• Author / Uploaded
• Sameh Soliman

• Categories
• Bautismo
• Juan el Bautista
• Arrepentimiento
• Evangelio de Marcos
• Jesús

Citation preview

WUEST’S Word Studies in the Greek New Testament by Kenneth S. Wuest Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Grand Rapids, Michigan 49502

Copyrights Mark Copyright 1950 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company RomansCopyright 1955 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Galatians Copyright 1944 by Kenneth S. Wuest Copyright renewed 1972 by Jeannette I. Wuest Ephesians and Colossians Copyright 1953 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Philippians Copyright 1942 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Copyright renewed 1970 by Jeannette I. Wuest Hebrews Copyright 1947 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company The Pastoral Epistles Copyright 1952 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company First Peter Copyright 1942 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Copyright renewed 1970 by Jeannette I. Wuest In These Last Days Copyright 1954 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company BypathsCopyright 1940 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Copyright renewed 1968 by Jeannette I. Wuest Treasures Copyright 1941 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Copyright renewed 1969 by Jeannette I. Wuest Untranslatable Riches Copyright 1942 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Copyright renewed 1970 by Jeannette I. Wuest Studies in the Vocabulary Copyright 1945 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Copyright renewed 1973 by Jeannette I. Wuest

Great Truths to Live By Copyright 1952 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company

MARK In the Greek New Testament

Dedicated To the Missionary Translators, that noble band of men and women, who at great personal sacrifice, under the most trying conditions, and with prodigious labors, are giving God’s Word to the peoples of the world in their own languages.

PREFACE Every book ought to have a reason for its existence. This volume is a simplified commentary on the Greek text of the Gospel according to Mark, written for the Bible student who is not conversant with the Greek language, furnishing him in terms which he can understand, all that he should have for a more intensive study of Mark than any translation affords. So far as the author knows, there is no other book like it in existence. The additional material made available to the student is in the form of word studies, an expanded translation which uses more English words than the standard translations do, in order to bring out more of the richness of the Greek text, and interpretive material based on the Greek text, some original with the author, and some, culled from Greek authorities such so Alexander Balmain Bruce, D. D., in Expositors Greek Testament, Marvin R. Vincent, D. D., Word Studies in the New Testament, Henry Barclay Swete, D. D., on Mark, and Archibald T. Robertson, A. M., D. D., LL. D., Litt. D., Word Pictures in the New Testament, making available to the student of the English Bible, the rich comments of Greek scholars to which he does not have access (with the exception of Robertson.) The author has made a careful translation, taking note of tense meanings which the standard translations do not bring out. The imperfect tense, so frequent in Mark, for instance, which draws a picture, is regularly rendered in the standard translations as the aorist is, referring to the mere fact of an action. Consequently, the vivid picture which Mark paints, is lost. The order of words in the Greek text is preserved so far as possible, consistent with a not too awkward English diction, so that the student may see where the Greek places the emphasis. Polished diction has been sacrificed in the interest of clarity and a closer adherence to the style and force of the Greek text. This translation must not be used in the place of the standard translations, but as a companion, explanatory translation, making clearer many of the English words which do not in themselves equal the total meaning of the Greek word. The Greek words treated, are given in their transliterated form for the benefit of students who know Greek. The book should prove useful to missionary translators, especially those who do not

know Greek. It will enable them to make a far more accurate translation into the native tongue, than is possible when the English translation is the sole basis of their work. Pastors, Bible teachers, Sunday School teachers, and all serious Bible students should find it helpful in quickly getting back of the English translation to a far more intelligent understanding of the Gospel than they could obtain from the translation they are using. The book is indexed for quick reference research work. Finally, the book will open up to the Bible student a portrait gallery of vivid pictures of our Lord that Mark paints with his Greek brush, pictures, which, while accurate in the translation, are not so vivid, clear, and impressive as those in the Greek text. Erasmus, the great humanist, a contemporary of Luther, says in the preface of his Greek Testament: “These holy pages will summon up the living image of His mind. They will give you Christ Himself, talking, healing, dying, rising, the whole Christ in a word; they will give Him to you in an intimacy so close that He would be less visible to you if He stood before your eyes.” The Gospel according to Mark is preeminently the Gospel of action, of pictures, of description. The student can study it through verse by verse, and with the help of this book, obtain a clearer, more vivid portrait of the Lord Jesus than he could from the translation he is using, and for the reason that he has been given access to the Greek text. The English translation commented upon is the Authorized Version, and the Greek text used is that of Nestle.

CHAPTER ONE (1:1) Beginning,  (ajrch), “beginning, origin, the person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series”; used without the definite article, showing that the expression is a kind of title. It is the beginning, not of Mark’s book, but of the facts of the gospel. Mark shows from the prophets that the gospel was to begin by the sending forth of a forerunner. Each evangelist has a different starting point. Mark begins with the work of John the Baptist, Matthew with the ancestry and birth of the Messiah, Luke with the birth of the Baptist, and John with the preincarnate Word. Of the gospel, euaggelion (eujaggelion), “a message of good news.” This word was in common use in the first century for good news of any kind. The proclamation of the accession of a new Roman emperor was entitled “good news.” The evangelists appropriate the word, take it out of the current secular usage, and speak of the message of salvation as good news. Of Jesus Christ,  (ÆIhsou"), the transliterated form of the Hebrew word we know as Jehoshua, which means, “Jehovah saves;” Christos (Cristo"), the transliterated form of the Greek word which means “The Anointed One;” in the first name we have the deity, humanity, and atonement of our Lord, in the second, the fact that He is the Anointed of God, to Israel, its Messiah. These words are in the objective genitive; the good news is not preached by Jesus Christ but is concerning Him. The message announces Him. The Son of God; this title is implicit in the name “Christ,” for the Anointed of God is the Son. Therefore, its addition here must indicate that Mark wishes to inform the reader that he will present our Lord from that point of view. The word “Son” is without the article in the Greek text. Emphasis is therefore upon character or nature. Jesus Christ is Son of God by nature. That is, He proceeds by eternal generation from God the Father in a birth which never took place because it always was. By virtue of all this, He possesses

co-eternally, the same essence as God the Father. The article is absent before the word “God,” showing that absolute Deity as such is in view. Translation. The beginning of the good news concerning Jesus Christ, Son of God. (1:2) As,  (kaqw"), “according as, even as, just as;” the Greek word is stronger than the English adverb, emphasizing an accurate reproduction of what one has spoken or written. It is written, gegraptai (gegraptai); the perfect tense, speaking of an act completed in past time having present results, is used here to emphasize the fact that the Old Testament records were not only carefully preserved and handed down from generation to generation to the first century, but that they are a permanent record of what God said. They are, in the language of the Psalmist, “forever settled in heaven.” One can translate, “It has been written, with the present result that it is on record,” or, “it stands written.” In the prophets. The best Greek texts have “in Isaiah the prophet.” The quotation is from Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3. As to the apparent discrepancy here, Robertson says that it was common to combine quotations from the prophets. Bruce, in Expositor’s Greek Testament, says, “An inaccuracy doubtless, but not through error of memory, but through indifference to greater exactness, the quotation from Isaiah being what chiefly occupied the mind. It is somewhat analagous to attraction in grammer.” Behold, idou (ijdou), a word used to give a pecular vivacity to the style by bidding the reader or hearer to attend to what is said. I send,  (ajpostellw), literally, “to send someone off” from one’s self; The word is used in an early secular document in the clause, “to proceed with the officers sent for this purpose.1” The sense here is that the officers were commissioned to do something. In Herodotus and the LXX, the noun form of this word is used for an ambassador or an envoy. Thus, the Baptist was an ambassador or envoy representing God, and sent on a commission to perform certain duties. Messenger, aggelos (ajggelo"); in a 2 b.c., manuscript, envoys, whose names are given; the verb form means “to proclaim.” Thus, the word refers to a messenger who is an envoy bearing a message. The Greek word comes into English in the word “angel,” and is so given in its proper context in the New Testament. “Which” is a masculine relative pronoun in the original. Translate “who.” Prepare,  (kataskeuazw), used in the papyri with reference to the visit of a Roman senator to the Fayum. Directions are given for his welcome; “take care that at the proper places the guest-chambers be got ready.”2 The verb means, “to furnish, equip, prepare, make ready.” Way, hodos (oJdo"), “a travelled way, a road.” The idea would be clearer if one translated by the word “road.” The pronouns “they” and “thee” refer, in Isaiah 40:3 to “our God,” and in Malachi 3:1 to “the Lord.” In the coming of God the Son, Messiah of Israel is referred to, John the Baptist, his forerunner. Translation. Behold, I will send my envoy on a commission before your face, who will make ready your road.

(1:3) The voice; no definite article in the Greek text. The Baptist was not the only mouthpiece of God sent to Israel. John only claimed to be “a voice,” not “the voice” (John 1:23). The One for whom he made ready the road, was the Son of God, the unique Son, Himself, Very God. Of one crying,  (boaw), “to cry aloud, to shout, to speak with a high, strong voice.”  (Kalew) in classic usage meant “to cry out” for a purpose,  (boaw) “to cry out” as a manifestation of feeling. The preaching of the Baptist was full of emotion, of feeling. It came from the heart, and was addressed to the heart. John said, “I am a voice of One shouting out in the wilderness” (John 1:23). The One shouting out was God. John was His mouthpiece. Back of John’s preaching to Israel, and in and through it, was the infinite longing of the God of Israel for His chosen people. The heart of God was in that message, full of pathos and love and entreaty. In the wilderness,  (ejrhmo"); the word signifies “a solitary, lonely, desolate, uninhabited place.” Here it refers to the uncultivated regions fit for pasturage in Judaea. Prepare,  (eJtoimazw), “to make ready, prepare.” Thayer says when it is used as here to prepare the way (hodos (oJdo") road) of the Lord, it is used as a figure “drawn from the oriental custom of sending on before kings on their journeys persons to level the roads and make them passable,” thus, “to prepare the minds of men to give the Messiah a fit reception and secure His blessings.” The verb is in the plural number, thus addressed to Israel. It is aorist in tense and imperative in mode, thus, issuing a summary command given with military snap and curtness, and was a command to be obeyed at once. That was the character of the preaching of the Baptist. His was no pussy-footing, no beating about the bush, no smooth, oily, namby-pamby preaching. The Baptist was a man among men, and his preaching was straight from the shoulder. The way of the Lord; “way” is again hodos (oJdo"), a road. “Lord” is kurios (kurio"), used of a person who is the possessor and disposer of a thing, the master. It is the word used in the LXX3 to translate the august title of God which we know as Jehovah. The Ancient of Days was to incarnate Himself in humanity, grow up from a little child to manhood, and offer Himself to Israel as its Messiah, its King. His road needed to be prepared, that is, the hearts of His Chosen People must be ready. John’s ministry was to see to it that Israel was ready to welcome its Messiah. The word “Lord” is without the article, the emphasis being upon character or quality. The road is a Lord’s road, of such a quality as would belong to Jehovah. Make His paths straight. The verb “make” is present imperative, issuing a command to be obeyed continuously. It should be a habit with Israel, a constant attitude, not a formal. abrupt welcome and that is all, but a welcome that would extend on and on, an habitual welcome that would be the natural expression of the heart. “Straight” is euthus (eujqu"), meaning “straight, level.” Robertson speaks of the wonderful Persian roads made for the couriers of the king, and then for the king himself, and of the Roman Empire, knit together by roads, some of which are in existence today. This word is not only used of straight and level roads, but also of a right way of life, as in II Peter 2:15, where the word is used with hodos (oJdo") (road). “Paths” is tribolos (tribolo"), “a worn path, a path.” The expression does not refer to a literal path or road down which the Lord would travel, but to the hearts of the people of Israel, and His entrance among them. Translation. A voice of One shouting out in the uninhabited place, Prepare the Lord’s road. Straight and level be constantly making His

paths. (1:4) Egeneto (ÆEgeneto), second aorist verb of ginomai (ginomai), literally, “to become.” Used of a person’s appearance on the stage of history. Not handled by the a.v. “There arose John,” in accordance with and in fulfilment of the prophecies mentioned in verses 2 and 3. The verb is used here to show that the appearance of the Baptist was not a mere event in history, but an epoch, ushering in a new regime or dispensation of God’s dealings with mankind. Did baptize,  (oJ baptizwn), an article and participle, literally, There arose John “the one who baptizes,” the latter phrase being the particular description by which he would be known. Thus we have John the Baptist. For a study of the Greek word “baptize,” see the author’s book, Studies in the Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, pages 70–76. Here the classical usage is presented, and the koine (koine) usage in the LXX, papyri, and New Testament. For our purpose here we might say that the word has three usages in the New Testament, a ceremonial one, where the saved person is baptized as a testimony of his salvation, such as I Corinthians 1:14, 16, and we would call that water baptism; then, a mechanical one, where a person or thing is introduced or placed into a new environment or into union with something else so as to alter its condition or its relationship to its previous environment or condition, such as I Corinthians 12:13; Romans 6:3, which we would call Spirit baptism, and a metaphorical use such as Matthew 20:22, 23. The general and common use of the word was that of placing a thing into a new environment, into something else. The word means literally, “to place into.” Since the ritual of water baptism involved that action, the Greek word meaning “to place into,” came to signify also what we mean by the act of administering the rite of water baptism. Thus, John came to be called, “The one who baptizes,” or in short, “The Baptist.” It will be helpful to trace briefly the idea of baptism from the Old Testament into the New. The ceremonial washings of the Levitical ordinances were in the LXX referred to by the word  (louw). This Greek word is found in Acts 22:16 in connection with the word  (baptizw) in the expression “Be baptized and wash away thy sins.” In Mark 7:4, Luke 11:38, and Hebrews 9:10, the ceremonial washings referred to were designated as  (baptizw), and the word translated “wash.” The word  (baptizw) was thus not unknown to the Jews. It represented or was symbolic of the cleansing from sin which followed the offering of an expiatory sacrifice. But with the coming of John, a radical change took place. While the ceremonial washings of Leviticus were performed by the person himself, with one exception, and that was where Moses in installing Aaron and his sons, himself washed them (Lev. 8:6), John baptized his converts. We must be careful to note that the baptism of which we are now speaking, is not Christian baptism, but a baptism connected with Israel and its acceptance of its Messiah. One needs to be careful as to the exact import of this baptism. John’s words as given in the a.v. of Matthew 3:11, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance,” make the rite the cause of repentance in the heart of the individual who is baptized. This is due to an unfortunate translation of eis (eij") which has various uses. A comparison of this passage with Matthew 12:41 where the same preposition eis (eij") is translated “at,” namely, “the men of Nineveh repented at, (because of) the preaching of Jonah,” makes it clear that John said, “Repent, and be baptized because of the remission of sins.” The same holds true of Peter’s words in Acts 2:38, where the same preposition is used. This is confirmed by the

context in Matthew (3:7–9) where John refuses to baptize the Pharisees and Sadducees because they did not show evidence of repentance. This is also shown to be the correct interpretation and translation of eis (eij") here, by the testimony of Josephus who declared that John taught the Jews that the rite of baptism would not wash away sins, but was for those who had already had their souls purified beforehand. Thus, we have here the import of water baptism. Submission to this rite is the testimony of the person to the fact that he has been saved. In the wilderness. Same word as in 1:3, speaking of the deserted region of Judaea, the place being the Jordan River. Preach,  (khrussw), “to be a herald; to officiate as a herald; to proclaim after the manner of a herald;” Thayer says, “Always with a suggestion of formality, gravity, and authority which must be listened to and obeyed.” It means generally, “to publish, proclaim, proclaim openly.” It is used in the New Testament of the public proclamation of the gospel and material pertaining to it, made by John the Baptist, our Lord, the apostles and other Christian leaders. The noun,  (khrux), means “a herald, a messenger vested with public authority who conveyed the official messages of kings, magistrates, princes, military commanders, or who gave a public summons or demand.” The English word “preach” brings to our mind, a minister of the gospel in his pulpit expounding the Word of God. But the word Mark uses here, pictures John as a herald with an official proclamation from a coming King, the Messiah of Israel. He acted as one, making a public proclamation of the news of the advent of the Messiah with such formality, gravity, and authority as must be listened to and obeyed. The coming of the forerunner and then of the King, had to Israel the atmosphere of the words  (khrussw) and  (khrux) about them (Matt. 21:1–11). It is interesting to note the words having to do with an official herald, envoy, and ambassador which Mark uses of John,  (khrussw), aggelon (ajggelon), and  (ajpostellw). The baptism of repentance. No article in Greek. Should be “a baptism of repentance.” The latter word is a genitive of description, indicating what kind of a baptism is meant. It was a baptism connected with the repentance of the individual. The word is metanoia (metanoia), made up of a preposition which when prefixed to a word signifies a change, and the Greek word for “mind.” It thus means “a change of mind” as it appears in a person who repents of a purpose he has formed or something he has done. Robertson quotes Broadus as saying that this is the worst translation in the New Testament. “Repent” he says, “means to be sorry again.” John did not call on Israel to be sorry, but to change their mental attitude and conduct. The word for “sorry” in Greek is metameleomai (metameleomai), and is used of Judas (Matt. 27:3). The word used here (metanoia (metanoia)) means “a change of mind and thus of action consequent upon the realization that one has sinned and that sin is wrong.” Metamelomai (Metamelomai) is sorrow for sin because of its evil consequences. This is remorse. Vincent, commenting on this phrase, says, “A baptism the characteristic of which was repentance, which involved an obligation to repent.” For the remission of sins. “For” is the translation (a.v.) of eis (eij"), a preposition which has various meanings in different contexts. The word “for” makes the contents of verse 4 mean that the individual’s sins were remitted as a result of his submission to John’s baptism. But it has been made clear from our previous study, that the only proper subject of baptism, is the one who has already repented of his sins, and that John was careful to baptize only those who showed the work of salvation in their lives. Remission of sin is part

of the salvation which God gives the believing sinner when he places his faith in the Lord Jesus. Therefore, remission of sins cannot be the result of baptism, but rather, its occasion. Baptism is the believer’s testimony to the fact that his sins are remitted. Since that is the case, we must study eis (eij") in its other usages. Dana and Mantey give as one of the New Testament usages of eis (eij") the meaning, “because of,” citing Matthew 12:41 as an example, where the men of Nineveh repented because of the preaching of Jonah. Here the baptism is because of the fact that the recipient’s sins have been remitted. The word “remission” in the Greek text is aphesin (ajfesin). The verb form of this word  ((afihmi)) means “to send from one’s self.” It refers to the act of putting something away. God did that at the Cross when He put sin away by incarnating Himself in humanity in the Person of His Son, stepping down from His judgment throne, assuming the guilt of man’s sin, and paying the penalty, thus, satisfying His justice, and making possible an offer of mercy on the basis of justice satisfied. When a sinner avails himself of the merits of that atoning sacrifice, he thus puts himself within the provision God made. His sins were put away at the Cross, and he comes into the benefit of that when he believes. His submission to water baptism is his testimony to the latter fact, not only that all sin has been put away, but that he has taken advantage of that fact. Translation. There arose John, the baptizer, in the uninhabited region, making a public proclamation of a baptism which had to do with a change of mind relative to the previous life an individual lived, this baptism being in view of the fact that sins are put away. (1:5) There went out to him. The verb, ekporeuomai (ejkporeuomai), is in the imperfect tense which speaks of continuous action. What a picture it draws here. There kept on constantly going out to John in a steady stream, all the people of the surrounding inhabited places in Judaea and from Jerusalem. The tense of the verb shows the widespread character of the movement. “Unto” is pros (pro"), a preposition not only speaking of direction and ultimate destination, but of a contact of persons, face to face. It indicates that those who came to John, came because of who he was and what he proclaimed. It was not a blind indiscriminate movement of a mass of people, but the deliberate act of each one, transacting real business with a God against whom they had sinned. Baptized of him in the river Jordan. The verb is also imperfect. Answering to the continuous coming of the people, was the continuous baptizing of John, one after another. “Baptized in the river” is literally, “placed in the river.” The preposition is en (ejn) (in), not eis (eij") (into), completing the picture, showing submersion in the river. Confessing their sins. The word “confess” is a present participle. The rule of Greek grammar that applies here is that the action of a present tense participle goes on at the same time as that of the leading verb. The leading verb here is “baptized.” Thus, the act of baptism and that of confessing sin, went on at the same time. But that means that the recipient of baptism had already repented of his sins before he came to John for baptism. His confession was the outward indication of that repentance. The preposition prefixed to the participle (ek (ejk), out) shows that this confession was an open one to those who were also waiting for baptism, not a private one to John. The word “confess” is  (oJmologew), made up of  (legw) “to speak,” and homos (oJmo"), “the same,” the compound word meaning “to speak the same thing that another speaks,” thus,

“to agree with someone else.” Thus, confession of sin is more than a mere acknowledgment of sin in the life. It is an agreeing with God as to all the implications that enter into the fact that one has sinned. It is looking at sin from God’s point of view, and acting accordingly. It means the putting away of that sin. It means the determination to be done with that sin. Translation. And there kept on continuously proceeding out to him in a steady stream all the Judaean region and all the people of Jerusalem. And they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River as they were confessing their sins. (1:6) Clothed with camel’s hair. “Clothed” is a perfect participle, indicating that this garb of John’s was not a uniform or affectation put on for the occasion, but his usual mode of clothing himself. Robertson says that this was probably a necessity with John, and not an affectation, although Elijah wore rough sack cloth woven from the hair of camels (II Kings 1:8). He quotes Plummer as holding that “John consciously took Elijah as a model.” “Hair” is plural in the Greek text. John’s garment was not made of the skin of a camel, but was a rough cloth woven of camel’s hairs. Wild honey. Vincent quotes Tristram in Land of Israel; “The innumerable fissures and clefts of the limestone rocks, which everywhere flank the valleys, afford in the recesses secure shelter for any number of swarms of wild bees; and many of the Bedouin, particularly about the wilderness of Judaea, obtain their subsistence by bee-hunting, bringing into Jerusalem jars of that wild honey on which John the Baptist fed in the wilderness” This, together with dried locusts which were considered palatable, was the chief source of John’s food. Translation. And there was this John, clothed habitually in a camel’s hair garment, and with a leather belt about his loins, and he customarily ate locusts and wild honey. (1:7) Preached, again  (khrussw), used of a king’s forerunner who as an imperial herald, proclaims the coming of his sovereign. John followed this pattern in a grave, formal, and authoritative manner of delivery which must be listened to and heeded. There cometh one mightier than I. The definite article is used. There cometh “the One,” not merely “one.” It was a distinctive, unique, outstanding Person, even the Jehovah of the Old Testament who was to come. The latchet of whose shoes. “Latchet” is himas (iJma"), the thong of the sandal which held it together. “Shoes” is  (uJpodhma), literally, “that which is bound under,” namely, a sole which is bound under the foot with thongs, thus, a sandal. I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. This was the menial task of a slave in an oriental household who took off the guest’s sandals and washed their feet as they entered the home. John was anxious that men would not form a wrong impression of him and his ministry. He took a place beneath that of an oriental slave. This is the man who said of the King whom he was proclaiming, “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30). “Increase” is the translation of  (aujxanw) “to become greater,” “decrease,” the translation of  (ejlattaw) “to be made less” in dignity, authority, and popularity. “Must” is dei (dei), “it is necessary in the nature of the case.” What John said

in its fulness was, “It is necessary in the nature of the case for that One to be constantly growing greater, but for me to be constantly growing inferior in dignity, authority, and popularity.” The necessity in the nature of the case was that John was only the herald, Jesus, the King whom he announced. The former must constantly be fading away into the distance, while the latter must increasingly be coming into the foreground. Translation. And he made proclamation, saying, There comes the One who is mightier than I after me, the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. (1:8) In this verse, John’s chief purpose is to contrast his baptism with that of the Messiah. This is shown by the use of the personal pronoun  (ejgw) which lends emphasis here, by the use of the personal pronoun autos (aujto"), in connection with Jesus. It is, “As for myself,” and “He Himself.” The word “water” has the case ending of the locative, instrumental, and dative cases. Since John’s purpose is contrast, identity is in view. The dative of reference would be the logical choice. The Greek could be rendered, “As for myself, I baptized you with reference to water. But He Himself will baptize you with reference to the Holy Spirit.” That is, John’s baptism had to do with water, Messiah’s with the Holy Spirit. John’s, was ceremonial, Messiah’s, supernatural. But we are not to understand that as John applied water to the recipient of his baptism, so Messiah applies the Holy Spirit to the recipient of His baptism. A parallel passage (Matt. 3:11) will help us here. John baptized en (ejn) (in) water. Messiah will baptize en (ejn) (in) the Holy Spirit. The preposition en (ejn) (in) is used in both instances, and with the locative case. In the case of John, we have a classification called the locative of place, where the limitations are spatial, the Jordan River. In the case of Messiah, the classification is locative of sphere where the limitations are logical, one idea being confined within the limits of another. Water was the element with which John baptized. But the Holy Spirit is not the element with which Jesus baptizes. The baptism connected with Messiah is the act of the Holy Spirit Himself baptizing (placing) the believing sinner into Christ (Rom. 6:3, 4), and thus into the Body of Christ (I Cor. 12:13). John’s baptism was water baptism, Messiah’s, Spirit-baptism. For a more extended discussion of this subject based on the rules of Greek grammar and syntax, see the author’s book Untranslatable Riches from the Greek New Testament. The fulfillment of John’s words is Pentecost, where individual Jewish believers were baptized by the Holy Spirit into the Body of Christ, formed that day. Translation. As for myself, I baptized you with water. But He Himself will baptize you with reference to the Holy Spirit. (1:9) Was baptized of John in Jordan. “In” is eis (eij"), the meaning of which is “into.” It is a preposition of motion. “Baptized” is literally “placed.” Clearly, immersion is in view here. In the next verse ek (ejk) (out) is used, literally, “out from within.” Jesus was baptized into the river and then came up out of the water. Messiah, though He had no sins to confess, nevertheless took His place with the righteous of Israel, submitting to the baptism of John. Had He not done so, He would have been misunderstood. No expanded translation needed. Authorized Version clear enough. (1:10) Heavens opened. “Opened” is  (scizw), “to cleave asunder, to divide by rending.” “He saw the heavens being rent asunder.” What a close connection there was

between the Father and the Son, between heaven and earth, during the earthly life of our Lord. The Spirit like a dove descending upon Him. “Upon” is eis (eij"), literally “into.” Epi (ÆEpi) (upon) is not used here. This was the act of the Holy Spirit taking up His residence in the Messiah. This was the anointing with the Spirit for His three-fold ministry of Prophet, Priest, and King, the dynamic equipment which would enable the Messiah to discharge the duties connected with these offices (Luke 4:16–19). For a discussion of the anointing with the Spirit, based upon the papyri usage of the particular Greek word used in connection with this subject, see the author’s book Untranslatable Riches. (1:11) From heaven. The preposition is ek (ejk), not apo (ajpo). The latter means “from the edge of,” the former, “out from within.” In the previous verse we had, “He saw the heaven being rent asunder.” Here we have “There came a voice out from within the heavens.” Heaven is a place. It has boundaries. It can be opened and closed. Thou art my beloved Son. The Greek has the pronoun of the second person su (su). Literally, “As for you, in contradistinction to all others.” Messiah is the unique Son of God. Believers are sons of God, but they sustain a different relationship to the Father than the Son does. Messiah claimed to be the Son of God in a unique way, for He said that God was His own private, personal, unique Father (His, not the personal pronoun of the third person (autos (aujto")), but idios (ijdio"), the latter word speaking of what is one’s own private, unique, absolute possession (John 5:18). The order of the Greek words are, “as for you, you are my Son, the beloved One.” Here, equal emphasis is laid upon the fact that Messiah is the Son of God, and that He is the beloved Son. The particular word for “love” here is  (ajgaph) which in the classics spoke of a love called out of one’s heart by the preciousness of the object loved. The Son of God is infinitely precious to God the Father. This love is called out of the Father’s heart by the preciousness of the Son. In whom I am well pleased. The best manuscripts have the personal pronoun of the second person, not the relative pronoun which appears in some. It is, “In you I am well pleased.” The Greek language had no “thee” and “thou” form of address. The writer prefers to use the “thee” and “thou” when addressing God in prayer, since this form of address shows more reverence for Deity. But for the sake of accurate translation and a faithful reproduction of the Greek text, the word “you” is used, however, without any thought of irreverence. “Well pleased” is  (eujdokew). The word is made up of  (dokew) “to be of opinion, to think, suppose,” and eu (euj) which when prefixed to a word adds the idea of “good.” The noun form of this compound word means “delight, pleasure, satisfaction,” the verb, as it is used in the New Testament, “to be well pleased with, to take pleasure in.” The entire statement is therefore, “As for you in contradistinction to all others, you are my Son, the beloved One; in you I am well pleased.” This verb is in the aorist tense, which in the indicative mode speaks of a past action. The particular classification here is that of the constative aorist, which contemplates the action in its entirety, gathering it into a single whole, presenting a panoramic picture. This tense was used here rather than the present, because the aorist reaches back into the past, and in its constative classification, regards the Father as always having been pleased with the Son and as always being pleased with him. It is a delight that never had a beginning, and will never have an end. Translation. And a voice came out from within heaven, As for you, you

are my Son, the beloved One; in you I am well pleased. (1:12) Driveth,  (ejkballw), stronger than Matthew’s  (ajnagw), “was led up,” and Luke’s  (ajgw), “was led;” literally, “to throw out from within, to cast out, to drive out.” It is used of our Lord’s expulsion of demons (Mark 1:34, 39). Expositor’s Greek Testament says; “The first thing the Spirit does is to drive Jesus into the wilderness, the expression not implying reluctance of Jesus to go into so wild a place (Weiss), but intense preoccupation of mind. Allowing for the weakening of the sense in Hellenistic usage (H. C.), it is a very strong word; and a second instance of Mark’s realism: Jesus thrust out into the inhospitable desert by force of thought. DeWette says that the ethical significance of the temptation is lost in Mark’s meager narrative, and that it becomes a mere marvelous adventure. I demur to this. The one word  (ejkballw) tells the whole story, speaks as far as may be the unspeakable. Matthew and Luke have tried to tell us what happened, but have they given us more than a dim shadow of the truth?” Thus, the first act of the indwelling Holy Spirit was to bring Messiah to the place of testing and temptation. Into the wilderness. Vincent says: “The place is unknown. Tradition fixes it near Jericho, in the neighborhood of the quarantonia, the precipitous face of which is pierced with ancient cells and chapels, and a ruined church is on its topmost peak. Dr. Tristram says that every spring a few devout Abyssinian Christians are in the habit of coming and remaining here forty days, to keep their Lent on the spot they suppose that our Lord fasted and was tempted.” Translation. And immediately the Spirit thrusts Him out into the uninhabited place. (1:13) Tempted of Satan. A present tense participle speaking of continuous action. Satan tempted Messiah constantly during the forty days. The three temptations which Matthew records at the end of the forty day period of temptation, merely indicate the additional intensity of the temptations as the period of temptation closes. Satan was attempting his worst, seeing that he had but a short time left. “Of” is the translation of hupo (uJpo), the Greek preposition speaking of personal agency, showing the personality of Satan. The designation “Satan” is from a Hebrew word meaning “an adversary.” It answers to the other name this fallen angel has, the Devil, in Greek, diabolos (diabolo"), a noun form coming from the verb  (diaballw) “to traduce, calumniate, slander, accuse, defame.” The verb describes not only those who bring a false charge against one, but also those who disseminate the truth concerning a man, but do so maliciously, insidiously, with hostility. “Tempted” is peirazomai (peirazomai) which meant originally “to make an experience of, to pierce or search into.” It came next to mean “to try intentionally, and with the purpose of discovering what good or evil, power or weakness, was in a person.” It means therefore in its basic usage “to put to the test to see what good or evil there is in a person.” Then, since men so often break down under such a test and display the evil there is in them, the word came to mean “to tempt” in the sense of soliciting a person to do evil. The word is seen in its two uses here. The Last Adam was being put to the test to show that He was equipped and ready for His ministry as prophet, priest, and king. The universe was looking on, God the Father and the holy angels, the

fallen angels, and the demons. What a battle royal was waged there. What tremendous things were at issue. But not only was He put to the test. He was solicited to do evil by Satan. Was with the wild beasts. The region abounded with boars, jackals, wolves, foxes, leopards, and hyenas. Expositors suggests that this description is “not merely pictorial or intended to hint danger; rather to indicate the uninhabited nature of the place; no supplies obtainable there, hunger therefore a part of the experience.” Alford commenting on this says, “Perhaps the being with the beasts may point to one form of temptation, that of terror, which was practiced on Him.” The first Adam fell into sin in an environment that was perfect and harmonious. The Last Adam maintained His sinlessness in an environment that was hostile. The angels ministered unto Him. “Ministered” is  (diakonew) “to minister to or serve one,” used especially of those who execute the commands of others. The definite article is used, not merely “angels ministered,” but “the angels ministered.” No human beings were near, only the angels. They were detailed to this work by God the Father, executing His commands to care for the Son. The verb is in the imperfect tense, indicating continuous action. All during the forty days of the temptation, the angels were continually ministering to the Messiah. Matthew says that after Satan left Him, angels came and went to ministering to Him. Both statements are true. They are not contradictory, but complementary. Since the ministry of the angels could not have included food for the body, it must have had to do with spiritual ministrations to the soul. Expositors says: “These few touches of Mark suggest a vivid picture of a spiritual crisis: intense preoccupation, instinctive retreat into uncongenial, grim solitudes, temptation, struggle, fierce and protracted, issuing in weakness, calling for preternatural aid.” Translation. And He was in the uninhabited region forty days, being constantly tempted by Satan; and He was with the wild beasts; and the angels were constantly ministering to Him. (1:14, 15) Preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God. “Preaching” is  (khrussw) “making proclamation as a herald.” The words “the kingdom of” are not in the best texts. “Gospel” is euaggelion (eujaggelion), “good news.” “Of God” is subjective genitive, “the good news that comes from God.” “Time” is kairos (kairo"), referring to a particular time marked by an epochal event, not chronos (crono"), time as such. The older order was giving place to a new one, the dispensation of law to the announcement of the good news of God as later defined, the Kingdom of Heaven, namely, the Messianic earth-rule of Messiah. But that rejected by Israel, the gospel of grace and the Age of Grace would be brought in, with the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ functioning in the interim between the rejection of Israel and its dispersion a.d. 70, and its regathering for the Millennial Kingdom. It is like Paul’s “The fulness of times” of Galatians 4:4. Is fulfilled, perfect passive, “has been fulfilled, with the present result that the time is ripe,” signifying that the change over is near at hand. The kingdom of God is defined as God’s rule over all moral intelligences willingly subject to His will, including the holy angels, and all believers of all ages. The kingdom was announced as at hand in that events were at that time moving towards a speedy and final conclusion. The Age of Grace and the Millennial Kingdom would be followed by a

perfect earth with the saved of the human race dwelling upon it for all eternity. This will be the answer of our Lord’s prayer, “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” Translation. And after John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, making a public proclamation of the good news of God and saying, The time has been fulfilled with the present result that the present moment is epochal in its significance, and the kingdom of God is near. Be having a change of mind regarding your former life, and be putting your faith in this good news. (1:16) Walked by the sea. “By” is para (para) “alongside.” Mark uses this preposition twice here, drawing a realistic picture of Messiah walking along the seashore, near the edge of the water. That was the best way He could reach the men He was after, and whom He had observed often and studied, carefully, preparatory to making His choice of disciples. When God looks for someone to use in a special mission, He looks for the person who is already busy, the energetic individual. Casting a net,  (ajmfiballw),  (ballw) “to throw” and amphi (ajmfi) “on both sides,” thus, “to throw around, to cast to and fro, now to one side and now to the other.” This refers to fishing with a net, making a cast and then a haul. Translation. And while He was walking along the Sea of Galilee, He saw Simon and Andrew the brother of Simon, casting about their net in the sea; for they were fishermen. (1:17) Come ye after Me. “Come” is the translation of deute (deute) the word our Lord used when He said, “Lazarus, come forth.” It means, “come here, come.” “After,”  (ojpisw), when used with deute (deute), has the idea of “after” in the sense of joining one’s party. Make you to become. The addition of the words “to become,” indicates a long, slow process in making them soul winners. Translation. And Jesus said to them, Come, after Me, and I will make you to become fishers of men. (1:18) They forsook their nets. “Forsook is  (ajfihmi), “to send from one’s self, to yield up, to leave.” The prefixed preposition implies a separation, here, a separation from the fishing business to the preaching of the Word of God. The participle is in the aorist tense, speaking of a once for all action. It was a complete break from their former life, and a permanent one. Followed Him. “Followed” is  (ajkolouqew) from a word meaning “to walk the same road.” The word is used with the associative-instrumental case, the idea being “to follow with” another. It implies fellowship, joint-participation, a side-by-side walking with another. Thus it has come to mean, “to join one as a disciple, to cleave steadfastly to one, conform wholly to his example, in living and, if need be, in dying.” Translation. And immediately, having put off their nets, they followed

with Him. (1:19) In the ship. Not ploiarion (ploiarion), the rowboat attached to a large vessel, but the ploion (ploion), the large fishing boat itself. Mending their nets. The word is  (katartizw), “to mend what has been broken or rent, to fit out, equip, put in order.” The word has in it the idea of equipping something or preparing it for future use. Called, from  (kalew), “to call aloud, to utter in a loud voice … ” This together with the fact that James and John were in the large boat which had to be moored some distance from shore unless there was a wharf there, indicates that our Lord called across a stretch of water in order to reach them. (1:20) Went after Him. The verb is  (ajphlqon), “went off” after Him. Again, the prefixed preposition apo (ajpo) shows separation. (1:21) The entrance into Capernaum was not immediately after the call of these four men. The calling of the other apostles, the Sermon on the Mount, the healing of the leper and of the centurion’s servant, preceded this miracle in the Capernaum synagogue. The word “synagogue” comes from the Greek words  (ajgw) “to go,” and sun (sun) “with”, thus speaking of the act of a number of people “going with” one another, thus, congregating in one place. The Jewish synagogue was therefore the place of worship other than the Temple at Jerusalem where the Jews congregated for worship. The service consisted of prayer, praise, the reading of the Word of God, and an exposition by any rabbi or other competent person. The sacred record shows that our Lord and also Paul were invited to either read the Scriptures or address the people in the synagogue (Luke 4:16–21; Acts 13:14–43). Taught,  (didaskw), the inchoative imperfect here, speaking of entrance into an activity. As soon as our Lord entered the synagogue, He went to teaching. The action of the imperfect is progressive, indicating that our Lord’s message was a discourse of some length. In other words, He did an extended piece of work in His teaching. Both  (khrussw) “to make a proclamation,” and  (didaskw) “to teach” are used of our Lord. He adapted His method of delivery to the place, time, audience, and subject matter. (1:22) They were astonished,  (ejkplhssw), a very strong word meaning, “to strike out, expel by a blow, drive out or away, to strike one out of self-possession, to strike with panic, shock” in a passive sense “to be struck with astonishment, amazed.” The verb is in the pictorial imperfect, describing the prolonged amazement of the audience. It is in the passive voice, showing that this amazement was caused by an outside influence, the tremendous impact that the Messiah made upon them by the new type of teacher and teaching that met their eyes and ears. “Doctrine” is  (didach) “teaching, that which is taught,” “doctrine” in the sense of a statement of belief consisting of formulated teaching. He taught; the Greek has a periphrastic construction emphasizing action going on, continuous action. The translation should read, “for He was teaching them.” Authority, exousia. (ejxousia.) The word means literally “to be out,” and was used of that authority which a person has which is delegated to him from someone else. The person delegating the authority is in a sense out of himself and acting in the person to whom he has delegated the authority. Thus, the word means “delegated authority.” The

word means also “the power of authority and of right.” It was used in legal practice of delegated authority. Here it is used of our Lord as having that authority in Himself, not derived from others. The rabbis quoted from other rabbis and felt themselves to be expounders of tradition. The Messiah struck a new note here, and the people were quick to recognize it. They saw that here was a Teacher who spoke on His own authority. Robertson quotes Bruce; “Mark omits much, and is in many ways a meager Gospel, but it makes a distinctive contribution to the evangelic history in showing by a few realistic touches (this one of them) the remarkable personality of Jesus.” He says: “At once the people see that Jesus stands apart from the old group. He made a sensation in the best sense of that word. There was a buzz of excitement at the new teacher that was increased by the miracle that followed the sermon.” Scribes, grammateus (grammateu"), “a man learned in the Mosaic law and in the sacred writings, an interpreter, a teacher.” Translation. And they were completely amazed at His teaching. For He was teaching them as one who possesses authority, and not as the scribes. (1:23, 24) The word euthus (eujqu"), “immediately,” not handled by the a.v., tells us that no sooner had the Messiah finished His teaching, than the demonized man arose and started to talk. “Their” refers back to the people who were so completely amazed that they well nigh lost their self-possession. These owned the synagogue. It also implies that the demonized man was not of their company. With an unclean spirit,  (ejn pneumati ajkaqartwi). This is Mark’s designation of a demonized person. The Greek is literally “in a spirit, an unclean one.” Robertson says that this use of en (ejn) is common in the LXX, and that it also occurs in the papyri. It is the same as the idiom “in Christ” and “in the Lord,” which is so common with Paul. The unclean spirit was in the man in the sense that he, an incorporeal being entered the man’s body, took up his residence in it, and controlled the person in whose body he dwelt. The man was in the demon in that he lived within the sphere of the demon’s control. We have here the locative of sphere. Luke speaks of the man as having an unclean demon. (Luke 4:33). The a.v., translates by the word “devil.” The Greek word is daimonion (daimonion) which should be rendered “demon.” The word “devil” is the proper translation of diabolos (diabolo"). There is one devil and many demons. The devil is a fallen angel. Demons constitute a different category of beings. From the fact that the demons have no rest unless they are living in some physical body, it seems clear that at one time they did have physical bodies, and that they were deprived of them by some judgment of God. Some, including the writer, think that they are the disembodied beings of a pre-Adamite race who inhabited the first perfect earth (Gen. 1:1), and that they followed their leader Lucifer, into sin, and were disembodied and deprived of residence upon the earth by the cataclysm of Genesis 1:2, which was coincident with the fall of Lucifer (Isaiah 14:12–17). These are the principalities and powers of Ephesians 6:12, and comprise the kingdom of Satan in the atmosphere of this earth (Eph. 2:2). He cried out,  (ajnakrazw), “to raise a cry from the depth of the throat, to cry out.” The demon cried out, using the man’s vocal organs. It was a deep, throaty, terrible cry. It had in it the fear of impending doom. It was from a member of one race of beings, speaking through and by means of a member of the human race. Let us alone. Not in the best texts. What have we to do with thee? The Greek is  (Ti hJmin kai soi),

literally, “What with reference to us and with reference to you?” Supplying the verb of being here which is often left out in the Greek sentence, we have “What is there with reference to us and with reference to you?” That is, “What do we demons have in common with you, holy One of God?” The demon recognized and acknowledged the deity of the Messiah. Satan did the same when he said, “In view of the fact that you are Son of God by nature, command that these stones become loaves of bread” (Matt. 4:3). The conditional particle ei (eij) is used, which speaks of a fulfilled condition. James says, “Even the demons believe and tremble” (James 2:19). The religious leaders of Israel recognized the Messiah as the Son of God and yet in their apostasy, rejected Him (Matt. 21:37–39). Art thou come to destroy us? Expositors says that this could be a question or an assertion, the sense of the whole passage being, “Thou art come to destroy us, for I know well who thou art, the Holy One of God.” The demon uses the plural pronoun “us,” referring to himself and his associated demons. Vincent quotes Bengel, “The demons make common cause.” Translation. And immediately, there was in their synagogue a man with a spirit, an unclean one. And he cried out, saying, What is there in common between us and you? You have come to destroy us. I know who you are, the Holy One of God. (1:25) Rebuked,  (ejpitimaw). There are two words used in the New Testament, both meaning “to rebuke,” the one used here,  (ejpitimaw), which means “to rebuke another, the rebuke failing to bring the offender to acknowledge his sin,” and  (ejlegcw), a rebuke which results in a conviction of sin and sometimes a confession of sin on the offender’s part. The former is used by Mark, for Satan, the fallen angels, and the demons are incorrigible. They refuse to be convicted of their sin, and they will not acknowledge it nor repent. This is just another illustration of the meticulous accuracy of the Bible writers in the choice of words as guided by the Holy Spirit. Hold thy peace,  (fimow) “to close the mouth with a muzzle, to muzzle,” metaphorically, “to stop the mouth, make speechless, reduce to silence.” In Deuteronomy 25:4 (LXX), 1 Corinthians 9:9, and I Timothy 5:18 it is used of the muzzling of an ox. It is used of our Lord muzzling the Sadducees (Matt. 22:34) and stilling the storm (Mark 4:39). Peter uses it of the well doing of the saints muzzling the ignorance of foolish men. The words, “Hold thy peace” are not an adequate rendering. The word is much more vigorous than that. Martin Luther translates by the German equivalent of our “Shut up.” The Authorized Version puts too high a polish on the sharp, incisive command of our Lord. From the latter, we can gather something of the attitude of God towards Satan, the other fallen angels, the demons, and the enormity of their sin. Gould translates “Shut up.” Robertson says that “Shut your mouth” is too colloquial. But that is the equivalent idiom of that day for our expression today. The verb is in the imperative mode and the aorist tense, issuing a sharp command to be obeyed at once. The same holds true of the command “Come out.” Translation. And Jesus rebuked him, the rebuke not resulting in any conviction or confession of sin, saying, Shut your mouth and come out of him at once.

(1:26) Had torn him. The word is  (sparassw) “to convulse” like a spasm. Medical writers use the term for the rotating of the stomach. Luke speaks of the demon throwing the man down. This was no doubt vindictiveness on the demon’s part in protest at being ordered to come out of the man. Cried with a loud voice. Robertson says that this was, in fact, a screech. Translation. And when the unclean spirit had torn him with convulsions, he screeched and came out of him. (1:27) They were all amazed. The word is  (qambew) “to be astonished, amazed, to be terrified, to be frightened.” Their amazement was mingled with fright and terror. Mark uses  (ejkplhssw) for “astonishment” in verse 22, which means “to be struck with astonishment to the place of panic and loss of self-possession.” These two words are graphic in their description of the reaction of the synagogue crowd to the impact of Jesus, His teaching, and the miracle He performed. They questioned among themselves,  (sunzhtew), made up of  (zhtew) “to seek,” and sun (sun) “with,” thus, “to seek or examine together, to discuss, dispute,” used of a group of people inquiring of one another. Tyndale translates “They demanded one of another among themselves.” The infinitive is in the present tense, emphasizing durative action. Mark is describing an animated, prolonged discussion. What new thing is this? This question refers to the whole appearance of Jesus in the synagogue on that day. What new doctrine is this? “Doctrine” is  (didach), “teaching.” “New” is kainos (kaino"). There are two words for “new,” neos (neo"), referring to that which is new as to the matter of time, namely, that which has just come into existence, and kainos (kaino"), which contemplates the new, not under the aspect of time, but of quality, the new as set over against that which has seen service, the outworn, the effete or marred through age. Compared to the stilted, staid, dry as dust rabbinical droning, this teaching of Jesus was like the fragrance of a field of clover in the springtime. It was fresh with the dew of heaven upon it. With authority. These words are to be construed with “the new doctrine.” Nestle’s Greek text so punctuates the passage. Expositors says, “A style of teaching new as to authoritativeness (entirely different from the familiar type of the scribes). His teaching was fresh, and was given with authority.” He commands the unclean spirits. “Command” is  (ejpitassw), a military term; the noun form used in the military sense of an “orderly array.” The single verb  (tassw) was used in classical Greek, “to draw up in order of battle, array, marshal.” Our Lord has the hosts of Satan under His absolute power at all times. Unwilling and incorrigible as they are, He can command them at will, and they obey Him. Satan always operates on a limited tether. To the synagogue crowd, the most astonishing thing was that the demons obeyed Him. Translation. And they were all amazed, so that they kept on inquiring and demanding of one another, saying, What is this? Fresh teaching backed by authority. And the unclean spirits He commands, and they obey Him. (1:28) Immediately His fame spread abroad. “Fame” is  (ajkoh); the verb form

is  (ajkouw) “to hear,” the noun  (ajkoh) is “the thing heard,” thus “a report.” The a.v., translates this word “rumor” in Matthew 24:6. The report concerning the new Teacher spread with lightning speed by word of mouth. Translation. And there went out the report concerning Him immediately throughout the whole region of Galilee. (1:29) “Simon” here is Peter. Peter was married, and Andrew, and Peter’s mother-inlaw lived with him. Jesus made His home with Peter when He was in Capernaum. (1:30) Simon’s wife’s mother lay sick of a fever. “Lay” is katakeimai (katakeimai), “to have lain down, to lie prostrate.” It was used colloquially of the sick, “down sick.” The papyri give us, “the blows caused me to be laid up with sickness,” and “she is laid up.”4 The verb is in the imperfect tense, speaking of continuous action or state in past time. She had been sick for some time. “Of a fever,”  (puressw) “to be sick with a fever.” The noun form is the Greek word for fire. The word is a present tense participle. She was burning up with a fever. It is interesting to note in passing that Thayer says that the Greek word for fire, pur (pur), is derived from the Sanskrit word pu (pu), which means “to purify.” The whole expression could be translated, “lay prostrate, burning with fever.” Matthew says “Stretched out with a fever,” and Luke uses a medical term, “holden with a great fever.” Luke speaks of Jesus standing over her like a doctor. Translation. And Simon’s mother-in-law had been down for some time, burning up with fever. And immediately they speak to Him concerning her. (1:31) “He came” is  (proselqwn), the prefixed preposition meaning “facing.” The Great Physician came to her couch and faced her. Luke, the Greek doctor says, “And He stood over her” (Luke 4:39) as a physician would do. Took her by the hand and lifted her up. The Greek order is, “He lifted her up, having taken hold of her hand.” Immediately the fever left her. The word “immediately” is not in the best texts. However, there was an instant recovery and no convalescence, for Luke tells us that she immediately began to minister to those assembled in the house. She ministered unto them. “Ministered” is  (diakonew) “to be a servant, a domestic, to wait upon, to serve.” It is the word Martha uses when she informs the Lord that Mary has let her down, leaving her to serve alone. The cure must have been instantaneous, to make it possible for Peter’s mother-in-law to cook a meal for the Lord and the men He had with Him. The verb is in the imperfect tense, showing progressive action. She went to serving them. It took some time to prepare the meal. Translation. And having come, He lifted her up, having taken hold of her hand. And the fever left her, and she went to serving them. (1:32, 33) And at even, when the sun was set. “And evening having come.” But the phrase would be somewhat indefinite without the qualifying words “when the sun did set.” “Did set” is  (dunw) “to go under, to be plunged into, sink in,” as into the sea. It was the Sabbath that day, as shown by the fact that the synagogue meeting was being held. The Sabbath closed at sunset, and so the people were at liberty to bring their sick ones. They brought unto Him all that were diseased. “Brought” is  (ferw), “to carry some burden, to move by bearing.” The verb is imperfect, speaking of continuous

action. They were carrying the sick in a steady stream to Jesus. One marvels at the number of sick people who were brought to our Lord at this place. H. V. Morton, in his excellent volume, In the Steps of The Master has an interesting bit of information for us on this point. He speaks of hot mineral waters containing curative properties, that were the center of the most famous spa in the country. This was located at the city of Tiberius which was ten miles from Capernaum. He says that in the time of our Lord these baths attracted the sick from every part of the country. And so it was that in the midst of a great health resort country, the Great Physician ministered to the ailments of multitudes. “All that were diseased” is literally “All those who were having ailments.” The demonized were brought because of the news of the casting out of the demon in the synagogue. Gathered together is from  (ejpisunagw),  (ajgw) “to go,” sun (sun), “with,” and epi (ejpi) “upon,” literally, “to go with others and settle down together in a group.” The participle is in the perfect tense, speaking of a past completed action having finished results. The people had brought their sick to the door of Simon’s house, and had seated themselves, waiting for the new Teacher to heal those who were ill. They were there to stay until their mission was accomplished. Translation. And evening having come, when the sun had gone down, they kept on carrying in a constant procession to Him all those having ailments, and all the city was gathered together, seated, and facing the door. (1:34) He healed many that were sick of divers diseases. In Matthew’s account, all are said to have been healed. “Divers” is from poikilos (poikilo") “variegated.” “Suffered” is from  (ajfihmi) “to permit,” imperfect in tense, speaking of continuous action. It was a continuous refusal. The demons clamored to be heard. Translation. And He healed many who were afflicted with various kinds of diseases, and demons, many of them, He ejected, and He kept on refusing the demons permission to be speaking, because they knew Him. (1:35) In the morning,  (prwi), the last watch of the night from three to six A. M. A great while before day, ennucha lian (ejnnuca lian), in the early part of the watch while it was still a bit dark. He went out, out of Simon’s house, and departed out of the city. Prayed, proseuchomai (proseucomai); the simple verb euchomai (eujcomai) means “to pray to God,” the prefixed preposition pros (pro"), meaning “towards,” adds the idea of definiteness, a conscious direction of one’s prayer to God, and a consciousness on the part of the one praying, of God’s presence and attention. The verb is imperfect, and pictures Jesus as praying through the early morning hours. As for the reason for our Lord’s sudden departure, Expositors has the following: “The real reason of the flight was doubtless a desire to preach in as many synagogues as possible before the hostility of the scribes, instinctively dreaded, had time to act obstructively. Jesus had a plan of a preaching tour in Galilee, and He felt He could not begin too soon. He left in the night, fearing the opposition of the people.”

Translation. And in the last watch of the night between three and six, in the early part of the watch while it was still somewhat dark, He arose and went out, and went off into a deserted place, and was there praying. (1:36) Followed after Him. The verb is  (katadiwkw);  (diwkw) is used of the hunt or chase. It means “to pursue.” The prefixed preposition kata (kata) has the local meaning of “down,” and the perfective force of “down to the finish.” “They hunted Him out,” or “They tracked Him down.” Robertson quotes Swete as saying, “Simon’s intentions at least were good; the Master seemed to be losing precious opportunities and must be brought back.” The object of the disciples was to bring Jesus back to Capernaum. Translation. And Simon and those with him hunted Him out. (1:37) All men seek for Thee. “All” is pantes (pante"), not merely all the inhabitants of Capernaum, but all the world. “Seek” is present tense, durative action. All men are seeking Thee. Translation. And they found Him, and say to Him, All are seeking for you. (1:38) Let us go,  (ajgwmen), present hortatory subjunctive, “Let us be going, and keep on going,” emphasizing the length and arduousness of the contemplated preaching mission. The Nestle Greek text includes the word allachou (ajllacou) “elsewhere,” which is not handled by the a.v. Into the next towns. “Next” is echomenas (ejcomena"), a classic use meaning “clinging to, next to a thing,” pointing to the towns close to Capernaum. “Towns” is the translation of  (kwmopolei"), “country towns or village cities without walls.” I came forth,  (ejxhlqon), “I came out,” that is, from Capernaum. Translation. And He says to them, Let us be going elsewhere into the nearby country towns in order that also there I may preach. For, for this purpose I came out. (1:39) The word  (hjlqon), “He came,” is not handled by the a.v. Translation. He came, preaching, into their synagogues all over Galilee, also casting out demons. (1:40) There came a leper. The verb is the historic present, picturing a past event with the vividness of a present reality. “And there comes a leper.” To Him, “to” is pros (pro"), face to face with Jesus. The leper confronts Him. Beseeching,  (parakalew), an urgent appeal, “I beg of you, please.” If thou wilt. There are two words in Greek meaning “to be willing, to desire,”  (qelw), “a desire that comes from one’s emotions,” and boulomai (boulomai), “a desire which comes from one’s reason.” The first is used here. The leper appeals to the

tenderheartedness of the Messiah. Thou canst, dunamai (dunamai), “to have power, to be able.” The leper does not doubt the ability of the Lord to heal. He has heard of His Capernaum ministry. But “he doubts the will,” Expositors says, “naturally from the nature of the disease, especially if it be the first cure of the kind, or the first so far as the man knows.” Translation. And there comes to Him a leper, begging Him and kneeling, saying to Him, If you are willing, you have power to cleanse me. (1:41) Jesus, moved with compassion, splagchnizomai (splagcnizomai), passive voice. The pitiful state of the leper aroused in our Lord’s heart the feeling of pity and love. Expositors says, “Watch carefully the portraiture of Christ’s personality in this Gospel, Mark’s specialty.” Luke, describing the same incident, does not have the words “moved with compassion,” but has the same construction that Mark uses “having stretched out His hand,” an aorist participle, and “touched him,” an aorist verb, but instead of using the finite verb “saith” of Mark, he uses the present participle “saying.” This gives us a wonderful truth. The rule of Greek grammar that governs this construction is that the action of the present tense participle goes on simultaneously with the action of the leading verb. That is, Jesus was saying “I will” at the time He was touching the leper. But the thought “I will,” the determination to follow out His desire to cleanse the leper, and the act of cleansing him, all preceded the spoken words and the outstretched hand. All of which means that our Lord did not touch the leper in order to cleanse him, but to show him and the people around, that he was cleansed of his leprosy. The Levitical law forbad a Jew to touch a leper. Our Lord lived under that law and obeyed it. The first kind touch of a human hand that leper ever experienced, was the gentle touch of the Son of God. How all this illustrates the sweet old story of the gospel. Leprosy is a type of sin. The sinner comes crying, “Unclean, unclean, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.” And the Lord Jesus, moved with compassion, stretches out His hand and touches him, saying, “I will, be thou clean.” And, as in the case of the leper, He cleanses us from sin before He touches us. In John 1:12, justification precedes regeneration in the divine economy. Mercy is only given on the basis of justice satisfied. So it is, “But as many as appropriated Him, to them gave He a legal right to become born ones of God, to those who put their trust in His name.” And so, as the sinner recognizes the Lord Jesus as the One who through His outpoured blood on the Cross, procured for sinful man a legal right to the mercy of God, he becomes the recipient of regeneration and of all the other parts of salvation. Be thou clean. The verb is in the aorist passive imperative. That is, “be cleansed at once.” It was an immediate cure. Translation. And having been moved with compassion, having stretched out His hand, He touched him; and He says to him, I desire it. Be cleansed at once. (1:42) And as soon as He had spoken. These words are not in the best texts. The leprosy departed. The verb is  (ajphlqon), literally, “to go off from,” the prefixed preposition signifying separation. The man was completely separated from his leprosy.

Translation. And immediately there left him completely the leprosy, and he was cleansed. (1:43, 44) He straightly charged him. The verb is embrimaomai (ejmbrimaomai) from brimaomai (brimaomai) “to be moved with anger.” The word Mark uses means “to snort,” and was used of horses. In the classics it meant “to be very angry, to be moved with indignation.” In the Bible it has a use unknown to profane authors, “to charge with earnest admonition, sternly to charge, threateningly to enjoin.” Sent him away,  (ejkballw), “to throw out.” Our Lord thrust the leper out from the crowd that was surrounding Him. Vincent says, “The reason for this charge and dismissal lay in the desire of Jesus not to thwart His ministry by awaking the premature violence of His enemies; who, if they should see the leper and hear his story before he had been officially pronounced clean by the priest, might deny either that he had been a leper or had been truly cleansed.” Expositors says, “He (Mark) does not mean to impute real anger to Jesus, but only a masterful manner dictated by a desire that the benefit should be complete—, away, out of this, to the priest; do what the law requires, that you may be not only clean but recognized as such by the authorities, and so received by the people as a leper no longer.” Robertson says that embrimaomai (ejmbrimaomai) “expresses powerful emotion as Jesus stood here face to face with leprosy, itself a symbol of sin and all its train of evils.” For a testimony unto them. This refers to the testimony of the priests to the people, to the effect that the leper was officially pronounced clean. Translation. And sternly charging him, He immediately thrust him out, and says to him, See to it that you say nothing to anyone, but, go, show yourself to the priest, and present that offering with reference to your cleansing which Moses commanded, for a testimony to them. (1:45) “To publish” is  (khrussw) “to make a public proclamation.” The infinitive is present in tense, speaking of a continuous proclaiming. “To blaze abroad” is  (diafhmizw) “to blaze abroad,” and speaks of continuous action. “The matter” is logos (logo"), the account of the healing. The city. There is no article in the Greek text. Jesus was unable to enter any city. “Came” is  (hjrconto), an imperfect, “They kept on coming.” Expositors says: “What Jesus feared seems to have happened. The man went about telling of his cure, and neglecting the means necessary to obtain social recognition as cured. This cure and the popularity it caused may have cooperated to bring Christ’s synagogue ministry to an abrupt termination by stirring up envy. Jesus was between two fires, and His order to the leper, “Go, show thyself,” had a double reference: to the man’s good and to the conciliation of the scribes and synagogue rulers.” Translation. But having gone out, he began to constantly proclaim in public a great deal, and to be blazing abroad the account, so that no longer was He able to enter a city, but was outside in uninhabited places. And they kept on coming to Him from everywhere.

CHAPTER TWO (2:1) Again He entered into Capernaum. The “again” points back to His departure (1:35) on a preaching tour. “He entered” is an aorist participle in the Greek text, making the fact of His discovery in Capernaum by the townspeople, the important thing. “Having entered, it was noised.” “After some days” is  (di hJmerwn) literally “after days.” Expositors remarks that this expression “suggests a short period, a few days, which seems too short for the time required for the preaching tour, even if it had been cut short by hostile influence, as is not improbable.” Expositors suggests that the words dia chronou (dia cronou) “for a considerable time” would be the appropriate phrase. The solution to the difficulty is in construing the words “after some days” with “it was noised,” the resultant meaning being that some days went by after our Lord’s arrival in Capernaum before the people found out that He was there. He had been absent possibly for some months, and had returned to Capernaum quietly. “It was noised” is  (hjkousqh). The verb means “to hear.” The form is aorist passive. The subject is our Lord. “Having entered Capernaum, He was heard of as being in the house.” “In the house” is  (ejn oijkwi), namely, at home, in Peter’s house presumably. Translation. And having again entered into Capernaum, after some days He was heard of as being at home. (2:2) “Straightway” is not in the best texts. “Insomuch” is  (wJste). Expositors says of this word; “The gathering was phenomenal; not only the house filled, but the space about the door was crowded—no room for more people even there ( (mhde)), not to speak of within.” He preached the word to them. “Preached” is  (lalew) not  (khrussw) here. The latter word means “to make a public proclamation in a formal, grave, and authoritative manner which must be heeded.”  (Lalew), used originally just of sounds like the chatter of birds, the prattling of children, is used here of the most serious kind of speech. It takes note of the sound and the manner of speaking. One thinks of the words in the song In the Garden; “He speaks, and the sound of His voice is so sweet, the birds hush their singing.” Robertson says that the word  (lalew) is common in the vernacular papyri examples of social intercourse. Our Lord thus spoke to the crowd assembled, in a conversational tone. The beauty of His voice, the charm of His manner, and the tenderness and love in His countenance, must have come to this weary, sick group of people as a breath from heaven. The verb is in the imperfect tense, emphasizing continuous action. Expositors’ comment on the tense of this verb is as follows; “Jesus was preaching the gospel of the kingdom when the following incident happened. Preaching always first.” Translation. And there were gathered together many, so that no longer was there room to receive them, not even at the door; and He was talking

to them about the Word. (2:3) And they come to Him. Mark uses the present tense here of a past event. It is called the historical present, presenting in graphic language a past event with the vividness of a present reality. One can see them coming. “Bringing” is  (ferw), “to carry some burden, to move by bearing.” “Sick of the palsy” is from paralutikos (paralutiko"), which is made up of  (luw) “to loose,” and para (para), “alongside,” thus “suffering from the relaxing of the nerves on one side.” Our word is “a paralytic.” “Which was borne of four,” is airomenon hupo tessaron (aijromenon uJpo tessaron). The word  (aijrw) means “to raise from the ground, take up, to carry what has been raised up.” The verbal form is a participle, describing the paralytic. Expositors says: “The arrival creates a stir … this may mean more than the four who actually carried the sick man,… friends accompanying. The bearers might be servants.” Translation. And they come, bearing to Him a paralytic who had been picked up and was being carried by four men. (2:4) When they could not come nigh unto Him. The Nestle and Westcott and Hort texts have prosenegkai (prosenegkai), the second aorist infinitive of  (prosferw) “to bring to.” “Him” is in the locative case, emphasizing “position within which.” It is, “not being able to bring him to a place before Him.” “For the press” is dia ton ochlon (dia ton ojclon), in modern English, “because of the crowd.” “They uncovered the roof” is  (ajpestegasan thn steghn). Here we have a cognate accusative. “They unroofed the roof.” This is the only instance of this word in the New Testament. It is a rare word in late Greek, Robertson says. Moulton and Milligan do not give any papyri examples of it. The oriental roof was flat, and the veranda of the house. It could be reached by outside stairs. This would explain the men’s access to the roof. “When they had broken it up,” is from  (ejxorussw), “to dig out, to scoop out.” Vincent says: “A modern roof would be untiled or unshingled; but an oriental roof would have to be dug to make such an opening as was required. A composition of mortar, tar, ashes, and sand is spread upon the roofs, and rolled hard, and grass grows in the crevices.… In some cases, as in this, stone slabs are laid across the joists. See Luke 5:19, where it is said ‘they let him down through the tiles;’ so that they would be obliged, not only to dig through the grass and earth, but also to pry up the tiles.” They let down the bed. “Let down” is from  (calaw) “to let down from a higher place to a lower.” Probably the men had a rope fastened to each corner of the pallet on which the paralytic lay. “Bed” is from krabattos (krabatto"), “a thickly padded quilt or mat.” “Lay” is katakeimai (katakeimai), keimai (keimai) “to lie,” and kata (kata), “down.” The paralytic was a dead weight. He was prostrate. Translation. And not being able to bring the paralytic to a place before Him because of the crowd, they unroofed the roof where He was, and having dug it up, they lowered the pallet where the paralytic was lying

prostrate. (2:5) When Jesus saw their faith. “Saw,” aorist participle in predicate position. “Jesus” is articular, in nominative case. The construction calls for, “And having seen their faith, Jesus says to the paralytic.” “Their” refers to the men who carried the sick man and dug up the roof and let him down into the room. Their actions were the visible evidence of their faith. It is possible that the paralytic had faith to be healed, but the faith referred to here was that evidenced by the strenuous actions of the men. What a repair bill Peter must have had when it came to replacing the torn-up roof. Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. “Son” is teknon (teknon), “child,” the word “son” being the proper translation of huios (uiJo"), “an adult son.” Moulton and Milligan say that teknon (teknon) is used in the papyri as a term of kindly address, even to adults. The wretched physical condition of the sick man was due to his sinful life. Yet Jesus treats him with the utmost of kindness. “Be forgiven” is the translation (a.v.) of  (ajfihmi). Moulton and Milligan say that the uses of  (ajfihmi) start from the etymological sense “throw.” They give an illustration of its use in the papyri, “let the pot drop.” From this primitive physical meaning may be derived the common meaning “leave, let go.” Another instance of its use in koine (koine) Greek is in the words “waived the extra fifty percent,” which usage is seen in Matthew 18:27, and which idea leads to the general idea of forgiveness. Still another instance of its use is found in the Rosetta stone, in the words “total remission” of certain taxes. Thayer gives for  (ajfihmi), “to send from one’s self, to send away, to let go or give up a debt, to remit, forgive.” Our word “forgive” does not, as commonly used, give an adequate picture of this Greek word. We say that we have forgiven some one who has wronged us. By that we mean that any feeling of animosity we may have had, has changed to one of renewed friendliness and affection. We do not hold the wrong done us against the person anymore. But so far as the act itself is concerned, we cannot do anything about it. It has been done, and it cannot be removed from the one who committed the wrong. But this word  (ajfihmi) includes within its content of meaning, the act of dealing with the act of wrong doing in such a way that the sinner who appropriates the Lord Jesus as Saviour, has his sins put away, and in two ways. First, they are put away on a judicial basis by the out-poured blood of Christ. He paid the penalty the broken law required, and thus satisfied divine justice. Second, on the basis of that, God removes the guilt of that sin from the believing sinner and bestows a positive righteousness, Jesus Christ Himself, in whom this person stands justified forever This is what is meant by Bible forgiveness in the case of God and a believing sinner. “Be forgiven” (a.v.) is present indicative in the Greek text and states a fact. “Are forgiven” is the correct rendering. Translation. And having seen their faith, He says to the paralytic, Child, your sins are put away. (2:6, 7) Certain of the scribes sitting there. Expositors says; “If the posture is to be pressed, they must have been early on the spot, so as to get near to Jesus and hear and see Him distinctly.” These scribes were there to cause trouble and to pick flaws in His teaching. They were jealous of this new Teacher’s popularity and power. Reasoning in their hearts. The word is dialogizomai (dialogizomai), “to bring

together different reasons, to revolve in one’s mind, to deliberate.” But what they thought in their hearts, was expressed in their faces, actions, and very personalities. There was a hostile atmosphere in the room, and our Lord sensed it. Why does this man thus speak blasphemies? The best Greek texts have, “Why is this one speaking thus? He is blaspheming.” Our word “blaspheme” is the transliteration of  (blasfhmew) “to utter injurious speech or slander.” Robertson has a valuable note here: “It was, they held, blasphemy for Jesus to assume this divine prerogative. Their logic was correct. The only flaw in it was the possibility that Jesus held a peculiar relation to God which justified His claim. So the two forces clash here as now on the deity of Jesus Christ.” Translation. And there were certain of the scribes sitting there and debating in their hearts, Why is this one speaking in this manner? He is blaspheming. Who is able to put away sins except one person, God? (2:8) Immediately when Jesus perceived in His spirit. “Perceived” is epignous (ejpignou"). The verbal form comes from  (ginwskw) “to know by experience,” and is ingressive aorist, speaking of entrance into a new state. The prefixed preposition epi (ejpi) gives the force of “fully.” Our Lord was not only immediately aware of what the scribes were thinking, but was clearly and fully aware of it. In His spirit. “Spirit” is pneuma (pneuma), which has various meanings. Here it refers to the rational spirit, the power by which a human being feels, thinks, wills, decides. Translation. And immediately having become fully aware in his innermost being that in this manner they were debating within themselves, He says to them, Why are you debating these things in your hearts? (2:9) “Whether” is ti (ti), “which of two?” “Arise” is egeire (ejgeire), a present imperative, speaking of progressive action, literally, “be arising.” “Take up” is aron (ajron), “to pick up and carry,” aorist tense and imperative mode showing that the command was given with military snap and curtness, and was to be obeyed at once. “Walk” is peripatei (peripatei), “to walk about,” present imperative, “start walking about and keep on walking.” It was a permanent cure. Translation. Which of the two is easier to say to the paralytic? Your sins are put away; or to say, Be arising and pick up your pallet at once and carry it away, and start walking and keep on walking? (2:10, 11) That ye might know. “That” is hina (iJna) “in order that,” introducing a purpose clause. “Know” is oida (oijda), speaking of absolute, positive, beyond a peradventure of a doubt, knowledge. “Power” is not dunamis (dunami") here as in Romans 1:16, namely, power in the sense of that which overcomes resistance, but exousia (ejxousia), delegated authority. The word is derived from exesti (ejxesti), “it is permitted, it is lawful.” It means literally “to be out of.” When a person delegates someone to do something for him and in his name, he is in a sense in that person, doing that very thing which he asked the other one to do. The Son of Man on earth has the delegated authority, as the Son of God, from God the Father, to forgive sins. It is the answer to the reasonings of the scribes, “Who can forgive sins but God only?” By their question, the scribes have given just another demonstration of the deity of the Messiah, for His miracle

proved that His claims were true. “Go thy way” is the present imperative of  (uJpagw) which means “to withdraw one’s self, to depart, go away.” The word is used of the final departure of one who ceases to be another’s companion or attendant. The use of the word here indicates the desire of our Lord that the paralytic when healed, would not remain with Him and thus attract unnecessary attention to Him. For the same reason He forbade the man cleansed from leprosy to publish it abroad. It would only increase the antagonism of the religious leaders and thus hinder His preaching ministry. Translation. But in order that you may have absolute knowledge of the fact that the Son of Man holds authority to forgive sins on the earth,—He says to the paralytic, To you I say, Be arising, pick up your pallet at once, and be going away into your home. (2:12) The word order in the Greek text is, “And he arose and immediately, having picked up his pallet, went out before all of them.” They were all amazed. The verb is  (ejxisthmi), literally, “to stand out of.” Our word “ecstasy” comes from this word. A person in an ecstasy might just as well be standing out of his body so far as registering sense impressions is concerned. His attention is so taken up with the one thing, that he notices nothing else. These people were in a sense taken out of their usual routine of sense impressions by the wonder of the miracle, and had their entire attention taken up with the marvelous cure, and this, to the point of being almost beside themselves. This was the intensity of their amazement. Translation. And he arose, and immediately, having picked up his pallet, he went out before all of them, so that they were astounded for some time, and were glorifying God, saying, In this manner, never have we seen it. (2:13) Again; Expositors says, “This incident is not to be conceived as following immediately after that narrated in the foregoing section. Verse 13 interrupts the continuity of the history.” By the seaside. “By” is para (para), “alongside.” It suggests the idea that our Lord did not only go to the seashore, but that He loved to walk along the shore, perhaps for rest and quiet, and for the opportunity to be alone with God His Father. The freshness of the air, the quieting influence of the sound of the waves, and the long view over the sea which met His eyes, all would be a tonic to the Man Christ Jesus, whose human nature with its limitations, needed recreation and rest just as our bodies need these things. Resorted unto Him. The verb is imperfect, emphasizing action going on. The whole crowd kept on coming to Him. He taught them. Again, imperfect in tense. He kept on teaching them. Translation. And He went out along the seashore. And all the crowd kept on coming to Him, and He kept on teaching them. (2:14) As He passed by. The durative aspect of the present tense is seen here. As Jesus was passing by, He saw Levi. Sitting at the receipt of custom. Levi was sitting at the toll-gate on the Great West

Road from Damascus to the Mediterranean. This was also the customs office at Capernaum, the landing place for the many ships that traversed the Sea of Galilee or coasted from town to town. He was a tax collector who collected toll for Herod Antipas. Being in the employ of the Roman government which bled its subjects for taxes, these tax collectors were hated and despised by the Jews, and classed with sinners. “At” is epi (ejpi), “on.” He was sitting on the elevated platform or bench which was the principal feature of the toll-office, and which was put for the whole establishment. Here was a Jew who loved money more than the good regard of and fellowship with his countrymen. The bond between Jew and Jew is usually far more close than it is between members of other races, since the Jew is an isolated, unique, persecuted nation. It all shows the sordidness of Levi’s soul. But here was a man our Lord could use. He had intensity of purpose, and that intensity could be turned into right channels by Jesus. This is not the first time our Lord had seen Levi. His choice of this man as one of the Twelve, was based upon long observation of him as he sat at his tax collector’s desk. And this is not the first time that Levi saw our Lord. The whole city of Capernaum was flooded with our Lord’s fame and reputation. Follow Me. The word is  (ajkolouqew). It comes from a word meaning “to walk the same road.” It means, “to follow one who precedes, to join him as his attendant, to join one as his disciple, to side with his party.” All these things were involved in our Lord’s command. This was more than an invitation. The word is in the imperative mode, issuing a command. It is not, “Would you like to follow Me? I extend this invitation to you.” Here was a King, sovereign in His demands. Levi recognized the imperative tone of our Lord’s voice. This was an effectual call, like the call to salvation. The one called is rendered willing to respond. Levi left his tax collector’s desk in the power of a compulsion which he did not understand. It meant poverty for him, instead of the affluence and luxury to which he had been accustomed. The verb is in the present tense, commanding the beginning of an action and its habitual continuance. It is, “Start following Me, and continue as a habit of life to follow Me.” This meant for Levi, that henceforth he would walk the same road that Jesus walked, a road of self-sacrifice, a road of separation, a road of altruism, a road of suffering, a road of holiness. But the command was not merely, “Follow Me.” It was “Follow with Me.” The pronoun is in the associative-instrumental case. The person indicated by the pronoun is the instrument which completes the association between the two individuals. Our Lord did not therefore merely command Levi to become His follower. He welcomed him to a participation in His companionship. And this “with Me” companionship, was not one of an Indian-file nature, one following after another. It was a side by side walk down the same road. And this blessed fellowship is for every believer in the Lord Jesus. Translation. And as He was passing by, He saw Levi the son of Alphaeus, sitting at the tax collector’s desk. And He says to him, Start following with Me, and continue to do so as a habit of life. And having arisen, he followed with Him. (2:15) And it came to pass. The verb is in the present tense, the historical present, presenting a past event with the vividness of a present reality. We use the same device today in relating an incident. Literally, “And it comes to pass.” Sat at meat. The verb is katakeimai (katakeimai), “to lie prostrate, to have lain

down.” The same verb is used of Peter’s wife’s mother lying prostrate because of her illness (1:30). The orientals did not sit at the table on chairs, but reclined on couches, the head or raised end of the couch being at the table, the couch in its length extending out from the edge of the table. The words “at meat” are not in the Greek text as words. The verb itself refers here to a person reclining at the table for the purpose of eating. In passing, we might suggest that the word “meat” in the a.v., is the translation of the Greek  (brwma) which means “that which is eaten, food.” Today the word is used of edible animal flesh. Substitute the word “food,” and the translation is brought up to date. Our Lord said, “My food is to be doing the will of Him that sent Me” (John 4:34). In other words, that which was the sustenance of our Lord’s deepest inner life was, to be constantly doing the will of God. In his house. Luke 5:29 makes it clear that it was the home of Levi. Luke says that Levi made our Lord a great feast. Many sat also together with Jesus. That is, many reclined at the table with Him, or in other words, ate a meal with Him. Many publicans and sinners. Here was a crowd that Jesus could not contact in the synagogues. Expositors says that these Jewish tax collectors seem to have been excluded from the synagogue. This was Levi’s gesture of introducing his fellow tax collectors to his new-found Saviour. It was also an indication that our Lord was attracting a following from these tax collectors that swarmed the marts of trade in Capernaum, for Mark says, “There were many, and they followed Him.” It appears that some were feasting there who had not received a formal invitation, but because of their fascination for the new Jewish Teacher who befriended them while their fellow-countrymen ostracized them, they had come. His disciples. The Greek word for “disciples,”  (maqhth"), means “one who learns.” The word in itself does not include the idea of salvation in it, nor is it a guarantee of the fact that the person called a disciple is a saved person. A case in point is that of those individuals who rejected the teaching of salvation through atoning blood (John 6:60, 66). Judas was a disciple, and yet never was saved. Here the word is used of the disciples our Lord had just called to be His helpers. Translation. And it comes to pass that, as He was dining in his house, many tax collectors and sinners were dining with Jesus and His disciples, for there were many, and they followed with Him. (2:16) The scribes and the Pharisees. The best Greek texts have “The scribes of the Pharisees,” namely, the scribes who belonged to the sect of the Pharisees. The scribes were what Robertson calls “young theologues.” One might call them divinity students today. Vincent says that they had followed our Lord into the hall where the company was seated. He says this hall in Levi’s home answered to a similar one in Arabian houses which he describes as follows; it “was a long oblong hall about twenty feet in height, fifty in length, and sixteen or thereabouts in breadth. The walls were covered in a rudely decorated manner with brown and white wash, and sunk here and there into small triangular recesses, destined for the reception of books, lamps, and other such like objects. The roof was of timber, and flat; the floor was strewn with fine, clean sand, and garnished all round alongside of the walls with long strips of carpet upon which cushions, covered with faded silk, were disposed at suitable intervals.”

Translation. And the scribes belonging to the sect of the Pharisees, having seen that He was eating with the sinners and tax collectors, were saying to His disciples, With the tax collectors and sinners is He eating? (2:17) They that are whole. The word is  (ijscuw), “to be strong.” They that are sick. The word is  (kakw"). The word is used in 1:32, and translated “diseased.” Literally, “they who are having it bad,” physically. The Greek order of words shows where the emphasis is placed in the thought of our Lord, namely, “No need have those who are strong, for a doctor, but those who are sick.” In these words is found the reason why Jesus was in that motley group. He was there, not because He enjoyed that kind of company, for He did not. There was sin all about Him, and His righteous, sensitive soul shrank back from it. But He was there to reach their souls for salvation. To repentance. Not in the best texts. Translation. And having heard, Jesus says to them, No need do they have who are strong, for a doctor, but those who are ill. I did not come to call righteous ones but sinners. (2:18) And. The function of this conjunction here is that of a connection that is purely topical. It was another case where the Messiah was brought into conflict with the religious elements of the day. The disciples of John and of the Pharisees. The latter two words are in the nominative case in the best texts. The correct reading is “The disciples of John and the Pharisees.” Used to fast. We have the periphrastic imperfect, emphasizing the durative aspect of this tense. The idea Mark wishes to bring is that they were observing a fast at that very time. Robertson says that probably Levi’s feast happened on one of the weekly fast days. The disciples of John sided with the Pharisees in the Jewish ceremonial and ritualistic observances. John was in prison at that time. John’s disciples had not read their leader right when they sided with the Pharisees. He had called the Pharisees a brood of vipers. Here his disciples join with the Pharisees in criticizing Jesus. Translation. And John’s disciples and the Pharisees were observing a fast. And they come and say to Him, Because of what are John’s disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fasting, and your disciples are not fasting? (2:19) Children of the bridechamber. The word is huios (uiJo"), not teknon (teknon), properly “sons.” These were not the groomsmen, the friends of the bridegroom, but the guests invited to the wedding. This scene is laid in Galilee, where the custom of having groomsmen was not observed as in Judaea. Our Lord takes John’s own metaphor (John 3:29), substituting the sons of the bridechamber for the friend of the bridegroom, which latter designation John used of himself in his relation to the Messiah he proclaimed. Mourning does not befit a marriage scene. The three parables of the bridegroom, unfulled cloth, and new wineskins, illustrating and defending the conduct of Jesus in attending the

feast at Levi’s home on a Jewish fast day, are all given by the three evangelists, Mark, Matthew, and Luke. Robertson says that Jesus seems iconoclastic to the religious leaders of His day, and revolutionary in His emphasis on the spiritual instead of the ritualistic and ceremonial. The question of Jesus is preceded by one of the Greek particles of negation. The negative ou (oJu) when used with a question, expects an affirmative answer, the negative  (mh), a negative reply. Mark uses the latter, indicating that Jesus expected a negative answer in the minds of His hearers to His rhetorical question. Translation. And Jesus said to them, The sons of the bridechamber are not able to be fasting while the bridegroom is with them, are they? As long as they are having the bridegroom with them, they are not able to be fasting. (2:20) The days will come. The word “days” does not have the article in the Greek text. Stress is laid upon quality. That is, “days of such a nature will come.” The order in the Greek text is, “There shall be taken away from them the bridegroom,” the emphasis being upon the verb, since it comes first. The reference is to the crucifixion. In those days. The best texts have the singular, “in that day.” Expositors says this change from the plural to the singular is very impressive, and is for the purpose of expressing the solemn character of the fact stated. Translation. But there shall come days of such a character, when there shall be taken away from them the bridegroom, and then they shall fast in that day. (2:21) A piece of new cloth on an old garment. “Piece” is  (ejpiblhma) from  (ejpiballw) “to throw upon,” hence a patch, that which is imposed upon a rent in a piece of cloth to mend it. “New” is agnaphos (ajgnafo"), “unfulled, unmilled, undressed.” It refers to the fuller’s trade in which a new piece of cloth is made usable by a process of cleansing, shrinking, and thickening, through the use of moisture, heat, and pressure. The point is that unfulled cloth would shrink when used to patch fulled cloth, and thus tear away from the latter. “Old” is not from archaios (ajrcaio"), “old in point of time,” but from palaios (palaio") “old in point of use, worn-out.” The worn-out garment, weakened by use and age, would not furnish the unfulled patch with enough of a grip to keep both together. The patch refers to the Messiah’s new type of ministry and preaching, grace, as compared to the Mosaic law, the old worn-out garment which was ready to be set aside. We must be careful not to drive every detail of this parable to the wall. No parable walks on all fours, but will limp somewhere if the expositor seeks to explain every detail. No illustration using material objects to explain spiritual truth, is able to perfectly comprehend the latter, and for the reason that the material and the spiritual occupy two different spheres. There are those today who attempt to retain the Mosaic law which God set aside at the Cross, and put upon it the patch of grace. It happens as our Lord said, “The new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse.” When the attempt is made to mix law and grace, both lose their true identity and you have the doctrines of the Judaizers in the Galatian heresy. Translation. No one sews a patch consisting of unfulled cloth upon a worn-out garment. Otherwise that which fills it up takes away from it, the

new from the worn-out, and the rent becomes worse. (2:22) Old bottles. The latter word brings to one’s mind the idea of glass bottles. The Greek word is “wineskins.” These were made of the skins of animals. In the case of glass containers of wine, the corks would come out and the bottles would not burst. But it is easy to see that containers made of animal skins could easily burst under the pressure of newly-fermenting wine. It is important to adequately translate the word here, lest a thoughtful Bible student run up against a difficulty. “Old” is again palaios (palaio"), referring to worn-out wineskins. New wine, new bottles. Two different words for “new” are used. In the case of “wine” the word is neos (neo"), which means “new in point of time.” In the case of “bottles,” it is kainos (kaino"), which means “new in point of use,” this latter set over against palaios (palaio"), “old in point of use, worn-out.” The word “spilled” is not in the best manuscripts. The Greek word apollumi (ajpollumi) is construed both with “wine” and “bottles.” It means “to destroy, to render useless.” The same teaching is found in this parable as in the previous one, the commingling of the new with the old, which renders both useless. Translation. And no one puts newly-made wine into worn-out wineskins. Otherwise, the wine will burst the wineskins, and both the wine and the wineskins are destroyed. But newly-made wine is put into wineskins which are just beginning to be used. (2:23) And. The conjunction here does not connect this incident with the foregoing in a temporal way, but merely, in a topical. It was another case of conflict that Mark was reporting. Went through the cornfields. “Went through” is paraporeuomai (paraporeuomai) “to journey alongside.” The word seems to combine the ideas of going through and alongside. Jesus went through a cornfield on a footpath with grain on either side. The verbal form is present in tense, indicating durative action. He was going through the cornfields. Mark gives us vivid description rather than the mere facts of the incident. One can visualize our Lord and His disciples moving along that path through the cornfield. Began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn. The words “began as they went” are to be construed together. “As they went” is hodon poiein (oJdon poiein), an idiomatic expression meaning “to make one’s way.” Thus, “They began to be making their way through the cornfield.” To pluck. A participle, present tense, “plucking.” As they were making their way along the path, they were plucking the corn. Ears of corn. The word is stachus (stacu"), “an ear of corn or growing grain.” Robertson suggests grain of some sort, wheat or barley. In his Dictionary of the Bible, John D. Davis says, that the word for “corn” is “the generic name for several cereal grasses cultivated in Palestine, and so staple that corn and wine stand figuratively for the entire vegetable produce of the field.” The a.v. of John 12:24 has, “If a corn of wheat.” The word translated “corn” here is kokkos (kokko") which means “a grain.” Thus, the translators of this version used the English word “corn” as it was used in a.d. 1611, namely, “a grain.”

Translation. And it came to pass that on the Sabbath, He was proceeding along a path through the fields of grain. And His disciples began to be making their way, picking off the grains as they were going along. (2:24) The Pharisees said. The verb is elegon (ejlegon), imperfect in tense which is always durative in action. Had Mark wanted to speak merely of the fact of their speaking to Jesus, he would have used the aorist. But he goes out of his way to use the imperfect, all of which means that he wants to emphasize the fact that the Pharisees kept on speaking to Him about the matter. In the case of Jesus eating at Levi’s home during a Jewish fast, they speak to His disciples. Now, they speak directly to Him. They take issue with Him on the legality of picking the grain on the Sabbath, which was to them, reaping on a small scale. Translation. And the Pharisees kept on saying to Him, Observe that, will you. Why are they doing on the Sabbath that which is not lawful? (2:25) Have ye never. The word is oudepote (oJudepote), literally, “did ye not ever,” expecting an affirmative answer. These Pharisees knew the Old Testament scriptures frontwards and backwards. Our Lord was appealing to their knowledge of the Old Testament. Incidentally, our Lord did not say to these same religious teachers, “Search the scriptures” (John 5:39), but “Ye are constantly searching the scriptures.” The verb could be either imperative or indicative in form. The context here decides for the latter. Our Lord justifies the action of His disciples on the ground that they were hungry, and cites the case of David who satisfied his hunger by eating the bread from the table in the Holy Place, which bread was only for the priests. The verbs are in the singular, since David is the hero, and his followers are in the background. Translation. And He says to them, You have read, have you not, what David did when he had need and was hungry, he and those with him? (2:26) The house of God. This was the tabernacle, not the temple which Solomon built. Abiathar the high priest. I Samuel 21:1 names Ahimelech as high priest. Robertson says that apparently he was high priest at the time, and resolves the discrepancy by stating that it is possible that both father and son bore both names (I Sam. 22:20, II Sam. 8:17, I Chron. 18:16), Abiathar being mentioned, though both were involved. The shewbread. The Greek words are  (tou" ajrtou" th" proqesew"). The word for bread (artous (ajrtou")) is plural, referring to the loaves of bread. The word  (proqesew") is made up of the preposition pro (pro) which means “before,” and  (qesew") which comes from  (tiqhmi) “to place,” the compound word meaning in its verbal form “to set forth;” and in its noun form, “the setting forth” of a thing, the “placing it in view.” Vincent translates “the loaves of proposition,” namely, the loaves which were set forth before the Lord. The Jews called them the loaves of the face, namely, of the presence of God. There were twelve loaves of bread baked on Friday, and these were placed on the Table of Shewbread in the Holy

Place on the Sabbath, the others being removed. It was this old bread, Vincent says, that David ate, and which was ordinarily eaten only by Levitical priests. Translation. How he entered into the house of God when Abiathar was high priest; and the loaves that were set forth, he ate which it is not lawful to eat except for the priests; and he gave also to those who were with him? (2:27) The Sabbath was made for man. The word “man” is not aner (ajner), a male individual, but anthropos (ajnqropo"), the racial, generic term, in a sense, mankind, “For man” is  (dia ton ajnqrwpon), the preposition meaning, “on account of, for the sake of.” “Was made” is egeneto (ejgeneto), literally, “came into existence.” The principle is that the Sabbath is only a means to an end, the good of man. The rabbis, with all their petty rules, seemed to think that man was made for it. He said to them. The verb is imperfect. “He was saying.” It took some talking to get the idea across to minds warped with ecclesiasticism. Translation. And He was saying to them, The Sabbath for the sake of man came into being, and not man for the sake of the Sabbath. (2:28) The Son of Man; God the Son manifest in human flesh, identifying Himself in incarnation with mankind. Is Lord. The word is kurios (kurio") which means “he to whom a person or thing belongs, the owner;” it is used of the possessor and disposer of a thing. In this sense was the Son of Man Lord of the Sabbath. But the word is used in the LXX as a translation of the august title of God which we know as Jehovah, and thus has implications of deity. The Creator is Lord of creation, and Lord of the Sabbath He brought into being for the sake of mankind. “Also” is kai (kai), here, better translated “even.” Matthew and Luke record this statement as the climax, but only Mark has this little word kai (kai). The word “even” points to the Sabbath as so inviolable in the eyes of these formalists who strained out a gnat and swallowed a camel. Our Lord was no Sabbath breaker, but He set Himself against an attitude towards the Sabbath that would not permit the doing of good to a fellow-human being because it involved what the formalists called work, such as His healing of the sick on the Sabbath. Translation. So that the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.

CHAPTER THREE (3:1) And. The connection here is again merely topical. Here is another instance of collision between our Lord and the Jewish leaders with reference to the observance of the Sabbath. Again. It was His custom to attend the synagogue service on the Sabbath. The. Article is not in Greek text. He entered a synagogue. No particular synagogue is meant. The idea was, “He entered synagogue.” It was His characteristic place on the Sabbath. Withered. Perfect participle, speaking of an action completed in past time, having

present finished results. The withering of the hand was due to accident or disease. The man was not born with the deformity. Luke tells us it was his right hand. Just a touch of the Greek physician’s accurateness of detail in reporting a case. Translation. And He entered again into a synagogue. And there was there in that place a man whose one hand had withered. (3:2) And they watched Him. “They” were the Pharisees who had dogged our Lord’s footsteps on a previous Sabbath. The verb is in the imperfect tense, speaking of continuous action. They kept on watching Him, bent on finding our Lord at fault with reference to the Sabbath. Luke uses this verb in the middle voice to call attention to their personal interest in the proceedings. Here were the watchdogs of Israel’s religion, attempting to discredit this claimant to Messiahship by finding Him violating its regulations. The prefixed preposition para (para) which means “beside” in its local sense, speaks of the Pharisees as side-line observers. They would have nothing to do with our Lord, and kept themselves away from any fellowship with Him lest they be understood to be in sympathy with Him. They maintained an attitude of aloofness. The preposition in its perfective use accentuates the already-existing meaning of the verb. They were watching Him carefully and closely, as one who dogs another’s steps. Wycliffe translates: “They espieden Him,” that is, they played the spy. Whether He would heal. The verbal form is in the future tense, literally “whether He will heal.” Mark in this way places the reader at the time of the watching, looking forward, as the Pharisees did, to the future. That they might accuse Him. The distinctive word for “accuse”  (kathgorew) means “to accuse formally and before a tribunal, to bring a charge publicly.” The prefixed preposition kata (kata) suggests animosity. The Pharisees were determined on finding something in which He might be involved with the Old Testament law. The observance of the Sabbath seemed to present the best opportunity. Translation. And they kept on spying upon Him closely, as to whether He would on the Sabbath heal him, in order that they might bring a formal accusation against Him before a tribunal. (3:3) Stand forth. The literal Greek here is; “Be arising into the midst.” That is, “step into the midst of all the people so that all can see you.” Our Lord answered the spying attitude of the Pharisees by this daring act. He brought things out into the open at once, and threw out a challenge to them. Translation. And He says to the man having the withered hand, Arise, and stand in the midst. (3:4) To do good or to do evil? Expositors note is helpful: “to do good or evil to one, or to do the normally good or evil. Recent commentators favor the latter as essential to the cogency of Christ’s argument. But the former seems more consonant to the situation. It was a question of performing an act of healing. Christ assumes that the ethically good coincides with the humane (Sabbath made for man.) Therein essentially lay the difference

between Him and the Pharisees, in whose theory and practice, religious duty and benevolence, the divine and the human, were divorced. To do good or to do evil, these the only alternatives: to omit to do good in your power is evil; not to save life, when you can, is to destroy it.” They held their peace. The verb is imperfect. They kept on being quiet. Theirs was a painful, embarrassing silence. Expositors says: “What could they reply to a question which looked at the subject from a wholly different point of view, the ethical, from the legal one they were accustomed to? There was nothing in common between them and Jesus.” Translation. And He says to them, Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill? But they kept on being quiet. (3:5) He looked round about on them. The aorist in juxtaposition with the present tense of the participle “being grieved,” shows that it was a swift, sweeping glance. The prefixed preposition peri (peri), meaning “around,” indicates that His glance took them all in. With anger. There are three words speaking of anger, thumos (qumo"), indicating a sudden outburst of anger that cools off quickly,  (ojrgh), defining an abiding and settled habit of mind, not operative at all times, but exhibiting itself in the same way when the occasion demands it, and parorgismos (parorgismo") which speaks of anger in the sense of exasperation. The latter is forbidden in Scripture, “Let not the sun go down upon your wrath” (Eph. 4:26); the second,  (ojrgh) is permitted, but the qualification is that no sinful element be included in it. Mark uses the word  (ojrgh). Trench in his Synonyms in the New Testament, has some excellent material on this word: “Under certain conditions  (ojrgh) is a righteous passion to entertain. The Scripture has nothing in common with the Stoic’s absolute condemnation of anger. It inculcates no apatheia (ajpaqeia) (an apathetic attitude of no feeling whatever towards a thing), but only a metriopatheia (metriopaqeia), a moderation, not an absolute suppression, of the passions, which were given to a man as winds fill the sails of his souls, as Plutarch excellently puts it … Aristotle, in agreement with all deeper ethical writers of antiquity,… had affirmed that, when guided by reason, anger is a right affection, so the Scripture permits, and not only permits, but on fit occasions demands it … There is a wrath of God (Matt. 3:7) who would not love good, unless He hated evil, the two being so inseparable, that either He must do both or neither; a wrath also of the merciful Son (Mark 3:5); and a wrath which righteous men not merely may, but, as they are righteous, must feel; nor can there be a surer and sadder token of an utterly prostrate moral condition than the not being able to be angry with sin—and sinners. ‘Anger,’ says Fuller, ‘is one of the sinews of the soul; he that wants it hath a maimed mind, and with Jacob sinew-shrunk in the hollow of his thigh, must needs halt’ ” Robertson quotes Gould as saying; “Anger against wrong as wrong, is a sign of moral health.” Being grieved for the hardness of their hearts. Our Lord’s anger was tempered by grief. The participle is present in tense, thus durative in meaning, showing the continuous state of grief of the Man of Sorrows at the sins of the people, the aorist verb in juxtaposition; speaking of the look of anger as but momentary. “Hardness” is the translation of  (pwrwsi"). The verbal form means “to cover with a thick skin, to harden by covering with a callus,” the noun  (pwro") meaning, “hard skin, a hardening.” The word Mark uses means “obtuseness of mental discernment, dulled

perception.” Here the obtuseness is not mental but moral and spiritual. The word “hearts” is singular in the Greek text, “the hardness of their heart.” Expositors, commenting on this says; “singular, as if the whole class had but one heart, which was a fact so far as the type of heart (hardened) was concerned.” Vincent suggests that the word “hardening” gives the thought of the Greek better than the word “hardness.” It hints at the process going on. Stretch forth thy hand. Expositors says: “The stretching forth of the withered hand in obedience to Christ’s command, conclusive evidence of cure, was the signal for an immediate exodus of the champions of orthodox Sabbath-keeping; full of wrath because the Sabbath was broken, and especially because it was broken by a miracle bringing fame to the transgressor.” The words “whole as the other” are not in the Nestle text. The word “restored,”  (ajpokaqisthmi), means “to restore to its former state.” Translation. And having looked round about on them with anger, being grieved at the hardening of their hearts, He says to the man, Stretch out your hand at once. And he stretched it out. And his hand was restored to its former state. (3:6) Took counsel with the Herodians. The Nestle text has “gave counsel with the Herodians,” that is, offered counsel with the Herodians as the solution to their problem. The Herodians were a Jewish party in the time of our Lord who were evidently partisans of the Herod family. The Herods were not of proper Jewish descent, and they had supplanted a royal family not merely Jewish, but of priestly blood and rank. They also supported their authority by trying to please their Roman patrons. In doing this, they came into direct antagonism with the Pharisees. But in the case of our Lord, these two warring parties united. The Pharisees really aimed at the life of our Lord, and thus it was helpful to gain the assistance of people having influence at court. Went forth, and straightway. It is, “having gone out” i.e., of the synagogue, immediately, that is, on the Sabbath, they sought to destroy Him. One wonders whether our Lord when He uttered the words “to save life or to kill” (3:4), was referring to their purpose of putting Him to death. Translation. And having gone out, the Pharisees at once with the Herodians were giving counsel against Him, how they might destroy Him. (3:7) Jesus with His disciples. Expositors calls attention to the emphatic position of the words “with His disciples,” and says; “They now come to the front. We are to hear something about them to which the notice of the crowd is but the prelude.” To the sea. Robertson quotes Swete as saying; “He and His would be safer by the open beach.” Great multitude. The word “great,” polu (polu), is in an emphatic position, and calls attention to the fact that it was an exceptionally large crowd. The crowd did not gather in an hour. Mark’s descriptions are sometimes fragmentary, and the gaps must be filled in by the Spirit-taught reader. It evidently took some time for this vast assemblage to gather together. Vincent, commenting on this verse says: “Mark alone notes no less than eleven occasions on which Jesus retired from His work, in order to escape His enemies or to pray

in solitude, for rest, or for private conference with His disciples. See 1:12, 3:7, 6:31, 46; 7:24, 31; 9:2, 10:1, 14:34.” Translation. And Jesus with His disciples withdrew to the sea, and a vast multitude from Galilee followed, and from Judaea. (3:8) What great things He did. The verb is present in tense, speaking of durative action. The people were continually hearing of the many miracles He was always performing. Translation. And from Jerusalem, and from Idumaea and across the Jordan, and about Tyre and Sidon, a vast multitude hearing constantly of such great things which He is continually doing, came to Him. (3:9) A small ship should wait on Him. The expression “a small ship” is the translation of ploiarion (ploiarion). In John 21:3, we have the disciples entering a ship, a ploion (ploion), their large fishing vessel. In 21:8, they row from the ploion (ploion) in a ploiarion (ploiarion), a little boat, namely, the rowboat or dinghy which was attached to the large fishing boat. The small ship that waited on Jesus, was a rowboat. “Wait on” is from  (proskarterew), which when used of persons means “to give constant attention to a thing,” and of things as here, “to be in constant readiness for one.” Throng Him. The word is  (qlibw), “to press hard upon.” It is so used when speaking of pressing grapes so as to extract the juice. Jesus stayed with the crowds, for they needed Him. But He found it necessary to protect Himself from them, since they might crush Him. Therefore He asked that a little boat be always kept in readiness and in close to the shore so as to be able to take Him off at a moment’s notice, should the crowd throng Him and thus crush Him. The boat was to keep moving as He moved down the shore line. The verb is in the present subjunctive, showing continuous action. Some of the disciples procured a rowboat and kept on rowing near the shore, keeping a watchful eye on their Master. Translation. And He spoke to His disciples to the effect that they should always keep a small boat in readiness for Him because of the crowd, in order that they might not crush Him. (3:10) The reason for this provision becomes more apparent in this verse. Pressed upon Him. The verb is  (ejpipiptw), “to fall upon.” Those around Jesus were falling against Him to the extent that it was dangerous. They were knocking against Him in their eagerness to be healed. The sight must have been pathetic. They hoped to obtain a cure even though it might be by a rude collision. Plagues. The word is mastix (mastix), “a stroke or a scourge.” We use the same expression in the words “a paralytic stroke,” or an “influenza scourge.” Translation. For He healed many, so that as a result, they kept on jostling Him in order that they might be touching Him, as many as had a distressing bodily disease.

(3:11) Unclean spirits. The Greek text has “the spirits, the unclean ones.” Both noun and adjective are preceded by the definite article, indicating those particular spirits which took part in this scene. When they saw Him, fell down before Him. The verb is  (qewrew). It is used primarily, not of an indifferent spectator, but of one who looks at a thing with interest and for a purpose. It would be used of a general officially reviewing or inspecting an army, while theaomai (qeaomai) would be used of a civilian looking at the parade.  (Qewrew) would include within its meaning a critical, understanding investigation, while theaomai (qeaomai) would speak of the mere registering of impressions. The demons exhibited interest and purpose in their critical observation of the Lord Jesus. They looked at Him with a practiced eye, long used to the measuring of the good and the true as exhibited in the character of God. They recognized in Him the embodiment of the holiness out from the presence of which they were driven when the angel Lucifer fell and became Satan, in whose fall they shared because they followed him in his rebellion against the Most High. Some think that the demons are the disembodied beings of a pre-Adamic race which inhabited the perfect earth of Genesis 1:1. The verb is in the imperfect tense, the imperfect of repeated action. The demons kept on falling down before Him and crying out. The verb is  (krazw) which means “to cry aloud, to call out aloud.” Of course, we are to understand that they did this in the bodies of those in whom they had taken residence, which means that we have the spectacle of demonized persons constantly falling prostrate before the Lord. Cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God. The verb is again imperfect. They kept on constantly crying. What horrible confusion this was, deep throaty, raucous voices from the Satanic world. The word “Thou” is intensive, as shown by the Greek text. The Greek verb carries its own person with it. When a personal pronoun is used in connection with the verb, it is intensive in use. It is, “As for you, you are the Son of God.” This intensive use particularizes the subject of the verb. Our Lord is the unique, peculiar, only Son of God, in a class by Himself, with whom in His unique relationship to God, no one can be compared. The Jews recognized this when they accuse our Lord of saying that God was His own, His unique, private Father, His Father in a sense in which He was not the Father of anybody else (John 5:18). This indicates a knowledge by the demons, of the Trinity. This same knowledge Satan himself possesses, for he said, “In view of the fact that you are Son of God by nature, speak to the end that these stones become loaves of bread” (Matt. 4:3). Translation. And the spirits, the unclean ones, as often as they set eyes on Him, kept on falling prostrate before Him, and kept on crying out with a loud voice, saying, As for you, you are the Son of God. (3:12) He straightly charged them. The word is  (ejpitimaw), “to tax with fault, chide, rebuke, reprove, censure severely.” It is commonly rendered “rebuke” in the n.t. In classical Greek its predominating sense is that of severe, strenuous reproach for unworthy deeds or acts. In this sense, the word carries at bottom, a suggestion of a charge under penalty. Our Lord did not wish to have the testimony of the demons to His deity. He wanted no advertising from that source. Translation. And He kept on rebuking them and charging them under

penalty that they should not make Him known. (3:13) Calleth unto Him whom He would. “Calleth unto Him” is  (proskalew). The middle voice shows that our Lord in calling these individuals did it in His own interest. They were to be for Himself. The prefixed preposition pros (pro"), meaning “to” or “towards” gives us the idea “unto Him.” The verb “would” is  (qelw), “whom He desired.” The intensive pronoun is used with it. The idea is, “whom He himself desired.” That is, He did not allow any to offer themselves. He did the choosing. They came to Him. The verb is aperchomai (ajpercomai) which means “to go off from” someone or some place. The prefixed preposition implies separation. It was an invitation to leave the vast crowd and follow Him up the hill. It was addressed to a larger number than twelve, from whom He afterwards selected the Twelve. This selection, Luke tells us, was preceded by a night of prayer. This was a crisis in the ministry of our Lord. Translation. And He goes up into the mountain and calls for Himself and to Himself those whom He Himself desired, and they went off to Him. (3:14, 15) He ordained. The verb is the simple word  (poiew) “to make.” That is, He made twelve, constituted them as a compact body. That they should be with Him. The verb is present subjunctive, thus durative in action. One purpose of our Lord in forming the Twelve was that they might constantly be with Him. This would be their preliminary training. That He might send them forth. The verb is  (ajpostellw), “to send off from one’s self, furnished with credentials, with a commission to act as one’s representative and accomplish a certain mission.” The noun apostolos (ajpostolo") which comes from the verb, and from which we derive our word “apostle,” was used for an envoy, an ambassador. Thus, the Twelve were to be His ambassadors. To preach. The verb is  (khrussw). The word means “to make a public proclamation with such gravity, formality, and authority as must be heeded.” That was to be the manner of their delivery as they gave out the proclamation of the gospel. To have power to heal sicknesses and to cast out devils. “Power” is not the translation of dunamis (dunami"), used in Romans 1:16 of the supernatural power of God, but of exousia (ejxousia) which means here, “delegated authority.” God did not put His supernatural power into the hands of the Twelve to be exercised by them. He delegated to them the authority to cast out demons in the sense that they would speak the word declaring the casting out, and God’s power (dunamis (dunami")) would cast out the demon. The words “to heal sicknesses” are not in the Nestle text. It is most unfortunate that the a.v., translates diabolos (diabolo") which means “devil,” and daimonion (daimonion) which means “demon,” by the one word “devil.” There is one Devil, and many demons. Furthermore, the Devil is a fallen angel, whereas demons belong to a different category of beings. Translation. And He constituted twelve in order that they might constantly be with Him, and in order that He might send them forth as ambassadors with credentials, representing Him, to accomplish a certain task, that of making a proclamation, and, being equipped with delegated

authority, that of casting out the demons. (3:16) Nestle includes in his text the words, “And He appointed the Twelve.” The connection then is, “And He appointed as the Twelve—the following persons,” the twelve names mentioned being the object of the verb “appointed.” Simon He surnamed Peter. The verb is “to place upon.” That is, He gave him an additional name to the one he already had. This is a direct reference to John 1:42, where our Lord first added this name which was to become descriptive of Simon’s character after the Holy Spirit had gotten control of him. Thayer says of petros (petro") the Greek word from which we get the name Peter, “an appellative proper name, signifying ‘a stone, rock, ledge, or cliff,’ used metaphorically of a soul hard and unyielding, and so resembling a rock,” and says that it is so used in classical writings. Defining petra (petra), the feminine form of the word, he says that this word means “a rock, large stone,” and was used metaphorically to refer to a man like a rock by reason of his firmness and strength of soul. Comparing the masculine form petros (petro") with the feminine form petra (petra) he quotes Schmidt on Synonyms as saying that petra (petra) refers to the massive living rock, and petros (petro"), to a detached but large fragment, and that this distinction is important for the correct understanding of Matthew 16:18 where our Lord says, “As for you, you are Petros (Petro"), and upon this petra (petra) I will build my Church.” That is, “You are Petros (Petro"), a Rock-like man, and upon this petra (petra), this huge Gilbraltar-like rock, my deity, I will build my Church.” We find the English name “Peter,” used in the expression, “It just petered out,” meaning that the thing referred to, just failed and failed until it ceased to exist. This comes from the example of Peter’s character before he was filled with the Spirit, vacillating, unpredictable, frequently failing, especially in crises. But as the Lord used it, it means what the Greek word means of which it is the transliteration, and is descriptive of a rock-like man, dependable, immovable, equal to the emergencies and crises that confront him. Translation. And He appointed the Twelve, and added to Simon’s name, the name, Peter. (3:17) He surnamed them Boanerges, which is, sons of thunder. “Surnamed” is again from  (ejpitiqhmi), “to place upon.” That is, our Lord added this name to the one they already had. In Syrian, the name means “sons of thunder,” in Hebrew, “sons of tumult.” The expression “sons of” is a Hebrew idiom in which the distinguishing characteristic of the individual or thing named is regarded as his parent. Vincent says that the name Boanerges seems to have been intended as a title of honor, although it was not perpetuated like the surname Peter. He says that it is justified by the impetuosity and zeal which characterized both the brothers, which prompted them to suggest the calling of fire from heaven to consume the inhospitable Samaritan village (Luke 9:54), which marked James as the victim of an early martyrdom (Acts 12:2), and which sounds in the thunders of John’s Apocalypse. The Greek Church calls John  (Brontofwno") “the thunder-voiced.” (3:18) Andrew, a name of Greek origin though in use among the Jews, comes from aner (ajner) a Greek word for a man considered as a male individual of the human race, the name itself meaning “manly.” Philip is another Greek name, meaning “fond of horses.”

In ecclesiastical legend he is said to have been a chariot-driver. Matthew is a Hebrew name meaning “a gift of God.” Thomas is a Hebrew name meaning “twin.” Thaddaeus is the Judas of John 14:22. Luther calls him der fromme Judas, that is, the good Judas. Simon the Canaanite is properly Simon, the Canaanaean. Vincent quotes Geike in “Life and Words of Christ,” as follows: “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?” (3:19) Iscariot, which distinguishes this Judas from others, is usually explained as a compound, meaning “the man of Kerioth.” Reference is made to his native town which is given in Joshua 15:25 as one of the uttermost cities of Judah toward the coast of Edom southward. In this town was born the betrayer of the Saviour. And they went into an house. The verb is singular. “He comes into,” referring to our Lord. There is no definite article in the Greek text. The idea is “He comes home to houselife as distinct from hill-life.” Expositors says; “The formal manner in which this is stated suggests a sojourn on the hill of appreciable length, say, for some days. How occupied there? Probably in giving a course of instruction to the disciple-circle; say, that reproduced in the ‘Sermon on the Mount.’ ” Home to Jesus in this territory was the home of Peter. This was probably where our Lord went. ”Betrayed” is the translation of  (paradidwmi), made up of  (didwmi) “to give,” and para (para) “alongside,” thus “to hand over alongside.” Our “sold him down the river,” is the present equivalent. Translation. And Judas Iscariot who also handed Him over. And He comes home. (3:20) The multitude cometh together again. Expositors says; “The crowd, partially dispersed, reassembles, (implying lapse of an appreciable interval). Jesus had hoped they would go away to their homes in various parts of the country during His absence on the hill, but He was disappointed. They lingered on.” So that they could not so much as eat bread. Again, Expositors comments; “The crowding about the house and the demand for sight and succour of the Benefactor were so great that they (Jesus and His companions) could not find leisure, not even to take food, not to speak of taking rest, or giving instruction to His disciples.” (3:21) His friends. The Greek is  (oiJ par aujtou), “those from the side of Him.” Robertson says that the idiom most likely means the kinspeople or family of Jesus, as is common in the LXX. The fact that His mother and His brothers are mentioned in verse 31, would indicate that these were the ones alluded to in this verse. The word for “friend” ( (filh)) is not in the Greek text. When His friends heard of it. This does not refer to what is stated in verse 20. The words “of it” are in italics in the a.v., which means that there is no expression in the Greek text answering to that meaning, but only that the translators included the words in an effort to bring out what they thought was the sense of the passage. The Greek has a participle, literally, “having heard.” This refers to the entire Galilean ministry with its cures and crowds, and its strains. This news surely had reached Nazareth, hence the mission of

Mary and the brothers of Jesus. The word “brethren” of 3:31 is masculine. Had sisters been included, the feminine form of adelphos (ajdelfo") would have been used,  (ajdelfh), as it is used in 3:35 and there translated “sister.” The word means “from the same womb.” The masculine form refers to brothers, the feminine, to sisters. They went out. Not here, out of the home of Peter, for they were not there. They went out ostensibly from Nazareth, at which place they heard the news of our Lord’s great ministry. To lay hold on Him. The verb is  (kratew) “to get possession of, to become master of, to take hold of, to seize.” They were intending to take Him by force and against His will. He is beside Himself. The verb is  (ejxisthmi) “to throw out of position, to displace, to amaze, astonish, throw into wonderment.” It is used in the classics of the act of driving one out of his senses, throwing one out of his mind. The form here means “to be out of one’s mind, be beside one’s self, be insane.” Expositors does not take this statement in its absolute sense, but says that the statement means that our Lord was in an unhealthy state of excitement bordering on insanity. Again, this authority states, “The friends of Jesus thought that much benevolence had put Him into a state of enthusiasm dangerous to the health of body and mind,” and reminds the reader of Festus’ words to Paul, “Much learning doth make thee mad.” A note is added. “Christ’s healing ministry created a need for theories about it. Herod had his theory (Matt. 14), the friends of Jesus had their’s, and the Pharisees, their’s.… That which called forth so many theories must have been a great fact.” Translation. And having heard, those nearest to Him (in blood ties) went out for the purpose of taking Him by force. For they were saying, He is out of His mind. (3:22) The scribes which came from Jerusalem. The local Pharisees who had made an alliance with the Herodians to kill our Lord, had probably sent word to the Jerusalem authorities with a view to enlisting their aid against Jesus. He hath Beelzebub. The implication is that Beelzebub has Him, is using Him as his agent. Expositors says: “The expression points to something more than an alliance, as in Matthew, to possession, and that on a grand scale: a divine possession by a base deity doubtless, god of flies (Beelzebub) or god of dung (Beelzebul), still a god, a sort of Satanic incarnation.” The spelling Beelzebub differs but slightly from Beelzeboub, god of the Ekronites. Thayer speaks of certain who teach that the Jews transferred this name of the Philistine god to Satan in contempt. At all events, it is a title of the Devil. The prince of the devils. The English word “prince” brings to mind a son of royalty, one of noble lineage, one of noble character and bearing. The Greek word is  (ajrcwn). The word,  (ajrch) means “the first in a series of things or persons.” Thus,  (ajrcwn), when applied to an individual, refers to one who is first in order of importance or power. Satan is the prince of the devils in the sense that he is their ruler, the first among them in importance, privilege, and power. The word “devils” here is the translation of daimonion (daimonion) referring to demons. Here we have the case of a fallen angel, Satan, as ruler over a different order of beings than himself, the demons. In saying that Jesus cast out demons through the help of the prince of the demons, the Pharisees were arguing upon the basis of the assumption that spirits are cast out by the aid

of some other spirit stronger than those ejected. The religious leaders of Israel were trying to break the force of the attesting power of our Lord’s miracles done in the energy of the Holy Spirit, by saying that He performed them in dependence upon Satan, thus disproving His claims to Messiahship and linking Him with the Devil. This is the so-called unpardonable sin. It cannot be committed today, since the conditions are not here which made it possible in the first century. Our Lord is not here in humiliation attempting to gain a foothold for His claims and teaching by means of attesting miracles. Translation. And the scribes, the ones from Jerusalem, having come down, kept on saying, He has Beezeboul, and by means of the ruler of the demons He is casting out the demons. (3:23) He called them unto Him. Expositors says; “Jesus, not overawed by the Jerusalem authorities, invites them to come within talking distance, that He may reason the matter with them.” In parables. The word is from  (paraballw) “to throw alongside.” A parable is a concrete illustration thrown alongside of a truth to explain it. Jesus used figures here, kingdom, house, plundering the house of a strong man. How can Satan cast out Satan? “How” is  (pw") which means “how is it possible?” Our Lord by His question is declaring the impossibility of Satan casting out Satan. Our Lord’s argument is briefly;—Granted for the moment that spirits are cast out by the aid of other spirits. More is needed in the latter than superior strength. There must be a motive, and Satan would have no desire to operate against himself. Translation. And having called them to Him, He was speaking to them in parables; How is it possible for Satan to cast out Satan? (3:24–26) Expositors sums up the argument in these three verses very well in the following: “The theory in question is futile because it is not gratuitously to be imputed to any rational agents, to a kingdom (v. 24), to a house (v. 25), and therefore not to Satan (v. 26).” (3:27) “Spoil” is the translation of  (diarpazw) “to plunder, thoroughly ransack.” Robertson says this presents the picture of Satan, plundering the demons, the very tools by which he carries on his business. The goods of the strong man are  (ta skeuh), used of any apparatus, equipment, or furniture, used of utensils; hence the choice of this particular word is most fitting, suggesting the idea that the demons are the equipment Satan uses to further his ends. Translation. But no one is able, having entered the house of the strong man, to thoroughly ransack his equipment, unless first he binds this strong man, and then he will thoroughly plunder his house. (3:28–30) Expositors has a valuable note: “Jesus now changes His tone. Thus far He has reasoned with the scribes, now He solemnly warns to this effect. You do not believe your own theory; you know as well as I how absurd it is, and that I must he casting out devils by a very different spirit from Beelzebub. You are therefore not merely mistaken theorists, you are men in a very perilous moral condition.”

Blaspheme. This word is the transliteration of  (blasfhmew) “to speak reproachfully, to rail at, revile, calumniate.” Thus the word means “malicious misrepresentation.” It is used specifically of those who by contemptuous speech intentionally come short of the reverence due to God or to sacred things. Here the words speak of the action of the scribes, who, knowing that our Lord was performing miracles in the power of the Holy Spirit, deliberately and knowingly attribute them to Satan, and do this in an attempt to break the attesting power of the miracles our Lord was performing. This is the so-called unpardonable sin. Eternal damnation. Vincent is most emphatic in his denunciation of the translation offered here by the a.v. He says, “An utterly false rendering. Rightly as Revision, of an eternal sin. So Wycliffe, everlasting trespass. The a.v. has gone wrong in following Tyndale, who, in turn, followed the erroneous text of Erasmus,  (krisew"), judgment, wrongly rendering damnation.” The Nestle text has  (aijwniou aJmarthmato"), “an eternal sin.” Expositors says; “As this is equivalent to “hath never forgiveness,” we must conceive of the sin as eternal in its guilt, not in itself as a sin. The idea is that of an unpardonable sin, not of a sin eternally repeating itself.” For the sake of absolute accuracy, we would suggest that the Greek word  (aijwnio") which means “without beginning or end, that which always has been and always will be” in certain contexts, also means “without end, never to cease, everlasting” in other contexts. For instance, we should speak of the sufferings of the lost in the next world, not as eternal, for these have a beginning, but as everlasting. And when speaking of the life which God gives the believing sinner, we should use the word “eternal,” for, although the person receives that life at a point in time and he begins to experience it, yet that life is eternal in its being, having had no beginning and having no ending, for Christ Jesus is that life. So here, it would seem that the word qualifying “sin” should be “everlasting.” That is, this sin is everlasting in its guilt. Translation. Surely, of a truth, I am saying to you, All sins shall be forgiven the sons of men and all malicious misrepresentations, as many as they use to defame, but whoever maliciously misrepresents the Holy Spirit, never has forgiveness, but he is guilty of an everlasting sin: because they kept on saying, He has an unclean spirit. (3:31) There came then His brethren and His mother. The word “then” is not in the Nestle text. The Greek verb is present in tense. The original has “And there come His mother and His brethren.” Here Mark resumes the story about our Lord’s brethren which he started in verse 21 and interrupted by the account of the encounter with the scribes. Standing without, sent unto Him, calling Him. Robertson describes this as a pathetic picture of the mother and the brothers standing on the outside of the house, thinking that our Lord was beside Himself, and desiring to take Him home. He quotes Swete as saying that they were unwilling to disclose their errand to take Him home, and so sent word to Him by means of the crowd. Translation. And there come His mother and His brethren, and standing outside, they sent to Him, calling Him. (3:32) The multitude sat about Him. “About” is the translation of peri (peri),

“around.” That is, the crowd in the home of Peter, sat in a circle around our Lord, the disciples forming an inner circle. They report not only that His mother and brothers are outside, but also His sisters. The Nestle text includes hai adelphai (aiJ ajdelfai). Expositors suggests that they might have done so under a mistake, even though the sisters were not there. If the friends came to withdraw Jesus from public life, the sisters were not likely to accompany the party, though there would be no impropriety in going along with their mother. They are not mentioned in verse 31. Translation. And the crowd was sitting in a circle around Him, and they say to Him, Behold, your mother and your brothers and your sisters outside are seeking you. (3:33–35) Who is my mother, or my brethren? Expositors comments; “An apparently harsh question, but He knew what they had come for.” And He looked round about on them which sat about Him. The words “He looked round about” are the translation of  (periblepw),  (blepw), “to look,” and peri (peri), “around.” His gaze encircled them. It was a sweeping, all inclusive look. “About Him” is from  (kuklwi peri aujton), literally, “in a circle around Him.” Expositors says; “His eye swept the whole circle of His audience.” Here it was, not in anger, as in the case of the Pharisees of verse 5, but with a benign smile.” Whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother. The words “brother,” “sister,” and “mother,” are modified by the personal pronoun in the genitive case, and according to Greek practice, are usually preceded by the definite article. But in this case they are without the article, showing that the nouns in this case are used figuratively. Expositors says of this statement of our Lord’s; “This saying and the mood it expressed would confirm the friends in the belief that Jesus was in a morbid state of mind.” Robertson says; “One’s heart goes out to Mary who has to go back home without even seeing her wondrous Son. What did it all mean to her at this hour?” Translation. And answering them He says, Who is my mother and my brethren? And having looked round about upon those sitting in a circle around Him, He says, Behold my mother and my brethren. Whoever does the will of God, this one is my brother and sister and mother.

CHAPTER FOUR (4:1) And He began again to teach by the sea side. After spending some time teaching those whom He had called out to Himself as disciples ( (maqhth") learners), our Lord resumes His wider ministry among the people at various points along the sea shore. “To teach” is a present infinitive in the Greek text, and thus durative in action, “to be teaching,” emphasizing, not the fact of teaching, but the process. It was line upon line, precept upon precept. The teaching was simplicity itself, and possibly oft repeated in order that the people might understand. Entered a ship. The word here is ploion (ploion), not ploiarion (ploiarion) as in 3:9, the distinction there noted being that the former was a large vessel drawing too much water to be brought right into shore, and the latter being a rowboat used to reach shore from the larger vessel. Mark’s source is generally conceded to be Peter. The latter was a

fisherman and owned both types of boats. It would seem therefore that Peter would make a clear distinction between them in reporting this incident to Mark. All of which means that the boat Jesus kept in readiness for escape purposes from the crowd that might crush Him, was a rowboat, and the boat from which He preached, was a larger vessel, moored in close to shore. With a narrow strip of water between Himself and the crowd, Jesus taught them. The acoustics on a lake shore are excellent. One can hear and understand the human voice quite a distance. There was gathered unto Him a great multitude. “Great” is the translation of pleistos (pleisto"), the superlative of polus (polu"), meaning “much.” The crowds were greater than ever. The verb is present in tense, picturing a past event with the vividness of a present reality. Sat in the sea. The words “in the sea,” are locative of place. That is, our Lord sat on the deck of the boat encircled by the sea. “Sat” is an infinitive showing purpose, and speaks of a person occupying a certain place. The boat was therefore evidently not moored to a dock, but stood out in the water a short distance. Translation. And again He began to be teaching at the seashore. And there gathers together to Him a crowd, the largest one up to that time, so that He entered a ship in order to occupy a place on the sea. And the whole crowd was on the land facing the sea. (4:2) He taught them. The verb is imperfect, speaking of continued action. Mark uses this tense frequently, and for the purpose of drawing a vivid picture. He was teaching them. Our Lord’s form of address was of two kinds. He taught and He preached. The first is given us in the word  (didaskw), from which we get our word “didactic.” The purpose of this was the imparting of information, the explanation of the Word of God. He is often called in the a.v., “the Master” as in John 11:28. The Greek word is didaskalos (didaskalo"), which means “teacher.” The second we find in the word  (khrussw), “to make a proclamation.” There is no instance in the New Testament where our Lord is called a  (khrux), “one who proclaims,” in our terminology, “preaches.” The favorite word of people who knew our Lord was therefore “teacher.” In parables. That is, His teaching took the form of concrete illustrations thrown in alongside of a truth to explain it. Jesus adapted the simplicity of His teaching to the limitations of His hearers. Many things. Expositors thinks that the great bulk of our Lord’s material, indicated that He was dissatisfied with the results He was obtaining and that multiplied efforts would produce more results. This authority thinks that the calling out of the specially selected group and their instruction, was another attempt in that direction. Even our Lord’s words often fell on dull ears, hard hearts, and unresponsive wills. In His doctrine. The word ‘doctrine’ is  (didach) which is allied in form to the Greek words meaning “to teach” and “teacher.” Thus, this word means “that which is taught.” Translation. And He was teaching them many things by means of parables, and was saying to them in His teaching. (4:3) Hearken. The word is akouete (ajkouete), in the imperative mode, present

tense. “Be listening.” Our Lord could have used the equivalent of the Greek aorist imperative which issues a command with military snap and curtness. But this would not do here. He had to get His crowd, and kindness, magnanimity, and humility would do more than a peremptory command. The demand was quite natural, for a summons such as this was necessary if He was to obtain the attention of the crowd on shore while He was speaking from a ship. It was a crowd more interested in coming in contact with the Lord Jesus in order to be healed than in salvation for their souls. Behold. The word is idou (ijdou). It is a demonstrative particle which is used to give a peculiar vivacity to the style by bidding the reader or hearer to attend to what is said. It can be translated by “behold, see, lo.” Translation. Be listening. Give attention to this. The sower went out to sow. (4:4) “Wayside” is hodos (oJdo"), a road. Translation. And it came to pass that while he was sowing, some indeed fell alongside the road, and the birds came and ate it up. (4:5) “Some” is allo (ajllo), “other (seed) of the same kind.” It was all the same kind of seed. The type of ground upon which it fell determined the amount and kind of fruit that would result. Translation. And other (seed) of the same kind fell upon ground full of rocks, where it did not have much earth. And immediately it sprang up because it did not have depth of earth. (4:6) Translation. And when the sun arose, it was burnt with the heat, and because it did not possess rootage, it dried up. (4:7) Some fell among thorns. “Some” is the translation of allo (ajllo), “another of the same kind.” It is to be understood that the seed fell into the midst (eis (eij")) of seeds of thorns. No one would plant seed in the midst of growing thorns, bramble-bushes or briers. Choked it. The verb is  (sumpnigw) “to choke utterly.” It is used in Luke 8:42, where it means “to press round or throng one so as to almost suffocate him.” The word means “to strangle, throttle.” The prefixed preposition sun (sun), carries the idea of compression. Translation. And other (seed) of the same kind fell into the midst of thorns, and the thorns sprang up and utterly choked it, and it did not give fruit. (4:8, 9) Did yield. Imperfect in tense. Kept on yielding. That sprang up and increased. These are present tense participles to be translated, “growing up” and

“increasing,” thus describing the process spoken of in the imperfect verb more vividly. Brought forth, again, an imperfect, “kept on bearing.” Translation. And other (seeds of the same kind) fell on ground that was good, and they kept on yielding fruit, growing up and increasing, and they kept on bearing, (some) up to thirty, and (some) to sixty, and (some) to one hundred. And He was saying, He who has ears to be hearing, let him be hearing. (4:10) They that were about Him. These were not His kinsfolk of 3:21, the   (par aujtou), those closest to Him, but the outer circle of disciples, the peri auton (peri aujton), that group from which the Twelve were chosen. The parable. The best texts have this word in the plural number. Expositors says: “The plural, well attested, implies that the parables of the day had a common drift. To explain one was to explain all.” Robertson remarks that the disciples asked the explanation of the meaning of the parables when they were alone with Jesus, because they did not want the multitude to see that they did not understand His teaching. The construction in the Greek indicates that as soon as they were alone, the disciples lost no time in asking Jesus. Translation. And as soon as He was alone, those about Him, with His disciples, went to asking Him concerning the parables. (4:11, 12) The mystery. The Greek word is  (musthrion), from which we get our word “mystery.” The word is derived from  (musth"), “one initiated,” and this word from  (muew) “to close or shut.” The mystery-religions had their secrets and signs as modern secret societies have today. Those initiated into these pagan cults, knew these secret signs. The word  (musthrion) as used in Scripture means “the secret counsels of God which are hidden from the ungodly but when revealed to the godly, are understood by them.” The mystery is not in the fact that they are difficult of interpretation, but that they are impossible of interpretation until their meaning is revealed, when they become plain. The disciples had been initiated into these secret things. There is another class of mystery, the meaning of which is not to be understood in this life nor perhaps in the next, such as the mystery of iniquity. But of this type, our Lord was not speaking here. Unto you it is given. The verb is in the perfect tense, speaking of an act completed in past time having present results. The idea of permanency attaches to this construction. The disciples had been given, so as to be a permanent possession, the mystery of the Kingdom of God. They were initiates. They possessed the secret. It was now for them to come gradually into a clear understanding of the truth. To them that are without. Vincent says: “The two latter words are peculiar to Mark. The phrase means those outside our circle. Its sense is always determined by the contrast to it. Thus, in 1 Corinthians 5:12, 13, it is non-Christians in contrast with me. In Colossians 4:5, Christians contrasted with people of the world.” Robertson finds this contrast, not in the common people, but in the Pharisees. Our Lord explains that His parables are open to His disciples, but shut to the Pharisees with their hostile minds. That. The Greek word is hina (iJna), and is used very often to introduce a purpose

clause. The fuller translation is “in order that.” Robertson gives us help on this difficult passage. He says, “What is certain is that the use of parables on this occasion was a penalty for judicial blindness on those who will not see … The parables are thus a condemnation on the wilfully blind and hostile, while a guide and blessing to the enlightened.” This is on the same principle as God hardening Pharaoh’s heart by forcing him to an issue which he did not want to meet (Rom. 9:14–18). Light resisted, blinds. Here, these Pharisees, were attempting to show that our Lord was in league with Satan. They did not want the truth. Thus, rejecting the truth, they in a sense blinded themselves. The parables are so adjusted that they blind the one who wickedly rejects the truth, and enlighten the one who desires it. They should be converted. The verb means “to turn one’s self about, to turn to, to return to, to cause to return, to bring back.” It refers to a reversal of one’s position concerning anything previously held. Robertson translates “Lest haply they should turn again.” Their sins should be forgiven them. The words “their sins,” are not in the best texts. The verb is third person singular, not plural. The translation is “it should be forgiven them.” Robertson commenting on these words says: “It is the purpose of condemnation for wilful blindness and rejection such as suits the Pharisees after their blasphemous accusation against Jesus … Jesus is pronouncing their doom in the language of Isaiah. It sounds like the dirge of the damned.” The singular number of the verb “it should be forgiven them,” ostensibly refers to a single sin, in this context, the wilful rejection of the truth. Translation. And He was saying to them; To you the mystery of the kingdom of God has been given, and it is in your permanent possession. But to those who are outside, in the form of parables are all these things done, in order that seeing they may be seeing and may not perceive, and hearing, they may be hearing and may not understand, lest haply they turn again and it should be forgiven them. (4:13) The explanation of the parable of the sower, is preceded by a gentle reproach that explanation should be needed. Our Lord’s question implies surprise at their dullness, even though initiated into the mysteries of the Kingdom of God. Their incapacity to understand this parable, raises a doubt as to whether they are able to understand all the others. The definite article before the word “parables” indicates that our Lord is pointing to the parables He has already given and those which He will give. The implication in the question of our Lord is that to understand the parable of the Sower, is to understand all the parables. The word “how” is  (pw"), “how is it possible,” declaring the impossibility of knowing all the parables, if one does not know the one about the Sower. Translation. And He says to them, Do you not know this parable? And how is it possible that you will know all the parables? (4:14) In effect, this statement teaches that the seed which is sown is the Word of God. (4:15) They by the wayside, that is, “those alongside the road.”

“Satan” is from a Hebrew word which means “adversary.” The definite article precedes it, showing that a particular adversary is in the mind of the writer whom both the writer and the reader know. It is “The Satan.” Matthew in the parallel passage (13:19), calls this terrible being “the evil one,” the Greek word being  (oJ ponhro"), “the evil one.” There are two words translated “evil” in the New Testament, kakos (kako"), “evil in the abstract,” and  (ponhro"), “evil in active opposition to the good.” The kakos (kako") man is content to perish in his own corruption. The  (ponhro") man wants to drag everybody else down with him into that corruption. The word “pernicious” is an excellent rendering. Luke in his parallel passage (8:12), calls him ho diabolos (oJ diabolo"), in English “the Devil,” the meaning in Greek being “the slanderer, the false accuser.” Taketh away. The verb is  (aijrw) “to take away from another what is his or what is committed to him, to take by force.” That was sown. The verbal form is a perfect participle. This tense speaks of a completed work having present results. The act of sowing the seed of the Word had been a completed work, having a certain result. That is, the Word had found lodgment in the heart of the individual, and was starting, like seed, to germinate. But Satan snatches it out by force before it has time to grow up into the plant. In their hearts. The best texts have “in them.” Translation. And these are those alongside the road where the Word is being sown; and whenever they hear, immediately there comes Satan and snatches away by force the Word which has been sown in them. (4:16, 17) “Likewise” is the translation of  (oJmoiw"), “equally, in the same way.” The meaning here is, “on the same method of interpretation.” “Stony ground” is  (ta petrwdh), a plural article and noun, “the ground full of rocks.” Have no root in themselves. Thayer says this is “spoken of one who has but a superficial experience of divine truth, has not permitted it to make its way into the utmost recesses of his soul.” The word “offended” is the translation of  (skandalizw), “to put a stumbling block or impediment in the way upon which one may trip or fall.” Thus, to be offended in someone is to find occasion of stumbling in him, to see in another what one disapproves of and what hinders one from acknowledging his authority. Here, those who are like seed sown on ground full of rocks, are offended at the afflictions and persecutions in the sense that they find occasion of stumbling in them since they disapprove of them. Translation. And these are on the same principle of interpretation, those who are being sown on ground full of rocks, who, whenever they hear the Word, immediately with joy receive it; and they do not have rootage in themselves, but last only for a time; after that, affliction or persecution having come because of the Word, immediately they are displeased, indignant, resentful. (4:18, 19) These are they. The word “these” is not in the best texts. Alloi (ÆAlloi) “others” is given by Nestle. Expositors says that “it fixes attention on the third type of

hearers as calling for special notice. They are such as, lacking the thoughtlessness of the first and the shallowness of the second class, and having some depth and earnestness, might be expected to be fruitful; a less common type and much more interesting.” The cares of this world. “Cares” is merimna (merimna), which is derived from a root which means “to be drawn in different directions,” thus, “to be distracted.” The word means “care,” in the sense of “anxiety.” The word is closely akin to a Greek word for “worry.” It is used in a second century manuscript in the sentence, “I am writing in haste to prevent your being anxious, for I will see that you are not worried.” It is therefore a synonym for the Greek word meaning “worry.” “World” is the translation of  (aijwn), referring to the course of life as it is lived currently on this earth by those who do not know God. Our Lord is referring to the worries of the people of this age who live apart from God. The lusts of other things. The Greek word translated “lusts” means in itself “a craving or passionate desire,” the character of which, either evil or good, is determined by the context in which the word is found in each instance. The word today is obsolete, having changed its meaning to that of an immoral desire. “Other things” is ta loipa (ta loipa), literally, “the rest of the things that are not of a specified class or number.” Translation. And others are those who are being sown in the midst of thorns. These are those who heard the Word, and the anxieties of the present age and the deceitfulness of wealth, and the passionate desires of the rest of the things not in these categories entering in, choke the Word, and it becomes unfruitful. (4:20) Translation. And those are they which were sown on ground that is good, which are of such a nature as hear the Word and receive it, and bear fruit, some thirty-fold, some sixty, and some one hundred. (4:21) Is a candle brought? The question includes the negative  (mhti) which indicates that a negative answer is expected. The word for “candle” is luchnos (lucno"), “a lamp.” “Brought” is erchetai (ejrcetai), the Greek word for “come.” The question is, “The lamp does not come, does it,” etc? Vincent says, “This impersonation or investing the lamp with motion is according to Mark’s lively mode of narrative.” The definite article occurs before the words “lamps” “bed,” and “candlestick,” showing that these were familiar articles of household furniture. The word “bed” is the translation of  (klinh), from  (klinw) “to recline.” It refers to the reclining couch placed at the side of the dining table. The orientals did not sit on straight-backed chairs when eating at the table, but reclined on couches. The word “candlestick” is in the Greek text luchnia (lucnia), “a lampstand.” “Bushel” is modios (modio"), a dry measure holding about a peck. To put the lamp under a peck measure, would put out the flame, and it would give no light. To put it under a reclining couch would set it on fire. Expositors says: “True to His uniform teaching that privileges are to be used for the benefit of others, Jesus tells His disciples that if they have more insight than the multitude, they must employ it for the common benefit. These sentences in Mark represent the first special instruction of the disciples.”

Translation. And He was saying to them. The lamp does not come, does it, in order to be placed under the peck measure or under the reclining couch? Does it not come in order to be placed upon the lampstand? (4:22) There is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested. Vincent comments “The a.v., makes Christ say that every hidden thing shall be revealed. This is wrong.” He says that things are hidden in order that they may be manifested. Concealment is a means to revelation. Robertson quotes Swete as saying that it is stated that the temporary concealment is for final manifestation and a means to an end. Those who are charged with the secret at this time, are given the set responsibility of proclaiming it on the housetops after Ascension. The word “manifested” is the translation of  (fanerow) “to make manifest or visible or known what has been hidden or unknown.” Translation. For there is not anything which is hidden, except it be in order that it might be made known, nor has anything become hidden but in order that it might come into full view. (4:23) The “if” here is not the conditional particle ean (eJan) which introduces a future, unfulfilled, hypothetical condition, but ei (eij), the particle of a fulfilled condition. The point is, they had ears with which to hear. Therefore, they ought to use them. Robertson suggests that perhaps some inattention was noted. Both the infinitive and the verb here are present in tense and emphasize durative action. Translation. Since a person has ears to be hearing, let him be hearing. (4:24, 25) Unto you that hear shall more be given. The Nestle text does not include the words “Unto you that hear.” The words “shall more be given” are the translation of  (prostiqhmi), which Expositors says “implies that the reward will be out of proportion to the virtue, the knowledge acquired, to the study devoted to the subject.” The prefixed preposition pros (pro") means “toward.” The idea is that more will be added to that which is your due. “There shall be given over and above, not to those who hear, but to those who think on what they hear: … the more a man thinks, the more he will understand, and the less a man thinks, the less his power of understanding will become.” Euthy is quoted as follows; “Whoso hath attention, knowledge will be given him, and from him who hath not, the seed of knowledge will be taken. For as diligence causes the seed to grow, negligence destroys it.” Translation. And He was saying to them, Keep ever a watchful eye on what you are hearing. In the measure by which you are measuring, it will be measured to you; and it will be measured to you not only according to that measure, but there will be some added on top of that. For he who has, it shall be given to him. And he who does not have, even that which he has, shall be taken away from him. (4:26, 27) Expositors says, “This new parable refers to the disciples as representing the fertile soil, and is a pendant to the parable of the Sower, teaching that even in the case

of the fourth type of hearers the production of fruit is a gradual process demanding time. Put negatively, it amounts to saying that Christ’s ministry has as yet produced no fruit properly speaking at all, but only in some cases has met with soil that gives promise of fruit (the disciples).” Should cast seed. The verb is aorist subjunctive, speaking of a hypothetical case, and the fact of casting without referring to the details of the action. The word “seed” is preceded by the definite article in the Greek text, the force of the article being to call attention to that particular seed which he had to sow. Should sleep and rise. The verbs are present in tense, speaking of progressive action, “should be sleeping and rising,” “suggestive of the monotonous life of a man who has nothing particular to do beyond waiting patiently for the result of what he has already done” (Expositors). Should spring and grow. Again, durative in sense, “should be sprouting and lengthening.” He knoweth not how. The order in the Greek is “How, he knows not,” the emphasis being on the word “how.” Robertson has a valuable note on the latter expression: “The mystery of growth still puzzles farmers and scientists of today with all our modern knowledge. But nature’s secret processes do not fail to operate because we are ignorant. This secret and mysterious growth of the kingdom in the heart and life is the point of this beautiful parable by Mark. ‘When man has done his part, the actual process of growth is beyond his reach or comprehension’ (Swete).” Translation. And He was saying, In this manner is the kingdom of God, as if a man should throw the seed upon the earth, and should be sleeping and arising night and day, and the seed should be sprouting and lengthening; how, he does not himself know. (4:28, 29) The earth bringeth forth fruit of herself. The words “of herself” are the translation of  (aujtomath) which is made up of autos (aujto") “self,” and memaa (memaa) “to desire eagerly.” The word means in its totality, “self-moved, spontaneously, without external aid, and also beyond external control, with a way and will, so to speak, of its own that must be respected and waited for.” We get our word “automatic” from this Greek word  (aujtomath). There is only one other example of its use in the New Testament, where the gate opens to Peter of its own accord (Acts 12:10). The earth, therefore, brings forth fruit automatically. The nature of the soil, the weather, and the cultivation of the plant, all enter in. But the secret of the growth is in the seed itself. “Blade” is from chortos (corto") “grass, herbage,” the first shoots out of the soil; “ear” is from stachus (stacu") “an ear of corn or grain,” the covering of the grain itself; “full corn” is from sitos (sito") “wheat or corn,” the grain itself. Just so, we sow the seed, God’s Word; the soil, namely the soul, receives it; the Holy Spirit works on the heart of the sinner, uses the seed sown and causes it to germinate and grow. This is the law and order in nature and also the law and order of grace in the kingdom of God. Gould says, “This single fact creates the confidence shown by Jesus in the ultimate establishment of His kingdom in spite of the obstacles which obstruct its progress.” When the fruit is brought forth. The verb is  (paradidwmi) “to give over, deliver up, to yield up.” It is active in voice. Vincent suggests “When the fruit shall

have allowed, i. e., shall have admitted of being harvested.” Xenophon and Herodotus use the word in the sense of permit or allow. An exact parallel to this occurs in the historian Polybius, “When the season permitted.” He putteth in. The verb is  (ajpostellw) “To send forth.” This verb is used in John 4:38 of sending forth the apostles to reap the harvest of souls. The sickle here stands for the reapers who use it when the harvest stands ready for it. The harvest is come. The verb is  (paristhmi) “to stand at the side of,” thus, “to stand by,” here, “to stand ready.” It is perfect in tense, referring to a process complete in past time, having present results. The growing process of nature had brought the grain to complete maturity of growth, and as a result, it was in a condition for harvesting. Translation. The earth bears fruit spontaneously, first, herbage, then, a covering for the grain (the ear), then the fully-developed grain in its covering. And whenever the fruit permits, immediately, he sends forth the sickle, because the harvest stands ready. (4:30) Expositors has an excellent note: “This introductory question, especially as given in the text of W. H., is very graphic—how shall we liken the Kingdom of God, or in (under) what parable shall we place it? The form of expression implies that something has been said before, creating a need for figurative embodiment, something pointing to the insignificance of the Kingdom. The two previous parables satisfy this requirement—the word ‘fruitful’ in only a few, and even in them only after a time. What is the best emblem of this state of things?” The verb “liken” is  (oJmoiow) “to liken, to compare.” The noun of the same root refers to a likeness or a resemblance between two things. The use of the first person plural “we,” taking in the hearers with a fine tact, into consultation, is just another instance of our Lord’s masterful teaching technique. With what comparison shall we compare it? is literally, “With what parable shall we put it?” A parable, therefore, is an explanation, presenting a likeness to the thing which one wishes to explain, thrown in alongside of the fact discussed. Translation. And He was saying, In what way shall we liken the kingdom of God? In what parable shall we set it forth? (4:31, 32) The question, “In what way shall we liken the kingdom of God?” is answered in this verse. The words begin, “Like a grain of mustard seed.” The sense of the parable is: The mustard seed is the least of all seeds when it is sown or at the time of sowing, yet, after sowing, it springs up and becomes greater than all herbs. The latter word has the definite article, the word thus speaking of herbs which people plant in their gardens. It denotes garden or pot-herbs, as distinguished from wild herbs. Vincent speaks of one of the Talmudists describing the mustard-plant as a tree, of which the wood was sufficient to cover a potter’s shed. He quotes Professor Hockett as saying that on the plain of Akka, toward Carmel, he found a collection of mustard-plants from six to nine feet high, with branches from each side of a trunk an inch or more in thickness. Dr. Thompson, he says, speaks of the fact that near the bank of the Jordan, he found a mustard-tree more than twelve feet high. The word “lodge” is literally, “pitch their tents.” Translation. Like a grain of mustard seed, which when it is planted on the

earth, is less than all the seeds which are upon the earth; and when it is sown, it grows up and becomes greater than all of the herbs, and puts out great branches, so that the birds of the heaven are able to find shelter under its shadow. (4:33, 34) As they were able to hear. The verb “to hear” ( (ajkouw)) refers not only to the act of hearing, its usual meaning, but also in some contexts, to the act of understanding, as in 1 Corinthians 14:2. Here, our Lord spoke in parables, adjusting His discourse, to their capacity to understand. The implication is clear that parables were employed to make truth plain. Spake He not. The verb is in the imperfect tense, showing habitual action. Without a parable He was not in the habit of speaking to them. He expounded. The verb is  (ejpiluw).  (Luw) means “to unloose.” The prefixed preposition epi (ejpi) is perfective in its force, and makes the composite word mean “to give additional loosening,” so as to explain, make plainer and clearer, the Word of God, even to the point of revelation. This same idea is found in the noun form having the same root as the above verb, in II Peter 1:20, where the a.v., has “no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.” Verse 21 shows plainly that disclosure or revelation to the prophet is meant, not interpretation of what the prophet said. Thus, what Jesus taught His disciples here in private, amounted to fresh revelations concerning the mysteries of the Kingdom of God. To His disciples. The word “His” is idios (ijdio"), referring to one’s private, unique, personal possessions. These disciples were not the ordinary listeners of our Lord, even though these were disciples in the sense of learners, which last is what the word means, but the Twelve. Translation. And by means of many parables of this kind He was speaking to them, as they were able to be understanding. But without a parable He was not in the habit of speaking to them; but in private, He was in the habit of fully explaining all things to those disciples who were peculiarly His own. (4:35) And the same day. What a day it had been, the blasphemous accusation, the visit of the mother and brothers to take Him home, the leaving of the crowded house for the seaside, then in the house again, and now out of the house for the open sea. The designation of the time is of especial note, for Mark does not usually call attention to this. Our Lord and His disciples were on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee, and a trip over to the eastern shore would be a delightful and refreshing change for the weary Lord Jesus. This was His only way to escape the crowds. Translation. And He says to them on that day, evening having come, Let us go over to the other side. (4:36) They took Him. The verb is  (paralambanw). The simple verb means “to take,” the prefixed preposition “alongside.” The same verb is used where the angel says to Joseph, “Take the young child and His mother, and flee into Egypt” (Matt.

2:13), that is, “Take the young child and His mother under your protection and care.” The disciples took the exhausted Lord Jesus under their care just as He was, in the boat. The word is ploion (ploion), referring to the larger fishing boat, not a rowboat this time. Little ships. The a.v., translates from a reading which Nestle has put in the apparatus. He has ploion (ploion) in his text, a larger boat than a rowboat. Translation. And having dismissed the crowd, they take Him under their care just as He was, in the boat, and there were other boats with Him. (4:37) There arose a great storm. The Greek word is used of a furious storm or hurricane. It never refers to a single gust, nor a steadily blowing wind, however violent, but to a storm breaking forth from black thunder-clouds in furious gusts, with floods of rain, and throwing everything topsy-turvy. According to Aristotle, it is a whirlwind revolving from below upwards. It is used in the LXX of the whirlwind out of which God answered Job. Vincent quotes a Mr. Macgregor: “On the Sea of Galilee the wind has a singular force and suddenness; and this is no doubt because that sea is so deep in the world that the sun rarefies the air in it enormously, and the wind speeding swiftly above a long and level plateau, gathers much force as it sweeps through flat deserts, until suddenly it meets this huge gap in the way, and it tumbles down here irresistible.” Robertson suggests that the storm fell suddenly from Mount Hermon down into the Jordan Valley and hit the Sea of Galilee violently at its depth of 682 feet below the Mediterranean Sea. He explains that the hot air at this depth draws the storm down with sudden power. Luke says (8:23), “there came down a storm on the lake.” Matthew describes it as a susmos (susmo"), a violent upheaval like an earthquake (8:24). These sudden storms continue to this day. The waves beat into the ship. The verb is  (ejpiballw) “to throw upon.” The waves were throwing themselves into the boat. The tense is imperfect. They were repeatedly doing so. So that it was now full. The verb is  (gemizw) “to fill, to fill full.” The boat was now filling. Matthew has it, “so that the boat was covered with the waves.” Translation. And there arises a great windstorm of hurricane proportions, and the waves kept on beating into the boat, so that already it was being filled. (4:38) He was in the hinder part of the ship asleep on a pillow. “The hinder part,” from prumna (prumna), the stern or back of the ship, the opposite end to the bow or front. The pillow, from proskephalaion (proskefalaion), literally, “that towards which one puts the head,” was no soft luxurious cushion, but either the leathern cushion of the steersman, or the low bench at the stern on which the steersman sometimes sits, and the captain rests his head to sleep. Luke says of our Lord, “He fell asleep.” The ingressive aorist is used, speaking of entrance into a new condition. The Lord Jesus was worn out from the toil of the day. Master, carest thou not that we perish. Someone has said, “Jesus did not say, ‘Let us go down to the sea and be drowned,’ but, ‘Let us pass over to the other side.’ ” “Master” in the Greek text is didaskale (didaskale) “Teacher.” It is in the vocative case, which is the term of address. It is, “O, Teacher.” “Carest” is the translation of mellei

(mellei) “it is a care.” The idea contained in the verb is that of solicitude for another’s welfare. The verb “we perish” is apollumi (ajpollumi), in the present tense, “we are perishing.” They were rebuking the Lord Jesus for sleeping in the storm. What a picture of the humanity of God the Son. The noise of the storm, the violent pitching of the boat, and the sting of the cold water as it came beating into the boat, did not awake Him. The Teacher was so exhausted, that the need of His body for rest overcame the demands of outside impressions on His senses. From this, one can form some estimate of the tremendous drain on our Lord’s physical and nerve force by His ministry. Translation. And He Himself was in the stern of the boat, sleeping on the steersman’s leather cushion. And they arouse Him from sleep and say to Him, O, Teacher, is it not a concern to you that we are perishing? (4:39) Peace, be still. “Peace” is  (siwpaw), “to be silent, still, hushed, calm.” “Be still” is  (fimow) “to close the mouth with a muzzle, to muzzle,” used of muzzling an ox and of Jesus muzzling (silencing) the Pharisees. The first verb is present imperative, literally, “Be being calmed,” the second, perfect imperative, “Be muzzled and stay that way.” The wind ceased. The verb is  (kopazw) “to cease raging, to cease from violence, to grow weary or tired.” Expositors has a rich paragraph: “Observe the poetic parallelism in this verse: wind and sea separately addressed, and the corresponding effects separately specified: lulled wind, calmed sea. The evangelist realizes the dramatic situation … Silence! hush! laconic, majestic, probably the very words.” Translation. And having arisen, He rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, Be getting calm; hush up and stay that way. And the wind ceased its raging, and there was a great calm. (4:40) “Fearful” is an adjective used as a noun, plural in number. The word speaks of him who is timid, fearful. “So” is  (oJutw"), an adverb meaning “in the manner spoken of, in the way described, in this manner.” “How is it” is the translation of  (pw"), “how is it possible?” The Creator and Sustainer of the universe was with them in the boat. The disciples had accepted His Messiahship, but had a most inadequate view of the same. They evidently did not recognize all the implications which that office carried with it. Translation. And He said to them, Why are you such timid, fearful ones? How is it possible that you do not have faith? (4:41) They feared exceedingly. The Greek text is literally “they feared a great fear.” What manner of man? The word “man” is not found in the Greek. This translation grows out of Matthew’s report. “What manner of is this?” Mark has it, “Who then is this person?” The demonstrative is masculine in gender, showing here that male personality is in the writer’s mind. The “then,” (ara (ajra)) is argumentative. That is, since these things are so, who then is this? The identity and power of this Person who could command the wind and the waves at will, drive out demons, heal diseases, and speak such mysteries in

parables, filled the disciples with fear. Translation. And they feared a great fear, and were saying to one another, Who then is this person, that the wind and the sea obey him?

CHAPTER FIVE (5:1) The country of the Gadarenes. The word in the Greek text is  (Gerashnwn), speaking of the people of the town Khersa or Gerasa, in the district of Gadara, which latter borders on the southeastern shores of the Sea of Galilee. Matthew refers to the Gadarines, since the village of Gerasa is obscure, and the locality, Gadara, in which it is situated, is better known. Translation. And they came across the sea into the country of the Gerasenes. (5:2–5) Vincent quotes Trench: “The picture of the miserable man is fearful; and in drawing it, each evangelist has some touches which are peculiarly his own; but St. Mark’s is the most eminently graphic of all, adding, as it does, many strokes which wonderfully heighten the terribleness of the man’s condition, and also magnify the glory of his cure.” Who had his dwelling among the tombs. The verb has the prefixed preposition kata (kata) whose root meaning is “down,” and thus adds the idea of permanency to the already existing meaning of the word to which it is prefixed. The composite word has the idea of a settled habitation. Our “settled down,” is its equivalent. The verb “had” is imperfect, speaking of a continual possession. Vincent quotes Trench again, relative to the tombs: “In unclean places, unclean because of the dead men’s bones which were there. To those who did not on this account shun them, these tombs of the Jews would afford ample shelter, being either natural caves or recesses hewn by art out of the rock, often so large as to be supported by columns, and with cells upon their sides for the reception of the dead. Being, too, without the cities, and often times in remote and solitary places, they would attract those who sought to flee from all fellowship of their kind.” The word “chain” is the translation of halusis (aJlusi"), this word in turn being made up of  (luw) “to loose,” and Alpha privative, making the compound word mean “not to loose,” or “that which cannot be loosed.” It means “a chain,” for a chain is something which cannot be loosed. Paul, in Ephesians 6:20 speaks of himself as an ambassador in bonds, and uses this word. He refers here to the handcuffs he was wearing, and in II Timothy 1:16, to Onesiphorus, who was not ashamed of his chain. This demon-possessed man had often been handcuffed, but had every time, broken them by his superhuman strength. Bound with fetters and chains. The verb is perfect in tense, showing a well-done, complete piece of work. The binding had been done most thoroughly. “Fetters” is the translation of  (pedh), a fetter or shackle for the feet, the word coming from peza (peza) “the foot or instep.” The English plural of “foot” is of course “feet.” The AngloSaxon word for foot is fot, fet, and the plural is feeter, hence, fetter, that which binds the feet. The demonized man was bound both by his hands and his feet. “Plucked asunder” is from  (diaspaw) “to draw in two.” “Broken in pieces” is  (suntribw), “to rub together, to crush together.” The fetters that bound him might have been cords

which could be rubbed to pieces. “Tame” is  (damazw) “to restrain, curb, tame.” “Crying” is  (krazw), denoting an inarticulate cry, a shriek. It was a loud scream or shriek. “Cutting himself,”  (katakoptw), means “to cut one’s self up,” in the sense of gashing, hacking, or cutting one’s whole body so as to leave it covered with scars. Translation. And having come out of the boat, immediately, there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit, who had settled down and was making his home in the tombs; and no longer was anyone able to bind him, not even with manacles, because he had often been bound securely with manacles and fetters, and the manacles were snapped in two by him, and the fetters crushed together, and no one had sufficient strength to restrain him. And throughout the night and the day, in the tombs and in the mountains, he was continually screaming and shrieking, and was constantly lacerating himself all over with stones. (5:6–8) The word “but” is the a.v., translation of kai (kai), a Greek conjunction used most frequently in the simple continuative use of “and.” There are two adversatives in Greek, alla (ajlla), the stronger, and de (de) the milder. While kai (kai) is sometimes used in an adversative sense, the context seems to indicate that it is used here in a continuative one. Robertson, commenting on the words, “Ran and worshipped Him,” quotes Swete as follows: “At first perhaps with hostile intentions. The onrush of the yelling maniac must have tried the newly recovered confidence of the Twelve. We can imagine their surprise when, approaching, he threw himself on his knees.” The “and” connects the fact of the demoniac’s unusual behavior with his usual habit of attacking strangers who came near his abode. The fact that he saw Jesus at a distance would not lead him to worship Him, but to run to Him, and when he drew closer, the spiritual power and grace that always pervaded the personality of the Son of God, quieted his spirit and caused him to fall on his knees in reverence. “Worship” is  (proskunew), “to prostrate one’s self, to kiss the hand to (towards) one in token of reverence, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence (to make a salam), by kneeling or prostration to do homage to one or make obeisance, either in order to express respect or make supplication.” It is used of homage shown to men of superior rank, or of homage shown to God. Here it speaks of homage to God, the act of worship, for the demon recognizes our Lord as the Son of God. Here we have a being, incorrigible in his nature, destined to be damned for all eternity, one of the cohorts of Satan, bending the knee to God the Son. This is that of which Paul was speaking when he referred to the universal adoration of the Lord Jesus, even by beings under the earth (Phil. 2:10). They are even now bending the knee to the Son of God. In the last analysis, it was not the demoniac who was prostrating himself before the Lord Jesus. He was under the control of the demon, and the latter was the source of the homage paid the Son of God. What have I to do with thee? The literal Greek is, “What with reference to me and with reference to you?” The classification is dative of reference. Supplying the verb of being here, which is often left out and to be supplied by the reader, we have, “What is there with reference to me and with reference to you?” That is, “What is there in common between me and you?”

I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not. This certainly did not come from the man himself, for no human being is in the category of the demons, that of being destined to torment without having a salvation provided which he can accept. The demons know their fate now. “Torment” is  (basanizw). The word means first “to test metals,” then “to test one by torture.” The latter is our present “third degree.” It means simply also “to torture.” When the demon said, “I adjure thee by God,” he put Jesus under oath. The verb is  (oJrkizw) “to force to take an oath, to administer an oath.” For He said. The original has the progressive imperfect, “for He had been saying.” Our Lord had repeatedly ordered the demon to come out of the man, as a result of which the demon had made this outcry. Translation. And having seen Jesus from a distance, he ran and prostrated himself on the ground before Him, worshipping Him; and he cried out with a great voice, and says, What is there in common between me and you, Jesus, you Son of the most high God? I adjure you, by God, don’t begin to torment me. For He was saying to him, Come out of the man, unclean spirit. (5:9) He asked him. The verb is imperfect, “He kept on asking him,” the implication being that the demon only responded after repeated questioning.The word “legion” is the designation for a company of Roman soldiers numbering 6,826 men, an emblem of irresistable power and of a multitude organized into unity. A Roman legion was a common sight in these regions. The name was already naturalized into Greek and Aramaean. It seems that not only had one demon taken up his residence in this unfortunate man, but a legion of them had done so. Translation. And He kept on asking him, What is your name? And he says to Him, Legion is my name, because we are many. (5:10) He besought Him much. The verb is a very strong word, “I beg of you, please” ( (parakalew)), the tense, imperfect again. He kept on pleading with Him. The demon who called himself “Legion” was asking in behalf of the other demons as well. Expositors, quoting Grotius, says that Decapolis, full of Hellenistic apostate Jews, was loved by the demons. The word “Decapolis,” is the transliteration of two Greek words which together mean “ten cities.” It is the region just south east of the Sea of Galilee, and bordering on that sea. Translation. And he kept on pleading with Him to the effect that He should not send them off, outside of the country. (5:11, 12) All the devils besought Him. The words “all the devils” are not in the best texts. “Besought” is  (parakalew), and the tense now is aorist, referring merely to the fact of the action without speaking of details. “Send” is aorist imperative, issuing a sharp command to be obeyed at once. Evidently, the demons were frantic, and grasped quickly at this expedient lest a worse fate befall them at that time. The request shows that demons at one time had physical bodies, for they have no rest unless they are in some physical body, either that of a human being or that of an animal.

Translation. Now, there was there near the mountain, a herd of swine feeding, a great herd. And they begged Him saying, Send us at once into the swine, in order that we may enter into them. (5:13) And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. The words “forthwith Jesus” are not in the best texts. It should be noted that our Lord did not command the demons, but only gave them permission to enter the swine. Ran violently. The verb is  (oJrmaw) “to set in rapid motion, to stir up, incite, urge on, to start forward impetuously, to rush.” It was the fact of the unwelcome entrance of the demons into the swine that stirred them up to start forward impetuously on their rush down the steep bank into the sea. Were choked. The verb is imperfect, describing the disappearance of pig after pig into the sea. The verb,  (ejpnigw), is used by Josephus, of drowning. Translation. And having gone out, the unclean spirits entered into the swine, and the herd rushed impetuously down the steep place into the sea, about two thousand, and were drowned, one after another, in the sea. (5:14, 15) They that fed the swine fled. The verb is  (feugw) “to flee away, to seek safety by flight.” The implication is clear that the swineherds were filled with terror at what had taken place, as well as at the tragedy of the sudden destruction and loss of a herd of two thousand hogs. They literally ran away from the scene. They reported the news to the people of the nearby city and in the neighboring farms, the word for “country” here being agros (ajgro") “farms,” and in the plural number. Expositors says: “And the people in town and country as naturally went to see what had happened. Their road brings them straight to Jesus, and they see there a sight which astonishes them, the well-known demoniac completely altered in manner and aspect: sitting quiet, not restless; clothed, implying previous nakedness, which is expressly noted by Luke (8:27), sane, implying previous madness … They were afraid of the sane man, as much as they had been of the insane, i.e., of the power which had produced the change.” The word “told” is  (ajpaggellw) “to bring tidings from a person or thing, bring word.” The prefixed preposition which means “off from” adds to the meaning already existing in the simple verb  (ajggellw) “to announce,” the idea being that what one announces, he openly lays, as it were, off from himself. The swineherds were charged with the responsibility of safeguarding the animals under their care, and to have two thousand hogs piled up in heaps in shallow water, all dead, was something to explain. They see him that was possessed with the devil. The particular word for “see” used here is  (qewrew) “to view attentively, take a view of, survey, to consider, to ascertain or find out by seeing.” It is used, not of an indifferent spectator, but of one who looks at a thing with interest and attention. It would be used of a general officially reviewing or inspecting an army. Thus, the word speaks of a critical, searching investigation. In his right mind. There is a participle in the Greek. The verb is  (swfronew), “to be of sound mind, to exercise self-control, to curb one’s passions.” This last meaning was in classical Greek, as it is in New Testament Greek, the predominating usage of the word. Trench speaks of the word as habitual self-government with its

constant rein on all the passions and desires. Not only is sanity returned to the demoniac, but self-control. A wild man became the docile, quiet, self-possessed individual whom the people were viewing with a critical eye. Translation. And those feeding them fled away and brought away tidings into the city and into the farms. And they came for the purpose of seeing what it was that had taken place. And they come to Jesus, and view with a critical, searching eye the demoniac sitting, clothed, and in control of himself. And they became afraid. (5:16, 17) Told them. The verb is  (dihgeomai) “to lead or carry a narration through to the end, relate in full.” It was quite a story, and the swineherds gave a complete report to their employers, taking care to absolve themselves from any blame. They began to pray Him to depart out of their coasts. Expositors says: “The owners draw a natural inference: Cure causes catastrophe, and request Jesus, as a dangerous person, to retire,  (hjrxanto), began to request, pointing to transition from vague awe in presence of a great change, to desire to be rid of Him whom they believed to be the cause both of it and of the loss of their swine. Fritsche takes  (hjrxanto) as meaning that Jesus did not need much pressure, but withdrew on the first hint of their wish. Robertson remarks that in Decapolis, pagan influence was strong, and the owners of the hogs cared more for the loss of their property than for the healing of the demoniac. Translation. And those who saw, related fully and in detail to them how it happened to the demoniac and concerning the swine. And they began to be begging Him to go away from their boundaries. (5:18) When He was come into the ship. The verbal form is a present participle, the action of which goes on simultaneously with the leading verb which is “prayed.” It was while our Lord was stepping on board the boat that the man was begging Him to be allowed to accompany Him, ostensibly as a disciple, although one of the commentators suggests that his motive was fear lest the demons return. Translation. And while He was going on board the boat, the one who had been demon-possessed, kept on begging Him for permission to be with Him. (5:19) Go home to thy friends. The Greek is rather here, “Go into your home to your own.” That is, he was directed by our Lord to testify to his own flesh and blood, his own family. “Tell” is from  (ajpaggellw) “to bring back tidings.” The Lord hath done. The verb is in the perfect tense, speaking of the complete, finished results of a past action. It was a permanent cure. Had compassion. The verb is  (ejleew) “to feel sympathy with the misery of another, especially such sympathy which manifests itself in action, less frequently in word.” On several previous occasions our Lord had forbidden the one healed to tell others

about it, and because of the undue excitement and misunderstanding then present concerning His ministry. But in this case, there was no danger of too much enthusiasm, for the people had begged Him to leave. Furthermore, these people most certainly needed the message concerning our Lord. Translation. And He did not permit him, but says to him, Go into your home, to your own relatives, and bring back tidings to them of such great things which the Lord has done for you, and of the fact that He had a sympathy for you which issued in action in your behalf. (5:20) He began to publish in Decapolis. “To publish” is  (khrussw) “to make a public proclamation.” The word “Decapolis” is the transliteration of two Greek words meaning “ten cities.” The region was called “The Decapolis,” the region of the ten cities. Expositors remarks that this wide range of his public proclamations probably implied that he was known throughout the ten cities as the famous madman of Gerasa. Translation. And he went off and began proclaiming publicly in the Decapolis, such great things which Jesus did for him. And all were marvelling. (5:21) Much people was gathered unto Him. The Greek has, not “unto Him” but epi (ejpi), “after Him.” He was the great center of attraction. “Was gathered” is passive voice in the Greek text. These people did not gather of themselves, but were controlled by the irresistible longing to see Jesus and avail themselves of His help. He was nigh unto the sea. The word is para (para), alongside of the sea, that is, at the seashore. Translation. And when Jesus had passed over in the boat again to the other side, a great crowd was gathered together after Him, and He was at the seashore. (5:22, 23) One of the rulers of the synagogue. Acts 13:14, 15 makes it clear that a single synagogue had a number of rulers. Their duties were to select the readers or teachers in the synagogue, to examine the discourses of the public speakers, and to see that all things were done with decency and in accordance with ancestral usage. “Jairus” is a Hebrew name which means “whom Jehovah enlightens.” It is pronounced Ja-i-rus, the voice being stressed on the letter “i.” “Besought” is  (parakalew) “I beg of you, please.” At the point of death. The Greek is  (ejscatw" ejcei). The first word means “lastly” and modifies the verb “she has.” The idea is “to be in the last gasp,” at the point of death. The words “I pray thee” are in italics in the a.v., and are not in the Greek. The word “healed” is not from the usual words for “heal,” but the translation of the word which means “to save.” The idea of the father was not so much the healing of his daughter, although that was included in his desire, but the saving of her life from the impending death. We use the same expression today of a dying person’s life being saved, without referring to the idea of spiritual salvation.

Translation. And there comes one of the synagogue rulers, by name, Jairus; and having seen Him, he falls at His feet, and begs Him earnestly, saying, My little daughter is at the point of death. Come, place your hands upon her in order that she might be saved and live. (5:24) Jesus went with him. The Greek has it, “went off with him promptly.” Much people followed Him. The imperfect is used. They kept on following Him. Thronged Him. The verb is  (sunqlibw) “to press together, to press on all sides.” Luke (8:42) uses the word  (sumpnigw) “to press round or throng one so as almost to suffocate him.” Translation. And He went off with him. And there kept on following Him a large crowd, and they kept on pressing upon Him almost to the point of suffocation. (5:25, 26) The word for “suffered” is  (pascw) and means “to suffer pain.” It does not here refer merely to subjection to treatment. Of many physicians. The preposition is hupo (uJpo) “under.” She had suffered much under the hands of many doctors. Translation. And a woman who had a flow of blood for twelve years, and had endured much suffering under the hands of many doctors, and had spent all of the things which she had, and was not even one bit bettered but rather grew worse. (5:27, 28) When she had heard of Jesus. The plural article appears in the Greek text. The a.v., does not translate it. The literal rendering is “having heard of the things concerning the Jesus.” The definite article appears before the name “Jesus,” marking Him out as a particular Jesus. The English name “Jesus” is the transliteration of the Hebrew name Jehoshua. The name “Joshua” was very common in Palestine, and the definite article is used by the Gospel writers often to distinguish our Lord from others of the same name. The use of the article here points to the fact that our Lord’s fame had spread so that He was known as The Jesus. Regarding the use of the Greek word which we have translated “the things,” Expositors says: “The importance of the ta (ta) here is that with it the expression means not merely that the woman heard of the return of Jesus from the east side, but that she had for the first time heard of Christ’s healing ministry in general. She must have been a stranger from a distance, e.g., from Caesarea Philippi, her home, according to Eusebius, her house identifiable with a statue reproducing the gospel incident before the door; possibly a heathen, but more probably, from her behavior, a Jewess—stealing a cure by touch when touch by one in her state was forbidden (Lev. 15:19–27).” In the press. The word is “crowd.” She came in the crowd which was in back of our Lord. For she said. The verb is imperfect. She kept saying as she pressed through the crowd, either to herself or to others. I shall be whole. The verb is  (swzw) which is used of the act of saving, either

from a physically ill condition, or a spiritually evil state. Translation. Having heard the things concerning Jesus, having come in the crowd behind, touched His garment. For she kept saying, If I touch even His garments, I shall be saved. (5:29) The fountain of her blood was dried up. Expositors says: “Perhaps this means no more than Luke’s statement that the flux was stopped, but the expression seems chosen to signify a complete, permanent cure—not merely the stream, but the fountain dried.” The word “fountain” is the translation of  (phgh), “a spring.” She felt her body. The verb is  (ginwskw), “to know by experience.” She was conscious of the fact that the flow had stopped. The verb is ingressive aorist, speaking of entrance into a new condition. The fact that she was healed, dawned suddenly upon her. She was healed of that plague. The verb is perfect in tense. Her thought was “I have been healed.” What a moment of joy it was for her. The word “plague” is mastix (mastix) “a whip, scourge.” It is used of distressing bodily diseases. It is used also of afflictions which are regarded as a scourge from God. How this illness had whipped and scourged her. But now she was healed. Translation. And immediately there was dried up the fountain of her blood, and she suddenly came to feel in her body that she had been healed and was at that moment in a state of health. (5:30) Jesus, immediately knowing in Himself that virtue had gone out of Him. “Knowing” is  (ejpiginwskw), “knowledge gained by experience,” thus, a personal knowledge. This is the meaning of the simple verb. The prefixed preposition epi (ejpi) is perfective in meaning, intensifying the already existing idea in the verb. Thus, the compound verb means, “personal knowledge gained by experience and which is clear.” The word “virtue” is dunamis (dunami") in the Greek, “power” in the sense of that which overcomes resistance or effects a change. It was some of His supernatural power which He felt leaving Him in the accomplishing of the miraculous cure. The literal Greek here is, “Jesus, perceiving in Himself the out from Him power going out.” Our Lord must have related this to His disciples, and Mark must have heard it from Peter. Our Lord’s words then would be “I felt in Myself the power go out from Me.” Who touched my clothes? The Greek verb is followed by two genitives. It is, “Who touched Me on my clothes?” Translation. And immediately, Jesus, having had a personal and clear knowledge in Himself of the experience of power going out from Him, having turned around in the crowd, was saying: “Who touched Me on my garments?” (5:31) The multitude thronging Thee. The verb is  (sunqlibw). In 3:9 Mark uses  (qlibw) “to press hard.” It is used of the pressing of grapes in the making of wine. That means crushing them. Here Mark uses the compound form, prefixing the preposition sun (sun) which implies a concerted pressure on the part of the people, a greater crowd, and a more eager pressure around Jesus. The disciples were

surprised at the sensitiveness of Jesus to the touch of the crowds. They were unconscious of the tremendous drain on our Lord from all this healing that tugged away at the tender heart and exhausted the nervous energies of the Son of Man even though He was the Son of God. Translation. And the disciples kept on saying to Him, You are seeing the crowd pressing hard around you from all sides; yet you are saying, Who touched Me? (5:32) He looked round about. The verb is imperfect in tense, speaking of continuous action, and middle in voice, speaking of action done in one’s own interest. That is, Jesus kept on looking around for the woman, and He was doing it for Himself, regardless of what the disciples had said. His scrutinizing gaze was His answer to the protest of the disciples. To see her who had done this thing. The article and participle in the Greek are feminine in gender. indicating a woman actor in this case. Jesus looked for a woman, not a man, in the crowd. What told Him that it was a woman? Expositors says regarding this: “Did Jesus know that, or is it the evangelist choosing the gender in accordance with the now known fact? (Meyer and Weiss). The former possible, without preternatural knowledge, through extreme sensitiveness.” Certainly Jesus knew the difference between the rude jostling of the crowd and the sensitive touch of the woman’s hand. Had it been a man seeking healing, he very probably would have caught hold of the garment. The disease which the woman had, would, according to Levitical regulations, have kept her from touching our Lord at all. This made her extremely cautious when she did finally decide to do so. It was a woman, and a Jewish woman. No other hand would have touched His garments as she did. Translation. And He kept on looking around about to see the woman who had done this. (5:33) What was done. The verb is perfect in tense, indicating that it was a complete and a permanent cure. Expositors says: “She knew what had happened to her, and thought what a dreadful thing it would be to have the surreptitiously obtained benefit recalled by an offended benefactor disapproving her secrecy and her bold disregard of the ceremonial law— (pasan thn ajlhqeian), the whole truth, which would include not only what she had just done, but her excuse for doing it—the pitiful tale of chronic misery. From that tale impressively told, heard by the disciples, and not easily to be forgotten, the particulars of verse 26 were in all probability derived.” Translation. And the woman, fearing and trembling, knowing that which had been done for her, came and fell down before Him, and told Him all the truth. (5:34) And He said to her, Daughter. Expositors has a beautiful note: “The woman had already heard of the fame of Jesus (ver. 27). From what Jesus said to her she would for the first time get some idea of His exquisite sympathy, delicately expressed in the very first word:  (Qugathr), daughter, to a mature woman, probably not much, if at all

younger than Himself. He speaks not as man to woman, but as father to child. Note how vivid is Mark’s story compared with the meager colorless version of Matthew. A lively impressionable eye-witness, like Peter, evidently behind it.” Thy faith hath made thee whole. The verb is  (swzw), “to save,” and is used at times for the healing of the body as well as that of the soul. It is in the perfect tense, assuring her of a permanent cure. Go in peace. The preposition is not en (ejn) “in,” but eis (eij") “into,” literally, “Go into peace,” contemplating the new door just opened to her, the peace in store for her. Robertson suggests that peace here may have more the idea of the Hebrew word  (shalwm), which speaks of health of body and soul. Be whole of thy plague. The verb is present imperative, “Be continually whole.” The latter word is the translation of  (uJgih"), “to be sound of body,” and from which we get our word “hygienic.” “Plague” is mastix (mastix), “a whip, plague, a calamity or misfortune,” used of distressing bodily diseases. Translation. And He said to her, “Daughter, your faith has saved you. Be going in peace. Be continually sound in body from your affliction.” (5:35) While He yet spake. What a vivid touch. This is Mark’s report of the lifelike description which Peter gave him. The messengers came at the most opportune moment, attracting attention from the woman. There came from the ruler of the synagogue’s house. The verb is present in tense, speaking of a past event with the vividness of a present reality. It was an echo of Peter’s words: “There comes from the ruler of the synagogue’s house.” The word “house” is not in the Greek text. But the ruler himself was standing there with Jesus, therefore the messengers must have come from his home, not from him. Thy daughter is dead. The verb is aorist. The message was: “Your daughter died.” Why troublest thou the Master any further? “Troublest” is from the verb  (skullw), “to skin, to flay, to vex, to annoy, distress, bother, worry.” “Master” is didaskalos (didaskalo") “teacher.” The ruler must have kept close to the Lord Jesus during the incident of the healing of the woman, and while his heart went out to her in her distress, and rejoiced in her healing, yet his heart of hearts was with his daughter who was dying. Now comes the sudden news of her death. Translation. While He was still speaking, they come from the home of the ruler of the synagogue saying: Your daughter died. Why are you still bothering the Teacher? (5:36) Jesus heard. The verb is  (parakouw), “to hear alongside,” thus, “to overhear.” Be not afraid. We have here a present imperative in a prohibition which forbids the continuance of an action already going on. The ruler was fearing. Jesus said, “Stop fearing.” Only believe. The present imperative speaks of continuous action. “Be believing.” The command was for a continued, sustained faith. He was to continue believing, even in the presence of death.

Translation. And Jesus overhearing the word being spoken, says to the ruler of the synagogue, Stop fearing, only be believing. (5:37) The definite article appears with the name “Peter,” but not with the other two names. It binds the three individuals together as a unit. These three were chosen to be witnesses of a great miracle. The disciples were in training. Perhaps the number was restricted to three so as not to crowd the home of the ruler unduly. Translation. And He did not permit anyone to follow with Him except Peter, and James, and John the brother of James. (5:38) He cometh to the house. The best texts have “they come,” Jesus and the ruler and the three disciples. “To” is eis (eij") “into.” They entered the house of mourning. Seeth the tumult, and them that wept and wailed greatly. “Seeth” is  (qewrew) “to look at a thing with interest and for a purpose, to examine critically and carefully, and with a practiced eye.” The tumult. The word is thorubos (qorubo") “a noise, uproar,” used of persons wailing. Wailed. The word is an onomatopoetic word, that is, a word whose sound is logically related to its meaning. It is alalazoµ “to repeat frequently the cry alala (ajlala),” as soldiers used to do on entering battle. The word is used here of the monotonous wailing of hired mourners. Translation. And they come into the home of the ruler of the synagogue, and He looks carefully and with an understanding eye at the tumult, and at those who were weeping and at those who were wailing greatly. (5:39) Why make ye this ado? The verb is  (qorubew) “to make a noise or uproar, to wail tumultuously.” The damsel is not dead but sleepeth. “Damsel” is to paidion (to paidion) “the little girl.” The verb “is dead” is aorist, “died.” Our Lord meant that the child was not dead to stay dead. He spoke of death as sleeping. Translation. And having come in He says to them, Why are you wailing tumultuously and weeping? The little girl did not die, but is sleeping. (5:40) They laughed Him to scorn. The word is  (katagelaw) “to deride, to jeer at.” The simple verb means “to laugh at” the prefixed preposition “down,” thus “to laugh (someone) down,” thus, “to ridicule.” The loud laughter of those jeering at our Lord, sounded most incongruous in the room where death was holding sway. The verb is the inceptive imperfect, “they went to laughing and jeering at Him.” When He had put them all out. The word is  (ejkballw) “to throw out.” Our Lord had to use pressure to make the hired mourners leave. It must have been very close to a forceful ejection as in the case of the cleansing of the Temple. Vincent quotes Bengel: “Wonderful authority in the house of a stranger. He was really master of the house.” He taketh. The verb is  (paralambanw). The simple verb means “to

take,” the prefixed preposition, “alongside.” The idea is “He takes the father and mother, and His three disciples under His care, in His charge, under His authority.” Jesus was absolute master of the situation. The grief-stricken parents needed someone to guide them. The disciples were fearful at the fact that our Lord was confronted with death. They needed the reassurance of their Master. Entereth where the damsel was lying. The verb is eisporeuomai (eijsporeuomai). It is the word often used of a person going on a journey. There are other verbs which mean “to go,” such as  (ajgw),  (bainw),  (peripatew), all of which speak of the act of walking. This one was doubtless chosen because it conveys the idea of distance. For instance, the walk of a condemned criminal from his death cell to the electric chair is a matter of a few hundred feet. But the distance is a journey to him. The factors involved make it a long walk. Our Lord was leading the sorrowing parents into the deathchamber, and the disciples into a room fraught with great possibilities. It was a journey for these. The words “was lying” are not in the best texts. It is simply, “where the little girl was.” Translation. And they went to laughing and jeering at Him. But, after He Himself had thrown them all out, He takes the father of the little girl and her mother and those with Him under His care, and proceeds in to where the little girl was. (5:41) He took the damsel by the hand. The verb is  (kratew) “to get possession of, to become master of, to take hold of.” The word speaks of the strong grip with which our Lord took hold of the hand of the dead girl and with which He helped her arise after the miracle of giving her back her life had been consummated. Since she had been ill previous to her death, she would need such help. He says to her, Talitha cumi (Taliqa cumi). Peter heard these words spoken in our Lord’s native tongue and reports them to Mark. Then Mark interprets them in Greek for his Gentile readers The Greek language was in common use all over the Roman world at this time. Expositors says: “Jesus may have been bilingual, sometimes using Greek, sometimes Syriac. He would use the vernacular on a pathetic occasion like this.” It is significant also that our Lord’s words on the Cross, “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken Me?” are first reported in our Lord’s mother tongue, and then interpreted for Gentile readers. The Nestle text spells “cumi (cumi),” “koum (koum).” Translation. And having taken a strong grip on the hand of the little girl, He says to her, Talitha koum (Taliqa koum), which being interpreted is, Little girl, to you I say, be arising. (5:42) The damsel arose and walked. “Arose” is from  (ajnisthmi) “to arise, to stand up,” used of someone lying down on a couch. It is aorist, calling attention to the fact of the arising. “Walked” is  (peripatew) “to walk about,” and is imperfect, “kept on walking about,” first, possibly to her mother, then to her father, and then, finding out what had happened, to the Lord Jesus who had restored her to life. For she was twelve years. This explanation was needed, to show that the diminutive paidion (paidion) would not be mistaken here for a small child. The girl was old enough to walk about.

They were astonished with a great astonishment. The verb is  (ejxisthmi) from ek (ejk) “out,” and  (iJsthmi) “to place or put,” thus “to put out,” speaking of a removal, hence, of a man removed out of his senses. Our word “ecstasy” is the English spelling of this word. The word “amazement” would better translate its content of meaning. Translation. And immediately the little girl stood up and kept on walking about, for she was twelve years old. And they were amazed with a great amazement. (5:43) He charged them straitly that no man should know. The first verb is  (diastellw) “to order, charge.” Expositors comments: “That the girl had recovered could not be hid, but that she had been brought back from death might be. Jesus wished this, not desiring that expectations of such acts should be awakened.” Commanded that something should be given her to eat. Luke also records the fact that Jesus ordered food for the little girl. The Great Physician was careful about details. Bruce notes the fact that the girl could walk and eat, showing that she was not only alive, but well. Translation. And He charged them sternly that no one should know this. And He ordered that she be given something to eat.

CHAPTER SIX (6:1) Came into His own country. The word for “country” is patris (patri") “one’s native country, one’s native place i.e., city.” Our Lord had not lived in Bethlehem since His birth. Nazareth had been His home for almost thirty years. Neither Matthew nor Mark mention Nazareth by name. But the word patris (patri") makes it clear that that city and its environs are meant. Jesus was going back home again. Expositors thinks it very probable that this was another one of our Lord’s attempts to escape from the crowd into a scene of comparative quiet and rest, as He did in the case of the hill (3:13), the eastern shore (5:1), and now Nazareth (6:1). Translation. And He went out from there and comes into His own fatherland. And His disciples follow with Him. (6:2) He began to teach in the synagogue. Our Lord had come away from the crowds in order to rest. But when the ruler of the synagogue invited Him to speak to the assembled congregation, He could not resist the opportunity of giving out the Word. From whence hath this man these things? The question was asked in a curt, laconic, and stinging fashion. Literally it is, “from where, to this fellow these things?” Were astonished. The verb is  (ejkplhssw) “to strike out, expel by a blow, to strike one out of self-possession,” in a passive sense, “to be struck with astonishment.” The discourse and the miracles of our Lord struck them so forcibly that they were astonished to the point of losing control of themselves. The verb is imperfect, showing that this condition of being beside themselves with amazement continued for some time. It is, “they were continuing to be beside themselves with amazement.” The prefixed

preposition ek (ejk) meaning “out,” shows an exhausted state of affairs. It reminds one of an automobile tire that has been deflated. Their astonishment was so great that their selfpossession was exhausted. In the language of Webster, they were completely flabbergasted. This is the English word that adequately translates the Greek word. It does not partake of the polished diction of the a.v., but neither does the Greek text. And in spite of this unimpeachable testimony, present day Modernists persist in riding their hobby-horse of “No miracles in days gone by because there are no miracles today.” Mighty works. The word is dunamis (dunami"), a word used in the n.t., to speak of miracles from the standpoint of the supernatural power exerted in their performance. This word is used in Romans 1:16 where Paul speaks of the gospel as the power of God resulting in salvation. Here Jesus was back home among the people who had known Him for almost thirty years as the son of Mary and Joseph, one of their own number. They saw the miracles and noted the wisdom which was not of this world, but wondered where both had come from. Translation. And when the Sabbath had come, He began to be teaching in the synagogue. And the many hearing, were completely flabbergasted, saying, From where does this one get these things? And what wisdom is this which has been given to this fellow? Even such great exhibitions of power take place through the medium of His hands? (6:3) Is not this the carpenter? The word is  (tektwn). It comes from tekein (tekein),  (tiktw), “to beget, create,” like  (tecnh) “craft, art.” It first was used of the worker in wood or the builder with wood like our carpenter. Then it was used of any artisan or craftsman in metal or stone, and even of sculpture work. Our Lord was known first in Nazareth as the son of Joseph the carpenter, and after the latter’s death, as the carpenter of Nazareth. Justin Martyr speaks of the ploughs and yokes which Jesus made. He worked in the carpenter shop until He was thirty years old. There He developed the strong physique which stood Him in good stead during those strenuous years of His ministry. They were offended in Him. The contrast between a peasant of Galilee who had earned His daily bread by the sweat of His brow for the first thirty years of His life, with the Person who delivered those wonderful discourses and performed those miracles, was too much for His townspeople. They were offended with Him. The word is  (skandalizw), “to put a stumbling block or impediment in the way upon which another may trip or fall, to cause a person to begin to distrust one whom he ought to trust and obey”; in a passive sense, “to find occasion of stumbling in a person, to be offended in a person, to see in another what one disapproves of and what hinders one from acknowledging his authority.” They could not explain Him, so they rejected Him. The saddest part of all was that His own brothers and sisters, sons and daughters of Mary and Joseph, disbelieved His Messianic claims. They had lived in the same home with Jesus for many years, and had been the recipients of the financial support He brought in to the family coffers by His carpenter work. His singularly beautiful life had made no effective impression upon their dull, cold hearts. Translation. Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Jude, and Simon? And are not His sisters here with

us? And they saw in Him that of which they disapproved and which kept them from acknowledging Him. (6:4) A prophet is not without honor. The Greek word “prophet” ( (profhth")) means primarily “a forth-teller, one who speaks out God’s message.” The act of predicting future events is only incidental to his chief work. It is significant here that Jesus makes a definite claim to being a prophet. He had already claimed to be the Jewish Messiah (John 4:26, Luke 4:21), the Son of Man with power of God (Mark 1:10, Matt. 9:6, Luke 5:24), the Son of God (John 5:22). The word “honor” is  (timh), which means “deference, reverence, honor.” Translation. And Jesus was saying to them. A prophet is not without honor except in his own country and among his own kinsfolk and in his own home. (6:5) He could there do no mighty work. The word “no” is fully translated from oudemian (oJudemian), “not even one.” A few sick folk. The word “sick” is arrostos (ajrrosto") “without strength, weak, sick.” This is sickness regarded as constitutional weakness. Expositors remarks that the people of Nazareth were so consistently unbelieving that they would not even bring their sick to Him to be healed. The word “work” is again dunamis (dunami"), which refers to a miracle from the standpoint of the supernatural power involved in its performance. Translation. And He was not able there to do even one work of power, except that He laid His hands on a few sickly ones and healed them. (6:6) He marvelled because of their unbelief. Expositors says: “Jesus marvelled at the faith of the centurion. Nazareth supplied the opposite ground of astonishment. There Jesus found an amount of stupid unreceptivity for which His experience in Decapolis and elsewhere had not prepared Him.” The fact that our omniscient Lord marvelled at the unbelief of His fellow-towns-people, gives us a measure of understanding of His human limitations. As Deity, He would not marvel at anything. Yet in His humanity, He expected a different reception at Nazareth than He received. And He was disappointed. He went round about the villages. The Greek has it: “He went round about the villages in a circle.” That is, He visited all the villages in the adjacent country encircling Nazareth. Translation. And He marvelled because of their unbelief. And He kept going around the villages in the encircling country, teaching. (6:7) He called unto Him the twelve. The verb is present in tense, again the device of Mark to paint a vivid picture by speaking of a past fact as a present reality. The simple verb is  (kalew) “to call,” the prefixed preposition pros (pro") meaning “to, towards, facing.” The idea is that Jesus called to Himself the Twelve. Began to send them forth by two and two. The second verb is  (ajpostellw) “to send forth as an ambassador on a commission to represent one and to

perform some task.” Our word “apostle” comes from this word. The tense is present. It is, “He began to be sending them forth as His ambassadors.” Vincent says, “By two and two, to help and encourage each other, and also for fulness of testimony.” Gave them power over unclean spirits. The verb is imperfect. He kept on giving them power all through the tour. “Power” here is exousia (ejxousia), delegated authority. They possessed the authority to command demons to leave the individuals in whom they had been operating, and God’s power (dunamis (dunami")) was there to see that the command was obeyed. Translation. And He calls to Himself the Twelve. And He began to be sending them forth as His ambassadors with credentials on a commission to represent Him, sending them forth two by two. And He kept on giving them authority over the unclean spirits. (6:8, 9) “Staff” is rabdos (rJabdo") “a walking-stick.” “Scrip” is  (phra). On this word, Adolph Deissmann in his monumental work Light from the Ancient East gives us some helpful information. He says (p.p. 108–110) that most commentators think of it as a travelling-bag, or, more precisely, as a bread bag, and that the word is capable of either meaning according to the context. But he makes the point that the prohibition of bread here would make unnecessary that of the bread bag. He cites the use of the word as that of a beggar’s collecting bag, and mentions the beggar-priests who went around collecting money for their pagan gods. Here the prohibition of the beggar’s collecting bag points to the fact that Jesus forbad the disciples to go around collecting money, either for His support or for their subsistence. No money in their purse. “Money is chalkos (calko"). The word means “brass, coins of brass” (also of silver and gold). Moulton and Milligan in Vocabulary of the Greek Testament speak of its use as a word meaning “bronze-money.” From two quotations of the second and third centuries, it appears that the word was used of money in general. However, Expositors has: “no mention of gold or silver, brass the only money the poor missionaries were likely to handle.” “Purse” is a belt to hold in place long, flowing garments, and since it was hollow, to hold money. “Coats” is  (citwn) the undergarment, as himatia (iJmatia) is the long, flowing outer garb. Both Matthew and Luke quote our Lord as forbidding the disciples to take a staff, and the former quotes Him as forbidding shoes, while Mark quotes Him as telling the disciples to take a staff and sandals. Robertson suggests that the difficulty probably is solved by the fact that the three Gospels speak of “two,” and that this applies to the staff and shoes or sandals. He quotes Gould: “In general, these directions are against luxury in equipment, and also against providing themselves with what they could procure from the hospitality of others.” Translation. And He commanded them not to be taking even one thing for the road except only a walking stick, not bread, nor a begging-bag, nor money in their belt, but to wear sandals, and not to clothe themselves with two undergarments. (6:10, 11) Whosoever shall not receive you. Nestle’s text has “whatever topos (topo") (inhabited place, such as a city, village, or district) shall not receive you.” “Receive” is dechomai (decomai) “to take with the hand, grant access to a visitor, not to

refuse intercourse or friendship.” The idea of a welcoming or appropriating reception is inherent in this word. The act of shaking off the travel dust that has accumulated on one’s sandals, is symbolic of extreme contempt for another, and the refusal to have any further intercourse with him. The injunction to remain in the home where one has been welcomed and to stay there until he leaves the village, Robertson says: is “to avoid a restless and dissatisfied manner and to take pains in choosing a home.” The statement about Sodom and Gomorrha, the textual critic Nestle, has placed in the apparatus at the bottom of the page. Translation. And He was saying to them: In whose home you enter, there be abiding until you go out from thence, and whatever place does not welcome you nor hear you, when you are going on your journey out from there, shake off the dust that is underneath your feet as a testimony against them. (6:12, 13) Preached that men should repent. “Preached” is  (khrussw) “to make a public proclamation with such gravity, formality, and authority as must be heeded.” Luke, in reporting this, uses euaggelizomai (eujaggelizomai) “to announce glad tidings.” The word  (khrussw) does not carry within it the content or nature of the message which is proclaimed. The context usually indicates what is being preached. It Is used in I Peter 3:19 where our Lord preached to the imprisoned spirits, the fallen angels of Genesis 6:2, 4 (the sons of God). The content of our Lord’s message is not found in the context. The word euaggelizomai (eujaggelizomai) is made up of aggelos (ajggelo") “a message” and eu (euj) “good,” thus a message of good news. Our word “gospel” means a message of good news. The proclamation of the disciples was that men should repent. The word is  (metanoew) “to change one’s mind about one’s previous life and course of action.” Since one’s previous life could only be sinful, the only change of attitude would be in the direction of the good. The New Testament meaning of the word therefore is “a change of mind regarding one’s previous sinful life and the determination to be done with it.” This proclamation would not be good news to the sinner, unless it were accompanied with the announcement of a salvation from sin provided by God. This was included in the message of John the Baptist, our Lord, and the disciples, as shown by the word Luke used. Anointed with oil many that were sick. The word is  (ajleifw). The papyri give us examples of its usage. We have a letter from the second century in which a man whose wife had gone away a month before, writes that he has not bathed or anointed himself. There is a third-century inscription in honor of a gymnasiarch (head of a gymnasium) which speaks of him as the beloved anointer. In James 5:14, directions are given for the elders to anoint the sick person with oil. In Luke 10:34, the Samaritan treated the wounds of the man with oil and wine. Olive oil was a common remedial agent of the ancients and was used internally and externally. At a time when the healing art was in its infancy, and medicines were few, olive oil was a panacea for many ills. Here, the disciples are directed to use it in the healing of the sick. In the case of James 5:14, it is prayer and medicine, God working directly, and through the medicine, which resulted in the healing of the sick person. In this instance in Mark it is the same, but with this difference, that up to the time of the close of revelation with the writing of The Book of the Revelation, God performed miracles of healing through the apostles. This was for the purpose of attesting their messages as from Him. Since then, there is no need of this. Hence, God heals directly in answer to prayer now, not through individuals. The normal procedure now is prayer, the doctor, and the use of medicine and other means as God may

direct. Where the two latter are not obtainable, God does heal without means when it is in His wisdom to do so. Translation. And having gone out, they made a proclamation to the effect that they should be repenting. And demons, many of them, they were casting out, and they were anointing with oil many who were sick, and were healing them. (6:14) King Herod heard of Him. Matthew and Luke speak of Herod as a tetrarch, namely, as one of the four men who ruled Palestine at that time. The word “tetrarch” means “a rule by four.” But Mark is entirely correct in calling him a king, for he was writing for the Roman world, and this title was applied freely in the Roman world to all eastern rulers. This tour of Galilee by the disciples had resulted in the dissemination of the news about Jesus until even the palace heard about him. As Bengel says; “A palace is late in hearing spiritual news.” Herod’s explanation of our Lord and His miracles was that John the Baptist had risen from the dead, that while John had not performed any miracles, yet death had put him into touch with the unseen world and had enabled him to utilize its powers. Vincent quotes Dr. Morison: “A snatch of Herod’s theology and philosophy.” Nestle’s text gives, not “he said,” but “they said,” referring the estimate of Jesus to the court talk, not alone to Herod. It seems evident though that it started with Herod and was taken up by his courtiers, for Expositors says; “The theory that John was risen looks more like the creation of a troubled conscience than the suggestion of light-minded courtiers.” Matthew reports the above, the estimation of Herod, Luke, that of the court at large. Mighty works do shew forth themselves in him. “Shew forth” is the translation of  (ejnergew) “to put forth energy, to be operative, to work.” “Works” is from dunamis (dunami"), a word meaning “miracles” but from the standpoint of the supernatural power at work in the miracles. Translation. And the king, Herod, heard, for His name became known, and they were saying that John the Baptist had been raised out from among those who were dead, and because of this, the powers are operative in him. (6:15) Others said that our Lord was Elijah. Still others said that He was a prophet, not one of the o.t., prophets, but one like them. Translation. But others kept on saying that it was Elijah. But others were saying that it was a prophet like one of the prophets. (6:16) When Herod heard of the various opinions, he gave a most emphatic pronouncement; “Him whom I beheaded, John, this one was raised.” The emphatic words in a Greek sentence are at the beginning. “Him whom I beheaded”; Herod could not forget that sight of John’s head dripping with blood as the gold platter was brought in to the banquet hall. The “I” is emphatic, since it appears as a personal pronoun in the Greek text. The demonstrative pronoun houtos (oJuto") “this one,” is also emphatic. Herod was positive that Jesus was John. “Said” is imperfect. Herod kept on repeating his final

pronouncement as answer to the various theories when they were propounded to him. Translation. But Herod, having heard, kept on saying, Him whom I decapitated, John, this man was raised. (6:17, 18) Mark now proceeds to tell the grewsome story of John’s death. Robertson says that this narrative is very little out of the chronological order here. He quotes Swete as saying: “The tidings of the murder of the Baptist seem to have brought the recent circuit to an end.” John was imprisoned in the grim fortress of Machaerus, situated on the barren heights of Moab above the Dead Sea. Mark uses autos (aujto") as an intensive pronoun, emphasizing the fact that it was this very Herod, and no one else, who had imprisoned John. The definite article appears before the name “Herod,” further identifying the man. Translation. For this Herod himself, having commissioned an official representative, apprehended this aforementioned John and bound him in prison for the sake of Herodias, the wife of Philip his brother; for John had been saying to Herod, It is not lawful for you to be having the wife of your brother. (6:19) Herodias had a quarrel against him. “Had a quarrel” is from  (ejnecw) “to be enraged with, set one’s self against, hold a grudge against one.” In modern slang it is, “Had it in for him.” The tense is imperfect, which means that Herodias never let up on this fury of hers toward the Baptist for daring to denounce her private relations with Herod, but waited her time for revenge. She would have killed him; but she could not. The word is “desired” to kill him. Swete says, “The power was wanting, not the will.” Translation. But Herodias set herself against him, and was desiring to kill him, but she was unable to do so. (6:20) Herod feared John. The verb is imperfect. He was in a continual state of fear. Observed him. The verb is  (sunthrew) “to preserve a thing from perishing or being lost, to guard one, to keep him safe.” The a.v., rendering “observe” is not correct (Vincent, Robertson, Expositors). That is, Herod kept John safe from the evil plots of Herodias, who was seeking to kill him. The verb is imperfect, “kept on keeping him safe.” Herod maintained a constant watch over John. He did many things. This translation is based upon an erroneous reading. The Greek text is not polla epoiei (polla ejpoiei) which would be “did many things,” but   (polla hjporei). The verb is  (ajporew) from poros (poro") “way” and Alpha privative, which makes the word mean “without a way.” The verb thus means “to be without resources, to be in straits, to be embarrassed, not to know which way to turn, to be perplexed.” This was Herod’s state of mind when he heard John. He heard him gladly. The Greek has the imperfect, speaking of repeated visits of Herod to see John in the prison of Machaerus. But his visits to John, his life with Herodias, his guilty conscience, and the insistent demands of his wife, brought him to his wit’s ends, perplexed, knowing not which way to turn. “He was in perplexity about many

things,” the Greek has it. Translation. For Herod was in a continual state of fearing John, knowing him to be a man, righteous and holy; and he kept him constantly out of harm’s way, and, having heard him, he was in a continual state of perplexity, and he was in the habit of hearing him with pleasure. (6:21) A convenient day. “Convenient” is eukairos (eujkairo"), made up of kairos (kairo"), used of a critical epoch-making period of time, and eu (euj), “well” or “good.” Herodias chose Herod’s birthday as the strategic moment to spring her trap and force him to put John to death. This was the propitious, auspicious time that promised the attainment of her murderous plans. Those invited to the birthday-banquet were the lords (megas (mega") great ones), the high captains (chiliarchos (ciliarco") commander of a thousand soldiers, a Roman cohort), and chief estates of Galilee ( (prwto") the first-ones of Galilee, or the chief men). This was a notable gathering, composed of men from governmental, military, and civil life. Translation. And a strategic day having come, when Herod on his birthday made a supper for his great men, and his military commanders, and the chief men of Galilee. (6:22) The daughter of the said Herodias. The word “said” is the translation of the feminine personal pronoun, not here in the attributive position, the function of which is to identify, but in the predicate position which is intensive in its use. It is “the daughter of Herodias herself.” So Vincent and Robertson. The point is that it was Herodias’ own daughter who degraded herself in a licentious dance in which only professional actors of loose morals would engage. Robertson quotes Gould; “Such dancing was almost an unprecedented thing for women of rank, or even respectability. It was mimetic and licentious, and performed by professionals.” The immoral spectacle catered to the totally depraved natures of the drunken men, and Herod offers her a reward. Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee. “Ask” is aorist imperative, “ask at once.” “Wilt” is  (qelw), a desire that comes from one’s emotions. Herod had stepped into the trap which Herodias had set for him. Translation. And when the daughter of Herodias herself entered and danced, it pleased Herod and those who were dining with him. And the king said to the girl; Ask me at once whatever your heart desires, and I will give it to you. (6:23) He sware. The word is  (ojmnuw) “to put one’s self under oath.” Translation. And he put himself under oath to her; whatever you ask me I will give you, to the half of my kingdom. (6:24) What shall I ask? The verb is in the indirect middle voice in which the subject of the verb acts in his own interest. She said, “What shall I ask for myself?” She was totally unprepared for the grewsome request of her mother.

Translation. And having gone out she said to her mother, What shall I ask for myself? And she said, The head of John the Baptist. (6:25) She came in straightway with haste, that is, before the king could change his mind and before the spell of her dancing had passed. By and by. Obsolete English for “immediately.” The word is  (ejxauth"), “on the instant.” She wanted her wish gratified on the spot, at once. Expositors says: “Request proffered with a cool impudence almost outdoing the mother.” In a charger. The Greek word is pinax (pinax) “a dish, plate, platter.” The English word is obsolete. A charge is originally a burden. A charger is something loaded, hence, a dish. Translation. And having come immediately with haste to the king, she requested for herself, saying; I desire that you give me at once on a platter the head of John the Baptist. (6:26) The king was exceedingly sorry. It is perilupos genomenos (perilupo" genomeno") a concessive clause, the participle, an ingressive aorist, indicating entrance into a new condition; “The king, though having become exceedingly sorrowful.” The drunken king became as sorrowful as one in his condition could become. He realized all the implications of the request. He was now to become the murderer of the prophet whom he feared and respected. He would not reject her. “Reject” is “thwart the efficacy of a thing, nullify, frustrate.” Expositors says: “to slight her, by treating the oath and promise as a joke; a late word, used in reference to persons, in the sense of breaking faith with.” Translation. And though the king became exceedingly sorrowful, yet because of his oath and because of those who were dining with him, he did not desire to frustrate her. (6:27–29) Executioner. The word is spekoulatora (spekoulatora), a Latin word brought over into the Greek. We get our word “speculator” from it. The word itself means “a watcher.” It was used to designate a guardsman whose business it was to watch or spy out. It came gradually to denote one of the armed bodyguard of the Roman emperor. Suetonius says that Claudius did not dare to attend banquets unless his speculatores (speculatore") with their lances surrounded him. Seneca uses the word in the sense of an executioner. Herod imitated the custom of the Roman emperor and had a company of speculatores (speculatore") around him. It was one of these that he sent to behead John. Translation. And immediately, the king, having sent off one of his bodyguards, ordered him to bring his head. And having gone off, he beheaded him in the prison, and brought his head upon a platter and gave it to the girl, and the girl gave it to her mother. And having heard, his disciples came and took up his corpse, and laid it in a tomb.

(6:30) The apostles. The expression is not used here in the technical sense of later days, but merely of those who had been sent off on a commission to represent the one sending them and to perform a certain mission. This is what the word apostolos (ajpostolo") means. They were missionaries. Where they went and how long they stayed, and where had Jesus been and what had He done in the meanwhile, these are questions which must remain unanswered. Translation. And the missionaries gathered themselves together to Jesus, and brought back news to Him of all things whatever they did and whatever they taught. (6:31) Come ye yourselves apart into a desert place, and rest awhile. “Ye” is the pronoun humeis (uJmei"), not necessary to designate the person acting in the verb, since the Greek verb indicates its own person by the ending, and is therefore emphatic in use. It is, “As for yourselves.” That is, you who have been in the midst of constant activity and have worked hard during your preaching tour, you need some rest. But the personal pronoun autoi (aujtoi) is also used, which further particularizes these men as those who have labored to the point of exhaustion. “Apart” is the translation of  (kat ijdian). The word idios (ijdio") has the idea of privacy about it. What these men needed now was a little privacy, to be away from the crowd, in a desert place, the a.v., has it. The word is  (ejrhmo"), not a desert in the sense in which we use the word, but a deserted place, solitary, lonely, uninhabited, the kind of place for an over wrought, exhausted Christian worker. How solicitous Jesus was for His tired servants. He Himself was careful to take His needed rest. It is the duty of His servants to do so also. The Devil would wear us out before our time, if he could. Rest awhile. “Rest” is  (ajnapauw) “to cause or permit one to cease from labor in order to recover and collect his strength.” In the middle voice as it is used here, it means “to give one’s self rest, to take rest,” in our present day language, “to rest up.” “Leisure” is eukairos (eujkairo"), “opportune time;” “no good time” when they could eat. Translation. And He says to them; Come here, as for you, yourselves, into the privacy of an uninhabited place, and rest yourselves a little. For there were those who were coming and those who were going, many of them, and not even did they have an opportune time to eat. (6:32, 33) They departed into a desert place by ship privately. The definite article precedes the word “ship.” The words “by ship” are not an adequate translation. It was not merely by sea that they went, but in the boat, the ploion (ploion) which was always kept in readiness to take our Lord out of danger from the crowds that would crush Him. The use of ploion (ploion) here, referring to the large fishing boat, informs us that both that boat and the rowboat, the ploiarion (ploiarion), were held in readiness for our Lord. It was doubtless the fishing outfit which Peter, James, and John had used when they were catching fish instead of catching men. The word “privately” does not describe their going away, that is, in a private manner, but speaks of the privacy of the uninhabited region. Many knew Him. There is no pronoun in the Greek text. The thought is, as our Lord and His disciples were going away, the people understood their reason for doing so, namely, to obtain some rest. The verb is  (ejpiginwskw) “to recognize a thing to be what it really is, to understand.” Ran afoot thither out of all cities. Expositors says: “They ran together, excited and

exciting, each town on the way contributing its rill to the growing stream of eager human beings; what a picture! The ultimate result, a congregation of 5000. This is the climax of popularity, and from the fourth Gospel we learn, its crisis.” The word “ran” is from  (suntrecw) “to run along with others, to rush with.” It describes the frenzied hurry of the people who ran with one another out of the town. The words “came together unto Him,” are not in the best manuscripts. These people ran around the foot of the lake and met the boat as it landed. What a pathetic commentary on the condition and needs of the ancient world. Translation. And they went off in the boat to the privacy of an uninhabited place. And they saw them going away, and many understood, and on foot from all the cities they ran there with one another and preceded them. (6:34) He began to teach. The infinitive shows durative action. Jesus went to teaching and kept it up. Matthew and Luke speak of Him healing. But there could have been only a few who were sick in a crowd that was in such a hurry. The crowd, tired of the powerless teaching of the rabbis, sensed a new type of teaching and was eager to hear the new Teacher. Our Lord, though weary and seeking rest, gave Himself to them. The a.v., “moved with compassion,” is an excellent rendering of the Greek here, and is most descriptive. Translation. And having come out, He saw a large crowd, and He was moved with compassion upon them, because they were as sheep not having a shepherd. And He began teaching them many things. (6:35, 36) When the day was now far spent. The Greek has it, “much daytime already gone.” Luke says that the day began to decline. It was after 3 p. m., the first evening. Sunset was approaching. The country round about. The word is agros (ajgro") “a field, farm, bit of village.” The words “for they have nothing to eat,” are not in the best texts. Translation. And when the day was already far gone, His disciples came to Him and were saying, Uninhabited is this place, and already the hour is late. Dismiss them in order that, having gone off to the neighboring farms and villages, they might purchase for themselves something that they might eat. (6:37) Give ye them to eat. The “ye” in the Greek text is intensive. It is, “As for you, you give them to eat.” Two hundred pennyworth. The Greek text has denarion (denarion), a silver coin. Expositors says the sum was about $35, and adds, “the sum probably suggested by what the Twelve knew they were in possession of at the time.” Translation. And He answering said to them, As for you, you give them to eat. And they say to Him, Having gone off, shall we purchase 200 denarii (denarii) worth of bread, and give them to eat?

(6:38) No comment. (6:39, 40) He commanded them to make all sit down by companies upon the green grass. “Sit down” is  (ajnaklinw), the word used of a person reclining on a couch at a banquet. The word means “to lean up.” The raised head of the couch would be at the table side and the person dining would lean up on the couch. Here, the command was merely to recline on the green grass and wait to be served. The words “by companies” are sumposia sumposia (sumposia sumposia). The word originally meant “a drinking party,” then “the party of guests of any kind, without the notion of drinking.” They were seated like companies at tables open at the end. Vincent says: “The Jewish dining-room was arranged like the Roman: three tables forming three sides of a square, and with divans or couches following the outside line of tables. The open end of the square admitted the servants who waited at table. This explains the arrangement of the multitude here described by Mark. The people sat down, literally, in table-companies, arranged like guests at table … so that the disciples could pass along their side and distribute the loaves.” It was Passover time (John 6:4) and the grass was fresh and green. In ranks. The Greek is prasiai prasiai (prasiai prasiai). The word means “a garden bed.” Vincent says: “like beds in a garden. The former adverb, by companies, describes the arrangement, this the color. The red, blue, and yellow clothing of the poorest orientals makes an Eastern crowd full of color, a fact which would appeal to Peter’s eye, suggesting the appearance of flower-beds in a garden.” Translation. And He commanded them to make all recline in open squares like oriental diners, upon the green grass. And they reclined in squares that looked like flower-garden plots, by hundreds and by fifties. (6:41) Brake the loaves and gave. Vincent has a precious note: “The verbs are in different tenses; the former in the aorist, the latter in the imperfect. The aorist implies the instantaneous, the imperfect the continuous act. Farrar remarks that the multiplication evidently took place in Christ’s hands, between the acts of breaking and giving.” The Greek has it, “He brake and kept on giving.” Translation. And having taken the five loaves and the two fish, having looked up to heaven, He invoked a blessing, and broke the loaves, and kept on giving to the disciples in order that they might continue setting them beside them; and the two fish He divided to all. (6:42–44) “Basket” is kaphinos (kafino"), “a wicker basket.” Moulton and Milligan say that these baskets were of different sizes. That means that there is no use in attempting to speculate on the size of the baskets. Five thousand men. The word for “men” here is not anthropos (ajnqropo"), the generic term which could include men and women, but  (ajnhr), the word for a male individual. Matthew adds that there were women and children. A wonderful miracle. It is recorded by all four Gospel writers. Two of them, Matthew and John were eyewitnesses, and Peter, also an eyewitness, reported it to Mark. Translation. And all ate and were filled. And they took up twelve wicker baskets full of fragments, and from the fish. And those who had eaten the

loaves were five thousand men. (6:45) And immediately, He compelled His disciples to go on board the boat and precede Him to the other side, to Bethsaida, while He dismisses the crowd. (6:46) When He had sent them away. The verb is  (ajpotassw) and means “to separate one’s self, withdraw one’s self, to take leave of, bid farewell to.” To pray. The verb is proseuchomai (proseucomai), which is used of prayer addressed to God, the prefixed preposition meaning “toward, facing,” emphasizing the direct approach of the one who prays, in seeking God’s face. It speaks also of the consciousness on the part of the one who prays, of the fact of God’s presence and His listening ear. Translation. And having taken leave of them, He went off into the mountain to pray. (6:47) When even was come. It was the second or late evening, 6 p. m., at sunset. He alone on the land. Jesus had come down from the mountain and had returned to the seashore. Apparently He stayed some hours on the beach, for John says (6:17), “It was now dark and Jesus had not come to them.” Translation. And evening having come, the boat was in the middle of the sea, and He Himself alone upon the land. (6:48) He saw them toiling in rowing. The verb is  (basanizw) “to torture,” used in the passive, “to be harassed, distressed.” The fourth watch of the night. It was between three and six in the morning. Walking on the sea. The word “on” is epi (ejpi) which when used with the genitive case as it is here, signifies contact. Our Lord’s sandals had actual contact with the water. He walked on the surface of the sea as we walk on a hard pavement. Would have passed by them. The word “would” is the translation of  (qelw) “I desire.” He desired to pass by them. The word “by” is para (para) which means “beside.” The word “passed” is erchomai (ejrcomai) “to go.” The a.v., leaves the impression that our Lord desired to pass them by. But He went out on that turbulent sea in order to go to their help. This preposition para (para) when used in composition with a verb as it is here, denotes “situation or motion either from the side of or to the side of,” and thus means “near, beside, by, to.” The context points to the rendering. “He was desiring to go to their side.” An instance of this use is found in Acts 24:7, where the a.v., has “The chief captain Lysias came upon us,” and the same verb is used, parerchomai (parercomai). Both Expositors and Robertson understand the meaning to be that Jesus desired to pass by the disciples, and parerchomai (parercomai) has that meaning. But it also means “to come near.” The context is decisive for the latter, in the judgment of the present writer, since the reason why Jesus went out to the disciples, was, not to pass by and leave them to their fate, but to come near and help them in their difficulty, which thing He proceeded to do. Translation. And seeing them constantly distressed in their rowing, for the wind was against them, sometime between three and six in the

morning, He comes to them walking directly on the sea. And He was desiring to go to their side. (6:49) They supposed it had been a spirit. The word for “spirit” here is not pneuma (pneuma), referring to a disembodied individual who had died, but phantasma (fantasma) “an apparition, a specter.” The word was associated with magic and charms, thus with the system of Satan. When Luke (24:37) reports the fact of our Lord’s postresurrection appearance to the disciples, he uses the word pneuma (pneuma), for there they thought they had seen some person come back from the dead. But to have somebody walk on the sea, that would be magic to them. Cried out. The verb is  (ajnakrazw) “to raise a cry from the depth of the throat, to cry out.” It was a shriek of terror, a scream. Translation. But having seen Him walking directly upon the sea, they supposed that it was an apparition. And they screamed. (6:50) They all saw Him and were afraid. The words “were afraid” are  (tarassw) “to agitate, trouble, to cause one inward commotion.” He talked with them. Matthew and John use the simple dative, “talked to them.” Mark’s expression, “with them,” is more familiar, and describes our Lord’s words as more friendly and encouraging. Be of good cheer. It is I. Be not afraid. “Be of good cheer” is from  (qarsew) which also means “to be of good courage.” That is exactly what the terrorstricken disciples needed. “It is I.” The pronoun is used here for emphasis. Literally, “It is I and nobody else.” “Be not afraid.” The present imperative is used, forbidding the continuance of an action already going on. It is “Stop being afraid.” They were afraid. Translation. For they all saw Him, and were agitated. But He immediately spoke with them; and He says to them, Be of good courage. It is I. Stop being afraid. (6:51) The wind ceased. The verb is  (kopazw) “to grow weary or tired,” hence, “to cease from violence, cease raging.” The noun form means “beating, toil, weariness;” Vincent says; “a beautiful and picturesque word. The sea sank to rest as if exhausted by its own beating.” The words “and wondered” are not in the Nestle text. Translation. And He went up to them into the boat, and the wind ceased its violence. And exceedingly beyond measure, in themselves they were amazed. (6:52) They considered not the miracle of the loaves. The verb is  (sunihmi) “to set or bring together, to set or join together in the mind,” thus “to understand.” The literal Greek is; “They did not join together on the basis of the loaves.” That is, when considering the miracle of Jesus walking on the water, they did not reason upon the basis of the miracle of the feeding of the five thousand. They should have reasoned that if our Lord had the supernatural power to feed five thousand people by multiplying five loaves and two fish, He could also exert that supernatural power to quiet the wind, still the sea, and walk on the surface of water. For their heart was hardened. The verb is  (pwrow), in the passive “to grow

hard or callous, become dull, lose the power of understanding.” The word “heart” here refers to the entire inner man, his reason, affections, will. The second word “for” is the translation of alla (ajlla), a strong adversative conjunction. It could best be translated here “in fact.” “Was hardened” is a periphrastic perfect, emphasizing a settled state of dullness, callousness, and lack of understanding. Translation. For they did not reason upon the basis of the loaves. In fact, their heart was in a settled state of callousness. (6:53) Drew to the shore. The verb is  (prosormizw). The noun hormos (oJrmo") means “a roadstead, an anchorage.” The verb thus means “to bring a ship to moorings,” thus, “to anchor a ship.” The words “went up” ( (ajnabainw)) of verse 51, indicate that the boat must have been of considerable size for Jesus to have gone up into it, one standing quite high out of the water. That would mean that the boat was anchored off shore. Translation. And having crossed over, they came to the land, to Gennesaret. And they cast anchor off shore. (6:54, 55) They knew Him. That is, the people on shore immediately knew Him. The verb is  (ejpiginwskw) “to know by experience.” The people recognized Jesus, for they had seen Him before. He was becoming a well-known person by this time. Ran throughout that whole region round about. The verb is  (peritrecw) “to run around.” The prefixed preposition peri (peri) means “around” in the sense of a circle. To carry about. The verb is  (periferw) “to carry around.” Where they heard. The verb is imperfect, speaking of continuous action. What a pathetic picture. The people kept running from place to place, carrying their sick on pallets from place to place, wherever Jesus was reported to be or wherever it might be possible to find Him. This incident brings us near the close of our Lord’s Galilean ministry, and to the time when His popularity was phenomenal. Translation. And when they had gone out of the boat, immediately, having recognized Him, they ran around throughout that whole countryside, and began to be carrying around on pallets those who were afflicted, where they were hearing that He was. (6:56) The border of His garment. “Border” is kraspedon (kraspedon) “the fringe of a garment, a little appendage hanging down from the edge of the mantle or cloak.” The Jews had such appendages attached to their mantles to remind them of the law. The word “garment” is himation (iJmation) “the upper or outer garment, the cloak or mantle thrown over the tunic, the undergarment.” Translation. And whenever He kept on entering, into villages, or into cities, or into farming districts, they laid those who were sick in the market-places, and they kept on begging Him if they might touch the fringe of His cloak. And as many as touched Him were being made whole.

CHAPTER SEVEN (7:1) Mark begins his account of our Lord’s meeting with the Pharisees, with the Greek word kai (kai) (and). Expositors says: “Kai (Kai) connects what follows very loosely with what goes before: not temporal sequence but contrast between phenomenal popularity and hostility of the religious leaders of the people, in the view of the evangelist.” Mark uses the historical present, picturing a past event with the vividness of a present reality. Translation. And there gather together to Him the Pharisees and certain ones of the scribes who came from Jerusalem. (7:2) Defiled, unwashen hands. “Defiled” is koinos (koino"); the word refers to that which is common to everybody. In later Greek it came to mean what it means here, the profane as contrasted to the hallowed or the sacred. It was therefore applied to that which was ceremonially unclean. The washing of the hands here was not for purposes of cleanliness, but for ceremonial reasons. “Bread” is plural in the Greek, and is preceded by the definite article. The article points to some particular bread known by the Pharisees and by the Lord. The plural number speaks of loaves of bread. The reference evidently was to the disciples eating some of the bread preserved in the baskets from the feeding of the five thousand. There was no particular opportunity at that time to wash the hands, which would have been a proper thing to do. But the Pharisees were thinking only of the ceremonial aspect of the case. The words “they found fault,” are not in the best texts. Verses 3–4 are an explanatory parenthesis. The thought is picked up again in verse 5 with the words “the Pharisees and scribes asked Him.” Translation. And, having seen certain ones of His disciples, that with unhallowed hands, that is, unwashed hands, they were eating the loaves. (7:3) They wash their hands oft. The middle voice of the verb shows that they do the washing themselves. The washing is not left to an attendant. The word “oft” is  (pugmh). It is in the instrumental case. The washing is done with the clenched fist. The individual rubs one hand and the arm up to the elbow with the other hand clenched. He rubs the palm of one hand with the other closed, so as to make sure that the part that touched the food would be clean. Holding the tradition of the elders. “Tradition” is the translation of paradosis (paradosi") which comes from  (paradidwmi) “to give into the hands of another, to deliver something to keep, use, take care of.” The noun form therefore refers to something delivered by someone to a second individual for him to keep or care for. A tradition, as it is used here, refers therefore to instructions handed down from one generation to another, which are to be observed by the succeeding generations. “Holding” is  (kratew) “to keep carefully and faithfully.” The elders. The word is presbuteros (presbutero") “elder,” used of age, but here, of rank or position. Among the Jews it referred to members of the great council or

Sanhedrin. In early times the rulers of the people were selected from the elderly men. The traditions of the elders consisted of oral law originated by the Jewish religious leaders. They did not come from the Word of God. Our Lord (Matthew 15:6) asserts that they nullify the Word and thus are directly antagonistic to it. The rabbis held that disobedience to it was mortal sin. Thus, a real issue is raised here between the Pharisees and Jesus. It was man-made ceremonial laws in conflict with the Word of God. Translation. For the Pharisees and all the Jews, unless they wash their own hands meticulously, do not eat, habitually keeping, carefully and faithfully, that which is delivered from the elders to be observed. (7:4) The market. This is the agora (ajgora), the public forum in every town where people gathered, like the courthouse square in American towns. The Jews, mingling with men in public, would be ceremonially defiled. They wash. The Nestle has  (rJantizw) “to sprinkle.” There is a controversy among textual critics as to whether the original manuscript had  (rJantizw) “to sprinkle,” or  (baptizw) “to immerse.” We cannot hope to settle this question. Suffice it to say that the word “unwashed” of verse 2 and “wash” of verse 3, are the translation of  (niptw) “to wash,” and that the “washing” of these verses refers to the same act as the “washing” of verse 4. The washing was not for purposes of personal, physical cleanliness, but merely for ceremonial reasons. We will translate therefore by the word “wash.” The washing of cups. Here the word is  (baptizw) “to immerse.” There does not seem to be any controversy as to the reading here. The word will be translated “wash,” in accordance with the meaning of  (niptw). The word “pots” is  (xesth") “a wooden pitcher or ewer, a pint measure.” The brazen vessels were more properly, according to Vincent, made of copper. The Nestle text omits mention of the tables. Translation. And, from the marketplace, if they do not wash themselves, they do not eat. And other things of the same order, many of them there are which they received for the purpose of keeping, washing of cups and pint measures and copper vessels. (7:5) The Greek text goes this way; “And they keep on asking Him, the Pharisees and the scribes, Because of what do your disciples not order their manner of living according to that which was delivered from the elders to be observed, but with unwashen hands are eating bread?” This connects up with verse 2, where the Pharisees are said to have seen some of our Lord’s disciples eating bread with defiled hands. The above translation may be a bit cumbersome, but it reflects the thought and spirit of the Greek text more accurately than the polished diction of the a.v. (7:6) Well. The word is  (kalw") “beautifully, finely, excellently, well.” The word is used with its true intent here, describing the accuracy of Isaiah’s prediction, and ironically in verse 9 where our Lord is speaking of the Pharisees’ rejection of God’s Word. You hypocrites. The Greek has it, “You, the hypocrites.” The use of the definite article particularizes the Pharisees as arch-hypocrites, the outstanding ones. The word

“hypocrite” comes from the Greek  (uJpocrith"). The word is made up of hupo (uJpo) “under,” and  (krinw) “to judge,” and referred originally to “one who judged from under the cover of a mask,” thus, assuming an identity and a character which he was not. This person was the actor on the Greek stage, one who took the part of another. The Pharisees were religious actors, so to speak, in that they pretended to be on the outside, what they were not on the inside. See our Lord’s denunciation of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees in Matthew 23. As it is written. The verb is perfect in tense, speaking of a past completed act having present results. Literally, “as it has been written in time past, with the present result that it is on record.” It could be rendered, “It stands written.” Their heart is far from Me. The verb “is” is  (ajpecw). The preposition prefixed is apo (ajpo) “off from,” the verb,  (ejcw) “to have or hold.” The literal meaning is “to hold off from.” “Far” is  (porrw) “a great way off, at a distance, far.” The picture is of one holding himself a great distance from some one else. The verb when used in an intransitive way means “to be away, absent, distant.” The verb of being does not give an adequate picture of this word. The idea of volition is present, where the person far off, is so, because he wants to be. Yet one can hardly include this idea in a translation where the active voice is used, as here. The verb in its middle voice means “to hold one’s self off.” The word “answered” is not included in Nestle’s text. Translation. And He said to them; Excellently did Isaiah prophecy concerning you, the hypocrites, as it stands written; This people is constantly honoring Me with their lips. But their heart holds at a great distance from Me. (7:7) “In vain” is  (mathn) “fruitlessly, without profit.” The verb is  (mataiow) “to make empty, vain.” The word speaks of the futility of an action, the failure to attain a proposed end. “Worship” is  (sebw) “to revere, worship.” The word has the atmosphere of veneration, fear, piety, devoutness. Teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. “Doctrines” is didaskalia (didaskalia) “teachings, instructions, doctrines.” “Commandments” is entalma (ejntalma) “a precept.” The verb is  (ejntellw) “to order, command to be done, enjoin.” Translation. But in vain are they worshipping Me, while they are teaching doctrines, commandments of men. (7:8) Laying aside. The verb is  (ajfihmi), “to send away, to bid go away or depart, to send from one’s self, to let alone, to disregard.” It is used of teachers, writers, and speakers when presenting a topic, in the sense of “to leave, not to discuss.” It means “to abandon, to leave as behind and done with in order to go on to another thing.” Ye hold the tradition of men. “Hold” is  (kratew). The word has in it the idea of a powerful grip on something. In this context it means “to keep carefully and faithfully.” The Pharisees were zealots when it came to observing their own traditions. The latter word is paradosis (paradosi") “that which is delivered to be kept,” referring to instructions or teachings. The word means “a giving over which is done by word of mouth or in writing,” thus, “something taught.” The rest of the verse as it is found in the a.v., is

not in the Nestle text. Translation. Having abandoned the commandment of God, you are carefully and faithfully keeping those things of men delivered to you to be observed. (7:9) Full well. The word is  (kalw") “excellently, finely, well.” This is irony, and biting sarcasm. “Reject” is  (ajqetew). Theton ti (Qeton ti) is something laid down or prescribed. The former word comes from  (tiqhmi) “to place, set, or lay.” Alpha privative negates the word and makes it mean “something that has been laid down or prescribed which has in turn been done away with.” The word thus comes to mean “to thwart the efficacy of anything, to nullify, make void, frustrate.” The Pharisees are charged by our Lord with thwarting the efficacy of that which has been laid down or prescribed by God, namely, His commandments. They have made God’s Word null and void, have nullified it, frustrated it in its soul-saving work. This they did in order to keep their own tradition. Translation. And He was saying to them, In a very beautiful way you are constantly making the commandment of God null and void in order that that which has been delivered to you for observance, you may keep. (7:10) Honor. The word is  (timaw) “to honor, revere, venerate.” The noun form,  (timh), carries with it the idea of “a valuing by which the price is fixed, an evaluation.” Thus, the act of honoring carries with it a proper estimation of the value of a person or thing. In the case of honor due to parents, it is that respect or reverence for them in view of who and what they are, and their worth, which is their due. Curseth. The word is  (kakologew) “to speak ill of, revile, abuse, to calumniate, traduce.” The word does not mean “to curse” in the sense of Galatians 1:9, where “accursed” is anathema (ajnaqema) “a curse, a man accursed, devoted to the direst woes,” this curse of course being a divine curse. There is no good reason to understand this construction here except in the durative sense, which means that the death penalty is inflicted on an habitual offender. Let him die the death. The verb is  (teleutaw) “to come to an end.” Thus, the Greek is literally, “Let him come to an end by death.” This is physical death inflicted as a punishment for breaking the Mosaic law at this point. Translation. For Moses said, Be paying due respect and reverence to your father and your mother. And the one who is constantly reviling father or mother, let him come to an end by death. (7:11–13) The word “Corban” is a Hebrew word which Mark has transliterated. He explains it as referring to a gift. The Hebrew word refers to a gift or offering to God. The rabbis allowed the individual to keep whatever money should have been given by the son for the support of his parents, if he would declare it as a gift to God. He could keep the money and by merely speaking the word, justify his withholding it from his parents. This was in defiance of God’s command by which a son is required to honor his parents by providing for their necessities where they were in need. “Making of none effect” is the translation of  (ajkurow) “to render void, deprive

of force and authority, to invalidate.” Your tradition which ye have delivered. Both the noun and the verb find their origin in  (paradidwmi) “to give from.” The word refers to the act of one person giving over to another from himself. Hence it refers to the oral laws of the Pharisees which are handed down from generation to generation to be kept. The Pharisees, to whom our Lord was speaking. were adding weight to these laws by themselves transmitting them to their posterity. The words of our Lord begin with, “But ye say.” The “ye” is intensive. The personal pronoun is used. It is, “As for you, in contradistinction to the Word of God.” Translation. But as for you, you are saying, If a man should say to his father and his mother, Korban, namely, a gift, whatever from me you may be profited; no longer are you permitting him to do anything for his father and his mother. You are rendering void the authority of the Word of God by that which has been delivered to you to observe, which in turn you are delivering over (to another) to keep. And many things of this kind you are constantly doing. (7:14) He called all the people unto Him. Expositors remarks; “The people must have retired a little into the background, out of respect for the Jerusalem magnates.” Our Lord now takes the people into the discussion. He uncovers the hypocrisy of the Pharisees so that the people can see the true character of their religious leaders. The question at issue was concerning ceremonial defilement incurred by disobedience to the man-made regulations of the Pharisees. Jesus proceeds to show the fallacy of these regulations. Translation. And, having called to Himself again the crowd, He was saying to them, Hear Me, all, and understand. (7:15) The word “defile” is again  (koinow) as in verse 2. The word koinos (koino"), the noun form, refers to that which is common to everybody. In later Greek it came to mean what it means here, the profane as contrasted to the hallowed or sacred. “Profane” is used in the sense of secular, non-religious. When our Lord spoke of that which enters a man, He was speaking here of food. That does not make a man ceremonially unclean, even though he eat it with ceremonially unwashen hands. When He spoke of that which comes out of a man which defiles him, He was referring to the extrabiblical teachings of the Pharisees which defiled them in the sense that these teachers were, by their teachings which were in direct opposition to God’s Word, constituted false teachers, thus, not hallowed or set apart for God. Translation. There is not even one thing that from the outside of the man, entering into him, is able to defile him. But the things proceeding out from the man are those that defile the man. (7:16) This entire verse is not included in the Nestle text. All of which means that this textual critic did not consider it as part of the original text. (7:17) Into the house. The definite article is not in the Greek text. The idea is not that of entering any particular house, but of being at home, probably in the home of Peter.

His disciples asked Him. Matthew said that Peter asked. There is no discrepancy. Peter, as usual, was the spokesman for the rest. The verb is in the imperfect tense, the inceptive imperfect, “went to asking.” They lost no time. The moment they were free from the crowd and in the privacy of Peter’s home, they plied our Lord with questions regarding the interpretation of the parable. Translation. And when He entered into residence away from the crowd, His disciples went to asking Him about the parable. (7:18, 19) Are ye so without understanding also? The idea is, “You also, as well as the multitude?” It was a cause of disappointment to Jesus that His own chosen pupils were still under the spell of the Pharasaic theological tradition and outlook. Gould says, “They had been trained in Judaism, in which the distinction between clean and unclean is ingrained, and could not understand a statement abrogating this.” Expositors says: “The idea throughout is that ethical defilement is alone of importance, all other defilement, whether the subject of Mosaic ceremonial legislation or of scribe tradition, a trivial affair. Jesus here is a critic of Moses as well as the scribes, and introduces a religious revolution.” The word “belly” is koilia (koilia) “the bowels.” “Draught” is  (ajfedrwn). Liddell and Scott in their classical lexicon define this word as a privy, a place where the intestinal discharges are deposited. The word does not refer to a part of the physical body. Vincent and Robertson say that the words, “purging all meats” are not our Lord’s, but Mark’s comment and interpretation of His words. Expositors mildly suggests the same thing, and explains the words as follows: “This He said, purging all meats; making all meats clean, abolishing the ceremonial distinctions of the Levitical law.” This ties up with the fact that Peter reported our Lord’s words to Mark and had the house-top experience of the vision teaching the same thing, as the background of his thinking. Peter never forgot the “What God hath cleansed, that call thou not common” (Acts 11:1–10). Translation. And He says to them, In this manner, also, as for you, are you without understanding? Do you not know that everything which from the outside enters into the man, is not able to defile him, because it does not enter his heart but his intestines, and goes out into that which is designed to receive it? (This He said) making all the foods clean. (7:20–23) The words “And He said,” favor the view that the phrase “purging all meats,” is an interpolated remark by Mark, and not Jesus’ own words. “Evil thoughts,” hoi dialogismoi hoi kakoi (oiJ dialogismoi oiJ kakoi). The word “thoughts” carries the idea of discussion or debate, with an under-thought of suspicion or doubt, either in one’s own mind, or with another. “Evil” is kakos (kako") “of a bad nature, not such as it ought to be, base, wrong, wicked.” The very sound of the word as it is pronounced, suggests the idea in the word “reprehensible.” “Covetings” is pleonexia (pleonexia) “a greedy desire to have more, avarice.” “Wickedness” is  (ponhria), “depravity, iniquity.” The word speaks of wickedness, not merely in the abstract, but active. It has in it, the ideas of “dangerous, destructive.” Our word “pernicious” excellently describes it. The word kakos (kako") speaks of wickedness in the abstract.  (Ponhro") speaks of wickedness in active opposition to the good.

The kakos (kako") man is content to perish in his own corruption. The  (ponhro") man is not content unless he pulls everyone else down with him into his own destruction. “Lasciviousness” is aselgeia (ajselgeia). Robertson defines it as unrestrained sexual instinct. Vincent states that this meaning is included in the word, but that in its context here, it would seem better to take it in as wide a sense as possible, that of lawless insolence and wanton caprice, the single word “wantonness” adequately rendering it here. “Evil eye” is  (ojfqalmo" ponhro"). Vincent defines it as “a malicious, mischief-working eye,” with the meaning of positive, injurious activity. “Blasphemy” is  (blasfhmia). The word does not necessarily speak of blasphemy against God. It is used of reviling, calumny, evil-speaking in general, malicious misrepresentation. “Pride” is  (uJperhfania), from huper (uJper) “above,” and phainesthai (fainesqai) “to show one’s self.” The picture is that of a man who holds his head high above others. Vincent says, “It is the sin of an uplifted heart against God and man.” “Foolishness” is  (ajfrosunh) “lack of sense, folly, senselessness.” Translation. And He was saying, That which is constantly proceeding out of the man, that thing defiles the man. For from within, out of the heart of men are constantly proceeding the depraved thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, perniciousness, deceit, wantonness, a malicious, mischief-working eye, malicious misrepresentation, pride, folly. All these pernicious things from within are constantly proceeding and are constantly defiling the man. (7:24) The word “and” is the a.v., translation of de (de) which sometimes is continuative in its meaning, but here, in the opinion of the writer, is adversative, and for the reason that the new scene of our Lord’s ministry is quite in contrast to the previous one. Just before this, He was in Jewish territory, in Galilee. But now He was entering purely heathen country, the land of Phoenicia. He had experienced the antagonism of the Jewish leaders, and had failed to obtain the necessary quiet and leisure for purposes of recuperation after very heavy ministry, and for the instruction of His disciples. He entered the private home of some native of the country. But Mark says “It was not possible for Him to be hidden.” The news concerning the great Teacher and Healer, had spread beyond the confines of Israel into pagan country. Nestle only gives Tyre, excluding Sidon from the text. But this is enough to identify the locality, the character of the country, and its inhabitants. The little preposition eis (eij"), translated “into” is worthy of note. Our Lord did not merely cross over the border into Phoenician territory, but He went deep into the heart of the country. The word “borders” is horion (oJrion) “boundaries, region, district, land, territory.” Translation. But from there, having arisen, He went off into the region of Tyre. And having entered into a home, He was desiring that not even one should know. But it was impossible to be hidden. (7:25) The word euthus (eujqu") “immediately” is in the Nestle text. It is not that the

woman heard of Jesus the moment He entered Phoenicia, but that when she did hear of His entrance into the country, immediately she came to Him. Mark uses the diminutive, “little daughter.” Translation. But immediately, a woman having heard about Him, whose little daughter had an unclean spirit, having come, fell at His feet. (7:26) Mark is careful to describe the woman as to her religion, her language, and her race. She was Greek in religion. Here the word “Greek”  (eJllhni"), refers, not to a Greek by race, but to a Gentile as distinguished from a Jew. She was Syrian in tongue, and Phoenician in race. She was a Phoenician of Syria as distinguished from a Phoenician of North Africa. She besought Him. The verb is in the imperfect tense, progressive in action. The woman kept right on asking our Lord. The verb is  (ejrwtaw), which is used of a request, not a mere question. “Cast out” is  (ejkballw) “to throw out.” The aorist infinitive, speaking of the fact of the action, indicates that she wanted Jesus to cast the demon out at once and by one stroke. Translation. And the woman was a Gentile, a Syrophoenician as to her race. And she kept on beseeching Him to cast out the demon out of her little daughter. (7:27) It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and cast it to the dogs. The Jews looked upon all Gentiles as dogs. It was a term of reproach. Paul called the Judaizers, dogs when he said (Phil. 3:2), “Beware of the dogs.” But our Lord did not use the Greek word  (kuwn) here, the term for a dog. And He must have spoken Greek to this woman, for she would not know the Aramaic of the Jews. Greek was the international language of the day. The word Jesus used was kunarion (kunarion) “a little dog.” In answering the woman thus, He was just staying by His commission, to the Jew first, and then to the Gentile. And that order of procedure was not favoritism, but only the method of reaching the large number through a selected smaller group. The Jew was the chosen channel through which God has elected to reach the Gentiles. It would be just a wise efficiency to thus go to the Jew first. The Messiah, sent to Israel, was careful to preserve that order. And even when about to minister to a Gentile to whom His compassionate heart went out, He was careful to remind her of the fact that she came second, not first, in the great program of God. He uses the illustration of the children of the household at the table, and their little pets under the table. It is seemly, proper, (kalon (kalon)), He says, to see that the children are fed first, then the little dogs, their pets. Translation. And He was saying to her, Let first the children be fed. For it is not right to take the bread of the children and to throw it to the little dogs. (7:28) The diminutive is used throughout by the woman, little dogs (kunarion (kunarion)), little children (paidion (paidion)),and little morsels (psichion (yicion)).

She referred to the small scraps of food surreptitiously dropped by the children to their little pets underneath the table. Expositors says: “Household dogs, part of the family, loved by the children; hard and fast line of separation impossible.” How adroit was this woman’s plea. Love sharpens the sensibilities and reason. The word “Lord” is in the Greek text, kurios (kurio"). It was used of the one to whom a person or thing belonged, about which he has the power of deciding. It refers to the master or disposer of a thing. It was in this sense that the woman used the term. She knew nothing of the deity of the Jewish Messiah, and consequently did not use this word as Paul does when referring to the Son of God, using kurios (kurio") as a designation of His deity. The word “lord” therefore is not capitalized in the translation below. Translation. But she answered and says to Him. Yes, lord, yet the little dogs under the table are constantly eating from the little morsels of the little children. (7:29) For this saying. It is literally, “Because of this word.” The woman had taken the place of a Gentile, had accepted the second place in line, so to speak. Our Lord was now free to minister to her according to His commission. The devil is gone out. The translation is that of the perfect tense. The expanded rendering is, “The demon has gone out, with the present result that it is out.” It was a permanent cure. Translation. And He said to her, Because of this word, go; the demon is gone out of your daughter. (7:30) The devil gone out. The perfect tense is used again, showing the permanency of the cure. Daughter laid upon the bed. Again, the use of the perfect shows that the relaxed, resting position of the girl, was indicative of a complete cure.Translation. And having gone off into her home, she found the little child lying quietly upon her couch, and the demon gone out. (7:31) The Greek text here reads as follows: “And again, having gone out of the regions of Tyre, He went through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, in the midst of the regions of Decapolis.” A glance at the map shows that Phoenicia is north west of the Sea of Galilee. Our Lord thus went south east, and skirted the eastern shore of this sea to reach the region of Decapolis, which was on the south eastern shore. (7:32) An impediment in his speech. This is the translation of mogilalos (mogilalo"), mogi (mogi) “with difficulty,” and lalos (lalo") “speaking.” He was not absolutely dumb. Translation. And they bring to Him one who was deaf, and who spoke with difficulty. And they beg Him to place upon him His hand. (7:33) He took him aside from the multitude. The word “aside” is the translation of  (kat ijdian), the latter word speaking of privacy. The reason for this was most probably that our Lord did not want to encourage a wide healing ministry. The latter was only incidental to His preaching and teaching, and could assume such proportions that it

would interfere seriously with His ministry to the spiritual needs of the multitude. Put His fingers into his ears. The verb is  (ballw) “to throw,” here, “to thrust.” He put one finger of His right hand into one ear, and one finger of His left hand into the other. He spat and touched his tongue. The deaf person could not hear anything our Lord would say, and He took this means of arresting his attention and encouraging his faith. Mark gives us no explanation of the particular meaning of the acts to the first-century person. Translation. And having taken him away from the crowd, in private He put His fingers into his ears, and having spit, He touched his tongue. (7:34) Looking up to heaven, He sighed. The latter word is  (stenazw) “to sigh or to groan.” Expositors has a helpful note: “Jesus looked up in prayer, and sighed or groaned in sympathy. In this case a number of acts, bodily and mental, are specified. Were these peculiar to it, or do we here get a glimpse into Christ’s modus operandi in many unrecorded cases? On the latter view one can understand the exhausting nature of the healing ministry. It meant a great mental strain.” Translation. And having looked up into heaven, He groaned, and says to him, Ephphatha (ÆEffaqa), which is, Be opened. (7:35) His ears. The word in the Greek is  (ajkoh) “hearing, sense of hearing.” “String of his tongue,” is literally “that which bound his tongue.” The word is desmos (desmo"), “a band or bond.” He spake plain. The verb is the inchoative imperfect, “He began to be speaking.” “Plain” is  (ojrqw") “rightly.” He had heretofore been able only to make inarticulate sounds. Translation. And his ears opened, and immediately that which bound his tongue was loosed, and he began to speak rightly. (7:36) He charged them. The verb is  (diastellw). It means first “to separate;” then “to define or distinguish,” and as that which is separated or distinguished is emphasized, “to command or straightly charge.” It is in the middle voice, showing the charge was given with the personal interest of Jesus in view. It was for His sake and the future welfare of His ministry, that the command was given. So much the more a great deal. This is the A. V, rendering of a double comparative in the Greek. The word perissoteron (perissoteron) means “more abundantly,” the word mallon (mallon), “more, to a greater degree.” They published it. The verb is  (khrussw) “to make a public proclamation.” Translation. And He in His own interest commanded them to be saying not even one thing. But the more He kept on commanding them, they themselves kept on proclaiming it publicly so much the more to a greater degree. (7:37) Were beyond measure astonished. The verb is  (ejkplhssw) “to

strike one out of self-possession,” in the passive, “to be struck with astonishment.” The words “beyond measure” are the translation of  (uJperperissw"), a double superlative,  (perissw") meaning, “in superabundance,” and huper (uJper) “above.” Their astonishment at the miracle was so great that it almost deprived them of their self-possession, and it was in superabundance, and then some on top of that. He hath done all things well. The verb is in the perfect tense, showing the settled convictions of the people as to the meritorious work of our Lord. He maketh. The verb is present in tense. The reference is to the miracle which just had taken place. “To speak” is  (lalew), emphasizing, not the matter, but the fact of speech. The crowd was not interested in what the man was saying, but in the fact that he was able to express himself articulately. Translation. And they were completely flabbergasted, and that in a superabundant degree which itself was augmented by the addition of yet more astonishment, saying, He has done all things well. He makes both the deaf to be hearing, and the dumb to be speaking.

CHAPTER EIGHT (8:1–3) This is a second time our Lord fed a great multitude of people. There were two distinct occasions upon which He did so. Both Matthew and Mark give both miracles, both distinguish the words used for baskets, namely, kophinos (kofino") and sphuris (sfuri"), and both quote Jesus as referring to both incidents. The words “in those days” indicate Mark’s inability to assign to this incident a precise historical place. I have compassion. The verb is from splagchna (splagcna), “the inward parts,” especially, the nobler entrails, the heart, lungs, liver, and kidneys. These came gradually to denote the seat of the affections, like our word “heart.” This explains the frequent use of the word “bowels” in the a.v., in the sense of tender mercy, affection, compassion. This orientalism has been discarded by the r.v., and rightly so. We would today say, “My heart goes out to them.” They have been with Me. The verb speaks of more than merely position. It is  (prosmenw),  (menw) “to continue with, to abide with,” and pros (pro") “facing,” speaking of fellowship. Translation. In those days again, there being a great crowd, and they not having anything to eat, having called His disciples to Him, He says to them, My heart goes out to the crowd, because now for three days they are staying with Me and they do not have anything to eat. And if I send them off fasting to their homes, they will faint along the road. (8:4) “From whence” is pothen (poqen), an adverb used by the Greek in speaking of the source of supply with reference to food. Thayer suggests the meaning “how can it be that,” in this passage. “Satisfy” is  (cortazw). It meant “to feed with herbs, grass, hay, to fill or satisfy with food, to fatten” for instance, animals. In later Greek it meant “to fill or satisfy”

men. It is used with some degree of contempt in Plato. From this brief study of the word, one can get some idea of the background of the disciple’s thinking. The wilderness. The word is  (ejrhmia), “a solitude, an uninhabited region.” How quickly they had forgotten about the feeding of the five thousand. Translation. And His disciples answered Him, How can it be that anyone will be able to satisfy these with loaves of bread here in the uninhabited region? (8:5, 6) The student will notice durative action brought out in the following translation, which is not cared for in the a.v. Translation. And He went to asking them, How many loaves of bread do you have? And they said, Seven. And He commands the crowd to recline on the ground. And having taken the seven loaves of bread, having given thanks, He broke, and kept on giving them to His disciples in order that they might keep on setting them forth. And they served the crowd. (8:7) He blessed. The word is  (eujlogew). It is used, among other meanings, “to ask God’s blessing on a thing, to pray Him to bless it to one’s use.” When we offer the blessing at the table before meals, we do what our Lord did. Translation. And they had a few little fish. And having prayed that God might bless them to their intended use, He said to set these before them also. (8:8, 9) Broken meat. The word “meat” is in italics, which fact indicates that the word itself is not in the Greek text, but is supplied by the translators to complete the meaning for the English reader. The word “meat” meant food of any kind when the a.v., was translated. Today its use is limited to edible animal flesh. The word “broken” is klasma (klasma) “a fragment, broken piece,” used of remnants of food. Here, the overplus did not consist of scraps or crumbs, but of larger fragments. The words “they that had eaten,” are not in the Nestle text. Translation. And they ate and were satisfied. And they took up that which was left over, of broken pieces, seven baskets. And there were about four thousand. And He sent them away. (8:10, 11) Dalmanutha, and Magadan, as Matthew designates this place, are both unknown. The region however was Decapolis. The Pharisees came forth. Expositors remarks: “The Pharisees went out from their seat in the Holy Land into the heathen Decapolis, otherwise carefully shunned, in their zeal against Jesus.” Matthew adds the Sadducees. The Pharisees were the ritualists, the Sadducees, the rationalists. Began to question with Him. The verbal form “to question” is a present infinitive, showing continuous action. They began and kept it up. The verb is  (sunzhtew) “to seek or examine together, to discuss, dispute.” The Pharisees were putting our Lord

under a cross-examination, and this led to open dispute with Him. The pronoun “Him” is in the associative-instrumental case, showing that our Lord took part in the dispute, ostensibly defending His position with regard to the matters discussed. The person designated by the word in this Greek case, by his actions makes possible the completion of the associated action spoken of in the verb. The word “sign” is  (shmeion). This is one of the words used to designate a miracle. Vincent says: “As applied to the miracle of our Lord, this word emphasizes their ethical purport, as declaring that the miraculous act points back of itself to the grace or divine character or authority of the doer.” What the Pharisees were after, were our Lord’s credentials showing that He was a spokesman for God. They understood that the performance of a miracle was an attestation of the divine source of the message given by the person performing the miracle (John 3:2). Tempting Him. The verb is peirazomai (peirazomai). Its original meaning is “to put to the test to see what good or evil is in a thing or person.” Since mankind always failed under the test and exhibited evil, the word came to mean also “to tempt” in the sense of soliciting a person to do evil. The context here decides for the first meaning. The Pharisees were attempting to put our Lord to the test to see whether He was an impostor or what He claimed to be, the Messiah of Israel. Translation. And immediately, having gone on board the boat with His disciples, He came into the region of Dalmanoutha. And there came out the Pharisees, and began to dispute with Him, seeking from Him an attesting miracle from heaven, putting Him to the test. (8:12) He sighed deeply in His spirit. The simple verb is  (stenazw) “to groan, to sigh.” The prefixed preposition ana (ajna), is perfective in function, and intensifies the meaning already existent in the verb. Robertson quotes Swete as saying, “The sigh seemed to come, as we say, from the bottom of His heart; the Lord’s human spirit was stirred to its depths.” Jesus groaned because of the apostate rejection of His ministry. Here was no simple, hard-hearted rejection as from an ordinary sinner. This rejection came from the religious leaders of Israel, who, entrenched in their ecclesiasticism, later crucified the Lord of Glory, having recognized Him as such and having seen the attesting miracles He had performed, even attempting to break the force of these attesting miracles by attributing them to Satan (Matthew 21:37–39, 12:22–24). Expositors says: “The sigh physical, its source spiritual—a sense of irreconcilable enmity, invincible unbelief, and coming doom.” There shall no sign be given unto this generation. The statement is literally “If a sign shall be given.” It is a Hebrew idiom, and is really at bottom, a form of imprecation. The idea is “If I do not thus and so, may I die, or may God punish me.” In Mark, we have an absolute refusal of a sign. In Matthew, the refusal is qualified by the offer of the miracle of the resurrection (the sign of Jonah). But the latter was an absolute refusal of a sign in the sense that the Pharisees and Sadducees conceived of a sign. They later refused to be convinced after He had arisen from the dead (Acts 3–5). We must be careful to note that the primary purpose of our Lord’s miracles was that of attesting His Messianic claims to be true, and of proving that His message was from God (Matthew 11:2–5). That was Matthew’s purpose in gathering together some of the miracles of our Lord in what we know as chapters eight and nine of his Gospel. But when it came to the performing of

attesting miracles at the demands of apostates who He knew would not accept their attesting value, He refused. “Generation” is genea (genea), “of the same stock, a family.” While the word sometimes speaks of the entire nation of Israel, in this context it seems limited to the religious leaders of Israel who were apostates. Translation. And having groaned deeply in His spirit, He says, Why is this stock seeking an attesting miracle? Positively I am saying to you, There shall no attesting miracle be given to this stock. (8:13, 14). One loaf. Expositors says: “A curiously exact reminiscence where so much else that seems to us more important is left vague. But it shows that we have to do with reality, for the suggestion of the Tubingen critics that it is a mere bit of wood painting, is not credible. The one loaf seems to witness to a Christ-like easymindedness as to food in the disciple circle. Let tomorrow look after itself.” The word “forgotten,”  (lanqanw) “to forget,” has the prefixed preposition, perfective in use, thus, “completely forgotten.” He left them. The verb is  (ajfihmi), “to send away, to send from one’s self, to bid go away.” It is used of teachers, speakers, writers, in the sense of “to let go, let alone, disregard, to leave, not to discuss now,” when about to terminate a discussion. Our Lord brought the dispute to an abrupt end by His statement in which He refused an attesting miracle to that stock or breed of men He had before Him, namely, apostates. Translation. And having sent them away, again having embarked, He went off to the other side. And they had completely forgotten to take loaves of bread. And except for one loaf, they did not have any with them in the boat. (8:15) He charged them. The verb is in the imperfect tense “He repeatedly charged them.” The warning was needed. Take heed, beware. The first verb is  (oJraw) “to see, to become acquainted with by experience.” This word gives prominence to the discerning mind. The disciples were to use their heads. They were to put the teachings of the Pharisees and the Herodians to the acid test of experience, not in the actual doing of the things taught, but with the mind’s eye following out the ultimate conclusion of the act of practicing what they taught. The verb is present imperative, commanding the beginning of an action and its habitual continuance. The second verb is  (blepw) “to perceive by the use of the eyes.” It is used in a metaphorical sense, “to see with the mind’s eye, to discern mentally, understand, to turn the thoughts or direct the mind to a thing, to consider, to take heed.” It is also present imperative, “Be constantly keeping a watchful eye open to consider and take heed of.” Leaven. The word is  (zumh). It is used in the LXX (Ex. 12:15) of beer-yeast. The principle of fermentation which inheres in it makes it the symbol of corruption, for fermentation is the result of the divine curse upon the material universe because of sin. Always in the Bible, it speaks of evil in some form, Matthew 13:33 being no exception, for the kingdom of heaven here refers to Christendom, in which are the true and the false, the evil and the good. Leaven in I Corinthians 5:6–8, speaks of malice and wickedness as contrasted to sincerity and truth. In Matthew 16:12, it speaks of evil doctrine in its three-

fold form of Pharisaism, externalism in religion, of Sadduceeism, scepticism as to the supernatural and as to the Scriptures, of Herodianism, worldliness. Translation. And He repeatedly charged them, saying, Constantly be keeping a discerning mind’s eye upon, and ever be on the lookout for the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Herodians. (8:16) They reasoned among themselves. The verb is dialogizomai (dialogizomai) “to bring together different reasons, to reckon up the reasons, deliberate.” The imperfect tense shows that they kept it up. Expositors says: “The mind of Jesus was profoundly preoccupied with the ominous demands of the sign-seekers, and the disciples might talk quietly to each other unnoticed by Him.” Translation. And they kept on discussing among themselves, saying, Because we do not have loaves of bread. (8:17–21) Jesus asks six keen questions that show His disappointment at the intellectual and spiritual dullness of His pupils (the Greek word  (maqhth") “disciples,” meaning learners or pupils). Robertson quotes Bruce twice on this passage: Jesus “administers a sharp rebuke for their preoccupation with mere temporalities, as if there were nothing higher to be thought of than bread;” also, “For the time the Twelve are wayside hearers, with hearts like a beaten path, into which the higher truths cannot sink so as to germinate.” Why reason ye, because ye have no bread? The Greek makes it clear that Jesus did not mean, “Why are ye reasoning? Is it because ye have no bread?” It is rather, “Why are ye reasoning as follows? It is because we have no bread.” Jesus repeats their argument, and asks why they are reasoning along those lines. Have ye your heart yet hardened? The verbal form is a perfect participle. This tense speaks of a process that went on in past time which reached its state of completion, and whose results exist in present time. The hardening process in the disciple’s hearts had progressed to the state of completeness, and the present results constituted them as men who were in a state of settled hardness. These are the kind of men Jesus had to train as His disciples who would preach the gospel after He had ascended. One can understand the desire of our Lord for seclusion at times so that He could properly train them before it was necessary for Him to leave this earth for heaven. And in spite of all this training, the ringleader deserted Him and went back to his fishing business, taking with him six other disciples. And He said unto them, How is it that ye do not understand? The word “how”  (pw"), is not in the Nestle text. The verb is imperfect, speaking of continuous action. Expositors says: “If we may emphasize the imperfect tense of elegen (ejlegen), He said this over and over again, half speaking to them, half to Himself.” There was agony of soul back of this questioning, in view of the tremendous issues at stake. Matthew in reporting this happening gives us the information that Jesus finally had to explain to them that He was talking about the doctrines of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Translation. And having come to know, He says to them. Why are you reasoning as follows? Because you do not have loaves of bread. Not yet

are you perceiving, nor even understanding? In a settled state of hardness do you have your hearts? Having eyes, you are not seeing, and having ears, you are not hearing, and you are not remembering. When the five loaves I broke among the five thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up? They say to Him, Twelve. When the seven among four thousand, how many baskets of broken pieces did you take up? And they say, Seven. And He kept on repeating to them, Not yet are you understanding? (8:22, 23) Jesus Himself becomes the conductor of the blind man. He leads him out of the village in order that He might perform the cure in secret, and this, in order that He might not have a stampede of sick folk. Our Lord’s compassionate heart went out to the sick, but He always kept His chief mission in mind, the cure of souls, not bodies. When He had spit on his eyes. Expositors offers the following explanation: “Spitting, in this case certainly on the diseased parts. Spittle was regarded as a means of cure by the ancients. Holtzman (H. C.) cites the story of Vespasian in Alexandria narrated by Tacitus. The prince was asked to sprinkle the eyes of the blind man  ” Robertson suggests that the application of the spittle was to encourage the faith of the blind man. He asked him if he saw ought. Expositors translates the Greek here, “Do you possibly see anything?” Translation. And they come into Bethsaida. And they bring to Him a blind man. And they beg Him to touch him. And having taken the hand of the blind man, He brought him outside of the village, and having spit upon his eyes, having placed His hands upon him, He kept on asking him, Do you, possibly, see anything? (8:24, 25) Expositors says: “The narrative contains three compounds of  (blepw) (ana (ajna), dia (dia), en (ejn)); the first denotes looking up in the tentative manner of blind men, the second, looking through (a mist as it were) so as to see clearly, the third, looking into so as to see distinctly, as one sees the exact outlines of a near object.” “He looked up,” is  (ajnablepw). “Make him look up,” in the best texts is  (diablepw) “he looked through,” speaking of a piercing look. “Saw” is  (ejmblepw) “looking into so as to see distinctly.” This is the only report of a gradual cure in the healings wrought by our Lord. The reason for this method here is not given. The word “clearly” is  (thlaugw"), made up of  (thle), “afar,” and  (aujgh), “radiance,” the compound word meaning “far-shining.” Thayer gives, “at a distance and clearly.” Translation. And having looked up, he kept on saying, I see the men; as trees I see them walking around. Then again He placed His hands upon his eyes; and he looked steadfastly; and he was restored to his former state; and he was seeing all things at a distance and clearly. (8:26) Jesus told him to go to his own home and not into the town, in order to avoid a

sensation. Expositors says: “It has been suggested that the gradual restoration of sight in this case was meant to symbolize the slowness of the Twelve in attaining spiritual insight. They got their eyes opened very gradually like the blind man of Bethsaida.” The words “nor tell it to any in the town,” are not in the best texts. Translation. And He sent him off into his home, saying, Neither into the town go. (8:27, 28) Into the town of Caesarea Philippi. Mark has  (kwmh), “a village.” Matthew has mere (mere) “region.” Expositors says: “Apparently they did not enter the city itself. Jesus seems to have avoided the towns in which the Herodian passion for ambitious architecture was displayed. Besides at this time He desired solitude.” Robertson suggests that here Jesus was safe from annoyance by Herod Antipas and the Pharisees and Sadducees. Here He is to prepare His disciples for His coming crucifixion just a little over six months ahead. Commenting on the mention of the name “Jesus,” Expositors says: “That Jesus is here expressly named is a hint that something important is to be narrated, and the mention of the disciples along with Him indicates that it closely concerns them.” He asked … saying, Whom do men say that I am? The imperfect is used, “He kept on asking.” The purpose of the question was to draw out from the disciples what they thought of Jesus as they were influenced by the opinion of others and by His teaching. Translation. And He went out, Jesus and His disciples into the villages of Caesarea Philippi. And along the road He kept on asking His disciples, saying, Who do men say that I am? And they told Him, saying, John the Baptist, and others, Elijah, and others, one of the prophets. (8:29) He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? “Saith” is  (ejperwtaw) “to ask, to question,” imperfect in tense, “He kept on questioning them.” The personal pronoun is used with the verb for purpose of emphasis. It is “He Himself kept questioning them.” “Ye” is humeis (uJmei"), the personal pronoun used for contrast. It is “As for you, in contradistinction to others, who are you saying that I am?” Thou art the Christ. Again, Mark uses a pronoun for emphasis. It is, “As for you, you are the Christ.” The word “Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek word Christos (Cristo") which means “the Anointed One.” This in turn is the translation of the Hebrew word which comes into our English in the word “Messiah.” It is the judgment of the present writer that the translation here should be “Messiah,” the transliteration of the Hebrew word meaning “the Anointed One.” It has a definite content of meaning with reference to Israel which the word “Christ” does not have to the English reader. In Psalm 2:2, the kings of the earth are said to take counsel against the Lord and His anointed, the word “anointed” here being “Messiah” in the original. The word designates that King whom God will provide for Israel, who will occupy the throne of David forever. Thus Peter was confessing the fact that he believed that Jesus of Nazareth was that coming King. Translation. And He himself kept on questioning them, But as for you, who are you saying that I am? Answering, Peter says to Him, As for you,

you are the Messiah. (8:30) He charged them that they should tell no man of Him. “Charged” is  (ejpitimaw) “to admonish or charge sharply.” Expositors says: “He threatened them, spoke in a tone of menace, as if anticipating foolish talk.” Of Him. The context, of course, rules. This prohibition was of announcing Him as Messiah. The time was not yet ripe. His so-called triumphal entry into Jerusalem would be the fit occasion. Translation. And He strictly charged them that they should not tell even one person concerning Him. (8:31) He began to teach. Matthew has “to show.” It was a solemn intimation that was given. Son of man must suffer. “Must” is dei (dei) “it is necessary in the nature of the case.” The word points to the inevitableness and rationale of the Cross. Since God is love and man is a sinner, He will provide a salvation for him. But since He is also just, it is necessary in the nature of the case, for Him to die on the Cross and thus pay the penalty that would satisfy the demands of that justice which required that sin be paid for. Be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes. “Rejected” is  (ajpodokimazw). The simple verb means “to put a person to the test for the purpose of approving him should he meet the specifications laid down.” The prefixed preposition apo (ajpo) means “off, away from.” Thus, the compound verb means “to reject one after having put a person to the test for the purpose of approving him, that person not meeting the specifications set down.” The religious leaders of Israel put Jesus to the test for the purpose of approving Him as Messiah, for they were looking for their Messiah. But He did not meet their specifications. He was not the kind of a Messiah the Jews wanted. They wanted a military leader who would liberate them from the yoke of Rome, not a Saviour who would free them from their bondage to sin. Peter in his first letter (2:7 same Greek word, “disallowed”) speaks of the same thing. The article appears before each word, elders, chief priests, and scribes, saddling each, Expositors says, with his separate responsibility. The announcement of His resurrection made no impression upon the disciples, as their future behavior at that event clearly shows. Translation. And He began to be teaching them that it was necessary in the nature of the case for the Son of man to suffer many things, and, after having been put to the test for the purpose of being approved should He meet the specifications, to be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and to be put to death, and after three days to arise. (8:32) He spake that saying openly. The verb is imperfect, showing continuous action. Our Lord repeatedly and in detail gave them what He had to tell them. It was not a quick, short statement. “Openly” is  (parrhsia). Expositors says of the use of this word here: “He spoke the word plainly, unmistakably. This remark was rendered almost necessary by the choice of the word didaskein (didaskein) (to teach) in verse 31. This word in ordinary Greek usage means frank, unreserved speech, as opposed to partial

or total silence. Here, as in John 11:14, 16:25, 29, it means plain speech as opposed to hints or veiled allusions, such as Jesus had previously given as in Mark 2:20 (bridegroom taken away).” Peter took Him. The verbal form is the aorist participle of  (proslambanw). The simple verb means “to take,” the prefixed preposition, “facing.” The idea in the compound verb is that of someone taking hold of another so as to have him facing him. Thayer gives the meaning “to take by the hand so as to lead aside,” as the proper one in this instance of its use. Peter took our Lord aside from the other disciples in order to rebuke Him. Began to rebuke Him. The word is  (ejpitimaw). Trench in his Synonyms of the New Testament (p. 13) says: “In  (ejpitimaw) lies simply the notion of rebuking; which word can therefore be used of one unjustly checking or blaming another; in this sense Peter ‘began to rebuke’ his Lord.” Expositors says: “What Peter said is not given, Mark’s aim being simply to show that Jesus had so spoken that misunderstanding of what He said was impossible. That the news should be unwelcome is regarded as a matter of course.” Translation. And with utter plainness of speech, He was speaking the word. And having taken Him aside, Peter began to be rebuking Him. (8:33) When He had turned about. The word is  (ejpistrefw) “to turn one’s self about.” Peter had taken Jesus off to himself. But when Jesus heard what Peter said, He quickly wheeled round on Peter and faced the other disciples. In administering this rebuke to Peter, our Lord must have been conscious of the fact that the other disciples had heard what Peter said, for had they not, there would have been no point in thus subjecting Peter to the lesson he received before them all. He rebuked Peter. Mark uses the same word, ( (ejpitimaw)) which he used of Peter rebuking our Lord. The word is used not only of an unjust, undeserved rebuke, but also of one which is deserved, but where the rebuke is ineffectual, where the one rebuked is not brought to see his sin. Had Peter been convicted of wrong-doing here, Mark could have used  (ejlegcw) “to rebuke so as to bring the person rebuked, if not always to a confession, yet at least to a conviction of his sin.” Peter at this time did not realize the dreadful thing he did. Get thee behind Me, Satan, for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men. It was an agonizing cry, for Jesus recognized a repetition of the temptation of Satan when the latter said to Him, after he had shown Him the great Roman empire, “These things, all of them, I will give to you, if having fallen down, you will worship me” (Matt. 4:9). This is the order of the words in the Greek text. Notice the bargaining power of the Devil. It was a temptation to go around the Cross and receive the rulership of the world empire from the hands of Satan, the price, the worship of him. Here was Satan again, using the foremost of the disciples, to tempt our Lord to go around the Cross. It is the opinion of the present writer that our Lord did not call Peter, Satan, but that, recognizing the source, He spoke directly to the Tempter, including Peter in the rebuke. Since Satan is incorrigible, he could not be brought to repentance, and  (ejpitimaw) is most fitting here. Our Lord, in His utterance, brands Peter’s words as Satanic. The word “savourest” is  (fronew) which here has the meanings, “to be of

one’s party, to side with him, to direct one’s mind to a thing, to seek or strive for.” Paul uses this word in Philippians 2:5, “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.” The idea in the word is therefore “Have a mind for.” Translation. But having wheeled around and having looked on His disciples, He rebuked Peter, and says, Get behind Me, Satan, because you do not have a mind for the things of God but for the things of men. (8:34) Whosoever will come after Me. “Will” is  (qelw) “to desire.” It is “Whosoever desires to come after Me.” “Come” is erchomai (ejrcomai). The word is used in John 5:40 where our Lord speaks of the fact that certain will not come to Him that they might have life. The word is used here in the sense of becoming a disciple of Jesus, one who follows His instruction and enters into His fellowship. Likewise, to come after Jesus means to become His disciple, follow His teachings, and enter into His fellowship. Let him deny himself. The word is aparneomai (ajparneomai). When used with the reflexive pronoun as it is here, it means “to forget one’s self, lose sight of one’s self and one’s interests.” The verb is ingressive aorist, speaking of entrance into a new state or condition. It is “Let him at once begin to lose sight of himself and his own interests.” Take up his cross. The cross was the instrument of death. Here it speaks of death to self. Follow Me. The word “follow” is  (ajkolouqew) “to take the same road as another does.” It is used with the associative instrumental case. It is, “Let him follow with Me.” The idea is not that of following behind another, but that of accompanying the other person, taking the same road that he takes and fellowshipping with him along that road. The first two imperatives are aorist, giving a summary command to be obeyed at once. The “coming after” and the “taking up” are to be obeyed at once and are to be a once-forall act. That is, these acts are to be looked upon as a permanent attitude and practice of life. The whole life is to be characterized by an habitual coming after and taking up of the cross. After having once for all given over the life to the Lord, the believer must henceforward count it ever so given over. He is not his own anymore. He belongs to the Lord. He is the Lord’s property. The word “follow” however, is in the present imperative, which commands the doing of an action and its habitual, moment by moment continuance. The first two imperatives give direction to the life. The last speaks of the actual living of that which has been given direction by two once-for-all acts. Translation. And having called the crowd, together with His disciples, to Himself, He said to them, If, as is the case, anyone is desiring to come after Me as a follower of mine, let him at once begin to lose sight of himself and his own interests, and let him at once begin to take up his cross, and let him start taking the same road in company with Me, and let him continue to do so moment by moment. (8:35–37) Whosoever will save his life. The “whosoever will come after Me” of verse 34, is in the indicative mode and uses the conditional particle ei (eij). The expression assumes as true that some do desire to come after Jesus. It is, “If, as is the case, anyone is desiring, etc.” But the “whosoever will” of this verse is a future unfulfilled hypothetical condition. It is “For whosoever would desire to save his life.” The word “life” here is not bios (bio") referring to one’s physical existence and its needs but  (yuch), referring to the soul, that part of man which wills, and thinks, and feels, or in other words, to the will power, the reason, and the emotions, to the personality with all his activities,

hopes, and aspirations. That is, the person who desires to so live that these will find selfgratification, will lose that which alone makes the activity of these things, worthwhile and satisfying. God has so created man, that he does not find complete rest and satisfaction until his entire being is swallowed up in the sweet will of God. This is Jesus’ teaching here. Our Lord is not here giving the terms upon which God will give salvation, for self-denial never saved a soul from sin. Only Jesus’ blood can do that. Jesus is here giving His philosophy of life. What shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul. On the other hand, while self-denial will not save a person in the sense of making him a child of God, yet, lack of self-denial, together with self-satisfaction will result in his going into eternity, a lost sinner. “World” here is kosmos (kosmo"), and refers to the world system of evil of which Satan is the head, all unsaved people his servants, together with the pursuits, pleasure, purposes, people, and places where God is not wanted. The word “lose” is  (zemiow) “to sustain damage, to receive injury, to suffer loss.” Translation. For whoever would desire to save his soul, will lose it. But whoever will lose his soul for My sake and the gospel, will save it. For what shall it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul? For what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? (8:38) Whosoever shall be ashamed. Robertson translates “Whosoever is ashamed.” He says that this is not a statement concerning the future conduct of a person, but about that person’s present attitude toward Jesus. He makes the point that the conduct of the individual now determines Christ’s future conduct with reference to that person. The reference here is to the second Advent, not the Rapture, for in 9:1–9, our Lord speaks of the Millennial Kingdom. The chapter division is unfortunate here, cutting in two a connected discourse. Translation. For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this generation which is adulterous and sinful, also the Son of Man shall be ashamed of him, when He comes in the glory of His Father with the angels, the holy ones.

CHAPTER NINE (9:1) A. T. Robertson said that the first rule of scripture interpretation is that one should ignore chapter and verse divisions as one studies the Word. The chapter division destroys the connection here. In 8:38, our Lord is speaking of the second Advent of the Son of God, not the coming into the air to catch out the Church, commonly called the Rapture, but the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus to the earth itself to set up the Millennial Kingdom. At the Rapture, He is not attended by angels, but in the second Advent angels come with Him from the Glory (Rev. 19:14). He speaks of the kingdom of God coming with power. This is the Kingdom of Heaven of Matthew 3:2, 4:17, announced by John the Baptist and the Messiah Himself, rejected by Israel at the first Advent, to be accepted by Israel at the second Advent, the mysterious form of the kingdom, Christendom, obtaining during the time Israel is in rejection, the Church Age, and the Christian Church, namely, the Mystical Body of Christ, being included in the term Christendom (Matthew 13). Mark and Luke both use the term “Kingdom of God” where

Matthew uses “Kingdom of Heaven.” The probable reason for this is that the first two are writing for the Gentiles, Mark for the Romans, and Luke for the Greeks, whereas Matthew writes for the Jews. But what did our Lord mean by the statement that some of those standing there would not die until they saw the Millennial Kingdom? Peter, James, and John are dead. They were standing there. The Millennium is still future. The answer is that what these men saw at that time was an anticipatory picture of the Millennium. The transfigured Lord Jesus is the Messiah glorified in the Millennium. Peter, James, and John are Israel, cleansed, restored, at the second Advent. Moses points to the saints from Adam’s time to the Rapture, raised from the dead at the Rapture, and part of the Millennial Kingdom. Elijah speaks of the saints alive on earth at the Rapture who will be glorified and translated without dying. The great multitude (v. 14), in need of the ministry of the Messiah, points to the Gentile nations in the Millennium, the recipients of the ministry of Israel. There is a picture of the Millennial Kingdom in a nutshell, and this is what these men saw, the Kingdom in anticipation. Translation. And He was saying to them; Verily, I am saying to you, There are certain ones of those standing here who are such as will not taste of death until they see the kingdom of God having come in power. (9:2, 3) He was transfigured before them.The word “transfigured” is the translation of metamorphoomai (metamorfoomai). The simple verb refers to the act of giving outward expression of one’s inner character, that outward expression coming from and being truly representative of that inner character. The prefixed preposition signifies a change, here of the outward expression. The translation expanded, thus reads, “The manner of His outward expression was changed before them, that outward expression coming from and being truly representative of His inner nature.” The usual outward expression of our Lord in His humiliation was that of the Man Christ Jesus, the Man of Sorrows, the One acquainted with grief. He, to the world, was the travel-stained, itinerant preacher, the claimant to the Jewish Messiahship. What the world saw was a peasant from Galilee, clad in homespun, the son of the carpenter of Nazareth. But now, that outward expression was changed. Out from within the inmost being of the Son of God, there shone that dazzling glory of the essence of Deity which He possesses co-eternally with God the Father and God the Spirit. It shone right through the clay walls of His humanity and through the clothing He wore. It was that same dazzling radiance which the angels saw in His preincarnate state (Phil. 2:6), but given through a physical medium, not a spiritual one as in the case of the angels. And as a result, Mark says, “His raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow, so as no fuller on earth can white them;” and Matthew adds “His face did shine.” Here was no borrowed radiance, even from the skies, which might shine on the Lord Jesus. This effulgence of glory came from within, and was an inherent possession of the Lord of Glory. The word “shining” is  (stilbw) and is a participle, indicating that the shining was active. The word is used of a flashing sword and of sunshine on shields. This is what is meant by the transfiguration of the Lord Jesus. This is a picture of what He will be like in the Millennium. Translation. And after six days, Jesus takes with Him Peter, and James, and John, and brings them up into a mountain, a high one, in private,

alone. And the manner of His outward expression was changed before them, that outward expression coming from and being truly representative of His inner nature. And His garments became glittering ones, exceedingly white, such as a fuller on earth is not able thus to whiten. (9:4) “Elias” here is Elijah: the spelling is “Elias” because the Greek language does not have a letter “j”. They were talking with Jesus. We have a periphrastic construction here. It consists of the verb of being in the imperfect tense and the present tense participle. The emphasis is upon durative action. Mark wishes to convey to the reader the impression that the conversation with these two heavenly visitors was a protracted one. Translation. And there appeared to them Elijah and Moses, and they were holding a protracted conversation with Jesus. (9:5, 6) Peter answered and said to Jesus. The record does not indicate that Peter was addressed during this visit of Moses and Elijah. Here is impetuous, unpredictable Peter, intruding himself into the conversation. The Greek word for “answered” is apokrinomai (ajpokrinomai).  (Krinw) means “to form a proper appreciation of anything by discriminating between two or more things,” thus, “to form a judgment” of it. The prefixed preposition means “off.” Thus, the compound verb means “to give off from one’s self a judgment.” This act of course, in the Greek mind, presupposed deliberation. It is not necessary to suppose that a question had been asked Peter here. There is no record of any one addressing him at this point. Peter had been listening to the conversation and offered his judgment as to what ought to be done. He calls our Lord “Master.” The Greek is Rabbei (Rabbei). The Greek word is the transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning “much, great.” It was a term of honor and respect among the Jews, meaning “My great one, my honorable sir.” The Jews used this term when addressing their teachers, and also honored them by using it when they were speaking of them. It is good for us to be here. There are two words for “good” in Greek, agathos (ajgaqo") which speaks of intrinsic goodness, and kalos (kalo") which speaks of goodness as it is seen from without. The word kalos (kalo") has also the idea of “beautiful.” It was used by the Greeks of anything so distinguished in form, excellence, goodness, usefulness, as to be pleasing. Hence, it can refer to anything which is handsome, useful, excellent, suitable, commendable, excellent in its nature and characteristics, and therefore well adapted to its ends. The latter is used here. Let us make three tabernacles. The words “let us” do not mean “allow us.” The Greek construction is a hortatory subjunctive, exhorting others to join the one exhorting to do something in company with him. Peter said “Let us, Jesus, Peter, James, John make three tabernacles.” The word “tabernacles” is  (skhnh) “a tent.” The Greek word comes from a word meaning “to cover.” The word here referred to a tent made of green boughs, skins, or other materials. Peter had in mind just a tent in which to find shelter, not the Tabernacle as it was set up in Israel in Old Testament times. For he wist not what to say. For they were sore afraid. The Greek has it “For he did not know what to say, for they were terrified.” The words “sore afraid” are the

translation of ekphobos (ejkfobo"). The verbal form means “to throw into violent fright.” Peter certainly did not know what to say, for he was terribly frightened. But he was not called upon to say anything. It was an occasion where silence would have been the wisest procedure. Translation. And Peter giving off his judgment, says to Jesus, Rabbi, it is an excellent thing for us to be here. And let us make three tents, for you, one, for Moses, one, and for Elijah, one, for he did not know what to give as his judgment, for they were terribly frightened. (9:7) There was a cloud that overshadowed them. The words “there was” are the translation of egeneto (ejgeneto) “to become,” ingressive aorist signifying entrance into a new condition. The word is used by Mark to speak of the suddenness of the appearance of the cloud and the remarkable nature of the event. The word “cloud” here is  (nefelh) speaking of a cloud that has definite form and is of a limited size, as against nephos (nefo"), which speaks of the shapeless collection of vapor obscuring the heavens. This cloud was of course, not a cloud of vapor, but the Shekinah Glory Cloud which guided Israel out of Egypt, which rested above the Mercy Seat beneath the golden Cherubim in the Holy of Holies. “Overshadowing” is  (ejpiskiazw) “to throw a shadow upon, to envelope in shadow.” Thayer says: “From a vaporous cloud that casts a shadow, the word is transferred to a shining cloud surrounding and enveloping persons with brightness.” He applies this meaning to this event. This is my beloved Son. The Greek has it, “This is my Son, the Beloved One,” emphasis being placed equally upon the two facts, that the Messiah is God’s Son, and that He is the Beloved One. The Greek word used for “Beloved” is  (ajgapaw), speaking of a love called out of one’s heart by the preciousness of the person loved. Wycliffe translates “dearworthy.” One could translate, “The dearly-beloved One.” Hear Him. The verb is present imperative, speaking of continuous action. “Be constantly hearing Him.” The verb “hear,”  (ajkouw), in this context, does not merely refer to the act of hearing, in the sense of listening to, but to the act of obeying what is heard. Translation. And there came a cloud which enveloped and surrounded them. And there came a voice out of the cloud, This is my Son, the dearlybeloved One; Be constantly hearing Him. (9:8) The word “suddenly” is exapina (ejxapina), found only here in the New Testament. It does not qualify the verb “looked around,” but refers to the change in the situation which they discovered on looking around. Translation. And suddenly, after they had looked round about, no longer did they see anyone but Jesus only with them. (9:9) The word “tell” is the translation of dia (dia) “through” and  (hJgeomai) “to lead the way,” hence “to lead one through a series of events.” The single word “narrate” would be a good rendering. Were risen. The idea in the Greek is not that of the perfect tense. The aorist

subjunctive is used. The idea is more exactly, “should rise.” Translation. And while they were coming down out of the mountain, He charged them that they should narrate the things which they saw to not even one person, except when the Son of Man should arise out from amongst the dead. (9:10) They kept that saying with themselves. “Kept” is  (kratew) “to keep carefully and faithfully.” It is a strong word, speaking of a strong hold upon something, of the mastery of a certain thing. “Saying” is logos (logo") “a word,” namely, the matter spoken of. “Questioning one with another” is  (sunzhtew). The verb  (zhtew) means “to seek,” the prefixed preposition, “with.” Literally, “they were seeking with one another.” Wycliffe translates, “asking,” Tyndale, “disputing,” Robertson, “questioning.” The idea was that they were disputing among themselves with the purpose of finding out something. The subject of the discussion was as to what the rising from the dead should mean. That would involve death, the death concerning which Jesus had recently spoken, and which they had found it so difficult to receive. The resistance of Peter to the idea of our Lord being put to death by the Jerusalem authorities, was still fresh in their minds. Translation. And the foregoing matter they kept carefully and faithfully to themselves, all the while discussing with one another what that particular thing, namely, to arise out from amongst the dead, was. (9:11) They asked Him. The verb is imperfect, speaking of a continuous questioning. They kept on questioning Him. What follows in the Greek text may be taken as an indirect or suggested rather than an expressed question. The word “Elias” is the transliteration of the Greek word here. The reference is to Elijah. “Must” is dei (dei), “it is necessary in the nature of the case.” Translation. And they kept on putting the question to Him, saying, The scribes are constantly saying that it is necessary in the nature of the case for Elijah to come first. (9:12, 13) Elias verily cometh first. The reference is to Elijah. “Verily” is  (mhn), which means “it is true,” when it is not followed by de (de). It is therefore, “Elijah, it is true, comes first, (so teach the scribes), and restores all things.” On the question of Jesus, Expositors says; “The aim is to awaken thought in the minds of the disciples by putting together things incongruous. All things to be restored in preparation for Messiah; Messiah Himself to suffer and be set at naught: what then can the real function and fate of Elijah the restorer be? Who is Elijah?” In Matthew 11:14, our Lord identifies John the Baptist as Elijah. We are not to understand that he was the actual Elijah of the Old Testament, nor that his appearance and ministry to Israel fulfilled the prophecy of the future coming and ministry of Elijah, but that he came in the spirit and power of Elijah to prepare the hearts of Israel for the first Advent of Messiah as Elijah will do for His second Advent. Elijah was persecuted by Jezebel, as John was beheaded at the request of Herodias,

and as Elijah will in the future be crucified by Antichrist (Rev. 11:8, “where also our Lord was crucified”). Translation. And He said to them, Elijah, it is true, having come first, restores all things. And how does it stand written concerning the Son of Man, to the effect that He will suffer many things and be set at naught. But I say to you that also Elijah has come, and they did to him whatever things they were desiring to do, even as it stands written of him. (9:14) Expositors says of the words, “the scribes questioning with them,” “scribes wrangling with them, the nine. This is peculiar to Mark, but the situation is easily conceivable: the disciples have tried to heal the boy and failed (v. 18); the scribes, delighted with the failure, taunt them with it, and suggest by way of explanation, the waning power of the Master, whose name they had vainly attempted to conjure with. The baffled nine make the best defence they can, or perhaps listen in silence.” To this, the crowd was listening. Translation. And having come to His disciples, they saw a great crowd around them, and scribes wrangling with them. (9:15) Were greatly amazed. Expositors has a valuable note: “were utterly amazed, used by Mark only in n.t., here, and in 14:33 and 16:5 in connections which demand a very strong sense. What was there in the three situations: the returned Master, the agony in the garden, and the appearance of the angel at the resurrection? A surprise; which, whether sorrowful or joyful, always gives a certain emotional shock. The Master reappears, when He is not looked for, when He is needed, and when His name is being taken in vain, perhaps not without a certain sympathy on the part of the volatile crowd not accustomed hitherto to miscarriage of attempts at healing when the name of Jesus was invoked. In that case their feeling would be a compound of confusion and gladness—ashamed and yet delighted to see Him, both betrayed in their manner.” The word “salute” is aspazomai (ajspazomai), “to salute one, greet, bid welcome, wish well to.” The Israelites, on meeting and at parting, generally used the formula, “Peace unto thee.” It is interesting to note our Lord’s command to the outgoing disciples, “Salute no man by the way” (Luke 10:4). Thayer says in this connection, “As a salutation was made, not merely by a slight gesture and a few words, but generally by embracing and kissing, a journey is retarded by saluting frequently.” The word translated “greatly amazed” is  (ejkqaumazw). The simple verb means “to be amazed.” The prefixed preposition means “out.” The idea is one of exhaustion. Their amazement was so intense, it was well nigh exhausted. In other words, they had no further stores of amazement from which to draw. Translation. And immediately, all the crowd, having seen Him, was completely amazed, and having run to Him, gave Him greeting. (9:16) He asked the scribes. The best texts have “He asked them.” Expositors remarks: “the people who in numbers ran to meet Him. Jesus had noticed, as He drew near, that there was a dispute going on in which His disciples were concerned, and not knowing the composition of the crowd, He proceeds to the assumption that they all had a

share in it.” On the words “What question ye with them?” Swete says: this “is a bona fide request for information; the human mind of Christ acquires knowledge by ordinary means.” Translation. And He asked them, What is it that you are questioning them about? (9:17, 18) Swete says: “The crowd preserved a discreet silence; the answer came from an individual whose interest in the matter was deeper than any questioning.” Master, I have brought unto thee my son, which hath a dumb spirit. The word “master” is didaskalos (didaskalo"), “teacher.” “Have brought” is simple aorist, “I brought.” The man did not know that Jesus was absent, but thinking that He was with the disciples, brought his son to the nine. A dumb spirit. The word “dumb” is alalon (ajlalon), “he who does not talk.” The word emphasizes the sound of the word rather than the meaning. Hence, the boy could not utter a speech sound. The boy was demon-possessed. The demon had bound the boy’s tongue and vocal organs. He taketh him. The word is  (katalambanw) “to lay hold of so as to make one’s own, to seize upon, take possession of.” The picture in the word is that of seizing something and pulling it down. Our word “katalepsy” comes from the Greek word. Greek writers used it when speaking of fits. He teareth him. The word is  (rJhgnumi) “to distort, convulse,” used of a demon causing convulsions in a man possessed. Gnasheth with his teeth. The verb is  (trizw) “to squeak, utter a shrill cry,” when used in connection with the teeth, “to grind or gnash the teeth.” Pineth away. The verb is  (xhrinw) “to dry up, to wither,” of members of the body, “to waste away, pine away.” It speaks of the final stage of motionless stupor. They could not. The word is  (ijscuw) “to have power, to exert or wield power,” such as is evinced in extraordinary deeds. Translation. And there answered Him one of the crowd, Teacher, I brought my son to you, who has a dumb spirit. And wherever it takes possession of him, it throws him into convulsions, and he foams, and grinds his teeth, and falls into a motionless stupor. And I spoke to your disciples that they should cast it out, and they did not have the power to do so. (9:19) O faithless generation. The word “faithless” has come to mean “treacherous, not keeping faith.” But the Greek word here (apistos (ajpisto")) means “without faith, unbelieving.” The disciples are included in this rebuke. They of all men should have had the necessary faith to cast out the demon. How long shall I be with you? The last two words are pros humas (pro" uJma"). The preposition means “facing,” and implies fellowship. The idea is, “How long shall I be in relations with you, how long shall I have to do with you?” How long shall I suffer you? The verb is  (ajnecw) “to hold one’s self erect and firm” against a person or thing, “to bear with, to endure.” The durative action of the present imperative, “be bringing,” implies that the boy was not with the father, but in safe

keeping not far off. Translation. But answering them He says, O unbelieving generation, how long shall I have to do with you? How long shall I bear with you? Be bringing him to Me. (9:20) The demon, seeing Jesus, knowing that his control over the boy would soon be ended, made a last attack. The spirit tare him. The verb is sunsparassoµ “to convulse completely.” The demon threw the boy into a complete convulsion. Wallowed. The word is  (kuliw) “to be rolled.” The picture is that of the boy being rolled on the ground by the convulsion. The tense is imperfect. The rolling continued for some time. The participle “foaming” also has durative action. Translation. And they brought him to Him. And, having seen Him, the spirit immediately threw him into a complete convulsion, and having fallen upon the ground, he was being rolled and was foaming. (9:21, 22) Jesus asks the history of the case like a modern doctor. It hath cast him into the fire, and into the waters. Matthew merely mentions that the boy fell into the fire and the water. But Mark’s use of  (ballw) “to throw” indicates that in the view of the father, these frequent mishaps were not accidental, but were the result of a suicidal mania induced by the demon possession. If thou canst do anything. The word is dunami (dunami). The noun form is dunamis (dunami") which means “power” in the sense of that which overcomes resistance. The same word is used of the gospel as the power of God. The verb means “to be able, to have power.” The father’s faith had been shaken by the failure of the disciples, and also lessened by the severity of the case. Have compassion and help us. In the Greek text, the order is reversed. The appeal for help is in the aorist imperative, “help us at once.” The words “have compassion” are an aorist participle, the action of which precedes the action in the finite verb. It is “help us at once, having had compassion on us.” The father does not question nor appeal for the compassion of Jesus. He takes that for granted. Had he never seen nor heard of Jesus before, one look into that compassionate face, would be enough to assure him that Jesus would help him if He could. He only questions the ability of Jesus to cope with this desperate situation. He uses the plural pronoun “us”. It is very touching. The father identifies himself with the misery of the son. The Syro-Phoenician woman said, “Have mercy on me,” making her daughter’s affliction her own. Translation. And He asked his father, How long is it that this came to him? And he said, From a little boy. And often also it threw him into fire and into water in order that it might destroy him. But if you are able to do anything, help us at once, having had compassion upon us. (9:23) If thou canst believe. The word “believe” is not in the best texts. Our Lord’s answer was “If thou canst.” There is a Greek idiom here which cannot be brought over into the translation. The definite article occurs before the words “if thou canst.” It acts like

an index finger and a pair of brackets, holding up to the father his own words for his consideration and Jesus’ comments. As Vincent puts it in paraphrase: “Jesus said, ‘that if thou canst of thine—as regards that, all things are possible.’ ” In the Greek, there is a play upon the words  (dunhi) (canst), and dunata (dunata) (possible). It is “If thou canst—all things can be.” Jesus puts over against the “anything” of the father, the “all things” of the Son of God. Translation. And Jesus said to him, As for those words of yours, If you can:—all things are possible to the one who believes. (9:24) And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears. The words “with tears” are not in the best manuscripts. Vincent, commenting on the words “cried out and said,” has: “the former denoting the inarticulate cry, the ejaculation, followed by the words, ‘Lord, I believe.’ “ Expositors says of the cry, “eager, fear-stricken cry.” Swete says, “His strength of feeling shows itself in a cry as piercing as that of the demoniac son.” Lord, I believe. Help thou mine unbelief. The word “help” is  (bohqew) “to run to the cry” of those in danger, hence, “to succor, bring aid, to help.” In verse 22, this verb is in the aorist imperative. Instant help is asked for. Here it is in the present imperative. Continuous help is asked for. “Be constantly helping my unbelief.” Swete says: “The father instantly responds to the demand for fuller trust on his part … He recognizes that the help he needs is in the first instance help for himself and not for his boy.… He believes, but his faith is defective, and its defect needs the Master’s succor.” The word “unbelief,” apistia (ajpistia), Thayer says, can be translated in this context by the expression “weakness of faith.” Translation. And immediately having cried out, the father of the little boy was saying to Jesus, I am believing. Be helping my weakness of faith. (9:25) The people came running together. Swete says: “The conversation then was not in the presence of the crowd, but was interrupted by its arrival. The Lord had probably retired with the father and the boy to a distance from the crowd, but the cries of both brought them running to the spot, and privacy became impossible.” The words “running together” are the translation of a compound verb in the Greek,  (ejpisuntrecw),  (trecw) meaning “to run,” sun (sun), “with,” and epi (ejpi) “upon.” It presents the picture of the rapid gathering of the crowd to Jesus and the demon-possessed boy. The people ran with one another upon the scene. He rebuked the foul spirit. “Rebuke” is  (ejpitimaw), which refers to a rebuke that is ineffectual, and which does not bring the person to see his sin and confess it. The word  (ejlegcw) which means “to rebuke a person, which rebuke is followed by that individual’s confession or at least conviction,” is not used here. Observe, if you will, the meticulous accuracy with which the Holy Spirit leads the Bible writers in their choice of synonyms. Demons are incorrigible. They will never repent. The word “foul” is akathartos (ajkaqarto"). It is made up of the word katharos (kaqaro") “clean, pure, free from the adhesion of anything that soils, adulterates, corrupts,” in an ethical sense, “free from corrupt desire, sin, and guilt,” and the Greek letter Alpha prefixed, which makes the word mean the opposite of everything that it meant originally. Thus, the word

“foul” is an excellent rendering, and an accurate description of the demon. I charge thee. The verb “charge” is  (ejpitassw). The simple verb was used as a military term. It meant “to arrange soldiers in ranks.” Thus, it came to mean “to order or change.” Our Lord’s order to the demon was sharp and firm. The personal pronoun is used with the verb “charge.” It is there for emphasis. The reason He ordered the demon, not only to come out of the boy, but also to stay out, was that this case of demonpossession was of the intermittent kind. Translation. And Jesus, having seen that a crowd was running together, rebuked the foul spirit, saying to him, Dumb and deaf spirit, I order you, be coming out of him, and no longer enter into him. (9:26, 27) Swete says: “For the moment the only result was a fresh seizure; the spirit wreaked its revenge on its victim even in the act of quitting its hold upon him.… The convulsions were violent and prolonged, and when they ceased, the sufferer’s strength was exhausted; a collapse followed; he lay motionless and pallid as a corpse.” The word “rent” is  (sparassw) “to convulse.” Translation. And after crying out and throwing him into severe convulsions, it came out. And he became as one who is dead, so that many were saying that he had died. But Jesus, having taken a strong grip of his hand, went to raising him up. And he stood up. (9:28, 29) Swete says: “The Lord went indoors, into a lodging where the party was housed, to escape from the enthusiasm of the crowd, and because on such occasions further teaching was impossible. He and the disciples were now in privacy, and the nine took occasion to seek an explanation of their failure … The Lord seizes upon the essential weakness of their case. They had trusted to the quasi-magical power with which they thought themselves invested; there had been no preparation of heart and spirit. Spirits of such malignity were quick to discern the lack of moral power and would yield to no other.” Robertson says that the words “and of fasting” do not appear in the two best manuscripts (Aleph and B), also that it is clearly a late addition to help explain the failure of the disciples. Their failure was due to their prayerlessness. They lacked power because of that. The word “kind” is genos (geno") “offspring, family, kind, breed.” The Lord was referring to that certain kind of demon. Translation. And having entered into a house, His disciples kept on asking Him, As for us, why were we not able to cast it out? And He said to them, This kind is able to come out by nothing but by prayer. (9:30–32) Swete says: “The Lord and the Twelve now leave their retreat at the foot of Hermon and travel southwards. Their way to the north had perhaps led them through Gaulonitis and Ituraea, but they return through Galilee, i.e., along the west bank of the Jordan.” He quotes Matthew as suggesting that the disciples broke up into small parties which mustered at certain points in the route, the purpose being perhaps to avoid attracting notice.

Commenting upon the fact that our Lord did not desire anyone to know of their whereabouts because “He taught His disciples,” Swete says: “He was now fully occupied with the training of the Twelve. A journey through upper Galilee in which He could attach Himself now to one party of two or four apostles, and now to another, affording an opportunity of quiet teaching which might never return.” The Son of man is delivered. The verb is  (paradidwmai), the simple verb meaning “to give,” the prefixed preposition, “alongside,” the compound meaning “to give alongside.” Our “sell down the river,” is the modern equivalent. The word speaks of the act of handing someone over to another, the betraying of a person. The verb is in the present tense, durative in action. Literally, “the Son of Man is being delivered into the hands of men.” Swete says, “The event is regarded as imminent and indeed in process of accomplishment.… The instrument of the betrayal (ho paradidous (oJ paradidou") the one who is betraying, the betrayer) was in the company, and the Lord could see the purpose already lying as an undeveloped thought in his heart.” Translation. And going out from there, they went on their way through Galilee. And He was not desirous that anyone should know, for He was constantly teaching His disciples. And He was saying to them, The Son of Man is being betrayed into men’s hands, and they will kill Him, and having been put to death, after three days He will rise. But they were not understanding the word. And they were fearing to ask Him. (9:33) Being in the house. Peter’s home in Capernaum was Jesus’ home when the Twelve were in that city. The disciples had been disputing about the rank each would have in the kingdom they expected the Messiah would set up, not about the death of their Master. Robertson suggests that they apparently kept up the discussion in the house. He had been within earshot of them and had heard something of the conversation. Expositors remarks that Jesus did not always walk beside His disciples, but that at times “He went before, thinking His deep thoughts, they followed thinking their vain thoughts.” Translation. And they came into Capernaum. And being in the house, He kept on asking them, What along the road were you disputing about? (9:34) The Greek has it, “But they kept on being quiet.” No wonder. Our Lord was facing a cruel death, and they were nursing their ambitions. They were ashamed. Swete says that the dispute as to who should be greatest, was probably suggested by the selection of the Three for the mysterious ascent of Hermon, and the prominence of Peter among the three. Translation. But they kept on being quiet. For with one another they discussed along the road who was to be the greatest. (9:35) Expositors says: “Every word here betokens a deliberate attempt to school the disciples in humility. The Master takes His seat, calls His scholars with a magisterial tone.” Swete says: “The intention of the Master is not to enact ‘a penal provision against seeking the mastery,’ but to point out the way to true greatness. The spirit of service is the passport to eminence in the Kingdom of God, for it is the spirit of the Master who Himself

became servant of all.” The word “servant” here is diakonos (diakono"), used of one who ministers to another. The “if” Jesus uses is the particle of a fulfilled condition. Jesus recognizes that they wanted to be first. Translation. And having sat down, He called the twelve and says to them, If, as is the case, anyone is desiring to be first, let him be last of all and a servant of all. (9:36, 37) Jesus uses the child as a rebuke to the disciples. Swete says that the answer to the question as to who is greatest, is found in the character of the child, “the most childlike and trustful, the least self-conscious and self-sufficient. He who recognizes and welcomes such, because he sees in them the type of character which Christ Himself approved and exhibited, recognizes and welcomes Christ Himself—is a true and loyal disciple.” Translation. And having taken a little child, He stood him in their midst; and when He had taken him in His arms, He said to them, Whoever receives one of such little children in my Name, receives Me. And whoever receives Me, does not receive Me but the One who sent Me. (9:38) Swete says: “This is the only remark attributed by the Synoptists specifically to St. John, … and it creates an impression of candour and conscientiousness not unworthy of the future theologian. His words are a response to the teaching just received. He and one or more of the other disciples, probably during their recent journey through northern Galilee, had prohibited a non-disciple from using the Master’s Name for the purpose of exorcising demoniacs. Ought they rather have welcomed Him as a brother? The words, ‘He does not follow with us,’ are a frank confession of jealousy for the honor of the Apostolate. In the light of the Lord’s words, the action had begun to wear a different aspect to the mind of John.” Translation. John said to Him, Teacher, we saw a certain individual casting out demons in your Name, who does not follow with us. And we kept on forbidding him, because he was not following with us. (9:39, 40) Swete again has an excellent note: “The sincerity of the speaker, saves him from censure: the Lord merely corrects the error. He does not say ‘Receive him,’ for the man’s motive did not appear; but the attitude of His disciples towards such an one should have at least been neutral.… Whatever his intention, the man is for the time practically committed to a course of action which at least cannot be unfriendly.” Expositors says: “Use of Christ’s name in exorcism incompatible with hostile or unappreciative thought and speech of Him.” Translation. But Jesus said, Stop forbidding him, for there is no one who will perform a miracle upon the basis of my Name who will also soon be able to speak ill of Me, for whoever is not against us is in behalf of us. (9:41) Swete says: “The thread of the teaching, broken off at verse 38 by John’s

question, is now resumed. The spiritual significance of help offered to a brother for Christ’s sake is independent of the material value of the gift. A cup of water may be judged worthy of an eternal recompense.” The possessive pronoun “my” does not appear with “name.” The double negative appears with “lose,” making an emphatic negation. Translation. For whoever will give you to drink a cup of water because you belong to Christ, truly I am saying to you, he will positively not lose his reward. (9:42) Swete’s comment is as follows: “The converse is equal1y true. A wrong done to a disciple however insignificant, will bring incalculable evil upon the evil-doer. It is possible to be an innocent cause of stumbling; the Lord Himself was such (6:3, I Cor. 1:23, I Pet. 2:8). But He was careful to abstain from placing unnecessary stumbling-blocks in men’s way, and it is this scrupulous regard for the infirmities of others that He enjoins, and the wilful or heedless creation of stumbling-blocks that He condemns.” The word “offend” is the translation of  (skandalizw), “to put a stumblingblock or impediment in the way upon which another may trip or fall.” The noun form skandalon (skandalon) means, “the moveable stick or trigger of a trap, a trap, snare, any impediment placed in the way causing one to stumble or fall,” thus a stumbling-block, an occasion of stumbling. Swete says: “The man is seen, first at the moment when the weight is placed around his neck, then lying at the bottom of the sea; even under these circumstances he is in a better case.” The verb “cast” is perfect in tense, speaking of the fact that he stays down. Translation. For whoever will cause one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it is good for him rather if a millstone is hanged around his neck and he has been thrown into the sea. (9:43) Swete says: “A man may place moral stumbling-blocks in his own path; the temptation may proceed not from without, but from some part of his own nature. As men submit to the loss of a bodily organ or limb in order to preserve the body as a whole, so it is to their interest to sacrifice powers and functions of their spiritual nature which have been found to be inevitable occasions of sin. Better to live under a sense of partial mutilation and incompleteness than to perish in the enjoyment of all one’s powers.” The word “maimed” is kullon (kullon), used in classical Greek of one who has a crushed or crippled limb. “Life” is  (zwh), here, the higher life, or life that really is worthwhile. Does not refer here to eternal life. The word “hell” is geenna (geenna), in English, “Gehenna” It is the name of a ravine starting from the northwest of Jerusalem, which sweeps around the southwest angle of the city, then meets the Kedron below the Pool of Silvan. This valley is the traditional site of the fire-worship which began in the reign of Ahaz, and after its desecration by Josiah, became a common receptacle for the offal of the city, and in later Jewish thought, a symbol of the place of future punishment. The city garbage, where worms gnawed and fires burned continually, is a vivid picture of everlasting punishment. It is the word used in the n.t. to designate the place of the final abode of the wicked dead, the Lake of Fire of The Revelation being the same place. The words “never shall be quenched” are to asbeston (to ajsbeston). The Greek word sbennumi (sbennumi) means “to quench,” the Alpha privative prefixed negates the

word, and it then means “unquenchable.” Our word “asbestos” comes from it. Translation. And if your hand puts a stumbling block before you, cut it off at once. It is good for you to enter life maimed, than having two hands, to go off into hell, into unquenchable fire. (9:44, 46) The oldest and best manuscripts do not give these verses. They are a mere repetition of verse 48. (9:45) The a.v., reads as if the meaning is that of having two feet which would be cast into hell. The following translation corrects this. Nestle rejects the words, “into the fire that never shall be quenched.” Translation. And if your foot puts a stumbling-block before you, cut it off at once, for it is good for you to enter into life maimed, than, having the two feet, to be thrown into hell. (9:47) Swete says that Matthew in his parallel passage expands Mark’s compressed thought—“tear it out and cast it away.” He says: “Such a wrench may be necessary in the moral nature; the love of visible beauty is a true and noble element in man, but if it becomes in any individual the occasion of sin, he must put it from him; better to enter life with no eye but for the spiritual and eternal beauty than to indulge the lower taste to the loss of all.” Translation. And if your eye puts a stumbling-block before you, throw it out at once. It is good for you to enter the kingdom of God one-eyed, than, having two eyes, to be thrown into hell. (9:48) Where their worm dieth not. Robertson quotes Gould: “The worm, i. e., that preys upon the inhabitants of this dread realm.” Swete says: “Like the fire, the worm is undying:” he quotes Gould, “the wounds inflicted on the man himself by his sins, the degradation and the deterioration of his being, have no limitations (of time).” Translation. Where their worm does not come to its end in death, and the fire is not quenched. (9:49, 50) Verse 49, taken in its context, reaches back to the unquenchable fire of Gehenna (v. 48), and forward to the self-discipline of verse 50. Expositors says: “Every one must be salted somehow, either with the unquenchable fire of Gehenna or with the severe fire of self-discipline. Wise is he who chooses the latter alternative.” Robertson reminds us of the fact that the Lord Jesus once called His disciples the salt of the earth (Matt. 5:13). He warns them now (v. 50) not to lose their saltness. Swete quotes a Mr. Latham as connecting this warning with the dispute as to who would be greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven, in the words: “If the preserving principle embodied in the Apostles, and which was to emanate from them, should itself prove corrupt, then where could help be found? If they, the chosen ones, became selfish, if they wrangled about who should be greatest, then the fire which our Lord had come to send upon earth was clearly not burning in them, and whence could it be kindled afresh?”

Commenting on the words “Have salt in yourselves,” Swete says, “Keep the seasoning power, the preserving, sacrificial Fire, within your hearts, and as a first condition of its presence there, be at peace with your brethren. Thus, the discourse reverts to the point from which it started (v. 33). Disputes about precedence endangered the very existence of the new life.” The words, “And every sacrifice shall be salted with salt,” are rejected by Nestle. The “it” clearly refers to the salt, and for the reason that a pronoun agrees with its antecedent in gender and number. Both the pronoun and the word “salt” are neuter in gender. It could not refer to the word “sacrifice,” even though that rejected reading had been in the text, for the Greek word for “sacrifice” is feminine in gender. Translation. For everyone will be salted with fire. Salt is good. But if the salt become saltless, with what will you restore the saltness to it? Be having salt in yourselves, and be being at peace with one another.

CHAPTER TEN (10:1) And He arose from thence, and cometh. Swete says: “This phrase … seems to be used for the commencement of a considerable journey, compare 7:24. On the present occasion the Lord is finally quitting Galilee and Capernaum; His face is henceforth turned towards Jerusalem.” Coasts of Judaea. The word “coasts” is horion (oJrion) “a bound, a limit,” in the plural, “boundaries, region, district, land.” The English word is obsolete. It is the land of Judaea to which reference is made. The people resort unto Him. The verb is sunporeuomai (sunporeuomai). The simple verb means “to betake one’s self, to go to some place.” Thus, it refers to someone going on a journey. The prefixed preposition means “with,” making the compound verb mean “to go with someone on a journey.” There were many caravans going to Jerusalem. Many of the people were followers of the Lord Jesus. Others were kindly disposed towards Him. These joined our Lord and His disciples along the road. As they journeyed along together, the Lord Jesus kept on teaching them. Translation. And from there, having arisen, He comes into the regions of Judaea and across the Jordan, and again crowds journeying along with Him, come constantly to Him, and as was His custom, He again was constantly teaching them. (10:2) Swete says: “With the resumption of the public teaching the Pharisees return to the attack.… But their present attitude marks an advance; for the first time they venture to test the Teacher’s orthodoxy by a leading question.” Tempting Him. The verb is peirazomai (peirazomai) which means “to put to the test for the purpose of discovering what good or evil, of power or weakness is in a person or thing.” Since the result of this test usually disclosed evil in the person, the verb acquired a secondary meaning, namely, “to tempt,” in the sense of soliciting a person to do evil. The first and primary meaning is to be understood in this context. The Pharisees were not attempting to influence our Lord to do evil. They were trying to put Him to the test as a teacher. They wanted Him to commit Himself on the law of Moses. Their purpose was an ulterior one. If they could show that He was unorthodox, that would put Him in an

unfavorable light with the people. Regarding the question they asked, Swete says: “The question appears to have been already answered during the Galilean ministry (Matt. 5:31, 32) on an occasion when probably no Pharisees were present. They may have heard a rumor as to His view of the matter and wished to verify it, but it is unlikely that they hoped to draw Him in a moment of forgetfulness into a denial of His earlier teaching … Rather, they expected a negative reply, and were prepared to turn it to their own purposes. It might be used to excite the anger of Antipas, who had put away his first wife and married again; more probably their intention was simply to place Him in apparent opposition to Moses, who had permitted divorce.” The words “to put away” are  (ajpoluw), literally, “to release.” When used in connection with divorce, it means “to repudiate.” Translation. And having come to Him, Pharisees kept on asking Him whether it is lawful for a man to repudiate a wife, putting Him to the test. (10:3) Regarding the answer of Jesus, Expositors says: “Here Jesus has in view, not what Moses allowed in Deuteronomy 24:1, but what he in Genesis enjoined as the ideal state of things (Moses from the Jewish point of view, author of the Pentateuch and all its legislation). They naturally supposed He had in view the former.” The use of the word “command” by our Lord, shows the correctness of the above. Translation. And He answering, said to them, What did Moses command you? (10:4) The Pharisees quote Moses in Deuteronomy 24:1. Swete says in this connection: “The words, as the context shows, are simply permissive, the general purpose of the passage being to provide against a certain contingency which might follow the divorce. They recognize the validity of the husband’s act, but do not create the situation.” The word “bill” is biblion (biblion), a “little book.” Translation. And they said, Moses permitted the writing of a bill of divorce and a repudiation. (10:5–9) Swete says: “The Lord does not deny that Moses permitted divorce; command it he did not. The commandment consisted of ‘regulations tending to limit it and preclude its abuse’ (Driver). No such regulations would have been necessary but for the hardness which had been innate in the Hebrew people from the first. The purpose of the legislation of Deuteronomy was to check this disposition, not to give it head; and for the Pharisees to shelter themselves under the temporary recognition of a necessary evil was to confess that they had not outgrown the moral stature of their fathers.” The words “hardness of heart” are in the Greek,  (sklhrokardia),  (sklhro") meaning “hard, harsh, rough, stiff,” when used of men, “harsh, stern, hard,” and the Greek word for “heart,” kardia (kardia). This hardness of heart in the case of Israel, Swete defines as “a condition of insensibility to the call of God.” He says it is the result of “the withering up of the moral nature under the power of a practical unbelief.” Swete comments on the words “but from the beginning:” “From the temporary permission of divorce under the Deuteronomic law, the Lord appeals to the principle

enunciated in the original constitution of man.” Shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife. The word “leave” ( (kataleipw)) is a strong word. The simple verb means “to leave,” the prefixed preposition kata (kata), being used to intensify the already existing idea in the verb. The compound word means “to leave behind, to depart from, to forsake.” The word “cleave” is  (proskollaw) “to glue to, to join one’s self to, to cleave closely, to stick to.” The idea in the verb therefore includes the initial act of joining one’s self to another and then remaining thus joined. The word appears in an a.d., 6 manuscript in which “a man makes certain dispositions with regard to the wife who had been ‘joined’ to him” (Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek Testament). They twain shall be one flesh. The word “twain” is duo (duo), the Greek word for two. Vincent says: “literally, ‘shall be unto one flesh.’ The preposition expresses more graphically than the a.v., the becoming of one from two. So Revised Version, ‘shall become.’ “ What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. The words “joined together” are suzeugnumi (suzeugnumi) “to fasten to one yoke, to yoke together,” of the marriage tie, “to join together, to unite.” The word is made up of the Greek word for a yoke, such as is put on an animal, and the prefixed preposition sun (sun) which means “with.” The same word is used in Philippians 4:3 and translated “yokefellow.” It speaks of one who pulls well in double-harness. “Put asunder” is  (cwrizw) “to separate, divide, part.” Translation. And Jesus said to them, On account of your hardheartedness he wrote to you the commandment. But from creation’s beginning, male and female He made them. On account of this a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall be joined to his wife permanently, and the two shall become one flesh, so that no longer are they two but one flesh. That therefore, which God has yoked together, let not man separate. (10:10–12) And in the house His disciples asked Him again of the same matter. Swete says: “The incident was at an end, so far as the Pharisees were concerned; but it led afterwards to a private conversation between the Lord and the Twelve.” “Asked” is imperfect, thus, durative in action. The disciples plied our Lord with questions regarding divorce. Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another committeth adultery against her. Swete says: “Of simple divorce the Lord has spoken sufficiently; it is a dissolution of the divinely constituted union. He deals now with the case of marriage after divorce, and pronounces it adultery.” The words “against her” are given by Swete as “in reference to her.” Expositors says the expression may mean either “to the prejudice of, her (the first wife), or with her (the second.)” In Matthew 5:32 and 19:9, our Lord allows a solitary exception to the absolute prohibition of divorce, and that is in the case of unfaithfulness on the part of the husband or wife in the marriage relation. Swete remarks: “Whether in such a case Christ’s words in Matthew permit or tolerate re-marriage is a question of much difficulty, which belongs to the interpretation of the first Gospel; but this would certainly seem to be a natural inference from the words as they have reached us.” Robertson, commenting on Matthew 19:9 says; “Mere formal divorce does not annul

actual marriage consummated by the physical union. Breaking that bond does annul it.” Translation. And in the house again, the disciples kept on asking Him concerning this. And He says to them, Whoever puts away his wife and marries another woman, commits adultery against her. And if she herself, having put away her husband, marries another man, she commits adultery. (10:13) Swete says of this delightful and touching incident: “This incident follows with singular fitness after the Lord’s assertion of the sanctity of married life. Matthew regards the sequence as strictly chronological, and Mark appears to locate the arrival of the children at the house where the Lord delivered to the Twelve His judgment on marriages after divorce … It was a sign of the growing reverence for the great Rabbi when even infants were brought to Him for His blessing … Those who were brought to Jesus were doubtless of various ages, from the infant in arms to the elder children still under the mother’s care. The Lord Himself had passed through all the stages of human immaturity, and this group of children with their friends would recall His own experience at Nazareth.” Commenting on the words “that He should touch them,” Swete says: “The custom of laying on of hands with prayer upon children for the purpose of benediction, finds its archetype in Genesis 48:14, 15. Such benedictions, it seems, were commonly obtained by parents for their children from the ruler of the synagogue; and here was One greater than any local synagogue-ruler. But perhaps the purpose of the friends was simply to secure a blessing by contact with the wonder-working Prophet.” They brought the young children. The tense is imperfect, “they kept on bringing.” The verb is a compound of  (ferw) “to bring,” and pros (pro"), “to.” Expositors remarks: “Note the use of the compound; elsewhere, the simple verb. The word is commonly used of sacrifices, and suggests here the idea of dedication.” The word “rebuked” is  (ejpitimaw) “to unjustly check or blame another, to do it ineffectually.” The rebuke of the disciples was both unwarranted and without result. They kept on rebuking those who brought the children as fast as they came to Jesus. The disciples, Swete says, “discouraged the attempt as idle or, more probably, as derogatory to the Master’s dignity.” The words “that brought them,” Nestle rejects. Translation. And they kept on bringing to Him young children in order that He might touch them. And His disciples kept on rebuking them unjustly and without effect. (10:14) Swete says: “From the house Jesus saw what was happening, and His indignation was aroused.” He was much displeased. The verb is  (ajganaktew). Robertson takes it from agan (ajgan) and achthomai (ajcqomai) “to feel pain.” He says that it is a strong word of deep emotion. Thayer gives its meaning as “to be indignant, to be moved with indignation.” Paul uses it in II Corinthians 7:11, where he recognizes it under certain circumstances as a legitimate Christian feeling. The very fact that our sinless Lord manifested such feeling, is enough to show that under the proper circumstances it is not only right, but its absence would show a serious defect in Christian character. Swete says: “That the nature of His kingdom should still be misunderstood by the Twelve was a just cause for indignant surprise.” The verb is ingressive aorist, speaking of entrance into a

new state. Jesus became indignant. “Suffer” is  (ajfihmi) “to permit, allow.” “Forbid” is  (kwluw) “to forbid, hinder, prevent.” The construction is present imperative in a prohibition, “stop hindering.” That is exactly what the disciples were doing. Jesus forbids the continuance of the action. Translation. But, Jesus having seen, became indignant, and said to them, Be permitting the little children to come to Me. Stop preventing them, for of such ones is the kingdom of God. (10:15) Our Lord here holds up a little child as a model of trusting, simple, and loving obedience, for adults to emulate as the way to appropriate the salvation God offers the believing sinner. He shall not enter therein. The double negative in the Greek presents an emphatic negation. “As” is  (wJ"). The adverb means “in the same manner as, like as.” Translation. Truly, I am saying to you, Whoever does not receive the kingdom of God in the same manner as a little child, will positively not enter into it. (10:16) Swete says: “He had already called them to Him, and as they came up in succession, each was taken in His arms and blessed.… He blessed them fervently, in no perfunctory way, but with emphasis, as those who were capable of a more unreserved benediction than their elders. Instead of the mere touch for which the friends had asked, He laid His hands on them.” The verb “blessed” is intensive in its force, “blessed them fervently,” and imperfect in tense, “kept on blessing them.” Expositors says: “Jesus took each child in His arms, one by one, and blessed it … The process would last awhile, but Jesus would not soon weary of such work.” Translation. And having taken them up in His arms, He kept on fervently blessing them, placing His hands upon them. (10:17) Luke, in reporting this incident, calls the one who came running to Jesus an  (ajrcwn), Matthew, a neaniskos (neanisko"). The word  (ajrcwn) means literally “a first one.” It speaks of preeminence. It is a term of some latitude. It is used by Matthew (9:18) for the chief of a synagogue, where it is conjoined to the word “synagogue.” Luke uses it for a chief Pharisee (14:1). Josephus apparently understands by it any member of the Sanhedrin. The word passed into Rabbinic as a general term for a great man or prince. The word neaniskos (neanisko") is a relative term which may be used of any age between boyhood and middle life. Swete says that the homage paid Jesus by this person is “remarkable because he is not a supplicant for material help. In his eagerness to obtain spiritual advice he shows no less zeal than if he had sought the greatest of temporal benefits.” Good Master. The words are reversed in the Greek text, and they are “Teacher, good one.” Swete says: “The word ‘good’ is probably sincere, not a fulsome compliment, still less intended for irony. But it implies an imperfect standard of moral goodness, since the speaker regarded the Lord as a merely human teacher.”

Translation. And when He was going out into the road, there came one running toward Him, and having fallen on his knees before Him, he was asking Him, Teacher, good one, what shall I do in order that I might inherit life eternal? (10:18) Swete says: “The emphasis is on the word “good,” not on the pronoun. The Lord begins by compelling the enquirer to consider his own words. He had used the word ‘good’ lightly, in a manner which revealed the poverty of his moral conceptions … The man is summoned to contemplate the absolute goodness of God, and to measure himself by that supreme standard. Viewed in this light the words are seen not to touch the question of our Lord’s human sinlessness or of His oneness with the Father; on the other hand they are consistent with the humility which led Him as Man to refrain from asserting His equality with God.” Expositors says of the question, “Why callest thou Me good?”; “which means not, ‘the epithet is not applicable to Me, but to God only,’ but, ‘do not make ascriptions of goodness a matter of mere courtesy or politeness.’ The case is parallel to the unwillingness of Jesus to be called Christ indiscriminately. He wished no man to give Him any title of honor till he knew what he was doing. He wished this man in particular to think carefully on what is good, and who, all the more that there were competing types of goodness to choose from, that of the Pharisees, and that exhibited in His own teaching.” Translation. And Jesus said to him; Why do you say that I am good? No one is good except One, God. (10:19) Swete says: “Having fixed the standard of goodness, the Lord proceeds to rehearse the divine precepts which to the Jew were the highest expression of the good will (of God) … The Lord cites only the commandments which regulate man’s duty to his neighbor, probably because they admit of a relatively simple application of the conduct of life.” Translation. The commandments you know: Do not commit murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not defraud; honor your father and mother. (10:20) The word for “observed” is  (fulassw). This word was used in classical Greek as a military term meaning “to guard, watch.” It was used of sentinels keeping guard. As used here in connection with the keeping of the commandments, it refers not only to the act of obeying them, but to that solicitude for their preciousness and honor, that leads one to carefully guard them from being broken. It means, “to take care not to violate.” Swete says: “The young man is relieved by the Lord’s answer. If the eternal inheritance could be secured on so simple a condition as the keeping of the Decalogue, it was his already.… The deeper meaning and larger requirements of the Law were yet hidden from him.” Translation. And he said to him, Teacher, these things, all of them, I

carefully awarded and obeyed from my boyhood. (10:21) Jesus beholding him. The word is  (ejmblepw) “to fix the eyes for a moment on an object.” It speaks of a characteristically searching gaze turned on an individual. Loved him. The word is  (ajgapaw), “a love called out of one’s heart by the preciousness of the object loved.” It is used in the n.t., of God’s love, and of the love that God is. The tense is ingressive aorist, speaking of entrance into a new condition. Jesus fell in love with this young man. Swete says “The Lord loved in the man what He saw to be good.” Expositors quotes Grotius: “Jesus loved not virtues only, but seeds of virtues.” Matthew includes in the young man’s answer to Jesus, the words, “What lack I yet?” Expositors says: “The man is conscious of his defect, an important point in his spiritual condition.” Swete says: “The sale and distribution of his property were the necessary preparations in his case for the complete discipleship which admits to the divine kingdom. The words are not a general counsel of perfection, but a test of obedience and faith which our Lord saw to be necessary in this particular instance.” The word “follow” is  (ajkolouqew) “to follow with another, to take the same road that another takes.” Jesus walked a road of self-abnegation, of self-sacrifice, of service to others, of separation. To have obeyed the instructions of Jesus, would not have given this young man eternal life. The latter can only be had in answer to personal heart faith in the atoning sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ. But, that obedience would have been the first and the necessary step for this man to take in order to become a disciple (a learner) of Jesus. Taking the same road with Him, would have eventuated in his receiving salvation in answer to his faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour. That which was keeping him from the latter step, was his love of wealth. The words “take up thy cross,” are not in the best manuscripts. Translation. And Jesus, having fixed His searching gaze upon him, fell in love with him, and said to him, One thing you are lacking; go, whatever you have, sell at once, and give at once to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven, and come, make a beginning of following with Me on the same road that I am taking, and continue to do so. (10:22) Swete says: “As he heard the sentence, his brow clouded over, the lighthearted optimism of his mood broke down.” The verb “was sad” is  (stugnazw). Thayer gives as its meaning, “to be sad, sorrowful.” Referring to its use here he quotes Revised Version, “his countenance fell” at the saying. The word is used of the saddening of either the face of nature or the human face, of the dark, stormy night, of the sombre, gloomy man who broods over unwelcome thoughts. Swete says the sadness of which this word speaks is usually the result of disappointment and grief, and that this is the case here. He quotes Wycliffe; “He was ful sorie in the word.” Vincent says: “The word paints forcibly the gloom which clouded his face.” Swete says: “The answer did not exasperate, but it gave him pain which was visible on his countenance. His hopes were dashed; the one thing he wanted was beyond his reach; the price was too great to pay even for eternal life. For the time the love of the world prevailed. Yet it is unnecessary with Origen and Jerome to characterize his sorrow as that of the world (II Cor. 7:10); rather it may have been the birth-pangs of a spirit struggling for release. His riches were indeed as thorns (Jerome)

which threatened to choke the seed of the word (4:7, 19), but the end of the struggle is not revealed.” Translation. And he, saddening at the word, went off, being grieved. For he was holding great wealth. (10:23) Jesus looked round about. Swete says: “When the man was gone, the Lord’s eye swept round the circle of the Twelve, as He drew for them the lesson of the incident.” “How hardly” is  (pw" duskolw").  (Pw") is used here in an exclamation, and means “how?”  (Duskolw") means “with difficulty.” The question of our Lord does not declare the impossibility of a wealthy person being saved, but the difficulty of getting him saved. How the words of James echo in our hearts, “Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which He hath promised to them that love Him?” (2:5). Translation. And Jesus, having glanced swiftly around, says to His disciples, How with difficulty will those who keep on holding wealth, enter into the kingdom of God? (10:24) Swete says: “The Twelve were thrown into consternation at this last remark. What manner of kingdom was this which men must become as children to enter (v. 15), and which men of substance could scarcely enter at all.” Commenting on our Lord’s use of the word “children” (teknon (teknon)), he says: “The Lord, in sympathy with their growing perplexity, adopts a tone of unusual tenderness. Their perplexity arose from the fact that as Jews they regarded wealth as a token of God’s favor. Yet He repeats His hard saying, and this time removes His qualifying reference to the rich: ‘it is hard in any case, though specially hard for such.’ ” The words, “for them that trust in riches,” are an addition to the text here inserted to bring the verse into closer connection with the context by limiting its generality. Nestle rejects them. Translation. And the disciples were astonished at His words. And Jesus again answering, says to them, Little children, How difficult it is to enter the kingdom of God. (10:25) Some teach that the needle’s eye here refers to a gate in the wall of Jerusalem through which by means of much pulling and pushing a camel could finally be taken. The Greek of Matthew 19:24 and of Mark speaks of a needle that is used with thread, and that of Luke 18:25, uses a medical term for the needle used in surgical operations. It is evident that the gate is not meant, but the tiny eye of a sewing needle. This was probably a current proverb for the impossible. The Talmud twice speaks of an elephant passing through the eye of a needle as being impossible. It is therefore impossible for anyone whose love of riches keeps him from trusting the Lord Jesus as Saviour, to be saved. Translation. Easier it is for a camel through the eye of the needle to go, than for a wealthy man into the kingdom of heaven to enter. (10:26, 27) Swete says: “Their astonishment now passed all bounds and broke out into

a cry of despair.… Who then can be saved if the rich are excluded? The Twelve have not yet grasped the special difficulties of the rich, who seem from their position to have the first claim to admission into the kingdom.” They were astonished out of measure. The verb is  (ejkplhssw) “to strike out, expel by a blow, to strike out of self-possession.” With men it is impossible … With God all things are possible. The preposition is para (para) “alongside, beside, in the presence of.” That is, take your stand beside man on the question of riches, and it is impossible to be saved. But, take your stand beside God on the matter, and the formerly impossible becomes possible (A.T.R.). Translation. And beyond measure were they amazed to the point of almost losing their self-possession, saying to one another, Then who is able to be saved? After having swiftly glanced around them, Jesus says, With man, impossible, but not in the presence of God. For all things are possible in the presence of God. (10:28) Lo, we have left all, and have followed thee. “Lo” is idou (ijdou) “behold, see, lo,” a demonstrative particle, giving a peculiar vivacity to the style by bidding the hearer to attend to what is said. The word “left” is  (ajfihme) “to send or bid go away, yield up.” The idea is that of abandoning. Peter said “We abandoned all.” The verb is aorist, speaking of a once for all act. The “we” of course are the Twelve. Peter and John left a lucrative fishing business, and Matthew, a rich source of income from his taxcollector’s office, to become the disciples of a poor itinerant preacher. Peter’s question was in effect, “What reward will we get for having become poor for your sake?” The spokesman of the disciples showed by his question that they were still thinking in terms of material rather than spiritual riches. Peter’s act of abandoning his preaching commission to go back to his fishing business, shows that this tendency still clung to him even after the resurrection of our Lord (John 21:3). Have followed thee. The verb is in the perfect tense, speaking of a past, complete action having present results. The idea here is that the disciples had made an irrevocable decision to leave all they had, and forever, and to follow with the Lord permanently. Translation. Peter began to be saying to Him, Behold, as for us, we abandoned all once for all and have followed with you, and this, permanently. (10:29–31) Swete says: “The sacrifices contemplated embrace all the material possessions included under the three heads of home, relatives, and property … Without doubt the relations which the Lord offers ‘now in this time’ in place of those which have been abandoned for His sake are the spiritual affinities which bind the members of the family of God.” Our Lord mentions persecutions as a natural accompaniment of the present rewards since, as Expositors says “it is in this world that the moral compensation takes place.” Swete’s comment on the words “But many that are first shall be last; and the last first,” is as follows: “As it stands, it is a rebuke to the spirit which is impelled to the sacrifice by the mere hope of the reward. How much need there was of the warning, the experience of Judas Iscariot and of Simon Peter himself was to show.” Indeed, it seems that Jesus uttered these words in view of Peter’s implication in his words “Lo, we have left all, and

have followed thee,” an implication to the effect that “what do we get out of it all,” and which even impetuous Peter did not have the courage to put into words. The word “time” is kairos (kairo"), a word referring to the critical, epoch-making periods fore-ordained of God. Such was the time of the first Advent when the Jewish dispensation of the Mosaic covenant was passing away. The word “world” is  (aijwn) which does not refer here to the future life, but is used like kairos (kairo") to speak of a particular period of time, but with this difference, that whereas kairos (kairo") refers to a critical, epoch-making period, the joints or articulations of the various ages or dispensations in God’s program, such as the Age of Law, the Age of Grace, and the Millennial Age,  (aijwn) refers to the latter. Here, “the age to come” refers to the Millennial Age; Swete says, “the age which is to follow the Parousia, the appearing of our Lord for the Church.” The authorities are silent on all this, and the present writer confesses that he is at a loss to suggest an interpretation. The best he can do is offer the usage of the Greek words in question. Translation. Jesus said, Truly I am saying to you, There is no one who abandoned house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands for my sake and for the sake of the gospel, except he will receive one hundred times as much now at this time, houses, and brothers, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come, life eternal. But many who are first, shall be last, and the last ones, first. (10:32) Swete says: “The issue of the journey now becomes apparent; the road leads to Jerusalem, and to the Cross.” Mark says, “Now, they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem.” The Greek makes it clear that the words “going up to Jerusalem,” do not describe the road, but speak of the Lord and the disciples. This city stands near the highest point of the backbone of Palestine, namely, the line of hills running north and south between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. The city cannot be approached from any direction without an ascent. Jesus went before them. We have a construction in the Greek text which speaks, not of a momentary going on ahead, but of an habitual practice. Jesus often walked alone, ahead of His disciples. Swete says: “The Lord walked in advance of the Twelve with a solemnity and determination which foreboded danger.… His manner struck awe into the minds of the Twelve, who were beginning at length to anticipate an impending disaster.” The words “as they followed,” do not refer to the disciples, but to the accompanying crowds, the travellers going in caravans to Jerusalem. The Greek text has, “and those who followed.” Swete again has a helpful comment: “The crowd who usually hung upon the Lord’s footsteps, or His fellow-travellers on their way to the Passover, were conscious of a vague fear.” Expositors says: “The astonishment of the Twelve and the fear of the others were not due to the fact that Jesus had, against their wish, chosen to go to Jerusalem in spite of apprehended danger (Weiss). These feelings must have been awakened by the manner of Jesus, as of one laboring under strong emotion. Only so can we account for the fear of the crowd, who were not, like the Twelve, acquainted with Christ’s forebodings of death. Memory and expectation were both active at that moment, producing together a high-strung state of mind: Peraea, John, baptism in Jordan, at the beginning; Jerusalem, the priests, the Cross, at the end! Filled with the varied feelings excited by these sacred

recollections and tragic anticipations, He walks alone by preference, step and gesture revealing what was working within and inspiring awe—‘mutig und entschlossen’ Schanz; ‘with majesty and heroism,’ Morison.” He took again the Twelve. The words He addressed to the Twelve were for them alone, not for the crowd. The atmosphere was so tense that there was danger of a real panic. Our Lord checks His course, until the disciples come up to Him. The word “happen” is  (sumbainw), “to come together,” of things that happen with one another, thus, together. Translation. Now, they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem. And there was proceeding before them Jesus, and they were amazed. And those that were following along, were fearing. And having taken again the Twelve, He began to be speaking concerning the things that were about to be converging upon Him. (10:33, 34) These are some of the thoughts which were passing through our Lord’s mind, and which produced that high-strung state of mind, and that step and gesture which caused such consternation among the disciples and fear in the crowd that accompanied Him. As the prophet said of the Messiah, “I set my face like a flint” (Isaiah 50:7). The translation of the a.v., here is excellent. (10:35–37) Concerning this request, Swete says: “Matthew agrees with Mark in the dialogue, but represents the mother of James and John (i. e., Salome, Matt. 27:56, Mark 15:41) as the actual petitioner; she was in the company, and though the sons were certainly to some extent, responsible (Matt. 20:20, 22), it is more than probable that maternal ambition, prompted their application to our Lord.… According to Matthew, Salome approaches with her sons, prostrates herself, and intimates that she has a request to make. Mark, who for once lost the pictorial details, preserves the words, putting them however, into the lips of the sons. Both the homage offered and the terms of the petition, suggest that the Lord is approached in the character of a King who can gratify the desires of His subjects without limitation, as indeed in another sense He afterwards declared Himself able to do.” Robertson says: “The mother spoke for the sons. But they try to commit Jesus to their desires before they tell what they are, just like spoiled children.” The contrast between the self-abnegation and self-sacrificial heroism and courage of our Lord, and the utter absence of any self-ambition, stands out vividly with the petty self-interest and ambition of the disciples, and puts the latter in a most unfavorable light. He was going to the Cross. They had their thoughts centered on self-advancement in the kingdom. Translation. And there come to Him James and John, the sons of Zebedee, saying to him, Teacher, we want that whatever we ask you, you will do for us. And He said to them, What do you want Me to do for you? And they said to Him, Grant us at once that one on your right hand and one on your left hand we might sit down in your glory. (10:38) Ye know not what ye ask. The verb “ask” is in the indirect middle voice, which represents the person acting in the verb as acting in his own interest. It was the “self-seeking which inspired the request and was its deepest condemnation” (Swete) to which our Lord pointed. Our Lord asks, “Are ye able to be drinking the cup which I am

drinking?” The personal pronoun occurs with the verb, showing emphasis. It particularizes the cup which our Lord is drinking, from all other cups, and makes it stand out as a special one, an unusual one. The futuristic present is used here, denoting an event which has not yet occurred, but which is regarded as so certain that in thought it may be contemplated as already coming to pass. The cup is the one to which our Lord refers in His Gethsemane prayer (Matt. 26:39), its ingredients, our Lord being made sin (II Cor. 5:21), and being abandoned for the time being by God the Father and God the Spirit (Matt. 27:46). As to the use of the figure of baptism here to speak of our Lord’s sufferings, we might say that the metaphorical use of the word  (baptizw) (to baptize) is common in the later Greek, and is found in the o.t. (Ps. 18:16, 42:7, 59:1). The papyri offer instances of its use, as for instance, where a person is overwhelmed with calamities. Our Lord is referring to the sufferings into which He will be plunged at the Cross and which will overwhelm His soul, wringing from His broken heart that desolate cry, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken Me?” As one ponders over the answer of our Lord, one cannot help but see the patience, kindness, and love which is exhibited by Him for His disciples, when at this crucial and terrible moment in His life, they ask such a question. What a portrait of the Son of God is painted for us here. Translation. But Jesus said to them, You do not know what you are asking for yourselves. Are you able to be drinking the cup which I am drinking, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, are you able to be baptized? (10:39, 40) Swete call this “a lighthearted and eager reply, which reveals the absence even in a disciple like John of any clear understanding of the Master’s repeated warnings, and at the same time the loyalty of the men who were ready to share the Master’s lot, whatever that might be.” The “we can” of the disciples, is a mere profession of moral courage, not a claim to spiritual power. The words of our Lord came true in the case of these two disciples. James died by the sword of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:2), and John was exiled to Patmos, where, tradition says, he died at hard labor. As to the fact that our Lord does not have the authority to grant preferred places, Swete says: “Christ is indeed the appointed distributor of all eternal rewards (II Tim. 4:8, Rev. 22:12), but He will distribute them in accordance with the Father’s dispositions.” Translation. And they said to Him, We are able. And Jesus said to them, The cup which I drink, you will drink. And the baptism with which I am baptized, with that baptism you will be baptized. But the sitting on my right hand or my left, is not mine to give. But it is for those for whom it has been prepared. (10:41) Swete says: “If the rest of the Twelve were not present, the report naturally reached them and it at once revived the spirit of jealousy which had been checked by the teaching of 9:35, and went far to create a new group in the Apostolate. Hitherto Peter, James, and John had formed a recognized triumvirate; now Peter joins and probably leads the other nine in their indignation. The bitter feeling was perhaps not expressed in the presence of the two,… but it threatened the harmony and spiritual life of the Apostolate, and called for immediate correction.” The verb “displeased” is  (ajganaktew),

which comes from two words meaning “to feel pain, to grieve.” It means “to be indignant,” which is far stronger than “to be much displeased.” Translation. And when the ten heard, they began to be indignant with James and John, and kept it up. (10:42–45) Our Lord meets this crisis by showing the disciples the difference between that which is esteemed great in the Gentile world system, and the standard of greatness in the spiritual kingdom which He was inaugurating. It was pomp and circumstance, privilege and power, position and authority in the Gentile world, which was esteemed great, and the greatness of the individual came from his place in the system. But in the kingdom of God, the greatness of the individual comes from the lowly place he takes as a servant of all. Even the resplendent beauty of the Son of Man came from the fact, that He as Very God of Very God, became incarnate in human flesh and a servant to mankind. What a check this gently given teaching must have put upon the personal ambitions of the disciples. “Minister” is diakonos (diakono"), a servant seen in his activity of serving. “Servant” is doulos (doulo"), the most servile term for a slave. Paul uses it in II Corinthians 4:5. The words, “a ransom for many” need special attention. The word “ransom” is lutron (lutron) “the price for redeeming, the ransom paid for slaves.” The word “for” is anti (ajnti), the predominant meaning in the koine (koine) being “instead of.” It is the preposition of substitution. Our Lord paid the ransom money for slaves of sin who could not pay it themselves, namely, His own precious blood. The verb of the same root is used in I Peter 1:18, 19 where the Apostle tells us that we were not redeemed, set free by payment of ransom, with little silver and gold coins used to buy a slave out of slavery, but with precious blood, highly honored, blood as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, the blood of Christ. Our Lord here speaks of the substitutionary aspect of His atonement. This is usually Pauline as to presentation, but the Gospels which give the historic event, also interpret for the reader, the doctrinal significance of the Cross. Translation. And having called them to Himself, Jesus says to them; You know that those who are esteemed as ruling over the Gentiles, rule with absolute power over them, and their great ones domineer over them. But not thus is it among you. But whoever desires to be great among you, he will be your servant. And whoever desires to be first among you, he will be your bondslave. For even the Son of Man did not come to have service rendered Him, but to render service, and to give His life a ransom for many. (10:46) Our Lord is on His way to Jerusalem and the Cross. He enters Jericho in a public way, accompanied by the crowds going to the Passover. In doing so, He puts Himself in the power of the Roman procurator and the Sanhedrin. The blind beggar was a common sight in Palestine. Vincent says that diseases of the eye are very common in the East. He quotes Thomson on Ramleh: “The ash-heaps are extremely mischievous; on the occurrence of the slightest wind, the air is filled with a fine pungent dust which is very injurious to the eyes. I once walked the streets counting all that were either blind or had defective eyes, and it amounted to about one-half of the male population. The women I could not count, for they are rigidly veiled.”

Translation. And they come into Jericho. And as He is proceeding out from Jericho, and His disciples, and a sizeable crowd, the son of Timaeus, Bartimaeus, blind, a beggar, was sitting as was his wont, alongside the road. (10:47) The tramp of the feet of the crowd, told Bartimaeus that something unusual was happening, and upon inquiry, he was informed that Jesus of Nazareth was passing by. He calls Him “Son of David” because Jesus was now on Judaean soil. At Jerusalem all the Jews thought of David as their father, and of Messiah as the Son of David in a special sense. The Greek construction indicates that Bartimaeus kept on crying out to Jesus. The imperative is aorist, speaking of the fact that Bartimaeus asked that Jesus heal him at once. Translation. And having heard that it was Jesus, the Jesus from Nazareth, he began to keep on crying out and saying, Son of David, Jesus, have mercy upon me at once. (10:48) The word “charged” is  (ejpitimaw) “to rebuke, censure severely.” “Hold his peace” is  (siwpaw) “to be silent, to hold one’s peace.” It is ingressive aorist, speaking of entrance into a new condition. Luke says that it was the crowd in front that rebuked the blind man. As Swete says: “The cry spoilt the harmony of the triumph. Why should this beggar force his misery on the attention of the great Prophet?” But the remonstrance of the crowd only seemed to increase the vigor with which the blind beggar called out to Jesus. Translation. And many kept on censuring him severely to the effect that he should become silent. But he kept on crying out all the more, Son of David, have mercy upon me at once. (10:49, 50) In each instance of the use of the word “call,” Mark uses but one word,  (fwnew), the appropriate word for calling out loud in an audible voice that can be heard at a distance. There is no attempt to avoid monotony of repetition by varying the word. For the word “rose,” the best texts have  (ajnaphdaw) “to leap up, to spring up.” The garment in this case was the himation (iJmation), the large, upper garment of the oriental, so large that a man would sometimes sleep in it. The words of the crowd, changing quickly from those of rebuke to those of friendliness, are terse, “Courage, rise, He calls you!” no superfluous words, just as a crowd would speak. Expositors says: “Graphic description of the beggar’s eager response—mantle thrown off, jumping to his feet, he comes, runs, to Jesus. Though blind, he needs no guide, led by his ear.” Translation. And coming to a standstill, Jesus said, Call him at once. And they call the blind man, saying to him, Be of good courage, be arising, He is calling you. And having thrown off his outer garment, having leaped up, he came to Jesus. (10:51) The word “Lord” is Rabbounei (Rabbounei) in the Greek text, “my Master,” a term of reverent respect. “Receive my sight” is  (ajnablepw) “to recover sight.” The blind man had been able to see at one time.

Translation. And answering him, Jesus said, What are you desiring that I shall do for you? The blind man said to Him, Rabboni (Rabboni), that I might recover my sight. (10:52) Thy faith hath made thee whole. The word is  (swzw) “to save.” It is used either of physical healing or of spiritual salvation. The perfect tense here speaks of a permanent cure. Followed Jesus. The imperfect tense gives us a picture of joyful Bartimaeus following Jesus in the crowd that was on its way to Jerusalem. Translation. And Jesus said to him, Be off. Your faith has healed you perfectly. And immediately he recovered his sight and was following with Him on the road.

CHAPTER ELEVEN (11:1) Expositors says: “It is first stated generally that they approach Jerusalem, then Bethphage and Bethany are named to define more exactly the whereabouts. Both villages are named: partly because close together, partly because, while Bethphage was the larger and the better known place, and therefore might have stood alone as an indication of locality, Bethany was the place where the colt was to be got.” He sendeth forth. The verb is apostello (ajpostello) “to send on a commission to do something.” Translation. And when they are getting near to Jerusalem, to Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives, He sends two of His disciples on a commission. (11:2) Our Lord directed them to procure a colt which had never been ridden. Swete says: “The foal was unbroken, had never been ridden, as befitted an animal consecrated to a sacred purpose. The Lord was born of one who ‘did not know a man,’ and was buried where ‘no one was ever yet laid.’ His choice of an animal not ridden by anyone before Him, is another of those claims to uniqueness which contrast forcibly with His usual condescension to the circumstances of an ordinary human life.” Translation. And says to them, Be going off into the village before you, and immediately upon proceeding into it, you will find a colt securely tied, upon which not even one man ever sat. Loose it at once, and be bringing it. (11:3) Our Lord anticipates a possible difficulty which might arise when the disciples arbitrarily take the colt, and promises its return promptly after He has used it. Translation. And if anyone says to you, Why are you doing this? say, The Lord is having need of it, and at once will send it here again. (11:4) The disciples found the colt exactly as the Lord had said. Swete says: “For

other examples of this supernatural knowledge of circumstances compare Mark 14:13, Matthew 17:27, John 1:48.” The colt was outside the house and fastened to the door. Robertson quotes Gould: “The better class of houses were built about an open court, from which a passageway under the house led to the street outside. It was at this outside opening to the street that the colt was tied.” Vincent comments on the words “in a place where two ways met;” “Amphodon (ÆAmfodon) is literally any road which leads round (amphi (ajmfi)) a place or block of buildings. Hence the winding way. Rev., in the open street, which in an eastern town is usually crooked … ‘It is a topographical note,’ says Dr. Morison, ‘that could only be given by an eye-witness.’ According to Luke (22:8), Peter was one of those sent, and his stamp is probably on the narrative.” Translation. And they went off and found a colt tied securely to a door outside in the open street, and they loose it. (11:5, 6) Those that stood by were idlers; Luke says, they were the owners; they had tied up the animals while they took part in the street gossip. The fact that they were satisfied with the answer of the disciples, is explained by the consideration that the Lord was well-known in the neighborhood (John 11). They knew that this Prophet could be trusted, and its owners did not need the colt just at that time. They probably were proud of the fact that it would be used by Him. Translation. And certain of those who were standing there were saying to them, What are you doing, loosing the colt? And they spoke to them even as Jesus had told them to. And they gave them permission. (11:7) The colt, because yet unbroken, had no saddle. As a substitute, some spare clothing was thrown upon it. Translation. And they bring the colt to Jesus, and throw upon it their outer mantles, and He sat upon it. (11:8) Spread their garments in the way. The word is hodos (oJdo"), “a road.” Matthew and Luke say that they spread the garments in the road, Mark, into the road. They threw them into the road and spread them there. Matthew, Mark, and John each use a different word for “branches.” Matthew speaks of a young slip or shoot, a twig; Mark, of a mass of straw, rushes, or leaves beaten together or strewed loose, so as to form a bed or carpeted way; and John, of palm-branches, the feathery fronds forming the tufted crown of the tree. Each group contributed its own road-decorations. Robertson says that the deliberate conduct of Jesus here could have but one meaning, namely, that this was His formal presentation of Himself as the Messiah. The crowds realized this and entered into the spirit of the occasion. The people, however, expected the Lord to set up His rule in opposition to that of Rome, and deliver the Jews from the yoke of their oppressors. Translation. And many spread their garments into the road, and others, soft foliage, having cut it out of the countryside.

(11:9, 10) They that went before and they that followed. Swete suggests that the former consisted of the crowds that poured out from the city of Jerusalem, the latter, those that had assembled at Bethany and Bethphage the night before. The two streams met, the former turning around, the latter, following. Our Lord was caught in the center of these two crowds. The word “Hosanna,” Vincent says, means “O save.” The word “blessed” is  (eujlogew) “to speak well of, to praise, to eulogize.” Another word translated “blessed” is used in the New Testament, makarios (makario"), which means “prosperous” in classical Greek, and in n.t., Greek, “spiritually prosperous.” The word “blessed” is a good translation of this word, for the English word means just that, namely, a condition where the believer is the recipient of the good things of God. The words “to speak well of, to praise,” are more fitting for our present word,  (eujlogew). Translation. And those who went before, and those who followed, kept on crying out, Hosanna, praised be He who comes in the Name of the Lord. Praised be the kingdom of our father David. Hosanna in the highest. (11:11) Jesus entered the Temple. The word here is hieron (iJeron), the temple with all its porches, courts, and outbuildings, not naos (nao"), the inner part of the structure consisting of the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies. Swete suggests that our Lord did not go beyond the Court of the Gentiles this first day. Of course, He would have been excluded from the inner sanctuary mentioned above, for He was not a priest after the order of Aaron, but after the order of Melchisedec. The words “when He had looked around” are  (periblepw), the simple verb meaning “to look,” the prefixed preposition meaning “around,” in the sense of a circle. It was a comprehensive inspection. Vincent says: “as the Master of the house inspecting.” He quotes Meyer, “A look serious, sorrowful, judicial.” Expositors says: “He enters Jerusalem, and especially the temple, and surveys all with keenly observant eye, on the outlook, like St. Paul at Athens, not for the picturesque, but for the moral and religious element. He noted the traffic going on within the sacred precincts, though He postponed action till the morrow.” He went out unto Bethany with the twelve. Swete says that our Lord and His disciples spent the nights of Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday before the Passion in the open air on the Mount of Olives. He says that “the bivouac among the hills offered comparative security against the danger of sudden arrest; and the conditions were favorable to meditation and prayer.” The home of Lazarus was in Bethany. Jesus had often stayed overnight in the home of His friends there during His Jerusalem ministry. He must have visited with them at this time. The Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, needed human companionship and sympathy and love. He found it there. Translation. And He entered Jerusalem and the temple. And after He had given all things a comprehensive inspection, it being already the evening hour, He went out into Bethany with the Twelve. (11:12–14) On the morrow. It was Monday, the fourth day before the Passover. Jesus’ triumphal (so-called) entry into Jerusalem was on the first day of the week, our Lord’s Day. Matthew says it was early ( (prwi)), the fourth watch before six a.m. Expositors, remarking on our Lord’s hunger, says that that was surprising, considering that He probably spent the night in the home of hospitable friends, and asks whether the

sights in the Temple had killed sleep and appetite, so that He left Bethany without taking food. Swete says that our Lord had not broken His fast. He had a day of toil before Him, and He needed to recruit His strength. The spiritual exercises of the night had perhaps sapped His strength. The fig tree offered the necessary sustenance. The tree was prematurely in leaf, growing in some sheltered spot, and it was reasonable to expect a premature crop of figs. But the tree did not fulfill its promise. The Lord condemned the tree, not only because of its fruitlessness, but because of its fruitlessness in the midst of a display which promised fruit. This incident gives us an insight into the humanity of our Lord, and upon His selfimposed human limitations. He expected to find or at least hoped to find figs on the tree. He found that His expectations did not come true. While displaying a supernatural wisdom at times, yet, our Lord lived His life on earth usually as the Man Christ Jesus. He was revealing Deity to humanity, and how else could He do that except in human terms, a human body, human limitations, and a human life lived among men. However, we must include this safeguard. We have no right to put any human limitations of knowledge upon our Lord except where the Scriptures speak of such. Translation. And the next day, they having come out of and away from Bethany, He became hungry. And having seen a fig tree a long way off having leaves, He came, if therefore, He will find anything on it. And, having come to it, He found not even one thing except leaves. For it was not the time of figs. And answering, He said to it, Hereafter forever, from you no one eats fruit. And His disciples were listening. (11:15, 16) Expositors says: “The state of things Jesus saw in the temple yesterday has been in His mind ever since: through the night watches in Bethany; in the morning, killing appetite; on the way, the key to His enigmatical behavior towards the fig tree.” Swete says: “He began the day’s work by ejecting the traffickers, making no distinction between sellers and buyers. The market was within the precinct of the Temple, and had already attracted the attention of Jesus at the first Passover of His ministry (John 2:14). It was a recognized institution, under the protection of the chief priests, and known in Rabbinical writings. The sales were limited to the Temple requisites, victims for the sacrifices, and the wine, oil, salt, etc., used in the ritual.” As to our Lord prohibiting any from carrying a vessel through the Temple, the explanation is as follows: Persons carrying goods or implements, used the Temple as a short-cut when going between the city and the Mount of Olives. This had been forbidden by the Jewish authorities at one time, but the order was not being enforced. The word “vessel” is skeuos (skeuo"), and referred to an “implement, household utensil, domestic gear.” The Greek or Roman money which the Passover visitors from Gentile countries brought with them was changed into Jewish halfshekels, so that the Jew could pay his Temple-tax. A large profit was made in this way. To have their tables overturned and their money thrown all over the floor on the eve of the Passover, was to deal their business a serious blow at a time when the money traffic was at its height. Translation. And they come into Jerusalem. And having entered the temple, He began to be throwing out those who sold and bought in the temple, and He threw down the tables of the money-changers and the seats

of those who sold doves, and was not permitting anyone to carry household gear through the temple. (11:17) A crowd had gathered, seeing our Lord’s actions. This afforded an opportunity for teaching. As usual, our Lord bases His teaching on Old Testament scripture, Mark here quoting the LXX of Isaiah 56:7. Referring to the use of the Court of the Gentiles as a market place, Swete says: “Who could pray in a place which was at once a cattle-market and an exchange, where the lowing of oxen mingled with the clinking of silver and the chaffering and haggling of the dealers and those who came to purchase?” The words, “of all nations”, Vincent says, imply “by all nations.” He suggests the rendering of the Revision, “for all nations.” The construction is dative in the Greek. Vincent remarks that the word “thieves” of the a.v., should be “robbers.” The word “thief” in Greek is  (klepth"), whereas, the word here is leµisteµs, “a robber.” He says: “The robber, conducting his operations on a large and systematic scale, and with the aid of bands, is thus to be distinguished from the  (klepth"), or thief who purloins or pilfers whatever comes to hand. A den would be appropriate to a band of robbers, not thieves.” Swete says: “No bandit’s cave along the Jericho road (Luke 10:30), by which our Lord had lately come, was the scene of such wholesale robbery as the Mountain of the House.” Translation. And He went to teaching, and was saying to them, Does it not stand written, My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations? But as for all of you, you have made it a den of robbers. (11:18) The order is reversed in the Greek text. It is, “The chief priests and the scribes.” Swete remarks that this is the first time in the Synoptics that the chief priests combine with the scribes against Jesus. Our Lord’s attack against the Temple-market, incensed them. After this, they take the lead against the Galilean Prophet. They sought means by which to do away with Him. This was not easy, for the crowds at the Passover were mostly from Galilee and the Gentile countries. And they were drawn to our Lord. Such a crowd in its present humor could be dangerous. Stoning was not impossible, even within the Temple precincts, with the priests themselves, the victims. We have the inceptive imperfect, “they went to seeking” how they might destroy our Lord. The word “astonished” is again that very strong Greek word,  (ejkplhssw) “to strike out of one’s senses.” The teaching of our Lord was in such contrast to that of the Jewish leaders, that the people saw the difference at once, and were almost beside themselves because of it. What a commentary upon the type of teaching they had been receiving, dry, formal, stereotyped, without power, above their heads, and the powerful, simple, interesting thought-arresting teaching of our Lord. Translation. And the chief priests and the scribes heard. And they went to seeking how they might destroy Him, for they were fearing Him; for the entire multitude was struck with astonishment at His teaching. (11:19) Our Lord went out of the city each evening of the first three days of Holy Week. Swete remarks that hunger and fatigue were forgotten in the work of God, and that only the approach of the hour when the gates were closed, induced Him to retire for rest. The word “when” is hotan (oJtan), more accurately, “whenever.” That is, whenever

evening came, He made it a habit to leave the city. The verb is prefixed by the preposition ek (ejk), “out of,” but in addition, the word  (ejxw) “outside,” is used indicating that our Lord preferred the environs of the city, and was glad to get out of it for the night. Translation. And whenever evening came, He was proceeding out of the city to the outside. (11:20) The words “in the morning,” follow the words “as they passed by,” in the Greek text. Expositors says this is important. “It gives the emphasis as suggesting that it was in the clear morning light that they noticed the tree. It might have been in the same condition the previous evening, but it would be dark when they passed the spot.” “Dried up” is  (xhrainw) “to dry up, to wither.” The perfect tense is used, showing that the tree was completely withered away, dead. Translation. And passing by in the morning, they saw the fig tree completely withered from the roots. (11:21) Swete remarks that the connection between the withered tree and the Lord’s words on the previous morning, flashed through Peter’s mind. Robertson suggests that it almost sounds as if Peter blamed our Lord for cursing the fig tree. Translation. And being reminded, Peter says to Him, Rabbi, see, the fig tree which you cursed, is withered away. (11:22) Our Lord’s answer to Peter, on the surface so unrelated to Peter’s words, is explained by Swete as follows: “The answer is remarkable; the Lord does not explain the lesson to be learned from the fate of the tree, but deals with a matter of more immediate importance to the Twelve, the lesson to be learnt from the prompt fulfillment of His prayer.” This is just another instance in the life of our Lord that brings to view His humanity and His dependence upon God the Holy Spirit, for the words He uttered, the prayers which He prayed, the miracles He performed, and the life which He lived, was as the Man Christ Jesus, doing all this in the energy of the Holy Spirit. Our Lord exercised faith in the cursing of the fig tree. He presses home the lesson of the necessity of faith to the disciples. The word “God” is in the genitive case, showing here the object of faith. Translation. And answering, Jesus says to them, Be constantly having faith in God. (11:23) Swete has an illuminating note: “The Twelve were crossing the Mount of Olives; below them, between the mountains of Judaea and the mountains of Moab, lay the hollow of the Dead Sea. ‘Faith, cooperating with the Divine Will, could fill yonder basin with the mass of limestone beneath their feet.’ The metaphor was in use among the Rabbis.… Faith is regarded as the normal attitude of the heart, not a sudden emotion or isolated act. Faith contemplates the effect as potentially accompanying its exercise, though the actual fulfillment may be delayed.” The word “doubt” is  (diakrinw). The word means “to judge between two,” thus, a divided judgment, or a wavering doubt. The words “shall come to pass,” are

present tense in the Greek text. More accurately, “comes to pass.” Robertson calls it a futuristic present. The words “whatsoever he saith” are rejected by Nestle. Translation. Truly, I am saying to you, Whoever says to this mountain, Be lifted up and be thrown into the sea, and does not doubt in his heart but believes that which he says comes to pass, it shall be his. (11:24) The word “faith,” therefore, indicates the logical connection between the contents of verse 23 and this verse. The idea is that since faith is the criterion of success in spiritual matters, therefore faith should be the constant attitude of the mind when one prays. The word “pray” is proseuchomai (proseucomai), “to offer a prayer addressed to God, to Him as the object of faith and the One who will answer one’s prayer.” The word “desire” is  (aijtew), used of prayer when one asks for something to be given. “Receive” is aorist, thus antecedent in time to the verb “believe.” Robertson says: “That is the test of faith, the kind that sees the fulfillment before it happens.” “Faith is the title deed of things hoped for (Heb. 11:1).” Just as a title deed guarantees to the one whose name appears on it, the ownership of the property, even though he may not have it in his actual possession, so faith is the title deed that guarantees to the one exercising it, the answer to his prayer, even though that answer may be delayed, and the thing asked for not in his possession. Translation. On this account I am saying to you, All things whatever when praying you also ask for, believe that you received, and they shall be yours. (11:25, 26) The word “when” is hotan (oJtan) “whenever.” The standing posture when praying is not commanded here, nor is it the only posture allowed. The word merely calls attention to a practice among the Jews. The word “trespasses” is  (paraptwma), which means “a fall alongside,” thus “a fall from the right course,” thus, “a false step.” Nestle rejects verse 26, as do Westcott and Hort. The Revised Version puts it in a footnote. Translation. And whenever you are standing, praying, forgive, if you have anything against a certain person, in order that your Father who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses. (11:27, 28) This is the third day in which our Lord visits the Temple. He was walking about probably in the colonnades of the Temple. As He walked along He was teaching the people (Matthew). Then, representatives of three orders approach Him, the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders. The definite article is used in each case, which fact indicates that those who came, represented their own group. This united action was probably agreed upon during the night. Their questions were in themselves reasonable ones from their point of view. They were the custodians of the Temple. Our Lord, by forcibly ejecting those who were engaged in business in the Temple, was claiming a superior jurisdiction. They ask Him in public now to produce His credentials, first, to state the nature of His authority, and second, to name the person from whom He had received it. The word “what” is poios (poio"), speaking not only of identity but nature or character.

Translation. And they come again into Jerusalem. And when He was walking about in the Temple, there come the chief priests and the scribes and the elders, and they kept on saying to Him, By what sort of delegated authority are you doing these things, or, who gave you this delegated authority to do these things? (11:29, 30) Our Lord meets their questions with another question. He says that He has one question to ask them. The one question is not contrasted to the two questions asked Him, but points to the simplicity of the issue. The answer to our Lord’s one question should clear the air. He refers to John the Baptist. The latter had testified to the divine source of His mission. The question of the Sanhedrin resolved itself into a question as to the source of the Baptist’s teaching. In demanding an answer from them, our Lord was claiming an answer as from authorized teachers who were acquainted with the facts. In twentieth century language, He put them on the spot. Translation. And Jesus said to them. I will ask you concerning one point, and answer Me, and I will tell you by what sort of delegated authority I am doing these things. The baptism of John, from heaven was it or from men? Answer Me. (11:31, 32) Mark says, “They reasoned with themselves.” Conference in groups was scarcely possibly at this time. The same thought flashed through their minds. If they would accept the divine mission of the Baptist, they would charge themselves as a class with having rejected his baptism. This would give our Lord an advantage which He would not be slow to use. If they said that John’s baptism was of purely human origin, they would place themselves in a dangerous position with regard to the crowds, even to the place of being stoned. The people might look upon their attribution to man’s words, that which they held to be of God. Furthermore, John’s martyrdom had deepened the regard with which he was held by the people. Translation. And they were reasoning with themselves, saying, If we up and say, From heaven, He will say, Then, because of what did you not believe him? But if we up and say, From men, they were fearing the people. For all were holding John actually to be a prophet. (11:33) The Jewish leaders saved themselves from this dilemma by professing ignorance. Translation. And answering Jesus, they say, We do not know. And Jesus says to them, Neither am I telling you by what sort of delegated authority I am doing these things.

CHAPTER TWELVE (12:1) Our Lord’s teaching changed its manner of presentation to that of parables. Bruce says: “The circumstances called forth the parabolic mood, that of one whose heart is chilled, and whose spirit is saddened by a sense of loneliness, and who, retiring within himself, by a process of reflection, frames for his thoughts forms which half conceal, half

reveal them.” Our Lord was accusing the spiritual leaders of Israel of being the future murderers of the Messiah, and this in the presence of the crowd. His purpose was to expose the true character of the hostility of the Sanhedrin. The vineyard was a recognized symbol of Israel itself as the covenant people, and both the members of the Sanhedrin and the better-taught among the crowd, could not but understand the symbolism. The winefat referred to the receptacle into which the wine ran after it had been pressed out of the grapes. The man who planted the vineyard is God, the husbandmen, the spiritual leaders of Israel. The hedge speaks of God’s protecting care over Israel and His blessings upon the Chosen People. Translation. And He began to be speaking to them in parables. A man planted a vineyard, and set a hedge about it, and digged a place for a wine-press, and built a tower, and let it out for his own advantage to vineyard men, and went away to foreign parts. (12:2) The rent of the vineyard was to be paid in kind, namely, a stipulated portion of the wine. “Servant” is doulos (doulo"), a bondslave. The season was the time of the harvest. The bondslave speaks of the Old Testament prophets sent to Israel. Translation. And he sent off to the vineyard at the season, a bondslave, in order that from the vineyard men he might receive from the fruit of the vine. (12:3) The word “beat” is  (derw), originally “to flay,” but in the n.t., “to beat severely, to scourge.” The failure to receive fruit points to the failure of Israel to heed the preaching of the prophets. Translation. And having taken him, they beat him severely, and sent him off empty. (12:4) The second bondslave met a worse fate than the first. The reading “they cast stones” is rejected by Nestle. Translation. And again he sent off to them another bondslave. And that one they knocked about the head and grossly insulted. (12:5) Translation. And another he sent off. And that one they killed; and many others; some on the one hand, beating severely, and others on the other hand, killing. (12:6) The Greek text reads, “Yet he had one,” that is, one person to send, after all his bondslaves were either maltreated or killed. He reasons that the vineyard men would not dare to harm his son. Swete says of this: “But to the owner any other result was inconceivable, and the parable sets forth the improbability from the human point of view, of such an issue as the incarnation actually had.” All of which means that mankind does

not have any proper conception of the utter and complete depravity of the fallen race, nor to what lengths it will go to hold on to its sin. In using the words “beloved son,” our Lord may have had in mind, the words of the Father at His baptism, “This is my Son, the beloved One, in whom I am well pleased (Matt. 3:17).” Translation. Yet one he had, a son, a beloved one. He sent him off last to them, saying, They will reverence my son. (12:7) The Sanhedrin recognized our Lord for what He was, the Son of God, the Messiah of Israel. The Lord had come to claim the vineyard, Israel, for Himself. He had received friendly recognition from the people. This had aroused the jealousy of their spiritual leaders. They tried in desperation to recover their waning power over the people by giving Him over to the Gentiles for crucifixion. Translation. And those vineyard men said to themselves, This is the heir. Come. Let us put him to death, and ours will be the inheritance. (12:8) The “casting out” speaks of the act of Israel’s leaders excommunicating our Lord. He was treated as excommunicate when He was condemned as a blasphemer and handed over to the Romans for punishment. Our Lord’s crucifixion outside of the walls of Jerusalem symbolized this expulsion from the community of Israel. Translation. And having taken him, they killed him, and threw him out of the vineyard. (12:9) Here we have the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem and the world-wide dispersion of the Jews a.d. 70, the call of the Gentiles, and the Church of Jesus Christ, the latter being the channel through which God is operating temporarily while Israel is in dispersion, and until Israel will be regathered at the second Advent, and restored to fellowship with and usefulness to God. Translation. What will the lord of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the vineyard men, and will give the vineyard to others. (12:10, 11) The quotation is from Psalm 118:22, 23. It is quoted again in Acts 4:11, and I Peter 2:4, 7. The stone is the Messiah, the builders, the spiritual leaders of Israel. The word “rejected” is  (ajpodokimazw). The simple verb means “to put to the test for the purpose of approving.” The prefixed preposition means “off, away from.” This tells us the story of Messiah’s rejection by Israel. Israel was looking for its Messiah. Jesus of Nazareth claimed to be Messiah. The leaders of Israel investigated His claims, found them to be true, substantiated by the miracles He performed (John 3:2), yet with all this evidence, rejected Him as Messiah because He did not meet their specifications. They were looking for a Messiah who would deliver Israel from the despotism of Rome, not from the dominion of sin. But this Messiah will some day become the King of kings and Lord of lords over the earth as the Head of the Millennial empire, the Headstone of the Corner.

Translation. And did you not even read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected after having put it to the test for the purpose of approving it, this became the head of the corner? From the Lord came this. And it is marvellous in our eyes. (12:12) This is the second time the Sanhedrin representatives would have arrested our Lord in the precincts of the Temple, but fear of the people prevented this (11:18). For the moment they were forced to admit defeat, and they returned to their council chamber to mature their schemes. The words “they knew,” refer to the religious leaders. Translation. And they were seeking to seize Him, but they were fearing the crowd, for they knew that with reference to them He spoke the parable. And having left Him, they went off. (12:13) The defeat which these leaders had sustained, broke them up into separate parties again, each to formulate its own plans. The Pharisees moved first. They sent some of their disciples (Matthew) “who knew how to combine the vigilance of practiced dissemblers (hypocrites), with the apparent innocence of young inquirers” (Swete). They were to entrap our Lord into some remark by which He would fatally compromise Himself. They associated with themselves adherents of Herod. The word “catch” is  (ajgreuw) “to catch wild animals.” Their purpose was to hunt and catch Him like some wild animal. Matthew’s word is, “entangle” Him in His talk (Matt. 22:15). The word is  (ajgreuw) “to snare or trap” birds. Translation. And they sent to Him certain of the Pharisees, and of the Herodians with a commission to snare Him in a statement. (12:14) Swete’s comment is most valuable: “The preamble is skillfully arranged with the view of disarming suspicion, and at the same time preventing escape. So independent and fearless a teacher of truth could not from fear of consequences either refuse an answer to honest and perplexed inquiries, or conceal His real opinion … There is veiled irony in the words. He had shown little consideration for men of learning and hierarchical rank; doubtless He would be equally indifferent to the views of the Procurator and the Emperor himself; when the truth was concerned, His independence would assert itself with fearless impartiality.” Master, we know that thou art true. The word is didaskalos (didaskalo") “a teacher.” “Know” is oida (oijda), referring to positive knowledge. They were absolutely convinced of the fact. “True” is  (ajlhqh") “true in the sense that He could not lie.” “Tribute” is  (khnson). It refers here to the poll tax which the Jews paid the Emperor. This payment was objectionable to them for two reasons, first, because it was a sign of subjection to a foreign power, and second, because the coin with which it was to be paid, the denarius, bore the Emperor’s effigy stamped upon it. And this Emperor, it was Roman law to worship as a god. The compulsory use of the denarius could not but increase the scruples of patriotic and religious Jews. Is it lawful? The word is exestin (ejxestin). The English word “lawful” at once suggests government, a system of civil or criminal law. The Greek word does not

necessarily refer to that. The word means “it is permissible, it is allowed, permitted.” The context indicates whether the restrictions are religious or civil. Here the Jews were not discussing the legality of paying poll tax to Caesar, but whether a Jew should do so in view of his theocratic relationship to God. They pressed for an answer, yes or no, as if there were no other possible answer. They hoped, in view of His Jewish background and teaching, that He would say no. That would involve Him at once with the Roman authorities. Such a reply, considering the present mood of the crowd, might put Him at the head of a rebellion (Acts 5:37) or at least would have made Him liable to a charge of treason (Luke 23:2). Had He given an affirmative answer, He would have incurred the displeasure of the Jewish crowds. Translation. And, having come, they say to Him, Teacher, we know that you are true and that you are not obsequious to anyone, for you do not pay regard to the outward appearance of men, but upon the basis of the truth, you are teaching the way of God. Is it permissible to give poll tax to Caesar or not? (12:15) Mark has “knowing their hypocrisy,” Matthew, “perceived their wickedness” (22:18), Luke, “perceived their craftiness” (20:23). Thus, the three evangelists give us a rounded picture of the impressions these men made upon our Lord. Swete says, “Malice ( (ponhria) Matthew) lay at the root of their conduct, unscrupulous cunning (ponourgia (ponourgia) Luke) supplied them with means of seeking their end, whilst they sought to screen themselves under the pretence (hupocrisis (uJpocrisi") Mark) of a desire and admiration of fearless truthfulness. The Lord detected their true character intuitively ( (eijdw") Mark). He knew it by experience (gnous (gnou") Matthew), and He perceived it by tokens which did not escape His observation ( (katanohsa") Luke).” Why tempt ye Me? The word is  (peirazw) “to put to the test.” The secondary and late meaning of the word is “to tempt in the sense of soliciting to do evil.” Here, the Jewish leaders were putting our Lord to the test. Our Lord asked for a denarius. Such a coin was not likely to be ready at hand, since only Jewish coins were used in the Temple. It was necessary for them to send for one. During the pause, it is easy to imagine the breathless silence and the fresh interest this wait for the coin caused. Translation. Shall we give, or, shall we not give? But He, knowing their hypocrisy, said to them, Why are you putting Me to the test? Be bringing Me a denarius in order that I may see. (12:16) “Image” is  (eijkwn) “a derived likeness,” “superscription,”  (ejpigrafh), literally, “a writing upon,” thus, “a title, an inscription.” The question our Lord asked admitted of no escape, even if they suspected the purpose behind it. They could not profess ignorance, for the coin answered the question. Translation. And they brought. And He says to them, Of whom is this likeness, and whose is this title? And they said to Him, Caesar’s.

(12:17) The Greek has it, “The things belonging to Caesar, pay off to Caesar.” The verb is  (ajpodidwmi). The Jewish leaders had used only  (didwmi) “to give.” Our Lord’s word is  (ajpodidwmi) which speaks of paying something as a debt. Swete remarks: “The thought seems to be, ‘The coin is Caesar’s; let him have his own. The fact that it circulates in Judaea shows that it is in the ordering of God’s providence. Judaea is now under Roman rule; recognize facts, so long as they exist, as interpreting to you the divine will, and submit.’… The question rested on an implied incompatibility of the payment of tribute with the requirements of the law of God; and the Lord replies that there is no such incompatibility. Debts to man and debts to God are both to be discharged, and the two spheres of duty are at once distinct and reconcilable.” They marvelled at Him. The verb is  (qaumazw), and imperfect in tense, speaking of continuous action. They stood there, amazed at Him, not so much at the profundity of His reply, as at the fact that there was nothing in the reply on which they could lay hold. Translation. And Jesus said to them, The things belonging to Caesar, pay off to Caesar, and the things belonging to God, to God. And they stood, marvelling at Him. (12:18–23) The Pharisees were the ritualists, the Herodians, the political party among the Jews allied with the ruling Roman class, the Sadducees, the rationalists. The latter professed a disbelief in angels or spirits, and in a resurrection. They were closely identified with the priestly aristocracy (Acts 5:7), were relatively few in numbers, and were not held in as much esteem by the people as the Pharisees. These approached Jesus with the question which divided them from the Pharisees. Which say there is no resurrection. “Which” is hoitines (oiJtine") “which are of such a nature or class.” This pronoun marks the Sadducees out as a class. They are of that party which is characterized by the denial of a resurrection. The words are literally, “They say, A resurrection not to be.” It is one of the Greek methods of reporting direct discourse. This was no denial of any particular or future resurrection. It was a denial of the possibility of such a thing as a resurrection from the dead. It was a matter of opinion, not fact. Their question was perhaps largely tentative. They wanted to know what position this new Teacher took on a point at issue between themselves and the Pharisees. Their purpose was hostile. They address our Lord as Teacher, but the use of the title is purely formal. They did not come to learn. The purpose of the Mosaic legislation here was to prevent a family inheritance from being broken up. Since the seven men have died, and also the woman, the interest of the case had passed over into the future life, if there was such a thing. Their question, namely, “In the resurrection, therefore, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them?” is supposed to present difficulty to believers in the resurrection. The definite article is used here before the word “resurrection,” the idea being, “that resurrection of which so much is heard,” or, “about which we are now at issue.” The question is crude, but it presented serious difficulties to the Sadducees who held materialistic views of the future state. The “if” of the Sadducees is ean (eJan), a Greek particle introducing a hypothetical case. Translation. And there come Sadducees to Him, that class which says there is not a resurrection, and they kept on questioning Him, saying,

Teacher, Moses wrote us, If a brother of a certain man should die, and should leave a wife and should not leave a child, his brother should take the wife and raise up seed for his brother. There were seven brothers. And the first took a wife, and dying, did not leave a seed. And the second took her, and he died, not having left a seed. And the third likewise. And the seven did not leave a seed. Last of all the woman died also. In the resurrection, when they are raised, of which of them shall she be the wife? for the seven had her as wife. (12:24–27) The literal Greek is, “Because of this do you not err, not knowing the scriptures and the power of God?” The Greek negative ou (oJu) when used with a question, expects an affirmative answer. This form of question is stronger than a formal direct statement would be. The words “because of this” point ahead to the cause of their ignorance which was two-fold, both inexcusable in members of the priesthood, which most of these men probably were, ignorance of the Old Testament and ignorance of the power of God. Swete says: “The Sadducees (and the Pharisees also, so far as they connected marriage and the propagation of the race with the future life), showed themselves incapable of conceiving a power which could produce an entirely different order from any within their experience. They assumed either that God could not raise the dead, or that He could raise them only to a life which would be a counterpart of the present, or even more replete with material pleasures.” As to the words “are as the angels,” we note the following: the word “as” is  (wJ"), an adverb of comparision meaning, “in the same manner as, after the fashion of.” It speaks of similarity and equality. This similarity and equality here is of course, limited to the restrictions of the context which speaks of marriage and the propagation of the race. Angels were originally created. There are the same number of angels in existence today as when they were created. They do not propagate their kind. Human beings in the next life will not be angels, but human beings. They will be like angels in this respect, that they will not propagate their kind. Thus, the hypothetical case of the Sadducees has no relation to the future life. Having disposed of the previous matter, our Lord deals with the question of the resurrection. In quoting the words of Moses, and in commenting upon them, our Lord proves that there is life after death. Swete says: “In quoting that passage the Lord argues thus; In this place, God reveals Himself as standing in a real relation to men who were long dead. But the living God cannot be in relation with any who have ceased to exist; therefore the patriarchs were still living in His sight at the time of the Exodus; dead to the visible world, they were alive unto God … This argument establishes the immortality of the soul, but not, at first sight or directly, the resurrection of the body. But the resurrection of the body follows, when it is understood that the body is a true part of human nature. God would not leave men with whom He maintained relations, in an imperfect condition; the living soul must in due time recover its partner; the death of the body could only be a suspension of vital activities which in some form would be resumed.” Translation. And Jesus said to them, Is it not for this cause that you err, namely, that you do not know the scriptures nor even the power of God? For when they arise out from among the dead, neither do they marry nor do they give in marriage, but are as angels in heaven. But concerning the

dead, that they do not arise, did you not read in the book of Moses, at the bush how God spoke to him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not God of the dead but of the living. Greatly do you err. (12:28) Which is the first commandment? The word “which” is poia (poia), “of what sort.” Expositors says: “It is a question, not of an individual commandment, but of characteristic quality. The questioner, as conceived by Mark, probably had in view the distinction between ritual and ethical, or positive and moral. The prevalent tendency was to attach special importance to the positive, and to find the greater matters of the law in circumcision, Sabbath-keeping, the rules respecting phylacteries, etc., (Lightfoot). The opposite tendency, to emphasize the ethical was not unrepresented, especially in the school of Hillel, which taught that the love of neighbor is the kernel of the law. The questioner, as he appears in Mark, leant to this side.” Swete says: “The Lord is not asked to select one commandment out of the Ten, but to specify a class of commandments, or a particular commandment as representative of a class, to which priority belongs.” Translation. And having come, one of the scribes having heard them questioning together, knowing that He had answered them well, asked Him, Of what sort is the first commandment of all? (12:29–31) The quotation in verses 29 and 30 is from Deuteronomy 6:4, 5. It was recited daily by every Jew, and written on the miniature roll which every scribe carried in his phylactery. This was a small case, made of parchment bound to the forehead or arm, in which was placed small pieces of parchment inscribed with scripture portions. Thus, the words were already considered of prime importance by the Jews. The words are found at the very beginning of this fundamental confession of faith and duty, thus testifying by their very position to their importance. The mention of the heart, soul, mind, and strength speaks of “the devotion of the whole being to God” (Swete). The ancient Hebrews regarded the heart as the organ of the intellect, and the mind, that of the desires and affections. The word for “love” is  (ajgapaw) which speaks of that Holy Spirit generated love in the heart of the yielded saint, a divine love, which is due God from His creatures, not  (filew), which speaks merely of a non-ethical fondness. Swete says that these “were the first two commandments because they revealed the ultimate principles of morality which it was the business of the law to enforce, and on which the ripest teaching of the prophets depended. As to the relative importance of the commandments, our Lord is content to say that these fundamental laws of human life are second to none.” The following translation omits words not found in the Nestle text, but which appear in the a.v. The words “out of” are followed by a noun in the ablative case, ablative of source. The idea is, “You shall love out of a source of your whole heart.” Translation. Jesus answered, The first is, Hear, O, Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord, and you shall love the Lord your God out of your whole heart, and out of your whole soul, and out of your whole strength. The second is this, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. Greater than these, another commandment, there is not.

(12:32, 33) “Well” is  (kalw"), an exclamatory particle, used on hearing something which one approves, as one says “good.” Thou hast said the truth. Vincent says: “Incorrect. The phrase is adverbial; of a truth, in truth, truthfully, and qualifies the succeeding verb, thou hast said.” An expression of approval, “right! well!” (Thayer) . There is one God. The word “God” is not in the best texts. The expression in the Greek is “He is One.” Expositors says of the scribe’s words: “There is a ring of conviction in the words. The varied expression of the law of the love to God also bears witness to sincerity and independent thought.” Translation. Right, well, Teacher; truthfully you said, He is One, and there is not another except Him. And to be loving Him out of your whole strength, and to be loving your neighbor as yourself, is much more than all the whole burnt-offerings and sacrifices. (12:34) Swete’s note on this verse is most helpful. “What the Lord observed in reference to the man was the intelligence displayed by his answer. It was shown not only in accepting the Lord’s judgment as to the two primary commandments, but in detecting and admitting the principle on which the judgment rested, namely, the superiority of moral over ritual obligations … Under the old theocracy those far off are either exiled Jews (Isaiah 57:19), or Gentiles (Eph. 2:13); distance from the new Kingdom is measured neither by miles, nor by ceremonial standards, but by spiritual conditions. The man was to some extent intellectually qualified for admission to the Kingdom; certainly he grasped one of its fundamental principles. It would be interesting to work out a comparison between this scribe and the ruler of 10:17. In both cases something was wanting to convert admiration into discipleship. If wealth was the bar in the one case, pride of intellect may have been fatal in the other. The mental acumen which detects and approves spiritual truth may, in the tragedy of human life, keep its possessor from entering the Kingdom of God.” Expositors, commenting on the word “discreetly,”  (nounecw"), says; “intelligently, as one who had a mind of his own, a refreshing thing to meet with at any time, and especially there and then;” and on the words “not far,” “nearby insight into its nature (the ethical supreme), and in spirit—a sincere thinker.” Vincent, on the word translated “discreetly” says, “having his mind in possession, having his wits about him.” Translation. And Jesus, having seen him, that he answered intelligently, said to him, Not far are you from the Kingdom of God. And no one any longer was daring to ask Him a question. (12:35–37) Before considering the implication of our Lord’s words here, we need to define certain terms. The word “Christ” is the transliteration of the Greek word christos (cristo"), which means “the Anointed One,” and this Greek word is the translation of the Hebrew word transliterated into English in the word “Messiah.” The latter word has a definite connotation, namely, the future King of Israel who will some day reign on the throne of David. The word “son” as used here is a Hebraism speaking of a descendant. The word “Lord” is the translation of the Greek word kurios (kurio") which in itself means “master, one who has power over another,” and is the translation in the LXX of the

august title of God in the Hebrew Old Testament, Jehovah. It has implications of deity. Both the scribes and the people believed that the Jewish Messiah would come from the royal line of David. David was human, so would the Messiah be human. Thus, He would be David’s son. Our Lord reminds His hearers that David calls the Messiah his Lord (Ps. 110:1). That is, he recognizes Him as Deity, the Jehovah of the Old Testament. The difficulty our Lord puts before His listeners and at the same time tosses into the lap of the Pharisees, is as to how, since Messiah is Jehovah, deity, He can also be human. At once the incarnation is brought before them. One of the charges brought against the Lord Jesus was that He called God His (His private, unique) Father, making Himself equal with God, thus deity (John 5:18). Thus, the Jewish leaders rejected the teaching of the incarnation, and Jesus’ claim to deity. It is well to notice our Lord’s testimony to the divine inspiration of David, also the recognition by David of the two other Persons of the Trinity, the Father saying to the Son, “Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.” Thus, we have the Trinity mentioned in an Old Testament setting in verse 36. Translation. And answering, Jesus was saying as He was teaching in the temple, How is it that the scribes say that the Messiah is David’s Son? David himself said by the Holy Spirit, The Lord said to my Lord, Be seated on my right hand until I make your enemies the footstool of your feet. David himself calls Him Lord, and how can it be that He is his son? And the great crowd was hearing Him gladly. (12:38–40) Jesus warns the people against the scribes. He recognizes their official character and the duty of the people towards them as authorized teachers, but He denounces their conduct. He says they love certain things. The word is  (filew) “to be fond of, to like.” They are fond of wearing long clothing. The word is  (stolh), and is used in the Old Testament of priestly or royal robes, and in the New Testament, of dress worn on festive or solemn occasions. Our Lord does not condemn the use of a dignified costume, but the use of it for the sake of ostentatious display. The scribes were also fond of salutations in the market places (the public forums) in the cities or towns, and to be called Rabbi. Our Lord did not refuse such titles, but He did not demand nor desire them, as did the scribes. They were fond of the chief seats in the synagogues. These were benches up in front facing the congregation, and were reserved for officials and persons of distinction. The scribes claimed the places of honor also at social gatherings. They were fond of the uppermost places at feasts. The word here is  (prwtoklisia), “the first reclining place.” This is the place of the most honored guest at a feast. The orientals reclined on couches around the table instead of sitting on chairs as we do. These scribes devour widows’ houses. People often left their whole fortunes to the Temple, and a good part of the money went finally to the scribes and Pharisees. The scribes were employed to make out wills and conveyances of property. They inveigled widows to give their homes to the Temple, and then took the proceeds of the sale for themselves. In order to do this, they offered long prayers in the homes of these widows and for them. Thus, they bent the widows to their will. Our Lord calls these prayers, a pretence. They could not be true prayers when offered with such an ulterior purpose. Swete says: “Men who rob widows, and use prayer as a means of securing opportunities for committing a crime, shall receive a sentence in excess of that which falls to the lot of the dishonest man who makes no pretence to piety; to the sentence of the robber will be

added in their case the sentence on the hypocrite.” Translation. And in His teaching He was saying: Be constantly bewaring of the scribes who are fond of parading about in long robes, and are fond of salutations in the market places, and the seats of honor in the synagogues, and the chief couches at the feasts, those who devour the houses of widows and for a pretence offer long prayers; these will receive greater condemnation. (12:41) Our Lord’s teaching in the Court of the Gentiles had ceased, and He had passed within the low marble wall which fenced off the inner precinct of the Temple from the Gentiles. He was now in the Court of the Women. Here were thirteen chests placed at intervals around the walls, each marked with the purpose to which the offerings were to be devoted. This colonnade under which these chests were placed, was called The Treasury. Here our Lord sat down and looked with a discerning eye ( (qerwrew)) how the crowds threw in their money. Expositors says: “This charming story comes in with dramatic effect, after the repulsive picture of the greedy praying scribe. The reference to the widows victimized by the hypocrites may have suggested it to the evangelist’s mind.… One can imagine what comfort it would bring to the poor, who constituted the bulk of the early Gentile Church.” Translation. And having sat down opposite the treasury, He was viewing with a discerning eye how the crowd throws money into the treasury. And many wealthy ones threw in much. (12:42) The word “poor” is ptochos (ptoco"), the word used to designate the pauper rather than the mere peasant. The two mites were each the smallest copper coin in circulation, the eightieth part of a denarius. The widow threw in a total of one-fourth of a cent. Swete says: “The point of the present story lies in the circumstance that the widow’s last quadrans (quadran") was in two coins, and that she parted with both. A Rabbinic rule seems to have prohibited the offering of a single lepton (lepton).” Expositors says: “smallest of brass coins, significant of deep poverty; two given, of a willing mind.” The emphatic position of the word “poor” in the Greek text, speaks of the fact that she was poverty-stricken, shown by her dress and wasted look. Translation. And there came one, a widow, poverty-stricken. She threw in two mites, which are a farthing. (12:43, 44) The widow cast in more than all the wealthy in the sense that relatively to their respective means, her gift was incomparably the greater. All of which means that it is not how much we give to God, but how much we withhold for ourselves, that He is concerned about. The lesson is also brought home to our hearts that in the last analysis, God wants, not what we have, but us, our hearts. Translation. And having called His disciples to Him He said to them, Truly, I am saying to you, This widow, and she, poverty-stricken, threw in more than all those who threw into the treasury, for they all threw in out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty threw in all, as much as she had, the whole of her life’s necessities.

CHAPTER THIRTEEN (13:1) Our Lord had just left the Temple to judgment, and had pronounced the solemn words “Your house is left to you desolate” (Matt. 23:35). Swete says: “The disciples inwardly deprecated such a sentence upon so majestic a pile; they began talking of its magnificence, and one of them, the spokesman of the rest, bade Him turn and look at the glory of the buildings.” It was the temple which Herod had built for the Jews. The word “buildings” refers to the mass of separate edifices, enclosures, colonnades, halls, sanctuaries, composing the Temple enclosure. Some of the stones were massive, weighing over one hundred tons. Translation. And while He was proceeding out of the Temple, one of His disciples says, Teacher, see, what manner of stones and what manner of buildings. (13:2) “Do you see these great buildings?” Our Lord by this question fixes their attention upon an object concerning which a startling statement is to be made. He also acknowledges the fact of the greatness and magnificence of the Temple. But He also contrasts all that with its utter destruction. The words “thrown down” are the translation of  (kataluw) which means literally “to loose down.” It speaks of a gradual demolition of the Temple, such as took place when the Romans captured Jerusalem a.d. 70, and destroyed the Temple. Our Lord’s prediction was fulfilled in exact detail. Only the foundation stones remain of all that magnificence. A double negative appears twice in our Lord’s answer, making an emphatic negation. Translation. And Jesus said to him, Do you see these great buildings? There shall positively not be left a stone upon a stone which is not torn down. (13:3, 4) Swete remarks that “the very posture in which the Lord delivered His great prophecy was remembered, and found a place in the earliest tradition. He had crossed the Kedron, ascended the steep road over the Mount of Olives which led to Bethany, and was already resting and seated, when He was approached, not now by a solitary disciple (v. 1), but by four … The seated posture reminds us of the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:1); both the opening instruction and the concluding prophecy were delivered ex cathedra; a hill-side in each case supplied the Teacher’s chair. The first discourse had set forth the principles of the new Kingdom; the last deals with its ultimate issues.” The word “sign” is  (shmeion) “a sign, mark, token.” It refers to that by which a person or thing is distinguished from others and known. Translation. And being seated on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, there were asking Him privately Peter and James and John and Andrew; Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the token when these things, all of them, are about to be consummated?

(13:5, 6) The word “deceive” is  (planaw) “to lead astray.” Our Lord warns the disciples, not only against the deceptions of those who claim to be the Messiah, but against following them and thus being led astray. The phrase “in my name” is literally, “upon the basis of my name,” thus, “basing their claims on the use of my name.” The name “Christ,” namely, “Messiah,” was a title with which to conjure, for Israel was looking for its Messiah. Swete says: “Such impostors came upon the basis of the name, holding out a false Messianic hope, claiming powers which belonged to the true Christ, even if they did not assume the title.” The word “name” is used here to designate all that the Messiah is in His Person and His work. These impostors claimed to possess all that. The word “Christ” does not appear in the Greek text, only, “I, in contradistinction to all others, am he,” namely, the Messiah. The personal pronoun is used, giving emphasis and showing contrast. Translation. And Jesus began to be saying to them, Keep ever watching lest someone lead you astray. Many will come in the strength of my name, saying, I, in contradistinction to others, am he, and will lead many astray. (13:7, 8) Our Lord exhorts the disciples not to permit political troubles and national upheavals to distract them from their work of evangelization. There are two kingdoms on this earth moving along side by side, the world system of evil headed up by Satan and in which the nations are constantly at sword’s points, and the kingdom of God. No matter what happens in the former kingdom, the people of God must carry on toward the Godordained and predicted consummation. The word “troubled” is  (qroew) “to be disturbed, disquieted, terrified.” The present imperative in a prohibition is used here, forbidding the continuance of an action already going on. The disciples were already troubled about the political unrest in Palestine. Our Lord says, “Stop being troubled.” He says: “It is necessary in the nature of the case (dei (dei)) for such things to be”. The total depravity of the human race is the root of all war, and that is the nature of the case that makes war inevitable. As to the political unrest of that time, Vincent notes that there were threats of war against the Jews by three Roman emperors, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero. There were serious disturbances at Alexandria a.d. 38, in which the Jews were the special objects of persecution, and at Seleucia, in which more than fifty thousand Jews were killed, and at Jamnia near Joppa. Vincent also states that between this prophecy of Jesus (a.d. 30 or 29) and the destruction of Jerusalem a.d. 70, there was an earthquake in Crete (a.d. 46 or 47), at Rome (a.d. 51), at Apamia in Phrygia (a.d. 60), at Campania (a.d. 63). He also notes four famines during the reign of Claudius. One of these was in Judaea in a.d. 44 and is spoken of in Acts 11:28. The word “sorrows” is  (wjdin) “the pain of childbirth,” in the plural “pangs, throes,” thus, “intolerable anguish.” Translation. And when you hear of wars and reports of wars, stop being terrified. It is necessary in the nature of the case. But not yet is the end. For there will rise up nation against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be earthquakes in various places; there will be famines. A beginning of intolerable anguish are these. (13:9) Take heed to yourselves. The pronoun is added here for emphasis. It is, “But, as for you, do not think only of what is coming on the Jewish nation and on the world, but

also on yourselves.” The word “councils” is sunedria (sunedria), “sitting together.” These local councils of the Jews were modelled after the one at Jerusalem. They were the local courts of discipline. The sentences were carried out in the synagogues. But the Jewish believers will not only be brought before Jewish authorities, but Gentile ones as well (rulers and kings). The words “for a testimony against them,” Swete says, refer to the appearance of Christians before magistrates on a charge of loyalty to the Name of Christ, and that this in itself would be a proclamation of the Name to those who might otherwise from their social position have failed to hear the gospel. Paul faced Nero or at least his representative in the court at Rome, and proclaimed the gospel to the assembled audience. But the language goes beyond this, to the Jewish remnant in the Great Tribulation. The setting is Jewish. The expression should read, “for a testimony to them” (simple dative), not “a testimony against them.” Translation. But as for you, be constantly paying heed to yourselves. They will deliver you up to councils and in synagogues you will be beaten, and before rulers and kings you will be placed for my sake, as a testimony to them. (13:10) The gospel spoken of here is the Gospel of the Kingdom, not the Gospel of Grace. This is Jewish ground. Verse 14 introduces us to the Great Tribulation period and Antichrist. The Jewish remnant will preach this gospel in that period. The Jewish nation, restored at the second Advent, will preach it for the period of the Millennial Empire. While the conditions our Lord describes here, obtained in the first century, they will be intensified towards the close of the Age of Grace, as the Great Tribulation approaches, and will find their greatest intensity during that period. Translation. And to all the nations first is it necessary in the nature of the case for the gospel to be proclaimed. (13:11) Our Lord now deals with the fear which inexperienced provincials would have when expecting an appearance before a Roman Proconsul or Imperator. He promises them the assistance of the Holy Spirit. The speaking here is not the preaching of the gospel, but the defence which these disciples were to offer before a judge. Robertson says that there is no excuse here for the lazy preacher who makes no preparation for the preaching of his sermon, out of a mistaken reliance upon the Holy Spirit. Vincent offers the translation “when they may be leading you,” the thought being that while they are going along in custody to the judgment-seat, they are not to worry about their defence. The words “neither do ye premeditate,” are not in the Nestle test. Translation. And whenever they may be leading you, delivering you up, do not continue to be anxious as to what you will say, but whatever will be given you in that hour, this be speaking. For as for you, you are not the ones who are speaking, but the Holy Spirit. (13:12, 13) Treachery from friends and relatives is now predicted by our Lord in the Jewish community. While this may have had some partial fulfillment among the firstcentury Jewish Christians, yet it awaits a more intensified fulfillment in the Great

Tribulation period when the Church will be in the Glory and the Jews will be forced to choose between the coming Jesus Christ and the then present Antichrist. The words “ye shall be hated of all men” are distinctively Jewish. Only the Jewish nation ever has been or ever will be the global object of hatred. The words, “He that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved,” are explained by the context here, as well as that in Matthew (24). In the latter chapter, verses 4–12 speak of conditions in this Age of Grace which will be intensified as the time of the Great Tribulation period approaches, verses 13–26, present conditions as they will be in that period, and verses 27–31 speak of the second Advent of the Jewish Messiah. That which is to be endured are the sufferings of the Tribulation period. The end refers to the close of that period. Salvation here is not spiritual, for no one is ever saved by enduring anything, but is physical, physical protection and well-being for those who have endured the sufferings of that terrible period, these are saved to enter the Millennium. Translation. And a brother will deliver a brother to death, and a father, a child, and children will rise up against parents, and will cause them to be put to death. And you will be those who are being hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end, this one will be saved. (13:14–16) Our Lord’s words now definitely reach forward to the Great Tribulation and to Antichrist, the Abomination of Desolation, who will violate the Holy of Holies of the Temple in Jerusalem, (Matt. 24:15 standing in the holy place), also Paul (II Thess. 2:3, 4). When that occurs, let Israel take that as the signal to flee. Antichrist will make a treaty of friendship and religious toleration with the Jewish nation for a period of seven years (Daniel 9:27, confirm covenant … for one week). After 3 1/2 years, he will violate that covenant by stopping the Temple worship and will enter the Holy of Holies. He will then show himself to be, not the reputed friend and protector of Israel, but its bitter enemy. Translation. But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not, the one who reads, let him understand; then those who are in Judaea, let them flee into the mountains, the one who is on the housetop, let him not go down, neither let him enter to take anything out of his house, and the one in the field, let him not turn back to take his garment. (13:17, 18) The “woe” here refers only to the impossibility of hasty flight on the part of mothers who have young children. The word is ouai (oJuai), an interjection of grief. The severity of winter weather would tend to lessen the chance of escape from Antichrist. Translation. But woe to those who are with child, and to those who give suck in those days. And pray that it may not be winter. (13:19, 20) In those days shall be affliction. Not correct. The words “those days” are in the nominative case in the Greek text, and are therefore the subject of the verb. The correct rendering is “Those days will be a tribulation.” We use the expression “evil days.” These will be tribulation days. The judgments of God which will fall upon unbelieving Israel and the Gentile nations will have no precedent in all past history, and no counterpart

in all succeeding history. God, in mercy will shorten the period of the Great Tribulation so that Israel, the nation, might not cease to exist. In Revelation 7:4–8, we have 144,000 of Israel, the preaching remnant in the Great Tribulation period. These announce the coming of the Messiah, and lose their lives during that period by reason of the persecution of Antichrist. In Revelation 14 we see them in the Glory. The period of divine judgments will be shortened in order that the lives of God’s chosen-out ones, namely, Israel, might be spared. The word “elect” in the Greek text means “chosen out.” The verb  (ejklegw) means “to choose out from a number,” and refers to the act of God, who in sovereign grace, chooses certain from among mankind for Himself. Translation. For those days will be tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the creation which God created until this particular time, and will positively not be. And unless the Lord had shortened the days, no flesh would be saved. But for the sake of those chosen out ones whom He chose out for Himself, He has shortened the days. (13:21–23) We must remember that the word “Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek word christos (cristo") which means “the anointed one.” This Greek word is the translation of the Hebrew word meaning “the anointed one.” Our word “Messiah” is the English spelling of the Hebrew word. But it has a definite connotation. It refers to the promised and coming King of Israel who comes in the dynasty of David to rule over Israel in the Messianic Kingdom. Thus, our Lord was speaking of false Messiahs. This false Christ does not deny the being of a Christ. He builds on the world’s expectation of such a person. He appropriates to himself the title and identity, and affirms that he is the foretold one. These false Messiahs and prophets, will show signs and wonders in an attempt to prove their claims to be true. “Signs” is  (shmeion) “a miracle whose purpose is that of attesting the claims of the one performing the miracle to be true.” “Wonders” is teras (tera") “a miracle whose purpose it is to awaken amazement in the beholder.” It is the same miracle regarded from different standpoints. Our Lord warns Israel against accepting the claims of one who performs miracles solely upon the basis of the fact that he performs miracles. The character of the person and his message must also be taken into consideration. The words “if it were possible” are ei dunaton (eij dunaton) which Swete translates “if possible.” He says that the phrase leaves the possibility undetermined. Translation. And then, if anyone says to you, Behold, here is the Messiah; behold, there; stop believing. Moreover, there shall arise false Messiahs and false prophets, and they will perform attesting miracles and miracles that arouse amazement, in order to be leading astray, if possible, the chosen-out ones. But, as for you, be constantly taking heed. I have told you beforehand all things. (13:24–27) The functional disturbances in the sun, moon, and stars occur at the close of the great Tribulation period, and are literal. These are spoken of in the sixth seal judgment (Rev. 6:12–14). There is no definite article before the word “clouds.” The Son of man will come in clouds, clouds of glorified saints and angels. The Revelation speaks of this in 19:11–16. The word  (nefelh) (clouds) is used of a multitude of

individuals in I Thessalonians 4:17, where the saints will be caught up in clouds (no article) at the Rapture, and in Hebrews 12:1, where the writer visualizes the crowds that pack the Greek stadium. The word was used in classical Greek of an army of soldiers. The second advent of Messiah is spoken of here. He comes at the close of the Great Tribulation to defeat Antichrist and set up the Millennial Kingdom. The gathering of the elect refers here to the regathering of all of Israel at the second advent of Messiah. Israel will be saved in sovereign grace, and restored to fellowship with and service to God for the Millennial Kingdom. Translation. But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling out of the heaven, and the powers which are in the heavens will be shaken. And then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with much power and glory. And then He will send off the angels and will gather together His chosen-out ones from the four winds, and from the outermost border of the earth to the outermost border of heaven. (13:28–33) This section forms a unit, and will therefore be treated as such. The chief problem which presents itself is the meaning of the word “generation” genea (genea) in this context. This word is used in Matthew 11:16, 12:41, 23:36; Mark 8:12, and Luke 17:25, and in all of these places there can be no reasonable doubt but that the word refers to the generation of men living at the time of our Lord. But the context in which the word is used here, speaks of the Great Tribulation period, the Antichrist, the second Advent, the regathering of Israel. Certainly, the generation of men alive when our Lord was on earth, has died, and could therefore not remain until this future time. The context must rule here, as to the particular meaning of the word in this instance. The word was used in the papyri manuscripts in the sense of “race, lineage.” It denoted a family, without individual reference. It was used in a will to speak of a person’s issue, his descendants. The word was also used for a generation, for instance, “the fourth generation.” This koine (koine) usage is reported in A Vocabulary of the Greek Testament by Moulton and Milligan. The context is decisive for the meaning, “race,” here, the Jewish race. This generation shall not pass. The verb is parerchomai (parercomai), “to go past, pass by.” The meaning is not that the Jewish nation will not become extinct until after these things predicted by our Lord will have taken place. There is no question as to the extinction of the Jewish nation here. The Bible shows clearly that the Jewish nation is indestructible. All of God’s purposes in salvation are channeled through that nation. What is said here is that the Jewish nation will not pass out of this earthly sphere to heaven before these things have come to pass. That is, the Jewish nation will remain on earth as a nation through the time of the fulfillment of these events. In verse 32, the Lord Jesus, speaking in the capacity of the Son of Man under the selfimposed limitations of the incarnation, says that even He Himself did not at that time know the hour of the second Advent, and of the time of the fulfillment of these other things grouped around that event. Our Lord’s discourse here, looks through the needs of that generation in which He lived, to the future generation in Israel alive when He comes back to set up His kingdom. The words “it is nigh” of verse 29 in a.v., refer back to the word “summer.” That does not make sense. A wider context refers them back to the word “Son,” which is the true meaning. He is nigh.

Translation. Now, from the fig tree be learning the parable. When already its branch becomes tender and is putting out leaves, you know from experience that the summer is near. Thus also, as for you, when you see these things coming into being, you know, near He is, at the doors. Truly I am saying to you, This race will positively not pass away until these things, all of them, take place. The heaven and the earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. But concerning that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor even the Son, only the Father. Be constantly taking heed. Be constantly on the watch. For you do not know when it is the particular season. (13:34–37) A man taking a far journey. Vincent says “The a.v., is incorrect, since the idea is not that of a man about to go, as Matthew 25:14; but of one already gone. So Wycliffe, gone far in pilgrimage; Tyndale, which is gone into a strange country. The two words form one notion—a man gone abroad. Rev., sojourning in another country.” The man abroad is the Son of Man who leaves this earth to go back to the Father, leaving His servants, the douloi (douloi) (bondslaves) namely, disciples in general, and the porter, the  (qurwro") (the doorkeeper), namely, the Apostolate, to whom belongs the responsibility of guarding the house and of being ready to open the door to the Master at His return. The latter could stand today for the full-time active Christian worker, such as a pastor, Bible teacher, evangelist, missionary. These are exhorted to watch. The word here is  (grhgorew), a different word from the one translated “watch” in verse 33,  (ajgreuw). The former speaks of a sleeping man arousing himself, while the latter merely conveys the idea of wakefulness. The latter adds to the idea of wakefulness, the notion of alertness. Vincent’s note is helpful: “The apostles are thus compared with the doorkeepers, verse 34; and the night season is in keeping with the figure. In the temple, during the night, the captain of the temple made his rounds, and the guards had to rise at his approach and salute him in a particular manner. Any guard found asleep on duty was beaten, or his garments set on fire. Compare Revelation 16:15, ‘Blessed is he that watcheth and keepeth his garments.’ The preparations for the morning service required all to be early astir. The superintending priest might knock at the door at any moment. The Rabbis use almost the very words in which scripture describes the unexpected coming of the Master. Sometimes he comes at the cockcrowing, sometimes a little earlier, sometimes a little later. He came and knocked and they opened to him (Edersheim, ‘The Temple’).” The words “when the time is” of verse 33 are defined in their context as the time of the return of the Master, namely, the second Advent of the Messiah to Israel. Translation. It is as a man gone off to another country, having left his home, and having given to his bondslaves the authority, to each his work; and to the doorkeeper he gave orders to be constantly alert and watching. Therefore, be constantly alert and on the watch, for you do not know when the master of the house comes, whether at evening time, or at midnight, or at cockcrowing, or in the morning, lest having come unexpectedly, he find you slumbering. And that which I am saying to you, I am saying to all, be constantly watchful and alert.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN (14:1, 2) Mark says, “Now, it was the Passover and the unleavened loaves.” It was one feast. The word “Passover” is the translation of pascha (pasca) which means “a passing over.” The paschal lamb was the lamb for sacrifice which the Israelites were bidden to kill, the blood of which they were to sprinkle on the door-posts of their dwellings in Egypt so that the destroying-angel might pass over their homes without entering and taking the life of the first-born. The paschal lamb therefore was the slain lamb, the death of which was accepted in lieu of the life of the first-born child. Our Lord is the Paschal Lamb in the sense that His death was accepted by the High Court of Heaven as a payment for our sin. As the symbolic Passover was about to be celebrated in Israel, the actual Passover Lamb was entering Jerusalem to fulfill the type by dying on the Cross. Representatives of each order of the Sanhedrin were gathered together in council convened, chief priests, scribes, elders, to discuss ways and means of putting Jesus to death. They were assembled in the house of Caiaphas, who had for some time been advocating the policy of sacrificing Jesus to the Roman power (John 11:49). There was no division of opinion now as to principle or as to the means to be employed. The point under consideration was the strategic, opportune, safe time to give Jesus over to the Roman authorities. He was too popular with the people, for the Jewish leaders to hand Him over to Rome on the feast of the Passover, they reasoned. Translation. Now, it was the Passover and the unleavened loaves after two days. And the chief priests and the scribes were seeking as to how, having seized Him by craftiness, they might put Him to death. For they were saying, Not at the feast, lest now there will be an uproar of the people. (14:3) The ointment is described by Mark in three words, nardos (nardo") referring to a perfume which came from India, well known to the Greeks and Romans, and procured from the hills on the banks of the Ganges River, pistikos (pistiko"), speaking of the fact that it was genuine, not imitation or adulterated, and  (polutelh"), telling us that it was very costly. The woman broke the neck of the flask so that she could quickly pour the contents, and as Expositors says, “perhaps that the vessel used for so sacred a purpose might never be so employed again.” Translation. And while He was in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as He was reclining at table, there came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment, nard, pure, very costly. Having broken the alabaster box, she poured it upon His head. (14:4, 5) There were some that had indignation within themselves. John reports that Judas raised the objection. Mark says that the other apostles “had indignation among themselves,” exchanging remarks or looks which told of their sympathy with Judas. Swete says that the apostles, as men unaccustomed to luxury, might have naturally resented the apparent waste. He suggests that the Passover season was perhaps a time when alms were

given the poor (John 13:29). How many of Jerusalem’s poor might have been helped and gladdened by the money here wasted. A laborer’s daily wage was a denarius, and here was a sum of 300 denarii poured out in useless extravagance. Such must have been their thoughts. They murmured against the woman. The word is embrimaomai (ejmbrimaomai) “to be very angry, sternly to charge.” The verb in the imperfect tense, as it is here, is used in another connection, of the snorting of horses. Translation. Now, there were certain there who were moved with indignation among themselves, To what purpose has been this waste of the ointment? For it was possible to have sold the ointment for three hundred denarii and given to the poor. And they bristled with indignation against her. (14:6–9) She hath wrought a good work on me. The word “good” here is not agathos (ajgaqo") which speaks of intrinsic goodness, but kalos (kalo"), a goodness seen on the outside as it strikes the eye, a beautiful, pleasing goodness. It was a work that as Swete says, possessed true moral beauty. He remarks; “There was no intention on the Lord’s part to contrast services rendered to Himself in person with services rendered to the poor for His sake—the two are in His sight equivalents (Matt. 25:40, 45); His purpose is to point out that the former would very soon be impossible, whilst opportunity for the latter would abound to the end of time.” Robertson suggests that Mary could not comprehend our Lord’s death, but she showed sympathy for Him, a thing which the others did not do. Swete tells us that fragrant unguents were used for anointing the dead body after it had been washed, but says this is to be distinguished from the process of embalming, which consisted of laying myrrh and aloes in the folds of the grave clothes. Mark relates that the women came to anoint the body of Jesus, but the resurrection prevented the fulfillment of their purpose. So the only anointing which the Lord received was the anticipatory one by Mary. Translation. And Jesus said, Let her alone. Why are you causing her trouble? A beautiful service she rendered Me. For the poor you always have with you, and whenever you desire, you are able to do them good; but Me you are not always having. That which she had, she used. She took occasion beforehand to anoint my body for the burial. And truly I am saying to you, wherever the gospel may be proclaimed in the whole world, also that which she herself did, will be spoken as a memorial of her. (14:10, 11) The definite article appears before the word “one;” Judas, “the one of the Twelve” who betrayed the Lord. He went to the chief priests, realizing that they were the individuals chiefly concerned. The word “betray” is paradidomai (paradidomai) “to hand over or alongside,” our “sell him down the river.” They were glad. The verb is  (cairw) not  (ajgalliaw). The first word is more expressive of the inward feeling of joy, the second, of its audible or visible expression. Swete remarks that the proposal of Judas was received by the chief priests with more delight than they cared to show. The burden of finding a way to do away with Jesus so that the Passover crowds would not see, now was definitely on the shoulders of Judas. His position in the inner circle of disciples, gave him an advantage which the chief priests did not have.

Translation. And Judas Iscariot, the one of the twelve, went off to the chief priests for the purpose of betraying Him to them. And they, having heard, rejoiced inwardly, and promised to give him money. And he went to seeking how he might betray Him when the opportunity presented itself. (14:12) The paschal lamb was slain at 6 p. m., the beginning of the fifteenth of the month. Preparations for this were made on the fourteenth. When they killed the passover. The customary imperfect is used, “when they were accustomed to kill the to pascha (to pasca),” literally “the passing over,” thus, that which enabled God to withhold the judgment of death, thus passing over the homes of the Israelites in Egypt where the blood was sprinkled, thus, finally, the passover. Here the paschal lamb for sacrifice is called to pascha (to pasca), the passover. Translation. And on the first day of the unleavened loaves, when it was the custom to kill the passover, His disciples say to Him, Where do you desire that we go and prepare to eat the passover? (14:13–15) Peter and John were the two commissioned to procure the room where our Lord and His disciples were to eat the Passover. The carrying of water was usually a woman’s work. Hence, a man would be more noticeable carrying a jar of water. The man was probably a slave. The goodman of the house was the  (oijkodespoth"), “the master of the house, the householder.” The Master says, Where is the guest-chamber? The word “guest-chamber” is modified by the pronoun of the first person in the genitive case, “my guest-chamber.” There seems to have been a previous understanding between our Lord and this man who must have been a follower of His. He will show you a large upper room furnished and prepared. The intensive pronoun is used. He himself will show you. That is, the master of the house will not let this detail to a slave, but will himself personally conduct Peter and John to the room. It was a large room, of sufficient size to accommodate twelve men and the Son of God. It was a room above the ground level, so that our Lord could observe His last Passover with His disciples in private. It was furnished. The perfect participle is used here. The room had already been furnished and was in a state of readiness. It was furnished with carpets and hall couches around the table properly spread. The room was prepared for the eating of the Passover, speaking of the removal of all leaven, also, possibly of the master of the house sharing his passover lamb with our Lord and His disciples, as the custom was in Israel in the case of small families. Translation. And He sent off two of His disciples, and says to them, Go into the city and there will meet you a man carrying an earthenware pitcher of water. Follow him, and wherever he enters, say to the master of the house, The Teacher says, Where is my guest-chamber where I may eat the passover with my disciples? And he himself will show you an upper room, large, in a state of readiness, prepared. And there make ready for us.

(14:16) Swete remarks: “The minute explicitness of one who had part in the transaction shows itself here.… the particulars were as the Master foretold—the servant with the pitcher, the master of the house ready to oblige, the large divan-spread upper room. For the second time in that week the Lord had shown a superhuman knowledge of circumstances as yet unrealized.” Commenting on the words, “They made ready the passover,” he says: “Supposing the lamb to have been already slain, and returned to the house, there still remained much to be done; the roasting of the lamb, the provision of the unleavened cakes, the bitter herbs, the four cups of wine, and preparation of the room and the lamps; and in the preparation of the food there were many ritual niceties to be observed.” For instance, there was the making of a paste to resemble the mortar which was used in the laying of bricks in Egypt. The present day Jews make this paste by grinding apples, nuts, raisins, and mixing this with wine. Translation. And the disciples went out and came into the city, and found even as He told them. And they prepared the passover. (14:17–21) In the evening He cometh with the twelve. Swete says that motives of prudence would probably have prevented the Lord from making His way through the city before sunset. The announcement, “One of you which eateth with Me, shall betray Me,” narrows our Lord’s prediction of His death down to the point where the traitor is said to be one of the disciples. The words “eateth with Me” are not intended to be merely indicative of the person who would betray Him, but point to one aspect of the enormity of the offense. That person was a table-companion, one supposed to be a friend and associate. The question “Is it I?” includes the Greek negative which expects a negative answer to the question. Each one, including Judas said, “It is not I, is it?” It is one of the twelve, that dippeth with Me in the dish. The reference is probably to a sauce made of dates, raisins, and vinegar, into which the master of the house dipped pieces of the unleavened cake with bitter herbs between them. These were distributed to the company. The sign, indicating who the traitor was, consisted of our Lord’s dipping the unleavened cake into the sauce and handing it to Judas (John 13:26). The “woe” of verse 21 is not a vindictive one, or of the nature of a curse, but as Swete says: “reveals a misery which Love itself could not prevent.” Translation. And evening having come, He comes with the twelve. And while they were reclining and eating, Jesus said, Truly, I am saying to you, One of you will betray Me, the one eating with Me. They began to be grieved and to be saying to Him, one by one, It is not I, is it? And He said to them, One of the twelve, the one who dips with Me into the deep dish. The Son of Man indeed goes even as it stands written concerning Him. But woe to that man through whose agency the Son of Man is betrayed. Good were it for him, if that man had not been born. (14:22) While the Lord and His disciples were observing the Passover feast, He instituted what we know as the Lord’s Supper. Swete, commenting on the words, “as they did eat” says “Another stage in the Paschal meal has been reached. The eating of the lamb seems to have been by custom reserved to the end … The food up to this point consisted only of the unleavened cakes and bitter herbs”… The Lord took one of the cakes (for

artos (ajrto") a bread-cake, compare 8:14) which were placed before Him, as president, and gave thanks; … accompanied or immediately followed the benediction and then distribution.” Take eat: this is my body. Swete’s note on this is helpful: “The words would have recalled those spoken at the supper at Bethany six days before (14:8), and perhaps also the teaching at Capernaum just before the previous Passover (John 6:48). The bread which is now given is identified with the Body of His Flesh (Col. 1:22); to eat it is to partake in the Great Sacrifice.” Of course, we must understand these words like others of the same nature which Jesus uttered. He said, “I am the door of the sheep” (John 10:7). He did not mean that He was the literal, actual door or gate of the sheep fold, but that He as Saviour constituted the way whereby a sinner could enter into salvation. Just as the actual sheep gate pictured, illustrated, symbolized our Lord in His position and work as Saviour, so the bread symbolized Him as the spiritual nourishment upon which a sinner may feed and have eternal life. The word “eat” is rejected by Nestle. “Take” implies “eat.” Translation. And while they were eating, having taken bread, having offered a blessing, He broke and gave to them and said, Take. This is my body. (14:23–25) He took the cup. Paul identifies the cup with that which followed the meal. “The Talmud prescribed four cups at the Paschal feast. The third was known as the cup of blessing, and it has been usual to regard this as the Cup of the Eucharist” (Swete). The First Testament (Heb. 8:7) refers to the system of symbolic sacrifices known as the Levitical economy. The New Testament (Heb. 8:8) speaks of the sacrifice of our Lord on the Cross, the fulfillment of the First Testament. The words “is shed” are present tense, curative action, “which is being shed,” our Lord looking upon His sacrifice on the Cross as imminent and regarded as already present. The prediction of verse 25 will have its fulfillment in the Millennial Kingdom when the Messiah and His cleansed, restored Israel will drink in a new and glorious way the fruit of the Mystical Vine (John 15:1) in the world-wide kingdom where He will reign as a king upon the throne of His father David. Nestle rejects the word “new” as describing “testament,” in Matthew 26:28 and in this passage, as do Westcott and Hort. However, Hebrews uses “first” and “new” in connection with the testaments. The particular word for “new” in verse 25 is not neos (neo") “new” as to time, but kainos (kaino") “new” as to quality. The wine of the future Millennial Kingdom will be new in quality, spiritual not material. Translation. And having taken a cup, having given thanks, He gave to them, and all drank of it. And He said to them, This is my blood of the testament which is being poured out in behalf of many. Truly, I am saying to you, I will positively not drink of the product of the vine until that day when I drink it new in quality in the kingdom of God. (14:26) The singing of Psalms followed the meal. The verb “to sing” is  (uJmnew) from which we get our word “hymn;” it means “to sing the praise of, sing hymns to,” and intransitively, “to sing a hymn, to sing.” Swete says of their going to the Mount of Olives; “The nightly departure for the Mount of Olives; The nightly departure for the Mount had become habitual, and the Eleven felt no surprise when they were summoned to

leave the guest chamber: no provision had been made for spending the night in Jerusalem.” Translation. And having sung a hymn, they went out into the Mount of Olives. (14:27, 28) Our Lord predicts that all the disciples without exception will be offended because of Him, and He confirms His prophecy by an o.t., prediction. The word “offended” is  (skandalizw) “to find occasion of stumbling” in another, “to see in another what I disapprove of and what hinders me from acknowledging his authority.” The disciples deserted their Lord and fled. This was their act of stumbling. The occasion for their stumbling was in the fact that our Lord’s arrest and treatment by Rome might involve them in the same kind of treatment. They were out to save their own skins. This announcement of the desertion by the disciples was not made as a reproach, but as a preface of better things, namely, an early reunion. The adversative particle alla (ajlla) (but) is used, contrasting the gloom of the immediate future with the hope of the resurrection. The words “because of me this night,” are not in the Nestle text. Translation. And Jesus says to them, All of you will be caused to stumble, because it stands written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered. But, after I have been raised, I will go before you into Galilee. (14:29) The word “although” is ei (eij), the particle of a fulfilled condition. Expositors interprets Peter’s words, “even if (as is likely) all the rest shall be offended (the future, because the case put is conceived to be probable), yet certainly (alla (ajlla) but, strongly opposing what follows to what goes before) not I.” Translation. But Peter said, Even if all will be caused to stumble, certainly not I. (14:30) Swete says: “Peter’s boast is turned into a prophecy of a greater downfall.” Expositors has this note: “To this overconfident ‘certainly not I’ of the disciple, the Master returns a very pointed and peremptory reply: I tell thee that thou (su (su) emphatic) today ( (shmeron)), on this night (more precise indication of time), shall deny Me, not once, but again, and again, and again.” Translation. And Jesus says to him, Truly, I am saying to you, that, as for you, today, on this night, before a cock crows twice, three times you will deny Me. (14:31) He spake more vehemently. The verb is imperfect, “He kept on speaking.” The word “vehemently” is  (ejkperissw"), “abundantly in matter and manner, with vehemence and iteration.” Translation. And he kept on saying with more vehemence and iteration, If it should be necessary for me to die with you, I will positively not deny you. Moreover, in like manner also all kept on saying.

(14:32–34) Began to be sore amazed and to be very heavy. Swete says: “The Lord was overwhelmed with sorrow, but His first feeling was one of terrified surprise. Long as He had foreseen the Passion, when it came clearly into view, its terrors exceeded His anticipations. His human soul received new experience—He learned upon the basis of the things He suffered (Heb. 5:8), and the last lesson of obedience began with a sensation of inconceivable awe. With this there came another, that of overpowering mental distress (He began to be distressed).” It is as Swete says, “the distress which follows a great shock, ‘the confused, restless, half-distracted state’ (Lightfoot) which may be worse than the sharp pain of a fully realized sorrow.” The three disciples are placed so that they can be witnesses of the agony. “Sore amazed” is  (ejkqambew) “to throw into amazement or terror, to alarm thoroughly, to terrify, to be struck with terror.” “To be heavy” is  (ajdhmoneo), from a word  (ajdhmon), which means “uncomfortable,” as one not at home. It speaks of an experience of which one is not familiar, in which one does not feel at home, that is, at rest, and which distresses him. “Exceedingly sorrowful” is perilupos (perilupo"), lupos (lupo") meaning “grief,” and peri (peri), “around,” thus, “encompassed with grief,” thus, “very sad.” Grief enveloped Him, surrounded, saturated His consciousness. “Unto death” is  (eJw" qanatou), the adverb meaning here, “even to”; Thayer says, “so that I almost die.” Translation. And they come into a place called Gethsemane: and He says to His disciples, Sit here while I shall pray. And He takes with Him, Peter, and James, and John. And He began to be thoroughly alarmed and distressed. And He says to them, My soul is encompassed with grief even to the point of death. Abide here and be watching. (14:35) Fell on the ground. The verb is imperfect, speaking of two things, the fact that the disciples saw Him falling upon (epi (ejpi)) the ground, and also, of the fact that He did it repeatedly, showing the desperateness of the struggle in which our Lord was engaged at the time. “Prayed” is also imperfect, “kept on praying.” It was continuous prayer. The “hour” referred to His Cross. Our Lord had looked ahead to His hour (John 2:4; 7:30; 8:20; 12:23, 27; 13:1). But now as the time drew near, He dreaded it. Translation. And, having gone on ahead a little, He was falling upon the ground, and was praying that if it were possible, the hour might pass from Him. (14:36) The word “Abba” is the Aramaic word for “father.” The word “father,” the translation of the Greek word  (pathr) which means “father,” is preceded by the definite article in the Greek text. Our Lord naturally prayed in His mother tongue, Aramaic. Mark reports His prayer as given him by Peter, and possibly retains the Aramaic word for “father” because of the strong emotional tone of our Lord’s opening words to His heavenly Father, translating the word for his Greek readers. The words “Abba, Father,” were a formula familiar to the bilingual Palestinian Church. See Paul’s use of it in Romans 8:15. All things are possible unto thee. In saying this, our Lord was conscious of the great truth expressed in the words of Swete: “The divine will, which is the expression of the divine righteousness and love, limits the exercise of the divine power, and therefore

supplies a necessary check to the expectations which might otherwise arise from belief in the omnipotence of God.” The words, “nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt,” recognize this. There were two things in the cup from which our Lord naturally and sinlessly shrank. If He had not offered this petition, He would not have been who and what He was. One of them was to be made sin, to be charged by the High Court of Heaven with the guilt of all human sin. From that the holy Son of God drew back with all the infinite hatred of sin that was His. The other was the agony of being deprived of the fellowship of the Father for the time from nine o’clock in the morning to three in the afternoon (Psalm 22:1, 2). The fellowship between Father and Son had had no beginning. For a sinner who has never known the bliss of the Father’s fellowship, to be deprived of it all through eternity, is bad enough. But for the holy Son of God who knew nothing else up to that moment, the loss of that fellowship meant infinite suffering. Shrinking away from these two things, dreading them with all His heart, yet counting the awful cost, our Lord said, “not what I will; but what thou wilt.” In this expression, the pronoun is used with each verb. The idea is, “Not what I myself desire, but what you yourself desire.” Translation. And He was saying, Abba, Father, all things are possible to you. Cause this cup to pass by and from Me. But not what I desire, but what you desire. (14:37, 38) Swete has a valuable note: “The Lord rises again, and returning to the three, finds that His warning (v. 34) has been in vain; all are asleep. Luke explains their sleep as resulting from the exhaustion produced by their deepening realization of the Passion (compare v. 19, John 16:20). Peter is addressed as the first of the three; but the rebuke is partly personal, as Mark at least is aware. Mark has not used the personal name ‘Simon’ since Peter’s call to the Apostolate (3:16), and its appearance here is certainly suggestive; compare John 21:15, Simon, son of Jonas, where the reference to natural, perhaps hereditary, character is still more plainly emphasized. For the time he is ‘Peter’ no more; the new character which he owes to association with Jesus is in abeyance. He who was ready to die with the Master (v. 31) has been proved not to possess the strength of will requisite for resisting sleep during the third part of a single watch.” Swete explains the flesh here as follows: “The flesh is man as belonging to the sphere of the material life, under the limitations of a corporeal nature, frail, mortal, and in fact impure (Gen. 6:12).” The spirit he explains as “the vital force (Gen. 6:17) which in man is directly dependent on the Spirit of God (Gen. 2:7), and the organ of communication with God and the spiritual world.” He says: “In the Eleven, the human spirit was already under the influence of the Spirit of God through their intercourse with Christ (John 14:17). It was therefore willing and eager.… But its willingness was not a match for the inertia of its colleague, the frail flesh.” Translation. And He comes and finds them sleeping, and He says to Peter; Simon, are you sleeping? Did you not have strength to watch one hour? Be constantly watching and praying, in order that you might not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. (14:39, 40) Our Lord confirms His injunction to them to pray, by His example of going off again to offer His petition. He finds them asleep again, their eyes weighed down

with slumber. At the time of the Transfiguration, these three had experienced the same over-powering drowsiness, and the same inability to give expression to their thoughts. In the case of the Transfiguration experience, their drowsiness and stupidity was the result of fear, and here, the result of grief. Translation. And again, having gone off, He prayed, saying the same word. And again, having come, He found them sleeping, for their eyes were heavy, and they did not know what they should answer Him. (14:41, 42) On these difficult words, Swete has the following: “The time for watchfulness and prayer has gone by, and the injunction is not repeated: in place of it comes a permission to sleep. The permission is surely ironical; ‘sleep then, since it is your will to do so; rest, if you can’; … The Lord did not hesitate to use irony (compare 7:9) when there was occasion for it; exhortation and reproof had in this instance failed, and no other means of rousing the Three to a sense of duty remained … His irony has produced the desired effect, and the Apostles are roused, and the Lord at once reverts to His customary tone of serious direction.” On the words “It is enough,” Swete says: “The Lord breaks off the momentary play of irony—it is as if He would say, ‘this is no time for a lengthened exposure of the faults of friends; the enemy is at the gate.’ “ The disciples were still lying on the ground. Our Lord was standing. Judas and his party were approaching. Jesus went out to meet them. The words “let us go” meant, “let us go” to meet Judas and those with him. They did not mean that our Lord was contemplating flight. This was His hour and He was there to meet it. Translation. And He comes the third time and says to them, Keep on sleeping and taking your rest. It is enough. The hour has come. Behold, the Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of sinners. Be arising. Let us be going. Behold, the one who is betraying Me has come near and is at hand. (14:43) The words announcing the approach and presence of Judas had scarcely left our Lord’s lips, when Judas and his crowd arrived. The latter consisted of a hastily gathered group armed with short swords or knives and stout sticks. These were not the Temple crowds, but some who came from the Sanhedrin, members of the Temple police, and some of the regular Roman soldiers. There were also some personal servants of the High Priest, and members of the Sanhedrin. Translation. And immediately, while He was still speaking, there approaches Judas, one of the twelve, and with him a crowd with swords and cudgels, who came personally from the high priests and the scribes and the elders. (14:44) The word “token” is  (susshmon). It was a common word for a concerted signal according to agreement. This was a kiss, the customary mode of saluting a Rabbi. Swete, commenting on the words “Take Him, and lead Him away safely,” says: “The undertaking of Judas was fulfilled by the kiss, which betrayed the Lord to His enemies; the rest belonged to the agents of the Sanhedrin. Yet he volunteers advice: ‘seize

and carry Him off securely.’ The words reveal the interest which Judas, when committed to the scheme, had learnt to take in its success. It might even now be frustrated by the escape of Jesus before there was time to arrest Him, or by a rescue on the way to the city or in the streets; hence the double directions … There must be no risk of miscarriage, and Jesus had often shown His supernatural power of eluding His enemies.” Translation. Now, the one betraying Him, had given them a prearranged signal, saying, Whoever I shall kiss, it is He Himself. Seize Him, and lead Him away safely. (14:45, 46) No time was lost. Expositors says: “arrived on the spot he without delay approaches Jesus; no hesitation, promptly and adroitly done.” The verb “kissed” is  (katafilew), not the simple verb, but with a prefixed preposition which lends intensity to the already existing meaning of the verb. It was an affectionate, fervent kiss the traitor gave our Lord, of course, hypocritical. He addressed Him as Rabbi. Translation. And having come, immediately, approaching Him he says, Rabbi, and kissed Him fervently. And they laid their hands upon Him and seized Him. (14:47) The article appears before the word “sword.” It was “his sword,” the article here having the force of a possessive pronoun, as if each disciple was armed. Evidently, Peter was not intending a surgical operation on the man’s ear, but purposed to split his skull. Translation. And a certain one of those who stood by, drawing his sword, struck the slave of the high priest and took off his ear. (14:48) Our Lord does not protest against the arrest, but against its manner. He was not a robber, but a religious teacher. Translation. And answering, Jesus said to them, As against a brigand you came out with swords and cudgels to seize Me. (14:49) The Lord had visited the Temple on three consecutive days during that week. The treachery of Judas, the secrecy of the arrest, were fulfillments of prophecy. Translation. Daily I was with you in the temple teaching, and you did not seize Me. But the scriptures must be fulfilled. (14:50–52) The story of this young man is found only in Mark. As to his identity, Expositors says: “Who was this young man? Mark, the evangelist, say many, arguing, the story was of no interest to anyone but the hero of it, therefore the hero was the teller of the tale. A good argument, unless a motive can be assigned for the insertion of the narrative other than merely personal interest … On the whole, one feels inclined to acquiesce in the judgment of Hahn, quoted by Holtz., H. C., that in this curious incident we have ‘the monogram of the painter (Mark) in a dark corner of the picture.’ “ Commenting upon the words “having a linen cloth cast about his naked body,” Expositors remarks: “this suggests that the youth, on hearing some sudden report, rose out of his bed and rushed out in his night-shirt, or being absolutely naked, hurriedly threw

about his body, a loose cotton or linen sheet. The statement that on being laid hold of he cast off the garment, favors the latter alternative.” Translation. And having forsaken Him, they fled, all of them. And a certain young man was following with Him, who had thrown a linen cloth around his nakedness. And they seize him. And having left the linen cloth, he fled unclothed. (14:53, 54) The word “assembled” is sunerchomai (sunercomai), picturing the assembly as flocking together. The word “palace” is  (aujlh), the court around the house of the high priest. “Servants” is  (uJpereth") “the members of the Levitical guard.” The fire was a charcoal fire in a brazier used for heat and light. The fire not only warmed Peter but lit up his face so that he could be identified easily. The early morning air is cold at this season in Palestine. The words “even into” are  (eJw" ejso eij"), literally, “until within into.” Expositors remarks: “A redundant but expressive combination, suggesting the idea of one stealthily feeling his way into the court of the palace, venturing further and further in, and gaining courage with each step.” Translation. And they led Jesus off to the high priest. And there are gathered together all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes. And Peter, from a distance, followed Him even into the court of the chief priest. And he was sitting with the officers and warming himself at the fire. (14:55, 56) The word “council” is the translation of sunedrion (sunedrion), the latter, from sun (sun) and edra (ejdra), hence, “a sitting together.” The word was used in the Greek classics of any assembly of magistrates, judges, ambassadors, whether convened to deliberate or to pass judgment. The word here refers to the Sanhedrin, the great council of the Jews at Jerusalem consisting of seventy one members, scribes, elders, prominent members of the high-priestly families, and the high-priest, who was the president of the body. The most important causes were brought before this tribunal, inasmuch as the Roman rulers of Judaea had left to it the power of trying such cases, and also of pronouncing sentence of death, with the limitation that a capital sentence pronounced by the Sanhedrin was not valid unless it was confirmed by the Roman procurator. The word “all” (holon (oJlon)), indicates that it was the full meeting of that body of men. Their witness agreed not together. The Greek is literally, “Their testimonies were not equal.” That is, they did not correspond with each other on essential details. According to the law in Deuteronomy 19:15, the testimony of two witnesses is required for a conviction. No two witnesses could be found who agreed on essential points. The verbs are imperfect, showing that repeated attempts were made to bring testimony that would warrant conviction. Translation. Now, the high priests and the entire council were constantly seeking testimony against Jesus, with a view to putting Him to death; and they were not finding any. For many were repeatedly bearing false testimony against Him, but their testimonies were not in harmony. (14:57–59) I will destroy this temple. The false witnesses, two of them, the number

necessary to obtain a conviction under the Mosaic law, misquoted a statement made by Jesus, this misquotation probably being due to a misunderstanding of the words of our Lord as recorded in John 2:19. Instead of saying “I will destroy,” which would require a first person singular future construction, the Greek has second person plural, first aorist imperative. The first construction makes a prediction, the latter issues a command. The Jews had just asked for an attesting miracle which would prove to them that Jesus was all that He claimed to be. He offers His future resurrection, in the words, “You destroy this temple, (referring to His physical body), and in three days I will raise it up.” The words “that is made with hands” and “I will build another made without hands,” are evidently added to make clear that Jesus was talking about the Jerusalem temple. Translation. And certain, having arisen, were bearing false testimony against Him, saying, As for us, we heard Him saying, As for myself, I will destroy this temple which is made with hands, and through a period of three days another one made without hands I will build. And not even in the way described did their testimony harmonize. (14:60) The high priest stood up in the midst. Expositors says: “A graphic feature in Mark, suggesting that the high priest arose from his seat and advanced into the semicircle of the council towards Jesus—the action of an irritated, baffled man.” Robertson says that he stood up for greater solemnity, and tried to make up by bluster, the lack of evidence. Translation. And having arisen, the high priest in the midst was questioning Jesus, saying, Do you not answer even one thing? What is this that these are testifying against you? (14:61) But He held His peace. The Greek has it “But He kept on maintaining His silence.” Swete says: “The Lord refused the opportunity of either denying the charge, or justifying the words if they were His. This was not the time for serious instruction, nor were these the men to whom it could be profitably addressed; nor could He admit the authority of an assembly which was following up an unjust arrest by the employment of perjured witnesses.” In asking this question, Matthew records that the high priest put Jesus under a solemn oath. This he did to force Jesus to incriminate Himself, a thing unlawful in Jewish jurisprudence. But to refuse to answer this question, would be tantamount to a denial of His deity. Art thou the Christ? This in Jewish phraseology would be, “Art thou the Messiah?” namely, “the Anointed of God.” The Son of the Blessed. The word “Blessed” is  (eujloghto"). As an adjective it describes one who is worthy to be lauded, praised, well-spoken of. Here it is used absolutely as a name for God. Translation. But He kept on maintaining His silence, and answered not even one thing. Again, the high priest went to asking Him, As for you, are you the Anointed One, the Son of the Blessed? (14:62) The above question solemnly put to our Lord on oath by the ecclesiastical

head of the nation Israel, elicited the reply, “I am,” from Him. The pronoun is used for emphasis. It is, “As for myself, in contradistinction to all others, I am.” The words, “the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power,” a reference to Psalm 110:1, “and coming with the clouds of heaven,” a reference to Daniel 7:13, were considered as a claim to Messiahship by the Jews, as the Old Testament passages to which reference was made were looked upon as Messianic. Swete also says concerning our Lord’s answer; “But the words of Jesus are also a solemn warning that His position and that of His judges would one day be reversed, and a final but ineffectual summons to repentance and faith.” That is, our Lord’s words uttered at His trial before the Sanhedrin, were a final but ineffectual summons to repentance and faith, in that the Jewish leaders, instead of repenting of their rejection of Jesus as Messiah, and accepting Him as such, caused Him to be crucified. Translation. And Jesus said, As for myself, in contradistinction to all others, I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of the power, and coming with the clouds of heaven. (14:63–65) The high priest rent his clothes. The word is  (diarrhgnumi) “to tear asunder.” He tore asunder his  (citwna"), his tunics or undergarments, of which persons in good position wore two. This tearing of garments was an old sign of mourning or sorrow first mentioned in Genesis 37:29. The law forbad the high priest from rending his garments in the case of private troubles (Lev. 10:6, 21:10), but when acting as a judge, he was required by custom to express in this way his horror of any blasphemy uttered in his presence. In the words, “What need we any further witnesses?” “the relief of the embarrassed judge is manifest. If trustworthy evidence was not forthcoming, the necessity for it had now been superseded; the Prisoner had incriminated Himself” (Swete). What think ye? Swete translates “What is your view?” Expositors explains: “What appears to you to be the appropriate penalty of such blasphemous speech?” They all condemned Him to be guilty of death. Swete remarks; “On this occasion the conclusion was foregone; no one proposed to test the claim of Jesus before condemning it as blasphemous; all condemned Him to be worthy of death.” Joseph of Arimathaea was not present, since he did not consent to the death of Jesus (Luke 23:51). Nicodemus was apparently absent, probably not having been invited because of previous sympathy with Jesus. All the rest voted for His death. Began to cover His face. The verb is  (perikaluptw) “to cover all around, to cover up.” It referred to the act of wrapping a covering around our Lord’s head so as to blindfold Him. This was for the purpose of asking Him to identify the one who struck Him. The servants here were the Temple guard or soldiers. They, seeing the indignities heaped upon our Lord by the members of the Sanhedrin, joined their superiors in their treatment of Jesus. “Strike” is  (lambanw). The idea is “they caught Him with blows.” “Buffet” is  (kolafizw), “to strike with the fist,” thus, “to pummel.” Isaiah, 700 years before our Lord’s suffering, had a vision of His face after the rough and inhuman treatment of the frenzied mob. He said, “His visage was so marred more than any man” (52:14). The Scofield Bible footnote says: “The literal rendering is terrible: ‘So marred from the form of man was His aspect that His appearance was not that of a son of man’—i. e. not human—the effect of the brutalities described in Matt.

26:67, 68; 27:27–30.” Translation. Then the high priest, having torn apart his tunics, says, Why do we still have need of witnesses? You heard His blasphemy. What is your view? And they all condemned Him to be guilty of death. And certain ones began to be spitting upon Him, and to be covering His face, and to be pummelling Him, and to be saying, Prophesy. And the officers caught Him by blows with the flat of the hand. (14:66–68) The palace is the outer portico or porch of the high priest’s palace. The trial of Jesus was held in an upper story. The maid was one of the domestics employed by the high priest. That she was about and on duty at that hour, is indicative of the fact that there was something unusual astir. The words “she looked upon him” are   (ejmbleyasa aujtwi). The verb means “to gaze intently at.” I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. Peter’s meaning is, “I am neither conscious of the fact, nor is the statement intelligible to me.” Swete remarks: “Had Peter been called to go with the Master to judgment and death, probably he would have gladly done so. The trial came in an unexpected form, and discovered a weak point—his lack of moral courage.” The words “And the cock crew” are rejected by Nestle. Translation. And when Peter was down in the courtyard, there comes one of the servant-maids of the high priest, and having seen Peter warming himself, having gazed intently at him, she says, And, as for you, with the one of Nazareth you were, that Jesus. But he denied, saying, Neither do I know nor do I understand, as for you, what you are saying. And he went outside into the forecourt. (14:69–71) Peter, again charged with being a follower of Jesus, becomes desperate. Mark says that he began to curse and to swear. The word “curse” is  (ajnaqematizw), “to declare anathema or cursed.” The Jews had a practice of laying themselves under a curse (Acts 23:12). Paul in Galatians 1:8, 9, calls the divine curse (same word) down upon those who preached a different gospel than the true one. Peter, thus declares himself subject to the divine curse if he is not telling the truth when he disclaims all acquaintance with Jesus. The word “swear” is the same word found in Hebrews 3:11 where God is said to swear, that is, to put Himself under oath. The English words “curse” and “swear” today usually are understood to mean that the person is using profanity. But the Greek text here shows that Peter was not guilty of that. Translation. And the maid-servant, having seen him, began again to be saying to the bystanders, This man is one of them. But again he kept on denying. And a short time afterwards, again, the bystanders kept on saying to Peter, Truly, one of them you are. In fact, you are a Galilaean. But he began to be putting himself under a curse, and to be putting himself under oath, I do not know this man concerning whom you are speaking. (14:72) When he thought thereon. The Greek is  (ejpibalwn), from epi

(ejpi) “upon,” and  (ballw) “to throw,” thus, “having thrown his thought upon.” Swete says: “Peter’s weeping was his answer to the Lord’s words recalled to his memory by the second cockcrowing.” He wept. It is the inchoative imperfect, “began to weep.” Matthew has the ingressive aorist, “burst into tears.” Translation. And immediately a second time a cock sounded forth. And Peter remembered the word as Jesus spoke it to him, Before a cock sounds out twice, three times, Me you will deny. And having put his thought upon it, he began to be weeping.

CHAPTER FIFTEEN (15:1, 2) The question of Pilate, “Art thou the King of the Jews?” Expositors says “reveals the secret of the morning meeting. The crafty Sanhedrists put a political construction on the confession of Jesus. The Christ therefore is a pretender to the throne of Israel.” This is the only one of the charges which the Jews brought against Jesus which Pilate notices (Luke 23:2). He is forced to deal with this one, since neglect on his part in this case would involve him in a dereliction of duty towards the throne of the Caesars, for Jesus was accused by the Jews of setting himself up as a king in opposition to Caesar. Translation. And immediately at daybreak, the chief priests convened a council with the elders and scribes and the entire Sanhedrin; having bound Jesus, they carried Him away, and handed Him over to Pilate. Pilate asked Him, As for you, are you the King of the Jews? And answering him He says, As for you, you are saying it. (15:3–5) Swete says: “The Lord preserves a strict silence, as He had done when false witnesses had given contradictory evidence before Caiaphas. To Pilate this self-restraint was incomprehensible; he invited answers from the Prisoner, and, when He remained silent, expressed great astonishment.” Expositors remarks: “The governor had never seen a prisoner like this before. He does not believe Him to be a political pretender, but he sees that He is a remarkable man, and feels that he must proceed cautiously, groping his way amid the parties and passions of this strange people.” Translation. And the chief priests kept on accusing Him of many things. And Pilate kept on asking Him, saying, Are you not answering even one thing? Behold how many things of which they are accusing you. But Jesus still answered not even one thing, so that Pilate was amazed. (15:6–8) The verbs are in the imperfect tense, showing that the releasing of a prisoner and the demand for such by the Jews was a custom at every Passover. There was one named Barabbas. The literal Greek is, “Now, there was the one commonly called Barabbas,” or, “Now, there was the man known as Barabbas.” Swete says: “When the Marcan tradition was being formed, the name of Barabbas was still perhaps remembered at Jerusalem as that of a once formidable person.” He was a brigand who had been engaged with others in an insurrection against Rome, such as the Jews at Bethsaida Julias had wanted Jesus to lead (John 6:15). He was guilty of murder in the

insurrection. The crowd forced its way up to the headquarters of Pilate (anabas (ajnaba")), and began to be asking him to do as he had always done at the Passover. Translation. Now, at the feast, it was his custom to release to them one prisoner whom they would be desiring. Now, there was the one commonly known as Barabbas, who was in chains with those who had participated in an insurrection, these being of that class that had committed murder in the insurrection referred to. And, having gone up, the crowd began to be asking him to do just as he had always been accustomed to do for them. (15:9, 10) Expositors says: “Pilate makes the tentative suggestion that the favored person should be Jesus; whom he designates ‘King of the Jews,’ to see how the people would take a title which the Sanhedrists regarded as a mortal offense.” Commenting on the word “knew” ( (ejginwsken)), the same authority remarks; “it gradually dawned upon him. Pilate would see the animus (ajnimu") of the Sanhedrists in their many accusations (v. 3), from which it would appear that Christ’s real offense was His great influence with the people. Hence the attempt to play off the one party against the other: the people against the priests.” Swete says: “The pretence of loyalty to the Emperor, was too flimsy to deceive a man of the world, and he detected under this disguise, the vulgar vice of envy.” Translation. And Pilate answered them, saying, Are you desiring that I release to you the King of the Jews? For it was gradually dawning upon him that because of envy the high priests had delivered Him up. (15:11, 12) Swete comments: “An interval followed during which the hierarchy brought their influence to bear upon a crowd already perhaps divided upon the personal question submitted to them. What arguments were used to lead them to prefer Barabbas is a matter of conjecture; if Barabbas was a Jerusalemite, and the crowd consisted largely of his fellow-townsmen, an appeal may have been made to local prejudice; but there may have been also a lurking sympathy with the insurrectionists, which the Sanhedrists knew how to evoke. They would pose as advocates of Barabbas rather than as enemies of Jesus; to obtain the release of the one was to condemn the other.” Expositors, commenting on verse 12, says: “It is presupposed that the people have intimated their preference for Barabbas.… Hence Pilate proceeds to ask: ‘What then, am I to do with Him whom ye call the King of the Jews?’ That whom ye call was very astute. It ought to bring out the real feeling of the people as from the next verse we learn that it did.” Translation. And the high priests stirred up the crowd that he should rather release Barabbas to them. But Pilate again answering, was saying to them, What then shall I do to Him whom you are calling the King of the Jews? (15:13–15) Swete’s note is helpful; “There was now no hesitation: again the Procurator was answered by a shout in which all joined (Matt.). Perhaps the crowd were nettled by Pilate’s imputation (whom ye call etc.), perhaps they resented his desire to dictate their answer, and with the fickle cruelty of an irresponsible multitude they

clamored for the death of one whose release they had a few minutes before been disposed to demand (v. 8). Luke represents the cry as repeated again and again.” Commenting on the question of Pilate, “Why, what evil hath He done?” Swete says: “Pilate still reluctant, condescends to expostulate.” The question, he says, “invites an explanation … for that there has been wrong doing is implied in your demand for punishment. But a mob has no reasons to give beyond its own will, and the only answer is a louder and wilder clamor.” The Roman scourge was a lash usually made of leather thongs loaded at intervals with bone or metal. Peter, in his first epistle (2:24), in the words, “with whose stripes ye were healed,” gives us a vivid picture of his recollection of how our Lord s back looked after the scourging. The word “stripes” in the Greek text is in the singular number. The word refers to a bloody wale trickling with blood that arises under a blow. Our Lord’s back was so lacerated by the scourge that it was one mass of open, raw, quivering flesh trickling with blood, not a series of stripes or cuts, but one mass of torn flesh. Translation. But they again cried, Crucify Him at once. But Pilate was saying to them, Why, what evil has He done? But they cried beyond measure, Crucify Him at once. Then, Pilate, desiring after reflection, to satisfy the crowd, released Barabbas, and having scourged Jesus, delivered Him to be crucified. (15:16) Expositors says: “The soldiers in charge of the prisoner conduct Him into the barracks,… that is, the praetorium, and call together their comrades to have some sport.” The soldiers were non-Jews, provincials, serving under Roman orders. Translation. And the soldiers led Him off into the courtyard, which is the Praetorium, and they call together the entire band. (15:17, 18) Swete says that the garment was of scarlet, but with color enough left in it to suggest the royal purple, the cloak of one of the soldiers, possibly a cast-off and faded rag. The soldiers mocked our Lord by regarding Him as a pretender to an oriental throne. They put on His head a crown of thorns, composed of twigs broken off from some thorny plant which grew on waste ground near by, the thorns of which are long, sharp, recurved, and which often create a festering wound. The word for “crown” here is stephanos (stefano"), the victor’s wreath, which was presented to royal personages as a tribute to military prowess. The soldiers seem to have had in mind, the laurel wreath of the Imperator. Translation. And they clothe Him with purple; and having woven together a crown of thorns, they place it about His head. And they began to be saluting Him, Hail, King of the Jews. (15:19, 20) Translation. And they kept on beating His head with a staff made of a reed, and they kept on spitting upon Him; and bowing their knees, they were worshipping Him. And when they had mocked Him, they took off from Him the purple, and put on Him, His garments. And they lead Him

out in order that they may crucify Him. (15:21) The word “compelled” is  (ajggareuw), a word of Persian origin. The aggaroi (ajggaroi) were public couriers. stationed by appointment of the king of Persia at fixed localities, with horses ready for use, in order to transmit royal messages from one to another, and so convey them the more speedily to their destination. These couriers had authority to press into service, in case of need, horses, vessels, even men they met. The verb therefore means “to impress into service.” Simon was a native of Cyrene, a city of Libya, the latter, a country on the northern shore of Africa just opposite the Grecian peninsula. The city had received a Jewish settlement in the time of Ptolemy I, and the Jews formed an influential section of the inhabitants. At Jerusalem, the name of Cyrene was associated with one of the synagogues (Acts 6:9), and Jewish inhabitants of Cyrenaica were among the worshippers at the Feast of Pentecost in the year of the crucifixion (Acts 2:10). Whether this Simon had become a resident of Jerusalem, or was a visitor at the Passover, it is impossible to decide. Translation. And they press into service a certain Simon of Cyrene who was passing by at the time, coming from the surrounding farmland, the father of Alexander and Rufus, in order that he might carry His cross. (15:22, 23) The word “bring” is  (ferw) “to carry some burden, to move by bearing, to lead, to conduct.” Expositors says: “It would appear that Jesus was so weak through the strain of the last few days, and the scourging, that He was unable to walk, not to speak of carrying His cross. He had to be borne as the sick were borne to Him (Mark 1:32).” Swete remarks; “Mark’s pherousin (ferousin) (they bring) has been thought to imply that the Lord needed support; compare 1:32, 2:3, and contrast Heb. 1:3. But the word may mean simply ‘to lead,’ as a prisoner to execution or a victim to the sacrifice: compare John 21:18; Acts 14:13.” The present writer does not feel that he can decide between these two points of view. The a.v. and the R. S. V., translate by “bring” and “brought” respectively. Webster includes both ideas in the word “bring,” that of leading and that of carrying. They gave Him. We have the conative imperfect, “they tried to give, offered.” This was a stupefying drink which was usually offered to condemned malefactors through the charity (it is said) of the women of Jerusalem, the intention being to deaden the sense of pain. This drink Jesus refused. Translation. And they bring Him to the place Golgotha, which, interpreted, is a place of a skull. And they offered Him wine mixed with myrrh. But He did not receive it. (15:24–28) The third hour, (Jewish time) was nine o’clock in the morning. The superscription was the board on which was written the charge on which the one to be crucified had been condemned. It was carried before the criminal or affixed to him and later put on the cross. Nestle rejects verse 28. Translation. And they crucify Him, and distribute His garments among themselves, throwing a lot upon them, who should take what. Now, it was

the third hour, and they crucified Him. And there was the inscription of His accusation written down, The King of the Jews. And with Him they crucify two brigands, one on His right and another on His left. (15:29–32) The word “railed” is  (blasfhmew) “to speak reproachfully, to rail at, revile, calumniate.” The word “Ah” (Oua (ÆOua)) expresses admiration, real or ironical, the latter in this context. Commenting on the words, “Save thyself, and come down from the cross,” Swete remarks: “The jest was the harder to endure since it appealed to a consciousness of power held back only by the self-restraint of a sacrificed will.” Concerning verse 31, he says: “The Sanhedrists condescended to share the savage sport of the populace; members of the priestly aristocracy were seen in company with scribes and elders (Matt.) deriding the Sufferer, not indeed directly addressing Him, or mingling with the crowd, but remarking to one another on His inability to save Himself … Even in the act of mocking, they bear witness to the truth of His miraculous powers.” With regard to verse 32, Swete has this to say; “Unable to induce Pilate to remove or alter the title, they give their own complexion to it, substituting ‘Israel’ for the Jews, and explaining ‘the King’ by ‘The Christ.’ If He will even now substantiate His claim of Messiahship by a miracle wrought in His own behalf, they profess themselves ready to believe.” Translation. And those passing by kept on reviling Him, wagging their heads and saying, Ah, the One who is destroying the temple and building it in three days, save yourself, coming down from the cross. In the same way, the chief priests, mocking, were repeating to one another with the scribes, Others He saved, Himself He is not able to save. The Anointed One, the King of Israel, let Him come down now from the cross, in order that we may see with discernment and believe. And those crucified with Him were reviling Him. (15:33, 34) There was a supernaturally caused darkness over the land, from noon until three o’clock. The word “forsaken” is  (ejgkataleipw) “to leave down in,” the idea being that of deserting someone in a set of circumstances that are against him. The word means “to let one down, to desert, abandon, leave in the lurch, leave one helpless.” A discussion of the meaning and the implications of this terrible cry, is not within the province of this book. For a study of this subject, see the author’s brochure, From Heaven’s Glory (The Moody Press). Translation. And the sixth hour having come, a darkness came upon the whole land until the ninth hour. Jesus shouted with a loud voice, Eloi, Eloi, lama, sabachthani? which, interpreted is, My God, My God, Why have you let Me down? (15:35, 36) Expositors says: “The name of Elijah might be suggested by either form of the name of God—Eli or Eloi. Who the ones were that made the poor pun is doubtful, most probably heartless fellow-countrymen who only affected misunderstanding.” Elijah was regarded by the Jews as a deliverer in time of trouble. Commenting on verse 36, Expositors says: “If the wits were heartless mockers, then de (de) (but, translated ‘and’ in a.v.) will imply that this person who offered the sufferer a sponge saturated with vinegar, was a friendly person touched by compassion. His motive was to offer our Lord the liquid

in an effort to prolong His life, so that Elijah would have an opportunity to work an effectual deliverance by taking Him down from the cross. The word “vinegar” is oxos (ojxo"), a mixture of sour wine or vinegar with water which the Roman soldiers were accustomed to drink. Swete suggests that the Roman soldiers had brought some along for their own refreshment Translation. And certain ones of those standing by, having heard, were saying, Behold, He is calling for Elijah. But, having run, a certain one, having filled a sponge with sour wine, having put it upon a reed, was giving Him a drink, saying, Hold off. Let us see whether Elijah takes Him down. (15:37–39) The words “gave up” are literally, “breathed out.” The word “ghost” is the translation in the a.v. of the word pneuma (pneuma) (spirit) in the case of some of its occurrences. However, the word pneuma (pneuma) is not found in the text, nor in the apparatus containing the rejected readings. The words “gave up the ghost,” are the a.v., rendering of the verb  (ejkpnew), “to breathe one’s last, to breathe out one’s life, to expire.” Expositors translates, “breathed out His life.” The distinctive word for “temple” here is not hieron (iJeron) which refers to the temple with all its buildings and porches, but naos (nao"), referring to the inner sanctuary, consisting of the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies. The veil or curtain which separated these two rooms from one another, is referred to here. It was torn in two by the unseen hand of God, to show that the way into the earthly Holy of Holies was no more. The Sufferer who had just died on the Cross, had fulfilled all of the Levitical sacrifices and had abrogated them. The centurion, impressed with all that had taken place, exclaimed (a.v.), “Truly this man was the Son of God.” There is no definite article before the word “Son.” What this soldier said was, “Truly, this man was a son of God.” Swete says: “The testimony which the Gospels attribute to him (the centurion) is merely that of a man who was able to rise above the prejudices of the crowd and the thoughtless brutality of the soldiers, and to recognize in Jesus an innocent man (Lk.), or possibly a supernatural person (Matt. Mk.). Son of God is certainly more than righteous, but the centurion, who borrowed the words from the Jewish Priests (v. 3.), could scarcely have understood them even in the Messianic sense; his idea is perhaps analogous to that ascribed to Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 3:25, where the Hebrew word refers to an extraordinary, superhuman being.” Translation. And Jesus, having cried with a loud voice, breathed out His life. And the curtain of the inner sanctuary was torn in two from the top to the bottom. And, the centurion standing by opposite Him, having seen that thus He breathed out His life, said, Truly, this man was a son of God. (15:40, 41) Swete remarks: “There were others besides the centurion who viewed the crucifixion seriously, and were present throughout. ‘There were also women’—many women (Mt.)—‘looking on at a long distance,’ where they could be safe from the ribaldry of the crowd, and yet watch the Figure on the Cross—not the ‘daughters of Jerusalem’ who had bewailed Jesus on the way to Golgotha, but followers from Galilee.” The words “looking on” are  (qewrew) “to view attentively and with interest and for a purpose, carefully observing details.”

Translation. Now, there were also women looking on carefully and with interest, viewing attentively from a distance, among whom also was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome, who, when He was in Galilee, were accustomed to follow Him and minister to Him, and many other women who came up with Him to Jerusalem. (15:42, 43) Expositors says: “ (hjdh) (already): omitted by Mt., but important, as indicating that the business Joseph had on hand—that of obtaining and using permission to take down and bury the body of Jesus—must be gone about without delay. It was already the afternoon of the day before the Sabbath … called paraskeue (paraskeue) (a making ready, a preparation) … It must therefore be done at once, or it could not be done till Sabbath was past.” Swete says: “The Jews had already taken steps to provide for the removal of the bodies before the Sabbath … had they not been anticipated, the Lord’s body would have been committed to the common grave provided for criminals who had been hanged.” Opsia (ÆOyia) (evening) is a relative term, and an hour before sunset would be relatively late in view of the approaching Sabbath (Swete). Expositors says that Joseph was not a councillor of the provincial town of Arimathaea, which would have been mentioned, but a member of the grand council of Jerusalem, the Sanhedrin. He, in company with these devout women, was an expectant of the Kingdom of God. The same authority says of the word “boldly” ( (tolmhsa")), “a graphic word, in Mk., only, giving a vivid idea of the situation. Objections to be feared on Pilate’s part on score of time—dead so soon? possibly surly indifference to the decencies of burial in the case of a crucified person, risk of offense to the religious leaders in Jerusalem by sympathy shown to the obnoxious One, even in death.” Translation. And already evening had come. Since it was the time of making ready, which is the day before the Sabbath, Joseph, the one from Arimathaea, having come, an honorable councillor, who also himself was waiting for the kingdom of God, taking courage, went in to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus for himself. (15:44, 45) Death by crucifixion usually came two or three days afterwards. In some cases the victims died of starvation rather than of their wounds. Pilate wondered that Jesus was already dead. The verb is perfect in tense, speaking of death as an existing state. He asked the centurion “whether He had been anywhile dead.” The verb is aorist, speaking of death as a momentary effect. The word “anywhile” is palai (palai), not implying a considerable time before, but only bare priority to the present. The word “gave” is  (dwrew) “to freely give.” After satisfying himself officially that Jesus was dead, Pilate freely gave His body to Joseph, not out of any feeling of generosity, but because he would be rid of this most inconvenient and troublesome affair. The word “body” is not  (swma), which is the general word for the human body, but  (ptwma), “a corpse.” Translation. But Pilate wondered whether He were already dead. And having called the centurion, he asked him if He had just died. And having

come to know it from the centurion, he freely gave the corpse to Joseph. (15:46, 47) Swete’s note is helpful: “On his way back to Golgotha, Joseph provides himself with linen ( (sindwn)); the word is used here of linen in the piece, not of a garment; it was still, as Mt. says, kathara (kaqara), fresh and unused. His next task was to remove the body from the Cross … In this work, Joseph was probably not alone … St. John’s account leads us to suppose that his brother Sanhedrist, Nicodemus, was already on the spot. Nicodemus had brought a larger supply of spices used for embalming the dead.… The body was then taken by the two men, bathed perhaps, and wrapped in the linen between the folds of which the spices were freely crumbled, and finally bound with strips of cloth after the Jewish manner of burying. The picture may be completed by comparing what is said of Lazarus in John 11:44, and the account of the grave clothes in John 20:7: the hands and feet were bound with strips of linen, and the face covered with a face cloth. All was now ready for the interment.” The tomb in which the body of Jesus was laid, was a new one, and had been prepared by Joseph for his own burial. It was in a garden adjacent to the place of crucifixion, presumably the property of Joseph. The opening was usually closed with a stone if the tomb contained a body. Regarding the two women who “beheld where He was laid,” Robertson remarks that apparently these remained after the other women had left, and were watching the actions of Joseph and Nicodemus. He quotes Gould as saying that “It is evident that they constituted themselves a party of observation.” Translation. And, having purchased in the marketplace fine linen, having taken Him down, he wrapped Him with the fine linen and placed Him in a tomb which had been hewn out of rock, and rolled a stone against the door of the tomb. And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses, were attentively observing where He was laid.

CHAPTER SIXTEEN (16:1, 2) When the Sabbath was over, that is, after sunset, on the day which followed the crucifixion, the women purchased the aromatics for the anointing of the body of our Lord. They probably knew of the embalming of the body by Joseph and Nicodemus. But they desired to make an external application of fragrant oils. This may have been suggested by the memory of the anointing at Bethany. Our Lord’s body was buried late on Friday afternoon. The women rested on the Sabbath which began at sunset that evening. They purchased the anointing oil after sunset that closed the Sabbath (Saturday). Very early in the morning of our Sunday, perhaps while it was still dark, they left Bethany, which is about two miles from Jerusalem, and arrived at the tomb just after sunrise. The words “at the rising of the sun” are literally, “the sun having risen.” The action of the aorist participle precedes that of the leading verb. The sun arose before they reached the tomb. Translation. And the Sabbath being past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, purchased aromatic spices in order that, having gone, they might anoint Him. And very early in the morning of the first day of the week, they come to the tomb, the sun having risen.

(16:3, 4) They said among themselves. The verb is imperfect. “They kept on saying among themselves.” It was the chief topic of conversation. They had no anticipation of a resurrection. The word “roll” used by the women is slightly different from the one used by Mark in describing that event. The former word means “to roll away.” The idea is one of separation. They spoke of the stone being rolled clear of the door, so as to leave the doorway entirely open. The latter word refers to the act of rolling back the stone so as to leave the opening free of access. Swete remarks that this is “evidence of Mark’s care for accuracy of detail.” When they looked. The verb is anablepoµ “to look up.” They had approached the tomb with downcast eyes and bowed heads. The words, “for it (the stone) was very great,” either explain their being able to see that the stone had been moved, or what it was that arrested their attention. The word “from” (v. 3) is ek (ejk) “out of,” not apo (ajpo) “from the edge of,” and indicates that the stone was set into the entrance, not merely placed up to its edge. Translation. And they kept on saying among themselves, Who will roll away for us the stone out of the door of the tomb? And, having looked up, they saw clearly that the stone was rolled back, for it was exceedingly great. (16:5) Both Swete and Robertson comment on the diversity of testimony among the evangelists as to the facts recorded in this verse. The former says: “The very diversity of the accounts strengthens the probability that the story rests upon the basis of truth; the impressions of the witnesses differed, but they agree upon the main facts.” Robertson says that these variations strengthen the evidence for the fact of the resurrection. The word “garment” is  (stolh). Trench (Synonyms of the New Testament) tells us that a  (stolh) was a long stately robe, reaching to the feet, or trainlike, sweeping the ground. The word was used of any garment of special solemnity, richness, or beauty. Expositors remarks: “No such robe worn by young men on earth.” The implication is that the individual described was not a human being, but an angel. The word “affrighted” is  (ejkqambew). Vincent says: “Rev., better, amazed. It was wonder rather than fright.” The prefixed preposition is perfective in use, intensifying the already existing idea in the verb. They were completely amazed. Translation. And, having entered the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right, clothed in a long, stately garment, white. And they were utterly amazed. (16:6–8) Mark’s account here is so graphic, that it needs no comment nor explanation. It is a thrill to read in the original text. Translation. And he says to them, Stop being utterly amazed. Jesus you are seeking, the Jesus of Nazareth, the crucified. He was raised. He is not here. Behold the place where they laid Him. But be going; say to His disciples and Peter, He is going before you into Galilee. There you will find Him, just as He told you. And having gone, they fled from the tomb, for there had come upon them trembling and astonishment: And they said

not even one thing to anyone. For they were afraid. (16:9–11) The writer has decided not to touch the question of the Marcan authorship of verses 9–20, but to merely follow along the line of exegetical work he has pursued throughout the book. These verses appear in our standard translations, and the student will expect the exegesis of the same. “Jesus” does not appear in the Greek text of verse nine, but the reference is clearly to Him. Translation. Now, Jesus, having risen early, on the first day of the week, appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out from whom He had cast seven demons. That one, having proceeded, told those who had been with Him, who were mourning and weeping. And those, having heard that He lives and was seen by her, disbelieved. (16:12, 13) The words “in another form” are literally, “in a different outward expression or appearance.” Swete says: “The words must be explained as contrasting the Magdalene’s impression (v. 9) with that received by the two: to her He had seemed to be a gardener (John 20:15), to them He appeared in the light of a fellow-traveller.” The Greek word “form” is the same as that used in the account of the Transfiguration, but Swete says that there was clearly nothing in the Lord’s appearance to distinguish Him from any other wayfaring man. Translation. And after these things, to two of them while they were walking, He appeared in a different outward appearance, as they were proceeding into the country. And those having gone off, told the rest. But neither did those believe. (16:14, 15) Translation. And afterward He appeared to the eleven as they were reclining at table, and reproached their disbelief and hardness of heart because they did not believe those who viewed Him attentively after He was raised. And He said to them, Having proceeded into all the world, make a public proclamation of the good news to the whole creation. (16:16) Robertson, a Baptist, has this important note: “The omission of baptized with ‘disbelieveth’ would seem to show that Jesus does not make baptism essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on disbelief, not on baptism. So salvation rests on belief. Baptism is merely the picture of the new life, not the means of securing it. So serious a sacramental doctrine would need stronger support anyhow than this disputed portion of Mark.” As to the words “shall be damned,” Vincent says: “A most unfortunate rendering. The word is a judicial term, and as Dr. Morison truthfully says, ‘determines, by itself, nothing at all concerning the nature, degree, or extent of the penalty to be endured.’… Rev. rightly, ‘condemned’.” Translation. The one who believed and was baptized, will be saved, but

the one who disbelieved, will be condemned. (16:17, 18) Concerning the contents of these verses, Robertson issues this warning: “The great doubt concerning the genuineness of these verses (fairly conclusive proof against them in my opinion) renders it unwise to take these verses as the foundation for doctrine or practice unless supported by other and genuine portions of the n.t.” Expositors says: “Here also we find a great lapse from the high level of Matthew’s version of the farewell words of Jesus: signs, physical charisms, and thaumaturgic powers, taking the place of the spiritual presence of the exalted Lord. Casting out devils represents the evangelic miracles; speaking with tongues those of the apostolic age: taking up venomous serpents and drinking poison, seem to introduce us into the twilight of apocryphal story. Healing of the sick by laying on of hands, brings us back to apostolic times.” Translation. And these attesting signs will accompany those who believed. In my Name they will cast out demons. In new tongues they will speak. Snakes they will pick up. And if they drink anything deadly, it will positively not harm them. Upon the sick they lay hands, and they will recover. (16:19, 20) Translation. So then, the Lord Jesus, after He had spoken to them, was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. And those having gone forth, preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the Word through the attesting miracles following closely.

ROMANS In the Greek New Testament

PREFACE This book is written for the Bible student who is not conversant with Greek, but who would like to work beneath the surface of an English translation in the untranslatable richness and added accuracy which the original text affords. This is done by the use of word studies, interpretive material, and an expanded translation. The word studies bring out a far richer, more developed, fully-orbed, and clearer meaning of the Greek word than any single English word could do. In the process of translating, the standard versions leave much rich material behind in the Greek text, since these are held down to a minimum of words. The word studies bring this material out. The expanded translation, by the use of more words than the standard translations are able to use, is able to offer to the student more of the richness of the Greek text. He reads

what the first century reader read as he studied the Greek New Testament. The author has attempted to keep his expanded translations very close to pure translation work, without interpretive material added. However, in some cases, such as the sixth chapter, he has interpreted the word rather than translated it in some instances, for purposes of utmost clarity. But the reader will be able, by studying the comments, to distinguish between interpretation and translation. For instance, the word for “sin” (hamartia (aJmartia)) refers to the sinful nature here. The translation would be “sin,” but to make the meaning clearer and more forceful the author has put “sinful nature” in the translation, thus interpreting rather than translating the word. Words in parenthesis in the translation do not appear in the Greek text, and are added to complete or make clear the meaning. This expanded translation is not to be used as a substitute for the standard translation the student is using, but as a companion translation to shed light upon the standard version where the limited number of words tends in some places to a relative obscurity of meaning, also where the presence of obsolete words would present difficulties of interpretation. Much interpretive material is the author’s own work. He has added the quintessence of his gleanings from the great Greek masters to whom the student of the English Bible has no access, thus making available material hitherto denied him. But in addition to this, the author has not merely reproduced the comments of these Greek scholars, but he has weighed them (the interpretations) against one another, and has given his best judgment as to the most accurate and reliable interpretation. Thus, much work has been done for the student which he could not do for himself. This book is not armchair reading. Its place is next to the student’s open Bible on his study desk. With its aid, he can work through the Greek text of the Bible Book treated and obtain a far clearer and richer understanding of its contents than he could from any number of different translations. After he has worked through the Bible Book, he can use this book as a reference work in future Bible study. The index will enable him to find the material on any passage in an instant. The standard translation quoted and commented upon is the Authorized Version. The authorities used in the writing of this book are as follows: James Denney, D. D., writing in Expositor’s Greek Testament; Marvin R. Vincent, D. D., in his Word Studies in the New Testament; Henry Alford, D. D., in Alford’s Greek Testament; A. T. Robertson, A. M., D. D., LL. D., Litt. D., in his Word Pictures in the New Testament; Richard C. Trench, D. D., in his Synonyms of the New Testament; Joseph H. Thayer, D. D., in his Greek-English Lexicon; James H. Moulton, D. D., Th. D., and George Milligan, D. D., in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament; Hermann Cremer, D. D., in his BiblicoTheological Lexicon of New Testament Greek; H. E. Dana, Th. D., and Julius R. Mantey, Th. D., D. D., in their Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament. K. S. W.

CHAPTER ONE (1:1) Paul is the only one of the Bible writers who discarded his Jewish for his Gentile name. It is the transliteration of the Latin paulus (paulu") or paulles (paulle") meaning “little.” Some think it had reference to his diminutive stature (II Cor. 10:1, 10). It was a common practice among the Hebrews to give their children a Gentile name in addition to the Jewish one. The apostle’s Jewish name was Saul. His Gentile name gains the ascendancy on his first missionary journey as he deals with the Roman officer on

Cyprus, and thereafter marks him out as the apostle to the Gentiles. He designates himself as “a servant of Jesus Christ.” The word is doulos (doulo"), the most abject, servile term used by the Greeks to denote a slave. The word designated one who was born as a slave, one who was bound to his master in chords so strong that only death could break them, one who served his master to the disregard of his own interests, one whose will was swallowed up in the will of his master. Paul was born a slave of sin at his physical birth, and a bondslave of his Lord through regeneration. The chords that bound him to his old master Satan, were rent asunder in his identification with Christ in the latter’s death. The chords that bind him to his new Master will never be broken since the new Master will never die again, and is Paul’s new life. Paul’s will, at one time swallowed up in the will of Satan, now is swallowed up in the sweet will of God. The reader will observe how wonderfully God has watched over the development of the Greek language so that at the time it was needed as the medium through which He would give His New Testament revelation to the human race, its words were fit receptacles and efficient instruments for the conveyance of His message to man. Paul calls himself a bondslave of Christ Jesus. The case classification is genitive of possession. The apostle is proud of the fact that he is a slave belonging to his Lord. There were certain individuals in the Roman empire designated “Slaves of the Emperor.” This was a position of honor. One finds a reflection of this in Paul’s act of designating himself as a slave of the King of kings. He puts this ahead of his apostleship. This is followed by the designation, “called to be an apostle” (a.v.). The words “to be” are in italics, which means that they are not in the Greek text, but are supplied by the translators in an effort to clarify the thought for the English reader. Furthermore, the thought expressed by the a.v. would require a participle in the Greek text. The text has  (klhto" ajpostolo"), an adjective and a noun, literally, “a called apostle.” The adjective comes from the verb  (kalew), “to call” in the sense here of “to call to assume an office.” Paul was a called apostle in the sense that God summoned him to that position and placed him in it. The translation “called to be an apostle” could refer to a future apostleship of which Paul was not then in possession. Paul wished to emphasize for the sake of his authority and the authority which his position would give the letter he was writing, that he was already in possession of the office and exercising the authority it conferred upon him. We must be careful to note also, that the word “apostle” is not the translation of the word apostolos (ajpostolo") but its transliteration, and that in a shortened form. The word comes from the verbal form  (ajpostellw) which is found in a document bearing the date of a.d. 342, in the clause “to proceed with the officers sent for this purpose,” (Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, Moulton and Milligan) where the word “sent” is the Greek word  (ajpostellw), and where the context gives it the meaning of “sent on a commission.” The noun was used of an envoy, namely, one sent on a commission to represent another person, the person sent being given credentials and the responsibility of carrying out the orders of the one sending him. Our word “ambassador” adequately translates it. Paul thought of himself as an ambassador of the King of kings. The word “apostle” today has the idea of a disciple of the Lord Jesus, one of the Twelve, sent on a preaching tour. The Greek word as used by Paul did not have that meaning basically, although in the exercise of his duties, he as an ambassador would preach the gospel. Paul, therefore designates himself as a divinely and effectually summoned ambassador of the Lord Jesus, sent by Him on a commission with credentials, the commission, to evangelize the Gentile world, his credentials, miracles.

Paul defines his apostleship by the words, “separated unto the gospel of God,” that is, he as an apostle is separated to the gospel. The verb is  (ajforizw), made up of  (oJrizw), “to mark off by boundaries, to limit, separate,” and apo (ajpo), “off from,” the compound verb meaning, “to mark off from others by boundaries, to appoint, set one apart for some purpose.” He was separated by God from all mankind for his apostleship. We find a reflection of this in his words, “This one thing I do” (Phil. 3:13). “Separated” is a perfect participle in the Greek text, the tense speaking of a past completed action having present results. The past act of God in separating Paul to the one thing, the gospel, finds its results in his permanent position as a person separated to the one thing. “Gospel” is euaggelion (eujaggelion), “good news.” It is found in an inscription of 9 b.c., with reference to the birthday of the Emperor Augustus, “but the birthday of the god (the Emperor) was for the world the beginning of tidings of joy on his account” (Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, Moulton and Milligan). The term euaggelion (eujaggelion) as “good news” of an important character was well known throughout the Roman empire, and especially in its capital, Rome. Paul, writing to the saints in this city, must have had its secular and popular usage in mind, and sets off in contrast to it, the good news which he was separated by God to tell out to the Roman world, namely, God’s good news. Euaggelion (ÆEuaggelion) and theos (qeo") (God) do not have the definite article in the Greek text. Quality or character is stressed. The good news was such as would be expected from God, God-like good news. The Roman Emperor was worshipped as a god in the state religion. There was a polemic touch here, contrasting the God of the Christians with the god of the pagan Roman citizen. Paul was hoping some day to come to the city where the great power of Rome was centralized and the Emperor was worshipped as a god, with a message diametrically opposed to the religion and political atmosphere of Rome. Translation. Paul, a bondslave by nature, belonging to Christ Jesus, a called ambassador permanently separated to God’s good news. (1:2–4) In these verses, the apostle defines what he means by God’s good news. First, he says that God promised this good news by the writers of the Old Testament. As Denney says, “The gospel is not in principle a new thing, a subversion of the true religion as it has hitherto been known to the people of God. On the contrary, God promised it before, through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures. It is the fulfillment of hopes which God himself inspired.” Thus does Paul at one stroke cut away all objections to his message from the Jews who said he was introducing something new and opposed to the Mosaic economy. Vincent remarks, “Paul’s Old Testament training is manifest. Naturally, in beginning the more precise description of the new revelation, he refers to its connection with ancient prophecy.” The term “prophets” as used here does not limit the writers to those we know as the major and minor prophets, but includes writers such as Moses and David who also spoke of the good news. The Greek text does not have the definite article before “holy scriptures,” emphasis being upon quality or character. The books are in character holy, for they convey God’s good news. This good news is concerning God’s Son. Of this, Weiss says, “Taken by itself, ‘the Son of God’ is, in the first instance, a title rather than a name. It goes back to Psalm 2:7; the Person to whom it is applied is conceived as the chosen object of the Divine Love, God’s instrument for accomplishing the salvation of His people.” The words “Jesus Christ our Lord” are rejected by both

Nestle and Westcott and Hort. The title, “Son of God,” speaks of Him in His deity. Paul introduces the subject of His humanity in the words “which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.” “Was made” is ginomai (ginomai) in a second aorist participle signifying entrance into a new condition. The verb means “to become.” John uses it in his statement, “The Word became flesh” (1:14), that is, entered into a new state or condition by assuming a human body and putting Himself under human limitations. “Flesh” here refers to the corporeal part of man, his physical body. “Seed” is the seed from which anything germinates. It is used in this context of the ancestry of David. That is, the Son of God, so far as His human ancestry is concerned, comes from the line of David. This individual, comprising within His Person two natures, that of Deity and that of humanity, is “declared to be the Son of God.” “Declared” is  (oJrizw), “to mark out the boundaries or limits” of anything, “to appoint, decree, determine.” Thayer says, “for although Christ was the Son of God before His resurrection, yet He was openly appointed (a.v. declared) such among men by this transcendent and crowning event.” Vincent says, “As respecting Christ’s earthly descent, He was born like other men. As respecting His divine essence, He was declared. The idea is that of Christ’s instatement or establishment in the rank and dignity of His divine sonship with a view to the conviction of men. This was required by His previous humiliation, and was accomplished by His resurrection which not only manifested or demonstrated what He was, but wrought a real transformation in His mode of being.” Denney remarks, “The resurrection only declared Him to be what He truly was.” This declaration, this demonstration of the Deity of the God Man was, Paul says, “in power.” It was in the sphere of power that this declaration was made, the power of God that raised our Lord from the dead. This power operated “according to the spirit of holiness.” Vincent says here, “In contrast with according to the flesh. The reference is not to the Holy Spirit, who is nowhere designated by the phrase, but to the spirit of Christ as the seat of the divine nature belonging to His Person. As God is spirit, the divine nature of Christ is spirit, and its characteristic quality is holiness.” Denney is helpful here, “The sonship, which is declared by the resurrection, answered to the spirit of holiness which was the inmost and deepest reality in the Person and life of Jesus. The sense that there is that in Christ which is explained by His connection with mankind, and that also which can only be explained by some peculiar relation to God, is no doubt converged in this description, and is the basis of the orthodox doctrine of the two natures in the one Person of the Lord.” With respect to His humanity, our Lord came from the royal line of David, with respect to His divine essence (spirit of holiness), He was demonstrated to be such in the sphere of the resurrection power of God which raised Him from the dead. But here we must be careful. The Greek text does not have  (ejk nekrwn), “out from among the dead,” but only  (nekrwn), “of the dead.” The phrase refers to the resurrection of all the dead in other places in the New Testament, and here, to their resurrection as included and involved in the resurrection of our Lord (Vincent). It is Christ’s resurrection which demonstrates His deity after assuming humanity, but His resurrection viewed together with the resurrection of all the righteous, the resurrection of the latter being made possible by the former. Translation. Which He promised aforetime through the intermediate agency of His prophets in holy writings, concerning His Son who came from the seed of David so far as His humanity was concerned, who was

demonstrated as Son of God in the sphere of power so far as His divine essence was concerned, by the resurrection of the dead. (1:5–7) The “we” refers only to Paul, since it is qualified by the sphere of his ministry, to the nations or the Gentiles. The reception of grace by Paul was in the form of the salvation God gave him in response to his faith. As a saved man he was appointed as an apostle, an ambassador. He was given the office of an apostle. As to the meaning of the words, “for obedience to the faith,” scholars differ. Some say that it means obedience to the Faith, the Christian system of belief, as in Acts 6:7 where a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith. Others say that obedience is the obedience which springs from and is produced by faith. Robertson sees it as an objective genitive and interprets it as meaning the obedience which springs from faith. Vincent defines it as “the obedience which characterizes and proceeds from faith.” Denney defines it as “the obedience which consists in faith.” Alford translates, “obedience to the faith,” and defines the faith, not as the gospel which is to be believed but the state of salvation in which men stand by faith. “For” is eis (eij"), a preposition often speaking of purpose or result, here used in the sense of the words “in order to bring about.” “Nations” is ethnos (ejqno"), here, the Gentiles. Paul was appointed an apostle in order that through his ministry there might be brought about an obedience which springs from faith, or an obedience to the Faith, among the Gentiles. If we take the former interpretation as correct, then Paul’s commission was to bring about a general obedience among the Gentiles that springs from faith, if the latter, then his commission was to bring about an obedience to the Christian Faith among the Gentiles. The latter is more specific and definitive of that kind of a commission God would give Paul. He would not be given a commission in such indefinite terms. While not at all insisting upon the latter meaning, the writer suggests it as more in keeping with the context. Alford remarks that the construction here is like that in II Corinthians 10:5 where the a.v. has “bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” The word “Christ” is objective genitive. It receives the action of the noun of action, “obedience.” The translation could read “obedience to Christ.” “Faith” is objective genitive, and receives the action from the noun of action, “obedience,” and we have, “in order to bring about obedience to the faith among the Gentiles.” “For” is huper (uJper), “for the sake of, in behalf of.” The words “The Name” are an Old Testament expression speaking of all that God is in His being, His majesty, glory, power, holiness, righteousness. It is used in the sense of character or reputation. For instance, “that man has a name for honesty.” That is, he has a reputation for honesty. That is his character. So, Paul says that he was appointed as an apostle in order to bring about obedience to the Faith among the Gentiles in view of all that the Lord Jesus is in His glorious Person, that is, in honor or recognition of all that He is, and for His sake. It was a service of love in recognition of all that Jesus is in Himself and for His sake. Then Paul deftly brings in the Roman saints in the words “among whom (the Gentiles) are ye also the called of Jesus Christ.” “Called” is  (klhtoi), “called ones,” those called, summoned by an effectual call in which the one called is rendered in sovereign grace willing to appropriate salvation through faith in the Lord Jesus. Paul says these Roman saints were “the called of Jesus Christ.” This could be genitive of possession, belonging to Jesus Christ, as Robertson translates, “called to be Jesus Christ’s.” Denney says, “They belonged to Him because they have heard and obeyed the gospel.” Yet,

Alford says, “the expression can hardly be taken otherwise than as ‘called by Jesus Christ,’ ” and cites John 5:25 and I Timothy 1:12. Paul describes the recipients of this letter also as “beloved of God.” The word is in the plural, “loved-ones of God,” and the word “God” is without the article, “God’s loved-ones. “ The word “love” is  (ajgaph), the love that was shown at Calvary. Then the apostle says of them, “called to be saints.” The words “to be” are in italics, showing that they are not in the Greek text, and are supplied by the translators. The Greek has an adjective and a noun, namely, “called saints,” that is, saints who were constituted saints by the effectual call of God into salvation. The word “called” here has no idea of “named saints.” “Saints” is hagios (aJgio"), the noun form of  (aJgizw), “to set apart for God.” Thus a saint is a sinner who in answer to his faith in the Lord Jesus has been set apart by the Holy Spirit for God, set apart from sin to holiness, from Satan to God, out of the First Adam into the Last Adam, to live a set-apart life of separation. It is interesting to note that the words “saint, sanctify, sanctification, holy, hallow” all are translations of this same root hagi (aJgi). The root idea is that of separation from to separation to. In its religious use it contrasts the secular from the religious or sacred, that which is unholy from that which is holy. The word “saint” is God’s designation of a believer. The name “Christian” was coined by the world as a term of derision. The city of Antioch in Syria had a reputation for coining nicknames. Luke says, “The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch” (Acts 11:26). The word is used three times in the New Testament, and each time as a term of reproach or derision. Here in Antioch, the name Christianos (Cristiano") was coined to distinguish the worshippers of the Christ from the Kaisaranios (Kaisaranio"), the worshippers of Caesar. It was a term of derision, flung into the teeth of the followers of the Christ by the proud worshippers of the Emperor. Agrippa used the term when Paul was defending himself and his message before the king. Agrippa said, “With such little persuasion you would make me a Christianos (Cristiano").” Peter in his first letter (4:16), by the Holy Spirit appropriates the title as a proper designation of a believer when he says, “If any man suffer as a Christianos (Cristiano").” The grace which Paul prays will be theirs is grace for daily living in the form of the ministry of the Holy Spirit. The peace is peace of heart, a state of Christian tranquility. Translation. Through whom we received grace and apostleship in order that there may be obedience to the Faith among all the Gentiles in behalf of His Name, among whom you also are called ones belonging to Jesus Christ, to all who are in Rome, God’s loved ones, called (divinely summoned) saints. Grace to you and peace from God our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. (1:8) Paul’s “first” is not followed by “second, third” etc. The rush of the apostle’s thoughts precludes any orderly succession of points here. He thanks God through Jesus Christ as the medium through whom thanksgiving is to be made and through whom salvation came to the Roman saints. The faith of the saints here refers to the fact that they are Christians and to the lives they lived. To have a Christian church in the capital city of the Empire, into which city according to the Roman historian Tacitus, “flow all things that are vile and abominable, and where they are encouraged” was quite a thing, and to have the saints there living singularly pure lives, was a great testimony to the divine source of Christianity. “Spoken” is  (kataggellw), “to spread the tidings throughout,

down along those that hear them, with the included idea of celebrating or commending” (Vincent). Their faith was thus spoken of throughout the whole world. This is a popular hyperbole speaking of general diffusion throughout the Roman empire. This local church in the capital city was like a city set on a hill, occupying a prominent position in the world of that day. Translation. First, I am constantly thanking my God through Jesus Christ concerning all of you, because your faith is constantly being spread abroad in the whole world. (1:9–12) “Witness” is martus (martu"), “one who avers or can aver what he himself has seen or heard or knows by any other means.” Our word “martyr” is derived from it, and means “one who testifies to what he knows concerning the Lord Jesus even though that testimony costs him his life.” “Serve” is  (latreuw), “to render religious service or homage, to worship, to perform sacred services.” It is used in the LXX of the service of the priests. The word “spirit” (pneuma (pneuma)) refers to Paul’s human spirit, that part of man which gives him God-consciousness and enables him when regenerated, to worship and serve God. Denney comments, “Paul’s ministry is spiritual and rendered with the spirit—not like that of the ministers in the Temple at Jerusalem.” The sphere of this ministry is the good news concerning God’s Son. “Without ceasing” is from  (ajdialeiptw"), made up of  (dialeipw), “to leave off, to intermit,” and Alpha (ÆAlfa) which negates the word, namely, “without intermission, without leaving off, incessantly, assiduously.” Robertson remarks that Paul uses the same word in I Thessalonians 1:2 where he speaks of praying for those saints, and says that it seems that Paul had prayer lists. With reference to Paul calling upon God’s testimony as to his praying for the Roman saints, Denney says, “At a distance, the Apostle cannot directly prove his love, but he appeals to God, who hears his ceaseless prayers for the Romans, as a witness of it.” Bengel says, “There could be no other witness to his practice in his secret prayers, but God, and as the assertion of a habit of incessantly praying for the Roman Christians, whom he had never seen, might seem to savor of an exaggerated expression of affection, he solemnly appeals to this only possible testimony.” Paul prays that he may “have a prosperous journey” to come to the Romans. The word is  (eujodow), “to grant a successful issue, to cause to prosper.” The original meaning, “to grant an expeditious journey” seems to have been left behind here. Paul uses a series of four particles to express his eagerness to visit the Romans. He prays that “if it is possible, already, now at length,” after so long a time, he may be prospered to come to them. “By” is en (ejn), and could be instrumental here, but probably is locative of sphere. Paul’s petition is that if it is in the will of God for him to see the Romans, he asks that his prayer be answered. He wishes to impart to the saints at Rome some spiritual gift, and for the purpose that they may be established. The spiritual gift is a pneumatikon charisma (pneumatikon carisma), which Vincent defines as “a favor received without merit on the recipient’s part.” He says, “Paul uses it both in the ordinary sense (5:15, 16, 6:23), and in a special, technical sense, denoting extraordinary powers bestowed upon individuals by the Holy Spirit, such as gifts of healing, speaking with tongues, prophecy, etc. See Romans 12:6, I Corinthians 1:7; 12:4, 31, I Peter 4:10. In I Timothy 1:6, it is used of the sum of the

powers requisite for the discharge of the office of an evangelist. The purpose of the impartation of these gifts was that they might be established both in their Christian character and their service. After saying this, Paul offers “not merely an explanatory repetition of the preceding phrase, but modifies the idea contained in it. It is a modest and delicate explanation, by which Paul guards himself against the possible appearance of underestimating the Christian standpoint of his readers, to whom he was still, personally, a stranger. Hence he would say, ‘I desire to impart some spiritual gift that you may be strengthened; not that I would implya reproach of weakness or instability, but that I desire for you the strengthening of which I stand in need along with you, and which I hope may be wrought in us both by personal intercourse and our mutual faith’ ” (Vincent). Robertson suggests, “Instead of saying that he had a spiritual gift for them, he wishes to add that they also have one for him.” He translates, “That I with you may be comforted,” and adds, “My being comforted in you with you, a mutual blessing to each party (you and me).” The word “comfort” usually carries with it the idea of consolation which is not Paul’s thought here. The word is  (sumparakalew), “to strengthen with others.” It is a mutual strengthening, brought about by Paul’s ministry among them and their association with him, that the apostle is speaking of. Translation. For my witness is God, to whom I render sacred service in my spirit in the good news concerning His Son, how unceasingly I am making mention of you always at my prayers, making supplication if somehow now at last I may be prospered in the will of God to come to you, for I long to see you, in order that I may impart some spiritual gift to you, resulting in your being established, that is, moreover, that I may be strengthened among you through the mutual faith which is both yours and mine. (1:13) “Purposed” is  (protiqhmi), “to place before, to set before one’s self, propose to one’s self, to purpose, determine.” “Let” is obsolete English for “hinder” or “prevent.” The verb is  (kwluw), “to cut off, cut short,” hence “to hinder, prevent.” “Have” is ingressive aorist and should be translated “obtain.” Concerning the expression “even as among other Gentiles,” Denney says, “Nothing could indicate more clearly that the church at Rome, as a whole, was Gentile.” Translation. Moreover, I do not desire you to be ignorant, brethren, that often I proposed to myself to come to you, but I was prevented up to this time, in order that some fruit I might procure also among you even as also among the rest of the Gentiles. (1:14, 15) “Debtor” is  (ojfeileth"), “one held by some obligation, bound by some duty.” The word refers to a personal, moral obligation as contrasted to a necessity in the nature of the case, which latter idea is expressed by dei (dei). Vincent comments, “All men, without distinction of nation or culture, are Paul’s creditors. ‘He owes them his life, his person, in virtue of the grace bestowed upon him, and of the office which he received’ (Godet).” “Barbarians” is barbaros (barbaro"), “one whose speech is rude, rough, harsh,” as if repeating the syllables barbar (barbar). The Greeks used the

word of any foreigner ignorant of the Greek language and the Greek culture, whether mental or moral, with the added notion after the Persian war, of rudeness and brutality (Thayer). Paul’s thought is that he is obligated to all Gentiles without distinction. “Wise” is sophos (sofo"), “unwise,”  (ajnohto"). Sophos (Sofo") is the wisdom which is akin to goodness, or rather is goodness itself contemplated from one particular point of view, as indeed the wisdom which only the good can possess, whereas  (ajnohto") refers to that lack of wisdom which is due to a moral fault (Trench). The above represents the classical use of the words among the Greeks, which use survived in the  (Koinh) Greek of the first century. The Greek of “so, as much as in me is, I am ready,” Denney translates either, “all that depends on me is eager, i.e., for my part, I am ready,” or, “the readiness, so far as I am concerned, (is) to preach the gospel to you also who are at Rome.” He says, “The contrast implied is that between willing (which Paul on his part is equal to) and carrying out the will (which depends on God).” Translation. Both to the Greeks and to the Barbarians, both to the wise and to those who lack wisdom, I am debtor in such a manner that to the extent of my ability I am eager to proclaim the good news also to you who are in Rome. (1:16, 17) In introducing the theme of Romans, Paul uses gar (gar), “for.” Vincent says, “marking the transition from the introduction to the treatise, ‘I am ready to preach at Rome, for, though I might seem to be deterred by the contempt in which the gospel is held, and by the prospect of my own humiliation as its preacher, I am not ashamed of it.” Alford comments, “Yea, to you at Rome also, for though your city be mistress of the world, though your emperors be worshipped as deities, though you be elated by your pomps and luxuries and victories, yet I am not ashamed of the apparently mean origin of the gospel I preach.” And then he gives the reason why he is not ashamed of it. Coming to the city where power is the keynote, the power of the Roman empire, its military might, the apostle says that the good news he brings is “the power of God unto salvation.” Of the six words for “power” in the Greek language, Paul chooses dunamis (dunami") to describe the effectual working of the good news of salvation. Dunamis (Dunami") is power, natural ability, inherent power residing in a thing by virtue of its nature, or, power which a person or thing exerts or puts forth. The gospel is the inherent, omnipotent power of God operating in the salvation of a lost soul that accepts it. “Unto” is eis (eij"), a preposition often signifying result. The gospel is God’s power resulting in salvation to the one who believes. The definite article is absent before “power,” “The gospel is a power of God.” Denney says, “It does no injustice to render a ‘divine power.’ The conception of the gospel as a force pervades the epistles to the Corinthians; its proof, so to speak, is dynamical, not logical. It is demonstrated, not by argument, but by what it does; and looking to what it can do, Paul is proud to preach it anywhere.” Vincent says that the gospel is “not merely a powerful means in God’s hands, but in itself a divine energy.” It is the good news of salvation energized by the Holy Spirit. Our word “dynamite” is the transliteration of this Greek word but not its translation. Dunamis (Dunami") does not refer to an explosive powder. The Greeks knew nothing about gunpowder. The gospel is not the dynamite of God. It is a sweet and loving message of mercy and grace which the Holy Spirit in sovereign grace makes operative in the heart of the sinner elected to

salvation before the foundation of the universe. The words “of Christ” are not in the best texts. Paul says, “For I am not ashamed of the good news, for a power of God it is resulting in salvation to every one who believes, not only to the Jew first but also to the Gentile.” Paul wrote this letter before he had, after Israel’s repeated rejection of the good news, pronounced the fateful words, “Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it” (Acts 28:28). Until then, the apostle had given the Jew the priority in the hearing of the Word of God, but with that decision, the Jew was put on the same footing as the Gentile. Then, the apostle informs his readers what it is that makes the gospel a power of God, or what it is that makes it effectual in the saving of a believing sinner. He says, “A righteousness of God (or God’s righteousness) in it is revealed.” The word “righteousness” is a key word in Romans, and demands a careful and detailed treatment. The noun is  (dikaiosunh), and the adjective, dikaios (dikaio"). Cremer, in his Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek in which he specializes in the important doctrinal and theological words of the Christian system, is most helpful. He defines dikaios (dikaio"), “what is right, conformable to right, pertaining to right.” He says, “The fundamental idea is that of a state or condition conformable to order, apart from the consideration whether usage and custom or other factors determine the order and direction.” In other words, that which is righteous in the biblical sense is not determined by man nor by any external consideration but by God, and that by divine fiat. Cremer continues: “As to the import of the conception in a moral sense, there is a decisive difference, not to be mistaken, between the profane, and especially the Greek usage and the biblical, and this difference arises from the different, nay, opposite standards by which it is estimated in the two spheres. Righteousness in the biblical sense is a condition of rightness the standard of which is God, which is estimated according to the divine standard, which shows itself in behaviour conformable to God, and has to do above all things with its relation to God, and with the walk before Him. It is, and it is called, a righteousness of God (Rom. 3:21, 1:17)—righteousness as it belongs to God and is of value before Him, Godlike righteousness; with this righteousness, thus defined, the gospel (Rom. 1:17) comes into that world of nations, which had been wont to measure by a different standard. Righteousness in the Scripture sense is a thoroughly religious conception, designating the normal relation of men and their acts, etc., to God. Righteousness in the profane mind is a preponderatingly social virtue, only with a certain religious background.” Cremer, discussing the noun  (dikaiosunh) says, “Thus it appears how new, and yet not unprepared for, was the introduction of the Pauline righteousness of God into profane soil. That righteousness must be a righteousness of God; that God is the goal and standard of integrity, this is one of those unexpressed presuppositions, and underlying thoughts of Holy Scripture to which Paul in this and other instances, with peculiar acuteness and clearness which distinguish him in apprehending the ethic-religious contrast, has devoted the word. At the same time, it is a presentiment at attaining clearness, yet often felt and asserting itself in the Greek and, indeed, in the human mind which is inalienable so long as there exists in man the presentiment or the consciousness and intelligence more or less clear of a highest and final judgment (cf. Acts 17:31).” Referring to dikaios (dikaio") again, Cremer says, “Used of God Himself, dikaios (dikaio") designates before all His bearing towards mankind, and also His doings, not an

answering to the claims to be made upon Him from men, in which case it could not be said, ‘faithful is He and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from every unrighteousness’ (I John 2:9), but as answering to the norm once for all established in and with Himself, so that holiness, in which God’s nature manifests itself, is the presupposition of righteousness.” Dealing with dikaios (dikaio") in its relation to men, Cremer says, “It denotes their normal relation to the will and judgment of God.… Dikaios (Dikaio") throughout the n.t., designates that person or thing which corresponds with the divine norm whether, as the connection will show, the reference be to the person’s conduct before or towards God, or his relation to the claims and judgment of God.” In our present verse, Vincent says that “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 ch. 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.” Thus, the righteousness which the gospel offers the sinner is God’s own righteousness in which he will stand in right relation to Him forever. His guilt is taken away because borne by Another on the Cross, and a positive righteousness, Jesus Christ, is given him in grace. The white linen curtains of the Tabernacle Court symbolized three things, the righteousness which God is, which He demands of any person who would be in right relation to Him, and which He bestows in answer to faith. The linen curtains keep the sinner out of God’s presence, but the door or gate affords entrance to the Holy of Holies through the blood sacrifice. Now the same linen curtains that kept the sinner out of God’s presence, keep him in. The righteousness of God that will damn a sinner for all eternity who rejects it, saves and keeps saved for all eternity, the sinner who accepts it. For a long time, Martin Luther saw only the condemning righteousness of God, and he hated it. When he came to see that that righteousness that condemns when rejected, saves when it is accepted, the light of the gospel broke into his darkened soul. This righteousness, Paul says, is revealed in the good news of salvation. “Revealed” is  (ajpokaluptw), “to uncover what has been hidden.” He says, “It is revealed from faith to faith.” “From faith” is  (ejk pistew"). It is the ablative of source. The source of the bestowment of righteousness to man, that which is the medium or means whereby righteousness is given, is faith. Alford says, “ek (ejk) points to the condition, or the subjective ground. Pistis (Pisti") is faith in the sense of trust, and that (a) a trustful assumption of a truth in reference to knowledge which equals conviction: (b) a trustful surrender of the soul, as regards the feeling. Here it is especially the latter of these: that trust reposed in God’s grace in Christ, which tranquillizes the soul and frees it from all guilt,—and especially trust in the atoning death of Jesus. Bound up with this … is humility, consisting in the abandonment of all merits of a man’s own, and recognition of his own unworthiness and need of redemption.” “To faith” is eis pistin (eij" pistin). The expression refers to the attitude of faith on the part of a sinner. The gospel reveals a righteousness of God which is bestowed on the principle of faith, and reveals this, not to the sinner who would desire to merit that righteousness by good works but receive it by faith. In quoting Habakkuk 2:4, “The just shall live by faith,” Paul “shows that righteousness by faith is no new idea, but found in the prophets. The words are cited again in Galatians

3:11, Hebrews 10:38, in the former place with the same purpose as here. They are used in Habakkuk with reference to credence given to the prophetic word: but properly speaking, all faith is one, in whatever word or act of God reposed: so that the apostle is free from any charge of forcing the words to the present purpose” (Alford). The Greek text has it, “Moreover the just out of faith shall live.” That is, the source of his new life in Christ Jesus is faith, the appropriating medium by means of which he receives righteousness and life. This was the spark that lit the Reformation. Translation. For I am not ashamed of the good news. For God’s power it is, resulting in salvation to everyone who believes, to a Jew first and to a Gentile, for God’s righteousness in it is revealed on the principle of faith to faith, even as it stands written, And the one who is just on the principle of faith shall live. (1:18) The apostle now speaks of the wrath of God inasmuch as “the revelation of the righteousness of God (v. 17) is needed in view of the revelation of His wrath, from which only God’s righteousness (whether it be His justifying sentence or the righteousness He bestows on man) can deliver” (Denney). “Wrath” is  (ojrgh). The word is used of God’s wrath in Matthew 3:7, Romans 1:17, 12:19, and is defined by Trench as “a wrath of God who would not love good unless He hated evil, the two being inseparable, that He must do both or neither.” It is used of our Lord when, after healing the man with the withered hand, He observed the hardness of heart of the Pharisees, and looked upon them with anger (Mk. 3:5).  (ÆOrgh) is an anger “which righteous men not merely may, but as they are righteous, must feel; nor can there be a surer and sadder token of an utterly prostrate moral condition than the not being able to be angry with sin—and sinners” (Trench). Vincent describes  (ojrgh) as God’s personal emotion with regard to sin. It represents God’s abhorrence and hatred of sin. The same authority notes that  (ojrgh) is not punishment of sin but God’s attitude towards it. “Ungodliness” is asebeia (ajsebeia) “lack of reverence toward God, impiety, irreligiousness.” “Hold” is  (katecw), “to hold down, repress.” The truth here is not the gospel, for all men do not possess a knowledge of it. The truth here is found in the context, the fact of a supreme Being with divine attributes to whom worship and obedience are due, this truth being seen by all men through their observation of the created universe, the latter demanding a Creator to answer for its existence. The human race, possessing this truth, yet holds it down in the sense of refusing to acknowledge its moral implications, and goes on in its sin. Translation. For there is revealed God’s wrath from heaven upon every lack of reverence and (every) unrighteousness of men who the truth in unrighteousness are holding down. (1:19, 20) “That which may be known” is to  (gnwston). Vincent comments, “But that which is knowable was not revealed to the heathen. If it was, what need of a revelation? Better, that which is known, the universal sense in the New Testament, signifying the universal objective knowledge of God as the Creator, which is, more or less, in all men.” “Manifest” is phaneros (fanero"), “apparent, evident, known.” “In them” is en autois (ejn aujtoi"), in their hearts and conscience. Denney says, “God’s power, and the totality of the divine attributes constituting the divine nature, are inevitably impressed

on the mind by nature, (or, to use the scripture word, by creation). There is that within man which so catches the meaning of all that is without as to issue in an instinctive knowledge of God.… This knowledge involves duties, and men are without excuse because, when in possession of it, they did not perform these duties; that is, did not glorify as God the God whom they thus knew.” “Shewed” is  (fanerow), “to make visible, manifest.” God through the light of the created universe revealed Himself as Creator and God to the human race. Paul explains this in verse 20. The things which are invisible of God, namely, His eternal power and Godhead, are clearly seen. What a paradox, invisible things which are visible. This state of things has been true since the creation of the universe. The eternal power and Godhead of the Creator have been since that time and are now understood by the things that have been made, namely, the material creation. Man, reasoning upon the basis of the law of cause and effect, which law requires an adequate cause for every effect, is forced to the conclusion that such a tremendous effect as the universe, demands a Being of eternal power and of divine attributes. That Being must be the Deity who should be worshipped. The Greek word translated “Godhead” needs some study. It is  (qeioth"). We will compare it to  (qeoth") (also translated “Godhead” a.v.) in order to bring out its meaning more clearly.  (Qeoth") is used by Paul in Colossians 2:9 where he speaks of the fact that in our Lord “there is permanently at home all the fulness of absolute deity bodily” (in His incarnate state). Trench comments, “St. Paul is declaring that in the Son there dwells all the fulness of absolute Godhead; they were no mere rays of divine glory which gilded Him, lighting up His Person for a season and with a splendor not His own; but He was, and is, absolute and perfect God.” Commenting on the use of  (qeioth") in Romans 1:20, he says, “St. Paul is declaring how much of God may be known from the revelation of Himself which He has made in nature, from those vestiges of Himself which men may everywhere trace in the world around them. Yet it is not the personal God whom any man may learn to know by these aids: He can be known only by the revelation of Himself in His Son; but only His divine attributes, His majesty and glory … it is not to be doubted that St. Paul uses this vaguer, more abstract, and personal word, just because he would affirm that men may know God’s power and majesty, His divine power (II Peter 1:3) from His works; but would not imply that they may know Himself from these, or anything short of the revelation of His eternal Word. Motives not dissimilar induce him to use to theion (to qeion) rather than ho theos (oJ qeo") in addressing the Athenians on Mars Hill (Acts 17:29).” Vincent says, “Godhead expresses deity ( (qeoth")).  (Qeioth") is godhood, not godhead. It signifies the sum-total of the divine attributes.” Thus, through the light of the created universe, unsaved man recognizes the fact that there is a supreme Being who created it, who has eternal power and divine attributes, a Being to whom worship and obedience are due. This is the truth which unsaved man is repressing. Herein lies the just condemnation of the entire race, since it has not lived up to the light which it has. This, Paul says, renders man without excuse. “Without excuse” is the translation of  (ajnapologhto"), “without defense, without excuse.” That is, man in holding down the above truth renders himself without a defense for his action. Translation. Because that which is known of God is plainly evident in them, for God made it clear to them; for the things which are invisible of Him since the creation of the universe are clearly seen, being understood

by means of the things that are made, namely, His eternal power and divinity, resulting in their being without a defense. (1:21–23) The members of the human race are without defense for their actions because, knowing God as Creator they did not glorify Him as God. Their experiential knowledge ( (ginwskw)) of God is not here a saving knowledge of Him as the context indicates, but a knowledge of Him as the God who has been revealed through the light of nature as Creator. Failure to glorify Him resulted in ungratefulness of His gifts, food, clothing, shelter, the gift of life itself. Bengel says, “They did neither; in their religion, they deposed God from His place as Creator,—in their lives, they were ungrateful by the abuse of His gifts.” Denney says, “Nature shows us that God is to be glorified and thanked, i.e., nature reveals Him to be great and good.” The next step away from God is found in the words, “became vain in their imaginations.” “Became vain” is  (mataiow). The noun is mataios (mataio"), “devoid of force, truth, success, result.” The word “vain” today means “proud.” The Greek word did not have any idea like that. Mataios (Mataio") refers to that which is in vain, futile, that which is without result or success. It refers to the unsuccessful attempt to do something or be something. It refers to that which does not measure up to that which it should be. Solomon said, “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.” That is, “futility of futilities, all is futile.” All that he tried was futile, unsuccessful, in giving him complete satisfaction. Thus, the human race, refusing to glorify God and be grateful, became futile, unsuccessful in its reasonings (imaginations). The word is dialogismos (dialogismo"), “the thinking of a man deliberating with himself, deliberation.” As a result, “their foolish heart was darkened.” “Foolish” is asunetos (ajsuneto"), “unintelligent, without understanding.” “Heart,” kardia (kardia), is the seat of feeling, intelligence, moral choice. “Professing” is  (faskw), “to affirm, allege, pretend, profess.” Vincent says, “The verb is used of unfounded assertion.” “Wise” is sophos (sofo"). Aristotle defined the word as speaking of mental excellence in its highest and fullest sense. It speaks of the striving after the best ends as well as using the best means (Trench). The Greeks also used it to describe the man who was skilled, expert, skilled in letters, cultivated, learned. “Became fools” is  (mwrainw), “to be foolish, to act foolish” (Thayer). Liddell and Scott in their classical lexicon define  (mwrainw) as follows, “to be silly, foolish, drivel, play the fool, be stupefied, to become insipid.” The noun  (mwro") has the meanings of “dull, sluggish, stupid.” Our word “moron” comes from  (mwro"). This will give the reader a better understanding of the Greek word translated “became fools.” “Changed” is  (ajllassw), “to change, to cause one thing to cease and another to take its place, to exchange one thing for another.” The human race exchanged the glory of God for idols. The latter took the place of the former. “Uncorruptible” is aphthartos (ajfqarto"), “not liable to corruption or decay, imperishable,” as compared to man-made idols which are liable to decay and corruption. Man exchanged the glory of the uncorruptible God for a likeness which consists of an image of corruptible man. “Image” is  (eijkwn), “a derived likeness,” that is, the images of men and animals the heathen make are derived from the originals. Notice the descending scale of created things, man, birds, fourfooted beasts, snakes. Vincent says, “Deities of human form prevailed in Greece, those of bestial form in Egypt; and both methods of worship were practiced in

Rome. Serpent-worship was common in Chaldea, and also inEgypt.… The priests of Isis contrived that the silver imagesof serpents kept in her temple should move their heads to the suppliant.… The vestal virgins were entrusted with the attendance upon a holy serpent, and were charged with supplying his table with meats on festival days.” Translation. Because, knowing God, not as God did they glorify Him, nor were they grateful, but they became futile in their reasonings, and there was darkened their stupid heart. Assertinq themselves to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the uncorruptible God for a likeness of an image of corruptible man and of birds and of quadrupeds and of snakes. (1:24) “Gave up” is paradidoµmi, “to give into the hands of another, to give over into one’s power or use.” Since men chose to give up God and worship the creature, God could do nothing but give men into the control of the sinful things they preferred to God. In other words, God would not violate man’s will and force him to do something he did not want to do. When men persisted in following their totally depraved natures, God allowed them free rein. The natural result was immorality of the vilest kind. Alford, says of God’s act of delivering mankind over into the control of utter human depravity, “not merely permissive, but judicial, God delivered them over. As sin begets sin, and darkness of mind, deeper darkness, grace gives place to judgment, and the divine wrath hardens men, and hurries them on to more fearful degrees of depravity.” God delivered man to uncleanness. The word is akatharsia (ajkaqarsia), in the moral sense, “the impurity of lustful, luxurious, profligate living.” “Lusts” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a passionate craving, longing, desire,” here a sinful one. “Through” is en (ejn), “in their own hearts.” Alford says, “not by or through the lusts; the lusts of the heart were the field of action, the department of their being in which this dishonor took place.” He defines akatharsia (ajkaqarsia), “more than mere profligacy in the satisfaction of natural lust—bestiality, impurity in the physical, not only in the social and religious sense.” Translation. On which account God delivered them over in the passionate cravings of their hearts to bestial profligacy which had for its purpose the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves. (1:25) “Change” is  (metallassw), “to exchange one thing for another.” Instead of the truth of God, humanity embraced a lie. “Creature” is ktisis (ktisi") “the creation,” or “the created thing.” “Worshipped” is sebazomai (sebazomai), “to honor religiously, to worship.” “Served” is  (latreuw), “to render religious service or homage.” “More” is para (para), which means “alongside, beside.” Vincent says, “The preposition indicates passing by the Creator altogether, not merely giving preference to the creature. Hence, rather than (Rev.).” “Who” is hoitines (oiJtine"), referring back to those in verse 24 whom God gave up to their own passionate cravings. The word emphasizes character or nature. These were of such a nature or character as to have exchanged God’s truth for a lie. That is exactly what would be expected of persons so constituted. “Blessed” is  (eujloghto"), made up of  (legw), “to speak,” and eu (euj), “well” or “good,” thus, “to speak well or good” of a person, to eulogize him. Our word “eulogy” is derived from this Greek word.

Translation. Who were of such a character that they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and rendered religious service to the creation rather than to the Creator who is to be eulogized forever. Amen. (1:26) “Affections” is  (paqhma), “an affection, a passion.” “Vile” is atimia (ajtimia), “dishonor, ignominy, disgrace.” The Greek word for “honor,”  (timh), comes from  (tiw), the verbal form, “to estimate, honor.” Thus to honor someone is to evaluate the worth of that person and to treat him with the consideration, respect, and love due his character and position. To dishonor a person is to either put an incorrect appraisal upon his worth and treat him accordingly, or, having properly evaluated his character, to refuse to treat him with the respect and deference which is his due. The passions controlling these of whom Paul is speaking caused them to put an incorrect estimate upon the sacredness, dignity, and purity of the physical body and thus to use it in a way which dishonored it. Vincent’s note is helpful; “As distinguished from epithumia (ejpiqumia) (lusts) in verse 24,  (paqh) (passions), is the narrower and intense word. Epithumia (ÆEpiqumia) is the larger word, including the whole world of active lusts and desires, while the meaning of pathos (paqo") is passive, being the diseased condition out of which the lusts spring. Epithumia (ÆEpiqumia) are evil longings;  (paqh), ungovernable affections. Thus it appears that the divine punishment was the more severe, in that they were given over to a condition, and not merely to an evil desire.” The word for “women” is not the word used as in John 4:9,  (gunh), but  (qhlu"), “a female,” and the word for “men” in 1:27 is not  (ajnqrwpo"), or even  (ajnhr), a male member of the human race, but arsen (ajrsen), male as distinguished from a female. Vincent says that these terms are used “because only the distinction of sex is contemplated.” “Change” is  (metallassw), “to exchange one thing for another.” “Use” here is  (crhsi"), used of the sexual use of a woman. “Natural” is phusis (fusi"), “the nature of things, the force, laws, order of nature, as opposed to that which is monstrous, abnormal, perverse.” “Against nature” is para phusin (para fusin), “that which is against nature’s laws.” Translation. Because of which God gave them over to dishonorable passions, for even their females exchanged their natural use for that which is against nature. (1:27) “Burned” is  (ejkkaiw), “to burn out.” Vincent comments. “The terms are terrible in their intensity. Literally, ‘burned out.’ The preposition indicates the rage of lust.” Robertson defines, “to inflame with lust.” The word ek (ejk) prefixed to the verb, intensifies its meaning. Their lust was satiated. It was an all-out endeavor to satisfy their totally-depraved natures. “Lust” here is not the usual word used, epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a passionate craving,” but orexis (ojrexi"), “eager desire, lust, appetite.” “Working” is katergazomai (katergazomai), “to perform, accomplish, achieve, to do that from which something results, to carry to its ultimate conclusion.” “Unseemly” is  (ajschmosunh), “want of form, disfigurement, deformed, one’s nakedness, shame.” The word refers here to that which is unseemly in that it is immodest, shameful. “Recompence” is antimisthian (ajntimisqian) “a reward given in compensation, requital, recompense.”

The word here refers to that natural result of their sin which pays them back for what they have done, as a person says who contemplates doing something wrong, “I suppose I shall pay for this.” “Was meet” is edei (ejdei), “a necessity in the nature of the case.” The evil consequences were necessary as ordained by divine law. When one violates the laws of nature, one must pay the price. “Error” is  (planh), “a wandering, roving,” thus, “a deviation.” Translation. And likewise also the males, having put aside the natural use of the females, burned themselves out in their lustful appetite toward one another, males with males carrying to its ultimate conclusion that which is shameful, receiving in themselves that retribution which was a necessity in the nature of the case because of their deviation from the norm. (1:28) “Did like” is  (dokimazw), “to put to the test for the purpose of approving, and finding that the person tested meets the specifications prescribed, to put one’s approval upon him.” The human race put God to the test for the purpose of approving Him should He meet the specifications which it laid down for a God who would be to its liking, and finding that He did not meet those specifications, it refused to approve Him as the God to be worshipped, or have Him in its knowledge. This is the story of the Greek word translated “like.” “Knowledge” is  (ejpignwsi"), “full and precise knowledge.” Robertson says, “They had a dim memory that was a caricature.” “Reprobate mind” is adokimon noun (ajdokimon noun). The human race put God on trial ( (dokimazw)), and because it rejected Him after trial, God gives it a “trialess” mind, one incapable of discharging the functions of a mind with respect to the things of salvation. Denney says; “As they did not think it fit, after trial made to keep God in their knowledge, God gave them up to a mind which cannot stand trial. The one thing answers to the other. Virtually, they pronounced the true God adokimos (ajdokimo") (disapproved), and would have none of Him, and He in turn gave them up to a nous adokimos (nou" ajdokimo") (a disapproved mind), a mind which is no mind and cannot discharge the functions of one, a mind in which the divine distinctions of right and wrong are confused and lost, so that God’s condemnation cannot but fall on it at last. Nous (Nou") is not only reason, but conscience; when this is perverted, as in the people of whom Paul speaks, or in the Canaanites, who did their abominations unto their gods, the last deep of evil has been reached.” “Convenient” is  (kaqhkw), “it is becoming, it is fitting.” Robertson says, “Like an old abandoned building, the home of bats and snakes, left ‘to do those things which are not fitting,’ like the night clubs of modern cities, the dives and dens of the underworld, without God and in the darkness of unrestrained animal impulses. This was a technical term with Stoics.” Translation. And even as after putting God to the test for the purpose of approving Him should He meet the specifications, and finding that He did not, they disapproved of holding Him in their full and precise knowledge, God gave them up to a mind that would not meet the test for that which a mind was meant, to practice those things which were not becoming nor fitting. (1:29–32) “Being filled” is a perfect participle. The perfect tense in Greek speaks of a

past completed action having present results. These who had disapproved of holding God in their knowledge were completely filled as a consequence with the twenty-one sins mentioned in verses 29–32, with the result that they remained in a full condition. “Without natural affection” is astorgos (ajstorgo"), referring to love of parents for children, children for parents, husband for wife and wife for husband. Translation. Being filled with every unrighteousness, pernicious evil, avarice, malice, full of envy, murder, wrangling, guile, malicious craftiness, secret slanderers, backbiters, hateful to God, insolent, haughty, swaggerers, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, stupid, faithless, without natural affection, merciless; such are those who knowing the judgment of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only habitually do the same things, but also take pleasure in those who practice them.

CHAPTER TWO (2:1) Denney comments; “The apostle has now to prove that the righteousness of God is as necessary to the Jew as to the pagan; it is the Jew who is really addressed in this chapter from the beginning.” Alford says; “The address passes gradually to the Jews. They were the people who judged—who pronounced all Gentiles to be born in sin and under condemnation:—doubtless there were also proud and censorious men among the Gentiles, to whom the rebuke might apply, but these are hardly in the apostle’s mind.” Denney is again helpful, “The Jew is ready enough to judge the Gentile. But he forgets that the same principle on which the Gentile is condemned, namely, that he does evil in spite of better knowledge (1:32), condemns him also. His very assent to the impeachment in chapter 1:18–32 is his own condemnation. This is the force of deo (deo), ‘therefore.’ “ As to the words “Thou that judgest, doest the same things,” Denney says, “Not, you do the identical actions, but your conduct is the same, i.e., you sin against light. The sin of the Jews was the same, but their sins were not.” “Inexcusable” is  (ajnapologhto"), “without an apology or defence,” the word “apology” being used here not in the sense of begging one’s pardon, but in the sense of talking one’s self off from a charge. The Jew is unable to talk himself off from the charge of failing to live up to the light he has. “Judgest” is  (krinw), “to pick out, separate, approve, determine, pronounce judgment.” The word here refers to censorious criticism and judgment. It refers to a derogatory appraisal of another’s character, the forming of a judgment of his character. “Condemn” is  (katakrinw), the word  (krinw), “to judge,” and kata (kata), “down,” “to judge down,” thus, “to condemn.” Translation. Therefore, you are without a defense, O man, everyone who judges, for in that in which you are judging another, yourself you are condemning, for you who judge, practice the same things. (2:2) Vincent defines the judgment of God here as not the act of judging but the contents of the judgment. Denney says that “God’s judgment squares with the facts.” “Know” is oida (oijda), “absolute knowledge.” Translation. But we know that the judgment of God is according to truth

against those who practice such things. (2:3) “Thinkest” is logizomai (logizomai), “to reckon, compute, calculate, to take into account, to deliberate, weigh.” The word implies a process of reasoning. The “thou” is emphatic, “you the Jew.” Denney comments, “su (su) (you) has strong emphasis. The Jew certainly thought, in many cases, that the privilege of his birth would of itself ensure his entrance into the kingdom (Matt. 3:8, 9): this was his practical conviction, whatever might be his proper creed. Yet the su (su) (you) indicates that of all men the Jew, so distinguished by special revelation, should least have fallen into such an error. He is ‘the servant who knew his Lord’s will,’ and whose judgment will be most rigorous if it is neglected.” Translation. And do you reason thus, O man who judges those who practice such things, and (you yourself ) do the same things, that as for you, you will escape the judgment of God? (2:4) “Despises” is  (katafronew),  (fronew), “to have understanding, be wise, to feel, to think, to direct one’s mind to a thing,” kata (kata), “down,” thus, “to think a thing down,” in present-day parlance, “to look down one’s nose at a thing.” Vincent says: “The indicative mood unites a declaration with a question, ‘Do you despise? Aye, you do.’ “ “Goodness” is  (crhstoth"), “benignity, kindness.” “Forbearance” is  (ajnoch), “a holding back.” In classical Greek mostly of a truce of arms. It implies something temporary which may pass away under new conditions. Hence used in connection with the passing by of sins before Christ (Rom. 3:25). “ ‘It is that forebearance or suspence of wrath, that truce with the sinner, which by no means implies that the wrath will not be executed at the last; nay, involves that it certainly will, unless he be found under new conditions of repentance and obedience’ (Trench)” (Vincent). “Longsuffering”is makrothumia (makroqumia), “patience, slowness in avenging wrongs.” Denney says: “The goodness of God summarizes all three (goodness, forbearance, longsuffering) in the concrete. It amounts to contempt of God’s goodness if a man does not know (rather, ignores: compare Acts 13:27, I Cor. 14:38, Rom. 10:3) that its end is, not to approve of his sins, but to lead him to repentance.” The same authority says, “Not knowing, in that thou dost not know. This very ignorance is contempt.” Translation. Or, the wealth of His kindness and forbearance and longsuffering are you treating with contempt, being ignorant that the goodness of God is leading you to repentance? (2:5) “Treasurest” is  (qhsaurizw), “to gather and lay up, to heap up, store up.” “Hardness” is  (sklhroth") “obstinacy, stubbornness, hardness.” Vincent, commenting on the words, “wrath against the day of wrath,” says, “A very striking image—treasuring up wrath for one’s self. Rev., better, in the day, etc. The sinner stores it away. Its forthcoming is withheld by the forbearance of God. It will break out in the day when God’s righteous judgment shall be revealed.” Translation. But according to your obstinate and unrepentant heart you

are storing up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God. (2:6–10) Alford’s note on this difficult passage is most helpful. “The apostle is here speaking generally, of the general system of God in governing the world,—the judging according to each man’s works—punishing the evil, and rewarding the righteous. No question at present arises, how this righteousness in God’s sight is to be obtained—but the truth is only stated broadly at present, to be further specified by and by, when it is clearly shownthat by works of law no flesh can be justified before God. The neglect to observe this has occasioned two mistakes: (1) an idea that by this passage it is proved that not faith only, but works also in some measure justify before God, and (2), an idea that by a good work here is meant faith in Christ. However true it be, so much is certainly not meant here, but merely the fact, that everywhere, and in all, God punishes evil, and rewards good.” “Render” is  (ajpodidwmi), “to pay off, discharge” what is due, “to requite, recompense.” The word has in it the idea of reimbursing a person for doing something. “Deeds” is ergon (ejrgon), “works.” “Patient continuance” is  (uJpomonh), “steadfastness, constancy.” The root idea is that of remaining under some discipline, subjecting one’s self to something which demands the acquiescence of the will to something against which one naturally would rebel. “Immortality” is aphtharsia (ajfqarsia), “incorruption, perpetuity.” “Contentious” is eris (ejri"), “factious.” “Do not obey” is in its verb form  (ajpeiqew), “not to allow one’s self to be persuaded, to refuse or withhold belief.” The noun means “obstinacy, non-persuasibleness.” “Indignation” is  (ojrgh), God’s righteous wrath against sin. “Wrath” is thumos (qumo"), “anger.” “Tribulation” is thlipsis (qliyi"), “a pressing, pressing together, pressure, oppression, affliction, distress, straits.” “Anguish” is  (stenocwria), “narrowness of place, dire calamity, extreme affliction, distress, anguish.” Vincent comments; “The dominant idea is constraint. In Deuteronomy 33:53, 57, it describes the confinement of a siege. Trench remarks, ‘The fitness of this image is attested by the frequency with which, on the other hand, a state of joy is expressed in the Psalms and elsewhere, as a bringing into a large room.’ ” Translation. Who recompenses each according to his works, to those on the one hand who by steadfastness of a good work seek glory and honor and incorruptibility, life eternal; to those on the other hand who out of a factious spirit are both non-persuasible with respect to the truth and persuasible with respect to unrighteousness, wrath and anger. Tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man who works out to a finish the evil, both to the Jew first and also to the Gentile, but glory and honor and peace to everyone who works out to a finish the good, both to the Jew first and also to the Gentile. (2:11, 12) “Respect of persons” is  (proswpolhmyia). The writer once heard a young lady in a Christian Endeavor meeting expound this verse. She said, “I don’t wonder that God does not respect some people.” The Greek word is made up of the word for “face” and the verb “receive” the compound word meaning, “to receive face.”

Literally translated, the verse reads, “For there is not receiving of face in the presence of God.” That is, God does not receive anybody’s face. Thayer defines the word as follows; “partiality, the fault of one who when called on to requite or to give judgment has respect to the outward circumstances of men and not to their intrinsic merits, and so prefers, as the more worthy, one who is rich, high-born, or powerful, to another who is destitute of such gifts.” Alford says of this verse, “This remark serves as the transition to what follows, not merely as the confirmation of what went before. As to what preceded, it asserts that though the Jew has had great advantages, he shall be justly judged for his use of them, not treated as a favorite of Heaven: as to what follows, it introduces a comparison between him and the Gentiles to show how fairly he will be, for those greater advantages, regarded as first in responsibility. And thus we gradually pass on to the direct comparison between him and the Gentile, and consideration of his state.” Concerning the expression, “without law,” Vincent says: “Both law in the abstract and the Mosaic law. The principle laid down is general, though apparently viewed with special reference to the law of Moses.” “In the law” is  (ejn nomwi), “in law.” Vincent says; “Rev., under law, i.e., within the sphere of. No decision as to the reference to the law of Moses or otherwise can be based on the presence or absence of the article. Nomos (Nomo"), law, is used both with and without the article for the Mosaic law. Cremer correctly says that ‘the article is usually wanting when the stress is laid, not upon the historical impress and outward form of the law, but upon the conception itself; or, as Bishop Lightfoot, ‘law considered as a principle, exemplified no doubt chiefly and signally in the Mosaic law, but much wider than this in its application.’ “ The same authority, commenting on the words “shall be judged” says, “The antithesis shall perish suggests a condemnatory judgment. There is no doubt that the simple  (krinw) is used in the New Testament in the sense of condemning. See John 3:18; II Thessalonians 2:12; Hebrews 13:4. The change from perish to judge is suggested by the law. ‘The Jews alone will be, strictly speaking, subjected to a detailed inquiry such as arises from applying articles of a code’ (Godet). Both classes of men shall be condemned, in both the result will be perishing, but the judgment by the law is confined to those who have the law.” Translation. For there is not partiality in the presence of God. For as many as without law sinned, without law shall also perish. And as many as under law sinned, through the law shall be condemned. (2:13) The word for “hearers” here is not the usual word  (ajkouw) which refers to the act of hearing, but  (ajkroath"), used of pupils who hear, constant hearers who are educated in the law. Denney says, “No degree of familiarity with the law avails if it is not done.” Vincent comments, “Like the Jews, who heard it regularly in the synagogues. Only here in Paul. Three times in James. It brings out, better than the participle hoi akouontes (oiJ ajkouonte") those that hear, the characteristic feature, those whose business is hearing.” Alford says, “This is to explain to the Jew the fact, that not his mere hearing of the law read in the synagogue (his being by birth and privilege a Jew) will justify him before God, but (still keeping to general principles and not touching as yet on the impossibility of being thus justified) the doing of the law.” Translation. For not those who are instructed in the law are righteous in the presence of

God, but those who are doers of the law shall be justified. (2:14–16) “When” is hotan (oJtan). Paul is supposing a case which may occur at any time. There is no article before “Gentiles.” The supposed case occurs among the Gentiles. It is, Gentiles as such. Denney says, “There is, indeed, when we look closely, no such thing as a man absolutely without the knowledge of God’s will, and therefore such a judgment as the apostle has described is legitimate. Gentiles, ‘such as have not law,’ in any special shape, when they do by nature the things required by the law given to Israel, the only one known to the apostle—are in spite of not having law (as is a supposition here) a law to themselves.” “Which” is hoitines (oiJtine"), a double relative which shows class or kind. Translate, “which are of such a class” as to etc. Denney translates, “inasmuch as they show.” “The work of the law,” “is the work which the law prescribes” (Denney). “Excusing” is apologeomai (ajpologeomai), “to speak in one’s own defense.” Denney’s note is helpful, “ ‘Written on their hearts,’ when contrasted with the law written on the tables of stone, is equal to ‘unwritten’; the apostle refers to what the Greeks called agraphos nomos (ajgrafo" nomo") (unwritten law). To the Greeks however, this was something greater and more sacred than any statute, or civil constitution; to the apostle it was less than the great revelation of God’s will, which had been made and interpreted to Israel, but nevertheless a true moral authority. There is triple proof that Gentiles, who are regarded as not having law, are a law to themselves. (1) The appeal to their conduct, as interpreted by the apostle, their conduct evinces at least in some, the possession of a law written on the heart; (2) the action of conscience: it joins its testimony, though it be only an inward one to the outward testimony borne by their conduct; and (3) their thoughts. Their thoughts bear witness to the existence of a law in them, inasmuch as in their mutual intercourse these thoughts are busy bringing accusations, or in rarer cases putting forward defences, i.e., in any case, exercising moral functions which imply the recognition of a law.” The words “In the day” etc. are construed with “shall be judged by the law” of verse 12. Verses 13–15 are a parenthesis. Vincent says of the expression, “my gospel,” “as distinguished from false teaching. Paul’s assurance of the truth of the gospel is shown in his confident assertion that it will form the standard of judgment in the great day.” Translation. For whenever Gentiles which have no law do habitually by nature the things of the law, these having no law are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing joint-witness and their reasonings in the meanwhile accusing or also excusing one another, in the day when God judges the hidden things of men according to my gospel through Jesus Christ. (2:17–20) “Behold” is the translation of ide (ijde), an incorrect reading, the Nestle text having ei de (eij de). The ei (eij) is a conditional particle of a fulfilled condition. Translate, “assuming,” that is, “assuming that thou art called a Jew.” “Called” is  (ejponomazw), “to be named.” Vincent says, “bearest the name of, bringing out the value which attached to the name Jew.” The three titles, Hebrew, Jew, and Israelite should be distinguished. The first distinguishes a Hebrew-speaking Jew from a Greek-speaking one. The second distinguishes a Jew from a Gentile, and denotes nationality. The third is the most august title of all, speaking of the fact that the Jew is a member of the theocracy, and

thus an heir of the promises (Trench). “Restest in” should be “restest on.” The verb is  (ajnapauw), “to lean upon, to refresh one’s self back upon anything.” Robertson says, “It is a picture of blind and mechanical reliance on the Mosaic law.” The Jew boasts in God as the covenant God of Israel who are His peculiar people (Denney). “Approvest” is  (dokimazw), “to put to the test for the purpose of approving, and finding that the person or thing tested, meets the specifications laid down, to put one’s approval upon it.” “Things that are excellent” is ta diapheronta (ta diaferonta), “the things that differ.” The Jew put to the test things that differ, and then put his approval upon those that met his specifications. Vincent suggests the meaning is, “Thou dost test with nice discrimination questions of casuistry,” making the Jew a keen discriminator of truth as against the philosophical speculations of man. This seems to be the meaning in view of the following clause, “being instructed out of the law.” The words “being instructed” are the translation of  (katecew), “to teach orally, to instruct.” Vincent says, “systematically through catechetical and synogoguic instruction. This formal instruction is the basis of the critical discrimination.” “Confident” is pepoithas (pepoiqa"), “to persuade” and in the perfect tense. The word here refers to a process of thought in past time that has been completed, in which the person has come to a settled persuasion regarding some thing. The Jew here has persuaded himself that he is a guide to the blind, and has come to a settled conclusion about the matter. His position is fixed. No amount of persuasion would move him from that position. “Guide” is  (oJdhgo"), from  (hJgeomai), “to lead,” and hodos (oJdo"), “a road,” namely, “one who leads along a road,” used as Thayer says, “in figurative and sententious discourse, a guide of the blind, i.e., like one who is literally socalled, namely, a teacher of the ignorant and inexperienced.” “Thyself” is seauton (seauton), a reflexive pronoun, “you have persuaded yourself that you are a guide to the blind.” Robertson says: “The Jews were meant by God to be guides of the Gentiles, for salvation is of the Jews (John 4:22) … But this intention of God about the Jews had resulted in conceited arrogance on their part.” “Instructor” is  (paideuth"). Vincent suggests, “Rev., corrector. Better because emphasizing the element of discipline or training.” The word was used by the Greeks of a slave who had charge of a young child, taking him to school and bringing him home again. He had the moral and ethical supervision of the child also. Our word, “pedagogue” comes from this word. The word is used here of a corrector or chastizer as in Hebrews 12:9. “Foolish” is  (ajfrwn), “without reason, senseless, stupid, foolish, without reflection or intelligence.” Robertson says, “ (ÆAfrwn) is a hard word for the Gentiles, but it is the Jewish standpoint that Paul gives. Each termed the other ‘dogs.’ ” “Babes” is  (nhpion), “that which does not talk,” namely, “an infant.” It was a term used by the Jews to designate proselytes or novices. Paul used it of one who is immature (Gal. 4:1). The writer to the Hebrews used it of one spiritually immature (5:13), as did Paul (I Cor. 3:1). “Form” is  (morfwsi"), “the mere form, semblance, the form befitting the thing or truly expressing the fact.” Vincent suggests, “Not mere appearance, but the  (schmh), the correct embodiment of the lineaments of truth and knowledge in the law.” Robertson says; “Lightfoot considers the  (morfwsi") as a ‘rough-sketch, the pencilling of the  (morfh),’ the outline or framework, and in II Timothy 3:5, ‘the outline without the substance.’ This is Paul’s picture of the Jew as he sees himself drawn with consumate skill and subtle irony.” “Knowledge” is  (gnwsi"),

“experiential knowledge,” not a mere passing acquaintance. Translation. Assuming that you bear the name of Jew, and have a blind and mechanical reliance on the law, and boast in God, and have an experiential knowledge of His will, and after having put to the test for the purpose of approving the things that differ, and having found that they meet your specifications, you put your approval upon them, being instructed in a formal way in the law, you have persuaded yourself and have come to a settled conviction that you are a guide of the blind, a light of those in darkness, a corrector of those who are without reflection or intelligence, a teacher of the immature, having the rough sketch of the experiential knowledge of the truth in the law. (2:21–24) “Abhorrest” is  (bdelussw), “to render foul, to cause to be abhorred.” Vincent says, “The verb means originally to turn away from a thing on account of the stench.” “Commit sacrilege” is  (iJerosulew), “to plunder shrines, to rob temples.” Vincent says, “Some explain, the pillage of idol temples; others, robbing the Jewish temple by embezzlement, withholding the temple tribute, etc. The robbery of temples as practiced by the Jews is inferred from Acts 19:37.” “Breaking” is parabasis (parabasi"). Vincent says: “Trench remarks upon ‘the mournfully numerous group of words’ which express the different aspects of sin. It is hamartia (aJmartia), the missing of a mark; parabasis (parabasi"), the overpassing of a line;  (parakoh), the disobedience to a voice;  (paraptwma), a falling when one should have stood;  (ajgnohma), ignorance of what one should know;  (hJqhma), a diminishing of what should be rendered in full measure; anomia (ajnomia), or paranomia (paranomia), non-observance of law,  (plhmmeleia), discord.” As to our word here, parabasis (parabasi"), it is made up of  (bainw), “to step,” and para (para), “alongside, beside.” Vincent says, “The primary sense of the preposition para (para) is beside or by, with reference to a line or extended surface. Hence it indicates that which is not on its true line but beside it, either in the way of falling short or of going beyond.” Parabasis (Parabasi") should here be translated by the word “transgressing.” The negative ou (oJu) used here expects an affirmative answer. “Blasphemed” is the transliteration of  (blasfhmew), “to speak reproachfully of, rail at, revile, calumniate.” “It is used of those who by contemptuous speech intentionally come short of the reverence due to God or to sacred things” (Thayer). Translation. Therefore, you who are constantly teaching another, are you not teaching yourself? You who are constantly preaching a person should not be stealing, are you stealing? You who are constantly saying that a person should not be committing adultery, are you committing adultery? You who are turning away constantly from idolatry as from a stench, are you robbing temples? You who are making your boast in the law, through your transgression of the law are you dishonoring God? For the name of God because of you is reviled among the Gentiles, even as it stands written. (2:25) Denny explains; “The absence of the article (before circumcision ) suggests that

the argument may be extended to everything of the same character as circumcision. Circumcision was the seal of the covenant, and as such an assurance given to the circumcised man that he belonged to the race which was the heir of God’s promises. That was undeniably an advantage,… but if the actual inheriting of the promises has any moral conditions attached to it (as Paul proceeds to show that it has), then the advantage of circumcision lapses unless these are fulfilled. Now, the persons contemplated here have not fulfilled them.” “Keep” is  (prassw), “to practice.” “Breaker” is  (parabath"), “a transgressor.” “Is made” is gegonen (gegonen), a perfect tense verb, “has become with the result that the resulting state is a settled one.” Translation. For indeed, circumcision is profitable if you are a practitioner of the law, but if on the other hand you are a transgressor of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. (2:26) Denney explains; “Here the inference is drawn from the principle laid down in verse 25. This being so, Paul argues, if the uncircumcision maintain the just requirements of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be accounted circumcision, because it has really done what circumcision pledged the Jew to do?… As he has done what circumcision bound the Jew to do, he will be treated as if in the Jew’s position: his uncircumcision will be reckoned as circumcision.” “Counted” is logizomai (logizomai), “to count, compute, calculate, to put to one’s account.” “Keep” is  (fulassw), “to guard,” here to guard the commandments of God with a solicitous care lest they be broken, doing this by carefully observing them. The tense and mode are present subjunctive, speaking of habitual action. One is reminded of the Greek philosopher Socrates, whose ethics were so exalted that he said that he never did anything in his life which his reason told him was wrong. Knowing totally depraved nature as we do, one is hesitant to accept this statement at its full face value, but at least the intent of the pagan heart of this man was one concerning which our present verse speaks. Translation. Therefore, if the uncircumcision habitually guards righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be computed to his account for circumcision? (2:27) Denney construes the words “by nature” with “fulfil the law,” asking why nature should be mentioned at all in connection with the state of circumcision. “By” is dia (dia) which Robertson says means here “accomplished by, with the advantage of.” Denney says; “The dia (dia) is that which describes the circumstances under which, or the accompaniment to which anything is done. The Jew is a law-transgressor, in spite of the fact that he possesses a written revelation of God’s will, and bears the seal of the covenant, obliging him to the performance of the law upon his body. He has an outward standard, which does not vary with his moral condition, like the law written in the pagan’s heart: he has an outward pledge that he belongs to the people of God, to encourage him when he is tempted to indolence or despair; in both these respects he has an immense advantage over the Gentile, yet both are neutralized by this—he is a law-transgressor.” Translation. And the uncircumcision which by nature is fulfilling the law, will judge you who with the advantage of the letter and of circumcision

are a transgressor of the law. (2:28, 29) Denney explains; “The argument of the foregoing verses assumes what is stated here, and what no one will dispute, that what constitutes the Jew in the true sense of the term, and gives the name Jew its proper content and dignity, is not anything outward and visible, but something inward and spiritual. And the same remark applies to circumcision itself. The most natural way to read the Greek seems to me to be this, ‘Not he who is so outwardly is a Jew (in the true sense), nor is that which is outward, in flesh, the true circumcision; but he who is inwardly a Jew (is the true Jew), and heart circumcision, in spirit, not in letter (is the true circumcision).’ ” Robertson remarks; “This inward or inside Jew who lives up to his covenant relation to God is the high standard that Paul puts before the merely professional Jew described above.” “Outwardly” is phaneros (fanero"), “apparent, manifest, evident, known.” It refers to that which one can observe on the outside. “Inwardly” is kruptos (krupto"), “hidden, secret, concealed.” It speaks of the inner part of a man, his soul-life. “In spirit” and “in letter” are locative of sphere. It is that behavior of an individual which is in the sphere of man’s spirit, his religious, God-conscious inner life, rather than in the realm of an outward meticulous observance of law, concerning which the apostle is speaking. “Whose” is a masculine relative pronoun and refers to the Jew, the ideal Jew, here. Denney says that “the love of praise from each other, and religious vanity, are Jewish characteristics strongly commented on by our Lord.” Translation. For, not he who is so in outward fashion is a Jew, nor even that which is in an outward fashion in flesh is circumcision. But he who is so in the sphere of the inner man is a Jew, and circumcision is of the heart in the sphere of the spirit, not in the sphere of the letter, concerning whom the praise is not from man but from God.

CHAPTER THREE (3:1) Denney explains: “It might easily seem, at this point, as if the apostle’s argument had proved too much. He has shown that the mere possession of the law does not exempt the Jew from judgment, but that God requires its fulfillment; he has shown that circumcision in the flesh, seal though it be of the covenant and pledge of its promises, is only of value if it represents inward heart circumcision; he has, it may be argued, reduced the Jew to a position of entire equality with the Gentile. But the consciousness of the Jewish race must protest against such a conclusion. ‘Salvation is of the Jews,’ is a word of Christ Himself, and the apostle is obliged to meet this instinctive protest of the ancient people of God. The advantage of the Jew is admitted: it is admitted that his unbelief may even act as a foil to God’s faithfulness, setting it in more glorious relief; but it is insisted, that if God’s character as righteous judge of the world be maintained—as it must be— these admissions do not exempt the Jew from that liability to judgment which has just been demonstrated.” “Advantage” is perisson (perisson), “surplus, prerogation, preeminence.” Translation. What preeminence or advantage is there of the Jew? Or, What profit is there in circumcision?

(3:2) “Chiefly” is  (prwton), “first.” “Polu (Polu) ‘much’ points back to perisson (perisson). So it means that the overplus of the Jew is much from every angle” (Robertson). Paul does not enumerate more. He has given the chief vantage which the Jew enjoyed over the Gentiles. God had made him the depository of His oracles. “Oracles” is logia (logia), defined by Denney as “the contents of the revelation having God as their author.” At the time Paul was writing, these comprised the Old Testament. Translation. Much every way, for first of all, because they were entrusted with the oracles of God. (3:3, 4) “For what” is ti gar (ti gar), “for how,” namely, “Well then, how stands the case?” (Denney). “Did not believe” is the verb  (pisteuw), “to exercise faith, believe,” with Alpha privative prefixed which negates the word. They were without faith. “The faith of God,” could be better rendered “faithfulness of God” (Vincent). “Make without effect” is katergazomai (katergazomai), with the negative. Vincent says, “Dr. Morison acutely observes that it negatives the idea of agency or operation, rather than of result or effect. It is rather to make inefficient rather than to make without effect.” “God forbid” is  (mh genoito), literally, “may it not come to pass.” “Let God be true” Vincent corrects to “Let God be found true.” He says, “The phrase is used with reference to men’s apprehension. Let God turn out to be or be found to be by His creatures.” “Be justified,” he suggests, “Be acknowledged righteous.” “The figure is forensic. God’s justice is put on trial.” “Overcome” is  (nikaw), “to prevail,” that is, “gain the case” (Vincent). “When thou art judged” is rendered by Vincent, “when thou comest into judgment.” Translation. Well then—if as is the case, certain ones did not exercise faith. Their unbelief will not render the faithfulness of God inefficient, will it? May such a thing never occur. Let God be found veracious and every man a liar, even as it stands written, To the end that you may be acknowledged righteous in your words, and may come out victor when brought to trial. (3:5–8) “Commend” is  (sunisthmi), “to place together,” used of setting one person with another by way of introducing or presenting him, hence, “to commend.” It is used in the sense of putting together with a view to showing, proving, or establishing. Human sin is a foil by which God’s righteousness is seen all the more clearly. It establishes the fact of God’s righteousness, proves it by its very contrast with that sin. “Taketh vengeance” is  (ejpiferw ojrghn), literally, “brings the anger to bear.”  (ÆOrghn) is God’s righteous anger with sin. It is a holy wrath. Paul says, “speak as a man.” He speaks after the manner of men. Vincent explains, “I use a mode of speech drawn from human affairs.” He says, “The phrase is thrown in apologetically, under a sense that the mode of speech is unworthy of the subject. Morison aptly paraphrases, When I ask a question, ‘Is God unjust who inflicts wrath?’ I am deeply conscious that I am using language which is intrinsically improper when applied to God. But in condescension to human weakness I transfer to Him language which is customary for men to employ when referring to human relationships.” The question is accompanied by the Greek negative particle  (mh), which expects a

negative answer. Paul asks, “God is not unrighteous, is He?” “God forbid” is  (mh genoito), “Away with the thought,” or, “Let not such a thing be considered.” “How” is  (pw"), “how is it possible?” “If” (v. 7) is ei (eij), a particle of a fulfilled condition, to be rendered “since,” or “in view of the fact.” “Abounded” is  (perisseuw), “to be at hand in abundance, to be in affluence.” Here it has the idea of “being increased.” Thayer comments, “By my lie it came to pass that God’s veracity became the more conspicuous, and becoming thus more thoroughly known, increased His glory.” Commenting on the expression “by my lie,” Vincent says, “The expression carries us back to verse 4, and is general for moral falsehood, unfaithfulness to the claims of conscience and of God, especially with reference to the proffer of salvation through Christ.” Robertson says, “Paul ‘uses the first person from motives of delicacy’ (Sanday and Headlam) in this supposable case for argument’s sake as in I Corinthians 4:6. So here he ‘transfers by a fiction’ (Field) to himself the objection.” The statement slanderously attributed to Paul, “Let us do evil that good may come,” is commented upon by Robertson, “It sounds almost uncanny to find this maxim of the Jesuits attributed to Paul in the first century by the Jews. It was undoubtedly the accusation of Antinomianism because Paul preached justification by faith and not by works.” Translation. But in view of the fact that our unrighteousness establishes by proof God’s righteousness, what shall we say? God is not unrighteous who inflicts wrath, is He? I am using a mode of speech drawn from human affairs. Away with the thought. Otherwise, how will it be possible for God to judge the world? Moreover, if, as is the case, the truth of God by means of my lie became the more conspicuous, resulting in His glory, why then am I being judged as a sinner? And not, as we were slanderously reported and even as certain are saying that we are saying, Let us do the evil things in order that there might come the good things, whose judgment is just. (3:9) “What then?” is ti oun (ti oJun), namely, “How then are we to understand the situation?” (Denney). “Are better” is  (proecw), “to have before or in advance of another, to have preeminence, to excell, surpass.” Paul had just shown that the Old Testament privileges, though giving the Jews a certain superiority to the Gentiles, did not give them any advantages in escaping the divine condemnation. After such showing, it was natural that the question should be renewed: Do the Jews have any advantage?” (Vincent). “No, in no wise” is  (oJu pantw"), the latter word meaning, “altogether, in any and every way.” Robertson translates, “Not at all.” “Proved” is proaitiaomai (proaitiaomai), “to bring a charge against previously.” Vincent says, “The reference is not to logical proof, but to forensic accusation.” Translation. What then? Are we better? Not in any way, for we previously brought a charge against both Jew and Gentile that all are under sin. (3:10–12) “It is written” is gegraptai (gegraptai), in the perfect tense, literally, “It has been written, with the present result that it is on record.” Paul is quoting from the Old Testament. He uses the perfect tense to show the permanency of the record, as David says, “Forever, O Lord, thy Word is settled in heaven.” “Seeketh after” is 

(ejkzhtew), “to seek out, search for,” and speaks of a determined search after something. “Gone out of the way” is  (ejkklinw) from  (klinw), “to lean,” and ek (ejk) “out,” thus, “to lean out,” thus, “to turn aside, deviate” from the right way. “Are become unprofitable” is from  (ajcreiow), “to make useless, render unserviceable.” The Hebrew word here means “to go bad, become sour like milk.” “Good” is  (crhstoth"), “moral goodness, integrity, benignity, kindness.” Translation. As it stands written, There is not a righteous person, not even one. There is not the one who understands; there is not the one who seeks out God. All turned aside; all to a man became useless. There is not the one who habitually does goodness; there is not as much as one. (3:13–18) “Open” is a perfect participle. The grave has been opened with the result that it stands open. It speaks of a grave that stands open. Robertson says; “Their mouth (words) is like the odor of a newly opened grave. ‘Some portions of Greek and Roman literature stink like a newly opened grave’ (Shedd).” The full import of this can only be appreciated in hot climates like the middle east. “They have used deceit” is  (doliow), “to deceive, use deceit.” Vincent says, “Hebrew, they smoothed their tongues.” He quotes Wycliffe, “with their tongues they did guilingly.” “The imperfect tense denotes perseverance in their hypocritical professions.” The asp here is the Egyptian cobra, a deadly serpent. Its poison is contained in a bag under the lips. Commenting on verse 16, Denney says; “Wherever they go, you can trace them by the ruin and distress they leave behind,” and concerning verse 17 he says, “It does not mean, ‘They have failed to discover the way of salvation,’ but, ‘they tread continually in paths of violence’.” Translation. Their throat is a grave that stands open. With their tongues they continually were deceiving. Asps’ poison is under their lips; whose mouths are full of imprecations and bitterness; their feet are swift to pour out blood. Destruction and misery are in their paths. The road of peace they did not know. There is not a fear of God in sight of their eyes. (3:19, 20) “Know” is oida (oijda), “to know absolutely,” refers to a sure knowledge, a positive knowledge. The two words “saith” are in their order  (legw), referring to the meaning or the substance of that which is spoken, and  (lalew), speaking of the expression or act of expressing that substance. “Under” is en (ejn), locative of sphere. Those referred to here are within the sphere of the law, that is, legally within its jurisdiction. “Stopped” is “fenced in,” from  (frassw), “to fence in, block up, stop up, close up.” Vincent says, “The effect of overwhelming evidence upon an accused party in court” “Guilty” is hupodikos (uJpodiko"), literally, “under judgment.” In classical Greek it means, “brought to trial or liable to be tried.” In Plato we have, concerning a magistrate imposing unjust penalties, “Let him be liable to pay double to the injured party,” and “The freeman who conspired with the slave shall be liable to be made a slave.” Vincent comments, “The rendering, brought under judgment regards God as the judge; but He is rather to be regarded as the injured party. Not God’s judgments, but His rights are referred to here. The better rendering is liable to pay penalty to God.” “Deeds” is ergon (ejrgon), “works.” Vincent explains; “Not the Mosaic law in its ritual or ceremonial aspect, but the law in a deeper and more general sense as written both in the

decalogue and in the hearts of the Gentiles, and embracing the moral deeds of both Gentiles and Jews. The Mosaic law may indeed be regarded as the primary reference, but as representing a universal legislation and including all the rest.” He quotes Morison, “It is the law of commandments which enjoins those outer acts and inner choices and states which lie at the basis and constitute the essence of all true religion. In the background or focal point of these commandments he sees the decalogue, or duologue, which is often designated ‘the moral law’ by way of preeminence. By the phrase works of the law is meant the deeds prescribed by the law.” “Flesh” is sarx (sarx), equivalent here to “man.” “Justified” is  (dikaiow). The root of this word is the same as that in the Greek words translated “righteous, righteousness, justification, just, justifier.” The verb indicates “the act or process by which a man is brought into a right state as related to God” (Vincent). In simple, non-technical language it refers to the act of God removing the guilt and penalty of sin from a sinner who places his faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour, and the bestowal of a positive righteousness, Jesus Christ, in whom that believer stands a righteous person before God’s law for time and eternity, all this made possible by and based upon the satisfaction (hilasmos (iJlasmo"), propitiation) which Jesus Christ offered on the Cross as a complete payment of the penalty imposed by the law because of human infractions of that law, thus satisfying His justice, maintaining His government, and making possible the bestowal of mercy upon the basis of justice satisfied. This is a legal standing, and does not change nor affect the character of the person, which latter is changed by the work of the Holy Spirit in progressive sanctification. “Knowledge” is  (ejpignwsi"), a clear and exact knowledge. Vincent says, “Always of a knowledge which powerfully influences the form of the religious life, and hence containing more of the element of personal sympathy than the simple  (gnwsi") knowledge, which may be concerned with the intellect without affecting the character.… Hence the knowledge of sin here is not mere perception, but an acquaintance with sin which works toward repentance, faith, and holy character.” Denney explains; “ ‘By the law comes the full knowledge of sin’ ( (ejpignwsi"), a favorite Pauline word: used fifteen times in his epistles). This is its proper, and indeed its exclusive function. There is no law given with power to give life, and therefore there are no works of law by which men can be justified. The law has served its purpose when it has made men feel to the full how sinful they are; it brings them down to this point, but it is not for it to lift them up.” Translation. But we know absolutely that whatever things the law says, it says to those within the sphere of the law, in order that every mouth may be closed up and the whole world may become liable to pay penalty to God. Wherefore, out of works of law there shall not be justified every flesh in His sight, for through law is a full knowledge of sin. (3:21–23) “Now” is nuni (nuni); Vincent says, “Logical, not temporal, In this state of the case. Expressing the contrast between two relations—dependence on the law and nondependence on the law.” Vincent explains the words “without the law,” “In a sphere different from that in which the law says, ‘Do this and live’.” Which reminds us of the words, “Do this and live, the law commands, but gives me neither feet nor hands. A better word the gospel brings. It bids me fly and gives me wings.” “Righteousness” does not

have the article. It is “God’s righteousness.” “Is manifested” is perfect in tense, literally, “has been manifested and lies open to view” (Vincent). “Manifested” is  (fanerow), “to make visible.” “Being witnessed” is  (marturew) in a present passive participle; literally, “is having witness or testimony borne to it” or “is being attested” by the law and the prophets. “Faith of Jesus Christ” is a common idiom for “faith in Jesus Christ.” “By” is dia (dia), a preposition of intermediate agency. It is the means through which this righteousness is given. The words “upon all” are rejected by Nestle. “Difference” is  (diastolh). The verbal form is  (diastellw), literally “to send two ways,” thus, “to draw asunder, divide, distinguish.” The idea is, “There is not a distinction.” “Have sinned” is constative aorist, presenting a panoramic view of the human race as doing nothing except committing sin. The word is  (aJmartanw), “to miss the mark,” thus, “to fail in obeying the law.” “Come short” is present tense, “right now come short.” The verb is  (uJsthrew), “to be left behind in the race and so fail to reach the goal, to fall short of the end, to lack.” Translation. But now apart from law God’s righteousness has been openly shown as in view, having witness borne to it by the law and the prophets; indeed, God’s righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe, for there is no distinction, for all sinned and are falling short of the glory of God. (3:24–26) “Freely” is  (dwrean), “freely, for naught, gratis, gratuitously, without just cause.” “Grace” is charis (cari") which signified in classical authors a favor done out of the spontaneous generosity of the heart without any expectation of return. Of course, this favor was always done to one’s friend, never to an enemy. But when charis (cari") comes into the New Testament, it takes an infinite leap forward, for the favor God did at Calvary was for those who hated Him. It was a favor done out of the spontaneous generosity of God’s heart of love with no expectation of return. There are no strings attached to grace. It is given  (dwrean), gratuitously. Of course, grace in the form of salvation is so adjusted that the one who receives it, turns from sin to serve the living God and live a holy life, for grace includes not only the bestowal of a righteousness, but the inward transformation consisting of the power of indwelling sin broken and the divine nature implanted, which liberates the believer from the compelling power of sin and makes him hate sin, love holiness, and gives him the power to obey the Word of God. This grace shown the believing sinner is made possible, Paul says, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus. “Redemption” is  (ajpolutrwsew"), the verbal form of which is  (ajpolutrow), “to redeem by paying the lutron price.” There are three words translated “redeem,”  (ajgorazw), “to buy in the slave market” (I Cor. 6:20, 7:23, II Pet. 2:1), Christ bought us in this slave market of sin by His own blood; believers are His bondslaves;  (ejxagorazw), “to buy out of the slave market” (Gal. 3:13, 4:5), the redeemed are never to be put up for sale in any slave market again; and  (lutrow), “to set free by paying a price” (Tit. 2:14, I Pet. 1:18); the believer is set free from sin and free to live a life pleasing to God in the power of the Holy Spirit. The redemption price, the precious blood of Jesus, makes it possible for a righteous God to justify a believing sinner on the basis of justice satisfied. This Paul proceeds to explain in the next two verses.

“Set forth” is  (protiqhmi), “to place before, to set forth to be looked at, expose to public view.” Vincent says, “Publicly, openly, correlated with to declare. He brought Him forth and put Him before the public. Bengel, ‘placed before the eyes of all’ unlike the ark of the covenant which was veiled and approached only by the high priest.” The word translated “propitiation” is exceedingly important, and demands a careful treatment. It is  (iJlasthrion). The word in its classical form was used of the act of appeasing the Greek gods by a sacrifice, of rendering them favorable toward the worshipper. In other words, the sacrifice was offered to buy off the anger of the god and buy his love. Such a use is not brought over into the New Testament, for our God does not need to be appeased nor is His love for sale. The English word “propitiate” has the meaning of the Greek word as used in classical Greek, namely, to appease and rendered favorable. It is therefore not the correct word to use when translating the New Testament meaning of this word which it has accrued by its usage in the contexts in which it is found. The word is used in the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint (LXX), in the sense of an atonement or reconciliation. It refers to the act of getting rid of sin which has come between God and man. Canon Westcott says, “The scripture conception of this word is not that of appeasing one who is angry with a personal feeling against an offender, but of altering the character of that which, from without, occasions a necessary alienation, and interposes an inevitable obstacle to fellowship.” The word  (iJlasthrion) is used in Leviticus 16:14 (LXX) to refer to the golden cover on the Ark of the Covenant. In the Ark, below this cover, were the tablets of stone upon which were written the ten commandments which Israel had violated. Before the Ark stood the High Priest representing the people. When the sacrificial blood is sprinkled on this cover, it ceases to be a place of judgment and becomes a place of mercy. The blood comes between the violated law and the violators, the people. The blood of Jesus satisfies the just requirements of God’s holy law which mankind broke, pays the penalty for man, and thus removes that which had separated between a holy God and sinful man, sin, its guilt and penalty. This is a far cry from the pagan idea of propitiation which appeased the anger of the god and purchased his love. The words, “an expiatory satisfaction” seem to be the words rather than “propitiation” to adequately translate  (iJlasthrion).  (iJlasthrion) is the place of satisfaction, hilasmos (iJlasmo") (I John 2:2, 4:10) that which provides that satisfaction for the broken law. Thus, our blessed Lord is both the Mercy Seat and the Sacrifice which transforms the former from a judgment seat to one where mercy is offered a sinner on the basis of justice satisfied. God set forth the Lord Jesus as the One who would be the satisfaction for our sins, but Paul is careful to explain that the benefits of that sacrifice are only available to one when he places his faith in the efficacy of that blood which was shed. God set forth our Lord in the first century “to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God.” “Declare” is endeixis (ejndeixi"), from the verbal form endeiknumi (ejndeiknumi), “to show, demonstrate, prove,” the noun meaning, “a demonstration, proof.” It was to prove or demonstrate to the human race, God’s righteousness in the remission of sins before the Cross, that is, before they were actually paid for. The righteousness here is God’s righteous character as seen in His antagonism against sin. “Remission” is the a.v., translation of paresin (paresin). There are two words closely allied in meaning, aphesis (ajfesi") and paresis (paresi"). The former means literally “to put off” or “put away” and is used in such places as Matthew 26:28; Ephesians

1:7; Colossians 1:14; Hebrews 9:22, and is translated correctly “remission.” Paresis (Paresi"), used only here in the New Testament, means “passing over, letting pass,” and should be translated “pretermission.” Trench defines and explains the usage of the word in this context, “the pretermission or passing by of sins for the present, leaving it open in the future either entirely to remit, or else adequately punish them, as may seem good to Him who has the power and right to do the one or the other.” It was this passing by of sin before the Cross in the sense that God saved believing sinners without having their sins paid for, thus bestowing mercy without having justice satisfied, which would make God appear as if He condoned sin, that had to be set right in the thinking of the human race. The matter was always right in God’s eyes, for He looked forward to the satisfaction of the broken law at the Cross. It makes no difference with God whether He saves sinners before or after the Cross. The Cross is an eternal fact in the reckoning of God. Of course, the Cross had to come, for a righteous God could not pass by sin, but must require that sin be paid for. His justice must be satisfied and His government maintained. The Cross not only exonerated God from the charge that He passed by sin before the crucifixion, but also demonstrated that when He declared a believing sinner righteous, He all the time maintained His righteousness. It was a just as well as a merciful act for God to save a sinner, for mercy was bestowed upon the basis of justice satisfied. The demands of the broken law were satisfied. Sin was paid for, not condoned. Thus, the believing sinner is saved not only by the mercy of God, but by the righteousness of God, for his salvation rests upon the fact that his sins are paid for and justice has been maintained. Thus, God is just and at the same time the One who justifies the believing sinner. Translation. Being justified gratuitously by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God placed before the eyes of all, an expiatory satisfaction through faith in His blood, for a proof of His righteousness in view of the pretermission of the sins previously committed, this pretermission being in the sphere of the forbearance of God, for a proof of His righteousness at the present season, with a view to His being just and the justifier of the one whose faith is in Jesus. (3:27, 28) “Boasting” is  (kauchsi"), “glorying.” Vincent remarks, “The reference is to the glorying of the Jew (ch. 2:17), proclaiming his own goodness and the merit of his ceremonial observances.” “It is excluded” is aorist in tense, “It was excluded.” Vincent says, “It was excluded by the coming in of the revelation of righteousness by faith.” “By what law?” is accurately, “By what kind of law?” The question asks as to the nature of the excluding law (Vincent). The article appears before “works,” literally, “the works, of which the Jew makes so much. Is it a law that enjoins these works? Nay, but a law which enjoins faith. Paul does not suppose two laws and give preference to one. There is but one divine law of ejectment, the quality of which is such that, instead of enjoining the Jew’s work, it enjoins faith. The old and new forms of the religious life are brought under the one conception of law” (Vincent). “Conclude” is logizomai (logizomai), “to count, compute, calculate, to make account of, by reckoning all the reasons, to gather or infer.” The word refers to a reasoned conclusion.

Translation. Where then is glorying? It was once for all excluded. Through what kind of a law? Of the aforementioned works? Not at all, but through the law of faith. For we have come to a reasoned conclusion that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law. (3:29–31) “By faith” is  (ejk pistew"), “out of a source of faith”; “through faith” is  (dia pistew"), “through the intermediary instrumentality of faith.” Denney says that the difference in expression “serves no purpose except to vary the expression.” “Make void” is  (katargew), “to make of none effect.” Paul says that rather than make God’s law of none effect, faith establishes it in its rightful place. Denney says; “Law is set upon secure footing; for the first time it gets its rights. To prove this was one of the main tasks lying upon the Apostle of the New Covenant. One species of proof is given in chapter 4 when he shows that representative saints under the Old Dispensation, like Abraham, were justified by faith. That is the divine order still, and is securer than ever under the gospel. Another kind of proof is given in chapters 6–8, where the new life of the Christian is unfolded, and we are shown that ‘the just demands of the law’ are fulfilled in believers, and believers only. The claim which the Apostle makes here, and established in these two passages, is the same as that in our Lord’s words: “I came not to destroy (the law and the prophets), but to fulfil.’ ” Translation. Or, of the Jews only is He God? Is He not also of the Gentiles? Yes, also of the Gentiles, if indeed there is one God, who will justify circumcision out of a source of faith and uncircumcision through the intermediary instrumentality of faith. Then are we making law of none effect through this aforementioned faith? Let not such a thing be considered. Certainly, we establish law.

CHAPTER FOUR (4:1–3) “What shall we say?” is ti eroumen (ti ejroumen). The phrase anticipates an objection or proposes an inference. It is used by Paul only, and by him only in this epistle and in its argumentative portions. It is not found in the last five chapters, which are hortatory. “Father” is propatora (propatora), “forefather.” “Found” signifies, “attained by his own efforts” (Vincent). The phrase “as pertaining to the flesh,” Vincent construes with “found.” He says, “The question is, Was Abraham justified by anything which pertained to the flesh? Some construe with Abraham: our father humanly speaking.” Denney says; “ ‘According to flesh,’ goes with ‘our father,’ because the contrast with another kind of fatherhood belonging to Abraham is already in the Apostle’s thoughts; see verse 11. If the reading ‘hath found’ be adopted, no change is necessary in the interpretation. To take ‘according to the flesh’ with ‘hath found,’ as though the question were; What shall we say that our forefather Abraham found in the way of natural human effort, as opposed to the way of grace and faith? is to put a sense on ‘according to the flesh’ which is both forced and irrelevant. The whole question is, What do you make of Abraham, with the theory as that just described?” The a.v. so punctuates as to construe “hath found” with “according to flesh.” Alford agrees with Vincent. He says, “ ‘According to the flesh’ belongs to ‘hath found,’ for the course and spirit of the argument is not to limit the paternity of Abraham to a mere fleshly one, but to show that he was the spiritual

father of all believers. And the question is not one which requires any such distinction between his fleshly and spiritual paternity (as in ch. 9:3, 5). This being the case, what does ‘according to the flesh’ mean? It cannot allude to circumcision, for that is rendered improbable, not only by the parallel expression of works in the plural, but also by the consideration that circumcision was no work at all, but a seal of the righteousness which he had by faith being yet uncircumcised (v. 11),—and by the whole course of the argument in the present place, which is not to disprove the exclusive privilege of the Jew (that having been already done, ch. 2, 3), but to show that the father and head of the race himself was justified not by works, but by faith.… ‘According to the flesh’ then is in contrast to ‘according to the spirit.’—and refers to that department of our being from which spring works in contrast with that in which is the exercise of faith.” The “if” is ei (eij), “assuming that.” “By” is ek (ejk), “out of” a source of works. Vincent explains, “In speaking of the relation of works to justification, Paul never uses dia (dia), ‘by means of’ or ‘through,’ but ek (ejk) ‘out of’; works being regarded by the Jew as the meritorious source of salvation.” Now, as to the meaning of the words, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.” To what does the word “it” refer? Alford is very clear on this. He says, “The whole question so much mooted between Protestants on the one hand, and Romanists, Arminians, and Socinians on the other, as to whether this righteousness was reckoned (1) being God’s righteousness imputed to the sinner, or (2) so that God made Abraham righteous on account of the merit of his faith, lies in fact in a small compass, if what has gone before be properly taken account of. The Apostle has proved Jews and Gentiles to be all under sin: utterly unable by works of their own to attain to righteousness. Now faith, in the second sense mentioned above, is strictly and entirely a work, and as such would be the efficient cause of man’s justification,—which, by what has preceded, it cannot be. It will therefore follow, that it was not the act of believing which was reckoned to him as a righteous act, or on account of which perfect righteousness was laid to his charge, but that the fact of his trusting God to perform His promise introduced him into the blessing promised.” In other words, it was the act of Abraham placing himself in such an attitude of trust in and acceptance of God’s blessings that made it possible for God to bestow righteousness upon him. It is like the proffered hand of a drowning man that makes it possible for the life guard to save him. There is nothing meritorious in the act of a drowning man in stretching out his hand in order to be saved. It is the efficient medium through which he is saved. Thus, the act of faith on the sinner’s part is not meritorious but only the efficient medium through which God is able save him. The “it” therefore refers to the outstretched hand of faith of a sinner reaching out for salvation that God grasps in His own to lift him out of the mire of sin and place him upon the Rock, Christ Jesus. “Counted” is logizomai (logizomai). It was used in early secular documents; “put down to one’s account, let my revenues be placed on deposit at the storehouse; I now give orders generally with regard to all payments actually made or credited to the government.” Thus, God put to Abraham’s account, placed on deposit for him, credited to him, righteousness. The actual payment had not been made, the actual bestowal of righteousness had not been consummated, and for the reason that our Lord had not yet paid the penalty of man’s sin and had not yet been raised from the dead. Abraham possessed righteousness in the same manner as a person would possess a sum of money placed in his account in a bank. Since the resurrection, Old Testament saints share with

New Testament believers the possession of Christ as the righteousness in which they stand, guiltless and righteous for time and for eternity. Translation. What then shall we say that Abraham our forefather found with reference to the flesh? For, assuming that Abraham was justified out of a source of works, he has ground for boasting—but not when facing God. For what does the scripture say? Now Abraham believed God, and it was put to his account, resulting in righteousness. (4:4, 5) “Worketh” is katergazomai (katergazomai), “to do that from which something results.” The workman works in order to earn wages. “Reward” is misthos (misqo"), “dues paid for work, wages.” “Grace” is charis (cari"), the New Testament word for God’s grace, but used here in its classical sense of a favor. “Debt” is  (ojfeilhma), “that which is justly or legally due, a debt.” Paul uses an illustration here taken from human affairs. He calls attention to the fact that when the employer gives the workman his pay, that is not counted as a favor, but as a legal obligation which the employer is bound to discharge. It is a debt which he owes his employee. The latter, out of courtesy, thanks his employer, but he is not legally obligated to do so. He earned the wages and he deserved them. If the sinner earned salvation by good works, God would be indebted to man and obligated to give it to him. It would not be a favor which God would do for man. And man would not need to thank God nor glorify Him for it. But in the realm of the moral and spiritual, if a sinner does not perform good works in an effort to earn salvation, but instead puts his trust in the God who justifies the ungodly person, that act of faith is put down to his account as the efficient medium through which God bestows a righteous standing upon that person. The word “ungodly” is  (ajsebh"). It describes the person who is destitute of reverential awe towards God, an impious person. Every sinner who has not trusted the Lord Jesus for salvation, falls into this category. Translation. Now, for the one who works with a definite result in view [his wages], the remuneration is not put down on his account as a favor, but as a legally contracted debt. But for the one who places his trust upon the One who justifies the person who is destitute of reverential awe towards God, there is put to his account his faith, resulting in righteousness. (4:6–8) “Blessedness” is makarismos (makarismo"), “a declaration of blessedness.” Makarios (Makario") in classical Greek means “prosperous,” in the New Testament, “spiritually prosperous.” David declares the spiritually prosperous condition of the man to whom God imputes righteousness not on the basis of any good works on his part. “Impute” is logizomai (logizomai), “to put on one’s account, to credit him with, put on deposit.” “Blessed” (v. 7) is makarios (makario"), “spiritually prosperous.” Iniquities is “lawlessnesses,” from anomia (ajnomia), “contempt and violation of law.” “Are forgiven” is  (ajfihmi), “to put away” in a judicial sense at the Cross. Translation. Even as David also declares the spiritual prosperity of the man to whose account God puts righteousness apart from works.

Spiritually prosperous are those whose lawlessnesses were put away and whose sins were covered. Spiritually prosperous is the man to whose account the Lord does not put sin. (4:9–12) Paul had already argued that circumcision was not a good work, but the seal of God stamping Abraham’s faith as a faith which resulted in the bestowal of righteousness. Now, he proposes the question, Is the bestowal of a righteous standing before God connected with the observance of ordinances or apart entirely from such things? He answers his question by citing the case of Abraham who was declared righteous in answer to his faith, fourteen years before he was circumcised. Translation. Therefore, does this spiritual prosperity come upon the circumcised one or the uncircumcised one, for we say, There was put to Abraham’s account his faith, resulting in righteousness? How then was it put to his account? At the time when he was circumcised, or at the time when he was uncircumcised? Not in circumcision but in uncircumcision. And he received the attesting sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteous character of the faith which he had in his uncircumcision, resulting in his being the father of all who believe while in the state of uncircumcision, in order that there may be put to their account righteousness; and the father of circumcision to those who are not of the circumcision only but to those who walk in the footsteps of the faith of our father Abraham when he was in uncircumcision. (4:13–15) As to the promise that Abraham should be heir of the world, Vincent says; “Paul here takes the Jewish conception of the universal dominion of the Messianic theocracy prefigured by the inheritance of Canaan, divests it of its Judaistic element, and raises it to a christological truth.” By the phrase “righteousness of faith” we are not to understand that the faith exercised by the sinner is righteous in quality. The promise was made to Abraham not upon the basis of any attempted obedience to the law on his part but because of that faith which he exercised, which faith was of such a nature as to cause God to put righteousness down to his account. Denney says, “It was not as one under law, but as one justified by faith, that Abraham had the promise given him.” “Is made void” is perfect in tense, “has been voided and as a present result is in a state of invalidation.” “Made of none effect” is the perfect of  (katargew), “to render inoperative.” The promise in that case would be permanently inoperative. “Worketh” is katergazomai (katergazomai), “to result in.” Translation. For not through law was the promise made to Abraham or to his offspring, that he should be the heir of the world, but through a righteousness which pertains to faith. For, assuming that those who are of the law are heirs, the aforementioned faith has been voided with the result that it is permanently invalidated, and the aforementioned promise has been rendered inoperative with the result that it is in a state of permanent inoperation. For the law results in divine wrath. Now, where there is not law, neither is there transgression.

(4:16, 17) Paul argues that since the only thing the law can do is condemn, the inheritance is of faith. “Of faith” is  (ejk pistew"), ablative of source, “out of faith as a source.” That is, the terms laid down by God as to how the inheritance, eternal life, is dispensed by God and appropriated by the sinner, are that the latter exercise faith rather than perform works. The channel through which eternal life is given is that of faith, and in that sense the channel becomes the source of the transaction whereby God gives eternal life. And salvation is channelled to the sinner thus in order that it can be by grace. If the sinner earned salvation by his works, salvation would not be by grace, would not be an unmerited gift given out of the spontaneous generosity of the heart of God. But since faith is the supplicant’s hand outstretched for salvation, the latter can be a gift given in pure grace. And this is so adjusted also that salvation is available to both Jew and Gentile. The law was only given to the Jew, and if salvation could have been given on the basis of works, only the Jew could be saved, for the Gentile was never given the law. Abraham, Paul has shown, was saved before the ordinance of circumcision was given and thus before the Mosaic law was instituted. Thus, he becomes the spiritual father of both Jew and Gentile in that both are saved exactly like he by pure faith without the necessity of works as a preliminary requirement to salvation. “Sure” is bebaian (bebaian), “stable, valid, something realized.” Translation. On account of this it is by faith, in order that it might be by grace, to the end that the promise might be something realized by all the offspring, not to that which is of the law only, but also to that which is of the faith of Abraham, who is father of all of us, even as it stands written, A father of many nations I have established you permanently, before whom ye believed, before God who makes alive those who are dead and calls the things that are not as being in existence. (4:18) Denney explains; “Abraham’s faith is described. It was both contrary to hope (as far as nature could give hope), and rested on hope (that God could do what nature could not).” Robertson translates, “Past hope in (upon) hope he trusted.” “Against” is para (para), which with the accusative case as it is used here means “beyond.” Abraham’s situation was beyond hope. “In” is epi (ejpi), “upon.” Yet he based his expectation upon hope. His situation was beyond human hopes, but in spite of that he rested it upon hope in God. The quotation is from Genesis 15:5. “So” is  (oJutw"), “thus, in the manner spoken of,” and refers to the number of the stars. Translation. Who, being beyond hope, upon the basis of hope believed, in order that he might become father of many nations, according to that which has been spoken with finality, In this manner will your offspring be. (4:19–22) “Considered” is  (katanoew), “to consider attentively, fix one’s eyes or mind upon.” The best texts omit the negative before “considered.” Not being weak as respects faith, Abraham considered attentively his physical condition, stared his obstacles right in the face. The words “now dead” are a perfect participle in the text. That is, so far as procreative functions were concerned, Abraham’s body had died, (ceased to function) and was as a result in a condition in which it would stay dead (never function again). The door was absolutely and forever closed so far as having offspring was concerned. The word “neither” is also omitted. Abraham squarely faced the same obstacle with respect to the dead condition of Sarah’s womb. “Staggered” is  (diakrinw), made up of  (krinw), “to judge” and dia

(dia), whose root meaning is “two,” thus, “to judge between two,” thus, “to vacillate between two opinions or decisions.” Abraham did not vacillate between belief and unbelief with respect to his difficulty and the ability of God to meet it. He did not waver. Vincent says the word implies a mental struggle. Robertson translates, “He was not divided in his mind by unbelief.” “Was strong” is  (ejndunamaw), “to make strong, endue with strength,” and in the passive voice. He was strengthened or endued with strength. This strength is qualified by the words “in faith,”  (thi pistei), “with respect to faith.” That is, his faith was strengthened in God to meet his impossible difficulty with a miracle. The thought is not here that Abraham’s faith was strengthened so that his physical powers again became equal to bringing children into the world. Isaac was the result of a biological miracle performed by God in answer to Abraham’s faith. The glory would therefore be to God. Translation. And not being weak with respect to his faith, he attentively considered his body permanently dead, he being about one hundred years old, also the deadness of Sarah’s womb. Moreover, in view of the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief, but was strengthened with respect to his faith, having given glory to God, and was fully persuaded that what He had promised with finality, He was able to do; wherefore also it was put down in his account, resulting in righteousness. (4:23–25) “Shall be imputed” is not future in tense in the Greek text. The construction consists of mellei (mellei), a verb used with an infinitive to indicate that the action is shortly to take place, for instance, “he is about to do” so and so. Denney translates, “to whom it is to be imputed as righteousness.” He says, “Mellei (Mellei) conveys the idea of a divine order under which things proceed so.” Denney’s note is helpful. “The object of the Christian’s faith is the same as that of Abraham’s, God that giveth life to the dead. Only in this case specifically God as He who raised Jesus our Lord. Compare I Peter 1:21, where Christians are described as those who through Christ believe in God who raised Him from the dead. In Abraham’s case, God that quickeneth the dead is merely a synonym for God Omnipotent, who can do what man cannot. In Paul, on the other hand, while omnipotence is included in the description of God—for in Ephesians 1:19, in order to give an idea of the greatest conceivable power, the apostle can do no more than say that it is according to that working of the strength of God’s might which He wrought in Christ when He raised Him from the dead— omnipotence is not the sole object of the Christian’s faith. His spiritual attitude toward God is the same as Abraham’s, but God is revealed to him, and offered to his faith, in a character in which Abraham did not yet know Him. This is conveyed in the description of the Person in relation to whom the Omnipotence of God has been displayed to Christians. That Person is ‘Jesus our Lord,’ who was delivered up for our offenses, and raised for our justification. The resurrection of Jesus our Lord entitles us to conceive of God’s omnipotence not as mere unqualified power, but as power no less than infinite engaged in the work of man’s salvation from sin. In the resurrection of Jesus, omnipotence is exhibited as redeeming power, and in this omnipotence we, like Abraham, believe.” “Delivered” is  (paradidwmi), used of casting into prison or delivering to justice. Here it speaks of the judicial act of God the Father delivering God the Son to the justice that required the payment of the penalty for human sin.

Commenting on the words, “was raised for our justification,” Denney says: “He was delivered up on account of our offences—to make atonement for them; and He was raised on account of our justification—that it might become an accomplished fact.… Paul does ascribe expiatory value to the death or blood of Christ: in the sense it is true the work of Christ was finished on the Cross. But Paul never thought of that by itself: he knew Christ only as the Risen One who had died, and who had the virtue of His atoning death ever in Him; this Christ was One, in all that He did and suffered—the Christ who had evoked in him the faith by which he was justified, the only Christ through faith in whom sinful men ever could be justified; and it is natural, therefore, that he should conceive Him as raised with a view to our justification.” “Offences” is  (paraptwma). The verb is  (parapiptw), “to deviate from the right path, turn aside,” thus “to trespass, transgress.” Translation. Now, it was not written for his sake alone, namely, that it was put to his account, but also for our sakes, to whose account it is to be put, to ours who place our faith upon the One who raised Jesus our Lord out from among the dead, who was delivered up because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification.

CHAPTER FIVE (5:1) So far, Denney has divided Paul’s letter as follows: (1:18–3:20) where Paul has proved man’s need of the righteousness of God; (3:21–30) where he shows how that righteousness comes, and how it is appropriated; (3:31–4:25) where he shows by the example of Abraham, and the testimony of David, that it does not upset but establishes the spiritual order revealed in the o.t. In chapter five, “the apostle now, like David, enlarges on the felicity of the justified, and especially on their assurance of God’s love and of future blessedness.” The word “therefore” reaches back to the contents of chapter four—therefore being justified, not by works (1–8), not by ordinances (9–12), not by law obedience (13–25), but by faith, we have peace. The first three never give peace to the soul. Faith does. Now, to come to the problem which confronts the Greek exegete in this verse, a matter concerning which the student not conversant with the Greek language is blissfully unaware. It all resolves itself around one letter in the Greek word for “have.” If Paul’s original manuscript had an omicron, that is, a short “O,” the translation reads, “We have peace,” if an omega, namely, a long “O,” “Let us have peace.” The manuscript evidence demands the second reading. Robertson says, “This is the correct reading beyond a doubt.” Denney says; “The manuscript evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of  (ejcwmen), so much so that Westcott and Hort notice no other reading, and Tischendorf says ‘ (ejcwmen) cannot be rejected unless it is altogether inappropriate, and inappropriate it seemingly is not.’ ” Eberhard Nestle includes  (ejcwmen) in his text while putting echomen (ejcomen) in his apparatus. Irwin Nestle in his sixteenth edition of his father’s text, uses echomen (ejcomen), putting  (ejcwmen) in the apparatus. Over against this are the following considerations. The decision as to which is the correct meaning of Paul, namely, a statement to the effect that justified sinners are in possession of peace with God, or an exhortation to enter into and enjoy this peace which justification brings, rests, not on an entire word in the Greek text, but upon one letter in that word, all of which means that the exegete cannot be on too sure a footing when

resting his case only on the identity of that letter in dispute, not allowing himself to be governed by the context in which the word is found. While the science of textual criticism is based upon a comparison of manuscripts, their age and source, and is valid for the choice of words, yet in the case where a single letter would be the governing factor as to which interpretation is correct, the present writer wonders whether too much stress can be placed upon that one letter, especially when the entire context could prove the deciding factor in the decision regarding the correct letter. The context is didactic. It contains definite statements of fact. It is highly doctrinal in nature. It has to do with a sinner’s standing before God in point of law, not his experience. As Denney says; “The justified have peace with God,… His wrath (1:18) no longer threatens them; they are accepted in Christ. It is not a change in their feelings which is indicated, but a change in God’s relation to them.” To inject an exhortation in the midst of a doctrinal passage, when the apostle’s custom is to present exhortation after he has finished his doctrinal teaching as he does in Romans 12–16, and Ephesians 4–6, would be contradictory to his practice. The verbs which follow are all in the indicative mode, make definite assertions, do not exhort. Furthermore, there is a difference between having peace with God and having the peace of God in the heart. The first has to do with justification, the second with sanctification. The first is the result of a legal standing, the second, the result of the work of the Holy Spirit. The first is static, never fluctuates, the second changes from hour to hour. The first, every Christian has, the second, every Christian may have. The first, every Christian has as a result of justification. What sense would there be in exhorting Christians to have peace when they already possess it? The entire context is one of justification. Paul does not reach the subject of sanctification until 5:12–21 where he speaks of positional sanctification and 6:1–8:27 where he deals with progressive sanctification. Again, the Greek word for peace is  (eijrhnh). The verb is  (eijrw), “to bind together that which has been separated.” Our Lord made peace through the blood of the Cross (Col. 1:20) in the sense that through His atonement He binds together again, those who by reason of their standing in the First Adam had been separated from God and who now through faith in Him are bound again to God in their new standing in the Last Adam. This is justification. The word “with” is pros (pro"), “facing.” That is, a justified sinner has peace facing God. He stands in the presence of God, guiltless and uncondemned and righteous in a righteousness which God accepts, the Lord Jesus. The above considerations force upon the writer the conclusion that Paul was stating a fact here, not exhorting the reader to do something. Translation. Having therefore been justified by faith, peace we are having with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. (5:2) “Access” is  (prosagwgh), “the act of bringing to, a moving to.” Thayer says, “that friendly relation with God whereby we are acceptable to Him and have assurance that He is favorably disposed towards us.” The word is made up of  (ajgw), “to bring,” and pros (pro"), “facing,” thus, is used of a person who brings another into the presence of a third party. Moulton and Milligan in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament give as the meaning of the verb, “to present, introduce.” They quote from a secular document of the second century, “Cronion, who now happens to be in Alexandria, will bring them before his highness the high-priest.” The same authority, commenting on

the noun form,  (prosagwgh), which is used in our present verse, says that it sometimes means a landing-stage. Grace here is seen as a haven or harbor, and the word is used of the landing-stages or approach of a ship to the harbor. It is so used in secular documents. The present writer remembers running across a use of the word, the source he cannot recall, where it was used of one who secured for his friend an audience with a king, brought him, properly attired, into his presence and favor. The French have a word for this, entree. And that is exactly what our Lord does for a believing sinner. He clothes him with Himself as his righteousness, cleanses him in His own precious blood, and brings him into the full favor (grace charis (cari")) of God the Father. This is entree. But for how long? “Have” is perfect in tense. The translation reads, “through whom we have our permanent entree by faith into this unmerited favor in which we have been placed, and that permanently,” the word “stand” also being perfect in tense. The hope here is that of participating in the glory of heaven. Translation. Through whom also our entree we have as a permanent possession into this unmerited favor in which we have been placed permanently, and rejoice upon the basis of hope of the glory of God. (5:3–5) The “we” is Paul, editorial “we.” “Glory” is kauchoomai (kaucoomai), “to glory on account of a thing,” that is, exult because of something. “Tribulations” is thlipsis (qliyi"), “a pressing, pressing together, pressure, oppression, affliction, distress, straits.” It is preceded by the article, marking these out as things naturally expected in a Christian’s life. To exult here in the tribulations does not mean merely in their midst but because of them. Denney says, “does not simply mean ‘when we are in tribulations,’ but also ‘because we are,’ the tribulations being the ground of the glorying.” This requires supernatural grace supplied by the Holy Spirit. Paul did not exult because of the tribulations themselves but because of their beneficial effect upon his Christian life. This the saint must learn to do. He must look at these trials and difficulties as assets that develop his Christian character. Paul says that they work patience. “Work” is katergazomai (katergazomai), “accomplish, achieve, to do that from which something results.” One could translate “tribulation generates patience,” or “produces patience.” “Patience” is  (uJpomonh), “steadfastness, constancy, endurance.” Thayer says, “the characteristic of a man who is unswerved from his deliberate purpose and his loyalty to faith and piety by even the greatest trials and sufferings.” The verbal form is  (uJpomenw), “to remain under,” thus, to remain under trials in a God-honoring way so as to learn the lesson they are sent to teach, rather than attempt to get out from under them in an effort to be relieved of their pressure. “Experience” is  (dokimhn). Vincent says of the a.v. “experience,” “Wrong. The word means either the process of trial, proving, as in II Corinthians 8:2, or the result of trial, approvedness, Philippians 2:22. Here it can only be the latter: tried integrity; a state of mind which has stood the test. The process has already been expressed by tribulation.” The verbal form is  (dokimazw), “to put to the test for the purpose of approving, and finding that the person tested meets the specifications, to put one’s approval upon him.” Denney, speaking of “patience” ( (uJpomonh)), says, it “produces approvedness—its result is a spiritual state which has shown itself proof under trial.” This approved character produces and increases hope. Denney comments, “The

experience of what God can do, or rather of what He does, for the justified amid the tribulations of this life, animates into new vigor the hope with which the life of faith begins.” “Ashamed” is  (kataiscunw). In a context like this the verb has the Hebrew usage where one is said to be put to shame who suffers a repulse, or whom some hope has deceived. Thayer translates, “does not disappoint.” Denney explains, “All these Christian experiences and hopes rest upon an assurance of the love of God. That the love of God to us is meant, not our love to Him, is obvious from verse 6 and the whole connection: it is the evidence of God’s love to us which the apostle proceeds to set forth.” “Is shed abroad” is in the Greek text the perfect tense of  (ejkcew), “to pour out,” which Denney translates, “has poured in, and still floods our hearts.” This giving of the Spirit here does not refer to the giving of the Spirit at Pentecost in the sense that at that time He came to form the Church, but to the act of the Spirit at the time of the conversion of the individual taking up His permanent abode in his inner being. Denney says that the aorist tense of the verb “is given” can hardly refer to Pentecost. He says, “What the Spirit, given, … to faith, does, is to flood the heart with God’s love, and with the assurance of it.” Translation. And not only this, but we also are exulting in our tribulations, knowing that this tribulation produces endurance, and this endurance approvedness, and this approvedness, hope. And this hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts and still floods them through the agency of the Holy Spirit who was given to us. (5:6–8) Paul now speaks of a demonstration of God’s love for mankind in that Christ died for the ungodly. When sinners were in the condition in which they were powerless for good, He died for (huper (uJper)) them. The preposition huper (uJper) means “for the sake of, in behalf of, instead of.” In John 11:50, we have, “It is expedient for you that one man should die (huper (uJper)) instead of the people, and not that the whole nation perish,” and in Galatians 3:13, “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse (huper (uJper)) instead of us.” Dana and Mantey in their Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament say, “In both of these passages the context clearly indicates that substitution is meant.” Thus our Lord died instead of us, taking our penalty, and in behalf of us, in that His death was in our interest. “Due time” is kairos (kairo"), “a strategic time, a time determined by a set of circumstances which make that particular point of time part of the efficient working of an action or set of actions.” “Ungodly” is  (ajsebh"), “lack of reverence towards God, impiety.” Paul uses the terms “righteous” and “good” here, not in their New Testament sense, but in their classical meaning. He is using an illustration from human experience. Vincent’s note is helpful; “The distinction is: dikaios (dikaio") (righteous) is simply right or just; doing all that law or justice requires; agathos (ajgaqo") (good) is benevolent, kind, generous. The righteous man does what he ought, and gives everyone his due. The good man ‘does as much as ever he can, and proves his moral quality by promoting the well-being of him with whom he has to do.’ Agathos (ÆAgaqo") (good) always includes a corresponding beneficient relation of the subject of it to another subject; an establishment of a communion and exchange of life; while dikaios (dikaio") (righteous) only expresses a relation to the purely objective  (dikh) (right). Bengel says; ‘dikaios (dikaio")

(righteous), indefinitely, implies an innocent man; ho agathos (oJ ajgaqo") (the good), one perfect in all that piety demands; excellent, honorable, princely, blessed; for example, the father of his country.’ “Therefore, according to Paul, though one would hardly die for the merely upright or strictly just man who commands respect, he might possibly die for the noble, beneficent man who commands affection. The article is omitted with righteous, and supplied with good—the good man, pointing to such a case as a rare and special exception.” “Commends” is  (sunisthmi), “to put together by combining or comparing, hence to show, prove, establish, exhibit.” The word means here more than “to hold up to favorable view, to recommend.” Denney says, “How greatly is this utmost love of man surpassed by the love of God. He commends, or rather makes good, presents in its true and unmistakable character,… His own love toward us.” Vincent comments, “Note the present tense. God continuously establishes His love in that the death of Christ remains as its most striking manifestation.” It must be remembered that while a human being may be found who will give his life for someone else, that that person is always either a friend, or at least, someone who has done the person wrong, nor is he his enemy. Christ died for those who are at enmity with Him and who bitterly hate Him. Vincent comments on the word “His” before “love.” It is the reflexive pronoun, and he says it carries the weight of “His own,” adding, “Not in contrast with human love, but as demonstrated by Christ’s act of love.” Translation. For when we were yet without strength, in a strategic season, Christ instead of and in behalf of those who do not have reverence for God and are devoid of piety, died; for, very rarely in behalf of a righteous man will anyone die, yet perhaps in behalf of the good man, a person would even dare to die. But God is constantly proving His own love to us because while we were yet sinners, Christ in behalf of us died. (5:9–11) Paul’s argument is from the greater to the less. Since God the Son died for us when we were sinners, unlovely and unlovable, rebellious against Him, hating Him, how much more will He save from the future wrath, those who are now in Christ as righteous in their standing as He Himself is in His Person, and as lovely as He is in the sight of God the Father. The article appears before “wrath,” pointing out a particular wrath, that of the Lake of Fire which is a manifestation of God’s wrath against sin. The “if” is ei (eij), the particle of a fulfilled condition. It is, “in view of the fact that when we were enemies.” Vincent, commenting on “enemies,” says, “The word may be used either in an active sense, hating God, or passively, hated of God. The context favors the latter sense; not, however, with the conventional meaning of hated, denoting the revengeful, passionate feeling of human enmity, but simply the essential antagonism of the divine nature to sin. Neither the active nor the passive meaning needs to be pressed. The term represents the mutual estrangement and opposition which must accompany sin on man’s part, and which requires reconciliation.” “Reconciled” is  (katalassw), “to change, exchange,” hence, “to reconcile” those at variance. Vincent’s note is most illuminating, “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 onesided 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, 8; II Corinthians 5:18, 19; Ephesians 1:6; I John 4:19). Hence the passive form of the verb here: we were made subjects of God’s reconciling act. (2) a corresponding movement on man’s part toward God; yielding to the appeal of Christ’s self-sacrificing love, laying aside his enmity, renouncing his sin, and turning to God in faith and obedience. (3) a consequent change of character in man: the covering, forgiving, cleansing of his sin; a thorough revolution in all his dispositions and principles. (4) a corresponding change of relation on God’s part, that being removed which alone rendered Him hostile to man, so that God can now receive him into fellowship and let loose upon him all His fatherly love and grace (I John 1:3, 7). Thus there is complete reconciliation.” The word “life” here is  (zwh), “the life principle.” The comparison is with death. Our Lord said to His disciples, “Yet a little while, and the world seeth Me no more,” referring to His death; “but ye see Me: because I live, ye shall live also,” referring to His life in resurrection power (John 14:19). That is, in virtue of the fact that our Lord lives after death, He is able to save us completely and to the end (Heb. 7:25). Salvation is in three parts, justification, the removal of the guilt and penalty of sin and the bestowal of a righteous standing in Christ before God’s law, which is given to us at the moment of believing; sanctification, the progressive work of the Holy Spirit during the Christian life; and glorification, the glorifying of our bodies at the Rapture. It is of the latter two Paul is speaking, since he is writing in a context of justification. It should be clear that the statement, “we shall be saved by His life,” has no reference to our Lord’s life on earth as an example of how a Christian should live. His example saves no one. His blood does. Alford explains; “Not only has the reconciled man confidence that he shall escape God’s wrath, but triumphant confidence—joyful hope in God.” “Atonement” is the a.v. translation of  (katallagh), the verb form of which is  (katallassw), “to reconcile.” The translation should be “reconciliation.” Vincent says; “Atonement at the time of the a.v. signified reconciliation, at-one-ment, the making two estranged parties at one.” He quotes Shakespeare, “He and Aufidius can no more atone (that is, be at one), than violentest contrarieties”; also Fuller, “His first essay succeeded so well, Moses would adventure on a second design to atone two Israelites at variance.” He says, “The word at present carries the idea of satisfaction rather than of reconciliation, and is therefore inappropriate here.” Translation. Much more therefore, having been justified now by His blood, we shall be saved through Him from the wrath. For though, while being enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. And not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom now we received the reconciliation. (5:12–14) We come now to the consideration of a passage (5:12–21) which reaches back to 3:18–20 where the subject of the total depravity of the race is discussed, and includes in its scope the section, 3:21—5:11, where justification is dealt with. Paul shows

in this passage that sin and death come from the First Adam, and righteousness and life from the Second Adam. “World” here is kosmos (kosmo"), the human race, the same word used in John 3:16 of the world of sinners. Sin originated with the angel Lucifer, who in rebelling against God contracted a sinful nature. Adam in his disobedience was the channel through which sin entered the human race. Through sin, death entered the race, physical and spiritual. The literal Greek which follows is, “And thus into all men death came throughout.” That is, when death entered the race, it went throughout the race, affecting everyone. The reason why death affects all, Paul says, is that all sinned. Here Adam is looked upon as the federal head of the race, and that when he sinned, all of humanity sinned in him. It is Adam’s initial sin that constituted him a sinner in which all human beings participated, and which brings death upon all. In other words, we are sinners, not because we have committed acts of sin, but because Adam sinned. Now Paul proceeds to explain and demonstrate this. Until the law was given, that is, during the period between Adam and Moses, sin was in the world. But sin is not put to the account of the person when there is no law. Yet, death reigned as king from the time of Adam to that of Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam’s transgression. Since death comes by means of sin, and those living between Adam and Moses had no sins charged to their account by reason of the non-existence of the written law, and yet in spite of that, died, logic leads us to conclude that their death came by reason of Adam’s sin and that they sinned in him, their federal head. Adam is spoken of as “the figure of Him who was to come.” “Figure” is tupos (tupo"), used in a doctrinal sense of a type, a person or thing prefiguring a future (Messianic) person or thing; in this sense Adam is called a type of Jesus Christ, each of the two having exercised a preeminent influence upon the human race (the former destructive, the latter, saving) (Thayer). Translation. Wherefore, as through the intermediate agency of one man the aforementioned sin into the world entered, and through this sin, death; and thus into and throughout all mankind death entered, because all sinned. For until law, sin was in the world, but sin is not put to one’s account, there being no law. But death reigned as king from Adam to Moses, even over those who did not sin in the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of the One who is to come. (5:15) “Offense” is  (paraptwma), “a falling alongside, a deviation from the right path.” Adam’s original sin was the violation of the known will of God. “Free gift” is charisma (carisma), “a gift of grace, a favor which one receives without merit of his own,” referring here to the gift of eternal life. Paul is here introducing a contrast. The one act of obedience is not like the free gift. The word “one” is preceded by the article. It is the transgression of the one, Adam. This one transgression resulted in the physical and spiritual death of all. The word “one” before “man” is preceded by the article. It is “the one Man.” Vincent comments, “Some explain of the quality of the cause and effect: that as the fall of Adam caused vast evil, the work of the far greater Christ shall much more cause great results of good. This is true, but the argument seems to turn rather on the question of certainty. ‘The character of God is such, from a Christian point of view, that the comparison gives a much more certain basis of belief, in what is gained through the second

Adam, than in the certainties of sin and death through the first Adam’ (Schaff and Riddle).” Translation. But not as the transgression, thus also is the gratuitous favor. For since by the transgression of the one the many died, much more the grace of God and the gratuitous gift by grace which is of the one Man, Jesus Christ, to the many will abound. (5:16) The contrast here is that of source. Out of the source of one sin, Adam’s, God’s judgment fell, resulting in the condemnation of all. Out of a source of many transgressions, as an occasion for the display of God’s grace, the free gift of salvation came, resulting in justification. Translation. And not as through one who sinned, was the gift, for the judgment was out of one (transgression) as a source, resulting in condemnation. But the gratuitous gift was out of many transgressions as a source, resulting in justification. (5:17) Vincent says that the emphatic point of the comparison is in the word “reigned.” “The effect of the second Adam cannot fall behind that of the first. If death reigned, there must also be a reign of life.” Translation. For in view of the fact that by means of the transgression of the one, death reigned as king through that one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness in life will reign as kings through the One, Jesus Christ. (5:18) “Offense” is  (paraptwma), “transgression.” The Greek reads: “So then, therefore, as through one transgression, to all men.” The preposition eis (eij") often shows result. A translator is not bound to duplicate the exact parts of speech found in the original when a Greek idiom would when brought over into the second language, cause misunderstanding. Here the absence of the verb must be taken care of. The translation can therefore read, “So then, therefore, as through one act of transgression, to all men there resulted condemnation.” “Righteousness” is  (dikaiwma), “a righteous act or deed,” here, that righteous act of our Lord in satisfying the demands of the law which mankind broke. “Justification” is  (dikaiwsi"), “the act of God declaring men free from guilt and acceptable to Him” (Thayer). The same authority explains, “unto acquittal, which brings with it the bestowment of life.” The words “of life” are genitive of description in the Greek text, describing the quality of the righteousness bestowed upon man. It is a righteousness which is connected with the impartation of spiritual life. In itself, this righteous standing is a purely legal matter and does not impart life nor change character. But it is accompanied by the life that God is, imparted to the believing sinner in regeneration. Translation. So then, therefore, as through one act of transgression to all men there resulted condemnation, thus, also, through one act of righteousness, to all men there resulted a righteous standing that had to do with life.

(5:19) “Disobedience” is  (parakoh). This is one of the nine words for sin in the New Testament. It describes the nature of Adam’s first act of sin, the one act that plunged the entire race into sin with its accompaning degradation and misery. The word is made up of  (ajkouw), “to hear,” and para (para), “alongside,” the compound word meaning, “to hear alongside.” Trench says, “ (Parakoh) is in its strictest sense a failing to hear or a hearing amiss, the notion of active disobedience which follows on this inattentive or careless hearing, being superinduced upon the word; or, it may be, the sin being regarded as already committed in the failing to listen when God is speaking.… It need hardly be observed how continually in the o.t., disobedience is described as a refusing to hear (Jer. 11:10, 35:17); and it appears literally as such at Acts 7:57.” “Obedience” is  (uJpokoh), made up of  (ajkouw), “to hear,” and hupo (uJpo), “under,” literally “to hear under.” The idea is that of a willing listening to authority. Thayer defines it; “obedience, compliance, submission.” The obedience here on the part of the Lord Jesus is spoken of in Hebrews 10:7, where He is quoted as saying to God the Father, “Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of Me) to do thy will, O God.” The Father’s will was the Cross for the Son. “Made” in both occurrences is  (kaqisthmi), “to set, place, put, to appoint one to administer an office, to constitute.” The Greek word for “make” is  (poiew), which refers to a mechanical operation such as that of making a spear out of wood and iron. It refers to the act of changing a certain material object so as to fit it for a certain purpose.  (Kaqisthmi) has in it more than that. By the one act of Adam in disobeying God, the human race was constituted sinful, and this by the judicial act of God. Likewise, by the one act of obedience of the Lord Jesus, all who believe are constituted righteous, and this by the judicial act of God. Translation. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were constituted sinners, thus also through the obedience of the One, the many will be constituted righteous. (5:20) There is no article before “law.” Law as a method of divine dealing entered. “Entered” is  (pareishlqen). Elthon (ÆElqon) means “to come,” eis (eij") “into,” and para (para), “alongside,” thus, “entered alongside.” Vincent says, “Now that the parallel between Adam and Christ is closed, the question arises as to the position and office of the law. How did it stand related to Adam and Christ? Paul replies that it came in alongside of the sin. ‘It was taken up into the divine plan or arrangement, and made an occasion for the abounding of grace in the opening of the new way of justification and life’ (Dwight).” Denney explains, “ ‘The comparison between Adam and Christ is closed. But in the middle between the two stood the law’ (Meyer). Paul must refer to it in such a way as to indicate the place it holds in the order of Providence, and especially to show that it does not frustrate, but further, the end contemplated in the work of Christ … Sin entered into the world; the Law entered into the situation thus created as an accessory or subordinate thing; it has not the decisive significance in history which the objective power of sin has.” “Offense” is  (paraptwma) (transgression). “Abound” is  (pleonazw), “to increase, be augmented.” Denney says, “The offense is multiplied because the law, encountering the flesh, evokes its natural antagonism to God, and so stimulates it into disobedience … As the offense multiplied, the need of redemption, and the sense of that need were intensified.” Vincent explains, “Not primarily of the greater consciousness and acknowledgment, but of the increase of actual transgression. The other

thought, however, may be included.” “Did much more abound” is  (uJperperisseuw). The simple verb means “to be over and above a certain number or measure,” thus, “to superabound.” The prefixed preposition means “above.” Thus, Paul says, “Where sin increased ( (pleonazw)), grace superabounded, and then some on top of that.” Denney says that the word for sin, hamartia (aJmartia) seems used here, not  (paraptwma), because more proper to express the sum total of evil, made up of repeated acts of disobedience to the law. Translation. Moreover, law entered in alongside, in order that the transgression might be augmented. But where the sin was augmented, the grace superabounded with more added to that. (5:21) The a.v., says “sin reigned unto death.” “Reigned” is  (basileuw), “to reign as king.” Here sin is personified, and refers to a nature, the totally depraved nature of the unsaved person, That reigns as an absolute monarch in his being. “Unto death” is en toi thanatoi (ejn toi qanatoi), “in the sphere of death.” Alford says that death is that in and by which the reign of sin is exercised and shown. Grace is supplied in superabundance in order that it might reign as king through righteousness, resulting in eternal life, and this eternal life in its application to the believing sinner is made possible through the Lord Jesus’ work on the Cross. Translation. In order that just as the aforementioned sin reigned as king in the sphere of death, thus also the aforementioned grace might reign as king through righteousness, resulting in eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

CHAPTER SIX (6:1) The questions in this verse are rhetorical in their nature so far as Paul is concerned, and he raises them in order that he might introduce his subject of the Godordained method whereby a saint can live a victorious life over sin. But they were not original with him. He understood grace, and such questions would never occur to him. The questions were asked him over and over again after his messages on grace by those who were legalists and who did not therefore understand grace. He answers the first question regarding his doctrine of grace in verses 2–14 by declaring the mechanical impossibility of a Christian continuing to live a life of habitual sin. In response to this, the same objector asks another question of the same nature which Paul brings before his readers (v. 15). This second question proposes a life of planned infrequent, spasmodic acts of sin, since grace makes it impossible for a Christian to live a life of habitual sin. Paul answers this question in verses 16–23 by showing that the Christian has changed masters, and that serving the Lord Jesus, it is not his nature to sin. So Paul proposes the question, “What shall we say then?”—say then to what? We go back to 5:20 for our answer which we find in the apostle’s statement, “Where sin abounded, there grace was in superabundance, and then some on top of that.” The objector’s thought was as follows; “Paul, do you mean to tell me that God is willing to forgive a person’s sins as often as he commits them?” In response to Paul’s affirmative answer, this legalist says in effect, “Well then, if that is the case, shall we Christians keep

on habitually sinning in order that God may have an opportunity to forgive us and thus display His grace?” That is the background of this man’s reasoning. We will now consider the implications of his question. The first thing we must settle is regarding the word “sin,” does it refer here to sin as an abstraction, namely, to acts of sin committed by the believer, or to the totally depraved nature still in him? A rule of Greek syntax settles the question. The definite article appears before the word in the Greek text. Here the article points back to a previously mentioned sin defined in its context. The reference is to sin reigning as king (5:21). There sin is personified since it reigns as a king. But one cannot conceive of acts of sin reigning as king in the life of a person. They are the result of some dominant factor reigning as a king. That can only be the evil nature still resident in the Christian. And here is the key to the interpretation of the entire chapter. Every time the word “sin” is used in this chapter as a noun, it refers to the evil nature in the Christian. Read the following verses and substitute the words “sinful nature” for the word “sin,” and see what a flood of light is thrown upon your understanding of this section of God’s Word (1, 2, 6, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23). The key word in Romans 6 is “machinery.” Here we have the mechanics of the Spiritfilled life. We see the inner workings of the machinery set-up God brings into being when He saves a sinner, the power of indwelling sin broken and the divine nature implanted. In Romans 8 we have the dynamics of the Spirit-filled life. There we have the Holy Spirit mentioned all through the chapter, the source of power and the Operator of the spiritual machinery in the inner being of the believer. In Romans 7 we see the monkey wrench, self dependence, which when dropped into the inner workings of this machinery, stops the works, preventing the Holy Spirit from giving the believer victory over the sinful nature and producing His own fruit. Thus we have a trio of chapters, The Mechanics of the Spirit-filled Life (6), The Dynamics of the Spirit-filled Life (8), and The Monkey Wrench, Self Dependence (7). Thus, in chapter six, Paul is not talking about what kind of a life the believer should live, but by what method or how he should live that life. The question reads as follows, “Shall we continue in the sinful nature?” The word “continue” is  (menw), “to remain, abide.” It is used in the New Testament of a person abiding in some one’s home as a guest, or of a person abiding in a home. It has in it the ideas of fellowship, of cordial relations, of dependence, of social intercourse. The question now can be further interpreted to mean, “Shall we continue habitually to sustain the same relationship to the sinful nature that we sustained before we were saved, a relationship which was most cordial, a relationship in which we were fully yielded to and dependent upon that sinful nature, and all this as a habit of life?” The idea of habitual action comes from the use of the present subjunctive which speaks of habitual action. The fundamental question therefore is not with regard to acts of sin but with respect to the believer’s relationship to the sinful nature. This is after all basic, acts of sin in his life being the result of the degree of his yieldedness to the sinful nature. Translation. What then shall we say? Shall we habitually sustain an attitude of dependence upon, yieldedness to, and cordiality with the sinful nature in order that grace may abound? (6:2) Paul now proceeds to deal with this question. His first reaction is an emotional one, “God forbid.” His second answer is a rational one. He shows that for a Christian to habitually sustain the same relationship to indwelling sin, namely, that of a dependence

upon it, a yieldedness to it, and a cordiality with it, is a mechanical impossibility. This he does in verses 2–14. “God-forbid” in the Greek text is  (mh genoito), an optative of wishing. One could translate literally, “may such a thing never occur,” or interpret, “away with the thought.” He declares the mechanical impossibility of such a thing in the words, “How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?” The word “how” is  (pw"), “how is it possible?” Paul is not asking a question for information, but is rather presenting a rhetorical question designed to declare the impossibility of the thing. He says that it is a mechanical impossibility for a Christian to habitually sustain the same relationship to the evil nature that he sustained before God saved him. “We” is hoitines (oiJtine"), a relative and an indefinite pronoun put together to form a word which emphasizes quality or nature. It is, “How is it possible for such as we are, born-again children of God, to do such a thing. It is against our nature to habitually yield to the evil nature. We are not persons of such a nature as to do so.” Then Paul tells us what there is in the inner spiritual and mechanical set-up of a Christian which prevents him from habitually obeying the behests of the sinful nature. These two things are the result of a major surgical operation which God performs in the inner being of every sinner He saves. They are the breaking of the power of indwelling sin, and the impartation of the divine nature. The first is referred to in verse 2 in the words “are dead to sin,” and the second, in verse 4, in the words, “walk in newness of life.” Christians are dead to sin. Just what does that mean? Sin here, we have established, is the sinful nature. We are dead to the sinful nature. “Are dead” is apethanomen (ajpeqanomen), a second aorist of  (ajpo qnhscw), “to die.” Death means separation. Physical death is the separation of a person from his body, spiritual death, the separation of the person from God. There is a preposition prefixed to the verb (apo (ajpo)) which means “off, away from,” and is used with the ablative case whose root meaning is separation. This teaches us that there was a cleavage consummated between the individual and his evil nature. God used His surgical knife to cut the believing sinner loose from his evil nature. This occurred potentially in the mind and purpose of God when that believing sinner, elected to salvation before the universe was created, was identified with the Lord Jesus in His death on the Cross (vv. 3–7), and actually, the moment he placed his faith in Him as Saviour. Now, while God separated the believing sinner from the evil nature, yet He did not take it out of him, but left it in his inner being. John in his first letter (1:8) is most careful to tell us that this evil nature remains in the Christian throughout his earthly life and is not eradicated until that Christian dies or is glorified. This is what he says in his Greek; “If we say that sin we are not constantly having, ourselves we are deceiving (nobody else), and the truth is not in us.” Sin here is the nature, not the act, and for two reasons; the word is without the article, and such a construction in Greek emphasizes nature, quality, and because the word is singular. The word “ourselves” is in the emphatic position, John’s thought being that any person who holds the theory that the sinful nature is eradicated at a certain point in the Christian’s experience is only deceiving himself. Others are not deceived, for they can see sin sticking out all over his life. Let us therefore hold to this, that while there is a definite cleavage between the believer and the sinful nature, yet that nature remains in him until he dies or is glorified. The tense of the verb is aorist, which speaks of a once for all act. God has wrought a cleavage or separation between the believer and the sinful nature which is a permanent one, a once for all disengagement of the person from the evil nature. This

surgical operation is never repeated. So far as God is concerned, He has so thoroughly done His work that that separation could be permanent. But alas, because of the frailty of man, the Christian at infrequent intervals does yield to the evil nature and sin. But the point is, God has so constituted him, that he need not do so. He has imparted the divine nature which gives the Christian a hatred of sin and a love for righteousness. In addition to this, the Holy Spirit has been caused to take up His permanent residence in him to aid him in his battle against sin, and in his effort to live a Christian life. So Paul says, “How is it possible for such as we who have died off once for all with respect to sin, any longer to live in it?” Or to translate and interpret, “How is it possible for such as we, Christians, who have been separated once for all from the sinful nature, any longer to live within its grip?” Let us use a few illustrations. The Christian has the same power over the evil nature that he has over his radio. When a program suddenly comes over the air unfit for Christian ears, he can shut the radio off with a “There, you cannot bring that smut into my life.” Before salvation, the evil nature had absolute dominion over the sinner. Since salvation has wrought its beneficent work in his inner being, he has absolute dominion over it. Believe this, child of God, and act upon it. The evil nature is a dethroned monarch. Paul personifies it as a king reigning (5:21, “as sin has reigned as king”). The Holy Spirit at the time of the sinner’s salvation, enthroned the Lord Jesus in the throne room of the believer’s heart. He stays on the throne so long as the believer keeps yielded to the Spirit and rejects the behests of the evil nature. When the believer sins, the dethroned king, the evil nature, mounts to the throne, with the consequent dethronement of the Lord Jesus. These are cold, hard facts, yet, nevertheless true to the Word of God in its teaching on this subject. However, such a procedure cannot go on indefinitely nor often, for God puts a curb upon such a thing by sending suffering, chastening, and the Christian is made most miserable by a guilty conscience and the indwelling Holy Spirit who is grieved at such conduct. To use an illustration that will show the definite cleavage between the Christian and the evil nature, the disengagement that took place when God performed that major surgical operation. A floor lamp is connected to a wall outlet. It derives its power to give light from the electric outlet in the wall. Just so, a sinner is connected to the evil nature, and derives his incentive and energy to sin, from the evil nature. Remove the connecting plug from the wall outlet, and the light ceases to function. Its source of power has been cut off. Cut the connection between the sinner and the evil nature, and he ceases to function as a sinner. His source of power has been cut off. Upon no other basis can one explain the instantaneous and radical change in the outlook and actions of a sinner saved in a rescue mission, this change more apparent because of the life of gross sin he has lived. Connect the floor lamp with the wall outlet, and it starts to give light again. Connect the Christian with the evil nature still in him, and he sins again. But the point is, he is under no compulsion to put himself back into the control of the evil nature again, nor can he do it habitually, nor frequently. God has so adjusted things in the Christian’s life, that, while he remains a free moral agent capable of choosing between obeying the divine nature or the evil nature, yet, the preponderance of his choices are Godward. Thus does Paul declare the mechanical impossibility of a Christian habitually sustaining the same relationship to the evil nature which he sustained before he was saved. Translation. May such a thing never occur. How is it possible for such as

we who have died off once for all from sin (have been separated once for all from the sinful nature), any longer to live in it (in its grip)? (6:3, 4) Paul now proceeds to show how this mighty cleavage was effected. He says that it was brought about by God’s act of baptizing the believing sinner into Christ so that that person would share His death on the Cross, which identification of the believing sinner with Christ in His death, brought about the separation of that person from the sinful nature. He speaks of the same thing in verse 11, where he says that Christ died with reference to the sinful nature (ours) once for all. The death of our Lord had a two-fold aspect with reference to sin. In 3:21–5:11 He dies with reference to our acts of sin. He pays the penalty for us which the law demanded. In 6:11 He dies with reference to our sinful nature. His death brings about a separation between the believing sinner and the evil nature. We have this thought expressed in the words of the song, “Rock of Ages”—“Let the water and the blood, from thy riven side which flowed, be of sin the double cure, save from wrath and make me pure.” “Save from wrath” is justification (3:21–5:11), “make me pure” is sanctification, the breaking of the power of indwelling sin (5:12–8:27). The word “baptized” is not the translation of the Greek word here, but its transliteration, its spelling in English letters. The word is used in the classics of a smith who dips a piece of hot iron in water, tempering it, also of Greek soldiers placing the points of their swords, and barbarians, the points of their spears in a bowl of blood. In the LXX (Lev. 4:6) we have, “The priest shall dip his finger in blood seven times and sprinkle of the blood seven times before the Lord,” where “dip” is  (baptw) (related to  (baptizw)), and “sprinkle,”  (rJantizw),  (baptw) referring to the action of placing the finger in the blood. In Luke 16:24, the rich man asks that Lazarus dip ( (baptw)) his finger in water and cool his tongue. The usage of the word as seen in the above examples resolves itself into the following definition of the word  (baptizw), “the introduction or placing of a person or thing into a new environment or into union with something else so as to alter its condition or its relationship to its previous environment or condition.” And that is its usage in Romans 6. It refers to the act of God introducing a believing sinner into vital union with Jesus Christ, in order that that believer might have the power of his sinful nature broken and the divine nature implanted through his identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection, thus altering the condition and relationship of that sinner with regard to his previous state and environment, bringing him into a new environment, the kingdom of God. God placed us in Christ when He died so that we might share His death and thus come into the benefits of that identification with Him, namely, be separated from the evil nature as part of the salvation He gives us when we believe. We were placed in a new environment, Christ. The old one was the First Adam in whom as our federal head we were made sinners and came under condemnation. In our new environment in Christ we have righteousness and life. Our condition is changed from that of a sinner to that of a saint. But we were not only placed in Christ by God the Holy Spirit in order that we might share his death and thus be separated from the evil nature, but we were placed in Him in order that we might share His resurrection and thus have divine life imparted to us. This Paul tells us in the words, “that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” The newness of life here does

not refer to a new quality of experience or conduct but to a new quality of life imparted to the individual. Romans 6 does not deal with the Christian’s experience or behavior. Paul treats that in chapters 12–16. In this chapter the key word is machinery, the mechanics of the Spirit-filled life being Paul’s subject. The newness of life therefore refers, not to a new kind of life the believer is to live, but to a new source of ethical and spiritual energy imparted to him by God by which he is enabled to live the life to which Paul exhorts in Romans 12–16. “Walk is  (peripatew), “to order one’s behavior, to conduct one’s self.” The word “should” (a.v.) throws us off the track. There is no moral obligation imposed here. We have a purpose clause in the subjunctive mode introduced by the purpose particle hina (iJna). That is, we shared Christ’s resurrection in order that we may order our behavior in the power of a new life imparted. Here we have then the two-fold result of the major surgical operation God performs in the inner being of the sinner when he places his trust in the Saviour. He is disengaged from the evil nature, separated from it, no longer compelled to obey it. He has imparted to him the divine nature (II Peter 1:4) which becomes in him the new source of ethical, moral, and spiritual life, which causes him to hate sin and love righteousness, and which gives him both the desire and the power to do God’s will. Paul, speaking of the same thing in Philippians 2:12, 13, says, “Carry to its ultimate conclusion your own salvation,… for God is the One who is constantly putting forth energy in you, giving you both the desire and the power to do His good pleasure.” The Christian’s will has been made absolutely free. Before salvation it was not free so far as choosing between good and evil is concerned. It was enslaved to the evil nature. But now, it stands poised between the evil nature and the divine nature, with the responsibility to reject the behests of the former and obey the exhortations of the latter. To constantly say NO to the former and YES to the latter becomes a habit, and then the victorious life has been reached. Paul has answered the question, “Shall we as a habit of life continue to sustain the same relationship to the evil nature that we sustained before salvation?” by showing that this is a mechanical impossibility and for two reasons, first, the power of the sinful nature has been broken, and therefore the Christian is not compelled to sin, and second, the divine nature is imparted, and the Christian does not want to sin. When a person does not have to do something which he does not want to do, he simply does not do it. Translation. Do you not know that all we who were placed into Christ, were placed into His death? We therefore were entombed with Him through this being placed into His death, in order that in the same manner as there was raised up Christ out from among those who are dead through the glory of the Father, thus also we by means of a new life may order our behavior. (6:5–7) In verses 1–4, Paul has brought out two major facts; first, that when God saves a sinner, He separates him from the indwelling sinful nature, which cleavage is so effective, that the believer is not compelled to sin anymore; he has been permanently delivered from its power, when at the same time that nature is left in him permanently; second, that God at the same time has imparted the divine nature, which gives him both the desire and the power to do God’s will. Now, in verses 5–10, he repeats these great truths in the event that some of his readers may not have caught their full implications as

presented in verses 2–4. The “if” is the “if” of a fulfilled condition, the “in view of the fact,” or the “since such and such a thing is so.” “Have been planted together” is the perfect tense verb of ginomai (ginomai), “to become,” speaking of a past complete act and its abiding results, and the noun sumphutoi (sumfutoi). The verb  (fuw) means “to grow,” and the prefixed preposition sun (sun), “with,” thus, the compound word means “to grow up together with.” It speaks of a living, vital union of two individuals growing up together. The word could be used of the Siamese twins whose bodies were connected at one point, and whose blood stream flowed through two physical bodies as it does normally through one. Here the word speaks of that vital union of the believing sinner and the Lord Jesus mentioned in verses 3 and 4 where God places him into Christ at the Cross, to share His death and resurrection. The word “likeness” is  (oJmoiwma), referring to a likeness or resemblance which Thayer says in this case amounts almost to an identity. That is, the believing sinner and the Lord Jesus were united in a death at Calvary, His death, a vicarious one that had to do with the salvation of the believing sinner from the guilt, penalty, and power of sin, the sinner’s death, one which he in justice should have died as a result of that sin, but which in the grace of God was borne as to its guilt and penalty by His Son. Both deaths had to do with sin, but from different aspects. The future aspect of the words “we shall be” is not that of a predictive future so far as time is concerned, but that of a logical future. Paul says in his Greek, “For, in view of the fact that we have become those permanently united with Him with respect to the likeness of His death, certainly also (as a logical result) we shall become those who have become permanently united with him with respect to the likeness of His resurrection.” The latter expression is defined by its context. The physical aspect of the resurrection, namely, the glorification of our bodies, is not in the apostle’s mind here, for he is writing in a context of sanctification, not glorification. The aspect of our Lord’s resurrection spoken of here is that of the new type of life He lives as the Man Christ Jesus since His resurrection, not now a life in which the soul life has prominence, since He as the Man Christ Jesus was surrounded with and had to take cognizance of the human life and limitations He possessed and which surrounded Him, but a life in which the human spirit is in prominence. So, the saint in his new condition orders his behavior in the power of a new life imparted, namely, the resurrection life of his Lord. The little word “also” (v. 4) tells us all this. Our Lord’s resurrection life is being lived in a new sphere, and so is the Christian’s. Then Paul develops his thesis. As a result of the believer having become united with Christ in His death, the power of the sinful nature is broken, and this Paul treats in verses 6 and 7. In view of the fact that he has become united with Him in His resurrection, the divine nature has been imparted. And this Paul speaks of in verses 8–10. In verse 6, three problems face us. Who is the old man, what is the body of sin, and what is involved in the word translated “destroyed”? There are two words in Greek which mean “man,”  (ajnqrwpo"), the generic, racial term which is used for a male individual at times, which also has the idea in it of mankind, and when speaking of the human race as a collection of individuals, can include men and women. The other word is  (ajnhr), which refers to a male person. The word  (ajnqrwpo") is used here, referring to the individual man or woman. There are two words in Greek which mean “old,” archaios (ajrcaio"), which means “old in point of time,” and palaios (palaio"), which means “old in point of use.” The second

is used here. Trench defines the word as follows; “old in the sense that it is more or less worn out.” It describes something that is worn out, useless, fit to be put on the scrap pile, to be discarded. Thus, the old man here refers to that person the believer was before he was saved, totally depraved, unregenerate, lacking the life of God. The word “body” is  (swma), the human body. The word “sin” is in the genitive case, here, the genitive of possession. The reference is therefore to the believer’s physical body before salvation, possessed by or dominated and controlled by the sinful nature. The person the believer was before he was saved was crucified with Christ in order that his physical body which before salvation was dominated by the evil nature, might be destroyed, Paul says. The word “destroyed” is  (katargew), “to render idle, inactive, inoperative, to cause to cease.” Thus, the entire idea is, “knowing this, that our old man, that person we were before we were saved, was crucified with Him, in order that our physical body which at that time was dominated by the sinful nature, might be rendered inoperative in that respect, namely, that of being controlled by the sinful nature, in order that no longer are we rendering a slave’s habitual obedience to the sinful nature.” The words “that henceforth we should not serve sin” (a.v.) imply an obligation on our part. There is such, but Paul is not discussing that in this chapter. He argues that point in 12:1, 2. Here the fact is stated, that this disengagement of the believer from the evil nature has been brought about by God with the result that the believer no longer renders a slave’s obedience to the evil nature habitually as he did before God saved him. Let us use a rather simple illustration to make this clear. It is that of a machine shop in which there is a turning lathe operated by means of a belt which is attached to a revolving wheel in the ceiling of the room. When the workman wishes to render the lathe inoperative, in other words, wishes to stop it, he takes a pole and slides the belt off from the wheel, thus disengaging the turning lathe from the revolving wheel which heretofore had driven it. That turning lathe is like the human body of the sinner, and the revolving wheel in the ceiling, like the evil nature. As the wheel in the ceiling makes the turning lathe go round, so the sinful nature controls the body of the sinner. And as the machinist renders the lathe inoperative by slipping off the belt which connected it with the wheel, so God in salvation slips the belt, so to speak, off from the sinful nature which connected it with the physical body of the believer, thus rendering that body inoperative so far as any control which that nature might have over the believer, is concerned. The Christian is exhorted to maintain that relationship of disconnection which God has brought about between him and the indwelling sinful nature. God has not taken away the Christian’s free will, and does not treat him as a machine. It is possible for the Christian by an act of his will to slip the belt back on, connecting himself with the evil nature, thus bringing sin into his life. But, he is not able to do this habitually, and for various reasons. In the first place, it is not the Christian’s nature to sin. He has been made a partaker of the divine nature which impels him to hate sin and to love holiness. In the second place, the minute a Christian sins, the Holy Spirit is grieved, and that makes the believer decidedly uncomfortable, spiritually. God also sends suffering and chastening into his life as a curb to sin. All these things taken together, preclude any possibility of the Christian taking advantage of divine grace. Paul now reinforces his previous declaration to the effect that the believer is so disengaged from the evil nature that he no longer lives a life of habitual sin, by the statement, “For he that is dead is freed from sin.” “Is dead” is aorist tense in the Greek text, namely, “he who died,” referring to the historic fact of a believing sinner being

identified with Christ in His death on the Cross. The prefixed preposition apo (ajpo) means “off, away from” and the aorist tense refers to a once for all action. Thus we have, “the one who died off once for all,” that is, off from the evil nature, this being a separation from that nature. “Is freed” is the word  (dikaiow) and in the perfect tense.  (Dikaiow) means “to justify, to declare righteous, to render or make righteous, acquit of a charge, to absolve.” It is a term having to do with the law and the courts of law. In this sense Paul uses it in the section in Romans (3:21–5:11) where he deals with the doctrine of justification. But in Romans 6 he is presenting the doctrine of sanctification. Therefore, the idea of being “set free,” growing out of the idea that a justified person is set free from the penalty of the law, is used. The one, Paul says, who died off once for all from the sinful nature, has been set free completely from it, with the present result that he is in a state of permanent freedom from it, permanent in the sense that God has set him free permanently from it, and it is his responsibility to maintain that freedom from it moment by moment. Translation. For in view of the fact that we are those who have become permanently united with Him with respect to the likeness of His death, certainly also we shall be those who have become permanently united with Him with respect to the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this experientially, that our old self was crucified once for all with Him, in order that the physical body dominated by the sinful nature might be rendered inoperative, with the result that no longer are we rendering a slave’s habitual obedience to the sinful nature, for the one who died off once for all stands in the position of a permanent relationship of freedom from the sinful nature. (6:8–10) In verses 5–7 Paul presents the negative aspect of the surgical operation God performs in the sinner when he believes, namely, the separation between him and the evil nature. Now, in verses 8–10, he gives the reader the positive angle. He says in his Greek, “Now, in view of the fact that we died off with Christ. we believe (dogmatically) that we will also live with Him.” “With Him” is the personal pronoun, either the dative of respect or the instrumental of means. We will live with respect to Him. That is, the believer’s new life imparted to him at the moment of believing is Christ. We will live by means of Him. The believer derives his spiritual life from Christ in that sense. Paul is not speaking here of the believer’s fellowship with Christ here or in eternity. How long does the believer derive his spiritual life from the Lord Jesus? As long as He lives. Paul says He died once for all, and that death over Him will never again exercise lordship. Thus, the believer will be sustained in spiritual life for time and eternity, since Christ is his life. Paul says, “He died unto sin once for all.” The sin here does not refer to acts of sin. That aspect of the death of our Lord, namely, that of paying the penalty for our sins, Paul took care of in 3:21–5:11. Here he speaks of the relation of Christ’s death to the sinful nature of the individual. Our Lord’s death not only paid the penalty of human sin, but it was used of God to break the power of indwelling sin in the believer’s life. This is what the song writer meant when he wrote concerning the blood of Christ, “be of sin the double cure, save from wrath and make me pure.” Translation. Now, in view of the fact that we died off once for all with Christ, we believe that we shall also live by means of Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised up out

from among those who are dead, no longer dies. Death over Him no longer exercises lordship. For the death He died, He died with respect to the sinful nature once for all. But the life He lives, He lives with respect to God. (6:11–14) We come now to another aspect of the method whereby the saint obtains victory over sin. In verses 1–10, Paul has presented two main facts; first, the believer stands in the position of a permanent relationship of freedom to the sinful nature, and need not obey it, and second, the divine nature is imparted by which he is given both the desire and the power to do God’s will. This is the inner spiritual machinery God has installed whereby the believer lives his Christian life. But, like an automobile engine, this machinery works best when it is serviced regularly. There is always a change for the good in a new convert’s life. But if he does not understand this inner change and adjust himself properly to it, he lives a mediocre Christian life. This adjustment Paul speaks of in verses 11–13, namely, that which the believer must do if he expects the best results from this inner change God wrought in him. He is to do two things, one, reckon himself dead to sin, two, reckon himself alive to God. The word “reckon” is logizomai (logizomai), “to reckon, count, compute, to take into account.” Here Paul is exhorting the saints that in their endeavor to live a life in accordance with the Word of God, they should take into account the fact that they are dead to sin, that they have been disengaged from the evil nature, that it has no power over them anymore, that they are scot free from it and can say a point blank NO to it, also to take into account the fact that they are alive to God, that is, that the divine nature has been imparted with the result that that nature gives them both the desire and the power to regulate their lives in accordance with the Word of God. Now, reckoning one’s self dead to sin and alive to God does not make one so. God constituted the saint so when He saved him. But the act of reckoning brings into better operation with beneficial results, the working of this inner spiritual machinery. For instance, there is a game in which a blindfolded person is brought into the room, and made to stand on a table board which rests on some books on the floor. Two young men lift the board about a foot, and warn the young man not to bump his head against the ceiling. Thinking that he is near the ceiling, he loses his balance and falls off. He lost his balance and fell because he reckoned himself where he was not. Just so, a Christian who fails to count upon the fact that the power of the sinful nature is broken in his life, fails to get consistent victory over it, with the result that he lives a mediocre Christian life. He reckoned himself where he was not. Another young man is blindfolded and stood on the board. He knows the game. When the board is lifted and he is warned not to bump his head against the ceiling, he remains perfectly straight and maintains his equilibrium, because he reckoned himself where he was. And so it is with a Christian who counts upon the fact that the power of the sinful nature is broken. He knows that he does not have to obey it, and that he has the power to say NO to it, and he turns his back on it and does what is right. The Christian who does not count upon the fact that the divine nature is implanted in his inner being, goes on living his Christian life as best he can more or less in the energy of his own strength, with the result that he exhibits a mediocre Christian experience. But the believer who counts upon the fact that he is a possessor of the divine nature, ceases from his own struggles at living a Christian life, and avails himself of the life of God supplied in the divine nature. So the first adjustment the Christian should make is that of counting upon the fact that the power of the indwelling sinful nature is broken and the divine nature imparted, and order his life on that principle.

When the saint counts upon the fact that the power of the sinful nature over him is broken, he obeys the exhortation of Paul, “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body.” “Reign” is  (basileuw), “to exercise kingly power.” The verb is present imperative with the negative  (mh), which construction forbids the continuance of an action already going on. It is, “Stop allowing the sinful nature to reign as king in your mortal body.” The sinful nature is a dethroned monarch. The believer has the responsibility of keeping it from mounting into the throne of his heart, the place which the Lord Jesus should occupy. The believer is well able to do this. His will is free. He has the divine nature and the Holy Spirit to urge him on, and give him the desire and the power to refuse the sinful nature and obey the Word. Paul says, “Order your behavior in the sphere of, by means of, the Spirit, and you will positively not fulfil the desires of the flesh” (Gal. 5:16). Paul says, “Stop allowing the sinful nature to reign as king in your mortal body with a view to obeying it in the sphere of its passionate cravings.” Now, to what does the word “it” refer, to the sinful nature or the body? Logic would lead us to relate the pronoun to the sinful nature, but Greek grammar refers it back to the body, since the pronoun is neuter, the word “sin” is feminine, and the word “body,” neuter. The pronoun in Greek agrees with its antecedent in gender. It is true that the sinful desires originate with the evil nature, not with the physical body. But why does Paul in this instance relate them to the body? The answer is found in the fact that the sinful nature is an intangible, invisible entity, and cannot be watched. It is an unseen enemy whose tactics cannot be observed and therefore cannot be guarded against. But the saint is able to keep watch over the members of his body, what his eyes look at, his ears listen to, his mind thinks about, his hands do, and where his feet carry him. But not only will the saint who counts upon the fact that the power of the sinful nature is broken, stop allowing it to reign as king over him, but he will obey Paul’s exhortation, “neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin.” The verb is again present imperative with  (mh), “Stop yielding.” The verb is  (paristhmi), “to place beside or near, to present, to proffer, to put at one’s disposal.” We are to stop putting the members of our body at the disposal of, at the service of the sinful nature. The word “instruments” is hopla (oJpla). In classical Greek the word referred to the weapons of the Greek soldier. Paul thinks of the members of the Christian’s body as weapons to be used in the Christian warfare against evil. The saint, counting upon the fact that he has been disengaged from the evil nature, does two things, he refuses to allow it to reign as king in his life, and he stops putting his members at its disposal to be used as weapons of unrighteousness. Now, the saint who counts upon the fact that the divine nature has been implanted, will obey Paul’s exhortation, “Yield yourselves to God, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God.” The word “yield” is again  (paristhmi), but in the aorist imperative, which commands a once for all action to be done at once. Paul says, “Put yourselves at once, and once for all, at the disposal of God, as those who are actively alive out from among those who are dead, and your members as weapons of righteousness, at the disposal of God.” This is a once for all act of the saint dedicating himself to God and His service, an act to be lived by, and upon the basis of its implications, moment by moment. The saint should live his life every day with the consciousness of that fact in his mind. When the saint obeys the instructions laid down in these verses relative to his adjustment to the evil nature and the divine nature, Paul says, “The sinful nature will not

exercise lordship over you,” and he gives the reason, “You are not under law but under grace.” To be under law refers to an unsaved person who attempts to live in obedience to the law of God. To be under grace is to be a saved person who has been the subject of the surgical operation in which the power of the sinful nature has been broken and the divine nature implanted. The poet says, “Do this and live, the law commands, but gives me neither feet nor hands. A better word the gospel brings. It bids me fly and gives me wings.” Wings in Scripture, speak of supernatural power. Translation. Thus also be constantly counting upon the fact that on the one hand, you are dead ones with respect to the sinful nature, and on the other, that you are living ones with respect to God in Christ Jesus. Stop therefore allowing the sinful nature to reign as king in your mortal body with a view to obeying it (the body) in its passionate cravings. Moreover, stop putting your members at the disposal of the sinful nature as weapons of unrighteousness, but by a once for all act and at once, put yourselves at the disposal of God as those who are actively alive out from among the dead, and your members as weapons of righteousness at the disposal of God, for (then) the sinful nature will not exercise lordship over you, for you are not under law but under grace. (6:15) In verses 2–14, Paul has answered his listener’s question regarding the proposed habitual yieldedness of the believer to the evil nature, by showing that that was a mechanical impossibility considering the way the believer’s inner mechanical set up was arranged by God, the power of indwelling sin broken and the divine nature implanted. His listener comes back with another question. He says in effect, “Well then, since grace makes it impossible for the believer to sin habitually like he did before he was saved, may we Christians live a life of planned, occasional sin, since we are not under the uncompromising rule of law, but under the lenient sceptre of grace?” The verb in verse one is in the present subjunctive, speaking of habitual, continuous action. The verb in verse fifteen is in the aorist subjunctive, referring to a single act. Arthur S. Way, in his excellent translation and paraphrase of The Pauline Epistles, has read this man’s mind aright when he speaks of the uncompromising rule of law and the lenient sceptre of grace. The man simply did not know grace. Law is uncompromising. But grace is never lenient. It is far stricter than law ever could be. It is a far greater deterrent of evil than law ever was. A half dozen motorcycle policemen with their motors tuned up, are a far greater deterrent to speeding, than any number of placards along the road indicating the speed limit. The Holy Spirit, indwelling the believer, takes notice of the slightest sin and convicts him of it, whereas the law could act only generally and then only when the conscience of the individual cooperated with it. Grace not only forgives, but teaches (Titus 3:11–14). Just because the believer now is scot free from the law, does not mean that he can sin with impunity. There is a new propelling and compelling deterrent to sin, divine love, produced in the believer’s being which causes him to hate sin and obey the Word of God (Gal. 5:13, John 14:21–24). Translation. What then? Shall we sin occasionally, because we are not under law but under grace? Away with the thought.

(6:16) Paul answers the question of the man by showing that the believer has changed masters. The argument is based upon the meaning of the Greek word translated “servants.” Adolph Deissmann, in his Light From the Ancient East, says that the English word totally obscures Paul’s argument here. The word is doulos (doulo"), the most abject, servile term for a slave in the Greek language. The believer was a slave of Satan before salvation, but since he has been saved, he is a slave of the Lord Jesus. He has changed masters because he has a new nature, the divine, and the evil nature which compelled him to serve the Devil has had its power over him broken. In the various meanings of this word doulos (doulo") we will trace Paul’s argument to the effect that it is an impossibility for the believer to live a life of planned occasional sin. The believer does sin at times, but he does not provide in his life’s plan for occasional acts of sin. He hates sin and endeavors to keep it out of his life, and in the event that he does commit an act of sin, he deals with it in confession to the Lord Jesus, putting it out of his life and receiving the cleansing the blood of our Lord offers. The word refers to one who is born into a condition of slavery. As we were born by natural generation, we inherited a totally depraved nature through our parents from Adam, a nature which made us love sin and compelled us to serve it habitually. Now, being born again by the act of regeneration through the agency of the Holy Spirit, we are given a new nature, the divine, which gives us both the desire and the power to do God’s will. With our liberation from the compelling power of the evil nature and our acquisition of the divine nature, we have changed masters, from Satan to our Lord. Paul argues that the believer does not want to live even a life of planned, occasional sin because, in the first place he does not have to, since the power of the evil nature over him is broken, and in the second place, he does not desire to do so, since his new nature causes him to hate sin and love righteousness, and when a person does not have to do what he does not want to do, he simply does not do it. The believer has changed masters. Again, doulos (doulo") means, “one whose will is swallowed up in the will of another.” Paul argues that before salvation, the person’s will was swallowed up in the will of Satan, but since he has been saved, his will is swallowed up in the sweet will of God. And since that is so, he does not desire to live a life of planned occasional sin. Again, doulos (doulo") refers to one who is bound to another in bands so strong that only death can break them. The believer’s identification with the Lord Jesus in His death, broke the bands which bound him to Satan. Now, he is bound to the Lord Jesus as His bondslave in bands so strong that only death can break them. Since Christ is the believer’s life and He will never die again, the believer is bound to Him forever. The only way he could live a life of planned occasional sin is to become the slave of the evil nature and Satan. But his bands binding him to the Lord Jesus are unbreakable, and therefore a return to Satan and his slavery is an impossibility. Doulos (Doulo") also means, “one who serves another to the disregard of his own interests.” The sinner serves Satan to the disregard of his own best interests. He does so because he is compelled to do so. He gets sin and death, sorrow and suffering. The believer, with his own will and accord, serves the Lord Jesus with an abandon that says; “Nothing matters about me, just so long as the Lord Jesus is glorified.” Now, Paul argues, a person who does that, who disregards himself for the sake of the Lord Jesus, does not want to live a life of planned occasional sin. Translation. Do you not know that to whom you put yourselves at the

disposal of as slaves resulting in obedience, slaves you are to whom you render habitual obedience, whether slaves of the evil nature, resulting in death, or obedient slaves (of Christ) resulting in righteousness? (6:17) It is true that according to the a.v., the doctrines of salvation were delivered to us, and we by the grace of God believed them. However, that is not what Paul said in his Greek. The verb “delivered” is second person plural. The Greek text reads, “the form of doctrine into which you were delivered.” That is, in salvation, God constituted the believer according to this chapter (vv. 1–14) inwardly so that he would react to the doctrines of grace by nature (the divine nature) in such a way as to receive and obey them. We were delivered into the teaching (doctrine,  (didach)) in that we were constituted in salvation so that we would obey it. Paul thanks God that whereas before salvation we were slaves of the evil nature, we were in salvation delivered (handed over  (paradidwmi)) to the teachings of grace so that we become slaves of righteousness. Translation. But God be thanked, that you were slaves of the evil nature, but you obeyed out from the heart as a source, a type of teaching into which you were handed over. (6:18) “Being made free” is  (ejleuqerow), “to liberate, set free from bondage, to set at liberty,” Having been set free from the evil nature, the believer was constituted a slave of righteousness. Translation. Having been set free once for all from the evil nature, you were constituted bondslaves to righteousness. (6:19, 20) Paul apologizes for using the illustration drawn from human relations, that of a slave, but says that he was forced to do so because of the frailties of humanity. Translation. I am using an illustration drawn from human affairs because of the frailties of your humanity. For just as you placed your members as bondslaves at the disposal of uncleanness and lawlessness resulting in lawlessness, thus now place your members as bondslaves at the disposal of righteousness resulting in holiness. For when you were slaves of the evil nature, you were those who were free with respect to righteousness. (6:21–23) “Wages” is  (ojywnion), “whatever is bought to be eaten with bread, as fish, flesh. Corn, meat, fruits, salt, were given the soldiers instead of pay. That part of a soldier’s support given him in place of pay (i.e., rations) and the money in which he is paid” (Thayer). Paul used a military term hopla (oJpla), the weapons of a Greek foot soldier, translated “instruments” (6:13). Now, he uses the illustration of a soldier’s wages. The battle is between Satan’s hosts of wickedness and the people of God. The wage that Satan doles out is death. Translation. Therefore, what fruit were you having then, upon the basis of which things now you are ashamed? For the consummation of those things is death. But now, having been set free from the evil nature and having been made bondslaves of God, you are having your fruit resulting in holiness, and the consummation, life eternal. For the subsistance pay which the evil nature doles out is death. But the free gift of God is life eternal in Christ Jesus our Lord.

CHAPTER SEVEN (7:1) As we approach the contents of this chapter, Denney’s comment is helpful; “The subject of chapter 6 is continued. The apostle shows how by death the Christian is freed from the law, which, good as it is in itself and in the divine intention, nevertheless, owing to the corruption of man’s nature, instead of helping to make him good, perpetually stimulates sin. Verses 1–6 describe the liberation from the law; verses 7–13, the actual working of the law; in verses 14–25 we are shown that this working of the law is not due to anything in itself, but to the power of sin in the flesh.” In further pursuing the matter of the Christian’s relation to law as a method of divine dealing, Paul recurs to the substance of his statement in 6:14, “You are not under law, but under grace.” To be under law is to be an unsaved person obligated to obey God’s law. But the law gives neither the desire nor the power to obey its precepts. Instead, it brings out sin all the more, because its very presence incites rebellion in the totally depraved nature of the individual (5:20). To be under grace is to be a Christian, who has had the power of the evil nature broken in his life so that he does not need to obey it anymore, and has been given the divine nature which gives him both the desire and the power to do God’s will. As the poet says, “Do this and live, the law commands, but gives me neither feet nor hands. A better word the gospel brings. It bids me fly and gives me wings.” Paul’s purpose now is to press home the point that the believer is not under law anymore (vv. 1–6), that a Christian putting himself under law and thus failing to avail himself of the resources of grace is a defeated Christian, his own experience before he came into the knowledge of Romans 6 (vv. 7–13), and that while the law incites this Christian to more sin, yet the law is not responsible for that sin, but the evil nature, which only can be conquered as the believer cries “who shall deliver me?” and thus looks away from himself and self-dependence to the Lord Jesus (vv. 14–25). Paul says that it is a matter of common knowledge that the (civil) law can exercise dominion over a person only as long as he lives. When he dies, he has passed out of the realm where that law could have jurisdiction over him. Just so, the law of God can have dominion over a person as long as he remains within the domain where the law has jurisdiction, namely, in his unsaved state. But when a believing sinner has been identified with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection (Ch. 6), he has passed out of the realm where the law holds sway. He has ceased to be an unsaved person and has become a saved individual. Translation. Or, are you ignorant, brethren, for I am speaking to those who have an experiential knowledge of law, that the law exercises lordship over the individual as long as he lives? (7:2, 3) “Hath a husband” is hupandros (uJpandro"), “under or subject to a husband.” “Is bound” is dedetai (dedetai), perfect in tense, “is permanently bound.” There is no release. “Is loosed,” is katergazomai (katergazomai), “to render inoperative, to bring to naught,” literally, “she has been brought to naught as respects the law of her husband” (Vincent). This authority explains the words “the law of her husband,” “her legal connection with him.” He says, “There is an apparent awkwardness in carrying out the figure. The law, in vv. 1, 2, is represented by the husband who rules (hath

dominion). On the death of the husband the woman is released. In v. 4, the wife (figuratively) dies. ‘Ye are become dead to the law that ye should be married to another.’ But as the law is previously represented by the husband, and the woman is released by the husband’s death, so, to make the figure consistent, the law should be represented as dying in order to effect the believer’s release. The awkwardness is released by taking as the middle term of comparison the idea of dead in a marriage relation. When the husband dies, the wife dies (is brought to naught) so far as the marriage relation is concerned. The husband is represented as the party who dies because the figure of a second marriage is introduced with its application to believers (v. 4). Believers are made dead to the law as the wife is maritally dead—killed in respect of the marriage relation by her husband’s death.” Translation. For the woman subject to a husband, is permanently bound to her husband during his lifetime. But if her husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. So then, while her husband is living, an adulteress she will be called if she is married to another man. But if her husband is dead, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress, though being married to another man. (7:4) “Are become dead” is  (qanatow). Vincent says, “Rev., more accurately, ye were made dead, put to death; because this ethical death is fellowship with Christ’s death, which was by violence.” Alford says, “The more violent word is used instead of apethanete (ajpeqanete) (you died), to recall the violent death of Christ, in which, and after the manner of which, believers have been put to death to the law and sin,—and the historic aorist, to remind them of the great event by which this was brought about.” Robertson says; “The analogy calls for the death of the law, but Paul refuses to say that. He changes the structure and makes them dead to the law as the husband (6:3– 6). The relation of marriage is killed ‘through the body of Christ’ as ‘the propitiation’ (3:25) for us.” Translation. So that, my brethren, you also were put to death with reference to the law, through the intermediate agency of the body of Christ, resulting in your being married to another, to the One who was raised up out from among the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God. (7:5) The expression “in the flesh” refers to the condition of a person in the absolute control of the evil nature, as is clearly seen by a consideration of Paul’s words in 8:9, where he says, “But ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God, dwell in you.” That is, in the case where the person is indwelt by the Holy Spirit, that person is not in the control of the evil nature. That individual is a saved person. Consequently, the one who is in the flesh is an unsaved person, the flesh here referring to the fallen nature. “Motions” is  (paqhma), “an affection, a passion, impulse.” Vincent says, “Motions was used in earlier English for emotions or impulses. Thus Bacon: ‘He that standeth at a stay where others rise can hardly avoid motions of envy.’ ” “Did work” is  (ejnergew), “to be operative, put forth power, be at work.” The emotions or

impulses of sin, stirred to activity by the law, were operative in the members of our bodies with the result of the production of fruit, this fruit being with respect to death, identified with death, thus, characterized by death. Translation. For when we were in the sphere of the flesh, the impulses of sins which were through the law, were operative in our members, resulting in the production of fruit with respect to death. (7:6) By the believer’s death with Christ on the Cross, he was discharged from the law as the woman was discharged from the law which bound her to her husband. The believer is not under the law anymore, nor subject to it. The words “that being dead wherein we were held” could better be rendered, “having died to that in which we were constantly being held down.” That in which the believer was constantly held before he was saved is the evil nature. That is anything but dead. In fact, in the Christian, it is more alive than ever, being the point through which Satan seeks to obtain control over him. The point is, however, as Paul has so clearly shown, that the power of the evil nature has been broken in the believer. Before salvation, he was constantly held down within its grip and control. Paul uses the imperfect tense here to show the absolute control of the evil nature over the unsaved person. The words “that we should serve” (a.v.) indicate a future purpose, or an obligation on the part of the believer. The Greek text speaks of result. Paul’s thought is, “We were discharged from the law, having died to that in which we were constantly held down, insomuch that ( (wJsth)) we are habitually rendering a bondslave’s obedience.” It is a fact that we are doing so, a natural result of having been discharged from the law and having been separated from the compelling power of the evil nature in which we were constantly held down. This is the mechanics of the thing. We are doing this “in newness of spirit and not in the oldness of the letter,” Paul says. The word “letter” is gramma (gramma). It was used of a bond, a document, a letter one writes. Here it refers to the written law of God as found in the Old Testament. The Greek has two words for “new,” neos (neo"), “that which is new in regard to the time in which it has been in existence,” and kainos (kaino"), “that which is new as to quality, as set over against that which has seen service, the outworn, the effete or marred through age.” The second is used here. The word pneuma (pneuma) is spoken of as that which is new as compared to the nomos (nomo") (law) which is said to be old. There are two words for “old” in Greek, archaios (ajrcaio"), “that which is old in point of time,” and palaios (palaio"), “that which is old in point of use, worn out, useless.” The second is used here. The law abrogated at the Cross, is looked upon as outworn, useless, so that it has been set aside. Now, spirit and law are contrasted here. Does the word pneuma (pneuma) (spirit) refer here to man’s human spirit or to the Holy Spirit? A logical contrast would suggest that the distinction here is made between the Holy Spirit as the new method of divine dealing and the law, which was God’s old method. Paul’s thought here is not that the believer serves in a new spirit, that is, in a new attitude and with new motives, but that he serves now in the power of the Holy Spirit, under a new energy and control, rather than in an attempt to obey an objective law. It is again the thought expressed by the poet, “Do this and live, the law demands, but gives me neither feet nor hands. A better word the gospel brings. It bids me fly and gives me wings.” Wings in Scripture speak of supernatural power, here of the operation of the Holy Spirit.

Translation. But now, we were discharged from the law, having died to that in which we were constantly being held down, insomuch that we are rendering habitually a bondslave’s obedience in a sphere new in quality, that of the Spirit, and not in a sphere outworn as to usefulness, in a sphere of that which was written. (7:7) With this verse, we come to a new division of the subject under discussion. In 7:1–6, Paul has shown that the believer is not under law. In 7:7–13, he shows that a believer putting himself under law, thus failing to avail himself of the resources of grace, is a defeated Christian (here he recounts his own experience as a Christian before he came into the knowledge of Romans 6); and in 7:14–25, he teaches that while the law incites this Christian to more sin, yet the law is not responsible for that sin, but his evil nature, which only can be conquered as the believer cries, “Who shall deliver me?” and thus looks away from himself and self-dependence to the Lord Jesus. We will study Paul’s account of his Christian experience while he was attempting to live a Christian life under law. He poses the question, “What shall we say then to the fact (v. 5) that the desires or impulses in the evil nature in me were stirred into activity by the law. Is that law sinful or evil which does that?” His first answer is “God forbid,”   (mh genoito), literally “may it not become,” that is, “let not such a thing be thought of,” or “away with the thought.” His second answer is, “I did not know sin in an experiential way except through the instrumentality of the law.” That is, it was through the law that I came to know sin in my experience. Therefore, that law which shows me the sin in my life must be holy. “Lust” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a passionate craving,” good or bad as the context requires, here evil. “Covet” is again epithumia (ejpiqumia) in its verb form. Denney says, “The desire for what is forbidden is the first conscious form of sin.… He, Paul, says that the consciousness of sin awoke in him in the shape of a conflict with a prohibitive law.” Translation. What therefore shall we say? The law, is it sin? Away with the thought. Certainly I did not come into an experiential knowledge of sin except through the instrumentality of the law, for I had not known evil desire except that the law kept on saying, You shall not desire evil. (7:8) “Occasion” is  (ajformhn). Vincent’s note is helpful; “Emphatic, expressing the relation of the law to sin. The law is not sin, but sin found occasion in the law. Used only by St. Paul. See II Corinthians 5:12; Galatians 5:13; I Timothy 5:14. The verb  (ajformaw) means to make a start from a place.  (ÆAformh) is therefore a starting place, a base of operations. The Lacedaemonians agreed that Peloponnesus would be  (ajformh iJkanhn) a good base of operations (Thucydides, 1., 90). Thus, the origin, cause, occasion, or pretext of a thing; the means with which one begins. Generally, resources, as means of war, capital in business. Here the law is represented as furnishing sin with the material or ground of assault, ‘the fulcrum for the energy of the evil principle.’ Sin took the law as a base of operations.” “Wrought” is katergazomai (katergazomai), “to accomplish, achieve an end, carry something to a conclusion.” “Concupiscence” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), here “evil desire.” “Sin” is here the evil nature. Without the incitement produced by the law, the evil

nature was relatively dormant. A fulcrum is an instrument in the form of a pole or long stick, which when applied beneath an object, will pry that object loose from its position. Just so, the sinful nature uses the law as a fulcrum by which to pry itself loose from its relative inactivity into activity. Translation. But sin, using the commandment as a fulcrum, brought about in me every kind of evil craving. For without law, sin was dead. (7:9) The period in which Paul says he was alive without the law is probably his period of childlike innocence and on in life until he came face to face with the law of God and it began its work of showing him the exceeding sinfulness of sin and of inciting in him a rebellion against itself. Vincent says; “Referring to the time of childlike innocence previous to the stimulus imparted to the active principle of sin by the coming of the law; when the moral self-determination with respect to the law had not taken place, and the sin-principle was therefore practically dead.” When the commandment, “do not have evil desire” had come to Paul in all its implications, the evil nature (sin) regained its strength and vigor ( (ajnazaw)). Thayer, treating this word in this place, says; “Sin is alive, indeed, and vigorous among men ever since the fall of Adam; yet it is destitute of power in innocent children ignorant of the law; but when they come to a knowledge of the law, sin recovers its power in them also.” Alford explains the words “I was alive” as “when I lived and flourished,” and the words “I died,” as “ceased to live and flourish as before,—fell into a state of unhappiness.” Translation. But I was alive without law aforetime. But the commandment having come, sin regained its strength and vigor, and I died. (7:10, 11) The literal Greek is, “And there was found with reference to me the commandment which was to the life, this to death.” Vincent says, “The a.v. omits the significant  (auJth) this. This very commandment, the aim of which was life, I found unto death. Meyer remarks: ‘It has tragic emphasis.’ So Rev., this I found. The surprise at such an unexpected result is expressed by I found, literally, was found.” That is, Paul expected his Christian life under law to issue in the production of a testimony and experience that would be a living one, alive with the life of God, and this, accomplished through his attempt at law-obedience. But he found that mere effort at obeying an outside law resulted in defeat. The law, using the evil nature in him as a fulcrum, brought out sin all the more, and this condition he calls death. He describes this in the words, “For sin, (the evil nature) using the law as a fulcrum, beguiled me and through it (the law) killed me.” Translation. And the commandment which was to life, this I found to be to death; for sin, using the commandment as a fulcrum, beguiled me and through it killed me. (7:12) Vincent says, “Holy as God’s revelation of Himself; just (Rev. righteous) in its requirements, which correspond to God’s holiness; good, salutary, because of its end.”

Translation. So that the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and righteous, and good. (7:13) Denney explains; “The description of the commandment as ‘good’ raises the problem of verse 7 in a new form. Can the good issue in evil? Did that which is good turn out to be death to me? This also is denied, or rather repelled. It was not the good law, but sin, which became death to the apostle. And in this there was a divine intention, namely, that sin might appear sin, might come out in its true colors, by working death for man through that which is good. Sin turns God’s intended blessing into a curse; nothing could more clearly show what it is, or excite a stronger desire for deliverance from it.” Robertson comments; “The excesses of sin reveal its real nature. Only then do some people get their eyes opened.” Translation. Therefore, the good, to me did it become death? Away with the thought. But the sin (sinful nature) in order that it might become evident that it is sin, through the good (the commandment) brought about death, in order that sin (the sinful nature, its impulses and workings) may become exceedingly sinful. (7:14, 15) Paul has three words to describe man, “natural” psuchikos (yuciko"), the unsaved man whose highest form of life is dominated by his reason and emotional nature, the soulicle man (I Cor. 2:14); “carnal” sarkinos (sarkino"), the saved man who has not found deliverance from the power of sin in the fulness of the Spirit but is more or less still under the control of the evil nature; and “spiritual” pneumatikos (pneumatiko") (I Cor. 3:1), the believer who is living his life in the fulness of the Holy Spirit. Here he describes himself as carnal, as a Christian living, however unwillingly, more or less under the control of the evil nature from which he had been liberated, and under its control, because he was living under law instead of grace. He is sold as a slave under sin. “Sold” is  (pipraskw) in the perfect tense. Robertson says; “sin has foreclosed the mortgage and owns its slave.” Now, Paul explains his situation. “Allow” is  (ginwskw), “to know by experience, to understand.” He says, “For that which I do, I do not understand.” He does not understand his experience as a Christian. He says, “For that which I desire, this I do not practice, but that which I hate, this I am doing.” That is, the very thing he desires to do, namely, good, this he does not do, and that which he hates, this is the thing he does do. It is clear that Paul is recounting his experience as a saved man. He desires to do good and hates sin. No unsaved man does that. The failure to achieve his purpose is found in the fact that he is attempting in his own strength that which can only be accomplished in the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit. Translation. For we know that the law is spiritual. But as for myself, I am fleshly, permanently sold under sin. For that which I do, I do not understand. For that which I desire, this I do not practice. But that which I hate, this I am doing. (7:16–20) “Consent” is  (sumfhmi), “to speak together with, concur with.”

Vincent says, “since the law also does not desire what I do.” Robertson explains, “My wanting to do the opposite of what I do proves my acceptance of God’s law as good.” Denney says, “In doing what he hates, i.e., in doing evil against his will, his will agrees with the law, that it is good.” The distinctive word for “good” here is kalos (kalo"), not agathos (ajgaqo"). Denney says that kalos (kalo") suggests the moral beauty of the law, agathos (ajgaqo"), its beneficial purpose. The word “now,” nuni (nuni), Vincent says is “not temporal, pointing back to a time when it was otherwise, but logical, pointing to an inference. After this statement you can no more maintain that, etc.” The pronoun  (ejgw) appears with the verb. It is, “It is no longer I that am doing it.” Vincent explains, “My personality proper, my moral selfconsciousness which has approved the law (v. 16) and has developed vague desires for something better.” Denney explains; “ (ejgw) (I) is the true I, and emphatic. As things are, in view of the facts just explained, it is not the true self which is responsible for this line of conduct, but the sin which has its abode in the man.… ‘Paul said, It is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me; and, I live, yet not I, but Christ that liveth in me; and both these sayings of his touch on the unsayable’ (Dr. John Duncan). To be saved from sin, a man must at the same time own it and disown it; it is this practical paradox which is reflected in this verse. It is safe for a Christian like Paul—it is not safe for everybody—to explain his failings by the watchword, Not I, but indwelling sin.… A true saint may say it in a moment of passion, but a sinner had better not make it a principle.” Sin, of course, here, is the evil nature indwelling a believer. As to verse 18, Denney is helpful; “It is sin, and nothing but sin, that has to be taken into account of in this connection, for ‘I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, there dwells no good,’ in me, regarded as a creature of flesh, apart from any relation to or affinity for God and His Spirit.” “To will” is  (qelw), in the present infinitive, literally, “the being constantly desirous.” That is, Paul was constantly desirous of doing God’s will. “Present” is parakeimai (parakeimai), “to lie beside.” This came from his divine nature (II Peter 1:4). The words “how” and “find” are not in the Greek text, the former word being supplied by the translators of the a.v. to complete the thought, the latter being rejected by Nestle and placed in his apparatus. The literal Greek reads, “but to perform the good, not,” that is, while the desire to do God’s will is always with him, the ability or power to perform it is not. Ignorant of the truth of Romans 6 and 8, Paul was depending upon his own efforts to do God’s will. Translation. In view of the fact then that what I do not desire, this I do, I am in agreement with the law that it is good. And since the case stands thus, no longer is it I who do it, but the sin (sinful nature) which indwells me; for I know positively that there does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh, good; for the being desirous is constantly with me; but the doing of the good, not; for that which I desire, good, I do not; but that which I do not desire, evil, this I practice. But in view of the fact that that which I do not desire, this I do, no longer is it I who do it, but the sin which indwells me. (7:21–23) The word “law” is preceded by the article. The word could refer to a law such as the constant rule of experience imposing itself on the will such as a modern

scientific law, or the Mosaic law, or to the law of sin which Paul speaks of as in his members (Vincent). The last interpretation seems most in keeping with the times in which Paul is writing, and with the context. The law in his members warring against the law of his mind is, of course, the evil nature. Paul finds a condition that when he desires to do good, this evil nature always asserts itself against the doing of that good. He brings out the same truth in Galatians 5:17 where he says, “The flesh (evil nature) has a passionate desire to suppress the Spirit, and the Spirit has a passionate desire to suppress the flesh. And these are set in opposition to each other so that you may not do the things which you desire to do.” “I delight” is  (sunhdomai), “to rejoice,” “stronger than I consent unto v. 16). It is the agreement of moral sympathy” (Vincent). The inward man, Vincent defines as “the rational and moral I, the essence of the man which is conscious of itself as an ethical personality. Not to be confounded with the new man (Eph. 4:24, Col. 3:10). It is substantially the same as the mind (v. 23),” Denney explains. “The incongruity between inclination and action has its roots in a division within man’s nature. The law of God legislates for him, and in the inner man (Eph. 3:16) he delights in it. The inner man is not equivalent to the new or regenerate man; it is that side of every man’s nature which is akin to God, and is the point of attachment, so to speak, for the regenerating Spirit. It is called inward because it is not seen. What is seen is described in verse 23. Here also law is not used in the modern physical sense, but imaginatively, ‘I see a power to legislate, of a different kind (different from the law of God) which asserts itself in my members, making war on the law of my mind.’ The law of my mind is practically identical with the law of God in verse 22: and the mind itself, if not identical with the inward man, is its chief organ. Paul does not see in his nature two normal modes in which certain forces operate: he sees two authorities saying to him, Do this, and the higher succumbing to the lower. As the lower prevails, it leads him captive to the law of sin which is in his members, or in other words, to itself: ‘of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.’ The end therefore is that man as a creature of flesh, living under law, does what sin enjoins. It is the law of sin to which he gives obedience.” Translation. I find therefore the law, that to me, always desirous of doing the good, to me, the evil is always present. For I rejoice with the law of God according to the inward man. But I see a different kind of a law in my members, waging war against the law of my mind, making me a prisoner of war to the law of sin which is in my members. (7:24, 25) “Wretched” is  (talaipwro"), originally “wretched through the exhaustion of hard labor” (Vincent). The literal Greek is, “Wretched man, I.” Denney says, “a wail of anguish and a cry for help.” This was Paul’s cry during the spiritual experience he describes of himself in this chapter, Paul the saint, ignorant of the delivering power of the Holy Spirit, concerning whom he has so much to say in the next chapter. The minute he cries “who” he finds the path to victory, for he calls upon a person for help. The interrogative pronoun in the Greek text is masculine, indicating a person. The words “this death” refer to the miserable condition of the Christian who is yet dominated more or less by the evil nature which all the while he is desiring to gain victory over. It is the death Paul speaks of in verse 9. The body here is the physical body, as that body in which the sinful nature dwells and through which, when it is in the ascendancy, it

operates. Vincent quotes Meyer, “Who shall deliver me out of bondage under the law of sin into moral freedom, in which my body shall no longer serve as the seat of this shameful death?” Paul is not crying out for egress from his body but for deliverance from the condition of defeat which his residence in his physical body makes a possibility, and his lack of spiritual knowledge up to that moment, resulted in. Paul answers his question as to who shall deliver him from the compelling power of the sinful nature by saying that that deliverance comes through Jesus Christ, and he gives thanks to God for that fact. Alford, commenting on the rest of verse 25, says: “These words are most important to the understanding of the whole passage. We must bear in mind that it had begun with the question, Is the law sin? The apostle has proved that it is not, but is holy. He has shown the relation it holds to sin; namely, that of vivifying it by means of man’s natural aversion to the commandment. He has further shown, that in himself, even as delivered by Christ Jesus, a conflict between the law and sin is ever going on: the misery of which would be death itself were not a glorious deliverance effected. He now sums up his vindication of the law as holy; and at the same time, sums up the other side of the evidence adduced in the passage, from which it appears that the flesh is still, even in the spiritual man subject (essentially, not practically and energetically) to the law of sin,—which subjection, in its nature and consequences, is so nobly treated in chapter 8.” Vincent explains: “Paul says therefore, that, so far as concerns his moral intelligence or reason, he approves and pays homage to God’s law; but, being in bondage to sin, made of flesh, sold under sin, the flesh carries him its own way and commands his allegiance to the economy of sin. It should be carefully noted that this last summation does not describe Paul after he has found the way of deliverance through Jesus Christ, but is a recurrence to his discussion of his state before he found victory, and closes the discussion of the question, Is the law sin?” Translation. Wretched man, I. Who shall deliver me out of the body of this death? Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ. Therefore, I myself with my mind serve the law of God, but with my flesh the law of sin.

CHAPTER EIGHT (8:1) Alford sums up the contents of this chapter as follows: “In the case of those who are in Christ Jesus, this divided state ends in the glorious triumph of the Spirit over the flesh: and that (vv. 1–17), though incompletely, not inconsiderably, even in this state,— and (vv. 18–30) completely and gloriously hereafter. And (vv. 31–39) the Christian has no reason to fear, but all reason to hope; for nothing can sever him from God’s love.” Commenting specifically on verses 1–17, he says; “Although the flesh is still subject to the law of sin, the Christian, serving not the flesh, but walking according to the Spirit, shall not come into condemnation, but to glory with Christ.” The words “who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit,” are rejected by both Nestle and Westcott and Hort. Paul does not base his assertion of no condemnation to the saint upon the saint’s conduct, but upon his position in Christ. His position in Christ has liberated him from the compelling power of the evil nature and made him a partaker of the divine nature, a new inner condition which produces in every saint a life which has for its motive, obedience to His commandments. In other words, it is what God has made the believing sinner that insures the fact that there is no cause for condemnation in him. This is

further explained in verses 2–4. Translation. Therefore, now, there is not even one bit of condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus. (8:2–4) The law here is not a written law but a regulative principle which exercises a control over the life of the believer. This regulative control over his life is exercised by the Holy Spirit. This control is in the form of the energy given the believer both to desire and to do God’s will, this energy coming from the life that God is, which in the believer is given him by reason of his position in Christ Jesus. One could translate, “For the law of the Spirit, of the life in Christ Jesus.” One could interpret, “For the regulative principle of the Spirit, namely, the life which is in Christ Jesus,” this freed me from the regulative principle of sin and death (the evil nature), at the moment I put my trust in the Lord Jesus and was saved. It is Romans 6 in a nutshell. Alford says “This law of the Spirit of life having freed him from the law of sin and death, so that he serves another master, all claim of sin on him is at an end—he is acquitted, and there is no condemnation for him.” Denney explains, “It is subjection to the law of sin and death which involves condemnation, emancipation from it leaves no places for condemnation.” The Spirit which brings the believer the life which is in Christ Jesus, brings with it also the divine law for the believer’s life; but it is now, as Paul says in Galatians 3:21, a law which is able to give life, not an impotent law written on tables of stone, and hence righteousness comes by it; and it proves more than a match for the authority exercised over man by the forces of sin and death.” The words, “What the law could not do,” could be rendered literally, “the impossible (thing) of the law. A nominative absolute in apposition with the divine act-condemned sin. God condemned sin, which condemnation was an impossible thing on the part of the law. The words stand first in the Greek order for emphasis.” (Vincent). God condemned sin in the flesh, a thing which the law could not do in the sense that “Christ by His sinless life in our nature condemned our sinful lives, and left us inexcusable and without hope … God’s condemnation of sin is expressed in His sending His Son in our nature, and in connection with sin that He died for it—i.e., took its condemnation upon Himself. Christ’s death exhibits God’s condemnation of sin in the flesh. The words ‘in the flesh’ are to be construed with ‘condemned’: the flesh—that in which sin had reigned—was also that in which God’s condemnation of sin was executed. But Paul does not mean that by His sinless life in our nature, Christ had broken the power of sin at one point for the human race; he means that in the death of his own Son, who had come in our nature to make atonement for sin, God had pronounced the doom of sin, and brought its claims and authority over man to an end” (Denney). As to the words, “God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh,” Vincent is helpful; “I.iterally, of the flesh of sin: The choice of words is especially noteworthy. Paul does not say simply, ‘He came in flesh’ (I John 4:2, I Tim. 3:16), for this would have expressed the bond between Christ’s manhood and sin. Not in the flesh of sin, which would have represented Him as partaking of sin. Not in the likeness of flesh, since He was really and intensely human; but, in the likeness of the flesh of sin: really human, conformed in appearance to the flesh whose characteristic is sin, yet sinless. ‘Christ appeared in a body which was like that of other men insofar as it consisted of flesh, and was unlike insofar as the flesh was not flesh of sin’ (Dickson).”

In the phrase “for sin,” the preposition is peri (peri) which Vincent states, “expresses the whole relation of the mission of Christ to sin. The special relation is stated in condemned. For sin—to atone, to destroy, to save and sanctify its victims.” He explains the implications of the word “condemned” in this context as follows: “Deposed from its dominion, a thing impossible to the law, which could pronounce judgment and inflict penalty, but not dethrone. Christ’s holy character was a condemnation of unholiness. Construe in the flesh with condemned.” This He did in order that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, Paul says. “Righteousness” is  (dikaiwma), “Rev., ordinance. Primarily that which is deemed right, so as to have the force of law; hence an ordinance. Here collectively, of the moral precepts of the law: its righteous requirement. Compare Luke 1:6; Romans 2:26; Hebrews 9:1” (Vincent). As to the clause, “might be fulfilled in us,” Alford says, “find its full accomplishment, not merely, be performed by us, for the apostle has a much deeper meaning, namely, that the aim of God in giving the law might be accomplished in us, in our sanctification, which is the ultimate end of our redemption, Colossians 1:22; Ephesians 2:10. The passive is used, to show that the work is not ours, but that of God by His grace.” The words “who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit” are descriptive of the Christian, an identifying characteristic. That is true of every child of God. “Walk” is  (peripatew), “to order one’s behavior or conduct.” “Flesh” is the indwelling evil nature. “Spirit” is the Holy Spirit. “After” is kata (kata), whose root meaning is “down,” which suggests domination. A Christian is one who orders his behavior in such a way that it is not dominated by the evil nature, but by the Holy Spirit. Translation. For the law of the Spirit, of the life in Christ Jesus, freed you once for all from the law of sin and death. For that which is an impossibility for the law, because it was weak through the flesh, God having sent His Son in likeness of flesh of sin, and concerning sin, condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law may be brought to completion in us who, not as dominated by the flesh are ordering our behavior, but as dominated by the Spirit. (8:5–8) The Greek has it, “For those who are habitually dominated by the flesh put their mind on the things of the flesh” The flesh here is the evil nature. “Dominated” is from kata (kata), “down.” The present participle is used, the state being continuous. This is an unsaved person, habitually dominated by the indwelling sinful nature. “Mind” is  (fronew), “to direct the mind to something, to seek or strive for.” The word speaks of a deliberate setting of one’s mind upon a certain thing. The unsaved person is dominated by the evil nature habitually and as habitually puts his mind on those things that the sinful nature has always welling up within itself, the things of sin. The words “carnally minded” are  (to fronhma th" sarko"), literally, “the mind of the flesh.” “Flesh” here refers to the evil nature. It is the genitive of possession. The mind is possessed by, thus controlled or dominated by the evil nature, a description of the unsaved person. That person is dead in trespasses and sins, dead in the sense that he is separated from God and His life, for death is separation, and is on his way to a final and everlasting state of death in eternity. The words “spiritually minded” are   (to fronhma tou pneumato"), literally, “the mind possessed

by the Spirit,” thus a mind controlled or dominated by the Holy Spirit. That person possesses the life that God is, and peace, the Greek word for peace in its verb form meaning “to bind together that which has been separated,” thus, the believing sinner, bound together with God and His life after having been separated by sin. The reason why the mind dominated by the evil nature represents a state of death in the person so constituted, and results in final death, is that it is at enmity against God. “Subject” is  (uJpotassw), a military term meaning “to arrange in order under” a commanding general, for instance. Such a mind is not marshalled under the command of God, but of Satan. Consequently, those who are within the sphere of the evil nature, are not able to please God. These are, of course, the unsaved. Denney explains: “The reason why the mind of the flesh terminates so fatally: it is hostility to God, the fountain of life. Alienation from Him is necessarily fatal. It is the flesh which does not (for indeed it cannot) submit itself to God; as the seat of indwelling sin it is in permanent revolt, and those who are in it (a stronger expression, yet substantially identical with those who are after it, verse 5), cannot please God.” Translation. For those who are habitually dominated by the flesh, put their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are habitually dominated by the Spirit, put their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to have the mind dominated by the flesh, is death, but to have the mind dominated by the Spirit, is life and peace; because the mind dominated by the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not marshal itself under the command of the law of God, neither is it able to. Moreover, those who are in the sphere of the flesh are not able to please God. (8:9) The “ye” is emphatic. The Greek verb carries its own person in its ending, and does not need a pronoun to indicate the person acting in the verb. Consequently, when a pronoun is used with a verb, it is used for emphasis or contrast. Paul had just spoken of those who were in the sphere of the flesh, that is, within the grip of the evil nature, namely, the unsaved. Then he says, “But as for you, in contradistinction to the unsaved, you are not in the sphere of the evil nature, if so be.” The last three words are the translation of eiper (eijper), used of something that is assumed to be, but whether rightly or wrongly, is left in doubt. The word could be translated “provided that,” or “assuming that.” That is, assuming that the Spirit of God dwells in you, that is an indication that you are not in the sphere of the evil nature. The word “dwell.” is  (oijkew). The Greek word for “a home” is oikos (oijko"). The verb therefore means “to live or dwell in a certain place as your home.” The Spirit is not only resident in the believer in the sense of position in him, but He is actively at home in him, living in him as His home. He has a ministry to perform in him, namely, to give him victory over sin and produce His own fruit. This, together with the presence of the imparted divine nature in him, and the fact that God has broken the power of the evil nature, puts that person out of the sphere of the evil nature and within the sphere of the Holy Spirit. The saved person is therefore not in the grip of the evil nature but under the control of the Holy Spirit as he yields himself to Him. But, Paul says, “assuming that a certain individual does not have the Spirit of Christ, this one does not belong to Him.” The words “of His” are genitive of possession, and show ownership. This is an unsaved person. The truth is brought out here that the Holy Spirit is given the believing sinner the moment he puts his faith in the Lord Jesus, and not

some time afterwards, as is erroneously taught in some quarters, since that believing sinner becomes the possession of the Lord Jesus the moment he believes and thus must possess the Holy Spirit as an indweller. Translation. But as for you, you are not in the sphere of the flesh but in the sphere of the Spirit, provided that the Spirit of God is in residence in you. But, assuming that a person does not have the Spirit of Christ, this one does not belong to Him. (8:10) The body here is the believer’s human body. The word here refers, not to the Holy Spirit which is not a logical contrast to the human body, but to the human spirit, that part of man which gives him God-consciousness and enables him when that spirit is made alive by the Holy Spirit, to worship God. The believer’s human body is dead in the sense that it has death in it because of sin, Adam’s sin which brought both spiritual and physical death to each member of the race. The believer’s spirit is alive ( (zwh)) in that the Holy Spirit energizes it with divine life which is righteous in its quality. Eternal life is not only unending in its nature, but also ethical and spiritual in its content. Translation. But, assuming that Christ is in you, on the one hand, the body is dead on account of sin, and on the other hand, the spirit is alive on account of righteousness. (8:11) “Quicken” is  (zwoporew), “to cause to live, make alive, give life.” The future resurrection of the believer’s body is in view here, as the context and the word “also” indicate. Our Lord was raised out from among the dead. This is physical resurrection. The dead saints will be raised out from among the dead at the time of the Rapture through the instrumentality of the Holy Spirit. Translation. And assuming that the Spirit of the One who raised up Jesus out from among the dead is in residence in you, He who raised out from among the dead Christ Jesus, will also make alive your mortal bodies through the agency of the Spirit who is resident in you. (8:12, 13) “Debtors” is  (ojfeileth"), one held by some obligation, bound to some duty.” “Therefore” is ara oun (ajra oJun), “so then.” Paul’s thought is, “So then, since the saint is not within the sphere of evil nature, the power of the latter having been broken, and since he is within the sphere of the Holy Spirit, he is under no obligation to the evil nature to live under its dominion.” Assuming that a person lives habitually under the dominion of the evil nature, Paul says, that person is about to be dying. The verb is present in tense, and therefore durative in meaning, indicating habitual action. The individual who lives habitually under the dominion of the evil nature is an unsaved person. That one is on the way to final death in the Lake of Fire. But the person who by the Holy Spirit habitually puts to death the deeds of the body, will live. That person is a saved person. Translation. So then, brethren, we are those under obligation, not to the flesh, to live habitually under the dominion of the flesh. For, assuming

that you are living habitually under the dominion of the flesh, you are on the way to dying. But, assuming that by the Spirit you are habitually putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live. (8:14–17) “Sons” is huios (uiJo"), used in Galatians 4:5 of a mature child of God in a legal standing as against a child of God (teknon (teknon)) in his minority (4:1–3). When receiving the Holy Spirit at the moment of believing in the Lord Jesus as Saviour, Paul says, the saints did not receive a spirit of bondage resulting in fear. The word “spirit” here refers to a disposition or attitude. We use the word in this way for instance, “The spirit of that man is wonderful.” Denney explains; “It was not the spirit proper to slaves, leading them again to shrink from God in fear as they had done when under the law of sin and death, but a Spirit of adoption, a Spirit proper to those who were being translated from the servile to the filial relation to God.” “Adoption” is huiothesias (uiJoqesia"), made up of “son” and “to place.” Thus, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit who places children of God (teknon (teknon) born ones) as adult sons in a legal standing before God and in relation to Him. Vincent quotes a Mr. Merivale, “The process of legal adoption by which the chosen heir became entitled not only to the reversion of the property but to the civil status, to the burdens as well as the rights of the adopter—became, as it were, his other self, one with him … this too is a Roman principle, peculiar at this time to the Romans, unknown, I believe, to the Greeks, unknown, to all appearance, to the Jews, as it certainly is not found in the legislation of Moses, nor mentioned anywhere as a usage among the children of the covenant. We have but a faint conception of the force with which such an illustration would speak to one familiar with the Roman practice; how it would serve to impress upon him the assurance that the adopted son of God becomes, in a peculiar and intimate sense, one with the heavenly Father.” “Cry” is  (krazw), and speaks of a loud cry or vociferation, expressing deep emotion (Vincent). The word “Abba” is a Syrian term which Paul translates in Greek “The Father.” Our Lord used the term “Abba” in His Gethsemane prayer (Mk. 14:36) which Mark translates into Greek. Robertson, Denney, and Alford say however, that the Greek word is not meant to be a mere translation of the Syriac, but that the name “Father” is repeated. Robertson says it is a child’s privilege to repeat the name. Vincent suggests that it probably is from a liturgical formula which may have originated among the Hellenistic Jews who retained the consecrated word Abba. Alford says that it is a form of address, expressing, probably the idea, “my father.” Luther translates, “dear Father.” The Holy Spirit enables the child of God to call God, Father. The a.v., translation, “the Spirit itself” is explained as follows: The Greek word “spirit” (pneuma (pneuma)), is neuter in gender; the personal pronoun according to the rules of Greek grammar must agree with its antecedent in gender, therefore, the translation “itself.” The translators followed a slavish, idiomatic method of translation here instead of translating according to sense. The Holy Spirit is a Person. The pronoun should be rendered “Himself.” “Beareth witness with” is  (summarturew), “to bear joint witness with” some other person, “to bear joint-testimony with” some other person. “Our spirit” refers to the saint’s human spirit energized by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit bears testimony to our human spirit that we are children of God (teknon (teknon), without article, thus, children of God by nature), and our Spiritenergized spirit thus joins the Holy Spirit in a joint-testimony to that fact. Alford

translates, “testifies to our spirit,” saying that the prefixed preposition to the verb sun (sun), meaning “with,” does not refer to the words “the Spirit,” but to “agreement in that fact.” Denney says; “ ‘The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit.’ Our own spirit tells us we are God’s children, but the voice with which it speaks is, as we know, prompted and inspired by the divine Spirit itself.” Robertson identifies the verb as used with the associative-instrumental case, which gives us the translation, “with our spirit.” Alford’s note is helpful: “What is this witness of the Spirit itself? All have agreed, and indeed this verse is decisive for it, that it is something separate from and higher than all subjective inferences and conclusions. But on the other hand, it does not consist in mere indefinite feeling, but in a certitude of the Spirit’s presence and work continually within us. It is manifested, as Olshausen beautifully says, ‘in His comforting us, His stirring us up to prayer, His reproof of our sins, His drawing us to works of love, to bear testimony before the world, etc.’ And he adds, with equal truth, ‘On this direct testimony of the Holy Ghost rests, ultimately, all the regenerate man’s conviction respecting Christ and His work.’ ” “If” (v. 17) is ei (eij), introducing a fulfilled condition. That is, the Spirit constantly bears testimony in company with our spirit that we are children of God, and since children, also heirs, on the one hand, heirs of God, on the other hand, joint-heirs with Christ, the identifying mark of heirship, suffering together with Christ in order that we, the believer and Christ, may be glorified together. Vincent says; “Roman law made all children including adopted ones, equal inheritors. Jewish law gave a double portion to the eldest son. The Roman law was naturally in Paul’s mind, and suits the context, where adoption is the basis of inheritance.” On the phrase, “suffer with Him,” Vincent says, “Mere suffering does not fulfill the condition. It is suffering with Christ.” Denney says; “The inheritance attached to divine sonship is attained only on the condition expressed in the clause, ‘if so be we suffer with Him, that we may be also glorified together.’… Paul was sure of it in his own case, and took it for granted in that of others. Those who share Christ’s sufferings now will share His glory hereafter; and in order to share His glory hereafter, it is necessary to begin by sharing His sufferings here.” Translation. For as many as are being constantly led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. For you did not receive a spirit of slavery again with resulting fear, but you received the Spirit who places you as adopted sons, by whom we cry out with deep emotion, Abba, Father. The Spirit Himself is constantly bearing joint-testimony with our spirit that we are God’s children, and since children, also heirs; on the one hand, heirs of God, on the other, joint-heirs with Christ, provided that we are suffering with Him in order that we may be glorified together. (8:18) “Reckon” is logizomai (logizomai), “to compute, calculate.” The word implies reasoning (Vincent). “I judge after calculation made” (Godet). The word refers to a process of reasoning which results in the arriving at a conclusion. The present sufferings are nothing to be compared with the glory that will be revealed in the saints at the second advent of the Lord Jesus (II Thess.1:5–10, I Pet. 1:7, 4:13). “Worthy” is axios (ajxio"), “weighing as much as, of like value, worth as much.” “In” is eis (eij"), “to, towards,” “ ‘to usward.’ We shall be included in the radiance of the coming glory which will put in the shadow the present sufferings” (Robertson). Denney says, “toward us and upon us.” It

will be a reflected glory, reflected from our Lord in His glory, that will make the saints radiant when they return to the earth with the Lord Jesus at the second Advent. Translation. For I have come to a reasoned conclusion to the effect that the sufferings of the present season are of no weight in comparison to the glory which is about to be revealed upon us. (8:19–21) The words “earnest expectation” are apokaradokia (ajpokaradokia), “only here and in Philippians 1:20. From apo (ajpo) away, kara (kara) the head, dokein (dokein) to watch. A watching with the head erect and outstretched. Hence a waiting in suspense. Apo (ÆApo) from, implies abstraction, the attention turned from other objects. The classical student will recall the watchmen in the opening of Aeschylus’ Agamemnon, awaiting the beacon which is to announce the capture of Troy” (Vincent). “Creature” is ktiseos (ktiseo"), “the non-rational creation viewed collectively, animate and inanimate. Equivalent to all nature” (Vincent). “Waiteth” is apodechomai (ajpodecomai), “assiduously and patiently to wait for.” Denney comments; “First testimony to this glorious future: creation sighs for it. In some sense the hope and promise of it is involved in the present constitution of the world.… In Paul, however, the spirit of the passage is rather poetic than philosophical. Its affinities are with Genesis 3:17, where the ground is cursed for man’s sake: he conceives of all creation as involved in the fortunes of humanity. But this, if creation be personified, naturally leads to the idea of a mysterious sympathy between the world and man, and this is what the apostle expresses. Creation is not inert, utterly unspiritual, alien to our life and its hopes. It is the natural ally of our souls. What rises from it is the music of humanity— not apparently so still and sad to Paul as to Wordsworth, but with a note of hope in it rising triumphantly above all the pain of conflict.” “Manifestation” is apokalupsis (ajpokaluyi"), “an uncovering, a laying bare.” That is, the non-rational creation, subject to the curse put upon it because of man’s sin, is expectantly waiting for the glorification of the saints, that it also may be delivered from the curse under which it now exists. “Was made subject” is  (uJpotassw), “to arrange under, to subject, put in subjection.” “Vanity” is mataios (mataio"), “idle, resultless, futile, aimless.” It describes something that does not measure up to that for which it is intended. Here the creation is viewed as originally created, a perfect creation to glorify God. When the curse was put upon it, that purpose was interfered with in that a perishing and decaying creation cannot perfectly glorify Him. It was rendered relatively futile in that respect. This cursing of the creation, Paul says, was not done willingly, but “by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope.” Vincent says, “God, not Adam nor Satan. Paul does not use the grammatical form which would express the direct agency of God, by Him who hath subjected, but that which makes God’s will the occasion rather than the worker—on account of Him. Adam’s sin and not God’s will was the direct and special cause of the subjection to vanity. The supreme will of God is thus removed ‘to a wider distance from corruption and vanity’ (Alford).” Denney explains, “It was on account of Him—His righteousness might be shown in the punishment of sin—that the sentence fell upon man, carrying consequences which extended to the whole realm intended originally for his dominion. The sentence on man, however, was not hopeless, and creation shared in his hope as in his doom. When the curse is completely removed from man, as it will be when the sons of God are revealed, it

will pass from creation also; and for this, creation sighs. It was made subject to vanity on the footing of this hope; the hope is latent, so to speak, in the constitution of nature, and comes out, in its sighing, to a sympathetic ear.” “In hope” is literally, “upon the basis of hope.” Nestle construes it with the contents of verse 21. “Because” is dioti (dioti), which is also translated “that.” Vincent suggests, “the creation was subjected in the hope that also the creation itself will be liberated from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God.” He says, “the hope is that of the subjected, not the subjector. Nature ‘possesses in the feeling of her unmerited suffering, a sort of presentiment of her future deliverance’ (Godet).” As to the translation, “liberty of the glory,” Vincent says, “Liberty is one of the elements of the glorious state and is dependent upon it. The glory is that of verse 18.” Translation. For the concentrated and undivided expectation of creation is assiduously and patiently awaiting the revelation of the sons of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not voluntarily, but on account of the One who subjected it, upon the basis of the hope that the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. (8:22, 23) The word “for” introduces the proof of the hope, not of the bondage. Together refers to the common longing of all the elements of the creation, not to its longing in common with God’s children (Vincent). Regarding the adoption, Denney says; “They have already received adoption, and as led by the Spirit are sons of God; but only when their mortal bodies have been quickened, and the corruptible has put on incorruption, will they possess all that sonship involves. For this they wait and sigh, and the inextinguishable hope, born of the Spirit dwelling in them, guarantees its own fulfillment.” Translation. For we know that the whole creation groans and travails together up to this moment, and not only, but we ourselves also who have the first-fruits of the Spirit, we ourselves also are groaning within ourselves, assiduously and patiently waiting son-placing, the redemption of our body. (8:24, 25) Denney explains; “This sentence explains why Paul can speak of Christians as waiting for adoption, while they are nevertheless in the enjoyment of sonship. It is because salvation is essentially related to the future. ‘We wait for it: for we were saved in hope.’… Hope, the apostle argues, is an essential characteristic of our salvation; but hope turned sight is hope no more, for who hopes for what he sees? We do not see all the gospel held out to us, but it is the object of our Christian hope nevertheless; it is as true and sure as the love of God which in Christ Jesus reconciled us to Himself and gave us the Spirit of adoption, and therefore we wait for it in patience.” Translation. For we were saved in the sphere of hope. But hope that has been seen is not hope, for that which a person sees, why does he hope? But if that which we do not see, we hope for, through patience we

expectantly wait for it. (8:26, 27) “Helpeth” is  (sunantilambanw), made up of sun (sun), “together with,” anti (ajnti) “over against,” and  (lambanw), “to take.” The word speaks of the action of a person coming to another’s aid by taking hold over against that person, of the load he is carrying. The person helping does not take the entire load, but helps the other person in his endeavor. The word is used where Martha says to the Lord Jesus concerning Mary, “Bid her therefore that she help me” (Luke 11:40). One could translate, “Bid her lend me a helping hand,” the idea being that Martha would continue preparing the meal but needed Mary to help her. Just so, the Holy Spirit indwelling the saint, comes to the aid of that saint in his spiritual problems and difficulties, not by taking over the responsibility for them and giving the saint an automatic deliverance without any effort on his part, but by lending a helping hand, allowing him to work out his problems and overcome his difficulties, with His help. The word “infirmities” is astheneia (ajsqeneia), “want of strength, weakness.” The weakness spoken of here is defined by the context which speaks of prayer, one of the things in the spiritual realm in which our weakness needs His power. The infirmities here therefore are, not physical, but spiritual. The weakness spoken of here is the inability of the saint to know what to pray for. We do know what the general objects of prayer are. But we do not know what the specific, detailed objects of prayer in any given emergency or situation are. The definite article is used before the word “what.” Paul says, “We do not know the what we should pray for, the particular what.” The words “as we ought” are in the Greek text katho dei (kaqo dei), namely, just what is necessary in the nature of the case to pray for. Denney says, “Broadly speaking, we do know what we are to pray for—the perfecting of salvation, but we do not know what we are to pray for according to what is necessary—according as the need is at the moment; we know the end, which is common to all prayers, but not what is necessary at each crisis of need in order to enable us to attain this end.” The Spirit Himself makes intercession. The words “makes intercession” are  (uJperentugcanw), “to intercede for one.” Robertson says, “It is a picturesque word of rescue by one who ‘happens on’ ( (ejntugcanw)) one who is in trouble, and ‘in his behalf’ (huper (uJper)) pleads ‘with unuttered groanings’ (instrumental case) or with ‘sighs that baffle words’ (Denney).” Thayer says, “Although we have no very definite conception of what we desire, and cannot state it in fit language (as we ought) in our prayer but only disclose it by inarticulate groanings, yet God receives these groanings as acceptable prayers inasmuch as they come from a soul full of the Holy Spirit.” Alford says, “The Holy Spirit of God dwelling in us, knowing our wants better than we, Himself pleads in our prayers, raising us to higher and holier desires than we can express in words, which can only find utterance in sighings and aspirations.” Alford is helpful, “He who searcheth the hearts (God) knoweth what is the mind (intent or bent, as hidden in those sighs) of the Spirit.” That is, God the Father who searches the hearts of His saints, understands the intent or bent of our unutterable prayers, unutterable because we do not know the particular things we should pray for in connection with a certain circumstance, for He knows the mind of the Holy Spirit praying for us and in our stead in our prayers in the case of the above-mentioned items for prayer, the Holy Spirit praying according to the plan of God for our lives. Translation. And in like manner also, the Spirit lends us a helping hand

with reference to our weakness, for the particular thing that we should pray for according to what is necessary in the nature of the case, we do not know with an absolute knowledge; but the Spirit Himself comes to our rescue by interceding with unutterable groanings. Moreover, He who is constantly searching our hearts, knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because according to God He continually makes intercession on behalf of the saints. (8:28) The text reads, “And we know with an absolute knowledge that all things are constantly working together, resulting in good for those who are loving God, for those who are called ones according to His purpose.” Alford comments, “In this further description, the apostle designates the believers as not merely loving God, but being beloved by God. The divine side of their security from harm is brought out, as combining with and ensuring the other. They are sure that all things work for their good, not only because they love Him who worketh all things, but also because He who worketh all things hath loved and chosen them, and carried them through the successive steps of their spiritual life. The calling here and elsewhere spoken of by the apostle is the working, in men, of ‘the everlasting purpose of God whereby before the foundations of the world were laid, He hath decreed by His counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom He hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation.” The Eberhard Nestle text puts ho theos (oJ qeo") (God) in the apparatus and has “All things work together for good.” The Irwin Nestle and Westcott and Hort texts include the ho theos (oJ qeo") in brackets in their text. Robertson says the words are found in two prominent manuscripts A and B. which read, “God works all things together for good.” He says, “That is the idea anyhow. It is God who makes ‘all things work together’ in our lives ‘for good,’ ultimate good.… Paul accepts fully human free agency, but behind it all and through it all runs God’s sovereignty as here and on its gracious side.” Translation. And we know with an absolute knowledge that for those who are loving God, all things are working together resulting in good, for those who are called ones according to His purpose. (8:29, 30) Paul now proceeds to explain how this calling of the saints out from their lost estate (v. 28) came about. The first step God took was to “foreknow” them. The word is  (proginwskw), which in its verb and noun forms is used seven times in the New Testament, two of those times of man where it means “previous knowledge based upon circumstances” (Acts 26:5, II Peter 3:17), and five of those times of God (Acts 2:23, Rom. 8:29, 11:2, I Pet. 1:2, 20). In Acts 2:23 it is used in the statement “Him being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.” The words “determinate counsel” are the translation of a perfect participle and a noun. The latter is  (boulh), used in classical Greek of a council convened for the purpose of administering the affairs of government, such as the Roman Senate, or of the camp-fire council of Xenophon and his officers on their march back to Greece. Out from the deliberations of this latter council, for instance, would come counsel, a pre-determined course of action that would best meet the circumstances they had to face on the march.

Here we have the Triune God in council convened, the purpose of which was to select out from the three Persons of the Godhead, the Lamb for sacrifice who would pay the penalty for man’s sin. The result of the deliberations of this council, namely, the counsel that came from these deliberations was that the Son of God was to die on Calvary’s Cross. The word  (boulh) (counsel) is described by the perfect participle of  (oJrizw), “to mark out the boundaries or limits” of any place or thing, “to determine or appoint.” This verb tells us that these deliberations were for the purpose of determining something, and the fact that it is in the perfect tense shows that these deliberations had reached a successful conclusion and the counsel of the council was fixed and unchangeable. The words  (boulh) (counsel) and  (prognwsi") (foreknowledge) are in a construction called Granville Sharps rule, where two nouns are in the same case, connected by kai (kai) (and), the first noun preceded by the article, the second noun without the article. The rule states that in this construction the second noun refers to the same thing to which the first noun does, and is a further description of it. That means that  (boulh) and  (prognwsi") refer to the same thing, the act of selecting the One out of the Persons of the Godhead who would be the Lamb slain as the Sacrifice for sin. The word  (prognwsi") therefore means more here than mere previous knowledge, even though that knowledge be part of the omniscience of God. It partakes of the nature of  (boulh) and is part and parcel of the same act. It means “foreordination.” The a.v., translators have so rendered it in I Peter 1:20 where they speak of Christ as “the Lamb who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world.” The word should also be so translated in Romans 8:29 and 11:2 in connection with Israel as the people foreordained of God, and in I Peter 1:2, with relation to the saints being foreordained, as well as in our present verse, where the translation should read, “for whom He did foreordain.” It speaks of the sovereign act of God foreordaining certain from among mankind to be saved. It is only fair that the author inform the reader that Vincent, Denney, Robertson, and Alford all translate  (prognwsi") by the word “foreknowledge” and understand it to refer to the prescience of God, as Vincent puts it, not to the idea of pre-election. After foreordaining the sinner to salvation, God predestinates him to be conformed to the image of His Son, also to be placed as an adult son (Eph. 1:5). The word is  (proorizw). The simple verb  (oJrizw) means “to mark out the boundaries or limits” of a place or thing, “to determine or appoint.” The prefixed preposition pro (pro) means “before.” Thus, the compound verb means “to put limits or boundaries upon beforehand,” thus, “to pre-determine.” Those foreordained to be saved now have special limitations put upon them provided within the scope of the salvation which they are to receive, namely, to be conformed to the image of the Lord Jesus, and to be placed as adult sons. Thus, predestination is the effective carrying out of God’s will in the case of those who are foreordained to salvation. This conformation to the image of the Lord Jesus is the work of the Holy Spirit in the process which is called sanctification, a process which begins the moment the sinner is saved, and which continues throughout eternity, the saint always approaching the likeness of the Lord Jesus but never equalling it, since finiteness can never equal infinity. The word “conformed” is  (summorfow), “to bring to the same form with” some other person or thing, “to render like.” The noun  (morfh) refers to the outward expression of an inward essence or nature. Thus, in the process of sanctification, the saint is transformed in his inner heart life to resemble the Lord Jesus,

which inner change results in a change of outward expression that reflects the beauty of the Lord Jesus. The word “image” is  (eijkwn), “a derived likeness.” Trench, defining the word says, “The monarch’s head on the coin is  (eijkwn) (Matt. 22:20), the reflection of the sun in the water is  (eijkwn) (Plato), the statue in stone or other material is  (eijkwn) (Rev. 13:14): and coming nearer to the heart of the matter than by any of these illustrations we have done, the child is the  (eijkwn) of his parents.” There is another Greek word meaning “an image,”  (oJmoiwma). Of that, Trench says, “But in the  (oJmoiwma), while there is a resemblance, it by no means follows that it has been acquired in this way, that it is derived: it may be accidental, as one egg is like another, as there may exist a resemblance between two men in no way akin to one another.” The image of the Lord Jesus in the saint is not accidental but derived, as the likeness of a child is derived from its parents. Through the new birth we become children of Jesus Christ (Heb. 2:13) and thus inherit His image. This image, indistinct in the new convert, becomes progressively clearer and distinct as that believer grows in the Christian life. This conformation of the saints to the image of the Lord Jesus was for the purpose that He, the Lord Jesus “might be the firstborn among many brethren.” Alford says: “that He might be shown, acknowledged to be, and glorified as, the Son of God, preeminent among those who are by adoption through Him sons of God. This is the further end of our election, as regards Christ: His glorification in us, as our elder Brother and Head.” Those foreordained to salvation and marked out to be conformed to the image of the Lord Jesus, God called. Alford says, “In making the decree, He left it not barren, but provided for those circumstances, all at His disposal, by which such decree should be made effectual in them.” Denney says; “The eternal foreordination appears in time as ‘calling,’ of course effectual calling: where salvation is contemplated as the work of God alone (as here), there can be no break-down in its processes.” Peter in his first epistle speaks of this in the words, “through sanctification of the Spirit” (I Peter 1:2), where the Greek reads, “Chosen-out ones, this choice dominated by the foreordination of God the Father within the sphere of the setting-apart work of the Spirit, resulting in obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” The setting-apart work of the Spirit is His presalvation work of bringing the sinner, foreordained to salvation, to the place where he becomes obedient to the Faith (Acts 6:7), namely, puts his faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour. This is the effectual call of which Paul speaks here. Those God called into salvation, He justified, that is, He takes away the guilt and penalty of their sins, and bestows upon them a positive righteousness, even Jesus Christ Himself, in whom the believer stands forever, innocent, uncondemned, and righteous in point of law. Those whom He justified, He glorified. Glorification refers to the act of God transforming the believer’s body at the Rapture into a body like the resurrection body of the Lord Jesus. This is a future event. Yet the apostle puts it in the past tense. Denney, commenting upon that fact says, “The whole argument of chapters 6–8 has been that justification and the new life of holiness in the Spirit are inseparable experiences. Hence Paul can take one step to the end, and write, ‘but whom He justified, these also He glorified.’ Yet the tense in the last word is amazing. It is the most daring anticipation of faith that even the n.t. contains: the life is not to be taken out of it by the philosophical consideration that with God there is neither before or after.” Robertson says; “The glorification is stated as already consummated (constative aorists, all of them), though still

future in the fullest sense. ‘The step implied in He glorified is both complete and certain in the divine counsels’ (Sunday and Headlam).” Alford comments, “He did not merely, in His premundane decree, acquit them of sin, but also clothe them with glory: the aorist being used, as the other aorists, to imply the completion in the divine counsel of all these, which are to us, in the state of time, so many successive steps,—simultaneously and irrevocably.” Translation. Because, whom He foreordained, He also marked out before hand—conformed ones to the derived image of His Son—resulting in He being firstborn among many brethren. Moreover, whom He thus marked out, these He also called. And whom He called, these He also justified. Moreover, whom He justified, these He also glorified. (8:31, 32) The “these things” Denney enumerates as follows; “The idea underlying all that precedes is that of the suffering to be endured by those who would share Christ’s glory (v. 17). The apostle has disparaged the suffering in comparison with the glory (v. 18); he has interpreted it (vv. 19–27) as in a manner prophetic of the glory; he has in these last verses asserted the presence through all the Christian’s life of an eternal victorious purpose of love: all this is included in ‘these things.’ “ The “if” is ei (eij), the conditional particle of a fulfilled condition. The words “be” and “can be” are in italics, which means that they are not in the Greek text, but were supplied by the translators in an effort to fill out the thought. The thought of Paul is not in the form of a hypothetical condition, as if it were a question whether God was for us or not. His thought is, “In view of the fact that God is for us, who is or could be against us, so as to do us harm? That is, since God is for the saints, on their side, who can harm them?” Denney explains, “The Christian’s faith in providence is an inference from redemption. The same God who did not spare His own Son will freely give us all things … It vivifies the impression of God’s love through the sense of the sacrifice it made.… He who has done so much, is certain to do much more.” “His own” is idios (ijdio"), “one’s own peculiar, private possession.” Our Lord is the Father’s very own, private possession, infinitely dear to Him. Translation. What then shall we say to these things? In view of the fact that God is on our behalf, who could be against us? Indeed, He who His own Son did not spare, but on behalf of us all delivered Him up, how is it possible that He shall not with Him in grace give us the all things? (8:33, 34) “Elect” is eklektos (ejklekto"), “chosen out ones.” Paul’s argument is, “Who shall prefer any charge or accusation against the chosen-out ones of God? God, the one who justifies? Even He cannot do both, accuse and justify at the same time. And since our justification resides in a Person, the Lord Jesus our righteousness, in whom we stand as uncondemned and unchargeable as the Son Himself, it is impossible, after having been justified, that we be again accused—and brought under condemnation.” Again, Paul’s argument is, “Who is he that condemns? Christ that died, yes, rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us?” Paul asks, “Can Christ who is always making intercession on behalf of us, at the same time condemn us?” Even He cannot do both. While interceding on our behalf, He cannot condemn.

Vincent says, “ ‘Our faith should rest on Christ’s death, but it should rather also so far progress as to lean on His resurrection, dominion, and second coming’ (Bengel). ‘From the representations of the dead Christ, the early believers shrank as from an impiety. To them He was the living, not the dead Christ—the triumphant, the glorified, the infinite— not the agonized Christ in that one brief hour and power of darkness which was but the spasm of an eternal glorification’ (Farrar).” Translation. Who shall bring a charge against God’s chosen-out ones? God, the One who justifies? Who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus, the One who died, yes, rather, who has been raised, who is on the right hand of God, who also is constantly interceding on our behalf? (8:35–39) Alford asks the question, “Is this (1) our love to Christ, or (2) Christ’s love to us, or (3) our sense of Christ’s love to us?” He suggests the second, Christ’s love to us, saying that “having shown that God’s great love to us is such that none can accuse nor harm us, the apostle now asserts the permanence of that love under all adverse circumstances—that none such can affect it,—nay more, that it is by that love that we are enabled to obtain the victory over all such adversities. And finally he expresses his persuasion that no created thing shall ever separate us from that love, i.e.. shall ever be able to pluck us out of the Father’s hand.” The phrase, “more than conquerors” is  (uJpernikaw), made up of  (nikaw), “to conquer, to carry off the victory, come off victorious,” and huper (uJper) which means “above,” thus, “to come off more than victorious, to gain a surpassing victory.” Meyer says, “A holy arrogance of victory in the might of Christ.” Denney says, “Perhaps it is a mistake to define in what the ‘more’ consists; but if we do, the answer must be sought on the line indicated in the note on ‘for thy sake we were killed all the day long’; these trials not only do not cut us off from Christ’s love, they actually give us more intimate and thrilling experience of it.” Angels can only mean fallen angels, of whom Satan is one. Principalities are the demons inhabiting the atmosphere of this earth (Eph. 2:2, 6:12). As to “things present,” Bengel says, “Things are not mentioned, not even sins, for they have passed away.” “I am persuaded” is  (peiqw), perfect in tense, “I have come through a process of persuasion to a settled conclusion.” “Creature” is “created thing.” Translation. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation or distress or persecution or famine or nakedness or peril or sword? Even as it stands written, For your sake we are being put to death all the day long. We were accounted as sheep destined for slaughter. But in these things, all of them, we are coming off constantly with more than the victory through the One who loved us. For I have come through a process of persuasion to the settled conclusion that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor things present nor things about to come, nor powers nor height nor depth nor any other created thing will be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

CHAPTER NINE (9:1–3) Anticipating the doctrine of election in this chapter, Vincent quotes Luther as

follows: “Who hath not known passion, cross, and travail of death, cannot treat of foreknowledge (election of grace) without injury and inward enmity toward God. Wherefore take heed that thou drink not wine while thou art yet a sucking child. Each doctrine hath its own reason and measure and age.” Alford explains the inclusion of chapters 9–11 as follows: “The gospel being now established in its fulness and freeness, as the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth,—a question naturally arises, not unaccompanied with painful difficulty, respecting the exclusion of that people, as a people, to whom God’s promises were made. With this national rejection of Israel the apostle now deals.” The Abrahamic covenant, promising Israel the possession of the land from the Nile on the southwest to the Euphrates on the northeast and east, actually, from the Mediterranean Sea on the west to the Euphrates on the east, and the Davidic covenant, promising to Israel an eternal dynasty of kings of whom the last one would be an eternal Person, had never up to the time of the writing of Romans, been fulfilled. Paul explains this by calling Israel’s attention to the fact that these covenants were designed for a spiritual people, whereas Israel at that time was apostate. He goes on to explain that Israel will be brought back in sovereign grace, saved, and restored to its land under its covenanted King, the Lord Jesus. Denney says of Paul’s opening words: “This solemn asseveration is meant to clear him of the suspicion that in preaching to the Gentiles he is animated by hostility or even indifference to the Jews.” The same authority says of the phrase “in Christ,” that it means that he speaks in fellowship with Christ, so that falsehood is impossible. Concerning the a.v., “my conscience also bearing me witness,” Vincent says, “Rev., bearing witness with me. Concurring with my testimony. Morison remarks that Paul speaks of conscience as if it were something distinct from himself, and cities Adam Smith’s phrase ‘the man within the breast.’ ” The Greek reads, “my conscience bearing joint-testimony with me,” and this, “within the sphere of the Holy Ghost,” that is, in the control of the Holy Spirit, the words “Ghost” and “Spirit” being the translation of the same Greek word pneuma (pneuma), the former designation being obsolete English for the word “Spirit.” “Heaviness” is  (luph), “sorrow, pain grief,” used of persons mourning. “Sorrow” is  (ojdunh), “consuming grief.” Its verbal form,  (ojdunaw) means, “to cause intense pain, to be in anguish, to be tormented.” “Continual” is adialeiptos (ajdialeipto"), from  (dialeipw), “to intermit, leave off,” and Alpha privative which negates the word, namely, “unintermitted, unceasing, without leaving off.” In the words, “I could wish,” Paul uses the optative mode in the imperfect tense. Alford says, “The imperfect is not historical, alluding to his days of Pharisaism, as Pelagius and others, but quasi-optative, as in I was wishing had it beenpossible … The sense of the imperfect in such expressions is the proper and strict one: “the act is unfinished, an obstacle intervening.” Vincent explains; “Literally, I was wishing; but the imperfect here has a tentative force, implying the wish begun, but stopped at the outset by some antecedent consideration which renders it impossible, so that, practically, it was not entertained at all. So Paul to Onesimus: ‘Whom I could have wished to keep with me,’ if it had not been too much to ask (Philemon 13). Paul would wish to save his countrymen, even at such sacrifice, if it were morally possible.” The unexpressed but mentioned wish was, “I myself to be anathema (ajnaqema) from Christ.” The word “anathema” is the spelling of the Greek word meaning, “a curse, a man accursed, devoted to the direst woes.” Thayer interprets it as meaning, “doomed and

separated from Christ,” Alford says, “It never denotes simply exclusion or excommunication, but always devotion to perdition—a curse.” He quotes Burton as defining it as follows, “cut off and separated from Him (Christ) forever in eternal perdition.” Denney says, “Anathema (ÆAnaqema) is to be construed with from Christ; the idea of separation from Christ, final and fatal separation, is conveyed.” Of the spiritual heroism of Paul’s act, Denney says; “There is a passion in it more profound even than that of Moses’ prayer in Exodus 32:32. Moses identifies himself with his people, and if they cannot be saved, would perish for them; Paul could find it in his heart, were it possible, to perish with them.” Vincent quotes Bengel; “It is not easy to estimate the measure of love in a Moses and a Paul. For our limited reason does not grasp it, as a child cannot comprehend the courage of warriors.” And now for the reasons why Paul did not follow through with that wish. In the first place, he had just written Romans 8 which begins with no condemnation in the saint in Christ Jesus and ends with no separation of the saint from Christ Jesus. So to wish what scripture plainly makes impossible, would be futile. In the second place, Paul knew that were such a thing possible that he, a saved person should spend eternity in the Lake of Fire, that that would not do what the Holy Spirit did not do, namely, bring the nation to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus. Man’s will must be reckoned with, and the persuasive power of Paul’s sacrifice could not do what the power of the Holy Spirit did not do. In the third place, Paul knew that in the sovereign grace of God, the nation would be saved at the second Advent, and such a sacrifice of himself would be unnecessary. Translation. Truth I speak in Christ. I am not lying, my conscience bearing joint-testimony with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have a consuming grief, a great one, and intense anguish in my heart without a let-up. For I could wish that I myself be accursed from Christ on behalf of my brethren, my kindred according to the flesh. (9:4, 5) Denney says, “The intensity of Paul’s distress, and of his longing for the salvation of his countrymen is partly explained in this verse. It is the greatness of his people, their unique place of privilege in God’s providence, the splendor of the inheritance and of the hopes which they forfeit by unbelief, that make their unbelief at once so painful, and so perplexing.” “Who” is hoitines (oiJtine"), emphasizing character or quality, namely, “who are of such a character or quality as to be” Israelites. Vincent says, “The double relative characterizes the Israelites with their call and privileges as such that for them he could even wish himself accursed.” He calls them Israelites. The term “Hebrew” speaks of a member of the Chosen People as a Hebrew-speaking rather than a Greekspeaking Jew, the latter called a Grecian in Acts 6:1, or one could use the designation, “a Hellenist,” or “a Hellenistic Jew,” one who read his Old Testament in the Septuagint (Greek) version. The name “Jew” speaks of him in his national distinction from a Gentile. The term “Israelite” refers to him as a member of the theocracy, and a partaker of the theocratic privileges and glorious vocation of the nation Israel and an heir of the promises. The term “theocracy” in the Greek means literally “the power of God.” It speaks of Israel as the nation which enjoys the privilege of having a unique relationship to God as its sovereign, a privilege which is not accorded the Gentile nations. Israel in its apostate condition, repudiated this honor. The word “adoption” here is huiothesia (uiJoqesia), “the son-placing.” However,

here there is no reference to that which is designated by the same term in 8:15, but rather to that to which reference is made in Exodus 4:22 and Hosea 11:1, the word huios (uiJo") “son” being used in Exodus 4:22, and teknon (teknon), “child,” in Hosea 11:1. Israel as a nation was known as a son of God in the Old Testament. When the word “son” is used in the plural in the Old Testament, it refers to angels, such as Genesis 6:2 and Job 1:6, 2:1. The glory refers to “the visible, luminous appearance of the divine presence called by the Israelites the glory of Jahveh, or, in rabbinical phrase, the Shekinah” (Vincent). It was that luminous cloud that led Israel out of Egypt, that rested over the Mercy Seat in the Holy of Holies, the visible manifestation of God’s presence with His Chosen People. The covenants refer to the various covenants God made with Israel such as the Abrahamic, promising to make of Abraham a great nation and giving him possession of the land from the Nile to the Euphrates (Gen. 15:18), and the Davidic, promising to that nation an eternal dynasty of kings stemming from David (II Sam. 7:11–16). God never makes any covenants with the Gentiles. He made these covenants with Israel because that nation was to be used as a channel to bring salvation to the human race. The Mosaic law was given exclusively to Israel, and never pertained to the Gentiles. “The service” is  (hJ latreia). The verb is  (latreuw), “to render religious service.” Here it refers to the service as seen in the tabernacle, offerings, and priesthood as found in Exodus and Leviticus. The promises refer to the Messianic promises. The fathers refer to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Denney says: “The greatness of its ancestry ennobled Israel, and made its position in Paul’s time harder to understand and to endure. Who could think without the keenest pain of the sons of such fathers forfeiting everything for which the fathers had been called? The supreme distinction of Israel is however seen in the words, “out from whom as a source the Christ (Messiah) came according to the flesh.” The word “Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek word Christos (Cristo") which in turn is the translation of the Hebrew word for Messiah, both words meaning “the Anointed.” The Messiah, so far as His humanity is concerned, came out of Israel. But so far as His deity is concerned, Paul says, He is “over all, God blessed forever.” Paul’s Greek here is “out from whom as a source (Israel) the Christ came according to the flesh (His humanity), the One who is above all things, God eulogized forever.” The present writer is aware of the fact that some end the statement describing our Lord with the words “according to the flesh,” and construe the words “God blessed forever” as an ascription of praise and a doxology with reference to God. Robertson says: “A clear statement of the deity of Christ following the remark about His humanity. This is the natural and obvious way of punctuating the sentence. To make a full stop after ‘flesh’ (or colon) and start a new sentence for the doxology is very abrupt and awkward. See Acts 20:28 and Titus 2:13 for Paul’s use of theos (qeo") (God applied to Jesus Christ).” Vincent mentions both interpretations but comes to no positive conclusion about them, but in a footnote says he inclines to the view that the words form a doxology. Denney suggests the use of the doxology. Alford’s reasons for rejecting the idea of a doxology here are as follows: (1) Without one exception in Hebrew or Greek, the predicate  (eujloghto") (blessed) precedes the name of God. Here the word order is   (qeo" eujloghto") (God blessed), the descriptive word “blessed” follows the name “God.” (2) The present participle  (wjn) would be altogether superfluous if we understood the words to be a doxology having reference to God rather than a descriptive clause speaking of the deity of the Lord Jesus. The construction in Greek is as follows:

After speaking of ho Christos (oJ Cristo"), the Christ coming as to His human nature out of Israel, Paul adds  (oJ wjn), the article pointing back to ho Christos (oJ Cristo") and the participial form of the verb of being, the Greek reading “the One being above all,” or in good English diction, “the One (Christ) who is above all.” The sense then follows, “The One (who is above all), who is God.” The word “blessed” is  (eujloghto"), made up of  (legw), “to speak,” and eu (euj), “good,” thus, “to speak well of a person, to eulogize him (the word “eulogize” being the English spelling of the Greek word). Thus, our Lord is spoken of as God, the One who is well-spoken of, eulogized, praised, forever. (3) The doxology would be unmeaning and frigid in the extreme. It is not the habit of the apostle to break out into irrelevant ascriptions of praise; and certainly there is here nothing in the immediate context requiring one. If it be said that the survey of all these privileges bestowed on his people prompts the doxology,—surely such a view is most unnatural: for the sad subject of the apostle’s sympathy, to which he immediately recurs again, is the apparent inanity of all these privileges in the exclusion from life of those who were dignified with them. If it be said that the incarnation of Christ is the exciting cause, the words “according to the flesh” come in most strangely, depreciating, as they would on that supposition, the greatness of the event, which then becomes a source of so lofty a thanksgiving. (4) The expression “blessed forever” is twice used by Paul, and each time unquestionably not in an ascription of praise, but in an assertion regarding the subject of the sentence (Rom. 1:25, II Cor. 11:31). (5) In II Corinthians 11:31, the same construction is found,  (oJ wjn), and there it refers to the subject of the sentence. (6) The interpretation which holds that the clause is not a doxology but descriptive of the Christ is the only one admissable by the rules of Greek grammar and arrangement. (7) It also admirably suits the context: for, having enumerated the historic advantages of the Jewish people, he concludes by stating one which ranks higher than all,—that from them sprung, according to the flesh, He who is God over all, blessed forever. The Amen implies no optative ascription of praise, but is the accustomed ending of such solemn declarations of the divine Majesty. Thus does the devout scholar, Henry Alford, demolish the position of the present-day Liberal who would fain take out of the Bible as much of the testimony to our Lord’s absolute deity as he can, changing Paul’s Greek from a descriptive clause to a doxology to the God he professes to worship but which he does not possess, for John says that a Unitarian does not have God as his God (I John 2:22, 23). Translation. Who in character are Israelites, who are possessors of the position of a son by having been placed as such, and of the glory, and of the covenants, and to whom was given the law, and [who are] possessors of the sacred service and the promises, of whom are the fathers, and out from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, the One who is above all, God eulogized forever. Amen. (9:6, 7) Thayer translates, “But the thing (state of the case) is not such as this, that the Word of God hath fallen to the ground, i.e., the Word of God hath by no means come to nought.” “Hath taken none effect” is  (ejkpiptw), “to fall out of, to fall down from, to fail, to fall from a place which one cannot keep, to fall powerless, be without effect.” The verb is in the perfect tense speaking here in connection with the negative, of the fact that the Word with reference to Israel has not failed to work effectively in time past and at

present is still potentially effective. Denney explains the statement, “For not all those who are out of Israel as a source (the physical nation) these are Israel (the spiritual remnant). The meaning is, But in spite of my grief, I do not mean to say any such thing as that the Word of God has come to nothing. For not all they who are of Israel, i.e., born of the patriarch, are Israel, i.e., the people of God. This is merely an application of our Lord’s words, That which is born of the flesh is flesh. It is not what we get from our fathers and mothers that ensures our place in the family of God.” Regarding verse 7, the same authority says; “Nor because they are Abraham’s seed, are they all tekna (tekna), i.e., children in the sense which entitles them to the inheritance.… God from the very first made a distinction here, and definitely announced that the seed of Abraham to which the promise belonged should come in the line of Isaac—not of Ishmael, though he also could call Abraham father.” Commenting on the words, “In Isaac shall thy seed be called,” Denney says: “The words literally mean that in the line of Isaac, Abraham should have the posterity which would properly bear his name, and inherit the promises made to him by God. Isaac’s descendants are the true Abrahamidae.” “Call” is  (kalew), here, “to bar a name or title.” Translation. But the case is not such as this, that the Word of God is fallen powerless; for not all who are out of Israel, these are Israel, nor because they are offspring of Abraham, are all children, but in Isaac an offspring shall be named for you. (9:8, 9) “That is” is  (tout ejstin), “this is,” “The Old Testament saying amounts to this” (Vincent). Paul says, “Not the children of the flesh (earthly descendants of Abraham), these are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted for offspring, for the word of promise is this,” and then he quotes from Genesis 18:10. The words “at this time” are kata ton kairon touton (kata ton kairon touton), “according to this season.” Vincent explains, “The reference is to Genesis 18:14, where the Hebrew is when the season is renewed or revives, i.e., next year at this time. The season is represented as reviving periodically.” Translation. That is, not the children of the flesh, these are children of God, but the children of the promise are counted for offspring; for the word of promise is this. According to this season I will come, and there will be to Sarah a son. (9:10–13) Vincent comments on the words “And not only this”; “The thought to be supplied is, Not only have we an example of the election of a son of Abraham by one woman, and a rejection of his son by another, but also of the election and the rejection of the children of the same woman.” As to the words “by one,” he says, “Though of one father, a different destiny was divinely appointed for each of the twins. Hence, only the divine disposal constitutes the true and valid succession, and not the bodily descent.” The words, “Purpose according to election” are  (hJ kat ejkloghn proqesi"). The word “purpose” in its verbal form is  (protiqhmi), “to set before one’s self, to propose to one’s self, to purpose, to determine.” The word speaks of the action of an individual setting before himself a proposed action. Thus, it presupposes deliberation upon a course of conduct, and then the determination to carry it

through. The word “election” is  (ejklogh). The verbal form is  (ejklegw), “to select out from a number.” The noun means, “the act of picking out, choosing.” The Greek order is “the according to selection out purpose.” The words, “according to selection out” are used like an adjective describing “purpose.” Vincent says, “The phrase signifies a purpose so formed that in it an election is made. The opposite of one founded upon right or merit.” Denney’s note is helpful; “But the argument can be made more decisive. A Jewish opponent might say, ‘Ishmael was an illegitimate child, who naturally had no rights as against Isaac; we are the legitimate descendants of the patriarch, and our right to the inheritance is indefeasible.’ To this the apostle replies in verses 10–13. Not only did God make the distinction already referred to, but in the case of Isaac’s children, where there seemed no ground for making any distinction whatever, He distinguished again, and said, The elder shall serve the younger. Jacob and Esau had one father, one mother, and were twin sons; the only ground on which either could have been preferred was that of priority of birth, and this was disregarded by God; Esau, the elder, was rejected, and Jacob, the younger, was made heir of the promises. “Further, this was done by God of His sovereign freedom: the decisive word was spoken to their mother while they were as yet unborn and had achieved neither good nor evil. Claims as of right, therefore, made against God, are futile, whether they are based on descent or on works. There is no way in which they can be established: and, as we have just seen, God acts in entire disregard of them. God’s purpose to save men, and make them heirs of His kingdom—a purpose which is characterized as ‘according to election,’ or involving a choice—is not determined at all by consideration of such claims as the Jews put forward. In forming it, and carrying it out, God acts with perfect freedom. In the case in question, His action in regard to Jacob and Esau agrees with His word in the prophet Malachai: Jacob I loved but Esau I hated; and further than this we cannot go. To avoid misapprehending this, however, it is necessary to keep the apostle’s purpose in view. He wishes to show that God’s promise has not broken down, though many children of Abraham have no part in its fulfillment in Christ. He does so by showing that there has always been a distinction among the descendants of the patriarchs, between those who have merely the natural connection to boast of, and those who are the Israel of God; and, as against Jewish pretensions, he shows at the same time that this distinction can be traced to nothing but God’s sovereignty. It is not of works, but of Him who effectually calls men … No Jewish birth, no legal works, can give a man a claim which God is bound to honor; and no man urging such claims can say that God’s Word has become of no effect though his claims are disallowed, and he gets no part in the inheritance of God’s people.” The word “hate” is  (misew), “to hate.” However, when it is used in contrast to “love” here, it does not retain its original meaning of a literal hatred, but of a lesser degree of love. God cannot be said to hate anyone. The idea is, “Jacob I loved, but Esau, I loved less.” Translation. And not only, but also Rebecca, conceiving by one, Isaac, our father. For not yet having been born, nor having practiced any good or evil, in order that the purpose of God dominated by an act of selecting out, may abide, not out of a source of works, but out of the source of the One who calls, it was said to her, The older shall serve the younger; even

as it stands written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. (9:14–16) Vincent’s note on the words “mercy” and “compassion” is as follows: “The former verb emphasizes the sense of human wretchedness in its active manifestation; the latter, the inward feeling expressing itself in sighs and tears. Have mercy therefore contemplates, not merely the sentiment in itself, but the determination (the selection and appointment) of those who should be its objects. The words were spoken to Moses in connection with his prayer for a general forgiveness of the people, which was refused, and his request to behold God’s glory, which was granted. With reference to the latter, God asserts that His gift is of His own free grace, without any recognition of Moses’ right to claim it on the ground of merit or service.” The first “I will have mercy” is a future indicative, predicting a future event. The second occurrence of these words is a present subjunctive. The relative pronoun is accompanied by an (ajn), a particle used with the subjunctive mode, used here with the relative pronoun to make the latter mean “whoever,” emphasizing indefiniteness. (The idea is not, “I will have mercy on whoever I desire or will to have mercy.”) It is, “I will have mercy on anyone, whoever he is, that I will show mercy to in the future.” This emphasizes the absolute sovereignty of God in the disposition of His mercy. The word “it” refers to the fact of a participation in God’s mercy (Vincent). It is, A participation in God’s mercy is not of him that desires mercy nor runs, that is, works for it. Vincent says, “God is laid under no obligation by a human will or a human work.” A participation in God’s mercy is dependent upon God’s sovereign will alone. The question of verse 14 in the Greek requires a negative answer, the negative  (mh) being included. Translation. What shall we say then? There is no unrighteousness with God, is there? Away with the thought. For to Moses He says; I will have mercy upon whoever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whoever I will have compassion. Therefore then, mercy is not of the one who desires nor even runs, but of the One who is merciful, God. (9:17, 18) Vincent quotes Morison commenting on the present tense of the word “saith,” “There is an element of tirelessness in the utterance. If the scripture ever spoke at all, it continued and continues to speak. It has never been struck dumb.” Denney shows that while in verse 16 the experience of God’s mercy does not depend on man’s resolve or effort, in verse 17, the contrary phenomenon is seen, “that of a man who does not and cannot receive mercy.” The same authority says concerning Paul’s use of Scripture here, “It is on Scripture the burden of proof is laid here and at verse 15. The Jew might answer the arguments Paul uses here if they were the apostle’s own; to Scripture he can make no reply; it must silence, even where it does not convince.” The verb “raised up” is  (ejxegeirw), “to arouse, to raise up.” Vincent explains the use of the word here as follows; “In the Hebrew the word means caused thee to stand. The meaning here is general, allowed thee to appear, brought thee forward on the stage of events.” “Declared” is  (diaggellw), “to carry a message through, announce everywhere, publish abroad.” Godet says, “Even to this present day, whenever throughout the world, Exodus is read, the divine intervention is realized.” Concerning Paul’s choice of Pharaoh as an example of God’s sovereignty, Denney says, “Pharaoh as

well as Moses can be quoted to illustrate it. He was the open adversary of God, an avowed, implacable adversary; yet a divine purpose was fulfilled in his life, and that purpose and nothing else is the explanation of his very being.” The word “hardeneth” is  (sklhrunw), “to make hard, to harden,” metaphorically, “to render obstinate, stubborn.” Vincent says of the word: “Three words are used in the Hebrew to describe the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. The one which occurs most frequently, properly means to be strong, and therefore represents the hardness as foolhardiness, infatuated insensibility to danger. See Exodus 14. The word is used in its positive sense, hardens, not merely permits to become hard. In Exodus the hardening is represented as self-produced (8:15, 32; 9:34), and as produced by God, (4:21; 7:3, 9:12; 10:20, 27; 11:10). Paul here chooses the latter representation.” We are not to understand in the latter instance that God arbitrarily and directly forced upon Pharaoh an obstinate and stubborn resistance to Himself. Evil cannot be laid at the door of God. God not only does not solicit a sinner to do evil (James 1:13), but He also does not cause man to do evil. When man does wrong, that wrong comes from his own totally depraved nature (James 1:14). Therefore when Pharaoh acted in stubborn rebellion against God, all of that rebellion came as a result of his own depravity, not any directly from God. When God is said to harden Pharaoh’s heart, it is that He be demanding the release of Israel, confronted him with an issue which he did not wish to meet. It is like the case of a naughty boy whose violent temper is incited to greater effort by the demand of his mother that he behave himself. Paul says, “Whom He will, He hardeneth.” “Will” is  (qelw), “to be resolved, to determine, to purpose.” Vincent says that the word is used here in the sense of a decree. God’s resolve to use Pharaoh as an example of His sovereignty issued in a decree that he be so used. Pharaoh was an incorrigible, and God simply used him as He found him to demonstrate His power to the human race, in the last analysis, an act of mercy to the larger number, while also an act of perfect justice toward Pharaoh, for God’s demands were just. Denney says: “The purpose Pharaoh was designed to serve, and actually did serve, on this stage, was certainly not his own; as certainly it was God’s: God’s power was shown in the penal miracles by which Pharaoh and Egypt were visited, and His name is proclaimed to this day wherever the story of the Exodus is told.” Translation. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, For this same purpose I raised you up, in order that I may demonstrate in you my power, and in order that there may be published everywhere my Name in all the earth. Therefore then upon whom He desires, He shows mercy, and whom He desires to harden, He hardens. (9:19–21) “Hath resisted” is the perfect tense verb of  (ajnqisthmi), “to set one’s self against, to withstand, resist, oppose.” The simple verb is  (iJsthmi), “to stand,” the prefixed preposition, anti (ajnti), “against,” thus, “to stand against.” The use of the perfect tense here speaks of a process of standing against God’s will which has come to a finished end, and the resulting state, that of a confirmed and permanent stand against God. Vincent says; “Rev., more correctly, withstandeth. The idea is the result rather than the process of resistance. A man may resist God’s will, but cannot maintain his resistance. The question means who can resist Him? Paul leaves the question unanswered, for there is no answer which a finite mind can either reason out nor understand, since it involves the sovereignty of God and the fact of man as a free moral

agent. The point where both of these touch each other has never been found by man.” Denney’s note is most helpful. “But human nature is not so easily silenced. This interpretation of all human life, with all its diversities of character and experience, through the will of God alone, as if that will by itself explained everything, is not adequate to the facts. If Moses and Pharaoh alike are to be explained by reference to that will—that is, are to be explained in precisely the same way—then the difference between Moses and Pharaoh disappears. The moral interpretation of the world is annulled by the religious one. If God is equally behind the most opposite moral phenomena, then it is open to anyone to say, what Paul here anticipates will be said; why does He still find fault? For who withstands His resolve? To this objection there is really no answer, and it ought to be frankly admitted that the apostle does not answer it. The attempt to understand the relation between the human will and the divine seems to lead of necessity to an antinomy (the opposition of one law to another) which thought has not yet succeeded in transcending. To assert the absoluteness of God in the unexplained, unqualified sense of verse 18 makes the moral life unintelligible; but to explain the moral life by ascribing to man a freedom over against God reduces the universe to anarchy. Up to this point Paul has been insisting on the former point of view, and he insists on it still as against the human presumption which would plead its rights against God; but in the very act of doing so he passes over (in verse 22) to an intermediate standpoint, showing that God has not in point of fact acted arbitrarily, in a freedom uncontrolled by moral law; and from that again he advances in the following chapter to do full justice to the other side of the antinomy— the liberty and responsibility of man. The act of Israel, as well as the will of God, lies behind the painful situation he is trying to understand.” “Repliest” is antapokrinomai (ajntapokrinomai), made up of apokrinomai (ajpokrinomai), “to give off a judgment,” thus, “to answer,” and the prefixed preposition anti (ajnti) “against,” thus, “to answer by contradicting.” Vincent says, “The word signifies here to reply to an answer which God had already given, and implies, as Godet observes, a spirit of contention.” Denney remarks that the phrase O man “is not used contemptuously, but is set intentionally over against ‘God’: the objector is reminded emphatically of what he is, and of the person to whom he is speaking. It is not for a man to adopt this tone toward God.” The adaptability of the illustration of a lump of clay in the potter’s hand to the idea of man in God’s hand is seen in Vincent’s note: “Lump, from  (furaw), ‘to mix so as to make into dough.’ Hence any substance mixed with water and kneaded. Philo uses it of the human frame as compounded. By the lump is here meant human nature with its moral possibilities, ‘but not yet conceived of in its definite, individual, moral stamp’ (Meyer). The figure of man as clay moulded by God carries us back to the earliest traditions of the creation of man (Gen. 2:7). According to primitive ideas man is regarded as issuing from the earth. The traditions of Libya made the first human being spring from the plains heated by the sun. The Egyptians declared the Nile mud, exposed to the heat of the sun, brought forth gems which sprang up as the bodies of men. A subsequent divine operation endowed these bodies with soul and intellect, and the divine fashioner appears upon some monuments moulding clay, wherewith to form man, upon a potter’s wheel. The Peruvians called the first man ‘animated earth’; and the Mandans of North America related that the Great Spirit moulded two figures of clay, which he dried and animated with the breath of his mouth, one receiving the name First Man, the other that of companion.” The word “vessel” is skeuos (skeuo"), “a vessel such as a receptacle, household

utensil, the tackle and armament of ships, an implement,” here, a human being as an implement or utensil to be used of God for a special purpose. As the potter moulds some clay into a utensil to be used for noble purposes such as eating, and other clay to be used for ignoble purposes such as a depository for refuse, so God is sovereign in His use of an incorrigible such as Pharaoh for the purposes of demonstrating His power in the case of such an evil character, hardening his heart by forcing him to an issue which he did not want to meet, and in His use of Moses, the man meek above all men on the face of the earth, demonstrating His grace in using him to His glory. “The thing formed” is plasma (plasma), from which we derive our word “plastic.” Translation. Then you will say to me, Why does He still persist in finding fault? For with respect to His counsel, who has taken a permanent stand against it? O man; nay, surely, as for you, who are you who contradicts God? The plastic material shall not say to the one who moulds it, Why did you make me thus, shall it? Or, does not the potter possess authority over the clay, out of the same lump to make on the one hand an instrument which is for honorable purposes, and on the other hand, one which is for dishonorable uses? (9:22–24) Of God, “willing to show His wrath,” Vincent says; “Although willing, not because. Referring not to the determinate purpose of God, but to His spontaneous will growing out of His holy character. In the former sense, the meaning would be that God’s long-suffering was designed to enhance the final penalty. The emphatic position of willing prepares the way for the contrast with long-suffering. Though this holy will would lead Him to show His wrath, yet He withheld His wrath and endured.” As to “vessels of wrath,” the same authority understands them to be, “not filled with wrath, nor prepared to serve for a manifestation of divine wrath; but appertaining to wrath. Such as by their own acts have fallen under His wrath.” “Fitted” is from  (katartizw). Vincent says; “Literally, adjusted … Not fitted by God for destruction, but in an adjectival sense, ready, ripe for destruction, the participle denoting a present state previously formed, but giving no hint of how it has been formed. An agency of some kind must be assumed. That the objects of final wrath had themselves a hand in the matter may be seen from I Thessalonians 2:15, 16. That the hand of God is also operative may be inferred from the whole drift of the chapter. ‘The apostle has probably chosen this form because the being ready certainly arises from a continual reciprocal action between human sin and the divine judgment of blindness and hardness. Every development of sin is a network of human offenses and divine judgments’ (Lange).” The word “and” presents a difficulty in interpretation as to just what the connection is. Westcott and Hort omit it from their text on the single authority of the manuscript B. In verse 22 the vessels of wrath are fitted ( (katartizw)) to destruction. In verse 23, the vessels of mercy are previously prepared ( (proetoimazw)) for glory. Vincent says; “The studied difference in the use of this term instead of  (katartizw), to fit (v. 22) cannot be overlooked. The verb is not equivalent to foreordained ( (proorizw)). Fitted, by the adjustment of parts, emphasizes the concurrence of all the elements of the case to the final result. Prepared is more general. In the former case the result is indicated; in the latter, the previousness. Note before prepared, while before is wanting in verse 22. In this passage the direct agency of God is

distinctly stated, in the other, the agency is left indefinate. Here a single act is indicated; there a process.” In this connection, Vincent quotes such precious thoughts that the present author must share them with the reader; “Ah, truly, if the last word of the Christian revelation is contained in the image of the potter and the clay, it is a bitter derision of all the deep needs and legitimate desires of a soul aspiring toward its God. This would be at once a satire of reason upon herself and the suicide of revelation. But it is neither the last word nor the only word: nor has it any immediate observable bearing on the concrete development of our lives. It is not the only word, because, in nine-tenths of Scripture, it is as wholly excluded from the sphere of revelation as though it had never been revealed at all; and it is not the last word, because, throughout the whole of Scripture, and nowhere more than in the writings of the very apostle who has faced this problem with the most heroic inflexibility, we see bright glimpses of something beyond. How little we were intended to draw logical conclusions from the metaphor, is shown by the fact that we are living souls, not dead clay; and St. Paul elsewhere recognized a power, both within and without our beings, by which, as by an omnipotent alchemy, mean vessels can become precious, and vessels of earthenware be transmuted into vessels of gold” ( Farrar). Translation. But if, as is the case, desiring to demonstrate His wrath and to make known His power He endured with much long-suffering instruments of wrath fitted for destruction, in order that He might make known the wealth of His glory upon instruments of mercy which were previously prepared for glory, even us whom He called, not only from among the Jews but also from among the Gentiles. (9:25, 26) The contents of these verses refer back to the fact that Paul includes the Gentiles with the Jews within the scope of God’s mercy. The “my people which were not my people,” and the “beloved which was not beloved” are the Gentiles. Alford says: “It is difficult to ascertain in what sense the apostle cites these two passages from Hosea as applicable to the Gentiles being called the people of God. That He does so, is manifest from the words themselves and from the transition to the Jews in verse 27. In the prophet they are spoken of Israel,… who after being rejected and put away, was to be again received into favor with God.” He suggests that the explanation is as follows: “He (Paul) brings them forward to show that it is consonant with what we know of God’s dealings, to receive as His people those who were formerly not His people—that this may now take place with regard to the Gentiles, as it was announced to happen with regard to Israel,— and even more,—that Israel in this as in so many other things was the prophetic mirror in which God foreshowed on a small scale, His future dealings with mankind.” Translation. As also in Hosea He says, I will call those not my people, my people, and those not beloved, beloved. And it shall come to be that in the place where it was said to them, Not my people are you, there they shall be called sons of the living God. (9:27–29) The word “crieth” is  (krazw). Vincent says, “an impassioned utterance, mostly an inarticulate cry,” and quotes Morison, “The prophet in an awful earnestness, and as with a scream of anguish, cries over Israel.” Denney explains, “From

the calling of the Gentiles, as foretold in prophecy, Paul passes now to the partial, but only partial, calling of Israel, as announced by the same authority. The Jews cannot quarrel with the situation in which they find themselves when it answers so exactly to the Word of God.” Paul speaks of the remnant in Israel during its apostasy as a nation, elected to salvation by the sovereign grace of God. As to verse 28, there is considerable difficulty with regard to the translation. Vincent quotes the Revision, “The Lord will execute His word upon the earth, finishing and cutting it short.” The reader need not be bothered with the problems involved. The word “work” of the a.v., is logos (logo") in the Greek text, which latter Vincent says “does not mean work, but word, utterance, doctrine; not decree, which logos (logo") never means, though the idea may underlie it. Better, reckoning.” This saving the remnant of verse 27 is the matter referred to by the word “utterance” or “word.” “Remnant” is from hupoleima (uJpoleima), “that which is left.” Translation. And Isaiah cries in anguish concerning Israel, If the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, the remnant will be saved. For the Lord will execute His word upon the earth, finishing and cutting it short. And even as Isaiah said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us seed, we would in that case have become even as Sodom and been made like Gomorrha. (9:30–33) Denney introduces this section as follows; “We come now to the second main division of that part of the epistle in which Paul discusses the problem raised by the relation of the Jews to the gospel. He has shown in chapter 9:6–29 that they have no claim as of right to salvation: their whole history, as recorded and interpreted in the Scriptures, exhibited God acting on quite a different principle; he now proceeds to show more definitely that it was owing to their own guilt that they were rejected. They followed, and persisted in following, a path on which salvation was not to be found; and they were inexcusable in doing so, inasmuch as God had made His way of salvation plain and accessible to all.” There is no article in the Greek text before “Gentiles.” Gentiles as a class of individuals are in view in contrast to Israel. “Followed” is  (diwkw), “to run swiftly in order to catch some person or thing, to run after, pursue,” in a metaphorical sense, “to seek after eagerly, earnestly endeavor to acquire.” This the Jews were doing but in the wrong way, by works. “Attained” is  (katalambanw), “to lay hold of so as to make one’s own, to appropriate, take possession of.” Concerning the repetition of the word “righteousness,” Denney says; “The repetition of ‘righteousness’ is striking: it is the one fundamental conception on which Paul’s gospel rests; the questions at issue between him and the Jews were questions as to what it was, and how it was to be attained.” Concerning the fact that the pagan Gentiles did not eagerly pursue after righteousness, Denney says, “Not an unfair description of the pagan races as contrasted with the Jews; how to be right with God was not their main interest.” With reference to the Gentiles appropriating a righteousness which comes by faith, Denney remarks: “It is not surprising that a righteousness of this sort should be found even by those who are not in quest of it: its nature is that it is brought and offered to men, and faith is simply the act of appropriating it.” Speaking of Israel in pursuit of the law of righteousness, the same authority is most

helpful; “The idea is not that Israel was in quest of a law of righteousness, in the sense of a rule by the observance of which righteousness would be attained: every Israelite believed himself to be, and already was, in possession of such a law. It must rather be that Israel aimed incessantly at bringing its conduct up to the standard of a law in which righteousness, was certainly held out, but was never able to achieve its purpose. The law of righteousness, the unattained goal of Israel’s efforts, is of course the Mosaic law; but it is referred to, not definitely, but in its characteristic qualities, as law, and as exhibiting and enjoining (not bestowing) righteousness. (They) did not attain to, arrive at, that law—it remained out of their reach. Legal religion proved a failure.” The stumbling stone against which Israel stumbled was the necessity of faith in Messiah. Godet says; “In their foolish course Israel thought that they were advancing on a clear path, and lo! all at once there was found in this way an obstacle upon which they were broken; and this obstacle was the very Messiah whom they had so long invoked in all their prayers.” Faith in the Messiah was also a rock of offence. Denney explains; “The offense of the Cross, at which they stumbled, is not simply the fact that it is a cross, whereas they expected a Messianic throne; the Cross offended them because, as interpreted by Paul, it summoned them to begin their religious life, from the very beginning, at the foot of the Crucified, and with the sense upon their hearts of an infinite debt to Him which no ‘works’ could ever repay.” In verse 30 Gentiles “attained” (a.v.)  (katalambanw), appropriated salvation by faith. In verse 31, Israel failed to “attain” (a.v.)  (fqanw), “to arrive at, to come to, to reach.” The words are used advisedly. The Gentiles who did not pursue after righteousness appropriated it by faith. Israel, who did pursue after it, did not reach it. Translation. What then shall we say? That Gentiles, the ones who do not earnestly endeavor to acquire righteousness, appropriated righteousness, in fact, a righteousness which is out of a source of faith. But Israel, earnestly endeavoring to acquire a law of righteousness, did not measure up to the law. Because of what? Because, not out of a source of faith but even as out of a source of works (they sought to acquire it). They stumbled up against the stone which is a stumbling stone, even as it stands written, Behold I place in Zion a stone, a stumbling stone, and a rock of offense. And the one who places his faith upon it will not be put shame.

CHAPTER TEN (10:1) “Brethren” adelphoi (ajdelfoi), is a term used by Paul here to indicate his affection for the saints in the local church at Rome. These were Gentile, since the best texts read  (uJper aujtwn), “on behalf of them,” not “for Israel” as a.v. reports, the pronoun “them” referring to the Jews of 9:32. “Desire” is eudokia (eujdokia), “will, choice, delight, pleasure, satisfaction.” Thayer offers for this instance of its use, “desire, for delight in any absent thing easily begets a longing for it.” The Greek has it, “the desire of my heart.” “Prayer” is  (dehsi"), in the sense of supplication for one’s needs, from deomai (deomai), “to want, to beg, to pray.” Denney says; “His heart’s eudokia

(eujdokia) (desire) is that in which his heart could rest with complacency; that which would be a perfect satisfaction to it.… His inmost desire and his supplication to God are in their interest, with a view to their salvation.” Translation. Brethren, the consuming desire of my heart and my supplication to God on behalf of them is with a view to (their) salvation. (10:2–4) “I bear record” is  (marturew), “to bear witness, to testify, to affirm that one has seen or heard or experienced something.” Godet says “He seems to be alluding to his conduct of former days, and to say, ‘I know something of it, of that zeal.’ ” “Zeal of God” is more accurately, “zeal for God.” It is the genitive of description, defining just what kind of zeal it is. It is a zeal which has to do with God as its object. “Knowledge” is  (ejpignwsi"), “full, correct, vital, experiential knowledge.” That is, the Jew’s zeal for God was not conditioned nor characterized by a complete but a partial, insufficient knowledge, which because insufficient, led them astray as to the method whereby they could appropriate salvation. Paul procedes to show in verse 3 that this insufficiency lay in their ignorance of God’s righteousness. Denney says; “An unbelieving Jew could interpret his opposition to the lawless gospel of Paul as zeal for the divinely-given rule of life, and his opposition to the crucified Messiah as zeal for the divinely-given promises. It was God’s honor for which he stood in refusing the gospel.” “To establish” is  (iJsthmi), “to set up,” Vincent says, “indicating their pride in their endeavor. They would erect a righteousness of their own as a monument to their own glory and not to God’s.” “Going about” is  (zhtew), “to seek.” “Their own” is idios (ijdio"), “one’s own private, personal possession,” in a class by itself, peculiarly one’s own. The righteousness the Jews desired was a righteousness that was in character their own, one tinged with their own endeavors, the product of their own efforts, one that would glorify themselves, not one characterized by what God is in His glorious Person, not one handed to them as a gift for which they would feel obligated to thank Him. “Submitted” is  (uJpotassw), a military word, “to arrange under, to subordinate,” as soldiers in a battalion under a commanding officer, “to put one’s self under orders, to obey.” Appropriation by faith of God’s righteousness involves not only the discarding of all dependence upon self and self-effort for salvation, but also the heart’s submission or capitulation to Jesus as Saviour and Lord. This the Jews did not want to do. “Subjected” would be a better translation. “End” is telos (telo"), “the termination or limit at which a thing ceases to be.” Christ is the termination or limit at which law ceases to be. Denney explains; “The sense required—a sense which the words very naturally yield—is that with Christ in the field, law as a means of attaining righteousness has ceased. The moment a man sees Christ and understands what He is and what He has done, he feels that legal religion is a thing of the past, the way to righteousness is not the observance of statutes, no matter though they have been promulgated by God Himself; it is faith, the abandonment of the soul to the redeeming judgment and mercy of God in His Son.” Translation. For I bear testimony to them that a zeal for God they have, but not according to a full and accurate knowledge. For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to set up their own peculiar, private righteousness, to the righteousness of God they have not subjected

themselves. For the termination of the law is Christ for righteousness to everyone who believes. (10:5–8) The Nestle text and the Revision offer the following for verse 5, “Moses writes that the man who does the righteousness which is of the law shall live thereby.” How are we to understand this? Denney says, “Moses’ authority is unimpeachable on this point. The righteousness that comes from law must be an achievement: the man who has done it shall live in it (Lev. 18:5). Paul writes ‘in it’ with reference to ‘righteousness:’ the ‘in them’ of the LXX refers to ‘all the judgments’ which Moses, of course, in writing thus did not mock his people; the o.t. religion, though imperfect, was a real religion, under which men could be right with God. To keep the law of God and live by doing so (Matt. 19:17) was the natural aim and hope of a true Israelite; only, in this case, the law was not a collection of statutes, but a revelation of God’s character and will, and he who sought to keep it did so not alone, but in conscious dependence on God whose grace was shown above all things else by His gift of such a revelation. Paul, however, is writing with Pharisees and legalists in his eye, and with the remembrance of his own experience as a Pharisee in his heart; and his idea no doubt is that this road leads nowhere. Compare Galatians 3:10–12. To keep the law thus is an impossibility.” Paul is quoting from Leviticus 18:5, “Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them.” Both Moses and Paul clearly understood and taught that obedience to the Decalogue, for instance, or any injunctions in the Old Testament that were pure law, that is, legal requirements of conduct, would never give that person a righteous standing in point of law before a holy God. Paul writes that Abraham was given a righteous standing by faith, not by law obedience (Rom. 4). Only faith in the coming Sacrifice for sin that God would offer, that Sacrifice, the Lord Jesus, symbolized and prefigured in the Old Testament by the Levitical sacrifices, could give the person such a standing. The Mosaic law consisted of three parts, two of them pure law, the Decalogue and the social judgments upon conduct, the other, the tabernacle, sacrifices and priesthood. The first two showed Israel its sin and condemned it. The other made a way of salvation for the individual. Obedience to the first two on the part of a saved Jew would result in a righteous character. Obedience to the last on the part of an unsaved Jew which is the same as his act of faith in the coming Sacrifice for sin, would result in a righteous standing before God. When Moses writes that the Jew who does the statutes and ordinances of God shall live in them, he does not mean that he will be given eternal life by reason of his obedience. Eternal life is a gift both in the Old and New Testaments, and is never earned. But the one who has eternal life lives in the sphere of the commandments when he obeys them, lives in their sphere in the sense that his activities and interests are within their scope. The words of the a.v. “shall live by them” are   (zhsetai ejn aujthi), which could be locative of sphere or instrumental of means. The a.v. of Leviticus 18:5 reads “in them.” Paul in this section has in the background of his mind, the fact that the Judaism of the first century had been perverted from a supernaturally revealed and empowered system in which salvation was given in answer to faith in a blood Sacrifice, to a mere ethical cult where obedience to the Old Testament Decalogue would bring salvation. He is combatting this. Israel sought a righteous standing by law obedience. Paul says it can be only appropriated by faith. He presents this in verses 6–8. Denney says concerning the words, “The righteousness which is of faith speaketh on

this wise,” “It is remarkable that Paul does not make Moses his authority here, though he is about to express himself in words which certainly go back to Deuteronomy 30:12–14. It is the righteousness of faith itself which speaks, describing its own character and accessibility in words with a fine flavor of inspiration about them. But it is not so much a quotation we find here, as a free reproduction and still freer application of a very familiar passage of the o.t.” As to the words, “Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:), or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead),” Alford is helpful: “Personifying the great Christian doctrine of free justification through faith, he (Paul) represents it as addressing every man who is anxious to obtain salvation, in the encouraging words of Moses: ‘Say not in thine heart, (it says to such an one) etc.’ In other words, ‘Let not the man who sighs for deliverance from his own sinfulness suppose that the accomplishment of some impossible task is required of him in order to enjoy the blessings of the gospel. Let him not think that the personal presence of the Messiah is necessary to ensure his salvation. Christ needs not to be brought down from heaven, or up from the abyss, to impart to him forgiveness and holiness. No. Our Christian message contains no impossibilities. We do not mock the sinner by offering him happiness on conditions which we know that he is powerless to fulfill. We tell him that Christ’s word is near to him: so near, that he may speak of it with his mouth, and meditate on it with his heart.… Is there any thing above human power in such a confession, and in such a belief? Surely not. It is graciously adapted to the necessity of the very weakest and most sinful of God’s creatures.” The words, “that is” (v. 6) are  (tout ejstin), “this is,” as Alford explains, “that imports in its full and unfolded meaning, to bring Christ down.” That is, to ask the question, “Who shall ascend into heaven” is equivalent to saying, “Let us ascend into heaven so as to bring Christ down,” and to ask the question, “Who shall descend into the deep” is equivalent to saying, “Let us descend into the deep in order to bring Christ up.” The word “deep” is in the Greek text abusson (ajbusson), from which we get our word “abyss.” The Greek word means “bottomless, unbounded,” and is here used of that portion of the unseen world that is the common abode of the dead. It is called Hades (Hell a.v. Luke 16:23). Robertson suggests that Paul’s thought was as follows. It is not necessary to bring Christ down from Heaven nor up from the regions of the dead, since the Incarnation and the resurrection are facts. Vincent, commenting on verse 8 says, “Christ has accomplished the two great things necessary for salvation. He has descended to the earth and has risen from the dead. All that is necessary is to accept by faith the incarnate and risen Christ, instead of having recourse to the long and painful way of establishing one’s own righteousness by obedience to the law.” The expression, “the word of faith” is  (rJhma th" pistew"). Logos (Logo"), “word,” is not used here, but  (rJhma), the other Greek word for “word.” Logos (Logo") refers to the total expression of some idea or person.  (Hrhma) is used of a part of speech in a sentence. Paul is referring here to the words themselves which constitute his message of faith. Alford defines, “which forms the substratum and object of faith.” The word “faith” describes the contents of Paul’s message. It is a message of salvation in which faith is the appropriating method of obtaining salvation. Translation. For Moses writes that the man who does the righteousness which is of the law shall live in its sphere. But the righteousness which is

out of a source of faith speaks in this manner. Stop saying in your heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? This, in its implications, is to bring Christ down. Or, Who shall descend into the abyss? This, in its implications, is to bring Christ up out from among those who are dead. But what does it say? Near you the word is, in your mouth and in your heart. This is the word of the faith which we are proclaiming. (10:9, 10) The word “this” of the last sentence in the foregoing translation, points back to the words, “Near you the word is, in your mouth and in your heart.” The first word of verse 9 is hoti (oJti), translated “that” (a.v.). This is often used to introduce a declarative clause. It is used like quotation marks in English. The words of verses 9 and 10 are an elaboration upon and explanation of the previous directions of Paul as to the method of appropriating salvation as given in his words, “near you the word is, in your mouth and in your heart.” It could be rendered “namely,” as indicating that the contents of verses 9 and 10 explain the above statement. The word “confess” is  (oJmologew), made up of homos (oJmo"), “same,” and  (legw), “to speak,” thus, “to speak the same thing,” thus, “to agree with some person with reference to something.” To confess the Lord Jesus means therefore to be in agreement with all that Scripture says about Him, which includes all that these two names imply. Robertson translates, “Confess Jesus as Lord.” The name “Jesus” is the transliteration of the Greek  (ÆIhsou"), which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew name we know as “Jehoshua,” the latter meaning, “Jehovah saves.” The name “Lord” is kurios (kurio") which in the Greek version of the Old Testament is used for the august name “Jehovah,” and by its use, implies deity. Thus, to confess Jesus as Lord includes a heart belief in His deity, incarnation, vicarious atonement and bodily resurrection. Robertson says, “No Jew would do this who had not really trusted Christ, for Kurios (Kurio") in the LXX is used of God. No Gentile would do it who had not ceased worshipping the emperor as Kurios (Kurio"). The word Kurios (Kurio") was and is the touchstone of faith.” Commenting on the words, “with the heart” of verse 10, Vincent says, “As the seat of the energy of the divine Spirit; mediating the personal life of the soul ( (yuch)) which is conditioned by the Spirit. It is not the affections as distinguished from the intellect. Believing with the heart is in contrast with oral confession, not with intellectual belief. ‘Believing is a mode of thinking, not of feeling. It is that particular mode of thinking that is guided to its object by the testimony of another, or by some kind of intermediation. It is not intuitive’ ” (Morison). Denney says; “The parallelism is like that in the previous verse, though the order of the clauses is reversed. To be saved one must attain righteousness, and this depends on heartfaith; such faith, again, leading to salvation, must confess itself. To separate the two clauses, and look for an independent meaning in each, is a mistake: a heart believing unto righteousness, and a mouth making confession unto salvation, are not really two things, but two sides of the same thing. The formalism which seems to contrast them is merely a mental (perhaps only a literary) idiosyncrasy of the writer. It is true to say that such a confession as is meant here was made at baptism: but to limit it to baptism, or to use this verse to prove baptism essential to salvation, is as Weiss says, unheard of dogmatism.” Regarding the act of confession, Morison says: “Confession is just faith turned from its

obverse side to its reverse … When faith comes forth from its silence to announce itself, and to proclaim the glory and the grace of the Lord, its voice is confession.” Translation. If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe with your heart that God raised Him out from among the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart faith is exercised resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made resulting in salvation. (10:11–13) Paul quotes Isaiah 28:16 in substantiation of what he has just asserted. “Shall not be ashamed” should be “shall not be put to shame.” The verb is  (kataiscunw). The word here is used by Paul in a Hebrew usage where a person is put to shame who suffers a repulse. Paul uses it in Romans 5:5, “Hope does not put to shame in the sense of disappoint.” The idea of being ashamed of the Lord Jesus is not in the apostle’s mind. Rather, he says that the sinner who places his faith in the Lord Jesus will not be defeated, disappointed, suffer a repulse in his life. Paul, writing to the Romans says that when he brings the gospel to Rome he will not be ashamed. By that he means that he is not afraid that it will not work. He believes in its power to save. The word “difference” is  (diastolh). The verb form is  (diastellw), “to draw asunder, divide, distinguish.” The noun means “distinction.” The word “Greek” here stands for “Gentile.” “Lord” is Kurios (Kurio") and is applied to the Lord Jesus, again a testimony to His deity. “Calling upon the Name of the Lord” is defined in verses 9 and 10. Translation. For the scripture says, Every one who believes on Him shall not be put to shame. For there is not a distinction between Jew and Greek. For the same Lord is over all, constantly rich toward all those who call upon Him. For whoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (10:14, 15) Denney says; “It is difficult to trace very clearly the line of the apostle’s thought here. Many scholars … connect verses 14 and l5 closely with what precedes, and mark a break between verses 15 and 16. It is as if Paul were expanding the pas (pa") (whosoever) of verse 13 and justifying that universal preaching of the gospel which was itself a stumbling-block to the Jews. Every one who invokes the name of the Lord shall be saved, and therefore the conditions of such invocation must be put within reach of everyone.” Alford says: “It has been much doubted to whom these questions refer,—to Jews or to Gentiles? It must, I think, be answered, To neither exclusively. They are generalized by the whosoever of the preceding verse to mean all, both Jews and Gentiles. And the inference in what follows, though mainly concerning the rejection of the unbelieving Jews, has regard also to the reception of the Gentiles … At the same time, as Meyer remarks, ‘the necessity of the gospel being sent away must first be laid down, in order to bring out in strong contrast the disobedience of some.’ ” The word “beautiful” is  (wJraioi) “from  (wJra), the time of full bloom or development. Hence the radical idea of the word includes both blooming maturity and vigor. Appropriate here to the swift, vigorous feet. Feet, emphasizing the rapid approach of the messenger. ‘In their running and hastening, in their scaling obstructing mountains, and in their appearance and descent from mountains. they are the symbols of the earnestly-

desired, winged movement and appearance of the gospel itself’ (Lange)” (Vincent). Nestle omits the words, “that preach the gospel of peace,” as do also Westcott and Hort. Translation. How is it possible then that they shall call upon the One in whom they did not believe? Moreover, how is it possible that they will believe on the One concerning whom they did not hear? And how is it possible that they shall hear without one who proclaims? And how is it possible that they shall make a proclamation except they be sent on a commission? Even as it stands written, How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good tidings of good things. (10:16, 17) Denney says; “The fact remains, however, in spite of this universal preaching, that there has not been a universal surrender to the gospel. Not all; the Jews are present to the writer’s mind here, though the words might apply more widely; hence, the compassionate mode of statement … Yet this quantum of unbelief does not discomfit the apostle, for it also as well as the proclamation of the gospel, is included in prophecy.” “Report” is  (ajkoh). The word  (ajkouw) means “to hear.”  (ÆAkoh), the noun means “the thing heard.” The word “hearing” is  (ajkoh), the same word translated “report” (a.v.). Paul says, “So then, faith is out of the source of that which is heard.” It is the publication of the gospel which produces belief in it (Alford). That is, as the gospel is preached in the power of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit engenders faith in the gospel message in the hearts of those elected to salvation. And the thing heard (the gospel message), comes through the agency of the Word of Christ. Robertson says this is an objective genitive, “the word about Christ,” which Alford says is the instrument or vehicle of the gospel message. The word “Christ” appears in the best manuscripts, not the word “God.” “Obeyed” is  (uJpakouw), “to hear under” authority, thus, to be obedient to it. Translation. But not all lent an obedient ear to the good news. For Isaiah says, Lord, who believed our message? So then, faith is out of the source of that which is heard, and that which is heard (the message) is through the agency of the Word concerning Christ. (10:18) Denney writes: “The process of convicting the Jews is now under way, and but I say introduces a plea on their behalf. It is Paul who speaks: hence the form of the question did they not hear? suggests his opinion as to the answer. To hear is necessary in order to believe; you do not mean to say they did not hear?… The contrary is so clearly the case that there is a touch of derision in the word with which Paul introduces the proof of it … The gospel has been preached in all the world: the words of Psalm 19:4 are at once the expression and the proof of this. Of course they refer to the revelation of God in nature, but their use will seem legitimate enough if we remember that Paul knew the extent to which the gospel had been proclaimed in his day. Compare Colossians 1:6, 23. It was as widely diffused as the Diaspora (the Jews scattered throughout the Roman Empire).” “World” is  (oijkoumenh), used of the extent of the Roman empire. Translation. But I say, did they not hear? Most certainly. Into all the

earth their sound went out, and into the extremities of the inhabited earth, their words. (10:19, 20) Denney says: “Another attempt to introduce a plea on behalf of Israel. You cannot say, ‘they did not hear?’; surely you do not mean to say, then, Israel did not understand … Above all nations Israel ought to have understood a message from God: Israel, and inability to understand God’s Word, ought to be incompatible ideas.” The word “know” is  (ginwskw), which refers to knowledge gained by experience, and thus involves the idea of understanding what is known. The question in the Greek includes the negative  (mh) which calls for a negative answer. Robertson translates, “Did Israel fail to know?” The answer expected is “no.” Israel in its bigotry, claimed it had a monopoly on salvation in spite of the fact that Moses and Isaiah had predicted the salvation of the Gentiles, and Isaiah, Israel’s opposition to the same. Moses predicts that God will provoke Israel, rejecting His salvation, to jealousy of the Gentiles, by giving salvation to the latter, thus, arousing in Israel a desire for the same. The words “by no people” are literally, “upon the basis of a no-people.” The no-people, the Gentiles, who are a no-people with reference to God’s heritage are the basis upon which God will provoke Israel to jealousy. Regarding the quotation from Isaiah, Denney quotes Gifford, “Isaiah breaks out boldly.” Denney says; “It was an act of great daring to speak thus to a nation with the exclusive temper of Israel, and Paul who needed the same courage in carrying the gospel to the Gentiles was the man to see this.… What the prophet has in view is God’s spontaneous, unmerited goodness, which takes the initiative, unsolicited, in showing mercy to faithless Jews who make no appeal to Him and never sought Him; the apostle applies this, like similar passage in 9:25, for instance, to the reception of the gospel. The very calling of the Gentiles, predicted and interpreted as it is in the passages quoted, should itself have been a message to the Jews, which they could not misunderstand; it should have opened their eyes as a lightning flash to the position in which they stood— that of men who had forfeited their place among the people of God—and provoked them, out of jealousy, to vie with these outsiders in welcoming the righteousness of faith.” Translation. But I say, Did Israel fail to know? First Moses says, I will provoke you to jealousy by those who are no people, and by a foolish people I will provoke you to anger. Moreover, Isaiah breaks out boldly and says, I was found by those who are not seeking Me. I was made manifest to those who are not inquiring about Me. (10:21) Denney comments; “The arms outstretched all the day long are the symbol of that incessant pleading love which Israel through all its history has consistency despised. It is not want of knowledge, then, nor want of intelligence, but wilful and stubborn disobedience that explains the exclusion of Israel (meanwhile) from the Kingdom of Christ and all its blessings.” The word “disobedience” is  (ajpeiqew), “not to allow one’s self to be persuaded.” It speaks of Israel as non-persuasible, a people stiff-necked, obstinate. “Gainsaying” is  (ajntilegw), “to oppose one’s self to one, decline to obey him, declare one’s self against him, refuse to have anything to do with him.” Translation. But to Israel He says, The whole day I stretched out my hands to a nonpersuasible and cantankerous people.

CHAPTER ELEVEN (11:1) Denney introduces his discussion of this chapter as follows: “Briefly, the ninth chapter means, God is sovereign, and the tenth chapter means, Israel has sinned. Both of these are presented in relative independence as explanations of the perplexing fact which confronted the apostle, namely, that the Jews did not receive the gospel, while the Gentiles did; in this chapter, the two are brought into relation to each other, and we are shown (to some extent) how in the sovereign providence of God even the sin of Israel is made to contribute to the working out of a universal purpose of redemption—a redemption in which Israel also shares, in accordance with the inviolable promise of God. The chapter can be naturally divided into three sections: (1) verses 1–10, in which the question immediately arising out of chapter 10 is discussed, namely, whether the unbelief of which Israel as a whole has been convicted involves God’s rejection of the chosen people; (2) verses 11–24, in which the result to be attained by the partial and temporary exclusion of the Jews from the Messianic kingdom is enlarged upon, and the Gentiles warned against self-exaltation; and (3) verses 25–36, in which Paul magnifies the unsearchable wisdom, love, and faithfulness of God, as revealed in securing by a common method the salvation alike of Israel and the Gentiles.” “Then, oun (oJun) introduces the question as an inference from the whole previous discussion, especially verses 19–21” (Vincent). The question, “Hath God cast away His people?” is so phrased in the Greek text that it requires a negative answer. Paul is not raising a question. He is driving home the fact that God did not cast Israel away. He uses the rhetorical question, “God did not cast away His people, did He?” The word “cast away” is  (ajpwqew), “to thrust away, push away, repel, to thrust away from one’s self, to drive away from one’s self, to repudiate.” The word is used in the Greek classics where Oedipus says, “I charge you that no one shelter or speak to that murderer, but that all thrust him from their homes.” Paul’s first answer to that terrible thought is, “God forbid.” The Greek is  (mh genoito), “may such a thing never occur.” Then he proceeds to prove that God has not repudiated the Jewish nation. He says, “As for myself, I also am an Israelite.” An Israelite is a Jew as he is seen as a member of the theocracy and thus an heir of the promises God gave to that nation. This is the most august title of all three names, a Hebrew being a Hebrew-speaking as against a Greek-speaking Jew or a Grecian Jew, while a Jew is a Jew in his national distinction from a Gentile. Paul also is the offspring of Abraham, and he comes from the tribe of Benjamin. Alford, in commenting upon this, says; “Three ways are open to us: either (1) it is a case in point, as an example of an Israelite who has not been rejected, but is still one of God’s people; so almost all the commentators—but this is hardly probable,—for in this case (a) he would not surely bring one only example to prove his point, when thousands might have been alleged.—(b) it would hardly be consistent with the humble mind of Paul to put himself alone in such a place,—and (c)  (mh genoito) (God forbid) does not go simply to deny a hypothetical fact, but applies to some deprecated consequence of that which is hypothetically put:—or (2) as De Wette, ‘How can I say such a thing, who am myself an Israelite? etc.’ ‘Does not my very nationality furnish a security against my entertaining such an idea?’—or (3) which I believe to be the right view; but which I have

found only in the recent commentary of Mr. Ewbank,—as implying that if such an hypothesis were to be conceded, it would exclude from God’s kingdom the writer himself, as an Israelite. This seems better to agree with ‘God forbid,’ as deprecating the consequence of such an assertion.—But a question even more important arises, not unconnected with that just discussed: namely, Who are ‘His people’? In order for the sentence ‘For I also am etc.,’ to bear the meaning just assigned to it, it is obvious that ‘His people’ must mean the people of God nationally considered. If Paul deprecated such a proposition as the rejection of God’s people, because he himself would thus be as an Israelite cut off from God’s favor, the rejection assumed in the hypothesis must be a national rejection. It is against this that he puts in his strong protest. It is this which he disproves by a cogent historical parallel from Scripture, showing that there is a remnant even at this present time according to the election of grace: and not only so, but that that part of Israel (considered as having continuity of national existence) which is for a time hardened, shall ultimately come in, and so all Israel (nationally considered again, Israel as a nation) shall be saved. Thus the covenant of God with Israel, having been national, shall ultimately be fulfilled to them as a nation: not by the gathering in merely of individual Jews, or of all the Jews individually, into the Christian Church,—but by the national restoration of the Jews, not in unbelief, but as a Christian believing nation, to all that can, under the gospel, represent their ancient pre-eminence, and to the fulness of those promises which have never yet in their plain sense been accomplished to them.” Translation. I say then, God did not repudiate His people, did He? Far be the thought, for as for myself, I also am an Israelite, the offspring of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. (11:2–4) Paul here infers the impossibility of repudiating Israel since He “foreknew” that nation. The word is  (proginwskw). This word in its verb and noun forms is used seven times in the n.t., twice in connection with man (Acts 26:5, II Peter 3:17), where it signifies foreknowledge based upon previous experience, and five times with reference to God (Acts 2:23, Romans 8:29, 11:2, I Peter 1:2, 20), where it means “foreordination.” The a.v. so translates it with respect to our Lord (I Peter 1:20). The word occurs first in Acts 2:23 where it is associated with the words “determinate counsel” by Granville Sharp’s rule which requires that the word “foreknowledge” refer to the same thing that the words “determinate counsel” refer to, and is a further description of it. The words “determinate counsel” refer here to the council composed of the Persons of the Triune God in council convened to select and appoint from among their number, the One who should be the Lamb for Sacrifice. This action is foreordination, the appointing of a person to a certain destiny. The word “foreknowledge” (a.v.) is part and parcel of that act and partakes of the meaning of that act, namely, that of foreordination. Alford explains the word, “which, in His own eternal decree before the world, He selected as the chosen nation, to be His own, the depository of His law, the vehicle of the theocracy, from its first revelation to its completion in Christ’s future kingdom.” Denney says; “Which He foreknew” must contain a reason which makes the rejection incredible or impossible. This excludes the interpretation of Weiss, who thinks that Paul means to say that God knew what Israel was before He chose it, and therefore cast it off as if this unbelief had disappointed Him; He knew from the first what it would be. To plead thus for God is too paltry. We must take ‘foreknew’ as in 8:29: the meaning is, Israel stood before

God’s eyes from eternity as His people, and in the immutableness of the sovereign love with which He made it His, lies the impossibility of its rejection.” The word  (h), “or,” appears in the Greek text. The a.v. takes no notice of it. Vincent says of its use, “confirming what precedes by presenting the only alternative.” “Wot is oida (oijda), “to know in an absolute manner.” It speaks of positive knowledge such as Paul’s Jewish readers would be expected to possess. “Of Elias” is  (ejn Hhleiai), “in Elijah.” The change in the spelling of the name is due to the fact that the Greek has no letter for “J.” The idea is, “in the case of Elijah” (Robertson), or “in the history of Elijah” (Alford). The passage quoted is in I Kings 19:10, 14. “Maketh intercession against,” is  (ejntugcanw) “to plead for” with kata (kata) prefixed which means “against,” the compound word meaning, “to plead against.” “Digged down” is  (kataskaptw), “to dig under, demolish, destroy.” Denney remarks, “In Elijah’s mood, Paul might have said something similar of his own time, for their circumstances were not unlike. The apostle, like the prophet, was lonely and persecuted, and Israel as a whole seemed to have abandoned God or been abandoned by Him. But he understands God’s way (and His faithfulness) better.” “Answer” is  (crhmatismo"), “a divine response, an oracle.” Denney remarks: “The quotation is from I Kings 19:18 with ‘to myself’ added, by which Paul suggests God’s interest in this remnant, and the fact that He has a purpose of His own identified with them. God has reserved the seven thousand; He has reserved them for Himself; it is on this the proof depends that He has not cast off His people. The seven thousand are Israel to Him. Yet His unchanging faithfulness in keeping a people is not represented as a merely unconditional decree having no relation to anything but His own will, for the seven thousand are described by their character such as did not ‘bow the knee to Baal.’ Hoitines (oJitine") ‘who’ is qualitative; such were those whom God reserved for Himself, men who never bowed the knee to Baal.” Translation. God did not repudiate His people whom He foreordained. Or, do you not know absolutely in the case of Elijah what the Scripture says, how he pleads against Israel? Lord, your prophets they killed. Your altars they demolished. And as for myself, I was left alone, and they are seeking my life. But what does the divine answer say to him? I reserved for myself seven thousand men who are of such a character that they did not bow the knee to Baal. (11:5, 6) “Time” is kairos (kairo") here, not chronos (crono"), the latter word speaking merely of time as such, the former referring to “the seasons, the joints or articulations in these times (chronos (crono")), the critical epoch-making periods foreordained of God … when all that has been slowly, and often without observation, ripening through long ages is mature and comes to the birth in grand decisive events which constitute at once the close of one period and the commencement of another” (Trench). The time to which Paul had reference was a strategic one, one marked by the inclusion of the Gentiles together with the Jew in the one Body of Christ, a time at which, while the Gentiles gladly received the Word, Israel was apostate, a time at which in spite of Israel’s apostasy, there was a remnant in Israel saved in the sovereign grace of God. The word “remnant” is limma (limma), the verb form of which is  (leipw), “to leave.” Thus, a remnant is that which is left. The word refers here to that group in Israel

which was left, so to speak, out of the general apostasy. This remnant, Paul says is “according to the election of grace.” “Election” is  (ejklogh), from  (ejklegw), “to pick out, to choose out from a number.” The word “grace” is genitive of description. The ground or motivating factor in this choice of certain in Israel who were to be the objects of the sovereign choice of God for salvation, was grace, the spontaneous overflowing love of God bestowing the gift of salvation upon one who does not only not deserve that gift, but deserves condign punishment for his sins. “Is” is ginomai (ginomai), “to become,” in the perfect tense. This remnant has come into being and is a permanent part of the great host of the saved. Alford, commenting on the contents of verse six, says; “And let us remember, when we say an election of grace, how much those words imply: namely, nothing short of the entire exclusion of all human work from the question. Let these two terms be regarded as, and kept distinct from one another, and do not let us attempt to mix them and so destroy the meaning of each.” In the statement, “Grace is no more grace,” the word “is” is ginomai (ginomai), “to become.” Vincent says; “No longer comes into manifestation as what it really is. ‘It gives up its specific character’ (Meyer).” Nestle rejects the last half of verse 6, as do Westcott and Hort. Translation. Therefore, thus also at this present season a remnant according to a choice of grace has come into being. But since it is by grace, no longer is it out of a source of works. Otherwise no longer is grace, grace. (11:7–10) “Blinded” is  (pwrow), “to cover with a thick skin, to harden by covering with a callous,” metaphorically, “to make the heart dull” (John 12:40). “Slumber” is katanuxis (katanuxi"), “severe sorrow, extreme grief, insensibility or torpor of mind, a spirit of stupor,” and as Thayer says, “a spirit of stupor which renders their souls torpid, i.e., so insensible that they (the Jews) are not affected at all by the offer of salvation through the Messiah.” “Table” is trapeza (trapeza), “a table,” “representing material prosperity: feasting in wicked security. Some explain of the Jews, presumptuous confidence in the law” (Vincent). “Snare” is pagis (pagi"), “a snare, a trap, a noose,” used of snares in which birds are entangled. It refers to whatever brings peril, loss, destruction. “Trap” is  (qhran), “a hunting of wild beasts to destroy them,” thus, of preparing destruction for men. “Recompense” is antapodoma (ajntapodoma), “a just retribution.” Paul says all in Israel not included in the remnant chosen to salvation by sovereign grace were hardened. He explains this hardening in that God gave them a spirit of slumber, an insensibility of heart that made them insensible to the gospel, sightless spiritual eyes, and deaf ears. How are we to understand this? Moses records the fact that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, but not until Pharaoh had first hardened his own heart. The original hardening came from his totally depraved nature. Then God hardened Pharaoh’s heart by forcing him to an issue which he did not want to meet. The more God demanded that he let Israel go, the more Pharaoh rebelled. The more he rebelled, the harder his heart became. So with Israel. Israel rejected God and His Word, and the more it did so the harder its heart became. Light rejected, blinds. In addition to this natural hardening of the heart, there was God’s judicial action of hardening as a just judgment upon its sin of rejection. Denney explains as follows; “Paul does not say how they were hardened or by

whom: there is the same indefiniteness here as in ‘vessels fitted to destruction’ in 9:22. It may be quite possible to give a true sense to the assertion that they were hardened by God (compare the following verse), although the hardening in this case is always regarded as a punishment for sin, that is, a confirming in an obduracy which originally was not of God, but their own: as if the idea were, first they would not, and then, in God’s reaction against their sin, they could not.” “Bow down” is  (sunkamptw), “to bend together as of captives whose backs were bent under burdens.” Translation. What then? That which Israel is constantly seeking, this it did not obtain. But those chosen out obtained it. And the rest were hardened. Even as it stands written, God gave them a spirit of insensibility, eyes for the purpose of not seeing, and ears for the purpose of not hearing, until this day. Even David says, Let their table become for a snare and a trap, and a stumblingblock and a just retribution to them. Let their eyes be darkened in order that they may not see, and in order that they may always bow down their back. (11:11) Paul’s question is preceded by the negative particle  (mh) which expects a negative answer, “They did not stumble that they should fall, did they?” Denney translates, “Surely, they did not stumble so as to fall?” He says; “The subject is the mass of the Jewish nation, all but the elect remnant. The contrast here between stumbling and falling shows that by the latter is meant an irremediable fall from which there is no rising.” The word “that” is hina (iJna) which means “in order that.” But Denney suggests that this usage cannot here be pressed. The idea is not so much purpose as a result. Paul rejects vehemently the idea that the stumbling of Israel in its rejection of the Messiah resulted in its final downfall. He goes on to say that God in His providence used it as an occasion to bring His salvation to the Gentiles, and this latter, as a means whereby He could make Israel jealous of the Gentiles and thus incite in them a desire for the salvation they had rejected. Paul followed this procedure all through his missionary labors, first going to the Jews, and when they rejected the gospel, to the Gentiles, until finally in his first Roman imprisonment, he abandoned Israel entirely and turned to the Gentiles. Translation. I say then, Surely, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? Away with the thought. But through the instrumentality of their fall salvation has come to the Gentiles with a view to the provoking of them to jealousy. (11:12) Paul argues that, since the fall of national Israel in its rejection of Messiah and consequent temporary rejection by God results in the enrichment of the world of sinners in the sense that salvation now is come directly to the Gentiles, then—. Again, since the diminishing of national Israel results in the enrichment of the Gentiles in that they became recipients of salvation—then. “Diminishing” is  (hJtthma), “a diminution, decrease, defeat, loss.” The idea is not that the nation is diminished numerically, but that it has suffered defeat in its spiritual life and loss of the blessings that accompany salvation, since they had no salvation to start with and rejected the salvation offered to them. Now, since their fall, defeat, and loss resulted in the enrichment of the Gentiles in salvation, Paul argues, how much more will their fullness result in the enrichment of the Gentiles, at

which time the nation will receive its Messiah at His second Advent. The word “fullness” is  (plhrwma), “that which has been filled.” The word refers to that which is complete, the completeness of Israel referring here to its return to God at the second Advent, and its salvation. Denney quotes Professor J. A. Robinson’s paraphrase: “If the Gentiles have been enriched in a sense through the very miscarriage and disaster of Israel, what wealth is in store for them in the great Return, when all Israel shall be saved—‘when God hath made the pile complete.’ ” Think of it—the Lord Jesus, personally reigning on the throne of David in Jerusalem, the nation Israel saved, Satan bound, and universal righteousness, peace, and prosperity for one thousand years, “that the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles” (Acts 15:17). Translation. But since their fall is the enrichment of the world, and their defeat and loss, the enrichment of the Gentiles, how much more their fulness? (11:13, 14) The better texts read de (de) “but,” not gar (gar), “for.” Vincent says; “The sentence does not state the reason for the prominence of the Gentiles asserted in verse 12, but makes a transition from the statement of the divine plan to the statement of Paul’s own course of working on the line of that plan. He labors the more earnestly for the Gentiles with a view to the salvation of his own race.” Commenting on the word “inasmuch,” Vincent says, “The best texts insert oun (oJun), ‘then.’ So Rev.; thus disconnecting it with what follows.” “Magnify” is  (doxazw), “to glorify.” Paul glorifies his ministry in the sense that he honors it by the faithful discharge of its duties” (Vincent). Denney remarks; “Paul does not here address a new class of readers. He has been speaking all along to a Gentile church, and speaking to it in that character; and he feels it necessary to show the relevance, in such circumstances, of bestowing so much attention on the condition and prospects of the Jews. His mission to the Gentiles has an indirect bearing on his own countrymen: the more successful he can make it, the greater is the prospect that some of the Jews may be provoked to jealousy and saved.” “Provoke to emulation” is  (parazhlow), the same word which is translated “provoke to jealousy.” Translation. But to you, I am speaking, the Gentiles. Inasmuch, then as for myself, as I am apostle of the Gentiles, I do my ministry honor, if by any means, possibly, I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh, and save some of them. (11:15) The word “if” which Paul uses throughout his argument here is not ean (eJan), the “if” of a hypothetical condition, but ei (eij), the “if” of a fulfilled condition. Paul is not arguing upon the basis of an hypothesis, but upon the basis of facts. The translation should read, “since,” or “in view of the fact.” The casting away of Israel the nation, refers to the act of God setting Israel aside temporarily as a channel through which to bring the good news of salvation to the world, and the substitution of the Church, this with a view to bringing Israel back into fellowship with Himself and service in the Millennium. This resulted in a direct ministry to the Gentiles and the rise of the latter as the heralds of salvation. This occurred actually a.d. 70 when God dispersed Israel over the then known world. Through the acceptance of the gospel message, the unsaved are reconciled to God

in the sense that their attitude of unbelief and hatred is turned to one of trust and love. The receiving of Israel refers to that wonderful moment when, as the Messiah returns to the Mt. of Olives (Zech. 14) all Israel shall be saved (Rom. 11:26). This will be “life from among the dead” in that the nation will be saved by the sovereign grace of God out from a spiritually dead state and from among those who remain spiritually dead. Translation. For, in view of the fact that their repudiation (results) in the world’s reconciliation, what will the receiving of them (result) in if not in life from among the dead.? (11:16) “For” is de (de), which means “but” or has a continuative sense of “now.” The words “first-fruit” refer to the patriarchs of Israel. Vincent says concerning the word “lump,” “The whole body of the people. The apparent confusion of metaphor, first-fruit, lump is resolved by the fact that first-fruit does not apply exhaustively to harvest, but is the general term for the first portion of everything which was offered to God. The reference here is to Numbers 15:18–21: according to which the Israelites were to set apart a portion of the dough of each baking of bread for a cake for the priests. This was called first-fruits.” Regarding the words “root” and “branches,” the same authority says, “The same thought under another figure. The second figure is more comprehensive, since it admits an application to the conversion of the Gentiles. The thought of both figures centers in holy. Both the first-fruits and the root represent the patriarchs (or Abraham singly, compare verse 28). The holiness by call and destination of the nation as represented by its fathers (first-fruit, root) implies their future restoration, the holiness of the lump and branches.” The “if” is the “if” of a fulfilled condition, ei (eij), “since, in view of the fact.” The word hagios (aJgio"), “holy” means basically, “set apart for God.” There is no reference here to the quality of the life of the patriarchs, but to the fact that they, and thus Israel, have been set apart for God as a chosen nation through which salvation could be produced and channelled to the rest of the human race. Translation. Now, in view of the fact that the first-fruit is holy, also the branches. (11:17, 18) “Some of the branches broken off” refers to the rejection of the apostate nation, its dispersion a.d. 70, and God’s act of setting it aside temporarily as the channel through which He would work. The wild olive tree grafted in refers to the act of God breaking down the wall of separation between Jew and Gentile at the Cross by the abrogation of the Mosaic economy, and the inclusion of the Gentile with the Jew in one body, the Church (Eph. 3:6). Vincent is most helpful here. He says: “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 the Jew through the Gentile. The spiritual plan moves from the Abrahamic covenant downward, and from the Israelitish nation outward’ (Dwight).” Vincent continues his discussion. His note is so valuable that the author feels he must include it for the English reader. “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 (rather Israel, insertion mine), 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.’ ” However, Robertson remarks, “Ramsey 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 verse 24 Paul expressly states that the grafting of Gentiles on to the stock of the spiritual Israel was ‘contrary to nature.’ ” Paul then exhorts the Gentiles not to boast against the branches, saved and unsaved Jews, really, against the Jew as such. The Gentile is to remember that in the words of Denney, all that he boasts of he owes to an artificially formed relation to the race he despises. Translation. Now, since certain of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became a jointpartaker with them of the root of the fatness of the olive, stop glorying against the branches. But, assuming that you are glorying, you are not sustaining the root, but the root, you. (11:19–21) Denney goes to the heart of the matter when he says; “The presumptuous Gentile persists: It is not to the root I compare myself, but branches were broken off that I might be engrafted: that surely involves some superiority in me.” Commenting on the word “well” ( (kalw")), he says; “ ‘a form of partial and often ironical assent’ (Gifford). Paul does not think it worth while to dispute the assertion of verse 9 though as it stands it is by no means indisputable; he prefers to point out what it overlooks—the moral conditions of being broken off and of standing secure—and to urge them on the conscience.” In interpreting verse 21, we must keep in mind that the corporate nation Israel and the Gentiles as distinctive parts of the race are in view, not an individual Gentile. In other

words, Paul is not speaking of the possible loss of salvation on the part of a Gentile who glories against the Jew. Denney’s note will help us: “As far as comparisons can be made at all in such things, the Jews had been more securely invested in the kingdom than the Gentiles. They were, in the language of the figure, not artificially grafted, but native branches, on the tree of God’s people; yet even that did not prevent Him from cutting off those who did not believe. And if He did not spare them, He will not spare Gentiles either, if in pride they fall from faith.” It should be clear that those in danger of being cut off are unsaved Gentiles, and not cut off from salvation, for they have none, but cut off from the place where God might use them, as unsaved Israel was cut off in the dispersion. Translation. You will say then, Branches were broken off in order that I might be grafted in. Well! Because of their unbelief they were broken off. But, as for you, by faith you stand. Stop being of a superior complex, but be fearing; for in view of the fact that God did not spare the branches which were according to nature, neither will He spare you. (11:22) “Goodness” is  (crhstoth"), “benignity, kindness.” “Severity” is apotomia (ajpotomia), “the nature of that which is cut off, abrupt, precipitous like a cliff, rough” (Thayer). It speaks of severity, roughness, rigor. The “if” is ean (eJan), the particle of a hypothetical condition. Denney explains, “if you remain on in the goodness, i.e., continue to be indebted to it, and to it alone, for your religious position. This excludes presumption, and in general all such temper as is betrayed in taking an attitude of superiority to the Jews. The Jews lost their standing because they had come to believe that it was indefectable, and independent of moral conditions; and if the Gentiles commit the same mistake, they will incur the same doom. It is not to Israel only God may say, The Kingdom is taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” The visible organized church on earth today is for the most part modernistic, and at the Rapture will be set aside in favor of Israel which will be restored as the final channel through which God will work to bring the good news of salvation to the human race. In this sense, the Gentiles will be cut off as Israel was a.d. 70, and for the same reason, failure to function as the means through which God works for the salvation of sinners. “Cut off” is literally “cut out” as a branch is cut out of the main trunk of a tree. “Continue” is  (ejpimenw), “to remain, abide.” The word speaks of position in and relationship to. It is often used of one abiding in a home as a guest. Thus, it speaks of friendship, companionship, mutual intercourse. It is the attitude of the Gentile towards the Jew and towards the benevolent kindness of God in including him in the salvation offered to the Jew, to which the apostle has reference in this context by the use of this word. Translation. Behold therefore, God’s benevolent kindness and His severity; on the one hand, upon those who fell, severity, and on the other hand, upon you, God’s benevolent kindness, upon the condition that you continue to remain in and abide by His benevolent kindness. Otherwise, also you will be cut off. (11:23) “They” is ekeinos (ejkeino"), “those,” the unbelieving Jews. “If” is ean (eJan), the “if” of a hypothetical condition. The negative and ean (eJan) are translated by Denney as “unless.” He says, “It is assumed that they need not do this. The hardening spoken of in verses 7–10, though it is a judgment upon sin, and may seem from the nature of the case to be irremediable, is not to be absolutely taken. Even in the case of the most hardened rejector of the gospel we are not to limit either the resources of God’s power, or

the possibilities of change in a self-conscious, self-determining creature. All things are possible to him that believes, and we are not to say that in this man or that, Jew or Gentile, unbelief is final, and belief an impossibility. If the Jews give up their unbelief they will be incorporated again in the true people of God.” And this is exactly what will take place at the second Advent. Israel as a nation will in the sovereign grace of God be regenerated and filled with the Spirit to become again the channel through which God will operate for one thousand years to bring salvation to a Christ-rejecting world. When Paul says “God is able” with reference to grafting Israel back into the good olive tree, he implies “not only the possibility but the difficulty of the operation.… With man it is impossible, but not with God. Nothing less than the thought of God could keep Paul from despairing of the future of Israel” (Denney). Translation. And those also, if they do not remain in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to again graft them in. (11:24, 25) “Mystery” is  (musthrion) “a hidden purpose or counsel of God which when revealed, is understood by the believer.” The times of the Gentiles (Luke 21:24) must be distinguished from the fulness of the Gentiles (Acts 15:14, Ephesians 4:11–13, I Corinthians 12:12, 13). The first term refers to that time from Nebuchadnezzar’s deportation of the dynasty of David to the defeat of Antichrist at Armageddon, during which the Gentile rules the Jew. The second speaks of the completion of the Mystical Body of Christ made up of Jew and Gentile saved from Pentecost to the Rapture. The hardening of Israel extends to the time when the last sinner elected to salvation for this Age of Grace, by his introduction into the Body of Christ, completes that Body. The Rapture occurs, the Seventieth Week of Daniel comes some time after this event, and at the second Advent, the salvation of Israel. Translation. For in view of the fact that you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into the good olive tree, how much more will these who are according to nature, be grafted into their own olive tree. For I do not desire you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning this mystery, in order that you may not be wise in yourselves, that hardening in part has come to Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles has come in. (11:26, 27) “And thus”—“not merely temporal, but under the influence of the jealousy so excited—under the impression produced on the Jews by the sight of the Gentiles in their fulness peopling the kingdom—all Israel shall be saved” (Denney). By all Israel being saved, Paul means the individual salvation of each member of the nation Israel living at the time of the second Advent. Zechariah (13:1) predicts this cleansing of Israel from its sins in the words, “In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and uncleanness.” This individual cleansing from sin will be followed by a national restoration to the Messianic kingdom with Messiah reigning on the throne of David in Jerusalem as King of kings and Lord of lords for one thousand years. Translation. And thus all Israel shall be saved, even as it stands written;

There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn ungodliness from Jacob. And this to them is the covenant from Me, when I shall take away their sins. (11:28, 29) The words “concerning” and “touching” are the translations of kata (kata), the root meaning of which is “down.” There is in the word therefore the idea of domination. The attitude of God with regard to Israel is determined by or with reference to the gospel and its rejection of the same. In view of that rejection, He counts Israel as an enemy. The attitude of God towards Israel with reference to the elect remnant in that nation is that those whom He counts as enemies of His by reason of their rejection of the gospel, are beloved ones, and this, for the sake of the fathers of Israel, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, with whom He made an everlasting covenant. “Gifts” is charisma (carisma), “a favor which one receives without any merit of one’s own.” The usual word for a gift is  (dwra). These gifts, according to Godet, are not the moral and intellectual qualifications with which Israel was endowed for its mission in the world, but the privileges of grace spoken of in 9:4. “Calling” is  (klhsi"), used in the New Testament in the technical sense of the divine invitation to embrace salvation in the kingdom of God (Thayer). Here it refers, not to “a calling in the modern sense of a vocation or career assigned to any one by Him; it is His authoritative invitation to a part in the Messianic kingdom. From Israel these things can never be withdrawn” (Denney). The words “without repentance” are  (ajmetamelhto"). The verb metamelomai (metamelomai) means “to repent one’s self, to regret.” The prefixed preposition meta (meta) signifies a change, here a change of mind concerning something. The idea is that the gifts and calling of God are not subject to a change of mind on His part. That is, He will not change His mind regarding His chosen people, the Jews, and their God-ordained mission and destiny. Translation. On the one hand, with reference to the gospel, (they are) enemies for your sakes; on the other hand, with reference to the elect ones (they are) beloved ones for the fathers’ sake; for the gifts in grace and the calling of God are with respect to a change of mind, irrevocable. (11:30–32) “Concluded” is the a.v. translation of  (sugkleiw), “to shut up on all sides, to enclose, shut up completely.” Vincent explains the use of the word “concluded” in its 1611 a.d. usage. “A very literal rendering, etymologically considered; con (con) together, claudere (claudere) to shut. The a.v. followed the Vulgate conclusit (conclusit). So Hooker: ‘The person of Christ was only, touching bodily substance, concluded within the grave.’ The word has lost this sense. Rev., hath shut up.” Denney explains; “The prefixed preposition does not refer to the fact that Jews and Gentiles are shut up together, but indicates that those who are shut up are shut up on all sides, so that they cannot escape.” The author has used the word “corralled” to translate the Greek word here. Webster defines it as follows: “to confine in, as in a corrall, to enclose, to coop up.” The thought is that God confined both Jew and Gentile within the scope of one kind of guilt, that of unbelief. Denney comments, “The past unbelief of the Gentiles and the mercy they presently enjoy, the present unbelief of the Jews, and the mercy they are determined to enjoy in the future—these things not only correspond to

each other, but they are interwoven with each other; they are parts of a system which God controls, and in which every element conditions and is conditioned by all the rest: there is a divine necessity pervading and controlling all the freedom of men, a divine purpose mastering all the random activity of human wills; a purpose which is read out by the apostle in verse 32: God shut them all up into disobedience that He might have mercy upon them all.” The same authority has this warning note for his readers, “Salvation, he (Paul) sees, as he looks at the world before him, is to come to Jew and Gentile alike by the way of free grace: and it answers to this, that in the providence of God, Jew and Gentile alike have been made to feel the need of grace by being shut up under disobedience. It is within Paul’s thought to say that the sin of Jews and Gentiles to whom he preached the gospel, did not lie outside the control, or outside the redeeming purpose of God; but it does not seem to me to be within his thought to say that God ordains sin in general for the sake of or with a view to, redemption. This is a fancy question which the apostle would hardly discuss. God subordinates sin to His purpose, but it is not a subordinate element in His purpose.” The words “not believed” and “unbelief” are  (ajpeiqew), “not to allow one’s self to be persuaded, not to comply with, to refuse or withhold belief, to be disobedient, to refuse belief and obedience.” It speaks of a stubborn, stiff-necked attitude. Translation. For, even as you formerly disbelieved God, yet now have been made recipients of mercy through (the occasion of) their unbelief, thus also these now have disbelieved in order that through (the occasion of) the mercy which is yours, they themselves also might become the recipients of mercy, for God has corralled all within (the state) of unbelief in order that He might have mercy upon all. (11:33–36) Godet says; “Like a traveller who has reached the summit of an Alpine ascent, the apostle turns and contemplates. Depths are at his feet, but waves of light illumine them, and there spreads all around an immense horizon which his eye commands.” Robertson comments; “Paul’s argument concerning God’s elective grace and goodness has carried him to the heights, and now he pauses on the edge of the precipice as he contemplates God’s wisdom and knowledge, fully conscious of his inability to sound the bottom with the plummet of human reason and words.” “Past finding out” is anexichniastos (ajnexicniasto"), “that which cannot be traced out.” Vincent translates, “that which cannot be tracked out.” The word could be used of a blood-hound who found it impossible to follow the scent of a criminal, or of a guide who could not trace out or follow a poorly marked path in the woods. The word “way” here is hodos (oJdo"), “a road.” Translation. O, the depth of the wealth and wisdom and knowledge of God. How unsearchable are His judgments, and how untraceable, the paths He takes; for who ever knew the Lord’s mind? Or, who has become His counsellor? Or, who has previously given to Him, and it shall be recompensed to him? Because out from Him, and through Him, and for Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.

CHAPTER TWELVE (12:1) We come now to a new major section of the letter. In chapters 1–8, Paul

explains the doctrines of condemnation, justification, sanctification, and glorification. In chapters 9–11, he explains to Israel why the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants have not been fulfilled. Now, in chapters 12–16, the apostle exhorts to a life in conformity with the exalted position in which chapters 1–8 place the believer, and in view also of the Godgiven ability which the believer has to live such a life. Doctrine must always precede exhortation since in doctrine the saint is shown his exalted position which makes the exhortation to a holy life, a reasonable one, and in doctrine, the saint is informed as to the resources of grace he possesses with which to obey the exhortations. Paul says, “I beseech you.” The word is  (parakalew), “I beg of you, please.” The word “therefore” reaches back to the contents of the previous chapters. The basis of Paul’s exhortation, or that by which he urges obedience to the exhortation is “by the mercies of God.” The mercies of God here are the justification, sanctification, and glorification of the believer. “By” is dia (dia), the preposition of intermediate agency. The exhortation to a holy life in conformity to the exalted position of the saint in Christ Jesus is to be obeyed in view of these mercies. Thus, in view of the fact that we are justified persons, righteous in our standing before God, we are under obligation to live a righteous life. In view of the fact that we are the objects of the Holy Spirit’s work of sanctification, we are to live those lives in the spiritual energy He supplies. In view of the fact that we are yet to be glorified, we are to look forward to our Lord’s coming, and purify our lives. Thus, the exhortations are to be obeyed in view of the contents of and through the enablements which chapters 1–8 provide. The word “present” is  (paristhmi) “to place beside or near, to present, to offer, to put at one’s disposal.” It is the same word used in 6:13 translated, “yield.” Vincent says; “It is the technical term for presenting the Levitical victims and offerings. See Luke 2:22. In the Levitical sacrifices the offerer placed his offerings so as to face the Most Holy Place, thus bringing it before the Lord.” The body here is the physical body of the believer. It is to be a living sacrifice. Vincent comments: “Living in contrast with the slain offerings. Compare chapter 6:8, 11.” He quotes Chrysostom, “How can the body become a sacrifice? Let the eye look on no evil, and it is a sacrifice. Let the tongue utter nothing base, and it is an offering. Let the hand work no sin, and it is a holocaust. (Webster gives as a definition of “holocaust,” a sacrifice wholly consumed by fire.) But more, this suffices not, but besides we must actively exert ourselves for good; the hand giving alms, the mouth blessing them that curse us, the ear ever at leisure for listening to God.” “Holy” is hagios (aJgio"), the root meaning of which is “that which is set apart for God.” The Greek word has no idea of holiness about it in the sense of purity, and freedom from evil. The pagan Greek worshipper, the pagan Greek temple, was hagios (aJgio") (holy) in the sense that both were set apart for the worship of the Greek deity, but both were sinful, since the Greek deities were merely divinities formed after the human pattern. But the Christian hagios (aJgio") (holy) accrues to itself the idea of purity and freedom from sin in that the God of the Christian is both infinitely pure and is also free from sin. Thus, the physical body of the believer, put at the disposal of God, presented to Him, is holy, both in the sense of being set apart for His use, and holy in the sense of being used for pure and righteous purposes, and thus, free from sinful practices. “Acceptable” is euareston (eujareston), made up of arestos (ajresto"), “acceptable, pleasing, approved, satisfactory,” and eu (euj), “good, well,” the compound word speaking of something which is well approved, eminently satisfactory, or extraordinarily pleasing. “Service” is latreia (latreia), “any service or ministration rendered

for hire, the service of God” in the LXX, “the service or worship of God according to the requirements of the Levitical law.” It is used in Hebrews 9:6 of the priests who performed the sacred service. Thus, it speaks of priestly service. Doubtless, in the thinking of Paul, the word was used here to speak of the believer-priest’s sacred service, not as the Levitical priests, offering a burnt sacrifice which was apart from themselves, but a living sacrifice which was not only part of themselves but also entailed the giving of themselves in connection with the giving of their bodies to the service of God, for a person cannot act independently of his body. The word “reasonable” is logikos (logiko"), “rational, agreeable to reason, following reason.” Thayer says, “the worship which is rendered by the reason or the soul.” This is in contrast to the worship of the priests which consisted of outward forms, symbolic in themselves of spiritual truth, and yet not rational in the sense that this worship was not devoid of a material connection. Vincent says, “Reasonable, not in the popular sense of the term, as a thing befitting, or proper, but rational, as distinguished from merely external or material. Hence nearly equivalent to spiritual. So Rev., in margin. It is in harmony with the highest reason.” Israel preached the gospel through the use of object lessons, the Tabernacle, Priesthood, and Offerings. The Church preaches the same gospel in abstract terms. Translation. I therefore beg of you, please, brethren, through the mercies of God, by a once for all presentation, to place your bodies at the disposal of God, a sacrifice, a living one, a holy one, well-pleasing, your rational, sacred service. (12:2) “Conformed” is  (sunschmatizw).  (Schmatizw) refers to the act of an individual assuming an outward expression that does not come from within him, nor is it representative of his inner heart life. The prefixed preposition sun (sun) adds to the meaning of the verb the idea of assuming an expression that is patterned after some definite thing. The verb is present imperative with  (mh), the negative, which construction forbids the continuance of an action already going on. Paul exhorts the saints, “Stop assuming an outward expression which is patterned after this world, an expression which does not come from, nor is it representative of whatyou are in your inner being as a regenerated child of God.” One could translate, “Stop masquerading in the habiliments of this world, its mannerisms, speech expressions, styles, habits.” The word “world” is  (aijwn), which Trench defines as follows: “All that floating mass of thoughts, opinions, maxims, speculations, hopes, impulses, aims, aspirations, at any time current in the world, which it may be impossible to seize and accurately define, but which constitute a most real and effective power, being the moral, or immoral atmosphere which at every moment of our lives we inhale, again inevitably to exhale,—all this is included in the  (aijwn) (age), which is, as Bengel has expressed it, the subtle informing spirit of the kosmos (kosmo") or world of men who are living alienated and apart from God.” The Germans have a word for it, the zeitgeist or spirit of the age. This masquerade costume which saints sometimes put on, hides the Lord Jesus living in the heart of the Christian, and is an opaque covering through which the Holy Spirit cannot radiate the beauty of the Lord Jesus. The world says to that kind of a saint, “The modernism of your appearance nullifies the fundamentalism of your doctrine.” Instead of masquerading in the habiliments of this age, Paul exhorts the saints to be

transformed. The word is metamorphoomai (metamorfoomai), which speaks of the act of a person changing his outward expression from that which he has to a different one, an expression which comes from and is representative of his inner being. The word is used in Matthew 17:2 where it is translated “transfigured.” The translation could read, “The manner of His outward expression was changed before them, and His face shone as the sun, and His clothing was white as the light.” The usual manner of our Lord’s outward expression during His humiliation was that of the Man Christ Jesus, a Man of sorrows and of grief, the itinerant preacher and teacher from Nazareth dressed in the homespun of a Galilean peasant. But here, our Lord allows the glory of the essence of His deity that came from His inner being as deity and was representative of Him as such, to shine through His human body. This radiance caused His face to shine and His garments to appear white as the sun. Paul therefore says in effect to the saints, “Change your outward expression from that which you had before salvation, an expression which came from your totally depraved nature and was representative of it, to an expression which comes from your regenerated inner being and is representative of it.” The saint is to do this by the renewing of his mind. “Renewing” is  (ajnakainwsi"), which Trench defines as “the gradual conforming of the man more and more to that new spiritual world into which he has been introduced, and in which he now lives and moves; the restoration of the divine image; and in all this so far from being passive, he must be a fellow-worker with God.” Thayer defines the word, “a renewal, renovation, complete change for the better.” That is, the change of outward expression is dependent upon the renovation, the complete change for the better of the believer’s mental process. This is accomplished through the ministry of the indwelling Holy Spirit, who when definitely, and intelligently, and habitually yielded to puts sin out of the believer’s life and produces His own fruit. He does that by controlling the mental processes of the believer. It is the prescription of the apostle. “Habitually be ordering your behavior within the sphere and by means of the Spirit, and you will positively not fulfil the desire of the flesh (evil nature) “ (Gal. 5:16). “That” is eis (eij"), which often shows result. When the saint in dependence upon the Spirit renovates his mental processes, the result will be that he will “prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God.” “Prove” is  (dokimazw), “to put to the test for the purpose of approving, and finding that the thing tested meets the specifications laid down, to put one’s approval upon it.” As a result of the Spirit’s control of the mental processes of the saint, the latter is enabled to put his life to the test for the purpose of approving it, the specifications being that it conform to the Word of God, and thus, experiencing what obedience is to the Word, and finding out what it feels like to have the Word saturate and control the life, he sees that it really is the Word of God and puts his approval upon it. Our Lord Jesus was speaking of the same thing when He said, “If any man will to do His will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself” (John 7:17). “Perfect” is teleios (teleio"), “brought to its end, finished, wanting nothing necessary to completeness.” Translation. And stop assuming an outward expression that does not come from within you and is not representative of what you are in your inner being, but is patterned after this age; but change your outward expression to one that comes from within and is representative of your inner being, by the renewing of your mind, resulting in your putting to the

test what is the will of God, the good and well-pleasing, and complete will, and having found that it meets specifications, placing your approval upon it. (12:3) Denney is helpful here. In commenting on this verse he says, “The duties of members of the Church as such; avoidance of self-exaltation, and mutual service in the measure of the gift bestowed on each. The gar (gar) (for) indicates that ‘humility is the immediate effect of self-surrender to God’ (Gifford). Paul illustrates in his own person, in giving this advice, the rule he is laying down for the Church. He speaks ‘through the grace given him,’ and therefore without presumption; but he does speak, and so puts wisdom and love at the service of the Church … Everybody in the Church needs this word. To himself, every man is in a sense the most important person in the world, and it always needs much grace to see what other people are, and to keep a sense of moral proportion.… Whatever the characteristic of any individual may be, it is due to the discriminating act of God in measuring out faith to him in a greater or less degree. Taken in connection with what precedes, the idea seems to be: There are various degrees of selfestimation proper, for God gives one more and another less; but all are fundamentally regulated by humility, for no one has anything that he has not received.” There is a play upon the words in the Greek text translated, “Not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think.” Alford renders the text, “not to be high-minded above that which he ought to be minded, but to be so minded as to be sober-minded.” All of which goes to say that a Christian should appraise the gifts God has given him fairly, glorifying God for their bestowal, and their exercise through dependence upon the Holy Spirit, and not in mock humility make light of them. “To think” in “ought to think” is phronein (fronein). “To think more highly” is huperphronein (uJperfronein), “to over-think, to think above,” thus “to proudly think.” He is “to think” that is, appraise his gifts rightly, but not become proud of them. “To think soberly” is  (swfronein), “to be in one’s right mind.” Robertson says that “conceit here is treated as a species of insanity.” This estimate or appraisal of one’s God-given gifts is to be “according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.” “According to” is kata (kata), the root meaning of which is “down,” the idea of domination being brought out by the word. Our estimate of our gifts is to be governed by the measure of faith God gives each of us. This faith Vincent defines as follows: “Its meaning, therefore, must not be strictly limited to the conception of justifying faith in Christ, though that conception includes and is really the basis of every wider conception. It is faith as the condition of the powers and offices of believers, faith regarded as spiritual insight, which, according to its degree, qualifies a man to be a prophet, a teacher, a minister; etc., faith in relation to character, and which therefore, is the determining principle of the renewed man’s tendencies, whether they lead him to meditation and research, or to practical activity. As faith is the sphere and subjective condition of the powers and functions of believers, so it furnishes a test or regulative standard of their respective enduements and functions. Thus the measure applied is distinctively a measure of faith. With faith a believer receives power of discernment as to the actual limitations of his gifts. Faith, in introducing him into God’s kingdom, introduces him to new standards of measurement, according to which he accurately determines the nature and extent of his powers, and so does not think of himself

too highly. This measure is different in different individuals, but in every case faith is the determining element of the measure. Paul, then, does not mean precisely to say that a man is to think more or less soberly of himself according to the quantity of faith which he has, though that is true as a fact; but that sound and correct views as to the character and extent of spiritual gifts and functions are fixed by a measure, the determining element of which, in each particular case, is faith.” Translation. For I am saying through the grace which is given to everyone who is among you, not to be thinking more highly of one’s self, beyond that which one ought necessarily to be thinking, but to be thinking with a view to a sensible appraisal (of one’s self ) according as to each one God divided a measure of faith. (12:4, 5) “Office” is praxis (praxi"), “a mode of acting or a function.” “Every one” is in the Greek text, “and as to what is true according to one, that is, individually, severally” (Vincent). Translation. For even as in one body we have many members, but all the members do not have the same function, thus we, the many, are one body in Christ, and members severally one of another. (12:6–8) “Gifts” is charisma (carisma), “extraordinary powers, distinguishing certain Christians and enabling them to serve the Church of Christ, the reception of which is due to the power of divine grace operating in their souls by the Holy Spirit” (Thayer). “Prophecy—in the New Testament, as in the Old, the prominent idea is not prediction, but the inspired delivery of warning, exhortation, instruction, judging, and making manifest the secrets of the heart” (Vincent). “Proportion” is analogia (ajnalogia). Vincent says that in classical Greek the word was used as a mathematical term. He quotes Plato; “The fairest bond is that which most completely fuses and is fused into the things which are bound; and proportion (analogia (ajnalogia)) is best adapted to effect the fusion.” He quotes Meyer, “Those who prophesy are to interpret divine revelation ‘according to the strength, clearness, fervor, and other qualities of the faith bestowed upon them; so that the character and mode of their speaking are conformed to the rules and limits which are implied in the proportion of their individual degree of faith.’ ” The words “let us prophesy” are not in the Greek text, but are rightfully supplied by the a.v., translators. Paul is exhorting to a proper use of the gift of prophecy. “Ministry” is diakonia (diakonia). This is one of the Greek words for a servant. Trench says that this word represents the servant in his activity. The word therefore refers to one who serves. The words “let us wait on our” are also absent. The word “ministry” is in the locative of sphere. The exhortation is that the one who renders service should render service in the realm or sphere in which God placed him and for which He gave him that gift. Moule says of this word, “Almost any work other than that of inspired utterance or miracle-working may be included in it here.” Godet says; “An activity of the practical nature exerted in action, not in word.” As to teaching, it is aimed at the understanding, with reference to exhortation, at the heart and will (Vincent). Both words are in the locative of sphere, the idea being that the one who is given a teaching gift should remain within the exercise of that gift, and the one who has been given the gift of exhortation,

within the exercise of that gift. It is a wise man who stays within the sphere of service for which God the Holy Spirit has fitted him, and does not invade some other field of service for which he is not fitted. “Giveth” is  (metadidwmi), “to impart” of one’s earthly possessions. “Simplicity” is  (aJplothth"), “singleness, simplicity, sincerity, mental honesty,” the virtue of one who is free from presence and hypocrisy, openness of heart manifesting itself by benefactions, liberality (Thayer). A cognate word,  (aJplw") is used in James 1:5, and is translated “liberally” by the a.v. Thayer gives for  (aJplw"), “simply, openly, frankly, sincerely.” That is the way God gives. “He that ruleth” is  (oJ proisthmi), “he who is placed in front,” referring to anyone placed in a position of authority or superintendence. “Diligence” is  (spoudh). The verb is  (spoudazw), “to make haste, do one’s best, take care, desire.” The idea of making haste, being eager, giving diligence, and putting forth effort are in the word. The word speaks of intense effort and determination. “Cheerfulness” is  (iJlaroth"), “cheerfulness, readiness of mind.” Our word “hilarity” comes from this Greek word. Vincent defines, “the joyfulness, the amiable grace, the affability going the length of gayety, which make the visitor a sunbeam penetrating into the sick-chamber, and to the heart of the afflicted.” Translation. Having therefore gifts differing according to the grace given us, whether (that of) prophecy, (prophesy) according to the proportion of faith, or serving, exercise that gift within the sphere of service, or teaching, within sphere of teaching. or he who exhorts, within the sphere of exhortation, the one who distributes of his earthly possessions, in the sphere of an unostentatious simplicity, the one who is placed in a position of authority, with intense eagerness and effort, the one who shows mercy, with a hilarious abandon. (12:9–13) “Dissimulation” is anupokritos (ajnupokrito"). The verb is hupokrinomai (uJpokrinomai), “to take up another’s statements in reference to what one has decided for one’s self to reply, to answer, to give off a judgment, to be an actor on the stage, to impersonate anyone, play a part, to simulate, feign, pretend, to play the hypocrite.” The noun therefore means, “hypocrisy.” “Abhor” is  (ajpostugew), “to dislike, abhor, have a horror of.”  (Misew) speaks of a concealed and cherished hatred,  (stugew), of a hatred which is expressed. The prefixed preposition apo (ajpo) which means “off, away from,” shows separation. The Christian is to express his hatred of evil by a withdrawal from it and a loathing of it. “Evil” is  (ponhro"), not kakos (kako") here, the latter speaking of evil in the abstract, the former, of evil in active opposition to the good. The word “pernicious” could well translate it. “Cleave” is  (kollaw), “to glue to, cement, to join or fasten firmly together.” “With brotherly love” is philadelphia (filadelfia), made up of  (filew), “to have an affection for, to be fond of,” and adelphos (ajdelfo"), “a brother,” thus, exhibiting brotherly affection, the brotherhood here being that of believers. “Kindly affectioned” is philostorgos (filostorgo"). Vincent comments, “From stergo (stergo), to love, which denotes peculiarly a natural affection, a sentiment innate and peculiar to men as men, as distinguished from the love of desire, called out by circumstance. Hence of the natural love of kindred, of people and kind (the relation being regarded as founded in

nature), of a tutelary god for a people. The word here represents Christians as bound by a family tie. It is intended to define more specifically the character of philadelphia (filadelfia) (brotherly love) which follows, so that the exhortation is, ‘love the brethren in the faith as though they were brethren in blood’ (Farrar).… The a.v., in the word kindly, gives the real sense, since kind is originally kinned (kinned); and kindly affectioned is having the affection of kindred.” “Honor” is  (timh), “a valuing by which the price is fixed, deference, reverence, veneration, honor.” Hence, the word means “that respect shown another which is measured by one’s evaluation of another.” “Preferring” is  (prohgeomai), “to go before and lead, to go before as leader, one going before another as an example of deference.” Vincent translates, “leading the way in showing the honor that is due.” Denney explains, “in showing honor—i.e., to those whose gifts entitle them to respect in the Church—giving each other a lead, each so to speak, being readier than the other to recognize and honor God’s gifts in a brother.” “Slothful” is  (ojknhro"), from the verb  (ojknew), “to delay, to feel loath, to be slow, to hesitate.” “Business” is  (spoudh), the same word translated “diligence” in 12:8. Vincent says, “Wrong. Render as Rev., in diligence. Luther, “in regard to zeal be not lazy.” “It denotes the moral earnestness with which one should give himself to his vocation. In this Christians are not to be backward” (Denney). “Fervent” is  (zew), “to boil with heat, be hot,” used of boiling anger, love, zeal for what is good or bad.” The word “spirit” (pneuma (pneuma)) refers to the human spirit as that part of man which gives him God-consciousness, or to the attitude or disposition of a man, as “that man’s spirit is good,” or to the Holy Spirit. The definite article appears before it in the Greek text. The absence of the Greek definite article emphasizes character. If that were absent here, the reference would be to the disposition or attitude of a person. The presence of the article points to the Holy Spirit. It is the locative of sphere. That is, Paul exhorts to fervency in the Christian life which is engendered by the Spirit, not produced by the flesh (self-effort). It is, “rejoicing in the sphere of hope.” That is, when earthly prospects are dark, the Christian’s rejoicing should be in the sphere of hope that the Lord will send deliverance, and in the meantime take care of His afflicted child. “Patient” is  (uJpomenw), literally, “to remain under,” that is, to remain under the test in a God-honoring manner, not seeking to escape it but eager to learn the lessons it was sent to teach. That is patience. Thayer defines the word, “to remain, abide, not recede or flee, to persevere, to endure, bear bravely and calmly.” “Tribulation” is thlipsis (qliyi"), “a pressing together, pressure, oppression, affliction, tribulation, distress, straits.” “Continuing instant” is  (proskarterew), “to persevere, to give constant attention to a thing, to be devoted or constant to one, to be steadfastly attentive to, to give unremitting care to, to wait on continually, to be in constant readiness for one.” The word is used of the soldier who waited on Cornelius continually (Acts 10:7), and of the Twelve who said, “We will give ourselves continually to prayer” (Acts 6:4). “Distributing” is  (koinwnew), “to enter into fellowship, make one’s self a sharer or partner.” The exhortation is to make one’s self a sharer or partner in the needs of our fellow-saints in the sense that we act as if those needs were our own. We would satisfy our own needs, and the exhortation is to satisfy those of our Christian brother. “Given” is  (diwkw), “to pursue, to seek after eagerly, earnestly endeavor to acquire.” Vincent translates, “pursuing hospitality.” The latter word is philoxenia (filoxenia), “fondness or affection for

strangers, hospitality.” The word philoxenos (filoxeno") means, “hospitable, generous to guests.” Vincent explains, “A necessary injunction when so many Christians were banished and persecuted. The verb indicates not only that hospitality is to be furnished when sought, but that Christians are to seek opportunities of exercising it.” The hospitality referred to here is the giving of food, clothing, and shelter to persecuted Christians who have lost these, due to their testimony to the Lord Jesus. Translation. Love, (let it be) without hypocrisy. Look with loathing and horror at that which is pernicious. Stick like glue to that which is good. In the sphere of brotherly love have a family affection for one another, vying with one another in showing honor, with respect to zeal, not lazy, fervent in the sphere of the Spirit, serving the Lord, rejoicing in the sphere of hope, patient in tribulation, with respect to prayer, persevering in it continually, with respect to the needs of the saints, being a sharer with them, eager for opportunities to show hospitality. (12:14–16) “Bless” is  (eujlogew), from  (legw) “to speak,” and eu (euj), “well,” thus, to speak well of a person, to eulogize him. Our word “eulogize” is the spelling of the Greek word and also its meaning. Thayer defines, “to bless one, to praise, celebrate with praises.” The exhortation is to bless our persecutors in the sense of returning kindness and love to those who mistreat us because of our testimony to the Lord Jesus. It is “to speak them good” ( (eujlogew)). Paul uses the same word in Ephesians 1:3 when referring to God “who bath blessed us.” The verb is present imperative which commands an habitual action, “Be constantly blessing.” “Curse” is kataraomai (kataraomai), “to curse, doom, imprecate evil on.” Vincent gives an illustration of the use of the word in classical Greek. “Plutarch relates that when a decree was issued that Alcibiades should be solemnly cursed by all the priests and priestesses, one of the latter declared that her holy office obliged her to make prayers, but not execrations.” The construction in the Greek text forbids the continuance of an action already going on. It is, “Stop cursing.” From the above it is clear that the English word “curse” does not here have the usual present day meaning of profanity, but of calling down divine curses upon some person. “Be of the same mind one toward another” is literally, “thinking the same thing with respect to one another.” Denney explains, “The idea is that of loving unanimity, and the  (eij" ajllhlou") (toward one another) points to the active manifestation of this temper in all the mutual relations of Christians. ‘Let each so enter into the feelings and desires of the other as to be of one mind with him’ (Gifford).” Alford translates, “having the same spirit towards one another,” and adds, “actuated by a common and wellunderstood feeling of mutual allowance and kindness.” It is not uniformity but unanimity of which Paul is speaking here. The negatives which follow, Denney says, “introduce explanatory clauses: they forbid what would destroy the unanimity of love.” “Mind not high things” is literally, “not thinking the high things.” “Condescend” is  (sunapagw), “to lead away or together,” in passive voice. metaphorically, as here, it means “to be carried away with. to yield or submit one’s self to” lowly things, conditions, employment—not to evade their power, as in Romans 12:16 (Thayer). “Men of low estate” is tois tapeinois (toi" tapeinoi"), which could be either masculine or neuter, thus referring either to lowly things or lowly men. The word “lowly” is tapeinos (tapeino"), “not rising far from the ground, of low degree.” The word  (tapeinofrosunh) means, “the having a humble opinion of one’s self; a deep sense of one’s (moral) littleness, modesty, humility, lowliness of mind.”  (Tapeinwsi")

means, “spiritual abasement leading one to perceive and lament his (moral) littleness and guilt.” Concerning the word as used by the pagan Greeks and before it entered the New Testament to receive a new content of meaning, Trench says, “The instances are few and exceptional in which tapeinos (tapeino") signifies anything for them which is not grovelling, slavish, and mean-spirited.” But when it entered the New Testament, it acquired the meanings given above. Lowly things would be things of no great consequence so far as the spirit of this age is concerned. Lowly men would be those who in self-abasement and humility walk this earth with a deep sense of their moral littleness. Vincent says: “According to the original sense, the meaning will be, being led away with lowly things or people; i.e., being drawn into sympathy with them. Farrar suggests, letting the lowly lead you by the hand. Meyer, who maintains the neuter, explains; ‘The lowly things ought to have for the Christian a force of attraction, in virtue of which he yields himself to fellowship with them, and allows himself to be guided by them in the determination of his conduct. Thus Paul felt himself compelled to enter into humble situations.’ On the other hand, Godet, maintaining the masculine, says: ‘The reference is to the most indigent and ignorant and least influential in the Church. It is to them the believer ought to feel most drawn. The antipathy felt by the apostle to every sort of spiritual aristocracy, to every caste-distinction within the Church, breaks out again in the last word.’ Condescend is a feeble and inferential rendering, open to construction in a patronizing sense; yet it is not easy to furnish a better in a single word. The idea, then, fully expressed is, ‘set not your mind on lofty things, but be borne away (apo (ajpo)) from these by the current of your Christian sympathy along with (sun (sun)) things which are humble.’ ” “In your own conceits” is par heautois (par eJautoi"), literally, “with yourselves,” in your own opinion (Vincent). Denney says, “Be not men of mind in your own conceit. It is difficult to put our judgment into a common stock, and estimate another’s as impartially as our own; but love requires it, and without it there is no such thing as ‘being of the same mind one toward another.’ ” Translation. Be constantly blessing those who are constantly persecuting you; be blessing and stop cursing. Be rejoicing with those who are rejoicing, and be weeping with those who are weeping; having the same mind towards one another, not setting your mind upon lofty things, but associating yourselves with lowly things and lowly people. Stop being those who are wise in their own opinion. (12:17, 18) “Recompence” is  (ajpodidwmi), “to give back, to requite.” “Provide” is  (pronoew), “to perceive beforehand, forsee, think beforehand, to provide.” Vincent says; “The a.v., uses provide in its earlier and more literal meaning of taking thought in advance. This has been mostly merged in the later meaning of furnish, so that the translation conveys the sense of providing honestly for ourselves and our families. Better, as Rev., take thought for. Robertson defines, “taking thought beforehand.” “Things honest” is kala (kala). The word is one of the two words which the Greeks have of describing that which is good, agathos (ajgaqo") referring to intrinsic goodness, and kalos (kalo"), our word here, to exterior goodness, or goodness that is seen on the exterior of a person, the outward expression of an inward goodness. When this outward expression conforms to the inward goodness, then that expression which a Christian gives of himself is an honest one, one conforming to the inner facts. The word

could be translated in a connection like this by the word “seemly,” seemly in that the expression is fitting. But if the Christian assumes an outward expression which is patterned after this age, that expression not representing what he is, a child of God, but giving the beholder the impression that he is a person of the world, that expression is a dishonest one. Peter exhorts to the same thing in his first letter when he says, “holding your manner of life honest among the Gentiles” (2:12). That is, the Christian is exhorted to take careful forethought that his manner of life, his outward expression conforms to, is honestly representative of what he is as a child of God. As to verse 18, Alford has a helpful note; “The ‘if it be possible’… is objective only— not ‘if you can,’ but if it be possible—if others will allow it. And this is further defined by ‘as much as lieth in you’; all your part is to be peace: whether you actually live peaceably or not, will depend then solely on how others behave towards you.” Denney comments, “Over others’ conduct we have no control; but the initiative in disturbing the peace is never to lie with the Christian.” Translation. Requiting to no one evil in exchange for evil, taking thought in advance with regard to things that are seemly in the sight of all men. If it is possible so far as it depends upon you, with all men be living at peace. (12:19–21) “Avenge” is  (ejkdikew), “to vindicate one’s right, do one justice, to avenge one’s self.” Denney says: “Even when the Christian has been wronged, he is not to take the law into his own hand, and right or vindicate himself.” “Wrath” is preceded by the article, and points to a special wrath, God’s wrath. “To give place to God’s wrath means to leave room for it, not to take God’s proper work out of His hands … The idea is not that instead of executing vengeance ourselves, we are to abandon the offender to the more tremendous vengeance of God; but this—that God, not injured men or those who believe themselves such, is the maintainer of moral order in the world, and that the righting of wrong is to be committed to Him.” “vengeance” is again  (ejkdikhsi") “a revenging, punishment,” the latter word more applicable in this context as connected with God. God cannot be said to have vengeance in the sense that a person has vengeance, namely, a retaliatory feeling which prompts a vindictive requittal. “Repay” is  (ajntapodidwmi) “to give back or requite.” As to heaping coals of fire on the head of the one who has injured one, that is equivalent to satisfying his hunger and quenching his thirst. The latter two actions meet a desperate need of that individual, and are an outstanding kindness shown him. Heaping coals of fire on his head also meets a desperate need. The author cannot put his hand on the source from where he procured the following, but he gives it for what it may be worth as an explanation of a difficult passage. In Bible times an oriental needed to keep his hearth fire going all the time in order to insure fire for cooking and warmth. If it went out, he had to go to a neighbor for some live coals of fire. These he would carry on his head in a container, oriental fashion, back to his home. The person who would give him some live coals would be meeting his desperate need and showing him an outstanding kindness. If he would heap the container with coals, the man would be sure of getting some home still burning. The one injured would be returning kindness for injury, the only thing a Christian is allowed to give back to the one who has injured him. This act of kindness God could use to soften the heart of the person and lead him on to repentance and the offering of a

recompence for the injury sustained. In this way the Christian would overcome evil with good. In fairness to the reader, the author gives the other interpretations found in his sources. Denney says; “The meaning of ‘heaping burning coals on his head’ is hardly open to doubt. It must refer to the burning pain of shame and remorse which the man feels whose hostility is repaid by love. This is the only kind of vengeance the Christian is at liberty to contemplate.” Alford explains; “I understand the words, For in this doing, you will be taking the most effectual vengeance; as effectual as if you heaped coals of fire on his head.” Robertson says, “It is a metaphor for keen anguish. The Arabs have a proverb, ‘coals in the heart, fire in the liver.’ ” Vincent does not come to any definite conclusion, but says after giving the explanation of some, “Perhaps it is better to take it that kindness is as effectual as coals of fire.” Translation. Stop avenging yourselves, beloved ones, but give place at once to the wrath, for it stands written, To Me (belongs) punishment. I (in contradistinction to anyone else) will repay, Says the Lord. But, if your enemy is hungry, be feeding him. If he thirsts, be giving him to drink, for doing this, you will heap burning coals of fire upon his head. Stop being overcome by the evil, but be overcoming the evil by means of the good.

CHAPTER THIRTEEN (13:1) Paul had been dealing with the subject of the mutual responsibilities and duties of Christians in the Body of Christ (12:1–21), and now he abruptly launches into a discussion of the Christian’s obligations to the human government under which he lives. There is nothing in the letter to indicate why Paul feels it necessary to so positively and quickly change from one subject to another without explanation. Denney has some helpful comments on this. They are briefly, as follows. While the Roman local church was predominantly Gentile, yet there were some Jewish members. The Jews of the Roman empire were notoriously bad citizens. Many held on the ground of Deuteronomy 17:15 that to acknowledge a Gentile ruler was sinful. This was the spirit back of the question of the Pharisees who asked, “Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” Gentiles, in contact with such Jewish Christians, could well imbibe the spirit of anarchy which such an attitude would foment. Thus, Paul writes to make sure that these Christians understand their relations and obligations to government. His thesis is in the words of Denney, “Law and its representatives are of God, and as such are entitled to all honor and obedience from Christians.” Human government is a divine institution, instituted by God when Noah came out of the ark, a basic law of which is capital punishment for the murderer duly convicted of his crime (Gen. 9:5, 6). The words “every soul” are a Hebraism for “every man.” “Be subject” is a present imperative middle of  (uJpotassw). The verb is a military word speaking of soldiers arranged in order under a general. They are subject to his orders. The translation reads, “Let every soul place himself habitually in subjection to the higher powers.” “Higher powers” is literally “authorities which have themselves over,” that is, authorities who are over the citizen. “Of God” is hupo theou (uJpo qeou), literally, “by means of God,” that is, constituted such by God. “The powers that be” are “the existing powers.” “Ordained” is  (tassw), “to appoint, to assign a place to, to ordain.” The word is in the perfect tense, “have been ordained and as a result remain ordained.” That is,

human government is a permanent institution brought into being by God for the regulation of human affairs. The powers or authorities here are seen, not in their individual personalities, but as officers of the law, whose positions are ordained by God. That is, the various offices of civil authority are appointed by God. The structure of government and the laws connected with it are appointed by God as a means of promoting law and order on earth. The incumbents in those offices are not always ordained of God. We know that demons have a great deal to do with various governments. Yet, the Christian is obligated to honor and obey the magistrates under whose jurisdiction he lives. Alford has a helpful note here. “We may observe that the apostle here pays no regard to the question of the duty of Christians in revolutionary movements. His precepts regard an established power, be it what it may. It, in all matters lawful, we are bound to obey. But even the parental power does not extend to things unlawful. If the civil power command us to violate the law of God, we must obey God before man. If it commands us to disobey the common laws of humanity, or the sacred institutions of our country, our obedience is due to the higher and more general law, rather than the lower and particular. These distinctions must be drawn by the wisdom granted Christians in the varying circumstances of human affairs: they are all only subordinate portions of the great duty of obedience to LAW. To obtain, by lawful means, the removal or alteration of an unjust or unreasonable law, is another part of this duty: for all powers among men must be in accord with the highest power, the moral sense. But even where law is hard and unreasonable, not disobedience, but legitimate protest, is the duty of the Christian.” Translation. Let every soul put himself habitually in subjection to authorities which hold position over (them), for there is not an authority except that (ordained) by God. Moreover, the existing authorities stand permanently ordained by God. (13:2) “Resisteth” is  (ajntitassw), “to arrange in battle against, to oppose one’s self, resist.” The participle is middle in voice, “sets himself in array against.” The second use of “resisteth” is  (ajnqisthmi), “to set one’s self against, to withstand, resist, oppose,” and is perfect in tense. Thus, “so that the one who sets himself in array against the aforementioned authority, against the ordinance of God has set himself, with the result that he is in a permanent position of antagonism (against the ordinance).” “The conclusion is,” Denney says, “that he who sets himself against the authorities, withstands what has been instituted by God.” “Damnation” in the Greek text is krima (krima), “judgment,” namely, a judicial sentence from the magistrate. Alford says that this judgment is in the form of punishment from God, through His minister, the civil power. Denney maintains that this judgment is “of course a divine one—that is the nerve of the whole passage; but most commentators seem to regard it as coming through the human authority resisted. This is by no means clear; even a successful defiance of authority which involved no human judgment would according to Paul ensure judgment from God.” There is truth in both positions. Certainly, the human authority would punish violators of the law, and since disobedience to human law on the part of a Christian is disobedience to God, because God has obligated the Christian to obey it, God would also deal with the Christian. Translation. So that the one who sets himself in array against the

authority, against the ordinance of God has set himself, with the result that he is in a permanent position of antagonism (against the ordinance). And those who resist, shall receive for themselves judgment. (13:3, 4) Denney says: “The gar (gar) (for) can only be connected in a forced and artificial way with the clause which immediately precedes: it really introduces the reason for a frank and unreserved acceptance of that view of ‘authorities’ which the apostle is laying down. It is as if he said: Recognize the divine right of the State, for its representatives are not a terror—an object of dread—to the good work, but to the bad.… It is implied that those to whom he speaks will always be identified with the good work, and so have the authorities on their side; it is taken for granted also that the State will not act in violation of its own idea, and identify itself with the bad.” The word “minister” is diakonos (diakono"), “a servant as seen in his activity.” The civil magistrate, saved or unsaved, is a servant of God in the sense that since God has instituted human government as a means of regulating the affairs of the human race, a magistrate who carries out the law, acts as a servant of God. As to the sword which the magistrate wears, Vincent says; “Borne as a symbol of the magistrate’s right to inflict capital punishment. Thus Ulpian, ‘They who rule a whole province, have the right to the sword.’ The Emperor Trajan presented to a provincial governor, on starting for his province, a dagger, with the words, ‘For me. If I deserve it, in me.’ ” Alford comments; “In ancient times and modern times, the sword has been carried before sovereigns. It betokens the power of capital punishment: and the reference to it here is among the many testimonies borne by Scripture against the attempt to abolish the infliction of the penalty of death for crime in Christian states.” Translation. For the rulers are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. Now, do you desire not to be afraid of the authority? Keep on doing the good, and you will have commendation from him, for he is God’s servant to you for good. But if you are habitually doing that which is evil, be fearing, for not in vain is he wearing the sword, for he is God’s servant, an executor of wrath upon the one who practices the evil. (13:5–7) Denney explains, “There is a two-fold necessity for submission—an external one, in the wrath of God which comes on resistance; an internal one, in conscience. Even apart from the consequences of disobedience, conscience recognizes the divine right and function of the authority and freely submits to it.” “Pay” is  (telew), “to fulfill, to complete,” Vincent says, “carrying the sense of the fulfillment of an obligation.” “Tribute” is phoros (foro"), “that which is brought,” taxes. Alford quotes Tertullian, “That which the Romans lost by the Christians refusing to bestow gifts on their temples, they gained by their conscientious payment of taxes.” The word “pay” in the Greek text could be either indicative, speaking of a fact, or imperative, issuing a command. Robertson, without presenting any reason, says it should be understood as indicative. The connection would be as follows: Since it is necessary for the Christian to put himself in subjection to the authorities, he pays taxes, for that is one of his responsibilities. The Greek word translated “minister” in verse seven is not diakonos (diakono"), “a

servant seen in his activity,” as in verse four, but leitourgos (leitourgo"), “a public minister, a servant of the state.” It is the word used also of the sacred religious service of the priests in the Jerusalem Temple (Heb. 8:2). Vincent says; “The word here brings out more fully the fact that the ruler, like the priests, discharges a divinely ordained service. Government is thus elevated into the sphere of religion. Hence Rev., ministers of God’s service.” “Render” is  (ajpodidwmi), “to give over.” The simple verb  (didwmi) means “to give.” The prefixed preposition apo (ajpo) (off, away from) makes the verb mean “to give off” from one’s self. Thayer quotes Winer who regards apo (ajpo) as denoting “to give from some reserved store, or to give over something which might have been retained, or to lay off some burden of debt or duty.” “Dues” is  (ojfeilh), “that which is owed, a debt.” The word has in it the idea of a moral obligation. “Custom” is telos (telo"), “an indirect tax on goods.” Translation. On which account there is a necessity for putting one’s self in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also because of conscience; for because of this you pay taxes; for God’s public servants they are, continually giving their attention to this very thing. Deliver to all the debts due them, to the one (collecting) the tax, the tax; to the one (collecting) the custom, the custom; to the one to whom the fear is (due), the fear; to the one to whom the honor (is due), the honor. (13:8) Here we have the present imperative with the negative  (mh) which forbids the continuance of an action already going on. It is, “Stop owing to anyone even one thing.” That is, do not continue owing a person. Pay your debts. The language of the a.v., prohibits the Christian from contracting legal debts such an mortgages and business loans. But that is not Paul’s thought here. The only thing we are allowed to owe is divine love; that love produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit, a love self-sacrificial in its essence, giving of itself for the benefit of the person loved. Alford says; “Pay all other debts: be indebted in the matter of love alone. This debt increases the more, the more it is paid, because the practice of love makes the principle of love deeper and more active.” Translation. Stop owing to even one person, even one thing, except to be loving one another; for the one who is loving another, has fulfilled the law. (13:9, 10) The words “thou shalt not bear false witness” are not found in the best Greek texts. “Comprehended” is  (ajnakefalaiow), “to sum up, to repeat summarily, to condense into a summary.” “Saying” is logos (logo"), “a word.” The word “love” is  (ajgapaw), “divine love produced by the Holy Spirit, self-sacrificial in its nature.” Denney comments; “This is all that is formally required by the law as quoted above: therefore love is law’s fulfillment. Of course, love is an inspiration rather than a restraint, and transcends law as embodied in merely negative commandments; but the form in which the law actually existed, determines the form in which the apostle expresses himself. It is apparent once more that nomos (nomo") (law) is the Mosaic law, and not law in general; it is from it the prohibitions are derived on the ground of which the apostle argues, and to it therefore we must apply his conclusion.”

Translation. For this, you shall not commit adultery. You shall not kill. You shall not steal. You shall not covet. And if there is any commandment of a different nature, in this word it is summed up, in this; you shall love your neighbor as yourself. The aforementioned love does not work evil to a neighbor. Therefore, love is the fulfilling of the law. (13:11, 12) Paul urges the importance of the foregoing exhortations in view of the imminency of the Rapture and the Judgment Seat of Christ. “Time” is not chronos (crono"), “time as such,” but kairos (kairo"), “season,” “a special, critical, strategic period of time.” Denney defines, “not the time abstractly, but the time they lived in with its moral import, its critical place in the working out of God’s designs. It is time regarded as having a character of its own, full of significance for them.” “Sleep” here refers to a lethargic, non-aggressive, lazy Christian life. The word “our” is construed with “nearer,” not “salvation,” the idea being that salvation is nearer to us than at the time we put our faith in the Lord Jesus. Salvation is in three tenses; past, justification, the removal of the guilt and penalty of sin from the believing sinner and the bestowal of a righteousness, Christ Jesus Himself, this occurring at the moment of believing; present, sanctification, the continuous process by which the Holy Spirit puts sin out of our lives, produces His own fruit, gradually conforming us to the image of our Lord; and future, glorification, the transformation of our bodies at the Rapture into perfect bodies of a new nature. It is of the last that Paul is speaking. The idea is, “Now is the completion of our salvation nearer to us than the day we placed our faith in the Lord Jesus.” “At hand” is  (ejggizw), “to draw near, to approach,” in the perfect tense as it is here, “to have drawn near and as a result to be present or at hand.” “Armor” is hopla (oJpla), “weapons.” “Put on” is  (ejndunw), “to put on” as a garment, “to clothe with.” Translation. And this; knowing the season, that it is an hour now for you to awake out of sleep, for now our salvation is nearer to us than when we believed. The night has long been on its way, and the day has arrived. Therefore, let us at once and once for all put off the works of the darkness, and let us at once and once for all clothe ourselves with the weapons of the light. (13:13, 14) “Honestly” is  (eujschmonw"), “in a seemly manner, decently.” “Walk” is  (peripatew), “to conduct one’s self, order one’s behavior.” The idea of honesty is seen in the fact that Paul is exhorting the saints to give an honest impression of themselves to the world. They should conduct themselves in a manner befitting their high station in life, as saints of the Most High God. Their outward expression should conform to their inner regenerated being. “Rioting” is  (kwmo"), “a revel, a carousal, in the Greek writers, a nocturnal and riotous procession of halfdrunken and frolicsome fellows, who after supper, parade through the streets with torches and music in honor of Bacchus or some other deity, and sing and play before the houses of their male and female friends; hence used generally of feasts and drinking-parties that are protracted till late at night and indulge in revelry” (Thayer). “Chambering” is  (koith), “sexual intercourse.” “Wantonness” is aselgeia (ajselgeia), “unbridled lust, excess, licentiousness, shamelessness, insolence.” “Envying” is  (zhlo"), “jealousy,

an envious and contentious rivalry.” “Lusts” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a craving, passionate desire,” good or bad, depending upon the context, here an evil one. When the Christian puts on Christ, he clothes his soul in the moral disposition and habits of Christ (Gifford). “Make provision” is  (poiew), “to make,” and pronoia (pronoia), “forethought, provident care.” Denney defines as “an interest in it which consults for it, and makes it an object.” “Flesh” here could be understood in its physiological sense of the human body or in its moral sense of the totally depraved nature. An overbalanced interest in the former will result in the neglecting of the spiritual part of one’s life, and lead to sin. The slightest interest in the latter will bring sin into the life. Paul means that in the case of the evil nature, we are to take the attitude that we are under no obligations to obey it, and thus we will not provide for it in any part of our lives. Translation. In the same manner as in the day, let us order out behavior in a seemly fashion, not in carousals and drunkenness, not in sexual intercourse and a dissolute abandon, not in strife and jealousy. But clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and stop making provision for the flesh with a view to a passionate craving.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN (14:1) In this section (14:1–15:4), Paul is dealing with the relations between the weak and the strong among the saints in the church at Rome. Denney describes the weak saint as follows: “The weakness is weakness in respect of faith. The weak man is one who does not fully appreciate what his Christianity means; in particular, he does not see that the soul which has committed itself to Christ for salvation is emancipated from all law but that which is involved in its responsibility to Him. Hence his conscience is fettered by scruples in regard to customs dating from pre-Christian days.” The scruples in question here were connected with the use of wine and flesh, and with the religious observance of certain days. There might have been also, he suggests, another class of individuals who by an inadequate appreciation of Christian liberty were practicing an over-scrupulous asceticism. These things Paul deals with in this section of Romans. “Him that is weak” is an article and a participle in the Greek text. Godet points out that the use of the participle instead of the adjective  (ajsqenh), “weakness,” speaks of one who is for a time feeble but who may become strong. The phrase, “weak in the faith,” Denney explains as follows; “in respect of faith, i.e.,—in Paul’s sense of the word—in respect of his saving reliance on Christ and all that it involves: One is weak in respect of faith who does not understand that salvation is of faith from first to last, and that faith is secured by its own entireness and intensity, not by a timorous scrupulosity of conscience.” “Disputations” is dialogismos (dialogismo"), “the thinking of a man deliberating with himself, inward reasoning, a deliberating, a questioning.” “Doubtful” is diakrisis (diakrisi"), “a distinguishing, a discerning, judging.” The word is made up of krisis (krisi"), “a judging,” and dia (dia), whose root meaning is “two,” thus, a judging two ways or in two directions, thus, a doubting as to which is correct. Denney explains, “with a view to deciding or passing sentence on his doubts. The disputations are the movements of thought in the weak man, whose anxious mind will not be at peace; no censure of any kind is implied by the word. The strong, who welcome him to the fellowship of the Church, are to do so unreservedly, not with the purpose of judging and ruling his mind by

their own.” “Receive” is  (proslambanw), used of God’s gracious acceptance of men, and also of men welcoming other men to their society (Denney). Vincent comments: “Receive these weak brethren, but not for the purpose of passing judgment upon their scruples.” Translation. Now, the one who is weak with respect to the faith, be giving a cordial welcome, not with a view to a critical analysis of (his) inward reasonings. (14:2, 3) Vincent explains the clause, “believeth that he may eat”; “The a.v., conveys the sense of having an opinion, thinking. But the point is the strength or weakness of the man’s faith (see verse 1) as it affects his eating. Hence Rev., correctly, hath faith to eat.” Denney explains, “has confidence to eat all things.” He quotes Gifford who gives an example of how the Greek word  (pisteuw) (to exercise faith), was used by Demosthenes, “he had not confidence, i.e., was too cautious to give up the dowry” and says, “This use of  (pisteuw) shows that pistis (pisti") (faith) to Paul was essentially an ethical principle; the man who was strong in it had moral independence, courage, and originality.” “Herbs” is lachana (lacana), from  (lacanw), “to dig,” thus, “garden herbs or vegetables,” indicating that the one to whom Paul has reference was a vegetarian. It must be kept in mind that his refusal to eat meat and his limiting himself to a vegetarian diet was for religious, not dietary reasons, and that these, in the estimation of Paul were scruples, the product of an inadequate understanding of God’s Word and an over-sensitized conscience which was of course relatively unenlightened. “Despise” is  (ejxouqenew), “to throw out as nothing,” thus, “to treat as nothing and so with contempt.” “Judge” is  (krinw), “to judge” in the sense of “criticize.” Vincent comments, “Judgment is assigned to the weak brother, contempt to the stronger. Censoriousness is the peculiar error of the ascetic, contemptuousness, of the liberal. A distinguished minister once remarked, ‘The weak brother is the biggest bully in the universe.’ Both extremes are allied to spiritual pride.” Vincent explains “hath received,” “The aorist points to a definite time—when he believed on Christ, though there is still a reference to his present relation to God as determined by the fact of his reception then, which may warrant the rendering by the perfect.” Translation. One, on the one hand, has confidence that he may eat all things; but the one on the other hand who is weak, constantly eats vegetables. The one who eats, let him not treat with contempt the one who does not eat; and the one who does not eat, let him not be critical of the one who eats, for God received him. (14:4) The “thou” is in the emphatic position, “as for you, who are you, etc.” The person addressed is the weak brother, since the word “judgment” of this verse corresponds with the word “judge” of verse 3. Denney comments; “The sharpness of this rebuke shows that Paul, with all his love and consideration for the weak, was alive to the possibility of a tyranny of the weak, and repressed it in its beginnings. It is easy to lapse from scrupulousness about one’s own conduct into Pharisaism about that of others.” “Servant” is  (oijketh"), “a household slave.” Paul says, in effect, “It is his own

Lord who is concerned—it is His interest which is involved and to Him (not to you) he must answer—as he stands or falls, but he shall be made to stand, i.e., shall be preserved in the integrity of his Christian character,… for the Lord has power to keep him upright. Paul does not contemplate the strong man falling and being set up again by Christ; but in spite of the perils which liberty brings in its train—and the apostle is as conscious of them as the most timid and scrupulous Christian could be—he is confident that Christian liberty, through the grace and power of Christ, will prove a triumphant moral success” (Denney). The best texts have kurios (kurio"), “Lord,” instead of theos (qeo"), “God.” Translation. As for you, who are you who are judging another’s household slave? To his own personal master he stands or falls. Indeed, he shall be made to stand, for the Lord has power to make him stand. (14:5) The connection of the contents of this verse with what preceded, Denney suggests, is as follows; “Among those who abstained from flesh and wine, some did so always, others only on certain days. ‘To observe the day’ might in itself mean to observe it by fasting—this would be the case if one’s ordinary custom were to use flesh and wine; or it might mean to observe it by feasting—this would be the case if one ordinarily abstained.… It is not probable that there is any reference either to the Jewish Sabbath or to the Lord’s Day, though the principle on which the apostle argues, defines the Christian attitude to both. Nothing in the Christian religion is legal or statutory, not even the religious observance of the first day of the week; that observance originated in faith, and is not what it should be except as it is maintained by faith.” “Alike” is not in the Greek text. The translation should read merely, “judges every day, that is, subjects every day to moral scrutiny” (Vincent). “Fully persuaded” is  (plhroforew), “to be fully convinced or assured, to be persuaded.” Bengel, commenting on the words, “in his own mind,” says, “As a boat may pursue its course uninjured either in a narrow canal or in a spacious lake.” Translation. On the one hand, there is the one who judges a day above another day. On the other hand, there is the one who subjects every day to a scrutiny. Let each one in his own personal mind be fully assured. (14:6) Denney explains, “The indifference of the question at issue, from the religious point of view, is shown by the fact that both parties, by the line of action they choose, have the same end in view—namely, the interest of the Lord … Thanksgiving to God consecrates every meal whether it be the ascetic one of him who abstains from wine and flesh (he who does not eat), or the more generous one of him who uses both (he who eats). The thanksgiving shows that in either case the Christian is acting to the glory of God (I Cor. 10:31), and therefore that the Lord’s interest is safe.” The words, “He that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it,” are not in the best Greek texts. “Regard” is  (fronew), “to have understanding, to feel, think.” “To the Lord” is kurios (kurio"), in the dative case, here, the dative of reference. The man’s judgment of a certain day is with reference to the Lord. That is, his measure of what that day stands for and his appropriate conduct in it is conditioned by his estimation of the Lord Jesus and what is fitting with reference to Him. Thus, a Christian’s viewpoint regarding and estimation of any certain thing is controlled or conditioned by the measure in which he

knows the Lord Jesus. Translation. The one who has formed a judgment regarding the day, with reference to the Lord he judges it. And the one who eats, with reference to the Lord he eats, for he gives thanks to the Lord. And the one who does not eat, with reference to the Lord does not eat, and he gives thanks to God. (14:7–9) Denney’s note on these verses is most helpful, “The truth which has been affirmed in regard to the Christian’s use of food, and observance or non-observance of days, is here based on a larger truth of which it is a part. His whole life belongs, not to himself, but to his Lord. ‘No one of us liveth to himself’ does not mean, ‘every man’s conduct affects others for better or for worse, whether he will or not’; it means, ‘no Christian is his own end in life; what is always present to his mind, as a rule of his conduct, is the will and the interest of his Lord.’ The same holds true of his dying. He does not choose either the time or the mode of it, like a Roman Stoic, to please himself. He dies when the Lord wills, as the Lord will, and even by his death glorifies God. In verse 14 Paul comes to speak of the influence of conduct upon others; but here there is no such thing in view; the prominence given to the Lord three times in verse 8 shows that the one truth present to his mind is the all-determining significance, for Christian conduct, of the relation of Christ. This (ideally) determines everything, alike in life or death; and all that is determined by what is right.” “Rose” is not in the Greek text. “Revived” is  (zaw), “to live.” Denney says that the word refers to the resurrection, as is shown by the order of the words, the connection elsewhere in Paul of Lordship with the resurrection (compare Phil. 2:9), and the aorist tense which describes an act, and not the continued existence of Christ on earth. Translation. For no one lives with reference to himself, and no one with reference to himself dies. For, whether we live, with reference to the Lord we live. Whether we die, with reference to the Lord we die. Therefore, whether we live or whether we die, we belong to the Lord; for to this end Christ both died and lived, in order that He might exercise lordship over both dead ones and living ones. (14:10–12) The “thou” is in the emphatic position again. It is, “But as for you (in contrast to the Lord) why do you, (the weaker brother) judge your brother (your Christian brother)?” Denny says, “in face of our common responsibility to Him, how dare we judge each other?” The phrase, “your brother” is “another reason for not judging: it is inconsistent with a recognition of the brotherhood of believers. Or, thou, again, why despisest thou? etc. This is addressed to the strong and free thinkers, as the first question is to the weak and scrupulous Christian. Censoriousness and contempt are never anything but sins, not to be practiced but shunned, and that all the more when we remember that we shall all stand at one bar. God is the universal Judge” (Denney). The best Greek texts have judgment seat “of God,” not “of Christ.” The same authority explains; “We cannot suppose that by ‘of God’ here Paul means Christ in His divine nature; the true way to mediate between the two expressions is seen in Romans 2:16 and Acts 17:31. When we all stand at that bar—and it should be part of our spiritual

environment always—no one will look at his brother with either censoriousness or contempt.” These verses speak of the general idea of judgment. However, we must distinguish between the Judgment Seat of Christ (II Cor. 5:10) where the saints will be judged, and The Great White Throne where sinners will be judged (Rev. 20:11–15). “Confess” is  (ejxomologew), “to acknowledge or profess from the heart,” thus, in a context like this, “to make a confession to one’s honor, hence to praise” (Vincent). “Give account” is  (dwsei logon). The phrase was a common way of referring to an account in a ledger which a bookkeeper enters (Robertson). Translation. But as for you, why are you judging your brother? Or, why do you treat your brother with contempt? For we all shall stand before the judgment seat of God. For it stands written, As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall confess to God. Therefore then each one shall give an account of himself to God. (14:13) Robertson explains the words, “Let us not therefore judge one another any more,” as follows; “Let us no longer have the habit of criticising one another.” “Stumbling block” is proskamma (proskamma), from  (proskoptw), “to cut toward or against, to strike against,” used of those who strike against a stone or other obstacle in the path, “to stumble” (Thayer.) Thus, proskamma (proskamma) is a stumbling block, “an obstacle in the way which if one strike his foot against, he necessarily stumbles or falls, hence, that over which the soul stumbles” (Thayer). “Occasion to fall” is skandalon (skandalon), “The movable stick or trigger of a trap, a snare, any impediment placed in the way and causing one to stumble or fall, any person or thing by which one is entrapped, drawn into error or sin” (Thayer). Translation. Therefore, no longer let us be judging one another. But be judging this rather, not to place a stumblingblock before our brother, or a snare in which he may be entrapped. (14:14) Bengel says of the words, “I know and am persuaded,” “A rare conjunction of words, but fitted here to confirm against ignorance and doubt.” “Know” is oida (oijda), “absolute, positive knowledge.” “Am persuaded” is  (peiqw) in the perfect tense. Paul’s reasoning had gone on through a process to a point where it was complete, with the result that he had come to a finished persuasion that was permanent. He stands persuaded. He could not be budged from his conviction, so sure was he of the truth of the matter. “Unclean” is koinon (koinon) “common.” The word means “common” in the sense of that which is general, which stands in connection with everything which does not distinguish or separate itself from anything else. It denotes that which is opposed to the divine (Cremer). It means in this connection, “unhallowed.” The thing described as unhallowed would be something not connected with the worship and service of God, and in that sense unclean. It is used in the Levitical sense of that which is unholy or impure in a ritualistic, ceremonial fashion. In Mark 7:2, the word is used in the charge of the Pharisees who said the disciples ate with defiled (koinon (koinon)) hands. The word speaks of ceremonial impurity, not of actual immorality. The context has to do with religious scruples regarding animal flesh and a vegetarian diet, with the keeping of one day as against another in a special observance. Paul’s declaration is “in the Lord.” That is, it finds its source in the Lord, not merely in his reason. Denney comments; “In principle, the apostle sides with the strong. He has no scruples about meats or drinks or days.” Commenting on the phrase “in the Lord,” he says; “It is as a Christian, not as a libertine, that Paul has this conviction; in Christ Jesus he

is sure that there is nothing in the world essentially unclean; all things can be consecrated and Christianized by Christian use.” Speaking of the word koinon (koinon) (common) he says; “It is the opposite of hagion (aJgion) (holy), and signifies that which is not and cannot be brought into relation to God.… Though there is nothing which in itself has this character, some things may have it subjectively, i.e., in the judgment of a particular person who cannot help (from some imperfection of conscience) regarding them so, to him (ekeinos (ejkeino") that one, emphatic) they are what his conscience makes them; and his conscience (unenlightened as it is) is entitled to respect.” Translation. For I know with an absolute knowledge and stand persuaded in the Lord Jesus that not even one thing is unhallowed in itself except it be to the one who reasons it out to be unhallowed, to that one it is unhallowed. (14:15) The word “meat” is  (brwma), “food” in general. Denney comments, “ (dia brwma) is contemptuous, ‘for the sake of food’ thy brother is grieved.  (Brwma) is the food which the strong eats in spite of his brother’s scruples. ‘Be grieved’ need not imply that the weak is induced against his conscience to eat also (though that is contemplated as following); it may quite well express the uneasiness and distress with which the weak sees the strong pursue a line of conduct which his conscience cannot approve. Even to cause such pain as this is a violation of the law of Christ. He who does it has ceased to walk according to love, which is the supreme Christian rule. In the sense of this, and at the same time aware that the weak in these circumstances may easily be cajoled or overborne into doing what his conscience disapproves, the apostle exclaims abruptly, ‘Destroy not him with thy meat for whom Christ died.’ To tamper with conscience, it is here implied, is ruin: and the selfish man who so uses his Christian liberty as to lead a weak brother to tamper with his conscience is art and part in that ruin.” Translation. For if because of food your brother is made to grieve, no longer are you conducting yourself according to love. Stop ruining by your food that one on behalf of whom Christ died. (14:16–18) The “good” here refers to “Christian liberty, the freedom of conscience which has been won by Christ, but which will inevitably get a bad name if it is exercised in an inconsiderate, loveless fashion.” “Evil spoken of” is  (blasfhmew), “to speak reproachfully of, rail at, revile.” The kingdom of God is defined here by Lange as follows: “The heavenly sphere of life in which God’s Word and Spirit govern, and whose organ on earth is the Church.” “Meat and drink” is  (brwsi" kai posi"), which the Rev., translates “eating and drinking.” Righteousness here is not used in its judicial sense of justifying righteousness, but in its “practical, ethical sense, as shown in moral rectitude toward men” (Vincent). “Peace is not peace with God, but mutual concord among Christians” (Vincent). Joy is “common joy, arising out of the prevalence of rectitude and concord in the Church. The whole chapter is concerned with the mutual relations of Christians, rather than their relations to God” (Vincent). The qualifying phrase “in the Holy Ghost” according to Godet, refers to all three terms, righteousness, peace, and joy. He says, “It is this divine guest who—by His presence, produces them in the Church.” On verse 18, Denney comments, “One may serve Christ either eating or

abstaining, but no one can serve Him whose conduct exhibits indifference to righteousness, peace, and joy.” “Serve” is  (douleuw), “to be a slave, do service.” “Acceptable” is euarestos (eujaresto"), “well-pleasing, acceptable.” “Approved” is dokimos (dokimo"), “put to the test for the purpose of being approved, and having met specifications, having the stamp of approval placed upon one.” Translation. Therefore, stop allowing your good to be spoken of in a reproachful and evil manner; for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the sphere of the Holy Spirit; for the one who in this serves the Christ, is well-pleasing to God, and because having met the specifications, approved by men. (14:19) “Follow” is  (diwkw), “to run swiftly in order to catch some person or thing, to run after, to pursue,” metaphorically, “to seek after eagerly, earnestly endeavor to acquire.” There is a difference of opinion as to whether the verb is indicative which would speak of a fact, or subjunctive, which would make it an exhortation. The a.v., Westcott and Hort, Denney, and Robertson take it as subjunctive, Eberhard and Irwin Nestle report it as indicative. In the subjunctive mode, the translation reads, “let us eagerly and earnestly be seeking after”; if in the indicative, it would read, “we are eagerly and earnestly seeking after.” The deciding factor is one Greek letter. If the original manuscript of Paul had the Omega, the long “o,” it would be subjunctive, if the Omicron, the short “o,” the indicative. Since authorities are divided on the basis of textual criticism, the exegete could have recourse to the context for some light. In view of the fact that in verse 20, the imperative mode is used—which mode issues a command, one would naturally conclude that Paul was exhorting in this verse also. “Which make for peace” is  (th" eijrhnh"), “of peace.” “Edify” is  (oijkodomew), “to build a house, erect a building, to build up, to promote growth in Christian wisdom, affection, grace, virtue, holiness, blessedness.” Commenting on the words “one another,” Vincent says; “The Greek phrase ( (th" eij" ajllhlou")) has a defining force which is lost in the translations. Literally, things of edification, that, namely, which is with reference to one another. The definite article thus points Paul’s reference to individuals rather than to the Church as a whole.” Translation. Accordingly therefore, the things of peace let us be eagerly and earnestly seeking after, and the things of a building up nature which (latter) are with respect to one another. (14:20) “Destroy” here is not the translation of apollumi (ajpollumi) (destroy, ruin) of verse 15, but of  (kataluw), “to loose down, to tear down,” as one would tear down a building, and is in keeping with the word  (oijkodomew) (edify) of verse 19. Paul says, “Stop on account of food tearing down the work of God,” here the Christian character and testimony of a brother Christian. “Offense” is proskamma (proskamma), “a stumbling-block”; see material on verse 13. Commenting on the words, “All things are pure,” Denney says, “This is the principle of the strong, which Paul concedes; the difficulty is to get the enlightened to understand that an abstract principle can never be the rule of Christian conduct. The Christian, of course, admits the principle, but he must act from love. To know that all things are clean,

does not (as is often assumed) settle what the Christian has to do in any given case. It does not define his duty, but only makes clear his responsibility. Acknowledging that principle, and looking with love at other Christians, and the effect of any given line of conduct on them, he has to define his duty for himself. All meat is clean, but not all eating.” Explaining the words, “It is evil for that man who eateth with offense,” the same authority says; “Sin is involved in the case of the man who eats with offense. Some take this as a warning to the weak: but the whole tone of the passage, which is rather a warning to the strong, and the verse immediately following, which surely continues the meaning and is also addressed to the strong, decide against this. The man who eats with offense is therefore the man by whose eating another is made to stumble.” The word “pure” is kathara (kaqara). This purity is ceremonial, non-moral in its implications. “With offense” is dia proskammatos (dia proskammato"). Thayer on the preposition dia (dia) translates, “with offense, or, so as to be an offense.” The idea is that the man in question here eats such things, the eating of which would be a stumbling block to the weaker brother. Translation. Stop on account of food ruining the work of God. All things indeed are pure. But (it is) evil to the man, the one who eats so as to be an offense. (14:21) To eat flesh and to drink wine, are the two points of the weak brother’s special scruple (Vincent). The words “or is offended or is made weak,” are a rejected reading. “Flesh” is kreas (krea"), the flesh of a sacrificial animal. Translation. It is good not to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor even (anything) by which your brother stumbles. (14:22, 23) “The true text is, ‘the faith that thou hast, have thou to thyself in the sight of God.’ The verse is still addressed to the strong. The faith he has is the enlightened faith which enables him to see that all things are clean; such faith does not lose its value though it is not flaunted in reckless action. ‘In the sight of God’ reminds the strong once more (v. 10) that the fullest freedom must be balanced by the fullest sense of responsibility to God” (Denney). “Happy” is makarios (makario"), “spiritually prosperous.” Commenting on this word, Denney says, “It is a rare felicity (this is always what makarios (makario") denotes) to have a conscience untroubled by scruples—in Paul’s words, not to judge one’s self in the matter which one approves (by his own practice): and he who has this felicity should ask no more. In particular, he should not run the risk of injuring a brother’s conscience, merely for the sake of exercising in a special way the spiritual freedom which he has the happiness to possess—whether he exercises it in that way or not.” “Condemn” is  (krinw), “to judge.” “Alloweth” is  (dokimazw), “to approve after having put to the test and finding that that which is tested meets specifications. Commenting on verse 23, Denney says; “Such on the other hand, is the unhappy situation of the weak—a new motive for charity … The weak Christian cannot be clear in his own mind that it is permissable to do as the strong does; it may be, he thinks one moment, and the next, it may not be; and if he follows the strong and eats in that state of

mind, he stands condemned. This condemnation is absolute: it is not only that his own conscience pronounces clearly against him after the act, but that such action incurs the condemnation of God. It is inconsistent with that conscientiousness through which alone man can be trained in goodness; the moral life would become chaotic and irredeemable if conscience were always to be treated so.” Translation. The faith which you have, have to yourself in the sight of God. Spiritually prosperous is the one who does not judge himself in that which he has tested with a view to approving should it meet specifications, and having found that it does, has placed his approval upon it. But the one who doubts, if he eats, stands condemned, because not by faith (did he eat). Moreover, everything which is not of faith, is sin.

CHAPTER FIFTEEN (15:1–3) The chapter division is unfortunate. The subject of stronger and weaker Christians, the scruples of the latter and the correct attitude of the former towards the latter, is continued. The strong here are believers whose understanding of the Word frees them from religious scruples. The weaker are believers whose understanding of the Word is so limited, that they consider some things which are right in themselves, to be wrong. These false notions are included in the infirmities here spoken of. “Infirmities” is  (ajsqenhma), used of physical or mental weakness. “Ought” is  (ojfeilw), “to be a debtor, to be under obligation, bound by duty.” The word speaks of a moral obligation as contrasted to a necessity in the nature of the case as is dei (dei). “Bear” is  (bastazw) “to bear” what is burdensome. When an informed believer foregoes an action which he knows is right, but which a weaker Christian thinks to be wrong, and does it for the sake of not offending that weaker Christian, he curtails his own freedom of action, denies himself something that is legitimately his, and this is a burden to him. Denney says, “Paul says, ‘bear’ their infirmities: because the restrictions and limitations laid by this charity on the liberty of the strong are a burden to them.” While Paul had in mind the particular case of scruples, yet Alford thinks that these infirmities are general and include various types of weaknesses At all events, the principle applies to these latter also. We are not to refuse to do this and thus please ourselves. Denney remarks, “It is very easy for self-pleasing and mere wilfulness to shelter themselves under the disguise of Christian principle. But there is only one Christian principle which has no qualification— love.” The pleasing one’s neighbor in this context refers to the act of the believer foregoing a legitimate act because that weaker Christian thinks it to be wrong. It pleases him because it removes a source of temptation to him to do that thing, and makes his attempt to live a life pleasing to God easier. But the stronger Christian is to do this only in the instance where the weaker Christian would be edified or built up in the Christian life. Paul then enforces his exhortation by citing the example of our Lord Jesus who pleased not Himself. The writer to the Hebrews speaks of this in 12:2 when he refers to our Lord who instead of (huper (uJper)) the joy then present with Him, endured the Cross. It was the joy of heaven, of the Father’s smile, of the worship of the angels that was His legitimate prerogative, that He voluntarily set aside to drink the Gethsemane cup, the ingredients of which He did not want, namely, to be made sin and to lose the fellowship of the Father as

He hung on the Cross. Paul quotes from a Messianic Psalm (69:9) in substantiating his assertion rather than taking an incident from our Lord’s life. Peter speaks of the reproaches that fell on our Lord when he writes, “When He was reviled, reviled not again; when He suffered, He threatened not; but committed Himself to Him that judgeth righteously” (I Pet. 2:23). Translation. As for us, then, the strong ones, we have a moral obligation to be bearing the infirmities of those who are not strong, and not to be pleasing ourselves. Each one of us, let him be pleasing his neighbor with a view to his building up; for even the Christ did not please Himself, but even as it stands written, The reproaches of those who reproached you fell upon Me. (15:4) Denney says, “Here Paul justifies his use of the whole o.t. … (It) was written to teach us, and therefore has abiding value.” “That” is hina (iJna), “in order that.” Denney again is helpful, “Hina (iJna) introduces God’s purpose, which is wider than the immediate purpose of the apostle. Paul meant to speak only of bearing the infirmities of the weak, but with the quotation of Psalm 69:9 there came in the idea of the Christian’s sufferings generally, and it is amid them that God’s purpose is to be fulfilled.” The same authority translates, “that through the patience and the comfort wrought by the Scriptures we may have our hope,” and says, “the Christian hope, the hope of the glory of God; and the Christian has it as he is able, through the help of God’s Word in the Scriptures, to maintain a brave and cheerful spirit amid all the sufferings and reproaches of life.” “Comfort” is  (paraklhsi"). The word has various meanings; “a calling near, a summons, imploration, supplication, entreaty, exhortation, admonition, encouragement, consolation, solace.” The well-rounded allinclusive idea is that of encouragement, of aid given the needy person, whether it be consolation, exhortation, or supplication. Translation. For whatever things were written aforetime, with a view to our learning were written, in order that through the patience and through the encouragement arising from the scriptures, we might be having hope. (15:5–7) Denney says, “Paul returns to his point in a prayer: the God of the patience and comfort just spoken of grant unto you, etc.… Paul wishes here that the minds of his readers—their moral judgment and temper—may all be determined by Jesus Christ … In this case there will be the harmony which the disputes of chapter 14 disturbed.” “That” (verse 6) is hina (iJna), “in order that,” and introduces the purpose of this unanimity among the saints, namely, that with one accord they may glorify God. The word “even” is the a.v. rendering of kai (kai), the Greek word for “and,” but which in certain contexts can be translated “even.” Denney, Robertson and Alford all prefer the rendering, “God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,” making God the Father, the God of Jesus Christ. Alford says this rendering is preferable on account of its simplicity. Robertson cites Ephesians 1:3 and I Peter 1:3 as examples of the usage. Denney remarks, “When the Church glorifies such a God with one heart and one mouth, it will have transcended all the troubles of chapter 14.” “Receive” (verse 7) is  (proslambanw), in the middle voice only in the

n.t., “to take to one’s self, to grant one access to one’s heart, to take into friendship and intercourse.” Thayer, defining this word says. “God and Christ are said to have received those who, formerly estranged from them, they have reunited to themselves by the blessings of the gospel.” Denney says that believers are to receive one another that such praise may be possible. He says that the “us” covers both parties in the Church, however they are distinguished; if Christ received both, they are bound to receive each other. Translation. Now the God of the patience and the encouragement arising from the scriptures, give to you to be thinking the same thing among one another according to Christ Jesus, in order that with one mind and one mouth you may keep on glorifying the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Wherefore be receiving one another even as the Christ received us with a view to the glory of God. (15:8, 9) “Minister” is diakonos (diakono"), “one who serves.” “Was” is ginomai (ginomai), “to become,” and in the perfect tense. “Of the circumcision” is descriptive genitive. Our Lord has become one who served circumcised persons, namely, the Jews. He explains this Himself in His answer to the disciples who misunderstood His answer to the woman, “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). This was in fulfillment of the Messianic promises to Israel. But this was a means to an end, that the Gentiles might be reached through Israel and thus glorify God for His mercy. Thus, Paul is contrasting the two groups here, Jews and Gentiles. The connection between this and the preceding teaching regarding scruples and the attitude of the informed Christian toward his weaker brother and the latter’s scruples, is brought out in the words of Denney, “The Gentiles must not be contemptuous of scruples or infirmities, especially such as rise out of any associations with the old covenant; nor should the Jews be censorious of a Gentile liberty which has its vindication in the free grace of God.” Regarding the words quoted from Psalm 18:49, Denney says, “Christ is assumed to be the speaker, and we may say that He gives thanks to God among the Gentiles when the Gentiles give thanks to God through Him (Heb. 2:12).” Translation. For I am saying, Christ has become a servant to the circumcision on behalf of God’s truth, resulting in the confirmation of the promises to the fathers and (resulting) in the Gentiles on behalf of (His) mercy glorifying God; even as it stands written, Because of this I will openly confess to you among the Gentiles and sing to your name. (15:10–12) “Root” is riza (rJiza), “a sprout from the root.” Vincent translates, “that ariseth to reign.” Bengel says, “There is a pleasant contrast: the root is in the lowest place, the banner rises highest. so as to be seen even by the remotest nations.” “Trust” is  (ejlpizw) “to hope.” The Greek word for “trust” is  (pisteuw). Translation. And again he says, Rejoice, Gentiles with His people. And again, extol, all you Gentiles, the Lord. And let all the people extol Him. And again Isaiah says, There shall be a sprout out of the root of Jesse, even the One who arises to be a ruler of the Gentiles. Upon Him will the

Gentiles place their hope. (15:13) Denney’s note on this verse is most helpful. “Prompted by the ‘place their hope,’ the apostle closes this section, and the body of the epistle, by calling on ‘the God of hope’ to bless those to whom it is addressed. For the expression ‘the God of the hope’ compare verse 5; it means the God who gives us the hope which we have in Christ. The joy and peace which He imparts rest on faith (in believing). Hence they are the joy and peace specially flowing from justification and acceptance with God, and the more we have of these, the more we abound in the Christian hope itself. Such an abounding in hope, in the power of the Holy Ghost (Acts 1:8, Luke 4:14) is the end contemplated in Paul’s prayer that the God of hope would fill the Romans with all joy and peace in believing.” “In believing” is  (ejn twi pisteuein), literally, “in the believing,” interpreted, “in the sphere of the act of habitually believing.” “Abound” is  (perisseuw), “to exceed a fixed number or measure, to be over, to exist in abundance, to be in affluence.” The noun perissos (perisso") means “more than is necessary, superadded.” These words speak of a superabundance. “Ghost” is pneuma (pneuma), “spirit,” obsolete English for “spirit.” Translation. Now the God of the hope fill you with every joy and hope in the sphere of believing, resulting in your superabounding in the sphere of the hope by the power of the Holy Spirit. (15:14) Denney says, “The tone in which he has written, especially in Chapter 14, might suggest that he thought them very defective either in intelligence, or love, or both; but he disclaims any such inference from his words.” With this verse, Vincent says “the Epilogue of the Epistle begins.” He quotes Bengel as saying, “As one street often leads men, leaving a large city, through several gates, so the conclusion of this Epistle is manifold.” “Am persuaded” is perfect tense, “I have been completely persuaded with the result that I have arrived at a settled conviction.” The pronoun is used intensively in Paul’s statement, “Ye yourselves are full of goodness,” the thought being that the Roman saints as well as Paul are full of goodness, and as Denney remarks, “and that without the help of Paul who had never ministered to them.” The context defines this goodness, not as goodness in general, but the Christian love which bears the infirmities of the weaker brother. “Filled” is perfect in tense, “having been filled completely full with the present result that they are in an abiding state of fulness.” The words “all knowledge” are to be taken in the sense of “Christian knowledge in its entirety” (Sanday and Headlam), not in an absolute sense. Translation. But I have reached a settled conviction, my brethren, even I myself, concerning you, that you yourselves also are full of goodness, having been filled completely full of every knowledge, with the result that you are in an abiding state of fulness, able also to admonish one another. (15:15, 16) “Have written” is epistolary aorist, a device whereby a first-century writer observes the courtesy of putting himself at the viewpoint of the recipient of the letter, viewing the writing of his letter which is a present occurrence to him, as a past event,

which latter viewpoint the reader would have when receiving the letter. The reference is therefore to the contents of the letter to the Romans which he was then in the process of writing “The more boldly” is  (tolmhroterw"). Vincent says, “Not too boldly, but the more boldly because you are full of goodness.” “In some sort” is apo merous (ajpo merou"), “in some measure, qualifying I write, and referring to some passage in which he had spoken with especial plainness; as in ch. 6:12, 19; 8:9; 11:17; 14:3, 4, 10, 13, 15, 20, etc.” (Vincent). “Minister” here is not the usual word translated “minister,” namely, diakonos (diakono") (a servant), but leitourgos (leitourgo"), used in secular life of a public minister, a servant of the state, in sacred things, of the priests of the Jerusalem Temple (Heb. 8:2). Paul uses it here to speak of his ministry of preaching the gospel as a priestly ministry, and of equal value and sacredness to the ministry of the priesthood of the Old Testament. The word “ministering” is again another of those words speaking of a ministry that is sacred,  (leitourgew) used of the priests and Levites who were busied with the sacred rites in the tabernacle and temple (Septuagint, Greek version of the Old Testament). Denney explains, “The offering which Paul conceives himself as presenting to God is the Gentile Church, and the priestly function in the exercise of which this offering is made is the preaching of the gospel.” Translation. The more boldly nevertheless I am writing to you in some measure, as recalling to your mind again because of the grace which was given to me from God, resulting in my being a servant of Christ Jesus in holy things to the Gentiles, exercising a sacred ministry in the good news of God, in order that the offering up of the Gentiles might be wellpleasing, being sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

(15:17–21) Denney comments, “In spite of the apologetic tone of verse 14, Paul is not without confidence in writing to the Romans. But there is no personal assumption in this; for he has it only in Christ Jesus and only in his relations to God.” Vincent translates, “I have my glorying in Christ Jesus,” and says that it denotes the act. The same authority says of the “in those things which pertain to God,” “a technical phrase in Jewish liturgical language to denote functions of worship (Heb. 2:17; 5:1). According to the sacerdotal ideas of the previous verse.” Regarding the contents of verse 18 Denney says, “All other boasting he declines.… In effect this means, I will not presume to speak of anything except what Christ wrought through me. This is the explanation of ‘I therefore have my glorying in Christ.’ The things which Christ did work through Paul He wrought with a view to obedience on the part of the Gentiles. This combination—Christ working in Paul, to make the Gentiles obedient to the gospel—is the vindication of Paul’s action in writing to Rome. It is not on his own impulse, but in Christ that he does it; and the Romans as Gentiles lie within the sphere in which Christ works through him.” “Signs” is  (shmeion), one of the seven Greek words which speak of miracles. Here the emphasis is upon the attesting power of the miracle. The primary purpose of a miracle in the first century was to prove that the person performing the miracle spoke or wrote by the power of the Holy Spirit, and that therefore, his words were from God, and authenticated by God. “Wonders” is teras (tera"), used when the emphasis is upon the

extraordinary character of the miracle which draws attention to the miracle and impresses it upon the memory of the beholder. Illyricum is a Roman province on the northwestern edge of the Grecian peninsula, so that Paul preached the gospel throughout Palestine, Asia Minor, and Greece. The words “round about” do not imply that Paul in his travels took a circuitous route from Jerusalem to Illyricum, but that he preached the gospel in the territory reaching from Jerusalem to the regions about Illyricum. “Fully preached the gospel” is from the verb  (plhrow), “to fulfill, to perfect, to consummate, to make complete in every particular,” in the perfect tense, and the word euaggelion (eujaggelion), “good news.” Vincent translates “fulfilled,” and says, “Some explain, have given the gospel its full development so that it has reached every quarter.” Alford translates and interprets, “executed my office of preaching.” He says regarding Illyricum, “It is possible that Paul may literally have advanced to its frontiers during his preaching in Macedonia; but I think it more probable that he uses it broadly as the terminus the next province to that in which he had preached.” Robertson, referring to the same thing says, “Probably a journey during the time when Paul left Macedonia and waited for II Corinthians to have its effect before coming to Corinth. If so, see II Corinthians 13 and Acts 20:1–3. When he did come, the trouble with the Judaizers was over.””Strived” is philotimeomai (filotimeomai), “to be fond of honor, to be actuated by love of honor, from a love of honor to strive to bring something to pass, to be ambitious, etc.” Vincent says, “The correct sense is to prosecute as a point of honor.” His word “prosecute” had better be guarded here. The word as he uses it does not have its usual present day legal meaning, namely, the action of a prosecuting attorney bringing charges against a defendant. The word is used here in the sense of prosecuting a project, a proposed piece of work, carrying it on to a successful termination. Denney remarks, “He (Paul) had never sought to preach where Christianity was already established. A point of honor, but not of rivalry, is involved.” Translation. I have therefore my glorying in Christ Jesus with reference to the things which pertain to God. For I will not dare to be speaking concerning anything of the things which Christ did not bring about through my agency resulting in the obedience of the Gentiles, by word and deed, by the power of attesting miracles and miracles of an extraordinary character, by the power of the Holy Spirit, so that from Jerusalem and the environs of Illyricum I have fulfilled my commission of preaching the good news of the Christ. Indeed, in this manner I have been actuated by considerations of honor to be ambitious to announce the glad tidings, not where Christ was named, in order that I would not be building upon a foundation belonging to another; but as it stands written, They shall see, those to whom there was not made an announcement concerning Him, and those who have not heard, they shall understand. (15:22–24) “For which cause” is dio (dio), “wherefore, on which account,” the reason being that his preaching throughout the territory Paul just mentioned, had kept him from coming to Rome. “Hindered” is  (ejgkoptw), “to cut into, to impede one’s course by cutting off his way, to hinder.” The verb is imperfect, implying a succession of hindrances. “Much” is ta polla (ta polla), “with reference to the many things,” the things that cut in on Paul and prevented him from going to Rome.

“Place” is topos (topo"), “opportunity, power, occasion for acting.” Vincent defines, “scope, opportunity.” Robertson says, “Surprising frankness that the average preacher would hardly use on such a matter. Paul is now free to come to Rome because there is no demand for him where he is.” “Many” is hikanos (iJkano"), “sufficient, many, enough,” the idea being that he had desired to come to Spain long enough, and now he was ready to have his hopes fulfilled. “In my journey” is literally “journeying through” (Vincent). “Brought on my way” is propempoµ “to send forward, bring on the way, escort,” that is, fit him out with the requisites for his journey (Acts 15:3). “Filled” is  (ejmpimplhmi), “take one’s fill of, glut one’s desire for, to be satiated.” But before being supplied with the requisites for his journey and sent on his way by the Roman church, Paul would want to be satisfied, satiated, at least in part, with their company or fellowship. Alford says that the words “in part” speak of an affectionate limitation of “satiated,” implying that he would wish to remain much longer than he anticipated being able to do. The words, “I will come to you,” are not in best manuscripts. Translation. On account of which also I have been continually hindered by the many things in coming to you. But now no longer having opportunity in these parts, and having a passionate desire to come to you these many years, whenever I journey into Spain, I am hoping to see you as I journey through, and by you to be furnished with the necessities of travel to that place, if first in part I may be fully satisfied with your (fellowship). (15:25–27) Paul’s purpose in taking the contributions of the Gentile saints and bringing them to the poor Jewish saints in Jerusalem was not only to supply their needs, but to bring about a better understanding between Gentiles and the Jews in the Church at large (II Cor. 8, 9). The word “certain” (tina (tina)) shows that there was no assessment to raise a prescribed amount, but it was more or less according to the willingness of the individual and the circumstances he was in (Denney). The words “it pleased” ( (eujdokew)) “it seems good to one, is one’s good pleasure,” Denney says, “express the formal resolution of the churches in question, but here as in many places with the idea that it was a spontaneous and cordial resolution.” The words “the poor saints” are more correctly rendered, “the poor of the saints.” All the saints in Jerusalem were not poor. The spiritual things of which the Gentiles partake are the spiritual blessings of salvation, and they are debtors to the Jew for them because as our Lord said, “Salvation is of the Jews” (John 4:22). The carnal things which the Gentiles minister to the Jews are the necessities of life, food clothing, and shelter, in short, money. The word “contribution” is in the Greek text,  (koinwnia), the verb form of which means “to participate jointly with some other person, to have fellowship.” Here it speaks of the Gentile saints participating jointly or having fellowship in the sending of the money to the Jewish saints in Jerusalem and of having fellowship with them in their necessities by making these necessities their own. The same word is translated “communicate” in Hebrews 13:16 and means there, “share what you have with others.” Translation. But now I am going on my journey to Jerusalem, ministering to the saints. For it was the good pleasure of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain benefaction jointly contributed for the poor of the saints

which are in Jerusalem; it was their good pleasure, and their debtors they are. For in view of the fact that the Gentiles were fellow-partakers of their spiritual things, they are under moral obligation to minister to them in the sphere of things needed for the sustenance of the body. (15:28, 29) “Performed” is  (ejpitelew), “to bring to an end, accomplish, execute, complete.” Paul was anxious to complete this project of the collection of money for the Jerusalem poor. “Sealed” is  (sfragizw), “to set a seal upon.” Denney says, “The point in the figure in  (sfragizw) cannot be said to be clear. It may possibly suggest that Paul, in handing over the money to the saints authenticates it to them as the fruit of their ‘spiritual gifts’ which have been sown among the Gentiles; or it may only mean ‘when I have secured this fruit to them as their property’ (Meyer). The ideas of ‘property, security, formality, solemnity, finality’ are all associated with sphragis (sfragi") and  (sfragizw) in different passages of the New Testament, and it is impossible to say which preponderated in Paul’s mind as he wrote these words.” The same authority, commenting on the word “fruit” says, “This fruit is, of course, the collection; it is one of the gracious results of the reception of the gospel by the Gentiles, and Paul loves to conceive and to speak of it spiritually rather than materially.” “By” is dia (dia) “through.” It is used in relation to space, for instance, “The road runs through the territory.” Paul was intending to go through Rome on his way to Spain. The word “gospel” is rejected by Nestle. Translation. Then, having brought this to a successful termination, and having secured to them this fruit, I will come through you into Spain. And I know positively that when coming, in the fulness of the blessing of Christ I will come. (15:30–33) “Beseech” is  (parakalew), “I beg of you, please.” “For” in both cases is dia (dia), used here with the genitive case, and means therefore “through” in the sense of intermediate agency, not “for the sake of,” its meaning when used with the accusative case. Denney says, “The Romans and Paul were alike servants of this Lord, and His name was a motive to the Romans to sympathize with Paul in all that he had to encounter in Christ’s service.” In other words, that agency which would urge the Roman saints to join Paul in prayer for his safety and success in his proposed journey to Spain was all that the Lord Jesus meant to them and to Paul. The other was the love of the Spirit. “Spirit” here is descriptive genitive, the divine love which the Holy Spirit produces in the hearts of the saints, (Rom. 5:5, Gal. 5:22). Afford says, “a love which teaches us to look not only on our own things but on the things of others.” “Strive together” is sunagonizomai (sunagonizomai). This word was used in classical Greek as an athletic term, describing the concerted action of a team of athletes in the Greek games. It meant “to contend along with, to share in a contest.” Paul asks the Roman saints to contend with him in prayer against the opposition of the hosts of wickedness, contending with him as athletes would do with one another, with intensity of purpose and in perfect cooperation. The reason for Paul’s apprehension of what he might encounter in Jerusalem is made clear in Denney’s note; “It was not the unbelieving Jews only who hated Paul. To them he was an apostate who had disappointed all their hopes; but even Christian Jews in many

cases regarded him as false to the nation’s prerogative, and especially to the law. “There was a real danger that the contribution he brought from the Gentile churches might not be graciously accepted, even accepted at all; it might be regarded as a bribe, in return for which Paul’s opposition to the law would be condoned, and the equal standing of his upstart churches in the Kingdom of God acknowledged. It was by no means certain that it would be taken as what it was—a pledge of brotherly love; and God alone could dispose ‘the saints’ to take it as simply as it was offered.” “Believe not” is  (ajpeiqew) from  (peiqw), “to persuade” and Alpha privative, which makes the verb mean “not to persuade.” The noun form is “nonpersuasible.” This describes Israel, stiffnecked, obstinate. Denney says, “Paul looks forward to a time of joy and rest beyond these anxieties and dangers, as the ultimate end to be secured by their prayers.” He quotes Hort, “Rest after the personal danger and after the ecclesiastical crisis of which the personal danger formed a part.” Alas, how differently things turned out. Ordered to stay away from Jerusalem as a sphere of his ministry and sent to the Gentiles by the Lord Jesus (Acts 22:17–21), forbidden to set foot in Jerusalem by the Holy Spirit (Acts 21:4), allowing his emotions to get the better of his reason, Paul entered Jerusalem against the will of God, was mobbed by the Jews, rescued by the Romans, arrested by the latter when charges were preferred against him, and sent to Rome in chains for his hearing before Caesar. Translation. But I beg of you, please, brethren, through our Lord Jesus Christ and through the love which is of the Spirit, contend intensely with me in your prayers on my behalf to God, in order that I may be delivered from those who are non-persuasible in Judaea, and that my service which is for Jerusalem may become well-pleasing to the saints, in order that in joy having come to you through God’s will, I may rest and refresh myself with you. Now. the God of the peace be with you all. Amen.

CHAPTER SIXTEEN (16:1, 2) The word “commend” is  (sunisthmi), made up of  (iJsthmi), “to place,” and sun (sun), “with,” thus, “to place with,” thus “to recommend, commend, vouch for.” Denney says, “the technical word for this kind of recommendation, which was equivalent to a certificate of church membership.” “Servant” is diakonos (diakono"), a word that could be used in either the masculine or feminine genders. Our words “deacon” and “deaconess” are derived from it. The word means “a servant as seen in his activity.” Vincent has an illuminating note; “The word may be either masculine or feminine. Commonly explained as deaconess. The term diakonissa (diakonissa) is found only in ecclesiastical Greek. The Apostolic Constitutions distinguish deaconesses from widows and virgins, prescribe their duties, and a form for their ordination. Pliny the Younger, about a.d. 104, appears to refer to them in a letter to Trajan, in which he speaks of the torture of two maids who were called ministrae (ministrae) (female ministers). The office seems to have been confined mainly to widows, though virgins were not absolutely excluded. Their duties were to take care of the sick and poor, to minister to martyrs and confessors in prison, to instruct catechumens, to assist at the baptism of women, and to exercise a general supervision over female church-members. Tryphaena, Tryphosa, and Persis (v. 12) may have belonged to this class. Conybeare (Life and Epistles of St. Paul) assumes that Phoebe was a widow, on the ground that she could not,

according to Greek manners, have been mentioned as acting in the independent manner described, either if her husband had been living or if she had been unmarried. Renan says: ‘Phoebe carried under the folds of her robe the whole future of Christian theology.’ ” The Roman letter was written at and sent from Corinth. Cenchrea was nine miles away, and one of its seaports. Vincent says it was a thriving town. It contained temples of Venus, Aesculapius, and Isis. The church there was perhaps a branch of the church at Corinth. Paul sent the letter (no carbon copy) with this woman over the long and dangerous journey to Rome. God’s watchful care was over both the bearer and the letter. Paul calls Phoebe “our sister,” that is “Christian sister.” “Receive” is prosdechomai (prosdecomai), “to receive to one’s self, to give access to one’s self, to receive into intercourse and companionship.” Paul exhorts the Roman saints to receive Phoebe “in the Lord.” Denney remarks, “no mere reception of Phoebe into their houses satisfies this— their Christian life was to be open for her to share in it; she was no alien to be debarred from spiritual intimacy.” “Becometh” is axios (ajxio"), “weighing, having weight,” with the genitive case, “having the weight of another thing, of like value, worth as much.” Paul uses it in Philippians 1:27 when he urges the saints in that church to see to it that their manner of life as citizens of heaven weighs as much as the gospel they preach, that is, be worthy of the gospel. Here Paul exhorts the Roman saints to welcome Phoebe into their spiritual company in a manner worthy of a saint. Their welcome should weigh as much as the position they hold in the family of God. It should be fitting to their position as saints. They should act worthy of a saint. “Assist” is  (paristhmi), “to stand by, to help or succour.” It is the word used by Paul when he says that the Lord Jesus stood by him at his trial before Caesar (II Tim. 4:17). It was used as a legal term of presenting culprits or witnesses in a court of law. Denney says that Paul’s language suggests that Phoebe was going to Rome on business in which the Roman saints could assist her. “Succourer” is prostatis (prostati"), “a woman set over others, a protectress, a patroness,” caring for the affairs of others and aiding them with her resources. “Church” is  (ejkklhsia), “an assembly of called out ones.” Translation. Now, I recommend to you Phoebe, our sister, who is a deaconess of the assembly at Cenchrea, to the end that you take her to yourselves in the Lord, in a manner which is fitting to the saints, and that you stand by her in whatever business she may have need of you, for verily, she herself became a benefactress of many, and of me myself. (16:3, 4) “Priscilla” is the diminutive form of “Prisca” which latter appears in the Greek text of Nestle. Paul met Prisca the wife, and Aquilla, her husband, first at Corinth. They were tentmakers and he stayed with them and made tents for a living and at the same time preached the gospel (Acts 18:1–3). The wife’s name is given first, because she was the more prominent Christian worker. These two risked their lives to save Paul at one time. No details are known. The words, “laid down their necks” are literally, “placed their necks under” the axe. Translation. Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow-workers in Christ Jesus, who are such that on behalf of my life they laid down their necks, to whom

I not only give thanks, but also all the assemblies of the Gentiles. (16:5) Vincent says, “The phrase, ‘church that is in their (or his) house’ occurs I Cor. 16:19, of Aquila and Priscilla; Col. 4:15, of Nymphas; Philem. 2, of Philemon. A similar gathering may be implied in Rom. 16:14, 15. Bishop Lightfoot says there is no clear example of a separate building set apart for Christian worship within the limits of the Roman Empire before the third century. The Christian congregations were therefore dependent upon the hospitality of prominent church members who furnished their homes for this purpose. Hence their places of assembly were not called temples until late; but houses of God; houses of the churches, houses of prayer.” “Epaenetus” is a Greek name. From his residence in Asia (best texts read “Asia,” not Achaia), it could be inferred that he was a Greek, since the Roman province of Asia was chiefly Greek. But Vincent says that it is impossible to infer the nationality, since it was common for the Jews to have a second name which they adopted during their residence in heathen countries. Asia here is the western part of what used to be called Asia Minor, and which today is called Turkey. Translation. Also, greet the assembly in their home. Greet Epaenetus, my well-beloved, who is the first-fruits of Asia with reference to Christ. (16:6–9) “Mary” is in the Greek text “Marian,” a Jewish name, the same as Miriam, meaning obstinacy, rebelliousness (Vincent). She is described in the Greek text as a person of such character as to have labored with wearisome effort to the point of exhaustion with reference to many things for Paul. “Kinsmen” is  (suggenh"), “of the same kin, related by blood, of the same race, a fellow-countryman.” The latter meaning is probably to be taken here. Denney says, “It is hardly possible that so many people in the church addressed should be more closely connected with Paul than by the bond of nationality.” “Fellowprisoners” is  (sunaicmalwto"), literally, “a fellow-captive in war.” Robertson says, “Perhaps they had shared one of Paul’s numerous imprisonments.” “Of note” is  (ejpishmo"), “having a mark upon, marked, stamped, of note, illustrious.” Robertson comments, “Naturally this means that they are counted among the apostles in the general sense true of Barnabas, James, the brother of Christ, Silas, and others. But it can mean simply that they were famous in the circle of the apostles in the technical sense.” These were in Christ before Paul in the sense that they were saved before Paul was. The apostle uses the perfect tense (were gegonen (gegonen), to become) to indicate that they were at the time of writing still in Christ. Paul goes out of his way to use the perfect tense often when speaking of salvation, for it spells the eternal security of the believer. “Urbane” is ourbanos (oJurbano"), “city-bred.” “Stachys” is Stachus (Stacu"), an ear of corn.” Translation. Greet Marian, who was such as to have labored with wearisome effort to the point of exhaustion on our behalf with reference to many things. Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow-countrymen and my fellow-prisoners who are of excellent reputation among the apostles, who also came in Christ before me. Greet Amplias, my beloved in the Lord.

Greet Urbane, our fellow-helper in Christ, and Stachys, my beloved. (16:10–16) The words “greet” and “salute” are the translation of the same Greek word aspazomai (ajspazomai), and were used by the translators of the a.v. to vary the diction. Those of the household of Aristobulus, Vincent says. were possibly household slaves. They might have borne the name of Aristobulus even if they had passed into the service of another master, since household slaves thus transferred, continued to bear the name of their former proprietor. Robertson reports Lightfoot as suggesting that some of the slaves in his household had become Christians, Aristobulus, being dead. Herodion, probably belonging to the Herod family, was a fellow-countryman of the apostle, that is, a Jew. Vincent says regarding Narcissus, “This name was borne by a distinguished freedman, who was secretary of letters to Claudias (Roman emperor). Juvenal alludes to his wealth and his influence over Claudias, and says that Messalina, the wife of Claudias was put to death by his order. His household slaves, passing into the hands of the emperor or of some other master, would continue to bear his name.” Tryphaena and Tryphosa are slavenames, and are derived from the word  (trufaw), “to live luxuriously.” “Rufus” means “red.” Vincent says, “Possibly the son of Simon of Cyrene” (Mk. 15:21), the words “his mother and mine” “delicately intimating her maternal care for him.” Philologus is another common slave name. One can see that many were won to Christianity from the ranks of the slaves. Regarding the holy kiss, Denney says, “The custom of combining greeting and kiss was oriental, and especially Jewish, and in this way became Christian.… By ‘holy’ the kiss is distinguished from an ordinary greeting of natural affection or friendship. It belongs to God and the new society of His children. It is specifically Christian.” Robertson says, “The near-east mode of salutation as hand-shaking in the western … Men kissed men and women kissed women.” Translation. Greet Apelles, the one who having been put to the test and having been found to meet the test, is approved in Christ. Greet those belonging to Aristobulus. Greet Herodion, my fellow-countryman. Greet those belonging to Narcissus, those who are in the Lord. Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those who labored to the point of exhaustion in the Lord. Greet Persis, the beloved who was such that she labored to the point of exhaustion with reference to many things in the Lord. Greet Rufus, the one selected out in the Lord, and his mother and mine. Greet Asyncritus, Philegon, Hermas, Patrobas, Hermes, and the brethren with them. Greet Philologus, and Julia, Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints with them. Greet one another with a holy kiss. There greet you all the churches of Christ. (16:17–20) “Beseech” is  (parakalew), “I beg of you, please.” “Mark” is  (skopew), “to look at, observe, contemplate, to fix one’s eyes upon, direct one’s attention to, scrutinize.” Robertson translates, “Keep an eye on so as to avoid.” Denney says, “Warning against false teachers. This comes in very abruptly in the middle of the greetings, and as it stands, has the character of an afterthought. The false teachers referred to are quite definitely described, but it is clear that they had not yet appeared in Rome, nor begun to work there. Paul is only warning the Roman Church against a danger which he has seen in other places.” The words “divisions” and “offenses” have the definite article, indicating that both were well-known to the Roman saints. These were in other Christian assemblies in the empire. “Offenses” is skandalon (skandalon), “an impediment placed

in the way and causing one to stumble or fall,” metaphorically, “any person or thing by which one is drawn into error or sin.” These, Denney says, “refer more naturally to conduct which would create a moral prejudice against the gospel, and so prevent men from accepting it, than to any ordinary result of Jewish legal teaching. But if the latter caused dissension and generated bad tempers in the Church, it also might give outsiders cause to blaspheme, and to stumble at the gospel.” “Avoid” is  (ejkklinw), from  (klinw), “to incline, bow,” and ek (ejk), “out,” thus, “to lean out,” thus, “to turn aside, turn away from, keep aloof from, to shun one.” “Belly” is koilia (koilia), “the whole belly, the entire cavity.” The reference here is to the stomach, and the satisfaction of the creature needs. Denney explains, “The words need not mean the teachers in question were mere sensualists, or that they taught Epicurean or antinomian doctrines; the sense must partly be defined by the contrast—it is not our Lord Christ whom they serve; on the contrary, it is base interests of their own. It is a bitter contemptuous way of describing a self-seeking spirit, rather than an allusion to any particular cast of doctrine.” “Good words” is  (crhstologia), “fair speaking, the smooth and plausible address which simulates goodness.” “Fair speeches” is eulogia (eujlogia), made up of eu (euj), “good,” and logos (logo"), “word.” Our word “eulogy” is derived from it. Thayer defines eulogia (eujlogia) as “praise, laudation, panegyric, fine discourse, polished language.” Grimm says that  (crhstologia) refers to the insinuating tone, and eulogia (eujlogia), to the fine style of the false teachers. “Deceive,” Vincent suggests should be translated “beguile.” He says, “It is not merely making a false impression, but practically, leading astray.” “Simple” in verse 18 is akakos (ajkako"), “literally, not evil. Rev. innocent. Bengel says; “An indifferent word. They are called so who are merely without positive wickedness, when they ought to abound also in prudence, and to guard against other men’s wickedness.” Commenting on the connection between the individuals of verse 18 and the obedience of the Roman saints, Denney says, “What is the connection? ‘I give this exhortation, separating you altogether from the false teachers, and from those who are liable to be misled by them; for your obedience (the Greek word your in the emphatic position) has come abroad to all men. Over you therefore I rejoice, but,’ etc. He expresses his confidence in them, but at the same time conveys a feeling of anxiety.” “Simple” (v. 19) is akerios (ajkerio"), “unmixed, pure, without admixture of evil, free from guile, innocent, simple.” Denney says, “The fundamental idea of the word is that of freedom from alien or disturbing elements. What Paul here wishes for the Romans—moral intelligence, not impaired in the least by any dealings with evil—does suggest that antinomianism (lawlessness, antagonism against law) was the peril to be guarded against. Integrity of the moral nature is the best security: the seductive teaching is instinctively repelled.” Denney suggests that the expression, “the God of the peace” is used by Paul with special reference to the divisions referred to in verse 17. He says, “Divisions in the Church are Satan’s work, and the suppression of them by the God of peace is a victory over Satan.” The Greek word for “peace” is in its verbal form  (eijrw), “to bind together that which was separated.” When the divisions are bound together again, the result is peace. “Bruise” is  (suntribw), “to crush, trample underfoot.” Denney says, “There is an allusion to Genesis 3:15, though it is doubtful whether Paul found anything there to  (suntribw).” “Shortly” is en tachei (ejn tacei). Tachos (Taco") is “quickness, speed, speedily, soon.” Robertson says, “as God counts time. Meanwhile,

patient loyalty from us.” Translation. Now, I beg of you, please, brethren, be keeping a watchful eye ever open for those who are causing the divisions and the scandals which are contrary to the teaching that you learned, and be turning away from them. For they are such as are not rendering service as bondslaves to our Lord Christ, but to their own stomachs; and with smooth and plausible address which simulates goodness, and with polished eulogies, are leading astray the innocent, for your obedience has come to (the ears of) all. Because of you therefore I am rejoicing. But I desire you to be wise ones with reference to the good, and pure ones with reference to the evil. And the God of the peace will trample Satan under your feet soon. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you. (16:21–24) “Timotheus” is Timothy, Paul’s young understudy and fellow-worker. The name is a combination of two Greek words,  (timaw) “to honor,” and theos (qeo"), “God,” the name meaning, “one who honors God.” The name was given him when a child in the hope that he would live up to its implications as he grew older. Tertius was the secretary to whom Paul dictated the letter to the Romans. The great apostle, afflicted with an Oriental eye disease called ophthalmia which he contracted in the lowlands of Pamphylia while on his first missionary journey, and which induced almost total blindness (Gal. 4:13–15), was in the habit of dictating his letters to a secretary. “Wrote” is what is called an epistolary aorist. It was a courtesy which a first-century writer showed the recipient of the letter, by which he looks at his writing of the letter which is a present event with him, as the reader will look at it when he receives it, namely, as a past event. The translation should be in the present tense since the English reader does not understand the Greek idiom. Vincent says “Godet remarks upon Paul’s exquisite courtesy in leaving Tertius to salute in his own name. To dictate to him his own salutation, would be to treat him as a machine.” The words “in the Lord” indicate that “it is as a Christian, not in virtue of any other relation he has to the Romans, that Tertius salutes them” (Denney). Regarding Gaius, Paul’s host, the same authority says, “As the Epistle to the Romans was written from Corinth, this hospitable Christian is probably the same who is mentioned in I Corinthians 1:14.” The words “of the whole Church” could mean either that the Corinthian assembly met in the home of Gaius or that he acted as host to all Christians who came to Corinth (Denney). “Chamberlain” is oikonomos (oijkonomo"), “the manager of a household or of household affairs, steward, superintendent.” Denney defines Erastus’ position as city treasurer, Vincent, probably the administrator of the city lands, Robertson, the city manager. Both Nestle and Westcott and Hort reject the entire twenty-fourth verse. Translation. There greet you Timothy, my co-worker, and Lucius, and Jason, and Sosipater, my countrymen. As for myself, I, Tertius, greet you, the one who is writing this letter. There greets you Gaius, my host and (host) of the whole assembly. There greet you Erastus, the manager of the city, and Quartus, the brother. (16:25–27) “Stablish” is  (sthrizw), “to make stable, place firmly, set fast, to

strengthen, make firm.” Denney remarks, “This word takes us back to the beginning of the epistle (1:11). Paul wished to impart to them some spiritual gift, to the end that they might be established; but only God is able (compare 14:4) to effect this result. The stablishing is to take place ‘according to my gospel:’ in agreement with the gospel Paul preached. When it was achieved, the Romans will be settled and confirmed in Christianity as it was understood by the apostle.” As to the words “my gospel,” the same authority says, “The expression implies not only that Paul’s gospel was his own, in the sense that he was not taught it by any man (Gal. 1:11), but also that it had something characteristic of himself about it. The characteristic feature, to judge by this epistle, was his sense of the absolute freeness of salvation (justification by faith, apart from works of law), and of its absolute universality (for everyone that believeth).” “The preaching of Jesus Christ” is   (to khrugma ÆIhsou" Cristo"). “Preaching” is a noun, could be rendered “proclamation.” It was the proclamation of Jesus Christ in Paul’s gospel to which the apostle has reference. The words “according to the revelation” etc., are construed with “preaching.” That is, the gospel proclaiming Jesus Christ is in accordance with the revelation of the mystery, and as Denney says, “identical with it.” “Mystery” is  (musthrion), “something hidden and unknown but later revealed and then understood.” This mystery, Denney says, “is God’s world-embracing purpose of redemption, as it is set out conspicuously in this epistle.… The gospel as Paul understood it was a mystery, because it could never have been known except through divine revelation.” “Kept secret” is  (sigaw), “to keep silence, to hold one’s peace,” in the passive voice as here, “to be kept in silence.” “Since the world began” is  (crono" aijwnio"), which Robertson translates “through times eternal,” or, “along with times eternal.” The expression refers to the eternal ages before creation. “Made manifest” is  (fanerow), “to make visible, to make known what has been hidden or unknown.” The Greek reads, “but now has been made known through prophetic writings.” These were the Old Testament scriptures of which Denney says “Paul made constant use in preaching his gospel (compare ‘according to the scriptures’ in I Cor. 15:3, 4). For him the o.t. was essentially a Christian book. His gospel was witnessed to by the law and the prophets, and in that sense the mystery was made known through them. But their significance only came out for one who had the Christian key—the knowledge of Christ which revelation had given to Paul.” The word “everlasting” is  (aijwnio") which means, “without beginning and without end, eternal.” The word “eternal” is the better rendering, since something that is everlasting may have a beginning. The making known of this mystery was according to the commandment of the eternal God. Denney remarks, “The idea is that only an express command of the eternal God could justify the promulgation of the secret He had kept so long.” “For” is eis (eij"), “with a view to” the obedience of faith. The same expression is found in Romans 1:5 where we translated “obedience to the Faith,” the Christian Faith as a system of truth. Translation. Now, to the One who is of power to establish you according to my gospel, even the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the uncovering of the mystery, which during eternal times has been kept in silence, but now has been made known through prophetic writings according to the mandate of the eternal God, having been made known with a view to the obedience to the Faith among all nations, to God alone wise, through Jesus Christ, to Him (God alone wise) be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.

GALATIANS In the Greek New Testament

Dedicated To John C. Page, D.D., my honored and beloved instructor in Bible Doctrine and Homiletics during student days at the Moody Bible Institute, whose masterful teaching technique, clear exposition of the Word, and humble Christian life redolent with the fragrance of the Lord Jesus, have left their deep impression upon my life and ministry.

PREFACE The story of this book can be summed up in the following words: “Other men have labored. The author has entered into their labors.” Whatever original work the writer has done, concerns itself chiefly with the ministry of the Holy Spirit and its relationship to the spiritual situation in the Galatian churches at the time of the inroads of the Judaizers, a theme which the commentaries do not treat adequately. Seven authorities on the Greek New Testament were consulted as the writer studied the words, phrases, and sentences of the text, and others were brought in when needed. Where portions are quoted verbatim, due recognition has been given the particular author, but the writer has for the most part made the material his own, and has put it in words which the average Bible student can understand. The seven authorities in their alphabetical order are: Henry Alford, The Greek Testament; Ernest DeWitt Burton, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians; Bishop J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians; Heinrich Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament; Frederic Rendall in Expositor’s Greek Testament; A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, and Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament. The supplementary authorities are: Joseph H. Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament; James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek Testament; Herman Cremer, Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek; Liddel and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon (classical); Archbishop Trench, New Testament Synonyms; H. E. Dana, and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament; Henry C. Thiessen, Introduction to the New Testament, and Theodor Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament. The writer has made available to the student of the English Bible, a wealth of interpretive and translation material from these authorities to which he otherwise would have no access (with the exception of Robertson’s Word Pictures), and he has tried to present it in language which the average student is able to follow. Many of the Greek words commented upon have been included in their transliterated form for those who are

conversant with the Greek New Testament. This is no book to peruse in one’s easy chair. It is designed like its predecessors, Philippians in the Greek New Testament, and First Peter in the Greek New Testament, for use on the Christian’s study table alongside of his Bible. The book is a simplified commentary on the Greek text of Galatians, making available to the Bible student who is not acquainted with Greek, and who has had no formal training in Bible study, a wealth of informative and explanatory material that will throw a flood of light upon his English Bible. The translation offered is what might be called a fuller translation, using more words than a standard version of the Scriptures in order to bring out more of the richness of the Greek, and make certain passages clearer, where the condensed literality of the standard translations tends to obscure their meaning. Words in parenthesis are not part of the translation but are explanatory. The translation must not be used as a substitute for, but as a companion to the standard translation the student is using. The book is not written for the scholar, and lays no claim to being a finished piece of work on the Greek text of Galatians. It is designed for those who love the Lord and His Word and delight in feasting upon it. The index makes it possible for the student to turn quickly to any verse desired. Where a word or subject is treated more fully or in its every New Testament occurrence in the author’s other books, a footnote will direct the reader to the page or pages where that treatment may be found. The English translation referred to is the Authorized Version. The Greek text used is Nestle’s. K. S. W.

1. The Historical Background of the Letter Before entering upon an exegetical study of Paul’s Galatian letter, we must consider the following questions: first, Where were the Galatian churches located?; second, Who were the Galatians?; and third, Who were the Judaizers and what did they teach? First, then, as to the location of the Galatian churches. Some have held that these churches were situated in that section of Asia Minor designated on the map as Galatia, in which are situated the cities of Pessinus, Ancyra, and Tavium. This is known as the North Galatian theory. Others hold that these churches were located in the cities of Pisidian Antioch,1 Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. This is the South Galatian theory. The first theory had a clear field until Sir William M. Ramsay, a traveller in Asia Minor and a student of the Book of Acts, demonstrated that the Roman province of Galatia included at the time of the founding of the Galatian churches, not only the territory of Galatia, but also the country immediately to the south of it in which were situated the cities of Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. In 278–277 b.c., a people known as the Gauls left their home in southern Europe and settled in northern Asia Minor. After 232 b.c., their state became known as Galatia. King Amyntas (35–25 b.c.), the last independent ruler of Galatia, bequeathed his kingdom to Rome, and Galatia became a Roman province, 25 b.c. During the first century, the term Galatia was used in two different senses: geographically, it referred to the territory in the northern part of the central plateau of Asia Minor where the Gauls lived; and politically, it was used to designate the Roman province of Galatia as it varied in extent. There was a wide difference between North and South Galatia in respect to language, occupation, nationality, and social organization. The northern section was still mainly populated by the Gauls, and was pastoral, with comparatively little commerce and few roads.

But in South Galatia the situation was radically different. This section was full of flourishing cities, and was enriched by the constant flow of commerce across it. This was the natural result of its geographical position and political history. In ancient times it was the highway along which Asiatic monarchs kept up their communications with the western coast of Asia Minor. When Greek monarchs ruled in Syria and Asia Minor, the highway between their capitals, Syrian Antioch and Ephesus, passed through South Galatia, and was the principal channel through which Greek civilization flowed eastward. These monarchs planted colonies of Jews and Greeks along the extent of this highway. The Caesars inherited the policy of the Greek monarchs, and planted fresh colonies along this road in order to secure this important route to the east for their legions and their commerce. Dr. Henry Clarence Thiessen, B.D., Ph.D., D.D., chairman of the Department of Bible, Theology, and Philosophy at Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois, an authority among evangelical scholars, says in his most excellent book, Introduction to the New Testament, that now all scholars agree that Paul was in the province of Galatia when he on his first missionary journey visited Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe (Acts 13:1–14:28). He says that Sir William Ramsay has proved this conclusively, and that no one today disputes the assertion. Dr. Thiessen also states that it seems clear that Paul on his second missionary journey (Acts 15:36–18:22) went through North Galatia (Acts 16:6) after he had passed through South Galatia, Luke using the term Galatian in its territorial sense. On his third journey, he visited the disciples in North Galatia made on the second journey (Acts 18:23). Dr. Thiessen remarks that it is significant that Luke uses the word disciples rather than churches in connection with Paul’s visit to North Galatia on his third journey. The implication is clear that the Galatian churches as such were in South Galatia and that there were only scattered disciples in the north section. Paul, Dr. Thiessen says, always used the provincial names of the districts that were under the Roman domination, never the territorial, except as the two were identical in significance. He speaks of Achaia, Macedonia, Illyricum, Dalmatia, Judaea (in the Roman sense of Palestine), Arabia, and Asia as provinces. Dr. Thiessen asks some significant questions, the obvious answers to which point to the opinion that, as he says, the Galatian letter was written primarily to the churches of Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. First, is it likely since Paul alway used the provincial names of districts, that he would speak of Galatia in any other sense? Second, would it not be strange for Luke to tell us so much about the founding of churches in South Galatia (Acts 13:14–14:23), and for Paul to say nothing about them? Third, does it not seem strange, on the other hand, to think that Paul would write so weighty a letter as the Epistle to the Galatians to churches whose founding is practically passed over in silence by Luke, as would be the case if the Galatian churches were located in North Galatia? Fourth, would it not be strange also for the Judaizers of Palestine to pass by the most important cities of Iconium and Antioch in South Galatia, where there were a good many Jews, and no doubt, some Jewish Christians, and go to the remoter Galatian country to do their mischievous work? The location of the Galatian churches in South Galatia, will help us understand the identity of the Galatian Christians. And this brings us to our next question, Who were the Galatians? It was Paul’s practice to establish groups of churches around the capitals of the Roman provinces, link those centers together by chains of churches along the principal roads, and so bring into being an ecclesiastical organization closely corresponding to the

divisions of the Roman empire. He made the provincial capitals of Pisidian Antioch, Corinth, and Ephesus, the centers of church life, as they were centers of imperial administration, and surrounded each with its group of dependent churches. Paul and Barnabas left Syrian Antioch on their first missionary journey with the purpose of extending the gospel to the Greek cities of Asia Minor and the famous centers of Greek civilization in Greece itself. This was a radical departure from the previous method by which the gospel was spread. Heretofore, the good news was spread by providential circumstances such as persecution, where refugees took their faith with them in their flight (Acts 8:1–4). But here we have a purely missionary enterprise. They sailed to Cyprus, landed at Salamis, went through the island, took a boat at Paphos and sailed to Perga, and then took the highway to Pisidian Antioch. This highway continued to Ephesus, which city would put them in touch with the Greek cities of Asia Minor and the mainland of Greece itself. Paul could have gone to Ephesus by sea from Perga, but at a certain time of the year, autumn, the violence of the winds made the sea voyage along the Aegean coast dangerous, and travellers would take the highway from Perga through Antioch. Had Paul intended to evangelize the cities of South Galatia, he would have taken the overland route from Syrian Antioch through Tarsus, as he did on his second journey. Arriving at Antioch, he was seized with a sudden attack of illness which forced him to stay in that city, and made necessary the abandonment of his projected tour of evangelism in the Greek cities of Asia Minor and the Greek mainland (Gal. 4:13) . There in Antioch he preached the gospel and from there he was driven by the Jews. He could not continue his journey westward to Ephesus because of his illness, so the only thing he could do was to strike out for home. He accordingly took the great highway back through Tarsus on which the cities of Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe were located. After establishing churches in these cities, instead of going back to Syrian Antioch by way of Tarsus, he retraced his steps in order to establish his young converts in the Faith, his illness having been presumably alleviated, which fact permitted him to take the long way home. The religion of the Gentiles in the South Galatian cities was more oriental than Greek. Its degraded type of sensuous worship could hardly satisfy the conscience even of a heathen community to which the influences of western civilization had come. Greek philosophy and Roman morality created a nobler idea of human duty and divine government than could be reconciled with the popular religion. Thus all the better feelings of educated men and women were stirred to revolt against the degraded superstition of the masses. Into this conflict of religious ideas, the Jewish synagogue entered. The Gentiles flocked to its higher and nobler conceptions. However, while they gave adherence to the exalted ethics of the synagogue, yet they would have nothing to do with the sacrificial system which centered in the Jerusalem Temple. To Paul’s preaching, they gave a cordial welcome. In the synagogue at Antioch (Acts 13:14–43), the Jews heard the impotence of the law for salvation announced, and the Gentiles heard the offer of a salvation procured at the Cross and given in answer to faith in Christ alone. From that hour, both Jew and Gentile recognized in Paul the foremost champion of the Gentiles, and the most formidable adversary of Judaism, which latter had been set aside by God at the Cross, but which, under an apostate priesthood, was still being nominally observed. Before this first missionary journey, the Christian churches had been predominately Jewish. The teachers were Jewish with an Old Testament background. While interpreting

the Old Testament in a new light, they yet fixed their hopes on the future kingdom of a national Messiah. But now, the newly formed churches were predominately Gentile, and the Gentiles recognized the Lord Jesus, not as a Saviour looked upon as the Messiah of Israel only, but as a world-Saviour. Thus, the Galatian Christians were not for the most part, the fickle-minded Gauls of North Galatia, but Greeks and Jews of flourishing cities situated on the highways of commerce and government. This brings us to our third question, Who were the Judaizers, and what did they teach? In order to answer this question properly, we must no back to Cain, for it was he who first exhibited the tendencies which form the background of the teachings and activities of the Judaizers. Adam had instructed his sons, Cain and Abel, as to the proper approach of a sinner to a holy God, namely, by means of a blood sacrifice which pointed to and symbolized the actual sacrifice for sin which God would some day set forth, even the Lord Jesus. However, the offering of such a blood sacrifice in itself would not result in the salvation of the offerer. That offering was to be only an outward visible manifestation of an inward fact, namely, the act of that offerer in placing his faith in the coming virginborn child who would crush the head of the serpent, Satan. Without that act of faith, the offering of the sacrifice would be a mere form, and a mockery in the eyes of God. Cain’s reaction to this instruction was that he rejected the teaching of salvation through faith in a substitutionary sacrifice, and substituted for it his own personal merit and good works. Abel followed the instructions of his father, his faith leaped the centuries to the Cross, and he was declared righteous. Since the time of these two men, these two diametrically opposed tendencies are seen in the human race. We see them in the history of Israel. There always was the remnant in Israel, a little group which offered the symbolic sacrifices as an indication of a real living faith in the future substitutionary sacrifice, and there was always the larger group, which, while it went through the ritual of the Levitical sacrifices, yet exercised no heart faith to appropriate a salvation offered in grace on the basis of justice satisfied by the atonement, but depended upon personal merit and good works for salvation. These two groups were in existence in Israel in the first century. An illustration of the first is found in such believers as Zacharias, Elizabeth, Mary the virgin, the disciples other than Judas. An illustration of the second we find in the priests, Pharisees, Sadducees, and the Herodians, who while observing the sacrificial ritual of the Temple yet ignored its significance and depended for salvation upon personal merit and their own good works. From this latter group came two attacks against New Testament truth, inspired by Satan, two attempts of the Adversary to destroy the newly-formed Christian Church. One of these was the attempt to substitute good works for faith in Christ. This was met by the letter to the Galatians. The other was the attempt to invalidate the atoning worth of the Cross by urging the Jewish wing of the Church to return to the Levitical ritual of the Temple. This was met by the Book of Hebrews.2The first was aimed at the Gentile wing of the Church, the second, at the Jewish group in the Church. The Judaizers were members of this unsaved group in Israel, seeking to maintain a corrupt form of the Jewish national religion as against the Christian Church which had been formed at Pentecost. So much for their identity. We now approach the question as to their teachings. Our first source of information is Philippians 3:2–6,3 where Paul warns the Philippian saints against the Judaizers. He calls them dogs. The Greek word was a term of reproach among both Greeks and Jews. He calls them evil workers. The term implies, not merely evil doers, but those who actually wrought against the gospel. He speaks of them as the

concision. The Greek word occurs only here in the New Testament. A kindred verb is used in the Greek translation of the Old Testament, speaking of the mutilations forbidden by the Mosaic law such as the pagans were wont to inflict upon themselves in their religious rites. The Greek word which Paul uses is a play upon the Greek word circumcision. Paul characterizes those who were not of the true circumcision as merely mutilated. Heathen priests mutilated their own bodies. The Judaizers mutilated the message of the gospel by substituting works for grace, and thus their own lives and those of their converts. Then Paul contrasts true believers with the Judaizers by saying that the former worship God in the Spirit whereas the latter have confidence in the flesh. The best Greek texts read, “worship by the Spirit of God.” The implication is clear that the Judaizers did not worship in the energy of the Holy Spirit, which means that they were unsaved. The words have confidence are in the Greek literally, “have come to a settled persuasion.” That is, these Judaizers had come to a settled belief in the merit of human attainment. They depended upon good works for acceptance with God, which teaching goes right back to Cain. Then Paul enumerates some of the human attainments and merits which the Judaizers were depending upon for acceptance with God. The first was circumcision, marking out that person as a member of the Chosen People, Israel, separating the people of that nation from all other peoples as the chosen channel through which God would reveal Himself and His salvation to the human race. The rite had nothing to do with the personal salvation of a Jew or his acceptance before God. The Judaizers made it a prerequisite to salvation. Luke records the fact that “Certain men which came down from Judaea (to Antioch) taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved” (Acts 15:1). Circumcision was obedience to a command of God. Thus it is included in what we call good works. All of which means that the Judaizers taught that salvation is by good works. Second, they taught that acceptance with God was brought about by virtue of the fact that one was a member of the nation Israel, “of the stock of Israel.” John the Baptist met this teaching when the Pharisees and Sadducees came to him. He said to them, “Think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father” (Matt. 3:9). Our Lord encountered the same teaching when the Jews claimed to have Abraham as their father, which fact would provide for their acceptance with God (John 8:39). Third, they taught that an ecclesiastical position in the religious system of Israel gave one acceptance with God. Paul says that he could also have claimed that as a Pharisee he was accepted with God. Fourth, the faithful observance of the law would provide for them a righteousness acceptable with God. Paul speaks of this same thing in Romans 9:30–10:3, where Israel is said to have failed in obtaining a righteousness acceptable with God because the nation ignored the righteousness of God, Christ, given in answer to faith, and went about to establish its own righteousness by doing good works. This was typical of the rank and file of Israel, of course, with the exception of the remnant. Isaiah (64:6) speaks of the same tendency of Israel all down the ages when he predicts that at the Second Advent of Messiah, Israel will finally acknowledge that all of its righteousnesses are as filthy rags in God’s sight. Paul distinguishes between the righteousness which is in the law and the righteousness which is by faith (Rom. 10:5, 6). The first would be possible to a perfect sinless person. By his perfect obedience to God, he could accrue to himself a righteousness. But no sinner

can perfectly obey the legal enactments of the Mosaic law, and therefore any attempt to produce a righteousness would result in what Isaiah calls filthy rags. The Judaizers clothed themselves with these. The righteousness of God, Christ, offered to the believing sinner in answer to his faith, is infinitely more precious and meritorious than any righteousness which a sinless person could accrue to himself by a perfect obedience to the will of God. Paul in Philippians 3:9,4 says that he will have nothing to do with the righteousness which the Judaizers have. He will have nothing else but the righteousness of God. After enumerating the various things that the Judaizers were depending upon for salvation, and saying that he could depend upon those also, Paul says that he has discarded all dependence upon these, for dependence upon these kept him from Christ. That means that the Judaizers, depending upon these things, were unsaved. Our next source of information regarding the Judaizers we will find in Romans 2:17– 3:8. Paul, writing to the believers at Rome, finds it necessary to combat this same Jewish tendency of dependence upon Jewish ancestry, the law and a knowledge of the same, and circumcision. He shows the Jew that with all his boasted privileges, he is still an unsaved man as shown by the fact that he does not practice what he preaches (2:21–24). He devotes chapter 4 to showing that salvation is not by works (1–8), not by ordinances (9– 12), and not by law observance (13–25), saying that Abraham was justified by faith alone, was saved before the rite of circumcision was performed, and that the law is a ministry of condemnation rather than of salvation. We turn now to Philippians 1:14–18.5 Paul is writing from his prison in Rome. He informs the Philippians that one result of his imprisonment was that many of the brethren were becoming more confident in the Lord by reason of his own fearless example, and were preaching the gospel in the face of opposition and persecution. This group, composed of true believers, was motivated by a love for Paul and sympathy for him in his present distress. The other group was announcing the Messiah out of a spirit of rivalry and envy, seeking to make Paul’s imprisonment more distressing to him. They announced Messiah not sincerely, but with mixed motives, insincerely. This group was at odds with Paul. They were the Judaizers who dogged Paul’s footsteps, ever seeking to undermine his work of evangelization and the founding of churches. They announced Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah, but in a most inadequate way. They could not have announced Him as the Lamb of God who took away the sins of the world, for they preached salvation by works. An illustration of the hazy, inadequate, and erroneous conception which the apostate Jewish world had of its Messiah in the first century is found in the fact that the writer to the Hebrews, in combating the Judaistic attack upon Christianity from the standpoint of a return to the Levitical sacrifices, finds it necessary to prove from Old Testament scripture that the Messiah is better than the prophets of Israel, the angels of God, superior to Moses, Joshua, and Aaron. The writer to the Hebrews was not fighting a straw man. He would not waste time nor energy nor space in his treatise to refute an argument or a system of teaching that did not exist.6 In addition to circumcision and obedience to the precepts of the Mosaic law, the Judaizers taught that it was necessary for these Galatian Christians to keep the Jewish feasts (Gal. 4:10). They did not touch the matter of the Levitical sacrifices so far as the Gentiles were concerned, for the latter were attracted only by the pure monotheism and high precepts of the Jewish synagogue, and rejected teaching regarding salvation through a substitutionary sacrifice which this symbolic system presented. And the very fact that the

Judaizers left this part of the Mosaic law alone so far as the Galatian Christians were concerned, shows that they considered the Temple sacrifices a mere form, and not an essential part of the revelation of God to Moses so far as salvation was concerned. Thus the Judaizers belong to that section of the nation Israel that was unsaved. They are to be distinguished however from the rest of their brethren after the flesh, in that they had infiltrated into the visible Christian Church, and were attempting to set up a perverted legalism built around the Mosaic economy, whereas the others rejected Jesus as Messiah, were holding aloof from the Church, and were persecuting the Jews in the Church. While giving a mental assent to the Messiahship of Jesus of Nazareth, they had at the same time a most inadequate view of that office. They taught that acceptance with God was to be had by means of personal merit obtained through the individual’s good works and that the saved individual was sanctified by observance of the legal precepts of the Mosaic law. The Judaizers did not attempt to introduce the economy of the Old Testament into the Church, but a false view of that economy. Sinners were saved in Old Testament times by pure grace just as they are today, without any admixture of good works. Had the Judaizers believed in their hearts in the true economy of the Old Testament, they would not have been false teachers, but true believers in the Lord Jesus, for all Old Testament saints alive when Jesus came, accepted Him as Messiah and High Priest, and those who over-lived the Cross, became members of the Body of Christ at Pentecost. Here therefore was an attempt on the part of Satan, working through Israel, to ruin the Christian Church, not by introducing Old Testament Judaism, but a false conception of the same, by going back to Cain and his system of salvation by works. Paul was the chief exponent of grace, and the apostle to the Gentiles. It was therefore necessary to undermine, and if possible, to destroy his work. This the Judaizers tried to do by two methods. First, they endeavored to depreciate Paul’s apostolic position and set up the Twelve Apostles as the real interpreters of Christ in order that they might thereby discredit his authority as a teacher of grace. They argued that Paul was not one of the original Twelve, he had not listened to Christ’s voice, he had not seen His face, he had not attended on Christ’s ministry, and that he had not been sent out like them at His express command. Furthermore, they said that he had not received the gospel by direct revelation from Christ as had the others, but had gathered it at secondhand from the Twelve. The second method they used was to substitute a salvation-byworks system for the doctrine of pure grace which Paul preached. Paul therefore found it necessary to defend his apostolic authority, which he does in the first two chapters of Galatians; and to show that salvation was by grace before the Mosaic law was given, and that the coming in of the latter did not supersede nor affect the economy of grace in the least, and this he does in chapters three and four. Then, because the teachings of the Judaizers were working havoc in the lives of the Galatian Christians, he found it necessary to introduce some corrective measures emphasizing the ministry of the Holy Spirit to the Christian, which he does in chapters five and six. Thus the epistle can be summed up in three words and divided into three sections, Personal (1, 2), Doctrinal (3, 4), Practical (5, 6). The inroads of the Judaizers into the Galatian churches took place during Paul’s third missionary journey, for Paul had visited them again on his second journey, and at that time there were no evidences of their destructive work. It was during his third journey, when Paul was either in Macedonia or Greece, and about a.d. 55, 56 (Thiessen) that Paul received word of the serious danger which the Galatian churches were in, and recognized

in that danger, a serious threat to the whole Christian system. From the following considerations, it seems probable that the way in which Paul found out about the activities of the Judaizers was that accredited representatives of the Galatian churches had come to Paul to obtain a decision on the whole matter of their teachings concerning his apostolic credentials and his gospel of pure grace without works. Paul does not seem anywhere in the Galatian epistle to be uncertain with regard to the facts and conditions among the Galatians which are presupposed and discussed by him. It is hardly possible that his information was derived solely from private sources, letters, or oral statements of individual Christians as is the case in I Corinthians 1:11, 11:18. Again, there is nothing in the letter which would lead one to think that it is an answer to a writing sent to Paul in the name and by the direction of the churches. It is much more probable that accredited representatives of the Galatian churches came to Paul, of whom he could have inquired as to the details concerning the matters which they had brought to his attention. Otherwise he could not have written this epistle without first asking for an explanation of the surprising things that were going on, or without expressing doubt as to the truthfulness of the reports that had come to him. Being assured of the facts, he proceeds to pass judgment on them. Finding it impossible to go at once to them, he writes this letter (4:20). We are now ready for the exegetical study of its contents.7

2. The Analysis of the Letter PERSONAL Paul defends his apostolic authority against the efforts of the Judaizers to discredit it, by proving it to be of divine origin (Ch. 1 and 2). I. The salutation and ascription of praise. In his salutation, Paul expands his official title into a statement of his direct commission from God, thus meeting at once the attack of his opponents against his apostolic authority, and by dwelling on the work of redemption in connection with the name of Christ, he protests against their doctrinal errors (1:1–5). II. The Galatian Christians are rebuked and the Judaizers denounced (1:6–10) . III. Paul asserts that the gospel he preaches came to him, not from man but directly from God (1:11–2:21). 1. It was a special revelation given to Paul directly from God (1:11, 12). 2. Paul’s previous education could not have been responsible for his teaching of grace, for it was directly opposed to the latter (1:13, 14). 3. Paul could not have learnt the gospel from the Twelve Apostles at Jerusalem, for he kept aloof from them for some time after his conversion (1:15–17) . 4. When he did go up to Jerusalem, he only saw Peter and James, only remained fifteen days, and returned without being recognized by the mass of believers (1:18– 24). 5. When Paul did go back to Jerusalem after some years, he was most careful to maintain his independence of the apostles there. His fellowship with them was on terms of equality. He was not indebted to them for anything (2:1–10). 6. But Paul’s independence of the Twelve is not only seen in his activities at

Jerusalem, but in his act of rebuking Peter at Antioch when the latter was yielding to pressure from the legalizers, and was adding law to grace, and in that way denying the fundamental of the Gospel (2:11–21)

DOCTRINAL Paul defends his doctrine of justification by faith alone without works against that of the Judaizers who taught that the works of an individual gave him acceptance with God (Ch. 3 and 4). I. The Galatian Christians received the Holy Spirit in answer to their faith in Christ, not through obedience to law (3:1–5). II. Abraham was justified by faith, not works. Therefore the true children of Abraham are justified in the same way (3:6–9). III. The Judaizers taught that the law was a means of justification. Paul shows that the law is a means of condemnation, and that it is the Lord Jesus who rescues us from its condemnation through the blood of His Cross (3:10–14). IV. God made provision for justification to be given on the basis of faith in Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, and also the gift of the Spirit to both Jew and Gentile, doing this before the Mosaic law was given. The law therefore cannot make void that which was done by God prior to the giving of the law (3:15–18). V. If the law was never given as a means whereby a sinner might be saved, why was it given, and for what purpose? (3:19–4:7) . 1. It was given to show man that sin is not a mere following of evil impulses, but a direct violation of the laws of God (3:19–23). 2. It was given in order that, by showing the sinner that sin was an actual transgression of God’s laws, he might see the necessity of faith in a substitutionary sacrifice for sin, and thus be led to put his trust in the Christ of prophecy who would in the future die for him (3:24–29) . 3. It was given because the sinner was like a child in its minority, and could therefore only be dealt with in a most elementary way (4:1–7). VI. Yet the Galatians are determined to return to their former position as minors and slaves under law (4:8–11). VII. Paul appeals in a touching way to the Galatians to maintain their freedom from the law. He reminds them of their enthusiastic reception of him and the gospel which he preached. He tells them of his longing to be with them now in order that he might speak to them personally (4:12–20). VIII. The history of Hagar and Sarah illustrates the present status of law and grace. As the son of the bondwoman gave place to the son of the freewoman, so law has given place to grace (4:21–31).

PRACTICAL I.

Paul exhorts the Galatians to hold fast to the freedom from law which the Lord Jesus procured for them by the blood of His Cross, and not become entangled in a legalistic system (5:1–12). II. They have been liberated from the law by the blood of Christ. But they are not to

think that this freedom gives them the liberty to sin. The reason why they have been liberated from such an elementary method of controlling the conduct of an individual, is that they might be free to live their lives on a new principle, namely, under the control of the Holy Spirit (5:13–26) . 1. He warns them not to use their freedom from the law as a pretext for sinning, thus turning liberty into license, ant he exhorts them instead, to govern their lives by the motivating impulse of divine love (5:13–15). 2. The subjection of the saint to the personal control of the indwelling Holy Spirit is the secret of victory over sin and of the living of a life in which divine love is the motivating impulse (5:16–26). a. The Holy Spirit will suppress the activities of the evil nature as the saint trusts Him to do so and cooperates with Him in His work of sanctification (5:16–21). b. The Holy Spirit will produce His own fruit in the life of the saint as the latter trusts Him to do that and cooperates with Him in His work of sanctification (5:22–26). III. The Galatian saints who have not been enticed away from grace by the wiles of the Judaizers and who therefore are still living Spirit-controlled lives, are exhorted to restore their brethren who have been led astray, back to the life under grace (6:1–5). IV. The Galatian saints who have deserted grace for law are exhorted to put themselves under the ministry of the teachers who led them into grace, and are warned that if they do not, they will reap a harvest of corruption (6:6–10) . V. Paul’s final warning against the Judaizers, and his closing words (6:11–18).

3. The Exegesis of the Letter PERSONAL Paul defends his apostolic authority against the efforts of the Judaizers to discredit it, by proving it to be of divine origin (chapters 1 and 2). I. The salutation and ascription of praise. In his salutation, Paul expands his official title into a statement of his direct commission from God, thus meeting at once the attack of his opponents against his apostolic authority; and by dwelling on the work of redemption in connection with the name of Christ, he protests against their doctrinal errors (1:1–5). Verse one. Paul, an apostle. By the addition of the title apostle to his name, Paul at the very beginning of his letter, claims to be one who is divinely commissioned to preach the gospel and authorized to plant Christianity. He conceived of his apostleship as related to the Church universal, and thought of Christianity as an organic whole, not simply as isolated centers of effort and of divine appointment in relation to it. The word apostle is the translation of apostolos (ajpostolo"), a Greek word made up of apo (ajpo) “from” and stello (stello) “to send,” thus referring to the act of sending someone on a commission to represent the sender. It was used of a messenger or an envoy who was provided with credentials. Our word ambassador would be a good translation. The word apostle as Paul uses it here does not merely refer to one who has a message to announce,

but to an appointed representative with an official status who is provided with the credentials of his office. Not. The third word in the letter stamps it as argumentative and controversial. Paul plunges at once with characteristic vigor into a discussion of the questions at issue, his apostolic authority and the divine origin of his message. Paul was a man who could say NO. Of men. Paul is most discriminating in the use of his prepositions in this verse. Of is the translation of apo (ajpo), which means from, and which speaks of ultimate source. His apostleship did not come from men as its ultimate source. By the use of this preposition, he distinguishes himself from the false apostles who did not derive their commissions from God. He denies that his apostleship had a human source. The word for men used here anthropos (ajnqropo"), the racial term, not aner (ajner), the individual man, emphasizes again that the source of his apostleship was not human but divine in character. Neither by man. Neither is from oude (oJude), literally not even. Not only does Paul say that his apostleship did not find its ultimate source in mankind, but it did not find its intermediate source in man. Man was not even the agent of God in conferring that apostleship. By is the translation of dia (dia), the preposition denoting intermediate agency. It denotes the means or instrument in the hands of an individual by which an act is performed. Thus Paul not only denies that he was made an apostle by men, but also that God used the intermediate agency of man to constitute him an apostle. His apostleship was not derived from a human source or given through a human channel. The reason why Paul changes from the plural word men to the singular word man, is that titles and offices which emanate from a body of men are conferred by their single representative. The acts of the Roman senate took effect through the reigning monarch, those of the Sanhedrin, through the high priest. But by Jesus Christ.1 But is from alla (ajlla), the stronger of the two adversatives, de (de) being the milder one. Paul is very strong in his language when contrasting the divine origin of his apostleship with the human origin of the apostleship of the false apostles. By is from dia (dia), the preposition denoting intermediate agency. The use of dia (dia) here rather than apo (ajpo) indicates that Paul is speaking, not of a source of his apostleship between which and himself there intervenes an agent, but of the channel through which it came to him or of its immediate source. Dia (Dia) when used of personal agency sometimes expresses mediate agency which is both the agent and the source itself. Here Jesus Christ is both. And God the Father. The addition of the words God the Father to the name Jesus Christ, shows that Paul is not thinking simply of the agency through which his apostleship came to him, but also of the source through which, being ultimate, there can be no higher. Then again, both names are governed by the one preposition dia (dia), showing that Jesus Christ and God the Father are not separated in his mind as sustaining different relationships to his apostleship, but are conceived of jointly, and as sustaining one relation. Taken together, therefore, the whole expression has the meaning, “directly from Jesus Christ and God the Father.” Had he thought of Christ as the agent and the Father as the source, he would have used dia (dia) and apo (ajpo), the prepositions of intermediate agency and of ultimate source respectively. If he had used apo (ajpo) with both names, that would have left open the possibility of a human channel. Paul received his commission as an apostle directly from the Lord Jesus when he met Him on the Damascus road (Acts 9:3–8). He offers the fact that he has seen the Lord Jesus, as a token of his apostleship (I

Cor. 9:1). The open investiture may have taken place later (Acts 9:15–17; 13:2, 3). The intervention of the prophets and the Antioch church may have given a coloring to the false representations of the Judaizers that he was an apostle of men. Who raised Him from the dead. By adding this qualifying phrase, Paul emphasizes the fact that whereas the other apostles were commissioned by the Lord Jesus while He was in His humiliation, he himself was given his commission by the resurrected glorified Christ. Translation. Paul an apostle, not from man (as an ultimate source), nor even through the intermediate agency of a man, but through the direct agency of Jesus Christ and God the Father, the One who raised Him out from among the dead. Verse two. And all the brethren which are with me. Salutations at the end of a letter, expressive of love, good-will, sympathy, and interest are from persons whose names are mentioned at the close of the letter. But persons who join in the address prefixed to a letter, are persons whose authorization is required and conveyed in it. They are indicated as joint-authors. The letter, though composed by Paul, is a letter of Paul and those named with him. These all stamp with authority what is said in the letter. Accordingly, where Paul associates anyone with himself in the prefatory superscription of his letters, it is always some person who stands in a position of authority and influence towards those addressed. The above expression could hardly refer to the Christian brethren in the churches where Paul may have been at the time of the writing of Galatians, but would more naturally refer to his fellow-travellers. In Philippians 4:21, 22, he makes a distinction between the saints resident at Rome and “the brethren which are with me.” The omission of their names shows that the Galatians must have known who they were. Paul mentions them to show the Galatians that he is not alone in his doctrine of grace. The word all would indicate that there was a considerable number of his colleagues in the gospel ministry with him at the time. Unto the churches of Galatia. The abruptness of the language is remarkable. In Paul’s other letters, he always has a word of commendation for the churches to which he is writing, even in the case of the church at Corinth which he was taking severely to task because of serious disorders within its membership. He does not even address them as saints, although they were. This shows the extent and seriousness of their defection, also the troubled state of the apostle’s mind mingled with his indignation at the actions of his converts. The word church is the translation of ekklesia (ejkklesia), a word akin to the verb ekkaleo (ejkkaleo) which refers to the act of calling out a group of individuals to an assembly. The word in classical Greek referred to a summoned assembly, for instance, an assembly summoned for legislative business. In the New Testament, it refers usually to a local assembly of Christians, less frequently to the whole body of Christians as in the Ephesian letter. Translation. And all the brethren with me, to the assemblies of Galatia. Verse three. The salutation proper as given in this verse is the uniform one found in all of the Pauline church letters, but it has special significance in the Galatian letter since the recipients were turning away from the doctrine of grace toward the legalistic teachings of

the Judaizers. The grace spoken of here is sanctifying grace, the enabling ministry of the Holy Spirit in the lives of the saints. The Galatian letter reveals the fact that the Galatian saints were being deprived of the ministry of the Spirit by the teaching of the Judaizers to the effect that growth in the Christian life was to be had by obedience to the legal enactments of the Mosaic law (4:19), and thus coming under the Mosaic economy in which there was no provision for an indwelling Spirit whose ministry it was to sanctify the believer, they substituted self-effort for their former dependence upon the Spirit. The salutation therefore is the outbreathing of a Pauline prayer that the Galatians might again become recipients of the full work of the Spirit in their lives. The peace here mentioned is heart peace which is the result of the ministry of the Spirit. The names of God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ are governed by the one preposition of ultimate source apo (ajpo), thus indicating that they are the joint source of grace and peace, and that they cooperate in the carrying out of the plan of man’s redemption. Translation. Grace to you and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Verse four. Who gave Himself for our sins. Here Paul brings to the attention of the Galatian Christians who were practically ignoring the substitutionary character of the atoning death of the Lord Jesus, a declaration of the true ground of acceptance with God (2:21; 5:4). This was purposely added because the Galatians were falling back on works as the ground of such acceptance. The voluntary aspect of the death of our Lord is brought out here. He said, “Lo, I come to do thy will, O God” (Heb. 10:9). The preposition for is huper (uJper), a word that speaks of substitution, which was its usual meaning in the secular world of the first century. The professional letter writer acting in behalf of and instead of the illiterate, would put that fact at the close of a document which he wrote, using this word; for instance, “Heraikleios Horou (eJraikleio" oJrou); I wrote on behalf of him who does not know letters.” This is the usual formula which makes the contents legal. Two instances in the New Testament where huper (uJper) in its substitutionary usage is as plain as in the secular documents are: John 11:50, where Caiaphas uses it to speak of a political substitution, not a theological, although John finds that too; and II Corinthians 5:14, 15 in the words if one died for all, that is, instead of and in behalf of. Thus Paul brings over against the Judaizers’ bloodless religion, the doctrine of the substitutionary atonement which teaches that the Lord Jesus took our place with relation to our sins and gave Himself as the Sacrifice that would perfectly satisfy the just demands of God’s holy law which the human race has violated. That He might deliver us from this present evil world. Deliver is the translation of exaireo (ejxaireo) which means to pluck out, to draw out, to rescue, to deliver. The word strikes the keynote of the letter. The gospel is a rescue, an emanicipation from a state of bondage. The word here denotes, not a removal from, but a rescue from the power of the ethical characteristics of the present age. World is from aionos (aijono") which Trench defines as follows: “All that floating mass of thoughts, opinions, maxims, speculations, hopes, impulses, aims, aspirations, at any time current in the world, which it may be impossible to seize and accurately define, but which constitute a most real and effective power, being the moral or immoral atmosphere which at every moment of our lives we inhale, again inevitably to exhale.” It is that particular phase of human society, the one

which our Lord found existing when He came the first time, which He will still find existing when He comes the second time, and which will be displaced by a new order of things in the Millennium. The word present is used twice elsewhere where it is applied to things existing, by way of contrast to things future (Rom. 8:38; I Cor. 3:22). The word evil is not from kakos (kako") here but poneros (ponero"). In the latter word, the positive activity of evil comes out far more decidedly than in the former. The kakos (kako") man may be content to perish in his own corruption, but the poneros (ponero") man is not content unless he is corrupting others as well, and drawing them into the same destruction with himself. Satan is not called the kakos (kako") one but the poneros (ponero") one. This present age is described by Paul as poneros (ponero"). The English word which best translate this Greek word is pernicious. Webster says, “That is pernicious which works mischief or destruction.” This present age therefore is not content to perish in its own corruption, but seeks to drag all men with it down to its own inevitable destruction. The outstanding philosophy of religion of this present pernicious age is, that acceptance with Deity is by means of the good works of the individual. Every system of religion except that in the Bible bases salvation upon the good works of the worshipper. The Judaizers were part of this present evil age. Their system, not content with dragging down its own devotees to destruction, was attempting to pull down the Christian Church with it. Paul says that the substitutionary atonement of the Lord Jesus is that which will rescue the poor lost sinner from the clutches of the pernicious teaching of the Judaizers. According to the will of God and our Father. But Paul hastens to add that the act of Christ rescuing us is not according to our plan, or in proportion to our legal obedience or because of any quality in us, but according to the Father’s sovereign will which is the standard of all the process of redemption. This rescue therefore is according to the procedure prescribed by Him. All of which means that the salvation procured on the Cross for us by our Lord is to be received by faith aside from any merit of our own. We cannot earn what Christ procured for us. Salvation is given free, gratis, as a gift. Translation. Who gave Himself in behalf of our sins so that He might rescue us out from this present pernicious age, according to the will of our God and Father. Verse five. Translation. To whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen. II.

The Galatian Christians are rebuked and the Judaizers denounced (1:6–10). Verses six and seven. I marvel that you are so soon removed. Marvel is from thaumazo (qaumazo) which means to wonder at, to marvel. Its cognate adjective means wonderful, marvelous. Thus Paul considered the defection of the Galatian Christians as an extra-ordinary thing. Alford says of this word, “a word of mildness, inasmuch as it imports that better things were expected of them,—and of condescension, as letting down the writer to the level of the readers and even challenging explanation from them. Still, like many such mild words, it carries to the guilty conscience even sharper rebuke than a harsher one would.” Are removed is from metatithemi (metatiqemi) which means “to transpose two things, one of which is put in the place of the other.” In classical Greek it was used of a turncoat. The word is used of one altering his opinion or becoming of another mind. The word was also used of desertion or revolt, frequently of a change in religion, philosophy, or morals. The present tense indicates that when Paul wrote, the

defection of the Galatians was yet only in progress. Had he used the perfect tense, that would have indicated that the Galatians had actually and finally turned against grace and had come to a settled attitude in the matter. The mind of Paul wavers between fear and hope as to the outcome. Paul was trying desperately to arrest the progress of this new doctrinal infection if he could. The Judaizers had not yet achieved any decisive success, although the Galatians were disposed to lend a ready ear to their insinuations. So soon is from tacheos (taceo"). The word is used also in I Timothy 5:22 where Timothy is warned against ordaining anyone as an elder in a hurried fashion. The word means “readily, rashly, quickly,” and speaks here of the rapidity with which the Galatians were turning away from Paul and his teaching of grace, to the Judaizers with their teaching of works. From him who called you into the grace of Christ. The One who called the Galatians was God. Called is from kaleo (kaleo). Its distinctive use in the New Testament is to call a person for a definite purpose. Hence, it is synonymous with to select or choose. It refers to the act of calling someone so that he may hear, come, and do that which is incumbent upon him. It thus is a word that becomes a technical term for special relationships. In secular Greek it was used of a summons in the law courts. It denotes in the New Testament a call from God or in God’s Name, a call to participate in the revelation of grace. Paul’s use of the word in general suggests that he thought of those only as called who obeyed the divine summons. Of a rejected call he never speaks. The word grace2 is in the locative of sphere. God called the Galatians in the sphere of grace. That is, when He effectually summoned them to a participation in the salvation procured by His Son on the Cross, it was on a basis, not of works, but of a salvation unmerited by them and freely bestowed, offered out of the pure generosity and love of the heart of God, with no strings tied to it, offered as a free gift to be accepted by the outstretched hand of faith. This put the Galatians in a position in relationship to God in which they were the objects of His everlasting favor. In speaking of the change of position on the part of the Galatians, it would be more natural for Paul to refer to the state in which God’s call they are or should be than to emphasize the basis or instrument of God’s call. The Galatians were abandoning the position of grace, the relation toward God which made them the objects of the grace of Christ and participants in its benefits, to put themselves under law which could only award them their sad desserts. Unto another gospel; which is not another. Paul uses two Greek words, both of which mean another, but which have a further distinct meaning of their own. The first is heteros (eJtero"), the second allos (ajllo"). Heteros (eJtero") means another of a different kind, allos (ajllo"), another of the same kind. Heteros (eJtero") denotes qualitative difference, allos (ajllo"), numerical difference. Heteros (eJtero") distinguishes one of two. Allos (ÆAllo") adds one besides. Every heteros (eJtero") is an allos (ajllo"), but not every allos (ajllo") is a heteros (eJtero"). Heteros (eJtero") involves the idea of difference of kind, while allos (ajllo") denotes simply distinction of individuals. Heteros (eJtero") sometimes refers however, not only to difference in kind but also speaks of the fact that the character of the thing is evil or bad. That is, the fact that something differs in kind from something else, makes that thing to be of an evil character. We have the word heterodoxy, made up of heteros (eJtero"), and the word doxa (doxa) which means opinion. Paul’s doctrine of grace is God’s truth, and anything that differs in kind from it must necessarily be false doctrine. Heterodoxy is false doctrine. When Paul speaks of the Galatians turning to a heteros (eJtero") gospel, he means

that they are turning to a gospel that is false in its doctrine. It is not only different in character from the gospel which he preached to the Galatians, but it is different in a bad sense. It is essentially evil. We have here in the expression, heteros (eJtero") gospel, a contradiction in terms. Gospel is from euaggelion (eujaggelion) which means good news. There cannot be a heteros (eJtero") good news, that is, a message of good news different in kind from that which Paul preached, and different in an evil sense, and yet be a message of good news. A salvation-by-works message is no good news to a lost sinner, first, because the Bible says “not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us” (Titus 3:5), and second, if salvation would be by good works, one would not know how many good works a person must do to be saved or after being saved, to keep saved. No one could have any assurance of acceptance with God or security in salvation from such preaching. Thus, Paul stamps the message of the Judaizers as heterodoxy, false doctrine. Then he says that it is not an allos (ajllo") gospel. It is not only different in kind. It is not a gospel at all. It is not another gospel even when considered in a numerical way. There can be only one message of good news. Arthur S. Way in his excellent translation of Galatians renders heteros (eJtero") gospel, an opposition gospel, allos (ajllo") gospel, an alternative gospel. Thus, the Galatians were turning to an opposition gospel diametrically opposed to Paul’s message of grace, and this opposition gospel was not an alternative one. But there be some that trouble you. The word trouble is from tarasso (tarasso) which means “to disturb mentally” with excitement, perplexity, and fear. The present tense of this participle indicates that the Judaizers were still in Galatia at the time Paul wrote this letter, and that the Galatian letter was written to combat them while they were in the very midst of their work. The definite article is used with the participle, pointing out in a more marked manner, the notorious occupation of these men. Some is from tines (tine"), an indefinite pronoun. In the use of this word Paul refers to the Judaizers with a certain studied vagueness. They were evidently strangers whom the apostle treats with real or affected contempt. And would pervert the gospel of Christ. The word would is from thelo (qelo) which means to desire. It is in the present tense which indicates that the troubling was a present fact, the perversion was yet only a wish of the Judaizers, and that the Galatians had not completely succumbed to their influence. The word pervert is from metastrepho (metastrefo) which means “to reverse, to change to the opposite, to turn about.” The purpose of the Judaizers was to so change the gospel of grace which Paul preached, that it would be the reverse of what it was, a message of salvation by good works instead of a message of a salvation offered free in answer to faith. It was not merely to derange it or to turn aside its true meaning. It was to transform it into something diametrically opposed to what it was originally, into something of an opposite nature. Thus the actions of the Judaizers themselves testify to the mutual incompatibility of law and grace. These two systems have nothing in common; as Paul says, “If by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work” (Rom. 11:6). Translation. I am marvelling that in such a manner suddenly, you are becoming of another mind and are deserting from Him who called you in the sphere of Christ’s grace to a message of good news diametrically

opposed to the gospel, which message is not another gospel of the same kind. Only there are certain ones who are troubling your minds, and are desiring to pervert the gospel of Christ. Verse eight. But though we or an angel from heaven. But is from alla (ajlla), the stronger of two Greek adversatives. This strong language shows how serious Paul considered the differences to be between his gospel and the message of the Judaizers. He is concerned over the fact that the Galatians probably regarded the gospel he preached as, after all, not so very different from the message of the Judaizers. His own strong sense of the serious difference between the two messages, is responsible for the vehemence of his feelings in the premises. By the use of the plural pronoun we, Paul associates with himself his colleagues, Barnabas, Silas, and Timothy who had combined with him in the preaching of the gospel. He wants to show the Galatians that the controversy is not between one teacher and another, but between truth and error. Though has in the Greek text the idea of even though, supposing a case which has never occurred. The reference to an angel here could not be, that to the angels also was committed the preaching of the gospel, for Paul knew better than that. It might have reference to the incident referred to in 4:14. The Greek word translated angel (aggelos (ajggelo")) also mean a messenger. At Lystra, the Lycaonians witnessed the miraculous healing of the impotent man, and thought that they recognized in Barnabas, the chief of the Greek gods, Zeus. And they thought Paul was Hermes, the messenger and interpreter of the gods (Acts 14:8–18). Paul looks back to the day when the Galatian received him as a messenger of the gods. Thus he says, “But though we or a messenger from heaven.” The words preach gospel, are from euaggelizomai (eujaggelizomai), a verb which means “to announce a message of good news.” Paul could have used the Greek verb kerusso (kerusso) which means to announce and the noun euaggelion (eujaggelion) which means good news, but he chose the distinctive verb which in English would be rendered to evangelize. The expression preach gospel unto you, is literally, evangelize you. Than is from  (par oJ), and the idea is not merely against or besides, but beyond, in the sense of overstepping a limit into a new region. It points out a specific difference. The message of the Judaizers was of an entirely different character. It was intrinsically different. The entire expression in a literal translation would be, But even though we or a messenger from heaven evangelized you beyond that which we evangelized you. Let him be accursed. The word accursed is from anathema (ajnaqema). It is a word used in the LXX,3 of a person or thing set apart and devoted to destruction, because hateful to God. Hence in a spiritual sense it denotes one who is alienated from God by sin. It cannot refer here to ecclesiastical excommunication, for angels are included. The epistles of Paul attach to the word the idea of spiritual death. Its use in Romans 9:3 where Paul says that he could wish himself accursed from Christ for his brethren’s sake, associates it with the further idea of separation from Christ and destruction for all eternity, which is the fate of the unsaved. The word does not, like excommunication, pronounce a judicial sentence on particular convicted offenders, but solemnly affirms general laws of the spiritual kingdom. In I Corinthians 16:22, those who love not the Lord Jesus are declared to be outcasts from the Faith. Translation. In fact, even if we or a messenger from heaven preach a

gospel to you which goes beyond that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. Verse nine. As we said before, so say I now again. The words said before are from prolego (prolego) which means “to say beforehand, to predict,” and here have the idea of “to say before” in the sense of saying something in times past, since it is used in contrast to the word now. The reference is not to verse 8 but to a previous time when Paul made this same statement. The compound verb here and the words and now, point necessarily to an earlier time in contrast to the present. It was either said on a previous visit to the Galatian churches or in a letter. The word now, arti (ajrti) in the Greek, excludes any reference to the words just written down. This suggests an already existing danger, and also the fact that Paul had warned the Galatians against the Judaizers even before the latter had made their destructive inroads. Paul uses the perfect tense here which refers to an act completed in past time having present results. This fact marks this statement not simply as a past fact, but one of which the results remain, doubtless, in that they remember or may be assumed to remember the warning which Paul had given them. This makes the defection of the Galatians all the more inexcusable. The plural number of the verb shows that the previous warning was given not merely by Paul but also by his associates, since the apostle uses the singular verb in the expression, “so say I now again.” If any man preach any other gospel to you, let him be accursed. Paul does not use the Greek conditional particle ean (eJan), which introduces an unfulfilled condition or an hypothetical case, but he employs ei (eij) which speaks of a fulfilled condition. It is no longer now a supposition with him, but an assumption of the fact. This conditional particle suggests, not future possibility, but expresses a simple present supposition, and is used often when the condition is known to be actually fulfilled. The result is to bring Paul’s statement closer home to the actual case, and applies the anathema directly to the Judaizers. Again, the element of concession or improbability disappears in this statement as it existed in the one preceding, by the omission of the words “we or an angel.” In the words “any other gospel,” we have in the original text the idea as before that the “other gospel” was a message that went beyond that preached by Paul, and which therefore passed out of the territory or sphere of Paul’s gospel. It was not a perversion of Paul’s gospel but a message that was diametrically opposed to it. It was in character, of an opposite nature to Paul’s message. Received is from paralambano (paralambano), a word which means “to appropriate to one’s self.” It was used of a hospitable welcome such as a host gives to his guest. Such a welcome the Galatians had given the gospel of grace when it was preached among them by the great apostle. Translation. Even as we have said on a previous occasion, indeed, now again I am saying, If as is the case, anyone preaches a gospel to you which goes beyond that which ye took so eagerly and hospitably to your hearts, let him be accursed. Verse ten. For do I now persuade men or God? Paul feels that the curse which he had just repeated twice over, might strike his readers as unduly harsh and severe. By the use of

the word for, he introduces an explanatory justification of his stern language. He says that he would not have uttered the statement had he been concerned in influencing men in his favor rather than in God’s. By the use of the word now, he argues that at that critical moment when the Galatian Christians were leaning towards the false doctrines of the Judaizers, and a serious and malevolent attack was being made upon the Christian Church and its doctrine of pure grace, it could not possibly be his purpose to curry the favor of men rather than please God. It is as if someone was reproved for undue severity, and he answered, “The severity of my language at least proves that I am no flatterer.” Again, the use of the word now could include in it the fact that the Judaizers had caught hold of Paul’s statement, “Unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law” (I Cor. 9:20), and had charged him with being a temporizer, a man who changed color with a change in his surroundings in order to ingratiate himself into the good will of men. They charged him with having preached the Mosaic law, because he had become as a Jew to the Jews. He flings out the challenge to the Judaizers to judge now whether he was currying the favor of the legalizers. The vehemence of his language was enough to show clearly that he was anything but a turncoat or one who suited his preaching to the whims and the desires of his hearers. Persuade is from peitho (peiqo) which means “to persuade.” The more precise meaning in this context is, “to win over, to conciliate and render friendly to one’s self.” Paul in the use of this word evidently refers to a charge that on previous occasions or in other utterances, he had shaped his words so as to win the favor of men. A similar charge was made by Paul’s opponents at Corinth who said that when he was with the Corinthians, he had an abject, servile manner (base), and when he was not with them, he was daring, presumptuous, and over-bold (II Cor. 10:1). The word or is from e (e) which means “rather than.” This indicates clearly what kind of slanders were being circulated about Paul. His enemies accused him of sacrificing the truth of God for the sake of conciliating men and winning their favor. It was Paul’s boast that he became all things to all men, but whereas his real purpose was to win all to Christ, they insinuated that he was more bent on currying the favor of men than securing the approval of God. He had made two concessions to Jewish feeling; he had circumcised Timothy and had recommended for adoption certain regulations tending to promote harmonious intercourse between Jewish and Gentile converts. It was easy to misrepresent these concessions as an abandonment of his former principles. Or do I seek to please men? These words repeat a little more distinctly the thought of the preceding clause, expressing the idea of attempt more definitely. Translation. For, am I at this present moment seeking to win the favor of men rather than the approval of God? Or, am I making it my business to be constantly pleasing men? If I still were pleasing men, in that case, Christ’s bondslave I would not be. III.

Paul asserts that the gospel he preaches came to him, not from man but directly from God (1:11–2:21). 1. It was a special revelation given to Paul directly from God (1:11, 12). Verse eleven. Certify is from gnorizo (gnorizo). The word means in general “to make known.” But here the Galatians already knew the facts which Paul presents in verses 11

and 12. It has the force here of reminding the Galatians in an emphatic way of what they had already been convinced of. The use of the word brethren is a most tender touch on the part of the great apostle. The Greek word is adelphos (ajdelfo"). It means literally, “from the same womb.” It means in its purely masculine usage, a brother. Here it is plural, and refers to the Galatian Christians as Paul’s brethren in Christ. Both Paul and they found the source of their regenerated lives in the work of the Holy Spirit, and thus were children of the same heavenly Father. Is not after man. Paul’s use of the present tense shows the permanence and unchangeableness of his gospel of grace. The distinctive Greek word for man here is anthropos (ajnqropo"), the racial term. It speaks here, not of individual men as such, but of the race seen in its human characteristics. The word after is from kata (kata), the root meaning of which is down. The word thus has the idea of domination or control. The specific truth brought out here is that Paul’s gospel is not of human origin, is not measured by mere human rules and standards, and is not human in its character. Translation. For I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which was announced as good news by me, that it is not as to its nature, human. Verse twelve. The word I is not here from the person of the verb, but from the word ego (ejgo) which is the Greek pronoun meaning I. In the Greek language, the verb itself indicates the person doing the acting or representing the state mentioned in the verb, and therefore a pronoun is not needed as in English. That means that when a pronoun is used in connection with a verb, special emphasis is stressed. Paul uses the personal pronoun here to show that he is laying emphasis upon the special education he had received for his ministry of the gospel. He had not, like his converts, learnt it from human teachers, but by direct communion with God, as the Twelve had learnt it from Christ’s teaching. Paul is studiously careful to show his independence of the Twelve. By the use of the pronoun I, Paul also compares himself with the Twelve. His thought is, “for neither did I, who, because I was not of the Twelve might be supposed to have received the gospel from man, receive it in that way.” The entire tenor of this section indicates that Paul’s commission had been declared inferior to that of the Twelve, and that he had this in view when he was defending his apostleship from the attacks of the Judaizers. The word received is from paralambano (paralambano) which denotes the act of receiving through communication in general, and directly from the person giving the communication. Taught is from didasko (didasko) which refers to the act of receiving, specially through instruction. These were the methods by which the majority of the Christians and even the Christian teachers had received the gospel. Paul says that his was an exceptional case. The word revelation4 is from apokalupto (ajpokalupto) which originally referred primarily to the removal of that which conceals, an uncovering. In some cases the choice of the word seems to be due to the thought of a previous concealment. As it is used in Scripture, it refers to a subjective revelation which either takes place wholly within the mind of the individual receiving it, or is subjective in the sense that it is accompanied by actual perception, and results in knowledge. It has reference to a disclosure to the human mind involving also perception and understanding by the mind. Revelation therefore is the act of God the Holy Spirit uncovering to the Bible writers truth incapable of being

discovered by man’s unaided reason, this revelation being accompanied by the imparted ability to understand what is uncovered. The time of this revelation of the gospel of grace to Paul was in all probability during his sojourn in Arabia. The words of Jesus Christ are in a construction called the subjective genitive. Jesus Christ is the One acting in the noun of action, revelation. He did the revealing. He gave the revelation. Translation. For, as for myself, neither did I receive it directly from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation given me by Jesus Christ. 2. Paul’s previous education could not have been responsible for his teaching of grace, for it was directly opposed to the latter (1:13, 14). Verse thirteen. Paul’s argument in this verse is that his early education is a proof that he did not receive the gospel from man. He was brought up in a rigid school of ritualism directly opposed to the liberty of the gospel. He was a staunch adherent of the principles of that school, and as such, relentlessly persecuted the Christian Church. No human agency could therefore have brought about the change. It required the direct interposition of God. Ye have heard of my conversation. Paul had told the Galatians of his career as a persecutor. It was Paul’s habit to include in his preaching the history of his past life as a persecutor (Acts 22 and 26). The word conversation is obsolete English for manner of life, which latter is the meaning of the Greek word Paul used, anastrophe (ajnastrofe). The Jews’ religion. The word religion is not in the Greek text. The Greek word is Ioudaismos (ÆIoudaismo") which refers to the Jewish faith and worship. The term was perhaps coined by the Gentile world as was the name Christianos (Cristiano"), the name given followers of the Christ (Acts 11:26). The word occurs in II Maccabees where it refers to the Jewish religion as opposed to the Hellenism that the Syrian kings were imposing upon the Jews. As with the case of the name Christianos (Cristiano")5 (I Peter 4:14; Acts 26:28), the word Ioudaismos (ÆIoudaismo") conveyed some shadow of the contempt with which the pagan world regarded both Judaism and Christianity. But adopted by the Jews, it would lose the idea of contempt and even become a title of honor, as is the case with the name Christian. Now, the Judaism with which Paul was acquainted and in which his life had been immersed, was apostate. He knew nothing before his conversion, of the supernatural Judaism in which the Levitical sacrifices were the outward expression of an inward faith in a coming substitutionary atonement for sin. Judaism in Paul’s time was a mere ethical cult basing salvation on good works, and observing the sacrifices as a mere form. But when he was rethinking the Old Testament economy in the light of the revelations received in Arabia, the supernatural significance of it all opened up to him. But in this verse he is speaking of the apostate Judaism of his early life. How that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God and wasted it. The words persecuted and wasted are in the imperfect tense which speaks of continuous action. It describe the course of action continuously pursued by Saul right to the time of his conversion. The word wasted is very strong. It referred not merely to an attempt to devastate or ravage, but to ruin and destroy. It applied not only to cities and lands, but also to people. The word was used by the Christians in Damascus, of Saul after his conversion, and it probably became fixed in Paul’s mind. The reason why Paul here

mentions his attempt to destroy the Christian Church is that he might show that such bitter hostility proved that he was not among those whose association with Christians had led them to receive the gospel. Paul’s use of the term Church of God is significant. It show that Paul at the time of the writing of Galatians, had not only formed the conception of churches as local assemblies, but had already gathered these local churches in his thought into one entity, the universal Church. It also shows that he saw at this time that the nation Israel had been temporarily set aside and the Christian Church brought in, to be the channel through which God was to work for the time being. Translation. For you heard of my manner of life aforetime in Judaism, that beyond measure I kept on continuously persecuting the Church of God and continuously bringing destruction upon it. Verse fourteen. And profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine own nation. The word profit is from prokopto (prokopto), which means “to blaze a way” through a forest, “to cut a pioneer path.” Paul means that he outstripped his Jewish contemporaries in distinctively Jewish culture, zeal, and activity. He pioneered in his studies, cutting new paths ahead of his fellow-students. He was a brilliant pupil of Gamaliel.6 The word equals in the Greek text means, not equals in position but in age. In the words mine own nation, we have incidental proof that Paul was writing especially to Gentiles. Being more exceedingly zealous of the tradition of my fathers. The word traditions is from paradosis (paradosi") which means literally “to give from the presence of,” thus “to give personally.” It signifies an act of transmission or that which is transmitted. In the New Testament it is used in the latter sense, without indicating the method of transmission or implying any lapse of time such as is usually associated with the English word tradition. The use of the word fathers makes it clear that Paul is not referring here to the Mosaic law, but to the instruction received from previous generations. This point is very important. Had Paul lived in his unsaved state in the thought world of the Mosaic economy instead of having his thinking dominated by the Pharisaic traditions, his act of receiving Christ as Saviour would have had some reasonable background, for the Mosaic institutions pointed to a need for Christ and also to the Christ who was needed, the moral law serving the first purpose, the Levitical sacrifices, the second. But Paul is at pains to show his Galatian converts that his salvation and his appointment to the apostleship broke completely with all his background and all his traditions. He is speaking here of the hereditary traditions of his family. He was the son of a Pharisee. These Pharisaic traditions had been ingrafted on the law and had made that law void (Matt. 15:1–6). Thus, he could not have had a true conception of the Mosaic economy, and when he was converted, he found it necessary to restudy his Old Testament scriptures in the light of the revelations given him in Arabia, and under the instruction of the Holy Spirit. If Paul had intended to refer to the Mosaic law, either by itself or in connection with the Pharisaic traditions, he would have mentioned the law by itself or along with the traditions. He is here speaking of the way in which his brilliant advancement in Judaism had displayed itself. In short, the great apostle before his conversion, was occupied more with human legal enactments and practices as ingrafted upon the Word of God, and as interpreting that Word, than he was with the Word of God

itself. The traditions of his fathers included the religious definitions handed down in respect to doctrine, ritual, asceticism, interpretation of Scripture, and conduct of life. Thus, Paul shows that he was not at the time of his conversion and appointment to the office of apostle, under such influences or in such a frame of mind as to make the reception of the gospel by him from human instruction possible. Only a supernatural revelation could have effected it. Therefore, proof is established that neither Paul’s office as apostle nor his message came by way of a human channel, but direct from God. Translation. And I was constantly blazing a pioneer path, outstripping in Judaism many of my own age in my race, being more exceedingly zealous of my ancestral traditions. 3. Paul could not have learnt the gospel from the Twelve Apostles at Jerusalem, for he kept aloof from them for some time after his conversion (1:15–17) . Verses fifteen and sixteen. But when it pleased God who separated me from my mother’s womb. The word separated it from aphorizo (ajforizo) which means “to mark off from a boundary or line.” The simple verb horizo (oJrizo) means “to place a limitation upon, to fix limits around.” The cognate noun horos (oJro") means “a boundary, a frontier, a limit.” The verb proorizo (proorizo) (Eph. 1:5), “to set limits upon beforehand” is there translated predestinate. The word aphorizo (ajforizo) used in our Galatian verse (1:15), is used in Romans 1:1. The impression one gets from the rendering of the a.v. is that it refers to the physical separation of the child from the mother’s womb, which idea was not in the apostle’s mind. The idea is, “who set me apart, devoted me to a special purpose from before my birth, and before I had any impulses or principles of my own.” Passages from the Old Testament sustain this usage (Judges 16:17; Isaiah 44:21, 24, 49:1, 5). This idea is also seen in those instances where a child’s destiny is clearly fixed by God before birth as was Samson’s (Judges 16:17), and John the Baptist’s (Luke 1:15). The preposition ek (ejk) translated from, in the phrase “from my mother’s womb,” is used at times to mark a temporal starting point (John 6:66, 9:1; Acts 9:33, 24:10). Paul, therefore, states that he was set apart or devoted by God to the apostleship before he was born. Here again he shows his apostolic independence of men. To reveal His Son in me. Does Paul mean here that God called him in order that He might reveal the Lord Jesus to Paul, or that He might reveal the Lord Jesus through Paul to the world? The answer is found in the meaning and usage of the word translated reveal, apokalupto (ajpokalupto). We will use the terms subjective revelation and objective revelation in our discussion. A subjective revelation would be one in which God revealed the Lord Jesus to Paul, and an objective revelation, one in which God would reveal Him through Paul to others. The word apokalupto (ajpokalupto) refers to the disclosure of something by the removal of that which hitherto concealed it, and refers especially to a subjective revelation to an individual. A public disclosure of the Lord Jesus through Paul would necessitate the fact that He had been previously hidden from public knowledge, which is not the case, since He had already been preached in the world. But He had been previously hidden from Paul, which points to a subjective revelation of the Lord Jesus to Paul within Paul. Furthermore, if it were an objective revelation through Paul, the Greek would require the preposition dia (dia) which means through. Again, the entire context has to do, not with how Paul preached the gospel, but how he received it.

Paul makes a distinction between the call and the revelation The latter cannot then be identified with the previous vision of the Lord Jesus which Paul had on the road to Damascus. That vision was apprehended by the eye. The revelation of which he is speaking here was an inward one, apprehended by the spiritual senses, possibly given Paul during the three days which he spent in communion with his new found Saviour and Lord in Damascus. Thus, Paul, whom God from before his birth had set apart to be a preacher of the gospel to the Gentiles, and whom God had called into salvation and His service, could not have been dependent upon men for his commission or subject to their control. The word translated heathen is from ethnos (ejqno") which referred to foreign nations not worshipping the true God, pagans, Gentiles. Immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood. It was immediately after Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus that he went into Arabia. The word conferred deserves careful study. It is prosanatithemi (prosanatiqemi). It means “to betake one’s self to another for the purpose of consulting him.” In pagan writers it was used of consulting soothsayers and the like. It was as if Paul said, “I did not consult with anyone in order to learn the opinion of others as to this revelation I received, or to obtain instruction from them, or guidance, or advice.” The words “flesh and blood,” refer to mankind in general, with the idea of weakness, frailty, and ignorance. Thus Paul asserts that his commission and message came to him directly from God, and that neither was affected in any way by human intervention. Translation. But when it was the good pleasure of the One who set me apart before I was born, and called me by His grace, to give me an inward revelation of His Son in order that I might proclaim Him as glad tidings among the Gentiles, immediately I did not put myself in communication with flesh and blood for the purpose of consultation. Verse seventeen. Neither went I up to Jerusalem. Went up is from anerchomai (ajnercomai). It was used especially of visiting Jerusalem which was situated in the highlands of Palestine. Katerchomai (Katercomai) was used of the descending journey from the city. The religious position of Jerusalem as the seat of the Temple and the mother-city of the Church, and its geographical position on the central heights of Palestine, were the factors that suggested the expressions “going up” and “going down,” when a journey was made to that city and then back to one’s home. The word before is from pro (pro) which is evidently used in its temporal sense. Paul is referring here to those who were apostles before him in point of time. The order of the words in the Greek text, the before me apostles, shows that Paul recognized the apostleship of the Twelve as essentially the same in character as his apostleship. But I went into Arabia. Paul does not state his purpose in doing so, but his statement to the effect that after his conversion he did not consult with anybody but went into Arabia, leads one to the clear inference that he wanted to be alone with God. The word Arabia is the transliteration (spelling) of a Hebrew word meaning “an arid, thus a sparsely populated place.” He needed to be alone with God. He needed time and isolation in order to think. The revelation of the Son of God had blasted away the foundations of the Pharisaic thought structure which he had been building up with such consumate skill and zeal, and it had come tumbling down in ruins about his head. This revelation also furnished him with another foundation upon which to build a new theological structure. But the

replacement of the ruined structure with a new one could not be the work of a day or a month. There in Arabia, isolated from all human contact, alone with God, the great apostle restudied his Old Testament scriptures, not now with the Pharisaic traditions vitiating his thinking, but, led by the Holy Spirit, with the central fact of the Cross of the Lord Jesus as the controlling factor in his meditations. Out of all this study emerged the Pauline system of doctrine as we have it presented in Romans. The word Arabia was the term applied by Greek writers froth Herodotus down, to the whole or various portions of the vast peninsula between the Red Sea on the southwest, the Persian Gulf on the southeast, and the Euphrates River on the northeast. There is nothing to indicate exactly where in this vast territory Paul went. It is not necessary to suppose that Paul went far from Damascus, for the Arabian deserts were within easy reach of that city. It is not likely that Paul went to Mt. Sinai, as some suggest, for that would have constituted too effective an argument for the divine origin of his apostleship, to be omitted here. Furthermore, Sinai was a long way from Damascus, the journey was at all times dangerous for travellers without armed escorts, and in a.d. 37, the most probable year of Paul’s conversion, a war between King Aretas and the Romans was in progress, which fact would have made such a journey very doubtful. Translation. Neither did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and again returned to Damascus. 4. When he did go up to Jerusalem, he only saw Peter and James, only remained fifteen days, and returned without being recognized by the mass of believers (1:18–24). Verse eighteen. The words after three years do not merely refer to a lapse of time. They are argumentative. Paul is showing all through this section, his entire independence of the Jerusalem apostles. Therefore, the three years have reference, not to the time after his return from Arabia, but to the period of time after his conversion. The word see is from historeo (iJstoreo) which means “to inquire into, to find out, to visit.” Paul had been suddenly driven out of Damascus (Acts 9:19–25). He went to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Peter and possibly to seek another sphere of labor. The Authorized Version has the name Peter which is the English spelling of the Greek word petros (petro") meaning “a rock.” The Greek text has the word Kephas (Kefa") which is the Greek spelling of a Chaldaic word meaning “a rock.” He mentions his fifteen day stay to show how brief were his conversations with Peter. The reason his visit was so abruptly terminated was that the Hellenistic Jews were seeking his life (Acts 9:29), and also that the Lord Jesus appeared to him in the Temple and ordered him out of Jerusalem since his ministry would not be received by the Jerusalem Jews (Acts 22:17–18) . Translation. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Kephas, and remained with him fifteen days. Verse nineteen. The construction in the Greek indicates that James was one of the apostles Paul saw. He was not one of the Twelve however, since the brethren of our Lord did not believe on Him at the time of the choosing of the Twelve. The expression “James the Lord’s brother” means that he was the son of Joseph and Mary by natural generation. He is the same James mentioned in Mark 6:3; Galatians 2:9, 12; I Corinthians 15:7; Acts

15:13, 21:18. It is supposed that he was led to believe in the Lord Jesus by reason of the fact that he saw our Lord in His post-resurrection ministry (John 7:5; I Corinthians 9:5, 15:7). He was the Moderator of the church in Jerusalem (Acts 15:13, 21:18). Translation. But another of the apostles I did not see except James the brother of our Lord. Verse twenty. The words, “Now the things which I write unto you,” refer primarily and directly to Paul’s statements in verses 18 and 19, to the effect that he went to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Peter, that he saw no others of the apostles except Peter and James, and that he remained in Jerusalem only fifteen days. He considered these facts so important in his demonstration of his apostolic independence that he adds the words, “Behold, before God, I lie not.” The strength of Paul’s language is explained by the insidious falsehoods of the Judaizers regarding his supposed dependence upon the Twelve. The logical inference is that they had circulated statements to the effect that Paul had spent much time at Jerusalem with the apostles there. He denies this charge most vehemently. Translation. But the things which I am writing to you, behold, before the face of God, I am not lying. Verse twenty one. This verse records a period of preaching, as indicated by verse 23. The word region is from klimata (klimata). It denotes the fingers of coastland sloping down from the mountains to the sea in northwestern Syria and eastern Cilicia. The name Syria is placed first because Paul’s ministry at Antioch preceded that at Tarsus, and because Cilicia was subordinate to Syria in the Roman empire, being only a district of the great province of Syria. Here we have about ten years of Paul’s life passed over in silence, between his flight from Jerusalem to Tarsus and his return to the former city for the Apostolic Council. These years were spent around Tarsus and Antioch, in Cyprus and Asia Minor. Translation. Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. Verse twenty two. In the construction translated was unknown, the emphasis is upon a continuous state, literally “I remained unknown.” By face could be rendered “with respect to the face,” that is, they did not recognize Paul when they saw him. He speaks of the churches of Judaea as distinct from the church at Jerusalem. He left this city so abruptly that the Judaean churches had no opportunity to become acquainted with him. Had he been a disciple of the Twelve, his work would have been in Judaea, but because he was not, that showed that he was an independent missionary, and that he was not operating under the supervision of the Jerusalem church and the Twelve. The phrase in Christ distinguishes the Christian churches in Judaea from the unconverted Jewish assemblies. Translation. But I remained personally unknown to the churches of Judaea which are in Christ. Verse twenty-three. Heard is in the Greek text “they kept constantly hearing,”

emphasis being, not upon the fact of the hearing, but upon their hearing it constantly. Only limits the whole statement. This information regarding the apostle was the only exception to their ignorance of Paul. Faith does not refer to the body of truth preached by Paul, but to the faith in Christ which he exhorted his listeners to exercise. It was the principle of the Church’s life that the Pharisee Saul was aiming to destroy. His aim was the extermination of the Church and its faith in the Lord Jesus. This he tried to accomplish by the ravaging of the faith of individual Christians. Destroyed is from portheo (porqeo), which means “to ravage, to overthrow, to make havoc.” It is in the imperfect tense which speaks of continuous action in past time. It is not the fact of having destroyed the faith, that is in view here, for Paul never did that, but the continuous process of ravaging and making havoc of the Church. Translation. Indeed, they only kept on hearing, The one who used to persecute us at one time, is now announcing the glad tidings of the faith which at one time he was ravaging. Verse twenty-four. And they glorified God in me. The verb presents continuous action, literally, they kept on glorifying. In is from en (ejn), a preposition which sometimes designates that which constitutes the ground or basis of an action. This meaning comes from that use of the word which denotes the sphere within which the action takes place. Paul means that his example was the cause of the Judaean churches glorifying God. They found in Paul an occasion and a reason for glorifying God. Arthur S. Way translates: “And so in me they found that for which to glorify God.” Paul shows the cordial attitude of the churches of Judaea towards himself, contrasting that attitude with the hatred which the Judaizers displayed in their antagonism against him. Translation. And they were continually glorifying God (for that which they found) in me. 5. When Paul did go back to Jerusalem after some years, he was most careful to maintain his independence of the apostles there. His fellowship with them was on terms of equality. He was not indebted to them for anything (2:1–10). Verse one. Then fourteen years after, I went up again to Jerusalem. Paul has shown up to this point how independent he was of the Twelve during the first fourteen years of his Christian life. Now he proceeds to show how independent he was of the Jerusalem apostles at the time of his visit to that city. He had visited Jerusalem since his journey there to become acquainted with Peter, but he does not mention the fact, for his presence in the city at that time had nothing to do with the questions at issue. He went there with Barnabas to bring alms to the poor saints in that city (Acts 11:30). It was during a period of persecution when James the son of Zebedee and Peter were under the power of Herod, and when the other apostles were probably scattered. In Galatians he is interested only in his visits to that city which involved his relation to the Twelve and to the doctrine he preached. This visit mentioned in Galatians was ostensibly at the time of the church council spoken of in Acts 15:1–29. We have two records of this council, one by Paul (Gal. 2:1– 10), and the other by Luke (Acts 15:1–29). They differ in details, but are in agreement about the important facts. We can expect this when we remember that the two records are

independent accounts, and that Paul was drawing certain facts from that which transpired at the council for the purpose of using them in his argument, while Luke, approaching the matter from an historian’s view-point, is merely recording facts as he finds them. Both accounts speak of the same issue raised at the council, namely, the right of Paul and Barnabas to dispense with the obligation of circumcision in relation to their Gentile converts. The same apostles take part in the council. The result of the discussion is the same, namely, that circumcision was not to be required of Gentile converts. There is therefore no good reason to think that the two accounts present two different occasions. The reason why Paul mentions this visit to Jerusalem in such detail, is that his act of referring the matter of circumcision to the Jerusalem church and the Twelve was misrepresented as an act of submission and an acknowledgement of his inferiority to the Jerusalem apostles. The facts of the case were, as Paul brings out, that he had procured the condemnation of the Judaizers who had insisted upon circumcision, had been received by James, Peter, and John in brotherly fellowship, and had been accorded full recognition as the apostle to the Gentiles. Thus, the apostle Paul again demonstrates his entire independence of any human authority. Took Titus with me. The word took is from sunparalambano (sunparalambano), which means “to take along as a companion.” Titus was a Greek, and uncircumcised. Paul probably took him along to make of him a test case on the whole question of Gentile circumcision. This shows the determined spirit with which Paul came to the meeting of the council. Translation. Then after the space of fourteen years, again I went up to Jerusalem accompanied by Barnabas, having taken along also Titus. Verse two. I went up by revelation. This is not inconsistent with the statement in Acts to the effect that the church at Antioch deputed Paul to go to Jerusalem. By is from kata (kata). The rendering could be, “I went up in accordance or in conformity with a revelation.” That is, the church at Antioch could have commissioned Paul to go to Jerusalem, and in addition to that, the Holy Spirit could have spoken directly to him to the same effect. A like instance is seen in the fact that Peter was requested by the servant of Cornelius to go to the latter’s home, and God gave him a vision which prepared him for his mission to that Gentile home. Luke narrates the outward cause. Paul speaks of the inward impression made by the Holy Spirit. Communicate is from anatithemi (ajnatiqemi). The Greek word has the following meanings: “to set forth in words; to impart; to communicate with a view to consultation; to set up a thing for the consideration of others.” Preach is present tense, indicating that Paul was still preaching grace. The word privately indicates that he laid before his Jerusalem hearers, his gospel of grace in one or more separate conferences, separate from the general conferences he may have had at Jerusalem. To them that were of reputation is from tois dokousin (toi" dokousin). The verb involved is dokeo (dokeo) which in its intransitive use means, “to seem, to be accounted, reputed.” Thus the phrase could be rendered, “to those who were reputed” men of recognized position such as James, Peter, and John. The idea is “to men of eminence.” We have the idea repeated in verses 6 and 9, in the phrases “these who seemed to be somewhat,” and “who seemed to be pillars.” While the wording in the English of the Authorized Version seems to be somewhat ironical, yet the Greek text gives no hint of

that. This would be inconsistent with Paul’s assertion of fellowship with these apostles, and with his own humility, and it would have defeated his own purpose by that much, which was to show the Galatians that he was on terms of fellowship with them and was recognized by them in his apostolic authority. The word is a term of honor and conveys no tinge of depreciation. Lest by any means I should run or had run in vain. Paul uses his favorite metaphor, borrowed from Greek athletics,7 the stadium foot race, in speaking of his missionary career. The words I should run are present subjunctive, the rendering therefore being, “Lest I should be running,” referring to his apostolic labors in which he was then engaged. The great apostle expresses therefore a fear of present failure together with a fear that his past labors have been of no avail. But how are we to understand this fear on the part of the apostle? Paul most certainly does not mean that his past fruitful labors which resulted in the conversion of many sinners and the establishment of churches would be rendered null and void simply because they would not have the approbation of the Jerusalem church. It must be that Paul attached great importance to the estimation in which his preaching would be held by the Jerusalem church and the Twelve, and the reaction of the same upon the Roman world. When we think of the strong prejudices of that church situated in the stronghold of apostate Judaism, this feeling of anxiety lest his work be disowned, is certainly a natural thing. His fear was that those in authority in the Jerusalem church, by insisting on the Mosaic ritual, might thwart his past and present efforts at establishing a Church that would be free from all connections with the Mosaic economy which had been set aside at the Cross. Paul saw that in the existing situation, there was danger that his work would be rendered ineffectual by the opposition of the Jerusalem church; that the disapproval of the Twelve would have such repercussions in the Church that his work would be seriously handicapped. He was always careful lest the Jewish law be forced upon the Gentiles, and lest the unity of the Christian Church be broken by a division of the latter into a Jewish and a Gentile branch. Translation. And I went up in accordance with a revelation. And I laid before them for their consideration, the gospel which I am preaching among the Gentiles, but privately to those of recognized eminence, lest by any means I should be running or had run in vain. Verse three. It was a bold move on the part of Paul to bring with him to the Jerusalem council, an uncircumcised Gentile, introducing him as a test case. The dispute over the necessity of Gentile circumcision took place at the Antioch Church, and was successfully resisted there. Then the church in that city determined to send its decision to the Jerusalem church to see whether it would or would not sustain its action (Acts 15:1, 2.) But introduces evidence disproving a previously suggested hypothesis. The statement which follows in verse 3 proves that Paul’s fears mentioned in verse 2 had been groundless. The word Greek is from Hellen (eJllen) which means, first, a Greek by nationality, second, where opposed to Jews, a Gentile, and third, in a wider sense, all nations not Jews who adopted Greek learning and customs. Here it means Gentile. Being has a concessive force, literally, “although being” a Greek. Compelled denies, not the attempt to compel Titus to be circumcised, but the success of the attempt. The context clearly indicates that strong pressure was brought to bear upon the Jerusalem church to impose circumcision upon Gentile converts, Titus being the individual around whom the

controversy was waging. The Jerusalem council sustained the decision of the Antioch church to the effect that circumcision was not to be required of Gentile converts. Translation. But not even Titus who was with me, although he was a Gentile, was compelled to be circumcised. Verse four. Paul now speaks of the group that insisted upon the circumcision of Titus. He calls them false brethren, brought in unawares. There were three parties in the Jerusalem controversy: Paul and Barnabas who maintained that Gentile converts were not to be circumcised, the false brethren who demanded that they be circumcised, and the Jerusalem apostles who for the sake of expediency were urged by the false brethren to insist that Paul and Barnabas require circumcision of their Gentile converts. The false brethren were the Judaizers who were sneaked into the Jerusalem council, whose purpose it was to bring both Jew and Gentile under the Mosaic law. The expression brought in unawares is from pareisago (pareisago) which means “to bring in alongside,” thus, “secretly or surreptitiously brought in.” Strabo uses this word when speaking of the introduction of foreign enemies into a city by a faction within the walls. Who is from hoitines (oiJtine"), speaking not only of identity but emphasizing character or nature. These false brethren were running true to type. They could not come in the front door, but were sneaked in the back way. The presence of the article before false brethren in the Greek text, indicates that the Galatian Christians knew who these latter were. Came in privily is from pareiserchomai (pareisercomai), “to come in alongside,” thus, “to come in secretly.” The verb is aorist with a pluperfect sense, speaking of the earlier intrusion of these persons into the Christian churches. This indicates a gradual infiltration of these unsaved Jews who had accepted the Lord Jesus as their Messiah, but who knew nothing of salvation through His precious blood, and who clung to the salvation by-works system of apostate and legalistic Judaism, which system they were desirous of bringing into the Church itself. To spy out is from kataskopeo (kataskopeo), which is used in the LXX of the spying out of a city (II Sam. 10:3). The word means “to spy out with a hostile intent,” and likens these Judaizers to spies who are bent on discovering to an enemy the weak points in a military position. The liberty here is the Christian’s freedom from the Mosaic law which would have been surrendered in principle if the Gentiles at Antioch had been compelled to be circumcised. The phrase “which we have in Christ,” gives the causal ground or basis of the Christian’s liberty from the Mosaic economy. Bring into bondage is from katadouloo (katadouloo). The word means, “to reduce to abject slavery.” The future tense tells us that it was not merely an intention on the part of the Judaizers, but an attempt which they thought had assured hopes of success. Translation. Now it was because of the false brethren who had been surreptitiously brought in, those of such a character that they sneaked in for the purpose of spying out our liberty which we are having in Christ Jesus, with the expectation of reducing us to abject slavery. Verse five. We gave place is from eiko (eijko) which means “to yield.” By subjection is from hupotage (uJpotage) which speaks of the act of subjecting. It denotes a voluntary act, not one imposed from without.

That the truth of the gospel might continue with you. This was a grave crisis. The entire status of Gentile Christianity was involved in the case of Titus. The question as to whether Christianity was to be merely a modified form of legalistic Judaism or a system of pure grace, was at stake. Justification by faith was on trial. Circumcision would have set it aside. The word remain is from diameno (diameno). The idea of firm possession is present in this compound verb. With you is from pros humas (pro" uJma"). The idea is not that of simple rest. The preposition expresses the relation of an active bearing on life. One could translate for you, and paraphrase by the words with a view to your welfare. Translation. To whom not even for an hour did we yield with reference to the particular voluntary submission (demanded), in order that the truth of the gospel might abide for you. Verse six. Not only did Paul successfully maintain his position with regard to the matter of Gentile immunity from the obligation of circumcision at the Jerusalem council, but the persons of eminence in the church there, imposed no restrictions nor commands upon him relative to the matter. The expression these that seemed to be somewhat, is from the same Greek word translated reputation in verse 2, and refers to the apostolic leaders of the church at Jerusalem. The verb added which is attached to this phrase, appears at the end of this verse, Paul indulging in one of his departures from his trend of thought in the intervening words, only to race back to it before he leads his readers too far afield. In the words “whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter with me: God accepteth no man’s person:” Paul means no disrespect. He is merely asserting his own independence of them, thus by contrast setting off his apostolic authority in the light of their’s. He says that it made no difference with him what their former position was, referring to their former intercourse with the Lord Jesus. The knowing Christ after the flesh (II Cor. 5:16) gives one no position of preeminence in the Church. Furthermore, he says that God is no respecter of persons, literally, “God does not receive the face of a man.” He shows no partiality because of a man’s natural ability, his position or possessions in the various departments of human society. Paul says, “It maketh no matter to me.” The word is diaphero (diafero) which means “to matter, it is of importance, it makes a difference.” It made no difference to Paul who these men were, what position they were holding, and what advantages they had had, so far as his receiving at their hands an apostolic commission was concerned. He had received his direct from God. These men of eminence, Paul says, added nothing to him. The word added is from prosanatithemi (prosanatiqemi). It means “to communicate, to impart.” In these words Paul says what he began to say at the beginning of the verse. The Jerusalem apostles imposed on him no burden of doctrine or practice, and imparted to him nothing in addition to what he knew. Translation. But to be something from (at the hands of) those who were of repute, whatever they were aforetime, is of no importance to me. God accepts not man’s person. For those who were of repute imposed nothing on me. Verse seven. But contrariwise. Paul states here that instead of the Jerusalem apostles championing the case of the Judaizers as certain had hoped, they came boldly over to Paul’s side after they had heard the issue discussed in private conference. The words when they saw, gives the reason for the statement which follows. They imply that what the

Jerusalem apostles had learned, had led them to give their endorsement to Paul’s message and his stand on the matter of Gentile circumcision. Paul speaks of the gospel of the circumcision and the gospel of the uncircumcision. His thought is not that there are two different gospels, two different types of messages adjusted to the needs of the Jews and the Gentiles respectively. He means that to him was committed the responsibility of taking the gospel of grace to the Gentiles, and that to Peter was given the commission of taking it to the Jews. Since this point needs to be guarded in these days, we quote some authorities on the matter. Lightfoot says that these phrases denote “a distinction in the sphere in which the gospel was to be preached, not a difference in the type of gospel.” Burton says that the context demonstrates that Paul regarded the distinction between the gospel entrusted to him and that entrusted to Peter as not one of content but of the persons addressed. Meyer says that this passage does not refer to two different gospels but to the same gospel to be given to two different groups of individuals, whose peculiarities demanded of the preacher a special adaptation to his distinctive audience. He says that the passage cannot be worse misunderstood than it has been by Bauer who maintained that there was a special gospel to the circumcised which maintained the necessity of circumcision, and a special gospel to the uncircumcised which allowed the matter of circumcision to drop. Burton again says that the words circumcision and uncircumcision are genitives of connection denoting to whom the gospel is to be given. The word gospel (euaggelion (eujaggelion)) carries its own content of meaning, namely, “a message of good news.” The word committed is from pepisteumai (pepisteumai) which latter is in the perfect tense, implying a permanent commission. This word was also a technical word used in the imperial government of Rome. The imperial secretary used the technical expression pepisteumai (pepisteumai), I have been entrusted, the qualifying word being added which would designate the matter with which he was entrusted.8 The apostles were the imperial secretaries of the King of kings, the Lord Jesus, to whom was entrusted the writing and propagation of the New Testament message. Translation. But on the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with (the responsibility of preaching) the gospel to the uncircumcised as Peter with (the responsibility of preaching) the Gospel to the circumcised. Verse eight. This verse is a parenthetical statement. It confirms the contents of the preceding verse, namely that God delegated to Paul the responsibility of giving the gospel to the Gentiles, and to Peter, the responsibility of giving the same message to the Jews. Paul’s reasoning is as follows. He recognizes with out hesitation Peter’s apostleship and its divine source. Then he proves that the recognition of his apostleship given by the Jerusalem apostles was merited, because his experience in preaching the gospel among the Gentiles was equal to and like in character to their efforts among the Jews. He says that God who wrought effectually in Peter’s work among the Jews, did the same with reference to his work among the Gentiles. All of which means that both Peter and Paul were recipients of the blessing of God in their work for Him, which is tantamount to saying that He gave recognition to each one as an apostle by divine appointment. The word wrought is from energeo (ejnergeo). When this verb is applied to the work of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the believer, the preposition en (ejn) (in) is used with it.9 The fact that this word is not used in connection with the words Peter and me, tells us that

this verse is not describing the work of grace in the hearts of Peter and Paul, but the work of God for them in owning and blessing their preaching with the result that souls were saved in each case. This is in line with the context, for it speaks of God’s seal of approval resting upon the work of both Peter and Paul, and thus upon their apostleship. The words Peter and me are in the dative case, which case designates the person or thing in whose interest or for whom the action in the verb is performed. God wrought for Peter and for Paul. To before apostleship is from eis (eij"), which here has the meaning of “with respect to.” Translation. For He who worked effectively for Peter with respect to (his) apostolate to the circumcision, also worked effectively for me with respect to the Gentiles. Verse nine. And when James, Kephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me. James is mentioned first by Paul, and for four possible reasons. First, Paul showed his respect to the mother-church at Jerusalem and its highly esteemed leader. Second, this James was the brother of our Lord. Third, he had presided at the Council. Fourth, his well-known strictness as to the observance of the Mosaic law gave special weight to his support of Gentile freedom from the law. The word pillars is from stulos (stulo"), which was used to speak of literal pillars or columns of buildings. But it was also a natural metaphor used in the classics as it is used here. The Church was looked upon as a temple of God, and these men, among others, were looked upon as supporters of the Church, men of distinction and prominence. The word seemed is from the same Greek word used in verses 2 and 6, dokeo (dokeo). The word does not cast any doubt nor present a supposition, but means here “to repute.” That is, these three men were reputed to be pillars of the Church. They were so thought of by the Jerusalem church. They gave me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship. The custom of giving the hand as a pledge of friendship or agreement has been found among both the Hebrews and the Greeks. It was probably derived by the Hebrews from some outside source. The custom appears as early as Homer. It is found in an inscription from Pergamum (98 b.c.), where the people of that city offer to adjust the strife between Sardis and Ephesus and send a mediator to give hands for a treaty. The custom is found among the Persians. Images of right hands clasped were often exchanged in token of friendship. An extract from Tacitus says, “The state of the Lingones had sent, according to an ancient institution, right hands, as gifts to the legions, a signal of good will.” On Roman coins there often is seen two hands joined, with various inscriptions speaking of concord and agreement. The word fellowship is from koinonia (koinonia). Its use here is illustrated from secular documents in the clause, “My brother on my father’s side with whom I have no partnership.”10 The word koinonia (koinonia) defines the compact recognized and sealed by the right hands of fellowship as a partnership, in this case, a partnership in the preaching of the same gospel. It was a mutual alliance, for Paul and Barnabas grasped the proffered hands of James, Kephas, and John. The details of the compact are found in the words “that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.” The agreement therefore was that Paul and Barnabas should go as apostles to the Gentiles, and the Jerusalem apostles were to go as apostles to the Jews, both groups taking the same gospel. The state of things which

existed hitherto remained undisturbed. Two nationally different spheres were to be evangelized with one and the same message. But the agreement was more than this. It was an acknowledgment of apostolic equality. Paul would not be content with the mere approbation of the Twelve upon his missionary labors. He needed to show the Galatians that he was an apostle equal in rank to the apostles at Jerusalem. In addition to that, he deemed it necessary to show them that his contention for Gentile freedom from the obligation of circumcision was sustained in the Jerusalem council. However, this mutual understanding did not forbid Paul to minister to the Jews on occasion or prevent Peter from ministering to the Gentiles should the opportunity arise. Paul began his ministry in each new place by preaching to the Jews. Peter preached to the Gentiles in the house of Cornelius, and ministered at the Gentile church in Syrian Antioch. Translation. And having come to perceive the grace which was given to me, James, and Kephas, and John, those who in reputation were looked upon as pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, to the end that we should preach the gospel to the Gentiles and they themselves to the circumcision. Verse ten. Only, that is, one item in the agreement was emphasized, the care of the poor. This is not a request added to the agreement, but a part of the agreement itself. Remember is from mnemoneuo (mnemoneuo). This is the only instance in the New Testament where this word means “to remember” in the sense of “benefit or care for.” The force of the tense and mode of the verb causes us to translate, “that we should keep on remembering the poor.” Paul and Barnabas had done this before when they brought relief to the poor at Jerusalem on a previous occasion (Acts 11:27–30). Judaea often suffered from famine, and the Christians there were perhaps the worst sufferers because of the illwill and persecution which came from the unsaved Jews. This passage implies that there was a state of chronic poverty there, as does Paul’s efforts in collecting money on his missionary journeys. He was not attempting to meet an emergency, since it took more than a year to collect the fund, the latter being organized to meet a permanent demand for continuous help. The word forward is from spoudazo (spoudazo) which means not only “to be willing, to do with eagerness,” but “to make diligent effort.” It does not refer merely to the apostle’s state of mind, but to his activity in relieving the necessities of the poor saint at Jerusalem. Translation. Only that we should keep on remembering the poor, which very thing I have made a diligent and eager effort to do. 6. But Paul’s independence of the Twelve is not only seen in his activities at Jerusalem, but in his act of rebuking Peter at Antioch when the latter was yielding to pressure from the legalizers and was adding law to grace, and in that way denying the fundamental of the gospel (2:11–21). Verse eleven. In this verse Paul opens the question as to whether the Jew himself is still bound by the Mosaic law. In the Jerusalem council, the question was as to whether the rite of circumcision should be required of the Gentiles. The particular Mosaic legislation to which Paul had reference here and which he presented as a test case before

the Galatians, had to do with the Levitical legislation regarding the eating of certain foods. While one purpose of the giving of this legislation permitting the eating of certain foods and the prohibition regarding other foods, was a dietary one to promote the physical wellbeing of the Jews, yet another was that of keeping the Jews a separate people from the Gentiles, thus preserving clean the channel which God was using to bring salvation to the earth. The forbidden foods were found on the tables of the Gentiles. Hence a Jew could never accept a dinner invitation of a Gentile. This was one of the factors which kept the nation Israel apart from the Gentile world. God had made clear to Peter that this legislation was set aside at the Cross, by the vision He gave him while he was on the housetop of Simon the tanner, with the result that Peter was willing to go to the home of Cornelius (Acts 10). This occurred before the incident to which Paul refers in these verses. When Peter came to Antioch, he saw Jews and Gentiles eating together, and joined their fellowship. When certain Jews from the Jerusalem church came as representatives of James, and saw Peter eating with the Gentiles, they contended that he was going against Levitical legislation. They brought pressure to bear upon Peter, and he discontinued his practice of eating with the Gentiles. This caused the Jews in the church at Antioch to cease eating with the Gentiles, and brought about a division in the church. Paul, in resisting Peter, thus showed that he not only refused to take orders from the Jerusalem apostles, but on the other hand felt that his apostolic position gave him the right to stand openly against there in matters of wrong conduct. In no way could he have better demonstrated his independence as an apostle. The word but introduces the contrast between the fellowship of Paul with the Jerusalem apostles and his attitude against them. The word withstood is from anthistemi (ajnqistemi) which means “to set one’s self against, to withstand, resist, oppose.” This verb usually implies that the initial attack came from the other side. It was Peter, in Paul’s mind, who was the aggressor. Although not intentional, yet in effect it was an attack on the position which Paul was maintaining at Antioch. The words, “he was to be blamed,” are from kataginosko (kataginosko) and eimi (eijmi). The literal meaning of the former word is “to know (some one) down,” thus “to condemn” someone. The tense of the participle, perfect, and that of the verb, imperfect, gives us “he stood condemned,” and that in a continuous fashion. He stood condemned by the Christians of Antioch. The public judgment had turned against him. The intrigue of the Jerusalem Jews at Antioch, the purpose of which was to affix the stigma of uncleanness on the uncircumcised Gentile Christians, was countenanced by Peter and Barnabas. Peter’s offensive behavior aroused the indignation of the Antioch Christians. Paul could not therefore keep silence, but was forced to rebuke Peter. Here the argument for Paul’s apostolic independence has come to the highest level yet attained. In Jerusalem Paul faced Peter as an equal in rank and in the gospel ministry. At Antioch he faced him as his superior in character and courage. Translation. But when Kephas came to Antioch, to his face I opposed him, because he stood condemned. Verse twelve. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles. It is clear that these men were sent by James, men of importance as is shown by the deference with which Peter treated them, and the obsequiousness with which he bowed to their requests. They were not from the ranks of the Judaizers, for James would not send

men of that stamp, but Jewish Christians of Jerusalem who like James were still most scrupulous in their obedience to the Mosaic law. James, even after the decision of the council at Jerusalem regarding the relation of the law to Gentile converts to Christianity, still held to the view that the Jewish converts were under the law. James was the occasion of Paul’s lapse when the apostle at his request took upon himself a Jewish vow to show the Jews in Jerusalem that he was still a strict Jew (Acts 21:18–26). Here he was the occasion of Peter’s lapse when he sent this mission to Antioch with the purpose of enforcing the Mosaic law so far as the Jewish Christians were concerned. News had reached Jerusalem that Jewish and Gentile Christians were eating together, hence the mission from James. The words eat with are from sunesthio (sunesqio). The verb is in the imperfect tense. The preposition sun prefixed to the verb implies close fellowship or cooperation. The tense of the verb tells us that it was a practice of Peter to eat with the Gentiles. The preposition speaks of the fact that in the act of joining in their meals, not only in the Christian love-feast which was connected with the worship program of the local church, but also in their homes, Peter was on terms of the greatest intimacy. The love-feast was recognized as the bond of fellowship in the infant church. The probable origin of the Antioch practice of Jew and Gentile eating together, was that the church argued that since the Jerusalem council had upheld the position of Paul on the freedom of the Gentiles from the obligation of circumcision, that all restrictions of the Mosaic economy had been set aside. This would include the Levitical legislation regarding foods. The foods previously forbidden the Jew and found on Gentile tables, now could be included in his menu. Accordingly, the Jewish and Gentile Christians welcomed the opportunity of Christian fellowship at meals. This practice could not have been in force before the Jerusalem council, for, had it been, that question would also have been dealt with. Peter, finding this situation at Antioch, fell in with it in his usual impetuous way. The church at Jerusalem, hearing of his actions, sent this deputation to investigate. These men sent by James, found Peter eating with the Gentiles. The word withdrew is from hupostello (uJpostello). This word was used frequently to describe strategic military operations. This suggests that it was part of Peter’s strategy in the circumstances with which he was faced. Polybius used this word of the drawing back of troops in order to place them under shelter. This suggests a retreat on the part of Peter from motives of caution. The tense is imperfect, indicating that Peter did not start his withdrawal from the Gentile tables at once, but gradually, under the pressure of their criticism. It gives a graphic picture of the Jerusalem apostle’s irresolute and tentative efforts to withdraw from an intercourse that gave offense to these visitors. The verb also was used of furling the sails of a boat. Peter, the former fisherman, was expert at that. Now. he was trimming his sails in a controversy that involved Jewish freedom from the Mosaic law which had been set aside at the Cross. The word separated is from aphorizo (ajforizo). It is also in the imperfect tense, speaking of a gradual separation. Hupostello (uJpostello) describes the partial withdrawal of Peter, and aphorizo (ajforizo) the complete and final separation from the combined fellowship of the Jewish and Gentile meals, both the common meal eaten at the church, the love-feast, and the meals eaten at the homes of the Gentiles. The whole incident is characteristic of Peter. He was always the first to recognize great truths and the first to draw back from these truths. Witness his great confession of the deity of the Lord Jesus, and so soon after, his repudiation of the prediction of our Lord to the effect that He

would soon die at Jerusalem and be raised again (Matt. 16:13–23); also his call to preach (Matt. 4:18–20), and his action of returning to his fishing business in stead of fulfilling his commission of preaching the gospel (John 21:3). Translation. For before certain from James came, with the Gentiles it was his habit to eat meals. But when they came, he began gradually to draw himself back, and began slowly to effect a final separation, fearing those of the circumcision. Verse thirteen. This verse gives the result of Peter’s action in the church at Antioch. The Jewish Christians there refused to eat anymore with their Gentile brethren in the Lord. The church was split wide open on the issue. The love-feast, that bond of fellowship expressive of Christian love amongst the brethren, was divided into two groups. The friendly groups of Jews and Gentiles in the fellowship of the homes were discontinued. The fact that the Jews of the Antioch church followed Peter in his withdrawal from the Gentiles, shows that the entire group had eaten with the latter. Paul says that the Jews dissembled with Peter. The word is from hupokrinomai (uJpokrinomai), which speaks of the act of concealing one” real character under the guise of conduct implying something different. The word itself means literally “to answer from under,” as an actor who speaks from under a mask. Our word hypocrite comes from this Greek word. It usually referred to the act of concealing wrong feelings or character under the pretence of better ones. But in the present case, the knowledge, judgment, and feelings which were concealed, were worse only from the viewpoint of those who had come from Jerusalem of whom Peter and the Antioch Jews were afraid. From Paul’s viewpoint, it was their better knowledge which they covered up by their misconduct, the usual type of hypocrisy that proceeds from fear. Paul, by characterizing their actions as hypocrisy, implied that there had been no real change of conviction on the part of Peter and the rest of the Jews, but only conduct that misrepresented their true convictions. But now regarding Barnabas, and the fact that he was swept off his feet and carried away with their hypocrisy. It was bad enough for Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles and the champion of Gentile liberty from the law, to have Peter act as he did. But the hypocrisy of Barnabas was the cruel blow. With the single exception of Paul, Barnabas had been the most effective minister of the gospel in the conversion of the Gentiles. He had been deputed with Paul by the Antioch church to the council at Jerusalem as its representative. He had come back with the news that the position held by Paul and himself with regard to Gentile freedom from circumcision had been sustained by the Jerusalem apostles. Now, his withdrawal from social fellowship with the Gentiles, came with the force of a betrayal to Paul and the church at Antioch. The defection of Barnabas was of a far more serious nature with regard to Gentile freedom than the vacillation of Peter. Barnabas was Paul’s chief colleague in the evangelization of the Gentiles, and now to have him play the hypocrite and deserter, was a bitter blow to the great apostle. This may well have prepared the way for the dissension between them which shortly afterwards led to their separation (Acts 15:39). Barnabas, the foremost champion of Gentile liberty next to Paul had become a turncoat. Translation. And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite jointly

with him, so that even Barnabas was swept along with their hypocrisy. Verse fourteen. The word translated uprightly is from orthopodeo (ojrqopodeo). Orthos (ÆOrqo") means straight, and pous (pou"), which has the same root as the verb podeo (podeo), means foot, literally “to walk with straight feet,” thus “to walk a straight course.” It speaks of straightforward, unwavering, sincere conduct in contrast to a crooked, wavering, and more or less insincere course such as Paul had said Peter and the other Jews were guilty of. Keeping in mind the foregoing definition of the Greek word we could say, “But when I saw that they walked not orthopedically,” that is, in a straightforward, unwavering, and sincere way. The words according to are from pros (pro"), and put definite limitations upon the words walked uprightly. The sense here is not that Peter failed to walk in conformity to the precepts of evangelical truth, but that his attitude towards the truth of the gospel was not straightforward. The idea is, “He did not pursue a straight course in relation to the truth of the gospel.” He did not deal honestly and consistently with it. His was an attitude that led him to juggle with its sacred truth, to warp it, to misrepresent it, to deal crookedly with it. What an indictment of Peter. Before all is from emprosthen panton (ejmprosqen panton). Paul’s rebuke of Peter was in the sight of the whole Antioch church, in the presence of everybody. The fact that the article is absent before the word all makes it a general statement. The rebuke was not given before the officers of the church only, or before a specially convened and restricted number of people, but right in open church meeting and before all the members of the Antioch church who were present. Augustine said, “It is not advantageous to correct in secret an error which injured openly.” If thou being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? The word live here, from zao (zao), does not refer to the moral living according to Gentile or Jewish fashion, but to the shaping of the life with reference to the external social observances in the Christian fellowship, such as Levitical restrictions on eating. The present tense of live must not be pressed to the point of teaching that Peter at the time of this rebuke, was living as the Gentiles do, for he was not. It describes a mental attitude or habit which had in times past shown itself in outward actions, and which was still in force, but which was being hypocritically covered up by Peter’s action of withdrawing from fellowship with the Gentiles. It shows that Peter had not in principle abandoned it, but had trimmed his sails to the sudden change of wind that came from Jerusalem. Paul, in his rebuke, forcibly sets forth Peter’s inconsistency in compelling the Gentiles to obey the Levitical legislation regarding foods, for the Gentiles had only one of two choices in the premises, either to refuse to obey the law in this respect and thus cause a split in the Christian Church, or to preserve harmony by coming under the law. And the apostle Peter did all this with a full understanding of the vision God had given him, which clearly taught him that the Levitical legislation for the Jew was now a thing of the past (Acts 10:28), and that the line of separation had been broken down between Jew and Gentile by the Cross. Peter’s action of refusing to eat with the Gentiles, did not merely have the effect of maintaining the validity of the law for Jewish Christians, but it involved the forcing of that law upon the Gentile Christians, that, or creating a wide-open division in the Church. This latter was what concerned the apostle Paul. He deemed it of utmost importance to

maintain the unity of the Christian Church as against any division into Jewish and Gentile groups. At the Jerusalem council he had agreed to a territorial division of the missionary field into Gentile and Jewish divisions, but to create a division between Jew and Gentile in a Gentile community and church, was out of the question and was something not to be permitted. At the Jerusalem council, it was agreed that the Jewish Christians should continue to keep the law, and that the Gentile Christians were to be free from the law. But this arrangement left the question undecided as to which decision of the council should take Precedence when an issue arose such as we see at Antioch where Peter’s action brought pressure to bear upon the Gentiles. Paul insisted that in such an instance, the Jews were not obligated to keep the law. Translation. But when I saw that they were not pursuing a straightforward course in relation to the truth of the gospel, I said to Kephas in the presence of everybody, If you, being a Jew, habitually are living after the manner of the Gentiles, and not after that of the Jews, how is it that you are compelling the Gentiles to live after the Jewish manner? Verse fifteen. The word we is emphatic and serves to emphasize the sharp contrast which Paul is about to make between the Jew and the Gentile. The Greek verb carries its own person in itself, and when the pronoun is used with it, the writer wishes to call particular attention to the subject of the verb. The translation could thus read, As for us, by nature we are Jews, not sinners of the Gentiles. The word sinners is not here used in its strict sense where it speaks of persons guilty of sin and thus not righteous, but as it is often used in the New Testament, of persons from the point of view of the speaker or from that point of view which he was momentarily holding, who were preeminently sinful, sinners above others, or habitual sinners. The phrase “publicans and sinners” is an example. It was the Pharisaic point of view in relation to persons guilty of specific violations of the law. The Jews so regarded the Gentiles whom they spoke of as unclean and dogs. Paul is here speaking to Peter on the common ground of their former Judaism and in an ironical fashion using the language of Judaism. In the word we, Paul includes himself, Peter, and the Jewish Christians at Antioch in contrast to the Gentile Christians. He says that he and they are Jews by birth, not only not Gentiles but not even Gentile proselytes. He implies that as such, the Jews have special privileges and prerogatives. Authorities differ on the question as to whether verses 15–21 are part of Paul’s words to Peter in the hearing of the Antioch church, or whether Paul’s words in verse 14 are all that is reported of what he said to him on that occasion, and that verses 15–21 are specially written to the Galatians as an answer to the question of Paul. The matter is not important, but the writer leans toward the opinion that they are part of what Paul said to Peter, and for the following reasons. The bare reproach of verse 14 would hardly be in keeping with the serious nature of the trouble at Antioch. Again, it would be too brief an extract from Paul’s words to Peter, to show the Galatians that Paul had really come to grips with Peter on the question at issue. In the third place, Paul in 4:1 resumes his direct words to the Galatians in the expression “O foolish Galatians.” Translation. As for us, we are Jews by nature, and not sinners of Gentile

origin. Verse sixteen: The word law here is used in its qualitative ant legalistic sense. It denotes divine law looked upon as a purely legalistic system. It consists of statutes. If a person obeys the law, he secures thereby the divine approval. If he disobeys it, he is subject to divine condemnation. The divine approval is a matter of debt which God owes and pays to the person who obeys. This is a salvation which the person merits, and which is given on the basis of works, not grace. We must be careful to note that the Bible nowhere teaches this concept of divine law so far as a lost sinner is concerned, and with reference to his salvation from sin. This concept had its origin in the thought and practice of man all down the ages since its inception in the heart of Cain. Paul had held this view as a self-righteous Pharisee. The commandment which he thought was ordained to give life, he found to be a ministration of death (Rom. 7:10) . He admits, that with all the racial superiority and privileges inferred in what he says in verse 15, that even Jews found out that they could not be declared righteous by virtue of their obedience to the legal enactments of the Mosaic law. But is not adversative but exceptive. Faith here refers to the acceptance of that which accredits itself as true, and a corresponding trust in the person concerning whom the facts are presented. The expression, of Jesus Christ, is an objective genitive, corresponding to another construction in Greek which is translated in Jesus Christ. By is from dia (dia) which means through, and it indicates the channel through which one secures salvation. The word justified is from dikaioo (dikaioo). The cognate noun is dikaiosune (dikaiosune) which means righteousness. Thus the act of God it justifying a believing sinner consists of taking away his guilt and its penalty, since Christ bore both on the cross, and the imputation of a righteousness, even Christ Jesus Himself, in whom the believer stands not only guiltless and uncondemned for time and eternity, but also positively righteous in the sight of the eternal laws of God. Translation. And knowing that a man is not justified by law works but only through faith in Christ Jesus, we also placed our trust in Christ Jesus, in order that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by law works, because by law works there shall no flesh be justified. Verse seventeen. The word if is from ei (eij), referring to a fulfilled condition. The Christian Jews, in seeking to be justified in Christ, were shown to be sinners just like and in the same class as the Gentiles. When they sought justification in Christ and thus by grace, it was an admission on their part that there is no justification by works, that the seeker is not justified, and is therefore a sinner. The attempt to be justified in Christ awakens the consciousness of sin, and compels the Jew to put himself on the plane of the Gentile. The Jew who calls the Gentile a sinner, in seeking to be justified by faith, is forced to admit that he is a sinner also. He has found that the law has failed him as a justifying agency. Paul repudiates the false assumption of the Judaizers who charged that Christ is the promoter and encourager of sin in that He causes the Jew to abandon the law as a justifying agency, and in doing so, puts himself on the common plane of a Gentile whom he calls a sinner and a dog. The Judaizers argued that in view of the fact that violation of the law is sin, therefore, abandonment of the law in an effort to be justified in Christ is also

Sin. Thus Christ is the Promoter of sin. The word by is from en (ejn) which is used with the instrumental case at times, and means “by means of.” But here it is better to use it with the locative of sphere and translate in Christ, since Christ is the sphere within which his justification was procured and applied, Christ being his righteousness. Translation. But if, as is the case, while seeking to be justified in Christ, we (Jews) ourselves also were found to be sinners, is Christ therefore a promoter of sin? Away with the thought. Verse eighteen. In this verse, Paul sustains his statement “Away with the thought.” Build is from oikodomeo (oijkodomeo) which in connection with the law means “to render or declare valid.” Destroy is from kataluo (kataluo) which applied to the law means “to deprive of force, to abrogate.” Paul is really referring to Peter’s action of declaring the Levitical legislation regarding the eating of food, null and void by his eating with the Gentiles, and then declaring it valid by his act of withdrawing from that fellowship. But he tactfully puts himself into the picture and supposes an hypothetical case. His argument is to the effect that instead of committing sin by abandoning the law for grace, one becomes a transgressor by returning to the law which he has abandoned. The word transgressor is from parabates (parabate"). This word seems to have been chosen by the inspired apostle rather than the term used so far in the discussion, namely, sinner, from hamartolos (aJmartolo"), to get rid of the ambiguity of the latter word as it was used in this context. Parabates (Parabate") refers to one who disregards the ethical spirit of the law, hamartolos (aJmartolo"), to one who disregards the letter of the law. The use of the former word rather than of the latter, emphasizes the point here that one who is obedient to the statutes of the law yet may miss the real meaning of the law. Peter, by withdrawing from fellowship with the Gentiles, was obeying the letter of a law he knew had been set aside by God, and was ignoring its significance, namely that of a temporary measure for the time of the Old Testament dispensation, to be abrogated at the Cross. Peter became a transgressor in that he, declaring by his conduct that the law was null and void, now declares valid again that which he destroyed, thus admitting his guilt in that destruction. The word make is from sunistemi (sunistemi) which means here “to exhibit in one’s conduct.” Translation. For if the things I tear down, these again I build up, I exhibit myself as a transgressor. Verse nineteen. Paul’s use of the word law in this verse must be governed by its use in the context. The words, “works of the law” of verse 16, speak of the divine law conceived of as a means of acceptance with God in the case of the sinner who obeys it. Paul does not say that he is dead to law, that is, a law to himself, thus a lawless individual. He still holds to the great ethical principles of love and justice, for instance, which are eternal in their significance, the great underlying principles that inhere in God’s character and in His government. When Paul says that he has died to a thing he means that he has ceased to have any relation to it, so that it has no further claim upon or control over him. It is law as conceived of as a body of legalistic statutes, that he has died to. He uses the personal pronoun ego (ejgo), which indicates that he is speaking of his own personal experience. His attempt to fulfil the requirements of the Mosaic legislation as a means of salvation, had taught him his own inability to meet its demands, and its inability to make him righteous.

Thus he finally abandoned it as a means of justification, and accepted salvation in Christ. He found that what the law did was to reveal sin, to provoke sin, in a certain sense, to create sin, for where there was no law, sin was not reckoned. He found that it provided no remedy for sin, but rather condemned him hopelessly, for no one can fulfil its requirements. It exercised a double power over him, for it made him a sinner and punished him for being one. The poet says, “Do this and live, the law commands, but gives me neither feet nor hands. A better word the gospel brings. It bids me fly and gives me wings.” Faith in Christ was the means whereby Paul’s; complete and irreparable break with the law was effected. The Lord Jesus lived under the law, fully obeyed that law, assumed the guilt and penalty which the human race incurred by having violated the law, and in dying under the law satisfied its requirements. Thus he passed out of the realm where law in its legalistic aspect had control over Him. All believers were identified with Christ in His death and also in His resurrection, and thus have passed out of the realm of divine law so far as its legalistic aspect is concerned. He says that he has thus died to the law that he might live unto God. Subjection to the law as a means of acceptance with God, in reality prevented him from living a life of unreserved devotion to God. This is one of the most grievous vices oflegalism, that it comes between the soul and God. Translation. For, as for myself, I through the intermediate agency of the law died to the law, in order that I might live with respect to God. Verse twenty. I am crucified with Christ. The verb is in the perfect tense which speaks of a past completed action having present finished results. Paul uses it to show that his identification with Christ at the Cross was a past fact, and that the spiritual benefits that have come to him through his identification are present realities with him. By this statement he also shows how he died to the law, namely by dying with Christ who died under its penalty. The law’s demands were satisfied and therefore have no more hold on Paul. But thus being crucified with Christ, meant also to Paul, death to self. When Paul died with Christ, it was the Pharisee Saul who died. What he was and did up to that time passed away so far as he was concerned Saul was buried, and the old life with him. The dominating control of the Adamic nature had its power over him broken. Nevertheless I live. Saul the self-righteous Pharisee, died, but Paul the great apostle, lives. The ego (ejgo) remained. Yet not I, but Christ liveth in me. It is no longer a self-centered life that he lives, but a Christ-centered one. His new life is a Person, the Lord Jesus living in Paul. And through the ministry of the Holy Spirit. the Lord Jesus is manifest in his life. The new life is no longer, like the former one, dependent upon the ineffectual efforts of a man attempting to draw near to God in his own righteousness. The new life is a Person within a person, living out His life in that person. Instead of attempting to live his life in obedience to a set of rules in the form of the legal enactments of the Mosaic law, Paul now yields to the indwelling Holy Spirit and cooperates with Him in the production of a life pleasing to God, energized by the divine life resident in him through the regenerating work of the Spirit. Instead of a sinner with a totally depraved nature attempting to find acceptance with God by attempted obedience to a set of outward laws, it is now the saint living his life on a new principle, that of the indwelling Holy Spirit manifesting forth the Lord Jesus.

That is what Paul means when he says: And the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.11 Translation. With Christ I have been crucified, and it is no longer I who live, but there lives in me Christ. And that life which now I live in the sphere of the flesh, by faith I live it, which faith is in the Son of God who loved me and gave Himself on my behalf. Verse twenty one. Frustrate is from atheteo (ajqeteo) which means “to do away with something laid down, presented, or established, to act towards anything as though it were annulled, to thwart the efficacy of anything, to nullify, to make void.” All these meanings could be applied here to the act of adding law-works to faith as the ground of a sinner’s justification. One may preach that Christ died for our sins, but if he adds works to faith as the means of the acceptance of the salvation Christ procured for lost sinners at the Cross, he has thwarted the efficacy of grace, for the fundamental meaning of grace is that salvation is given free, without money and without price. There is no salvation for the sinner who depends in the least upon good works as a means of acceptance with God. If righteousness is imputed on the basis of obedience to law, then, Paul says, Christ is dead in vain. The words in vain are from dorean (dorean) which means literally, without a cause. That is, if a person could be saved by keeping the law, then there would be no need for the death of Christ. He would have died without a cause, needlessly. Translation. l do not thwart the efficacy of the grace of God. For if through law comes righteousness, then Christ died without a cause.

DOCTRINAL Paul defends his doctrine of justification by faith alone without works, against that of the Judaizers who taught that the works of an individual gave him acceptance with God (Ch. 3 and 4). I. The Galatian Christians received the Holy Spirit in answer to their faith in Christ, not through obedience to law (3: 1–5) . Verse one. Paul says, O foolish Galatians. It is an expression of surprise mingled with indignation. The situation in Galatia will help us understand this outcry. There was on the one hand, the native and national spirit joined to the power of the priesthood and the temples, the spirit of Orientalism, that of stagnation, ignorance and superstition. On the other hand, there was the desire for education, the recognition that Greece and Rome stood on a higher intellectual level than was afforded by the native religions and customs, and in addition to that, a revolt against the ignorant and enslaving native superstitions. The people of the province of Galatia are those who have shaken off the benumbing and degrading influence of the native magic and superstition. They are those who judge for themselves as to the real values in life, and lay claim to insight and wisdom. Paul accuses them with failing to use that insight and wisdom, that appreciation of the better things, when he uses the Greek word translated foolish. The word is anoetos (ajnoeto"). It denotes the stupidity that arises from deadness and impotence of intellect. It means

“lacking in the power of perception unwise.” It refers to one who does not reflect. The word speaks of failure to use one’s powers of perception. The Galatians, Paul says, were certainly not using their heads. The word is used with an ethical reference as the faculty of moral judgment. Thus the word indicates a failure to use one’s powers of perception, that failure being due to a moral defect. It is always true, as it was with the Galatians, that the act of a Christian who embraces false doctrine, is due to sin in his life. The Galatian defection was not due to any fickleness of the Gauls. They are not prominent in the picture. Paul sends this stinging rebuke therefore, “O Galatians, who fail in the first characteristic of the Galatians, namely, the ability to use their heads and to appreciate the finer values of life.” Who hath bewitched you? The word bewitched is from baskaino (baskaino). Paul’s metaphor is derived from the popular superstition of the evil eye. The word denoted either the fascination of an evil eye or some malignant influence akin to it. The infatuation of the Galatians is attributed to the baneful effect of some mysterious power of evil. Before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you. The words set forth are from prographo (prografo). It is the usual word speaking of the act of posting up public announcements or notices. The word is found in early secular documents where a father posted a proclamation that he would no longer be responsible for his son’s debts. It does not here speak of the act of painting the crucified Christ on a placard for public notice, but of posting a public announcement to the effect that He was crucified. This Paul did in his preaching among the Galatians. This placarded notice of the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus should have been enough to keep the eyes of the Galatians from wandering to the enticements of the Judaizers. The word crucified is in the perfect tense. This speaks of the fact that the apostle is not speaking of the figure of a dead Christ on a crucifix, but of the risen, ascended Christ who had been crucified, who was alive, whose glorified body still bore the marks of the nails and the scars of the crown of thorns, and who is the living Saviour by virtue of His atoning work on the Cross. Translation. O, unreflecting Galatians, who bewitched you,12 before whose eyes Jesus Christ was placarded publicly as the Crucified One? Verse two. We have here a forcible appeal to the experience of the Galatians. By the use of the word now, Paul indicates that an answer to the question about to be asked, would be a decisive argument. It is as if Paul said, “I will convince you of your error by this one argument.” By the receiving of the Spirit, Paul means the initial entrance of the Holy Spirit into their hearts when they put their trust in the Lord Jesus. The words “by the hearing of faith,” are from ex akoes pisteos (ejx ajkoe" pisteo"). The word akoes (ajkoe") translated hearing refers either to the act of hearing a message, or to the message that is heard. The second meaning agrees more with the context since Paul is contrasting his message of grace with the preachments of the Judaizers. The phrase of faith defines or describes the message. It is a message that announces faith as the means whereby one receives salvation. The only answer the Galatians could give to this question was that they received the Spirit, not by obedience to the law, but through their faith in Paul’s message of grace. Translation. This only am I desiring to learn from you. By means of law works did you receive the Spirit or by means of the message which

proclaims faith? Verse three. In verse 2, Paul speaks of the initial entrance of the Holy Spirit into the hearts of the Galatian Christians when they put their trust in the Lord Jesus. In this verse, he is speaking of the sanctifying work of the Spirit in the lives of these saints. He asks the question, “Are you to such a degree irrational? Having begun your Christian life in dependence upon the indwelling Spirit, are you now being brought on to the state of spiritual maturity by means of self effort?” The words made perfect are from epiteleo (ejpiteleo) which means “to bring something to the place where it is complete.” The cognate noun is the word Paul uses when he speaks of a spiritually mature Christian, one who is living a well-rounded, wellbalanced, mature life.13 By the word flesh here he refers to all that a person is as the product of natural generation apart from the morally transforming power of the Holy Spirit in regeneration. The word speaks of the unsaved man, body, soul, and spirit, controlled by his totally depraved nature, together with all his human accomplishments, positions, capabilities, and philosophies. See the following scriptures as illustrations of this use: John 3:6; Philippians 3:3, 4; Romans 6:19, 7:5, 18, 25, 8:3; II Corinthians 1:17. The Judaizers in preaching a message of law obedience to the Galatian Christians, caused these latter to abandon the position of grace and put themselves in the sphere of law, both that of the Judaizers’ system of legalism, and that of the Old Testament economy. Because there was no provision in the Mosaic economy for an indwelling Spirit who would sanctify the believer as that believer trusted Him for that work, the Galatians were turning away from the teaching and the reality of the ministry of the Spirit in the life of the believer in this dispensation of grace, and were starting to depend upon self effort in an attempt to obey an outward legalistic system of works. Thus these Christians who had begun their Christian lives in dependence upon the Holy Spirit, now were depending upon self effort to continue in them the work of sanctification which the Holy Spirit had begun. The present tense of the verb here indicates that the Galatians had already begun this attempt. Paul says in effect, “How foolish to think that you can bring yourselves to a state of spiritual maturity in your Christian lives. That is the work of the Spirit. Only He can do that for you.” Translation. Are you so unreflecting? Having begun by means of the Spirit, now are you being brought to maturity by the flesh? Verse four. This verse speaks of the sufferings which the Galatian saints went through as a result of having received the Lord Jesus as Saviour. The only record of any persecutions in the Galatian cities is in Acts 14:2, 5, 19, 22. We are left somewhat in the dark regarding these sufferings, their nature and extent. Paul appeals to the Galatians not to let these sufferings be in vain by turning their backs on grace and putting themselves under the legalistic system of the Judaizers. The construction in the Greek text gives the idea, “If it really be in vain.” It leaves a loophole for doubt in the apostle’s mind that the Galatians really were swinging away from grace to law. It implies an unwillingness on his part to believe this. Translation. So many things did you suffer in vain? If indeed they really

were in vain? Verse five. The word therefore continues the thought of verses 2 and 3 which is further emphasized. In verse 2, Paul is speaking of the initial entrance of the Spirit into the hearts al the Galatians at the moment they placed their faith in the Lord Jesus. In verse 3, he refers to the sanctifying work of the Spirit in the believer’s life. In this verse, the subject of the charismatic manifestations of the Spirit is introduced, namely, the act of the Holy Spirit in enduing certain members of the Galatian churches with special gifts of the Spirit. All these Paul brings to bear upon his contention that the grace way of salvation must be God’s way since it is accompanied by the supernatural ministry of the Holy Spirit. The construction in the Greek requires us to understand that the One who ministered the Spirit to the Galatians is the same Person who worked miracles among them, namely, God the Father. The word ministereth is from epichoregeo (ejpicoregeo) which mean “to supply abundantly or bountifully.” The word miracles is from dunamis (dunami"), used in I Corinthians 12:10 (miracles), and it II Corinthians 12:12 (wonders). In each place, the reference is to the Holy Spirit conferring miracle-working power upon certain members of the early Church. In the view of Paul, it was the same Spirit who was performing His work of sanctification in the lives of the Galatian saints, who was also bestowing miraculous powers upon them. The present tense of the participles here informs us that the work of the Holy Spirit in both respects was continually going on in the Galatian churches, even at the time of the inroad of the Judaizers, although His work was being hindered by the act of the Galatians slowly turning away from His ministrations and depending instead upon self effort. The point however is that these Galatians still had the attesting power of the miracles among them, proving that grace and not works was the way of salvation. Yet in spite of all this irrefutable proof, they were forsaking the place of grace to take their stand under law. Over against all this, the Judaizers had nothing as an evidence that their message was from God. Translation. Therefore, the One who is constantly supplying the Spirit to you in bountiful measure, and constantly working miracles among you, by means of law works is He doing these things, or by means of the message which proclaims faith? II.

Abraham was justified by faith, not works. Therefore the true children of Abraham are justified in the same way (3:6–9) Verse six. In this section entitled DOCTRINAL (chapters 3 and 4), Paul demonstrates that salvation is by grace and in answer to faith, and not by works. His first proof was based upon the fact that the supernatural ministry of the Spirit which accompanied the act of faith on the part of the Galatians, is aproof that his message of grace was of divine origin, and that the message of the Judaizers which in character was diametrically opposed to it, was of human origin. Now, in these verses, he adduces proof from the fact that Abraham was saved by faith and not by works. The occasion for his argument is found in the fact that the Judaizers taught that the natural descendants of Abraham were his children, and thus accepted with God. All of which meant that only the circumcised could be saved. Thus, circumcision was a prerequisite of salvation. This teaching was based on a misapprehension of Genesis 12 and 17. They argued that no one could participate in the blessings of God’s covenant with

Abraham, and so in the Messianic salvation which was inseparably connected with it, unless he was circumcised. The mistake they made was in failing to distinguish between the purely Jewish and national covenant God made with Abraham, which had to do with the earthly ministry and destiny of the Chosen People as a channel which God would use in bringing salvation to the earth, and that salvation which came through a descendant of Abraham, the Messiah. Circumcision was God’s mark of separation upon the Jew, isolating him in the midst of the Gentile nations, in order that He might use the nation Israel for His own purposes. It had nothing to do with the acceptance of salvation by the Jew. Over against this contention, Paul argues that Abraham was justified by faith, not by circumcision. In Romans 4:9, 10, he proves his case conclusively when he shows that Abraham was declared righteous before he was circumcised, which demonstrates that his circumcision had nothing to do with his acceptance of salvation. We now look at the words, Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. The word accounted is from logizomai (logizomai). It deserves careful study. The word is used in the papyri as a business term: for instance, “put to one’s account; let my revenues be placed on deposit at the storehouse; reckoning the wine to him at 16 drachmae the monochore; a single artabae being reckoned at 180 myriads of denari; I now give orders generally with regard to all payments actually made or credited to the government.”14 Thus Abraham believed God, and his act of faith was placed to his account in value as righteousness. He believed God and his act of faith was credited to him for righteousness. He believed God and his act of faith was placed on deposit for him and evaluated as righteousness. He believed God and his act of faith was computed as to its value, and there was placed to his account, righteousness. He believed God, and his act of faith was credited to his account for righteousness. Finally, he believed God, and his act of faith was credited to him, resulting in righteousness. All this does not mean, however, that Abraham’s act of faith was looked upon as a meritorious action deserving of reward. It was not viewed as a good work by God and rewarded by the bestowal of righteousness. That would be salvation by works. But the fact that Abraham cast off all dependence upon good works as a means of finding acceptance with God, and accepted God’s way of bestowing salvation, was answered by God in giving him that salvation. Abraham simply put himself in the place where a righteous God could offer him salvation upon the basis of justice satisfied, and in pure grace. God therefore put righteousness to his account. He evaluated Abraham’s act of faith as that which made it possible for Him to give him salvation. We now come to a study of the Greek word translated righteousness, dikaiosune (dikaiosune), and the adjective dikaios (dikaio"), both having the same root. Cremer in his monumental work, Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek, has the following to say on these important words: He says that dikaios (dikaio") is “what is right, conformable to right, answering to the claims of usage, custom, or right.… The fundamental idea is that of a state or condition conformable to order, apart from the consideration whether usage or custom or other factors determine the order of direction. Thus, dikaios (dikaio") is synonymous with agathos (ajgaqo") (good) only that dikaios (dikaio") is a conception of a relation and presupposes a norm, whereas the subject of agathos (ajgaqo") is its own norm. “As to the import of the conception in a moral sense, there is a decisive difference not

to be mistaken between the profane and especially the Greek usage, and the Biblical, and this difference arises, from the different, nay, opposite standards by which it is estimated in the two spheres. Righteousness in the biblical sense is a condition of rightness the standard of which is God, which is estimated according to the divine standard, which shows itself in behavior conformable to God, and has to do above all thing with its relation to God, and with the walk before Him. It is, and it is called dikaiosune theou (dikaiosune qeou) (righteousness of God) (Rom. 3:21, 1:17), righteousness as it belongs to God, and is of value before Him, Godlike righteousness, see Ephesians 4:24; with this righteousness thus defined, the gospel (Rom. 1:17) comes into the world of nations which had been wont to measure by a different standard. Righteousness in the Scripture sense is a thoroughly religious conception, designating the normal relation of men and their acts, etc., to God. Righteousness in the profane mind is a preponderatingly social virtue, only with a certain religious background.… In pagan Greece the dikaios (dikaio") (righteous) person is he who does not selfishly nor yet self-for-gettingly transgress the bounds fixed for him, and gives to everyone his own, yet still desires what is his, and does not in the least withdraw the assertion of his own claims, a view which Christianity has continually to combat.15, 16 “In its scriptural sense, both in the Old Testament and New Testament, righteousness is the state commanded by God, and standing the test of His judgment (compare II Cor. 3:9), 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, compare Ephesians 4:24; or more generally it denotes the sum-total of all that God commands, of all that He appoints. As God Himself is thus the standard of this righteousness, it is dikaiosune theou (dikaiosune qeou), a righteousness as it belongs to God or to itself for God, is well pleasing to Him, Godlike righteousness.… Just such a righteousness that ought to be the goal of human effort and desire, St. Paul insists upon as, strictly speaking, the Scripture conception of dikaiosune (dikaiosune) (righteousness), and as the result of the New Testament salvation realized or to be realized in man “ This righteousness Cremer describes as “a state of the subject who stands God’s judgment, who having fulfilled all obligations, has no guilt to hide.… The righteousness of God is a state called forth by God’s act of justification, namely, by judicial disengagement or release from all that stands in the way of being righteous, a liberation of which man becomes a partaker by means of faith.… We see therefore that the Pauline conception of righteousness—which as to form always expresses a relation to the judgment of God— includes this special feature, namely, it denotes the state of the believing man called forth by the divine acquittal.” Justification is the act of God removing from the sinner his guilt and the penalty incurred by that guilt, and bestowing a positive righteousness, Christ Jesus Himself in whom the believer stands, not only innocent and uncondemned, but actually righteous in point of law for time and for eternity. This is what God did for Abraham when he believed Him. This is what the Judaizers were attempting to merit for themselves by their own good works. Translation. Just as Abraham believed God, and his act of faith was credited to him, resulting in (his) righteousness. Verse seven. The words “know ye,” are not imperative but indicative. “Ye perceive,”

is the sense. This verse contains a deduction from the previous verse. The word therefore from ara (ajra), is inferential. The argument is, “Since faith was the way Abraham was justified, it follows that those who exercise like faith, are his true followers.” The word faith is here general in its application, indicating the determinative factor in life, as against works as a means of appropriating salvation. The expression “they which are of faith,” refers to those who have exercised faith for salvation, and whose standing and character are consequently determined by that faith. The phrase “sons of Abraham,” is not to be understood in a genealogical sense but rather in the ethical sense of the term. Abraham was accepted by God on the basis of faith, and God deals with all men on the same moral basis. God is no respecter of persons. Thus the faith exercised by Abraham is declared to be the fundamental condition of acceptance with God. Children is from huioi (uiJoi), properly sons. Translation. Ye perceive, therefore, that those who are of faith these are sons of Abraham. Verse eight. This verse contains Paul’s answer to the false assumption of the Judaizers that inasmuch as it is in Abraham that all nations were to be blessed, they would have to be incorporated in his descendants by the rite of circumcision. By the use of the word and, from de (de), Paul asserts that the blessing of Abraham, namely, the one he received from God, justification, was received by him through faith, and that it is through the exercise of a like faith that the Gentiles become his spiritual children, and not through submission to circumcision. The expression the scripture, usually denotes a particular passage of scripture (see Luke 4:21; II Tim. 3:16) . The passage referred to here is Genesis 12:3. Paul attributes foresight to scripture. This is a figure of speech expressing the thought that God’s divine foresight is expressed in the scriptures. The Jews had the formula, “What did the scripture foresee?” Thus God, foreseeing that He would justify the Gentiles by faith announced the gospel to Abraham, which message was to be received by faith. The good news announced to Abraham was that some day the Saviour would arise out of his nation Israel, and that the Gentiles would be saved through Him as Abraham was saved. Thus, Abraham rejoiced to see the coming of that day (John 8:56). Abraham was therefore to become the pattern to all who would follow, of how a sinner, Jew or Gentile, must appropriate salvation. The words would justify, are from a present tense verb in Greek, the thought being that Paul is here dealing with a general principle, God’s rule of action on the basis of which He operates for all time. Thus, the condition upon which any person was to be justified is faith, and this was announced to Abraham before he was circumcised, which means that circumcision had nothing to do with the acceptance of salvation. Translation. And the scripture forseeing that on a basis of faith God justifies the Gentiles, announced the gospel beforehand to Abraham, namely, All the Gentiles shall be blessed in you. Verse nine. This is a definite statement of the proposition which Paul wishes to prove. The emphasis is upon the fact that the believing ones are blessed with salvation, rather than those who depend upon good works as the Judaizers did. The word faithful is added

as a descriptive word in order to impress upon the reader that the important thing about Abraham was the fact that he chose the faith way of salvation rather than depend upon personal merit and good works. The word here does not speak of faithfulness of life in the sense of fidelity, but of the fact that Abraham believed God. And well might Abraham have depended upon good works, from a purely human standpoint. Excavations in the city of Ur where Abraham lived, reveal the fact that Abraham was not a wild desert sheik, but an educated, wealthy, sophisticated citizen of the world, a man living in and ostensibly partaking of a state of culture and opulence little dreamed of by the person who is unfamiliar with the ancient civilizations of the past. Abraham was no ignoramus with a gullible faith. With all his cultural background, and in spite of it, he saw that much of that with which we have to do, is taken upon faith, including the way of salvation. Those who exercise a like faith to Abraham, share with him in the same salvation which he received from God. Translation. So that those who are believing ones are being blessed in company with believing Abraham. III. The Judaizers taught that the law was a means of justification. But Paul shows that the law is a means of condemnation, and that it is the Lord Jesus who rescues us from its condemnation through the blood of His Cross (3:10–14). Verse ten. Paul quotes from Deuteronomy 27:26. Instead of being blessed by their act of putting themselves under the law, men put themselves under a curse. The Judaizers maintained that their knowledge of the law entitled them to the blessings which were attached to the sons of Abraham. Our Lord said to representatives of this same system: “Ye are constantly searching the scriptures;17 and in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of Me. And ye will not come to Me that ye might have life” (John 5:39, 40). This was the sin of Israel, ignoring the righteousness of God, Christ, and going about to establish its own righteousness (Rom. 10:1–4). Paul argues that on the contrary, Israel has by its attempt to be justified by the law, entailed the curse of the broken law, for no man could keep the law. This curse is not merely the wrath of God in the form of the final banishment of the sinner from His presence, with all the sorrow and misery which that includes, but represent also a present condition of alienation from God caused by a violation of His law. The word continueth is a figurative expression. It speaks of the law as a prescribed district or domain in which one remains or out of which one goes. Translation. For as many as are of the works of the law, are under curse. For it stands written, Cursed is every one who is not remaining constantly in all things which stand written in the book of the law in order to do them. Verse eleven. The words “by the law” are in the Greek en nomoi (ejn nomoi), literally “in law,” corresponding to “in the book of the law” of verse 10. We have here the locative of sphere. The man who does not continue in the sphere of the law is under the curse. And the man who attempts to remain in the sphere of the law by obeying it, is not justified in the sight of God, and for the reason that justification is by faith. The reason why obedience to the law cannot justify a sinner is that his obedience cannot pay for his sin. Only blood

can pay for sin, for blood means outpoured death, and death is the wages of sin. God declares a believing sinner righteous on the basis of the fact that Christ has met the requirements of the law which we broke and Himself becomes our righteousness. The word just as describing man is used as a legal rather than an ethical term. It refers to the man approved by God and accepted on the basis of faith, not to the man’s character as exhibited by what he does. The words shall live refer as the context indicates, not to the impartation of a new and divine life which produces a new experience, but to the act of God in justifying him. He lives in a new relationship to God, that of being accepted in the Beloved. Translation. But that in a sphere of law no one is being justified in the sight of God is clear, because, The righteous man shall live by means of faith. Verse twelve. The statement, “The law is not of faith” means that the two principles of law and of faith as a means of justification are mutually exclusive of one another. They are diametrically opposed to each other. Then Paul quotes Leviticus 18:5, “The man that doeth them shall live in them.” Light is thrown upon this statement by the apostle in Romans 10:5 where he quotes this same passage from Leviticus, when he says, “Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law.” That means that there is a righteousness that a human being could accrue to himself by a perfect obedience to the law, a thing which a fallen sinful human being cannot do, but which a perfect sinless being could do. But that righteousness would be different from the righteousness which God imputes to the believing sinner. The former would be obtained by works, and would be a human righteousness. The latter is obtained by faith and is a divine righteousness. Under the legal enactments of the Mosaic law, this could be the futile attempt of a sinner to work out under law a righteousness which God could approve. Under grace, it is the act of a believing sinner accepting as a gift, a righteousness which God has approved, even the Lord Jesus Himself. Translation. And the law is not of faith; but the one who has done them, shall live in them. Verse thirteen. The word redeemed is from exagorazo (ejxagorazo), the general significance of which is “to redeem from slavery.” It means “to buy up.” It is used frequently in the LXX, with the idea that such deliverance involves cost of some kind, effort suffering, or loss to the one who effects the deliverance. It conveys the figure of a ransom. Men needed a ransom, for the law had left them prisoners under sentence of death. There are three Greek words translated by the words bought or redeemed. These three tell the story of redemption. The first is agorazo (ajgorazo) (I Cor. 6:20), which means to buy in the slave market. We are slaves of sin. Our ransom price was paid by the Lord Jesus, His precious blood. Peter in his first epistle (1:18) says that we were not redeemed with little silver and gold coins used to buy a slave out of slavery, but with precious blood, highly honored, as of a lamb without spot or blemish, the blood of Christ. Thus, believers become bondslaves of the Lord Jesus by right of purchase. The word doulos (doulo"), bondslave, translated servants in Romans 6:18, refers to one born in slavery.

The second word is the one Paul uses in the verse we are studying, exagorazo (ejxagorazo), to buy a slave out of the market-place. The bondslave of the Lord Jesus is bought not only to be His bondslave, but he is bought out of the slave market, never to be put up for sale in any slave market. He becomes the bondslave of the Lord Jesus for time and for eternity. The third word is lutroo (lutroo) (I Peter 1:18; Titus 2:14). The noun having the same root means “ransom money used to liberate a slave.” The verb means “to set free by the payment of a ransom.” The bondslave of the Lord Jesus is set free from his former slavery to sin, to realize in his life that for which God created him, to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever. The curse here is that which the legalistic passages of the Mosaic law pronounced upon those who did not perfectly obey its demands. The law pronounced a blessing and a curse. But the blessing proved barren, for the law made no allowance for human sin and frailty. The curse, which involved the wrath of a righteous God, brought condemnation upon the offender. From this hopeless state of condemnation in which the sinner was not only helpless to redeem himself, but helpless to satisfy the just demands of the law and thus find acceptance with God, Christ redeemed us by satisfying the just demands of the law which we broke, paying the penalty in our stead, leaving a holy God free to bestow mercy on the basis of justice satisfied. A vivid picture of it all is given us in the three expressions, under the curse (3:10), made a curse for (above) us (3:13), and redeemed us out from under the curse (3:13). Sinners were under the curse. Christ came above us, thus between us and the curse. He took the blow of the Damascus blade that hung over us, and took us out from under the curse, having become a curse about us. The word above is the root meaning of huper (uJper), the preposition of substitution, used already in this epistle by Paul to speak of the substitutionary character of our Lord’s death. The word us refers to the Jewish nation. The Mosaic law was given to the Jew only. That is not to say however that the Gentile is not held responsible by God under the allinclusive principles of right conduct that inhere in God’s character and in His dealings with the human race. Thus the Jew was under the curse, and being redeemed by Christ from the curse, the blessing of Abraham, justification by faith, which in the plan of God was to flow through Israel to the Gentiles, was at liberty to flow out to the latter. The words being made are from genomenos (genomeno") which means “to become.” It is a participle of means, expressing the method by which Christ redeemed us from the curse. In the words “Cursed is everyone that hangeth on a tree,” Paul is quoting from Deuteronomy 21:23. They are introduced by Paul to support his statement to the effect that Christ became a curse. The Deuteronomy passage has reference to the dead body of a criminal who had been put to death by stoning, and which was hung upon a tree. There is no reference here to Roman crucifixion, which was unknown at the time of Moses. Paul quotes from the LXX and omits the words of God after cursed, since our Lord was in no sense accursed by God in His crucifixion. It was the curse of the Mosaic law that descended on Christ, subjecting Him to the death of a malefactor. The law satisfied its demands upon the Lord Jesus, and thus thrust Him out of the pale of its legal jurisdiction. Believers, being identified with Him in His death in which He paid our penalty, are likewise cast out with Him, and are therefore no longer under curse. Translation. Christ delivered us by the payment of ransom from the curse

of the law by becoming a curse in behalf of us, because it stands written, Accursed is every one who is suspended upon a tree. Verse fourteen. There are two purpose clauses in this verse, each introduced by the word that (hina (iJna)) . These are coordinate, depending upon the statement in verse 13 to the effect that Christ became a curse for us in order that the blessing of Abraham, justification by faith, and also the Holy Spirit, might be given to both Jew and Gentile (Joel 2:28). The law which was the barrier that separated Jew and Gentile, is done away in Christ. By its removal, the Gentiles are put on a common level with the Jew, and thus united, both Jew and Gentile are recipients of the Holy Spirit through faith. Translation. In order that to the Gentiles the blessing of Abraham might come in Jesus Christ; in order that the promise of the Spirit we (Jew and Gentile) might receive through faith. IV.

God made provision for justification to be given on the basis of faith in Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, and also the gift of the Spirit to both Jew and Gentile, doing this before the Mosaic law was given. The law therefore cannot make void that which was done by God prior to the giving of the law (3:15–18) . Verse fifteen. Paul now presents an argument to show that the covenant God made with Abraham was still in force, basing it upon the priority of the covenant and its irrevocable character. He asserts that it is common knowledge that when men makecontract, and that contract is once agreed upon, it cannot be modified or changed except by the mutual consent of both parties to the contract. Paul applies this to God’s covenant with Abraham, contending that the law cannot modify it since it was given centuries later. Paul addresses them as brethren here. In the preceding section he was not so much addressing the Galatians as he was speaking of the Judaizers. Here he is directly addressing the former. It was an expression of loving urgency, and conciliatory in tone. How different is this from the apostle’s abrupt “Paul.… to the churches of Galatia” (1:1, 2). The words, “I speak after the manner of men” have in them the idea of, “I speak from a human point of view,” or, “I speak as men do concerning their affairs.” Paul is not apologizing for the illustration he is using, but is desirous of accommodating himself to the ordinary way in which the average man thinks, so as to be perfectly intelligible to his readers. The word translated covenant, deserves careful treatment. It is the word diatheke (diaqeke) which in its verb form means “to place between two.” It refers to the act of one of two individuals placing between them something to which he obligates himself. It is an engagement on the part of one in the sense that he enters into an agreement with another to do thus and so. The word here must not be understood as meaning a testament, namely, the testamentary disposition of goods. It is used only once in the New Testament in that way (Heb. 9:15–17). It refers to an agreement in which God enters into covenant relations with Abraham, and in which He promises to justify him on the basis of his faith in the atonement which He Himself would some day offer. That covenant or agreement was made by God. God also gave the law centuries later, and the God who made a covenant with Abraham would not invalidate that covenant by adding another specification to it,

namely, obedience to law coupled with faith as the two prerequisites to salvation. The word confirmed is from kuroo (kuroo) which means “to confirm solemnly or publicly, to ratify.” It is in the perfect tense, which indicates that the ratification is a past matter, and that at present the matter is closed and established. Therefore, just as in human relations, an agreement solemnly ratified cannot be changed unless by mutual consent of the parties involved, so in this divine relationship. “No man disannuleth or addeth thereto.” Disannuleth is from atheteo (ajqeteo) which means “to render without place or standing, to abrogate, to annul.” Addeth thereto is from diatasso (diatasso), which means, “to make additional prescriptions.” Two distinct methods of invalidating a contract are, first, to annul it directly, and second, to impose new conditions which are diametrically opposed to its spirit or purpose. The doctrine of the Judaizers at first glance appeared only to add some harm less new conditions to the covenant of grace. But the character of these new conditions virtually annulled it. Works added to faith would annul the entire covenant since any dependence upon works means that it is necessary to abandon faith. That means that any sinner who claims to be saved on the basis of works plus faith is still a lost sinner. One cannot carry water on two shoulders. Neither can one depend upon self effort to save one, and at the same time put faith in the Lord Jesus for salvation. Here is the terrible tragedy of those systems which teach that works are needed for salvation in addition to faith in the atoning sacrifice of the Lord Jesus. They are sending millions to the Lake of Fire by their heretical teaching. Translation. Brethren, what I have to say is in accordance with common human practice. Even though it be a man’s covenant, when it has finally been ratified, no man annuls it nor adds stipulations to it. Verse sixteen. The promises were made to Abraham and to his seed, Christ. But when Christ is seen as seed of Abraham here, all those saved by Him are included. The word seed when used in the singular number in the Old Testament means progeny. Thus to Abraham personally and to all those who by faith in Christ are brought into salvation, were the promises made. The fact that the promises were made to Abraham and to all believers all down the ages who follow Abraham in his act of faith, indicates that the faith way of salvation existed before the law was given, continued through the time the law was in force, and still is in effect after the abrogation of the law at the Cross. Thus the entrance of the law did not affect the covenant at all. Translation. Now to Abraham were made the promises, and to his seed. He does not say, And to the seeds, as in respect to many (seeds), but in respect to one (seed), and to your seed who is Christ. Verse seventeen. The words “And this I say,” take up for the purpose of further argument or explanation a thought which has already been expressed. In verse 16, Paul has by inference hinted at what he states plainly in this verse. The figure of 430 years, Paul probably took from Exodus 12:40. The statement of the length of time that elapsed between the giving of the covenant to Abraham and the giving of the law to Moses, implies that the law was something new and different which could not therefore be an element forming part of the promise. The longer the covenant was in force as the alone method upon which God operated in the saving of sinners, the more impressive is Paul’s

statement. God was saving men on the basis of faith without works since the time of Adam, or 2,500 years before the law was given. The law was in force from Moses to Christ, or for a period of 1500 years. At the Cross it was abrogated. The Judaizers not only attempted to retain the Mosaic institutions for the Jews, but tried to impose them upon the Gentiles, to whom that law was never given. This was what Paul was fighting. Paul’s argument therefore is as follows. If a covenant once in force cannot be changed or rendered void by any subsequent action, God’s covenant with Abraham cannot be changed or rendered void by the subsequent law. If this principle holds good in a human covenant, much more is it true when God makes the covenant, since God is more certainly true to His promise than man. Translation. This now is what I mean. A covenant previously established by God,18 the law, which came after four hundred and thirty years, does not render void, with the result that the promise becomes inoperative. Verse eighteen. Paul’s argument in this verse is, that if the law affects the promise at all, it renders it null and void. It cannot be added to it without destroying it. Salvation must rest either upon the promise or upon the law. The Judaizers claimed that it rested upon the promise and the law. But Paul has shown that the law did not abrogate the promise, and thus it had no effect upon it. Thus, if as the Judaizers say, the inheritance is on the basis of law obedience, then it is not on the basis of promise. But, Paul adds, God gave it to Abraham on the basis of promise. That settled the matter. The words, law and promise are without the definite article, indicating that Paul is speaking of them here in their character of two opposing principles. The word gave is from charizomai (carizomai). This is a specialized word. It denotes not merely a gift, but a gift which is given out of the spontaneous generosity of the giver’s heart, with no strings tied to it. The Greek word grace (charis (cari")) has the same root and the same meaning. Thus the word refers, not to an undertaking based upon terms of mutual agreement, but upon the free act of one who gives something, expecting no pay for it. This at once shows the difference between law and grace. If salvation were by obedience to the law, that would mean that it would be based upon a mutual agreement between God and the sinner whereby God would obligate Himself to give salvation to any sinner who would earn it by obedience to the law. But the very genius of the word charizomai (carizomai) militates against the teaching of the Judaizers, namely, that salvation is by works. There is a Greek word huposchesis (uJposcesi") which is used of an offer based upon the terms of a mutual agreement. But it is not used here. Furthermore, the verb gave is in the perfect tense here, which tense speaks of a past completed act having present results. The past act of God giving the inheritance on the basis of a promise, has present results, present to the writer. God gave the inheritance to Abraham by promise 2000 b.c. The results of this act were still in existence in the century when Paul wrote. The law was given 1500 b.c., and the promise still held good after the law came and had been set aside. Translation. For if the inheritance is from law (as a method of divine dealing), no longer is it from promise (as a method of divine dealing). But to Abraham through the intermediate instrumentality of promise God has in grace freely bestowed it.

V.

If the law was never given as a means whereby a sinner might be saved, why was it given, and for what purpose? (3:19–4:7). 1. It was given to show man that sin is not a mere following of evil impulses, but a direct violation of the laws of God (3:19–23). Verse nineteen. Paul now proceeds to answer the argument that if the law was never given as a means of salvation, then that fact leaves the law without a reason for being. He asserts that the law was given because of transgressions. The words because of are from charin (carin), which may have either a causal or a telic force. The context and also Paul’s conception of the functions of the law indicate that the latter is its usage here. The word telic is from the Greek telos (telo") which means, “tending toward an end, purposive.” Thus, the law was given for the purpose of transgressions. The crux of the whole assertion is found in the distinctive meaning of the word translated transgressions. It is parabasis (parabasi"). The simple verb means “to step,” the prefixed preposition, “beyond.” It refers to the act of a person stepping beyond a fixed limit into forbidden territory. The word for sin is hamartia (aJmartia) which meant in classical Greek “to miss the mark,” and was used of a person who failed to hit a target. The verb was used in connection with a direct object hodos (oJdo") (road), in a sentence where someone missed the road. Thus, the word implies a deviation from the right course of action. But the word in the classics never had the idea of a willful transgression or overstepping of limitations with reference to conduct imposed by the deity. The word parabasis (parabasi") when used of human conduct, indicates a violation of the rights of others, or of limitations imposed upon one. This word Paul now uses to indicate the purpose of the giving of the law. Before the law was given by Moses to Israel, the wrong doing of man was recognized as hamartia (aJmartia), sin, a deviation from the course of right conduct. But when the law was given, sin was seen to be, not merely the following of evil impulses, but the violation of explicit law. Thus, the exceeding sinfulness of sin was recognized by the human race, which otherwise might not have been evident. The law therefore was not given because of the existence of transgressions, but to show hamartia (aJmartia) (sin) in its true light, an overstepping of what is right into the realm of what is wrong. This revelation of the true nature of sin, would cause man to fear God’s wrath, which in turn would give strength to the weakness of man’s moral sense and thus educate his conscience and make it more sensitive to sin. The particular phase of the Mosaic law here as well as throughout all of the Galatian letter is the purely mandatory statues of “Thou shalt,“ and “Thou shalt not.“ The law was given therefore to set the stamp of positive transgression upon already existing sin. It was not to give the knowledge of sin as sin, but to show that it was a violation of God’s commandments. The law was added, Paul says. The word added is from prostithemi (prostiqemi), the simple verb meaning “to place,” the prefixed preposition, “toward.” It marks the law as supplementary to the covenant of grace, and therefore subordinate to it. Paul in Romans 5:20 says, “The law entered,” (pareiserchomai (pareisercomai)), that is, came in alongside. It was not added to grace as an extra provision whereby a sinner might appropriate salvation, for it is diametrically opposed to grace. It was brought in alongside of grace as a measure to show sinners the real nature of their sin and thus their need of a Saviour who in infinite grace offers them a salvation free in answer to faith. It was brought in alongside until the seed should come to whom the promise was made. Grace flowed full and free from Adam’s time to Abraham’s, and from Abraham’s

time to Moses’, and from Moses’ time to Paul’s. And it flows full and free from Paul’s time through the present, and will be in force as the only way in which God saves a sinner, until the Great White Throne. The law was merely in force from Moses’ time to Christ’s death on the Cross, and even while it was in force, God saved sinners by pure grace. The covenant of promise is therefore of permanent validity, beginning before and continuing through the period of the law, and afterwards. The law was a temporary provision brought in alongside of grace to show sinners their need of grace, from Moses’ time to the Cross. The law was ordained by angels, Paul says. The New Testament refers three times to the interposition of angels in the giving of the law. In Acts 7:53 the fact is mentioned in order to enhance the authority of the law. In Hebrews 2:2 it is contrasted with God’s revelation in His Son. Here it is contrasted with God’s familiar intercourse with Abraham in which He spoke to Abraham, calling him His friend. At Sinai, the law was given through two intermediaries, angels and Moses. The people stood afar off. Grace says, “Come nigh,” law says, “Stand off.” The object of showing how the law was given, was to indicate the inferior and subordinate position of the law in comparison to the superior position held by grace. The promise was given direct to Abraham, the law through two intermediaries, angels and Moses. Paul shows that the law does not, as the Judaizers claim, have as direct and positive a relation to the divine plan of salvation as does the promise. He also shows that it is only of transitory significance, whereas the promise has an eternal value and meaning. Translation. What is then the significance of the law? For the sake of transgressions it was added, until there should come the Seed to whom the promise was made, having been promulgated by angels through the instrumentality of the hand of a mediator. Verse twenty. In this verse Paul shows that the promise is superior to the law, for the former was given directly from God to Abraham, whereas the latter was given to Israel by God through a mediator. We will examine the statement, “A mediator is not of one.” The word mediator is from mesites (mesite"), which in turn comes from mesos (meso") which means middle, the midst. Thus a mediator is one who intervenes between two, either to make or restore peace and friendship, to form a compact, or ratify a covenant. The word in the Greek text is preceded by the definite article, making the word generic in character. That is, Paul is not referring here to any particular mediator as Moses, but to the office of a mediator, and to mediators in general looked upon as a class of individuals. However, this generic statement is intended to be applied to Moses, the mediator referred to in verse 19. The word one is masculine in gender, and therefore is personal, referring to a person. That is, a mediator does not act simply in behalf of one person. The very genius of the word implies that the mediator stands “in the midst” of two or more persons, thus acts as a go-between. It is not that the mediator acts in behalf of a plurality of persons that constitute one party, but that there is a plurality of parties between which he acts. Thus the law is a contract between two parties. God gives the law through a mediator Moses, and man is obligated to obey it. God will bless man if he obeys, and will punish man if he disobeys. But the promise of free grace is not in the nature of a contract between two parties. God acts alone and directly when He promises salvation to anyone who will receive it by the out-stretched hand of faith. There are no good works to be done by the

sinner in order that he might merit that salvation. Grace is unconditional. There are no strings tied to it. God is One, that is, He acts alone without a mediator in respect to the promise of grace. Therefore grace is superior to law. In the case of the former, God spoke directly to Abraham. In the case of the latter, He spoke to Israel through a mediator, Moses. The dignity of the law is thus seen to be inferior to that of the promise. Translation. Now, the mediator is not (a go-between representing the interests) of one (individual), but God is one (individual). Verse twenty one. The apostle then asks the question, “Is the law then against the promises of God?” The answer is that the law and the promises are not in conflict because each has a distinct function. The law is a ministry of condemnation. The promises are a ministry of salvation. The law judges a person on the basis of obedience or disobedience. The promises judge man on a basis of faith. The law, whose ministry is one of condemnation, was not intended to express God’s attitude towards man. God’s attitude towards man is one of grace. The law is not the basis of God’s judgment of man. A sinner who rejects Christ, goes to the Lake of Fire for all eternity, not because he has broken God’s laws, for his sin is paid for. He goes to a lost eternity, because he rejects God’s grace in the Lord Jesus. The law is a revelation of the sinner’s legal standing, and as such condemns him. It cannot therefore justify him, as the Judaizers claim. Law and grace are not in conflict, since they operate in different spheres. For instance, here is a father who has discovered that his son has disobeyed his commands. He calls the son’s attention to the law which he broke, and pronounces him guilty. He uses this very sentence of guilty to bring the boy to see his misdemeanor in its true light. The son becomes repentant, and the father assures him of his forgiveness. The father is not in conflict with himself when using law to bring his son to a realization of the true nature of his disobedience, in order that he might repent and thus put himself in a position where the father can forgive him. God is not in conflict with Himself when He gives the law that man might come to see his sin as a transgression or violation of His holy will, which is the first step in his act of repentance and faith, and which latter is answered by God with the gift of eternal life. Furthermore, no law could give eternal life. The wages of sin is death. The law demands of the sinner the death penalty, spiritual and physical death. The law will not accept the good works of a sinner in lieu of the death penalty. Only the precious blood of Jesus could satisfy the righteous demands of the broken law. Salvation therefore is by grace, since God the Son took the sinner’s place on the Cross and offers salvation to the one who believes on Him. Translation. Is therefore the law against the promises of God? God forbid. For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, righteousness in that case would have been from the law. Verse twenty two. The word scripture in the singular number refers to a particular passage. Two Old Testament passages to which Paul probably has reference, are, Psalm 143:2, quoted in Galatians 2:16, and Deuteronomy 27:26, quoted in 3:10. The word concluded is from sunkleio (sunkleio) which means “to shut up, to confine.” Scripture in its divine utterances regarding the universality of sin, is spoken of as a jailer who shuts

all up in sin as in a prison. The function of the law was therefore to convict of sin that men might turn to the Lord Jesus for salvation. Translation. But the scripture shut up all under sin, in order that the promise on the ground of faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. Verse twenty three. The correct understanding of the expresssion, “Before faith came” is found in the fact that the definite article is used before the word faith, namely, “before the faith came.” The article here identifies the faith mentioned in this verse with the faith spoken of in verse 22, personal faith in Jesus Christ as Saviour, exercised in this Age of Grace. That faith is fundamentally alike so far as its character goes, to the faith Abraham exercised, but different in that it looks back to an accomplished salvation at the Cross, whereas the faith of Abraham looked forward to the accomplishment of that salvation at Calvary. The former is faith in an historic Christ, whereas the latter was faith in a prophetic Christ. Faith has been the appointed means of obtaining the salvation of God since Adam’s time. Faith itself did not begin to be exercised on the occasion of the Cross. Faith as such did not come then. But the particular faith in Jesus Christ as exercised in this Age of Grace came at the beginning of the age. The word kept is from phroureo (froureo), which means “to keep inward under lock and key.” The law was a jailer who held in custody those who were subjected to sin, in order that they should not escape the consciousness of their sins and their liability to punishment. The word unto is from eis (eij"), and is not temporal in its significance, having the idea of until, but means here “with a view to.” That is, sinners were kept guarded under the law with a view to their exercising faith in Christ. The law shut them up to one avenue of escape, namely, faith in Christ, for during the 1500 years in which the law was in force, it was the means of convicting sinners of their sins and of causing them to look ahead in faith to the atonement God would some day offer which would pay for their sins. These sinners were saved by the blood of Christ just as surely and just as eternally as believing sinners since the Cross. But when the faith in an historic Christ came, that is, a faith exercised in the Christ of history rather than in the Christ of prophecy, then the law was abrogated. Translation. But before the aforementioned faith came, under law we were constantly being guarded, being shut up with a view to the faith about to be revealed. 2. The law was given in order that, by showing the sinner that sin was an actual transgression of God’s laws, he might see the necessity of faith in a substitutionary sacrifice for sin, and thus be led to put his trust in the Christ of prophecy who would in the future die for him (3:24–29). Verse twenty four. The word translated schoolmaster is the important word here. It is paidagogos (paidagogo"). The word schoolmaster could better be the translation of didaskalos (didaskalo") which means “a teacher.” It is true that our word pedagogue comes from the Greek paidagogos (paidagogo"), and that it refers to a schoolmaster. But the Greek word did not have that meaning. The word designated a slave employed in Greek and Roman families who had general charge over a boy in the years from about 6–

16. He watched over his outward behavior, and took charge over him whenever he went from home, as for instance, to school. This slave was entrusted with the moral supervision of the child. His duties were therefore quite distinct from those of a schoolmaster. Furthermore, the metaphor of a paidagogos (paidagogo") seems to have grown out of the word kept (phroureo (froureo)) of verse 23, which means “to guard.” Thus the word refers to a guardian of a child in its minority rather than to a teacher or schoolmaster. By describing the law as a paidagogos (paidagogo"), Paul emphasizes both the inferiority of the law of grace, and its temporary character. The law was therefore the guardian of Israel, keeping watch over those committed to its care, accompanying them with its commands and prohibitions, keeping them in a condition of dependence and restraint, and continually revealing to them sin as a positive transgression. Translation. So that the law became our guardian until Christ, in order that on the grounds of faith we might be justified. Verse twenty five. The article appears before the word faith in the Greek text, showing that it is the faith in the historic Christ which is referred to, as in verses 22 and 23. Translation. But (this) faith having come, no longer are we under the guardian. Verse twenty six. By the change from the first person we, with its reference to the Jews, to the second person ye with its reference to his readers, both Jew and Gentile, Paul shows that the wall of separation between Jew and Gentile had been broken down at the Cross, and that both Jew and Gentile become children of God in Christ Jesus. The word translated children is huios (uiJo") and is the important word here. This word signifies someone of full age. Under law, the individual was in his minority and under a guardian. Now, under grace, he has attained his majority, having outgrown the surveillance of his former guardian. The context shows that the words “in Christ Jesus,” must be separated from the words “by faith.” They are put at the end of the sentence so as to form a distinct proposition which Paul enlarges upon in the following verses. Translation. For all of you are God’s sons through faith, in Christ Jesus. Verse twenty seven. Having spoken of the Galatians in the previous verse as in Christ, referring to that mystical and vital union which exists between the Lord Jesus and the believer, Paul now reminds them of how they became united with Christ. When they put their faith in Him as Saviour, the Holy Spirit baptized (introduced or placed) them into vital union with Christ (Rom. 6:3; I Cor. 12:13). The reference cannot be to water baptism, for that never put a believing sinner in Christ. The Greek word baptizo (baptizo) means “to put or place into.”19 The words put on are from enduno (ejnduno). The latter is used in the LXX, of the act of clothing one’s self with strength, righteousness, glory, salvation. The word does not convey the idea of putting on a mask or playing the part of another. It refers to the act in which one enters into actual relationship with some one else. Chrysostom says, “If Christ

is Son of God, and thou hast put Him on, having the Son in thyself and being made like unto Him, thou hast been brought into one family and one nature.” Translation. For as many as were introduced into (a mystical union with) Christ, put on Christ. Verse twenty eight. The individual differences between Jew and Greek, between slave and free, between male and female, are merged in that higher unity into which all believers are raised by the fact that they all have a common life in Christ Jesus. One heart now beats in all. The pulsating life of the Lord Jesus is the motive power. One mind guides all, the mind of Christ. One life is lived by all, the life of the Lord Jesus produced by the Holy Spirit in the various circumstances and relations of each individual believer’s experience. Translation. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female. For ye are all one in Christ Jesus. Verse twenty nine. The Judaizers taught that by becoming subjects of the Mosaic law, the Galatian Gentiles would become the seed or progeny of Abraham. Paul asserts that this privilege comes to one by faith in Christ. In Romans 4, Paul shows that Abraham was justified by faith, and was thus constituted the spiritual father of all who put their faith in Christ, whether they are circumcised or uncircumcised. God made salvation dependent upon faith in order that it might be available to both Jew and Gentile. Since Abraham is the spiritual father of all believers, this does away with the false Jewish notion that kinship to Abraham brings one into the divine favor and gives one salvation. By belonging to Christ, believers are also Abraham’s posterity, for Christ is the seed of Abraham. Since believers have entered into relationship with Christ, they must consequently have a share in the same state, and must likewise be Abraham’s seed. Translation. And since ye are Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise. 3. It was given because the sinner is like a child in its minority, and can only be dealt with in a most elementary way (4:1–7). Verses one and two. Paul here continues the argument for the inferiority of the condition under law, using an illustration from contemporary life. In order to understand his argument, we must understand the technical terms which he uses. The first word is child, the translation of nepios (nepio"). The Greek word is made up of two words that together mean “one that does not speak.” The word refers to an immature person, intellectually and morally. This word Paul uses to describe the person under the law. He is treated as an immature person. An adult for instance, is old enough to govern his own actions. A child must have restraints put upon him. So in the spiritual world. Israel under law was treated like a minor. The word servant is the next term. The Greek word here is doulos (doulo"), speaking of a bondslave. It is the term used of a slave in a servile condition. The minor was legally in much the same position as a slave. He could not perform any act except through his legal representative. This person was the guardian in the case of a minor, whose sanction was necessary for the validity of any contract undertaken in his behalf. The word lord is from kurios (kurio"), which here is used in the

sense of owner. The word tutor is from epitropos (ejpitropo"), the word which designates the guardian of a minor orphan. The word governor is from oikonomos (oijkonomo"), referring to a steward of one’s property. The tutor was the guardian of the child’s person, the governor, the guardian of the child’s property. The words “the time appointed,” are from prothesmias (proqesmia"), an Athenian legal term referring to an appointed time for the termination of the minority, this time set by the father of the child. There is an illustration of this in the case of Antiochus Ephiphanes who appointed Lysias to be steward of the affairs of the kingdom and guardian of his son Antiochus Eupator until a specified time, that time being when the father would resume the authority on his return. Translation. Now I say, that as long as the heir is in his minority, he does not differ one bit from a slave, even though he is owner of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time previously fixed by his father. Verse three. The word we refers to Christians, Gentile and Jew. Children is from nepios (nepio"), the word meaning immature, thus, “when we were immature ones.” Elements is from stoicheion (stoiceion), which refers to any first thing from which the others belonging to some series or composite whole take their rise. The word refers to first principles. The word world is from kosmos (kosmo") and is to be understood as in John 3:16; I Corinthians 6:2, 11:32, the world of humanity. The “elements of the world” refer here therefore to the first principles of non-Christian humanity; in the case of the Jew, to the symbolic and ceremonial character of Judaism and its legal enactments, and in the case of the Gentiles, to the ceremonial and ritualistic observances of the pagan religions. Translation. In like manner, we also, when we were in our minority, were in a permanent state of servitude under the rudimentary first principles of mankind. Verse four. In the phrase, “the fullness of the times,” the words, “of the times” are in a construction called the objective genitive, in which the word “times” receives the action of the noun of action. The word times, (chronos (crono")), refers merely to time as conceived of as a succession of moments. The other Greek word for time, kairos (kairo"), refers to the critical epoch-making periods foreordained by God. But the word Paul uses here refers merely to the lapse of time. The meaning is that when that moment came which completed the period of time designated by God that should elapse before the coming of the Son of God in incarnation, then He would send forth His Son. This point of time marked some outstanding events in the history of the human race. First, it was the moment which God had ordained for Messiah’s coming. To Daniel was given the date of His coming, 483 years after the edict of the Medo-Persian government to rebuild Jerusalem. Second, the Mosaic law had done its educational work, showing to the world that the most highly-favored nation on earth, the Jewish nation, was, despite all of God’s blessings and mercy, totally depraved, giving the Gentile portion of the race a picture of its own totally depraved heart. Third, the Mosaic law in its three sections, the ten commandments, the laws governing social relationships, and the Levitical system of sacrifices, was done away with as a legal system, to be superseded by the gospel of grace

centering faith in an historic Saviour. Fourth, the Roman empire maintained world peace. Roman roads made travel for missionaries easy. The universal use of the Greek language made the speedy propagation of the gospel possible. The earth-stage was all set for the greatest event in the history of the human race, the incarnation, sacrificial death, and bodily resurrection of God the Son. The word translated sent forth demands study. It is exapostello (ejxapostello). The word apostello (ajpostello) refers to the act of one who sends another with a commission to do something, the person sent being given credentials. Our word apostle comes from it. The prefixed preposition apo (ajpo) means from, off. This means that the person sent is to represent the sender. He is his ambassador. Our Lord is called the Apostle and High Priest of our confession in Hebrews 3:1. But not only was our Lord sent off from the presence of the Father, but as the other prefixed preposition ex (ejx) signifies, He was sent out from His presence. “Out from the ivory palaces, into a world of woe” came our Saviour. Not only was He sent forth from Heaven, but He became incarnate in the human race through virgin birth, as the words “made of a woman” indicate. Not only did He become incarnate, but He was born and lived His life previous to His Cross under the Mosaic law, yes, under law as such, for the definite article is absent before the word law in the Greek text. He was subject to the Jewish legal economy just as any Jew was subject to it. Translation. But when there came the fulness of the time, God sent off His Son, woman born, made subject to law. Verse five. The word redeem is from exagorazo (ejxagorazo) “to buy out of the slave market.” The word law is not preceded by the definite article, hence law in general is referred to here. Paul conceived of the Gentiles as possessing a law, and that law being of divine origin. He speaks of the law written in the hearts of the Gentiles. (Rom. 2:14, 15). This law written upon the Gentile heart could easily become externalized and be made into a legalistic system. In I Corinthians 9:20, Paul refers first to the Jews, and then to those who are under the law, including in the second expression, anyone who was living under a system of legalism, Jew or Gentile. The Lord Jesus was born under the law, lived under the law, and died under the penalty of the law which we broke, and in paying our penalty, He delivered us from any claims which the law had against us. He died under law, and in His resurrection, was raised into a realm where law as a legalistic system does not exist. This He did, in order that He might not only deliver us from the law but also raise believers with Himself into a realm where law does not operate. Instead therefore of being children (immature ones, nepios (nepio")) under law, we became adult sons (huios (uiJo")) under grace. We received the adoption of sons. This expression in the Greek is literally, “in order that we might receive the adult son-placing.” We could paraphrase it “in order that we might be placed as adult sons.” Thus, we have presented to us the status of a person under grace as compared to that of a person under law. The latter is in his minority, the former in his majority, the latter treated like a minor, the former like an adult. Translation. In order that He might deliver those under law, in order that we might receive the placing as adult sons.

Verse six. The phrase “because ye are sons,” gives the reason for God’s act of sending the Holy Spirit to take up His permanent residence in the hearts of the Galatians. The act of the Spirit in placing the Galatian believers as adult sons of God, is the first and objective step which the preceding context has spoken of. This brought about their release from the position of minors under law, and placed them in the position of adult sons. The bestowal of the Holy Spirit gave the Galatians a consciousness of the filial relationship between themselves as sons of God and God their Father. Instead of looking upon God as a Judge, they could now look upon Him as their Father with whom they have the privilege of living as His sons. The fact of their possession of the indwelling Spirit was enough to demonstrate to the Galatians that they were no longer under law, but under grace. The word crying, from krazo (krazo), signifies “a loud and earnest cry,” or “a public announcement.” See Matthew 9:27, Acts 14:14, Romans 9:27, John 7:28, 37. In the LXX it is often used ofprayer addressed to God (Ps. 3:4, 107:13). It emphasizes the earnestness and intensity of the Holy Spirit’s utterance in the Christian. The word itself does not convey the idea of joy, but the intensity of the Spirit’s utterance in this case must include a joyous note. The word crying is, in the Greek text, associated with the word Spirit, so that it is the Spirit who is doing the crying. He cries Abba. The word pater (pater) (father) is the Greek equivalent of the Aramaic word Abba. Aramaic is the language which the Jews spoke in Palestine in the first century. Paul translates the word Abba for his Greek readers who were not acquainted with Aramaic. It is possible that the use of the name Abba was derived from the Lord Jesus. When reporting in Greek the word Jesus used, His hearers would use the Aramaic Abba with a sort of affectionate fondness as the very term Jesus used to express the wonderful thought of filial relationship to God. Translation. And because you are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts crying Abba, my Father. Verse seven. In the fact of the Galatian’s possession of the Spirit, Paul finds the proof that they are adult sons of God. The emphasis is still upon the fact that their position as sons gives them freedom from bondage to the law, for he says that they are no longer slaves (doulos (doulo")). It is also implied by the use of the words “no longer,” that at one time the Galatians were under bondage to law. The change from the plural sons to the singular son brings the matter of sonship closer home to each individual reader. As a son, Paul says, the believer is an heir of God. The purpose of the apostle in again bringing up the conceptions of heirship and inheritance is perhaps that he wants to remind the Galatians that their position as heirs of God is due, not to any personal merit or good works, but to the grace of God. Thus, the Galatians are reminded that it is not through coming under law, but in maintaining their freedom from it that they will be able to obtain the blessing of Abraham, which blessing the Judaizers had held before their eyes as a prize obtainable only through circumcision. Paul appeals to them to retain the status of adult sons under grace which they already possessed, rather than go back to the position of a minor and a slave under law. Translation. So that no longer are you a slave but a son, and since (you are) a son, (you are) also an heir through God.20

VI.

Yet the Galatians are determined to return to their former position as minors and slaves under law (4:8–11). Verse eight. The apostle speaks of the former gods which the Galatian Gentiles worshipped (Acts 14:9–18). He thinks of them as realities, calling the gods of the pagan world demons (I Cor. 8:5, 6, 10:19, 20; Col. 2:15). The words “did service” are from douloo (douloo), the kindred verb to doulos (doulo"), a slave. The Galatians were slaves of these deities, in bondage under a system of legalism. He grants them objective existence, but denies that they are gods by nature. The word nature is from phusis (fusi") which means, “that which belongs to a person or thing by virtue of its origin,” then, “its essential character.” It is used even of the divine nature which is without origin. Paul does not deny their existence, but their deity. Yet while the apostle did not think of them as deity by nature, yet at the same time he did not class them as being of mere mundane matter. They belonged to a world not human but demoniac, a point which must have been well known to the Galatians from Paul’s oral instruction. Translation. But at that time in fact, not knowing God, ye were in a slave’s bondage to the gods which are not gods by nature. Verse nine. The expression “known by God,” cannot refer merely to knowledge simply in a purely theocratic or intellectual sense, since the apostle must have regarded such knowledge by God as an ever present fact. The phrase must refer to God knowing the Galatians in a saving way. For this use see Psalm 1:6, Nahum 1:7, I Corinthians 8:3, Matthew 7:23. Paul adds the phrase, “or rather are known of God” to the phrase “after that ye have known God,” for the following reasons. It is to remind the Galatians that they do not owe their knowledge of God to themselves, but to Him. Their escape from idolatry and bondage to law was not effected by any knowledge they acquired of God, but by God coming to know them in a saving way. Hence, they should clearly see the folly and wrong of abandoning this advantageous position to take an inferior one from which they had been rescued. Eadie says in this connection, “God knew them ere they knew Him, and His knowing them was the cause of their knowing Him.” Dean Stanley remarks that “Our knowledge of God is more His act than ours.” If God knows a man, that means that an activity of God has passed over to man, so that the man, as the subject of God’s knowledge, enters into the knowledge of God. The Greek word translated know here is ginosko (ginosko), which in the New Testament often implies a personal relation between the knower and the known. The word how is from pos (po"), rather, “how is it possible?” It is, as Bengel says, a question full of wonder. The apostle could hardly conceive of such a thing as a believer, having been once rescued from abject slavery to demons in a pagan religion, returning to a human system of bondage. The word turn is present in tense, “How is it possible that you are turning?” They were in the act of turning away from grace to law while Paul was writing this letter. The question, “How is it possible that you are turning back again to the weak and beggarly rudimentary things to which ye desire to be in bondage again?” is a rhetorical one, the purpose of which is to show the absurdity of their actions. It also calls the attention of the Galatians to the ineffectualness and poverty of their old religious system, contrasted to the power and richness of the gospel. It is of course a perverted form of Judaism to which they were turning, but pagan religions are included in Paul’s thought as

just as ineffectual. Both were legalistic in character, and were without a dynamic to make actual the realization of ethical principles in the life. The words again are from palin (palin) and anothen (ajnoqen) respectively, Greek synonyms meaning again. The first refers to a repetition of an act. The second speaks of the repetition of an act, that repetition having the same source as the first act. In other words, in the second word there is a return to a former position. The Galatians, in turning to a system of legalism, would be returning to their former position under law. The word anothen (ajnoqen) not only refers to the act of returning to a former position, but of returning to the beginning. These Galatians would be going back to the elementary beginning principles of religious thought. When Paul speaks of the rudimentary forms of religion, calling them weak and beggarly, he shows the utter impotence of these to do and bestow what was done and bestowed by God in grace. They are weak in that they have no power to rescue men from condemnation. They are beggarly, since they bring no rich endowment of spiritual blessings. Up to this point, Paul has spoken with respect to the education given to the world by the social habits, institutions, and laws of the Greco-Roman world. Through this education, civilized man learnt much in the sphere of morals and natural religion which would bear comparison with the progress of Israel under the ethics of the Mosaic law. But when he compares the mechanical routine of formal religious ceremonies which were found in the pagan religions and among so-called religious Jews, with the spiritual teachings and dynamics of the gospel, he does not hesitate to call them weak and beggarly. Lightfoot has a most illuminating note on this matter which is so valuable that we quote it in its entirety. “It is clear however from the context, that the apostle is not speaking of the Jewish race alone, but of the heathen world also before Christ—not of the Mosaic law only, but of all forms of law which might be subservient to the same purpose. This appears from his including his Galatian hearers under the same tutelage. Nor is this fact to be explained by supposing them to have passed through a stage of Jewish proselytism on their way to Christianity. St. Paul distinctly refers to their previous idolatrous worship (verse 8), and no less distinctly and emphatically does he describe their adoption of Jewish ritualism, as a return to the weak and beggarly discipline of childhood, from which they had been emancipated when they abandoned that worship. “But how, we may ask, could St. Paul class in the same category that divinely ordained law which he elsewhere describes as ‘holy’ and ‘just’ and ‘good’ (Rom. 7:12), and those degraded heathen systems which he elsewhere reprobates as ‘fellowship with devils’21 (I Cor. 10:20)? “The answer seems to be that the apostle here regards the higher elements in heathen religions as corresponding, however imperfectly, to the lower element in the Mosaic law. For we may consider both the one and the other as made up of two component parts, the spiritual and the ritualistic. “Now viewed in their spiritual aspect, there is no comparison between the one and the other. In this respect the heathen religions, so far as they added anything of their own to that sense of dependence upon God which is innate in man and which they could not entirely crush (Acts 14:17, 17:23, 27 and 28; Rom. 1:19 and 20), were wholly bad; they were profligate and soul-destroying, were the prompting of devils. On the contrary, in the Mosaic law, the spiritual element was most truly divine. But this does not enter into our

reckoning here, for Christianity has appropriated all that was spiritual in its predecessor. The Mosaic dispensation was a foreshadowing, a germ of the gospel: and thus, when Christ came, its spiritual element was of necessity extinguished or rather absorbed by its successor. Deprived of this, it was a mere mass of lifeless ordinances, differing only in degree, not in kind, from any other ritualistic system. “Thus the ritualistic element alone remains to be considered, and here is the meeting point of Judaism and Heathenism. In Judaism this was as much lower than its spiritual element, as in Heathenism it was higher. Hence the two systems approach within such a distance of each other that they can under certain limitations be classed together. They have at least so much in common that a lapse into Judaism can be regarded as a relapse to the position of unconverted Heathenism. Judaism was a system of bondage like Heathenism. Heathenism had been a disciplinary training like Judaism. “It is a fair inference, I think, from St. Paul’s language here, that he does place Heathenism in the same category with Judaism in this last respect. Both alike are stoicheia (stoiceia), ‘elementary systems of training.’ They had at least this in common, that as ritual systems they were made up of precepts and ordinances, and thus were representatives of ‘law’ as opposed to ‘grace,’ ‘promise,’ that is, as opposed to the gospel. Doubtless in this respect the highest form of heathen religion was much lower and less efficient than the Mosaic ritual. But still in an imperfect way they might do the same work: they might act as a restraint which, multiplying transgressions, and thus begetting and cherishing a conviction of sin, prepared the way for the liberty of manhood in Christ.” Translation. But now having come to know God, indeed rather having become known by God, how is it possible that you are turning back again to the weak and beggarly rudimentary principles to which ye are bent on again being in bondage? Verse ten. The days, months, and years which the Galatians were observing, were those which the Mosaic law required Israel to observe. This is made clear by Paul’s statement in 4:21, to the effect that the Galatians are bent on being under law. From 5:1 it is clear that the Galatians had not yet adopted circumcision, and from 5:3, that they had not been asked to adopt the whole law as yet. This shows that the Judaizers had pursued the adroit course of presenting to them only part of the requirements of the Mosaic law, those parts which might be least repulsive to them as Gentiles. Having gotten them to adopt the festivals and perhaps the fast days, the Judaizers were now urging them to adopt circumcision. The word observe is from paratereo (paratereo). The word denotes careful, scrupulous observance, an intent watching lest any of the prescribed seasons be overlooked. A merely legal or ritualistic system of religion always develops such scrupulousness. Paul, a former Pharisee, was well acquainted with the meticulous care with which the Pharisees kept all the appointed feasts and fasts. It hurt him to see these Gentile Christians being drawn into the net of the Judaizers, and enslaved by a mere formal, lifeless ritual. The days probably refer to the Sabbath days and to the feasts which were observed just for a day. The months refer to the monthly recurring events (Isaiah 66:23), or to the seventh month (Numbers 29). The reference also could have to do with the celebration of the appearance of the new moon (Numbers 10:10, 28:11). Times refers to the celebrations

not limited to a single day, such as the Passover, Feast of Tabernacles, and to the feasts of the fourth, fifth, and seventh months (II Chron. 8:13). Years may have reference to the year of Jubilee or the Sabbatical year. Translation. Days ye are scrupulously and religiously observing, and months, and seasons, and years. Verse eleven. Martin Luther said of this verse, “These words of Paul breathe tears.” The construction in the Greek does not give the impression that the apostle has fears about the future of the Galatians which may not be realized. It is clear that he suspects that what he fears has already happened. Paul was not apprehensive with respect to his own interests or his fruitless labors, but with respect to the spiritual welfare of his Galatian converts. They were the objects of his anxiety. The word labour is from kopiao (kopiao) which means “to labor to the point of exhaustion.” It is in the perfect tense, indicating the finished, thorough piece of work Paul had done in the evangelization of the Galatians. Translation. I am afraid about you lest perhaps in vain I have labored to the point of exhaustion for you. VII. Paul appeals in a touching way to the Galatians to maintain their freedom from the law. He reminds them of their enthusiastic reception of him and the gospel which he preached, and tells them of his longing to be with them now in order that he might speak to them personally (4:12–20). Verse twelve. He exhorts them, “Be as I am, for I am as ye are.” The word “be” is from ginomai (ginomai) which means literally “to become.” His exhortation is therefore, “Become as I am, because I also became as you are.” That is, “become as I am, free from the bondage of the law. I became as you are, Gentile.” Paul exhorts the Galatians to free themselves from bondage to law as he had done. He appeals to them to do this because he who had possessed the advantages of the law, had foregone these advantages and had placed himself on the same level in relation to the law as Gentiles. He tells them that he gave up all those time-honored Jewish customs and those dear associations of race to become like them. He has lived like a Gentile so that he might preach to Gentiles. He pleads with them not to abandon him when he has abandoned all for them. The Galatians could not fail to remember the occasion when at the close of Paul’s address at Pisidian Antioch, the Jews departed from the synagogue, but the Gentiles besought him to repeat to them the words of life on the next Sabbath. They could not fail to remember how the Jews had expelled Paul from the city. They, the Galatian Gentiles, had been suitors to Paul to maintain the freedom of the gospel. Now, he in turn is appealing to them to maintain the freedom of that same gospel. Translation. Become as I am, because I also became as you were, brethren, I am beseeching you. Ye had done me no wrong. Verse thirteen. Paul reminds the Galatians of the fact that when he came to Antioch the first time, it was not his intention to evangelize that territory, but to go on to another place, and that a sudden attack of illness made it imperative that he stay there. Thus it was

because of his illness, that he preached the gospel to them. Regarding Paul’s illness at Antioch, the following facts should be noted. First, it occurred under the observation of the Galatians who watched its progress, were familiar with its repulsive symptoms, and showed tender sympathy toward the sufferer. This fact may help us to understand the words, “Ye had done me no wrong.” The Galatians might easily have spurned Paul and refused his fellowship. There he was, a Jew, and a stranger to them, afflicted with an illness that normally aroused disgust and loathing by reason of its repulsive nature. But instead of doing Paul the wrong of rejecting him, they welcomed him with open arms, and his gospel message with open hearts. Second, the Galatians knew that Paul had not intended to work among them. His face was turned to the Greek cities of Asia Minor and the mainland of Greece itself. They knew that he was detained amongst them by his illness. Third, this illness which incapacitated him for further travel, yet allowed free intercourse with those around him. Fourth, the success he had in winning the Galatians to the Lord Jesus, indicates that his illness was of a chronic nature. His sick chamber was his pulpit. Fifth, in connection with his reference to his illness, Paul mentions the fact in verse 15 that if it had been possible, the Galatians would have plucked out their eyes and would have given them to him. The inference should be clear that he needed a new pair of eyes, and that therefore his illness was an eye affliction. His words in 6:1, “Ye see with what large letters I have written to you with my own hand,” confirm this, the large Greek letters being necessary because of his impaired vision. A further confirmation of this is found in the fact that in the lowlands of Pamphylia, a region through which Paul had just passed on his way to Pisidian Antioch, an oriental eye disease called ophthalmia was prevalent In addition to all this, the Greek words translated despised and rejected, indicate that the illness had caused him to have a repulsive appearance, which answers to the symptoms of ophthalmia. Translation. But ye know that because of an infirmity of the flesh, I preached the gospel to you on the occasion of my first visit. Verse fourteen. The best Greek texts read your, referring to the Galatians, not my, referring to Paul. Paul’s illness was in a sense a temptation to the Galatians, in that its nature was such that a normal reaction to it would be in the form of loathing and disgust, which attitudes would be followed by the rejection of the afflicted one. The word despised is from ekptuo (ejkptuo) which means “to spit out, to reject, to spurn, to loathe.” Rejected is from exoutheneo (ejxouqeneo) which means “to hold and treat as of no account, to despise.” There was something in the physical appearance of the apostle that tempted the Galatians to reject him and his message. Instead of spurning Paul, these unsaved Galatians had received him as an angel of God, even as Jesus Christ. The reference is probably to the occasion of the healing of the lame man at Lystra. In their excitement at this miraculous healing, the Lycaonians thought that Barnabas was Zeus, the chief of the Greek gods, and that Paul was Hermes, the messenger and the interpreter of the gods. Paul looks back to the day when these Galatians had received him as a messenger of the gods, even as the son of God. This was, to be sure an outburst of native superstition and pagan religion, and was repudiated at the time with indignation by Paul. However, these converted Galatians could look back at all this and thank God with a feeling of grateful joy that they had not welcomed the Greek gods of Olympus, but messengers of the living God who had made heaven and earth.

There is an echo of this same incident in Paul’s words in 1:8, “But though we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that we have preached unto you.” Translation. And the temptation to which ye were subjected and which was in my flesh, ye did not loathe nor utterly despise, but as a messenger of God ye received me, as Christ Jesus. Verse fifteen. The word blessedness is from makarios (makario") which in secular Greek means prosperous, and which indicates that the makarios (makario") person is in a state of prosperity. Paul reminds the Galatians of the prosperity of their spiritual lives which consisted of such a state of self-sacrifice and self-abnegation that they were willing to dig out their own eyes and give them to Paul. He asks, Where is that prosperous condition now? The reader should know that the author has not followed Burton, Vincent, Lightfoot, Meyer, and Alford on the question of the nature of Paul’s illness, but instead, the Rev. Frederic Rendall, in Expositor’s Greek Testament, and Dr. A. T. Robertson. However, the decision of the writer is not based simply nor primarily upon the authority of the last two men named. That which tipped the scales in favor of the ophthalmia solution, was the Greek text of 4:13–15 and 6:11. Let the reader judge for himself as to whether the evidence presented is conclusive. Translation. Where is therefore your (spiritually) prosperous state? For I bear witness to you that if it had been possible, you would have dug out your own eyes and would have given them to me. Verse sixteen. Therefore is from hoste (oJste), which is often used by Paul in the sense of therefore, to introduce an imperative or an affirmative conclusion but not an interrogation. The word enemy is from echthros (ejcqro") which speaks of an enemy in an active sense, of one who is hostile to another. Paul says that he has become an enemy of the Galatians, not from his point of view, but from the standpoint of the Galatians. He refers to the fact that he has told them the truth. It was probably on the occasion of his second visit to them (Acts 18:23) that he found the danger impending, and spoke plainly against the Judaizers. Translation. So then I have become your enemy because I am telling you the truth. Verse seventeen. In contrast to his own frank truthfulness in which he risked incurring the displeasure of the Galatians, the apostle tells them of the Judaizers’ dishonorable attempt at paying them court in order to win them over to themselves. The word they refers to the Judaizers. The fact that Paul does not mention the Judaizers by name, is in keeping with the emotional strain and the irritation he was experiencing at the time. Calvin says, “For those whom it disgusts and offends us to mention, we generally refer to with a suppression of the name.” The words “zealously affect” are from zeloo (zeloo). The word affect as used here, is an example of one of the obsolete words in the Authorized Version. The word is from affectaire which means “to strive after, to earnestly desire.” Shakespeare in The Taming of the Shrew has, “In brief, sir, study what you most affect.”

Ben Jonson has, “Pray him aloud to name what dish he affects.” Chaucer gives us, “As Crossus dide for his affectis wronge” (his wrong desires). Both Vincent and Lightfoot translate it, “to pay court to,” ostensibly, as a lover pays court to his lady. The Judaizers were zealously paying court to the Galatians. Paul adds, “but not well.” Well is from kalos (kalo"). The Judaizers were paying court to the Galatians, but not in an honorable way. What was dishonorable about their paying court to the Galatians is told us in the words of Paul, “Yea, they would exclude you, that ye might affect them.” The word exclude is from ekkleio (ejkkleio) which means “to shut out.” That from which the Judaizers wished to shut out the Galatians, is not stated in so many words. The context suggests that the Judaizers were attempting to shut the Galatians out, either from the benefits of the gospel of grace, or from fellowship with Paul and his companions who maintained that the Gentiles are accepted by God on the basis of faith without works. In either case, the result would be that the Galatians would turn to the Judaizers for guidance and fellowship, and the latter would be in a position where the Galatians would be paying court to them. However, it would be more natural to speak of shutting out the Galatians from the benefits of the gospel, since the verb ekkleio (ejkkleio) favors that, and because a verb meaning “to alienate or cause separation from” would be more natural if Paul meant that the Judaizers were attempting to separate the Galatians from Paul. Thus, the idea is that the Judaizers were zealously paying court to the Galatians, attempting to shut them out from the benefits of the gospel in order that they (the Galatians) might have to pay court to the Judaizers, since they would have no refuge for their souls elsewhere. Translation. They are zealously paying you court, but not honestly, desiring to isolate you in order that you might be paying court to them. Verses eighteen and nineteen. Paul says, “But it is good to be zealously courted at all times in a good thing, and not only when I am present with you.” He refers here probably to his own persistent courting of the Galatians. He says that the fact that someone else pays them court, and that they court the favor of others, is not wrong in itself. He says that he himself is not insensible to such attachments. He remembers how warm were the feelings of the Galatians toward him when he was with them, and he yearns for their continued cordiality towards himself. Paul courted the Galatians, not to attach them to himself, but that he might join them to the Lord Jesus. He was glad that they should be courted at all times, even by others in his absence, if it is done in a right spirit and in connection with the truth of the gospel. Translation. But it is good to be zealously courted in a good thing at all times, and not only when I am present with you, my little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you. The Greek text shows that the words “my little children,” are not in the vocative case, introducing a fresh appeal, but an accusative in apposition with the pronoun you of verse 18. This is the language of deep affection and emotion, in which Paul asserts his rights to hold the love of the Galatians. He speaks of them as his children (tekna (tekna), born ones). He is for the second time distressed for his Galatian converts with the same anguish that he experienced in his efforts at their conversion. The metaphor speaking of a Christian winning converts to the Lord Jesus, as those who give birth to spiritual children, is found

in I Corinthians 4:15 and Philemon 10. It was a Jewish saying, “If one teaches the son of his neighbor the law, the Scripture reckons this the same as though he had begotten him.” The word formed is from  (morfow) which refers to the act of giving outward expression of one’s inner nature. We use the English word form in that way sometimes. For instance, “I went to the tennis match yesterday. The winning player’s form was excellent.” We mean by that, that the outward expression which he gave of his inward ability to play tennis, was excellent. In our Galatian verse, Paul refers to the outward expression of the Lord Jesus in the lives of the Galatian Christians. These to whom Paul was writing, were truly saved. The Lord Jesus was resident in their hearts. But there was little of His beauty in their lives. The word again tells us that at one time He was clearly and abundantly evident in their experience. But now He ceased to be seen in the lives of the Galatian Christians. The reason is found in the fact that the Judaizers in placing the Galatian Christians under law, had caused them to substitute self effort in an attempt to obey a newly imposed law, for their previous dependence upon the Holy Spirit for the production of a Christ-like life in and through them. The passive voice of the verb “be formed,” tells us that the Lord Jesus dwells in the heart of a Christian in a passive way, and thus does not express Himself through the Christian. He has given that ministry over to the Holy Spirit. He said, referring to the Spirit, “That One shall glorify Me” John 16:14). The Holy Spirit was not being recognized and depended upon by the Galatians. Consequently He was not able to minister the Lord Jesus to and through the Galatians in a full measure. What havoc the Judaizers were working in the Galatian churches.22 Translation. But it is good to be zealously courted in a good thing at all times, and not only when I am present with you, my born ones, concerning whom I am again striving with intense effort and anguish until Christ be outwardly expressed in you. Verse twenty. Paul, concerned about the unhappy situation in the Galatian churches (4:11), moved by his deep love for the Galatian believers (4:19), and perplexed as to how he could help them in this present crisis (4:20), expresses the wish that he might be with them personally. He desired to be present in order that he could “change his voice.” These last words could mean either or both of two things, each in perfect harmony with the context. First, they could mean that the apostle regretted the severity of his language on the occasion of his second visit to the Galatian churches at which time he had warned them against the Judaizers, and that he desired to be with them personally in order that he might talk to them in a more tender and affectionate manner, however, still telling them the truth. For a similar instance in which he for a time regretted the stern tone he used see II Corinthians 7:8. Second, the words “to change my voice,” were regularly used of the act of changing to some other means of expression. Paul longs to go to them and speak personally rather than send a message through the medium of writing. Robertson says in connection with this passage, “Paul could put his heart into his voice. The pen stands between them. He knew the power of his voice on their hearts.”23 But the apostle found it impossible to go to them at that time, and thus in the providence of God, the Church has the letter to the Galatians, and has found it a tower of strength and a bulwark against the heresy which

teaches that salvation is appropriated by faith plus works. Both of these interpretations could be true, and could be included in what Paul meant by these words. He desired to be with the Galatians personally so that he might speak to them face to face instead of writing a letter, and in speaking to them, change his tone from one of severity to one of gentleness. The word now is not from nun (nun) but from arti (ajrti), which latter word more sharply defines and particularizes the point of time referred to in the context. One could translate it by the words “at this very moment.” The words “stand in doubt” are from  (ajporew). The word finds its base in poros (poro"), “a transit, a ford, a way, revenue, resource,” and has the Greek letter alpha (ajlfa) prefixed which negates the meaning of the word, and thus it comes to mean, “to be without a way or path, not to know which way to turn, to be without resources, to be in straits, to be in perplexity.” That was Paul’s position with regard to his Galatian converts. The verb is in the middle voice, which fact speaks of the inward distress of a mind tossed to and fro by conflicting doubts and fears. The Greek has it, “I am perplexed in you.” Paul’s perplexity is conceived as being in the Galatians. He says in effect, “I am puzzled how to deal with you, how to find an entrance into your hearts.” Translation. Moreover, I was wishing that I were present with you at this very moment, and could thus change my tone, because I am perplexed about you. VIII. The history of Hagar and Sarah illustrates the present status of law and grace. As the son of the bondwoman gave place to the son of the freewoman, so law has given place to grace (4:21–31) . Verse twenty one. The words “ye that desire to be under the law,” imply that the Galatians had not adopted, but were on the point of adopting the law. The idea is, “ye who are bent on being under law.” The article is absent before law in the Greek text. The word law here refers to law as a principle of life, not only to the Mosaic law. The apostle asks the Galatians who are bent on being under law, “Are ye not hearing the law?” This is a remonstrance to these Galatians who are bent on upholding the authority of the law, but who are not heeding the full significance of that law. Translation. Tell me, ye that are bent upon being under law, are ye not hearing the law? Verse twenty two. The word for connects the contents of verse 21 with those of 22. The idea is, “Your desire to be under law is not in harmony with Scripture, and here is the scripture.” The word bondmaid is the translation of paidiske (paidiske), a term frequently used in the LXX of a female slave. Translation. For it stands written, Abraham had two sons, one from the maidservant and one from the freewoman. Verse twenty three. Ishmael, born of the bondwoman, was born after the flesh, that is, by natural generation in the ordinary course of nature. But Isaac, born of the freewoman, was born according to promise, through the miraculous interposition of God, when the parents were too old to have children. The words “was born,” are in the perfect tense in preference to the usual aorist, because Paul was not thinking simply of the historic fact of

the two births, but of the existing results. Ishmael’s descendants do not belong to the covenant people, Israel. Isaac’s descendants are those that have the promises. In verse 22, Ishmael and Isaac are coupled together as the sons of one father. Here they are contrasted in that they each had a different mother. Translation. But on the one hand, the son of the maidservant was one born in the ordinary course of nature. On the other hand, the son of the freewoman was one born through the promise. Verse twenty four. Paul says that the story of Hagar and Ishmael and Sarah and Isaac, is an allegory. This does not mean that he is casting doubt upon the historical trustworthiness of the patriarchal narrative in Genesis. An allegory is a statement of facts which is to be understood literally, and yet requires or justly admits a moral or a figurative interpretation. Paul, while using the story as an illustration, does so in order to prove his argument to the effect that the law is superseded by grace. Then he speaks of the covenant of law that was given at Mt. Sinai. This is allegorically identified with Hagar. This covenant places its children in a condition of bondage. Translation. Which class of things is allegorical. For these are two covenants, one from Mount Sinai, begetting bondage, which is as to its nature classed as Hagar. Verse twenty five. The exact meaning of the statement, “For this Hagar is Mount Sinai,” is in debate among commentators. A possible interpretation is as follows: The word Hagar in this verse is not used of the woman Hagar, but is another designation of Mount Sinai. The name Hagar resembles the Arabic name of Sinai. The Arabians are called sons of Hagar. This Hagar or Sinai corresponds, Paul says, to the then existent city of Jerusalem, the center of the apostate observance of Judaism. Just as Hagar, a slave, bore children that by birth became slaves, so the followers of legalistic Judaism are in bondage to law. Translation. Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to the Jerusalem which now is, for she is in bondage with her children. Verse twenty six. The phrase “Jerusalem which is above,” was familiar to the rabbinical teachers who thought of the heavenly Jerusalem as the archtype of the earthly. The heavenly Jerusalem which is free, therefore represents Sarah; and finally, grace, and the faith way of salvation, for it is contrasted to the earthly Jerusalem which represents legalistic Judaism. Translation. But the Jerusalem which is above is free, which is our Mother. Verse twenty seven. This verse is a quotation from Isaiah 54:1, and follows the LXX. The words are applied to the unfruitful Sarah who answers to the heavenly Jerusalem. Translation. For it stands written, Rejoice, barren (woman) who does not

bear. Break forth and cry, you who do not travail, because more are the children of the desolate than of the one who has an husband. Verse twenty eight. The best texts have ye instead of we. Paul is assuring the Galatian Christians that they are not like Ishmael the son of the slave woman, but like Isaac who was born according to the promise, not in the usual course of nature but miraculously. So they are born of the Holy Spirit, and have their standing before God, not on the basis of physical descent from Abraham, but upon the promise made to Abraham which applies to all who have like faith to him. Translation. And, as for you, brethren, after the manner of Isaac are ye children of promise. Verse twenty nine. The reference is to Ishmael who persecuted Isaac (Gen. 21:9) . So the Judaizers were persecuting Paul and all those who would not forsake grace for law. Translation. But just as then he who was born according to the flesh was constantly persecuting him who was born according to the Spirit, so also now. Verse thirty. Paul, in interpreting the allegory, says that the rejection of Ishmael points to a rejection of the children of Abraham after the flesh in favor of those who become children of Abraham by faith. Lightfoot has the following to say about these words of the apostle Paul. “The law and the gospel cannot coexist. The law must disappear before the gospel. It is scarcely possible to estimate the strength of conviction and depth of prophetic insight which this declaration implies. The apostle thus confidently sounds the death-knell of Judaism at a time when one half of Christendom clung to the Mosaic law with a jealous affection little short of frenzy, and while the Judaic party seemed to be growing in influence, and was strong enough even in the Gentile churches of his own founding to undermine his influence and endanger his life. The truth which to us appears a truism, must then have been regarded as a paradox.” Translation. But what does the Scripture say? Throw out the maidservant and her son. For the son of the maidservant shall by no means inherit with the son of the freewoman. Verse thirty one. This verse brings to a climax the argument that believers are not a community or nation in bondage to legal statutes, but members of the community of believers whose relation to God is that of sons, and who do not have the spirit of bondage but the Spirit of sonship. It also serves as the basis upon which Paul builds the practical instruction which follows in chapters five and six. Translation. Therefore, brethren, we are children not of a maidservant, but of the freewoman.

PRACTICAL In 1:11–2:21, Paul shows that he was divinely commissioned as an apostle and as such was not answerable to the Twelve in Jerusalem. In chapters 3 and 4, he defends his doctrine of justification by faith alone, against the Judaizers who added works to faith as the necessary conditions for salvation. In 5:1–6:10 the inspired apostle presents practical teaching and exhortation designed to correct the havoc which the teaching of the Judaizers was causing in the personal lives of the Galatian Christians. In 4:19 Paul expresses the wish that the Lord Jesus might again be outwardly expressed in their lives. The Galatians had lost His beauty which before the coming of the Judaizers had been so prominent in their experience. The Lord Jesus was not being expressed in their lives as heretofore. This was the direct result of the Judaizer’s legalistic teachings. The Galatian Christians, instead of depending upon the indwelling Spirit to produce in their lives the beauty of the Lord Jesus, now were depending upon self-effort in an attempt to obey law. Accordingly, Paul’s practical teaching emphasizes the ministry of the Spirit, and the Galatians are exhorted to put themselves again under His control. I. Paul exhorts the Galatians to hold fast to the freedom from law which the Lord Jesus had procured for them by the blood of His Cross, and not to become entangled again in a legalistic system (5:1–12). Verse one. We can best approach the study of this verse by offering the translation at the start. For this aforementioned freedom, Christ set us free. Keep on standing firm therefore, and stop being held again by a yoke of bondage. The word free of 4:31 is the translation of the same Greek word rendered liberty in this verse. The word is dative of advantage. The teaching is that Christ died on the Cross to give us the advantage of having this liberty or freedom. This liberty consists of the Christian’s freedom from the law. Under the law, the person has no more liberty than a child in its minority under a guardian. The child has no freedom of action nor right of self-determination. He must move within a set of rules prescribed by his guardian. He is not old enough to act alone. He must always act under the restrictions of his guardian. So is it with the person under the law. Here were these Galatian Christians, free from the law, having been placed in the family of God as adult sons, indwelt by the Holy Spirit who would enable them to act out in their experience that maturity of Christian life in which they were placed, now putting on the straight-jacket of the law, cramping their experience, stultifying their actions, depriving themselves of the power of the Holy Spirit. They were like adults putting themselves under rules made for children. The liberty spoken of here does not refer to the kind of life a person lives, neither does it have reference to his words and actions, but it has to do with the method by which he lives that life. The Judaizers lived their lives by dependence upon self effort in an attempt to obey the law. The Galatian Christians had been living their’s in dependence upon the indwelling Holy Spirit. Their hearts had been occupied with the Lord Jesus, the details of their lives being guided by the ethics that emerged from the teaching of the apostles, both doctrinal and practical. Now, in swinging over to law, they were losing that freedom of action and that flexibility of self-determination which one exercises in the doing of what is right, when one does right, not because the law forbids the wrong and commands the right, but because it is right, because it pleases the Lord Jesus, and because of love for Him. Paul exhorts them to keep on standing fast in that freedom from law.

The word entangled is from enecho (ejneco), which means “to be held within, to be ensnared.” It is used of those who are held in a physical (net or the like) or ethical (law, dogma, emotion) restriction upon their liberty, so that they are unable to free themselves. The Galatian Christians, having escaped from the slavery of heathenism, were in danger of becoming entangled in the meshes of legalistic Judaism. Paul in 4:1–7 had already told them of the fact that grace had placed them as adult sons in the family of God, and in 4:8– 10 had asked them how it was that they were turning back to such an elementary method of living their lives. Now, in 5:1 he enforces his exhortation and launches out into a discussion of the Spirit-filled life.24 Translation. For this aforementioned freedom Christ set you free. Keep on standing firm therefore, and stop being held in again by a yoke of bondage. Verse two. The words “if ye be circumcised,” present an hypothetical case. The Galatians had not yet submitted to that rite, but were on the verge of doing so. The words “Christ shall profit you nothing,” must be interpreted in their context. Paul is not speaking here of their standing in grace as justified believers. He is speaking of the method of living a Christian lift and of growth in that life. Thus, if the Galatians submit to circumcision, they are putting themselves under law, and are depriving themselves of the ministry of the Holy Spirit which Christ made possible through His death and resurrection, and which ministry was not provided for under law. In the Old Testament dispensation, the Spirit came upon or in believers in order that they might perform a certain service for God, and then left them when that service was accomplished. He did not indwell them for purposes of sanctification. The great apostle had taught the Galatians that God’s grace guaranteed their everlasting retention of salvation, and so they understood that he was speaking of their Christian experience, not their Christian standing. Translation. Behold, I, Paul, am saying to you that if you go on (persist in) being circumcised, Christ will be advantageous to you in not even one thing. Verse three. This verse continues the argument of verse 2. Not only would the Galatians lose the aid of the Holy Spirit in the living of their Christian lives, but they would be assuming the burden of the entire legalistic system. Paul warns them that the acceptance of circumcision would be in principle the acceptance of the whole of that system. The fact that Paul points this out to the Galatians, implies that the Judaizers had not done so. They were now asking the Galatian Christians to accept circumcision as a rite by which they would become sons of Abraham and thus participants in the blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant The Judaizers had already persuaded them to adopt the Jewish cycle of feasts. The words “I testify,” are from marturomai (marturomai) which without an object accusative as it is here, signifies, not “to call to witness” but “to affirm, to protest.” It is a strong asseveration, not merely a simple testimony. The word again refers to a like statement made to the Galatians, probably on the occasion referred to in 4:16 and 1:9. The words “every man who is circumcised,” do not refer to the fact that the Galatians had accepted circumcision. That would call for the perfect tense. The present is used here. The

idea is “everyone who receives circumcision.” The warning is addressed, not to the man who has been circumcised, but to the one contemplating doing so. The word debtor is from opheiletes (ojfeilete"), which refers to one who is under obligation. one who is bound to do a certain thing, here in effect, to one who binds himself to something. The obligation is as the context shows, one which the Christian ought not to assume. The believer is free from the law in three respects. First, he is free from the condemnation it imposes upon the one who would disobey it. Second, he is free from the law as a means of justification. Third, he is free from the obligation to render obedience to its statutes. The believer in this Age of Grace is obligated to obey either all of the law or none of it. If he feels that he is obligated to obey parts of it which he chooses, that, for instance, obligates him to keep the Sabbath, the seventh day, instead of the first day of the week, the Lord’s Day. By what rule can one isolate certain parts of the Old Testament law as binding upon Christians and disregard other parts as purely Jewish in their application? The Galatians were not obligated to obey any of the law. Submission of the Galatians to the rite of circumcision, makes them a party to the covenant of the law, and the law requires from everyone thus committed, a full and perfect obedience. The ethics of the Pauline epistles and the ministry of the Holy Spirit, take the place of and are an advance upon the Mosaic economy of regeneration and the objection written law. Whatever is of value for the Church in the legal enactments of the Mosaic code, is found in the hortatory passages of the New Testament epistles. That is not to say, however, that the great principles of conduct underlying the statutes of the Mosaic law, are to be ignored. The Old Testament, even though superseded by the New which is specially designed for the Church, yet has great value to the latter. Still it must be used with the following two guiding principles in mind; first, it is specially adapted to the needs of the nation Israel and for the time before the Cross, and second, its legal enactments where they deal with general principles of conduct that are universal and eternal in their application, must never be treated as legally binding upon the believer but only as ethics to guide his conduct. Translation. And I solemnly affirm again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to do the whole law. Verse four. The words “Christ is become of no effect unto you,” must be understood in their context to refer, not to their justification but to their spiritual lives as Christians. The apostle is not here speaking of their standing but of their experience. The words “become of no effect,” are from katergeo (katergeo) which means “to make ineffectual,” and which used with the word apo (ajpo) (from) as it is here, means “to be without effect from, to be unaffected by, to be without effective relation to.” The word is applied to any destruction of growth or life, physical or spiritual. Joined with apo (ajpo) (from), it speaks of the loss of some essential element of life by the severance of previous intimate relations. The subject of the verb here is the Galatian Christians. One could translate “You have become unaffected by Christ,” or, “You have become without effective relation to Christ.” The idea is that the Galatian Christians, by putting themselves under law, have put themselves in a place where they have ceased to be in that relation to Christ where they could derive the spiritual benefits from Him which would enable them to live a life pleasing to Him, namely, through the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Thus, Christ has no more effect upon them in the living of their Christian lives. In depriving themselves of the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the living of a Christian

life, they have fallen from grace. The words “fallen from” are from ekpipto (ejkpipto) which means “to fail of, to lose one’s hold of.” The Galatian Christians had lost their hold upon the grace for daily living which heretofore had been ministered to them by the Holy Spirit. God’s grace manifests itself in three ways, in justification, sanctification, and glorification. The context rules. All through chapter five, Paul is talking about the Holy Spirit’s ministry to the believer. Therefore grace here must be interpreted as the daily grace for living of which the Galatian Christians were depriving themselves. But because they had lost their hold upon sanctifying grace, does not mean that God’s grace had lost its hold upon them in the sphere of justification. Because they had refused to accept God’s grace in sanctification is no reason why God should withdraw His grace for justification. They had received the latter when they accepted the Lord Jesus. That transaction was closed and permanent at the moment they believed. Justification is a judicial act of God done once for all. Sanctification is a process which goes on all through the Christian’s life. Just because the process of sanctification is temporarily retarded in a believer’s life, does not say that his justification is taken away. If that were the case, then the retention of salvation would defend upon the believer’s works, and then salvation would not depend upon grace anymore. And we find ourselves in the camp of the Judaizers, ancient and modern. Translation. You are without effect from Christ, such of you as in the sphere of the law are seeking your justification. You have lost your hold upon grace. Verse five. The righteousness spoken of here is not justifying righteousness, and for three reasons. First, it is righteousness which finds its source in the operation of the Holy Spirit. Justifying righteousness is a purely legal matter and has to do with a believer’s standing before God. The Holy Spirit has nothing to do with that. That is a matter between God the Father and God the Son. The Father justifies a believing sinner on the basis of the work of the Son on the Cross. Second, the context is dealing with the Christian’s experience, not his standing, with the method of living a Christian life, not the relation of that person to the laws of God. Third, love as a fruit of the Holy Spirit in the life of the Christian, is spoken of in verse 6, which verse is bound up with verse 5. This again shows that the grace spoken of in verse 5 is sanctifying grace, of which latter the Galatian saints were depriving themselves by their act of depending upon self effort in an attempt to obey law. Paul says that it is through the agency of the Spirit that we can hope for the presence of an experimental righteousness in the life, not by self effort. The word we is emphatic. It is, “as for us, we (Christians) through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith,” not as the Judaizers who attempted to live a righteous life by self effort rather than by dependence upon the Holy Spirit. The phrase “the hope of righteousness,” is a construction of the Greek text called an objective genitive. It can be translated “the hopedfor righteousness.” It is that righteousness which is the object of hope. The words “by faith,” are to be construed with “wait.” We wait for this hoped-for righteousness by faith. The word wait is from apodechomai (ajpodecomai). The same word is used in Philippians 3:20, and there translated look. The word speaks of an attitude of intense yearning and an eager waiting for something. Here it refers to the believer’s intense desire for and eager expectation of a practical righteousness which will be constantly produced in

his life by the Holy Spirit as he yields himself to Him. Translation. For, as for us, through the agency of the Spirit, on thy ground of faith, a hoped-for righteousness we are eagerly awaiting. Verse six. The word availeth is the translation of ischuo (ijscuo) which means “to have power, to exert or wield power.” Thus, in the case of the one who is joined to Christ Jesus in that life-giving union which was effected through the act of the Holy Spirit baptizing the believing sinner into the Lord Jesus (Romans 6:3, 4), the fact that he is circumcised or is not circumcised, has no power for anything in his life. The thing that is of power to effect a transformation in the life is faith, the faith of the justified person which issues in love in his life, a love produced by the Holy Spirit. Translation. For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision is of any power nor uncircumcision, but faith coming to effective expression through love. Verse seven. The words “did run” are in the imperfect tense, referring to a continuous action going on in past time. Here, as in 4:12, Paul breaks off his argument to make an appeal to his readers on the basis of their past experience. He uses the figure of a Greek runner. “You were running well.” The word well is from kalos (kalo"), suggesting the translation, “You were conducting yourselves bravely, honorably, becomingly.” The word hinder is from enkopto (ejnkopto) which means “to cut in, to make an incision, to hinder.” Inasmuch as Paul is using the figure of a race, this word suggests a breaking into the race course, a cutting in on a runner by another runner, thus slowing up his progress. The Galatian Christians were running the Christian race well, but the Judaizers cut in on them and now were slowing up their progress in their growth in the Christian life. They had deprived the Galatians of the ministry of the Holy Spirit, and the latter had been thrown back upon self effort in an attempt to obey a set of legal restrictions, with the result that their lives had lost the fragrance of the Lord Jesus and the enabling power for service which the Spirit formerly gave them. The question Paul asks is rhetorical, not for information. The great apostle knew well enough who had slowed up the Christian growth of the Galatians. Translation. You were running well. Who cut in on you and thus hindered you from obeying the truth? Verse eight. The word persuasion is from peismone (peismone), the verb of the same root being peitho (peiqo), which latter means “to persuade,” that is, “to induce one by words to believe.” The word is used here in an active sense. It refers to the act of the Judaizers inducing the Galatians to believe their preaching. This activity of the Judaizers, Paul says, does not come from the One who called them into salvation, namely, God. This negative statement indicates that the influence which was turning them away from grace was hostile to God. He definitely expresses this in the next verse where he speaks of the teachings of the Judaizers as leaven, the term leaven always referring in Scripture to evil, here to false doctrine. The definite article before the word persuasion in the Greek text, identifies the persuasion as that which cut into the Galatian’s progress in the Christian life mentioned in verse 7, namely, the teachings of the Judaizers. God who called them, called

them to freedom in Christ, not to the enslaving tenets al the Judaizers. Translation. This persuasion is not from the One who calls you. Verse nine. Leaven is always a symbol of evil in the Bible. The Jews before the days of unleavened bread, would remove every particle of leaven from their homes. Leaven, which operates on the principle of fermentation, is an apt symbol of moral and spiritual corruption. A very small lump readily permeates the entire bread dough. Our Lord used it as a symbol of the false doctrines of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 16:6–12). In I Corinthians 5:6, Paul uses the symbol, of the immoral conduct of a few in the church which was endangering the life of the entire church, and which unrebuked, would spread throughout that local assembly. The symbol appears to have had a wide usage as a proverbial saying referring to the tendency of an influence, even though small, to spread so as to control the entire situation or surroundings. The insidious work of these Judaizers was slowly permeating the religious life of the Galatian churches. The verb is in the present tense, indicating that the process of doctrinal fermentation was going on, but that it had not yet corrupted the entire church structure. It had made but a little progress. Paul was more alarmed over its insidious nature than over the extent to which it had permeated the churches. Translation. A little leaven is leavening the whole lump. Verse ten. Paul now turns with decided abruptness from the discouraging picture of verse 9 to one of encouragement. The personal pronoun ego (ejgo) (I) appears in the Greek text. It emphasizes the personal character of Paul’s confidence in them. It is, “I, at least, whatever others may think.” The word confidence is from peitho (peiqo), “to persuade,” and in the perfect tense. Paul had come to a settled persuasion or conviction regarding them. The words “through the Lord,” speak of the Lord Jesus, not primarily as the object of trust, but as the One who is the basis or ground of Paul’s confidence. The words “none otherwise,” tell us that Paul expected the Galatians to take no other view of the source of the Judaizer’s message than he took, namely, that it did not come from God but from an evil source, and that the leaven of the Judaizers was false doctrine. The words “be minded,” are from phroneo (froneo) which denotes a general disposition of the mind rather than a specific act of thought directed at a given point. The word troubleth is from tarasso (tarasso) which is used of the act of disturbing the faith of someone. The word bear is from bastazo (bastazo) which speaks of a grievous burden. The judgment of God would be the grievous burden which anyone would have to bear who would disturb the faith of the Galatian Christians. Translation. As for myself, I have come to a settled confidence in the Lord with respect to you, namely, that you will take no other view than this. But the one who troubles you shall bear his judgment, whoever he is. Verse eleven. The Judaizers said that Paul was still preaching circumcision when it suited his purpose. Paul answers this charge by calling the attention of the Galatians to the fact that he we still being persecuted, implying that it was for his anti-legalism. The first yet is from eti (ejti), which word speaks of a thing that went on formerly, whereas now a

different state of things exists. The implication is clear that Paul at one time preached the necessity of circumcision as a means of acceptance with God. There is no evidence to prove that he included that in his preaching after he was saved. It is clear that he made a clean break with legalism as a method of salvation before he commenced his ministry. The Book of Acts records the fact that he was continually being persecuted by the Jews because of his break with the Mosaic economy. It was as a Pharisee that he had preached circumcision. The word if is from ei (eij). It is a contrary-to-fact condition. Paul denies that he is preaching circumcision. The first yet is temporal, and one could translate by the word still. The second yet denote logical opposition. The idea is, “If I am still preaching circumcision, why am I in spite of that fact being persecuted?” The persecution of Paul had its basis in the fact that the Cross was an offense to the Jew. What made the Cross an offense to the Jew? Paul tells us in the words, “If I yet preach circumcision, then is the offense of the cross ceased.” That is, if circumcision be preached as one of the prerequisites of salvation, then the Cross of Christ would cease to be an offense. Thus, the offensiveness of the Cross to the Jew lay in the teaching that believers in the Lord Jesus are free from the Mosaic law. That was the very point at issue when the Sanhedrin was trying Stephen. The charge was not that he was worshipping the Crucified One. It was that he was speaking blasphemous words against the Jewish Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13, 14) . Chrysostom commenting on this same thing said, “For even the cross which was a stumbling block to the Jews, was not so much so as the failure to require obedience to ancestral laws. For when they attacked Stephen they said not that he was worshipping the Crucified, but that he was speaking against the law and the holy place.” Saul, the Pharisee, persecuted the Church for the same reason (1:13, 14) . The Cross was offensive to the Jew therefore because it set aside the entire Mosaic economy, and because it offered salvation by grace through faith alone without the added factor of works performed by the sinner in an effort to merit the salvation offered. All of which goes to show that the Jew of the first century had an erroneous conception of the law of Moses, for that system never taught that a sinner was accepted by God on the basis of good works. The word ceased is from katergeo (katergeo) which means “to render idle or inoperative, put to an end, abolish.” The word offense is from skandalon (skandalon) which means, “a stumbling block.” Translation. And I, brethren, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I in spite of this fact being persecuted? Then the stumbling-block of the Cross has been done away with. Verse twelve. The words cut off are from apokopto (ajpokopto). The word refers to bodily mutilation. Paul expresses the wish that the Judaizers would not stop with circumcision, but would go on to emasculation. The town of Pessinus was the home of the worship of Cybele in honor of whom bodily mutilation was practiced. The priests of Cybele castrated themselves. This was a recognized form of heathen self-devotion to the god and would not be shunned in ordinary conversation. This explains the freedom with which Paul speaks of it to his Galatian converts. In Philippians 3:2, the apostle speaks of the Judaizers as the concision that is, those who mutilate themselves. Vincent expresses his conception of Paul’s words as follows: “These people are disturbing you by insisting on circumcision. I would that they would make thorough work of it in their own case, and

instead of merely amputating the foreskin, would castrate themselves as heathen priests do. Perhaps this would be even more powerful help to salvation.” He says that this is perhaps the severest expression in Paul’s epistles. The great danger in which Christianity was placed by the Judaizers, made such a severe statement necessary. The man who could beseech his converts with the meekness and gentleness of Christ, could also deal in a most severe way when the occasion for such treatment presented itself. The whole expression shows that circumcision had become for Paul a purely physical act without religious significance, and, performed for such a purpose as that for which the Judaizers used it, it became a bodily mutilation not different in character to the mutilations of the heathen religions. Thus, by glorying in the flesh, the Galatians would be returning to the bondage of their former heathenism. The word trouble is from  (ajnastatow) which means “to upset or overthrow.” It is used of driving one out of his home, of ruining a city. The word forcibly expresses the revolutionary character of the agitation with which the Judaizers were upsetting the peace and the order of the Galatian churches. The words I would are from  (ojfeilw) which when coupled with the future tense as it is here, does not express a wish, but speaks of that which ought to be the logical outcome of the present. The statement predicts in a bitter and ironic fashion what this superstitious worship of circumcision must lead to where men exalt an ordinance of the flesh above the necessity of faith in Christ, namely, to self-mutilation as was the practice of the heathen world of that time. Translation. I would that they who are upsetting you, would even have themselves mutilated. II.

You have been liberated from the law by the blood of Christ. But do not think that this freedom gives you the liberty to sin. The reason why you have been liberated from such an elementary method of controlling the conduct of an individual, is that you might be free to live your life on a new principle, namely, under the control of the Holy Spirit (5:13–26). 1. He warns them not to use their freedom from the law as a pretext for sinning, thus turning liberty into license. He exhorts them instead, to govern their lives by the motivating impulse of a Spirit-produced divine love (5:13–15) . Verse thirteen. The sentence, “For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty,” is transitional, reaching back to all that has preceded it, summing up the whole preceding argument for Christian liberty, and looking ahead to what follows in that it introduces a wholly new aspect of the matter of Christian liberty, the danger of abusing it. To those who have been accustomed to regard law as the only controlling factor that stands in the way of self-indulgence and a free rein in sin, and to those who have not been accustomed to a high standard of ethics, the teaching of Christian liberty might easily mean that there is nothing to stand in the way of the unrestrained indulgence of one’s own impulses. Paul often during his ministry, had his hearers react in this way to his teaching of grace. The questions in Romans 6:1 and 6:15, Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? and, Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? were asked by someone who did not understand grace. Paul answers these questions in Romans 6, by showing that the control of the sinful nature over the individual is broken the moment he believes, and the divine nature is imparted, and therefore he hates sin and loves the right, and has both the

desire and power to keep from sinning and to do God’s will.25 In Galatians he shows that the believer has come out from under whatever control divine law had over him, and in salvation has been placed under a superior control, that of the indwelling Holy Spirit who exercises a stricter supervision over the believer than law ever did over the unbeliever, whose restraining power is far more effective than the law’s restraining power ever was, and who gives the believer both the desire and power to refuse the wrong and choose the right, a thing which law never was able to do. The believer therefore has passed out of one control into another, from the control of a mere system of legal enactment into the control of a Person, God the Holy Spirit. When God abrogated the law at the Cross, He knew what He was doing He did not leave the world without a restraining hand. He ran this world for 2500 years before the Mosaic law was enacted. He can run it again without the Mosaic law. He does not need the help of legalistic teachers and preachers in the Church who think they are helping Him control this world by imposing law on grace. Indeed, it is the general ignorance and lack of recognition of the ministry of the Holy Spirit that is responsible for the tendency in the Church of adding law to grace. There is a recognition of the fact that the flesh is still with the Christian even though its power over him is broken, and consequently a feeling that even the child of God still needs a restraint put upon him. And this is as it should be. But the mistake that is made so often is that the Mosaic law is substituted for the restraint of the Holy Spirit, and with disastrous results. Not only does the law not restrain evil, but on the other hand it brings out evil in the life because the fallen nature rebels against it (Rom. 7:7–13), and the latter is thus incited to evil. The Holy Spirit strove with men before the Mosaic law was given. He still continues to do so. And what is more, He indwells the Church and has the cooperation of the Christian in His work of restraining evil. He will restrain evil through the Church until He goes to Heaven as He takes the Church with Him (II Thess. 2:7). He will still be restraining evil during the Great Tribulation, since He is omnipresent. No preacher ever enables the Christians to whom he ministers, to live a better Christian life by putting them under the Ten Words from Sinai and by letting them smell the brimstone of the Lake of Fire. A policeman on the street corner is a far more efficient deterrent of law-breaking than any number of city ordinances placarded for public notice. To acquaint the saint with the ministry of the indwelling Holy Spirit, is far more productive of victory over sin than the imposition of the law. The controlling ministry of the Holy Spirit is the secret of holy living. And that is Paul’s thesis here. The word occasion is from aphorme (ajforme). It is a military term speaking of a base of operations. In our Galatian passage it means “the cause, occasion, or pretext” of a thing. Paul exhorts the Galatians not to make their liberty from the law a base of operations from which to serve sin. Their liberty was not to be used as a spring-board from which to take off with the intention of sinning. The antidote against using their liberty from the law as a pretext for sinning, is found in the exhortation, “By love serve one another.” The Greek word for love here is  (ajgaph), which refers, not to human affection but to divine love, the love produced in the heart of the yielded believer by the Holy Spirit, and the love with which that believer should love his fellow-believers. This love is a love whose chief essence is self-sacrifice for the benefit of the one who is loved. Such a love means death to self, and that means defeat for sin, since the essence of sin is self-will and self-gratification. The word serve is from  (doulow) which means “to render service to, to do that which is for the advantage of someone else.” It is the word Paul used when he spoke of the slavery that is imposed by

the law upon the one who is under law. The Galatian Christians were rescued from the slavery which legalism imposed, and brought into a new servitude, that of a loving, glad, and willing service to God and man which annihilates self and subordinates all selfish desires to love. This is the secret of victory over the totally depraved nature whose power over the believer was broken when God saved him, when that nature attempts to induce the Christian to use his liberty as a pretext to sin. Translation. For, as for you, upon the basis of freedom you were called, brethren. Only do not turn your liberty into a base of operations for the flesh, but through love keep on constantly serving one another. Verse fourteen. The apostle has up to this point bent all his efforts at dissuading the Galatians from coming under bondage to law again. Now he exhorts them to love one another. If they do this he says, they will fulfill the law. But how are we to understand this? In Romans 8:4 Paul speaks of the fact that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in the Christian by the Holy Spirit. There is therefore a sense in which the word law is used other than in the legalistic sense in which Paul has used it throughout this letter so far. It is that sense in which it is conceived of as divine law consisting of ethical principals and standards that inhere in the being of God, and represent those things that go to make up right conduct on the part of man. Paul’s statement becomes intelligible and consistent when we recognize the following points; first, that believers through their new relation to the Lord Jesus, are released from the whole law as statutes, and from the obligation to obey its statutes, second, that all which God’s law as an expression of His will requires, is included in love, and third, when the believer acts on the principle of love, he is fulfilling in his actions toward God, his fellowman, and himself, all that the Mosaic law would require of hin in his position in life were that law in force. The statutes of the law, the believer will incidently obey so far as love itself requires such a course of action of him, and in no case will he obey them as statutes. Thus, the individual is released from one law consisting of a set of ethical principles to which was attached blessing for obedience and punishment in the case of disobedience, a law that gave him neither the desire nor the power to obey its commands, and is brought under another law, the law of love, which is not a set of written commandments but an ethical and spiritual dynamic, produced in the heart of the yielded believer by the Holy Spirit, who gives him both the desire and the power to live a life in which the dominating principle is love, God’s love, which exercises a stronger and stricter control over the heart and is far more efficient at putting out sin in the life than the legalizers think the thunders of Sinai ever were. The word fulfilled is from  (plerow) which means “to make full,” and when used of a task or a course of action, “to fully perform,” here, “to fully obey.” The verb is in the perfect tense, and the translation could read, “The whole law stands fully obeyed.” The idea is not that the whole law is embraced in or summed up in the act of loving one’s neighbor as one’s self, but that in doing that, one is complying with the whole law and its demands. Translation. For the whole law in one utterance stands fully obeyed: namely in this, Love your neighbor as you do yourself.

Verse fifteen. The words bite ( (daknw)), devour ( (katesqiw)), and consumed ( (ajnaliskw)), were used commonly in classical Greek in connection with wild animals in deadly struggle. The if here is from ei (eij). That condition was existing in the Galatian churches. Neither the passage itself nor the context tells us in so many words to what this condition of strife was due. But most probably it was strife over matters on which the Judaizers were unsettling them. The words constitute a strong expression of partisan hatred resulting in actions that lead to mutual injury. By consuming one another, Paul does not mean that they will lose their status as Christians, but that such altercation within the Christian churches will at length if persisted in, destroy the organic community life of the churches. Translation. But if you are biting and devouring one another, take heed lest you be consumed by one another. 2. The subjection of the saint to the personal control of the indwelling Holy Spirit, is the secret of victory over sin and of the living of a life in which divine love is the motivating impulse (5:16–26). a. The Holy Spirit will suppress the activities of the evil nature as the saint trusts Him to do so, and cooperates with Him in His work of sanctification (5:16–21) . Verse sixteen. The words “I say then,” throw emphasis upon the statement which they introduce. Paul now introduces a statement intended to counteract the erroneous impression held by the Galatians, possibly at the suggestion of the Judaizers, that without the restraining influence of the law, they would fall into sin. Instead of an attempted law obedience in their own strength motivated by the terrors of the law, Paul admonishes them to continue to govern their lives by the inward impulses of the Holy Spirit. The type of life and the method of living that life which he here speaks of, Paul had already commended to them in 5:5, in the words “For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness.” Thus, the secret of victory over sin is found, not in attempted obedience to a law that has been abrogated, but if subjection to a divine Person, the Holy Spirit, who at the moment the sinner places his faith in the Lord Jesus, takes up His permanent residence in his being for the purpose of ministering to his spiritual needs. The word walk is from peripateo (peripateo) which means literally “to walk about,” but when used in a connection like this, refers to the act of conducting one’s self, or ordering one’s manner of life or behavior. The word lust is from epithumia (ejpiqumia) which refers to a strong desire, impulse, or passion, the context indicating whether it is a good or an evil one. The word flesh refers here to the totally depraved nature of the person, the power of which is broken when the believer is saved. Therefore, the lusts of the flesh refer to the evil desires, impulses, and passions that are constantly arising from the evil nature as smoke rises from a chimney. The evil nature is not eradicated. Its power over the believer is broken, and the believer need not obey it. But it is there, constantly attempting to control the believer as it did before salvation wrought its work in his being. The word fulfill is from teleo (teleo) which here means “to bring to fulfillment in action.” The verb is future, and is preceded by two negatives. Two negatives in Greek do not, as in English, make a positive assertion. They strengthen the negation. We have here an emphatic promissory future. It does not express a command, but gives a strong assurance that if the believer depends upon the Spirit to give him both the desire and the

power to do the will of God, he will not bring to fulfillment in action, the evil impulses of the fallen nature, but will be able to resist and conquer them. We must be careful to notice that Paul puts upon the believer, the responsibility of refusing to obey the behests of the evil nature by conducting himself in the power of the Holy Spirit, and under His control. The will of the person has been liberated from the enslavement to sin which it experienced before salvation, and is free now to choose the right and refuse the wrong. The Holy Spirit has been given him as the Agent to counteract the evil nature, but He does that for the saint when that saint puts himself under His control, and by an act of his free will, says a point-blank positive NO to sin. In other words, there must be a cooperation of the saint with the Holy Spirit in His work of sanctifying the life. The Holy Spirit is not a perpetual motion machine which operates automatically in the life of the believer. He is a divine Person waiting to be depended upon for His ministry, and expecting the saint to cooperate with Him in it. Thus the choice lies with the believer as to whether he is going to yield to the Holy Spirit or obey the evil nature. The Spirit is always there to give him victory over that nature as the saint says a point-blank NO to sin and at the same time trusts the Spirit to give him victory over it.26 Translation. But I say, Through the instrumentality of the Spirit habitually order your manner of life, and you will in no wise execute the passionate desire of the flesh. Verse seventeen. The word against is from kata (kata), the root meaning of which is down, and which thus has the idea of suppression. The words “are contrary” are from antikeimai (ajntikeimai) which means “to lie opposite to,” hence “to oppose, withstand.” The words “the one to the other” are from allelos (ajllelo"), a reciprocal pronoun in Greek. Thus, there is a reciprocity on the part of the flesh and Spirit. Each reciprocates the antagonism which the one holds for the other. The translation is as follows: For the flesh constantly has a strong desire to suppress the Spirit, and the Spirit constantly has a strong desire to suppress the flesh. And these are entrenched in an attitude of mutual opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you desire to do. When the flesh presses hard upon the believer with its evil behests, the Holy Spirit is there to oppose the flesh and give the believer victory over it, in order that the believer will not obey the flesh, and thus sin. When the Holy Spirit places a course of conduct upon the heart of the believer, the flesh opposes the Spirit in an effort to prevent the believer from obeying the Spirit. The purpose of each is to prevent the believer from doing what the other moves him to do. The choice lies with the saint. He must develop the habit of keeping his eyes fixed on the Lord Jesus and his trust in the Holy Spirit. The more he says NO to sin, the easier it is to say NO, until it becomes a habit. The more he says YES to the Lord Jesus, the easier it is to say YES, until that becomes a habit. The will of the believer is absolutely free from the compelling power of the evil nature. If he obeys the latter, it is because he chooses to do so. But the Holy Spirit has given the believer a new nature, the divine nature. And the sweet influences of that nature are constantly permeating the activities of the believer’s will as the believer keeps himself yielded to the Spirit. In that way, the Spirit keeps on suppressing the activities of the evil nature and any control which it might attempt to exert over the saint. Verse eighteen. The Galatian Christians had up to the time of the Judaizers’ entry into

their churches, lived their Christian lives in dependence upon the Holy Spirit, in accordance with the teaching of the apostle Paul. The power of the sinful nature had been broken, the divine nature had been implanted, and the Spirit had entered their hearts to take up His permanent residence. The conflict spoken of in verse 17 had been going on in them, and the result had been that they were living victorious lives over sin (4:19). But now a new factor had entered, the law and with it, their dependence upon self effort to obey that law. The Galatians were still trying to live Christian lives, but they were going about it in the wrong way, with the result that they were failing. The entrance of these new factors meant that the Spirit had no opportunity to minister to their spiritual lives. The mechanical set-up of spiritual machinery which God had installed, had become ineffective by reason of the monkey-wrench of self-dependence which the Galatians had thrown into it. Paul here presents to them a third way of life, distinct from that of a person under law, and also from that of a person who, because he is not under the restraining influences of law anymore, thinks that that leaves him without restraint of any kind, and thus yields to the impulses of the evil nature. That third way is not a middle road between these two, but a highway above them. It is a highway of freedom from statutes and from the sinful nature, a highway which is a faith way, a dependence upon the Spirit. The exhortation is therefore, to be led by the Spirit. The assurance is given those who do so, that they will not be living their lives on the principle of legalism. The Spirit and the law are here contrasted, and are shown to be methods of living a Christian life that are diametrically opposed to one another. The law is not only no safeguard against the flesh, but rather provokes it to more sin. Therefore, the believer who would renounce the flesh, must renounce the law also. Thus, the flesh and the law are closely allied, whereas the flesh and the Spirit are diametrically opposed to one another. Again, the law finds nothing to condemn in the life of the person who is led by the Spirit, for that person checks every wrong desire which is brought to him by the evil nature, and so he fulfills the law. This is the blessed moral freedom of the person who is led by the Spirit. He is in such a condition of moral and spiritual life that the law has no power to censure, condemn, nor punish him. This is the true moral freedom from the law to which Paul refers (Rom. 8:1–4). Translation. But if you are being led by the Spirit, you are not under law. Verse nineteen. Paul’s purpose in enumerating the various manifestations of the evil nature, is to enforce the exhortation of verse 13 to the effect that the Galatian Christians are not to use their liberty from the law as a base of operations from which to cater to the flesh, but instead, are to rule their lives by love. Such a catalogue of sins would act as a repellent and thus cause them to turn away from sin. The word manifest is from phaneros (fanero"), which means “open, evident” so that anyone may see, hence, “well-known.” Paul appeals to their common knowledge. It is as if Paul said to the Galatians, “You have a clearly defined standard by which to decide whether you are being led by the Holy Spirit or by the flesh. Each is known by its peculiar work. or fruits.” The word works is from ergon (ejrgon). It is probably to be under stood as active rather than passive, as referring to the deeds rather than to the products of the evil nature. The word uncleanness is from akatharsia (ajkaqarsia) which is used in the New Testament of sensual impurity. Lasciviousness is from aselgeia (ajselgeia) which refers

to lawless insolence and wanton caprice. The word is not limited to impurities of the flesh. It speaks of one who acknowledge no restraints, who dares whatever his caprice and wanton petulance may suggest. It refers to one who has an insolent contempt for public opinion, and shamelessly outrages public decency. Demosthenes, making mention of the blow which Meidias had given him, characterizes it as in keeping with the well-known aselgeia (ajselgeia) of the man. The word which is from hatina (aJtina), the relative and indefinite pronouns combined into one word, the combination having a qualitative function. That is, all the works of the flesh are not here enumerated, but enough of them are, so that the reader may be able to form an estimate of their character. The word adultery is not in the best Greek texts, hence the reason for its omission in the translation. Translation. Now the works of the flesh are well-known, works of such a nature as for example, fornication, uncleanness, wantonness. Verse twenty. Idolatry is from eidololatreia (eijdololatreia), a word which denotes worship of an image or of the god represented by it. Witchcraft is from pharmakia (farmakia), which word speaks in general of the use of drugs, whether helpfully by a physician, or harmfully by someone whose purpose it is to inflict injury, hence, in the sense of poisoning. Aristotle, Polybius, and the LXX use the word of witchcraft, since witches used drugs. In Isaiah 47:9, it is a synonym of the word epaiode (ejpaiode) which means enchantment. In the LXX, the word is uniformly used in a bad sense, of the witchcraft or enchantments of the Egyptians (Ex. 7:11, 22), the Canaanites (Wisdom 12:4), and the Babylonians (Isa. 47:9, 12). It is used in the New Testament to refer to sorceries (Rev. 9:21). In the present passage, the reference is to witchcraft, sorcery, magic art, without special reference to the use of drugs. Hatred is from echthra (ejcqra), the opposite of love. It speaks of enmity and hostility in whatever form manifested. The word is plural in the Greek text. Variance is from eris (ejri") which refers to contention, strife, fighting, discord, quarreling, wrangling. Emulations is from zelos (zelo") which refers to jealousy, the unfriendly feeling excited by another’s possession of good, and to envy, the eager desire for possession created by the spectacle of another’s possessions. Wrath is from thumos (qumo") which refers here to passionate outbursts of anger or hostile feeling. Strife is from eritheia (ejriqeia) which means “self-seeking, selfishness, factiousness.” Seditions is from dichostasia (dicostasia) which speaks of dissensions and divisions. Heresies is from hairesis (aiJresi"). The verb of the same stem means “the act of taking, of choosing.” Thus the noun means “that which is chosen.” It can refer therefore to a chosen course of thought or action, hence one’s chosen opinion, and according to the context, an opinion varying from the true exposition of the Word of God, in the latter sense, heresy. It also refers to a body of men separating themselves from others and following their own tenets. The word could have incidental reference to the Judaizers and their teachings. Translation. Idolatry, witchcraft, enmities, strife, jealousy, angers, selfseekings, divisions, factions. Verse twenty one. Revellings is from komos (komo") which refers to “a nocturnal and riotous procession of half-drunken and frolicsome fellows who after supper parade

through the streets with torches and music in honor of Bacchus or some other deity, and sing and play before the houses of their male and female friends; hence used generally of feasts and drinking parties that are protracted till late at night and indulge in revelry” (Thayer). The word do is from  (prassw) which means “to do, to practice.” It is durative in action, thus speaking of the habitual practice of such things, which indicates the character of the individual. The Word of God bases its estimation of a person’s character, not upon his infrequent, out-of-the-ordinary actions, but upon his habitual ones, which latter form a true indication of character. Such people, the apostle says, shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Translation. Envyings, drunkenness, carousings, and the thing of such a nature which are like these things, respecting which things I am telling you beforehand even as I told you in advance, that those who are in the habit of practicing things of that nature, shall not inherit the kingdom of God. b.

The Holy Spirit will produce His own fruit in the life of the saint as the latter trusts Him to do that, and cooperates with Him in His work of sanctification (5:22–26) . Verses twenty two and twenty three. These verses continue the exhortation of Paul to the Galatians, not to make their liberty from the law a base of operations from which to serve the flesh, but rather to live their Christian lives motivated by divine love. As the repulsiveness of the works of the flesh would deter the Galatians from yielding to the evil nature, so the attractiveness of the fruit of the Spirit would influence them to yield themselves to the Spirit. The word but is from de (de), is slightly adversative, and introduces the subject of the fruit of the Spirit as a contrast and in antithesis to the works of the flesh. The choice of fruit here instead of works is due probably to the conception of the Christian experience as the product of a new and divine life implanted in the saint. In 5:25, Paul speaks of the fact that the Christian lives in the Spirit, that is, derives his spiritual life from the indwelling Spirit, which spiritual life is the motivating force producing the fruit of the Spirit. The word fruit is singular, which fact serves to show that all of the elements of character spoken of in these verses are a unity, making for a well-rounded and complete Christian life. The particular word for love here is  (ajgaph). It is the love the God is (I John 4:16), produced in the heart of the yielded believer by the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5; Gal. 5:22), its chief ingredient, self-sacrifice for the benefit of the one loved (John 3:16), its constituent elements listed in I Corinthians 13. Joy is from chara (cara), which is used most frequently in the New Testament of joy that has a spiritual basis, for instance, “joy of the Holy Ghost” (I Thess. 1:6). Peace here is not the peace with God which we have in justification, but the peace of God in our hearts, and can be defined as tranquility of mind based on the consciousness of a right relation to God. It is from  (eijrenh) which in its verb form means “to bind together.” Thus, Christ Jesus through the blood of His Cross binds together that which was separated by human sin, the sinner who puts his faith in the Lord Jesus, and God. Longsuffering is from makrothumia (makroqumia) which speaks of the steadfastness

of the soul under provocation. It includes the idea of forbearance and patient endurance of wrong under ill-treatment, without anger or thought of revenge. Gentleness is from chrestotes (crestote") which refers to benignity and kindness, a quality that should pervade and penetrate the whole nature, mellowing in it all that is harsh and austere. Goodness is from  (ajgaqosunh). The word refers to that quality in a man who is ruled by and aims at what is good, namely, the quality of moral worth. It is so used in Ephesians 5:9, II Thessalonians 1:11, and Romans 15:14. Faith is from pistis (pisti") which does not refer here to faith exercised by the saint, but to faithfulness and fidelity as produced in the life of the yielded Christian by the Holy Spirit. Meekness is from prautes (praute"), which was used in Greek writers to refer to the qualities of mildness, gentleness, and meekness in dealing with others. Temperance is from egkrateia (ejgkrateia) which means “possessing power, strong, having mastery or possession of, continent, self-controlled.” It is used in I Corinthians 7:9 of the control of sexual desire. In I Corinthians 9:25, it is used of the control of the athlete over his body and its desires, during the period in which he is in training for the stadium athletic games.27 The word thus refers to the mastery of one’s own desires and impulses. The word does not in itself refer to the control of any particular or specific desire or impulse. The context in which it is found will indicate what particular desire or impulse is meant, if a particular one is referred to. The words “against such there is no law,” are an understatement of Paul’s thought in the premises, and are for the purpose of rhetorical effect. This mild assertion to the effect that there is no law against such things, has the effect of an emphatic statement that these things fully meet the demands of the law. Translation. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control. Against such things there is no law. Verse twenty four. Christians crucified the evil nature with its affections and lusts, in the sense that when they put their faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour, they received the actual benefits of their identification with Christ in His death on the Cross, which benefits were only potential at the time He was crucified. The Christian’s identification with Christ in His death, resulted in the breaking of the power of the sinful nature over the life. This victory over sin which the Lord Jesus procured for us at the Cross, is made actual and operative in our lives as we yield to the Holy Spirit and trust Him for that victory. It is the Holy Spirit’s ministry that applies the salvation from the power of the sinful nature which God the Son procured at the Cross for us. Thus the Holy Spirit has a two-fold ministry in the saint, that of making actually operative in the life of the Christian, the victory over sin which the Lord Jesus procured for us at the Cross, and that of producing in the Christian’s experience, His fruit. But this He is only able to do in a full and rich measure as the saint puts himself definitely under subjection to the Spirit. This initial act of faith in the Lord Jesus which resulted in the crucifixion (putting to death) of the affections and lusts of the totally depraved nature, is followed during the life of that Christian, by the free action of his liberated will in counting himself as having died to (having been separated from the power of) the evil nature with the result that he says NO to sin and stops yielding himself and his members to sin.28 The word affections is from pathema (paqema) which means “a disposition, an

impulse, a propensity, a passion.” The word lusts is from epithumos (ejpiqumo") which means “a desire, a craving, a longing.” The former word is passive in its significance, speaking of the innate forces resident in the evil nature. The latter word is active in its nature, speaking of these forces reaching out to find expression in the gratification of these desires. Translation. And they who belong to Christ Jesus, crucified the flesh with its dispositions and cravings once for all. Verse twenty five. The word Spirit is dative of reference. The word if is the conditional particle of a fulfilled condition. That is, “in view of the fact” or “seeing that” we live with reference to the Spirit. The Galatians were living with reference to the Spirit in the sense that the new divine life resident in their beings, was supplied by the Spirit. Now, Paul says, “in view of the fact that you Galatians have a new life principle operating in your beings, then walk by the Spirit.” The word walk is from  (stoicew) which means “to walk in a straight line, to conduct one’s self (rightly).” Thus, the exhortation is to the Galatians who have divine life resident in their beings, to conduct themselves under the guidance, impulses, and energy of that life. Here we have the free will of the Christian and his responsibility to live the highest type of Christian life, and the grace of God which will make that possible. The responsibility of the saint is to desire to live a Christlike life, to depend upon the Holy Spirit for the power to live that life, and to step out on faith and live that life. This fulfilled, will bring all the infinite resources of grace to the aid of the saint, and put in operation all the activities of the Spirit in his behalf. Translation. In view of the fact that we are being sustained in (spiritual) life by the Spirit, by means of the Spirit let us go on ordering our conduct. Verse twenty six. The words, “vain glory” are from kenodoxos (kenodoxo") which means, “having a conceit of possessing a rightful claim to honor.” It speaks of that state of mind which is contrasted to the state of mind which seeks God’s glory. There were two classes of Christians in the Galatian churches. One class thought that they had attained to freedom in the absolute sense, freedom from any restraint whatsoever. These were in danger of turning liberty into license. This class took pride in their fancied liberty from all restraint. The other class was composed of the more scrupulous and timid brethren. The former class would be tempted to dare the latter group to do things which the law forbids, insinuating that they were afraid to do them. The former class thus would be guilty of vain glory, empty pride, provoking the latter group to do things which it did not think right. On the other hand, the latter group would be tempted to regard the spurious liberty of the former class as something to be desired, and thus would envy them their liberty, wishing that they felt the same way about their freedom. It is like the case of the strong Christian and the weak one who has scruples. Romans 14:1–15:3 and I Corinthians 8 deal with this subject. The strong Christian should bear the infirmities of the weak, Paul said. This would be the cure for the situation in the Galatian churches. Translation. Let us stop becoming vain-glorious, provoking one another,

envying one another. III.

The Galatian saints who have not been enticed away from grace by the wiles of the Judaizers, and who therefore are still living Spirit-controlled lives, are exhorted to restore their brethren who have been led astray, back to the life under grace (6:1– 5). Verse one. This verse is closely connected with the contents of chapter 5. In the latter chapter, two methods of determining conduct and following out that determination with the appropriate action, are presented. One is in dependence upon the Holy Spirit for the supply of both the desire and the power to do the will of God. This method results in a life in which the fruit of the Spirit is evident. The other method is that of putting one’s self under law, and by self effort attempting to obey that law. This results in a defeated life full of sin, for the law gives neither the desire nor the power to obey it, and on the other hand, uses the evil nature as a means by which to bring sin into the life, since the evil nature is aroused to active rebellion by the very presence of the law. Those Galatians who were adopting the latter method in conformity to the teaching of the Judaizers, were finding that sin was creeping into their lives. Since they were most earnestly zealous of living a life of victory over sin, and in conformity to the ethical teachings of the New Testament dispensation, the presence of sin in their lives was a source of surprise to them. They found that sin often appeared in their lives before they were conscious of its presence, and at a time when they were not at all conscious of harboring any sinful desire. They were in about the same position as Paul before he knew of the delivering power of the Holy Spirit, when he said, “I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do, I do not understand: for what I would (the good), I do not; but what I hate (the evil), that I do.… For to will is present with me: but how to perform that which is good I find not.… For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do” (Rom. 7:14, 15, 18b, 19). That is exactly the predicament which many Christians are in today, since they do not have an intelligent understanding of the ministry of the Holy Spirit, and the needful and correct adjustment of the Christian to the Spirit, and are consequently depending upon self effort to obey the ethics of the Pauline epistles, or the legal enactments of the Mosaic law. Deprived therefore of the ministry of the Holy Spirit, the lives of the Galatians were an easy prey to the Tempter of men’s souls, and he was working havoc amongst them. That brings us to a consideration of the word translated “overtaken.” The context which we have presented will help us in determining the meaning of the word as it is used here. The word is  (prolambanw). It has the following meanings: “to anticipate, to forecast, to overtake, to come upon, to take unawares.” Two of our Greek authorities, Lightfoot and Alford, think that the reference here is to the act of a Christian detecting a fellow-Christian in the commission of a sin, thus catching him unawares in it, and establishing by that means the fact of the sin. Four, Burton, Vincent, Expositors, and Meyer think that it refers to the Christian himself being overtaken by the sin before he is aware that he has done wrong. Robertson merely defines the word without interpreting it. The context rules in favor of the opinion of the four. Vincent says, “surprised by the fault itself.” Expositors says, “His surprise in the very act.” The word fault is from paraptoma (paraptoma). The word means “a fall beside, a false step, a blunder, a failure to achieve.” It is in antithesis to walk in 5:25, which latter word ( (stoicew)) means “to walk in a straight line.” The word in the papyri

means “a slip or lapse,” rather than “a wilful sin.” Paul used the word parabasis (parabasi") in 3:19 (transgressions), where he spoke of sin as a wilful stepping beyond the limits imposed by law. There he was speaking of the ministry of the Mosaic law in showing unsaved man that sin was not only the following of evil impulses, but that it was the violation of the laws of God. Here the apostle is speaking of the case of a Christian, who while desiring wholeheartedly to do the right, yet does the wrong because he is not availing himself of the God-appointed method of living the Christian life. His sin is not therefore the deliberate violation of God’s will and His Word, but a lapse into sin through a helplessness to prevent it, a helplessness however self-imposed in this case, for the Galatians had had the ministry of the Spirit taught to them by the apostle who has recorded his failure as a Christian when living under law, in Romans 7, and the way of victory which he afterwards found, in Romans 6 and 8. The spiritual among the Galatians, namely, those who were still living their lives in dependence upon the Spirit, are exhorted to restore those Galatians who had abandoned that method for the one taught by the Judaizers. The word restore is from  (katartizw). This word has the following meanings: “to repair, to restore to a former good condition, to prepare, to fit out, to equip.” It is used of reconciling factions, of setting bones, of putting a dislocated limb into place, of mending nets, of manning a fleet, of supplying an army with provisions. It is used by Paul usually in a metaphorical sense of setting a person to rights, of bringing him into line. Those Galatians who had not abandoned their dependence upon the Holy Spirit, now are asked by Paul to set those Galatians right who had been seized unawares by sin because they had deprived themselves of the ministry of the Spirit. The primary thing that they needed to be set right about was not the act of sin which they committed, but that they had wandered off the right road of grace and were stumbling in the quagmire of self-dependence and legalism. To set the sinning brother right with reference to his act of sin would be helpful, but that would still leave him on the wrong road with the result that he would go on being surprised at the entrance of sin into his life. Thus, the Galatians who had not become infatuated with legalism, were exhorted to bring back those who had, into the grace way of living the Christian life. That would repair the damage caused by the Judaizers in his life, and equip him to go on living his life in the right way. He would be restored to his former good condition. This was the apostle’s attempt to repair the damage caused by the Judaizers, using those Galatians who had not succumbed to their wiles. While the primary consideration in this restoration seems to be the necessity of getting the Christian brother back on the right road and in the proper position to live his Christian life, yet the fact that he committed a sin, would indicate the need of helping that person to judge that sin and confess it and put it away. This would restore such an one to his previous communion with the Lord Jesus, which communion had been interrupted by the entrance of sin into the life. Thus, the Christian brother would be repaired and again fitted out in his Christian life in two respects; first, he would be restored to his former method of living his life, namely, in dependence upon the Spirit, and second, he would be restored to his fellowship with the Lord Jesus. The Spirit-filled saint is exhorted to perform this ministry in a spirit of meekness, considering himself lest he also be tempted. The word consider is from skopeo (skopeo), which means “to look attentively at, to fix the attention upon a thing with an interest in it, to have an eye for a thing with a view to forming a right judgment of it, to give heed to.” The Galatian Christian who has maintained his liberty from the law, is thus cautioned to

keep a sharp watch upon himself lest he also forsake that liberty for the allurements of the Judaizers, and fall into sin. Translation. Brethren, if however, a man be overtaken (by sin) in a certain false step, as for you who are spiritual ones, be restoring such an one in a spirit of meekness, taking heed to yourself, lest you also be tempted. Verse two. The word burdens has the following meaning: either “a burden that is desirable” as in II Corinthians 4:17 (weight), or “one which is hard to bear” (Acts 15:28; Rev. 2:24). The context indicates the specific meaning. The burdens in this context refer to the responsibility each saint should feel for the spiritual welfare of his fellow-saints, especially when they have sinned. In this particular instance, the Spirit-dominated saints should feel the responsibility of rescuing their brethren who have put themselves under legalism, from an abject slavery to law, and of transferring their dependence again upon the Spirit; and in the case of the sin which has taken him by surprise, of helping the sinning brother to go to the Lord Jesus with a confession of that sin. The word bear is from  (bastazw) which means “to bear what is burdensome.” By bearing another’s burdens, Paul does not mean simply the enduring of these burdens in an enforced, reluctant manner as in 5:10 where the same word is used, but the assuming of those burdens in a willing, helpful, sympathetic way, despite the fact that the bearing of them may involve unpleasantness and heartache. The word fulfil is from  (plerow) which here means “to satisfy the requirements of.” It is found in the papyri where it is used with reference to the fulfilling of the requirements of a contract. The definite article appears before the word Christ in the Greek text. The use of the term “the Christ” gives the law here an official character. It is the law which Christ gave. Paul thought of that law as expressed in one word, love, the divine love produced if the heart of the yielded believer by the Holy Spirit, which exercises a restraint over the individual that takes the place of the restraint which the Mosaic law had imposed. Translation. One another’s burdens be ye constantly bearing, and thus you will fully satisfy the requirements of the law of the Christ. Verse three. If one has the conceited idea that he is morally and spiritually superior to what he actually is, this tends to make him unwilling to take the burden of responsibility for the restoration of a sinning fellow-saint. A Christian of that character, so far from fulfilling the law of the Christ, is deceiving himself as to his true status in the Christian experience. Translation. For if anyone thinks himself to be something when he is nothing, he is deceiving himself. Verse four. Here is the case of the self-deceived man of the previous verse, who boasts of his own superiority when he compares himself with the Christian brother who has fallen into sin. He has a ground for boasting only in respect to his much-vaunted superiority to his inferior brother. But the man who puts himself to the test without comparing himself

with others, bases his appraisal of himself on an absolute rather than a relative foundation, upon himself alone. Prove is from  (dokimazw) which means “to put to the test for the purpose of approving.” The exhortation is therefore to Christians not to form an estimate of themselves by comparing themselves with others, but to put themselves to the test to find out what there is in their characters and in their lives which would merit approval. The word rejoicing is kauchema (kaucema) which means “that of which one glories or can glory, matter or ground of glorying.” The word is not connected with the word glory (doxa (doxa)) which is used of God’s glory. It means glory in the sense of exultation, self-congratulation. It does not however have the idea of an excessive or unjustified estimate of one’s self that the English word boasting has. Translation. But his own work let each one put to the test and thus approve, and then with respect to himself alone will he have a ground for glorying, and not with respect to the other one (with whom he had compared himself). Verse five. The word burden in 6:2 is baros (baro"), and in this verse, phortion (fortion). While these words have their distinctive meaning in the secular usage of the early centuries, and while synonyms in juxtaposition should usually be carefully distinguished, yet we cannot draw a fine distinction between these two words in this passage. There is no use burdening the English reader with the various meanings of the two words, since they would have no bearing upon our study. In 6:2 the apostle exhorts the Galatian saints to bear the burdens of their fellow saints, namely, to assume the responsibility of giving that saint spiritual aid in case he has allowed sin to come into his experience. Here he exhorts the saints to bear their own burdens. This is doubtless an intentional paradoxical antithesis on the part of the apostle. It is the Christian who knows that he has a burden of his own, namely, a susceptibility to certain sins, and who has fallen himself, who is willing to bear his neighbor’s burden. Again, when each man’s selfexamination reveals infirmities of his own, even though they may not be the same as those of his neighbors, he will not claim moral and spiritual superiority to others. Furthermore, each saint should bear his own burden in the sense that he must recognize his personal responsibilities towards God and man. He is responsible for the kind of life he lives. Again, when he sees his own failings, he will have no inclination to compare himself with others. The word own is from idios (ijdio"), which means “pertaining to one’s self, one’s own as compared to that which is another’s.” It speaks of personal, private, unique possession. Translation. For each shall bear his own private burden. IV. The Galatian saints who have deserted grace for law, are exhorted to put themselves under the ministry of the teachers who led them into grace, and are warned that if they do not, they will reap a harvest of corruption (6:6–10). Verse six. The word taught is from katecheo (kateceo) which refers to the act of giving instruction, usually orally. It refers to oral teaching here, because that was the only form of instruction then in existence in the churches. The person referred to has received oral instruction in the Word of God. The word communicate means “to share, to be a partner in a thing with a person,” here “to hold fellowship with another person.” That in

which the person holds fellowship with another is designated by the context. The one who is taught should hold fellowship with his teachers in all good things. What the good things are is defined by the context. In verses 1–4, Paul exhorts the Spirit-filled saints in the Galatian churches to take upon themselves the responsibility of restoring to the right method of living a Christian life, those who had put themselves under law, and also that of restoring to fellowship with the Lord Jesus, these saints who had sin in their lives because of their lapse from sanctifying grace. In neither of these evil things, namely, the act of deserting grace for law, and that of committing an act of sin, could the Spirit-filled Galatians hold fellowship with those who had followed the Judaizers. Nor could these spiritual Galatians hold fellowship with the Judaizers, for the latter were not teaching the Word of God nor were they ministering good things to them. Therefore, the good things of verse 6 refer to spiritual things, since they are compared to the evil things just spoken of. Now, the Judaizers had precipitated a situation in the Galatian churches in which those who followed their teaching broke fellowship with the true teachers of the Word. Paul is exhorting these to resume their fellowship with their former teachers and share with them in the blessing of grace which their teachers were enjoying. The exhortation is that the disciple should make common cause with the teacher in everything that is morally good and which promotes salvation. This breach that had interposed itself between some of the Galatians and their teachers who had taught them grace (Paul included), could not but interfere with their moral and spiritual life. The Galatians’ growth in grace was largely dependent upon their attending the means of grace afforded by the presence and ministry of the teachers in their midst who had taught them grace. Furthermore, the work of the churches was hindered by this disruption. The disciple is not to leave the sphere of the morally good as Paul taught it, to the teacher alone, and go off to the Judaizers. He is to work in common with his teachers and so promote the spiritual life of the churches. The interpretation that makes the one taught assume the responsibility for the financial welfare of his teacher is not possible in this instance of the use of the word  (koinonew). This is the word Paul uses in Philippians 4:15, where he speaks of the obligation of the one taught to make the financial needs of his teacher his own, thus sharing with his teacher his earthly goods inasmuch as the teacher has shared with him his heavenly blessings. But Paul does not use it so here, and for the following reasons: First, the context which speaks both of the evil (6:1–5) and the morally good (6:9, 10), is against the interpretation that financial support is in the apostle’s mind here. Second, the context defines the good things as being of a spiritual, not a material nature. Third, it would be the height of folly for Paul to inject sucha delicate subject as the pocket book of the saint (delicate in some circles) into the already discordant atmosphere of the Galatian churches, especially when the whole trouble revolved around heretical teaching and not around the finances of the churches. Fourth, if Paul were exhorting the saints to contribute financially to the support of their former teachers, the Judaizers would be quick to say that the apostle was attempting to win the Galatian saints back to grace for financial reasons, since he himself was one of their former teachers. One of the favorite methods of attack adopted by the enemies of Paul was to charge him with commercializing his ministry. He would not lay himself open to this charge by such an unwise act as in the present circumstances exhorting the Galatians to resume their financial responsibility with reference to the material needs of their former teachers.

Translation. Moreover, let the one who is being taught the Word, constantly be holding fellowship with the one who in teaching in all good things. Verse seven. In verse 6, the apostle exhorts the Galatians to continue to hold fellowship with their teachers who taught them grace, the implication being that they were not availing themselves of their ministry because they were going over to the Judaizers and their teachings. In this verse, Paul tells the Galatians that they must not think that it is not a matter of importance whether their fellowship be with their former teachers who taught them the truth, or with the Judaizers who were teaching them error. He says to them, “Stop deceiving yourselves, God is not mocked.” The construction is present imperative in a prohibition, which forbids the continuance of an action already going on. The Galatians were saying to themselves already, “It is not important which teachers we listen to, Paul and his associates, or the teachers of the law.” Thus, they were already deceiving themselves, and leading themselves astray. The words is mocked come from  (mukterizw). The word means “to turn up the nose, to ridicule, to ignore, to sneer.” The word when used rhetorically, referred to the betrayal of covert ill-will and contempt by cynical gestures in spite of fair words. It implies an outward avowal of respect neutralized by an indirect expression of contempt. The thought which Paul wishes to press home to the Galatians is that it is vain to think that one can outwit God by reaping a harvest different from that which a person has sown. The figure of sowing and reaping used for conduct and its results is a frequent one. In the Greek classics we have, “For he that is furnished the seed, is responsible for what grows.” Paul therefore warns the Galatians against being led astray by the Judaizers, and reminds them that they cannot outwit God in doing so, for it will lead to disaster in their lives and chastening from the hand of God. Translation. Stop leading yourselves astray. God is not being outwitted and evaded. For whatever a man is in the habit of sowing, this also will he reap. Verse eight. The word to in the expressions, “to the flesh” and “to the Spirit,” is from eis (eij"), which latter is not used here in its local use, for instance where seed is dropped into the ground, but in the sense of “with a view to.” Sowing with a view to the evil nature refers to the act of a person choosing those courses of conduct that will gratify the cravings of the totally depraved nature. In this context, these words refer to the Galatians who in following the teachings of the Judaizers, catered to the desires of the evil nature. All false systems of religion are so adjusted that they appeal to the fallen nature of man, satisfying his religious instinct for worship, while at the same time allowing him to go on in his sin. The teachings of the Judaizers catered to the fallen natures of the Galatians in that they made no demand for the necessity of regeneration nor for faith in an atoning sacrifice that paid for sin. In addition to that, their teachings stressed a salvation-by-works religion, which glorifies man, not God, and which allows him to go on in his sin while seeking to buy the favor of God by his so-called good works. This could only lead, Paul says, to corruption in their lives. From our study of the contents of chapter 5 we have seen that such corruption was already starting in the lives of the Galatians.

The one who sows with a view to the Spirit, that is, the one who chooses his courses of conduct with a view to fulfilling the wishes of the Holy Spirit, is the Christian who reaps the blessings of the eternal life which God has given him. Translation. Because the one who sows with a view to his own flesh, from his flesh as a source shall reap corruption. But the one who sows with a view to the Spirit, from the Spirit as a source shall reap life eternal. Verse nine. In verse 8, Paul exhorts the Galatians to govern their lives with a view to the Spirit’s control over them. Now, he exhorts them not to become weary in that course of action. The words “be weary,” are from egkakeo (ejgkakeo) which was used of husbandmen who are tempted to slacken their exertions by reason of the weariness caused by prolonged effort. The word faint is from ekluo (ejkluo) which was used of reapers overcome by heat and toil. The word means “to relax effort, to become exhausted physically.” The incentive to keep on working was, that at the right time they would gather the harvest. Translation. Let us not slacken our exertions by reason of the weariness that comes with prolonged effort in habitually doing that which is good. For in a season which in its character is appropriate, we shall reap if we do not become enfeebled through exhaustion, and faint. Verse ten. The word opportunity is from kairos (kairo"), the same word being used in verse 9 where it is translated season. Here it means opportunity in the sense of a seasonable time, an appropriate time to do something. The word have is from echo (ejco), a present subjunctive, the apparatus giving a present indicative as a rejected reading. It is hortatory in its usage, namely, “let us be having” a seasonable time. The exhortation is not merely to do good to others when the opportunity presents itself, but to look for opportunities to do good to others. The word do is from ergazomai (ejrgazomai), which word emphasizes the process of an action, carrying with this the ideas of continuity and repetition. It means “to labor, to be active, to perform,” with the idea of continued exertion being included. The word good is preceded by the article. It is not merely what may be good in character as judged by anybody’s standards, but the good spoken of in the context, good which is the product of the work of the Holy Spirit through the saint. The word unto is from pros (pro") which combines the sense of direction with that of active relation to. None of us lives to himself as an isolated unit among his fellowmen. We are bound together in a racial group in which we have certain obligations to them. The word household acquired in a connection like the one in this verse, the general sense of pertaining or belonging. The definite article precedes the word faith. The expression refers to those who belong to the Faith, the Christian Faith. Translation. So then, in like manner, let us be having opportunity, let us be working that which is good to all, but especially to those of the household of the Faith. V.

Paul’s final warning against the Judaizers and his closing words. (6:11–18).

Verse eleven. Now comes a most pathetic appeal from the great apostle. He says, Ye see with what large letters I wrote to you with my own hand. Paul was in the habit of dictating his epistles to an amanuensis, writing the concluding words himself, and signing his name. Tertius, for instance, was the secretary who wrote the letter to the Romans as Paul dictated it to him (Rom. 16:22). These two things, the concluding words in his own handwriting and his signature, constituted the evidence that he was the author of the letter (II Thess. 3:17; I Cor. 16:21; Col. 4:18). There had been a case of forgery where someone had written a letter to the Thessalonian church to the effect that the Great Tribulation was upon them, and had signed Paul’s name (II Thess. 2:1, 2). A word about the large letters in which Paul wrote. There were two styles of Greek writing, the literary uncial which consisted of inch-high letters formed singly and with no connection with other letters, and the cursive, using smaller letters in a running hand, joined together. According to Sir Frederic Kenyon, there were four classes of workmanship in the style of the manuscripts of the first century. First, there was the work of a thoroughly good professional scribe. Second, there was the work of a good ordinary professional hand. Third, there was the work of an educated man not a professional scribe, writing a careful copy of a literary hand. Fourth, there was the running hand of common every day writing. Paul dictated his epistles to Tertius, Sosthenes, Timothy, and Silvanus. These were educated men, but not professional scribes. Therefore their writing would be that of the educated amateur. It is the opinion of Kenyon that Paul’s epistles were written in the cursive, that is, in small letters, joined together in a running hand. That means that if Kenyon is right, the original manuscripts of the Pauline epistles were in the cursive style of writing. He states it as his opinion also that if Paul dictated the Galatian letter, the dictated portion would be in the small cursive letters, and the part he wrote in his own handwriting, in uncial or inch-high letters. Scholars are in disagreement regarding the question as to whether Paul wrote the entire epistle with his own hand in inch high letters, or only the conclusion. The writer is frank to say that he has rejected the opinion of six of the seven authorities which he has studied throughout this epistle, and has accepted that of Alford to the effect that Paul wrote the entire letter in uncial Greek letters rather than only the conclusion. Alford’s opinion is based upon solid ground, Greek grammar. The aorist tense in the indicative mode in Greek refers to a past action. It was a courtesy extended by the writer to the reader in closing his letter, to look upon it as the reader would, as a past event. and he used the epistolary aorist for this purpose. The writing of the letter was a present fact to the writer before he closed the letter. Nevertheless he looked upon it while using this aorist verb in the closing portion of the letter as a past event, thus placing himself at the perspective of the reader when the latter would receive it. Zahn in his Introduction to the New Testament also holds the view of Alford that Paul wrote the entire letter with his own hand. Zahn makes the point that the epistolary aorist is never used, at least in the New Testament, to refer to something which the writer is about to write. He says that Paul is looking back upon the letter which is just being closed. Alford makes a sharp point when he calls attention to II Thessalonians 3:17 where Paul writes, “The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every epistle, so I write.” The words “I write,” are in the present tense. They refer here clearly to the concluding words of the letter only. Alford asks the question to the effect that if Paul had written only the concluding portion of Galatians, would he not have used the present tense as in the Thessalonian letter? He says that he does not see how it is possible to avoid the inference that these words in Galatians

6:11 apply to the whole epistle. The next question is regarding the reason why Paul wrote in large inch-high letters. The writer again desires the reader to know that in this question he has rejected the opinion of six of the authorities he has consulted and has followed Expositor’s Greek Testament. Paul had contracted an oriental eye disease called ophthalmia, which not only gave him a repulsive appearance, but rendered him almost totally blind. It was therefore necessary for him to write in letters large enough so that with his darkened vision he could see what he was doing. But why did Paul write the entire letter himself? He could have dictated it to a secretary. The answer is found in the fact that he wanted to have as personal a touch with the Galatians as possible under the circumstances. In 4:20 he had expressed the wish that he were personally present with them. The character of the letter and the circumstances in the Galatian churches made it inadvisable to send a dictated letter. Paul wished to give his letter the highest possible personal character. We cannot know with what pain and difficulty, with his own hand, and in the large letters his impaired vision compelled him to use, Paul wrote this letter. And now he appeals to the tender hearts of the Galatians. They would remember the afflicted apostle, and how graciously they had received him. He appeals to their tender emotions, not to forsake him, their suffering, self-sacrificing teacher. It is a most pathetic note. Translation. Ye see with what large letters I wrote to you with my own hand. Verse twelve. The Judaizers were attempting to escape persecution from their Jewish brethren who had rejected Jesus as Messiah and as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, those who had held aloof from the visible Christian church and were maintaining the Temple ritual. They had identified themselves with the visible church, and therefore were looked upon by their Jewish brethren outside of the church as having joined an organization that taught grace as against law. They however did not believe in grace, but instead, in works as a means of salvation. Now, to keep from being persecuted by the rest of Israel on the charge that they had embraced salvation through faith in the Cross of Christ, they were attempting to foist circumcision and finally the entire Mosaic economy upon the Gentiles in the Church, for the Cross of the Lord Jesus had put an end to the Mosaic law, and anyone who accepted the law, rejected the Cross. The Judaizers wished to remain in good standing with the Jewish community. Of course, back of the activities of the Judaizers was that sinister being, Satan, arch-enemy of God and the Church, seeking to destroy the latter. The words the cross are used by Paul here to refer to the whole doctrine of salvation through the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus viewed as the substitutionary atonement for sin. The words “to make a fair show,” are from  (eujprosopew) which is made up of the words eu (euj) meaning well, and prosopon (prosopon), face, thus “to present a good looking face.” This is its literal meaning. The lexicon definition is, “to please, to make a fair show.” The Judaizers desired to appear pleasing to their Jewish brethren who still clung to the Temple sacrifices and refused to have anything to do with the visible Christian church, pleasing in a doctrinal way. To do this, they would have to show them that they still held to the Mosaic economy. The easiest way to do this was to attempt to put the Gentiles in the Church under the law. Circumcision was the point at issue at the time. The Galatians had already succumbed to the Jewish feasts. More of the law would be

added as opportunity presented itself. Translation. As many as desire to make a good outward appearance in the sphere of the flesh, these are trying to compel you to receive circumcision, their only motive being that they might not be persecuted by reason of the cross of Christ. Verse thirteen. The Judaizers not only attempted to impose circumcision on the Gentiles in order to placate their Jewish brethren outside of the Church and win their confidence and regard in spite of the fact that they were identified with a body of people who taught grace, but also to cover up their own laxity in fulfilling all the requirements of the Mosaic law. In their act of forcing, if possible, circumcision upon the Gentiles, they would cover themselves with glory in the eyes of their Jewish brethren, and demonstrate to them how zealous they were of the law after all. Translation. For not even those who are circumcised, themselves are keeping the law, but they desire you to be circumcised in order that in your flesh they may glory. Verse fourteen. In contrast to the Judaizers who gloried in human attainment and self effort as a means of salvation, Paul boasted in the Cross of Christ. The world of which Paul speaks here is the world Paul knew before he was saved, the world of Philippians 3:4–6, his Israelitish ancestry, his Pharisaic traditions, his zeal for the law, in short, the world in which he had lived. To all this now he was dead. He had been separated from it by the Cross of the Lord Jesus. It had no more appeal to him nor influence upon him. Translation. For, as for me, far be it from me to be glorying, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom to me the world stands crucified, and I to the world. Verse fifteen. In this verse, Paul gives his reason for glorying in the Cross of Christ. It is because, while circumcision is of no avail to the Jew, nor the lack of circumcision of any avail to the Gentile, yet the Cross has power to make of believing Jew and Gentile a new creation which results in a radical transformation of character. Translation. For29 neither circumcision is anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. Verse sixteen. The word walk is from  (stoicew) which means “to direct one’s life, to order one’s conduct.” Rule is from kanon (kanon) which here means “a principle.” The principle here is the Cross and all that goes with it in the New Testament economy, including of course the ministry of the Holy Spirit which is so much in evidence in this last section of Galatians. Those therefore, who order their lives by the Holy Spirit’s control, constitute the true Israel of God, not the Jews who have the name of Israel but are only children of Abraham after the flesh. The Greek word for “and” also has the meaning of “even” in some contexts. We translate here, “even the Israel of God” as identifying those who “walk according to this rule.”

Translation. “And as many as by this rule are ordering their conduct, peace be upon them, and mercy, even upon the Israel of God”. Verses seventeen and eighteen. “As for the rest” is from tou loipou (tou loipou), a genitive of time, “henceforth.” The word marks is from stigma (stigma). The word had various uses. Slaves in the Phrygian temples with which the Galatians were familiar, were attached for life to the service of the temple, and were branded with the name of the deity. The name was the stigma (stigma) or mark. Slaves and soldiers bore branded upon their bodies the names of their masters and commanding generals. The marks (stigma (stigma)) of the Lord Jesus were the scars that were caused by the scourgings, the Roman rods, and the stoning at Lystra which Paul had received. The word bear is from  (bastazw) which means “to bear what is burdensome.” Paul’s body, marked by the assaults made upon his person, must often have been wracked with pain. Paul was a man old before his time, partly by reason of the sufferings he endured at the hands of his enemies, the Judaizers. He asks that such a situation as obtained in the Galatian churches be not repeated. The sufferings which he endured for the sake of the Lord Jesus and the gospel of grace, should deter the Galatians from adding more sufferings to the already full complement of suffering which the apostle had already borne, by again precipitating a situation like the present one which severely taxed the energies of the aged apostle as he sought to save his beloved Galatians, and the Christian Church for that matter, from a spiritual catastrophe, the evil effects of which would work havoc for the cause of Christ. Translation. Henceforth, let no man give me trouble, for I bear branded the marks of the Lord Jesus in my body. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brethren. Amen.

EPHESIANS In the Greek New Testament

Dedicated To Rev. and Mrs. Harold E. Garner, in glad recognition of their splendid work for the advancement of Christian Education in The Moody Bible Institute and in the Church at large. Their enthusiasm for their task and their gracious Christian spirit are a blessing to all of us.

INTRODUCTION This book is written for the student of the New Testament who does not have access to the Greek text, but who would like to work beneath the English translation in the untranslatable richness and added accuracy which the original autographs afford. This

book, with its twelve predecessors, is an attempt to put the Greek text on a level where the student of the English Bible can successfully work. This is done by the use of Greek word studies, interpretive material, and an expanded translation. The word studies bring out a far richer, more fully developed and clearer meaning of the Greek word than any single English word could do. In the interpretive material, the author gives the student the benefit of the rich studies of the great Greek masters, plus his own comments at times. In the expanded translation, a translation using more English words than the standard versions do, the author gives the English reader what the Greek reader of the first century read. In the process of translating, the standard versions leave much rich material behind in the Greek text, since these are held down to a minimum of words. This material, the Bible student should know if he expects to do the best kind of work. This book is not armchair reading. Its place is next to the student’s open Bible on his study desk. With its aid, the student can work slowly through the Ephesian and Colossian letters, ant obtain a far clearer and richer understanding of their contents than he could from a study of any number of translations. After he has worked through these epistles, he can use this book as a reference work. The sources consulted in the writing of this book are as follows: The Expositor’s Greek Testament, S. D. F. Salmond writing on Ephesians, A. S. Peake writing on Colossians; Word Studies in the New Testament, by Marvin R. Vincent; Alford’s Greek Testament, by Henry Alford; Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, by J. B. Lightfoot; Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek, by Hermann Cremer; Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, by J. H. Moulton and George Milligan; GreekEnglish Lexicon of the New Testament, by J H. Thayer; Greek-English Lexicon (classical), by Liddell and Scott; Synonyms of the New Testament, by R. C. Trench. The Greek text used is that of Nestle. The translation quoted is the Authorized Version, since most Christians still use that translation. The expanded translation offered must not be used as a substitute for but as a companion translation to the standard version the student is using. K. S. W.

PREFACE Ephesians and Colossians are two of the so-called Prison Epistles, written by Paul during his first Roman imprisonment, the date, about a.d. 64. They were sent by the same messenger (Tychicus) who also carried the letter to Philemon. They are companion letters, not only because written at the same time, but primarily because Ephesians speaks of the Body of Christ of which He is the Head, and Colossians presents Him as the Head of the Body. Colossians was written to combat the Colossian heresy, a discussion of which the reader will find in the introduction to that book. In Colossians we find the Person of the Lord Jesus more clearly presented than in any other of Paul’s letters. The very necessity of defining His Person in view of the heresies about Him, made this imperative. As to the Ephesian letter, Expositors has this to say: “In the judgment of many who are well entitled to deliver an opinion, it is the grandest of all the Pauline letters. There is a peculiar and sustained loftiness in its teaching which has deeply impressed the greatest

minds and has earned for it the title of the ‘Epistle of the Ascension.’ It tarries largely among ‘the heavenlies.’… It is characterized by a dignity and a serenity which is entirely in harmony with the elevation of its thoughts. It has little to do with the questions of ceremonialism or with the personal vindications which fill so large a space in others of the great epistles of St. Paul. The polemical element is conspicuous by its absence. There is scarcely even an echo of the great controversies which ring so loudly in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians.” While the Colossian letter was addressed to the local church at that place, the Ephesian epistle appears to have been a circular letter sent from church to church. The reader will find a discussion of this latter subject in the exegetical material of Ephesians 1:1. K. S. W.

CHAPTER ONE (1:1, 2) The name “Paul” is from the Latin, meaning “small.” Hebrew parents often gave their sons a Gentile name in addition to a Jewish one. From the meaning of this name and from I Corinthians 10:10, “His bodily presence is weak,” it is thought that Paul was of diminutive stature. His Hebrew name was Saul, which word meant “to ask or pray.” He designates himself an apostle; the Greek word is apostolos (ajpostolo"), from the verb  (ajpostellw), “to send one off on a commission to do something as one’s representative.” The word was used in an official capacity to refer to an ambassador or envoy. Paul considered himself an official envoy or ambassador of Christ Jesus. The Greek text has these names in the above order. “Christ” is the transliteration of christos (cristo") which means “anointed,” and this Greek word is the translation of the Hebrew word which we take over into English in the word “Messiah,” and which itself means “The Anointed One.” However, in the Church Epistles, the word does not refer to our Lord in His official capacity of the Messiah of the Jewish nation, but as The Anointed of God, the Person chosen from the Godhead to be the anointed Prophet Priest, and King to accomplish the purposes of God in the plan of salvation. The name “Jesus” is the transliteration of the Hebrew word which comes over into English in the name “Jehoshua.” It is  (ÆIhsou") in the Greek language. The Hebrew word means “Jehovah saves.” In it we find the deity, humanity and vicarious atonement of the Lord Jesus. God incarnate died for sinners to satisfy the just demands of His law which sinners violated. Paul designates himself an ambassador of Christ Jesus. The grammatical form is genitive of description. The great apostle looked upon himself as honored in being chosen as the representative of Christ Jesus. The allusion to his apostleship was for the purpose of giving this letter an official character. He became an apostle, he says, through the will of God. These words emphasize the fact that his apostleship was by divine appointment. Paul addresses his letter “to the saints.” The word is hagios (aJgio"). It is one of the great doctrinal words in this epistle. The word demands a careful and full treatment. Paul took it right out of the terminology of the pagan Greek religions. He had to. There were no other terms which he could use so long as he was confined to the Greek language. There it meant “devoted to the gods.” For instance, a Greek worshipper would bring an offering to the god as a gift. He devoted it to that god. Or, the Greeks would build a

magnificent temple and devote it to a certain god. The building was thereby set apart from any secular use, and separated to a religious one. It was consecrated to the worship of that particular Greek god. The building was therefore holy, holy, not in our sense of the term, pure, for the Greek temples were filled with immoral practices that were part of their religious worship (the temple at Corinth housing 3000 “sacred” harlots), but holy in the sense of being non-secular, and therefore religious in nature, set apart for the worship of the Greek divinities. The term was also used of persons who were devoted to the service of a god, separated to the service of the god, thus hagios (aJgio"), consecrated, nonsecular in character, but on the other hand, distinctively religious in nature and occupation. This is the genius of the Greek word translated “saint.” The verbal forms  (aJgizw) and  (aJgiazw) mean “to hallow, make sacred,” especially by burning a sacrifice. The foregoing estimate of hagios (aJgio") is taken from Greek-English Lexicon by Liddell and Scott. We turn now to the Biblico-Theological Lexicon of Herman Cremer which specializes in the great doctrinal and theological words of the Greek New Testament. Cremer says that hagios (aJgio") “is the rarest of five synonyms which the Greeks had to express the idea of holiness, so far at least as they knew such an idea. In biblical Greek on the other hand, of the Old as well as the New Testament, it is the only word by which the biblical conception of holiness is expressed, that conception which pervade the Bible throughout, which molds the whole divine revelation, and in which, we may say with perfect truth, are centered the fundamental and leading principles and aims of that revelation. What constitutes the essence of holiness in the biblical sense is not primarily contained in any of the above named synonyms (hieros, hosios, semnos, hagios (iJero", oJsio", semno", aJgio")); the conception is of purely biblical growth, and whatever the Greeks surmised and thought concerning the holiness of Divinity in any sense remotely similar to that in which Holy Scripture speaks of it, they had not one distinct word for it, least of all did they express it in any of the terms in question.… As Greek of itself did not possess the right word for it, the only term presenting itself as in any degree appropriate—hagios (aJgio")—had to be filled and coined afresh with a new meaning; and thus hagios (aJgio") is one of the words wherein the radical influence, the transforming and newly fashioning power of revealed religion is most clearly seen. Of all the ideas which, within the world subjected to the influence of Christianity or in the modern languages, are bound up in the word holy, none are to be found in the ancient tongues, Greek or Latin, in the terms above named, save those of ‘the sublime,’ ‘the consecrated,’ ‘the venerable.’ The main element—the moral—is utterly wanting. Hence it is not merely a topic of linguistic interest; it is a significant moral phenomenon which here presents itself to our inquiry.” The word hagios (aJgio") when applied to God signifies “His opposition to sin manifesting itself in atonement and redemption or in judgment. Or as holiness, so far as it is embodied in law, must be the highest moral perfection, we may say.… holiness is the perfect purity of God, which in and for itself excludes all fellowship with the world, and can only establish a relationship of free electing love, whereby it asserts itself in the sanctification of God’s people, their cleansing and redemption” (Cremer). The words, “saint, sanctify, sanctification, hallow, holy, holiness” in the New Testament are all translations of this same Greek root hagi (aJgi). The verb means “to set apart for God,” and refers to the act of the Holy Spirit setting apart for God the sinner who has been elected to salvation, taking him out of the first Adam and placing him in the Last Adam. This is positional sanctification, an act performed once for all the moment the

sinner places his faith in the Lord Jesus as his Saviour. This is followed by progressive sanctification, a process that goes on all through the earthly life of the Christian and continues throughout eternity, in which that person is being gradually conformed to the image of the Lord Jesus. That person is called a hagios (aJgio"), a set apart for God person, a consecrated person. He is, as such, looked upon as a non-secular person, a distinctively religious person, in that he has been set apart for God, His worship and service. This he is positionally. It is easy to see that this set apart position of separateness demands a separation of life in his experience, separation from the age system of evil, separation in his own sphere of life from everything that would interfere in the least from the worship and service which is due to the God to whom he is set apart. This is a saint in the Bible sense of the term. Paul is writing to the saints which are in Ephesus. The words “in Ephesus” are within brackets in the Nestle and the Westcott and Hort texts. Tradition has it that this letter was sent to the local church in that city. But certain considerations have led recent expositors to believe that it was not sent to that church alone, but that it was an encyclical letter, sent to all the churches in Asia Minor. The oldest and best manuscripts, Aleph and B, do not contain the words “in Ephesus.” Origen did not have them in his copy. Marcion called it the Epistle to the Laodiceans. Paul in Colossians 4:16 alludes to the letter from Laodicea. Marcion was familiar with the copy in Laodicea. Basil in the fourth century, mentions some manuscripts with no name in the address. Paul was intimately acquainted with the members of the Ephesian church, but he makes no personal reference to any of them in the letter, nor does he send any word of greeting to any of them, as is his habit in other letters. From the above it has been concluded that this letter was a general epistle to be circulated among the churches of the Roman province of Asia and it is supposed that the name of the church was inserted it the space provided in each instance. These saints are described as “the faithful in Christ Jesus.” The Greek word is pistos (pisto"), another important word which must be considered. It is the word used when the New Testament writers speak of a sinner exercising faith in the Lord Jesus. Moulton and Milligan in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, give some illustrations of its use in the secular documents of that time, which throw a flood of light upon the way the average person used the word in ordinary conversation. The Bible writers used the terminology of the average person of that time in the writing of the New Testament manuscripts. In the sentence “whom no one would trust, even if they were willing to work,” we see its meaning of confidence in the person’s character and motives. The sentence, “I have trusted no one to take it to her,” speaks of a person’s lack of confidence in the ability of another to perform a certain task. From the standpoint of the one trusted, we have, “I am no longer trusted, unless I behave fairly.” Paul uses the word in I Thessalonians 2:4; Galatians 2:7; I Corinthians 9:17; and I Timothy 1:11, “I was put in trust with the gospel, the gospel … was committed unto me, the gospel … which was committed to my trust.” This is the verb usage. When we come to the noun, we have the meaning of “faith and confidence, fidelity and faithfulness.” The adjective gives us “faithful and trustworthy.” Paul uses the word in his directions to the Philippian jailer, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house” (Acts 16:31). He exhorts him to consider the Lord Jesus worthy of trust as to His character and motives. He exhorts him to place his confidence in His ability to do just what He says He will do. He exhorts him to entrust the salvation of his soul into

the hands of the Lord Jesus. He exhorts him to commit the work of saving his soul to the care of the Lord. That means a definite taking of one’s self out of one’s own keeping and entrusting one’s self into the keeping of the Lord Jesus. That is what is meant by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ. The words, “the faithful,” refer in this context not to the fact that the saints at Ephesus were faithful in the sense of being true to the Lord Jesus in their lives, but to the fact that they were those who had put their trust in Him. They were believers as contrasted to unbelievers. The word “and” (kai (kai)) should here be translated “even.” Paul is writing to the saints. He identifies these saints as believing ones in Christ Jesus. There were two kinds of saints (hagios (aJgio")) in Ephesus, those who were devotees of the pagan religions, and those who were devotees of Christianity. The Greek word was taken by Paul from the Greek mystery religions and transplanted into Christianity. It therefore needed careful definition. It was the saints who were believers in Christ Jesus to whom Paul was writing, not the “saints” in the pagan religions. We come now to one of the most important words in this epistle, and indeed in the New Testament—”grace.” It deserves a detailed treatment. Archbishop Trench in his Synonyms of the New Testament says of this word, “It is hardly too much to say that the Greek mind has in no word uttered itself and all that was at its heart more distinctly than in this.” This was his comment regarding the word “grace” as it was used in the language of pagan Greece. In the case of the use of the same word in the Greek New Testament, we can repeat this Greek scholar’s words, substituting the word “God” for the word “Greek.” It is hardly too much to say that the mind of God has in no word uttered itself and all that was in His heart more distinctly than in this. We will look first at the way the word was used in pagan Greece with its philosophy, its athletics, its poetry and drama, its wonderful architecture and statuary, its blue skies and rugged mountains, its love of the beautiful. The word itself is a beautiful word, charis (cari"). It is pronounced as follows: ch as in Scotch loch, or as in our word chasm, a as in father, i as in police, and the s as in cerise. The voice is stressed on the first syllable. The Christian poet wrote “Grace! ’tis a charming sound, Harmonious to the ear; Heav’n with the echo shall resound, And all the earth shall hear. Saved by grace alone! This is all my plea: Jesus died for all mankind, And Jesus died for me.” But of the latter, the Greeks of the pre-Christian era knew nothing. Charis (Cari") referred first of all to “that property in a thing which causes it to give joy to the hearers or beholders of it.… After awhile it came to signify not necessarily the grace or beauty of a thing, as a quality appertaining to it; but the gracious or beautiful thing, act, thought, speech, or person it might be, itself—the grace embodying and uttering itself, where there was room or call for this, in gracious outcomings toward such as might be its objects.… There is a further sense which the word obtained, namely, the thankfulness which the favor calls out in return.… In the ethical terminology of the Greek schools charis (cari") implied ever a favor freely done, without claim or expectation of return.… Thus Aristotle, defining charis (cari"), lays the whole stress on this very point, that it is conferred freely, with no expectation of return, and finding its only motive in the bounty and free-heartedness of the giver” (Trench). Charis (Cari") was also used to describe an act that was beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and was therefore commendable. This word, the inspired writers take over into the New Testament. In a few instances, it has its distinctively classical meaning, but in the other places where it is used, it takes an

infinite step forward to a deeper, richer, more wonderful content of meaning. Luke uses it in its purely classical meaning when he says (4:22), “And all bare Him witness, and wondered al the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth.” Here the word has its classical meaning of that property in our Lords words which caused them to give joy to the hearers. How wonderful it must have been to hear the Lord Jesus speak in human speech and human tones. Not only was the content of His words gracious and beautiful, but the tones of His voice must have reflected all the depth of His personality, the intensity of His convictions (John 2:17), the fervor of His desire to serve (Matt. 20:28), the pathos and tenderness of His sorrow (Matt 23:37–39). It was the infinite God speaking with human lips and in human tones. Both Luke (17:9), and Paul in Romans 6:17 and II Corinthians 8:16 use charis (cari") in its classical meaning of “thankfulness.”Peter uses the word in its meaning of “that which is beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected and is therefore commendable,” in his first epistle (2:19, 20), where the words “thankworthy” and “acceptable” are the translations of charis (cari") which appears in the Greek text. Surely, for a slave to manifest a spirit of patient submission toward a master who mistreats him, is an action beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected and is therefore commendable. The usual reaction on the part of a slave who is mistreated is to rebel against his master. But how this purely classical meaning of the word describes what took place at Calvary. All the human race could expect in view of its sin, was the righteous wrath of a holy God, that and eternal banishment from His glorious presence. But instead, that holy God stepped down from His judgment seat and took upon Himself at Calvary’s Cross, the guilt and penalty of human sin, thus satisfying His justice and making possible the bestowal of His mercy. And this He did, not for those who were His friends, but His bitter enemies, unlovely creatures saturated with sin. Charis (Cari") in classical Greek referred to a favor conferred freely, with no expectation of return, and finding its only motive in the bounty and free-heartedness of the giver. This favor was always done to a friend, never to an enemy. Right here charis (cari") leaps forward an infinite distance, for the Lord Jesus died for His enemies (Rom. 5:8–10), a thing unheard of in the human race. Surely this was beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected and is therefore commendable. This is what John is speaking of in his first epistle (3:1) when he says, “Behold, what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called the children of God.” The words “what manner of” are from a Greek word which means “what foreign kind of.” That is the love shown by God at the Cross is foreign to the human race. Man simply does not act that way (Rom. 5:7, 8, 10). That is why God’s action at the Cross in dying for lost humanity is an action beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected and is therefore commendable. Here is one of the strongest proofs of the divine source of the Bible. The substitutionary atonement never came from the philosophies of man but from the heart of God. Thus, the word charis (cari") comes to its highest and most exalted content of meaning in the New Testament. It refers to God’s offer of salvation with all that that implies, which salvation was procured at Calvary’s Cross with all the personal sacrifice which that included, offered to one who is His bitter enemy, and who is not only undeserving of that salvation but deserves condign punishment for his sins, offered without any expectation of return, but given out of the bounty and free heartedness of the giver. This means that there is no room for good works on the part of the sinner as a

means whereby he could earn his salvation, or after salvation, whereby he might retain that salvation. Paul sets grace over against works as things directly in opposition to one another so far as the means of salvation is concerned (Rom. 4:4, 5, 11:6). But Paul is very careful to make plain that good works naturally issue from and are required by grace (Titus 2:11–12). Furthermore, he shows that this grace is unlimited in its resources. In Romans 5:20 he says, “Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” The word “abound” is from a different Greek word than that which is translated “abounded.” It is a compound word made up of a verb which means “to exist in superabundance,” and a prefixed preposition which means “above.” The translation could read, “grace existed in superabundance and then more grace added to this superabundance.” Thus, salvation is a gift, to be received by the open hand of faith, not something to be earned. Dear reader, if you have been depending in the least upon any personal merit, will you not now cast aside all this, and accept the free grace of God by faith in Jesus Christ as your personal Saviour, the One who died on the Cross for you, pouring out His precious blood as the God-appointed sacrifice for sins? “For God so loved the world that He gave His Son, the only begotten One, that whoever believes in Him might not perish but might be having eternal life” (John 3 :16). “Peace” is another word rich in meaning. The Greek noun is  (eijrhnh), the verb,  (eijrw). The latter means “to join.” That is, when things are disjointed, there is lack of harmony and well being. When they are joined together, there is both. Hamlet cried, “The times are out of joint. O, cursed spite that I was ever born to set them right.” Peace is defined by Cremer as follows: “a state of untroubled, undisturbed wellbeing.” It is used in contrast to strife, and to denote the absence or end of strife. Our Lord “made peace through the blood of His cross” (Col. 1:20) in that He by His death, satisfied the just demands of the law which we broke, thus making it possible for a righteous and holy God to bestow mercy upon a believing sinner and do so without violating His justice. Our Lord thus bound together again the believing sinner and God, thus making peace. There is therefore a state of untroubled, undisturbed wellbeing for the sinner who places his faith in the Saviour. The law of God has nothing against him, and he can look up into the Father’s face unafraid and unashamed. This is justifying peace. But Paul, in writing to the Ephesian saints, was writing to those who were enjoying this kind of peace already. Therefore, the peace he is speaking about is sanctifying peace, that state of untroubled, undisturbed tranquility and wellbeing produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:22). We have this peace to the extent that we are yielded to the Spirit and are intelligently conscious of and dependent upon His ministry for us. Paul says that this grace and peace come from God the Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ. In associating these names together as the apostle does, the conclusion is inescapable that the Lord Jesus must be Very God of Very God Himself, possessing coeternally with God the Father, the same essence, that of deity. Expositors comments: “The grace and peace desired for the readers by the writer are blessings which come only from God the Father and from Christ. The ‘Lord Jesus Christ’ is named with ‘God our Father’ as the giver of the grace and peace—a collocation impossible except on the supposition that the writer held Christ to be of the same rank with God or in a unique relation to Him. There is a distinction indicated here between God and Jesus Christ. But it is not in what they are able to give, for the gifts of grace and peace come from both. Nor is any distinction suggested here in respect of nature. But there is a distinction in respect of

relation to believers. To the receivers of grace and peace God is in the relation of Father; to the same subjects Christ is in relation of Lord. God is Father, having made them His children by adoption. Christ is Lord, being constituted Head of the Church, and having won the right to their loving obedience and honor.“ Translation. Paul, an ambassador of Christ Jesus through the will of God, to the saints, the ones who are (in Ephesus), even believing ones in Christ Jesus. Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. (1:3, 4) The contents of verses 3–14 make one long sentence, possibly the longest sentence of connected discourse in existence. Here we have some of the most important doctrinal words and profoundest and richest truths regarding what God has done for the saints. in all the Pauline writings. We will look first at the distinctive Greek word translated “blessed” here. There are two words translated “blessed,” makarios (makario"), which means “happy” in the sense of “prosperous,” used in Matthew 5:3–11, for instance, “Spiritually prosperous are the poor in spirit”; and  (eujloghto"), used here, which is made up of  (legw), “to speak,” and eu (euj), “good,” thus, “to speak well of” (our word “eulogize”). The first speaks of character, the second of repute.  (ÆEuloghto") is used exclusively of God in the n.t. The verb of being is usually left out and is supplied by the reader or translator. It is, “Let the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ be well spoken of, be eulogized.” When David says, “Bless the Lord, O my soul,” he is praising God, speaking well of God. The phrase, “The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,” needs some attention. God the Father is the God of our Lord Jesus Christ as He (the Lord Jesus) is seen in His humanity. He cried on the Cross, “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken Me?” The Persons of the Godhead also recognize each other as co-equal deity and address each other as God. The Father addresses the Son, “Thy throne, O, God, is for ever and ever” (Heb. 1:8). But in our Ephesian passage Paul is thinking of the humanity of our blessed Lord as it relates Him to God the Father. Our Lord recognized God as His Father in a twofold relation. In John 6:18, the Jewish leaders accused Him of making Himself equal with God because He said that God was His (idios (ijdio")) own, private, peculiar, individual Father, His Father in a different way from that in which He is the Father of believers. Here our Lord speaks of Himself as Son of God the Father from whom He proceeds by eternal generation in a birth that never took place because it always was. Thus, God is the Father of the Lord Jesus as He (the Lord Jesus) is seen in His deity. Again, He says to Mary (John 20:17), “I ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God and your God.” In the expression “my God,” we see the humanity of our Lord, and also the fact that in His humanity He bore a different, unique relation to God as His Father from that of the believer. It would seem that since He is speaking of His human relationship to God in this phrase, He is also doing so in the phrase “My Father and your Father.” Our Lord regarded God as His Father also in His humanity. “Hath blessed” is aorist tense in the Greek text, referring merely to the fact of an action. The translation should read “The One who blessed.” The same Greek word for “blessed” is used, but in a different form. When we bless God, we praise Him, speak well of Him. When He blesses us, it is not that He speaks us good but He does us good. Our

blessing is in word. His is in deed. He confers benefits upon us. Expositors says, “In word and thought we bless God because in deed and positive effect He blesses us.” The “us” refers to Paul and the Ephesian saints, and extends to all saints down the ages. And now to come to grips with the phrase, “with all spiritual blessings.” Alford and Vincent concur in the teaching that the word “spiritual” describes the blessings, not as spiritual as contrasted to physical, but to blessings produced and given us by the Holy Spirit. Alford says, “Pneumatikos (Pneumatiko") (spiritual) in the n.t., always implies the working of the Holy Spirit, never bearing merely our modern inaccurate sense of spiritual as opposed to bodily.” Vincent says, “Another leading word. Spirit and spiritual occur thirteen times. Paul emphasizes in this epistle the work of the divine Spirit upon the human spirit. Not spiritual as distinguished from bodily, but proceeding from the Holy Spirit.” Expositor says, “It is best … to take pneumatikos (pneumatiko") (spiritual) to define the blessings in question as spiritual in the sense that they are the blessings of grace, blessings of a divine order, belonging to the sphere of immediate relations between God and man. It is true that these come from God through the Spirit. But the point in view is what they are, not how they reach us. There is little to suggest either that a contrast is drawn between the blessings of the gospel and the more temporal blessings of the o.t. economy.… There is still less to suggest that the statement is to be limited to the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, healing, tongues, etc. This latter supposition is refuted by the all inclusive ‘all.’ The expression is a large one, covering all the good that comes to us by grace—whether the assurance of immortality, the promise of the resurrection, the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven, the privilege of adoption, etc.” Moule, in his Ephesian Studies, offers this translation and paraphrase, “all spiritual benediction; spiritual as shed from Him who is Spirit.” Summing up the above authorities we would say that the expression, “spiritual blessings” refers to blessings that are by their very character such as come from the Holy Spirit. We have here therefore, a balance, on the one hand. the kind of blessings. Spirit-produced, and on the other hand, the source of these blessings, the Holy Spirit. We come now to a consideration of the phrase, “in heavenly places” (a.v.). The word “places” is in italics, showing that the word as such is not in the Greek text, and is supplied by the translators in an attempt to make plain to the English reader, the thought in the Greek text. The original has en tois epouraniois (ejn toi" ejpouranioi"); a preposition (in), the definite article, and an adjective meaning “in or above heaven, existing in heaven, the heavenly regions, i.e., the abode of God and angels.” Thayer applies the last meaning to Ephesians 1:3, 20, 2:6, 3:10, where the same expression is used. In 6:12, the expression applies to the lower heavens or the heaven of the clouds (Thayer). Vincent says, “another key-word; one of the dominant thoughts of the epistle being the work of the ascended Christ. Places is supplied, the Greek meaning, in the heavenlies. Some prefer to supply things, as more definitely characterizing spiritual blessing. But in the four passages where the phrase occurs, 1:20, 2:6, 3:10, 6:12, the sense is local, and epouranios (ejpouranio") heavenly, is local throughout Paul’s epistles. The meaning is that spiritual blessings are found in heaven and brought thence to us.” Expositors concurs with Vincent in viewing the expression as referring to heaven as a locality, and says, “It is not merely that the blessings with which God blessed us are blessings having their origin in heaven,… but that they are blessings which have their seat where God Himself is and where Christ reigns.” It is that we saints while still in the body on earth, are enjoying some of the blessings which we will enjoy in heaven.

Paul has already given us a two-fold description of these blessings. They are of such a character that they are Spirit-produced ones. They are blessings which have their natural abode in and come from heaven. He adds another. They are blessings that are “in Christ.” Expositors comments, “Not merely through Christ. The phrase expresses the supreme idea that pervades the Epistle. Here it qualifies the whole statement of the blessing in its bestowal, its nature, and its seat. The divine blessing has its ground and reason in Christ, so that apart from Him it could have no relation to us. It is ours by reason of our being in Him as our Representative and Head, ‘by virtue of our incorporation in, our union with, Christ’ (Lightfoot). ‘In Him lay the cause that God blessed us with every spiritual blessing, since His act of redemption is the meritorious cause of this divine bestowal of blessing’ (Meyer).” We come now to the words, “according as He bath chosen us.” The words “according as” are  (kaqw") “even as, in conformity with the fact.” Vincent says: “Explaining blessed us, in v. 3. His blessing is in conformity with the fact that He chose.” Expositors comments: “Here  (kaqw") designates the ground of the ‘blessing’ and so is also the note of its grandeur. The ‘blessing’ proceeded on the divine election, and took effect in accordance with that. It has its foundation, therefore, in eternity, and is neither an incidental thing nor an afterthought of God.” “He hath chosen” is exelexato (ejxelexato), the first aorist middle of  (ejklegw) “to pick out, choose,” in the middle voice where the subject of the verb acts in his own interest, “to pick or choose out for one’s self.” This is another of those important doctrinal words in Ephesians. We turn to Biblico-Theological Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, by Hermann Cremer, which specializes in the important doctrinal and theological words of the Christian system. Cremer, in discussing the meaning and usage of this verb, makes the following points; first, the word is used of God choosing out Israel from amongst all nations to be the channel through which He will bring salvation to all those in these other nations who will receive it. This choosing out of Israel from among the nations does not imply that those nations not chosen are rejected or refused salvation. Indeed, the salvation of Israel was for the purpose of making salvation possible to the other nations. The same usage applies in the case of individual sinners selected out from amongst mankind. These are selected for the purpose of being channels through which the knowledge of salvation might be brought to the rest of mankind, so that those who put their trust in the Lord Jesus as Saviour might be saved. This precludes the idea that those not selected are rejected or refused salvation; second, the middle voice of the verb gives it the meaning of taking or setting apart something for one’s self, to seek or choose out something for one’s self; however, Cremer says “it is unwarranted to give special prominence either to the element of selection from among others, or to that of preference above others. The main import is appointment for a certain object or goal; third, the word is used of the act of choosing some person or thing for a definite object or calling. The middle voice in Greek represents the subject of the verb acting in his own interest or for himself. Thus, this selection of the saints in this age of grace is the act of God choosing out from among mankind, certain for Himself. These become His own, to be used for a certain purpose. The word “elect” (a.v.) of I Peter 1:2, is the translation of the noun form of this verb  (ejklegw). Here these are said to be “selected out ones, this selection being dominated by the foreordination of God the Father in the sphere of the setting apart work of the Spirit resulting in obedience and the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” We have here three steps God takes in the salvation of a sinner. God the Father selects him out

from among mankind. This selection is made in the sphere of the setting apart work of the Spirit, in which the Holy Spirit brings that sinner to the act of faith in the Lord Jesus, which faith is answered by the act of God the Son cleansing him in His precious blood. God the Father selects, God the Spirit brings to the act of faith, and God the Son cleanses the believing sinner in His precious blood. This is the same election or selection spoken of in Ephesians. In our I Peter passage, the method God uses in saving the individual is in view. In our Ephesian text, the result of this salvation is in view. Commenting on the words “according as He hath chosen us,” Expositors says: “What is meant, therefore, is that the blessing which God bestowed on these Ephesians was not a thing of time merely, but the issue of an election prior to their call or conversion, a blessing that came to them in accordance with a definite choice of them out of a mass of others by God for Himself.“ This selection of certain out of mankind to be channels through which God could reach the rest of mankind with the message of the gospel, was “in Him,” the pronoun referring back to the name “Christ.” The grammatical classification is locative of sphere, the translation, chosen out “in the sphere of Christ.” That is, those chosen out were chosen with the provision and limitation that this choice would be followed by the inclusion of the person thus chosen, within the sphere of the saving work of the Lord Jesus, which in turn would result in their position in Him as the Last Adam who would confer upon them righteousness and life as the first Adam by his fall brought sin and death upon the entire human race. This choice, Paul tells us was made “before the foundation of the world.” The word “foundation” is  (katabolh), from  (ballw), “to throw,” and kata (kata), “down,” the word meaning “a throwing or laying down.” It describes the act of the transcendent God throwing down a universe into space, speaking a material universe into existence which had no existence before. The writer to the Hebrew says, “Through faith we understand that the ages were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear” (Heb. 11:3). This leaves no room for the theory of evolution which holds that the things that are seen today were made of preexisting material. The word “world” is kosmos (kosmo"), “an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order.” The Greeks had a word, chaos (cao"), which comes into our language in its exact spelling, “chaos.” The Greek word was used by the pagan Greek philosophers of what they considered to be the first state of the universe. The word meant “unformed matter.” It spoke of darkness, a vast gulf or chasm, a pit, the nether abyss. But the Bible writers speak of the original state of the universe as one of a harmonious arrangement of things. They use the word kosmos (kosmo") not chaos (cao"). God, speaking of the laying of the cornerstone of the universe, speaks of the sons of God, the angels, shouting for joy at its creation (Job 38:6, 7). The holy angels did not shout for joy over a chaos. How long ago did God create the universe? Astronomers recently have discovered stars that are over 500,000,000 light years from the earth. That means that the universe is over 500,000,000 years old. But God chose us out before that. Commenting on the phrase, Expositors says: “It expresses most definitely the fact that the election in question is not the setting apart of certain persons at a definite period, an act in time, a historical selection, as some … strive to prove, but an eternal choice, a determination of the Divine Mind before all time. The idea of the Divine election in the n.t., is not a philosophical idea expressing the ultimate explanation of the system of things or giving the rationale of the story of the human race as such, but a religious idea, a note of grace, expressing the fact that salvation is originally and wholly of God. In Pauline

teaching, the subjects of this Divine election are neither the Church as such (Ritschl), nor mankind as such (Beck), but Christian men and women, designated as  (hJmei") (us), humeis (uJmei") (you). It is, as is here clearly intimated, an eternal determination of the Divine Will, and it has its ground in the freedom of God, not in anything forseen in its subjects. Of a prevision of faith as the basis or motive of the election, there is no indication here. On the contrary, the character or distinguishing inward quality of the subjects of the election is presented in the next clause as the object of the election, the end it had in view.” And yet, there is more to be said. The above is what is called an anthropomorphic statement of the matter, that is, a manner of stating a fact in a way so as to accommodate it to human intelligence and a human viewpoint. We were chosen in eternity before the universe was created. But, wonder of wonders, this choice was never made. God cannot be said, in the last analysis, to decide upon any course of action. That choice is as eternal as God is. The name of every Christian is as eternal as God is, for God has had that individual in His heart for salvation as long as He has been in existence. What a salvation, based upon an eternal choice, which extends through time, into, and throughout the eternity after time ceases. And then some dear children of God are afraid that after God has saved them, they can be lost. We were chosen out from amongst mankind before the foundation laying of the universe, “that we should be holy and without blame before Him.” We must be careful to note that the words “that we should be” do not refer to an obligation put upon a Christian to be holy and without blame in his Christian experience. That responsibility is spoken of in Chapters 4–6. The context here is doctrinal in character, not hortatory. Paul bases exhortation on doctrine. The latter must always precede the former, for only in doctrine can one see the sweet reasonableness of the exhortation and find the way to avail one’s self of the power to obey that exhortation. The words “holy” and “without blame,” do not refer to the Christian’s standing as a justified person, but to his character as a child of God. Paul perhaps had in mind the words in Deuteronomy 7:6 and 14:2, “For thou art a holy people unto the Lord: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto Himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.” The word “holy” is again hagios (aJgio"), the same word we studied in our consideration of the word “saints” of 1:1. The root means “separated to God.” The verb means, “to separate from things secular and dedicate to God.” Thus, we are in our character as Christians, a separated people, separated from evil and dedicated to the worship and service of God. That is what we are in the position in which God in salvation has placed us, in Christ. The position has to do, not with justification, which is a legal position in which the guilt and penalty of sin is taken away and a positive righteousness, even Christ Jesus, bestowed, but with sanctification, positional here, namely, the saint’s position in the Last Adam, which is a matter of character, and is followed by progressive sanctification spoken of in chapters 4–6, namely, growth in the Christian experience. The Greek word translated “without blame” is  (ajmwmo"), “without blemish,” free from faultiness, as a sacrificial animal without spot or blemish (Lev. 22:21), or as the Lamb of God (I Peter 1:19). The words, “before Him,” are  (katenwpion aujtou). The first word we break up as follows: kat (kat), “down,” en (ejn), “in,” and  (wjp), “to see,” namely, “to see down in.” The word speaks of a penetrating gaze that sees right down into a thing. It refers here to the penetrating gaze of the Holy Spirit as He sees right down into our

innermost being, through all of the superficialities, hypocrisies, and shams of human existence. This refers to a present, searching gaze of God into the inner character of the saint, not to a future judgment at the Judgment Seat of Christ. And it is not a searching gaze conducted in a critical attitude which looks for faults, but a satisfied, delighted contemplation of the reflection of the holiness and spotlessness of the Lord Jesus in the character of the saint, for Alford says; “implying an especial nearness and dearness to Him—and bearing a foretaste of the time when the elect shall be before ( (ejnwbion)) the throne of God (Rev. 7:15).” The words, “in love,” are, in the a.v., construed with what has gone before, but Nestle in his Greek text punctuates so as to relate them to what follows, thus, “in love having Predestinated.” (1:5) Expositors and Alford take it with the preceding “that we should be holy and without blame in love.” Bible expositors are in hopeless disagreement as to whether the words “in love” qualify that which precedes or that which follows. We cannot report the discussion of the matter by Expositors and Alford, since it is too lengthy. Vincent takes the words “in love” to go with “predestinated.” The author can only give his opinion as to what he thinks is the correct interpretation here after weighing the arguments on both sides, each of which has cogent reasons for its position. In either case, we have the truth. It is true that “the electing act and the object it had in view, namely, holiness and blamelessness on our part, were both due to God’s love and had their explanation in it” (Expositors). It is also true that the motivating factor in God’s act of predestinating us, was divine love. Perhaps we will have to wait until we see the great Apostle in heaven before we can settle the matter with certainty. While the present author would not be at all dogmatic in his interpretation, and not even sure that he is right, he leans to the opinion that the words “in love” are to be construed with “predestinated”. The verb “chosen” (selected out) is too remote from the words “in love,” and the word “predestinated,” so near, that it would seem to decide the case for, “in love having predestinated.” As one reads the Greek, the grand sweep of the sense of the passage tends to the same thing, for instance “even as He selected us out for Himself in Him before the laying down of the foundations of the universe, to be holy and without spot in His penetrating, searching gaze, in love having predestinated us, etc.” We now come to grips with the word translated “having predestinated.” The word is  (proorizw), made up of pro (pro), a preposition and the simple verb  (oJrizw). The noun horos (oJro") means “a boundary, a limit.” The verb itself means “to mark out the boundary or limits” of any place or thing. When used of persons, it means “to put limitations upon that person,” thus, “to determine his destiny.” The preposition pro (pro), prefixed to the verb means “before.” The compound verb means “to mark out the boundary or limits of a place, thing or person previously,” thus “to predestine.” Cremer defines it, “to determine or decree beforehand.” He says, “The matter to be considered when the word is used is not who are the objects of this predestination, but what are they predestined to. This second object of the verb, as it has been called, forms an essential part of the conception expressed by it; what is called the first object, i.e., the persons, is an accidental one, a contingency belonging to history, whereas  (proorizw) itself precedes history.” Expositors suggests the word “foreordain” as a better translation than the word “predestine.” This authority says; “While in Romans and Ephesians the a.v., adopts ‘predestinated,’ in I Corinthians 2:7 it has ‘foreordained.’ It is best to adopt ‘foreordain’

all through, as  (proorizw) means to determine before.… In the n.t., it is always used of God as determining from eternity, sometimes with the further definition ‘before the age’ (I Cor. 2:7)—decreeing to do something (Acts 4:28); foreordaining things or persons (I Cor. 2:7, Rom. 8:29); or as here, appointing one beforehand to something. The pro (pro) (before) in the compound verb expresses the fact that the decree is prior to the realization of its object. The aorist participle may be taken as temporal, in which case the foreordination would be something prior (not in time, indeed, but in logical order) to the election, and the election would be defined as proceeding on the foreordination. But it may also be taken as modal, not prior to the election, but coincident with it, and expressing the mode of its action or the form which it took—‘in that He foreordained us’.… This is the more probable view, because no real distinction appears to be made between the  (ejklegw) (to select out from) and the  (proorizw) (to mark out or set limits upon previously) beyond what may be suggested by the ek (ejk) (out of) in the one and the pro (pro) (before) in the other; the idea in  (ejklegw) being understood to be that of the mass from which the selection is made, and that of  (proorizw), the priority of the decree.” Alford says: “In God, indeed, all is one; but for our anthropomorphic way of speaking and treating, which is necessary to us, there follows on His first decree to adopt and to sanctify, the nearer decision, how and by what this shall be brought about, because it could only be thus brought about.” We consider now the words “unto the adoption of children.” The preposition is eis (eij"), which is sometimes translated “with a view to,” signifying purpose or result. This marking out beforehand, this setting limits upon, this predestinating had in view the act of God adopting these selected out ones as children. The Greek word is huiothesia (uiJoqesia), from tithemi (tiqemi), “to place,” and huios (uiJo"), “an adult son.” Thus, the word refers to the act of God placing these selected-out ones as adult sons. Paul speaks of this in Romans 8:15 in the words “Spirit of adoption.” The apostle here uses as an illustration the Roman practice of legally adopting a child, and thus not only bequeathing to him the material possessions of the one adopting, but also giving him his civil status. Thus God takes a believing sinner, regenerates him, and by means of this makes him His child (teknon (teknon), a born one). Then He takes this child and places him in a legal position as an adult son (huios (uiJo")). We thus become joint-heirs with Christ, having been raised to a civil status as adult sons, in which we become heirs of God, inheriting jointly with Christ all that He possesses as an heir of God the Father by virtue of His Sonship and work on the Cross. This is one object of God’s predestination. The other is that the believer is to be conformed to the image of God’s Son (Rom. 8:29). Thus, God selected certain from among mankind to be included within the saving work of Christ, and those selected, He predestined to be placed as adult sons and to be conformed to the image of His own Son. Hence, predestination follows election, not in point of time, for the acts were simultaneous, but in point of divine economy or logical order. This act of God the Father placing believing sinners as adult sons was “by Jesus Christ.” The preposition is dia (dia), the preposition of intermediate agency. Jesus Christ was the intermediate agent of God the Father to bring to fruition His purpose of placing believers as adult sons. He did that through His work on the Cross where He satisfied the just requirements of God’s law which we broke, making it possible for Him to bestow mercy upon a believing sinner on the basis of justice satisfied. This placing of believing sinners as adult sons was “to Himself.” The words, “to Himself,” refer, of course, to the subject of “predestinated,” namely, God the Father. He

previously marked us out with a view to placing us as adult sons for Himself, for His own satisfaction, that He might lavish His love on us as His sons, that He might give us the high privilege of sonship to and fellowship with Him, that He might be glorified in saving us and being the recipient of our worship and service. All this was “according to the good pleasure of His will.” Of the word eudokian (eujdokian) (”good pleasure”), Vincent says; “Not strictly in the sense of kindly or friendly feeling, as Luke 2:14, Phil. 1:15, but because it pleased Him, see Luke 10:21; Matt. 11:26. The other sense, however, is included and implied, and is expressed by in love.” Expositors gives the meaning of eudokia (eujdokia) as follows: “good will, delight, satisfaction, purpose, counsel” The word “will” is  (qelhma). “a desire which proceeds from one’s heart or emotions.” The same authority says: “In the present passage it is only in relation to the grace of His dealings with sinful men that reference is made to the will of God. The clause in question presents that grace in the particular aspect of its sovereign, unmerited action. It adds the last note to the statement of the wonders of the Divine election by expressing the fact that that election and God’s foreordination of us unto adoption are not due to any desert in us or anything outside God Himself, but are acts of His own pure goodness, originating wholly in the freedom of His own thoughts and loving counsel.” (1:6) This act of God in previously marking out certain to be placed as adult sons through Jesus Christ for Himself according to the good pleasure of His will was “to the praise of the glory of His grace.” Vincent comments: “The ultimate aim of foreordained … Glory is an attribute of grace: that in which grace grandly and resplendently displays itself. Praise is called forth from the children of God by this divine glory which thus appears in grace. The grace is not merely favor, gift, but it reveals also the divine character. In praising God for what He does, we learn to praise Him for what He is. Glory is another of the ruling words of the epistle, falling into the same category with riches and fulness. The apostle is thrilled with the sense of the plentitude and splendor of the mystery of redemption.” Alford says: “The end, God’s end, in our predestination to adoption is, that the glory, glorious nature, brightness and majesty, and kindliness and beauty,—of His grace might be the object of men and angel’s praise: both as it is in Him, ineffable and infinite,—and exemplified in us, its objects.” This grace is described as that “wherein He hath made us accepted in the Beloved.” The better manuscripts have “which” referring to “grace,” not “wherein.” The translation reads “Which (grace) He freely bestowed upon us in the Beloved.” The words “freely bestowed” are the translation of  (caritow), “to pursue with grace, to compass with favor, to honor with blessings.” This verb has the same stem as the noun charis (cari") (grace). One could render the clause, “which (grace He graced us with in the Beloved.” The word “Beloved,” referring to the Lord Jesus, is the translation of a Greek verb “to love,” ( (ajgapaw)), which here is a participle in the perfect tense. This Greek word for “love” is the same one found in John 3:16, Romans 5:5, 8, Gal. 5:22, I John 4:8. It speaks of the love that God is, and with which He loves the lost, the love which is the product of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the yielded believer. The perfect tense speaks of an action completed in past time having present, and in a context like this one, permanent results. It speaks of the fact that God the Father has always loved God the Son with an absolute love which is a permanent attitude on His part. The words “in the Beloved” are locative of sphere. That is, God the Father freely bestowed on us the grace which saved us, and did so in the sphere of the Lord Jesus, His

Person and His work on the Cross. His grace could not operate in our salvation apart from the atoning death of our Lord, for God is not only aloving God, but a righteous and just God who cannot pass by sin, but must require that it be paid for. Only thus can He manifest His grace. The word “Beloved” is a perfect participle, the perfect tense being used by Paul to show the degree of the love with which the Father loves the Son. Vincent says: “Beloved par excellence.” He refers us to Col. 1:13 and the expression, “the Son of His love.” (1:7) “The Beloved” is described as the One “in whom we have redemption.” The verb is present in tense, and durative in action, thus, “in whom we are having redemption.” The redemption is an abiding fact from the past, through the present, and into the future. The fact of redemption is always a present reality with the believing reader of this passage whether he reads it today or ten years from now. The definite article appears before. “redemption.” It has a two-fold significance, pointing to the particular redemption spoken of in the Bible with which both the writer and reader are acquainted, and speaking of ownership. It is “in whom we are having our redemption.” The word “redemption” is  (ajpolutrwsi") which Thayer defines as follows; the verb “to redeem one by paying the price, to let one go free on receiving the price”; the noun, “a releasing effected by payment of ransom, deliverances, liberation procured by the payment of a ransom.” The story of redemption can be told in three Greek words;  (ajgorazw), “to buy in the slave market” (I Cor. 6:20, 7:23, 30, II Pet. 2:1, Rev. 5:9); the Lord Jesus bought us in the slave market of sin, the ransom price, His blood; we are his bondslaves;  (ejxagorazw), “to buy out of the slave market, to buy off, to buy for one’s self” (Gal. 3:13, 4:5); the redeemed are the possession of the Lord Jesus forever, and will never be put up for sale in any slave market again;  (lutrow) “to liberate by payment of ransom” (Tit. 2:14, I Pet. 1:18); the redeemed are set free from the guilt and power of sin now, to be finally set free from the presence of sin at the Rapture. The particular aspect of redemption spoken of here is redemption from the guilt and condemnation of sin, for the qualifying phrase, “the forgiveness of sins” is added. This redemption is said to be “through His blood.” The preposition is dia (dia), the preposition of intermediate agency. The out-poured blood of the Son of God at the Cross is the lutron (lutron), “the price for redeeming, the ransom,” used of the act of buying slaves, of paying the ransom for a life or of captives. The blood of Christ paid for the sins of the human slaves of sin in the sense that it satisfied the just demands of God’s holy law which decreed that “the wages of sin is death”; and outpoured blood means death. This redemption is defined as “the forgiveness of sins.” The word “forgiveness” is aphesis (ajfesi") from  (ajfihmi), “to send from one’s self, to send away, to bid go away or depart.” The noun aphesis (ajfesi"), used in relation to “sins,” means “a release, the letting them go as if they had not been committed, thus, forgiveness, a remission of their penalty” (Thayer). Trench says that the image under lying the verb is that of releasing a prisoner (Isaiah 61:1), or letting go, as of a debt (Deut. 15:3). One is reminded of the one goat who was offered as a sin-offering on the Day of Atonement, and of the other goat upon which was placed the sins of the people (symbolically) and which was let go in the wilderness, never to be seen again by Israel, the latter goat typifying that aspect of redemption in which the sins of the human race were put away, never to be charged against the individual again. All of which means that sinners are lost today, not because they sin, but because they have not availed themselves of the salvation which is in Christ Jesus. God’s forgiveness of sin refers therefore to His act of putting sin away on a

judicial basis, to His remitting the guilt and penalty. It is for the sinner to avail himself of salvation by appropriating the Lord Jesus as his Saviour by faith in what He has done for him on the Cross. The particular word for “sins” here is  (paraptwma), from  (parapiptw), “to fall beside a person or thing, to slip aside”; the noun form  (paraptwma) means, “a fall beside or near something; a lapse or deviation from truth and uprightness, a sin, a misdeed, a trespass.” This forgiveness is “according to the riches of His grace.” The words “according to” are the translation of kata (kata), a preposition which in its local meaning has the idea of “down.” The word “down” speaks of domination. The word “domination” speaks of control. The degree of this forgiveness was controlled, dominated by the riches, (ploutos (plouto")) wealth, abundance, plenitude of God’s grace. This forgiveness is therefore a complete, an unqualified, an unchanging one, since it is controlled by the plenitude of God’s grace, and that plenitude is infinite in proportion. Expositors comments: “The freeness of this divine favor in the form of grace, the unmerited nature of the divine goodness, is what Paul most frequently magnifies with praise and wonder. Here it is the mighty measure of the largesse, the grace in its quality of riches, that is introduced. This magnificent conception of the wealth of the grace that is bestowed on us by God and that which is in Christ for us, is a peculiarly Pauline idea.” (l:8) Greek grammar refers the word “wherein” back to “grace,” “in which grace He hath abounded toward us.” The word “abounded” is  (perisseuw), “to exceed a fixed number or measure, to be over and above a certain number or measure, to exist or be at hand in abundance” (Thayer). Moulton and Milligan give as the papyri usage. the meaning of the verb, “to remain over,” and the meaning of the adjective, “over and above, superfluous,” and quote extracts as follows: “more than enough has been written; if you find any purchasers of the surplus donkeys”; of the noun they say; “superfluity.” Thus, the verb means “to exist in superfluity, to super-abound.” The translation reads “which (grace) He super-abounded to (eis (eij")) us.” That is, God’s grace was manifested to us in superabundance. It is an oversize grace. It is more than enough to save and keep saved for time and eternity, every sinner who comes to God in Christ Jesus. Paul uses this same verb in Rom. 5:20 but prefixes the preposition huper (uJper), which preposition means “above,” and the translation reads; “Where sin existed in abundance ( (pleonazw)), grace existed in super-abundance, and then some on top of that.” The a.v., translates eis (eij"), “toward.” But the preposition reaches farther than pros (pro") which means “to, toward.” Eis (ÆEi") means “in, into,” and reaches not only toward the believing sinner, but into his very being. The grace comes not only towards him, but grips him in its irresistible working and brings him into salvation. This grace God superabounded to us “in all wisdom and prudence.” It is locative of sphere. This superabundance of grace was ensphered within the guiding limitations of all wisdom and prudence. The word “all,” occurring as it does here with a singular substantive without the article, is to be translated “every.” The word wisdom is sophia (sofia). “This was a great word with the Greeks. With them the word included the ideas of cleverness and skill in handicraft and art, skill in matter of common life, sound judgment, intelligence, practical wisdom, learning, speculative wisdom, natural philosophy and mathematics” (Liddell and Scott). Trench says that sophia (sofia) is recognized in the n.t. and in Christian writers as expressing the highest and noblest in wisdom. He says; “We may affirm with confidence that sophia (sofia) is never in Scripture ascribed to other than God or good men, except in an ironical sense.… For, indeed, if sophia

(sofia) includes the striving after the best ends as well as the using of the best means, is mental excellence in its highest and fullest sense,… there can be no wisdom disjointed from goodness.” Thayer says that when sophia (sofia) is used of God, it refers to supreme intelligence such as belongs to God. The word “prudence” is  (fronhsi"), “understanding.” Trench says of the word; “It skillfully adapts its means to the attainment of the ends which it desires; but whether the ends themselves which are proposed are good, of this it affirms nothing.” Moulton and Milligan say: “ ‘prudence’ as leading to right action, as compared with the more theoretical sophia (sofia).” To compare the two words, we would say that sophia (sofia) refers to wisdom as such, and  (fronhsi"), to the right and effective use of that wisdom in order to attain desired ends. This wisdom and prudence is bestowed upon the recipients of God’s grace. Expositors says; “Sophia (Sofia) is the collective moral intelligence, ‘insight into the true nature of things’ (Lightfoot) and in the Pauline Epistles it is this intelligence in especial as knowledge of the divine plan of salvation long hidden and now revealed; while  (fronhsi") is the practical use of wisdom, the product of wisdom, ‘the right use and application of the  (frhn) (the mind)’ (Trench), the faculty of discerning the proper disposition or action. The riches, the abounding riches, of the grace expended on us stood revealed in the bestowal of these gifts of spiritual discernment with reference to the deep things of the divine counsel and the divine revelation “ (1:9) The words, “having made known to us the mystery of His will,” are explanatory of the previous verse. It is, “Wherein He hath abounded, having made known.” The participle is modal, indicating the manner in which the action of the main verb is performed. “He hath abounded, in that He made known.” The word “mystery” is  (musthrion), in classical Greek, “a hidden thing, a secret, a mystery,” in n.t., “the secret purposes and counsels which God intends to carry into effect in His kingdom.” It is something which is not understood until revealed, and when revealed, not difficult of being understood by the Spirit-enlightened believer. Vincent says: “Another key-word of this epistle. God’s grace as manifested in redemption is a mystery in virtue of its riches and depth—as the expression of God’s very nature. The mystery of the redemption in Christ, belonging to the eternal plan of God, could be known to men only through revelation— making known. Of His will; pertaining to His will.” Expositors translates “the mystery touching or pertaining to His will.” The word “will” is the translation, not of  (boulh), a desire based upon the reason, but  (qelhma), a desire based upon the emotions. God’s will or desire here, comes from His heart of love. This will or desire is “according to His good pleasure.” The words “according to” are kata (kata), the preposition meaning “down” and suggesting domination. This desire on God’s part is dominated by His good pleasure (eudokia (eujdokia)). This Greek word is made up of  (dokew), “to seem, to be accounted.” It is often used in the question, “What does it seem to you?” The word eu (euj) means “well, to be well off, to prosper.” Thus eudokia (eujdokia) means “that which seems good or well” to one. God’s good pleasure, therefore, is not an arbitrary whim of a sovereign, but represents that which in the wisdom and love of God would contribute most to the well-being and blessing of the saints. The word means “will, choice, delight, pleasure, satisfaction.” In the case of God, all these are dictated by what is good or well. Thus, the delight, pleasure, and satisfaction which God has in blessing the saints is found in the fact that what He does for them is dictated by what is good for them.

This good pleasure is that “which He hath purposed in Himself.” “Purposed” is  (protiqhmi), “to set before one’s self,” thus, “to determine.” This good pleasure God purposed “in Himself.” As Expositors so aptly puts it, “The purpose is God’s own free determination, originating in His own gracious mind.” (1:10) The purpose God had in mind is given us in the words, “that in the dispensation of the fulness of times, etc.” The preposition is eis (eij"), “with a view to,” indicating what direction the purpose took. The word “dispensation” requires some study. It is not preceded by the definite article. The word is oikonomia (oijkonomia) which is made up of oikos (oijko"), “house,” and nomos (nomo"), “law.” The compound word means, “the management of a household. or of household affairs, the management, oversight, administration of other’s property, the office of a manager, overseer, stewardship.” Thus, it speaks here of an administration by God of a certain period of human history designated as “the fulness of times.” Our word “dispensation,” used in Bible teaching nomenclature, refers to a certain period of time marked by a certain method in which God administers the affairs of mankind, such as the dispensation of grace, etc. It does not have that meaning here. Instead of referring to a dispensation itself, it speaks of the method by which God administers the particular time referred to in the words “the fulness of times.” We now address ourselves to the question as to what this fulness of the times has reference. The Greek word translated “times” here is kairos (kairo"). In Gal. 4:4 we have the words, “when the fulness of time was come.” The Greek word for “time” here is chronos (crono"), which refers to “time, contemplated simply as such, the succession of moments” (Trench). In our Ephesian passage, the word is kairos (kairo") which Trench defines as “the joints or articulations in these times (chronos (crono")), the critical, epoch-making periods foreordained of God … when all that has been slowly, and often without observation ripening through long ages is mature and comes to the birth in grand decisive events, which constitute at once the close of one period and the commencement of another.” The word could be translated “seasons.” The word “fulness” is  (plhrwma), “fulness, completeness.” The kairos (kairo") (“times”) refer to the various periods of human history as they have to do with Israel and the Church in which God deals with these in a particular manner, each season, age, or dispensation being marked by a separate and distinct manner of dealing, such as the Age of Law and Age of Grace. By the fulness of these seasons is meant the time when the succession of the ages has come to a close in the plan of God. We are now living in the age of Grace. The season or dispensation which will complete the succession of seasons is the Messianic Kingdom. God will, after this last age comes to a close, “gather together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven, and which are on earth, in Him.” The words “gather together,” are the translation of  (ajnakefalaiow), “to bring back to and gather round the main point.” Vincent says, “It does not indicate Christ (the Head) as the central point of regathering, though He is in fact. That is expressed by in Christ. The compounded preposition ana (ajna) signifies again, pointing back to a previous condition where no separation existed. All things. All created beings and things; not limited to intelligent beings. Compare Rom. 8:21, I Cor. 15:28.… God contemplates a regathering, a restoration to that former condition when all things were in perfect unity, and normally combined to serve God’s ends. This unity was broken by sin. Man’s fall involved the unintelligent creation (Rom. 8:20). The mystery of God’s will includes the restoration of this unity in and through Christ; one kingdom on earth and in heaven—a new heaven and a new earth in which shall dwell righteousness, and ‘the creation shall be delivered from the

bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God.’ ” The purpose of God, therefore, is with a view to the administration that has to do with the completion of the seasons. At the close of the Messianic Kingdom, the Great White Throne judgment will take place at which all lost human beings, fallen angels, and demons will be judged. The material universe cursed by sin will be brought back to its pristine state, the saved of the human race will live on the new earth, and the endless eternal ages will begin. This is what is meant by an administration of the completion of the seasons. God will accomplish all this restoration work in and through the Lord Jesus and His atoning death on the Cross. He is the Head, the center around which God revolves everything He does in relation to sin and salvation. (1:11) The word “also” (kai (kai)) gives the connection. Expositors comments: “Not only was it the purpose of God to make known the secret of His grace to us Christians, but this purpose was also fulfilled in us in point of fact and we were made His own—not only chosen for His portion but actually made that.” The best Greek texts have, not, “we have obtained an inheritance,” but “we were made an inheritance,” or, “we were designated as a heritage.” Thus, the saints are God’s heritage, His possession through the work of Christ on the Cross. This “being made an inheritance” is explained by the words “being predestinated (to such a destiny) according to the purpose of Him who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will.” The word “predestinated” is  (proorizw) “to mark out the boundaries or limits beforehand.” The translation reads “in whom we were made an inheritance, having been previously marked out (for this) according to the purpose of His will.” Expositors comments: “The panta (panta) (all) has the absolute sense, and is not to be restricted to ‘the all things’ that belong to divine grace and redemption. The foreordination of men to a special relation to God is connected with the foreordination of things universally. The God of the chosen is the God of the universe; the purpose which is the ground of our being made God’s heritage embraces the whole plan of the world; and our position as the heritage and possession of God has behind it both the sovereignty and the efficiency of the Will that energizes or is operative in all things.” The word “counsel” is  (boulh) which has in it the ideas of intelligence and deliberation. The word “will” is “a desire that springs from one’s emotions.” Here the emotional nature is governed by reason and deliberation. Expositors says: “Here, therefore, the will of God which acts in His foreordaining purpose or decree, in being declared to have its  (boulh) or ‘counsel,’ is set forth as acting, not arbitrarily, but intelligently and by deliberation, not without reason, but for reasons, hidden it may be from us, yet proper to the Highest Mind and Most Perfect Moral Nature. ‘They err,’ says Hooker, ‘who think that of God’s will there is no reason except His will.’ It is also implied in this statement that the divine foreordination, whether of things universally or of men’s lots in particular, is neither a thing of necessity on the one hand nor of caprice on the other, but a thing of freedom and of thought; and further, that the reasons for that foreordination do not lie in the objects themselves, but are intrinsic to the divine Mind and the free determination of the divine Will.” (1:12) The saints were made God’s heritage “that we should be to the praise of His glory.” “That” is eis (eij"), a preposition often showing result. Translate, “to the end that we are to the praise of His glory.” The words “should be” too often carry the idea of obligation to the English reader, and thus suggest here the obligation of the Christian to live a life that will be to the praise of God’s glory. But Paul is speaking here of the saint’s

position, not his Christian experience, which latter he takes up in chapters 4–6. Expositors comments: “This clause states the ultimate end which God had in view in foreordaining us to be made His inheritance. It was not for our own privilege (as the Jews with their limited and exclusive ideas had misinterpreted the object of God in His election of them), but that through us His glory might be set forth. Compare the prophetic declaration, ‘this people which I formed for myself, that they might show forth my praise’ (Isa. 43:21).” The “we” are described as those “who first trusted in Christ.” The word “trusted” is not  (pisteuw), the Greek word which means “to believe, to trust,” but  (proelpizw), “to hope before, to repose hope in a person or thing before the event confirms it.” Vincent says: “We refers to Jewish Christians, and the verb describes their Messianic hope before (pro (pro)) the advent of Christ. Hence Rev., correctly, we who had (have) before hoped. In Christ should be ‘in the Christ,’ as the subject of Messianic expectation and not as Jesus, for whom Christ passed into a proper name. It is equivalent to in the Messiah.” The English word “Christ” is the transliteration (spelling) of the Greek word which means “the anointed,” and this is the translation of the Hebrew word “Messiah.” (1:13) The word “trusted” is in italics and is therefore not in the Greek text. It is not needed. We have in the Greek what is called an interrupted construction. The translation reads, “in whom also as for you (Gentiles), having heard the word of the truth, the good news of your salvation, in whom having believed, you were sealed with the Spirit of the promise the Holy (Spirit).” The word “sealed” is  (sfragizw), “to set a seal upon, mark with a seal.” The papyri afford the following examples of its use: “If the fruit is sealed, then everything is in order: the sealing is the last thing that must be done prior to delivering ;” “let him seal a sample,” obviously to prevent the corn from being tampered with during its transit; “I gave the letter sealed (to the messenger);” “send the ass to be branded” (Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek Testament). The Scofield Bible footnote is helpful: “The Holy Spirit is Himself the seal. In the symbolism of Scripture a sea signifies (1) A finished transaction (Jer. 32:9, 10; John 17:4, 19:30), (2) Ownership (Jer. 32:11, 12; II Tim. 2:19), (3) Security (Esth. 8:8; Dan. 6:17; Eph. 4:30).” Thus, God places the Holy Spirit in us permanently (”The Spirit who has been caused to take up His permanent residence in us, has a passionate desire to the point of envy” Jas. 4:5), indicating that the great transaction in which God the Son paid for sin, thus satisfying the just demand of God’s holy law, is finished; that we saints belong to Him as His heritage, and that we are eternally secure. The Holy Spirit is described as the Spirit of the promise, namely, the Spirit who was announced by promise; see Acts 2:16, Joel 2:28; Zech. 12:10; Isa. 32:15, 44:3; John 7:39; Acts 1:48; Gal. 3:14 (Vincent). (1:14) The Holy Spirit is described as “the earnest of our inheritance.” The word “earnest” is  (ajrrabwn). Vincent defines it as “caution-money deposited by a purchaser in pledge of full payment.” The papyri give us the following examples: “a woman who was selling a cow received 1000 drachmae as earnest money; regarding Lampon the mouse-catcher, I paid him for you as earnest money 8 drachmae in order that he may catch the mice while they are with young” (M. and M.). They say: “The above vernacular usage amply confirms the n.t., sense of at ‘earnest’ or a part given in advance of what will be bestowed fully afterwards.” The bestowal of the Holy Spirit is God’s part payment in the salvation He gives the believing sinner, that part payment guaranteeing the full delivery of all parts of the salvation given. Salvation is in three parts; justification, the removal of the guilt and penalty of sin and the bestowal of a positive righteousness, Jesus

Christ, is given at the moment the sinner puts his faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour; sanctification, a progressive work of the Spirit in the life of the believer, is a present possession in which He eliminates sin from the experience of the believer and produces His own fruit; glorification, the act of God transforming the present bodies of believers into perfect, sinless, deathless bodies. The believer has the first two now. The Holy Spirit, indwelling the believer, is God’s earnest money, guaranteeing to him the future glorification of his body. The Holy Spirit is this guarantee until “the redemption of the purchased possession.” The words “purchased possession” are  (peripoihsi"), which “expresses the general idea of preserving, acquiring, gaining for one’s self, without specific reference to a price” (Expositors). It refers to the saints as God’s heritage which He preserves for Himself. The final redemption of this possession is glorification, when the physical body will be the recipient of the work of salvation. The soul and spirit are now the recipients of God’s saving grace. The body will experience that work at the Rapture when the first resurrection takes place. This will result to the praise of God’s glory. Translation (1:3–14). May the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ be eulogized, the One who conferred benefactions upon us in the sphere of every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, (4) even as He selected us out for Himself is Him before the foundations of the universe were laid, to be holy ones and without blemish before His searching, penetrating gaze; (5) in love having previously marked us out with the result that He placed us as adult sons through the intermediate agency of Jesus Christ for Himself according to that which seemed good in His heart’s desire, (6) resulting in praise of the glory of His grace which He freely bestowed upon us in the Beloved, (7) in whom we are having our redemption through His blood, the putting away of our trespasses according to the wealth of His grace (8) which He caused to superabound to us in the sphere of every wisdom and understanding, (9) having made known to us the mystery of His will according to that which seemed good to Him, which good thing He purposed is Himself, (10) with respect to an administration of the completion of the seasons, to bring back again to their original state the all things in the Christ, the things in the heavens and the things on the earth, in Him, (11) in whom also we were made an inheritance, having been previously marked out according to the purpose of the One who operates the all things according to the counsel of His will, (12) resulting in our being to the praise of His glory who had previously placed our hope in the Christ, (13) in whom also, as for you, having heard the word of the truth, the good news of your salvation, in whom also having believed, you were sealed with the Spirit of the promise, the Holy (Spirit), (14) who is the earnest of our inheritance guaranteeing the full payment of all to the redemption of the possession which is being preserved, with a view to the praise of His glory. (1:15, 16) “Wherefore” is dia touto (dia touto), “on this account,” on account of all that is true of the saints which is stated in verses 3–14, and in particular, because of what is said of them in verse 13, Paul thanks God for the Ephesian saints and prays for them.

“Your faith” is  (thn kaq uJma" pistin), literally, “the down among you faith.” The preposition, kata (kata), “down,” when used with the accusative case as it is here, means “down along.” It has a distributive sense. Paul referred to the faith existent among the Ephesian saints, not the initial act of appropriating faith when they were saved, but the day by day faith exercised in the Lord Jesus for daily living. This faith resulted in love exhibited toward all the saints. The word “love” here is  (ajgaph), referring to that love produced in the heart of the yielded believer by the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:23). Translation. On account of this, I also, having heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus which is among you, and of hour love to all the saints, do not cease giving thanks for you as I constantly make mention of you in my prayers. (1:17) The expression, “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ,” refers to our Lord in His humanity as worshipping and being obedient to God the Father. “The Father of glory” is “the Father of the glory,” the definite article appearing in the Greek text. He is the Father of the glory in the sense that He is the Father to whom glory belongs. Paul prays that God might give the spirit of wisdom and revelation to the Ephesians. Are we to understand the word “spirit” which here is without the article, to refer to the human spirit or the Holy Spirit? The Ephesian saints had both. How could God give them something they already had? Vincent and Expositors say that it is the Holy Spirit to which reference is made. Alford says: “Certainly it would not be right to take pneuma (pneuma) (spirit) here as solely the Holy Spirit, nor as solely the spirit of man: rather as a complex idea, of the spirit of man indwelt by the Spirit of God that as such, it is His special gift of wisdom (not, which gives wisdom, but which possesses it as its character—to which appertains wisdom) and of revelation (i.e., that revelation which belongs to all Christians).” The word pneuma (pneuma) has among its various uses the meaning, “a disposition or influence which fills and governs the soul of anyone.” What Paul is praying for is that God might so work in the lives of the Ephesian saints that they will have the spiritual wisdom and a revelation from Him that is the result of the Holy Spirit’s work of energizing their human spirit. That spiritual disposition should characterize these saints. This spiritual wisdom and revelation is “in the knowledge of Him.” The word “knowledge” is  (ejpignwsi"), “knowledge the is true, accurate, thorough full knowledge.” Expositors says: “It was by a knowledge of God Himself, or, as it may be better put, within the sphere of that knowledge that the gift of enlightenment and the reception of further disclosures of the divine counsel were to make themselves good. The only gifts desired for these converts were gifts of a spiritual order, meaning better acquaintance with God Himself.” Translation. That the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of the glory, might give to you a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the sphere of a full knowledge of Him. (1:18) The words, “the eyes of your understanding being enlightened,” are explanatory of the act of God giving the saints a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the sphere of a full knowledge of Him. The Greek is, “the eyes of your heart,” the heart referring not only to

the emotional nature, but also to the reason and to the faculty of intelligence. The words, “being enlightened,” are a perfect participle in the Greek text, referring to a past complete act having present results. The translation reads, “the eyes of your heart having been enlightened with the present result that they are in a state of illumination.” That is, Paul is praying that a permanent work of the Holy Spirit be done in the human spirits of these saints, that their inner spiritual capacities for understanding the truth may be the recipients of a lasting benefit, and this with a view to their knowing three things. The first is that they may know “what is the hope of their calling.” The word “what” is tis (ti"), not “how great,” nor “of what kind,” but “what”—what the hope really is. “The ‘His calling’ is the call of which God is the author, and that is an effectual call.… The hope is not the object hoped for,… but the attitude of mind, the subjective hope, the assured Christian expectation” (Expositors). The second is that they may know “what is the wealth of the glory of His inheritance in the saints.” The words “in the saints” are locative of sphere. God’s inheritance is within the sphere of the saints. That is, the phrase “in the sphere of the saints” is definitive of the word “inheritance.” This takes us back to verse 11 where Paul says we saints were made God’s inheritance. In verse 18, Paul prays that we might know how precious the saints are in God’s eyes as His inheritance. He is glorified in His saints, and this glory is valuable. It is part of the wealth that God possesses, dearer to Him than all the splendors of creation. Translation. The eyes of your heart being in an enlightened state with a view to your knowing what is the hope of His calling, what is the wealth of the glory of His inheritance in the saints. (1:19, 20) The third thing Paul prays for is that the saints might know “what is the exceeding greatness of His power to us-ward who believe.” Expositors comments: “In these three clauses Paul leads the readers on from the hope itself which becomes theirs in virtue of their being called of God, to the splendor of the inheritance to which the hope points, and from this again to that in God Himself which makes the fulfillment of the hope and the possession of the inheritance certain, namely, the limitless efficiency which is His prerogative.” This power of God working in our behalf with reference to our salvation is not thought of here as operating only in the future, but also at present. The word “exceeding” is huperballon (uJperballon), literally, “a throwing beyond,” thus metaphorically, “superiority, excellence.” It speaks of power here that is beyond measure, more than enough, of surpassing power. This power is described as “according to the working of His mighty power which He wrought in Christ when He raised Him from the dead.” The word “working” is energeia (ejnergeia) from which we get our word “energy.” It speaks of energy put forth, in operation. This surpassing power which God in salvation uses in ministering to our spiritual needs, is in accordance with, commensurate with the divine energy “of His mighty power.” The Greek has it, “of the manifested power of His strength.” Paul uses four words here, all having the general meaning of “power;” the first use of “power” is dunamis (dunami"), “natural ability, general and inherent;” “working” is energeia (ejnergeia), “power in exercise, operative power;” “mighty” is kratos (krato"), “manifested strength ;” the second use of “power” is ischuos (ijscuo"), “strength, power as an endowment.” To put these together we have, “And what is the superabounding greatness of His inherent Dower to us who are believing ones as measured by the

operative energy of the manifested strength of His might.” This might “He wrought in Christ when He raised Him from the dead.” The word “wrought” is  (ejnergew), “to be operative be at work, put forth power.” The idea here is that this might or power was operative in Christ when God raised Him from the dead. It operated to raise Him from the dead. We can translate, “which might was operative in Christ.” The words, “from the dead” are literally, “out from among the dead.” “Set” is  (kaqizw), “to make to sit down.” Translation. And what is the superabounding greatness of His inherent power to us who are believing ones as measured by the operative energy of the manifested strength of His might, which (might) was operative in the Christ when He raised Him out from among the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places. (1:21) “Principality” is the translation of  (ajrch), literally “a first one, a leader,” and is used usually to refer to the holy angels or to demons. Here it refers to the former since the exaltation of Christ is in view, not His victory over the hosts of Satan. “Power” is the translation of exousia (ejxousia), “delegated authority.” It has reference to the holy angels also. The word “might” is dunamis (dunami"), “power,” and “dominion” is  (kurioth"), “lordship.” Alford says that “in this enumeration not only earthly, nor only heavenly authorities are meant to be included, but both together. That the evil spirits are included, is therefore manifest.” The words “far above” are the translation of  (uJperanw), literally. “over above.” Of the words, “and every name that is named,” Vincent says: “And has a collective and summary force—and in a word. Every name, etc. Whatever a name can be given to. ‘Let any name be uttered, whatever it is, Christ is above it; it is more exalted than that which the name uttered affirms’ ( Meyer). Compare Phil. 2:9. ‘We know that the emperor precedes all, though we cannot enumerate all the ministers of his court: so we know that Christ is placed above all, although we cannot name all’ (Bengal).” The word “world” is, not kosmos (kosmo"), “the created universe,” but  (aijwn), “age”; it speaks of duration; it speaks of this present state of things, and in the words, “but also in that which is to come,” of the future state of things. Translation. Over above every government and authority and power and lordship and every name that is constantly being named not only in this age but also in the one about to come. (1:22, 23) “Put under” is  (uJpotassw), a military term, “to put in subjection under one.” Expositors says: “The act referred to, therefore, by the aorist of  (uJpotassw), may be the definite gift of absolute dominion consequent on the exaltation. The raising of Christ to God’s right hand was followed by the placing of all things under His feet and making Him sovereign over all.” The Greek has it, “and gave Him as Head over all things to the Church.” Christ is therefore God’s gift to the Church. He as Head over all things and as Head of the Church is a love gift of God the Father to the Church. The word “church” is  (ejkklhsia), “a body of called out individuals.” It refers to the invisible Church, composed of only saved individuals, not to the visible, organized Church on earth.

The Church is described as that “which is His body.” The word “which” is  (hJti"), “which is of such a nature as,” and has a qualitative nature to it. Of the word “body,”  (swma), Expositors says: “The word  (swma), which passes readily from its literal meaning into the figurative sense of a society, a number of men constituting a social or ethical union (compare Eph. 4:4), is frequently applied in the n.t., epistles to the Church,… as the mystical body of Christ, the fellowship of believers regarded as an organic spiritual unity in a living relation to Christ, subject to Him, animated by Him, and having His power operating in it. The relation between Christ and the Church, therefore, is not an external relation, or one simply of Superior and inferior, Sovereign and subject, but one of life and incorporation. The Church is not merely an institution ruled by Him as President, a Kingdom in which He is the Supreme Authority, or a vast company of men in moral sympathy with Him, but a Society which is in vital connection with Him, having the source of its life in Him, sustained and directed by His power, the instrument also by which He works.” Commenting on the words, “the fulness of Him that filleth all in all,” Expositors has this preliminary note: “The preceding sentence carries the idea of the Church far beyond the limited conception of a concrete institution or outward, visible organization, and lifts us to the grander conception of a great spiritual fellowship, which is one under all varieties of external form and constitution in virtue of the presence of Christ’s Spirit in it, and catholic as embracing all believers and existing wherever any such are found. It is the conception of the Church which pervades this epistle (compare 3:10, 21; 5:23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 32). It appears again in similar terms in the sister epistle (Col. 1:18, 24), and elsewhere in the varied phraseology of the ‘royal priesthood’ (I Pet. 2:9) and the ‘Church of the First born’ (Heb 12:23). It is this supreme idea of the Church as a spiritual order, the essence of which is a living relation to Christ, that receives further expression in the profound sentence with which the paragraph closes.” The word “fulness” is  (plhrwma). Thayer gives the following: “that which is or has been filled; used of a ship inasmuch as it is filled (i.e., manned) with sailors, rowers, and soldiers; in the n.t., the body of believers, as that which is filled with the presence, power, agency, riches of God and of Christ.” Alford says, “the meaning being, that the Church, being the Body of Christ, is dwelt in and filled with God: it is His  (plhrwma) (fulness) in an especial manner—His fulness abides in it and is exemplified by it.” Expositors comments: “The idea is that the Church is not only Christ’s body but that which is filled by Him. In Col 1:19, 2:9, the whole  (plhrwma) or every plenitude of the Godhead, the very fulness of the Godhead, the totality of the divine powers and qualities, is said to be recognized as Framer and Governor of the world, and there is neither need nor place for any intermediate beings as agents in those works of creating, upholding and administering. Here the conception is that this plenitude of the divine powers and qualities which is in Christ is imparted by Him to His Church, so that the latter is pervaded by His presence, animated by His life, filled with His gifts and energies and graces. He is the sole Head of the universe, which is supplied by Him with all that is needed for its being and order. He is also the sole Head of the Church, which receives from Him what He Himself possesses, and is endowed by Him with all that it requires for the realization of its vocation.” “The all things” is “the whole system of things, made by Christ, and having in Him the ground of its being, its continuance, its order (Heb. 1:3, Col. 1:16, 17, I Cor. 8:6), ‘with all things,’… the universe itself and all the things that make its fulness” (Expositors).

Translation. And all things He put in subjection under His feet, and Him He gave as Head over all things to the Church, which is of such a nature as to be His body, the fulness of the One who constantly is filling the all things with all things.

CHAPTER TWO (2:1) The words “And you,” “take up the closing thought of the preceding chapter, the magnitude of God’s power toward believers as exhibited in Christ’s resurrection. He now shows that the same power is applied to his readers. Hence the connection is, ‘When He raised Him from the dead, etc., and you did He quicken, even as He quickened Christ.’ The structure of the passage is broken. Paul having prominently in mind the thought God quickened you as He did Christ, begins with you also. Then the connection is interrupted by vv. 2, 3, which describe their previous condition. Then v. 1 is taken up in v 4, by but God, God introducing a new sentence” (Vincent). The words “hath He quickened” are in italics and therefore not in the Greek text of v. 1. They are found in v. 5. The connection is as follows: in v. 5, those who are addressed in v. 1 are said to have been quickened by God. We therefore include them in v. 1 to fill up the gap left by Paul. “Quickened” of v. 5 is  (zwopoiew), “to cause to live, to make alive, to give life.” The translation reads, “And you He made alive.” The reference is to the act of God imparting divine life in regeneration to the believing sinner. “Were” is a present participle. The literal translation so far reads, “And you He made alive, being dead.” Vincent translates “when you were dead,” thus giving, as he says, the sense of the continued state in the past expressed by the participle “being.” The word “dead” is nekros (nekro"), “spiritually dead, that is, destitute of a life that recognizes and is devoted to God, because given up to trespasses and sins, inactive as respects doing right.” It should be kept clearly in mind that death is not extinction of being or inactivity. Spiritual death is the state of separation from God and His life. Death itself is a separation, whether physical, the separation of the person from his body, or spiritual, the separation of the person from God. The state of death spoken of here is “in trespasses and sins.” It is the dative of reference, “dead with reference to trespasses and sins.” That is, this state of death had to do with trespasses and sins. It was not physical death, although that is caused in the last analysis by sin. This state of death was linked with trespasses and sins in that it had to do with the moral and ethical part of the individual, his reason, will, and emotions. He was living in a state of separation from God and His life in that the latter did not energize and control the reason, will, and emotions of the person. These were very active, but were energized by the totally depraved nature. The word “trespasses” is the translation of  (paraptwma) from  (parapiptw), “to fall beside a person or thing, to slip aside, hence, to deviate from the right path, to turn aside, to wander.” Thus, in the word  (paraptwma), sin is looked upon as a lapse or deviation from truth or uprightness, a trespass, a misdeed. “Sins” is the rendering of hamartia (aJmartia) from  (aJmartanw), “to miss the mark.” It was used in the Greek classics of a spearman missing the target at which he aimed the spear. It was used in the ethical terminology of the Greeks to mean “to fail of one’s purpose, to go wrong.” In the n.t., it speaks of sin as the act of a person failing to obey the Word of God, failing to measure up in his life to the will of God. Its use is excellently illustrated in Romans 3:28, “All have sinned (missed the mark), and at present come short of the glory of God.” The mark or

target is the glory of God. Man was created to glorify God. His attempt, where the attempt is made, to live a life pleasing to God, falls short of the target, like a spear thrown by an athlete, falls short of the target at which it is thrown. Translation. And you being dead with reference to your trespasses and sins, He made alive. (2:2) The word “wherein” goes back to “trespasses and sins.” The idea is, “in which trespasses and sins ye walked.” The word “walked” is  (peripatew), from  (patew), “to walk,” and peri (peri), “around” or “about,” thus, “to walk about.” It then came to mean, “to make one’s way, to make progress, to make due use of one’s opportunities,” finally, “to live, to regulate one’s life, to conduct one’s self, order one’s behavior.” We have here the locative of sphere. The unsaved order their behavior, regulate their lives within the sphere of trespasses and sins. All their thoughts, words, and deeds are ensphered by sin. Not one of their acts ever gets outside this circle of sin. That is what is meant by total depravity. The word “walked” is in the aorist tense, the classification, constative, a construction which looks at a thing or an action as a complete unit, looks at it in a panoramic view. The whole life of the unsaved person is nothing but sin. The unsaved person orders his behavior within the sphere of trespasses and sins “according to the course of this world.” “According to” is kata (kata), a preposition which in its local and root meaning has the idea of “down,” which latter word speaks of domination and control. His act of ordering his behavior in the sphere of trespasses and sins is dominated or controlled by “the course of this world.” “Course” is  (aijwn), which Trench defines as “All that floating mass of thoughts, opinions, maxims, speculations, hopes, impulses, aims, aspirations, at any time current in the world, which it may be impossible to seize and accurately define, but which constitutes a most real and effective power, being the moral, or immoral atmosphere which at every moment of our lives we inhale, again inevitably to exhale,—all this is included in the  (aijwn), which is, as Bengel has expressed it, ‘the subtle informing spirit of the kosmos (kosmo"), or world of men who are living alienated and apart from God’ ” (Trench). The Germans have a word for it, zeitgeist, “the spirit of the age.” “World” is in the head, his demons are his emissaries, and all the unsaved kosmos (kosmo"), which here refers to the system of evil of which Satan are his slaves, together with the purposes, pursuits, pleasures, and places where God is not wanted. To distinguish the words, one could say that kosmos (kosmo") gives the over-all picture of mankind alienated from God during all history, and  (aijwn) represents any distinct age or period of human history as marked out from another by particular characteristics. But not only does the sinner order his behavior as dominated by the spirit of the age in which he lives, which spirit is just part of that kosmos (kosmo") human-history-long alienation of the human race from God. He is dominated or controlled by the “prince of the power of the air.” The word “prince” suggests the son of a king. We use the word in the expression “he is a prince of a fellow.” The Greek word is  (ajrcwn) which refers to the first in an order of persons or things. It speaks here of Satan who is the first one in power and authority in his kingdom. “Power” is exousia (ejxousia), “authority,” and refers to the demons. The word “air” here is aer (aJer), “the lower, denser atmosphere” as against the  (aijqhr), “the rarer atmosphere above the mountain tops.” The kingdom of Satan is in this lower atmosphere where we human beings are, in

order that that sinister being, filled with a bitter hatred of God and the human race, might with his demons, prey upon humanity. Satan is the leader of the authority (demons) of the lower atmosphere. The unsaved order their behavior according to his dictates and those of his demons. It is significant that Paul ascribes the origin of the false religions to the demons (I Tim. 4:1). In the a.v. translation, one would naturally think that “spirit” is in apposition with “prince” and in the same construction as that word is to the words “according to,” interpreting as follows: the prince is the spirit who works in the children of disobedience. That is, Satan is that spirit. Now, it is true that Satan is an angel, and in that sense could be called a spirit. It is true that he works in the unsaved. But according to the rules of Greek Grammar, it is impossible to so relate the words. “Prince” is in the accusative case, “spirit” in the genitive. They could not therefore be in apposition. The connection is as follows: the prince of the power of the air is also the prince of the spirit that now works in the children of disobedience. The question now is as to what this spirit is? It is the principle or power that comes into men from Satan, the spirit that is operative in the unsaved. The word “spirit” is used here as in the expression, “the spirit of Antichrist.” The word refers to one’s way of thinking and acting. We say, “the spirit of that man is beautiful.” It is an evil tendency, a way of living, a characteristic of the unsaved, the spirit of the unsaved. Satan is the one who dominates and controls this spirit in man. This spirit or disposition is said to work in the children of disobedience. “Worketh” is  (ejnergew), “to be operative, to be at work.” “Children” is huios (uiJo"), “sons” and is a Hebrew idiom in which one calls a person having a peculiar quality, or subject to a peculiar evil, a son of that quality. The unsaved are called sons of disobedience in the sense that they have the character of being disobedient. The word “disobedient” is the translation of  (ajpeiqh"), “impersuasable, uncompliant.” Stephen called Israel stiffnecked in heart. This gives the picture of a person who is impersuasable and uncompliant. The definite article before “impersuasable” seems to point to a particular act of that character, possibly the original sin of Adam. Translation. In the sphere of which (trespasses and sins) at one time you ordered your behavior as dominated by the age-spirit of this world system, as dominated by the leader of the authority of the lower atmosphere, (the leader also) of the spirit that is now operating in the sons of the impersuasableness. (2:3) The words, “among whom,” refer back to “the children of disobedience.” It is not “in the midst of whom,” but “numbered among whom.” The saints at one time were numbered among the sons of the impersuasableness. It is, “among whom, as for us, we all had our conversation.” The latter word today refers to converse between individuals, in short, to talk. The Greek word is  (ajnastrefw), “to conduct or behave one’s self, to order one’s behavior.” Thus, the saints at one time ordered their behavior, conducted themselves among the sons of the impersuasableness, in the lusts of their flesh. “Lusts” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a passionate longing, a craving,” good or bad, depending upon the context. Here it is an evil craving since it comes from the flesh. The word “flesh” is sarx (sarx), which here refers to the totally depraved nature as dominating the unsaved individual. In ordering our behavior in the sphere of the totally depraved nature, we “were

fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind.” The word “flesh” is again sarx (sarx), referring to the totally depraved nature. “Mind” is dianoia (dianoia), “the mind as the faculty of understanding, feeling, desiring”; when used in the plural as it is here, it refers to the thoughts, here to evil thoughts. “Fulfilling” is  (poiew), “to do, perform, accomplish.” The participle is present in tense, thus, durative in action. It speaks of the habitual performing of acts that satisfy the desires of the evil nature and of the evil thoughts, thus a fulfilling of those desires. We went the limit in sin. The evil nature had full sway. “Desires” is  (qelhma), “desires that come from the emotions.” Thus, the life of the unsaved is swayed by the emotions rather than the reason. We “were by nature the children of wrath.” “Were” is in the Greek text, imperfect in tense, which tense speaks of continuous action or state of being. Our totally depraved condition before salvation was a continuous one, from birth on without a cessation of that condition. “Children” is teknon (teknon), from  (tiktw), “to give birth to.” Thus, teknon (teknon) emphasizes the birth relationship. We were born children having a totally depraved nature. Vincent says: “Children (teknon (teknon)) emphasizes the connection by birth; … By nature accords with children, implying what is innate. Wrath is God’s holy hatred of sin; His essential antagonism to everything evil, (Rom. 1:18).” Expositors comments: “This holy displeasure of God with sin is not inconsistent with His love, but is the reaction of that love against the denial of its sovereign rights of responsive love. The term phusis (fusi") (nature), though it may occasionally be applied to what is habitual or to character as developed, means properly what is innate, implanted in one by nature, and this with different shades of meaning (compare Rom. 2:14; Gal. 2:15, 4:8 etc.). The clause means, therefore, that in their pre-Christian life those meant by the hemeis pantes (eJmei" pante") (we all) were in the condition of subjection to the divine wrath; and that they were so not by deed merely, nor by circumstance, nor by passing into it, but by nature. Their universal sin has already been affirmed. This universal sin is now described as sin by nature. Beyond this, Paul does not go in this present passage. But the one is the explanation of the other. Universal sin implies a law of sinning, a sin that is of the nature; and this, again, is the explanation of the fact that all are under the divine wrath, for the divine wrath operates only where sin is. Here is the essential meaning of the doctrine of original sin.” Translation. Among whom also we all ordered our behavior in the sphere of the cravings of our flesh, continually practicing the desires of our flesh and of our thoughts, and were continually children of wrath by nature, as also the rest. (2:4–6) Expositors comments: “A return is now made to the statement which was interrupted at verse 2. The resumption might have been made by oun (oJun) (therefore). The adversative de (de) (but), however, is the more appropriate, as the other side of our case is now set forth—the divine grace which meets the sinful, condemned condition, and which stands over the dark background of our death by sin and our subjection by nature to the divine wrath. God who is wroth with sin, is a God of grace. His disposition towards those who are dead by trespasses and sins is one of mercy, and this is no stinted mercy, but amercy that is rich, exhaustless.” The word “rich” is the translation of plousios (plousio"), “wealthy, abounding in material resources, abounding, abundantly supplied.” God who is rich in mercy is so “for His great love wherewith He loved us.” The word

“for” is dia (dia), “because of, on account of,” thus, “in order to satisfy” His great love. The distinctive word for “love” here is  (ajgaph) which speaks of a love called out of one’s heart by the preciousness of the one loved, a love that impels one to sacrifice one’s self for the benefit of the object loved. It is the love shown at Calvary (John 3:16). There are two parallel phrases here, “God being wealthy in the sphere of mercy,” and “we being dead with respect to our trespasses.” The entire translation is, “But God being wealthy in the sphere of mercy, on account of His great love with which He loved us, and we being dead with respect to our trespasses, hath quickened us together with Christ.” The word “quickened” is  (zwopoiew), “to cause to live, to make alive, to give life.” This takes us to Romans 6:3, 4, “Or, do you not know that as many as were placed into Christ Jesus (by the Holy Spirit), into His death were placed. We were entombed therefore with Him through this aforementioned placing into His death, in order that just as there was raised up Christ out from amongst the dead ones through the glory of the Father, thus also as for us, in the newness of a life (imparted) we may order our behavior.” This newness of life is a new life imparted through our identification with Christ in His resurrection. Our identification with Christ in His death broke the power of indwelling sin. Our identification with Him in His resurrection resulted in the impartation of divine life. This is what Paul has reference to when he says, “We were made alive together with Him.” Now comes the interjection, “by grace ye are saved.” We have here in the Greek what is called a periphrastic construction. This is used when the writer cannot get all of the details of action from one verbal form. So he uses two, a finite verb and a participle. The participle here is in the perfect tense, which tense speaks of an action that took place in past time and was completed in past time, having results existent in present time. The translation reads, “By grace have you been completely saved, with the present result that you are in a saved state of being.” The perfect tense speaks of the existence of finished results in present time. But Paul is not satisfied with showing the existence of finished results in present time. He wants to show the persistence of results through present time. So he uses the verb “to be” in the present tense which gives durative force to the finished results. Thus, the full translation is, “By grace you have been saved in past time completely, with the result that you are in a state of salvation which persists through present time.” The unending state of the believer in salvation could not have been put in stronger or clearer language. The finished results of the past act of salvation are always present with the reader. His present state of salvation is dependent upon one thing and one thing only, his past appropriation of the Lord Jesus as Saviour. His initial act of faith brought him salvation in its three aspects, justification, the removal of the guilt and penalty of sin and the impartation of a positive righteousness, Jesus Christ Himself, an act which occurs at the moment of believing, and a position that remains static for time and eternity; sanctification, positional, the act of the Holy Spirit taking the believing sinner out of the first Adam with his (Adam’s) sin and death, and placing him in the Last Adam (Jesus Christ) with His righteousness and life, an act that occurs at the moment of believing; progressive, the process by which the Holy Spirit eliminates sin from the experience of the believer and produces His fruit, gradually conforming him into the image of the Lord Jesus, a process that goes on all through the life of a Christian and continues all through eternity, and which never is completed, for a finite creature can never equal an infinite one in any quality; and glorification, the act of the Holy Spirit, transforming the

mortal bodies of believers into glorified, perfect bodies at the Rapture of the Church. The believer has had his justification, he is having his sanctification, and he is yet to have his glorification. The earnest of the Spirit guarantees to him his glorification. “Hath raised us up together” is  (sunegeirw). Expositors translates, “Raised us with Him,” and comments: “That is, to life now, in a present spiritual sense. The  (sunegeirw) expresses the definite idea of resurrection, and primarily that of physical resurrection. The introduction of this term and the following makes it not improbable that both ideas, that of the present moral resurrection and that of the future bodily resurrection, were in Paul’s mind, and that he did not sharply distinguish between them, but thought of them as one great gift of life.” “Made us sit together” is the translation of  (sunkaqizw), which Expositors translates, Seated us (or, enthroned us) with Him in the heavenlies, and comments: “Made us sharers with Him it dignity and dominion, so that even now, and in foretaste of our future exaltation, our life and thought are raised to the heavenlies where He reigns.” As to the phrase “in Christ Jesus,” the same authority says: “Not the ‘seated us with Him’ only, but the whole statement is qualified by this. This quickening, this resurrection, this seating of us with Him take effect in so far as we are in Him as our Representative, having our life and our completeness in our Head.“ Translation. But God, being wealthy in the sphere of mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, and we being dead with respect to our trespasses, made us alive together with the Christ, by grace have you been saved completely in past time, with the present result that you are in a state of salvation which persists through present time, and raised us with Him and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus. (2:7) Now comes the purpose for which God saved us, namely, “that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.” Expositors says: “The satisfaction of His love was God’s motive in quickening and raising them. The manifestation of His glory in its surpassing wealth is His final purpose in the same.” The expression, “the ages to come” are in the Greek,   (ejn toi" aijwsin toi" ejpercomenoi"), literally, “in the ages that are coming one upon another,” that is, in the eternal ages that roll in, one after another in the future eternity after the universe is returned to its pristine glory. Expositors comments: “God’s purpose, therefore, is that in the eternal future, the future which opens with Christ’s Parousia (His personal presence in His second coming), and in all the continuing length of that future, the grace of His ways with those once dead in sins should be declared and understood in all the grandeur of its exceeding riches.” “Kindness” is  (crhstoth"), “benignity, kindness.” “Toward” is epi (ejpi), “upon,” with the accusative case as here. “to.” “Show” is endeiknumi (ejndeiknumi), in the middle voice, which voice indicates that the subject of the verb acts in his own interest. God will exhibit His kindness to the saints for His own glory, in order that He may be glorified. And the spectators will be the angels. We saints will be the objects of this kindness. We will be on display before the angelic world, basking in the sunshine of God’s smile, enjoying the riches of His blessings, all, in order that He might be glorified by the angelic hosts. Translation. In order that He might exhibit for His own interest (glory) in

the ages that will pile themselves upon one another in continuous succession, the surpassing wealth of His grace in kindness to us in Christ Jesus. (2:8–10) The definite article appears before the word “grace” here, pointing the reader back to the same statement in verse 5, and informing him that the writer is to elaborate upon this previously mentioned statement. The reader of this exposition is urged to go back to the exegesis of verse 5 and refresh his memory as to the total meaning of Paul’s statement, “by grace are ye saved.” The words, “through faith” speak of the instrument or means whereby the sinner avails himself of this salvation which God offers him in pure grace. Expositors says: “Paul never says ‘through the faith,’ as if the faith were the ground or procuring cause of the salvation.” Alford says: “It (the salvation) has been effected by grace and apprehended by faith.” The word “that” is touto (touto), “this,” a demonstrative pronoun in the neuter gender. The Greek word “faith” is feminine in gender and therefore touto (touto) could not refer to “faith.” It refers to the general idea of salvation in the immediate context. The translation reads, “and this not out from you as a source, of God (it is) the gift.” That is, salvation is a gift of God. It does not find its source in man. Furthermore, this salvation is not “out of a source of works.” This explains salvation by grace. It is not produced by man nor earned by him. It is a gift from God with no strings tied to it. Paul presents the same truth in Romans 4:4, 5 when speaking of the righteousness which God imputed to Abraham, where he says: “Now, to the one who works, his wages are not looked upon as a favor but as that which is justly or legally due. But to the one who does not work but believes on the One who justifies the impious, his faith is computed for righteousness.” One reason why salvation is a free gift of God and not earned by works, is given us in the words; “lest any man should boast.” Grace glorifies God. Works would glorify man. Commenting on the words, “For we are His workmanship.” Vincent says: “A reason why no man should glory. If we are God’s workmanship, our salvation cannot be of ourselves.” Expositors comments: “We ourselves are a work, the handiwork of God, made anew by Him, and our salvation, therefore, is due to Him, not to ourselves.” The word “workmanship” is  (poihma), from  (poiew), “to do, to make.” Thus,  (poihma) means “something thatis made.” The words, “created in Christ Jesus unto good works,” Expositors says are “a further definition of ‘His workmanship.’ We are God’s spiritual handiwork in the sense that we were created by Him, made a new spiritual creature by Him when His grace made us Christians. This new creation was in Christ, so that except by union between Him and us it could not have taken place (Eph. 2:15, 4:24, II Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15; Col. 3:10). Also it was with a view to good works.… We ourselves then having been created anew by God, and good works being the object to which that new creation looked, not the cause that led to it, all must be of grace—not of deeds, and there can be no room for boasting.” “We were created in Christ Jesus for good works,” and these good works are described as those good works “which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” The word “ordained” is  (proetoimazw), “to prepare before, to make ready beforehand.” Vincent says: “God prearranged a sphere of moral action for us to walk in. Not only are works the necessary outcome of faith, but the character and direction of the works are made ready by God.” Expositors says: “Before He created us in

Christ by our conversion, He had destined these good works and made them ready for us in His purpose and decree. There is the unseen source from which they spring, and there is their final explanation.” These good works were prepared beforehand “that we should walk in them.” The word “walk” is  (peripatew), “to regulate one’s life, to conduct one’s self, to order one’s behavior.” “In them” is en toutois (ejn toutoi"), “in these,” namely, the good works, locative of sphere. We are to order our behavior within the sphere of these good works. Expositors comments: “God’s purpose in the place which He gave to good works in His decree was that they should actually and habitually be done by us. His final object was to make good works the very element of our life, the domain in which our action should move. That this should be the nature of our walk is implied in our being His handiwork, made anew by Him in Christ; that the good works which are the divine aim of our life shall be realized, is implied in their being designed and made ready for us in God’s decree; and that they are of God’s originating, and not of our action and merit, is implied in the fact that we had ourselves to be made a new creation in Christ with a view to them.” Translation. For by the grace have you been saved in time past completely, through faith, with the result that your salvation persists through present time; and this (salvation) is not from you as a source. Of God it is the gift; not from a source of works, in order that no one might boast; for we are His handiwork, created in Christ Jesus with a view to good works which God prepared beforehand in order that within their sphere we may order our behavior. (2:11, 12) Expositors comments: “As dio (dio) (wherefore) indicates, what follows is a personal, ethical application of what has been said; and the application is drawn, not from the immediate preceding sentence, but from the contents of the prior paragraph as a whole. The great things done for them by God’s grace should incline them to think of the past from which they have been delivered. The remembrance of that past will make them more thankful for their present privilege, and more careful to walk in the good works which God has in view for them.” The word “Gentiles” is preceded by the definite article in the Greek text, marking Gentiles out as a distinct class. The word “flesh” in this verse does not refer to the unregenerate man, but to the actual physical body, as Expositors says: “The term sarx (sarx) (flesh) also is to be taken literally, not as referring to the former unregenerate life, but (as the subsequent sentences show) in the sense of the flesh to which circumcision is applicable. They are reminded that they belonged to the class of the Gentiles, their bodies proclaiming their heathen character.” As to the clause “that which is called Uncircumcision,” Expositors says: “A further definition of what they were as  (ejqnh) (Gentiles), suggestive of the low regard in which they were held as members of that class. The name Uncircumcision!—a name of contempt, was flung at them.” The same authority has this to say also: “This sentence also is introduced with reference to the poverty of the previous condition of these Godless, Christless Gentiles. The point seems to be that the inferiority in which they were held, and which was expressed by the contemptuous name Uncircumcision, meant all the more as it was fastened on them by those to whom, while proudly calling themselves the Circumcision, the distinction was nothing more than an outward manual act performed on their bodies. The rite, when its spiritual significance and use are in view, is spoken of with honor by Paul (Rom. 4:11). As a mere performance, a barrier between Jew and Gentile, a yoke imposed by the former on the latter, a thing made essential to salvation, he spoke of it in terms of scorn and repudiation.” The verse reads, “Wherefore, be keeping in remembrance

that at one time you, the Gentiles in the flesh, the ones habitually called Uncircumcision by the so-called Circumcision performed by hand in the flesh.” Now Paul enumerates five things that were true of these uncircumcised Gentiles. The first is that they were “without Christ.” Expositors says: “It describes their former condition as one in which they had no connection with Christ; in which respect they were in a position sadly inferior to that of the Jews, whose attitude was one of hoping and waiting for Christ, the Messiah. Their apartness from Christ, their lack of all relation to Him—this is the first stroke in the dark picture of their former heathen life, and the four to which the eye is directed in the subsequent clauses all follow from that.” To understand the above most clearly, we should know that the word “Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek word christos (cristo"), which in turn is the translation of the Hebrew word for Messiah. The word “Christ” here is not to be taken in its Christian sense, but in its Jewish one. The point is not that these Ephesians were without Christ as Saviour, but as Gentiles, they had no covenant connection with Him as the Jews had with Him as Messiah. The second thing true of these Ephesians was that they were “aliens from the commonwealth of Israel.” We have a participle in the Greek, “alienated from the commonwealth of Israel.” Expositors says: “It does not necessarily imply a lapse from a former condition of attachment or fellowship, but expresses generally the idea of being a stranger as contrasted with one who is at home with a person or an object. The term politeia (politeia) (commonwealth) has two main senses—a state or commonwealth, and citizenship or the rights of a citizen. The first of these is most in harmony with the theocratic term ‘the Israel,’ and so it is understood by most. These Ephesians, therefore, had no part in the theocracy, the o.t. constitution under which God made Himself known to the Jew and entered into relation with him.” The third thing true of them was that they were “strangers from the covenants of promise.” The definite article is in the Greek text. It is, “strangers from the covenants of the promise.” Expositors comments: “The word xenos (xeno") (strangers), which has the particular meaning of one who is not a member of a state or city, is used here in a general sense of foreign to a thing, having no share in it. The  (diaqhkai) (covenants) are the covenants with Abraham and the patriarchs. It is obviously the covenants of Messianic significance that are in view. That the Mosaic Law or the Sinaitic Covenant is not in view seems to follow from the mention of the promises; for that covenant was not distinctively of the promise, but is described by Paul as coming in after it and provisionally (Gal. 3:17–19). The ‘promise’ is the one distinctively so-called, the great Messianic promise given the Hebrew people.” The fourth thing true of these Gentiles was that they had “no hope.” Expositors says: “It is not only that they had not the hope, the Messianic hope which was one of the distinctions of the Israelite, but that they were utterly without hope. Ignorant of the divine salvation and of Christ in whom it was found, they had nothing to hope for beyond this world.” The fifth thing was that they were “without God in the world.” Again, Expositors has a helpful comment: “As they were without Christ, and without hope, so were they without God—without the knowledge of the one true and living God and thus destitute of any God. So in Gal. 4:8, Paul speaks of Gentiles like these as knowing not God and doing service unto them which by nature are no gods.” As to the phrase: “in the world,” the same authority says: “The domain of their life was this present evil world, and in it, alienated as it was from God, they had no God.”

Translation. On this account be remembering that at one time, you, the Gentiles in the flesh, the ones habitually called uncircumcision by that which is called circumcision in the flesh made by hand, that you were at that time without Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of the promise, not having hope and without God in the world. (2:13) Vincent says: “Now, in contrast with at that time. In Christ Jesus, in contrast with alienated from, etc. Jesus is added because the Christ who was the subject of promise, the Messiah, has come into the world under that personal name. The phrase includes the promised Messiah and the actual Saviour.” Translation. But now in Christ Jesus you who at one time were far off, have become near by the blood of the Christ. (2:14) The intensive use of the pronoun in the Greek text gives us, “For He Himself is our peace.” The Greek verb  (eijrw) means “to join”; the noun  (eijrhnh), refers to the things joined together. To make peace, therefore, means “to join together that which is separated.” Jew and Gentile, by God’s act of selecting the Jewish nation to be the channel through which He will bring salvation to the lost, had been separated. Now, in the blood of Christ they in the Church have been joined. This is the peace spoken of here. Expositors comments: “As most commentators notice, the emphasis is on the autos (aujto") (intensive pronoun)—‘He and no other.’ But there is probably more in it than that. The selection of the abstract  (eijrhnhn) (peace), instead of the simple  (eijrhnopoio") (peace maker), suggests that not only ‘He alone’ but ‘He in His own Person’ made peace. It is not only that the peace was made by Christ and ranks as His achievement, but that it is so identified with Him that were He away it would also fail,—so dependent on Him that apart from Him we cannot have it.” The word “our” refers to Jew and Gentile. In making peace, our Lord made the both (Jew and Gentile) one. The words “the both” are abstract neuter, showing that two parties or classes are in the apostolic mind. As to the words, “the middle wall of partition,” Vincent says: “literally, the middle wall of the fence or hedge. The wall which pertained to the fence; the fact of separation being emphasized in wall, and the instrument of separation in fence. The hedge was the whole Mosaic economy which separated Jew and Gentile.” Translation. For He Himself is our peace, the One who made the both one, having broken down the middle wall of the partition. (2:15) The words “the enmity” follow the words “middle wall of partition,” only the participle separating them, and should be construed as defining them, namely, “the middle wall which was the enmity.” The enmity was broken down. The law was abolished. The word “abolished” is  (katargew), “to render inoperative.” The enmity was between Jew and Gentile, the result of the separating influence of the Mosaic economy. The order of words in the Greek is, “in His flesh the law of the commandments in ordinances having abolished.” That is, our Lord abolished the law by His death on the

Cross. Expositors says: “Farther statement of the way in which Christ by His death on the Cross removed the separation and the hostile feeling between Jew and Gentile, namely, by abrogating the dividing law itself. The law is now introduced, and the term ‘the law’ is to be taken in its full sense, not the ceremonial law only, but the Mosaic law as a whole, according to the stated use of the phrase. This law is abolished in the sense of being rendered inoperative … The law is one of ‘commandment-in-decrees.’ What is in view is its character as mandatory, and consisting in a multitude of prescriptions or statutes.… The law was made up of commandments and these commandments expressed themselves and operated in the form of ordinances. The word dogma (ordinance) in the n.t. never means anything else than statute, decree, ordinance.” As to the meaning of the words, “to make in Himself of twain, one new man,” Expositors says: “The new creation and the new union have their ground and principle in Christ. What was contemplated, too, was not simply the making of one man where formerly there were two, but the making of one new man. The result was not that, though, the separation between them was removed, the Jew still remained Jew and the Gentile, still Gentile. It was something new, the old distinctions between Jew and Gentile being lost in a third order of ‘man,’—the Christian man.” The word “make” is not  (poiew), “to make,” but  (ktizw), “to create.” The word “new” is kainon (kainon), not “new” in time but “new” in quality. The word “man” is not  (ajnhr), “a male individual,” but  (ajnqrwpo"), the generic, racial term, speaking of an individual, here of the new creation made up of male and female, the mystical body of Christ. Translation. The enmity, in His flesh having rendered inoperative the law of the commandments in ordinances, in order that the two He might create in Himself, resulting in one new man, making peace. (2:16) We have here, Expositors says, “a further statement of object, the kai (kai) (and) continuing and extending it. Only at this point is the prior and larger idea of the reconciliation to God introduced, and even now it is in connection with the idea of the reconciliation of Jew and Gentile.… In the context, it is true, so far as the relations of Jew and Gentile to each other are dealt with, we have simply the idea of a state of separation into two hostile camps giving place to a state of unity. But in the present clause, the larger truth of a reconciliation to God is in view, and this favors the idea of a restoration to a condition which had been lost.” The verb,  (ajpokatallassw), because of its prefixed preposition apo (ajpo) which gives it the force of back, hints at a restoration to a primal unity, that unity being the unity of the human race before God brought in the Jew as a separate and distinct nation, not numbered amongst the other nations. That is, Jew and Gentile in Christ Jesus, restored to a primal unity where there was neither Jew nor Gentile, are now reconciled to God. The simple verb  (katallassw), means “to reconcile those that are at variance.” God and the sinner are at variance because of sin. In salvation the believing sinner is brought into a state in which he is yielded and obedient to God, willingly, of his own free will and accord. Jew and Gentile are reconciled in one body to God. “The reference,” Expositors says, “is to the Jews and Gentiles now making one body, compare the ‘one body’ in I Cor. 10:17; Eph. 4:4; and especially in Col. 3:15. His object was to bring the two longsundered and antagonistic parties as one whole, one great body, into right relation to God by His Cross.” As to the words “having slain the enmity thereby,” Alford says that the

enmity here refers to that between the sinner and God. The “enmity” of verse 15 is defined in its context as that between Jew and Gentile, for the purpose of God was to reconcile these two. The “enmity” of verse 16 is that between the sinner and God, for His purpose was to reconcile both Jew and Gentile in one body to Himself. Translation. And in order that He might reconcile the both in one body to God through the Cross, having put to death the enmity by it. (2:17, 18) “Came” is an aorist participle; “having come” in His first Advent, “He proclaimed glad tidings of peace” in His atoning work of salvation on the Cross, “to you (Gentiles) who were far off, and to you (Jews) who were near.” The word “preached” is not  (khrussw), “to proclaim,” but euaggelizomai (eujaggelizomai), “to bring good news.” Expositors says of verse 18, “the verse is a confirmation of the previous statement in the form of an appeal to the experience of those addressed. The fact that we, both of us, are now brought to God through Him is a witness to the truth … that Christ came and preached peace to both.” The word “access” is the translation of  (prosagw), “to open a way of access.” It was used of those who secure for one the privilege of an interview with a sovereign. The French word entree exactly translates it. It is by means of the ministry of the Holy Spirit that the saints have entree into the presence of God the Father. Note if you will, the Trinity. God the Son provides the way into the Father’s presence through the Blood of His Cross, God the Spirit conducts the saint in and presents him, and God the Father is the One into whose presence the believer is brought. Translation. And having come, He proclaimed glad tidings of peace to you who were far off, and to you who were near, because through Him we have our entree, the both of us, by one Spirit into the presence of the Father. (2:19, 20) In the words “now therefore” (ara oun (ajra oJun)), “Paul brings to their conclusion the statements made in vv. 14–18, and draws from them the natural, comforting inference” (Expositors). The words “strangers and foreigners” are a comprehensive expression including “all who, whether by natural or territorial demarcation, or by the absence of civic privileges, were not citizens.” The word “stranger” is zenos (zeno"), “an alien.” The word speaks of that which is of a different quality or nature than something else, thus, alien to it. Sinners are aliens to the kingdom of God, having a totally-depraved nature that makes them different, and different in a hostile sense. The word “foreigners” is paroikos (paroiko"), from para (para), “alongside,” and  (oijkew), “to make one’s home.” Thus it speaks of one who has a home alongside of someone else. It is used here of one who comes from another country or city and settles in another, but does not rank as a citizen. Translation. Now then, no longer are you aliens and foreign sojourners, but you are fellow-citizens of the saints and householders of God, having been built up upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, there being a chief corner stone, Jesus Christ Himself. (2:21, 22) “In whom” refers back to “Jesus Christ.” The building, of course, is the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ composed of believers who are brought into salvation

during the Church Age which began at Pentecost and ends at the Rapture. The words, “fitly framed together” are the translation of  (sunarmologew), from harmos (aJrmo"), “a joint,” and  (legw), “to pick out,” thus, “to join together,” the total meaning being, “to join closely together.” It is an architectural metaphor. “Temple” is naos (nao"), “the inner sanctuary,” not hieros (iJero"), “the temple with its porches and outbuildings.” Translation. In whom the whole building closely joined together, grows into a holy inner sanctuary in the Lord, in whom also you are being built together into a permanent dwelling place of God by the Spirit.

CHAPTER THREE (3:1) The words “for this cause” refer back to “the building together of the saints” of 2:20–22. That is, “seeing you art so builded together for a dwelling place of God” (Vincent). Then comes a parenthetical paragraph to verse 13, and the words “for this cause” are resumed. The apostle began his prayer of 3:14–21 in verse one, but between 3:1 and 3:14, we have a digression, the purpose of which is to acquaint the Gentiles with their call and Paul’s knowledge of the mystery of Jew and Gentile in one body. Paul designates himself as “I, Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles.” Expositors, quoting Meyer, says: “ (ejgw Paulo") (I, Paul), a solemn and emphatic designation of the writer by himself, expressive rather of his personal interest in them than the consciousness of his authority.” The definite article appears before “prisoner,” and Expositors says: “The article with desmos (desmo") (prisoner) expresses simply the character in which Paul appears at present or the class to which he belongs,… not his pre-eminence among the Lord’s prisoners, as if it meant the prisoner par excellence (Meyer), a claim surely which would neither be like Paul nor in harmony with the thought of the paragraph.” He is the prisoner of “the Christ Jesus,” the definite article appearing before Christ. Paul’s thought is, “the prisoner of the Messiah, who is now called Jesus.” The words are in the genitive case, probably, the genitive of originating cause. Paul was one made prisoner by Christ Jesus (Expositors). He is a prisoner “on behalf of you the Gentiles.” The same authority explains, “Paul was called specially to be a minister of Christ to the Gentiles (Acts 21:21, 28 ; 22:21), and his preaching Christ as for the Gentiles equally with the Jews provoked that enmity of the Jews which led to his imprisonment. It was thus for the Gentiles that he was a prisoner; and there is probably also the further thought in the  (uJper uJmwn) (on behalf of you) that Paul’s imprisonment was to be for their good, helpful to their Christian life, for the idea with which the paragraph closes is that his afflictions were their glory (v. 13).” Translation. On this account I, Paul, the prisoner of the Messiah, Jesus, on behalf of you, the Gentiles. (3:2, 3) The “if” is ei ge (eij ge). It is a supposition that is taken for granted. The idea is, “if, indeed, as I may assume” (Expositors). Alford translates “assuming that.” He says, “The Ephesians had heard all this, and St. Paul was now delicately reminding them.” The word “dispensation” is oikonomia (oijkonomia), made up of oikos (oijko"), “a

house” and nomos (nomo"), “law,” thus, “the law of the house.” The word speaks in general of the oversight, management, or administration one has over something. Paul was given the responsibility of having oversight or management over the grace of God in the sense that he was to administer it in its publicity. He was given the revelation of the grace of God and the responsibility of properly preaching and teaching it. This grace given Paul for the Gentiles, he defines in verse 6. Then Paul explains his knowledge of this particular grace. It was given him by revelation. The word is apokalupsis (ajpokaluyi"), “an uncovering, a laying bare.” “Mystery” is  (musthrion), “a secret purpose of God which when uncovered is understood by the Spirit-taught believer.” The words, “as I wrote afore in few words,” refer ostensibly to the contents of 2:11–22 which tie up with the mystery of 3:6. Translation. Assuming that you heard of the administration of the grace of God which was given to me for you, that by revelation there was made known to me the mystery even as I wrote above in brief. (3:4, 5) “Whereby” is pros ho (pro" oJ), literally, “toward which,” the idea being “agreeably to which,” namely to what Paul had written. Expositors offers “in accordance with which.” The word “knowledge” is sunesis (sunesi"). It is used in the n.t. of mental apprehension. It is defined as “insight depending on judgment and inference.” It appears to denote the idea of a critical understanding, the apprehension of the bearing of things. The words “of Christ” are genitive of description, defining the mystery. It is the mystery relating to Christ, the revelation of the long-hidden purpose of God regarding Christ as not for Israel only, but also for the Gentiles (Expositors). The word “ages” is genea (genea), “the period covered by a generation of men,” thus, “a generation.” The word “other” is heteros (eJtero"), “another of a different kind.” The expression, “the sons of men,” does not refer to o.t. prophets as against those of the n.t., but to men in general, in conformity with the word “generations.” The word “as” ( (wJ")) “has its proper comparative force.” “The fact of the revelation made in pre-Christian times to the fathers and the prophets is not questioned. The matter in view is the measure or manner of the revelation. The nun (nun) (now) is ‘in these Christian times,’ and the aorist ‘revealed’ defines the fuller revelation as made definitely at a former period of these times” (Expositors). Translation. In accordance with which you are able when you read to understand my insight into the mystery of the Christ which in other and different generations was not made known to the sons of men as now it has been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. (3:6) Paul now proceeds to make known the mystery. The words “should be” are einai (eijnai), the infinitive of the verb of being. The translation should read: “that the Gentiles are.” The contents of the mystery are a fact, not a purpose. The Gentiles are fellow-heirs with the Jews. They are  (susswma), “fellow-members,” that is, “belonging jointly to the same body.” They are “fellow-partakers of the promise.” The Gentiles inherit jointly with the Jews the blessings of salvation. They are fellow-members of the same body, the Mystical Body of Christ, which is a new creation, in which the line of separation between Jew and Gentile is broken down They are fellow-partakers of the

promises which are in Christ Jesus. The best Greek texts include the name “Jesus,” which makes all the difference in the world. If it were not there, Paul would be saying that the Gentiles were fellow-partakers of the Jewish Messianic promises, which is not true. Israel will yet be brought back into fellowship with and service to God in the Millennium. The addition of the name “Jesus” refers the name “Christ” to the “Anointed” of God who became the Saviour at the Cross. Any promises in Him that are not distinctly Messianic and Jewish, are the promises referred to here. The Scofield Bible has a valuable note: “That the Gentiles were to be saved was no mystery (Rom. 9:24–33; 10:19–21). The mystery ‘hid in God’ was the divine purpose to make of Jew and Gentile a wholly new thing—‘the Church, which is His (Christ’s) body,’ formed by the baptism with the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 12:12, 13) and in which the earthly distinction of Jew and Gentile disappears (Eph. 2:14, 15; Col. 3:10, 11). The revelation of this mystery, which was foretold but not explained by Christ (Mt. 16:18), was committed to Paul. In his writings alone we find the doctrine, position, walk, and destiny of the Church.” Translation. That the Gentiles are fellow-heirs, and belong jointly to the same body, and are fellow-partakers of His promise in the glad tidings. (3:7, 8) The word “minister” is diakonos (diakono"), “a servant seen in his activity.” Our word “deacon” comes from this Greek word. The Greek word refers to one who serves. The word “minister” is misleading, since it is the technical word used today to designate the pastor of a church. Paul merely meant that he became one who ministered the gospel, served God in that capacity. “The gift of the grace of God” is “the gift consisting in the grace, and the particular grace in view is the office of the apostleship or the ministry to the Gentiles” (Expositors). This gift of the apostleship was “according to the working of His power.” Vincent says: “The gift was bestowed in accordance with that efficiency which could transform Saul the persecutor into Paul the apostle to the Gentiles.” Expositors says: “The thought of the dignity of the office he had received at the cost of such grace and power at once evokes the sense of his own utter unworthiness, to which he gives stronger expression here than even in I Cor. 15:9, or II Cor. 12:11.” The words “less than the least” are elachestoteros (ejlacestotero"), a comparative formed on a superlative; literally, “more least” than all the saints. The word “unsearchable” is anexichniaston (ajnexicniaston), from  (ejxicniazw), “to trace out,” and Alpha privative which negates the word, making it mean, “that which cannot be traced out.” The riches of Christ here “are the riches that Christ has or which are in Him. The ploutos (plouto") (wealth) thus contained in Christ is the whole wealth of the salvation He bestows; and this is ‘unsearchable’ not in the sense of inexhaustible, but rather in that of unfathomable, ‘past finding out,’ such as cannot be fully comprehended by men” (Expositors). Translation. Of which I became one who ministers according to the gift of the grace of God which (grace) was given to me according to the operative energy of His power; to me, the one who is less than the least of all saints there was given this grace, to the Gentiles to proclaim the glad

tidings of the wealth belonging to the Christ. (3:9) “To make see” is  (fwtizw), “to bring to light.” The word “all” is rejected by the Nestle and the Westcott and Hort texts. “Fellowship” is oikonomia (oijkonomia), “administration, dispensing technique, stewardship.” It was given to Paul to bring to light the arrangement, the way this mystery was administered, namely, the admission of the Gentiles on equal terms with the Jews “World” is  (aijwn), “an age.” This mystery was formed before the ages of time began, and kept secret since they started “Through Jesus Christ” is a rejected reading. Translation. And to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which has been kept covered up from the beginning of the ages in the God who created the all things. (3:10) The words “to the intent” reach back to verses 8 and 9. Vincent says: “Grace was given me to preach Christ and to enlighten men as to the long-hidden mystery of the admission of the Gentiles, in order that now, etc.” The principalities and powers are the holy angels. Alford says: “For this sublime cause the humble Paul was raised up—to bring about—he, the least worthy of the saints,—that to the heavenly powers themselves should be made known, by means of those whom he was empowered to enlighten, etc.” “Might be known” is  (gnwrizw), “to make known.” “By” is dia (dia), “through the intermediate agency of.” “Manifold” is polupoikilos (polupoikilo"), “much— variegated, marked with a great variety of colors.” The Church thus becomes the university for angels, and each saint a professor. Only in the Church can the angels come to an adequate comprehension of the grace of God. They look at the Church to investigate the mysteries of redemption. I Peter (1:12) speaks of the things which the angels have a passionate desire to stoop down and look into, like the golden cherubim that overshadow the Mercy Seat, ever gazing upon the sprinkled blood that is upon it. The preposition para (para), “beside,” is prefixed to the verb “stoop down,” which speaks of the angels as spectators viewing the great plan of redemption from the side lines, not being participants in it. Translation. In order that there might be made known now to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places, through the intermediate agency of the Church, the much variegated wisdom of God. (3:11, 12) The words “eternal purpose” are  (proqesin twn aijwniwn), “the purpose of the ages,” but rendered best in English by the word “eternal.” Alford says: “The genitive is apparently one of time, as when we say, ‘it has been an opinion of years’: the duration all that time giving the  (aijwne") (ages) a kind of possession. If so, the sense is best given in English by ‘eternal.’ ” “Purposed” is  (poiew), “to do, to carry into effect.” “Boldness” is  (parrhsia), “freedom of speech, unreservedness of speech.” “Access” is  (prosagwgh). “entree”: Thayer defines, “that friendly relation to God whereby we are acceptable to Him and have assurance that He is favorably disposed towards us.” “Confidence” is  (pepoiqhsi"), from  (peiqw), “to persuade.” It comes from the perfect participial form which refers to a past process of being completely persuaded, with the present result that we are in a confirmed and settled state of utter confidence. The words, “faith of Him,”

Vincent renders, “faith in Him.” Translation. According to the eternal purpose which He carried into effect in the Christ, Jesus our Lord, in whom we are having our freedom of speech and entree in perfect confidence through faith in Him. (3:13) The word “wherefore” refers back to verses 1–12, where “the dignity of the office committed to Paul and its significance,” (Expositors) is spoken of. “Because the great trust of the apostleship among the Gentiles is what he has declared it to be for himself and for them, he puts this request before them.… Paul himself rejoiced in his tribulations (II Cor. 12:5, 10; Col. 1:24, etc.),… but he might have cause enough to be apprehensive that these converts might not all view painful things as he did” (Expositors). The word “faint” is  (ejgkakew), “to lose courage, become faint of heart.” Expositors says “Paul’s tribulations were endured in their behalf, and were of value for them. The greater the office of the sufferer, the more did the afflictions which he was content to endure for them redound to their honor; and the better this was understood by them, the less should they give way to weakness and discouragement.” “I desire” is  (aijtew), “to ask,” and in the middle voice as it is here, “to ask for one’s self, in one’s own interest.” Translation. Wherefore, I am asking in my own interest, that you do not lose heart by reason of my tribulations on your behalf which are of such a nature as to be your glory. (3:14, 15) The words, “for this cause,” go back to the same words in 3:1 which themselves go back to the thought of Jew and Gentile becoming one body in Christ, and this body growing into a holy inner sanctuary for the dwelling-place of God. On account of this. Paul says, “I bow my knees.” Expositor says, “The thought of the new relations into which the Ephesians had been brought by grace toward God and toward the Jews— the reconciliation of the Cross, peace effected where once there was only enmity, the place given them in the household of God gave Paul cause for prayer in their behalf.” The expression, “I bow my knees,” Calvin says, was “a simple, natural figure for prayer, earnest prayer—not as if Paul actually knelt as he wrote.” “Unto” is pros (pro"), which means “facing.” It speaks of the consciousness which Paul had when praying that he was directing his prayer to God who was listening while he prayed. “Of whom” is ex hou (ejx oJu), literally “out from whom,” thus, as Vincent puts it, “after whom.” The source of the naming was the Father. It is not “the whole family,” but “every family,” pas (pa") being used without the article. The translation therefore reads, “after whom every family in heaven and upon earth is named.” Expositors says: “The sense, therefore is ‘the Father, from whom all related orders of intelligent beings, human and angelic, each by itself, get the significant name of family, community.’ The various classes of men on earth, Jew, Gentile, and others, and the various orders of angels in heaven, are related to God, the common Father, and only in virtue of that relation has any of them the name of family.” But we must be careful here to note that the fatherhood of God over all created intelligences is in the sense of Creator, as in Paul’s word to the Athenians, “We are the offspring of God,” not at all in the sense of salvation where only saved individuals are children of God. The words “of our Lord Jesus Christ,” are rejected by Nestle and by

Westcott and Hort. Translation. On this account I bow my knees to the Father from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named. (3:16) Paul prays that “God might grant to you (the Ephesian saints) according to the measure of His glory, with power to be strengthened through His Spirit (this strengthening entering) into the inner man.” “The glory is the whole revealed perfections of God, not merely His grace and power … The measure of the gift for which Paul prays on behalf of the Ephesians is nothing short of those perfections of God which are revealed now in their glorious fulness and inexhaustible wealth” (Expositors). The preposition “in” is eis (eij"), “unto,” and is a preposition of motion. “The strengthening was to take effect by means of power imparted or infused, and this impartation of power was to be made through the Spirit of God into the inward man. The ‘inward man’ is viewed here as the recipient, that into which the strengthening was to be poured, or the object towards which the gift was directed” (Expositors). The inward man refers here to the personal, rational self, the moral I, the essence of the man which is conscious of itself as a moral personality (Expositors, Vincent). Paul is here speaking of the fulness of the Holy Spirit. The reader is urged to study the author’s work on that subject in his book Riches from the Greek New Testament. Translation. That He would grant to you according to the wealth of His glory, with power to be strengthened through the Spirit into the inward man. (3:17–19) The purpose of the strengthening by the Spirit is now given, “that Christ may dwell in your hearts.” The personal presence of the Lord Jesus in the heart of the believer is not in view here. That is taken for granted. The word “dwell” is  (katoikhsai), made up of  (oijkew), “to live in as a home,” and kata (kata), “down,” thus “to settle down and be at home.” The tense is aorist, showing finality. The expanded translation is; “that Christ might finally settle down and feel completely at home in your hearts.” Dr. Max Reich once said in the hearing of the writer, “If we make room for the Holy Spirit, He will make room for the Lord Jesus.” That is, if the saint lives in conscious dependence upon and yieldedness to the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit will make room for the Lord Jesus in the heart and life of the saint by eliminating from his life things that are sinful and of the world, and thus enable the saint to make the Lord Jesus feel completely at home in his heart. Wonderful condescension of heaven’s King, to be content to live in a believer’s heart and have fellowship with him. This at-home-ness of the Lord Jesus in the heart of the saint is “through faith in your hearts.” This faith is in the Lord Jesus for the fulness of the Holy Spirit. Our Lord says, “If a certain one is thirsting, let him be coming to Me and let him be drinking. The one who places his trust in Me, even as the scripture said, rivers out from his inmost being will flow, of water that is living” (John 7:37, 38). And John adds in explanation, “But this He spoke concerning the Spirit whom those who believed on Him were about to be receiving, for not yet was the Spirit given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.” This trust here is not a trust in the Lord Jesus as Saviour, but, having believed on Him as Saviour, the saint is now to believe on Him as the One who fills with the Spirit, or grants the fulness of the

Spirit, as Paul puts it in his prayer here. The words, “being rooted” and “grounded,” are perfect tense participles in the Greek text. They are the result of the strengthening by the Spirit and the consequent at-homeness of the Lord Jesus in the believer’s heart and His fellowship with him. The word “rooted” has the idea of securely settled, and “grounded,” that of deeply founded. Love here is that love which the Holy Spirit produces and with which He floods the heart of the yielded saint. This inner spiritual condition of heart enables the saint “to comprehend” (v. 18) and “to know” (v. 19). He will be able to comprehend. “Able” is  (ejxiscuw), “to be eminently able, to have full strength.” “Comprehend” is  (katalambanw). The word “comprehend” conveys to the English reader the idea of “understand.” The Greek word means “to lay hold of so as to make one’s own, to seize, take possession of.” One could translate “apprehend,” in the sense of mentally grasping some idea or truth. The words “with all saints” indicate that this spiritual capacity is not limited to a few select saints, but is the common property of all those saints who are the recipients of the strengthening fulness of the Holy Spirit. which latter is the result of their faith in the Lord Jesus for that very blessing. Paul prays that the saints might apprehend, not merely comprehend. One might be able to understand something without having a grasp of the full implications of that thing. Paul is talking about the latter here. The words “breadth, length, depth, and height” have no particular significance except to give the general idea of the vastness of the love of Christ. This love is His love for us, not ours for Him, which latter interpretation is out of the question. The words “to know” are the translation of  (ginwskw) which speaks of knowledge gained by experience. The apprehension of verse 18 is conceptual knowledge. In verse 19, this conceptual knowledge passes into experiential knowledge as the saint experiences in his life that comprehension of the love of Christ for him in the sphere of his earthly life. This love of Christ, Paul says, “passeth knowledge.” Expositors translates, “the knowledge surpassing love of Christ.” The word “surpassing” is a participle of huperballo (uJperballo), “to throw over or beyond, to transcend, exceed, excel.” This love surpasses knowledge,  (gnwsi"), “experiential knowledge.” That is, no matter how much the saint experiences of the love of Christ, yet there are oceans of love in the great heart of God that have not been touched by his experience. One is reminded of the words of that saint of old who penned the following lines on the walls of his cell regarding the love of God; “Could we with ink the ocean fill, and were the skies of parchment made; were every stalk on earth a quill, and every man a scribe by trade; to write the love of God above, would drain the ocean dry; nor could the scroll contain the whole, though stretched from sky to sky.” The saints are to have an experiential knowledge of the love of God “in order that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.” “With” is eis (eij") in the Greek text, which is better rendered “to” or “unto,” “to the measure or standard of.” Vincent says: “Fulness of God is the fulness which God imparts through the dwelling of Christ in the heart; Christ, in whom the Father was pleased that all the fulness should dwell (Col. 1:19), and in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead (Col. 2:9).” Translation. That the Christ might finally settle down and feel completely

at home in your hearts through the faith, in love having been firmly rooted and grounded in order that you may be able to grasp with all the saints what is the breadth and width and height and depth, and to know experientially the experiential-knowledge-surpassing love of the Christ in order that you may be filled up to the measure of all the fulness of God. (3:20, 21) In this doxology, we have two descriptions of God, one, a general one, the other, one that is specific and has to do with believers. The first characterizes Him as One who is able to do huper panta (uJper panta), literally, “above all things,” thus, “in a measure exceeding all things, beyond all things.” The second speaks of Him as able to do huperekperissou (uJperekperissou). The word is made up of perissos (perisso"), “exceeding some number or measure, over and above, more than necessary,” ek (ejk), which is perfective in force here, intensifying the already existing idea in the verb, here adding the idea of exhaustlessness, and huper (uJper), “above.” The compound word is a superlative of superlatives in force. It speaks of the ability of God to do something, that ability having more than enough potential power, this power exhaustless, and then some on top of that. Thus, Paul says that God is able to do super-abundantly above and beyond what we ask or think, and then some on top of that. The word “ask” is  (aijtew), “to ask that something be given”; it is a request of the will. The verb here is in the middle voice, “to ask for one’s self or in one’s own interest.” “Think” is  (noew), “to consider.” The power (dunamis (dunami")) that is putting forth energy in us ( (ejnergew)), is the operation of the Holy Spirit in His work of sanctification. God is able to do for us and answer our prayers according to the efficiency, richness, and power of the working of the Spirit in our lives. This latter is determined by the yieldedness of the believer to the Holy Spirit. Thus, the saint determines what God is able to do for him. In His inherent ability, there is no limit to what God can do in and through the saint. But the saint limits the working of God in and through him by the degree of his yieldedness to the Spirit. “Unto Him” refers to God the Father. The definite article appears before “glory.” It is the glory due Him. This glory is to be given Him “in the Church,” “the domain in which the praise that belongs to Him is to be rendered Him” (Expositors). “By Christ Jesus” is en (ejn) Christ Jesus, locative of sphere. It is “in the Church and in Christ Jesus.” “The idea is that praise is to be given to God, and His glorious perfections shown forth both in the Church which is the body, and in Christ who is the Head—in the Church as chosen by Him, and in Christ as given, raised, and exalted by Him” (Expositors). The words, “throughout all ages, world without end,” are literally, “unto all the generations of the age of the ages”; Expositors says, “Another of these reduplicated expressions by which the mind of man working with the ideas of time, labors to convey the idea of the eternal.” Translation. Now to the One who is able to do beyond all things, superabundantly beyond and over and above those things that we are asking for ourselves and considering, in the measure of the power which is operative in us, to Him be the glory in the Church and in Christ Jesus into all the generations of the Age of the Ages. Amen.

CHAPTER FOUR (4:1–3) We come now to an important dividing point in this letter. The first three

chapters contain doctrine, the last three, exhortation. This is the proper order, for only in doctrine can one see the sweet reasonableness of the exhortations, and obtain the necessary power and technique to obey them. In brief, God says in chapters 1–3, “I have made you a saint.” In chapters 4–6, He says, “Now, live a saintly life.” “Beseech” is  (parakalew), “I beg of you, please.” Paul might have used his apostolic authority. But, instead, he pleads. “Therefore” reaches back to all the blessings and exalted positions in salvation which the saints enjoy (ch. 1–3), and reaches ahead to the obligations which such privileges put upon the saints. Paul designates himself as the prisoner in the Lord. “In” is en (ejn), followed by the locative of sphere. He was the prisoner in the sphere of the Lord. Expositors says, “It expresses the sphere within which his captivity subsisted or the ground of that captivity. He was a prisoner because of his connection with Christ, the Lord, and for no other reason. As in chapter 3, so here the idea of the dignity of his office seems to lie behind the mention of his imprisonment. He designates himself ‘the prisoner in the Lord,’ not with a view to stir the sympathy of the readers, and enforce his exhortation by an appeal to feeling, but as one who could rejoice in his sufferings and speak of his tribulations as their ‘glory’ (3:13; Gal. 6:17).” The Greek order of words is as follows: “I beg of you, please, therefore, I, the prisoner in the Lord.” “Walk” is  (peripatew), “to walk about,” thus, “to conduct one’s self, to order one’s behavior.” “Worthy” is  (ajxiw"), an adverb, meaning “in a manner worthy of.” The adjective form means, “having the weight of (weighing as much as) another thing.” Thus, Paul exhorts the Ephesian saints to see to it that their Christian experience, the Christian life they live, should weigh as much as the profession of Christianity which they make. In other words, they are to see to it that they practice what they preach, that their experience measures up to their standing in grace. The words, “the vocation wherewith ye are called,” are literally, “the calling with which you were called.” “Calling” (vocation in a.v.) is  (klhsi"). The verb refers to that divine summons into salvation which God gives a sinner, in which he is constituted willing to accept the salvation offered. It speaks of that effectual call into salvation which God in sovereign grace extends to a sinner. In Hebrews 3:1, the writer speaks of the recipients as partakers of the heavenly calling, “the calling whose origin, nature, and goal are heavenly” (Cremer). The word “calling” in English sometimes means “occupation” as, “His calling was that of a shoemaker.” But it is not so used here. Paul’s thought is that sinners were called into salvation and made saints. They are to be obedient to that heavenly calling or summons to be saints, and live saintly lives. This Christian behavior is to be accompanied by “all lowliness,” that is, “all possible lowliness, every kind of lowliness,” not, “the sum total of lowliness.” The word is  (tapeinofrosunh), which in pagan Greek meant only abject servility, slavishness, a grovelling, mean-spirited disposition, but in the n.t. has been glorified in its meaning. Trench says of this word: “The Christian lowliness is no mere modesty or absence of pretension, nor yet a self-made grace. The making of ourselves small is pride in the disguise of humility. But the esteeming of ourselves small, inasmuch as we are so, the thinking truly, and because truly, therefore, lowlily of ourselves.” The word is used in an early secular manuscript of the Nile River at its low stage, “It runs low.” Expositors defines it: “the lowliness of mind which springs from a true estimate of ourselves—a deep sense of our own moral smallness and demerit.” “Meekness” is  (prauthto"). Trench defines it as follows: “It is an inwrought grace of the soul, and the exercises of it are first and chiefly toward God. It is that temper of spirit in which we accept His dealings

with us as good, and therefore without disputing. This meekness before God is also such in the face of man.” “Longsuffering” is makrothumia (makroqumia). Trench, contrasting this word “longsuffering” with  (uJpomonh) (patience) says: “Makrothumia (Makroqumia) (longsuffering) will be found to express patience with respect of persons,  (uJpomonh), patience in respect of things. The man who is longsuffering, is he who, having to do with injurious persons, does not suffer himself easily to be provoked by them, or to blaze up in anger (II Tim. 4:2). The man who is patient ( (uJpomonh)) is the one who under a great siege of trials, bears up and does not lose courage.” “Forbearing” is  (ajnecw), “to hold up, to sustain, to bear with equanimity, to bear with, endure.” This is in explanation of makrothumia (makroqumia) (longsuffering). We are to bear with one another “in love.” It is in the sphere of the love that God the Holy Spirit produces in the heart of the yielded believer (Gal. 5:22), that we are to be patient with each other as misunderstandings arise, as cutting words are said, as unkind actions are done. The love shown at Calvary was a forgiving love. Ours should be the same. The words, “endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace,” are a further description of the mutual forbearance which is spoken of in the previous verse. “Endeavoring” is  (spoudazw), “to take care, make haste, do one’s best.” It speaks of a determined effort. It has the idea of exertion in it. “Keep” is  (threw), “to keep by guarding, to guard by exercising watchful care.” It speaks of guarding something which is in one’s possession. “Unity” is  (eJnoth"), “unanimity, agreement.” It is the unanimity or agreement among Christians that is the product of the Holy Spirit. “Bond” is sundesmos (sundesmo"), “that which binds together.” “Of peace” is genitive of description, defining this binding factor. Peace is the binding factor which will preserve the unity which the Spirit has produced. “Peace” is  (eijrhnh), “that which is bound together.” Expositors says: “The unity, therefore, which is wrought among these Ephesians by the Spirit of God will be theirs in so far as they make peace the relation which they maintain one to another, or the bond in which they walk together.” Translation. I beg of you, please, therefore, I, the prisoner in the Lord, order your behavior in a manner worthy of the summons with which you were called, with every lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, bearing with one another in love, doing your best to safeguard the unanimity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. (4:4–6) Vincent gives us the connection between what has preceded and these verses. “The connection with the preceding verses is as follows; “I exhort you to unity, for you stand related to the Church, which is one body in Christ; to the one Spirit who informs it; to the one hope which your calling inspires; to the one Lord, Christ, in whom you believe with one common faith, and receive one common sign of that faith, baptism. Above all, to the one God, and Father.” Expositors says, “It is a positive statement,… giving the objective ground or basis in fact on which the walk in lowliness, meekness, longsuffering, and loving forbearance is urged, and of which it should be the result.” The body is the invisible Church, the Mystical Body of Christ composed of believers saved between Pentecost when the Church was formed and the Rapture when the Church

will be caught out of this earth and taken to heaven. The Spirit is the Holy Spirit. The hope of our calling is “the hope which is characteristic of God’s call to salvation, and is engendered by it” (Vincent). “Faith” is not the Christian Faith as a system of doctrine and its respective responsibilities. It refers to the principle of faith by means of which all the saints enter into salvation. “One baptism” is hen baptisma (eJn baptisma). Why should all the other words be translated, and this alone be transliterated? Why should the a.v. and commentators transliterate the word, interpreting the Greek word as referring to the rite of water baptism when the entire context is supernatural, even to the faith exercised by the believer in appropriating salvation? The words translated are “one placing into.” That is, in response to our act of faith, we were placed by the Holy Spirit into the Body of which Christ is the Head. This is one of the unities vitally related to our salvation, and upon which Paul bases his plea for unity in the Church. There was and is one common placing into the Body of Christ. Translation. One body and one Spirit, even as also you were called in one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one placing into, one God and Father of all, the One above all and through all, and in all. (4:7) Vincent says: “From the Church as a whole, he passes to its individual members. In the general unity, the individual is not overlooked, and unity is consistent with variety of gifts and offices.” Expositors comments: “The article defined charis (cari") (grace) as the grace of which the writer and his fellow-believers had experience, which they knew to have been given them, and by which God worked in them. What is given is not the charisma (carisma) (extraordinary powers such as special gifts) but the charis (cari") (grace), the subjective grace that works within and shows itself in its result—the charism (carism), the gracious faculty or quality. The emphasis is on the  (eJkastwi) (to each one), and the de (de) (but) is rather the adversative particle than the transitional. It does not merely mark a change from one subject to another, but sets the each over against the all, and this in connection with the injunction to keep the unity of the Spirit. God’s gracious relation to all is a relation also to each individual. Not one of them was left unregarded by Him who is the God and Father of all, but each was made partaker of Christ’s gift of grace, and each, therefore stands pledged to do his part toward maintenance of unity and peace.” This grace which is in the form of the enabling and empowering of the Holy Spirit, is given the saint “according to the measure of the gift of Christ.” Expositors explains as follows: “Each gets the grace which Christ has to give, and each gets it in the proportion in which the Giver is pleased to bestow it; one having it in larger measure and another in smaller, but each getting it from the same Hand and with the same purpose.” We must be careful to note that this grace has to do with the exercise of special gifts for service, not the grace for daily living. The former is limited, and is adjusted to the kind of gift and the extent to which the Holy Spirit desires to use that gift in the believer’s service. The latter is unlimited and subject only to the limitations which the believer puts upon it by a lack of yieldedness to the Spirit. The context here, (4:11, 12), is one of service, not of general Christian experience. Translation. But to each one of us there was given the grace in the

measure of the gift of the Christ. (4:8) From the subject of the general enabling grace of God given to all saints for service, Paul turns to gifts which He gives to men. The word here is not charisma (carisma), referring to special gifts such as the gifts noted in I Cor. 12:4–11, but doma (doma), a general term for that which is given. These gifts are the gifted men mentioned in 4:11. Christ gave these gifts to the Church when He ascended to Heaven. But in order to ascend to Heaven and give these gifts to the Church, He had to lead captivity captive. Who are these captives? He led these individuals captive in His ascension. But what ascension? Was it His ascension from Olivet after His forty day post-resurrection ministry? Or, was it His ascension or the first day of the week, straight from the resurrection tomb (John 20:17)? In the former instance, the Shekinah Glory Cloud was God’s official chariot of protection through the principalities and powers in the lower atmosphere, the demons. In His ascension from the Easter morning tomb, there is no record of such a cloud. Fulfilling the type of the priest on the Day of Atonement in which the latter after sacrificing the animal at the Brazen Altar, and passing through the Court and the Holy Place into the Holy of Holies, sprinkled the blood on the Mercy Seat, thus, completing the typical atonement, our Lord was on His way from the Cross through the heaven of the clouds and of the stars, into Heaven itself, to present Himself in the Holy of Holies as High Priest, having shed His blood on the Cross, completing the atonement by His presence in the heavenly Holy of Holies in a bloodless human body, proof of the fact that He had paid for sin with His own blood (Heb. 9:11–15, 24–28). But to go from earth to Heaven, He had to pass through the territory of Satan and his demons in the air (Heb. 4:14, passed through (dia (dia)) the heavens). Satan tried to keep our Lord from going to the Cross. He tried to keep Him in the tomb. Unsuccessful in these attempts, he tried to keep Him from completing the atonement by barring His progress through the air. Concerning this battle our Lord had with the demons, Paul speaks in Col. 2:15. The principalities and powers are the demons of Ephesians 6:12. The word “spoiled” is apekduomai (ajpekduomai), “wholly to strip off from one’s self for one’s own advantage.”  (ÆEndunw) means “to put on,” as a garment. Thus, apekduomai (ajpekduomai) means “to strip off from one’s self” that with which one is clothed. Our Lord, in going through the kingdom of Satan in the air, was opposed by the demons who attempted to keep Him from completing the atonement by presenting Himself as High Priest in Heaven. He stripped off and away from Himself, the demons who in attempting to impede His progress, would cling to His Person. The words “made a show of,” are the translation of  (deigmatizw), “to make a display of, exhibit.” “Openly” is  (parrhsia), “boldly.” “Triumphing” is  (qriambeuw), “to celebrate a triumph.” It was used among the Romans of a triumphal procession, such as that of a victorious general home from the wars, leading his captives and booty in a procession through the streets of Rome. Here our Lord leads the demons whom He has stripped off and away from Himself, in a triumphal procession through the air. The translation reads, “Having stripped off and away from Himself the principalities and authorities, He made a display of them in boldness, leading them in a triumphal procession in it.” Translation. Wherefore He says, Having ascended on high, He led away

captive those taken captive, and gave gifts to men. (4:9, 10) The contents of these verses “are parenthetical, showing what the ascension of Christ presupposes. By descending into the depths and ascending above all, He entered upon His function of filling the whole universe, in virtue of which function He distributes gifts to men.… His ascent implies a previous descent” (Vincent). The words “lower parts of the earth,” Vincent says, refer to the under world. “The reference is to Christ’s descent into Hades” (Vincent). Our Lord, between His death on the Cross and His resurrection from the tomb, went to two places in the unseen world. Peter says: “For Christ also once for all died for sins, a just Person in behalf of unjust persons, in order that He might provide for us an entree into the presence of God, having been put to death on the one hand with respect to the flesh, but made alive on the other hand with respect to the spirit (His human spirit), in which spirit also to the imprisoned spirits proceeding, He made a proclamation, to those who were non-persuasible aforetime when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah while the ark was being gotten ready” (I Peter 3:18–20). This place is called  (Tartarwsa"), the prison house of the fallen angels (II Peter 2:4). What He proclaimed to them is not specifically stated. The verb “preached” is not euaggelizomai (eujaggelizomai), “to preach the gospel,” but keµrussoµ, “to make a proclamation.” The other place He went to was the place for departed human beings, called “Paradise” (Luke 23:43) or “Abraham’s Bosom” (Luke 16:22). He, as the Man Christ Jesus, went to the place of the righteous dead. Translation. Now, the fact that He ascended, what is it except that also He descended into the nether parts of the earth. The One who descended, Himself is also the One who ascended above all the heavens, in order that He might fill all things. (4:11, 12) In verse 11, Paul identifies the gifts spoken of in verse 7. They are gifted men, given to the Church. There is an intensive pronoun in the Greek text. “He Himself gave,” and no other. He gave some saints as apostles. The word speaks in a primary sense of the twelve apostles, and in a secondary sense, of those who proclaim the Word of God today. “Prophets” refers, not to those who foretell the future, but to preachers and expounders of the Word. Evangelists are the travelling missionaries both in home and foreign lands. The word “pastor” is  (poimhn), “a shepherd.” The words “pastors” and “teachers” are in a construction called Granvill Sharp’s rule which indicates that they refer to one individual. The one who shepherds God’s flock is also a teacher of the Word, having both the gifts of shepherding and teaching the flock. God’s ideal pastor is one who engages in a didactic ministry, feeding the saints on expository preaching, giving them the rich food of the Word. These gifted men are given the Church “for the perfecting of the saints.” The word “perfecting” is  (katartizw), “to equip for service.” These gifted men are to specialize in equipping the saints for “the work of the ministry,” that is, for ministering work, in short, Christian service. This is in order that the Body of Christ, the Church, might be built up, by additions to its membership in lost souls being saved, and by the building up of individual saints. Translation. And He Himself gave some, on the one hand, as apostles,

and on the other hand, as prophets, and still again some as bringers of good news, and finally, some as pastors who are also teachers, for the equipping of the saints for ministering work, with a view to the building up of the Body of Christ. (4:13) “Till” is mechri (mecri), “as far as, unto, until.” Expositors says: “The statement of the great object of Christ’s gifts and provision made by Him for its fulfillment is now followed by a statement of the time this provision and the consequent service are to last, or the point at which the great end in view is to be realized. It is when the members of the Church have all come to their proper unity and maturity in their Head.… Paul gives no clear indication of the time, and it may be, therefore, that he has in view only the goal itself and the attainment of it at whatever time that may take effect.” “Come” is  (katantaw), “to arrive at, to attain to.” “In” is eis (eij"), “into, unto.” It is a goal to be striven after; translate, “until we all attain to the unanimity of the faith.” The faith here is faith as exercised in Christ. It is the oneness of faith in Christ. Alford asks: “Have not all Christians the same faith? No doubt they have as regards its substance, but not as regards its clearness and purity; because the object of faith may be diversely known, and knowledge has ever such a powerful influence on faith. Therefore, he adds to this unity of faith, ‘and of the knowledge of the Son of God’; true and full unity of faith is then found, when all thoroughly know Christ, the object of faith, alike, and that in His highest dignity as the Son of God.” The word “knowledge” is  (ejpignwsi"), “full knowledge, precise and correct knowledge.” “Perfect” is teleios (teleio"), “mature, complete, full grown.” Expositors says: “The state at which unity is lacking is the stage of immaturity; the stage in which oneness in faith and knowledge is reached, is the state of mature manhood in Christ.” The words “mature man,” refer to the individual believer. The apostle has in mind the spiritual maturity of each saint. The words, “unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ,” further define what Paul means by the mature saint. The expression “the fulness of Christ,” refers to the sum of the qualities which make Christ what He is. These are to be imaged in the Church (1:23), and when these are in us we shall have reached our maturity and attained to the goal set before us. Thus the whole idea will be this—‘the measure of the age, or (better) the stature, that brings with it the full possession on our side of that which Christ has to impart—the embodiment in us the members, of the graces and qualities which are in Him the Head.’ ” The term, “spiritual maturity,” as applied to a Christian, is ever a relative one, not an absolute one. Paul, in Phil. 3:12 disclaims absolute spiritual maturity, while in 3:15, he claims relative maturity of Christian experience. This process of conforming the saint to the image of Christ begins in this life in the work of the Spirit in sanctification and is never completed in eternity, for the finite can never equal the infinite nor even remotely approach to it. Christ’s perfections are so wonderful that the saints will ever bear but a dim reflection of them. This is the distance between finiteness and infinity. Translation. Until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the experiential, full, and precise knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ. (4:14) “Children” is  (nhpio"), literally, “that which does not talk,” thus, “an

infant, a little child.” It is the opposite of teleios (teleio"), “mature.” “Tossed to and fro” is  (kludwnizw), a nautical term meaning, “to be tossed by the waves,” metaphorically, “to be agitated mentally,” like the waves. “Carried about” is  (periferw), “to carry around.” The verb has the idea of carrying about in circles. “Doctrine” is didaskalia (didaskalia), “teaching.” Vincent says, “The different teachings of philosophers or of religious quacks are represented as winds, blowing the unstable soul in every direction.” “Sleight” is kubeia (kubeia), literally, “dice-playing.” Expositors says: “It is in the character, not of gamesters, but deceivers that the false teachers are immediately presented. This ‘sleight of men’ is in contrast with ‘the faith and the knowledge of Christ,’ or it may be with the pure, sure word of God by which the faith and knowledge of the Son of God came.” “Cunning craftiness” is panourgia (panourgia), “cunning, knavishness, treacherous deceitfulness.” The words, “whereby they lie in wait to deceive,” resolve themselves into the following: “Lie in wait” is methodeia (meqodeia), “a deliberate planning or system.” Our word “method” comes from this Greek word. Expositors offers the translation, “in craftiness, furthering the scheming, deceitful art which has for its result the false way of life that strays fatally from the truth.” Translation. In order that no longer we may be immature ones, tossed to and fro and carried around in circles by every wind of teaching in the cunning adroitness of men, in craftiness which furthers the scheming deceitful art of error. (4:15, 16) “Speaking the truth” is  (ajlhqeuw), which Expositors translates as “truthing it.” Vincent offers, “being or walking in truth.” Alford says: “Commit here means merely to speak the truth, as the whole matter dealt with is more general … The verb has the widest sense of being true.… It it almost impossible to express it satisfactorily in English.” He offers, “followers of truth,” but not in the sense of searchers after truth. The phrase “in love” qualifies “speaking the truth.” Alford says: “ ‘In love’ is added, as the element in which the Christian ‘speaking the truth’ must take place; it is not and cannot be a ‘speaking the truth’ at all hazards—a fiat truthfulness: but must be conditioned by love: a true-seeking and true-being with loving caution and kind allowance—not breaking up, but cementing brotherly love by walking in truth.” “Into” is eis (eij"), and the latter should be rendered “unto.” We are to grow unto Him. “This means,” Expositors says, “more than that we are to grow into resemblance to Him, or that our growth is to be according to His example. It means that as He is the source from which the grace or power comes that makes it possible for us to grow, He is also the object and goal to which our growth in its every stage must look and is to be directed.” “Which” is hos (oJ"), the masculine relative pronoun, and should be rendered “who.” Paul uses the analogy of a human head and a human body to illustrate the relation of the Lord Jesus as the Head to His Body, the Church, each saint being a member of that body. He as the Head is the source of growth and well-being of each member. “Fitly joined together” is in the Greek text a present participle. This process is still going on. The word is  (sunarmologew), “to join closely together.” “Compacted” is  (sunbibazw), “to cause to coalesce, to unite or knit together.” This is also a present participle, speaking of a process going on. So far we have, “From whom as a

source, all the body being constantly joined closely together and growing constantly together.” This process in which the members of the Body of Christ are being joined closely together and are growing together in a vital, organic union, is brought about “by that which every joint supplieth.” “By” is dia (dia), the preposition of intermediate agency. The Greek here is “through the intermediate agency of every joint of supply.” That is, the joints of supply are the bonds that bind the members of the Body together, and are the channels through which the source of supply of life from the Head, Jesus Christ, is brought to the various members, this divine energy joining closely together the members and causing them to grow into an organic union. The entire Body composed of individual saints, constantly being more closely joined together and constantly growing together into an organic union through the life of the Head flowing through the bands of supply that join its members together, does so “according to the measure of every part.” The words “effectual working” are the translation of energeia (ejnergeia), “working, efficiency.” The word speaks of power in exercise, operative power. “According to” is kata (kata), “down.” The word speaks of control, domination. “Measure,” is metron (metron), “an instrument for measuring, a vessel for receiving and determining the quantity of things, determined extent, portion measured off.” The life of the Head flowing through the bands of supply, is constantly joining together and causing to grow together the individual members, this process being controlled or dominated by the operative energy put forth, the volume or strength of this operative energy coming from the Head of the Body, being determined by the capacity of each part to hold and allow to operate in him or her. That is, the degree to which this life of the Head flowing through the members operates, joining the members of the Body more closely together into a more compact organic union, is determined by the individual saint’s fellowship with the Lord and with his fellow saints. This more compactly built Body will show in the closer ties of Christian love and brotherhood as exhibited by the saints in their Christian experience. This “maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.” “Increase” is  (aujxhsi"), “growth, increase.” “Edifying” is  (oijkodomh), “building up, the act of building up,” the promoting of Christian wisdom, piety, holiness, etc.” Expositors sums it up by saying, “The idea appears to be that the body is fitly framed and knit together by means of the joints, every one of them in its own place and function, as the points of connection between member and member, and the points of communication between the different parts and the supply which comes from the Head. The joints are the constituents of union in the body and the media of the impartation of the life drawn by the members from the head.” Translation. But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into Him in all things, who is the Head, Christ, from whom all the body constantly being joined closely together and constantly being knit together through every joint of supply according to the operative energy put forth to the capacity of each part, makes for increased growth of the Body resulting in the building up of itself in the sphere of love. (4:17) “Therefore” resumes the exhortation of 4:1–3. “This” (touto (touto)) refers to the words of exhortation which follow. “Testify” is  (marturew), which is used of a solemn declaration, protest, or injunction of the nature of an appeal to God. In the

words, “in the Lord,” the writer is seen “identifying himself with Christ and giving the exhortation as one made by Christ Himself” (Expositors). “Walk” is  (peripatew), “to conduct one’s self, order one’s behavior.” “Vanity” is mataios (mataio"), “that which is in vain, aimless, resultless, futile.” The word speaks of want of attainment. “Mind” is nous (nou"), not merely the intellectual faculty or understanding, but also the faculty for recognizing moral good and spiritual truth. Expositors says: “It is a description of the walk of the heathen world generally—a walk moving within the limits of intellectual and moral resultlessness, given over to things devoid of worth or reality.” Translation. This, therefore, I am saying and solemnly declaring in the Lord, that no longer are you to order your behavior as the Gentiles order their behavior in the futility of their mind. (4:18) “Darkened” is the perfect participle of  (skotow), “to darken or blind the mind.” The perfect tense speaks of a process completed in past time having present results. Paul uses the perfect tense here to show the finished and permanent result of the blinding of the mind by sin. “Understanding” is dianoia (dianoia), “the mind as the faculty of understanding, feeling, desiring.” The translation reads; “being those who have been permanently blinded with respect to the mind.” “Alienated” is  (ajpallotriw), “to be estranged,” used of those who have estranged themselves from God. It means also, “to shut out from one’s fellowship and intimacy.” Expositors says: “Being in a state of moral darkness, they also become alienated from the true life.” The life of God is the life that God has in Himself and that which He imparts to the believing sinner. “Ignorance” is agnoia (ajgnoia), which Expositors says “is not a term merely of intellect. It denotes an ignorance of divine things, a want of knowledge that is inexcusable and involves moral blindness (Acts 3:17, 17:30, I Peter 1:14). It is further defined here not simply as ‘their ignorance,’ but as an ignorance ‘being in them’—surely a phrase that is neither tautological nor without a purpose, but one that describes their ignorance in respect to its seat. Their alienation had its cause, not in something external, casual, or superficial, but in themselves,—in a culpable ignorance in their own nature or heart.” The word “blindness” is  (pwrwsi"), “hardness.” The word is formed from  (pwro"), “hard skin or induration.” It means literally “the covering with a callous.” The word occurs in Mark 3:5; Romans 11:25, and here, and is used of mental or moral hardening. These Gentiles were alienated from God through their culpable moral and spiritual ignorance and through the hardening of their hearts. Translation. Being those who have had their understanding darkened, who have been alienated from the life of God through the ignorance which is in them, through the hardening of their hearts. (4:19) “Who” is hoitines (oiJtine"), a relative and indefinite pronoun showing character or nature, “who are of such a nature that.” “Being past feeling” is  (ajpalgew), a participle in the perfect tense. The word means, “to cease to feel pain or grief, to become callous, insensible to pain, apathetic.” Expositors says: “It expresses the condition, not of despair merely, but of moral insensibility, ‘the deadness that supervenes when the heart has ceased to be sensible to the stimuli of the conscience’ (Ellicott).”

“Have given themselves over” is  (paradidwmi), literally, “to give alongside.” Today we would say, “sell down the river.” The verb means “to give into the hands of another, to betray, to hand over, give one’s self up, present one’s self.” “Lasciviousness” is aselgeia (ajselgeia), “wanton lawless insolence.” The aselgeia (ajselgeia) person is one who acknowledges no restraints, who dares whatsoever his caprice and wanton petulance may suggest. “Wantonness” is the best word to describe it. The word speaks of a complete surrender of self. “To work” is eis ergasian (eij" ejrgasian), literally, “to a working.” Vincent says, “In Acts 19:25, used of a trade. Not precisely in this sense here, yet with a shade of it. They gave themselves up as to the prosecution of a business. The eis (eij"), ‘unto,’ is very forcible.” “All uncleanness” is  (ajkaqarsia" pash"), “every kind of uncleanness,” moral uncleanness in the widest sense. “With greediness describes the condition or frame of mind in which they wrought the uncleanness” (Expositors). The Greek word means “greed,covetousness.” Translation. Who, being of such a nature as to have become callous, abandoned themselves to wantonness, resulting in a performing of every uncleanness in the sphere of greediness. (4:20, 21) The “ye” (humeis (uJmei")) is emphatic. It is, “As for you, in contradistinction to the Gentiles yet unsaved.” The Greek order of words is, “But as for you, not thus did you learn the Christ.” The aorist tense marks a specific time. It was at their conversion. Vincent says: “The phrase learn Christ occurs nowhere else. Christ does not stand for the doctrine of Christ; but Christ is the subject of His own message.” Expositors says: “Nor can it be taken to mean ‘learned to know Christ.’ Christ must be taken as the object of the learning, and the form ‘the Christ,’ especially looking to the following ‘Jesus’ (v. 21), probably indicates that the official sense is in view here.… The Christ, the Messiah. He personally—that was the contents of the preaching which they heard, the sum of the instruction they received and the knowledge they gained then.” “If so be” is ei (eij), a particle of a fulfilled condition. The a.v. translates as if it were ean (eJan), the conditional particle of a hypothetical case. This particle ei (eij) is used with the indicative mode which implies the truth of the supposition. The translation should read: “If as is the case.” They had heard. Expositors says: “The point, therefore, is this— ‘if, as I take it to be the fact, it was He, the Christ, that was the subject and the sum of the preaching which you heard then.’ ” “By Him” is en autoi (ejn aujtoi), “in Him.” It is, “in Him you were instructed.” Expositors says: “en autoi (ejn aujtoi) (in Him) is not to be reduced to ‘by Him,’ or ‘about Him,’ or ‘in His name,’ but has its proper sense of ‘in Him.’ The underlying idea is that of union with Christ. The ‘taught,’ therefore, refers probably to instructions subsequent to those which were given them at their first hearing. It was in fellowship with Christ that they received these instructions.” Vincent comments on the words “as the truth is in Jesus.” “As corresponds with not so. Ye did not in such a manner learn Christ if ye were taught in such a manner as is truth, etc. Render, as Rev., as truth is in Jesus. Schaff paraphrases: ‘If you were taught so that what you received is true as embodied in the peronal Saviour.’ ‘Taught in the lines of eternal fact and spiritual reality which meet in Him’ (Moule). Jesus is used rather than Christ; the historical rather than the official name. The life of Christianity consists in

believing fellowship with the historic Jesus, who is the Christ of prophecy.” Translation. But as for you, not in this manner did you learn Christ, since indeed, as is the case, you heard, and in Him were taught just as truth is in Jesus. (4:22–24) “That ye put off, etc.” gives the purport of the instruction given. Connect with “were taught.” The connection is, “ye were taught that ye put off, etc.” The word “old” is palaios (palaio"), “old in the sense of worn out, decrepit, useless.” “Man” is  (ajnqrwpo"), the racial term, not  (ajnhr), a male individual. The word refers to the individual self. The expression “the old man” therefore refers to the unsaved person dominated by the totally depraved nature. The expression, “put off,” is a figure taken from the putting off of garments. Paul, in Romans 6:6 says: “Knowing this, that our old man (that person we were before we were saved) was crucified with Him in order that the physical body which before salvation was dominated by the totally depraved nature, might be rendered inoperative in that respect, to the end that no longer are we rendering an habitual slave’s obedience to sin” (translation plus paraphrase). It was in our identification with Christ in His crucifixion that potentially we put off the old man, and we did so actually at the moment we were saved. This act of putting off this old man had to do with the “former conversation.” The word “conversation” is obsolete English for “manner of life.” This old man is described as “corrupt according to the deceitful lusts.” “Is corrupt” is a present participle. The idea is, “which is being corrupted.” It speaks of the progressive condition of corruption which characterized the old man. The unsaved person is thus subject to a continuous process of corruption which grows worse as time goes on. This process of corruption is “according to the deceitful lusts.” “Lusts” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a craving, a passionate desire,” good or evil according to the context. Here it is evil cravings. This process of corruption is dominated or controlled by the passionate desires of deceit, deceit being personified. All this, the believing sinner put off when he was saved. The second point in the teaching they received was that in their Christian experience they are being renewed in the spirit of their mind. “Renewed” is  (ajnaneow), “to be renewed, to be renovated by inward reformation.” “And” is de (de), a particle which here is transitional or continuative. They have put off the old man. Moreover, they are being renewed in the spirit of their minds. And they have put on the new man. Upon the basis of these three facts, Paul commences his exhortations in 4:25 will “wherefore, speak every man truth etc.” The renewal is, of course, accomplished by the Holy Spirit. The word “spirit” refers to the individual’s human spirit, that part of him which gives him God-consciousness, that makes him a moral agent. Vincent comments: “The apostle’s object is to set forth the moral self-activity of the Christian life. Hence pneuma (pneuma) (spirit) is here the higher life-principle in man by which the human reason, viewed on its moral side—the organ of moral thinking and knowing is informed. The renewal takes place, not in the mind, but in the spirit of it. ‘The change is not in the mind psychologically, either in its essence or in its operation; and neither is it in the mind as if it were a superficial change of opinion on points of doctrine or practice: but it is in the spirit of the mind; in that which gives mind both its bent and its material of thought. It is not simply in the spirit as if it lay there in dim and mystic quietude; but it is in the spirit of the mind; in the power which, when changed itself, radically alters the entire sphere and

business of the inner mechanism’ (Eadie).” The third fact in the teaching is that they “put on the new man.” The word “new” is kainos (kaino"), not new in point of time, which would be neos (neo"), but new in point of quality, new in quality as opposed to the old in the sense of outworn, marred through age, which latter designations refer to the old man. “Man” is again  (ajnqrwpo"), the individual. Since the old man refers to the unsaved person dominated by the totally depraved nature, the new man refers to the saved person dominated by the divine nature. This new man “after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” This is what Paul has reference to when he says, “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creation” (II Cor. 5:17). “After God” is kata theon (kata qeon), “according to what God is in Himself,” that is, created after the pattern of what God is. The expression “true holiness” could better be rendered, “holiness of truth,” “truth” being personified and being opposed to the “deceit” of verse 22 which was also personified. Translation. That you have put off once for all with reference to your former manner of life the old man which is being corrupted according to the passionate desires of deceit; moreover that you are being constantly renewed with reference to the spirit of your mind; and that you have put on once for all the new man which after God was created in righteousness and holiness of truth. (4:25) At this point we will take a little time out to look at the construction of this large section. In chapters 1–3 Paul presents doctrine. He shows the exalted position to which the believing sinner was raised in Christ Jesus. In chapters 4–6 he presents exhortation which is based upon the doctrine, which latter demonstrated the sweet reasonableness of the exhortation and the ability of the saint to obey it. In 4:1–3, the apostle starts his hortatory section with general exhortations. In 4:4–16, he speaks of the gifted men given the Church by God whose ministry should help the saints obey the exhortations. In 4:17–25, Paul shows the tremendous change wrought in the believing sinner. Now, upon this latter basis consisting of three points, first, they put off the old man, second, they are being renewed in the inner man, and third, they have put on the new man, he presents the detailed exhortations beginning in verse 17. Therefore, since all this is true of you, “putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbor.” “Putting away lying” is in the Greek text an aorist participle, and an article and noun in the accusative case. The translation reads, “having put off once for all the lie.” In putting off once for all the old man, they put off the habit of lying which was part of that old man. In view of the fact that they have done that, they are exhorted to speak truth, each one to his neighbor. The reason for this exhortation is that they are members of one another. Expositors says: “Reason for this practice of truth—a reason drawn not from the common conceptions of duty or social weal, but from the profound Christian idea of union one with another through union with Christ. As in the human body each member is of the other in connection and for the other in service, so in the spiritual body of which Christ is the Head, the members belong one to another and each serves the other.” Translation. Wherefore, having put off the lie once for all, be speaking truth each with his neighbor, because we are members belonging to one another. (4:26) There are three words for “anger” in the Greek New Testament. Thumos (Qumo") speaks of a turbulent commotion, the boiling agitation of the feelings, passion,

anger forthwith boiling up and soon subsiding, which is forbidden in Ephesians 4:31. Parorgismos (Parorgismo"), translated “wrath” in 4:26, is also forbidden. It refers to anger that is accompanied by irritation, exasperation, embitterment.  (ÆOrgh) is an anger which is an abiding and settled habit of the mind that is aroused under certain conditions. This is the anger spoken of in the words, “be ye angry.” Trench says: “Under certain conditions,  (ojrgh) (anger) is a righteous passion to entertain. The Scripture has nothing in common with the Stoic’s absolute condemnation of anger. It inculcates no apathetic attitude, but only a moderation, not an absolute suppression of the passions which were given to man as winds to fill the sails of his soul, as Plutarch excellently puts it. When guided by reason, anger is a right affection, so the Scripture permits it, ant not only permits, but on fit occasion demands it.… There is a ‘wrath of God’ (Matt. 3:7, Rom. 12:19); who would not love good unless He hated evil, the two being so inseparable, that either He must do both or neither; a wrath also of the merciful Son of Man (Mk. 3:5); and a wrath which righteous men not merely may, but, as they are righteous, must feel; nor can there be a surer or sadder token of an utterly prostrate moral condition than the not being able to be angry with sin—and sinners. ‘Anger,’ says Fuller, ‘is one of the sinews of the soul; and he that wants it hath a maimed mind, and with Jacob sinew-shrunk in the hollow of his thigh, must needs halt. Nor is it good to converse with such as cannot be angry.’ ‘The affections’ as another English divine has said, ‘are not, like poisonous plants, to be eradicated, but as wild, to be cultivated.’ St. Paul is not therefore, as so many understand him, condescending to human infirmity, and saying, ‘Your anger shall not be imputed to you as sin, if you put it away before nightfall,’ but rather, “Be ye angry, yet in this anger of yours suffer no sinful element to mingle; there is that which may cleave even to a righteous anger, the parorgismos (parorgismo"), the irritation, the exasperation, the embitterment which must be dismissed at once, that so, being defecated (purified) of this impurer element which mingled with it, that only may remain which has a right to remain.” The words, “be ye angry,” are a present imperative in the Greek text, commanding a continuous action. This  (ojrgh), this abiding, settled attitude of righteous indignation against sin and sinful things, is commanded, together with the appropriate actions when conditions make them necessary. But the exhortation “and sin not” is provided as a check and restraint. It is, “stop sinning.” Expositors says: “A righteous wrath is acknowledged in Scripture as something that not only may but ought to be, and is seen in Christ Himself (Mk. 3:5). So Paul speaks here of an anger that is approvable and to be enjoined, while in ‘and sin not’ he forbids only a particular form or measure of anger. As the following clause suggests, even a righteous wrath by over-indulgence may pass too easily into sin.” In the words, “Let not the sun go down upon your wrath,” the word “wrath” is parorgismos (parorgismo"), anger that is mingled with irritation, exasperation, and embitterment. Such anger is forbidden. In Ephesians 6:4, “Provoke to wrath” is our word  (parorgizw), the verbal form of parorgismos (parorgismo"). This kind of anger is forbidden, and if indulged in must be checked and surrendered without delay. Translation. Be constantly angry with a righteous indignation, and stop sinning. Do not allow the sun to go down upon your irritated, exasperated, embittered anger. (4:27) “Neither give place” is in a construction in Greek which forbids the continuance

of an action already going on. It is literally, “And stop giving place.” “Place” is topos (topo"), “any portion of space marked off from the surrounding territory.” Here it is used in the sense of “opportunity, power, occasion for acting.” Translation. And stop giving an occasion for acting (opportunity) to the devil. (4:28) The Greek is, “The one who is stealing, let him no longer be stealing.” That sin was still being committed by the members of the Ephesian church. Expositors says: “Stealing was not wholly condemned by ancient heathen opinion. It was even allowed by the Lacedaemonians. It was a vice into which the recently converted living in the old pagan surroundings, especially when unemployed, might all too readily slip. It has been thought strange, scarcely credible indeed, that professing Christians in these Asiatic churches would have given way to thieving. But the Epistles bear witness to the existence of grosser offenses against morality in the churches.” Paul now offers a corrective to stealing, in the words, “but rather let him be laboring, working with his own hands that which is good, in order that he may be having wherewith to be sharing with the one who is having need.” Translation. The one who is stealing, let him no longer be stealing, but rather let him be laboring, working with his own hands that which is good, in order that he may be having wherewith to be sharing with the one who is having need. (4:29) The Greek order is, “every word that is corrupt, out of your mouth let it not proceed.” Expositors says: “pas (pa") (every) …  (mh) (no), the well-known Hebraistic form, the negative attaching itself to the verb, means ‘non-utterance’—let that be for every word.” The word “communication” is logos (logo"), “a word,” here in the sense of “a saying, utterance, speech.” “Corrupt” is sapros (sapro"), “rotten, worn out, unfit for use, worthless, bad.” Paul goes on; “Every word that is corrupt, out of your mouth let it not be proceeding, but whatever is good, suitable for the use of edification with respect to the need, and this, in order that it may impart grace to those who are hearing.” “Grace” is charis (cari"), the n.t. word for God’s grace in salvation. Here it refers to the spiritual blessings and benefits that will accrue to the hearers from the gracious words of the speaker. Translation. Every word that is rotten and unfit for use, out of your mouth let it not be proceeding, but whatever is good, suitable for edification with respect to the need, in order that it may impart grace to the hearers. (4:30) The Greek has it, “And stop grieving the Spirit, the Holy Spirit of God.” Expositors says: “This is not a general exhortation, but one bearing, as the ‘and’ indicates, particularly on the preceding injunction. The utterance of evil or worthless words is repugnant to the holiness of the Spirit, and is to be refrained from as calculated to grieve Him. The injunction is made more solemn by the designation as ‘the Holy Spirit’ and ‘the Spirit of God.’ The Spirit is here seen as capable of feeling, and so as personal. In Isaiah

63:10 we have a similar idea, following the statement that Jehovah was afflicted in all His people’s afflictions. These terms, no doubt, are anthropopathic, as all terms which we can use of God are anthropomorphic and anthropopathic. (Gentle reader, these two enormous words mean “a representation or conception of God under human form or with human attributes.” K.S.W.) But they have reality behind them, and that as regards God’s nature and not merely His acts. Otherwise we should have an unknown God and One who might be essentially different from what we are under the mental necessity of thinking Him to be. What love is in us points truly, though tremulously, to what love is in God. But in us love, in proportion as it is true and sovereign, has both its wrath-side and its grief-side; and so must it be with God, however difficult for us to think it out.” The word “whereby” is en hoi (ejn oiJ), literally “in whom.” The Holy Spirit is Himself the seal that God has placed in us. Please turn back to our comments on 1:13 for the significance of a seal and its application with reference to the Spirit as a seal. He is the seal, indicating that the transaction whereby the Son of God paid the penalty of human sin at the Cross is a finished transaction, and that God owns us as His property by right of purchase, also that because of the two preceding facts the saints are secure in salvation “unto the day of redemption,” that is, with a view to the day (at the Rapture) when our physical bodies will be glorified. The Holy Spirit is the seal God places upon the saints which guarantees all this. Translation. And stop grieving the Spirit, the Holy Spirit of God, in whom you were sealed with a view to the day of redemption. (4:31) “Bitterness” is pikria (pikria), “resentfulness, harshness, virulence,” “All” is pasa (pasa), “all manner of.” “Wrath” here is thumos (qumo"), “a violent outbreak of anger, anger forthwith boiling up and soon subsiding again.” “Anger” is  (ojrgh), the word used in 4:26 of legitimate anger, namely, righteous indignation. But here, Vincent says: “What is commanded in verse 26 is here forbidden, because viewed simply on the side of human passion.” “Clamor” is  (kraugh), “the outcry of passion, the outward manifestation of anger in vociferation or brawling.” “Evil speaking” is  (blasfhmia), slanderous and injurious speech.” “Put away” is  (aijrw), “to bear away what has been raised, to carry off, to take away.” Translation. All manner of harshness and violent outbreaks of wrath and anger and brawling and slanderous speech, let it be put away from you together with all manner of malice. (4:32) “Be” is ginomai (ginomai) “to become.” Expositors says: “The idea is that they had to abandon one mental condition and make their way, beginning there and then, into its opposite.” “Kind” is  (crhsto"), “benevolent, gracious, kind,” opposed to “harsh, hard, bitter, sharp.” “Tenderhearted” is eusplagchnos (eujsplagcno"), “compassionate, tenderhearted.” “Forgiving” is not  (ajfihmi), the word usually used when God forgives our sins, which word means “to put away,” God forgiving our sins in the sense that He in the Person of His Son bore them on the Cross, paying the penalty, satisfying the just demands of His law, but charizomai (carizomai), “to do a favor to, do something agreeable or pleasant to one, to show one’s self gracious, benevolent, to forgive in the sense of treating the offending party graciously.” The same

word is used of God here forgiving us in Christ. The translation should not be “for Christ’s sake,” but “in Christ.” The Greek is  (ejn Cristwi), “in Christ.” It is “the God who forgives, being the God who manifests Himself and acts in the suffering, reconciling Christ” (Expositors). It is the God who forgives in the sphere of Christ in that His forgiveness is made possible from the point of the law, through the atonement. “Even as” is  (kaqw"), “according as, just as, in the degree that, seeing that”; Alford says, “argument from His example whom we ought to resemble—also from mingled motives of justice and gratitude.” Translation. And be becoming kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving each other even as and just as also God in Christ forgave you.

CHAPTER FIVE (5:1, 2) “Be” is ginomai (ginomai), “to become.” “Followers” is  (mimhtai), “imitators.” Our word “mimick” comes from this Greek word. Expositors says: “The loftiest and most exalting endeavor that can possibly be set before man, proposed to us by Christ Himself (Matt. 5:45, 48).” “Dear children” is  (tekna ajgaphta), “children beloved.” “As” is  (wJ"); “the comparative particle points to the manner or character in which the imitation is to be made good, and indicates at the same time a reason for it. They are children of God, experiencing His love. Children should be like the father, and love should meet love” (Expositors). “Walk in love” is “be constantly ordering your behavior within the sphere of love.” This love is the  (ajgaph) love which God is, which God exhibited at the Cross, which Paul analyzes in I Corinthians 13, and which is the fruit of the Spirit in the yielded saint. The saint is to order his behavior or manner of life within the sphere of this divine, supernatural love produced in his heart by the Holy Spirit. When this love becomes the deciding factor in his choices and the motivating power in his actions, he will be walking in love. He will be exemplifying in his life the selfsacrificial love shown at Calvary and the Christian graces mentioned in I Corinthians 13. “Hath given Himself” is  (paredwken eJauton), “gave Himself up”; a “statement of the act in which Christ’s love received its last and highest expression, namely, the surrender of Himself to death” (Expositors). “For us” is  (uJper hJmwn). Huper (uJper) is the great preposition of substitutionary atonement in the n.t., and means, “instead of, in behalf of.” It does not merely mean that Christ died for us, for our benefit, but He died instead of us, in our place. He substituted for us, receiving the full impact of the divine wrath against sin. “Offering” is prosphoran (prosforan), from  (prosferw), “to carry to.” It is used of the blood offerings of the Levitical system (Heb. 10:8). Our Lord fulfilled these by becoming an offering for sin on the Cross. “Sacrifice” is thusia (qusia), from  (quw), “to kill a sacrificial victim, to immolate, to sacrifice.” Thus, again, our Lord is spoken of in o.t. terminology as a sacrifice, the fulfillment of the o.t. sacrifices which were in the form of animals killed and then offered on the Brazen Altar. He offered Himself as a sacrifice to God in full payment of the debt of sin which we as sinners owed, and which the violated law demanded. “A sweetsmelling savour” is  (eij" ojsmhn eujwdia"), literally, “for a savour of a sweet smell,” or, “for an odor of a sweet smell.” Translation. Be becoming therefore imitators of God, as children beloved, and be ordering your behavior within the sphere of love, even as

Christ also gave Himself up in our behalf and in our stead as an offering and a sacrifice to God for an odor of a sweet smell. (5:3, 4) The Greek order of words is, “But fornication and uncleanness, every kind of it.” Expositors says: “De (De) (but) carries the exhortation over to a prohibition expressed in the strongest terms, which is levelled against one of the deadliest and most inveterate temptations to which Gentile Christians were exposed. The term porneia (porneia) (fornication) is to be taken in its proper sense and is not to be restricted to any one particular form—the license practiced at heathen festivals, concubinage, marriage within prohibited degrees, or the like. The moral life of the Graeco-Roman world had sunk so low that, while protests against the prevailing corruption were never entirely wanting, fornication had long come to be regarded as a matter of moral indifference, and was indulged in without shame or scruple, not only by the mass, but by philosophers and men of distinction who in other respects led exemplary lives.” The word porneia (porneia) was used of illicit sexual intercourse in general. The word “or” ( (h)) Vincent says, “sets this sin emphatically by itself.” The word “covetousness” is pleonexia (pleonexia), “greedy desire to have more, avarice.” “Not once” is  (mhde), “not even.” Expositors says: “The strong negative  (mhde) gives it this force—‘Not to speak of doing such a thing, let it not be even so much as mentioned among you.’ “ Commenting on “as becometh saints,” the same authority says: “The position of sainthood or separation to God, in which the gospel places the Christian, is so far apart from the license of the world as to make it utterly incongruous even to speak of the inveterate sins of a corrupt heathenism.” “Filthiness” is  (aijscroth"), “obscenity, shameless, immoral conduct.” “Foolish talking” is  (mwrologia), from  (mwro"), “foolish” in the sense of the lack of forethought and wisdom. impious, godless, because such a man neglects and despises what relates to salvation, and logos (logo"), “a word, speech.” Vincent says: “Talk which is both foolish and sinful. It is more than random or idle talk.” “Words obtain a new earnestness when assumed into the ethical terminology of Christ’s school. Nor, in seeking to enter fully into the meaning of this one, ought we to leave out of sight the greater emphasis which the words fool, foolish, folly obtain in Scripture than elsewhere they have or can have. There is the positive folly as well as the negative to be taken account of, when we are weighing the force of  (mwrologia): it is that talk of fools which is foolishness and sin together (Trench).” “Jesting” is eutrapelia (eujtrapelia). Vincent says: “Only here in the n.t. From eu (euj), ‘well’ or ‘easily,’ and  (trepw), ‘to turn.’ That which easily turns and adapts itself to the moods and conditions of those with whom it may be dealing at the moment. From this original sense of versatility it came to be applied to morals, as time-serving, and to speech with the accompanying notion of dissimulation. Aristotle calls it chastened insolence. The sense of the word here is polished and witty speech as the instrument of sin; refinement and versatility without the flavor of Christian grace. ‘Sometimes it is lodged in a sly question, in a smart answer, in a quirkish reason, in shrewd intimation, in cunningly diverting or cleverly retorting an objection: sometimes it is couched in a bold scheme of speech, in a tart irony, in a lusty hyperbole, in a startling metaphor, in a plausible reconciling of contradictions, or in acute nonsense … Sometimes an affected simplicity, sometimes a presumptuous bluntness giveth it being. Its ways are unaccountable and inexplicable, being

answerable to the numberless rovings of fancy and windings of language’ (Barrow).” “Convenient” is  (ajnhkw), and in the perfect tense. The word means “befitting, seemly.” Translation. But fornication and uncleanness, every kind of it, or covetousness, let it not be even named among you, just as it is befitting to saints; and obscenity and foolish talking or ribaldry, which things have not been seemly or fitting, but rather giving of thanks. (5:5) “Ye know” is  (ijste ginwskonte"), “ye are knowing, recognizing.” The Revision gives “ye know of a surety.” Expositors translates, “ye know, being aware that.” The word “know” is oida (oijda) which speaks of absolute, beyond the peradventure of a doubt knowledge, a knowledge that is self-evident. The word translated above, “recognizing,” is  (ginwskw) which speaks of knowledge gained by experience. Paul reminds the Ephesian saints that they are absolutely convinced of the truth of the facts which he is about to call to their attention. “Whoremonger” is pornos (porno"), “a man who prostitutes his body to another’s lust for hire, a male prostitute, a man who indulges in unlawful sexual intercourse, a fornicator.” “Unclean” is akathartos (ajkaqarto"), used in a moral sense, “unclean in thought or life.” “Covetous” is  (pleonekth"), “one eager to have more,” especially what belong to others, “greedy of gain.” “Idolator” is  (eijdwlolatrh"), “a worshipper of false gods, a covetous man as a worshipper of Mammon.” Translation. For this you know absolutely and experientially, that every whoremonger or unclean person or covetous person who is an idolater, does not have an inheritance in the kingdom of the Christ and of God. (5:6) “Vain” is kenos (keno"), “empty, hollow.” These words were empty, hollow, without the substance of truth or reality. They were “plausible, but devoid of truth. and employed to palliate heathen vices” (Vincent). Expositors says: “The expression is a general one, applying to all who sought by their sophistries to palliate the vices in question or make them appear to be no vices. These would be found mostly (though by no manner of necessity exclusively) among the heathen, especially among such Gentiles as heard the truth and remained unbelieving.” “These things” refers back to the sins mentioned in the previous verse. The word “children” is huios (uiJo"), “sons,” a Hebraism, calling a person having a certain quality, a son of that quality. Translation. Let no one keep on deceiving you by means of empty words, for because of these things there comes the wrath of God upon the sons of the disobedience. (5:7–10) “Be” is ginomai (ginomai) “to become.” Vincent says that “it is a warning against lapsing into old vices.” “Partakers” is sunmetochos (sunmetoco") from  (metecw), “to hold with” another, and sun (sun) “with,” the compound word meaning, “partaking together with one.” The prohibition is that the saints should not participate with the sons of disobedience in the vices mentioned in verse 5 The prohibition is in the present imperative with the negative  (mh), “Stop therefore becoming joint-

partakers with them.” The reason for not lapsing into their former sins is seen in the words, “for you were at one time darkness.” The verb “were” is in the emphatic position. The sense is, “You were. So do not again become darkness.” The word “light” is  (fw"), referring to light itself, not a mere lamp. Expositors says: “The completeness of the change is indicated again by the use of the abstract term—so possessed and penetrated were they by that truth that they could be described not simply as enlightened but as themselves now light. And this ‘in the Lord,’ for it was in virtue of their fellowship with Christ that this new apprehension of things came to them, transforming their lives.” “Walk” is  (peripatew), “to order one’s behavior, to conduct one’s self.” Present imperative in form, the verb commands an habitual action; “Be habitually conducting yourselves as children of light.” The word “children” is teknon (teknon), “a born one,” a child looked upon in his birth relationship to the one who bore it. The admonition is to those who are children of God, thus light in the Lord, thus, children of light. Expositors comments: “If these Ephesians were now ‘light in the Lord,’ it was not for themselves only but for others. They were called to live a life beseeming those to whom Christian enlightenment and purity had become their proper nature.” The Nestle and the Westcott and Hort texts have “light” rather than “spirit.” The fruit of the aforementioned light is a figurative expression, speaking of the moral results of the light, of its products as a whole. “Goodness” is  (ajgaqwsunh), “goodness” in the sense of “active goodness, beneficence.” “Proving” is  (dokimazw), “to put to the test for the purpose of approving, and having found that the thing tested meets the specifications laid down by the test, then to place one’s sanction or approval on the thing or person tested.” “Acceptable” is euareston (eujareston), “well-pleasing.” Translation. Stop therefore becoming joint-participants with them; for you were at one time darkness, but now light in the Lord. As children of light be habitually conducting yourselves; for the fruit of this light is in the sphere of every beneficence and righteousness and truth, putting to the test and then approving what is well-pleasing to the Lord. (5:11, 12) “Fellowship” is  (sunkoinwnew), “to become a partaker together with others.” The word refers to a joint-participation between two or more individuals in a common interest and a common activity. “Reprove” is  (ejlegcw), “to reprove or rebuke so as to bring out conviction or confession of guilt.” Trench says that the word “implies not merely the charge, but the truth of the charge, and further the manifestation of the truth of the charge; nay, more than all this, very often also the acknowledgment, if not outward, yet inward, of its truth on the part of the accused; it being the glorious prerogative of the truth in its highest operation not merely to assert itself, and to silence the adversary, but to silence him by convincing him of his error.” Alford explains verse 12 as follows: “The connection seems to be, ‘reprove them—this they want, and this is more befitting you—for to have the least part in them, even in speaking of them, is shameful.’ ” He quotes Klotz, “the connection being, ‘I mention not, and you need not speak of, these deeds of darkness much less have any fellowship with them—your connection with them must only be that which the act of reproof necessitates.’ ” Expositors explains: “The secrecy of the works in question is the reason

why they require to be openly reproved; and the point is this—the heathen practice in secret, vices to abominable even to mention; all the more is the need open rebuke instead of silent overlooking or connivance ( Meyer, Ellicott, etc.).” Translation. And stop having fellowship with the unfruitful works of this darkness, but rather be rebuking them so as to bring out confession and conviction, for concerning the things done in secret by them, it is shameful to be speaking. (5:13) “All things” is ta panta (ta panta), “the all things,” that is, the secret sins just mentioned, the Greek article pointing back to these. “That are reproved” is a present participle in the Greek text, “being reproved,” or “when they are reproved.” “Made manifest” is  (fanerow), “to make visible or known what has been hidden or unknown.” “Doth make manifest” is passive voice in Greek text, “is made manifest.” Thus, “everything that is made manifest is light.” Vincent comments: “A general proposition, going to show that manifestation can come only through light. Whatever is revealed in its true essence by light is of the nature of light. It no longer belongs to the category of darkness. Manifestation is a law of good and evil alike. That which is of the truth seeks the light and cometh to the light. That which is evil avoids the light and loves darkness better than light, but none the less is brought to the light and appears in its own light.” Translation. But all the aforementioned things when they are reproved by the light are made visibly plain, for everything that is being made plain is light. (5:14) The words, “he saith,” are sometimes used by Paul as a formula referring to what God has said. The source of the quotation is a moot question, whether a combination of some texts in the o.t., or the words of some ancient hymn. As to its connection with what precedes, Expositors has a helpful note: “The passage is introduced in Connection with the reference to the effects of a faithful ‘reproof’ and under the impression of the figure of the light. It takes the form of an appeal to wake out of the pagan condition of sin, described by the two-fold figure of sleep and death, and of a promise that then Christ will shine upon the sinner with the saving light of His truth. The quotation comes in relevantly, therefore, as a further enforcement both of the need for the reproof which is enjoined, and of the good effects of such a reproof faithfully exercised.” The words “give light,” are the translation of  (ejpifauskw), “to shine upon.” Thayer comments as follows: “Christ will pour upon thee the light of divine truth as the sun gives light to men aroused from sleep.” Translation. Wherefore He says: Be waking up, the one who is sleeping, and arise from the dead, and there shall shine upon you, Christ. (5:15, 16) “See” is  (blepw), “to discern mentally, observe perceive, consider, contemplate, look to in the sense of taking care, take heed.” “Circumspectly” is  (ajkribw"), “exactly, accurately, carefully.” “Walk” is  (peripatew), “to order one’s behavior, to conduct one’s self.” The translation reads, “Be constantly taking heed

how accurately you are conducting yourselves.” That is, see to it that your conduct is accurate with respect to the demands of the Word of God. It is like a motorist accurately following on the right side of the center line dividing traffic. “Fools” is asophos (ajsofo"), “the unwise”; “wise,” sophos (sofo") “the wise.” “Redeeming” is  (ejxagorazw), “to buy up.” In the middle voice as it is used here, it means, “to buy up for one’s self or one’s advantage.” Metaphorically, it means, “to make a wise and sacred use of every opportunity for doing good,” so that zeal and well-doing are as it were the purchase-money by which we make the time our own” (Thayer). “Time” is not chronos (crono"), “time as such,” but kairos (kairo"), “time as regarded in its strategic, epochmaking, seasonable, opportune seasons.” The idea is not to make best use of time as such, which is what we should do in the sense of not wasting it, but of taking advantage of the opportunities that present themselves. “Evil” is not kakos (kako"), “evil in the abstract,” but  (ponhro"), “evil in active opposition to the good, pernicious.” Translation. Be constantly taking heed therefore how accurately you are conducting yourselves, not as unwise ones but as wise ones, buying up for yourselves the opportune time, because the days are pernicious. (5:17) “Unwise” is  (ajfrwn), “without reason, senseless, foolish, stupid, without reflection or intelligence, acting rashly.” “Understanding” is  (sunihmi), “to set or bring together, to put the perception with the thing perceived, to set or join together in the mind,” thus, “to understand.” The word speaks of reflective thinking. The verb is present imperative in a prohibition, forbidding the continuance of an action already going on. Ginomai (Ginomai) is the verb, meaning “to become.” Translation. On this account stop becoming those who are without reflection or intelligence, but be understanding what the will of the Lord is. (5:18–20) “Be drunk” is  (mequskw), “to get drunk, become intoxicated.” Wycliffe translates, “be filled.” Vincent says: “A curious use of the word occurs in Homer, where he is describing the stretching of a bull’s hide, which in order to make it more elastic, is soaked ( (mequskw)) with fat.” The word, therefore, refers to the condition of a person in which he is soaked with wine. The words, “wherein is excess,” are to be construed with the entire clause, “Be not drunk with wine,” not with the word “wine” alone, but with the becoming drunk with wine. “Excess” is  (ajswtia), from  (swzw), “to save,” and Alpha privative, the literal meaning being, “unsavingness”; that is, that which is  (ajswtia) has nothing of a saving quality about it, but rather, a destructive one. The word as it is generally used expresses the idea of an abandoned, debauched, profligate life. The words “profligacy, debauching,” well describe its meaning. “Filled” is  (plhrow), “to fill up, to cause to abound, to furnish or supply liberally, to flood, to diffuse throughout.” In Acts 6:15 we have Stephen, a man filled with faith and the Holy Spirit. Faith filled Stephen in the sense that it controlled him. The Holy Spirit filled Stephen in the sense that He controlled him. Therefore, the fullness of the Spirit has reference to His control over the believer yielded to Him. The verb is in the present imperative; “Be constantly being filled with the Spirit.”

The interpretation is, “Be constantly, moment by moment, being controlled by the Spirit.” Please consult the author’s book, Untranslatable Riches in the Greek New Testament for a detailed, practical treatment of the fullness of the Holy Spirit. “Speaking to yourselves” is lalountes heautois (lalounte" eJautoi"), literally, “speaking with yourselves.” But this translation is open to misinterpretation, namely, that of each Christian communing with himself, which is not the idea. Saints are to speak to one another. That is, in letting other saints know of their joy in salvation, they are to do so in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs. They are to find expression to the Spirit-filled life in this way. As to the definitions of these terms, Expositors says: “What the distinctions are, if any, between the three terms, has been considerably disputed. Psalms are religious songs, especially those sung to a musical accompaniment, and par excellence an o.t. psalm; hymns are properly speaking songs of praise; songs, the most general term, are applicable to all kinds of songs, secular or sacred, accompanied or unaccompanied. The three words are brought together here with a view to rhetorical force, and it is precarious, therefore, to build much upon supposed differences between them.” Another way in which the Spirit-filled life is manifested, is in the giving of thanks for all things. Regarding the all things, Expositors says: “The ‘for all things’ is taken by many in its widest possible extent, as including things evil as well as good. The Epistle does not deal, however, particularly with the sufferings of the Christian, but with what he receives from God and what his consequent duty is. It is most accordant therefore with the context, to understand the ‘all’ as referring to all the blessings of the Christian, the whole good that comes to him from God.“ Translation. And stop being intoxicated with wine, in which (state of intoxication) there is profligacy. But be constantly filled (controlled) by the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your hearts to the Lord, giving thanks always concerning all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father. (5:21) In this verse Paul speaks of yet another way in which the Spirit-filled life should express itself. “Submitting” is  (uJpotassw). The simple verb  (tassw) was used in classical Greek in a military meaning, “to draw up in order of battle, to form, array, marshall” both troops or ships. It speaks of soldiers marshalled in military order under a commanding officer. Thus, it speaks of the subjection of one individual under or to another. The prefixed preposition hupo (uJpo) means “under.”  (uJpotassw) in classical Greek meant, “to subject, make subject.” In n.t. Greek, it means, “to arrange under, to subordinate, put in subjection,” in the middle voice as it is here, “to subject one’s self to, to obey.” Alford says: “As we are otherwise to be filled, otherwise to sing and rejoice, so also we are otherwise to behave—not blustering nor letting our voices rise in selfish vaunting, as such men do,—but subject to one another.” Subjecting one’s self to another is the opposite of self assertion, the opposite of an independent, autocratic spirit. It is the desire to get along with one another, being satisfied with less than one’s due, a sweet reasonableness of attitude. The best texts have “Christ” instead of “God.” Translation. Putting yourselves in subjection to one another in the fear of

Christ. (5:22, 23) Expositors comments: “The great Christian law of mutual subjection or submissive consideration is now to be unfolded in its bearing on three particular relations which lie at the foundation of man’s social life—those of husbands and wives, parents and children, masters and servants. The relation of husbands and wives, as the most fundamental, is taken up before the others, and the Christian duty of the wives is set forth first. The Greek has it, “The wives to their own husbands as to the Lord.” The verb  (uJpotassw), “submit, subject,” is supplied from the preceding verse. “Your own” is idios (ijdio"), “one’s own private, peculiar, unique possession.” “As” is  (wJ"), an adverb of comparison, and means, “even as, in the same manner as, like as.” Expositors says: “That is, to Christ; not to the husband as lord and master. If the husband’s supremacy had been in view, it would have been expressed by tois kuriois (toi" kurioi") (your lords and masters). The  (wJ") (as) denotes more than similarly, and more than ‘just as they are submissive to Christ so should they be to their husbands.’ The next sentence, and the whole statement of the relation between husband and wife in the following verse in terms of the relation between Christ and the Church, suggest that the point of the  (wJ") (as) is that the wife is to regard the obedience she has to render to her husband as an obedience rendered to Christ, the Christian husband being head of the wife and representing to her Christ the Head of the whole Christian body.” Commenting on the words: “Because the husband is the head of the wife, as also Christ is the Head of the Church,” Expositors says this: “Reason for a wifely subjection of the kind indicated. It is found in the relation of headship. In the marriage union the husband holds the same relation, namely, that of headship, as Christ holds to the Church, and the headship of the one represents the headship of the other.” With regard to the words, “and He Himself is the Saviour of the body,” the same authority says, “It is best taken as an independent clause, stating in a definite and emphatic way an important point in which Christ, who resembles the husband in respect to headship, at the same time differs from the husband.… The husband is head of the wife, and in that he is like Christ; but Christ is also that which the husband is not, namely, Saviour of that whereof He is Head.” Translation. The wives, be putting yourselves in subjection to your own husbands as to the Lord, because the man is head of the wife as the Christ is Head of the Church, He Himself being the Saviour of the body. (5:24) “Therefore” is the a.v., translation of alla (ajlla). Both Vincent and Expositors take exception to that rendering. The alla (ajlla) is the strongest adversative particle, de (de), a particle that opposes but continues and connects, being the milder one. Alla (ÆAlla) opposes and disannuls or discounts what has gone before. It should be rendered “but,” or “nevertheless.” Expositors show. its significance in this context as follows: “The twenty-fourth verse thus looks to the peculiarity mentioned as belonging to Christ’s headship in distinction from the husband’s, namely, the fact that He is not only the Head, but Saviour. And the idea becomes this—‘Christ indeed is Saviour of the body, and that the husband is not; nevertheless the question of obedience is not affected thereby; for all that, as the Church is subject to Christ so too are wives to be subject to their husbands.’ ”

The words, “in everything” refer to everything in the marriage relation. The verb “is subject” is  (uJpotassw), which in the middle voice as it is here, means “to subject one’s self to, to obey.” This rendering lays upon the members of the Church in relation to Christ and upon wives in relation to their husbands, the duty of thus subjecting themselves to their respective heads and to render them obedience. Translation. Nevertheless, as the Church subjects itself to the Christ, in this manner also the wives should subject themselves to their husbands in all things. (5:25–27) The duty of the wives is to obey their husbands. The duty of the husband is to love his wife. The word for “love” here is  (ajgapow), referring to the love that God is (I John 4:8), that God showed at Calvary (John 3:16), and the love that the Holy Spirit produces in the heart of the yielded believe (Gal. 5:22). This is a self-sacrificial love, a love that impels the one loving to give himself in self-sacrifice for the well-being of the one who is loved. The husband has three other kinds of love for his wife, a love of passion ( (ejrw")), a love of complacency and satisfaction ( (stergw)), and a fondness or affection ( (filew)). All these are saturated with the  (ajgapaw) love of the Spirit-filled husband, purified and made heavenly in character. Expositors comments on the words, “that He might sanctify and cleanse it,” as follows: “Statement of the great object with which Christ in His love for the Church gave Himself up to death for it. An object worthy of the self-sacrifice, described in definite terms and with a solemn significance—the sanctification and cleansing of the Church with a view to its final presentation in perfect holiness at the great day.” “Sanctify” is  (aJgiazw), “to set apart for a sacred use.” The distinctive aspect of sanctification here is that of inward ethical purification as in I Thessalonians 5:23. The succeeding context points to this interpretation “Cleanse” is a modal participle, showing how or in what manner the sanctification takes place. The translation so far reads: “In order that it He might sanctify, cleansing it.” This cleansing is accomplished by “the washing of water by the word.” “Washing” is loutron (loutron), “a bath.” The words “of water” are genitive of description, describing the bath as one effected by water. “By the word” is  (ejn rJhmati), “in the sphere of the Word.” That is, this inward ethical purification is accomplished by the Word of God having liberty in the heart of the Spirit-filled believer, displacing sin and substituting in its place, righteousness. The blood of Christ cleanses from actual sin, and thus cleanses the believer. The Word cleanses him in the sense above mentioned, water being a type of the Word of God. The Greek of verse 27 begins as follows: “In order that He might Himself present to Himself the Church glorious.” Expositors comments: “It is Christ Himself who is to present the Church, and it is to Himself He is to present it. He is at one the Agent and the End or Object of the presentation.… The idea, as the context suggests, is that of the Bridegroom presenting or setting forth the bride. The presentation in view, which is given here as the final object of Christ’s surrendering of Himself to death, and (by use of the aorist) as a single definite act, cannot be anything done in the world that now is, but must be referred to the future consummation, the event of the Parousia (the Rapture).” The words. “not having spot or wrinkle,” are an explanation on the negative side of what is meant in the word “glorious.” The bride is to be without moral blemish. “Holy” is hagia (aJgia), “separate from evil”; “without blemish,”  (ajmwmo"),

“faultless, unblamable,” namely, free from faultiness, as a sacrificial animal without blemish. Translation. The husbands, be loving your wives in the manner in which Christ also loved the Church and gave Himself on behalf of it, in order that He might sanctify it, cleansing it by the bath of water in the sphere of the Word, in order that He might Himself present to Himself the Church glorious, not having spot nor wrinkle nor any of such things, but in order that it might be holy and unblamable. (5:28–30) Expositors’ comment on verse 28 is as follows: “The idea, therefore, is that even as Christ loved the Church, so too ought husbands to love their wives,—as their own bodies. This is not to be reduced to ‘like themselves’: nor does  (wJ") (as) here mean simply ‘like,’ as if all that is meant is that the husband’s love for his wife is to be similar to his love for his own body. The  (wJ") (as) has its qualitative force, ‘as it were,’ ‘as being.’ Christ and husband are each head, as Paul has already put it, and as the Church is the body in relation to the former, so is the wife in relation to the latter. The husband, the head, therefore, is to love the wife as being his body, even as Christ loved the Church as forming His body. The idea of husband and wife as being one flesh is probably also in view. He that loveth his own wife loveth himself. The relation of head and body means that the wife is part of the husband’s self. To love his wife, therefore, in this character as being his body, is to love himself. It is a love consequently, not merely of duty,—but of nature.” The same authority continues on verse 29. “The ‘for’ gives a reason for the preceding statement, looking to the thought, however, rather than to the form of the statement. The thought is the oneness of husband and wife, the position of the wife as part of the husband’s self; and the connection is this; ‘he should love her even as Christ loved the Church, for the wife, I say, is as the body in that natural relationship in which the husband is the head, so that in loving her he loves himself; and this is the reason in nature why he should love her, for according to this, to hate his wife is to hate his own flesh, which is contrary to nature and a thing never seen.’ ‘Flesh’ here has its non-ethical sense, practically, body.” In verse 30, the Greek order is, “Because members we are of His body.” The word “members” has the emphatic position. Expositors says: “We are not something apart from Christ, nor do we occupy only an incidental relation to Him. We are veritable parts of that body of which He is Head, and this is the reason why He nourishes and cherishes the Church.” The words, “of His flesh and of His bones” are a rejected reading by Nestle and also Westcott and Hort. Translation. In this manner ought also the husbands to love their wives as their own bodies. The one who loves his owe wife loves himself, for no one ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, even as the Christ, the Church, because members are we of His body. (5:31) “Leave” is  (kataleipw), “to leave behind, depart from.” “Joined” is  (proskollaw), “to glue upon, to glue to, to join one’s self to closely, cleave to, stick to.” The compound verb denotes a most intimate union. “Shall be one flesh” does

not include the preposition eis (eij") in the Greek text, which the a.v., does not translate. The full rendering is, “shall be unto one flesh.” The Revision has “shall become one flesh.” Translation. Because of this a man shall leave behind his father and his mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. (5:32, 33) The word “great” is in the predicate, not the attributive position. It is, “This mystery is great.” Vincent says; “The reference in this mystery is to the preceding statement of the conjugal relation of the Church with Christ, typified by the human marriage relation.” The same authority translates, “In regard of Christ and the Church,” and says: “Not calling your attention to the mere human relationship, but to the mysterious relation between Christ and His Church, of which that is a mere semblance.” Commenting on the words: “Let each one of you love his own wife as himself,” Expositors says: “The ‘each one’ expresses still more emphatically the absoluteness and universality of the Christian duty of conjugal love—a duty from which no single husband is exempt. As in verse 28, the  (wJ") (as) means not merely that each husband is to love his wife as he loves himself, but that he is to love her as being herself part and parcel of himself according to the divine idea of the marriage union.” The word “reverence” is  (fobew), “to fear, to be afraid of, to reverence, to venerate, to treat with deference or reverential obedience.” Expositors defines: “fear in the sense of reverence, spontaneous, obedient regard.” Translation. This mystery is great. However, I am speaking with regard to Christ and the Church. Nevertheless also as for you, let each one in this manner be loving his own wife as himself, and the wife, let her be continually treating her husband with deference and reverential obedience.

CHAPTER SIX (6:1–3) “Obey” is  (uJpakouw), the simple verb meaning “to hear,” the prefixed preposition, “under,” the compound verb meaning, “to hear under,” that is, “to hear under” authority. It speaks of the one hearing as being under the authority of some one else. Thus, the verb comes to mean, “to hearken to a command, to obey, to be obedient to, submit to.” The verb is in the present imperative, which construction commands habitual, constant obedience here. The phrase, “in the Lord” is to be construed with “obey.” That is, as Expositors says; “It defines the quality of the obedience by defining the sphere within which it is to move—a Christian obedience fulfilled in communion with Christ.” Vincent says: “The children being with their parents in the Lord, are to be influenced by religious duty as well as by natural affection.” The word “right” is dikaios (dikaio"), “not in the sense of befitting merely, but in that of righteous, what is required by law—the law that is at once founded on the natural relation of children and parents and proclaimed in the divine commandment (v. 2)” (Expositors). “Honor” is  (timaw), “to estimate, fix the value.” To honor someone therefore, is to evaluate that person accurately and honestly, and treat him with the deference, respect, reverence, kindness, courtesy, and obedience which his station in life or his character demands. Expositors says: “Obedience is the duty; honor is the disposition of which the obedience is born.”

Translation. The children, be always obedient to your parents in the Lord, for this is a righteous thing. Be always honoring your father and your mother, which is a commandment of such a nature as to be the first commandment with promise, in order that it may be well with you, and in order that you may be long-lived upon the earth. (6:4) “Provoke” is  (parorgizw), “to rouse to wrath, to provoke, exasperate, anger.” Expositors says: “The parental duty is given first negatively, as avoidance of all calculated to irritate or exasperate the children—injustice, severity and the like, so as to make them indisposed to filial obedience and honor.” “Bring up” is  (ejktrefw), “to nourish up to maturity, to nurture, bring up, to rear up.” The word is not confined to the nourishing of a child physically, but includes its bringing up or rearing in the various departments of its life. “Nurture” is paideia (paideia), “the whole training and education of children which relates to the cultivation of mind and morals, and employs for this purpose, now commands and admonitions, now reproof and punishment” (Thayer). “Admonition” is nouthesia (nouqesia), “exhortation, admonition.” Trench says of this word, “it is a training by word—by the word of encouragement, when that is sufficient, but also by that of remonstance, of reproof, of blame, where these may be required, as set over against the training by act and discipline which is paideia (paideia).” Translation. And the fathers, stop provoking your children to anger, but be rearing them in the discipline and admonition of the Lord. (6:5–8) “Servants” is doulos (doulo"), “slaves.” These were Christian slaves working for the most part for pagan masters. Vincent says, “In this appeal, Paul was addressing a numerous class. In many of the cities of Asia Minor, slaves outnumbered freemen.” Expositors has a valuable note: “Many questions would inevitably arise with regard to the duties of masters and servants in a state of society in which slavery prevailed and had the sanction of ancient and undisputed use. Especially would this be the case when Christian slaves (of whom there were many) had a heathen master, and when the Christian master had heathen slaves. Hence the considerable place given in the n.t., to this relation and the application of Christian principles (I Cor. 7:21, 22; I Tim. 6:1, 2; Tit. 2:9, 10; and Philemon, in addition to Col. 3:22, 4:1, and I Pet. 2:18–25). Here, as elsewhere in the n.t., slavery is accepted as an existing institution, which is neither formally condemned nor formally approved. There is nothing to prompt revolutionary action, or to encourage repudiation of the position. Onesimus, the Christian convert, is sent back by Paul to his master, and the institution is left to be undermined and removed by the gradual operation of the great Christian principles of the equality of men in the sight of God, and a common Christian brotherhood, the spiritual freedom of the Christian man, and the Lordship of Christ to which every other lordship is subordinate.” The Greek order is, “Be constantly obedient to those who according to the flesh are your masters.” The word “masters” here is kurios (kurio"), while  (despoth") is used for “masters” in I Peter and the Pastoral Epistles. Expositors suggests that the phrase “ ‘according to the flesh’ was used to distinguish these masters (kurios (kurio")) who were masters of their slaves only so far as material and earthly consideration are

concerned, while Christ is Kurios (Kurio") (Lord), Master in a spiritual relation as well.” As one wise monarch once said, “My dominion over my subjects ends where that of God’s begins.” As to the expression, “with fear and trembling,” the same authority says: “The use of the same phrase with regard to Paul himself (I Cor. 2:3), the Corinthians (II Cor. 7:15), and Philippians (Phil. 2:12), is enough to show that nothing more is in view here than solicitous zeal in the discharge of duty, anxious care not to come short.” The words “in singleness of heart,” qualify “be obedient,” not “fear and trembling.” “It states the spirit in which the obedience was to be rendered,—not in formality, pretence, or hypocrisy, but in inward reality and sincerity, and with an undivided heart” (Expositors). The same authority defines eyeservice as follows: “It is the service that is done only when one is under the master’s eye—an obedience to save appearances and gain undeserved favor, which is not rendered when the master is absent as it is when his scrutiny is on us.” “Heart” is  (yuch), “soul.” Expositors says: “It belongs to the character ( (wJ") as) of the bond-servant of Christ to do the will of God, the God and Father of Christ, in his condition in life, and to do that not grudgingly or formally, but with hearty readiness.” In verse 7 the motive for service to a human master should be as to the Lord Jesus. In other words, the slave should serve the human master as if he were serving the Lord Jesus. The encouragement for doing this is found in the fact that whatever good the slave does for his human master, if done as to Christ, shall be rewarded (v. 8). Translation. The slaves, be constantly obedient to those who according to the flesh are your masters, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart as to the Christ, not in the way of eyeservice as menpleasers, but as Christ’s bond-slaves, doing the will of God from the soul, with good will rendering a slave’s service as to the Lord and not as to men, knowing that each one, whatever good he may do, this he will receive from the presence of the Lord, whether he is a slave or whether he is free. (6:9) “Masters” is kurios (kurio"), the lords and masters of slaves. These slavemasters are Christians, for God has no exhortations to conduct for unsaved slave-masters. The words, “do the same things,” do not mean that the masters are to render service to the slaves as the latter do to them, but that they are to treat them with the same Christian principles and consideration that the slaves show to the masters. “Forbearing” is  (ajnihmi), “giving up.” “Threatening” has the definite article, referring to the well-known habit of masters threatening their slaves. The Greek text then follows: “knowing that also their Master and yours is in heaven.” “Respect of persons” is  (proswpolemyia), literally, “to receive face.” Thayer defines: “the fault of one who when called on to requite or to give judgment has respect to the outward circumstances of men and not to their intrinsic merits, and so prefers, as the more worthy, one who is rich, high-born, or powerful, to another who is destitute of such gifts.” The word “partiality” could translate it. Translation. And the masters, be practicing the same things toward them, giving up your threatening, knowing that also their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is not partiality with Him.

(6:10) “Be strong” is endunamooµ, “to make strong, to endue with strength.” The idea is, “to clothe one’s self with strength as one puts on a garment.” Here the verb is in the passive voice, “be continually strengthened.” The qualifying phrase, “in the Lord,” defines the strengthening as Christian strengthening, such as can take effect only in union with the Lord (Expositors). The rendering, “be strong,” could encourage one to self-effort at being strong, whereas the translation “be strengthened,” causes the saint to depend on the Lord for the supply of that strength. “Power” is kratos (krato"), “relative or manifested power,” and “might” is ischuos (ijscuo"), “power as an enduement.” The idea is, “in the active efficacy of the might that is inherent in Him.” Translation. Finally, be constantly strengthened in the Lord and in the active efficacy of the might that is inherent in Him. (6:11) “Put on” is  (ejnduw), “to envelope in, to hide in, to clothe with.” “Whole armor” is panoplia (panoplia), made up of pas (pa"), “whole,” and hoplon (oJplon), “weapon”; literally “all the weapons.” The word is from panoplos (panoplo"), “wholly armed, in full armor.” It means “full armor, complete armor,” shield, sword, lance, helmet, greaves, and breastplate. The word “panoply” is the English spelling of our word. In classical Greek, the word was used of the full armor of a heavy-armed soldier. Expositors says: “ ‘Of God’ is the genitive of origin or source, the panoply which comes from God or is provided by Him. To put the emphasis on the words ‘of God’ is to miss the point and to suppose a contrast which there is nothing here to suggest, namely, with some other kind of panoply. The emphatic thing, as most exegetes notice, is the panoplian (panoplian), the idea being that we need not only a divine equipment, but that equipment in its completeness, without the lack of any single part. The fact that, in order to meet our spiritual foe, we need to take to ourselves all that God provides for living and for overcoming, is expressed in a telling figure drawn from the world of soldiery. The figure of the Christian as a warrior with his arms, wages, etc., occurs repeatedly in the Pauline writings.… No doubt the Roman soldier is particularly in view. Paul, the Roman citizen, would think of him, and it was the Roman military power that filled the eye when Paul labored and wrote.” “Wiles” is methodeia (meqodeia), “cunning arts, deceit, craft, trickery.” The word comes from the verbal form  (meqodeuw), “to follow up or investigate by method and settled plan, to follow craftily, frame devices, deceive.” The word “stratagem” will translate it adequately. The phrase “stand against” is a soldier’s expression, used for standing one’s ground, as against taking to flight. Translation. Clothe yourselves with the full armor of God to the end that you will be able to hold your ground against the stratagems of the devil. (6:12) In the word “wrestle,” ( (palh)), Paul uses a Greek athletic term. Thayer defines as follows: “a contest between two in which each endeavors to throw the other, and which is decided when the victor is able to press and hold down his prostrate antagonist, namely, hold him down with his hand upon his neck.” When we consider that the loser in a Greek wrestling contest had his eyes gouged out with resulting blindness for the rest of his days, we can form some conception of the Ephesian Greek’s reaction to

Paul’s illustration. The Christian’s wrestling against the powers of darkness is no less desperate and fateful. The literal Greek is, “Our wrestling is not against blood and flesh.” The Greek reverses the order. The principalities and powers, are the  (ajrch), “first ones, preeminent ones, leaders,” and the exousia (ejxousia), “authorities,” the demons of Satan in the lower atmosphere who constitute his kingdom in the air. The rulers of the darkness of this world, the  (kosmokratwr), “the world-rulers of this darkness,” are Satan and his demons. They are also called “the spirit forces of perniciousness in the heavenly places.” The heavenly places here are not those highest ones inhabited by the holy angels, but the lower heavens, the lower atmosphere surrounding this earth. One might be troubled at the change of figure from that of a Roman soldier to that of a Greek wrestler, arguing that a soldier does not engage in a wrestling contest clad in full armor. But the difficulty disappears when one sees that the figure of a wrestling match speaks of a contest at close quarters, and an individual contest, between the Christian and his demon enemies. Translation. Because our wrestling is not against blood and flesh, but against the principalities, against the authorities, against the world-rulers of this darkness, against spirit-forces of perniciousness in the heavenly places. (6:13) “Wherefore” (dia touto (dia touto)), “on this account,” because the fight is with such powers as the demons of Satan, “take unto you the whole armor of God.” “Take unto you” is  (ajnalambanw), “to take up” in order to use, “to take to one’s self,” thus, “take up” as one takes up armor to put it on. The verb is aorist imperative, which construction issues a command given with military snap and curtness, a command to be obeyed at once and once for all. Thus, the Christian is to take up and put on all the armor of God as a once-for-all act and keep that armor on during the entire course of his life, not relaxing the discipline necessary for the constant use of such protection. The historian, Gibbon, relates how the relaxation of discipline and the disuse of exercise rendered soldiers less willing and less able to support the fatigue of the service. They complained of the weight of their armor, and obtained permission to lay aside their cuirasses and helmets. “Withstand” is  (ajnqisthmi), “to stand against, resist, oppose,” here to stand against the onslaught of the demons. The definite article before “day,” marks it out as a particular day, probably, as Expositors says, “the day of violent temptation and assault, whenever that may come to us during the present time.” “Evil” is  (ponhro"), “pernicious, evil in active opposition to the good.” “Done” is katergazomai (katergazomai), “to perform, accomplish, achieve, to do that from which something results, to carry something to its ultimate conclusion.” Translation. On this account, take to yourself at once and once for all, the complete armor of God in order that you may be able to resist in the day, the pernicious one, and having achieved all things, to stand. (6:14–17) “Having girt about” is  (perizwnnuw), “to gird around, to fasten garments with a girdle or belt.” It is in the middle voice, not passive as a.v., since context is hortatory, thus, “having girded about.” The Christian must gird his loins about with truth. That is his responsibility. Expositors says; “First in the list of these articles of equipment is mentioned the girdle. Appropriately so; for the soldier might be furnished with every other part of his equipment, and yet, wanting the girdle, would be neither fully

accoutered nor securely armed. His belt was no mere adornment of the soldier, but an essential part of his equipment. Passing round the loins and by the end of the breastplate (in later times supporting the sword), it was of especial use in keeping other parts in place, and in securing the proper soldierly attitude and freedom of movement.” As to the reference to truth, the same authority says: “It is simplest and most accordant with usage to take it so here (in the sense of candour, sincerity, truthfulness). And this plain grace of openness, truthfulness, reality, the mind that will practice no deceits and attempt no disguises in our intercourse with God, is indeed vital to Christian safety and essential to the due operation of all the other qualities of character.” With regard to the breastplate, the same authority says: “As the soldier covers his breast with the breastplate to make it secure against the disabling wound, so the Christian is to endue himself with righteousness so as to make his heart and will proof against the fatal thrust of his spiritual assailants.” The righteousness here is not justifying righteousness given the believing sinner when he first believes, but sanctifying righteousness, the product of the Holy Spirit in the life of the yielded saint. It can be defined as moral rectitude. The breastplate of righteousness is therefore the breastplate which is righteousness or consists of righteousness. The Greek middle is used again in the exhortation, “and having shod your feet“ the responsibility of the Christian soldier. If the Christian soldier is to stand up against the attack of the demons, he must see to it that his feet are properly protected and equipped. The Roman soldier wore sandals which were bound by throngs over the instep and around the ankle, and the soles were thickly studded with nails. This would give him a firm footing in case of attack. The word “preparation” is  (eJtoimazw), which was used in classical Greek in the sense of establishment or firm foundation. Thus, the Christian soldier should see to it that his feet are equipped with the sandals which will give him a firm footing, namely, the good news that speaks peace to a sinful heart, for the Lord Jesus made peace by the blood of His Cross, making a way for a holy God to reunite Himself with a believing sinner who in Adam had been separated from Him and His life. The Greek word “peace” is  (eijrhnh), and means “that which has been bound together.” Expositors says: “The preparedness, the mental alacrity with which we are inspired by the gospel with its message of peace with God, is to be to us the protection and equipment which the sandals that cover the feet are to the soldier. With this we shall be helped to face the foe with courage and with promptitude.” The “above all” of verse 16 is ambiguous. The thought in the original is, “in addition to all,” that is, in addition to all the equipment just mentioned, the Christian should add that mentioned in verses 16 and 17. The word “shield” used here (thureon (qureon)) designated the shield of the heavy infantry, a large, oblong one, four by two and one half feet, sometimes curved on the inner side. This shield which the Christian soldier uses is faith, a present faith in the Lord Jesus for victory over sin and the hosts of the devil. The fiery darts refer to arrows tipped with tow, pitch, or such material, set on fire before they were discharged. “The wicked” is  (oJ ponhro"), “the pernicious one,” Satan, who is not content to perish in his own destruction, but seeks to drag everyone else down with him to the utter ruin that will be his in the future eternity. The fiery arrows represent the temptations with which he assails the saints. These saints were saved in the sense that they were justified. The salvation spoken of here must therefore be salvation from the power of sin in this present life, salvation from the onslaughts of Satan. As to the expression, “the sword of the Spirit,” Vincent says:

“The word of God serves both for attack and to parry the thrusts of the enemy. Thus Christ used it in His temptation. It is the sword of the Spirit because the Spirit of God gives it and inspires it. The Spirit’s aid is needed for its interpretation.” Translation. Stand therefore, having girded your loins in the sphere of truth, and having clothed yourself with the breastplate of righteousness, and having sandalled your feet with a firm foundation of the glad tidings of peace; in addition to all these, taking to yourselves the shield of faith by means of which you will be able to quench all the fiery arrows of the pernicious one, and take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God. (6:18) “Always” is  (ejn panti kairwi), “on every occasion”; the Revision gives, “at all seasons,” praying at all seasons with every  (proseuch) (prayer in general) and  (dehsew") (special supplication) in the sphere of the Spirit (that is, directed and empowered by the Spirit). Expositors says: “This great requirement of standing ready for the combat can be made good only when prayer, constant, earnest, spiritual prayer is added to the careful equipment with all the parts of the panoply.” “Watching” is  (ajgrupnew), “to be sleepless, keep awake.” It means “to be attentive, vigilent.” It is the opposite of listlessness, expressing alertness. “Perseverance” is  (proskarterew), “to give constant attention to a thing, to give unremitting care to a thing.” Translation. Through the instrumentality of every prayer and supplication for need, praying at all seasons by means of the Spirit, and maintaining a constant alertness in the same with every kind of unremitting care and supplication for all the saints. (6:19, 20) “Utterance” is logos (logo"), “a word.” Paul asks that the Ephesian saints pray that God would give him a gift of utterance “in the opening of his mouth,” that is, when he opens his mouth to speak. This utterance, this speech, Paul desires, should be in boldness. “Boldness” is  (parrhsia), literally, “all speech.” The word means “fearless, confident freedom in speaking.” Translation. And on behalf of me, in order that there might be given me utterance in the opening of my mouth, in every fearless, confident freedom of speaking, to make known the mystery of the glad tidings, on behalf of which I am an ambassador in a chain, in order that in it I may speak with every fearless and confident freedom as it is necessary in the nature of the case for me to speak. (6:21–24) But in order that you also might come to know my circumstances, what I am doing, all things to you Tychicus, the beloved brother and faithful ministering servant in the Lord, will make known, whom I sent to you for this same purpose, in order that you might come to know our circumstances and in order that he might comfort your hearts. Peace to the brethren and love with faith from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. The grace be with all those who are loving our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity.

THE EXPANDED TRANSLATION OF EPHESIANS Read this through at a single sitting. In that way you will grasp the grand sweep of this wonderful letter. What you read will be that which the Ephesian saints read in all the richness of the Greek text. The author has divided Paul’s letters into paragraph divisions in order that the Bible student may be able to read them with more ease and facility. The great uncial manuscripts such as the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus (a.d. 350 and 375), consist of lines of Greek capital letters with no space between the letters or sentences, no punctuation, no accents or breathing marks. Manuscripts such as these were written on vellum, made from the skins of antelopes, specially prepared for this purpose. The Alexandrinus, another of the uncials, used the skins of 410 animals. The cost of hunting these animals and preparing the skins for manuscript purposes, made these early copies of the New Testament very expensive. One can readily see the reason for the crowding of the words and the lack of paragraph divisions to indicate the units of thought. For the same reason we can safely assume that the original manuscripts which left the hands of the inspired writers were written in the same form. This necessity of crowding as much written material as possible into the least amount of space was a blessing in disguise, for it eliminated such a thing as chapter and verse divisions, which latter are a most convenient way of locating scripture portions, but which, on the other hand, militate against the proper method of scientific exegesis, and which if followed, often cut the trend of thought in two, and isolate things that should be construed together. This book provides the student with the opportunity of reading these letters as they should be read, and as they were read in the local church to which they were addressed.

PHILIPPIANS In the Greek New Testament

DEDICATED To Wilbur M. Smith, D.D., colleague of mine on the Faculty of The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, who has won my deep and abiding love by his devotion to the Lord Jesus; for whom I have the greatest admiration because of his sanctified scholarship and tireless energy in His service; whose genuine Christian friendship I treasure most highly; and to whom I am sincerely grateful for the encouragement he has given me in my work in the Greek New Testament.

INTRODUCTION Every book should have a reason for its existence. One hesitates to add another volume to the many excellent works written on Paul’s letter to the Philippians. It would seem that an author is justified in doing so however, providing he can offer the Bible student a treatment of this epistle which is unique, and which gives him an access to it which no other book offers. Greek scholars write for the person who knows Greek. Here is a book which offers to the Bible student who has no knowledge of Greek, and who has had no formal training in Bible study, word studies in 297 Greek words found in the Philippian epistle, presenting the material in such a simple easy-to-be-understood manner that he is able to enjoy some of the untranslatable richness of the Greek New Testament, a thing heretofore denied him. In addition to this help, a fresh translation of the entire epistle is offered. This translation, used in connection with the English reader’s study Bible, will, together with the Greek word studies, enable the student to arrive at a much clearer understanding of his English text than he would otherwise be able to have, and also make accessible to him a great deal of the richness of the Greek text which does not at all appear in his English translation. The word studies and the translation offered, represent many hours of patient, exhausting, and careful research. The writer, for the most part, has not included the intricate technicalities of Greek grammar, syntax, and idiom in the presentation of the material. He has not offered any explanation of certain interpretations and translations simply because to do so would swamp the reader with detailed discussion involving technicalities in the Greek which the student of the English Bible would not understand. The translation offered must not be used as a substitute for the standard translations such as the Authorized Version, for instance, but as a companion translation which will help make clearer the standard version used. But this does not mean that the translation offered is a paraphrase, namely, a translation including explanatory or interpretive material. Just because a translator uses more words than the Authorized Version has, does not say that his translation is not accurate, nor does it imply that the Authorized Version is not dependable. It merely is indicative of the fact that the Greek language can say more in less words than the English, and that if one wants to bring over into the English translation more of the richness of the Greek, he will have to use more words, that is all. The words in parentheses are not part of the translation, but are explanatory. Smoothness of diction and elegance of expression have been sacrificed in order to bring out more clearly the thought of the original. The usual English order of words has been set aside at times, so that the Greek order may be followed, for the Greek places his words in such a position in the sentence as will bring out emphasis where emphasis is desired. The author has tried to show connections more clearly, where these are obscured by the condensed literality of the standard translations. Finally, the translation in modern day English rather than in the polished periods of the Authorized Version, much of which we know by heart and love, is thought-provoking. Paul’s letter divided into chapters and verses, furnished with footnotes, marginal readings, an introduction, and cross Scripture references becomes for the Bible student, a Bible book to be studied as a religious treatise. And this is as it should be. But one misses the frank, intimate informality of the letter as

seen when one reads it for what it is, a letter of a missionary to some of his converts, thanking them for a gift which they had sent him. And so, while the word studies and translation have been arranged according to verses for purposes of study, the entire translation has also been offered in the form of a letter. We have divided it into paragraphs in order that it might be more easily read, although letters of the first century do not appear to have been written in that way. Read it at a sitting, and catch the charm of this friendly, informal, “thank-you” letter, every word in its Greek original inspired by God, and thus the infallible Word of God, and yet full of the human writer, his style of writing, his character, and his personality. Then, with all this fresh in your mind, begin a verse by verse study of the letter. With your standard translation open before you, read the first verse. Follow each word study, endeavoring to understand more clearly the translation which you are using. Then read the fuller translation which the author offers. Work slowly through the epistle in this way, and you will be gratified to find that you have come to a clearer understanding of one of the best loved Bible books, and that you have also made your own some of the untranslatable richness of the Greek text itself. The work which the writer has done is chiefly interpretive, leaving for the Bible student the delightful exercise of developing, enlarging upon, and applying the truth brought out. The word studies rarely go afield, treatment of the Greek words found in this epistle being confined to the book itself. Where a word has been treated more fully, or completely, or in its every occurrence, or where the thought has been developed in the author’s four other books, a footnote will direct the student to the page or pages where such treatment can be found. These books are Golden Nuggets from the Greek New Testament for the English Reader, Bypaths in the Greek New Testament for the English Reader, Treasures from the Greek New Testament for the English Reader, and Untranslatable Riches from the Greek New Testament for the English Reader. These books will be mentioned by the abbreviated titles of Nuggets, Bypaths, Treasures, and Riches.

Paul’s Letter Paul and Timothy, bondslaves by nature, belonging to Christ Jesus, to all the consecrated and separated ones in Christ Jesus, together with the overseers and ministering deacons. (Sanctifying) grace be to you, and (heart) peace, from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ. I am thanking my God constantly for my whole remembrance of you, always in every prayer of mine making supplication for you all with joy. I am constantly thanking my God for your joint-participation in the furtherance of the gospel from the first day until this particular moment, having come to this settled and firm persuasion concerning this very thing, that He who began in you a work which is good, will bring it to a successful conclusion right up to the day of Christ Jesus; even as it is right for me to be constantly turning my mind in the direction of this very thing in your behalf (namely, the completion of God’s good work in you), because you are holding me in your heart both in my bonds and in my defense and confirmation of the gospel, you all being co-sharers with me in this grace; for my witness is God, how I long after all of you with the tender-heartedness of Christ Jesus. And this is the constant purport of my definite petitions, namely, that your love yet

more and more may overflow, but at the same time be kept within the guiding limitations of an accurate knowledge gained by experience and those of every kind of sensitive moral and ethical tact, so that you may after testing, recognize the true value of the finer points of Christian conduct and thus sanction them, in order that you may be pure and not a stumbling block, keeping in view the day of Christ, being filled full with the fruit of righteousness, which fruit is through Jesus Christ, resulting in glory and praise to God. But after mature consideration I desire you to gain this knowledge from (my) experience, that my circumstances have come to result rather in the pioneer advance of the gospel, so that it has become plainly recognized that my bonds are because of Christ, throughout the whole Praetorian Guard and to all the rest. And the great majority of the brethren having come to a state of settled confidence in the Lord by reason of the fact that they have been persuaded by my bonds, are more abundantly bold, fearlessly breaking their silence and speaking the Word. In fact, certain ones even because of envy and rivalry, but also others because of good will are proclaiming Christ; some indeed out of a spirit of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; but others out of a partisan self-seeking spirit are announcing Christ, not with pure unmixed motives, but insincerely, thinking to make my chain gall me. What is my feeling in view of these things? (Supposing they do purpose to make my chain gall me.) The only thing that follows is that in every manner whether in pretense or in truth, whether insincerely or sincerely, Christ is being announced; and in this I am rejoicing, and certainly I will continue to rejoice, for I know that this for me shall result in salvation through your petition and through the bountiful supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ. And this is exactly in accordance with my undivided and intense expectancy and hope, namely, that in respect to not even one thing shall I be ashamed, but in every boldness of speech as always so also now, Christ shall be conspicuously and gloriously manifested, whether through life or through death, for, so far as I am concerned, to be living, both as to my very existence and my experience, that is Christ, and to have died, is gain. But if for me life in the flesh be my portion, this very thing (namely, life in the flesh) is that in which the fruit of my ministry will be involved, and is the condition of that fruit being brought forth. Then, what I shall prefer for myself, I do not make known. Rather, I am being held motionless by an equal pull from the two (namely, life and death), so that I cannot incline either way, having the passionate desire towards striking my tent and being with Christ, which is by far better, but still to remain with my flesh is more needful for your sakes. And having come to this settled conviction (namely, that to remain in the flesh is more needful for you), I know that I shall remain and continue alive with you all for your progress and joy in your faith, in order that your rejoicing may abound in Christ Jesus through me by reason of my personal presence with you again. Only (since my only reason for remaining on earth is for your progress in the Christian life), see to it that you recognize your responsibility as citizens (of heaven), and put yourselves to the absolute necessity of performing the duties devolving upon you in that position, doing this in a manner which is befitting to the gospel of Christ, in order that whether having come and having seen you, or whether being absent, I am hearing the things concerning you, namely, that you are standing firm in one spirit, holding your ground, with one soul contending (as a team of athletes would) in perfect cooperation with one another for the faith of the gospel, and not being affrighted in even one thing by those who are entrenched in their opposition against you, which failure on your part to be

frightened is an indication of such a nature as to present clear evidence to them of utter destruction, also clear evidence of your salvation, and this evidence from God. And the reason why you should not be terrified is because to you that very thing was graciously given for the sake of Christ and in His behalf, not only to be believing on Him, but also to be suffering for His sake and in His behalf, having the same struggle which you saw in me and now hear to be in me. In view of the fact that there is a certain ground of appeal in Christ which exhorts, since there is a certain tender persuasion that comes from divine love, in view of the fact that there is a certain joint-participation with the Spirit in a common interest and activity, since there are certain tenderheartednesses and compassionate yearnings and actions, fill full my joy by thinking the same thing, having the same love, being in heart agreement, thinking the one thing, doing nothing impelled by a spirit of factiousness, nothing impelled by empty pride, but in lowliness of mind consider one another as excelling themselves, this estimation resting, not upon feelings or sentiment, but upon a due consideration of facts, not consulting each one his own interests only, but also each one the interests of others. This mind be constantly having in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who has always been and at present continues to subsist in that mode of being in which He gives outward expression of His essential nature, that of Deity, and who did not after weighing the facts, consider it a treasure to be clutched and retained at all hazards, to be equal with Deity (in the expression of the divine essence), but emptied Himself, having taken the outward expression of a bondslave, which expression came from and was truly representative of His nature, entering into a new state of existence, that of mankind. And being found to be in outward guise as man, He stooped very low, having become obedient to the extent of death, even such a death as that upon a cross. Because of which voluntary act of supreme self-renunciation, God also supereminently exalted Him to the highest rank and power, and graciously bestowed upon Him THE NAME, the one which is above every name, in order that in recognition of THE NAME belonging to Jesus, every knee should bow, of things in heaven, of things on earth, and of things under the earth, and in order that every tongue should plainly and openly declare that Jesus Christ is LORD, resulting in the glory of God the Father. Wherefore, my beloved ones, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but much more in my absence, carry to its ultimate conclusion your own salvation with fear and trembling, for God is the One who is constantly putting forth His power in you, both in the form of the constant activity of (your) being desirous of and the constant activity of (your) putting into operation His good pleasure. All things be constantly doing without discontented and secret mutterings and grumblings, and without discussions which carry an undertone of suspicion or doubt, to the end that you may become those who are deserving of no censure, free from fault or defect, and guileless in their simplicity, children of God without blemish, in the midst of a perverse and distorted generation, among whom you appear as luminaries in the world, holding forth the Word of life, to the end that I may have a ground for glorying reserved for the day of Christ, this glorying being because of the fact that I have not run in vain nor have I labored to the point of exhaustion in vain. In fact, if also I am being poured out as a libation upon the altar and priestly service of your faith, I rejoice and continue to rejoice with you all. But as for you, you even be rejoicing in the same thing and continue to rejoice with me. But I am hoping in the Lord quickly to send Timothy to you, in order that I also may be of good cheer, having come to know of your circumstances. For not even one do I

have who is like-souled, one of such a character who would genuinely and with no secondary regard for himself be concerned about the welfare of your circumstances. For one and all without exception are constantly seeking their own things, not the things of Christ Jesus. But you know by experience his character which has been approved after having been tested, that as a child to a father, with me he has served in the furtherance of the gospel. Him therefore I am hoping to send as soon as, having turned my attention from other things and having concentrated it upon my own situation, I shall have ascertained my position. But I have come to a settled conviction, which conviction is in the Lord, that I also myself shall come shortly. But after weighing the facts, I considered it indispensable to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother and fellow-worker and fellow-soldier, but your ambassador to whom you entrusted a mission, and he who in a sacred way ministered to my needs, for he was constantly yearning after you, and was in sore anguish because you heard that he was sick; for truly he was ill, next door to death. But God had mercy upon him, and not upon him alone, but also on me, in order that I might not have sorrow upon sorrow. With increased haste and diligence therefore I sent him, in order that having seen him again, you may recover your cheerfulness and my sorrow may be lessened. Receive him to yourselves therefore with all joy, and hold such ones in honor, value them highly, and deem them precious, because on account of the work of Christ he drew near to death, having recklessly exposed his life in order that he might supply that which was lacking in your service to me. As for the rest (of which I wish to say to you), go on constantly rejoicing in the Lord. To go on writing the same things to you is not to me irksome or tedious, while for you it is safe. Keep a watchful eye ever upon the dogs. Keep a watchful eye ever upon the evil workers. Keep a watchful eye ever upon those who are mutilated, doing this for the purpose of bewaring of and avoiding the same. For, as for us, we are the circumcision, those who by the Spirit of God are rendering service and obedience, and who are exulting in Christ Jesus, and who have not come to a settled persuasion, trusting in the flesh. Although as for myself, I might be having confidence even in the flesh. If (as is the case) anyone else presumes to have come to a settled persuasion, trusting in the flesh, I could occupy that place, and with more reason; eight days old in circumcision, my origin, from Israelitish stock, belonging to the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew from true Hebrew parents, with reference to the law, a Pharisee, with regard to zeal, a persecutor of the Church, with reference to that kind of righteousness which is in the law, become blameless. But the things which were of such a nature as to be gains to me, these things I have set down for the sake of Christ as a loss. Yea, indeed, therefore, at least, even, I am still setting all things down to be a loss for the sake of that which excels all others, my knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord which I have gained through experience, for which sake I have been caused to forfeit all things, and I am still counting them dung, in order that Christ I might gain, yea, in order that I might through observation of others be discovered by them to be in Christ, not having as my righteousness that righteousness which is of the law, but that righteousness which is from God on the basis of faith. Yes, for His sake I have been caused to forfeit all things, and I count them but dung, in order that I might come to know Him in an experiential way, and to come to know experientially the power of His resurrection, and a joint-participation in His sufferings, being brought to the place where my life will radiate a likeness to His death, if by any

means I might arrive at my goal, namely, the out-resurrection out from among those who are dead. Not that I have already made acquisition or that I have now already been brought to that place of settled spiritual maturity beyond which there is no progress, but I am pursuing onward if I may lay hold on that for which I have been laid hold of by Christ Jesus. Brethren, as for myself, as I look back upon my life and calmly draw a conclusion, I am not counting myself yet as one who has in an absolute and complete way laid hold (of that for which I have been laid hold of by Christ Jesus); but one thing, I, in fact am forgetting completely the things that are behind, but am stretching forward to the things that are in front; bearing down upon the goal, I am pursuing on for the prize of the call from above of God which is in Christ Jesus. As many therefore as are spiritually mature, let us be of this mind. And, if (as is the case), in anything you are differently minded, and that, in an evil sense, this also will God reveal to you. Only one thing, so far as we have come, let us keep our lives in the same path. Become imitators of me, brethren, and observe attentively those who conduct themselves in a manner which reflects the example which you have in us, for many are going about, concerning whom I often have been telling you, but now tell you weeping, enemies (they are) of the cross of Christ, whose end is utter destruction, whose god is their belly and that which they esteem to be their glory is their shame, who regard the things upon the earth. For the commonwealth of which we are citizens, has its fixed location in heaven, out from which we with our attention withdrawn from all else, are eagerly waiting to welcome the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, and to receive Him to ourselves: who will transform our humiliated body, conforming it to the body of His glory, by means of the energy through which He is able to marshal all things under Himself. Therefore, my brothers, individually loved ones, and individually passionately longed for, my joy and my victor’s festal garland, thus be standing firm in the Lord, beloved ones. Euodia I exhort, please, and Syntyche, I exhort, please, to be of the same mind in the Lord. Even so, I make request of you also, Syzygus, who art a genuine yokefellow in deed as well as in name, lend a hand with these women in their efforts to settling the differences which they have between themselves, women of such a character that in the gospel they labored and contended in perfect cooperation with me (as a team of athletes would), together also with Clement and the rest of my fellow-workers whose names are in the book of life. Be rejoicing in the Lord always. Again I say, be rejoicing. Let your sweet reasonableness, your forbearance, your being satisfied with less than your due, become known to all men. The Lord is near. Stop perpetually worrying about even one thing, but in everything, by prayer whose essence is that of worship and devotion, and by supplication which is a cry for your personal needs, let your requests with thanksgiving for the things asked for be made known in the presence of God, and the peace of God which surpasses all power of comprehension, shall mount guard over your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus. Finally, brethren, whatever things have the character of truth, whatever things are worthy of reverence, whatever things are righteous, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are attractive, whatever excellence there may be or fit object of praise, these things make the subject of careful reflection. The things also which you learned and received and heard and saw in me, these things, habitually practice: and the God of peace shall be with you. But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly that already once more you let your care for me

blossom into activity again, in which matter you were all along thoughtful, but you never had an opportunity. It is not that I speak as regards want, for, so far as I am concerned, I have come to learn, in the circumstances in which I am placed, to be independent of these and self-sufficient. I know in fact how to keep myself low; I know in fact how to have more than enough. In everything and in all things I have learned the secret, both to be satiated and to be hungry, and to have more than enough and to lack. I am strong for all things in the One who constantly infuses strength in me. All the same, you did a beautiful thing when you made yourselves fellow- partakers with my tribulation. But, you yourselves also know, Philippians, that at the beginning of the gospel, when I went out from Macedonia, not even one assembly made itself a partner with me as regards an account of giving and taking except only you, that even in Thessalonica more than once you sent to relieve my necessities. Not that it is my character to be ever seeking the gift, but I am seeking the fruit which is accumulating to your account. But I have all things to the full and overflowing. I have been filled completely full and at present am well supplied, having received at the hand of Epaphroditus the things from you, a scent of sweet savor, a sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing to God. But my God shall satisfy to the full all your need in accordance with His wealth in glory in Christ Jesus. Now to God even our Father, be the glory for ever and ever. Amen. Greet every saint in Christ Jesus. The brethren with me send greeting. All the saints send greeting, especially those of Caesar’s household. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, with all of you and in this respect individually.

THE OUTLINE OF PAUL’S LETTER 1. Paul greets the saints at Philippi (1:1, 2) 2. Paul thanks God for the cooperation of the Philippian saints in the work of the gospel, and prays for them (1:3–11) 3. Paul assures the saints that his circumstances have brought about a pioneer advance of the gospel (1:12–26) 4. Paul exhorts the saints to live in a manner which is worthy of the gospel (1:27–30) 5. Paul holds up to the saints the example of the Lord Jesus (2:1–18) 6. Paul brings before them the example of Timothy (2:19–24) 7. Paul speaks of the charming testimony of Epaphroditus (2:25–30) 8. Paul, using himself as an example, warns the saints against the Judaizers (3:1–14) 9. Paul closes his letter with various exhortations (3:15–4:23)

1. PAUL GREETS THE SAINTS AT PHILIPPI (1:1, 2) Verse one The writer of this letter to the Philippians had two names, Saul, which means “to ask or pray,” his Hebrew name, and Paul, coming from the Latin, meaning “little,” his Gentile name. Some think that he had the two names in childhood. The practice of adopting Gentile names may be traced through all the periods of Hebrew history. When Paul became the apostle to the Gentiles, he discarded his Hebrew name (Acts 13:9). There are

indications that Paul was small in stature, hence his Latin name. He was a man of prayer, and thus lived up to his Hebrew name. Paul’s practice of beginning his letters with the name of the writer, followed by the name of the recipient, which in turn was followed by a greeting (“Paul … to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons, grace be unto you and peace, from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ”), is not peculiar to the Bible epistles. Paul simply followed the custom of the day. Pliny the younger, writing to the Emperor Trajan, begins his letter, “Pliny, to the emperor Trajan, wisheth health. It is my custom, Sir, etc.” The emperor answers, “Trajan to Pliny, health and happiness. You have taken the right method, my Pliny, etc.” Adolph Deissman, in his monumental work on the Greek papyri, Light from the Ancient East, gives instances of the same custom. A letter from an Egyptian to a family in mourning, second century a.d., begins as follows: “Irene to Taonnophris and Philo, good comfort. I am so sorry and weep over the departed one as I wept for Didymas.” A letter of an Egyptian soldier to his father, second century a.d., begins: “Apion to Epimachus his father and lord, many greetings. Before all things I pray that thou art in health, and that thou dost prosper and fare well continually.” Is not this just like John’s letter, “The elder unto the well-beloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth. Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth” (III John 1, 2)? Then there is a letter from a prodigal son to his mother: “Antonis Longus to Nilus his mother, many greetings. And continually do I pray that thou art in health.” The name “Timothy” is a combination of two Greek words which together mean, “he who honors God.” The Greek word for “honor” has in it the ideas of reverence and veneration. Possibly, his grandmother Lois was responsible for the naming of the child, and also for much of the religious training he received, so that when Timothy grew to manhood, he exhibited those qualities in his life. These were the qualities which perhaps attracted Paul to the young man. Paul calls Timothy and himself servants of Jesus Christ. There is no definite article in the Greek. They were servants by nature. The word is doulos (doulo"),1 and refers to one bound to another. Paul was bound to Jesus Christ by the bands of a constraining love. It refers to one born into slavery. Paul was born into slavery to sin by his first birth, and into the position of a loving bondslave of the Lord Jesus by his new birth. It refers to one who is in a relation to another which only death can break. Paul’s relation to Satan was broken by his identification with Christ in His death. He now is in a relation to Jesus Christ which will last forever, since Christ can never die again, and Paul’s life is Christ. It refers to one whose will is swallowed up in the will of another. Paul’s will was at one time swallowed up in the will of Satan. Now his will is swallowed up in the sweet will of God. It refers to one who serves another even to the disregard of his own interests. Paul served Satan to the detriment of his own interests. Now he serves the Lord Jesus with a reckless abandon, not regarding his own interests. The name “Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek word Christos (Cristo"), which in turn is the translation of the Hebrew word meaning “Messiah.” The word “Christ” means “The Anointed One.” The name “Jesus” is the English spelling of the Greek Iesous (ÆIesou"), which is in turn the Greek spelling of the Hebrew word Jehoshua which means “Jehovah saves.” We have therefore in these two names, the Messianic office of our Lord, His deity, and His substitutionary atonement. Paul is writing to the saints. The word “saint”1 is the translation of a Greek word

meaning “to set apart,” in its verb, and “set apart ones,” in its noun form. The pagan Greeks set apart buildings as temples, consecrating them for non-secular, and therefore, religious purposes. These became the objects of veneration and reverence. Thus, saints are believing sinners set apart from sin to holiness, set apart from Satan to God, thus being consecrated for Gods’ sacred fellowship and service. The word “saint” as a designation of a Christian, brings at once to our attention the duty of every believer, that of living a separated life. The words, “saint, sanctify, holy,” are all translations of this same Greek root. They all speak of the absolute separation from evil and dedication to God, that must always be true of the Christian believer. Paul uses the word “all” because he wishes to put those Philippians who had not sent to his support, on a level with those who had. There were some divisions among the Philippians, and Paul set himself above these. The phrase “in Christ Jesus” was necessary in defining just who these saints were. The Greek word “saint” was used in Philippi as a name for individual worshippers in the pagan Greek religions. Paul wished to differentiate the saints of God from the “saints” in the Greek mystery religions. The word “in” is used with the locative of sphere. These saints were saints in the sphere of Christ. That is, Christ is the sphere in which the believer has his new life and all his interests and activities. The believer’s new existence is circumscribed by Christ. Paul put this in other words in the expression, “For to me to live is Christ.” That is, the new life Paul has is Christ, which issues in a Christ-like life. Here again we have separation, for that which surrounds the believer, namely, Christ in whom he is ensphered, separates him from all else. The word “bishop” is the translation of a Greek word used in secular pursuits, of an overseer in any capacity, for instance, the official in charge of the repairing of a temple or an officer in an army. The word itself means “to look upon.” Paul uses it as another name for an elder, the latter being the title of the office so far as status in the church is concerned, the former being the title that indicated the responsibility and activity of the office, that of overseeing the spiritual welfare of the local church. He brings the two names together as designating one individual in Acts 20:17, 28. The word “deacon” is the English spelling of a Greek word that was used as a general term to designate a servant. It covered both slaves and hired servants. It represented a servant, not in his relation to his master, but in his activity. The same word is translated “minister” in I Corinthians 3:5; II Corinthians 3:6; Ephesians 3:7. Here it refers to a distinct class of officers in the apostolic church. The origin of the office is given us in Acts 6: The care of the sick and the poor however led to spiritual ministrations. Stephen and Philip are examples of those early church deacons who ministered in the Word. Translation: Paul and Timothy, bondslaves by nature, belonging to Christ Jesus, to all the consecrated and separated ones in Christ Jesus, together with the overseers and ministering deacons.

Verse two The Greek word for “grace” is a wonderful word. Archbishop Trench says of it, It is hardly too much to say that the Greek mind has in no word uttered itself and all that was at its heart more distinctly than in this. When this word is brought over into the New Testament one can repeat Trench’s statement, substituting the word “God” for “Greek.” It

is hardly too much to say that God has in no word uttered Himself and all that is in His heart more distinctly than in this. In its use among the pagan Greeks it referred to a favor done by one Greek to another out of the pure generosity of his heart, and with no hope of reward. When it is used in the New Testament, it refers to that favor which God did at Calvary when He stepped down from His judgment throne to take upon Himself the guilt and penalty of human sin. In the case of the Greek, the favor was done to a friend, never an enemy. In the case of God it was an enemy, the sinner, bitter in his hatred of God, for whom the favor was done. God has no strings tied to the salvation He procured for man at the Cross. Salvation is given the believing sinner out of the pure generosity of God’s heart. The Greek word referred to an action that was beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and was therefore commendable. What a description of that which took place at the Cross! The grace spoken of here is sanctifying grace, that part of salvation given the saint in which God causes him to grow in Christ-likeness through the ministry of the Holy Spirit. The word “peace” in classical Greek means “to bind together,” in the New Testament, “the operation of God’s grace in binding the believing sinner to God and His life again, this operation continued in bringing that believer in his experience more and more into harmony with God in his life and service,” the latter being the particular phase to which Paul refers here. Translation: (Sanctifying) grace be to you, and (heart) peace, from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

2. PAUL THANKS GOD FOR THE CO-OPERATION OF THE PHILIPPIAN SAINTS IN THE WORK OF THE GOSPEL, AND PRAYS FOR THEM (1:3–11) Verses three and four The word “upon” does not mean “at.” That is, Paul does not mean here that he thanks God at every remembrance of the Philippians. It means “upon the basis of.” That is, the Philippians form the basis for Paul’s thanksgiving. The word “every” in the Greek text has the idea of “whole.” Paul thanks God because of his whole remembrance of the Philippians. There were no regrets in all of Paul’s relationships with them. Translation: I am thanking my God constantly for my whole remembrance of you, always in every prayer of mine making supplication for you all with joy.

Verse five The word “fellowship” in the original means, “a joint-participation in a common interest and activity.” This was the meaning of the word “fellowship” when the Authorized Version was made. The English word has largely lost its original meaning in religious circles, although it has retained it in academic phraseology. The word “fellowship” today usually means “companionship, intercourse between individuals.” This was the Philippian’s joint-participation with Paul in a common interest and activity, that of preaching the gospel. The preposition “in” is a preposition of motion. This common interest and activity

was in the progress of the gospel. The Philippians supported Paul with their prayers and finances while he went about his missionary labors. This is what he is thanking God for. And this is part of that “whole remembrance” of them for which he is grateful. This jointparticipation in the work of propagating the gospel had gone on from the first day when Lydia had opened her home to the preaching of the Word (Acts 16:15), until the moment when Paul was writing this letter. Paul was grateful to God for all their help. And he was thanking them also. There is a most delicate touch here that cannot be brought out in any English translation, since the English language does not have the idiom. In the Greek there is a definite article before the adverb “now.” That is, Paul was thanking God for the jointparticipation of the Philippians with him in the great missionary enterprise from the first day until the now. The article “the” is a delicate Pauline finger pointing to the gift which the Philippians had just sent with Epaphroditus, their messenger. Paul thanks them in so many words at the end of his letter. But here he does not want to appear too hastily and obtrusively grateful. So he thanks God for all of their help, and points a delicate finger consisting of the Greek definite article, used before an adverb, at the most recent gift as included in the “whole remembrance.” Translation: I am constantly thanking my God for your jointparticipation in the furtherance of the gospel from the first day until this particular moment.

Verse six The words “being confident,” have a slight causitive force in the Greek. Coupled with his thanksgiving for their past generous aid in the cause of foreign missions, is his thanksgiving for their future aid, since he is confident of their future help. The word translated “confident,” speaks of the fact that Paul had come to a settled persuasion concerning the fact that the God who had begun in the Philippians the good work of giving to missions, would bring it to a successful conclusion right up to the day of Christ Jesus. The word translated “until,” assumes the nearness of the Rapture in Paul’s mind and outlook. Translation: Having come to this settled and firm persuasion concerning this very thing, that He who began in you a work which is good, will bring it to a successful conclusion right up to the day of Christ Jesus;

Verse seven The word translated “meet” has the idea of “right” or “just.” That is, Paul says that it is no more than right or just on his part to think this of them, namely, their continued jointparticipation with him in missionary work. The word translated “think,” speaks of the action of a person constantly having his mind directed in a practical way in the good interest of someone. Paul’s mind, turned in the direction of the Philippians, would soon turn to prayer in their behalf. The expression “because I have you in my heart,” could just as properly be, “because you have me in your heart.” The second way of rendering the Greek is more in accord with the context. The Philippians had a large place in their hearts for Paul, and at this time especially with reference to the two particulars mentioned here, first, with reference to his defense of the gospel, and second, in his confirmation of the

same. The word “defense” is a Greek judicial term referring to an attorney talking his client off from a charge, thus presenting a verbal defense. Paul was defending the Faith before the tribunal of the world, Nero’s throne. A successful defense would result in the gospel being confirmed, that is, made stable in the sense that its claims would be shown to be true. In this joint-participation of the Philippians, not only in the missionary enterprise but in the defense and establishment of the gospel, Paul says that they were partakers of his grace. The word “my” is to be connected with “partakers,” not “grace.” The Philippians were Paul’s co-sharers in the grace of God. Their love and kindness to him in his dark moments, constituted proof of the fact that they were joint-participants with Paul in the grace that resulted in their joint efforts at propagating the gospel. Translation: Even as it is right for me to be constantly turning my mind in the direction of this very thing in your behalf (namely, the completion of God’s good work in you), because you are holding me in your heart both in my bonds and in my defense and confirmation of the gospel, you all being co-sharers with me in this grace.

Verse eight The word “record” is the translation of the Greek word meaning “one who bears testimony.” It is the word from which we get “martyr.” Such adjuration of God, Paul uses only in solemn personal statements. The words “long after” are in the Greek, a verb meaning “to desire earnestly, to have a strong affection for.” The prefixed preposition is intensive in its use, intensifying the meaning of the verb. But one can also see a local usage. Not only does Paul have an intense desire or longing for the Philippians, but he longs over them. What a miracle of divine grace for this heretofore proud Pharisee to have tender heart-longings for these former pagan Greeks! But that is not all. He tells them that this longing is in the bowels of Jesus Christ. The inner organs, here designated by the word “bowels,” were regarded by the ancients as the seat of the tender affections. The word used here refers to the upper organs, the stomach, liver, and lungs, another word being used for the intestines. We would say “the heart.” Paul thus describes his longing, not as his individual emotion, but as Christ’s longing, as if the very heart of Christ dwelt in Paul. The great apostle lived so close to the Lord Jesus, and he had so shared the sufferings of his Lord for righteousness’ sake, that his heart was very tender, and beat as one with the heart of Jesus. Translation: For my witness is God, how I long after all of you with the tenderheartedness of Christ Jesus.

Verse nine “Pray” is the translation of a word which speaks of prayer directed consciously to God, and with a definite aim. As Paul prayed, he had a definite consciousness of the presence of God, and that he was speaking, not into mere space, but to a Person, and that that Person was listening, giving attention to what he was saying. The word “that” could also be rendered, “this is the purport and substance of my prayer.” The love spoken of here is the love that God is (I John 4:16), produced in the heart of

the yielded believer by the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5), its chief ingredient, self-sacrifice for the benefit of the one who is loved (John 3:16), and its constituent elements analyzed for us in I Corinthians 13: “Abound” is from a Greek word which means “to exceed a fixed number or measure, to exist in superfluity.” This divine love, an exotic flower from heaven, planted in the foreign soil of the believer’s heart (I John 3:1, “what manner of,” namely, “what foreign kind of”), was existing in superabundance in the hearts of these Greeks who had been saved out of gross paganism, and was overflowing into the hearts of others. Paul prays that it might increase. But like a river in flood-time, its volume needed to be brought within guiding limitations lest it work harm rather than bring blessing. There was an eager and enthusiastic spirit among these new converts, but a lack of a deep understanding of the truth, and also a lack of a sensitive moral perception and tact. So Paul prays that this love may overflow more and more, but that its outflow and application might be brought within the guiding limitations of knowledge and judgment. “Knowledge” is from the Greek work speaking of knowledge gained by experience, as contrasted to intuitive knowledge, which is from another word. A prefixed preposition intensifies the word, and we have “full knowledge.” The full knowledge which these Philippians needed to gain by experience was a better understanding of God’s Word as translated into their experience, and a clearer vision of the Lord Jesus in all the beauty and fragrance of His Person. A Christian can have an “understanding” knowledge of the Word, that is, be able to explain its meaning to others, without having an experiential knowledge of the same. But when that Christian has put the Word of God into practice in his life, then he has what Paul is talking about here. This is the difference between a young convert and a matured believer. The former has not had time to live long enough to live out the Word in his life, the latter has. The former, if his life is wholly yielded, is a delight to look upon in his Christian life, as one would enjoy the vigor and sparkle of youth. The latter, in his mellowed, well-rounded, matured, and fully-developed Christian experience, his life full of tender reminiscences of his years of companionship with the Lord Jesus, has the fragrance of heavenly things about him. This was what the Philippian saints needed, but it would take time for this to be brought about. This mellowed Christian experience would constitute the limitations thrown around this overflowing love that would insure its proper application and wise outreach. The words “all judgment” are the translation of a Greek word referring to a sensitive moral perception, and a quickness of ethical tact. How often we saints mean to be loving to others, and say the wrong words or do the wrong thing. We lack that delicate sensibility, that ability to express ourselves correctly, that gentle, wise, discriminating touch which would convey the love we have in our hearts to the lives of others. But this can be ours if we but live in close companionship with the One who always exhibited that sense of delicate tactfulness in His life. Translation: And this is the constant purport of my definite petitions, namely, that your love yet more and more may overflow, but at the same time be kept within the guiding limitations of an accurate knowledge gained by experience and those of every kind of sensitive moral and ethical tact.

Verses ten and eleven Paul prays that the love manifested by the saints might be guided into proper channels by the limiting factors of a full and experiential knowledge and a sensitive moral and ethical tact, in order that they may be able to approve things that are excellent. The word “approve”1 is from a Greek word which refers to the act of testing something for the purpose of approving it, thus “to approve after testing.” It was used of the standing of candidates for the degree of doctor of medicine, who had passed their examinations. They were certified physicians. Here the word refers to the ability of the saints to sift or test a certain thing and thus to recognize its worth and put their stamp of approval upon it. The expression “the things that are more excellent” (the definite article is used in the Greek, pointing to particular things), comes from a word that means “to carry two ways,” thus “to carry different ways,” thus “to differ.” It refers here to those moral and spiritual concepts and actions which involve delicate and keen distinctions, those that require a deep and keen discernment to recognize. Not the ordinary, every-day, easily-understood spiritual obligations, but the finer points of Christian conduct are in the apostle’s mind. The Greek word is found in an early secular document in the sentence, “you are superior to Ptolemais in experience,” and in the phrase “most vital interests in the treasury.” It speaks of those things therefore that are superior, vital, that surpass, that excel. Thus, a Spirit-produced love in the heart and life of the saint, which has been confined like a river within the limiting banks of a full experiential knowledge and a sensitive moral and ethical tact, is the thing that sharpens the moral and spiritual perceptions for the discernment of the finer qualities of Christian conduct. This will result in the saint being sincere and without offence until the day of Christ, which latter expression refers to the Rapture of the Church. “Sincere” is from a Greek word which means “distinct, unmixed, pure, unsullied.” There is no hypocrisy about such a saint. His life is open like a book waiting to be read. “Without offence” is literally, “not cut against, not stumbled against.” This saint is not a stumbling block to others. Translation: So that you may after testing, recognize the true value of the finer points of Christian conduct and thus sanction them, in order that you may be pure and not a stumbling block, keeping in view the day of Christ, being filled full with the fruit of righteousness, which fruit is through Jesus Christ, resulting in glory and praise to God.

3. PAUL ASSURES THE SAINTS THAT HIS CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE BROUGHT ABOUT A PIONEER ADVANCE OF THE GOSPEL (1:12–26). Verse twelve Epaphroditis had told Paul that the Church at Philippi was afraid that his imprisonment was curtailing his missionary work. Paul assures them that the contrary has been the ease. The gospel has made pioneer advances by reason of his circumscribed activities. The word “would” speaks of a desire that has purpose and intention back of it. It is “will” with determination. The desire came after mature consideration. “Understand” is from the word meaning “to acquire knowledge by experience.” The Philippian saints, he desired, should

learn something from his experience. “The things which happened unto me,” are literally, “the things dominating me.” The words “which happened” are not in the Greek text and are not needed. Nothing ever just happens to the saint. Things either come directly from God or they reach us from some other source by His permissive will. The things that were then dominating Paul’s life were those connected with his imprisonment. “Have fallen out” is literally, “have come to result.” The use of “rather” tells us that the Philippians were thinking that Paul’s ministry was being curtailed. The word “furtherance” is from a Greek word which means “to cut before,” and is thought to have been used of an army of pioneer wood cutters which precedes the regular army, cutting a road through an impenetrable forest, thus making possible the pioneer advance of the latter into regions where otherwise it could not have gone. Paul assures the Philippian saints that his circumstances have not only failed to curtail his missionary work, but they have advanced it, and not only that, they have brought about a pioneer advance in regions where otherwise it could not have gone. It is so in our lives. Our God-ordained or God-permitted circumstances are used of God to provide for a pioneer advance of the gospel in our Christian service. Translation: But after mature consideration I desire you to gain this knowledge from (my) experience, that my circumstances have come to result rather in the pioneer advance of the gospel.

Verse thirteen The word “bonds” refers to Paul being a prisoner of the Roman empire. “Manifest” is the translation of a Greek word meaning, “to make known what has been unknown, to become known, to be plainly recognized, thoroughly understood.” “Are” is from a word meaning “to become.” The phrase “in Christ,” is to be construed with “are manifest,” not “bonds.” The question of the reason for Paul’s imprisonment was raised, and the word was passed around that it was because of his relationship to Christ. The next question would be, “Who is Christ?” And the gospel story would be told. It became known and understood that Paul was in prison because he preached the gospel. The word “palace” refers in the Greek to the Praetorian Guard, composed of the soldiers of the imperial regiments whose barracks were at Rome. Paul had been living in his own rented quarters near these barracks, guarded by soldiers twenty-four hours a day. He lived for two years with a Roman soldier chained to his wrist. As the different soldiers would take their turn guarding Paul, they would hear the conversations he had with his visitors, conversations full of the gospel and of the Saviour of sinners. They would hear the apostle pray, and would listen as he dictated the epistles he wrote. The noble prisoner would talk to them about their souls, talking in the international Greek so common in those days. Thus, the gospel went through the barracks of the Roman soldiers, a place where it would not have gone, if Paul had not been a prisoner there. Translation: So that it has become plainly recognized that my bonds are because of Christ, throughout the whole Praetorian Guard and to all the rest.

Verse fourteen In addition to the gospel making a pioneer advance throughout the Praetorian Guard,

Paul speaks of the increase of preaching in the city of Rome itself. The word “many” is literally, “the most.” Most of the Christian brethren were preaching now, the implication being that a few held back. Persecutions in Rome had somewhat silenced gospel preaching there. The words “waxing confident” come from a word which means “to persuade.” These Christians had been persuaded by the brave and fearless example of Paul in prison, and had come to a state of settled confidence in the Lord. The words, “in the Lord” are to be construed with “waxing confident,” not “brethren.” They became more abundantly bold to speak the Word. The boldness required to profess Christ in Rome is illustrated by a wall scribble. A caricature of Christ on the Cross with an ass’ head is portrayed, while on the left appears a Christian youth in an attitude of adoration. Underneath are the words, “Alexamenos worships God.” The word “speak” denotes the fact, not the substance of the speaking. They had broken silence. Translation: And the great majority of the brethren having come to a state of settled confidence in the Lord by reason of the fact that they have been persuaded by my bonds, are more abundantly bold, fearlessly breaking their silence and speaking the Word.

Verses fifteen to seventeen After telling the Philippians that one result of his imprisonment was to increase the number of gospel witnesses, he speaks of the two groups into which they were divided, and the different motives that impelled them to break their silence, which motives were governed by their different attitudes toward Paul. The preposition “of” in verse fifteen is the translation of a Greek word meaning “because of.” One group preached because it was envious of Paul and was at odds with him. This group was composed of the Judaizers, Jews who taught that the Gentiles had to enter Christianity through the gate of Judaism. They preached Christ, but their real object was to gain adherents to the law. They valued success, not as a triumph over paganism, but as a triumph over Paul. It would make them feel good if they could make his sufferings in prison more acute by reason of jealousy which might arise in his heart. The other group was composed of Gentile converts, friends of Paul, who were encouraged to preach by the thought that it would give joy to the great apostle whose liberty was restricted. The word “contention” is the translation of a Greek word speaking of self-seeking partisanship, intrigue, a factious, selfish spirit. “Defense” is from a technical word in the law courts speaking of the verbal defense presented by a lawyer who defends his client. The word “set” is literally “appointed.” Translation: In fact, certain ones even because of envy and rivalry, but also others because of good will are proclaiming Christ; some indeed out of a spirit of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; but others out of a partisan self-seeking spirit are announcing Christ, not with pure unmixed motives, but insincerely, thinking to make my chain gall me.

Verse eighteen But observe the effect all this had on the great apostle. The Greek for “what then”

could be rendered, “What is my feeling thereupon?” “Every way” has the idea of “in every way or manner” of preaching method. “Pretext” is from a Greek word which has in it the idea of an ulterior motive. Paul rejoices that the people get some knowledge of Christ. Translation: What is my feeling in view of these things? (Supposing they do purpose to make my chain gall me). The only thing that follows is that in every manner whether in pretense or in truth, whether insincerely or sincerely, Christ is being announced; and in this I am rejoicing, and certainly I will continue to rejoice.

Verses nineteen and twenty The word “this” refers to the fact that Christ is being more widely announced as a result of Paul’s imprisonment. The Greek word “salvation” is used in the New Testament to refer not only to the spiritual salvation of the individual, but also to the healing of the body (Matt. 9:21,22), and of self-preservation in a physical sense, or of the well-being of the individual (Mark 15:30, 31). Paul uses it here of his own well-being. The knowledge that his imprisonment was not hindering the preaching of the gospel, but on the other hand was cutting pioneer roads for its advance, and causing many in Rome to break their silence and proclaim the Word, was like a tonic to his soul, saving him from discouragement and spurring him on to greater endeavor in his service for his Lord. But even these encouraging facts would not in themselves have been enough to produce that result unless the Philippians would pray for his spiritual welfare, and the Holy Spirit would in answer to their prayers minister to Paul’s spiritual needs in the midst of these circumstances. This salvation of which Paul speaks, is described as to its nature in verse twenty. The words “earnest expectation” are from a Greek word made up of three words, “away, the head, to watch.” It describes a person with head erect and outstretched, whose attention is turned away from all other objects and riveted upon just one. The word is used in the Greek classics of the watchman who peered into the darkness, eagerly looking for the first gleam of the distant beacon which would announce the capture of Troy. It is that concentrated, intense hope which ignores other interests and strains forward as with outstretched head, that was Paul’s attitude of heart. The Greek word translated “boldness” gives us the key to the understanding of the sentence, “in nothing I shall he ashamed.” It means literally “all speech,” thus, “freedom of speech.” In Paul’s difficult position, a prisoner of the Roman empire, there was a danger of failure on his part to maintain that bold and fearless testimony which was his habit all through his missionary career. This testimony had to do here not only with his spoken words but also with his life. It was the intense desire of his heart that Christ be magnified in him, whether by a life lived in the fullness of the Spirit or in a martyr’s death. The word “magnify” is the translation of a Greek word meaning, “to make great, to make conspicuous, to get glory and praise.” Paul’s desire was that the Lord Jesus might be seen in his life in all His beauty, that He might be conspicuous, that He might get glory and praise to Himself through Paul. Translation: For I know that this for me shall result in salvation through your petition and through the bountiful supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ. And this is exactly in accordance with my undivided and intense expectancy and hope, namely, that in respect to not even one thing shall I be ashamed, but in every boldness of speech as always so now, Christ

shall be conspicuously and gloriously manifested, whether through life or through death.

Verse twenty-one Paul is determined that Christ shall be radiated through his life, and so he says, “For to me to live is Christ.” His words in Colossians 3:4, “Christ, our life,” help us to understand this statement. Christ is Paul’s life in that He is that eternal life which Paul received in salvation, a life which is ethical in its content, and which operates in Paul as a motivating, energizing, pulsating principle of existence that transforms Paul’s life, a divine Person living His life in and through the apostle. All of Paul’s activities, all of his interests, the entire round of his existence is ensphered within that circumference which is Christ. The words, “to die” are more accurately, “to have died.” The tense denotes, not the act of dying, but the consequences of dying, the state after death. Death itself would not be a gain to Paul, but to be in the presence of his Lord in glory, that would be gain. Translation: For, so far as I am concerned, to be living, both as to my very existence and my experience, that is Christ, and to have died, is gain.

Verse twenty-two In view of the fact that Paul says that death has no terrors for him, he must assure them that to remain on earth with the encumbrance of sinful flesh, is probably best for them and him. The word “this” refers to the fact of his remaining on earth. It is that in which the fruit of his apostolic ministry is involved and the necessary condition of that fruit being brought forth. Then, if Paul is assured that his continuing to live in the flesh is most fruitful for the Philippian saints, he has nothing to say as to his preference with respect to his living or dying. Translation: But if for me life in the flesh be my portion, this very thing (namely, life in the flesh) is that in which the fruit of my ministry will be involved, and is the condition of that fruit being brought forth. Then, what I shall prefer for myself, I do not make known.

Verses twenty-three and twenty-four The expression, “I am in a strait betwixt two,” could be variously translated. “I am hemmed in on both sides by the two,” or “I am held together by the two so that I cannot incline either way.” The definite article appears in the Greek text before “two,” the word “two” referring back to the life and death previously mentioned. There is an equal pressure being exerted from both sides, from the desire for continued life and from the desire for death. Paul was perplexed, held in, kept back from decision. There was a strong pressure bearing upon him from both sides, keeping him erect and motionless. The word “desire” is in the Greek “a passionate desire.” “To depart” is from a Greek word used of loosing a ship from its moorings or of striking one’s tent. Probably, the latter figure was in the apostle’s mind. He was a tent maker by trade, he spoke of the human body as a tent, and he was a prisoner at the barracks of the Praetorian Guard. The phrase “abide in the flesh,” has the idea, “to cling to this present life with all its inconveniences

and to stand by a mortal body.” Translation: Rather, I am being held motionless by an equal pull from the two (namely, life and death), so that I cannot incline either way, having the passionate desire towards striking my tent and being with Christ, which is by far better, but still to remain with my flesh is more needful for your sake.

Verse twenty-five The word “confidence” in the Greek means “to persuade,” and is in the perfect tense. It speaks of a settled conviction which is the result of a past completed process of turning a matter over in one’s mind until one is persuaded of it. Paul had turned over in his mind the need which the Philippian saints had of his ministry, and had come to the settled conviction that they needed him more than he needed to go to heaven just then. That was just like Paul. He lived a crucified life, dead to self, ever setting even his legitimate desires aside in order that he might serve others. Having come to this settled conviction, namely, that they needed him more than he needed to go to heaven right then, he tells them that he will remain on earth with them. While Paul had no active choice in the matter, yet he believed that the servant of the Lord is immortal until his work is done. Thus, if the Philippians needed his ministry, that fact would indicate that he was not to die at that time by the hand of Rome, but that he would be released and thus be able to minister to the spiritual needs of the saints. The word “continue” is the translation of a Greek word having a special sense of remaining alive. “Furtherance” is from the same Greek word we studied in verse twelve, referring to the pioneer advance of the gospel there, and here, to the Christian progress which the Philippians would make under the ministry of the apostle, a progress in new paths of Christian conduct and service which would otherwise not be possible. Translation: And having come to this settled conviction (namely, that to remain in the flesh is more needful for you), I know that I shall remain and continue alive with you all for your progress and joy in your faith. Verse twenty-six The progress which the saints would make in their trust in the Lord Jesus, which progressive trust would result in growth in their Christian experience and the joy that would be theirs in their enjoyment of this repose of their faith in their Saviour, would in turn result in their more abundant rejoicing in the Lord Jesus. Christ Jesus is the sphere in which these blessings are enjoyed, the sphere in the sense that He made them possible through the blood of His Cross, and in the sense that He is the joy of the believer’s life, the One who completely satisfies. Paul is the human instrument through whom God works to bring these joys to the Philippians by means of his personal presence with them again. The word “coming” is from a Greek word which means “to be beside,” and thus has come to mean “personal presence.” It is the word used of the coming of the Lord Jesus, both with reference to His coming for His Church and with reference to His second Advent. Translation: In order that your rejoicing may abound in Christ Jesus through me by reason of my personal presence with you again.

4. PAUL EXHORTS THE SAINTS TO LIVE IN A MANNER WHICH IS WORTHY OF THE GOSPEL (1:27–30) Verse twenty-seven The word “only” connects Paul’s statement that the assurance which he has that he will be given his freedom, comes from the fact that the Philippian saints need his ministry, with his exhortation to them to conduct themselves worthy of the gospel. Since their need of his ministry is the only reason for his wishing to remain on earth, it behooves the Philippian saints to receive that ministry with an open heart, obey his Spirit-given exhortations, and grow in their Christian experience. The rest of the letter therefore has to do with the spiritual needs of these saints. As we study these exhortations, we discover what things were lacking in their lives and what things needed to be corrected. The basic, all-inclusive exhortation is, “Let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ.” The word “conversation” deserves special attention. Today the word refers to the interchange of connected discourse between two or more persons. At the time the Authorized Version was translated, it meant “manner of life,” “behavior.” While the Greek word from which it is translated means that, yet it means more than that. It is the word politeuo (politeuo). From it we get such words as “politic, political.” It referred to the public duties devolving upon a man as a member of a body. Paul uses it in Acts 23:1 where he answers the charge of having violated the laws and customs of the Jewish people and so subverting the theocratic constitution. He says, “I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.” The words “have lived” are the translation of this word. Paul said in effect by the use of this word, “I have fulfilled all the duties devolving upon me as a member of the nation Israel in its relation to God.” Polycarp, writing to the Philippians, and using this same word says, “If we perform our duties under Him as simple citizens, He will promote us to a share in His sovereignty.” The word “conversation” is the translation in the New Testament of another Greek word anastrepho (ajnastrefo), in such places as II Corinthians 1:12 and Ephesians 2:3, and means “manner of life, behavior.” This Greek word means literally “to turn hither and thither, to turn one’s self about,” and thus has come to refer to one’s walk, manner of life, or conduct. But Paul uses a specialized word here which is directly connected with the city of Philippi and its citizens. The word anastrepho (ajnastrefo) speaks of one’s manner of life considered as such, but the word Paul uses in Philippians speaks of one’s manner of life seen as a duty to a body or group of which one is a member, and to the head of that group to whom he is responsible. It is a more inclusive word. The use of this word has to do with the fact that the city of Philippi was a Roman colony. Lightfoot says of its use: “Appreciating its strategical importance of which he had had recent experience, Augustus founded at Philippi a Roman military colony with the high-sounding name ‘Colonia Augusta Julia Philippensis.’ At the same time he conferred upon it the special privilege of the ‘jus Italicum.’ A colony is described by an ancient writer as a miniature likeness of the Roman people; and this character is fully borne out by the account of Philippi in the apostolic narrative. The political atmosphere of the place is wholly Roman. The chief magistrates, more strictly designated duumvirs, arrogate to

themselves the loftier title of praetors. Their servants, like the attendant officers of the highest functionaries in Rome, bear the name of lictors. The pride and privilege of Roman citizenship confront us at every turn. This is the sentiment which stimulates the blind loyalty of the people:1 that is the power which obtains redress for the prisoners and forces an apology from the unwilling magistrates.2 Nor is this feature entirely lost sight of, when we turn from St. Luke’s narrative to St. Paul’s epistle. Addressing a Roman colony from the Roman metropolis, writing as a citizen to citizens, he recurs to the political franchise as an apt symbol of the higher privileges of their heavenly calling, to the political life as a suggestive metaphor for the duties of their Christian profession.” Paul uses the word in its noun form in 3:20 where he says, “For our conversation is in heaven,” or as one could more fully translate, “For the commonwealth of which we are citizens has its fixed location in heaven.” The use of this specialized word colors the entire epistle, and gives to it a heavenly atmosphere. It teaches us that Christians are citizens of heaven, having a heavenly origin, and a heavenly destiny, with the responsibility of living a heavenly life on this earth in the midst of ungodly people and surroundings, telling sinners of a Saviour in heaven who will save them from their sins if they but trust Him. The ethics in the letter are invested with heavenly standards. The saints are reminded that as a colony of heaven, they are to live heavenly lives on earth, representing their Sovereign by a life which reflects Him. They are taught that obedience to the ethics of the Pauline epistles is not merely obedience to ethics as such, but involves a duty which they are responsible to discharge as citizens of a heavenly kingdom, and as subjects of a heavenly King. The earthly counterpart of this was the institution of emperor worship, in which the subjects of Rome were not only obligated to obey the laws as a political duty, but to obey them as a religious one, since the emperor was worshipped as a god. Paul says “Let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ.” The expression could be variously translated: “Behave as citizens.” “Live as citizens.” “Perform your duties as citizens.” It is in the middle voice, which voice is defined as follows: When a verb is in the middle voice, the subject acts upon itself. For instance, “the man is prodding his own conscience.” Here, the Philippian saints are exhorted to act upon themselves in recognizing their duties with respect to their heavenly citizenship, and holding themselves to them. It is a stronger exhortation than merely that of commanding someone to do something. In the latter kind of exhortation, the person obeys the one who exhorts. But in the form in which Paul gives the exhortation, the person exhorted is to recognize his position as a citizen of a heavenly kingdom, and while obeying the exhortation as a matter of obligation to God, yet at the same time realize his responsibility to obey it because of the privileged position he occupies, and literally exhort or charge himself to do the same. One could translate therefore: “Only see to it that you recognize your responsibility as a citizen and put yourself to the absolute necessity of performing the duties devolving upon you in that position.” The Greek word translated “becometh” is most interesting. When it is used with the genitive case, it means “having the weight of (weighing as much as) another thing.” It means, “of like value, worth as much.” Other meanings are “befitting, congruous, corresponding.” The saints are to see to it that their manner of life weighs as much as the gospel they profess to believe, or their words will not have weight. That which gives weight to a Christian’s words, is the fact that his manner of life befits, is congruous to, corresponds with the gospel he preaches.

In the Greek word translated “stand fast,” the ideas of firmness or uprightness are prominent. It means “to stand firm and hold one’s ground.” The implication is clear that when one holds one’s ground, he does it in the face of enemy opposition. They are to stand fast in one spirit. The word “spirit” here refers to the unity of spirit in which the members of the church should be fused and blended. The Greek word “spirit” is used at times of the disposition or influence which fills and governs the soul of anyone. It is so used here. This unity of spirit when present among the members of a local church, is produced by the Holy Spirit. The word “mind” is the translation of the Greek word “soul.” The soul is that part of man which on the one hand receives impressions from the human spirit, and on the other hand, from the outer world. It is the sphere of the emotions, the reason, and the will. It is that in and by which the exertion here spoken of would take place. “Striving” is the translation of a Greek word used of an athletic contest. We get our words “athlete” and “athletics” from it. A prefixed preposition implying co-operation, makes the total meaning of the word refer to an athletic contest in which a group of athletes co-operates as a team against another team, working in perfect co-ordination against a common opposition. Paul is exhorting the members of the Philippian church to work together in perfect coordination just like a team of Greek athletes. This illustration was not lost upon the Greek readers of Paul’s letter. This is the first intimation in the latter that there were some divisions in the church. Paul had somehow gotten out of a possibly reluctant Epaphroditus, that all was not well in the Philippian church. The words, “the faith,” are a technical term referring to Christianity. Translation: Only (since my only reason for remaining on earth is for your progress in the Christian life), see to it that you recognize your responsibility as citizens (of heaven), and put yourselves to the absolute necessity of performing the duties devolving upon you in that position, doing this in a manner which is befitting to the gospel of Christ, in order that whether having come and having seen you, or whether being absent I am hearing the things concerning you, namely, that you are standing firm in one spirit, holding your ground, with one soul contending (as a team of athletes would) in perfect co-operation with one another for the faith of the gospel.

Verse twenty-eight “Terrified” is from a word used of the terror of a startled horse. The Greek word translated “adversaries” gives us a picture of these enemies of the gospel, namely, “those who are entrenched in their opposition against” you. These were the pagan Greeks at Philippi who were idolators and very devout. These would oppose a faith which forbade idolatry. “Which” refers to the fact of the Philippian saints not being terrified. It has in it a qualitative aspect, emphasizing the nature of the act. The words “evident token” are the translation of a Greek law term, denoting proof obtained by an appeal to facts. Thus the failure of the saints to be terrified by the antagonism of their adversaries, was clear evidence of such a nature as to convince these pagans that they were on the road to utter destruction, and clear evidence of the salvation of the Philippian believers. The word “that” refers back to the words “evident token.” This clear evidence was

from God, on the one part to the pagans, on the other to the believers. Vincent connects the words “evident token” with the phrase “that of God;” “Lightfoot finds here an allusion, in accord with striving together, to the sign of life or death given by the populace in the amphitheater when a gladiator was vanquished, by turning the thumbs up or down. ‘The Christian gladiator does not anxiously await the signal of life or death from a fickle crowd. The great Director of the contest Himself has given him a sure token of deliverance’.” Translation: And not being affrighted in even one thing by those who are entrenched in their opposition against you, which failure on your part to be frightened is an indication of such a nature as to present clear evidence to them of utter destruction, also clear evidence of your salvation, and this evidence from God.

Verse twenty-nine The words “it is given” are from the word used of God when He in grace freely and graciously bestows on believing sinners the gift of salvation. The words “in the behalf of” are the translation of the Greek preposition used of the substitutionary aspect of our Lord’s death on the Cross. It means not only “for the sake of,” but “in the place of.” It has been graciously given the saints to suffer not only for the sake of but in the place of Christ. It should be clear that we cannot share in His expiatory sufferings on the Cross, much less endure those in His stead. The sufferings to which Paul refers here are Christ’s sufferings for righteousness’ sake while on earth in His humiliation. He says in Colossians 1:24 that he fills “up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ” in his flesh “for His body’s sake.” Our Lord’s sufferings for righteousness’ sake which He endured as a result of human antagonism against Himself, ended with His death on the Cross. He has left with the Church the message of salvation, the preaching of which draws the antagonism of the world. Thus, as the saints suffer for righteousness’ sake, they substitute for their absent Lord not only in the task of preaching the message He has given them but also in suffering for His sake and in His stead. The word “for” connects the words “in nothing terrified” with “to suffer for his sake.” The prospect of suffering was apt to terrify the Philippian saints, but when they viewed suffering in its true light, they discovered that it was a gift of God’s grace instead of an evil. But not only is suffering a gift of God’s grace, but the act of placing one’s faith in the Lord Jesus is a gift of that same grace (Eph. 2:8). Translation: And the reason why you should not be terrified is because to you that very thing was graciously given for the sake of Christ and in His behalf, not only to the believing on Him, but also to be suffering for His sake and in His behalf.

Verse thirty The word “conflict” is the translation of a Greek word used of an athletic contest. Our word “agony” comes from it. “Life is in reality an Olympic festival. We are God’s athletes to whom He has given an opportunity of showing what stuff we are made of.” The word was used in later Greek of an inward struggle. Paul uses it to describe his own life in the

midst of his untiring work for the Lord Jesus. Translation: Having the same struggle which ye saw in me and now hear to be in me.

5. PAUL HOLDS UP TO THE SAINTS THE EXAMPLE OF THE LORD JESUS (2:1–18) Verse one The exhortation in 1:27, expressed more in the form of a hope that Paul will hear that the Philippians are standing fast in one spirit and with one mind are striving together for the faith of the gospel, is elaborated upon in 2:2 in the words, “Fulfill ye my joy that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.” This exhortation to unity is given in view of four facts which are stated in 2:1, and should be obeyed by the Philippians because of these four facts. The word “if” is the translation of a conditional particle referring to a fulfilled condition. One could translate “since,” or “in view of the fact.” The four things mentioned in this verse are not hypothetical in their nature. They are facts. The first is that there is a certain consolation in Christ, the word “any” being the translation of the indefinite pronoun in Greek which means “a certain thing.” The word “consolation” is the translation of a Greek word which has various meanings; “imploration, supplication, entreaty, exhortation, admonition, encouragement, consolation, comfort, solace,” the meaning to be used in any particular case being determined by the context in which the word is used. What these Philippians needed right here was not consolation but exhortation, in view of the lack of unity among them. Our translation reads, “In view of the fact that there is a certain exhortation, admonition, encouragement in Christ.” That is, Christ’s wonderful life should be an admonition and exhortation and encouragement to the Philippians to live in a state of harmony among themselves. Paul uses this as a basis for his exhortation to them. Thus our fuller translation reads, “In view of the fact therefore that there is a certain ground of appeal in Christ which exhorts,… be likeminded.” The word “comfort” is the translation of a Greek word which means literally, “a word which comes to the side of one to stimulate or comfort him.” It speaks of persuasive address. Lightfoot translates it by the words “incentive, encouragement.” It is almost equivalent to the word rendered “consolation,” but has an element of tenderness and persuasion involved in its meaning. The word “love” is the Greek word used of God’s love. We have here the subjective genitive construction, in which the noun in the genitive case, “love,” produces the action in the noun of action, “comfort.” That is, the tender persuasion and encouragement which exhorts to unity among the Philippians, comes from God’s love for them. Their realization of divine love which reached down and saved them, should urge them to live in a spirit of unity with one another. In addition to that, this divine love produced in the hearts of the Philippian saints by the Holy Spirit, should cause them to so love each other with a love that impels one to sacrifice one’s self for the one loved, that their little differences will be ironed out, and they will live in unity with one another. We translate, “since there is a certain tender persuasion that comes from divine love.” Then there is a certain fellowship of the Spirit. The Greek word translated

“fellowship,”1 speaks of a common interest and a mutual and active participation in the things of God in which the believer and the Holy Spirit are joint-participants. This is the result of the Spirit’s work of regeneration and His control over the saint who is definitely subjected to Him. Paul appeals to the Philippians to be likeminded in view of the fact that each of them participates with the Holy Spirit in a common interest and activity, and therefore, if each saint is interested in the things of the Spirit, and thus in the same things, there should naturally follow a unity among the Philippians. The Holy Spirit by thus controlling each saint, produces this unity and accord amongst them. One might ask here, “If each saint is indwelt by the Spirit, why is there not that unity among the saints, of which Paul speaks?” The answer is, that this joint-participation in an interest and a mutual and active participation in the things of God is produced by the Spirit, not by virtue of His indwelling but by virtue of His control over the believer. The trouble in the Philippian church was that all the saints were not living Spirit-filled lives. If they had been, there would have been unity. Paul’s exhortation to unity among the Philippian saints was therefore given upon a reasonable and workable basis. There could be unity if they would all live Spirit-controlled lives. Our fuller translation is: “In view of the fact that there is a certain joint-participation with the Spirit in a common interest and activity,… be likeminded.” The fourth reason why the Philippians should live in harmony with one another is that there are certain “bowels and mercies.” The word “bowels” we treated in 1:8. It means here “tenderheartednesses.” “Mercies” could also be rendered “compassionate yearnings and actions.” These graces present in the lives of the Philippian saints would move them to live at peace with one another. Little differences would be patched up. Estrangements would be healed. Bickerings would cease. Translation: In view of the fact that there is a certain ground of appeal in Christ which exhorts, since there is a certain tender persuasion that comes from divine love, in view of the fact that there is a certain jointparticipation with the Spirit in a common interest and activity, since there are certain tenderheartednesses and compassionate yearnings and actions.

Verse two “Fulfil” is to be taken in the sense of “complete, fill full.” “Be likeminded,” literally, “think the same thing,” refers to the general concord that should exist among them. This is defined and shown in its three constituent elements, “having the same love,” unity of affection, “being of one accord,” literally, “soul with soul,” unity of sentiment, and “of one mind,” literally, “thinking the one thing,” the last expression being repetition in stronger terms. Here we have what is called “the tautology of earnestness.” These exhortations refer to the same point of view in common interests. Minute distinctions must not be forced. Translation:Fill full my joy by thinking the same thing, having the same love, being in heart agreement, thinking the one thing. Verse three “Through” in the Greek indicates the regulative state of mind. It shows the impelling motive. “Strife” has the idea of factiousness. There were factions in the Philippian church, as this exhortation infers. The prohibitions in the Pauline epistles are an indication of what

is wrong in the situation which the apostle wishes to correct. “Vain glory” is the translation of a word made up of two words, one word meaning “empty,” or “vain,” used in the sense of “to no purpose, futile,” and the other meaning “opinion.” Thus the total meaning is “empty pride.” “Lowliness” is the translation of the word translated in other places “humble, humility.” Plato defines it as follows: “That state of mind which submits to the divine order of the universe, and does not impiously exalt itself.” In pagan writers generally, the word had a bad meaning, “abject, grovelling.” But when it comes into the New Testament, its meaning is ennobled. The word is used in a secular document, of the Nile River at its low stage, in the sentence, “It runs low.” “Esteem” is from a word referring to a belief that rests, not on one’s inner feelings or sentiment, but on the due consideration of external grounds, on the weighing and comparing of facts. “Better” is the translation of a word which means literally “having above,” thus “to excel or surpass.” Translation: Doing nothing impelled by a spirit of factiousness, nothing impelled by empty pride, but in lowliness of mind consider one another as excelling themselves, this estimation resting, not upon feelings or sentiment, but upon a due consideration of facts.

Verse four “Look” is from a Greek word which means “to fix the attention upon with desire for and interest in.” Lightfoot renders it, “to consult one’s own interest.” Expositor’s Greek Testament translates, “No party having an eye for its own interests alone but also for the rest.” Translation: Not consulting each one his own interests only, but also each one the interests of others.

Verse five After exhorting the Philippian saints in 2:2–4 to think the same thing, to have the same love, to be in heart agreement, and in lowliness of mind to consider one another as excelling themselves, Paul says, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.” This exhortation reaches back to 2:2–4 for its definition and ahead to 2:6–8 for its illustration. Paul does not give all that is in the mind of Christ in these verses. He selects those qualities of our Lord which fit the needs of the Philippians at that moment. That which Paul speaks of as being in the mind of Christ and which the Philippians were to include in their own spiritual lives consisted of a spirit of humility and of self-abnegation and an interest in the welfare of others. These graces were illustrated in our Lord’s act of becoming incarnate in the human race and becoming the substitutionary atonement for sin. This lack of unity among the Philippian saints became the occasion for perhaps the greatest Christological passage in the New Testament that sounds the depths of the incarnation. Among scholars it is known as the Kenosis (Kenosi") passage, speaking of the self-emptying of the Son of God as He became incarnate in humanity, the word kenosis (kenosi") being the Greek word meaning “to empty.” The Greek word order for the expression just noted is, “This be ye constantly thinking in you which also was in Christ Jesus.” The position of the pronoun “this” is emphatic and

shows that the exhortation reaches back basically to 2:2–4, while the pronoun “who” in 2:6 connects the exhortation with the illustration in 2:5–8. The words “let mind be” are the translation of one Greek word which means, “to have understanding, to be wise, to direct one’s mind to a thing, to seek or strive for.” The word seems always to keep in view the direction which thought of a practical kind takes. The expression could be translated in a number of ways, each of which while holding to the main idea, yet brings out a slightly different shade of meaning. For instance: “Be constantly thinking this in yourselves;” “Be having this mind in you;” “Reflect in your own minds, the mind of Christ Jesus” (Lightfoot); “Let the same purpose inspire you as was in Christ Jesus” (Way). The sum total of the thought in the exhortation seems to be that of urging the Philippians to emulate in their own lives, the distinctive virtues of the Lord Jesus spoken of in 2:2–4. It is the habitual direction of our Lord’s mind with reference to self that is in the apostle’s thinking, an attitude of humility and self-abnegation for the benefit of others, which should be true also of the Philippians. This gives us the key to unlock the rich treasures of the great doctrinal portion of the letter we are now to study. As to the translation of the verse, we might say that the verb of being is not in the Greek text. It is often left out by the writer, and supplied by the reader. In the case of the Authorized Version, we have the word “was.” It could just as well be “is,” for the Lord Jesus still has that same mind. But the past tense verb “was” suits the context better since the apostle is speaking of the past act of supreme renunciation performed by our Lord in His incarnation and atoning sacrifice. Translation: This mind be constantly having in you which was also in Christ Jesus.

Verse six The first word which we must carefully study is “form.” The Greek word has no reference to the shape of any physical object. It was a Greek philosophical term. Vincent has an excellent note on the word. In discussing it, he has among other things, the following to say: “We must here dismiss from our minds the idea of shape. The word is used in its philosophical sense to denote that expression of being which carries in itself the distinctive nature and character of the being to whom it pertains, and is thus permanently identified with that nature and character … As applied to God, the word is intended to describe that mode in which the essential being of God expresses itself. We have no word which can convey this meaning, nor is it possible for us to formulate the reality. Form inevitably carries with it to us the idea of shape. It is conceivable that the essential personality of God may express itself in a mode apprehensible by the perception of pure spiritual intelligences; but the mode itself is neither apprehensible nor conceivable by human minds. “This mode of expression, this setting of the divine essence, is not identical with the essence itself, but is identified with it as its natural and appropriate expression, answering to it in every particular. It is the perfect expression of a perfect essence. It is not something imposed from without, but something which proceeds from the very depth of the perfect being, and into which that being unfolds, as light from fire.” Thus the Greek word for “form” refers to that outward expression which a person gives of his inmost nature. This expression is not assumed from the outside, but proceeds

directly from within. To illustrate: “I went to a tennis match yesterday. The winning player’s form was excellent.” We mean by that, that the outward expression he gave of his inward ability to play tennis, was excellent The expression in this case took the form of the rhythmic, graceful, swift, and coordinated movements of his body and its members. Our Lord was in the form of God. The word “God” is without the definite article in the Greek text, and therefore refers to the divine essence. Thus, our Lord’s outward expression of His inmost being was as to its nature the expression of the divine essence of Deity. Since that outward expression which this word “form” speaks of, comes from and is truly representative of the inward being, it follows that our Lord as to His nature is the possessor of the divine essence of Deity, and being that, it also necessarily follows that He is absolute Deity Himself, a co-participant with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit in that divine essence which constitutes God, God. The time at which the apostle says our Lord gave expression to His essential nature, that of Deity, was previous to His coming to earth to become incarnate as the Man Christ Jesus. But Paul, by the use of the Greek word translated “being,” informs his Greek readers that our Lord’s possession of the divine essence did not cease to be a fact when He came to earth to assume human form. The Greek word is not the simple verb of being, but a word that speaks of an antecedent condition protracted into the present. That is, our Lord gave expression to the essence of Deity which He possesses, not only before He became Man, but also after becoming Man, for He was doing so at the time this Philippian epistle was being written. To give expression to the essence of Deity implies the possession of Deity, for this expression, according to the definition of our word “form,” comes from one’s inmost nature. This word alone is enough to refute the claim of Modernism that our Lord emptied Himself of His Deity when He became Man. This expression of the essence of His Deity which our Lord gave in His pre-incarnate state, was given through a spiritual medium to spiritual intelligences, the angels. Human beings in their present state of being cannot receive such impressions, since they are not equipped with the spiritual sense of perception which the angels have. What Peter, James, and John saw on the Mount of Transfiguration was an outward expression of the essence of Deity, but given through a medium by which the physical senses of the disciples could receive the expression given. But when believers receive their bodies of glory, they will be equipped to receive the expression of Deity which the angels received, and through a like spiritual medium. Now, at this time, in the eternity before the universe was created, Paul says that our Lord “thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” The word translated “thought” refers to a judgment based upon facts. The word “God” is used again without the article. Had the article preceded it, the meaning would be “equal with God the Father.” The word “God” here refers to Deity, not seen in the three Persons of the Godhead, but to Deity seen in its essence. Equality with God does not refer here to the equality of the Lord Jesus with the other Persons of the Trinity. Nor does it refer to His equality with them in the possession of the divine essence. Possession of the divine essence is not spoken of here, but the expression of the divine essence is referred to, although possession is implied by the expression. Equality with God here refers to our Lord’s co-participation with the other members of the Trinity in the expression of the divine essence. This is a very important point, for when we come to consider the fact that our Lord laid aside something, we will see that it was not the possession but the expression of the divine essence. We must now consider carefully the word “robbery.” The Greek word has two distinct

meanings, “a thing unlawfully seized,” and “a treasure to be clutched and retained at all hazards.” When a Greek word has more than one meaning, the rule of interpretation is to take the one which agrees with the context in which it is found. The passage which we are studying is the illustration of the virtues mentioned in 2:2–4, namely, humility, and selfabnegation for the benefit of others. If our Lord did not consider it a thing to be unlawfully seized to be equal with God in the expression of the divine essence, then He would be asserting His rights to that expression. He would be declaring His rightful ownership of that prerogative. But to assert one’s right to a thing does not partake of an attitude of humility and self-abnegation. Therefore, this meaning of the word will not do here. If our Lord did not consider the expression of His divine essence such a treasure that it should be retained at all hazards, that would mean that He was willing to waive His rights to that expression if the necessity arose. This is the essence of humility and of selfabnegation. Thus, our second meaning is the one to be used here. Translation: Who has always been and at present continues to subsist in that mode of being in which He gives outward expression of His essential nature, that of Deity, and who did not after weighing the facts, consider it a treasure to be clutched and retained at all hazards, to be equal with Deity (in the expression of the divine essence);

Verse seven We now consider the words, “made himself of no reputation.” Instead of asserting His rights to the expression of the essence of Deity, our Lord waived His rights to that expression, being willing to relinquish them if necessary. He did not consider the exercise of that expression such a treasure that it would keep Him from setting that expression aside, and making Himself of no reputation. The words “made himself of no reputation” are the translation of two Greek words which literally translated mean, “emptied Himself.” Before we discuss the question as to what our Lord emptied Himself of, we must examine the words, “and took upon him the form of a servant.” The word “form” is from the same Greek word that we studied in verse six. The word “servant” is the translation of the Greek word which Paul used in 1:1 to describe himself, a bondslave. The word “and” is not in the Greek text, but was supplied by the translators. The word “took” is an aorist participle. A rule of Greek grammar says that the action of an aorist participle precedes the action of the leading verb. The leading verb here is “emptied.” That means that the act of taking preceded the act of emptying. That in turn means that the act of taking upon Himself the form of a servant preceded and was the cause of the emptying. The translation so far could read, “emptied Himself, having taken the form of a bondslave.” What do the words mean, “having taken the form of a bondslave?” The word “form,” you remember, referred to the outward expression one gives of his inward being. The words “form of a bondslave” therefore mean that our Lord gave outward expression to His inmost nature, the outward expression being that of a bondslave. The words “having taken” tell us that that expression was not true of Him before, although the desire to serve others was part of His nature as Deity. When expressing Himself as a bondslave come to serve, He necessarily exchanged one form of expression for another. In verse six He was in His pre-incarnate state expressing Himself as Deity. In verse seven He expresses

Himself in incarnation as a bondslave. This is the direct opposite of what took place at the Transfiguration. There we have the same word “form” used, but with a prefixed preposition signifying a change. We could translate “And the mode of His outward expression was changed before them, and His face did shine as the sun, and His raiment was white as the light” (Matt. 17:2). Our Lord’s usual mode of expression while on earth previous to His resurrection was that of a servant. He said, “The son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Matt. 20:28). But now, His outward expression as a servant ceased, and He gave outward expression of the glory of His deity. In our Philippian passage, the change of expression is reversed. Instead of giving outward expression of His deity to the angels in His pre-incarnate glory, He gives outward expression of His humility in becoming the servant of mankind. The one expression was set aside so that the other could become a fact. Vincent says in this connection: “This form, not being identical with the divine essence, but dependent upon it, and necessarily implying it, can be parted with or laid aside. Since Christ is one with God, and therefore pure being, absolute existence, He can exist without the form. This form of God, Christ laid aside in His incarnation.” Both expressions came from our Lord’s nature, His act of glorifying Himself and His act of humbling Himself. Both are constituent elements of the essence possessed by the Triune God. But in exchanging one form of expression for the other, He emptied Himself. The question arises, “Of what did He empty Himself?” He did not empty Himself of His deity, since Paul says that the expression of His deity was a fact after His incarnation, that expression implying the possession of the essence of Deity. He set aside the outward expression of His deity when expressing Himself as a bondslave. It was the outward expression of the essence of His deity which our Lord emptied Himself of during the time when He was giving outward expression of Himself as a bondslave. But the emptying Himself of the expression of Deity is more implied by the context than stated specifically by the verb “emptied.” When our Lord set aside the expression of Deity in order that He might express Himself as a bondslave, He was setting aside His legitimate and natural desires and prerogatives as Deity. The basic, natural desire and prerogative of Deity is that of being glorified. But when Deity sets these aside, it sets its desires aside, and setting its desires aside, it sets Self aside. The pronoun “Himself” is in the accusative case. The action of the verb terminates in the thing expressed by that case. The act of emptying terminated in the self life of the Son of God. Our Lord emptied Himself of self. This agrees perfectly with the context which is an example of humility and self-abnegation for the benefit of others. This setting aside of self by the Son of God was the example that Paul held before the saints at Philippi. If each one would set self aside, then unity would prevail. An illustration of this self-emptying of the Son of God is found in John 13:1–17. Our Lord seated at the table, the Master and Lord of the disciples, is illustrative of Him in His preincarnate glory, giving outward expression of the glory of His deity to the angels. Our Lord, girded with a towel, and washing the feet of the disciples, is illustrative of His taking the outward expression of a servant in His incarnation. His outer garments laid aside for the time being, point to His setting aside the outward expression of His pre-incarnate glory while He expressed Himself as a bondslave. The fact that He was still their Master and Lord while kneeling on the floor doing the work of an oriental slave, speaks of the fact that our Lord’s assumption of humanity did not mean that He relinquished His deity. He was just as much God while on earth in His humiliation, as He was before He came and as

He is now. His act of taking His outer garments again, tells of the resumption of the expression of His glory after the resurrection. The words “took upon him the form of a servant,” do not refer to His assumption of human nature without its sin, but to His expression of Himself as a bondslave. His humanity was only the necessary medium through which He would express Himself as a servant of mankind. The fact of His becoming man is expressed in the words, “and was made in the likeness of men.” The words “was made” are the translation of a word meaning “to become.” The tense of this verb is ingressive aorist, which signifies entrance into a new state. Our Lord entered into a new state of being when He became Man. But His becoming Man did not exclude His possession of Deity. He was and is today a Person with two natures, that of absolute Deity and that of humanity. The text says, “He became in the likeness of men.” The word “likeness” in the Greek text refers to “that which is made like something else.” Our Lord’s humanity was a real likeness, not a phantom, nor an incomplete copy of humanity. But this likeness did not express the whole of Christ’s being. His mode of manifestation resembled what men are. But His humanity was not all that there was of Him. He was also Deity. He was not a man, but the Son of God manifest in the flesh and nature of man. Translation: But emptied Himself, having taken the outward expression of a bondslave, which expression came from and was truly representative of His nature, entering into a new state of existence, that of mankind.

Verse eight The word “fashion” is the translation of a Greek word that refers to an outward expression that is assumed from the outside and does not come from within. Our Greek word for “form” we found to refer to an outward expression that came from one’s inner nature. Our Lord’s expression of His Deity was not assumed from the outside, but came from His inmost nature. Likewise, His outward expression as a bondslave came from His inmost nature. But His expression of His humanity came, not from His inmost nature as God, but was assumed in the incarnation. The contrast here is between what He was in Himself, God, and what he appeared in the eyes of men. The word “fashion” therefore referred to that which is purely outward, and appeals to the senses. Our Lord’s humanity was real. He was really a Man, but He was not a real man in the sense that He was like others of the human race, only a man. He was always in His incarnation, more than man. There was always that single personality with a dual nature. His deity did not make Him more nor less than a Man, and His humanity did not make Him less than absolute Deity. He became in the likeness of man, and He was found in fashion as a man. “Likeness” states the fact of His real resemblance to men in mode of existence, and “fashion” defines the outward mode and form as it appeared in the eyes of men. But He was not found in fashion as a man. The indefinite article should not be in the translation. He was found in outward guise as man, not a man. He was not a man but God, although He had assumed human nature yet without its sin. The word “humbled” means “to make or bring low.” The word was used in a secular document when describing the Nile River at its low stage, in the sentence “It (the Nile) runs low.” What a description of the Son of God. But this self-humbling does not refer to the self-emptying of verse seven. That was a self-humbling in His character as God the

Son. Here the self-humbling is the act of our Lord as the Son of Man. It was the humiliation of the death of a cross. If it was humiliating to our Lord in His humanity, how much more was it so in His deity. He became obedient unto death. But this does not mean that He became obedient to death. He was always the Master of death. He died as no other individual ever died or ever will die. He died of His own volition. He dismissed His human spirit. The word “unto” is the translation of a Greek word which means “up to the point of.” Our Lord was obedient to the Father up to the point of dying. He said, “Lo, I come to do thy will, O God” (Heb. 10:9). There is no definite article before the word “cross” in the Greek text. There should be none in the translation. That which the apostle wishes to bring out by the absence of the article is the character of His death. It was the death of a cross, its nature, one of ignominy and degradation. It was the kind of death meted out to criminals, and only to those who were not citizens of the Roman Empire. Translation: And being found to be in outward guise as man, He stooped very low, having become obedient to the extent of death, even such a death as that upon a cross.

Verses nine to eleven “Wherefore,” that is, because of this voluntary act of humility, God also highly exalted Him. “Also” marks the correspondence between His self-renunciation and His consequent exaltation by God the Father. The words “highly exalted” are the translation of a Greek word which means “to exalt to the highest rank and power, to raise to supreme majesty.” It refers to a super-eminent exaltation. The word “given” is the translation of the Greek word used when God in grace freely gives salvation to the believing sinner. It is so used in Romans 8:32. It was an act of grace on the part of God the Father toward the incarnate Son who had voluntarily assumed a subordinate position so as to function as the Sin-bearer on the Cross. Vincent translates it, “freely bestowed;” Lightfoot, “gave;” and Thayer, “graciously given.” That which was graciously bestowed was not “a name,” but “the Name.” The definite article appears in the Greek text and refers to a particular name. The title, THE NAME, is a very common Hebrew title, denoting office, rank, dignity. The expression, “The Name of God” in the Old Testament, denotes the divine Presence, the divine Majesty, especially as the object of adoration and praise. The context here dwells upon the honor and worship bestowed on Him upon whom this name was conferred. The conferring of this title “The Name,” was upon the Lord Jesus as the Son of Man. A Man, the Man Christ Jesus, who as Very God had voluntarily laid aside His expression of the glory of Deity during His incarnation, now has placed upon His shoulders all the majesty, dignity, and glory of Deity itself. It is the God-Man who stooped to the depths of humiliation, who is raised, not as God now, although He was all that, but as Man, to the infinite height of exaltation possessed only by Deity. It is the answer of our Lord’s prayer “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was” (John 17:5). It is the glory of Deity, not now seen shining in infinite splendor as in His preincarnate state, but that glory shining in perfect contrast to and with His glorified humanity raised now to a place of equal dignity with Deity. It is the ideal and beautiful combination of the exaltation of Deity and the humility of Deity seen in incarnate Deity.

We come now to the expression, “that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow.” But it is not at the name “Jesus” that every knee will bow. “Jesus” was the name given our Lord at His humiliation. It is at THE NAME that belongs to Jesus that every knee will bow. Every knee will bow in recognition of all that Jesus is in His exaltation. The word “that” is in the Greek literally “in.” It is in The Name that every knee will bow. The Name is the spiritual sphere, the holy element as it were, in which every prayer will be offered and every knee will bow. All creation will render such homage, whether animate or inanimate, whether in heaven, on earth, or under the earth. “Confess” is from a Greek word which means “to openly or plainly confess.” The word means “to confess” in the sense of “to agree with someone.” Some day, the entire universe will agree with God the Father on the testimony which He has given of His Son. The word means also, “to publicly declare.” It is used frequently in the Septuagint, and has the ideas of praise or thanksgiving associated with it. The word “Lord” is the translation of a word found in the Greek translation of the Old Testament, where it is used to translate the august title of God, Jehovah. Translation: Because of which voluntary act of supreme selfrenunciation, God also super-eminently exalted Him to the highest rank and power, and graciously bestowed upon Him THE NAME, the one which is above every name, in order that in recognition of THE NAME belonging to Jesus, every knee should bow, of things in heaven, of things on earth, and of things under the earth, and in order that every tongue should plainly and openly declare that Jesus Christ is LORD, resulting in the glory of God the Father. Verses twelve and thirteen “Wherefore,” goes back to 1:27 where Paul’s presence and absence are referred to as in this verse. In 1:27 we have Paul’s exhortation to the Philippian saints to conduct themselves as citizens of heaven should. Then the apostle singles out one of the obligations of a citizen of heaven, that of living in harmony and unity with his fellowsaints. In 2:1–4, he gives four reasons which in themselves are enablements, why they should live in unity together, and further develops the theme of Christian unity. In 2:5, he tells them that such unity is one of the constituent elements in the mind of Christ, and in 2:6–8, he shows how Christ Jesus exhibited the basic quality of unity, namely, humility and self-abnegation in His incarnation and vicarious death on the Cross, which act on His part was recognized by God the Father in that He exalted His Son as the Man Christ Jesus, placing Him in the place of highest honor in the universe. Now, in 2:12, 13, the apostle exhorts these saints to make the humility and selfabnegation exhibited by the Lord Jesus, a fact in their own lives. He calls them, “my beloved ones,” the word being plural in the Greek. The distinctive word here for “love” refers to the love that God is, to the love produced in the heart by the Holy Spirit, a love that impels one to sacrifice one’s self for the benefit of others. This is the heavenly love with which the great apostle loved the Philippians. He commends them for their constant obedience. Then he exhorts them to work out their own salvation. Let us be clear first of all as to what this exhortation does not mean. It does not mean to work for one’s salvation, and for two reasons; first, Paul was writing to those who were already saved, and second, salvation is not a work of man for God, but a work of God for man, a work

that was accomplished at the Cross. Neither does it mean to work out an inworked salvation. The idea of working out an inworked salvation is merely a play upon the English words “work out,” and has no support from the Greek. The words “work out” are the translation of a Greek word which means “to carry out to the goal, to carry to its ultimate conclusion.” We say, “The student worked out a problem in arithmetic.” That is, he carried the problem to its ultimate conclusion. This is the way it is used here. The Philippians are exhorted to carry their salvation to its ultimate conclusion, namely, Christlikeness. The salvation spoken of here is not justification, but sanctification, victory over sin and the living of a life pleasing to the Lord Jesus. They are to see to it that they make progress in their Christian lives. They are to do this with fear and trembling. This is not a slavish terror, but a wholesome caution. “This fear is selfdistrust; it is tenderness of conscience; it is vigilance against temptation; it is the fear which inspiration opposes to high-mindedness in the admonition, ‘be not high-minded but fear.’ It is taking heed lest we fall; it is a constant apprehension of the deceitfulness of the heart, and of the insidiousness and power of inward corruption. It is the caution and circumspection which timidly shrinks from whatever would offend and dishonor God and the Saviour” (Vincent, quoting Wardlaw On Proverbs). This is human responsibility. In verse thirteen we have divine enablement. The saints are to carry their salvation which God has given them and which thus belongs to them, to its ultimate goal, always remembering and depending upon the fact that it is God who is working in them both to will and to do of His good pleasure. The word “worketh” in the Greek means “to energize, to work effectively.” Our words “energy” and “energize” come from it. The words “to will” are the translation of a Greek word meaning “to desire,” and refer to a desire that comes from one’s emotions rather than from one’s reason. It is this desire to do the good pleasure of God that is produced by divine energy in the heart of the saint as he definitely subjects himself to the Holy Spirit’s ministry. It is God the Holy Spirit who energizes the saint, making him not only willing, but actively desirous of doing God’s sweet will. But He does not merely leave the saint with the desire to do His will. He provides the necessary power to do it. This we have in the words “to do.” The Greek construction implies habit, the habitual doing of God’s will. In verse twelve, we have human responsibility, in verse thirteen, divine enablement, a perfect balance which must be kept if the Christian life is to be lived at its best. It is not a “let go and let God” affair. It is a “take hold with God” business. It is a mutual cooperation with the Holy Spirit in an interest and an activity in the things of God. The saint must not merely rest in the Holy Spirit for victory over sin and the production of a holy life. He must in addition to this dependence upon the Spirit, say a positive NO to sin and exert himself to the doing of the right. Here we have that incomprehensible and mysterious interaction between the free will of man and the sovereign grace of God. Translation: Wherefore, my beloved ones, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, carry to its ultimate conclusion your own salvation with fear and trembling, for God is the One who is constantly putting forth His power in you, both in the form of the constant activity of (your) being desirous of and the constant activity of (your) putting into operation His good pleasure.

Verses fourteen and fifteen One of the ways in which this lack of harmony among the Philippian saints was manifesting itself, was in murmurings and disputings. Paul had somehow gotten that fact out of an Epaphroditus whose love for his brethren back home had led him to cover up their sins. Paul exhorts them to be done with these. The word “murmurings” is the translation of a Greek word which means, “to mutter, to murmur.” It was used of the cooing of doves. It is an onomatopoetic word, that is, a word whose sound resembles its meaning. It is spelled, gongusmon (gongusmon). It refers, not to a loud outspoken dissatisfaction, but to that undertone murmuring which one sometimes hears in the lobbies of our present day churches where certain cliques are “having it out,” so to speak, among themselves. The word refers to the act of murmuring against men, not God. The use of this word shows that the divisions among the Philippians had not yet risen to the point of loud dissension. The word was used of those who confer secretly, of those who discontentedly complain. The word is found in a secular document reporting an interview between Marcus Aurelius and a rebel. A veteran present interposes with the remark, “Lord, while you are sitting in judgment, the Romans are murmuring.” The word “disputings” is the translation of a Greek word that carries the ideas of discussion or debate, with the underthought of suspicion or doubt. The murmurings led to disputes. The words “may be” are more properly, “may become,” implying that they were not blameless at that time. They were not harmless when there were such divisions among them. The Greek word “blameless,” has the idea of “blameless, deserving no censure, free from fault or defect.” “Harmless” in the Greek text has the idea of “unmixed, unadulterated.” It was used of wine without water, and metal without alloy. It means “guileless.” “Sons” is more properly “children” or “born ones.” “Without rebuke” has the idea of “without blemish, faultless, unblamable.” “Crooked” in the Greek has the idea of “crooked, perverse, wicked,” in the sense of turning away from the truth. “Perverse” has the idea of “distorted, having a twist.” It is a stronger word than “crooked.” “Shine” refers to the fact of appearing, not the act of shining. The word for “lights” is the translation of the Greek word used of the heavenly bodies such as the stars. How appropriate to speak of the saints as luminaries, since they are heavenly people. Translation: All things be constantly doing without discontented and secret mutterings and grumblings, and without discussions which carry an undertone of suspicion or doubt, to the end that ye may become those who are deserving of no censure, free from fault or defect, and guileless in their simplicity, children of God without blemish, in the midst of a perverse and distorted generation, among whom ye appear as luminaries in the world.

Verse sixteen The words “holding forth” are the translation of a Greek word used in secular documents of offering wine to a guest. It means “to hold forth so as to offer.” This should ever be the attitude of the saint, offering salvation to a lost and a dying world. The word “rejoice” is not from the usual Greek word translated “rejoice,” but from a word which

means “to boast,” or “to glory.” The word “that,” has the idea of “because.” The day of Christ refers to the Rapture of the Church. The word “labored” means “to labor to the point of exhaustion.” If the Philippians would continue to hold forth the Word, Paul would have ground for glorying when the Lord Jesus comes for His saints, for he would not have run his Christian race in vain nor would he have bestowed exhausting labor on the Philippians in vain, for the results of his efforts in Philippi would be apparent in the soulwinning activities of the saints there. Translation: Holding forth the Word of life, to the end that I may have a ground for glorying reserved for the day of Christ, this glorying being because of the fact that I have not run in vain nor have I labored to the point of exhaustion in vain.

Verses seventeen and eighteen The words “offered up” are the translation of a Greek word used in the pagan Greek religions, of the drink-offering poured out upon the sacrifice itself, the latter being the major part of the offering to the gods, and the former, the minor part. Paul uses this drinkoffering or libation to speak of the violent death he will some day die as a martyr. It will be his blood poured out. Indeed, during his second Roman imprisonment, knowing that he would shortly be sent to the executioner’s block for decapitation, he writes to Timothy, using the same word, “For I am now ready to be offered,” or as one could translate, “For my life’s blood is already being poured out” (II Tim. 4:6). He uses the main sacrifice as an illustration of the Philippian saint’s Christian life and service. The Greek word for “sacrifice” used here was used for both pagan animal sacrifices, and in the Septuagint, for the Old Testament sacrifices. What humility for the great apostle to rejoice at the fact that some day he would be the lesser part of the sacrifice poured out upon the major part, the Philippian’s Christian testimony and service to God. The word “service” is from a Greek word used of the religious service of the Old Testament priests. Translation: In fact, if also I am being poured out as a libation upon the sacrifice and priestly service of your faith, I rejoice and continue to rejoice with you all. But as for you, you even be rejoicing in the same thing and continue to rejoice with me.

6. PAUL BRINGS BEFORE THEM THE EXAMPLE OF TIMOTHY (2:19–24) Verses nineteen to twenty-four After presenting the example of our Lord, Paul brings Timothy to the attention of the Philippians. He says, “I trust in the Lord to send Timothy.” The phrase “in the Lord” tells us that Paul’s every thought, word, and deed proceeded from the Lord as the center of his volition. Paul says in effect, “My hope is not an idle one, but one that is founded on faith in the Lord.” “Timotheus” is the English letter equivalents of the Greek name, and so appears in the Authorized Version. The Anglicized form is of course “Timothy.” The words “good comfort” are the translation of a Greek word which means literally “well-

souled.” It speaks of the well-being of one’s soul. The phrase could be translated, “that I also may take courage and be of good cheer.” The words “no man” are literally, “not even one.” Paul speaks with severity of a disposition so opposed to his own or to that of Timothy. The word “likeminded” is the translation of a Greek word made up of the words “equal” and “soul.” The Greek word for “mind” is not used here. Paul says that he does not have a person in Rome with a soul equal to Timothy’s. “Likesouled” would be the translation. “Who” has a qualitative aspect in the Greek, namely, “who is of a character such that.” “Naturally” in the Greek text has the ideas of “genuinely, faithfully, sincerely,” as opposed to “spurious.” That is, Timothy was “all wool and a yard wide.” He was the genuine article. He could be depended upon. “Care for” is from a word which has the following ideas, “give one’s thought to a matter, seek to promote one’s interests.” Thus Timothy could be depended upon to have a real concern about the welfare of the Philippians. The words “All seek their own, not the things of Jesus Christ’s,” do not mean that Paul had no genuine Christian friends in Rome, but that all shrank from visiting far distant Philippi. The word “all” is strong. It means “the whole of them, one and all, all without exception.” The word “proof” refers to that which has met the test and has been approved. Thus, Timothy’s approved character is what the word “proof of him” has reference to. “Ye know” is from the Greek word speaking of knowledge gained by experience. The Philippian saints knew Timothy personally. Paul’s use of the preposition “with,” shows his humility. Timothy was Paul’s assistant. He was also Paul’s spiritual child. He could have said, “as a son to a father, he hath served me in the gospel.” The Greek makes it plain that Paul said “as a son to a father,” not “as a son with a father.” But instead, in lowliness of mind, he mentions him as a fellow-servant in the Lord. The word “in” is in the Greek text a preposition of motion. It was in the progress of the gospel that Timothy served with Paul. The word “see” gives us another glimpse into the character of the great apostle. The Greek word speaks here of the act of turning one’s attention from other things and concentrating them upon one’s own situation. Paul was so forgetful of self, yes, so dead to self, so engrossed in the welfare of others, that, even though he was a prisoner, and was facing martyrdom, yet he had not taken thought of his own welfare. He voices the hope that he will be able to send Timothy soon. But his sending Timothy is dependent upon his own circumstances which may or may not hinder. The word “trust” in the Greek text is not the usual word for “trust,” but one that means “to persuade.” It is in the perfect tense. Thus, Paul had come to a settled persuasion. This settled persuasion was in the sphere of the Lord, that is, Paul’s convictions in the matter were based on the Lord’s faithfulness to him. Translation: But I am hoping in the Lord quickly to send Timothy to you, in order that I also may be of good cheer, having come to know of your circumstances. For not even one do I have who is like-souled, one of such a character who would genuinely and with no secondary regard for himself be concerned about the welfare of your circumstances. For one and all without exception are constantly seeking their own things, not the things of Jesus Christ. But you know by experience his character which has been approved after having been tested, that as a child to a father,

with me he has served in the furtherance of the gospel. Him therefore I am hoping to send as soon as, having turned my attention from other things and having concentrated it upon my own situation, I shall have ascertained my position. But I have come to a settled conviction, which conviction is in the Lord, that I also myself shall come shortly. Thus Paul paints for the Philippians the portrait of Timothy, dependable, self-forgetful, genuine in character, “all wool and a yard wide,” and unconsciously exhibits some of his own fine qualities also.

7. PAUL SPEAKS OF THE CHARMING TESTIMONY OF EPAPHRODITUS (2:25–30) Verse twenty-five Epaphroditus is the next example which Paul brings forward who also illustrates in his life the exhortations of 2:1–4. His name means “charming.” And what a charming winsome person he was. Paul uses four words to describe him, “brother, companion, fellow-soldier, and messenger.” The Greek word “brother,” means literally, “from the same womb.” It speaks of a common origin. A common origin speaks of a common level. The great apostle puts himself on a common level with this humble brother in Christ who was the Philippians’ messenger to Paul. Thus it is that Christianity levels off artificial earthly distinctions and places all, rich and poor, nobility and peasantry, wise and unlearned, on the same level, yes, but on what level? It places all believers on the highest plane, namely, in heavenly places in Christ Jesus. It levels off the distinction between nobility and peasantry, abolishing both so far as our heavenly citizenship is concerned, and creates an aristocracy of which all are members, the aristocracy of heaven. Then he calls him his fellow-worker. Next he refers to him as his fellow-soldier in the Christian conflict against the powers of darkness. Finally, Paul calls him the messenger of the Philippians. The word “messenger” is the translation of a Greek word that is usually translated “apostle,” as in Galatians 1:1. It was used of an ambassador sent on a commission. In using this word, the apostle clothes the messenger service of Epaphroditus with the dignity of an ambassador. But that is not all. The word “ministered” is the translation of a Greek word used of the ritualistic service of the Levitical priests. The service of Epaphroditus in ministering to the needs of Paul while the former was in Rome, was looked upon by the apostle as a ministry having as much sacredness about it as one would meet with in the ministry of the priests in the Jewish temple services. Paul supposed it necessary to send Epaphroditus back to the Philippians. The word “necessary” in the Greek text is a very strong word. It means “indispensable, what one cannot do without.” “Supposed” is the translation of a word that does not contain a doubt, but refers to a decision arrived at after weighing the facts in the case. Translation: But after weighing the facts, I considered it indispensable to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother and fellow-worker and fellowsoldier, but your ambassador to whom you entrusted a mission, and he

who in a sacred way ministered to my needs.

Verse twenty-six The reason why Paul deemed it an absolute necessity to send Epaphroditus back to the Philippians, was because the latter was homesick. Paul says, “He longed after you all.” The Greek construction shows that this was not a spasmodic yearning but a continuous one. The words “full of heaviness” are from a Greek word used only two other times in the New Testament (Matt. 26:37 and Mk. 14:33), both of which refer to our Lord’s heaviness of soul in Gethsemane. The Greek word finds its origin in a word that has the idea of “not at home,” thus, “uncomfortable, troubled, distressed.” The word does not refer to homesickness, but to the discomfort of not being at home. Thus the heart of Epaphroditus was not at rest. The reason for this restlessness was that he was concerned that the Philippians had heard of his illness and were themselves concerned over their messenger for whom they in a measure held themselves responsible. What a miracle divine grace had wrought in the hearts of these Greeks who had recently come up out of rank paganism! Translation: For he was constantly yearning after you, and was in sore anguish because you heard that he was sick.

Verses twenty-seven to thirty The words “nigh unto,” in the Greek tell us how near Epaphroditus was to death, just next door. He and death were next door neighbors. The word means literally, “alongside of a neighbor.” The words “the more carefully” in the Greek have the ideas of “haste,” and “diligence.” “Receive” is the translation of a verb which means “to receive to one’s self, to give access to one’s self.” The prefixed preposition in its root meaning signifies “facing,” and this implies fellowship. The exhortation indicates that there had been some alienation between Epaphroditus and the Philippians. The word “reputation” is the translation of a Greek word which means “to hold one dear or in honor, to value highly, to prize, to deem precious.” “Not regarding” in the Greek text is a term used in gambling circles. It means, “to throw down a stake, to venture.” Its adjective means “rash, reckless.” The word was used of brotherhoods who at the risk of their lives nursed the sick and buried the dead. Epaphroditus had recklessly exposed his life. That which had brought this servant of the Lord to the door of death was his work of ministering to the apostle. He supplied the Philippians’ lack of service toward Paul in that the former were separated by many miles from their beloved spiritual father and thus could not minister personally to his needs. But the comforts of his own hired house near the barracks of the Praetorian Guard would not have made necessary such over-exertion on the part of Epaphroditus. The probability is that Paul was now confined to a prison, the discomforts of which were somewhat relieved by the strenuous labors of Epaphroditus. Translation: For truly he was ill, next door to death. But God had mercy upon him, and not upon him alone, but also on me, in order that I might not have sorrow upon sorrow. With increased haste and diligence therefore I sent him, in order that having seen him again, you may recover your cheerfulness, and my sorrow may be lessened. Receive him to yourselves therefore with all joy, and hold such ones in honor, value them highly, and

deem them precious, because on account of the work of Christ he drew near to death, having recklessly exposed his life in order that he might supply that which was lacking in your service to me.

8. PAUL, USING HIMSELF AS AN EXAMPLE, WARNS THE SAINTS AGAINST THE JUDAIZERS (3:1–14) Verse one Paul’s “finally” here is not the “finally” of the present day preacher. He has another “finally” in 4:8. He does not mean by this that he is about to close his letter. The words translated by the word “finally” are literally “as for the rest.” In every case, the use of this Greek expression has the idea of something left over. Paul has been concerned so far in the letter with the internal dissensions, mild though they were, that endangered the wellbeing of the Philippian church. Now he turns his attention to a danger that would assail it from without, namely, the Judaizers. These were Jews who were nominal Christians, who accepted the Lord Jesus as the Saviour of Israel only, and who taught that a Gentile had to come through the gate of Judaism in order to be saved. They thus refused to accept the fact of the setting aside of Israel at the Cross, and the bringing in of the Church at Pentecost. They wished to continue under the Mosaic law. What happened in the Galatian churches, Paul was trying to forestall in the church at Philippi. His first exhortation was designed as a positive preventive of becoming entangled in this false teaching. “Go on constantly rejoicing in the Lord.” The Judaizers were rejoicing and boasting in man and his attainments (Gal. 6:12), but Paul said that he would glory only in the Lord Jesus (Gal. 6:14). The words “the same things” refer to former warnings addressed to the Philippian saints against these dangerous teachers who would lead them astray. Translation: As for the rest (of which I wish to say to you), go on constantly rejoicing in the Lord. To go on writing the same things to you is not to me irksome or tedious, while for you it is safe.

Verses two and three The Greek word translated “beware” has the idea of “constantly observing with a view to avoiding, constantly be looking at in the sense of bewaring.” The word “dogs” was a term of reproach among both Greeks and Jews. The poet Homer uses it of men and women, implying recklessness in the former, and shamelessness in the latter. Gentiles of the Christian era were called dogs by the Jews. Our Lord in Matthew 15:26 does not use the word which Paul uses, but instead, a diminutive form of the word. The dogs here were the mangy, flea-bitten, vicious, starved scavengers of the oriental streets, while the dogs our Lord referred to were the well-cared for little house pets of an oriental household. The dogs were the Judaizers. Paul calls them evil workers. The term implies, not merely evil doers, but those who actually wrought against the gospel of grace. He speaks of them as the concision. The Greek word occurs only here in the New Testament. A kindred verb is used in the Greek

translation of the Old Testament, speaking of mutilations forbidden by the Mosaic law such as the pagans were wont to inflict upon themselves in their religious rites (Zech. 13:4–6). The Greek word which Paul uses is a play upon the Greek word “circumcision.” Paul characterizes those who were not of the true circumcision as merely mutilated. Heathen priests mutilated their own bodies. The Judaizers mutilated the message of the gospel by adding law to grace, and thus their own spiritual lives and those of their converts. The word “worship” is the translation of the Greek word referring to the service of Jehovah by His peculiar people, the Jews. A Jew would be scandalized by the application of this word to a Gentile. Paul uses it to designate the religious service and obedience of the believer in the Church. The best Greek texts have “worship by the Spirit of God,” not “worship God by the Spirit.” The word “rejoice” in the Greek text has the idea of “glorying” or “exulting.” It shows the high spiritual level of the apostle’s life. The word “confidence” has the idea of “coming to a settled persuasion regarding something.” The “we” is the editorial “we” of Paul. The implication is that the Judaizers had come to a settled confidence in the flesh, while Paul disclaims such a thing in relation to himself. Paul has used this word before in this letter (1:25). It shows that the apostle did not arrive at his decisions or convictions hastily, but only after mature consideration. Translation: Keep a watchful eye ever upon the dogs. Keep a watchful eye ever upon the evil workers. Keep a watchful eye ever upon those who are mutilated, doing this for the purpose of bewaring of and avoiding the same. For, as for us, we are the circumcision, those who by the Spirit of God are rendering service and obedience, and who are exulting in Christ Jesus, and who have not come to a settled persuasion, trusting in the flesh.

Verse four The Judaizers had confidence in the flesh. That is, they trusted in human attainments, in the works of man. Theirs was not a supernatural system in which salvation was a work of God for man, but a natural system in which salvation was a work of man for God. They did not believe in a supernatural Judaism in which God had given salvation to the offerer of the symbolic sacrifice by virtue of the merits of the coming true sacrifice for sin, the Lord Jesus. Over against this dependence of the Judaizers upon human attainment and merit, Paul sets his own human attainments and merits, saying that he had more to boast of than they, and yet he had discarded all these and any dependence upon them in order that he might appropriate the salvation which is in Christ Jesus. Thus Paul uses himself as an example to warn the Philippians against the seductive snares of the Judaizers. “Thinketh” is the translation of a word that refers to one’s judgment of himself, not that of others. The word “if,” refers to a fulfilled condition. There were those who did have confidence in themselves, namely, the Judaizers. Translation: Although as for myself, I might be having confidence even in the flesh. If (as is the case) anyone else presumes to have come to a settled persuasion, trusting in the flesh, I could occupy that place, and with more reason.

Verses five and six And now Paul takes inventory of those human attainments and merits in which he could trust. He says literally, “eight days old in circumcision.” Converts to Judaism were circumcised in maturity, Ishmaelites in their thirteenth year. But Paul was neither. He was a pure-blooded Jew. He was “of the stock of Israel.” “Of” is literally “out of,” and is the word used to denote origin, the class or country of a man. The word “stock” also speaks of origin. Paul came, not from Esau but from Jacob. He belonged to the tribe of Benjamin, a tribe highly thought of, the tribe that remained loyal to David, and which formed with Judah the foundation for the restored nation after the captivities. He was the son of Hebrew parents who had retained their Hebrew language and customs, in contrast to the Hellenized Jews who read the Old Testament in the Greek language. The Greek word for “zeal” would almost have a technical meaning at that time for a strict Jew who was a member of the fanatical party among the Pharisees who called themselves Zealots. Paul had at one time considered his persecution of the Church a meritorious work. He said that he became blameless so far as the righteousness which is in the law was concerned. He had carried this righteousness so far as to become perfect before men. Translation: Eight days old in circumcision, my origin, from Israelitish stock, belonging to the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew from true Hebrew parents, with reference to the law, a Pharisee, with regard to zeal, a persecutor of the Church, with reference to that kind of righteousness which is in the law, become blameless.

Verse seven The word “what” in the Greek text has a qualitative aspect. It refers to things that were of such a nature as to be an asset or gain. The word “gain” is plural in the Greek, namely, “gains.” The word “those” is emphatic, namely, “these things.” “Counted” is the translation of a word meaning “to consider, deem, think, account.” It is in the perfect tense which speaks of a process completed in past time having present results. After mature consideration, Paul came to a settled conviction with regard to the matter. “Loss” is singular. The various gains are all counted as one loss. Some of the “all things” which Paul forfeited, he has mentioned in verses five and six. Translation: But the things which were of such a nature as to be gains to me, these things I have set down for the sake of Christ as a loss.

Verse eight The words “yea, doubtless” are the translation of five particles, which latter are literally translated, “yea, indeed, therefore, at least, even,” and show the force and passion of Paul’s conviction. “I count” is from the same verb that is used in verse seven, here, in the present tense, showing continuous action in present time. Paul had come to a settled conviction with reference to the liability of what he termed gains, that is, when failure to appropriate Christ would be the price he would have to pay should he hold on to those things. And he still held this conviction tenaciously as an habitual attitude of his mind towards anything which would come between him and his Lord. He still sets these things

down as a loss if he by retaining them, would deprive himself of Christ. The expression “the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord,” does not refer to the knowledge which the Lord Jesus possesses, but the knowledge of the Lord Jesus which Paul gained through the experience of intimate companionship and communion with Him. Paul came to know His heart, His will, as one comes to know another through intimate fellowship and close association with that person. The distinctive Greek word for “knowledge” used here, leads us to this interpretation. The expression, “for whom I have suffered the loss of all things,” speaks of what Paul in his unsaved state gave up when he received the Lord Jesus as his Saviour on the road to Damascus. The words “have suffered,” are in the Greek text a business term meaning, “to fine, mulct, to punish by exacting a forfeit.” One could translate “for whose sake I have been caused to forfeit.” Paul was a citizen of Tarsus. At the time he lived there, only families of wealth and reputation were allowed to retain their Tarsian citizenship. This throws a flood of light upon Paul’s early life. He was born into a home of wealth and culture. His family were wealthy Jews living in one of the most progressive of oriental cities. All this Paul left to become a poor itinerant missionary. But not only did he forfeit all this when he was saved, but his parents would have nothing to do with a son who had in their estimation dishonored them by becoming one of those hated, despised Christians. They had reared him in the lap of luxury, had sent him to the Jewish school of theology in Jerusalem to sit at the feet of the great Gamaliel, and had given him an excellent training in Greek culture at the University of Tarsus, a Greek school of learning. But they had now cast him off. He was still forfeiting all that he had held dear, what for? He tells us, “that I may win Christ.” This latter expression does not refer to Paul’s acquisition of Christ as Saviour, but to Paul’s appropriating into his life as a Christian, the perfection, the graces, the fragrance of the Person of Christ. The word “win” is the translation of the same Greek word translated “gain” in verse seven. This acquisition of the perfections of Christ, he elaborates upon in verses nine to fourteen. Translation: Yea, indeed, therefore, at least, even, I am still setting all things down to be a loss for the sake of that which excels all others, my knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord which I have gained through experience, for whose sake I have been caused to forfeit all things, and I am still counting them dung, in order that Christ I might gain.

Verse nine The words “be found” are probably used here in a semi-technical sense found in postclassical Greek, with the meaning of “turn out actually to be.” Paul uses a similar expression in Galatians 2:17, “we ourselves are found to be sinners.” The idea involved is that of a revelation of character. Paul wants his life to demonstrate that he is in Christ. He wants to be found by observing men to be in Christ. The words “not having mine own righteousness,” assume that Paul had a personal righteousness, which was not the case. The idea is “not having any righteousness which can be called my own.” Paul did not desire to be seen to have any righteousness that would be the result of law-keeping. He was done with that. He wanted men to see in his life, the righteousness which the Holy Spirit would produce in answer to his faith in Christ. Personal righteousness in the life is

referred to here rather than justifying righteousness, since only the former could be seen by men, the latter being the legal standing of the believer as in Christ and before God. The phrase, “faith of Christ” refers to the faith which Christ kindles, of which He is the Author, which also He nourishes and maintains. It is therefore the faith which is furnished the believer by God and with which he appropriates the blessings of grace. Translation: Yea, in order that I might through observation of others be discovered by them to be in Christ, not having as my righteousness that righteousness which is of the law, but that righteousness which is through faith in Christ, that righteousness which is from God on the basis of faith.

Verses ten and eleven But Paul has forfeited the loss of all things not only that he might appropriate Christ as Saviour and have others see by his life that that was the case, but in order that he may know Him. The words “to know,” are again, “to know by experience.” The tense causes us to translate, “to come to know by experience.” Paul wants to come to know the Lord Jesus in that fulness of experimental knowledge which is only wrought by being like Him. He wants to know also in an experiential way the power of Christ’s resurrection. That is, he wants to experience the same power which raised Christ from the dead surging through his own being, overcoming sin in his life and producing the Christian graces. The Greek word for “power” used here is the same one that is used in Romans 1:16, and means. “that which overcomes resistance.” He wants to come to know the fellowship of Christ’s sufferings. The Greek word for “fellowship”1 here means “a joint participation.” The sufferings of Christ spoken of here are of course not His substitutionary sufferings on the Cross, but His sufferings for righteousness’ sake while on earth. Paul speaks of these and of his joint-participation in them in Colossians 1:24. When these four things are true of Paul, namely, to be discovered by men to be in Christ by the very life he lives, by coming to know Him better all the time, by experiencing the same power that raised Christ from the dead surging through his own being, and by becoming a joint-participant in His sufferings for righteousness’ sake, then Paul will constantly be made conformable to Christ’s death. The words “made conformable” mean literally, “to bring to the same form with some other person.” It is the same Greek word the apostle used in the great Kenosis (Kenosi") passage (2:5–8), meaning in its verb form “to give outward expression of one’s inner intrinsic nature.” Paul’s desire was that he might so come to know his Lord, the power of His resurrection operative in his life, and a joint-participation in His sufferings, that he would be brought to the place where he would become, both as to his inner heart life and also as to the outward expression of the same, like his Lord with respect to His death, not merely His physical death which was for others, but His death to self, as illustrated so vividly to the Philippians in the self-emptying of the Lord Jesus in 2:7, a self-emptying that was true of our Lord not only in His act of becoming incarnate and of stooping to the death of the Cross, but also one that conditioned His entire earthly life and made it the beautiful life it was, a death to self, a denying of self for the blessing of others. This was what Paul was striving for. The most radical conformity is here indicated. It was not only the undergoing of a physical death like that of Christ’s, but a conformity to the spirit and temper of His life, the meekness, lowliness, and submission of Christ.

The expression, “if by any means” is not an expression of doubt but one of humility. It is a modest but assured hope. “Might attain” has the idea in the Greek text of “to arrive at, as at a goal.” The Greek word used here translated “resurrection” is only found here in the New Testament. It is literally, “out-resurrection.” Paul is not speaking here of the future resurrection of the physical body of the saint. That is assured him in I Corinthians 15. He has in mind the spiritual resurrection of the believing sinner spoken of in Ephesians 2:4–8, a resurrection out from a state in which he is dead in trespasses and sins to one in which he is alive with the divine life of God motivating his being. Paul desires the full operation of this life to surge through his Christian experience in such a manner that the fragrance of the life of his Lord may permeate his life. This is the goal to which he is striving and the goal to which he has not yet attained. Then will be realized in his experience what he longed for in his desire that he might he found by men to be in Christ, to have Him as his righteousness, to come to know Him in an experiential way, to feel the power that raised Christ from the dead surging through his being, to have a participation in His sufferings for righteousness’ sake, and to be made conformable to His death to self as spoken of in chapter 2:1–8. Translation: Yes, for His sake I have been caused to forfeit all things, and I count them but dung, in order that I might come to know Him in an experiential way, and to come to know experientially the power of his resurrection, and a joint-participation in His sufferings, being brought to the place where my life will radiate a likeness to His death, if by any means I might arrive at the goal, namely, the out-resurrection out from among those who are dead.

Verse twelve In the words, “not as though I had already attained,” Paul does not have reference to a failure to attain to the out-resurrection from among those who are dead. His death or his participation in the Rapture if still alive on earth, would be the only ways in which he could attain to this. This word “attained” in this verse is from a different Greek word than that in the preceding verse. In the latter instance, we found that it meant “to arrive at, as at a goal.” Here the Greek verb speaks of an active appropriation. That which Paul says he has not yet appropriated in an absolute sense, he mentions in verse ten. He has come to experience in some degree at least, the power of God surging through his being. He has entered into a joint-participation with Christ in suffering for righteousness’ sake. The stoning at Lystra is an example of that. He has been brought to the place in his experience where he radiates to some degree the self-lessness, the self-abnegation of the Lord Jesus. But he has not appropriated these, laid hold upon these, in the fullest measure. There is room for much improvement and advance in these respects. Then he says “either were already perfect.” The Greek word used here does not mean “sinless, flawless,” but spiritually “mature.” Paul uses it three times in contrast to the Greek word meaning spiritually “immature.” The tense is the perfect. Paul states that he has not come to the place in his Christian life where growth in spiritual maturity has been completed, beyond which there is no room for further development, and that as a result he is now in a state of absolute spiritual maturity. He has not reached a spiritual impasse of

non-development. The words “follow after” are from a Greek word meaning “to pursue.” He has in mind the image of a Greek runner streaking down the race course. He is keeping up the chase, so to speak. He is pressing on toward a fixed goal. The word “apprehend” is from the same Greek word translated “attained,” but with a preposition prefixed which means in its local force “down.” He wants to catch hold of it and pull it down, like a football player who not only wants to catch his man, but wants to pull him down and make him his own. Paul wants to appropriate and make his own that for which Christ caught Paul and made him His own. Paul speaks of the latter in Galatians 1:16, where God’s purpose of calling Paul into salvation and the office of apostle was that He might reveal His Son in Paul. And that is exactly what Paul is talking about in the expression, “being made conformable to His death.” It was Christlikeness that Paul was pursuing after. It is absolute Christlikeness that he says that he has not yet captured and pulled down so as to make his own. Translation: Not that I have already made acquisition or that I have now already been brought to that place of settled spiritual maturity beyond which there is no progress, but I am pursuing onward if I may lay hold of that for which I have been laid hold of by Christ Jesus.

Verses thirteen and fourteen The word “count” is from a Greek word which has the force of looking back upon the process of a discussion and calmly drawing a conclusion. Paul had after much deliberation and consideration arrived at the conclusions which he stated in verse twelve. It is evident that some of the Philippian saints had arrived at the opposite conclusion regarding themselves, for Paul uses the personal pronoun in the Greek in connection with the verb here, and which, because it is not necessary as in English to show the person of the verb, is therefore used for emphasis and to show contrast. The erroneous teaching of sinless perfection is not new. It was held in the Philippian church. The words “attained” and “apprehended” in verse twelve merely refer to a past fact, the word “apprehend,” to a present process. But the word “apprehended” in this verse speaks of a past completed process with present results, the strongest way Paul had of stating the fact. That settled the question. He meant that he had not completely grasped that for which the Lord Jesus had grasped him. In the phrase “but this one thing I do,” the words “this I do” are in italics, showing that they are not in the Greek, but are supplied by the translators. They are not needed. The literal Greek here, “but one thing,” sums up his Christian conduct and purpose. The phrase “those things which are behind,” refers to the things he had depended upon to find favor with God (3:5, 6). “Forgetting” is stronger in the Greek, “completely forgetting.” Paul uses an illustration here of a Greek runner completely forgetting his opponents whom he is leading in the race. Just as a runner’s speed is slackened should he think of those behind him, and the thud, thud of their pounding feet, so the Christian’s onward progress is hindered should he dwell on the past full of failures and sins, full of heartaches and discouragements, full of disappointments and thwarted hopes and plans. As long as a Christian has made things right with God and man, he should completely forget the past. The words “reaching forth” are from another Greek athletic term which describes the runner whose “eye outstrips and draws onward the hand, and the hand the foot.” The

word means “to stretch forth after.” “Press” is literally “pursue.” “Mark” refers to a target for shooting, here a moral and spiritual target. “Toward” is from the preposition meaning “down,” and has the idea of “bearing down upon” in the direction of the goal. The mark is Christlikeness. What a goal for a Christian! Contrast this with Omar Khayyam, “The stars are setting and the caravan starts for the dawn of nothing.” The words “the high calling” have the idea of “a calling which is from heaven and to heaven.” The word is not to be construed as meaning “a calling in life,” but “a call from heaven to which the apostle must ever give heed.” Translation: Brethren, as for myself, as I look back upon my life and calmly draw a conclusion, I am not counting myself yet as one who has in an absolute and complete way laid hold (of that for which I have been laid hold of by Christ Jesus); but one thing, I, in fact am forgetting completely the things that are behind, but am stretching forward to the things that are in front; bearing down upon the goal, I am pursuing on for the prize of the call from above of God which is in Christ Jesus.

9. PAUL CLOSES HIS LETTER WITH VARIOUS EXHORTATIONS (3:15–4:23) Verse fifteen Paul says, “Let us as many as be perfect.” Here he asserts that some of the Philippian saints and also he himself were perfect. But in verse twelve he denies the fact that he is yet perfect. How are we to understand this? Again, he exhorts those who are perfect, to consider themselves not yet perfect. And we ask again, how are we to understand this? Is Paul asking the Philippian saints to deny the reality of something they know to be a fact? The answer is found in the fact that in verse twelve Paul is speaking of a finished process and absolute spiritual maturity beyond which there is no room for improvement, whereas in verse fifteen he is speaking of relative spiritual maturity where there is room for development and growth. This is clear from the fact that in the former verse he uses a verb in the perfect tense, whereas in the latter, he uses a noun. Paul therefore exhorts the Philippian saints who are spiritually mature to consider themselves so only in a relative sense, and to remember that there is much room for spiritual growth in their lives. The spiritual maturity spoken of here is as we have seen, not a state of sinlessness or flawlessness, but one of completeness, of a well rounded Christian character, a state opposite to spiritual infancy. The word “if” presents, not an hypothetical case but a fulfilled condition. Some of the Philippians were otherwise minded. Epaphroditus had told Paul of those in the church who were teaching sinless perfection. Paul turns these over to God. God will reveal the truth about the matter to them if they are willing to be taught. The word “otherwise” speaks of diversity in a bad sense, and refers to the “otherwise” thinking of some of these Philippian saints who thought that they had reached the place beyond which there could be no spiritual development or progress. Translation: As many therefore as are spiritually mature, let us be of this mind. And, if (as is the case), in anything you are differently minded, and

that, in an evil sense, this also will God reveal to you.

Verse sixteen The word translated “attained” is a different Greek word from that translated “attained” in 3:12. The word there meant “to take or appropriate.” This word means “to arrive at, to reach.” It speaks of progress along a road to a certain point. Paul is thinking of the Philippian’s progress along the Christian path. His idea is, “so far as we have come.” The word “walk” means “to proceed in a row,” and refers to literal walking. Its next meaning is “to go on prosperously, to turn out well.” Then it means “to direct one’s life, to live.” It has the last meaning here. The word “rule” is not in the Greek, but has been supplied by the translators. The literal Greek is, “walk by the same.” The context speaks of a path. Translation: Only one thing, so far as we have come, let us keep our lives in the same path.

Verse seventeen The words “be followers together of me” could also be rendered, “Be together, jointly, imitators of me” (Vincent); “Vie with each other in imitating me” (Lightfoot). Paul is compelled to make his own example a norm or standard of the new life. As yet there was no tradition of the Christian life. The word “mark” is the translation of a word which means “to fix the attention upon with a desire for or interest in.” It means “to observe intently.” Alford offers a clearer translation for the words “mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.” His translation is: “mark those who walk in such manner as ye have an example in us.” That is, Paul exhorts the Philippians to observe his life attentively and to become imitators of him, and to do the same also with reference to those other Christians in whose lives they find an example of Paul’s own manner of life. Translation: Become imitators of me, brethren, and observe attentively those who conduct themselves in a manner which reflects the example which you have in us.

Verses eighteen and nineteen The individuals spoken of in these verses are not Judaizers but professed Christian Greeks of Epicurean tendencies. The Epicureans represented a Greek school of philosophy which taught that the satisfaction of the physical appetites was the highest aim of man. They had allowed their Christian liberty to degenerate into license (Gal. 5:13). They did not understand God’s grace and thus thought lightly of continuing in sin (Rom. 6:1, 15). They were engrossed only in self-indulgence (Rom. 16:18). A swing away from legalism would land such a person into anti-nomianism, namely, lawlessness. Paul, acquainted with the Greek classics, writing to Greeks who knew their own literature speaks of these as having their belly as their God. He probably was thinking of the Cyclops in Euripedes who says, “My flocks which I sacrifice to no one but myself, and not to the gods, and to this my belly, the greatest of the gods: for to eat and drink each day, and to give one’s self no trouble, this is the god of wise men.”

Translation: For many are going about, concerning whom I often have been telling you, but now tell you weeping, enemies (they are) of the cross of Christ, whose end is utter destruction, whose god is their belly and that which they esteem to be their glory is their shame, who regard the things upon the earth.

Verses twenty and twenty-one The word “conversation” is from the same Greek word which we studied in 1:27 except that there we had the verb, and here we have the noun. The word here refers to the commonwealth of which the Philippian saints of 1:27 were citizens and to which they had citizenship obligations. This commonwealth, Paul says, is in heaven. The word “is” is not the translation of the common verb of being, but of the same Greek word found in 2:6 where it is translated “being.” The Greek word refers to an antecedent condition protracted into the present. It speaks here of fixedness. Thus the commonwealth of which the saints are citizens has its fixed location in heaven. The stability and security of the citizen under Roman law filled the thoughts of the time with high conceptions of citizenship and its value. Philippi, being a Roman colony, and its citizens therefore Roman citizens, thought in terms of citizenship. Paul seizes this fact as a good opportunity to illustrate to the saints their heavenly citizenship with its privileges and responsibilities. What a contrast between those mentioned in 3:18, 19, who were citizens of this earth, and those spoken of in 3:20, 21, who are citizens of heaven! The word “look” is the translation of a Greek word made up of three words put together, the word, “to receive,” which speaks of a welcoming or appropriating reception such as is tendered to a friend who comes to visit one; the word “off,” speaking here of the withdrawal of one’s attention from other objects, and the word “out,” used here in a perfective sense which intensifies the already existing meaning of the word. The composite word speaks of an attitude of intense yearning and eager waiting for the coming of the Lord Jesus into the air to take His Bride to heaven with Him, the attention being withdrawn from all else and concentrated upon the Lord Jesus. The word “change” is the translation of a Greek word which speaks of an expression which is assumed from the outside, which act brings about a change of outward expression. It is the change which occurs in our physical bodies at the Rapture of the Church. These mortal bodies become immortal. These bodies which are now dominated by the soul and adjusted to its control, will be changed so as to be dominated by the human spirit, and adjusted to its control. These bodies whose life principle is now in the blood, will then be devoid of blood and will have a new life principle. These bodies of flesh and blood and bones will be bodies of flesh and bones (Luke 24:39). These bodies in whose members there resides the sin principle (Rom. 7:17, 18), will be devoid of that in their new condition. The change has to do with the body, the house or outer casing in which the person dwells. The individual himself is not changed at glorification, only his body. That is why the particular Greek word was used which denotes an outward change. The word “vile” is the translation of the Greek word rendered “low estate” in Luke 1:48, “humiliation” in Acts 8:33, and “made low” in James 1:10. The root of the word is also found in words meaning “humble” and “humility” (I Peter 5:6; Phil. 2:8). The word “vile” today means “unclean, filthy, repulsive.” When the Authorized Version was made, it

meant what the Greek word means of which it is the translation, namely, “lowly, humiliated, of humble origin.” These physical bodies of ours have death in them, and sickness, and weakness. The principle of sin, sometimes called the sinful nature, dwells in its members (Rom. 7:17, 18). The body has been humiliated by the fall of Adam. The enswathement of glory which proceeded out from within the inmost being of Adam before he sinned, and provided a covering of glory for his body, was taken away in the fall of man. Thus we wear clothes. The mind of Adam, functioning perfectly before the fall, was wrecked by sin. The sense functions, operating perfectly before the fall, became debilitated after he sinned. As such, our present bodies are imperfect mediums through which the regenerated Spirit-filled inner life of the believer seeks unsuccessfully to express itself in the fullest measure. The Greek work speaks of the unfitness of our present bodies to fulfil the claims of the spiritual life. But what a transformation there will be when these bodies of our humiliation are changed so as to be fashioned like unto the body of His glory. The word “fashioned” is from the same Greek word translated “form” in 2:6, 7, which speaks of the outward expression one gives of his inner nature. A Greek preposition is prefixed which signifies a likeness to something else. Thus, this transformation of our bodies at the Rapture of the Church results in our bodies being made like our Lord’s body of His glory, but not only made like it in substance and nature, but made so that they will become a perfect medium through which our inner spiritual lives can express themselves. The enswathement of glory will return. Our minds will again function perfectly. Our bodies will be immortal, perfect, free from all the effects of sin that have accumulated in 6000 years of human history. This will all be accomplished “according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.” The word “working” is from a Greek word meaning “power in exercise, energy,” and is only used of super-human power. The word “subdue” is the translation of a Greek military term meaning “to arrange under one’s authority,” as a general arranges his regiments in orderly array before himself. Thus it means here, “to bring all things within His divine economy, to marshall all things under Himself.” Translation: For the commonwealth of which we are citizens, has its fixed location in heaven, out from which, we with our attention withdrawn from all else, are eagerly waiting to welcome the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, and to receive Him to ourselves: who will transform our humiliated body, conforming it to the body of His glory, by means of the energy through which He is able to marshal all things unto Himself.

Verse one “Therefore,” bearing these things in mind, living as citizens of a heavenly commonwealth, and having a hope of a coming Saviour, the Philippians are exhorted to stand fast in the Lord. Paul calls them “dearly beloved.” The expression is one word in the Greek, the word which is used for God’s divine and self-sacrificial love. It is plural in number. Paul loves all of these saints individually, and with a love produced in his heart by the Holy Spirit. The word “longed for” is also plural. It is “divinely loved ones and longedfor ones.” The great apostle calls the Philippian saints his crown. The particular Greek word for “crown”1 here refers to the victor’s garland or wreath placed upon the head of the victor in the athletic games. It was given for military valor. It was used at festal

occasions as an expression of gladness. This garland was woven of oak leaves, ivy, myrtle, olive, or of flowers, violets or roses. Paul’s garland of victory in his Christian service was composed of the Philippian saints whom he had won to the Lord Jesus. Translation: Therefore, my brothers, individually loved ones, and individually and passionately longed for, my joy and my victor’s festal garland, thus be standing firm in the Lord, beloved ones.

Verse two The apostle sends a personal word to two saints in the Philippian church. They were two women of prominence, leadership and capability, as their names indicate. Euodia, not Euodias, which is a man’s name, means “prosperous journey.” This woman in modern language could be spoken of as “one who has arrived.”She has gotten somewhere in her life. Syntyche means “pleasant acquaintance, happy chance, good luck.” The verb of the same stem means “to meet with.” Her name indicates that she was one of those pleasant affable people who are what we call today “good mixers,” one of those valuable people in the local church who is the first to greet strangers and who makes everybody feel welcome and at home. The Greek order of words is “Euodia I beseech, and Syntyche I beseech.” The word “beseech” in the Greek is a strong word. It means “I exhort, I beg, please.” Paul sends an individual message to each. Observe the humility and lovingkindness of the great apostle when he writes from his prison in Rome to these two women and says “please” to them, and begs them to become reconciled. He could have used his apostolic authority had he chosen to do so. Instead, in meekness and humility he beseeches. He begs them to be of the same mind in the Lord. However, this was no abrupt request. Paul had prepared these women for this exhortation in 1:27–30 where he exhorts the Philippian saints to stand fast in one spirit, and in 2:1–4, where he exhorts them all in lowliness of mind to esteem others better than themselves, and to be likeminded, in 2:5–8, where he brings to their attention the humility of the Lord Jesus, and in 2:19–30 where he speaks of the self-lessness of both Timothy and Epaphroditus. Translation: Euodia I exhort, please, and Syntyche, I exhort, please, to be of the same mind in the Lord.

Verse three The word “and” is a translation of a Greek word which assumes the granting of the request just made, and pursues the matter further. Thus does Paul suggest to these women his confidence in their willingness to comply with his request. The word “entreat” is from a word that implies a request that has back of it the authority of the apostle. When dealing with these two saints who were out of fellowship with each other because of some difference, and therefore out of fellowship with their Lord because of sin in their lives, Paul uses a very tender word, pleading with them in all humility, for one must deal very carefully with a saint out of fellowship with his Lord. Witness the “Ye which are spiritual restore such” of Galatians 6:1. It requires all the tact, love and gentleness of a Spirit-filled saint to deal with such as Euodia and Syntyche. But when Paul makes a request of the “true yokefellow,” he uses his authority, for “true yokefellow,” in fellowship with the Lord, is like an obedient soldier who expects just such orders given with a military

curtness, and is willing to snap right into the action demanded and obey the order. This man designated by the apostle as “true yokefellow,” was a particular associate of Paul in the labor of the gospel. The word “true” refers to that which is true in the sense of genuine as contrasted to that which is counterfeit. He was “all wool and a yard wide.” The word “yokefellow” is made up of a word referring to the yoke or cross-bar tied to the end of a pole and having collars or loops at each end by which two oxen were put to the plough, and a preposition meaning “with.” The composite word is thought to have been used as a proper name. It was a practice among these first century Greeks at their Christian baptism, to discard their pagan name, and be given a new name descriptive of their new characters as moulded by their new Lord and Master. It was not so in the case of Diotrephes of John’s third letter, whose name means “nourished by Zeus.” Zeus was the principal god of the Greeks. This may indicate that the man never was saved. But Syzygus, for that is the English spelling of our Greek word meaning “yokefellow,” was truly born from above, as his character and name indicated. His name referred to one who pulled well in double harness. How we need such today in our churches. What troublemakers the “Diotrephes” kind are. To this man Paul appealed, enlisting his aid in helping these women make up their differences. He could not have appealed to a better one, for Syzygus knew how to pull well in harness with someone else, and these women did not. The word “help” implies that Euodia and Syntyche were already trying to lay aside their difficulties. The word means “to take hold with another” in a task. This same word is used where Martha asks Jesus to bid Mary lend her a helping hand (Luke 10:40). Paul asked Syzygus to lend a hand with these women in their efforts at settling their differences. He describes Euodia and Syntyche as “those women which labored with me in the gospel.” History speaks of the superior position of women in Macedonia, in which province Philippi was situated. That would account in part for the prominent place these women had in the Philippian church. The word “which” has a qualitative character. They were women who were of such a character as to have labored with Paul. The word “labored” is the translation of a Greek word used of a group of athletes who played on a team together, co-operating with one another in perfect harmony to attain a certain end, the word having in it also the ideas of strenuous and agonizing effort. This is the way Euodia and Syntyche had once worked in perfect co-operation with Paul in the great task of spreading the knowledge of the Word. But now they were causing trouble in the Philippian church, leading rival factions. The words “with Clement” are to be taken with “labored.” Paul, while naming these women of distinction, did not want to imply that he had forgotten those of lesser station, Clement, and the host of other humble servants of the Lord whose names will never be heralded abroad but are nevertheless written in the book of life. Translation: Even so, I make request of you also, Syzygus, who are a genuine yokefellow in deed as well as in name, lend a hand with these women in their efforts at settling the differences which they have between themselves, women of such a character that in the gospel they labored and contended in perfect co-operation with me (as a team of athletes would), together also with Clement and the rest of my fellow-workers whose names are in the book of life.

Verse four Be rejoicing in the Lord always. Again I say, be rejoicing. Verse five The word “moderation” is the translation of a Greek word having the following meanings: “not being unduly rigorous, being satisfied with less than one’s due, sweet reasonableness, forbearance.” The word “known” refers to knowledge gained by experience. The exhortation is therefore, “Do not keep this sweet reasonableness in your heart. Let it find expression in your conduct. Thus others will experience its blessings also.” The words “at hand” are from a Greek word meaning literally “near.” The nearness of the Lord’s return (the Rapture is in Paul’s mind), enforces gentleness and is a cure for worry. Translation: Let your sweet reasonableness, your forbearance, your being satisfied with less than your due, become known to all men. The Lord is near.

Verses six and seven The exhortation “be careful” today means, “exercise caution.” When the Authorized Version was made, it meant, “be full of care.” One needs to be on the lookout for words that have changed their meaning in three hundred years. The Greek word here is found in an early manuscript in the sentence, “I am writing in haste to prevent your being anxious, for I will see that you are not worried,” where its translation, “anxious” is used as a synonym for the Greek word “worried.” The word means “worry, anxious care.” The Greek construction indicates that we have here a prohibition which forbids the continuance of an action already habitually going on. The Philippian saints were habitually worrying. Paul exhorts them to stop it. The word “nothing” is literally “not even one thing.” Then the apostle gives these saints the cure for worry, believing prayer. The word “prayer” is the translation of a Greek word which speaks of prayer addressed to God as an act of worship and devotion. “Supplication” is from a word that speaks of supplicating for one’s personal needs. “Requests” is the translation of a word which emphasizes the objects asked for, namely, the things requested. The preposition “unto” in the Greek text suggests the translation, “in the presence of God,” and is a delicate and suggestive way of hinting that God’s presence is always there, that it is the atmosphere surrounding the Christian. Anxious care is out of place in a heavenly Father’s presence. Requests are always in place with Him. The words “shall keep,” are from a military word, “shall mount guard.” God’s peace, like a sentinel, mounts guard and patrols before the heart’s door, keeping worry out. Translation: Stop perpetually worrying about even one thing, but in everything, by prayer whose essence is that of worship and devotion, and by supplication which is a cry for your personal needs, let your requests with thanksgiving for the things asked for be made known in the presence of God, and the peace of God which surpasses all power of comprehension, shall mount guard over your hearts and minds in Christ

Jesus.

Verse eight We come now to a list of Christian virtues which Paul exhorts the saints to make the subject of careful reflection. The word “true” in the Greek text does not mean “truthful” in the sense of veracious, but true in character in the widest sense. “Honest” is the translation of a word which was used in classical Greek in the sense of “venerable, inviting reverence, worthy of reverence.” The word exhorts here to a due appreciation of such things as produce a noble seriousness. The word “just” is from the Greek word meaning both “just” and also “righteous,” here, “righteous” in a comprehensive sense. The Greek word “pure” speaks of purity in all things. “Lovely” speaks of that which is adapted to excite love and to endear him who does such things. One could translate by the words, “winsome, pleasing, amiable.” The words “good report” in the Greek text are literally “fair speaking,” thus “winning, attractive.” The word “if” refers to a fulfilled condition. The word “virtue” in the Greek text was used in classical Greek for any mental excellence, moral quality, or physical power. Paul studiously avoids it. Only here does he use it. It seems that the apostle includes it in order that he may not omit any possible ground of appeal. Lightfoot suggests, “Whatever value may reside in your old heathen conception of virtue, whatever consideration is due to the praise of man.” Expositor’s Greek Testament translates, “Whatever excellence there be or fit object of praise.” The word “think” in the Greek speaks of the act of careful reflection. How scarce a commodity this is in our mechanized age. Translation: Finally, brethren, whatever things have the character of truth, whatever things are worthy of reverence, whatever things are righteous, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are attractive, whatever excellence there be or fit object of praise, these things make the subject of careful reflection.

Verse nine The word “received” in the Greek was used regularly of receiving truth from a teacher. “Do” refers in its Greek word, to practice as a habit. Translation: The things also which you learned and received and heard and saw in me, these things, habitually practice: and the God of peace shall be with you.

Verse ten The words “hath flourished,” are the translation of a word found in the Greek translation of the Old Testament in the clause, “have made the dry tree to flourish” (Ezek. 17:24). It means “to sprout, to blossom again.” Vincent translates, “Ye caused your thinking on me to bloom anew, ye revived your thought for me.” Alford translates, “Ye budded forth again in caring for my interest.” Expositor’s offers the rendering, “You let your care for me blossom into activity again.” The word “but” arrests a subject which is in danger of escaping. It was concerning the gift which the Philippians had sent by

Epaphroditus. Paul had in a most delicate way thanked them in 1:3–5, using a definite article before the adverb “now,” the article being a Pauline finger pointing to the gift. And while the apostle mentions the gift in so many words now, yet he is most careful in his treatment of the matter in hand, because of the base slanders that had been directed against him in the churches of Corinth and Macedonia, slanders to the effect that Paul made the gospel a means of livelihood. “Wherein” could be rendered “about whom,” referring to Paul, or “in which,” referring to Paul’s wants. The words “were careful” are from a Greek word speaking of the act of taking thought, not from the Greek word translated “be careful” of verse six. Translation: But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly that already once more you let your care for me blossom into activity again, in which matter you were all along thoughtful, but you never had an opportunity.

Verse eleven The words “have learned” are in a construction in the Greek which speaks of entrance into a new condition. It is, “I have come to learn.” Paul had not always known that. He had been reared in the lap of luxury, and had never known want as a young man. The “I” is emphatic. It is, “I, for my part, whatever others may feel.” The word “therewith” is in italics and therefore not in the Greek text. It is not needed. The word “content” is the translation of a Greek word used by the Stoic school of philosophy which taught that man should be sufficient to himself for all things. It means “to be independent of external circumstances.” It speaks of self-sufficiency and competency. But Paul’s self-sufficiency was not of the Stoic kind. It was Christ-sufficiency. Paul’s independence was not Stoic independence, but dependence upon Christ. He found his sufficiency in Christ. He was independent of circumstances because he was dependent upon Christ. Translation: It is not that I speak as regards want, for, so far as I am concerned, I have come to learn, in the circumstances in which I am placed, to be independent of these and self-sufficient.

Verses twelve and thirteen After thanking the Philippian saints for their gift in 4:10, Paul, in view of the slanders to the effect that he was making the gospel a means of his livelihood, informs them in 4:11 that he has come to learn, in the circumstances in which he is placed, to be independent of these and self-sufficient. That being the case, he certainly is not bending any efforts at making money in gospel preaching, attempting to meet the requirements of a certain standard of life. In 4:12, he tells them that he knows how to suffer hunger and how to enjoy affluence. The words “to be abased” are the translation of the Greek word which is rendered “humbled” in 2:8, and “vile” in 3:21, and means “to make low, to humble, to humiliate.” The expression refers to Paul’s ability to keep himself low as respects the needs of the daily life. Paul thus assured the saints that he knew how to live on a very small income. The words “to abound” are the rendering of a Greek word which means “to overflow.” Thus, Paul knew what it was to live on a little, and also to have more than he could use. The words “I am instructed” are from a technical word in the initiatory rites of the pagan mystery religions, literally, “I have been initiated,” or, “I have learned the

secret.” The word is used in the New Testament of something which, while it may be obscure in nature or kept hidden in the past, is now revealed. The words “to be full” are from a very strong word in the original. It was used of the feeding of animals. It means in this connection, “to be filled,” and so “to fatten like an animal.” It means “to be satiated.” Translation: I know in fact how to keep myself low; I know in fact how to have more than enough. In everything and in all things I have learned the secret, both to be satiated and to be hungry, and to have more than enough and to lack. I am strong for all things in the One who constantly infuses strength in me.

Verse fourteen The word “notwithstanding,” he includes, lest in declaring his independence of human aid, he should seem to disparage the gift of the Philippian church. The word “well” is the translation of the Greek word for “good” which refers to a beautiful goodness. The phrase “ye have done well” is in the Greek the equivalent of our present day “ ‘You did a beautiful thing’ when you did that.” The Greek word translated “communicate” means “to make one’s self a fellow partaker in common with.” The Philippians made themselves fellow-partakers with Paul in his needs. They made themselves responsible for the satisfying of his needs. The words “with my affliction,” tell us that it was not the actual gift so much as the sympathy and fellowship of the Philippian saints in his sorrow, which the great apostle valued. Translation: All the same, you did a beautiful thing when you made yourselves fellow-partakers with my tribulation.

Verses fifteen and sixteen The word “now” marks the transition to his first experience of their generosity. In effect he said to them, “But this is no new thing, for you have always been generous.” Again, the word “communicated” means “to make one’s self a fellow-partaker with someone else,” and here refers to the act of the Philippians in making themselves fellowpartakers with Paul in the responsibility of spreading the gospel. The words “giving and receiving” are a business term referring to the credit and debit side of the ledger. The Philippian saints owed Paul much since he was the one who won them to the Lord and nurtured them in the Faith. Thus, Paul had certain credits on their ledger which they were obligated to honor. Paul referred to a like thing in I Corinthians 9:11, “If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?” meaning by carnal things, material things. The phrase, “the beginning of the gospel,” refers to the time when Paul first preached the Word to them about ten years previously. He speaks of Thessalonica, a much wealthier church. The Philippians had sent aid to Paul while he was in that city ministering to that church. Translation: But, you yourselves also know, Philippians, that at the beginning of the gospel, when I went out from Macedonia, not even one assembly made itself a partner with me as regards an account of giving and taking except you only, that even in Thessalonica more than once you

sent to relieve my necessities.

Verse seventeen Paul is still defending himself against the slanderous assertion that he is using the gospel as a means of livelihood, when he says, “Not that I desire a gift.” The word “desire” is in the present tense which usually indicates habitual action. Alford translates it here, “Not that it is my character or habit to seek.” The word “gift” has the definite article, Paul again using it as in 1:5 to point to the particular gift which the Philippian church had just sent. The words “may abound to your account” are terms used in the money-markets of the day, namely, “interest which may accumulate to your account.” Translation: Not that it is my character to be ever seeking the gift, but I am seeking the fruit which is accumulating to your account. Verse eighteen And now Paul signs a receipt for the gift they sent him, possibly a bit of apostolic humor. The words “I have” are a rubber-stamp of the first century for, “I give you a receipt for what you sent me,” or “I have received in full.” The word “abound” in the Greek speaks of that which exists in superfluity. The Philippian gift must have been generous, and Epaphroditus must have been loaded down. What a demonstration of the work of the Holy Spirit is seen in this act of generosity on the part of these former pagans, performed for one who in origin, training, and religion had been and in some ways was still so different from them, different in a sense which would naturally militate against Paul, Gentiles of the proudest and most exclusive race of antiquity, the intelligentsia of the world, loving one who belonged to a race that was looked down upon and despised. Then Paul says, “I am full.” The verb is in that wonderfully descriptive Greek tense, the perfect. Paul said in this one Greek word, “I have been filled full and at present am well supplied.” How the Greek language is able to compress so much into one word! The words “an odor of a sweet smell” are used in the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, of the odors of the Levitical sacrifices. The word “sacrifice” is the Greek word used of these sacrifices. Paul wished to invest the gift of the Philippians with the sacredness of the Jewish sacrifices. Indeed, a gift to an apostle or spiritual teacher in the early Church, seems to have been regarded as an offering to God. Translation: But I have all things to the full and overflowing. I have been filled completely full and at present am well supplied, having received at the hands of Epaphroditus the things from you, a scent of sweet savor, a sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing to God.

Verses nineteen to twenty-three Then Paul hastens to assure them that they have not impoverished themselves in giving so liberally to the cause of the gospel. The word “supply” is the translation of the same Greek word translated “I am full.” That is, God’s treatment of the Philippian saints will correspond to their treatment of Paul. They filled full Paul’s every need to overflowing. God will do the same for them. The measure of the supply which God the Father has is

determined by His wealth in glory, which wealth in glory is in Christ Jesus, an infinite supply. Translation: But my God shall satisfy to the full all your need in accordance with His wealth in glory in Christ Jesus. Now to God even our Father, be the glory forever and ever. Amen. Greet every saint in Christ Jesus. The brethren with me send greeting. All the saints send greeting, especially those of Caesar’s household. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, with all of you in this respect individually.

COLOSSIANS In the Greek New Testament

THE COLOSSIAN HERESY Bishop J. B. Lightfoot says of the Epistle to the Colossians, “The doctrine of the Person of Christ is here stated with greater precision and fulness than in any other of St. Paul’s epistles.” The reason for this is that the Colossian heresy in its attack upon the Person of the Lord Jesus, made it imperative that the great Apostle meet it with such precision and fulness in doctrine regarding His Person as would successfully cope with the false teachings of this system. In order to understand the full implications of the truth in Colossians, the student must first acquaint himself with this heresy. Internal evidence in the letter indicates that the heresy with which Paul is dealing, contains two elements that are fused into one system. His mention of the observance of sabbaths and new moons, his distinction between meats and drinks, and his reference to circumcision, all point to an element of Judaism in this system. His reference to a selfimposed humility and service of angels, the hard treatment of the body, and a superior wisdom, indicates that he is dealing with a Gnostic element. The word “Gnostic” comes from the Greek  (gnwsi") which means “knowledge.” It is the name designating an intellectual oligarchy, a few who set themselves above all others as possessing a superior knowledge. We will look at Gnosticism. This school of thought was concerned with two questions: first, How can the work of creation be explained? and, second, How are we to account for the existence of evil? These two questions posed the following problem, namely, How can one reconcile the creation of the world and the existence of evil with the conception of God as the absolute Being? In other words, How explain the fact of a holy God as Creator, and a universe in which there is sin? The Gnostic argued as follows: If God had created the universe out of nothing, and evolved it directly from Himself, then God being holy, could not have brought an evil universe into existence. Otherwise, one is driven to the inescapable conclusion that God created evil, which is impossible, since He is holy. But the fact of a holy God and an evil universe still remained, and the Gnostic must explain. He does so by putting forth the theory of some antagonistic principle, independent of God, by which His creative energy was thwarted and limited. This opposing principle of evil he thought of as the world of matter. Thus, evil is seen by him to be residing in the

material universe. The Gnostic then asks the questions, How then is creation possible? How can the Infinite communicate with the finite, the good with the evil? How can God act on matter? God, he says, is perfect, absolute, incomprehensible. The Gnostic answers his own question by saying that the difficulty is solved by the theory that God must have limited Himself in some way in the act of creation. There must have been some evolution, some effluence from God. There was a germination of God. This first germination evolved a second, and so the process went on. The more numerous the emanations, the farther away from Deity they became, and as a result the divine element in them became more feeble, until it became so diffused that contact with matter was possible, and creation took place. Thus, the gap between a holy creator God and matter which, according to the Gnostic is evil, is bridged by these emanations from God that are so far removed from a Deity who is holy, that matter could be created which is inherently evil, and this act of creation could not be attributed to a holy God. In this way, the Gnostic brushes aside the intermediate agent in creation, the Lord Jesus (John 1:3), and the fact that God put a curse upon the perfect creation because of sin (Rom. 8:20). Paul says in the latter text that the creation was made subject to futility (vanity mataios (mataio")). That is, God rendered it relatively futile so far as glorifying Him was concerned. From these philosophical speculations, two opposing codes of ethics emerged, a rigid asceticism and an unrestrained license. The problem confronting the Gnostic was as follows: Since matter is evil, how can one avoid its baneful influence and thus keep his higher nature unsullied? The answer, according to one group, was a rigid asceticism. All contact with matter should be reduced to a minimum. Thus, the material part of man would be subdued and mortified. One should live on a spare diet and abstain from marriage. The edible flesh of animals was forbidden. The anointing of the body with olive oil, so necessary in hot climates, was prohibited. But with others, such a negative course of procedure produced but slight and inadequate results. These argued that matter is everywhere. One cannot escape contact with it. Therefore, one should cultivate an entire indifference to the world of sense. One should not give matter any thought one way or the other, but just follow one’s own impulses. How like the behavioristic psychology of today. This group argued that the ascetic principle gives a certain importance to matter, and thus he fails to assert his own independence to it. The true rule of life is to treat matter as foreign or alien to one, and as something towards which one has no duties or obligations, and which one can use or leave unused as one likes. This philosophy led to unbridled license. Gnosticism as described above, had no connection with Christianity in itself. That which channeled it into the thinking of the professing Christian Church was a sect of Jews who were called Essenes. The Essene was a mystic, and a member of a brotherhood. The characteristic feature of Essenism was mystic speculation involving a rigid asceticism. However, the Essene also included in his system, a rigorous observance of the Mosaic ritual. In his strict abstinence from work on the Sabbath, he far surpassed other Jews. He would not light a fire or move a vessel. He would not perform the most ordinary functions of life. His whole day was given over to religious exercises and the exposition of the Scriptures. After God, the name of Moses was held in the highest reverence. The one who blasphemed the name of Moses, was punished by death. But the Essenes went beyond the Mosaic legislation. Marriage to them was an

abomination. To secure the continuance of the order, they adopted children. Some accepted marriage as necessary for the preservation of the race, but nevertheless regarded it as an evil. The Essenes drank no wine, nor did they eat animal food. They lived on bread and vegetables. They refused to anoint their bodies with olive oil, which in hot countries is almost necessary to life. They condemned in any form the natural cravings, and sought to disengage themselves from all conditions of physical life. In addition to these practices, the Essenes were sun-worshippers. At day-break they would address certain prayers to the sun as if entreating it to rise. They would bury all polluting substances so as not to insult the rays of the god. The Essenes did not believe in the resurrection of the body, but confined themselves to a belief in the countinuance of the soul-life after death. This is, of course, in line with their belief that matter is evil. They maintained that the soul was confined in the body as a prisoner in jail, and that only after death, would it be free by reason of its escape from the body. They rejected the blood sacrifices of Judaism, and instead sent bloodless offerings to the Temple as gifts. They placed angels in the category of beings that should be worshipped. Like the Gnostics who prided themselves upon the exclusive possession of religious secrets, the Essenes had their secret doctrines which were the possession of an exclusive few, and these they refused to divulge except to initiates to their order. These false doctrines and practices had crept in to the local church at Colossae. Paul’s letter to this church was designed to combat them. One of these errors was an intellectual oligarchy in religion, namely, the teaching that a select few had a monopoly in a superior wisdom. The apostle meets this by contending for the universality of the gospel message. But Paul, in maintaining this doctrine, has changed his mode of attack. He is not here contending against a national exclusiveness in religion, which was true of Pharasaic Judaism, but against the intellectual exclusiveness in religion of the Essenes which was even more fatal to the claims of the gospel because more specious and insidious. Paul warns every man and teaches every man in every wisdom, that he may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. The word “perfect” was the term applied by the Gnostics to members of the exclusive group which possessed the superior wisdom. The Gnostics made much of wisdom (sophia (sofia)), intelligence (sunesis (sunesi")), and knowledge ( (ejpignwsi")). Paul takes up the language of the Gnostics and translates it to the higher spheres of Christian thought. Against the false wisdom of the Gnostics, the apostle sets the true wisdom of the gospel. The initiatory rites of these Gnostics in which certain were inducted into their order, were secret mysteries. Paul sets over against these the fact that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden in that comprehensive mystery, the knowledge of God in Christ. Paul had also to combat the Gnostic teaching of successive emanations from deity, the angelic mediators who were responsible for the act of creation, and for the headship of the spiritual creation, which took the place of the Lord Jesus as Creator of the universe and Head of the Church. The apostle meets these false doctrines by showing that “all things were created by Him,” and “He is Head of the body, the Church.” As to the teaching of the Gnostic to the effect that the divine essence is distributed among the angelic emanations from deity, Paul declares that the  (plhrwma), or plenitude of the divine essence is permanently at home in the Lord Jesus. For the totality of the divine essence, the Gnostics had this word  (plhrwma), “fulness” or “plenitude.” Paul says that Jesus Christ is not only the chief manifestation of the divine nature. He exhausts the God-head. In Him resides the totality of the divine powers and

attributes. From the necessities imposed upon Paul by the character of the Gnostic heresy, it is easy to see that as Bishop Lightfoot says: “The doctrine of the Person of Christ is here stated with greater precision and fulness than in any other of St. Paul’s epistles.”*

CHAPTER ONE (1:1, 2) The only difference between Paul’s opening words in Ephesians and those in this letter is the inclusion of Timothy as Paul’s associate in the gospel at the time of the writing, and the fact that the words, “the Lord Jesus Christ,” do not appeal in the Nestle or the Westcott and Hort texts. For studies on the other words, please see notes on Ephesians 1:1, 2. Light foot, commenting on the words “faithful brethren in Christ,” says: “This unusual addition is full of meaning. Some members of the Colossian church were shaken in their allegiance, even if they had not fallen from it. The Apostle therefore wishes to be understood that, when he speaks of the saints, he means the true and steadfast members of the brotherhood. In this way he obliquely hints at the defection. Thus, the words ‘and faithful brethren’ are a supplementary explanation of ‘to the saints.’ He does not directly exclude any, but he indirectly warns all. The epithet ‘faithful’ cannot mean simply ‘believing’; for then it would add nothing which is not already contained in ‘saints’ and ‘brethren.’ Its passive sense, ‘trustworthy, steadfast, unswerving’ must be prominent here.” Translation. Paul, an ambassador of Christ Jesus through the will of God, and Timothy our brother, to the saints in Colossae, even faithful brethren in Christ. Grace to you and peace from God our Father. (1:3–8) Lightfoot, Vincent, and Expositors concur in the opinion that “always” is to be construed with “give thanks” rather than “praying.” The translation therefore reads, “giving thanks always to God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” The word “and” is not in the Greek text. The preposition “for” in “praying for you” is peri (peri), “concerning.” It was concerning the needs and the circumstances of the Colossian saints that Paul was praying. The word “praying” is proseuchomai (proseucomai) which speaks of prayer to God. It is never used of petitions to man. The prefixed preposition pros (pro") gives it the idea of definiteness and directness in prayer, with the consciousness on the part of the one praying that he is talking face to face with God. Paul in verse four indicates what is the ground of his thanksgiving, namely, the Colossian’s faith in the Lord Jesus and their love to all the saints. The preposition eis (eij") (to) is a preposition of motion. It is used in John 3:16, for instance, where the evangelist speaks of the initial act of faith which the sinner exercises in the Lord Jesus. It is literally, “believes into Him.” The preposition used here (1:4) is en (ejn), a preposition of rest. Having placed our faith in the Lord Jesus as our Saviour, it now rests in Him. Lightfoot says that the preposition here “denotes the sphere in which their faith moves, rather than the object to which it is directed.” The particular love which the Colossian saints had for all the saints was that agape (ajgape) love which is produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit, a love which impels one to sacrifice one’s self for the object or person loved. The preposition “to” is not pros (pro"), “to, towards,” but eis (eij"), “into,” showing that the Colossian’s love reached into the very hearts of the

other saints. The a.v., connects “We give thanks” with “for the hope,” but Expositors, Vincent, and Lightfoot demur, saying that it is to be construed with the words, “your faith, etc.,” saying that the words “for the hope” are too far removed from “We give thanks” to be taken with the latter words. Vincent says, “Faith works by love, and the ground of their love is found in the hope set before them. The motive is subordinate, but legitimate. ‘The hope laid up in heaven is not the deepest reason or motive for faith and love, but both are made more vivid when it is strong. It is not the light at which their lamps are lit, but it is the odorous oil which feeds their flame’ (Maclaren).” As to “hope,” Vincent says; “In the n.t., the word signifies both the sentiment of hope and the thing hoped for. Here the latter. Lightfoot observes that the sentiment oscillates between the subjective feeling and the objective realization. The translation reads; “having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and the love which you are having to all the saints on account of the hope.” That is, this hope of reward has been an incentive to the Colossians in their faith in the Lord Jesus and their love to the saints, encouraging both and causing both to make progress and grow more intense. The preposition “for” is dia (dia), which is a preposition of intermediate agency. This shows clearly that the hope is an active thing, working in the saints, energizing that faith and love to a greater intensity. Paul speaks of this hope “which is laid up for you in heaven.” “Laid up” is the perfect participle of apokeimai (ajpokeimai), made up of keimai (keimai), “to lie,” as in the sentence, “The book lies on the table,” speaking of its position, and apo (ajpo), “off, away from.” Thus, the compound verb means “to be laid away, to be reserved, put to one side,” metaphorically, “to be reserved for one, awaiting him,” used with the dative of the person involved. The perfect participle gives, “the hope which has been laid away in times past with the present result that it is reserved for and awaiting you.” Lightfoot translates, “which is stored up.” Vincent quotes Bishop Wilson, “Deposited, reserved, put by in store out of reach of all enemies and sorrows.” This hope is laid up in heaven, all of which means that the saints will enjoy it in the future life. There are treasures in heaven earned by the saints while on earth (Matt. 6:20), our citizenship is in heaven (Phil. 3:20), and we have an inheritance reserved for us in heaven (I Pet. 1:4). Concerning the words, “whereof ye heard before in the word of the gospel,” Lightfoot says: “seems intended to contrast their earlier with their later lessons—the true gospel of Epaphras with the false gospel of their recent teachers.” Epaphras was the saint who brought the gospel to Colossae, having heard it from the great apostle himself. In verse 6, Paul further defines the gospel so as to identify it and differentiate it from the false message of the Gnostics. He says. “which is come unto you.” The Greek idea is, “which is being alongside you.” Lightfoot translates, “which reached you.” The idea is that the gospel has snuggled close up to the Colossian saints and they have taken it into their hearts. But not only does that identify it from the Gnostic message, but the gospel Paul gave them is making progress all over the world in that it is constantly bearing fruit and increasing even as it has been doing among the Colossians from the day in which they heard it and came to know the grace of God in the sphere of truth. The words, “in all the world,” are “hyperbolical, possibly with a suggestion of the universal character of the gospel as contrasted with the local and special character of false gospels” (Vincent). The participles “bearing fruit” and “increasing” are in the middle voice. Lightfoot comments; “The middle denotes the inherent energy. The gospel is essentially a reproductive organism, a plant whose ‘seed is in itself’.… The gospel is not like those plants which

exhaust themselves bearing fruit and wither away. The external growth keeps pace with the reproductive energy. While ‘bearing fruit’ describes the inner working, ‘increasing’ gives the outward extension of the gospel.” The expression, “the grace of God in truth,” means “the grace of God in its genuine simplicity, without adulteration” (Lightfoot). But Paul identifies the true gospel again by saying that it was the message which they heard from Epaphras whom he calls “the beloved” and “his fellow-bondslave,” also the minister (diakonos (diakono") servant) to the Colossians; the one who ministered the Word of God to them, the one who declared to Paul the Colossians’ love in the sphere of the Spirit. The word “love” here is again  (ajgaph), that supernatural love which God is and which God the Holy Spirit produces in the heart of the yielded saint. Translation. I am giving thanks to God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, concerning you constantly offering petitions, having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and of the love which you constantly have to all the saints through the agency of the hope laid aside for you in heaven, concerning which you heard before in the word of the truth of the glad tidings which are with you, even as also they are in all the world constantly bearing fruit and increasing, just as they are also among you from the day when you heard them and came to know experientially the grace of God in the sphere of truth, even as you learned from Epaphras, the beloved, our fellow-bondslave, who is faithful on your behalf as a servant of Christ, who also declared to us your love in the sphere of the Spirit. (1:9, 10) “For this cause” is dia touto (dia touto), “on this account, because of this,” namely, the good report from Colossae as given in verses 4–8, the motive that prompted Paul to pray for these saints. “Also” indicates that they had been praying for him.“Pray” is proseuchomai (proseucomai), a general word for prayer, meaning “to offer petitions.” “Desire” is  (aijtew), a specific word for prayer which signifies to ask for something to be given, not done, giving prominence to the thing asked for rather than the person. The word “desire,” used in the sense of ask, is found in Shakespeare and Spenser, which accounts for the a.v.. rendering. “Knowledge” is  (ejpignwsi"). The word is an advance upon  (gnwsi") (knowledge) in that it denotes a larger and more thorough knowledge. It is a knowledge which grasps and penetrates into an object. It was a favorite word of the Gnostics who used it to designate the superior knowledge which they claimed al their exclusive possession. Paul prays that all the saints might become possessors of this knowledge, indicating that it was open for all to appropriate, not a secret mystery into which only a favored few could be initiated. If the Gnostics had their superior knowledge, so did the Christian Church. The former was speculative and false, the latter, positive and true. Paul prays that they not only might have it but that they might be filled with it. His petition is that the Colossian saints might be filled with a thorough knowledge of God’s will. As to God’s will, Expositors says, “This does not mean God’s counsel of redemption, nor ‘the whole counsel of God as made known to us in Christ’ (Findlay), but, as the context indicates (v. 10), the moral aspect of God’s will, ‘His will for the conduct of our lives’ ( Meyer).” This thorough, perfect knowledge of God’s will should be in the sphere of “all wisdom

and spiritual understanding.” Again, Paul uses two Gnostic words, sophia (sofia) (wisdom) and sunesis (sunesi") (understanding). Expositors in defining these words, says: “sophia (sofia) is general, sunesis (sunesi"), special. Sophia (Sofia) embraces the whole range of mental faculties; sunesis (sunesi") is the special faculty of intelligence or insight which discriminates between the false and the true, and grasps the relations in which things stand to each other. The addition of pneumatikos (pneumatiko"), (spiritual) shows that both are to proceed from the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. They thus stand in opposition to fleshly wisdom (II Cor. 1:12), and especially, it would seem, though Haupt denies this, to the false wisdom by which the Colossians were in danger of being ensnared.” The word “all,” qualifying “knowledge” and “understanding,” is better, “every kind of.” This is another thrust on the part of Paul against the religious exclusiveness of the Gnostics. Paul prays that the Colossian saints might be filled with the knowledge of God’s will in the sphere of every kind of thorough wisdom and intelligence in order that they “might walk worthy of the Lord.” “Walk” is  (peripatew), “to order one’s behavior, to conduct one’s self.” “Worthy” is  (ajxiw"). When this word is used with the genitive case as it is here, it means, “having the weight of (weighing as much as) another thing.” It means, “of like value, worth as much.” The saints are to see to it that their manner of life, their conduct, weighs as much as the character of their Lord. That is, He is to be their example in life, and the copy must be like the example. Peter says: “Christ also suffered on your behalf, leaving behind for you a model to imitate, in order that by close application you might follow in His footprints” (I Pet. 2:21). Expositors says: “This lofty wisdom and insight is not an end in itself. It must issue in right practice. Doctrines and ethics are for Paul inseparable. Right conduct must be founded on right thinking, but right thinking must also lead to right conduct.” The words “unto all pleasing” are eis pasan areskian (eij" pasan ajreskian), “with a view to every pleasing.” Lightfoot explains, “so as to please God in all ways.” One of the activities of the saint in the sphere of a behavior which is worthy of the Lord, is fruitbearing. This fruitbearing and increasing is to be, not in the knowledge of God, since the latter is the motivating energy which produces the former, but by means of the knowledge of God. It is the instrumental case here, not the locative. Lightfoot and Expositors concur in this. Vincent gives this as the reading of the best texts. Translation. Because of this, we also, from the day we heard, do not cease on behalf of you of Bring our petitions and presenting our definite requests, that you might be filled with the advanced and perfect knowledge of His will in the sphere of every kind of wisdom and intelligence which is spiritual, so that you may order your behavior worthily of the Lord with a view to pleasing Him in everything, in every work which is good, constantly bearing fruit and increasing by means of the thorough and perfect knowledge of God. (1:11, 12) In the expression “strengthened with all might,” the verb is  (dunamow), the noun, dunamis (dunami"). The reader will observe that both words have the same stem, which means that intrinsically they have the same meaning. Dunamis (Dunami"), the noun, has the following meanings, “strength, ability, power, inherent power, power residing in a thing by virtue of its nature, power which a person or thing exerts and puts forth.” The verb dunamai (dunamai) means “to be able, to have power.” Thus, it is easy to see that these words speak of inherent power which gives one the ability to do something.  (Dunamow), which is used here, means “to make strong, to

strengthen.” One could translate, “by every enabling power being constantly strengthened.” The word “power” is kratos (krato"), “relative and manifested power.” The Greek has it, “according to the manifested power of His glory.” Lightfoot says: “The glory here, as frequently, stands for the majesty or the power or the goodness of God, as manifested to men. The doxa (doxa) (glory), the bright light over the mercy-seat (Rom. 9:4) was a symbol of such manifestations. God’s revelation of Himself to us, however this revelation may be made, is the one source of all our highest strength.” Commenting on the words “according to” (kata (kata)), Expositors says: “The equipment with power is proportioned not simply to the recipient’s need, but to the divine supply.” This being strengthened by God results in “all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness.” “Patience” is  (uJpomonh), “longsuffering,” makrothumia (makroqumia). Trench’s note on these words is valuable: “Makrothumia (Makroqumia) will be found to express patience in respect of persons,  (uJpomonh), in respect of things. The man makrothumei (makroqumei), who having to do with injurious persons, does not suffer himself easily to be provoked by them, or to blaze up in anger (II Tim. 4:2). The man  (uJpomonh), who under a great siege of trials, bears up, and does not lose heart or courage (Rom. 5:3; II Cor. 1:6).” In another place, commenting on the word makrothumia (makroqumia), the same authority defines it as “a long holding out of the mind before it gives room to action or passion—generally to passion. ‘Forbearing one another in love’ (Eph. 4:2) beautifully expounds the meaning which attaches to the word. Anger usually, but not universally is the passion thus held aloof … Still, it is not necessarily anger which is excluded or set at a distance, for when the historian of the Maccabees describes how the Romans had won the world ‘by their policy and their patience,’ makrothumia (makroqumia) expresses there that Roman persistency which would never make peace under defeat.” Commenting upon  (uJpomonh), Trench says; “It does not mark merely endurance, or even patience, but the perseverance, the brave patience with which the Christian contends against the various hindrances, persecutions, and temptations that befall him in his conflict with the inward and outward world.” In brief, makrothumia (makroqumia) is patience exhibited under ill-treatment by persons,  (uJpomonh), patience shown under trials, difficulties, hardships. This patience and longsuffering is to be accompanied with joyfulness. Expositors says; “It (joyfulness) forms a very necessary addition, for the peculiar danger of the exercise of those qualities is that it tends to produce a certain gloominess or sourness of disposition. The remedy is that the Christian should be so filled with joy that he is able to meet all his trials with a buoyant sense of mastery.” The Father to whom constant thanksgiving should be expressed is He who “hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light.” “Made meet” is  (iJkanow), “to make sufficient, render fit, qualify.” The standing of the believer in Christ is here in view, not his Christian character. The Father qualified believers to partake of the inheritance of the saints by placing them in Christ, in whom they enjoy a standing which makes them the objects of God’s grace. “Partakers of the inheritance” is  (thn merida tou klhrou), “the portion of the lot.” The word  (klhrow) means “to cast lots, to determine by lot.”  (Klhro") means “an object used in casting lots.” The lot of the saints, namely, that which is determined upon the saints is future blessedness, not only in the future life, but also here on earth. “The path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day” (Prov. 4:18).

The words “in light” qualify “inheritance” not “saints.” Expositors, Vincent, Alford, and Lightfoot concur on this. “The light is the region in which the inheritance of the saints, and consequently our share in it, is situated” (Alford). Vincent says: “The inheritance which is in light. This need not be limited to future glory. The children of God walk in light on earth. See I John 1:7, 2:10.” Translation. By every enabling power being constantly strengthened in proportion to the manifested power of His glory resulting in every patience and forbearance with joy, constantly giving thanks to the Father who qualified you for the portion of the lot of the saints in the light. (1:13) “Delivered” is ruomai (rJuomai), “to draw to one’s self, to rescue, to deliver.” Lightfoot says; “rescued, delivered us by His strong arm, as a mighty conqueror.” “Power” is exousia (ejxousia). Lightfoot defines and describes this word as follows: “Here, arbitrary power, tyranny. The word exousia (ejxousia) properly signifies liberty of action, and thus, like the corresponding English word license, involves secondary ideas, of which either may be so prominent as to eclipse the other; (1) authority, delegated power (Luke 22:2), or (2) tyranny, lawlessness, unrestrained or arbitrary power … This latter idea of a capricious unruly rule is prominent here. The expression ‘the power of darkness’ occurs also in Luke 22:53, where again the idea of disorder is involved. The transference from darkness to light is here represented as a transference from an arbitrary tyranny, an exousia (ejxousia), to a well-ordered sovereignty, a kingdom.” The phrase refers to the tyrannical rule of Satan and his demons over the unsaved. “Translated” is  (meqisthmi), “to transpose, transfer, remove from one place to another,” thus, speaks of a change of situation or place. Lightfoot translates, “removed,” and says, “the image of  (meqisthmi) is supplied by the wholesale transportation of peoples, of which the history of oriental monarchies supplied so many examples.” The Greek has it, “unto the kingdom of the Son of His love.” Vincent says; “The Son who is the object of His love, and to whom, therefore, the kingdom is given. See Psalm 2:7, 8; Heb. 1:3–9. It is true that love is the essence of the Son as of the Father; also, that the Son’s mission is the revelation of the Father’s love; but, as Meyer correctly says, ‘the language refers to the exalted Christ who rules.’ ” Lightfoot, commenting on the word “Son” says, “Not of inferior angels, as the false teachers would have it (2:18), but of His own Son. The same contrast between a dispensation of angels and a dispensation of the Son underlies the words here, which is explicitly brought out in Hebrews 1:1–8.” Translation. Who delivered us out of the tyrannical rule of the darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of the Son of His love. (1:14) “Redemption” is  (ajpolutrwsi"), “a releasing effected by payment of ransom, liberation procured by the payment of ransom.” Paul continues the image of an enslaved people. He defines this liberation on payment of ransom as a forgiveness. The word is aphesis (ajfesi"), “release as from bondage or imprisonment.” This word in turn comes from  (ajfihmi), “to send from one’s self, to send away, to bid go away or depart.” It speaks of the act of God at Calvary, paying the penalty of human sin, thus satisfying the just demands of His holy law, putting away sin, bidding it go away. This was

symbolized in the o.t., by the goat, laden with the sins of Israel, being led away into the wilderness and lost. Israel never saw that goat again, and thus never saw its sins again. Vincent says, “Lightfoot’s suggestion is very interesting that this precise definition may convey an allusion to the perversion of the term  (ajpolutrwsi") by the Gnostics of a later age, and which was possibly foreshadowed in the teaching of the Colossian heretics. The Gnostic used it to signify the result of initiation into certain mysteries.… The idea of a redemption of the world, and (in a perverted form) of the person and work of Christ as having part in it, distinctively marked the Gnostic schools. That from which the world was redeemed, however, was not sin in the proper sense of the term, but something inherent in the constitution of the world itself, and therefore due to its Creator.” Translation. In whom we are having our liberation, procured by the payment of ransom, the putting away of our sins. (1:15) We now come to a very important section of Colossians, and one in which Paul comes to grips with the Gnostic teaching. Lightfoot says, “In the passage which follows, Paul defines the Person of Christ, claiming for Him the absolute supremacy, (1) in relation to the universe, the natural creation (vv. 15–17); (2) in relation to the Church, the new moral creation (v. 18); and he then combines the two, ‘in order that in all things, He might have the preeminence,’ explaining this twofold sovereignty by the absolute indwelling of the  (plhrwma) (fullness) in Christ, and showing how, as a consequence, the reconciliation and harmony of all things must be effected in Him (vv. 19, 20). As the idea of the Logos (Word) underlies the whole passage, though the term does not appear, a few words explanatory of this term will be necessary by way of preface. The word logos (logo") then, denoting both ‘reason’ and ‘speech,’ was a philosophical term adopted by Alexandrian Judaism before Paul wrote, to express the manifestation of the unseen God, the Absolute Being, in the creation and government of the world. It includes all modes by which God makes Himself known to man. As His reason, it denoted His purpose or design; as His speech, it implied His revelation.… Christian teachers, when they adopted this term, exalted and fixed its meaning by attaching to it two precise and definite ideas: (1) The Word is a divine Person (John 1:1), and (2) The Word became flesh (John 1:14).” Now, for an exposition of the phrase, “Who is the image of the invisible God.” Lightfoot says; “The Person of Christ is described first in relation more especially to Deity, and secondly, in relation more especially to created things. The fundamental conception of the Logos (Logo") involves the idea of mediation between God and creation. A perverted view respecting the nature of the mediation between the two lay at the root of the heretical teaching at Colossae, and required to be met by the true doctrine of Christ as the Eternal Logos.” “Image” is  (eijkwn). The word means “a likeness,” and this idea involves two other ideas. One is that of representation. Lightfoot says; “In this respect it is allied to  (carakthr), ‘a mark or figure burned or stamped on, an impression, a precise reproduction in every respect,’ and differs from  (oJmoiwma), ‘a likeness.’ In  (oJmoiwma) the resemblance may be accidental, as one egg is like another, but  (eijkwn) implies an archetype of which it is a copy The  (eijkwn) might be the result of direct imitation like the head of a sovereign on a coin, or it might be due to natural causes like the parental features in the child, but in any case, it was derived from its

prototype.” The Lord Jesus is therefore the image of God in the sense that as the Son to the Father He is derived by eternal generation in a birth that never took place because it always was. Our Lord said, “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father” (John 14:9). That is, the Son is the exact reproduction of the Father, a derived image. The other idea involved in the word “representation” is that of manifestation, the manifestation of the hidden. The Logos is the revelation of the Unseen Father, whether pre-incarnate or incarnate. Lightfoot says that the idea of the invisible God “must not be confined to the apprehension of the bodily senses, but will include the cognizance of the inward eye also.” The word “firstborn” is  (prwtotoko"). The Greek word implied two things, priority to all creation and sovereignty over all creation. In the first meaning we see the absolute pre-existence of the Logos. Since our Lord existed before all created things, He must be uncreated. Since He is uncreated, He is eternal. Since He is eternal, He is God. Since He is God, He cannot be one of the emanations from deity of which the Gnostic speaks, even though He proceeds from God the Father as the Son. In the second meaning we see that He is the natural ruler, the acknowledged head of God’s household. Thus again, He cannot be one of the emanations from deity in whom the divine essence is present but diffused. He is Lord of creation. Translation. Who is a derived reproduction and manifestation of the Deity, the invisible One, the One who has priority to and sovereignty over all creation. (1:16) “For” is hoti (oJti), “because.” Lightfoot says; “We have in this sentence the justification of the title given the Son in the preceding clause, ‘the firstborn of every creature.’ It must therefore be taken to explain the sense in which this title is used. Thus connected, it shows that the  (prwtotoko") (firstborn) is not included in ‘every creature’; for the expression used is not ‘the other things of a like nature’ or, ‘the rest of the things,’ but ‘the all things were created’—words which are absolute and comprehensive, and will admit of no exception.” “By Him” is  (ejn aujtwi), here, not instrumental but locative; “in Him” were all things created. Vincent says: “In is not instrumental but local; not denying the instrumentality, but putting the fact of creation with reference to its sphere and center. In Him, within the sphere of His personality, resides the Creative will and the creative energy, and in that sphere the creative act takes place. Thus creation is dependent on Him.” “All things” is ta panta (ta panta), “the all things.” Vincent says; “The article gives the collective sense—the all, the whole universe of things. Without the article it would be all things severally.” “Were created” is  (ejktisqh), the aorist verb, which speaks of a definite historical event. The qualifying phrases, “that are in heaven,” and “that are in earth,” Lightfoot says, present “a classification by locality, as the words visible and invisible, speak of a classification by essences. Heaven and earth together comprehend all space; and all things whether material or immaterial are conceived for the purposes of the classification as having their abode in space.” The words, “thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers” refer to both holy and fallen angels, to demons and man. Vincent says; “The passage is aimed at the angelworship of the Colossians; showing that while they have been discussing the various grades of angels which fill the space between God and men, and depending on them as

media of communion with God, they have degraded Christ who is above them all, and is the sole mediator.” “By Him” is dia autou (dia aujtou), “through His intermediate agency.” “For Him” is eis auton (eij" aujton), “unto Him.” Vincent says; “All things came to pass within the sphere of His personality and as dependent upon it … All things, as they had their beginning in Him, tend to Him as their consummation, to depend on and serve Him.… The false teachers maintained that the universe proceeded from God indirectly, through a succession of emanations. Christ, at best, was only one of these. As such, the universe could not find its consummation in Him.” Lightfoot says; “As all creation passed out from Him, so does it all converge again towards Him.” The first use of the word “created” in this verse is aorist, and the second, perfect in tense, the latter showing the abiding result. Translation. Because in Him were created the all things in the heavens and upon the earth, the visible things and the invisible ones, whether they are thrones or lordships or principalities or authorities. The all things through Him as intermediate agent and with a view to Him stand created. (1:17) The personal pronoun in the Greek text is used for emphasis. It is, “And He Himself is before all things.” Lightfoot says; “The autos (aujto") (Himself) is as necessary for the completeness of the meaning, as the estin (ejstin) (is). The one emphasizes the personality, as the other declares the pre-existence.” The verb of being emphasizes our Lord’s absolute existence as well. “Before all things” is “before all things” in time. The word “consist” is  (sunisthmi), and is used here in the perfect tense. Lightfoot translates; “hold together, cohere.” He says; “He is the principle of cohesion in the universe. He impresses upon creation that unity and solidarity which makes it a cosmos (cosmo") (an ordered system) instead of a chaos (cao") (an unformed mass). Thus (to take one instance) the action of gravitation, which keeps in their places things fixed and regulates the motions of things moving, is an expression of His mind.” Translation. And He Himself is before all things, and the all things in Him hold together. (1:18) Again, the personal pronoun is used for emphasis. “He Himself is the Head of His body, the Church.” Lightfoot says; “The Creator of the world is also Head of the Church. There is no blind ignorance, no imperfect sympathy, no latent conflict, in the relation of the demiurgic power to the gospel dispensation, as the heretical teachers were disposed consciously or unconsciously to assume, but an absolute unity of origin.” As to our Lord as the Head of His body, the Church, Lightfoot says; “the head, the inspiring, ruling, guiding, combining, sustaining power, the mainspring of its activity, the center of its unity, and the seat of its life.” He is the “beginning.” The word is  (ajrch), “the origin, the beginning,” this in relation to the Church. The word  (ajrch) here involves priority in time; our Lord was the first-fruits from among the dead; and originating power; He was also the source of life (Lightfoot). In the words, “the firstborn of the dead,” Paul shows how Christ is the beginning of the new spiritual life in the Church, by His resurrection. “He comes forth from among the dead as the first-born issues from the womb. Compare Acts 2:4, ‘having loosed the pains of death’ where the Greek is  (wjdina"), ‘birth-throes’ ” (Vincent). “Might have the preeminence” is  (genhtai prwteuwn), “might

become being first;  (Prwteuw) to be first only here in the n.t.  (Genhtai) (become) states a new relation into which Christ came in the course of time: estin (ejstin) (is) (the firstborn of all creation) states a relation of Christ’s absolute being. He became head of the Church through His incarnation and passion, as He is head of the universe in virtue of His absolute and eternal being” (Vincent). Translation. And He Himself is the Head of His body, the Church, who is the originator, firstborn out from among the dead, in order that He might become in all things Himself the One who is preeminent. (1:19) The words, “the Father,” are in italics in the a.v., which means that they are not in the Greek text and are supplied by the translators. The word “pleased” is  (eujdokew), “to think it good, to be well pleased.” The word studies suggest “God.” The article occurs before “fulness.” Thus we have, “because in Him God was well pleased that all the fulness should dwell.” The word “fulness” is  (plhrwma). Vincent says: “The word must be taken in its passive sense—that with which a thing is filled, not that which fills. The fulness denotes the sum-total of the divine powers and attributes. In Christ dwelt all the fulness of God as deity.” Lightfoot says; “  (to plhrwma), the plenitude, a recognized technical term in theology, denoting the totality of the divine powers and attributes.” Vincent continues: “There must also be taken into account the selection of this word fulness with reference to the false teaching in the Colossian church, the errors which afterward were developed more distinctly in the Gnostic schools.  (Plhrwma) (fulness) was used by the Gnostic teachers in a technical sense, to express the sum-total of the divine powers and attributes. ‘From the  (plhrwma) they supposed that all those agencies issued through which God has at any time exerted His power in creation, or manifested His will through revelation. These mediatorial beings would retain more or less of its influence, according as they claimed direct parentage from it, or traced their descent through successive evolutions. But in all cases this  (plhrwma) was distributed, diluted, transformed, and darkened by foreign admixture. They were only partial and blurred images, often deceptive caricatures of their original, broken lights of the great Central Light’ (Lightfoot). Christ may have been ranked with these inferior images of the divine by the Colossian teachers. Hence the significance of the assertion that the totality of the divine dwells in Him” (Vincent). The word “dwell” is  (katoikew), “to be at home permanently” in a certain place. The Greek word for a “home” is oikos (oijko"), “to live at home,”  (oijkew). The prefixed preposition kata (kata), the local meaning of which is “down,” adds permanency to the idea in the verb. The Greeks had a word,  (paroikew), used of transient sojourning. But  (katoikew), used here, speaks of the fact that all the divine fulness is at home permanently in the Lord Jesus, at home in the sense that this divine fulness was not something added to His Being that was not natural to Him, but that it was part of His essential Being as part of His very constitution, and that permanently. Translation. Because in Him God was well pleased that all the fulness be permanently at home. (1:20) Commenting on this verse, Lightfoot says; “The false teachers aimed at

effecting a partial reconciliation between God and man through the interposition of angelic mediators. The apostle speaks of an absolute and complete reconciliation of universal nature to God, effected through the mediation of the Incarnate Word. Their mediators were ineffective, because they were neither human nor divine. It was necessary that in Him all the plenitude of the Godhead should dwell. It was necessary also that He should be born into the world and should suffer for man. “ Both the Nestle and the Westcott and Hort texts put “reconcile” before “having made peace.” The translation is as follows: “Because in Him God was well pleased that all the fulness be permanently at home, and (God was well pleased) through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His Cross.” The fulness of the Godhead that resides permanently in Christ constituted Him equal to the task of reconciliation, and His act of making peace effected that reconciliation, His Blood being that which satisfied the just demands of the broken law. The Greek word “to make peace” ( (eijrw)) means “to bind together.” Our Lord by His death on the Cross bound together again a holy God and sinful man who placed his faith in the Saviour. Likewise, the curse placed upon the material universe because of sin, will one day be removed through that same precious Blood. Reconciliation in the case of God and man is twofold. A holy God is reconciled in that justice has been satisfied at the Cross, and sinful man is reconciled in that, in the case of the believing sinner, his attitude of enmity towards God is changed to one of friendship. The verb “reconcile” is  (ajpokatalassw). Vincent says that “the compounded preposition apo (ajpo) gives the force of back, hinting at restoration to a primal unity.” Lightfoot says; “The whole universe of things, material as well as spiritual, shall be restored to harmony with God.” We must be careful here to remember that when Paul wrote “the all things” he did not include the lost in eternity. Any portion of Scripture must be considered in the light of what the rest of Scripture teaches. Translation. And (God was well pleased) to reconcile the all things to Himself, having concluded peace through the blood of His Cross, through Him, whether the things upon the earth or the things in the heavens. (1:21, 22) “Alienated” is  (ajpallatriow), “to alienate, to estrange.” Here it is in the form of a perfect participle, passive in voice. The Colossians had been in their unsaved state, estranged from God, and permanently so. “Enemies” is echtros (ejctro"), “hostile,” and in an active sense. “By wicked works” is  (ejn toi" ejrgoi" toi" ponhroi"), “in the sphere of works which were pernicious.” Vincent says; “In your evil works. In the performance of the sphere in which, outwardly, their alienation had exhibited itself.” As to the qualifying phrase “in the body of His flesh,” Expositors says; “The most satisfactory view is that Paul has in mind the false spiritualism which thought reconciliation could be accomplished by spiritual beings only, and hence attached little or no value to the work of Christ in a body composed of flesh. In opposition to this, Paul emphasizes the fact that it was just by the putting to death of this body composed of flesh that reconciliation was effected, and thereby excludes from the work the angels who had no body of flesh.” “To present” is  (paristhmi), “to place beside or near, to present, to proffer.” In Romans 12:2 it is used of presenting our bodies as a sacrifice. “Holy” is hagios (aJgio"). The fundamental idea in this word is separation to God and from worldly

defilement. “Unblamable” is  (ajmwmo"), “without blemish,” like an o.t. animal sacrifice free from defects, without blemish. “Unreprovable” is  (ajnegklhto"), “not only free from the blemish but from the charge of it” (Vincent). “Sight” is  (katenwpion), made up of kata (kata), “down,” en (ejn), “in,” and  (wjp), “to look,” thus “to look down in,” speaking of a searching, penetrating gaze. Translation. And you who were at one time those who were in a settled state of alienation, and hostile with respect to your intents in the sphere of your works which were pernicious, yet now He reconciled in the body of His flesh through His death, in order that He might present you holy and without blemish and unchargeable in His searching and penetrating gaze. (1:23) The word “if” here is not ean (eJan), an unfulfilled, hypothetical condition used with the subjunctive mode, presenting the possibility of a future realization, but ei (eij) with the indicative, having here the idea of “assuming that you continue in the faith.” That is, continuance in the gospel as it was preached by Paul would show that the person was saved and thus would be presented holy, without blemish, and unchargeable before God. That is, Paul was here addressing truly born-again Colossians, not unsaved professors of Christianity who would follow the Colossian heresy. Heretics would not so be presented, only true believers. It is not the retention of salvation that is in the apostle’s mind, but the possession of it that would be shown by their continuance in the gospel. Expositors says; “This is directed against the false teacher’s assurance that the gospel they had heard needed to be supplemented if they wished to attain salvation.” “Continue” is  (menw), “to persist in, adhere to, stay at or with, abide by.” The faith here is not the Christian system of doctrine, but their faith as exercised in the gospel message. As to the words, “grounded and settled,” Lightfoot translates, “built on a foundation and so firm.” Bengel says: “The former is metaphorical, the latter more literal. The one implies greater respect to the foundation by which the believers are supported; but settled suggests inward strength which believers themselves possess.” Expositors says; “ ‘Grounded’ refers to the firm foundation, ‘settled,’ to the stability of the building.” “Grounded” is the perfect participle of  (qemeliow), “to lay a foundation.” The perfect tense speaks of an action completed in past time having present results. Those Colossians who were saved, had been placed on the foundation, the Lord Jesus, with the result that they were grounded on Him. That is a once-for-all act on the part of God, having permanent results. That is what happens to a sinner who puts his faith in the Lord Jesus. In the case of those Colossians who professed to be recipients of this work of God, and who followed the Colossian heresy, this would only go to prove that their profession did not accord with the facts, namely, that they were never placed on that foundation, the Lord Jesus. Translation. Assuming indeed, that you are adhering to your faith, having been placed upon a foundation with the present result that you are on that foundation, firmly established, and that you are not continually being shifted away from your hope held out by the gospel which you heard, that gospel which was proclaimed in all creation, which is under heaven, of which I, Paul, became one who ministers. (1:24) The relative pronoun “who” is omitted by the Nestle and the Westcott and Hort texts. “Now” is nun (nun), and Vincent says: “Now is temporal: in the midst of my imprisonment and sufferings, after having become a minister of the gospel, and having

preached it.” Lightfoot says; “The underlying nun (nun) (now) seems to be this: If ever I have been disposed to repine at my lot, if ever I have felt my cross almost too heavy to bear yet now,—now, when I contemplate the lavish wealth of God’s mercy—now when I see all the glory of bearing a part in this magnificent work—my sorrow is turned into joy.” Commenting on the words, “now I rejoice,” the same authority has this to say; “A sudden outburst of thanksgiving, that he, who is less than the least, who was not worthy to be called an apostle, should be allowed to share and even supplement the sufferings of Christ.” As to the phrase, “in my sufferings,” Vincent says; “not as our idiom, rejoice in, as rejoice in the Lord, but in the midst of: while enduring. It is not over my sufferings, but in the sphere of my sufferings. Paul was surrounded with sufferings in his prison in Rome, but he was rejoicing in the midst of them.” “Fill up” is  (ajntanaplhrow), “to fill up in turn.” The prefixed preposition anti (ajnti) “signifies that the supply comes from an opposite quarter to the deficiency” (Lightfoot). Thus, the translation reads: “I fill up on my part.” “The afflictions of Christ” here do not refer to His expiatory sufferings on the Cross, but to His sufferings endured in His humiliation prior to that event, sufferings for righteousness’ sake, sufferings incurred through exhausting service, heart-sufferings due to the opposition of sinners, sufferings which were the result of persecution; and for two reasons, first, because the atonement was a finished work, and second, because the word for “sufferings” here, thlipsis (qliyi"), is never used of the vicarious sufferings of the Lord Jesus. These sufferings incurred during His earthly ministry, were necessarily curtailed by reason of His limited life on earth, and needed to he continued in His servants if the work of preaching the Word was to be carried on. Thus, all the saints down the ages are partakers of these sufferings when they are faithful to the obligation they have of preaching the Word. The word “church” is  (ejkklhsia), from  (ejkkalew), “to call out of.” The word was used in classical Greek of a gathering of citizens called out from their homes into some public place. It was used among the Greeks of an assembly of the people convened at the public place of council for the purpose of deliberation. In the Christian sense, it is used of an assembly of Christians gathered for worship, and then of the entire Mystical Body of Christ, as it is here. Translation. I now am rejoicing in my sufferings on your behalf, and on my part am filling up the things lacking of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for the sake of His Body, which is the Church. (1:25) “Whereof” refers back to “Church.” Paul was made a minister (diakonos (diakono"), a servant). “Dispensation” is oikonomian (oijkonomian), made up of oikos (oijko"), “house,” and nomos (nomo"), “law,” namely, the law of the household, the method of administrating the household. It speaks of a house-steward, one to whom is given the responsibility of administering the laws regulating the proper conduct of affairs in the household. Here the meaning is that of stewardship. Paul was given the responsibility of preaching the Word of God and seeing to it that it was guided rightly in its initial impact upon the Roman Empire. Commenting on the word “fulfil,” Lightfoot says; “to preach fully to give its complete development to” the Word. Vincent says; “Fully discharge my office, so that the divine intent shall be fully carried out in the preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles no less than to the Jews.

Translation. Of which I became a servant according to the stewardship of God which was given to me for you, to fulfil the Word of God. (1:26) Lightfoot says concerning the word “mystery”: “This is not the only term borrowed from the ancient mysteries which Paul employs to describe the teaching of the gospel.… There is this difference, however; that, whereas the heathen mysteries were strictly confined to a narrow circle, the Christian mysteries are fully communicated to all. There is therefore an intentional paradox in the employment of the image by Paul. Thus, the idea of secrecy or reserve disappears when  (musthrion) (mystery) is adopted into the Christian vocabulary by Paul, and the word signifies simply a truth which was once hidden but now is revealed, a truth which without special revelation would have been unknown. Of the nature of the truth itself the word say. nothing … But the one special mystery which absorbs Paul’s thoughts in the Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians is the free admission of the Gentiles on equal terms to the privileges of the covenant. See also Ephesians 3:1–6 for the same mystery.” Commenting on the words, “From ages and from generations,” Vincent says; “The unit and the factors: the aeon (aJeon) or age being made up of generations … The preposition apo (ajpo) (from), differs from pro (pro) (before) as marking the point from which concealment could properly begin. Before the beginning of the ages of the world, the counsel of God was ordained, but not concealed, because there were no human beings from whom to conceal it. The concealment began from the beginning of the world, with the entrance of subjects to whom it could be a fact.” Translation. The mystery which has been kept hidden from the ages and from the generations, but now was made known to His saints. (1:27) “Would” is  (qelw), “to desire.” Thus the translation reads, “to whom God desired to make known.” Lightfoot says; “It was God’s grace, it was no merit of their own.” As to the words, “the riches of the glory of this mystery,” Vincent says; “The mystery of the admission of the Gentiles to the gospel covenant, now revealed through Paul’s preaching, was divinely rich and glorious.… The richness exhibited itself in the free dispensation of the gospel to the Gentile as well as the Jew. It was not limited by national lines.” The wealth of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles is Christ. Lightfoot explains; “i.e., ‘as exhibited among the Gentiles.’ It was just here that this ‘mystery,’ this dispensation of grace, achieved its greatest triumphs and displayed its transcendant glory.… Here too was its wealth; for it overflowed all barriers of caste or race. Judaism was ‘beggarly’ (Gal. 4:9) in comparison, since its treasures sufficed only for a few.” As to the words, “the hope of the glory,” Vincent says; “The Gentiles, in receiving the manifestation of Christ, did not realize all its glory. The full glory of the inheritance was a hope, to be realized when Christ should appear.… Glory refers to the glory of the mystery; hence the glory consummated at Christ” coming—the glory which shall be revealed.” Translation. To whom God desired to make known what is the wealth of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the

hope of the glory. (1:28) “Whom” goes back to Christ. Paul preached, no a system of doctrine so much as a Person, the Lord Jesus. His statements regarding that Person and what He did on the Cross, constituted the doctrine he preached. “Preached” is  (kataggelw), “to announce.” “Warning” is  (nouqetew), “to admonish, exhort warn.” “Teaching” is  (didaskw), “to instruct.” Lightfoot says “The two words present complementary aspects of the preacher’s duty, and are related the one to the other, as repentance to faith warning to repent, instructing in the faith.” Commenting on the repetition of the word “every,” Lightfoot says; “three times repeated for the sake of emphasizing the universality of the gospel. This great truth for which Paul gave his life, was now again endangered by the doctrine of an intellectual exclusiveness taught by the Gnosticizers at Colossae, as before it had been endangered by the doctrine of a ceremonial exclusiveness taught by the Judaizers in Galatia.” “In all wisdom” is more properly “in every wisdom,” that is, “in every kind of wisdom.” Lightfoot says; “The Gnostic spoke of the blind faith for the many, of the higher  (Gnwsi") (knowledge) for the few. Paul declares that the fullest wisdom is offered to all alike. The character of the teaching is as free from restriction, as are the qualifications of the recipient.” The word “perfect” is teleios (teleio") which when used of a believer as it is here, means “mature,” spiritually mature and complete. Vincent says that “there may be in this word, a hint of its use in the ancient mysteries to designate the fully instructed as distinguished from the novices.” Lightfoot says; “The language of the heathen mysteries is transferred by Paul to the Christian dispensation, that he may the more effectively contrast the things signified. The true gospel also has its mysteries, its hierophants (iJerofant") (priests), its initiation; but these are open to all alike. In Christ, every believer is teleios (teleio"), fully initiated, for he has been admitted as an eye-witness of its most profound, most awful secrets.” Translation. Whom we are constantly announcing, admonishing every man and instructing every man in every wisdom in that we may present every man fully mature in Christ Jesus. (1:29) “Labor” is  (kopiaw), “to grow weary, exhausted, to labor with wearisome effort, to labor to the point of exhaustion.” Lightfoot says; “This word is used especially of the labor undergone by the athlete in his training, and therefore fitly introduces the metaphor of  (ajgwnizomai) (to contend in athletic games)” (striving). “Working” is energeia (ejnergeia), “working, efficiency, used only of superhuman power, whether of God or the devil.” It is power in exercise. Our word “energy” is derived from this word. “Mightily” is dunamis (dunami"), “power” in the sense of natural inherent ability. Expositors says; “The struggle is carried on in proportion, not to his natural powers, but to the mightily working energy of Christ within him.” Translation. To which end also I am constantly laboring to the point of exhaustion, engaging in a contest according to His efficient power in exercise which is working in me in power.

CHAPTER TWO (2:1) The better translation is, “For I desire you to know.” There is no optative of wishing here, just the plain indicative mode. Paul is imparting some information. “Conflict” is  (ajgwn), continuing the metaphor of 1:29 in the word “striving,”  (ajgwnizomai). The noun refers to the arena of the contest to which  (ajgwnizomai) in the preceding verse has reference. The conflict could be either outward or inward, fightings without or fears within. Here it is the inward struggle, the wrestling in prayer for the Colossian saints (Lightfoot). Translation. For I desire you to know how great a conflict I am having in your behalf and in behalf of those in Laodicea, and as many as have not seen my face in the flesh. (2:2, 3) “Comforted” is  (parakalew), “encouraged, confirmed.” The word “comfort” had these meanings when the a.v., was translated. In the words “being knit together,” Expositors says; “there may be a reference to the divisive tendencies of the false teaching.” The translation reads so far: “In order that your hearts may be established, having been knit together in love and resulting in all the wealth of the full assurance of the understanding, resulting in a full knowledge of the mystery of God, Christ, in whom are all the treasures of the wisdom and of knowledge, hidden ones.” The words, “of the Father,” are not in the best manuscripts. The word “Christ” is in the same case as “mystery,” placing it in apposition with it. The mystery is Christ. The word “hid” is plural in number and an adjective describing “treasures.” They are hidden treasures. The words, “to the acknowledgment of,” are  (eij" ejpignwsin), “resulting in a full knowledge.” Expositors comments: “The force of this passage then is this: all, and not merely some of the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are contained in Christ; therefore the search for them outside of Him is doomed to failure. But not only are they in Christ, but they are contained in a hidden way. Therefore they do not lie on the surface, but must be sought for earnestly, as men seek for hidden treasure. They are not matters of external observances, such as the false teachers enjoined, but to be apprehended by deep and serious meditation.” Translation. In order that your hearts may be established, having been knit together in the sphere of love and resulting in all the wealth of the full assurance of the understanding, resulting in a full knowledge of the mystery of God, Christ, in whom are all the treasures of the wisdom and knowledge, hidden ones. (2:4) Commenting on the words, “And this I say,” Lightfoot quotes Paul as saying in effect, “I say all this to you, lest you should be led astray by those false teachers who speak of another knowledge, of other mysteries.” “Beguile” is paralogizomai (paralogizomai), literally, “to reason alongside,” thus, “to reckon wrong, to deceive by false reasoning, delude, to lead astray by false reasoning.” “Enticing words” is pithanlogia (piqanlogia), from  (peiqw), “to persuade,” and logos (logo"), “word,” thus,

“persuasive words, speech adapted to persuade, discourse in which probable arguments arc adduced”; in a bad sense, “persuasiveness of speech, specious discourse leading others into error.” Translation. This I am saying in order that no one may be leading you astray by false reasoning with specious discourse. (2:5) The phrase “in the spirit” refers to Paul’s human spirit. “It is the common antithesis of the flesh and the Spirit, or body and spirit” (Lightfoot). The words, “rejoicing and beholding,” the same authority says, “must not be regarded as a logical inversion. The contemplation of their orderly array, though it might have been the first cause, was afterwards the consequence of the apostle’s rejoicing. He looked because it gave him satisfaction to look.” “Order” is taxis (taxi"), a military term speaking of an orderly array of soldiers. Paul wrote this from his prison in Rome where he had constant contact with soldiers. “Steadfastness” is  (sterewma), another military word, a noun form coming from the verb  (stereow), “to make solid.” First Maccabees has the verb; “he solidified the battle, massed his lines.” “Faith is represented as a host solidly drawn up: your solid front, close phalanx” (Vincent). Expositors says; “It is clear that the Church as a whole remained true to the doctrine it had been taught.” Translation. For, as is the case, I am in fact absent in my flesh, yet I am with you in my spirit, rejoicing and beholding your orderly array and the solid front of your faith in Christ. (2:6, 7) “As” is  (wJ"), “In the same manner as, like as.” “Received” is  (paralambanw), “to take to, to join to one’s self.” The simple verb  (lambanw) means “to appropriate,” the prefixed preposition para (para), “beside,” thus, “to take to one’s side,” thus “to personally appropriate to one’s self.” Expositors says; “ (paralambanw) is practically equivalent to  (manqanw) ‘to receive by instruction,’ rather than received into the heart.” That is, Paul is speaking of the doctrines regarding the Person and Work of the Lord Jesus, rather than of Him personally, for the former were involved in the Colossian heresy. The exhortation therefore is that in the same manner as the Colossian saints received the instruction regarding Christ as to His Person and Work, they should also order their behavior. They are to keep to the doctrines pertaining to Him in which they were first instructed by Paul. Regarding the words, “Christ Jesus the Lord,” Vincent says; “The Christ, specially defined by the following words, thus emphasizing the personal Christ rather than the gospel, because the true doctrine of Christ’s Person was perverted by the Colossian teachers. The Christ, even, Jesus, the Lord.” “Rooted” is a perfect participle in the Greek text expressing an abiding result, “having been rooted with the present result that you are firmly anchored.” “Built up” is a present participle, speaking of continuous action, “being constantly built up.” Vincent says; “Note the changing metaphor from the solidity of military array to walking, rooting of a tree, and then to building.” “In Him” is  (ejn aujtwi). “Rather than upon Him, as might have been expected. In this and in the Ephesian epistle, Christ is represented as the sphere within which the building goes on. Compare Ephesians 2:20. The whole upbuilding of the Church proceeds within the compass of Christ’s personality, life, and power” (Vincent).

“Stablished” is  (bebaiow), “to make firm, establish.” A present participle, emphasizing continuous action, it refers to a process going on, “constantly being established.” “In the faith” is  (thi pistei), which Lightfoot says is dative of the instrument, and which in modern grammar is called the instrumental case. He translates, “by your faith,” making “faith” the instrument by which they were being established. Alford and Expositors demur, and take this as a dative of reference, Alford saying that there is no question of instrumental of means in this passage. Thus, the translation would be, “constantly being established with reference to your faith.” “Abounding” is  (perisseuw), “to be in abundance.” This phrase qualifying “faith” seems conclusive for the latter interpretation. That is, as their faith was constantly being established, they would have it in abundance. “Therein” is  (ejn aujtwi), which Nestle omits and Westcott and Hort bracket. It appeared in some manuscripts. Thanksgiving is the sphere in which the abundance is manifested. Translation. In the same manner, therefore, as you received the Christ, Jesus, the Lord, in Him be constantly ordering your behavior, having been rooted, with the present result that you are firmly anchored, and constantly being built up in Him and constantly being established with reference to your faith even as you were instructed, abounding in it in the sphere of thanksgiving. (2:8) “Beware” is blepete (blepete), “Be constantly looking out, keep a watchful eye ever open.” Lightfoot says; “The form of the sentence is a measure of the imminence of the peril.” Expositors says; “The future indicative after  (mh) (not) implies a more serious estimate of the danger than the subjunctive.” The Greek is, “Be ever on your guard lest there shall be anyone who spoils you.” “Spoil” is  (sulagwgew), “to carry off booty, to carry off as a captive and slave.” Expositors translates, “lead you away as prey.” Vincent says: “The a.v., is ambiguous, and might be taken to mean corrupt or damage you.” “Philosophy” is philosophia (filosofia). Vincent says; “It had originally a good meaning, the love of wisdom, but is used by Paul in the sense of vain speculation, and with special reference to its being the name by which the false teachers at Colossae designated not only their speculative system, but also their practical system, so that it covered their ascetic practices no less than their mysticism. Bishop Lightfoot remarks upon the fact that philosophy, by which the Greeks expressed the highest effort of the intellect, and virtue ( (ajreth)), their expression for the highest moral excellence, are each used but once by Paul, showing ‘that the gospel had deposed the terms as inadequate to the higher standard, whether of knowledge or practice, which it had introduced.’ ” The definite article appears before “philosophy.” It is “his philosophy.” “And” is kai (kai), and should here be rendered “even,” making the words “vain deceit,” explanatory of “philosophy.” Paul’s warning is not against all philosophy, only against that which is vain deceit, as that of Colossian heretics. “Vain” is kenos (keno"), “empty, devoid of truth, futile, fruitless, without effect.” It is used of things that will not succeed, that are to no purpose, that are in vain. “Tradition” is paradosis (paradosi"), “that which is handed down” from generation to generation. The phrase describes “philosophy” and “vain deceit.” Vincent says; “The term is especially appropriate to the Judaeo-Gnostic teachings in Colossae, which depended for their authority, not on ancient writings, but on tradition.

The later mystical theology or metaphysic of the Jews was called Kabbala, literally meaning reception or received doctrines, tradition.” “Rudiments” is stoicheia (stoiceia), “rudimentary teachings,” such as “ceremonialism, meats, drinks, washings, Essenic asceticism, pagan symbolic mysteries and initiatory rites—all belonged to a rudimentary moral stage” (Vincent). “World” is kosmos (kosmo"). Lightfoot defines; “belonging to the sphere of material and external things.” Expositors says of the phrase, “not after Christ”; “Christ means the Person of Christ, not teaching about Christ … The false teachers put these angels in the place of Christ.” Translation. Be ever on your guard lest there shall be someone who leads you astray through his vain speculation, even futile deceit, which is according to the tradition of men, according to the rudimentary teachings of the world, and not according to Christ. (2:9) Commenting on the contents of this verse, Lightfool says; “The apostle justifies the foregoing charge that the doctrine was not according to Christ: ‘In Christ dwells the whole  (plhrwma) (fulness, plenitude), the entire fulness of the Godhead, whereas they represent it to you as dispersed among several spiritual agencies. Christ is the fountain-head of all spiritual life, whereas they teach you to seek it in communion with inferior creatures.’ ” “Dwelleth” is katoikei (katoikei).  (ÆOikew) means “to be at home.” Kata (Kata), prefixed, means “down,” thus showing permanence. The compound verb was used of the permanent residents of a town as compared with the transient community. The verb is in the present tense, showing durative action. The translation reads: “Because in Him there is continuously and permanently at home all the fulness of the Godhead in bodily fashion.” Vincent says; “The indwelling of the divine fulness in Him is characteristic of Him as Christ, from all ages and to all ages. Hence the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in Him before His incarnation, when He was ‘in the form of God’ (Phil. 2:6). The Word in the beginning was with God and was God (John 1:1). It dwelt in Him during His incarnation. It was the Word that became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth, and His glory which was beheld was the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father (John 1:14; compare I John 1:1–3). The fulness of the Godhead dwells in His glorified humanity in heaven. The fulness of the Godhead dwells in Him in a bodily way, clothed with a body. This means that it dwells in Him as one having a human body. This could not be true of His pre-incarnate state, when He was ‘in the form of God,’ for the human body was taken out by Him in the fulness of time, when He became in the likeness of men (Phil. 2:7), when the Word became flesh. The fulness of the Godhead dwelt in His person from His birth to His ascension. He carried His human body with Him into heaven, and in His glorified body now and ever dwells the fulness of the Godhead.” Meyer says; “What a contrast to the human tradition and the rudiments of the world.” Vincent adds; “What a contrast to the spiritual agencies conceived as intermediate between God and men, in each of which the divine fulness was abridged and the divine glory shaded, in proportion to the remoteness from God in successive emanation.” “All the fulness” is  (pan to plhrwma), which Lightfoot defines as “the totality of the divine powers and attributes.” As to the word “godhead,” it is found three times in the a.v., of the New Testament,

Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20, and in this verse. The one word “Godhead” is the translation of two Greek words which have a real distinction between them, a distinction that grounds itself on their different derivations. In Romans 1:20 we have the word  (qeioth"). In this word, Trench says that “Paul is declaring how much of God may be known from the revelation of Himself which He has made in nature, from those vestiges of Himself which men may everywhere trace in the world around them. Yet it is not the personal God whom any man may learn to know by these aids: He can be known only by the revelation of Himself in His Son; but only His divine attributes, His majesty and glory.… And it is not to be doubted that St. Paul uses this vaguer, more abstract, and less personal word, just because he would affirm that men may know God’s power and majesty, His theia dunamis (qeia dunami") (divine power) (II Pet. 1:3), from His works; but would not imply that they may know Himself from these, or from anything short of the revelation of His eternal Word. Motives not dissimilar induce him to use to theion (to qeion) rather than ho theos (oJ qeo") in addressing the Athenians on Mars’ Hill (Acts 17:29).” In Romans 1:20, Paul states that the invisible things of God, here, His eternal power and His  (qeioth"), His divinity, namely, the fact that He is a Being having divine attributes, are clearly seen by man through the created universe. Man, reasoning upon the basis of the law of cause and effect, namely, that every effect demands an adequate cause, comes to the conclusion that the universe as an effect demands an adequate cause, and that adequate cause must be a Being having divine attributes. It was as the creator of the universe that fallen man knew God (v. 21). Perhaps the word “Godhead” is the best oneword translation of  (qeioth") in Romans 1:20. But the term must be explained as above for a proper exegesis of this passage. The same is true of Acts 17:29. When Paul speaks of all men as the offspring of God, he uses the word theos (qeo") for “God,” the word that implies deity as Paul knows God. But when he speaks of the Greeks’ conception of God or of what they as pagans might conceive God to be, he uses  (qeioth"), for the Greeks could, apart from the revelation of God in Christ, only know Him as a Being of divine attributes. In Colossians 2:9,  (qeoth") is used. Here Trench says, “Paul is declaring that in the Son there dwells all the fulness of absolute Godhead; they were no mere rays of divine glory which gilded Him, lighting up His Person for a season and with splendor not His own; but He was, and is, absolute and perfect God; and the apostle uses  (qeoth") to express this essential and personal Godhead of the Son.” Here the word “divinity” will not do, only the word “deity.” It is well in these days of apostasy, to speak of the deity of the Lord Jesus, not using the word “divinity” when we are referring to the fact that He is Very God. Modernism believes in His divinity, but in a way different from the scriptural conception of the term. Modernism has the pantheistic conception of the deity permeating all things and every man. Thus divinity, it says, is resident in every human being. It was resident in Christ as in all men. The difference between the divinity of Christ and that of all other men, it says, is one of degree, not of kind. Paul never speaks of the divinity of Christ, only of His deity. Our Lord has divine attributes since He is deity, but that is quite another matter from the Modernistic conception. Translation. Because in Him there is continuously and permanently at home all the fulness of the Godhead in bodily fashion. (2:10) “Are complete” is  (plhrow), the verbal form of our word 

(plhrwma). It is a participle in the perfect tense. Literally it is, “And you are in Him, having been filled full, with the present result that you are in a state of fulness.” Paul says in Ephesians 3:19, “In order that you may be filled with all the fulness of God.” Vincent says; “Not, ye are made full in Him, but ye are in Him, made full. In Him dwells the fulness; being in Him, ye are filled.” Lightfoot says; “Being fulfilled with a direct reference to the preceding  (plhrwma); ‘your fulness comes from His fulness; His  (plhrwma) (fulness) is transfused into you by virtue of your incorporation in Him.’… Hence also the Church, as ideally regarded, is called the  (plhrwma) (fulness) of Christ because all His graces and energies are communicated to her.” We must be careful to note that the fulness of God communicated to the saints does not consist of the divine essence which is alone possessed by Deity, but of such qualities as holiness, righteousness, and the like, as in Ephesians 3:19. Expositors says; “What Paul means is that in Christ they find the satisfaction of every spiritual want. It therefore follows of itself that they do not need the angelic powers. That Christ is the Head of every principality and power is a further reason why they should not seek to them. All they need they have in Christ.” Translation. And you are in Him, having been completely filled full, with the present result that you are in a state of fulness, in Him who is the Head of every principality and authority. (2:11) Lightfoot has a valuable note. “The previous verses have dealt with the theological tenets of the false teachers. The apostle now turns to their practical errors. ‘You do not need the circumcision of the flesh; for you have received the circumcision of the heart. The distinguishing features of this higher circumcision are threefold: (1) It is not external but inward, not made with hands, but wrought by the Spirit. (2) It divests not of a part only of the flesh, but of the whole body of carnal affections. (3) It is the circumcision not of Moses nor of the patriarchs, but of Christ.’ Thus, it is distinguished, as regards first its character, second, its extent, and third, its author.” Vincent has an excellent word study on the words “putting off.” “The verb ekduomai (ejkduomai) means to strip off from one’s self, as clothes or armor: ek (ejk), out of, having the force of getting out of one’s garments. By the addition to the verb of apo (ajpo), from, there is added to the idea of getting out of one’s clothes, that of getting away from them; so that the word is a strong expression for wholly putting away from one’s self. In the putting off, is, in the act or process of. Not by.” The expression, “the body of the sins of the flesh,” needs careful study. The words “of the sins,” are not in the best texts, so that the expression is “the body of the flesh.” Lightfoot, Expositors, Alford, and Vincent concur in the teaching that the body here is the physical body, and the flesh is indwelling sin. The body that was put off when the Colossian saints were saved was the physical body as dominated by the totally depraved nature. This body, while still the possession of the believer, was put off in the sense that it was rendered inoperative so far as the constant control of the evil nature was concerned. Paul states the same truth in Romans 6:6 when he says: “Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him in order that the body possessed by sin might be rendered inoperative, so that henceforth we are not yielding an habitual slave’s obedience to sin.” The power of the sinful nature was broken, and it was deprived of its control over the body. This was accomplished “by the circumcision of Christ.” Vincent defines: “The spiritual

circumcision effected through Christ. In, as above. The fleshly circumcision removed only aportion of the body. In spiritual circumcision, through Christ, the whole corrupt, carnal nature is put away like a garment which is taken off and laid aside.” We must be careful to note here that the evil nature is not eradicated. That remains in the believer until death (I John 1:8). Its power is broken, and it has no more power over the believer than he allows it to have. It is the physical body as dominated by the evil nature that is put away in favor of a physical body now dominated by the divine nature. Translation. In whom you were circumcised by a circumcision not effected by hand, in the putting off and away from yourselves the body of the flesh in the circumcision of Christ. (2:12) To understand this verse we must go back to Romans 6:3, 4, where Paul says: “Do you not know that so many of us as were placed in Jesus Christ, were introduced into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him by this aforementioned introduction into His death in order that just as Christ was raised up from among the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also may be able to order our behavior in the energy of a new life imparted.” The believing sinner’s identification with Christ in His death, broke the power of indwelling sin. His identification with Him in His resurrection, resulted in the impartation of the divine nature. The baptism (placing, introduction into) is that effected by the Holy Spirit. The baptism in our Colossian passage is the same. Thus, “risen with Him” does not refer to our future physical resurrection, but to that spiritual resurrection from a sinful state into divine life. This was in answer to our faith in the operation of God who raised Christ from the dead. It is only fair to the reader to say that the authorities the author is consulting, all see water baptism in this passage. The words, “the placing into,” give the sense in which the Greek reader of the first century would understand this text. Translation. Having been entombed with Him in the placing into, in which placing into also you were raised with His through your faith in the effectual working energy of the God who raised Him out from among the dead. (2:13) “You” refers to Gentiles, as in the parallel passages in Ephesians 1:13, 2:1, 11, 13, 17, 22, 3:2, 4:17. The Colossian church was composed mainly of Gentiles. “Sins” is  (paraptwma), “a fall beside, a lapse or deviation from the truth and uprightness, a trespass.” The word is dative of reference. They were dead with reference to their trespasses. That is, the death spoken of was spiritual death, a death involving wrong doing. They were physically alive while walking around in a state of spiritual death, devoid of the life of God and activated by a totally depraved nature. They were also dead with reference to the uncircumcision of their flesh. Lightfoot says: “The  (paraptwma) (trespasses) are the actual definite transgressions, while the  (ajkrobustia th" sarka") (uncircumcision of the flesh) is the impure carnal disposition which prompts them.… The external fact is mentioned, not for its own sake, but for its symbolical meaning. The outward uncircumcision of the Gentiles is a type of their unchastened carnal mind. In other words, though the literal meaning is not excluded, the spiritual reference is most prominent.” Paul is still talking about the fact that when God saves a person, He breaks the power

of the indwelling sinful nature. He speaks of that in Romans 6:3, 4, and here in Colossians 2:11, in the words, “in putting off the body of the flesh.” The Colossians in their unsaved state, were possessed by the sinful nature, the power of which is not cut off until salvation. Thus, their flesh was uncircumcised. “Quickened together” is  (sunzwpoiew), “to make alive together with” some one else. This occurred when our Lord was raised from the dead. All believers at that time in the mind and purpose of God were identified with Him in His resurrection, and potentially given divine life, which latter was actually received by them when they placed their faith in Him as Saviour. Translation. And you being dead with reference to your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He gave life together with Him, having in grace forgiven you all your trespasses. (2:14) “Blotting out” is  (ejxaleifw), “to wipe off, wipe away, to obliterate, erase.” “Handwriting” is cheirographon (ceirografon), “an autograph, a note of hand, a bond.” This bond consisted of ordinances. This bond was against us, both Jew and Gentile. Vincent says: “As Paul declares this bond to be against us, including both Jews and Gentiles, the reference, while primarily to the Mosaic law, is to be taken in a wider sense, as including the moral law of God in general, which applied to the Gentiles as much as to the Jews. See Romans 3:19. The law is frequently conceived by Paul with this wider reference, as a principle which has its chief representative in the Mosaic law, but the applications of which are much wider. This law is conceived here as a bond, a bill of debt, standing against those who have not received Christ. As the form of error at Colossae was largely Judaic, insisting on the Jewish ceremonial law, the phrase is probably colored by this fact.” Paul says that this bond was not only against us, but contrary to us. Vincent says: “He has just said which was against us; which stood to our debt, binding us legally. This phrase enlarges on that idea, emphasizing the hostile character of the bond, as a hindrance. Compare Romans 4:15, 5:20, I Corinthians 15:56; Galatians 3:23. ‘Law is against us, because it comes like a taskmaster, bidding us do, but neither putting the inclination into our hearts nor the power in our hands. And law is against us, because the revelation of unfulfilled duty is the accusation of the defaulter, and a revelation to him of his guilt. And law is against us, because it comes with threatenings and foretastes of penalty and pain. Thus, as standard, accuser, and avenger it is against us’ (Maclaren).” “Took out of the way” is in the Greek, literally, “took out of the midst.” Our Lord nailed it to the Cross. Again Vincent is helpful: “The law with its decrees was abolished in Christ’s death, as if crucified with Him. It was no longer in the midst, in the foreground, as a debtor’s obligation is perpetually before him, embarrassing his whole life.” Translation. Having obliterated the bond consisting of ordinances, the one against us, which was directly opposed to us, and it He removed out of the midst with the result that it is no longer there, having nailed it to the Cross. (2:15) The principalities and authorities here are the same as in Ephesians 6:12, the demons of Satan in the atmosphere of this earth. Our Lord, after His death on the Cross,

needed to present Himself at the heavenly Mercy Seat in His bloodless body glorified, as the great High Priest, thus completing the atonement, fulfilling the o.t. type when the High Priest on the Day of Atonement killed the sacrifice at the Brazen Altar and then carried the blood into the Holy of Holies, sprinkling it on the Mercy Seat, thus completing in type the atonement for sin. In order to do this, our Lord had to pass through the kingdoms of Satan in the air. The demons offered opposition. He, stripping them off and away from Himself (apekduomai (ajpekduomai) spoiled a.v.), displayed them boldly ( (deigmatizw), “to make an example of,” “made a shew of” a.v.), leading them in triumph in it. These are the captives taken by our Lord in His ascension as He left the tomb (Eph. 4:8). Translation. Having stripped off and away from Himself the principalities and authorities, He boldly made an example of them, leading them in triumph in it. (2:16, 17) After informing His readers that the bond consisting of ordinances was obliterated, Paul tells them that they should not go back to their former obedience to it. “Judge” is  (krinw), “take you to task, sit in judgment.” “Meat” is  (brwsi"), “the act of eating,” and “drink” is posis (posi"), “the act of drinking.” Expositors comments: “ (brwsei kai posei); ‘eating and drinking,’ not food and drink, for which Paul would have used  (brwma) and poma (poma). The question is not altogether between lawful and unlawful food, but between eating and drinking or abstinence. Asceticism rather than ritual cleanness is in his mind. The Law is not ascetic in its character, its prohibitions of meats rests on the view that they are unclean, and drinks are forbidden, save in exceptional cases, and then not for ascetic reasons. But these injunctions stand along with ordinances of the Law itself, partly, because they may have been regarded as extensions of its principles, partly, we may suppose, because, like the Law, they were attributed to the angels by the false teachers.” Vincent says: “The Mosaic law contained very few provisions concerning drinks. See Leviticus 10:9, 11:34, 36; Numbers 6:3. Hence it is probable that the false teachers had extended the prohibitions as to the use of wine to all Christians. The Essenes abjured both wine and animal food.” “In respect” is en merei (ejn merei), “in the division or category.” Lightfoot translates, “in the matter of.” “Holy day” is  (eJorth"), “a festival or feast day.” It is not a holiday, but a holy day, a sacred day. As to the new moon, Vincent says: “The festival of the new moon is placed beside the Sabbath (Isaiah 1:13, Ezekiel 46:1). The day was celebrated by blowing of trumpets, special sacrifice, feasting, and religious instruction. Labor was suspended, and no national or private feasts were permitted to take place. The authorities were at great pains to fix accurately the commencement of the month denoted by the appearance of the new moon. Messengers were placed at commanding heights to watch the sky, and as soon as the new moon appeared, they hastened to communicate it to the synod, being allowed even to travel on the Sabbath for this purpose. The witnesses were assembled and examined, and when the judges were satisfied, the president pronounced the words it is sanctified, and the day was declared new moon.” The Sabbath here is the weekly festival of the Sabbath. As to the words, “shadow of things to come,” Vincent says: “Shadow, not sketch or outline, as if shown by body following. The Mosaic ritual system was to the great verities of the gospel what the shadow is to the man, a mere general type or resemblance. The substance belongs to the Christian economy. It is

derived from Christ, and can be realized only through union with Him.” The word “body” here means “substance, reality,” as opposed to the shadow. Translation. Stop therefore allowing anyone to be sitting in judgment upon you in eating or drinking or in the matter of a feast-day or a newmoon, or a Sabbath-day, which things are a shadow of those things about to come. But the body belongs to Christ. (2:18, 19) “Beguile of reward” is  (katabrabeuw). The word is made up of kata (kata), “against,” and  (brabeuw), “to act as a judge or umpire.” The compound word means, “to decide against, to declare unworthy of the prize.” The use of this word follows the idea of the previous verse where the act of sitting in judgment is spoken of. Vincent says: “The attitude of the false teachers would involve their sitting in judgment as to the future reward of those who refused their doctrine of angelic mediation. Paul speaks from the standpoint of their claim.” We could go a step farther and say that these false teachers would actually deprive those Christians who would be led astray by them, of their reward at the Judgment Seat of Christ by reason of the fact that their Christian experience would be affected, and in a bad way. “Voluntary” is  (qelw), “taking delight in, devoting himself to, delighting in.” Vincent says: “It falls in, in the regular participial series, with the other declarations as to the vain conceit of the teachers; signifying not their purpose or their wish to deprive the Christians of their reward, but their vain enthusiasm for their false doctrine, and their conceited self-complacency which prompted them to sit as judges. The worship of angels involved a show of humility, an affectation of superior reverence for God, as shown in the reluctance to attempt to approach God otherwise than indirectly: in its assumption that humanity, debased by the contact with matter, must reach after God through successive grades of intermediate beings.” As to the word “humility,”  (tapeinofrosunh), in this setting, Lightfoot says: “Humility is a vice with heathen moralists, but a virtue with Christian apostles. In this passage, which, with verse 23, forms the sole exception to the general language of the apostles, the divergence is rather apparent than real. The disparagement is in the accompaniments and not in the word itself. Humility, when it becomes selfconscious, ceases to have any value; and self-consciousness at least, if not affection, is implied by  (qelw) (voluntary a.v.). Moreover, the character of the humility in this case is further defined as a worshipping of angels, which was altogether a perversion of the truth.” Regarding the worship of angels, Lightfoot says: “This word  (qrhskeia) (worship) is closely connected with the preceding by the bond of union of the same preposition. There was an officious parade of humility in selecting these lower beings as intercessors, rather than appealing directly to the throne of grace. The word refers properly to the external rites of religion, and so gets to signify an over-scrupulous devotion to external forms.” “Intruding” is  (ejmbateuw), “to enter, investigate, search into, scrutinize minutely.” The word “not” is not in the best texts. These false teachers scrutinized minutely the things which they imagined or professed to have seen in a vision. “Vainly” is  (eijkh), “in vain, without success or effort.” “Puffed up” is  (fusiow), “to inflate, blow up, to be puffed up, bear one’s self loftily, be proud.” The translation reads,

“being futilely puffed up.” “Fleshly mind” is rather “by the mind of the flesh.” Vincent says: “The intellectual faculty in its moral aspects as determined by the fleshly, sinful nature.… The teachers boasted that they were guided by the higher reason. Paul describes their higher reason as carnal.” The word “Head” here refers to our Lord as Head of His Body, the Church. Lightfoot says: “the Head regarded as a title, so that a person is at once suggested, and the relative which follows is masculine.” The English reader should understand that the Greek word for “head,”  (kefalh), is feminine, and that a relative pronoun agrees with its antecedent in gender. The pronoun here is masculine and refers back to “Head.” This violates grammar and for the purpose of showing the personality of the Head. Lightfoot again says: “The supplication and worship of angels is a substitution of inferior members for the Head, which is the only source of spiritual life and energy.” Expositors says: “Paul proceeds to point out that so far from securing spiritual growth of a higher order, the false teaching, by loosening the hold on Christ, prevented any growth at all, since it obstructed or severed the very channel of spiritual life.” The same authority translates, “and not holding fast the head.” As to the words, “joints and bands,” Vincent says: “The word (joints) means primarily touching, and is used in classical Greek of the touch upon harpstrings, or the grip of a wrestler, not quite the same as joints in the sense of the parts in contact, but the relations between the adjacent parts. The actual connection is expressed by bands or ligaments.” Lightfoot says: “When applied to the human body, they would be ‘joints,’ provided that we use the word accurately of the relations between contiguous limbs, and not loosely of the parts of the limbs themselves in the neighborhood of the contact.” As to the words, “knit together,” Lightfoot says: “The discoveries of modern physiology have invested the apostle’s language with far greater distinctness and force than it can have worn to his own contemporaries. Any exposition of the nervous system more especially reads like a commentary on his image of the relations between the body and the head. At every turn we meet with some fresh illustration which kindles it with a flood of light. The volition communicated from the brain to the limbs, the sensations of the extremities telegraphed back to the brain, the absolute sympathy between the head and the members, the instantaneous paralysis ensuing on the interruption of continuity, all these add to the completeness and life of the image.” How this truth should give us pause as to the delicate and close relations which we should maintain in unbroken fellowship with our Lord. Think of the instant paralysis of our spiritual life and service that obtains when sin enters our experience. As to the words, “having nourishment ministered,” Lightfoot says: “The two functions performed by the joints and bands, are first, the supply of nutriment, and second, the compacting of the frame (knit together). In other words, they are the communication of life and energy, and the preservation of unity and order. The source of all is Christ Himself, the Head; but the channels of communication are the different members of His body, in their relation one to another.… By the two-fold means of contact and attachment, nutriment has been diffused and structural unity has been attained, but these are not the ultimate result; they are only intermediate processes; the end is growth.” Concerning the words, “of God,” Lightfoot has this valuable note: “i.e., which partakes of God, which belongs to God, which has its abode in God. Thus the finite is truly united with the Infinite; the end which the false teachers strove in vain to compass is attained; the gospel vindicates itself as the true theanthropism (union of the human being

with God), after which the human heart is yearning and the human intellect is feeling.” Translation. Let no one as a judge declare you unworthy of a reward, taking delight in a self-imposed humility and a worship of the angels, scrutinizing minutely the things he has seen, being futilely puffed up by the mind of the flesh, and not holding fast the Head out from whom all the body, through the instrumentality of the joints and ligaments, being constantly supplied with nourishment and being constantly compacted together, increases with the increase wrought by God. (2:20–23) “If ye be dead” is ei apethanete (eij ajpeqanete), the conditional particle of a fulfilled condition, and the aorist indicative verb which speaks of a past action. It is, “in view of the fact that you died with Christ,” or, “if, as is the case, you died with Christ.” Death means separation. The Colossian believers died with Christ at the Cross (Romans 6:2–4), and thus were separated from all such things as are mentioned in verses 20–23. Expositors says: “The apostle, recalling them to the time of their conversion, points out how inconsistent with a death to the elemental spirits any submission to ordinances belonging to their sphere would be. The death of the believer with Christ is a death to his old relations, to sin, law, guilt, the world. It is a death which Christ has Himself undergone (Romans 6:10). Here it is specially their death to the angels who had ruled their old life, and under whose charge the Law and its ceremonies especially stood. They had died with Christ to legalism, how absurd then for ordinances to be imposed upon them.” “Wherefore” is not in the best texts. “Rudiments” is stoicheia (stoiceia), “elementary teachings and practices.” “World” has its ethical sense, “the sum-total of human life in the ordered world, considered apart from, alienated from, and hostile to God, and of the earthly things which seduce from God.” “Are ye subject to ordinances” is  (dogmatizw), “subject yourselves to ordinances.” The verb is better taken as passive. “Touch” is haptomai (aJptomai), “to fasten one’s self to, to cling to.” The idea is more than that of inadvertently touching. It refers to a conscious effort to touch. “Handle” is  (qigganw), “to handle in a superficial or transitory way.” Lightfoot says: “These prohibitions relate to defilement contrasted in diverse ways by contact with impure objects. Some were doubtless reenactments of the Mosaic law, while others would be exaggerations or additions of a rigorous asceticism, such as we find among the Essene prototypes of these Colossian heretics, e.g. the avoidance of oil, of wine, or of flesh-meat, the shunning of contact with a stranger or a religious inferior, and the like.” “Which” refers to the meats and the drinks. The words, “are to perish,” are estin eis phthoran (ejstin eij" fqoran), “are for corruption; destined for (eis (eij")). Corruption, in the physical sense of decomposition” (Vincent). “With the using” is  (thi ajpocrhsei), “rather, using up, consumption. Their very using destroys them” (Vincent). The phrase, “after the commandments and doctrines of men,” describes the rudiments of verse 20. “Commandment” is entalma (ejntalma), “a precept,” and “doctrines” is didaskalia (didaskalia), “teachings, doctrinal instructions.” “Which things” is hatina (aJtina). “The relative and indefinite pronoun classifies, putting these precepts and teachings, and all that are like them in one category: a class of things

which” (Vincent). These “have a show of wisdom.” “Show” is logon (logon), “a plausible reason, a show of reason,” hence, a reputation for wisdom. “Will worship” is  (ejqeloqrhskeia), “voluntary, arbitrary worship, a worship which one devises and prescribes for himself, contrary to the contents and nature of the faith which ought to be directed to Christ” (Thayer). Lightfoot defines, “in volunteered, self-imposed, officious, supererogatory service, one or both of these two ideas, (1) excessive readiness, officious zeal, (2) affectation, unreality, are involved in this and similar compounds.” The word “humility” is here disparaged by its connection (Lightfoot). Vincent says: “voluntary and affected.” “Neglecting of the body” is  (ajfeidiai swmato"), “hard treatment of the body.” The word apheidia (ajfeidia) is from pheidomai (feidomai), “to spare,” and Alpha privative, the compound word meaning, “unsparing treatment or severity.” The word “honor” is  (timh). Vincent defines: “of any value.” “The real value of these practices contrasted with their popular estimation. Price or value is the original meaning of  (timh), and its use in this sense is frequent in classical Greek.” Commenting on the words, “to the satisfying of the flesh,” the same authority says: “To means as a remedy against.  (Plhsmonhn) (satisfying) denotes repletion, surfeiting. Paul says that these ascetic observances, while they appeal to men as indications of superior wisdom and piety, have no value as remedies against sensual indulgence.” Lightfoot translates: “not of any value to remedy indulgence of the flesh.” Translation. In view of the fact that you died with Christ from the rudimentary things of the world, why, as living in the world, are you subjecting yourselves to ordinances: Do not begin to touch, neither begin to taste, nor begin to handle, which things all are destined for corruption in their consumption; (ordinances) which are according to the precepts and teachings of men? Which things as a class have a reputation for wisdom in a voluntary worship and an affected humility and an unsparing and severe treatment of the body, not of any value as a remedy against the indulgence of the flesh.

CHAPTER THREE (3:1) “If ye be risen” is subjunctive and presents a hypothetical case. The Greek text has ei (eij), the particle of a fulfilled condition, followed by the indicative mode. It is, “In view of the fact, therefore, that you were raised with Christ.” Paul bases his exhortation to seek those things which are above, not on an unfulfilled hypothetical case, but upon a fulfilled condition. The people to whom he was writing, were saved. They had been identified with Christ in His resurrection (Romans 6:2–4). His was a physical resurrection out from among the dead, theirs, a spiritual resurrection out from among the spiritually dead and from a state of spiritual death into that of spiritual life. This was potential at the time Christ died, and actual for them when they placed their faith in Him as Saviour. The Greek text follows: “The things above be constantly seeking.” The word “things” is in the emphatic position, contrasting the above things with those earthly things which the heretics were seeking after. The word “above” is  (ajnw). Kata (Kata) means “down,”  (ajnw), “above, a higher place.” The reference is to heavenly things. The word is defined as to the location to which it refers by the words, “where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.” That is a place, heaven itself, where a glorified Man, Himself God

the Son, is seated, His work of salvation finished. Translation. In view of the fact, therefore, that you were raised with Christ, the things above be constantly seeking, where Christ is, on the right hand of God, seated. (3:2–4) “Set your affection” is  (fronew), “to direct one’s mind to a thing.” Lightfoot says: “The same expression repeated for emphasis; ‘You must not only seek heaven; you must also think heaven’… Here the apostle points the antithesis to controvert a Gnostic asceticism: in the Philippian letter he uses the same contrast to denounce an Epicurean sensualism. Both alike are guilty of the same fundamental error; both alike concentrate their thoughts on material, mundane things.” Vincent translates, “be minded, think.” The Revision gives, “set your mind.” Vincent says: “Seek marks the practical striving; set your mind, the inward impulse and disposition. Both must be directed at things above.” Expositors says: “ ‘The things on the earth’ are not in themselves sinful, but become so if sought and thought on in preference to the things above.” “Ye are dead” is apethanete (ajpeqanete), an aorist indicative, referring to a past fact. The translation should be, “Ye died,” that is, so far as your spiritual being is concerned, you died to, that is, were separated from the former life and everything of an evil nature that pertained to it. The word “life” is  (zwh), here, the resurrection life which the saint enjoys. It is the eternal life given him as the motivating energy and directive agent of the new kind of life he lives, together with that life lived out. It is hidden with Christ in the sense that as Vincent says; “Your new spiritual life is no longer in the sphere of the earthly and sensual, but is with the life of the risen Christ, who is unseen with God.” Expositors says: “In God asserts Christ’s own union with God, and emphasizes our union with God in Him.” “Appear” is  (fanerow), “to make manifest or visible,” in the passive voice, “to become manifest or visible.” The reference is to the second Advent when our Lord shall come from heaven with all His glorified saints in glory. Commenting on the words, “our life,” Lightfoot says: “It is not enough to have said that the life is shared with Christ. The apostle declares that the life is Christ.” Expositors comments: “This life is not always to remain hidden, it will be manifested at the second coming, and that not merely in union with Christ, for it is Christ Himself who is our Life. This is not to be toned down to mean that Christ is the possessor and giver of eternal life. Paul means quite literally what he says, that Christ is Himself the essence of the Christian life.… His manifestation therefore includes that of those who are one with Him. And this can only be a manifestation in glory.” Lightfoot says: “The veil which now shrouds your higher life from others, will then be withdrawn. The world which now persecutes, despises, ignores now, will then be blinded with the dazzling glory of the revelation.” Translation. The things above be constantly setting your mind upon, not the things on the earth; for you died, and your life has been hidden with Christ in God. When Christ shall be made visible, our life, then also you with Him shall be made visible in glory. (3:5–7) Lightfoot has a valuable note: “The false doctrine of the Gnostics had failed to check sensual indulgence (2:23). The true doctrine of the apostle has power to kill the

whole carnal man. The substitution of a comprehensive principle for special precepts—of the heavenly life in Christ for a code of minute ordinances—at length attains the end after which the Gnostic teachers have striven, and striven in vain.” “Mortify” is  (nekrow), “to put to death, to deprive of power, to destroy the strength of.” “Mortify” is obsolete English. Erasmus wrote, “Christ was mortified and killed.” Lightfoot says: “Carry out this principle of death (2:20, 3:3), and kill everything that is mundane and carnal in your being.” “Members” refer to the “physical members so far as they are employed in the service of sin” (Vincent). Paul has the same thought in mind in Romans 6:6, when he says: “Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him in order that the body possessed by sin might be rendered inoperative (in that respect), that henceforth we are not yielding an habitual slave’s obedience to sin.” God in salvation has broken the power of the evil nature over the believer’s physical body. Now, the believer is charged with the responsibility of maintaining in his experience that state of liberation, and, as the behests of the evil nature come before him, he is to put them to death, that is, refuse to obey them. The words “which are upon the earth,” describe these members as organs of the earthly, sensuous life. The words “fornication, inordinate affection,” etc., are in apposition to “members,” and denote the manner in which the members exert themselves in a sinful way (Vincent). “Fornication” is porneia (porneia), “illicit sexual intercourse in general.” “Uncleanness” is akatharsia (ajkaqarsia), “uncleanness in a moral sense, the impurity of lustful, luxurious, profligate living.” “Inordinate affection” is pathos (paqo"), “depraved passion.” “Evil concupiscence” is  (ejpiqumia kakh), “evil, wicked cravings.” “Covetousness” is pleonexia (pleonexia), “greedy desire to have more, avarice.” “Idolatry” is eidolatreia (eijdolatreia) “the worship of false gods,” used here of the worship of Mammon. The words, “the children of disobedience,” are not in the best texts. “In the which” (en hois (ejn oiJ")) refers to the things of verse 6. The Colossian saints at one time ordered their behaviour, conducted themselves (walked peripateo) in the sphere of these evil things. That is, their entire lives were circumscribed by these sins. Not a ray of light from God, not a single good thing in the sight of God penetrated that circle. That is total depravity. Translation. By a once-for-all act put to death your members, the ones upon the earth; fornication, impurity, depraved passions, wicked cravings, and avarice which is of such a nature as to be idolatry; because of which things there comes the wrath of God; in the sphere of which things also you ordered your behavior at one time when you lived in them. (3:8) “But now” says in effect, “Now that you have passed from that life of sinful conduct, see that you strip yourselves of these vices” (Expositors). “Anger” is  (ojrgh), “an abiding, settled, and habitual anger that includes in its scope the purpose of revenge.” “Wrath” is thumos (qumo"), “the boiling agitation of the feelings, a sudden violent anger.” “Malice” is kakia (kakia), “malignity, ill-will, desire to injure, wickedness, depravity.” “Blasphemy” is  (blasfhmia), “slander, detraction, speech injurious to another’s good name.” “Filthy communication” is aischrologia (aijscrologia), “foul sneaking, low and obscene speech.”

Translation. But now put away once for all also all these things; an habitual, revengeful anger, violent fits of anger, malignity, slander, obscene speech out of your mouth. (3:9–11) “Lie” is present imperative in a prohibition, forbidding the continuance of an action already going on. It is, “Stop lying to one another.” These Colossian saints had carried over into the new life, the sin of lying. They should stop lying because they had put off the old man with his practices, that person they were before they were saved, and had put on the new man, that person they were now in Christ Jesus, this new person being constantly renewed with respect to a complete and perfect knowledge which is according to the image of the One who created him. Lightfoot says: “Which is ever being renewed unto perfect knowledge, the true knowledge in Christ, as opposed to the false knowledge of the heretical teachers.” Regarding the reference to “the image of Him that created him,” the same authority offers this explanation: “This reference however does not imply an identity of the creation here mentioned with the creation of Genesis, but only an analogy between the two. The spiritual man in each believer’s heart, like the primal man in the beginning of the world, was created after God’s image. The new creation in this respect resembles the first creation. The pronoun ‘him’ cannot refer to anything else than the new man, the regenerate man … The new birth was a recreation in God’s image; the subsequent life must be a deepening of this image thus stamped upon the man.” This putting off of the old man and this putting on of the new man took place at the moment the Colossian sinner put his faith in Christ. “Where” is hopou (oJpou), “in which state,” namely, in the renewed state. “There is” is eni (ejni) from eneimi (ejneimi). The verb as used here signifies not only the fact but the impossibility. Lightfoot says: “Not only does the distinction not exist, but it cannot exist. It is a mundane distinction, and therefore has disappeared.” Expositors translates, “where there cannot be.” Vincent comments on this verse as follows: “National, ritual, intellectual, and social diversities are specified. The reference is probably shaped by the conditions of the Colossian Church, where the form of error was partly Judaistic and ceremonial, insisting on circumcision; where the presence of superior knowledge affected contempt for the rude barbarian, and where the distinction of master and slave had place as elsewhere.” Lightfoot says: “To the Jew the whole world was divided into Jews and Greeks, the privileged and unprivileged portions of mankind, religious prerogative being taken as a line of demarcation. To the Greek and Roman it was similarly divided into Greeks and Barbarians, again the privileged and unprivileged portion of the human race, civilization and culture being now the criterion of distinction. Thus from one point of view the Greek is contrasted disadvantageously with the Jew, while from the other he is contrasted disadvantageously with the Barbarian. Both distinctions are equally antagonistic to the spirit of the gospel. The apostle declares both alike null and void in Christ. The two-fold character of the Colossian heresy enables him to strike at these two opposite forms of error with one blow. The word ‘Barbarian’ properly denoted one who spoke an inarticulate, stammering, unintelligible language.” The Scythians were the lowest type of barbarian. Bengel describes them as “more barbarious than the barbarians.” “Bond” is doulos (doulo"), “a slave.” “Free” is eleutheros (ejleuqero"), “free born, one who is not a slave.” Lightfoot translates: “Christ is all things and in all things. Christ

has dispossessed and obliterated all distinctions of religious prerogative and intellectual preeminence and social caste; Christ has substituted Himself for all these; Christ occupies the whole sphere of human life and permeates all its developments.” Translation. Stop lying to one another, having stripped off and away from yourselves and for your own advantage, the old man with his wicked doings, and having clothed yourselves with the new man who is constantly being renewed, with a resulting full and perfect knowledge which is according to the image of the One who created him; in which state there cannot be Greek or Jew, circumcision or uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, slave, or free man, but Christ is all things and in all things. (3:12, 13) “Put on” is  (ejndunw), “to envelope in, clothe with.” Thayer, commenting on the use of this verb in 3:10 (put on the new man), defines it as follows: “to become so possessed o the mind of Christ as in thought, feeling, and action to resemble Him and, as it were, reproduce the life He lived.” The verb in 3:12 is imperative in mode. This is a command to be obeyed. It is aorist in tense, which means that the command must be obeyed at once. Commenting on “therefore,” Lightfoot says: “as men to whom Christ has become all in all. The incidental mention of Christ as superseding all other relations, gives occasion to this argumentative ‘therefore.’ ” “The elect of God” is eklektoi tou theou (ejklektoi tou qeou). The adjective eklektoi (ejklektoi) is from the verb  (ejklegw), “to select out from a number.” It refers to God’s choice of certain from among mankind who were as saved individuals, to be channels through which others might learn the way of salvation, this choice having been made before the universe was created. “As” is  (wJ"), “like as, even as, in the same manner as.” The word is an adverb of comparison. It does not merely identify. The idea is, “Put on therefore in the same manner as the elect of God.” That is, see that your manner of life is fitting, seemly, in accordance with that kind of life the elect of God should live. “Holy” is hagios (aJgio"), from  (aJgizw), “to set apart for God.” The elect are those set apart for God. The word speaks of their standing in grace as separated ones, to live a separated life. The same adjective is translated “saints” in 1:2. “Beloved” is  (ajgapaw), a perfect participle. This is the Greek word for God’s love, the love shown at Calvary, a love that denies self for the benefit of the object loved. The perfect tense is used to show the far reaching and the abiding character of that love. The saints are those who have been loved by God with the present result that they are the objects of His love. “Bowels” is splagchnon (splagcnon). Thayer says that “in the Greek poets the bowels were regarded as the seat of the more violent passions, such as anger and love: but by the Hebrews as the seat of the tenderer affections, especially kindness, benevolence, compassion, hence, our heart, tender mercies, affections.” “Mercies” is oiktirmos (oijktirmo"), “compassion, pity, mercy.” Thayer translates, “a heart of compassion.” “Kindness” is  (crhstoth"), “benignity, kindness.” The word speaks of a gentle, gracious disposition. “Humbleness of mind,” is  (tapeinofrosunh), “the having a humble opinion of one’s self, a deep sense of one’s (moral) littleness, modesty, lowliness of mind.” “Meekness” is  (praoth"), “an inwrought grace of the soul, that temper of spirit in which we accept God’s dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting. It is the humble heart which is also the meek; and which, as such, does not fight against God, and more or less struggle

and contend with Him. This meekness, however, being first of all a meekness before God, is also such in the face of men, even of evil men, out of a sense that these, with the insults and injuries which they may inflict, are permitted and employed by God for the chastening and purifying of His elect” (Trench). “Longsuffering,” makrothumia (makroqumia), speaks of “the man, who, having to do with injurious persons, does not suffer himself easily to be provoked by them, or to blaze up in anger.” The word expresses patience under the ill-treatment of others. “Forbearing” is  (ajnecw), “to bear with, endure.” “Forgiving” is charizomai (carizomai), “to show one’s self gracious, kind, benevolent, to grant forgiveness.” The Greek word “grace” is charis (cari"), and has the same form as this word. “Quarrel” is  (momfh), “cause of blame, matter of complaint.” “Even as” is  (kaqw"), “according as, just as, in proportion as, in the degree that.” We are to forgive others because God forgave us, and in the degree that He forgave, that is, a full forgiveness. Translation. Put on therefore, as chosen-out ones of God, saints, beloved ones, a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, longsuffering, bearing with one another and forgiving one another, if any one has a matter of complaint against anyone. Even as and in the degree that the Lord forgave you, in the same manner also you forgive. (3:14) “Above” is epi (ejpi), which latter could better be translated here, “upon.” That is, Paul is carrying on the figure of putting on as a garment all the qualities spoken of in verses 12 and 13, and he exhorts the Colossian saints to put on over these, love as the binding factor, which will hold them together and make them usable. “Charity” is  (ajgaph), God’s love produced in the heart of the yielded believer. Vincent says: “Love embraces and knits together all the virtues.” Lightfoot says: “Love is the outer garment which holds the others in their places.” Expositors says: “These virtues are manifestations of love, but may be conceivably exhibited where love is absent.” All of which goes to say that when these virtues are practiced without the accompaniment of divine love, they are as sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal. This love, Paul says, is the “bond of perfectness.” Lightfoot defines: “the bond of perfection, i.e., the power which unites and holds together all those graces and virtues which together make up perfection.” “Bond” is sundesmos (sundesmo"), “that which binds together.” Thayer comments on this expression: “that in which all the virtues are so bound together that perfection is the result, and not one of them is wanting to that perfection.” “Perfection” is  (teleioth"). The word teleios (teleio") means “completeness, full growth, maturity, in good working order.” All these describe the Christian in whose life the virtues of verses 12–14 are present as the result of the fulness of the Spirit. Vincent says that  (teleioth") “is a collective idea, a result of combination, to which bond is appropriate.” He quotes Plato: “But two things cannot be held together without a third; they must have some bond of union. And the fairest bond is that which most completely fuses and is fused into the things which are bound.” How true that last sentence is. How completely divine love is fused with the other virtues as it binds them together into one harmonious whole and makes them usable. Translation. And upon all these, put on divine love which is a binding

factor of completeness. (3:15) It is the peace of Christ here. Best texts read “Christ,” not “God.” It is the peace, tranquility of heart, which He left as a legacy to His disciples (John 14:27). “Rule” is  (brabruw), an athletic term, “be umpire.” Lightfoot says: “Wherever there is a conflict of motives or impulses or reasons, the peace of Christ must step in and decide which is to prevail.” Vincent comments: “Literally, be umpire. The previous reference to occasions for meekness, long-suffering, forbearance, forgiveness, etc., indicates a conflict of passions and motives in the heart. Christ is the one who adjusts all these, so that the metaphorical sense is appropriate.” Into the enjoyment of this peace the saints are called by the effectual call of God into salvation. This calling into a participation in and enjoyment of peace was in one body. That is, as members of the One Body of Christ, the saints are to enjoy peace. This peace not only refers to individual tranquility of heart, but extends to peace among the members of the Body in their relations to one another. Alford says: “Oneness of body being the sphere and element in which that peace of Christ was to be carried on and realized.” Expositors says: “Disunion in the body is incompatible with the peace of the individual members.” Translation. And the peace of Christ, let it be acting as umpire in your hearts, into which also you were called in one body. And be constantly thankful ones. (3 :16, 17) “The word of Christ” is the word spoken by Christ. This expression is not limited to His utterances while on earth in His humiliation, but refers to the entire body of truth as given through the n.t. writers. “Dwell in” is  (ejnoikew). The word oikos (oijko") means “a home.”  (ÆOikew) means “to live in a home.” The exhortation is to the effect that the Christian is to so yield himself to the Word that there is a certain athomenes of the Word in his being. The Word should be able to feel al home in his heart. The saint should give it unrestricted liberty in his life. “Richly” is  (plousiw"), “abundantly.” Not only must the saint be yielded to the Word, but he must have a good knowledge of it. The Holy Spirit uses the Word of God that we know as He talks to us and guides our lives. He can efficiently talk to us to the extent to which know the Word. That is the language He uses. The words, “in wisdom,” are to be understood with that which follows, since “dwell in” is sufficiently qualified by “richly.” Thus, the saints are in all wisdom to teach and admonish one another. The participles “teaching” and “admonishing” are imperative it force. They exhort. “Admonishing” is  (nouqetew), “to warn exhort, admonish.” The word contains the ideas of encouragement, reproof, blame, as well. This teaching and admonition was to be in the form of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. Vincent is authority for the statement that in the early Christian Church, it was not unusual to employ verse or rhythm for theological teaching or statement That would explain Paul’s exhortation embracing this form of pedagogy, a system which we do not use today in any formal presentation of theological or doctrinal teaching, although in congregational singing, we do still follow the custom. Lightfoot defines these as follows: “While the leading idea of psalmos (yalmo") (psalms) is a musical accompaniment and

that of humnos (uJmno") (hymns), praise to God,  (wJide) (spiritual songs) is the general word for a song, whether accompanied or unaccompanied, whether of praise or on any other subject. Thus it was quite possible for the same song to be at once a psalm, hymn, and a spiritual song. In the text, the reference to psalms, we may suppose, is specially, though not exclusively (I Cor. 14:26), to the Psalms of David, which would early form part of the religious worship of the Christian brotherhood. On the other hand, hymns would more appropriately designate those hymns of praise which were composed by the Christians themselves on distinctly Christian themes, being either set forms of words or spontaneous effusions of the moment. The third word, spiritual songs, gathers up the other two, and extends the precept to all forms of song, with the limitation however, that they must be spiritual.” The saints are to sing with grace in their hearts to the Lord. The article occurs before “grace,” marking it out as a particular grace, the grace of God supplied by the Holy Spirit to the yielded saint, the grace for daily living, that divine energy produced in the heart by the Holy Spirit. The word “grace,” charis (cari"), also means “thanksgiving,” which element should be included in our singing. This singing should be as to God, (the word “Lord” is not in the better manuscripts). That is, our singing should have for its purpose the glory of God, not the display of one’s voice or musical technique. Translation. The word of Christ, let it be at home in you in abundance; with wisdom teaching and admonishing each other by means of psalms, hymns, spiritual songs, with the grace singing in your hearts to God. And all, whatever you do in the sphere of word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, constantly giving thanks to God the Father through Him. (3:18–22) Paul now turns from general exhortations to those addressed to particular individuals, wives, husbands, children, fathers, servants. In verse 18, the expression, “as is fit in the Lord,” needs some exposition. “Fit” is  (ajnhkw). The word is used of actions that are due someone. Lightfoot says: “The idea of propriety is the link which connects the primary meaning of such words as   (ajnhkein, proshkein, kaqhkein), ‘aiming at or pertaining to,’ with their ultimate meaning of moral obligation.” The verb is in the imperfect tense which speaks of an action going on in past time. Vincent says: “The imperfect tense, was fitting, or became fitting, points to the time of their entrance upon the Christian life. Not necessarily presupposing that the duty remained unperformed. Lightfoot illustrates by ought, the past tense of owed (oJwed), and says: ‘the past tense perhaps implies an essential a priori obligation.” The term a priori refers to that which it known by reasoning from what is self-evident and therefore known without any appeal to the particular facts of experience. What Lightfoot says is that the use of the past tense here point to the fact that the wife’s submission to her husband is an obligation that is a self-evident one which is arrived at from reasoning regarding the proper relation of the wife to the husband. The words, “in the Lord,” are to be construed with the word “fitting.” This obligation on the part of the wife is fitting in the Lord in the sense that she is as to her position in salvation, in Christ, and a person in such a position has the moral obligation to obey the scriptures when they admonish the wife to be in subjection to her husband. The husbands are exhorted to love their wives. The word here is not  (filew), a non-ethical fondness or affection. They all did that. That was the type of love which was

exercised when they fell in love with them. It is  (ajgaph), the love that was shown at Calvary, the love produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit, the love that will cause the husband to sacrifice himself and his own wishes in the interest of the well-being of the wife. “Be bitter” is  (pikrainw), “to embitter, exasperate, irritate.” Lightfoot translates, “show no bitterness, behave not harshly.” “Well pleasing” is euareston (eujareston), “commendable, well pleasing.” The expression, “unto the Lord,” should read “in the Lord,” the preposition en (ejn) appearing in the best texts. Lightfoot says “implies ‘as judged by a Christian standard,’ ‘as judged by those who are members of Christ’s body.’ “ “Provoke” is  (ejreqizw), “provoke, irritate.” Lightfoot says: “Irritation is the first consequence of being too exacting with children, and irritation leads to moroseness.” “Discouraged” is  (ajqumew), “to be disheartened, dispirited, broken in spirit, lose heart.” “Servants” is doulos (doulo"), “slaves.” These were Christian slaves working for the most part in the service of pagan masters. Expositors comments: “The case of slaves is treated at greater length than that of the other family relations, probably on account of Onesimus. But Paul was much possessed with the need for keeping Christianity free from the suspicion it naturally created of undermining the constitution of society. So while doulos (doulo") (a slave), eleutheros (ejleuqero") (a free man) is a distinction which has vanished for Christianity, in the interests of Christianity as a spiritual power, social freedom had to be cheerfully foregone till the new religion was able to assert its principle with success. An instructive parallel is the exhortation to submission to constituted authority in Romans 13. In Paul’s time, slaves probably made up the larger part of the population of the empire.” The expression, “according to the flesh,” describes the masters as contrasted to the Lord who was the Master of these slaves with reference to their spiritual lives. “Eyeservice” is ophthalmodouleia (ojfqalmodouleia), “service performed under the master’s eye, service which is most zealous when the eye of the master or overseer is upon them.” Expositors, commenting on “menpleasers,” says; “It is the Christian’s first duty to please the Lord, and this he can do only by conscientious performance of his tasks quite apart from the recognition he receives from men. If the principle of his conduct is the pleasing of men, he will neglect his duty where this motive cannot operate.” The words, “in singleness of heart,” are contrasted to the idea of the double-dealing of eyeservice (Expositors). Lightfoot explains; “with undivided service.” As to fearing the Lord (” Lord,” not “God” in best texts), they are to do that as fearing “the one Lord and Master, as contrasted with the masters according to the flesh” (Lightfoot) . Translation. Wives, be constantly subjecting yourselves to your husbands as you ought to do in the Lord. Husbands, be loving your wives with a divine love which impels you to deny yourselves for their benefit, and stop being bitter and harsh to them. Children, be obeying your parents in all things, for this is commendable in the Lord. Fathers, stop irritating your children, lest they become disheartened. Slaves, be constantly obedient in all things to your human masters, not with eyeservice as menpleasers, but with an undivided heart, fearing the Lord. (3:23–25) It is, “Whatsoever ye do ( (poiew)), do (ergazomai (ejrgazomai)) it.” The English reader will observe that the two occurrences of the word “do” are translated from two different words in the Greek text. The first ( (poiew)) refers to

the mere doing of something. The second is an advance upon the first word. Ergazomai (ÆErgazomai) means, “to labor, do work.” It is opposed to inactivity or idleness. Lightfoot translates. “do it diligently.” Expositors says: “Not only must the slave’s work be done in the fear of the Lord, but done as if it were actually for the Lord that he was doing it, and not for a mere human master. And this principle is to govern every detail of his varied service. Their service, Paul would say, is not to be rendered at all to their human master, but exclusively to Christ. However their earthly master may reward their service, there is a Master who will give them a just recompense; although they cannot receive an earthly, He will give them a heavenly inheritance.” “Heartily” is literally, “out from the soul.” “Reward” is antapodoma (ajntapodoma), “that which is paid back, a requital.” Lightfoot translates, “the just recompense.” “Of the inheritance” is genitive of apposition. Translate ‘which consists in the inheritance’ ” (Lightfoot). The same authority translates the words,  (twi Kuriwi Cristwi douleuete), you serve (as your Master) the (great) Master, Christ. The word kurios (kurio") (Lord), also means “master.” Vincent comments on the words, “He that doeth wrong,” as follows: “The reference is primarily to the slave; but the following clause extends it to the master. If the slave do wrong, he shall be punished; but the master who does wrong will not be excused; for there is no respect of persons. Tychicus, who carried this letter to Colossae, carried at the same time the letter to Philemon, and escorted Onesimus to his master.” Lightfoot comments: “The recent fault of Onesimus would make the apostle doubly anxious to emphasize the duties of the slave towards the master, lest in his love for the offender, he should seem to condone the offence. But on the other hand, it is the apostle’s business to show that justice has a double edge. There must be a reciprocity between the master and the slave. The philosophers of Greece taught, and the laws of Rome assumed, that the slave was a chattel. But a chattel could have no rights. It would be absurd to talk of treating a chattel with justice. St. Paul places the relations of the master and the slave in a wholly different light. Justice and equity are the expression of the divine Mind, and with God there is no respect of persons. With Him the claims of the slave are as real as the claims of the master.””Receive,”  (komizw), in the middle voice here, means “to recover, to get back, to be recompensed.” “Respect of persons” is  (proswpolemyia), made up of  (lambanw) “to receive,” and  (proswpon), “face,” thus, “receiving of face,” thus, “judging upon the basis of outward appearance,” thus, “showing partiality.” Translation. Whatever you do, from your soul do it diligently as to the Lord and not to men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive back the just recompense which consists of the inheritance. The Master, Christ, you are serving. For the one who is doing wrong, will get back that which he did which is wrong. And there is no showing of partiality.

CHAPTER FOUR (4:1) This verse really belongs to the material in the closing words of the previous chapter. It contains a final word to masters of slaves. “Give” is  (parecw), “to exhibit or offer on one’s own part, to render or afford from one’s own resources or by one’s own power.” The idea is, “render on your own part.” “Equal” is  (ijsoth"),

“equity, fairness, what is equitable.” Vincent says: “Literally, the equality. Not equality of condition, but the brotherly equality growing out of the Christian relation, in which there is neither bond nor free.” Expositors says: “The master should regulate his treatment of his slave, not by caprice, but by equity.” It should be kept in mind that these masters were Christians. Translation. Masters, that which is just and equitable, be rendering on your part to your slaves, knowing that also you have a Master in heaven. (4:2–4) “Continue” is  (proskarterew), “to give constant attention to a thing, to give unremitting care to a thing, to persevere, to wait continually upon, to be in constant readiness for.” “Watch” is  (grhgorew), “to give strict attention to, to be active, to take heed lest through remissness and indolence some destructive calamity suddenly overtake one.” Lightfoot says: “Long continuance in prayer is apt to produce listlessness. Hence the additional charge that the heart must be awake, if the prayer is to have any value.” “Withal” is hama (aJma), “at the same time.” The “us” refers to Paul and his associates in the ministry of the Word, and in particular to Timothy (1:1) and Epaphras (4:3, 4). “A door of utterance” is thuran tou logou (quran tou logou), “a door of the Word.” Lightfoot interprets, “a door of admission for the Word, i.e., an opportunity of preaching the gospel.” “To speak” is  (lalew). It is an infinitive of the consequence, “so as to speak” (Lightfoot). The mystery here is that spoken of in Ephesians 3:6, to the effect that the Gentiles are to be one body with the Jew in the mystical body of Christ, the Church. “I am in bonds” is dedemai (dedemai), the perfect tense of  (dew), “to bind.” The translation reads, “I have been bound with the present result that I am in a bound condition.” Paul was a closely guarded prisoner of the Roman empire, handcuffed to a Roman soldier twenty-four hours a day. The words, “that I may make it manifest,” go back to, “praying for us.” Paul’s imprisonment curtailed his activities in the preaching of the gospel. Translation. Be giving constant attention to prayer, constantly active in it with thanksgiving, praying at the same time also concerning us, that God would open for us a door for the Word, to speak the mystery of Christ, because of which (mystery) also I have been bound, in order that I may make it plain as it is necessary in the nature of the case for me to speak. (4:5) “Walk” is  (peripatew), “to order one’s behavior.” “Them that are without” is  (tou" ejxw), “those outside,” namely, those without the pale of the Church, the unbelievers. Expositors says: “They must be wise in their relations with them so as not to give them an unfavorable impression of the gospel.” “Redeeming” is  (ejxagorazw), “to buy up the opportunity for one’s self,” that is, to make a wise and sacred use of every opportunity for doing good, so that zeal and well-doing are, as it were, the purchase-money by which we make the time our own” (Thayer). Expositors quotes Ramsay, “making your market fully from the occasion,” and goes on to say, “They are to seize the fitting opportunity when it occurs, to do good to ‘those without,’ and thus promote the spread of the gospel.” “Time” is kairos (kairo"), “a strategic point of time.”

Translation. In wisdom be ordering your behavior towards those on the outside, buying up for yourselves the strategic, opportune time. (4:6) “Speech” is logos (logo"), “a word.” “With grace” is en chariti (ejn cariti). Expositors says: “probably gracious: ‘pleasant’ is the meaning; by the sweetness and courtesy of their conversation they are to impress favorably the heathen.” As to the expression, “seasoned with salt,” Lightfoot says: “Salt has a twofold purpose; (1) It gives flavor to the discourse and recommends it to the palate. This is the primary idea of the metaphor here, as the word ‘seasoned’ seems to show; (2) It preserves from corruption and renders wholesome. It may be inferred that this secondary application of the metaphor was present to the apostle’s mind here, because of the parallel epistle (Eph. 4:29), ‘Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth.’ “ Lightfoot quotes Plutarch, “The many call salt charitas (carita"), graces, because, mingled with most things, it makes them agreeable and pleasant to taste.” Expositors says: “They must strive to cultivate the gift of pleasant and wise conversation, so that they may be able to speak appropriately to each individual (with his peculiar needs) with whom they come in contact.” Translation. Your word, let it always be with graciousness, with salt thoroughly seasoned, to the end that you may know how it is necessary in the nature of the case to answer every one. (4:7–9) Lightfoot says: “Tychicus was charged by Paul at the same time with a more extended mission. He was entrusted with copies of the circular letter, which he was enjoined to deliver in the principal churches of proconsular Asia. This mission would bring him to Laodicea, which was one of these great centers of Christianity, and, as Colossae was only a few miles distant, the apostle would naturally engage him to pay a visit to the Colossians.” “All my state” is ta kat eme panta (ta kat ejme panta), “all that relates to me” (Lightfoot). “Brother” is adelphos (ajdelfo"), a brother Christian. “Minister” is diakonos (diakono"), “servant,” to Paul in the ministry of the Word. Fellow-servant is sundoulos (sundoulo"). Vincent says: “By this term he designates Tychicus as, in common with himself, a servant of Jesus Christ.” The word doulos (doulo") was used of a slave. Here one could translate, “fellow-bondslave.” “I have sent” is the epistolary aorist, in which the writer putshimself at the standpoint of the reader when he receives the letter, and looks at the writing of the letter which is a present event with him, as a past event. Paul sent this letter with Tychicus. “Your estate” is literally, “the things concerning you.” “Comfort” is  (parakalew), “to encourage,” here by his tidings and exhortations. Regarding Onesimus, Lightfoot writes, “The man whom the Colossians had only known hitherto, if they knew him at all, is thus commended to them as no more slave but a brother, no more dishonest and faithless but trustworthy, no more an object of contempt but of love.” Translation. All that relates to me, Tychicus will make known to you, the beloved brother and faithful minister and my fellow-bondslave in the Lord, whom I sent to you for this same purpose, in order that you may come to know the things concerning me and in order that he may

encourage your hearts; with Onesimus the faithful and beloved brother, who is one of you. All things to you they will make known, the things here. (4:10, 11) As to the significance of the term “fellow-prisoner” as applied to Aristarchus, authorities disagree. Lightfoot says: “The most probable solution would be, that his relations with St. Paul in Rome excited suspicion and led to a temporary confinement. Another possible hypothesis is that he voluntarily shared the apostle’s captivity by living with him.” “Saluteth” is aspazomai (ajspazomai). “to greet, wish well.” Marcus is John Mark, the writer of the Gospel. “Sister’s son” is anepsios (ajneyio"), “a cousin.” Expositors says: “Paul may have feared that Mark’s defection from him, which led to the sharp quarrel between him and Barnabas, might prejudice the Colossians against him. The mention of his relationship to Barnabas was probably intended as a recommendation to their kindness. He seems to have been unknown to the Colossians.” The name “Jesus” is the transliteration of the Greek  (ÆIhsou"), which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew name from which we get “Joshua” or “Jehoshua.” In Hebrews 4:8, the name  (ÆIhsou") refers in its context, not to the Jesus of the first century, but to the Joshua of the conquest of Canaan. The case is the same here. This man was probably known by the name “Joshua.” “Justus,” Lightfoot says, is “a common name or surname of Jews and proselytes, denoting obedience and devotion to the law.” Aristarchus and Joshua here are described as of the circumcision. They were converts from Judaism. The word “only” marks these two men out as the only Jewish Christians in Rome who were fellow-workers of Paul. Lightfoot says that this description must not be closely pressed, as if absolutely no Jewish Christians besides had remained friendly; they will only imply that among the more prominent members of the body, the apostle can only name these three as steadfast in their allegiance. “Comfort” is  (parhgoria), “comfort, solace, relief, alleviation, consolation, encouragement.” They were a medicine for Paul. The word “paregoric” comes from this Greek word. Translation. There greets you Aristarchus, my fellow-prisoner, and Mark, the cousin of Barnabas, concerning whom you received commandments; if he comes to you, receive him; and Joshua, the one called Justus, who are of the circumcision. These are my only fellow-workers with respect to the kingdom of God who are of such a character as to have become a solace to me. (4:12, 13) The name “Epaphras” is the shortened form of Epaphroditus. He was not the man of that same name who was associated with Paul in the Philippian letter. Lightfoot suggests that he was the one who brought the gospel to Colossae. He was a native of that city as is seen by the phrase, “who is of you.” “Servant” is doulos (doulo"), “a slave.” Lightfoot says: “This title, which the apostle uses several times of himself, is not found elsewhere conferred on any other individual, except once on Timothy (Phil. 1:1), and probably points to exceptional services on the part of Epaphras.” “Laboring fervently” is  (ajgwnizomai), “to contend in the gymnastic games, to contend with adversaries,” figuratively, “to contend, struggle with difficulties and dangers antagonistic to the gospel.” Lightfoot translates, “wrestling,” Vincent,

“striving.” “Stand” is  (staqhte), “to stand fast.” “Perfect” is teleios (teleio"), “complete, spiritually mature, full-grown.” The word does not mean “sinless.” “Complete” is the perfect participle of  (plhroforeo), “to bear or bring to the full, to carry through to the end, to make full, to persuade, fully convince.” Lightfoot translates, “fully persuaded.” Vincent quotes the Revision, “fully assured.” The phrase “in all the will of God” is  (ejn panti qelhmati tou qeou), “in everything willed by God.” “Zeal” is from  (zhlon) which does not appear in the best texts, ponon (ponon), “toil,” being found. Lightfoot says: “much toil, both inward and outward, though from the connection, the former notion seems to predominate.” Expositors says: “The anxiety of Epaphras for these churches was probably due to his connection with them either as founder or teacher.” Translation. There greets you Epaphras, the one who is one of your number, a bondslave of Christ Jesus, always wrestling on your behalf in his prayers, to the effect that you may stand fast, spiritually mature ones, and those who have been brought to the place of full assurance in everything willed by God; for I bear witness to him that he has much toil on your behalf and on behalf of those in Laodicea, and those in Hierapolis. (4:14) The Greek text has, “Luke, the physician, the beloved one.” The word “physician” is iatros (iJatro"), the verbal form of which is iaomai (iJaomai), “to heal, cure.” This is Luke, the evangelist, and the writer of the Gospel that bears his name. He was a Greek, a Gentile, as is shown by his Greek name, and the fact that Paul does not include him with those of the circumcision of verse 11. He shows a knowledge of medical terms in the Gospel he wrote. The practice of medicine was highly developed among the Greeks, Greek doctors being in attendance at the royal courts in the Roman empire. Luke was the personal physician of Paul. The words, “the beloved one,” breathe with Paul’s gratitude for his services. My illustrious Greek professor at Northwestern University, the late John A. Scott, writes in the closing words of his book, Luke, Greek Physician and Historian, “Without Luke’s help as a physician, as a companion and friend, Paul could never have carried his heavy load in the Christian ministry, and without Luke’s pen, the same grave that covered Paul’s body would also have covered his name. In my mind, the most important event in the history of time took place on that day when a poor, sick, discouraged Jew went into the office of Luke, the Greek physician; with the single exception of that Friday afternoon when Jesus hung from the cross on Calvary.” As to the bare mention of Demas, Lightfoot says: “While Luke is described with a special tenderness as the Physician, the beloved one, Demas alone is dismissed with a bare mention and without any epithet of commendation.” Alford says: “The absence of any honorable or endearing mention here may be owing to the commencement of this apostasy, or some unfavorable indication in his character.” This is the Demas who let Paul down during Paul’s second Roman imprisonment (II Tim 4:10). The word “forsaken” in the latter scripture is  (ejgkataleipw), ”to let one down.” Translation. There greets you Luke, the physician, the beloved one, and Demas. (4:15) The words, “the church which is in his house,” are explained as follows: “There is no clear example of a separate building set apart for Christian worship within the limits of the Roman empire before the third century, though apartments in private houses might be specially devoted to this purpose” (Lightfoot). An assembly of the saints met in the

home of Nymphas for worship. The Nestle text has the personal pronoun in the feminine gender, indicating that Nymphas was a woman. Translation. Greet the brethren in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the assembly in her home. (4:16) As to the letter from Laodicea, Expositors says: “clearly a letter sent by Paul to Laodicea, which the Colossians are instructed to procure and read. It may be a lost letter, or it may be our so-called Epistle to the Ephesians, to which Marcion refers as the Epistle to the Lacdiceans, and which was probably a circular letter.“ Translation. And when this letter is read in your presence, see to it that also it is read in the assembly of Laodicea, and the letter from Laodicea, see to it that you also read it. (4:17) As to the ministry committed to Archippus, Lightfoot says: “From the stress which is laid upon it, the diakonia (diakonia) (ministry) here would seem to refer, as in the case of Timothy,… to some higher function than the diaconate properly so called.” “Fulfil” is  (plhroo), “to discharge fully.” Translation. And say to Archippus; Look to the ministry which you received in the Lord, that you discharge it fully. (4:18) Paul wrote the salutation or greeting (1:1, 2) with his own hand. The rest of the letter was written by a secretary at the dictation of Paul. The reason for the latter practice is found in the fact that the great apostle suffered from an oriental eye disease called ophthalmia, which induced almost total blindness, and which caused a repulsive appearance. This he contracted on his first missionary journey as he was going through the lowlands of Pamphylia where this disease was prevalent. He had his heart set on Athens, going by way of Pisidian Antioch but God took this means of leading Paul to evangelize the Galatian cities, for it was evidently not His will at the time for him to go to Athens. Paul writes to the Galatians that he had brought the gospel to them because he was prevented by illness from going on, and reminds them that they at that time were willing to dig out their own eyes and give them to him, the inference being clear that he needed a new pair of eyes (Gal. 4:13–15). In the same letter (6:11) he writes, “You see with what large letters I wrote to you in my own hand.” The Galatian heresy was a delicate problem for Paul to handle, and he wrote the entire letter to the Galatians in inch-high Greek capital letter in order that in his semi-blindness he could see what he was doing. In the case of his other letters, he dictated them to a secretary. In Romans 16:22 we have, “I, Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord.” The reason why Paul was careful to put his signature on every letter in his own handwriting. is found in the fact that someone had written a letter to the Thessalonian church and had forged Paul’s name to it (II Thess. 2:2, “letter as from us,” and 3:17, “The salutation of Paul with my own hand, which is the token in every epistle”). A pathetic note is struck in the words, “Remember my bonds.” Expositors says: “As he writes, his chain, fastened on his left hand, would impress itself on his notice. Hence the touching request, ‘Remember my bonds,’ which may bear the special sense, ‘remember in your prayers.’ ” Alford says: “These words

extend further than to mere pecuniary support, or even mere prayers: they were ever to keep before them the fact that one who so deeply cared for them, and loved them, and to whom their perils of false doctrine occasioned such anxiety, was a prisoner in chains: and that remembrance was to work and produce its various fruits—of prayer for him, of affectionate remembrance of his wants, of deep regard for his words.” Translation. The greeting by my hand, the hand of Paul. Be remembering my bonds. The grace be with you.

FIRST TIMOTHY In the Greek New Testament

Dedicated To pastors everywhere, shepherds of God’s flock, with the hope that this book will open up rich truth from the Greek New Testament for the spiritual enrichment of their own lives and of those to whom they minister.

PREFACE Very few Bible students enjoy the high privilege and tremendous advantage of being able to work beneath the surface of an English translation in the added richness and accuracy of interpretation which is found in the text of the Greek New Testament. Here is a book, which together with its eleven predecessors, is unique in the field of Biblical interpretation, a book which puts the Greek New Testament on a level where the student of the English Bible can successfully work, and with great benefit, a book which will enable him to uncover a wealth of truth that lies embedded like a gold mine in the manuscripts which left the hands of the inspired writers, and to which he does not have access except by means of the original language in which the New Testament was written. For instance, he is studying Ephesians 4:11, 12 and he reads in the Authorized Version, “And He gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ” He would never suspect that there are only four individuals mentioned in verse eleven. The student of the English Bible could never know that the words, “pastors” and “teachers,” are in a construction in the Greek text called Granville Sharp’s rule which is stated as follows: “When two nouns are in the same case, connected by the word kai (kai) (and), the first noun having the definite article, the second noun without the article, the second noun refers to the same person or thing to which the first noun refers and is a further description of it.” Not knowing this rule, he would fail to see that Paul was only referring to one individual when he spoke of pastors and teachers.

Thus, he would miss the important truth that God’s ideal pastor is a teaching pastor, one who specializes in expository sermons, one whose ministry is a teaching ministry. He would fail to grasp the fact that God gives to every man whom He calls to be a pastor, a teaching gift which he is to develop by use. A knowledge of this would revolutionize the ministry of many pastors. Again, the student of the English Bible, not familiar with Latin, would not know that the word “pastor” is from a Latin word meaning “shepherd,” and not conversant with Greek, would be ignorant of the fact that the word in the Greek text was the Greek word for a shepherd. Thus, he would miss the practical illustration of the shepherd in the East who always leads his flock, never drives it. The story goes that a traveller in the East once saw a man driving a flock of sheep. He said to the man, “I thought that eastern shepherds always led their flocks, never drove them.” Replied the man, “Oh, I am not the shepherd. I am the butcher.” All of which means that the pastor who attempts to drive God’s flock to the living of a holy life, only works havoc amongst his people, but the pastor who leads the people by a Christlike life, attains his purpose. Again, the English reader studies verse twelve, and sees that the pastor has three responsibilities, to perfect the saints, to do the work of the ministry, and to edify the body of Christ. That means that the pastor does all the work in the local church, and his parishioners pay him for doing it, and sit back and do nothing. He could never know that the Greek New Testament has four different words which mean “perfect,” and that the particular word used here means “to equip someone in order that he might be able to perform a certain piece of work.” He would naturally think that the word “ministry” referred to the ordained minister, since the word is so used today. He would never suspect that the Greek word of which it is the translation refers to the rendering of service. Thus, he could never know that Paul’s idea was, “He gave some, teaching pastors for the equipping of the saints for ministering work with a view to the building up of the body of Christ.” But that clearer, more accurate translation and understanding of Paul’s Greek here, would again revolutionize the ministry of a pastor. He would see that God called him to be a specialist. He was not to do all the work of the church, nor even a large part of it. He was to specialize in training the saints in the pews to engage in Christian service, and he would thus be multiplying himself and his efforts, and instead of being a superintendent of an old people’s rest home, he would be nurturing a beehive of activity. He would begin to be in God’s eyes, a successful pastor. And so this book will open up to the student of the English Bible, a gold mine of truth which he can never obtain by the study of any translation or any number of translations. To obtain the best results, the student should have this book open alongside of his English Bible, and work through the Pastoral Epistles slowly, verse by verse. After he has completed his study, he will have had access to the Greek text of these three letters, and will have in his possession, a greatly augmented store of rich truth, and a more accurate interpretation of these books. After that, he can use the book as a reference work. The complete index in the back, will enable him to quickly find any passage. The translation commented upon is the Authorized Version, and the Greek text used is Nestle’s. The authorities used are as follows: Greek English Lexicon, Thayer; Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, Moulton and Milligan; Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek, Hermann Cremer; Synonyms of the New Testament, Archbishop Trench; Word Studies in the New Testament, Marvin R. Vincent; Expositor’s Greek Testament, Newport J. D. White; Alford’s Greek Testament, Henry Alford; Word Pictures in the New Testament, A.

T. Robertson; A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, Dana and Mantey. The Greek words have been included in their transliterated form for the benefit of those who are conversant with the Greek text. These latter will find this book of great help in that the author has done much of the Greek work for them, and has given them the results of his own study and the comments of Greek authorities, thus saving the Greek student much time and energy. The material is there, ready for him to use to the glory of God.

INTRODUCTION These three letters are called the Pastoral Epistles because they consist chiefly of instructions and admonitions to two pastors, Timothy and Titus. Hence, they are of extreme importance to pastors today. Their contents revolve about three main subjects: false teaching, directions for a definite church polity, and adherence to the traditional doctrines of the Church. They are just as authoritative and helpful in the administration of the twentieth century local church, and as well adapted to meet its problems, as they were to cope with the situation in the first century Church, since like conditions obtain today. These epistles should be the handbook of every pastor in the administration of the affairs of the local church. The following evidence seems conclusive to the effect that Paul suffered two Roman imprisonments, which would place the writing of I Timothy and Titus during the interval between them, and II Timothy at the time of the second one, I Timothy about a.d. 65, Titus, about 66, 67, and II Timothy, about 67, 68. 1. Luke, in recording the fact of Paul’s two-year imprisonment in Rome, certainly would have known that the Apostle had been martyred at its termination, had such been the case, and would have included the account of his death. That he does not do so, is evidence of the fact that Paul was liberated from his first Roman imprisonment. 2. The condition of heresy and false teaching in the Church as reflected in the Pastoral Epistles, did not obtain during the time in which the other Pauline letters were written, which places the former after Paul’s first Roman imprisonment. 3. The style and diction of the Pastoral Epistles is so similar, and so dissimilar to the other Pauline letters, that the former must have been written in close succession, one after another and not during the time of the writing of the other letters. 4. Eusebius writes: “Paul is said, after having defended himself, to have set forth again upon the ministry of preaching and to have entered the same city a second time, and to have there ended his life by martyrdom. Whilst then a prisoner, he wrote the Second Epistle to Timothy, in which he both mentions his first defence, and his impending death.” There is no contrary tradition, and one cannot see what purpose anyone could have for foisting a lie upon the public in a case like this. 5. Passages in the Pauline Epistles confirm the view that Paul suffered two imprisonments. a. Paul, writing to the Philippians during his first imprisonment, tells them that since it was needful for them that he remain on earth in order that they might make a pioneer advance in their spiritual lives, he has come to the settled conviction that he will remain with them. Paul believed that the servant of the Lord is immortal until his work is done (Phil. 1:23–26). b. That he anticipated release from prison, is seen in the fact that he writes Philemon to have his guest room in readiness for him (22). Contrast this with his attitude

towards death in II Timothy, where he expected martyrdom. c. In writing to Titus (1:5), he speaks of having left him in Crete. Paul did not touch Crete on his first three missionary journeys, which argues for his release from prison. d. In II Timothy 4:13, Paul asks Timothy to bring his cloak and books which he had left at Troas. In 4:20 he says: “Erastus remained at Corinth, but Trophimus left I in Miletus sick.” Since Paul was in prison in Rome for two years, the last time he was at Troas and Miletus was six years before (Acts 20:6, 17). At that time, Timothy was with him, and he had repeatedly seen Timothy since. But what is even more conclusive, is that Trophimus did not remain at Miletus, for he was in Jerusalem with Paul at the time of the latter’s arrest. e. In Titus 3:12, Paul writes that he planned to spend the winter at Nicopolis. There were three cities of that name. But there is no record in the Book of Acts, of Paul having visited any city of that name on his first three missionary journeys.

REGARDING THE EXPANDED TRANSLATION This book offers the student of the English Bible an expanded translation, the purpose of which is to bring out more truth from the Greek text than the standard translations are able to present. This is done by the use of more words than the standard versions use, the latter being held to a minimum number of words. It often happens, however, that there is no single English word which will bring out all there is in a certain Greek word. To bring out the total meaning of a Greek word, sometimes requires the use of several English words, or even an entire sentence. These added words are pure translation material, since their content of meaning is derived directly from the Greek word itself or from the rules of Greek grammar and syntax. For instance, Greek has two words for “know,”  (ginwskw) and oida (oijda), the first referring to experiential knowledge, the second, to absolute knowledge. The standard translations make no distinction between them, rendering both by the single word “know,” whereas an expanded translation will take note of the difference between them, and render the first “experiential knowledge,” and the second, “absolute knowledge.” The two qualifying adjectives are pure translation, not paraphrase, not even what is called free translation. Each word is given its total meaning in the translation, which makes for more accurate interpretation. Take the case of the verb, for instance. The word  (metaschmatizw) means, “to change one’s outward expression by assuming an expression that does not come from within, nor is it representative of what one is in his inner being, that expression being put on from the outside.” This word is translated by the single word “transform” in II Corinthians 11:13–15. It takes thirty five English words to bring out the total meaning of the Greek word. Manifestly, one could not hope to offer that in a standard translation. But see how much richness of translatable material is left behind in the Greek text by the a.v., here, and how much more is brought out by an expanded translation. Take the word metamorphoomai (metamorfoomai), which means, “to change one’s outward expression by giving expression to one’s inner being, that expression coming from and being truly representative of one’s inner nature.” That word is rendered in the a.v., (Rom. 12:2) by the single word “transform.” Notice, if you will, that the words,  (metaschmatizw) and metamorphoomai (metamorfoomai),

while alike in that they both speak of a change of outward expression, are diametrically opposed as to the source of that expression, a fact which a standard translation fails to bring out. It is this wealth of untranslatable material in the case of the standard translations, which the Bible student should know if he expects to do work of a high order in his interpretation of the New Testament. It is exactly this kind of material which this book and its eleven predecessors offer the English reader, and on a level where he can successfully work. The expanded translations in these books are to be used in connection with the student’s standard translation, not as a substitute for it.

CHAPTER ONE (1:1, 2) “Paul … unto Timothy.” It was the usual practice in the first century for the writer of a letter to sign his name first, and then write the name of the recipient. We have examples of this practice in official correspondence, for instance, “Pliny, to the emperor Trajan, wisheth health” etc., to which the emperor replied as follows: “Trajan to Pliny— health and happiness.” Adolph Deissmann in his monumental work, Light from the Ancient East, gives us a letter from a naughty schoolboy to his father. The boy follows this first century custom when beginning his letter, “Theon to Theon his father, greeting.” A prodigal son writing to his mother, begins his letter, “Antonus Longus, to Nilus his mother, many greetings.” It was supposed that the recipient of the letter we know as Third John, was in ill health, since John begins his letter, “The elder unto the well beloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth. Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.” But with the discovery of the papyri, it was found that this was just the usual form of first century greeting, and our understanding of this portion of sacred Scripture had to be revised. The opening greetings in the New Testament letters, therefore, are not the distinctive practice of Bible writers, but represent the usual custom of first century letter writers. The name “Paul” is a transcript for the Latin paulus or paullus, meaning little. It was a favorite name among the Cilicians, and the nearest approach in sound to the Hebrew “Saul.” According to some, both names were borne by him in his childhood, Paulus being the one by which he was known among the Gentiles, and which was subsequently assumed to the exclusion of the other, in order to indicate his position as a friend and teacher of the Gentiles. The practice of adopting Gentile names may be traced through all the periods of Hebrew history. There is a hint in this name that the apostle was of diminutive stature. An expression in II Corinthians 10:1, “who in presence am base among you,” the word “base” being tapeinos (tapeino"), which among the Greeks meant, “that which is grovelling, slavish, mean-spirited,” and another in the tenth verse, “his bodily presence is weak,” speaks of Paul’s physique as being in the estimation of these athletically-minded Greeks, infirm, feeble, lacking manliness and dignity. But, as in the case of other servants of God, there was a great heart in a frail body. The name “Timothy” is the transliteration of the Greek name made up of two words, “to honor,” and “God,” the name meaning, “he who honors God.” The name was doubtless given him in his early childhood by his mother Eunice or his grandmother Lois, both godly women, in the hope that with right training, he might grow up to exemplify the name which he bore. Paul designates himself as an apostle of Christ Jesus, thus giving an official tone to this

letter. The word is apostolos (ajpostolo"), from the verb  (ajpostellw), “to send one off on a commission to do something as one’s personal representative, with credentials furnished.” The word was used in the first century for an envoy or ambassador. Paul thought of himself as an official ambassador of Christ Jesus. The best texts have the order of the names reversed. Christ Jesus, not Jesus Christ. These names are used by the average English reader merely to indicate the identity of the person to whom they have reference. But to Paul and his Greek readers, each had a special significance over and above that of identifying the person. The word “Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek word christos (cristo"), and this in turn is the translation of the Hebrew word which we know as “Messiah,” both words, the Hebrew and the Greek, meaning “the one who is anointed.” In a Jewish setting such as the Gospel according to Matthew, the word refers to the Messiah of Israel, the Anointed of God who is to become its King. In a Church setting, as here in First Timothy, it had the significance, not of the covenanted King of Israel, but of The Anointed One of God, to Paul and his Greek readers. The name “Jesus” is the English spelling of the Greek word  (ÆIhsou"), which in turn is the Greek spelling of the Hebrew word we know in its transliterated form as “Jehoshua,” the “h” disappearing, since the Greek language has no letter “h.” The Hebrew word means “Jehovah saves.” This was its significance to Paul and his Greek readers. In the latter name, we see the deity, incarnation, and substitutionary atonement of our Lord, for the Jehovah of the Old Testament could not save lost sinners unless He paid the price of their sins, thus satisfying His justice, the price being outpoured blood, since the penalty of sin is death. And He could not die unless He became incarnate in human form. Expositors* says, “The use of this official title (apostle) is an indication that the Pastoral Epistles were not merely private letters, but were intended to be read to the churches committed to the charge of Timothy and Titus respectively.” He was an apostle by the commandment of God. Robertson says, “by way of command.” He suggests that Paul means to convey the idea that he is an apostle under orders. Expositors has a note at this juncture. “It is to be noted that the command proceeds equally from God and from Christ Jesus. This language could hardly have been used if St. Paul conceived of Christ Jesus as a creature.” The same authority has this to say regarding the use of the expression, “of God our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ, our hope.” “In the text there is an antithesis between the offices of God as our Saviour and of Christ Jesus as our hope. The one points to the past, at least, chiefly, and the other to the future. In speaking of the saving action of God, St. Paul uses the aorist (II Tim. 1:9, Tit. 2:11, 3:4, 5). He saved us potentially … God is the efficient cause of our justification, while Jesus, ‘our righteousness’ besides being the meritorious cause, may be said to be the formal cause; for ‘the righteousness of God by which He maketh righteous,’ is embodied in Jesus, who ‘was made unto us … righteousness, and sanctification’ (I Cor. 1:30). We advance from salvation to sanctification; and accordingly we must not narrow down the conception Christ Jesus our hope to mean ‘the hope of Israel’ (Acts 23:6, 28:20), but rather, the historicalmanifestation of the Son of God as Christ Jesus is the ground of our ‘hope of glory’ (Col. 1:27). Our hope is that ‘the body of our humiliation will be conformed to the body of His glory’ (Phil. 3:20, 21). Our hope is that we shall be like Him (I John 3:2).” Paul calls Timothy, “my own son in the faith.” The word “son” is not huios (uiJo"), “an adult son,” but teknon (teknon), “a child, a born one,” the emphasis being upon the birth relationship between child and parent. The word “own” is  (gnhsio"),

“legitimately born, not spurious, genuine, true.” The faith spoken of here is the Christian faith. When Paul contacted Timothy on his first missionary journey, the latter was already a disciple (Acts 16:1). That is, he was a learner. The term does not necessarily signify that the person is saved. Paul speaks of the Corinthian saints as those whom he begot through the gospel. This is his way of saying that he won them to a saving faith in the Lord Jesus. Timothy’s mother and grandmother were Jews, and it is possible that Timothy, instructed in o.t. truth, was saved as sinners in the o.t., times were saved. When Paul contacted him, faith in the added revelation of the historic work of our Lord on the Cross, when accepted, would place him in the Body of Christ. In that sense, he could be a convert of the apostle, and thus, a genuine child by birth. The words in the salutation, “grace, mercy, peace,” deserve careful study. The word “grace” is probably the greatest word in the n.t., greater even than “love,” for grace is love in action, and therefore includes it. Speaking of the use of the Greek word “grace,” charis (cari"), in classical Greek, Trench, in his Synonyms of the New Testament has this to say; “It is hardly too much to say that the Greek mind has in no word uttered itself and all that was at its heart more distinctly than in this.” In other words, all that the Greeks were and loved and exemplified in their art, literature, and thought, lies embedded in this word. We can take Trench’s words, and substituting the word “God” say, “It is hardly too much to say that God has in no word uttered Himself and all that is in His heart more than in this.” In pagan Greece, the word referred, among other things, to a favor done by one Greek to another, out of the spontaneous generosity of his heart, without hope of reward. Of course, this favor was always done to a friend, not an enemy. When the word is used in the n.t., it takes an infinite leap forward, and acquires an additional meaning which it never had in pagan Greece, for this favor was done by God at the Cross, not to one who loved Him, but to one who hated Him. Grace here, is sanctifying grace, the work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the yielded believer. Turning to the word “mercy,” eleos (ejleo"), we offer Trench’s note comparing it to grace; “While charis (cari") (grace) has reference to the sins of men, and is that glorious attribute of God which these sins call out and display, His free gift in their forgiveness, eleos (ejleo") (mercy) has special and immediate regard to the misery which is the consequence of these sins, being the tender sense of this misery displaying itself in the effort, which only the continued perverseness of man can hinder or defeat, to assuage and entirely remove it.… In the divine Mind, and in the order of our salvation, as conceived therein, the mercy precedes the grace: God so loved the world with a pitying love (herein was the mercy), that He gave His only begotten Son (herein is the grace), that the world through Him might be saved. But in the order of the manifestation of God’s purposes in salvation, the grace must go before, and make way for the mercy.” The word “mercy” is not found in the apostolic salutations of any of Paul’s letters except those to Timothy. The Nestle text of the letter to Titus does not include it. Expositors says concerning this: “If one may hazard a guess as to what prompted St. Paul to wish mercy to Timothy rather than Titus, it may be a subtle indication of the apostle’s anxiety as to Timothy’s administrative capacity.” The Greek word “peace,”  (eijrhnh), means literally, “that which has been bound together again after having been separated.” The verb means “to bind together that which has been separated.” One is reminded of the words of Hamlet, “The times are out of joint. Oh, cursed spite that I was ever born to set them right.” That is, when things become disjointed, separated, there is no feeling of tranquility, comfort, well-being. The

latter come as a result of binding together things that have become separated. When the sanctifying grace and remedial mercy of God are operative in the life and ministry of Timothy, then that pleasant, satisfying feeling of tranquility, comfort, and well-being obtains. Translation. Paul, an ambassador of Christ Jesus by command of God our Saviour and Christ Jesus our hope, to Timothy, my genuine child in the Faith. Grace, mercy, peace, from God our Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. (1:3, 4) The words, “as I besought thee,” refer Timothy to some previous instruction which Paul gave him. Expositors says: “The motive of this letter is to provide Timothy with a written memorandum of previous verbal instructions, especially with a view to novel speculations about the laws which sap the vitality of the gospel, the root of which is sincerity and love.” The construction is left dangling in the air, so far as the actual Greek text is concerned. The a.v., rightly completes the thought of the apostle left unexpressed by him in his Greek, with the words, “so do.” The word “besought” is  (parakalew,) “to beg, entreat, beseech.” It is a strong word. Evidently Timothy had other plans, and it needed Paul’s pleading to get him to stay at the Ephesian church. The word “abide” is  (prosmenw), “to continue on.” Expositors says: “The word naturally implies that St. Paul and Timothy had been together at Ephesus, and that St. Paul left Timothy there as vicar apostolic.” The words, “when I went,” are from a present participle in the Greek text. Vincent suggests, “was going,” or, “was on my way.” The words, “teach no other doctrine,” are the translation of a negative and the verb  (eJterodidaskalew), the latter word being made up of the verb, “to teach,” and the word heteros (eJtero"), which means, “another of a different kind.” The idea is not merely that those exhorted are not to teach any other doctrine, but they are not to teach a different doctrine, a doctrine which is contrary to the true doctrine. Our word, “heterodoxy,” namely, false doctrine, refers, not to doctrines of false religions, but to doctrine which poses as true Christian doctrine, but which is diametrically opposed to the true teachings of Christianity. This is what Paul is referring to. “Give heed” is prosechein (prosecein), literally, “to hold to.” It means here, not merely, “to give attention to,” but, “to give assent to.” “Fables” is muthos (muqo"), from which we get our word “myth.” The word in its widest sense means “word, speech, conversation.” Hence it has reference to the talk of men, a rumor, report, a story, false or true. Later it came to mean a fiction as opposed to an historic tale. In Attic prose it referred to a legend of prehistoric Greek times. Vincent says: “As to its reference here, it is impossible to speak with certainty. Expositors are hopelessly disagreed, some referring it to Jewish, others to Gnostic fancies. It is explained as meaning traditional supplements to the law, allegorical interpretations, Jewish stories of miracles, Rabbinical fabrications, whether in history or doctrine, false doctrines generally, etc. It is to be observed that muthoi (muqoi) (fables) are called Jewish in Titus 1:14. In I Timothy 4:7, they are described as profane and characteristic of old wives.” As to the endless genealogies, Vincent states that “by some the genealogies are referred to the Gnostic aeons or series of emanations from the divine unity; by others to the o.t., genealogies as interpreted allegorically by Philo, and made the basis of a

psychological system, or o.t., genealogies adorned with fables: by others to genealogical registers proper, used to foster the religious and national pride of the Jews against the Gentiles, or to ascertain the descent of the Messiah.” The word “endless” is aperantos, peras, (ajperanto", pera",) meaning, “a limit or terminus,” the Alpha prefixed making the word mean, “without limit or terminus.” Vincent suggests that the word may be taken in the sense of “object” or “aim,” and thus, it would describe the study and teaching regarding these genealogies as without object, useless. The same authority says that the word “and” is explanatory. The fables and genealogies form a single conception, the genealogies indicating in what the peculiarity of the fables consists. The word “minister” is  (parecw), “to reach forth, to offer,” thus, in this case, “to afford, furnish, give occasion to” questions. The word “questions” is  (ejkzhthsi"). The simple noun means “questionings,” the prefixed preposition, ek (ejk), “out,” making the compound word mean “an investigation, a subtle, laborious inquiry or dispute, an exhaustive investigation.” The word “edifying” is the translation of oikodomian (oijkodomian), “edification.” The correct reading is oikonomian (oijkonomian), made up of oikos (oijko"), “house,” and nomos (nomo"), “law,” the compound word meaning “household economy,” in the sense of the administration of the affairs of a household. The word here refers to the scheme or order of salvation as devised and administered by God, the method of operation of God’s salvation in the life of the believing sinner. The words, “which is in faith,” speak of the fact that faith is the sphere or element in which this salvation operates. Thayer in his lexicon offers the following translation: “which furnish matter for disputes rather than the (knowledge of the) dispensation of the things by which God has provided for and prepared salvation, which salvation must be embraced by faith.” Translation. Just as I begged you to continue on in Ephesus, when I was going into Macedonia, in order that you might charge certain ones not to be teaching things contrary to sound doctrine, nor to be giving assent to fables and useless genealogies which are of such a character as to provide occasion for exhaustive investigations rather than a (knowledge of the) administration of the things by which God has provided for and prepared salvation, which salvation must be embraced by faith. (1:5–7) The word “commandment” is not  (ejntolh), the word used when speaking of a commandment such as one of the ten commandments. It is paraggelia (paraggelia), a noun that has the same root as the verb in verse three, translated “charge.” The article refers the word back to its cognate. Thus, it is, “the end of the charge,” that charge which Paul gave Timothy in verses three and four. The word “end” is telos (telo"), “aim,” that which the charge contemplates, the object aimed at by the charge. Expositors says:“The true teaching—that of the apostle and of Timothy—would be the consequence of the charge given by Timothy and would issue in and be productive of an oikonomia theou (oijkonomia qeou) (an administration of the things by which God has provided for and prepared salvation).” That is, if those to whom Timothy gives the charge, follow his instructions, they will exercise a careful stewardship of the gospel message, in other words, preach it in a way in which sinners will be saved. This working of God through His Word is further seen as to its nature, to be productive of charity out of a

pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned. The word “charity” is  (ajgaph), the word used in John 3:16 of God’s love for the lost, in Romans 5:5 of the love which the Holy Spirit sheds abroad in the heart of the yielded believer, and of the love defined by Paul in I Corinthians 13. The word “charity” is today an unfortunate translation of the Greek word. The word “good” is agathos (ajgaqo"). Cremer in his Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek, has some valuable material on this word. “The word expresses in its use, a recognition alike simple and full, that the thing spoken of is perfect in its kind, so as to produce pleasure, satisfaction, and a sense of well-being. The fundamental conception of the word is that of well-being, pleasure. Good is existence which is perfect and promotes perfection. “The transference of this conception to the sphere of morals was easy. Since that is good which, after its kind, is perfect, the sphere of good at once fundamentally limits itself to that which is as in general a thing should be, and thus the word becomes synonymous with dikaios (dikaio") (righteous), observing divine and human laws, upright, virtuous, keeping the commands of God.” One can see from the above that a good conscience, therefore, is one that produces a sense of well-being, satisfaction, and pleasure. The guilty conscience is uncomfortable, dissatisfied. A good conscience is one that leads its owner to obey the Word of God. The word “unfeigned” is the translation of anupokritos (ajnupokrito"). The verb is hupokrinomai (uJpokrinomai). The simple verb means “to judge,” the prefixed preposition, “under.” It was used in ancient Greece of an actor on the stage, of one who assumes to be what he is not. Our word “hypocrite” comes from this word. The Alpha prefixed makes the noun form refer to one who is not hypocritical in his actions or speech, one who is unfeigned, undisguised. The faith spoken of here is a genuine, as contrasted to a spurious, assumed, pretended faith, a mere intellectual assent that poses for a heart acceptance. “Having swerved” is  (ajstocew), “to miss the mark, to deviate from.” “Have turned aside” is  (ejktrepw), a medical term meaning “to turn or twist out,” used of limbs which were dislocated. Reference is made here to quite a doctrinal wrench from the true position. This was no slight misinterpretation of the Word, but a serious change of position doctrinally. The words, “vain jangling,” are mataiologian (mataiologian), made up of mataios ( mataio"), “that which is devoid of force, truth, success, result, that which is useless, to no purpose,” and logos (logo") “a word.” Thus, the compound word means “useless talk.” Their talk was vain in the sense of being in vain, futile. The participle “desiring,” Vincent says, is explanatory and confirmatory of the preceding statement. It is, “They have turned aside unto vain jangling since they desire to be teachers of the law.” The same authority says that this law is apparently the Mosaic law, and that these teachers may have been arbitrary teachers of the law, but in what way, cannot be shown. The participle “understanding” is concessive, namely, “though they neither understand.” Concerning the expression, “what they say, nor whereof they affirm,” Vincent says, “They know not what they say, nor what kind of things they are of which they speak so confidently.… The false teachers announce their errors with assurance.” The word “affirm” is diabebaiomai (diabebaiomai), “to affirm strongly, to assert confidently.” The words, “teachers of the law,” are one word in the Greek, nomodidaskalos (nomodidaskalo"), literally, “law teachers.” That is, these individuals wished to be, not

teachers who taught the law among other things, but their exclusive stock in trade would be the o.t., law. They aimed at being professional interpreters of the law. Translation. Now, the objective which is the aim of the aforementioned charge is love out of a heart which is pure, and a conscience which is good, and a faith which is not assumed but real, from which things certain having deviated, have turned off into talk which is futile, since they desire to be law teachers, though they neither understand what things they are saying, nor what kind of things they are concerning which they speak so confidently. (1:8–11) Lest Paul be misunderstood in his words about the Mosaic law, he now indicates the true use of the law as against the use to which these teachers just mentioned put the law. He says the law is good (kalos (kalo")) if a man uses it lawfully. The word agathos (ajgaqo") refers to intrinsic goodness, while kalos (kalo") refers to goodness as it is seen on the outside. But the distinction does not help us here. Cremer says that the Greeks brought kalos (kalo") into very close connection with agathos (ajgaqo"), so that the basic meaning of each is the same, although the goodness is looked upon from two different standpoints. The word “lawfully” is  (nomimw"), properly, “agreeable to the law.” Then Paul proceeds to make clear the proper use of the law. The word “law” in verse 9 is without the article. While the word “law” could refer to the Mosaic law in such a construction, Expositors suggests that it refers to law in general. The same authority says: “Law is not enacted for a naturally law-abiding man. Dikaios (Dikaio") (righteous) is used here in the popular sense, as in ‘I came not to call the righteous.’ It is unnecessary to suppose that St. Paul had the theory of justification in his mind when writing this.” Vincent concurs, in the words, “Morally upright. Not in the Pauline sense of justified by faith.… This appears from the way in which the opposite of righteous is described in the next clause. The lawless person is anomos (ajnomo"), recognizing no law. The disobedient person is anupotaktos (ajnupotakto").” Vincent says, “Better unruly. Disobedient is too specific. It means those who will not come into subjection. It is closely allied with lawless. In the one case no legal obligation is recognized; in the other, subjection to law is refused.” “Ungodly” is  (ajsebh"), “destitute of reverential awe towards God, impious.” The word “profane” is  (bebhlo"). The word is derived from  (bhlo"), “a threshold,” and hence has the primary sense of that which may be trodden. That which is permitted to be trodden by people at large is unhallowed, profane. Thus, a profane person is one who has made himself accessible to evil influence. He has not kept himself for God. He is common, unhallowed territory. He is secular, as contrasted to religious, so far as his relation to God is concerned. He is a non-religious person. The Greek word translated “murderers,” may be applied to any unnatural treatment of fathers and mothers. Several authorities render it “smiters.” The expression, “them that defile themselves with mankind,” is the translation of  (ajrsenokoith"), which Thayer defines as a sodomite, one who lies with a male as with a female. “Menstealers” is  (ajndrapodisth"). The word comes from  (ajnhr) and pous (pou"), a person taken in war and sold into slavery. It refers to a slave-dealer, a kidnapper, a man-stealer, as well as to one who unjustly reduces free men to slavery, also to one who steals the slaves of others and sells them. The word includes all who exploit men and women for their own

selfish ends. The word “sound” is  (uJgiainw), “to be in good health, to be well, sound.” Expositors says; “Healthy, wholesome, admirably describe Christian teaching, as St. Paul conceived it, in its complete freedom from casuistry or quibbles in its theory, and from arbitrary or unnatural restrictions in its practise.” Commenting on the words, “According to the gospel of the glory of the blessed God,” Expositors says: “Inasmuch as unsound teaching had claimed to be a gospel (Gal. 1:6), St. Paul finds it necessary to recharge the word with its old force by distinguishing epithets. The gospel had become impoverished by heterodox associations. The gospel with which St. Paul had been entrusted, was the gospel of the glory of the blessed God.… And this glory, although primarily an attribute of God, is here and elsewhere treated as a blessed state to which those who obey the gospel may attain, and which it is possible to miss (Rom. 3:23, 5:2, 15:7).” Translation. But we know that the law is good if a person uses it properly, knowing this, that law is not enacted for a law-abiding person, but for lawless ones, and for unruly ones, for those who are destitute of reverential awe towards God, and for sinners, for unholy ones and for those who are non-religious, for those who ill-treat fathers and ill-treat mothers, for man-slayers, for whoremongers, for those who defile themselves with men, for menstealers, for liars, for perjurers, and if as is the case, there is anything of a different nature which is opposed to sound teaching, according to the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I was entrusted. (1:12–14) Expositors says that “this parenthetical thanksgiving, which is quite in St. Paul’s manner, is suggested by the words ‘which was committed to my trust’ (v. 11).” The words “I thank,” are literally, “I have constant gratitude to.” It is not a mere statement of the fact of being grateful, but a revelation of Paul’s constant attitude of gratefulness. The word “enabled” is  (ejndunw). Paul uses this verb in Philippians 4:13, “I am strong in the sphere of all things in the One who is constantly infusing strength in me.” The verb itself means “to clothe with, to furnish with anything,” the context indicating that with which the person is furnished. Since Paul in this statement is talking about being strong, the thing with which God clothes him or with which He furnishes him is strength. In our First Timothy context, the apostle is speaking of being entrusted with the proclamation of the gospel. Paul thus was clothed with the ability to proclaim the good news of salvation. The Greek text reads: “I have constant gratitude to the One who endued me with the necessary strength, Christ Jesus our Lord.” What Paul is grateful to Him for is given in the words, “for that He counted me faithful.” The word “for” is hoti (oJti), better translated “because.” The word “counted” is  (hJgeomai), “to deem, account, consider, think.” It speaks of a belief or appraisal that does not rest upon one’s emotions, but upon the due consideration of external grounds, upon the weighing and comparing of facts. It refers to a deliberate and careful judgment. God saw that the fiery, zealous, intense Pharisee would be just as fiery, zealous, and intense in the proclamation of the gospel as he was in its persecution, when saving grace was operating in his being. God demonstrated His confidence in Paul by putting him into the ministry. The participle is aorist, its classification, circumstantial. God

considered Paul trustworthy, having put him into the ministry. The latter word is diakonia (diakonia). The word means “service, ministering.” This Greek word could have been used in the last war when speaking of the Armed Services. It speaks of a branch of activity in which the individual renders service. Here it is Christian service. The word “ministry” today is used of the ordained clergy. Paul thought of the sphere of Christian service as a whole. God placed him in the service. The word “was” is a concessive participle in the Greek text, “though I was.” Expositors notes that it was against Jesus personally that Paul had acted (Acts 9:5, 22:7, 26:14), and that this brings into stronger relief the kindness of Jesus to Paul. The word “blaspheme” in Greek means, “to speak reproachfully of, rail at, revile, calumniate.” Paul was guilty of all this in respect to Jesus. The word “injurious” is the translation of  (uJbristh"), “one whose insolence and contempt of others breaks forth in wanton and outrageous acts.” Paul was  (uJbristh") when he persecuted the Church. In commenting upon the statement, “I obtained mercy,” Expositors says, “Obtaining mercy does not in this case mean the pardon which implies merely exemption from punishment: no self-respecting man would value such a relationship with God. Rather, St. Paul has in his mind what he has expressed elsewhere as the issue of having received mercy, namely, to have been granted an opportunity of serving Him whom he injured.” On the words “in unbelief,” the same authority says, “ ‘In unbelief’ does not so much qualify ‘ignorantly,’ as correct a possible notion that all ignorance must be excusable. St. Paul declares, on the contrary, that his was a positive act of sinful disbelief; but ‘where sin abounded, grace did abound more exceedingly.’ ” Translation. I am constantly grateful to the One who endued me with the necessary strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because He deemed me trustworthy, having placed me in service, though I was the very one who heretofore was a reviler, and a persecutor, and an insolent, destructive person. But I was shown mercy because, being ignorant, I acted in unbelief. Moreover, the grace of our Lord abounded exceedingly, together with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. (1:15–17) Introducing comments on these verses, Expositors says, “The dealings of Christ with me, of course, are not unique. My experience is the same in kind, though not in degree, as that of all saved sinners. Christ’s longsuffering will never undergo a more severe test than it did in my case, so that no sinner need ever despair. Let us glorify God therefore.” The Greek order is, “faithful is the saying.” The word “faithful” is pistos (pisto"). Its usage in the first century can be seen from the following examples taken from the papyri, and quoted by Moulton and Milligan in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament: “whom no one would trust; I have trusted no one to take it to her; I am no longer trusted, unless I behave fairly.” It is easy to see that the basic idea in the word is that of trustworthiness. The statement Paul is about to make, he declares to be trustworthy. The word “acceptation” is  (ajpodoch). The verb form, apodechomai (ajpodecomai), means “to accept what is offered from without, to receive into the mind” with assent. The noun form means “reception, admission, approbation.” The word “all,” Vincent says, “describes the reception of which the saying is worthy, as complete and excluding all

doubt.” The words, “of whom I am chief,” are literally, “of whom, I, in contradistinction to others, am foremost.” The pronoun is used with its intensive force. The word “howbeit” is alla (ajlla), used here, not in its adversative, but its ascensive sense, that of “moreover.” It continues the thought of verse 13 and develops the expression of self-depreciation. The connection, Expositors says, is, “I was such a sinner that antecedently one might doubt whether I could be saved or was worth saving. But Christ had a special object in view in extending to me His mercy.” In the phrase, “that in me first Jesus Christ,” the word “first” does not indicate that Paul is the chief sinner, but that he is “the representative instance of God’s longsuffering to a high-handed transgressor” (Vincent). The word is explained by the word “pattern.” Vincent notes that the a.v., misses the possessive force of the definite article which occurs with the word “longsuffering” in the Greek text. It is more correctly, “all His longsuffering.” Expositors translates, “the utmost longsuffering which He has.” The Greek word translated “longsuffering,” is makrothumia (makroqumia), made up of makros (makro"), “long,” and thumos (qumo"), “soul” or “spirit.” It has the sense of a strong passion, stronger even than  (ojrgh), “anger.” Thumos (Qumo") is a tumultuous welling up of the whole spirit, a mighty emotion which seizes and moves the whole inner man. The restraint implied in makrothumia (makroqumia) is more correctly expressed by long-suffering. It is a patient holding out under trial, a long-protracted restraint of the soul from yielding to passion, especially that of anger. The word “pattern” is  (uJpotupwsi"). The cognate verb means “to delineate, to outline.” The noun means “an outline, sketch, brief or summary exposition, an example, a pattern.” Thayer explains its use in this instance in the words, “for an example of those who should hereafter believe, i.e., to show by the example of my conversion that the same grace which I had obtained would not be wanting also to those who should hereafter believe.” The word “everlasting” is  (aijwnion), “without beginning or end, that which has always been and always will be.” When used of the sufferings of the damned, the word of necessity must mean everlasting, not eternal, for these have a beginning but no end. When it is used of the life which God gives the believing sinner in salvation, the meaning is “eternal,” since the life God gives is the life He possesses, and that life had no beginning and will have no end. Hence, the word “eternal” should be used here, not the word “everlasting.” The Greek has, “Now, to the King of the Ages.” What a conception; God, the absolute Ruler of the Ages of time and of all that goes on in those ages. The word “immortal” is aphthartos (ajfqarto"), “uncorrupted, not liable to corruption or decay, imperishable.” The word “immortal,” meaning “that which is exempt from death,” is not a correct translation of the Greek word. The word “wise” is not in the best texts. It is “the only God.” Expositors translates by the word “unique.” The word “honor” is  (timh), “a valuing by which the price is fixed.” Hence, it comes to mean “honor” in the sense that a person accords veneration, reverence, deference, to some one in the measure that he values that person. Translation. Trustworthy is this word and worthy of unqualified acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am foremost. Moreover, on this account I was shown mercy, in order

that in me first Jesus Christ might demonstrate the longsuffering which He has, as an example to those who are about to be believing on Him for life eternal. Now, to the King of the Ages, the incorruptible, invisible, unique God, be honor and glory, for ever and ever. Amen. (1:18–20) The charge is given in what follows in this verse and the next. The expression, “son Timothy,” is most tender. The word is teknon (teknon), “child,” but the word was used as a term of endearment in connection with adults also. The words, “according to the prophecies that went before on thee,” are explained as follows: “The sense of the whole passage is: ‘I commit this charge unto thee in accordance with prophetic intimations which I formerly received concerning thee.’ According to I Timothy 4:14, prophecy has previously designated Timothy as the recipient of a special spiritual gift; and the prophecies in our passage are the single expressions or detailed contents of the prophecy mentioned here” (Vincent). The words, “that by them,” are literally “in order that in them,” that is, “in their sphere,” or, possibly, “in their power.” “Having put away,” Vincent says, is not strong enough. The Greek has it, “having thrust from them.” It implies wilful violence against conscience. The word “faith” has the definite article. It was not with reference to their personal faith, but with regard to the Faith, the Christian Faith as looked upon as a revelation, that they made shipwreck. Commenting on the words, “whom I have delivered unto Satan,” Vincent refers the reader to his notes on I Corinthians 5:5, where another was to be delivered to Satan. He says, “On this very obscure and much controverted passage, it may be observed: 1. That it implies excommunication from the Church. 2. That it implies something more, the nature of which is not clearly known. 3. That, casting the offender out of the Church involved casting him back into the heathen world, which Paul habitually conceives as under the power of Satan. 4. That Paul has in view the reformation of the offender, ‘that the spirit may be saved’ etc. This reformation is to be through affliction, disease, pain, or loss, which also he is wont to conceive as Satan’s work.” The word “learn” is  (paideuw), in the passive, “to be instructed or taught.” The verb, “have delivered,” is in the perfect tense, speaking of a past complete act having present results. These two were still under sentence of excommunication at the time of the writing of I Timothy. Translation. This charge I am entrusting to you, son Timothy, in accordance with the prophetic intimations concerning you, to the effect that in their sphere you are to wage the good warfare, holding faith and a good conscience, which (latter) certain having thrust from themselves concerning the Faith, have suffered shipwreck, among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered over to Satan, in order that they may be taught not to be blaspheming.

CHAPTER TWO (2:1, 2) The words, “I exhort therefore,” resume and develop Paul’s charge to Timothy in 1:18. The words, “first of all,” are to he connected with “I exhort.” It is as if Paul said, “The most important point in my exhortation concerns the universal scope of public prayer” (Expositors). The word “supplications” is  (dehsi"), a word which

gives prominence to personal need. It refers to prayer for one’s personal needs. Here, the word refers to petitions having to do with one’s personal needs as they are related to the government under which he lives. “Intercessions” is enteuxis (ejnteuxi"). The verbal form means “to fall in with a person, to draw near so as to converse familiarly.” Hence, enteuxis (ejnteuxi") does not mean “intercession” in the accepted sense of that word, but rather, approach to God in free and familiar prayer. The verbal form  (ejntugcanw), used in Romans 8:26, and translated “maketh intercession,” has the idea of “to intervene, interfere.” It is not that the Holy Spirit pleads in our behalf, but that He throws Himself into our case, takes part in it. In Hebrews 7:25, it is not that our Lord is ever interceding for us, but that He is always meeting us at every point in our lives and intervening in all our affairs for our benefit (Vincent). In our present passage, the idea of interposition is prominent. We are as Christians to make prayers a factor in our relations to our secular rulers. The word “authority” is  (uJperoch). The verb form is  (uJperecw) “to hold above,” the noun meaning “elevation, preeminence, superiority.” The word “quiet” is  (ejrhmo"). It denotes quiet, arising from the absence of outward disturbance. The word may here imply, keeping aloof from political agitations, and freedom from persecutions. The word “peaceable” is  (hJsucio"), “tranquility arising from within.” The word “honesty” is  (semnoth"). Vincent says that “honesty” according to the modern accepted meaning, is an unfortunate rendering. In earlier English it meant “becoming deportment, decency, decorum.” It is so used in Shakespeare, “He is of noble strain, of approved valor and confirmed honesty.” The adjective means “reverenced, venerable, exhibiting a dignity which arises from moral elevation, and thus invites reverence.” Translation. I exhort therefore, first of all, that petitions be made continually for personal needs, prayers, intercessions, giving of thanks on behalf of all, on behalf of kings and all those holding high positions, in order that a quiet and peaceful life we may be leading in all godliness and becoming deportment. (2:3–5) The demonstrative pronoun “this” points back to the obligation to pray for all men. The word “good” is not to be construed with the phrase “acceptable in the sight of God.” Praying for all men “approves itself to the natural conscience, and it is also in accordance with the revealed will of God” (Expositors). The words, “God our Saviour,” are literally “Our Saviour, God.” In the Cult of the Caesar, the reigning emperor was called  (swthr), “saviour.” He was a saviour in that he held mankind together under the great Roman power, providing peace and order, prosperity and protection. Over against this Cult of the Caesar, was the Cult of Christ, in which the Lord Jesus was worshipped as the Saviour—God. The former ruled over the temporal affairs of his subjects and was one of their gods. The latter was Saviour in the sense that He saved the believer’s soul from sin and exercised a spiritual control over his life. In the expression as it stands in the Greek text, there seems to be a polemic touch, contrasting the Saviour of Christians with the pagan saviour, and yet in the context, recognizing the right the latter had to rule over the temporal aspects of the lives of the members of the Roman empire. Paul recognizes here the fact that human government is a divinely appointed institution, and yet draws the line between that and such a thing as the worship of the Caesar, by

using the expression, “Our Saviour, God.” The word “will” is  (qelw), speaking of a wish or desire that arises from one’s emotions. The desire for the salvation of lost sinners arises spontaneously from the love of God for a lost race. The literal Greek is, “who willeth all men” etc. It marks a determinate purpose. Yet with this purpose, God does not force a man to accept salvation against his will. He made man a free moral agent, and He will not violate the will of man. The word “knowledge” is  (ejpignwsi"), “advanced or full knowledge.” In the New Testament it is always used of the knowledge of things ethical or divine, and is never ascribed to God. Commenting on the words, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,” Expositors says: “This emphatic statement as to the unity of the Godhead is suggested by the singular  (swthro") (Saviour) just preceding. The word ‘one’ neither affirms nor denies anything as to the complexity of the nature of the Godhead; it has no bearing on the Christian doctrine of the Trinity; it is simply intended to emphasize the uniqueness of the relations of God to man. The use of ‘one,’ with this intention, is well illustrated by Ephesians 4:4–6. The current thought of the time was conscious of many saviours. In contrast to these, St. Paul emphasizes the uniqueness of the Saviour and God worshipped by the Christians.… The oneness of God has a bearing on the practical question of man’s salvation. It is possible for all men to be saved, because over them there are not many gods that can exercise conflicting will-power towards them, but one only. One Godhead stands over against one humanity; and the Infinite and the finite can enter into relations one with the other, since they are linked by a mediator who is both God and man. The word “man” explains how Christ Jesus could be a mediator. He can only be an adequate mediator whose sympathy with, and understanding of both parties is cognizable by and patent to both.” The word “mediator” is  (mesith"), “one who intervenes between two, either in order to make or restore peace and friendship, or to form a compact or ratify a covenant.” Our Lord is a mediator in that He interposed Himself by His death, and made possible the restoration of the harmony between God and man which had been broken by sin. The distinctive word for “man” here is not  (ajnhr), “a male individual,” but  (ajnqrwpo"), the racial, generic term. it was not that our Lord became a man in the sense of a male individual of the human race, but that He in the incarnation, incorporated Himself with the human race. Translation. This is good and acceptable in the sight of our Saviour, God, whose desire it is that all men be saved and come to a precise and experiential knowledge of the truth, for there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a Man, Christ Jesus. (2:6, 7) The words, “who gave Himself,” speak of the fact that our Lord’s death was a spontaneous and voluntary sacrifice on His part. “We may note that this statement necessarily implies not only the pre-existence of our Lord, but also His co-operation in the eternal counsels and purpose of the Father as regards the salvation of man. Alford is probably right in saying that ‘to give Himself,’ as St. Paul expresses it, suggests more than ‘to give His soul.’ The latter might naturally be limited to the sacrifice of His death; the former connotes the sacrifice of His lifetime, the whole of the humiliation and selfemptying of the Incarnation” (Expositors).

The word “ransom” is antilutron (ajntilutron), made up of anti (ajnti) and lutron (lutron). The latter was the common word used of the ransom of a slave or prisoner. Anti (ÆAnti) was the preposition signifying substitution. Dana and Mantey, in their Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (p. 100), say that “there is conclusive proof that the dominant use for anti (ajnti) in the first century was instead of.” They quote Moulton and Milligan in Vocabulary of the Greek Testament as saying, “By far the commonest meaning of anti (ajnti) is the simple instead of.” Thus the antilutron (ajntilutron) is a payment given instead of the slave or prisoner, that is, in substitution for the slave or prisoner. The person holding the slave or prisoner is satisfied with the payment as a substitute for the slave he owns or the prisoner he holds. The preposition “for” is huper (uJper), “for the sake of, in behalf of, instead of.” It is used in Titus 2:14, “He gave Himself in behalf of us,” also in Galatians 3:13, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse instead of (huper (uJper)) us.” “In these passages, the context clearly indicates that substitution is meant” (Dana and Mantey). Expositors, commenting on “a ransom for all,” says, “If we are to see any special force in the anti (ajnti), we may say that it expresses that the lutron (lutron) is equivalent in value to the thing procured by means of it. But perhaps St, Paul’s use of the word, if he did not coin it, is due to his desire to reaffirm our Lord’s well-known declaration in a most emphatic way possible. Lutron anti (Lutron ajnti) merely implies an exchange; antilutron huper (ajntilutron uJper) implies that the exchange is decidedly a ‘benefit to those on whose behalf it is made.’ As far as the suggestion of vicariousness is concerned, there does not seem to be much difference between the two phrases.” The words, “to be testified in due time,” are in apposition with, “who gave Himself.” Expositors says: “The great act of self-sacrifice is timeless; but as historically apprehended by us, the testimony concerning it must be made during a particular and suitable period of history.” That period of history is, of course, from the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost until the end of the Millennium. The words, “in due time,” are the translation of kairois idiois (kairoi" ijdioi"). The former word speaks of “the critical, epoch-making periods fore-ordained of God when all that has been slowly, and often without observation, ripening through long ages, is mature and comes to birth in grand decisive events which constitute at once the close of one period and the commencement of another” (Trench). The latter word (idiois (ijdioi")) means “private, unique, only of its kind.” The due time would be that unique, particular season for the proclamation of the gospel based upon the historic work of Christ on the Cross. The gospel was preached all through o.t., times, but this was upon the basis of a prophetic work of salvation which was yet to be wrought out on the Cross. The word “ordained” is  (tiqhmi), “to appoint.” “Preacher” is  (khrux), in its common use in the first century, “a herald, a messenger vested with public authority, who conveyed the official messages of kings, magistrates, princes, military commanders, or who gave a public summons or demand, and who performed various other duties.” When Paul writes Timothy, (II Tim. 4:2), he says, “Make a public proclamation of the Word with such formality, gravity, and authority as must be heeded.” He uses  (khrussw), the verbal form of the noun  (khrux). The Imperial Herald would enter a town in behalf of the Emperor, and make a public proclamation of the message which his Sovereign ordered him to give, doing so with such formality, gravity, and authority as must be heeded. He gave the people exactly what the Emperor bade him give, nothing more, nothing less. This should be the example and pattern for present day preachers of

the gospel. The word “apostle” (apostolos (ajpostolo")) is from  (stellw) “to send,” and apo (ajpo), “off from,” the word speaking of the act of an individual sending someone off from himself with a commission and credentials to act in his behalf and accomplish a certain mission. The noun form was used of an ambassador or an envoy. Paul thought of himself as such, a representative of the Lord Jesus. Commenting on the words, “I speak the truth in Christ, I lie not,” Expositors says; “There is nothing derogatory from the apostle in supposing that the personal struggle in which he had been for years engaged with those who opposed his gospel made him always feel on the defensive, and that his self-vindication came to be expressed in stereotyped phrases which rose to his mind whenever the subject came before him even in a letter to a loyal disciple.” The words, “in Christ,” are a rejected reading. The words, “in faith and verity,” are explanatory of the sphere in which the apostle discharges his apostolic function. The word “sincerity” is  (ajlhqeia). The verbal form is  (lanqanw), “to be hidden.” Alpha privative prefixed makes it mean, “that which is not hidden,” namely, “that which is open to the light.” Truth, in the thinking of the Greeks is that which is not covered or hidden, that which is open for inspection, that which is of such a nature, that, knowing that it is all that it should be, welcomes investigation. Thus, “faith and truth are the element or sphere in which the apostolic functions are discharged: that he preaches with a sincere faith in the gospel, and with a truthful representation of the gospel which he believes” (Vincent). Translation. Who gave Himself a ransom on behalf of all, the testimony of which was to be given in His own strategic seasons, to which I was appointed an official herald and an ambassador; I am speaking truth, I am not lying; a teacher of Gentiles in faith and truth. (2:8) The word “therefore” is resumptive, picking up again the general topic of public worship from which Paul digressed in verses 3–7. The words “I will” are boulomai (boulomai), speaking of a desire which proceeds from the reason, as against  (qelw), a desire which originates with the emotions. The word “men” is preceded by the definite article in the Greek text. Paul means that the men, as opposed to the women, should conduct public worship (Expositors). The word “everywhere” is  (ejn panti tropwi), more correctly, “in every place,” that is, wherever Christian congregations assemble, not in every place indiscriminately. The word “holy” is not in this instance hagios (aJgio"), holy in the sense of being set apart for God, but hosios (oJsio"), which is grouped with dikaios (dikaio") (righteous) for purposes of discrimination. The holiness here is not that of position but of experience, of life. As to the lifting up of the hands, the following can be stated: Vincent says that among the orientals, the lifting up of the hands accompanied the taking of an oath, blessing, and prayer. The custom passed over into the primitive church, as may be seen from the mural paintings in the catacombs. Expositors suggests that “this is not directly intended to enjoin a particular gesture appropriate to prayer, but merely avoids the repetition of proseuchomai (proseucomai) (pray).” The words, “without wrath or doubting,” indicate the two conditions necessary to effectual prayer, freedom from irritation towards our fellowmen, and confidence toward God. The word “doubting” (dialogismos (dialogismo")) means “disputatious reasoning,

skeptical questions or criticisms.” Prayer, Vincent says, “is to be without the element of skeptical criticism, whether of God’s character and dealings, or of the character and behavior of those for whom prayer is offered.” Translation. I desire, therefore, that the men pray in every place, lifting up holy hands without anger or skeptical criticism. (2:9, 10) Commenting on the words, “in like manner,” Vincent says, “The writer’s thought is still running upon the public assemblies for worship.” The word “adorn” is  (kosmew). The noun is kosmos (kosmo"), the basic meaning of which is “an ordered system, an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order.” It was used by the Greek writers with the meanings, ornament, decoration, adornment” The verb  (kosmew) means, “to put in order, arrange, make ready.” The word kosmos (kosmo") (”order”), is opposed to chaos (cao") (our “chaos”) which latter word the Greek philosophers used to designate what they thought was the original condition of the universe, one of disorder. In passing, it might be well to note that when the n.t., writers speak of the universe as it came into existence, they use kosmos (kosmo"), indicating that the original condition was that of order, perfection. By the use of this word, Paul indicates that the adornment of the Christian woman should be one in which order, not disorder, obtains. And this orderliness must not extend merely to the relationship of the various articles of wearing apparel to one another, but also to the relationship of that apparel to her Christian character and testimony. In other words, the apparel must be congruous with, fitting to, and consistent with what she is, a child of God. The word “modest” is the translation of kosmios (kosmio") “well arranged, seemly, modest.” The word “apparel” here is  (katastolh), which conveys the idea of external appearance, principally in dress. It is deportment, as exhibited externally, whether in look, manner, or dress. The word “shamefacedness” is  (aijdw"). In earlier Greek it was sometimes blended with the sense of  (aijscunh) (shame), though it was used also of the feeling of respectful timidity in the presence of superiors, or of penitent respect toward one who has been wronged. It is the feeling of a suppliant or an unfortunate in the presence of those from whom he seeks aid, of a younger toward an older man. It is a feeling based upon the sense of deficiency, inferiority. or unworthiness. The word is a blend of modesty and humility. “Sobriety” is  (swfrosunh), “soundness of mind, self-control, sobriety.” The word speaks of the entire command of the passions and desires, a self-control which holds the reins over these. Euripedes a Greek writer, calls it “the fairest gift of the gods.” Vincent remarks that the fact that it appears so rarely in the n.t., is, as Trench remarks, “not because more value was attached to it in heathen ethics than in Christian morality, but because it is taken up and transformed into a condition yet higher still, in which a man does not command himself, which is well, but, which is better still, is commanded by God.” The fruit of the Spirit is temperance (egkrateia (ejgkrateia)), “self-control,” the virtue of one who masters his desires and passions, especially his sensual appetites. Balancing the above, we might say, that the Christian is a free moral agent, not a machine, and is expected by God to exercise self-control by a free act of his will, doing this however in the energy which the Holy Spirit supplies to the yielded Christian. It is a happy combination and interworking of the free will of the believer and the grace of God.

The word “with” is meta (meta), a preposition speaking of association. Vincent says that “the words with shamefacedness and sobriety, may be taken directly with adorn themselves, or better perhaps as indicating moral qualities accompanying (meta (meta) with) the modest apparel. Let them adorn themselves in modest apparel, having along with this shamefacedness and sobermindedness.” The words, “broided hair,” are literally “with plaitings.” Vincent suggests “braided hair.” Here is another of those obsolete words in the a.v., going back in this case to Chaucer; “Hir helow heer was broyded in a tresse, Bihinde hir bak, a yerde long, I gesse.” It is the principle that governs the kind of adornment, which is in Paul’s mind here, namely, the Christian woman is to depend for her adornment upon a Christian character, good works. When she does this her apparel will be in keeping with her Christian character. Translation. Likewise, I desire that women be adorning themselves in apparel that is seemly, having along with this, modesty and sobermindedness; not with braided hair, or pearls, or very costly garments, but with that which is fitting for a woman professing godliness, by means of good works. (2:11, 12) Paul is still dealing with the conduct of women in the assemblies. This admonition to the effect that women are to learn in silence with all subjection, is made clear as to its meaing by I Corinthians 14:34, 35, where the women were disturbing the church service by asking their husbands questions, presumably about that which was being preached. The silence here and in our I Timothy passage has to do with maintaining quiet in the assembly, and does not forbid a woman to take an active part in the work of the church in her own sphere and under the limitations imposed upon her in the contextual passage (I Tim. 2:12). The correct understanding of Paul’s words, “I suffer not a woman to teach,” are dependent upon the tense of the Greek infinitive and the grammatical rule pertaining to it. In the case of the infinitive, the Greek has a choice between the present and aorist tenses, and he can use either at will, since the time element in the tense of the infinitive is not considered. When the Greek desires to refer only to the fact of the action denoted by the infinitive, without referring to details, he uses the aorist. Should he use any other tense, he is going out of his way to add details, and the student must pay particular attention to his choice of the tense. Dana and Mantey in their Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (p. 199) have this to say on the subject: “The aorist infinitive denotes that which is eventual or particular, while the present infinitive indicates a condition or process. Thus pisteusai (pisteusai) (aorist) is to exercise faith on a given occasion, while pisteuein (pisteuein) (present) is to be a believer; douleusai (douleusai) (aorist) is to render a service, while douleuein (douleuein) (present) is to be a slave; hamartein (aJmartein) (aorist) is to commit a sin, while hamartanein (aJmartanein) (present) is to be a sinner.” Thus, didaxai (didaxai) (aorist), is to teach, while didaskein (didaskein) (present 2:12), is to be a teacher. Paul, therefore, says, “I do not permit a woman to be a teacher.” The context here has to do with church order, and the position of the man and woman in the church worship and work. The kind of teacher Paul has in mind is spoken of in Acts 13:1, I Corinthians 12:28, 29, and Ephesians 4:11, God-called, and God-equipped

teachers, recognized by the Church as those having authority in the Church in matters of doctrine and interpretation. This prohibition of a woman to be a teacher, does not include the teaching of classes of women, girls, or children in a Sunday School, for instance, but does prohibit the woman from being a pastor, or a doctrine teacher in a school. It would not be seemly, either, for a woman to teach a mixed class of adults. The expression, “usurp authority,” Vincent says, is not a correct translation of the Greek word. It is rather, “to exercise dominion over.” In the sphere of doctrinal disputes or questions of interpretation, where authoritative pronouncements are to be made, the woman is to keep silence. Translation. Let a woman be learning in silence with all subjection. Moreover, I do not permit a woman to be a teacher, neither to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence. (2:13–15) The reason for the above position of the man in the Church and that of the woman, Paul says, is found in the original order of creation, and in the circumstances of the fall of man. The word “formed” is  (plassw) “to form, mold” something from clay or wax. It was used strictly of one working in soft substances, as a potter in clay, molding or shaping. The first word “deceived,” is the translation of  (ajpataw), “to cheat, deceive, beguile.” The second instance of the use of the word is  (ejxapataw), “to completely or thoroughly deceive.” The word “was” is ginomai (ginomai), in the perfect tense, which verb when used with en (ejn) (in) as it is here, often signifies the coming or falling into a condition. One could render the expression, “has fallen into transgression.” Verse fifteen is most difficult of interpretation. We will look at the expression, “she shall be saved.” The salvation spoken of here is not salvation in the ordinary sense of the word, as when a sinner puts his faith in the Lord Jesus, and is saved from sin and becomes a child of God. The woman spoken of here is a Christian, for Paul speaks of her as continuing in faith and love and holiness. These things could not be said of an unsaved person. The Greek word “to save” ( (swzw)), has a variety of uses. It is used in the n.t., of the healing of a sick person in the sense that he is saved from illness and from death (Mark 5:34 “made whole,”  (swzw)). It is used in the sense of being saved from drowning in a shipwreck (Acts 27:20). Paul uses it in relation to being saved from becoming entangled in false teaching (I Tim. 4:16). In our present verse (2:15), the word is used in the sense of being saved from something other than from an unsaved condition. It should be clear, that salvation in the latter sense can only be had through faith in the atoning work of the Lord Jesus, never by good works, or by anything which the sinner might do. What that something is which child-bearing saves the woman from is made clear by the excellent note in Expositor’s Greek Testament; “The penalty for transgression, so far as woman is concerned, was expressed in the words, ‘I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children’ (Gen.3:16). But just as in the case of man, the world being as it is, the sentence has proved a blessing, so it is in the case of woman. ‘In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread’ expresses man’s necessity, duty, privilege, dignity. If the necessity of work be a stumbling block, man can ‘make it a stepping-stone’ (Browning, The Ring and the Book, The Pope, 413). Nay, it is the only stepping-stone available to him. If St. Paul’s argument had led him to emphasize the man’s part in the first transgression, he might have said, ‘He shall be saved in his toil,’ his

overcoming the obstacles of nature. “So St. Paul, taking the common-sense view that childbearing, rather than public teaching or the direction of affairs, is woman’s primary function, duty, privilege, and dignity, reminds Timothy and his readers that there was another aspect of the story in Genesis besides that of the woman’s taking the initiative in transgression: the pains of childbirth were her sentence, yet in undergoing these, she finds her salvation. She shall be saved in her childbearing (r.v. m. nearly). That is her normal and natural duty; and in the discharge of our normal and natural duties we all men and women alike, as far as our individual efforts can contribute to it, ‘work out our own salvation.’ ” To briefly state the matter, the interpretation is as follows: Just as hard labor is the man’s salvation in a set of circumstances and surroundings that without it, would cause him to deteriorate instead of make progress in character, so the pains of childbirth become the salvation of the woman, and in the same sense and for the same purpose, that of enabling the woman to adjust herself in her circumstances and surroundings so that she too will do the same. As to the Greek exegesis involved, we submit the following: The words “in childbearing” are the translation of  (dia th" teknogonia"). The preposition dia (dia) which ordinarily has the force of “by means of” and denotes intermediate agency, Expositors says, “here has hardly an instrumental force; it is rather the dia (dia) of accompanying circumstances, as in I Corinthians 3:15 (yet so as through fire).” As to the plural pronoun “they,” the same authority says, “The subject of ‘continue’ is usually taken to be women; but inasmuch as St. Paul has been speaking of women in the marriage relation, it seems better to understand the plural of the woman and her husband.” Translation. For Adam first was molded, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman, having been completely deceived, has fallen into transgression. Yet she shall be saved in her childbearing if they continue in faith and love and holiness accompanied by sobermindedness.

CHAPTER THREE (3:1) After giving directions concerning public prayer, Paul takes up the matter of Church organization. He begins with the office of the bishop. The words, “This is a true saying,” are more accurately, “Faithful (trustworthy) is the word.” The word is pistos (pisto"), “faithful,” not  (ajlhqh"), “true.” The word “bishop” is the rendering of episkopos (ejpiskopo"). The verbal form is  (ejpiskopew), “to look over, to oversee, to superintend, to exercise oversight or care over.” The word came originally from secular life, referring to the foreman of a construction gang, or the supervisor of building construction, for instance. Thayer defines the word; “an overseer, a man charged with the duty of seeing that things to be done by others are done rightly, any curator, guardian, or superintendent.” The word was taken up by the Church, and designated an overseer of any Christian church. The responsibilities of this office have to do with the oversight and direction of the spiritual life of the local church. The word “desire” is  (ojregw), “to stretch one’s self out in order to touch or to grasp something, to reach after or desire something.” Thus the word means more than “to desire.” It includes the idea of reaching after or seeking. The word “desireth” is 

(ejpiqumew), “to passionately long after.” Translation. This is a trustworthy word. If a certain one is seeking the office of an overseer, he passionately desires a good work. (3:2) The word “blameless” is  (ajnepilambanw), made up of  (lambanw), “to take,” and epi (ejpi), “upon”; thus, the compound means “to lay hold upon,” and all this is stated in the negative by having prefixed to it the letter, Alpha, making the entire word mean, “one who cannot be laid hold upon.” That is, a bishop must be of such a spotless character that no one can lay hold upon anything in his life which would be of such a nature as to cast reproach upon the cause of the Lord Jesus. He presents to the world at large such a Christian life that he furnishes no grounds for accusation. Expositors says: “It is not enough for him to be not criminal; he must be one against whom it is impossible to bring any charge of wrong doing such as could stand impartial examination. He must be without reproach (r.v.), irreprehensible (Trench).” Now, to consider the meaning of the words, “the husband of one wife.” The Greek is mias (mia") (one) gunaikos (gunaiko") (woman) andra (ajndra) (man). The word “man” is not  (ajnqrwpo"), the generic term for man, but  (ajnhr), the term used of a male individual of the human race. The other two words are in the genitive case, while  (ajnhr) is in the accusative. The literal translation is, “a man of one woman.” The words, when used of the marriage relation come to mean, “a husband of one wife.” The two nouns are without the definite article, which construction emphasizes character or nature. The entire context is one in which the character of the bishop is being discussed. Thus, one can translate, “a one-wife sort of a husband,” or “a one-woman sort of a man.” We speak of the Airedale as a one-man dog. We mean by that, that it is his nature to become attached to only one man, his master. Since character is emphasized by the Greek construction, the bishop should be a man who loves only one woman as his wife. It should be his nature to thus isolate and centralize his love. Does this mean that if the bishop is married, he is only to have one wife, not two, or does it mean that if his wife dies, he is not to marry again? As to the answer, we will let Expositors, Alford, and Vincent speak. The two first named believe that the words forbid a second marriage, and the last thinks that that is the probable meaning. As to the meaning that a bishop may have only one wife at a time, not two or more, Alford has this to say; “But the objection to taking this meaning is, that the Apostle would hardly have specified that as a requisite for the episcopate or presbyterate, which we know to have been fulfilled by all the Christians whatever: no instance being adduced of polygamy being practiced in the Christian church, and no exhortations to abstain from it.” Expositors says: “The better to ensure that the episcopus (ejpiscopu") be without reproach, his leading characteristic must be self-control. In the first place—and this has special force in the East—he must be a man who has—natural or acquired—a high conception of the relations of the sexes: a married man, who, if his wife dies, does not marry again. Men whose position is less open to criticism may do this without discredit, but the episcopus (ejpiscopu") must hold up a high ideal. Second marriage, which is mentioned as a familiar practice (Rom. 7:2, 3), is expressly permitted to Christian women in I Corinthians 7:39, and even recommended to, or rather enjoined upon, young widows in I Timothy 5:14. “The words ‘the husband of one wife,’ of course, do not mean that the episcopus

(ejpiscopu") must be, or has been married. What is here forbidden is bigamy under any circumstances. This view is supported (a) by the general drift of the qualities required here in a bishop; self-control or temperance, in his use of food and drink, possessions, gifts, temper; (b) by the corresponding requirement in a church widow, V9, the wife of one man, and (c) by the practice of the early church (apostolic Constitutions, VI 17: Apostolic Cannons 16 (17); Tertullian, Athenagoras, Origen, and the Canons of the councils. “On the other hand, it must be conceded that the patristic commentators on the passage, (with the partial exception of Chrysostom)—Theodor Mops., Theodoret, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Jerome, suppose that it is bigamy or polygamy that is here forbidden. But commentators are prone to go too far in the emancipation of their judgments from the prejudices or convictions of their contemporaries. In some matters ‘the common sense of most’ is a safer guide than the irresponsible conjectures of a conscientious student.” An interpretative translation offers the rendering, “married only once.” We submit that this is not the literal translation of the Greek here, but in the light of the above historical background, it is the correct interpretation of the words, and gives the English reader in unmistakably clear language, the true meaning of the words in the a.v., “the husband of one wife.” Alford, in his closing comments, has the following to say: “How far such a prohibition is to be considered binding on us, now that the Christian life has entered into another and totally different phase, is of course an open question for the present Christian at any time to deal with. It must be as a matter of course understood that regulations, in all lawful things, depend even when made by an Apostle, on circumstances: and the superstitious observance of the letter in such cases is often pregnant with mischief to the people and cause of Christ.” The word “vigilant” is  (nhfalion), “to be calm, dispassionate, and circumspect.” “The a.v., ‘vigilant’ is too limited. Wise caution may be included” (Vincent). “Sober” is  (swfrona), “soberminded, serious, earnest.” “Of good behaviour” is kosmion (kosmion), which speaks of order as against disorder. The word could be rendered here, “orderly.” Expositors suggests, “perhaps dignified in the best sense of the term.” The words, “given to hospitality,” are philoxenon (filoxenon). The word xenos (xeno") meant first of all, “a stranger, a foreigner.” It was also used of a guest-friend, also of a host, one who receives and entertains hospitably. The word philos (filo") refers to one who has a liking for, is fond of something. Thus, the compound word means, “one who is fond of offering hospitality.” But the hospitality referred to here is not of the kind which says, “Come over for dinner and let us have a good time. Some day you will return the favor and I will enjoy your hospitality.” The hospitality spoken of here found its occasion in the fact that in the days of the great Roman persecutions, Christians were banished and persecuted, and rendered homeless. Or, in the case of travelling preachers and teachers, ministering from church to church, these servants of God were to be received and cared for by the bishop. Or, because in the early centuries, the local churches had no church edifice in which to worship, the church met in the home of an individual. The bishop should be glad to thus open his home for this purpose. “Apt to teach” is didaktikon (didaktikon). Alford says: “not merely given to teaching, but able and skilled in it. All might teach to whom the Spirit imparted the gift: but skill in teaching was the especial office of the minister on whom would fall the ordinary duty of instruction of believers and refutation of gainsayers.” Expositors says: “didaktikon (didaktikon), as a

moral quality would involve not merely the ability, but also the willingness to teach, such as ought to characterize a servant of the Lord (II Tim. 2:24). The deacon’s relation to theology is passive, ver. 9.” Translation. It is necessary in the nature of the case, therefore, that the bishop be irreproachable, a one-wife sort of a husband, calm, dispassionate, and circumspect, soberminded, dignified, hospitable, a skilled teacher. (3:3) The words, “not given to wine,” are  (mh paroinon). The noun is made up of para (para), “beside,” and oinon (oijnon), “wine.” The compound means, “one who sits long at his wine.” In our Timothy passage, the wine is fermented. Vincent says that the verb paroinein (paroinein), “to behave ill at wine, to treat with drunken violence,” is found in Xenophon, Aeschines, Aristophanes, and Aristotle. He suggests the translation, “quarrelsome over wine.” Paul’s meaning is that the bishop, in partaking of wine, which in the first century was a common beverage not having the associations with which it is identified today, must not drink it so freely that he becomes intoxicated and hence quarrelsome. While this injunction does not teach total abstinence in the case of intoxicating liquors, but rather temperance, yet the present day Christian should use such an injunction as I Corinthians 10:31 as a guide in the case of present day indulgence in intoxicating liquors. Alford says of the word, “one in his cups, a man rendered petulant by much wine.” The word and its cognates were often used without reference to wine. Expositors says, “The word means ‘violent temper,’ not specially excited by overindulgence in strong drink.” The words, “no striker,” are  (mh plhkthn). The noun speaks of “a bruiser, one who is ready with a blow, a pugnacious, contentious, quarrelsome person.” The words, “not greedy of filthy lucre,” are rejected by Nestle. The word “patient” is  (ejpieikh"). A cognate noun is defined by Trench as expressing “exactly that moderation which recognizes the impossibility cleaving to all formal law, of anticipating and providing for all cases that will emerge and present themselves for decision; which, with this, recognizes the danger that ever waits upon the assertion of legal rights, lest they should be pushed into moral wrongs … which, therefore, urges not its own rights to the uttermost, but, going back in part or in the whole from these, rectifies and redresses the injustices of justice. It is thus more truly just than strict justice would have been.” Thayer defines, “mildness, gentleness, fairness, sweet reasonableness.” Vincent says, “not unduly rigorous, not making a determined stand for one’s just due.” The word is used in Philippians 4:5 and translated “moderation.” Lack of this grace was at the bottom of the differences between those two saints, Euodia and Syntyche, who were not on speaking terms. The words, “not a brawler,” are amachon (ajmacon). The word  (mach) means “a fight, combat,” used of those in arms, “a battle.” Thus, the word means, “not a fighter.” Vincent suggests, “not contentious.” The word describes a person who does not go about with a chip on his shoulder. The words, “not covetous,” are aphilarguron (ajfilarguron). The word is made up of  (filew), “to be fond of,” arguros (ajrguro"), “silver,” and Alpha prefixed which makes the compound word mean, “not fond of silver.” The love of money is in view here. The word “avaricious” could well translate it.

Translation. Not quarrelsome over wine, not pugnacious, but sweetly reasonable, not contentious, not avaricious. (3:4, 5) The word “rule” is  (proisthmi), “to superintend, to preside over.” The word “own” is idios (ijdio"), “the bishop’s own, private, peculiar household, as contrasted to the household of God. The word “house” is masculine, oikos (oijko"), “household.” The word “subjection” is  (uJpotagh), “obedience, subjection.” The verb is  (uJpotassw), “to arrange under, to subordinate.” It was originally a military term, used of a general arranging soldiers in battalions in military order. The words, “with all gravity,” are to be construed with the bishops having their children in obedience. Expositors quotes Dean Bernard’s comment to the effect that this is hardly a grace of childhood. The former authority translates, “with the strictest regard to propriety.” Thayer defines the word as “that characteristic of a person or thing which entitles to reverence or respect, dignity, gravity, majesty, sanctity.” The word “well” is  (kalw"), “beautifully, finely, excellently, well.” The word “church” is  (ejkklhsia), “a called-out body of individuals who assemble in a certain place”; in the Christian sense, the Mystical Body of Christ, composed of believing sinners called into salvation. The word is also used of a local church or assembly. Translation. Presiding over his own household in a beautiful manner, holding children within the sphere of obedience, doing so with the strictest regard to propriety. Indeed, if a person does not know how to preside over his own household, how is it possible that he take care of God’s assembly? (3:6) The word “novice” is neophutos (neofuto"), made up of neos (neo"), “new,” and  (fuw), “to spring up.” The word is used of newly-planted palm trees. It is used here of a new convert. The words, “being lifted up with pride,” are  (tufow), “to raise a smoke, to emit smoke, smoulder,” hence metaphorically, “to blind with pride or conceit.” The noun describes a person who is in a beclouded or stupid state of mind as the result of pride. The condemnation of the devil refers to the fact that Satan is under the condemnatory sentence of God because of his original sin of rebellion against God, which sin was motivated by pride. Alford says that the decisive word which gives us the correct interpretation is krima (krima), which in a context such as this, is to be rendered “condemnation,” not “judgment.” Expositors concurs in Alford’s judgment. Translation. Not a new convert, lest, having his mind blinded by pride, he fall into the condemnation of the devil. (3:7) The words, “good report,” are  (marturian kalhn), “an excellent testimony.” “Those without” refers to the non-Christian world in the midst of which the saints live. Expositors says: “In the passage before us, indeed, St. Paul may be understood to imply that the opinion of ‘those without’ might usefully balance or correct that of the Church. There is something blameworthy in a man’s character if the consensus of outside opinion be unfavorable to him; no matter how much he may be admired and respected by his own party.… One cannot safely assume, when we are in antagonism to it, that, because we are Christians, we are absolutely in the right and the world wholly wrong. Thus to defy public opinion in a superior spirit may not only bring discredit (reproach) on one’s self and on the Church, but also catch us in the devil’s snare, namely, a supposition

that because the world condemns a certain course of action, the action is therefore right and the world’s verdict may be safely set aside.” Translation. Moreover, it is a necessity in the nature of the case for him to be having an excellent testimony from those on the outside, lest he fall into reproach and into the snare of the devil. (3:8, 9) The absence of the article before “deacons” shows that these church officers, charged with the temporal welfare of the local church as the bishops were with its spiritual welfare, are treated as a class. The Greek word is used generally of a servant as seen from the standpoint of his activity in service. The word “grave” is semnos (semno"), of which Trench says: “The word we want is one in which the sense of gravity and dignity, and of these inviting reverence, is combined.” The word “double-tongued” is dilogos (dilogo"), “saying one thing and meaning another, and making different representations to different people about the same thing.” Expositors says: “Persons who are in an intermediate position, having in the same department, chiefs and subordinates, are exposed to a temptation to speak of the same matter in different tones and manner, according as their interlocutor is above or below them.” The word “given” is  (prosecw, pro"), “toward,”  (ejcw), “to hold,” thus, “to hold toward, to apply one’s self to, to attach one’s self to.” Alford translates, “addicted to.” “Greedy of filthy lucre,” is the translation of aischrokerdeis (aijscrokerdei"), made up of aischros (aijscro"), “disgraceful,” and kerdos (kerdo"), “gain.” The adverb is used in I Peter 5:2, “in a base and gain-greedy way.” The words “not greedy of gain” are a proper rendering. Expositors says: “The kerdos (kerdo") (gain) becomes aischron (aijscron) (disgraceful), when a man makes the acquisition of it, rather than the glory of God, his prime object. On the other hand, the special work of deacons was Church finance; and no doubt they had to support themselves by engaging in some secular occupation. They would thus be exposed to temptations to disappropriate Church funds or to adopt questionable means of livelihood.” The word “mystery” is  (musthrion), the n.t., meaning of which is, “truth which was kept hidden from the world until revealed at the appointed time, and which is a secret to ordinary eyes, but is made known by divine revelation” (Vincent). This truth is understood by the illumination of the Holy Spirit. The words, “the faith,” refer to the Christian system of revelation. Vincent, commenting on the words, “in a pure conscience,” says; “Construe with holding. The emphasis of the passage is on these words. They express conscientious purity and sincerity in contrast with those who are described as branded in their own conscience, and thus causing their followers to fall away from the faith (Ch. 4:1, 2). ‘Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience, is a significant association of faith with ethics.’ As Weiss puts it, ‘It is as if the pure conscience were the vessel in which the mystery of the faith is preserved.’ The idea is sound and valuable. A mere intellectual attitude toward the mystery which, in every age, attaches to the faith, will result in doubt, questioning, and wordy strife (see I Tim. 6:4, II Tim. 2:23, Tit. 3:9), sometimes in moral laxity, sometimes in despair. Loyalty and duty to God are compatible with more or less ignorance concerning the mystery. An intellect, however powerful and active, joined with an impure conscience, cannot solve but only aggravates the mystery; whereas a pure and loyal conscience, and a frank acceptance of imposed duty along with mystery, puts one in the

best attitude for attaining whatever solution is possible.” Translation. Deacons, in like manner, grave and dignified, not doubletongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy of gain, holding the mystery of the Faith in a pure conscience. (3:10) The words, “these also,” imply clearly that the bishops must be proved before being appointed, as well as the deacons. The word “proved” is  (dokimazw), “to be put to the test for the purpose of approving, and having met the test, to be approved.” The test and approval here do not refer to a formal examination, but have reference to the general judgment of the Christian community as to whether they fulfil the specifications set down in verse 8. The word “blameless” is  (ajnegklhtoi), “unaccused.” It is a judicial term. The participle ontes (ojnte") is a conditional one, “provided they are unaccused.” Translation. And these moreover are to be first put to the test and then approved if they meet the specifications; then let them serve as deacons, provided they are unaccused. (3:11) The word “wives” is  (gunh), “a woman.” The word when used in reference to the marriage relation, means “a wife.” Here, it should be translated “women.” It does not necessarily refer to the wives of the deacons, and for the following reasons: first, the words, “even so,” are the translation of  (wJsautw"), which is used in introducing a second or third in a series. The series here is of Church officials; second, there is no possessive pronoun in the Greek, which would be needed if the women were the wives of the deacons; third, the four qualifications which follow correspond, with appropriate variations, to the first four required of deacons as regards demeanor, government of the tongue, use of wine, and trustworthiness; and fourth, this is a section dealing wholly with Church officials. The reference here is to women who hold the office of deaconess, as Phoebe (Rom. 16:1). The word “grave” is the translation of semnos (semno"), the same word used of the deacons (v. 8). It speaks of that combination of gravity and dignity which invites the reverence of others. The word “slanderers” is diabolos (diabolo"), the word used of the devil. The word comes from  (diaballw), which means “to throw over or across, to traduce, calumniate, slander, accuse, defame.” “Sober” is  (nhfalion), the same word that is used in connection with a bishop (v. 2). It means, “to be calm, dispassionate, circumspect.” “Faithful” is pistos (pisto"), “faithful” in the sense of fidelity, of being true to the trust imposed in one. Translation. Women, likewise, grave and dignified, not slanderers, calm, dispassionate, and circumspect, faithful in all things. (3:12, 13) The Greek construction is the same as that in verse 2. “Let the deacons be one wife sort of husbands,” that is, married only once. The word “ruling” is  (proisthmi), “to be over, to superintend, to preside over.” The word “purchase” is an unfortunate translation of  (peripoiew), from the standpoint of modern day usage. The words “acquire” or “obtain” would better translate the Greek word. The word

“degree” is bathmon (baqmon), primarily, “a step,” used of a threshold; in ecclesiastical writers, “order, rank, grade.” “Here the word apparently means a position of trust and influence in the church, possibly a promotion from the diaconate to the episcopate” (Vincent). Expositors says; “The r.v., gain to themselves a good standing, does not necessarily imply an advance in rank, but an assured position in the esteem of their fellowChristians. We know that among the many who possess the same rank, whether in church or state, some from their character and abilities gain a standing that others do not.” “Boldness” is from the word  (parrhsia), primarily, “free and bold speaking; speaking out every word.” Its dominant idea is boldness, confidence, as opposed to fear, ambiguity, or reserve. The idea of publicity is sometimes attached to it, but as secondary. “An assured position and blameless reputation in the church, with a pure conscience, would assure boldness of speech and of attitude in the Christian community and elsewhere” (Vincent). The words, “in faith,” are to he connected with the word “boldness” only. It speaks of boldness here as distinctively Christian, as founded on faith in the Lord Jesus. Translation. Let the deacons be one-wife sort of husbands, ruling their children and their own households in a commendable way, for those who have ministered in the office of a deacon in a commendable manner acquire a good standing and much confidence in the sphere of faith which is in Christ Jesus. (3:14, 15) The things Paul is writing to Timothy consist of instructions concerning the officers of the local church, their duties and qualifications, and matters of church discipline. The purpose Paul had in sending these was, not that Timothy should know how he should behave himself, but how the members of the church should conduct themselves. The word “church” is  (ejkklhsia). The verb is  (ejkkalew), “to call out of.” The church is therefore composed of a body of called out people, called by the sovereign grace of God into salvation. The noun  (ejkklhsia) was used in pagan Greek to designate a meeting of the citizens of a town called by the town officials to an assembly. The local church is therefore an assembly of God’s people. The word “ground” is  (eJdraiwma), “a stay, a prop.” The kindred adjective is hedraios (eJdraio"), “firm, stable.” The words, “pillar” and “ground,” are in apposition to the word “church.” The idea is that the church is the pillar, and as such, the prop or support of the truth. Translation. These things to you I am writing, hoping to come to you quickly, but if I am long, in order that you may know how it is necessary in the nature of the case for men to be conducting themselves in God’s house which is of such a nature as to be the living God’s assembly, a pillar, even a support, of the truth. (3:16) The words, “without controversy,” are the translation of  (oJmologoumenw"), an adverb from  (oJmologew), “to agree with.” The translation could read, “confessedly.” The word “godliness” is eusebeia (eujsebeia), “reverence, respect,” in the Bible everywhere, “piety towards God, godliness.” It is a term used, not of God, but of men. The word “mystery” is  (musthrion). A mystery in the Greek Mystery Religions was a secret rite which was administered to the person being initiated. The word as used in the n.t., refers to truth previously hidden, which when revealed, is understood by the believer. The word is also used of such things as the

mystery of evil, which is a mystery not to be understood, at least, this side of the grave. The mystery of piety towards God on the part of men is the truth to which Paul referred in the previous verse. “The contents of this truth or mystery is Christ, revealed in the gospel as the Saviour from ungodliness, the norm and inspiration of godliness, the divine life in man, causing him to live unto God as Christ did and does (Rom. 6:10)” (Vincent). The word “God” is not in the best texts, rather the relative pronoun hos (oJ"), “who,” which refers to Christ as its antecedent Vincent says that “the abruptness of its introduction may be explained by the fact that it and the words which follow were probably taken from an ancient creedal hymn. In the early Christian ages it was not unusual to employ verse or rhythm for theological teaching or statement.” Our Lord was manifest in the flesh. The word “manifest” is  (fanerow), “to make visible.” He said to the Samaritan woman, “God is as to His nature, spirit.” That is, God is incorporeal being. He does not have a physical body. He is therefore invisible. But in the incarnation, the invisible Son of God became visible as He took upon Himself a physical body. He was justified in the Spirit. The word “justified” is  (dikaiow), used of the act of God justifying a believing sinner, that is, declaring him righteous. But here the meaning is “vindicated, endorsed, proved, pronounced as.” The words “flesh” and “spirit” are set in opposition to one another. The former word refers to our Lord’s life on earth as the Man Christ Jesus. The latter word refers to what He was in His preincarnate state as pure spirit, as Deity, as being in the form of God and as being the express image of God’s substance. To simplify the matter further, let us say that the word “flesh” refers to His humanity, the word spirit, to His deity. During His life on earth, His humanity was clearly seen, but His deity was usually hidden underneath the cloak of His humanity. Yet, at times, momentary flashes of His deity were seen, such as on the Mount of Transfiguration, on the occasion when the Father’s voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, hear Him.” It was seen by His exalted and spotless character, by His works of love and power, by His words of authority. All these vindicated, proved, endorsed, pronounced Him for what He was, Very God of Very God manifest in human flesh. Our Lord was seen by angels. The incarnation was a spectacle to the angelic world, at our Lord’s birth, His temptation, His agony in Gethsemane, at His resurrection and ascension. The word “Gentiles” is ethnos (ejqno"), better, “nations.” He was received up into glory. The word “received” is  (ajnalambanw), “to take or receive up.” It is the formal term to describe the ascension of Christ (Acts 1:2, 22). The reference here is most probably to that event. The word “into” is the translation of en (ejn), “in.” He was taken up in glory, “with attendant circumstances of pomp or majesty, as we say of a victorious general” (Vincent). The cloud that received Him out of the sight of the disciples was the Shekinah Glory. Translation. And confessedly, great is the mystery of godliness; who was made visible in the sphere of flesh, vindicated in the sphere of spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

CHAPTER FOUR (4:1–3) The word “now” is de (de), sometimes continuative in function, but here

adversative, “but.” There is a contrast here between the preceding confession of faith (v. 16) and the false doctrines spoken of in 4:2, 3. The word “latter” is husteros (uJstero"), a word referring to that which comes after. No particular period is referred to, simply, things which would come to pass after Paul had written. Expositors says: “In this sort of prophetical warning or denunciation, we are not intended to take the future tense too strictly. Although the prophet intends to utter a warning concerning the future, yet we know that what he declares will be hereafter, he believes to be already in active operation. It is a convention of prophetical utterance to denounce sins and sinners of one’s own time under a form of a predictive warning.” The word “times” is kairos (kairo"), speaking, not of time as such (chronos (crono")), but of the critical, epoch-making periods of time foreordained of God. Those who depart from the faith are not the heretical teachers of 1:3, but those whom they mislead (Vincent). The word “depart” is  (ajfisthmi), “to stand off from, to fall away.” Our word “apostatize” is the English spelling of a form of the Greek word. The definite article before the word “faith” marks it out as speaking, not of faith as an act, but of the Faith, that body of doctrine which forms the basis of what we as Christians believe. The word “seducing” is planos (plano"), “wandering, roving, misleading, leading into error.” The word “spirits” refers to evil spirits actuating human agents of the spirit of error, namely, Satan (I John 4:1, 6). The word “doctrines” is didaskalia (didaskalia), “teaching, instruction.” “Devils” is daimonion (daimonion), demons. There is one devil (diabolos (diabolo")) a fallen angel, and many demons, not angels, but another order of being, who are his servants. It is significant that Paul finds the source of false doctrine in these demons who actuate members of the human race. The words “speaking, having seared, forbidding” refer to the human agents of the seducing spirits. Demons are spirits, that is, free moral agents without physical bodies, and these are the seducing spirits. As to the expression, “speaking lies in hypocrisy,” Expositors says: “The spirits work, and the teachings are exhibited in the hypocrisy of them that speak lies; and this hypocrisy finds detailed expression in regulations suggested by a false asceticism.” The clause could be better rendered “through the hypocrisy of liars.” It connects with “departing from the faith.” That is, these individuals depart from the faith through the hypocrisy of liars, the false teachers. These who depart from the faith have their conscience seared with a hot iron. The words, “hot iron,” are superfluous. Vincent offers, “branded in their conscience.” He says, “The metaphor is from the practice of branding slaves or criminals, the latter on the brow. These deceivers are not acting under delusion, but deliberately, and against conscience. They wear the form of godliness, and contradict their profession by their crooked conduct (II Tim. 3:5). The brand is not on their brow but on their conscience.” These are branded with the marks of Satan (II Tim. 2:26) as Paul was with the marks of the Lord Jesus (Gal. 6:17). As to the prohibition of marriage and meats ( (brwma), food, not particularly animal flesh), Vincent says: “The ascetic tendencies indicated by these prohibitions, developed earlier than these Epistles among the Essenes, an ascetic Jewish brotherhood on the shores of the Dead Sea, who repudiated marriage except as a necessity for preserving the race, and allowed it only under protest and under stringent regulations. They also abstained from wine and animal food. This sect was in existence in the lifetime of our Lord. Strong traces of its influence appear in the heresy assailed in Paul’s Epistle to the Colossians. The Christian body received large accessions from it after the destruction of Jerusalem (a.d. 70). The prohibitions above named were imposed by the later Gnosticism

of the second century.” It is important to note that the word “meat” in a.d. 1611, meant food of any kind. Today, its meaning is largely confined to edible animal flesh. It must not be taken here to mean only the latter, but to refer to food in general. Asceticism would prescribe the particular kind of food forbidden. The words, “to be received,” are  (metalambanw), “to be made a partaker.” These things were created so that those who believe might participate in them. The words “believe” and “know” do not denote two classes but one. Those who believe are described as those who have a precise and experiential knowledge of the truth. The better rendering is, “for them,” not, “of them.” That is, these things were created for those who believe in order that they may participate in them. Translation. But the Spirit says expressly that in latter times some will depart from the Faith, giving heed to spirits that lead one into error, and to teachings of demons, doing this through the hypocrisy of liars, branded in their own conscience, forbidding to marry, and commanding abstinence from foods, which things God created for participation with thanksgiving for those who are believers and who have a precise and experiential knowledge of the truth. (4:4, 5) The word “creature” is ktisma (ktisma), which is better translated here “created thing.” When we offer thanks at the table for the food we are about to eat, it is sanctified, Paul says. The word “sanctify” is hagiazo (aJgiazo), “to set apart for God.” Vincent says: “Not declared holy, but made holy. Thanksgiving to God has a sanctifying effect. The food in itself has no moral quality (Rom. 14:14), but acquires a holy quality by its consecration to God; by being acknowledged as God’s gift, and partaken of as nourishing the life for God’s service.” The food is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer Vincent says again: “The custom of grace at meat appears in I Samuel 9:13. Christ blessed the loaves and fishes (Matt. 14:19; 15:36). Paul on the ship gave thanks for the meal which the seamen ate (Acts 27:35).” Translation. Because every created thing of God is good, and not even one thing to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is consecrated through God’s Word and prayer. (4:6) The word “brethren” is the translation of the Greek word for “brother,” adelphos. The word means literally, “from the same womb.” Thus, Christians are brethren in the sense that they have the same heavenly Father. Vincent, commenting on the use of the word here says: “In the Pastorals, it is only here that adelphos (ajdelfo") ‘brethren’ means the members of the church to whose superintendent the letter is addressed. In II Timothy 4:21, they are the Christians of the church from which the letter comes; in I Timothy 6:2, Christians in general; and in I Timothy, without any ecclesiastical sense.” “Put in remembrance” is from  (uJpotiqhmi), “to put under” thus, metaphorically, “to suggest, remind.” Expositors remarks, “a somewhat mild term, as Chrysostom points out; but in some circumstances suggestion is more effectual than direct exhortation.” The word “minister” today generally refers to an ordained clergyman, a pastor of a

church. And while Timothy was pastor of the local assembly at Ephesus, yet, the Greek word here does not have the technical meaning which we today give to the word “minister.” The word is diakonos (diakono"), one of the words used of a servant. It has special emphasis upon the servant as seen in his activity of serving. Our word “deacon” comes from it. Here, the idea is that of a servant, without any official meaning. Timothy is seen here as a servant of Jesus Christ, rendering Him a service by setting himself against ascetic errors. The words, “these things,” refer to the contents of verses 1–5. The words, “nourished up,” are a present participle in the Greek, indicating the means by which Timothy may become a good minister. The idea is, “constantly nourishing thyself.” This Timothy has been doing “in the words of faith and of good doctrine.” The article is used with the two nouns. It is “the Faith and the good teachings,” namely, the body of Christian truth as it is found in the Word of God. The case is locative of sphere, indicating the sphere within which the nourishing is taking place, and instrumental of means, speaking of the means employed, namely, the Word of God. The word “attained” is  (parakolouqew), “to follow beside, to attend closely.” The perfect tense is used, indicating that Timothy has done a finished piece of work in thus closely attending to his course of Christian instruction. One could translate, “which you have closely followed.” Translation. Constantly reminding the brethren of these things, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, continually nourishing yourself by means of the words of the Faith and of the good teaching which you have closely followed. (4:7, 8) The word “refuse” is paraiteomai (paraiteomai), “to refuse, decline, shun, reject, beg off, get excused, avoid.” The word “profane” is  (bebhlo"), “accessible, lawful to be trodden,” hence, profane in the sense of unhallowed, common, the absense of a divine or sacred character. The word “fables” is muthos (muqo") “a fiction, a fable, an invention, falsehood.” The fictions of the Jewish theosophists and Gnostics, especially concerning the emanations and orders of the aeons, are called muthoi (muqoi), myths. “Exercise” is  (gumnazw), a word speaking of Greek athletes engaging in athletic exercises in the gymnasium. Here, the exercise is not that of the physical body but that of one’s mind, emotions, will, the spiritual part of man. “Unto” is pros (pro"), “with a view to.” Just as a Greek athlete would exercise with a view to winning in the athletic contests, so Timothy is exhorted to exercise with a view to excelling in godliness. The latter word is eusebeia (eujsebeia), “reverence, respect, piety toward God,” thus, “godliness.” The words, “bodily exercise,” are found in a parallel passage from Seneca. Expositors remarks that this renders it almost certain that the primary reference is to gymnastic exercises. The context in which it is found in our Timothy passage refers this bodily exercise to an absurd and profane theosophy of which discipline of the body was the chief or only practical expression. The contrast then is not so much between bodily exercise commonly so called, and piety, as between piety (which includes a discipline of the body) and this asceticism spoken of in the context, that absurd and profane theosophy of which the just-mentioned authority speaks. Paul is not referring here to gymnastic exercises as such, and therefore what he says about their value, cannot be inferred from his remarks here. He is referring to ascetic practices which took the form of physical exercise. The

latter as such is for the purpose of physical health, not a means of advancing in holiness of life. The apostle says that the bodily discipline which took the form of physical exercise “profiteth little.” The literal Greek is, “is profitable for a little.” The meaning is that the use of physical exercise extends to only a few things. On the other hand, godliness is profitable for all things. The word “godliness” is again eusebeia (eujsebeia), “reverence, respect, piety toward God.” Vincent’s note here is helpful: “Godliness involves a promise for this life and for the next; but for this life as it reflects the heavenly life, is shaped and controlled by it, and bears its impress.” One is reminded of Longfellow’s lines in Evangeline: “Men whose lives glided on like rivers that water the woodlands, darkened by shadows of earth, but reflecting an image of heaven.” “Godliness has promise for the present life because it has promise of the life which is to come. Only the life which is in Christ Jesus (II Tim. 1:1) is life indeed, I Timothy 6:19. (Compare I Peter 3:10; I Corinthians 3:21–23)” (Vincent). Translation. But unhallowed and old wives’ fictions shun. On the other hand, be exercising yourself with a view to piety toward God. For the aforementioned bodily exercise is of some small profit, but the aforementioned piety toward God is profitable with respect to all things, holding a promise of this present life and of that about to come. (4:9–11) The truth stated in verse 8, Paul earmarks with the statement, “This is a trustworthy word and worthy of every acceptance.” The word “for” introduces a statement in support of his previous declaration in the latter verse. The words “labor” and “suffer reproach” are  (kopiaw), “to labor to the point of exhaustion,” and  (ajgwnizomai), a Greek athletic term speaking of the participation of the athlete in the Greek games. We get our word “agony” from the latter. Both words denote strenuous and painful effort. The word “and” is ascensive, “we labor, yea struggle.” The word “hope” is  (ejlpizw), and is in the perfect tense. Literally, “we have set our hope upon with the present result that it is a settled hope.” Paul says that the Christian God is the Saviour of all men. This might appear to teach universalism, and hence needs careful exegesis. The word “Saviour” ( (swthr)) means “saviour, deliverer, preserver.” The name was given by the ancients to deities, to princes, kings, and in general, to men who had conferred signal benefits upon their country, and in the more degenerate days, by way of flattery, to personages of influence (Thayer). In the Cult of the Caesar, the state religion of the Roman Empire, the reigning emperor was called “saviour of the world,” in the sense that he was the preserver of mankind by reason of his beneficent reign. One could find in this statement the idea that God is the Preserver of the entire human race in the sense of His providential care. But the context, which brings in the idea of faith, seems to indicate that the idea of salvation from sin and the impartation of eternal life is the function here of God as Saviour. He is Saviour of all men in the sense that our Lord is “the Saviour of the world” (John 4:42). He is the actual Saviour of those who believe, and the potential Saviour of the unbeliever in the sense that He has provided a salvation at the Cross for the sinner, and stands ready to save that sinner when the latter places his faith in the Lord Jesus.

Translation. This is a trustworthy word and worthy of every acceptance, for with a view to this we are laboring to the point of exhaustion; yes, we are putting forth great efforts against opposition, because we have set our hope permanently upon the living God who is the Saviour of all men, especially of believers. These things be constantly commanding and teaching. (4:12) Vincent says that Timothy was probably from 38 to 40 years old at that time. Expositors remarks that, “many, probably, of the Ephesian presbyters were older than Timothy,” also, that “in any case, the terms ‘young’ and ‘old’ are used relatively to the average age at which men attain to positions in the world. Forty is reckoned old for a captain in the army, young for a bishop, and very young for a Prime Minister.” The word “despise” is  (katafronew). It speaks of that contempt felt in the mind which is displayed in injurious action. Moulton and Milligan say of this word: “The word does not denote a mere feeling of contempt—it is active. We may infer that Timothy is told not to let men push him aside as a stripling; and in all the n.t., passages, the action encouraged by contempt seems implied, rather than a mental state.” The verb is present imperative in a prohibition, forbidding the continuance of an action already going on. Timothy was being despised. Paul says, “Stop allowing anyone to despise you.” Paul means, “Assert the dignity of your office even though men may think you young to hold it. Let no one push you aside as a boy” (Expositors). Today we would say, “Stop allowing anyone to push you around.” And the same authority says that “St. Paul shows Timothy ‘a more excellent way’ than self-assertion for the keeping up of his dignity: give no one any ground by any fault of character for despising thy youth.” The word “be” is not the ordinary verb of being in the Greek, but ginomai (ginomai), “to become,” Paul saying, “keep on becoming.” “Example” is tupos (tupo"), “the mark of a stroke or blow, a print, a figure formed by a blow or impression,” in a technical sense, “the pattern in conformity to which a thing must be made,” in an ethical sense, “a dissuasive example, pattern of warning, an example to be imitated.” The last mentioned meaning is to be understood in our Timothy passage. Timothy is to be a pattern to them that believe. It is an objective genitive. He is to be such in word, that is, in what he says, including teaching and verbal instruction. The word “conversation” is obsolete English for “behavior, manner of life.” “Charity” is  (ajgaph), the love which God is and which the Holy Spirit produces in the heart of the yielded saint, a love whose constituent elements Paul gives us in I Corinthians 13, a love which impels the one loving to sacrifice himself for the benefit of the person loved. God’s love must be seen in superabundance in the life of Timothy. The words, “in spirit,” are not in the best Greek texts. The word “purity” (hagnos (aJgno")) is always used with a moral sense. It is not limited to sins of the flesh, but covers purity in motive as well as in acts. Translation. Stop allowing anyone to contemptuously push you aside because of your youth, but keep on becoming an example to the believers, in word, in behavior, in love, in faith, in purity. (4:13) The word “reading” is  (ajnagnwsi"). The verb is  (ajnaginwskw), “to distinguish between, to recognize, to know accurately, to read.” The

verb is usually used of public reading. Here the noun refers to the public reading of the Scriptures in the meeting of the local assembly for worship. In post-classical Greek it is used sometimes of reading aloud with comments. Here we have the three elements in the ministry of the Word, the reading aloud of the Scriptures, exhortation based on the reading and appealing to the moral sense, and teaching, appealing to the intellect. Robertson injects a keen remark when he says that probably Paul does not mean that the exhortation should precede the instruction, but that the instruction should be given first. Exhortation needs teaching as a basis. This same authority suggests the rendering, “while I am coming,” instead of, “till I come.” “Give attendance to,” is from  (prosecw), literally, “to hold toward,” thus, “to give attention to.” Robertson translates, “keep on putting your mind on.” The word “doctrine” is from didaskalia (didaskalia), “teaching.” Doctrine is a systematized body of teaching. Translation. While I am coming, keep concentrating on public reading, exhortation, and teaching. (4:14) “Gift” is from charisma (carisma), “in the technical Pauline sense of extraordinary powers distinguishing certain Christians and enabling them to serve the church of Christ, the reception of which is due to the power of divine grace operating in their souls by the Holy Spirit” (Thayer). The word refers here to a “special inward endowment which qualified Timothy for exhortation and teaching, and which was directly imparted by the Holy Spirit” (Vincent). This special enduement was given Timothy “by prophecy.” That is, prophetic intimations were given to Paul as to the selection of Timothy for the ministerial office. These prophecies were given by the Holy Spirit who also bestowed the gift. These prophetic intimations were repeated in connection with the ceremony of ordination at which time the hands of the Church elders were laid upon Timothy. The laying on of hands speaks of identification. Here it was the outward act and ceremony symbolizing the fact that Timothy was now to be identified with the elders in the common work of the ministry of the Word. He became one of them and one with them. The word “presbytery” is from presbuteros (presbutero"), “an older person, one advanced in years,” used in Luke 22:66 of the body of representative elders of the people in the Sanhedrin. Here it is used of the elders of the local assemblies, those church officials charged with the responsibility of supervising the spiritual welfare of the local assembly. The word “neglect” is in the present imperative, which when used in a prohibition, forbids the continuance of an act already going on. One hesitates to translate, “Do not keep on neglecting the spiritual enduement which is in you,” making Timothy guilty of such neglect. But if Paul were merely warning Timothy against such an act, he would have used the aorist subjunctive with the proper negative. Timothy, while a good young man at heart, was rather diffident, and needed periodical prodding by the great apostle. Translation. Do not keep on neglecting the spiritual enduement which is in you, which was given to you through prophecy in connection with the imposition of the hands of the elders. (4:15) The word “meditate” is  (meletaw), “to care for, to attend to carefully, practice.” It was used by the Greeks of the meditative pondering and the practice of

orators and rhetoricians, but the context in which it is found in I Timothy, indicates that the meaning here is that Timothy is to carefully attend to the public reading of the Word, exhortation, and teaching. The exhortation, “give thyself wholly to them,” is en toutois isthi (ejn toutoi" ijsqi), “be constantly in these.” The meaning is that Timothy is to throw himself wholly into his ministry. Robertson says that it is our “up to his ears in work” and “sticking to his task.” The word “profiting” is  (prokophn), “to cut forward, to blaze the way, make a pioneer advance.” Translation. Diligently attend to these things; be constantly engrossed in them, in order that your advancement may be evident to all. (4:16) “Take heed” is from  (ejpecw), “to hold upon, to fasten attention on.” The exhortation is, “keep on paying attention to yourself and to your teaching.” Vincent says: “The order is significant. Personality goes before teaching.” “Continue” is  (ejpimenw), “to stay by the side of” a person or thing. The idea is, “stay by them, stick to them, see them through” (Robertson). The word “them” goes back to verse 15 (these things), and the latter words refer back to the things in verse 13 which Paul enjoined upon Timothy. Timothy, Paul says, will save himself and those under his spiritual care by giving diligent attention to the public reading of the Word in the local assembly, by exhortation based upon the Word which has been read, and by an explanation of that Word. The salvation spoken of here cannot be the salvation of the sinner nor the preservation of the saint in salvation, for the reason that both of these are a work of God for man. The Salvation referred to here is understood by a study of the context (vv. 1–3), namely, being saved from the teachings of demon-influenced men. That is, by the reading of the Word, by exhortation from it, and by a clear explanation of its meaning, Timothy and his hearers will be saved from becoming entangled in these heresies. Translation. Keep on paying careful attention to yourself and to the teaching. Constantly stay by these things, for in doing this, you will both save yourself and those who hear you.

CHAPTER FIVE (5:1, 2) The word “elder” in this passage is to be understood as a designation of age, not of an appointed office. In this, Vincent, Expositors, and Robertson agree. Vincent says: “The Presbyterate denotes an honorable and influential estate in the church on the ground of age, duration of church membership, and approved character.” Expositors says: “Presbuteros (Presbutero") is best taken as a term of age.” Robertson says: “Presbuteros (Presbutero") used in the usual sense of an older man, not a minister (bishop as in 3:2) as is shown by ‘as a father.’ ” Vincent presents a strong case for his assertion that “modern criticism compels us, I think, to abandon the view of the identity of Bishop and Presbyter.” He cites the testimony of Clement of Rome to the effect that Bishops are distinguished from the Presbyters, and if the bishops are apparently designated as Presbyters, it is because they have been chosen from the body of Presbyters, and have retained the name even when they have ceased to

hold office. Vincent argues that the offices are exhausted in the description of Bishops and Deacons. Nothing is said of Presbyters until chapter 5, where Timothy’s relations to individual church members are prescribed, and in Titus 2:2, these members are classified as old men (presbutos (presbuto")), old women, young men, and servants. Vincent makes the point that men are not appointed as elders. They became elders by reason of long, mature experience in the Christian life. Bishops or overseers are appointed from among the elders (Tit. 1:5, Acts 14:23). It is best, therefore, to take the term “elder” as a designation of a class of men in the church, the older men who by reason of age, character, and long church-membership, have a respected and trusted standing in the church.The word “rebuke” is  (ejpiplhssw), “to strike upon, beat upon, to chastise with words, to chide, upbraid, rebuke, treat harshly.” Expositors says: “Respect for age must temper the expression of reproof of an old man’s misdemeanors.” The word “intreat” is  (parakalew), “to beg, beseech, entreat.” It is, “I beg of you, please.” Translation. Do not upbraid an elderly man, but entreat him gently as a father, younger men as brethren, older women as mothers, younger women as sisters, with the strictest regard to purity. (5:3) The word “honor” ( (timaw)) means “to estimate, fix the value, to honor, revere, venerate.” It has in it the idea of properly appreciating the value of someone or something and of paying that person or thing the respect, reverence, deference, and honor due him or it by reason of its value or position. Here, the context injects the added idea of financial support as included in the honor shown the widows. As to the identity of these widows, Vincent has a helpful note: “Paul alludes to widows in I Corinthians 7:8, where he advises them against remarrying. They are mentioned as a class in Acts 6:1, in connection with the appointment of the seven. Also Acts 9:39, 41. In the Pastorals they receive special notice, indicating their advance from the position of mere beneficiaries to the quasi-official position in the church. From the very first, the church recognized its obligation to care for their support. A widow, in the East, was peculiarly desolate and helpless. In return for their maintenance, certain duties were required of them, such as the care of orphans, sick and prisoners, and they were enrolled in an order, which, however, did not include all of their number who received alms of the church. In Polycarp’s epistles, they are styled ‘the altar of God.’ To such an order, the references in the Pastorals point.” The word “indeed” is  (ojntw"), “verily, truly.” “The meaning is, who are absolutely bereaved, without children or relations, (comp. v. 4), and have been but once married. There is probably also an implied contrast with those described in vv. 6, 11–13” (Vincent). Translation. Be constantly showing filial reverence and respect to widows who are truly widows. (5:4) The English word “nephews” is used here in an obsolete sense of grandsons or other lineal descendants. Vincent quotes Jeremy Taylor, “Nephews are very often liker to their grandfathers than to their fathers.” The words, “let them learn,” are to be construed with widows, not children, since Paul is speaking of what should be done to the widow, not of what she should do. The widows if utterly alone and without natural supporters, are

to be cared for by the Church, but if they have children, or grandchildren, these should assume the obligation for their support. The word “first” ( (prwton)) points to this obligation as their first and natural one. The words “to show piety,” are  (eujsebew), “to act piously or reverently” toward God, one’s country, magistrates, relations, and all to whom dutiful regard or reverence is due. “At home” is to idion oikon (to ijdion oijkon), literally, “one’s own private, unique, personal household.” Vincent remarks that it has been suggested that the phrase may mark the duty as an act of family feeling and honor. The word “requite” is  (ajpodidwmi). The verb itself means “to give,” the prefixed preposition “off,” the compound verb, “to give off from” one’s self. It is used of discharging one’s obligations, since a debt like a burden, is thrown off. The word “parents” is progonos (progono"), from proginomai (proginomai), “to become before.” Thus, it refers to those who have come into existence before, thus, to ancestors. The word “parents” is therefore too limited. The reference is to mothers and grandmothers here and to living ancestors generally. The words, “good and,” are a rejected reading. The word “before” is  (ejnwpion), literally, “in the sight of.” Translation. But, as is the case, if a certain widow has children or grandchildren, let them learn first to show filial reverence and respect to their own household, and to discharge their obligation relative to a recompense to their forebears, for this is acceptable in the sight of God. (5:5–7) The word “now” is de (de), and is adversative here, pointing to the contrast between the widow of verse 4 who has relatives to take care of her, and the widow of verse 5 who does not. Alford says, “Thus what follows is said more for moral eulogy of such a widow, than as commending her to the charity of the church: but at the same time, as pointing out that one who thus places her hopes and spends her time, is best deserving of the Church’s help.” The word “desolate” is from monos (mono"), “alone.” The perfect tense participle of  (monow), “to leave alone,” is used, emphasizing a lone condition. The word “trusteth” is  (hjlpike), the perfect tense of  (ejlpizw), “to hope.” This tense speaks of a past completed process having present results, sometimes, permanent ones. It speaks here of a widow who has as a habit of life set her hope upon God with the result that the hope has become permanently fixed as a settled and immovable trust. One could translate, “has directed her hope at God,” or, “has her hope settled permanently on God.” The word “supplications” is  (dehsi"), and refers to a prayer that is the expression of one’s personal needs. “Prayers” is  (proseuch), “prayer addressed to God.” It has an element of devotion in it. The words, “liveth in pleasure,” are the translation of  (spatalaw), “to live luxuriously, lead a voluptuous life” (Thayer). Expositors says of this word; “The modern term fast, in which the notion of prodigality and wastefulness is more prominent than that of sensual indulgence, exactly expresses the significance of this word.” The same authority suggests the translation of the r.v., “she that giveth herself to pleasure.” Moulton and Milligan in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament give the meaning as, “give myself to pleasure, am wanton.” They say that this word is often combined in the LXX and other sources with  (trufaw), “ ‘to live a luxurious life,’ with perhaps somewhat worse associations.” The expression, “is dead while she liveth,” is  (zwsa teqnhkin), the present participle of the

verb  (zaw), “to live, be alive,” and the perfect tense verb of  (qnhskw), “to die.” The literal Greek here is, “living, having died, with the present result that she is dead.” Translation. But the one who is a widow and has been left completely and permanently alone, has set her hope permanently on God, and continues constantly in petitions for her needs and in prayers night and day. But the one who lives luxuriously, lives while she is in the state of having died, with the result that she is dead. And these things constantly be commanding in order that they may be irreproachable. (5:8) The word “provide” is  (pronoew), “to perceive before, foresee, think of beforehand, provide, to take thought for, care for.” Vincent says that “the a.v., uses provide in its earlier and more literal meaning of taking thought in advance. This has been mostly merged in the later meaning of furnish, so that the translation conveys the sense of providing honestly for ourselves and our families” (note onRomans 12:17). Vincent comments on the words, “he hath denied the faith,” as follows: “Faith demands works and fruits. By refusing the natural duties which Christian faith implies, one practically denies his possession of faith. ‘Faith does not abolish natural duties, but perfects and strengthens them.’ ” The word “infidel” is apistos (ajpisto"), the word for “faith,” pistos (pisto"), and Alpha prefixed which negates the word, the total meaning of the word being, “an unbeliever.” Vincent remarks that even an unbeliever will perform these duties from natural promptings. The faith spoken of here is, of course, the Christian Faith. Expositors has a helpful note: “The Christian faith includes the law of love. The moral teachings of Christianity recognize the divine origin of all natural and innocent human affections. The unbeliever, i.e., the born heathen, possesses natural family affection; and though these feelings may be stunted by savagery, the heathen are not likely to be sophisticated by human perversions of religion, such as those denounced by Jesus in Mark VII.… The Christian who falls below the best heathen standard of family affection, is the more blame-worthy, since he has, what the heathen has not, the supreme example of love in Jesus Christ.” The words, “his own,” refer to near relatives, “of his own house,” to members of one’s own household. Translation But if, as is the case, a certain one does not anticipate the needs of his own and provide for them, and especially for those of his own household, he has denied the Faith and is worse than an unbeliever. (5:9, 10) The words, “be taken into the number,” are the translation of  (katalegw, legw), “to pick out,” and kata (kata), “down,” thus, “to select and write down in a register or a list.” The verb was used originally in the sense of “to pick out,” as soldiers. Here it means “to be enrolled” in the body of widows who are to receive church support. The words, “having been the wife of one man,” are literally, “a woman of one man.” That is, she could be enrolled as above, provided she had not married more than once. “Well reported” is literally, “borne witness to.” It is the word  (marturew), “to bear witness or testimony.” On the clause, “if she have washed the saint’s feet,”

Vincent comments, “A mark of Oriental hospitality bestowed on the stranger arriving from a journey, and therefore closely associated with ‘lodged strangers.’ ” A definite article in the Greek text where the a.v., uses an indefinite article, makes it clear that this washing of the feet was a necessity and not a ritual. In John 13:5, Jesus is said to pour water into the basin. The Greek definite article points to a basin placed at the door of the rented room by the owner of the building for the use of a slave who would wash the feet of the guests as they arrived for the supper. The Oriental wore sandals, and as a result, his feet became dusty and needed cleansing. There being no slave in attendance, the Son of God performed the duties of a slave. The word “saints” is hagios (aJgio"), the verb  (aJgiazw), “to set apart for God, to consecrate.” Thus, a saint is a Christian, one set apart for God. The name “Christian” was coined by the world. The city of Antioch in Syria was noted in the first century for the nicknames it coined and applied to famous personages. Luke tells us, “The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch” (Acts 11:26). It was a term of derision given to those who worshipped Christ as God rather than the Roman Emperor. Agrippa used the name in his famous sentence, “With but little persuasion you would make me a Christian” (Acts 26:28). He used it as a term of derision. Peter, by the Holy Spirit, accepts it as a name to designate a believer when he says, “If any man suffer as a Christian” (I Peter 4:16). In each case, it is used as a term of reproach. Translation. Do not allow a widow to be enrolled who is less than sixty years old; she must be married only once, have testimony borne her in the matter of good works, if she reared children, if she showed hospitality to strangers, if she washed the saints’ feet, if she succored those who were hard pressed by circumstances, if she persevered in every good work. (5:11, 12) “Younger” ( (newtere")) may be rendered positively, “young” (Expositors). Vincent says: “Almost in a positive sense, young. Not under sixty years.” “Wax wanton” is  (katastrhniaw), “to feel the impulses of sexual desire.” Vincent corrects a.v., rendering, “when they have begun to wax wanton.” Hotan (oJtan) (whenever) is used with the aorist subjunctive. Vincent says, “Their unruly desire withdraws them from serving Christ in His church, and is, therefore, against Him.” “They will marry is gamein thelousin (gamein qelousin). The verb  (qelw) speaks of a desire which comes from the emotions. These widows were bent on marrying or determined to marry. The word “damnation” is from krima (krima), which only means “judgment,” or at its strongest, “condemnation.” Vincent says that “the meaning is that they carry about with them in their new married life, a condemnation, a continuous reproach.” The word “damnation” in a.d. 1611 was used in the sense of judgment or condemnation, as is shown by the present tense of the participle “having.” In its early usage, the word had in it no idea of a future punishment. Chaucer uses the word in the following: “For wel thou woost (knowest) thyselven verraily, that thou and I be dampned (damned) to prisoun.” Here is just another example of those obsolete words in the a.v. “Cast off” is  (ajqetew), “to do away with something laid down or prescribed, to act towards something as though it were annulled, to make void, nullify.” Vincent explains: “The meaning here is that they have broken their first pledge: and this may refer to a pledge to devote themselves, after they became widows, to the service of Christ and the Church. The whole matter is obscure.”

Translation. But young widows refuse. For whenever they feel the impulses of sexual desire, thus becoming unruly with respect to Christ, they determine to marry, having judgment because they have nullified their first faith. (5:13) Vincent, commenting on the words, “They learn to be idle,” says: “To be taken absolutely, as in I Cor. 14:31; II Tim. 3:7. They go about under the influence of an insatiable curiosity, and meet those who creep into houses and take captive silly women (II Tim. 3:7), and learn all manner of nonsense.” “Wandering about” is perierchomai (periercomai), “to go about,” used of strollers, wanderers, navigators. Expositors suggests that this may possibly refer to the house to house visitation which might be part of the necessary duty of the Church widows; but which would be a source of temptation to young women, and would degenerate into wandering. “Tattlers” is  (fluarew), “to utter nonsense, talk idly, prate, to bring forward idle accusations, make empty charges, to accuse one falsely with malicious words.” “Busybodies” is periergos (periergo"). In Acts 19:19, the neuter form of the word is used, and it refers to the curious arts of the pagan Greeks. There it means, “the arts of those who are curious about, and pry into matters concealed from human knowledge, impertinent to man’s lawful needs” (Expositors). In our Timothy passage, the word refers to these young widows who would pry into the private affairs of others. Translation. And at the same time they also learn to be idle, gadding about from house to house, and not only idle, but tattlers, and those who pry into the private affairs of others, speaking the things which they ought not to speak. (5:14, 15) “I will” is boulomai (boulomai), speaking of a desire which comes from one’s reason as contrasted to a desire which comes from one’s emotions. The word “women” is not in the Greek text. The word “younger” is in the feminine gender. The word oun (oJun) (therefore) indicates that the word to be supplied should be “widows.” Expositors says: “There is nothing really inconsistent between this deliberate injunction that young widows should marry again, and the counsel in I Cor. 7:8, that widows should remain unmarried. The widows here spoken of would come under the class of those who ‘have not continency’; not to mention that the whole world-position of the Church had altered considerably since St. Paul had written I Cor.” “Guide the house” is  (oijkodespotew), “to manage family affairs.” “Occasion” is  (ajformh), “a place from which a movement or attack is made, a base of operations.” “Adversary” is antikeimai (ajntikeimai), “to be set over against, lie opposite to (in a local sense), to oppose, be adverse to, to set one’s self over against another.” The word does not speak of Satan here, but of any human being who sets himself against Christianity. “Satan” is the transliteration of the Hebrew word for “adversary.” Translation. Therefore, after mature consideration, I desire that the younger widows marry, bear children, manage house-hold affairs, affording not even one place of advantage from which the one who sets himself in opposition would be able to revile, for already certain ones

have turned aside to Satan. (5:16) The word “church” is  (ejkklhsia), from  (ejkkalew), “to call out from.” The noun speaks of a group of individuals summoned to a meeting. It was used of a gathering of citizens called out from their homes into some public place. As used in Christianity, it refers to that called-out body of individuals elected before the universe was created, to be saved, from Pentecost to the Rapture, which constitutes the Church of Jesus Christ, called also the Mystical Body of Christ. In our present passage, the word refers to the local church made up of a number of these called-out ones. The word thus means literally, “an assembly,” and we so translate it. Translation. If, as is the case, a certain person who is a believer, has widows, let him be giving them assistance, and let not the assembly be burdened, in order that it may give assistance to those who are truly widows. (5:17, 18) “Rule” is  (proisthmi), “to be over, to superintend, preside over.” “Honor” is  (timh), which Vincent says, “at least includes pecuniary remuneration for services, if it is not limited to that. The use of  (timh) as pay or price appears (Matt. 27:6, 9; Acts 4:34, 7:16; I Cor. 6:20).… The comparison is with those Elders who do not exhibit equal capacity or efficiency in ruling. The passage lends no support to the Reformed theory of two classes of Elders—ruling and teaching. The special honor or emolument is assigned to those who combine qualifications for both.” “Doctrine” is didaskalia (didaskalia), “teaching.” Vincent says that “the special emphasis (especially) shows the importance which was attached to teaching as an antidote of heresy.” “Labor” is  (kopiaw), “to grow weary, tired, exhausted, to labor with wearisome effort, to toil.” Translation. Let the elders that are ruling well be deemed deserving of double honor, especially those who are laboring with wearisome effort in the Word and in the teaching; for the scripture says, You should not muzzle an ox while he is treading out the corn, The worker is worthy of his pay. (5:19) “Accusation” is  (kathgoria), “a formal accusation before a tribunal.” “But” is  (ejkto" eij mh), a pleonastic formula, “except in case.” “Before” is epi (ejpi), “upon,” the idea here being, “upon the authority of.” Translation. Against an elder do not receive a formal accusation before a tribunal, except it be upon the authority of two or three who bear testimony. (5:20) “Them that sin” refers to the elders in the context. Because of their public position, they should receive a public rebuke. “Rebuke” is  (ejlegcw), “to rebuke another with such effectual wielding of the victorious arms of the truth, as to bring him, if not always to a confession, yet at least to a conviction of his sin” (Trench). “Others” is hoi

lopoi (oiJ lopoi), “the rest,” namely, of the elders. “May fear” is  (fobon ejcwsin), “may have fear.” Translation. Those who are sinning, in the presence of all be rebuking, in order that the rest may have fear. (5:21) “I charge,” is diamarturomai (diamarturomai), “to call gods and men to witness (classical meaning), to testify earnestly, religiously charge.” Expositors says: “It is easy to see that St. Paul had not perfect confidence in the moral courage of Timothy. He interjects similar adjurations, 6:13, II Tim. 4:1.” As to the expression, “the elect angels,” Expositors says, “The epithet elect has probably the same force as holy in our common phrase, The holy angels.… The references to angels in St. Paul’s speeches and letters suggest that he had an unquestioning belief in their beneficient ministrations; though he may not have attached any importance to speculations as to their various grades. We are safe in saying that the elect angels are identical with ‘the angels which kept their own principality’ (Jude 6), ‘that did not sin’ (II Pet 2:4).” “Observe” is  (fulassw), “to guard,” in the Pauline sense of keeping the law (Vincent). “Preferring one before another” is prokrimatos (prokrimato"), “a pre-judgment” The idea is well expressed by the word “prejudice.” “Partiality” is prosklisis (prosklisi"), “leaning toward, a joining the party of one.” It refers in general to a leaning or inclination toward one person, thus, “a showing of partiality towards him.” The words, “God, and the Lord Jesus Christ,” are in a construction which is called Granville Sharp’s rule which makes the words “God” and “Lord Jesus Christ” refer to the same individual. It is “our God, even Christ Jesus.” “Lord” is not in text. “Our” is from the article before “God.” The expression is polemic, the apostle having in mind the institution of emperor worship, the state religion of the Roman Empire, in which the emperor was worshipped as a deity. He was called “lord,” “saviour,” and “god.” Translation. I solemnly charge you in the presence of our God, even Christ Jesus, and the elect angels, that these things you are to guard without showing prejudice, doing not even one thing dominated by the spirit of partiality. (5:22) The words, “Lay hands suddenly,” have to do with the restoration of a sinning church member back into the fellowship of the local church. The laying on of hands always signifies identification. The saint, upon forsaking his sin, is again identified with the local church. In verse 19, we see the accusation, in verse 20, the conviction and sentence, and in verse 22, the restoration to church fellowship. Expositors says: “Timothy is bidden to restrain by deliberate prudence, the impulses of mere pity. A hasty reconciliation tempts the offender to suppose that his offence cannot have been so very serious after all; and smooths the way to a repetition of the sin; ‘good-natured easy men’ cannot escape responsibility for the disastrous consequences of their lax administration of the law. They have a share in the sins of those whom they have encouraged to sin. Those who give letters of recommendation with too great facility, fall under the apostolic condemnation.” These latter words explain Paul’s injunction to Timothy, “Neither be partaker of other men’s sins.” “Keep” is  (threw), “to exercise a watchful care.” The Greek word is suggestive of a present possession. “Pure” is hagnos (aJgno"). The context demands that

the meaning here should not be “chaste,” but “upright, honorable” as in II Cor. 7:11, Phil. 4:8, Jas. 3:17 (Expositors). Translation. Lay hands hastily on not even one person, neither be a partner in others’ sins. Exercise a watchful care over yourself with respect to your present purity. (5:23) The words, “Drink no longer water,” are  (mhketi uJdropotei), the verb meaning, “to drink water, be a drinker of water.” Thus Vincent translates rightly, “Be no longer a drinker of water.” “Timothy is not enjoined to abstain from water, but is bidden not to be a water-drinker, entirely abstaining from wine” (Vincent). The same authority, commenting on the words, “for thy stomach’s sake,” says: “The appearance at this point, of this dietetic prescription, if it is nothing more, is sufficiently startling; which has led to some question whether this verse has been misplaced. If it belongs here, it can be explained only as a continuation of the thought in verse 22, to the effect that Timothy is to keep himself pure by not giving aid and comfort to ascetics, and imperiling his own health by adopting rules of abstinence. Observe that oinos (oijno") (wine) here, as everywhere else, means wine, fermented, and capable of intoxicating, and not a sweet syrup made by boiling down grape-juice, and styled by certain modern reformers ‘unfermented wine.’ Such a concoction would have tended rather to aggravate than relieve Timothy’s stomachic or other infirmities.” Expositors concurs in the above interpretation of the matter. We must remember that wine was one of the chief remedial agents of those times in which the science of medicine was in its infancy among Greek physicians. We must remind ourselves that Paul was speaking of wine as a medicine here, not as a beverage. The rule for the Christian today in the midst of the complex civilization in which we live is found in I Cor. 10:31, “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink. or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.” Translation. Be no longer a water-drinker, but be using a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent illnesses. (5:24) Both Vincent and Expositors say that the a.v., is wrong in translating  (prodhloi), “open beforehand.” The pro (pro) is not temporal in its significance, but merely strengthens  (dhloi). The meaning is, “openly manifest to all eyes.” As to the words, “going before to judgment,” Vincent says: “The meaning here is that these open sins go before their perpetrator to the judgment-seat like heralds, proclaiming their sentence in advance. Krisin (Krisin) (judgment), is not specifically the judgment of men or the final judgment of God, or the sentence of an ecclesiastical court—but is used indefinitely. The writer would say, no judicial utterance is necessary to condemn them of these sins.” The words, “they follow after,” refer to sins that “follow up the offender to the bar of judgment, and are first made openly manifest there” (Vincent). Translation. The sins of certain men are openly manifest to all eyes, going ahead to judgment; and certain individuals, they follow after. (5:25) The works that are “otherwise” are not evil works in contrast to good ones, but works that are not openly evident or plainly seen, as the word  (wJsautw") (likewise) indicates, which introduces an antithesis to what has gone before in verse 24. Translation. Likewise, also the good works are openly manifest to all eyes, and those that are otherwise than manifest, are not able to be hidden.

CHAPTER SIX (6:1) “Servants” is doulos (doulo"), a slave. Slavery in the Roman Empire was taken for granted. While the general ethics of Christianity did not allow such a thing, yet the apostles never openly preached against it. It was a common thing for Christians to have slaves, witness Philemon and his slave Onesimus. These slaves to whom Paul has reference here, were Christians, slaves of unsaved masters. Vincent translates, “as many as are under the yoke as bondservants.” The designation, “bondservants,” is added in explanation of under the yoke, which implies a hard and disagreeable condition. Expositors says that the phrase, “under the yoke,” proves that that slave belongs to a heathen master. The same authority says: “The heathen estimate of a slave differed in degree, not in kind, from their estimate of cattle. A Christian master could not regard his slaves as under a yoke.” The words “their own” are idios (ijdio"), “one’s personal, private, peculiar possession.” “Master” is not kurios (kurio"), “lord, master,” but  (despoth"), a correlative of doulos (doulo"), and denoted absolute ownership and uncontrolled power. The word “count” is  (hJgeomai), which denotes a belief or opinion, resting, not upon one’s inner feelings or sentiments, but upon the due consideration of external facts. The word “honor” is  (timh), “a valuing by which a price is fixed, thing prized, the honor which belongs to one, deference, reverence.” Hence the admonition is for these Christian slaves to treat their pagan masters with the respect and honor due one who is master. They are not called upon to honor what they are, but to honor the position they occupy, lest reproach be brought upon the name of God. Since slavery was a common and accepted institution at that time, it would hurt the cause of Christianity for Christian slaves to rebel against their masters. Peter, in his first letter, exhorts to the same thing (2:18–25). The expression, “the name of God,” refers to all that God is in His matchless Person as deity. Rebellion on the part of these Christian slaves would bring reproach upon all that God is in Himself. The word “blasphemed” is  (blasfhmew), “to speak reproachfully, to revile, rail at, calumniate.” Translation. Let as many as are under the yoke as slaves, consider their own absolute masters worthy of the greatest respect, in order that the name of God and the teaching be not evil spoken of. (6:2) Expositors says that “a Christian slave would be more likely to presume on his newly acquired theory of liberty, equality, and fraternity in relation to a Christian master than in relation to one that was a heathen. The position of a Christian master must have been a difficult one, distracted between the principles of a faith which he shared with his slave, and the laws of a social state which he felt were not wholly wrong.” Robertson suggests that some of these slaves might have been pastors of local churches to which the master belonged. “Despise” is  (katafronew), “to think down, disdain, think little or nothing of.” The Christian slaves are exhorted not to despise their Christian masters, because they (the masters) are brethren, (belonging to the same brotherhood and not liberating them). Instead, they are to do them service. The verb is  (doulow), having the same stem as the noun doulos (doulo"), literally “slave for them all the more,” or, “serve them as their slaves all the more.” They are to do this because the Christian

masters are faithful and beloved. “Faithful” is pistos (pisto"), referring here, not to the fact that these Christian masters have the quality of faithfulness, but that they are believers. The word “benefit” is euergesia (eujergesia), used here in its non-religious signification of “kindly service.” It refers to kindly acts which these Christian masters do to their slaves, not to benefits received by the masters. Expositors and Vincent both concur in this interpretation. This would be the appreciation on the part of the Christian master of the excellent service rendered by the Christian slave. Translation. And those who have believing masters, let them not despise them because they are brothers, but render them a slave’s service, all the more because they are believing ones and beloved ones who busy themselves in kindly service. (6:3–5) The “if” is the particle of a fulfilled condition (ei (eij)), “If, as is the case, any man teaches otherwise.” Some were teaching things diametrically opposed to Paul’s teaching. The word “otherwise” is heteros (eJtero"), “another of a different kind,” and which frequently refers to something diametrically opposed to what is right. The word “consent” is proserchomai (prosercomai), literally, “to come to, to draw near.” It refers to the act of one who confidingly accepts another’s proffer. Thus it means, “to give one’s assent to.” “Wholesome” is  (uJgiainw), “to be sound, to be well, to be healthy.” Our word “hygiene” comes from this Greek word. Expositors says, “Healthy, wholesome, admirably describe Christian teaching, as St. Paul conceived it, in its complete freedom from casuistry or quibbles in its theory, and from arbitrary or unnatural restrictions in its practice.” The word “godliness” is eusebeia (eujsebeia). The verbal form means, “to act piously or reverently toward God.” The noun form used here means, “piety toward God, reverence, respect.” The doctrine which is according to godliness therefore refers to that teaching which concerns the proper attitude of the individual towards God. “Proud” is  (tufow), “to raise a smoke, to wrap in a mist.” It speaks metaphorically of a beclouded and stupid state of mind as the result of pride. The verb is in the perfect tense which speaks of an action completed in past time having finished results in present time. The person concerning whom Paul is speaking has come to the place where pride has finished its work, and he is in a permanent or settled state of pride. “Knowing” is epistamai (ejpistamai), “to put one’s attention on, fix one’s thoughts on, to understand.” Thus, this person is not merely devoid of a knowledge of facts, but is unable to do any concentrated or reflective thinking. “Nothing” is literally, “not even one thing.” “Doting” is  (nosew), “to be sick,” metaphorically used of any ailment of the mind. It speaks of a morbid fondness for something. Expositors says that both doting and mad after as translations err by excess of vigor. The idea is a simple one of sickness as opposed to health. The word is used as opposed to the word  (uJgiainw), translated “wholesome” in v. 3, and referring to a state of sound health. This person has a morbid curiosity about questions. The word is  (zhthsi"), literally, “processes of inquiry,” hence, “debates.” “Strifes of words” is logomachia (logomacia), which is made up of logos (logo"), “a word,” and  (mach), “a fight,” hence, “a war of words.” “Perverse disputings” is  (diaparatribh).  (Paratribh) is “a rubbing against.” Dia (Dia) signifies continuance. Thus the meaning is continued friction. “Of men of corrupt minds” has a participial construction in the Greek text and could better be, “of men corrupted in mind.” These are “destitute of the truth” (a.v.). The

word is  (ajposterew), “to defraud, rob, despoil, to allow one’s self to be defrauded.” “The implication is that they once possessed the truth. They put it away from themselves. Here it is represented as taken away from them” (Vincent). Expositors says, “The truth was once theirs; they have disinherited themselves.” The word “destitute” (a.v.) does not adequately translate it. Commenting on the words, “supposing that gain is godliness,” Vincent says: “Wrong. Rend. that godliness is a way (or source) of gain.… They make religion a means of livelihood.” Expositors comments: “not godliness in general, but the profession of Christianity.… Here the significance of the clause may be that the false teachers demoralized slaves, suggesting to slaves who were converts, or possible converts, that the profession of Christianity involved an improvement in social position and worldly prospects.” The words, “from such withdraw thyself,” are not in the best texts. Translation. If, as is the case, anyone is teaching things of a different nature and opposed to the things just mentioned, and does not give his assent to wholesome words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the teaching which is according to a godly piety, he is in a beclouded and stupid state of mind, which condition is caused by pride, not doing any concentrated or reflective thinking in even one instance, but exercising a morbid curiosity about inquiries and quarrels about words, from which come envy, strife, speech injurious to another’s good name, malicious suspicions, protracted and wearing discussions of men corrupted in mind, who have disinherited themselves of the truth, thinking that godly piety is a way of gain. (6:6–10) “Contentment” is autarkeia (aujtarkeia). It speaks of an inward self-sufficiency as opposed to the lack or the desire of outward things. It is a favorite Stoic word, expressing the doctrine of that philosophy that a man should be sufficient to himself for all things, and able, by the power of his own will, to resist the force of circumstances. “In Song of Solomon 5:18, we read: ‘Blessed is the man whom God remembereth with a sufficiency convenient for him;’ that is, with a sufficiency proportioned to his needs” (Vincent). Thus, Paul’s teaching here is that the possession of a godly piety makes a person independent of outward circumstances, and self-sufficient, enabling him to maintain a spiritual equilibrium in the midst of both favorable circumstances and those which are adverse. “With” is meta (meta), a preposition showing close association of two things. This inward self-sufficiency is a natural accompaniment of godly piety. The “and” of verse 7 is in italics and thus not in the Greek text. The translators supplied it in an attempt to connect the two statements. The Greek word hoti (oJti) is the connection. Vincent offers the following “Omit and and certain. Rend hoti (oJti) because. The statement is: We brought nothing into this world because we can carry nothing out. The fact that we brought nothing into the world is shown by the impossibility of our taking with us anything out of it: since if anything belonging to us in our premundane state had been brought by us into the world, it would not be separated from us at our departure from the world. Compare Job 1:21, Eccl. 5:15, Ps. 49:17.” Expositors says: “The reasoning of this clause depends upon the evident truth that since a man comes naked into this world (Job 1:21), and when he leaves it can ‘take nothing for his labor which he may carry away in his hand’ (Eccl. 5:15; Ps. 49:17), nothing the world can give is any addition to the man

himself. He is a complete man, though naked (Matt. 6:25, Luke 12:15).” The word “content” of v.8, has the same root as the one in v.6. It is the Stoic word, except that the pronoun autos (aujto"), “self,” is not prefixed. The word is  (ajrkew), “to be possessed of unfailing strength, to suffice, to be enough (as against any danger),” hence, “to defend, ward off.” It is used in the statement, “My grace is sufficient for thee,” that is, it is sufficient “to enable thee to bear the evil manfully; there is, therefore, no reason why thou shouldst ask for its removal (II Cor. 12:9)” (Vincent). The contentment in v.8 is therefore the consciousness that having food and clothing provided by God, we are fortified against outward circumstances. These protect the body. Nothing of outward circumstances can injure the inner life. The word “will” is not  (qelw), a desire which comes from the emotions, but boulomai (boulomai), a desire that comes from the reasoning faculties. This desire to be wealthy is not a passing emotional thing, but the result of a process of reasoning. Mature consideration has been given the matter of the acquisition of riches, with the result that that desire has become a settled and planned procedure. Vincent says: “It is not the possession of riches, but the love of them that leads men into temptation.” Expositors comments: “The warning applies to all grades of wealth: all come under it whose ambition is to have more money than that which satisfies their accustomed needs. We are also to note that what is here condemned is not an ambition to excel in some lawful department of human activity, which though it bring an increase in riches, develops character, but the having a single eye to the accumulation of money by any means.” “Coveted” (v. 10) is  (ojregw), “to stretch one’s self out in order to touch or grasp something, to reach after or desire something.” “Sorrows” is  (ojdunh), “consuming grief.” Translation. But godly piety associated with an inward self-sufficiency which is its natural accompaniment, is great gain; for not even one thing did we bring into this world, because not even one thing are we able to take out. And having food and clothing, by these we shall be fortified sufficiently; but they that after giving the matter mature consideration, desire to be wealthy, fall into temptation and a snare and many foolish and hurtful cravings which drown men in destruction and perdition; for a root of all the evils is the fondness for money, which certain ones bending their every effort to grasp, have been led astray from the Faith and have pierced themselves through with many consuming griefs. (6:11) “But thou” is su de (su de), the pronoun being used for emphasis and contrast. It is, “but as for you in contradistinction to others.” The phrase, “O man of God” is not an official designation of Timothy’s position in the Church, but a strong form of address. It is in the vocative case in Greek, the case of address. The word “God” is in the genitive case, the descriptive genitive here, describing the kind of man Timothy was, a godly man. The verb “flee” is  (feugw), in the present imperative which commands a continuous action. Timothy is to make it the habit of his life to be everlastingly fleeing away from a fondness for money. Expositors says that “love of money in ministers of religion does more to discredit religion in the eyes of ordinary people than would indulgence in many grosser vices.” “Follow” is  (diwkw), “to run swiftly in order to catch some person or thing, to run after, pursue,” metaphorically, “to seek eagerly, earnestly endeavor to acquire.” “Righteousness” here is not in the Pauline dogmatic sense, but as in Ephesians

5:9, refers to moral rectitude. “Love” here is  (ajgaph), God’s love as produced in the heart of the yielded believer by the Holy Spirit. “Patience” is  (uJpomonh) “steadfastness, constancy, endurance.” Thayer defines it: “in the n.t., the characteristic of a man who is unswerved from his deliberate purpose and his loyalty to faith and piety by even the greatest trials and sufferings.” The word is a compound of  (menw), “to remain,” and hupo (uJpo), “under,” and describes the man who remains under trials in a God-honoring manner. “Meekness” is praupatheia (praupaqeia); in general, “mildness of disposition, gentleness of spirit, meekness.” Trench in defining the Greek word for meekness ( (praoth")) says, “It is that temper of spirit in which we accept God’s dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting.… This meekness, however, being first of all a meekness before God, is also such in the face of men, even of evil men, out of a sense that these, with the insults and injuries which they may inflict, are permitted and employed by Him for the chastening and purifying of His elect.” Translation. But, as for you, O man of God, these things be constantly fleeing. But be as constantly eagerly seeking to acquire righteousness, godly piety, faith, divine love, steadfastness, meek-spiritedness. (6:12) In the exhortation to Timothy, “Fight the good fight of faith,” we have a reference to the Greek athletic games. Paul was educated so far as his Greek training was concerned, at the University of Tarsus, at that time the foremost Greek university in the world, outstripping, according to Strabo, the University of Athens, in its zeal for learning. The great apostle shows a first-hand acquaintance with Greek athletics in his writings, where he frequently uses them as illustrations of spiritual truth, for instance, I Corinthians 9:24–27 and Philippians 3:12. All the churches Paul founded were composed of Greeks. Here he was writing to Timothy, whose father was a Greek. One of the chief activities of Roman life was the Greek games, held all over the empire. It was part of the atmosphere the Romans breathed. When Rome conquered Greece in a military sense, Greece conquered Rome in a cultural one. The word “fight” is  (ajgwnizomai). Its cognate noun was used in pagan Greece to refer to the place of a contest, the lists, race course, the assembly at the national games, a struggle, battle. The verb means, “to contend in the athletic games for the prize, to fight.” When we find that the gloves of the Greek boxer were fur lined on the inside, but made on the outside of ox-hide with lead and iron sewed into it, and that the loser in a wrestling match had his eyes gouged out, we come to some appreciation of what a Greek athletic contest consisted of. Thus, the word “fight” ( (ajgwnizomai)) had a very definite meaning for Timothy. The verb is present tense, imperative mode, commanding a continuous action. It showed Timothy the necessity for the continuous nature of the Christian’s warfare against evil, and of his desperate effort to live a life pleasing to God. The second use of the word “fight” is  (ajgwn), the cognate noun of the verb. Expositors translates, “Engage in the contest.” The word “good” is not agathos (ajgaqo"), referring to intrinsic goodness, but kalos (kalo"), speaking of goodness as seen from the outside by a spectator. Paul, writing to Timothy just before his martyrdom, says, “The desperate, straining, agonizing contest, marked by its beauty of technique, I, like a wrestler, have fought to a finish, and at present am resting in its victory” (II Tim. 4:7). The phrase, “marked by its beauty of technique,” refers to the beautiful display of his art which the Greek athlete presents to the thousands in the stadium, and in Paul’s sentence, to the beautiful technique inspired by the Holy

Spirit, which he used in gaining victory over sin and in the living of a life pleasing to God. Paul therefore exhorts Timothy, “Be constantly engaging in the contest marked by its beauty of technique.” The word “faith” is preceded by the definite article in the Greek text, “the faith.” It is not “faith” in general as exercised by the Christian, to which reference is made here, but to the Faith as consisting of a body of doctrine with its corresponding ethical responsibilities, namely, Christianity and the Christian life. “Lay hold of” is  (ejpilambanw), “to seize upon, take possession of.” Thayer, in defining the word, says, “i.e., to struggle to obtain eternal life.” Thus, the act of fighting the good fight is the same act as seen in the words, “lay hold of.” The verb is in the aorist imperative, referring to a single act rather than a process. It refers to the habitual act of fighting the good fight, but takes no note of the process, rather emphasizing the result. Grammarians call it the culminative aorist, viewing the action from its existing results. Now, when Paul exhorts Timothy to lay hold of eternal life, he does not imply that he does not possess it. Timothy was saved, and possessed eternal life as a gift of God. What Paul was desirous of was that Timothy experience more of what this eternal life is in his life. The definite article appears before “life,” marking it out as a particular life which the Scriptures say God gives the believer. The word “profession” is  (oJmologew), made up of  (legw), “to say,” and homos (oJmo"), “the same,” hence, “to say the same thing as another says,” thus, “to agree with what someone else says.” Here it is used of Timothy’s statement of his agreement with the doctrines of Christianity at the occasion of his baptism. “In the early Church, the baptism of a person was a matter in which the Church generally took an interest and a part. The rule in The Didache was, “Before baptism let him that baptizeth and him that is baptized fast, and any others also who are able” (Expositors). This explains the many witnesses who testified to Timothy’s statement of faith in the doctrines of the Church, and his acceptance of them. Translation. Be constantly engaging in the contest of the Faith, which contest is marked by its beauty of technique. Take possession of the eternal life, into a participation of which you were called and concerning which you gave testimony to your agreement with the good profession in the presence of many witnesses. (6:13–16) Expositors says: “St. Paul passes in thought from the past epoch in Timothy’s life, with its human witnesses, among whom was the apostle himself, to the present probation of Timothy, St. Paul, far away; and he feels impelled to remind his lieutenant that there are real Witnesses of his conduct whose real though unseen presence is an encouragement as well as a check.” “Give charge” is  (paraggellw), “to command, order, charge.” “Quickeneth” is  (zwogonew), “to preserve alive.” The word  (zwopoiew) means, “to quicken” or “make alive.” Expositors remarks that “the word has here a special appropriateness. Timothy is stimulated to exhibit moral courage by an assurance that he is in the hands of One whose protective power is universal, and by the example of One who, as Man, put that protective power to a successful test, and was ‘saved out of death’ ” (Heb 5:7). The good confession here is the historical confession of our Lord before Pilate. Vincent says that this is the warrant for the truthfulness of Timothy’s confession. The latter authority, commenting on the mention of Pilate here says that “the mention of Pontius Pilate in connection with the crucifixion is of constant occurrence in early Christian writings.” “Keep” is  (threw), “watch,

observe, guard, protect, preserve.” It is aorist imperative. Paul gives the order to Timothy with military snap and curtness. It was a sharp order. Timothy, a good young man, was rather diffident. He was not cast in the heroic mold of a Paul. He needed just such sharp prodding once in awhile. He commands him to preserve the commandment intact. The commandment here is probably to be explained by reference to the commandment spoken of in 1:5. There it referred to the responsibility Paul laid upon Timothy to charge certain ones not to teach any other doctrine, etc. “Without spot” is aspilon (ajspilon), “free from censure, irreproachable, free from vice, unsullied.” “Unrebukable” is  (ajnepilhpto"), which in turn comes from Alpha privative prefixed to  (ejpilambanw), “not apprehended, that cannot be laid hold of,” hence, “that cannot be reprehended, not open to censure, irreproachable.” “Appearing” is epiphaneia (ejpifaneia), “an appearing, appearance.” It was often used by the pagan Greeks of a glorious manifestation of the gods, and especially of their advent to help (Thayer). Here it is used of the second Advent of our Lord, His coming to the earth to reign over the Millennial Kingdom. As a Christian, Timothy would be looking, not for the Advent, but for the Rapture of the Church, and doubtless the latter was blended with the former in the mind of Paul when he wrote this. The word “which” is a relative pronoun in the Greek text referring back to the word “appearing.” The connection is as follows: “Which appearing in His own times He will expose to the eyes, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, etc.” The word “times” is not chronos (crono") “time in general,” but kairos (kairo") “the critical and epoch-making periods fore-ordained of God when all that has been slowly, and often without observation, ripening through long ages, is mature and comes to birth in grand decisive events which constitute at once the close of one period and the commencement of another” (Trench). “His” is idios (ijdio"), a word referring to one’s own peculiar, private, personal possessions. It will be in God the Father’s own personal time only known to Himself that the Lord Jesus will come in glorious manifestation. Our Lord in Acts 1:7 says that it is not for us to know the times (chronos (crono")) or seasons (kairos (kairo")) which the Father has put in His own power (exousia ((exousia) authority), and that He Himself does not know the time of the second Advent (Mark 13:32). God is called a Potentate. The word is  (dunasth"); the verb form is dunamai (dunamai), “to be able, to have power.” The noun is dunamis (dunami"), “strength, power, ability.” It is the word used in Romans 1:16, where the gospel is the power of God resulting in salvation. Here our word refers to one who has power such as a prince, a high officer, a royal minister. God is called a potentate from the view-point of His power. He is a ruler by virtue of the fact that He has the power and ability to rule. This is what is meant by the word “potentate” here. He is the blessed potentate. There are two words in the Greek New Testament translated “blessed,”  (eujloghto"), “well spoken of, praised” (Eph. 1:3, our word “eulogy,” Greek word made up of logos (logo") “a word,” and eu (euj), “good,” thus, “a good word”), and makarios (makario") “happy” (used here), in the sense of prosperous. The blessedness of this Potentate is found in the fact of His prosperity, all that He is and possesses in His Person as deity. The word “only” (monos (mono")) expresses His uniqueness as God. “King of kings” is literally, “King of those who are ruling as kings.” “Lord of lords” is again, “Lord of those who are ruling as lords.” This is a protest against the Cult of the Caesar in which the Roman emperor was worshipped as lord and god. Domitian (a.d. 81–96) assumed the titles of “lord” and “god.” The Roman emperors were called “saviour of the world.” “Immortality” is athanasia (ajqanasia), made up of

thanatos (qanato"), “death,” and the Greek letter Alpha, which when prefixed to a word negates its meaning, thus, “no death, incapable of dying.” “Dwelling” is  (oijkew), “to be at home.” God is spoken of here as being at home in unapproachable light. Expositors says: “This is a grander conception than that in Psalm 104:12, ‘Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment.’ Here, if one may venture to express it, the Person of God is wholly concealed by His dwelling, which is light; and this dwelling is itself unapproachable.” Translation. I am giving you a charge in the presence of God who is constantly preserving in life all things, and Christ Jesus, the One who in His testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good profession, preserve this commandment intact, unsullied, irreproachable, until the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ, which (glorious manifestation) He will expose to the eyes in His own strategic seasons, the One who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of those who are reigning as kings, and Lord of those who are ruling as lords, who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom not even one in the human race has seen nor even is able to see, to whom be honor and power forever. Amen. (6:17–19) “World” is  (aijwn), which Trench defines as, “All that floating mass of thoughts, opinions, maxims, speculations, hopes, impulses, aims, aspirations, at any time current in the world, which it may be impossible to seize and accurately define, but which constitute a most real and effective power, being the moral, or immoral, atmosphere which at every moment of our lives we inhale, again inevitably to exhale.” Bengel defines  (aijwn) as “the subtle, informing spirit of the kosmos (kosmo") or world of men who are living alienated and apart from God.” The Germans have a word for it—zeit geist, “the spirit of the age.” It is this present age of which Paul is speaking. The Greek has it, “the now age.” He is thinking here of those who belong to the unsaved portion of humanity and are part of this age system, and who think that the material wealth which they possess is the sum of all existence. Timothy is under the responsibility of charging them not to be high-minded. The word is  (uJyhlofronew), made up of  (fronew), “to think” and  (uJyhlo"), “high, lofty,” the compound word meaning, “proud, highminded.” The word “trust” is  (ejlpizw), “to hope.” The infinitive is in the perfect tense. The translation reads: “have their hope set on.” “Giveth” is  (parecw), “to hold forth, offer, supply.” Translation. To those who are wealthy in the present age, be giving a charge not to be high-minded, neither to have their hope set upon the uncertainty of wealth, but upon God, the One who is constantly offering us all things in a rich manner to enjoy; to be doing good, to be wealthy in the sphere of good works, to be liberal, sharers with others, laying away for themselves a good foundation with a view to the future, in order that they may lay hold of that which is truly life. (6:20, 21) “Keep” is  (fulassw), “to guard,” used so in a military sense in the classics. Timothy is commanded by Paul to guard as a sacred trust, the deposit of truth

delivered to him. The words, “committed to thy trust,” are  (paraqhkhn), the verbal form meaning “to place alongside of someone.” It is the teaching which Paul imparted to Timothy, “the sound words,” that the latter was to guard. “Vain babblings” is  (kenofwnia), from kenos (keno"), “empty” and  (fwnh), “voice,” thus, “empty voices.” “Profane” is  (bebhlo"), literally, “accessible, lawful to be trodden,” thus, “common, unhallowed,” here, devoid of godliness. Timothy is to avoid these. The word is  (ejktrepw), “to turn aside, to turn away from, to shun, to avoid meeting or associating with one.” The words, “falsely so called,” are  (yeudwnumou), made up of pseudos (yeudo"), “false” and onoma (ojnoma), “name,” literally, “falsely named.” “Science” is the a.v., translation of  (gnwsew"), “knowledge.” The definite article precedes it. It is a particular knowledge to which Paul refers. It is used here, Vincent says, “in its simple sense of the arguments and teachings of those who opposed the true Christian doctrine as entrusted to Timothy.” “ (Gnwsi") (knowledge) was the characteristic word of the Gnostic school, the most formidable enemy of the Church of the second century. The Gnostics claimed a superior knowledge peculiar to an intellectual caste. According to them, it was by this philosophic insight, as opposed to faith, that humanity was to be regenerated. Faith was suited only to the rude masses, the animal-men. The intellectual questions which occupied these teachers were two; to explain the work of creation, and to account for the existence of evil. Their ethical problem was how to develop the higher nature in the environment of matter which was essentially evil. In morals they ran to two opposite extremes—asceticism and licentiousness. The principal representatives of the school were Basilides, Valentinus, and Marcion. Although Gnosticism as a distinct system did not reach its full development until about the middle of the second century, foreshadowings of it appear in the heresy at which Paul’s Colossian letter was aimed. It is not strange if we find in the Pastoral Epistles, allusions pointing to Gnostic errors; but, as already remarked, it is impossible to refer these allusions to any one definite system of error” (Vincent). The word “oppositions” is antithesis (ajntiqesi"), which comes into our language in exact transliteration. The verbal form is made up of anti (ajnti), “against,” and  (tiqhmi), “to place”; hence it refers to the act of placing arguments and objections against any certain proposition. Expositors, commenting on our word says: “The antithesis (ajntiqesi"), then of this spurious knowledge would be the dialectical distinctions and niceties of the false teachers. Perhaps inconsistencies is what is meant.” “Erred” is  (ajstocew), “to deviate from, miss the mark.” Translation. O, Timothy, that which was committed to you, guard, turning away from unhallowed and empty mouthings, and oppositions of the falsely-named knowledge, which (knowledge) certain ones announcing, missed the mark concerning the Faith. The grace be with all of you.

SECOND TIMOTHY In the Greek New Testament

CHAPTER ONE

(1:1, 2) For comments on the words, “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ,” see notes on I Timothy 1:1. “Will” is  (qelhma), “a desire which comes from one’s emotional nature” as contrasted to  (boulh), “a desire which comes from one’s rational processes.” “St. Paul believed that his commission as an apostle was a part of God’s arrangements to this end, one of the ways in which the Will manifested itself” (Expositors). Vincent, commenting on the words, “An apostle … according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus” says: “With the promise of the life in Christ goes the provision for its proclamation. Hence the apostle, in proclaiming ‘Ye shall live through Christ,’ is an apostle according to the promise. For word studies covering verse 2, see I Timothy 1:2. “Child” is teknon (teknon), which was used as a term of affection even in the case of adults. Translation. Paul, an ambassador of Christ Jesus through the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus, to Timothy, beloved child. Grace, mercy, peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. (1:3–7) Expositors sums up these verses in the following: “I know that your weak point is deficiency in moral courage. Be braced, therefore, by the assurance that I am constantly thinking with thankfulness and prayer about your genuine and inborn faith; and by the fact that the gift of the Holy Spirit which you received at ordination, was that of power and love and discipline.” “I thank God,” is literally, “I am constantly having thanks to God.” “Serve” is  (latreuw), “to render religious service.” Expositors comments: “Two thoughts are in St. Paul’s mind: (a) the inheritance of his religious consciousness from his forefathers, and (b) the continuity of the revelation of God; the same light in the New Covenant as in the Old, only far brighter. If St. Paul had been asked, When did you first serve God? he would have answered, Even before God separated me from my mother’s womb for His service. St. Paul was conscious that he was the result of generations of God-fearing people. His inborn, natural instincts were all towards the service of God (Acts 22:3, 24:14; Rom. 11:1; II Cor. 11:22; Phil. 3:5).” Paul remembered the tears Timothy had shed at their last parting. The Ephesian elders wept when Paul bid them farewell (Acts 20:37). Expositors translates, “having been reminded,” and rejects, “I call to remembrance.” The word used here ( (uJpomnhsi")) speaks of an act of recollection specially excited by a person or thing, whereas  (ajnamnhsi") speaks of an act of recollection which is self-originated. The word “unfeigned” is anupokritos (ajnupokrito"). The verb is hupokrinomai (uJpokrinomai), literally, “to judge under,” thus, “to act beneath a disguise.” Greek actors were called  (uJpokrith"). Our word “hypocrite” is the transliteration and also translation of this word. The Alpha put before the word negates its meaning, thus, “unhypocritical.” That was the nature of Timothy’s faith. “Dwelt in” is  (ejnoikew), “to dwell in,” metaphorically, “to dwell in one and influence him for good.” The word oikos (oijko") means “a home,” and oikeoµ means “to live at home.” The supernatural faith resident in Timothy was at home in him in the sense that it held free sway over his life. “Stir up” is  (ajnazwpurew) a compound of ana (ajna), “again,”  (zwh), “life,” and pur (pur), “fire,” the word meaning, “to kindle anew, rekindle, resuscitate.” The infinitive is in the present tense which speaks of progressive, continuous action. Robertson translates, “keep blazing.” Vincent says that it is not necessary to think that Timothy’s zeal had grown cold.

The a.v. could have translated, “keep stirring up.” The particular gift of God here is determined by the context which speaks of fearfulness. This would point to a gift of administration, presiding over the affairs of the local church. The word “spirit” here is best taken as an equivalent of charisma (carisma), a gift given by the Holy Spirit, thus, a spirit of power and of love and of a sound mind. The word “spirit,” used with “fear,” is best understood as referring to a disposition of the mind, thus, a spirit of fear. “Fear” is deilia (deilia), ”fearfulness, timidity.” Expositors comments: “There was an element of deilia (deilia) ‘fear’ in Timothy’s natural disposition which must have been prejudicial to his efficiency as a church ruler. For that position is needed (a) force of character, which if not natural, may be inspired by consciousness of a divine appointment, (b) love, which is not softness, and (c) self-discipline, which is opposed to all easy self-indulgence which issues in laxity of administration.” Translation. I constantly have a spirit of thanksgiving to God, to whom I am constantly rendering sacred service from the time of my forebears with a pure conscience, how unceasingly I have you in my mind in my petitions for needs, day and night, greatly longing to see you, remembering your tears, in order that I may be filled with joy, having been reminded of the unhypocritical faith which is in you, which is of such a nature as to have been at home first in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice, and concerning which I have come to a settled persuasion, is at home in you also; for which cause I am reminding you to keep constantly blazing the gift of God which is in you through the imposition of my hands. For God did not give to us a spirit of fearfulness, but of power and of love and of a sound mind. (1:8) The exhortation, “Be not ashamed,” does not mean that Timothy was ashamed. Had that been the case, Paul would have used the present imperative, which with the negative, forbids the continuance of an action already going on. Here he uses the aorist subjunctive with the negative which forbids the doing of an act not yet begun. The testimony of the Lord here refers to “the testimony borne by our Lord, His ethical and spiritual teachings by which Christianity has influenced the ideals and practice of society” (Expositors). The construction is the subjective genitive. The words, “of me His prisoner,” do not mean one made prisoner by the Lord but one who belongs to the Lord and is a prisoner for His sake. “Be thou partaker of the afflictions” is  (sugkakopaqew) made up of sun (sun), “with,”  (paqew), “to suffer,” and kakos (kako"), “evil.” The compound word means, “to suffer hardships together with one.” The exhortation is, “Be a fellow-partaker with us (the Lord and Paul) with respect to our sufferings for the gospel’s sake.” The sufferings are those that are a natural accompaniment of the preaching of the gospel. Paul alludes to the same thing in Colossians 1:24 where he says: “Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for His Body’s sake which is the Church.” The phrase “according to the power of God” is connected with the verb “be thou partaker.” It is the power given by God which enables Timothy to endure suffering for the sake of the gospel. This is ministered to the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit. Translation. Therefore, do not be ashamed of the testimony borne by our

Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but be a fellow-partaker with respect to our sufferings for the sake of the gospel according to the power of God. (1:9) Having just spoken of the power of God given us in salvation whereby we are enabled to suffer hardship for the sake of the gospel, Paul now speaks of God’s act of saving the believing sinner. “Who saved” is  (tou swsanto"), article and participle, the latter in the aorist tense, which tense refers the act of saving to a definite point of time. Paul’s argument is that since God saved us and called us at a definite point of time, that should strengthen our faith in the continuance in the future of His gifts of power to us (Expositors). The call of God here is, of course, that effectual call into salvation in which the sinner called, willingly accepts the salvation God offers him. Pauline teaching is to the effect that even the appropriating faith is given in sovereign grace by God, and is part of the salvation given. In Ephesians 2:8 we have, “For by the grace have you been completely saved in past time with the result that your salvation persists through present time, through faith, and this (salvation) is not from you as a source. Of God it is the gift, not out of a source of works, in order that a person may not boast.” Paul uses the periphrastic perfect here. The word “this” (“that” a.v.) is neuter, and cannot therefore refer to either “grace” or “faith” which are feminine. It refers to the general idea of salvation spoken of in the context. The words, “holy calling,” are  (klhsi" aJgia. Klhsi"), “a calling to, an invitation,” is used here not only of the invitation which God extends to a holy life, but also to the holy life which the one called is expected to live. This act of God saving and calling us, was not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace. The words, “according to,” are the translation of kata (kata), which in its local use means “down.” The word “down” has the idea of domination or control. Thus, salvation is not dominated or controlled by the works of the sinner. The works of a sinner do not enter into the economy of God whereby He gives salvation to the individual. All of which means that salvation is not earned nor merited by anything that the sinner does. It is dominated by God’s purpose in salvation, that of glorifying Himself in the bestowal of salvation and in the life of the person who is the recipient of that salvation. Salvation, therefore, can never be earned. If it could, the sinner would be glorified. Salvation must be a free gift with no strings tied to it. And that is grace, the act of God giving salvation as a free gift to one who does not only not deserve it, but who deserves punishment for his sins. This grace is given us in Christ Jesus in the sense that He made the gift of salvation possible through His death on the Cross by which He satisfied the just requirements of the law which sinners broke, thus making it possible for a righteous God to show mercy to a hell-deserving sinner on the basis of justice satisfied. This grace was given us before the world began. The expression in the Greek is  (pro cronwn aijwniwn), literally, “before eternal times.” Expositors, commenting on these words says: “expresses the notion of that which is anterior to the most remote period in the past conceivable by any imagination that man knows of.” It was before the time of the ages, before time was reckoned by aeons or cycles, and that was before the creation of the universe, that grace was given the believer, not actually, for he did not exist, but in God’s decree. Vincent says, “The gift planned and ordered in the eternal counsels is here treated as an actual bestowment.” Translation. The One who saved us and called us in the sphere of a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own private

purpose and grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time. (1:10, 11) “Made manifest” is  (fanerow), “to make manifest or visible or known what has been hidden or unknown.” The word refers back to “purpose” and “grace.” Paul speaks of the hidden purpose of God in forming Jew and Gentile into one body in Christ (Eph. 3:5). The word “appearing” is epiphaneia (ejpifaneia), used by the pagan Greeks of a glorious appearance of a Greek god, and by the New Testament writers in other places, of the second Advent, and here by Paul of the first Advent at which time our Lord by His death on the Cross abolished (a.v.) death. Expositors says, however, that we must not restrict the application of the word here to the incarnation, but should extend its application to the future Advent. “Abolished” is  (katargew), “to render idle, unemployed, inactive, inoperative, to bring to naught, make of none effect.” Expositors says, “Abolished does not express the truth. Christians all ‘taste of death’ as their Master did (John 8:52, Heb. 2:9), though they do not ‘see’ it; and they are confident that they too will be saved ‘out of death’ (Heb. 5:7). Death for them has lost its sting (Heb. 2:14, 15).” The word “see” in John 8:52, is  (qewrew), “to look at with interest and attention.” The dying saint has his interest and attention so fixed on the Lord Jesus and the glories of Heaven, that that stark specter, death, is only on the periphery of his consciousness. “Immortality” is from aphtharsia (ajfqarsia), “incorruption, perpetuity.” “Brought to light” is  (fwtizw); as used in this verse, “to cause something to exist and thus come to light and become clear to all” (Thayer). The words, “of the Gentiles,” are not found in the best manuscripts. Paul calls himself a preacher. The word is  (khrux), a name given the Imperial Herald who made a public proclamation of the Emperor’s message with that formality, gravity, and authority which must be heeded. It is the noun form of the word used by Paul in II Timothy 4:2 where he exhorts his young understudy to preach the Word. Translation. But is now made known through the appearing of our Saviour, Christ Jesus, since He not only made of none effect the death, but also brought to light, life and incorruption through the gospel, with reference to which gospel I was appointed a herald and an ambassador and a teacher. (1:12) The words, “for the which cause,” refer back to verse 11. The connection is: “I suffer these things because I am a herald, an ambassador, and a teacher of the gospel.” Expositors interprets the words, “I am not ashamed,” “I am not disappointed of my hope.” The idea is that Paul, in spite of his sufferings incurred in his service for the Lord, has not been put to shame, has not been defeated, has not had his hopes disappointed. When writing to the Romans (1:16) he uses the same word, saying that he is not afraid that the gospel will not work at Rome, for it is the power of God. Therefore, he is not ashamed of it. The word “know” is not  (ginwskw), “experiential knowledge,” but oida (oijda), “absolute, beyond a peradventure of a doubt knowledge,” the latter being the stronger word. The knowledge here is not personal knowledge gained by experience, such as fellowship with God, but a knowledge of what God is in Himself which makes Him absolutely dependable in any circumstances. “I have believed,” is in the perfect tense in the Greek text. It is in its full meaning, “I have believed with the present result that my faith is a firmly settled one.” It is like hammering a nail through a board and clinching it on the other side. It is there to stay. So, Paul’s faith was placed permanently in the God whom he

knew, which faith was immovable. Again, “persuaded” is perfect in tense. Paul had come to a settled persuasion regarding the matter and was fixed in an immovable position. You could not budge him. “Able” is dunatos (dunato"). The verb dunamai (dunamai) means, “to be able, to have power.” The noun dunatos (dunato"), Vincent says, is “often used with a stronger meaning, as I Cor. 1:26 mighty; Acts 25:5 hoi dunatoi (oiJ dunatoi), the chief men; as a designation of God, ho dunatos (oJ dunato"), the mighty one, Luke 1:49: of preeminent ability or power in something, as of Jesus,   (dunato" ejn ejrgwi kai logwi), mighty in deed and word.” Thus, when Paul uses the word here, he is not thinking of mere ability to do something, but of the might and power resident in the Being who is of ability to do what he trusts Him to do. The word “keep” is  (fulassw), a military term meaning “to guard, defend, keep watch.” Now, as to the meaning of the words, “that which I have committed unto Him.” Expositors and Alford concur in saying that they refer to the apostle committing the salvation of his soul into the keeping of God. Vincent maintains that they refer to the deposit of the truth and the responsibility to preach it, that God has committed to Paul. In cases like this, the acid test as to who is correct, is a recourse to the context. The latter does not have to do with salvation, but service. This consideration has decided the present writer for Vincent. The Revised Standard Version has, “He is able to guard until that Day what has been entrusted to me.” Paul had just been speaking of himself as a herald, an apostle, and a teacher. In verse 13 he exhorts Timothy to maintain sound doctrine. In verse 14 he charges him to guard the deposit of the truth which God had entrusted to him. Vincent says: “The meaning of the passage is that Paul is convinced that God is strong to enable him to be faithful to his apostolic calling, in spite of the sufferings which attend it, until the day when he shall be summoned to render his final account.” The word “committed” is  (paratiqhmi), “to place beside, to deposit, to entrust, commit to one’s charge.” The words, “that day,” refer to the time when Paul’s works will be judged at the Judgment Seat of Christ, the purpose of the judgment being the determination of the reward which the apostle earned. Translation. On which account I am also suffering these things. But I am not ashamed, for I know with an absolute knowledge the One in whom I have permanently placed my trust, and have come to a settled persuasion that He is of power to guard that which has been committed as a trust to me with reference to that day. (1:13) “Form” is  (uJpotupwsi"). The verb is  (uJpotupow), “to sketch, outline.” The noun tupos (tupo") means “a blow”; it was used of the beat of horses’ hoofs; it meant the impression left by a seal, the effect of a blow or pressure, an engraved mark, a pattern, a model. The word thus speaks of a pattern by which one can maintain the sameness of a thing. Paul exhorts Timothy to hold fast the pattern of the sound words committed to him. That is, he is to hold to the doctrinal phraseology he received from the great apostle. Particular words are to be retained and used so that the doctrinal statements of the truth may remain accurate and a norm for future teachers and preachers. This is vitally connected with the doctrine of verbal inspiration which holds that the Bible writers wrote down in God-chosen words, the truth given by revelation. The words, “in faith and love,” are understood with the exhortation, “hold fast.”

Translation. Be holding fast the pattern of sound words which (words) from me personally you heard, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. (1:14) The words, “that good thing which was committed unto thee,” refer to the form of sound words, the deposit of truth committed to Timothy by Paul. The Greek is, “the beautiful deposit entrusted to you.” “Keep” is  (fulassw), “to guard, watch, defend.” Timothy is to guard, watch, and defend the truth once for all delivered to the saints in view of the defection from the truth that was even then in its inception in the early Church. He is to do this “through the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us” (a.v.). The word “ghost” is the translation here of the same Greek word (pneuma (pneuma)) which is rendered elsewhere “spirit.” “Dwelleth” is  (ejnoikew), made up of en (ejn), “in,” and  (oijkew), “to be at home.” The word means “to dwell in one and influence him for good.” Paul’s idea of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is that the normal, expected attitude of the believer is one of yieldedness to and cooperation with the Spirit, which makes Him feel at home in the believer’s heart and unrestricted in His work of sanctification. Translation. That goodly thing which was committed in trust to you, guard through the Holy Spirit who indwells you. (1:15) Asia is not here to be understood as the continent of that name, but proconsular Asia, which included Mysia, Lydia, Caria, a great part of Phrygia, the Troad, and the islands off the coast. This would include the western part of what we used to know as Asia Minor, but which today is called Turkey. It comprises the provinces bordering the Aegean Sea, except Phrygia, which is inland. Paul says that all the believers in this territory had turned away from him. But this turning away was not for mere personal reasons, as the context indicates. In 1:13, 14, the apostle had just been speaking of the necessity for guarding and defending the truth, and in 2:17, 18, the two individuals mentioned in verse 15, are said to be involved in a departure from true doctrine. It was for doctrinal reasons that those in Asia turned away from Paul. Translation. You know this, that there turned away from me all those in Asia, of whom there are Phygellus and Hermogenes. (1:16, 17) In 4:19, the household of Onesiphorus is greeted. It is natural to suppose that he was dead. Robertson hints that he may have lost his life at the hands of Rome by reason of his visit to Paul in prison. “Refreshed” is  (ajnayucw), “to cool again, to cool off.” It is an admirable word to express the comforts which this saint brought to Paul who was enduring the discomforts of a Roman prison. “Chain” is halusis (aJlusi"), “a manacle or handcuff.” Paul was handcuffed to a Roman soldier twenty-four hours a day. By not being ashamed of Paul’s chain, the apostle means that Onesiphorus was not deterred from visiting Paul in prison by any danger which he might incur by reason of the fact that he was a friend of a prisoner who was a Christian, and who was on trial for his life. “Very diligently” is spoudaios (spoudaio"), which speaks of a diligence which was more than could be looked for or expected. Alford translates, “with extra-ordinary diligence.”

Translation. The Lord give mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, because he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my handcuff, but when he was in Rome he sought me out with more than expected diligence, and found me. (1:18) “Very well” is the comparative beltion (beltion), “better.” The idea is, Timothy knew better than Paul all that Onesiphorus did for the apostle at Ephesus, for Timothy was the pastor of the Ephesian church. Translation. The Lord grant to him to find mercy in the presence of and from the Lord in that day. And in how many things he served me in Ephesus, you know better (than I).

CHAPTER TWO (2:1, 2) “Thou” is the translation of su (su), the pronoun of the second person. It is used for emphasis here, and as Expositors remarks, “marks the apostle’s anxiety for the future conduct of Timothy in the Church.” “Therefore” is oun (oJun). “It is resumptive of all the considerations and appeals for loyalty in chapter one” (Expositors). “Son” is teknon (teknon), “child,” used even of adults as a most endearing term of affection. “Be strong,” is  (ejndunamow), “to be strengthened inwardly.” “Of me” is not, “concerning me,” but  (par ejmou), “from me personally.” The preposition para (para) speaks of personal presence. “Among” is dia (dia), speaking of accompanying circumstances. The witnesses here could refer to those who were present at Timothy’s baptism or ordination, or at any public occasion where the members of the local church were present. “Commit” is  (paratiqhmi), “to deposit as a trust.” “Faithful” is pistos (pisto"), not “faithful” in the sense of “believing” but in the sense of “trustworthy.” “Able” is hikanos (iJkano"), “sufficient.” Expositors’ note here is most helpful. “St. Paul is here contemplating an apostolic succession in respect of teaching rather than of administration. It is natural that in the circumstances of the primitive Church, the building up of converts in the Faith should have occupied a larger place in the Christian consciousness than the functions of an official ministry; but the historical continuity of the ministry of order is of course involved in the direction here. St. Paul would have been surprised if any other conclusion had been drawn from his words. In any case, the Providence of God sees further than do His servants.” Translation. As for you, therefore, my child, be clothed with inward strength by the grace which is in Christ Jesus; and the things which you heard from me personally in the presence of many witnesses, these things commit as a trust to trustworthy men who are of such a character as to be adequate to teach others also. (2:3, 4) “Endure hardness” is  (sunkakopaqew), “to endure hardship together with someone else.” The a.v. fails to take note of the prefixed preposition sun (sun) which means “with.” Paul is exhorting Timothy to endure hardships with him. Expositors suggests the translation, “Take your part in suffering hardship.” Paul and other Christian workers were enduring afflictions, and so should Timothy. The exhortation was

needed. Timothy was a rather timid, reticent young fellow. He was not cast in the heroic mold of Paul. Paul uses the military metaphor of a soldier. The Roman legionnaires suffered hardship in the service of the Emperor. Why not the Christian in the service of the King of kings? “Warreth” is  (strateuw), “to make a military expedition, to do military duty, be on active service, to be engaged in warfare.” “Entangleth” is  (ejmplekw), “to inweave, to be involved in, to entangle.” “Affairs” is pragmateia (pragmateia), “the prosecution of any affair, business, occupation”; with the addition of bios (bio"), “the necessaries of life” as it is here, it means “pursuits and occupations pertaining to civil life.” “Chosen as a soldier” is  (stratologew), “to enlist one as a soldier.” Translation. Take your part with others in enduring hardships as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No one when engaged in military service allows himself to become involved in civilian pursuits, in order that he may please the one who enlisted him as a soldier. (2:5) From the figure of a soldier, Paul turns to that of a Greek athlete. “Striveth for the masteries” is  (ajqlew), “to engage in a contest, to contend in the public games.” Our words, “athletic, athlete,” come from this word. It was the Greek word for the act of contending in athletic contests. The crown the victor received, was a wreath for his head, woven of ivy, laurel, roses, oak leaves, etc. But the victor does not receive it unless he has striven lawfully, that is, unless he has obeyed the regulations governing the contest. The Greek athlete was required to spend ten months in preparatory training before the contest. During this time he had to engage in the prescribed exercises and live a strictly separated life in regard to the ordinary and lawful pursuits of life, and he was placed on a rigid diet. Should he break training rules, he would, in the words of the a.v., be a castaway (I Cor. 9:27), adokimos (ajdokimo"), “disqualified,” barred from engaging in the athletic contest. Translation. And if a person contends in the games, he is not crowned as the victor unless he engages in the athletic contest according to the prescribed rules. (2:6) Having used the illustrations of a soldier and an athlete, Paul now brings to Timothy’s attention that of a farmer. The word is  (gewrgo"), “a tiller of the soil.” “Laboreth” is  (kopiaw), “to grow weary, exhausted, to labor with wearisome effort, toil.” “Must” is dei (dei), “it is necessary in the nature of the case.” The tiller of the soil must be the first to partake of the fruits. Vincent says: “His is the first right to the fruits of his labor in the gospel. The writer seems to have in his eye I Cor. 9:7, where there is a similar association of military service and farming to illustrate the principle that they that proclaim the gospel should live of the gospel.” But there is a great difference in living off the gospel, which latter is strictly forbidden. Translation. It is a necessity in the nature of the case that the tiller of the soil who labors with wearisome effort, be the first to partake of the fruits. (2:7) “Consider” is  (noew), “to perceive with the mind, to understand, think upon, ponder, consider.” Expositors translates, “ ‘Grasp the meaning’ of these three

similes.… If you have not sufficient wisdom to follow my argument, ‘ask of God who giveth to all men liberally’ (Jas. 1:15).” Paul had used the illustration of a soldier. Timothy was to live a rugged, strenuous Christian life in which hardships as the result of serving the Lord Jesus were an expected thing. He used the simile of a Greek athlete. Timothy should live a life of rigid separation, not merely with respect to evil things, but also with regard to things which, good in themselves, would unfit him for the highest type of Christian service. Paul now uses the metaphor of a tiller of the soil. Timothy is reminded that the Christian worker who labors with wearisome effort in the Lord’s service, has the right to derive his financial support from it, so that he might be able to give all of his time and strength to his work. Translation. Grasp the meaning of that which I am saying, for the Lord will give you understanding in all things. (2:8–10) Expositors says: “These words form rather the conclusion of the preceding paragraph than the beginning of a new one. St. Paul in pressing home his lesson, passes from the figure of speech to the concrete example of suffering followed by glory. And as he has, immediately before, been laying stress on the certainty of reward, he gives a prominent place ‘the having been raised from the dead.’ Jesus Christ, of the seed of David, ‘Himself Man’ (I Tim. 2:5), is the ideal soldier, athlete, and field-laborer; yet One who can be an example to us. It is not the resurrection as a doctrinal fact (a.v.) that St. Paul has in mind, but the resurrection as a personal experience of Jesus Christ, the reward He received, His being ‘crowned with glory and honor, because of the suffering of death’ (Heb. 2:9).” Alford, commenting on verses 8–10, says: “This statement and substantiation of two of the leading facts of the gospel, seems especially connected with the exhortations which follow on it, to be aimed at the false teachers by assumption that Timothy was in danger of being daunted. The incarnation and resurrection of Christ were two truths especially imperiled, and indeed, denied, by their teaching. At the same time these very truths, believed and persisted in, furnished him with the best grounds for steadfastness in his testimony to the gospel, and attachment to the Apostle himself, suffering for his faithfulness to them.” The Greek has it, “Remember Jesus Christ raised from the dead.” The perfect participle is used, referring to an action completed in past time having present results. “The perfect tense marks the permanent condition—raised and still alive” (Vincent). Commenting on the words, “Of the seed of David,” Vincent says: “Not referring to Christ’s human descent as a humiliation in contrast with his victory over death, but only marking His human, visible nature along with His glorified nature, and indicating that in both aspects He is exalted and glorified.” “From the dead” is  (ejk nekrwn), “out from among the dead people.” When our Lord was raised from the dead, the rest of the dead stayed dead. He arose out from among them to live forevermore. The expression, “my gospel,” means, of course, “the gospel or good news preached by me, Paul.” “Wherein” refers to the gospel. It was because of his preaching of the gospel that Paul suffered trouble. “Evil doer” is kakourgos (kakourgo"), “a malefactor.” It is a technical word. Expositors says: “Evil doer (a.v.) does not so vividly express the notion of criminality implied in the word. Ramsay notes that the use of this word here marks ‘exactly the tone of the Neronian period, and … refers expressly to the flagitia, for which the Christians were condemned under Nero, and for which they were no longer condemned in a.d. 112.’ ” “Unto bonds” is mechri desmos (mecri desmo"),

“to the extent of bonds.” “The word of God is not bound.” The verb is perfect in tense, literally, “The word of God has not been bound, with the present result that it is not shackled.” “Therefore,” is, “because I know that God is carrying on His work” (Vincent). This, together with the knowledge that others had been, and were being saved through his ministry, enabled Paul to endure afflictions that accompanied the preaching of the good news. The word of God was not shackled, and there were souls to be saved. Expositors offers the following as a definition of “the elect”: “ ‘The elect’ are those who, in the providence of God’s grace, are selected for spiritual privileges with a view directly to the salvation of others, as well as of themselves.” The word “elect” is  (ejklegw), “to pick out.” It refers to the act of God selecting from among mankind certain to be the recipients of spiritual privileges with a view directly to the salvation of others. Translation. Be remembering Jesus Christ raised out from among the dead, from the seed of David according to my gospel, in which sphere of action I am suffering hardship to the extent of bonds as a malefactor. But the Word of God has not been bound, with the present result that it is not shackled. Because of this I am enduring all things for the sake of the selected-out ones, in order that they themselves also may obtain salvation which is in Christ Jesus, together with eternal glory. (2:11–13) The Greek order of words is, “Faithful is the saying.” The word “saying” is logos (logo"), “a word,” used to indicate a concept of thought. One could translate, “Trustworthy is the word.” “Saying” in English usually refers to a proverbial expression or statement. The word to which reference is made here is in the previous verse which speaks of the eternal glories of those who are saved, which stimulate to endurance of suffering for the gospel. “For” introduces a reinforcement of the teaching, and connects the contents of verses 11–13 with what precedes. The “if” in the Greek text is the particle of a fulfilled condition. Here is no hypothetical case, “if we be” (a.v.), but an, “in view of the fact that we died with Him,” the aorist speaking of a past fact, not a present condition. Paul refers to the same thing in Romans 6:1–10, where he speaks of the believer’s identification with Christ in His death and resurrection when He died on the Cross and was raised from the dead. The words, “We shall live with Him,” are in a context in which they are also found in Romans 6:8, “We shall live by means of Him.” He is our life. They should so be rendered here. We have the preposition sun (sun) with the instrumental case. The reference is to this present life as well as the life to come. The word “suffer” is  (uJpomenw), “to endure, to persevere,” here to persevere in and under trials and hold to one’s faith in Christ. “Reign” is  (basileuw), “to reign as a king.” referring here to the saints as reigning with the King of kings in the Messianic Kingdom. Commenting on the words, “He also will deny us,” Vincent says, “ ‘will not acknowledge us as His own,’ compare Luke 9:26, Matt. 10:33.” The words, “believe not,” are  (ajpisteuw), and refer here, not to the act of believing, but to unfaithfulness. “If we are untrue to the Lord Jesus in our Christian lives,” is the idea. He abides faithful. Vincent says, “True to His own nature, righteous character, and requirements, according to which He cannot accept as faithful one who has proved untrue to Him. To do this would be to deny Himself.” The “if” with “deny” and “believe not” is ei (eij), the particle of a fulfilled condition. Some were denying Him and were unfaithful.

Translation. Trustworthy is the word. For in view of the fact that we died with Him, also we shall live by means of Him. If, as is the case, we are persevering, we shall reign as kings with Him. If, as is the case, we are denying Him, that One will deny us. If, as is the case, we are unfaithful, that One remains faithful, for to deny Himself He is not able. (2:14) Expositors, commenting on the words, “of these things,” says: “Tauta (Tauta) (these things) has special reference to the issues of life and death set out in verses 11–13. There is no such prophylactic against striving about words as a serious endeavor to realize the relative importance of time and eternity. ‘He to whom the eternal Word speaks is set at liberty from a multitude of opinions’ (De Imitatione Christi, 1:3).” “Strive about words” is  (logomacew), “to contend about words,” and in this context “to wrangle about empty and trifling matters.” “Profit” is  (crhsimo"), “fit for use, useful.” “Subverting” is  (katastrefw), “to turn over, turn under,” as the soil with a plow, “to overturn, overthrow, throw down.” Our word “catastrophe” is the transliteration of the noun form. In the LXX, the word is used of the destruction or overthrow of men or cities. Translation. These things constantly be reminding (them), charging (them) in the presence of God not to be continually wrangling about empty and trifling matters, which results in not even one useful thing, since it ruins those who hear. (2:15) “Study” is  (spoudazw) “to make haste, to exert one’s self, endeavor, give diligence.” There are some interesting examples of its use in the papyri. Moulton and Milligan in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament give the following: “make haste, am eager, give diligence” with the further idea of “effort.” “I am anxious that you receive another letter.” “I wish to know that you are hurrying on the making of it.” “Make haste therefore and put our little slave Artemidorus under pledge”; “that he may meet him and do his best until it is effected.” “Take care that Onnophris buys me what Irene’s mother told him.” Paul writes to Timothy, “Do your best, make haste, give diligence, hurry on, be eager to show yourself approved unto God.” “Show” is  (paristhmi), “to place beside or near, to present”; “to show” the quality which the person or thing exhibits. “Approved” is dokimos (dokimo"). The verbal form means “to put to the test for the purpose of approving, and finding that the person or thing meets the specifications laid down, to put one’s approval upon that person or thing.” A workman approved is a workman who has been put to the test, and meeting the specifications, has won the approval of the one who has subjected him to the test. The words, “to God,” are to be understood with the verbal form, “to present.” It is, “Do your best to present yourself to God, approved.” “That needeth not to be ashamed,” is explained by Expositors, “a workman who has no cause for shame when his work is being inspected.” Literally, the verb can be rendered, “not made ashamed.” “Rightly dividing” is  (ojrqotomew), from  (temnw), “to cut,” and orthos (ojrqo"), “straight,” the compound verb meaning “to cut straight.” Moulton and Milligan suggest that it might be a metaphor derived from the stone mason’s art of cutting stones fair and straight to fit into their places in a building. They quote Sophocles, a Greek writer, using it to mean,

“expound soundly.” Vincent defines the word, “to cut straight,” as paths, “to hold a straight course, to make straight, to handle rightly.” He says: “The thought is that the minister of the gospel is to present the truth rightly, not abridging it, not handling it as a charlatan, not making it a matter of wordy strife (v. 14), but treating it honestly and fully, in a straightforward manner.” Alford says that the meanings, “to manage rightly, to treat truthfully without falsification,” seem to approach the nearest to the requirements of the context. Expositors suggests, “handling aright,” as giving the general sense well enough. Robertson suggests, “handling aright.” He quotes Theodoret as explaining it to mean “ploughing a straight furrow,” and Parry as saying that the metaphor is that of a stone mason cutting the stones straight, since the Greek words were so used. He adds his own comment; “Since Paul was a tent-maker and knew how to cut straight the rough camelhair cloth, why not let that be the metaphor? Certainly plenty of exegesis is crooked enough (crazy-quilt pattern) to call for careful cutting to set it straight.” Translation. Bend your every effort to present yourself to God, approved, a workman unashamed, expounding soundly the word of the truth. (2:16:18) “But” (de (de)) points a contrast, not only to the last injunction, “expounding soundly the word of truth,” but to the exhortation, “to bend your every effort to present yourself to God, approved.” “Shun” is  (periisthmi), “to place around, to stand around,” in the middle voice, “to turn one’s self about,” as for the purpose of avoiding something, hence, “to avoid, shun.” Expositors translates, “give them a wide berth.” “Profane” is  (bebhlo"), from  (bainw), “to step,” and  (bhlo"), “threshold,” thus, “accessible, lawful to be trodden,” used of places, thus, “common, unhallowed” as opposed to “that which is set apart, restricted as to its use for God,” thus “holy.” “Vain babblings” is  (kenofwnia), made up of  (fwnh), “voice,” and kenos (keno"), “empty, hollow.” The word is used in I Cor. 15:58 “labor in vain,” thus, “labor which yields no return”; in Phil. 2:3 “vainglory,” hence, “empty glory.” Trench says: “St. Paul reminds the Thessalonians (I Thess. 2:1) that his entrance to them was not  (kenh) (feminine gender of kenos (keno")), not unaccompanied with the demonstration of the Spirit and of power. When not used of things but persons, kenos (keno") predicates not merely an absence and emptiness of good, but, since the moral nature of man endures no vacuum, the presence of evil. It is thus employed only once in the n.t., namely, at James 2:20, where the  (ajnqrwpo" keno") (the empty man) is one in whom the higher wisdom has found no entrance, but who is puffed up with a vain conceit of his own spiritual insight, ‘aufgeblasen,’ as Luther has it.” Thus, “vain babblings” are not merely empty words, but because empty, evil words, for as nature will not endure a vacuum, so empty words become filled with evil, and thus become words of evil content and purpose. Thayer defines  (kenofwnia) as “empty discussion, discussion of vain and useless matters.” The word  (fwnh) means “a sound, a tone, a voice,” namely “the sound of uttered words.” Thus, it does not refer directly to words as such, but to “babbling” as the a.v. puts it, or to “chatter,” as the R.S.V. renders the word. “Increase” is  (prokoptw), “to cut or beat forward, to lengthen out by hammering” (as a smith forges metals); metaphorically, “to promote forward; to go forward, advance, proceed.” “Ungodliness” is asebeia (ajsebeia), the opposite of eusebeia (eujsebeia), “a holy reverence or respect for God, piety towards God.” The word does not refer to a person’s

character as such, but to his attitude towards God. “Will eat” is  (nomh), “pasturage, fodder, food,” and  (ejcw), “to have,” thus, “Their word will have pasturage,” and “so grow.” Thayer defines the word, “growth, increase.” It refers to the spread of something, for instance,  (nomh puro") “a spreading of fire”; a sore is said  (nomh poiew), “to spread.” “Canker” is gaggraina (gaggraina), our word “gangrene.” Thayer defines it as follows: from the verb  (graw) or  (grainw), “to gnaw, eat”; “a disease by which any part of the body suffering from inflammation becomes so corrupted that, unless a remedy be seasonably applied, the evil continually spreads, attacks other parts, and at last eats away at the bones.” “Who” is hoitines (oiJtine"). The word has the two-fold function of pointing out and showing character. It refers back to Hymenaeus and Philetus, “the very ones who are of such a character as to.” The word, Expositors says, “implies that Hymenaeus and Philetus were only the more conspicuous members of a class of false teachers.” “Erred” is  (ajstocew), “to deviate from, miss the mark.” Translation. But with reference to unhallowed and empty discussions, give them a wide berth, for they will progress to more impiety towards God, and their word will spread as does a gangrene, of whom are Hymenaeus and Philetus, the very ones who are of such a character as to have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection already has taken place, and are overthrowing the faith of certain ones. (2:19) “Nevertheless” connects the mention of the defection of some from the truth (v. 16, 17) with the fact that “the foundation of God standeth sure,” the thought being that the “Church of the New Covenant … has an ideal integrity unaffected by some who seemed to belong to it” (Expositors). John, speaking of the same thing says, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us” (I John 2:19). This firm foundation, Expositors defines as the Church, in the words: “The Church, as existing in the divine knowledge, not as apprehended by man’s intellect, is the firm foundation of God (r.v.) i.e., that which God has firmly founded.” Vincent takes exception to the a.v. translation, and correctly translates, “the firm foundation of God standeth,” explaining that the adjective “firm” is in the attributive, not the predicate position. “Firm” is stereos (stereo"), which Thayer defines in this instance of its use as “immovable.” “Standeth” is  (eJsthken), a verb in the perfect tense, literally, “has stood with the present result that it stands permanently.” Vincent also holds this to be the Church “which is the ‘pillar and stay of the truth’ (I Tim. 3:15), by means of which the truth of God is to withstand the assaults of error.” As to the words, “having this seal,” Expositors has this comment: “Here the apostle passes rapidly from the notion of the Church collectively as a foundation, or a building well founded, to that of the men and women of whom it is composed, and who have been sealed by God.… They are marked by God so as to be recognized by Him as His; and this mark also serves as a perpetual reminder to them that ‘they are not their own,’ and of their consequent obligation to holiness of life (I Cor. 6:19, 20).… The one seal bears two inscriptions, two mutually complementary parts or aspects: (a) The objective fact of God’s superintending knowledge of His chosen; (b) the recognition by the consciousness of each individual of the relation in which he stands to God, with its imperative call to holiness.” Vincent puts the matter this way, “There are two inscriptions on the foundation stone, the one

guaranteeing the security, the other the purity, of the Church. The two go together. The purity of the Church is indispensable to its security.” The best manuscripts have, “the name of the Lord.” “Nameth” is  (ojnomazw), “to pronounce a name as having a special virtue, to utter a name as acknowledging and appropriating what the name involves, as a confession of faith and allegiance.” Translation. However, the immovable foundation has stood and at present stands, having this seal, The Lord knows those who are His, and, Let those who name the name of the Lord depart from unrighteousness. (2:20, 21) In verse 19, Paul has been speaking of the true Church, the Mystical Body of Christ made up of believers only. In this verse he is referring to the visible organized Church on earth, made up of saved and unsaved. Vincent says: “But the Church embraces a variety of characters. Unrighteous men steal into it. So in a great household establishment there are vessels fit only for base uses.” The word “base” is here used as meaning “common.” Again, the same authority has this: “As themelios (qemelio"), ‘foundation,’ indicates the inward, essential character of the church, oikia (oijkia), ‘house,’ exhibits its visible, outward aspect. The mixed character of the Church points to its greatness ( (megalh)).” “Vessels” is  (skeuh), “any apparatus, equipment, or furniture, household utensils, domestic gear.” “Earth” is ostrikinos (ojstrikino"), “baked clay.” “Honor” is  (timh), “a valuing by which the price is fixed, an estimation of the value of a thing,” thus, “an attitude towards a person or thing commensurate with its value,” and therefore, “reverence, deference.” “Dishonor” is atimia (ajtimia), “ignominy, disgrace, contempt.” “Purge” is  (ejkkaqairw), “to cleanse out, clean thoroughly.” Here it means, “to avoid defilement from one and so keep one’s self pure.” Timothy is to separate himself from communion with “these,” the vessels of dishonor spoken of in verse 20, such as are mentioned in verses 16, 17. “Sanctified” is  (aJgiazw), “to set apart for the worship and service of God.” The word is a perfect participle. The reference here is to the separated life a Christian should live. Here it has direct application to the obligation of a pastor to refuse to fellowship in the work of the ministry with another pastor who is a Modernist. The perfect tense speaks of a past action on his part of separating himself from such, and his present confirmed practice of maintaining that separation. “Meet” is  (eujcrhsto"), “easy to make use of, useful, usable.” “Master” here is  (despoth"), “a master, lord, one who has undisputed ownership and uncontrolled power over someone else.” It is used often in relation to slavery. “Prepared” is  (eJtoimazw), “prepared” in the sense of being “equipped.” Translation. Now, in a great house there are not only instruments of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of baked clay, also some which are highly prized and others which are treated with contempt. If, therefore, a person separate himself from these, he shall be an instrument highly prized, in a state of permanent separation, useful to the master, for every good work equipped. (2:22) “Lust” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a craving, a passionate desire,” good or evil, depending upon the context. It is used of the Holy Spirit in Gal. 5:17. Here, the context refers it to inordinate desires of uncontrolled youth. Expositors says: “Timothy had just been cautioned against errors of the intellect; he must be warned also against vices of the

blood.” “Follow” is  (diwkw), “to pursue,” a stronger word than “follow”; Vincent says: “a favorite word with Paul to denote the pursuits of moral and spiritual ends.” “Faith” is pistis (pisti"), better here translated “faithfulness” in the sense of fidelity, trustworthiness, since Paul is speaking of Christian virtues in the context. “Charity” is  (ajgaph), “love,” the love which God is and which is produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit, a love that impels one to sacrifice one’s self for the benefit of the object loved (John 3:16). “Charity” is used today for the help one gives to the poor. Translation. The passions of youth be constantly fleeing from, but be pursuing as constantly, righteousness, faithfulness, love, peace, in company with those who are calling upon the Lord out of a pure heart. (2:23) “Foolish” is  (mwro"), “dull, sluggish, stupid.” “Unlearned” is  (ajpaideuto". Paideuw) means “to train children.” A  (paideuth") is an instructor, a teacher. The Alpha privative placed before our word makes it mean “untrained, uninstructed, undisciplined.” These questions were those of an untrained mind carried away with novelties. They were questions that did not come from any trained habit of thinking. “Questions” is  (zhthsi"), “questionings.” “Avoid” is paraiteomai (paraiteomai), “to refuse, decline.” “Gender” is  (gennaw), “to beget.” “Strifes” is  (mach), “a quarrel, a contention, a fight.” Translation. But stupid questionings, and questionings that come from an uninstructed and undisciplined mind refuse, knowing that they constantly beget contentions. (2:24–26) “Servant” is doulos (doulo"), “a bondslave” of the Lord, referring here primarily to the pastor. Paul says in II Cor. 4:5, “We proclaim not ourselves but Christ Jesus as Lord, but ourselves your bondslaves for Jesus’ sake.” “Strive” is machomai (macomai), “to fight, wrangle, quarrel, dispute.” “Must” is dei (dei), “it is a necessity in the nature of the case.” There is a moral obligation attached to this duty. “Gentle” is  (hjpio"), “affable, mild, gentle.” Expositors says that  (hjpio") implies gentleness in demeanor, as  (prauth"), meekness of disposition. “Apt to teach” is didaktikos (didaktiko"), “skillful in teaching.” “Patient” is anexikakos (ajnexikako"), “patient of ills and wrongs, forbearing.” “Those that oppose themselves” is  (ajntidiatiqhmi), “to place one’s self in opposition.” Those who place themselves in opposition to the true servant of the Lord and to true doctrine, “are to be dealt with as tenderly and considerately as they who err from right living” (Expositors). “Instructing” is  (paideuw). Vincent suggests “correcting” as the better rendering here. The context bears him out. “Will give” is  (dwih), a verb in the optative mood, expressing a condition undetermined and with remote prospect of determination. “Acknowledging” is  (ejpignwsi"), “precise, experiential knowledge.” “May recover themselves” is  (ajnanhfw), “to return to soberness.” “A similar connection of thought between coming to the knowledge of God and awaking out of a drunken stupor, occurs I Cor. 15:34” (Vincent). “Who are taken captive” is a perfect participle in the Greek text, literally, “having been held captive.” “At his will” is  (eij" to ejkeinou qelhma), “unto his will,” that is, to do God’s will. The pronoun ekeinos

(ejkeino") refers back to “God” (v. 25). Translation. And the Lord’s bondslave must not in the nature of the case quarrel, but be gentle to all, skillful in teaching, forbearing, in meekness correcting those who set themselves in opposition, if perchance God may give them repentance, resulting in a precise, experiential knowledge of the truth, and that they may return to soberness out of the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him, (so as to serve) the will of that One. (God).

CHAPTER THREE (3:1–5) “This know,” is like Paul’s, “I would have you to know” (Phil. 1:12) and, “I would you should know” (I Cor. 11:3), literally, “this be knowing,” that is, “be keeping this in your mind.” The demonstrative pronoun “this” points to the contents of verses 2–5. The expression, “in the last days,” refers to the time immediately preceding the Rapture of the Church and the second Advent of the Lord Jesus. “Times” is kairos (kairo"), which Trench defines as follows: “a critical, epoch-making period foreordained of God when all that has been slowly, and often without observation, ripening through long ages, is mature and comes to the birth in grand decisive events, which constitute at once the close of one period and the commencement of another.” “Perilous” is chalepos (calepo"), literally, “hard times,” schwere zeiten in the German language. Expositors defines: “grievous (r.v.), but not necessarily perilous to those who feel their grievousness.” Moulton and Milligan define the word as follows: “hard, difficult.” They mention an account of an audience granted by Trajan to certain Greek and Jewish envoys from Alexandria, when the Emperor does not return the salute of the Alexandrian envoys, but exclaims, “Do you give me greeting like men deserving to receive one, when you are guilty of such outrages to the Jews?” The word “outrages” is our word chalepos (calepo"). The word speaks of the difficult, dangerous times which Christians, living just before the Rapture, will encounter. “Shall come” is  (ejnisthmi), “to set in.” “Men” is  (ajnqrwpo"), the generic, racial term referring, not to male individuals only, but to the race, mankind. “Lovers of their own selves” is philautos (filauto"), made up of  (filew), “to be fond of,” and autos (aujto"), “self,” thus, “fond of self.” The word  (ajgapaw), referring to the love produced in the heart of the believer by the Holy Spirit, is not used here. It is  (filew), which speaks of a fondness, a liking, an affection. “Covetous” is philarguros (filarguro"), made up of  (filew), “to be fond of,” and arguros (ajrguro"), “silver,” thus “fond of money.” “Boasters” is  (ajlazwn), its root, the same as that of  (ajlh), “wandering,” its meaning, “an empty pretender, a boaster, a swaggerer.” “Proud” is  (uJperhfano"), “to show above,” thus, speaks of one who shows himself to be above other people. Vincent defines it by the word “haughty.” “Blasphemous” is  (blasfhmo"), “speaking evil, slanderous, reproachful, reviling, railing, abusive.” “Without natural affection” is astorgos (ajstorgo"). This is the Greek word denoting natural affection, with Alpha, which when prefixed to a word negates its meaning. The word is  (stergw). Benjamin B. Warfield, in his excellent article in The Princeton Theological Review of April 1918, The Terminology of Love in the New Testament, defines it as follows: It designates “that quiet and abiding feeling within us, which, resting on an object as near to us, recognizes that we are closely bound up with it and takes satisfaction in its recognition.” It is a love that is “a

natural movement of the soul, something almost like gravitation or some other force of blind nature.” It is the love of parents for children, and children for parents, of husband for wife, and wife for husband. It is a love of obligatoriness, the term being used here, not in its moral sense, but in a natural sense. It is a necessity under the circumstances. This is the binding factor by which any natural or social unit is held together. “Trucebreakers” is aspondos (ajspondo"). The word is made up of  (spondh), “a libation,” which is a kind of sacrifice, and which accompanied the making of treaties and compacts. The Alpha prefixed, negates the word, and it means “refusing to enter into a treaty, irreconcilable, implacable.” “False accusers” is diabolos (diabolo"), the word used for the devil, literally, “slanderers.” “Incontinent” is  (ajkrath". Krato") means “power,” and with Alpha privative means “without power,” thus, “without power over one’s self,” thus, “without self-control.” “Fierce” is  (ajnhmero"), “not tame; savage, fierce.” “Despisers of those that are good,” is aphilagathos (ajfilagaqo"), literally, “not fond of that which is good,” the good being such things that are true, honorable, just, pure, lovely, and of good report (Phil. 4:8). Vincent translates, “Haters of good,” r.v., “no lovers of good.” “Traitors” is  (prodoth"), “a betrayer or traitor.” “Heady” is  (propeth"), from pro (pro), “before” and  (piptw), “to fall,” thus, “falling forwards, headlong; precipitous.” It describes a person who is reckless, headstrong, in the pursuit of a bad end, under the influence of passion (Vincent). “Highminded” is  (tufow), “to raise a smoke, to wrap in a mist.” It is used metaphorically, “to make proud, puff up with pride, render insolent.” The participle here is perfect in tense, and speaks of a person who in the past has come to a state of such pride, and is so puffed up, that his mind as a permanent result is beclouded and besotted with pride. “Lovers of pleasure, lovers of God”; the word is  (filew), “to be fond of.” “Form” is  (morfwsi"). Vincent says: “ (morfh), form is the expression or embodiment of the essential and permanent being of that which is expressed … yet the meaning differs in different passages. In Rom. 2:20,  (morfwsi") is the truthful embodiment of knowledge and truth as contained in the law of God. Here, the mere outward resemblance, as distinguished from the essential reality.” “Godliness” is eusebeia (eujsebeia), not “godlikeness,” but “reverence, respect, piety toward God.” “Power” is dunamis (dunami"), “power” in the sense of that which overcomes resistance. It is used in Rom. 1:16 of the power of God which results in salvation. Here it refers to that same power which those who only have an outward semblance of piety toward God and not the inward reality, refuse to allow access to their lives that they might be saved. Translation. This be constantly knowing, that in the last days, difficult times will set in, for men shall be fond of self, fond of money, swaggerers, haughty, revilers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, implacable, slanderers, lacking self-control, savage, haters of good, betrayers, headstrong, besotted with pride, fond of pleasure rather than having an affection for God, having a mere outward semblance of piety toward God, but denying the power of the same. And these be constantly shunning. (3:6, 7) “Of this sort” is  (ejk toutwn), literally, “out of these.” The idea is, “from these evil doers seen as a group, which are mentioned in verses 2–5, there are certain ones who creep into houses, etc.” “Creep into” is  (ejndunw), “to envelope

in, to hide in, to put on, to clothe with.” It is used of a person clothing himself with a garment. From the meaning of “enveloping one’s self in something,” the word thus comes to mean, “to insinuate one’s self into, to enter, to creep into.” By trickery, stealth, under false pretences, these insinuate themselves into the homes of people. Expositors quotes Chrysostom, “Observe how he (Paul) shows their impudence by this expression, their dishonorable ways, their deceitfulness.” “Lead captive” is  (aijcmalwtizw), “to lead away captive, subjugate, bring under control, take captive one’s mind.” “Silly women” is gunaikarion (gunaikarion), “a little woman,” and is used here contemptuously, the diminutive form of the word expressing the idea of contempt and giving us the adjective “silly.” Expositors says: “Chrysostom acutely implies that the victims of the crafty heretics were ‘silly women’ of both sexes. ‘He who is easy to be deceived is a silly woman, and nothing like a man; for to be deceived is the part of silly women.’ St. Paul, however, refers to women only.” Alford, Robertson, and Vincent concur with Expositors in limiting the expression to women. One of the great virtues of womanhood, namely, that of trusting another, is turned into a weakness by Satan here. Eve was deceived. Adam sinned with his eyes wide open. “Laden” is  (swreuw), “to heap together, to heap up.” It is used in the LXX, of loading a wagon. It implies “heavily laden.” Expositors translates, “overwhelmed,” and asks: “Is there any contrast implied between the diminutive, indicating the insignificance of the women, and the load of sins which they carry? DeWette (quoted by Alford), notes that a sin-laden conscience is easily tempted to seek the easiest method of relief.” And that method of getting relief from a sin-laden conscience, is the embracing of a false religion, one that satisfies the religious instinct of the individual, and at the same time fails to deal with the sin question and the true way of salvation. “Led away” is  (ajgw), “to move, impel,” used of forces and influences affecting the mind. “Lusts” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a craving, a passionate desire.” “Divers” is poikilos (poikilo"), “variegated, of many different kinds.” Vincent comments on the words, “ever learning,” as follows: “From anyone who will teach them.… It is a graphic picture of a large class, by no means extinct, who are caught and led by the instruction of itinerant religious quacks.” With reference to the words, “never able,” he says: “Because they have not the right motive, and because they apply to false teachers. Ellicott thinks that there is in dunamena (dunamena) (able) a hint of an unsuccessful endeavor, in better moments, to attain to the truth.” “Knowledge” is  (ejpignwsi"), “a knowledge gained by experience,” the prefixed preposition making the compound word mean “precise and correct experiential knowledge.” This would mean, not merely an intellectual understanding of the truth, but a heart submission and appropriation of the same, resulting in salvation. Translation. For of these are those who by means of insinuation, slink into houses and take captive the minds of silly women who have been in times past heavily laden with sins, and who are at present heavily loaded down with them, who are under the impelling urge of variegated, passionate desires, ever learning and never able to come to a precise and experiential knowledge of the truth. (3:8) Paul now leaves the matter of silly women led astray in doctrinal matters by the false teachers, to consider the latter again, whom he compares with the two instruments of Satan who withstood Moses and Aaron (Ex. 7:11, 22). “Withstood” is 

(ajnisthmi), “to set one’s self against.” “So” is  (oJutw"), which Expositors says, “refers rather to the degree of their hostility, than to the manner in which it was expressed, i.e., by magical arts. At the same time, it is possible that magic was practiced by the false teachers; they are styled impostors in verse 13: Ephesus was a home of magic. See Acts 19:19.” Vincent suggests, “men corrupted in mind,” as better than “men of corrupt minds.” “Reprobate” is adokimos (ajdokimo"), “rejected after having been tested for the purpose of approving,” thus, “disapproved.” Translation. Now, in the same manner as Jannes and Jambres set themselves against Moses, so also these set themselves against the truth, men corrupted in mind; after having been put to the test, disapproved concerning the truth. (3:9) “Proceed” is  (prokoptw), “to lengthen out by hammering,” metaphorically, “to promote, further, forward.” The word speaks of progress made in some activity. “Folly” is anoia (ajnoia), “want of understanding, folly,” “madness” expressing itself in rage. Vincent comments: “The senselessness of their teaching, with an implication of its immoral character.” Expositors uses the word “dementia” as an approximation of its meaning. In the case of Jannes and Jambres, Aaron’s rod swallowed up their rods, they failed to produce lice, they could not stand before Moses because of the boils with which they were afflicted. Translation. But they shall make no further progress, for their insane folly shall become evident to all, as their folly became evident. (3:10–11) “Thou hast fully known” is  (parakolouqew), “to follow after, so to follow one as to be always at his side, to follow faithfully (a standard or rule), to conform one’s self to.” The simple verb  (ajkolouqew) means “to join one as a disciple, become his disciple, conform wholly to another’s example.” Expositors translates, “Thou wert attracted as a disciple to me on account of.” This same authority comments: “It is not necessarily implied that Timothy had copied his master in all these respects. The a.v., Thou hast fully known, follows the a.v. of Luke 1:3. This translation fails to bring out the appeal to Timothy’s loyalty which underlies this passage. The aorist is appropriate here, because St. Paul is recalling to Timothy’s recollection the definite occasion in the past when the youth cast in his lot with him. He is not thinking, as in I Tim. 4:6, of Timothy’s consistent discipleship up to the moment of writing.” The pronoun is used here for emphasis. It is, “But as for you in distinction from others.” “Manner of life” is  (ajgwgh), which both Vincent and Expositors translate “conduct,” the latter authority commenting; “The a.v., manner of life has perhaps reference to guiding principles of conduct rather than to the external expression of them, which is meant here.” “charity” is  (ajgaph), the word for the divine love produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit. Translation. But as for you, you were attracted as a disciple to me because of my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, longsuffering, love, patience, persecutions, afflictions such as came to me in Antioch, in Iconium, in Lystra, what manner of persecutions I endured; and out of them all the Lord delivered me. (3:12) “Will live” is  (qelw), “to desire.” Vincent translates, “Whose will is” to

live, or, “who are bent on” living. “Godly” is  (eujsebw"), “piously, godly.” The word describes a life of piety towards God. Expositors comments: “Consistency in the life in Christ must necessarily be always opposed by the world.” Translation. And all indeed who desire to be living a life of piety towards God in Christ Jesus, shall be persecuted. (3:13) “Evil” is  (ponhro"), “evil in active opposition to the good,” thus, “pernicious.” “Seducers” is  (goh"), “a wailer, a howler, a juggler, an enchanter” (incantations used to be uttered in a kind of howl), thus, one who chants spells, a wizard, a sorcerer,” hence “a cheat.” Translate, “imposter, deceiver.” “Wax” is  (prokoptw), “to increase, make progress.” “Deceiving” is  (planaw), “to lead astray, to deceive.” Expositors comments: “Those who deceive others impair, in so doing, their sense of the distinction between truth and falsehood, and thus weaken their power of resistance to self-deceit and to imposition by others.” Translation. But pernicious men and impostors shall progress to the worst, leading astray and being led astray. (3:14, 15) “The holy scriptures” is hiera grammata (iJera grammata), referring here to the Old Testament scriptures which Timothy was taught. The word gramma (gramma) means, “that which has been written, any writing, a document, a record.” The word “scripture” comes from the Latin scriptura and means “anything written.” The author has retained this word in preference to the word “writing,” since it has by usage come to signify the Word of God. Josephus used the above expression of the sacred writings of the Old Testament. “Child” is brephos (brefo"), “a new-born child, an infant, a babe.” Timothy’s tutorship in the scriptures began at a very early age. Translation. But, as for you, remain as you are in the things which you learned and have been assured of, knowing from whom you have personally learned them, and that from a very young child you knew the sacred scriptures which are able to make you wise with respect to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. (3:16, 17) After exhorting Timothy to hold fast to the sacred scriptures he was taught, and those were the Old Testament scriptures, Paul now proceeds to describe them. “All” is pas (pa"), which when used with a singular substantive without the article, means “every,” not “all.” “Scripture” here is  (grafh), “a writing, thing written,” used of the writings of the o.t. prophets (Matt. 26:56), and of the o.t. scriptures in general (Matt. 26:54). The expression  (pasa grafh) (“every scripture”) speaks, not of the o.t. scriptures as a whole, but of each separate passage considered as a unit. The first thing Paul says about the o.t. scriptures which Timothy was taught, is that every part of them is inspired of God. The verb of being is often left out, as it is here, and the reader or translator must supply it. “Inspired of God” is theopneustos (qeopneusto"), made up of theos (qeo"), “God,” and pneustos (pneusto"), from pnein (pnein), “to breathe.” The compound word means “God-breathed.” The statement therefore is, “Every scripture is God-breathed.” The context in which Paul is writing is limited to the o.t. scriptures. One

could translate, “Every scripture is God-breathed.” The context limits these writings to the o.t. writings. Thus, does Paul declare the divine inspiration of the o.t. The n.t. had not yet been completed, and Paul does not refer here to its divine inspiration. His classic passage on this subject is I Cor. 2:9–16 which includes the inspiration of the n.t. “Doctrine” is didaskalia (didaskalia), “teaching,” that is, “teaching material.” “Reproof” is elegmos (ejlegmo"), “conviction.” The verbal form  (ejlegcw) means “to rebuke another with such effectual wielding of the victorious arms of the truth, as to bring him, if not always to a confession, yet at least to a conviction of his sin” (Trench). “Correction” is  (ejpanorqwsi"), “restoration to an upright or right state, correction or improvement” of life or character. Vincent translates, “setting right.” “Instruction” is paideia (paideia), “the whole training and education of children which relates to the cultivation of mind and morals, and employs for this purpose, now commands and admonitions, now reproof and punishment; whatever in adults also cultivates the soul, especially by correcting mistakes and curbing passions, hence, instruction which aims at the increase of virtue; in biblical usage, chastisement, chastening” (Thayer). In the LXX, the word means primarily either “correction” or “discipline.” It is used in the n.t. especially of God’s chastisement by means of sorrow and evil. We must be careful to note that the word does not have a punitive connotation. “Perfect” is artios (ajrtio"), “complete, fitted,” having reference to special aptitude for given uses. It speaks of “a mutual, symmetrical adjustment of all that goes to make a man: a harmonious combination of different qualities and powers” (Vincent). “Throughly furnished” is  (ejxartizw), “to complete, finish.” It has the same root as artios (ajrtio"), the word for “perfect.” The prefixed preposition ex (ejx) means “out,” and makes the compound verb mean, “fitted out.” Translation. Every scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for teaching, for conviction, for correction, for training with respect to righteousness, in order that the man of God may be complete, fitted out for every good work.

CHAPTER FOUR (4:1) Paul says, “I charge thee therefore.” Paul’s final charge to the young pastor, Timothy, the one upon whose shoulders he is now placing the responsibility for the care of all the churches and the leadership in maintaining the Faith once for all delivered to the saints, is given in view of the spiritual declension and departure from true doctrine which had even then already set in, and which in the last days would come to a head. The Greek word translated “charge” is diamarturomai (diamarturomai). In pagan Greek it was used to call the gods and men to witness. It was used in such an expression as, “I adjure thee.” Timothy had splendid moral and spiritual qualities. But he lacked the dogged perseverance and tremendous moral courage of the great apostle. Hence this strong word. The word translated “before,” is  (ejnwpion), and is a compound of a number of Greek words which together mean, “one who is in sight.” It was used in such expressions as, “the case will be drawn up against you in the court at Heracleopolis in the presence of,” “deliver personally,” “I gave notice in person.” It is used of one who does or says something in the presence of someone else, and does it with the consciousness that that one has him in sight and mind. Paul delivered this solemn charge to Timothy, conscious of the fact that he was doing so in the sight of God, and he wished Timothy to ever so regard

the charge. The expression, “God, and the Lord Jesus Christ” is in a construction in Greek which requires us to understand that the word “God” and the names “Lord Jesus Christ” refer to the same person. The translation should read, “our God, even Christ Jesus,” the word “Lord” not appearing in the best Greek texts. This gives us an insight into the Pauline attitude towards the deity of the Lord Jesus. He emphasizes the fact here, and in a way in which to defend it against both the heresies of the day and the cult of the Caesar, both of which were opposed to the doctrine of the deity of our Lord. Thus, the departing apostle leaves with his young understudy, an indelible impression of the basic and large place which the deity of our Lord should occupy in our Christian teaching and preaching. The Lord Jesus is described as One “who shall judge the quick and the dead.” “Shall” is  (mellw), “to be about” to do something. The word is used of someone who is on the point of doing something, and in Scripture, of those things which will come to pass by fixed necessity or divine appointment. Paul was living in the expectation of the imminent return of the Lord. “Judge” is from a construction which speaks of action going on. Thus, the various judgments are in the apostle’s mind, the judgment of the Church, of the Nations, and that of the Great White Throne, a series of judgments, not one judgment. The word “quick” ( (zaw)) has changed its meaning in the years since the Authorized Version was translated. Today it means “fast, swift.” Then it meant “alive.” The words, “appearing” (epiphaneia (ejpifaneia)) and “kingdom” (basileia (basileia)), are in a construction which shows the thing by which a person adjures another. For instance, Mark 5:7 has, “I adjure thee by God.” Paul solemnly charged Timothy by the appearing and the kingdom of the Lord Jesus. The Greek word translated “appearing” means “to appear or become visible.” It was often used by the Greeks of a glorious manifestation of the gods, and especially of their advent to help. It is used of the first Advent in II Timothy 1:10, here of the second. Thus the aged apostle, expecting martyrdom, puts upon the shoulders of Timothy, the great responsibility which he himself had carried these many years, and solemnly charges him in the presence of God, even the Lord Jesus, and by His glorious appearing and kingdom. Translation. I solemnly charge you as one who is living in the presence of our God, even Christ Jesus, the One who is on the point of judging the living and the dead, I solemnly charge you as not only living in His presence, but also by His appearing and His kingdom. (4:2) The charge is to preach the Word. The English word “preach” brings to our mind at once the picture of the ordained clergyman standing in his pulpit on the Lord’s Day ministering the Word. But the Greek word here ( (khrussw)) left quite a different impression with Timothy. At once it called to his mind the Imperial Herald, spokesman of the Emperor, proclaiming in a formal, grave, and authoritative manner which must be listened to, the message which the Emperor gave him to announce. It brought before him the picture of the town official who would make a proclamation in a public gathering. The word is in a construction which makes it a summary command to be obeyed at once. It is a sharp command as in military language. This should be the pattern for the preacher today. His preaching should be characterized by that dignity which comes from the consciousness of the fact that he is an official herald of the King of kings. It should be accompanied by that note of authority which will command the respect, careful attention, and proper

reaction of the listeners. There is no place for clowning in the pulpit of Jesus Christ. Timothy is to preach the Word. The word “Word” here refers to the whole body of revealed truth, as will be seen by comparing this passage with I Thessalonians 1:6 and Galatians 6:6. The preacher must present, not book reviews, not politics, not economics, not current topics of the day, not a philosophy of life denying the Bible and based upon unproven theories of science, but the Word. The preacher as a herald cannot choose his message. He is given a message to proclaim by his Sovereign. If he will not proclaim that, let him step down from his exalted position. He is to be instant in season and out of season in this proclamation. The words, “be instant” are from a word which means “to stand by, be present, to be at hand, to be ready” ( (ejpisthmi)). The exhortation is for the preacher to hold himself in constant readiness to proclaim the Word. The words, “in season,” are from a word which means “opportune” ( (eujkairw")), “out of season,” from a word which means “inopportune” ( (ajkairw")). The preacher is to proclaim the Word when the time is auspicious, favorable, opportune, and also when the circumstances seem unfavorable. So few times are still available for preaching that the preacher must take every chance he has to preach the Word. There is no closed season for preaching. In his preaching he is to include reproof and rebuke. The Greek word translated “reprove” ( (ejlegcw)), speaks of a rebuke which results in the person’s confession of his guilt, or if not his confession, in his conviction of sin. The preacher is to deal with sin, both in the lives of his unsaved hearers and in those of the saints to whom he ministers, and he is to do it in no uncertain tones. The word “sin” is not enough in the vocabulary of our preaching today. And as he deals with the sin that confronts him as he preaches, he is to expect results, the salvation of the lost and the sanctification of the saints. The word “rebuke” ( (ejpitimaw)) refers to a rebuke which does not bring the one rebuked to a conviction of any fault on his part. It might be because the one rebuked is innocent of the charge, or that he is guilty but refuses to acknowledge his guilt. This word implies a sharp, severe rebuke with possibly a suggestion in some cases, of impending penalty. Even where the preacher has experienced failure after failure in bringing sinners or saints to forsake their sin, or where there seems little hope of so doing, yet he is to sharply rebuke sin. He has discharged his duty, and the responsibility is upon his hearers to deal with the sin in their lives. Not only is he to speak in stern language against sin, but he is to exhort. The word “exhort” ( (parakalew)) has in it the ideas of “please, I beg of you, I urge you.” Thus, there is to be a mingling of severity and gentleness in his preaching. He is to exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. The word “longsuffering” (makrothumia (makroqumia)) speaks of that temper which does not easily succumb under suffering, of that self-restraint which does not hastily retaliate a wrong. The word “doctrine” ( (didach)) is in the Greek, literally, “teaching.” It speaks of instruction. Vincent says in this connection: “Longsuffering is to be maintained against the temptations to anger presented by the obstinacy and perverseness of certain hearers; and such is to be met, not merely with rebuke, but also with sound and reasonable instruction in the truth.” Calvin says: “Those who are strong only in fervor and sharpness, but are not fortified with solid doctrine, weary themselves in their vigorous efforts, make a great noise, rave … make no headway because they build without a foundation.” Or, as Vincent says, “Men will not be won to the truth by scolding,” and then quotes another as saying, “They should understand

what they hear, and learn to perceive why they are rebuked.” Translation. Make a public proclamation of the Word with such formality, gravity, and authority as must be heeded. Hold yourself in readiness for this proclamation when opportunity presents itself and when it does not; reprove so as to bring forth conviction and confession of guilt; rebuke sharply, severely, and with a suggestion of impending penalty. Pleadingly exhort, doing all this with that utmost self-restraint which does not hastily retaliate a wrong, and accompany this exhortation with the most painstaking instruction. (4:3, 4) The exhortation to proclaim the Word is given in view of the coming defection from the Faith once for all delivered to the saints. The word “endure” ( (ajnecw)) means literally, “to hold one’s self upright or firm against a person or thing.” It is a perfect description of the Modernist and his following today. The Greek word translated “sound” ( (uJgiainw)), has the idea of “healthy, wholesome.” The word “doctrine” (didaskalia (didaskalia), teaching), is preceded by the definite article. It is Paul’s system of doctrine to which reference is made, the Pauline theology. “After” is from a preposition whose root meaning is “down” (kata (kata)). It speaks of domination. “Lusts” is in the Greek, epithumia (ejpiqumia), “cravings.” These who set themselves against Pauline theology are dominated by their own private, personal cravings. Those cravings consist of the desire for personal gratification. They, having itching ears, heap to themselves teachers. The Greek makes it clear that the itching ears belong to the people. The word “heap” ( (ejpiswreuw)) means “to accumulate in piles.” It speaks of the crowd electing teachers en masse, an indiscriminate multitude of teachers. These teachers give the people what they want, not what they need. The word “itch” ( (knhqw)) in its active verb form means “to scratch, to tickle, to make to itch,” in the passive, “to itch.” It describes that person who desires to hear for mere gratification, like the Greeks at Athens who spent their time in nothing else but either to tell or to hear, not some new thing, but some newer thing (Acts 17:21). The comparative form of the adjective is used here, not the positive. Ernest Gordon, commenting on this verse says: “Hardly has the latest novelty been toyed with, than it is cast aside as stale and frayed, and a newer is sought. One has here the volatile spirit of the Greek city, so in contrast with the gravity and poise of the Christian spirit, engaged with eternal things.” Such is the spirit of Modernism with its teachings of the divinity of mankind, and the relativity of truth, its rejection of the doctrine of total depravity, the sacrificial atonement, the resurrection, and the need of the new birth, catering to the desires of a fallen race. It gratifies man’s pride. It soothes his troubled conscience. The desire for the gratification of one’s cravings is insatiable, and is increased or aggravated by having that desire satisfied. Hence the heaping to themselves of teachers. The words “turn away” ( (ajpostrefw)), carry the idea of “averting.” That is, those who follow these heretics, not only turn away their ears from the truth, but see to it that their ears are always in such a position that they will never come in contact with the truth, like a country windmill whose owner has turned its vanes so that they will not catch the wind. Notice the active voice of the verb “turn away,” and the passive voice of the verb “shall be turned.” The first named action is performed by the people themselves, while in the case of the second one, they are acted upon by an outside force. The second

occurrence of the word “turn” is from a verb ( (ejktrepw)) which means “to turn or twist out.” In a medical sense it means, “to wrench out of its proper place,” as of the limbs. It is used of a dislocated arm, for instance. When people avert their ears from the truth, they lay themselves open to every Satanic influence, and are easily turned aside to error. Instead of being in correct adjustment to the truth, namely, that of seeking it for the purpose of appropriating it, these people have put themselves out of adjustment and have been consequently wrenched out of place. They have become dislocated, put out of joint. Like a dislocated arm which has no freedom of action, they have given themselves over to a delusion which incapacitates them for any independent thinking along religious lines which they might do for themselves. They are in much the same condition as those under the reign of the Beast who, because they refuse to receive the love of the truth, are the victims of a strong delusion (II Thess. 2:10, 11). The word “fable” (muthos (muqo")) is from a Greek word which refers to fiction as opposed to fact. And surely, the teachings of Modernism are fictional as to their nature, for they have a theoretical basis, the unproved hypotheses of science, naturalism and evolution. Translation. For the time will come when they will not endure our wholesome doctrine, in that they will hold themselves firm against it, but, dominated by their own personal cravings, they, having ears that desire merely to be gratified, gather to themselves an accumulation of teachers. In fact, from the truth they shall avert the ear, and (as a result) they shall receive a moral twist which will cause them to believe that which is fictitious. (4:5) In view of this sad condition in the visible church, Timothy is exhorted by the great apostle to do four things in connection with his proclamation of the Word. First, he is to watch in all things. “Watch” is from a Greek word ( (nhfw)) which has the following meanings, “to be in a sober mood, to be calm and collected in spirit, to be temperate, dispassionate, circumspect, alert.” All these would pass through the mind of Timothy as he meditated upon Paul’s Greek. Second, the pastor is to endure afflictions. “Endure afflictions” is  (kakopaqew), “to suffer evils, hardships, troubles.” The verb is aorist imperative. It is a sharp command given with military snap and curtness. Timothy needed just that. He was not cast in a heroic mold. How we in the ministry of the Word need that injunction today. What “softies” we sometimes are, afraid to come out clearly in our proclamation of the truth and our stand as to false doctrine, fearing the ostracism of our fellows, the ecclesiastical displeasure of our superiors, or the cutting off of our immediate financial income. I would rather walk a lonely road with Jesus than be without His fellowship in the crowd, wouldn’t you? I would rather live in a cottage and eat simple food, and have Him as Head of my house and the Unseen Guest at every meal, than to live in royal style in a mansion without Him. Third, the pastor is to do the work of an evangelist. The latter word is the transliteration of a Greek word ( (eujaggelisth")) that means, “one who brings good news.” The word is not preceded by the definite article. When that is the case, character, quality, or nature are stressed. The idea is, “let your work be evangelistic in character. Always be a bringer of good news. Be ever reaching out for lost souls in your teaching and preaching.” Paul does not exhort the local pastor to engage in an itinerant ministry, going from place to place holding evangelistic meetings. That work is for those specially gifted men called evangelists (Eph. 4:11). But the local pastor should be evangelistic in his message and methods. He must ever be reaching out for the lost both in his teaching, preaching, and personal contacts. Fourth, he must make full proof of his ministry. The words, “make full proof,” are the

translation of a Greek word ( (plhroforew)) which means “to cause a thing to be shown to the full, to carry through to the end, to fully perform.” “Ministry” is from a Greek word (diakonia (diakonia)) which speaks of Christian work in general, covering every mode of service. One of the chief temptations of the pastorate is laziness and neglect. Paul lived an intense and tremendously active life. The word “drive” characterizes him perfectly. As the saying goes: “It is better to wear out for the Lord than to rust out.” Translation. But as for you, you be constantly in a sober mood, calm, collected, wakeful, alert in all things. Endure hardships. Let your work be evangelistic in character. Your work of ministering fully perform in every detail. (4:6) In verses one to five, Paul is urging Timothy to take the initiative because he himself is being called from the field of action, and Timothy must carry on. He says, “I am now ready to be offered.” The “I” is emphatic in the Greek text. It is, “as for myself,” in contradistinction to Timothy and others. To translate literally, “As for myself, I am already being offered.” What he is now suffering is the beginning of the end. The process has already begun which shall shed his blood. The word “offered” is from a Greek word (spendomai (spendomai)) used in pagan worship to refer to the libation or drinkoffering poured out to a god. Paul uses the same word in Philippians 2:17, where he looks upon himself as the libation poured out upon the sacrifice, namely, the Philippian’s service to the Lord Jesus, the lesser part of a sacrifice poured out upon the more important part. Only one who considered himself less than the least of all saints could write in such deep humility. Paul had had his preliminary hearing before Nero, and was expecting the final one, and death. He knew it would not he crucifixion, for a citizen of the Roman Empire was not crucified. If the death penalty was demanded by the State, it would be decapitation, hence the figurative reference to a libation. He writes, “the time of my departure is at hand.” The servant of the Lord is immortal until his work is done. Paul’s work was over, or Nero could not have taken his life. The word translated “departure” ( (ajnaluw)) is interesting. The simple meaning of the word is “to unloose, undo again, break up.” It meant “to depart.” It was a common expression for death. It was used in military circles of the taking down of a tent and the departure of an army, and in nautical language, of the hoisting of an anchor and the sailing of a ship. Paul uses the same word in Philippians 1:23. During his first imprisonment, he was kept a prisoner at the Praetorium, the military camp of the Emperor’s bodyguard, but now in his second, it is thought that he writes from a cold, damp, Roman dungeon. In his first use of the word, it would seem that he used the figure of striking one’s tent. He was in a military camp, he was a tent-maker by trade, and he spoke of the human body as a tent. If so, it is probable that he had the same figure of speech in mind here. The words, “is at hand,” are from a word ( (ejfisthmi)) which means “to stand by, to be on hand.” It was as if death already stood there. Peter also had a premonition of approaching death (II Peter 1:14). Translation. For my life’s blood is already being poured out as a libation, and the time of my departure is already present.

(4:7) And now he casts a swift glance over his past life, and sums it up in three sentences, using the figures of a Greek wrestler, a Greek runner, and a Roman soldier. He says, using the first figure, “I have fought the good fight.” The definite article appears before the word “fight” in the Greek. The use of the indefinite article in the English translation is unwarranted, and makes the expression appear egotistical. The word “fight” is the translation of a word ( (ajgwn)) used in Greek athletics of a contest in the Greek stadium where the games were held. The word “good” (kalos (kalo")) refers to external goodness as seen by the eye, that which is the expression of internal, intrinsic goodness. It is goodness that is not moral here but aesthetic, a beauty of action that would characterize either the Greek wrestler’s efforts or the Christian’s warfare against evil. The words “have fought” ( (ajgwnizomai)), are in the perfect tense, speaking of an action completed in past time with present results. Paul fought his fight with sin to a finish, and was resting in a complete victory. What a happy ending to a strenuous, active, heroic life. He says in his colorful Greek, “The beautiful contest I, like a wrestler, have fought to the finish, and at present am resting in a complete victory.” “I have finished my course.” The Greek word translated “course” (dromos (dromo")) refers to a race course, the cinder path of the present day college athletic field. The words “have finished” ( (telew)) are also in the perfect tense. Like a Greek runner, he has crossed the finishing line and is now resting at the goal. His life’s work is over. “I have kept the faith.” “The faith” here is the deposit of truth with which God has entrusted Paul. The word “kept” ( (threw)) means “to keep by guarding.” Again, the apostle uses the perfect tense. His work of safe-guarding that truth is now at an end. He has defended it against the attacks of the Gnostics, the Judaizers, and the philosophers of Athens. He has laid it down now at the feet of his Captain. He, like a soldier who has grown old in the service of his country, is awaiting his discharge. And so he writes to Timothy, “The desperate, straining, agonizing contest marked by its beauty of technique, I, like a wrestler, have fought to a finish, and at present am resting in its victory; my race, I like a runner have finished, and at present am resting at the goal; the Faith committed to my care, I, like a soldier, have kept safely through everlasting vigilance.” All this would surge through Timothy’s mind as he read Paul’s Greek. Much of this is lost to the English reader, this untranslatable richness of the Greek New Testament. Translation. The desperate, straining, agonizing contest marked by its beauty of technique, I, like a wrestler, have fought to the finish, and at present am resting in its victory. My race, I, like a runner, have finished, and at present am resting at the goal. The Faith committed to my care, I, like a soldier, have kept safely through everlasting vigilance, and have delivered it again to my Captain. (4:8) But his use of illustrations from Greek athletics is not finished. He likens himself to the Greek athlete, who, having won his race, is looking up at the judge’s stand, and awaiting his laurel wreath of victory. He says, “Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness.” “Henceforth” is from a word (loipon (loipon)) that means literally “what remains.” “Crown” is from the Greek word stephanos (stefano"), referring to the victor’s crown, a garland of oak leaves or ivy, given to the winner in the Greek games. The victor’s crown of righteousness is the crown which belongs to or is the due reward of righteousness. The righteous Judge is the just Judge, the Umpire who makes no mistakes

and who always is fair. The word “judge” is  (krith"), and refers here in this context, not to a judge on a judicial bench but to the umpire or referee at the athletic games. The words “righteousness” and “just” are the two translations of the Greek word used here (dikaios (dikaio")). The word “love” is perfect in tense, and is the Greek word for a love that is called out of one’s heart because of the preciousness of the object loved ( (ajgapaw)). The Greek word translated “appearing” (epiphaneia (ejpifaneia)), means literally, “to become visible,” and was used of the glorious manifestation of the gods, here of the glorious coming of the Lord Jesus into the air to catch out the Church. To those who have considered precious His appearing and therefore have loved it, and as a result at the present time are still holding that attitude in their hearts, to those the Lord Jesus will also give the victor’s garland of righteousness. The definite article is used in the Greek text. It is a particular crown reserved for these. The word “give” ( (ajpodidwmi)) can be here translated “award.” Thus Paul, the spiritual athlete, his victory won, is resting at the goal posts, awaiting the award which the judge’s stand will give him. Translation. Henceforth, there is reserved for me the victor’s laurel wreath of righteousness, which the Lord will award me on that day, the just Umpire, and not only to me but also to all those who have loved His appearing and as a result have their love fixed on it. (4:9) After his swift glance down the years of his strenuous life, Paul turns to his present circumstances. He is a prisoner in a cold, Roman dungeon, awaiting his second trial before Nero, and death. Great soul that he was, he yet needed and craved human fellowship and sympathy in his hour of trial. How this reminds us of the Man of Sorrows who needed the fellowship and sympathy of the inner circle, Peter, James, and John, in His hour of trial in Gethsemane. How real a Man He was, yet all the time Very God. Paul writes to Timothy, “Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me.” The words, “do thy diligence,” in the Greek have the idea of “make haste, exert every effort,” and can be translated “do your best.” It is the word  (spoudazw), translated “study” in II Timothy 2:15. See notes on that verse for a more intensive study of the Greek word. Timothy was urged to do his best to come to Paul quickly. Timothy was at Ephesus, bearing a heavy burden of responsibility. Translation. Do your best to come to me quickly. (4:10–12) Paul’s associates who were carrying on the work in Rome, had left. He writes, “Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world.” The Greek word “forsaken” ( (ejgkataleipw)) means “to abandon, desert, leave in straits, leave helpless, leave in the lurch, let one down.” This tells us that Demas had not only left Paul so far as fellowship was concerned, but he had left him in the lurch also, so far as the work of the gospel was concerned. He had been one of Paul’s dependable and trusted helpers. Paul said that he let him down. This latter expression, so often heard today, was in common use in Paul’s day. Our Lord used it while on the Cross (Matt. 27:46), and it is used in Hebrews 13:5. The Greek word is however stronger than the English words. It is made up of three words, “to leave” ( (leipw)), “down” (kata (kata)), and “in” (en (ejn)), that is, to forsake one who is in a set of circumstances that are against him. It was a cruel blow to Paul. Right to the last, his intense nature impelled him to do what he could

in the service of the Lord. He was awaiting the executioner’s axe. Now, one whom he had trusted, had let him down. Paul was in prison, his freedom of action curtailed. Here was one who had his liberty, and who deserted the Christian work for the world ( (aijwn)), that world which Trench defines as “that floating mass of thoughts, opinions, maxims, speculations, hopes, impulses, aims, aspirations at any time current in the world, which it may be impossible to seize and accurately define, but which constitutes a most real and effective power, being the moral or immoral atmosphere which at every moment of our lives we inhale, again inevitably to exhale, the subtle informing spirit of the world of men who are living alienated and apart from God.” Demas loved all this. He prized it highly, and therefore set his affection upon it. The spirit of the age had gotten hold of him. What a warning example to those of us who are teachers and preachers of the Word. How careful we should be to obey the exhortation of Paul, “Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth” (Col. 3:2). Crescens and Titus, others of Paul’s helpers, had set out on their own initiative as appears from a small particle Paul uses in verse 12 (de (de)), which is translated “and,” but is adversative in its nature, and should be translated “but.” He writes Timothy, “Only Luke is with me.” The “only” refers to Paul’s fellow-laborers. He had many friends in Rome. How beautiful it is to see that the “beloved physician” should feel that his place was beside Paul when the end was approaching. How true to his medical instinct this was; not to depreciate the grace of God moving him in his heart to the same action. What a trophy of God’s grace Luke is. Here is a Greek doctor of medicine, leaving his medical practice to be the personal physician of an itinerant preacher, to share his hardships and privations, his dangers, and toil. The great success of the apostle whom he attended in a medical way, is due in some measure, to the physician’s watchful care over his patient who was the recipient of stonings, scourgings, and beatings, a man whose physical strength was always at the ragged edge of exhaustion because of his incessant and intense work and long difficult journeys. Luke knew all the marks (stigmata (stigmata)) of the Lord Jesus (Gal. 6:17) on the body of the apostle, the scars left after the assaults upon his person. He had bathed and tended those wounds. Now, his patient, grown old before his time, was suffering the discomforts of a Roman cell. He had to be guarded against disease. “Only Luke is with me.” What a comfort he was to Paul. A Gentile and a Jew, one in Christ Jesus. Paul writes to Timothy, “Take Mark and bring him with thee.” “Take” ( (ajnalambanw) “to take up”) is literally, “pick up.” That is, “on your way to Rome, stop by Mark’s home and pick him up.” The word “and” in the Greek text is adversative, and has the idea of “but.” It distinguishes the going of Demas, Crescens, and Titus from that of Tychicus. The latter had been sent by Paul to Ephesus, possibly to take Timothy’s place there while the latter came to Rome. The “but” implies that Paul had not sent the others. Crescens and Titus had gone to some other field of Christian work, leaving Paul alone in Rome, and without helpers. Translation. For Demas let me down, having set a high value upon this present age and thus has come to love it. And he set out for Thessalonica, Crescens, for Galatia, Titus, for Dalmatia. Luke alone is with me. Mark, pick up, and bring with you, for he is profitable for ministering work. But

Tychicus I sent off to Ephesus. (4:13) The apostle asks Timothy when he sets out, to bring his cloak along which he left behind at the home of Carpus who lived in Troas. The Greek word translated “cloak,” is the name of a circular cape which fell down to the knees, with an opening for the head in the center. H. V. Morton, a student of Roman times, and a traveller in the regions of the Pauline journeys, speaks of this type of cloak in his excellent book, “In the Steps of St. Paul.” He has seen these cloaks on shepherds in what in the Bible is called Cilicia. They are felt cloaks called kepenikler (kepenikler), and are impervious to wind and water. They are so stiff, he says, that the wearer can step out of them and leave them in an upright position. They are made of the tough Cilician goat’s hair with which Paul was familiar in the making of tents. Such a coat must have been a great comfort to Paul on his long journeys. Now he needed it to keep out the cold and damp of his Roman cell. Paul asks Timothy to carry along his books and the parchments. The word “books” is the translation of a Greek word (biblion (biblion)) meaning a “book,” which in turn comes from a Greek word (bublos (bublo")) that refers to the pith of the papyrus plant which grew in the Nile River. This pith was cut in strips and laid in rows, over which other rows were laid crosswise, and the whole was pressed into a paper-like material called papyrus. The books Paul asked for were papyrus rolls. The parchment manuscripts (membrana (membrana)) were made from the skins of sheep, goats, or antelopes, or of vellum, which latter was made from the skins of young calves. Even at the approach of death, and in the midst of the discomforts of his dungeon, the aged apostle did not allow his normal strenuous life and his study habits to grow less intense in their nature. What a rebuke this is to those who, charged with the responsibility of expounding the Word of God, are content with a mere surface understanding, not willing to do the exhausting work of research which only will bring out the inexhaustible riches of the Bible. What a reprimand this is to those who have had training in Greek, and who have put aside their Greek New Testament. What an exalted privilege it is to be called of God to minister the Word. As Alexander Whyte says in his book, The Walk, Conversation, and Character of Jesus Christ our Lord, “That elect, and honorable, and enviable class of men that we call students of New Testament exegesis. Surely they are the happiest and the most enviable of all men, who have been set apart to nothing else but to the understanding and the opening up of the hid treasures of God’s Word and God’s Son.” Translation. My cloak, which I left behind at Troas at the home of Carpus, when you are coming, carry along, and my papyrus rolls, especially my parchments. (4:14, 15) Paul warns Timothy against a certain Alexander. The word “coppersmith” in the Greek text refers to any craftsman in metal. He was a metal worker of Ephesus, probably engaged in the manufacture of silver shrines of Diana. Paul’s preaching of the gospel was cutting into his trade in idols, and that touched his pocket book, and he was out to get Paul. The word “did” (endeiknumi (ejndeiknumi)) is literally “showed,” with the idea of, not only “evil words,” but “evil deeds.” One could translate, “showed me much ill-treatment.” The word “reward”  ((apodidwmi)) does not in the Greek text express a wish or desire. It is a simple future, a statement of a future fact. The word is

to be taken in the sense of “will requite.” The apostle takes satisfaction in the future punishment of Alexander because of his opposition to Christianity. Expositors has the following to say on this attitude of Paul’s: “Was the future punishment of Alexander which Paul considered equitable, a matter of more satisfaction than distress to Paul? Yes, and provided that no element of personal spite intrudes, such a feeling cannot be condemned. If God is a moral governor; if sin is a reality; those who know themselves to be on God’s side cannot help a feeling of joy in knowing that evil will not always triumph over good.” The word “beware” ( (fulassw)) is from a Greek word meaning “to guard one’s self.” It often implies assault from without. The word “withstood,”  (ajnisthmi) in the original, has the idea of “to set one’s self against.” Alexander set himself against Christianity. It interfered with his business. How this reminds us of our Lord’s words; “For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Matt. 16:26). Translation. Alexander, the metal worker, showed me many instances of ill-treatment. The Lord shall pay him off in accordance with his evil works. And you also, with reference to him, be constantly guarding yourself, for he in an extraordinary manner set himself in opposition to our words. (4:16) Then Paul speaks of his trial at Nero’s tribunal. It is possible that Nero himself was presiding. He speaks of his “first answer.” The word “answer” is the translation of a Greek word (apologia (ajpologia)) which literally means, “to talk one’s self off from.” It was a technical word used in the Greek law courts, referring to a verbal defense in a judicial trial, namely, talking one’s self off from a charge preferred against one. Paul was offering his defense against the charges of his accusers. But he stood alone, for he says, “No man stood with me.” The word “stood” (paraginomai (paraginomai)) is a technical word used of one who appeared in a court of justice in behalf of the accused. No one appeared, to act as his advocate, to advise him as to legal forms, to testify to his character. The last persecution had been so severe, that those who lived through it, dared not appear in Paul’s defense. Paul says, “All forsook me.” He used the same word (egkataleipo (ejgkataleipo)) when he wrote, “Demas hath forsaken me.” Those whom he had reason to suppose would come to his aid, left him in the lurch, left him helpless, let him down. Translation. During my self defense at the preliminary trial, not even one person appeared in court, taking his stand at my side as a friend of mine, but all let me down. May it not be put to their account. (4:17) But the Lord did not let Paul down. He made good his promise, “I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee” (Heb. 13:5), this Lord of his who on one awful day was let down by His Father (Matt. 27:46). He says, “The Lord stood with me.” “Stood” is from a Greek word  (paristhmi), “to stand alongside,” used in Romans 16:2, where it is translated “assist.” The Roman saints were to stand by Phoebe the deaconess in whatever she needed, that is, they were to make themselves responsible for all her needs. So the Lord Jesus took His stand by the side of His faithful apostle and made Himself responsible for all his needs. He strengthened Paul, that is, poured strength into him,

clothed him with strength ( (ejndunw)). The strengthening of Paul resulted in the preaching being fully known. “Preaching” refers in the Greek to a public proclamation given by an official herald. Paul used the same word in 4:1 ( (khrussw)). As long as there had been no public proclamation of the gospel by Paul himself in Rome, the function of a herald had not been completely fulfilled by him. Thus, Paul brought in a full declaration of the gospel as he gave his teachings to the court. If Nero sat on the judge’s bench, he heard the gospel from the lips of the great apostle himself. We now consider the significance of Paul’s words, “And I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion.” Paul did not mean that he was delivered from death, for he had just written, “my life-blood is already being poured out as a libation.” He did not mean that he was delivered from Nero’s power, for he was aware that a second trial was awaiting him, and that he would be executed. He was not referring to the lions of the arena, for this could not come to a Roman citizen. The expression, “I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion,” is an echo of our Lord’s words in Psalm 22:21 where He, while hanging on the Cross, prays to be delivered from the lion’s mouth, namely from death, His humiliation. Hebrews 5:7 (Greek text) makes it clear that our Lord was not praying to be saved from death, that is, saved from dying, but, out of death, that is, saved from the grip of death, namely, to be raised out from among the dead. Paul’s humiliation in these circumstances would be his defeat at the hands of Satan when all his friends had let him down, and he would fail to proclaim the gospel from the pulpit of the then known world. Translation. But the Lord took His stand at my side to render all the assistance I needed, and clothed me with strength, in order that through me the public proclamation might be heralded abroad in full measure, and that all the Gentiles might hear. And I was drawn to His side out of the lion’s mouth. (4:18–22) The words, “And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work,” are vitally bound up with, “I was delivered from the mouth of the lion.” The word for “evil” here ( (ponhro"), pernicious), refers to evil that is in active opposition to the good. The word “work” in the Greek text has a subjective reference and thus speaks of an action that would be committed by Paul. Thus, the expression does not speak of deliverance from an external evil personality here, but from a possible evil deed of the apostle’s own doing. This is in harmony with the context. Failure to proclaim publicly the gospel on this important occasion, would have been in Paul’s opinion “an evil work.” The word “deliver” (ruomai (rJuomai)) is from a very tender word in the Greek text. It means “to draw to one’s self out of harm’s way.” Paul was standing alone before the great tribunal, yet not alone, for the unseen Christ, standing at his side, drew Paul to Himself out of harm’s way. This was the climax of Paul’s testimony to the Faith once for all delivered to the saints. He had faithfully preached the Glad Tidings through a long life in which hardships, trials, opposition, illness, heartache, and tremendous responsibility had been the rule rather than the exception; and now, at its close, just before his martyrdom, had he failed in maintaining that testimony to his Lord before the Court of the Emperor, what an inglorious ending that would have been to a glorious life. But God’s grace Paul found to

be sufficient right to the end of his life (1:12). He could now go to a martyr’s death in triumph. He had remained faithful to his Lord. Translation. And the Lord will draw me to Himself away from every pernicious work actively opposed to that which is good, and will keep me safe and sound for His kingdom, the heavenly one, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen. Greet Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus. Erastus was remaining in Corinth, but Trophimus, being ill, I left behind in Miletus. Do your best to come before winter. There greet you Eubulus, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren. The Lord be with your spirit. The grace be with you.

TITUS In the Greek New Testament

CHAPTER ONE (1:1–4) We have in these verses, the salutation of the writer to the recipient of this letter; Paul (v. 1) to Titus (v. 4). For word studies on “Paul” and “apostle” see notes on I Timothy 1:1. “Servant” is doulos (doulo"), the most abject, servile term in use among the Greeks for a slave. This abject, servile attitude on the part of a pagan slave finds its expression in true Christian humility on the part of the Christian who regards himself as a slave of Jesus Christ. The word in its various meanings finds a doctrinal place in the Christian system in the providence of God who destined the Greek language as the vehicle by which to give His n.t., revelation to the human race. Doulos (Doulo") refers to one born into slavery. The Greeks had a word for a person taken in war and sold as a slave (andrapodon (ajndrapodon)). Paul was born into slavery to sin at his first birth. He became a loving bond-slave of the Lord Jesus through being born of the Holy Spirit. The word refers to one whose will is swallowed up in the will of another. Before salvation, Paul’s will was swallowed up in the will of Satan. After he was saved, his will was swallowed up in the sweet will of God. The word referred to one bound to another in bands so strong that only death could break them. It was Paul’s identification with Christ in His death (Rom. 6:3) which broke the bands that bound him to Satan. After salvation, Paul became bound to the Lord Jesus in bands so strong that only death could break them. And because the Lord Jesus became Paul’s life, and He will never again die, Paul’s union with the Lord is so strong that nothing can break it. Doulos (Doulo") refers to one who serves another to the disregard of his own interests. Before Paul was saved, he served Satan to the disregard of his own best interests. After salvation, Paul served Jesus Christ with an abandon that caused him to live a life of self-sacrificial service which culminated in a martyr’s death. “According to” is kata (kata), a preposition whose local meaning is “down,” which suggests “domination,” and which here is used with the accusative case which is the case of extension, the two ideas totaling up to the concept of a correspondence with some thing. Paul was an apostle of Jesus Christ, whose apostleship corresponded “to the norm or standard of faith which is set for God’s elect” (Vincent). This apostleship in its nature corresponds or is fitting or congruous to the precise, experiential knowledge ( (ejpignwsi")) of the truth which in turn corresponds to

(kata (kata)) piety toward God. Since faith and truth are brought together here, we take it that the faith spoken of here is not an act of faith exerted by the saints, but the Christian faith, that body of truth which we call the doctrines of the Christian system. “In” is epi (ejpi), “upon,” and can be translated, “upon the basis of” a hope of life eternal. Paul characterizes his apostleship as of a kind that corresponds to the Christian faith embraced by God’s elect (believers), and a full knowledge of that truth, and then says that both these characterizations have to do with life eternal which God who cannot lie (literally, “the unlie-able God,”  (ajyeudh"), “without lie”) promised before eternal times (  (pro cronwn aijwniwn), “before the times of the ages”), that is, before time began to be reckoned by aeons. “Due times” is idios kairos, idios (ijdio" kairo", ijdio") referring to that which is one’s own peculiar, private, unique possession, kairos (kairo") speaking of those strategic times in the calendar of God during which events come to a culmination and ripen to usher in a new age or dispensation. “Manifested” is  (fanerow), “to make visible that which has been hidden.” God’s secret purposes in salvation have in the preaching of the apostle been brought to light. “Own” is  (gnhsio"), “legitimately born.” Titus was a convert of Paul. “Common” is  (koinh), “common” in the sense of belonging to several, thus “held in common.” For word studies on “grace” and “peace,” see notes on I Timothy 1:2. “Mercy” not in best Mss. Translation. Paul, God’s slave, and an ambassador of Jesus Christ in accordance with the Faith of God’s elect ones and a precise experiential knowledge of truth which is in accordance with piety towards God, upon the basis of a hope of life eternal which God who cannot lie promised before eternal times, but made known in His own strategic seasons, His Word in a proclamation with which I was entrusted in correspondence with the commandment of our Saviour, God; to Titus, a genuine child in correspondence with the commonly-held Faith. Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus, our Saviour. (1:5) Crete, one of the largest islands in the Mediterranean Sea, was not visited by Paul on any of his first three missionary journeys. He touched there on his way to Rome as a prisoner of the Roman Empire, but at that time, Titus was not with him. This is one of the facts which indicates that Paul was liberated from his first Roman imprisonment and spent some time in missionary work. Here he refers to the time when he and Titus had worked there together, and he had left him there to finish the organization of the churches they had founded. “Left” is  (ajpoleipw), “to leave behind temporarily” something or someone.  (Kataleipw) is often used of a permanent leaving behind. Expositors notes that “St. Paul’s language favors the supposition that the commission given Titus was that of a temporary apostolic legate rather than a permanent local president.” “Set in order” is  (ejpidiorqow), used by medical writers of setting broken limbs or straightening crooked ones. It is used in the n.t., with the meaning, “to set in order besides or further.” Titus should arrange what remained to be set in order after Paul’s departure. “Things that are wanting” is ta leiponta (ta leiponta), “the things left” to do. “Ordain” is  (kaqisthmi), literally “to set down,” thus, “to appoint one to administer an office.” “Elders” is presbuteros (presbutero"). Vincent says: “The meaning of the injunction is, that Titus should appoint out of the number of elderly men of approved Christian reputation, certain ones to be overseers (episkopos

(ejpiskopo")) of the churches in the several cities. The eldership was not a distinct office.” “Appointed” is  (diatassw), “to prescribe, give a charge.” Translation. On this account I left you behind temporarily in Crete, in order that you should straighten out the things which are left to do, and appoint in every city, elders, as I gave you charge. (1:6–9) In these verses, Paul gives the qualifications of bishops or overseers. These were to be selected from the elderly men who had a reputation in the church, of approved Christian character. Paul lists the requirements for this office. “Blameless” is  (ajnegklhto"), from  (ejgkalew), “to call to account, to bring a charge against,” and Alpha prefixed, which negates the word and makes it mean, “not to call to account, etc.” Thus, a bishop must live such an exemplary life that there is no occasion to call him to account or bring a charge against him. As to the requirement, “the husband of one wife,” this has been treated sufficiently in the notes on I Timothy 3:2, which please see. “Faithful children” are believing children or children who are believers. “Riot” is  (ajswtia), “an abandoned, dissolute life, profligacy.” “Unruly” is anupotaktos (ajnupotakto"), “that cannot be subjected to control, refractory.” It is not “a bishop,” but ton episkopon (ton ejpiskopon), “the bishop” or “the overseer.” Vincent observes that “the qualifications of the elders are fixed by those of the bishop. Appoint elders who shall be unaccused, etc., for the bishop must be unaccused, etc. The overseers must have the qualifications of approved presbyters (elders presbuteros (presbutero")).” “Steward” is oikonomos (oijkonomo"), made up of oikos (oijko"), “house,” and nomos (nomo"), “law,” hence, the law whereby a household is administered or governed. The word refers to a manager of a household, a superintendent. Into such a person’s hands is entrusted the responsibility to properly administer the affairs of the household. The bishop is given the responsibility of properly administering the affairs of the local church. “Self-willed” is  (aujqadh), made up of autos (aujto"), the personal pronoun of the third person, “he,” and  (hJdomai), “to enjoy one’s self, take one’s pleasure.” The compound word means “self-pleasing, self-willed, arrogant.” “Soon angry” is orgilon (ojrgilon), “prone to anger, irascible.” The orgilon (ojrgilon) person is one who does not have his passion of anger under control (Expositors). On the words, “not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre,” see notes on I Timothy 3:3. For the words, “a lover of hospitality,” see notes on I Timothy 3:2. “A lover of good men” is philagathon (filagaqon), “a lover of goodness.” See I Timothy 3:2 (notes) on the word “sober.” “Temperate” is  (ejgkrath). The word originally meant, “having power over, possessed of,” hence, “keeping in hand, controlling.” It is the great Greek word for “selfcontrol.” This is one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:23 “temperance”). “Holding fast” is  (ajntecw), “holding firmly to.” Expositors says: “The r.v. holding to correctly suggests the notion of withstanding opposition, which is not so clearly felt in a.v., holding fast.” “The faithful word” is “the trustworthy, reliable word,” the word worthy of trust because it is reliable. “As he hath been taught” is  (kata didachn), literally, “according to the teaching,” that is, agreeing with the apostolic teaching. Expositors translates, “the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching.” Vincent translates, “may be able both to exhort in the sound teaching” (the body of Christian doctrine). “Exhort” is, “I beg of you, please” ( (parakalew)), and “convince” is  (ejlegcw), “to convict so as to bring forth conviction or confession.” Expositors says,

“The shepherd must be able to tend the sheep, and to drive away the wolves.” “Gainsayers” is  (ajntilegw), “to speak against, to contradict.” Translation. If a certain one is such that no charge can be brought against him, married only once, having children who are believers, who are not such as could be charged with dissolute living or cannot be subjected to control; for it is a necessity in the nature of the case that the overseer be such that no charge can be brought against him as God’s superintendent; not self-willed, not irascible, not quarrelsome over wine, not pugnacious, not eager for base gain, but fond of showing hospitality, fond of that which is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled, holding to the trustworthy Word according to the teaching, in order that he may be able both to be exhorting in the sound teaching and to be convicting the gainsayers. (1:10, 11) Expositors sums up the contents of verses 10–16 as follows: “I have just mentioned rebuke as a necessary element in a presbyter’s teaching. This is especially needful in dealing with Cretan heretics, in whom the Jewish strain is disagreeably prominent. Alike in their new-fangled philosophy of purity, and in their pretensions to orthodoxy, they ring false. Purity of life can only spring from a pure mind; and knowledge is alleged in vain, if it is contradicted by practice.” “Vain talkers” is matailogos, mataios (matailogo", mataio"), “devoid of force, truth, success, result,” thus “vain” in the sense of “in vain”; and logos (logo"), “a word,” thus, speech that is in vain, resultless, speech that does not bring the results that it should; thus, an empty talker, one who utters empty, senseless things. “Deceivers” is  (frenapath"), “a mind deceiver.” Of the verb, Thayer remarks, “More is implied in this word than in  (ajpataw) (‘to cheat, beguile, deceive’), for it brings out the idea of subjective fancies.” The word “specially,” Expositors says, shows that “it is probable that there were very few false teachers who were not ‘of the circumcision.’ ” On the word “circumcision,” Expositors comments: “The persons spoken of here were Christian Jews.… That they were at least nominally Christians is also implied by the epithet ‘unruly.’ We cannot call those persons unruly on whose obedience we have no claim.” “To stop the mouth” is  (ejpistomizw), originally “to put something into the mouth,” as a bit into a horse’s mouth. The noun form is used of the “stop” of a waterpipe. The verb used metaphorically means “to reduce to silence.” Vincent translates, “whom it is necessary to silence.” “Subvert” is  (ajnatrepw), “to overturn, overthrow, destroy.” “Houses” is oikos (oijko"), “households, families.” Expositors translates; “pervert whole families.” The words, “teaching … for filthy lucre’s sake” refer to the claim to financial support made by itinerant or vagrant prophets and apostles. Translation. For there are many who are refractory, empty talkers, and deceivers of the mind, especially those of the circumcision whom it is a necessity in the nature of the case to be reducing to silence, who are of such a character as to disrupt whole families, teaching things which they ought not for the sake of base gain. (1:12) The phrase, “one of themselves,” refers to the gainsayers. The Cretan false teachers were self-styled prophets, and it is possible that Paul was referring to this when he used the word. The Cretan to whom reference is made was Epimenides, a contemporary with Solon who was born in Crete 659 b.c. “Always” is aei (aJei), “perpetually, incessantly.” Here was a Cretan who for once told the truth. Vincent says

that the Cretan habit of lying passed into a verb  (krhtizw), “to speak like a Cretan, to lie,” and a noun  (krhtismo"), “Cretan behavior, lying.” “Evil beasts” is  (kaka qhria), “evil wild beasts,” rude, cruel, and brutal (Vincent). “Slow bellies” is  (gasthr ajrgo"), “idle bellies.”  (Gasthr) refers to the stomach in this context. Vincent says: “Rev. gives the correct idea, idle gluttons. They are so given to gluttony that they are mere bellies.” Expositors says: “The r.v., idle gluttons, is more intelligible English than a.v. slow bellies, but does not so adequately represent the poet’s meaning. He has in mind the belly, as it obtrudes itself on the beholder, and is a burden to the possessor, not as a receptacle for food.” The writer cannot help but add the following, addressed to himself and his associates in the ministry; “Brethren, let us curb our appetite for food in order that we may make a pleasing appearance in the pulpit.” Translation. A certain one of themselves, a prophet of their very own, said, Cretans by nature are incessant liars, evil beasts, idle gluttons. (1:13, 14) Paul endorses this testimony of the poet Epimenides. He had a first-hand knowledge of these Cretan characteristics. “Rebuke” is  (ejlegcw), “to rebuke so as to bring conviction and confession of sin.” “Sharply” is  (ajpotomw"), from  (ajpotemnw), “to cut off.” Thus the adverb means, “abruptly, precipitously,” and then, “sharply, severely, curtly.” The word “that” is hina (iJna), which “expresses the object aimed at in the reproof, not the substance of it. The intention of the reproof was not merely the securing of a controversial triumph, but ‘to bring into the way of truth all such as have erred, and are deceived’ ” (Expositors). “Giving heed” is  (prosecw) literally, “to hold to.” The word implies the giving one’s consent, as well as one’s attention. The commandments of men refer to arbitrary ascetic prohibitions such as are referred to in Col. 2:22. “Turn” is  (ajnastrefw), a participle in the middle voice, thus, men who “turn themselves away” from the truth. Translation. This testimony is true, for which cause, be rebuking them severely, in order that they may be sound in the Faith, not giving consent to Jewish myths and the commandments of men who are turning themselves away from the truth. (1:15, 16) The words, “Unto the pure all things are pure,” are to be understood in their context, which latter speaks of arbitrary ascetic prohibitions. Expositors says: “This is best understood as a maxim of the Judaic Gnostics, based on a perversion of Luke 11:41” where our Lord, speaking of the Pharisees and their man-made ceremonial washings says, “All things are clean to you.” The purity spoken of in our Titus reference speaks, not of purity which is the absence and opposite of immorality, etc., but of the ceremonial purity of man-made regulations. Our Lord tells the Jewish leaders that there is nothing wrong in eating with ceremoniously unwashen hands. That is, the person who does not subscribe to the Pharasaical regulations is not impure or defiled, nor is the food he eats affected in that way. We must be careful in explaining our Titus passage to make clear that the purity here spoken of is not moral, but ceremonial purity, lest we by our interpretation open the flood gates to license. Expositors says: “Paul accepts the statement as a truth, but not in the intention of the speaker.” Commenting on the rest of the verse, the same authority says, referring to those who are defiled; “their moral obliquity is more

characteristic of them than their intellectual perversion. The satisfaction of natural bodily desires (for it is these that are in question) is, when lawful, a pure thing, not merely innocent, in the case of the pure; it is an impure thing, even when lawful, in the case of ‘them that are defiled.’ And for this reason: their intellectual apprehension of these things is perverted by defiling associations; ‘the light that is in them is darkness,’ and their conscience has, from a similar cause, lost its sense of discrimination between what is innocent and what is criminal. That any action with which they themselves are familiar could be pure, is inconceivable.” “Profess” is homologeomai (oJmologeomai), “to agree” with someone as to some thing, thus, “to confess belief” in it. “Reprobate” is adokimos (ajdokimo"), “put to the test for the purpose of being approved, but failing to meet the requirements, being disapproved.” Translation. All things are pure to those who are pure. But to those who are defiled and unbelieving, not even one thing is pure. But even their mind and conscience are defiled. God, they confess that they know, but in their works they deny, being abominable and disobedient and with reference to every good work, disapproved.

CHAPTER TWO (2:1) “Thou” is su (su), the pronoun used intensively. It is, “But as for you, in contradistinction to those I have just mentioned.” “Become” is  (prepw), originally, “to stand out, be conspicuous,” hence, “to become conspicuously fit, to be becoming, beseem, to be seemly.” Translation. But as for you, be constantly speaking the things which are fitting to sound teaching. (2:2) “Aged men” ( (presbuth")) are here not to be understood as holding an ecclesiastical position but as men old in years. “Sober” is  (nhfalio"), “abstaining from wine, either entirely or at least from its immoderate use.” “Grave” is semnos (semno"), “august, venerable, reverent.” “Temperate,”  (swfrwn), “curbing one’s desires and impulses, self-controlled.” “Faith” has the definite article, here, not “faith” as exercised, but “The Faith,” the body of Christian doctrine. “Charity” is  (ajgaph), with the definite article, referring to that love produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit. “Patience” is  (uJpomenw), literally, “rernaining under” trials and afflictions in a way that honors God. It is patience in the sense of meekness which Trench has defined as “that temper of spirit in which we accept God’s dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting.” “Sound” is  (uJgiainw), “to be sound, well, in good health.” It is used of those whose Christian teachings are free from any admixture of error. The word here speaks of true and incorrupt doctrine. Translation. That aged men be sober, venerable, self-controlled, sound in the Faith, in the love, in the patience. (2:3–5) “Behavior” is  (katasthma). Expositors says: “Demeanor (r.v.) is better than behavior (a.v.), which has a wide reference to conduct, in all respects and on

all occasions. Deportment which includes a slight reference to dress, would be the best rendering, only that the word has become depreciated.” “Holiness” is  (iJeropreph"), from hieron (iJeron), “a sacred place, a temple,” and  (prepw), “to be fitting,” the compound word meaning, “befitting men, places, actions, or things sacred to God, reverent.” “False accusers” is diabolos (diabolo"), “a slanderer.” This is the word rendered “devil” in other contexts. “Given to much wine” is the translation of the Greek words for “much wine,” and the perfect participle of  (doulow), “to make a slave of.” The tense speaks here of a confirmed drunkard. Expositors remarks: “It is proved by experience that the reclamation of a woman drunkard is almost impossible.” “Teachers of good things” is kalodidaskalos (kalodidaskalo"), the word for “good” (kalos (kalo")), and “teacher” (didaskalos (didaskalo")). We get our word “didactic” from the latter. “They may teach” is  (swfronizw), “to make sane or soberminded, to recall a person to his senses,” hence “to moderate, chasten, discipline.” Here it should be translated “to school, to train.” “Sober” is not in the Nestle text. With reference to Paul’s words, “to love their husbands, to love their children,” Vincent calls attention to an inscription from Pergamum; “Julius Bassus to Otacilia Polla, my sweetest wife, who loved her husband and children and lived with me blamelessly for thirty years.” “Discreet” is  (swfronw"), “with sound mind, discreetly.” “Keepers at home” is oikourgos (oijkourgo"), “caring for the home, working at home.” So Vincent, Expositors, Thayer. “Good” is agathos (ajgaqo"). Expositors says: “Mothers who work at home usually find it a more absorbing pleasure than ‘going about from house to house’ (I Tim. 5:13). But ‘the worker at home’ is under temptation to be as unsparing of her household as of herself; and so St. Paul adds agathos (ajgaqo") ‘kind’ (r.v.) rather than ‘good’ (a.v.).” “Obedient” is  (uJpotassw), used in a military connection of a general arranging soldiers under him in subjection to himself. “Blasphemed” is  (blasfhmeo), “to speak reproachfully, to revile, calumniate, rail at.” Translation. Aged women likewise, that they be reverent in demeanor, not slanderers, not enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good, in order that they may train the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, workers at home, kind, in subjection to their own husbands, in order that the Word of God may not be reproachfully spoken of. (2:6–8) “Exhort” is  (parakalew), “I beg of you, please, I urge.” This word is a good commentary upon the manner in which Titus should deal with these various groups. It should not be a domineering, high-handed, demanding one, but a humble, loving, kindly, exhorting one. The heart will respond to loving, kind treatment where it will rebel against the opposite. “Sober minded” is  (swfrwnew), “to exercise self-control, think of one’s self soberly, to put a moderate estimate upon one’s self, to curb one’s passions.” “Sincerity” is not in Nestle text. It is  (hJmwn), “us,” not “you.” Translation. The young men likewise be exhorting to be exercising selfcontrol; concerning all things showing yourself a pattern of good works; in the teaching, uncorruptness, gravity, sound speech which cannot be censured, in order that the one who is an opponent may be ashamed, not

having one evil thing to be saying concerning us. (2:9, 10) “Servants” is doulos (doulo"). These were Christian slaves serving for the most part in pagan households. “Be obedient” is  (uJpotassw), used in a military sense of soldiers arranged in battalions under the commanding officer, thus, in subjection to him. Here it refers to the obligation of the slave (middle voice) to put himself in subjection to his master. “Master” is  (despoth") (our word “despot”), “a master, lord, one who has absolute ownership of and uncontrolled power over another.” “In all things” is to be construed with “be obedient.” “To please well” is euaristos (eujaristo"). Alford says that it is a servant’s phrase, like the English, “to give satisfaction.” “Answering” is  (ajntilegw), “to speak against, contradict.” Ellicott thinks that more is implied than pert answers (a.v. answering again); rather, thwarting their master’s plans, wishes, or orders. “Purloining” is  (nosfizw). Expositors says that “the particular form of theft implied is the abstraction or retention for one’s self, of a part of something entrusted to one’s care.” The word “pilfer” will translate it well. “Fidelity” is agathos (ajgaqo"). Expositors suggests, “trustworthiness.” “Adorn” is  (kosmew), “to put in order, arrange, to ornament, adorn, decorate, garnish.” The noun is kosmos (kosmo"), “an ordered system, a system where harmony prevails.” Expositors says: “The teaching, though really practical, can be plausibly alleged to be mere theory; it must then, by good works, be rendered attractive to them that are without.”  (Kosmew), as used in our present passage. means therefore “to embellish with honor.” The doctrine (teaching) is that found in verses 11–14. Translation. Exhort slaves to put themselves in subjection to their own masters in all things; to give them satisfaction, not crossing them, not pilfering, but showing the utmost trustworthiness, in order that the teaching of God our Saviour they may embellish with honor in all things. (2:11–15) “Grace” is charis (cari"). Of this word, Trench in his Synonyms of the New Testament has this to say: “It is hardly too much to say that the Greek mind has in no word uttered itself and all that was at its heart more distinctly than in this.” With regard to its use in the New Testament, we could say; “It is hardly too much to say that the mind of God has in no word uttered itself and all that is in His heart more distinctly than in this.” In the ethical terminology of the Greek schools, charis (cari") implied a favor freely done, without claim or expectation of return. Aristotle, defining charis (cari"), lays the whole stress on this very point, that it is conferred freely, with no expectation of return, and finding its only motive in the bounty and free-heartedness of the giver. But in pagan Greece, this favor was always conferred upon a friend, not upon an enemy. When charis (cari") is taken over into the terminology of the New Testament, it takes an infinite leap forward, and acquires an added meaning which it never had in pagan Greece, for the favor God did at Calvary’s Cross, He did, not for a race that loved Him but which hated Him. Thus, in the n.t., charis (cari") refers to an act that is beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected and is therefore commendable. All the human race could rightfully expect would be condign punishment for its sins. But it is offered mercy from the Judge who stepped down from His judgment throne in the Glory, to take upon Himself the guilt and penalty of human sin, thus satisfying His justice and making it possible to bestow

mercy on the basis of justice satisfied upon a hell-deserving sinner who puts his faith in the Saviour who died for him. “That bringeth salvation” is  (swthrio"), “bringing salvation,” an adjective qualifying “grace.” “Hath appeared” is  (ejpifainw), “to appear, become visible, to become clearly known.” “Teaching” is  (paideuw), “to instruct, train.” Our words, “pedagogue, pedagogy,” come from this word. “Ungodliness” is asebeia (ajsebeia), “lack of piety or reverence toward God.” “Lusts” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a passionate desire.” “Worldly” is kosmikos (kosmiko"), “worldly, having the character of this present age.” The word kosmos (kosmo") is used here of the world system of evil of which Satan is the head, the fallen angels and the demons are his emissaries, and all the unsaved are his servants, together with the pleasures, pursuits, practices, and purposes of the individuals involved. “Soberly” is  (swfronw"), “with sound mind, temperately, discreetly.” “Godly” is  (eujsebw"), “piously, godly.” “World” is  (aijwn) which Trench defines as “that floating mass of thoughts, opinions, maxims, speculations, hopes, impulses, aims, aspirations, at any time current in the world, which it may be impossible to seize and accurately define, but which constitute a most real and effective power, being the moral or immoral atmosphere which at every moment of our lives we inhale, again inevitably to exhale.” Christians live in this atmosphere. We breathe it. It confronts us wherever we go. It seeks our destruction. It is pernicious. It surrounds us like the air we breathe. We take it in unconsciously like every breath of air we breathe. We must therefore be well supplied with an inner antidote which will counteract its evil tendencies, the fullness of the Holy Spirit, the Word of God, a godly life, and the upward look for the coming of the Lord Jesus. “Looking” is prosdechomai (prosdecomai), “to receive to one’s self, to admit, give access to one’s self, to receive into intercourse and companionship, to expect, look for, wait for.” The verb has an atmosphere of expectancy about it, and a readiness to welcome the person looked for and expected. The a.v. makes “that blessed hope” and “the glorious appearing” to be two different things, whereas the Greek text requires that they be construed as one. We have Granville Sharp’s rule here, which says that when there are two nouns in the same case connected by kai (kai) (and), the first noun having the article, the second noun not having the article, the second noun refers to the same thing the first noun does and is a further description of it. Thus, that blessed hope is the glorious appearing of our Lord. The translation should read, “that blessed hope, even the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ.” The same rule applies to the words, “the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” Both expressions refer to the same individual. The deity of the Lord Jesus is brought out here by a rule of Greek syntax. The pronoun “our” is polemic. The god and saviour of the Roman empire was the Emperor himself, who was looked upon as a god and as the saviour of the world in that he by his government brought peace and prosperity to the people. He was worshipped as a god in the state religion of the Roman empire, which was Emperor Worship. But the Christian’s God and Saviour is Jesus Christ. This is a protest against emperor worship. “Blessed” is makarios (makario"), “prosperous.” The hope we have of the return of our Lord to catch out the Church, is one that is prosperous, it is filled with richness, benefits, good things. “Appearing” is epiphaneia (ejpifaneia), which was used by the pagan Greeks of the glorious manifestation of their gods. Here it is used of the glory that will accompany the return of the Lord Jesus. The Greek does not speak of “the glorious appearing.” It is “the appearing of the glory” of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ. “For” is huper (uJper), the preposition of substitutionary atonement. It means, “for the sake of, in behalf of,

instead of.” It is used in John 11:50: “It is expedient for you that one man should die instead of the people, and not that the whole nation perish.” In Galatians 3:13 we have: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse instead of us.” The local meaning of huper (uJper) (instead of) is “above.” One could translate, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse above us.” In His death on the Cross, He came above us and between us and a holy God, thus intercepting the penalty that would have fallen upon us. “Redeem” is  (lutrow). There are three words in the n.t., translated “redeem,” which tell the story of the Cross. The first is  (ajgorazw), “to buy a slave in the market place” (I Cor. 6:20, II Peter 2:1, Rev. 5:9). The slave market is this earth. All the unsaved are slaves of sin and Satan. Our Lord paid the penalty for sin at the Cross. Those who trust in His blood, belong to Him as His bondslaves. The second is  (ejxagorazw), “to buy off, to buy up,” thus, “to buy out of the slave market” (Gal. 3:13, 4:5). The saved are never to be put up for sale in any slave market again. They belong to the Lord Jesus forever. The third is  (lutrow), “to set free by the payment of a ransom” (Titus 2:14, I Peter 1:18). The Lord’s slaves are set free from sin and their old master Satan, to experience in their lives, that for which God created them, fellowship with and service to God. “Iniquity” is anomia (ajnomia), “lawlessness,” made up of nomos (nomo"), “law,” and Alpha privative, thus, “without law.” “Peculiar” is periousion (periousion), from the participle of perieinai (perieinai), “to be over and above.” It also means, “possessed over and above,” that is, “specially selected for one’s own; exempt from ordinary laws of distribution.” It refers therefore to a private possession. The word “peculiar” is from peculium (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.” Thus, Christians are the private possession of God. Translation. For the grace of God bringing salvation, appeared to all men, instructing us that denying impiety and worldly cravings, we should live discreetly and righteously and piously in the midst of this present age, expectantly looking for the blessed hope, even the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself on our behalf in order that He might set us free from all lawlessness, and purify to Himself a people of His own private possession, zealous of good works. These things be constantly speaking and exhorting; and be rebuking with all authority. Let no one despise you.

CHAPTER THREE (3:1–3) Since the Cretans were naturally intractable, Paul warns Titus to be careful to insist upon obedience to the properly constituted civil authorities (Expositors). “Put in mind” is  (uJpomimniskw), “to cause one to remember, bring to remembrance.” “Be subject” is  (uJpotassw), used here in the direct middle voice, “to put one’s self in subjection to or under the authority of” some person. “Principalities” is  (ajrch), “the person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the first place, the rule, magistracy.” The word speaks here of the persons first in order of rulership in a community, “the first ones” in the town. “Powers” is exousia (ejxousia), which speaks of delegated authority. Here the word qualifies the civil rulers as those having duly constituted authority. The word “and” is not in the Nestle text.

“To obey magistrates” is  (peiqarcew), “to obey a ruler or superior.” Expositors says that the word here is best taken in its wider sense “to be obedient,” rather than merely to obey magistrates. “No brawlers” is amachos (ajmaco"), “abstaining from fighting, not contentious.” “Gentle” is epieikeia (ejpieikeia). Trench has a valuable note on this word. “The mere existence of such a word as epieikeia (ejpieikeia), is itself a signal evidence of the highest development of ethics among the Greeks. It expresses exactly that moderation which recognizes the impossibility cleaving to all formal law, of anticipating and providing for all cases that will emerge and present themselves to it for decision; which with this, recognizes the danger that ever waits upon the assertion of legal rights, lest they should be pushed to moral wrongs … which, therefore urges not its own rights to the uttermost, but, going back in part or in the whole from these, rectifies and redresses the injustices of justice. It is thus more truly just than strict justice would have been.” The word could be translated, “sweet reasonableness, being satisfied with less than is due you.” “Meekness” is  (prauth"). Trench says of this word: “The scriptural  (praoth") (related word to  (prauth")) is not in man’s outward behavior only; nor yet in his relations to his fellow-men; as little in his mere natural disposition. Rather is it an inwrought grace of the soul; and the exercises of it are first and chiefly towards God (Matt. 11:29; James 1:21). It is that temper of spirit in which we accept His dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing and resisting; it is closely linked with  (tapeinofrosunh) (humility), and follows directly upon it (Eph. 4:2; Col. 3:12; cf. Zeph. 3:12); because it is only the humble heart which is also the meek; and which, as such, does not fight against God, and more or less struggle and contend with Him. This meekness, however, being first of all meekness before God, is also such in the face of men, even of evil men, out of a sense that these, with the insults and injuries which they may inflict, are permitted and employed by Him for the chastening and purifying of His elect. This was the root of David’s  (praoth"), when Shimei cursed and flung stones at him—the consideration that the Lord had bidden him (II Sam. 16:11), that it was just for him to suffer these things, however unjustly the other might inflict them; and out of like convictions all true Christian  (praoth") must spring. He that is meek indeed will know himself a sinner among sinners;—or, if there was One who could not know Himself such, yet He too bore a sinner’s doom, and endured therefore the contradiction of sinners (Luke 9:35, 36; John 18:22, 23);—and this knowledge of his own sin will teach him to endure meekly the provocations with which they may provoke him, and not withdraw himself from the burdens which their sin may impose (Gal. 6:1; II Tim. 2:25; Tit. 2:2).” “Foolish” is  (ajnohto"), “not understanding, unwise; without understanding” of spiritual things, as in Proverbs 17:28. “Disobedient” is  (ajpeiqh"), from peithomai (peiqomai), “to persuade,” and Alpha privative, “impersuasible, uncompliant” “Living” is  (diagw), “to lead through, to pass the time.” “Hateful” is  (stughto"), “hated, detestable.” Translation. Be constantly reminding them to put themselves in subjection to rulers who have been delegated their authority, to be obedient, to be ready to every good work, to be speaking evil of not even one person, to abstain from being contentious, sweetly reasonable, exhibiting all meekness to all men. For we were at one time also foolish, impersuasible, deceived, rendering a slave’s obedience to variegated pleasures, in malice

and envy passing the time, detestable, hating one another. (3:4–7) “Love toward man” is  (filanqrwpia), from  (filew), “to be fond of, to show affection to,” and  (ajnqrwpo"), the racial term for “man.” Our word philanthropy comes from this word. The Greek has it, “not by works, those in the sphere of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us.” Paul is using the term “righteousness” in its classical sense, for he is speaking of the effort of an unsaved person attempting to merit salvation by the performance of deeds done in the sphere of righteousness as conceived of by the pagan Greeks. He uses the word in a like sense in Romans 5:7, “For scarcely for a righteous man will one die,” namely, a man who lives an outwardly moral, respectable, upright life. “According to” is kata (kata), the root idea of which is “down” and suggests dominance, control. God, in saving sinners, is dominated in His act by the mercy that flows spontaneously from His heart. Pure mercy on the part of God shown to the sinner, does not take into account any so-called good works the latter may do. After indicating the factor that motivated God in saving the sinner, Paul speaks of the process. “Regeneration” is palinggenesia (palinggenesia). In heathen and Jewish Greek it meant “a recovery, a restoration, a revival.” The word is a compound of palin (palin), “again,” and ginomai (ginomai), “to become.” It is the new-birth of the believing sinner to which Paul refers here. Our Lord spoke of it in John 3:3–7. There He speaks of the necessity of the sinner being born again. The word “again” is  (ajnwqen), “the repetition of an act, the repeated act having the same source as the first act.” The source of the repeated act, namely, regeneration, is the Holy Spirit. The repeated act is the impartation of divine life to the believing sinner. The source of the first act is the Holy Spirit, and the act was that of the impartation of divine life to Adam in his creation (Gen. 2:7). The first Adam lost that life for the human race in the Fall, and the Last Adam recovered it for those who put their trust in Him through His atoning work on the Cross. “Washing” is  (loutron. Louw) means, “to bathe, perform a complete ablution.” Our Lord uses the word in John 13:10, “He that has been completely bathed with the present result that he is bathed, ( (louw) perfect tense), needeth not save to wash ( (niptw)) his feet.” The first refers to the cleansing of the sinner in the Fountain filled with Blood drawn from Immanuel’s veins. The second refers to the need for the daily cleansing of the saint in his walk. The first has to do with justification, the second with sanctification. In regeneration there is also a cleansing, in that a new life is introduced into the believing sinner. Trench defines palinggenesia (palinggenesia) as follows: “that free act of God’s mercy and power, whereby He causes the sinner to pass out of the kingdom of darkness into that of light, out of death into life.” This ultimately results in the introduction of righteousness and holiness into the life, thus, purifying and cleansing it. “Renewing” is  (ajnakainwsi", kaino"), “new,” and ana (ajna), “again.” “This is the gradual conforming of the man more and more to that new spiritual world into which he has been introduced, and in which he now lives and moves; the restoration of the divine image” (Trench). This is the work of the Holy Spirit in sanctification. “Which” is the relative pronoun referring back to the words, “Holy Ghost,” which are neuter gender in the Greek text. The pronoun as to form could be either neuter or masculine. Since the Holy Spirit is a person, we translate according to sense rather than grammar, and render it “whom.” Translation. But when the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward

man appeared, not by works, those in the sphere of righteousness, which we did, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit whom He poured forth upon us abundantly through our Saviour, Jesus Christ, in order that, having been justified by His grace, we might become heirs according to the hope of life eternal. (3:8) “Faithful” is pistos (pisto"), in the sense of “trustworthy” here. “Saying” is logos (logo"), “a word,” the emphasis being upon the word as a concept of thought. Thus, logos (logo") refers to the doctrines as given in verses 4–7, and their contents. “Affirm” is  (diabainw), “to assert strongly, to asseverate.” The word “constantly” comes from the prefixed preposition which has a perfective force, which intensifies the already existing idea in the verb. The idea is not “constantly” in the sense of continually, but uniformly. Vincent translates, “affirm steadfastly.” “Be careful” is  (frontizw), “to think or consider, to take careful thought.” “Maintain” is  (proisthmi), “to set or place before, to give attention to, to be forward in.” Expositors translates, “occupy themselves in good works.” Translation. Trustworthy is the word. And concerning these things I desire you to be strongly assertive, in order that those who have believed God may take careful thought to be forward in good works. (3:9) “Avoid” is  (periisthmi), in the middle voice as used here, “to turn one’s self about” for the purpose of avoiding something, thus, “to avoid, shun.” “Foolish” is  (mwro"), “dull, sluggish, stupid.” “Questions” is  (zhthsi"), “questionings.” On “genealogies” see notes on I Timothy 1:4. “Vain” is mataios (mataio"), “aimless, resultless,” thus, “in vain.” Translation. But stupid questionings and genealogies and wranglings and contentions about laws turn away from and shun, for they are without profit and in vain. (3:10, 11) “Heretick” is hairetikos (aiJretiko"), from the verb  (aiJrew), “to take, to take for one’s self, to choose, prefer.” The noun means, “fitted or able to take or choose, schismatic, factious.” A heretic is one therefore who refuses to accept true doctrine as it is revealed in the Bible, and prefers to choose for himself what he is to believe. “Subverted” is  (ejktrepw), “to turn or twist out,” used in a medical sense of limbs; “to turn aside.” Vincent says: “More than turned away from the right path: rather, turned inside out.” “Condemned of himself” is autokatakritos (aujtokatakrito"), literally, “self-condemned,” made up of autos (aujto"), “self,” kata (kata), “down,” and  (krinw), “to judge,” thus, “to judge one’s self down,” thus, “to condemn one’s self.” Translation. A schismatic individual, after one or two admonitions be rejecting, knowing that he that is of such a character, is turned inside out, and keeps on constantly sinning, being self-condemned. (3:12) As to Nicopolis, Vincent says that there were three cities of that name, one in

Cilicia, one in Thrace, and one in Epirus. Expositors reports that the city in Epirus has found more favor with modern scholars. Either Artemas or Tychicus was to relieve Titus at Crete and assume his duties so that the latter could join Paul at Nicopolis. “Be diligent” is  (spoudazw), “do your best,” the word translated in II Timothy 2:15, “study.” See note there for more detailed word study. “Determined” is  (krinw), “to separate, put asunder, pick out, select, choose, approve, prefer,” thus, “to determine, resolve.” It is in the perfect tense which speaks of an action completed in past time having present results. The use of this tense by Paul is indicative of a person who thinks a matter through and finally comes to a conclusion where he is so sure of himself that he is settled in his determination to follow a certain course of action. Paul thought the matter through carefully as to the advisability of spending the winter season in which travel by land was difficult, and by sea impossible, at Nicopolis, and came to the settled conclusion that that city was the best place at which he could stay. Translation. When I shall send Artemas to you or Tychicus, do your best to come to me at Nicopolis, for there I have determined to spend the winter. (3:13) As to the word “lawyer,” Expositors says: “In the absence of any example of this word being used as referring to the legal profession, it seems best to assume that Zenas was a nomikos (nomiko") (lawyer) in the usual n.t. sense, an expert in the Mosaic law.” Translation. Zenas the lawyer, and Apollos, diligently set forward on their journey in order that not even one thing be lacking to them. (3:14) “Ours” ( (hJmetero")) refers to the Christian brethren in Crete. “Maintain” is  (proisthmi), “to give attention to.” On the word “unfruitful,” Vincent says: “Not only in supplying the needs, but in cultivating Christian graces in themselves by acts of kindness.” Translation. And let those also who are ours, learn to give attention to good works for necessary needs in order that they may not be unfruitful. (3:15) “Salute” is aspazomai (ajspazomai), “to salute one (not in a military sense), greet, wish well to.” Translation. All those with me send greetings to you. Greet those who love us in the Faith. The grace be with you all.

HEBREWS In the Greek New Testament

Dedicated to William H. Marbach, D.D., my Sunday School teacher when I was a boy—whose Christian life and testimony exerted a powerful influence over me at that time—for which I shall ever be grateful.

PREFACE This is not a book simply to be read. It must be studied. It is a detailed exposition of the Greek text of the Epistle to the Hebrews, making available to the Bible student who does not know Greek the added light and richness of the original text, resulting in a clearer and more accurate understanding of that book than he is able to obtain from a study of the standard translation which he is using. Approximately 430 Greek words are treated in an individual way and, in addition to this, the student is given the benefit of the author’s study of the Greek text in many places where specific Greek word studies are not presented. For the most part, these studies are non-technical in their nature. The Greek words studied are given in their transliterated form for the benefit of those who are conversant with the Greek New Testament. However, this book does not claim to be a finished treatise on the Greek text of Hebrews, written for the Greek scholar. It is intended for the Bible student who has little or no knowledge of Greek. Should accomplished students of Greek happen to dip into its pages, the author asks that they take these facts into consideration when they form an opinion of this book. The Epistle to the Hebrews is unique among the New Testament books in that the entire book is concerned with a situation that obtained in the first century which does not exist today. From this fact there emerge two necessary requirements having to do with the correct exegesis of this book. The first is that the exegete must adhere closely to the guidance offered by the historical background and analysis of the letter. The second is that the basic interpretation of this book must rest upon this historical background and analysis, and that the application of this basic interpretation must apply only to the first century conditions. In this case there can be no secondary application for today, since the conditions which existed then do not obtain today. However, while the book in its basic interpretation and application is confined to the conditions existent in the first century, yet it has an important application for the times in which we are living. In days like these, when Modernism has left its tents and has come out in the open to do battle against the time-honored orthodox, evangelical school of interpretation, the Book of Hebrews enters the lists, emphasizing the great fundamental truths of the deity, humanity, and blood atonement of the Lord Jesus. The Book is crimson with the precious Blood of God’s dear Lamb. It exalts the Lord Jesus in a day when Modernism seeks to place Him among the prophets of the false religions. The Book of Hebrews offers another service to the believer today. It makes clear the relationship between the Levitical sacrifices and their fulfilment in the Lord Jesus and His substitutionary atonement for sin. While the Gospels give the details of the fulfilment of

the Levitical sacrifices in the death of our Lord on the Cross, yet it is left for the Book of Hebrews to present Him as the High Priest of the believer, in all the glory and richness of the imagery of the Old Testament. One cannot become familiar with this Book without entering into a new and deeper appreciation of the Lord Jesus as his Saviour from sin. Finally, just a suggestion as to how the Bible student should use this book. With his English Bible open, he should work slowly through the Book of Hebrews, verse by verse, using this book as his guide. He should first master the contents of the historical background, and become familiar with the analysis of the book before entering upon the exegetical study of its contents; this, in order that he may follow more easily along the exegetical path that winds through the mazes of interpretation. He has the help, not only of the Greek word studies, but also of the expanded translation which bring out details in the original text that cannot be included in a translation which is held down to a minimum of words. The student is cautioned not to use this translation as a substitute for the standard version which he is using, but as a companion translation which will help to make clearer the one which he has before him. K.S.W.

I. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE LETTER Any attempt to deal in an adequate way with the Epistle to the Hebrews must be based, not only upon a careful exegesis of its text in the Greek, but also upon a study of the historical background and an analysis of the book. All correct exegesis is based upon and checked up by analysis. Analysis is to the exegete what a compass is to a mariner, or a radio beam to an aviator. The two individuals named cannot hope to arrive at their destination without the aid of their instruments. Similarily, no expositor of Hebrews can hope to arrive at a correct exegesis of that book without constantly checking his position by its historical background and analysis. Therefore, before attempting the interpretation, we must lay a comprehensive groundwork consisting of the historical background and analysis of the book. The reader can then check the interpretation of any particular detail by consulting this analysis. That interpretation which agrees with the analysis is correct, and that which is not in such agreement is not correct. The matter of correct interpretation, therefore, is reduced to a science. This eliminates all discussion as to one’s theological background or personal views. The working out of the problems of exegesis upon the basis of the laws of analysis and the rules of Greek grammar becomes almost as sure a scientific procedure as the working out of a problem in mathematics or an experiment in chemistry. The writers of the Bible, led by the Holy Spirit, wrote within the limits imposed by their context. No Scripture statement is unrelated to the context in which it is found. We therefore approach the study of this portion of God’s Word with the confidence that we are, to change the figure, playing the game according to the rules, not offering the reader an interpretation colored by whatever theological background or personal opinions the writer may have. It is just the scientific way of obeying the laws governing the experiment and tabulating the facts as one finds them. The book was written before a.d. 70, but after the ascension of our Lord (Heb. 10:11, 12). The temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in a.d. 70, but at the time of the writing of Hebrews, priests were still offering sacrifices, this fact showing that it was still standing. Our Lord is seen, seated in heaven after His ascension. Thus the date is somewhere

between a.d. 33 and a.d. 70. The book was written to prove that a certain proposition is true. The writer states the proposition in the following words: “He (Christ) is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises” (8:6). “By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament” (7:22). “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah” (8:7, 8). “He taketh away the first (covenant), that he may establish the second” (10:9). The proposition is, therefore: “The New Testament in Jesus’ blood is superior to and supplants the First Testament in animal blood.” We must be careful to note that the book is not an argument to prove that Christianity is superior to and takes the place of Judaism. The New Testament is the reality of which the First Testament was the type. The type consisted of a blood sacrifice which symbolically gave the offerer salvation, while in reality his salvation came from the New Testament which necessarily is a sacrifice, even the Lord Jesus at Calvary. Christianity is not a sacrifice nor a means of salvation. Christianity is a result of what happened at the Cross, namely, the Christian church made up of all believers from Pentecost to the Rapture, together with the doctrines and duties of the members of that Church. Furthermore, the New Testament is a covenant made with the Jewish nation. The latter must be distinguished from the Church. It is not a matter of a choice between Judaism and Christianity with which the writer is dealing, but between the type and the reality, between the Levitical sacrifices and the substitutionary atonement of the Lord Jesus. Since the argument of the book has to do with the abrogation of the Levitical system of sacrifices at the Cross, called in this book the First Testament (9:18), and the supplanting of the same by the sacrifice of our Lord, called in this book the New Testament (9:15), the concern of the writer must therefore be with reference to the unsaved Jew, for the proposition which the writer wishes to prove has already been accepted as true by the believing Jew of the first century, for when putting his faith in Christ as High Priest, it became necessary for him to forsake any dependence he may have had upon the typical sacrifices, and recognize in Him their fulfilment. To prove to him on the basis of his own Old Testament Scriptures that the New Testament has superseded the First, would result in that Jew going on to faith in Christ, if he is really sincere in wanting to be saved. The author proves the proposition he advances twice, and from two different standpoints. First, he compares the relative merits of the founders of the testaments, arguing that a superior workman turns out a superior product. This he does in 1:1–8:6 where he proves that Christ, the Founder of the New Testament is superior to the founders, under God, of the First Testament, who are the prophets (1:1–3), the angels (1:4–2:18), Moses (3:1–6), Joshua (3:7–4:13), and Aaron (4:14–8:6). After stating in 8:6 the proposition he has just shown to be true, he proves it again by comparing the relative merits of the testaments themselves in 8:7–10:39; first, the New Testament was prophesied to be better (8:7–13); second, it is actual, the First Testament typical (9:1– 15); third, it is made effective with better blood (9:16–10:39). Then he proves in 11:1– 12:2 that faith, not works, is the way of salvation, and closes his letter with admonitions (12:3–13:25). In addition to proving that the New Testament in Jesus’ blood is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament in animal blood, the writer warns those of his unsaved readers who have made a profession of Christ, against the act of renouncing their

profession and returning to the temple sacrifices which they had left, and urges them to go on to faith in the New Testament sacrifice, the Messiah. He warns them against letting the New Testament truth slip away (2:1–4), against hardening the heart against the Holy Spirit (3:7–19), against falling away (5:11–6:12), against committing the wilful sin of treading underfoot the Son of God, counting His blood as common blood, and doing insult to the Holy Spirit (10:26–29), all this being involved in his act of renouncing his professed faith in Christ and returning to the Levitical sacrifices. These are not separate and distinct sins, but one sin described in various ways, the sin of this first century Jew renouncing his professed faith in Messiah as High Priest and of returning to the abrogated sacrifices of the First Testament. He urges them to put their faith in Messiah as High Priest. He is apprehensive lest there may be among his Jewish readers some who have an unbelieving heart and who are standing aloof (Greek for “departing”) from the living God (3:12). He fears lest some should come short of rest in Christ and die in their sins as the generation that came out of Egypt came short of rest in Canaan and died a physical death in the wilderness because they did not appropriate the land by faith (4:1, 2). Therefore he appeals to them to go on to faith in Messiah. He appeals to them to be followers of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises (6:12). When one exhorts someone to do something, it is clear evidence that the latter is not doing that which is exhorted. These Jews, while making a profession, had no faith, and under the pressure of persecution, were in danger of renouncing the intellectual assent which they gave to the New Testament and returning to the First Testament (10:23, 32–34). The writer urges them to place their faith in the New Testament High Priest (10:19, 20), using First Testament typology. Under the First Testament system, the Israelite would enter the tabernacle in the person of the priest who would procure salvation for him through a blood sacrifice. The writer exhorts the first century Jew to enter, not the Holy of Holies of the temple on earth, but the Holy of Holies of heaven, and in the same way, in the Person of the new High Priest, by a freshly slain (new) and living way, and to do so in the faith which brings full assurance of salvation, a faith they did not have. He warns them against drawing back from their profession of faith in Christ to perdition, and urges them on to faith in this same Christ, with the result that their souls will be saved (10:38, 39). Finally, he devotes chapter eleven to an argument based upon Old Testament Scripture, that faith is the way of salvation, urging them to look off and away to Jesus in faith, a thing they were not doing (12:1, 2). Thus, the purpose of the writer was to reach the professing Jews of that date who outwardly had left the temple sacrifices, and had identified themselves with those groups of people who were gathering around an unseen Messiah, the High Priest of the New Testament system who had at the Cross fulfilled the First Testament system of typical sacrifices. These unsaved Jews were under the stress of persecution, and in danger of renouncing their profession and returning to the abrogated sacrifices of the Levitical system (10:32–34).

II. ANALYSIS OF THE LETTER I.

The New Testament is better than and takes the place of the First Testament because its Founder, the Messiah, is better than (1:1–8:6). 1. The prophets (1:1–3), since Messiah is—

a. b.

2.

3.

4.

5.

God the Son, heir of all things, and creator of the universe the outshining of God’s glory, the expression of the nature or essence of Deity, the sustainer of the universe He created, and the Sacrifice that paid for sin (v. 3) The angels (1:4–2:18), since He— a. Has a better name, Son (1:4, 5) b. Is worshipped by angels (v. 6) c. Is Creator and Master of angels (v. 7) d. Has an eternal throne and is anointed with the Holy Spirit (vv. 8, 9) e. Is unchangeable (vv. 10–12) f. Is seated at God’s right hand (v. 13) g. Has ushered in a Testament which displaces theirs (2:1–4) (1) Warning against letting New Testament truth slip away (v. 1) (2) If rejection of First Testament truth was punished (v. 2), how much more will rejection of New Testament truth be punished (v. 3), which truth was spoken by the Lord, confirmed by those who heard Him, and attested by miracles (vv. 2–4) h. Is to be Ruler over the Messianic Kingdom (vv. 5–9) (1) Angels, being servants, cannot rule (v. 5) (2) Adam, placed over earth, lost his dominion through sin (vv. 6–8) (3) Our Lord has regained this dominion for man, who will be associated with Him in His rule (v. 9) i. Is the High Priest who has put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself (vv. 10– 18) (1) He becomes Saviour through His death on the cross (v. 10) (2) This death made possible through His incarnation (vv. 11–16) (3) As High Priest for human beings, it was necessary that He become incarnate (vv. 17, 18) Moses (3:1–6), because a. He is Creator of Israel, Moses only a member of that house (vv. 1, 4) b. He is Son of God over Israel, Moses a servant (vv. 5, 6) Joshua (3:7–4:13), because He leads into a spiritual rest which is better than the temporal rest into which Joshua led Israel. a. Warning against hardening their hearts toward the Holy Spirit as the wilderness wanderers hardened their hearts against God (3:7–9) b. That generation did not enter Canaan rest (vv. 10, 11) c. The evidence of the fact that the recipient is saved, is that he retains his profession of faith in Messiah under the stress of persecution, not going back to the First Testament sacrifices (vv. 12, 14) d. The recipient will die in his sins if he fails to put his faith in Messiah as High Priest, just as the wilderness wanderers died a physical death because of unbelief (3:15–4:8) e. Exhortation to enter rest in Messiah, and warning against continued unbelief (vv. 9–13) Aaron (4:14–8:6), since He a. Ascended through the heavens into the actual Holy of Holies (4:14–16) b. Was taken, not from among men, but from the Godhead (5:1)

c. d. e. f.

Is sinless (vv. 2, 5) Is an eternal High Priest (v. 6) Becomes actual High Priest through His death and resurrection (vv. 7–10) Is the reality as High Priest, which does away with the types of the First Testament (5:11–6:12) (1) The recipients hard to teach and dull as to spiritual perception (5:11) (2) They had been instructed in New Testament truth (5:12) (3) They were babes, that is, immature in their spiritual thinking (vv. 13,14) (4) They are exhorted to put away “the beginning word of the Christ,” namely, the Levitical ritual, and be borne along to New Testament truth, and are warned against laying down again a foundation of First Testament doctrines (6:1–3) (5) They had been enlightened by the Holy Spirit as to New Testament truth, and they had tasted of that which constitutes salvation, and had been made partakers of the Holy Spirit (v. 4) (6) They had tasted the Word and had seen the attesting miracles (v. 5) (7) They had been led into repentance. Now should they fall away from their profession of faith in Messiah and back to the sacrifices, it would be impossible to renew them to repentance (vv. 6–8) (8) The saved among the recipients would not apostatize. The unsaved exhorted to follow in the steps of faith of the saved (vv. 9–12) g. Is a High Priest who actually brings the believer into an eternal standing in grace (vv. 13–20) (1) Abraham, the man of faith who was rewarded, a precedent (vv. 13–15) (2) God’s oath and God’s promise guarantee the believer’s eternal retention of salvation (vv. 16–18) (3) This salvation made possible by the presence of the High Priest in the heavenly Holy of Holies (vv. 19, 20) h. A High Priest after the order of Melchisedec (7:1–3) (1) Melchisedec, a sinner saved by grace, had no recorded parents, no recorded date of birth or of death (2) A type, therefore, of Messiah in His eternal priesthood i. A High Priest in a superior order of priesthood (7:4–10) (1) The Aaronic priests received tithes (vv. 4, 5) (2) Melchisedec received tithes from Abraham, therefore, was better than he (vv. 6, 7) (3) Melchisedec in type still receiving tithes, whereas Aaronic priests died (v. 8) (4) Aaron in Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedec, therefore, the latter is superior; therefore, Messiah is better than Aaron, being a priest in the order of Melchisedec (vv. 10) j. Is High Priest of a Testament that offered a sacrifice that put away sin (vv. 11–22) (1) The First Testament neither offered nor made anything complete (v.11) (2) First Testament priest came from tribe of Levi, the New Testament priest from the tribe of Judah (vv. 12–17) (3) First Testament set aside in favor of a better Testament (vv. 18–22)

k.

Messiah lives forever: the Aaronic priests died (vv. 23–28) (1) Because mortal, there were many Aaronic priests (v.23) (2) Our Lord, because eternal, has a non-transferable priesthood thus able to save the believer forever (vv. 24, 25) (3) A better High Priest, because sinless (vv. 26–28) l. Officiates in a better tabernacle (8:1–6) (1) His tabernacle the heavenly one; Aaron’s merely the type (vv. 1–5) (2) His Testament therefore better than the one Aaron served under (v. 6) II The New Testament is better than and takes the place of the First Testament (8:7– 10:39), because 1. It was prophesied to be better (8:7–13) a. The First Testament faulty in that it did not put away sin (v. 7) b. New Testament made with Israel and Judah (v. 8) c. First Testament dealt with Israel as with a minor (v. 9) d. New Testament through indwelling Spirit brings believers to adult sonship (v. 10) e. Under the New Testament, all individuals in Israel will know the Lord (v. 11) f. Under New Testament, sins put away (v. 12) g. New Testament displaces First Testament (v. 13) 2. It is actual; the First Testament only typical (9:1–15) a. First Testament typical (vv. 1–10) (1) Its sanctuary on earth (v. 1) (2) Its appointments typical (vv. 2–5) (3) Its priesthood temporary (vv. 6–10) b. New Testament actual (vv. 11–15) (1) The reality better than the type (v. 11) (2) The sacrificial blood better (vv. 12–15) (a) It was His own blood (v. 12) (b) Animal blood cleanses from ceremonial defilement (v. 13) (c) Jesus’ blood cleanses from actual sin (v. 14) (d) Therefore, He is the Priest of a better Testament (v. 15) 3. It is made effective with better blood (9:16–10:39) a. The heavenly Testator Himself dies (9:16–22) (1) A last will or testament operative at testator’s death (vv. 16, 17) (2) First Testament made operative by death of animal (vv. 18–22) b. The better tabernacle purified with better blood (vv. 23, 24) (1) Earthly tabernacle cleansed with animal blood (v. 23) (2) Heavenly tabernacle cleansed with blood of Messiah (v. 24) c. The once for all sacrifice of Messiah better than all the sacrifices of the First Testament (9:25–10:39) (1) He suffered once on the cross (vv. 25, 26); He appears in heaven as High Priest now (v. 24): He will come in His second Advent to Israel (vv. 27, 28). Notice, if you will, the three appearings of the Messiah here. These correspond to and are the fulfillment of the three appearings of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement in Israel. (2) Blood of animals cannot take away sin (10:1–4)

(3) In view of that fact, Messiah volunteers to become the sacrifice. In so doing, He sets aside the First and establishes the Second Testament (vv. 5– 10) (4) Notwithstanding the fact that the First Testament had been set aside by God, and the New Testament had been brought in, the Aaronic priests still offered animal sacrifices (v. 11) (5) The New Testament Priest procured a finished salvation (vv. 12–14) (6) The Holy Spirit through Jeremiah bears witness to the New Testament (vv. 15–18) (7) The unsaved professing Hebrew exhorted to place his faith in the High Priest of the New Testament (vv. 19–22) (8) He is exhorted to hold fast his profession and not waver between the desire to go on to faith in Messiah or to go back to the sacrifices (v. 23) (9) Exhorted to continue attendance upon the New Testament assembly (v. 24, 25) (10) Warned not to sin wilfully in renouncing his professed faith in Messiah and going back to the sacrifices (v. 26) (11) For the one who would go back, there remains only judgment (v. 27) (12) The one who rejected the First Testament was punished (v. 28) (13) The one committing the threefold sin against the three Persons of the Triune God would be punished more severely (vv. 29–31) (14) The recipients are urged to remember the persecutions they endured for their testimony to Messiah, and not let them go for naught by returning to the sacrifices (vv. 32–37) (15) They are urged to obtain justification through placing their faith in Messiah, and not draw back to perdition (vv. 38, 39) III. Faith, not works, the way of salvation, as proved by instances of First Testament saints (11:1–12:2) 1. Faith defined (11:1–3) 2. Faith illustrated (11:4–40) 3. Faith exhorted (12:1, 2) IV. Final Warnings and Exhortations (12:3–13:25) 1. If these Jews remain under the chastening hand of God, and do not seek to escape persecution by renouncing their professed faith in Messiah, that is an evidence that they are saved. But if they do the opposite, that shows they have never been saved (12:3–17) 2. When they come to New Testament truth, they come, not to the thunders of Sinai, but to the grace of Calvary (vv. 18–24) 3. They are warned not to refuse the Lord Jesus, for those who refused Moses were punished (vv. 25–29) 4. General exhortations (13:1–17) 5. Closing words (vv. 18–25)

III. EXEGESIS OF THE LETTER

I.

The New Testament is better than and takes the place of the First Testament because its Founder, the Messiah, is better than (1:1–8:6) 1. The prophets, since Messiah is a. God the Son, heir of all things, and creator of the universe (vv. 1–2). (1:1) In the Greek text, the order of the words is, “At sundry times and in divers manners God spake.” The Greek places his words at the beginning of a sentence for emphasis. Therefore, the main idea in the writer’s mind here is not that God spake, but that it was at sundry times and in divers manners that He spake. He is not combating the denial of a revelation, but is preparing the reader for the truth that God has now, after the preliminary revelations, given a final word in the revelation of His Son. The revelations of First Testament truth were given “at sundry times” (polumeros (polumero")). The word is made up of polus (polu") “many,” and meros (mero") “parts,” the total meaning being “by many portions.” It was given also “in divers manners” (polutropos (polutropo")). The word is made up of polus (polu") “many,” and tropos (tropo") “manner” or “fashion,” thus, “different manners,” or “many ways.” In the giving of the First Testament truth, God did not speak once for all, but in separate revelations, each of which set forth only a part of His will. One writer was given one, and another, another element of truth. God spoke in different ways. This does not refer to different ways in which He imparted His revelations to the writers, but to the difference of the various revelations in contents and form. He spoke to Israel in one way through Moses, in another, through Isaiah, etc. At the beginning of the revelation, the presentation was elementary. Later it appealed to a more developed spiritual sense. Again, the revelation differed according to the faithfulness or the unfaithfulness of Israel. Clement of Alexandria associates this passage with Ephesians 3:10, “the many-tinted (polupoikilos (polupoikilo")) wisdom of God.” The First Testament revelation was progressive. All could not be revealed at once, and because all could not be understood at once. Thus the revelation was given in many parts. In addition to this, it was given in different modes. It was given in the form of law, prophecy, history, psalm, sign, type, parable. Expositor’s1 says that the people of Israel “were like men listening to a clock striking the hour, always getting nearer the truth but obliged to wait till the whole is heard.” The words “in times past” are the translation of palai (palai). The Greek has two words meaning “old,” archaios (ajrcaio"), meaning “old in point of time,” and palaios (palaio"), meaning “old in point of use, worn out, ready to be displaced by something new.” The close association of our word palai (palai) to palaios (palaio") suggests that the writer had in mind by its use, the fact that while the First Testament revelation was not to be cast aside, yet it was time for a new one to be given, one that would be God’s final word, one that would complete and round out the first one. The translation so far reads “In many parts and in different ways of old.” Now comes the word “God.” It is preceded by the definite article which has several functions here. First of all, it serves notice on the reader, that the God of whom the writer speaks, is the same God whom the Hebrew addressees of the epistle profess to worship. Thus does the writer seek to place himself on common ground with his readers in the very beginning of a treatise which is highly argumentative in character. It is the debater’s technique which concedes all it safely can to an opponent. The other function of the article here is to indicate the particular Person of the Godhead spoken of, God the Father.

The next word “spake,” is a participle in the Greek text, and is associated with the word “spoken” of verse two, which is a finite verb. That is, “God, having spoken, spoke.” Thus, we have the two revelations, that of the First Testament and that of the New, joined together. He spoke to Israel “by the prophets.” The preposition is en (ejn). Used here in the locative case, we would have the locative of sphere. That is, the writers of the First Testament constituted the sphere within which God spoke. He spoke exclusively through them and through no other men, so far as the written revelation is concerned. This preposition is used also in the instrumental case. Then the writers would be looked upon as the instruments in God’s hands by which the First Testament Scriptures were written down. Archbishop Trench has this to say about the correct meaning of the word “prophet”; “It is almost needless at this day to warn against what was once a very common error, one in which many of the Fathers (Christian) shared,… namely a taking of the pro (pro) in propheteuo (profeteuo) (to prophecy), and prophetes (profete") (prophet) as temporal, which it is not any more than in prophasis (profasi") (a pretext), and finding as the primary meaning of the word, he who declares things before they come to pass. This foretelling or foreannouncing may be, and often is, of the office of the prophet, but is not the essence of that office; and this is as little in sacred as in classical Greek. The prophetes (profete") (prophet) is the outspeaker; he who speaks out the counsel of God with the clearness, energy, and authority which spring from the consciousness of speaking in God’s name and having received a direct message from Him to deliver.” Thus, the prophets were the mouthpieces of God. John the Baptist said, “I am a voice of One who is crying out in the wilderness” (John 1:23). John did not use the definite article before the word “voice.” He was merely one among many voices which God used in the Old Testament dispensation. But note: the One crying out, giving the message, was God. John was His articulate voice, a mere instrument in His hands. Translation. In many parts and in different ways of old, God having spoken to the fathers by means of the prophets. (1:2) The expression “in these last days” is in the Greek text, “in the last of these days.” The word “last” is eschatos (ejscato") which means, “the outermost, the extreme, last in time or in place.” The writer had just been speaking of the times in which God spoke through the prophets. Now, at the very termination of the times in which He is speaking to man, He speaks, not through the prophets, but IN SON. The definite article appearing before “prophets,” sets these individuals off by themselves as a class. The fact that the article is absent before the word “Son,” emphasizes character, nature. It speaks of the Son-relationship of the Messiah to God the Father. It speaks of the distinction that exists between the prophets as God’s creatures used as instruments in His hands and the Son who by nature is Deity. The Son belongs to a different category. God spoke through One who is in character a son. The revelation God gave in His Son, consisted not merely in what was said, as in the case of the prophets, but in what the Son was, not merely in what He (the Son) said. In other words, it was not primarily, nor finally, a revelation given through words, but through a Personality. It was a revelation made by One who in all that He is and all that

He does and says, reveals the Father. He is the Logos, the total concept of Deity, Deity told out, the Word of God, not in the sense of a spoken or a written word, but in the sense of a Person who in Himself expresses all that God the Father is. He said on one occasion, “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father” (John 14:9). And so John could write, “In the beginning was the Logos (Logo") (the Word), and the Word (Logos (Logo")) was in fellowship with God (the Father), and the Logos (Logo") was as to His nature Deity” (John 1:1). This is the Person in whom God gave His final revelation to the human race. But now, after the exegesis of this wonderful portion of God’s Word, we must pay attention to the argument of the writer. He wrote the book to prove just one proposition to be true; “The New Testament is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament.” His first major argument (1:1–8:6) shows that the Founder of the New Testament is superior to the founders of the First Testament, which makes the former Testament superior to the latter. The first class of individuals he selects among the founders of the First Testament are the prophets. He has now shown that the Founder of the New Testament is superior to the prophets in that the latter were merely created beings used as instruments by God, whereas the former is the Son, God the Son, thus very God of very God. But not only is the Son superior in His Being, but the mode of revealing God’s Word to the human race was superior in His case. When the prophets spoke, it was merely as mouthpieces. When the Son spoke, it was God Himself who spoke. Thus, by two counts already, has the writer shown that the One who gave the truth of the New Testament to man is superior to those who gave the truth of the First Testament. But not satisfied with that, the writer goes on to point out more of the superiorities of the Son over the prophets. He says that God appointed Him heir of all things. The dominion promised to Adam, the latter lost through his fall into sin. This dominion the Son of God regained as the Last Adam through His incarnation, vicarious death, and victorious, bodily resurrection. In the future Messianic Kingdom, the Lord Jesus as Messiah will reign over a perfect earth and a glorified humanity, heir of all things. And this makes Him better than the prophets. But the writer, not content with these superiorities, says, “by whom also he made the worlds.” The word “by” is dia (dia) in the Greek text, a preposition commonly expressing secondary agency, but sometimes used of God’s direct agency. The Son of God is here seen as the mediate agency in creation, but is not here represented as a mere instrument, a passive tool, but as a cooperating agent. In Colossians 1:16, Paul says that all things were created in Him (en (ejn)) and through Him (dia (dia)). The expression “in Him” enlarges and makes complete the expression “through Him.” “Through Him” speaks of the Son as the mediate instrument. “In Him” indicates that “all the laws and purposes which guide the creation and government of the universe reside in Him, the Eternal Word, as their meeting-point” (Lightfoot). The word “worlds” is the translation of aionas (aijona"). The word here includes according to Alford, “God’s revelation of Himself in a sphere whose conditions are Time and Space, and so all things existing under these conditions, plus these conditions themselves which exist not independently of the Creator, but are His work, His appointed conditions of all created existence, so that the universe, as well in its great primeval conditions,—the reaches of Space, and the ages of Time, as in all material objects and all successive events, which furnish out and people Space and Time, God made by Christ.” The idea in the word aionas (aijona") is not merely that of the vastness and magnificence

of the physical universe, but the thought of the times and ages through which the purpose and plan of God are gradually unfolding. Thus, the Son is the Divine Agent not only in the original creation of the physical universe, but also in the operation and management of that universe and all its creatures all down the ages of time. And that makes Him better than the prophets. Translation. In the last of these days spoke to us in One who in character is (His) Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made2 the ages. b.

The outshining of God’s glory, the expression of the nature or essence of Deity, the sustainer of the universe He created, and the Sacrifice that paid for sin (v. 3). (1:3) The Son is superior to the prophets because He is the brightness of God’s glory. “Brightness” is the translation of apaugasma (ajpaugasma), in the classics, “a radiance, effulgence,” used of light beaming from a luminous body. Its verbal form means “to flash forth.” Expositor’s has a valuable note on “effulgence;” The word “seems to mean, not rays of light streaming from a body in their connection with that body or as part of it, still less the reflection of these rays caused by their falling upon another body, but rather rays of light coming out from the original body and forming a similar light-body themselves … So in India, Chaitanya taught that the human soul was like a ray from the Divine Being; God like a blazing fire and the souls like sparks that spring out of it. In the Arian controversy this designation of the Son was appealed to as proving that He is eternally generated and exists not by an act of the Father’s will but essentially … As the sun cannot exist or a lamp burn without radiating light, so God is essentially Father and Son.” Vincent3 translates the Greek word by “effulgence,” or “out-raying.” He says that the meaning is that “the Son is the out-raying of the divine glory, exhibiting in Himself the glory and majesty of the divine Being.” He quotes Weiss as saying that “God lets His glory issue from Himself, so that there arises thereby a light-being like Himself.” Alford4 says that “the Son of God is, in this His essential majesty, the expression and the sole expression of divine light, not as in His incarnation, its reflection.” The word apaugasma (ajpaugasma) is not preceded by the definite article, which fact makes the term highly descriptive of character or nature, all of which bears out the correctness of the above teaching. The glory spoken of here refers to the expression of the divine attributes collectively. Vincent says that it is the unfolded fulness of the divine perfections. He makes a difference between the “form of God” (Phil. 2:6) and the effulgence of God’s glory in that the form (morphe (morfe)) is the immediate, proper, personal investiture of the divine essence, and is identified with the inmost being of Deity, whereas the glory spoken of here is attached to Deity. The word doxa (doxa) (glory) is used of various visible displays of divine light and splendor, such as Moses’ vision of the divine glory (Ex. 33:18–23, 34:5, 7). But the writer, not content with speaking of the transcendant glory of the Son from the standpoint of the out-raying of the glory of God, brings to the attention of the reader, the fact that the Son is also “the express image of His person.” The words “express image” are the translation of charakter (carakter). This word was used in classical Greek of an engraver, one who mints coins, a graving tool, a die, a stamp, a branding iron,

a mark engraved, an impress, a stamp on coins and seals. Metaphorically it meant “a distinctive mark or token impressed on a person or thing, by which it is known from others, a characteristic, the character of.” It was a Greek idiom for a person’s features. It was used of the type or character regarded as shared with others. It meant also an impress or an image. The classical usage of this word should throw some light upon its use in the New Testament. Moulton and Milligan5 say that it was used to denote the tool for engraving; then it came to be used of the mark or impress made, with special reference to any distinguishing peculiarity. Hence it referred to an exact reproduction. They quote Deissmann in the sentence from the papyri, “He made a successful voyage to the August Persons (Augustus and Livia), the word “persons” being the translation of charakter (carakter). The word “substance” is the translation of hupostasis (uJpostasi"). The word is a compound of hupo (uJpo) meaning “under” and histemi (iJstemi), meaning “to stand.” The total literal meaning of the word therefore is “that which stands under.” The word was used in the following senses: “something which stands underneath, foundation, ground of hope or confidence, assurance.” Vincent, commenting upon the entire expression says, “Here the essential being of God is conceived as setting its distinctive stamp upon Christ, coming into definite and characteristic expression in His Person, so that the Son bears the exact impress of the divine nature and character.” Expositor’s suggests that the words “nature” or “essence” better convey the meaning of hupostasis (uJpostasi"). Thus it is the impress of the divine essence possessed by absolute Deity which is an exact reproduction of that essence. And that impress is the Son of God. But the writer brings another of the superiorities of the Son to the attention of the recipients of this letter. The Son “upholds all things by the word of His power.” The word “upholds” is phero (fero). The word “maintaining,” Vincent says, is a better translation than “upholding.” The latter word conveys too much the idea of the passive support of a burden. Westcott quotes another as saying, “The Son is not an Atlas, sustaining the dead weight of the world.” But while the word implies the idea of sustaining, it also includes in itself the idea of movement. It speaks of the act of sustaining something that is in constant movement. Weiss speaks of the act of sustaining as dealing “with the all, in all its changes and transformations throughout the aeons.” This act has to do, not only with sustaining the weight of the universe, but also with maintaining its coherence and carrying on its development. Paul speaks of this same act of the Son in Colossians 1:17 where he says, “By Him all things consist.” That is, all things maintain their coherence in Him. The Lord Jesus holds all things together and in their proper relationship to each other by His own power. The oceans are held in their beds. The rivers run down into the sea. The heavenly bodies are held in their orbits. Philo calls the Logos (Logo") the bond (desmos (desmo")) of the universe. This act of maintaining this coherence, implies the guidance and propulsion of all the parts of the universe to a definite end. An illustration of this use of phero (fero) is found in the LXX,6 where Moses says, “I am not able to bear (phero (fero)) all this people alone,” where phero (fero) has in it the idea of the responsibility of the government and guidance of Israel. This sustaining of the universe, this maintaining its coherence in all its parts, the Son accomplishes “by the word of his power.” The universe was called into being by the Word of God (11:3), and is sustained by that same Word. God willed it. His power brought into being that which He willed.

But now the inspired writer brings to our attention a greater miracle than the creation and the sustaining of the universe, when he says, “When he had by himself purged our sins.” The words “by himself” are the translation of a rejected reading, and so will not be considered in our study, nor included in our translation. The Greek here is “having made purification of sins.” The words “having made” are the translation of a participle in the middle voice, which voice represents the person as either acting upon himself or in his own interest. Thus, when the Son of God made purification of sins, He did so by Himself, acting upon Himself, offering Himself as the Sacrifice for sin (Heb. 10:12), and for Himself, acting in His own interest. The voice of the participle has given us more truth than the rejected reading  (di eJautou) (by himself). The word “purged” of the a.v., and our word “purification” which we have used, are the translation of katharismos (kaqarismo"). Alford7 is careful to note the fact that the Greek text does not read “purification” apo (ajpo) (from) sins, but “purification” of (genitive case) sins. He says, “Sin was the great uncleanness, of which He has effected the purgation: the disease of which He has wrought the cure.” He makes the point that katharismos (kaqarismo") “must be understood by the subsequent argument of the Epistle: for that which the Writer had it in his mind to expand in the course of his treatise, he must be supposed to have meant when he used without explanation a concise term like this. And that we know to have been, the purifications and sacrifices of the Levitical law, by which man’s natural uncleanness in God’s sight was typically removed, and access to God laid open to him.” The writer has put this most succinctly in 9:26 where he says; “He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.” One could translate, “He has appeared, resulting in the putting away of sin by His sacrifice.” The words “putting away” are the translation of thetos (qeto") meaning “placed,” or “set,” “having position,” and Alpha privative prefixed which negates the word, making it mean, “not placed or set,” “not having position.” The verb means “to do away with something laid down, prescribed, established.” Sin had established itself in the human race through the disobedience of Adam, a sinful nature and acts of sin. When God saves a sinner, He breaks the power of the indwelling sinful nature at the moment that sinner places his faith in the Lord Jesus (Romans 6). When that believer dies, he loses the sinful nature, and in his glorified body has only the divine nature. God also removes the guilt and penalty of sin and gives the believer a righteous standing. The Son of God made all this possible when He died on the Cross. His blood delivers the believer from the power of sin in this present life, and from the presence of sin in the future life. His blood removes the guilt and penalty of sin and cleanses the believer from its defilement. That is what is included in the act of our Lord making purification for sins. The participle is in the aorist tense, which indicates that His act of making purification for sins was a single definite act, and a once-for-all act. The writer had just been speaking of the fact that the Son was the creator, sustainer, and motivater of all things from their beginning all down the ages of time. It was and is His responsibility to see to it that they in the plan of God are brought to a final ultimate and proper conclusion. Sin interposed itself in the smooth-working perfect universe. In carrying on all things to the desired end, the Son had to confront and deal with sin which had thrown the world into disorder and out of God’s order. When His work on the Cross was finished, the Son “sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” The seated posture indicates that His work was finished, in contrast to the Levitical priests who never sat down so far as their tabernacle work was concerned,

and for the reason that their work was never finished, and this because the blood of bulls and goats could not pay for sin. The verb “sat down” denotes a solemn, formal act. It speaks of the assumption of a position of dignity and authority. The reference is to the Son’s glorification and ascension. In His exalted state He is still bearing on all things toward their destined consummation, and is still dealing with sin as the Great High Priest, saving believing sinners in His precious blood and cleansing saints from the defilement of sin that at times enters their lives. With this, the inspired writer closes his argument to the effect that the Son of God is superior to the Old Testament prophets. He has enumerated seven superiorities. First, the Son is superior to the Old Testament prophets in that, whereas they were the mouthpieces of God, He was God Himself speaking on earth. Second, the Son inherits all things, the prophets being part of that inheritance. Third, the Son created all things and is the One who operates and manages the universe and all its creatures all down the successive ages of time. Fourth, the Son is the effulgence, the out-raying of the glory of God, not merely in the sense that He is the outshining of that glory, but that He Himself is a divine center of the out-raying of God’s glory, co-eternal and co-existent with the Father, of the same substance as the Father and, while the Son by eternal generation from the Father, yet also very God of very God, possessing in Himself life and light. For instance, the sunshine resting upon the earth is of the same essence as the light still in the sun, and is the outshining of the light in the sun. But the Lord Jesus is more than that illustration includes. He is not merely the outshining of God’s glory, but the outshining of that glory which in itself becomes a center from which the glory of God out-rays itself. Fifth, the Son is the exact impression of the Person and the character of Deity, thus its exact expression. Sixth, the Son carries the weight of the universe, maintains its coherence, and carries on its development. Seventh, He has by the shedding of His own blood on the Cross, put away sin. Is He better than the prophets? Yes, infinitely so. Not one of these superiorities could be ascribed to the Old Testament prophets, or for that matter, to any ancient or modern so-called prophet of any religious system. In view of the Son’s superiorities over God’s prophets, what audacity it is for Modernism to place Socrates alongside of the Son of God. What sacrilege to say that He was only a human being. The Jesus of the Gospels is the Jesus of the Epistle to the Hebrews (2:9). Again, what a low-estimate first century Israel had of its Messiah, as shown by the fact that the writer needed to demonstrate that He was superior to its prophets. Translation. Who, being the out-raying (effulgence) of His glory and the exact reproduction of His essence, and sustaining, guiding, propelling all things by the word of His power, having made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high. 2. The angels (1:4–2:18) since He a. Has a better name, Son (1:4, 5). (1:4) The writer says that the Son was made better than the angels. The informal and abrupt introduction of angels, shows that the writer was addressing Jews, who were familiar with the important part the angels played in the Old Testament, particularly in the giving of the law. The word “made” is the translation of ginomai (ginomai), a word the meaning of which is in contrast to that of poieo (poieo) which means “to make.” The

latter means “to construct or fashion something out of existing materials.” The former is the word used of the universe coming into existence. It means “to become.” The Son became better than the angels, inferring that at one time He was lower than the angels. The writer does not deny that He was, and is, essentially and eternally better than the angels. He is speaking here of His glorification which was conditioned upon His fulfilment of the requirements of His human state, which He emphasizes. After He had passed through the experience described in Philippians 2:6–8, He sat down on the right hand of the divine Majesty as Messianic sovereign, and thus became and was proved to be that which in reality He always was, superior to the angels. The superiority here is not that of moral excellence, but of dignity and power. He became superior to the angels when He resumed His preincarnate dignity at His resurrection. The writer tells us in 2:7, 9, that for a little time, i.e., during His incarnation previous to His glorification, He was made lower than the angels. This Sonship is referred by the writer to the Old Testament, where the Messiah, then future, was spoken of as Son. The writer, in support of this fact of Sonship, adduces an abundance of evidence, citing no fewer than seven passages from the Old Testament. The Messianic Sonship rests upon the Eternal Sonship. But the latter is not in view here, rather the former. But, the question arises, Why does the inspired writer bring in a comparison between the Son and angels? The answer is as follows: The entire Old Testament dispensation is related to the New Testament dispensation as the angels are related to the Son. In the former dispensation, mankind and God are separated by sin. The angels stand as mediators between God and man. Here there was a chain of two links, Moses, and the angel of the Lord. In the former, we have a mere man raised above his fellows by being given a commission to lead Israel, and brought nearer to God. But he is a sinner like his brethren. In the latter, we have God revealing Himself in angelic form to Israel, but without becoming Man. There was no real union of the Godhead and Manhood. How different it is in the New Testament dispensation. God and Man become personally One in the Son incarnate. God no longer accommodates Himself to the capacities of man in an angelophony or theophony, but has revealed Himself in the Son become incarnate. The writer’s thesis throughout the letter is that the New Testament is better than the First Testament. If he can show that the One Mediator between God and man of the New Testament is superior to the mediators of the First, the angels, then he has shown that the New Testament takes the place of the First. And this he proceeds to do. He says. “He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.” The words “hath by inheritance obtained” are in the perfect tense in the Greek text, literally, “He inherited in times past with the present result that the inheritance is in His permanent possession.” The use of the perfect here shows that the writer is speaking of a past completed action, and of the present abiding results. The words “more excellent” are the translation of diaphoroteron (diaforoteron). The Greek comparative for “better” is kreitton (kreitton). The former word means literally “more different.” “Than they” is in the Greek text  (par aujtou"), literally, “alongside of them.” That is, the Son has a name more different for good beside, or in comparison to the angels. Translation. Having become as much superior to the angels as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.

(1:5) The writer now proceeds with his argument by asking a rhetorical question expressing a denial of the fact that the angels were ever given the name Son, and he follows that by bringing to the attention of his Jewish readers seven quotations from their Old Testament Scriptures. The first quotation is from Psalm 2:7. In the Greek text, the order of the words is, “Son of mine thou art.” The word “Son” is in the emphatic position. In the Old Testament “son” is applied to the angels collectively, but never individually (Job 1:6; Ps. 89:6). The word “son” is applied to the chosen nation (Ex. 4:22; Hos. 11:1). Psalm 2 is a Messianic psalm. The word “begotten” here does not refer either to the Son’s eternal generation from God the Father, or to His generation in time as the incarnate Son of Man, but as the context shows, to the act of God the Father establishing in an official sonship-relation, His Son at the resurrection. “The psalm was written to celebrate the accession of a king, Solomon or some other, but the writer, seeing in his mind’s eye the ideal King, clothes the new monarch in His robes.”8 The idea in the words, “I have begotten thee” are “I have begotten thee to kingly dignity.” The reference is not to entrance into life, but to entrance to an office. The Messianic reference is to the Son’s resurrection (Acts 13:33), and to the declaration of the Father with reference to the character of the Son as Son of God, this declaration being substantiated by the resurrection of the Son (Rom. 1:4). But the writer reminds his readers that such statements were never made of angels. The second quotation is from II Samuel 7:14. While it is conceded that a faint and primary reference to Solomon is found in verses 12–16, yet the clear and final reference is to the Son. Solomon’s kingdom was not established but divided, whereas the Son’s kingdom will be eternal. Solomon built a temple for God, but the Son will build the Millennial Temple. With regard to the words in verse 14, “If he commit iniquity,” Dr. James M. Gray in his Christian Workers’ Commentary says, “Bishop Horseley’s and Adam Clarke’s translation … is interesting and significant: ‘When iniquity is laid upon Him, I will chasten Him with the rod of men’—a parallel to Isaiah 53 concerning the suffering Messiah.” Other Hebrew scholars reject the above translation, and are in accord with that of the a.v., explaining the statement as generic in character, namely, that the act of committing sin was true of the Davidic line but not of the Messiah. The writer to the Hebrews applies the words “I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son,” directly to the Lord Jesus. This was never said of angels. They were sons of God by creation. The Messiah of the Book of Hebrews is Son of God by eternal generation, Son of God in His incarnation, and Son of God in an official relationship as Messiah consequent upon His resurrection. The Son is therefore better than angels. He has inherited a better name than they. Translation. For to which of the angels did He say at any time, Son of mine thou art, I this day have begotten thee? And again, I will be to Him for a Father, and He Himself shall be to Me for a Son? b. Is worshipped by angels (v. 6). (1:6) The third quotation is introduced by the words, “And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith.” It will be observed that the word “again” is used to indicate the addition of a new quotation to the preceding ones. But Vincent, Expositor’s, and Alford insist that palin (palin) (again) by its juxtaposition to the verb “bring in,” is to be understood as being used with that verb. The order of the words in the

Greek text is “Whenever and again He brings in.” When used with a verb in Hebrews, the word means “a second time” (5:12, 6:1, 2) The meaning therefore is, “When He a second time bringeth in the first-begotten into the world,” reference being to the second advent of Messiah. The verb is aorist subjunctive, culminative aorist. The event is viewed as occurring at an indefinite time in the future, but viewed as complete. It is, “Whenever He shall have brought.” The translation is much like that of the future perfect, except that the future perfect refers to a future act, but with no qualifications that are indefinite. The word “first-begotten” is the translation of prototokos (prototoko"), a term used by Paul in Colossians 1:15 and by the writer to the Hebrews here, of the Son of God. The term speaks of priority to all creation and sovereignty over all creation. Whereas the term “only-begotten” (monogenes (monogene")) describes the unique relationship of the Son to the Father in His divine nature, prototokos (prototoko") (first-begotten) describes the relation of the risen Messiah in His glorified humanity to man. The word “world” is here the translation of oikoumene (oijkoumene), “the inhabited earth.” This word was used at the time this epistle was written, to refer to the entire Roman empire. At the accession of Nero, the proclamation referred to him in the words, “and the expectation and hope of the world (oikoumene (oijkoumene)) has been declared Emperor, the good genius and source of all good things, Nero, has been declared Caesar.” 9 It will be into the midst of the Revived Roman Empire headed up by Antichrist, that God will bring the Messiah, the empire at that future time covering the entire earth. It is of that future time that God says concerning the Messiah, “And let all the angels of God worship him.” The quotation is from the LXX (Deut. 32:43) where Moses speaks of the victory of God over His enemies, and the avenging of His people. The writer probably also had Psalm 96:7 in mind. The return of the Messiah to this earth will be accompanied by hosts of worshipping angels (II Thess. 1:7, Rev. 19:11–16). The argument of the writer is that if the Son is to be worshipped by angels, surely He must be superior to them, which fact makes the New Testament He inaugurated better than the First Testament which they were instrumental in bringing in. Translation. And whenever He shall have brought again the first-begotten into the inhabited earth, He saith, And let all the angels of God worship Him. c. Is Creator and Master of angels (v.7). (1:7) The fourth quotation is from Psalm 104:4 (LXX). The word “spirits” is the translation of pneuma (pneuma), which means “wind, spirit, messenger.” Here the meaning is “winds.” The emphasis is upon the variableness of the angelic nature. They are what they are at any time by the decree of God, fitted by their character to any special service. The point of the writer is that the angels are not merely servants, but of such a nature that God makes them according to the needs of His service, and being such as they are, they are changeable, in marked contrast to the Son who is their ruler, and unchangeable. The word “servants” is the translation of leitourgos (leitourgo"), the word used of the sacred and religious ministry of the Old Testament priests. Since Messiah is the Creator and Master of angels, He is superior to them, which fact makes the New Testament better than the First which it displaces.

Translation. And with reference to the angels He saith, Who maketh His angels winds, and His servants a flame of fire. d. Has an eternal throne and is anointed with the Holy Spirit (vv. 8, 9). (1:8, 9) The fifth quotation is from Psalm 45:6, 7. The word “righteousness” in the a.v., (v. 8), is not the translation of dikaiosune (dikaiosune) but of euthutetos (eujquteto") which means more properly “rectitude, uprightness.” The word “righteousness” in verse 9 is the translation of dikaiosune (dikaiosune) which means “that which conforms to a standard or norm which is itself in keeping with what God is in His holy character.” “Anointed” is the translation of chrio (crio) which is always used in the New Testament of the anointing with the Holy Spirit, aleipho (ajleifo) being used uniformly of the anointing with oil. Here the oil of joy refers to the Holy Spirit who bestows joy, and thus the word chrio (crio) is used fittingly here. Kings were anointed in Israel with oil when they ascended the throne. Our Lord was anointed with the Holy Spirit for His three-fold office of prophet, priest, and king, at His baptism in the Jordan, which was at the time of His entrance into His ministry. The word “fellows” is the translation of metochos (metoco"), which word refers to one who is a co-participant with someone else in a common undertaking. Here the angels are viewed as co-participants with Messiah in His work of salvation and future sovereignty over the redeemed creation. The emphasis of the passage is upon the fact that Messiah’s future kingdom is an eternal one, and that He as the anointed King will rule in righteousness. Isaiah XI speaks of His millennial reign and of the fact that He will be the King anointed with the Spirit. As such, the angels will be associated with Him in that reign, but He will be their sovereign Lord, they His servants. All of which again means that Messiah is better than angels. Translation. And with reference to the Son; Thy throne, O God, is forever and forever. And the sceptre of equality is the sceptre of His kingdom. Thou didst love righteousness and didst hate lawlessness. On this account there has anointed thee, God, Thy God, with the oil of exultant joy above thy associates. e. Is unchangeable (vv. 10–12). (1:10) In the support of his argument to the effect that the Son is better than the angels, the writer quotes Psalm 102:25–27. The unchangeable and eternal power and majesty of the Son, spoken of in verses 11, 12, find their basis in the fact that He is the One who laid the foundation of the earth and fashioned the heavens. Translation. As for thee, in the beginning, O Lord, thou didst lay the foundation of the earth. And the works of thy hands are the heavens. (1:11) The word “they” refers back, not to the earth, but to the heavens. The Greek text makes this clear. The pronoun is intensive, “they themselves.” The word “remainest” is from diameno (diameno). The simple verb meno (meno) means “to remain.” The prefixed preposition dia (dia) is intensive in force, making the compound word mean “to remain permanently.” The verb is in the present. It is not “shalt remain.” “Permanency is the characteristic of God in the absolute and eternal” (Vincent). The words “shall wax

old,” are the translation of palaioo (palaioo) which means “to make ancient or old, to be worn out.” The idea here is not that the heavens will become old so far as lapse of time is concerned, but old in the sense of wearing out. The Greeks had a word for “old in point of lapsed time” namely, archaios (ajrcaio"). Translation. They themselves shall perish, but as for thee, thou dost remain permanently. And all these shall become old and worn out as a garment. (1:12) The word “vesture” is the translation of peribolaion (peribolaion), literally, “that which is thrown around.” The word speaks of a mantle, a wrapper, an article of clothing which is wrapped around one. “Shalt fold” should be “roll up,” the mistake being due to a scribal error. “Shall fail” is in the Greek text “shall fail” in the sense of “shall be ended, shall leave off,” the word leipo (leipo) “to leave” being used. The angels, being part of the Son’s creation, are as subject to change and decay as are the heavens. He, the changeless One, is therefore superior to them. Translation. And as a garment which one throws about one’s self shall they be rolled up; as a garment also shall they be changed. But as for thee, thou art the same, and thy years shall not leave off. f. Is seated at God’s right hand (vv. 13, 14). (1:13) The seventh quotation is from Psalm 110:1. These words were spoken to the Son, but never to an angel. The word “sit” is present tense imperative in the Greek text, which construction emphasizes durative action, literally, “be sitting,” a permanent place. “On my right hand” is literally “from my right hand.” The usual formula is “on my right hand.” The ablative case and the preposition ek (ejk) indicate a moving from the right and taking the seat. The meaning, Vincent says, is “be associated with Me in my royal dignity.” Translation. But to which of the angels did He say at any time, Be sitting at my right hand until I set your enemies down as the footstool of your feet. (1:14) Here the writer sums up the function of the angels as compared to that of the Son. He is the highest dignity, a co-ruler with God. They are His servants, appointed to minister to the heirs of redemption. Translation. Are not they all ministering servants sent on a commission for the sake of those who are about to inherit salvation? Note. In the midst of his argument, “the Son is better than the angels” (1:4–14, 2:5– 18), the writer issues an exhortation and a warning (2:1–4) to these Hebrews who had outwardly left the temple sacrifices, had made a profession of Messiah as High Priest, and who were in danger of renouncing that profession and of returning to the sacrifices. g. Has ushered in a Testament which displaces theirs (2:1–4). (1) Warning against letting New Testament truth slip away (v.1). (2:1) The exhortation is to give more earnest heed to the New Testament message,

and the warning, against letting that truth slip away. The nature of the sin of Adam was a careless, indifferent attitude towards the commands of God. The particular word which is translated “disobedience” in Romans 5:19 (parakoe (parakoe)) means literally “to hear alongside,” thus, “a failing to hear, a hearing amiss.” But this failure to hear is due to a carelessness in paying attention to what God had to say. Back of that carelessness is the desire to have our own will. Under pressure of persecution, these Jews were discontinuing their attendance upon the Christian assemblies (10:25), and giving less and less heed to the New Testament truth. The reason for this failure to attend earnestly upon the truth of the new dispensation was that these Hebrews were desirous of getting out from under the persecution to which they were being subjected from apostate Judaism. Entrenched and apostate ecclesiasticism was trying to take these Jews away from the visible Church and bring them back to the temple. Thus does sin lead us to take the easy road, tempting us to sell our birthright for a mess of pottage (12:16, 17). The words “let them slip” are the translation of pararuomen (pararuomen) which Vincent translates “should drift past them.” The verb itself means “to flow,” and the prefixed preposition, “alongside.” The word was used of the snow slipping off from the soldiers’ bodies, and of a ring slipping from the finger. Vincent quotes a rendering of Proverbs 4:21 as follows: “Let not my words flow past before thine eyes.” The words “give the more earnest heed” are literally “to give heed more abundantly.” “Give heed” is the translation of prosecho (proseco) which means literally “to hold to,” thus, in its use here, “to hold (the mind) to.” But these Hebrews are to give the more earnest heed “on account of this;” “because of this,” the Greek has it. Because of what? Because the Son is better than the prophets and the angels. Israel had given heed to the First Testament truth which was ministered to it by the prophets and the angels. Now, because the Son is superior to these, the Testament He brought in is better than the one they introduced. They should therefore hold their minds the more earnestly to it. Translation. On this account it is a necessity in the nature of the case for us to give heed more abundantly to the things which we have heard lest at any time we should drift past them. (2) If rejection of First Testament truth was punished (v. 2), how much more will rejection of New Testament truth be punished (v. 3), which truth was spoken by the Lord, confirmed by those who heard Him, and attested by miracles (vv. 2–4). (2:2) The Greek word “if” represents a fulfilled condition, not an hypothetical case. The idea is, “in view of the fact that.” The word spoken by angels is the First Testament (Acts 7:38, 53). The agency of angels shows the limits of the dispensation of law. The setting aside of the First Testament, means the abolition of man’s subordination to angels. Such subordination is inconsistent with man’s ultimate destiny to sovereignty over all creation. The word spoken by angels was steadfast, proved sure, proved inviolable, held good. “Transgression” is the translation of parabasis (parabasi"), “a stepping over the line,” “disobedience,” the rendering of parakoe (parakoe), “a disobedience which results from neglecting to hear, from letting things drift by.” The First Testament was steadfast, inviolable, in that every overstepping of the line, every neglecting to hear, was punished.

Translation. For in view of the fact that the word spoken by angels was steadfast, and every over-stepping of the line and neglecting to hear received a just recompense of reward; (2:3) “How” is from pos (po") which means “how is it possible?” The rhetorical question expresses a denial. There would be no escape. The word “we” in the Greek text is emphatic. The pronoun refers here to the first-century readers of this letter, its Jewish recipients. It is “we” to whom God spoke in One who in character is His Son, and who therefore have much more reason for giving heed. “Escape” is the translation of ekpheugo (ejkfeugo) which means literally “to flee out from.” The words “if we neglect” have their primary reference to the Jews of the period in which the writer lived, who had outwardly left the temple sacrifices, had made a profession of Messiah as High Priest, and who under stress of persecution from apostate Judaism, were neglecting attendance upon the means of grace (10:25), were allowing themselves to drift by New Testament truth, were leaning back towards the First Testament, and were in danger of returning to the temple sacrifices, an act that would constitute the sin known as apostasy, from which there would be no recovery. The writer is trying to keep them from committing that sin. The word “salvation” refers to salvation itself, not to the teaching concerning it. The word “which” in the Greek text is qualitative in nature. The idea is, “salvation which is of such a character” as to have been spoken by the Lord. The message of salvation given by the angels was typical in its method of presentation. It looked forward. It was not final in itself, since sin had not actually been dealt with. It was given in many parts and in many ways. But the message of salvation given by the Lord was in its character, final. He was not only the Spokesman but the One who brought into being and made available to believing sinners, the salvation which He announced. Our Lord announced the New Testament as taking the place of the First Testament, when He said, “This is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28). These Hebrews had been convinced of the trustworthiness of the First Testament. They were beginning to doubt the validity of the New Testament. The law had proved its validity by punishing transgressors. But the certainty of the new revelation was becoming doubtful to them. Therefore, the writer speaks of the New Testament as “so great salvation,” and shows its trustworthiness by adducing the following three features: first, it was originally proclaimed by the Lord; second, it was confirmed by those that heard Him; third, it was certified as from God by reason of the miracles that accompanied its announcement. The word “Lord,” kurios (kurio"), in the Greek, is the word used in the LXX to translate the august title of God in Israel, Jehovah. To the Jewish readers of this epistle, it meant just that. The First Testament was given by angels; the New Testament, by Jehovah personally. And, being of such a nature as would be expected of Jehovah, these Hebrews were certainly obligated to give more earnest heed to it than to one given by angels. The second proof of the validity of the New Testament which the writer brings to the attention of his readers, is that those who heard the Lord Himself and His presentation of the New Testament truth, and here the reference is presumably to official witnesses, the apostles, confirmed the truth of the New Testament to the writer of the letter who refers to himself by the pronoun “us,” the literary “we.”

Translation. How is it possible for us to escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which salvation is of such a character as to have been spoken at the first by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him. (2:4) But this confirmation not only had back of it the official sanction of those who heard the Lord, and their attested characters and veracity, but also the accompaniment of miracles. The attesting power of miracles was well known. The primary purpose of miracles in the first century was not to alleviate distress and suffering, but to prove that the one performing the miracles, spoke or wrote from God (John 3:2; Matt. 11:2–5). These miraculous manifestations were in the form of signs (semeion (semeion)), “a sign, mark or token miraculous in nature,” wonders (teras (tera")), “something so strange as to cause it to be watched, miraculous in nature,” divers miracles (dunamis (dunami")) “a supernatural act which has in it the inherent power of God,” thus, a miracle, and gifts (merismos (merismo")), “distributions or impartations” from the Holy Spirit, the latter construction being subjective genitive, in which the person in the genitive case performs the action in the noun of action, here the word merismos (merismo"), (distributions, impartations). For a catalogue of all these, one can go to the Gospels, the Book of Acts, and to First Corinthians. Translation. God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with variegated miracles, and with distributions from the Holy Spirit, according to His will. h.

Is to be ruler over the Messianic Kingdom (vv. 5–9) (1) Angels, being servants, cannot rule (v. 5). (2:5) The words “put in subjection” are the translation of hupotasso (uJpotasso), a military term used of arranging soldiers in order under the commanding general. The word speaks of an economy, a system of administration. The word “world” is the translation of oikoumene (oijkoumene), literally, “the inhabited earth,” here the Millennial Kingdom of the Messiah. This kingdom will not be administered by angels. An angel once was the regent of God on the first perfect earth, which angel with his associated angels administered the affairs of a pre-Adamic race. His throne was on earth. He was the anointed cherub, the guardian of the holiness of God. He struck at God’s throne, and forfeited the regency of this earth (Isaiah 14:12–14; Ezekiel 28:1–19). That angel was Lucifer. He is now Satan. The earth over which he had ruled, was rendered a desolation and a waste, and he, with his angelic cohorts, were banished. After the restoration of the earth, God placed man upon it, but man handed the sceptre over to Satan, who now is the god of the world-system and whose throne is again on earth (Rev. 2:13). But the Lord Jesus, through the blood of His Cross, has regained for man the dominion over this earth, and will in the Millennial Kingdom dethrone Satan, ruling as King of kings and Lord of lords. The saved of the human race will be associated with Him in this reign. Thus, the angels will not administer the Millennial earth, but man in the Person of the Son of Man and those of the human race saved by His precious blood. Translation. For He has not given the administration of the inhabited

earth to come concerning which we are speaking, to the angels. (2) Adam, placed over the earth, lost his dominion through sin (vv. 6–8). (2:6) The writer now quotes from Psalm 8. The words “one in a certain place” do not mean that the writer is ignorant of the identity of the writer of the psalm, but assume that the readers know who the author was. The word “testified” in the Greek text implies a solemn, earnest testimony. The question as to whether the Messiah or man is spoken of in verses 6–8, is settled easily and finally by the Greek word translated “visit.” The Psalmist is exclaiming as to the insignificance of man in the question, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? That is clear. But to whom do the words “son of man” refer, to the Messiah who is called the Son of man, or to mankind? The Greek word “visit” is episkeptomai (ejpiskeptomai). The word means “to look upon in order to help or to benefit, to look after, to have a care for.” This clearly indicates that the son of man spoken of here is the human race. God looks upon the human race in order to help or to benefit it. Thus, the picture in verses 6–8 is that of the human race in Adam. Translation. But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man that thou art mindful of him, or the son of man that thou dost look upon him in order to come to his aid? (2:7) The words “What is man?” do not as the Hebrew text implies, mean, “how great is man?” but “what kind of” that is, “how small or insignificant is man?” The words “son of man,” are in the Hebrew text, “son of Adam.” The reference is to the earthly nature of man as formed out of the dust. The distinctive word for “man” here in the Greek text is not aner (ajner) (a male individual) but anthropos (ajnqropo") (the generic term, mankind). The word “little” is applied by some interpreters to the meaning and connection which the a.v., gives it, and by others, to the idea of time. The idea of time suits the whole line of thought better, would appear to a Greek reader as the more natural interpretation, and is certainly clearly seen in verse 9, where the Messiah is for a little time, i.e., during His incarnation previous to His resurrection, made lower than the angels, to be raised in resurrection higher than the angels in His humanity glorified. Adam was therefore made for a little time lower than the angels. In his position as the federal head of the race, in his unfallen state, God crowned him with glory and honor. This is a picture of Adam in the paradise of Eden, before he sinned. The distinctive word for “crowned” here is stephanoo (stefanoo). The diadema (diadema) is the royal crown, the stephanos (stefano"), the victor’s crown, and the crown given to a person because of his exalted rank or station. The context here indicates that it is used here in the latter sense. The position of Adam as the federal head of the human race, his control of the animal kingdom through love, all spoke of his exalted position. And he was given honor and glory in view of it. The words, “and didst set him over the works of thy hands,” are, according to Nestle, a rejected reading. Translation. Thou madest him for a little time lower than the angels; thou didst crown him with glory and honor.

(2:8) God put all things in subjection to Adam. He was the head of the human race, the lord of the earth. Even the animal kingdom was in subjection to him. But now comes a sad note. The words, “But now we see not yet all things put under him,” point to the fact that Adam through his fall into sin, lost the dominion he had before enjoyed. He was no longer master of himself. He had become a fallen creature, with a totally depraved nature. He was a slave to sin. The animal kingdom was subservient to him not now through affection but fear. The ground, instead of yielding only good things, now produced also thorns, weeds, and other harmful things. Extremes of heat and cold, poisonous reptiles, earthquakes, typhoons, hurricanes, all conspired to make his life a constant battle to survive. He had lost the dominion over all these things. Translation. All things thou didst put in subjection under his feet. For in that He put all in subjection under Him, He left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. (3) Our Lord has regained this dominion for man, who will be associated with Him in His rule (v. 9). (2:9) But now, in the midst of this dark picture of man’s lost dominion, the writer calls our attention to a bright beam of light that pierces the surrounding gloom. It is Jesus. When the reader of the English translation comes to this name here, at once there flashes into his mind the Jesus of the Gospels, the Jesus of Paul, the Saviour of lost sinners. And that is all good, so far as it goes. But to the Jewish reader of the Greek text of this letter, the reaction would be somewhat different. He would say to himself that the name Jesus in the Greek text is just the transliteration of the Hebrew name Jehoshua (Jehoshua), the name of the God of Israel that points to His distinctive nature as the One who saves. The idea of Deity would come to his mind. But as he read on, he would see incarnation in the words, “who was for a little time made lower than the angels.” And that would lead him to the Person who in the Gospels was spoken of as Jesus of Nazareth. Up to this point, the writer has not mentioned the name Jesus to his Jewish readers. He was well aware of the fact that they were in a frame of mind in which they would be hard to handle. The controversy centered around the claims of Jesus of Nazareth to the Messiahship. At one time some of these Jewish recipients of this letter had acknowledged Him as such, with an intellectual assent to the fact, but not a heart acceptance of His Person and Work. Now, they were drifting away from their former position. The writer up to this point had spoken of the Son as superior to the prophets and the angels. Now, he suddenly says that the Son is the Jehoshua of the Old Testament and the Jesus of Nazareth of the New. The vision of Jesus which the writer wishes to bring to his readers is that of the Son incarnate, glorified, crowned with glory and honor, seated at the right hand of God, a position of glory and honor which the saved of the human race will share with Him in His future Millennial glory and earth dominion. That is the glorious ray of light which the writer brings into the dark picture of man’s present estate. But the path to glory and honor for the Son was through incarnation and the death of the Cross. He was therefore made for a little time lower than the angels, in order that He might taste death for the human race. The penalty of sin was paid by Him. He through the blood of His Cross regained for man that which Adam through his fall lost for man. Man today may have salvation from sin, its penalty and power, by believing. The earth

itself, and the animal kingdom will some day be relieved of the curse that was put upon it because of Adam’s sin, and in the eternity to come, the saved of the human race will live on the earth remade into a paradise, with the Son as their Sovereign and Lord. Thus, the angels will not rule over the Millennial earth, nor will the earth in its eternal state consequent upon its renovation, be under the administration of angels. The saved of the human race in their glorious Head, the Last Adam, will rule over the earth paradise of God. Thus, the Messiah is better than the angels, since He will bear the rule and the sceptre, and they will be His servants. The words “for the suffering of death” are in the Greek text associated with the words, “crowned with glory and honor.” It was through our Lord’s sufferings and because of them that He was crowned with glory and honor. Our Lord’s exaltation and preeminence over the angels was obtained through His humiliation. God manifested His grace toward man in that He set forth His Son as the propitiation that would pay for sin. As in verse 7, the distinctive word for “crowned” is stephanoo (stefanoo), the act of placing a victor’s crown upon the head. Here the Last Adam gained the victory through the Blood of His Cross over the Serpent under whose attack the First Adam had gone down in defeat, dragging down with him, the entire human race of which he was the federal head. But the Last Adam, raising Himself out from under that awful thing called death, brings with Him from that sphere into which He vicariously descended, the saints of all ages, to some day share His glory and honor on His throne. Translation. But Jesus, made for a little time lower than the angels with the design that He by the grace of God should taste death for every man, we see crowned as victor with glory and honor because of the suffering of death. i.

Is the High Priest who has put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself (vv. 10–18). (1) He becomes the Saviour through His death on the Cross (v. 10). (2:10) Christ (Messiah) crucified (I Cor. 1:23), was a stumbling block to the Jew. This may have been one of the factors which was influencing these Hebrews in their drift away from their new profession of Messiah, back to the Levitical sacrifices. The inspired writer seeks to justify his bold assertion of verse 9. He senses the recoil which his readers would have from the thought of a suffering Messiah, and he now shows that Jesus’ suffering and death were according to the divine fitness of things. He says, “It became Him (namely, God the Father), for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.” The words “it became” are the translation of prepo (prepo), “to be becoming, seemly, fit.” It was not a logical necessity (dei (dei) “ought”) as in verse 1. It was not an obligation growing out of circumstances (opheilen (ojfeilen)) as in 2:17 (behooved). It was an inner fitness in God’s dealings. The fact that God the Father decreed that it must be through the blood of Christ’s Cross that the Captain of our salvation would become the Saviour of sinners, did not find its origin in a divine fiat, but in the very constitution of the nature of God. A holy God cannot look upon sin with any degree of allowance. A righteous God cannot but require that the demands of the violated law be satisfied. And a loving God cannot but provide the very payment of the penalty which His law demands.

Thus, the writer shows the sweet reasonableness of the Cross. And because only God can satisfy the demands of God, so only the Messiah who is one of the Persons of the Godhead, could in the great plan of salvation, provide the sacrifice. God the Father provides the salvation, God the Son procures it, and God the Holy Spirit applies it. The writer speaks of God as the God for whom (di hon (di oJn)) are all things. “For whom” is literally “on account of whom,” that is, for whose sake all things exist. God is the final reason for all things. “By whom” is literally “through whose agency” all things came into being. These two emphasize the idea which the writer has just given his readers, that of the sweet reasonableness and fitness of the fact that the Messiah was to be a suffering Messiah. The clause, “in bringing many sons unto glory,” speaks not only of believers as sons but includes also the Son of God Himself, for in verse 9 the writer declares that our Lord was crowned with glory and honor because of His sufferings. The words “to make perfect” are literally “to carry to the goal or consummation.” The word is teleioo (teleioo). This does not imply any moral imperfection in the Lord Jesus, but speaks of the consummation of the human experience of suffering the death of the Cross, through which He must pass if He is to become the Captain of our salvation. The word “captain” is the translation of archegos (ajrcego"), a word compounded of ago (ajgo) “to lead or go,” and arche (ajrce), “first,” thus, “one who goes first,” a “leader.” The Son precedes the saved on the road to heaven. He says, “I am the road (hodos (oJdo")),… No man cometh to the Father but by Me” (John 14:6). And the writer to the Hebrews speaks of “the freshly slain and living road” (10:20) into the presence of God, the road sprinkled with the blood of Jesus. Our blessed Lord is, therefore, not only the leader on the road to God, but the road itself, and that by reason of His precious blood. Translation. For it was fitting for Him, for whose sake all things exist, and through whose agency all things came into existence, when bringing many sons into glory, to make complete (as to His Saviour-hood) the fileleader of their salvation through sufferings. (2) This death made possible through His incarnation (vv. 11–16). (2:11) In order to bring many sons to glory, our Lord becomes to them a brother. The words “He that sanctifieth” refer to the Lord Jesus, the One who puts the believer on the path to glory, and then through the ministry of the Holy Spirit leads him on that road through the process of progressive sanctification and finally through glorification into the eternal conditions where all through the eternal ages he will grow more and more like the Lord Jesus and approach toward His likeness, but will not in the infinite years of eternity, ever become in an absolute sense just like Him, for finiteness can only approach toward infinity, never equal it. The words “they who are sanctified” refer, of course, to the saints. The words “of one” are literally, “out of one.” We have the ablative of source here. That is, the Lord Jesus and the saints, are all out of one source. Because the Lord Jesus and the saints are all out of one source, the writer says that He is not ashamed to call the saints His brethren. The Greek word for brother (adelphos (ajdelfo")) means “from the same womb.” That one source is God the Father. The Son in His deity proceeds by eternal generation from God the Father. In His humanity, He finds His source in God. The saints find the source of their sonship in God the Father. Thus, Jesus calls us His brethren. We, the Lord Jesus and the saints, have the same God for our Father. What condescension on

the part of our glorious Lord! Notwithstanding His superior and exalted dignity, He is not ashamed to call us His brethren. Translation. For both He who sanctifies, and those who are sanctified, are all out of one source, for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren. (2:12) The writer has just stated the fact that the Lord Jesus is not ashamed to call believers brethren. He quotes the words, “I will declare thy Name unto my brethren” (Ps. 22:22), uttered on the Cross by the Lord Himself. While the psalm has its background in David’s own experience, yet the final and full application of its truth, is to the Son of God. In verses 19–21, He prays to be raised out from among the dead. In verses 22–31, He gives thanks for answered prayer even before His prayer is actually answered. In view of the fact that God will raise Him from the dead, He will declare His Name to His brethren. The writer to the Hebrews quotes this statement, not for its contextual value, but only to give scriptural verification to his statement in verse 11. Translation. Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee. (2:13) The writer now quotes Isaiah 8:17, 18 LXX, to show the close unity which exists between the Lord Jesus and those whom He calls His brethren. The context of the quotation from Isaiah concerns the prophet’s invective against trusting in any help but God’s during the Syro-Israelitish war under Ahaz. Isaiah declares his own trust in God, and that his children have been appointed as living symbols of the divine will. The meanings of the names of the prophet’s children are “a remnant shall return,” and “hastespoil-hurry, prey.” These names will teach Israel that Assyria will spoil Damascus and Samaria, and that in the midst of a foreign invasion, God will still be with Judah. Both the prophet and the children are omens of the nation’s future. The children were babes at the time. Thus, the unity which existed between Isaiah and the children was that which exists between every father and his children. This unity the writer to the Hebrews uses as an illustration of the close unity between the Lord Jesus and believers, whom He calls brethren. Translation. And again, I will put my trust in Him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me. (2:14) The children here refer of course, to human beings, the subjects of the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. The word “partakers” is from koinoneo (koinoneo) which means “to have a share in common with someone else.” Thus, the individuals of the human race have in common with one another, flesh and blood. The order in the Greek text is “blood and flesh.” In the rabbinical writers, this was a technical phrase speaking of human nature in contrast with God. “Likewise” is the translation of paraplesios (paraplesio"), made up of para (para) “alongside” and plesios (plesio") “nearby.” The Lord Jesus, in His incarnation, took His place alongside and nearby the human race. The word could be better translated “in like manner.”

But now we come to a careful distinction. The words “took part of” are the translation of a different word from that translated “partakers.” It is metecho (meteco), made up of echo (ejco) “to hold” and meta (meta) “with,” thus, “to hold with.” Thus, our Lord took hold of human nature without its sin in the incarnation, and held it to Himself as an additional nature, thus associating Himself with the human race in its possession of flesh and blood. He took to Himself, something with which by nature He had nothing in common. Human beings possess human nature in common with one another. The Son of God united with Himself, something that was not natural to Him. God, as to His nature, is spirit, that is, incorporeal Being (John 4:24). Vincent says that Westcott states the matter correctly. He says that koinonia (koinonia) (partakers) marks the characteristic sharing of the common fleshly nature as it pertains to the human race at large, whereas metecho (meteco) (took part of) speaks of the unique fact of the incarnation as a voluntary acceptance of humanity. What light this throws upon the Bible’s attitude towards the dual nature of our Lord, Very God and true Man. The reason why the Lord Jesus became incarnate is that He might die. The reason why He needed to die is that through dying and raising Himself out from under death, He might break the power of death, and thus break the power of the one who has the power of death. The word “destroy” is the translation of katergazomai (katergazomai), which means “to bring to naught, to render inoperative.” Satan was not annihilated at the Cross. His power was broken. Spiritual death cannot hold the person who puts his faith in the Saviour. Physical death cannot keep his body in the grave. The resurrection of the Lord Jesus provides the believer with eternal life, and his body with glorification at the Rapture. Thus, Jesus conquered death, and brought to naught the Devil. Satan had the power of death, not in the sense that he had power over death, but that he had the sovereignty or dominion of death. He had a sovereignty of which death is the realm. The word for “power” in the Greek text here is kratos ( krato"), which means “power in the sense of dominion.” His dominion over the human race was in the form of death. That dominion is now broken. Translation. Therefore, since the children share in common with one another blood and flesh, He Himself also partook with them in the same, in order that through the aforementioned death He might bring to naught the one having the dominion of death, that is, the Devil. (2:15) The word “deliver” is the translation of apallasso (ajpallasso) which was used in the papyri, for instance, of a wife who may desire to be released from a marriage contract. So our Lord, through His death, made possible for the believing sinner release from the grip that death had on him. The word “subject” is the translation of enochoi (ejnocoi), which is compounded of en (ejn), “in,” and echo (ejco), “to hold.” That is, death held sinners in bondage. Translation. And effect the release of those who by reason of fear of death through the entire course of their lives were held in bondage. (2:16) The word “verily” is the translation of depou (depou) which has the ideas of “doubtless, as is well known.” The words “he took” are epilambanetai (ejpilambanetai) in the Greek text. The verb means “to take, lay hold of, take possession

of.” By a metaphor drawn from laying hold of another to rescue him from peril, the word came to mean “to lay hold of for the purpose of helping or succoring.” It is used in this latter sense here. The words in the Authorized Version “him the nature of,” are in italics indicating that they are not in the Greek text but are supplied by the translators in an effort to translate the passage. They are superfluous and give the reader the wrong interpretation of the passage, in view of the meaning of epilambano (ejpilambano) here. The idea here is that the Lord Jesus, in His work on Calvary’s Cross, did not provide for the salvation of fallen angels but for the salvation of fallen human beings. In perfect righteousness He passed by fallen angels, and in infinite mercy and condescension, stooped to provide salvation for man. He passed by the superior being to save an inferior being. He gets more glory in taking an inferior being and raising him to an exalted position in Christ Jesus, than in saving a superior being and raising him to those heights of blessedness. Translation. For, as is well known, He does not take hold of angels for the purpose of helping them, but of the seed of Abraham He takes hold, with a view to succoring them. (3) As High Priest for human beings, it was necessary that He become incarnate (vv. 17, 18). (2:17) The word “wherefore” speaks of the necessity of the incarnation in view of the fact that our Lord laid hold of the human race for the purpose of saving those in it who would accept salvation by faith. The words “it behooved” are in the Greek text opheilo (ojfeilo), which speaks of an obligation imposed upon one by reason of a certain consideration. Here the consideration is that of the position our Lord assumed as the One who would come to the aid of lost sinners. The obligation arising out of this position was that in order to provide a salvation for the human race, He had to become like the human race, namely, Man, for a priest must always partake of the nature of the one for whom he officiates. Thus, the incarnation was a necessity in the nature of the case. He became “like unto His brethren.” Vincent says in this connection: “Likeness is asserted without qualification. There was a complete and real likeness to humanity, a likeness which was closest just where the traces of the curse of sin were most apparent—in poverty, temptation, and violent and unmerited death.” The incarnation made possible, therefore, His becoming a merciful high priest. The Greek word “merciful” speaks of that feeling of sympathy with the misery of another that leads one to act in his behalf to relieve that misery. The idea is that of a compassionate heart leading one to acts of mercy, the purpose of which is to relieve the suffering and misery of the object of that compassion. The Lord Jesus, being such a compassionate high priest, is, therefore, a faithful one, the word “faithful” here having the idea of fidelity. The idea of compassion as an attribute of priests is not found in the Old Testament. One of the faults of the priests was their lack of sympathy with the people (Hos. 4:4–9). In later Jewish history and in New Testament times, the priests were unfeeling and cruel. This idea of a compassionate priest would be welcomed by the Jewish readers of this letter, who knew of the lack of sympathy exhibited by the Aaronic priesthood. The words “in things pertaining to God” are a technical phrase in Jewish liturgical language speaking of the functions of worship. The phrase is to be construed with the words “a faithful high priest,” not with “merciful.”

The particular service our Lord as High Priest rendered, is given us in the words “to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.” The verb here is hilaskomai (iJlaskomai). Its noun form, hilasterion (iJlasterion), is found in Romans 3:25, where it is translated “propitiation.” In its Biblical usage, the verb refers to the act of our Lord offering Himself on the Cross to satisfy the righteous demands of God’s justice so that His government might be maintained, and that mercy might be shown on the basis of justice satisfied. The words “reconciliation” and “propitiation” are to be understood in this light. Translation. For this reason it was an obligation in the nature of the case for Him in all things to be made like to His brethren, in order that He might become a compassionate and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, with a view to offering that sacrifice for the sins of the people that would perfectly meet the demands of God’s justice. (2:18) The emphasis in this verse is not upon the fact that the Lord Jesus suffered, but upon the fact that He was tempted. The order of the Greek words and their translation are as follows: “For in that which He suffered, having Himself been tempted.” The words “in that which He suffered” qualify the word “tempted.” The phrase explains in what the temptation consisted. The word “tempted” is the translation of peirazomai (peirazomai), which referred first to the action of putting someone to the test to see what good or evil is in the one tested, and second, because so many broke down under the test and committed sin, the word came to mean a “solicitation to do evil.” Both meanings are in view here. Our Lord in His incarnation as the Last Adam, was put to the test and was also solicited to do evil (Matt. 4:1–11). Here the inspired writer has in view the testings and solicitations to do evil that were associated with His expiatory sufferings on the Cross. For examples of these see Matthew 4:8, 9, where Satan tempts our Lord to go around the Cross and accept from his hands the world-dominion He is yet to have. See Matthew 16:21, 22, where Peter, the unconscious tool of Satan dismisses as absurd the idea that Jesus as Messiah should die at the hands of the leaders of Israel; and Matthew 26:36–46, where in Gethsemane His sinless human and at the same time divine shrinking back from the prospect of being made sin and of losing the fellowship of the Father caused Him to pray, “If it be possible, let this cup pass from Me.” But see how He met each temptation. In the case of Satan tempting Him to worship him, He who had obeyed as a habit of life the words of Deuteronomy 10:20, now had because of that fact, reserves of spiritual power in His sinless humanity with which to say NO to Satan. The believer has the same resource. When Peter tempted Him to put the Cross away, He recognized Satan’s hand in it all, and withstood the temptation, choosing the way that savored of God, not man. The believer has the same resource. With his spiritual vision sharpened by the Holy Spirit through the Word, he is able to detect Satan’s machinations and swing out away from them, keeping in the path of God’s leading. In the garden of Gethsemane, our Lord was victor when He said, “nevertheless, not my will but thine be done.” He chose death to self rather than disobedience to the Father’s wishes. That is what Paul is speaking of in Philippians 2:5–8, 10. The believer has the same resource. When he comes to the place where he is dead to self, where self has ceased its imperious demands for satisfaction, where nothing matters except the sweet will of God, then he finds an arsenal of ammunition which he can hurl as an effective broadside against temptation. In all temptations the Lord Jesus stands ready to give aid to the sorely tried

saint. He understands all about it, not only in His omniscience, but also experientially, for He has experienced all this Himself. The word “succor” is the translation of boetheo (boeqeo) which means “to run to the cry of those in danger and bring them aid.” How precious to know that when we are being tempted, the Lord Jesus always stands ready, eager to run to our cry and bring us aid. Translation. For in that which He suffered, having Himself been tempted, He is able to run to the cry of those who are being tempted and bring them aid. 3. Moses (3:1–6) because a. He is Creator of Israel, Moses only a member of that house (vv. 1–4). Note. After having shown that Messiah is better than the prophets (1:1–3), and better than angels (1:4–2:18), the writer demonstrates that Messiah is better than Moses. (3:1) By the use of the word “wherefore,” the writer draws a conclusion from the preceding argument. Having shown that Messiah is better than the prophets and the angels, he asks his readers to consider Him in relation to Moses. He calls them “holy brethren.” The word “holy” here does not have particular reference to a quality of life but to a position in salvation. The Greek word means “set apart for God.” Thus, the basic idea of the word is that of a set-apart, a separated position with reference to God. The term “holy brethren” here refers to the New Testament believers, the saints, set-apart ones. We must remember in this connection that this epistle is addressed to the professing Church, made up of real believers and also of those who gave only an intellectual assent to the Word. The writer, knowing in his heart that some were not saved, yet addresses them upon the basis of their profession, not upon that of his own estimation of their spiritual status. But the words “holy brethren” could be used of the Old Testament saints. Therefore, to distinguish these from the former, the writer adds the words “partakers of the heavenly calling.” “Partakers” is the translation of the same Greek word translated “fellows” in 1:9, and “partners” in Luke 5:7. It speaks of one who is associated with others in a common task or condition. Here the word designates the saints as those who are associated with one another in a heavenly calling. Paul speaks of the “calling from above,” that effectual call into salvation which comes from heaven and is to heaven (Phil. 3:14). This expression in Hebrews 3:1 speaks therefore of the Church. Israel has an earthly calling and an earthly destiny. The Church has a heavenly calling and a heavenly destiny. Thus does the writer mark the Jews to whom he was writing, as belonging to the Church and as distinct from Israel. The word “consider” is the translation of katanoeo (katanoeo) which means, “to consider attentively, to fix one’s eyes or mind upon.” The readers of this letter needed just that exhortation. They were allowing their attention to relax so far as Messiah and the New Testament were concerned, and their gaze was slowly turning back upon the First Testament sacrifices. The writer speaks of the Lord Jesus as the apostle of the profession which has to do with the New Testament. The word “apostle” is the English spelling of the Greek word apostolos (ajpostolo") which in turn comes from the verb apostello (ajpostello), the latter speaking of the act of sending someone off on a commission to do something, the person sent having been furnished with credentials. This verb is often used in the LXX of

God sending Moses on a commission for Him (Ex. 3:-7:), and is used of God sending the Lord Jesus on a commission (Luke 10:16; John 3:17, 5:36, 6:29). The two apostles are now compared. The word translated “profession” (homologia (oJmologia)), could better be translated “confession.” The Greek word means “to speak the same thing as another,” thus, “to agree with someone else.” The idea here is that of the believer agreeing with God as to the report He gives in the Bible of His Son. That is the believer’s confession. The word “profession” while including within itself the idea of bearing testimony to what one believes, does not have in it the idea of agreeing with someone else on something and then testifying to one’s faith in that thing. Translation. Wherefore, brethren, set apart ones for God, associates of the heavenly calling, consider attentively and thoughtfully, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Jesus.10 (3:2) The subject of the comparison of Messiah with Moses, was a most delicate one. Moses was the object of deepest veneration to these Jewish readers. The writer displays great tact by showing that both Messiah and Moses were faithful, before showing that while Moses was faithful as a servant, Messiah was faithful as the Son. The reader will notice that the present author uses the name Messiah where the name Christ appears in the translation. The name Christ is the English spelling of the Greek word Christos (Cristo"), and this Greek word is the translation of the Hebrew word which is by transliteration brought over into the English language, Messiah. The name Christ has no meaning except that which the English reader puts upon it. The Greek word means “the anointed,” as does the Hebrew word. But the name Messiah has a definite content of meaning, even though it is but the transliteration of the Hebrew word. It refers to the anointed King of Israel. In that sense it is used here. The present tense is used in the Greek text, not the past. It is “who is faithful.” It is a general designation of inherent character. Thus, Messiah is faithful as He always has been faithful. He is compared to Moses, who was the highest example of human fidelity known to the Jewish readers of this epistle. God Himself bears testimony to the fidelity of His servant Moses in the words, “My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house” (Num. 12:7). Translation. Who is faithful to the One who appointed Him, as also Moses was in his whole house. (3:3) But now, having prepared the ground, the writer comes out boldly with the assertion that Messiah was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, on the basis of and measured by the principle that the one who builds a house has more honor than the house. Messiah built the house of Israel. Moses is a member of that house. Since Messiah has more honor than the house of Israel, it follows that He is worthy of more honor than Moses, for Moses is a member of the house of Israel. Since Messiah is better than Moses, the Testament which He inaugurated must be better than the one Moses was instrumental in bringing in, and for the reason that a superior workman turns out a superior product. Translation. For this One was counted worthy of more glory than Moses

by so much as he who built a house has more honor than the house. (3:4) In verse 3, Messiah is seen as the Builder of the house of Israel. In this verse, the writer guards that fact against any possible misunderstanding on the part of his readers. Messiah is the Builder of the house of Israel, but not by any independent will or agency of His own. He as the Son built the house, but it was as one with God who built all things, that He built the house of Israel. The special foundership of Messiah does not exclude the general foundership of God. Translation. For every house is built and completely furnished by someone. But the one who built and completely furnished all things is God. b. He is Son of God over Israel, Moses a servant (vv. 5, 6). (3 :5) The word “and” introduces the further development of the thought of verses 2, 3, namely, the fidelity of the Messiah and Moses, and the corresponding honor. The writer says that Moses was faithful as a servant. The particular word he uses for “servant” deserves special study. It is therapon (qerapon). This word is used in the LXX of angels and prophets. There is an ethical character attached to the word. It speaks of service of an affectionate nature, and of a hearty character, performed with care and fidelity. Therapon (Qerapon) speaks of service that is of a nobler and a freer character than that of doulos (doulo") (bondslave). The verb is used of the physician’s care of the sick. Xenophon uses it of the gods taking care of men, and of men worshipping the gods. The word is used in the Book of Wisdom 10:16 of Moses in the phrase, “servant of the Lord.” The use of the word in our present passage is indicative of the close relationship which existed between Jehovah and Moses, and of the fact that his services were of an exceptionally high and important character, and valued by Him. The fidelity of Moses as a servant in the house of Israel is now said to be a “testimony of those things which were to be spoken after.” The meaning is that the fact that God bore testimony to the fidelity of Moses, was a guarantee of the trustworthiness of the report which Moses gave of the things God spoke to him. This interpretation seems to be the correct one in view of the context in Numbers 12:7, 8, where God says, “My servant Moses … is faithful in all my house. I will speak to him mouth to mouth, apparently, and not in dark speeches.” Translation. And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; (3:6) Whereas Moses was a servant (en (ejn)) in God’s house, Messiah was Son (epi (ejpi)) over that house. Both were faithful in their respective positions and capacities. But Messiah’s exalted position and more important work enhanced the quality of His fidelity over that of Moses, since both His position as Son and work as High Priest involved peculiar difficulties and temptations to which Moses never was subject. Thus, Messiah is better than Moses, and the Testament which He inaugurated is better and takes the place of the one Moses was instrumental in founding. The word “house” in verses 5, 6 must be defined by the context in which it is found.

The general application in all instances of its use in these verses is to the house of God. In the case of Moses, it was the house of God as related to Israel. In the case of Messiah, it was the house of God as related to the family of God in all ages. In the case of the “we” of verse 6, it is the house of God as related to the saints of this dispensation. Now, the writer, keeping in mind the fact that only part of his readers were really saved, and the other part were merely making a profession of salvation, and the latter under stress of persecution were in danger of relapsing back to apostate Judaism, proposes to these readers a test whereby they can tell whether they really belong to the house of God or not, that is, whether they are really saved or not. The “if” in the Greek text is the particle ean (eJan), introducing a future, unfulfilled, hypothetical condition. The writer is proposing a condition as yet unfulfilled. If these Jews, to whom he is writing, hold fast their confidence and the rejoicing of their professed hope in Messiah firm to the end of their lives, that fact shows that they belong to the house of God, in other words, are saved. If they do not do so, but instead, renounce that profession and return to the abrogated system of Levitical sacrifices, that shows that they never were saved. It is not the retention of salvation that is in question here, but the possession of salvation. The text does not say, “whose house will we continue to be,” but “whose house are we.” Frequently the verb of being is left out by the Greek writer, it being understood in the light of the context. But it is in the Greek text here, and in the present tense. Therefore, the subject of the security of the believer is not in view here. This verse must be understood in the light of its historical background and context The purpose of the writing of the Epistle to the Hebrews was to meet a certain condition in the first century. It was to reach Jews who had outwardly left the temple sacrifices, had identified themselves with the visible Christian Church, had made a profession of Messiah as High Priest, and who were at the time suffering persecution from apostate Judaism in an effort to force them to renounce their professed faith in Messiah and return to the First Testament sacrifices. Now—if under the pressure of this persecution they should hold fast their confidence and rejoicing of their hope in Messiah to the end of their lives, that would show that they were saved, and if not, that would indicate that they had never been saved. This verse therefore cannot be made to refer in a secondary application to the present day, since the conditions in the first century which the verse was written to meet, do not obtain today. The words “hold fast” are the translation of katecho (kateco). Among its meanings is one that vividly illustrates its use here. It is used in nautical circles in the meaning of “holding one’s course toward.” Luke uses it in Acts 27:40 where the storm-tossed ship held its course toward shore. The Authorized Version translates “made toward shore.” If these Hebrews would hold their course in life steadfastly along the lines of their present profession, that would show that they were saved. If they veered away from that course, that would show that they never had been saved, but that their profession of Messiah had been, not one of the heart but of the head. The word “confidence” is the translation of parresia (parresia), which is a compound of pan (pan) “all,” and hrema (rJema) “speech,” literally “all speech.” Its dominant idea is one of the boldness and confidence which are exhibited in freedom of speech, the unreserved, unfettered flow of language which is opposed to fear, ambiguity, and reserve. This confidence or boldness would characterize the speech and behavior of the Jew who was actually a possessor of salvation and not merely a professor of the same, but would soon disappear in the case of a mere professor should he turn away from

Messiah back to the sacrifices. The writer reminds his readers that the word of God is alive and powerful, and able to penetrate beneath any mere profession (4:12, 13). It is important to note that a spirit of rejoicing must accompany this spirit of confidence, stamping it as genuine, for a simulated confidence does not give rise to any real rejoicing. Translation. But Messiah as Son over His house; whose house are we if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm to the end. 4. Joshua (3:7–4:13), because He leads into a spiritual rest which is better than the temporal rest into which Joshua led Israel. a. Warning against hardening their hearts toward the Holy Spirit as the wilderness wanderers hardened their hearts against God (3:7–9). (3:7, 8) The word “wherefore” reaches back into the epistle to the three preceding arguments. In view of the fact that Messiah is better than the prophets, the angels, and Moses, the warning is, not to harden their hearts in renouncing their professed faith in Messiah and returning to the sacrifices. The construction is; Wherefore (v. 7), take heed (v. 12), the contents of verses 7–11 being the parenthetical background and scriptural enforcement of the warning of verse 12. The warning of the parenthetical passage is however addressed to the readers. The writer quotes from Psalm 95:7–11. The psalm was written by David, but the writer attributes it here to the Holy Ghost.11 The Holy Ghost spoke the words. David, the inspired penman, wrote them down. The Hebrew reads, “O that you would hear his voice.” The Greek has the conditional particle ean (eJan) introducing a conditional sentence, undetermined but with prospect of determination. The condition which must be met if these Hebrews are to hear the voice of God is, that they must not harden their hearts. In the psalm, the pronoun “he” refers back to God. In the context into which the writer of this epistle has put it, it refers back to Christ. This makes the Jehovah of the o.t., the Messiah of the n.t. It is He who is said to have spoken the words of the New Testament (2:3). These Jews were leaning back towards the First Testament. This was a heart-hardening process. They are warned against it. The writer recalls to them the provocation Israel caused God by its hardness of heart on account of the lack of water at Rephidim, when the people murmured against Moses (Ex. 17:1–7). The word “temptation” (peirasmos (peirasmo")) is preceded here by the definite article, pointing to a particular temptation. The Greek word means in its primary usage, “to put to the test.” Israel put God to the test by asking, “Is the Lord among us, or not?” Instead of trusting God in the midst of adverse circumstances, they demanded that He show His hand in order to demonstrate to them that He was in their midst to help them. The Greek verb translated “harden,” together with the negative, forbids the continuance of an action already going on. These Hebrews were already hardening their hearts. The writer exhorts them to stop doing so. Translation. Wherefore, as the Holy Spirit says; Today, if His voice ye will hear, do not go on hardening your hearts as in the provocation, in the day of the putting to the test in the wilderness. (3:9) The word “when” is the Authorized Version translation of hou (oJu) which really means “where.” The Greek words translated “tempted” and “proved,” are peirazomai

(peirazomai) and dokimazo (dokimazo) respectively. They are an interesting contrast. Peirazomai (Peirazomai) means “to put to the test to see what good or evil may be in a person.” Dokimazo (Dokimazo) means “to put to the test for the purpose of approving the person if he meets the test.” The Greek here is “put Me to the test to see what evil or good there is in Me when they put Me to the test for the purpose of approving Me should I meet the test.” What crass unbelief is shown in such a procedure. What an insult it flings into the face of an all-loving, all-powerful God. The first-century readers of this letter are warned not to take that attitude toward God. They were being bitterly persecuted because of their professed faith in Messiah and the New Testament. But they should trust God in the midst of it all and not harden their hearts against Him. Translation. When your fathers put Me to the test to see what good or evil there is in Me, when they put me to the test for the purpose of approving Me should I meet the test, and saw my works forty years. b. That generation did not enter Canaan rest (vv. 10, 11). (3:10) The word “grieved” is the translation of prosochthizo (prosocqizo) which means “to be wroth or displeased with.” It is the translation in the LXX of Hebrew verbs meaning “to loathe, be disgusted, to spue out, to exclude, reject, abhor, repudiate.” One can see that the Greek word is, therefore, a strong one, expressive of a strong displeasure, amounting to offence. God was offended at the actions of Israel. The word translated “do err,” planao (planao), here occurring in the passive voice, means “to be led astray, to be led aside from the right way.” Israel was led astray with respect to the heart, the seat of one’s personal character and of one’s moral and spiritual life. The Hebrew has it, “They are a people of wanderers in heart.” “Have known” is in the aorist tense in the Greek text, and is therefore a fact antecedent to the verb “err.” The distinctive word “to know” here is ginosko (ginosko) which speaks of knowledge gained by experience. Israel’s ignorance of the ways of Jehovah preceded and was the cause of their being led astray. Their ignorance was due to their neglect of Jehovah, for the knowledge they lacked was experiential knowledge which was to be acquired through experience with the ways and character of God. Translation. Because of this I was offended with this generation, and I said, Always are they being led astray in their hearts. And they themselves did not have an experiential knowledge of my paths. (3:11) The word “so” is the translation of hos (oJ") which has the idea of “according as, in conformity with which fact.” The word “sware” is the translation of omnuo (ojmnuo) which means “to take an oath, to threaten with an oath.” The words “They shall not enter into” in the Greek text include a conditional particle not brought over into the English. It is, “If they shall enter.” This is a common Hebraistic formula in oaths. In the case where God speaks, as here, it is “may I not be Jehovah if they shall enter.” The word for “rest” here is katapausin. Pauo (katapausin. Pauo), the verb, means “to cease or desist.” Thus, this kind of rest refers to a cessation of activity. The prefixed preposition in its local use means “down,” and speaks of permanency. Thus, the compound word refers to a permanent cessation of activity, a permanent rest. The rest spoken of here is defined in the context as Israel’s rest in Canaan. It is God’s rest, in that He would give it to His

people. It refers to the permanent and tranquil abode promised Israel in Canaan. It would be in contrast to the abject slavery of Israel in Egypt. This permanent and tranquil rest will be Israel’s in the Millennium under its covenanted King, the Lord Jesus. The wilderness wanderers failed of it because of unbelief. The new generation did enter the land but enjoyed no permanent rest because of sin, and was taken into captivity. The remnant that returned was governed by the successive Gentile empires, until during the Roman supremacy, it was scattered over the then known earth in the dispersion, a.d. 70. Translation. In conformity with which fact I took an oath in my wrath. They shall not enter into my rest. c.

The evidence of the fact that the recipient is saved, is that he retains his profession of faith in Messiah under the stress of persecution, not going back to the First Testament sacrifices (vv. 12–14). (3:12) Having reminded his readers of the defection of the wilderness generation, the writer now proceeds to warn them against committing a similar sin. He says “Take heed.” The word is blepete (blepete), a present imperative involving durative action. “Be seeing to it constantly, keep a watchful eye ever open,” is the idea. The words, “lest there be” are in a construction in the Greek which indicates that with the fear that the thing spoken of may occur, there is also a suspicion that it will occur. The words “in any certain individual of your number” show that the writer is appealing to each one individually. The Greek order of words is “ a heart evil with reference to unbelief.” The genitive of reference here defines the kind of evil spoken of. The particular word for evil here is not kakos (kako"), evil in the abstract, but poneros (ponero"), evil in active opposition to the good. When Satan is spoken of as the evil one, the word used is poneros (ponero"). The latter is a much stronger word than kakos (kako"). Paul uses it in Galatians 1:4. He speaks there of this present poneros (ponero") (pernicious) age. The positive activity of evil comes out far more in this word than in kakos (kako"). The kakos (kako") man may be content to perish in his own corruption, but the poneros (ponero") man is not content unless he is corrupting others as well, and dragging them down into the same destruction with himself. The English word which best translates this Greek word is “pernicious.” This evil heart of unbelief of which the writer speaks, and which he suspects is found in some of his readers, is a heart in which the evil of unbelief is present, not in a passive or latent state, but in an active, pernicious condition. The attitude of these Hebrews toward the New Testament was not one now of a passive neglect, but one of an active opposition, which attitude the writer was afraid would result in a deliberate and final rejection of the New Testament. We must be careful to discriminate here between a heart in which unbelief is present, and an unbelieving heart. The first may be true of a Christian, but not the second. The latter expression refers to a heart solely and entirely controlled by unbelief, in which there is no faith whatever. These Jews to whom this warning was issued, were not saved as our historical background and analysis have shown. They had merely given an intellectual assent to the Messiahship of Jesus of Nazareth and to the New Testament. The word “departing” deserves special attention. It is aphistemi (ajfistemi) which is made up of apo (ajpo) “off,” and histemi (iJstemi) “to stand,” the compound word meaning “to stand off from.” This was exactly the position of these Hebrews. They were standing aloof from the living God. The idea is not that of departing, but of standing off

from. Our word “apostasy” is derived from a form of this Greek word. Apostasy is defined as the act of someone who has previously subscribed to a certain belief, and who now renounces his former professed belief in favor of some other which is diametrically opposed to what he believed before. In other words, his new belief is not merely a new system of faith, but one which at every point negates his former belief. These Jews, should they renounce their professed faith in the New Testament system and go back to the First Testament sacrifices, would be embracing that which if brought in again would negate the New Testament. It was a question of the Levitical sacrifices or the crucified Messiah. In making a profession of Messiah as High Priest and then renouncing that professed faith to return to a dependence upon the sacrifices which God set aside at the Cross, the person would commit the sin called apostasy. Translation. Take heed constantly, brethren, lest there be in any one of you a heart perniciously evil with unbelief in standing aloof from the living God. (3:13) The word “exhort” is parakaleo (parakaleo), made up of kaleo (kaleo) “to call” and para (para) which is used here to intensify the meaning of the verb. Kaleo (Kaleo) is used in this verse in the words “while it is called to-day.” The word means “to call aloud, to utter in a loud voice.” The idea is “as long as the word ‘today’ is called out or proclaimed.” When the preposition para (para) is prefixed to this verb, the compound word means “to call urgently,” thus, “to exhort.” Parakaleo (Parakaleo) means, therefore, “to beg, entreat, beseech, exhort.” The recipients of this letter are urged by the writer to exhort one another not to harden their hearts by renouncing their professed faith in Messiah and going back to the Levitical sacrifices which had been set aside by God at the Cross, also to exhort one another to go on to a heart faith in Messiah. They were to beg, entreat, beseech one another not to go back to the sacrifices but on to faith in Messiah as High Priest. The word “Today” is preceded by the definite article in the Greek text. The article here points back to the former expression in verse 7. It is, “But exhort one another daily so long as the aforementioned Today is being called out.” It is the day of grace, while salvation through the Lord Jesus is still obtainable. The word “deceitfulness” is the translation of apate (ajpate) which refers to a trick, stratagem, or deceit rather than to the quality of deceitfulness. The recipients are warned against being hardened by a trick which their sin may play upon them. The definite article precedes the word “sin,” identifying that sin with the one spoken of in the context, namely, the sin of apostasy. The deceit here would be the illusion of their past faithfulness to the ritual of the Levitical economy. Translation. But be constantly exhorting one another daily, so long as the aforementioned Today is being announced, lest any of you be hardened through the strategem of this sin. (3:14) The word “partakers” is the translation of metochoi (metocoi) which is translated “fellows” in 1:9, its verb form, rendered “took part of” in 2:14. The verb means literally “to hold with,” the noun, “one who holds with another.” Here the word means “participators.” The word is used of those who are participators in something, or of those

who are participators with someone. The words “of Christ” are in the genitive case. Thayer in defining this word says, “sharing in, partaking of,” with the genitive of the thing. That would mean that those to whom the inspired author of the book is writing, were coparticipators of Messiah. They participated together in their possession of Him. In verse 6, the writer is speaking of the fact that true believers are Messiah’s house, that is, they are His possession. In this verse, he is referring to the fact that Messiah is the possession of believers. This is the uniform use of metochos (metoco") in this epistle where the genitive of the thing possessed is given. In 1:9 the word is used of participation with someone. But in 2:14, 3:1, 5:13, 6:4, 7:13, 12:8, it is used of participators in something. The phrase thus refers to the possession of salvation by the believer, a salvation which is in Christ. The words “are made” are the translation of gegonamen (gegonamen), the perfect of ginomai (ginomai), a word which means “to become.” The perfect tense in Greek speaks of an action that was completed in past time, having present results. The translation reads, therefore, “For we became partakers of Messiah with the present result that we are partakers of Him.” That is, if these first-century Jews would maintain their faith in Messiah to the end of their lives, that would show that they had become in the past partakers of Messiah, and that as a present result they were partakers of Him. Again as in verse 6, the question is not one of the retention of salvation based upon a persistence of faith, but of the possession of salvation as evidenced by a continuation of faith. The perfect tense reaches back into the past and then speaks of the present. It is not the future of these Jews that the writer is concerned about here, but he is concerned as to whether in times past and as a result at the time of the writing of the epistle they were partakers of salvation in Messiah. The word “confidence” is the translation of hupostaseos (uJpostaseo"). Its primary meaning is “that on which anything is based.” Hence it takes the sense of hope or confidence. It is the ground of hope they have in Messiah. This word is translated “title deed” in Hebrews 11:1 (“substance” a.v.). The word was used, in secular manuscripts, of the documents bearing on the ownership of a person’s property, deposited in the archives, and forming the evidence of ownership. It, therefore, was used of that which formed the basis or evidence of one’s assurance of the ownership of anything. Here, it refers to their faith in Messiah which is their ground of assurance that they are saved. If the faith of these Jews is a heart faith, they will persist in that faith to the end of their lives, despite the persecution which they are enduring. If that faith is a mere intellectual assent, it will not be able to stand up under this persecution, but will be repudiated by that person. The first person is saved, the second, unsaved. The phrase “the beginning of our confidence” refers to the incipient confidence they had which had not yet reached its perfection. The words “the end” could refer either to the end of their lives or to the consummation of the whole life of faith. Translation. For we have become participators of Messiah and as a present result are participators of Him, (and that is shown) if we hold the beginning of our assured expectation steadfast to the end. d.

The recipient will die in his sins if he fails to put his faith in Messiah as High Priest, just as the wilderness wanderers died a physical death because of unbelief (3:15–4:8).

(3:15) The inspired writer warns against hardening the heart in verse 13, and now in this verse exhorts against it. He uses the unbelieving generation in the wilderness as an example, which at the borders of Canaan refused to follow Caleb and Joshua into the Promised Land, but chose to take the advice of the others. In the last analysis it was lack of faith in God and His power to give them victory over the giants. This is the provocation spoken of. Translation. While it is being said, Today, if His voice ye will hear, stop hardening your hearts as in the provocation. (3:16) The word “some” is the translation of the indefinite pronoun in the Greek text. The interrogative pronoun is spelled the same as the indefinite, the only thing that distinguishes the two being the accent. The Nestle Greek text accents the word as the interrogative. The writer is saying, “For who, having heard, did provoke?” using a question to recall to the minds of his readers the identity of those who refused to enter Canaan. The interrogation is continued. “But, was it not all who came out of Egypt through the instrumentality of Moses?” The writer reminds his readers that it was the entire generation that committed the sin of apostasy. Translation. For who, having heard, did provoke? But was it not all who came out of Egypt through the instrumentality of Moses? (3:17) The word “carcases” is the translation of a Greek word which in its singular number means “a limb.” The idea of dismemberment underlies its use. The LXX uses it to translate a Hebrew word meaning “a corpse.” The writer is referring in this verse to Numbers 14:29. Paul speaks of the same thing in I Corinthians 10:5 where the literal translation of the Greek gives us the picture of this tragic event, “They were strewn down along in the wilderness.” Translation. But with whom was He grieved forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness? (3:18) The word translated “believed not” is apeitheo (ajpeiqeo) which means, “not to allow one’s self to be persuaded, not to comply with, to refuse or withhold belief, to be disobedient.” The word pisteuo (pisteuo) which is the usual word translated “believe” is not used here. The word used is more descriptive of the character of the generation that refused to enter Canaan. They were of that non-persuasible type that will not listen to reason, stiffnecked, obstinate. Translation. And to whom sware He that they should not enter into His rest but to those who were non-persuasible? (3:19) The word “unbelief” is the translation of apistia (ajpistia), a compound of the usual word for “faith” in the New Testament with Alpha privative prefixed to negate the word. Their disobedience led to their lack of faith. At the root of all unbelief is sin. Lack of faith in God’s Word is never purely an intellectual thing. At its basis is the love of sin.

Translation. So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. (4:1) Having reminded his readers that the generation which came out of Egypt did not enter into the rest of Canaan because of unbelief, the writer now proceeds to warn them of a possible failure on their part of entering into rest in Messiah. The words “being left” are the translation of a present participle. The idea is “there being left behind and still remaining.” The writer wishes to emphasize the fact that the promise of a spiritual rest in Messiah is still available to the first century Hebrews. He is fearful lest any of them should come short of this rest. The words “come short of” are the translation of a verb which could be rendered either “should seem to have fallen short, should be judged to have fallen short, or, should think that he has fallen short or come too late.” The historical background and the context are decisive for the last. These persecuted Jews had expected to find the fulfilment of all promise in Messiah, including freedom from stress and strain such as they were experiencing in the persecutions (10:32–34). The Old Testament Jews were taught to believe that tribulation was a mark of God’s displeasure with Israel. They did not understand that that which was a mark of God’s displeasure with His own in Old Testament times, was a mark of His blessing and a means of purging and refining the lives of saints in New Testament times. Thus, they found it hard to believe that rest was attainable in Messiah. Their professed faith was being sorely tried by the adverse circumstances in which they found themselves. Thus, they were in danger of renouncing their professed faith and of returning to the First Testament sacrifices under the stress of this persecution. The writer proceeds to show that this promise is still open. Translation. Let us therefore fear lest a promise being left behind and still remaining of entering into His rest, anyone of you should think that he has fallen short of it or has come too late. (4:2) To understand this verse we must identify the pronouns. “Us” refers to the firstcentury Jewish readers of this letter, “them” to the generation which came out of Egypt. The words “the gospel was preached” are the translation of a verb which means “to announce good news.” The character of the good news must be defined by the context. The good news which was announced to the first-century readers of this epistle was that of a spiritual rest in Messiah. The good news given to the generation which came out of Egypt was that of a temporal, physical rest in a land flowing with milk and honey, offered to a people who had been reduced to abject slavery for 400 years and who had lived on a diet of leeks, garlic, and onions during that time. But the writer says that this good news did not profit this generation, “not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.” The verb is sugkerannumi (sugkerannumi). It means “to mix together, commingle, to unite one thing to another.” Thayer says, “the word heard did not profit them, because it had not united itself by faith to them that heard, i.e., because the hearers had not by their faith let it find its way into their minds and make it their own.” Those who heard did not assimilate the good news by faith. They did not make the promise of rest in Canaan their own. The words “Unto us was the gospel preached” are a periphrastic perfect participial construction in the Greek text. This speaks not only of a complete work accomplished in the past, but also of the persistence of the finished results in the present. The announcing of the good news of Canaan to the

generation which came out of Egypt, and the proclamation of the good news of a spiritual rest in Messiah to the first-century generation was so thoroughly done that the memory of these messages was indelibly impressed on the minds of their respective hearers. There was therefore no excuse possible that the message had not been clearly and forcibly delivered in both instances. The participle is in the passive voice. The literal rendering is, “For we have in times past been completely evangelized with the present result that the message of good news is in our minds, even as they.” The word “evangelized” is the transliteration of the Greek word here. We could translate, “We have been completely good-newsed.” Translation. For to us (first-century Jews) was the good news (of rest in Messiah) thoroughly announced, with the present result that we have it indelibly impressed in our minds, as well as the good news (of rest in Canaan) thoroughly proclaimed to them (the generation which came out of Egypt), good news that was indelibly impressed on their minds. But the word of the report did not profit them, not having become united by faith to those who heard. (4:3) In this verse, the writer enforces his declaration of the previous verse to the effect that faith is the God-ordained way of appropriating that which God has for the individual. In the words, “We which have believed do enter into rest,” he says that the entering into rest is a fact which characterizes believers. And this is in accordance with the implication of the words of God, “As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest.” The meaning is, that we who have believed have entered into rest in accordance with God’s declaration to the effect that those who did not believe should not enter into rest. The point the writer makes is that faith is the condition of entering into rest. The words “although the works were finished from the foundation of the earth,” assume the reader’s acquaintance with the account of creation in Genesis. The providing of a rest is implied in the completion of God’s works. The unbelieving generation which came out of Egypt did not enter into Canaan rest, although God had provided that rest into which they might have entered. Translation. For we enter into this rest, we who believed, as He said, As I swore in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest, although the works from the foundation of the world were constituted. (4:4) What was implied in the previous words is now stated. The reference is to Genesis 2:2. Translation. For He spoke in a certain place concerning the seventh day thus, And God rested on the seventh day from all His works. (4:5) The words “in this place” refer back to the words “If they shall enter into my rest” in verse 3. They are cited again to emphasize the fact that the rest was not entered into by Israel.

Translation. And in this place again, if they shall enter into my rest. (4:6) The writer now proceeds to show that those under Moses have failed completely of the rest in Canaan through unbelief, that those under Joshua had entered into the temporal, physical, and material rest in Canaan, and that the rest under Joshua was not a complete and final one since God invited Israel into rest during David’s time. The words “it remaineth” are the translation of apoleipo (ajpoleipo). The idea is “remains over from past times.” The promise of rest had not been appropriated in the first instance, and in the second instance the character of the rest was not final, so that the promise of rest still holds good. The rest was not provided for nothing. God’s provision of a rest implies that some will enter into it. But the appropriation of that rest is still future. Some, therefore, must enter into it. The words “they to whom it was preached” are the translation of one word euaggelizomai (eujaggelizomai), an aorist passive participle. One could translate, “They who were the subjects of the announcement of the good news.” The word “unbelief” is the translation of apeitheia (ajpeiqeia), made up of peitho (peiqo) “to persuade” and Alpha privative which makes the compound word mean, “non-persuasible,” thus, “disobedient.” Translation. Since therefore it remains over (from past times) that certain must enter into it, and they who were first the subjects of the announcement of the glad tidings, did not enter because of disobedience. (4:7) The word “limiteth” is the translation of horizo (oJrizo) which means “to mark out the boundaries of,” thus, “to put limitations upon, and thus “to define.” The “again” is the writer’s, as in verse 5, calling attention to another added detail. God in Psalm 95, defines or designates a day in which the promise of rest is offered. The words “after so long a time” are not part of the quotation from the psalm, but refer to the fact that God, five hundred years after His offer of rest to the generation under Moses, makes another offer of rest. This offer is accompanied by the warning that the people should not harden their hearts. The words “as it is said” are from a verb in the perfect tense, “as it has before been said, and is still on record.” The words refer to the citations in 3:7, 8, 15. Translation. Again, a certain day He designates, Today, speaking by means of David after such a long time, just as it has been said before and is still on record, Today, if His voice ye will hear, stop hardening your hearts. (4:8) The Greek form of the Hebrew name Jehoshua is Iesous (ÆIesou"). This Greek word refers to the Lord Jesus in the New Testament except in two places where the context clearly indicates that it speaks of Joshua, Acts 7:45 and in this passage. The Greek name refers to either Joshua or Jesus. The argument of the writer is that if Joshua had given Israel a complete and final rest in Canaan, then God would not, five hundred years afterward, have spoken of a rest for Israel as He did in Psalm 95. The writer has now proved that Jesus the Messiah is better than Joshua since He provides a better rest than Joshua did. The rest into which Joshua led Israel was a temporal, physical, and material rest, whereas Jesus leads into an eternal and spiritual rest. Since Jesus is better than

Joshua, the New Testament is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament. Translation. For if Joshua had given them rest, then would He not have spoken of another day afterward. e.

Exhortation to enter into rest in Messiah, and warning against continued unbelief (vv. 9–13). (4:9) The writer uses here a different Greek word for “rest.” In his previous references to the idea of rest, he has used katapausis (katapausi"), meaning “a cessation from activity,” thus “a rest,” a general word for the idea of rest. Now, he uses sabbatismos (sabbatismo"), the word used of the Sabbath rest. The word points back to God’s original rest, and speaks of the ideal rest. It is a Sabbath rest because the believer reaches a definite stage of attainment and has satisfactorily accomplished a purpose, as God did when He finished the work of creation. It is not the believer’s rest into which he enters and in which he participates, but in God’s unique, personal rest in which the believer shares. Translation. Therefore there remains over a rest for the people of God. (4:10) The writer goes back to katapausis (katapausi") as the word for “rest” in this verse. The person who has entered into His (God’s) rest, has ceased from his works as God did from His own private, peculiar, personal works. The word “his” before “rest” is the general personal pronoun, referring here to God. The words “his own” are the translation of the same personal pronoun, and the translation should be “his.” The last mention of the pronoun “his” in the Greek text is the word idios (ijdio") which speaks of private ownership, of individuality, of uniqueness, and should be translated “His own.” Translation. For the one who has entered into His rest also himself has rested from his works, even as God rested from His own works. (4:11) The words “let us labor” are the translation of spoudazo (spoudazo) which means “to hasten, make haste, to exert one’s self, endeavor, give diligence.” It is used in the papyri in such senses as “do your best, take care, hurry on the doing of something.” The verb speaks of intensity of purpose followed by intensity of effort toward the realization of that purpose. These first-century Jews who were on the point of renouncing their professed faith in Messiah and of returning to the abrogated sacrifices of Judaism, are exhorted to give diligence, take care, exert themselves, hasten to enter the rest in Messiah. The readers are warned not to fall as did the generation under Moses. That generation died a physical death in the wilderness. Those to whom this warning was issued, would die in their sins and be lost forever. The example of the wilderness wanderers should deter them from committing the same sin of unbelief. Translation. Let us give diligence to enter into that rest, lest anyone fall in the same example of disobedience. (4:12) The writer now warns against any insincerity and lack of diligence in appropriating the rest offered. He says that the Word of God, here, the body of revealed truth, which offers rest to the believer, is able to penetrate beneath any insincerity and lack

of diligence on the part of these who profess faith in Messiah but who have never really exerted a heart faith in Him. He says that the Word of God is quick. The word “quick” is the translation of zon (zon), a present participle of the verb zao (zao) which means “to live, be alive.” The word “quick” is obsolete English. The translation here should be brought up to date. The Word of God is alive, actively alive, and as the tense indicates, constantly active. It is powerful. The word “powerful” is the translation of energes (ejnerge") from which we get our word “energy,” and which means “active, energizing.” The word “sharper” is the translation of tomoteros (tomotero") which comes from temno (temno) “to cut.” Vincent says in this connection, “The word of God has an incisive and penetrating quality. It lays bare self-delusions and moral sophistries.”12 “Piercing” is the translation of diikneomai (diikneomai) which means “to go through.” The words “The dividing asunder of soul and spirit,” do not mean, “the dividing asunder of soul from spirit.” Nor is it “the dividing asunder of joints from marrow.” The case in Greek is the genitive of description, defining the action in the verb in this case. It is a going through the soul, a going through the spirit. Joints and marrow are not in contact with one another, and cannot therefore be said to be divided asunder. The preposition prefixed to the verb is dia (dia) which means “through,” in the sense of “the sword pierced through the heart.” The dividing asunder here is not that of one thing from another, but of one thing in itself by the action of something separating its constituent elements from one another by piercing it. Vincent says, “The form of the expression is poetical, and signifies that the word penetrates to the inmost recesses of our spiritual being as a sword cuts through the joints and marrow of the body. The separation is not of one part from another, but operates in each department of the spiritual nature.” The word translated “discerner” further expands and defines the writer’s meaning here. It is kritikos (kritiko"), which comes from krino (krino) “to divide or separate,” thus “to judge,” the usual New Testament meaning being “to sift out and analyze evidence.” In the word kritikos (kritiko"), the ideas of discrimination and judgment are blended. Thus, the Word of God is able to penetrate into the furthermost recesses of a person’s spiritual being, sifting out and analyzing the thoughts and intents of the heart. The word “thoughts” is the translation of enthumesis (ejnqumesi"), which has the idea of pondering or thinking out. The word “reflections” is an accurate translation. “Intents” is the translation of ennoia (ejnnoia) which means a “conception.” This word is closely allied to enthumesis (ejnqumesi") in that both refer to the act of consideration or reflection. Translation. For actively alive is the Word of God and energetic, and sharper than any two-edged sword, going through even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a sifter and analyzer of the reflections and conceptions of the heart. (4 :13) The word “creature” is the translation of ktisis (ktisi"), namely, “a thing created.” The word “opened” is the translation of the Greek word trachelizo (tracelizo). The noun form is trachelos (tracelo"), “the neck or throat.” The verb means “to seize and twist the neck or throat.” It was used of combatants who handled their antagonists in that way. It meant also “to bend back the neck of the victim to be slain, to lay bare or expose by bending back.” Hence the verb came to mean “to lay bare,

to uncover, to expose.” The three possible metaphors in this case seem to be first, the athlete grasping his opponent by the throat; second, the bending back of the malefactor’s neck and the exposing of his face to the spectators; and third, the drawing back and the exposing of the neck of the sacrificial victim at the altar. The last one suits the previous figure of a sword better than the others. The metaphor of the victim’s throat bared to the sacrificial knife is a vivid illustration of the total exposure of the human heart to the eye of God whose inspired Word is as keen as a two-edged sword. The words “with whom we have to do” in the Greek text, have in them the idea of “with whom is our reckoning,” or “to whom we must give account.” The word “logos (logo")” is used, which was used in classical Greek in the phrase “to make account,” that is, “to put a value on a person or thing.” The idea therefore in the word is that of a reckoning. There is a day of reckoning coming, when these Hebrews will have to give account to God for the way in which they treated the New Testament truth. Translation. And there is not a thing created which is not manifest in His sight. But all things are naked and laid bare to His eyes, to whom we must give account. 5. Aaron (4:14–8:6) since He Ascended through the heavens into the actual Holy of Holies (4:14–16). (4:14) Having shown that Messiah is superior to the prophets, the angels, Moses, and Joshua, the writer now proceeds to prove on the basis of Old Testament Scripture that He is better than Aaron. Notice the ascending scale of importance. The prophets gave the Word to Israel, the Word was given to the prophets through the disposition of angels, Moses led Israel out of Egypt, and Joshua led the nation into Canaan. But all this would be of no avail if Israel did not have a high priest to mediate salvation. Aaron occupies the pinnacle of importance among the servants of God in Israel. The writer represents the Messiah as a great high priest, greater than Aaron, since He is passed into the heavens. But Aaron also passed into the heavens when the Lord Jesus took the Old Testament saints from Hades to heaven when He ascended. In what sense is Messiah better than Aaron, therefore, on that basis? The solution to the problem is found in the Greek preposition translated “into.” The Authorized Version translators have given us the result of the action referred to in the verb, not the description of the action. The preposition is dia (dia), which means “through.” Messiah “is passed through the heavens.” The participle is perfect in tense, speaking of a completed action in past time, having results existing in present time. Literally, “He has passed through the heavens with the present result that He is in heaven.” The word “through” is the clue that opens up the truth here which shows that Messiah is better than Aaron. The latter as high priest in Israel, passed through the court of the tabernacle, through the Holy Place, into the Holy of Holies, which were all figures or types of realities. Messiah as High Priest of the New Testament passed through the heaven of the clouds, the heaven of the stars, into the heaven of heavens, the centralized abode of Deity. Since Messiah passed through the realities of which the tabernacle was only a type, and Aaron passed through the things that were the types, Messiah is better than Aaron. But there is another way in which Messiah is seen to be better than Aaron. The events that took place when Messiah passed through the; heavens, show that He is infinitely better than Aaron. Aaron could never have performed such a feat. The reference here is to a.

our Lord’s Easter morning ascension from the resurrection tomb to heaven as High Priest having made atonement for sin at the Cross. In Israel, the atonement was not complete at the brazen altar. Not until the high priest had carried the atoning blood into the Holy of Holies, and had sprinkled it on the Mercy Seat, was the atonement complete. Likewise, our Lord’s atonement was not complete at the Cross. Not until He had entered heaven as the High Priest having made atonement for sin, was His atonement complete. He, glorified High Priest, in His body of flesh and bones but no blood, had to present Himself at the Mercy Seat in Glory in His bloodless body, the evidence that sin had been paid for. The writer says of Him, “By His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us” (9:12). But that is not all that is involved in His superiority to Aaron. Not only was Aaron unable to offer a sacrifice that would pay for sin, but he could not have passed through the heavens to complete the atonement, had he been able to offer one. And there was more than the gravitational pull on Aaron that would have kept him from passing through the heavens. There was the power of Satan and his demons that would have opposed his progress through the atmosphere of this earth, which is the region where Satan has his kingdom of demons and from where he operates in his attempt to isolate and insulate the human race so far as God and heaven are concerned. This power opposed the progress of the Messiah as He left the resurrection tomb and went through the heavens to present Himself as the High Priest who had made atonement for sin at the Cross. Our Lord met this opposition from Satan and his demons, the principalities and powers of Ephesians 6:12 and Colossians 2:15. He spoiled the principalities and the powers (the definite article is in the Greek). The word “spoiled” is the translation of apekduomai (ajpekduomai). The verb means “to wholly put off from one’s self,” the prefixed preposition apo (ajpo) implying separation from that which is put off, the compound word meaning “wholly to strip off from one’s self, that is, for one’s own advantage; to despoil, disarm.” What a picture of that Easter morning battle in the skies in which the demons of Satan were attempting to keep the Messiah from going from the Cross to the Mercy Seat in heaven to complete the atonement. As they tried to impede His progress, He stripped off and away from Himself the demons that sought to lay hands on Him and keep Him from going through their territory to heaven. The word “triumphing” is the translation of thriambeuo (qriambeuo) which among the Romans was used of a triumphal procession where a conquering general home from the wars would lead a procession in which were his captives. Our Lord, when stripping off and away from Himself the attacking demons, led them captive in a triumphal procession. Paul speaks of this same thing in Ephesians 4:7–11. The victorious Messiah led the captive demons captive. Because He was able to go through the abode of the demons in His ascension, He was able to give the gifted men of verse eleven to the Church. Thus was Messiah better than Aaron. He is passed through the heavens, a thing Aaron could not do. Now comes the exhortation based upon the foregoing facts; “Having therefore a high priest, a great one who is passed through the heavens, let us continue to hold fast our confession.” The recipients of this letter, who under the persecution of apostate Judaism, were sorely tempted to renounce their professed faith in Messiah as High Priest and to return to the abrogated sacrifices of the Jerusalem temple, are exhorted to retain that faith which they professed to have, in view of the greatness of their High Priest. But now the inspired writer confronts his Jewish readers with a, to a Jew, most puzzling conception. It is found in the phrase, “Jesus the Son of God.” It is the same thing

with which our Lord confronted the Pharisees when they asserted that Messiah would be the Son of David. He asked, “How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord?” (Matt. 22:43). That which was involved in our Lord’s question was the incarnation of the Jewish Jehovah in the Person of the Messiah. Here the word Iesous (ÆIesou"), the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew Jehoshua, would speak to the Jew of his God, the God of the Old Testament. But the name Iesous (ÆIesou") had by this time acquired another particular significance, designating a particular Person, Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah. Jehoshua, his (Israel’s) God was the Son of God, thus, God the Son. How could that be except there be more than one Person in the Godhead; and that Person become incarnate in human flesh as Jesus of Nazareth, Deity and humanity united in one Person, the Jewish Messiah. Those are the thoughts which would run through the Jewish reader’s mind as he came to this passage. Not only was He the High Priest, but He was Son of God, God the Son, Jesus of Nazareth, the One who was rejected and crucified by the nation Israel, its Messiah. The writer here brings to bear upon the heart and conscience of his Jewish readers, the acid test of their faith. Could the Jewish mind give adherence to such doctrine and the Jewish heart give entrance to this Messiah? The test would be an encouragement to those of his Jewish readers whose hearts were ripe for salvation, to go on to a real saving faith in the Lamb of God, and would be the means of turning back to the act of apostasy, those whose sin hardened hearts would have none of the salvation Messiah had provided. As it is the same sun that melts the wax which hardens the clay, so it is the same Word of God that leads some on to salvation, and turns others who will have none of it away into outer darkness. Translation. Having therefore a high priest, a great one, One who is passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us continue to hold fast our confession. (4:15) The writer, having spoken of the exalted and victorious High Priest, and of the fact that He is Very God of Very God, now hastens to assure his readers that, whatever they, because of these facts, have thought to the contrary, this high priest is quite approachable and of a sympathetic nature. He speaks of Him as not one who cannot be touched with the feelings of our infirmities. The word in the Greek is sunpatheo (sunpaqeo). The word patheo (paqeo) comes from pascho (pasco) which means “to suffer.” The prefixed preposition means “with.” The compound word means “to suffer with” another person, thus to sympathize with him to the extent of entering into his experience and feeling his heartache yourself. The use of the word here means more than a knowledge of human infirmity. It points to a knowledge that has in it a feeling for the other person by reason of a common experience with that person. Our Lord’s appreciation of our infirmities is an experiential one, based upon the fact that He was tempted like we are. The infirmities here are not sufferings but weaknesses, moral and physical, that predispose one to sin, the weaknesses which undermine our resistance to temptation and make it difficult for us to keep from sinning. He was tempted “like as we are.” On this last, Expositor’s has a valuable note: “The writer wishes to preclude the common fancy that there was some peculiarity in Jesus which made His temptation wholly different from ours, that He was a mailed champion exposed to toy arrows. On the contrary, He has felt in His own consciousness, the difficulty of being righteous in this world; has felt pressing upon

Himself the reasons and inducements that incline men to choose sin that they may escape suffering and death; in every part of His human constitution has known the pain and conflict with which alone temptation can be overcome; has been so tempted that had He sinned, He would have had a thousandfold better excuse than ever man had. Even though His divinity may have ensured His triumph, His temptation was true and could only be overcome by means that are open to all. The one difference between our temptations and those of Jesus is that His were without sin.” The words “without sin” mean that in our Lord’s case, temptation never resulted in sin. They could mean also that temptation never sprang, in our Lord’s case, from any sinful desire on His part. In other words, they could mean that He was apart from sin in that he had no sinful nature like us. But, in the light of the context, it seems that the first meaning is the one which the writer is desirous of imparting to his readers, since it is the likeness of our Lord to us which is the point of emphasis, not a dissimilarity. Translation. For we do not have a high priest who is not able to enter experientially into a fellow-feeling with our infirmities, but one who has been tempted in all points like as we are, without sin. (4:16) Now the writer exhorts these Hebrews who have only given an intellectual assent to the New Testament truth, to obtain salvation at the throne of grace. They had not yet obtained mercy. Mercy was offered on the basis of Messiah’s atonement. God waits for man to come by faith and appropriate it. “Let us come” is the translation of proserchomai (prosercomai), used commonly of the sinner’s approach to God through the First Testament sacrifices, and in this epistle, of his approach to God through the sacrifice of Messiah. Mercy was to be obtained for past sins. That is justification. Grace was to be procured for present and future spiritual needs. That is sanctification. The words “in time of need” in the Greek text have the idea of “seasonable help,” or “help in good time.” The idea is that these Jews should obtain salvation before it is too late, while there is still time to seek God’s rest. Translation. Let us come therefore with boldness to the throne of grace, in order that we may procure mercy and find grace for seasonable help. b. Was taken, not from among men, but from the Godhead (5:1). (5:1) Having indicated in 4:14 the identity of the New Testament High Priest, Jesus, the Son of God, having spoken of His fellow-feeling with our infirmities in verse 15, and having exhorted his readers to come to Him in faith to appropriate the salvation which He procured for them by His death on the Cross, the writer now proceeds to explain Him further as a high priest. The Hebrews had not been familiar with the idea of Messiah being High Priest. He had not come from the family of Aaron. His was a priesthood of another order, that of Melchisedec. The Messiah while on earth did not have access to the Jerusalem temple so far as officiating as a priest was concerned. He performed no priestly duties and thus contradicted the whole Jewish conception of the priesthood. The writer feels the need of explaining somewhat further about this new Priest to whom they were to go for salvation. He says that every (Levitical) priest, since he is taken from among men, is constituted a priest on behalf of men. The point is that in order for a priest to officiate on behalf of

men, he must be taken from among men. A priest must partake of the nature of the person for whom he officiates. His work is to minister to men in things that involve man’s relation to God. This he does by offering gifts and sacrifices. The word “offer” is the translation of prosphero (prosfero), which means “to carry toward or to.” It is used often in the LXX of the priest bringing the sacrifice to the altar. The word “gifts” refers to gifts in general, while the word “sacrifices” speaks of blood sacrifices. These are for the sins of the individual. If the priest is to do this efficiently, he must have a genuine compassion for the sinful. This the writer proceeds to bring out in the next verse. Messiah is seen here to be superior to Aaron in that He as High Priest is not taken from among men but from among the members of the Godhead. In I Peter 1:20 we see Him foreordained to be the Lamb slain for sacrifice, and in Hebrews 10:7 He responds to the summons. Translation. For every high priest, since he is taken from among men, on behalf of men is constituted as such with reference to the things which pertain to God, in order that He may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins. c. Is sinless (vv. 2–5). (5:2) Because the high priest is taken from among men, he is able to have compassion on his fellow-sinners, since he himself is a sinner. The Greek word translated “compassion” is not the one translated “touched with the feeling of” in 4:15, sunpatheo (sunpaqeo), which we translated “to have a fellow-feeling for.” The word here is metripatheo (metripaqeo). The reader will observe that the words are the same except for the prefixed additions. Sun (Sun) means “with” and makes the compound word mean “to suffer with” another person. Metri (Metri) has the same root as metron (metron) which means “measure.” The latter is used to designate an instrument for measuring something. Thus, the compound word means literally “to suffer according to a measured limit.” The word was used originally by the Greeks, of the rational regulation of the natural passions, as opposed to the Stoic word apatheia (ajpaqeia), which involved the crushing out of the passions. Metripatheo (Metripaqeo) means to be moderate or tender in judgment toward another’s errors. It speaks of a state of feeling toward the ignorant and the erring which is neither too severe nor too tolerant. The high priest must be careful lest he become irritated at sin and ignorance. He must also take care that he does not become weakly indulgent. The high priest must be able to be moderate and tender toward the ignorant. The word is defined by its historical background. In Numbers 15:22–31 we learn that even sins committed through ignorance of God’s commandments must be atoned for (see also Hebrews 9:7). This was required by the Levitical law as a means of educating the moral perception, also in order to show that sin and defilement might exist unsuspected, that God saw evil where men did not, and that His test of purity was stricter than theirs. The high priest is able to be moderate and tender in his judgment toward other’s sins, because he himself is compassed with infirmity. The Greek word translated “is compassed” presents a graphic picture here. The word is perikeimai (perikeimai) which means literally “to be lying around.” The high priest has infirmity, sinful tendencies, lying around him. That is, he is completely encircled by sin, since he has a sinful nature which if unrepressed, will control his entire being. The same word is used by the writer in 12:1, where he speaks of the encompassing cloud of witnesses. This is denied in the case of

Messiah, which fact makes Him better than Aaron. The word “infirmities” is astheneia (ajsqeneia), “moral weakness which makes men capable of sinning,” in other words, the totally depraved nature. Translation. Who is able to exercise moderate and tender judgment with respect to those who are ignorant (of certain sins in their lives) and with respect to those who are being led astray, since also he himself is completely encircled with (moral) weakness. (5:3) The word “ought” is opheilo (ojfeilo) which speaks of an obligation that is a necessity imposed either by law and duty, by reason, by the times, or by the nature of the matter under consideration. It is here a moral obligation. It is the moral obligation of the high priest to offer sacrifice for his own sins as well as for those of the people for whom he officiates, since he also is completely encircled with moral weakness (total depravity). Translation. And because of this, he is under a moral obligation, just as with reference to the people, thus also concerning his own sins, to offer (sacrifice). (5:4) But the high priest must be divinely called to his office. One who is compassed with infirmity would hesitate to offer sacrifice for sin unless called by God to do so. Translation. And not to himself does one take this honor, but being called by God (he takes it), even as also Aaron. (5:5) The writer is careful to let the reader see that it was no personal ambition on Messiah’s part that resulted in His becoming a high priest, but rather the fact that God called Him to that position, and that the call to priesthood was based upon the fact that the Messiah was God’s Son. Bruce says regarding this: “Christ’s priestly vocation ceases to be an accident in history, and becomes an essential characteristic of His position as Son: sonship, Christhood, priestliness, inseparably interwoven.” We have an unfinished sentence which the writer expects the reader to complete. It appears in its entirety in the translation offered. Translation. So also the Messiah did not glorify Himself, becoming a high priest, but the One who said to Him, My Son thou art, I this day have begotten thee (this One glorified Him by constituting Him a high priest). d. Is an eternal High Priest (v. 6). (5:6) After informing his readers in verse 5 that Messiah’s priesthood was not by selfappointment but by God’s appointment, the writer goes on in this verse to speak of the different and superior order of priesthood into which He was called. He quotes from Psalm 110 where Messiah is prophetically pointed out as a priest after the order of Melchisedec, the distinguishing characteristic of this order of priesthood being that it is an eternal one. Translation. As He said also in another place, Thou art a priest forever

after the order of Melchisedec. e.

Becomes actual High Priest through His death and resurrection (vv. 7–10). (5:7) The writer now speaks of the training Messiah received for His work as priest. He also speaks of a prayer Messiah offered during His earthly life to the One who was able to save Him from death. The implication is clear that He prayed to be saved from death. There are two words in Greek which mean “from,” apo (ajpo) which means “from the edge of,” and ek (ejk) which means “out from within.” The second is used here. The Messiah prayed to be saved out from within death. Had the inspired writer used apo (ajpo), he would have reported our Lord as praying to be saved from dying a physical death. At no time in His life did He pray that prayer. The cup for Him in Gethsemane included two things, that He was to be made sin, and that the fellowship between Father and Son would be broken. Our Lord fully expected to be raised out from among the dead. Hence there was no need of such a petition. Furthermore, if He had prayed for escape from physical death, His prayer was not answered. And the writer to the Hebrews says that this prayer spoken of in 5:7 was answered, which shows that escape from physical death was not in the writer’s mind. The prayer here was a petition to be saved out from under death. It was a prayer for resurrection, uttered on the Cross. It is believed, and with good reason, that our Lord uttered the entire twenty-second Psalm while hanging on the Cross. It is His own description of what took place there. Verses 1–13 speak of His heart sufferings; those due to His abandonment by God in verses 1–6, those due to the fact that mankind spurned Him in verses 7–13. His physical sufferings are described in verses 14–18. His prayer for resurrection is recorded in verses 19–21, and His thanksgiving for answered prayer in verses 22–31. The word “prayers” is the translation of deesis (deesi") which speaks of special, definite requests. The word comes from deo (deo) which means “I want, I need.” Thus, requests of this nature emphasize the fact that the suppliant is in need of the thing asked for. The word “supplications” is the translation of hiketerios (iJketerio"). The word translated “offered” is prosphero (prosfero) which was used in the LXX of the priests bringing a sacrifice to the altars of God. The Levitical priests offered up blood sacrifices. This Priest after the order of Melchisedec offered up Himself as a blood sacrifice, but before doing this, brought another offering to God, a heart torn with anguish and suffering, a soul in which the conflict of the ages was raging, a contest in which God the Son was facing the powers of darkness, waging a battle for the lost race, a battle in which He was victor over death, and thus over him who had the power of death, the devil. This prayer was accompanied with strong cryings and tears. Those at the foot of the Cross must have heard this prayer, the strong cryings of a dying Man, but they could not have seen the tears that coursed down His face, marred and disfigured by the blows of sinners, covered with blood from the crown of thorns, for the darkness covered the land and hid His sufferings from the ribald mob. He was heard in that He feared. The word for “fear” in the Greek text is not phobos (fobo"), the ordinary word for fear, but eulabeia (eujlabeia). The verb of the same root means “to act cautiously, to beware, to fear.” The picture in the word is that of a cautious taking hold of and a careful and respectful handling. Hence, it speaks of a pious, devout,

and circumspect character, who in his prayer, takes into account all things, not only his own desire, but the will of the Father. Translation. Who in the days of His flesh, offered up special, definite petitions for that which He needed, and supplications, doing this with strong cryings and tears to the One who was able to save Him out from within death, and was heard on account of His godly fear. (5:8) The Authorized Version translates, “Who (v. 7) though He were a Son, yet learned He obedience.” But there is no point in saying “though He were a Son, yet learned He obedience.” All believers are sons of God, and they learn obedience by the things which they suffer. There is no indefinite article in Greek comparable to the indefinite article in English. The absence of the definite article in Greek emphasizes quality or character. The translation should read, “Though He was Son by nature.” The deity of the Messiah is referred to here. The idea is, “Though He was the Son of God, God the Son, Very God of Very God, yet He learned obedience by the things He suffered.” The omniscient God knew what obedience was, but He never experienced it until He became incarnate in human flesh. Before His incarnation, He owed obedience to no one. There was no one greater than He to whom He could have rendered obedience. But now in incarnation, God the Son became obedient to God the Father. He learned experientially what obedience was. It was not that He had to learn to obey, for He said, “I do always those things that please Him” (John 8:29). Vincent says that “He required the special discipline of a severe human experience as a training for His office as a high priest who could be touched with the feeling of human infirmities. He did not need to be disciplined out of any inclination to disobedience; but as Alford puts it, ‘the special course of submission by which He became perfected as our high priest was gone through in time, and was a matter of acquirement and practice.’ This is no more strange than His growth in wisdom (Luke 2:52). Growth in experience was an essential part of His humanity.” Translation. Though He was Son by nature, yet He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. (5:9) The word “perfect” is the translation of teleios (teleio"). The fundamental idea in this word is the bringing of a person or thing to the goal fixed by God. The word speaks here of Messiah having reached the end which was contemplated in His divinely appointed discipline for the priesthood. This consummation was reached in His substitutionary death on the Cross. The word “author” is the translation of aitios (aijtio") which means “that in which the cause of anything resides.” Messiah in His death on the Cross is the cause of our salvation. His death is that from which our salvation proceeds. The words “that obey Him” are descriptive of those who are saved. They do not present the grounds of their salvation. Translation. And having been brought to the place of completeness (as to His experience in suffering), He became to all those who obey him, the One who brought into being eternal salvation.

(5:10) The word “called” is the translation of prosagoreuo (prosagoreuo) which means “to address or accost by some name, to give a name to publicly, to salute, to style.” He was addressed or saluted by God as a high priest after the order of Melchisedec. God thus addressed Him because He had passed through and completed His earthly discipline. Translation. Saluted by God as a high priest after the order of Melchisedec. f.

Is the reality as High Priest, which does away with the types of the First Testament (5:11–6:12). Note. Before beginning a study of this difficult section, we must indicate its analytical structure. The section consists of a description of the spiritual status of the Jew whom the writer wishes to reach, of a warning not to go back to the abrogated sacrifices of the Levitical system, and of an exhortation to put a heart faith in the New Testament sacrifice, the Messiah. It is one of the passages found throughout the book containing a warning not to go back to the type but to go on to faith in the reality. This individual is described as hard to teach and dull of hearing (5:11), one who ought to be able to teach but cannot (5:12), one who is a babe (5:13), who was enlightened, who tasted of the heavenly gift and had been made a partaker of the Holy Ghost (6:4), one who had tasted the Word of God and the powers of the age to come (6:5), and who had been brought to repentance (6:6). He is exhorted to put off once for all any dependence upon the Levitical sacrifices and to go on to faith in the New Testament Sacrifice (6:1). The first part of this exhortation is strengthened by the warning that should he fall away, that is, renounce his professed faith in Messiah as the High Priest of the New Testament and return to the abrogated sacrifices of the First Testament, he would be crucifying the Son of God. This would be an act which would make it impossible to restore him again to that place of repentance to which he had been brought (6:6). The second part of the exhortation is repeated in the words, “that ye be not slothful but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises” (6:12), this second exhortation to faith being strengthened by the example of the saved among these Jews who showed by their lives that they really had exercised saving faith, the “beloved” of 6:9. We must be careful to note that this letter to the Hebrews is written to the professing church made up of saved and unsaved, but the concern of the writer is with reference to the unsaved. We are now ready for an exegetical study of the Greek text of the passage under discussion, based upon the analysis of the entire epistle, the only scientific way of going about our work. (1) The recipients hard to teach and dull as to spiritual perception (5:11). (5:11) The words “of whom” of 5:11 are from a preposition and a relative pronoun, which latter is in a case form that indicates either the masculine or neuter gender. The last named individual to which a masculine pronoun could point, is Melchisedec. But the writer is not concerned with him in what he has to say in 5:11–6:12. Therefore, the pronoun is neuter, referring to the teaching of the Melchisedecan priesthood of Jesus Christ, a thing which these Jewish readers who were still unsaved, needed to be convinced of if they were to leave the Aaronic priesthood and its system of Levitical sacrifices. The superiority of the New Testament sacrifice over the Levitical offerings is the very thing which the writer is seeking to prove. He shows that Melchisedec is better than Aaron. Therefore, the sacrifice of Christ is better than the Levitical sacrifices. The words “hard to

be uttered” are literally “hard of interpretation to be speaking.” It is difficult to make this teaching intelligible to these unsaved Hebrews. The difficulty is experienced by the writer. However, it is not found in any lack in the writer, but in the spiritual condition of the subjects of this warning and exhortation. They are dull of hearing. The word “dull” is from nothros (noqro"), meaning “slow, sluggish.” It is used of the numbed limbs of a sick lion, and the stupid hopes of the wolf that heard the nurse threaten to throw the child to the wolves. It is a combination of two Greek words, one meaning “no,” the other “to push,” hence, “no push,” thus “slow, sluggish.” These Hebrews were slow, sluggish, stupid, numbed, in their apprehension of the teaching of New Testament truth. This made it difficult to teach them. The difficulty lay therefore not in the writer but in them. But they had not always been in that condition, as is shown by the word translated “are.” The word means “to become.” It is in the perfect tense which tense speaks of a process completed in past time having present results. These Hebrews had at one time a spiritual apprehension of New Testament truth sufficiently clear that they saw that the New Testament Sacrifice displaced the First Testament offerings. The writer tells us that also in the words, “who were once enlightened” (6:4). The inability to apprehend was not a natural, inherent, and pardonable weakness, but a culpable incapacity which was the result of past neglect of and a gradual working away from New Testament truth (2:1–3). It was the hardening of the heart against the ministrations of the Holy Spirit (3:7, 8). It was a deterioration of spiritual apprehension on the part of these unsaved Hebrews who had been the recipients of the pre-salvation ministry of the Holy Spirit, who had been leading them on step by step toward the act of faith in the New Testament sacrifice, the Messiah. The use of the perfect tense here tells us that the process had gone on to the point of completion, with finished results. Their neglect had done its work, and they as a result were in a settled state of spiritual stupidity so far as their ability to apprehend New Testament truth was concerned. Translation. Concerning which (teaching, namely, that the Lord Jesus is a high priest after the order of Melchisedec) there is much that we can say; yet when it comes to the saying of it, one finds it difficult to explain, because you are become those who are in a settled state of sluggishness, yes, of stupidity in your apprehension of the same. (2) They had been instructed in New Testament truth (5:12). (5:12) “Time” is from chronos (crono"), speaking of time contemplated merely as the succession of moments, not from the word referring to a definite portion of time having limits. The word is in a construction which refers to extension. Thus because of the length of time in which these Hebrews had been under the instruction of teachers presenting New Testament truth, they ought to be teaching the same. The “ought” is one of moral obligation. The Greek word is used of a necessity imposed either by law or duty, or by the matter under consideration. “Again” is in an emphatic position in the Greek and is to be construed with “need,” not “teach.” They again have need that someone be teaching them, the word “teach” showing a continuous process. These Hebrews had grown so sluggish in their apprehension of New Testament truth that it would require many lessons to do anything with them. “Principles” is from stoicheion (stoiceion), which refers to rudimentary ideas. The

word “first” in the Greek text refers to the first in a series, the very beginning of things. “Oracles” is from the Greek word used also in Romans 3:2, and Acts 7:38, and refers to divine utterances. Thus, these Hebrews again needed someone to be teaching them, and the start should be made with the rudiments of the very beginning of the divine utterances in New Testament truth. “Meat” is from the Greek word meaning “food” in general. Today the word “meat” refers to the edible flesh of animals. When the Authorized Version was translated, it meant food in general. Our Lord said, “My food is to do the will of Him that sent Me and to finish His work” (John 4:34). “Are become” is perfect tense, speaking of a process finished in past time with present results. These Hebrews by their neglect of New Testament truth, and their gradual turning away from it because of the pressure of persecution which they were undergoing, had come to the place where they could only assimilate milk. The word “strong” is literally “solid.” Thus, only a liquid diet, milk, the very beginning of the rudimentary teachings of the New Testament could be administered, not solid food, the deeper teachings of the Word. Translation. In fact, when at this time you are under moral obligation to be teaching by reason of the extent of time (you have been under instruction), again you are in need of someone to be teaching you the rudimentary things of the very beginning in the oracles of God, and are become such as have need of milk, and not of solid food. (3) They were babes, that is, immature in their spiritual thinking (vv. 13, 14). (5:13, 14) The writer continues his explanation in the words, “For everyone that useth milk is unskillful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe.” “Useth” has the idea of “has for his share in ordinary feeding.” It refers to an exclusive diet of milk. Adults drink milk, but it is not their exclusive diet. “Unskillful” is from a Greek word that means “inexperienced.” The word “babe” is not the translation of a Greek word meaning an “infant,” such as is used in Luke 2:16, nor from a word translated “child” as in Luke 1:7, which latter word is related to the verb which means “to give birth to,” and therefore speaks of a child in its birth relationship to its parents; but from nepios (nepio"), which means “immature” as contrasted to “mature.” Paul used this word in contrast to a word which means “mature.” In I Corinthians 2:6 he says that he speaks wisdom among the perfect, that is, the spiritually mature. But the Corinthian saints were babes in Christ, immature Christians. He speaks of those who are perfect, that is, spiritually mature, in contrast to children, namely, immature Christians (Eph. 4:13, 14). Here the writer contrasts these Hebrews who are immature so far as their spiritual apprehension is concerned, with those of full age, namely spiritually mature. We must be careful to note that the Greek word “babe” in itself carries with it no implication of salvation. The phrase, “babe in Christ,” as used today, refers to a new convert. Paul’s use of it in I Corinthians 3:1 is different. There he refers to immature Christians. One can be forty years old in the Faith and still be immature spiritually. Furthermore, the word “babe” needed the qualifying phrase “in Christ” to indicate that these Corinthian “babes” were saved. Therefore, the word “babe” in our Hebrew passage cannot be made to show that the person referred to is a saved individual. It has no birth relationship idea about it. The analysis of the book and the context in which the word is found require that we understand it to refer to these unsaved Hebrews who, because of

their neglect of New Testament truth and their turning away from it, have again become immature in their spiritual apprehension of the same. These who are described as perfect or mature and thus able to partake of solid food (strong meat), are said, “by reason of use, to have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.” The word “use” is translated from a Greek word which refers to a habit of the body or mind. It speaks here of the habitual use of the perceptive faculties (senses) which are being vigorously exercised. This results in the ability to discriminate between good and evil, and in this context, good and evil teaching. But these Hebrews had abused their perceptive faculties in rejecting the new light given and turning again to the First Testament sacrifices. Light rejected, blinds. Translation. For everyone whose sole diet is milk is inexperienced in a message which is righteous in quality, for he is an (spiritually) immature person. But solid food belongs to those who are (spiritually) mature, to those who on account of long usage have their powers of perception exercised to the point where they are able to discriminate between both that which is good in character and that which is evil. (4) They are exhorted to put away “the beginning word of the Christ,” namely, the Levitical ritual, and be borne along to New Testament truth, and are warned against laying down again a foundation of First Testament doctrines (6:1–3). (6:1–3) We now come to a careful study of the two Greek words translated “leaving” and “let us go on.” A correct understanding of these is absolutely essential to the proper exegesis of the passage we are treating. The word translated “leaving” is a verb meaning “to put or place,” with a preposition prefixed which means “off” or “away” (aphiemi (ajfiemi)). The preposition implies separation and is used with a case in Greek which implies separation. The case speaks not only of the literal removal of one object from the vicinity of another, but also of the departure from antecedent relations such as derivation, cause, origin, and the like. It contemplates an alteration in state from the viewpoint of the original situation. It comprehends an original situation from which the idea expressed is in some way removed. Thus, the basic idea in the verb is that of an action which causes a separation. The various meanings of the word are as follows: “to send away, to bid go away or depart, to let go, to send from one’s self, to let alone, to let be, to disregard.” It is used of teachers, writers, and speakers when presenting a topic, in the sense of “to leave, not to discuss.” In manuscripts of the Koine (Koine) period, we have as reported in Moulton and Milligan’s Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, the sentence, “Let the pot drop,” and the clause, “Not to leave me to be neglected in a strange land;” also an appeal from a forsaken girl to her lover, “Oh, Lord, do not leave me.” In Matthew 13:36 and Mark 4:36, this word is used of the sending away of the multitudes. Expositor’s Greek Testament translates it here, “Let us abandon.” Alford explains it in the words, “Leaving as behind and done with in order to go on to another thing.” To use the word “leaving” in the sense that a superstructure of a house leaves the foundation and yet builds on it, as is done by some expositors, is a case of English eisegesis (reading into the text what is not there). But such a usage will not stand the scrutiny of the Greek exegesis of this word (taking out of the text what is there), nor is it in accord with the historical background and the analysis of the book.

The word is an aorist participle. Greek grammar tells us that the action of the aorist participle precedes the action of the leading verb in the sentence, which in this case is “let us go on.” The aorist tense speaks of a once for all action. We could translate, “Therefore, having abandoned once for all the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on to perfection.” The act of abandoning is the pre-requisite to that of going on. One cannot go on without first separating one’s self from that to which one is attached. The word translated “let us go on” is first person plural subjunctive, which is used for hortatory purposes in Greek. That is, we have an exhortation here. Another way of exhorting one in Greek is to use the imperative mode. There is a classification of the participle in Greek which is designated, “the participle used as an imperative.” Our word “abandoning” is an imperative participle. It gives a command. We come now to the word translated “let us go on.” The verb means “to carry or bear,” (phero (fero)). Moulton and Milligan report its use as “bring” and “carry,” in such sentences from early Greek manuscripts as: “Her tunic, the white one which you have, bring when you come, but the turquoise one do not bring,” and “Return from where you are before someone fetches you,” the words “bring” and “fetch” being the translations of this word. The word is in the passive voice, which means that the subject is passive or inactive itself and is being acted upon by some outside agent. Thus we could translate, “abandoning once for all … let us be carried along.” Now what does the writer exhort these Hebrews to abandon, and to what does he urge them to allow themselves to be borne along? Well, what does a mariner do when he is at a loss as to exactly where he is? He checks his position by his instruments. The aviator in a similar situation checks his course by the radio beam. An exegete in a similar situation will consult the historical background and analysis of the book. And that is exactly what we will do. We found that the writer proves twice over that the New Testament in Jesus’ Blood is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament in animal blood. After proving this, he shows that faith is the only way of appropriating the salvation which the High Priest procured for sinners at the Cross. In the light of this demonstration, he warns them against falling away. He exhorts them to go on to faith in the New Testament Sacrifice. Having left the temple sacrifices, and having identified themselves with the visible Church, from what could they fall away but from their profession of Messiah as High Priest, and to what could they fall back to but First Testament sacrifices? Thus the words, “the principles of the doctrine of Christ,” must refer to the First Testament sacrifices, for these Jews are exhorted to abandon them. Likewise, the word “perfection” must speak of the New Testament Sacrifice to which they are exhorted to allow themselves to be borne along. Our analysis has guided us to the correct interpretation. A study of the Greek text here will substantiate this. The words, “the principles of the doctrine of Christ,” are literally, “the word of the beginning of the Christ.” The phrase, “of the beginning,” does not modify “Christ” for He had no beginning. It therefore modifies “word.” The phrase, “the beginning word of the Christ,” refers to that teaching concerning Him which is first presented in the Bible. And what is that but the truth concerning His Person and work found in the symbolism of the Levitical sacrifices. The tabernacle, priesthood, and offerings all speak of Him in His Person and work. And this interpretation is in exact accord with the argument of the book. All dependence upon the Levitical sacrifices is to be set aside in order that the Hebrews can go on to “perfection,” as we have it here. That the word “perfection” speaks of the New Testament Sacrifice, the Lord

Jesus, and the Testament He inaugurated by His work on the Cross, is seen from the use of the Greek word here (teleios (teleio")), referring to that which is complete, and in 7:11 where the writer argues that if perfection (same Greek word) were under the Levitical priesthood, then there would be no further need of another priesthood. But since God has brought in a priestly line after the order of Melchisedec, it logically follows that completeness obtains under the New Testament which He brought in. He states in 7:19 that the law of Moses, namely the sacrificial law, made nothing perfect. That is, the Levitical offerings were not complete in that the blood of bulls and goats could not pay for sin. Neither was their completeness in what they could do for the offerer. But “this priest (the Lord Jesus), after He had offered one sacrifice for sins, sat down in perpetuity on the right hand of God” (10:12). His sacrifice was complete. Thus, the writer exhorts these Hebrews to abandon the type for the reality, that which is incomplete for that which is complete. Before leaving this point, the English reader should know that the expressions, “the first principles of the oracles of God” (5:12), and “the principles of the doctrine of Christ” (6:1), are quite different in the Greek. The word “principles” in these verses comes from two different Greek words. The expression in 5:12 refers to the elementary teachings in New Testament truth, and the one in 6:1, to the teaching of the First Testament where Messiah was first spoken of. If they would go back to the First Testament sacrifices, they would be laying again the foundation of the First Testament, and building upon it again. This foundation is given us in 6:1, 2. “Repentance from dead works” is First Testament teaching, was preached by John the Baptist, and is in contrast to New Testament teaching of repentance toward God (Acts 20:21). “Faith toward God” is First Testament teaching, and is contrasted to the New Testament teaching of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21). “The doctrine of baptisms” (same Greek word translated “washings” in 9:10) refers to the ceremonial ablutions or washings of Judaism, and is typical of the New Testament cleansing of the conscience from dead works to serve the living and true God by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost (Titus 3:5). The “laying on of hands” refers to the imposition of the offerer’s hand upon the sacrificial offerings of the Levitical system (Lev. 1:4), and is typical of the act of a sinner today laying his hand of faith upon the sacred head of the Lamb of God. “The resurrection of the dead,” an Old Testament doctrine, is more fully developed in the doctrine of the out-resurrection from among the dead (Phil. 3:11 Greek) which indicates that there are two resurrections, one of the saints, the other of the lost. “Eternal judgment” of the old dispensation is in contrast to the “no judgment for the believer in Christ” of the new. Thus, these Hebrews are exhorted not to return to First Testament teaching, but to go on to faith in the New Testament Sacrifice. But coupled with this exhortation is an ominous hint, as Vincent calls it. It is in the words, “And this will we do if God permit.” Here are his words: “An ominous hint is conveyed that the spiritual dullness of the readers may prevent the writer from developing his theme, and them from receiving his higher instruction. The issue is dependent on the power which God may impart to his teaching, but His efforts may be thwarted by the impossibility of repentance on their part. No such impossibility is imposed by God, but it may reside in a moral condition which precludes the efficient action of the agencies which work for repentance, so that God cannot permit the desired consequence to follow the word of teaching.” All of which goes to say that while there is such a thing as the sovereign grace of God, yet there is also such a thing as the free will of man. God never in

the case of salvation violates man’s free will. The choice must be made by these Hebrews between going back to the sacrifices or on to faith in Christ as High Priest. But their spiritual declension if persisted in, would result in their putting themselves beyond the reach of the Holy Spirit. This is implied in 3:7, 8 where they are warned that if they desire to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit, they should not harden their hearts, the implication being clear that they could harden their hearts to the extent that they would have no more desire to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit. This shows that the “impossibility” of 6:4, 6 resides in the condition of their hearts, not in the grace of God. Translation. Therefore, having put away once for all the beginning word of the Messiah, let us be carried along to that which is complete, not again laying down a foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, of the teaching of ablutions, and of imposition of hands, of a resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this will we do if only God permits. (5) They had been enlightened by the Holy Spirit as to New Testament truth, they had tasted of that which constitutes salvation, and had been made partakers of the Holy Spirit (v. 4). (6:4) And now the writer presents a most solemn warning to those among his readers who would persist in their leanings toward the First Testament and their abandonment of the New. It would be impossible to renew them again to repentance. The Greek word translated “impossible” cannot be diluted to mean “difficult.” The same word is used in Hebrews 6:18; 10:4, and 11:6, where it can only mean “impossible.” Likewise, the word “renew” must be taken in its full force. Expositor’s Greek Testament says that it means that those who have once experienced a renewal cannot again have a like experience. The person described cannot again be brought to a life-changing repentance. Repentance is a work of the Holy Spirit on the heart of the one who is approaching the act of faith in Christ. It is usually involved in that act, but can also exist separate and apart from it, as is seen in the present instance. These Hebrews had allowed the Holy Spirit to carry them along to the place of repentance. Now should they refuse the proffered faith by which they could lay hold of the High Priest as their Saviour, and return to the abrogated sacrifices of the First Testament, it would be impossible to bring them back to the act of repentance again. And as we have seen, the impossibility would inhere in their own spiritual condition, not in the grace of God. In connection with this solemn warning, the writer reminds these Hebrews of all that a loving God had done for them. They were once enlightened. The word translated “once” is literally “once for all,” and is used of that which is so done as to be of perpetual validity, and never needs repetition. That means that as these Hebrews listened to the message of the New Testament, the Holy Spirit enlightened their minds and hearts to clearly understand it. The work of the Spirit with reference to their understanding of New Testament truth had been so thorough that it needed never to be repeated for the purpose of making the truth clear to them. These Hebrews had understood these issues perfectly. The type was set aside for the reality, the First Testament for the New. They were enlightened as every sinner is enlightened who comes under the hearing of God’s Word. But as the unsaved in an evangelistic meeting today clearly understand the message of salvation but sometimes refuse the light and turn back into the darkness of sin and

continued unbelief, so these Hebrews were in danger of doing a like thing. They had tasted of the heavenly gift, and in such a way as to give them a distinct impression of its character and quality, for the words “once for all” qualify this word also. These Hebrews were like the spies at Kadesh-Barnea who saw the land and had the very fruit in their hands, and yet turned back (4:1–13). One of the pre-salvation ministries of the Spirit is to enable the unsaved who come under the hearing of the gospel, to have a certain appreciation of the blessedness of salvation. He equips them with a spiritual sense of taste with reference to the things of God. Many a sinner has been buoyed up by the message of the evangelist, has had stirrings in his bosom, has had a pleasant reaction towards the truth, and yet when the decision time came has said, “The world is too much with us,” and has turned back into sin. They had been made partakers of the Holy Ghost. We must be careful to note that the Greek word translated “partakers” does not mean “possessors,” in the sense that these Hebrews possessed the Holy Spirit as an indwelling Person who had come to take up His permanent abode in their hearts. The word is a compound of the Greek verb “to have or hold” (echo (ejco)), and a preposition meaning “with” (meta (meta)), thus “to hold with.” It is used in Luke 5:7 where it is translated “partners,” signifying one who cooperates with another in a common task or undertaking. It is used in Hebrews 1:9 where the angels are “fellows” of our Lord, partners or associates with Him in the work of salvation. It is used in Hebrews 3:1 where the recipients of this letter are called participators in the heavenly calling. That is, they participated together in the heavenly calling. These Hebrews had left the earthly calling of the nation Israel, and had identified themselves with the Church which has a heavenly calling. It is used in Hebrews 3:14, where it speaks of those who participate together in the Lord Jesus. The word (metochos (metoco")) was so used in secular Greek. Moulton and Milligan give examples of its usage in the following phrases: “We, Dionysius son of Socrates and the associate collectors;” “Pikos son of Pamonthes and his colleagues,” “the joint-owner of a holding,” “I am unable to take part in the cultivation,” “Some do so because they are partners in their misdeeds.” Thus the word signifies one who participates with another in a common activity or possession. It is so used here. These Hebrews became participators in the Holy Spirit insofar as an unsaved person can do so, namely, in the sense that they willingly co-operated with Him in receiving His pre-salvation ministry, that of leading them on step by step toward the act of faith. He had led them into the act of repentance. The next step would be that of faith. Here they were in danger of turning their backs upon the Spirit and returning to the sacrifices. Peter in his first epistle (1:2) in the words, “through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience,” speaks of this work of the Holy Spirit on the unsaved, setting them apart from unbelief to faith. This word in its context does not at all imply that these Hebrews had been born of the Spirit, sealed with the Spirit, indwelt by the Spirit, anointed with the Spirit, baptized by the Spirit into the Body of Christ, or filled with the Spirit. This work of the Holy Spirit in leading them on towards faith was a once-for-all work, so thoroughly done that it needed never to be repeated. However, there was nothing permanent of itself in this work, for the work was only a means to an end. This is shown by the aorist participle used, referring to the mere fact, not a perfect, speaking of a finished act having present results. The fact that the writer did not use the perfect tense here, which is a specialized tense, but rather the aorist, which is the maid of all work, points to the incompleteness of the work of the Spirit in the case of these Hebrews. So far as the work had been done, it was perfect, thorough. But it

would not be complete until the Hebrews accepted the proffered faith from the Spirit. The incompleteness of the work would be due, therefore, not to the Spirit, but to their unwillingness to go on as a partner or cooperator with the Spirit. Translation. For it is impossible in the case of those who have been once for all enlightened, and have both tasted of the heavenly gift and have become participators in the Holy Spirit. (6) They had tasted the Word, and had seen the attesting miracles (v. 5). (6:5) They had tasted “the good word of God,” and “the powers of the world to come.” The word translated “powers” is used in the Gospels repeatedly to refer to miracles, and is translated by the words, “wonderful works, mighty works, miracles, powers.” The word “world” (aion (aijon)) is the word which in Romans 12:2; I Corinthians 1:20, 2:6; II Corinthians 4:4 refers to an age, that is, a period of time characterized by a certain type of life or economy of government or other social regulating agency. In the passages just mentioned it refers to “all that floating mass of thoughts, opinions, maxims, speculations, hopes, impulses, aims, aspirations, at any time current in the world, which it may be impossible to seize and accurately define, but which constitute a most real and effective power, being the moral or immoral atmosphere which at every moment of our lives we inhale, again inevitably to exhale, the subtle informing spirit of the world of men who are living alienated and apart from God” (Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament). It is the “age,” the “spirit or genius of the age.” This is the present age in which we are living. The age to come is the Millennial Age. What a change there will be when God the Son reigns on earth personally, and His Chosen People are saved. These Hebrews had seen attesting miracles performed, the performance of which proved to them that the New Testament was from God. This was another factor which made their guilt so enormous. It is interesting to note in passing that attesting miracles will again be performed in the Millennial Age when the Lord Jesus comes back to earth. Translation. And have tasted the good word of God, also the powers of the age that is about to come. (7) They had been led into repentance. Now should they fall away from their profession of faith in Messiah and back to the sacrifices, it would be impossible to renew them to repentance (vv. 6–8). (6:6) We come now to a study of the Greek word translated “fall away,” (parapipto (parapipto)). It is used only here in the New Testament. It is found in the Greek translation of the Old Testament in Ezekiel 14:13, 15:8, where Israel is seen falling away from the true worship of Jehovah. The Greek word itself means “to fall beside a person or thing, to slip aside,” hence, “to deviate from the right path, to turn aside, to wander.” Moulton and Milligan give two occasions of its use in the Greek papyri which exactly correspond to its usage in Hebrews. The first is; “If the terms of it (the contract) should be broken or it in any other way rendered invalid,” which usage is similar to that in the case of these Hebrews should they break their contract which they made with the Holy Spirit when they willingly became His associates in His pre-salvation work, breaking their contract by refusing His further ministrations and going back to the First Testament

sacrifices. The other instance of its use is in a document which speaks of a person who falls back on his earlier interpretation of a verb. How like the act of this Hebrew, should he fall back to his earlier position with regard to the sacrifices. The words “fall away” are from a participle in the aorist tense, the time of action being past time, the classification being a conditional participle. The translation reads therefore, “if they fell away.” Paul here presents a hypothetical case, warning these unsaved Hebrews from making such a thing a reality. Now the writer gives the reason why these Hebrews cannot be brought back to the place of repentance, should they return to the First Testament sacrifices. They would crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to an open shame. The word “afresh” is not needed nor is it warranted from the Greek. It was included in the translation from a prefixed preposition to the verb meaning “to crucify.” But Expositor’s Greek Testament makes it clear that this preposition here means “up” and refers to the lifting up on the Cross; also that the compound verb was used and understood by the Hellenistic world to mean only “crucify.” Besides, any “crucifying to themselves” would be a fresh crucifixion. The words “to themselves” have the idea, “so far as they are concerned.” “The apostate crucifies Christ on his own account by virtually confirming the judgment of the actual crucifiers, declaring that he, too, has made trial of Jesus and found Him no true Messiah but a deceiver and therefore worthy of death” (Expositor’s). “The greatness of the guilt is aggravated by the fact that they thus treat the Son of God” (Vincent). The words “put to an open shame” are from a Greek word used also in Numbers 25:4 (Septuagint translation), where it implies exposing to ignominy or infamy, such as was effected in barbarous times by exposing the quarters of the executed criminal, or leaving him hanging in chains. Archilochus, says Plutarch, rendered himself infamous by writing obscene verses. He put himself to open shame. All this these Hebrews would be doing to the Son of God if they renounced their professed faith in Messiah and went back to the First Testament. Should they do this, they would render their hearts so hard that they would be impervious to the ministry of the Holy Spirit. They would be irrevocably lost. There would be no more hope for them. Of course, it should be plain that this sin cannot be committed today. There is no temple in Jerusalem, there are no sacrifices to leave and to return to, no attesting miracles being performed, there is no question as to the closing of the old dispensation and the opening of the new. This sin is not the same as the rejection of Christ by the sinner today. It is not only a rejection of Christ, bad as that is. This sin involves the relative merits of the First and New Testaments, the abandonment of the type for the reality, the sin of the crucifixion of Messiah by His own people. Translation. And have fallen away, again to renew to repentance, crucifying the Son of God and putting Him to an open shame. (6:7–8) In these verses the writer presents an analogy in nature. The abundant and frequently renewed rain, represents the free and reiterated bestowal of spiritual enlightenment and impulse to these Hebrews. One piece of ground reacts by producing herbage good for food. This is the Hebrew who accepts the New Testament by faith. On the other hand, the ground that receives the same rain, but produces thorns and briers, is likened to the Hebrew who being the recipient of the pre-salvation work of the Spirit, yet turns his back on Him and goes back to the First Testament sacrifices, the apostate who

can look for nothing but certain judgment (10:26–31). Translation. For land which drank in the rain that comes oft upon it and produces herbage meet for those on whose account it is tilled, partakes of a blessing from God. But if it brings forth thorns and thistles, it is rejected and nigh unto a curse, and its end is burning. (8) The saved among the recipients would not apostatize. The unsaved exhorted to follow in the steps of faith of the saved (vv. 9–12). (6:9–12) We come now to the concluding section of this analytical unit. We will need to remind ourselves again of the historical background and analysis of the book, and the purpose of the author in writing it. He was writing to the visible professing Church made up of saved and unsaved. There is no greeting to the saints like we find in most of the epistles. The concern of the writer is with those of his unsaved Jewish readers who under stress of persecution were in danger of renouncing their professed faith in Messiah and returning to the abrogated sacrifices of the First Testament. These he repeatedly warns against this act, and repeatedly exhorts to go on to faith in the New Testament sacrifice, Messiah. The fact that he urges them on to faith, shows that they merely made a profession and were not saved. After issuing this solemn warning in 5:11–6:8, he addresses the saved among his readers and uses them as an example to urge the unsaved on to the act of faith. He addresses them as “beloved.” The word occurs only here in this epistle. It is plural in number, and the word used is the one that speaks of God’s love. One could translate, “divinely loved ones.” It is clear that the writer is differentiating between the saved and unsaved among his readers in this section, because after holding up the “beloved ones” as examples, he says, “We desire that everyone of you do show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end, that ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.” These words imply that some of his readers were not of the class called “beloved” whose lives showed that they were saved. This group whom he exhorts here is made up of those whom he warns in 5:11–6:8. He urges them to follow those who have exercised faith, implying that they had no faith. He says that he is persuaded better things of these who are saved. “Persuaded” in the Greek implies that the writer had felt misgivings but had overcome them. His conviction was the result of proof. The perfect tense is used, “I have come to a settled conviction.” He assures them that he is persuaded better things of them than those of falling away and crucifying the Son of God. He also is persuaded that things that accompany salvation are true of them. One of these he gives in verse 10. The work of the Holy Spirit spoken of in verses 4–6 precedes salvation. The constant practice of these called “beloved,” namely, that of ministering to the saints, shows that the Holy Spirit had produced His fruit in their lives, and that they were truly born-again ones. The writer then uses these as an example for his unsaved readers to follow. Their lives showed evidence of faith, and the mere professing Hebrew should go on to that act. In verses 13–20, the great example of faith, Abraham, is introduced to strengthen the exhortation. Translation. But we have come to a settled persuasion concerning you, divinely loved ones, the things which are better and which are attached to

a saved condition of life, even if we thus speak. For God is not unjust to forget your work and the divine love which you exhibited toward His name in that you ministered to the saints and are continuing to minister. But we are strongly desirous that each one of you show the same diligence which will develop your hope into full assurance until the end, in order that you may become, not sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patient waiting are now inheriting the promises. g.

Is a High Priest who actually brings the believer into an eternal standing in grace (vv. 13–20). (1) Abraham, the man of faith who was rewarded, a precedent (vv. 13– 15). (6:13) In verses 11, 12, the writer exhorts the unsaved among his readers, to go on to the act of faith in Messiah as High Priest, and thus to be followers of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises. In this verse, he cites the example of Abraham as an illustration of one of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises. The Jewish community in the Christian Church was undergoing persecution by apostate Judaism, and was growing restive because of the fact that Messiah’s return was being seemingly delayed. The writer is conscious of this, and seeks to comfort these Jewish believers by the words “For yet a little while, and He that shall come will come, and will not tarry” (10:37). All the examples of faith in chapter 11 illustrate the long outlook of faith, involving patient waiting and endurance. Abraham is one of them (11:9, 10). The example of Abraham shows that the promise of God is sure. Translation. For when to Abraham God made promise, since He had no one greater to swear by, He swore by Himself. (6:14) The words “blessing I will bless,” and “multiplying I will multiply,” are Hebraisms, the repetition emphasizing the idea. Translation. Saying, Blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee. (6:15) “Patiently” refers back to the word “patience” in verse 12. The word “obtained” is the translation of epitugchano (ejpitugcano) which means “to light or hit upon a person or thing, to attain to, obtain.” The word here indicates that Abraham did not personally receive the entire fulfilment of the promise, but only the germ of that fulfilment. The promise was that Abraham was to become a great nation, and that the earth was to be blessed through Abraham. Isaac, born miraculously, was a partial fulfilment of the promise, and the Lord Jesus as Saviour and coming Messiah fulfils all that God promised Abraham. Translation. And thus, having patiently endured, he obtained the promise. (2) God’s oath and God’s promise guarantee the believer’s eternal retention of salvation (vv. 16–18). (6:16) The writer now illustrates the security of the divine promise by using the

analogy of human practice. The word “oath” is preceded by the definite article in the Greek text. The oath, which is used with a view to confirming something, is the end of all disputes. Thus, the act of God in confirming His promise by an oath, is justified by human practice. The confident hope which God’s oath warrants is justified by the fact that even a human oath puts an end to dispute. Translation. For men swear by the greater, and the oath which is for the purpose of confirmation, is to them an end of every dispute. (6:17) The word “wherein” refers to the entire previous clause. The idea is “in accordance with this universal custom.” Since the oath has this convincing power among men, God disregards the insult implied in man’s doubting His Word, and condescends to human infirmity, confirming His Word by an oath. The word “willing” is the translation of boulomai (boulomai) which speaks of a desire that is based upon the reasoning faculties as over against thelo (qelo), a desire that arises from the emotions. God, facing human infirmities, was minded to do thus and so. The word “immutability” is the translation of ametatheton (ajmetaqeton). The word is from metatithemi (metatiqemi). Tithemi (Tiqemi) means “to place,” and meta (meta) prefixed refers to a change. Thus, the compound word means “to change place,” thus “to transpose” two things, one of which is put in place of the other. The derived noun metathemenos (metaqemeno") means “a turncoat.” The Greek letter Alpha prefixed to the word makes it mean the opposite to what it meant originally. That is, God will not change His position as to His promise. Having made the promise, He will stand by it. He is not a turncoat. He will not change His position as to His promise, because that promise rests upon His counsel, and that is ametatheton (ajmetaqeton) also, immutable. The word “counsel” is the translation of boule (boule), which word is allied to boulomai (boulomai) “to desire, which desire comes from one’s reason.” The Triune God in council convened brought forth this counsel to the effect that the soul might find a sure refuge in the Lord Jesus. This counsel is immutable. The word “confirmed” is the translation of mesiteuo (mesiteuo) which means “to act as mediator between litigating or covenanting parties, to accomplish something by interposing between two parties.” A mesites (mesite") is a sponsor or surety, so mesiteuo (mesiteuo) comes to signify “to pledge one’s self, to give surety.” God placed Himself between Himself and the inheritors of the promise. Expositor’s quotes Delitzsch as follows: “God descended, as it were, from His own absolute exaltation, in order, so to speak, to look up to Himself after the manner of men and take Himself to witness; and so by a gracious condescension confirm the promise for the sake of the inheritors”; and Davidson, “He mediated or came in between men and Himself, through the oath by Himself.” The word “promise” is preceded by the definite article in the Greek text, pointing to a definite, particular promise defined in the context. It is the promise to Abraham and his posterity found in verse 14. Translation. In (accordance with) which God more abundantly desirous of demonstrating to those who are inheritors of the promise, the immutability of His counsel, interposed with an oath.

(6:18) The word “things” is the translation of pragma (pragma), which comes from prasso (prasso), “to do, practice, accomplish, perform.” Pragma (Pragma), therefore, means more than “thing.” It speaks of an accomplished fact, of that which has been done. The two accomplished facts, the two things which were done, are the act of God making a promise and the act of God taking an oath. And these are not subject to change. They are immutable. The word “consolation” is the translation of parakaleo, kaleo (parakaleo, kaleo) meaning “to call,” para (para) prefixed being perfective in its function, thus making the compound word mean “to call earnestly,” thus “to exhort, to encourage.” “Strong” in the Greek text is ischuros (ijscuro") which speaks of indwelling strength embodied or put forth either aggressively or as an obstacle to resistance, as an army or a fortress. Thus the encouragement which God’s promise and God’s oath afford is a strong army or a fortress against doubt and discouragement. God’s promise and God’s oath should keep these Jews from apostatizing through the encouragement they give. The writer says that this encouragement is for those of his readers who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before them. The Greek word meaning “to flee for refuge” katapheugo (katafeugo) is used in the LXX (Deut. 4:42) of the slayer who killed his neighbor unawares, and who, to escape the avenger, flees for refuge to one of the cities of refuge. Here it speaks of the sinner fleeing for refuge from the penalty of sin, to the High Priest who has offered atonement for him and his sin. His only hope is in his High Priest, the Messiah. Translation. In order that through the instrumentality of two immutable facts in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might be having a strong encouragement, we who fled for refuge for the purpose of laying fast hold of the hope which is lying before us. (3) This salvation made possible by the presence of the High Priest in the heavenly Holy of Holies (vv. 19, 20). (6:19) The writer speaks of the hope of eternal life as an anchor of the soul. He uses two adjectives to describe this anchor, “sure” and “steadfast.” The distinction between these two adjectives here is in the relation of the same object to two different tests applied to it from without. The word “sure” is the translation of asphale (ajsfale), which is made up of a (a), “not,” and sphallo (sfallo), “to make totter,” the compound word meaning “not to make totter, not to baffle or foil.” It speaks, therefore, of something that cannot be made to totter when put to the test. “Steadfast” is the translation of bebaian (bebaian) which means “sustaining one’s steps in going.” Thus it speaks of something which does not break down under the weight of something that steps on it. This hope which the believing soul has in the Lord Jesus is an anchor of the soul which cannot be made to totter nor break down when put under stress and strain. The words “which entereth” go back syntactically to the word “anchor.” It is the anchor that enters into that within the veil. The words “that within” are the translation of to esoteron (to ejsoteron), the definite article and the comparative, the latter speaking of something farther within. The words speak, therefore, of the place within the veil. The word “that,” properly a demonstrative, does not point to anything definite here. The idea is merely that the anchor is within the veil. The veil of the temple separated the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies. But the writer is not speaking here of the type but of the reality, the Holy

of Holies of heaven itself which is the reality of which the earthly Holy of Holies is the type. The anchor of the believer is, therefore, fastened within the veil of the Holy of Holies of heaven. We have some rich figures here. This present life is the sea; the soul, a ship; the hidden bottom of the sea, the hidden reality of the heavenly word. The soul is seen as stormtossed on the troubled sea of life. The soul of the believer, as a tempest-tossed ship, is held by the anchor within the veil, fastened by faith to the blessed reality within the veil. Translation. Which (hope) we are having as an anchor of the soul both stable and steadfast and which anchor enters into the place within the veil. (6:20) The anchor of the believer’s soul, his hope of eternal life in his High Priest, the Messiah, is fastened securely to a Rock within the veil of the Holy of Holies in heaven. That Rock is Messiah, whom the writer now speaks of as the forerunner. Here an entirely new idea is introduced, foreign to the ideas of the Levitical economy. The Aaronic high priest did not enter into the Holy of Holies as a forerunner, but only as the people’s representative. He entered a place where the one in whose behalf he ministered, could not follow him. He entered the Holy of Holies in the stead of the believer, not as one cutting a pioneer path for him. The writer in 10:19, 20, when exhorting the unsaved professing Jew to place his faith in the Messiah as High Priest, urges him to enter the Holy of Holies personally, a thing which the First Testament believer could only do in his high priest. The Authorized Version misses the point entirely, when it places the definite article before the word “forerunner,” as if the idea of a high priest being a forerunner were perfectly familiar to the Jewish recipient of this letter. Again, the name Iesous (ÆIesou"), in the English translation, Jesus, reminds the reader of the fact that the Jehoshua of the Old Testament is the Jesus of the New Testament, that it was the God of Israel who died on the Cross as an atonement for sin. But this High Priest is not in the line of Aaron, but in that of Melchisedec. He is an eternal High Priest. His priesthood had no beginning nor will it have an ending. This High Priest is the Rock of Salvation into which the anchor of the believer’s soul is fastened, which anchor is his faith in the atonement his High Priest has offered. The high priest in Israel arrayed in his gorgeous robes, would enter the sanctuary, wearing on his shoulders twelve onyx stones upon which were inscribed the names of the twelve tribes of Israel, and upon his breastplate, twelve onyx stones with the names of the tribes of Israel upon them. Thus he would carry upon the shoulders of his strength and upon the heart of his love, the saved of Israel into the presence of God. Just so, this heavenly High Priest after the order of Melchisedec, carries upon the shoulders of His omnipotence, and upon the heart of His infinite love, those who place their faith in Him, into the presence of God. Thus does the writer encourage the unsaved reader to put his faith in the New Testament Sacrifice, the Messiah, rather than go back to the First Testament sacrifices which were set aside by God at the Cross. Translation. Where a forerunner on behalf of us entered, Jesus, having become a High Priest forever after the order of Melchisedec. h.

A High Priest after the order of Melchisedec (7:1–3). (1) Melchisedec, a sinner saved by grace, had no recorded parents, no

recorded date of birth or of death. (2) A type, therefore, of Messiah in His eternal priesthood. (7:1) The brief history of Melchisedec is given in Genesis 14:18–20. When Abraham came to Salem, he found a Gentile priest of God, ministering to believers in that city. Translation. For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of God the Most High, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him. (7:2) The word “gave” is the translation of merizo (merizo) which means “to separate into parts, to distribute.” In dividing to Melchisedec a tenth part of the spoils of battle, Abraham acknowledged Melchisedec as a priest. The startling conclusion based upon this fact is stated in 7:4–10. The word “first” refers to the first designation with reference to this mysterious individual. The name Melchisedec which is the first designation which the writer uses, means “king of righteousness.” Then follows a designation “king of Salem,” which means “king of peace,” the latter coming from his character, as the first came from his name. The ancient name of Jerusalem was Jebus. When Melchisedec was the King and Priest of the city, it was called Salem. Translation. To whom also Abraham divided a tenth part of all; the first designation on the one hand being interpreted means king of righteousness, and then, on the other hand (he was) king of Salem which is king of peace. (7:3) The words “without father, without mother, without descent” speak of the fact that there is no record of his parentage. This is significant, for it indicates a different type of priesthood from the Levitical, in which a person’s genealogy was of first importance. In Israel, no man was allowed to exercise priestly functions unless he belonged to the family of Aaron. The words “having neither beginning of days nor end of life,” refer to the fact that the historical record is silent regarding his birth and death. Melchisedec was made like the Son of God, likened to the Son of God (aphomoioo (ajfomoioo), to produce a facsimile), in the sense that his history was so written up that he appeared to have no father and mother, and no end of days. As Westcott says, “The resemblance lies in the Biblical representation, and not primarily in Melchisedec himself.” One could not have a type that was in itself eternal, for then one would have the reality, not the type. Thus, an accommodative type, so to speak, must be used. It is important to note that the likeness of Melchisedec is not to Messiah as Son of Man but to Him as Son of God. As Son of Man He was born and died. As Son of God, neither could be said of Him. The words “abideth a priest continually” are not to be construed with “made like unto the Son of God.” The latter clause refers to what has preceded. It is not here likeness with respect to priesthood that is asserted, but likeness with respect to duration of being which is asserted. In view of the fact that there is no record of the death of Melchisedec, it is assumed that he is still alive, and is therefore still a high priest, thus, a fitting type of the eternity of being of the Messiah as a High Priest.

Translation. Fatherless, motherless, having no genealogy, having no beginning of days nor termination of life, but likened (in these respects) to the Son of God, remains a priest continually. i.

A High Priest in a superior order of priesthood (7:4–10). (1) The Aaronic priests received tithes (vv. 4, 5). (7:4) The writer now proceeds to show that Melchisedec was better than Abraham, in order that he might show that he was better than Levi, and thus better than Aaron. It follows therefore that if Melchisedec is superior to Aaron, his priesthood must be better than that of Aaron. Since that is the case, Messiah’s priesthood, being in the order of the priesthood of Melchisedec, must be better. That makes Messiah better than Aaron and, therefore, the New Testament He instituted, better than the First Testament, which Aaron was instrumental in bringing in. And that is the argument of the Book of Hebrews, namely, that the New Testament in Jesus’ blood is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament in animal blood. The word “consider” is theoreo (qeoreo) in the Greek text. It is used, not of an indifferent spectator, but of one who looks at a thing with interest and attention. Theoreo (Qeoreo) would be used of a general officially reviewing or inspecting an army, as against theaomai (qeaomai) which would be used of a lay spectator viewing the parade. It speaks of a critical, discriminating inspection. The word “spoils” in the Greek text is interesting. It is akrothinion (ajkroqinion), made up of akron (ajkron), “the topmost point,” and this (qi"), “a heap.” It was the tenth part of the top of the pile, or the pick of the spoil, which Abraham gave to Melchisedec. The Greeks after a victory, gathered up the spoils in a heap, and the top, or best part of the heap, was presented to the gods. The fact that Abraham gave a tenth of the pick of the spoils to Melchisedec, magnifies the latter’s greatness in the eyes of the readers of this letter. But it was not any ordinary man called Abraham who paid tithes to Melchisedec. It was Abraham, the patriarch. The writer is careful to identify him, lest his Jewish readers think it might be some other man of the same name. The word “patriarch” is the transliteration of the Greek word patriarches (patriarce"). Patri (Patri) means “father,” and arches (ajrce") means “first.” Thus, Abraham is their first father. He is the progenitor of the Hebrew race, and yet Melchisedec is greater than he. Translation. Now, give careful consideration to how great this man was, to whom a tenth part Abraham gave of the pick of the spoils, the patriarch. (7:5) The words “they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood” are in the Greek text “those out of the sons of Levi who receive the office of priest.” There should not be a comma after Levi in the Authorized Version. The point is that not all the sons of Levi became priests, but only those who belonged to the family of Aaron. These were given a special injunction to take tithes of their brethren, even though the latter, like them, were descended from a common ancestor, Abraham. The significance of this act of tithing is seen when one understands that the Aaronic priests took tithes of their brethren by legal appointment only. When they paid tithes in this way, there was no acknowledgment of inferiority on the part of these who paid tithes.

It was mere compliance to a law. But in the case of Abraham, there was no law that required him to pay tithes to Melchisedec. When he paid the latter tithes, it was an acknowledgment on his part of his own inferiority and a personal tribute to his greatness and superiority. Translation. And those of the sons of Levi who receive the office of priest, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, and this from their brethren, even though they are come out of the loins of Abraham. (2) Melchisedec received tithes from Abraham, therefore, was better than he (vv. 6, 7). (7:6) The words “But he whose descent is not counted from them” are in the Greek text literally, “But he who is not genealogically derived from them,” speaking here of Melchisedec. The latter, who had no part in the Levitical genealogy or economy, and because of that, no legal right to exact tithes from Abraham, took tithes from the patriarch himself. The voluntary gift of Abraham implied a recognition on the part of the latter, of the personal superiority of the former. Then, Melchisedec accepted the exalted position Abraham accorded him, and gave the patriarch his blessing. Abraham, who had received the divine promises and blessings, might be supposed to have been above being blessed by any man. But not so. Translation. But he who is not genealogically derived from them, received tithes of Abraham, and the one who has the promises, he blessed. (7:7) The word translated “contradiction” is antilogia (ajntilogia) which means literally, “a word spoken against,” and thus it comes to mean “a dispute.” The writer says that such a universally held truth that the inferior is blessed by the superior, leaves no room for dispute about the matter. The words “less” and “better” are in the neuter gender in the Greek text, expressing in its widest form the principle stated above. This principle applies where the blessing carries with it not only the verbal expression of good-will, but also goodwill achieving actual results. Translation. But apart from every dispute, the less by the better is blessed. (3) Melchisedec in type still receiving tithes, whereas Aaronic priests die (v. 8). (7:8) The word “here,” hode (oJde), means “according to the Levitical law which was still being observed, though unlawfully, by Israel!” “There,” ekei (ejkei), means “in the passage in Genesis where Melchisedec is recorded to have been receiving tithes.” The words do not refer to any specific places. In the expression “men that die receive tithes,” the word “die” is a participle, describing “men.” The emphasis is upon the fact that dying men receive tithes. The Levites are dying men who pass off the scene in due time and are succeeded by others. The record concerning Melchisedec does not mention his death. Thus the record testifies in that way to the fact that he is still alive. Thus, his office as priest does not pass on to another. He is

still receiving tithes. Translation. And here on the one hand dying men are receiving tithes, but there he receives them, concerning whom the testimony is that he lives. (4) Aaron in Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedec, therefore, the latter is superior; therefore, Messiah is better than Aaron, being a priest in the order of Melchisedec (vv. 9, 10). (7:9, 10) The words “as I may so say” are literally “so to speak a word.” The expression introduces an unusual statement, one that may appear paradoxical or startling to the reader. The expression indicates that what is to be said is not to be taken in strictness. It is used when anything is about to be said that is unexpected, or somewhat strained, not likely to be universally recognized, at least in the general way in which it is asserted. It is sometimes used for “roughly, improperly.” The tendency in Jewish theology was to view heredity in this realistic manner. Levi was in the loins of Abraham in that he was descended from him. When Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedec, Levi paid him tithes. Thus, Melchisedec was superior to Levi. That means that he was better than Aaron. It follows that since Melchisedec is better than Aaron, Messiah is better than Aaron, for He belongs to a superior order of priesthood. That makes the New Testament better than the First Testament, which is the argument of the book. This kind of reasoning would appeal to Jewish readers, for they emphasized strongly the solidarity of the Jewish race. The whole Jewish law, its ordinances and priesthood, it regarded as potentially in Abraham. Translation. And so to speak, by the intermediate agency of Abraham, also Levi who receives tithes, paid tithes, for yet in the loins of his father he was when Melchisedec met him. j.

Is High Priest of a Testament that offered a sacrifice that put away sin (vv. 11–22). (1) The First Testament neither offered nor made anything complete (v. 11). (7:11) The word “perfection” is the translation of teleiosis (teleiosi") which signifies the act or process of consummating. It speaks of completeness. An institution is perfect or complete when it effects the purpose for which it was instituted, and produces a result that corresponds to the idea of it. The purpose of the priesthood was to remove the obstacle, sin, which kept man from God, and make a way of access for man to God. The Levitical priesthood could do that in a typical but not in an actual way. The priesthood and the sacrifices were an index finger pointing to the Messiah and His substitutionary death on the Cross. Because the Levitical sacrifices and priesthood could not actually provide a salvation for sinful man, it follows that a new priesthood must be instituted that would. And because a salvation needed to be provided, a new priesthood was brought in, and a new priest, Messiah, a priest after the order of Melchisedec. The word “another” is the translation of heteros (eJtero"), meaning, “of another kind.” That is, since the Levitical priesthood brought nothing to completion, not merely another priest was needed, but another priest of a different kind. It could not be another priest in the line of Aaron, but one of a different order of priesthood. That is the argument of the writer. Since there was

a need for a priesthood of a different order than Aaron, it follows that a new order of priesthood has arisen, that of Melchisedec. The writer has proved his proposition again, namely, that the New Testament, is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament. There was a need for a different Testament since the first one could not offer a sacrifice that paid for sin. Translation. If indeed, therefore, completeness were through the Levitical priesthood, for the people upon the basis of it had the law laid down (to them), what need after that should there be of a priest of a different kind arising according to the order of Melchisedec and not being called after the order of Aaron? (2) First Testament priests came from the tribe of Levi, the New Testament priest from the tribe of Judah (vv. 12–17). (7:12) The words “being changed” are the translation of metatithemi (metatiqemi) which means “to transpose, to put one thing in the place of another.” Thus, the priesthood after the order of Melchisedec was put in the place of the priesthood after the order of Aaron. The blood of animals could not pay for sin, but the blood of Messiah could. Thus, the New Testament was substituted for the First Testament, Jesus’ blood, the reality, for animal blood, the type. But that could only be done by changing the law governing the priesthood. Thus, if a transfer to a new and different order of priesthood was to be effected, it must be by reason of a transfer to a new basis. The law governing the priesthood as found in the Mosaic economy must be abrogated in favor of another which would provide for an order of priesthood that would function successfully in the very thing in which the Aaronic priesthood failed. Translation. For there being a transfer of the priesthood (to another order), of necessity also of the law there is a transfer. (7:13) Since the Mosaic law required that the priests should come from the tribe of Levi, a new priesthood, not of the order of Aaron, must set aside that law. The Messiah comes from another tribe, and not merely from another tribe, but from a tribe which was not specially set apart for priestly service, a tribe of a different nature in that respect from the tribe of Levi. This is made clear by the use of heteros (eJtero") rather than allos (ajllo"), the first referring to another of a different kind, the second to another of the same kind. The word “altar” is the translation of thusiasterion (qusiasterion) which means “an altar for the sacrifice of victims.” Translation. For He concerning whom these things are spoken, pertained to a different kind of a tribe from which no one gave attendance at the altar. (7:14) The word “evident” is the translation of prodelos (prodelo") which means “openly evident, known to all.” The facts concerning the birth and ancestry of Jesus of Nazareth were well known from the records in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. The fact of this origin would naturally militate against His claims as High Priest, among Jews

who knew nothing in the history of their nation except the Aaronic order of priests. The word “sprang” is the translation of anatello (ajnatello) which was used of the rising of a heavenly body, sun, star, of a cloud, of the springing up of plants. The word “Lord” is the translation of kurios (kurio") which is used in the LXX to translate the august title of God, Jehovah. In the Jewish setting in which it is found, the use of this name is significant. The writer predicates deity to Jesus of Nazareth. He calls Him our (the Jewish) Jehovah, the One to whom the Jews laid claim as their God. Translation. For it is known to all that out of Judah our Lord has sprung, with reference to which tribe concerning priesthood not even one thing did Moses say: (7:15) The words “far more evident” are the translation of katadelion (katadelion) which means “thoroughly evident.” The statement of the writer here does not refer to that which is declared to be prodelon (prodelon) “evident” in verse 14, namely, that Messiah sprang out of Judah, but to the general proposition which the writer is putting forth in the context, to the effect that the Levitical priesthood did not measure up to the purpose for which a priesthood is instituted, namely, to offer a sacrifice that would pay for sin and make a way for sinful man to be saved. The writer says that it is perfectly obvious that after the likeness of Melchisedec a different kind of a priest should arise. Translation. And it is yet far more obvious that after the likeness of Melchisedec there arises a different kind of priest. (7:16) The Levitical priests were constituted such by a law of a carnal commandment. The High Priest after the order of Melchisedec was constituted a high priest according to the power of an endless life. Here we have two most important statements that present an important contrast. The word “law” is the translation of nomos (nomo") which means “a norm, a standard.” The word “commandment” is the rendering of entole (ejntole) which is a specific precept. “Carnal” is the translation of sarkines (sarkine") which means “fleshly.” The norm or standard prescribed by the Mosaic commandments had to do with the human body. The priests had to come from a certain family, the Aaronic. Fitness for office even among the male members of this family was determined largely by physical qualifications. The priests must be without bodily blemish, and ceremonially pure. The word “endless” is the translation of akatalutos. Luo (ajkataluto". Luo) means “to loose,” kata (kata), “down,” a (a), “not,” and thus the compound word means “not to loose nor to dissolve or disunite.” The word describes therefore that which cannot be dissolved or disunited. The Messiah was constituted a High Priest according to the power of an indissoluble life. The life which was His could not be broken down into disunited elements. In the case of the Levitical priest, no matter how ill-suited he was and reluctant to take the office, the law made him a priest because of his pedigree. He did what he did so far as official duties were concerned by reason of an outside compulsion. In the case of the High Priest after the order of Melchisedec, He performed His duties as High Priest, not by reason of the fact that any official necessity was laid upon Him, but by virtue of a power in His own nature compelling and enabling Him, the power of a life that even death could not dissolve, for He raised Himself from the dead.

The life of the new priest is indissoluble or indestructible, not as eternally existing in the preincarnate Son, but as existing in Him incarnate and while fulfilling priestly duties. It is here that the term “indestructible” is applicable, for He died on the Cross as the High Priest offering atonement, but it was necessary for the continuance and completion of His priestly duties, that He raise Himself from the dead, thus manifesting the power and the nature of that indissoluble life that is His. Translation. Who was constituted (a priest), not according to the norm of a fleshen commandment, but according to the power of an indissoluble life. (7:17) Scripture testifies to the fact of the indestructible character of the life of the new priest in the words of the Psalmist (110:4). Translation. For He testifies, as for thee, a priest thou art forever according to the order of Melchisedec. (3) First Testament set aside in favor of a better Testament (vv. 18–22). (7:18, 19) These two verses take up the idea of verse 16. They speak of the negative and positive result of the superseding of the fleshly ordinance by the power of an indestructible life. On the one hand there is a setting aside of the previous enactment. On the other, there is the bringing in of a better hope. The word “disannulling” is the translation of athetesis (ajqetesi"), the fundamental idea of which is the doing away of something established. The words, “the commandment going before” could better be phrased “a foregoing commandment.” The word “foregoing” does not emphasize mere precedence in time, but rather the preliminary character of the commandment as destined to be done away by a later ordinance. It was set aside because of its weakness and unprofitableness. The Levitical economy was perfect for the purpose for which it was instituted, that of being an index-finger pointing to the High Priest, Messiah. But when it came to the place where a sacrifice would be demanded of it that would pay for sin, it was found to be weak and unprofitable. This is explained in the words, “for the law made nothing perfect.” The words “made perfect” are the translation of teleioo (teleioo) which means “to carry through completely, to make complete, to finish, bring to an end.” The Mosaic economy brought nothing to a conclusion. It could not offer a sacrifice which would pay for sin. Therefore, it could not save anyone. Therefore, it was set aside. In place of it, there was brought in a better hope. The Greek text has it “a bringing in upon;” that is, the better hope was brought in upon the ground formerly occupied by the commandment. The reason why the new order is better is that through it, men are enabled to draw nigh to God. The old priesthood could not effect this. Translation. For there is indeed a doing away with a foregoing commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, for not even one thing did the law bring to completion; and a bringing in thereupon of a better hope, by means of which we are drawing near to God. (7:20, 21) When the Levitical priests were inducted into office, God took no oath. But

when Messiah was made a high priest, God took an oath guaranteeing the unending character of His priesthood. This shows the inferiority of the Aaronic priesthood to that of Melchisedec. Translation. And not without an oath (He was made priest); for indeed without an oath they have become priests, but this One with an oath through the agency of the One who says to Him, The Lord took an oath and will not change His mind. As for thee, a priest forever than art.13 (7:22) In this verse, the writer states the proposition which he wishes to prove, namely, that the New Testament in Jesus’ blood is better than and takes the place of the First Testament in animal blood. His argument here is that Jesus is the surety of a better covenant because God took an oath that His priesthood would be an everlasting one. Jesus is the guarantee or pledge of a better covenant or testament. Translation. By so much was Jesus made a pledge of a better testament. k.

Messiah lives forever: the Aaronic priests died (vv. 23–28). (1) Because mortal, there were many Aaronic priests (v.23). (7:23) Another proof of the superiority of the New Testament over the First Testament is found in the continued life of the priest, this priest therefore able to make intercession for the believer forever, and thus able to save him completely, whereas the Aaronic priests were compelled by death to transfer their ministry to the next priest in succession. The word “continue” is the translation of parameno (parameno) which means “to remain alongside.” The idea is that because the Aaronic priests died, they were hindered from abiding by their ministration. Translation. And they indeed have been made many priests in number, because they were hindered from continuing by reason of death. (2) Our Lord, because eternal, has a non-transferable priesthood, thus able to save the believer forever (vv. 24, 25). (7:24, 25) The word “unchangeable” is the translation of aparabation (ajparabation) which is made up of baino (baino) “to step,” para (para), “across,” and a (a) “not,” the compound word meaning “not stepping across.” Thus, the word describes that which cannot be violated, or that which does not pass over to another. The priestly ministry of Messiah is in view here, a ministry such that no other person can step into it, a ministry that cannot be transferred to another. The word “uttermost” is the translation of panteles (pantele") which is made up of pas (pa") “all,” and telos (telo") “end, termination.” Thus, we have a two-dimensional salvation spoken of here. By reason of Messiah’s eternal ministry as High Priest, He is able to save the believer in his totality of being, body, soul, and spirit, and do all that to the point of termination, an unending state of salvation in eternity. The word “intercession” is the translation of entugchano (ejntugcano) which speaks of intervention rather than merely intercession. It includes every form of Messiah’s identifying Himself with humanity, and includes the idea of intercession. The writer speaks here of the present intercession of Messiah on behalf of believers, which is based upon and

follows His once-for-all offering of Himself as the sacrifice for sin. Translation. But this (priest), because He abides forever, has the priesthood which is non-transferable, for which reason He is able to be saving those completely and forever who come to God through Him, being always alive for the purpose of continually making intercession for them. (3) A better High Priest, because sinless (vv. 26–28). (7:26) The word “became” is the translation of prepo (prepo) which means “to be becoming, to be seemly, to be fitting.” The Messiah as High Priest was as to His character, one who was fitting to us. There was an essential fitness in the provision God made in Him as High Priest of the believer. That essential fitness consisted of the qualities mentioned in verses 26–28. That is, we sinners being sinful and dependant upon the mediation of a priest, needed a sinless one. What a contrast this is to the Aaronic priests who were themselves sinners and who needed in the last analysis, a High Priest to mediate salvation for them. Messiah is holy. The word is hosios (oJsio") here, not hagios (aJgio"). The former speaks of personal holiness, the latter of holiness as a state of separation to God. It speaks of holiness as that state of a person who is undefiled by sin, free from wickedness. “Harmless” is the translation of akakos. Kakos (ajkako". Kako") is the Greek word for evil in the abstract sense. The Greek letter Alpha prefixed makes the compound word mean “not evil,” that is guileless, free from malice and craft. The word “undefiled” is the translation of amiantos (ajmianto") which is defined as follows, “free from that by which the nature of a thing is deformed or debased, or its force or vigor is impaired.” “Separate” is a perfect participle in the Greek text, literally “separated.” That is, the Messiah is separated from sinners in that in His service as High Priest, He is void of all contact and commerce with sinners, removed far away in His glorified state and body, into God’s Holy of Holies. Translation. For such a high priest is fitting to us, holy, without guile, undefiled, having been separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. (7:27) Messiah’s once-for-all offering of Himself on the Cross as a sacrifice for sin, is contrasted to the daily offering of the high priests in Israel. Here we meet a difficulty. The high priest entered the Holy of Holies just once a year. Several views are offered as an explanation. We submit the following: Alford points out that the position of the word “daily” shows that it belongs to Messiah, not to the high priests, so that the sentence means, “Who has not need day by day, as the high priests had year by year.” Messiah’s intercession is continuous, from day to day, but in order to intercede daily, He does not need day by day to renew the sacrifice as the Aaronic high priest year by year, and whose intercession was once a year, which intercession was only efficacious and that only typically, when he offered an annual sacrifice. The great point is repetition. The Aaronic priests had to offer repeated sacrifices because the blood of animals could not pay for sin. Messiah needed to offer but one sacrifice, because His blood did pay for sin. Furthermore, He did not, like the high priest, have to offer first for His own sins, for He had none. The word “once” is the translation of ephapax (ejfapax), which means “once for all.” Messiah is, therefore, shown to be a high priest who is fitting to us, a priest of the kind lost sinners need.

Translation. Who does not have daily need, even as those high priests, first for their own sins to be offering up sacrifice, then for those of the people, for this He did once for all, having offered up Himself. (7:28) The word “infirmity” is the translation of astheneian (ajsqeneian) which is stronger than astheneis (ajsqenei"), the former speaking of infirmity as a general characteristic, whereas the latter might imply only special exhibitions of weakness. The law constitutes men who are constitutionally weak, morally, spiritually, physically, high priests, whereas the sworn declaration of God constitutes the Son High Priest, who is perfected forevermore. “Consecrated” of the Authorized Version is from teleioo (teleioo) which means “to bring to completion.” Translation. For the law constitutes high priests men having infirmity, but the word of the oath which was since the law, constitutes One who is in character Son (a High Priest), who is perfected forevermore. 1.

Officiates in a better tabernacle (8:1–6). (1) His tabernacle, the heavenly one, Aaron’s merely the type (vv. 1–5). (8:1) The words “of the things which we have spoken” are an inaccurate translation of the Greek text here. The verb is present in tense, and the preposition epi (ejpi) does not mean “of” but “in the case of.” The reference is not to the things just discussed, but to the matters to be considered. The word “sum” is the translation of kephalaion (kefalaion) which means “the chief point.” It does not refer to the sum of what precedes, but to the main point of that which follows. The words “such an high priest” refer back to verses 26, 27. The words “is set” are the translation of ekathisen (ejkaqisen), literally “sat down.” Here we have priestly imagery. This High Priest took His seat in the heavens. His work of offering a sacrifice for sin was finished. He now officiates in a heavenly tabernacle, whereas Aaron engaged in priestly service in an earthly one. The place of the Messiah is at the right hand of the throne in heaven, a place which Aaron could not occupy. Thus, Messiah as High Priest is seen in every way to be superior to Aaron, and, therefore, the New Testament He inaugurated, superior to the First Testament which Aaron officiated under. Translation. Now, in the consideration of the things which are being spoken, this is the chief point: Such an High Priest we possess, who took His seat on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. (8:2) Messiah, having paid for sin at the Cross, is now seated in heaven as a minister. The word “minister” is the translation of leitourgos (leitourgo") which is made up of an old adjective leitos (leito") meaning “belonging to the people,” and ergon (ejrgon), meaning “work.” It was used of a person in the service of the state who held public office. The word is used in the LXX and the New Testament, both of priestly service to God and of service to man. The word “sanctuary” is the translation of ton hagion (ton aJgion). The latter word means “holy.” The words are in the plural. Thus, Messiah ministers in the holy places, the heavenly sanctuary. The word “tabernacle” is in the Greek text literally “a tent.” “True” is alethinos (ajleqino"), literally “genuine,” not in this case opposed to that

which is false or counterfeit, but in contrast to that which is a mere copy or representation of the heavenly. The genuine tent or tabernacle which the Lord pitched is the Holy of Holies of heaven itself, and it is in this sanctuary that Messiah officiates as High Priest. He is, therefore, superior to Aaron since He serves in a superior sanctuary, and because He is superior to Aaron, the New Testament which He inaugurated is superior to the First Testament under which Aaron served. And this is the argument of the epistle. Translation. A minister of the holy (places) and of the tabernacle, the genuine one which the Lord pitched, not man. (8:3) A priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices. Therefore, Messiah as High Priest must have gifts and sacrifices to offer also, and a sanctuary in which to offer them. Translation. For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Wherefore it is necessary that this one be having that which He might offer. (8:4) Since Messiah was not a priest in the order of Aaron, He could not officiate on earth, for the Levitical order of priesthood was established by law, the Mosaic. He would, therefore, not be a priest on earth. Since that is true, He must be a high Priest in heaven. Translation. If indeed, therefore, He were on earth, in that case He would not be a priest, there being those who offer the gifts according to law. (8:5) The word “example” is the translation of hupodeigma (uJpodeigma) which refers to a sign suggestive of anything, an outline, a delineation, a suggestion. The word “shadow” is the translation of skia (skia), “an adumbration (imperfect portrayal or representation of a thing) of a reality which it does not embody.” A shadow has no substance in itself. It has no independent existence. It merely is proof of the fact that there is a reality back of it. It is not itself solid or real. Just so, the earthly tabernacle gave proof of the fact that there was a real one, the heavenly one where God Himself dwelt, where Messiah officiates as High Priest. The Aaronic priests performed their priestly rites in the representation of the heavenly tabernacle. Translation. Who are of such a character as serve the copy and representation of the heavenly things, even as Moses was divinely commanded when about to make the tabernacle. For, See, He says, make all things according to the pattern which was showed to you on the mountain. (2) His Testament therefore better than the one Aaron served under (v. 6). (8:6) This is an important verse. It is a pivotal verse in the epistle. It closes the first major argument. The book was written to prove the following proposition: The New Testament in Jesus’ blood is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament in animal blood. The writer has proved this to be true on the basis of pure logic and the Old Testament Scriptures. Using the logical argument that a superior workman turns out a

superior product, he has shown that Messiah, the Founder of the New Testament is better than the founders of the First Testament, who were the prophets, angels, Moses, Joshua, and Aaron. Therefore, the testament He brought in is superior to and takes the place of theirs. In the light of this, we can better understand the words, “But now hath He (Messiah) obtained a more excellent ministry than they (prophets, angels, Moses, Joshua, Aaron), by how much also He is the Mediator of a better covenant (the New Testament), which is established upon better promises.” The words “more excellent ministry” refer primarily to the more excellent ministry which Messiah has than that of the Aaronic priests, but since this verse concludes the first major argument in which the relative merits of the founders are compared, and the next verse begins the second major argument in which the relative merits of the Testaments themselves are compared, the present writer has reached back to the beginning of the epistle to gather together the threads of the entire demonstration. The word “now” is not temporal but logical in its usage here. The word “established” is the translation of nomotheteo (nomoqeteo) which means “to enact laws.” Translation. But now a more excellent ministry He has obtained, by how much also He is a mediator of a better testament, which is of such a character as to have been enacted upon the basis of better promises. II.

The New Testament is better than and takes the place of the First Testament (8:7–10:39) because 1. It was prophesied to be better (8:7–13). a. The First Testament faulty in that it did not put away sin (v. 7). (8:7) Since God instituted the First Testament, it was perfect for the purpose for which it was planned, as an index-finger pointing to Messiah and His substitutionary atonement. But it was faulty when it came to the place of providing an atonement that would pay for sin. The very fact that a place in history was sought for a new one, shows that the First Testament was faulty. The words “have been sought” are the translation of zeteo (zeteo), a verb in the imperfect tense, which tense speaks of progressive action going on in past time. The literal translation is, “then no place would have been being sought.” That is, a search would not have been going on for a new testament if the First Testament had been faultless. This implies a sense of dissatisfaction with the First Testament while the First Testament was still in force, and a looking about for something better. The writer to the Hebrews is now going to show that the Levitical system was in character, a testament which was recognized as imperfect and transitory by an Old Testament prophet, since he spoke of the divine purpose of bringing in a new testament. Translation. For if that first testament had been faultless, in that case there would not have been a constant searching out of a place for a second. b. New Testament made with Israel and Judah (v. 8). (8:8) The writer now quotes Jeremiah (31:31–34), one of their own prophets. It is an astute move. He puts the Jewish recipients of this letter in the place where they will have to accept the New Testament and the testimony of their own prophet to the effect that

God would bring in a New Testament, or, if they reject the New Testament, they will be forced to reject their own prophet. Thus does the writer build his argument upon the Old Testament Scriptures, the very Word of God his readers profess to believe. The word “them” refers to the people of Israel during the time the First Testament was in force. The writer after finding fault with the First Testament, now finds fault with the people. Expositor’s quotes Rendall; “There is a subtle delicacy of language in the insensible shifting of language from the covenant to the people. The covenant itself could hardly be said to be faultless, seeing that it failed to bind Israel to their God; but the true cause of failure lay in the character of the people, not in the law, which was holy, righteous, and good.” Expositor’s continues: “The old covenant was faulty because it did not provide for enabling the people to live up to the terms or conditions of it. It was faulty inasmuch as it did not sufficiently provide against their faultiness.” The word “make” is the translation of sunteleo (sunteleo), which means “to conclude or consummate.” The writer seems to have chosen this word rather than poieo (poieo) “to make,” in order to emphasize more clearly the conclusive perfecting power of the New Testament. It is important to note that the New Testament is not Christianity. The Book of Hebrews is not an argument the purpose of which is to prove that Christianity is superior to Judaism as seen in its Founder, Christ. The First Testament was a covenant made with Israel. The New Testament is also a covenant made with Israel. God makes no covenants with the Gentiles. Israel is the chosen channel through which He brings salvation to the human race. The First Testament consisted of a system of sacrifices, symbolic in their import. The New Testament is a Sacrifice, the Lord Jesus at the Cross, actual in its character, and efficacious in its merits. The First Testament began at Genesis 3:21, and ended at the Cross. The New Testament began at the Cross and is an everlasting one (13:20). Christianity refers to the Mystical Body of Christ of which He is the Head. This Body is composed of all who are saved from Pentecost to the Rapture. The New Testament made Christianity possible. The saints of the Church Age are saved through the Blood of the Sacrifice which was offered under the New Testament. That is the relationship between the New Testament and Christianity. The two names, Israel and Judah, refer here to the two parts of the divided nation, Israel the northern kingdom, and Judah, the southern. Translation. For, finding fault with them He says, Behold the days come, says the Lord, and I will consummate with the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new testament. c. First Testament dealt with Israel as with a minor (v. 9). (8:9) The word “covenant” is the translation of diatithemi (diatiqemi) which is made up of tithemi (tiqemi) “to place” and dia (dia) the root meaning of which is “two!” thus, “to place between two.” Thus, a covenant is something placed between two, an arrangement between two parties. The inspired writer uses the same word in 9:16–20 where the meaning of the word is that of a testament in the sense of a last will or testament, the legal instrument by which something is bequeathed to someone. Thus, the words “covenant” or “testament” refer in this epistle to one thing, the act of God providing for the salvation of the believing sinner through the blood atonement offered on Calvary’s Cross by the Lord Jesus. It is a covenant in the sense that it is an agreement on

God’s part that He will give salvation to the sinner who will receive it by faith in the High Priest He has appointed. It is a last will or testament in the sense that God bequeaths salvation to the sinner who will receive it on the terms of the will, faith in the blood of Jesus. God, the divine Testator, dies to make the will effective. The words “covenant” and “testament” are used of one thing in this book, viewed from two angles. The words “lead them by the hand,” speak of the fact that the First Testament was given to a people in its minority. Israel was treated as a minor. God put it under laws and regulations. If Israel behaved itself, it was rewarded, and if it misbehaved, it was punished. Israel was taught by object lessons as one would teach a child, for instance, the tabernacle, priesthood, offerings, the gorgeous vestments of the high priest. Under this covenant, the believer in Israel was declared righteous (Gal. 3:6), and was regenerated (John 3:10 “Art thou the teacher of Israel and dost thou not have an experimental knowledge (ginosko (ginosko)) of these things?)”. But with all this, the believer was only a born child in its minority (teknon (teknon)), as over against the believer in this Age of Grace, an adult son (huios (uiJo")), (Gal. 4:2 children, teknon (teknon), 3:26 the sons of God huios (uiJo"), not “children” as in the Authorized Version). The word “continue” is the translation of emmeno (ejmmeno) which means “to persevere, to hold fast, be true to, abide by.” “Regarded not” is the translation of ameleo (ajmeleo) which is made up of melo (melo) “to care for” and Alpha privative which negates the word, making it mean “not to care for.” The idea in the word melo (melo) is that of a concern or solicitude which one has for another. When Israel failed to be true to the covenant, God’s solicitude and concern for His chosen people gave place to one of righteous indignation, which attitude culminated with the captivities. How serious was Israel’s defection is seen in the words which Delitzsch quotes from Schelling: “The Law appears to be the mere ideal of a religious constitution, as it has never existed in fact: in practice, the Jews were almost throughout polytheists. The substance of their national feeling was formed by heathendom: the accidents only, by revelation. From the queen of heaven down to the abominations of the Phoenicians, and even Cybele, the Jews passed through every grade of paganism.” Delitzsch adds, “In fact, there is no period of the history of Israel before the captivity, in which more or less idolatry was not united with the worship of Jehovah, except the time of David and the first years of Solomon, during which the influence of Samuel still continued to be felt. And when by the captivity idol-worship was completely eradicated from the people, as far at least as regards that part of it which returned, it is well-known that a hypocritical letter-worship got the mastery over them, which was morally very little better.” Translation. Not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, because they did not continue true to my covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord. d.

New Testament through the indwelling Spirit brings believers to adult sonship (v. 10). (8:10) The words “the covenant that I will make” are interesting in the Greek text. The noun and verb are cognate. By that is meant that the noun and verb both have the same root and meaning. Literally, it is, “the arrangement which I will arrange with them,” or

“the covenant which I will covenant with them.” In the case of the First Testament, God wrote His laws on tables of stone to be obeyed by the regenerated Israelite. In the case of the New Testament, He writes them on the mind and heart in the sense that He not only regenerates the individual, but He provides for the personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the believer, in whose ministrations are added resources of grace which give the believer both the desire and the power to do God’s will (Phil. 2:12, 13). The words “I will be to them a God,” have the idea, “I will be to them to serve as a God.” Translation. Because this is the covenant which I will arrange with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord, giving my laws into their mind, and upon their hearts I will write them. And I will be to them, God, and they themselves will be to Me a people. e.

Under the New Testament, all individuals in Israel will know the Lord (v. 11). (8:11) In explanation of this verse we offer the excellent note in Expositor’s: “The inward acceptance of God’s will involves the knowledge of God. In the new covenant all were to be ‘taught of God’ (Isa. 54:13; John 6:45) and independent of the instruction of a privileged class. Under the old covenant, none but the educated scribe could understand the minutiae of the law with which religion was identified. The elaborate ritual made it impossible for the private individual to know whether a ram or a pigeon was the appropriate sacrifice for his sin, or whether his sin was mortal or venial. A priest had to be consulted. Under the new covenant intermediates were to be abolished. The knowledge of God was to lie in the heart alongside of the love of parent or friend, and would demand for its expression no more external instruction than those primal, instinctive and home-grown affections.” The words “they shall not teach” are emphatic in the Greek text. There are two negatives before the word “teach,” which in Greek do not make a positive, but an emphatic negation. The construction speaks of that which will in no wise happen. The word “neighbor” is the translation of polites (polite") which means “a fellow-citizen.” The Greek text uses two different words in the case of the expressions “know the Lord,” and “all shall know Me.” In the case of the first instance of the use of the word “know,” the word is ginosko (ginosko). This word is used where one commends God to the knowledge of one who is ignorant of Him. The word thus implies the recognition of the person or thing disclosed, upon the part of the one to whom disclosure is made. The other word is oida (oijda) which speaks of an absolute acquaintance with something. Under the New Testament, Israel in the Millennium, its individual members cleansed in the fountain filled with blood through the sovereign grace of God, indwelt by the Holy Spirit who will both sanctify and teach the individual (Zech. 12:10–13:6), will have no need of any intermediate between the individual believer and God. Equipped with the Great Teacher, the Holy Spirit, all, from the least to the greatest among them, shall have a personal, direct relationship to God. While there will be priests offering sacrifices, yet the people will be on a level with the priests of Israel so far as their understanding of God and His Word is concerned. In this sense the New Testament is an advance upon the First Testament. This knowledge of God will be without any distinction of age or station in life.

Translation. And in no wise shall each one teach his fellow-citizen and each one his brother, saying, Come to know the Lord in an experiential way, because all shall know Me in an absolute way, from the least to the greatest of them. f. Under New Testament, sins put away (v. 12). (8:12) The word “for” is hoti (oJti) in the Greek text. Introducing the statement in this verse and connecting that statement with the contents of the preceding verse, it speaks of the fact that the forgiveness of sins or the manifestation of God’s grace are prerequisite and fundamental to the person’s participation in the blessings of the New Testament and a personal acquaintance with God. The words “and their iniquities” are not found in the best manuscripts. The expression “will I remember no more” is emphatic in the Greek text, two negative particles occurring before the word “remember.” Under the First Testament, sins were brought to mind every year by reason of the constant repetition of the sacrifices. Under the New Testament sins are forgotten, and for the reason that they have been paid for. God remembers them no more. Translation. Because I will be merciful in the case of their unrighteousnesses, and their sins l will in no wise remember anymore. g. New Testament displaces First Testament (v. 13). (8:13) In saying the word “new” (v. 8) God through the prophet Jeremiah had even at that time made the First Testament old. The distinctive Greek word for “old” here is not archaios (ajrcaio"), namely, that which is old in point of time, but, palaios (palaio"), that which is old in point of use, worn-out, antiquated, useless, outmoded. Even in Jeremiah’s time, the insufficiency of the First Testament was recognized, and the need of a new one proclaimed. The words “made old” are the translation of palaioo (palaioo) which verb has the same root as the noun palaios (palaio") mentioned above. It is in the perfect tense, which tense speaks of an action completed in past time having present results. Thus, we could translate, “In saying new, He has permanently antiquated the first (covenant).” The word “decayeth” is the translation of the same verb, and we have “that which is being antiquated.” The words “waxeth old” are the translation of gerasko (gerasko) which means “to grow old” and carries with it the suggestion of the waning strength and the decay which are incident to old age. It has the meanings also of being obsolescent, failing from age. Translation. In the fact that He says new, He has permanently antiquated the first. Now, that which is being antiquated and is waning in strength, is near to the point of vanishing away. 2. It is actual, the First Testament, only typical (9:1–15). a. First Testament typical (vv. 1–10). (1) Its sanctuary on earth (v. 1). (9:1) The words “ordinances of divine service” mean “ordinances adapted for divine service.” The definite article occurs before the words “worldly sanctuary.” The word

translated “worldly” is kosmikon (kosmikon) which means “of this world” as contrasted to the heavenly world, having to do with the earth in contrast to heaven. The word “worldly” does not here have any evil connotation. Translation. Then indeed the first testament had ordinances of divine service, and its sanctuary, a sanctuary of this world. (2) Its appointments typical (vv. 2–5). (9:2) The word “tabernacle” is the translation of the ordinary Greek word for “tent.” The writer speaks of the first tent, that is, the first division of the tabernacle, the Holy Place, thirty feet long, fifteen feet wide, and fifteen feet high. He speaks of the two divisions as two tabernacles or tents. The word “candlestick” is the translation of luchnia (lucnia) which refers to a lampstand. There were seven lamps burning on this lampstand. The table and the loaves are treated as one item. The Greek text is literally here, “the table and the setting forth of the loaves”; that is, it refers to the table with its loaves set forth. The word “sanctuary” is the translation of hagia (aJgia) which means “holy.” This Greek word is in the plural number, literally “holies.” Translation. For a tent was constructed, the first in which was both the lampstand, and the table and its loaves set forth, which (the tent) is of such a character as to be called a sanctuary. (9:3) According to Exodus 26:31–37, there were two veils. One was before the door of the Holy Place and the other separated the latter from the Holy of Holies. Translation. And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies. (9:4) We face a difficulty here in the words “which had the golden censer.” In speaking of the articles of furniture in the Holy Place, the writer omitted the altar of incense which stood just before the veil in the Holy Place. Now, he speaks of the golden censer as being one of the appointments of the Holy of Holies. Alford offers the following as a possible solution. He says that the Greek word translated “had” (echo (ejco)), which means “to have,” cannot be kept to its stricter meaning of “containing,” since neither the incense-altar nor the censer was kept in the Holy of Holies. He quotes from the Mischna to the effect that there was a censer used on the day of expiation that was different from that used on any other day, different in that it was made of gold, and of a particular and precious kind of gold. This golden censer, full of burning coals of fire was carried into the Holy of Holies by the high priest on the Day of Atonement. The incense was then put upon the fire, and the cloud of the incense covered the mercy seat (Lev. 16:12, 13). The meaning of the writer therefore would be that the golden censer had to do with the Holy of Holies, but was not a permanent article of furniture which it contained. The word “ark” is the translation of kiboton (kiboton) which means a box or chest. The word “ark” is still used in Scotland in the expression “the meal-ark,” for the “mealchest.” The ark in the Holy of Holies was made of shittim wood overlaid with gold. Regarding the statement of the writer to the effect that the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod were in the ark, Vincent calls our attention to the fact that according to Exodus 16:34 and

Numbers 17:10, both of these were “before the testimony,” and that in Exodus 25:16, Moses is commanded to put only the tables of the law into the ark, also that in I Kings 8:9 it is said of the ark in the temple “there was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone.” Vincent comes to the conclusion that the writer followed the rabinnical tradition that the pot of manna and the rod were inside the ark. Alford, on the other hand points out that “this, as Delitzsch observes, will not prove anything against the pot of manna and the rod having once been there; nay, rather from the express declaration that there was then nothing but the tables of stone, it would seem that formerly there had been other things there. The Rabbis certainly treat of the pot of manna as of the rod being in the ark … The Gemara mentions a tradition that with the ark disappeared the pot of manna, and the cruse of anointing oil, and the rod of Aaron with its almonds and blossoms, and the chest which the Philistines sent for a trespass-offering (I Sam. 6:4, 8).” Translation. Having the golden censer and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, in which was the golden pot having the manna, and the rod of Aaron, the one that budded, and the tablets of the covenant. (9:5) The writer next speaks of the cherubim overshadowing the mercy seat. The word “cherubim” is a transliteration of the Hebrew word meaning “living creatures.” Those in Ezekiel have four faces, of a man, a lion, an ox, and an eagle, representing respectively intelligence, strength, steadfastness, and rapidity. They represented all that is best in creation by a combination of excellences found in no single animal. The cherubim associated with the ark were two in number, made of gold, of one piece with the mercy seat, the golden cover of the ark, one at each end of the ark, looking towards one another, and overshadowing the mercy-seat. They are described as the cherubim of glory probably because they were closely attached to and attendant upon the place of the manifestation of the divine glory in redemption. The words “mercy seat” are the translation of hilasterion (iJlasterion), used in the LXX to designate the throne of mercy above the ark. This same word is used in Romans 3:25 where it is translated “propitiation.” This Greek word as used in the Bible does not as its English translation, “propitiation,” suggests, mean “something offered to placate or appease anger,” but refers to atonement or reconciliation through covering, and in that way getting rid of the sin which stands between God and sinful man. The chief idea in the word is not that which is related to an offended party, but to sin or uncleanness. As Vincent says, “the scripture conception of hilaskomai (iJlaskomai) (the cognate verb) is not that of appeasing one who is angry with a personal feeling against an offender, but of altering the character of that which, from without, occasions, a necessary alienation, and interposes an inevitable obstacle of fellowship.” That obstacle between God and man, namely, sin, was removed by our Lord’s atoning death on the Cross. The sacrificial blood sprinkled on the cover of the ark fully satisfies the demands of the broken law, and comes between the tablets of the law reposing in the ark and the high priest who represents the people and in whom the people stand. Thus, did the blood of Jesus interpose itself between the law of God and the guilty sinner. The hilasterion (iJlasterion) or cover of the ark, called the mercy seat, the throne where mercy is offered on the basis of justice satisfied, is the place where a holy God will meet sinful man and save him. The writer says

that he could not at the time of the writing of this passage speak particularly of the mercy seat. That is, he did not feel that he could speak of it in detail, since the emphasis of his discussion was upon the two-fold division of the tabernacle. Translation. And over it the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat, concerning which we cannot now speak in detail. (3) Its priesthood temporary (vv. 6–10). (9:6) The word “ordained” is the translation of kataskeuazo (kataskeuazo) which means “to furnish, equip, prepare, make ready.” The word is in the perfect tense, speaking of an action completed in past time, having present results. That is, these articles of furniture in the tabernacle having been arranged so as to properly furnish it, and continuing to be so arranged, the priests went day by day into the Holy Place, accomplishing the service of God. The word “accomplishing” is the translation of epiteleo (ejpiteleo), which was used in Herodotus of the performing of religious services. The word itself refers to the act of completing something. In this verse, the writer, in preparation for what follows, emphasizes the inaccessible sacredness of the inner tent, the Holy of Holies as compared to the constant openness of the outer tent, and the mysterious closeness of the former. Translation. But these things having been thus arranged, into the first tent continually there enter the priests, fulfilling the service of God. (9:7) Regarding the entrance of the high priest into the Holy of Holies, the Mosaic law (Lev. 16:2, 34) forbad his entering daily, and commanded him to enter once a year, on the Day of Atonement, the tenth day of the seventh month. On that day he entered at least three times, first with the incense, then with the blood of the bullock which atoned for his own sins and those of his house, and finally with the blood of the goat for the sins of the people. The word “errors” is the translation of agnoema (ajgnoema), a sin committed through ignorance or thoughtlessness. The word “for” is the translation of huper (uJper), a preposition which speaks of substitution. It means “for the sake of, in behalf of.” It speaks of the substitutionary character of the atonement. For instance, “it is expedient for you that one man should die instead of the people” (John 11:50), or, “He gave Himself in behalf of us” (Titus 2:14). Here the blood is offered as a type pointing to the atonement of our Lord. Translation. But into the second once a year, alone, the high priest entered, not without blood which he offers in behalf of himself and in behalf of the sins of ignorance of the people. (9:8) The writer states that the Holy Spirit is both the divine Author of the Levitical system of worship and its interpreter.14 The first tabernacle is the Holy Place. As long as that part of the Levitical institution was still in effect, Israel was to understand that the way into the presence of God had not yet been opened. The division of the tabernacle into the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies showed the limitations of the Levitical system, and kept the people from coming directly to God. The Holy Place barred both priests and people from the Holy of Holies.

When the new order of things was brought into being by the death of Messiah on the Cross, thus fulfilling the typical sacrifices, God rent the inner veil of the temple which separated the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies, making of the two rooms, one. There was, therefore, no more “within the veil.” This was God’s object lesson to the Aaronic priesthood that its ministry was now over, that the temple was to be closed, that a new Priest had arisen after the order of Melchisedec. But, Israel in its apostasy, repaired the veil, kept on offering sacrifices, until God in His wrath, sent Rome to destroy the city of Jerusalem and scatter His chosen people to the ends of the Roman empire. The way into the Holiest of all, into heaven itself and the presence of God, had been opened at the Cross. God made it impossible for the high priest in Israel to enter within the veil, all of which was enough to show Israel that the true High Priest, the Messiah, had entered the heavenly Holy of Holies, and that the earthly one was to be a thing of the past. Translation. The Holy Spirit all the while making this plain, that not yet was made actual the road into the Holiest while still the first tabernacle had standing (i.e., remained a recognized institution). (9:9) The word “which” refers back to the word “tabernacle,” namely, the Holy Place or the first division of the tabernacle as such. The Greek word is hetis (eJti"), referring not only to a particular thing but also emphasizing quality or nature. The idea is “which was of such a nature that it was such and such a thing.” “Figure” is the translation of parabole (parabole) which comes into our language in the word “parable”. The Greek word means “that which is thrown alongside of something else” to explain it. Thus, the tabernacle was an object lesson used to explain spiritual truth. As long as it remained an object lesson, thus a recognized institution, it was clear that the actual tabernacle to which it pointed was not yet in use. The tabernacle in Israel, and later, the temple, remained that object lesson during the history of Israel, until the veil of the temple was rent. The words “in which” do not refer back to the tabernacle but to the word “figure.” It was according to the prescribed details of the Levitical ritual that the sacrifices were offered. These gifts and sacrifices could not make the worshipper perfect so far as his conscience was concerned. The word “perfect” is teleios (teleio") which does not mean sinless, but complete, finished. The word described that which needed nothing to make it what it should be, complete. The Levitical ritual as such did not touch the conscience. No ritual in itself ever does. There was nothing in it that could deal with conscience. Only the working of the Holy Spirit through the Word of God and the efficacy of the blood of the Messiah could do that. The Holy Spirit did in Old Testament times deal as He does today with the consciences of men, but the salvation which He applied under the Levitical system found its source in the New Testament Sacrifice, the Lord Jesus. Therefore, while operating under the jurisdiction of the First Testament, God was giving salvation to the First Testament believer by virtue of that which was accomplished through the New Testament. Since the First Testament could not do that which the New Testament did, it was set aside in favor of the New Testament. And this is the argument of the Book of Hebrews. Translation. Which (tabernacle) was of such a nature as to be an explanation for the ensuing time, according to which both gifts and

sacrifices are being offered which are not able to make complete the one who offers them, so far as the conscience is concerned. (9:10) The word translated “in” is epi (ejpi), which means literally “upon.” The thought of the writer is that the Levitical system found its operating basis in meats and drinks and divers washings. The word “meats” is broma (broma) which means “food.” The English word “meat” meant just that in 1611 a.d., when the Authorized Version was made. Today the word is confined almost entirely to the meaning of edible animal flesh. In regard to drinks, the Levitical law laid down no prescriptions except as to abstinence in the case of a Nazarite vow, and of the priests when they were to officiate. Alford says that the writer had in mind both the legal and the Talmudic conditions imposed upon the worshippers. The writer describes these as carnal ordinances. The word “carnal” is sarx (sarx) which refers here to humanity. The ordinances were such as had to do with human conditions of life, food, drink, cleanliness. These were imposed upon Israel until the time of reformation. The Greek word translated “imposed” does not carry with it necessarily the idea in the English word, that of an imposition, something laid upon one as a burden. The word is epikeimai (ejpikeimai), which means merely “to lay upon.” The word translated “reformation” is interesting and important. It is diorthosis (diorqosi"), from the verb diorthoo (diorqoo). The word means in its physical sense the making straight, the restoring to its natural and normal condition, something which in some way protrudes or has gotten out of line, as for instance broken or misshapen limbs. It means “to set things to rights.” In the LXX it is used of mending one’s ways (Jer. 7:3, 5), and of setting up or establishing (Isa. 16:5). The word in its context here means “to bring matters to a satisfactory state.” It refers to the introduction of the New Testament which latter displaces the First Testament. The First Testament never was satisfactory, so far as offering a sacrifice that could pay for sin was concerned. It could not actually in itself save the believer. Translation. Which (the Levitical system) had its basis only in food and drink and various washings, ordinances befitting human beings, enjoined until the time of bringing matters to a satisfactory state. b.

New Testament actual (vv. 11–15). (1) The reality better than the type (v. 11). (9:11) In verses 1–10 the writer has spoken of the typical significance of the First Testament, and its transitory use. Now, in verses 11–15, he speaks of the New Testament, and its ability to do that which the sacrifices of the First Testament could not do, namely, make atonement for the lost sinner. The little word “but” is the pivot upon which this argument swings. He speaks of Messiah “being come.” The word is paraginomai (paraginomai), which means “to become alongside,” thus, “to arrive upon the scene,” here the human scene. It speaks here of an advent. Messiah was not a mere human being born in the midst of humanity. He came from outside of humanity and incorporated Himself with humankind through the virgin birth. He came from another world. The words “of good things to come,” are the translation of a rejected reading. The best texts read, “of the good things realized,” referring not as the rejected reading, to

merely prophetic blessings or objects of hope, but also to blessings already attained, free approach to God, the better covenant, personal communion with God, and the purging of the conscience. Messiah arrives upon the scene of human sin and sorrow as a High Priest whose work of providing a salvation for the lost is “by a greater and more perfect tabernacle.” The word “by” is the translation of dia (dia), the preposition of intermediate agency. That is, the kind of tabernacle the priest officiates in, determines the quality of his work. If he ministers in a tabernacle that is a mere type, his work is not efficacious so far as actual salvation is concerned, but only typical. If he on the other hand, serves in the actual tabernacle of which the other tabernacle is only a type, his work of salvation is actual and meritorious. In the case of Messiah, the heavenly tabernacle was the sanctuary in which He served. It is described as the greater and more complete tabernacle. The definite article is used with the word “tabernacle,” pointing out a particular and individual one. It is further described as not being made with hands, and this description is further defined by the phrase, “not of this building.” The word “building” in the Greek text is ktisis (ktisi"), “creation.” That is, the tabernacle in which Messiah serves, does not belong to the natural creation, the material universe. Translation. But Messiah having appeared upon the scene, a High Priest of good things realized, through the instrumentality of the greater and more complete tabernacle not made by hands, that is to say, not of this creation. (2) The sacrificial blood better (vv. 12–15). (a) It was His own blood (v. 12). (9:12) But not only were the tabernacles different. The blood offered was different. In the case of the Aaronic priests, it was the blood of goats and calves. In the case of Messiah, it was His own blood. The words “His own” are the translation of idios (ijdio"). Had the personal pronoun autos (aujto") been used, the reference would be merely to the fact that it was by means of His blood that He entered the Holy of Holies. But the word idios (ijdio") speaks not merely of ownership, but of a personal, private, unique ownership. For instance, John in his Gospel (5:18) states the fact that the Jews tried to kill our Lord because He had said that God was His personal, unique Father. Had John used autos (aujto"), there would have been no justification for their accusation, for each one of these Jews claimed God as his Father. John used idios (ijdio"), reporting the Lord Jesus as saying that God was His private, unique Father. God was His Father in a different sense from that in which He might be the Father of others. Our Lord claimed unique Sonship, and, therefore, Deity. And these Jews recognized that fact. Now, the efficacy of our Lord’s blood rested, not in the fact that it was human blood, but that it was human blood of a unique kind. It flowed in the veins of One who was as to His humanity, sinless, and as to His Person, Deity. And the combination of these two, sinless humanity, and Deity, made it unique, efficacious. It was the only sacrificial blood that could be sprinkled on the Mercy Seat in the heavenly Holy of Holies, the only blood which the High Court of Heaven would accept as atonement for human sin. It was this blood poured out on Calvary’s Cross that gave Messiah access as High Priest into the Holy of Holies of heaven.

However, we are not to understand that our Lord took His blood into heaven. That precious blood was poured out on the Cross and dripped into the earth. But it was by virtue of that fact that He entered heaven, having accomplished salvation by the sacrifice of Himself. It was in that bloodless, glorified human body which is an eternal testimony that sin is paid for, that our blessed Lord entered heaven. He entered in once into the Holy of Holies. The word is ephapax (ejfapax), “once for all,” in distinction to the Aaronic high priest who entered into the earthly Holy of Holies annually. By entering thus into the Holy of Holies, the writer says that Messiah obtained eternal redemption for lost sinners. The word “obtained” is the translation of heurisko (euJrisko). The writer could have used lambano (lambano) which is the general word for the idea of obtaining or procuring something. But he uses a specialized word. Heurisko (eJurisko) means “to find, to come upon, to find a thing sought, to discover.” In the middle voice it means “to find for one’s self, to acquire, obtain, procure.” The word thus speaks of the act, not merely of obtaining something, but of seeking for something, of finding it, and then of appropriating it. The problem of how a just God could require that justice be satisfied in the case of the human breaking of His law, and mercy be offered the evil doer, was solved by the substitutionary atonement. The Judge in this case steps down from His judgment throne to take upon Himself the guilt and penalty of the sinner. In this way justice was satisfied, His government maintained, and the flood gates of mercy opened, resulting in the righteous bestowal of salvation. The Messiah found and procured salvation by means of His outpoured blood. This is also told us in the Greek word translated “redemption,” lutrosis (lutrosi"). The verbal form of this word means “to release on receipt of ransom, to redeem or liberate by payment of a ransom.” The word “ransom,” lutron (lutron), was used of the ransom-money that was paid in freeing a slave. Sinners are slaves of sin and Satan. Messiah by His sacrifice on the Cross, paid for their liberation, the ransom-money, His blood, for the wages of sin is death, and death means outpoured blood. Thus, the primal necessity of the Cross was in satisfying the claims of outraged justice, of paying the penalty of man’s sin. The sinner, having placed his faith in Messiah as his High Priest, is liberated forever from sin’s penalty. This is given us in the word “eternal.” The believing sinner saved by the blood of Jesus, is saved for time and for eternity. He can never be lost. The Lord Jesus by His outpoured blood, procured for man, not a probation but a salvation. Translation. Nor even through the intermediate instrumentality of the blood of goats or calves, but through that blood of His own, He entered once for all into the Holies (the Holy of Holies), having found and procured eternal redemption. (b) Animal blood cleanses from ceremonial defilement (v. 13). (9:13) The writer in this verse speaks of the unclean Israelite, the person who was rendered ceremonially unclean by contact with a dead body, or by entering a house where a corpse was lying, or by touching a bone or a tomb. If he should enter the tabernacle while thus defiled, he was cut off from Israel. Ceremonial defilement was not in itself sin, but a type of sin. Hence the blood of animals could cleanse away this defilement. It was only the flesh of the person which was defiled by contact with the dead. It was likewise only the flesh that was cleansed. Thus, defilement and cleansing were both symbolic. The word “unclean” in the Greek text is koinoo (koinoo) which means “to make

common, to render unhallowed, profane.” The word “sanctify” is hagiazo (aJgiazo) which means “to set apart for God.” Thus, the word “unclean” means here “that which is common, profane, unhallowed, not related to or connected with God.” The unclean Israelite was, therefore, “out of bounds,” so to speak, so far as participation in the tabernacle service of Israel was concerned, and also his service to God. When he fulfilled the Levitical ritual that had to do with his position and his restoration to a participation in the worship of Israel, he was sanctified, that is, set apart for God again. Translation. For if, as is the case, the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling those who are in a state of uncleanness, set that person apart with reference to the purity of the flesh. (c) Jesus’ blood cleanses from actual sin (v. 14). (9:14)The writer now makes a comparison between the efficacy of the blood of animals and that of the blood of Messiah. The former could cleanse ceremonial defilement, but the latter can cleanse from actual sin. And the reason why the blood of Messiah is so much more efficacious, is stated by the writer in the words, “Who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God.” The word “through” is dia (dia), the preposition of intermediate instrumentality. There is no definite article before the word “Spirit.” The translation thus reads: “Who through the instrumentality of eternal Spirit.” We cannot do better than give Alford’s words on this difficult statement: ”The animals which were offered, had no will, no pneuma (pneuma) (spirit) of their own, which could concur with the act of sacrifice. Theirs was a transitory life, of no potency or virtue. They were offered through law rather than any consent, or agency, or counteragency, of their own. But Christ offered Himself, with His own consent assisting and empowering the sacrifice. And what was that consent? the consent of what? of the spirit of a man? such a consent as yours or mine, given in and through our finite spirit whose acts are bounded by its own allotted space of time and its own responsibilities? No: but the consenting act of His divine Personality—His pneuma aionion (pneuma aijonion) (eternal spirit), His Godhead, which from before time acquiesced in, and wrought with, the redemption— purpose of the Father … Pneuma aionion (Pneuma aijonion) (eternal Spirit) is not the Spirit of the Father dwelling in Christ, nor is it the Holy Spirit given without measure to Christ, but it is the divine Spirit of the Godhead which Christ Himself had and was in His inner Personality. And I conclude with Delitzsch as to the relevancy of such a clause here: the eternal spirit is absolute spirit, divine spirit, and thus self-conscious, laying down its own course purely of itself unbound by conditions, simply and entirely free: so that Christ’s offering of Himself through eternal Spirit is, as such, a moral act of absolute worth.” This is what gave efficacy to the blood of Messiah. It was owned and offered by a Person eternal in His Being, infinitely and absolutely worthy in moral and spiritual character, and offered voluntarily. But not only was it the fact that Messiah’s offering of Himself was a voluntary one and by Himself as Deity, that made His blood infinitely efficacious. It was also because of the fact that He in His Person was spotless, absolutely holy, perfectly righteous. The animals for sacrifice under the Levitical code, were physically unblemished according to ceremonial standards. He was unblemished in respect to His Person and His character. The superior nature of Messiah’s sacrifice is seen in its deeper effect. While the Levitical ritual accomplished only formal ritual expiation, and left the inner man

untouched, the sacrifice of Messiah reaches the very center of the moral and spiritual being of the individual. It cleanses the conscience of dead works, in that it changes the character of the works done by the individual. Before salvation, the sinner did so-called good works in the strength of his own sinful nature. They were dead works. After salvation has wrought its mighty transformation within the individual, the good works are motivated, empowered, and produced by the Holy Spirit. They are, therefore, living works. Thus, the person serves the living God. Translation. How much more shall the blood of Messiah, who by virtue of (His) eternal Spirit offered Himself spotless to God, purge your conscience from dead works to the serving of the living God. (d) Therefore, He is the Priest of a better Testament (v. 15). (9:15) After comparing the relative merits of the blood of the First Testament and that offered under the New Testament, and showing that the blood of Messiah cleansed from actual sin, whereas the blood of animals could only cleanse from ceremonial defilement, the writer arrives at his conclusion, namely, that that was the reason why Messiah became the mediator of the New Testament. The word “mediator” is the translation of mesites (mesite") which refers to one who intervenes between two, either to make or restore peace and friendship, to form a compact, or to ratify a covenant. Here the Messiah acts as a go-between or mediator between a holy God and sinful man. By His death on the Cross, He removes the obstacle, sin, which caused an estrangement between man and God. When the sinner accepts the merits of Messiah’s sacrifice, the guilt and penalty of his sin is his no more, the power of sin in his life is broken, he becomes the recipient of the divine nature, and the estrangement between himself and God, both legal and personal, disappears. Messiah became the Mediator not only in order that He might pay the penalty of sinners who live since the Cross, but also that He might do so for those who lived before the Cross. Sinners who were saved under the First Testament were actually saved, not by it or by any sacrifice offered under its jurisdiction, but through the atoning work of Messiah under the New Testament. Translation. And because of this, of a new testament He is a mediator, in order that, a death having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions under the first testament, those who have been called might have the promise of the eternal inheritance. 3. It is made effective with better blood (9:16–10:39). a. The heavenly Testator Himself dies (9:16–22). (1) A last will or testament operative at testator’s death (vv 16, 17). (9:16, 17) Before presenting the exegesis of the section 9:16–22, it is necessary to study the word diatheke (diaqeke) which is throughout the Authorized Version of the New Testament translated either by the word “covenant” or “testament,” the former appearing twenty times, the latter, thirteen. The word itself is from diatithemi (diatiqemi), the root meaning of dia (dia) being “two,” and the meaning of tithemi (tiqemi) being “to place,” the total meaning of the word being literally “to place between two.” The word in classical Greek meant “to arrange each in their several places, to distribute, to dispose of, arrange as one likes, to dispose of one’s property, devise it by

will, to make a will, to arrange or settle mutually.” The noun diatheke (diaqeke) meant “disposition of property by a will, a testament, a compact, a covenant, a disposition.” In the papyri and the inscriptions, Moulton and Milligan15 say that the word diatheke (diaqeke) meant testament, will, “with absolute unanimity, and such frequency that illustration is superfluous.” They report the instance where this word was so used of the instrument by which King Attulus of Pergamum devised his country to Rome, also where a woman bequeathed houses and gardens to Aphrodite Urania. They cite another instance which shows that the Jews used the word in this sense. These scholars say that the word suntheke (sunqeke) which is not used in the New Testament “is to the last word for a compact just as diatheke (diaqeke) is always and only the word for will.” They say that diatheke (diaqeke) was used by the Jews with the meaning of covenant in the sense of a compact, but that that usage is not limited to the Jews, for it appears in Aristophanes in that sense. This proves, they say, that diatheke (diaqeke) means “an arrangement made by one party with plenary power, which the other party may accept or reject, but cannot alter.” To quote them again: “A will is simply the most conspicuous example of such an instrument, which ultimately monopolized the word just because it suited its differentia so completely. But it is entirely natural to assume that in the period of the LXX this monopoly was not established, and the translators were free to apply the general meaning as a rendering for the Hebrew word meaning a covenant. For this course there was an obvious motive. A covenant offered by God to man was no ‘compact’ between two parties coming together on equal terms. Diatheke (Diaqeke), in its primary sense as described above, was exactly the needed word.” The conclusion to which Moulton and Milligan come with reference to the use of diatheke (diaqeke) in the New Testament, is that while in the LXX the word meant a covenant in the sense of disposition made by one party to another on specified terms that must be acceded to, that a Hellenist like the writer to the Hebrews “or even a Jew like Paul with Greek language in the very fibre of his thought, could never have used diatheke (diaqeke) for covenant without the slightest consciousness of its ordinary and contemporary meaning. He would use the ‘Biblical’ word—‘Biblical’ in this case being synonymous with ‘Archaic’—but always with the possibility of a play on the later meaning of the word. This is what comes in Hebrews 9:15.” In addition to this data, we will add some words of Alford. He says that diatheke (diaqeke) is used in the LXX in the sense of a covenant or arrangement between two parties of equal status such as that made between Abraham and Abimelech (Gen. 21:27), and also in the sense of a disposition where one party promises to another a certain disposition, as in the case of God and Noah (Gen. 6:18). With the foregoing in mind, the present writer offers the following with reference to the usage of diatheke (diaqeke) in the Book of Hebrews: In every place except 9:16, 17, diatheke (diaqeke) refers either to the Levitical sacrificial system or to the sacrifice of the Messiah. The word refers to the disposition of eternal life to the recipient on the basis of his acceptance of the atoning merits of the latter sacrifice. In the sense that the word diatheke (diaqeke) refers to the act of God as one party making a disposition to another on specified terms, the word means “a covenant.” But when the substitutionary death of the One making the disposition is brought into the picture, the idea of a covenant is merged with that of a will or testament. Since the new covenant was made effective through the death of the Testator, the Messiah, and since the first covenant is typical of the new, both covenants take on themselves the idea of a last will or testament. The

present writer has, therefore, translated diatheke (diaqeke) uniformly in Hebrews by the word “testament” in the sense which the writer to the Hebrews gives it in 9:16, 17. The word “inheritance” in 9:15 leads the inspired penman to define the content of diatheke (diaqeke) as it is used in this epistle. An inheritance involves the idea of someone making a disposition of his property, the heir receiving same at the death of the testator. Just as in human relationships, where a will or testament is of force only after the one who makes the will is dead, so in the case of God bequeathing salvation to the lost sinner, the bequest is only operative by reason of His death. Thus, in verse 15, the writer speaks of the Messiah as the Mediator of the New Testament who made that Testament effective through His death, and in that way, lost sinners who accept salvation on the terms of the will or testament come into their inheritance. Translation. For where a testament is, a death must of necessity be brought in, the death of the testator, for a testament is of force after men are dead, since it has no strength when the testator is living. (2) First Testament made operative by death of animal (vv. 18–22). (9:18) In view of the fact that a testamentary disposition requires the death of the testator to make it effective, the writer says that it was necessary for the First Testament to be inaugurated with blood, that is, by a death. Translation. From whence it follows that neither was the first testament inaugurated without blood. (9:19, 20) The Testator of the First Testament was God, for it was God who was the source of salvation for believers in Old Testament times. But God was not yet ready to come in the Person of His Son and die on the Cross for man. Therefore, He provided a substitute which would typically represent Him in death, a death that would make the First Testament effective. This substitute was an animal. The emphasis in these verses is that everything connected with the testament bears the mark of blood, death. Translation. For after every commandment was spoken by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people, saying, This is the blood of the testament which God enjoined to you. (9:21, 22) The word “almost” in the Greek text is prefixed to the entire clause. The idea is “I may almost say,” or, “one may almost say.” The exception to the rule that cleansing is by blood, is in the case where water was used for cleansing from certain pollutions. Translation. Moreover, the tabernacle and all the instruments of the service with blood he likewise sprinkled. And one may almost say that with blood all things are cleansed according to the law. And without bloodshedding, there is no remission. b.

The better tabernacle purified with better blood (vv. 23, 24). (1) Earthly tabernacle cleansed with animal blood (v. 23).

(9:23) “The patterns of things in the heavens” refer to the earthly tabernacle. This needed cleansing from the defilement it incurred by reason of its presence in the midst of a sinful people. This rite was observed on the Great Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:16). The word “these” refers to the animal sacrifices. Thus, the sacrificial blood of animals was used to cleanse the tabernacle in Israel from the defilement it contracted by reason of its position in the camp of Israel. Likewise, the writer says, that the heavenly tabernacle needs to be cleansed, but with better blood than that of animals, namely, the blood of Messiah. The question at once arises as to why heaven itself needed to be cleansed? We will quote some of our authorities on this difficult problem. Vincent quotes Delitzsch as follows: “If the heavenly city of God, with its Holy Place, is conformably with the promise, destined for the covenant-people, that they may there attain to perfect fellowship with God, then their guilt has defiled these holy things as well as the earthly, and they must be purified in the same way as the typical law appointed for the latter, only not by the blood of an imperfect, but a perfect sacrifice.” Expositor’s says: “The earthly tabernacle, as God’s dwelling, might have been supposed to be hallowed by His presence and to need no cleansing, but being also His meeting-place with men it required to be cleansed. And so our heavenly relations with God, and all wherewith we seek to approach Him, need cleansing. In themselves things heavenly need no cleansing, but as entered upon by sinful men they need it. Our eternal relations with God require purification.” Alford says: “The heaven itself needed, and obtained, purification by the atoning blood of Christ. And if we inquire how this could be, we may find an answer in reflecting on the consequence of man’s sin on the mind and aspect of God towards Him. That unclouded benignity wherewith the Creator contemplated His creation (Gen. 1:31), had become overcast by the divine anger on account of sin, but was restored by Him in whom the Father was pleased, the darkness being by His blood turned into light, the frown into an eternal smile.” Translation. It was therefore necessary on the one hand, that the representations of the things in the heavens should be cleansed with these, but on the other hand, the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. (2) Heavenly tabernacle cleansed with blood of Messiah (v. 24). (9:24) This verse is in explanation of the statement in the previous verse to the effect that the heavenly things had to be purified by blood superior to animal blood, and that Messiah did not enter the Holy of Holies on earth as High Priest, but the Holy of Holies of heaven itself. The word “figure” in the Greek text is antitupon (ajntitupon) which here speaks of the earthly tabernacle as a type which prefigures the heavenly and corresponds to it. The word “true” is the translation of alethinos (ajleqino") which means “true” in the sense that the thing described is in its character, all that is expected of it. In short, the thing described measures up to the specifications which such a thing demands for itself. The heavenly Holy of Holies is everything that could be expected of such a place. The word “now” speaks of Messiah’s present ministry in the New Testament dispensation as contrasted with the old, typical economy, and also refers to a continually present manifestation of Himself in the heavenly Holy of Holies. The Greek word translated “to appear” deserves careful treatment. Vincent translates, “to be manifested.”

He says this word “exhibits the manifestation of Christ as something brought about as the result of a new and better economy, and distinctly contemplated in the institution of that economy. Christ is made openly manifest before the face of God. The Levitical priest was compelled to shroud the ark and the shekinah with incense-smoke, that he might not look upon God face to face.” Expositor’s says that, “the darkness and clouds of incense in the old sanctuary were meant as much to veil the unworthiness of the priest from God as the glory of God from the priest. Now Christ appears before God face to face with no intervening cloud. Perfect fellowship is attained by His perfect and stainless offering of Himself. All is clear between God and man. For it is ‘for us’ He enters this presence and fellowship; not that He alone may enjoy it, but that we may enter into the rest and blessedness that He won for us.” Translation. For not into handmade holy places did Messiah enter, which are the types of the true (holy places), but into heaven itself, now to be manifested before the face of God on behalf of us. c.

The once for all sacrifice of Messiah better than all the sacrifices of the First Testament (9:25–10:39). (1) He suffered once on the Cross (vv. 25, 26); He appears in heaven as High Priest now (v. 24); He will come in His second Advent to Israel (vv. 27, 28). Notice, if you will, the three appearings of Messiah here. These correspond to and are the fulfillment of the three appearings of the high priest on the Day of Atonement in Israel. (9:25) The word “offer” does not refer here to Messiah offering Himself on the Cross, but to His entrance into the Holy of Holies. Vincent says: “The point is that, being once in the heavenly sanctuary, Christ was not compelled to renew often His presentation of Himself there, since, in that case, it would be necessary for Him to suffer often. Each separate offering would necessitate a corresponding suffering.” His was a once-for-all entrance, based upon and given efficacy and merit by virtue of His precious blood, as against the annual entrance of the high priest in Israel who came into the earthly tabernacle by virtue of the blood of sacrificial animals. Translation. Nor yet (did He enter) in order that He might offer Himself often, even as the high priest enters into the holy places every year with blood belonging to another. (9:26) Expositor’s says of this verse: “If Christ’s one offering of Himself were not eternally efficacious, if it required periodical renewal, then this demanded periodical sacrifice. It was ‘not without blood’ that the entrance was made, and if the entrance required repetition, so must the sacrifice be repeated.” Davidson is quoted by Expositor’s as follows: “If His offering of Himself were not independent of time and valid as a single act, if it were valid only for the generation for whom it was immediately made, then in order to benefit men in the past, He must have suffered often, indeed in each generation of the past.” Vincent says: “For, from the foundation of the world, sin required atonement by sacrifice; and, therefore, if Christ had been a victim like others, which must be offered repeatedly, He would have had to suffer repeatedly from the foundation of the world. If His sacrifice, like the animal atonements, had availed for a time only, He would have been

obliged to repeat His offering whenever that time expired; and, since His atonement was designed to be universal, it would have been necessary for Him to appear repeatedly upon earth, and to die repeatedly from the foundation of the world.” The words “in the end of the world” are in the Greek text, “in the consummation of the ages.” Messiah appeared on earth to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself “when the former ages had reached their moral consummation under the old Levitical economy.” 16 Expositor’s says; “If there was to be one sacrifice for all generations, the occurrence of that sacrifice itself marked the period as the consummation. It closes the periods of symbolism, expectation and doubt.” The word “appeared” is the translation of phaneroo (faneroo), a verb in the perfect passive, meaning here, “He has been manifested.” This appearance of Messiah at the Cross, corresponds to the appearance of the high priest at the Brazen Altar on the Day of Atonement where the animal for sacrifice was slain. This is Messiah’s first appearance. He puts away sin. His second appearance, recorded in verse 24, is in the Holy of Holies of heaven, His present appearance. There He appears in the presence of God for us who are saved. His presence there, brings believers into the presence of God. Translation. Since then would He have been under constant obligation to suffer often since the foundation of the universe. But now at this very time, once in the consummation of the ages for the putting away of sin through His sacrifice has He been manifested. (9:27, 28) Vincent, commenting on verse 27 says; “That there is no place for a repeated offering of Christ is further shown by reference to the lot of men in general. The very idea is absurd; for men die once, and judgment follows. Christ was man, and Christ died. He will not come to earth to live and die again. Christ died, but judgment did not follow in His case. On the contrary, He became judge of all.” The act of Messiah in bearing the sins of humanity, refers to His first appearance upon earth, to His first Advent. The words “shall He appear the second time,” refer to His second Advent. The words “unto them that look for Him,” refer to Israel. The disciples of John the Baptist came to Jesus and said, “Art thou He that should come, or look we for another?” (Matt. 11:3). The Rapture is not in view here, neither the Church. This is Jewish. The expression refers to the second Advent of Messiah to Israel for the Millennium. The first appearance of the high priest on the Day of Atonement was at the Brazen Altar where the sacrifice was slain. This corresponds to Messiah’s first appearance on earth to die on the Cross. The second appearance of the high priest was in the Holy of Holies. This corresponds to Messiah’s present appearance before God in heaven now. The third appearance of the high priest was out the gate of the court surrounding the tabernacle, to Israel, having in a symbolic way accomplished salvation. This corresponds to Messiah’s appearance upon earth in the second Advent to Israel, having actually accomplished salvation. His return will be apart from sin in that He settled the sin question the first time He came. Now He comes with salvation for the one who puts his faith in Him. Translation. And inasmuch as it is appointed to men once to die, but after this judgment, thus also the Messiah once was offered for the purpose of bearing the sins of many; a second time apart from sin shall He be

manifested to those who wait for Him, resulting in salvation. (2) Blood of animals cannot take away sin (10:1–4). (10:1) The word “for” indicates that the writer engages in a further explanation of the finality of Messiah’s one sacrifice and thus of its superiority to the sacrifices of the law. Expositor’s says in this connection: “The explanation consists in this that the law had only ‘a shadow of the good things that were to be, not the very image of the things.’ Skian (Skian) (shadow) is in the emphatic place, as that characteristic of the law which determines its inadequacy. ‘A shadow’ suggests indefiniteness and unsubstantiality; a mere indication that a reality exists. Eikon (ÆEikon) (image) suggests what is in itself substantial and also gives a true representation of that which it images. The eikon (eijkon) (image) brings before us under the conditions of space, as we can understand it, that which is spiritual’ (Westcott) … The contrast is between a bare intimation that good things were to be given, and an actual presentation of these good things in an apprehensible form. It is implied that this latter is given in Christ; but what is asserted is, that the law did not present the coming realities in a form which brought them within the comprehension of the people.” The fact that the sacrifices were constantly renewed, shows that the law possessed no more than a mere shadow of the coming good which was exhibited in those sacrifices. Expositor’s quotes Davidson as saying in this connection; “No repetition of the shadow can amount to the substance.” The words “make perfect” are the translation of teleioo (teleioo) which means “to bring to a state of completeness.” The idea here is that the ceremonial law could not actually save the believer. Its work was always short of completeness. Translation. For the law having a shadow of the good things about to be, and not the image itself of the actual things, is never able by means of these sacrifices which they are offering year after year, continually to make those who come to it complete. (10:2) Concerning this verse, Expositor’s has a helpful note: “The constant renewal of the yearly round sacrifices proves that they were inefficacious, for had the worshippers once been cleansed they would have had no longer any consciousness of sins and would, therefore, have sought no renewal of sacrifice … So far from these Old Testament sacrifices once for all cleansing the conscience and thus perfecting the worshippers, ‘by and in them there is a yearly remembrance of sins,’ that is, of sins not yet sufficiently atoned for by any past sacrifice … The remembrance was not of sins previously atoned for but of sins committed since the previous sacrifice.” While this was the viewpoint of the Old Testament worshipper, yet actually, the Jew who would come to the tabernacle, present his animal for sacrifice, look ahead in faith to the God appointed Lamb who would some day bear his sins, was saved in Jesus’ precious blood and saved forever. This, of course is from God’s viewpoint. The blood of Jesus was just as powerful to save and keep saved for time and eternity before the Cross as since the Cross, for we have a God who takes things that are not in existence to bring to naught the things that are. Translation. Since then would they not have ceased to be offered?

because the worshippers once cleansed, would not be having any longer even one compunction of conscience with respect to sins. (10:3) The word “remembrance” is the translation of anamnesis (ajnamnesi") which speaks of “a calling to mind.” The memory of sins committed, is revived by the continual repetition of the yearly sacrifice on the Day of Atonement. The sacrifices themselves did not satisfy the consciences of the worshippers. They knew that these sacrifices did not pay for sin. Translation. But in them (the sacrifices) there was a calling to mind of sins year by year. (10:4) The truth of this statement is so obvious that it hardly needs proof. There is no relation between the physical blood of animals and man’s moral offence. Translation. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take away sins. (3) In view of that fact, Messiah volunteers to become the sacrifice. In so doing He sets aside the First and establishes Second Testament (vv. 5– 10). (10:5) The contents of this verse confirm the statement of verse 4. In view of the fact that the blood of sacrificial animals cannot take away sin, the Messiah, when He became incarnate in humanity to perform His priestly work of offering a sacrifice that would pay for sin, did not offer animal sacrifices, but instead, Himself in His physical body gotten through virgin birth from Mary. The reference is to Psalm 40:7–9, the theme of which is that deliverance from sin is not obtained by animal sacrifices, but by fulfilling God’s will. Vincent says, “The course of thought in the Psalm is as follows: ‘Thou, O God, desirest not the sacrifice of beasts, but thou hast prepared my body as a single sacrifice, and so I come to do thy will, as was predicted of me, by the sacrifice of myself.’ Christ did not yield to God’s will as authoritative constraint. The constraint lay in His eternal spirit. His sacrifice was no less His own will than God’s will.” This reminds one of the words in 9:14, “who through eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God.” Expositor’s says; “In the Psalm, indeed, sacrifice is contrasted with obedience to the will of God. A body is prepared for Christ that in it He may obey God. But it is the offering of this body as a sacrifice in contrast to the animal sacrifices of the law, which the writer emphasizes … The passage in the epistle is far from saying that the essence or worth of Christ’s offering of Himself lies simply in obedience to the will of God. It does not refer to the point wherein lies the intrinsic worth of the Son’s offering, or whether it may be resolved into obedience unto God. Its point is quite different. It argues that the Son’s offering of Himself is the true and final offering for sin, because it is the sacrifice, which according to prophecy, God desired to be made” (Davidson). Translation. Wherefore, when coming into the world He says, Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire, but a body thou didst prepare for Me.

(10:6) The point is not that God took no pleasure in the offering of the Levitical sacrifices. These offerings were according to His will, and He did take pleasure in the fact that they were offered, since the act of offering them was in obedience to His will. But when it came to the place where they failed to pay for sin, God took no pleasure in them. Translation. In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou didst take no pleasure. (10:7) The words “In the volume of the book it is written of Me,” speak of the fact that in the Old Testament are written instructions regarding the divine will for the Messiah. Translation. Then I said, Behold I come, in the volume of the book it stands written concerning Me, to do thy will, O God. (10:8, 9) “Above” refers back to verse 5. The writer shows the incompetence of animal sacrifices to satisfy the will of God, and the setting aside of the same in order that room might be made for that Sacrifice which will permanently satisfy His holy requirements. When Messiah offers Himself as the sacrifice, God takes away the First Testament and brings in the second or the New Testament. And this is the argument of the Book of Hebrews. Translation. Above, when saying, Sacrifice and offering and burntofferings also for sin thou didst not desire nor even have pleasure in, which were of such a nature as those offered according to law, then He said, Behold, I come to do thy will. He takes away the first in order that He may establish the second. (10:10) The word “will” refers here to the will of God which Messiah came to do. The will of God which the First Testament sacrifices could not accomplish was the sanctification of men. This was accomplished through the sacrifice of Messiah. The Greek word “to sanctify,” hagiazo (aJgiazo), means “to set apart for God.” Here the work of sanctification refers to the placing of the believing sinner into the status of a saved person, with all the accompanying blessings and enablements which that act includes. The words “we are sanctified” are in the Greek text a perfect participle and a finite verb, showing in the strongest way the permanent and continuous state of salvation into which the believer is brought and in which he lives. The words “once for all” are to be taken with “the offering of the body of Jesus Christ,” not here with the act of sanctifying, although verse 14 speaks of the latter fact. The context here is contrasting the many offerings under the Levitical system with the once for all offering of our Lord. Translation. By means of which will we stand permanently sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (4) Notwithstanding the fact that the First Testament had been set aside by God, and the New Testament had been brought in, the Aaronic priests still offered animal sacrifices (v. 11).

(10:11) The priests were still ministering in the temple at Jerusalem, which fact shows that the book was written before a.d. 70, at which date Jerusalem was destroyed by Rome. The standing position of the priests is set in vivid contrast to the seated posture of Messiah (v. 12), indicating the fact that the work of the former was never finished and that of the latter was complete. This was apostasy on the part of the leaders of Israel. They had had an unmistakable demonstration of the fact that the First Testament was annulled and fulfilled, and thus set aside by the New Testament (9:7, 8). Yet in defiance of the clear will of God, they kept on offering sacrifices. Translation. And indeed every priest has stood and as a result continues to remain in that position, day by day performing his service and often offering the same sacrifices which are of such a nature that they cannot take away sins. (5) The New Testament Priest procured a finished salvation (vv. 12–14). (10:12) The word “man” is not in the Greek text. The demonstrative pronoun in the masculine gender occurs, and grammatically is related to the word “priest” of verse 11. It is “this priest.” Greek authorities are divided as to whether the word “forever” is to be construed with the offering of one sacrifice, or to the act of Messiah sitting down on the right hand of God. Both facts are true. His offering of Himself on the Cross was an act that has never-ending results and that needs no repetition. This is in contrast to the oftrepeated offerings of the Levitical priests. It is also true that our Lord seated Himself forever at the right hand of God. This is in contrast to the perpetual standing posture of the First Testament priests. Without insisting upon his opinion, the present writer leans toward the latter meaning, since the word “one” modifying the word “sacrifice,” is enough to contrast Messiah’s one sacrifice with the many offerings of the Aaronic priests. Translation. But this priest, having offered one sacrifice for sins, sat down in perpetuity on the right hand of God. (10:13, 14) The word “perfected” is the translation of teleioo (teleioo) which means “to bring to a state of completion.” Here, the completeness of the state of salvation of the believer is in view. Everything essential to the salvation of the individual is included in the gift of salvation which the sinner receives by faith in Messiah’s sacrifice. The words “for ever” here are to be construed with “perfected.” It is a permanent state of completeness in salvation to which reference is made. The words “them that are sanctified” are descriptive of the believer. He is one set apart for God. Translation. From henceforth expecting until His enemies be set down as a footstool for His feet, for by one offering He has brought to completion forever those who are sanctified. (6) The Holy Spirit through Jeremiah bears witness to the New Testament (vv. 15–18). (10:15) The writer now quotes the prophet Jeremiah again as to the finality of the New Testament. He places the Jewish recipients of this letter in the position where they will either accept their prophet and thus the New Testament, or in rejecting the New

Testament, they will be rejecting their own prophet. He declares the inspiration of the Old Testament, for he says that the Holy Spirit spoke the words. Jeremiah was only His penman. Translation. Moreover, there testifies also to us the Holy Spirit, for after having said, (10:16–18) The writer now quotes Jeremiah on the New Testament which God was going to inaugurate. A distinctive feature of the new one was to be the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit who would be caused to take up His permanent abode in the believer under the New Testament dispensation. Heretofore, He had come upon or in individuals in order to equip them for a certain ministry, and then would leave them when the time of that ministry was over. He did not personally indwell them for purposes of sanctification. The Old Testament saint was regenerated, thus becoming a partaker of the divine nature, and thus had that impetus to the living of a holy life. The New Testament saint has both the advantages of regeneration and the personal indwelling and the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit. Thus, under the First Testament God wrote His laws on stone, whereas under the New Testament He writes them upon the heart. The other distinctive feature of the New Testament is the fact that God remembers sins and iniquities no more. The constant repetition of the sacrifices demonstrated that the sin question was not settled. The once for all offering of the Messiah shows that sin is paid for and put away. The writer now draws an important conclusion to all this. He says that in view of the fact that sin has been paid for, there is no more need of the constant repetition of sacrificial offerings. And that is exactly what the writer is attempting to instill into the minds and hearts of his readers, namely, that the New Testament in Jesus’ blood is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament in animal blood. Translation. This is the testament which I will make with them after those days, says the Lord. I will put my laws upon their hearts, and upon their minds I will write them. And their sins and their iniquities I will positively not remember any more. Now where a putting away of these is, no longer is there an offering for sin. (7) The unsaved professing Hebrew exhorted to place his faith in the High Priest of the New Testament (vv. 19–22). (10:19, 20) When a Gentile like the Philippian jailor is dealt with about his soul, the approach is “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved” (Acts 16:31). When a Jew is appealed to, the approach is in terms of First Testament typology as we have it in these two verses. The exhortation to enter into the Holy of Holies of heaven by the blood of Jesus would bring to the Jewish reader’s mind the picture of the high priest in Israel on the Day of Atonement entering the tabernacle for him. He stood in the Holy of Holies, not actually, but in the person of the high priest. The high priest’s presence in the Holy of Holies meant his presence there too, for the high priest had offered sacrifice first for his own sins and was thus accepted with God, and then for the people’s sins. The individual Israelite who trusted Jehovah for his salvation, that Jehovah who would some day offer a sacrifice which would pay for his sins, thus stood symbolicly in his high priest

for salvation, but actually in the coming Messiah who would some day be the real High Priest. The writer makes it plain that he does not have reference to the earthly Holy of Holies. In the first place, it is by means of the blood of Jehoshua, his Jehovah-Saviour that he is to enter, not by means of the blood of animals. In the second place, he calls the road into the Holy of Holies, “a new and living way.” The Greek word translated “way” is hodos (oJdo"), “a road.” The order in the Greek text is, “Having therefore, brethren, boldness for the entering of the holiest by means of the blood of Jesus, which He inaugurated for us, a road, a freshly-slain one, a living one.” The order of the words in the Authorized Version, makes the word “which” in verse 20 refer back to the word “way,” but as the above shows, it goes back to the words “to enter,” namely, “the entering.” It was the entrance into the Holy of Holies of heaven which Messiah consecrated for us. The word “consecrated” is the translation of egkainizo (ejgkainizo) which means “to dedicate, to innovate, to initiate.” The word is used in the LXX of the inauguration of a house, kingdom, temple, altar. The word “new” in the Greek text is very interesting. It is prosphaton (prosfaton), made up of pros (pro") meaning “near to,” and phatos (fato") from pephamai (pefamai) the perfect of phenein (fenein) “to kill.” The original meaning of the total word is “newly-slain.” Here the contrast is between the “old-slain road” of the earthly tabernacle where the high priest would sprinkle the blood of the sacrificial animal seven times on the ground as he approached the mercy seat in the Holy of Holies (Lev. 16:14), and the freshly-slain road into the Holy of Holies of heaven, sprinkled with the blood of the Lamb of God. Over this latter road is the Jewish recipient of this letter urged to come. The old road to the mercy seat of the tabernacle in Israel was a dead road. There was no life there. It was all symbolism, an index-finger pointing to the reality with which this firstcentury Jew was then faced. In the new road was life. This entering into the Holy of Holies which the Messiah inaugurated for sinners was by way of a freshly-slain and living road, and this road went “through the veil, that is to say, His flesh.” The inner veil of the tabernacle separated the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies. It barred man’s access to God. When the high priest in Israel went into the Holy of Holies, he brushed aside that veil. The writer speaks of Messiah’s humanity, as the veil through which the entrance into the heavenly Holy of Holies was made. As the veil in the tabernacle of Israel while it was not rent, barred man’s access to God, so Messiah’s humanity, before it was rent on the Cross, barred man’s access to God. An uncrucified Saviour is no Saviour. When the Messiah died on the Cross, the veil of the temple was rent by the unseen hand of God, showing Israel two things, that the Messiah had now provided the actual entrance for the sinner into the presence of God, and that the symbolic sacrifices were to be discontinued, for the Reality to whom they pointed had come (9:7– 10). The unsaved Jew of the first century who had made a profession of Messiah but had not placed a heart faith in Him for salvation, is now exhorted to do the latter, the writer using Jewish terminology and typology in his exhortation. Translation. Having therefore, brethren, boldness in the entering into the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, which (entrance into) He inaugurated for us, a road freshly-slain and living, through the veil, namely, His flesh. (10:21, 22) The Authorized Version gives us “an high priest”; the Greek text has “a

priest, a great one.” Not only is Messiah now a high priest, but He is a great one, and His greatness is shown by the fact that He is the priest over the actual house of God, the One who by His death on the Cross saves all those who belong to the house of God in all dispensations. The Jew is exhorted to draw near to the mercy seat as a believer-priest. He is to do so with a true heart. The word “true” is alethinos (ajleqino"), which means “true” in the sense of “genuine,” and speaks of that which measures up to or consists of all that would make that person or thing that which is expected of him or it. Vincent says, “A true heart is required to enter the sanctuary. The phrase means more than in sincerity. Sincerity is included, but with all that enters into a right attitude toward God as revealed in our Great High Priest,—gladness, freedom, enthusiasm, bold appropriation of all the privileges of sonship.” He is to draw near to God in full assurance of faith. The very thing which this Jew lacked was faith. And because he had no faith, he had no assurance of salvation. He should draw near in the attitude of full assurance which faith produces. The words “having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water” speak of the Levitical ceremonies with reference to the preparation of the priests for their priestly service. Vincent puts this very succinctly: “This qualification for a right approach to God is stated typologically. As the priests were sprinkled with the sacrificial blood and washed with water before ministering, so do you who have now the privilege and standing of priests in approaching God, draw near, priestlike, as sharers in an economy which purges the conscience (ch. 9:14), having your consciences purged. Your own hearts must experience the effects of the great sacrifice of Christ,—pardon, moral renewal, deliverance from a legal spirit.” Regarding the words “bodies washed with pure water,” Vincent says that most expositors refer that to water baptism. But the present writer agrees with Vincent when he says that they “indicate generally the thoroughness of the cleansing process undergone by one who surrenders himself, soul, body, and spirit, to God.” Translation. And having a priest, a great one, over the house of God, let us keep on drawing near with a genuinely true heart in full assurance of faith, having had our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and having had our bodies washed with pure water. (8) He is exhorted to hold fast his profession and not waver between the desire to go on to faith in Messiah or to go back to the sacrifices (v. 23). (10:23) The words “hold fast” are the translation of katecho (kateco) which means literally “to hold down.” It speaks here of a firm hold which masters that which is held. “Profession” is the translation of homologia (oJmologia), the verb form of this word being homologeo (oJmologeo) which means, “to say the same thing” as another, thus “to agree with the statement of another,” thus “to confess one’s faith in the statements of another.” Here the confession is that of the recipient’s professed faith in the Messianic sacrifice of the New Testament, on the part of some, a heart faith, on the part of others, a mere intellectual assent. It was this latter class which the writer was especially desirous of reaching. Under stress of persecution, these were wavering, the Authorized Version says. The word “wavering” is the translation of aklines (ajkline"). The word is made up of klino (klino) “to incline, bow,” thus “to lean towards,” and Alpha privative, which when

prefixed to a word makes it mean the opposite to what it meant originally. The writer urges the recipients not to lean back towards the First Testament. Like the generation which left Egypt, who in their hearts were returning to that place of slavery, so these unsaved Jews under stress of persecution were leaning back in their hearts to the First Testament. The Holy Spirit was leading them on toward the act of faith in the Lord Jesus, while at the same time there was that tug of the evil nature urging them to return to the temple sacrifices and escape the persecution. Thus, they were wavering between two things, either to go on to the act of faith in Messiah or to go back to the First Testament. The writer exhorts his readers to hold fast the profession of their faith. The Greek word in the best manuscripts is “hope,” not “faith.” Translation. Let us constantly be holding fast our confession of the hope, doing so without being moved, for faithful is He who promised. (9) Exhorted to continue attendance upon the New Testament assembly (vv. 24, 25). (10:24) “Consider” is the translation of katanoeo (katanoeo) which speaks of attentive, continuous care. The exhortation is to take careful note of each other’s spiritual welfare. The purpose of this attentive, continuous care is to provoke each other to the exercise of love and good works. The word “provoke” is the translation of paroxusmos (paroxusmo") which means “an inciting, incitement, a stimulation.” The word is used also in a bad sense, for instance, “irritation.” Here it is used in its good sense, that of a stimulation. Vincent says: “The new economy demands mutual care on the part of the members of the Christian community … They must stir up each other’s religious affections and ministries.” Translation. And let us constantly be giving careful attention to one another for the purpose of stimulating one another to love and good works. (10:25) The word “forsaking” is the translation of egkataleipo (ejgkataleipo) which means “to let down, to abandon.” “Assembling” is the translation of episunagoge (ejpisunagoge). The word is a compound of ago (ajgo) “to go,” sun (sun) “with,” and epi (ejpi). Sun (Sun) and ago (ajgo) come over into English in the word “synagogue,” the meeting place of the Jews other than the temple at Jerusalem. Alford suggests two reasons for the addition of epi (ejpi). It was used by the writer to take away the Judaistic sound of sunagoge (sunagoge). Or, it might point to the individual meeting places of the various assemblies. Some of the recipients of this letter were, under stress of persecution, absenting themselves from the Christian assemblies. They are exhorted not to egkataleipo (ejgkataleipo), that is, let down in their attendance upon these meetings, or abandon them. They are, on the other hand to exhort each other to continued attendance, and in view of the fact of the approach of the time when the Lord would come. Translation. Not letting down on the assembling of ourselves together, even as the custom of certain is, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as ye see the day drawing near.

(10) Warned not to sin wilfully in renouncing his professed faith in Messiah and going back to the sacrifices (v. 26). (10:26) This wilful sin must be defined in its context. It will not do to ignore the historical background of this book and its analysis, and then put an arbitrary meaning upon the words. That is not exegesis, namely, taking out of the text what is there, but eisegesis, putting into the text what is not there. The sin which the book warns against is that of a Jew of the first century who left the temple sacrifices, identified himself with the visible Church and made a profession of Messiah as High Priest, renouncing that profession and returning to the temple sacrifices. This sin is spoken of in 2:1 as letting New Testament truth slip away, in 3:7, 8 as hardening the heart against the Holy Spirit, in 6:4 as falling away and crucifying the Son of God, in 10:26 as a wilful sin, and is analyzed in 10:29 as the three-fold sin against the three Persons of the Triune God. This sin could only be committed in the first century while the temple was still standing and only by an unsaved Jew or proselyte to Judaism. In this case, there can be no secondary application to present day circumstances or individuals. This sin is described as a wilful sin. The word is hekousios (eJkousio"), which means, “voluntarily, of one’s own accord.” It is opposed to sins committed inconsiderately, and from ignorance or weakness. The Greek has it, “If we go on sinning wilfully,” stress being placed upon the habitual aspect of the sin. The immediate context defines that sin as one of the continued forsaking of the means of grace at the services of the Christian assemblies, and the habitual commission of the sin defined in 10:29. The word “knowledge” is not the simple word gnosis (gnosi"), but the stronger word epignosis (ejpignosi"). Alford quotes Delitzsch as saying: “When epignosis (ejpignosi") is used, there is the assumption of an actual direction of the spirit to a definite object and of a real grasping of the same: so that we may speak of a false gnosis (gnosi"), but not of a false epignosis (ejpignosi"). And the Writer, by the use of this word, gives us to understand that he means by it not only a shallow historical notion about the Truth, but a living believing knowledge of it, which has laid hold of a man and fused him into union with itself.” Thus it is clear that the Jew who committed this sin, was fully informed by the Holy Spirit of the issues involved between the First Testament and the New Testament, and also of the meaning and the implications of the New Testament, (6:4, “who were once enlightened”) and therefore, he sinned with his eyes wide open. Should he commit this sin, there would remain no more sacrifice for sin. Expositor’s quotes Delitzsch as follows: “The meaning is not merely that the Jewish sacrifices to which the apostate has returned have in themselves no sin-destroying power, nor even that there is no second sacrifice additional to that of Christ, but further that for a sinner of this kind the very sacrifice of Christ itself has no more atoning or reconciling power.” Alford, commenting upon this same thing says: “There is but One true sacrifice for sins: if a man, having availed himself of that One, then deliberately casts it behind him, there is no second left for him. It will be observed that one thing is not, and need not be, specified in the text. That he has exhausted the virtue of the one sacrifice, is not said: but in proportion to his willing rejection of it, has ceased to operate for him. He has in fact, as Delitzsch observes, shut the door of repentance behind him, by the very fact of his being in an abiding state of willing sin.” All of which means that this abandonment of the New Testament sacrifice, the Messiah, and the return to the abrogated sacrifices of the First Testament, was not a snap judgment on the part of this first century Jew, but a confirmed state of heart.

Translation. For if we go on sinning wilfully after having received a full knowledge of the truth, no longer for sins does there remain a sacrifice. (11) For the one who would go back, there remains only judgment (v. 27). (10:27) Instead of a sacrifice for sin awaiting this apostate, there awaits him a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation. The Greek could be rendered, “a kind of fearful expectation.” Translation. But a kind of fearful expectation of judgment and fiery indignation which is about to be devouring the adversaries. (12) The one who rejected the First Testament was punished (v. 28). (10:28) Alford says: “We must not take this as a general assertion, as true of whoever in any way broke the Mosaic law: but as an alleging of a well-known fact, that in certain cases a breaker of the law was subject to the penalty following. The form of the sentence might be changed thus, ‘If Moses’ law could attach to violations of it the inexorable doom of death,’ etc.… The reference is especially to Deuteronomy 17:2–7, where the punishment of death is attached to the same sin as here in question, namely, apostasy.” Translation. Anyone who has set aside Moses’ law, without mercy, upon the evidence of two or three witnesses, dies. (13) The one committing the three-fold sin against the three Persons of the Triune God would be punished more severely (vv. 29–31). (10:29) The words “of how much” do not qualify “sorer,” but the entire clause. It is “by how much think ye shall he be thought worthy of sorer punishment.” Treading under foot the Son of God, is a sin against God the Father who gave the Son to become the Sin-offering (John 3:16). Counting the blood of the New Testament an unholy thing, is a sin against God the Son who shed His blood. The word “counted” in the Greek text refers to a conscious judgment resting on deliberate weighing of the facts. Here it implies a deliberate, contemptuous rejection of the Messianic sacrifice of the Son of God. The word “unholy” is the translation of koinos (koino"), the fundamental idea of which is “shared by all, public.” From this comes the idea of “not sacred” that is, “not set apart for God’s use.” The idea here is that the apostate regarded Messiah’s blood as common, having no more sacred character or specific worth than the blood of any ordinary person. The words “wherewith he was sanctified” in connection with the identity of the person who committed this sin, might trouble the reader when he remembers that the historical background and analysis of the book show that that person is an unsaved person. But the difficulty disappears when we remember that the writer is addressing himself to the professing Christian church, made up of saved and unsaved, and that the idea here is, “wherewith he professed to be sanctified.” Doing despite to the Spirit of grace is a sin against God the Holy Spirit. “Despite” in the Greek text has the idea of insulting. It refers to the act of this professed Hebrew, who after allowing the Holy Spirit to lead him along in His pre-salvation work of convicting

him of sin and of energizing him to the act of repentance, now turns away from His further ministration of imparting faith, back to the temple sacrifices. This verse gives us the three-fold analysis of this sin of apostasy spoken of in this book. Translation. By how much think ye shall he be thought worthy of sorer punishment who has trodden under foot the Son of God, and has considered the blood of the testament a common thing by which (the blood) he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace. (10:30) The certainty of the punishment is assured by the word of God. Vincent says that the word “vengeance” is “an unfortunate translation, since it conveys the idea of vindictiveness which does not reside in the Greek word. It is the full meting out of justice to all parties. The quotation is an adaptation of the LXX of Deut. 32:35. The second citation is literally from LXX of Deut. 32:36.” Translation. For we know the One who said, The meting out of full justice belongs to Me. I will recompense. And again, The Lord will judge His people. (10:31) This verse must be understood in its context. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God when one is an apostate. Translation. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. (14) The recipients are urged to remember the persecutions they endured for their testimony to Messiah, and not let them go for naught by returning to the sacrifices (vv. 32–37). (10:32) The words “call to remembrance” are the translation of anamimesko (ajnamimesko) which Alford says is stronger than the simple verb, and means “call over in your minds, one by one,” the present tense implying constant habit. The word “fight” is the translation of athlesis (ajqlesi"), which was used by the Greeks to speak of an athletic contest or combat. This word was used in the next generation, of martyrdom. It refers to a terrific struggle. “Afflictions” in the Greek text is pathema (paqema) which speaks of suffering. The writer now turns from his solemn warnings against apostasy, to a word of encouragement arising from the conduct of his readers in the past. Their firmness under persecution did not look likely to end in apostasy. So he cheers and invigorates them by recalling to their memories their past afflictions because of their testimony to the crucified risen, ascended Messiah. These persecutions came from the adherents of Judaism. Just as a Jew who receives the Lord Jesus is bitterly persecuted today by his brethren after the flesh, so it was in the first century. Translation. But constantly be recalling the former days, in which after being enlightened, ye endured much conflict with sufferings. (10:33) In this verse we are given two forms in which the persecution was aimed at the

recipients of this letter. They were made a gazingstock. The latter word is the translation of theatrizo (qeatrizo) from which we get our word “theatre,” and which means “to bring upon the stage, to set forth as a spectacle, expose to contempt.” This was literally true in the case of the Roman Empire exposing Christians to the wild beasts in the amphitheatre. But in the case of apostate Judaism in its treatment of its former adherents who became converts to the New Testament truth, it was not by means of lions but by means of reproaches and afflictions. The word “reproaches” is the translation of oneidismos (ojneidismo"). The verb of the same root means “to upbraid, to revile, to cast in one’s teeth.” It is used of unjust reproach. Here the word refers to a bitter invective hurled at the Jews for having forsaken the temple sacrifices and having embraced the New Testament truth. “Afflictions” in this verse is the translation of a different word than appears in verse 32. It is thlipsis (qliyi"). The word means “a pressing together,” thus, “oppression, affliction, tribulation, distress, straits.” All this was the result of the persecution. But these Jews were not persecuted only because they had renounced Judaism and embraced the New Testament, but because they became companions of their fellow-Jews who were being persecuted. “Companions” is the translation of koinonia (koinonia) which means “co-sharers in, partakers with someone else.” These became co-sharers with other persecuted Jews in the sense of 6:10, where the writer is speaking of the saved among his readers who ministered to the saints. That is, they helped others in a financial way when they lost their earthly belongings by reason of persecution. The writer exhorts to the same thing in 13:3. For this they were persecuted, for sympathizing with others who were persecuted. Translation. On the one hand, this, while ye were being made a spectacle as in a theatre by means of both revilings and distresses, and on the other hand, this, while ye made yourselves fellow-partakers of those who fared thus. (10:34) This verse explains the significance of the words of the previous verse, “ye became companions.” The “companionship,” (koinonia (koinonia)) took the form of compassion. The latter word is the translation of sunpatheo (sunpaqeo), “to sympathize with, to feel for.” This sympathy went to the length of ministering to the saints (6:10) as noted in the previous verse. The words “of me” are the translation of a corrupt text. Vincent says that this corrupt reading has furnished one of the stock arguments for the Pauline authorship of the epistle. He says in this connection: “ ‘Who wrote the Epistle God only knows.’ Such was the verdict of Origin, and modern criticism has gotten no farther.” That being the case, this present writer will waste no time with the question. The Nestle Greek text has, “Ye had compassion on those in bonds.” The bonds here are evidently the bonds of affliction caused by the persecution. The word “spoiling” is the translation of harpazo (aJrpazo) which here refers to the violent, unjust seizure of the property of these who were being persecuted. “Took” is the translation of prosdechomai (prosdecomai) which means “to receive to one’s self, to accept.” These Jews accepted the unjust seizure of their goods with joy. That takes grace. That which enabled them to do so with joy was the consciousness that they had possessions which could not be taken away. The words “in heaven” are not in the best

texts. It is, of course, heavenly possessions that are meant. Translation. For ye both sympathized with those in bonds and accepted with joy the plundering of your goods, knowing that ye yourselves have a better and an enduring possession. (10:35) The word “confidence” is the translation of parresia (parresia) which is a compound of pan (pan) (all) and resis (rJesi") (speech). The word means “freedom in speaking, unreservedness in speech, free and fearless confidence, cheerful courage, boldness, assurance.” The writer exhorts the Jewish recipients of this letter not to throw away that cheerful courage, that boldness, that free and fearless confidence which they were displaying while they were enduring this persecution referred to in verses 32–34. If they would persist in it, and go on to the act of faith in Messiah as High Priest, they would receive salvation. If they shrank away in fear and returned to the temple sacrifices, they would be committing apostasy, an act from which there would be no recovery, and because of which they would be doomed to everlasting banishment from the presence of God. Translation. Do not throw away, therefore, your courage and boldness, which is of such a nature that it has great recompense of reward. (10:36) The word “receive” is the translation of komizo (komizo) which means “to receive and carry away for use and enjoyment.” Endurance is spoken of by the writer as a necessary prerequisite to receiving the promise of God, namely, salvation through faith in the blood of Messiah. The word “patience” is the translation of hupomene (uJpomene) which means literally “to remain under.” That is, these Jews are exhorted to remain under the persecutions and not seek to escape them by renouncing their professed faith in Messiah. Those that remained under the persecution and thus under the chastening hand of God, maintaining their faith in the Messiah, were true sons of God (12:7). Those who did not remain under this persecution, but renounced their profession to return to the sacrifices, were only unsaved professed believers (12:8). Translation. For ye have need of patience (of remaining under), in order that, having done the will of God, ye might receive the promise. (10:37) The exhortation to patience is strengthened by the promise of the soon coming of Messiah. The expression is very much stronger in the Greek text. Expositor’s translates it: “For yet a little—a very little—while and He that cometh will come and will not delay.” Another translates it: “For yet a little—ever so little—while.” The expression comes from Habakkuk 2:3. Vincent says: “In the Hebrew (Hab. 2:3), the subject of the sentence is the vision of the extermination of the Chaldees. ‘The vision—will surely come.’ As rendered in the LXX either Jehovah or Messiah must be the subject. The passage was referred to Messiah by the later Jewish theologians, and is so taken by our writer.” The disciples of John the Baptist asked Jesus, “Art thou He that should come or look we for another?” The expression “He that should come” is Jewish and refers to Messiah. Translation. For yet a little—a very little while, and He that cometh will

come and will not delay. (15) They are urged to obtain justification through placing their faith in Messiah, and not draw back to perdition (vv. 38, 39). (10:38) The writer now quotes the words of Habakkuk 2:4, “The just shall live by faith,” repeated by Paul in Romans 1:17 and Galatians 3:11. This was the divine spark that lit the Reformation when Martin Luther, an Augustinian monk, found them in his Greek New Testament, illuminated by the Holy Spirit. That is, the justified person is justified by God upon the basis of and in answer to his faith in the Lord Jesus. After stating again the terms of salvation, a personal faith in Messiah as High Priest, the writer warns those among his readers who only made a profession of faith, that if any draw back to the temple sacrifices, renouncing their professed faith in Messiah, his soul shall have no pleasure in that person. The words “any man” are not in the Greek text. The translation should read “If he.” We must keep in mind that this letter is written to the professing Church which is made up of true believers and of unbelievers. Here the writer is thinking of the one who professes to be justified but who has only an intellectual faith, not a heart trust (Acts 8:13, 21). The verb translated “draw back” means “to shrink in fear.” The persecution would be that which is feared in this case. Translation. Now, the just shall live by faith. But if he draw back in fear, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. (10:39) The pronoun in its intensive force is used here, contrasting the writer and possibly those who are associated with him as true believers, with that hypothetical Jew who is in danger of drawing back to the sacrifices. It is, “But as for us, we are not of the shrinking back kind.” The words “of them who draw back” are the translation of one word in the Greek text which is not preceded by the definite article, all of which means that character or nature are stressed. The “shrinking back” ones are said to be shrinking back to perdition. The word “perdition” is the translation of apoleia (ajpoleia) which means “utter destruction,” and in this context means “the destruction which consists in the loss of eternal life; eternal misery, perdition,” which is the lot of those who would renounce their professed faith in Messiah as High Priest and return to a dependence upon the abrogated sacrifices for salvation. The Word of God is very clear in its statements to the effect that a person once saved can never be lost. Therefore, this person who draws back to perdition must be an unsaved person. The writer informs his readers that he is of the believing kind whose faith is answered with the gift of salvation. Translation. But as for us, we are not of the shrinking back kind who draw back to perdition, but of the believing kind who believe to the end of the saving of the soul. III.

Faith, not works, the way of salvation, as proved by instances of First Testament saints (11:1–12:2). Note This brings us to another major analytical division of this epistle. In the first ten chapters, the writer has proved just one statement to be true, namely, that “The New

Testament in Jesus’ blood is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament in animal blood.” He has proved this proposition twice, first, by comparing the relative merits of the founders of the covenants, arguing that a superior workman turns out a superior product (1:1–8:6), and second, by comparing the relative merits of the Testaments themselves (8:7–10:39). Now, having proved this proposition to the firstcentury Jew, the latter, if his heart is ready to accept salvation, would endeavor to appropriate it. But how would he do so? And there’s the rub. He would attempt to merit the salvation wrought out on the Cross by Messiah, by the performance of good works. That is the only method he knows. A study of the Gospels discloses the fact that the Judaism of the first century was not the supernatural system given by God whereby the sinner was given a salvation in answer to his faith in the Offering for sin which God would some day set forth, the animal sacrifice he offered being an outward testimony of his inward faith in the Sacrifice it symbolized. The Judaism of that day was an ethical cult. It taught salvation by works. The sacrifices were a mere form on the altars of Judaism. It was therefore necessary for the writer to prove to this Jew that salvation was by faith, not works. He does this in 11:1–12:2, basing his proof on the Old Testament Scriptures this Jew professed to believe. He first defines faith (11:1–3). Then he illustrates the efficacy of faith by using examples of First Testament saints (11:4–40). Finally, he exhorts to the act of faith (12:1, 2). 1. Faith defined (11:1–3). (11:1) The mention of a faith that is answered by salvation (10:39), leads the writer to speak about it now in detail. The word “faith” occurs without the article here, indicating that it is treated in its abstract conception, not particularly as New Testament faith. Vincent says, “It is important that the preliminary definition be clearly understood, since the following examples illustrate it. The key is furnished by verse 27, as seeing him who is invisible. Faith apprehends as a real fact what is not revealed to the senses. It rests on that fact, acts upon it, and is upheld by it in the face of all that seems to contradict it. Faith is real seeing.” The word “substance” deserves careful treatment. It is hupostasis (uJpostasi"), made up of stasis (stasi") “to stand,” and hupo (uJpo) “under,” thus “that which stands under, a foundation.” Thus it speaks of the ground on which one builds a hope. Moulton and Milligan17 report its use as a legal term. They say that it stands for “the whole body of documents bearing on the ownership of a person’s property, deposited in archives, and forming the evidence of ownership.” They suggest the translation, “Faith is the title-deed of things hoped for.” The Holy Spirit energized act of faith which a believer exercises in the Lord Jesus is the title-deed which God puts in his hand, guaranteeing to him the possession of the thing for which he trusted Him. In the case of this first-century Jew, his act of faith in Messiah as High Priest would be the title-deed which God would give him, guaranteeing to him the possession of the salvation for which he trusted God. Thus, he would have assurance. Vincent translates, “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for.” He says that “It is the firm grasp of faith on unseen fact.” The word “evidence” is the translation of elegchos (ejlegco") which means, “a proof, that by which a thing is proved or tested.” Thayer in commenting on its use here defines it as follows: “that by which invisible things are proved and we are convinced of their reality.” His second definition of the word is “conviction.” Vincent says: “Observe that hupostasis (uJpostasi") and elegchos (ejlegco") are not two distinct and independent conceptions, in which case kai (kai) (and) would have

been added; but they stand in apposition. Elegchos (ÆElegco") is really included in hupostasis (uJpostasi"), but adds to the simple idea of assurance, a suggestion of influences operating to produce conviction which carry the force of demonstration. The word often signifies a process of proof or demonstration. So von Soden: ‘a being convinced. Therefore not a rash, feebly-grounded hypothesis, a dream of hope, the child of a wish.’ ” The word “things” is the translation of pragma (pragma), “a thing done.” Vincent says that it introduces a wider conception than “things hoped for.” It embraces not only future realities, but all that does not fall under the cognizance of the senses, whether past, present, or future. Translation. Now faith is the title-deed of things hoped for, the conviction of things which are not being seen. (11:2) The word “for” introduces proof of the preceding statement regarding the nature of faith. The words “by it” are in the Greek text en tautei (ejn tautei), literally, “in this,” that is, “in the sphere and exercise of faith.” The locative of sphere, “in this,” approaches in meaning the instrumental of means, “by means of.” “Faith has power to see and realize the unseen, for the experience of the fathers proves it.”18 The word “elders” used here instead of the more common expression, “the fathers,” refers to the saints of the Old Testament dispensation, many of whose names are recorded in this chapter. The words “obtained a good report” are the translation of martureo (martureo) which means “to bear witness to.” Here the verb is in the passive voice. Literally “for by it the elders were borne witness to.” God bore witness to them that their faith gained victory for them over all obstacles. It is well to notice that the statement in this verse does not begin the list of examples which starts in verse four, but is still attached to the definition of faith in verse one, and is a justification of it. Translation. For by means of it the elders had witness borne to them. (11:3) This verse does not begin the list of instances where faith was exercised in Old Testament times. It is still part of the exposition of faith found in verses 1–3. It shows that in its earliest and most general expression, belief that the visible universe was created by God, is a conviction of something not apprehensible by the senses. The word “understand” is the translation of noeo (noeo) which means “to perceive with the reflective intelligence.” It is distinguished from the mere physical act of seeing. It is the perception of the mind consequent upon seeing. In the New Testament it is never used of mere physical sight. Vincent says: “Here is meant the inward perception and apprehension of the visible creation as the work of God, which follows the sight of the phenomena of nature.” The word “worlds” is the translation of aion (aijon). While the context speaks of created things, yet it does not seem that the meaning of aion (aijon) should be limited to the material universe alone. It includes that here, but embraces more. It refers to the created universe and the periods of time as administered by God. Alford says that the expression “includes in it all that exists under the conditions of time and space, together with those conditions of time and space themselves, conditions which do not bind God, and did not exist independently of Him, but are themselves the work of His word.”

The words “were framed” are the translation of katartizo (katartizo) which means “to fit out or equip, so that person or thing thus equipped or fitted out might subserve the purpose for which it was made.” It speaks of a wise adaptation of part to part and of the whole to its purpose, in this case, of the created universe and the periods of time, by the Word of God. Expositor’s says: “The Word of God is an invisible force which cannot be perceived by sense. The great power which lies at the source of all that is does not itself come into observation; we perceive it only by faith which is (v. 1) ‘the evidence of things not seen.’ ” The word “word” is not the translation of logos (logo") as in John 1:1, logos (logo") being a designation of the Son of God as the Word of God in the sense that He is in Himself all that deity is, deity expressing itself not in words as parts of speech, but in the revelation of a Person. It is the translation of hrema (rJema) which speaks of articulate utterance. This word is never used as a designation of God the Son. It is the Word of God to which reference is made here, not the Son of God. God spoke the word, and a universe sprang into existence. Since the universe was framed by the word of God, it follows, the writer argues, that that which is seen was not made out of that which is visible. Expositor’s says: “Had the visible world been formed out of materials which were subject to human observation, there would have been no room for faith. Science could have traced it back to its origin. Evolution only pushes the statement a stage back. There is still an unseen force that does not submit itself to experimental science, and this is the object of faith.” Translation. By means of faith we perceive that the worlds were framed by God’s word, and it follows, therefore, that that which we see did not come into being out of that which is visible. 2. Faith illustrated (11:4–40). (11:4) It is significant that the writer chooses Abel as the first example of what faith can do for the one who exercises it. In the case of Abel, it was the matter of his personal salvation which was in view, as was also the case with the recipients of the letter to the Hebrews. If Abel’s appropriation of salvation was by means of faith, that would mean that if the first-century Jew wanted to be saved, he would have to exercise faith. By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain. That which made Abel’s sacrifice more excellent than Cain’s, was not its quantity but its quality. Its quality inhered in the fact that it was the offering which God had prescribed, a blood offering. Abel had learned this from his father Adam. The word “which” could refer grammatically either to the sacrifice or the faith. The context decides. God testified of his gifts, namely, the sacrifice. All of which means that it was by means of the blood sacrifice that he obtained witness that he was righteous. Though Abel is dead, yet “by it” (the sacrifice) he yet speaks, telling to all that live after, that salvation is through sacrificial blood. In 12:24, the statement is made that Jesus’ blood speaks better things than the blood of Abel. It is not Abel’s own blood which is in view here, but the blood of the offering Abel presented to God. This is shown by the historical background and analysis of the epistle, the argument of which is that “The New Testament in Jesus’ blood is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament in animal blood.” The blood of Abel’s offering spoke symbolically of a Sacrifice for sin that God would one day offer. But Jesus’ blood is the actual sacrifice, and speaks of the salvation which He

procured for us on the Cross. It was the blood offering which Abel presented to God through which he was declared righteous. This is in accord with Pauline doctrine where the great apostle speaks of “being now justified by his blood” (Rom. 5:9). Cain followed his reason and ignored revelation. He argued that his own good works as manifested by the produce which he had grown, would please God rather than a blood sacrifice. Abel accepted revelation instead, and had faith in the divine acceptability of the offering prescribed by God. His own reason may have argued otherwise, but his faith in what God had said, won the day. Here was the example which this first-century Jew should follow in his appropriation of the salvation which Messiah procured for him on the Cross, not the way of Cain, which he had been taught by the first-century religious leaders in Israel. Translation. By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which (sacrifice) it was testified that he was righteous, God bearing witness to his gifts, and through it (the sacrifice), though he is dead, yet he speaks. (11:5) Enoch was translated. The word is metatithemi (metatiqemi). The verb tithemi (tiqemi) means “to place,” the prefixed preposition meta (meta) signifying a change, the compound word meaning “to transpose” (two things, one of which is put in place of the other). This word is used in Acts 7:16 of the transporting of the remains of Jacob and his sons to Shechem, in Gal. 1:6 of the sudden change of the doctrinal position of the Galatian Christians, and in Heb. 7:12, of the change of the law of the priesthood, a new regulation being instituted in place of the old. In the case of Enoch, the word speaks of his sudden transference from earth to heaven. It refers to a change of position. It was one thing put in the place of another, heaven for Enoch rather than earth. Now, in the transference of believers from earth to heaven, that operation is effected usually by death. But in the case of Enoch, it was apart from death. He departed this earthly scene without dying. This verse does not teach that Enoch had faith to be translated. God translated him because he lived a life in which He was pleased. It was by faith that he lived that life. The Mosaic commentary on his life is in the words “Enoch walked with God” (Gen. 5:22). Vincent says when commenting on this: “Faith creates a close personal relation.” Translation. By faith Enoch was translated, with the result that he did not have a glimpse of death, and he was not found because God translated him. For before his translation, he had witness borne (to him), that testimony still being on record, to the effect that he pleased God. (11:6) Now the writer lays down an axiomatic truth. He uses the aorist tense in the infinitive “to please.” The statement is universal in its application and timeless. The idea is, “Without faith it is impossible to please Him at all.” The one who comes to God, must believe two things, first that He exists, and second, that He rewards those who diligently seek Him. The first verb “is” is the translation of estin (ejstin) which speaks of existence. The second verb “is” is the translation of ginomai (ginomai). The idea is not merely that God exists as a rewarder, but that He will prove Himself to be a rewarder of that person who diligently seeks Him. As Vincent puts

it: “He who approaches God has, through faith, the assurance that his seeking God will result in good to himself.” The words “diligently seek” are literally “seek Him out,” the prefixed preposition being local in its force in this translation. But those who seek Him out are diligently seeking Him, and here we have the perfective use of the preposition. Vincent says in this connection: “God’s beneficent will and attitude toward the seeker are not always apparent at the first approach. In such cases there is occasion for faith, in the face of delay, that diligent seeking will find its reward. One is reminded of Jesus’ lessons on importunity in seeking God (Luke 11:5–10, 18:1–8).” “He hides himself so wondrously As though there were no God; He is least seen when all the powers Of ill are most abroad. Or He deserts us at the hour The fight is almost lost. And seems to leave us to ourselves Just when we need Him most. It is not so, but so it looks; And we lose courage then; And doubts will come if God hath kept His promises to men.” Faber. Translation. But without faith it is impossible to please Him at all. For he who comes to God must of necessity in the nature of the case believe that He exists, and that He becomes a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him out. (11:7) The words “of God” are not in the best texts. The word “fear,” gives one the erroneous impression that Noah acted under the influence of fright. The Greek word is eulabeomai (eujlabeomai), which means “to act cautiously, circumspectly, to reverence, stand in awe of” in this context. Noah acted with “pious care, a reverent circumspection with regard to things enjoined by God, and as yet unseen, yet confidently expected on the strength of God’s word” (Vincent). The things not seen were the contents of God’s revelation to Noah regarding the flood (Gen. 6:13–22). The word “prepared” is the translation of kataskeuazo (kataskeuazo) “to equip, prepare, make ready.” Noah built and equipped the ark. “Ark” is in the Greek text, kiboton (kiboton), originally, a wooden chest. Same word is used of the ark of the covenant. The word “which” goes back to “faith” for its antecedent. Noah condemned the world by his faith. There are two interpretations of this statement, depending upon which meaning one takes for the word “world” (kosmos (kosmo")). If kosmos (kosmo") refers to the physical earth, then the sentence is to be interpreted as follows: Noah by acting in faith when building the ark, announced the condemnation of the earth to destruction. If we take kosmos (kosmo") as referring to the fallen, human race, the meaning is that Noah condemned the conduct of his contemporaries by the contrast which

his own faith presented. We have examples of the same thing in Matt. 12:41, Rom. 2:27. However, Weiss objects to this interpretation and says that in this epistle kosmos (kosmo") is not used to denote the world of men. But the question arises as to what God judged in the flood, the physical earth or the sinful race? It seems, therefore, that the first interpretation is the correct one. Noah threw into bold relief by his faith, the unbelief of the human race. Not only did he condemn the human race by his faith, but he became heir of the righteousness which is by faith. The words “became heir” in the Greek text here mean merely “became owner” or “became partaker,” although there is underneath the word the idea familiar to the Jewish mind, that spiritual blessings are a heritage bestowed by God. We must be careful to note here that this righteousness is not justifying righteousness, but experimental righteousness, righteousness in conduct. In Genesis the warning of God was given Noah because he was righteous. In Hebrews we are told that Noah wrought righteousness in his life by faith. He is one of those who as in 11:33 wrought righteousness. Translation. By faith Noah having been warned concerning things not seen, with reverential care prepared an ark to save his household; by means of which (faith) he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith. (11:8) Abraham exhibits that faith which is defined in the opening verses of this chapter as “that assurance and conviction of unseen things which caused him to rely confidently upon the future fulfilment of the divine promises.” The words “When he was called” are the translation of a present participle which speaks of action going on at the same time as that of the leading verb, which is “obeyed.” The translation is “Abraham, while he was being called, obeyed.” It indicates Abraham’s immediate obedience to God’s call. The words “to go out” are to be construed, not with “called” but “obeyed.” They specify that in which his obedience was shown. The idea is, “when he was called, obeyed to go out” The word “knowing” is the translation, not of ginosko (ginosko) or oida (oijda), the usual words for knowing, but of epistomai (ejpistomai) which means “to put one’s attention on, to fix one’s thoughts on, to know.” Abraham’s faith was so great, that he was not particularly concerned as to what the nature of the country was. His faith displaced all worry as to his future in that country. He did not trouble to think upon the matter. Expositor’s says: “The faith of Abraham appeared in his promptly abandoning his own country on God’s promise of another, and the strength of this faith was illustrated by the circumstance that he had no knowledge where or what that country was.… It was, therefore, no attractive account of Canaan which induced him to forsake Mesopotamia, no ordinary emigrant’s motive which moved him, but mere faith in God’s promise. ‘Even still the life of faith must be entered on in ignorance of the way to the inheritance, or even what the inheritance and rest in each one’s particular case will be, and of the experiences that the way will bring. This is true even of ordinary life’ (Davidson).” Translation. By faith, Abraham while he was being called, obeyed to go out into a place which he was about to receive as an inheritance, and he went out, not troubling his mind as to where he was going. (11:9) The words “he sojourned” are the translation of paroikeo (paroikeo). The

word means literally “to dwell beside or among.” It speaks of a foreigner dwelling in a state without rights of citizenship. The preposition “in” is the translation of eis (eij"), a preposition of motion. Here we have, therefore, a verb of rest used with a preposition which signifies motion. This combination speaks of the fact that Abraham went into the land and dwelt there. The definite article occurs in the Greek text before the word “promise.” It is “the land of the promise,” speaking of a particular promise, the one in Gen. 12:7, 13:15, in which God gave Abraham the land between the Nile River on the south and west, to the Euphrates on the north and east. The word “strange” is the translation of allotria (ajllotria), a land other than his own. The word “tabernacles” is the translation of skene (skene), the Greek word for “tent” Vincent says, “The three, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are mentioned because they cover the entire period of the sojourn in Canaan. Faith inspired these to endure patiently their unsettled life, since it assured them of a permanent home in the future.” Translation. By faith he dwelt as a foreigner without rights of citizenship in the land of the promise as in a land not his own, having settled down to live in tents, with Isaac and Jacob, joint-heirs with him of the promise, the same one. (11:10) Both the words “city” and “foundations” are preceded by the definite article in the Greek text. Abraham looked for the city which had the foundations. It was a particular city with particular foundations. He was looking for the heavenly Jerusalem. The idea of the heavenly Jerusalem was familiar to the Jews. See Heb. 12:22, 13:14; Gal. 4:26. But we must not confuse this city, namely, the heavenly dwelling of the saved to which Abraham was looking forward, with the heavenly Jerusalem of Rev. 3:12, 21:2, which is the home of the Bride of Christ, the Church. The word “builder” is the translation of technites (tecnite"), “an artificer, a craftsman, architect.” The word “maker” is in the Greek text demiourgos (demiourgo"), which meant originally “a workman for the public (demos (demo")), generally, a framer, builder.” Translation. For he was constantly waiting for and expecting the city having the foundations, the architect and builder of which is God. (11:11) The intensive use of the pronoun “herself” emphasizes the fact that it was Sarah, the former unbelieving one, who received strength to conceive. The latter expression is in the Greek text eis katabolen spermatos (eij" katabolen spermato"). The word katabolen (katabolen) means originally “a throwing down,” hence, here the depositing of the male seed in the womb. The sentence may be explained either, “received strength as regards the deposition of seed,” to fructify it, or, “received strength for the foundation of a posterity.” The words “and was delivered of a child,” are not in the text. Translation. By faith Sarah herself received power as regards the deposition of seed, and that when she was past age, because she considered Him faithful who promised. (11:12)

Translation. And therefore there sprang from one, and that a dead man, even as the stars of the heaven in multitude and as the sand beside the lip of the sea (seashore) innumerable. (11:13) The words “in faith” are in the Greek text kata pistin (kata pistin), literally, “according to faith.” That is, “they died according to faith, inasmuch as they did not receive. They died under the regime of faith, and not of sight” (Vincent). The word “embraced” is the translation of aspazomai (ajspazomai) which means “to greet or salute.” Vincent says that the word “embraced” is a sort of inferential rendering of the original sense of this word. He offers the translation, “having seen them from afar and greeted them:” and adds this comment, “as seamen wave their greeting to a country seen far off on the horizon, on which they cannot land.” In confessing that they were strangers and pilgrims, “they admitted and accepted the fact with the resignation of faith, and with the assurance of future rest” (Vincent). In the anonymous Epistle to Diagnetus, probably of the second century, there occur these words concerning Christians: ”They inhabit their own country, but as sojourners: they take part in all things as citizens, and endure all things as aliens: every foreign country is theirs, and every country is foreign.” Translation. These all died dominated by faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off and greeted them, also confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims upon the earth. (11:14) Translation. For they who say such things as these declare plainly that they are seeking a fatherland. (11:15) The words “been mindful” have the idea in the Greek text of “habitually remembered.” The meaning here is “that if, in their declaration (v. 14) that they were seeking a country, they had called to mind the country from which they came out, they could have returned thither, so that it is evident that they did not mean that country” (Vincent). Thus, when they were seeking a home-country, a fatherland, they were not thinking of Mesopotamia from which they had come. Translation. And if indeed they had been remembering that country from which they had gone out, in that case they would have had constant opportunity to bend their way back again. (11:16) The word “now” is logical here, not temporal. The idea is “as the case now stands.” God is not ashamed to be called their God, because they have commended themselves to God by their faith. The expression “to be called their God” is most interesting in the Greek. The word “called” is epikaleisthai (ejpikaleisqai), the simple verb meaning “to be called,” the preposition meaning “upon.” Thus the compound word means “to be called upon.” The idea is, therefore, that of adding an additional name to the one which one already has, namely, a surname. God was not ashamed to be surnamed their God. He is called the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And this is shown by the fact

that He has prepared for them a city, introducing them into the perfection of social life, fellowship with Him. Translation. But now as the case stands, they are reaching out in their desires for a better (country), that is, a heavenly one, because of which God is not ashamed of them to be surnamed their God, for He prepared for them a city. (11:17–19) The word “tried” is the translation of peirazo (peirazo) which means “to put to the test.” Here it refers to the act of God putting Abraham to the test in order to prove his character and the steadfastness of his faith. The construction in the Greek makes it clear that while the testing of Abraham was still in progress, he had already offered up his son, that is, before the trial had come to an issue, by the act of his obedient will, through faith in God. Abraham met the test through faith before there was any visible evidence of God’s intervening hand. Abraham fully expected to offer his son as a sacrifice, and as fully expected God to raise his body from the dead out of the ashes of the burnt sacrifice. He reasoned that since God promised him a line of ancestry through Isaac, He would have to do that. And he had faith to believe that God would do so. Vincent explains the words “Also he received him in a figure,” as follows: “Since the sacrifice did not take place as a literal slaughter, there could not be a literal restoration from death. There was a real offering in Abraham’s will, but not a real death of Isaac. Isaac’s death took place symbolically, in the sacrifice of the ram: correspondingly, the restoration was only a symbolic restoration from the dead.” Translation. By faith Abraham offered up Isaac while being put to the test; even he who received the promises, offered up his only begotten, with reference to whom it was said, In Isaac shall your seed be called, counting upon the fact that God also was able to raise him out from amongst the dead, because of which fact (namely, that Isaac only passed through the likeness of death) he also received him back in a figure. (11:20) The Authorized Version omits the Greek word for “and” which gives emphasis to the following words. It is, “Isaac pronounced a blessing, and that concerning things to come,” namely, things beyond the lifetime of Jacob and Esau. The blessing was an act of faith. Translation. By faith, and that concerning things to come, Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau. (11:21) “Both” is the translation of hekaston (eJkaston) “each.” Each son received a separate and distinct blessing. This shows discernment of faith on Jacob’s part, as in the precedence Isaac gave to his younger son Jacob. The expression, “leaning on the top of his staff” is a quotation from Gen. 47:31. Vincent explains that according to the vowelpoints, the same Hebrew word means either staff or bed. The LXX chose the former meaning, and the writer to the Hebrews quoted from that version. Translation. By faith, Jacob when dying, blessed each of the sons of

Joseph, and worshipped upon his staff. (11:22) “Made mention” is the translation of emnemoneuo (ejmnemoneuo) “to remember.” Joseph on his death-bed remembered the promise of God to give the land of Canaan to the seed of Abraham (Gen. 12:7, 13:5, 15:7), and also the prediction that Abraham’s descendants should spend 400 years in bondage in a strange land, and should afterward be brought out thence (Gen. 15:13, 14). Translation. By faith, Joseph when near his end, remembered the exodus of the sons of Israel and so gave a command concerning his bones. (11:23) The word “proper” is the translation of asteion (ajsteion) “comely.” This word is used in Acts 7:20 where Stephen says that Moses was “comely to God.” The Authorized Version translates “exceedingly fair.” The construction in the Greek text is a dative of respect. He was comely with respect to God. That means that in the sight or estimation of God, Moses was comely. The Greek word meant “of the city, of polished manners, genteel, elegant of body, fair.” The latter two definitions would apply here to the infant Moses. The faith of Moses’ parents was shown in their concealing him for three months after his birth and thus evading the law that male children were to be killed. The word “commandment” is the translation of diatagma (diatagma), namely, “a mandate.” We might say in passing, that the children of God are by God obligated to obey the laws of the country in which they reside, and disobedience to these laws is sin against God. But they are obligated to obey these laws only up to the point where obedience to these laws would mean disobedience to God. The parents of Moses were entirely within their rights in this case, for the reigning Pharaoh was violating the law of God which forbids murder. In view of the fact that Moses was such a handsome, well-favored child, the parents naturally looked forward to a great destiny for him, an exceptional career, and that God would use him for an outstanding service. They had faith that God would thus save him from the mandate of the king. Translation. By faith, Moses having been born was hid three months by his parents, because they saw that he was a comely child. And they did not fear the mandate of the king. (11:24–26) With respect to the action of Moses in renouncing his relationship to Pharaoh and his court, and choosing to cast his lot with Israel, we cannot do better than quote Expositor’s: “The significance and source of this refusal lay in his preferring to suffer ill-usage with God’s people rather than to have a short-lived enjoyment of sin … It was because they were God’s people, not solely because they were of his blood, that Moses threw in his lot with them. It was this which illustrated his faith. He believed that God would fulfil His promise to His people, little likelihood as at present there seemed to be of any great future for his race. On the other hand there was the hamartias apolausis (aJmartia" ajpolausi") (the pleasure of sin), the enjoyment which was within his reach if only he committed the sin of denying his people and renouncing their future as promised by God. For ‘the enjoyment to be reaped from sin,’ does not refer to the pleasure of gratifying sensual appetite and so forth, but to the satisfaction of a high ambition and the gratification of his finer tastes which he might have had by remaining in the Egyptian court. Very similarly Philo interprets the action of Moses, who, he says, ‘esteemed the

good things of those who adopted him, although more splendid for a season, to be in reality spurious, but those of his natural parents, although for a little while less conspicuous to be true and genuine’.… That which influenced Moses to make this choice was his estimate of the comparative value of the outcome of suffering with God’s people and of the happiness offered in Egypt.… ‘He considered the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt; for he steadily kept in view the reward.’ The reproach or obloquy and disgrace, which Moses experienced is called “the reproach of the Christ because it was on account of his belief in God’s saving purpose that he suffered … The writer uses the expression … with a view to his readers who were shrinking from the reproach of Christ (13:13).” Translation. By faith, Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be called a son of Pharaoh’s daughter, having chosen for himself rather to be suffering affliction with the people of God than to be having sin’s enjoyments temporarily, since after weighing and comparing the facts in the case, he considered the reproach of the Messiah, greater wealth than Egypt’s treasures, for he looked away (from the treasures of Egypt) to the recompense. (11:27) Moses’ act of forsaking Egypt referred to here is not that connected with the Exodus, but is his flight consequent upon his killing the Egyptian. The writer states that he did not fear the wrath of Pharaoh. But Ex. 2:15 states that fear was the motive of his flight. This seeming contradiction is cleared up by Expositor’s in the following: “But what is in the writer’s mind is not Pharaoh’s wrath as cause but as consequence of Moses’ abandonment of Egypt. His flight showed that he had finally renounced life at court, and in thus indicating by this decisive action that he was an Israelite, and meant to share with his people, he braved the king’s wrath. This he was strengthened to do because he saw an invisible monarch greater than Pharaoh. Vaughan seems to be the only interpreter who has precisely hit the writer’s meaning: ‘the two fears are different, the one is the fear arising from the discovery of his slaying the Egyptian, the other is the fear of Pharaoh’s anger on discovering his flight. He feared and therefore fled: he feared not, and therefore fled. Having fled and so cutting himself off from all immediate opportunity of helping his people, ekarteresen (ejkarteresen) (he endured), ‘he steadfastly bided his time,’ because he saw the Invisible … The aorist gathers the forty years in Midian into one exhibition of wonderful perseverance in faith.” It was during those forty years in Midian that Moses kept before himself his great destiny, that of leading God’s people out of Egypt, and kept trusting God in spite of his flight from Egypt and his enforced absence from that land, that He would yet bring him back there and effect the deliverance of the Chosen People. Translation. By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king, for he was staunch and steadfast, as seeing the Invisible One. (11:28) The word “kept” is the translation of poieo (poieo) “to make,” which in this context means “to institute.” This verb is in the perfect tense which speaks here of the continued significance of the service of the Passover to the time of the writing of this epistle, not that the Passover is looked at here as a permanent institution, for it was not,

being only typical and therefore transitory in its nature, in operation only until the Reality to which it pointed, appeared. But its significance, namely, that of a type of the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus, that is of permanent value. The word “sprinkling” is proschusis (proscusi"), the verb form meaning “to pour on,” the noun, “an affusion.” While the blood was in the case of the first Passover, sprinkled on the door-posts and lintels, in the case of the post-Exodus legislation, it was poured upon the altar. Translation. By faith he instituted the Passover and the sprinkling of the blood, in order that the destroyer of the first born should not touch them. (11:29) Translation. By faith they passed through the Red Sea, of which the Egyptians having taken trial, were drowned. (11:30) Translation. By faith the walls of Jericho fell, having been encircled seven days. (11:31) The word translated “believed not” is not the simple word for “faith,” but apeitheo (ajpeiqeo) which means “to be disobedient.” It speaks of disbelief manifesting itself in disobedience. The word here speaks of the failure on the part of the inhabitants of Jericho, to be persuaded that God had given the land to the Israelites, and the consequent refusal to surrender Jericho. Rahab’s faith is shown in that she harbored the spies. The word “received” is dechomai (decomai), which was used in the sense of the friendly reception of a guest. The words “with peace” speak of the act of Rahab in receiving the spies without enmity, and in not allowing them to suffer harm from others. Translation. By faith, Rahab the harlot did not perish with those who were disobedient, having received the spies with peace. (11:32) Translation. And what shall I say yet? For the time will fail me telling of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jepthae, and both David and Samuel and the prophets. (11:33) The word “subdued” is katagonizomai (katagonizomai) which means literally “to fight down,” thus, “to struggle against, to overcome.” The word signifies a desperate contest. The words “wrought righteousness” refer not only to their personal virtues, but also to the public exercise of these men as leaders. Faith was evident in the association of righteousness in their lives with the power they wielded. Translation. Who through faith overcame kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions.

(11:34) Translation. Quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, from weakness were made strong, became mighty in war, turned to flight armies of aliens. (11:35) The word “tortured” is tumpanizo (tumpanizo) “to torture with the tumpanum.” The latter seems to have been a wheel-shaped instrument of torture, over which criminals were stretched as though they were skins, and then horribly beaten with clubs or thongs. The word “deliverance” is preceded by the article. It was the deliverance offered at the price of denying their faith, that was refused. They did this in order that they might attain to a better resurrection than the one mentioned above, namely, a mere continuation of life on earth. These were looking forward to the resurrection that would be unto glory. Translation. Women received by resurrection their dead, and others were tortured, not accepting the deliverance, in order that they might obtain a better resurrection. (11:36) The word “others” is the translation of heteros (eJtero") which means “another of a different kind.” This word introduces a different class of victories achieved by faith, although mockings and scourgings were endured by the martyrs just mentioned. The words “yea, moreover” (eti de (ejti de)) are used commonly to express a climax. Such imprisonment as was endured by Jeremiah (38:9), was certainly to be dreaded even more than scourging. Translation. And still others of a different nature, received a trial of mockings and scourgings, yes, moreover, of bonds and imprisonment. (11:37) Stoning was a characteristic Jewish punishment. Tradition has it that Isaiah was sawn asunder with a wooden saw by Manasseh. The fact of being tempted, appearing in the midst of these terrible tortures, has given expositors some surprise. They have various solutions, taking it out of the text entirely as a spurious reading, or substituting some other Greek word somewhat like it and of a different meaning. It is probably best to leave it as it is, and suggest that one of the most fiendish tortures was not that of the body but of the conscience, when the torturer would offer the victim opportunity to recant and thus obtain his freedom. The Greek has it that they “died by sword-slaughter,” indicating mass-slaughters. Examples of this abound in the Maccabean period. The dress of sheepskin, and that of the still rougher material, that of goatskins, was worn, not as a professional uniform, but because they had no other material for clothing. The word “afflicted” is the translation of thlibo (qlibo) “to press hard upon.” Thus, the idea is that they were hardpressed by their foes. “Tormented” is the translation of kakoukeo (kakoukeo), “to maltreat, oppress, plague.” Translation. They were stoned, tempted, sawn asunder; they died, slaughtered by the sword; they wandered around in sheepskins and goat

skins; being destitute, hardpressed, maltreated. (11:38) The word “world” (kosmos (kosmo")) does not refer here to the corrupt world system, but to the world considered as an economy which was unworthy of these, because it was an economy ruled by sense, the world of the martyrs being an economy ruled by faith. The plane of life of the martyrs was higher. Expositor’s quotes Davidson: “The world drove them out, thinking them unworthy to live in it, while in truth it was unworthy to have them living in it.” The word “caves” is the translation of ope (ojpe) which means “a hole,” primarily a place through which one can see. It is used in the LXX of the cleft in the rock in which God placed Moses (Ex. 33:22). Translation. Men of whom the world was not worthy, wandering over deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes of the earth. (11:39, 40) Expositor’s has a good note on these verses: “ ‘And these all,’ that is, those who have been named in this chapter, ‘although they had witness borne to them through their faith,’ as has been recorded (vv. 2–38), ‘did not receive the promise,’ that is, as already said in verse 13, they only foresaw that it would be fulfilled and died in that faith. But this failure to obtain the fulfilment of the promise was not due to any slackness on the part of God nor to any defect in their faith; there was a good reason for it, and that reason was that ‘God had in view some better thing for us, that without us they should not be perfected.’ The ‘better thing’ is that which this Epistle has made it its business to expound, the perfecting (teleiothosin (teleioqosin)) of God’s people by full communion with Him mediated by the perfect revelation (1:1) of the Son and His perfect covenant (8:7–13), and His better sacrifice (9:23). And the perfecting of the people of God under the Old Testament is said to have been impossible, not as might have been expected ‘apart from the Son,’ but ‘without us,’ because the writer has in view the history of the Church, the relation of the people of God in former times to the same people in Messianic times.” Alford adds: “The Advent and work of Christ has changed the estate of the Old Testament fathers and saints into greater and perfect bliss; an inference which is forced on us by many other places in Scripture. So that their perfection was dependent on our perfection: their and our perfection was all brought in at the same time, when Christ ‘by one offering perfected forever those who are sanctified.’ So that the result with regard to them is, that their spirits, from the time when Christ descended into Hades and ascended up into heaven, enjoy heavenly blessedness, and are waiting with all who have followed their glorified High Priest within the veil, for the resurrection of their bodies, the Regeneration, the renovation of all things.” Translation. And these all, although they had witness borne to them through their faith, did not receive the promise, God having provided some better thing for us, in order that they without us should not be made perfect. 3. Faith exhorted (12:1, 2). (12:1) The “wherefore” (toigaroun (toigaroun)) reaching back and gathering together all the heroes of 11:4–40, their faith, and their exploits, is an emphatic particle,

strongly affirming the facts on which the following exhortation is based. The words “we also” are not to be construed with “are compassed about, etc.,” but with “let us run.” The Nestle Greek text so punctuates. The Old Testament saints, the witnesses of chapter 11, were not compassed about with a cloud of witnesses. They are the witnesses of whom the writer is speaking. The word “cloud” here is not nephele (nefele) which is a detached and sharply outlined cloud, but nephos (nefo"), a great mass of cloud covering the entire visible space of the heavens, and therefore without definite form, or a single large mass in which outlines are not emphasized or distinguished. The use of “cloud” for a mass of living beings is familiar in poetry. Homer speaks of “a cloud of footmen, a cloud of Trojans.” Themistocles, addressing the Athenians, says of the host of Xerxes, “we have had the fortune to save both ourselves and Greece by repelling so great a cloud of men.” The question to which we must now address ourselves is as to just how we must regard these witnesses? The word is martus (martu"), “one who testifies, or can testify, to what he has seen or heard or knows by any other means.” It is used in a legal way in the papyri in the sense of witnesses to a contract or legal document. In an ethical sense it was used in the early Church to designate those who have proved the strength and genuineness of their faith in the Lord Jesus by undergoing a violent death. The word does not include in its meaning, the idea of a person looking at something. Peter uses it of himself (I Pet. 5:1) as a witness of the sufferings of Christ, that is, one who has been retained and commissioned to testify to the sufferings of Christ which he has seen. The heroes of faith of 11:4–40 are the cloud of witnesses, testifying to the efficacy of the faith way of salvation and victory. The writer calls them, so to speak, to the witness stand to bear testimony to what they have seen and heard and felt as to what faith could and did do for them, so that this first century Jew might become convinced that the salvation which Messiah wrought out on the Cross, must be appropriated by faith, not works. As to the idea of these Old Testament saints looking down from heaven and watching the lives of the saints on earth, the following might be said: Vincent teaches it, Alford insists upon it, and Expositor’s says that if the idea is there at all, which is very doubtful, it is only introduced by the words “running” and “race.” The writer visualizes a great host of people encircling these first century readers, and then speaks of a race (agona (ajgona), a Greek athletic term speaking of a contest). The natural and correct inference is that he is thinking of the Greek games here, the spectators in the tiers upon tiers of seats, the athletes competing in the stadium, the latter speaking of the Christian life as a contest and a race, and the former, of the saints of chapter eleven. Vincent and Alford see these saints looking down from heaven observing the lives of those on earth. The present writer cannot bring himself to go that far. Rather than seeing the witnesses as spectators looking at this earthly scene from heaven, it would seem nearer the correct interpretation here to think of these first century readers running their Christian race, not having in mind the witnesses of 11:4–40 as spectators, but rather their testimony as examples urging them on to faith in Messiah as High Priest. The recipients are exhorted to lay aside every weight. The word is ogkon (ojgkon) “bulk, mass,” hence, “a swelling, superfluous flesh.” The allusion, therefore, is to the training period preparatory to a race in which encumbering superfluity of flesh is reduced. Expositor’s says: “The Christian runner must rid himself even of innocent things which might retard him. And all that does not help, hinders. It is by running he learns what these things are. So long as he stands he does not feel that they are burdensome and

hampering.” Thus, the word “weight” has the idea of “encumbrance.” Not only are the readers to lay aside every general encumbrance which would slacken their speed in the Christian race, but also any particular, specific one. The words “easily beset” are the translation of euperistatos, eu (eujperistato", euj) meaning “readily, deftly, cleverly,” and the verbal form of the rest of the word, “to place itself around.” It speaks of a sin which readily or easily encircles the Christian runner, like a long, loose robe clinging to his limbs. The sin may be any evil propensity. Here the context suggests the sin of unbelief which was the thing keeping the unsaved recipients of this letter from putting their faith in Messiah as High Priest. The Greek word “patience” (hupomone (uJpomone)) includes both passive endurance and active persistence. The specific word for a race (dromos (dromo")) is not used, the general term for an athletic contest (agon (ajgon)) being chosen. The words “set before us” (prokeimai (prokeimai)) give one the idea that a certain type of race is placed before the Christian. The idea in the word prokeimai (prokeimai) is that of something lying before one. It is like a road that stretches out before one’s gaze. Translation. Therefore also as for us, having so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, having put off and away from ourselves every encumbrance and that sin which so deftly and cleverly places itself in an entangling way around us, with patience let us be running the race lying before us. (12:2) Having presented a catalog of Old Testament witnesses to the efficacy of faith, the writer now speaks of Messiah, the Jehoshua of the Old Testament, the Jesus of the New, God Himself incarnate in human flesh. He uses Him as the supreme example to which his readers should look as they run life’s race. The word “looking” is aphorao (ajforao) “to turn the eyes away from other things and fix them on something.” The word also means “to turn one’s mind to a certain thing.” Both meanings are applicable here, the spiritual vision turned away from all else and together with the mind, concentrated on Jesus. What a lesson in Christian running technique we have in that little preposition “off, away from,” which is prefixed to this verb. The minute the Greek runner in the stadium takes his attention away from the race course and the goal to which he is speeding, and turns it upon the onlooking crowds, his speed is slackened. It is so with the Christian. The minute he takes his eyes off of the Lord Jesus, and turns them upon others, his pace in the Christian life is slackened, and his onward progress in grace hindered. Messiah is called the author of our faith. The word “author” is the translation of archegon (ajrcegon). Vincent says that the Authorized Version is misleading and narrows the scope of the passage. The word is made up of ago (ajgo) “to lead,” and arche (ajrce), “the first.” The compound word means “the chief leader, one that takes the lead in anything and thus furnishes the example.” In our passage it describes Jesus as the One “who in the pre-eminence of His faith far surpasses the examples of faith commemorated in chapter 11” (Vincent). The word “faith” has the article before it in the Greek text. It is the faith of which the writer is speaking as exhibited in the examples of chapter eleven and in the Lord Jesus. It is not the Christian Faith as such, but faith absolutely. Christ is the archegon (ajrcegon), the chief leader of this faith in that He “furnished the perfect development, the supreme example of faith, and in virtue of this He is the leader of the whole believing host of all time.” He is also the finisher of

the faith spoken of in these chapters. The word is teleioo (teleioo) which means “to carry through completely, to finish, to make perfect or complete.” Our Lord in His life of faith on earth, became the perfect or complete example of the life of faith. Thayer speaks of our Lord as “one who has in his own person raised faith to its perfection and so set before us the highest example of faith.” The words “who for the joy set before Him, endured the cross,” are usually interpreted as meaning that the Lord Jesus endured the cross in order that He might obtain certain joy which was placed before Him as a reward for His sufferings. But this interpretation is based upon an erroneous use of the preposition “for.” The Greek preposition is anti (ajnti), the predominant use of which in the first century was “instead of.” It is so used in Luke 11:11 where we have, “If he asked a fish, will he for (anti (ajnti), instead of) a fish give him a serpent?” The word “set” is the translation of prokeimenes (prokeimene") literally “lying before.” Vincent says, “The joy was the full, divine beatitude of His preincarnate life in the bosom of the Father; the glory which He had with God before the world was. In exchange for this He accepted the Cross and the shame. The contrast is designed between the readers (v. 1), and the joy which was already present to Christ. The heroic character of His faith appears in His renouncing a joy already in possession in exchange for shame and death. The passage thus falls in with Philippians 2:6–8.” He despised the shame attendant upon a death by crucifixion, namely, the fact that that kind of a death was meted out upon malefactors. The words “is set down” are in the perfect tense in the Greek text, the idea being that He, after His work of providing a salvation was finished, sat down, and remains seated. He need never arise and repeat His work on the Cross for sinners. It is a finished work. He is not only seated, but He occupies the position of preeminence, at the right hand of God. Translation. Looking off and away to Jesus, the preeminent leader and perfecter of this aforementioned faith, who instead of the joy then present with Him endured the Cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of God. IV.

Final Warnings and Exhortations (12:3–13:25). 1. If these Jews remain under the chastening hand of God, and do not seek to escape persecution by renouncing their professed faith in Messiah, that is an evidence that they are saved. But if they do the opposite, that shows they have never been saved (12:3–17). (12:3) Now, the writer, having called attention to the fact that Messiah is the preeminent example of the life of faith, exhorts his readers to consider Him. The word is analogizomai (ajnalogizomai), “to reckon up, to consider by way of comparison.” The word “for” introduces the reason for the exhortation to look off and away to Jesus. When considering Him, the readers will see how much more He had to endure than they. Their sufferings, the result of the persecutions which they are enduring, would seem but insignificant compared to His. “Contradiction” is antilogia (ajntilogia) in the Greek text, the Greek word meaning literally, “to speak against, gainsaying.” It sometimes refers to opposition in act. The word “contradiction” here refers, therefore, to the opposition Messiah endured from the human race in word and act. These persecuted Jews, mistreated by their brethren after the flesh who were still clinging to the temple sacrifices, are exhorted to thus contrast this opposition which they were meeting, with that endured by

Messiah, and to do this in order that they would not be weary, fainting in their souls. Translation. For consider by way of comparison, the One who endured opposition by sinners against Himself, in order that you do not become weary, fainting in your souls. (12:4) The readers are reminded of the fact that the persecutions they were enduring, had not yet entailed the shedding of their blood, as was the case of Messiah, who became obedient to God the Father to the extent of death, yes, to such a death as that upon a cross. Their striving against sin was their battle against the temptation of renouncing their professed faith in Messiah in order that they might be relieved of the persecution which they were enduring. His striving against sin was His submitting to the death of the Cross, with all that that involved, His becoming sin for us, the breaking for the time of the fellowship between the Father and the Son, and all the intense and awful physical agony of crucifixion. The word “resist” is antikathistemi (ajntikaqistemi) “to stand against.” The word “striving” is antagonizomai (ajntagonizomai) “to fight agonizingly against.” It speaks of a terrific fight. Translation. Not yet have you withstood to the extent of blood, struggling against sin. (12:5, 6) The writer now quotes from Proverbs 3:11, 12, exhorting his readers to take these persecutions as allowed of God for the purpose of chastening them. The latter word is paideia (paideia), which was used of the whole training and education of children. It speaks also of whatever in adults cultivates the soul, especially by correcting mistakes and curbing the passions. It speaks also of instruction which aims at the increase of virtue. The word does not have in it the idea of punishment, but of corrective measures which will eliminate evil in the life and encourage the good. Here, the persecutions were used of God in an effort to clarify the spiritual vision of the readers as to the relative merits of the First Testament and the New Testament, warning them against returning to the temple sacrifices and urging them on to faith in the Messiah as High Priest. The readers, in their action of leaning back towards the First Testament and by their avowed purpose of returning to it in order to escape the persecution, had forgotten the lesson of Proverbs. Translation. And you have completely forgotten the exhortation which was of such a nature as to speak to you as to sons, My son, stop making light of the Lord’s chastening. Stop fainting when you are being rebuked by Him. For the one whom the Lord loves, He chastens, and He scourges every son whom He receives in His heart and cherishes. (12:7) The Authorized Version follows a faulty Greek text in the word “if.” The Greek here is “it is for chastening that ye are enduring.” The word “endure” is hupomeno (uJpomeno), literally, “to remain under.” That is, the recipients of this letter are exhorted to remain under the chastening hand of God, for the purpose of this chastening is disciplinary. “Dealeth” is the translation of prosphero (prosfero) which in its passive voice as it is used here means “to behave toward, to deal with.” That is, the afflictive dealing of God with the recipients is an evidence that they are sons of God. We must keep

in mind that this letter is written to the professing Christian Church made up of saved and unsaved. Both classes were the recipients of the persecution, because both classes had left the temple sacrifices and had identified themselves with the visible church. But only those who would remain under the chastening hand of God would prove themselves to be true sons of God. Those who would renounce their profession of Messiah as High Priest and return to the sacrifices in order to escape the persecution, would show by that, that they had never been saved. Translation. It is for the purpose of chastening that you are enduring. As those who by nature are sons, is God dealing with you. For what son is there whom the Father does not chasten? (12:8) In the Old Testament, Israel was taught to regard any visitation of God’s disciplinary measures such as drought and famine or enemy attack, as a sign of His displeasure with His people because of their sins. Hence, these Hebrews in the firstcentury Church would naturally regard this persecution in the same light. The writer hastens to assure them that instead of this chastening being an indication that they were not right with God, it was a proof of their sonship, for all sons are partakers of chastening. Those among them who would not submit to this chastening were, therefore, unsaved. Translation. But if you are without chastisement of which all (sons) have been made partakers, it follows, therefore, that you are bastards and not sons. (12:9) The word “furthermore” (eita (eijta)) here introduces a new phase of the subject under discussion. “Up to this point the sufferings of Christians have been explained by God’s fatherly relation to them. Now the emphatic point is that their fathers, with whom God is compared, were only earthly human parents” (Vincent). In the words “Shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live,” “the comparison is between the respect paid to a fallible, human parent, which may grow out of the natural relation, or may be due to fear, and the complete subjection to the divine Father” (Vincent). The phrase, “Father of spirits” is contrasted to “fathers of the flesh.” Vincent says: “Their relation to us is limited: His is universal. They are related to us on the fleshly side: He is the Creator of our essential life. Our relation to Him is on the side of our eternal being. The words “and live,” are not limited in their application to the future life, but refer to this present existence. The idea is, “have true life.” Translation. Furthermore, we have been having indeed fathers of our flesh as chasteners, and we have been in the habit of giving them reverence. Shall we not much rather put ourselves in subjection to the Father of spirits and live? (12:10) A comparison is now drawn between the character and end of the earthly father’s discipline and that of the heavenly Father. There are two things that indicate the imperfection of the discipline of the former, namely, it is during the brief period of youth, and it must cease when manhood is reached, whether or not it has accomplished its end; and then again, the human parents are short-sighted, fallible. They are sometimes moved by passion rather than by sound judgment, with the result that they are often mistaken in their disciplinary methods. The thing that seemed good to them was not always best for us. This latter consideration is brought out in the Greek word translated “pleasure.” The word

is dokeo (dokeo), which has the following meanings: “to be of opinion, to think, suppose.” It is used of a subjective judgment which may or may not conform to the fact. Thus, the word indicates that the judgment of the parents on matters of discipline is based on opinion, conjecture, supposition. It is, therefore, not infallible as is the case of the judgment of the heavenly Father. Such methods of discipline as those of our earthly parents, while right at times, must sometimes have hindered rather than promoted true growth. But in the case of the discipline of the heavenly Father, the results in our lives are to our advantage. Such discipline results in the believer becoming a partaker of God’s holiness in his experience. Translation. For on the one hand, they chastened us for a few days upon the basis of that which seemed good to them, but He chastens us for our profit, to the end that we might partake of His holiness. (12:11) The word “no” in the Greek text does not negate “chastening,” but “seemeth.” The idea is, “all chastening does not seem.” The emphasis is upon the fact that every kind of chastening, whether human or divine, does not seem joyous. The words “for the present” do not merely mean “during the present,” but speak of the present regarded as the time in which the chastening is necessary and good for one. The word “yieldeth” is the translation of apodidomi (ajpodidomi) which often means “to give back.” Vincent says in this connection, “perhaps with a suggestion of recompense for the longsuffering and waiting.” The word “exercised” is the translation of gumnazo (gumnazo) which was used of Greek athletes exercising in connection with their athletic games. It means also “to exercise in any way, either the body or the mind.” Here it refers to the spiritual exercise which the recipients went through as a result of the persecutions which in the last analysis were the chastening hand of God. That spiritual exercise consisted of the struggles of the soul, the battle between the determination to go back to the temple sacrifices and thus escape the persecutions, or to go on to faith in the High Priest of the New Testament in spite of them. Translation. In fact, all chastening for the time being does not seem to be joyous but grievous; yet afterward it yields a return of the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who are exercised by it. (12:12) The word “wherefore,” introducing the exhortation in this verse, refers also to the subject matter in the preceding one. The idea is, “Because chastening is thus necessary, and serves for a wholesome discipline, and issues in holiness” (Vincent), therefore “lift up the hands which hang down and the feeble knees.” The word “lift up” is anorthoo (ajnorqoo) which means “to restore to straightness or erectness, to reinvigorate.” It was used by medical writers of the act of setting dislocated parts of the body. The Authorized Version translation “lift up,” is inappropriate to paralyzed knees which need to be set right, braced, reinvigorated. The word “hang” is in the Greek text pariemi (pariemi) which meant originally “to let pass, disregard, neglect,” then “to relax, loosen.” The recipients of this letter were neglecting prayer. The word “feeble” is the translation of the same word rendered “sick of the palsy” (Matt. 8:6). It is paraluo (paraluo) “to loose on one side, to loose or part things placed side by side, to loosen, dissolve, to weaken, enfeeble, suffering from the

relaxing of the nerves, weak of limb.” Our word “paralytic” is the transliteration of this word. Translation. Wherefore, the hands which are relaxed and the knees which have become paralyzed, reinvigorate. (12:13) The word “paths” is troichia (troicia), literally, “a wheel-track.” “Straight” is the translation of orthos (ojrqo"). Here the Greek word is used, not in the sense of straight as distinguished from crooked, but more generally in the sense of right or plain, and by implication, even or smooth. The exhortation is “exert yourselves to make the course clear for yourselves and your fellow-Christians, so that there be no stumbling and laming” (Vincent). The word “lame” is cholon (colon), “lame, halting.” It is found only in the Synoptics and Acts, and is used mostly in the literal sense. It is used here metaphorically. In I Kings 18:21 where the Authorized Version has “How long halt ye between two opinions?” the LXX has, “How long do ye go lame (cholaino (colaino)) on both your hams (ignua (ijgnua), the part behind the thigh and knee)?” The word here speaks of a spiritual limping, and in particular, to those among the recipients who were most seriously affected by the persecutions, and who were on the verge of going back to the temple sacrifices. The exhortation is to the born-again Jews who had left the temple, to live such consistent saintly lives, and to cling so tenaciously to their new-found faith, that the unsaved Jews who had also left the temple and had outwardly embraced the New Testament truth, would be encouraged to go on to faith in Messiah as High Priest, instead of returning to the abrogated sacrifices of the Levitical system. These truly born-again Jews are warned that a limping Christian life would cause these unsaved Jews to be turned out of the way. These latter had made a start towards salvation by leaving the temple and making a profession of Messiah. But they needed the encouraging example and testimony of the saved Jews. The words “turned out of the way” are the translation of another medical term, ektrepo (ejktrepo), “to turn or twist out.” Thayer treats the use of this word in our passage; “lest it be wrenched out of (its proper) place.” Vincent says that “there is nothing strange in the use of this word in a medical sense by our writer, whose work bears the stamp of Alexandria.” This city in Africa was a great center of medicine. In 163 a.d., the medical school there was the most famous in the world. Vincent suggests the rendering “be put out of joint.” These unsaved Jews bore a certain relation to the New Testament truth as mentioned above. Now, if the saved Jews would exhibit a weak and limping testimony, the unsaved would be in danger of being wrenched out of joint so far as that position was concerned. The literal picture of all this is given by Vincent in the words, “Make the paths smooth and even, so that the lame limb be not dislocated by stones or pitfalls.” Translation. And be making smooth paths for your feet, in order that that which is limping may not be wrenched out of joint, but rather that it be healed. (12:14) The word “follow” is the translation of dioko (dioko) “to run swiftly in order to catch some person or thing, to run after, to press on.” It is used of one who in a race runs swiftly to reach the goal (Phil. 3:12 “follow after”). Used in a metaphorical sense it

means ”to pursue, to seek after eagerly, earnestly endeavor to acquire.” The word is seen, therefore, to have a sense of urgency about it, of intensity of purpose. The exhortation to earnestly seek after peace, has its rise in the historical background here. Expositor’s says: “The circumstances of the Hebrews were fitted to excite a quarrelsome spirit, and a feeling of alienation towards those weak members who left the straight path. They must not suffer them to be alienated but must restore them to the unity of the faith, and in endeavoring to reclaim them must use the methods of peace, not of anger or disputation.” The exhortation is thus addressed to the saved among the recipients of this letter, and in relation to their attitude towards the unsaved Jews who were in danger of renouncing their professed faith in Messiah and of returning to the temple sacrifices. The holiness spoken of here is defined in the context and by the historical background of the letter. Expositor’s says: “The holiness which this epistle has explained is a drawing near to God with a cleansed conscience (10:14, 22), a true acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice as bring the worshipper into fellowship with God.” Translation. Constantly be eagerly seeking after peace with all, and holiness, without which (holiness) no one shall see the Lord. (12:15) The words “looking diligently” are episkopeo (ejpiskopeo). The simple verb means “to look.” The prefixed preposition epi (ejpi) has a perfective use, intensifying the already existing idea in the verb, the Authorized Version treating it as such, and a local use, adding an additional meaning to the verb, “looking over,” thus “overseeing.” The same word is used in I Peter 5:2 where the elders are exhorted to take the oversight of the local church. The noun form is used in Acts 20:28 where Paul calls the elders, overseers. The idea here is that these Jews should exercise oversight over their lives to the end that they do not fail of the grace of God. The word “fail” is hustereo (uJstereo) “to come late or too tardily.” In Heb. 4:1 it means “to be left behind in the race and so fail to reach the goal, to fall short of the end.” It is used here with the preposition apo (ajpo) which means “off, away from,” and means “to fall back from,” implying a previous attainment. The participle is in the present tense and thus speaks of something in progress. The translation is “lest any one be falling back.” This exactly describes the situation of this unsaved Jew who has allowed himself to be led along by the Holy Spirit in His pre-salvation work of convicting the sinner of sin, and of bringing him to the place of repentance (Ch. 6). These Jews were thus the recipients of the grace of God up to this point. The writer is concerned that they might fall back from this grace to the temple sacrifices again, and thus be irrevocably lost (Ch. 6). It should be clear that the writer is not here speaking of the Jew who had already put his faith in Messiah as High Priest. That person could not fall back to the sacrifices (6:9). He has been the recipient of the work of the Spirit by whom he was regenerated, baptized into Jesus Christ as his Head and into the Body of Christ, and permanently indwelt, and sealed with the Spirit by God the Father until the glorification of his body. The word “root” is riza (rJiza). It is used in I Macc. 1:10 of a person. In the LXX (Duet. 29:18), it is used of an evil person in Israel. In Matt. 13:21 it is used of one who has but superficial experience of divine truth, has not permitted it to make its way into the inmost recesses of his soul. In our passage here, it refers to the first century Jew who is disposed to apostatize and induce others to commit the same offence. The words “springing up” are a present participle which pictures the springing up in progress. The

root is gradually revealing its pernicious character. The word “many” in the Greek text has the definite article before it. It is “the many,” the majority in the church. Translation. Exercising oversight (over yourselves) lest anyone be falling back from the grace of God, lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and through this the many be defiled. (12:16, 17) The recipients of this letter are exhorted to exercise oversight over themselves and the churches, lest there be those guilty of fornication. The word “fornication” is to be taken in its literal sense here. Expositor’s says that fornication was one of the dangers to which these Hebrews were exposed. The word is not to be taken here as descriptive of Esau, however. He is described as a profane person. The Greek word is bebelos (bebelo"). The word means first of all, “accessible, lawful to be trodden,” used of places. Thus it means “profane, unhallowed, common.” It has the opposite meaning to hagios (aJgio") “holy, set apart, consecrated.” It speaks of the secular, the non-religious, as contrasted to that which is associated with the worship of deity. The profane character of Esau manifested itself in his act of selling his birthright to satisfy a physical appetite, that of hunger. The birthright consisted of the honor and privilege of being the next family priest at the death of the father. Esau had no appreciation of the spiritual side of life. His life centered about the gratification of the desires of the body. Thus, in parting with his religious privileges, he declared himself a non-religious person. He is, therefore, an appropriate warning to these Hebrews. They were in danger of selling their birthright, the offered salvation which would be theirs in answer to their faith, for freedom from the persecution which they were enduring, as Esau sold his birthright for the gratification of his physical appetite. But note, how exact the analogy is. The birthright had been given by God to Jacob. Esau knew of this, but in spite of it all, he claimed it and professed to have it. He sold what he did not possess, but only professed to have, for a mess of pottage. These Hebrews who were in danger of apostatizing, were not saved, but professed faith in Messiah. They were in danger of selling what they did not have but only professed to have, salvation, for a mess of pottage, freedom from the persecution they were enduring. After having despised the birthright to which he laid claim, and after having sold it for the gratification of a physical desire, Esau, finding that Jacob had received it, desired it. But he was disqualified (rejected, adokimazo (ajdokimazo)). The reason why he was disqualified is that he found no place of repentance. There are two words translated “repent,” metameleomai (metameleomai) and metanoeo (metanoeo). The former means “regret or remorse for one’s actions because of the evil consequences entailed.” It is used of Judas (Matt. 27:3). The latter means “a change of mind consisting of a reversal of moral purpose.” While these distinctions are not observed in every occurrence of these words, yet Thayer says that metanoeo (metanoeo) is the fuller and nobler term, expressive of moral action and issues. Here the word for repentance, metanoeo (metanoeo), is used advisedly. While Esau could bring himself to the place where he was filled with remorse because of his action, yet he could not get himself to repent of it in the sense that he was sorry for it because it was wrong. The word “it” by the rules of Greek syntax, refers back to the word “repentance.” Esau again is seen to be a warning to the Hebrew recipients of this letter. If they renounced their professed

faith in Messiah as High Priest and returned to the temple sacrifices, it would be impossible to renew them again to repentance. They should take a warning from the case of Esau who could not get himself to repent of his misdeed. We might observe in passing that there are just two sins spoken of in the New Testament, the commission of which puts the performer in a place where he is incapable of being saved, the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matt. 12:22–32), and the sin of Hebrews 6:6, neither of which can be committed today, since the conditions existent in the first century do not obtain today. In the case of the sin against the Holy Spirit, the Lord Jesus is not here in humiliation performing miracles as a divine attestation of His mission, and in the case of the falling away of Hebrews 6:6, the temple sacrifices are not being offered in Jerusalem. Both of these sins render the heart so hard that the person is impervious to the pleadings of the Holy Spirit. All of which means that there is no person today who is beyond the reach of the Holy Spirit and the Word of God. We can, therefore, preach and teach with the confidence that the Holy Spirit and the Word can reach any sinner with whom we are dealing. Translation. Lest there be a fornicator, or an unhallowed person such as Esau, who in exchange for one bit of food, gave up his birthright. For ye know that after that, when desiring to inherit the blessing, he was disqualified, for he did not find a place of repentance (room to repent), even though he sought it (repentance) with tears. 2. When they come to New Testament truth, they come, not to the thunders of Sinai, but to the grace of Calvary (vv. 18–24). (12:18) The mention of Esau and his rejection in the previous verse, leads the writer to speak of the judgments of the First Testament, and to compare them with the blessings of the New Testament. The symbol of the First Testament and its picture is Sinai. The writer speaks of the latter as “the mount that might be touched.” The word is spelaphao (spelafao), which does not necessarily imply contact with an object, but sometimes only the movements of the hands feeling after something. It is appropriate here as speaking merely of superficial contact. The word is a present participle, speaking of action continuously going on. The expression means simply that the mountain was something material and tangible. The Greek words “blackness” (gnophos (gnofo")), and “darkness” (zophos (zofo")) signifying half-darkness, gloom, nebulousness, as the darkness of evening or the gathering gloom of death. It is a darkness which does not entirely conceal color. The word “tempest” is thuella (quella) “a sudden storm, a tempest, a whirlwind.” It comes from thuein (quein) “to boil or foam.” It is a brief, violent, sudden, destructive blast, sometimes working upward and carrying objects into the upper air. Such is the description of Sinai which the writer to the Hebrews gives as a picture of the First Testament. He assures them that his readers, in drawing near to Messiah and His Cross, are not approaching such a place as Sinai. Translation. For ye have not come to the mount which might be touched, and that has been set on fire, and to blackness and darkness and tempest. (12:19) Here the writer enumerates more of the things attendant upon the revelation of the law at Sinai, to accentuate the material and terrifying character of that revelation upon

which the First Testament was founded. He is urging these Hebrews not to go back to that dispensation of God’s dealings with sinful man, but on to the New Testament which emphasizes grace. Translation. And to a sound of a trumpet, and to a sound of uttered words, concerning which sound those who were hearing, made supplication that there should not be spoken an additional word to them. (12:20) The word “touch” here is thiggano (qiggano) “to touch, handle.” It implies a touching or a grasping which affects the object. In classical Greek it is often used of touching or handling some sacred object which may be desecrated by the one who lays hands on it. Here, to touch the mountain, was to profane it. The words “or thrust through with a dart,” are not in the best texts. Translation. For they could not bear that which was commanded. And if a wild beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned. (12:21) The word “fear” is intensified as to its meaning by the prefixed preposition. It is ekphobos (ejkfobo"), literally, I am “frightened out or away.” Translation. And so terrible was its appearance, that Moses said, I am terrified and trembling. (12:22–24) Instead of returning to Mount Sinai, the readers are urged to continue their approach to Mount Sion, the spiritual mountain and city where God dwells and reigns. Paul in Galatians 4:19–31 contrasts the First Testament with the New Testament by speaking of Sinai and the Jerusalem which is above. The writer here defines what he means by Mount Sion in the words “even unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem.” The angels are introduced here because they are the usual accompaniment of God’s glory and ministers of His will. The words “general assembly” are the translation of paneguris (paneguri"), “a festal gathering of the whole people to celebrate public games or other solemnities” (classical meaning). Here it refers to a festal gathering of the holy angels, and to the saints of God, living and dead. The word “church” is the translation of ekklesia (ejkklesia) which means “a called-out body of people, an assembly.” The words “spirits of just men made perfect” refer to the saints in heaven. The festal character of this great company is set in sharp contrast to the sombre, terrible appearance of Sinai. Thus, does the writer warn his readers not to go back to the First Testament, to Sinai, and judgment, and exhorts them to go on to the New Testament and join this vast multitude composing this festal gathering. But best of all, the readers, if they place their faith in Messiah as High Priest, come to Jesus, the mediator of the New Testament. They come also to the blood of sprinkling, Jesus’ blood, which speaks better things than the blood of the sacrificial animal which Abel offered. It is not Abel’s own blood which is compared here with Jesus’ blood, for the historical background and the analysis of the book show that the purpose of the writer is to prove that Jesus’ blood of the New Testament is better than and takes the place of the animal blood shed under the First Testament. Our exegesis of this verse, therefore, is in line with the analysis of the letter. Again, the writer confronts his readers with the

superiority of Jesus’ blood as over against that of the Levitical sacrifices. Translation. But ye have come to Mount Sion, even to the city of the living God, heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable multitude of angels, to a festal gathering, and to the assembly of the first born who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men who have been made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of the new testament, and to the blood which speaks better things than that of Abel. 3. They are warned not to refuse the Lord Jesus, for those who refused Moses were punished (vv. 25–29). (12:25) “See” is the translation of blepo (blepo) which as used here, has the idea of “see to it.” The verb is in the present imperative which speaks of continuous action. The idea is “ever keep a watchful eye open,” thus, “ever be seeing to it that you refuse not him that speaketh.” The word “refuse” is the translation of paraiteomai (paraiteomai), “to deprecate, to prevent the consequences of an act by protesting against and disavowing it, to decline, refuse, avoid.” The word “speaketh” shows durative action in the original, denoting something that is going on. The phrase “Him that speaketh” refers back to Jesus, the mediator of the New Testament whose blood speaks of better things than the sacrificial blood which Abel shed. It is Messiah speaking to these first-century Jews by means of His blood. The “they” refers to the Jews of the Exodus. They refused (same word) God who spake on earth at Sinai through His angels (Acts 7:38, 53). “Spake” is the translation of chrematizo (crematizo). This word was used in the classics of the response given those who consulted an oracle. In the Bible it is used of the act of giving a divine command or admonition, or of the act of teaching from heaven. It refers here to the act of God in admonishing and warning the people. The words “if we turn away” are a present participle, speaking of action then going on. It speaks of the turning away of some of these Hebrews from the Messiah, back to the temple sacrifices, which was in progress at the time of the writing of this letter. God spoke on earth at Sinai in the sense that He spoke through angels who had been sent by Him. He speaks from heaven in that He speaks through His glorified Son. Translation. Constantly be seeing to it that ye do not disavow Him who is speaking. For if, as is the case, those did not escape who disavowed Him that warned (them) upon earth, much rather shall not we escape who are turning away from the One who is speaking from heaven. (12:26) The pronoun “whose” refers to God whose voice at Sinai at that time shook the earth, but who since Calvary, is speaking, not through angels but through His Son. But a future time will come when God will not only shake the earth but the heavens. The writer quotes the prophecy of Haggai (2:6). This will be fulfilled during the Great Tribulation period at which time the movements and functions of the heavenly bodies will be disorganized (Rev. 6:12–17, 8:12), and an earthquake will shake the entire earth, occurring at the moment the Messiah’s feet touch the Mount of Olives at the close of the Great Tribulation (Zech. 14:4, 5; Rev. 6:12, 11:13, 16:18, 18:).

Translation. Whose voice then shook the earth: But now He has promised, this promise being on record, saying, Yet once (more) I will shake not only the earth but also the heaven. (12:27) The writer calls the attention of his readers to the words “yet once more.” They are specially significant because they indicate that the shaking predicted by Haggai is to be final. It precedes the new heaven and the new earth (Rev. 21:1). The word “removing” is the translation of metatithemi (metatiqemi) which means “to transfer to a new basis, to transpose, to change.” It refers to the act of God transferring to a new basis, this present universe which is under the curse of Adam’s sin, that new basis being a new and perfect universe. John speaks of this in the words “I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away” (Rev. 21:1). The universe was created by God, but will be made to pass away, and to be substituted by a new universe which will exist forever. Thus, transitory, perishable things must pass away, in order that the eternal things may appear in their abiding value. The writer is pointing out that the passing away of perishable things only emphasizes the eternal. One of these is mentioned in the next verse, an eternal kingdom, the kingdom of God’s rule over the saved of the human race on a new earth all through eternity. The old earth will pass away and a new earth will be made so that the saints might have a fit place of habitation throughout the eternal ages. Translation. And this word, yet once more, makes evident the transposition upon a new basis of the things that are shaken as of things made, in order that the things that are not shaken might remain. (12:28, 29) The writer exhorts his readers to appropriate the enabling grace of God (4:16, 12:15) so that they may serve Him so as to be well-pleasing (acceptable) in His sight. The word “reverence” is eulabeia (eujlabeia) which means “caution, circumspection, discretion,” thus, in a context such as this “pious care.” The words “godly fear” are the translation of deos (deo"), the fundamental idea of which is “timid apprehension of danger,” as over against phobos (fobo") which speaks of the terror which seizes one when danger appears. Here deos (deo") speaks, not of a slavish, cringing apprehension, but of a wholesome regard for a holy God and His standards and requirements, which if a person violates, he must suffer the consequences. The words, “our God is a consuming fire” are derived from Deuteronomy 4:24. Expositor’s says: “The fire and smoke which manifested His presence at Sinai (v. 18) were but symbols of that consuming holiness that destroys all persistent inexcusable evil. It is God Himself who is the fire with which you have to do, not a mere physical, material, quenchable fire.” The historical background of this last statement here is that of the apostate Jew who having left the temple sacrifices, and having made a profession of faith in Messiah as High Priest, now renounces that professed faith and returns to the Levitical system. To that person, God is a consuming fire. Translation. Wherefore, receiving a kingdom which cannot be shaken, let us be having grace, by means of which we might be serving God, well pleasing to Him, doing this with pious care and fear, for our God is a

consuming fire. 4. General exhortations (13:1–17). (13 :1) The words “brotherly love” are the translation of philadelphia (filadelfia). The word agapao (ajgapao) which speaks of God’s love (John 3:16), of the love produced in the heart of the yielded believer by the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5), and the love defined by Paul in I Corinthians 13, is not used here. The one the writer uses is phileo (fileo), which speaks of human affection, fondness, a non-ethical, though perfectly legitimate, form of love. Expositor’s labels these exhortations (vv. 1–3) as exhortations to social manifestations of the Christianity of the recipients of this letter. The same authority says: “In the general decay of their faith, tendencies to disown Christian fellowship had become apparent (10:24, 25).” The word “brother” in the Greek, adelphos (ajdelfo"), means “from the same womb.” Thus, the basis of their Christian fondness and affection for each other, the source of their Christian fellowship, was the fact that they all came from the same source, having one Father God. Translation. Let brotherly affection continue. (13:2) This tendency to the neglect of Christian fellowship would lead to failure to recognize the needs of Christians coming from a distance. Hospitality should be shown such, especially to those who because of their profession of the Messiah had suffered persecution (10:32–34). Translation. Of hospitality, be not forgetful, for through this (namely, hospitality) some have shown hospitality to angels unawares. (13:3) Writing to these first-century Jews who were enduring the persecution of their brethren after the flesh who had not left the temple, the writer exhorts them to be mindful of their fellow-believers when they suffer imprisonment and adversity, remembering that each of them is still in the physical body, and thus subject to persecution. Translation. Be mindful of those in bonds as bound with them, of them who are suffering ill-treatment as also yourselves being in a body. (13:4) This verse is hortatory in character, in keeping with the context in which it is found. The verb of being is omitted frequently in the Greek text, as it is here, and is supplied by the translators. The problem is as to whether it is the present indicative that is to be supplied, which would make the contents declarative in nature, or the present imperative, which would make them hortatory. The context decides for the latter. It is, “Let marriage be held in honor among all” (Expositor’s), or “Let your marriage be held in honor in all things” (Alford). The word “honor” is timios (timio") which means, “held as of great price, esteemed, especially dear.” Alford then translates, “And your marriage bed be undefiled.” Expositor’s says: “As a natural result of holding marriage in honor, its ideal sanctity will be violated neither by the married nor by the unmarried.” Expositor’s translates, “And thus let the bed be undefiled.” Translation. Let your marriage be held in honor in all things, and thus let your marriage-bed be undefiled, for whoremongers and adulterers God

will judge. (13:5, 6) The word “conversation” today is limited in its meaning to converse between two or more persons. In 1611 a.d., when the Authorized Version was translated, it meant what the Greek word means, “manner of life, behavior.” The words “without covetousness” are the translation of aphilarguros (ajfilarguro"), made up of phileo (fileo) “to be fond of,” arguros (ajrguro") “silver,” and Alpha prefixed, the total word meaning “without fondness for silver.” The exhortation is against covetousness in the form of love of money. The word “content” is the translation of arkeo (ajrkeo) “to be possessed of unfailing strength, to be strong, to suffice, to be enough,” finally, “to be satisfied, contented.” The underlying thought is that one should be satisfied with that which meets our need, and not desire a superfluity. The cognate noun of this verb is compounded with the personal pronoun “self” in Philippians 4:11 to mean “self-sufficient.” This latter word was used by the Stoics to express the favorite doctrine of the sect, that man should be sufficient to himself for all things, able by the power of his will to resist the shock of circumstance. Paul was self-sufficient because he was Christ-dependent. The word “content,” therefore, in our Hebrew passage means more than “satisfied.” It refers to the ability of the Christian dependent upon the Holy Spirit, to be independent of outward circumstances. The words “such things as ye have” are the translation of tois parousin (toi" parousin), literally, “the things which are at present around one,” namely, one’s circumstances. The reason why the child of God can and should obey these admonitions, is now given. The words “He hath said,” are intensive in the Greek text, “He Himself hath said.” The following promise and guarantee was spoken by God Himself. The word “leave” is not the usual word which means “to leave,” leipo (leipo), but aniemi (ajniemi) “to send back, to relax, to loosen, not to uphold, to let sink.” It is preceded by two negatives in the Greek text which in English make a positive, but which in Greek only serve to strengthen the negation. It is “I will not, I will not cease to sustain and uphold thee.” The word “forsake” is a compound of three Greek words, egkataleipo, eg (ejgkataleipo, ejg) meaning “in,” kata (kata) meaning “down,” and leipo (leipo) meaning “to leave.” Leipo (Leipo) has the idea of forsaking one, kata (kata) suggests rejection, defeat, helplessness, and eg (ejg) refers to some place or circumstance in which a person may find himself helpless, forsaken. The meaning of the word is that of forsaking someone in a state of defeat or helplessness in the midst of hostile circumstances. The word in its totality means “to abandon, desert, leave in straits, leave helpless, leave destitute, leave in the lurch, let one down.” There are three negatives before this word, making the promise one of triple assurance. It is, “I will not, I will not, I will not let thee down, leave thee in the lurch, leave thee destitute, leave thee in straits and helpless, abandon thee.” All of which means that our God will come to our rescue when we find ourselves in difficult circumstances. As a consequence we may boldly say, “The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me.” The Greek text is literally, “So that, being of good courage, we say.” The writer now quotes the LXX of Psalm 118:6. The word “what” in the Greek text is not a relative pronoun but an interrogative. It introduces a question. It is, “The Lord is my helper, I will not be afraid. What shall man do to me?” The first word in the quotation is “Lord,” the last word, “man,” as it is in the Greek text. These are brought out in strong

contrast. The Greek word for Lord is kurios (kurio"), the word used by the LXX to translate the Hebrew word Jehovah. Translation. Let your manner of life be without love of money, being satisfied with your present circumstances. For He Himself has said, and the statement is on record, I will not, I will not cease to sustain and uphold you. I will not, I will not, I will not let you down. So that, being of good courage, we say, The Lord is my helper. I will not fear. What shall man do to me? (13:7) The writer is still mindful of the danger which many of the Jewish recipients of this book were in, namely, that of renouncing their professed faith in Messiah, and of returning to the abrogated sacrifices of Judaism. He exhorts them to remember those which have the rule over them. The word “remember” is mnemoneuo (mnemoneuo), “to be mindful of.” Here it means “to think of and feel for a person.” The exhortation is, “Remember, with a view to observing the admonitions of those who have the rule over you.” The word “follow” is the translation of mimnisko (mimnisko) “to imitate.” The word “considering” is anatheoreo (ajnaqeoreo) “to observe attentively.” The words “end of their conversation” are more clearly, “the outcome or issue of their manner of life.” The exhortation is to remember their deceased leaders, persons of such a nature that they spoke the Word of God to them (2:3, 4:2). Some of these had probably gone to heaven by way of martyrdom. They are urged to imitate their faith while they at the same time observe attentively the kind of lives they lived and the outcome and issue of their lives. They were to imitate their lives where the latter tallied with what they preached. Thus, they would be guarded against forsaking Messiah and going back to the temple sacrifices. Translation. Be constantly remembering those ruling over you, especially as they are those who spoke to you the Word of God, whose faith imitate as you closely observe the outcome of their manner of life. (13:8) This verse as it is commonly translated and interpreted, teaches that Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday, today, and forever. And yet, in the light of the historical background of this book, the unchangeableness of Jesus Christ cannot be the subject of the faith of its recipients, although that doctrine is true. The thought of the writer is “Jesus is Christ, the same, yesterday, today, and forever.” The word “Christ” is the transliteration of the Greek word meaning “anointed,” which in turn is the translation of the Hebrew word meaning “Messiah.” That is, the Jehovah of the Old Testament is the Jesus of Nazareth of the New. And that Person is the Messiah, the unchangeable One. Those who had the rule over the recipients of this letter, those who had spoken the Word of God to them, they were the ones who had lived and died in the faith that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah). Translation. Jesus is Messiah, yesterday and today the same and forever. (13:9) “Be not carried about” is the translation of me paraphero, (me parafero,) the present tense indicating that this was a present and an active danger. It is “Stop being

carried away.” “Divers and strange doctrines” refer to the various phases of one radical error; the denial of the Messiahship of Jesus, and of His Messianic sacrifice as superseding Judaism. The Greek text has “Stop being carried away.” Not only was the danger present, but some were being carried away. In the words “It is a good thing that the heart be established with grace not with meats,” the writer points out the fact that the meats (the system of ceremonial observances), emphasizes externalism, whereas the New Testament insists upon the purification of the heart and conscience. Translation. Stop being carried away with variegated and strange teachings. For it is good when the heart is established by grace, not with foods, in the which they who walked were not profited. (13:10) The writer now makes it clear that those Jews who persist in adhering to the First Testament sacrifices can have no part in the blessings of the New Testament. The two testaments are mutually exclusive. He uses the phraseology of the Jewish sacrificial ritual and the figure of eating a sacrificial meal. On the word “altar,” Vincent has a helpful note. “It is a mistake to try to find in the Christian economy some specific object answering to altar—either the cross, or the eucharistic table, or Christ Himself. Rather the idea of approach to God-sacrifice, atonement, pardon and acceptance, salvation—are gathered up and generally represented in the figure of an altar, even as the Jewish altar was a point at which all these ideas converged. The application in this broader and more general sense is illustrated by Ignatius: ‘If one be not within the altar … (the sacred precinct), he lacketh the bread of God … Whosoever, therefore, cometh not to the congregation … he doth thereby show his pride, and hath separated himself’… Ignatius here uses the word, not of a literal altar, but of the church.” Vincent quotes Ignatius again as follows: “Hasten to come together as to one temple, even God; to one altar, even to one Jesus Christ.” The figure of eating at this altar, that is, of partaking of the blessings of the New Testament among which was fellowship with God made possible by the blood sacrifice He offered at Calvary and the sinner’s acceptance of the same, is taken from the peace offering in which the worshipper partakes of part of the flesh of the sacrificial victim as a guest in God’s house, God showing His friendship and good-will toward the worshipper by reason of the fact that He put away his sin at the Cross and the worshipper put his faith in the Messiah as his High Priest. The word “right” is the translation of exousia (ejxousia) which has the idea of delegated right or authority. It was a technical term used in the law courts, of a legal right. The expression “they … who serve the tabernacle” refers, not only to the priests, but includes also the people who worshipped at the tabernacle, for the whole drift of the discussion contrasts the privileges of the entire body of believers in the New Testament with those under the First Testament. The tabernacle refers here to the entire Levitical economy which was then being observed. Translation. We have an altar from which they have no right to eat who are serving the tabernacle. (13:11) In the previous verse, the writer states that the adherents of the First

Testament are excluded from the privileges of the New Testament. He proves this statement to be true by using an illustrative argument drawn from the ceremonies of the Great Day of Atonement. Neither the people nor the priests were allowed to eat of the sacrificial victims offered on that occasion. Even the bodies of the slain animals were burned outside the camp of Israel. Expositor’s has a helpful note on this matter. “Sacrificial meals are also shown to be irreconcilable … with the Christian approach to God, for our (Christian) altar is one from which neither worshippers nor priests have any right to eat. The point he wishes to make is, that in connection with the Christian sacrifice there is no sacrificial meal. As in the case of the great sacrifice of the Day of Atonement, the High Priest carried the blood into the Holy of Holies, while the carcase was not eaten but burned outside the camp; so the Christian altar is not one from which food is dispensed to priest and worshipper.” Translation. For the bodies of those living creatures whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest on account of sin, are burned outside the camp. (13:12) As the carcases of the sacrificial animals mentioned in verse 11 were burned outside the camp of Israel, so Jesus was crucified outside the city of Jerusalem. Expositor’s says: “The suffering outside of the gate is equivalent to the shame of 12:2; the ignominy of the malefactor’s death was an essential element in the suffering. The utmost that man inflicts upon criminals He bore. He was made to feel that He was outcast and condemned. But it is this which wins all men to Him.” Jerusalem was the center of the apostate Judaism that crucified its Messiah and continued the temple sacrifices in defiance of God’s plainly revealed will (9:8). When the Jew would leave the temple sacrifices in order to place his faith in their fulfilment, the crucified, risen Messiah, he would necessarily be separated, thus, set apart from that Judaism which he had formerly espoused. The word “sanctify” in the Greek means “to set apart for God.” Thus, our Lord by becoming a sacrifice under the jurisdiction of the New Testament and as an outcast from Israel, set apart from the First Testament, and Israel, the Jew who placed his faith in Him, and consecrated that person to God. It was with His own blood He did this. Translation. Wherefore, also Jesus, in order that He might set apart for God the people through His own blood, suffered outside the gate. (13:13, 14) The writer now exhorts his first-century readers to leave apostate Judaism and the temple sacrifices, and placing their faith in the Messiah as High Priest, bear His reproach, the reproach of exclusion from the Jewish commonwealth. This exhortation was addressed, of course, to those Jews who, while they had outwardly left the temple, yet had not placed their faith in Messiah, and were in danger of going back to the sacrifices. On the words, “For here we have no continuing city, but we seek one to come,” Vincent says: “Here, on earth. Continuing city. Let us go forth without the gate to Jesus; for the system which has its center in Jerusalem, the Holy City, is no more ours. We are excluded from its religious fellowship by embracing the faith of Him who suffered without the gate. The city itself is not abiding. As a holy city, it is the center and representative of a system of shadows and figures (ch. 8:5; 9:9, 23, 24; 10:1), which is to be shaken and

removed, even as is the city itself (12:27); 8:13; 9:10; 10:9, 18.” Translation. Therefore, let us be going out to Him outside of the camp, bearing His reproach, for we do not have here an abiding city, but we are seeking that one which is to come. (13:15, 16) The believer-priests of the New Testament are to offer, not animal sacrifices as did the Aaronic priests, but the sacrifices of praise. The Rabbins had a saying, “in the future time all sacrifices shall cease; but praises shall not cease.” Philo says: “They offer the best sacrifice who glorify with hymns the Saviour and benefactor, God.” But the recipients are cautioned that their obligations as priests are not exhausted with praise. Good deeds must also be included. The Greek word translated “communicate,” koinoneo (koinoneo), in this context means “to make one’s self a sharer or partner” with someone else in his poverty or need. That is, the saints are exhorted to share what they have of earthly goods with their fellow-saints who, undergoing persecution, have been brought to a state of poverty by reason of the fact that their persecutors have confiscated their goods (10:34). Translation. Through Him, therefore, let us be offering sacrifice of praise continually to God, that is, the fruit of lips which make confession of His Name. But to do good and to share with others do not keep on forgetting, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased. (13:17) Expositor’s note on this verse is so illuminating, that we quote it in its entirety. “Having exhorted the Hebrews to keep in mind their former rulers and adhere to their teaching, the writer now admonishes them, probably in view of a certain mutinous and separatist spirit, (10:25) encouraged by their reception of strange doctrines, to obey their present leaders, and yield themselves trustfully (hupeikete (uJpeikete)) to their teaching—an admonition which, as Weiss remarks, shows that these teachers held the same views as the writer. The reasonableness of this injunction is confirmed by the responsibility of the rulers and their anxious discharge of it. They watch, like wakeful shepherds (agrupnousin (ajgrupnousin)), or those who are nursing a critical case, in the interest of your souls (huper ton psuchon humon (uJper ton yucon uJmon)) to which they may sometimes seem to sacrifice your other interests. They do this under the constant pressure of a consciousness that they must one day render to the Chief Shepherd (v. 20) an account of the care they have taken of His sheep (hos logon apodosontes (oJ" logon ajpodosonte")). Obey them, then, that they may discharge their responsibility and perform these kindly offices for you (touto (touto) referring not to logon apodosontes (logon ajpodosonte") … but to agrupnousin (ajgrupnousin)) joyfully and not with groaning (stenazontes (stenazonte"), the groaning with which one resumes a thankless task, and with which he contemplates unappreciated and even opposed work). And even for your own sakes you should make the work of your rulers easy and joyful, for otherwise it cannot profit you. Your unwillingness to listen to them means that you are out of sympathy with their teaching and that it can do you no good (alusiteles gar humin touto (ajlusitele" gar uJmin touto)).” Translation. Keep constantly obeying your rulers, and constantly be

submitting to them; for they are constantly watching for your souls, knowing that they are to give account, that they may do this with joy, not with lamentation, for this would be profitless to you. 5. Closing words (vv. 18–25). (13:18, 19) Expositor’s has an illuminating note on this verse: ”Both the next clause and the next verse seem to indicate that by hemon (eJmon) the writer chiefly, if not exclusively, meant himself; the next clause, for he could not vouch for the conscience of any other person; the next verse because one principal object or result of their prayer was his restoration to them. Request for prayer is common in the Epistles, I Thess. 5:25; II Thess. 3:1; Rom. 15:30; Eph. 6:18; Col. 4:3. The reason here annexed is peculiar. ‘The allusion to his purity of conduct, and strong assertion of his consciousness of it, in regard to them and all things, when he is petitioning for their prayers, implies that some suspicions may have attached to him in the minds of some of them. These suspicions would naturally refer to his great freedom in regard to Jewish practices’ (Davidson). But notwithstanding verse 23 it may be that he was under arrest and shortly to be tried and naturally adds to his request for prayer a protestation of his innocence of all civil offence … The writer was conscious of a readiness and purpose to live and conduct himself rightly in all circumstances. This gives him confidence and will lend confidence to their prayers. He is more urgent in this request … because he is desirous to be quickly restored to them; implying that he in some sense belonged to them and that the termination of his present exile from them would be acceptable to them as well as to him.” Translation. Be praying for us, for we are persuaded that we have a good conscience, desiring in all things to be conducting ourselves in a seemly manner. Moreover, I beg of you the more earnestly, to do this, in order that I may be restored to you more quickly. (13:20, 21) Now the writer prays for those to whom he addresses this letter. He speaks of God as the God of peace. The context here speaks of the substitutionary atonement of Messiah on the Cross, and the above expression reminds us of Paul’s words in Colossians 1:20, “Having made peace through the blood of His Cross.” That which separated a holy God from sinful man, namely, sin, was put away at the Cross. The death of Messiah paid for sin, satisfied the righteous demands of the broken law, and made it possible for God to bestow mercy on the basis of justice satisfied. We have an echo of all this in Ephesians 2:17, “And came and preached peace to you who are far off (the Gentiles) and to them that are nigh (the Jews).” The words “brought again” are the translation of anago (ajnago) “to bring up.” The words “through the blood of the everlasting covenant” are in a construction called in the Greek, the locative of sphere. The New Testament is called the eternal one, in contrast to the First Testament which was of a transitory nature. It was within the sphere of the eternal covenant that Messiah, having died for sinful man, was raised up from among those who are dead. He could not be a high priest after the order of Melchisedec if He were not raised from the dead. Sinful man needs a living Priest to give life to the believing sinner, not a dead priest merely to pay for his sins. Thus, it was provided within the New Testament that the priest who offered Himself for sacrifice, would be raised from the dead. We have a prophetic type of this in Aaron’s rod that budded.

The words “make perfect” are the translation of katartizo (katartizo) which means “to equip one for service.” Translation. Now the God of peace, the One who brought up out from among the dead, the Shepherd of the sheep, the Great One, in the blood of an eternal testament, our Lord Jesus, equip you in every good thing to do His will, doing that in you which is well-pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever and ever, Amen. (13:22) The word “suffer” is the translation of anecho (ajneco) “to bear with or endure.” The writer pleads with the recipients not to become impatient at his counsels in this letter. The words “word of exhortation,” refer to the entire letter which the writer regards as hortatory rather than didactic or consolatory. The words “I have written a letter,” are the translation of epistello (ejpistello) “to send” one a message, command. It is used of sending a letter, of enjoining by letter, of writing instructions. Our word “epistle” is derived from the cognate Greek noun. In the words “in few words,” there is a suggestion of apology. The writer exhorts against impatience in view of the fact that the letter is short. Translation. And I beg of you, please, brethren, patiently permit the word of exhortation, for verily I am writing you in few words. (13:23) Timothy had been under arrest, but as to where, when, and why is not known. Translation. Know that our brother Timothy has been released, with whom, if he come quickly, I will see you. (13:24, 25) Both Vincent and Expositor’s say that it is wrong to determine the location of the writing of the letter by the words “They of Italy salute you.” Expositor’s quotes Winer as saying “A critical argument as to the place at which the Epistle was written should never have been founded on these words.” Vincent says the expression, “They of Italy” may mean “those who are in Italy send greeting from Italy,” or, “those of Italy (Italian Christians with the writer at the time) send greeting from the place at which the letter was written.” He says, “The phrase affords no reliable indication as to the residence of the persons addressed.” Translation. Greet all those who have the rule over you, and all the saints. There greet you those from Italy. Grace be with you all.

FIRST PETER In the Greek New Testament

DEDICATED To my beloved wife, Jeannette Irene Wuest, brave soldier of the Cross full of faith and good works, my companion in life, my diligent and self-sacrificing co-worker in the ministry of the Word, the one who spurs me on to the highest endeavors, my wise counselor, my comforter in hours of stress and strain, my God-given helpmeet whose consistent and sweet Christian life is ever a blessing and help to me.

INTRODUCTION This is no book to peruse in one’s easy chair. It is designed, like its predecessor, Philippians in the Greek New Testament, for use on the Christian’s study table alongside of his Bible. The book is a simplified Greek commentary making available to the Bible student who is not acquainted with Greek, and who has had no formal training in Bible study, a wealth of informative and explanatory material that will throw a flood of light upon his English Bible. The translation offered is what might be called a fuller translation, using more words than a standard version of the Scriptures in order to bring out more of the richness of the Greek, and make certain passages clearer, where the condensed literality of the standard translations tends to obscure their meaning. Words in parenthesis are not part of the translation but are explanatory. The translation must not be used as a substitute for, but as a companion to the standard translation the student is using. The writer has confined himself largely to interpretation. The fundamental basis of all Christian life and service is a clear understanding of what the Word of God means. This is what the word studies and the fuller translation seek to give the Bible student. While devotional studies where the truth is applied to Christian life and service are most helpful and desirable, yet it is a good thing for the Christian to do some study for himself also. The Bible student can study First Peter, verse by verse, with the help of the word studies and the fuller translation, developing the truth and applying it to his own life. The Holy Spirit, if recognized and depended upon for His teaching ministry, will lead the earnest Christian into such fresh, new truth that this study will be one succession of spiritual discoveries and thrills. The book is not written for the scholar, and lays no claim to being a finished piece of work on the Greek text of First Peter. It is designed for those who love the Lord and His Word and delight in feasting upon it. The eighteen units into which it is divided can be used as a basis for a series of Bible expositions or expository sermons. The index makes it possible for the student to turn quickly to any verse desired. Where a word is treated more fully or in its every New Testament occurrence in the author’s other books, a footnote will direct the reader to the page or pages where that treatment may be found. The English translation referred to is the Authorized Version. K. S. W.

1. THREE STEPS IN A SINNER’S SALVATION (1:1, 2)

Verse one The inspired writer of this letter, whose original name was Simon, received the Aramaic name of Cephas as a descriptive title of what he would some day be like (John 1:42). The a.v. translates, “Thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, a stone.” The word “stone” is from the Greek word petros (petro") which means “a detached but large fragment of rock,” and is used here metaphorically to describe Peter as a man like a rock by reason of his firmness and strength of soul. The name “Peter” is the English spelling of the Greek petros (petro") which is the word chosen by the Holy Spirit that would adequately translate the meaning of the Aramaic “Cephas.” In answering Peter’s great confession of His deity, the Lord Jesus says, “Thou art Peter (petros (petro")), and upon this rock (petra (petra)) I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18). Thayer quotes Schmidt as treating petros (petro") and petra (petra) as synonyms, petros (petro") meaning “a detached but large fragment of rock,” petra (petra) “the massive living rock.” The foundation of the Church of Jesus Christ is that massive living rock, the Son of God seen in His deity, acknowledged as such by Peter. Peter is but a fragment of that massive rock in the sense in which he speaks of believers as “lively stones,” deriving their eternal life from the great Living Stone Himself (2:4, 5.) It was the fulness of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost that transformed Simon into Peter, the Rock-Man. He designates himself as an apostle, the word “apostle” coming from apostolos (ajpostolo") made up of apo (ajpo), “off,” and stello (stello), “to send,” a technical word used of one sent from someone else with credentials on a mission. Peter was an ambassador of Jesus Christ sent by Him with credentials in the form of miracles, and on a mission, that of proclaiming the good news of salvation. Those to whom he writes, he designates as strangers. The English word “strangers” refers to anyone with whom we are not acquainted. But the Greek word means far more than that. It is parepidemois (parepidemoi"), made up of para (para), “alongside of,” epi (ejpi), “upon,” and demos (demo"), used in Biblical Greek of the people of a heathen city. The word here describes the recipients of this letter as Christians who have settled down alongside of the unsaved. Peter uses the same word in 2:11. He will not let us forget that we are living among the unsaved who are always carefully observing us. The word “scattered” is from diasporas (diaspora"). This word is found in the LXX1 where Moses says of Israel, “Thou shalt be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth” (Deut. 28:25), and is probably the earliest example of its use as a technical designation of the Jews who for whatever reason lived outside of Palestine. The word is used in John 7:35 and James 1:1, in both places referring to those Jews who were living outside of Palestine. Peter uses it in the same way. We thus see that the recipients of this letter were Christian Jews. These Jews were living among the Gentiles in the various provinces named by Peter, all of which were in Asia Minor. The word diaspora (diaspora) is the noun form of diaspeiro (diaspeiro), which verb is made up of dia (dia), “through” and speiro (speiro), “to sow, to scatter seed,” which latter is the derivative from which sperma (sperma) the Greek word for “seed” comes. This scattering of these Jews referred to in First Peter took place previous to the world-wide dispersion, a.d. 70, which latter was the judgment of God upon the apostasy of Israel. The great majority of the Jews living outside of Palestine in the first century and before a.d. 70, were living where they were by their own choice, the chief reason being the

opportunity for business activity which the Gentile centers of population afforded. There they were when the Christian missionaries contacted them. There they had been providentially sown by the great Sower, to become themselves disseminators of the gospel story. The application can be made to all Christians. We who are saved, are providentially placed by God in the midst of the unsaved, living in Satan’s territory, for he is the god of the world system, to win those among whom we have been placed, to the Lord Jesus. Verse two The recipients of this letter are called “elect.” The world is eklektois (ejklektoi"), a plural adjective from the verb eklego (ejklego) which means “to pick out” or “to select out of a number.” The verb is used in Ephesians 1:4 where it is rendered “chosen,” referring to the act of God in sovereign grace choosing out certain from among mankind for Himself, the verb in Ephesians being middle in voice, speaking of the subject acting in his own interest. These to whom Peter is writing are “selected out ones.” The words “according to” are the translation of kata (kata) whose root meaning is “down,” which gives the idea of domination. This choice out from a number was dominated by the foreknowledge of God the Father. This is the first step in the act of God bringing a sinner into the place of salvation. God the Father chooses him out, this choice being dominated or controlled or determined by His foreknowledge. The word “foreknowledge” is the translation of the noun prognosin (prognosin) which is found twice in the New Testament, its verb form proginosko (proginosko), five times. In Acts 26:5 and II Peter 3:17 we have the purely classical meaning of the verb, namely, “previous knowledge.” But in Acts 2:23, and I Peter 1:2, the meaning of the noun form, and in Romans 8:29 and 11:2, and I Peter 1:20, the meaning of the verb form, goes beyond the purely classical meaning of the possession of previous knowledge, and refers to that which the a.v. in I Peter 1:20 calls foreordination. The first time the noun form prognosin (prognosin) is found is in Acts 2:23, where it is used in the clause, “him being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.” The words “counsel” and “foreknowledge” are in a Greek construction which makes both words refer here to the same act, presenting that act in its two aspects. The content of meaning in the word “foreknowledge” here is made clear therefore by the words “the determinate counsel.” The meaning of “foreknowledge” here and in the other four places where the words “foreknew” and “foreknowledge” occur, cannot be merely “previous knowledge.” The Greek word “counsel,” boule (boule), refers to an interchange of opinions, a mutual advising, the exchange of deliberative judgment. The word “determinate” is the translation of horismenei (oJrismenei), a perfect participle which refers to the past act of putting limits upon something with the present result that some certain thing has been appointed or decreed. The word “foreknowledge” therefore refers to that counsel of God in which after deliberative judgment, the Lord Jesus was to be delivered into human hands to be crucified. In I Peter 1:20, He is the One who was foreordained before the foundation of the world to be the Lamb who was to take away the sins of lost humanity. Thus, in I Peter 1:2, the word “foreknowledge” refers to that counsel of God in which after deliberative judgment certain from among mankind were designated to a certain position, that position being defined by the context. The second step in the salvation of a sinner is seen in the words “through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience.” The Greek makes it clear that it is the Holy Spirit who does the sanctifying. The Greek word “sanctify” means “to set apart.” The word “through” is

the translation of en (ejn), which means literally “in.” The whole phrase is in a grammatical classification known as the locative of sphere. It was in the sphere of the setting apart work of the Spirit that the sinner was chosen. That is, God the Father chose the sinner out from among mankind to be the recipient of the setting-apart work of the Spirit, in which work the Holy Spirit sets the sinner apart from his unbelief to the act of faith in the Lord Jesus. The act of faith is spoken of here by the word “obedience,” which is not the obedience of the saint, but that of the sinner to the Faith, for this act is answered by his being cleansed in the precious blood of Jesus. In Acts 6:7 we read that “a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.” Thus, the second step in the salvation of a sinner is taken by the Holy Spirit who brings the one chosen to the act of faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour. This is followed by the third step in which God the Son cleanses that believing sinner in His precious blood. This is given us in the words “sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ,” Peter using the phraseology and typology of the Levitical ritual where the priest sprinkled the people with the sacrificial blood (Heb. 9:19). We have therefore the three steps taken by the three Persons of the Triune God. God the Father chooses the sinner to salvation. God the Spirit brings the sinner thus chosen to the act of faith. God the Son cleanses him in His precious blood. Perhaps someone may read these lines who is not saved. Your question is, “How can I know whether I am one of those whom God has chosen?” The answer is simple. Put your faith in the Lord Jesus as your personal Saviour, the One who died on the Cross in your stead to make atonement for your sins, and God will save you. You will find that God the Father chose you for salvation, God the Spirit brought you to the act of faith, and God the Son cleansed you from your sin. The Greek word “grace” is so rich in its meaning that the reader is referred to the author’s other books for a study of its classical and New Testament meanings, where it is fully treated.1 Here the word refers to the enabling grace for daily Christian living which is given to the saint yielded to and dependent upon the Holy Spirit. The peace spoken of here is not justifying peace, but peace of heart produced by the Holy Spirit in the heart of the Spirit-filled saint. Translation. (1) Peter, an ambassador of Jesus Christ, to those who have settled down alongside of the native pagan population, scattered as seed throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, (2) chosen-out ones, this choice having been determined by the foreordination of God the Father, those chosen out to be recipients of the settingapart work of the Spirit resulting in obedience (of faith) and (thus) in the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. Grace (be) to you, and (heart) peace be multiplied.

2. THE SAINTS INHERITANCE (1:3–5) Verse three The mention of God in verse two is followed by the Benediction of the Name, as Jewish piety prescribed. God the Father is the central figure in verses 3–5, God the Son, in verses 6–9, and God the Holy Spirit, in verses 10–12. The word “blessed” is the translation of eulogetos (eujlogeto") from which we get our words “eulogize” and “eulogy.” The Greek word means to praise, to celebrate with praises.” The word is a compound of eu

(euj) which means “well” and is used in such expressions as “well done” or “to do well,” and logeo (logeo) which has the same root as logos (logo"), “a word,” and is associated with lego (lego), “to speak.” Thus, the word means “to bless” someone in the sense of speaking well of him. Another Greek word, makarios (makario"), meaning in secular Greek “prosperous” and in the New Testament “spiritually prosperous,” the idea of “spiritually” coming from its usage in its context, is found in Matthew 5:3–11. That is, the meek are spiritually prosperous. Our Lord said, “There is more spiritual prosperity in the act of constantly giving than in the act of constantly receiving” (Acts 20:35). All of which goes to say that a Christian grows faster spiritually by giving sacrificially of himself in the Lord’s service than in receiving the spiritual ministrations of others. The latter is perfectly proper and is needed, but a sponge-like absorption alone is not conducive to a healthy growth in the Christian life. Christian character is developed, not by one’s knowledge of the Word of God, but by putting into practice what one knows of the Word of God. Spiritual prosperity is not dependent upon what one takes in of the Word, but upon what one gives out of himself in the service of the Lord Jesus as one obeys the Word. The word Peter uses (eulogetos (eujlogeto")) is one in which he blesses God in the sense that he eulogizes, speaks well of, praises Him. Peter, a Jew with an Old Testament Jewish background, writing to Christian Jews of the same background, speaks of the God of Israel as the “God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,” thus recognizing the latter in His human relationship to God the Father, for our Lord in His incarnate humanity worshipped God and recognized Him as His Father. Yet he also takes into account His deity in the name “Jesus” which means “Jehovah-Saviour,” and also in the name “Christ” which means “the Anointed One.” The word “which” is from a masculine article in the Greek text, and should therefore be rendered “who,” referring as it does to God who is a person. “According to” is from kata (kata) whose root meaning is “down.” From this we get the idea of domination, thus not “according to the measure of His abundant mercy,” but “impelled by His abundant mercy.” It was the compelling constraint in the merciful heart of God that made inevitable the atonement for sinners. “Hath begotten” is from an aorist participle, and refers merely to the past fact of begetting, “begat us.” “Again” is from the preposition ana (ajna) prefixed to the participle, the preposition meaning in composition with another word, “renewal, new again.” Thus, regeneration is spoken of here, the act of the Holy Spirit imparting to us a new life, making us partakers of the divine nature and thus children of God, a begetting anew. The word “unto” is from eis (eij"), a preposition speaking of result in this context. Alford translates “so that we have.” The hope here is not only an objective thing, but a subjective hope on the part of the believer. It is a lively hope, that is, not only living, but actively alive, an energizing principle of divine life in the believer, a Christian hopefulness and optimism produced in the believer yielded to the indwelling Holy Spirit. It is both an attitude of expectancy as the Christian looks forward to the inheritance awaiting him in heaven, and a hopefulness of present blessing from God in this life in view of the eternal blessedness of the believer in the next life. A child of God has no right to look on the dark side of things, and to look for the worst to happen to him. As the object of God’s care and love, he has the right to look for the best to come to him and to look on the bright side of things. “The path of the just is as the shining light that shineth more and more unto the perfect day. The way of the wicked is as darkness: they know not at what they stumble”

(Prov. 4:18, 19). This lively hope is made possible by the resurrection of the Lord Jesus in that it is through the believer’s identification with Him in the resurrection that he is given a new life in regeneration, and thus will also be able to enjoy the heavenly inheritance into which he has been born. The word “from” is not from apo (ajpo) which means “from the edge of,” but from ek (ejk) which means “out from within.” Our Lord was raised out from among the rest of the dead. He as the Man Christ Jesus went to the part of Hades reserved for the righteous dead, and His body lay in Joseph’s tomb. But when He was raised from the dead, the rest of those in Hades stayed there, and their bodies remained in the earth. But He left that place, and reunited with His body glorified, appeared alive again after three days. That is what the expression “out from among the dead” means. Verse four As begotten children of God, we become His heirs, and joint-heirs with His Son Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:17), and thus come into an inheritance. This inheritance is incorruptible because it belongs to the future life which the risen saints share with God Himself. It is undefiled as our great High Priest is undefiled (Heb. 7:26 same word). It is non-fading, not able to wither away, as a flower would. The word “reserved” is from tereo (tereo) which means “to watch, to observe, to guard, protect, to reserve, set aside.” Heaven is the safedeposit box where God is guarding our inheritance for us under constant surveillance, The participle is in the perfect tense, speaking of a past completed action having present results. We could translate, “has been laid up and is now kept guarded in safe deposit.” Verse five “Kept” is from phrouomenous (frouomenou"), a present participle implying action constantly going on. It is a military term, meaning “to guard or protect.” Illustrations of its use in secular documents are given by Moulton and Milligan in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament: “belonging to the guard at Socnopaei Nesus,” “at Kerkeosiris, which is unguarded and not situated upon the great river.” While our inheritance is being kept guarded in heaven under the watchful eye of God, we are being garrisoned about by God’s protecting care for it. The guard is never changed. It is on duty twenty-four hours a day, year in and year out until we arrive safe in heaven. This protection is God’s response to our faith which we exercised in the Lord Jesus as Saviour and which now rests in Him as our Preserver. Our faith lays hold of this power, and this power strengthens our faith, and thus we are preserved. The salvation spoken of here is of course the glorification of our bodies. We received our justification at the moment we believed. We are receiving our sanctification, namely victory over sin and growth in the Christian life now. We will yet receive that part of salvation which awaits us in Glory. Translation. (3) Let the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ be eulogized, who impelled by His abundant mercy begat us anew so that we have a lively hope, this lively hope having been made actual through the intermediate instrumentality of the resurrection of Jesus Christ out from among those who are dead, (4) and an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that does not fade away, which inheritance has been laid up and is now kept guarded in safe deposit in heaven for you, (5) who are constantly being kept guarded by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

3. THE PURPOSE OF CHRISTIAN SUFFERING (1:6–9) Verse six The word “wherein” is most naturally referred by the English reader to the word “salvation” in verse 5. It is true that we rejoice in our salvation. But here the Greek text helps us to the correct interpretation, for the word goes back to “time,” since the Greek word “salvation” is feminine in gender and the word “time” is neuter, the word “wherein” being neuter, referring back to its neuter antecedent. Herein lies the value of the Greek. The rules of Greek grammar are just as clear and definite as those of mathematics. It is as simple a matter as that of fitting a round peg in a round hole, and a square peg in a square hole. The saints are to rejoice in the last time, that is, when they receive their glorified bodies at the Rapture. “Rejoice” is from a Greek word speaking of extreme joy expressing itself externally in an exuberant triumph of joy. In verse 8 we see that it is a glorified joy made possible by our future glorified state, a joy not possible now in our mortal bodies. Tears of joy are just an evidence of the inability of our present state to fully feel the joy that comes to us at times. But then in our bodies of glory we will be able to drink in and appreciate all the boundless joys of the Saviour’s presence. “Season” is from oligon (ojligon) which means “little, small, few,” and refers here to a little while. Surely, this present life is a little while compared to eternity. And then a loving God sees to it that in the midst of the shadows and heartaches and trials, His children have their days of sunshine even in this life. The words “if need be” are hypothetical, not affirmative. That is, they do not state that there is always a need for the dark days, for testing times and difficulties. In some lives there seems to be more need of trials than in others. To those servants of God whom He purposes to use in a larger, greater way, many trials are allowed to come, for “we must be ground between the millstones of suffering before we can be bread for the multitude.” And then, in the case of a saint who is not living close to his Lord, it is necessary to send disciplinary trials to purge his life of sin and draw him into a closer walk with God. The words “ye are in heaviness” could be rendered “ye have been made sorrowful,” The word “temptations” is from peirasmos (peirasmo") which refers both to trials and testings, and also solicitations to do evil, in short, to all that goes to furnish a test of character. The trials may come from God or under His permissive will from Satan, or may be the result of our own wrong doing. The solicitations to do evil come from the world, the evil nature, or Satan. These are described as manifold, namely, variegated. The word emphasizes the diversity rather than the number of the trials. The word “through” is from en (ejn) with the locative, speaking of the sphere in which these Christians have been made sorrowful. Verse seven In this verse we are informed as to the reason and purpose of these trials, namely, that the trial of our faith might result in praise and honor and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ. The word “trial” is the translation of dokimion (dokimion) the noun, dokimazo (dokimazo) being the verb of the same root, the latter referring to the act of putting someone or something to the test with a view of determining whether it is worthy of being

approved or not, the test being made with the intention of approving if possible. The word was used of the act of examining candidates for the degree of Doctor of Medicine. It is the approval of our faith which is to resound to the praise of the Lord Jesus. Testing times put our faith to the test, and as we are submissive to God and remain faithful to Him and are ready to have Him teach us the lessons He would have us learn through them, we demonstrate by our actions that the faith we have is a genuine God-given, Holy Spirit produced faith, the genuine article. This faith and its working in our lives is to the glory of the Lord Jesus. It is not the testing of our faith that is to the glory of God, but the fact that our faith has met the test and has been approved, that redounds to His glory. This is made very clear by the Greek grammar involved in the statement. It is not the approved faith, but the approval itself that is in the apostle’s mind here. For instance, a gold-mining company wishes to buy a proposed site where gold is said to have been found. But it is not sure whether the metal is real gold or not and whether it is there in sufficient quantity so that a mine if sunk would be a profitable venture. It engages an assayer of metals to take samples of the gold ore to his laboratory and examine them. The assayer sends his report to the effect that the ore contains true gold, and that the gold is found in sufficient quantity so that the venture will pay. The report of the assayer approving the gold ore is of far more value to the mining company than the gold he returns with his report, for upon the basis of the report, the company can go ahead with assurance and buy the land and begin mining operations. The fact that God finds our faith to be one which He can approve, is of far more value to Him and to His glory, than the approved faith, for He has something to work with, a faith that He knows can stand the testings and the trials which may come to the Christian. The fact that God can trust a Christian as one that is dependable, is of great value to Him, God is looking for faithful, dependable workers, not necessarily gifted, educated, cultured ones. It is a “well done, thou good and faithful servant” that will greet the ears of the saint at the Judgment Seat of Christ. Peter tells us that this approval of our faith is much more precious than the approval of gold, even though that gold be approved through fire-testing. The words “of gold” of the a.v. are an excellent rendering for a literal word-for-word translation. But the words “the approval of” are necessarily supplied to make clear the apostle’s thought. It is not the approval of our faith that is compared to gold, but to the approval of gold. The picture here is of an ancient gold-smith who puts his crude gold ore in a crucible, subjects it to intense heat, and thus liquifies the mass. The impurities rise to the surface and are skimmed off. When the metal-worker is able to see the reflection of his face clearly mirrored in the surface of the liquid, he takes it off the fire, for he knows that the contents are pure gold. So it is with God and His child, He puts us in the crucible of Christian suffering, in which process sin is gradually put out of our lives, our faith is purified from the slag of unbelief that somehow mingles with it so often, and the result is the reflection of the face of Jesus Christ in the character of the Christian. This, above all, God the Father desires to see. Christlikeness is God’s ideal for His child. Christian suffering is one of the most potent means to that end. Verses eight and nine The Christians to whom Peter was writing were not personal disciples of Jesus, but converts of the apostles. They had not seen the Lord Jesus on earth during His incarnate residence here, either while in His humiliation or at the time of His post-resurrection

ministry. The Greek has it, “Of whom not having had a glimpse.” Yet they loved Him. They never saw the Lord Jesus with the physical sense of sight, but ah, what a vivid portrait of Him did the Holy Spirit paint for them on the canvas of their spiritual vision. And that is the perfectly proper order for this Age of Grace. Paul says “Though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more” (II Cor. 5:16). The picture of the earthly Lord Jesus in His mortal body, seen by human eyes, is supplanted now by the picture of the glorified Man in the Glory, painted by the Holy Spirit for the spiritual vision of the saint. The poet1 sings, “I read thy Word, O Lord, each passing day, and in the sacred page find glad employ: But this I pray—Save from the killing letter. Teach my heart, set free from human forms,2 the holy art of reading thee in every line, in precept, prophecy, and sign, till, all my vision filled with thee, thy likeness shall reflect in me. Not knowledge but thyself my joy!—For this I pray.” It is as we free ourselves from the conception an artist may have of what he thinks the Lord Jesus looked like in His life on earth, and depend upon the Holy Spirit through the Word to reveal to us the likeness of our Lord Jesus, that we come to some true conception of Him in His glorified state. We will recognize Him in the Glory over yonder, not by what human artists have conceived Him to be, but by the Holy Spirit’s portrait of Him. These saints loved the Lord Jesus, even though they had never had a glimpse of Him with their physical sense of sight. But one cannot love another unless one has some clearcut conception of that person. One must know the person in order to love him. It was the clear-cut conception of the Lord Jesus which the Holy Spirit had given these saints through the Word, that caused them to love Him. The distinctive Greek word for “love” here, agape (ajgape), refers to a love that is called out of one’s heart by the preciousness of the person loved. But even the preciousness of the Lord Jesus would not have made these individuals love Him if God in salvation had not produced in them that divine love which He Himself is, with which to love Him (Rom. 5:5; Gal. 5:22, 23). One must have the nature of an artist to really appreciate and love art. One must have the nature of God (II Peter 1:4) to appreciate and love the Lord Jesus. It is this ideal combination of a study of God’s Word and a definite subjection to the Holy Spirit that results in the clear, vivid portrait of the Lord Jesus in the spiritual vision of the saint. To know Him is to love Him. To know Him better, is to love Him better. The secret of an intimate, loving fellowship with the Lord Jesus, the secret of knowing Him in an intimate way, is in the moment-bymoment control of the Holy Spirit over the life of the Christian believer. Then Peter draws the same contrast between the present sorrow and future joy of verse 6 in this verse, where he contrasts our present seeing Him with the eye of faith and our future seeing Him face to face at the Rapture, at which time we will rejoice with an unspeakable and glorified joy, and at which time we will receive the consummation of our faith, namely, the salvation of our souls, deliverance from the presence of sin in the glorification of our physical bodies. Translation. (6) In which last time you are to be constantly rejoicing with a joy that expresses itself in a triumphant exuberance, although for a little while at the present time if perchance there is need for it, you have been made sorrowful in the midst of many different kinds of testings, (7) in order that the approval of your faith, which faith was examined by testing for the purpose of being approved, that approval being much more precious than the approval of gold which perishes, even though that gold be approved by fire-testing, may be discovered after scrutiny to result in praise and glory and honor at the time of the revelation of Jesus Christ; (8) of whom not having had a glimpse, you love

because of His preciousness, in whom, now not seeing, yet believing, you are to be rejoicing with an inexpressible and glorified joy, (9) upon the occasion of your receiving the promised consummation of your faith which is the (final) salvation of your souls.

4. THE SILENCE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT REGARDING THE BODY OF CHRIST (1:10–12) Verses ten to twelve The mention of their salvation in verse 9, leads the apostle to relate the same to the Old Testament writers for the information of the Jewish recipients of his letter. There is no article before “prophets” in the Greek text. It was the Old Testament prophets as a class of individuals that conducted an exhaustive inquiry and search into their own writings. Peter speaks of this grace which they wrote about as “the particular grace destined for you” (Greek), inferring that believers in this age have something unique and for them alone. What they looked for was as to what time or if they could not find that, what kind of time would usher in this particular unique salvation. The answer to their question would throw light upon the character of that salvation. There are two words referring to time, chronos (crono") which speaks of time contemplated simply as such, the succession of moments, and kairos (kairo") which speaks of a limited period of time, with the added notion of suitableness. Both words appear in the answer of Jesus, “It is not for you to know the times or the seasons” (Acts 1:6, 7), the times (chronos (crono")), the seasons (kairos (kairo")). The seasons (kairos (kairo")) are the joints or articulations of the times (chronos (crono")). The seasons (kairos (kairo")) represent the critical epochmaking periods when all that has been maturing through long ages comes to a head in grand decisive events which constitute the close of one period and the beginning of another. Such an event the prophets were searching for. If they could find out when it would occur, well and good, and if not, they would attempt to ascertain of what character the event would be. Their inquiry was regarding the relation of this event as to order in time or with respect to the economy of God, to the atonement of our Lord at the Cross and His future glorious reign in the Millennial Kingdom. They searched the Old Testament scriptures as to what the Holy Spirit, who was in them when they wrote their inspired books, was pointing to or making plain when He bore testimony to the sufferings and the glory of the Lord Jesus. It was revealed to them that this truth concerning the particular grace that was destined for believers of this age, was not for them but for those of this dispensation. The great event ushering in a new order of things which they were looking for was Pentecost, the time when the Body of Christ was formed. Paul speaks of this mystery in the words, “which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; that the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel” (Eph. 3:5, 6). That the Gentiles were to be saved, was no mystery to the Old Testament writers, but that the wall of separation so rigidly held in Old Testament times between Gentile and Jew was to be broken down at the Cross, and that the two would become one body, that was the mystery. Peter did not see this truth until eight years after Pentecost (Acts 10:1–48). Here we have the great truth of the Body of Christ, its living Head, the

Lord Jesus Himself, its members, all believers of this Age of Grace which began at Pentecost and closes with the Rapture, Jew and Gentile becoming one body in Christ. Peter says that the angels desire to look into these things. The word “desire” is a strong one, referring to a passionate desire. “To look into” is the translation of parakupto (parakupto), used in Luke 24:12 and John 20:5, 11, of Peter, John, and Mary stooping down and looking into the empty tomb. The word means, “to look at with head bent forward, to look into with the body bent, to stoop and look into.” Metaphorically it means, “to look carefully into, to inspect curiously.” It is used in the latter sense in this passage. The preposition para (para) prefixed to the verb means “beside” and is used at times with a case denoting separation. Thus the angels peer into the mysteries of Church truth from beside it, like the cherubim bending over the Mercy Seat where man has access to God through a substitutionary sacrifice that cleanses him from sin. They are not participants in the salvation but spectators of it. Paul writing in a context of this mystery says, “To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God” (Eph. 3:10). The principalities and powers are of course the holy angels. The manifold wisdom of God as seen in the context is the truth of the Body of Christ. “Might be known” is passive and is more properly rendered “might be made known.” “By” is the translation of dia (dia), the preposition of intermediate agency. That is, this truth is to be made known to the holy angels by means of the instrumentality of the Church. The Church is the teacher of angels. Paul says that the apostles “are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men” (I Cor. 4:9). How the angels watch the saints. How they wonder at creatures once totally depraved, now living holy lives that glorify God. It is in the Church that they catch the supreme view of God’s love, sinners saved by grace, raised to a seat in the heavenly places in Christ. The Church is God’s university for angels. The verse reads, “To the intent that now to the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be made known by means of the instrumentality of the church, the manifold wisdom of God.” Translation. (10) Concerning which salvation prophets conducted an exhaustive inquiry and search, those who prophesied concerning the particular grace destined for you, (11) searching as to what season or character of season the Spirit of Christ who was in them was making plain, when He1 was testifying beforehand concerning the sufferings of Christ and the glories which would come after these sufferings, (12) to whom it was revealed that not for themselves were they ministering these things which now have been reported to you through those who have announced the glad tidings to you by the Holy Spirit who was sent down on a commission from heaven, into which things the angels have a passionate desire to look carefully.

5. THE HOLY WALK OF THE BELIEVER (1:13–16) Verse thirteen The “wherefore” is equivalent to, “in view of the fact that even though you are undergoing many kinds of trials (v. 6), yet because your heavenly inheritance awaits you” (vv. 3–6), gird up the loins of your minds. Peter here uses an oriental expression referring to the act of gathering up around the waist, the long, loose eastern robes which would impede one’s progress in running or other exertion. The recipients of this letter are reminded by the

apostle in 1:1 that they are strangers, those who have temporarily settled down alongside of a pagan population, and also pilgrims as well (2:11). As such they should always be ready to move. The Israelites had orders to eat the Passover with their loins girded, their shoes on their feet, their staff in their hand, ready to move on a moment’s notice (Ex. 12:11). It is not physical exertion that Peter has in mind here, but mental. If the purpose of girding up the clothing was to put out of the way that which would impede the physical progress of an individual, the girding up of the loins of the mind would be the putting out of the mind all that would impede the free action of the mind in connection with the onward progress of the Christian experience, things such as worry, fear, jealousy, hate, unforgiveness, impurity. These things harbored in the mind prevent the Holy Spirit from using the mental faculties of the Christian in the most efficient manner, and thus from causing that believer to grow in the Christian life and make progress in his salvation. The word “to gird up” is in the aorist tense which refers to a past once-for-all act. Bringing this oriental expression over to the occidental manner of thinking, enables us to translate, “Wherefore, having put out of the way, once for all, everything that would impede the free action of your mind.” Peter treats this as a God-expected obligation on the part of the believer. In 1:3 we learned that as the believer definitely subjected himself to the ministry of the Holy Spirit, He would produce in his life through the Word, that Christian optimism that always looks for the best and not for the worst, that always sees the silver lining on every cloud. By the power of the same Holy Spirit, he is able to exert his will in putting out of his mind those things that would impede its free action. Thus, the Christian has the privilege of enjoying the wholesome mental atmosphere called “Christian optimism and a care-free mind,” not a mind devoid of an appreciation of the seriousness of life and its responsibilities, but a mind not crippled and frozen by worry, fear, and their related mental attitudes. Living in this blessed mental state, the believer is ready and able to obey the exhortations to which the apostle now addresses himself. The first one is, “be sober.” The Greek word means, “to be calm and collected in spirit, to be temperate, dispassionate, circumspect.” It speaks of the proper exercise of the mind, that state of mind in which the individual is self-controlled, and is able to see things without the distortion caused by worry, fear, and their related attitudes. The second admonition is, “hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.” The words, “hope to the end,” do not refer to the Christian living in a state of hopefulness to the end of his life. The word “end” is the translation of teleios (teleio")1 which means “perfectly, completely.” The root idea of the word refers to that which is in a state of completeness. Thus this adverb qualifies the verb “hope” and describes this hope. It is to be a hope that is complete, a perfect hope, wanting nothing, being in its character an assured expectation. One could translate, “set your hope perfectly, unchangeably, without doubt and despondency.” Peter had spoken of the saint’s inheritance which will be his in the last time (1:4, 5). Here he refers to this inheritance as the grace that will be his at the revelation of the Lord Jesus. The words “that is to be brought” are from an article and a present participle in the Greek text. It is true that our reception of this grace is yet future. But the picture in the word used is of this grace being brought to us right now. That is, it is already on the way. It is on the divine menu. We have our justification the moment we put our faith in the Lord Jesus. It is ours forever. We are having our sanctification during our earthly life, namely, the work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts giving us victory over sin and producing

in us His fruit as we are definitely subjected to Him. We will have our glorification, namely, the transformation of our physical bodies at the Rapture. The first two courses on the divine menu, justification and sanctification, we are enjoying now. Peter exhorts us to set our hope perfectly, wholly, and unchangeably, without doubt and despondency upon our future glorification. It is like eating a bountiful repast at the home of Mrs. Charming Hostess. While we are enjoying the delicious meal, we are not worrying whether there will be dessert or not. We know it is on the menu, and is being brought to us as soon as we are ready for it. Alford translates “which is even now bearing down upon you.” The word means literally “to carry.” One could thus translate, “which is being brought to you.” Verse fourteen The words “as obedient children” are literally in the Greek, “as children of obedience.” The motive principal of the child of God should be obedience, the latter being related to him as a parent is to a child. As children inherit the nature of their parents, so a child of God is made a partaker of the divine nature, which nature always impels to the act of obedience. It is natural for a child of God to obey Him. In our characters as obedient children of God, we are exhorted not to fashion ourselves with respect to our former lusts. The word “fashion”1 in the Greek text refers to the act of assuming an outward appearance patterned after some certain thing, an appearance or expression which does not come from and is not representative of one’s inmost and true nature. It refers here to the act of a child of God assuming as an outward expression the habits, mannerisms, dress, speech expressions, and behavior of the world out from which God saved him, thus not giving a true expression of what he is, a cleansed, regenerated child of God, but instead, hiding the Lord Jesus who should be seen in the life of the Christian. It is the believer masquerading in the costume of the world. The word “lusts” is literally “passionate desires,” here, as the context indicates, evil desires. The word “lust,” when the a.v. was translated, referred to any craving or strong desire, good or bad, as the context indicated. Today, its meaning is confined almost entirely to that of an immoral desire. Verse fifteen The word “as” is from kata (kata) which has the root idea of “down,” thus “domination.” Vincent suggests, “after the pattern of the One who called you.” “Holy” is to be taken here as a noun, not an adjective. “The Holy One” was a title of God well established in His relation to Gentile Christians. “Be” is from ginomai (ginomai) which is not the verb of being, but of “becoming.” It is ingressive aorist here, signifying entrance into a new state. Those who at one time were wholly controlled by their evil cravings, had through salvation entered into a new state of being, that of inward holiness, by virtue of the residence in them of the Holy Spirit, and now they were to see to it that that inward holiness found outward expression in their lives. The word “holy” in Greek means literally, “set apart.” Thus, a holy person is one set apart from sin to righteousness. It has in it the idea of separation. Thus it is a separated life of which Peter is speaking. The word “saint” is the translation of the same word. Furthermore, they were not to cover up their characters as Christians by outwardly assuming a masquerade costume patterned after their former worldly garments. The second use of the word “holy” is in the plural. They were to become holy ones in their personal experience. “Conversation” is the translation of a Greek word meaning “behavior.” Today the word “conversation” means “talk.” In a.d. 1611, when the a.v. was translated, it meant “manner of life, behavior.” One must be

careful to take into account changes of meaning in the case of certain words in the English Bible. Verse sixteen The words “it is written” are the translation of a verb in the perfect tense in Greek, which tense speaks of a past completed action having present results. One could translate more fully, “It has been written and as a present result is on record.” Peter was quoting from Leviticus 11:44 which was written by the stylus of Moses, the inspired man of God, 1500 b.c., and probably on clay tablets. At the time of the writing of this letter, a.d. 60, Peter spoke of Moses’ words as still on record, the eternal, unchanging Word of God. Our Lord used the same expression in Matthew 4:4, 7, and Satan used it in 4:6 when quoting, rather misquoting, Psalm 91:11, 12. In the words “I am holy,” the “I” is intensive, the emphatic use of the personal pronoun being in the Greek text. It is, “I, in contradistinction to anyone else, am holy.” Translation. (13) Wherefore, having put out of the way, once for all, everything that would impede the free action of your mind, be calm and collected in spirit, and set your hope perfectly, wholly, and unchangeably, without doubt and despondency upon the grace that is being brought to you upon the occasion of the revelation of Jesus Christ; (14) as children of obedience not assuming an outward expression which would not be true of your inner life, an expression patterned after that which you formerly had in the ignorance of your passionate desires, (15) but after the pattern of the One who called you, the Holy One, also yourselves become holy persons in every kind of behavior, (16) because it has been written and as a present result is on record, Holy ones be ye, because I am holy.

6. THE INFINITE COST OF REDEMPTION (1:17–21) Verse seventeen The “if” does not introduce an hypothesis but a fulfilled condition. “Since,” or “in view of the fact,” is the idea in the word. These to whom Peter was writing, were Christians. They were calling upon the Father. The idea in the Greek is, “in view of the fact that you call on as Father.” That is, they recognized God as their Father since they had been brought into the family of God in salvation. They appealed to Him as a child would appeal to its father. What a blessed thought to give us encouragement in our praying, faith that the answer is sure, and a sweet feeling of nearness to God. To think that He is our Father and we are His children. To think that He regards us as His children, and thus the objects of His special care and love. Peter describes Him as being One “who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work.” The words “without respect of persons” are the translation of one word in Greek which means literally, “does not receive face.” That is, God does not receive anybody’s face. He is impartial. Outward appearance, wealth, culture, social position, family background, education, beauty, intellect, all things that more or less sway the opinions of man, do not count with God when it comes to appraising a person’s character or worthiness. “The Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart” (I Sam. 16:7). God, Peter says, judges each man’s work with impartiality. And yet we are not to understand that He is a

critical judge trying always to find a defect or flaw in our conduct or service. The Greek word is found oftener in a good than in a bad sense. That is, God’s impartiality is an honest appraisal of things, while His heart is always with His child and goes out to him in a spirit of love. That is beautifully brought out in the use of a particular Greek word in I Corinthians 3:13, which verse and its context refer to the judgment of the believer’s works at the Judgment Seat of Christ. There are two Greek words which mean “to put to the test,” one meaning “to put to the test in order to discover what evil or good there may be in a person,” the other, “to put to the test in order to sanction or approve the good one finds in that person.”1 The latter is used in our verse. God expects to find in the life of each saint that upon which He can put His approval, for the Holy Spirit produces good works in all the saints, more in those who are definitely subjected to His control. In view of this impartial judgment of God, the Christian is exhorted to pass the time of his sojourning in fear. The word “pass” is the translation of a Greek word meaning “to conduct one’s self, to order one’s conduct or behavior.” The word “sojourning” is from a word meaning literally “to have a home alongside of,” and refers to a person living in a foreign land alongside of people who are not of his kind. Here it refers to children of God living far from their heavenly home, in foreign territory, on a planet that has a usurper, Satan, as reigning monarch, the people of which are his subjects. The Christian must always live in the consciousness of the fact that he is being watched by the unsaved, that his responsibility is to bear a clear, ringing, genuine testimony to His God and Saviour by the kind of life he lives. Peter says he is to do this in fear. This fear has been defined as follows: “This fear is self-distrust; it is tenderness of conscience; it is vigilance against temptation; it is the fear which inspiration opposes to highmindedness in the admonition, ‘be not high-minded but fear.’ It is taking heed lest we fall; it is a constant apprehension of the deceitfulness of the heart, and of the insidiousness and power of inward corruption. It is the caution and circumspection which timidly shrinks from whatever would offend and dishonor God and the Saviour” (Vincent, quoting Wardlaw On Proverbs). Verse eighteen The word “know” in the Greek text speaks of a self-evident, intuitive knowledge. The word “redeemed” means “to set free by the payment of a ransom.” The words “silver” and “gold” are in a diminutive form, referring to little silver and gold coins which were used to buy slaves out of slavery. The word “vain” is the translation of a Greek word which has in it the idea of an ineffectual attempt to do something, an unsuccessful effort to attain something. It is found in the sentence from an early secular document, “He vainly relates.” Thus, the vain conversation from which the Christian is liberated is his manner of life before he was saved which failed to meet the standards of God. It was a futile life, in that it did not measure up to that for which human life was created, to glorify God. This manner of life they had received by tradition from their fathers. The phrase “received by tradition from your fathers” is the translation of one Greek word which means literally “given from father.” That is, this futile manner of life was passed down to the son from the father through the channels of heredity, teaching, example, and environment. The child is born in sin, that is, comes into being with a totally depraved nature, and if the parents are unsaved, comes into a home where evil customs and practices are observed. What the child inherits, Peter calls a futile manner of life. From this futile manner of life the recipients of this letter were delivered. Verse nineteen

The Greek word “precious” has a two-fold meaning, “costly” in the sense of value, and “highly esteemed or held in honor.” The blood of Christ is costly, essentially and intrinsically precious because it is God’s blood (Acts 20:28), for Deity became incarnate in humanity. For that reason it is highly honored by God the Father. The order of the words in the Greek text is beautiful. Please observe same in the fuller translation. It was not little silver and gold coins which set these Christians free from sin, but the blood of Christ. Verse twenty “Foreordained” in the Greek text means “to designate beforehand” to a position or function. In the councils of the triune God, the Lord Jesus was the Lamb marked out for sacrifice. “Foundation” is the translation of a word meaning literally “to throw down,” and was used of the laying of the foundation of a house. It speaks of the act of the transcendent God throwing out into space the universe by speaking the word. “World” in the Greek text is kosmos (kosmo"), which speaks of an ordered system, and here of that perfect universe which left the hands of the Creator. The Greeks have a word for a rude, unformed mass, a word from which we get our English word “chaos.” In Genesis 1:1 we have a kosmos (kosmo"), a system in which order prevails, and in 1:2, a chaos (cao"), a rude unformed mass, the latter the result of God’s curse because of Lucifer’s sin. Before this universe was created, the Lord Jesus had been foreordained to be the Saviour of lost sinners, and the saints had been foreordained to become recipients of the salvation He would procure for lost sinners at the Cross (Eph. 1:4; Rom. 8:29).1 The word “manifest” in the Greek means “to make or become visible.” It was the invisible God who in the Person of His Son was made visible to human eyesight by assuming a human body and human limitations. Verse twenty-one The words in the Greek text translated “do believe” refer to the identity of the recipients, speaking of the fact that they were believers, rather than of the act of believing. “From” is the translation of a preposition meaning “out from.” “Dead” refers not to the state of death, but to individuals who are dead. It is a plural noun in the Greek. Our Lord was raised out from among those who were dead. They stayed in that condition called death, whereas He was given life. This belief in God of which Peter speaks is not a mental acceptance of the fact of His existence, but a heart faith in the God who saves sinners in answer to their faith in the resurrected Lord Jesus who died for them. Translation. (17) And in view of the fact that you call on as Father Him who judges, not with a partiality based upon mere outward appearance, but with impartiality in accordance with each individual’s work, in fear order your behavior during the time of your residence as a foreigner, (18) knowing as you do, that not by means of corruptible things, little coins of silver and gold, were you set free once for all by the payment of ransom money, out of and away from your futile manner of life handed down from generation to generation, (19) but with costly blood highly honored, blood as of a lamb that is without blemish and spotless, the blood of Christ, (20) who indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the universe was laid, but was visibly manifested at the closing years of the times for your sake, (21) who through Him are believers in God, the One who raised Him out from among those who are dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope might be in God.

7. THE LOVE FOR THE BRETHREN (1:22–25) Verses twenty-two—twenty-five The recipients of this letter had purified their souls with the result that they came to love their Christian brethren with an unfeigned love, the implication being clear that at one time these Christians were guilty of feigning love for certain of their brothers in Christ. The word “unfeigned” is the translation of the Greek word from which we get our word “hypocrite,” with the letter Alpha prefixed which makes it mean “not a hypocrite.” The Greek word for “hypocrite” was used of an actor on the Greek stage, one who played the part of another. The word means literally, “to judge under,” and was used of someone giving off his judgment from behind a screen or mask. Some of these to whom Peter was writing, had put a mask of feigned love over their usual countenances when associating with certain others of their brethren. There were two conditions in the early Church which were responsible for this hypocrisy. Some Christians were tempted to go back to their old associates, preferring their company to that of their Christian brethren. This is intimated in 4:3, where the apostle suggests that they had plenty of time before salvation to run in sin with the world. Those Christians who went back to their former worldly associates and preferred their company to that of believers, would naturally assume an attitude of love towards the latter. Then there was that other condition in which different grades of society were represented in the early Church, slaves and freeman, rich and poor, educated and illiterate. The privileged were slow to take the under-privileged to themselves in a Christian brotherly way. This is hinted at in 2:1 in the words “hypocrisies” and “evil speakings,” the latter expression referring to the act of deprecating another, literally “speaking a person down.” The particular word for love used here is phile (file), a love called out of one’s heart by the pleasure one takes in the person loved. It is a love of “liking.” One likes another person because that person is like himself in the sense that that person reflects in his own personality the same characteristics, the same likes and dislikes that he himself has. It is an affection or fondness, a purely human attachment for another, and perfectly legitimate. This particular Greek word for love was used advisedly by the inspired apostle. The context in which it is found is concerned with one’s attitude toward one’s fellow Christian as contrasted to one’s former worldly associates. This attitude with respect to the latter should be necessarily changed at the time of salvation. The necessity for the change is based upon a change in the person’s character from that of a sinner to that of a saint. The saying goes, “Birds of a feather flock together.” The species has an attachment for itself based upon similarity of character. Thus an affection or fondness for another based upon the likeness of that other to one’s self is in the mind of Peter here. Now, the thing that caused some of these Christians to revert to their former worldly associates was failure to obey the Word of God. Consequently, their heart-life became sinful. Therefore, they preferred their former sinful companions to their fellow Christians. But when they started to obey the Word again, their souls were purified, and they came to have that fondness and affection for their Christian brethren which is the normal condition among saints who are living lives of obedience to God’s Word. The love which they

showed toward other believers was an unassumed one. It came from the heart. Then again, obedience to the Word would cause the upper classes of society to have a fondness and affection for the lower classes, in that Christianity levels off all classes and distinctions in the spiritual realm and constitutes the saints an aristocracy of heaven, where all are seen on an infinitely high plane, in Christ Jesus. The words “have purified” are from a perfect tense verb in the Greek. That is, a past completed process, that of a consistent, habitual obedience to the Word, had resulted in the purifying of their souls as they obeyed, with the result that their souls were in a present state of purification. They also rectified an existing evil practice in their lives, that of a hypocritical affection for their Christian brethren. The lesson for us is that when we obey God’s Word, our heart-life is being purified, and this purification puts sin out of our experience. To those who were now loving their brethren in the sense of a fondness and affection for them, God gives the exhortation, “See that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently.” The question arises, “Why does God exhort those to love one another who are already loving one another?” The answer is found in the use of another distinctive word for “love,” agape (ajgape), which Peter uses. This word speaks of a love which in its classical usage refers to a love called out of one’s heart by the preciousness of the person loved, which usage is carried over into the New Testament, but which word has an additional content of meaning poured into it by the way it is used in certain contexts such as John 3:16, where the idea of self-sacrifice for the benefit of the person loved is added to its classical meaning, I Corinthians 13, where the constituent elements of its Biblical usage are listed, and I John 4:8, where it is said to refer to the love that God is. Thus, the exhortation is to love one’s brother Christian because he is precious to God, and to love him with a love that is willing to sacrifice one’s self for the benefit of that brother, a love that causes one to be long suffering toward him, a love that makes one treat him kindly, a love that so causes one to rejoice in the welfare of another that there is no room for envy in the heart, a love that is not jealous, a love that keeps one from boasting of one’s self, a love that keeps one from bearing one’s self in a lofty manner, a love that keeps one from acting unbecomingly, a love that keeps one from seeking one’s own rights, a love that keeps one from becoming angry, a love that does not impute evil, a love that does not rejoice in iniquity but in the truth, a love that bears up against all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. That is the kind of love which God says one Christian should have for another. These Christians to whom Peter was writing already had a fondness and an affection for one another. The feeling of fondness and affection was perfectly proper in itself, but it could degenerate into an attachment for another which would be very selfish. But if these Christians would blend the two kinds of love, saturate the human fondness and affection with the divine love with which they are exhorted to love one another, then that human affection would be transformed and elevated to a heavenly thing. Then the fellowship of saint with saint would be a heavenly fellowship, glorifying to the Lord Jesus, and most blessed in its results to themselves. There is plenty of the phile (file)1 fondness and affection among the saints, and too little of the agape (ajgape)1 divine love. But how to have such a heavenly love for one another, that is the problem, one may say. The answer is simple. This love is produced in the heart of the saint who is definitely subjected to the control of the Holy Spirit. This love is one of His fruits (Gal. 5:22). Thus God exhorts the saints to love one another with a divine love, and then produces that love

in their hearts as they trust Him to do that for them and by the action of their free will choose to be loving and exert themselves to act in a loving way towards their brethren.2 The best Greek texts do not have the words “through the Spirit.” It is true that we can only obey the Word as the Holy Spirit gives us the desire and the power to do so, and these are given to us as we yield to Him. But we have left these words out of the fuller translation since they do not appear in the best Greek texts. The word “another” is a reciprocal pronoun in Greek and thus refers here to a reciprocal love. The words “with a pure heart,” are literally, “out of a pure heart.” The word “fervently” is the translation of a Greek word meaning “an intense strain.” Verses 23–25 are sufficiently clear in the a.v., the Greek words involved do not need any special treatment, and the fuller translation offered will bring out any added shades of meaning which are in the Greek text. Therefore, there is no special exegesis offered of these verses. Translation. (22) Wherefore, having purified your souls by means of your obedience to the truth, resulting in not an assumed but a genuine affection and fondness for the brethren, an affection and fondness that springs from your hearts by reason of the pleasure you take in them; from the heart love each other with an intense reciprocal love that springs from your hearts because of your estimation of the preciousness of the brethren, and which is divinely self-sacrificial in its essence, (23) having been begotten again through the Word of God which lives and abides; (24) for every kind of flesh is as grass, and its every kind of glory is as the flower of grass. The grass withers away, and the flower falls off, (25) but the Word of the Lord abides forever. And this is the Word which in the declaration of the good news was preached to you.

8. THE BELIEVER-PRIEST’S SPIRITUAL FOOD (2:1–5) Verse one “Wherefore” goes back to the fact of the new life imparted (1:23), and argues in 2:1–3 that therefore a new kind of experience is demanded of the believer. “Laying aside” is from a participle that has imperative force. In view of the fact that divine life has been imparted to the believer, it is imperative that he “put away once for all” any sins that may be in his life. The preposition prefixed to the verb implies separation. The believer is commanded to separate himself from sin. This act of separating himself from sin must be a once for all action, as the tense of the participle suggests. There must be a complete rightabout face. Peter then singles out five sins that the recipients of this letter were guilty of. The Greek word translated “malice” refers to any kind of wickedness. “Guile” is the translation of a word which in its verb form means “to catch with bait,” and in the noun which Peter uses means “craftiness.” The word “hypocrisies” is the transliteration of the Greek word hupokriseis (uJpokrisei") which means literally “to judge under,” as a person giving off his judgment from behind a screen or mask. The true identity of the person is covered up. It refers to acts of impersonation or deception. It was used of an actor on the Greek stage. Taken over into the New Testament, it referred to a person we call a hypocrite, one who assumes the mannerisms, speech, and character of someone else, thus hiding his true identity. Christianity requires that believers should be open and above-board. They should be themselves. Their lives should be like an open book, easily read. The word “evil

speakings” are in the Greek text “speaking down” a person, referring to the act of defaming, slandering, speaking against another. Verse two “Newborn babes” is from the Greek word brephos (brefo"), used only here in the New Testament in its metaphorical sense. Luke uses it (2:16) of the babe in the manger. In classical Greek it was used of a babe at the breast. Peter probably took the figure from Isaiah 28:9, “Whom will he teach knowledge? Them that are weaned from the milk and drawn from the breasts.” The recipients of this letter are called just-born infants, speaking of the recency of the Christian life in their case. The Greek word translated “desire” speaks of an intense yearning. That which they are exhorted to have is an intense yearning for milk. The word “sincere” is from the same Greek word translated in 2:1, “guile,” but with the Greek letter Alpha prefixed which makes the word mean the opposite to what it meant before. It is guileless milk, thus unadulterated. It has nothing added to it. The Word of God has no ulterior motives like so many human teachings, but has for its only purpose that of nourishing the soul. The words “of the word” are from an article and adjective in the Greek text speaking of the quality of this milk, literally, rational as opposed to ceremonial, thus spiritual. The word “milk” here does not refer to that part of the Word of God which is in contrast to the meat or solid food of the Word as in Hebrews 5:13, 14, but to the Word of God in general. The words “that ye may grow thereby” could also be rendered “in order that ye might be nourished up.” There is a phrase in the Greek text not brought out in the translation, “resulting in your making progress in your salvation.” The prerequisite to the act of intensely yearning for the Word of God is the act of once for all putting sin out of our lives. Sin in the life destroys the appetite for the Word. The Christian who tries to find satisfaction in the husks of the world, has no appetite left for the things of God. His heart is filled with the former and has no room for the latter. A healthy infant is a hungry infant. A spiritually healthy Christian is a hungry Christian. This solves the problem of why so many children of God have so little love for the Word. Verse three The “if” is a fulfilled condition. They as newborn babes had tasted the Word of God, and had found in it that the Lord was gracious. The word “gracious” is the translation of a Greek word used in Luke 5:39 where it is translated “better.” The word means literally, “excellent.” Verse four The words “to whom coming” in the Greek text do not refer to the initial act of the sinner coming to the Lord Jesus for salvation, but indicate a close and habitual approach and an intimate association made by faith when the believer realizes the presence of and seeks communion and fellowship with his Lord. The words “as unto” are in italics in the translation, showing that they are not in the Greek text, and were supplied by the translators to help give the sense of the passage. But here we have no metaphor. There is no such thing in existence as a living stone. God is that Living Stone to whom we come. The article is not used with the expression, showing that emphasis is placed upon character or quality. He is in character a Living Stone. The word “disallowed” is the translation of a word that refers to the act of putting someone or something to the test for the purpose of putting one’s approval upon that person and thus receiving him, this act of testing being carried to the point where no

further testing is needed, with the result that one comes to the settled conclusion that the one tested does not meet the requirements of the test and is therefore disapproved, repudiated. This Living Stone in the Person of God the Son became incarnate, lived for thirty-three years in the midst of Israel, offered Himself as its Messiah, was examined by official Israel for the purpose of approving Him as its Messiah, and then repudiated because He was not what official Israel wanted in a Messiah. What a commentary on the totally depraved condition of man’s heart. The word “chosen” is not a verb in the Greek text but a noun, literally “a chosen-out one,” thus “elect.” “Precious” is the translation of a Greek word used in Luke 7:2, describing the centurion’s servant as “dear” to him. The word speaks of one being held in honor and as dear to another. “Of God” is literally “in the sight of God.” Verse five Believers are lively or living stones (the same Greek word is used for both Christ and the believer) because their life is Christ. This spiritual house is not the local church nor even a group of saints, but the Mystical Body of Christ, the Church Universal, for Peter is addressing believers in five Roman provinces. The words “holy priesthood” in the Greek text are preceded by a preposition showing purpose. Thus we translate, “to be a holy priesthood.” The words “to offer up” are the translation of a word used in the Greek translation of the Old Testament of the act of the priest bearing the sacrifice up to the brazen altar. The latter was four and one-half feet high and was approached by an incline up which the priest carried the sacrifice. The word itself means literally, “to carry up.” Thus the Church is an unlimited priesthood to offer upon the altar of the consecrated, dedicated heart of the believer, spiritual sacrifices, not animal sacrifices as in the case of the Levitical priests, but the activities of the human spirit of man energized by the Holy Spirit. The word “acceptable” in the Greek text means literally “to receive to one’s self with pleasure.” What a blessing it is to think that God is pleased with the spirituality He finds in the life of a Christian. He was pleased with the sacrifices offered up in Old Testament times in that they spoke of the Lord Jesus. He is pleased with the spiritual sacrifices of the believer because He sees in them a reflection of the Lord Jesus. Translation. (1) Wherefore, putting away once for all, all wickedness, and all craftiness, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all slanderings, (2) as newborn infants, intensely yearn for the unadulterated spiritual milk in order that you may be nourished and make progress in (your) salvation, (3) in view of the fact that you have tasted that the Lord is excellent; (4) toward whom we are constantly drawing near, Himself in character a Living Stone, indeed by men repudiated after they had tested Him for the purpose of approving Him, in which investigation they found Him to be that which did not meet their specifications, but in the sight of God a chosen-out One and held in honor; (5) you yourselves also as living stones are being built up a spiritual house, to be a priesthood that is holy, bringing up to God’s altars spiritual sacrifices which are received by God through the mediatorship of Jesus Christ.

9. THE CHIEF CORNERSTONE (2:6–10) Verse six This Living Stone, the Lord Jesus, becomes the Chief Cornerstone of the temple, the

Church, the One who is not only its foundation (Matt. 16:16, 18),1 but also that which holds the Church together. The word “elect” is literally “a chosen-out one.” The word “precious” has the idea of “held in honor.” The word “confounded” is the translation of a Greek word that means “to be put to shame” in the sense of being defeated or deceived in some hope. Verse seven The words “he is” are supplied by the translators in an effort to make the meaning of the Greek plain to the English reader. They are not in the Greek text. Expositor’s Greek Testament offers the following: “The ‘precious’-ness of the stone is for you who believe but for the unbelievers it is … ‘a stone of stumbling’.” Evidently Peter is showing the contrast between what the Living Stone means to believers and what He becomes to the unbelievers because they refuse to allow Him to become precious to them. One could translate, “To you therefore who are believers, the Living Stone is precious.” The words “Living Stone” are taken from verse 4 where they appear in the Greek text. The word “disobedient” is the translation of a word literally meaning “disbelieving.” “Disallowed” has the same meaning as in verse 4, which please see. The Living Stone which is precious to believers and a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense to unbelievers, God has chosen for the head cornerstone. It was the builders of Israel, the spiritual leaders of the nation, that repudiated the Living Stone after investigating Him, and yet God in His grace made Him a Head Cornerstone to these latter, if they would accept Him as such. The door of mercy was not closed to them. Verse eight The words “a stone of stumbling” are the translation of lithos (liqo"), “a loose stone in the path,” and proskommatos (proskommato") meaning “to cut against,” which altogether mean “an obstacle against which one strikes.” The words “rock of offence” are from petra (petra), “a ledge rising out of the ground,” and skandalou, “a trap set to trip one.” Our word “scandal” comes from the latter word. These who are disobedient (the literal Greek has it “non-persuasable”) are appointed to stumble at the Word, which is the penalty for refusal to believe it. “By faith we understand” (Heb. 11:3), is the God-ordained way. Thus, unbelievers find the Living Stone, which is precious to believers, an obstacle against which they strike, and a scandal, that which offends them. Verse nine The “ye” is emphatic in the Greek text. Literally, “but as for you,” in contrast to the disobedient of verse 8. “Generation” is from a Greek word meaning “a race, a body with a common life and descent.” It does not mean here a group of individuals living within the span of a lifetime. The word “royal” is the translation of the Greek word for “king.” The Levitical priesthood were only priests. Believers in this dispensation are king-priests, associated with the Lord Jesus who is a priest after the order of Melchisedec, a kingpriest. The word “nation” is the translation of a Greek word meaning “a multitude of people of the same nature.” The word “holy” in the Greek text means literally “set apart for the service of Deity.” The word “peculiar” here is used in a way not often seen today. The Greek word means literally “to make around,” that is, to make something and then to surround it with a circle, thus indicating ownership. The same verb is used in the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 43:21 which reads, “This people have I formed for myself.” The word “peculiar” today usually means “odd, strange.” But it is not so used

here. The Greek word speaks of the unique, private, personal ownership of the saints by God. Each saint is God’s unique possession just as if that saint were the only human being in existence. The words “show forth” in the Greek text refer to a spoken message. The word “praises” is not the translation of the Greek word customarily used to indicate praise, but of one which means “excellencies, gracious dealings, glorious attributes.” The word “into” refers here not merely to locality, but to a result, that of the saints being participants of the light that God is in His nature. We are made creatures of light. Translation. (6) Because of this, it is contained in Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a Stone, one chosen out, a cornerstone, held in honor, and the one who rests his faith on Him shall not be defeated. (7) To you therefore who are believers, the Living Stone is precious; but to those who are disbelievers, the Stone which the builders repudiated after they had tested Him for the purpose of approving Him, finding Him to be that which did not meet their specifications, this Stone became a Head Corner Stone, (8) and an obstacle stone against which one cuts, and a rock which trips one, even to those who because they are non-persuasable, stumble up against the Word, to which (action of stumbling) they were indeed appointed. (9) But as for you, you are a race chosen out, king-priests, a set-apart nation, a people formed for God’s own possession, in order that you might proclaim abroad the excellencies of the One who out of darkness called you into participation in His marvelous light, (10) who at one time were not a people, but now are the people of God; who were not subjects of mercy, but now have become objects of mercy.

10. THE DEPORTMENT OF THE CHRISTIAN AMONGST THE UNSAVED (2:11–17) Verse eleven The words “dearly beloved” are the translation of one word in Greek, plural in number, the distinctive word used of God’s divine love. This is not the “dearly beloved” of the pastor addressing his congregation on the Lord’s Day morning, but Peter reminding them that they are dearly loved-ones of God. The Greek word “beseech” is literally, “I exhort, urge, I beg of you, please.” While it is Peter writing, yet it is the great God of the universe saying to His blood-bought children, “I beg of you, please.” Think of the love and humility, the infinite condescension of God that stoops to address a creature of His handiwork whom He could command. The word “stranger” is the translation of a Greek word meaning “to have one’s home alongside of,” thus a “sojourner.” “Pilgrims” is from a word which literally means “to settle down alongside of pagans.” The two words describe the Christian in his position in this world. He has made his home alongside of the unsaved and settled down amongst them, a sojourner and one that is a stranger to them in that he is different from them. The exhortation to abstain from fleshly lusts is based upon the fact that Christians are living in the midst of the unsaved. They have a testimony to maintain and a message to give. The word “abstain” is literally, “hold yourself constantly back from” fleshly lusts, the implication being clear that the fallen nature whose power over the believer was broken when he was saved is still there with its sin-ward pull. We are told to hold ourselves back from doing the things which before salvation wrought its work in our beings we did

naturally. The word “lusts” is literally “cravings, strong desires,” good or bad, depending upon the context, here evil cravings coming from the totally depraved nature. The word “which” has a qualitative aspect in the original, “which are of such a nature as to.” “War” is from a verb which speaks of the act of carrying on a military campaign. The word “against” is the translation of a Greek word whose root meaning is “down.” Verse twelve “Having” has a durative aspect in the Greek. It is a steady holding of our conversation up to a certain standard. “Conversation” is the translation of a Greek word speaking of one’s manner of life. The word meant that when the a.v. was translated. Today, the meaning of the word is limited to the act of speaking. We must be careful to note the obsolete words in the a.v., and not interpret them in their present day meaning. The word “honest” is the translation of a Greek word that speaks of goodness which is beautiful, an outer goodness that strikes the eye. Alford translates it “comely”; Robertson, “seemly.” Our manner of life is honest when our lives are in accordance with what we are inwardly, cleansed, regenerated children of God. We give others an honest testimony and picture of what we really are inwardly. “Seemly” also speaks of the necessity of maintaining an outward testimony that is in conformity with our profession. The word “Gentiles” is from the Greek word referring here, not to Gentiles as in contrast to Jews, but to the unsaved world, the world of people without Christ. The word “whereas” is literally “in what thing,” that is, in the very thing in which the world speaks evil of a Christian, namely, of his Christian life, which latter makes it necessary for him to diverge from the things of the world and live a life of separation. The words “speak against” are literally “speak down,” referring to the act of adversely criticizing a person. The separated life of a Christian is one of the most powerful means God has of convicting the world of its sin. The world does not like its sin uncovered, hence the persecution which it directs against the separated Christian. How the people of the world watch the Christian. The word “behold” in the Greek text means “to view carefully as a personal witness.” The word “visitation” is the translation of the Greek word which is also rendered “bishop, overseer.” It means “to observe, inspect, oversee” in its verb form, and “one who oversees or observes,” in its noun form which is used here. The day of visitation is “the day of looking upon.” Wherever this word is used in the New Testament and translated “visit” or “visitation,” it refers to the visitation of God’s mercy and grace.1 Here it refers to the day when as Vincent puts it, “God shall look upon these wanderers as a pastor over his flock, and shall become the overlooker or bishop of their souls.” The same Greek word is translated “Bishop” in 2:25. The good works of Christians, their beautiful and separated lives, are used of God as one of the means of bringing lost sinners to the Lord Jesus. When they are saved, God becomes the spiritual overseer of their souls. Then these sinners saved by grace will glorify Him because of the Christlike lives of certain Christians that caused them to want the Saviour too. Verse thirteen The words “submit yourselves” are the translation of a Greek military term meaning “to arrange in military fashion under the command of a leader.” One could translate, “put yourselves in the attitude of submission to.” The exhortation is not merely to obey ordinances, but to create and maintain that attitude of heart which will always lead one to obey them. “Ordinances of man” refer to human institutions, such as the laws of the land.

Christians are to do this because of their testimony to the Lord Jesus. Verse fifteen There are no Greek word studies in verse 14. The words “put to silence” are the translation of a Greek word which means “to close the mouth with a muzzle.” It was used of the muzzling of an ox (I Cor. 9:9). It means here, “to reduce to silence.” Matthew uses it (22:34) of our Lord putting the Sadducees to silence, and Mark, of stilling the storm on the Sea of Galilee (4:39). The word “ignorance” in the Greek text speaks of want of knowledge, not in the sense of want of acquaintance, but want of understanding. The word “foolish” is the translation of a Greek word speaking of lack of reason, reflection, and intelligence. Translation. (11) Divinely loved ones, I beg of you, please, as those who are sojourning alongside of a foreign population (should), be constantly holding yourselves back from the fleshly cravings, cravings of such a nature that, like an army carrying on a military campaign, they are waging war, hurling themselves down upon your soul; (12) holding your manner of life among the unsaved steadily beautiful in its goodness, in order that in the thing in which they defame you as those who do evil (namely, in your Christianity), because of your works beautiful in their goodness which they are constantly, carefully, and attentively watching, they may glorify God in the day of His overseeing care. (13) Put yourselves in the attitude of submission to, thus giving yourselves to the obedience of, every human regulation for the sake of the Lord, whether to the king as one who is supereminent, (14) or to governors as those sent by him to inflict vengeance upon those who do evil, and to give praise to. those who do good; (15) for so is the will of God, that by doing good you might be reducing to silence the ignorance of men who are unreflecting and unintelligent; (16) doing all this as those who have their liberty, and not as those who are holding their liberty as a cloak of wickedness, but as those who are God’s bondmen. (17) Pay honor to all, be loving the brotherhood, be fearing God, be paying honor to the king.

11. A PORTRAIT OF THE SUFFERING SERVANT OF JEHOVAH (2:18–25) Verse eighteen The particular Greek word translated “servants” indicates that these were household slaves. They were Christian slaves serving for the most part in the homes of pagan masters. The fact that Peter singles them out for special admonitions indicates that slaves, as a class, formed a large part of the early Christian community. The slaves are exhorted to put themselves in subjection to their absolute lords and masters. They are to do this to the good and gentle ones. Some of these pagan masters had what the poet calls “the milk of human kindness.” They were good to their slaves. The Greek word translated “good,” refers to inner intrinsic goodness. They were good at heart. The word “gentle” in the Greek refers to that disposition which is mild, yielding, indulgent. It is derived from a Greek word meaning, “not being unduly rigorous.” Alford translates, “where not strictness of legal right, but consideration for another is the rule of practice.” The one word “reasonable” sums up its meaning pretty well.

The slaves were to put themselves into subjection as well to the froward. The Greek word means “unfair, surly, froward.” The word “froward” is from the Anglo-Saxon word “from-ward,” namely, “averse.” The masters had their faces dead set against these Christian slaves. We can understand that attitude when we remember that these slaves lived lives of singular purity, meekness, honesty, willingness to serve, and obedience in the households of their heathen masters. This was a powerful testimony for the gospel, and brought them under conviction of sin. All this irritated them, and they reacted in a most unpleasant way toward their slaves, whom they would punish without provocation. Yet they did not want to sell these Christian slaves and buy pagan ones, for the Christian slaves served them better. So they just had to make the best of the situation. Verse nineteen The word “this” is neuter in the Greek text, literally “this thing,” namely, obedience to masters who are averse to their slaves, and patience under unjust punishment meted out by these masters. “Thankworthy” is the translation of a Greek word referring to an action that is beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and is therefore commendable. The unsaved slave would react toward unjust punishment in a surly, rebellious, sullen, vindictive manner. That would be the expected and ordinary thing. But Peter exhorts these Christian slaves to be obedient to these unjust and cruel masters, and when punished unjustly to behave in a meek, patient, and forgiving manner. This would be an action beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and would therefore be commendable. The motive for acting thus, Peter tells them, is “for conscience toward God.” The idea here is not that of conscientiousness in the ordinary sense, but of the Christian slave’s conscious sense of his relation to God. He has a testimony to maintain before his pagan master. He has the Lord Jesus Christ to emulate and reflect in his life. The Greek word translated “thankworthy,” referring to an action which is beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected and is therefore commendable, is the word used in the New Testament when it speaks of God’s grace. When used in the latter connection, it refers to God’s action of stepping down from His judgment throne and in infinite love taking upon Himself the guilt and penalty of human sin in order that He might satisfy the just requirements of His law which we disobeyed, thus making possible the righteous bestowal of His mercy on the basis of justice satisfied. It is a favor done out of the pure generosity of God’s heart for beings who not only did not deserve salvation but deserved divine wrath. This act of God at the Cross is surely beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and is therefore commendable. This is just another proof of the divine source of the Bible. Such an act of grace never occurred to sinful man because it is beyond the ordinary course of action which would be expected of a member of the human race. The race simply does not act that way. Verse twenty The word “glory” is not the translation of the word doxa (doxa) which is used when the glory of God is spoken of, but of kleos (kleo"), found only here in the New Testament, and which means “fame, praise, glory, good report.” The word “buffeted” in the Greek text speaks of the act of striking with the fist. It is in the present tense which usually refers to progressive action. The word here could be translated “pummeled.” These Christian slaves were being pummeled by their irate masters, the only offence of the former being that they lived Christlike lives which were used of the Holy Spirit to convict the latter of sin.

The same Greek word is used in Matthew 26:67 where the Lord Jesus was pummeled by the frenzied Jewish mob. Isaiah 52:14 gives us a picture of our Lord after the pummeling which He received at the hands of the Jews; “As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men.” The literal rendering of this verse according to Hebrew scholars is as follows, “So marred from the form of man was His aspect that His appearance was not that of a son of man,” namely, not human. This passage bears the marks of Peter’s memories of that awful night. His exhortation to these Christian slaves is that when they are being unjustly pummeled by their masters, they should remember the Lord Jesus and how He was unjustly pummeled, and for them, and react towards their masters as Jesus did to those who mistreated Him. They are to take this punishment patiently, and this would be acceptable with God. The word “acceptable” is the translation of the same Greek word rendered “thankworthy” in verse 19. Patient endurance of unjust punishment on the part of these slaves is in the sight of God an action that is beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and is therefore commendable. Verse twenty-one “Hereunto” is literally “into this” namely, the endurance of wrongful sufferings. The divine call of God to a lost sinner is an effectual call into salvation, and an accompaniment of that salvation is suffering for righteousness’ sake, the natural result of the Christian’s contact with the people of the world and their reaction towards the Lord Jesus who is seen in the life of the saint. Paul speaks of the same thing when he says, “For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake” (Phil. 1:29). Then Peter reminds these slaves that Christ also suffered unjustly, for He the just One, died on behalf of unjust ones. He suffered vicariously, that is, He paid the penalty of sin for lost sinners. Thus He suffered for these Christian slaves. They are suffering for Jesus in the sense that by their patient endurance of unjust punishment, they are bearing a powerful testimony to His saving grace. Peter’s use of the word “also” puts the sufferings of these slaves on a new plane. They find comfort in knowing that someone else, and that person the Lord Jesus Himself, went through a like experience, that of suffering unjustly. The word “leaving” is literally “leaving behind.” When Peter used the Greek word here translated “example,” he went back to his boyhood days for an illustration. The word means literally “writing under.” It was used of words given children to copy, both as a writing exercise and as a means of impressing a moral. Sometimes it was used with reference to the act of tracing over written letters. Peter changes over easily from the idea of a child tracing over the writing of the writing-master to a Christian planting his feet in the foot-prints left by our Lord. In this context, these footprints are foot-prints of suffering. But the illustration holds good for our Lord’s entire life. Just as a child slowly, with painstaking effort and close application, follows the shape of the letters of his teacher and thus learns to write, so saints should with like painstaking effort and by close application, endeavor to be like the Lord Jesus in their own personal lives. Or, as a small child endeavors to walk in the footprints made by his father’s feet in the snow, so we are to follow in the path which our Lord took. The Greek word “follow” means literally “to take the same road” as someone else takes. We should walk the same road that Jesus walked, in short, be Christlike.

Verse twenty-two The word “did” in the Greek text speaks of the fact of sin. Alford translates, “Who never in a single instance committed sin.” The Greek word for “guile” is the same one found in 2:1, which verse please consult for full treatment of the word. The word speaks of craftiness or trickery. “Found” is the translation of a Greek word which, together with the negative with which it is used, speaks of a failure to find something after careful scrutiny. Verse twenty-three The Greek word translated “revile,” Calvin defines as follows, “It is a harsher railing, which not only rebukes a man but also sharply bites him, and stamps him with open contumely. It is to wound a man with an accursed sting.” Thus was the tender heart of the Lord Jesus wounded by totally depraved human nature. The words “suffered” and “threatened” have a progressive force in the original. Even continuous suffering at the hands of the mob did not elicit from our Lord any retaliatory words. The word “but” in the Greek text does not adversely contrast the two actions here, but removes the thing previously negatived altogether out of our field of view and substitutes something totally different. The word “committed” is the translation of a Greek word which means literally “to hand over.” It means “to deliver something to someone to keep, use, take care of, manage.” Our Lord kept on delivering over to God the Father both the revilers and their revilings as both kept on wounding His loving heart. It is for us to do the same thing when men revile us because of our Christian testimony. Verse twenty-four The word “bare” is the translation of a word used in the LXX, of the priest carrying the sacrifice up to the altar. The brazen altar was four and one-half feet high, and was approached by an incline up which the priest bore the sacrifice. Alford says that this word belongs to the idea of sacrifice and is not to be disassociated from it. The Greek word translated “tree” does not refer to a literal tree but to an object fashioned out of wood, in this case, the Cross. Thus, our Lord, Himself the High Priest and the Sacrifice, carried our sins as a burden of guilt up to the Cross. The phrase “being dead to sins” is literally, “having become off with respect to sins.” It speaks of the action of God in breaking the power of the sinful nature in the sinner when he puts his faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour. Henceforth he need not be a slave to sin. The word “stripes” in the Greek presents a picture of our Lord’s lacerated back after the scourging He endured at the hands of the Roman soldier. The Romans used a scourge of cords or thongs to which latter were attached pieces of lead or brass, or small, sharppointed bones. Criminals condemned to crucifixion were ordinarily scourged before being executed. The victim was stripped to the waist and bound in a stooping position, with the hands behind the back, to a post or pillar. The suffering under the lash was intense. The body was frightfully lacerated. The Christian martyrs at Smyrna about a.d. 155 were so torn by the scourges that their veins were laid bare, and the inner muscles and sinews and even the bowels were exposed. The Greek word translated “stripes” refers to a bloody wale trickling with blood that arises under a blow. The word is singular, not plural. Peter remembered the body of our Lord after the scourging, the flesh so dreadfully mangled that the disfigured form appeared in his eyes as one single bruise. Thus we have the portrait of the suffering Servant of Jehovah, His blessed face so

pummeled by the hard fists of the mob that it did not look like a human face anymore, His back lacerated by the Roman scourge so that it was one mass of open, raw, quivering flesh trickling with blood, His heart torn with anguish because of the bitter, caustic, malevolent words hurled at Him. On that bleeding, lacerated back was laid the Cross. Unsaved reader, this was all for you, just as if you were the only lost person in the universe. The Lord Jesus died for you, in your stead, took your place on the Cross, paid your penalty, so that God could offer a salvation from sin based upon a justice satisfied. Will you not right now appropriate the Lord Jesus as your own personal Saviour, trust Him to save you? And saint, does not all this make you love the Lord Jesus more, soften and make more tender your heart? Does not all this make you say, “I can see the blood drops, red ’neath His thorny crown, from the cruel nail-wounds, now they are falling down; Lord, when I would wander from thy love away, let me see those blooddrops shed for me that day?” The blood of Christ heals our sin in that He by one offering put away sin forever. There is no room here for the healing of illness through the blood of Jesus. The Cross was a purely judicial matter. One goes to a hospital when one is ill, and to a law court to take care of legal matters. In the great law court of the universe, the Judge offers mercy on the basis of justice satisfied at the Cross. The matter of bodily illness is not mentioned in the context. Furthermore, the Greek word used here is not confined in its meaning to physical healing. In Luke 4:18 it refers to the alleviation of heartaches, and in Hebrews 12:13, to the rectifying of one’s conduct. In Matthew 13:15, it means, “to bring about (one’s) salvation.” This passage cannot therefore be made to teach the erroneous doctrine that healing of the body is to be found in the atonement as salvation from sin is found at the Cross. The context in which the word is found clearly decides the meaning of the word here, not that of the healing of the body, but that of the salvation of the soul. Verse twenty-five The word “Bishop” is the translation of the same Greek word rendered “visitation” in verse 12. Please consult comments on that verse for a discussion of the word. God is the Bishop of the souls of Christians in the sense that He is the Overseer of their spiritual welfare. We have the all-seeing eye of our loving God always upon us, watching tenderly over us in order that He may nurture our spiritual growth and keep us from falling into temptations which the world, the flesh, and Satan are ever placing before us. It is for us to be ever mindful of God’s loving care over us and of the responsibility we have to obey His Word. Translation. (18) Household slaves, put yourselves in constant subjection with every fear to your absolute lords and masters; not only to those who are good at heart, but also to those who are against you: (19) for this subjection to those who are against you is something which is beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and is therefore commendable, namely, when a person because of the conscious sense of his relation to God bears up under pain, suffering unjustly. (20) For what sort of fame is it when you fall short of the mark and are pummeled with the fist, you endure this patiently? But if when you are in the habit of doing good and then suffer constantly for it, and this you patiently endure, this is an unusual and not-to-be-expected action, and therefore commendable in the sight of God. (21) For to this very thing were you called (namely, to patient endurance in the case of unjust punishment), because Christ also suffered on your behalf, leaving behind for you a model to imitate, in order that by close application you might follow in His footprints; (22) who never in a single instance

committed a sin, and in whose mouth, after careful scrutiny, there was found not even craftiness; (23) who when His heart was being wounded with an accursed sting, and when He was being made the object of harsh rebuke and biting, never retaliated, and who while suffering never threatened, but rather kept on delivering all into the keeping of the One who judges righteously; (24) who Himself carried up to the Cross our sins in His own body and offered Himself there as on an altar, doing this in order that we, having died with respect to sin, might live with respect to righteousness, by means of whose bleeding stripes you were healed. (25) For you were straying like sheep, but you have turned back to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.

12. THE ADORNMENT OF THE CHRISTIAN WOMAN (3:1–7) Verse one After singling out as a particular class, Christian household slaves, and exhorting them to be submissive to their masters and to patiently endure unjust punishment, Peter addresses another class of Christians which also was prominent in the early Church, namely, Christian wives who had unsaved husbands. The wife had been saved under the preaching of the gospel, but the husband had remained an unbeliever. These wives were seeking to win their husbands to the Lord Jesus. But they were going about it in the wrong way. The inspired apostle gives them instruction how to win their husbands to the Lord. The word translated “if” in the Greek text refers to a fulfilled condition. The word “even” in the Greek text is not brought out by the translators. It is, “even if.” “Obey not” is the translation of a word which speaks of a state of unbelieving disobedience. The word means literally in its verb form, “not to allow one’s self to be persuaded.” These husbands were of that obstinate, non-persuasable type that will not listen to reason. Their wives had often given them the gospel, but they had met it with stiff-necked obstinacy. Peter exhorts them, in view of their husbands’ obstinate rejection of the gospel, to stop talking about it, and just live a Christlike life before them. The husband was to be won to the Lord Jesus not by nagging, but by holy living. Peter says, “that even if any obey not the Word, they may without a word be won.” The second occurrence of the word “word” does not have the definite article in the Greek text. These husbands were to be won to the Lord Jesus now without a word from their wives. They knew the gospel. The wife’s Christian example, used by God, would do the rest. The word “won” in the Greek text means “to gain, acquire,” in the sense of the acquisition of money in James 4:13, here, “to gain” anyone by winning him over to the kingdom of God. “A soul won is a gain to our Lord who bought him, a gain to the one who won him, and a gain to that soul itself.” The word “conversation” today refers to the interchange of language between two or more persons. When the a.v. was translated it meant what the Greek word means, “one’s behaviour, manner of life.” Thus do some English words change their meaning in the course of time. This manner of life included in it submissiveness to their husbands. Both Peter and Paul found it necessary to impress upon the Church that incompatibility of religion did not justify dissolution of marriage. This subjection to their husbands would also be a factor which God could use in winning their husbands. Verse two The word “behold” in the Greek text refers to the act of viewing attentively. How

carefully the unsaved watch Christians. The word “chaste” in the Greek means not only “chaste” but “pure”. The phrase “with fear” is to be understood as referring to the wives, not the husbands. It is their pure manner of life which is coupled with fear that is used of the Lord to gain these husbands. The Greek word “fear” here is used also in Ephesians 5:33 and is there translated “reverence.” The word in a connection like this means “to reverence, venerate, to treat with deference or reverential obedience.” Verse three Peter in verses 1 and 2 exhorts these Christian wives to win their husbands to the Lord by pious living. In this verse, he forbids them to depend upon outward adornment in their effort at gaining their husbands, and not only upon outward adornment as such, but upon worldly adornment, the kind which they wore before they were saved, immodest, gaudy, conspicuous. These women were making the mistake of thinking that if they would dress as the world dressed, that that would please their unsaved husbands, and they would thus be influenced the easier to take the Lord Jesus as Saviour. It is true that they would be pleased, pleased because the appearance of their wives appealed to their totally depraved natures, and pleased because the Christian testimony of their wives was nullified by their appearance. They would say, “What you appear to be speaks so loudly I cannot hear what you are saying.” It is not true that that would help win their husbands to the Lord. These wives could hardly have made a greater mistake. The word “adornment” is the translation of the Greek word kosmos (kosmo") which was used in classical Greek to refer to the adornment or the ornaments worn by women. The word in itself refers to an ordered system, namely, a system where order prevails. The word in the Greek opposite in meaning to kosmos (kosmo") is chaos (cao"), which comes into English in the word “chaos,” and which means “a rude unformed mass.” Kosmos (Kosmo") is used in the New Testament to refer to the original, perfect creation, a system where order prevailed. Here the word refers to the adornment of the woman, and the genius of the word speaks of the fact that that adornment should be that which is fitting, congruous, not diverse from one’s character. That is, the adornment of the Christian woman should be in keeping with what she is as a Christian. She should not be a Christian at heart and her adornment be that of a person of the world. Then Peter not only forbids worldly adornment, but says that the adornment of the Christian woman should not be mere outward adornment as against that which is from within. This he further develops in verse 4 where the principle is brought out that the adornment of the Christian woman should proceed from within her heart, not be put on from without. But before he enunciates that principle, he speaks of the way these Christian women were adorning themselves, and forbids the same. First he speaks of the plaiting of the hair. The Greek word refers to an elaborate gathering of the hair into knots. History informs us that the Roman women of that day were addicted to ridiculous extravagance in the adornment of the hair. Juvenal says, “The attendants will vote on the dressing of the hair as if a question of reputation or of life were at stake, so great is the trouble she takes in quest of beauty; with so many tiers does she load, with so many continuous stories does she build up on high her hair. She is as tall as Andromache in front, and behind she is shorter. You would think her another person.” Clement of Alexandria comments on this same thing when he says that the women do not even touch their own heads for fear of disturbing their hair, and sleep comes to them with terror lest they should unawares spoil their coiffures. I Timothy 2:9 speaks against the

golden combs and nets used for hair ornamentation. What the Word of God forbids the Christian woman is a conspicuous, extravagant, intricate artificiality in the manner of wearing the hair. She must not think that to adopt the latest style of coiffure will give her a better access to someone whom she wishes to lead to the Lord. She will find that it is a hindrance. Why is this worldly artificiality forbidden? It is forbidden because the Holy Spirit does not use the styles of the world in winning a lost soul to the Lord as He seeks to work through the believer. It is forbidden because such an elaborate and worldly display gratifies what the apostle John calls “the lust of the eyes.” When a Christian woman’s appearance appeals to and gratifies the totally depraved nature of the unsaved person whom she is seeking to win to the Lord, she is feeding that person’s appetite for sin instead of appealing to that person’s conscience. She is confronting that person with the world, not with the Saviour. Such an artificial display also destroys the personal testimony of the soul winner. We may be fundamental in our doctrine, and yet defeat the power of the Word we give out by the modernism of our appearance. It is forbidden because God seeks to glorify Himself in the personality and life of the Christian. He made men in His own image. That image is the ideal medium through which He can reveal Himself. But if that image is marred and distorted by artificiality, it becomes an imperfect medium, and the beauty of the Lord Jesus is hidden beneath a veneer of worldliness. Then the apostle takes up the matter of the wearing of jewelry. The woman’s adornment must not be that of the wearing of gold. As the English translation stands this is an absolute prohibition of the wearing of gold jewelry. But this is not the thought in the Greek text. The word translated “wearing” means literally, “putting around,” and here gives the picture of these wives covering their persons with a lavish, conspicuous display of jewelry. The wearing of jewelry is not forbidden the Christian woman, but a gaudy, expensive, elaborate display of the same is, and for the same reasons that made necessary the prohibition of a highly artificial manner of wearing the hair. Then the Word of God speaks of the putting on of apparel. The word “apparel” here is the translation of the common Greek word referring particularly to outer clothing. The translators of the a.v. caught the meaning of what the apostle was after when they used the word “apparel” instead of “clothing” or “garments.” The purpose of clothing is for the protection of the body and for the sake of modesty and good taste. The purpose of apparel is for the adornment of the body. The choice of this word was therefore good, for Peter certainly is not forbidding the wearing of clothing, but the donning of such apparel as these wives were using in an effort to win their husbands to the Lord, clothing that the world wore, immodest, gaudy, conspicuous. Such clothing hides the Lord Jesus who should Himself be conspicuous in the life. Such clothing attracts to itself and to the wearer, whereas the business of a Christian is to let the Lord Jesus be radiated from the life by the Holy Spirit. Paul speaks against this tendency in the words, “Be not conformed to this world” (Rom. 12:2). The Greek word “conformed” refers to the act of a person assuming an outward expression which does not come from within and is therefore not truly representative of his inner character, this expression assumed from the outside and patterned after the world. The English word “masquerade” fits this Greek word exactly. When Christian women adorn themselves in the coiffures of the world, copy the world’s lavish and gaudy display of jewelry, and don the apparel of the world, they are masquerading in the garments of the world. They are playing the part of another. They are, in the language of the Greeks, hypocrites, acting the part of another on the stage of life. They dress like the world and act like the world, and the world thinks them to be

people of the world. Then when they come with the news of the gospel, their message falls on deaf ears. Verse four In verses 1–3, the inspired apostle lays down a two-fold prohibition, first, that the Christian woman must not depend upon outward adornment as she seeks to maintain a Christian testimony, and second, that she must not adorn herself in the habiliments of the world. The manner of wearing the hair must not be highly artificial and in conformity with the latest styles in hair-dress dictated by the fashions of the hour. There must not be a lavish and gaudy display of jewelry. The clothing which she selects must not be conspicuous, immodest, worldly in appearance. Now Peter comes to the positive part of his subject. He lays down the fundamental principles upon which a Christian woman should act in the matter of adornment. That principle can be stated as follows: The Christian woman should depend upon an adornment that proceeds from within her inner spiritual being and is truly representative of that inner spiritual life. The words, “the hidden man of the heart” refer to the personality of the Christian woman as made beautiful by the ministry of the Holy Spirit in glorifying the Lord Jesus and manifesting Him in and through her life. Peter describes that personality briefly in the case of these wives as a meek and quiet spirit which is in the sight of God of great price. The only self-description our Lord ever used of Himself as reported in the Gospels is found in the two words “meek” and “lowly” (Matt. 11:29). The adornment must be spiritual, not physical. Personality is after all far more important than either physical beauty or the adornment which mere clothing affords. A person ought to be bigger than any consideration of outward decoration. One can dress up a fence post. If one finds it necessary to depend upon either physical beauty or clothing in order to make a favorable impression upon others, that fact shows that that person realizes his lack of those personal and spiritual qualities that make a virile Christian character. The principle to the effect that adornment should proceed from within and be truly representative of the inner being is the principle upon which God operates. It is said of God, “Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment” (Psalm 104:2). But this light comes from the inmost being of God and is an expression of His intrinsic essence. The light that caused our Lord’s face and garments to shine with a heavenly radiance in the Transfiguration (Matt. 17:2), came, as the Greek verb indicates, from His inmost being. Adam and Eve before they fell into sin were adorned with an enswathement of glory that was produced from within their inner beings and was truly representative of their inner spiritual lives. When they sinned, the power to thus adorn themselves left them, and finding that their bodies had death and sin and decay in them, they made clothing to cover up their sin and shame. Our Lord after His resurrection covered His glorified body with an enswathement of glory that was produced by the new life principle motivating His resurrection body. What does a glorified body have to do with clothing whose purpose it is to cover a mortal body? Had our Lord worn clothing as He appeared to His disciples (Luke 24), they would not have been frightened. His glory covering caused Him to appear for the moment to the disciples as a spirit. When the saints receive their glorified bodies, that power of producing an outward adornment which comes from within and is truly representative of one’s inner nature will return, and the saints will shine with the glory of a new life principle motivating their resurrection bodies. The angel Lucifer before he fell was covered with an enswathement of glory, for he was an angel of light. He produced his

outward covering from within. When he fell into sin, he became an angel of darkness, that glory covering departed, and he gave expression to the darkness of sin that was true of his inner being. But Paul tells us that Satan has transformed himself into an angel of light (II Cor. 11:13–15). The Greek verb used in this passage speaks of Satan’s action of changing his outward expression by assuming, from the outside, an appearance or expression of light. He masquerades as an angel of light. God works upon the same principle in the animal kingdom. The fur-bearing animals produce their beautiful fur from the inside. The plumage of birds is grown from within. Just so, on the same principle, a Christian woman’s adornment should come from within her inner spiritual nature and be truly representative of that nature. Paul in Romans 12:2 (fuller translation) says to the saints, “Stop assuming an outward expression that does not come from and is not representative of your inner being, an expression patterned after the world, but change your outward expression by giving outward expression of your inner being.” The chief adornment of the Christian should be the Lord Jesus, manifested in and through the life of the believer. This is the principle upon which the Christian woman should act in adorning herself. But while the Christian woman must not depend upon adornment put on from the outside to make herself pleasing in the eyes of others, that does not mean that she is not to dress with neatness and good taste, or that she should be austere and drab in her appearance or so plain in her apparel that she is conspicuous. True Christianity is something joyful, and expresses itself in color and neatness and good taste. It does not mean that a Christian woman should not pay careful attention to the details of her apparel. That should be one of her chief concerns. It does mean that in selecting the manner in which she shall wear her hair, in choosing the jewelry and clothing she may wish to put on, she should be guided by the principle that her chief and basic adornment must be the Lord Jesus, and that whatever she may choose of wearing apparel, of jewelry, and of hair adornment should be in keeping with the sweetness, simplicity, and purity of the Lord Jesus. Then the manner in which she wears her hair, the kind and amount of jewelry she puts on, and the apparel she dons, will be attractive without attracting from the Lord Jesus, will be beautiful without detracting from His beauty, will have character without attracting attention to the person herself, will be apparent but not obtrusive, and will be in keeping with the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit in her life. Then the Lord Jesus will be seen in her life, and even her physical adornment will reflect Him. This is the ideal Godglorifying procedure upon the basis of which a Christian woman should act in the manner of her personal adornment. Verse five In this verse, the apostle speaks of another adornment of the Christian woman, that of subjection to her husband. The phrase “holy women,” should not be interpreted as referring to some particular and unique class of Old Testament individual with a special halo about her head. These women concerning whom the apostle is speaking were just ordinary sinners saved by grace. The word “holy” is the translation of a Greek word which means literally, “set-apart ones.” These women lived holy lives because they lived separated lives, separated from the world out from which God had saved them. It can be done in the days in which we are living. The word “trusted” is from the Greek word meaning “to hope.” The entire expression in the Greek text describes these women as those whose hope was directed towards and rested in God. The Greek word “adorned” is in the imperfect tense which speaks of action going on in past time. They were

accustomed to adorn themselves in that manner. It was a habit of life with them to adorn themselves with a meek and quiet spirit, not with the habiliments of the world. Subjection to their husbands, which Peter defines in verse 6 as obedience to their husbands, was one of the elements in this adornment. Verse six The word “obeyed” is in the constative aorist in Greek which speaks of an action going on over a long period of time, looking at it in one single panoramic view. The whole tenor of Sarah’s life was one of obedience to her husband. She called him “lord.” The Greek word translated “lord” is kurios (kurio"), a word used in various ways. It is the word used in the LXX as the Greek equivalent of the august title of God “Jehovah.” The word was used as a title of the Roman emperors, the term carrying with it the implication of divinity which was ascribed to them. It is the word used for the name “Lord,” when it is applied to the Lord Jesus. It is the word which the Philippian jailer used when he said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” It is used in the sentence, “No man can keep on serving two masters” (Matt. 6:24). The word was used in secular Greek as a title of honor addressed by subordinates to their superiors, or as a courteous appellative in the case of persons closely related. In a petition to a Prefect we have, “I became very weak, my lord.” In another example we have, “I entreat you, sir, to hasten to me.” The designation is applied to near relatives, to a father, mother, brother, sister, son, and in one expression probably to a wife. The apostle John uses it in his second epistle which he writes to the “elect lady,” “lady” being the translation of the feminine form of the word. Sarah used it as a wifely courtesy to her husband, and as a recognition of his authority over her. The word “daughters” is in the Greek text here literally “children.” These wives, by adorning themselves as Sarah did, would become her children in the sense that a child is like its mother. They would resemble Sarah and follow her example. The words “as long as ye do well” are the translation of one Greek word which Peter uses and which could also be rendered, “if the whole course of your life is in the doing of good.” The Greek word translated “amazement” has in it the idea of “terror.” Alford suggests an interpretation of this difficult expression; “As long as the believing wives are doing good, they need not be afraid with any sudden terror of the account which their unbelieving husbands may exact from them.” Verse seven While the subject matter in this verse does not align itself with the contents of verses 1–6, we are including its interpretation and translation with our consideration of those verses, rather than make a separate heading for it. The word “likewise” goes back to 2:17 where exhortations are addressed generally to all the saints. In 2:18–25, Christian household slaves are addressed, in 3: l-6, Christian wives, and in 3:7, now, Christian husbands. Exhortations to a Christian manner of life are addressed only to the saints. God has no exhortations to the unsaved except to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. The word “dwell” is the translation of an old verb which referred to domestic association. The word “knowledge” here refers to an intelligent recognition of the marriage relation. The word “honor” is the translation of the same Greek word in 1:19 translated “precious.” Christian husbands are to deem the helpmeets which God has given them precious, and are to treat them with honor. The word “giving” is the rendering of a Greek word which means “to assign to, to portion off.” Husbands should keep a special place of honor in their hearts for their wives. They should treat them with special deference, courtesy, respect, and

kindness. The word “vessel” is the translation of a Greek word referring to a vessel used in the services of the temple (Mark 11:16), also to household utensils. The English word comes from a Latin word vasellum, the diminutive form of vas, a vase, the Latin words referring to a receptacle which covers and contains. Thus, the word comes to refer to an instrument whereby something is accomplished. It is used in the latter sense here. The word is used of Paul who is called “a chosen vessel” (Acts 9:15), a chosen instrument of God. The husband is to dwell with the wife, remembering that she is an instrument of God as well as the husband, a child of God to be used by Him to His glory. The husband must ever keep in mind that she is the weaker instrument of the two, not morally or intellectually, but physically. This attitude toward the wife on the part of the husband therefore includes loving consideration of the wife in view of the fact that she is not physically as strong as he is. The husband should pay due honor to the wife because she is a joint-heir together with him of the grace of life, eternal life, the gift of God. That is, he is ever to remember that Christ died for her as well as for him. Her soul is just as precious in the sight of God as his is. This admonition was especially needed at the time when this letter was written because of the low place in general which was accorded womanhood. History records the fact of the high place accorded womanhood in Macedonia, showing that the woman was not generally held in high esteem nor given that respect, reverence, and honor that her sex demands of the man. Christian husbands today will do well to heed this admonition. The husband is to pay her honor so that their prayers be not hindered. The word “hindered” in the Greek text means literally “to cut in, to interrupt.” Failure to give due honor to the wife will result in a cutting in on the efficacy of their united prayer times. Translation. (1) In like manner wives, put yourselves in subjection to your own husbands, in order that even though certain ones obstinately refuse to be persuaded by the Word and are therefore disobedient to it, they may through the manner of life of the wives, without a word, be gained, (2) having viewed attentively your pure manner of life which is accompanied by a reverential obedience; (3) whose adornment, let it not be that adornment which is from without and merely external, namely, an elaborate gathering of the hair into knots, and a lavish display of gold ornaments, or the donning of (worldly) apparel, (4) but let that adornment be the hidden personality, the heart, standing in as its condition and element, the incorruptible ornament of a meek and quiet disposition, which is in the sight of God very costly. (5) For thus formerly also the holy women, the ones whose hope is directed to and rests in God, were accustomed to adorn themselves, putting themselves in subjection to their own husbands, (6) as Sarah was wont to render obedience to Abraham, calling him lord, whose children (namely, Sarah’s) ye become if the whole course of your life is in the doing of good, and you are not fearing even one bit of terror. (7) Husbands, in like manner, let your domestic life with respect to them be governed by the dictates of knowledge, they being the weaker instrument, the feminine, holding in reserve for them particularly, honor as to those who are also fellow-inheritors with you of the grace of life, and this, in order that no (Satanic) inroads be made into your prayers.

13. THE BEHAVIOR OF THE PERSECUTED CHRISTIAN (3:8–17)

Verse eight The word “finally” does not indicate the conclusion of the letter, but the conclusion of the exhortations to the various classes. The exhortation, “be ye all of one mind,” literally “be ye all likeminded,” cannot be pressed to refer to minute details but refers to a unity on the major and important points of Christian doctrine and practice that should be maintained among members of the Body of Christ. The words “having compassion” are the translation of a Greek word from which we get our word “sympathy.” The word is made up of two Greek words, one word meaning “to be affected” by something, hence “to feel,” that is, to have feelings stirred up within one by some circumstance, the other word meaning “with.” The word means therefore, “to have a fellow-feeling.” It refers here to the interchange of fellow-feeling in either joy or sorrow. It is “rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep” (Rom. 12:15). The English word “sympathy” refers to the fellowfeeling we should have with those that suffer, and that is the secondary meaning of our Greek word. The primary meaning refers to a fellow-feeling with a brother Christian either in his joys or in his sorrows. It takes as much grace sometimes to rejoice with another saint in the way God has blessed him as it does to sympathize with someone who is in sadness. What a miserable thing this petty jealousy is among the saints. The words “love as brethren” are the translation of an adjective. The idea is, “Be loving brethren,” or “Be brethren who are loving.” The word here does not refer to the love that God produces in our hearts as one of the fruits of the Spirit. It is that human affection and fondness for one another as brother Christians which Peter spoke of in the first occurrence of the word “love” in 1:22. The word “pitiful” as used here is obsolete English. Today it refers to a person or circumstance that arouses pity in the heart. The translation should be, “full of pity.” The Greek word means “tenderhearted.” The first century was cold and hard-hearted. Christianity, with its tenderizing influence upon the heart, had not had time nor opportunity yet to make much of an impact upon the callous heart of man. Today we have as a result of its benign influence hospitals, homes for the aged, charities of one sort or another. And yet how callous our hearts are to another’s pain. Only the overflowing love of God and the experience of much suffering in one’s own life can fit us to really sympathize with others in the sense of feeling their pain ourselves, thus suffering with them. The word “courteous” is the translation of a Greek word which means “humbleminded, having a modest opinion of one’s self.” Verse nine “Rendering” is literally “giving back.” “For” is the translation of a preposition meaning “in exchange for.” “Blessing” is not a noun, but a participle, “be constantly blessing.” “Thereunto” is literally “into this,” that is, “for this very purpose.” Verse ten The word “will” is a present participle in the Greek speaking of an action going on in present time, literally, “he who is wishing or desiring to be loving life.” The idea is, “he who is loving life and wishes to continue to do so.” The word “refrain” is the translation of a word which speaks of a natural tendency towards that from which the abstention exhorted is to take place, literally, “Let him stop the tendency of his tongue from evil.” Verse eleven

The word “eschew” came originally from a Norman word “eschever” which means “to shun or avoid.” The Greek word means literally, “to lean out from.” The word here refers to the act of bending aside from one’s path at the approach of evil. The word “ensue” is obsolete. The Greek word means “to pursue.” Verse twelve The word “over” is literally “upon.” The eyes of the Lord are directed in a favorable sense for the good of those that are righteous. “Unto” is literally “into.” God’s ears are “into” the prayers of the righteous. What a picture of God bending down into the very prayers of His children, earnestly listening to their petitions, eager to answer them and come to the aid of those who pray. We have no far off deity to make propitious. We do not have to plead with God to make Him willing to answer our prayers. He is more desirous of answering them than we are to have them answered. Verse thirteen The word “and” is, “seeing that God takes such good care of the righteous,” who is he that will harm you? This question was asked in view of the persecution and suffering through which these saints were going. Peter tells them that as a result of their righteous lives and God’s care, their blessedness will be such as to turn off all the malice of their persecutors and make their suffering itself to be a joy. The word “followers” is the translation of a Greek word meaning “zealots.” The verb means “to burn with zeal, to desire earnestly.” Verse fourteen The words “but and if ye suffer” are in a construction in Greek which refers to a rare thing, a possible but not a probable happening. The idea is, “if matters in spite of the prophetic note of victory in verse 13 should come to actual suffering for righteousness’ sake.” Alford translates, “If ye chance to suffer.” The word “happy” is the translation of a Greek word which means “prosperous.” That is, the spiritual state of those who suffer persecution because of their righteous lives is prosperous, spiritually prosperous. The words “be not afraid of their terror” involve what is called a cognate accusative, where the idea in the object of the verb is the same as that in the verb. Literally it is: “Be not affected with fear by the fear which they strive to inspire in your heart.” The word “troubled” in the Greek means “to disturb, be agitated.” Verse fifteen The word “sanctify” is the translation of a Greek word meaning “to set apart.” It was used in the pagan Greek religions of the act of setting apart a building as a temple, thus designating it as religious in character, to be used for religious purposes. The word “God” is a rejected reading and “Christ” appears in the best texts. The exhortation is to set apart Christ as Lord in the heart. The word “Lord” is the translation of kurios (kurio"), here referring to Christ as the Jehovah of the Old Testament. The word “Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek word christos (cristo"), which in turn is the Greek translation of the Hebrew word meaning “The Anointed One,” which latter is a designation of the Jewish Messiah. Peter was exhorting these Jews to set apart their Messiah, the Lord Jesus, as Jehovah, Very God, in their hearts, giving first place to Him in obedience of life. The word kurios (kurio") also has the idea of “master” in it. Thus, the second Person of the Triune God was to be lord and master of their lives. He was to be their resource and

defender when persecution came. Not only were these Christian Jews to find a refuge in Christ Jesus as they set Him apart as Lord of their lives, but they were to be ready to give an answer to these persecutors who attacked them and the Word of God which they believed. The words “give an answer” are the translation of a Greek word used as a legal term in the courts. It means literally “to talk off from,” and was used of an attorney who talked his client off from a charge preferred against him. He presented a verbal defense. The exhortation is to Christians to talk the Bible off from the charges preferred against it, thus presenting for it a verbal defense. Today, Modernism has preferred charges against the Word of God, has placed it in the dungeons of the destructive critic’s inquisition, and has charged it with gross errors, and with being man-made. It is not allowed to speak for itself except through the prosecuting attorney, the destructive critic. But those who believe in a whole Bible, rather than a Bible full of holes, are admonished not to remain silent in the face of this attack by Modernism, but to defend the Bible against these false charges by presenting a verbal defense for it, refuting the statements of the destructive critic. Such a great classical Greek scholar as Professor John A. Scott, Ph.D., LL.D., in his excellent defense of the historical accuracy of the Gospels,1 writing in a context of the discovery of ancient manuscripts says, “So far as I know, not a single discovery has ever confirmed the conclusions of destructive criticism either in classical or biblical literature.” This defense of the Bible, Peter cautions us, must be conducted in a spirit of meekness and fear. The Christian apologist who defends the Faith once for all delivered to the saints, must not deal with the opposition in a high-handed, domineering way. He must follow in the footsteps of the One who said of Himself, “I am meek and lowly in heart.” He must defend the Faith with fear in his heart. “This fear is self-distrust; it is tenderness of conscience; it is vigilance against temptation; it is the fear which inspiration opposes to high-mindedness in the admonition, ‘be not highminded but fear.’ It is taking heed lest we fall; it is a constant apprehension of the deceitfulness of the heart, and of the insidiousness and power of inward corruption. It is the caution and circumspection which timidly shrinks from whatever would offend and dishonor God and the Saviour” (Wardlaw). Verse sixteen But in addition to meekness and fear, the defender of the Faith must have a good conscience. Vincent translates, “havmg a conscience good or unimpaired.” The words “that whereas they speak evil of you” can be rendered a little more accurately, “that in the matter in which ye are spoken against,” that is, in the matter of Christianity and one’s testimony to it by life and word, these critics of the Bible may be put to shame in that their misrepresentation of Christians and of Christianity will be shown to be wrong. The words “falsely accuse” are very strong in the Greek, namely, “to spitefully abuse, to insult, to traduce.” The words “good conversation” refer to the Christian behavior of the recipients of this letter, the word “conversation” having the meaning of “manner of life or behavior” when the a.v. was translated. Today of course it means “talk.” This behavior was in Christ in the sense that He was the center and the circumference of all their thoughts, words, and deeds. Verse seventeen Peter informs the recipients of this letter that it is better to suffer for doing good than to suffer for wrong-doing. The words, “if the will of God be so,” do not present a probability, but only a possibility in the Greek, “if perchance the will of God should so

will,” that is, for the Christian to suffer for doing well. Translation. (8) Now, to come to a conclusion. Be all of you like-minded. Have fellowfeeling for one another. Be brethren who are loving. Be tenderhearted. Be humbleminded, (9) not giving back evil in exchange for evil, or railing in exchange for railing, but instead on the contrary, be constantly blessing, since for this very purpose you were called, that you might inherit a blessing. (10) For he who desires to be loving life and to see good days, let him stop the natural tendency of his tongue towards evil, and the natural tendency of his lips to the end that they speak no craftiness, (11) but let him rather at once and once for all turn away from evil and let him do good. Let him seek peace and pursue it, (12) because the Lord’s eyes are directed in a favorable attitude towards the righteous, and His ears are inclined into their petitions, but the Lord’s face is against those who practice evil things. (13) And who is he that will do you evil if you become zealots of the good? (14) But if even you should perchance suffer for the sake of righteousness, (you are spiritually) prosperous ones. Moreover, do not be affected with fear by the fear which they strive to inspire in you, neither become agitated, (15) but set apart Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being those who are ready to present a verbal defense to everyone who asks you for a logical explanation concerning the hope which is in all of you, but doing this with meekness and fear, (16) having a conscience unimpaired, in order that in the very thing in which they defame you, they may be put to shame, those who spitefully abuse, insult, and traduce your good behavior which is in Christ; (17) for it is better when doing good, if perchance it be the will of God, that ye be suffering, rather than when doing evil.

14. THE REWARD OF SUFFERING FOR WELL DOING (3:18– 22) Verse eighteen Peter, in verse 17, stated that it was better to suffer for well-doing than for evil-doing. In verses 18–22 he shows that blessing always follows suffering for well-doing. He says that Christ also suffered for well-doing when He died on the Cross in order to make a way of salvation for sinful humanity (v. 18), that because He suffered for well-doing He was raised from the dead (v. 21) and given the place of glory and honor (v. 22). Paul presents the same idea in Philippians 2:5–11. When speaking of His death on the Cross in verse 18, and His resurrection and position of honor and glory in verses 21, 22, the inspired apostle also gives the reader some facts concerning our Lord between His death on the Cross and His resurrection from the tomb in verses 18b-20. Thus Peter encourages these Jewish Christians in their sufferings which they incurred by the doing of good, for Christ’s example made it clear to them that they also would receive blessing and reward for suffering when doing good. The word “for” is the translation of a Greek conjunction which means “because.” The resurrection of Christ and His consequent glorification in view of His suffering for sinners are presented as proof of the fact that suffering for welldoing on the part of Christians is also followed by blessing and reward in their lives. The word “suffered” is not in the best Greek texts, instead, the word “died.” However, the thought is not changed since Christ’s death involved suffering. Peter says that Christ’s death, thus His sufferings, were in relation to sin, and that the sufferings of these Christian

Jews were in relation to sin. His sufferings were vicarious. That is, He, the innocent One, died in behalf of the guilty. Our sufferings are not vicarious but merely a natural consequence upon our doing of the right. The words “just” and “unjust” are not preceded by the definite article in the Greek text, which is indicative of the fact that the writer is emphasizing quality or nature. The idea is, “a just Person in character in behalf of unjust persons in character.” Peter says that our Lord died in order that He might bring us to God. The word “God” is preceded by the article in the Greek, showing that the apostle is speaking here of God the Father. The word “bring” in the Greek text means literally “to lead to.” It was a technical word used of one who gained an audience at court for another. He brought his friend into the good graces of the reigning monarch. Just so, our Lord Jesus by dying on the Cross and paying for our sins, satisfied the just penalty of the broken law which we incurred by our disobedience, and removed for us that which barred our access to God. Thus as lost sinners receive Him as their Saviour, they are led into the presence of God the Father by God the Son, dressed in a righteousness, Christ Jesus Himself who brings us into the place of the unlimited favor of God. The word entree is the ideal word here which exactly reproduces the thought in the Greek. The Lord Jesus has provided for lost sinners an entree into the presence of God. Have you, dear reader, received Him as your Saviour, and as a consequence been led into the presence of the God of all grace? In the words, “being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit,” Peter introduces the facts which he wishes his readers to know concerning our Lord which took place between His death on the Cross (v.18) and His resurrection from the tomb (v. 21). The words, “being put to death,” are an aorist participle in the Greek text, speaking of a past fact, namely, “having been put to death.” The words, “in the flesh,” are the translation of one word in Greek, sarki (sarki), the word for flesh here referring to the physical body and human existence of our Lord. The dative case is used by the writer. The particular classification of the dative here is the dative of respect. That is, our Lord was put to death with respect to the flesh. The definite article is absent, its absence emphasizing character. The character of this death is in the apostle’s mind. The word “flesh” defines the word “death.” Peter was speaking of the physical death of our Lord on the Cross. The words, “but quickened by the Spirit,” are set in contrast to the words, “having been put to death with respect to the flesh.” The things set in contrast are first, the act of putting to death which is contrasted to the act of quickening, and second, the flesh which is contrasted to the Spirit. The word “quickened” is the translation of zoopoietheis (zoopoieqei"), which is made up of the word poieo (poieo) meaning “to make” and zoe (zoe), which means “alive.” The word does not mean “to energize,” but “to make alive.” The Greek word meaning “to energize” is energeo (ejnergeo). But to make something alive presupposes a condition of death. A living person may be energized, but only a dead person can be made alive. The opposite of death is life. We have therefore a contrast between two things, death and life, which are logical opposites of one another. In the same way, the words “flesh” and “Spirit” are contrasted and are logical opposites. The word translated “Spirit,” pneumati (pneumati), is in the same case and classification as the word for “flesh,” sarki. (sarki.) But the Holy Spirit is not a logical contrast to the human body of our Lord. It is the human spirit of our Lord that is set over against His human body. It is true that our Lord was raised from the dead by the power of the Holy Spirit, and that is taught by Paul in Romans 8:11. But Peter is not teaching that

truth here. He maintains the perfect contrast between our Lord’s human body and His human spirit. The translators of the a.v. have capitalized the word “spirit,” making it refer to the Holy Spirit. But the following considerations will show that they had no textual basis for doing so. In the first place, the three oldest and best manuscripts we have, the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus, fourth century, and the Alexandrinus of the fifth, are in capital letters entirely. The Chester Beatty manuscript, third century, does not contain the portion of Scripture we are studying. Eberhard Nestle in his text which is the resultant of a collation of three of the principal recensions of the Greek Testament appearing in the latter half of the nineteenth century, Tischendorf, 1869–1872, Westcott and Hort, 1881–1895, and Bernhard Weiss, 1894–1900, capitalizes the word “spirit” when the word is used to designate the third Person of the Triune God. But he has no manuscript evidence for doing this. With him it is a pure matter of interpretation. Every word of his Greek text which appeared in the originals is the inspired Word of God, but the capitalization is not inspired. The word “spirit” in I Peter 3:18 is not capitalized in Nestle’s text, which indicates that he thought that the word referred, not to the Holy Spirit but to the human spirit of the Lord Jesus. But this again is a textual critic’s interpretation. All of which goes to say that the present writer has a perfect right to write the word “spirit” in the passage in question without capitalization if he thinks that a careful exegesis of its context, based upon the rules of Greek grammar, warrants him in doing so. The problem is therefore purely one of interpretation and not at all of textual evidence. The translation reads, “having in fact been put to death with respect to the flesh, but made alive with respect to the spirit.” That preserves the balance in which the apostle contrasts the physical death of our Lord with the fact that His human spirit was made alive. But how are we to understand this latter? To make alive Christ’s human spirit presupposes the death of that human spirit. Our Lord on Calvary’s Cross cried, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matt. 27:46). The Greek word translated “forsaken” means “to abandon, desert, leave in straits, leave helpless, leave destitute, leave in the lurch, let one down.” The cry was addressed to the two other members of the Triune God. God the Father had abandoned and deserted Him. This is clearly seen by the fact that our Lord asks the question and also in that no answer to our Lord’s question comes from the Father. The fellowship had been broken. Our Lord’s prayer was unanswered. This unanswered prayer was predicted in type in Leviticus 5:11 where an offerer too poor to bring a blood offering could bring the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour, just enough to bake one day’s supply of bread, the giving up of the flour typifying the giving up of life, thus pointing to our Lord’s death. But he was forbidden to include frankincense with the flour. Frankincense is a type of answered prayer. Flour without frankincense speaks of our Lord’s death and His unanswered prayer. The sin of man had been laid on God the Son, and He was made a curse for us. The question, “Why hast thou left Me in straits, left Me helpless, destitute, in the lurch, why hast thou let Me down?” was also addressed to God the Holy Spirit. The same necessity which caused God the Father to abandon God the Son caused the Holy Spirit to do the same. Our Lord in His incarnation had a human body (Matt. 26:26), a human soul John 12:27), and a human spirit (Luke 23:46). That human spirit during our Lord’s earthly existence was energized by the Holy Spirit, with the result that every prayer our Lord uttered, every word He spoke, every miracle He performed, the sinless wonderful life He lived, was in dependence upon and in the energy of the Holy Spirit, so that He was able to offer Himself at the Cross without spot to become the sacrifice that God would accept as the atonement for sin (Heb. 9:14, “who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without

spot to God”). But now, in the hour of His direst need, the Holy Spirit left Him helpless and in the lurch. He abandoned the Son just as surely as did God the Father. This is predicted in type in Leviticus 5:11 where the offerer is forbidden to include oil in the flour. Oil is a type of the Holy Spirit. No oil in the flour speaks of the withdrawal of the Holy Spirit’s sustaining presence while our Lord was suffering on the Cross. He ceased keeping alive in divine life the human spirit of our Lord. That human spirit, sinless though it was and continued to be, was dead in that the life-giving power of the Holy Spirit ceased to energize it. Psalm 22 is thought with good reason to have been uttered on the Cross by our Lord. In verses 1–13, our Lord describes His heart sufferings, in verses 14–18, His physical sufferings. In verses 19–31 we have His prayer for resurrection. It was while our Lord was uttering the words found in verses 1–18 that His human spirit was devoid of the life-giving ministry of the Holy Spirit. And this latter was a matter of hours, for our Lord cried out to God in the day time, 9–12 o’clock in the morning, and in the night season, 12–3 in the afternoon, and God the Father would not hear Him. But then when He prayed that He might be raised from the dead, the Holy Spirit had already returned to make alive again His human spirit, for that prayer was answered. Sin had been paid for. The atonement was looked upon as complete. The fellowship between God the Father and God the Son was restored before the Son died on the Cross. This is what Peter has reference to when he says, “but made alive with reference to the spirit.” Verse nineteen The words “by which” in the Greek text are en hoi (ejn oiJ), a preposition and a relative pronoun, the latter either in the locative or the instrumental cases, since the preposition is used with both cases. The pronoun is either masculine or neuter, and there being a neuter noun “spirit” immediately preceding it, the word “which” according to the rules of Greek grammar, refers back to the word “spirit.” One could translate either “in which spirit,” or “by means of which spirit.” The word “went” is a translation of poreuomai (poreuomai), a word that is used of one travelling, going on a journey. The translation reads now, “in which (human) spirit having proceeded,” or, “by means of which human spirit having proceeded.” This speaks of our Lord in His disembodied state after He had spoken the words, “Into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Luke 23:46). His human body was laid in Joseph’s tomb, but He as the Man Christ Jesus, possessing His human soul and human spirit, departed this life. It is clear that our Lord as the Man Christ Jesus went to the place of the departed dead called in the Old Testament “sheol” and in the New Testament, “hell” (Acts 2:27), the word “hell” being the translation of the Greek word “Hades.”1 But Peter is not speaking of that here. Peter says “in which” or “by means of which (human) spirit also having proceeded, He preached unto the spirits in prison.” The word “also” speaks of the fact that it was in His human spirit as made alive by the Holy Spirit that our Lord proceeded. The question before us now is, “Who are these spirits?” They cannot be human beings, for a careful study of the Greek word “spirit” pneuma (pneuma) in the Greek New Testament will reveal the fact that in no place is the word used as a designation of a human being when the writer has in mind a human being considered as a free moral agent in a distinctive category or class of created beings. The word is used where a human being is said to have a spirit, referring to that part of a person which enables him to have Godconsciousness and which constitutes him a religious being (Luke 1:47). It is used of the disembodied state of human beings in the phrase, “the spirits of just men made perfect”

(Heb. 12:23). But in this latter phrase, it does not designate the human being as a class, distinct in the order of created beings, but speaks of the disembodied state of that human being. Our Lord in His glorified humanity is spoken of as “a quickening spirit” (I Cor. 15:45). This again refers not to Him as an individual but to His new position and condition resultant upon His resurrection. The context speaks of the natural body and the spiritual body, the body before death, and the resurrected body. It is the glorified state of our Lord which was in Paul’s mind as he wrote the words “a quickening spirit.” Observe with what meticulous care the inspired writer of the letter to the Hebrews uses the word pneuma (pneuma) in 12:23. He uses the word as a designation of angels in 1:7, 14. In 12:22 he uses the word “angels” when referring to the myriads of heavenly beings, and in connection with them he speaks of the saints in heaven in the words “spirits of just men made perfect.” He seems to feel that the word pneuma (pneuma) here needs some qualifying phrase to indicate to the reader that he is not referring to a created intelligence as such and considered as belonging to a distinct category, but to saints in heaven who were spirits only in the sense that they as human beings are temporarily without their physical bodies. It would seem therefore that if the word “spirits” pneuma (pneuma) in I Peter 3:18 referred to human beings in their disembodied state, the apostle Peter, inspired by the same Holy Spirit in His work of guiding the Bible writers as they wrote down in God-chosen words the truth of God, would have also qualified the word. The word pneuma (pneuma) is used as a designation of just two classes of free moral agents in the New Testament, of angels (Heb. 1:7, 14), and of demons (Matt. 8:16; Luke 10:17, 20), the word “devils” being the translation of daimonion (daimonion) in the a.v., but should be “demons,” the word “devil” being the correct translation of diabolos (diabolo"), a name of Satan.1 We must be careful to differentiate angels from demons. Acts 23:8, 9, is enough to show us that the Jews made a difference between them. One thing that clearly distinguishes them in the New Testament is the fact that demons take up their residence in the physical bodies of men and women, and have no rest until they do so (Matt. 12:43–45). This clearly infers that at one time they had physical bodies, and being deprived of them through some judgment of God, they try to satisfy their innate desire for a physical existence in that way. This is not true of angels. But are the spirits of our First Peter passage angels or demons? Peter tells us that these spirits were in prison. There are just two prisons in the unseen world where evil spirits are confined, Tartarus (II Peter 2:4, “hell” tartarosas (tartarosa")) where fallen angels are kept; and the Bottomless Pit (Rev. 9:1–12). When our Lord was about to cast out the demons from the maniac of Gadara, they besought Him not to cast them into the deep, the abusson (ajbusson) (Luke 8:31). The words “bottomless pit” of Revelation 9:1 are literally “the well of the abusson (ajbusson),” same Greek word as used in Luke 8:31, which fixes the Bottomless Pit as the prison house of demons. To which place did our Lord go and preach? Peter in his first epistle (3:19, 20) and in his second epistle (2:4, 5) links spirits and angels with the flood and states that they sinned at that time. The inference should be clear that he is referring to the same beings, for Hebrews uses the words “angels” and “spirits” as designating the same created beings, and Peter is just following the practice of other inspired writers. Our Lord therefore, between His death on the Cross and His resurrection from Joseph’s tomb, preached to the fallen angels in Tartarus. But what did He preach to them? The word translated “preached” here is kerusso (kerusso). The word was used in secular Greek of an official announcement or proclamation made by a representative of a

government. The word in itself does not indicate the content of the message. A qualifying phrase must be used for that purpose. In the New Testament, the word is used either with a qualifying phrase such as “the gospel” (Mark 16:15), or the contents of the proclamation are given as in Revelation 5:2, or it is used alone without the contents of the message being given as in Romans 10:15. Thus, one cannot say that our Lord preached the gospel to these fallen angels. There is a distinct word used in the Greek New Testament which means “to preach the gospel,” euaggelizomai (eujaggelizomai). In Luke 4:18 we have, “to preach the gospel to the poor,” where the words, “preach the gospel” are the translation of the one word euaggelizomai (eujaggelizomai). The word is made up of aggello (ajggello) “to bring a message,” and eu (euj) “well” or “good,” thus, “a message of good,” thus, “to bring good news.” The word “gospel” means “good news.” But this word is not used here. Our Lord made an official proclamation to these fallen angels. It was not the gospel. Angels are not included among those for whom Christ died. Hebrews 2:16 says, “For verily He took not hold of angels: but He took hold of the seed of Abraham.” In perfect righteousness, God in justice passed by fallen angels, and in infinite mercy, procured for fallen man a salvation at Calvary, purchased by His own precious blood (Acts 20:28). As to a suggestion regarding the possible content of the proclamation, that must await our treatment of the subject concerning the nature of the disobedience of these fallen angels. Verse twenty The sin of these angels was committed just previous to the flood. We have established the fact by a study of the usage of the word pneuma (pneuma), translated in 3:19 “spirits,” that Peter is referring here to angels. He states that they were disobedient at the time of the flood. In his second letter (2:4) he speaks of “angels that sinned,” and there is no good reason to think that he is referring to a different group of angels from that to which he has reference in 3:19 of his first letter. The connective “and” of 2:4 (second letter) associates the fact that God did not spare the fallen angels with the fact that He did not spare the antediluvian world but saved Noah, thus making clear that these angels are those mentioned in 3:19 of his first letter. These angels have been cast down to hell, the a.v. has it. The word “hell” is here the translation of the Greek word Tartarosas (Tartarosa"), the English spelling being “Tartarus.” In the Book of Enoch 22:2, Gehenna is said to be the place of dead apostate Jews, and Tartarus, of fallen angels. The Greek poet Homer uses the term “Hades” as the place for dead men, and “Tartarus,” a murky abyss beneath Hades, for fallen immortals. Peter uses the word in agreement with the Book of Enoch and with Greek mythology, because he is speaking of fallen angels, not men. Jude in verses 6 and 7 speaks of “the angels which kept not their first estate.” The words “first estate” are from the Greek word arche (ajrce) which speaks of office and dignity. The word means “the first in order of importance, honor, or position.” The word speaks here of the exalted position of angels in heaven, in contradistinction to the lower place occupied by the earth dwellers. This high position and condition, these angels left, which means that they descended to a lower position and condition. In doing that they sinned. Jude refers to the same angels of which Peter speaks. The Book of Enoch 12:4 uses arche (ajrce) of the Watchers (angels) who have abandoned the high heaven and the holy eternal place and have defiled themselves with women. After informing his readers that they have been reserved in everlasting chains under

darkness, the murky abyss designated “Tartarus” by Peter, Jude likens the sin of these angels to the sin of Sodom, Gomorrah, and the cities around them. The words “even as” are the translation of an adverb which means literally “like as, in the same manner as.” The sin of these angels was of the same character as that committed by the inhabitants of the cities mentioned in verse 7. The words “in like manner” of verse 7 cannot be construed with the words “and the cities about them,” thus confining the sin of fornication to Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities about them. The words “in like manner” do not present a likeness between Sodom and the cities about them. Expositor’s Greek Testament classifies the words “in like manner” as an adverbial accusative. This means that this phrase is to be construed with the verb translated “giving themselves over to fornication,” not with the words “and the cities about them.” Therefore the punctuation in the a.v. should be, “Even as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities about them, in like manner giving themselves over to fornication.” These words are so punctuated in the Greek text of Eberhard Nestle. Punctuation in the extant Greek manuscripts is not inspired. The punctuation of the textual critic is based upon the Greek grammar involved. This means that the comparison is between the angels of verse 6 and the cities of verse 7. This interpretation must be conclusive, all opinions to the contrary notwithstanding, for it is based upon the rules of Greek grammar. The sin in both cases is said to be fornication. We have the definite statement of Scripture therefore that the sin of the fallen angels was fornication. Expositor’s in commenting on this passage says, “Like them, the fallen angels.” Alford uses the phrase “in like manner to the angels.” This fornication was in character the “going after strange flesh.” The word “strange” is the translation of the Greek word heteros (eJtero") which means “another of a different kind.” In committing this sin of fornication, the angels transgressed the limits of their own kind and invaded the realm of another order of being. The sin of Sodom was the transgressing of the male beyond the limitations imposed by God (Rom. 1:27). Expositor’s says in the explanation of the phrase “going after strange flesh,” “In the case of angels the forbidden flesh (lit. ‘other than appointed by God’) refers to the intercourse with women, in the case of Sodom, to the departure from the natural use” (Rom. 1:27). Alford says of the same phrase, “It was a departure from the appointed course of nature and seeking after that which is unnatural, to other flesh than that appointed by God for the fulfillment of natural desire.” Justin Martyr speaks of the angels who violated the taxin (taxin) of women by intercourse with them. The word taxin (taxin) is used in the LXX when speaking of the priestly order (a.v.) of Melchisedec. The word “order” is used there to refer to a distinct class or kind of priesthood. Justin Martyr uses the word to speak of the distinct class in which women belong, that of the human race as distinct from angels as a class or order of being. He uses the word parabaino (parabaino) which means “to step beyond, to transgress” when describing the act of these angels in their act of fornication with these women. It was a mingling of two different orders of beings. These fallen angels and their sin of committing fornication with women of the human race is spoken of also in Genesis 6:1–4 in the words, “The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.” The expression “sons of God” is used in only three other places in the Old Testament, Job 1:6, 2:1, and 38:7. In the first two texts, Satan, a fallen angel, is said to have come also among the sons of God who presented themselves before the Lord, the clear inference being that the latter were also angels, although unfallen ones. In 38:7 the sons of God are said to

have shouted for joy when they saw the universe spring into existence. It should be clear that these are also angels. In every case the word “God” is Elohim (ÆElohim), the name of God as Creator. The book of Job is probably the oldest of the Bible books, having been written before the giving of the Mosaic law, for it would have been impossible in a discussion covering the whole field of sin, to avoid any reference to that law had it been known. If this is the case, then Moses was just following the terminology used by the inspired author of Job when speaking of angels as sons of God. In the expression “sons of the living God” of Hosea 1:10, the distinctive word for God is El (ÆEl), meaning “The Mighty One.” The fact that Paul and John both use the expression, “sons of God,” to designate believers in this age, has no bearing upon our discussion since Moses is not likely to have used New Testament terms. There is no good reason to doubt that Moses is referring to angels in our Genesis passage. This was the prevailing view of the passage in the ancient synagogue of the Jews. Josephus, Jewish historian of the first century, speaks of the sons of God of Genesis 6 as angels, and in such a way as to indicate that that was the commonly accepted interpretation in his day. It was the view held by Christian theologians for the first three or four centuries of the Church. Dr. James M. Gray in his book Spiritism and the Fallen Angels says, “There is reason to believe it would not have been changed in the latter case, had it not been for certain erroneous opinions and practices of Christendom.” One of these was angel worship which tended to remove everything that might shake confidence in the holiness of angels or mar the gratification which their worship afforded. The other was celibacy. To interpret the Genesis passage as referring to human “sons of God” instead of angelic “sons of God” would give an excuse for monkish transgressions occasioned by the fact that these celibates chafed at their self-imposed restrictions. It remains to suggest the possible purpose of Satan in this angelic inroad into the human race. Dr. Gray speaking of the term “sons of God” as used to designate angels says, “Moreover if it were so used, it would carry with it a confounding of two distinct orders of creatures and the production of a mixed race, partly human, partly super-human, which would be just such a derangement of the divine plan as to warrant that which occurred, namely, the almost total extermination of all who were upon the earth.” Now, connecting this with the fact that our Lord after His death on the Cross, went to Tartarus and made a proclamation to these fallen angels, we suggest that the probable purpose of the angelic apostasy so far as Satan was concerned was the derangement of the divine plan of the incarnation and substitutionary atonement of the Son of God, for if his purpose had succeeded, God would not have incarnated Himself in a race part angel and part man. The last Adam was to be God the Son come in a human incarnation to answer in His humanity to the humanity of the first Adam. The action of God in completely exterminating the race and saving Noah and his family prevented the spread of this unlawful mingling of angelic and human natures, and allowed the incarnation to take place. The proclamation was probably to the effect that, in the incarnation and the Cross, God had defeated the scheme of Satan to defeat His purpose. It would therefore be a proclamation of victory. For a complete treatment of this subject see Spiritism and the Fallen Angels by Dr. James M. Gray. The principal objection to the view that the fallen angels committed fornication with evil women of the human race is that an angel is altogether spiritual and immaterial, and that such a thing is therefore impossible. To meet this objection, Dr. Gray offers the following four points: First, that could not change the fact that the sons of God took wives

of the daughters of men, and that the phrase “sons of God” is used everywhere in the Old Testament of angels, not of men. He says: “Faith does not wait to learn the possibility of a thing before it believes it. It believes it on the evidence presented, assuming its possibility until the opposite is shown.” Second, no one is qualified to say just what angelic nature may be, because no one knows. Angels have appeared in human form and have partaken of food like human beings. Third, angels, even fallen angels, can work miracles, for instance, Satan assuming the body of a serpent in Eden. Angels do not possess creative powers, but they may be able to so combine existing elements as to form for themselves bodies like that of human beings. Fourth, human bodies have been possessed by demons who are spiritual intelligences similar to but not of the same category as angels. The large physical proportions, the superhuman strength, and evil dispositions of the offspring of the union between fallen angels and evil women, the giants, men of renown of Genesis 6:5, would be accounted for by the power thus imparted by the former. As to the interpretation which holds that the sons of God were the men of the righteous line of Seth, and the daughters of men, the women of the evil line of Cain, by what law of exegesis can that be sustained? It is pure eisegesis (reading into the text what is not there) to say that the words “daughters of men” refer to the women in the line of Cain. By what right can one limit the word “men” to a separate portion of the human race, when the word is race-wide in its significance, and then go a step further and single it out as a distinctive part of the human race, the Cainitic line? Then as to the term “sons of God.” In the New Testament, the word “son” huios (uiJo") is used as a designation of a child of God in this dispensation of grace. But Moses was unlikely to be using New Testament terms. And who would be prepared to say that all men of the line of Seth were saved and sons of God in that sense, and none of the men of the line of Cain? And the question might be asked as to whether godly men would enter into such marriages, and obtain a plurality of wives, and do so by exercising force? And would the union of the lines of Seth and Cain produce beings of superhuman character and strength? The interpretation falls by its own weight. Peter speaks of the ark “wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.” The words “were saved” are literally in the Greek, “were brought safely through.” The preposition “by” is from dia (dia), a preposition of intermediate agency. That is, the souls in the ark were brought safely through the time of the flood by the intermediate agency of water. While it is true that it was the ark that saved them, yet Peter is not teaching that here. He says the waters of the flood saved them. They buoyed up the ark above their own death-dealing powers and saved those inside the ark. The very waters that were death to the rest of the human race were life to the inmates of the ark. The former were drowned because they were not rightly related to the waters. The latter were saved because they were correctly adjusted to them. The righteousness of God that banishes forever from His presence those who reject it because they refuse to place their faith in the Saviour, saves and keeps saved forever those who accept it at the hands of the God who perfectly satisfied His just law which we broke, by stepping down from His judgment throne to take upon Himself our sin and penalty, thus satisfying His justice and making possible the righteous bestowal of His mercy. Dear reader, what is your relationship to this righteousness? Are you trusting in your own righteousness which according to Isaiah 64:6 is filthy rags in God’s sight, or are you standing in a perfect righteousness, Jesus Christ Himself, through faith in His Blood?

Verse twenty-one The words “the like figure” are in the Greek ho antitupon (oJ ajntitupon). The question as to whether the word “figure” refers back to the word “ark” or the word “water,” is easily settled by the Greek grammar involved in this expression, for the relative pronoun ho (oJ) is neuter, the word “ark” is feminine, and the word “water” neuter. The relative pronoun agrees with its antecedent in gender. Therefore the word “figure” which is neuter and construed grammatically with the pronoun ho (oJ) goes back to the word “water.” The word “figure” is the translation of antitupon (ajntitupon) which means “the counterpart of reality.” The Greek word “baptism” is in apposition with the word “figure.” Our translation so far reads, “Which (water) also (as a) counterpart now saves you, (namely) baptism.” Water baptism is clearly in the apostle’s mind, not the baptism by the Holy Spirit, for he speaks of the waters of the flood as saving the inmates of the ark, and in this verse, of baptism saving believers. But he says that it saves them only as a counterpart. That is, water baptism is the counterpart of the reality, salvation. It can only save as a counterpart, not actually. The Old Testament sacrifices were counterparts of the reality, the Lord Jesus. They did not actually save the believer, only in type. It is not argued here that these sacrifices are analagous to Christian water baptism. The author is merely using them as an illustration of the use of the word “counterpart.” So water baptism only saves the believer in type. The Old Testament Jew was saved before he brought the offering. That offering was only his outward testimony that he was placing his faith in the Lamb of God of whom these sacrifices were a type. The moment he conceived in his heart that he would bring his offering to the Tabernacle, his faith leaped the centuries to the time when God would offer the Sacrifice that would pay for his sin. Our Lord said, “Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad” (John 8:56). The act of bringing the sacrifice was his outward expression and testimony of his inward faith. Water baptism is the outward testimony of the believer’s inward faith. The person is saved the moment he places his faith in the Lord Jesus. Water baptism is his visible testimony to his faith and the salvation he was given in answer to that faith. Peter is careful to inform his readers that he is not teaching baptismal regeneration, namely, that a person who submits to baptism is thereby regenerated, for he says, “not the putting away of the filth of the flesh.” Baptism, Peter explains, does not wash away the filth of the flesh, either in a literal sense as a bath for the body, nor in a metaphorical sense as a cleansing for the soul. No ceremonies really affect the conscience. But he defines what he means by salvation, in the words “the answer of a good conscience toward God,” and he explains how this is accomplished, namely “by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” in that the believing sinner is identified with Him in that resurrection. Translation. (18) Because Christ also died once for all in relation to sins, a just One on behalf of unjust ones, in order that He might provide you with an entree into the presence of God, having in fact been put to death with respect to the flesh, but made alive with respect to the spirit, (19) in which (human spirit) also proceeding, He made proclamation to the spirits in prison (20) who were at one time rebels when the long-suffering of God waited out to the end in the days of Noah while the ark was being made ready; in which eight souls were brought safely through by means of the intermediate agency of water, (21) which (water) as a counterpart now saves you, (namely) baptism; not a putting off of filth of flesh, but the witness of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (22) who is at the right hand of God, having proceeded into heaven, there

having been made subject to Him, angels, and authorities, and powers.

15. SUFFERING FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS’ SAKE, THE ACCOMPANIMENT OF A SEPARATED LIFE (4:1–11) Verse one In 3:18–22 Peter spoke of the sufferings of the Lord Jesus and of His example of patience and submissiveness under unjust treatment. Now, he exhorts the saints to arm themselves with the same mind that Christ had regarding unjust punishment. Our Lord’s attitude toward unjust suffering is found in the words, “It is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing, than for evil doing” (3:17). The Greek word translated “arm yourselves” was used of a Greek soldier putting on his armor and taking his weapons. The noun of the same root was used of a heavy-armed foot-soldier who carried a pike and a large shield. The word was used of heavy-armed as against light-armed troops. Peter could have used the latter word. The Holy Spirit selected the former. The Christian needs the heaviest armor he can get, to withstand the attacks of the enemy of his soul. To have the same attitude toward unjust suffering that the Lord Jesus had, will cause us to react toward this suffering as He did. The words “suffered in the flesh” are in the same construction as the similar phrase “being put to death in the flesh” (3:18). In the latter expression we found that Peter was speaking of the fact that our Lord was put to death with respect to the flesh, thus suffering with respect to the flesh. This suffering was the result of unjust treatment. The same holds true in 4:1 where the Christian who has suffered in the flesh is the Christian who has suffered ill-treatment from the persecuting world of sinners. The fact that he has been persecuted is an indication of another fact, namely, that he has ceased from sin. The world directs its persecution against those who are living lives of obedience to God, thus those who have ceased from sin. The verb is passive. Literally, the Christian “hath got release” from sin. God broke the power of sin in his life when He saved him. Thus our reaction to unjust suffering should be that of a saint, not a sinner, since we have in salvation been released from sin’s compelling power. Verse two In this verse, the apostle tells his readers why God breaks the power of the sinful nature at the moment the Christian is saved. It is in order that he should no longer live the rest of his earthly life in the sphere of the cravings (lusts) of men, but live in the sphere of the will of God. The word “lust” in Greek speaks of any strong craving, here, an evil craving. Verse three The word “past” describing “time is in the Greek the perfect participle of a verb meaning “to pass by, to go past.” The tense used implies that the course is closed and done, and looked back upon as a standing and accomplished fact. Thus should a Christian view his life previous to salvation, namely, as a closed matter. He died with Christ, and has been raised to newness of life. Old things have passed away. All things have become new. The old habits, associates, practices, places, amusements, everything of the old life which is not in accord with the Word of God should be taboo in the new life he is now living as a

Christian. The word “suffice” is in the Greek, “sufficient.” That is, Peter argues that there was sufficient time before salvation for the unsaved to go the limit in sin. The word “wrought” means in the Greek “to work out to the end.” “Will” is literally, “desire, inclination, counsel,” the advice of the world. Then the apostle enumerates some of the sins which were part of that world out from which they were separated. “Lasciviousness” is the translation of a word which refers to actions that excite disgust and shock public decency. In the New Testament, the prominent idea in the word is that of sensuality. The Greek word translated “lusts” is not limited to the sense of a sexual desire, but has the unrestricted sense of a passionate desire, here a sinful one, as the context indicates. The words “excess of wine” are the translation of a Greek word made of two words, “wine” and “to bubble up or overflow.” “Revellings” is the translation of a word which meant at first, “a village merrymaking.” Then it came to mean “a carousal” such as a party of revellers parading the streets, or revels held in religious ceremonies, wild, furious. and ecstatic. “Banquetings” is from a Greek word speaking of drinking bouts possibly held in connection with pagan religious rites such as Paul speaks of in I Corinthians 10:14 where he forbids Christians to drink the cup of demons. The Greek word translated “abominable” means “contrary to law and justice, illicit, criminal.” These idolatries were forbidden by Roman law. They must have been pretty bad. Verse four The word “run” literally means “to run in company with” others. It means here “to run in a troop with others like a band of revellers.” The word “excess” is the translation of a Greek word meaning literally “a pouring forth or an overflowing.” It was used in classical Greek of the tides which fill the hollows. Alford translates it by the word “slough,” a state of moral degradation or spiritual dejection into which one sinks or from which one cannot free one’s self. The word “riot” in the Greek text is seen in its classic New Testament usage in Luke 15:13 where the prodigal son squanders his substance with riotous (same word) living. The word is made up of the Greek word meaning “to save” and Alpha privative which makes it mean “not save,” and when used as a descriptive word for an individual, speaks of him as being “an abandoned man, an incorrigible,” and when used to describe a manner of life, it speaks of “an abandoned dissolute life, profligacy, prodigality.” The words “think it strange” do not have the idea in the Greek of thinking something odd or unusual, but of thinking something to be foreign in nature to something else. The people of the world, the former associates of these Christians to whom Peter is writing, thought it a thing foreign to the natures of these Christians when they did not run any more in a troop like a band of revellers with them in the same slough of dissoluteness. They did not realize that their totally depraved nature which before salvation had given them a love for sinful things, now had its power over them broken, and that another nature, the divine nature, had been given them as their new motivating principle of life which caused them to hate the things they once loved and love the things they once hated. Verse five The English translation does not make it clear whether the word “who” refers back to the unsaved or to the saved in verse 4. Here is where Greek grammar is an invaluable and accurate help. The word “who” is in apposition with the participle translated “speaking evil,” and refers to the people of the world who shall give an account to God who is holding Himself in readiness (Greek) to judge the living (”quick” obsolete English for

“living”) and the dead. Verse six The key to the understanding of this difficult verse is found in the context of the entire book. In 1:6, 7 we are told that the recipients are in heaviness in the midst of manifold trials. In 2:18–25 we have the case of Christian household slaves being unjustly punished because of their Christian testimony. In 3:8–17 the saints are instructed as to their behavior when undergoing persecution. In 4:12–19 the apostle deals with the glory of suffering for righteousness’ sake. He speaks of this persecution of the saints by the world as a judgment that begins at the house of God, the Church (4:17). In 4:1–11 he speaks of the necessity of having the mind of Christ as armored protection against the persecution of the world. Thus the phrase “judged according to men,” refers to the judgment spoken of in 4:17 which is defined as to its nature by the words in verse 14, “If ye be reproached for the name of Christ.” The words “them that are dead,” refer to Christian believers who had died. The gospel had been preached to them and they had become Christians. As a result of this they had been judged according to men while they were on earth. This judgment was in the form of persecution because of their Christian testimony. The word translated “according to” means literally “down,” and speaks of domination. This judgment was in the hands of men and was administered by them. The words “in the flesh” are to be construed with “might be judged,” for they balance up the words “in the spirit” which clearly are to be understood with “live.” We have here the dative of respect. These Christians were judged with respect to the flesh, that is, with respect to their earthly existence in the body. The natural result of accepting the gospel would be the living of a Christian life, and the natural result of that would be persecution. But these Christians died, many of them as martyrs. Now, in heaven they were living according to the Word of God with respect to their spirits, their human spirits. They in their disembodied state were serving the Lord in the future life. Verse seven The word translated “of all things” is first in the sentence, and thus in the emphatic position. “Of all things the end is at hand.” “Be ye sober,” is literally, “Be ye of sound mind.” Sobriety of mind is in view here. “Watch” is the translation of a Greek word meaning “to be calm and collected in spirit.” “Unto” is in the Greek literally, “with a view to.” Tyndale translates, “That ye may be apt to.” That is, a calm and collected spirit is conducive to the act of praying. It results in prayer. The Christian who is always on a tear, whose mind is crowded with fears and worries, who is never at rest in his heart, does not do much praying. Verse eight The word “charity” is the translation of the Greek word speaking of God’s love (John 3:16), the love produced in our hearts by the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5; Gal. 5:22). The word today refers to the act of alleviating the necessities of the poor. The Greek word has no such idea in it. The Greek word here translated “fervent” means literally “stretched out.” The idea is that of a love that is extended to reach the one loved. It is the act of one who, instead of living a self-centered life, gives of himself to others. The word means here, “intent, earnest, assiduous.” “Have among yourselves” is literally “having (love) toward one another.”

The words “above all” are more properly “before all in order of importance.” That is, love is a prerequisite to all proper exercises of Christian duty. Courtesy without love is a cold thing. Generosity without love is a harsh thing. Love makes all the other virtues what they should be. The reason for this exhortation to love one another is that love covers a multitude of sins. That is, when one Christian truly loves his fellow Christian, he will not publish abroad his failings, but will cover them up from the sight of others. How much gossip is eliminated when we love each other. Verse nine The word “hospitality” is the translation of a Greek word meaning literally “friendly to strangers.” Thus the thought in the mind of the apostle is not that of hospitality shown to one’s friends who do not need it, but to Christians who in their travels for the Lord Jesus, or for whatever other reason, may be in need of food and shelter. The persecutions which some of these Christians were enduring deprived them often of the necessities of life, and such an exhortation as this was needed. Verse ten “As” is in the Greek text “in whatever quality or quantity.” The word “gift” here is not the usual Greek word, but one that refers to the special spiritual enablements given graciously to certain Christians as an aid in the discharge of the special duties to which God has called them, as in I Corinthians 12 and 13. The word “stewards” is literally “one who governs a household.” It speaks of the responsibility of the proper use and disposition of something entrusted to one’s care. Verse eleven The Greek word “oracles” was used in classical Greek of the oracular utterances of heathen deities. In the Christian system it refers to divine utterances or revelations. Translation. (1) Therefore, in view of the fact that Christ suffered with respect to the flesh, you also yourselves put on as armor the same mind, because the one who has suffered with respect to the flesh has gotten release from sin, (2) with a view to his not living the rest of his time while in his physical body in the sphere of the cravings of men, but in the sphere of the will of God. (3) For adequate has been the time that is now past and done with, for you to have carried to its ultimate conclusion the counsel of the Gentiles, walking as you have done in disgusting sensualities, in cravings, in wineguzzlings, in carousals, in drinking bouts, and in unlawful idolatries, (4) in which they think it a thing alien to you that you do not run in a troop like a band of revellers with them in the same slough of dissoluteness, speaking evil of you, (5) who (namely, the people of the world) shall give an account to the One who is holding Himself in readiness to judge the living and the dead. (6) For, for this purpose also to the dead was the good new’s preached, in order that they might be judged by men with respect to their physical existence, but live according to God with respect to their spirit existence. (7) But of all things the end has come near. Be of sound mind therefore, and be calm and collected in spirit with a view to (your giving yourselves to) prayer; (8) before all things in order of importance, having fervent love among yourselves, because love hides a multitude of sins. (9) Show hospitality to one another without murmuring. (10) In whatever quality or quantity each one has received a gift, be ministering it among yourselves as good stewards of the variegated grace of God. (11) If anyone speaks, as utterances of God let them be. If anyone ministers, let him minister as out of the strength which God supplies,

in order that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, in whom there is the glory and the power forever and ever. Amen.

16. THE GLORY OF CHRISTIAN SUFFERING (4:12–19) Verse twelve The word “beloved” is in the Greek, “beloved ones.” The word is the Greek word which speaks of God’s divine and infinite love. We could translate, “divinely loved ones:” Peter uses this word as a descriptive title, reminding the recipients of this letter who were going through much suffering because of persecution, that they were loved with all the love in the heart of God. What a sweet pillow upon which to rest our weary hearts, just to know that our Father loves us. It helps one endure the heartaches and pains of life. The words “think it not strange,” are literally “stop thinking it a thing alien” to you. These Christians were thinking that the suffering which they were enduring was a thing foreign or alien to their Christian lives, as if Christianity provided an immunity from suffering. They are exhorted by Peter to think it a natural and expected thing that such suffering for righteousness’ sake would come in view of the world’s hatred of Christ, and therefore to one who bears His name and reflects Him in his life. Peter speaks of these sufferings as a fiery trial. The words “fiery trial,” are the rendering of a word used also in the Greek translation of the Old Testament in Proverbs 27:21, which word in the a.v. is rendered “a furnace,” referring to a smelting furnace where gold is refined. The same word is found in Ps. 66:10 which Vincent translates, “Thou, O God, has proved us: thou hast smelted us, as silver is smelted.” The word means literally “a burning,” but is used in these passages to refer to a smelting furnace and the smelting process in which gold or silver ore is purified. These sufferings which the recipients of this letter were undergoing constituted the smelting furnace in which their lives were being purified. The words “strange thing” are the translation of a Greek word referring to something alien or foreign in nature. The word “happened” is in the Greek literally “to go together,” thus “to happen.” But nothing just happens in the life of a Christian. Even this suffering for righteousness’ sake is all within His plan. It is used of God to purify our lives from sin. Verse thirteen Instead of thinking it a thing alien to them, they are exhorted not only to expect such suffering, but to rejoice in the fact that they can be partakers of Christ’s sufferings. The word “inasmuch” is rather “in so far as.” That is, the Christian has no cause for rejoicing because of suffering that is brought on because of his own misdoing. But in so far as suffering is the result of doing well, he has cause for rejoicing. His rejoicing arises from the fact that he shares in common with Christ in suffering for righteousness’ sake. These sufferings of Christ which we share in common with Him are not His expiatory sufferings on the Cross, but His sufferings for righteousness’ sake while enduring the opposition of sinners previous to the Cross. Paul speaks of the same things in Colossians 1:24. Verse fourteen In the word “reproached,” we have an indication of the character of these sufferings. It was reproach which the world was casting in the teeth of the Christians. Christian

suffering in this epistle is limited in its primary application and reference to suffering which is the result of persecution by the world because of one’s testimony for the Lord Jesus. A secondary application may be made in the sense that suffering in general, acts as a purifying agency in the life of the Christian when the latter reacts toward it in a meek and submissive way. The Greek word “reproach” is found in Matthew 5:11 where it is translated “revile.” The word “if” is the “if” of a fulfilled condition. It could be translated “in view of the fact,” or “since.” These Christians were being reproached for the name of Christ. This was no hypothetical case. The apostle says that in view of the fact that they are being reproached, they are happy. The word “happy” is the translation of a Greek word which means “prosperous.” It is used in Matthew 5:3–11, where it is translated “blessed.” It refers in these contexts to a spiritually prosperous state or condition of the believer. That is, if the world persecutes a Christian, that is an indication of the spiritual prosperity of his life. The world does not persecute a worldly Christian, only a spiritual one. It is spirituality that rubs its fur the wrong way. But not only is the fact of persecution an indication of a spiritually prosperous life, but also of the fact that the Holy Spirit is resting upon the Christian. The words “rest upon” are the translation of a Greek word used in a manuscript of 103 b.c. as a technical term in agriculture. The writer speaks of a farmer resting his land by sowing light crops upon it. He relieved the land of the necessity of producing heavy crops, and thus gave it an opportunity to recuperate its strength. The word is used in Matthew 11:28 where our Lord says, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest,” literally, “and I will rest you.” Here our Lord causes the sinner who comes to Him to cease from his own efforts at carrying his load of guilt and suffering, taking it upon Himself, allowing the believer in his new life powers to function as a child of God. In our First Peter passage, the Holy Spirit rests and refreshes the believer in the sense that He takes over the saint’s battle with sin and the heretofore futile effort at living a life pleasing to God, by giving him victory over the evil nature whose power was broken the moment God saved him, and by producing in his life His own fruit. The Spirit of the Glory, even the Spirit of God, is resting with refreshing power upon the child of God, causing him to live a life which pleases God and toward which the world hurls its venom and hate. The words “on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified,” while true, do not appear in the best Greek texts, and are not therefore thought to be part of the original manuscript that left the hands of Peter. We have therefore not included them in the translation. Verse fifteen The word “suffer” must be taken in its context to mean “suffer reproach.” The form of the original forbids the continuance of an action already going on. Some of the recipients of this letter, before they were saved, had suffered reproach as murderers, thieves, evildoers, and busybodies. Peter admonishes them to let these sins be a thing of the past. What a life many of these had been saved out of. The word “busybody” means in the Greek, “a self-appointed overseer in other men’s matters.” Verse sixteen The words, “Yet if any man suffer as a Christian” should be understood in their historical background. The Cult of the Caesar was the state religion of the Roman empire, in which the emperor was worshipped as a god. It served two purposes. The subjects of

Rome gave obedience to the laws of the empire, not only as a political, but as a religious duty. It also constituted the unifying factor which bound the many different peoples of the empire into one, and made the military task of holding together its far-flung domain an easier one. The Greek word for Caesar is Kaisar (Kaisar). Those who worshipped the Kaisar (Kaisar) were called Kaisarianos (Kaisariano"). Christianity appeared as a rival claimant to world worship and dominion. The Lord Jesus, the Messiah of Israel, was looked upon in the Christian Church as the One who would some day come back and take the government of the world upon His shoulder. Those who worshipped Him as God were called Christianos (Cristiano"), worshippers of the Christ as against the Kaisarianos (Kaisariano"), worshippers of the Caesar. Rome saw that the imperialism of Christianity was challenging the imperialism of the Caesars, and that it was by its propagation, striking at the very vitals of the empire.1 It answered this by the ten bloody persecutions. It meant and cost something to be a Christianos (Cristiano") in those days. The members of the Imperial Cult looked down upon and persecuted the members of the Body of Christ. That is what Peter means when he says, “Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed.” He remembered that awful night when he cowered before the might of Rome and denied his Lord. But Peter the Rock-Man would never do such a thing now. He died a martyr on a Roman cross (John 21:18, 19), tradition tells us, head down, for he would not be crucified as his Lord was. Verse seventeen The judgment is the persecution which these saints were undergoing, a disciplinary judgment designed to purify their lives. The word “at” is literally “from.” That is, the starting place of the judgment is the Church, and from there as a starting point, the judgment goes on its way to the unsaved. Verse eighteen The word “scarcely” is the translation of a Greek word that means literally “with difficulty.” The word is used in Acts 14:18 where Paul experienced difficulty in restraining the people at Lystra from sacrificing to him as a god. The context in First Peter speaks of the persecutions which were allowed to come by God as a disciplinary judgment, the purpose of which was to purify their lives. They were being saved with difficulty in the sense that if it was necessary for God to purify the lives of saints by these drastic means, namely, persecution and suffering, what can one say as to the position of the unsaved in relation to God? If the righteous need disciplinary judgments, how much more will the unrighteous merit the wrath of God whose offer of righteousness they have rejected. Verse nineteen The Greek word “commit” is a banking term meaning “to give in charge as a deposit.” Peter exhorts believers who are undergoing persecutions, that in view of the fact that these are allowed to come by God and are designed to purify their lives, they have every reason to trust Him to take care of them through all of their sufferings. Translation. (12) Divinely loved ones, stop thinking that the smelting process which is (operating) among you and which has come to you for the purpose of testing (you), is a thing alien to you, (13) but insofar as you share in common with the sufferings of Christ, be rejoicing, in order that also at the time of the unveiling of His glory, you may rejoice exultingly. (14) In view of the fact that you have cast in your teeth as it were, revilings because of the name of Christ, (spiritually) prosperous (are you), because the Spirit of

the Glory, even the Spirit of God is resting with refreshing power upon you. (15) Now, let no one of you continue to be suffering (reproach) as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a self-appointed overseer in other men’s matters. (16) But if he suffer (reproach) as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God because of this name, (17) for the time is now, of the judgment beginning at the house of God. But if it start first with us, what shall be the end of those who are not obeying the gospel of God? (18) And if he who is righteous is with difficulty being saved, he that is both impious and a sinner, where shall he appear? (19) Ther4ore, also let those who are suffering according to the will of God, commit the safekeeping of their souls by a continuance in the doing of good, to a faithful Creator.

17. THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF ELDERS (5:1–5a) Verse one The Greek word “elder” was used as a designation of a man advanced in years. It became one of the official designations of an officer in a local church who in other places is called an overseer or a bishop (Acts 20:17, 28; I Tim. 3:2), and whose duty it was to exercise spiritual oversight and authority over its members. The Greek for “who am also an elder” could also be rendered “who am a fellow-elder,” which is decisive against the primacy of Peter. Peter neither claimed nor assumed any higher position than that of an ordinary elder in the Church. The word “witness” is the translation of the Greek word from which we get our word “martyr.” It does not refer to the act of seeing, but to the act of testifying to what one has seen. Peter is not merely claiming to have seen the crucifixion, but to have been retained to give testimony concerning what he had seen. In II Peter 1:16, the apostle uses another word which is translated “eyewitnesses.” There he refers to the fact of his having seen the incidents in our Lord’s life. But in 5:1 he speaks of himself as an official witness called to testify by God. Verse two The word “feed” is the translation of a Greek word which literally means “to shepherd,” and includes the duties of a shepherd, tending, feeding, guiding, and guarding the flock of God. The noun form of the word is translated “pastors” in Ephesians 4:11. The word “oversight” is the translation of the same Greek word in another form which is other places is rendered by the words “overseer,” or “bishop,” referring to the spiritual care of the flock. The words “filthy lucre” are literally in the Greek text “base or dishonorable gain.” The pastor is not to commercialize his ministry. Verse three The words “being lords over” in the Greek text speak of a high-handed autocratic rule over the flock, which is forbidden a true shepherd. One could translate, “lording it over.” However, this does not do away with a God-ordained, properly exercised authority which should be administered in the local church by the pastor and the elders. Paul speaks of this in I Thessalonians 5:12 and I Timothy 5:17, using another Greek word. The word “heritage” is the translation of a word meaning “a lot” as in the words, “gave forth their lots” (Acts 1:26). Here it refers to the lots or charges given the elders. Alford translates, “the portions entrusted to you.” It is interesting to note that our word “cleric” comes from

this Greek word, and that the latter was contracted to “clerk,” which in ecclesiastical writings referred to a pastor of a church. Instead of lording it over those portions of God’s flock assigned to them, these local pastors are exhorted to be an ensample to the entire flock. The word translated “ensample” means “a print left as an impression after a blow has been struck, a pattern or model of something else.” Under-shepherds should be living patterns or models of the Chief Shepherd, the Lord Jesus. Verse four The Greek word translated “crown” referred to a crown of victory in the Greek athletic games, a crown given for military valor, or a festal garland worn at marriage feasts.1 Here it is the reward given to faithful shepherds of the flock of God. “Fadeth” is a participle in the Greek describing this crown. The word in its noun form was the name of a flower that did not wither or fade, and which when picked, revived in water. The crown given to victors in either athletics or war was made of oak or ivy leaves, the festal garlands of the marriage feast, of flowers. These would wither and fade. But the victor’s crown which the Lord Jesus will give His faithful under-shepherds will never wither or fade. What form this reward will take, is not stated. Paul says that his crown of rejoicing at the coming of the Lord Jesus for His Church will be made of the souls he won (I Thess. 2:19). Verse five a The word “younger” is in this context not to be interpreted primarily as referring to the younger element in the church as composed merely of individuals, but as organized into guilds or associations. Inscriptions speak of youth organizations in the Greek cities of Asia Minor. The idea could easily have been taken over into the local church. The word “elders” in this context does not refer to the older men as a class, but to the elders of the local church as a group. It would seem therefore that the word “younger” would refer, not to the younger element as such, but to organizations composed of younger people. These organizations are exhorted to be in obedience to the elders of the church. Translation. (1) Elders therefore who are among you, I exhort, I who am your fellowelder, and one who saw the sufferings of Christ and who has been retained as a witness to bear testimony concerning them, who also am a fellow-partaker of the glory which is about to be unveiled; (2) shepherd the flock of God among you, doing so not by reason of constraint put upon you, but willingly according to God; nor yet as lording it in a highhanded manner over the portions of the flock assigned to you, but as becoming patterns for the flock.(4) And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you shall receive the conqueror’s unfading crown of glory. (5) Likewise, younger ones, be in subjection to the elders.

18. CHRISTIAN HUMILITY, A SAFEGUARD AGAINST SATAN AND A SOURCE OF STRENGTH IN SUFFERING (5:5b-14) Verse five b The subject of humility begins with the second sentence of verse five. The words “be subject to” are not in the best Greek texts. We have left them out of the fuller translation. “Be clothed with” is the translation of a word which speaks of the act of tying or tucking

up the long outer garments of the oriental around the waist as a roll or band or girth. It refers to the same action as Peter mentions in 1:13 where he says, “Gird up the loins of your mind.” The word in its noun form referred to a slave’s apron under which the loose outer garments were gathered. The exhortation is to put on humility as a working virtue which would make all the other virtues what they should be, thus workable in the Christian scheme of things. The other virtues such as kindness, generosity, justice, goodness, longsuffering, when saturated with humility, are most acceptable and praiseworthy, but when seen in a proud person, are like clanging brass or a tinkling cymbal. The word “resisteth” in the Greek is a military term, used of an army drawn up for battle. Pride calls out God’s armies. God sets Himself in array against the proud person. The word “proud” is the translation of a Greek word which means literally “to show above,” and thus describes the proud person as one who shows himself above others. The word “humble” is the translation of the Greek word rendered “lowly” in Matthew 11:29, where it describes our Lord’s character. The word is found in an early secular document where it speaks of the Nile River in its low stage in the words, “It runs low.” The word means “not rising far from the ground.” It describes the Christian who follows in the humble and lowly steps of his Lord. Verse six The verb translated “humble yourselves” is not in the aorist middle but the passive voice, which means that the subject of the verb is passive in the hands of God and is acted upon by Him. The exhortation is, “Be humbled,” or “Suffer yourselves to be humbled.” The humbling process which God was using was the persecution and suffering through which these Christians were passing. Peter exhorts these believers to react towards these in a God-honoring way, to be submissive to the discipline which God was using to make them more humble. But with this exhortation comes also a note of comfort and hope in that the presence of humility in the life of a Christian is the prerequisite that God demands before He will exalt that Christian to a high place of privilege and honor in His service. As someone has said, “He must take a low place before God, who would take a high place before men.” Verse seven Then comes an exhortation to cast all our care upon Him. The command is directly and vitally related to the context. These Christians were undergoing such persecution that the circumstances in which they found themselves gave abundant opportunity for that sin called worry. The apostle exhorts them that while this humbling process is going on, they should cast all their care upon God. The word “care” is the translation of a Greek word which means “anxiety” or “worry.” The word “all” in the Greek text has the idea, not of every worry that comes along, but the whole of their worries. They are to cast upon God the whole of their worries, that is, come to the place where they resolve to cast the whole of their future worries upon Him, and the result will be that when those things that would otherwise worry them come up, they will not worry. The word “cast” is the translation of a word that means “having deposited with.” It refers here to a direct and once-for-all committal to God of all that would give us concern. The words “for he careth for you” can be translated literally, “for it is a care to Him concerning you,” or “for you are His concern.” Anxiety is a self-contradiction to true humility. Unbelief is, in a sense, an exalting of self against God in that one is depending upon self and failing to trust God.

Why worry therefore, if we are His concern. He is more concerned about our welfare than we could possibly be. Furthermore, since the humbling process has been allowed to come to us in the permissive will of God, and He is using it to accomplish His purpose in our lives, He has it under His control and us in His care. In it all He is concerned about us, therefore, again, why worry?1 Verse eight In the words “be sober” sobriety of mind is enjoined. “Be mentally self-controlled,” is the idea. The words “be vigilant” in the Greek present the idea of “be awake and watchful.” The word “adversary” is the translation of a word used of an opponent in a lawsuit. The word “devil” is the word used in the English translation for diabolos (diabolo") which comes from a word diaballo (diaballo) which means literally, “to throw over or across, to send over.” It was used in classical Greek with the meanings, “to traduce, calumniate, slander, accuse, defame,” and was used not only of those who bring a false charge against one, but also of those who disseminate the truth concerning a man and do so maliciously, insidiously, with hostility. All that, the devil is in his character and in his actions against the saints. The word “roaring” in the Greek text speaks of the howl of a beast in fierce hunger. Verse nine The Greek word translated “resist” means “to withstand, to be firm against someone else’s onset” rather than “to strive against that one.” The Christian would do well to remember that he cannot fight the devil. The latter was originally the most powerful and wise angel God created. He still retains much of that power and wisdom as a glance down the pages of history and a look about one today will easily show. While the Christian cannot take the offensive against Satan, yet he can stand his ground in the face of his attacks. Cowardice never wins against Satan, only courage. The word “stedfast” is a military term. Paul uses it in Colossians 2:3 when he says “beholding your order,” that is, “beholding your solid front or close phalanx.” The Greek phalanx was a body of heavy-armed infantry formed in ranks and files close and deep. Pope has a line, “The Grecian phalanx, moveless as a tower.” The word speaks of solidity in the very mass and body of the thing itself. The exhortation is most appropriate to Peter whose name means “A Rock.” He was that at Pentecost and after, for the Holy Spirit controlled him. Any saint today can be the same, and by the energy of that same Spirit. The words “in the faith” refer to the believer’s own faith, the definite article here pointing to ownership. That is, the Christian is to stand firm against the onset of the devil, not in himself, but in the exercise of a faith that depends upon the strengthening and protecting power of God. Verse ten The phrase “the God of all grace” speaks of God as the source of all spiritual comfort and help for every occasion. The word translated “unto” means literally “with a view to.” The word “called” in its Greek usage means more than an invitation. It is a divine summons. The one summoned is constituted willing to obey the summons, not against but with his free will and accord. It is an effectual call. The one called always responds through the enablement of the Holy Spirit. This effectual call is with a view to God’s eternal glory. That is, God calls us into salvation in order that He may derive glory for Himself by virtue of our being saved. He who has called us in His grace will supply all

needed grace until we are ushered into the Glory. God’s eternal glory is involved in His keeping a believer in salvation. Thus we see the eternal security of the Christian. The words “by Christ Jesus” are to be construed with the word “called.” Christ Jesus is the sphere in which that calling takes place. That is, in order that God might call sinners with a view to His eternal glory, they need to be saved, and salvation is found only in the Lord Jesus. Therefore, this calling is in the sphere of or within the scope of the Saviour’s saving power and work. The words “a while” in the Greek text are literally “a little while.” The rest of the verse is not a wish nor a petition but a prediction. The verbs are all in the future tense. The words “make you perfect” are not the translation of the Greek word teleioo (teleioo) which means “to perfect”1 in the sense of “to make spiritually mature and complete,” but from a word meaning “to fit or join together.” The predominating idea in the verb is adjustment, the putting of parts into right relationship and connection with one another. It is the same word translated “perfecting” in Ephesians 4:12, where the gifted servants of the Lord mentioned were given to the Church for the equipping of the saints for ministering work.2 The word was used of James and John mending their nets, thus equipping them for service (Mark 1:19). Here the word refers to God mending the lives of Christians, thus equipping them for usefulness in His service. The word in First Peter speaks of the work of the Holy Spirit in rounding out the spiritual life of the saint so that he is equipped for both the living of a Christian life and the service of the Lord Jesus. The word “stablish” is the translation of a Greek word whose root is akin to the word translated “stedfast” in 5:9. It speaks of a solid foundational position. Alford translates, “shall ground you as on a foundation.” Bengel has a helpful note on this verse; “Shall perfect, that no defect remain in you, shall stablish that nothing may shake you, shall strengthen that you may overcome every adverse force.” No comments on verse eleven. Verse twelve In verses 12–14 we probably have the postscript in Peter’s own handwriting. This would indicate that Silvanus was the amanuensis, the one to whom Peter dictated the letter and by whom it was sent. The word “faithful” is preceded by the definite article in the Greek text, showing that he was well-known to the recipients. The English word “suppose” might suggest that Peter was not sure of the character of Silvanus. But the Greek word denotes a settled persuasion or assurance. It indicates that the apostle’s judgment of Silvanus was given as a recommendation. Robertson translates “as I account him.” The word “stand” is imperative in the Greek text, “in which stand.” Verse thirteen There is a division of opinion among commentators as to whether Peter is using the name “Babylon” in its apocalyptic sense of Rome, or whether he is referring here to the literal city on the Euphrates. It would seem that he is referring to the city of Babylon itself, from the following considerations. First, the fact that the word is used in a mystical sense in the Book of The Revelation, which book makes use of such figures, is no argument for the mystical use of the word in a writing of a different character. Second, the other geographical references in First Peter have undoubtedly the literal meaning, and it would be natural to expect that Peter’s use of the name “Babylon” would be literal also. Third, there is no reason to suppose that when this epistle was written the city of Rome was currently known among Christians as Babylon. Fourth, The Revelation was written after the composition of Peter’s letter, and therefore he could not be following John’s use of the

name. Fifth, wherever the city of Rome is mentioned in the New Testament, with the single exception of The Revelation (and even there it is distinguished as “Babylon the Great”), it gets its usual name, Rome. Sixth, there is very good ground for believing that at the date of the writing of Peter’s letter the Jewish, and also the pagan population of the city and its vicinity, was very considerable. The words “Greet one another with a kiss of love” refer to a custom in the early Church when after prayers, the brethren welcomed each other with a kiss. Chrysostom calls it “the peace by which the Apostle expels all disturbing thought and beginning of small-mindedness … this kiss softens and levels.” The practice was liable to abuse as Clement of Alexandria shows when he says, “love is judged not in a kiss but in good will. Some do nothing but fill the church with noise of kissing. There is another—an impure— kiss full of venom pretending to holiness.” Therefore the practice was regulated, men kissed men only, and the custom gradually dwindled. Translation. (5b) Moreover, all of you, bind about yourselves as a girdle, humility toward one another, because God opposes Himself to those who set themselves above others, but gives grace to those who are lowly. (6) Suffer yourselves therefore to be humbled under the mighty hand of God, in order that you He may exalt in due time, (7) having deposited with Him once for all the whole of your worry, because to Him it is a matter of concern respecting you. (8) Be of a sober mind, be watchful. Your adversary who is a slanderer, namely, the devil, as a lion roaring in fierce hunger, is constantly walking about, always seeking someone to be devouring. (9) Stand immovable against his onset, solid as a rock in your faith, knowing that the same kind of sufferings are being accomplished in your brotherhood which is in the world. (10) But the God of every grace, the One who has called you in Christ with a view to His eternal glory, after you have suffered a little while, shall Himself perfect you, shall establish you firmly, shall strengthen you, shall ground you as on a foundation. (11) To Him let there be ascribed this power forever and forever, Amen. (12) Through Silvanus, the faithful brother, which is my estimate of him, briefly I have written to you, exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God, in which stand. (13) The (church) in Babylon, elect with you, sends greeting, also Mark my son. (14) Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace be with you all who are in Christ.

SECOND PETER In the Greek New Testament

PREFACE The title of this book, In These Last Days,* was suggested by Paul’s words to Timothy (II Tim. 3:1), “This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.” In II Timothy, Paul predicts the end-time apostasy in the professing Church, and speaks of the fact that the laity will be infected with what we today call Modernism or Liberalism. Peter

in his second epistle, traces the source of this apostasy to false teachers. In II Peter, false teachers deny redemption truth. In I John they deny the truth concerning the Person of our Lord. In II John, the denial of the Incarnation is treated, and the correct attitude of the saints towards teachers who are Unitarians is enjoined. In III John, Diotrephes, a petty tyrant in a local church, and of Modernistic tendencies, is presented. In Jude, various characteristics of the apostasy are brought out. Thus, we have in these five books, a picture of the Church in the days in which we are living, a guide for the saints, acquainting them with the nature of the false teachers and their heretical doctrines, and a warning against both. In view of all the foregoing, a study of these books should prove most timely and salutary, since we are living in the very last days of the Church Age, and in the midst of the apostasy which these Books predict. K. S. W.

INTRODUCTION This book is written for the student of the New Testament who does not have access to the Greek text, but who would like to work beneath the surface of the English translation in the untranslatable richness and added accuracy which the original text affords. This is done by the use of Greek word studies, interpretive material, and an expanded translation. The word studies bring out a far richer, more developed, and clearer meaning of the Greek word than any single English word could do. In the interpretive material, the author gives the English student access to the work of the great Greek masters in addition to his own work in the Greek text. In the expanded translation, a translation using more English words than the standard versions do, the author gives the student what the Greek reader of the first century read. In the process of translating, the standard versions leave much rich material behind in the Greek text, since these are held down to a minimum of words. This added material, the Bible student should know if he expects to do work of a high calibre. This book is not armchair reading. Its place is next to the student’s open Bible on his study desk. With its aid, he can work through the Greek texts of the Bible Books treated, and obtain a far clearer and richer understanding of their contents than he could from a study of any number of different translations. After he has worked through these epistles, he can use this book as a reference work in future Bible study. The authorities used in the writing of this book are as follows: In Expositor’s Greek Testament, R. H. Strachan, M.A., writing on II Peter; David Smith, M.A., D.D., writing on the Epistles of John; and J. B. Mayor, Litt.D., writing on Jude; Marvin R. Vincent, D.D., in his Word Studies in the New Testament; Henry Alford, D.D., in Alford’s Greek Testament; A. T. Robertson, A.M., D.D., LL.D., Litt.D., in his Word Pictures in the New Testament; Richard C. Trench, D.D., in his Synonyms of the New Testament; Joseph H. Thayer, D. D., in his Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament; James H. Moulton, D.D., Th.D., and George Milligan, D.D., in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament; Hermann Cremer, D.D., in his Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek; H. E. Dana, Th.D., and Julius R. Mantey, Th.D., D.D., in their Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament.

The Greek text used is that of Nestle. The translation quoted is the Authorized Version. The expanded translation offered must not be used as a substitute for but as a companion translation to the standard version the student is using. K. S. W. In order to reap the most benefit from his study, the student is urged to work through Peter’s letter verse by verse, with his Bible and this exegesis before him, seeking to understand the meaning of the Word in the light of the word studies, interpretations, and expanded translation.

CHAPTER ONE (1:1) For the significance of the name “Simon Peter,” see notes on I Peter 1:1.1 The apostle calls himself a servant of Jesus Christ. The word is doulos (doulo"), the most abject and servile term for a slave of the five words the Greeks used when speaking of one who serves. The verb form is deo (deo), “to bind.” Thus, a doulos (doulo") is one bound to another as a slave. The word designated one who was born as a slave. This classical usage fits in very well with the doctrinal significance of the word as it is used in the Christian system. Sinners are born into slavery to sin at physical birth, and into a loving, willing, glad servitude to Jesus Christ by regeneration. The word referred to one whose will is swallowed up in the will of another. Before salvation, the sinner’s will is swallowed up in the will of Satan. After salvation has wrought its beneficent work in his being, his will is swallowed up in the sweet will of God. The word spoke of one who is bound to another in hands which only death can break. The sinner is bound to Satan in bands which only death can break. In the case of the believing sinner, his identification with the Lord Jesus in His death on the Cross broke the bands which bound him to Satan. Now, the believer is bound to Christ in bands which only death can break. But the Lord Jesus will never die again, and since He is the life of the saint, that saint will never be severed from his Lord, but will be His loving bondslave for time and eternity. Again, doulos (doulo") refers to one who serves another to the disregard of his own interests. Before salvation, the sinner served Satan to his own detriment. Since he has been saved, a Spirit-filled believer serves his Lord with an abandon that says, “Nothing matters about me, so long as the Lord Jesus is glorified.” As to the significance of the Greek word for “apostle,” please see notes on I Peter 1:1.2 The names, “Jesus” and “Christ” have important meanings. “Jesus” is the English spelling of the Greek word  (ÆIhsou"). This, in turn, is the Greek spelling of the Hebrew word which in English is “Jehoshua,” and which means, “Jehovah saves.” Thus, there are three cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith in the name “Jesus,” the deity of our Lord, His humanity, and His sacrificial atonement. Jehovah could not save sinners except on the basis of justice satisfied, this, in order that He might maintain His righteous government. Justice, to be satisfied, demanded that sin be paid for, and only God can satisfy His own demands. So, He in the person of His Son, stepped down from His judgment throne in heaven, and took upon Himself the guilt and penalty of human sin. But He could not do this except by the incarnation and the Cross. The word “Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek Christos (Cristo") which means “the anointed,” and this Greek word is the translation of the Hebrew word which comes into our language in the

name “Messiah.” In the case of the Gospel according to Matthew, the name is a designation of the Lord Jesus as the Messiah of Israel. In the Church epistles, it speaks of Him as the Anointed of God. “Obtain” is  (lagcanw,) “to obtain by lot, to receive by divine allotment.” The faith here is appropriating faith exercised by the believing sinner when he places his trust in the Lord Jesus. This faith is given in sovereign grace by God to the sinner elected (chosen out) to salvation, and is part of the salvation which is given him. It is given him, Peter says here, by divine allotment. See notes on I Peter 1:23 concerning the setting-apart work of the Spirit in which He brings the sinner foreordained to salvation to the act of appropriating faith. Paul speaks of the same thing in Ephesians 2:8, the word “that” referring to the general idea of salvation spoken of in the context. Should an unsaved person perchance read these lines and wonder whether he has been thus chosen to salvation, he is exhorted to place his heart-faith in the Lord Jesus as his Saviour from sin, and he will find that he has been chosen out to be a recipient of salvation. This faith is described as “like precious faith with us.” The word “precious” is isotimon, (ijsotimon,) made up of isos, (ijso",) “equal in quantity or quality,” and timios, (timio",) “held as of a great price.” The compound word means either “like in honor,” or “like in value.” Vincent suggests that both meanings are applicable here. His comment is as follows: “not in the same measure to all, but having equal value and honor to those who receive it, as admitting them to the same Christian privileges.” How priceless is this gift of faith which admits us to the salvation which God has provided through the death and resurrection of His Son! And what an honor is conferred upon those who are the recipients of this gift of faith! Peter, a Jew, writing to the Gentiles here, says that the latter have been given this faith by divine allotment together with the Jews. Paul speaks of the same thing in Ephesians 3:6. This faith which was given to both Jew and Gentile alike was given through the righteousness of God. The word is  (dikaiosunh,) and its distinctive meaning here is that of “justice, the virtue which gives each one his due.” It precludes the showing of partiality. The thought is not here that the gift of salvation was due a sinner in the sense that God was obligated to give it to him, or that the sinner deserved it, but that if the Jew was given it, it should also be given to the Gentile, lest God show partiality in giving it to one class of individuals and not to another. The expression, “God and our Saviour” is in a construction in the Greek text which demands that we translate, “our God and Saviour, Jesus Christ,” the expression thus showing that Jesus Christ is the Christian’s God; this, in opposition to the cult of the Caesar in which the Roman emperor was the god of the pagan Roman citizen. Because Peter continued to insist upon this teaching, he was martyred. Translation. Simon Peter, a bondslave and an ambassador of Jesus Christ, to those who have been divinely allotted like precious faith with us by the equitable treatment of our God and Saviour, Jesus Christ. (1:2) This is sanctifying grace, the work of the Holy Spirit producing in the yielded believer His own fruit. This peace is sanctifying peace, the tranquility of heart that is the result of the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the believer. “Knowledge” here is  (ejpignwsi",) full, perfect, precise knowledge as opposed to  (gnwsi",) imperfect, partial knowledge. Strachan says: “ (ejpignwsi",) ‘involving the complete

appropriation of all truth and the unreserved acquiescence in God’s will, is the goal and crown of the believer’s course’ (Lightfoot) …  (ejpignwsi") implies a more intimate and personal relationship than  (gnwsi".) It would be a useful word, seeing that  (gnwsi") had become associated with Gnosticism, then incipient in the Church.… Grace and peace are multiplied in and through this more intimate heart knowledge of Jesus Christ, in contrast to a mere barren  (gnwsi".)” “Knowledge” is locative of sphere and instrumental of means. This grace and peace are in the sphere of this knowledge and are produced by it. The particular word for “knowledge” here,  (ejpignwsi",) speaks of experiential knowledge, that is, knowledge gained by experience. This knowledge of the Lord Jesus possessed by the believer therefore, is not a mere intellectual knowledge of the facts concerning Him acquired by a study of the Gospels, for instance, but a heart experience of what and who He is gained by such a study plus a personal association with Him by means of the Word and the ministry of the Holy Spirit. It is a person with Person knowledge through intimate fellowship. The construction in the Greek text translated by the words “God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” is the same as in verse one, and requires the rendering, “our God, even Jesus the Lord.”4 Translation. Grace to you, and peace, be multiplied in the sphere of and by the full knowledge of our God, even Jesus, the Lord. (1:3) This grace and peace multiplied to the saints is further described in this verse. “According as” is  (wJ",) “assuming that, seeing that.” Alford, commenting on its use here says: “It is characteristic of this Epistle, to dilate further when the sense seems to have come to a close.” The word “divine” is theias, (qeia",) which Peter borrowed from the classical Greek usage. It was used of Zeus, the greatest of the Greek gods. Paul uses it in Acts 17:29 and Romans 1:20, and in both places he uses it to speak of the attributes of God, or of God seen from the standpoint of His attributes. Here Peter uses it to describe the power of God, dunamis, (dunami",) “that which overcomes resistance, inherent power, power residing in a thing by virtue of its nature, power which a person exerts or puts forth.” “Hath given” is  (dwrew,) a stronger and more expressive word than  (didwmi,) “to give.” It means “to grant or bestow.” Strachan says that “this word and itscognates always carry a certain regal sense describing an act of large-handed generosity.” It is a perfect participle, speaking of the past completed act of presenting the gift with the present result that it is in the possession of the believer with no strings tied to it. It is his permanent possession, having been given by pure grace. “Pertain” is in italics in the a.v. However, it is the translation of the preposition pros (pro") which appears in the Greek text, which preposition here could be translated, “with reference to.” “Godliness” is eusebeia. (eujsebeia.) Vincent’s note on this word is most helpful: “It is from eu, (euj,) ‘well,’ and sebomai, (sebomai,) ‘to worship,’ so that the radical idea is ‘worship rightly directed.’ Worship, however, is to be understood in its etymological sense, ‘worth-ship,’ or reverence paid to worth, whether to God or man. Wycliffe’s rendering of Matthew 6:2, ‘that they be worshipped of men’; and ‘worship thy father and thy mother’ (Matt. 19:19). In classical Greek, the word is not confined to religion, but means also piety in the fulfilment of human relations, like the Latin pietas. Even in classical Greek, however, it is a standing word for piety in the religious sense, showing itself in right reverence; and is opposed to dussebeia, (dussebeia,)

‘ungodliness,’ and  (ajnosioth",) ‘profaneness.’ ‘The recognition of dependence upon the gods, the confession of human dependence, the tribute of homage which man renders in the certainty that he needs their favor—all this is eusebeia, (eujsebeia,) manifest in conduct and conversation, in sacrifice and prayer.’ (Nägelsbach, cited by Cremer). This definition may be almost literally transferred to the Christian word. It embraces the confession of the one living and true God, and life corresponding to this knowledge.” As to the inclusion of the idea “life” with that of godliness, Strachan comments; “The conjunction of the two ideas ‘life’ and ‘godliness’ is significant. Religion does not narrow, but expands the province of life. The life in Christ is not ‘a little province of peculiar emotion … If we fear that it may lose itself in the vast and often lawless universe of life beneath, the danger is to be averted not by wilfully contracting it within a narrower field, but by seeking greater intensity of life in deeper and more submissive communion with the Head Himself in the heavens’ (Hort, The Way, the Truth, and the Life).” The word “life” here is not bios, (bio",) “the necessaries of life,” such as food, clothing, and shelter, but  (zwh.) This word speaks of life in the sense of one who is possessed of vitality and animation. It is used of the absolute fulness of life, both essential and ethical, which belongs to God. It is used to designate the life which God gives to the believing sinner, a vital, animating, spiritual, ethical dynamic which transforms his inner being and as a result, his behavior. The Lord Jesus is now described as the One who called us by means of His own uniquely possessed glory and virtue. The words are in the instrumental case in the Greek text, and the word idios (ijdio") is included, of which the a.v. takes no notice, and which means “one’s own private, unique, peculiar possession.” It was the attracting power of our Lord’s beautiful life that worked effectively in the act of God calling us into salvation. Strachan says; “The phrase contains one of the finest ideas in the New Testament. What could be a more effective answer to the intellectualism of the Gnostic teacher or its modern equivalent, than the impression produced on the lives of men, and especially the early disciples, by the personality of Jesus? They beheld His glory in the evidences of miraculous knowledge and power which Jesus showed at the time of their call (John 1:42, 47–51; Luke 5:4). Their sense of His moral greatness overcame all resistance on their part (Luke 5:8; John 1:49). If II Peter is lacking in devotional expression, his apologetic for the person of Christ is cast on most effective lines. Reason can only compass the facts of Revelation, in terms of antimonies (oppositions), and it is vain to meet inadequate theories of the person of Christ by dogmatic subtlety. The Life and Death of our Lord, if its significance is to be fully understood, must be looked upon largely as an acted parable, and Christian experience—the impression of ‘glory’ and ‘virtue’—is an indispensable constituent of dogmatic expression.” All of which goes to say that the convincing power of a Christlike life is of greater effect than all of the learned disquisitions of scholars concerning the Person and Work of our Lord. These latter are basic and absolutely necessary to the maintenance of true doctrine, but in themselves are helpless to answer the gainsayings of the destructive critic. But the latter has no answer for the supernatural transformation of a sinner’s life into that of a Christlike life. Translation. Seeing that the all things to us His divine power has generously given, the things which pertain to life and godliness, through the full knowledge of the One who called us by means of His own glory

and virtue. (1:4) “Whereby” goes back to “glory and virtue.” It is through these that are given to us the promises. Strachan’s explanation is helpful; “No doubt what II Peter has chiefly in view is the particular, comprehensive promise of His Second Coming (compare 3:4, promise, and 3:13). The Parousia (personal presence) will be the vindication of all moral and spiritual effort. Christ promised forgiveness to the sinful, rest to the weary, comfort to the sad, hope to the dying, and life to the dead. If the reference adopted above of ‘whereby’ is correct, the sense would be that in the character and deeds of the Incarnate One, we have a revelation that is itself a promise. The promises are given, not only in word but also in deed. The very life of Christ among men, with its glory and virtue, is itself the Promise and Life, and the Parousia expectation is also a faith that He lives and reigns in grace.” Through these promises, the saints have become partakers of, sharers in the divine nature. Peter is here referring to regeneration as in I Peter 1:23. This divine nature implanted in the inner being of the believing sinner, becomes the source of his new life and actions. By its energy in giving him both the desire and the power to do God’s will, he has escaped the corruption that is in the world. “Escaped” is  (ajpofeugw,) “to escape by flight.” That is, the believer has run away from the corruption which is in the world (kosmos (kosmo") world system of evil), this corruption being within the sphere of lust (epithumia, (ejpiqumia,) “craving, passionate desire”) here in the widest sense of inordinate affection. Translation. By means of which (glory and virtue) there have been generously given to us the precious and exceedingly great promises in order that through these you might become partakers of the divine nature) having escaped by flight the corruption which is in the world in the sphere of passionate cravings. (1:5–7) Concerning the words, “and besides this,” Vincent says; “Wrong. Render, for this very cause.” Robertson concurs in this translation, and adds that this is a classic idiom. “Giving” is  (pareisferw,) made up of  (ferw) “to bring,” eis, (eij",) “into,” and para, (para,) “alongside,” thus, “to bring in alongside, to contribute besides” to something. The r.v. translates, “adding on your own part.” Strachan says that the words “and besides this” emphasize the fact of the gifts spoken of in verse four as having their logical outcome in character, and quotes Bunyan as saying, “The soul of religion is the practical part.” “Diligence” is  (spoudh.) The verb is  (spoudazw) which means “to make haste, be eager, give diligence, to do one’s best, to take care, to exert one’s self.” In verses two and three we have the divine provision and enablement given the believer in salvation, an inner dynamic, the divine nature which impels to a holy life, giving both the desire and power to do God’s will (Phil. 2:13). In verses five to seven, we have human responsibility, that of seeing to it that the various Christian virtues are included in one’s life. The divine nature is not an automatic self-propelling machine that will turn out a Christian life for the believer irrespective of what that believer does or the attitude he takes to the salvation which God has provided. The divine nature will always produce a

change in the life of the sinner who receives the Lord Jesus as Saviour. But it works at its best efficiency when the believer cooperates with it in not only determining to live a life pleasing to God, but definitely stepping out in faith and living that life in dependence upon the new life which God has implanted in him. And this must not be a mere lackadaisical attempt at doing God’s will, but an intense effort, as shown by the word  (spoudh,) translated “diligence.” As to the translation, “add to your faith,” Vincent says; “The a.v. is entirely wrong. The verb rendered ‘add’ ( (ejpicorhgew)) is derived from chorus, (coru",) a chorus, such as was employed in the representation of Greek tragedies. The verb originally meant ‘to bear the expense of a chorus,’ which was done by a person selected by the state, who was obliged to defray all the expense of training and maintenance.” Strachan adds, “It was a duty that prompted to lavishness in execution. Hence  (corhgew) came to mean ‘supplying costs for any purpose,’ a public duty or religious service, with a tending, as here, towards the meaning, ‘providing more than is barely demanded.’ ” Thus, the word means “to supply in copious measure, to provide beyond the need, to supply more than generously.” Saints are to supply or provide in their faith, virtue. Vincent says; “The a.v. exhorts to add one virtue to another; but the Greek, to develop one virtue in the exercise of another; each new grace springing out of, attempting and perfecting the other. Render, therefore, as Rev. In your faith supply virtue, and in your virtue, knowledge, etc.” The exhortation is that in the faith which the saints exercise in the Lord Jesus, they should provide for virtue. The believer exercises faith in the Lord Jesus to supply his needs, to guide him along life’s way. He should also exercise faith for the generating of virtue in his inner being by the Holy Spirit. This virtue, Vincent says, is in the form, “not of moral excellence, but of the energy which Christians are to exhibit, as God exerts His energy upon them. As God calls us by His own virtue (v. 3), so Christians are to exhibit virtue or energy in the exercise of their faith, translating it into vigorous action.” They are to provide in this virtue, knowledge ( (gnwsi")), and in this knowledge, temperance (egkrateia, (ejgkrateia,) self-control), holding the passions and desires in hand. The word was used of the virtue of one who masters his desires and passions, especially his sensual appetites. The Greeks used it of the one who had his sex passions under control. The papyri (Moulton and Milligan) quote the phrase, “a trusty dispenser of continence.” One can see what a blessing the fruit of the Spirit is when it provides the saint with a mastery of his sex passions (Gal. 5:23, temperance, egkrateia, (ejgkrateia,) self-control). The saints are to provide generously in this self-control, patience. The word is  (uJpomonh,) literally, “to remain under,” thus, “to remain under trials and testings in a way that honors God.” Vincent translates, “remaining behind or staying.” He says further, “not merely endurance of the inevitable, for Christ could have relieved Himself of His sufferings (Heb. 12:2, 3, compare Matt. 26:53); but the heroic, brave patience with which a Christian not only bears but contends. Speaking of Christ’s patience, Barrow remarks, ‘Neither was it out of a stupid insensibility or stubborn resolution that He did thus behave Himself; for He had a most vigorous sense of all those grievances, and a strong (natural) aversation (act of turning away from) from undergoing them … but from a perfect submission to the divine will, and entire command over His passions, an excessive charity toward mankind, this patient, and meek behaviour did spring.’ The same writer defines patience as follows: ‘That virtue which qualifies us to bear all conditions and all events, by God’s disposal incident to us, with such

apprehensions and persuasions of mind, such dispositions and affections of heart, such external deportment and practices of life as God requires and good reason directs.’ ” Godliness is to be provided generously in patience. This is eusebeia, (eujsebeia,) a thorough treatment of which word was presented in the material of verse three, which please see. In this virtue of godliness is to be provided brotherly kindness. The word is philadelphia, (filadelfia,) made up of  (filew,) “to have an affection for,” and adelphos, (ajdelfo",) “a brother.” This affection or fondness for one’s Christian brethren is to be saturated with charity. The word is  (ajgaph,) “that divine love which God is as to His nature, which is produced in the heart of the yielded believer by the Holy Spirit, and which impels him to deny himself for the benefit of the one loved.” Translation. And for this very cause, having added on your part every intense effort, provide lavishly in your faith, virtue, and in your virtue, knowledge, and in your knowledge, self-control, and in your self-control, patience, and in your patience, godliness, and in your godliness, an affection for the brethren, and in your affection for the brethren, divine love. (1:8) “Be” is  (uJparcw.) The word refers to an antecedent condition protracted into the present. It speaks of possession. Vincent says: “In the sense of being the verb is stronger than the simple einai, (eijnai,) ‘to be’; denoting being which is from the beginning, and therefore attaching to a person as a proper characteristic, something belonging to him, and so running into the idea of rightful possession as above.” Thus, the possession of the Christian virtues by the believer is a natural, expected thing by reason of the fact that he has become a partaker of the divine nature. And they are not a spasmodic possession either, present one day and absent the next. Indeed, if they were not present in the life, one could well discount the person’s claim of being a child of God. “Abound” is  (pleonazw,) used of one possessing in the sense of “superabounding.” The Spirit-filled life is the overflowing life. It is like an artesian well whose source is higher than its outflow, the outflow being spontaneous by reason of that fact. The source of the Christian life is G6d; the outflow, through the believer. But the Christian life that does not run over, or overflow with spiritual blessings to others, is never a source of spiritual refreshment to others. A farmer once said to his helper who always filled the buckets of grain only three fourths full when they should have been full, “the buckets are never full until they are running over.” So a Christian is never filled with the Spirit and spiritual blessings until his life is running over with the good things of God, refreshing the lives of others. “Make” is  (kaqisthmi,) “to constitute, to render, make, cause.” “Barren” is argos, (ajrgo",) from ergon (ejrgon) “work” and a, “not,” thus, “no work,” hence, “idle.” “In” is eis (eij"). Vincent says: “Rev., more correctly, unto. The idea is not idleness in the knowledge, but idleness in pressing on and developing toward and finally reaching the knowledge.” Translation. For if these things are your natural and rightful possession, and are in superabundance, they so constitute you that you are not idle nor unfruitful in the full knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. (1:9) “But” of a.v. is gar (gar) in Greek text, and should be “for.” As to the words,

“He that lacketh these things,” the literal translation of the Greek text here is, “to whom these things are not present.” Vincent comments: “Note that a different word is used here from that in verse eight, are yours, to convey the idea of possession. Instead of speaking of the gifts as belonging to the Christian by habitual, settled possession, he denotes them now as merely present with him.” “Cannot see afar off” is  (muwpazw,) used by Aristotle of a near-sighted man. It is used in Ecclesiasticus of a soul on which the light shines (blinking and turning away). Here the word “limits the word tuphlos, (tuflo",) blind as a short-sighted man screwing up his eyes because of the light” (Robertson). The two words together speak of a person who is short-sighted spiritually, seeing only things present and not heavenly things (Vincent). Strachan quotes Mayor, “He cannot see the things of heaven, though he may be quick enough in regard to worldly matters.” ”Hath forgotten” is in the Greek text literally, “having taken forgetfulness.” “Purged” is katharismos, (kaqarismo",) “cleansing.” This is the case of a saint who has wandered far from the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit. He is carrying around with him his justification, but not availing himself of his sanctification. He is not stone blind. He has some spiritual sight But the light of the Word dazzles his sin-sick soul as he turns his dimned, spiritual eyes away, a sad situation in which to be. Translation. For he to whom these things are not present is blind, being short-sighted, having taken forgetfulness of the cleansing of his old sins. (1:10) “Wherefore” is, “because of the exhortation and argument in verses five to nine” (Robertson). “Rather” is mallon, (mallon,) a comparative adverb meaning “more,” and is to be construed with “give diligence.” The verb is ingressive aorist, “become more diligent.” It is the word  (spoudazw,) “to do your best, bend every effort.” “To make” is a middle infinitive, “make for yourselves,” that is, “satisfy yourselves that you are saved.” “Sure” is bebaios, (bebaio",) “stable, fast, firm.” Strachan says of the word: “The word has a legal sense. It is the legal guarantee, obtained by the buyer from the seller, to be gone back upon should a third party claim the thing. Here the readers are exhorted to produce a guarantee of their calling and election. This may be done by the cultivation of the Christian graces. “Calling” is  (klhsin,) from  (kalew,) “to call,” and refers to the divine call of God to a participation in salvation. “Election” is  (ejklogh,) “the act of picking out from a number,” and refers to the act of God choosing certain out of mankind for salvation. Alford says of the Christian’s act of making his calling and election sure, secure, firm, “for both (the calling and election), in as far as we look on them from the lower side, not able to penetrate into the counsels of God, are insecure unless established by holiness of life. In His foreknowledge and purpose, there is no insecurity, no uncertainty; but in our vision and apprehension of them as they exist in and for us, much, until they are pointed out.” The exhortation is that the believer should make sure of the fact that he is saved by seeing to it that the Christian graces superabound in his life. There is no idea here of making sure that we retain our salvation but that we possess salvation. “Fall” is  (ptaiw,) “to stumble, fall into misery, become wretched.” Translation. Wherefore, brethren, exert yourselves the more, and bend every effort to make for yourselves your calling and choosing out sure, for doing these things, you will never stumble.

(1:11) “Entrance” is eisodos, (eijsodo",) made up of eis, (eij",) “into,” and hodos, (oJdo",) “road,” thus, “the road into,” the definite article appearing before the word in the Greek text, pointing to a particular road. Our Lord said that He was the way (hodos, (oJdo",) John 14:6). The writer to the Hebrews (10:19, 20) says, “Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a freshly-slain and living way (hodos (oJdo") road).” Our Lord is the road to heaven by virtue of His precious blood. The words “shall be ministered” are  (ejpicorhgeo,) “to richly supply.” Vincent comments: “We are to furnish in our faith: the reward shall be furnished to us. Richly, indicating the fulness of future blessedness. Professor Salmond observes that it is the reverse of ‘saved, yet so as by fire’ (I Cor. 3:15).” Translation. For in this way the entrance shall be richly supplied to you into the eternal kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ. (1:12) Vincent says of the words, “I wilt not be negligent”; “The a.v. follows the reading  (oJuk ajmhlesw,) which it renders correctly. The better reading, however, is  (mellhsw,) I intend, or, as often in classical Greek, with a sense of certainty, I shall be sure, which the Rev. adopts, rendering I shall be ready.” The verb here is in the future tense. Strachan comments: “What is the exact significance of the future? It can hardly be a simple periphrastic future. ‘The idea is rather that the writer will be prepared in the future, as well as in the past and in the present, to remind them of the truths they know, whenever the necessity arises’ (Zahn).” “Be established” is  (sthrizw,) a perfect tense participle. The word means “to make stable, place firmly, set fast.” These saints had become stabilized in the truth and were in a state of being set fast, placed firmly on it. Their knowledge of the Word and the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith were set in their thinking. As to the words, “in the present truth,” Vincent says: “namely, the truth which is present with you through the instruction of your teachers; not the truth at present under consideration.” Translation. Wherefore, I intend always to remind you concerning these things even though you know them and have become firmly established in the truth which is present with you. (1:13, 14) “Think” is  (hJgeomai,) “to consider, deem, account.” “Right” is dikaios, (dikaio",) “to render each his due.” Thus, Peter’s idea in using the word was that it was his solemn duty to stir up his readers. Strachan translates, “I consider it a duty,” and remarks, “The language in verses 13 and 14 is studiously solemn and impressive.” “Tabernacle” is  (skhnwma,) “a tent.” He refers here to his physical body. Paul, in II Corinthians 5:1, 4 uses the same figure when referring to the body, but uses the shorter word,  (skhno".) Peter uses his word again in Matthew 17:4, where he speaks of making three tents. Vincent says, “The word, as well as the entire phrase, carries the idea of brief duration—a frail tent, erected for the night.” “Stir up” is  (diegeirw,) “to wake up, awaken, arouse,” metaphorically, “to arouse the mind, stir up, render active.” The prefixed preposition adds the idea of doing a thorough piece of work in arousing their minds. Robertson translates, “keep on rousing you up.” Peter purposed to do this by reminding them of the things which they had been taught. The phrase is instrumental of means. He would arouse their minds to action by

reminding them of the truth they had learned from the Word of God. The preacher and teacher should be an intense student of the Word, bringing to his hearers fresh, new truth with the dew of heaven upon it. But there is a place for the repetition of the old truths which the saints know well. Much of it has not yet been put into practice, and the fact that it is repeated gives the Holy Spirit an opportunity to make it experiential in the life of the believer. As to the words, “shortly I must put off this my tabernacle,” Vincent says, “Literally, quick is the putting off of my tabernacle. Rev. the putting off of my tabernacle cometh swiftly. Possibly an allusion to his advanced age. Putting off is a metaphor, from “putting off a garment.” So Paul (II Cor. 5:3, 4), being clothed, unclothed, clothed upon … Cometh swiftly, implying the speedy approach of death though others understand it of the quick, violent death which Christ prophesied he should die. ‘Even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath showed me.’ See John 21:18, 19. Compare also John 13:36, and note the word follow in both passages. ‘Peter had now learnt the full force of Christ’s sayings, and to what end the following of Jesus was to bring him’ (Lumby).” Translation. Indeed, I consider it due you as long as I am in this tent, to keep on arousing you by means of a reminder, knowing that very soon there is the putting off of my tent, even as also our Lord Jesus Christ gave me to understand. (1:15) “Endeavor” is  (spoudazw,) “to bend every effort, to do one’s best.” “Always” is hekastote, (eJkastote,) “on each occasion when you have need.” “That ye may be able” is echein humas, (ejcein uJma",) literally, “that you may have it.” “These things” refers back to verse 12 and to the Christian virtues of verses 5–7. Strachan says: “It must have reference as in verse 12 to the practice of the Christian graces, and the larger reference must be to some systematic body of instruction. This might easily take the form of reminiscences of the example of Jesus Himself, and the allusion may be to the Petrine reminiscences contained in the Gospel of St. Mark … Surely, nothing could be more appropriate, more helpful to a godly life, than that Peter should leave behind the picture of the glory and virtue drawn from his own recollection.” “Decease” is exodos, (ejxodo",) “the road out.” The word comes into our language in the title “Exodus.” The word is used only three times in the Greek n.t.: Luke 9:31, where the heavenly visitors speak of our Lord’s decease, His road out of this earth to heaven; Hebrews 11:22, where the reference is to the departing of the children of Israel; and in this passage. Alford says: “It is at least remarkable that, with the recollection of the scene on the Mount of Transfiguration floating in his mind, the apostle should use so close together the words which were there also associated, tabernacle and decease. The coincidence should not be forgotten in treating of the question of the genuineness of the epistle.” Translation. Indeed, I will do my best also that, on each occasion when you have need, after my departure, you will be able to call these things to remembrance. (1:16) “Followed” is  (ejxakolouqew,) “to follow out to a conclusion, to pursue a line of thought to its termination.” “Cunningly devised” is  (sofizw,) in a good sense, “to make wise, teach”; in a bad sense, “to invent, play the sophist, to devise

cleverly or cunningly.” Vincent translates, “artfully framed by human cleverness.” “Fables” is muthos (muqo") (myths). Vincent says: “The reference here may be to the Jewish myths, rabbinical embellishment of o.t. history; or to the heathen myths about the descent of the gods to earth, which might be suggested by his remembrance of the Transfiguration; or to Gnostic speculations about aeons or emanations which rose from the eternal abyss, the source of all spiritual existence, and were named Mind, Wisdom, Power, Truth, etc.” “Coming” is parousia, (parousia,) made up of para, (para,) “alongside,” and ousia, (oJusia,) “to be,” thus, “to be alongside”; thus, “personal presence.” Strachan quotes Dr. Milligan as authority for the statement that the word “occurs frequently in the papyri as a kind of terminus technicus (terminu" tecnicu") with reference to the visit of a king, or some other official.” Dr. Milligan then says: “The word must, therefore, have come into use, in this application to the Second Advent, in apostolic times, as faithfully representing the meaning of Jesus Himself (compare Matt. 24:3, 27, 37, 39). The usual classical sense of the word as ‘presence,’ must not be regarded. Taken together with the other meaning illustrated by the Koine, parousia (parousia) would thus seem to combine in itself the meaning of ‘actual presence’ and a near ‘coming.’ This combination of meaning in the consciousness of the early Church, with its perplexity as to the interpretation of our Lord’s promise, would seem to be reflected in John 16:16–18.” “Power” is dunamis, (dunami",) “inherent power, power residing in a person or thing by virtue of its nature, power which a person exerts.” “Eyewitnesses” is  (ejpopth",) “a spectator.” Thayer says: “Inasmuch as those were called epoptai (ejpoptai) by the Greeks, who had attained to the third degree of the Eleusinian mysteries, the word seems to be used here to designate those privileged to be present at the heavenly spectacle of the transfiguration of Christ.” Robertson says that “Peter clearly felt that he and James and John were lifted to the highest stage of initiation at the transfiguration of Christ.” Strachan says: “used here to enhance the splendor of the vision, and the honor done the disciples at the transfiguration, ‘admitted to the spectacle of His grandeur.’ ” “His” is a demonstrative pronoun in the Greek text, literally, “that One.” It is emphatic, pointing out the greatness of the Person to whom reference was made. “Majesty” is  (megaleiothto".) The positive adjective megas (mega") means “great.” Here we have the superlative form, “greatest.” The word means “magnificence.” It is used here, Thayer says, “of the visible splendor of the divine majesty as it appeared at the transfiguration.” Translation. For we did not follow out to their termination cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and personal coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but became spectators of that One’s magnificence. (1:17) There is a participial construction in the Greek text which should be translated as follows; “For, having received from the presence of God the Father,” the phrase referring back to our Lord in the previous verse. “Came” is the translation of  (ferw,) “to bear, carry,” literally, “there was borne along,” the participle here being in the passive voice. “From” is the translation of hupo, (uJpo,) “by means of.” The voice was borne or carried along by “the excellent glory.” “Such” is toiasde, (toiasde,) “such,” generally with an implied suggestion of something excellent or admirable. The word

“excellent” describing “glory” is  (megalopreph",) made up of megas, (mega",) “great,” and prepei, (prepei,) “it is becoming,” thus, “that which is becoming to greatness.” Thayer defines the word as follows: “befitting a great man, magnificent, splendid, full of majesty.” Vincent defines, “sublime.” The word is used in the LXX (Septuagint, Greek translation of the o.t.) in Deuteronomy 33:26 as an epithet of God. The a.v. translates by the word “excellency.” Vincent says that “the phrase excellent glory refers to the bright cloud which overshadowed the company on the transfiguration mount, like the shekinah above the mercy-seat.” It has always been the opinion of the present writer that that cloud was the Shekinah. Translation. For having received from the presence of God the Father honor and glory, there was borne along by the sublime glory such a voice, My Son, the beloved One, this One is, in whom I am well pleased. (1:18) The word “holy” means “set apart for God’s use, or rendered sacred by the divine presence.” Hence, the latter meaning is applicable. Robertson says that the scene of the transfiguration was probably one of the lower slopes of Hermon. Vincent quotes Lumby as follows: “Of all places to which special sanctity would be ascribed by Christ’s followers, surely that would be the first to be so marked where the most solemn testimony was given to the divinity of Jesus. To the Jewish Christian this would rank with Sinai, and no name would be more fitly applied to it than that which had so constantly been given to a place on which God first revealed Himself in His glory. ‘The holy mount of God’ (Ezek. 28:14) would now receive another application, and he would see little of the true continuity of God’s revelation who did not connect readily the old and new covenants, and give to the place where the glory of Christ was most eminently shown forth the same name which was applied so oft to Sinai.” Translation. And this voice we heard borne along, out from heaven, when we were with Him in the holy mountain. (1:19) The statement, “We have also a more sure word of prophecy,” could be understood in either one of two ways: (1) “We are better certified than before as to the prophetic word by reason of this voice,” or, (2) “We have the word of prophecy as a surer confirmation of God’s truth than what we saw ourselves, i.e., Old Testament testimony is more convincing than even the voice heard at the transfiguration” (Vincent). The context (vv. 20, 21) decides for the latter, for Peter goes on to speak of that which makes the o.t. scriptures unmistakably reliable, their divine inspiration. Vincent quotes two authorities on this matter: “To appreciate this we must put ourselves somewhat in the place of those for whom St. Peter wrote. The New Testament, as we have it, was to them non-existent. Therefore we can readily understand how the long line of prophetic scriptures, fulfilled in so many ways in the life of Jesus, would be a mightier form of evidence than the narrative of one single event in Peter’s life” (Lumby). “Peter knew a sounder basis for faith than that of signs and wonders. He had seen our Lord Jesus Christ receive honor and glory from God the Father in the holy mount; he had been dazzled and carried out of himself by visions and voices from heaven; but nevertheless, even when his memory and heart are throbbing with recollections of that sublime scene, he says, ‘we have something surer still in the prophetic word.’… It was not the miracles of Christ by which he came to know Jesus, but the word of Christ as interpreted by the Spirit of Christ” (Samuel Cox).

“More sure” is the comparative of bebaios, (bebaio",) “stable, fast, firm,” metaphorically, “sure, trusty.” The idea here is of something that is firm, stable, something that can be relied upon or trusted in. The idea in the Greek text is, “We have the prophetic word as a surer foundation” than even the signs and wonders which we have seen. “Light” is luchnos, (lucno",) “a lamp.” “Dark” is  (aujcmhro";) Vincent defines it, “Literally, a dry place. Rev. gives squalid in margin. Aristotle opposes it to bright or glistering. It is a subtle association of the idea of darkness with squalor, dryness, and general neglect.” Strachan defines: “dry, parched, squalid, rough,” and comments: “Here it means ‘murky.’ ” Thayer comments: “To a lamp is likened the prophecies of the o.t. inasmuch as they afforded at least some knowledge relative to the glorious return of Jesus from heaven down even to the time when by the Holy Spirit that same light, like the day and the day-star, shone upon the hearts of men, the light by which the prophets themselves had been enlightened and which was necessary to the full perception of the true meaning of their prophecies.” Translation. And we have the prophetic word as a surer foundation, to which you are doing well to pay attention, as to a lamp which is shining in a squalid place, until day dawns and a morning star arises in your hearts. (1:20, 21) The phrase, “knowing this first,” refers back to the words “whereunto ye do well that ye take heed.” That is, as Peter’s readers give their attention to the Old Testament prophecies, they are to keep in mind what follows in the rest of the verse and the succeeding one. The word “private” is idios, (ijdio",) “unique, one’s own.” “Interpretation” is epilusis, (ejpilusi",) “a loosening, unloosing,” metaphorically, “interpretation.” The verb is  (ejpiluw,) “to unloose, untie, to explain what is obscure and hard to understand.” The interpretation is here not that of the student of scripture, but of the inspired prophet or writer of the scriptures himself, since verse 20 speaks of the method by which these prophecies came with relation to these writers. “It is the prophet’s grasp of the prophecy, not that of the readers, that is here presented, as the next verse shows” (Robertson). No prophecy is of any private interpretation, so far as the writer of the prophecy is concerned. Strachan says: “It seems most satisfactory to understand this expression as the meaning of the prophet himself, or what was in the prophet’s mind when he wrote; the fulfilment in any particular generation or epoch. ‘The special work of the prophet is to interpret the working of God to his own generation. But in doing this, he is laying down the principles of God’s action generally. Hence there may be many fulfilments of one prophecy, or to speak more exactly, many historical illustrations of some one principle of providential government’ (Mayor).” Strachan translates, “No prophecy is of such a nature as to be capable of a particular interpretation.” In verse 20, the apostle explains what he means by the expression, “private interpretation.” The meaning or interpretation of the prophet does not come from the writer himself but from the Holy Spirit. Robertson says: “Peter is not here warning against personal interpretation of prophecy as the Roman Catholics say, but against the folly of upstart prophets with no impulse from God.” Strachan continues the explanation of this verse in the words: “Here we have the only reference to the Holy Spirit in the epistle, and only in this connection, namely, as the source of prophetic inspiration. The Spirit is an agency rather than an agent. The men

speak. The Spirit impels. It is of much significance for the interpretation of the whole passage that ‘men’ occupies a position of emphasis at the end of the sentence, thus bringing into prominence the human agent. The prophets were not ignorant of the meaning of their prophecies, but they saw clearly only the contemporary political or moral situation, and the principles involved and illustrated therein.” All of which means that the inspired prophets themselves, while understanding only the contemporary application of their prophecies, did not know their full implications and could not therefore limit that meaning to their own time, which would be private or particular interpretation. Translation. Knowing this first, that every prophecy of scripture is not of a particular or limited meaning. For not by the desire of man did prophecy come aforetime, but being carried along by the Holy Spirit, men spoke from God. This process of men being carried along by the Holy Spirit and thus speaking from God is explained by the apostle Paul in his classic passage on that subject in I Corinthians 2:9–16. It was written to a racial group that stands out in history as the most intellectual of all peoples, the Greeks. They were a race of creative thinkers. The sole instrument which they used in their attempt to pierce through the mysteries of existence was human reason. This they sharpened to a keen edge. But it was inadequate to solve the great mysteries of origins, of the wherefore of human existence, of God, and of evil. Plato, one of their great philosophers, said, “We must lay hold of the best human opinion in order that borne by it as on a raft, we may sail over the dangerous sea of life, unless we can find a stronger boat, or some sure word of God, which will more surely and safely carry us.” This great philosopher acknowledged that mere human reason was not sufficient to answer the riddles with which man is confronted, and that the only sure foundation for a system of religious truth was, not even the best of human opinion, but a revelation from God. The man who wrote this passage, declaring to these intellectuals that the Bible has come not from human reason but by divine revelation, was himself trained in their schools. He was a native of Tarsus, a city where Greek culture predominated. The University of Tarsus was known all over the world. Strabo placed it ahead of the universities of Athens and Alexandria in its zeal for learning. Paul’s people were Roman citizens, and also citizens of Tarsus, which latter fact tells us that his family was one of wealth and standing, for during the time of Paul, only people of wealth and standing in the community were allowed to possess Tarsian citizenship. This explains Paul’s statement, “I have suffered the loss of all things” (Phil. 3:8). The city was noted for its intense activity, its atmosphere of what we today call “drive.” Paul was not reared in the lassitude and ease of an oriental city, but in an atmosphere of physical and mental achievement. That he had a thorough training in the University of Tarsus is evident from his words to the Corinthians: “And I having come to you, brethren, came, not having my message dominated by a transcendent rhetorical display or by philosophical subtlety … and my message and my preaching were not couched in specious words of philosophy” (I Cor. 2:1, 4). He could have used these had he wanted to. He was schooled in Greek rhetoric, philosophy, and sophistry, also in Greek literature. Thus in giving the Greeks his teaching of verbal inspiration, Paul was not looking at the subject from only one angle, that of a mystic who knew what fellowship with God was and who had received communications from God, but he had had the other

side of the problem in the Greek university, where he was brought into contact with human reason at its best. He begins the treatment of his subject by telling the Greeks that neither scientific investigation nor human reason has ever been able to discover a sure foundation upon which a religious system could be built. He says, “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard,… the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.” The context makes it clear that these “things” consist of the revelation of truth, the holy Scriptures. But not only has scientific investigation never discovered this truth, but this truth has not been produced by the activity of man’s reason, for he said, “neither have entered the heart of man.” The Greek word translated “entered” does not refer to something entering the mind from the outside, but was used of things that come up in one’s mind. We use the expression today, “It never entered my mind,” meaning by that that the thing never occurred to us. Thus we have the statement of Paul that the truth of Scripture never arose in the consciousness of man, never found its source in the reason of man. Observe the bearing this has upon teaching that finds its basis in the theory of evolution, teaching to the effect that all that the human race knows is the result of divinity resident in man, and that therefore, all knowledge has come from within the race, none from without. After asserting the fact of the final inadequacy of reason in solving the riddle of existence, Paul proceeds to describe the three successive steps in the transmission of truth from the heart of God to the heart of man. These are, revelation, the act of God the Holy Spirit imparting to the Bible writers, truth incapable of being discovered by man’s unaided reason (2:10–12); inspiration, the act of God the Holy Spirit enabling the Bible writers to write down in God-chosen words, infallibly, the truth revealed (2:13); and illumination, the act of God the Holy Spirit enabling believers to understand the truth given by revelation and written down by inspiration (2:14–16). We will deal first with revelation. The first word in our English translation in verse nine, Authorized Version, is “but,” and is the translation of the strong adversative particle in the Greek. But the first word in verse ten should not be “but,” but “for,” since the Greek word here is not adversative but explanatory. Paul explains that the Bible did not come by the way of scientific investigation and human reason, but that it came in another way, by revelation. Then he shows that the very fact that God gave this truth by revelation proves that in the nature of things it could not have been given in any other way, and proceeds in verse eleven to show that this is true. The word “revealed” is the translation of a Greek word which means “to uncover, to lay open what has been veiled or covered up.” The word “us” refers to the Bible writers, for Paul is explaining to the Greeks his knowledge of the truth. The Holy Spirit who searches the deep things of God uncovered this truth to the vision of these men. Then Paul by the use of pure logic proves to these Greeks the impossibility of discovering God’s Word through scientific investigation or human reason. The word “man” in the Greek is not the word which refers to an individual male member of the human race, but is the generic term for man, which includes individuals of both sexes. The second use of the word “man” is accompanied by the definite article which in Greek points out individuality. Thus, our translation is, “For who is there of men who knows the things of the (individual) man.” That is, no individual knows the inner thoughts and heart-life of another person. Man is inscrutable to his fellow-man. The word “spirit” in the Greek refers here to the rational spirit, the power by which a human being feels, thinks, wills, and decides. Again, the word “man” in the phrase, “save

the spirit of man,” is preceded by the article. The Greek article originally came from the demonstrative pronoun, and it retains much of the demonstrative’s force of pointing out. Therefore, we translate, “For who is there of men who knows the things of the (individual) man except the spirit of (that) man which is in him.” Only the individual knows what is in his heart of hearts. To his fellow-man he is inscrutable. Just so, Paul says, logic will lead us to the conclusion that if a man is inscrutable to his fellow-man, so God must be inscrutable to man. And just as only the individual person knows what is in his own heart, so only God knows what is in His own heart. Therefore, if man finds it impossible through scientific investigation and human reason to discover the inner secrets of his fellow-man, it is clear that he cannot find out the mind of God by the same methods. The only way in which a person can come to know the inner heart-life of another person is to have that person uncover the secrets of his inner life to him. It likewise follows that the only way in which a person can know the mind of God is to have God uncover His thoughts to man. Thus Paul has demonstrated to these Greeks the absolute need of a revelation from God if we are to know what is in His heart. The first step therefore, in the transmission of truth from the heart of God to the heart of the believer is revelation, the act of God the Holy Spirit uncovering the things in the heart of God to the Bible writers, thus imparting the truth of Scripture to them. This brings us to the doctrine of verbal inspiration which Paul states in verse thirteen. After the Bible writers had been given the truth by means of the act of the Holy Spirit in uncovering it to them, the apostle says that they were not left to themselves to make a record of it. It is one thing to know a certain fact. It is quite another to find the exact words which will give someone else an adequate understanding of that fact. And right here is where the need of verbal inspiration comes in. Paul first makes the negative statement, “Which things we speak (put into words,  (lalew)), not in words taught by human wisdom.” That is, the words which the Bible writers used were not dictated by their human reason or wisdom. Then the apostle makes the positive statement, “but in words taught by the Spirit.” He says that the words which the Bible writers used were taught them by the Holy Spirit. That is, as they wrote the Scriptures, the Holy Spirit who had revealed the truth to them, now chooses the correct word out of the writer’s vocabulary, whose content of meaning will give to the believer the exact truth God desires him to have. This however does not imply mechanical dictation nor the effacement of the writer’s own personality. The Holy Spirit took the writers as He found them and used them infallibly. Luke’s Greek is the purest and most beautiful. He was a native Greek. Paul’s Greek is far more involved and difficult than John’s, for Paul had a university training, while John’s knowledge of Greek was that of the average man of the first century who knew Greek as his second language but never had any formal training in it. Professor John A. Scott in his excellent book, We Would Know Jesus, speaks of “the superb control of the Greek language” which Luke everywhere showed, and of the “hard and crabbed Greek of Paul as shown in Romans,” also of the flowing language of Paul’s speeches recorded in the Acts, which quality is not due to Paul’s delivery but Luke’s literary excellence. However, whether it is the pure Greek of Luke, the difficult Greek of Paul, or the simple Greek of John, it is all correct as to grammar and syntax. The Holy Spirit observed the rules of Greek grammar as they existed in the koine (koine) Greek of that time. And the wonder of it all is seen in the fact that John brings to his readers just as precious, just as deep truth, in his simple Greek, as Paul does in his intricate constructions and involved

sentences. God the Holy Spirit is above language. Thus we have in the original Hebrew and Greek texts of the Bible manuscripts the very words that God taught the writers to use as they recorded the truth which they had received by revelation. This is what is meant by verbal inspiration. Then Paul in the words “comparing spiritual things with spiritual” explains this process of choosing the right word in each case. We will look carefully at the Greek word translated “comparing,” for it throws a flood of light on Paul’s teaching of verbal inspiration. The word is a compound of the verb meaning “to judge” and a preposition meaning “with,” thus “to judge with.” It speaks of the action of judging something with something else. For instance, a milliner wishes to trim a red hat with ribbon of the same color. She takes the hat over to the spools of ribbon and “judges” the various shades of red ribbon “with” the hat. She compares the hat with ribbon after ribbon in an attempt to find one which will exactly match the color of the hat. She rejects one after another until she finally finds one ribbon that exactly matches the hat. And that is exactly what the word means, “to join fitly together, to combine, to compound.” That is just the procedure which the Bible writers went through in writing their books. As led by the Holy Spirit, they searched their vocabularies for the exact word which would adequately express the truth they wished to record. By the process of comparing the word with the truth they wished to write down, they rejected all those words which the Holy Spirit showed them would not correctly express the thought, and finally chose the word to which the Holy Spirit led them, and upon which the Holy Spirit put His stamp of approval. Thus the Holy Spirit allowed the writers the free play of their personalities, vocabulary, and training, while at the same time guiding them to make an infallible record of truth infallibly revealed. The words, “spiritual things with spiritual,” are from two adjectives in the Greek. The first word translated “spiritual” is in the accusative case, the direct object of the verb “comparing,” and in the neuter gender. It refers to the spiritual truths already given the writers by revelation. The second use of the word “spiritual” is in the instrumenta1 case, the instrumental of association. As to gender this word could be either masculine or neuter, for these two genders have the same form in the genitive through the dative cases. The English reader will please excuse these technicalities. We must look at the context to decide which gender is meant. The two things in the context which are compared and then combined are the truth revealed and the words which would correctly convey this truth. The words “spiritual things” refer to this truth. Therefore the word “spiritual” in its second use in verse thirteen refers to “words.” The gender is therefore masculine since the word “words” in this verse is masculine. Vincent translates this phrase, “combining spiritual things with spiritual words.” G. C. Findlay translates, “wedding kindred speech to thought.” Alford renders it, “putting together spiritual words to spiritual things.” We come now to the doctrine of illumination, namely, the act of God the Holy Spirit enabling the believer to understand the truth given by revelation, and by inspiration written down. Paul says, “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God.” The word “natural” is the translation of a Greek word which Paul uses to describe to the Corinthian Greeks the unregenerate man at his best, the man whom Greek philosophy commended, the man actuated by the higher thoughts and aims of the natural life. The word used here is not the Greek word which speaks of the sensual man. It is the word coined by Aristotle to distinguish the pleasures of the soul, such as ambition and the desire for knowledge, from those of the body. The natural man here spoken of is the educated man at the height of his intellectual powers, but devoid of the Spirit of God. This man,

whose powers of apprehension are limited to the exercise of his reason, does not admit these spiritual things into his heart. The reason for this rejection is that they are foolishness to him. Then Paul states the impossibility of his knowing them, and its reason, because they are spiritually discerned. The Greek word translated “discern” means “to investigate, inquire into, scrutinize, sift, question.” Thus the investigation of, inquiry into, scrutinizing, and sifting of scripture truth is done in the energy of the Holy Spirit who illuminates the sacred page of Scripture to the believer. It is “he that is spiritual” that judgeth all things. The word “judgeth” is the translation of the same Greek word rendered “discerneth.” The Spirit-controlled Christian investigates, inquires into, and scrutinizes the Bible and comes to an appreciation and understanding of its contents. The expanded translation of this important passage is as follows: Translation. But just as it stands written: The things which eye did not see and ear did not hear, and which did not arise within the heart of man, as many things as God prepared for those that love Him. For, to us God uncovered them through the agency of His Spirit. For the Spirit explores all things, yes, the deep things of God. For who is there of men who knows the things of the (individual) man, unless it be the spirit of (that) man which is in him. Even so also the things of God no one knows, but the Spirit of God (knows the things of God). But as for us, not the spirit which animates the world did we receive, but the Spirit who proceeds from God, in order that we might know the things which by God have been freely given to us; which things we speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in words taught by the Spirit, matching spiritual things with Spirittaught words. But the man whose powers of apprehension are limited to the exercise of his reason rejects the things of God since they are foolishness to him. And he is powerless to know them, because they are investigated through the instrumentality of the Spirit. But the man equipped by the Spirit comes to an apprehension of all things, yet he himself is comprehended by no one. For who knows the Lord’s mind, that he should instruct Him? But as for us, we have the mind of Christ. In 1:1–11, Peter has dealt with the subject of the divine provision for a holy life in days of apostasy. A holy life is the most powerful antidote to the false doctrine to which the saint is subject, and a preventive of becoming entangled in the heresies of Modernism. As the believer lives close to the Lord Jesus, controlled by the Holy Spirit, he is constantly being warned against the false doctrines with which he is confronted. In 1:12–21, the inspired apostle speaks of another safeguard against Modernism, namely, a rigid adherence to the doctrine of the full, verbal inspiration of the holy Scriptures, which he has just presented. After all, this is the crux of the whole controversy between the conservative position, sometimes called Fundamentalism, and Modernism. Did God really speak? Is every Hebrew and Greek word in the original autographs which left the hands of the inspired writers a God-chosen word? If so, all the other doctrines of the Christian system are shown to be from God, since they are clearly reiterated in the pages of holy writ, such doctrines as the deity, virgin birth, vicarious atonement, and bodily resurrection of the Lord Jesus.

CHAPTER TWO (2:1) After treating the subject of the Divine Provision for a Holy Life (1:1–11), and the Divine Inspiration of the Scriptures (1:12–21), the inspired apostle deals with the matter of false teachers in the Church (2:1–22). He had been speaking of the true prophets of God who wrote the o.t. scriptures (1:21). Now, he warns against false ones. The chief ministry of the o.t. prophet was a hortatory one to his own generation. That is, he was a preacher who rebuked Israel because of its sins, and pointed to the way of righteousness. His predicting of the future was but one of his ministries. In the case of the n.t. prophet in the Church, the preaching of the gospel of grace to the unsaved and the exposition of the Word to the saints constitute his responsibilities. The designation “teachers” which Peter uses, refers to any man who is engaged in Christian activity, whether a pastor, evangelist, teacher. In short, he is speaking in this section of anyone who teaches the Bible. “There were” is ginomai, (ginomai,) “there arose.” These were self-appointed prophets. “Who” is hoitines, (oiJtine",) speaking not only of identity but including the idea of class or kind, namely, “who were of such a kind or class that” etc. “Privily shall bring in” is  (pareisagw,) made up of  (ajgw,) “to bring,” eis, (eij",) “into,” and para, (para,) “alongside,” thus; “to bring in alongside.” That is, these false teachers, teaching much true doctrine, would cleverly include false teaching with it. Vincent says that the metaphor in the word is that of a spy or traitor. Strachan says: “The idea of ‘stealth’ or ‘secrecy’—‘stealthily to introduce’—is hardly in accord with their character described elsewhere … Rather the idea seems to be of the introduction of false teaching alongside the true, whereby the way of truth is brought into disrepute.” “Damnable heresies” is better rendered (Vincent) “heresies of destruction.” The Revision gives, “destructive heresies.” “Destructive” is the translation of  (ajpwleia,) “ruin, destruction, the destruction which consists in the loss of eternal life, eternal misery, perdition.” The word speaks of the loss of everything that makes human existence worthwhile. The word “heresies” is interesting. It is the English spelling of the Greek word hairesis (aiJresi"), the primary meaning of which is “choice.” Vincent explains: “so that a heresy is, strictly, the choice of an opinion contrary to that usually received.” Peter now mentions what was probably the most serious of the heretical teachings, the denial of the substitutionary death of our Lord. “Bought” is  (ajgorazw), one of the three words used in the n.t. which are translated “redeem.” The word in classical use meant “to purchase in the market place,” and was used of the purchase of slaves in the slave-market. Our Lord’s precious, outpoured blood was the ransom paid to redeem slaves of sin from that slavery. His death satisfied the just demands of the High Court of Heaven, paying the penalty for the sinner, and making a way whereby a righteous God could be just and at the same time the justifier of the believing sinner. Strachan says: “The denial seems to have consisted in an inadequate view of the Person and Work of Christ, and their relation to the problem of human sin.” Of course, such a person is unsaved. We make this point here in order that when we approach the subject matter dealing with the utter destruction of these false teachers, we may he guided by our context. These are not misguided Christians, but heretics. The word “destruction” is the same Greek word  (ajpwleia) discussed above, and which refers to the loss of all that makes existence worthwhile. It is eternal misery apart from a holy God that is in view

here. Translation. But there arose also false prophets among the people, even as also. among you there shall be false teachers, who will be of such a character as to bring in alongside (of true doctrine) destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who purchased them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. (2:2) “Follow” is  (ejxakolouqew), “to follow out to the end, to pursue to its termination,” a line of thought or activity. “Pernicious” is aselgeia (ajselgeia), “unbridled lust, excess, licentiousness, lasciviousness, wantonness, outrageousness, shamelessness, insolence.” The term, therefore, does not refer to the heresies of the false teachers, but to their immoral lives. The latter are the result of the former. “Whom” refers back to the many who followed the false teachers. “The way of truth” is more accurately, “the road of the truth.” The word “way” is to be understood here as a path or road, the road down which a person travels. It does not mean “method” or “manner,” but refers to the outworking of the truth in the life of the Christian, his behavior or manner of life. Thus, Christianity is spoken against by the world by reason of the ungodly lives of professing, and alas, sometimes of possessing Christians. “Evil spoken of” is  (blasfhmew), “to speak reproachfully of, rail at, revile, calumniate.” Translation. And many will follow their licentious conduct to its consummation, on account of whom the way of the truth will be reviled at. (2:3) “Covetousness” is pleonexia (pleonexia), “greedy desire to have more, avarice.” “Through” is en (ejn) followed by the locative of sphere. It is in the sphere of a greedy desire to have more, that these false teachers operate. Robertson says: “These licentious Gnostics made money out of their dupes.” “Feigned” is plastos (plasto"); the verb form is  (plassw), “to mould” as in clay or wax. Vincent says: “The idea is, therefore, of words moulded at will to suit their vain imaginations.” “Make merchandise” is emporeuomai (ejmporeuomai), “to go a trading, to traffic, trade.” The Greek word emporion (ejmporion), from which we get our word “emporium” means “a place where trade is carried on, a seaport, a mart.” Strachan translates, “make gain of, exploit.” Thayer translates, “whose punishment has long been impending and will shortly fall.” Vincent says (quoting Salmond and Lillie), “There is a graphic picture in the sentence. The judgment is not idle. It is ‘represented as a living thing, awake and expectant. Long ago that judgment started on its destroying path, and the fate of sinning angels, and the deluge, and the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah were but incidental illustrations of its power; nor has it ever since lingered.… It advances still, strong and vigilant as when it sprang from the bosom of God, and will not fail to reach the mark to which it was pointed from of old.” “Damnation” is  (ajpwleia), “utter ruin and destruction, the loss of all that makes existence worthwhile.” Translation. And in the sphere of covetousness, with moulded words they will exploit you, for whom the judgment is not lingering, and their destruction is not sleeping.

(2:4) “The angels that sinned” are the angels of Jude 6, 7 whose sin was that of fornication. There is no article before “angels” in the Greek text. They are looked upon as a class and with reference to their position in the scale of created beings, the argument being that if God did not spare a higher order of being to man, namely, angels, He will surely not spare human beings. “If” is ei (eij), the particle of a fulfilled condition. It could be translated “since,” or “in view of the fact” “Hell” here is Tartarus (Tartaru"). This is the prison of the fallen angels until the Great White Throne Judgment, from where they will be sent to eternal misery in the Lake of Fire (Rev. 20:14), the final abode of the wicked dead, also called “hell.” The Greek word is geenna (geenna), from which we get the name “Gehenna” (Matt. 5:22, 29, 30). The word  (aiJdh"), translated “hell” (Matt. 16:18), means “the unseen” and refers to the unseen world of free moral intelligences, holy angels, fallen angels, departed saints, the unsaved who died, Satan, and the demons. The context speaks of the latter two in the unseen world who would destroy the Church if they could. For a full discussion of the three words,  (geenna, tartarwsa"), and  (aiJdh"), see the author’s book, Treasures in the Greek New Testament, chapter 6, “Hell, Hades, and Tartarus.” Here, Peter is speaking of that place in the unseen world where the fallen angels are imprisoned until the Great White Throne Judgment. The word  (tartarwsa") is the Greek pagan name for the place of punishment of the evil. Strachan says: “In Homer, Hades is the place of confinement for dead men, and Tartarus is the name given to a murky abyss beneath Hades in which the sins of fallen immortals are punished. Hence II Peter uses this word in agreement with the Book of Enoch (where Tartarus is the place of punishment of fallen angels) and Greek mythology because he is speaking of fallen angels and not of men.” “Delivered” is  (paradidwmi), “to give over into the hands of another, to deliver to someone something to keep, to commit to another.” God committed these fallen angels into “chains of darkness.” “Chains” is seiros (seiro"), “a pit, an underground granary.” The word seira (seira), meaning “a line, a rope,” is found in some texts, but the best texts have seiros (seiro"), “a pit.” The English reader can see the similarity of the words and understand how the mistake could have occurred in the centuries when the Greek manuscripts were copied by hand. “Darkness” is zophos (zofo"), “blackness, the blackness of (i.e., the densest) darkness,” originally used of the gloom of the nether world. Homer uses the word in the lines, “These halls are full of shadows hastening down to Erebus amid the gloom” (Odyssey). When Ulysses meets his mother in the shades, she says to him, “How didst thou come, my child, a living man, into this place of darkness?” (Odyssey). Milton writes, “Here their prison ordained in utter darkness set, as far removed from God and light of heaven as from the centre thrice to the utmost pole” (Paradise Lost). “To be reserved” is a present participle in the Greek text, showing action going on, thus, “being reserved” for judgment. Translation. For, in view of the fact that God did not spare angels who sinned, but having thrust them down into Tartarus, committed them to pits of nether-world gloom, being reserved for judgment. (2:5) “Saved” is  (fulassw), “to guard a person that he remain safe, that is, lest he suffer violence, be despoiled.” Here it means “to preserve” Noah through the time of the flood. The word has no reference to spiritual salvation. Noah was already a saved

man before he entered the ark. The words “the eighth person” are to be understood as referring to the fact that there were eight people preserved in the ark. “Preacher” is  (khrux), “a herald.” A herald in ancient times was a highly honored person, frequently a spokesman for the emperor, or an ambassador of one country to another. The verbal form means “to proclaim or announce.” Noah proclaimed the message of God for 120 years to the antediluvian world, warning the people of the coming judgment of the flood and showing the way of personal salvation. “Bringing in” is  (ejpagw), “to cause something to befall one, usually something evil.” It is used of “setting on, letting loose” the dogs. “Flood” is kataklusmos (kataklusmo"). The verbal form is  (katakluzw), “to overwhelm with water, to submerge, deluge.” The noun means, “an inundation, deluge.” “Ungodly” is  (ajsebh"), “destitute of reverential awe towards God, impious.” Translation. And did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah as the eighth person (to be preserved), a proclaimer of righteousness, having let loose the deluge upon the world of those who were destitute of reverential awe towards God. (2:6) “Turning into ashes” is  (tefrow), “to reduce to ashes, to consume, destroy.” Strachan says: “ ‘to cover up with ashes,’ not ‘to reduce to ashes,’ found in a description of the eruption of Vesuvius.” “Overthrow” is  (katastrofh), “overthrow, destruction.” The verb is katastrephoµ, “to turn over, turn under, throw down.” Strachan translates: “constituting them an example to ungodly persons of things in store for them.” Translation. And the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha having reduced to ashes, He condemned them to destruction, having constituted them as a permanent example to the ungodly of things about to come. (2:7) “Vexed” is  (kataponew), “to tire down with toil, exhaust with labor, to afflict or oppress with evils.” The vile lives of the people of these two cities wore Lot down as his soul rebelled against the filth he saw always about him. “Conversation” is  (ajnastrofh), “manner of life.” “Wicked” is athesmos (ajqesmo"), “lawless,” used of one who breaks through the restraints of law and gratifies his lusts. The word is stronger than anomos (ajnomo"), “lawless,” because “it is used especially of a divine ordinance, a fundamental law” (Strachan). “Filthy” is aselgeia (ajselgeia), “unbridled lust, excess, wantonness, shamelessness.” The word is in the locative of sphere following the preposition en. (ejn.) Peter is referring to the behavior of the lawless in the sphere of unbridled lust. Translation. And righteous Lot, completely worn down by the manner of life of the lawless in the sphere of unbridled lust, He delivered. (2:8) “Dwelling” is  (ejgkatoikew), “to live in a home,” kata (kata), “down,” and eg (en) (ejg (en)) “in,” or “among.”  (Katoikew) speaks of the act of settling down permanently. It was used of the permanent residents of a town as contrasted to the transients who lived there only for a time. Lot had settled down permanently among the inhabitants of Sodom. “Seeing” is blemma (blemma) (from blepo (blepo)), “a look, a glance.” It is used of the look of a man from without. The

person looking is an onlooker but not a participant of the thing viewed. “Vexed” is  (basanizw), “to torment, to torture.” Strachan remarks: “It is somewhat peculiar that the active should be used. ‘He vexed, distressed his righteous soul.’ May it not be that in the use of the active a certain sense of personal culpability is implied? Lot was conscious that the situation was ultimately due to his own selfish choice.” Strachan translates, “day in, day out.” Translation. For, in seeing and hearing, the righteous one having settled down permanently among them, day in, day out, tormented his righteous soul with their lawless works. (2:9) Strachan says: “The idea here is primarily of those surroundings that try a man’s fidelity and integrity, and not of the inward inducement to sin, arising from the desires. Both Noah and Lot were in the midst of mockers, and unbelievers. This peirasmos (peirasmo") (testing, temptation) is the atmosphere in which faith is brought to full development. It was a condition even in the life of Jesus (Luke 22:28). It is the word used by St. Luke of the Temptation (Luke 4:13). On the one hand peirasmos (peirasmo") is not to be lightly sought (Luke 11:4) nor entered into carelessly (Mk. 14:38); the situation of peirasmos (peirasmo") may itself be the result of sin (I Tim. 6:9). On the other hand, it is a joyous opportunity for the development of spiritual and moral strength (James 1:2, 12). Peirasmos (Peirasmo") becomes sin only when it ceases to be in opposition to the will.” The word originally meant “a test,” and by use, came also to mean “a temptation,” in the sense of a solicitation to do evil. “To be punished” is a present participle in the Greek text. It presents continuous action. Translation. The Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of testing and temptation, but to be reserving the unrighteous for the day of judgment under punishment. (2:10) Peter, having spoken of the sins of the Sodomites, now turns to those of the Libertines. “Walk” is poreuomai (poreuomai). This word means “to proceed along a road, go on a journey.” It speaks of the act of leading or ordering one’s life. The usual word translated “walk” is  (peripatew), “to order one’s behavior.” Poreuomai (Poreuomai) has the added idea of pursuing a course of action. “After” is  (ojpisw), which is used of the act of joining a certain person as an attendant and follower, of running after a thing that one lusts for. “Flesh” is sarx (sarx), and here has reference to the totally depraved nature. The picture in the Greek therefore is of these Libertines pursuing after the evil nature, eager to follow its behests. “Lust” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “passionate desire, a craving.” “Uncleanness” is miasma (miasma), “that which defiles.” The same word is used in 2:20 in the phrase, “the pollutions of the world,” which Thayer defines as “vices the foulness of which contaminates one in his intercourse with the ungodly mass of mankind.” “Despise” is  (katafronew), made up of  (fronew), “to feel, think, have understanding,” and kata (kata) “down,” thus, “to think a thing down.” We say, “look down our noses at a thing.” The compound word means therefore, “to disdain, think little or nothing of, to condemn, despise.” “Government” is  (kurioth") “dominion, power, lordship,” used in the n.t. of one who possesses domimon. Strachan

says: “ (Kurioth") cannot be taken in a purely abstract sense, ‘despising authority.’  (Kurioth") is used in the abstract sense of the Lordship of Christ in Didache 4:1.… As is suggested by this passage in the Didache, we may conclude that by ‘despise government’ is meant a despising of the Lordship of Christ, which was the central theme of the apostolic teaching and preaching.” “Presumptuous” is  (tolmhth"). The verb is  (tolmaw), “to dare, not to dread or shun through fear, to be bold, bear one’s self boldly.” “Selfwilled” is  (aujqadh"), “self-pleasing, arrogant, selfwilled.” “Afraid” is  (tremw), “to tremble, to fear, be afraid.” The trembling spoken of in this word is predominantly physical. “Speak evil of” is  (blasfhmew), “to speak reproachfully of, rail at, revile, calumniate.” “Dignities” is doxa (doxa), used in the n.t. in the meaning of “splendor, brightness, a most glorious condition, most exalted state, used of the majesty (glory) of angels, as apparent in their exterior brightness (Luke 9:26); in a wider sense, in which angels are called doxa (doxa) as spiritual beings of preeminent dignity (Jude 8, II Peter 2:10) (Thayer). Strachan says: “The false teachers may have scoffed at the idea both of angelic help and of diabolic temptation. Their tendency seems to have been to make light of the Unseen, to foster a sense of the unreality both of sin and of goodness, and to reduce the motives of conduct to a vulgar hedonism, (the doctrine that pleasure is the sole or chief good in life, and that moral duty is fulfilled in the gratification of pleasure-seeking instincts and dispositions).” Translation. But especially those who proceed on their way, hot in pursuit of the flesh in the sphere of the passionate desire of that which defiles, and who disdain authority. Presumptuous, arrogant, they do not tremble when defaming those in exalted positions. (2:11) “Power” is ischus (ijscu"), “indwelling strength, especially as embodied, which dwells in persons or things, and gives them influence or value” (Vincent). “Might” is dunamis (dunami"), “ability, faculty, not necessarily manifest, as ischus (ijscu")” (Vincent). The angels are greater in power and might than the false teachers of verse 10. These latter presume to speak evil of the holy angels. But, the holy angels do not presume to speak reproachfully of fallen angels. Strachan is helpful here: “We may note the tendency in II Peter, exemplified here, to put in general terms what Jude states in the particular, in the story of Michael and Satan.… The sentence ‘they bear not against them railing accusation,’ is only intelligible by reference to Jude 9, where Michael does not himself condemn Satan, but says, ‘The Lord rebuke thee.’ ” “Accusation” is krisis (krisi"), “a judgment, an opinion or decision given concerning anything,” especially concerning justice and injustice, right and wrong. “Railing” is  (blasfhmo"), “reproachful.” Translation. Whereas, angels being greater in power and might, are not bringing against them from the presence of the Lord reproachful judgment. (2:12) “These” refers to the false teachers of verse 10. They are described as “natural brute beasts.” “Brute” is aloga (ajloga), “unreasoning, irrational.” Strachan says: “Their chief characteristic is that they are ‘alive,’ and have no sense of the moral issues of life.

Like animals, they exist to be taken and destroyed.” The word “natural” is phusikos (fusiko"), “produced by nature.” “Made” is to be construed with this word. “Made” is  (gennaw), “to beget,” passive, “to be born.” Here the word is a perfect passive participle. Thayer translates, “born mere animals.” The word he defines as “governed by (the instincts of) nature.” Strachan translates, “born creatures of instinct,” and says: “Instinct is here distinguished from the rational centres of thought and judgment.” “To be taken and destroyed” is eis halosin kai phthoran (eij" aJlosin kai fqoran), literally, “for capture and destruction.” Vincent translates, “But these, as creatures without reason, born mere animals to be taken and destroyed.” “Speak evil” is  (blasfhmew), which Strachan here translates, “speaking lightly of things they are ignorant of.” Vincent defines the word. as “railing.” In the words, “shall utterly perish in their own corruption,” we have in the Greek text a cognate construction. The meaning of the verb is the same as the meaning of the noun in the predicate. Vincent reports the Revision translation as follows: “shall in their destroying surely be destroyed.” Translation. But these, as irrational creatures, having been born as creatures of instinct, (destined) for capture and destruction, railing against things of which they are ignorant, shall in their destroying, surely be destroyed. (2:13) The word “receive” in the Greek text is  (ajdikew), in passive as it is here, “receiving unrighteousness.” Thus, the apostle is telling us here that these false teachers are receiving unrighteousness as their hire for unrighteousness. “Riot” is  (trufh), “softness, effeminacy, luxurious living.” These count it a pleasure to live a luxurious life in the day time, which means that they do not work for a living but live off of the money they get from those whom they lead astray into false doctrine. They live luxuriously at a time when men are supposed to be sober and at their daily occupations. See Acts 2:15 and I Thessalonians 5:7. “Sporting” is the translation of the verb  (ejntrufaw), “to live in luxury, to revel in.” “Deceivings” is the translation of apatais (ajpatai") “deceitfulness.” Vincent, Alford, and Robertson argue for the meaning of agapais (ajgapai"), as “a love-feast,” a feast expressing and fostering mutual love which was held by Christians before the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, and at which the poorer Christians mingled with the wealthier and partook in common with the rest, of food provided at the expense of the wealthy. The two words are very similar, apatais (ajpatai") and agapais (ajgapai"). A near sighted or careless scribe could have easily made such an error. Jude uses the word in verse 12 where he speaks of the Christian love feast. This is most probably the case where these false teachers ate with the Christians at the love-feast, enjoying the food provided by the rich. They were spots and blemishes at that occasion. “Spot” is spilos (spilo"), used in secular manuscripts of a spot or stain. Moulton and Milligan report its usage in the expression, “the dregs of humanity from the city.” The word is used metaphorically in Ephesians 5:27. It speaks of a fault or moral blemish. Here it is used of these gluttonous false teachers. “Blemish” is  (mwmo"), “a blot, a disgrace,” used here of men who are a disgrace to society. “Feast” is  (suneuwcew), “to feast sumptuously with.” Vincent says: “The word originally conveys the idea of sumptuous (sumptuou") feasting, and is appropriate in view of the fact to which Peter alludes, that these sensualists converted the love-feast into a revel. Compare Paul’s words (I Cor. 11:21), ‘one is hungry

and another drunken.’ This seems to favor the reading agapais (ajgapai") (love-feast).” Translation. Receiving unrighteousness as the hire for unrighteousness, deeming luxurious living in the day-time a pleasure; moral blemishes and disgraceful blots, living luxuriously at your love-feasts, feasting sumptuously with you. (2:14) Alford and Robertson translate, “having eyes full of an adulteress.” The latter says: “Vivid picture of a man who cannot see a woman without lascivious thoughts toward her (Mayor).” “Cannot cease” is  (ajkatapauw), “unable to stop.” “Beguiling” is  (deleazw), “to catch by bait” “Unstable” is  (ajsthriko"), “unsteadfast,” from  (sthrizw), “to make stable, place firmly, set fast,” and alpha privative which negates the word. It speaks of a person who is not anchored securely, or who is not solidly on a foundation, here, doctrinally and experientially. The translation could better read, “having a heart exercised in covetousness.” The word “exercised” is  (gumnazw). It is the word the Greeks used of an athlete exercising in the gymnasium. Here it speaks of the exercise of the heart, the latter standing for the reason, the will, and the emotions. The word is a perfect participle, speaking of a past completed action having present results. These false teachers had lived in a heart atmosphere of covetousness for so long that their heart condition was one of a permanent state. The Greek has it, “children of cursing,” the latter word, genitive of description. That was the character of these false teachers. “Curse” is katara (katara), “an execration, imprecation, curse.” The word is used of one who is under the divine curse. Translation. Having eyes full of an adulteress and which are unable to cease from sin, catching unstable souls with bait, having a heart completely exercised in covetousness, children of a curse. (2:15, 16) “Have forsaken” is  (kataleipw), “to abandon.” It is in the present tense, “abandoning,” emphasizing habitual action. “The right way” is “the straight road.” “Way” here is hodos (oJdo"), “a road,” metaphorically, “a course of conduct, a way of thinking, feeling, deciding.” “Right” is euthus (eujqu"), “straight, level, right.” Abandoning the straight way, they went astray. “Following” is an aorist participle, “having followed out to the end.” The verb is  (ejxakolouqew), the prefixed preposition being perfective in force, intensifying the already existing idea in the verb. These false teachers followed out most assiduously the way of Balaam. The verb means, “to tread in one’s steps, to imitate one’s way of acting.” Balaam was the hireling prophet who commercialized his gift. These false teachers were in the profession for the money they could get out of it. The word “loved” is  (ajgapaw), “a love called out of one’s heart by the preciousness of the object loved.” The same word is used of Demas who loved this present age (II Tim. 4:10). “Was rebuked” is literally “had a rebuke.” “His iniquity” is idias paranomias (ijdia" paranomia"), “his own transgression.” The possessive speaks of what is one’s own private, unique possession. The word translated “iniquity” (a.v.) is made up of nomos (nomo"), “law,” and para (para), “contrary to,” thus, “one who acts contrary to law.” “Ass” is hupozugion (uJpozugion), literally, “that which is beneath the yoke,” “namely, “a beast of burden.” “Dumb” is  (ajfwnon), “without the faculty of speech.” The

word “speaking” is phtheggomai, “to give out a sound, noise, cry”; used by the Greeks of any sound or voice, whether of man or animal or inanimate object, as of thunder, musical instruments. It denotes sound in its relation to the hearer rather than its cause. The inarticulate animal spoke in a human voice. “Forbad” is  (kwluw), “to hinder, check, restrain.” Translation. Abandoning the straight way, they went astray, having followed assiduously the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who set a high value upon and thus came to love the hire of unrighteousness, but had a rebuke for his own transgression, the inarticulate beast of burden having spoken in a man’s voice, restrained the insanity of the prophet. (2:17) “Well” is  (phgh), “a spring.” The Greek word for a “well” is phrear (frear). The word  (phgh) speaks of an ever-upleaping living fountain. The words “without water” are an oriental expression where the green verdure excites the traveller’s hope of water, only to have it often disappointed. Such are these false teachers. Where one looks for a clear spring of water, the living Word of God, there is a spring gone dry. “Clouds” does not occur in the best manuscripts, rather  (oJmiclh), “a mist, a fog.” “Carried” is  (ejlaunw), “to drive”; used of the wind driving ships or clouds. “Tempest” is lailaps (lailay), “a whirlwind, a tempestuous wind, a squall, a violent wind.” It is never a single gust, nor a steadily blowing wind, however violent, but a storm breaking forth from black thunder-clouds in furious gusts, with floods of rain, and throwing everything topsy-turvey (Thayer). “Mist of darkness” is “blackness of the darkness.” “Is reserved” is perfect in tense, namely, “has been reserved with the present result that it is kept in store.” False teachers are devoid of the Holy Spirit. Our Lord speaks of the one who drinks of the water that He shall give (John 4:14), and says that that water shall become in him a spring ( (phgh)) of water leaping up into eternal life. John in 7:39 says that our Lord’s use of water here as a symbol points to the Holy Spirit. Translation. These are springs without water; and mists driven by a tempest, for whom the blackness of the darkness has been reserved. (2:18) “Speak” is phtheggomai (fqeggomai), the same word used when Balaam’s beast of burden was uttering sounds. It denotes sound in relation to the hearer rather than the cause. From this we judge that the inspired apostle used this distinctive word to indicate that “the great swelling words” were spoken with an oratorical flare that would impress the hearers. One could better translate “utter.” “Great swelling” is huperogka (uJperogka) from huper (uJper) “over,” and ogkos (ojgko"), “a swelling,” thus “overswollen,” used metaphorically with the meanings of “immoderate, extravagant”; Thayer says, “expressive of arrogance.” Vincent comments: “The word means ‘of excessive bulk.’ It accords well with the peculiar word uttering, since it denotes a kind of speech full of high-sounding verbosity without substance.” The word “words” is not in the Greek text, but is rightfully supplied. “Vanity” is mataios (mataio"), “empty, vain” in the sense of “futile, in vain.” Strachan remarks that the reference no doubt is to Gnostic terms. Mataios (Mataio") (vanity) is used especially of moral insincerity. The verbose speech of these false teachers was futile in that it did not fulfil that for which speech was intended, to convey accurate

and true information. All it did was to allure like bait the hearers so that they would become followers of the false teachers. “Allure” is  (deleazw), “to catch by bait, to beguile by blandishments, to entice.” These false teachers allure through the lusts of the flesh, namely, the cravings of the totally depraved nature. That is, they appeal to these cravings and satisfy; them. The evil nature is that which they catch hold of to lead their hearers astray. Our Lord said in this connection, “The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me” (John 14:30), that is, Satan found nothing, no fallen nature in our Lord to catch hold of. “Wantonness” is aselgeia (ajselgeia). Thayer’s note on this word as it is used in this passage is as follows: ”plural, wanton. acts or manners, as filthy words, indecent bodily movements, unchaste handling of males and females.” The word is in apposition to “cravings.” That is, the false teachers use bait to catch their hearers, satisfying the cravings of the fallen nature in the realm of aselgeia (ajselgeia), these wanton acts or manners. “Clean” is the translation of ontos (ojnto"), “really, actually,” the Greek word being found in the Received Text which the translators of a.v. used. The best texts today read  (ojligw"), “in a little degree, just, scarcely.” “Escaped” is a present participle, denoting a process going on. The translation reads, “those who are just about escaping,” denoting, as Vincent says, “those who are in the early stage of their escape from error, and are not safe from it and confirmed in the truth.” Strachan describes these as those “who have been impressed with Christian truth, and have had strength to separate themselves from their old surroundings and customs, but are led to return through the compromises suggested by the false teachers. The phenomenon is not uncommon in all missionary work, of men who have escaped from ‘Gentile vices,’ but are not yet established in Christian virtues.” Those “who live in error” are the false teachers. “Live” is  (ajnastrefw), “to conduct one’s self.” “Error” is  (planh), “a wandering, a straying about, error, wrong opinion relative to morals or religion.” Translation. For when they are uttering extravagant things that are in their character futile, they are alluring by means of the cravings of the flesh (evil nature), by means of wanton acts, those who are just about escaping from those who are ordering their behavior in the sphere of error. (2:19) Strachan, commenting on the words, “while they promise them liberty,” says: “Doubtless that Antinomianism (against law, thus lawlessness, not responsible to law) is indicated to which the doctrine of grace has ever been open. Compare Galatians 5:13. It arises from the ever-recurring confusion of liberty and license. The training of conscience is contemporaneous with the growth of Christian character. The Pauline teaching, which abrogated external legality, was open to abuse, and might easily be dangerous to recent converts from heathenism.” The liberty spoken of in Galatians 5:1 is liberty from the Mosaic law, not liberty to do as one pleases. The one set at liberty from the law is under a stronger and more effective compulsion, namely, divine love as ministered to the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:13). These false teachers, not being saved and therefore not knowing grace, misrepresented the latter as license to sin. “Servants” is doulos (doulo"), “slaves.” The word is a designation of the most abject, servile form of slavery. The Greek back of the translation, “of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he

brought in bondage,” is literally, “by whom a person has been overcome with the result that he is in a state of subjugation, to this one has he been enslaved with the result that he is in a state of slavery.” The perfect tense is used by Peter. Translation. While they are promising them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption. For by whom a person has been overcome with the result that he is in a state of subjugation, to this one has he been enslaved with the result that he is in a state of slavery. (2:20, 21) The subject of false teachers is continued in this verse. These are the false teachers of 2:1 who deny the doctrine of atonement by the substitutionary death of the Lord Jesus. Hence they are not saved, only professing Christians. They are said to have had a knowledge of the Lord Jesus. It is one thing to know Him personally, as a believer does, and another to know of Him, namely, the facts about Him, and to give a mental acquiescence to these, as an unbeliever does. Such a knowledge resulted in their escaping the pollutions of the world. The world here is kosmos (kosmo"), the world system of evil. That in this system which they escaped is given us in the word miasma (miasma). Thayer defines this word as “that which defiles,” and explains it in its occurrence here as “vices the foulness of which contaminates one in his intercourse with the ungodly mass of mankind.” Strachan says: “In the LXX (Septuagint, Greek translation of the Old Testament) the word seems to have a technical religious sense, the profanation of flesh by ordinary use which is set apart for sacrifice. This sense lingers here. The body is sacred to God, and to give licentious rein to the passions is miasma (miasma) (pollution).” The moral and ethical influence of the Word of God had acted as a detergent and a deterrent upon these false teachers to the end that their outward lives had been relatively pure. But as they persisted in their false teaching that grace gave license to sin, they became entangled in their former licentious ways. “Entangle” is  (ejmplekw), “to inweave.” The noun speaks of an interweaving, a braiding. Their going back to their former immoral lives was not the act of a moment, but a gradual process, as the word implies. Vincent quotes a classical author (Aeschylus) on the use of this word, “For not on a sudden or in ignorance will ye be entangled by your folly.” Translation. For if, having escaped the pollutions of the world by a knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in these moreover again being entangled, they have been overcome with the result that they are in a state of subjuqation, the last things have become to them worse than the first ones; for it were better for them not to have known the way of the righteousness, than, having known it, to turn back from the holy commandment which was delivered to them. (2:22) Peter quotes Proverbs 26:11 in mentioning the dog. The second saying is not found in Scripture. Pagan sources speak of the habit of hogs delighting to bathe in a filthy mudhole. Robertson refers to a story about a hog in ancient literature “that went to the bath with people of quality, but on coming out saw a stinking drain, and went and rolled himself in it.” These unsaved teachers, cleaned up on the outside, experiencing an outward moral reformation but not an inward regeneration, like the sow, went back to their wallowing in

the gross forms of sin from which they had been outwardly delivered by the cleansing action of an intellectual knowledge of the Word of God. Translation. But it has happened to them according to the true saying: a dog returns to his own vomit, and a sow, having been bathed, to her rolling in mire.

CHAPTER THREE (3:1, 2) After dealing with the presence of false teachers in the first century church, Peter predicts that there will be such in the last times. “Pure” is  (eijlikrinh"), “unmixed, unsullied, sincere,” here, free from falsehoods. “Be mindful” is  (mimnhskw), “to remind.” Translation. This already, divinely-loved ones, is a second letter I am writing to you, in which I am stirring up your unsullied mind by way of remembrance, that you should remember the words spoken previously by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Saviour spoken by your apostles. (3:3) “Scoffers” is  (ejmpaikth"), “a mocker, a scoffer.” The cognate verb is  (ejmpaizw), “to play with, to trifle with, to mock.” “Lusts” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a desire,” here, as the context shows, “evil desires.” Translation. Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last of the days mockers with mockery, ordering their manner of life according to their own personal desires. (3:4) The question which faces the expositor now is as to the identity of this coming. Is it the coming of our Lord into the air to catch out the Church, or is it His Second Advent to this earth to reign? The following considerations indicate that it refers to the Advent. The word “coming” is parousia (parousia), literally, “a being alongside,” hence a personal presence. The word is used of the Rapture and the Advent. So the word itself is not decisive. First, Peter had spoken of the Advent in 1:16 (see work on that verse), second, the false teachers are not to be judged at the Rapture but at the Advent, and third, the context (3:10) speaks of the day of the Lord, which occurs at the time of the second Advent. There are four days in Scripture, the day of man (I Cor. 4:3, “man’s judgment,” Greek, “man’s day”), that time starting with Adam’s fall until the second Advent when unsaved man has liberty under the permissive will of God to do as he pleases; the day of Christ (Phil. 1:6), when Christ has His day in the catching out of His Bride at the Rapture; the day of the Lord (Isaiah 13:9, Rev. 6–20), the Great Tribulation and the Millennium, when the Lord has His day, visiting judgment upon the ungodly; the day of God (II Peter 3:12), when God has His day, the close of the Millennium, the Great White Throne judgment, and the restoration of the earth and its planetary heavens to their pristine glory. The end-time mockers will mock at the promise of our Lord’s second Advent. The basis of their rejection of the second Advent according to John in his second letter (v. 7) is that they deny that Jesus Christ comes in flesh. That is, they deny that the Jehoshua of the

Old Testament (Jehovah who saves) who is designated as the Anointed One (Christ) in the New Testament, ever would become incarnate, assume a human body and put Himself under human limitations without its sin. The denial of an incarnation today is given a rationalistic basis in the theory of evolution which teaches that the universe and man are such today by reason of the operation of a resident force in matter and man that is developing both from a crude beginning toward a perfect conclusion without the aid of any outside force. In short, the theory will not permit the introduction of anything or anyone from the outside into the unbroken continuity of existence, hence, no incarnation. The basis of the end-time mocker’s rejection of the second Advent is that from the beginning of the creation, all things continue as they were. Here we have the unbroken continuity of existence given as a reason for rejecting the coming of the Lord Jesus, no introduction of anything from without into the affairs of the human race. The promise of the Lord’s return must have been tied up in the minds of these mockers with the judgment of God upon the ungodly, for Peter in 3:5–12 speaks of the past judgment of Genesis 1:2 and the future judgment of the day of the Lord. The argument of the end-time false teachers is that since there was no judgment meted out upon the ungodly in the past, there will be none in the future. Alford explains the statement of the mockers as follows: “The time of waiting for the promise necessarily dates from the death of the fathers, and the duration of things continuing as they are now extends back beyond the death of the fathers; so that the meaning will be, ever since the death of those to whom the promise was made, things have continued as we now see them (and as they have ever continued even before the fathers) from the beginning of the creation.” All of which echoes the intent of the present day theory of naturalism which contends that nothing happened in days gone by that does not happen today. The fathers are evidently those to whom the promise of our Lord’s coming was made. Alford says that they are “largely and generally those to whom the promise was made; the same as are indicated in Romans 9:5; yet not exclusively these, but simultaneously with them any others who may be in the same category, namely, those who bear to the n.t. Church the same relation as they to that of the o.t.” The words, “fell asleep,” are a euphemism for death, that is, a pleasant way of speaking of something that in itself is not pleasant. Translation. And saying, Where is the promise of His coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things are remaining permanently in that state in which they were from the beginning of the creation. (3:5, 6) The literal Greek is, “for this escapes them being willing” (Robertson); Vincent translates, “this escapes them of their own will,” and quotes the Revision, “this they wilfully forget.” Alford suggests: “for (i.e., they speak thus because) this (namely, this fact which follows) escapes them (passes unnoticed by them) of their own will (i.e., they shut their eyes to this fact).” All of which means that the denial of the second Advent by these false teachers is due to a culpable ignorance on their part. The key to the understanding of the rest of verse five is in the word “world.” It is kosmos (kosmo"), which speaks of a system where order prevails. This word refers here to the original perfect system of the material universe of Genesis 1:1 which was brought into being by the fiat of God. He spoke the universe into existence. What a commentary as to the condition of the first perfect earth, the surface of which was made up of land masses

surrounded by water. This earth “being overflowed with water, perished.” This refers to the cataclysm of Genesis 1:2 where we read, “and the earth became without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep.” It was the judgment upon the fall of the angel Lucifer and the consequent apostasy of the pre-Adamic race. This judgment the endtime mockers are wilfully ignorant of, like the fictitious ostrich who buries his head in the sand and thus thinks to escape danger. The ancient Greeks thought the primeval condition of the earth was one of chaos. The theory of evolution starts with a chaos. The New Testament writers, using kosmos (kosmo"), describe the original condition of the universe as one of perfection. The sons of God (the angels) did not shout for joy over a chaos (cao") (Greek for a rude, unformed mass), but a kosmos (kosmo") when they saw this universe come into existence by the creative fiat of God (Job 38:4–7). The word “overflowed” is  (katakluzw), “to overwhelm with water, to submerge, deluge,” from which we get our word “cataclysm.” “Perished” is apollumi (ajpollumi), “to ruin so that the thing ruined can no longer subserve the use for which it was designed.” The Greek text back of the words, “the earth standing out of the water and in the water” is most difficult. The word “standing” is  (sunisthmi), “to place with” something else, thus, “to set or place together, to stand with or near” the former in a transitive sense, the latter in an intransitive. The word is a participle in the perfect tense. Thayer under this word states that the verb in this tense is used intransitively. It refers to the juxtaposition of the things, one next to another. Thus, the thought of Peter is that the land and water on the perfect earth of Genesis 1:1 were in juxtaposition, the earth rendered so out (ek (ejk)) of water and by means of (dia (dia)) water. Alford offers the following explanation: “out of water, because the waters that were under the firmament were gathered together into one place and the dry land appeared; and thus water was the material out of which the earth was made; by means of water, because the waters below the firmament by furnishing moisture and rain, and keeping moist the earth, are the means by which the earth ( (sunisthmi)) holds together.” Vincent says: “out of water, denoting not the position of the earth, but the material or mediating element in the creation; the waters being gathered together in one place, and the dry land appearing.… By means of water, (Bengel); The water served that the earth should consist, that is, cohere.” Robertson says that it is not plain what is meant by “by means of water,” and Strachan states that the meaning is obscure. Translation. For concerning this they wilfully forget that heavens existed long ago, and earth out of water as a source and by means of water cohering by the word of God, through which the ordered world of that time having been deluged by water, was ruined. (3:7) “Kept in store” is  (qesaurizw), “to gather and lay up, store up.” We have what is called a periphrastic perfect participle speaking of a past storing up completed, with a present state of being stored with that which has been gathered and laid up. “Fire” is in the instrumental case, showing the thing which was instrumental in completing the action in the verb. The present heavens and earth have been stored with fire with the present result that the deposit of fire with which they were stored resides in them as a permanent deposit. This present condition of the heavens and the earth, that of being stored up with fire, is being constantly maintained (reserved  (threw), guarded) with a view to the day of

judgment of ungodly men, the Great White Throne judgment which will occur at the close of the Millennium, at which time the wicked dead, fallen angels, and demons will be judged, to be sent to an eternity of suffering, banished from the presence of a holy God (Rev. 20:11–15). “Perdition” is  (ajpwleia). The verb is apollumi (ajpollumi), “to be delivered up to eternal misery, to incur the loss of all things that make existence worth while.” The noun ( (ajpwleia)) means “eternal misery.” “Ungodly” is  (ajsebh"), “destitute of reverential awe towards God.” Translation. But the present heavens and the earth by the same word have been stored with fire, being kept so guarded with a view to the day of judgment and eternal misery of men destitute of reverential awe towards God. (3:8) “Be ignorant” is  (lanqanw) which means literally “to be hidden,” thus, “stop allowing (this) to be hidden from you.” Robertson translates, “let not this one thing escape you.” The present imperative with  (mh) (not) is used in the Greek text, forbidding the continuance of an action or state already going on. The scoffing false teachers were deliberately allowing the fact Peter wishes to bring to their attention now to escape them. It was a culpable ignorance, as we saw in a previous verse. How are we to understand the words, “With the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day”? Alford suggests: “We are not to judge God, in the case of delay, as we do men, seeing that His thoughts are not as our thoughts.… The saying is the completion of Psalm 90:4, setting forth also in a wonderful way, that one day may be in God’s sight as productive of events as a millennium.” Robertson says: “Peter applies the language of Psalm 90:4 about the eternity of God and shortness of human life to ‘the impatience of human expectations’ (Bigg) about the second coming of Christ. ‘The day of judgment is at hand (I Pet. 4:7). It may come tomorrow, but what is tomorrow? What does God mean by a day? It may be a thousand years.’ (Bigg).” Strachan comments: Infinite compassion overrides in the divine Mind all finite reckoning.” The false teachers argue that the second Advent has not occurred after so many years of delay, therefore, it will not occur. Peter reminds them that God does not look at the passing of time as we do. He, in His eternal being does not experience time as such, and the passing of a thousand years is no different to Him than the passing of a day, so far as His predicted actions are concerned. Therefore, their argument is fallacious. Translation. But this one thing, stop allowing it to be hidden from you, divinely-loved ones, that one day in the sight of the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. (3:9) “Is slack” is  (brandunw), “to delay or loiter.” The Septuagint has it “to linger.” Alford translates “to be tardy.” “The word implies, besides delay, the idea of lateness with reference to an appointed time” (Vincent). Strachan comments: “The idea combated is that God has made a promise and has not kept it. He is, however, better than His promise. The additional element of His long suffering is brought into play. God is greater than men’s conception of Him especially if their’s is a mechanical view of the universe.… As nowhere else in the epistle, here the writer of II Peter enables us to view

the summit of the Christian faith, and to rise to a magnificent conception of God.… Delay does not spring from an unwillingness or impotence to perform. His will is not even that ‘some’ should perish, though that is regarded by the writer as inevitable.… Some will perish, but it is not His will. His will is that all should come to repentance. The goodness of God should lead to repentance.” The word “willing” is boulomai (boulomai). The synonyms  (qelw) and boulomai (boulomai) mean “to wish, desire.” Thayer says: “Many agree with Prof. Grimm that  (qelw) gives prominence to the emotional element, boulomai (boulomai), to the rational and volitional; that  (qelw) signifies the choice, while boulomai (boulomai) marks the choice as deliberate and intelligent; yet they acknowledge that the words are sometimes used indiscriminately, and especially that  (qelw) as the less sharply defined term is put where boulomai (boulomai) would be proper.” Trench, in his Synonyms of the New Testament says regarding synonyms: “All that we certainly affirm is that, granting this, (namely, that there may be one hundred passages where it would be quite as possible to use the one as the other), there is a hundred and first, where one would be appropriate and the other not, or where, at all events, one would be more appropriate than the other.” It would seem that boulomai (boulomai) is used here advisedly by Peter. It is not God’s considered will that any should perish. There is the sovereignty of God and the free will of man. God will not violate man’s will. While it is His considered will that no one should be lost, yet in making man in His image He necessarily had to make him a free moral agent, with a will which is able to say “yes” and “no” to Him. While God is always willing to save man, man is not always willing to be saved. “Longsuffering” is makrothumia (makroqumia), God’s infinite patience with sinners who put Him to the test and provoke Him. Trench says: “Men may tempt (test) and provoke Him, and He may and does display an infinite makrothumia (makroqumia) in regard of them (Ex. 34:6; Rom. 2:4; I Pet. 2:20); there may be a resistance to God in men, because He respects the wills which He has given them, even when those wills are fighting against Him.” Peter says that the seeming delay of God in fulfilling His promise of the second Advent is not any tardiness on His part to keep an appointment, but is due to His long patience with sinners, giving the human race an opportunity, generation after generation, to accept the salvation He has wrought out on the Cross. Translation. The Lord is not tardy with regard to the appointed time of His promise, as certain consider tardiness, but is long-suffering toward us, not having it as His considered will that certain should perish, but that all should come to repentance. (3:10) The Church is today in its last age, the Laodicean period (Rev. 3:14–19). The next prophetic event will be the Day of Christ or the Rapture of the Church. Following that will come the Great Tribulation, a period of seven years, the seventieth week of Daniel (9:24–27). That is to be followed by the one thousand year world empire of the Lord Jesus (Rev. 20:1–7). At its conclusion the Great White Throne judgment will occur, at which the wicked dead will be judged. This is what Peter has reference to in 3:7 when he speaks of “the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” At this time will occur the renovation of the earth and its planetary heavens mentioned in 3:7, 10, 12. The Day of

the Lord comprises the Great Tribulation and the Millennium. This great conflagration occurs at the latter’s end. The Millennium merging into eternity is the Day of God (3:12). That aspect of the Day of the Lord which will come suddenly and unawares as a thief will be the second half of the seven-year period in which Anti-christ turns against the human race to become the ruthless dictator, and the judgments of God fall upon a Christrejecting world. Not only will the beginning of the Day of the Lord come suddenly, but its end at the close of the Millennium will come unexpectedly. The Great White Throne judgment and the great conflagration will come upon the earth dwellers who are unsaved as suddenly as the judgment of the Great Tribulation. The greatest harvest of souls this earth has ever seen will come during the Millennium. Our Lord will rule as earth dictator. There will be universal righteousness, peace, and prosperity. Satan and his demons will be in the bottomless pit, the nation of Israel will be saved, and only true doctrine will be preached. But despite all this, there will be masses of humanity still unsaved at the end of the thousand years. To these the final judgment of The Great White Throne and the earthconflagration will come as a surprise. “Noise” is roizedon (rJoizedon). The sound of the word suggests the meaning. The word was used of the whistling of an arrow, the sound of a shepherd’s pipe, the rush of wings, the splash of water, the hissing of a snake, and the sound of filing. “Elements” is stoicheia (stoiceia), referring here to the four elements of which the universe is composed, fire, air, earth, and water. The words “pass away” are the translation of  (paraluw), “to loosen, dissolve.” “Melt” is  (luw) “to dissolve.” “Fervent heat” is  (kausow), “to burn up, to set fire to.” The word denotes a violent consuming heat. Literally, “the elements being scorched up, shall be dissolved.” As to the original text back of the words “shall be burned up,” authorities differ. The Nestle text gives the future of  (euJriskw), “shall be found.” Robertson suggests  (katakahsetai), “shall be burned up,” which from contextual considerations seems to be the most likely. Translation. But there will come the Lord’s day as a thief, in which the heavens with a rushing noise will be dissolved, and the elements being scorched up will be dissolved, and the earth also and the works in it will be burned up. (3:11, 12) The Greek has it, “all these things being in the process of dissolution.” “Ought” is dei (dei), “it is a necessity in the nature of the case.” “To be” is  (uJparcw), “to be” in the sense that an antecedent condition is protracted into the present. That is, saints are obligated to maintain the holy life of separation in which they started in the Christian life. “Holy conversation” is “holy manner of life.” The Greek word “holy” (hagios (aJgio")), means basically, “set apart for the service of God.” Thus, a holy life is a separated life, separated from the world and to God. “Godliness” is eusebeia (eujsebeia), “piety toward God.” Both “conversation” and “godliness” are plural. Robertson translates, “holy behaviours and pieties.” “Looking for” is  (prosdokaw), “to expect, look for, wait for.” The prefixed preposition pros (pro") means “towards” and adds the idea of “mental direction” to the already existing meaning of the verb. “Hasting” is  (speudw), “to hasten, to desire earnestly.” Vincent says: “I am inclined to adopt, with Alford, Huther, Salmond, and Trench the transitive meaning, hastening on. i.e., ‘causing the day of the Lord to

come more quickly by helping to fulfil those conditions without which it cannot come; that day being no day inexorably fixed, but one the arrival of which it is free to the church to hasten on by faith and by prayer’ (Trench). See Matthew 24:14,1 ‘this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.’ Compare the words of Peter, Acts 3:19,2 ‘Repent and be converted’ etc., that so there may come seasons of refreshing,’ and the prayer, ‘thy kingdom come.’ Salmond quotes a rabbinical saying, ‘If thou keepest this precept thou hastenest the day of Messiah.’ ” All of which means that Peter teaches here that the saints can hasten the coming of the day of God by a holy life. “Wherein,” Vincent says is not correct. The Greek is  (di hJn), the preposition dia (dia), meaning “because of,” and the relative pronoun. Translation. All these things in this manner being in process of dissolution, what sort of persons is it necessary in the nature of the case for you to be in the sphere of holy behaviors and pieties, looking for and hastening the day of God, on account of which (day) heavens being on fire shall be dissolved and elements burning up are being melted. (3:13) “New” is kainos (kaino"), “the new as seen from the aspect of quality; the new, as set over against that which has seen service, the outworn, the effete or marred through age” (Trench). The present heavens and earth, beautiful as they are, are under the curse placed upon them because of Adam’s sin. The new heavens and earth, new in quality, free from any curse, will surely be beautiful beyond the wildest expectation of man. “Dwelleth” is  (katoikew), “to be permanently at home.” Translation. But new heavens and a new earth according to His promise we are looking for, in which righteousness is permanently at home. (3:14) “Wherefore” is dio (dio), “on which account, wherefore.” “Beloved” is  (ajgaphtoi), “divinely-loved ones.” The word for “love” is  (ajgaph), used for the love that God is (I John 4:18), the love with which God loves the lost (John 3:16) and His own (John 13:34, 17:23). It is not Peter who is said to be loving the recipients, although he does, but God. Peter is reminding the saints that they are loved ones of God, loved with a divine and infinite love. “Be diligent” is  (spoudazw), “do your best, make haste, take care, hurry on.” Paul uses this same word in II Timothy 2:15. The word speaks of intense effort. “Of Him” is  (aujtwi), the personal pronoun in the dative case. The idea is, “Do your best to be found with respect to Him, in relation to Him,” thus, with respect to His coming and at that time by Him. “In peace” refers to the saints living at peace with one another. “Without spot” is aspilos (ajspilo"), “spotless,” used metaphorically, “free from censure, irreproachable.” “Blameless” is  (ajmwmhtoi), “that which cannot be blamed or found fault with.” Translation. On which account, divinely-loved ones, since you are looking for these things, do your best to be found with reference to Him irreproachable and unblameable, in peace. (3:15, 16) “Our Lord” refers to the Lord Jesus as the context (v. 18) indicates. Alford

says in this connection, “Throughout this weighty passage, the Lord Jesus is invested with the full attributes of Deity. It is He who waits and is longsuffering; He in His union and co-equality with the Father, who rules all things after the counsel of His own will.” The longsuffering of God gives opportunity for repentance and thus salvation for the lost who put their trust in the Lord Jesus. Robertson, commenting upon the rest of verse 15 says: “Peter claimed wisdom for himself, but recognizes that Paul had the gift also. His language here may have caution in it as well as commendation. ‘St. Peter speaks of him with affection and respect, yet maintains the right to criticise’ (Bigg).” “Account” is  (hJgeomai), “to consider, deem.” “Wrest” is  (streblow), “to twist, turn away.” The noun form refers to an instrument of torture. The verb thus means also, “to torture, put to the rack, to twist or dislocate the limbs on the rack.” Vincent says that “it is a singularly graphic word applied to the perversion of scripture.” The words, “other scriptures” show that Paul’s epistles were ranked as scripture at that time. Translation. And the longsuffering of our Lord, consider it as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul according to the wisdom given to him, wrote to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them concerning these things, in which (epistles) are certain things hard to be understood, which those who are unlearned and lacking stability distort (from their proper meaning) as also the rest of the scriptures to their own destruction. (3:17, 18) Robertson suggests that, since the recipients of this letter had a knowledge of the things which Peter was telling them, “they are without excuse for misunderstanding Peter and Paul on this subject.” “Beware” is  (fulassw), “to guard,” a military term. That is, “be on your guard.” “Being led away” is  (sunapagw), in passive as here, and in a metaphorical sense, “to be carried away with, so as to experience with others the force of that which carries away.” “With the error” is instrumental case, “by the error.” The word “error” is  (planh), “a wandering, a straying about,” whereby one, led astray from the right way, roams hither and thither. Vincent says: “It is the word used by Paul of Barnabas, when he dissembled (played the hypocrite) with Peter at Antioch. ‘Barnabas was carried away with their dissimulation.’ “ “Fall” is  (ejkpiptw), “to fall out of.” “Wicked” is athesmos (ajqesmo"), “lawless,” of one who breaks through the restraints of law and gratifies his lusts. Alford, commenting on the word “grow” says; “not only do not fall from your own steadfastness but be so firmly rooted as to throw out branches and yield increase.” This growth should be in the sphere of “grace and the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” That is, this growth is in the spiritual sphere. This grace is “the grace of which Christ is the author and bestower” (Vincent), grace for daily Christian living, namely, the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit in the yielded saint, and the Christian graces which are the product of His work. This knowledge is “the knowledge of which Christ is the object” (Vincent). This refers to the saint’s knowledge of the Lord Jesus as his Saviour and Lord, as his friend and companion. Translation. As for you, therefore, divinely-loved ones, knowing (these things) beforehand, be constantly on your guard lest having been carried away by the rovings of the lawless ones, you fall from your own steadfastness. But be constantly growing in the

sphere of the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and forever.

FIRST JOHN In the Greek New Testament In order to reap the most benefit from his study, the student is urged to work through John’s letter verse by verse, with his Bible and this exegesis before him, seeking to understand the meaning of the Word in the light of the word studies, interpretations, and expanded translation.

CHAPTER ONE (1:1) John begins his letter with a relative pronoun in the neuter gender, “that which.” The reference is to things relating to the Lord Jesus. We are not to understand the expression as equivalent to “He who.” The preposition “of” in the expression “of the Word of life” is peri (peri), “concerning.” This speaks of the things concerning our Lord, rather than of Him personally. John speaks of that which was true of our Lord from the beginning. “Was” is the verb of being in the Greek text (eime (eijme), “to be,” not ginomai (ginomai), “to become.”) It is in the imperfect tense which speaks of an abiding state in past time. Thus, John has reference to those things that were true of our Lord since the beginning. In his Gospel, he begins with the majestic words, “In the beginning was the Word.” The context there identifies this beginning as the beginning of created things. That is, when all creation came into existence, our Lord was in existence. Since He antedated all creation, He must be uncreated. Since He is uncreated, He must be without beginning, and therefore Deity. In his Gospel, John reaches back into the eternity before the universe was brought into existence to speak of the Lord Jesus as in fellowship with the Father, and as the Light that shone through the darkness of sin through His creative acts (1:1–10). In his first epistle, he goes back only to the time when the created universe came into existence, and speaks of that which was true concerning Him since that time and until His incarnation (“that which was in the beginning,” which would include the things true of Him mentioned in John 1:1–10), and then in the words “which we have heard, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled,” he speaks of His incarnation, as he does also in John 1:11–14 and on through the entire Gospel. Vincent says: “By the words ‘in the beginning,’ the writer places himself at the initial point of creation, and, looking back into eternity, describes that which was already in existence when creation began. ‘The Word was in the beginning.’ In the words, ‘from the beginning,’ the writer looks back to the initial point of time, and describes what has been in existence from that point onward. Thus, ‘in the beginning’ characterizes the absolute divine Word as He was before the foundation of the world and at the foundation of the world. ‘From the beginning’ characterizes His development in time.” The inspired writer does not in his first letter deal with the preincarnate life of our Lord, which he merely mentions in the words “that which was from the beginning.” But when he refers to His incarnation, he goes into careful detail as to His humanity.

Robertson mentions the view of Westcott, that John wrote his Gospel to prove the deity of our Lord, assuming His humanity, whereas he wrote his first epistle to prove His humanity, assuming His deity. In the words, “which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled,” he is maintaining the real humanity of our Lord against its denial by a certain group in the Church at that time. These were the Gnostics. There were two groups among them, both agreeing in the essential evil of matter. Both groups had their own private opinions regarding the Person of our Lord. The Docetic Gnostics denied His actual humanity. The word “Docetic” comes from the Greek word  (dokew), “to seem.” These argued that our Lord had only a “seeming” body, not a real physical body. The Cerinthian Gnostics distinguished between the man Jesus and the aeon (aJeon) Christ that came on Him at His baptism and left Him on the Cross. As to Cerinthus, Smith says: “His distinctive heresy was a theory of the Person of Christ.… He supposed that Jesus had not been begotten by a virgin, but had been born of Joseph and Mary as a son in like manner to all the rest of men, and became more righteous and prudent and wise. And after the baptism the Christ descended into Him from the Sovereignty which is over the universe, in the form of a dove; and then He proclaimed the unknown Father and accomplished mighty works, but at the end the Christ withdrew from the Jesus, and the Jesus had suffered and had been raised, but the Christ had continued throughout impassible. The essence of this is the dissolution of the Person of our Lord, the distinction between the human Jesus and the divine Christ. St. John encountered Cerinthus at Ephesus, and strenuously controverted his error. Irenaeus and Eusebius quote a story of Polycarp’s that the apostle once visited the public baths, and, seeing Cerinthus within, sprang out of the building. ‘Let us flee,’ he cried, ‘lest the building fall, since Cerinthus, the foe of the Truth, is within it.’ And all through our epistle, he has the heresy in view. See 2:18–23; 4:1–6, 13–15; 5:1–12.” Some Gnostics practiced asceticism, while others went to the other extreme of licentiousness. John deals with both classes in his first letter. The word “Gnostic” comes from a Greek word  (gnwsi"), which means “to know.” They claimed a superior, private knowledge over and above that of the Bible. Nine times John presents tests for knowing the truth, and uses the verb  (ginwskw) from which the Gnostics get their name. Therefore, in stressing the fact that he and his fellow-apostles had had personal experiential knowledge of the humanity of Jesus of Nazareth through the senses of hearing, seeing, and touching, he is combatting a doctrinal error in the early church known as Docetism, the teaching that our Lord had only a seeming body, not a real one. The first proof the inspired apostle advances for the fact of the actual humanity of the Son of God is that he and his fellow disciples heard Him speak in a human voice. The verb is in the perfect tense, which tense in Greek refers to a process completed in past time having present results. Had John desired merely to refer to the fact of hearing the Lord, he would have used the aorist tense in Greek, which tense refers to the fact of an action without referring to its details such as completeness or incompleteness, whether it was an instantaneous act or a process. The fact that he goes out of his way to use another tense than the aorist indicates that he wishes to stress the details of the action. The first thing he tells us by the use of this tense is that his hearing the Lord speak was not confined to one single occasion, but that he heard Him speak at repeated intervals and at length. The impressions his auditory nerves received were correct, for he heard His voice over and over again. It is like repeating a scientific experiment over and over again so as to check results.

The second thing John wishes to tell his readers by the use of this tense is that this past process was a complete one. That is, he heard our Lord speak so often that the experiment, so to speak, was a finished one. It was complete, and a fair test of the question as to His actual or seeming humanity. The third thing he tells his readers is that the past completed process of hearing the Lord Jesus speak had present results, that is, present results with John at the time he was writing this letter. John wrote his first epistle about a.d. 90. He heard our Lord speak from a.d. 30–33. About sixty years had elapsed between the impression he had received and the time of the recording of the events in the Gospel which he wrote, the date of which is about the same as that of his first epistle. Sixty years is a long time to remember the discourses of an individual. John was an unlettered man. He was not trained in the Greek schools of the time, as was the apostle Paul. However, there are several things which account for John’s memory of the events in the life of our Lord. One is that in the first century books were few and men trained themselves to remember much, whereas today books are plentiful and men remember little. Another is that in the case of unlettered ancient peoples, a vast amount of their literature was remembered and repeated letter perfect through generation after generation. Still another is that our Lord’s wonderful personality and discourses made an indelible impression upon those who were His constant companions for over three years. Finally, His words to His disciples, “He (the Holy Spirit) shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you” (John 14:26), account for any facts which it was necessary for John to know in order to write the Gospel which bears his name, and which he may have forgotten. As John thought over those eventful years, often the Holy Spirit would, during those sixty years, bring back to his memory things that had slipped his mind. Thus John gives his readers the assurance that he is well equipped to write his Gospel, for he was a competent witness of the events recorded and remembered them accurately, this from the human standpoint. Of course, from the doctrine of verbal inspiration, and that division of it which we call the inspiration of superintendence, we are assured that the Holy Spirit superintended the recording of the historical facts so as to guarantee an infallible record of our Lord’s life. John said in his Greek: “That which we have heard, and at this present moment is ringing in our ears.” For further proof of our Lord’s actual humanity, John turns to the sense of vision. The distinctive word he uses for “seeing” here is  (oJraw), which refers to the physical act of seeing, giving prominence to the discerning mind, to mental perception, and to mental activity. By the use of this particular Greek word for the act of seeing, John assures his readers that he not only had the sensory impressions on his retinae, but he understood what he was looking at. He was a correct interpreter of the events in our Lord’s life for the reader. He says he saw the events in the Lord’s life “with his eyes.” How else can one see anything except by the aid of his eyes? While this is a self-evident thing, yet John felt it necessary to mention it in order to be absolutely sure that his readers understood him to be referring to sensoryimpressions from our Lord’s actual human body. They were actual, discerning impressions, not an optical illusion or an hallucination. Again, he uses the perfect tense. By doing that he tells his readers that the things he saw concerning our Lord were indelibly retained in his mind’s eye. As he was writing this letter, he could close his physical eyes and see our Lord as He appeared to him during His humiliation on earth sixty years before. One could translate: “That which we have seen with discernment by means of our eyes, and which as a present result we have in our

mind’s eye.” But John did not only see our Lord with discerning eyes. He “looked upon” Him. Here he uses another word which means “to see.” It is theaomai (qeaomai), which means, “to behold, view attentively, contemplate.” In early classical usage it included the idea of wondering regard. Thayer says that this idea gradually faded out, to give place to “such a looking as seeks merely the satisfaction of the sense of sight.” However, we can well conclude that after John and his fellow-disciples had seen our Lord with discerning eyes, they looked with a contemplation that was a mingling of wonder, awe, and admiration. The Greek word comes over into our language in the word “theatre.” They looked at that unique life as upon a spectacle. Here John uses the aorist tense, referring merely to the fact of seeing without mentioning details. After having established the permanent accuracy of his observations in the use of the perfect tense in the previous verb which meant “to see,” he did not feel the need of repeating that tense. The translation could read, “That which we gazed upon as a spectacle.” After establishing proof of our Lord’s actual humanity through the scientific mediums of the senses of hearing and sight, John turns to that of touch. The words “have handled” are the translation of  (yhlafaw), “to handle, touch, feel.” In late Greek it meant “to examine closely.” The verb means, “to handle with a view to investigation.” The word is used in the Greek translation of the Old Testament when blind Isaac felt the hands of Jacob (Gen. 27:22). The old man, puzzled at the voice of Jacob, handled his hands with a view to investigating whether the speaker were really Esau. The same word is used in Luke 24:39, where our Lord said, “Handle Me with a view to investigation and see; because a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” Our Lord’s proof to the disciples that He was raised in the physical body in which He died was based on the scientific evidence of their sense of touch. They handled His body, investigating His claim to have a body of flesh and bones. John undoubtedly has reference to this occurrence here. It is the only reference to our Lord’s resurrection in the epistle. Thus far the expanded translation reads: “That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard and at this present moment is ringing in our ears, that which we have seen with discernment with our eyes and which is at this present moment in our mind’s eye, that which we gazed upon as a spectacle and our hands handled with a view to investigation, concerning the Word of the life.” Four times John uses the pronoun “that which.” Each is qualified by the phrase, “concerning the Word of life.” That is, the things John heard, saw, and felt concerned the Word of life. The word logos (logo") (word), is John’s particular designation of our Lord. Logos (Logo") comes from  (legw), “to speak,” and refers to the total concept of something. Our Lord is the Logos (Logo") of God in the sense that He is the total concept of God seen through a human medium, His humanity consisting of His human body, His human limitations, and His human life lived on earth in the power of the Holy Spirit. John calls Him here, “the Word of the life,” the definite article appearing in the Greek text, not any general idea of life here, but the particular life that God is and which was revealed in concrete form in the humanity of our Lord. Translation. That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard with the present result that it is ringing in our ears, that which we have discerningly seen with our eyes, with the present result that it is in

our mind’s eye, that which we gazed upon as a spectacle, and our hands handled with a view to investigation, concerning the Word of the life. (1:2) This life which God is, John says, “was manifested.” The word “manifested” is  (fanerow), “to make manifest or visible or known what has been hidden or unknown” (Thayer). This life which is invisible was made visible to the human race through the humanity of our Lord. We put light which is invisible through a prism, break it up into its component parts, and it becomes visible. The beauty of the life that God is, broken up into its various parts such as love, grace, humility, kindness, etc., is seen through the prism of the human life of our Lord. Vincent’s note is most helpful: “Was manifested; corresponding with the Word was made flesh (John 1:14). The two phrases, however, present different aspects of the same truth. The Word became flesh, contemplates simply the historic fact of incarnation. The life was manifested, sets forth the unfolding of that fact in the various operations of life. The one denotes the objective process of the incarnation as such, the other, the result of that process as related to human capacity of receiving and understanding it. ‘The reality of the incarnation would be undeclared if it were said, The Word was manifested; the manifoldness of the operations of life would be circumscribed if it were said, The life became flesh. The manifestation of the Life was a consequence of the incarnation of the Word, but it is not coextensive with it’ (Westcott).” Thus, the incarnation of the Son of God was the making visible to human understanding, the life which God is. John repeats the fact that he has seen with discernment and still has in his mind’s eye the visible disclosure of that life in the humanity of the Lord Jesus. He bears witness to what he has seen of that life in the Gospel which bears his name. The word is  (marturew), “to bear witness, testify, to affirm that one has seen or heard or experienced something.” “Show” is  (ajpaggellw), “to bring tidings from” a person or thing, “bring word, report.” He describes it as “that eternal life which was with the Father.” “With” is an important word here. It is pros (pro"), which means “facing” and implies fellowship. All of which means that the life here referred to is a Person, for it requires a person to have fellowship. A mere abstraction can have no fellowship. The life here is none other than the Lord Jesus Himself who is said by John to have been in fellowship with the Father. “Which” is also important. It speaks of character or nature. The Life, the Lord Jesus, is of such a nature as to have been in fellowship with God the Father, very God of very God Himself, possessing co-eternally with God the Father and God the Spirit, the divine essence. This life, a Person, the Lord Jesus, is described by John as  (aijwnio"), “without beginning and without end, that which always has been and always will be, eternal.” Since this life is without beginning, it must be uncreated, thus, deity in its essence. The particular word for “life” here is  (zwh), here used as Thayer indicates, as “the absolute fulness of life, both essential and ethical, which belongs to God.” Thus, this life that God is, is not to be defined as merely animation, but as definitely ethical in its content. God is not the mere reason for the universe, as the Greeks thought, but a Person with the characteristics and qualities of a divine Person. The ethical and spiritual qualities of this life which God is, are communicated to the sinner when the latter places his faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour, and this becomes the new, animating, energizing, motivating principle which transforms the experience of that individual, and the saint thus lives a Christian life. The message of John is that since the believer is a partaker of this life, it is

an absolute necessity that he show the ethical and spiritual qualities that are part of the essential nature of God, in his own life. If these are entirely absent, John says, that person is devoid of the life of God, and is unsaved. The ethical and spiritual qualities of this life were exhibited to the human race in the earthly life of the Lord Jesus. His life thus becomes the pattern of what our lives should be in holiness, self-sacrifice, humility, and love. Translation. And this aforementioned life was made visible, and we have seen (it) with discernment and have (it) in our mind’s eye, and are bearing witness to and bringing back to you a message concerning this life, the eternal, which is of such a nature as to have been in fellowship with the Father and was made visible to us. (1:3) John takes up the thought here of verse one, which was interrupted by the contents of verse two. The purpose for which he wrote the Gospel which bears his name and which contains the things which he had seen our Lord do and heard our Lord speak, was that his readers might have fellowship with him. This word “fellowship” is one of the important words in this letter. It becomes necessary for us right here to study the Greek word which is translated “fellowship,” and for the following reasons: first, the word is used in two different senses in this epistle, and second, because the English word as it is normally used today has a different meaning from that in which it was used in a.d. 1611 when the a.v. was translated. The word is  (koinwnia). Moulton and Milligan give instances of its use in the papyri in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, as follows: “belonging in common to, with whom I have no partnership.” The idea in the word is that of one person having a joint-participation with another in something possessed in common by both. A very touching use of the verbal form of this word was found in a fourth century inscription; a doctor of medicine had put up an inscription to his wife who had also studied medicine, and who had died. It read, “as with you alone I shared my life.” How beautiful it is when a sinner saved by grace comes to the sunset of life and can say to the Lord Jesus, “as with you alone I have shared by life.” Thus John writes, “That which we have seen with discernment and at present have in our mind’s eye, and have heard and at present is ringing in our ears, we are reporting also to you in order that, as for you also, a joint-participation you may be having in common with us.” Now to clear away some underbrush that would impede our progress through the intricacies of our interpretation. The word “fellowship” today means usually “companionship, social intercourse.” In this sense of the word, it was impossible for John to have had fellowship with many of his readers, for this is a general letter sent to the Church at large, and John would never have had opportunity to see them all personally and thus have fellowship with them. The word “fellowship” cannot here be understood in its commonly accepted usage. How are we to understand John here then? John wrote his Gospel so that his readers who were not eyewitnesses of the life of our Lord might enjoy joint-participation with him in his first-hand knowledge of the Lord as gained through the senses of sight, hearing, and touch. When his readers studied the Gospel under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, they would be looking at the Lord Jesus as He appeared on earth through John’s eyes; they would be hearing Him speak through John’s ears, and would be touching Him with John’s hands. Thus, having a supernatural, Holy Spirit energized, first-hand knowledge of the Lord Jesus, they therefore would be able to have a

real, practical, actual and more intimate companionship with Him. What if the Gospel records had not been written? We could find the way of salvation through the Pauline epistles and could be saved. We could have some mystical companionship with our Lord, but not such an intelligent, practical fellowship as we do have, since His portrait, painted by the Holy Spirit in the Gospels would be lacking. One cannot have very intelligent fellowship with a person whom we have never seen, even though reams of paper would be used in an effort to describe him. But as the child of God ponders the life of our Lord through Spirit-ground lenses, he sees Him in his spiritual mind’s eye so that an intelligent fellowship can be enjoyed by the saint. To substantiate further the above use and interpretation of the Greek word “fellowship,” we might add that the word “with” in “with us,” is meta (meta), and when used with the word “have” as it is here, means “partnership.” Thus, a joint-participation on the part of the Christian in John’s first-hand knowledge of the Lord Jesus, will issue in a real, practical, intelligent fellowship (companionship) with the Lord Jesus. And that is exactly what John is saying in the words, “and the fellowship indeed which is ours, is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ.” Here the word “fellowship” is the word we want. But even here it has a background of meaning that forms the basis of a companionship. That meaning is what the Greek word has, “a joint-participation with someone else in things held in common by both.” The English word is sometimes used in this way in academic circles. We speak of the fellows of a college, namely, scholars who reside at the school and participate jointly with the regular teaching faculty. There the idea of joint-participation is prominent. But to have fellowship in any profession or undertaking, or in social intercourse, the participants must have things in common, common likes and dislikes, common skills, a common educational level (in the professions), a common nature or character. Just so, to have fellowship with the Lord Jesus in the sense of companionship, the saint must have common likes and dislikes with the Lord Jesus, he must love what He loves, namely, righteousness, and hate what He hates, namely, sin. He must have a common nature, the divine nature, He must have a common Father, God, our Lord in His deity, the saint as a human being (Heb. 2:11). It is these things held in common on the part of the Lord Jesus and the saint that form the basis of the fellowship and make it possible. Translation. That which we have seen with discernment and at present is in our mind’s eye, and that which we have heard and at present is ringing in our ears, we are reporting also to you, in order that as for you also, you may participate jointly in common with us. And the fellowship indeed which is ours, is with the Father and with His Son, Jesus Christ. (1:4) The inspired apostle writes that the purpose he had in writing these things is that “your joy may be full.” The best texts have “our” not “your,” that is, John’s joy and that of the recipients, since both will then enjoy that intimate, intelligent fellowship with the Lord Jesus which only comes when the saint sees Him, hears Him speak, and touches Him, through the medium of the Gospel writers and the Holy Spirit as He ministers what they have written about the Lord in their writings. The words “may be full,” are what is called in Greek a periphrastic perfect participial construction. The meaning is quite involved. Its richness will appear in the following translation.

Translation. And these things, as for us, we are writing in order that our joy, having been filled completely full in times past, may persist in that state of fulness through the present time. (1:5) After informing the saints that in order to have an intelligent fellowship with the Lord Jesus they must come to know Him through the portraits painted by the Holy Spirit in the Gospels, John warns them against two heresies which, if followed, would prevent such fellowship. They are included in the heresy called Antinomianism as held by the Nicolaitans. Antinomianism means literally “against law.” It is lawlessness. It is disregard for law on the part of the one who professes to be a Christian. That teaching followed out to its logical conclusion results in the two things John is combatting in verses five and six. The first is that there is evil in God. The second is that the person who lives in sin may still have fellowship with Him. Smith’s note on this heresy is as follows: “It is said that the Nicolaitans were the followers of Nicolas, one of the seven deacons (Acts 6:5), and this strange story is told of him by Clement of Alexandria: ‘He had they say, a beautiful wife, and after the ascension of the Saviour, being taunted by the apostles with jealousy, he brought the woman forward and gave who would permission to marry her. This, they say, is in accordance with that expression of his: We must abuse the flesh. And indeed the adherents of his sect follow up the incident and the saying absolutely and unquestioningly and commit fornication without restraint. Clement proceeds to attest the moral purity of Nicolas and explain his action as an inculcation of ascetic self-restraint, but certainly the sect which bore his name was given over to licentiousness. Clement says elsewhere that they were ‘dissolute as he-goats,’ and others bear like testimony. They were Antinomians, disowning moral obligation.… This heresy was rampant among the churches of Asia Minor in St. John’s day (cf. Rev. 2:6, 14, 15), and he deals with it in our epistle. See 1:5; 2:6, 15, 17; 3:3–10.” John writes, “There exists this message which we have heard from Him and which at present is ringing in our ears.” “Of” is apo (ajpo), not para (para) here. The latter word refers to a personal source, the former, to an ultimate source. By using apo (ajpo), John tells his readers that this message was not only heard by him but by others. “Declare” is  (ajnaggellw) “to bring the tidings back to him who receives them.” The message is “God is light” (a.v.). As it stands, the statement is to the effect that God is an abstraction, for light is non-personal and an abstraction. That statement is not true. The word “light” ( (fw")) in the Greek text is without the article. The rule of Greek grammar is that the absence of the definite article shows quality, nature, or essence. What the inspired apostle said was, “God as to His nature, essence, character, is light.” That is, “God as a Person has a character or nature that partakes of light.” That light, of course, is not physical light, for John in the context is speaking of spiritual things. That light is ethical, spiritual, moral. Then John strengthens his assertion by saying, “And darkness in Him does not exist, not even one bit.” Vincent has an illuminating note: “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 … 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 at Sinai, and appeared in a luminous cloud which rested on the mercy-seat in the most holy place.” Again, Vincent says: “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 a principle of life.” He quotes a portion: In presence of that light one such becomes, That to withdraw therefrom for other prospect It is impossible he e’er consent: Because the good, which object is of will, Is gathered all in this, and out of it. That is defective which is perfect there. Translation. And there exists this message which we have heard from Him and at present is ringing in our ears, and we are bringing back tidings to you, that God as to His nature is light, and darkness in Him does not exist, not even one bit. (1:6) John here again deals with the heresy of Antinomianism teaching to the effect that a person may be living in sin and compromising with it, and at the same time have fellowship with God. “If we say” is a deliberative subjunctive, proposing a hypothetical case. John puts the case as a supposition, not an assumed fact. He deals gently and humbly with his readers, including himself in the statement. The claim of this hypothetical person is that he is having fellowship with God. Again, our word “fellowship” ( (koinwnian)), has the primary meaning of “to have joint-participation with someone else in things possessed in common by both,” and the secondary meaning of “companionship” or “comradeship.” This person claims to have things in common with God, common likes and dislikes, a common nature, the divine, which basic things eventuate in a communion of interest and activity which we call fellowship. This person is said to be walking in the darkness which is not in God, namely, sin. The verb is present subjunctive which speaks of habitual action. Thus, this person is sinning habitually, continuously, which shows that he is an unsaved person. No child of God sins habitually to the exclusion of righteous acts. We learn that from John’s use of modes and tenses as we proceed in our exegesis of this epistle. Furthermore, he walks in the darkness. The case of the noun is locative of sphere. He walks, that is, orders his behavior, conducts himself ( (peripatew)) in the sphere of the darkness of sin. His actions and words are ensphered by sin. Nothing of God’s righteousness or goodness ever enters that circle of sin which surrounds this person. The individual making this claim of fellowship with God while at the same time ordering his behavior within the sphere of sin, is an unsaved person. John says that in making that claim, he is lying, and he is not doing the

truth. Translation. If we say that fellowship we are having with Him, and in the sphere of the aforementioned darkness are habitually ordering our behavior, we are lying, and we are not doing the truth. (1:7) Now John supposes another case, that of a person walking in the sphere of the light which God is and in which He dwells. “Walk” is again present subjunctive, stressing habitual action. It is the habitual actions of a person that are an index to his character. This is a Christian, for only Christians are able to walk in the light that God is and in which He dwells. If we Christians order our behavior within the sphere of the light, John says, “we have fellowship one with another” (a.v.). Now, to whom does the pronoun “we” refer? Does John mean here that we Christians have fellowship with one another, or is it that the Christian and God have fellowship with one another? The theme of the epistle and the immediate context must decide. The theme of First John is “The Saint’s Fellowship with God.” In verse six, John tells his readers who does not have fellowship with God. In verse seven he tells them who does have fellowship with God. While it is true that when saints order their behavior within the sphere of the light they do have fellowship with one another, yet John is not teaching that here. He is concerned with the heresy of Antinomianism and its relation to the Christian in the latter’s relation to God. Thus, those referred to by the pronoun “we” are God and the believer. The words “one with another” are the translation of a preposition and a reciprocal pronoun in the Greek text A reciprocal pronoun shows reciprocity. Wonder of wonders, not only do we have fellowship with God, but He reciprocates in having fellowship with us! This fellowship is not a one-sided affair like that of a couple, only one of which is in love with the other. God condescends to have fellowship with worms of the dust, sinners saved by grace, creatures of His handiwork. And while we are having this fellowship with Him, the blood of Jesus, His Son, keeps constantly cleansing us from sins of omission, sins of ignorance, sins we know nothing about in our lives and for the reason that we have not grown in grace enough to see that they are sin. These would prevent our fellowship with God if this divine provision of the constant cleansing away of the defilement of sin in our lives was not taken care of by the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. So holy is the God with whom we have fellowship. Translation. But if within the sphere of the light we are habitually ordering our behavior as He Himself is in the light, fellowship we are having with one another. And the blood of Jesus His Son keeps continually cleansing us from every sin. (1:8) Here John again combats the Gnostic heresy which held that we do not have any principle of sin within us, since matter is evil and the soul is not contaminated by sinful flesh. Smith, commenting on this verse says: “The heresy of Perfectionism. Some might not say, with the Antinomians, that they were absolved from the obligation of the moral law, but they maintained that they were done with sin, had no more sinful propensities, committed no more sinful acts.” Here we have the heresy of the eradication of the totally depraved nature during the earthly life of the Christian. The heresy of perfectionism and of the eradication of the evil nature is the present day form of this problem of the indwelling

sinful nature. “Sin” here is singular in number and is used without the definite article, all pointing to the fact that the nature is referred to, not acts of sin. Here we have the denial of the indwelling, totally depraved nature passed down the race from Adam. John says therefore, “If we say that sin we are not having, ourselves we are deceiving.” Notice, if you will, the emphatic position of the pronoun “ourselves.” The Christian who believes his evil nature has been completely eradicated is deceiving himself, nobody else. All others can see sin stick out all over his experience. And that sin must come from the indwelling sinful nature. John says that the truth is not in that person. In the case of the Gnostics, that statement must be taken in an absolute sense. They were unsaved. In the case of a misinformed and mistaken present-day Christian, the statement will have to be qualified to mean that the truth of the indwelling sinful nature is not in him. The context would require this interpretation. Translation. If we say that sin we are not having, ourselves we are leading astray, and the truth is not in us. (1:9) Now John instructs the saints what to do about sins in their lives. The “we” includes John here, and it would seem that he is speaking of believers, for in other places he gives directions to the unsaved as to what they must do with relation to their sinful state and their sins. The sinner is to believe (John 3:16). The saint is to confess. The word “confess” is  (oJmologew), from homos (oJmo"), “the same,” and  (legw), “to say,” thus, “to say the same thing as another,” or, “to agree with another.” Confession of sin on the part of the saint means therefore to say the same thing that God does about that sin, to agree with God as to all the implication of that sin as it relates to the Christian who commits it and to a holy God against whom it is committed. That includes the saint’s hatred of that sin, his sense of guilt because of it, his contrition because of it, the determination to put it out of his life and never to do that thing again. This is what confession of sin means here. The English word “confess” means “to admit the truth of an accusation, to own up to the fact that one is guilty of having committed the sin.” But the Greek word means far more than that, as was shown above. The verb is present subjunctive, speaking of continuous action. This teaches that the constant attitude of the saint toward sin should be one of a contrite heart, ever eager to have any sin in the life discovered for him by the Holy Spirit, and ever eager to confess it and put it out of the life by the power of that same Holy Spirit. David wrote concerning that kind of heart when he penned the words: “The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise” (Psalm 51:17). If we confess our sins, John says, God is faithful to forgive them and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. The word “faithful” is pistos (pisto"). Vincent says of its usage here: “True to his own nature and promises; keeping faith with Himself and with man. The word is applied to God as fulfilling His own promises (Heb. 10:23; 11:11); as fulfilling the purpose for which He called men (I Thess. 5:24; I Cor. 1:9); as responding with guardianship to the trust reposed in Him by men (I Cor. 10:13; I Pet 4:19). ‘He abideth faithful. He cannot deny Himself’ (II Tim. 2:13). The same term is applied to Christ (II Thess. 3:3; Heb. 3:2; 2:17). God’s faithfulness is here spoken of not only as essential to His own being, but as faithfulness toward us; ‘fidelity to that nature of truth and light, related to His own essence, which rules in us as far as we confess our sins’

(Ebrard).” God is also just in forgiving our sins and cleansing us from their defilement. The word “just” is dikaios (dikaio"). Vincent has this comment: “Rev. righteous. From  (dikh), ‘right.’… The two words, faithful and righteous, imply each other. God, who is absolute rightness, must be faithful to His own nature, and His righteous dealing with men who partake of that nature and walk in fellowship with Him, is simply fidelity to Himself. ‘Righteousness is truth passing into action’ (Westcott).” “To forgive” is  (iJna ajfhi), “in order that He may forgive.”  (ÆAfhi) is second aorist subjunctive, speaking, not of a process, but of a single act here. In 1:7 we have durative action, “keeps on continually cleansing,” referring to the constant cleansing of the saint from the defilement of sins of ignorance by the blood of Jesus. These are habitual in the life of the believer. But sins we confess, as in 1:9, are not habitual. No child of God knowingly sins habitually. These sins for which confession is required are infrequent, isolated instances in the well-ordered life of a believer. Therefore, the aorist tense is used here, speaking of a single act of forgiveness. The word is the second aorist subjunctive form of  (ajfihmi), “to send away, dismiss,” hence of sins, “to remit” as a debt, “to put away.” All sin was remitted, paid for, put away on the basis of the satisfaction offered for the demands of God’s holy law which sinners broke, when the Lord Jesus died on the Cross. The law was satisfied. All the sins the believer commits, past, those in his unsaved condition, and future, those in his saved state, were put away on a legal basis at the Cross, and are in that sense forgiven the believer the moment he places his faith in the Lord Jesus. But the forgiveness spoken of here has to do, not primarily with the breaking of God’s law, for that was taken care of at the Cross and recognized as such at the time the sinner placed his faith in the Saviour. Therefore, sin in a Christian’s life is a matter, not between a lawbreaker and a judge, but between a child and his father. It is a matter of grieving the Father’s heart when a child of God sins. The putting away of the believer’s sin upon confession is therefore a forgiveness granted by the Father and a restoration to the fellowship that was broken by that sin. When the saint confesses immediately after the commission of that sin, fellowship is not broken except for that time in which the sin was committed. Not only does God forgive the believer, but He cleanses him from the defilement which he incurred in committing that act of sin. Here the verb “to cleanse” is aorist subjunctive, speaking of a single act of cleansing, for known sin in the life of a saint is not habitual, but the out of the ordinary thing. Translation. If we continue to confess our sins, faithful is He and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from every unrighteousness. (1:10) In verse eight, we have the denial of the indwelling sinful nature. In this verse we have the denial of specific acts of sin. The verb is in the perfect tense, which tense in Greek refers to an action completed in past time, having present results. The denial here is of any acts of sin committed in past time with the implication that none are able to be committed at present. This is sinless perfection with a vengeance. The person who makes that claim, John says, makes God a liar, and does not have the Word of God in him. Smith comments: “Perfectionism has two causes: (1) The stifling of conscience: we make Him a liar, i.e., turn a deaf ear to His inward testimony, His voice in

our souls. (2) Ignorance of His Word: it ‘is not in us.’ Such a delusion were impossible if we steeped our minds in the Scriptures.” Translation. If we say that we have not sinned and are not now in such a state that we could sin, a liar we are making Him, and His Word is not in us.

CHAPTER TWO (2:1, 2) Smith says: “Observe the sudden change in the apostle’s manner. His heart is very tender toward his people, and he adopts an affectionate and personal tone: (1) he passes from the formal ‘we’ to ‘I.’ (2) He styles them ‘my little children’… his favorite appellation (compare 2:12, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21). Not only was it very suitable on the lips of the aged teacher, but it was a phrase of Jesus (John 13:33). St. John had caught the phrase and its spirit. He remembered how the Master had dealt with His disciples, and he would deal with his people after the same fashion and be to them what Jesus had been to himself—as gentle and patient. “He assumes this tone because he is about to address a warning to them, and he would fain take the sting out of it and disarm opposition. He foresees the possibility of a two-fold perversion of his teaching: (1) ‘If we can never in this life be done with sin, why strive after holiness? It is useless; sin is an abiding necessity.’ (2) ‘If escape be so easy, why dread falling into sin? We may sin with light hearts, since we have the blood of Jesus to cleanse us.’ ‘No,’ he answers, ‘I am not writing these things to you either to discourage you in the pursuit of holiness or to embolden you in sinning, but, on the contrary, in order that (hina (iJna)) ye may not sin.’ Compare Augustine: ‘Lest perchance he should seem to have given impunity to sins, and men should now say to themselves,’ ‘Let us sin, let us do securely what we will, Christ cleanses us: He is faithful and righteous, He cleanses us from all iniquity’; ‘he takes from thee evil security and implants useful fear. It is an evil wish of thine to be secure; be anxious. For He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, if thou art always displeasing to thyself and being changed until thou be perfected.’ As a physician might say to his patient: ‘Your trouble is obstinate: the poison is in your blood, and it will take a long time to eradicate it. But I do not tell you this to discourage you or make you careless; no, on the contrary, to make you watchful and diligent in the use of the remedy’; so the apostle says: ‘My little children, these things I am writing to you in order that ye may not sin.’ “If, however, we fall into sin, let us not lose heart, for we have an Advocate with the Father … Our Advocate does not plead that we are innocent or adduce extenuating circumstances. He acknowledges our guilt and presents His vicarious work as the ground of our acquital. He stands in the Court of Heaven a Lamb as it had been slain (Rev. 5:6), and the marks of His sore passion are a mute but eloquent appeal: ‘I suffered all this for sinners, and shall it go for naught?’ ” The word “advocate” is  (paraklhto"), “one called to your side,” so, in a forensic sense “one who undertakes and champions your cause. Moulton and Milligan define; “a friend of the accused person, called to speak to his character, or otherwise enlist the sympathy of the judges.” This was its use in the secular world of that day. In the expression, “if any man sin,” we have the aorist subjunctive, speaking, not of habitual action, but of a single act. It could better be translated, “if any man commit an act of sin.” John regards sin in the believer’s life, not as habitual, but as extraordinary, as

infrequent. He says, “We have an Advocate with the Father.” “With” is pros (pro"), “facing” the Father. Our Advocate is always in fellowship with the Father in order that if the saint loses fellowship with Him through cherished and unconfessed sin, He might plead our cause on the basis of His precious blood, and bring us back into fellowship again. The word “facing” brings us to this solemn thought, that when we saints sin the Lord Jesus must face the Father with us and our sin. The saint has been saved in His precious blood so that he may be able to keep from sinning, and when he does sin, he wounds the tender heart of the Saviour, and forces Him to face God the Father with that saint whom He has saved in His precious blood. How that should deter us from committing acts of sin! This Advocate is described by John as “Jesus Christ the righteous.” Smith quotes Rothe: “Only the righteous One, the guiltless, the One that is separate from sin, can be the Advocate with God for sinners, in general, the Mediator of salvation, and makes His friendship for us prevalent with God, because only such a one has access to God and fellowship with God (Heb. 7:26; I Peter 3:18; John 16:8, 10),” and Taylor, “What better advocate could we have for us, than He that is appointed to be our Judge.” John further describes Him as “the propitiation for our sins.” The word is hilasmos (iJlasmo"). It is from the verb hilaskomai (iJlaskomai). In pagan usage it meant “to appease, to conciliate to one’s self, to make a god propitious to one.” Herodotus says, “The Parians, having propitiated Themistocles with gifts, escaped the visits of the army.” However, when the word comes over into New Testament usage, its meaning is radically changed. Canon Westcott says: “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.” That from without which occasioned the alienation between God and man, was sin. It was the guilt of sin that separated man from his creator. Our Lord on the Cross assumed that guilt and paid the penalty in His own blood, and thus removed the cause of alienation. Now a holy and righteous God can bestow mercy upon a believing sinner on the basis of justice satisfied. Our Lord provided a satisfaction for the demands of the broken law. That satisfaction is the hilasmos (iJlasmo"). The Greek has it, “He Himself is a satisfaction.” The intensive pronoun is used. The point is that the Old Testament priest offered an animal sacrifice, but not himself as the sacrifice. This wonderful New Testament Priest is both the Priest and the Sacrifice. He is the satisfaction “for our sins, but not only for ours but for the sins of the whole world” (a.v.). Vincent says: “The sins of (a.v., italicized) should be omitted; as in Rev., for the whole world. Compare I John 4:14; John 4:42; 12:32. ‘The propitiation is as wide as the sin’ (Bengel). If men do not experience its benefit, the fault is not in its efficacy. Dusterdieck (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 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.’ ” Smith comments: “for the sins of the whole world.” This is grammatically possible (cf. Matt. 5:20), but it misses the point. There are sins, special and occasional, in the believer; there is sin in the world; it is sinful through and through. The apostle means, ‘for our sins and that mass of sin, the world.’ ”

Translation. My little children, these things I am writing to you in order that you may not commit an act of sin. And if anyone commit an act of sin, One who pleads our cause we constantly have facing the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous One. And He Himself is a satisfaction for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the whole world. (2:3) Smith’s comment on verses three to six is helpful: “The apostle foresees the question which may be raised: ‘How can I be assured that Christ is all this to me—my Propitiation, my Advocate? And how can I be assured that I have an abiding interest in Him?’ He answers: (1) We attain to personal and conscious acquaintance with Christ by observance of His commandments (3–5a); (2) we attain to assurance of abiding union with Him by ‘walking even as He walked’ (5b-6). The principle is that it is not enough to understand the theory; we must put it into practice. E.g., what makes an artist? Not merely learning the rules of perspective and mixture of colors, but actually putting one’s hand to brush and canvas. First attempts may be unsuccessful, but skill comes by patient practice. Compare Rembrandt’s advice to his pupil Hoogstraten, ‘Try to put well in practice what you already know; and in doing so you will, in good time, discover the hidden things which you inquire about.’ To know about Christ, to understand the doctrine of His person and work is mere theory; we get to know Him and to know that we know Him by practice of His precepts.” “Hereby” is  (ejn toutwi), literally, “in this.” “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 with Him in the light” (Vincent). “We do know” is  (ginwskw), “to know by experience” as contrasted to oida (oijda), “absolute, immediate knowledge of a fact once for all.” This knowledge that we know Him is knowledge gained by experience day by day, experiential knowledge gained from the experience of keeping His commandments. “We know Him” is  (ejgnwkamen aujton). The verb is perfect in tense, referring to a past complete act having present results. That is, if we are keeping His commandments, we know that we have in time past come to know Him with the present result that that state of knowing Him is true of us in the present time. “Keep” is  (threw), “to attend to carefully, to guard, observe.” The word does not merely speak of the act of obeying His commands, but of a solicitous desire that we do not disobey any of them but on the other hand, that we obey them perfectly. It is that holy fear of disobeying God as expressed in the word phobos (fobo") (fear), used in I Peter as defined by Wardlaw: “This fear is self-distrust; it is tenderness of conscience; it is vigilance against temptation; it is the fear which inspiration opposes to highmindedness in the admonition, ‘be not highminded but fear.’ It is taking heed lest we fall; it is a constant apprehension of the deceitfulness of the heart, and of the insidiousness and power of inward corruption. It is the caution and circumspection which timidly shrinks from whatever would offend and dishonor God and the Saviour.” It is the saint’s love for God’s Word and his guardianship of that Word lest it be dishonored. Alford defines  (threw), “to watch, guard” as some precious thing. The verb is present subjunctive, which speaks of continuous action. It is the habitual, moment by moment safeguarding of the Word by the saint lest he violate its precepts. Robertson says that “the Gnostics boasted of their superior knowledge of Christ, and John here challenges their boast by an appeal to experiential knowledge of

Christ which is shown by keeping His commandments.” The word “commandments” is not here nomos (nomo"), “law,” which John never uses for the rule of Christian obedience, and which is reserved by him for the Mosaic law, John using it 15 times in his Gospel for that purpose (Alford). It is  (ejntolh), another word meaning “an order, command, charge, precept.” The precepts (commandments) are those given by our Lord either personally while on earth or through His apostles in the New Testament Books. Thus, a solicitous guarding of the precepts of Christ, a consumming desire that they be honored, a passionate determination that they always be kept, is a proof gained from experience, that that person has come to an experiential knowledge of the Lord Jesus and is at present in that state of knowing Him. This experiential knowledge is in contrast with and opposed to a mere theoretical knowledge of His Person. Translation. And in this we know experientially that we have come to know Him experientially and are in that state at present, if we are continually having a solicitous, watchful care in keeping His precepts. (2:4) Here the expanded translation reads, “He who keeps on saying, I have come to know Him experientially with the present result that I am in that state, and His precepts is not habitually guarding with solicitous care, is a liar, and in this one the truth does not exist.” Robertson comments: “This is one of the pious platitudes, cheap claptrap of the Gnostics, who would bob up in meetings with such explosions.” This person is an unsaved person, for a believer as a habit of life obeys the Word of God. Translation. He who keeps on saying, I have come to know Him experientially and as a present result am in that state, and His precepts is not habitually guarding with solicitous care, is a liar, and in this one the truth does not exist. (2:5) “Whoso” ( (oJ" dan)) “whoever,” destroys the religious exclusiveness of the Gnostics which limited such a knowledge as is referred to in 2:3, 4 to the intellectual oligarchy, the intelligentsia, and shows that a personal experiential knowledge of the Lord Jesus is open to all true believers. “Keepeth” is present subjunctive, speaking of habitual, continuous action. Thus, whoever keeps on continually keeping ( (threw)) (having a solicitous, watchful care for the Word so as to guard it from being disobeyed but on the other hand, obeyed) the Word, verily, in him is the love of God perfected. The demonstrative pronoun is used, “in this one truly is the love of God perfected.” As to the meaning of the phrase, “in this one is the love of God perfected,” Vincent has a helpful note: “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.” As to the phrase “the love of God,” Vincent inclines 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.” His reasoning that leads him to this interpretation is as follows: referring to chapter four of this letter he says: “Here we have, verse 9, the manifestation of the love of God in us. 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’ (v. 10). Our mutual love is a proof that God dwells in us. God dwelling in us, His love is perfected in us (v. 12). The latter clause, it would seem, must be explained according to verse 10. Then (v. 16), ‘We have known and believed the love that God hath in us.’ ‘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. ‘We love Him because He first loved us’ (v. 19). “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.’ “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 toward 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 its origin and its nature to the love of God.” To sum up the matter, we would say that the love of God here is the love that God is in His nature, produced in the believer yielded to the Holy Spirit by the same Holy Spirit, which love causes him to have a solicitous watchful care of His precepts. This love is brought to its completion or perfection in the sense that it accomplishes that for which it is intended, namely, to cause the saint to obey God’s Word, not because he should, not because it is right to do so, not in order to escape chastisement should he disobey it, all of which motives may enter into the subconscious reasons he may have for obeying it and which in themselves are proper motives, but he obeys the Word because he loves the Lord Jesus. Paul, in Galatians 5:1–26, teaches that the saint is not under law, and has been put under a superior restraint to evil and a compelling urge to do right, namely, divine love, produced in the heart by the Holy Spirit. Translation. But whoever habitually is with a solicitous care keeping His Word, truly, in this one the love of God has been brought to its completion, with the present result that it is in that state of completion. In this we have an experiential knowledge that in Him we are. (2:6) To understand this verse, we will need to study the Greek word translated “abide,” and see how it is used in the New Testament. It is  (menw). Thayer gives, “to abide, to remain, to sojourn, tarry.” The word refers, in a connection like this, more than merely to position. It is used very often of persons abiding in a home, which implies

more than mere position, but rather fellowship, communion, dependence, harmony, friendship. See, “there abide till ye go thence” (Matt. 10:11); “tarry ye here and watch with Me” (Matt. 26:38); “Mary abode with her” (Luke 1:56); “neither abode in (any) house” (Luke 8:27); “for today I must abide at thy house” (Luke 19:5); “They came and saw where He dwelt, and abode with Him that day” (John 1:39, 40). These instances could be multiplied. To abide in the Lord Jesus therefore implies not only position, but relationship. It implies fellowship, friendship, dependence, harmony, communion. There are three Greek words which give us the three aspects of a believer’s life. The verb of being (eimi (eijmi)), refers to the saint’s position in Christ. He has been placed into vital union with Him by the act of the Holy Spirit baptizing ( (baptizw) placing) him in Christ. Our present word,  (menw), refers to the saint’s fellowship with and dependence upon Him, communion, closeness of intercourse. The word  (peripatew) “to order one’s behavior, to conduct one’s self,” speaks of the saint’s manner of life. The first, the saint’s position in Christ, makes possible his Christian manner of life. The second, the saint’s fellowship with and dependence upon the Lord Jesus, conditions that manner of life, makes it what it should be. The word  (peripatew) literally means “to walk around.” And since the way a person walks is often a good index as to the kind of person he is, the word not only referred to the physical act of walking, but came to have the idea of the manner of life of the person. We must look at the Greek word translated “ought.” The word is  (ojfeilw), “to owe, to owe money, be in debt for, to be under obligation, bound by duty or necessity to do something, it behooves one, one ought.” It is “used thus of a necessity imposed either by law or duty, or by reason, or by the times, or by the nature of the matter under consideration” (Thayer). Cremer in comparing the synonyms dei (dei), “it is a necessity in the nature of the case,” and  (ojfeilw), “to owe,” says that the former designates more the necessity, whereas the latter denotes the personal, moral obligation. “So” is  (kaqw"), “according as, just as, even as.” “As” is  (oJutw"), “in the manner spoken of, in the way described, in this manner, in such a manner, thus, so.” “To walk” is a present infinitive in the Greek text emphasizing habitual, continuous action. The Christ-like life here admonished must be the continuous, habitual, moment by moment experience of the believer, no spasmodic, infrequent sort of thing. “Walk” is  (peripatew), “to conduct one’s self, to order one’s behavior.” Translation. He who is constantly saying that he as a habit of life is living in close fellowship with and dependence upon Him, is morally obligated just as that One conducted Himself, also himself in the manner spoken of to be conducting himself. (2:7) The best manuscripts do not have adelphoi (ajdelfoi), “brethren,” but  (ajgaphtoi), “beloved ones.” The distinctive word for “love” here is the one used of God’s love, as in John 3:16, I John 4:8. It is, “divinely-loved ones,” loved by God. The Greek order of words is, “No new commandment am I writing to you,” the words “no new commandment” being first in the sentence and thus in the emphatic position. The word “commandment” is  (ejntolh), “a precept” as in 2:4, not in the sense of the Mosaic law (nomos (nomo") law), but as an exhortation to the Christian, an injunction. The word “new” is kainos (kaino"). There are two words meaning “new” in the Greek language, neos (neo"), “new in point of time,” and kainos (kaino"), “new as pertains to

quality, the new as set over against that which has seen service, the outworn, the effete or marred through age” (Trench). Thus, John assures his readers that the commandment or precept he is giving them is nothing new in quality, but on the other hand, old. The word “old” here is palaios (palaio"), in which word “the simple conception of time dominates” (Vincent). “Had” is in the imperfect tense in Greek which tense speaks of continuous state or action in past time. The beginning here is the beginning of the Christian experience of the readers. They had this commandment before them and with them constantly during their lives as saved individuals. The words “from the beginning” in the second sentence of this verse are not found in the best manuscripts. That commandment was to love one another (John 13:34). Translation. Divinely-loved ones, no new commandment am I writing you, but a commandment, an old one, which you have had constantly from the beginning. The commandment, the old one, is the Word which you heard. (2:8) Vincent comments: “The commandment of love is both old and new. Old, because John’s readers have had it from the beginning of their Christian experience. New, because, in the unfolding of Christian experience, it has developed new power, meaning, and obligation, and close correspondence ‘with the facts of Christ’s life, with the crowning mystery of His passion, and with the facts of the Christian life.’” “Again” is palin (palin), and Smith says: “again, i.e., in another sense, from another point of view, not in itself but in our recognition of it, ‘it is a new commandment.’ ” Robertson says: “Paradox, but truth. Old in teaching (as old as the story of Cain and Abel, 3:11 f.), but new in practice. For this use of palin (palin) (again) for a new turn see John 16:28. To walk as Christ walked is to put into practice the old commandment and so make it new (ever new and fresh), as love is as old as man and fresh in every new experience.” “Which thing” is ho (oJ), the neuter relative pronoun. The relative pronoun agrees with its antecedent in gender and number. The word “commandment” is feminine in gender, and therefore it cannot be the antecedent of ho (oJ), “which thing.” Here the relative has no definite antecedent. Being neuter, it refers here to an abstract truth or fact. One would translate, “which fact is true in Him and in you.” Now, what is the fact which is thus true in the case of our Lord and in the case of the readers of this epistle? Vincent says that “the fact that the old commandment is new” is the thing referred to by John. Smith says that the fact pointed out is “the paramount necessity of love. This truth, though unperceived, is contained in the revelation of Jesus Christ (in Him) and proved in the experience of believers (in you). It is a fact that hatred of one’s brother clouds the soul and shuts out the light. ‘I know,’ says the Apostle, ‘because the darkness is passing away, and the light, the true light, is already shining,’ i.e., my eyes are getting accustomed to the light of the gospel-revelation, and I have seen this truth which at first was hidden from me.” “Is past” is paragetai (paragetai), “to pass by, go past,” metaphorically, “to pass away, to disappear.” The tense is present, speaking here of action going on in present time; “The darkness is passing away.” The picture is that of the darkness of sin and unbelief as passing by as a parade goes by on the street. All parades have an end. So will end some day the parade of Satan’s hosts. Darkness is skotia (skotia). Vincent comments: “God is light; and whatever is not in fellowship with God is therefore darkness. In all cases where the word is not used of physical darkness, it means moral

insensibility to divine light; moral blindness or obtuseness.” The word “true” as defining “light” is  (ajlhqino"). Greek has the synonyms,  (ajlhqh"), “true,” and  (ajlhqino"), “genuine.” Trench says, “God is  (ajlhqh") (true) and He is  (ajlhqino"), (genuine): but very different attributes are ascribed to Him by the one epithet, and by the other. He is  (ajlhqh") (John 3:33; Rom 3:4), inasmuch as He cannot lie, as He is  (ajyeudh") (without a lie) (Tit. 1:2), the truth-speaking and the truth-loving God. But He is  (ajlhqino") (I Thess. 1:9; John 17:3; Isaiah 65:16); very God, as distinguished from idols and all other false gods, the dreams of the diseased fancy of man, with no substantial existence in the world of realities.… This last adjective ( (ajlhqino")), is particularly applied to express that which is all that it pretends to be; for instance, pure gold as opposed to adulterated metal.” The word  (ajlhqino") as describing “light” here, speaks of the light that God is in His essence, as genuine light is contrasted to a false or spurious light. The false light is Satan who in imitation of God covers himself over with light assumed from the outside, which light does not proceed from nor is it representative of what he is in his inner being, an angel of darkness. This truth is given us in the Greek word  (metaschmatizw), translated inadequately “transformed” in II Corinthians 11:14 (a.v.). Satan, an angel of darkness, attempts to deceive and attract the human race by disguising himself as an angel of light. Translation.Again, a commandment, a new one, I am writing to you, which fact is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away, and the light, the genuine light, already is shining. (2:9) Vincent’s comment on the expression “hateth his brother” is helpful: “The sharp issue is maintained here as in Christ’s words, ‘He that is not with Me is against Me’ (Luke 11:23). Men fall into two classes, those who are in fellowship with God, and therefore walk in light and love, and those who are not in fellowship with God, and therefore walk in darkness and hatred. ‘A direct opposition,’ says Bengel; where love is not, there is hatred. ‘That heart is not empty.’ See John 3:20; 7:7; 15:18; 17:14. The word hate is opposed both to the love of natural affection ( (filew)), and to the more discriminating sentiment—love founded on a just estimate ( (ajgapaw)). For the former see John 12:25; 15:18, 19; compare Luke 14:26. For the latter, I John 3:14, 15; 4:20; Matt. 5:43; 6:24; Eph. 5:28, 29. ‘In the former case, hatred, which may become a moral duty, involves the subjection of an instinct. In the latter case it expresses a general determination of character’ (Westcott).” The brother here is a fellow-Christian. As to the words “until now,” Vincent remarks, “Though the light has been increasing, and though he may claim that he has been in the light from the first.” Translation. He who is saying that in the light he is, and his brother he is habitually hating, in the darkness is up to this moment. (2:10) The word “love” here is  (ajgapaw). To ascertain the content of this word see Paul’s definition of it in I Corinthians 13 (translated there by the word “charity”). See it illustrated in action in John 3:16. Note how it is produced (Gal. 5:22, 23; Rom. 5:5). The expression “loveth his brother” must be understood in the light of the above meaning of this word. The essence of the word is that of a self-sacrificial love that gives of

itself for the happiness and well-being of the fellow-Christian. The fact that this Christian is habitually loving his brother-Christian with the above kind of love, is indicative of his close fellowship with and dependence upon the Lord Jesus, for this supernaturally-produced love in his heart is present in an overflowing quantity only in the life of a believer who habitually is abiding in his Lord. The light here is, of course, the Lord Jesus Himself and all that is written in the Word about Him. The words, “occasion of stumbling” is skandalon (skandalon). The word meant, “the movable stick or trigger of a trap; a trap or snare; any impediment placed in the way and causing one to stumble or fall; a stumbling-block.” Vincent says: “The meaning is not that he gives no occasion of stumbling to others, but that there is none in his own way.” Smith comments: “ ‘there is no occasion of stumbling, nothing to trip him up and make him fall’—an echo of John 11:9, 10. Another interpretation, less agreeable to the context, but more consonant with the common use of skandalon (skandalon) (compare Matt. 13:41; 18:7; Rom. 14:13) is, Because he is winsome and gracious, there is in him no stumbling-block to others, nothing to deter them from accepting the gospel. The love of the primitive Christians impressed the heathen.” Translation. He who is habitually loving his brother, in the light is abiding, and a stumbling-block in him there is not. (2:11) Smith comments: “St. John recognizes no neutral attitude between ‘love’ and ‘hatred.’ Love is active benevolence, and less than this is hatred, just as indifference to the gospel-call amounts to rejection of it (compare Matt. 22:5–7). Observe the climax: ‘in the darkness is, and in the darkness walketh, and knoweth not where he is going.’ The penalty of living in the darkness is not merely that one does not see, but that one goes blind. The neglected faculty is atrophied. Compare the mole, the crustacea in the Mammoth Cave of Kentucky.” Commenting on the words “hath blinded,” Vincent says: “The aorist tense, blinded, indicates a past, definite, decisive act. When the darkness overtook, it blinded. The blindness is no new state into which he has come.” This person is, of course, an unsaved person professing Christianity. Habitually conducting one’s self in the sphere of darkness is indicative of an unsaved state. Translation. But he who as a habit of life hates his brother, in the darkness is, and in the sphere of the darkness is habitually ordering his behavior, and he does not know where he is going, because the darkness blinded his eyes. (2:12) “Little children” is teknion (teknion), “little born ones”; the Scotch, “bairns,” fits the meaning very well. “Are forgiven” is  (ajfihmi), “to send from one’s self, to send away, to bid go away or depart.” God’s forgiveness includes the putting away of our sins, their guilt, defilement, and penalty, at the Cross. The verb is in the perfect tense, which tense speaks of a past completed action having present and in some instances, permanent results. Our sins were put away at the Cross, with the result that they are never more remembered against us. Our Lord cried on the Cross, “It is finished” (a.v.). The perfect tense is used here. The atonement, to which He had reference, was effected at the Cross and became forever the all-sufficient payment for sin. The translation should read, “It stands finished.”

The permanent putting away of sin was “for His Name’s sake.” The words “the Name,” are an Old Testament term expressing the sum of the qualities which mark the nature or character of a person, in this case, the Person of God. It refers to all that is true of God in His glory, majesty, and might. The expression here refers to our Lord (2:1), and includes all that He is in His glorious Person. Paul in Philippians 2:9–11 tells us that in view of the self-emptying of our Lord as He chose the Cross rather than remain in Glory (”who instead of the joy then present with Him, endured the Cross” Heb. 12:2), God the Father exalted Him and gave Him “The Name”; placed upon the shoulders of the Man Christ Jesus, all the majesty, glory, and splendor of Deity. Because of what our Lord was in His Person as very God of very God, God the Father put away our sins, recognizing and accepting the atonement He offered on the Cross. Translation. I am writing to you, little children, because your sins have been put away for you permanently because of His Name. (2:13) “Ye have known” is  (ejgnwkate), the verb  (ginwskw) referring to experiential knowledge, knowledge gained by experience, and it is in the perfect tense. These fathers were the older men, mature in the Christian life, having lived in fellowship with the Lord Jesus for many years, and thus having gained much personal knowledge of Him by experience. The perfect tense shows that this knowledge was a wellrounded matured knowledge, the results of which were a permanent possession of these men grown old in the Christian life. The young men are said to have overcome the wicked one. The verb is again perfect in tense. As Robertson says, “a permanent victory after conflict.” They fought their fight to a finish and were enjoying the fruits of victory, a life lived in the power of the Spirit where their victory over Satan was a consistent one. “The wicked one” is  (ton ponhron), “the pernicious one.” The Greek has two words for the idea of wickedness, kakos (kako"), “evil in the abstract,” and  (ponhro"), “evil in active opposition to the good.” The kakos (kako") man is content to perish in his own corruption. The  (ponhro") man seeks to drag everyone else down with him into his ultimate downfall. Satan is of the latter character, pernicious. “Little children” is paidion (paidion). Vincent says: “Compare teknia (teknia) little children (v. 1), which emphasizes the idea of kinship, while this word emphasizes the idea of subordination and consequent discipline. Hence, it is the more appropriate word when spoken from the standpoint of authority, than of affection.” Teknia (Teknia) is related to  (tiktw), “to give birth to,” and emphasizes the birth or genital relationship, whereas paidion (paidion) is related to  (paideuw), “to train children.” Our word “pedagogue” comes from the latter word. One could translate paidion (paidion), “little child under instruction.” The first two verbs, “I write,” are in the present tense, referring to the apostle’s immediate act of writing. The last is in the aorist tense, which in the indicative mode usually refers to a past act. But this verb in that tense and mode and in a context like this is called an epistolary aorist, by which a writer looks at his present act of writing as the recipient of his letter will look at it when he receives it, as a past event. John uses the epistolary aorist twice in verse 14. The words “standing on his neck” in the following translation are used to indicate the present result of the past action of the perfect tense. Ancient kings stood on the necks of the captives whom they conquered as a sign of the

victory they gained over them. Translation. I am writing to you, fathers, because you have come to know experientially the One who is from the beginning, and as a present result are possessors of that knowledge. I am writing to you, young men, because you have gained the victory over the Pernicious One and as a present result are standing on his neck. I write to you, little children under instruction, because you have come to know the Father experientially, with the present result that you are possessors of that knowledge. (2:14) The writer is rendering the epistolary aorist used once in verse 13 and twice in this verse by the present rather than by a past tense, since it is a Greek idiom and not understood by the English reader. A past tense translation would suggest to the English reader a previous letter. John has reference here only to the present letter he is writing. “Strong” is ischuros (ijscuro"), which refers to power as an endowment. Strength to overcome Satan is part of the salvation given the believer. It takes the form of the spiritual energy supplied the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit. “Abide” is  (menw), “to dwell in as a home.” The word of God, residing in their hearts in an unhindered, welcome state, was that which, together with the power of the Holy Spirit, gave these young men victory over Satan, the Pernicious One, who sought to drag them down with himself into the ruin that some day will be his. Translation. I write to you, fathers, because you have come to know experientially the One who is from the beginning, and are as a present result, possessors of that knowledge. I write to you, young men, because you are strong with endowed strength, and the Word of God in you is abiding, and you have gained the victory over the Pernicious One, and as a present result are standing on his neck. (2:15–17) The word “world” here is kosmos (kosmo") which in its use here is defined by Vincent as follows: “The sum-total of human life in the ordered world, considered apart from, alienated from, and hostile to God, and of the earthly things which seduce from God (John 7:7; 15:18; 17:9, 14; I Cor. 1:20, 21; II Cor. 7:10; James 4:4).” Kosmos (Kosmo") refers to an ordered system. Here it is the ordered system of which Satan is the head, his fallen angels and demons are his emissaries, and the unsaved of the human race are his subjects, together with those purposes, pursuits, pleasures, practices, and places where God is not wanted. Much in this world-system is religious, cultured, refined, and intellectual. But it is anti-God and anti-Christ. Trench quotes Bengel as saying that this world of unsaved humanity is inspired by “the spirit of the age,” the Zeitgeist, which Trench defines as follows: “All that floating mass of thoughts, opinions, maxims, speculations, hopes, impulses, aims, aspirations, at any time current in the world, which it may be impossible to seize and accurately define, but which constitutes a most real and effective power, being the moral, or immoral atmosphere which at every moment of our lives we inhale, again inevitably to exhale.” This is the world-system to which John refers. The word “love” here is  (ajgapaw), the word used of God’s love for a lost race of sinners, and which is self-sacrificial in its essence (John 3:16), the love which He is

by nature (I John 4:8), and the love which is produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:22). The question confronts us now as to how believers can love the sinful world with a love produced in their hearts by the Holy Spirit. The answer is that the Bible writers when taking certain Greek words over into the Bible, poured an additional content of meaning into them, as in this case, but at times use the word, not in its newly-acquired New Testament meaning, but in its purely classical connotation. An example of this is found in the use of dikaios (dikaio") (righteous) in Romans 5:7, where the word refers to a righteous man, not in the Bible sense of a justified believing sinner, but in the classical sense, that of a law-abiding, just, and fair individual. Here,  (ajgapaw) is used merely in its classical meaning, that of a love called out of one’s heart by the preciousness of the object loved. The word as used here refers to a fondness, an affection, non-ethical in its content, for an object because of its value. It is a love of approbation, of esteem. Demas is said to have loved this present age. He found it precious and thus came to love it. The verb is a present imperative in a prohibition, which construction in Greek speaks of the act of forbidding the continuance of an action already going on. Some of John’s readers were still loving the world-system out from which they had been saved. John says: “Stop loving the world with a love called out of your hearts because of its preciousness.” The expression “if any man love the world” is a hypothetical condition in the subjunctive mode. The verb is in the present tense. John could have used the aorist tense, expressing merely the fact of loving the world. But he goes out of his way to use the present tense, which tense in the subjunctive mode always stresses continuous, habitual action. This marks this hypothetical person as one who loves the world as a habit of life to the exclusion of any love for God. This is an unsaved person. In this person, the love of the Father does not exist. This is love for the Father as generated in the heart of the yielded believer by the Holy Spirit. And here the word “love” ( (ajgaph)) is used in its New Testament sense. Vincent, commenting on the words “is not in him,” says: “This means more than that he does not love God: rather, that the love of God does not dwell in him as the ruling principle of his life. Westcott cites a parallel from Philo: ‘It is impossible for love to the world to coexist with love to God, as it is impossible for light and darkness to coexist.’ ” In the phrase, “all that is in the world,” the word “all” does not refer to all things severally, but to all that is in the world collectively (Vincent). “Lust” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a craving, a passionate desire,” good or evil, according to the context. Here it refers to evil cravings. The word “lust” is obsolete today, as it is used here, since the present day usage confines its meaning to an immoral desire. “Flesh” is sarx (sarx) which here refers to the totally depraved nature as governing the individual’s reason, will, and emotions. Thus, the lust of the flesh is the passionate desire or the craving that comes from the evil nature. The word “flesh” here has no reference to the physical body except as that body is controlled or energized by the evil nature. The physical body and its members in themselves have no evil desires except as controlled by the totally depraved nature. To say that the physical body of itself has evil desires is Gnosticism, the heresy that matter is inherently evil. Now, John speaks of one of the manifestations of the evil nature, the lust of the eyes, namely the passionate cravings of the eyes for satisfaction, these cravings finding their source in the evil nature. Another manifestation of the evil nature is the pride of life. The word is alazonia (ajlazonia), “vainglory.” Vincent says: “It means, originally, empty,

braggart talk or display; swagger; and hence an insolent and vain assurance in one’s own resources, or in the stability of earthly things, which issues in a contempt of divine laws. The vainglory of life is the vainglory which belongs to the present life.” Thayer defines: “an insolent and empty assurance which trusts in its own power and resources and shamefully despises and violates divine laws and human rights.” The word “life” here is bios (bio"), referring to that which sustains life, namely, food, clothing, and shelter. “Of the Father” is “out from the Father as a source.” “Of the world” is “out from the world as a source.” “Passeth away” is paragetai (paragetai), “to pass alongside, to pass by.” The verb is in the passive voice. The world is being caused to pass by. That is, God is causing the world to come to its end. It is being caused to pass by in a vain (futile) show, this parade of the world. But, John says, “The one who keeps on habitually doing the will of God abides forever.” Translation. Stop considering the world precious with the result that you love it, and the things in the world. If anyone as a habit of life is considering the world precious and is therefore loving it, there does not exist the love possessed by the Father in him. Because everything which is in the world, the passionate desire of the flesh, and the passionate desire of the eyes, and the insolent and empty assurance which trusts in the things that serve the creature life, is not from the Father as a source but is from the world as a source. And the world is being caused to pass away, and its passionate desire. But the one who keeps on habitually doing the will of God abides forever. (2:18) “Time” is  (wJra), “an hour.” John says, “It is a last hour.” The article is absent before “hour,” and the emphasis is not therefore upon the fact of a particular, definite time, but upon the character of that particular, definite time. Vincent says that John uses the word “hour” as marking a critical season. He says: “The dominant sense of the expression last days in the New Testament is that of a period of suffering and struggle preceding a divine victory. See Acts 2:17; James 5:3; I Peter 1:20. Hence the phrase here does not refer to the end of the world, but to the period preceding a crisis in the advance of Christ’s kingdom, a changeful and troublous period, marked by the appearance of ‘many antichrists.’ ” As to the term “Antichrist,” Vincent says that “the absence of the article shows its currency as a proper name. The distinction between a false Christ (pseudochristos (yeudocristo")) and an antichrist (antichristos (ajnticristo")) is that the former is a pretender to the Messianic office, whereas the latter is against Christ, not pretending to be Christ, but proposing to do the work of Christ.” Trench says of Antichrist, “To me St. John’s words seem decisive, that resistance to Christ, and defiance of Him, this, and not any treacherous assumption of his character and offices, is the essential mark of Antichrist; is that which, therefore, we should expect to find embodied in his name; … one who shall not pay so much homage to God’s Word as to assert its fulfillment in himself, for he shall deny that Word altogether; hating even erroneous worship, because it is worship at all, and everything that is called ‘God’ (II Thess. 2:4), but hating most of all the Church’s worship in spirit and in truth (Dan. 8:11); who, on the destruction of every religion, every acknowledgment that man is submitted to

higher powers than his own, shall seek to establish his throne; and, for God’s great truth that in Christ God is man, to substitute his own lie, that in him man is God.” His word on the subject of a false Christ is as follows: “The pseudochristos (yeudocristo") does not deny the being of a Christ; on the contrary, he builds on the world’s expectations of such a person; only, he appropriates these to himself, blasphemously affirms that he is the foretold One, in whom God’s promises and men’s expectations are fulfilled. “The distinction, then, is plain. The antichristos (ajnticristo") denies that there is a Christ; the pseudochristos (yeudocristo") affirms himself to be the Christ. Both alike make war against the Christ of God, and would set themselves, though under different pretences, on the throne of His glory. And yet, while the words have this broad distinction between them, while they represent two different manifestations of the kingdom of wickedness, there is a sense in which the final ‘Antichrist’ will be a ‘Pseudochrist’ as well; even as it will be the very character of that last revelation of hell to gather up into itself, and to reconcile for one last assault against truth, all anterior and subordinate forms of error. He will not, it is true, call himself the Christ, for he will be filled with deadliest hatred against the name and offices, as against the whole spirit and temper of Jesus of Nazareth, the exalted King of Glory. But, inasmuch as no one can resist the truth by a mere negation, he must offer and oppose something positive in the room of that faith which he will assail and endeavor to utterly abolish. And thus we may certainly conclude that the final Antichrist will reveal himself to the world—for he too will have his apokalupsis (ajpokaluyi") (revelation) (II Thess. 2:3, 8), his parousia (parousia) (advent) (v. 9)—as, in a sense, the Messiah of God, but still as the world’s saviour; as the one who will make the blessedness of as many as obey him, giving them the full enjoyment of a present material earth, instead of a distant, shadowy, and uncertain heaven.” This is the personal Antichrist to which John has reference. “Shall come” is present tense in the Greek text. It is the prophetic present, “is about to come.” John asserts that in his time “there are many antichrists.” The verb is in the perfect tense, indicating that they have arisen and are on the scene. They have established themselves in the midst of the Church. What will be true of the personal Antichrist when he comes is true of these men in a lesser sense, or in a lesser degree. They are imbued with the spirit that will animate Antichrist. John will have occasion to describe these false teachers as to their attitude towards the Person of the Lord Jesus in succeeding verses (22, 23) of this chapter. “Whereby” is hothen (oJqen), “for which reason, wherefore.” That is, because there were many antichrists in John’s time, it follows that it is a last hour. With 1900 years of Church history behind us since John’s time, and Modernism sweeping the visible Church, how close must the Rapture and then the Second Advent be. The Church is in its last period, the Laodicean or apostate stage. Translation. Little children under instruction, a last hour it is. And even as you heard that Antichrist is coming, even now antichrists, many of them, have arisen, from which (fact) we know by experience that it is a last hour. (2:19) The words “out from” and “of” in this verse are the translation of the preposition ek (ejk) which is followed by the ablative case. There are two classifications of the ablative here, ablative of separation and ablative of source. In the statement, “They

went out from us,” we have the ablative of separation. These false teachers (antichrists) went out from the true believers in the sense that they departed doctrinally from the position of the Church as to the Person of the Lord Jesus, a position which they had held only in an intellectual way. It was a mental assent to the doctrines concerning, not a heart acceptance of, the Person of Christ. In the words, “They were not of us,” we have the ablative of source. That is, the antichrists did not have their source in the Mystical Body of Christ composed only of true believers. They were merely members of the visible, organized church on earth. They did not partake of the divine life animating the members of the Body of Christ, made up of true believers. All of which means that an apostate is an unsaved person who has mentally subscribed to the doctrines of the Christian faith and who then rejects those doctrines while still remaining within the organization of the visible church and posing as a Christian. John argues that had these antichrists belonged to the Body of Christ, thus possessing divine life in company with true believers, they would in that case have remained with these true believers in matters of doctrine. But, he says, they departed from the doctrinal position of the Church so that it could be shown that they did not belong to the company of the saints. The words of the a.v. are misleading, dq>that they were not all of us,” the implication being left with the reader that some of these antichrists had belonged to the company of the saints. The translation should read, “All were not of us.” In the Greek text, the verb separates not from all. In such cases, according to New Testament usage, the negation is universal. The a.v. not all makes it partial (Vincent). Translation. Out from us they departed, but they did not belong to us as a source. For if they had belonged to us, they would in that case have remained with us. But (they departed) in order that they might be plainly recognized, that all do not belong to us as a source. (2:20) The word “unction” is chrisma (crisma). The word refers to that with which the anointing is performed, the unguent or ointment. Here it refers to the Holy Spirit with whom the believer is anointed. The two words meaning “to anoint” in the New Testament,  (ajleifw) and  (criw), refer to the act of applying something to something else for a certain purpose.  (ÆAleifw) was used, for instance, in the papyri of the act of greasing the yoke-band of an ox, namely, the act of applying grease to the yokeband so that it would not irritate the sleek hide of the ox.  (Criw) was used of the application of a lotion to a sick horse. Thus, the anointing with the Holy Spirit refers to the act of God the Father (applying to the believing sinner) sending the Spirit in answer to the prayer of God the Son to take up His permanent residence in the believer. James 4:5 reads in the Greek text, “Do you think the scripture says in vain, The Spirit who has been caused to take up His permanent residence in us has a passionate longing to the point of envy?” This refers to the initial coming of the Spirit into the heart of the believing sinner at the moment he places his faith in the Saviour. This anointing is never repeated. The Old Testament priests were anointed with oil just once, when they were inducted into their office. The New Testament priest (the believer) is anointed with the Spirit just once, when he is inducted into his office as a priest (when he is saved). This anointing is only potential. That is, in itself it offers no help to the believer. The help the saint receives from the Spirit is through the fullness or control of the Spirit, which control is consequent upon his

yieldedness and trust. The anointing is for the purpose of placing the Holy Spirit in a position where He can be of service to the believer, namely, in the saint’s inner being. From His position in the believer, the Spirit performs all His office work for him. One of the ministries of the Spirit consequent upon His indwelling presence is that of enlightening him regarding the meaning of the Word of God. He is the Great Teacher in the Church. As a result of this, John says, “Ye know all things” (a.v.). But the word “all” in the best Greek texts is in the nominative case, which makes it the subject of the verb. The correct translation is, “Ye all know.” That is, as a result of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the saints are given the ability to know God’s truth. The particular word for “know” here is not  (ginwskw), “to know by experience,” but oida (oijda), “to know absolutely and finally.” The antichrists, being unsaved and thus devoid of the Holy Spirit, do not have that ability. This ability to know the truth gives the saints the ability also to detect error. Translation. But as for you (in contradistinction to the antichrists), an anointing you have from the holy One, and you all know. (2:21) “I have not written” is aorist here, but not epistolary aorist. John is referring to the statement he had just made, namely, “You all know,” that is, all believers have the ability to know God’s Word by reason of the anointing they receive when they are saved, the personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit. “Because” is hoti (oJti), which could be causal in function (because), or declarative (that). The context decides for the latter use. John had just written that they all knew (v. 20). Now he writes (v. 21) “I did not write to you that you do not know the truth, but that you know it.” The word “know” here is again oida (oijda), referring to an absolute, final, correct knowledge, here of God’s Word as understood by the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Translation. I did not write to you that you do not know the truth, but that you know it, and that every lie is not out of the truth as a source. (2:22) The definite article appears before the word “liar” in the Greek text. It is, “Who is the liar?” Vincent says: “It marks the lively feeling with which the apostle writes. By the definite article, the liar, the lie is set forth in its concrete personality: the one who impersonates all that is false, as antichrist represents every form of hostility and opposition to Christ. The denial that Jesus is the Christ is the representative falsehood. He that denies is the representative liar.” Commenting on the words, “he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ,” Vincent says: “The article with the participle denotes habitual denial. Literally, the one denying, the one who habitually represents this attitude towards Christ. The words are aimed at the heresy of Cerinthus, a man of Jewish descent and educated at Alexandria. He denied the miraculous conception of Jesus, and taught that, after His baptism, the Christ descended upon Him in the form of a dove, and that He then announced the unknown Father and wrought miracles; but that, towards the end of His ministry, the Christ departed again from Jesus, and Jesus suffered and rose from the dead, while the Christ remained impassible (incapable of suffering) as a spiritual being.” But what is involved in the names “Jesus” and “Christ”? They are more than mere designations of the identity of a certain individual who flourished in the first century. The English name “Jesus” is the transliteration (spelling) of the Greek name  (ÆIhsou"),

which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew word which in English is spelled “Jehoshua,” and which means “Jehovah saves.” Thus, in the name “Jesus” there is contained the doctrines of the deity, humanity and vicarious atonement of the Person who bears that name. Only Jehovah could offer a sacrifice which would satisfy the demands of His holy law which the human race broke. But that sacrifice had to include within itself human nature without its sin, for deity in itself could not die, and deity acting as Priest for the sinner must partake of the nature of the individual on whose behalf He officiates. The name “Christ” is the transliteration of Christos (Cristo"), a Greek word meaning “the anointed one,” and this is the translation of the Hebrew word from which we get the name “Messiah.” The denial therefore is that the Person called Jesus was neither God nor man, and that on the Cross He did not offer an atonement for sin. Present day Modernism denies the deity of Jesus of Nazareth and the substitutionary atonement He offered on the Cross, while subscribing to His humanity. Modernism is branded here by John as “the liar.” The definite article appears before the word “antichrist.” John says, “This one is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.” Here we have present day Unitarianism with a vengeance. The Jews denied the same thing in the first century. Our Lord asked the Pharisees, “What do you think concerning the Christ (Messiah)? Whose son is He?” They answered, “The son of David.” Our Lord asks, “How then does David in (the) Spirit call Him Lord? (kurios (kurio"), “Lord,” the Greek word used in the LXX to translate the august title of God, Jehovah). If David therefore calls Him Lord, how is He his son?” Our Lord was pinning down these false teachers, these Unitarians, to an admission of the two Persons of the Trinity, God the Father and God the Son. They believed in the One God who manifested Himself as the Jehovah of the Old Testament, but they refused to believe in the deity of Jesus of Nazareth and His relation to their God as Son of God. Present day Modernism does the same. John brands this denial as partaking of the attitude of Antichrist, and as coming from “the antichrist,” not the person of that name yet to come, but the Modernist, whoever he may be who denies the above truth. It is antichrist in spirit, and with a vengeance. Modernism is therefore anti-christian in its nature, and does not deserve the name “Christian.” Translation. Who is the liar if not the one who is denying that Jesus is the Christ? This one is the antichrist, the one who is denying the Father and the Son. (2:23) After branding the one who denies the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as seen in His unique sonship in relation to God the Father as the Antichrist, John proceeds to show his relationship to the God whom he professes to worship. He says: “Everyone who denies the Son, not even does he have the Father.” That is, the Modernist who professes to worship the God of the Bible, and who at the same time rejects His Son as very God of very God, does not sustain a saving relationship to the God he professes to worship. He is not His child, not a Christian, but an unsaved individual. But John says: “The one who confesses the Son, also has the Father.” The word “confess” is  (oJmologew), “to speak the same thing that another does,” hence, “to agree with that person.” Thus, the word refers here to the act of a person agreeing with what the Bible teaches regarding the unique sonship of Jesus of Nazareth with respect to God as His Father. The unique sonship of Jesus of Nazareth is clearly brought

out in John 5:18 where the first century false teachers accuse Him of claiming to be the unique Son of God. The word “his” of a.v. is the translation of the word idios (ijdio") which means “one’s own private, personal, unique possession.” They saw that if that were true, it would make Him equal with God. And since these Jews were Unitarians, they rejected His claim. But the one who holds the doctrine of the unique sonship of Jesus possesses God the Father also in the sense that he is His child. He is a saved individual. Nestle’s Greek text includes the words, “The one who confesses the Son, also the Father he is having.” Translation. Everyone who denies the Son, not even does he have the Father. The one who confesses the Son, also the Father is he having. (2:24–26) The a.v. fails to handle the pronoun used for emphasis at the beginning of this verse. It is, “But as for you,” in contradistinction to the aforementioned false teachers, “you let that therefore abide in you which ye heard from the beginning.” The point is, they (the false teachers) did not. They at one time subscribed to the true doctrine concerning the Person of the Lord Jesus, but they departed from it (2:19). “Abide” is  (menw) “to remain.” The exhortation is that the saints should allow the teaching into which they were brought when they were saved to remain in them. They are to continue to hold it fast. They must not allow themselves to become entangled in the Gnostic heresy regarding the Person of the Lord Jesus. But the word  (menw) (abide) has in it more than the idea of “to remain.” The exhortation includes more than that the saint should allow the basic teaching concerning the Person of our Lord to remain in him. He should have that attitude towards it that it will also feel at home in him, have ready access to every part of his life. In other words, it is the responsibility of the believer to nurture the stability and growth of those doctrines by a holy life and a determination to cling to them and remain true to them. All this is included in the content of meaning of the word  (menw). John now proposes a hypothetical case. “Shall remain” is aorist subjunctive. The translation reads, “If in you there remains (abides  (menw)) that which from the beginning you heard.” That is, if the true doctrine relative to the Person of our Lord is abiding in the believer, that is an indication that he is saved and will as a saved person continue to abide both in the Son and in the Father. Translation. As for you, that which you heard from the beginning, in you let it be constantly abiding. If in you there abides that which from the beginning you heard, both in the Son and in the Father you will abide. And this is the promise which He Himself promised us, the life, the eternal (life). These things I wrote to you concerning those who are leading you astray. (2:27) Again John uses the pronoun in an intensive sense, contrasting his Christian readers with the false teachers. He says, “But as for you, the anointing which you received from Him remains in you,” teaching that the Holy Spirit who is that with which the saint is anointed, stays in that person forever. We have the same truth brought out in James 4:5, “The Spirit who has been caused to take up His permanent residence in us.” The verb is  (katoikizw), the prefixed preposition kata (kata), the root meaning of which is “down,” giving permanency to the act of taking up His residence. David could pray,

“Take not thy Holy Spirit from me” (Psalm 51:11), since the Spirit came upon an individual in Old Testament times for the period of that person’s ministry, and left him when that ministry was over, without affecting his salvation. But in New Testament times, the Spirit is in the believer to stay. In view of the fact of the indwelling Spirit, the saints, John says, do not have “need that any man teach” them. “Man” is the indefinite pronoun in the Greek text. “Teach” is in the present subjunctive, emphasizing continuous action. The translation reads, “and no need are you constantly having that anyone be constantly teaching you.” This does not set aside the usefulness and necessity of God-appointed and equipped teachers in the Church (Eph. 4:11, “teaching pastors,” Acts 13:1), but merely means that the saints are not at the mercy of these Gnostic teachers or at the mercy of any teachers, for that matter. No teacher, even a God-appointed one, is the only and ultimate source of the saint’s instruction. He has the Holy Spirit and the Word. And in the case of saints who are subjected to the teaching of Modernism, their court of appeal and refuge is the instruction of the Holy Spirit through the Word of God. John says that the anointing teaches the saints. The act of teaching presupposes a person. This anointing therefore is a Person, the Holy Spirit Himself. The words “ye shall abide” are present imperative in the Greek text. This is not a predictive future, but a command. “Him” refers to the Lord Jesus. Translation. But as for you, the anointing which you received from Him remains in you. And no need are you constantly having that anyone be constantly teaching you. But even as His anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true and is not a lie, and even as He (the Holy Spirit, the anointing) taught you, be constantly abiding in Him. (2:28) “When” is ean (eJan), “if,” used with the subjunctive mode, the mode of future probability. The doubt is here, not as to the fact of our Lord’s coming for His Church, He promised that, but as to the time of that coming. One could translate, “whenever He shall appear.” The exhortation, “Be constantly abiding in Him” is given in view of the uncertainty of the time of His coming. The believer must live in close fellowship with His Lord that he may be ready for that coming. “Appear” is  (fanerow), in the passive voice as it is here, “to be made manifest or visible.” The invisible Lord Jesus will some day be made visible as He comes from heaven into the atmosphere of this earth to catch out His Bride, the Church. For some special work on the subject of the Rapture, see the author’s book, Great Truths To Live By (pp. 135–143). “Confidence” is  (parrhsia), “freedom in speaking, unreservedness in speech, free and fearless confidence, cheerful courage, boldness, assurance.” The word speaks of the heart attitude of a saint who lives so close to the Lord Jesus that there is nothing between him and his Lord when He comes, nothing of known sin in his life when the Rapture occurs. This is the kind of saint that keeps a daily check-up on himself as to sin in his life. He maintains a constant yieldedness to and dependence upon the Holy Spirit to show him sin in his life and give him the grace to judge it and put it out. “May have” is  (scwmen), the aorist subjunctive, speaking of instantaneous action here. That is, the saint at the time of the Rapture should be living in such close fellowship with his Lord that the sudden appearance of the Saviour merely continues the

fellowship that was in progress on earth, like Enoch who walked with God on earth and suddenly was not, for God took him. There is no need for a gradual adjustment to that fellowship into which he is being introduced at the Rapture, because the latter fellowship is just a continuation of the former. It is an instantaneous freedom of speech, of holy boldness, of assurance. “Be ashamed” is  (aijscunw), “to suffuse with shame, make ashamed,” in the passive, as it is here, “to be suffused with shame, be made ashamed.” The verb is here associated with  (ajp aujtou) “from Him,” and could be translated, “in shame shrink from Him.” Vincent says: “The fundamental thought is that of separation and shrinking from God through the shame of conscious guilt.” “Coming” is parousia (parousia). The word is made up of a participial form of the verb “to be,” and a preposition para (para), “beside,” and means literally, “to be beside.” It speaks of the personal presence of a person. In addition to its meaning of “personal presence beside,” it is used to speak of the coming of a person and his arrival or advent. Translation. And now, little children, be continually abiding in Him, in order that, whenever He is made visible, we may have instant freedom of speech and not be made to shrink away from Him in shame at His coming and personal presence. (2:29) The first “know” is oida (oijda), “if you know absolutely.” The second “know” is  (ginwskw), “to know experientially.” Vincent translates, “If ye know absolutely that He is righteous, ye perceive that every one, etc.” In the clause “is born of Him,” the question arises as to whom the pronoun refers, to God or Christ. The context refers the pronoun to the latter. Yet nowhere else in Scripture is it said that believers are born of Christ, but always of God. Vincent quotes Westcott in explanation: “When John thinks of God in relation to men, he never thinks of Him apart from Christ (see I John 5:20); and again, he never thinks of Christ in His human nature without adding the thought of His divine nature. Thus a rapid transition is possible from the one aspect of the Lord’s divine-human person to the other.” “Born” is from the perfect participle of  (gennaw). The perfect tense speaks of a past completed action having present results. The expanded translation reads, “having been born with the present result that you are a child (of God) by birth.” The relationship between God and the believer as Father and child is a permanent one. “Doeth” is from the present tense participle of  (poiew). The habitual doing of God’s will is in view here. The habitual actions of a person are an index to his character. The habitual actions of righteousness, God’s righteousness here as produced by the Holy Spirit (the definite article stands before the word “righteousness” in the Greek text, marking this out as a particular righteousness) is an indication of regeneration. Translation. If you know absolutely that He is righteous, you know experientially that every one who habitually does this aforementioned righteousness (which God is), out from Him has been born, with the present result that that one is a born one.

CHAPTER THREE (3:1) “Behold” is plural here, literally, “behold ye.” The usual form is singular. John is

calling upon all the saints to wonder at the particular kind of love God has bestowed upon them. “What manner of” is  (potaphn), “from what country, race or tribe?” The word speaks of something foreign. The translation could read, “Behold, what foreign kind of love the Father has bestowed upon us.” The love of God is foreign to the human race. It is not found naturally in humanity. When it exists there, it is in a saved individual, and by reason of the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Smith suggests, “from what far realm? What unearthly love,… how other-worldly.” “Hath bestowed” is from  (dedwken), the perfect tense form of  (didwmi), “to give something to some one.” The perfect tense is used here to indicate that the gift becomes a permanent possession of the recipient. God has placed His love upon the saints in the sense that they have become the permanent objects of His love. One of the results of this love in action is that we are called sons of God. Smith says: “The purpose of this amazing gift; a wise, holy love, concerned for our highest good, ‘not simply that we may be saved from suffering and loss, but in order that we may be styled children of God.’ And we have not only the name but the character: ‘so we are.’ ” The word “sons” (a.v.) is not huios (uiJo") (sons), but teknon (teknon), “born children,” (Scotch “bairns”). “Called” is  (kalew), “named.” Vincent says, “The verb ( (kalew)) is never used by John of the divine call.” The words “and we are,” are “a parenthetical, reflective comment, characteristic of John” (Vincent). “Knoweth” and “knew” are both  (ginwskw), “to acquire knowledge through the medium of experience.” By the world here John means the people of that system spoken of in 2:15–17, the people of the world system of evil. From their experience with us, the people of the world, while recognizing us as Christians, children of God, do not come to an understanding and appreciation of the nature of person we are, since unsaved people never have had a saving relationship with and knowledge of God. Intimate understanding and knowledge of another person is based upon fellowship with him. Since the people of the world have nothing in common with the children of God, they have no fellowship with them, and therefore have no intelligent appreciation and understanding of them. The foreign kind of love produced in us by the Holy Spirit constitutes us a foreign kind of person to the people of this world, and since they do not understand foreigners, people of a different race from themselves, they simply do not understand Christians. Children of God could just as well have come to earth from a strange planet so far as the people of the world are concerned. They are strangers to them. Translation. All of you, behold what foreign kind of love the Father has permanently bestowed upon us, to the end that we may be named bornones of God. And we are. On this account the world does not have an experiential knowledge of us, because it has not come into an experiential knowledge of Him. (3:2) Commenting on the words, “Now are we the sons of God,” Vincent says: “The two thoughts of the present and future condition of God’s children are placed side by side with the simple copula, and, as parts of one thought. Christian condition, now and eternally, centers in the fact of being children of God. In that fact lies the germ of all the possibilities of eternal life.” The verb in the expression “it doth not yet appear” is aorist passive. The correct reading is, “It has not yet been made manifest or visible.” Vincent says: “The force of the

aorist tense is, was never manifested on any occasion.” The word “what” is the interrogative pronoun in the neuter gender in the Greek text. It is used here as in the simple question, “What shall we be?” Bengel comments: “This what suggests something unspeakable, contained in the likeness of God.” The verb in the expression “when He shall appear” is  (fanerow), the same verb used in the case of the previous word “anpear” in this verse. It means in the passive, “to be made manifest or visible.” Vincent says: “Rev., correctly, if He (or it) shall be manifested. We may render either, ‘if it shall be manifested,’ that is what we shall be; or, ‘if He,’ etc. The preceding  (ejfanerwqh) it is (not yet) made manifest, must, I think, decide us in favor of the rendering it. We are now children of God. It has not been revealed what we shall be, and therefore we do not know. In the absence of such revelation, we know (through our consciousness of childship, through His promise that we behold His glory), that if what we shall be were manifested, the essential fact of the glorified condition thus revealed will be likeness to the Lord. This fact we know now as a promise, as a general truth of our future state. The condition of realizing the fact is the manifestation of that glorified state, the revealing of the what we shall be; for that manifestation will bring with it the open vision of the Lord. When the what we shall be shall be manifest, it will bring us face to face with Him, and we shall be like Him because we shall see Him as He is.” Thus, the translation so far reads: “Divinely-loved ones, now born ones of God we are. And not yet has it been made visible what we shall be. We know absolutely that when it is made visible, like ones to Him we shall be, because we shall see Him just as He is.” This likeness in this context has to do with a physical likeness, not a spiritual one. Saints are spiritually like the Lord Jesus now in a relative sense, and through the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit, are being conformed more and more to His spiritual likeness. John is speaking here of the Rapture. Paul in Philippians 3:20 says: “For the commonwealth of which we are citizens has its fixed abode in heaven, out from which also the Saviour, we with our attention withdrawn from all else, are eagerly waiting to welcome, the Lord Jesus Christ, and to receive Him to ourselves; who shall change the outward appearance of the body of our humiliation so as to conform it to an outward expression like to the body of His glory.” The word ”change” (a.v.) is  (metaschmatizw), “to change the outward expression by assuming one put on from the outside.” The words “be fashioned like,” are summorphon (summorfon), “an outward expression which comes from within, and is truly representative of one’s inner character.” Both words refer to an outward, not an inward change. The Rapture has to do with the glorification of the physical body of the believer, not with a change of his inner spiritual life. While the saint enters heaven in a sinless state, yet he is not catapulted ahead to absolute spiritual maturity in an instant of time. He grows in likeness to the Lord Jesus spiritually through the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit all through eternity, always approaching that likeness but never equalling it, for finiteness can never equal infinity. The change which comes at the Rapture is therefore a physical one. We shall be like our Lord as to His physical, glorified body. The word summorphon (summorfon), “be fashioned like,” speaks of that outer enswathement of glory that now covers the body of the Lord Jesus, and which will at the Rapture, cover ours. Only at the Rapture will we be able to see our Lord as He is now, for physical eyes in a mortal body could not look on that glory, only eyes in glorified bodies. And that is the reason we shall be like Him, for only in that state can we see Him just as He is.

Translation. Divinely-loved ones, now born-ones of God we are. And not yet has it been made visible what we shall be. We know absolutely that when it is made visible, like ones to Him we shall be, because we shall see Him just as He is. (3:3) “Every man who hath,” Vincent says is, “a characteristic form of expression with John, containing ‘a reference to some who had questioned the application of a general principle in particular cases.’ Here to some persons who had denied the practical obligation to moral purity involved in their hope.” The hope here is the Christian hope of some day being like the Lord Jesus in respect to His glorified body. “In” is epi (ejpi), literally, “upon.” The idea is, “hope resting upon Him,” or “hope set on Him.” The pronoun “Him” refers to the Lord Jesus, not to God the Father, as Smith so clearly brings out when he says: “hagnos (aJgno") (pure) also proves that the reference is to Christ. As distinguished from hagios (aJgio") (holy), which implies absolute and essential purity, it denotes purity maintained with effort and fearfulness amid defilements and allurements, especially carnal.… God is called hagios (aJgio") but never hagnos (aJgno"). Christ is hagnos (aJgno") because of His human experience. The duty of his appearing before God, his presentation to the King, is hagnizein heauton (aJgnizein eJauton) (to purify himself), like the worshippers before the Feast (John 11:55), like the people before the Lord’s manifestation at Sinai (Ex. 19:10, 11, LXX). It is his own work, not God’s, or rather it is his and God’s.” As to the expression, “purifieth himself,” Alford comments: “These words are not to be taken in any Pelagian sense, as if a man could of himself purify himself: ‘apart from Me,’ says our Lord, ‘ye can do nothing’ (John 15:5). The man who purifies himself has this hope resting upon God. This mere fact implies a will to purify himself, not out of, nor independent of, this hope, but ever stirred up by and accompanying it. So that the will is not his own, sprung out of his own nature, but the result of his Christian state, in which God also ministers to him the power to carry out that will in self-purification.… The idea of hagnizein (aJgnizein) (to purify) is much the same as that of katharizein (kaqarizein) (to cleanse) (1:9): it is entire purification, not merely from unchastity, but from all defilement of flesh and spirit.” Thus, the hope of being like the Lord Jesus arouses the determination to be pure like Him, and this brings into play the will of the Christian to carry that resolve out into action. Thus, in dependence upon the Holy Spirit, the saint puts sin out of his life and keeps it out. Translation. And everyone who has this hope continually set on Him is constantly purifying himself, just as that One is pure. (3:4, 5) Now John shows the incompatibility of being a child of God and yet continuing in sin. “Committeth” is  (poiew), “to do.” Vincent comments: “Rev., better, every one that doeth sin.… The phrase to do sin regards sin as something actually realized in its completeness. He that does sin realizes in action the sin (note the article  (thn) (the), that which includes and represents the complete ideal of sin.” “Transgresseth the law” is literally “doeth ( (poiew)) lawlessness.” The words, “the transgression of the law” are in the Greek text one word, anomia (ajnomia), “lawlessness.” It is the word

nomos (nomo") “law,” with alpha privative put before it which negates the word. The composite word means literally, “no law.” The Greek construction makes sin and lawlessness identical. “Take away” is  (aijrw), to lift up and carry away.” Smith comments: “atone for sins of the past and prevent sins of the future. (ÆAirw), properly ‘to lift up and carry away’ (compare Mark 6:29;John 2:16), but the idea of expiation is involved since it is ‘the Lamb of God’ that ‘taketh away the sins.’ ” Translation. Everyone who habitually does sin, also habitually does lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness. And you know absolutely that that One was manifested in order that He might take away our sins; and sin in Him does not exist. (3:6) The words “abideth” and “sinneth” are used here to designate a certain class of individual. Character is shown by one’s habitual actions, not the extraordinary ones. The tense of the verbs is present, the kind of action, continuous, habitual. Thus, “every one who habitually is abiding in Him,” is a saved person, and, “every one who habitually is sinning,” an unsaved person. A Christian as a habit of life is abiding in fellowship with the Lord Jesus. Sin may at times enter his life. But sin is the exception, not the rule. The unsaved person as a habit of life sins continually. “Sinneth” is present in tense, continuous action being indicated. The person who is abiding in Christ is not habitually sinning. The child of God as a habit of life, does righteousness, and sin is not a habit with him. John is not teaching sinless perfection here. Vincent says: “John does not teach that believers do not sin, but is speaking of a character, a habit. Throughout the Epistle, he deals with the ideal reality of life in God, in which the love of God and sin exclude each other as light and darkness.” He does not deny that a Christian sins at times. Indeed he admits the possibility of sin in the Christian’s life in 1:9, and forbids sin in 2:1. What John denies here is that a Christian sins habitually. He denies that the life of a Christian is wholly turned towards sin as is that of the unsaved person. He asserts however that “Everyone who keeps on continually sinning, has not seen Him neither known Him.” This is an unsaved person. The verbs “seen” and “known” are in the perfect tense, implying that he has neither seen nor known God in times past, with the present result that He is still invisible and unknown to him. The particular word for “see” here means “to see with discernment.” Translation. Everyone who in Him is constantly abiding is not habitually sinning. Everyone who is constantly sinning has not with discernment seen Him, nor has he known Him, with the result that that condition is true of him at present. (3:7) Smith comments: “An affectionate warning against Nicolaitan Antinomianism. The apostle cuts away vain pretences by a sharp principle: a righteous character expresses itself in righteous conduct. Christ (ekeinos (ejkeino") “that One”) is the type. He was ‘the Son of God,’ and if we are ‘children of God,’ we must be like Him.” “Deceive” is  (planaw), “to lead astray.” “Little children” is teknia (teknia). The verbal form  (tiktw) means “to give birth to,” thus the noun is “little born ones,” “bairns” (Scotch). Translation. Little born-ones, stop allowing anyone to be leading you astray. The one who habitually does righteousness is righteous, just as

that One is righteous. (3:8) “Committeth” is  (poiew), in a present tense participle, “He who is continually doing sin.” Smith suggests, “He that makes sin his business or practice.” “Of” is ek (ejk), “out of,” used with the ablative case, gives us the ablative of source. He who continually does sin is out of the devil as a source. That is, his sinful propensities, issuing from his totally depraved nature inherited from Adam, find their ultimate source in the devil who brought about the downfall of our first parents. Habitual actions again are an index of character, and here, of source. “Sinneth” is a present of duration which speaks of that which has begun in the past and continues into the present. The translation could read, “The devil has been sinning from the beginning.” Vincent says: “He sinned in the beginning, and has never ceased to sin from the beginning, and still sins.” Smith identifies the words “the beginning” as “the beginning of his diabolic career.” “Destroy” is in the Greek text  (luw), “to loosen, dissolve.” Westcott comments: “The works of the devil are represented as having a certain consistency and coherence. They show a kind of solid front. But Christ, by His coming, has revealed them in their complete unsubstantiality. He has ‘undone’ the seeming bonds by which they were held together.” But He has done more than that. By the blood of His Cross He has paid for sin, made a way of escape from the arch enemy of men’s souls, defeated the purposes of the devil, and will finally bring about his complete downfall. Translation. The one who is habitually doing sin is out of the devil as a source, because from the beginning the devil has been sinning. For this purpose there was manifested the Son of God, in order that He might bring to naught the works of the devil. (3:9) “Is born” is a perfect participle in the Greek text, speaking of the past completed act of regeneration, namely, the impartation of the divine nature (II Pet. 1:4) or divine life, and the present result, the fact that the person who has been made the recipient of divine life is by nature, and that permanently, a spiritually alive individual. “Commit” is  (poiew) in the present tense which always speaks of continuous action unless the context limits it to punctiliar action, namely, the mere mention of the fact of the action, without the mentioning of details. The translation reads, “Every one who has been born out of God, with the present result that he is a born-one (of God), does not habitually do sin.” “His seed” refers to the principle of divine life in the believer. It is this principle of divine life that makes it impossible for a Christian to live habitually in sin, for the divine nature causes the child of God to hate sin and love righteousness, and gives him both the desire and the power to do God’s will, as Paul says, “God is the One who is constantly putting forth energy in you, giving you both the desire and power to do His good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13). Smith comments: “The reason of the impossibility of a child of God continuing in sin. The germ of the divine life has been implanted in our souls, and it grows—a gradual process and subject to occasional retardations, yet sure, attaining at length to full fruition. The believer’s lapses into sin are like the mischances of the weather which hinder the seed’s growth. The growth of a living seed may be checked temporarily; if there be no growth, there is no life.” “Cannot sin” is dunamai (dunamai), “I am not able,” and the present infinitive of

 (aJmartanw), “to sin.” The infinitive in the present tense in Greek always speaks of continuous, habitual action, never the mere fact of the action, since the aorist infinitive which refers to the fact of the action, may be used at will if the writer wishes to speak of the mere fact without reference to details. The translation therefore is, “He is not able to habitually sin.” The Greek text here holds no warrant for the erroneous teaching of sinless perfection. Translation. Everyone who has been born out of God, with the present result that he is a born-one (of God), does not habitually do sin, because His seed remains in him. And he is not able to habitually sin, because out of God he has been born with the present result that he is a born-one (of God). (3:10) The words “in this” point particularly to what follows, although a secondary reference might be to what precedes. “Loveth” is  (ajgapaw), which refers to divine love which is self-sacrificial in its essence, the love produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit, the love defined by Paul in I Corinthians 13, the love shown by God at Calvary. The brother here is ostensibly a Christian brother. The expression is equivalent to “a fellow-Christian.” “Children” is tekna (tekna), born-ones of the devil in the sense that from Adam they inherit a totally-depraved nature, the same as the devil has. Translation. In this is apparent the born-ones of God and the born-ones of the devil. Every one who is not habitually doing righteousness is not of God, also the one who is not habitually loving his brother. (3:11, 12) Cain “was of that wicked one.” The words “wicked one” are the translation of  (ponhro"), “evil in active opposition to the good.” The word “pernicious” is a good translation. A kakos (kako") (evil) man is willing to perish in his own corruption. But a  (ponhro") (pernicious) person, seeks to drag every one else down with himself into the corruption and destruction that awaits him. That is Satan. The word “slew” is  (sfazw), “to slay, slaughter, butcher, by cutting the throat.” It was used in classical Greek of slaughtering victims for sacrifice by cutting the throat, also of animals tearing by the throat, of any slaughter by knife or sword. It is used in the LXX (Greek translation of the Old Testament), of the slaying of the Levitical sacrifices (Lev. 1:5). The usual word meaning “to kill” is  (ajpoqnhskw). The inspired writer goes out of his way to use a specialized word to describe the murder of Abel by Cain. The latter cut his brother’s throat. God said to Cain, “What hast thou done? The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto Me from the ground” (Gen. 4:10). The method Cain used to kill his brother was one in which much blood would be shed. The cutting of the jugular vein would fit that description. The human race learned how to kill when it was taught to slay a sacrificial animal as it approached a holy God (Gen. 3:21). Cain’s works are described as evil. The same word ( (ponhro")) is used when the devil is spoken of as “that wicked one.” His works were pernicious, actively opposed to that which is good. Translation. Because this is the message which you heard from the

beginning, to the effect that we should habitually be loving one another with a divine love; not even as Cain was out of the Pernicious One, and killed his brother by severing his jugular vein. And on what account did he kill him? Because his works were pernicious and those of his brother, righteous. (3:13) “Marvel not” is in a construction in the Greek text which forbids the continuance of an action already going on. It is, “Stop marvelling.” John’s readers were astounded at the fact that people of the world should hate them because they were children of God. The “if” is ei (eij), a particle of a fulfilled condition. It is, “if, as is the case, the world hates you.” Smith puts in a word of caution here: “It is no wonder if the world hate us, and its judgment is not decisive. Nevertheless, our business is not to be hated by the world, but to commend Jesus to it and win it. We must not impute to the world’s hostility to goodness, the consequences of our own unamiability or tactlessness. ‘It is not martyrdom to pay bills that one has run into one’s self’ (George Eliot).” Translation. Stop marvelling, brethren, if, as is the case, the world hates you. (3:14) The pronoun is in the emphatic position, “as for us,” in contradistinction to the world, “we know that we have passed from death to life.” As Smith says: “ ‘Whatever the world may say, we know.’ The test is not its hatred but our love.” “Have passed” is  (metabainw), “to pass over from one place to another, to migrate.” Vincent translates, “have passed over.” The verb is in the perfect tense, speaking of a past completed act having in a case like this, permanent results. “We have passed over permanently.” The prefixed preposition signifies a change, here, of position or state. “From death” is ek tou thanatou (ejk tou qanatou), “out of the death.” We have here an ablative of separation, “separated from the death.” Vincent says that the article before “death” and “life” marks these as the two spheres in which men must be, death or life. “Know” is oida (oijda), “to know absolutely.” This love for fellow-Christians is that divine love produced in the heart of the yielded believer, the content of which is described in I Corinthians 13 and John 3:16. Evidence of a saved condition is that the person is habitually loving Christians with a love that impels him to deny himself for the benefit of the fellow-Christian. The individual who does not thus love Christians is abiding in the aforementioned death. This is that condition of the unsaved spoken of in Ephesians 2:1, as “dead in the sphere of trespasses and sins. Translation. As for us, we know absolutely that we have passed over permanently out of the sphere of the death into the life, because we are habitually loving the brethren. The one who is not habitually loving is abiding in the sphere of the death. (3:15) John says: “Every one who is habitually hating his brother is a manslayer.” How are we to understand this? Is he an actual murderer without committing the act of killing another? Alford has an illuminating note: “The living spirit of man being incapable of a

state of indifference; that he who banished brotherly love has in fact abandoned himself to the rule of the opposite state. In the ethical depth of the apostle’s view, love and hate, like light and darkness, life and death, necessarily replace, as well as necessarily exclude, one another. He who has not the one, of necessity has the other in each case. He who hates his brother is stated to be a manslayer. The example given (v. 12) showed the true and normal result of hate, and again in the apostle’s ethical depth of view, as in our Lord’s own (Matt. 5:21, 27), he who falls under a state, falls under the normal results of that state carried out to its issue.” All of which means that the one who habitually hates his fellow-man to the exclusion, of course, of any good attitude towards him, is a potential murderer. Should occasion arise, his hate would issue in action like that of Cain. A person like that, John says, does not have eternal life abiding in him. In short, he is unsaved. Translation. Every one who habitually is hating his brother is a manslayer. And you know absolutely that every manslayer does not have life eternal abiding in him. (3:16) “Hereby” is  (ejn toutwi), “in this.” “Perceive” is  (ginwskw) in the perfect tense. The word speaks of knowledge gained by experience. The saints have experienced the love of God in that He laid down His life for them, and in that they have become the recipients of salvation. This knowledge is a permanent possession. “Life” is  (yuch), “soul.” Our Lord’s death on the Cross involved not only His physical death, but abandonment from God because of human sin laid on Him. It was this that touched His soul and caused Him to cry out, “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?” “Ought” is  (ojfeilw), speaking of a moral obligation. “Lives” again is  (yuch), “soul.” The ego must be crucified. Self must be denied for the benefit of one’s brother. It must be kept in mind that our Lord’s death had atoning value, whereas our laying down our lives in glad service to our fellow man does not. Translation. In this we have come to know by experience that love, because that One on behalf of us laid down His soul. And, as for us, we have a moral obligation on behalf of our brethren to lay down our souls. (3:17) “Good” is bios (bio"), “the necessaries of life” such as food, clothing, and shelter. “World” here is not used in the bad ethical sense but refers to this mundane sphere of life on earth. “Has” is present subjunctive, speaking of habitual possession. The verb speaks of a person who regularly has the necessities of life. “Seeth” is  (qewrew), “to look with interest and purpose.” Vincent translates, “deliberately contemplates.” The verb speaks of continuous action. This person deliberately contemplates over a protracted space of time. This is not a hasty glance. It is seeing a Christian in need of the necessities of life over a long period. “Shutteth up” is  (kleiw), “to shut up,” and in the aorist subjunctive, speaking merely of the fact of an action. The word could be used of the slamming of a door, the snapping of a lock. It speaks here of this person who snaps shut the door of his heart against any compassionate feelings toward his needy brother and against any merciful actions. “Bowels” is splagchna (splagcna), the oriental metaphor for what we speak of as the heart. “How” is  (pw"), “how is it possible?” Smith says: “Love must be practical. It is easy to ‘lay down one’s life’: martyrdom is heroic and exhilarating; the difficulty lies in

doing the little things, facing day by day the petty sacrifices and self-denials which no one notices and no one applauds.” Translation. But whoever has as a constant possession the necessities of life, and deliberately keeps on contemplating his brother constantly having need, and snaps shut his heart from him, how is it possible that the love of God is abiding in him? (3:18) Robertson comments: “What John means is, ‘not merely by word or by the tongue.’ He does not condemn kind words which are comforting and cheering, but warm words should be accompanied by warm deeds to make real ‘in deed and in truth.’ Here is a case where actions speak louder than mere words.” Smith quotes Sheridan: “He appears to have as much speculative benevolence as any private gentleman in the kingdom, though he is seldom so sensual as to indulge himself in the exercise of it.” Translation. Little born-ones, let us not be loving in the sphere of word nor even in the sphere of the tongue, but in the sphere of deed and truth. (3:19, 20) Smith is helpful here “The foregoing exhortation may have awakened a misgiving in our minds: ‘Am I as loving as I ought?’ Our failures in duty and service rise up before us, and ‘our heart condemns us.’ So the apostle furnishes a grand reassurance: ‘Herein shall we get to know that we are of the truth, and in His presence shall assure our heart, whereinsoever our heart condemn us, because, etc.’ The reassurance is two-fold: (1) The worst that is in us is known to God, and still He cares for us and desires us. Our discovery has been an open secret to Him all along. (2) He ‘readeth everything’—sees the deepest things, and these are the real things. This is the true test of a man: Is the deepest that is in him the best? Is he better than he seems? His failures lie on the surface: is there a desire for goodness deep down in his soul? Is he glad to escape from superficial judgments and be judged by God who ‘readeth everything?’ who sees ‘with larger eyes than ours,’ to make allowance for us all?” David was a man after God’s own heart because the general tenor of his life was habitually Godward. The Psalms give the real David. “Assure” is  (peiqw), “to persuade”; Thayer on this word offers, “to tranquilize.” Smith translates, “to pacify, win with confidence, soothe the alarm” of our heart. “Before” is emprosthen (ejmprosqen), “in the presence of.” The translation reads so far: “In this we shall know experientially that out of the truth we are, and in His presence shall tranquilize our hearts.” Vincent quotes the Revision, “whereinsoever our heart condemn us, because God is greater than our heart.” The sense of the whole passage is therefore, “In this we shall know experientially that out of the truth we are, and in His presence shall tranquilize our heart in whatever our heart condemns us, because God is greater than our hearts and knows all things.” Vincent’s note is valuable: “Is this superior greatness to be regarded as related to God’s judgment or to His compassion? If to His judgment, the sense is: God who is greater than our heart and knows all things, must not only endorse but emphasize our selfaccusation. If our heart condemn, how much more God, who is greater than our heart. If to His compassion, the sense is: when our heart condemns us we shall quiet it with the assurance that we are in the hands of a God who is greater than our heart—who surpasses man in love and compassion no less than in knowledge. This latter sense better suits the

whole drift of the discussion.” Translation. In this we shall know experientially that we are out of the truth, and in His presence shall tranquilize our hearts in whatever our heart condemns us, because greater is God than our hearts and knows all things. (3:21, 22) The words, “If our heart condemn us not,” do not claim sinless perfection, but represent the heart attitude of a saint that so far as he knows has no unconfessed sin in his life, has nothing between himself and the Lord Jesus, a saint who is yielded habitually to the Holy Spirit and living in close fellowship with his Lord. “Confidence” is  (parrhsia), “freedom in speaking, unreservedness in speech, free and fearless confidence, cheerful courage, boldness, assurance.” “Toward” is pros (pro"), “facing, toward,” thus, “face to face” with God, “facing” God. The article appears before “God” here, thus referring the word “God” to God the Father. “Ask” is  (aijtew), “to ask for,” and in the present subjunctive, speaking of continuous action. It is, “whatever we keep on asking for,” speaking of repeated and continuous praying, day after day. The prerequisites for answered prayer are an uncondemning heart, the habitual keeping of God’s commandments, and the habitual doing of those things which please Him. “Sight” is  (ejnwpion), from  (wjp), “to see,” and en (ejn), “in,” thus, “a penetrating gaze.” Translation. Divinely-loved ones, if our heart is not condemning us, a fearless confidence we constantly have facing God (the Father), and whatever we are habitually asking, we keep on receiving from Him, because His commandments we are habitually keeping with solicitous care, and the things which are pleasing in His penetrating gaze we are habitually doing. (3:23) “Should believe” is aorist subjunctive, its classification, constative aorist, viewing the entire course of a Christian’s life in one panoramic view. That is, the whole tenor of a saint’s life should be Christward. “The Name” is dative case. Saints have already believed on the name of Jesus Christ for their entrance into salvation. Now, in their saved state, they are to believe the Name of Jesus Christ. The word “Name” stands for all that the Son of God is in His wonderful Person. Robertson quotes Westcott, “a compressed creed.” This belief is an intellectual assent to all that the Bible states is true of our Lord and a heart submission to Him personally. “Love” here is again the divine, supernatural love produced in the heart of the yielded saint. Translation. And this is His commandment, to the effect that we should believe the Name of His Son Jesus Christ, and that we should be habitually loving one another even as He gave a commandment to us. (3:24) Vincent quotes Bede, “Therefore let God be a home to thee, and be thou the home of God: abide in God, and let God abide in thee.” Paul prays in Ephesians 3:16, 17 that the saints might “be strengthened with might through His Spirit in the inner man in order that the Christ might finally settle down and feel completely at home” in their hearts.

The knowledge of the fact that God is abiding in the saint comes from the Holy Spirit. He bears witness in connection with our human spirit as energized by Him, that we are born-ones of God (Rom. 8:16). Translation. And the one who as a habit of life exercises a solicitous care in keeping His commandments, in Him is abiding, and He Himself (is abiding) in him. And in this we know experientially that He is abiding in us, from the Spirit as a source whom He gave to us.

CHAPTER FOUR (4:1) Smith introduces this important section with the following comment: “The apostle has just said that the Spirit begets in us the assurance that God abideth in us. And this suggests a warning. The Cerinthian heresy also had much to say about ‘the spirit.’ It boasted a larger spirituality. Starting with the philosophical postulate of an irreconcilable antagonism between matter and spirit, it denied the possibility of the incarnation and drew a distinction between Jesus and the Christ. Its spirit was not ‘the Spirit of Truth’ but ‘a spirit of error,’ and thus the necessity arises of ‘proving the spirits.’ ” “Believe not” is in a construction in the Greek text which forbids the continuation of an action already going on. It is, “Stop believing every spirit.” The fact is that some were being carried away with the errors of the Gnostics. The word “spirit” is pneuma (pneuma). The word as used here refers to “one in whom a spirit is manifest or embodied, hence one actuated by a spirit, whether divine or demonical” (Thayer). Paul finds the source of false doctrine in demons who actuate the false teachers who propound heresy (I Tim. 4:1 “devils” should be “demons” daimonion (daimonion)). Thus these spirits are human beings actuated either by demons or the Holy Spirit. In this case they would be the teachers, pastors, and evangelists who circulated around the local churches. The exhortation is to try these individuals to see whether they are of God or not. The word “try” is  (dokimazw), “to put to the test for the purpose of approving, and finding that the person put to the test meets the specifications laid down, to put one’s approval upon him.” Thus, the teacher, for instance, was not to be put to the test for the purpose of condemning him, but with the intent to approve him. The brother was not to be treated as a heretic before he had shown himself to be one. The reason for putting visiting teachers to such a test was that many false prophets “are gone out into the world.” The verb is perfect in tense. They have gone out and they are as a present result in the world of mankind, and they have established themselves amongst the people. Translation. Divinely-loved ones, stop believing every spirit. But put the spirits to the test for the purpose of approving them, and finding that they meet the specifications laid down, put your approval upon them, because many false prophets are gone out into the world. (4:2, 3) John now gives the test which will prove that the Holy Spirit is actuating a teacher. If that teacher confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, that is a proof of the fact that he is a true believer and is actuated by the Holy Spirit. The word “confess” is  (oJmologew), from homos (oJmo"), “the same,” and  (legw), “to speak,”

thus, “to speak the same thing as another,” thus “to agree with another” on some particular thing. Therefore, every teacher who is in agreement with the Bible “that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” is of God. Now, what is involved in the statement, “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh”? The name “Jesus” is the English form of the Greek  (ÆIhsou"), and this is the Greek form of the Hebrew name “Jehoshua” which means “Jehovah saves.” “Christ” is from christos (cristo"), “the Anointed One.” The words “is come” are in the perfect tense in the Greek text. From the foregoing it follows that the statement speaks of the God of the Old Testament who in the Person of His Son became incarnate in human flesh without its sin, died on the Cross to satisfy the just demands of His law which man broke, and raised Himself from the dead in the body in which He died, to become the living Saviour of the sinner who places his faith in Him in view of what He did for him on Calvary’s Cross. The person who teaches that, John says, is actuated by the Holy Spirit. Likewise, the teacher who does not agree to that doctrine is not of God. He is actuated by the spirit of Antichrist who denies and is against all that the Bible teaches regarding the person and work of the Lord Jesus. This is Modernism. Translation. In this you know experientially the Spirit of God. Every spirit who agrees that Jesus Christ in the sphere of flesh is come, is of God; and every spirit who does not confess this aforementioned Jesus (agree to the above teaching concerning Him), is not of God. And this is the (spirit) of the Antichrist which you have heard that it comes, and now in the world already is. (4:4) The intensive use of the personal pronoun gives us, “as for you, little born-ones (in contradistinction to the anti-Christian teachers), you are of God.” John states that the saints to whom he is writing have overcome these false teachers. The verb is perfect in tense, speaking of a past completed victory, and a present state of being a conqueror. That is, the saints to whom John refers were not taken in by the heresies of the false teachers, and were in a settled state of victory over them. They were confirmed in their attitude against heresy and had their eyes wide open to its source and nature. The reason why they thus gained a complete victory over the false teachers and their heresies is that God the Holy Spirit who indwelt them is greater than that fallen angel Satan who is in the world system of evil. Translation. As for you, out of God you are, little born-ones, and you have gained a complete victory over them, because greater is He who is in you than he who is in the world. (4:5) The personal pronoun is intensive here. It is, “They themselves are of the world.” We have here ablative of source. These false teachers have their source in the world system of evil, this present pernicious age. “Speak they of the world” could mean, “speak they concerning the world.” But the Greek is clear here. It is, “out of the world as a source they speak.” The source of their false doctrines is the world. The demons of Satan are part of this world system, and the source of all heresy. The world of sinners accepts their teaching, for it recognizes its own language.

Translation. They themselves are out of the world as a source. On this account out of the world as a source they are constantly speaking. And the world listens to them. (4:6) The intensive pronoun is used. “As for us (in contradistinction to the false teachers), out of God we are.” “He that knoweth” is present tense, progressive action, speaking, not of a complete knowledge, but a progressive, experiential knowledge. It is the growing saint to whom reference is made. Vincent says: “he who is habitually and evermore clearly perceiving and recognizing God as his Christian life unfolds. The knowledge is regarded as progressive and not complete.” “Hereby” is ek toutou (ejk toutou). “Not the same as the common  (ejn toutwi) (in this) (v. 2). It occurs only here in this Epistle.  (ÆEn toutwi) is in this: ek toutou (ejk toutou), from this. The former marks the residing or consisting of the essence or truth of a thing in something the apprehension of which conveys to us the essential nature of the thing itself. The latter marks the inference or deduction of the truth from something, as contrasted with its immediate perception in that something. Rev., by this” (Vincent). Smith comments: “Men’s attitude to the message of the incarnate Saviour ranks them on this side or on that—on God’s side or the world’s. Of course St. John does not ignore St. Paul’s “speaking the truth in love” (Eph. 4:15). The message may be the truth and be rejected, not because of the hearer’s worldliness, but because it is wrongly delivered—not graciously and winsomely. Compare Rowland Hill’s anecdote of the preaching barber who had made a wig for one of his hearers—badly made and nearly double the price. When anything particularly profitable escaped the lips of the preacher, the hearer would observe to himself, ‘Excellent. This should touch my heart; but oh, the wig.’ ” Robertson says: “John had felt the cold, indifferent, and hostile stare of the worldling as he preached Jesus.” He quotes Westcott, “The power of recognition ( (ginwskomen), we know by experience) belongs to all believers. Alford says that “the spirit of truth” is the Holy Spirit who teaches the truth, and “the spirit of error” is the spirit who comes from the devil, teaching lies and seducing men into error. The spirit that comes from the devil teaching heresy, Paul declares to be a demon (I Tim. 4:1). Translation. As for us, out of God we are. The one who is knowing God is hearing us. He who is not out of God is not hearing us. From this we know the Spirit of the truth and the spirit of the error. (4:7, 8) “Beloved” is  (ajgaphtoi), “divinely-loved ones,” that is, “beloved ones, loved by God.” Those who are loved by God should love one another. The love with which children of God should love one another is the  (ajgaph) love which God is in His nature, the love which is produced by the Holy Spirit in the heart of the yielded saint, the love which was seen in action at the Cross, and the love whose constituent elements are defined for us in I Corinthians 13. The exhortation is in the present subjunctive which speaks of continuous action. The translation reads, “Let us be habitually loving one another.” The words “one another” are a reciprocal pronoun in the Greek text. There should be reciprocity in the exercise of this love. Everyone who habitually loves “is born of God.” “Is born” is perfect tense in the Greek text, literally “has been begotten with the present result that that person is a child” of God. The new-birth is a permanent thing. A

child of God remains a child of God forever. The one who is not habitually loving “knoweth not God.” “Knoweth” is aorist tense in the Greek text, literally, “did not know God.” Vincent says, “He never knew.” Smith translates, “did not get to know.” The verb is ingressive aorist, referring to entrance into a new condition. As to the statement, “God is love,” we would suggest that that simply is not true. God is not an abstraction. The word “God” has the article, the word “love” does not, which construction in Greek means that the two words are not interchangeable. The absence of the article emphasizes nature, essence, character. The translation should read, “God as to His nature is love.” That is, God is a loving God. It is His nature to be loving. Translation. Divinely-loved ones, let us be habitually loving one another, because this aforementioned love is out of God as a source; and everyone who is habitually loving, out of God has been born with the present result that he is regenerated and knows God in an experiential way. The one who is not habitually loving has not come to know God, because God as to His nature is love. (4:9) “Toward us” is  (ejn hJmin), “in our case.” “Only begotten” is  (monogenh"), “single of its kind, only.” Thayer says: “Used of Christ, denotes the only Son of God or one who in the sense in which He Himself is the Son of God has no brethren.” Our Lord is the uniquely begotten Son of God in the sense that He proceeds by eternal generation from God the Father as God the Son in a birth that never took place because it always was, possessing co-eternally with God the Father and God the Spirit, the essence of Deity. “Sent” is  (ajpostellw), “to send on a commission as an envoy, with credentials (the miracles), to perform certain duties,” here, to die for sinners, providing a salvation to be offered on the basis of justice satisfied to the one who places his faith in Him as Saviour. The verb is in the perfect tense speaking of a past complete action having present results. The prefixed preposition is apo (ajpo), “off.” He has sent off the Son with the result that a salvation has been provided for sinful man. Translation. In this was clearly shown the love of God in our case, because His Son, the only begotten One, God sent off into the world in order that we may live through Him. (4:10) In the expression, “Herein is love,” the definite article appears before the word “love,” not any kind of love, but the particular love that inheres in God’s nature, divine love. “We loved” is perfect in tense. The human race has not loved God with the present result that it does not possess any love for Him. “He loved” is constative aorist, giving a panoramic view of God’s love for the human race. God has always loved sinners. “Sent” is also aorist, marking the Incarnation as an historic event. “Propitiation” is hilasmos (iJlasmo"). The English word “propitiate” means “to appease and render favorable.” That was the pagan meaning of the Greek word. The pagan worshipper brought gifts to his god to appease the god’s wrath and make him favorable in his attitude towards him. But the God of Christianity needs no gifts to appease His wrath and make Him favorable towards the human race. Divine love springs spontaneously from His heart. His wrath against sin

cannot be placated by good works. Only the infliction of the penalty of sin, death, will satisfy the just demands of His holy law which the human race violated, maintain His government, and provide the proper basis for His bestowal of mercy, namely, divine justice satisfied. This is the hilasmos (iJlasmo"), that sacrifice which fully satisfies the demands of the broken law. It was our Lord’s death on Calvary’s Cross. Thus does this pagan word accrue to itself a new meaning as it enters the doctrinal atmosphere of the New Testament. Translation. In this is the love, not that we have loved God with the present result that we possess love (for Him), but that He Himself loved us, and sent off His Son, a satisfaction concerning our sins. (4:11) “So” is  (oJutw"), and refers back to the act of God sending off His Son to become the expiatory sacrifice for our sins. It was an act of infinite love and infinite sacrifice, not only on the part of the Son on the Cross, but on the part of the Father who sent the Son, for the heart of the Father was pierced when sin was laid on the Son at the Cross and His holiness demanded that He abandon the Son (Zech. 12:10). In the same manner, to the same extent, John says that the saints have a moral obligation to be constantly loving one another. The infinitive “to love” is present tense in Greek, speaking of continuous action. The “if” is a particle of a fulfilled condition, and should be “since” or “in view of the fact.” “Ought” is  (ojfeilw) which speaks of a moral obligation. Translation. Divinely-loved ones, since in that manner and to that extent did God love us, also, as for us, we are under moral obligation to be constantly loving one another. (4:12) The word “God” is in the emphatic position, coming first in the Greek sentence, namely, “God no one ever yet has seen.” The word “God” is without the article, indicating that character, essence, or nature is stressed. “Deity in its essence” no one has ever yet seen. The particular word for “see” here is theaomai (qeaomai), “to behold, look upon, view attentively, contemplate.” The verb is in the perfect tense. The expanded translation reads, “Deity in its essence no one has ever yet beheld, with the present result that no one has the capacity of beholding Him.” The words “His love” do not refer to our love for Him, nor to His love for us, but to the love which is peculiarly His own, which answers to His nature (Vincent). “Is perfected” is  (teleiow), “to bring to completion, to accomplish, finish.” If saints have this  (ajgaph) love habitually for one another, that shows that this love which God is in His nature, has accomplished its purpose in their lives. It has made us loving and self-sacrificial in our characters. This love has been brought to its human fulness in the lives of the saints. The verb “is perfected” is perfect in tense, speaking of a past completed act having present results. Translation. God in His essence no one has ever yet beheld, with the result that no one has the capacity to behold (Him). If we habitually are loving one another, God in us is abiding, and His love has been brought to its fulness in us, and exists in that state of fulness. (4:13) Alford comments: “nearly repeated from 3:24. But why introduced here? In the former verse, the fact of His abiding in us was assured to us, if we love one another. Of

this fact, when thus loving, we need a token. Him we cannot see: has He given us any testimony of His presence in us? He has given us such a testimony, in making us partakers of His Spirit. This fact it is to which the Apostle calls our attention, as proving not the external fact of the sending of the Son (v. 14), but one within ourselves, the indwelling of God in us, and our abiding in Him.” “Know” is  (ginwskw), “to know by experience.” That is, the saint experiences the work of the Holy Spirit in him, and from that experience, he deduces the fact that the Holy Spirit is in him, a gift of God. This experiential knowledge confirms the fact that the saint dwells in God and God in him. “Dwells” is  (menw), which is used often in the Gospel narratives of one person dwelling in the home of another. The word speaks of fellowship between two or more individuals. The pronoun is used intensively here, namely, “He (God) Himself in us.” “Hath given” is perfect tense in the Greek text. The Spirit was given the saints as a permanent gift. He is in us to stay, as James says (4:5), “The Spirit who has been caused to take up His permanent residence in us.” “Of His Spirit” is ek tou pneumatos autou (ejk tou pneumato" aujtou), literally, “out of His Spirit.” Paul’s words in I Corinthians 12:4–11 are of help here. John in using ek (ejk), “out of,” does not mean to infer that the individual saint receives only part of the Holy Spirit, for a person cannot be divided and parcelled out in parts. Each saint receives the Holy Spirit Himself in His entirety. John is here referring to that which the saint experiences of the indwelling Holy Spirit, namely, the operation of the spiritual gifts. No saint is given all of them. The individual saint who is the recipient of these spiritual gifts of the Spirit receives certain ones (ek (ejk)) out of the total number. But the presence of these gifts in him, shown by their outworking in his life, is also an evidence of the presence of the Spirit in him, and this latter, a proof of the fact that God dwells in that saint and that saint dwells in God. Translation. In this we know experientially that in Him we are dwelling and He Himself in us, because He has given us out of His Spirit as a permanent gift. (4:14) The pronoun appears in its intensive use in the Greek text. It is, “as for us (in contradistinction to certain others), we have seen.” The verb is theaomai (qeaomai), “to steadfastly and deliberately contemplate.” The verb is in the perfect tense, speaking of a past complete action with its present existing results. The act of viewing was not a mere momentary thing. It consisted of a process, which process was a completed one, one in which an assured result would be obtained. Furthermore, that result was an abiding fact. “Sent” is perfect in tense, and the preposition apo (ajpo) is prefixed, all of which gives us, “has sent off.” The expression, “the Saviour of the world” has a reference to the fact that the Roman emperor was called  (swthr tou kosmou), “Saviour of the world.” The Samaritan men also have the above in mind when they say to the woman, “We have heard Him ourselves, and know that this is the Christ, the Saviour of the world” (John 4:42). Emperor worship was the state religion of the Roman Empire, and the binding factor that united its far-flung, heterogeneous subject-peoples together in a union stronger than that of any military force. To recognize our Lord as the Saviour of the world instead of the Emperor was a capital offence, for such recognition was a blow at the very vitals of the Empire. That was the quarrel which Rome had against Christianity, and that was the reason for the bloody persecutions.

Translation. And as for us, we have deliberately and steadfastly contemplated, and we are testifying that the Father has sent off the Son as Saviour of the world. (4:15) “Confess” is  (oJmologew), “to speak the same thing that another speaks,” thus, “to agree with someone as to a certain proposition.” The word therefore implies a statement with which one is in agreement, that statement formulated by someone else, here, the doctrine concerning our Lord. The verb is in the aorist tense, making the act of confession a definite one, and the classification, constative aorist, speaking of the fact that that confession is a life-time confession, and represents the sustained attitude of the heart. The confession is that Jesus is the Son of God, thus, God the Son, thus very God of very God. Robertson says, “This confession of the deity of Jesus Christ implies surrender and obedience also, not mere lip service (cf. I Cor. 12:3; Rom. 10:6–12).” Translation. Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God in him dwells and he himself in God. (4:16) The pronoun is used in an intensive sense, “As for us, we have known and believed.” Both verbs are in the perfect tense, emphasizing not only a past completed act but abiding results in present time. “To us” is  (ejn hJmin), “in us,” that is, “in our sphere, in our case,” speaking of the sphere in which God’s love operates. Translation. And as for us, we have known the love which God has in our case, and have that knowledge at present, and we have believed and at present maintain that attitude; God is as to His nature, love, and he who dwells in the aforementioned love, in God is dwelling, and God in him is dwelling. (4:17) “Is made perfect” is perfect tense, “has been made perfect or complete, and exists in its finished results.” This represents a past fact in the saint’s life and a present reality. “Our love” is literally “the love with us.” This is not primarily God’s love for us or our love for Him, but the love which God is in His nature, produced in our hearts by the Holy Spirit. The saint who in the future Rapture of the Church will approach the Judgment Seat of Christ with boldness ( (parrhsia), freedom of speech) is the saint who in his earthly life has had the love that God is in His nature brought to its full capacity of operation by the Holy Spirit in his life. That fullness of love results in a life devoted entirely to the Lord Jesus. The word speaks of unreservedness of speech, a free and fearless confidence, with nothing to hide or be ashamed of. In that kind of life, the saint has nothing of which to be ashamed at the judgment of his works. That kind of life is a Christ-like life, and that makes the saint as he dwells in the midst of a world of sinful people, like Christ. And the Lord Jesus will not at the Judgment Seat of Christ condemn those who while they lived on earth, were like Him. Translation. In this has been brought to completion the aforementioned love with us, which love exists in its completed state, in order that we may be having unreservedness of speech at the day of judgment, because just

as that One is, also, as for us, we are in this world. (4:18) The fear spoken of here is not a godly fear or filial reverence, a holy fear of displeasing the Father through sin (I Peter 1:17, Heb. 12:28), but as the context indicates (“fear hath torment”), a slavish fear of a slave for a master, or of a criminal before a judge. The divine love produced in the heart of the yielded saint includes the former but not the latter. “Torment” is kolasis (kolasi"), “ ‘correction, punishment, penalty,’ and brings with it or has connected with it the thought of punishment” (Thayer). Thus, the saint who has experienced the fulness of this divine love in his earthly life, will have no fear of correction or penalty (loss of reward) at the Judgment Seat of Christ. The word “perfect” is teleios (teleio"), “that which is complete, brought to its fulness.” The saint who approaches that tribunal in a spirit of fear is the saint who has not experienced the fulness of this love, and for the reason that he did not maintain a Spirit-filled life during his earthly sojourn. Translation. Fear does not exist in the sphere of the aforementioned love. Certainly, this aforementioned, completed love throws fear outside, because this fear has a penalty, and the one who fears has not been brought to completion in the sphere of this love, and is not in that state at present. (4:19–21) The word “Him” is not in the best Greek texts, and the word “love” is not indicative in mode but subjunctive, expressing an exhortation. The Greek has it, “As for us, let us be loving, because He Himself first loved us.” Smith says: “The thought is that the amazing love of God in Christ is the inspiration of all the love that stirs in our hearts. It awakens within us an answering love—a grateful love for Him manifesting itself in love for our brethren (cf. v. 11).” The expanded Greek translation of verse 20 reads as follows: “If anyone says, I am constantly loving God with a divine love, and his brother is as constantly hating, he is a liar. For the one who is not constantly loving with a divine love his brother whom he has seen with discernment and has still within the range of his vision, God whom he has not seen with discernment and does not have within the range of his vision, he is not able to be loving.” The love here is as before,  (ajgaph), divine love, self-sacrificial in its essence. The brother is of course a fellow-Christian. The perfect tense is used in the case of the verbs meaning “to see.” This was no passing glance, but a completed act having abiding results. Translation. As for us, let us be constantly loving, because He Himself first loved us. If anyone says: I am constantly loving God, and his brother is as constantly hating, he is a liar. For the one who is not constantly loving his brother whom he has seen with discernment and at present has within the range of his vision, God whom he has not seen with discernment and at present does not have within the range of his vision, he is not able to be loving. And this commandment we have from Him; the one who is constantly loving God, should constantly be loving also his brother.

CHAPTER FIVE (5:1) The Cerinthian Gnostics denied the identity of Jesus and the Christ. That is, they denied that the individual whom the Christian Church knew by the name “Jesus” was also the Christ. The word “Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek word christos (cristo") which means “the anointed one.” But the predicted Anointed One was to be God-incarnate, virgin-born into the human race. Thus, the incarnation is in view here. But this belief is not a mere intellectual assent to the fact of the incarnation, but a heart acceptance of all that it implied in its purpose, the substitutionary death of the Incarnate One for sinners, thus making a way of salvation in which God could bestow mercy on the basis of justice satisfied. That person, John says, and he uses the perfect tense here, has been born of God and as a result is a child of God. “Him that begat” is God. “Him that is begotten of Him” is the child of God. John says therefore that the person who loves God as his Father also loves God’s children because of the fact of the family relationship, that of having a common Father and that of sustaining the relationship with other believers, that of children in the same family. Translation. Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ, out from God has been born and as a result is His child. And everyone who loves the One who begot, loves the one who has been begotten out from Him. (5:2) “By this” is  (ejn toutwi), literally, “in this.” Vincent says, “Not by this or from this, as an inference, but in the very exercise of the sentiment toward God, we perceive.” “When” is hotan (oJtan), “more strictly, whenever. Our perception of the existence of love to our brethren is developed on every occasion when we exercise love and obedience toward God” (Vincent). Love ( (ajgaph), divine love) on the part of a saint for his brother in Christ is shown when that saint observes the commandments of God, for obedience to the commandments puts that saint in right relationship to his brother Christian, which relationship results in his acting in a loving manner toward that Christian. The converse also is true, namely, when a saint disobeys God’s commandments, he is acting in an unloving way toward his fellow-saint. The word “keep” is  (threw), “to attend to carefully, to take care of, to guard, observe.” The word in this connection speaks of a watchful, solicitous guarding and care of God’s commandments lest we disobey them, with the thought that we are concerned with His honor and glory and our Christian testimony to the same. It is a jealous safe-keeping of His commandments lest they be violated. The words “love” (second occurrence) and “keep” are in the present subjunctive, speaking of continuous action. “Know” is  (ginwsko), “to know by experience.” Translation. In this we know experientially that we are habitually loving the born-ones of God, whenever God we are habitually loving and His commandments are habitually guarding and observing with solicitous care. (5:3) In the expression “the love of God,” we have the objective genitive, in which the

noun in the genitive case (God), receives the action of the noun of action (love). Thus, we are to understand that John means “the love for God.” That is, the saint’s love for God is shown by his keeping His commandments. This should be the motivating factor in our keeping God’s Word, our love for Him. This love is  (ajgaph), that divine love produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit, which love impels us to obey Him. “Grievous” is “heavy.” The word speaks of that which is burdensome, severe, stern, violent, cruel, unsparing. Love for God makes the keeping of His commandments a delight rather than a burden. Translation. For this is the love for God, namely, that we are habitually and with solicitous care guarding and observing His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome. (5:4, 5) The reason why God’s commandments are not burdensome is that obedience to them enables the saint to overcome the world. “Whatsoever” is neuter in gender, the comprehensive, categorical neuter, expressing the universality of the principle, and refers to persons, those persons born of God. “Born” is again perfect in tense, referring to a past completed act of regeneration with the present result that that regenerated individual has been made a partaker of the divine nature and as such is a child of God (II Peter 1:4, John 1:12 “sons,” tekna (tekna), “bairns,” born-ones). “Overcometh” is  (nikaw), “to carry off the victory, come off victorious.” The verb implies a battle. Here the forces of the world-system of evil, the flesh (totally depraved nature), the devil, and the pernicious age-system (zeitgeist German) with which the saint is surrounded, are all engaged in a battle against the saint, carrying on an incessant warfare, the purpose of which is to ruin his Christian life and testimony. The verb is in the present tense, “is constantly overcoming the world.” It is a habit of life with the saint to gain victory over the world. To go down in defeat is the exception, not the rule. In the expression, “This is the victory that overcometh,” the verbal form is an aorist participle, literally, “This is the victory that overcame the world”; as Smith says, “St. John says first, ‘is conquering,’ because the fight is in progress, then ‘that conquered’ because the triumph is assured.” The same authority says, “ ‘Our faith’ conquers the world by clinging to the eternal realities.” Vincent says, “Our faith is embraced in the confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.” This is brought out in v. 5, in the question, “Who is he who is constantly conquering the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?” A heart belief in the incarnation with all that that implies results in an individual who gains the victory over the world. Unitarianism was clearly one of the most wide-spread heresies of the early Church, for John over and over again in this epistle writes against it. Translation. Because everything born of God is constantly coming off victorious over the world. And this is the victory that has come off victorious over the world, our faith. Who is he who is constantly coming off victorious over the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.? (5:6) “Came” is an aorist participle in the Greek text, referring to a definite fact in history, the first Advent of the Son of God embracing human nature without its sin

through virgin birth. “By” is dia (dia), the preposition of intermediate agency, speaking here of accompaniment and instrumentality. His coming to make an atonement for sin was accompanied by and made effective through water and blood. Vincent says, “Water refers to Christ’s baptism at the beginning of His Messianic work, through which He declared His purpose to fulfil all righteousness (Matt. 3:15). Blood refers to His bloody death upon the Cross for the sin of the world.” Robertson says, “These two incidents in the Incarnation are singled out because at the baptism Jesus was formally set apart to His Messianic work by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon Him and by the Father’s audible witness, and because at the Cross His work reached its culmination (‘It is finished,’ Jesus said).” The combination “Jesus Christ,” used together by John to designate one individual, is a refutation of the Cerinthian Gnostic heresy to the effect that Jesus was the person, only human, not deity, and that the Christ or divine element came upon Him at His baptism and left Him before His death on the Cross. In the words, “not by water only, but by water and blood,” John changes from the preposition dia (dia) to en (ejn). It is locative of sphere, “not in the sphere of the water only but in the sphere of the water and the blood.” Dia (Dia) presents the medium through which, and en (ejn), the sphere or element in which Jesus Christ came to offer Himself as the atonement for sin. It is the Holy Spirit who is the third witness to the Incarnation, the water and the blood being the other two. John writes, “And the Spirit is the One who is constantly bearing witness, because the Spirit is the truth.” This latter statement does not take away from the conception of the Holy Spirit as one of the Persons of the Trinity, for the Lord Jesus referred to Himself as the truth (John 15:26). The idea is that it is the Holy Spirit whose characteristic is truth, to whom John refers. Translation. This is the One who came through water and blood, Jesus Christ; not in the sphere of the water only, but in the sphere of the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the One who is constantly bearing witness, because the Spirit is the truth. (5:7) There is general agreement among textual critics that the contents of this verse are spurious, and do not belong to the original text. “The fact and the doctrine of the Trinity do not depend upon this spurious addition” (Robertson). (5:8) The words “in earth” are not found in the best manuscripts. The same three witnesses of verse 6 are repeated. The expression “these three agree in one is literally in the Greek text, “are to the one thing”; that is, in the words of Vincent, “they converge upon the one truth, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, come in the flesh.” Alford translates, “Concur in the one, contribute to one and the same result, namely, the truth that Jesus is the Christ, and that we have life in Him.” Translation. Because three there are that are constantly bearing testimony, the Spirit and the water and the blood. And the three concur in the one thing. (5:9) The word “if” here is not ean (eJan), a conditional particle of an unfulfilled condition, but ei (eij), the conditional particle of a fulfilled condition. It is used with the

indicative mode, and assumes the reception of the witness of men to be a fact. The idea is, “In view of the fact that we receive the witness or testimony (marturia (marturia)) of men.” “Receive” is  (lambanw), “to take, appropriate, receive.” The reception of testimony is therefore the act of appropriating it to ourselves as something to be depended upon as the truth. John’s thought is here, “Since we are in the habit of receiving the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater, and therefore should be received.” “For” is hoti (oJti) “because.” Vincent says, “Not explaining why it is greater, but why the principle of the superior greatness of divine testimony should apply and be appealed to in this case. Supply mentally, and this applies in the case before us, for etc.” “Which” is not  (hJn) but hoti (oJti) in the best texts. John’s thought is as follows: “Since we are in the habit of receiving the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater (and therefore should be received); because this is the testimony of God (and this applies in the case before us) that God has borne testimony concerning His Son with the present result that that testimony is on record.” That is, we receive testimony from our fellow-man. But God’s testimony is greater than man’s testimony. God testifies of the fact that He has borne testimony concerning His Son, and since He is the One who has borne this testimony, not man, that testimony should be received. The verb is in the perfect tense, speaking of a past act of bearing testimony with the result that the testimony is on record at the present time. Translation. Since the testimony of men we are habitually receiving, the testimony of God is greater, because this is the testimony of God, that He has borne testimony concerning His Son, and this testimony is on record. (5:10, 11) Smith has a most helpful note here: “A subtle and profound analysis of the exercise of soul which issues in assured faith. Three stages, ‘believe God,’… accept His testimony concerning His Son, i.e., not simply His testimony at the Baptism (Matt. 3:17), but the historic manifestation of God in Christ, the Incarnation. God speaks not by words but by acts, and to set aside His supreme act, and all the forces which it has set in operation is to ‘make Him a liar’ by treating His historic testimony as unworthy of credit. (2) ‘Believe in the Son,’… make the believing, self-surrender, which is the reasonable and inevitable consequence of contemplating the Incarnation and recognizing the wonder of it. (3) The Inward Testimony … The love of Jesus satisfies the deepest need of our nature. When He is welcomed, the soul rises up and greets Him as ‘all its salvation and all its desire’ and the testimony is no longer external in history but an inward experience, and therefore indubitable.”“Witness” is martus (martu"). It is used of a witness, “one who avers, or can aver, what he himself has seen or heard or knows by any other means” (Thayer). It is used of one who testifies to what he has seen or heard, for instance, a witness in a court of law. Thus, the one who believes on the Son of God has the testimony in him to the effect that he thus believes. Paul in Romans 8:16 tells us that the Holy Spirit bears testimony in connection with our human spirits as energized by the Holy Spirit that we are children of God. That is, our human spirit, energized by the Holy Spirit, gives us the consciousness that we as believers are children of God. The Holy Spirit testifies to us that that same thing is true. The following verbs, “hath made, believeth, gave record” are in the perfect tense, and as Vincent says, the act perpetuates itself in the present condition of the person acting in the verb. In verse 11 we have the simple aorist in the verb “hath given,” marking the giving of His Son at the Cross as an historic fact.

Translation. The one who believes on the Son of God has the testimony in himself. The one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, and as a result considers Him to be such, because he has not believed the testimony which God has given concerning His Son, which testimony is on record, with the result that he is in a settled state of unbelief. And this is the testimony, that life eternal God gave us. (5:12) The definite article appears before the word “life,” pointing out a particular life, that life which God is and which He gives sinners who place their faith in the Son. The first mention of the Son is without the qualifying words, “of God,” the second has them. Bengel remarks: “The verse has two clauses: in the former, of God is not added, because believers know the Son; in the other it is added, that unbelievers may know at length how serious it is not to have Him.” Translation. The one who has the Son, has the life. The one who does not have the Son of God, the life he does not have. (5:13) Smith comments: “The purpose for which St. John wrote his Gospel was that we might believe in the Incarnation, and so have eternal life (20:31); the purpose of the Epistle is not merely that we may have eternal life by believing, but that we may know that we have it. The Gospel exhibits the Son of God, the Epistle commends Him. It is a supplement to the Gospel, a personal application and appeal.” “I have written” is an epistolary aorist, a courtesy extended the reader by the writer of a letter in which the latter puts himself at the viewpoint of the reader when he receives the letter, looking at the letter which he is writing as a past event, although it is a present one with him. John refers here, therefore, not to a previous letter, but to the one he is writing. “Know” is oida (oijda), speaking, not of experiential knowledge, but of absolute, beyond the peradventure of a doubt knowledge, a positive knowledge. The words, “and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God,” are not found in the best texts. The words, “unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God,” appear after the words, “that ye may know that ye have eternal life,” in the Greek text. Translation. These things I write to you in order that you may know with an absolute knowledge that life you are having, eternal (life), to you who believe on the name of the Son of God. (5:14, 15) “Confidence” is  (parrhsia), “free and fearless confidence, cheerful courage, boldness, assurance.” “In Him” is pros auton (pro" aujton). The preposition pros (pro") means “toward,” speaking of the saint’s attitude towards a prayer-hearing and a prayer-answering God. “Ask” is  (aijtew), “to ask for something to be given.” It is in the middle voice in which the person acting in the verb does so in his own interest. It is in the present subjunctive, which speaks of continuous action. Thus, the total idea is, “if we keep on asking for something for ourselves.” “Will” is  (qelhma), a desire which springs from the emotions. Smith suggests: “A large assurance: our prayers are always heard, never unanswered. Observe two limitations, (1) according to His will which does not mean that we should first ascertain His will and then pray, but

that we should pray with the proviso, express or implicit, ‘If it be thy will.’ Matthew 26:39 is the model prayer. (2) The promise is not ‘He granteth it’ but ‘He hearkeneth to us.’ He answers in His own way Verse 15. An amplification of the second limitation. ‘We have our requests’ not always as we pray but as we would pray were we wiser. God gives us not what we ask but what we really need.” Said Shakespeare, “We, ignorant of ourselves, beg often our own harms, which the wise powers deny us for our good; so find we profit by losing of our prayers.” Translation. And this is the assurance which we are having toward Him, that whatever we keep on asking for ourselves according to His will, He hears us. And if we know with an absolute knowledge that He hears us, whatever we are asking for ourselves, we know with an absolute knowledge that we have the things which we have asked from Him. (5:16, 17) For the exposition of this difficult verse, we turn to Alford, and his canons or rules of interpretation. He says: “Our first canon of interpretation of ‘the sin unto death’ and ‘not unto death’ is this, that the ‘death’ and the ‘life’ must correspond. The former cannot be bodily death, while the latter is eternal and spiritual life. This clears away at once all those commentators who understand the sin unto death to be one for which bodily death is the punishment, either by human law generally,… or by sickness inflicted by God. “Our second canon will be, that this sin unto death being thus a sin leading to eternal death, being further explained to the readers here, must be presumed as meant to be understood by what the Evangelist has elsewhere laid down concerning the possession of life and death. Now we have from him a definition immediately preceding this, in verse 12, ‘The one who has the Son has the life. The one who does not have the Son of God, the life does not have.’ And we may safely say that the words ‘unto death’ here are to be understood as meaning ‘involving the loss of this life which men have only by union with the Son of God.’ And this meaning they must have, not by implication only, which would be the case if any obstinate and determined sin were meant, which would be a sign of the fact of severance from the life which is in Christ (see 3:14, 15, where the inference is of this kind), but directly and essentially, i.e., in respect of that very sin which is pointed at by them. Now against this canon are all those interpretations far too numerous to mention, which make any atrocious and obstinate sin to be that intended. It is obvious that our limits are thus confined to abnegation of Christ, not as inferred by its fruits otherwise shown, but as the act of sin itself. “Our third canon. will help us decide, within the above limits, which especial sin is intended. And it is, that by the very analogy of the context, it must be not a state of sin, but an appreciable ACT of sin, seeing that that which is opposed to it in the same kind, as being not unto death, is described by ‘if anyone see his brother sinning.’ (The verb “see” is aorist subjunctive, speaking of a single act of seeing. K.S.W.) “In enquiring what this is, we must be guided by the analogy of what St. John says elsewhere. Our state being that of life in Christ Jesus, there are those who have gone out from us, not being of us (2:19), who are called antichrists, who not only ‘have not’ Christ, but are Christ’s enemies, denying the Father and the Son (2:22), whom we are not even to receive into our houses nor to greet (II John 10, 11). These seem to be the persons pointed out here, and this is the sin, namely, the denial that Jesus is the Christ, the

incarnate Son of God. This alone of all sins bears upon it the stamp of severance from Him who is the Life itself. As the confession of Christ, with the mouth and in the heart, is salvation unto life (Rom. 10:9), so denial of Christ with the mouth and in the heart, is sin unto death.” From the above we are led to the conclusion that “the sin unto death” refers in the context in which John is writing, to the denial of the Incarnation, and that it would be committed by those whom John designates as antichrists, who did not belong to the true Christian body of believers, but were unsaved. In view of the foregoing interpretation which is based upon the historical background and the context in which John is writing, we can now proceed with the exegesis of this verse. We will look at the Greek text itself. “See” is aorist subjunctive, speaking of a single act, not a continuous viewing. The sin in question here therefore is not an habitual one but a single act. The word “unto” is pros (pro"), “near, facing.” Vincent says: “describing the nature of the sin. The preposition unto (pros (pro")) signifies tendency toward, not necessarily involving death.” “He shall ask” is  (aijtew), in future tense, the imperative future. Vincent suggests: “In prayer. The future tense expresses not merely permission (it shall be permitted him to ask), but the certainty that, as a Christian brother, he will ask. An injunction to that effect is implied.” “For it,” referring to “the sin unto death,” is ekeinos (ejkeino"), the pronoun of the remote person or thing. Vincent says in this connection. “Note the sharp distinctness with which that terrible sin is thrown out by the pronoun of remote reference and its emphatic position in the sentence.” “Pray” is  (ejrwtaw), used of one on equal terms with another making request. Vincent suggests that “it may mark a request based upon fellowship with God through Christ, or it may hint at an element of presumption in a prayer for a sin unto death.” The present writer confesses his utter inability to understand this verse except that the sin unto death is the denial of the incarnation, and that it is committed by an unsaved person who professes to be a Christian. The rest of the verse is an enigma to him, and he will not attempt to offer even a suggestion as to its possible interpretation. Translation. If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which is not in its tendency towards death, he should ask, and He will give him life, to those who are sinning not with a tendency towards death. There is a sin which tends towards death. Not concerning that one do I say that he should ask. Every unrighteousness is sin. And there is a sin which does not tend towards death. (5:18) “We know” is oida (oijda), “to have positive, absolute knowledge.” “Is born” is in the perfect tense, and speaks of a past complete act of regeneration with the present result that the believing sinner is a born-one of God. “Is begotten” is aorist tense and speaks of the Son of God, Son of God by eternal generation from God the Father in a birth that never took place because it always was. “Sinneth” is present tense, continuous action. The one born of God does not keep on habitually sinning. “Keepeth” is  (threw), “to take care of, to guard.” The word expresses watchful care. “Wicked one” is  (ponhro"), “evil in active opposition to the good, pernicious.” The word refers to Satan who is not content to perish in his own corruption, but seeks to drag everyone else down with himself to his final doom. “Toucheth” is  (aJptw), in the middle and passive voice, “to grasp, to lay hold of.” “Himself” is autos (aujto"), the pronoun of the

third person, and should be rendered “him.” As Smith says, “There is no comfort in the thought that we are in our own keeping; our security is not in our grip on Christ but His grip on us.” Translation. We know absolutely that everyone who has been born out of God and as a result is a regenerated individual, does not keep on habitually sinning. But He who was born out of God maintains a watchful guardianship over him, and the Pernicious One does not lay hold of him. (5:19) “Lieth” is keimai (keimai). Vincent comments: “The word is stronger than esti (ejsti), ‘is,’ indicating the passive, unprogressive state in the sphere of Satan’s influence. ‘While we are from God, implying a birth and a proceeding forth, and a change of state, the kosmos (kosmo") (the world), all the rest of mankind, remains in the hand of the evil one’ (Alford).” “Wickedness” is  (ponhro"), the word translated “wicked one” in verse 19, and refers again to Satan. “World” is kosmos (kosmo"), the world-system of evil of which all the unsaved are a part. Translation. We know with an absolute knowledge that out of God we are, and the whole world in the Pernicious One is lying. (5:20) Smith, commenting on this verse, says: “The assurance and guarantee of it all— the incarnation, an overwhelming demonstration of God’s interest in us and His concern for our highest good. Not simply a historic fact but an abiding operation—not ‘came’ ( (hjlqe)) but ‘hath come and hath given us.’ Our faith is not a matter of intellectual theory but of personal and growing acquaintance with God through the enlightenment of Christ’s Spirit.”“Is come” is  (hJkw), “to have come, have arrived, be present.” John does not use erchomai (ejrcomai) here, a verb which speaks only of the act of coming, but  (hJkw), which includes in the idea of coming, the fact of arrival and personal presence. It is, “the Son of God has come (in incarnation), has arrived and is here.” While He departed in His glorified body to Heaven, yet He is here in His presence in the Church. His coming was not like that of a meteor, flashing across the sky and then gone. He remains in His followers on earth. “Hath given” is perfect in tense, “has given with the result that the gift is in the permanent possession of the recipient” “True” is not  (ajlhqh"), “true,” that is, veracious, but  (ajlhqino") “genuine” as opposed to the false and counterfeit, here, the genuine God as opposed to the false God of the heretics. Translation. We know with an absolute knowledge that the Son of God has come and is here, and that He has given us a permanent understanding in order that we may be knowing in an experiential way the One who is genuine. And we are in the Genuine One, in His Son, Jesus Christ. This is the genuine God and life eternal. (5:21) “little children” is teknia (teknia), a tender word, “little born-ones.” “Keep” is  (fulassw), “to guard, to watch, to keep watch.” It is used of the garrison of a city guarding it against attack from without. Smith says, “The heart is a cidatel, and it must be guarded against insidious assailants from without.” The verb here is not in the

present tense imperative, commanding an habitual guarding, but in the aorist, which marks a crisis. “The Cerinthian heresy was a desperate assault demanding a decisive repulse” (Smith). “Idols” is  (eijdwlon), “an image, likeness, idol.” Smith says, “St. John is thinking, not of the heathen worship of Ephesus—Artemis and her Temple, but of the heretical substitutes for the Christian conception of God.” He had just written concerning the genuine God of the Bible. Now he warns against the false, counterfeit gods of paganism. Vincent suggests that the command, however, has apparently the wider Pauline sense, to guard against everything which occupies the place of God. Translation. Little children, guard yourselves from the idols.

SECOND JOHN In the Greek New Testament In order to reap the most benefit from his study, the student is urged to work through John’s letter verse by verse, with his Bible and this exegesis before him, seeking to understand the meaning of the Word in the light of the word studies, interpretations, and expanded translation. (1, 2) John calls himself “the elder.” The Greek word is presbuteros (presbutero"). It was used originally in secular life of an older man, afterwards as a term of rank or office. The members of the Sanhedrin were called presbuteros (presbutero") (elders). In the Christian Church, the men who bad attained to a well-proved, mature Christian experience were designated as elders. From the ranks of these the bishops were chosen. For a discussion of the latter subject, see the author’s book, The Pastoral Epistles in the Greek New Testament (p.77). John is writing as one of these men grown old in the Christian Faith. And yet, an examination of the two letters, II and III John, discloses the fact that he was exercising authoritative supervision over a wide circle of churches, he was corresponding with and visiting them, interfering with their disputes and settling these by his personal and solitary arbitrament, and sending deputies and receiving them (Smith). This indicates that he was also acting in an official capacity as an elder. He writes to “the elect lady.” The following considerations point to the interpretation that this was a Christian woman of some prominence in the Church. The apostle addresses his letter to her and her children, and mentions the fact that in his travels he met others of her children, and reports that they were ordering their behavior in the sphere of the truth. He also sends greetings from the children of this elect lady’s sister. The word “lady” is kuria (kuria). It is the feminine form of kurios (kurio"), which means “lord, master.” It was a common name in those days. It is the Greek form of the name “Martha” which means “mistress.” She was a devout Christian who lived near Ephesus. Women occupied a prominent place among the Greeks at this time, which fact, together with her character as a Christian, would account for the fact that she was so well-known in the first-century Church. Her home was the meeting-place of the local assembly, there being no church buildings in those days. “Elect” is eklektos (ejklekto"), “one picked out, chosen.” The reference is to the fact that this lady was one of the elect of God, one of the chosen-out ones of God, chosen-out from among mankind by the sovereign grace of God for

salvation. “Children” is teknon (teknon), “born-ones,” Scotch, “bairns.” “Whom” is in the masculine gender, referring to both sons and daughters, and to the Lady herself. The aged apostle writes that he loves this elect Lady and her children. The particular word he chooses is  (ajgapaw), not  (filew). Had he used the latter word, he would have been expressing a human fondness for her, which would have been a grave mistake in a man of John’s position in the Church. He tells her that he loves her and her children with a Christian love, a love produced in his heart by the Holy Spirit, a pure, selfsacrificial, heavenly, non-human love devoid of any sex relation. It is as if he said, “I love you in the Lord.” But he is not satisfied with thus carefully delineating his love for her by the use of  (ajgapaw). He adds the qualifying phrase, “in the truth.” It is locative of sphere. That is, the love with which he loved this well-known woman of position in the Church was circumscribed by the truth as it is in Christ Jesus. It was in connection with the Word of God that he loved her. His love for her had to do with Christian relationships in the Church life and work. The example of John in all this could well be emulated in these days. He uses the pronoun in an intensive way, “whom, as for myself, I love in the sphere of the truth.” But not only does John especially love her, but all those who have come to know experientially the truth and as a result have it in their knowledge, also love her. John and all those who have come to know the truth, love her “for the truth’s sake.” “For” is dia (dia), a preposition which means, “for the sake of, because of.” That is, they loved her because of her Christian character which exemplified the truth as it is found in the Word of God. This truth, John describes as “abiding in us.” Smith says, “not merely apprehended by the intellect but welcomed by the heart.” The word is  (menw), which is used often in the Gospels of one living as a guest in the home of another. Thus the truth is a welcome guest in the heart of the Christian. This truth, John says, “shall be with us forever.” Smith adds “as our guest and companion. Translation. The Elder, to the chosen-out Lady, and to her born-ones, whom, as for myself, I love in the sphere of the truth, and not only I, but also all who have come to know experientially the truth and at present possess a knowledge of it, because of the truth which is continuously dwelling in us, and with us it shall be forever. (3) The Greek text has, “There shall be with us grace, mercy, peace.” For an extended treatment of the word “grace,” please see the author’s book, Treasures from the Greek New Testament (pp. 15–19). Briefly, in the ethical terminology of the pagan Greeks, charis (cari") (grace) referred to a favor conferred freely, with no expectation of return, and finding its only motive in the bounty and free-heartedness of the giver. Of course, this favor was always done for a friend, never for an enemy. When charis (cari") is taken into the New Testament, it leaps an infinite distance forward, for the “favor” God did at Calvary in becoming sin for man and paying the penalty instead of man, was done for a race that bitterly hated Him, a race, unlovely, and humanly speaking, unlovable. Mercy (eleos (ejleo")) is God’s “kindness and goodwill toward the miserable and afflicted, joined with a desire to relieve them” (Vincent). Grace meets man’s need in respect to his guilt and lost condition; mercy, with reference to his suffering as a result of that sin. Trench says: “In the divine mind, and in the order of our salvation as conceived therein,

the mercy precedes the grace, God so loved the world with a pitying love (therein was the mercy), that He gave His only-begotten Son (herein the grace), that the world through Him might be saved. But in the order of the manifestation of God’s purpose of salvation, the grace must go before the mercy and make way for it. It is true that the same persons are the subjects of both, being at once the guilty and the miserable; yet the righteousness of God, which it is quite as necessary should be maintained as His love, demands that the guilt should be done away before the misery can be assuaged; only the forgiven may be blessed. He must pardon before He can heal … From this it follows that in each of the apostolic salutations where these words occur, grace precedes mercy.” Peace is  (eijrhnh). The verb is  (eijrw), “to bind together.” Thus, our Lord made peace through the blood of His Cross when He made it possible for a holy God in perfect justice and holiness to bind together a believing sinner and Himself in an indissoluble, living union. Grace for daily living as the Holy Spirit ministers to the spiritual needs of the yielded saint, mercy in the form of God’s care over the physical needs of the saint, and peace in the form of heart tranquility, shall be with us, John says. These come from the presence of God the Father and from the presence of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father. The Greek preposition translated “from” is not apo (ajpo), speaking of ultimate source, but para (para), referring to immediate, personal source. Of course all these find their ultimate source in Deity, but the personal, immediate source is emphasized here by John. This preposition “from” is repeated with the words, “Jesus Christ.” Westcott says that “it serves to bring out distinctly the twofold personal relation of man to the Father and the Son.” Brooke comments: “The Fatherhood of God, as revealed by one who being His Son can reveal the Father, and who as man (Jesus) can make Him known to men.” “The Son has interpreted the Father to man, ‘not merely in truth,’ enlightening the intellect, but ‘in love,’ engaging the heart” (Smith). Translation. There shall be with us grace, mercy, peace, from the presence of God the Father, and from the presence of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in the sphere of truth and love. (4) “I rejoiced” is  (cairw) expressing a glad surprise. John had often been disappointed in the kind of lives some of the young people of the early Church were living. But when he met some of this elect Lady’s children, he experienced a glad surprise. “I found” is perfect tense, “I have found.” He sits down and writes this Lady at once, telling her of the good news. The character of the lives which these children were living demonstrated to John that this was no spasmodic thing, but a practice with them, for the present results of the perfect tense are not lost sight of here. Evidently he had had contact with them for some time. The expression, “found of thy children” is literally, “found some out of thy children.” The indefinite pronoun is understood here. John ran across some of this Lady’s children in his preaching and administrative itineraries. They were “walking in truth.” “Walking” is  (peripatew), “to order one’s behavior, to conduct one’s self.” “In truth” is the locative of sphere. Her children were conducting themselves in the sphere of the truth as it is in Christ Jesus. That is, their actions and words were circumscribed by the Word of God. Their conduct was governed by the Word of God. This truth is further defined by John as being the commandment received from God as to how a Christian should conduct

himself. John uses the word teknon (teknon), born-ones, Scotch “bairns,” a most tender word. Translation. I rejoiced greatly that I have found some of your born-ones conducting themselves in the sphere of the truth, even as a commandment we received from the presence of the Father. (5) “Beseech” is  (ejrwtaw), “to request, entreat, beg, beseech.” “Had” is imperfect tense, “which we were constantly having.” The commandment was always with the Christian Church ever since its beginning, and was with the individual saint from the beginning of his Christian experience. The commandment was to the effect that Christians should love one another. The verb is in the present subjunctive, stressing continuous action. The distinctive word for “love” here is  (ajgapaw). This love with which saints are to love one another needs to be defined. The English word “love” may mean any one of a dozen kinds of love. There are as many meanings to it as there are persons in a preacher’s audience, for a speaker is understood in the definition his audience puts upon a word, unless he defines it himself. Wise is the preacher who defines it for his people. This love with which a saint should love another saint is produced by the Holy Spirit in the heart of the saint, and its amount and intensity are determined by the degree of yieldedness on the part of that saint. It is self-sacrificial in its essence (John 3:16). It is longsuffering in its character, kind, self-abasing, humble, well-behaved, altruistic, is not provoked, thinks no evil, does not rejoice in iniquity, rejoices in the truth, bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things, never fails (I Cor. 13:4–8). The words “one another” are a reciprocal pronoun in the Greek text. That is, there must be reciprocity among the saints as to this love. A saint must reciprocate the love shown him by a fellowsaint. Translation. And now I entreat you, Lady, not as writing a commandment to you which is new, but that (commandment) which we have been having continually from the beginning, that we should be habitually loving one another with a divine love. (6) “Love” has the definite article. It was the love just referred to in the commandment, namely, “And this is the aforementioned love.” John defines it as walking according to God’s commandments. “According to” is kata (kata), the local meaning of which is “down,” thus suggesting domination. We are to order our behavior, conduct ourselves, dominated by the commandments of God. They are to be the dominating factor in our behavior. In the clause, “ye should walk in it,” the word “it” refers to “love,” not “commandment.” We should conduct ourselves in the sphere of love. Divine love, produced in the heart by the Holy Spirit, is the motivating factor that impels saints to observe the commandments of God. Translation. And this is the aforementioned love, that we should order our behavior dominated by His commandments. This is the commandment, just as you heard from the beginning, that in its sphere we should be ordering our behavior.

(7) And now John gives his reason for his urgent entreaty that the saints conduct themselves in the sphere of God’s commandment to love one another. It is the presence of heretics and their heresies in the visible Church. “Deceivers” is planos (plano"), “wandering, roving, misleading, leading into error, a vagabond, tramp, impostor, a corrupter, deceiver,” thus, a false teacher who leads others into heresies. “Are entered into,” is  (ejxhlqon), “went forth into” the world. The verb is aorist, speaking here of a particular crisis in the first-century Church when these false teachers suddenly broke with the saints in matters of doctrine, and went forth teaching heresy. “World” here is kosmos (kosmo"), the world of unsaved humanity. These, John says, “confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.” “Confess” is  (oJmologew), “to agree with” someone as to a certain teaching. These teachers were not in agreement with the doctrines of the Church. They not only did not admit them to be true but differed with them by teaching heresy. “Is come” is a present participle in the Greek text. There is no article before the word “flesh.” The emphasis is upon character or manner. The prepositional phrase qualifies the coming as a flesh-coming. The word “flesh” refers, not to the totally-depraved nature, but to the physical body and human life with its human limitations. The denial here is that of the incarnation, not specifically of the First and Second Advent, although both are included in the apostle’s thought, but of the fact of an Advent of Deity at all, of an incorporation by Deity of human nature. Here we have Unitarianism with a vengeance again. John says that this is “the deceiver and the antichrist,” the definite article appearing with both nouns. “This” is houtos (oJuto"), the demonstrative pronoun in the masculine gender, referring here to personality. That is, the teacher who denies the fact of an incarnation is a deceiver and an anti-christ, and as Alford says, a representative and precursor of Antichrist himself. Translation. Because many deceivers went forth into the world, those who do not agree that Jesus Christ comes in the sphere of flesh. This one is the deceiver and the antichrist. (8) “Look to yourselves” is literally, “ever keep a watchful eye upon yourselves” ( (blepw)). The best texts have, not, “we lose not,” but, “ye lose not.” “Lose” is apollumi (ajpollumi), “to destroy, ruin, lose.” “We receive” is in the best texts, “ye receive.” Smith explains: “We have worked together: see that you do not forfeit the reward of your labor. Get a full wage. Be not like workmen who toward the close of the day fall off, doing their work badly or losing time, and get less than a day’s pay.… We have been fellow-workers thus far, and I mean to be faithful to the last: see that you also be so.” He adds, “Their danger lay in taking up with false teaching and losing the comfort of the gospel in its simplicity and fulness.” Translation. Ever be keeping a watchful eye upon yourselves in order that you do not lose the things we accomplished, but that you receive a full reward. (9) “Transgresseth” is  (proagw), “to lead forward, to go before,” in a bad

sense, “to go further than is right or proper,” in this context, “to go beyond” the limits of true doctrine. “Doctrine” is  (didach), “teaching,” namely, that which is taught. Smith says that it is the teaching which recognizes Jesus as the Christ, the Messiah, the Saviour. We have a genitive of reference, “teaching with reference to Christ.” “The Cerinthian Gnostics boasted of their enlightenment. They were ‘progressives,’ advanced ‘thinkers’ ” (Smith). Robertson says: “These Gnostics claimed to be the progressives, the advanced thinkers, and were anxious to relegate Christ to the past in their onward march. This struggle goes on always among those who approach the study of Christ. Is He a ‘landmark’ merely or is He our goal and pattern? Progress we all desire, but progress toward Christ, not away from Him.” In the second instance of the use of the expression, “in the doctrine of Christ,” the words “of Christ” are not found in the best texts. The person therefore, who goes beyond the teaching of the incarnation of the Son in human flesh, thus denying the incarnation, does not possess God in a saving relationship. That person is Unitarian in doctrine and a Modernist or Liberal, an unsaved person who has no right to the name “Christian.” Translation. Everyone who goes ahead and does not remain in the teaching with reference to Christ, does not have God. The one who remains in the aforementioned teaching, this one has both the Father and the Son. (10, 11) The “if” is the particle of a fulfilled condition. There were such teachers circulating around the local churches who were Unitarians. These visitors to whom John has reference were not ordinary guests needing hospitality, but teachers, as is shown by the words “bring not this doctrine.” John forbids her to show them hospitality. Since the local church held its meetings, not in a building designated for that purpose, but in the homes of its members, it is very possible that the local church of her community met for worship in her home, since she was a woman of outstanding prominence. If this was the case, the command of John would extend to the responsibility of the local church of today to exclude Modernists from occupying its pulpit. She is forbidden to bid these false teachers “godspeed.” The Greek is, “and say not to him ‘greeting.’ ” The Greek word is chairein (cairein), “rejoice, hail.” The word was used for a greeting or farewell. The context speaks of the coming of the false teacher and the necessity of barring his entrance to the home, either with respect to general hospitality, or if the home was the meeting place of the local church, with reference to his teaching at the worship service. It would seem therefore that the reference here is to the greeting, not the farewell. The words “receive not” and “neither bid godspeed” are in a Greek construction which forbids the continuance of an act already going on. This Lady had received such false teachers and had given them greeting, of course, innocently. John exhorts her to stop doing so. The reason for the prohibition of hospitality and greeting in the case of false teachers, here, the Gnostics, was that the Christian who did offer both, became a sharer or partner of the false teachers in the disseminating of heresy. The word “partaker” is  (koinwnia), “a partner, one who cooperates with another.” Robertson says: “It is to be borne in mind that the churches often met in private homes (Rom. 16:5; Col. 4:15), and if these travelling deceivers were allowed to spread their doctrines in these homes and then

sent on with endorsement as Apollos was from Ephesus and Corinth (Acts 18:27), there was no way of escaping responsibility for the harm wrought by these propagandists of evil. It is not a case of mere hospitality to strangers.” Translation. If, as is the case, a certain one comes to you, and this teaching is not bearing, stop receiving him into (your) home. And stop giving him greeting. For the one who gives him greeting is a partner in his works which are pernicious. (12) “Would” is boulomai (boulomai), “a desire which comes from one’s reason.” John had considered the matter carefully and had come to the conclusion that it would be wiser to wait until he saw this Lady again to talk things over with her rather than include them in this letter. Smith has a most helpful note in this connection: “Why would he not write all that was in his mind? It was a deliberate decision ere he took pen in hand: This is the force of ‘I would not.’ His heart was full, and writing was a poor medium of communication.… he was an old man, and writing was fatiguing to him (Plummer). The reason is deeper. The ‘many things’ which he had in mind, were hard things like his warning against intercourse with heretics, and he would not write at a distance but would wait till he was on the spot and had personal knowledge. It is easy to lay down general principles, but this application to particular cases is a delicate task, demanding knowledge, sympathy, charity. (1) The sight of peoples’ faces appeals to one’s heart and softens one’s speech. (2) When one meets with people and talks with them, one’s judgment of them and their opinions is often modified. Writing from Ephesus, St. John might have condemned a teacher in a neighboring town whose teaching he knew only by report; but perhaps if he met the man and heard what he bad to say, he might discover that there was nothing amiss, at all events, nothing which called for excommunication. Dr. Dale of Birmingham was at first inclined to look with disfavor on Mr. Moody. He went to hear him, and his opinion was altered. He regarded him ever after with profound respect, and considered that he had a right to preach the gospel, ‘because he could never speak of a lost soul without tears in his eyes.’ St. John shrank from hasty condemnation that there might be no after-regret.” “Paper” is  (carth"). The reference is to the Egyptian papyrus, the form of paper used at that time. It was made of a tall, smooth reed which had a triangular stalk. This contained the pith from which the paper was made. The paper was made by arranging the pith in strips, laying other strips crosswise, uniting these two layers with a paste, and putting all under a heavy pressure. This was papyrus, writing material of the ancients. “Ink” is melanos (melano"), “that which is black.” Ancient ink was prepared from soot, vegetable, or mineral substances. Gum and vitriol were used also. Colored inks, red and gold, were used (Vincent). “Would” is an epistolary aorist and can best he rendered by the present tense in English. The writer puts himself at the viewpoint of the recipient, and views an act that is present with him as a past event. “Might be full” is a periphrastic construction which totals up to the following: “in order that our joy, having been filled completely full, might persist in that state of fulness through present time.” Translation. Having many things to be writing to you, I do not, after giving the matter mature consideration, desire to do so with pen and ink,

but I am hoping to be present with you and to speak face to face, in order that our joy, having been filled completely full, might persist in that state of fulness through present time. (13) John closes this rather informal yet divinely-inspired letter by relaying greetings from the children of the sister of this elect Lady. This sister was a Christian as seen in the word “elect.” Translation. There greet you the children of your sister, the chosen-out one.

THIRD JOHN In the Greek New Testament In order to reap the most benefit from his study, the student is urged to work through John’s letter verse by verse, with his Bible and this exegesis before him, seeking to understand the meaning of the Word in the light of the word studies, interpretations, and expanded translation. (1) The Greek order of words is, “The elder to Gaius, the beloved.” John calls him “beloved,” four times in this brief letter, here, and in verses 2, 5, and 11. The adjective describes this man as being well-beloved by his fellow-saints, an outstanding member of the local church to which he belonged. The word “beloved” is  (ajgaphto"), the word used of divine love. For the significance of the term “elder” see notes on II John 1. Translation. The Elder, to Gaius, the beloved, whom, as for myself, I love in the sphere of the truth. (2) Regarding the contents of this verse, Adolph Deissmann in his monumental work, Light from the Ancient East, shows that the words “I pray that in all things thou mayest prosper and be in health,” are found frequently in letters of that day. He presents a letter, “Apion to Epimachus his father and lord, many greetings. Before all things I pray that thou art in health, and that thou dost prosper and fare well continually.” In another letter we have, “Antonius Maximus to Sabina his sister, many greetings. Before all things I pray that thou art in health.” Here is a letter from a prodigal son to his mother, “Antonus Longus to Nilus his mother, greetings. And continually do I pray that thou art in health. I make intercession for thee day by day to the lord Serapis.” Deissmann appends this note: “Misunderstanding this formula, many commentators on the Third Epistle of St. John have assumed that Gaius, the addressee, had been ill immediately before.” It is therefore not necessary to suppose that Gains was ill. The letters from which the above excerpts were taken were written by pagans. The reader will note the first-century custom of a letter-writer in writing his name first and then that of the person to whom it was addressed, also the custom of these pagan peoples to pray to their gods even about such a mundane matter as the health of a loved-one. John adds to the formula by praying that the physical health of Gaius may equal the health of his soul, which latter health was robust. If the physical health of some saints equalled the health of their souls, they would be persons of the stature of an Atlas or a Hercules, while

in the case of others they would be physical dwarfs, emaciated and weak. How often great spiritual vitality is found in saints of infirm health and broken bodies. The word “soul” is  (yuch). Vincent defines it as follows:“The soul is the principle of individuality, the seat of personal impressions. It has a side in contact with both the material and the spiritual element of humanity, and is thus the mediating organ between body and spirit. Its meaning, therefore, constantly rises above life or the living individual, and takes color from its relation to either the emotional or the spiritual side of life, from the fact of its being the seat of the feelings, desires, affections, aversions, and the bearer and manifester of the divine life-principle (pneuma (pneuma)). Consequently  (yuch) (soul) is often used in our sense of heart (Luke 1:46; John 10:24; Acts 14:2); and the meanings of  (yuch) (soul), and pneuma (pneuma) (spirit), occasionally approach each other very closely.” It was the inner heart-life of Gaius that John said was in a prosperous condition. The word “prospereth” is  (eujodow). The word is made up of hodos (oJdo") “a road,” and eu (euj), “good,” thus, “a good road, or a good journey.” The verb is used of the granting of a prosperous and expeditious journey, and means, “to cause to prosper.” The words “above all things” are the a.v. translation of  (peri pantwn), which Vincent says is wrong. “This sense of peri (peri) is contrary to New Testament usage. The preposition means concerning. So Rev., ‘I pray that in all things thou mayest prosper.’ ” Translation. Beloved, in all things I am praying that you will be prospering, and that you will be continually having good health just as your soul is prospering. (3) John now discloses the source of his information regarding the properous condition of the inner heart-life of Gaius. Christian workers were always going out from Ephesus on preaching and teaching missions, and bringing back to John, reports from the various churches. “Came” is a present participle in the Greek text, and speaks of continuous action. The brethren were constantly coming back from these missions and bringing John glowing reports of the truth of God in the heart of Gaius and of the outworking of that truth in his life. The words “the truth that is in thee” are literally “your truth,” that is “your share of that truth in which you walk” (Alford). Translation. For I rejoiced greatly when brethren were constantly coming and constantly bearing witness of your truth, just as, as for you, in the sphere of the truth you are conducting yourself. (4) The Greek reads, “Greater joy than this I do not have.” “Children” is teknon (teknon). The verbal form is  (tiktw), “to give birth to”; thus a teknon (teknon) is a child as it is seen in relation to its parents. The use of this word and the fact that “my” is not the personal pronoun in the genitive case in the Greek text but a possessive adjective, literally, “my own,” would seem to indicate that Gaius was a convert of John. Translation. Greater joy than this I do not have, namely, that I am hearing that my own children are habitually ordering their behavior in the

sphere of the truth. (5–7) For, “thou doest faithfully,” Vincent offers, quoting the Rev., “thou doest a faithful work,” and Smith, “a work of faith.” The hospitality of Gaius was not merely a kind and generous act, but he considered it a religious or spiritual service. That is, the hospitality he afforded travelling preachers and teachers, he considered a definite piece of work for the Lord Jesus, as Christian service. The verb here is  (poiew), “to do.” The second occurrence of the word “doest” is ergazomai (ejrgazomai), “to labor, be active, to perform.” It emphasizes the process rather than the end of the action, and includes the ideas of continuity and repetition. Gaius was continually engaged in caring for the needs of the servants of the Lord who were ministering the Word from place to place. “And to strangers” is literally in the Greek text, “and this to strangers.” That is, those who were the recipients of the hospitality of Gaius were for the most part, not his friends, but those with whom he was not acquainted. The word “charity” is today an unfortunate translation. The word is  (ajgaph), the particular word for the divine love which is produced in the heart of the yielded saint by the Holy Spirit, love which is self-sacrificial in its essence, always giving of itself for the benefit of others. “Church” is  (ejkklhsia), “a called-out body of people,” thus, “an assembly,” here referring to the local church or assembly at Ephesus. These testified to the loving hospitality of Gaius in the assembly of the saints when they were visiting the church at Ephesus. “Bring forward on their journey” is  (propempw), “to send forward, bring on the way, accompany or escort.” Robertson says: “From Homer’s time … it was customary to speed the parting guest, sometimes accompanying him, sometimes providing money and food. Rabbis were so escorted, and Paul alludes to the same gracious custom in Romans 15:24 and Titus 3:13.” “After a godly sort” is axios tou theou (ajxio" tou qeou), “worthily of God,” that is, as God would have treated them. “For His Name’s sake” is literally “for the sake of the Name.” It is for the sake of the Name of Jesus that these missionaries went forth. The word “Name” is here used absolutely, and does not refer to “Jesus” as a name or designation of an individual. Paul uses it in Philippians 2:10 in the same way. It is at the Name conferred upon Jesus at His exaltation consequent upon His humiliation, that every knee shall bow. “The Name” is an Old Testament expression speaking of all that God is in His glorious attributes. It refers here and in Philippians to all that the Lord Jesus is in His glorious attributes. The word is used in the sense of reputation, of what a person is in character and stands for. For instance, we say, “That man has a name for absolute honesty.” Thus, these first-century missionaries went from place to place preaching the gospel and teaching the Word for the sake of all that Jesus was in His glorious Person and what He meant to them in that respect. “Gentiles” is ethnikos (ejqniko"). Here it refers to the pagan world of that time. These itinerant missionaries would accept no support from the pagans to whom they went, and rightly so, lest they be accused of commercializing their ministry. Translation. Beloved, you are doing a work of faith, whatever you are performing for the brethren, and this to strangers, those who bore testimony of your love before the assembly, whom you are doing well to

send forward on their journey in a manner worthy of God; because, for the sake of the Name they went forth, taking not even one thing from the pagans. (8) The pronoun is used in an intensive way here. It is, “As for us, in contradistinction to the pagans.” “Ought” is  (ojfeilw), “to have a moral obligation.” “Receive” is  (uJpolambanw), made up of hupo (uJpo), “under,” and  (lambanw), “to take,” thus, “to catch hold from underneath and lift up,” thus, in the language of today, “to underwrite,” that is, assume responsibility for the expenses of someone. “Might be” is ginomai (ginomai), “to become.” “Fellow-helpers” is sunergos (sunergo"), “a companion in work, a fellow-worker.” “To the truth” is either dative case, “for the truth,” or associative-instrumental, “with the truth.” Translation. Therefore, as for us, we ought as a moral obligation to underwrite such as these, in order that we may become fellow-workers with the truth. (9) The a.v. does not take notice of the indefinite pronoun ti (ti), “somewhat, something,” in the statement, “I wrote to the church.” The reference is to a letter which John had written to the local church of which Gaius was a member. Smith suggests that it was a brief letter of commendation (II Cor. 3:1), introducing and authorizing a company of itinerant brethren, probably those referred to in verse 5. The use of the indefinite pronoun ti (ti), Vincent suggests, indicated that “the apostle did not regard the communication as specially important.” The name “Diotrephes” is the English spelling of the Greek  (diotrefh"). The word is made up of Dios (Dio") (of Zeus) (Jove), and  (trefw), “to nourish,” and it means, “Zeus-nursed.” Zeus was the chief of the gods in the Greek pantheon. The custom in the early Church was for a Christian Greek to discard his pagan name and take a Christian name at his baptism, the Christian name often being descriptive of his Christian character, such as is seen in the case of Epaphroditus, whose name means “charming.” He was a charming Christian. Diotrephes had never changed his name, although he was a professing Christian, and a member of the local church of which Gaius was a member. Robertson calls him an “ambitious leader and sympathizer with the Gnostics.” Since he was of Gnostic leanings in his doctrine, he opposed John and any letters of commendation he had sent. John warns Gaius against him. He says that Diotrephes would not receive him. The word is epidechomai (ejpidecomai), “to receive hospitably.” He refused to accept John’s authority and any teachers John would send. The apostle describes him as one “who loveth to have the preeminence.” The word is made up of  (filew), “to be fond of,” and  (prwto"), “first,” thus, “to be fond of being first.” Smith remarks that “proagein (proagein) (transgresseth) of II John 9, and philoproteuein (filoproteuein) (fond of being first) of III John 9, denote two tempers which disturbed the Christian life of Asia Minor—intellectual arrogance and personal aggrandisement.” He evidently was not satisfied with the official position he held and its scope of power, but desired to rule the entire church. Robertson, in connection with his discussion of this man’s character, says that he wrote an article for a denominational paper on Diotrephes, and the editor told him that twenty-five deacons

stopped the paper to show their resentment against being personally attacked. Translation. I wrote somewhat to the church. But the one who is fond of being the first one of them, Diotrephes, is not accepting us. (10) “If I come” is  (eJan ejlqw), an hypothetical case. Smith says, “the aged apostle with his failing strength can only ‘hope’ (cf. verse 14) to undertake the journey.” On the words, “remember his deeds,” the same authority says, “not ‘remind him of his works’… but ‘bring his works to remembrance’ by reciting them at the meeting of the church. St. John does not threaten excommunication or any sort of discipline, but simply will state the facts and let them speak for themselves.” “Prating” is  (fluw), “to bubble up or boil over.” The word is used to describe talk which is both fluent and empty. “Malicious” is  (ponhro"), “pernicious.” Not content with undercutting John with pernicious words, Diotrephes refuses to accept the itinerant Bible teachers whom John had commended to the church, and prevents ( (koluw), hinders, prevents, forbids) those who after mature consideration (boulomai (boulomai) “would” a.v.) desired to welcome them, and excommunicates ( (ejkballw) “to cast out”) them. Alford says, “The present tense indicates his habit. He was evidently one in high power, and able to forbid, and to punish, the reception of the travelling brethren.” Translation. On this account, if I should come, I shall bring to remembrance his works which he has been constantly doing, prating against us with pernicious words, and not being content with these things, neither does he himself accept the brethren; and those who after mature consideration desired to do so, he prevents, and out of the church he throws them. (11) “Follow” is mimeomai (mimeomai), “to imitate.” Our word “mimick” comes from this word. The verb is present-imperative in a prohibition, and Robertson translates here, “do not have the habit of imitating.” The usual meaning of this Greek construction is that of forbidding the continuance of an action already going on (Dana and Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament). But Gains, because of his exceptionally excellent Christian testimony, can hardly be accused of imitating that which is evil. Translation. Beloved, do not have the habit of imitating the evil, but the good. The one who is in the habit of doing good, out of God is. The one who is in the habit of doing evil has not seen God and at present as a result has no vision of Him. (12) Demetrius was probably the bearer of this letter to Gaius. He was a stranger to the members of the local church of which Gaius was a member, and needed a word of commendation from the apostle. John writes, “to Demetrius there has been borne testimony.” He uses the perfect tense, which means that the testimony to the Christian character of Demetrius that was given in the past, stood at the same level at the time of the writing and sending of this letter as it did when it was first spoken. John reports that this testimony came from three sources in the city of Ephesus, the community as a whole (“of all”), the truth itself, and from John himself and his colleagues (“we bear record”).

Translation. To Demetrius there has been borne testimony by all, and by the truth itself. And, as for us, moreover, we are bearing testimony. And I know positively that our testimony is true. (13, 14) “Had” is imperfect in tense, literally, “I was having” many things to write to you when I began this letter. “Pen” is kalamos (kalamo"), a reed-pen, as distinguished from a sharp stylus used for writing on waxed tablets. John asked Gaius to greet the members of the church by name. John, like a true shepherd of God’s flock, knew them all by name. Translation. I was having many things to write to you, but I do not desire to be writing to you with ink and pen. But I am hoping shortly to see you, and face to face we shall speak. Peace be to you. The friends send greeting to you. Be greeting the friends by name.

JUDE In the Greek New Testament In order to reap the most benefit from his study, the student is urged to work through Jude’s letter verse by verse, with his Bible and this exegesis before him, seeking to understand the meaning of the Word in the light of the word studies, interpretations, and expanded translation. (1) The author’s name in Greek appears as “Judas.” This Judas was a brother of James, the superintendent of the Church at Jerusalem, and is named among the brethren of the Lord (Matt. 13:55; Mk. 6:3). It was a very common name in Israel. “Servant” is doulos (doulo"), “a bondslave.” Vincent says, “He does not call himself an apostle, as Paul and Peter in their introductions, and seems to distinguish himself from the apostles in vv. 17, 18, ‘The apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, how that they said, etc.’ We are told that Christ’s brethren did not believe on Him (John 7:5); and in Acts 1:14, the brethren of Jesus are mentioned in a way which seems to separate them from the apostles.” Alford says: “a servant of Jesus Christ, probably not here in the wider sense in which all Christians are servants of Christ, but in that special sense in which those were bound to His service who were employed in the preaching and disseminating of His word.” The author calls himself “brother of James.” This makes him a brother of the Lord Jesus in the family of Joseph and Mary. Vincent comments: “That Jude does not allude to his relationship to the Lord may be explained by the fact that the natural relationship in his mind would be subordinate to the spiritual (see Luke 11:27, 28), and that such a designation would, as Dean Alford remarks, ‘have been in harmony with those later and superstitious feelings with which the next and following ages regarded our Lord’s earthly relatives.’ He would shrink from emphasizing a distinction to which none of the other disciples or apostles could have a claim, the more so because of his former unbelief in Christ’s authority and mission. It is noticeable that James likewise avoids such a designation.” Both the Nestle and the Westcott and Hort texts have  (ajgapaw), “to love,” instead of  (aJgiazw), “to sanctify.” The participle is in the perfect tense, speaking

of a past complete act having present, and in a context like this, permanent results. The distinctive word for “love” here is the word for God’s self-sacrificial love which was shown at Calvary. This love here is the outgoing of God’s love for the saints in which He gives of Himself for their good. He will do anything within His good will for the saints. He went all the way to Calvary for them when they were unlovely and naturally unlovable. He will do as much and more for His saints who in Christ are looked upon by God the Father with all the love with which He loves His Son. The perfect tense speaks here of the fact that the saints are the permanent objects of God’s love. Jude is therefore writing to those who have been loved by God the Father with the present result that they are in a state of being the objects of His permanent love, and that love extends not merely through the brief span of this life, but throughout eternity. And then some dear children of God fear that they might be lost. “Preserved” is  (threw), “to guard, to hold firmly, to watch or keep,” expresses watchful care, and is suggestive of present possession. Here again Jude uses the perfect participle. The saints have been kept guarded by God the Father with the present, and here, permanent result that they are the objects of His permanent, watchful care. The words “Jesus Christ” are in the simple dative case. God the Father is keeping them guarded for Jesus Christ. Our Lord prayed (John 17:11), “Holy Father, keep ( (threw) same word) through thine own name those whom thou hast given Me, that they may be one as we are.” Our Lord committed the saints into the watchful care of God the Father, and He is keeping them for Jesus Christ, not in the sense that the Father is keeping the saints in lieu of His Son keeping them, but in the sense that the Father is keeping them so that they might continue to be forever the possession of the Lord Jesus. “Called” is  (klhto"), placed at the end of the sentence for emphasis. It is an adjective used to describe those who were called in the sense of being invited, for instance, to a banquet. The word here speaks of that effectual call of God whereby the sinner called to salvation is constituted willing to receive that which he by nature rejects, namely, salvation, this being the pre-salvation work of the Holy Spirit in which He brings the sinner to the place of repentence and the act of faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour. Translation. Jude, a bondslave of Jesus Christ and brother of James, to those who by God the Father have been loved and are in a state of being the permanent objects of His love, and who for Jesus Christ have been guarded and are in a permanent state of being carefully watched, to those who are called ones. (2) “Mercy” is eleos (ejleo"). Trench when comparing charis (cari") (grace) with eleos (ejleo") (mercy) says: “While charis (cari") has thus reference to the sins of men, and is that glorious attribute of God which these sins call out and display, His free gift in their forgiveness, eleos (ejleo"), has special and immediate regard to the misery which is the consequence of these sins, being the tender sense of this misery displaying itself in the effort, which only the continued perverseness of man can hinder or defeat, to assuage and entirely remove it.… In the divine mind, and in the order of our salvation as conceived therein, the eleos (ejleo") (mercy) precedes the charis (cari") (grace). God so loved the world with a pitying love (herein was the eleos (ejleo")), that He gave His only begotten Son (herein the charis (cari")), that the world through Him might be saved (compare Eph. 2:4; Luke 1:78, 79). But in the order of the manifestation of God’s purposes of salvation the grace must go before the mercy, the charis (cari") must go before and

make way for the eleos (ejleo"). It is true that the same persons are the subjects of both, being at once the guilty and the miserable; yet the righteousness of God, which it is quite necessary should be maintained as His love, demands that the guilt should be done away before the misery can be assuaged; only the forgiven can be blessed. And as the righteousness of God absolutely and in itself requires this, so no less that righteousness as it has expressed itself in the moral constitution of man, linking as it there has done misery with guilt, and making the first the inseparable companion of the second.” “Peace” is  (eijrhnh), the verbal form being  (eijrw), “to join.” To make peace is therefore to join together that which has been separated. Our Lord through the blood of His Cross has made peace between a holy God and sinful man in the sense that He has joined together those who were by sin separated, God and the believing sinner. This is justifying peace. Jude, writing to the saints, is speaking here of sanctifying peace, that state of tranquillity which is the result of the eleos (ejleo") (mercy) of God assuaging the evil results of sin. “Love” here is  (ajgaph), that divine love which God is and which is shed abroad in the heart of the yielded saint. Mayor says: “The divine love is infused into them, so that it is their own, and becomes in them the source of a divine life (Rom. 13:10). In virtue of this gift they are inspired with a love which is like the love of God, and by this they truly claim the title of children of God as partakers of His nature (I John 4:7, 10).” Jude prays that mercy, peace, and love may be in them in an increasing abundance. Translation. Mercy to you, peace, and love be multiplied. (3) “Beloved” is  (ajgaphtoi), a plural adjective, “beloved ones,” that is, “divinely-loved ones,” loved by God, God’s beloved ones. “Gave all diligence” is literally, “making all diligence.” The latter word is  (spoudh), the verbal form being  (speudw), “to hasten, desire earnestly.” Alford says: “It implies more than mere earnest desire; a man’s  (spoudh) is necessarily action as well as wish. ‘Giving diligence’ seems the exact idea required.” The participle is present in tense, the action simultaneous with the infinitive. The translation reads, “when giving all diligence to be writing to you.” The word “common” is koinos (koino"), the verbal form being  (koinwnew), “to become a sharer, a partner.” Thus, the idea is of “a common salvation” possessed in common with others. The best texts add  (eJmwn), “our salvation held in common by all of us.” “It was needful” is  (ajnagkhn ejscon), literally, “I had need.” The verbal form of  (ajnagkh) is  (ajnagkazw), “to necessitate, compel, drive to, constrain,” whether by force, threats, persuasion, entreaties. The noun means “necessity” either imposed by external conditions, or by the law of duty. Alford translates, “I found it necessary.” The Revision renders it, “I was constrained.” The compulsion to exhort the saints to contend for the faith found its source in the Holy Spirit. The first infinitive “to write” is in the present tense, speaking of continuous action. The second is in the aorist tense, implying an act performed at once. Mayor comments, “The aorist, contrasted with the preceding present, implies that the new epistle had to be written at once and could not be prepared for at leisure, like the one he had previously contemplated. It was no welcome task: ‘necessity was laid upon him.’ ” Jude had originally intended writing a letter containing a positive presentation of the doctrines of the Christian faith. The Holy Spirit laid upon his heart the necessity of writing in defence of the faith.

The exhortation was to earnestly contend for the faith. The faith here is not faith as exercised by the individual, but Christianity itself in its historic doctrines and life-giving salvation. “Earnestly contend” is epagonizomai (ejpagonizomai), found only here in the New Testament. The simple verb was used of athletes contending in the athletic contests. The word speaks of a vigorous, intense, determined struggle to defeat the opposition. Our word “agony” is the English spelling of the noun form of this word. The Greek athletes exerted themselves to the point of agony in an effort to win the contest. With such intense effort does Jude say that saints should defend the doctrines of Christianity. Peter, in his first epistle (3:15), tells us how we are to do so. He says that we should “be ready always to give an answer” to the opposition. The words “give an answer” are in the Greek a technical term of the law courts, speaking of the attorney for the defence “presenting a verbal defence” for his client. This is part of the ministry of every pastor. He must guard the flock of God under his charge from the inroads of Modernism by presenting evidences of the divine source of Christianity and the falsity of the modernistic position. The intensity of the defence must be adjusted to the intensity of the opposition which comes from Satan through Modernism. The word “once” is hapax (aJpax), “once for all.” Vincent says, “Not formerly, but once for all.” He quotes Bengel, “No other faith will be given.” “Delivered” is  (paradidwmi), “to give over into (one’s) power or use, to deliver to one something to keep, use, take care of, manage.” The idea is that God gave the Christian doctrines to the saints as a deposit of truth to be guarded. “Saints” is hagios (aJgio"), “a set-apart person, set apart for the worship and service of God,” namely, a believer, a Christian. Translation. Divinely-loved ones, when giving all diligence to be writing to you concerning the salvation possessed in common by all of us, I had constraint laid upon me to write to you, beseeching (you) to contend with intensity and determination for the Faith once for all entrusted into the safe-keeping of the saints. (4) Now Jude gives the reason why the saints should contend for the faith. False teachers crept into the Church. The words “crept in” are  (pareisdunw, dunw), “to enter,” eis (eij"), “into,” para (para), “beside,” thus, “to enter alongside.” Vincent translates, “to get in by the side, to slip in a side-door.” These are the tactics of Modernism, slipping into orthodox pulpits by stealth and dishonesty. There is a Greek word in II Corinthians 11:13–15 which admirably describes the methods of the Modernist, who takes after his father, the Devil. It is  (metaschmatizw), translated “transformed” in a.v. It refers to the act of an individual changing his outward expression by assuming an expression put on from the outside, an expression that does not come from nor is it representative of what he is in his inner character. Lucifer did that after he struck at God’s throne and became the fallen angel, Satan. As a fallen angel he gave expression to his sin-darkened heart. But he knew that he could not attract the human race that way. He must impersonate God if he expected to be worshipped as God. He therefore assumed an outward expression of light, put on from the outside and not representative of his inner sinful being. He disguised himself as an angel of light. His ministers, (servants), Modernistic preachers, have done the same (v. 15). Using evangelical terms such as “salvation, faith, regeneration, atonement, resurrection,” they put their own private meanings upon them (which negate the orthodox view), and pose as

orthodox exponents of Christianity. Reader, do not trust a Modernist any farther than you would a rattlesnake. A rattlesnake will give you warning before it strikes, but not a Modernist. The eternal welfare of your soul depends upon what you believe regarding the person and work of our Lord on the Cross. Jude says these false teachers were “ordained to this condemnation.” The word “ordained” would indicate that it was the decree of God that these men should be false teachers. However, the word in the Greek text has quite a different connotation. It is  (prografw), “to write beforehand.” Mayor translates, “to designate.” The reference is to the prophecy of Enoch with regard to these false teachers (v. 14). The word “to” is eis (eij"), and should be translated here “with reference to.” “Condemnation” is krima (krima), in this context, “judgment,” in the sense of the condemnation of wrong, the decision which one passes on the faults of others. Enoch wrote beforehand (prophesied) concerning the fact of the stealthy entrance of these men into the midst of the people of God and true doctrine, the word “this” referring to their creeping in unawares, the word “condemnation” (judgment) speaking of the estimation of their activities as being wrong. These men are called ungodly. The word is  (ajsebh"), “destitute of reverential awe toward God, impious.” “Turning” is  (metatiqhmi), “to transpose” two things, one of which is put in place of the other. Thus, these false teachers put lasciviousness in the place of the grace of God. “Lasciviousness” is aselgeia (ajselgeia). The aselgeia (ajselgeia) person is he who in the words of Trench “acknowledges no restraints, who dares whatever his caprice and wanton petulance may suggest.” The word “wantonness” best translates it. The meaning of the word partakes of the spirit of anarchy. That is the spirit of Modernism which refuses to acknowledge the authority of God’s Word, and itself sits in judgment upon it. Now, what is involved in their act of “denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ”? The word “deny” is arneomai (ajrneomai), “to deny, disown.” It is used of followers of Jesus who, for fear of death or persecution, deny that Jesus is their Master, and desert His cause; also of those who deny God and Christ, who by cherishing and disseminating pernicious opinions and immorality, are adjudged to have apostatized from God and Christ (Thayer). The word “God” is not found in the best texts. “Lord” is not kurios (kurio") in the Greek text, the usual word for “lord,” but  (despoth"), which speaks of one who is the absolute owner, and has uncontrolled power over another. The word  (despoth") is always used of God the Father in the Greek n.t., except in II Peter 2:1, and the adjective “only” is used elsewhere of the Father only. It would seem therefore that God the Father is in view here, and God the Son in the words “our Lord Jesus Christ” Mayor suggests that the two Persons of the Godhead are presented here to combat the Gnostic denial of the union of the divine and human in one Person. This authority says that “Westcott notes that a common Gnostic theory was that ‘the Aeon Christ’ descended upon the man Jesus at His baptism and left Him before His passion. Those who held such a doctrine denied … the union of the divine and human in one Person … and this denial involves the ideas of sonship and fatherhood as correlative, but because … it is only in the Son that we have the full revelation of God as Father.” Modernism is Unitarian in its theology, and this description of a false teacher of the first century fits the Modernist of the twentieth.

Translation. For certain men entered surreptitiously who were of old predicted with reference to this judgment, (men) destitute of reverential awe towards God, putting anarchy in the place of the grace of God, and denying the only absolute Master and our Lord Jesus Christ. (5) After referring to the occasion of his letter, namely, the presence of apostate teachers in the visible organized church on earth (vv. 3, 4), Jude speaks of apostasy in Israel and among the angels, and the sins of Sodom and Gomorrha (vv. 5–7). “I will” is boulomai (boulomai), “a desire which springs from the reasoning faculties.” The words “though ye once knew this,” are an inadequate rendering of the Greek text here. The translation of the best Greek reading here, eidotas hapax panta (eijdota" aJpax panta) is, “knowing once for all, all things,” that is, all things which pertain to the context in which Jude is speaking. Mayor, commenting on the use of hapax (aJpax) (once for all), says, “it suggests something of anxiety and upbraiding, which may be compared to the tone of St. Paul in writing Galatians,” The instance to which Jude has reference is that of the Jews, after having been convinced by the spies of the truth of God’s assertion that the land of Canaan was a land flowing with milk and honey, most productive as proved by the grapes they brought out, yet refused to enter it, not trusting God to give them the land as He said He would do. This was apostasy, sinning with the eyes wide open, and could only be dealt with by the infliction of the death penalty. That generation died a physical death in the wilderness. Translation. Moreover, after mature consideration, I desire to remind you, (who) know all things once for all, that the Lord, having saved the people out of Egypt, then destroyed those who did not believe. (6) From the apostasy of Israel, Jude turns to the sin of the angels. He describes them as those who “kept not their first estate.” The word “estate” is the a.v. translation of  (ajrch). The word means first of all, “beginning.” Thus does the a.v. understand it. The angels left their first or original status as angels, their original position, to violate the laws of God which kept them separate from the human race, members of which latter race occupy a different category among the created intelligences than that of angels. Angels are a host. They do not reproduce themselves. There are the same number of angels today as there were when they were created. The human race reproduces itself. From a beginning of two individuals the race has grown to the proportions it is today. The second meaning of  (ajrch) is derived from the first, namely, “sovereignty, dominion, magistracy,” the beginning or first place of power. The word is translated “principalities” in Ephesians 6:12, and refers to demons there. Thus, this meaning of  (ajrch) teaches that these angels left their original dignity and high positions.  (ÆArch) is used in the Book of Enoch (12:4) of the Watchers (Angels) who have abandoned the high heaven and the holy eternal place and defiled themselves with women (Mayor). This original state of high dignity which these angels possessed, Jude says, they did not keep. The verb is  (threw), “to guard.” The verb expresses the act of watchful care. That is, these angels did not fulfil their obligation of carefully guarding and maintaining their original position in which they were created, but transgressed those limits to invade

territory which was foreign to them, namely, the human race. They left their own habitation. “Habitation” is  (oijkhthrion), “a dwellingplace,” here, heaven. “Their own” is idion (ijdion), “one’s own private, personal, unique possession,” indicating here that heaven is the peculiar, private abode of the angels. Heaven was made for the angels, not for man. It is the temporary abode of the departed saints until the new heavens and new earth are brought into being, but man’s eternal dwelling-place will be on the perfect earth (Rev. 21:1–3). “Left” is  (ajpoleipw). The simple verb  (leipw) means “to leave.” The prefixed preposition apo (ajpo) makes the compound verb mean “to leave behind.” These angels left heaven behind. That is, they had abandoned heaven. They were done with it forever. The verb is aorist in tense which refers to a once-for-all act. This was apostasy with a vengeance. They had, so to speak, burnt their bridges behind them, and had descended to a new sphere, the earth, and into a foreign relationship, that with the human race, foreign, because the latter belongs to a different category of created intelligences than they. These angels are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness. “Reserved” is  (threw), and is in the perfect tense. That is, they have been placed under a complete and careful guard, with the result that they are in a state of being under this complete and careful guard continually. These angels are carefully guarded in everlasting chains. “Chains” is desmos (desmo"), “a band or bond.” The word does not indicate that the angels are chained, but that they are in custody, detained in a certain place. The custody is everlasting. The Greek word is aidios (aijdio"), “everlasting.” “Darkness” is zophos (zofo"), “darkness, blackness,” used of the darkness of the nether world. “Unto” is eis (eij") which can very well be translated here, “with a view to.” That is, these angels are in the custody of God, carefully guarded with a view to “the judgment of the great day.” That day will be the Day of the Lord, more specifically, the time of the Great White Throne Judgment (Rev. 20:11– 15). Peter in his second epistle (2:4), tells us that the place of their present incarceration is Tartarus, the prison house of fallen angels. He mentions them again in his first epistle (3:19, 20), and the fact that our Lord, between His death and resurrection, went there and made a proclamation to them. Please see treatment of this subject in the author’s book, First Peter in the Greek New Testament, pp. 97–106. Translation. And angels who did not carefully guard their original position of preeminent dignity, but abandoned once for all their own private dwelling-place, with a view to the judgment of the great day, in everlasting bonds under darkness, He has put under careful guard. (7) This verse begins with hos (oJ"), an adverb of comparison having the meanings of “in the same manner as, after the fashion of, as, just as.” Here it introduces a comparison showing a likeness between the angels of verse 6 and the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha of this verse. But the likeness between them lies deeper than the fact that both were guilty of committing sin. It extends to the fact that both were guilty of the same identical sin. The punctuation of the a.v. is misleading, as an examination of Greek text discloses. The a.v. punctuation gives the reader the impression that Sodom and Gomorrha committed fornication and that the cities about them committed fornication in like manner to the two cities named. The phrase “in like manner” is according to the punctuation construed with the words “the cities about them.” A rule of Greek grammar comes into

play here. The word “cities” is in the nominative case. The words “in like manner” are in the accusative case and are classified as an adverbial accusative by Dana and Mantey in their Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (pp. 91, 93). This latter construction is related syntactically, not with a word in the nominative case but with the verbal form in the sentence. All of which means that the words “in like manner” are related to the verbal forms, “giving themselves over to fornication” and “going after strange flesh.” In addition to all this, the Greek text has toutois (toutoi"), “to these.” Thus, the translation should read, “just as Sodom and Gomorrha and the cities about them, in like manner to these, having given themselves over to fornication and having gone after strange flesh.” The sense of the entire passage (vv. 6, 7) is that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha and the cities about them, in like manner to these (the angels), have given themselves over to fornication and have gone after strange flesh. That means that the sin of the fallen angels was fornication. This sin on the part of the angels is described in the words, “going after strange flesh.” The word “strange” is heteros (eJtero"), “another of a different kind.” That is, these angels transgressed the limits of their own natures to invade a realm of created beings of a different nature. This invasion took the form of fornication, a cohabitation with beings of a different nature from theirs. This takes us back to Genesis 6:1–4 where we have the account of the sons of God (here, fallen angels), cohabiting with women of the human race. For a discussion of this subject, the reader is referred to the author’s volumes, First Peter in the Greek New Testament (pp. 97–107), and The Practical use of the Greek New Testament (pp.31–35). The words describing both the sin of the angels and of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrha, “giving themselves over to fornication” are the translation of  (ejkporneuw). The prefixed preposition ek (ejk) indicates in the usage of the word a lust that gluts itself, satisfies itself completely. The force of ek (ejk) which itself means “out,” is “out and out.” It signifies a giving of one’s self utterly. The words “strange flesh,” that is, flesh of a different and in this case an opposite (diametrically opposed) nature, speak of the angels’ intercourse with women, the latter being forbidden flesh. The sin of the angels was against nature. In the case of the cities mentioned, it was the sin which Paul mentions in Romans 1:27, a departure from the natural use and against nature. Just as the incarceration of the fallen angels is an example of God’s judgment upon sin, so the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha, “are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” “Are set forth” is prokeimai (prokeimai). The verb means “to lie exposed,” and is used in classical writings of food on the table ready for the guests, and of a corpse laid out for burial. The word “example” is deigma (deigma), from the verb deiknumi, “to display or exhibit.” The noun therefore refers to something which is held up to view as a warning. “Suffering” is  (uJpecw), “to hold under, to put under,” metaphorically, “to sustain, undergo.” Vincent says, “The participle is present, indicating that they are suffering to this day the punishment which came upon them in Lot’s time.” The reference to these cities is not therefore limited to the ruins of the literal cities, but to the inhabitants who right now are suffering in Hades. The rich man in Hades (Luke 16:22–24) is another instance of the lost who are now in conscious suffering, awaiting the Great White Throne Judgment and everlasting suffering in hell. For a discussion of Hell, Hades, and Tartarus, consult the author’s book, Treasures in the Greek New Testament (pp. 44–46). “Vengeance” is  (dikh), “justice, a judicial decision, especially, a sentence of condemnation, execution of sentence, punishment.” Vincent suggests “punishment” rather

than “vengeance” as the most appropriate word. The same authority states that the best modern expositors render, “are set forth as an example of eternal fire, suffering punishment.” He quotes Lumby as saying, “A destruction so utter and so permanent as theirs has been, is the nearest approach that can be found in this world to the destruction which awaits those who are kept under darkness to the judgment of the great day.” “Eternal” is  (aijwnio"), here better rendered “everlasting” rather than “eternal” since the suffering has a beginning but no ending. Translation. Just as Sodom and Gomorrha and the cities about them, in like manner to these, having given themselves out and out to fornication and having gone off to a different kind of flesh, are set forth as an exhibit, undergoing the punishment of everlasting fire. (8) “Likewise” is homoios (oJmoio"), “in the same way.” The a.v. takes no notice of mentoi (mentoi), a particle of affirmation and often of opposition, meaning “but yet, nevertheless.” Vincent says the word expresses the fact “that though they have these fearful examples before them, yet they persist in their sin.” “These dreamers” (“filthy” is not in the original) is a demonstrative pronoun and a present participle. The verb is  (ejnupniazw), “to dream.” It is used of divinely suggested dreams. Thayer gives its metaphorical use here as follows; “to be beguiled with sensual images and carried away to an impious course of conduct.” “Defile” is  (minainw), “to defile, pollute, sully, contaminate, soil.” Thayer says it is used here in a physical and moral sense, the word “flesh” here speaking of literal flesh, and thus suggesting the sin of licentiousness. Immorality is thus in view here. “Despise” is  (ajqetew), “to do away with something laid down, prescribed, established.” It means also “to thwart the efficacy of anything, nullify, make void, frustrate.” “Dominion” is  (kurioth"), “one who possesses dominion.” The word kurios (kurio"), “lord,” speaks of one who is lord or master over another.  (Kurioth") is used of angels in Ephesians 1:21, Colossians 1:16, and II Peter 2:10. Mayor says: “On first reading one is inclined to take the words “dominion” and “dignities” simply as abstractions. The result of indulgence in degrading lusts is the loss of reverence, the inability to recognize true greatness and due degrees of honor.… When we examine however the use of the word  (kurioth") and the patristic comments, and when we consider the reference to the archangel’s behavior towards Satan,… we seem to require a more pointed and definite meaning, not simply ‘majesty,’ but ‘the divine majesty,’ not simply ‘dignities’ but ‘the angelic orders.’… We have then to consider how it can be said that the libertines (these filthy dreamers) ‘despise authority’ in like manner to the above-mentioned offenders. For the former we may refer to verse 4 (denying our Lord), for the latter, to the contempt shown by the Israelites towards the commandments of God. So the desertion of their appointed station and abode by the angels showed their disregard for the divine ordinance, and the behavior of the men of Sodom combined with the vilest lusts, an impious irreverance towards God’s representatives, the angels (Gen. 19:5).” Thus, these false teachers refuse to show proper reverence for the angelic beings. “Dignities” is doxa (doxa), “splendor, brightness, dignity, preeminence, magnificence, excellence.” The word is used, Mayor says, in the singular of the Shekinah, which would suggest that Clement may be right in supposing the plural to be used for the angels. “Speak evil” is  (blasfhmew), “to speak reproachfully of, rail at, revile,

calumniate.” Translation. In the same manner nevertheless, also these who are beguiled with sensual images and carried away to an impious course of conduct, defile indeed the flesh, and set at naught authority, and speak evil of preeminence. (9) In contrast to the treatment accorded the holy angels by these false teachers, Jude now presents the case of Michael the archangel, and his treatment of a fallen angel, Satan. Mayor says, “The story here narrated is taken from the apocryphal Assumptio Mosis, as we learn from Clement.… Charles, in his edition of the Assumption thus summarizes the fragments dealing with the funeral of Moses: (1) Michael is commissioned to bury Moses, (2) Satan opposes his burial on two grounds: (a) he claims to be the lord of matter (hence the body should be handed over to him). To this claim Michael rejoins, ‘The Lord rebuke thee, for it was God’s spirit which created the world and all mankind.’ (b) He brings the charge of murder against Moses (the answer is wanting). The story is based on Deuteronomy 34:6 (r.v.), “He buried him (mg. he was buried) in the valley … but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.’ ” Alford says, “St. Jude took the incident from primitive tradition, which tradition, slightly modified, is also given by the prophet Zechariah (3:1–3). That the incident is related as a matter of fact, and not as an argument is evident by the very form of it. That, being thus related as a matter of fact, it is matter of fact, is a conclusion which will or will not be made, according as we are or are not persuaded of the authenticity of our Epistle as a part of canonical Scripture; and according as we esteem that canonical Scripture itself.” All of which means that since we regard the Epistle of Jude part of the canonical scriptures, and therefore verbally inspired, and because the author treats the subject matter as fact, we are to regard it as such. The word “archangel” is archaggelos (ajrcaggelo"), from  (ajrch), “first in rank,” and aggelos (ajggelo"), “angel,” chief of the angels. Michael, the archangel, is spoken of in Daniel 10:13, 21; 12:1; I Thessalonians 4:16. His name means “who is like God?” He was regarded as the special protector of the Jewish nation. “Contending” is  (diakrinw), “to dispute.” “Disputed” is dialegomai (dialegomai), “to argue.” “Durst” is  (tolmaw), “to dare.” “Railing accusation” is krisis (krisi") (accusation) “judgment,” and  (blasfhmia) (railing), “detraction, reviling.” Thayer translates, “a judgment pronounced in reproachful terms.” Vincent offers, “a judgment of railing.” He explains, “a sentence savoring of impugning his dignity.” Michael remembered the high estate from which he (Lucifer) fell, and left his sentence to God.” The word “rebuke” is in the optative mode in Greek, the mode that expresses a wish or a desire. The translation could read, “May the Lord rebuke thee.” The particular word for “rebuke” here is  (ejpitimaw), “to rebuke another but without any effect upon the person rebuked, the latter not being convicted of any wrongdoing on his part nor brought to the place of conviction or confession, and for either one of two reasons; either the person is innocent, or he is incorrigible, that is, his heart is so hard that he refuses to be convicted of his sin or to confess it. Satan is incorrigible. Jude knew it, and therefore used that particular word. There is another word,  (ejlegcw), which speaks of a rebuke that brings out either conviction or confession of sin.

Translation. Yet Michael, the archangel, when disputing with the devil, arguing concerning the body of Moses, dared not bring a sentence that would impugn his dignity, but said, May the Lord rebuke you. (10) Mayor comments: “The libertines do the contrary of what we are told of the respect shown by the angel even towards Satan; they speak evil of that spiritual world, those spiritual beings, of which they know nothing.” “Speak evil” is  (blasfhmew), “to speak reproachfully, revile, calumniate.” Jude uses two different words for “know” in this verse. The first is oida (oijda), speaking of mental comprehension and knowledge, and referring to the whole range of invisible things (Vincent). The second is epistamai (ejpistamai), “to understand.” Vincent says that it was originally used of skill in handicraft, and refers to palpable things, objects of sense, the circumstances of sensual enjoyment. “Brute beasts” is alogos (ajlogo") (brute) “without reason,” and  (zwon), “a living being, an animal.” The word  (zwon), “a living being,” gives prominence to the vital element, whereas  (qhrion), “a wild beast,” gives prominence to the bestial element. Here Jude refers to the false teachers as in a class with unreasoning animals. “Naturally” is  (fusikw"), “by instinct.” Mayor, commenting on the words, “in those things they corrupt themselves,” says: “The natural antithesis here would have been, ‘these things they admire and delight in.’ For this Jude substitutes by a stern irony, ‘these things are their ruin.’ ” “Corrupt” is  (fqeirw), “to corrupt, to destroy.” Thayer chooses the meaning in Jude 10, “to destroy.” It is passive in voice, thus, “by these things they are being brought to ruin.” Translation. But these on the one hand revile as many things concerning which they do not have absolute knowledge, and on the other hand as many things, by instinct, like the unreasoning animals, which they understand, by these they are being brought to ruin. (11) “Woe” is ouai (oJuai), “an interjection of grief or of denunciation,” here, the latter. “Way” is hodos (oJdo"), “a road, a way,” metaphorically, “a course of conduct, a way, manner of thinking, feeling, deciding.” The Scofield Bible speaks of Cain as the “type of a religious, natural man who believes in a God and in ‘religion,’ but after his own will, and who rejects redemption by blood. Compelled as a teacher of religion to explain the atonement, the apostate teacher explains it away.” “Gone” is poreuomai (poreuomai), “to take one’s way, set out, to go on a journey,” metaphorically, “to follow one, to become his adherent.” The Scofield Bible defines the error of Balaam as follows: “The ‘error’ of Balaam must be distinguished from his ‘way,’ and his ‘doctrine.’ The ‘error’ of Balaam was that, reasoning from natural morality, and seeing the evil in Israel, he supposed a righteous God must curse them. He was blind to the higher morality of the Cross, through which God maintains and enforces the authority and awful sanctions of His law, so that He can be just and the justifier of a believing sinner. The ‘reward’ of v. 11 may not be money, but popularity, or applause.” “Ran greedily” is  (ejkcew), “to pour out.” The verb is in the passive voice here. Thayer says that in this voice the verb “is used of those who give themselves up to a thing, rush

headlong into it.” Vincent says, “A strong expression, indicating a reckless, abandoned devotion of energies.” “Reward” is misthos (misqo"), “dues paid for work, wages.” “Error” is  (planh), “a wandering, a straying about, whereby one, led astray from the right way, roams hither and thither,” metaphorically, “error, a wrong opinion,” relative to morals or religion (Thayer). Mayor commenting on the error of Balaam says: “Balaam went wrong because he allowed himself to hanker after gain and so lost communion with God. He not only went wrong himself, but he abused his great influence and his reputation as a prophet, to lead astray the Israelites by drawing them away from the holy worship of Jehovah to the impure worship of Baal Peor. So these false teachers use their prophetical gifts for the purpose of self-aggrandisement, and endeavor to make their services attractive by excluding from religion all that is strenuous and difficult, and opening the door to every kind of indulgence.” As to the sin of Korah, the Scofield Bible defines it as “the denial of the authority of Moses as God’s chosen spokesman, and intrusion into the priest’s office.” “Gainsaying” is antilogia (ajntilogia), “to speak against,” hence, “a contradiction.” Translation. Woe to them, because in the way of Cain they took their way, and to the error of Balaam they abandoned themselves for a reward, and in the gainsaying of Kore they perished. (12) “Spots” is spilas (spila"). Vincent’s note is illuminating: “Only here in the New Testament. So rendered in a.v., because understood as kindred to spiloi (spiloi) (II Pet. 2:13); but rightly, as Rev., hidden rocks. So Homer, (Odyssey, III, 298), ‘the waves dashed the ship against the rocks (spiladesin (spiladesin)) … These men were no longer mere blots, but elements of danger and wreck.” The word was used of rocks covered by water and thus hidden. “Feasts of charity” is  (ajgaph), the word for God’s love. It was used of the love feasts in the early Christian Church, a fellowship meal eaten by the Christians when they came together for worship. It was eaten at the local church, which in the first century always was in a person’s home. There were no church edifices until much later. “Feast” is  (suneuwcew), “to feast sumptuously with” someone. Nestle, in his Greek text, punctuates the words, “without fear” with “feast with you.” That is, these false teachers have no compunctions of conscience about participating in the fellowship of evangelical believers, posing as Christians. “Feeding” is  (poimainw), “to feed, tend a flock of sheep.” It is used of shepherds pasturing their flocks. Vincent translates literally, “shepherding themselves,” and quotes the Rev., “shepherds that feed themselves,” and remarks, “further their own schemes and lusts instead of tending the flock of God.” Jude likens these false teachers to clouds without water, literally “clouds that are waterless.” “Carried about” is  (paraferw); the simple verb is  (ferw) “to carry”; and the prefixed preposition, para (para), means “alongside,” the compound verb meaning “to carry alongside.” Vincent says: “As clouds which seem to be charged with refreshing showers, but are borne past and yield no rain.” The expression, “whose fruit withereth” is  (fqinopwrina), made up of  (fqinw), “to waste away, pine,” and  (ojpwra), “autumn.” The latter word characterizes these trees as late autumn trees. Thus, the reference is to autumn trees without fruit, at the time at which they are expected to have fruit. So these false teachers, men from whom one might expect the ministration of the Word, are as devoid of spiritual food for the saints as are these autumn trees without fruit. These trees are described as twice dead. Vincent remarks, “not only the apparent death of winter, but a real death, so that it only remains to pluck them

up by the roots.” Translation. These are the hidden rocks in your love feasts, sumptuously feasting with you without fear, as shepherds leading themselves to pasture, waterless clouds carried past by winds, autumn trees without fruit, having died twice, rooted up. (13) “Raging” is agrios (ajgrio"), “wild, fierce, untamed.” Vincent says, “Rev. wild, which is better, as implying quality rather than act. Waves, by nature untamed. The act or expression of the nature is given by the next word.” “Foaming out” is  (ejpafrizw), “to foam up, to cast out as foam.” Thayer says that these false teachers are “impelled by their restless passions. They unblushingly exhibit in word and deed, their base and abandoned spirit.” Concerning the expression, “wandering stars,” Vincent says: “Possibly referring to comets, which shine a while and then pass into darkness. ‘They belong not to the system: they stray at random and without law, and must at last be severed from the lights which rule while they are ruled’ (Lumby).” Translation. Wild, untamed sea waves, foaming up their own shames, wandering stars, for whom the blackness of the darkness has been reserved forever. (14, 15) Enoch is the Old Testament person of that name (Gen. 5:18–24), the man who “walked with God.” The quotation is from the apocryphal Book of Enoch. This book, known to the Church Fathers of the second century, lost for some centuries with the exception of a few fragments, was found in its entirety in a copy of the Ethiopic Bible in 1773 by Bruce. It consists of revelations purporting to have been given to Enoch and Noah. Its object is to vindicate the ways of divine providence, to set forth the retribution reserved for sinners, and to show that the world is under the immediate government of God. “Of these” is toutois (toutoi") in dative case. Enoch prophesied with respect to these false teachers of these last days. The translation should read, “prophesied with respect to these.” “Ten thousands of His saints” is literally, “His holy ten thousands.” The word “myriad” is the English spelling of the Greek word here, which latter word means in the singular, “ten thousand,” and in the plural as it is here, “an innumerable multitude, an unlimited number.” The translation could also read, “His holy myriads.” These would not be limited to saints, but would also include angels. The word “saints” is the a.v. translation of hagios (aJgio") which is an adjective meaning “holy,” but can also be used as a noun to mean “saint.” Here it is in the same case as “myriads” and therefore has an adjectival function. “Convince” is  (ejlegcw), “rebuke so as to bring the sinner to either a conviction or confession of his sin.” “Ungodly” is  (ajsebh"), “destitute of reverential awe towards God, impious.” “Hard speeches” is  (sklhro"), “hard, harsh, rough, stiff,” of men, metaphorically, “harsh, stern, hard.” When used with  (lalew), “to speak,” it is used of one who speaks roughly. Translation. And there prophesied also with respect to these, the seventh from Adam, Enoch, saying, Behold, there comes the Lord with His holy myriads, to execute judgment against all and to convict all those who are

destitute of a reverential awe towards go on a journey,” metaphorically, “to order one’s life.” The God, concerning all their works of impiety which they impiously performed and concerning all the harsh things which impious sinners spoke against Him. (16) “Murmurers” is  (goggusth"), “one who discontentedly complains,” here, against God. The word is used of the cooing of doves. It refers, not to a loud, outspoken dissatisfaction, but to an undertone muttering. “Complainers” is memspimoiros (memspimoiro"), from memphomai (memfomai), “to find fault with,” and moira (moira), “a part or lot.” The compound word means, “blamers of their lot, complaining of one’s lot, discontented.” “Walking” here is poreuomai (poreuomai), “to word speaks of a planned course of conduct. “Lusts” is epithumia (ejpiqumia), “a passionate craving,” good or bad, according to the context, here, evil. The word “lust” today refers to an immoral desire, but in a.d. 1611 when the a.v. was translated, it meant what the Greek word means, strong desire or craving, good or evil, depending upon the context. “Swelling” is huperogkos (uJperogko"), “overswollen,” metaphorically, “immoderate, extravagant,” expressive of arrogance. “Having men’s persons in admiration” is  (qaumazw proswpon), “admiring countenances.” The Revised translates, “showing respect of persons.” Mayor comments: “As the fear of God drives out the fear of man, so defiance of God tends to put man in His place, as the chief source of good or evil to his fellows.” Translation. These are complainers against their lot, ordering their course of conduct in accordance with their own passionate cravings, and their mouth speaks immoderate, extravagant things, catering to personalities for the sake of advantage. (17–19) The Greek has a pronoun which is not handled by the a.v. It is, “But as for you (in contradistinction to the apostates), divinely-loved ones.” The word “beloved” does not refer to Jude’s love for those to whom he is writing, but to the fact that the saints are beloved ones of God. The word is  (ajgapaw), the distinctive word for “love” used in John 3:16, for instance. “Separate themselves” is  (ajpodiorizw), “by drawing boundaries to disjoin, part, separate from one another.” The Revised has “make separations.” Vincent says: “Cause divisions in the Church. Of those who draw a line through the Church and set off one part from another.” “Sensual” is psuchikos (yuciko"). Vincent says: “As  (yuch) denotes life in the distinctness of individual existence, ‘the centre of the personal being, the I of each individual,’ so this adjective derived from it denotes what pertains to man, the natural personality as distinguished from the renewed man … The rendering sensual, here, is inferential: sensual because natural and unrenewed.” Alford has an illuminating note: “The  (yuch) is the centre of the personal being, the ‘I’ of each individual. It is in each man bound to the spirit, man’s higher part, and to the body, man’s lower part; drawn upwards by the one, downward by the other. He who gives himself up to the lower appetites, is sarkikos (sarkiko") (fleshly): he who by communion of his pneuma (pneuma) (spirit) with God’s Spirit is employed in the higher aims of his being, is pneumatikos (pneumatiko") (spiritual). He who rests midway,

thinking only of self and self’s interests, whether animal or intellectual, is the psuchikos (yuciko") (sensual), the selfish man, the man in whom the spirit is sunk and degraded into subordination to the subordinate  (yuch) (soul). In the lack of any adequate word, I have retained the ‘sensual’ of E.V., though the impression which it gives is a wrong one: ‘selfish’ would be as bad, for the psuchikos (yuciko") may be an amiable and generous man: ‘animal’ would be worse, ‘intellectual,’ worse still. If the word were not so illlooking in our language, ‘psychic’ would be a great gain.” Moulton and Milligan in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament quote from a papyrus fragment as follows, “my human natural powers,” where the word “natural” is psuchikos (yuciko"). They quote Souter, “the principle of life and the basis of its emotional aspect, animating the present body of flesh, in contrast to the higher life.” The word is used of worldly wisdom in James 3:15, and translated “sensual.” James is speaking of the wisdom (sophia (sofia)) which does not come down from above, but is earthly (epigeios (ejpigeio")) as opposed to the wisdom which came down from above; it was sensual ( (yucikh)) human, the domain wherein all that is essentially human holds sway in that it pandered to self-esteem; and it was devilish ( (daimoniwdh") demonical) in that it raised up the “very devil” in the hearts of both opposer and opposed (Mayor). The question before us now is whether pneuma (pneuma) (spirit) refers here to the Holy Spirit or to the human spirit of these false teachers, the word “spirit” being defined as that part of man which gives him God-consciousness, and enables him when in possession of salvation to worship and serve God. Mayor and Robertson think that the word here refers to the Holy Spirit. Vincent and Alford say that it refers to man’s human spirit. Mayor after taking the position that the Holy Spirit is in view here, quotes Plumptre as follows: “the false teachers were so absorbed in their lower sensuous nature that they no longer possessed, in any real sense of the word, that element in man’s compound being, which is itself spiritual, and capable therefore of communion with the Divine Spirit.” Alford says: “not directly the Holy Spirit of God … but the higher spiritual life of man’s spirit in communion with the Holy Spirit. These men have not indeed ceased to have pneuma (pneuma) (spirit), as a part of their own tripartite nature: but they have ceased to possess it in any worthy sense: it is degraded beneath and under the power of the  (yuch), the personal life, so as to have no vitality of its own.” Vincent says: “the higher spiritual life. So the adjective pneumatikos (pneumatiko"), (spiritual), is everywhere in the n.t. opposed to psuchikos (yuciko"), natural. See I Corinthians 15:44, 46.” The present writer decided with Vincent, Alford, and Plumtre, on the basis of the contrast implied which is not between the psuchikos (yuciko") of man and the Holy Spirit, but between man’s psuchikos (yuciko") and man’s pneumatikos (pneumatiko"). Of course, since these false teachers are devoid of the higher spiritual life and its accompanying sensibilities, it is clear that they do not have the Holy Spirit. Translation. But, as for you, divinely-loved ones, remember the words which were spoken previously by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, that they were saying to you, In the last time there shall be mockers ordering their course of conduct in accordance with their own passionate cravings which are destitute of reverential awe towards God. These are those who cause divisions, egocentric, not holding the spirit. (20, 21) Again, Jude contrasts the saints to whom he is writing with the false teachers, in the words, “But as for you, (in contradistinction to these false teachers), divinely-loved ones.” “Building up” is  (ejpoikodomew), “to build upon, build up,” to finish the structure of which the foundation has already been laid, metaphorically, “to give

constant increase in Christian knowledge and in a life conformed thereto” (Thayer). The papyri afford the following example, “build on it (a sound foundation) your firmness and unshaken resolve” (Moulton and Milligan). “Faith” does not refer to faith as exercised by the saint, for it is described as “most holy,” but to the Christian faith, Christianity. The saints are exhorted to build up their Christian lives on the foundation of all that God has done for them in salvation, such as making them a partaker of the divine nature and giving them the indwelling Holy Spirit, together with the Word of God. Mayor says: “The faith here is called ‘most holy’ because it comes to us from God, and reveals God to us, and because it is by its means that man is made righteous, and enabled to overcome the world.” The words, “praying in the Holy Ghost” show how the saints are to build themselves up on their most holy faith. That is, prayer is the vital factor in the Christian life which activates all the other departments of the Christian experience. “Ghost” is the translation of pneuma (pneuma), the word in other places rendered “Spirit.” “Ghost” is obsolete English as used here for the word “spirit.” “In the Holy Ghost” is locative of sphere. That is, all true prayer is exercised in the sphere of the Holy Spirit, motivated and empowered by Him. That means that if the saint expects to really pray, he must be Spirit-filled or Spirit-controlled. The fullness of the Holy Spirit is the prerequisite to effectual praying. The Spirit, when yielded to, leads us in our petitions and generates within us the faith necessary to acceptable and answered prayer. The expression “praying in the Holy Ghost” is also instrumental of means. We pray by means of the Holy Spirit, in dependence upon Him. Jude exhorts the saints, “Keep yourselves in the love of God.” They are to do this by means of the two things just mentioned, building themselves up in their Christian lives and by praying in the Holy Spirit. “Keep” is  (threw), “to attend to carefully, take care of, guard.” The word is expressive of watchful care and is suggestive of present possession (Thayer). “In the love of God” is locative of sphere. The exhortation is to the saints, to keep themselves within the sphere of the love of God. That is, they are to see to it that they stay within the circle of His love. Alford says: “within that region of peculiar love wherewith God regards all who are built up on the faith and sustained by prayer.” This is the love that God is, and the love with which He loves the saints. The saints are exhorted to so build themselves up on their Christian foundation and so pray in the power of the Holy Spirit, that they as a result keep themselves in the place where God is able to shower all of His love upon them. In other words, they are to so live that they will keep themselves in the place of blessing. There is no hint here that God will stop loving them, but that they by sin in their lives would make it impossible for God to give them blessings in the fullest sense. “Looking” is prosdechomai (prosdecomai), “to receive to one’s self, to admit, give access to, to expect, wait for.” The meaning of this word seems to point to that part of eternal life which will be given the saint at the Rapture, namely, the glorification of his physical body. The reader will not fail to observe the studied reference of Jude to the Three Persons of the God-head in these two verses. Translation. But, as for you, divinely-loved ones, building yourselves up constantly in the sphere of and by means of your most holy Faith, and as constantly praying in the sphere of and by means of the Holy Spirit, with watchful care keep yourselves within the sphere of God’s love, expectantly

looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ resulting in life eternal. (22, 23) There is some question among textual critics regarding the Greek text here. Both Nestle and Westcott and Hort agree on the Greek which requires the rendering, “And upon some, on the one hand, be having mercy, (those) who are in doubt; be saving (them), snatching (them) out of the fire. Upon others, on the other hand, be showing mercy in fear, hating even the undergarment completely defiled by the flesh.” However, Alford and Mayor read  (ejlegcw), “to bring to a confession and conviction of sin,” rather than  (ejleew), “to have mercy on.” Mayor then translates, “reprove them because of their doubts,” or “convince them when they dispute with you.” Alford translates, “And some indeed convict when contending with you.” The particle men appears in verse 22, and de (de) in verse 23. When these are used together as they are here, they show contrast. This would decide for the reading given by Alford and Mayor,  (ejlegcw), “to convict,” instead of  (ejleew), “to show mercy,” since there is a contrast between these two actions, whereas there is no contrast between the act of showing mercy of verse 22 and the act of saving in verse 23. Thayer in his treatment of men and de (de) in verse 22 says, “the one indeed—and but the other,” showing contrast. These considerations decide the present writer for Alford and Mayor, even though in doing so he must set aside the findings of Nestle and Westcott and Hort in this instance. In the words, “pulling them out of the fire,” Jude has in mind Zechariah 3:2, “a brand plucked from the burning.” Commenting upon the words “with fear,” Vincent says: “lit., in fear, i.e., of the contagion of sin while we are rescuing them,” and Mayor: “The faithful are urged to show all possible tenderness for the fallen, but at the same time to have a fear lest they themselves or others whom they influence should be led to think too lightly of the sin whose ravages they are endeavoring to repair.” Translation. And some indeed on the one hand be convicting when contending with you; be saving, snatching out of the fire, others on the other hand, upon whom be showing mercy in fear, hating even the undergarment completely defiled by the flesh. (24, 25) Mayor comments on the final benediction and ascription as follows: “I have bidden you to keep yourselves in the love of God; I have warned you against all impiety and impurity. But do not think that you can attain to the one, or guard yourselves from the other, in your own strength. You must receive power from above, and that it may be so, I offer up my prayer to Him, who alone is able to keep you from stumbling, and to present you before the throne of His glory, pure and spotless in exceeding joy. To Him, the only God and Saviour belong glory, greatness, might, and authority throughout all ages.” “From falling” is  (ajptaisho"), from  (ptaiw), “to stumble, to sin, to make a mistake,” and alpha privative which negates the word. The word means in classical writers, “sure-footed as a horse that does not stumble” (Xenophon), and thus of a good man (Epictetus, Marcus Antoninus) (Robertson). “Present” is  (iJsthmi), “to cause or make to stand, to place.” Translation. Now, to the One who is able to guard you from stumbling and to place you before the presence of His glory faultless in great rejoicing, to the only God our Saviour,

through Jesus Christ our Lord be glory, majesty, might, and authority before all time, both now and forever. Amen.

GOLDEN NUGGETS FROM THE

GREEK NEW TESTAMENT To My Wife JEANNETTE IRENE WUEST My Companion and Co-Laborer in the Gospel

Foreword Among the gifts which the glorified Christ has bestowed upon His body, the Church, is that of “teachers” (Eph. 4:11). How grateful we should be that it is so, and how deeply indebted we are to those Spirit-filled men and women who have brought to our minds and hearts, by word of mouth and the printed page, precious truths from God’s holy Word. The author of this book possesses the gift of teaching to an unusual degree, and his faithful exercise of this gift, in the classrooms of The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, on the public platform, as well as over the radio, combined with a humble dependence upon the energy of the Holy Spirit, has made his ministry of untold value to multitudes of believers. The material in these pages has been broadcast over the Institute station, WMBI, Chicago, and has proved to be so helpful, that Mr. Wuest was asked to send it forth in printed form. The studies are brief and to the point, thoroughly scriptural in every respect, and so carefully worded that they may be clearly understood by the reader who has no knowledge of the Greek New Testament, and at the same time will furnish seed thoughts to the seasoned Bible student, teacher and preacher which will lead out into the refreshing streams of deep truth. So far as we know, this book is unique in the field of Bible exposition, being the first of its kind to appear. We predict that it will be enthusiastically received, more enthusiastically read, and most enthusiastically reread. May God be pleased to richly bless its author and readers. Wendell P. LOVELESS Director, Radio Department, The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago.

Preface The purpose of this book is to make available to the Bible student who is not familiar with the original text, the added richness and light which a study of the Greek Scriptures brings. The reliable English versions give the meaning of the Greek in a translation which is held down to the fewest possible words which will best convey to the reader the thought of the original. However, no translation is able to bring out all that is in the Greek. There are delicate shades of meaning, vivid word pictures, language idioms, that no standard version can handle. These we will seek to bring out. Then again, some English words have changed their meaning, and we must substitute a word in use today that will better express the meaning of the Greek word. Finally we have come in these latter years to a better knowledge of the Greek language, and therefore in some instances can offer a clearer translation. But we must not let these facts disturb our confidence in and dependence upon our reliable translations. We are concerned here with minor details, not with the great outstanding eternal doctrines and facts in God’s Word. Most men have been saved and have grown in grace through faith in the Word in its translated form. The Holy Spirit owns and quickens the translated Word, and has done so from the beginning. Therefore, as we seek to bring out from the Greek text aspects of truth that the translations do not handle, let us thank God for these translations which He has given us, and receive with gratefulness any added light which the labors of Bible students have been able to gather from the original text. K.S.W. The Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

1. The Peculiar People of God The Word “peculiar” is found in Titus 2:14. Christians are the peculiar people of God. We use the word sometimes when we speak of something odd or strange. But that is not its use here. The word is translated from a Greek word which is made up of two words, one which means “around,” as a circle, and the other which means “to be.” It can be charted by a dot within a circle. This will help us to understand the meaning of the combined word. As the circle is around the dot, so God is around each one of His saints. The circle monopolizes the dot, has the dot all to itself. So God has His own all to Himself. They are His own private unique possession. He has reserved them for Himself. The expression in I Thessalonians 1:1, “The church of the Thessalonians in God,” has in it the same idea, for the Greek case is locative of sphere. That is, it is in the sphere of God, circumscribed by God, surrounded by Him. This is a place of high privilege. In I Peter 2:7, the Greek has it, “Unto you who believe, is the preciousness.” That is, the preciousness of Jesus is imputed to us. He becomes our preciousness in the eyes of the Father as He becomes our righteousness before the law. The Son dwells in the bosom of the Father, closest to the Father’s

affections. Marvellous grace, that we sinners saved by grace are brought into that favored place closest to the Father’s affections. The Father loves us as much as He loves His only begotten Son. What a pillow on which to rest our weary hearts when going through a testing time. This is also a place of protection. Place a dot outside of the circle, and draw an arrow from that dot to the dot inside the circle. Label that dot a temptation. As the arrow cannot reach the dot except it go through the circle, so no temptation can reach us except it go through the permissive will of God first. As we walk in the center of God’s will, He will not permit the Devil to confront us with a temptation too great for us, but will provide us with the necessary faith and spiritual strength to overcome it. Victory over sin is a guaranteed fact when we are in the center of God’s will. Put another dot outside the circle. Run an arrow to the dot inside. Label the outside dot “a trial or testing time.” As the arrow cannot reach the dot inside unless it goes through the circle, so no time of testing, no sorrow, can reach the child of God who dwells in the center of His will, unless it comes through the permissive will of God, and when it reaches us, God sees to it that all needed grace is given to bear that trial. He is the God of all grace who comforts us in all our afflictions. And this is what Paul means in I Corinthians 10:13 when he says, “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way of escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” The Greek word translated “temptation” has two meanings, first, “a time of testing or trial,” second, “a solicitation to do evil.” We are the peculiar people of God, all His own, closest to His affections, under His protecting care, the recipients of all needed comfort and grace. God in His wisdom plans the test, and limits the temptation. God in His love sends the test, and permits the temptation. God in His grace meets the test, and overcomes the temptation. In His wisdom He plans and limits. The purpose of Christian suffering is that it is a means whereby sin is put out of our lives and likeness to Jesus produced. “We must be ground between the millstones of suffering before we can become bread for the hungry multitudes.” In His love He sends and permits. Christian suffering shows God’s love for that saint. God wants him more to Himself. In His grace He meets and overcomes. The grace of God is sufficient to surmount every difficulty, comfort any sorrow, overcome any temptation.

2. The Christian and Trench Warfare There are some interesting word studies in Galatians 5:16–17. Those we will study are “walk, Spirit, lusteth, against, contrary, cannot.” The Christian is exhorted to walk in the Spirit. The word “walk” is used in an early Greek manuscript in the sentence, “I am going about in a disgraceful state.” The writer of this sentence was commenting upon the kind of life he was living, how he was conducting himself. The form in the Greek shows that it is a command to be constantly obeyed. “Be constantly conducting yourselves in the Spirit.” The word “Spirit,” referring here to the Holy Spirit, is in the locative of sphere, and could be charted by a dot within a circle. The dot is ensphered within the circle. The exhortation therefore is, “Be constantly conducting yourselves in the sphere of the Spirit.” That is, determine every thought, word, and deed by the leading of the Spirit through the Word, and think every thought, speak every word, and do every deed, in an attitude of entire dependence upon the Holy Spirit’s empowering

energy, “Bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (II Cor. 10:5). ”If we do this, we have God’s guarantee and promise that we shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. The word “flesh” refers here to the fallen depraved nature with which we were born, but whose power was broken when we were saved. The word “lust” has changed its meaning. Today it refers to an immoral desire. When the Authorized Version was translated, it meant what the Greek word means from which it is translated, simply a desire. The desire may be a good one or a bad one, according to the context. The word in the Greek has in this verse a preposition prefixed which intensifies its meaning. It is not only a desire, it is a craving. But as we determine our conduct by what the Spirit leads us to do, and yield to Him for the divine energy with which to do it, we have God’s promise that we will not; there is a double negative in the Greek which strengthens the negation, we will absolutely not fulfill the cravings of the fallen nature. The explanation of how we are delivered from those cravings and the actions which would satisfy those cravings, is found in verse seventeen. The fallen nature lusts against the Holy Spirit. The same word for “lust” is used as in the previous verse. The flesh has a strong desire again the Spirit. The word “against” is from a Greek preposition which literally means “down.” The idea is one of defeat, suppression. One could render the sentence, “The flesh has constantly a strong desire to suppress the Spirit.” The work of the Holy Spirit in the believer is two-fold, namely, to put sin out of the life and to produce His own fruit. The fallen nature has a strong desire to suppress the Holy Spirit in the work of His office. But the Holy Spirit has a strong desire likewise to suppress the fallen nature in its attempt to cause the believer to obey its behests. They are contrary to one another. The words “one another” are a reciprocal pronoun in the Greek. The Spirit and the flesh reciprocate the antagonism each has for the other. The word “contrary,” speaks of a permanent attitude of opposition toward each other on the part of both the flesh and the Spirit. The picture in the Greek word is that of two opposing armies, each digging a system of trenches for the purpose of holding the land they have and conducting a trench warfare. They have dug themselves in for a long drawn-out contest. This contest is going on all the time in the heart of every child of God. It continues until the death of the believer. The Holy Spirit is the divine provision for victory over sin, “so that ye may not do the things that ye would desire to do.” The part the Christian must play in this trench warfare is found in our previous verse, namely, to be constantly determining his every thought, word, and deed by the leading of the Spirit, yielding to Him for the energy to act in the premises. The entire translation could read, “But I say, be constantly conducting yourselves within the sphere of the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the cravings of the flesh. For the flesh has constantly a strong desire to suppress the Spirit, and the Spirit has as constantly a strong desire to suppress the flesh, and these are entrenched in a permanent attitude of opposition to one another, so that ye may not do the things that ye would desire to do.”

3. The “Falling Away” of Hebrews VI There is but one sin spoken of in the Book of Hebrews, namely, the act of a first century Jew who has left Judaism and has identified himself with the visible Christian church, who having made a profession of Christ now is in danger under stress of persecution, of renouncing that faith and going back to the abrogated ritual of the Levitical system.

It is described in chapter 2:1 as a “slipping away from the New Testament truth,” a “hardening of the heart against the Holy Spirit” (3:7, 8), a “falling away,” and a “crucifying the Son of God afresh” (6:6), a “wilful sin” consisting of three-fold sin against the Triune God, “treading under foot the Son of God,” a sin against the Father who sent the Son, “counting Jesus’ blood as common blood,” a sin against the Son who shed His blood, and “doing despite to the Holy Ghost,” a sin against the Holy Ghost who led them to the place of repentance (10:26, 29). The words “falling away” are from a Greek word which literally means “to fall beside a person or thing, to slip away, to deviate from the right path, to turn aside.” From early manuscripts we have two illustrations of its use: “if the terms of the contract be broken,” and where it is used of a person who falls back to his earlier interpretation. These two uses fit exactly into the historical background of the book, and the context in which the word is found. Here is the case of Jews who professed faith in Christ, who going along with the Holy Spirit in His pre-salvation work, had been brought into the place of repentance, to the very threshold of salvation. They had made a contract so to speak with the Spirit, willingly being led along by Him. Now, should they refuse the proffered faith and return to Judaism, they would be breaking their contract which they made with the Spirit. Again, at one time they had adhered to the sacrificial system of the First Testament. Then they had left it to embrace the New Testament truth. Now, should they return to the temple sacrifices, they would be reverting to their former opinion regarding the same. These words “falling away,” can only refer to the one sin spoken of in this book. It could only be committed in the first century and by a Jew, or a Gentile proselyte to Judaism, and for the reason that conditions since a.d. 70 have been such as to make impossible the committing of that sin. The temple at Jerusalem was destroyed on that date. There are no Jewish sacrifices to leave nor to return to. This was apostasy, a most serious sin. These Jews had been made partakers, “partners,” see Luke 5:7, same Greek word, of the Holy Ghost, going along with Him in His pre-salvation work. Now, to reject His further ministrations, was a most serious thing from which act there was no recovery.

4. Does He Feel at Home? Paul Prays (Eph. 3:17) that Christ may dwell in the hearts of the saints. The word “dwell” is from a Greek word made up of two words, one meaning “to live in a home,” and the other, literally meaning “down.” Paul prays that our Lord might live in our hearts as His home. He is already in us, therefore Paul’s thought must be that He feel at home in our hearts. The tense speaks of finality, the word for “down” speaking of permanency. The full translation is, “That Christ may finally settle down and feel completely at home in your hearts.” It is one thing to be in a person’s home, another thing to feel completely at home there. Our Lord condescends to live in the heart of a sinner saved by grace. What an honor to have such a guest in our hearts. Do we make Him feel at home? Does He have free access to all parts of our heart life, or is He shut out from this thing or that? Is He our constant companion or are we occupied at times with persons or things that we feel are not consistent with our fellowship with Him? Is He Lord of our lives, the invited guest to occupy the throne room of our hearts? Many have tried to make Jesus Lord of their lives, and have failed because they have tried in their own strength. No man calls Jesus Lord

except by the Holy Spirit. That is why Paul prays that we might be strengthened with might by His Spirit in order that Christ might finally settle down and feel completely at home in our hearts. The secret of the Lordship of Jesus, is a desire that the Holy Spirit make Him Lord of our lives, and a trust in the Spirit to accomplish that for us.

5. Dislocated Saints We Have the case (Gal. 6:1) of a child of God overtaken in a fault, the Greek word for “overtaken” carrying the idea here of a Christian surprised by the fault itself. He was hurried into sin. He sinned before he knew it. That person needs to be restored. Sin in a Christian’s life that is known and cherished, causes the fellowship between the saint and God to be broken. That which restores fellowship in confession of that sin (I John 1:9). This restoration is an act of God. But sometimes God uses another Christian as a channel through which He can work to bring the sinning saint to the place where he will confess the sin. Our verse speaks of this. The word “restore” is from a Greek word which means “to reconcile factions, to set broken bones, to set a dislocation, to mend nets, to equip or prepare.” What the particular meaning is in this instance will be determined by the context. Paul is speaking of a child of God, a born-again blood-cleansed believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. As a believer, that person is a member of the Body of which Christ is the Head (Eph. 1:22, 23; 5:23, 30), the figure being that of a human body and a human head, the saints of this Age of Grace as members of the Body and thus composing it, and our Lord as the Head of the Body. The saint with sin in his life is not in correct relationship to his Head and to the rest of the Body, just as an arm out of joint is not in correct relationship to the body and the head. But the saint still is a member of the Body as the dislocated arm is a member of the human body. Again, the life of the Head still abides in the saint as the life in the human head still flows through the arm. Once more, as a dislocated arm is useless to the body and head and will obey neither, so a saint out of fellowship with his Lord is useless to both the Body and the Head, and will obey neither. As a dislocated arm is a hindrance to the body and head, so is a saint with sin in his life a hindrance to the Church and its Head. As an arm out of joint is a source of pain to both body and head, so is a Christian with sin in his life, a source of heart pain to his fellow saints and his Lord. As a dislocated arm is extremely painful in itself, so a child of God with sin in his life, is a miserable Christian. The longer an arm is out of joint, the more painful it becomes, and the harder it is to put back. The longer a child of God remains in sin, the more miserable he becomes, and the harder it is to restore him to fellowship again. But thank God, he can be restored. Restoration to fellowship from the standpoint of cleansing from the defilement of sin, is the work of our Lord as Advocate (I John 2:1–2). The restoration spoken of in Galatians is the work of bringing that saint to the place where he will confess that sin. Here God is pleased often to use one of His children. Putting an arm back in joint is a delicate piece of work that should be undertaken only by a doctor, who with utmost gentleness and careful handling skilfully restores the dislocated arm. There is a gentle way and a rough way. The Christian worker must be spiritual to do this work. That is, he must be a Spirit-filled saint. As such, God works through him, gently, tactfully, lovingly, wooing the saint away from his sin and to the place of confession. As the saint prays for his fellow saint and speaks with him, the work is done, done by the Holy Spirit. A Christian worker must do this work in a humble, meek, gentle way, remembering that he himself is subject to temptation

and possible sin in his life.

6. Transfigured Saints We Read in Matthew 17:2 that our Lord “was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.” The word “transfigured” is from a Greek word made up of two words, one word referring to the outward expression one gives to his inmost true nature, the other, signifying a change of activity. We could translate, “His mode of expression was changed before them.” Our Lord’s usual mode of expression while on earth in His humiliation, was that of a servant. He came (Mark 10:45) “not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” But now, that usual mode of expression was changed. Our Lord now gave expression to the glory of His deity. The word “transfigured” here means that He changed His outward form of expression, namely, from that of a servant to that of Deity. We have in II Corinthians 11:13–15 another Greek word of the direct opposite meaning, namely, the act of changing the outward expression of that which inwardly remains the same, that outward expression not being representative of that person’s inmost nature. Satan, his false apostles and ministers assume an outward expression which does not correspond to their true natures. Before masquerading, and that is what the Greek word means, as an angel of light, Satan gave outward expression to his inmost nature. But in order to mislead the human race and gain followers, he had to pose as an angel of light. He changed that outward expression which was expressive of his inmost nature, and assumed another, which did not correspond to it. Satan masquerades as an angel of light, whereas he is all the while an angel of darkness. In Romans 12:2, we have both words used. Paul exhorts the saints not to be conformed to this world. Here he uses the word found in our Corinthian passage. Christians must not change their outward expression from that of a true expression of their inmost natures, to an assumed expression not true of their new regenerated inmost being, that assumed expression patterned after the world. He exhorts them instead to be transformed, and here we have the same Greek word which is used in the Matthew passage and translated “transfigured.” Saints are to change their outward expression from that which was true of them before salvation, when they gave expression to what was in their indwelling sinful nature, to an expression of their inmost regenerated being. Then they would be transfigured saints. Thus Paul exhorts the saints not to assume as an outward expression the fashions, habits, speech expressions, and artificiality of this evil age, thus hiding that expression of themselves which should come from what they are intrinsically as children of God. How saints sometimes like to have just a dash of the world about them so as not to appear too unworldly. How a coat of worldliness can cover up the Christ within. But instead, saints are to be transformed, that is, give expression of what they really are, partakers of the divine nature, indwelt by the Spirit. They are to do so by having their inward life renewed by the Holy Spirit so that the Lord Jesus may be seen. Thus they will be transfigured saints. And as our Lord was seen by the disciples, shining resplendent in the glory of His deity, so the saints will shine with a heavenly radiance pervading their thoughts, words, and deeds even on their earthly pilgrimage, lighting many a lost wanderer home amid the darkening shadows of this age.

7. Everlasting Watchfulness In Luke 4:13 we read, “And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season.” The English words “for a season,” could imply that there are times when the saint is free from the temptations of Satan, and thus he might relax his vigilance. But the Greek words do not permit of such a thought. The thought in the original text is that Satan departed from our Lord until a more opportune, propitious, or favorable time, when our Lord would be more susceptible to temptation, when Satan could work more effectively. The word “departed” is from a Greek word which literally means “to stand off from.” Thus Satan never leaves the saint alone. If he ceases his activities, it is only that he might stand off from him and wait for a time when the saint is more susceptible to temptation. Therefore, the price of victory over Satan is in everlasting watchfulness, “lest Satan should get an advantage of us, for we are not ignorant of his devices” (II Cor. 2:11).

8. The Needle’s Eye The Rich young ruler loved his riches so much that they kept him from accepting eternal life from the Son of God. In speaking of the impossibility of such entering the kingdom of God, Jesus uses the illustration of the impossibility of a camel going through the eye of a needle. Some have taught that the needle’s eye referred to a gate in the wall of Jerusalem through which by means of much pulling and pushing a camel could finally be taken. The Greek of Matthew 19:24 and Mark 10:25 speaks of a needle that is used with thread, and Luke 18:25 uses the medical term for the needle used in surgical operations. It is evident that the gate is not meant, but the tiny eye of a sewing needle. This was probably a current proverb for the impossible. The Talmud twice speaks of an elephant passing through the eye of a needle as being impossible. It is therefore impossible for anyone whose love for wealth keeps him from trusting Jesus Christ as Saviour, to be saved. In answer to the disciples’ question, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus says, “The things that are impossible with men, are possible with God.” The word “with” in the Greek means literally “beside.” Take your stand beside man on the question of riches and it is impossible to be saved. But take your stand beside God on the matter, and the formerly impossible becomes possible.

9. Our Lord’s Prayer for Resurrection Frequently the fine shades of meaning in the Greek bring out wonderful truth. In Hebrews 5:7 our Lord is referred to as the One “who in the days of his flesh when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong cryings and tears unto him that was able to save him from death.” The preposition “from” in the Greek is the key to the understanding of this passage. There are two prepositions which mean “from,” one, “from the edge of,” the other, “out from within.” The first one could be used when one goes from the building, having stood outside against its wall. The other would be used when one is inside of a building and goes out from it. The second is used here.

Our Lord prayed to be saved from the Cross if there was such a possibility and it was within the will of God. Not that He was unwilling to suffer for lost sinners, but His holy soul shrank very properly and naturally from the terrible ordeal of being made sin and of having His Father turn away His face. It was the revulsion of His holy soul from that awful thing called sin, and the natural yearning of His heart for unbroken fellowship with the Father that wrung from His lips that prayer. There in Gethsemane He prayed to be saved from all of this. The first Greek preposition could be used in this case. But the second one appears in the Greek text. This reference is not to the Gethsemane prayer. Here He prayed to be saved not from the edge of death, but out of death. Here He expected to die, and He prayed to be saved out from under the dominion of death. That meant that He prayed to be raised from the dead. We find His prayer recorded in Psalm 22, a Messianic Psalm which many believe our Lord uttered in its entirety while on the Cross. “But be not thou far from me, O God. O my strength, haste thee to help me. Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog. Save me from the lion’s mouth.” This is His prayer for resurrection. He praises God for answered prayer in the words, “for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns. I will declare thy name unto my brethren.” Our Lord’s earthly life was saturated with prayer. As the Man Christ Jesus, He prayed His way through His ministry even to the very end. What a lesson to us. Let us live prayer-saturated lives.

10. God’s University for Angels In Ephesians (3:10) we read that one of the purposes of Paul’s ministry was “that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God.” The word “by” is from a Greek preposition which speaks of intermediate agency. It is through the agency of the Church, that the holy angels are learning the manifold wisdom of God. The angels were created before this universe was brought into existence through the creative act of God, for they shouted for joy at the beauty of the original creation (Job. 38:7). The universe is very old, millions of years, as shown by the science of astronomy. The angels have been contemplating the majesty and the glory of the Godhead all those years, and yet have not learned some things regarding their Creator which the Church can teach them. Peter in his first epistle (1:12) tells us what those things are which “the angels passionately desire to bend low and look into.” The angels never had a conception of the love, the grace, the humility, the self-sacrifice of God until they saw it in the Church. There they see Calvary where the Creator died, the Just for the unjust. There they see the incarnation where the Creator took to Himself the form and limitation of a created being. There they see the power of God in transforming a sinful human being into the image of God’s dear Son, manifestation of power far greater than that which operated in the creation of the universe. God spoke a universe into being by uttering a word. It took Calvary to make possible the Church. Thus, the Church provides a university course for angels. How they watch us. How they wonder at us. Beings lower than angels in the scale of creation, raised in Christ to beings higher than angels, into the family of God. The translation is as follows, “In order that the variegated wisdom of God might be known to the principalities and authorities in the heavenlies through the intermediate agency of the Church.”

11. The Fullness of the Spirit There are four grammatical rules in the Greek language which lead us to four truths relative to this great subject. The words in Ephesians 5:18 are, “Be filled with the Spirit.” First, the verb is in the imperative mode. That is, it is imperative that we be filled with the Spirit, first, because God commands it, second, because the fullness of the spirit is the divine enablement in the life of a Christian which results in a Christ-like life. Failure to be filled with the Spirit is sin and results in failure to live a life honoring to God. Second, the tense of the verb is present, and this tense in the imperative mode always represents action going on. We learn from this that the mechanics of a Spirit-filled life do not provide for a spasmodic filling, that is, the Christian is not filled only when doing service such as preaching or teaching. But the Christian living a normal life of moment by moment yieldedness to God, experiences a moment by moment fullness of the Spirit. No Christian can do with less and at the same time live a victorious life. Third, the verb is in the plural number, which teaches us that this command is addressed, not only to the preacher and the deacon, and the teacher in the Sunday School, but to every Christian, to the business man, the laborer, the housewife. It is the responsibility of every Christian to be always filled with the Holy Spirit. Fourth, the verb is in the passive voice. This grammatical classification represents the subject of the verb as inactive but being acted upon. This teaches us that the filling with the Spirit is not a work of man but of God. We cannot work ourselves up to that condition by any amount of tarrying, praying, or agonizing. A simple desire for that fullness and a trust in the Lord Jesus for that fullness will result in that fullness (John 7:37–39). But what is meant by the fullness of the Holy Spirit? We find the answer in James 4:5, “Do ye think that the Scripture saith in vain, ‘The Spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy’?” The word “lust” is an obsolete English word meaning “to earnestly desire.” The translation reads, “The Spirit who has taken up his permanent abode in us constantly and earnestly desires to the point of envy.” Now, what does He desire even to the point of a divine envy? In Galatians 5:17 we read, “For the flesh has a strong desire to suppress the Spirit, and the Spirit has a strong desire to suppress the flesh, and these are firmly settled in an attitude of opposition to one another that you may not do the things which you constantly desire to do.” The constant desire of the fallen nature is to sin. The Holy Spirit is the divine provision against sin in the life of a Christian. The evil nature wishes to use the faculties of the believer for sinful purposes. The Holy Spirit desires to use them for God’s glory. The choice is with the Christian. He chooses which of the two will control his faculties. Thus the passage in James reads in paraphrase, “The Spirit who has taken up his final abode in us, jealously desires the whole of us.” Yieldedness to and dependence upon the Holy Spirit results in the Spirit putting down the evil nature in defeat and producing in the believer a life pleasing to God. Thus, the fullness of the Spirit refers to His control over the believer. The translation of our text is, “Be ye being constantly filled with the Spirit.”

12. The Saint’s Individual Responsibility Punctuation in neither the present Greek nor the English texts is inspired. The earliest

manuscripts of the New Testament which we possess have no punctuation. The punctuation of Ephesians 4:12, a.v., works havoc with God’s plan of operation in the Church, namely, that each saint is expected to be engaged in some form of Christian service as God may lead, for it puts the entire responsibility of proclaiming the Word upon the shoulders of the gifted men who are God’s gift to the Church, and requires nothing of the saints to whom they minister. The men to whom God has given special gifts for ministering in the Word as given in verse eleven are, apostles, prophets, evangelists, and teaching pastors. The construction in the Greek does not allow us to speak of pastors and teachers as two individuals here. The two designations refer to a pastor who has also the gift of teaching. The two gifts go together in the divine economy, and it therefore follows that a God-called pastor is to exercise a didactic ministry. That is, his chief business will be to teach the Word of God. His is a ministry of explaining in simple terms what the Word of God means. The word “pastor” is from a Greek word which means “a shepherd.” The illustration is evident. The pastor is to bear the same relationship to the people to whom he ministers, that a shepherd does to his flock of sheep. Turning to verse twelve, we find that the word “perfecting” is not from the Greek word which refers to spiritual maturity, but from one that has the idea of equipping someone or something so that it might serve the purpose or do the work for which it was brought into being. The English word “ministry” has changed its meaning. Today when we speak of the ministry, we usually have in mind the regularly ordained clergymen of the church. The word has no such meaning here. The Greek word from which it is translated comes by transliteration into our language in the word “deacon,” and translated, it means “one who serves.” The full translation is as follows: “And he himself gave the apostles, and the prophets, and the evangelists, and the teaching pastors, for the equipping of the saints for ministering work, resulting in the building up of the Body of Christ.” From this translation we see that the pastor of a church, for instance, is a specialist. His work is to teach the Word to the saints, and to train them in the art of winning souls and of teaching and preaching the Word. Each church should be a miniature Bible Institute, a training station from which saints go out to spread the gospel. The pastor thus multiplies himself. He has a ministry to the unsaved, that of preaching the gospel to them, and of winning them to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus. But his chief work is to equip the saints to do that work. Since the pastor must specialize in the work of training the saints, it follows that he cannot spend his time and energy upon a thousand and one things in the work of the church which should be done by its members. It is a wise pastor that puts people to work and holds himself to a life of prayer and the ministry of the Word. Each of us is to engage in some form of Christian service as the Lord leads. It may be a ministry of prayer, or of tract distribution, or of personal work or of teaching the Word, or of song. Thus each saint has his own responsibility in the service of our Lord.

13. The Greek Word for Faith The Usage in early secular documents throws light upon its meaning. In the sentence “whom no one would trust, even if they were willing to work,” we see its meaning of confidence in the person’s character and motives. The sentence “I have trusted no one to take it to her,” speaks of a person’s lack of confidence in the ability of another to perform a certain task. From the standpoint of the one trusted we have “I am no longer trusted,

unless I behave fairly.” Paul uses the word in I Thessalonians 2:4; Galatians 2:7; I Corinthians 9:17; and I Timothy 1:11 “I was put in trust with the gospel, the gospel,… was committed unto me, the gospel … which was committed to my trust.” This is the verb usage. When we come to the noun, we have the meaning of “faith and confidence, fidelity and faithfulness.” The adjective gives us “faithful and trustworthy.” Paul uses the word in his directions to the Philippean jailer, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house” (Acts 16:31). He exhorts him to consider the Lord Jesus worthy of trust as to His character and motives. He exhorts him to place his confidence in His ability to do just what He says He will do. He exhorts him to entrust the salvation of his soul into the hands of the Lord Jesus. He exhorts him to commit the work of saving his soul to the care of the Lord. That means a definite taking of one’s self out of one’s own keeping and entrusting one’s self into the keeping of the Lord Jesus. That is what is meant by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ.

14. About Tents Paul Was a tentmaker. He like every Jewish boy learned some manual trade in addition to his chosen profession. The great scholar made tents for a living while preaching Christ (Acts 18:3). Writing to the Philippians (1:23), he tells them of his conflicting desires, to depart and be with Christ, or to remain with them for their benefit. The words “to depart” are from a military word meaning “to take down one’s tent and be off.” Paul wrote this in a military camp. Paul’s human body was the tent in which he was living. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Heb. 11:9), lived in tents. A tent speaks of a pilgrim journey. They were looking for a permanent place of abode. “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14). The word “dwelt” in the Greek is not the ordinary word which means “to abide,” but a verb whose root is our word “tent.” Literally, “the Word took up his residence in a tent among us.” Out from the ivory palaces, the King of Glory came to live in a tent among a people who lived in tents. What condescension. But that is not all. In Revelation 21:3 we read, literally, “The tent of God is with men, and he will live in a tent in company with them.” This tent is the same human body in which our Lord lived while on earth, glorified, Wonder of wonders. The King condescends to live in a tent all through eternity with His Bride. If His Bride lives in a tent, He will. He chose Her for Himself notwithstanding the tent.

15. A Contradiction Cleared Up by the Greek Luke Who wrote the Book of Acts, records for us under the superintendence of the Holy Spirit, Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus, as he heard it from the lips of Paul himself (Acts 9). Luke also records Paul’s speech of defense to the Jews (Acts 22) as he heard it from Paul. In 9:7 the statement is made that the men with Paul heard the voice of the One speaking to him, and in 22:9, that they did not hear the voice. Here we have a real contradiction in the English translation. We believe in an infallible inspired text. We claim verbal inspiration for the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, and for our present day manuscripts where textual criticism assures us of a correct text, which is in the case of the New Testament, 999

words out of every one thousand. We do not claim verbal inspiration for any translation. Therefore, the Greek text is the final court of appeal. In the Greek of Acts 9:7, the word “voice” is in the genitive case, and in 22:9, it is in the accusative case. The grammar rule here states that in the first instance, the voice is heard only as a sound. The meaning of the words are not understood. The men with Paul heard the sound but did not understand the words which our Lord spoke to Paul. It states in the second instance, that not only is the voice heard, but the words are understood. Thus the men with Paul did not hear the voice so as to understand the words. The contradiction is not a contradiction in the Greek text. Child of God, trust your Bible. It is the very Word of God, given by revelation and written down by inspiration.

16. The Husband of One Wife “A Bishop then must be … the husband of one wife” (I Tim. 3:2). The nouns are without the definite article, indicating that character is stressed. The teaching is that a bishop can only marry once. Expositors Greek Testament says: The better to ensure that the bishop be without reproach, his leading characteristic must be self-control. He must have a high conception of the sexes, a married man who, if his wife dies, does not marry again. Men whose position is less open to criticism may do this without discredit. But the bishop must hold up high ideals. Alford says that the words do not mean that the bishop should have only one wife at a time, since polygamy was unknown in the early Church, also, how far such a prohibition is binding today, now that the Christian life has entered into another and totally different phase, is an open question. The Revised Standard Version has, “married only once.”

17. Contact In Mark 6:48 we read of our Lord “walking upon the sea.” The preposition in the Greek is used with a certain case which means that the idea of actual contact is in mind. Our Lord was not in any mysterious way moving over the general surface of the water, but was walking upon it, His feet contacting the surface of the water just as naturally and really as our feet have contact with the hard surface of the pavement. In Revelation 5:10, the Church is seen in heaven after the Rapture. Its song includes the words “We shall reign on the earth.” The same preposition and case is used as in Mark 6:48, which means that the Church saints, associated with our Lord in reigning over this earth, will have contact with this earth in the Millennium. That means that millions of glorified saints will be visible object lessons of what God’s grace can do for a poor lost sinner. God will use us in His last great attempt to save the lost of the human race, in that last great harvest of souls (Acts 15:17) before the final judgment at The Great White Throne.

18. Why Worry? In Philippians 4:6 we are exhorted to be careful for nothing. We have here a word that has changed its meaning. Today it means to exercise caution. When our translation was made it meant to be full of anxious care. The Greek word is used in a second century

sentence, “I am writing in haste to prevent your being anxious, for I will see that you are not worried.” The word therefore is a synonym for the word “worry.” The force of the word in the Greek is that of forbidding the continuance of an action already going on. Thus the translation is, “Stop perpetually worrying about even one thing.” The same Greek word is found in Matthew 6:25 and is translated, “Take no thought.” We have the same force of the Greek here. “Stop perpetually worrying.” This recognizes the habitual attitude of the unsaved human heart toward the problems and difficulties of life. God commands us to “Stop perpetually worrying about even one thing.” We commit sin when we worry. We do not trust God when we worry. We do not receive answers to prayer when we worry, because we are not trusting. But this command not to worry is founded upon a reasonable basis. That is, there is a reason why we need not worry. In I Peter 5:7 we have, “Casting all your care upon him, for he careth for you.” The word “care” is from the same Greek word. We are commanded to cast all our worry upon Him. The word “cast” is not the ordinary word in Greek which means “to throw,” but one which signifies a definite act of the will in committing to Him our worries, giving them up to Him. That means that we are through worrying about the matter. We will let God assume the responsibility for our welfare in the premises. And that is just what He desires to do. We are to commit to Him all our worries, or the things that would worry us if we assumed the responsibility, because He cares for us. But the word “careth” is not the word for “worry” in the Greek. The expression in the original means literally, “it is a care to him concerning you.” That is, your welfare is His concern. He in bringing you in salvation into His family, has undertaken the responsibility of caring for your welfare. Therefore, if that is true, why worry? There is on record in an early Greek manuscript, the name of a man called Titedios Amerimnos. The first name is a proper name. The second name is made up of the word which means “to worry,” with the Greek letter Alpha prefixed to it which makes the word mean the opposite of what it formerly meant. It is thought that this man was a pagan Greek who perpetually worried, but who after being saved, stopped worrying. So he was called, “Titedios, the Man who Never Worries.” Can we write our name and add to it, “The One Who Never Worries”?

19. Bondslaves In Romans 6:16–18, the word “servants” is from a Greek word that has its derivation in a word which means “to bind.” Thus the word in Romans refers to one who is bound to another, a slave. There are two words in Greek referring to a person in slavery. One speaks of a slave taken in war. The other refers to a person born into slavery. The latter is the one used in Romans. It presents the slave in various aspects. He is one bound to his master. We who believe in the Lord Jesus as our Saviour, were once bound to Satan in the bonds of sin. We were his bondslaves. Now we are bound to our Lord Jesus by the bonds of an eternal life. Again, this slave is in a permanent relationship to his master which only death can break. We were in permanent relationship to Satan until by our identification with Christ in His death, those bonds were broken. Now we are in permanent relationship to Jesus Christ, a relationship which only death could break. But praise God, because He lives, we live, and since He never dies, we will never die. We are His bondslaves forever. And yet again, this

slave is one born into slavery. We were born into slavery to Satan by our first birth. We are born by our second birth into slavery to Jesus Christ, into a glorious free, blessed, condition in which we are His loving bondslaves forever. In addition to that, the word refers to one whose will is swallowed up in the will of another. Before we were saved, our wills were swallowed up in the will of Satan. We walked according to the prince of the power of the air. Now our wills as we yield to the Holy Spirit’s fullness, are swallowed up in the will of Another, our blessed Lord. “Have thine own way Lord,” is the song of our hearts. The word also refers to a slave who is devoted to the interests of his master to the extent that he disregards his own interests. While we were Satan’s slaves, we served him to the disregard of our own best interests, for the wages we received from him was death. We recklessly served him, no matter how dearly we paid for it. And now, are we as bondslaves of Jesus Christ, serving Him to the disregard of our own interests? Are we serving Him just to the point where it starts costing us something, and we are stopping there? Or are we in utter abandonment of self serving Him, not counting the cost, not counting our lives dear to ourselves? What an example we have in the apostle Paul. His favorite designation of himself is that of a bondslave of Jesus Christ. His apostleship comes next. He counts all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of his Lord.

20. Intense Christianity In Philippians 1:20, the apostle Paul has an earnest expectation and hope that Christ shall be magnified in his body whether it be by life or by death. He was awaiting trial before Nero, the Roman emperor. The intensity of Paul’s Christianity is seen in the words “earnest expectation.” They are one word in the Greek which in turn is made up of three words meaning respectively, “away, the head, to watch.” They together speak of a watching with the head erect or outstretched, hence a waiting in suspense, the first word meaning “away” or “from,” implying abstraction, the attention turned from other objects. The word is used in the Greek classics of the watchman awaiting the beacon which is to announce the capture of Troy. With such intensity of purpose Paul desired that Christ be magnified in his body, whether in a life of continued service for the Lord Jesus, or by a martyr’s death. The word “magnified” is from a Greek word made up of a verb meaning to “unloose or set free,” and an adjective meaning “great.” The English word “magnify” which is used to translate this word means to take something small in size and make it appear large by means of a magnifying glass. But the Greek word literally means “to greatly unloose or set free,” in this context, “to display in a way so that Christ may be seen in all His glory.” The word is used in an early secular document in the sense of “get glory and praise.” Paul’s intense desire is that the Lord Jesus indwelling His heart may be allowed freedom of action in Paul so that being greatly unloosed or set free, that is, not hindered in His manifestation of Himself through the Holy Spirit by anything which Paul might do, He might get glory and praise to Himself whose right it is to be glorified, and that, either in Paul’s life or by his death. That is, Paul’s thought is that nothing really matters except that his Lord is glorified. His own circumstances and wishes do not come in for consideration. Oh, for such an intensity of purpose in our Christian lives today.

21. The Natural and the Spiritual Body Paul Says in I Corinthians 15:44, “It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.” The first expression refers to the human body as it comes into the world. The second expression refers to that same body raised from the dead. We will study the two words, “natural” and “spiritual.” The word “natural” is from the word which the Greeks used to designate the soul of man. The word “spiritual” is from a word which speaks of the spirit of man. A human being is composed of three parts. With his physical body he has world consciousness. His five senses located in this body receive sense impressions from the outside world. With his soul he has self-consciousness. He knows that he is a personality. With his spirit, he has God-consciousness. He is enabled to know that there is a God, and to worship that God when that spirit, dead because of sin, is made alive by the operation of the Holy Spirit. The body as it exists before death is a natural or “soulicle” body. That is, it is so constituted that most of its activities are concerned with the individual’s experience on earth, in his adjustments to his fellow man, his work, his play, himself. The human spirit functions at the same time, enabling man to adjust himself to the religious environment which surrounds him. If he is a pagan, he worships idols and participates in the ceremonies of the idol’s temple. If his human spirit is quickened by the Holy Spirit as part of the saving work of God, he is enabled to worship God and participate in the service of the Lord Jesus. But this constitutes a lesser part of his life than that occupied by the activities of the soul. But it is the determining factor. The type of spiritual life determines the quality of the soul life. Thus the body we have now is a natural body, one in which the spiritual life is not absent, but where it occupies not a lesser place but less of one’s time and energy, and where the soul life is most prominent in the sense of the latter two specifications. The resurrection body will be a spiritual body. By that we do not mean that it will be composed of some intangible, vapory, illusive substance. It will be a body in which the spiritual life of man will predominate. That is, the individual will be occupied for the most part with the things of God, His worship, His fellowship, His service, while to a far less degree will one be occupied with the soul life. In other words, the tables will be turned. As the song goes, “Eternity’s too short to sing Thy praise.” This body dominated by the spirit, will be the same body as to identity which we have now, but changed as to composition and life principle. It will be a body of flesh and bones that can be felt by the physical sense of touch as we have that sense today, for the disciples handled our Lord’s resurrection body with a view to investigating as to whether or not it was a body of flesh and bones as He claimed to have (Luke 24:39; I John 1:1). This body will have no blood, and since the life of the body today is in the blood, it follows that a new life principle must animate that body. Our resurrection bodies will be like our Lord’s (Phil 3:20, 21).

22. The Word of God John Uses it as a name for our Lord (1:1). There are three words in the Greek language for “word,” one referring to the mere articulate sound of the voice, another speaking of that sound as the manifestation of a mental state, and still another, the one

used by John, and whose meaning will be discussed. The word is Logos (Logo"). It comes from the verb which means literally “to pick out or select,” thus “to pick words in order to express one’s thoughts,” thus “to speak.” It speaks of a word uttered by the human voice which embodies a conception or idea. It refers not merely to a part of speech but to a concept or idea. Greek philosophers, in attempting to understand the relationship between God and the universe, spoke of an unknown mediator between God and the universe, naming this mediator, “Logos (Logo").” John tells them that this mediator unknown to them is our Lord, and he uses the same name “Logos (Logo").” Our Lord is the Logos (Logo") of God in the sense that He is the total concept of God, Deity speaking through the Son of God, not in parts of speech as in a sentence composed of words, but in the human life of a divine Person. Our Lord said, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father,” Paul says that (Heb. 1:1–2) whereas in times past God spoke to Israel using the prophets as mouthpieces, He now has spoken in the Person of His Son. Our Lord is therefore the Word of God in that He is Deity told out. The definite article appears before “Word.” He is not merely a concept of God among many others, for the heathen have many concepts of God. He is THE concept of God, the only true one, the unique one. He was in existence when things started to come into being through the creative act of God. He existed before all created things. Therefore, He is uncreated, and therefore eternal in His being, and therefore God. The Word was with God. The word “with” is from a preposition meaning literally “facing.” Thus the Word is a Person facing God the Father. The article appears before the word “God” in the Greek, which indicates that the First Person of the Trinity is meant. Thus, John is speaking of the fellowship between the Word, Jesus Christ, and the Father, a fellowship that existed from all eternity and will exist to all eternity, and which was never broken except at that dark mysterious moment at Calvary when the Son cried, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” The Word was God. Here the word “God” is without the article in the original. When it is used in that way, it refers to divine essence. Emphasis is upon quality or character. Thus, John teaches us here that our Lord is essentially Deity. He possesses the same essence as God the Father, is one with Him in nature and attributes. Jesus of Nazareth, the carpenter, the teacher, is Very God. “In the beginning was the Word (total concept of God), and the Word was in constant fellowship with God (the Father), and the Word was (as to His essence or nature) God.”

23. Luke, the Greek Historian Luke Was a Greek, educated in the Greek schools, prepared for the medical practice which was held in high regard as a profession, and among the Greeks had attained to a place of eminence among the nations of the world. Greek doctors of medicine were in attendance upon many of the royal families of other nations.The Greeks were by nature and training, a race of creative thinkers who pursued their studies in a scientific manner. Their sense of what really constituted scientific accuracy and method in the recording of history was well developed. The writings of Luke, both his Gospel and The Acts, demonstrates Luke’s training as an historian. He writes his Gospel to a Gentile friend, Theophilus. The name means “a god-lover,”

or “god-beloved,” and may have been given him when he became a Christian. The words “most excellent” according to Ramsay, were a title like “Your Excellency,” and show that he held office, perhaps was a Knight. Luke wrote the Gospel for Theophilus to use as a standard whereby to judge the accuracy of the many uninspired accounts of our Lord’s life which were written in the first century. The facts he records were most surely believed by the first century church. Luke arranges the facts of our Lord’s life in historical order as they occurred. The other Gospels do not claim to do that. The arrangement of events was dictated by the purpose which each author had in writing his account. The sources of Luke’s information were oral and written, from eye-witnesses of the events recorded. He as a trained historian would carefully check over these accounts, investigating and verifying every fact. And this is what he has reference to when he uses the words “having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first.” The words “having had perfect understanding” are literally, “having closely traced.” The verb means “to follow along a thing in the mind.” The word was used for the investigation of symptoms. Thus it speaks of a careful investigation of all sources, oral and written, which purport to be accounts of our Lord’s life. Luke had the historian’s mind, a thing native to the educated Greek. Herodotus, the father of Greek history, exhibited the Greek determination to get at the truth no matter how much work it required, when he travelled to central Africa to verify the account of the annual rise and fall of the Nile River. In those days this was a long and difficult journey. Sir William Ramsey said, “I regard Luke as the greatest historian who has ever lived, save only Thucydides.” Thus we have no doubt but that Luke made a personal investigation of all the facts he had recorded. He interviewed every witness, visited every locality. If Mary was still alive, he, a doctor of medicine investigated the story of the virgin birth by hearing it from Mary’s own lips. And as Professor John A. Scott, a great Greek scholar has said, “You could not fool Doctor Luke.” But Luke was not dependent alone upon his personal investigations for the accuracy of his record. He says that he closely traced all things from above. The words “from above” are from a Greek word translated “from the very first,” in the Authorized Version. The word occurs in John 3:31; 19:11; James 1:17; 3:15, 17, and is in every instance translated “from above.” It is used often in contrast to a word which means “from beneath.” Paul had doubtless heard the account of the institution of the Lord’s Supper from the eleven, but he also had it by revelation from the Lord (I Cor. 11:23). He had received his gospel by direct revelation in Arabia, and this was his check upon the gospel he heard at Jerusalem from the apostles. So Luke claims to have closely investigated the facts he had received, and to have done so through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, which fact guarantees the absolute accuracy of the record (Luke 1:1–4).

24. The Indestructibility of the Church Peter Had just given his testimony to the fact that Jesus Christ is God. That was his estimation of his Lord. Now Peter’s Lord gives His estimation of Peter. Peter’s original name was Simon. Our Lord adds the name Cephas, which in Aramaic means “a stone” (John 1:42), as a descriptive name that will show the character of Simon in the days when the Holy Spirit should fill him. Our Lord in Matthew 16:18 reminds Peter of his future character by the same designation, Matthew however reporting the name by the Greek

word which means “a little rock,” from which word we obtain the English name “Peter.” Having finished his appraisal of Peter which answered to Peter’s appraisal of his Lord, Jesus uses Peter’s estimation of Him as a basis for a further declaration. He declares that His deity is the rock upon which He will build His Church. The second word “rock” is from a different form of the word than that which is translated by the name “Peter.” It refers to a large massive rock like Gibraltar. Thus Peter is not the rock foundation of the Church. The deity of Jesus Christ is the foundation. Because the foundation of the Church is the deity of Jesus Christ, the church is indestructible. The declaration of our Lord is that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. We will study the three words, “prevail,” “hell,” and “gates.” The word “prevail” is from a Greek word which means “to overpower, to be strong to another’s detriment.” Thus the indestructibility of the Church is in view here. The word “hell” is from a Greek word which is brought over into our English language in the word “Hades.” This is not the translation of the word, but its transliteration. In the former we bring over the meaning of a word into another language, in the latter, its spelling. The pagan Greeks designated the world of departed human beings by the name “Hades.” It had two compartments, one for the evil doers, Tartarus, and one for those who were good, Elysium. These were the permanent abodes of the dead. Likewise, the word “Hades” is used in Christian terminology to designate the place of departed human beings, it being divided into a place for the unrighteous dead, and one for the righteous. The former is still occupied and the place where the unsaved go, but the latter is empty, for the righteous dead which occupied that place before the resurrection of our Lord are now in heaven, and believers since that great event go at once to be with their Lord. The question comes, then, as to who in Hades would have the power to wage war against the Church. Surely the unsaved dead are powerless in the premises. The saints there at the time our Lord uttered these words would have no such desire. It follows therefore that Hades cannot be referred to here. We turn from the transliteration of the Greek word to its translation. The word is made up of one word which means “to see,” and the Greek letter Alpha, which when prefixed to a word causes it to have the opposite meaning to that which it originally had. The word means therefore “not to see,” and in its noun form, “the unseen.” It refers to the unseen world, that world of personalities that is unseen. The unseen world of the Christian system includes the place called Hades, and also the kingdom of Satan and his demons in the air. Hades is eliminated as a possible enemy of the Church. The logical enemy therefore in view here is Satan and his kingdom. Now as to the word “gates.” The idea of literal gates is out of the question here, for the unseen world has no boundaries. When the term is not used to refer to literal gates, it is used in its oriental sense, that of referring to a council or ruling body whose meeting place in ancient times was the gates of the city. Lot sat in the gate of Sodom (Gen. 19:1), that is, he was one of the officials of the council ruling the city. Boaz took care of a legal matter at the gate of Bethlehem (Ruth 4). Our Lord suffered outside of the gate (Heb. 13:12), not of Jerusalem here, although that was true, but outside of the jurisdiction of the First Testament. The word therefore refers here to a council. The councils of the Unseen will not overcome the Church, that is, the councils of Satan and his demons, for it is founded upon a Rock, even our God and Saviour Jesus Christ.

25. Entree

In Romans 5:2, Paul speaks of the fact that we have access through our Lord into the grace in which we stand. The word “access” is from a Greek word which refers to the act of one who secures for another an interview with a sovereign. In the first place, the person thus acting must be close to the king himself. Our Lord dwells in the bosom of the Father. He occupies the place closest to the Father’s affections. He is therefore fitted for His task. In the second place, the one for whom this entree has been gained, and the French word most happily gives the meaning of the Greek, must be rendered acceptable to the king. This our Lord did through the blood of His Cross whereby He put away the guilt and penalty of our sin and bestowed upon us a righteousness, even His own standing before the Throne, and thus we are “accepted in the Beloved.” As I Peter 2:7 says, “Unto you therefore that believe is the preciousness.” The preciousness of Jesus in the eyes of God the Father has been imputed to us, as His righteous standing has been imputed. God therefore looks upon us with all the favor with which He looks upon His own well-beloved Son. Then again, the one presented at the High Court of Heaven must be correctly attired. Our Lord clothes us with His own beauty, for He is made unto us sanctification, Paul says. The Father sees us in His Son, not apart from Him. And the glorious radiance of the One Altogether Lovely shines upon us. Finally, when we have been brought by Him into the place where we have entree into the presence of God, we find that we are standing in His unlimited favor, in unlimited grace. No demand made upon that grace can exhaust it. For time and eternity we are the objects of the Father’s supreme affection, the recipients of His boundless mercies, the favored ones of His matchless grace. Hallelujah! Praise the Lord “by whom we have our permanent entree by faith into this grace in which we stand.”

26. Concerning Fellowship With Jesus I John is the epistle of fellowship. It is a family letter written to the children of God. This fellowship is therefore only between the saved person and God, not the unsaved. The word “walk” (1:7), is from a Greek word which appears in a second century manuscript in the sentence, “I am going about in a disgraceful state,” the words “going about” being its translation. The word refers to conduct. Our conduct consists of our thoughts, words, and deeds. The action in the word is continuous, “If we are constantly walking in the light.” The normal experience of a Christian should be just that, a life constantly lived according to the Word of God. The word “fellowship” is from a Greek word which means “to have in common with.” The basis of human fellowship is a common nature. An artist and a ditch-digger have no fellowship because they have no common nature, but two artists do, for their natures are the same. So with man’s fellowship with God. If a man is to have fellowship with God he must have a common nature. Man has a nature subject to wrath (Eph. 2:3). But in answer to faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour, a believing sinner is made a partaker of the divine nature (II Peter 1:4), thus having a common nature with God. As a result he has common likes and dislikes. The Christian who loves what Jesus loves and hates what Jesus hates has fellowship with Him. The person who loves what Jesus hates, namely, sin, does not have fellowship with Him. The fellowship here is not between Christian and Christian, but between the Christian and God, for the theme of the Book (1:3) “The Believer’s Fellowship with God,” and the analysis of the section in which this verse is found, “A Condition of Fellowship with God,

Walking in the Light,” requires the second meaning. Again, the words, “one with another” are from a reciprocal pronoun in Greek. That speaks of reciprocity, the act of two individuals returning to each other mutual love. This fellowship is not only on the part of the saint with Jesus, but on the part of the Lord Jesus with the saint. The word “cleanseth” speaks in the Greek of action in progress. The blood of Jesus keeps continually cleansing us from sins of ignorance. The fuller translation is, “If we are constantly walking in the light as he himself is in the light, we are having constant fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son keeps continually cleansing us from all sin.”

27. “Agapao (ÆAgapao)” Love “Agapao (ÆAgapao)” speaks of a love which is awakened by a sense of value in an object which causes one to prize it. It springs from an apprehension of the preciousness of an object. It is a love of esteem and approbation. The quality of this love is determined by the character of the one who loves, and that of the object loved. Agapao (ÆAgapao) is used in John 3:16. God’s love for a sinful and lost race springs from His heart in response to the high value He places upon each human soul. Every sinner is exceedingly precious in His sight. “Phileo (Fileo),” which is another word for love, a love which is the response of the human spirit to what appeals to it as pleasurable, will not do here, for there is nothing in a lost sinner that the heart of God can find pleasure in, but on the contrary, everything that His holiness rebels against. But each sinner is most precious to God, first, because he bears the image of his Creator even though that image be marred by sin, and second, because through redemption, that sinner can be conformed into the very image of God’s dear Son. This preciousness of each member of the human race to the heart of God is the constituent element of the love that gave His Son to die on the Cross. The degree of the preciousness is measured by the infinite sacrifice which God made. The love in John 3:16 therefore is a love whose essence is that of self-sacrifice for the benefit of the one loved, this love based upon an evaluation of the preciousness of the one loved. This use of “Agapao (ÆAgapao)” is seen also in Ephesians 5:25; Romans 5:5, 8; John 15:9–13; 14:28, 31; I John 4:7–5:3; Matthew 5:43–44. The word is also used in I Corinthians 13, where its content is defined by Paul, the idea of self-sacrifice, of self-abnegation, being found in all its constituent elements in some way. The word is used in I John 2:15. Here saints are forbidden to set a high value upon the world, namely the world system of evil, to consider it as precious and thus have a love for it. Here the love is of the wrong kind, a sinful love.

28. “Phileo (Fileo)” Love “Phileo (Fileo)” is a love which consists of the glow of the heart kindled by the perception of that in the object which affords us pleasure. It is the response of the human spirit to what appeals to it as pleasurable. The Greeks made much of friendship. The word was used to speak of a friendly affection. It is a love called out of one in response to a feeling of pleasure or delight which one experiences from an apprehension of qualities in

another that furnish such pleasure or delight. “Agapao (ÆAgapao)” on the other hand, speaks of a love which is awakened by a sense of value in the object loved, an apprehension of its preciousness. “Phileo (Fileo)” is found in Revelation 22:15; Matthew 6:5; 10:37; 23:6; Luke 20:46; John 11:3, 36; I Corinthians 16:22. Those who find pleasure in a lie and thus love it, will go to a lost eternity. Hypocrites find pleasure in ostentatious prayer and thus love it. Those that take more delight in father or mother than in God, love them better and for that reason. Our Lord found delight in the response of the heart of Lazarus to His own and thus loved him. God has a love of delight in those whose love for Jesus is based upon their delight in Him. “Phileo (Fileo)” like “Agapao (ÆAgapao)” has its quality determined by the character of the one who loves and of the object loved. “Agapao (ÆAgapao)” is a love springing from a sense of the preciousness of the object loved, while “Phileo (Fileo)” arises from a sense of pleasure found in the object loved. When used in a good meaning, both are legitimate, but the first is the nobler word. In John 21: our Lord uses “agapao (ajgapao)” in verses 15 and 16, “phileo (fileo)” in 17. Peter uses “phileo (fileo)” three times. Our Lord uses the noblest word in the Greek language the first two times and changes to Peter’s word the third time, but assures Peter that his coming martyrdom speaks of the fact that his future love for his Lord will be based not only upon his delight in his Lord but upon his apprehension of His preciousness. “Phileo (Fileo)” is used in John 16:27. The saints have a love for the Lord Jesus which springs from their joy in Him, a love of delight. The Father has a love of delight in the saints, for He finds in each saint the One in whom He takes delight, the Lord Jesus, and because the saints find their delight in Him also.

29. The Monkey Wrench in the Machinery Paul Says in Romans 7:15, “That which I do, I allow not.” He is describing his experience as a saved person, but one ignorant of the way of living the victorious life. The things he desires to do, namely, good things, he does not do. Things he does not want to do, namely, sinful things, he does do. The power of sin in his life has been broken, and the divine nature implanted. But the correct adjustment to these facts, Paul does not know. Hence the evil nature is still the master. Paul says that this experience he does not “allow.” The word “allow” is from a Greek word which means “to know by experience.” Paul says in effect, “What I carry out I do not recognize in its true nature, as a slave who ignorantly performs his master’s behest without knowing its tendency or result.” Paul does not recognize his experience in its true nature. He is acting blindly at the dictates of another, like a slave who does not have the liberty to determine the details of his life for himself because he is governed by another. He is somewhat of an automaton, not quite a machine, but yet a human being without self-determination in his spiritual life. He has the desire to do good but no power to put that desire into practice. He rebels against doing evil, but does not have the power to keep from sinning. He fights as one that blindly beats the air. He is in a spiritual fog. He does not understand his experience, for he is acting involuntarily. Romans can be likened to a great factory. The sixth chapter takes us to the floors where the machinery is located. There we have the mechanics of the Spirit-filled life, namely, the power of sin broken and the divine nature implanted. The eighth ushers us into

the basement where the power to operate that machinery is generated. There we have the dynamics of the Spirit-filled life, the power of the Holy Spirit. Chapters twelve to sixteen take us to the upper floors of the factory where the finished product is on display. Chapter seven is the monkey wrench which, if it falls into the machinery, interferes with its working and thus prevents the production of the finished product. That monkey wrench in the Christian life is self-dependence. All the resources of the Holy Spirit are there to put down sin and produce a Christ-like life, but they are not appropriated because the believer is depending upon self. Paul never finds the way to a victorious life until he cries out “Who” with a question mark after it. The minute he says that word, he despairs of himself, and despairing of himself, he turns to the Holy Spirit, whom the Lord Jesus has made available to the saint. Instead of self effort, his reliance is upon what God has done for him as recorded in Romans six and upon what the Holy Spirit is doing for him moment by moment as stated in Romans eight.

30. Citizens of Heaven The Greek word translated “conversation” in Phil. 1:27 is found in an early manuscript in the sentence, “I live the life of a member of a citizen body,” that is, the writer was fulfilling the duties expected of a citizen of a commonwealth. Indeed, our English word “politics,” is a transliteration of this Greek word. Paul exhorts them, “Only be constantly performing your duties as citizens, worthy of the gospel of Christ.” In Philippians 3:20 we have the noun, “Our citizenship is in heaven.” Philippi was a Greek city far from Rome, but in the Roman Empire, and a colony of Rome in the sense that its citizens possessed Roman citizenship. The inhabitants of Philippi recognized the emperor of Rome as their sovereign and were obligated to conduct themselves as Roman citizens, just as if they were residents of Rome itself. Paul was teaching the Philippian saints that just as they constituted a colony of Rome so far as their earthly connections were concerned, so they were also a colony of heaven so far as their heavenly relationships were concerned. They were far from their home country, far from their Sovereign, the Lord Jesus, just a little colony of citizens of heaven in the midst of a godless and perverse generation, among which they were to shine as luminaries, that is the word in the Greek. They were a heavenly people with a heavenly origin, a heavenly citizenship, a heavenly destiny, to live heavenly lives in a foreign land, telling others of a heavenly Father who offered them salvation through faith in His Son. What was true of the Philippian saints then is true of all the saints. We are a heavenly people with the obligation and privilege of 1iving a heavenly life on earth. Some day our Sovereign (Phil. 3:20, 21) will come back for us and take us to our native land, changing this body of our humiliation, fashioning it like to the body of His glory. The word “vile” is obsolete English for our word “humiliation.” The physical body has been humiliated by the curse of sin. It will be freed from that curse at the coming of the Lord for His Bride. In the meanwhile, we are to live on earth the same holy life that we would were we walking the streets of heaven.

31. Apostolic Memory The apostle John writing about a.d. 90, says in his first epistle (1:1–3), “That which we

have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we have looked upon and our hands have handled concerning the Word of life … declare we unto you.” The things he refers to, of course, are recorded in the Gospel which he wrote somewhere between a.d. 85–90. A lapse of 50 to 60 years is quite a long time for one to accurately report the happenings in our Lord’s life. Yet John claims to remember them as if they happened but yesterday. The words “we have heard” are in the perfect tense in the Greek. This tense speaks of an action which was completed in past time whose results still exist in present time. The full translation reads “that which we have heard in times past and which we still retain in our memory.” Likewise, the words “we have seen” are in the same tense and are fully rendered, “that which we have seen in times past and which we still have in our mind’s eye.” John therefore claims that the things which he heard and saw, were still fresh in his mind after all those years. But in the word for “seen” he refers to more than the physical act of seeing, for he uses a word which speaks of discerning sight. The apostles understood the things they saw, and thus could be accurate witnesses and hand down to us a correct account of His life. The translation could read, “that which we discerningly saw with our eyes, and which we still have in our mind’s eye.” The next word translated “looked upon” also means “to see,” but is a different word. It means literally “to view attentively, to contemplate.” No wonder that, after the apostles saw our Lord with discerning eyes, they watched His wonderful life with attention and contemplation. Their question must often have been, “What manner of Man is this?” This verb is not in the perfect tense but in the aorist, the tense used most naturally when the Greek writer does not want to go into detail. John had already informed his reader of his fitness to report what he saw and heard in our Lord’s life, and he did not feel the need of repeating that fact. Then he says, “our hands handled.” The verb referred to the act of handling something in order to investigate the nature of that thing. The same word is used in Luke 24:39, where our Lord says, “Handle me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have.” One of the evidences of the fact that our Lord was raised out of death in the same body in which He died is that the disciples felt of that body after the resurrection, investigating the claim of Jesus that it was a true physical body of flesh and bones. Thus, the apostle John when writing his account of our Lord’s life had clearly in mind the things he saw our Lord do and heard Him say approximately sixty years before. But how can a man remember so much for so long a time, and with such accuracy? There are two answers, one from the human side, one from the divine. In the first century, there were few books, and consequently people were forced to retain in their memory much more than we do today when we have many books. In fact, many ancient peoples have been known to hand down from generation to generation, large quantities of poetry and prose by committing it to memory. So John remembered much of what he had seen. He may have had access to some written records also. In addition to this, he had the promise of our Lord in John 14:26 that the Holy Spirit would bring all the things Jesus said, to the remembrance of the apostles. We have therefore the answer as to how John could have written the Gospel attributed to him, so many years after the events took place.

32. Working Out Your Own Salvation Before attempting to explain this passage (Phil. 2:12–13), we must be clear as to what

it does not teach. There is no idea here of an unsaved person doing good works to earn salvation, and for two reasons, first, because those addressed were already saved, and second, because the Bible is clear in its teaching that “not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us” (Titus 3:5). Again, the passage does not mean that a Christian should work out an inworked salvation. There is no such idea in the Greek. The English translation is good, if one uses the words “work out” as one does when referring to the working out of a problem in mathematics, that is, carrying it to its ultimate goal or conclusion. The Greek word here means just this. The words “your own salvation,” are to be taken in their context. The working out of the Philippians’ salvation was affected in some way by the presence of Paul with them and his absence from them. When Paul was with them, his teaching instructed them, his example inspired them, his encouragement urged them on in their growth in grace. Now in his absence they were thrown upon their own initiative. They must learn to paddle their own canoe. Thus Paul sets before them their human responsibility in their growth in grace, for sanctification is in the apostle’s mind. They have their justification. Their glorification will be theirs in eternity. Their growth in Christ-likeness is the salvation concerning which Paul is speaking. Thus, the saints are exhorted to carry their growth in grace to its ultimate goal, Christ-likeness. I John 3:2 speaks of the saint’s future conformation to the image of Christ, and (3:3) says, “And every man that hath this hope set on him purifieth himself even as he is pure.” The salvation spoken of in verse twelve is defined for us in verse thirteen, namely, the definite act of willing to do God’s good pleasure and the doing of it. That is the saint’s responsibility from the human standpoint. But the saint is not left without resources with which to do both, for God the Holy Spirit indwelling him produces in him both the willingness and the power to do His will. The saint avails himself of both of these by fulfilling the requirements laid down by our Lord in John 7:37, 38, namely, a thirst or desire for the fullness of the Spirit, and a trust in the Lord Jesus for that fullness. The literal translation is as follows: “Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, carry to its ultimate goal your own salvation with fear and trembling, for God is the One who is constantly supplying you the impulse, giving you both the power to resolve and the strength to perform his good pleasure.” In verse twelve we have human responsibility, and in verse thirteen, divine enablement.

33. About Saints Ephesians 1:1 reads, “Paul … to the saints … and to the faithful in Christ Jesus.” The word translated “faithful” has the idea here, not of faithfulness in the Christian life, but of the act of believing. But why the double characterization, “saints and believers in Christ Jesus”? Surely, every saint is a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. The Greek word for “and” can also be translated “even.” From a consideration of the historical background of this epistle this is the better translation. Paul was writing to the saints in Ephesus, namely, those saints who were believers in Christ Jesus. Indeed, Paul finds it necessary to define the word “saint” every time he uses it as a term of address in his epistles. In Romans, it is “saints beloved of God,” in First and Second Corinthians, “saints sanctified in Christ Jesus,” and in Colossians, “saints, even believing brethren in Christ.”

In the pagan religions of Greece, we find a word for the act of setting apart a building, an altar, an offering for religious purposes. The object set apart was thus declared sacred, holy, devoted to religious purposes. It applied also to the worshippers. They were set apart persons, thus religious devotees of the temple. The pagan Greek worshippers would therefore in our English language be called saints, for this word coming from the Latin means “holy.” The pagan Greeks were holy, not in the sense of our word “holy” which has a certain content of meaning, namely, pure, righteous, free from sin, but holy in the sense of their set-apartness for the worship of their deities. When they acquired the characteristics of their gods, they were saints in conduct as well as in position. Of course, their saintliness consisted of the most degraded forms of sin. But Paul was not writing to the set apart ones in the pagan mystery religions. Those to whom this letter was addressed were set apart ones in Christ Jesus, set apart by God the Holy Spirit to obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ (I Peter 1:2). They were saints of the Most High God. The word “sanctification” is from the same Greek word and has the same idea, that of setting apart. As set apart ones by God in His worship and service, they gradually acquired through the sanctifying (setting apart) work of the Spirit, more of His characteristics in their experience. Thus their lives became holy, and they were saints in experience as well as in position. The words “sanctify, sanctification, saint, and holy,” are all from the same Greek root and have basically the same meaning, namely, “set apart,” to be translated and interpreted according to their context. There is positional sanctification, the act of God the Holy Spirit setting believing sinners apart in Christ Jesus. This is an act resulting in a position. There is progressive sanctification, the work of the Holy Spirit producing in the lives of believers, a set apart life consistent with their new position. This is a process, resulting finally in conformity to the image of Christ in glorification.

34. Regarding Peter’s Denial of His Lord Mark 14:71 reports Peter as cursing and swearing when denying his Lord. Some have imagined that Peter was a man given to profanity, for these English words are sometimes used in that connection. The Greek helps us here. The word translated “curse” is the same word which Paul uses in Galatians 1:9, but different from the word translated “curse” in Galatians 3:10. The word in Mark 14:71 and Galatians 1:9 means “to declare anathema or cursed, to declare one’s self liable to the severest divine penalties.” Thus Peter was calling down upon himself the severest divine penalties if his words were not true. The word translated “swear” is from the same word in Hebrews 6:13 which means “to take an oath.” Thus Peter in denying any connection with Jesus, attempted to convince his accusers of the truthfulness of his words by taking an oath upon that statement. This explanation does not lessen Peter’s guilt in the matter, but clears him of the charge of profanity, while it also gives one the correct meaning of the words.

35. The Personality of the Life That Eternal life which is given to the believing sinner is not a mere abstraction, not some spiritual energy or dynamic, but a Person, the Lord Jesus. Paul speaks of “Christ, our life” (Col. 3:4). John speaks of “the Word of the life” (I John 1:1). The life here is

eternal life. It has the definite article in the Greek, pointing out the particular life which the Scriptures reveal, not here the Greek word speaking of the necessities of physical life, such as food, clothing and shelter, but the word referring to the principle of life. The word “Word” is in the Greek, not the usual word speaking of a part of speech, that is, a word in a sentence, but one which means a word as setting forth a concept, an idea in its complete presentation. This is the use of the word in John 1:1, where our Lord is the Word in the sense that He in His incarnation presents to humanity the picture or concept of God, God revealed in the Person of His Son who is Very God Himself. John uses the phrase, “concerning the Word of the life.” That is, our Lord is both the life itself and the embodiment or concept of that life in His incarnation. This life, John says, was with the Father. The word “with” is from a Greek word whose root meaning is “facing.” The life was facing the Father, referring to the pre-incarnate fellowship between the Father and the Son. Fellowship demands personality. Therefore, that eternal life which is ours is a Person, Jesus Christ. Christianity is a Person, Jesus Christ living in and through a believer. The part of the Christian in the plan of salvation, is to allow Him to act freely in him, so that He can manifest Himself through that saint. The secret of this is in yielding to the ministry of the Holy Spirit, trusting Him to enthrone Jesus in his heart.

36. Our Lord’s Proclamation in Tartarus I Peter 3:19 says, “By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison.” Who were these spirits, what did our Lord preach, and what was this prison? In verse eighteen we offer the translation “being put to death as to the flesh, but being quickened as to the spirit.” The word “spirit” in the Greek does not begin with a capital letter in the best texts. The word “flesh” refers to our Lord’s human body. He died as to His human body. Then the contrast is maintained. He was quickened, made alive, in spiritual life as to His human spirit. Our Lord, very God, in His incarnation added to Himself a human body, soul, and spirit. It was in this human spirit as quickened by the Holy Spirit, that the Man Christ Jesus preached to the spirits in prison, between His death on the Cross and His resurrection from the tomb. Now, God is spirit (John 4:24), not a spirit. The indefinite article appears in the a.v., but should not be there. There is no indefinite article in the Greek language. The English indefinite article should only be included in the translation when the original in its context demands it. A spirit is a created intelligence. But God is not created. The absence of the definite article in Greek emphasizes character or quality. The translation could read, “God in His essence is spirit.” That is, He is Personality without a body. Human beings have spirits (Heb. 12:23). Angels are spirits (Heb. 1:7). Our Lord preached to angels in prison. The name of this prison is given us in II Peter 2:4, where the word “hell” is translated from the Greek word “Tartarus,” which is distinct from hell, namely, the Lake of Fire, being the prison house of the wicked angels. In both passages Peter connects these angels with the time of the flood, speaking of their disobedience and their sin. They are today in Tartarus awaiting the judgment of the Great White Throne, from where they will be cast into the Lake of Fire. These are the angels whom the saints of the church age will judge (I Cor. 6:3). Their sin consisted of cohabiting with sinful women of the human race and of producing a composite being, part angel, part man, the giants in the earth at that time (Gen. 6:6). This seems to have been the work of

Satan, attempting to dehumanize the human race, thoroughly impregnate it with angelic nature, and so prevent the incarnation, and therefore the Cross, and therefore his defeat. The flood was God’s answer, wiping out the human race which seems to have been more or less permeated by this evil, those in the ark being saved. What our Lord preached to them is not explicitly revealed, but it was not the gospel, and for several reasons. First, the Greek word which means to preach the gospel is not used, but a word which means merely to proclaim something. It was used of heralds who made an official proclamation of some kind. The word translated “preached” here does not convey within itself the content or nature of the message. It needs a qualifying word as in Acts 8:5, “Philip preached Christ unto them.” Second, there is no provision in the atonement for the salvation of angels, for our Lord as the great High Priest did not reach a helping hand to angels, but to the seed of Abraham (Heb. 2:16), for He assumed human, not angelic nature for His substitutionary work on the Cross. Some have surmised that He proclaimed His victory over the fallen angels which He procured at the Cross, the angelic apostasy having for its purpose the defeat of God’s plans through the Cross. This portion of the Word does not therefore teach a second chance after death given to the wicked dead to believe the gospel and be saved. “It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” (Heb. 9:27).

37. The Lord’s Day John in Rev. 1:10 refers to the fact that he was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day. Opinion is divided as to the meaning of the phrase “on the Lord’s Day.” Some think that it refers to the Day of the Lord, an expression referring to the Great Tribulation period when the judgment of God will fall upon the earth, and that John was projected ahead in the control of the Holy Spirit to see the things that would take place at that time as recorded in chapters six to nineteen of this book. But the expression, “the Lord’s Day,” was a technical expression used in the first century, which had a certain content of meaning that requires us to put another interpretation upon it. In the first place, the expression, “the day of the Lord” is a technical expression with a uniform grammatical arrangement. The phrase, “the Lord’s Day,” has a different grammatical order, and is found only here. Why, if the inspired writer meant the Great Tribulation, would he change the grammatical form here, in the climax of all the revelations referring to this time? These references are uniform throughout the Bible, and to present a different grammatical form here, would tend to mislead the reader. In the second place, the expression in the Revelation has a counterpart in first century documents. This form of the word “Lord” was in common use for the sense “imperial,” as “imperial finance” and “imperial treasury.” There was an expression, “ ‘Augustus’ Day,” which was the first day of the month, Emperor’s Day, on which money payments were made. It was natural for the Christians to take this term already in use and apply it to the first day of the week in honor of the Lord’s resurrection on that day. Thus, the designation, “The Lord’s Day,” is the scriptural name for the day which is commonly called Sunday, or, by some, the Sabbath.

38. The Mote, the Beam, and The Hypocrite

The Greek word translated “mote” (Matthew 7:3–5) was found on a tombstone of the first century in the sentence, “He was not a whit injured,” the words “a whit” being the translation of the word. That is, he was not injured in the slightest degree. The word in other connections refers to a straw, or a piece of chaff, a very small particle. The word for “beam” is found in the early inscriptions referring to logs used for heating the bath, or heavy beams on which a temple was to be built. A log of that size would distort one’s vision regarding a small particle in the eye of another. Our obligation is to put out of our lives those glaring faults that prevent us from properly appraising the character of another, before we seek to deal with the tiny faults of someone else. The person with a log in his own eye who attempts to deal with the tiny fault of another is a hypocrite. The Greek word here was used in ancient times to refer to one who judges under a mask. That is the composition of the word. It referred also to the person who played a part on the stage, to an actor, one who pretends to be what he is not. Here the person judging another from back of the mask of his self-righteousness, plays the part of an actor, giving out that he is something which he is not. Therefore, our Lord says, “Stop constantly judging, in order that ye be not judged.”

39. Superabundant Grace In Romans 5:20 the Word tells us, “But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” The word “grace” is one of the most precious words in Scripture. Archbishop Trench says of this word in the Greek language, “It is hardly too much to say that the Greek mind has in no word uttered itself and all that was in its heart more distinctly than in this.” The Greeks were lovers of beauty, in nature, in their architecture, their statuary, their poetry, their drama. Anything which called out of the heart wonder, admiration, pleasure, or joy, was designated by this word. The word came also to signify the doing of a favor graciously, spontaneously, a favor done without expectation of return but arising only out of the generosity of the giver. When we take the Greek word for grace over into the New Testament, we can apply Trench’s words as well: “It is hardly too much to say that God has in no word uttered Himself and all that is in His heart more distinctly than in this.” God’s grace is that matchless, wonderful, marvelous, act on His part when He out of the spontaneous infinite love of His heart steps down from His judgment throne in heaven to take upon Himself the guilt of our sin and the penalty which is justly ours, doing this not for His friends but for His enemies. Here the word “grace” goes infinitely beyond its meaning in pagan Greece. The word “abounded,” is from a different Greek word than that which is translated “abound.” The word means “to exist in abundance.” But the second word which meaning also “to exist in abundance,” carries with it the added idea that that abundance is more than enough. The thing exists in superfluity. A cognate of the word is used in a letter of a.d. 108, “More than enough has been written,” or in one of a.d. 117, “I count it superfluous to write at greater length.” In addition to that, Paul prefixes a preposition to the word which means “to be over and above.” Thus the translation reads, “Where sin existed in abundance, grace was in superabundance, and then some more added on top of that.” God created the sun to give light and heat to the earth upon which we live. But only a very small fraction of that light and heat ever reaches our globe. The rest is lost in space.

We need never be concerned that the light and heat of the sun will fail us. God has made an oversize reservoir to serve us. There is enough grace in God’s heart of love to save and keep saved for time and eternity, every sinner that ever has or ever will live, and then enough left over to save a million more universes full of sinners, were there such, and then some more. There is enough grace available to give every saint constant victory over sin, and then some more. There is enough grace to meet and cope with all the sorrows, heartaches, difficulties, temptations, testings, and trials of human existence, and more added to that. God’s salvation is an oversize salvation. It is shock proof, strain proof, unbreakable, all sufficient. It is equal to every emergency, for it flows from the heart of an infinite God freely bestowed and righteously given through the all-sufficient sacrifice of our Lord on the Cross. Salvation is all of grace. Trust God’s grace. It is superabounding grace.

40. Jesus of Nazareth, Who Is He? Paul in Colossians 1:15 speaks of Him as “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature.” We will study the words “image” and “firstborn.” The word “image” has the obvious idea of likeness. But the Greek word does not refer to an accidental likeness, as one egg is like another. It implies an original of which the image is a copy. But the image in this case is not the result of direct imitation as the head of a king on a coin, but is derived, like the features of the parent in the child. In John 3:16 our Lord is the only begotten Son of God. John 1:18 refers to Him as the only begotten God, the word “God” appearing in the best manuscripts. It is a tremendous thought. The word “only begotten” does not only mean that our Lord was the only Son of God, but that He as God the Son is alone of His kind, unique, begotten of God through eternal generation. He is the image of God in the sense that He is a derived representation of God the Father, co-existent eternally with Him, possessing the same essence, Deity Himself. Being the representative of God, He is also therefore the manifestation of God. He said to Philip, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (John 14:9). Our Lord is also the firstborn of every creature. The word “firstborn” is from a Greek word that had a certain technical use in the first century. It is difficult to bring out all its content of meaning in a translation. It implied priority to all creation. Our Lord was not the first created thing to be brought into existence. The word declares the absolute preexistence of the Son. He existed before any created thing was brought into existence. Therefore He is not created, and being uncreated, He is eternal. Paul in the next verse says, “For by him were all things created.” Instead of being the first in order of created things, He is their Creator. That is what our Lord has reference to in Revelation 3:14 when He speaks of Himself as “the beginning of the creation of God.” The word “beginning” in the Greek has two meanings, “the first in a series,” and “the originator” of something. Our Lord was the originator of the created universe in that He was its Creator. Thus the Greek word translated “firstborn” implies here “priority to all creation.” It speaks also of sovereignty over all creation. The first born is the natural ruler, the acknowledged head. He is also ruler by right of the fact that He is the Creator. The words “every creature” are more properly translated “all creation.” Jesus of Nazareth, the Galilean peasant, the carpenter, the friend of publicans and sinners, is the image of God, a derived copy by eternal generation of God the Father, the Creator of the universe and its sovereign Lord.

He is also the One who made peace through the blood of His Cross. That is, through His substitutionary death He satisfied completely all the claims which the law of God had against us. We as lost sinners violated that law. The justice of God demanded that the penalty, death, be paid. But God in His love desired to save those who would come to Him in faith to appropriate salvation. So He in the Person of His Son, Jesus of Nazareth, stepped down from His judgment throne to take upon Himself at Calvary your sin and mine, your penalty and mine. God’s law being satisfied, He is now free to righteously bestow mercy. If you have never definitely placed your trust in the Lord Jesus as your personal Saviour, will you not just now do so? Settle the matter of your eternal salvation once for all. Do not put it off. Delay is dangerous. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house” (Acts 16:31).

41. The Exegesis of God In John 1:18 we read in a literal translation and paraphrase, “God in his invisible essence no one has ever yet seen. The only begotten God who is constantly in the bosom of the Father, that one has fully explained him.” The words “only begotten God” are in the best manuscripts. What a tremendous thought. To think that the eternal God and Saviour Jesus Christ, the One who has no beginning, the Ancient of Days, yet was begotten. He proceeds by eternal generation from the Father as the Son, and because eternal, that birth never took place, it always was. Our Lord never started to be God’s only begotten Son. He always was His Son. He possesses the same essence as God the Father, and therefore He can in His incarnation fully explain God. The word “declared” in our English version is from a Greek word which means “to lead out.” God the Son in His incarnation led the Father out from behind the curtain of His invisibility into full view. The Greek word here comes into the English language in the word “exegesis.” Exegesis is the method of Bible study in which we fully explain every detail of the text. Jesus Christ has in His incarnation, fully explained in finite terms so far as finite minds can grasp, all the details of the Person of God the Father. He said, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” Thus Jesus Christ is the exegesis of God.

42. Two Obsolete Words The Word “prevent” in I Thessalonians 4:15 means today “to so order or control circumstances that a certain proposed act will not take place.” But when the Authorized Version was translated in a.d. 1611, it meant what the Greek word from which it is translated means. The word means “to precede, to get the start of.” The teaching is that the saints who are alive when our Lord comes, will not precede the saints who died previous to the Rapture, in receiving their glorified bodies, for the dead in Christ shall take the precedence, being glorified first. The other word is “letteth,” in II Thessalonians 2:7. The word today means “to allow,” but when the Authorized Version was made, it meant what the Greek word from which it is translated means, namely, “to hold down,” thus “to restrain.” It is spoken of the Holy Spirit who through the Church is restraining evil on earth. The words “taken home” are from a word which literally means, “to become.” The Holy Spirit will restrain evil until He “become out of the midst,” that is, go out of the midst of humanity. And when He goes

back to heaven, the saints will go with Him, for He has taken up His permanent abode in them.

43. Praying Without Ceasing The Greek language can say more in one word through the grammatical rules that pertain to it, than the English language can in half a dozen words. In the imperative mode, the Greek tenses are very definite in their distinctions. We have the imperative mode in the exhortations in Matthew 7:7–8 as well as the indicative mode, both used in the present tense, the former always speaking of continuous action, the latter usually, as the context allows it. We have the word “knock” in verse 7. There are two words for “knock” in Greek, one which refers to an unceremonious pounding, the other to a polite knock. The latter is used here. Thus we have the translation: “Keep on asking, and it shall be given you: keep on seeking and ye shall find, keep on reverently knocking, and it shall be opened unto you: for everyone that keeps on asking, keeps on receiving; and he that keeps on seeking, keeps on finding, and to him that keeps on reverently knocking, it shall be opened.” The lessons we learn from this fuller translation are as follows: First we learn that the Scriptures teach that if we do not receive answers to prayers at once, we should persevere in prayer until we do, or until God shows us that the petition is not according to His will. Second, we are taught that in the case of some prayers, it takes God time to answer the petition. It takes God time to grow a beautiful rose. Likewise, it takes Him time to bring the granite-like heart of a sinner to bow in submissive faith to the Lord Jesus. Third, this text teaches that while we keep on praying, God keeps on working in our behalf. Many a meagre Christian experience is due to a meagre prayer life. Fourth, we learn that we have no right to demand of God that He answer our prayer, but we may keep on reverently knocking with the hand of faith. Perhaps this brief study may be the means of solving some of our problems relating to the prayer life.

44. The Road to Heaven In Romans 3:23 we read, “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” The Greek word translated “sin” is a word which among the pagan Greeks meant “to be without a share in,” thus, “to miss the mark, to fail of doing.” The Greek athletes aiming at a target would sometimes miss the mark. Thus, the human race has missed the mark, namely, a life lived to the glory of God. Our Lord in John 14:6 says, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” The word “way” is from a Greek word which has two uses, a literal and a metaphorical. It was used to speak of a road and also to refer to a method or manner of accomplishing something. These uses are closely intertwined and cannot be disassociated. The road leading to a certain place is the method of getting there. Our Lord is the literal road which a sinner must take if he is to reach heaven, and Jesus thus becomes the method by which he is saved. Missing the glory of God is evidence of the fact that the sinner has not gone in the right direction, and that shows that he has not been on the right road. He has missed the road. To reach heaven, the sinner must put himself on the road to heaven. Jesus is that road. But, that Jesus is not that road as a teacher or an example, is clear, for Paul in Heb.

10:19–20 says, “Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us through the veil, that is to say, his flesh.” The writer to the Hebrews is inviting Jews to receive Jesus Christ as Saviour, and is using Old Testament typology in an effort to make himself clear to them. The word “way” is again this road which is the method whereby one reaches heaven. The word “new” is from a word which is used in the Greek translation of the Old Testament to refer to the slaying of sacrificial victims. A Greek preposition prefixed to the word makes the composite word mean “freshly slain.” The road is a freshly slain road. That reminds us of the road in the Holy of Holies which led to the Mercy Seat, sprinkled with the blood of the sacrificial animals. It was the road which led into the presence of God through a substitutionary sacrifice which put away sin. But that road was only typical of another road, this freshly slain road which is actual and living, an effective way to God, namely Jesus Christ who is that road by virtue of His outpoured blood on Calvary’s Cross. Are you on that road? There is no other that leads to heaven.

45. The Other Comforter Our Lord was about to return to heaven. The disciples were troubled because the One who had been their Guardian, Helper, Adviser, Strength-giver, was now leaving them. They thought that Jesus would leave them alone. But He told them that “another Comforter” would come to their aid, even the Holy Spirit (John 14:16, 17). The word “comforter” is from a Greek word which means literally “to call alongside.” It was used in the first century of one called in to support another or give him aid. It was a technical term to describe a lawyer in the Greek law courts, one who was called in to aid the accused. But in this case, we do not have to do with the law, for a Christian is not under the law but under grace. Therefore, the word here merely means “one called in to help another.” The word “comforter” is a good translation if rightly understood. It comes from the Latin and means “one who comes with strength.” To comfort in the sense of consoling one, is just one of the many ministries of the Holy Spirit to the believer. His many-sided work can be summed up in the phrase “one called in to stand by and give aid.” The idea “to stand by” comes from the preposition which is part of this Greek word. The word “another” is significant. There are two words in Greek which mean “another,” one referring to another of a different kind, and the other meaning “another of the same kind.” Jesus uses the latter word. The Holy Spirit is a Helper of the same kind as Jesus. The Holy Spirit is a divine Person just like our Lord and has the same attributes and qualities. Paul says in I Corinthians 6:19, “What? know ye not that your body is an inner sanctuary of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom ye have from God, and that ye are not your own?” There are two words in Greek translated “temple,” one referring to the temple in its entirety, the other speaking of the inner sanctuary. The latter is used here. The physical body of each saint is an inner sanctuary in which the Holy Spirit has come to take up His permanent abode. The truth of the fact that the Holy Spirit resides permanently in the body of the believer is from the word translated “dwelleth” in James 4:5. Thus our great Helper, the One Jesus called to the aid of the believer when He left this earth, has taken up His permanent residence in our hearts to stand by, ready to render instant help at any time.

But He comes to the help of the saint when that saint expresses a desire for that help and trusts Him to render that help. Our Lord says (John 7:37–38), “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink. He that believeth on me, as the Scripture hath said, out from his inmost being shall flow rivers of living water.” John says that the living water refers to the Holy Spirit. Our Lord sent the Holy Spirit to come to our aid. Now He lays down the necessary procedure for the believer to follow in order to avail himself of that aid. The Christian life is not a life of self-effort but of dependence upon the Holy Spirit to put sin out of the life and to produce His fruit in us. He does that as we desire Him to do that and trust Him to do that. As we fulfill these two requirements, we are filled with the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is constantly working in and for the believer who is filled with the Spirit. Only in that way can He give us aid. The Holy Spirit is God’s provision for living a life pleasing to Him.

46. A Parable One of our Lord’s favorite methods of teaching was that of using parables (Matt. 13:3). The English word “parable” is from a Greek word which means “to throw alongside.” Thus, a parable is an illustration thrown alongside of a truth in order to explain it. Someone has said, “A pound of illustration is worth a ton of explanation.” It was a gracious act of mercy to those whose hearts were darkened by sin, to have the truth brought to them so simply.

47. Defending the Faith It is every saint’s obligation (I Peter 3:15). In days of apostasy, every believer needs divine protection against false teaching. The best protection is found in obeying Peter’s words, “Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts.” The word “sanctify” is from a Greek word whose root meaning is “to set apart.” The Greeks sanctified their temples and their gods in the sense that they set them apart for religious purposes, thus declaring them nonsecular, that is, holy. Then they set themselves apart as worshippers of these gods, and as those who attended the temple worship. Thus they acquired the character of the deities worshipped. This use of the word holds good in the Christian life. We who are saved in the precious blood of Jesus Christ are also indwelt by Him. We are to set Him apart in our hearts as the alone object of worship. He is to occupy the throne of our lives. We set ourselves apart to His worship and obedience. Thus we acquire a character like His. This results in a holy separated Christ-like Spirit-filled life. This is the best protection of the saints against becoming entangled in false teaching. As thus living close to the Lord Jesus, we must “be ready always to give an answer to every man that asks us a reason for the hope” that is in us, Peter states. The words “give an answer” are from a Greek word which means literally “to talk one’s self off from a charge preferred against one.” It was a technical word in the Greek law courts used to designate the work of a lawyer, one who presented a verbal defense for his client, proving that the charge preferred against his client was not true. The Bible today is being charged with being a man-made book, full of inaccuracies, a mass of myths and fairy tales. Christians are exhorted to present a verbal defense for the Bible,

proving that that charge is not true. Fulfilled prophecy, the proof that the miracles of the Gospels actually took place, the transformed lives of believers, all constitute proof of that fact. We are to contend for the Faith once for all delivered to the saints.

48. Two Kinds of Power There are two Greek words translated by the word “power,” one in John 1:12, the other in Romans 1:16. “To as many as received him, to them gave he the power to become the sons of God.” The word here is from a Greek word which was used in the first century to refer to a legal right, that is, a person was given the legal right to do or be something. A sinner who appropriates Jesus Christ as Saviour, is given the legal right to become a child of God. He becomes a child of God through regeneration. But his legal right to regeneration is procured by his action of trusting the Lord Jesus as Saviour. In regeneration, God is extending mercy to a sinner who has violated His laws. Violation of laws incurs a penalty. Justice demands that the penalty be paid. Until the penalty is paid, no mercy can be given. But if one bears the penalty himself, no mercy can be shown. Therefore Jesus Christ paid the penalty of the broken law in the sinner’s stead. Justice is satisfied. If the sinner desires mercy from God, he must recognize the payment of the penalty by Jesus Christ before he can be a recipient of that mercy. When he does that, he has the legal right to accept that mercy. Therefore, regeneration must first be preceded by justification, not in point of time, but in the divine economy. Therefore, “To as many as received him, to them gave he the legal right to become children of God.” The word in the Greek translated “sons” is from a word whose root comes from a verb which means “to give birth to.” Thus the word means, “born ones.” The new birth is in view here. The word “receive” here implies an active appropriation, not a passive acceptance. It is used synonymously for the word “believe” which in a context like this one refers to a definite act of the will entrusting one’s self into the keeping of another. The same word for “believe” is used in John 2:24, where Jesus did not commit Himself or entrust Himself to men. The whole translation can read, “To as many as appropriated him, to them gave he the legal right to become born ones of God, to them that are trusting in his name.” The other word for “power” is in Romans 1:16, “I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.” The word in the Greek means “power,” in the sense of that which overcomes resistance. Our English word “dynamite,” comes from this Greek word. The gospel is God’s spiritual dynamite which breaks the granite-like heart of the sinner into rock dust, pulverizing it so that it becomes rich soil in which the seed of the Word finds root and grows. The gospel is the most powerful thing in all the world. When it is unloosed in the Spirit-empowering preaching of the Word, souls are saved. The word “gospel” is from a Greek word which means “good news.” The good news is that God has wrought out a salvation through the blood of the Cross for needy sinners who may by pure faith without the addition of good works, appropriate that salvation as a free unmerited gift. Anything else than that is not gospel, for it is not good news.

49. Since or When Ye Believed? The Translation in Acts 19:2, “Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed,”

has been a basis for the unscriptural teaching to the effect that the Holy Spirit does not come to indwell the believer at the moment he believes, but that that believer must come to some certain degree of holiness in his life as a Christian before the Spirit is given. Greek authorities agree on the translation, “Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye believed?” Or it could be rendered, “Did ye receive the Holy Spirit, having believed?” The tense of the participle and verb point to a simultaneous act. That is, the reception of the Holy Spirit occurs at the same instant as the act of believing in the Lord Jesus as Saviour. This is what the Greek grammar here teaches. Indeed, Paul’s words, “Unto what then were ye baptized?” indicate that the reception of the Spirit is connected with the act of believing, not with anything which might take place after that act. It developed that these individuals were disciples of John the Baptist, who announced a coming Messiah, rather than converts of Paul, who preached a crucified risen Saviour who sent the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Furthermore, when the converts of John extended their faith to take in a Saviour who had already died for them, they received the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the coming of the Spirit to indwell a believer is always in this age in response to that person’s faith in the Lord Jesus as Saviour. When Peter was preaching to the Gentiles in the house of Cornelius, the Spirit came upon the hearers while Peter was preaching. Paul says (Rom. 8:9), “If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” That is, the person in whom the Spirit does not dwell, is not a Christian. Again, in I Corinthians 6:19, he says, “What? know ye not that your body is an inner sanctuary of the Holy Ghost who is in you?” This teaching that the Holy Spirit does not indwell a believer until he comes to a certain state of holiness, is most harmful. It deprives that Christian of the help of the Holy Spirit in his life. It is a most ridiculous teaching, for how can a believer come to that state of holy living except through the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit?

50. The Spirit’s Ministry in Prayer The Infirmities in Romans 8:26–27 have to do with certain weaknesses in our prayer life. The Holy Spirit, Paul says, helps them. The Greek word translated “helpeth,” literally means “to lend a hand together with, and at the same time with one.” Martha used the same word when appealing to our Lord to bid Mary help her with the preparation of the meal (Luke 10:40). The Holy Spirit lends a hand together with us as we are praying. It is not that He helps us bear our weaknesses, but He helps our weaknesses. The weaknesses spoken of here are two, what we should pray for, the matter of prayer, and how we should pray, the form and manner of our prayer. The word “what” has an article before it in the Greek. Literally, we do not know “the what” to pray for. That is, we do not know the particular definite thing to pray for. As to the general subjects for prayer, the salvation of the lost, the sanctification of the saints, our daily needs, these we know of. But to be specific in our praying involves a knowledge of God’s will in particular instances, and of that we are naturally ignorant. It is right here that the Spirit comes to our aid. The word “pray” is from a Greek word made up of a word which means “to pray,” with a prefixed preposition which means literally “toward.” The composite word refers to prayer directed to God, a conscious definite commitment to Him of our needs, our desires, our petitions. The Holy Spirit thus energizes the saint along the line of prayer for

particular things which are according to the will of God, prayer directed consciously to Him. The word translated “know,” is not the Greek word which means “knowledge gained by experience,” but “knowledge that is intuitive, natural to one’s being and constitution.” We do not have intuitive knowledge of the particular thing to pray for. The word “ought” is the same word used in John 3:7 in the word “must.” Literally it means, “it is necessary in the nature of the case.” The necessity in the nature of the case is found in the fact that God brings His plans to fruition through the prayers of the saints, and in order for us to pray according to the will of God, we must be so yielded to the control of the Spirit that He can bring into our prayer ministry, the things which God is planning to accomplish. It is clear, therefore, that in order to pray aright, we must be filled with the Spirit. The Spirit Himself, not “itself,” should be the translation here. The word “spirit” in the Greek language is in the neuter gender, and consequently its pronoun is neuter. But the Holy Spirit is a Person, and should not be referred to as “it.” The translation should be according to sense here, not grammar. He makes intercession. This word comes from a Greek word which is most picturesque. It is used of one who happens upon one who is in trouble and pleads in that one’s behalf. As Alford says, “The Holy Spirit of God dwelling in us, knowing our wants better than we, Himself pleads in our prayers, raising us to higher and holier desires than we can express in words, which can only find utterance in sighings and aspirations.” God the Father who searches the hearts of His saints for their prayers, uttered and unexpressed, interprets those inarticulate sighings of the Spirit in us by reason of the fact that the Spirit pleads for us and in us and through us according to the will of God. The lesson for us here is that if we expect to have an intelligent, powerful, rich prayer life, we must live Spirit controlled lives.

51. God’s Emancipation Proclamation A Literal translation of Romans 6:12–14 is as follows: “Therefore, stop letting sin rule constantly as king in your bodies which are subject to death, resulting in your habitual obedience to its cravings. Neither keep on habitually putting your members at the service of sin as weapons of unrighteousness. But put yourselves once for all at the service of God, as those who are living ones out from among the dead, and put your members once for all at the service of God as weapons of righteousness, for sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.” The word studies are as follows: In verse twelve, the Greek construction in the exhortation forbids the continuance of a habit already going on. Those believers before salvation had been constantly allowing sin to reign over their bodies. The word “reign” is from a word which refers to a king reigning. The prepositional phrase could show either purpose or result. This preposition often means the latter, and we have so translated it. The word “lust” has changed its meaning since the Authorized Version was made. It refers today to an immoral desire. The Greek word refers simply to a desire, and has a preposition prefixed which intensifies the meaning, thus, a craving. The context rules as to whether it is an evil or a good desire. In verse thirteen, the first exhortation is in the same construction as in verse twelve, forbidding the continuance of an action already going on. The word “yield” is from a word which means “to put at the service of,” as a volunteer placing himself at the service of this

government or an individual at the service of a master. The word “instruments” is from a Greek word which means, “tools or instruments, a ship’s tackle, implements of war.” It is used in John 18:3 in the last sense. Our members, namely, our eyes, hands, feet, mind, are weapons which either Satan or God may use. This at once brings to mind the conception of two armies, Satan’s and God’s. When a saint puts his members at the service of Satan, he fights against God and His army, which is a serious thing. The second exhortation in verse thirteen is in a construction which exhorts to a once-for-all act. We are to put ourselves and our members at the service of God once for all. Having done that we must keep hands off. We are bought with a price, and we are not our own. We must daily, yes, hourly, count ourselves as having thus put ourselves into the hands of God for His service. In verse fourteen we have the promise, that having done this, sin shall no longer have lordship over us. This is God’s emancipation proclamation. The definite article before the word “law,” does not appear in the Greek. The absence of the article gives the idea that Christians are not under the law as a method of divine dealing. That is, we are not unsaved persons upon whom the law makes demands that no unsaved person can ever meet, for the law commands to obedience but gives neither the desire nor the power to obey. But we are under grace as a method of divine dealing, for grace sweetly exhorts to a life of obedience and provides both the desire and the power to obey (Phil. 2:12–13).

52. Divine Wood Cutters Paul is in prison in Rome, writing to his beloved Philippians. He is assuring them that the circumstances in which he finds himself, are contributing to, rather than hindering, the advance of the gospel. He says in Philippians 1:12 that the things that have happened to him have fallen out rather to the furtherance of the gospel. The word “furtherance” is from a Greek word which is thought to have been used in the first century to refer to a company of wood cutters preceding the progress of an army, cutting a road through the forest so that it might advance. Paul says that his circumstances are divine wood cutters, cutting a way through the opposition so that the gospel might be advanced. What were these circumstances? His liberty was gone. He was chained to a Roman soldier night and day. God had built a fence around the apostle. He had put limitations about him. He had placed handicaps upon him. But Paul says that they are God’s wood cutters making a road for the advancement of the gospel. The gospel was now being proclaimed from the pulpit of the Roman empire. The Praetorium guard of 10,000 picked Roman soldiers was hearing it from the soldiers chained to Paul. The jealous brethren in Rome were announcing Christ more energetically, out of envy of course, but yet announcing Him. The friendly brethren out of love for Paul were more zealous in their preaching. And so it is in every Christian’s life. The things that hedge us in, the things that handicap us, the tests that we go through and the temptations that assail us, are all divinely appointed wood cutters used by God to hew out a path for our preaching of the gospel. It may be that our fondest hopes are not realized. We are in difficult circumstances. Illness may be our lot. Yet if we are in the center of God’s will, all these are contributing to the progress of the gospel. They draw us closer to the Lord so that the testimony of our lives will count more for God, and thus we become more efficient in proclaiming the gospel. Thank God for the handicaps and the testings. They are blessings in disguise. When we have limitations imposed upon us we do our best work for the Lord, for then we are most

dependent upon Him. Paul said, “Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me” (II Cor. 12:9). Paul knew then, for he had plenty of them.

53. The Devil and His Demons There are two different Greek words translated by the one English word “devil” in the Authorized Version which fact leads to some confusion in our thinking. One word is “diabolos (diabolo"),” which in its literal meaning refers to one who falsely accuses another or slanders him. The word comes from another word which literally means “to throw through.” Thus it means “to riddle one with accusations.” This title is coupled with the word “Satan” in Revelation 20:2, the latter being a transliteration of a Hebrew word which means “adversary.” These two names are used to refer to the angel Lucifer who as regent of God fell from his high position through sin and today is god of this world. The other word is “daimonion, (daimonion,)” quite a different word. It was used in pagan Greek writings to refer to an inferior race of divine beings, lower than the Greek gods, but more powerful than men. The Bible uses the term to refer to the evil spirits who are servants of the Devil. They are the principalities and powers of Ephesians 6:12, the kingdoms of the Devil located in the atmosphere surrounding this earth. There is one Devil and many demons. We must be careful to distinguish between them. The rule for the English reader to follow as he seeks to correctly interpret the passages in which these two Greek words are found, is as follows: First, where the word is found in the plural, as “devils,” always translate by the word “demons,” for the word “daimonion (daimonion)” is in the Greek. Second, where you have the word “devil” in a passage that speaks of a person possessed with a devil, as for instance Matthew 9:32, or a person having a devil as in Luke 7:33, always translate by the word “demon.” Third, where the king of the demons is in view, that awful personality known as Satan, as in Luke 4:2; I Peter 5:8; Revelation 20:2, translate by the word “Devil.” In John 6:70 Judas is called a devil by our Lord, the word here being “diabolos (diabolo").”

54. Fellowship With Jesus There are two Greek words translated “wash” that appear in John 13:5–10. The one which means “to wash part of the body” appears in verses five, six, nine, and in verse ten the second time the word is used. The other word, meaning “to perform a complete ablution,” is used in verse ten in the word “washed.” These two words in their usage here point to two truths of the standing of a believer in Christ, and his experience. The first remains the same for time and eternity. The latter changes from time to time during this life. Someone has said, “Union with Jesus is so strong, that nothing can break it. Communion with Jesus is so fragile that the slightest sin can break it.” To understand the conversation between our Lord and Peter, and the spiritual lesson in it, we must understand something of the habits of the citizen of that time. Rome established public baths in the cities of the empire. A Roman would bathe completely at the public bath, and upon reaching his home needed to wash his feet, for although cleansed at the time, they contracted defilement by reason of the insufficient covering which his sandals afforded. Peter refuses to allow the Lord to wash his feet, but upon being told that

if he does not permit the Lord to do that for him, he will have no fellowship with Jesus, he asks that the Lord wash his hands and his head. Our Lord answers, “He that is bathed all over stays bathed and needs not except to wash his feet, but is clean every whit.” The spiritual lesson we have from this is as follows. Every believer has been cleansed completely from his sins in the precious blood of Jesus once and for all at Calvary. This is his standing before God, guiltless, sinless, righteous. That position is permanent, as changeless as our unchanging Lord. If sin comes into the life, it does not affect that standing, for that standing is Jesus Christ who is accepted by God and we in Him. Thus, if a believer sins, he does not need to go back to Calvary to be saved all over again, any more than the Roman needed to go back to the public baths for a complete bath just because his feet became dusty on the way home. Feet stand for a person’s walk, his experience. As we are on our way home to heaven, sin sometimes enters our lives. No saint wants to sin. It is his nature to hate sin. But when sin does enter, our walk is defiled and needs to be cleansed. Our Lord said to Peter, “If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.” That is, if we are not cleansed from sin in our experience, we have no fellowship with our Lord. Known sin in the life that is held to and cherished, breaks our fellowship with Him. The only way to regain that blessed privilege of fellowship is to confess our sins (I John 1:9), and God will cleanse us and restore to us that communion with our Lord which we enjoyed before. The word “confess” is from two Greek words joined together to make one word in the original. One means “to speak,” the other “the same.” The word means “to speak the same thing.” Thus, if we speak the same thing about our sin to God that He does to us, that is confession. That includes sorrow for sin because it is evil, hatred of the sin, and the putting away of the same with the determination never to do that thing again. Our experience is then cleansed from sin’s defilement and we are restored to fellowship with our Lord.

55. About Trances John in Revelation 1:10 states that he was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day. The word translated “was” is not from the simple verb of being in the Greek, but from a word which means “to become.” The experience John had that Lord’s Day was not the usual moment by moment experience he enjoyed, namely, that of being filled with the Holy Spirit. He literally “became in the Spirit.” That is, he entered into a new kind of experience relative to the Spirit’s control over him. Peter in Acts 10:10 had the same kind of experience. The translators called it a trance. The word “trance” here is from a Greek word which literally means “to stand out of,” and is brought over into our language in the word “ecstasy.” The experience which both of these apostles went through was that of being so absolutely controlled by the Holy Spirit, that their physical senses of sight, hearing, feeling, were not registered so far as any recognized impressions were concerned. It was as if they were temporarily outside of their bodies. The control of the Holy Spirit over their faculties was such that He could give them the visions they had, Peter, the vision of the sheet let down from heaven, John, the prophetic visions of the Revelation. A word of warning is in order here. The revelation to the saints closed with the last book in the Bible. All that God has for us is included in the books from Genesis to the Revelation. No further revelations are being made. The Holy Spirit now illuminates the sacred page of Scripture for our understanding.

Since such visions were for that time only, it follows that a trance such as these men had is a thing of the past also. Satan in these last days is counterfeiting these Holy Spirit given trances with disastrous results to those who lend themselves unwittingly to his control. Those who are not properly taught regarding their relationship to the third Person of the Triune God, fall a prey to Satan. The safeguard against this is found in the words of Sir Robert Anderson, “In proportion therefore as mind and heart are fixed on Christ, we may count on the Spirit’s presence and power; but if we make the Holy Ghost Himself the object of our aspirations and worship, some false spirit may counterfeit the true and take us for a prey.”

56. Unfeigned Love In Romans 12:9 we have the exhortation, “Let love be without dissimulation.” The word “love” is from the same Greek word for “love” that we have in John 3:16; Romans 5:5; and I Corinthians 13. It is in its essence a self-sacrificial love, a love that puts self aside in an effort to help and bless others, yes, a love that goes to the point of suffering if that is necessary in order to bless others. And for the highest kind of blessing, suffering is necessary, for “we must bleed if we would bless.” This is the love of God, not love for God, but the love which God is and which He provides through the operation of the Holy Spirit as the believer depends upon His ministry, a love that will flow like rivers of water out from the Christian who is filled with the Spirit, refreshing the dry parched lives around him and making a desert-heart blossom like a rose. This is the love which God says should be without dissimulation. The word “dissimulation” is from a Greek word which is made up of three parts, a verb which means “to judge,” a preposition which means “under,” and the Greek letter Alpha which when prefixed to a word gives it a meaning directly opposite to that which it had before. The preposition and verb together mean literally, “to judge under,” and had reference to one who gave off his judgment from under a mask or a cloak, thus appearing to be what he was not. This word comes over into our language in the word “hypocrite,” one who plays the part of a character which he is not, and does it to deceive. The word means ”hypocrisy.” The Alpha prefixed gives us the translation “without hypocrisy.” “Let love be without hypocrisy.” That is, do not try to counterfeit this love by seeming to love a Christian brother and yet not be willing to put that love into action. The same word is used in II Corinthians 6:6 and I Peter 1:22, where it is translated “unfeigned.” The world wears a mask. The love which it shows on the face is only external. That is feigned love. Ours should be unfeigned. If a saint does not have a love which is unfeigned, the trouble is with his adjustment to the Holy Spirit who is the One to provide that saint with that love. The Spirit-filled saint does not have to play the hypocrite in the matter of love, for love shines right out of his eyes. It is on his face, in his actions.

57. Base Things Paul Tells us in I Corinthians 1:28 that God has chosen the base things of the world to bring to naught the things that are. That is, the great majority of sinners He saves are base. Of course, all sinners are totally depraved, yet some are base and others are not base. In verse twenty-six Paul tells us that God does not call many noble unto salvation. The word

“noble” here does not refer to nobility of character, but to nobility of birth. The word “base” is the same word in the Greek that is used for “nobility” except that instead of it being compounded of the words “well” and “born” it is made up of the word “born” and the letter Alpha, which together mean here, “not well born.” Indeed, Shakespearean English uses the expression “base born,” when it refers to one who is not of the titled nobility. The idea therefore is that the great majority of those who are saved come from that section of the human race called “the common people.” Abraham Lincoln said, “God must have loved the common people. He made so many of them.” And yet, the great heart of God pulsates with infinite love for the nobility also. It is still true that “whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely” (Rev. 22:17).

58. The Names, Christ and Jesus Acts 9:20 reads, “And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues that he is the Son of God.” Paul’s synagogue audiences were amazed at Paul’s theology. But surely, a Jewish audience would find nothing surprising in the fact that Christ is the Son of God, for that was clearly taught in the Old Testament and believed by an orthodox Jew. What is more, they wanted to kill Paul, we read, for having made that statement. The word “Christ” is a transliteration of a Greek word which means “anointed.” By transliteration we mean the act of bringing a word from one language into another in its spelling, whereas by translation we refer to the meaning of the word being taken over into the second language. The Greek word “anointed,” is a translation from a Hebrew word which means “the Anointed” and which latter is brought over into English by transliteration in the word “Messiah.” The Messiah of Israel is the Anointed of God. Thus when the name Christ is found in connection with Israel, either in the Old or New Testament, it refers to Israel’s Messiah. Now, if Paul had preached that in the synagogue in Damascus, the Jews would have welcomed him with open arms. The solution to our problem is in the fact that the best Greek texts have the word “Jesus” not “Christ.” To announce Jesus of Nazareth, the One whom the highest court of Israel condemned as a blasphemer, as the Son of God, therefore Messiah, was quite another thing. No wonder that the hatred and antagonism of the Jews was aroused, and that they were amazed at the fact that one who had so recently persecuted those who were preaching the same message which he was presenting, should have turned so suddenly. Paul was announcing Jesus of Nazareth as Deity. The Jews had tried to stone our Lord for claiming to be the unique Son of God. “Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God” (John 5:18). The key to the interpretation of this passage is in the Greek word translated “his.” Had our Lord used the ordinary pronoun showing possession, the Jews would have taken no exception to His words. But He used a word which in the Greek speaks of uniqueness. Our Lord was the Son of God in a way different from that of any other person. A believer is a son of God like all other believers. But our Lord’s sonship was unique. It was not only different from that of others, but it was the only one of its kind. The Jews at once recognized it as a claim to joint participation in the divine essence of the Father. Thus, Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of Israel. The name Jesus is also a transliteration from the Hebrew. The angel said to Mary (Matt. 1:21), “Thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.”

Matthew reports the angel’s words in Greek. Being a Jew, Matthew of course knew Hebrew and transliterated the Hebrew word which means “Saviour,” into Greek, from which language we brought the name over into English in the name Jesus. The Hebrew word is in English “Yeshua.” Thus the name “Jesus” speaks of our Lord as the Saviour, the One who shed His precious blood on Calvary’s Cross for lost sinners, while the name “Christ” speaks of Him in a context of Israel, as Israel’s Messiah. Where the two names appear together they refer to Him as the Anointed of God, the Saviour. The name “Lord,” refers to Him in His relation to the Church, its Head.

59. A Castaway Paul in a figurative sense beats his body black and blue, and brings it into bondage to himself, lest after having preached to others, he himself should be a castaway (1 Cor. 9:27). Some have interpreted this as meaning that Paul feared that if he did not properly fulfill his apostolic office, he would be cast away by God into an eternity of suffering in the Lake of Fire. But there are three things that forbid this meaning. First, the context is not one of salvation, but of service and rewards. Salvation is a free gift with no strings tied to it. It was made possible by the infinite price that was paid at the Cross. Rewards are earned by service. Second, the words of Paul’s Saviour are pertinent here, “Him that cometh unto me, I will in no wise cast out” (John 6:37). The word “castaway” in our Corinthian passage is an entirely different word from the two Greek words translated “cast out,” the latter being literally “cast out into the outside.” The words “in no wise” are from a double negative in the Greek which does not make a positive assertion but means a most emphatic “NOT.” Third, the word “castaway” is from a word compounded of two parts of speech, a word meaning “to put one’s approval upon after one has tested something,” and the Greek letter Alpha, which when prefixed to a word makes the word mean the opposite to that which it originally meant. The word means “disapproval after having failed to meet the requirements.” Paul was speaking of his apostolic service. He was careful lest that should not meet the requirements of His Lord and that therefore he be disapproved, not as a Christian, for salvation is not in view here, but as an apostle, for his service was the thing that was being weighed in God’s balances. Before Paul could be disapproved as to his standing in Christ, namely, as to his salvation, his Lord would have to be disapproved. But He is God Himself, in His holy character unchangeable. Paul was running a race. To win a crown, his service must be acceptable. Greek runners would compete for a prize, a crown of oak leaves. If they broke training, they would be disqualified, forbidden to race. The Greek word translated “castaway” is this word “disqualified,” disapproved after having failed to meet the requirements. Paul served his Lord with an intense earnestness lest he be disqualified, forbidden to exercise his ministry. Let us who are serving the Lord do our very best to please Him lest we be set aside and someone else put in our place.

60. The Grace of Giving Paul Says in Gal. 6:6, “Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.” The word “communicate” is from a Greek word which means

“to share with another.” In this context it means to share with another in his necessities by making those necessities one’s own. Those who are instructed in the Word, have the responsibility of making the teacher’s needs his own. That is, in the case of a God-called servant of the Lord who devotes his full time to the Lord’s work, those who regularly are recipients of his ministry are to make it their business to see that he is properly taken care of financially, so that he might be able to give of his best to the Lord’s work. The same Greek word is used in Philippians 4:15 where Paul says that only the Philippian church recognized their obligation to make Paul’s necessities their own. In Philippians 1:3–6 Paul says, “I thank my God … for your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now.” The word “fellowship” is from the same Greek word that he used in the Galatian and Philippian passages, except that the preposition is not prefixed. Here the word has a slightly different shade of meaning, namely, “joint participation.” But this joint participation does not refer to their fellowship with Paul over the Word or their companionship with him. The word “in” is in the Greek a preposition of motion. Paul thanks God for their joint participation in the progress of the gospel. The occasion for the writing of this book was a gift which the Philippians sent to Paul while he was in prison in Rome (4:10–12). It is clear that this consisted of financial support. He thanks them in so many words as he closes his letter. But in 1:3–6 he with Pauline delicacy indicates his gratitude without mentioning the specific gift. He does not want to appear as if in thanking them he is looking for another gift. So he thanks God for their joint participation in the progress of the gospel from the first day when Lydia, the purple dye seller, opened her home as a meeting place where Paul could preach the Word until that present moment. In the Greek the definite article appears before the adverb “now.” Paul says, “From the first day until the now.” That article is a delicate finger pointing to that present moment as characterized by the receipt of the gift. Then Paul adds that he is confident that God who has begun in them this good work of giving liberally to the support of the work of the gospel, will continue to impart grace to continue that same liberality until the Philippian saints stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ. Paul speaks of the liberality of the Macedonian churches as the grace of giving (II Cor. 8:1–7). It is a spiritual grace produced in the saint by the Holy Spirit. Thus, the grace of giving is one of the necessary ingredients of Christian character, if that character is to be a well rounded complete one. And then Paul has this promise from God for the liberal giver, “My God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.” I am persuaded that this promise is for the one who is generous with God. God cannot afford to lavish his gifts upon the stingy Christian, for he would only squander them upon his own selfish desires. And then Paul in our Galatian passage tells the saint that if he is liberal with God, he will reap spiritual blessings, but if he uses his money for his own selfish purposes, that money and what it will buy, will breed corruption in his life.

61. The Intense Life Paul Writes to Timothy (II Tim. 2:15), “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” The word “study” has changed its meaning somewhat in the 300 years since the Authorized Version was made. Today the word refers to the mental effort put forth in an attempt to add to one’s store of knowledge and one’s ability to use that knowledge in an effective way. When we use the word “study,” we think of school, the class room, the teacher, and

books. But the word is not so used here. The following are some examples of its usage in the early centuries which should determine its translation today. “I wish to know that you are hurrying on the making of it.” “Make haste therefore and put our little slave Artemidorus under pledge.” “In accordance with the king’s desire.” “That he may … do his best until it is effected.” “Take care that Onnophris buys me what Irene’s mother told him.” The ideas of making haste, being eager, and giving diligence, with the added idea of effort put forth, are in the Greek usage of the word. The context of this exhortation includes both Christian character and service. Timothy is exhorted to study to show himself approved to God in both respects. The exhortation is addressed to every Christian. The Christian life is a matter of reckoning ourselves dead to sin and alive to God, of presenting our members as instruments of warfare to God. It is a life of dependence upon God, of allowing God the Holy Spirit to produce in and through us a Christlike life. The Christian life is a rest in God, a trust in Him to impart both the desire and the power to do His will (Phil. 2:13). But there is another side to the living of a Christian life. It is not merely a rest in God, it is a constant battle on the part of the believer. Paul says, “Fight the good fight of faith” (I Tim. 6:12). There must be an eager, active, intense determination to live a life pleasing to God. We must not only yield to the Holy Spirit’s fullness, trusting Him to produce in us that love that God is, but we must definitely will to be loving and try to be loving. Intensity in the living of a Christian life is the total concept of this word translated “study.” The Greek word implies haste, desire, the doing of one’s best, the act of carefully attending to a duty. The living of a Christian life is an urgent matter. One must with intensity of desire will to live the highest type of Christian life. The Christian must do his best to live a life pleasing to his Lord. One must attend carefully to that matter. Thus, the word “study” has in it all of these meanings.

62. A Perfect Salvation The Perfect tense in Greek is very expressive. It speaks of an action that took place in the past, which was completed in past time, and the existence of its finished results. For instance: “I have closed the door,” speaks of a past completed action. But the implication is that as a result the door is still closed. Thus, the entire meaning is, “I have closed the door and it is closed at present.” In John 19:30 our Lord cries from the Cross, “It is finished,” referring to His work of procuring for lost sinners a salvation from sin through the blood of His Cross. The entire sense is, “It was finished and as a result it is forever done.” “It stands finished” would be a good translation. The priests in the tabernacle always stood when ministering in the sacrifices. But our great High Priest is seated. His work is finished. He need never arise and offer another sacrifice. In Matthew 4:4, our Lord answers Satan, “It is written.” The perfect tense is used. He quoted from Deuteronomy. The words had been written by Moses 1500 years before, but are still on record. David said, “Forever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.” A good translation reads, “It stands written.” It is the eternal word of God. In Ephesians 2:8 we have, “For by the grace are ye saved.” The definite article appears in the Greek. God’s salvation does not merely issue from a gracious attitude on His part. It proceeds from that particular gracious act of God the Son in dying upon the Cross to

pay man’s penalty incurred by him through sin. It is the particular grace that issues from Calvary that saves sinners. The words, “ye are saved,” are in the perfect tense in Greek. That is, a Christian was given a perfect salvation in past time when he believed, and as a result of that past completed work of Jesus Christ on the Cross and his past acceptance of the same, he at present is a saved person. His present possession of salvation is based upon one thing only, what Jesus did on the Cross for him and his past acceptance of that work. That means that the works of an individual, past or present, do not enter into his acceptance or retention of salvation. Salvation is the alone work of Christ. The believer is the recipient. That means that the believer is saved and saved forever, for as he reads this text, the present results of the perfect tense are always present with the reader. And to strengthen the assertion, Paul adds another word in the present tense to show not only the existence but the persistence of the results. The full translation is, “By the grace ye were saved and as a result are in a saved state at the present time.”

BYPATHS IN THE

GREEK NEW TESTAMENT To my mother, who, like Hannah of old, gave her son to the Lord “all the days of his life.”

Foreword The author of this book has already introduced himself to the reading public through his helpful volume, Golden Nuggets from the Greek New Testament for the English Reader. He is well known to thousands of friends of the Moody Bible Institute, and is held in admiration and affection by hundreds of present and former students. The Greek New Testament is to Mr. Wuest a real mine, with gold and diamonds to be found by the diligent miner. His work in this book arouses the desire to do some mining for one’s self, and will induce many ministers to make larger use of their Greek. At the same time the book gives stirring information for readers who may know nothing of Greek. Preachers, Sunday School teachers, and other Christian workers will find the book packed with valuable material they can use in preaching and teaching. And the ordinary reader will find his heart warmed and his faith strengthened through the perusal of these pages. May God bless this good book and give it a wide ministry.

Will H. Houghton President, Moody Bible Institute

Preface A. T. Robertson in his book, The Minister and His Greek New Testament, says, “The Greek New Testament has a message for each mind. Some of the truth in it has never yet been seen by anyone else. It is waiting like a virgin forest to be explored.” We have called this small volume which follows Golden Nuggets from the Greek New Testament for the English Reader: Bypaths in the Greek New Testament for the English reader. It is the author’s constant delight to explore this virgin forest, and to come upon precious truths that do not appear in the English translation, but which are hidden away in secluded nooks in the Greek text. It is a fresh delight to lead the English reader along the same paths, pointing out those precious truths to which only a Greek student has access. The plan of this book has been to treat only those things which the English reader cannot find for himself. While the book can be read as a series of separate articles, it should also be useful as a reference work. When the English reader is studying a portion of the New Testament, he can consult the “Index to Scripture References,” and if the passage is commented upon, obtain help from the Greek text presented in a simple nontechnical way. Or, should one be looking for a germ-thought which will lead out into a fresh bit of truth, he will find the word studies helpful. The English words treated are from the Authorized Version. The author’s justification in sometimes offering a fuller or a slightly different translation is found in the fact that no single translation is able to bring out all the delicate shades of meaning, all the expressions peculiar to the Greek language, and for the reason that the standard translations are held down to a minimum of words which would best express the thought of the Greek, and rightly so. Then there are a limited number of English words that have changed their meaning in the last three hundred years since the Authorized Version was made. Since the majority of Bible students still use this version, it is necessary to take care of these words. But we must not allow these facts to disturb our confidence in and dependence upon our reliable translations. We are concerned here with minor details, not with the great outstanding doctrines and facts in God’s Word. Most men have been saved and have grown in grace through faith in the Word in its translated form. The Holy Spirit owns and quickens the translated Word, and has always done so. Therefore, as we seek to bring out from the Greek text aspects of truth that the translations do not handle, let us thank God for these translations which He has given us, and receive with gratefulness any added light which the labors of Bible students have been able to gather from the Greek text. K. S. W. The Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

I. The Romance of the Inscriptions In Recent years there has been unearthed in the Bible lands a great deal of rich material which throws a flood of light upon certain details of first-century life and which gives one

a new and clearer insight into certain portions of the New Testament. This material is in the form of inscriptions dating from Alexander the Great, 332 b.c., to Constantine the Great, a.d. 313, and has been found on the sites of ancient civilizations all over the Graeco-Roman world, from the Rhine to the upper reaches of the Nile, and from the Euphrates to Britain. It consists of non-literary inscriptions from governmental or religious sources, or from the under-privileged classes of society. They are written on various materials, stone, metal, wax tablets, or are in the form of scribblings found on walls, and inscriptions on bronze, lead, or gold tablets. A great number are found written on papyrus, the ancient form of paper. This was manufactured from the inner pith of the papyrus plant which was cut into thin strips, laid side by side perpendicularly, in length and number sufficient to form a sheet. Upon these another layer was laid horizontally. The two layers were glued together with adhesive, pressed, sun-dried, and then made smooth by polishing. A great quantity of these papyri was found in Egypt where the dry climate has preserved them for thousands of years. The oldest papyrus sheet dates from about 2600 b.c. Many of these have been dug up from the rubbish heaps of buried cities. There they were thrown, old discarded office-records, worn-out books, legal documents, leases, bills and receipts, marriage contracts, bills of divorce, wills, decrees issued by authority, denunciations, suings for the punishment of wrongdoers, minutes of judicial proceedings, and tax-papers in great numbers. There are letters and notes, schoolboy’s exercise-books, magical texts, diaries and horoscopes, letters of consolation, letters of prodigal sons writing home. These furnish a vivid crosssection of contemporary life as it was lived during the time when Christianity was gaining a foothold in the eastern world. There is a freshness, warmth, and sincerity about them that one does not find in the literary productions of the same age. These show us the people, their characters, and the inner recesses of their hearts. Since Christianity procured most of its converts from the under-privileged classes, these papyrus sheets throw a flood of light upon the New Testament. Another thing that makes these records so valuable is that most of them are dated, and the place of writing noted. Another rich source of information is the ostraca. These are broken pieces of pottery upon which something has been written. Papyrus was the rich man’s writing material, the ostraca, the poor man’s. The man of humble means would search the rubbish heaps in his neighborhood for the discarded fragments of a broken piece of pottery. New Testament manuscripts were costly and few, so the poor would copy Scripture portions on these pieces of pottery. On these ostraca are found receipts, letters, contracts, bills, decrees, even extracts from classical authors. The great majority are, however, tax-receipts. The Greek found on these inscriptions is known as the Koine Greek and is the same as that found in the New Testament. This Greek was the international language of the Roman world. It numbered more speakers than Latin with its millions. Just before the beginning of the Christian era, the conquests of Alexander the Great spread the Greek language throughout the then-known world, and thus made possible the rapid spread of the gospel through the medium of an international language, Greek. This Greek is called Koine or “common” Greek, because after the conquests of Alexander, men did not speak the local dialects of Greece any more, but a Greek tongue common to all. Thus, the fact that both the inscriptions and the New Testament are written in the same international Greek, and because the inscriptions provide a vivid picture of contemporary life, we have in this material uncovered by the spade of the archaeologist, a source of information which helps us to better understand the historical background, local customs, and certain details with

reference to the New Testament manuscripts which otherwise would be somewhat obscure to a western mind. Instances of some of these are found in certain chapters in this book.

II. The Title Deed to Answered Prayer “Faith is the substance of things hoped for” (Heb. 11:1). The Greek word translated “substance” had a technical meaning in the business world of the first century. It referred to one’s property or effects. It was used in such expressions as “Out of this estate I declare that my husband owes me,” or, “more land than I actually possess,” the italicized words being the translation of the word. It was also used to refer to “the whole body of documents bearing on the ownership of a person’s property, deposited in the archives, and forming the evidence of ownership.” Moulton and Milligan in their “Vocabulary of the Greek Testament” say of these uses, “These varied uses are at first sight somewhat perplexing, but in all the cases there is the same central idea of something that underlies visible conditions and guarantees a future possession.” Thus they translate “Faith is the title deed of things hoped for.” To substantiate this usage, there is in “Living Yesterdays,” a delightful brochure by H. R. Minn, the story of a woman named Dionysia. She is described as “a woman of set jaw and grim determination.” It seems that she had lost a case in a local court over a piece of land to which she laid claim. Not satisfied with the decision of a lower court, she determined to take her case to a higher court in Alexandria. She sent her slave to that city, with the legal documents safely encased in a stone box. On the way, the slave lost his life in a fire which destroyed the inn where he had put up for the night. For 2,000 years the sands of the desert covered the ruins of the inn, the charred bones of the slave, and the stone box. Archeologists have recently uncovered these remains. In the box they found the legal documents. They read the note which this woman had sent to the judge in Alexandria, “In order that my lord the judge may know that my appeal is just, I attach my hupostasis (uJpostasi").” That which was attached to this note, she designated by the Greek word translated “substance” in Heb. 11:1. The attached document was translated and found to be the title deed to the piece of land which she claimed as her own possession, the evidence of her ownership. What a flood of light is thrown upon this teaching regarding faith. The act of exercising true faith as one prays, or as one leans on the resources of God, is itself the title deed or evidence of the sure answer to our prayer or the unfailing source of the divine supply. It is God’s guarantee in advance that we already possess the things asked for. They may still be in His hands, awaiting the proper time for their delivery, but they are ours. If the answers to our prayers are not forthcoming at once, let us rest content with the title deed which God has given us, namely, a Holy Spirit energized act of faith. We may be absolutely certain that our God will honor this title deed at the right moment.

III. The Imperialism of Christianity Christianity came into a world dominated by the Cult of the Cæsar, a religious system in which the Roman emperor was worshipped as a god. The empire, made up of many widely different peoples with their own distinctive languages, customs, and religions, was

held together not merely by one central ruling power at Rome which was supported by the military power of its legions, but also and probably more efficiently so, by the universal religion of Emperor-worship. Political and military ties are strong, but religious ties are stronger. Rome knew this and guarded jealously its Cult of the Cæsar. Its policy was to allow its subjects to retain their own religions as long as they accepted Emperor-worship in addition to their own system of belief. But Rome would not countenance a religion that set itself up as unique and as taking that place in the hearts of men which was occupied by the Cult of the Cæsar. Into this atmosphere Christianity came with its unique and imperialistic claims. It was inevitable that there would be a clash between these two imperialisms, that of Heaven and that of Rome. It came in the form of the bloody persecutions hurled against the Christian Church by Rome during the first three hundred years of its existence. What an unanswerable proof of the divine origin of Christianity do we have in the fact that by a.d. 316, Christianity had displaced Emperor-worship as the predominating system of belief in the Roman world and that the Emperor Constantine at that time made it the state religion. The inscriptions which archeologists have unearthed give us some information regarding the Cult of the Cæsar which throws an abundance of light upon some passages in the New Testament. They reveal a parallelism between Christianity and the imperial cult with reference to the position of the Lord Jesus in the system called Christianity and that of the Roman emperor in the system called the Cult of Cæsar, and the official titles held by each. For instance, the term kurios (kurio") meaning “Lord” was used as a divine title of the emperor. It was also an official title of our Lord Jesus. This Greek word kurios (kurio") is the translation in the Septuagint of the august title of God in the Old Testament, “Jehovah.” The term “Lord” was understood to be a title which included within its meaning of “master” the idea of divinity. It was a divine title. These facts throw a flood of light on Paul’s assertion (I Corinthians 8:5, 6), “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” These words are set in a context in which Paul is pleading for separation from the pagan Greek mystery religions. He cites the example of the Christian’s separation from the Cult of Cæsar, arguing that if the Corinthian Christians have thrown off their allegiance to the Cæsar so far as worshipping him is concerned, they ought also to separate themselves from any participation in the Greek religious practices. Here the chief exponent of Christianity is throwing out into the arena of the imperialistic contest the imperialistic challenge of Christianity, namely, that while the Greeks may people the heavens with deities, and the Romans may worship the emperor on earth, yet so far as Christians are concerned, they do not recognize these, for they are monotheists, worshipping the absolute God, and His Son Jesus Christ who Himself is God. Our Lord referred to this practice of the deification of the emperor when He said (Luke 22:25), “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them.” The meaning of the word “lordship” here is not merely that the emperor rules as an absolute autocrat, but that he rules as an emperor-god. In answer to the question of the Herodians (Matt. 22:15–22), “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Cæsar, or not?” He said, “Render therefore to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s.” The question was fully answered. The words, “and unto God the things that are God’s,” is a protest against Emperor-worship. Taxes should be paid to

Cæsar, but no worship should be accorded him. To be worshipped is the prerogative of God alone. “There went out a decree from Cæsar Augustus that the whole inhabited earth” i.e., the Roman Empire, “should be enrolled” (Luke 2:1). The Greek word is not “taxed” but “enrolled.” Taxation was probably one of the purposes of this enrollment, but it was the imperial census that was being taken. The inscriptions furnish instances of other enrollments, showing that such a thing was neither unreasonable nor impossible, the destructive critics notwithstanding. Joseph and Mary in obedience to the imperial decree go to Bethlehem where the prophecy of Micah (5:2) is fulfilled. Now comes the imperialistic announcement, brought by an angel from heaven (Luke 2:10, 11), “Fear not; for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour which is Christ the Lord.” Here was heaven’s King coming to dispute the claims and position of the Cæsar who arrogated to himself the title of “lord,” and who was worshipped as a god. No wonder that Herod and the Jews were agitated at this news (Matt. 2:1–8), the former because of the imperialistic challenge which would present new problems of administration to him in addition to the ones he already had in connection with troublesome Israel, the latter because, entrenched in their ecclesiastical sin, they did not want to be deprived of their lucrative positions. But while heaven’s King came in humiliation the first time and did not displace the world empire of the ruling Cæsar but only found a place in a few hearts, He will some day come in exaltation to dethrone Antichrist, the then ruling Cæsar, and, occupying the throne of David, rule over a world-empire as King of kings, and Lord of lords. It was Thomas who exclaimed (John 20:27), “My Lord and my God.” This was enough to involve him in serious trouble with the Roman authorities had they known of it, for he was acknowledging Jesus of Nazareth as his Lord and his God instead of Cæsar. Polycarp, who lived a.d. 156, was confronted with the question by the Roman official, “What is the harm in saying ‘lord Cæsar’?” And because he refused to acknowledge Cæsar as lord, he was martyred. Festus (Acts 25:26) said regarding Paul, “Of whom I have no certain thing to write unto my lord.” His lord was Cæsar, “lord” in the sense that Festus recognized Nero, who was then Cæsar, as the emperor-god to whom worship was due. But see the imperialistic challenge of Christianity in the words of the apostle Paul (Phil. 2:9–11), “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him the Name which is above every name, that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” The terms theos (qeo"), “god,” and huios theou (uiJo" qeou), “son of god,” were both used in the Cult of the Cæsar and were titles of the emperor. Our Lord claimed oneness in essence with the Father (John 10:30). He said (John 8:58), “Before Abraham came into existence, I am.” He claimed to be the Son of God (John 9:35–38) and accepted worship as the Son of God, thus demonstrating the fact that His position as Son of God made Him a co-participant in the essence of Deity. All this was in startling contrast to the claims of the then ruling emperor, and our blessed Lord knew it. Luke 22:25 shows His accurate knowledge of the customs, political practices, and happenings of His day, when He speaks of those who exercise authority over the people as being called “benefactors.” The term “benefactor” was an honorable title given to princes and other eminent men for valuable services rendered to the State. The emperor was also given the title “overseer.” He was the “overseer” of his subjects

in that he was charged with the responsibility of caring for their welfare. The same term “overseer” is given God the Father in I Peter 2:25 where the word meaning “overseer” is translated “bishop.” Peter, in writing his epistle, must have been conscious of the imperialistic challenge of Christianity when presenting the God of Christians as the Overseer of their souls, refusing to acknowledge the overseeing care of the emperor-god. Another title given the emperor was basileus (basileu"), “king.” Some monarchs used the title “king of kings.” Our Lord claimed this title in relation to His distinctive position as the Messiah of Israel. The Jews recognized this as directly opposed to the imperial position of Cæsar as king. Not that there were no kings in the empire ruling under the authority of the world-Cæsar. But the Jewish leaders understood Old Testament truth well enough to know that our Lord’s claim to the position of king over Israel involved world-dominion, which at once struck at the throne of Cæsar. They tried to use this as a means of involving Him in difficulties with Rome, for they said to Pilate (John 19:12), “If thou let this man go, thou art not Cæsar’s friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Cæsar.” They had accused Him of forbidding them to pay taxes to Cæsar, which was a lie, and of claiming to be the Anointed of God, which was the truth (Luke 23:2). Upon our Lord’s acknowledging the fact that He was a king, Pilate turned to the Jews and said, “I find no fault in this man” (Luke 23:3, 4). One look at Jesus was enough to convince Pilate that he was not a dangerous character, and he dismissed from his mind any disposition to treat our Lord’s claim seriously. Had Pilate taken our Lord’s claims at their face value, his position as a representative of Cæsar would have demanded that he deal with the case before him in no hesitant manner. When Pilate said to them (John 19:14, 15), “Behold your king,” the Jews who hated and despised the Roman yoke and the emperor who ruled them, cried in a false patriotism, “We have no king but Cæsar.” Paul, after he had faced Nero as the prisoner of the Roman empire and had been liberated, wrote the following to Timothy (First epistle 1:17, 6:15), “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be glory and honor for ever and ever. Amen.” “Which in his times he shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen.” Again the great apostle, having been snatched from the jaws of death at the hands of Rome, puts himself within reach of the long arm of the empire when he denies the supremacy of the emperor in things spiritual. But not only did the emperor have the titles of lord, son of god, god, overseer, and king, all of which were titles of our Lord also, but he was given the title soter (soter), “saviour.” At least eight of the emperors carried the title “saviour of the world.” They were hailed as the saviours of the people. For the most part, the Roman world was well governed and policed, Roman law was administered in equity, the Roman roads caused travel and commerce to flourish, and the Roman peace made living conditions bearable and in some instances pleasant. Thus the emperors were the world-saviours. Now comes Christianity with its imperialistic announcement (Luke 2:11), “For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.” But this Saviour’s name was Jesus, one who would save them from the sins which they loved and from which they did not want to be separated. What motive would they have in transferring their allegiance from a world-saviour who gave them the comforts of life and at the same time allowed

them to go on in their sin, to the Lord Jesus, especially when allegiance to this new Saviour could very well result in their crucifixion by Rome? And yet for the first three hundred years of the Church’s history, tens of thousands willingly embraced this new Saviour and went to a horrible death. How explain this? The only answer is that the supernatural power of God was operative in their hearts. The Samaritans said (John 4:42), “We have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.” It took grace to say that, for they realized that should this come to the ears of Rome, they would be charged with treason. In I Timothy 1:1, Paul refers to “the commandment of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ,” coupling the titles “God” and “Saviour” together as they are in the Cult of the Cæsar. In the same epistle (4:10), he speaks of God as the Saviour of all men. The context, which brings in the idea of faith, seems to indicate that the idea of salvation from sin and the impartation of eternal life is the function here of God as Saviour. He is Saviour of all men in the sense that our Lord is “the Saviour of the world” (John 4:42). He is the actual Saviour of those who believe, and the potential Saviour of the unbeliever in the sense that He has provided a salvation at the Cross for the sinner, and stands ready to save that sinner when the latter places his faith in the Lord Jesus. The Emperor was the Saviour of the world. No wonder that Rome recognized in Christianity a formidable rival. No wonder the Roman writer Tacitus says of Christianity, “This destructive superstition, repressed for awhile, again broke out, and spread not only through Judæa where it originated, but reached this city also (Rome), into which flow all things that are vile and abominable, and where they are encouraged.” Paul uses the words “God our Saviour” in Titus 1:3, here the Saviour of believers in a spiritual sense. Peter applies the title “Saviour” to our Lord in his second epistle (1:11), adding the title “Lord,” which also was claimed by the emperor. Jude closes his book with the words, “to the only wise God our Saviour,” again a conscious assertion of the preeminence of God over all the claims of earthly sovereigns. Another term found in the Christian system and which was used by Roman emperors was archiereus (ajrciereu"), “high priest.” The emperors were called “Pontifex Maximus” in the east, the name being the Latin translation of the Greek archiereus (ajrciereu"). In contrast to the arrogancy, cruelty, and wickedness of the Roman emperor who was recognized not only as lord, son of god, god, saviour, but also as high priest, we have the words of Paul, “Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession, for we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities: but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need” (Heb. 4:14–16). The primary contrast here is undoubtedly between the Aaronic high priest and our Lord as High Priest, but the background of Roman imperialism seems to be in the picture also. The Roman emperor was Pontifex Maximus, a high priest upon the throne of the Cæsars. But our Lord Jesus is a high priest who, now seated upon a throne of grace, will some day as High Priest in the Messianic Kingdom occupy the throne of David in Jerusalem, as Zechariah says, “He shall be a priest upon his throne” (Zech. 6:13). Turning now to words used in a technical sense in the Cult of the Cæsar with reference to the people instead of the emperor, we have the expression, “friend (philos (filo")) of the emperor,” which was an official title in the imperial period. What a flood of light this throws upon our Lord’s words, “Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.

Henceforth I call you not bondslaves, for a bondslave knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends” (John 15:14, 15). As our Lord knew of the Roman custom of calling a servant of the State a Benefactor (Luke 22:25), so He knew of this custom of certain ones being called “friends of the emperor.” There was real point to His words and they were not lost upon His disciples. Think of what faith this involved on His part and theirs. The King of kings was on His way from the upper room where they had celebrated the Passover together for the last time, to His crucifixion and death, the rejected King of Israel. Yet in all the dignity of His royal position as King of the Jews in the Davidic dynasty, He said, “I have called you friends.” Yes, they were friends of the Emperor who would be raised from the dead, ascend to heaven, and some day come back to this earth to reign as King of kings and Lord of lords. Another official title was “bondslave (doulos (doulo")) of the emperor.” There were imperial slaves all over the Roman world. There was an honor in even being a bondslave of Cæsar. Paul must have been conscious of the analogy when he wrote, “Paul, a bondslave of Christ Jesus” (Rom. 1:1). If it was an honor in the Roman world to be a bondslave of the emperor, what an exalted privilege it was to be a bondslave of the King of kings. In II Corinthians 5:20, Paul calls himself (editorial “we”) an ambassador for Christ. The Greek word is presbeuo (presbeuo), a technical term used of the emperor’s legate, namely, the one who speaks for the emperor. Paul was a spokesman on behalf of Christ. The word is used also in Ephesians 6:20 and in Luke 14:32, in the latter text appearing in the translation as “ambassage.” The word clearly refers to the imperial service of Cæsar, and in the Scriptures to the imperial service of Christ in which the saints are engaged. Thus did Christianity parallel the imperialism of Rome. The imperial secretary used the technical expression pepisteumai (pepisteumai) which meant “I am entrusted,” the qualifying word being added which would designate the matter with which he was entrusted. Paul as an imperial secretary of the Lord Jesus entrusted with the writings of the epistles which bear his name, uses the same technical phrase current in the Roman world at that time. The word is used in Galatians 2:7, “committed;” in I Corinthians 9:17, “committed;” in I Thessalonians 2:4, “put in trust;” I Timothy 1:11, “committed to my trust;” and in Titus 1:3, “committed.” The correspondence of the imperial secretary was designated by the technical expression, hiera grammata (iJera grammata), “sacred writings.” It was used of Imperial letters and decrees. The expression theia grammata (qeia grammata), “divine writings” was used of imperial letters. Imperial ordinances were referred to as “divine commandments.” This shows clearly how completely the religious or ecclesiastical position of the emperor made its influence felt throughout the affairs of state. Alongside of all this we have Paul using the same expression, hiera grammata (iJera grammata), in II Timothy 3:15 in the words “holy scriptures.” Here the writings of the Old Testament are put over against the imperial decrees of Cæsar, which latter had not only governmental but also religious significance. New Testament writings were looked upon by the early Christians in the same way. Finally, the word euaggelion (eujaggelion) “good news” or “good tidings” was used in a profane sense of any piece of good news. But it also had a sacred connection as when it was used to refer to the good news of the birthday of the emperor-god. At the accession of a Cæsar to the throne, the account of this event was spoken of as euaggelion (eujaggelion) “good tidings.”

See the parallel in the imperialistic announcement by the angels, “Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord” (Luke 2:10, 11). How all this gives further point to Paul’s words “I am ready to preach the good news to you that are at Rome also. For I am not ashamed of the good news: for it is the power of God resulting in salvation to every one that believeth.” Paul was expecting to come to Rome where the “good news” of the emperor found its reality, that emperor who was called lord, son of God, god, king, saviour, and high priest, and he was to announce the true Lord from heaven who was the Son of the eternal God, yes, very God Himself, coming King of kings, Saviour of the believer, and High Priest who by His atoning death on Calvary’s Cross paid for sin and put it away. He was to announce this good news, this gospel, for that is what the word “gospel” means, right in the stronghold of Emperorworship. But he was not afraid to do so, for he knew that it was of divine and supernatural origin and would accomplish that whereunto it was sent. Dear reader, what do you think of the Lord Jesus? Have you taken him as your personal Saviour? Are you trusting in His precious blood for your salvation from sin? If you have not yet received the gift of salvation by faith from the hands of a God eager to save you, will you not just now do so? “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).

IV. About Royal Visits The Greek inscriptions throw a flood of light upon the New Testament. One of the current expressions in the first century was the word parousia (parousia), used in the east as a technical expression for the royal visit of a king or emperor. The word means literally “the being beside,” thus, “the personal presence.” The parousia (parousia) of the king must have been well known to the people, for there were special payments and taxes to defray the cost of the festivities on that occasion. All over the world, advent-coins were struck after a parousia (parousia) of the emperor. Advent-sacrifices were offered at these parousiai (parousiai). A papyrus manuscript speaks of contributions given for a crown of gold to be presented to the king at his parousia (parousia). A papyrus found among the wrappings of the mummy of a sacred crocodile, speaks of the requisition of corn to help defray the expenses of the parousia (parousia) of a king, which was being collected from the peasants by the village headman and the elders. These parousiai (parousiai) were noted for their special brilliance. New eras in the history of mankind were proclaimed at the parousia (parousia) of a sovereign. Advent coins, the word “advent” being the Latin equivalent of the Greek for parousia (parousia), were struck and became official coinage of the empire. Solemn sacrifices were offered in the king’s presence. Monuments were erected. The day of the visit was designated “a holy day.” As the pagan world designated the parousiai (parousiai) of its sovereigns by their number, so the Christian system has its three parousiai (parousiai) of the Kings of kings and Lord of lords, twice to the earth, and once between these events, into the air. This word parousia (parousia) is translated “coming” in our English text, in relation to the coming of our Lord into the air to catch out His Bride the Church, the coming of

our Lord to the earth to Israel to set up His Millennial kingdom, and the coming of Antichrist to establish his worldwide kingdom during the Tribulation (II Thess. 2:1, 8, 9). The Christians of the first century felt the parallelism between the parousia (parousia) of the reigning emperor and the parousia (parousia) of Christ. In the case of the Rapture, it will be the royal visit of the Bridegroom into the atmosphere of this earth to receive His Bride the Church to Himself and to take her with Him to heaven. In the case of the return of the Lord to this earth, it will be the royal visit of the King of kings and Lord of lords who comes from the royal line of David, who will dethrone Antichrist and set up the throne of David. In the case of Antichrist, it will be the coming of the Wild Beast (Greek) of Revelation 13:1–8 as a king, to assume absolute authority as world dictator, occupying Satan’s throne for a brief space of seven years. Note again if you will the parallelism which exists. As the royal visit of a Roman emperor was marked by elaborate and brilliant festivities, so our blessed Lord’s parousia (parousia), both when He comes for His Bride, and when He comes to the earth with His Bride to reign as King of kings, will be accompanied by a heavenly splendor that will far outshine the displays of earthly sovereigns. As the parousia (parousia) of a Roman emperor brought in a new era, so the first advent of our Lord ushered in a new era, both dispensationally, and for the world at large. As advent coins were struck at the parousia (parousia) of a Roman emperor, so our money is dated according to our Lord’s first advent. But note the contrast. Solemn sacrifices were offered before earthly sovereigns who were worshipped as gods, whereas our Lord in His first advent was Himself the sacrifice that paid for sin. Other scriptures where the word occurs and in which it has the meaning of the royal visit of a sovereign are, I Corinthians 1:7, 15:23; I Thessalonians 2:19, 3:13, 4:15, 5:23; James 5:7; II Peter 1:16, 3:4, 12; and I John 2:28. Such was the imperialism of Christianity in the first century that it clearly saw the parallel between the parousia (parousia) of an earthly sovereign and the parousia (parousia) of the Lord Jesus, and at the same time, the rival claims of each. These Christians were not afraid to give allegiance to the lowly carpenter from Nazareth, the travel-worn itinerant teacher who was rejected by His own people and nailed to a Roman cross. They were convinced that He was what He claimed to be, God the Son, incarnate in humanity. They were not intrigued by the Roman purple, the armies of the empire, the far-flung colonies. Their hearts responded to the unique beauty of the meek and lowly Jesus, and to the fragrance of His Person. He was the King of Glory, and they would rejoice in His parousia (parousia).

V. The Power of a Christlike Life “Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul; having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, glorify God in the day of visitation” (I Peter 2:11, 12). Word Studies The Words “dearly beloved” are from a Greek word which speaks of God’s love as seen in John 3:16 and Romans 5:5 where the same word is used, referring to that love expressed at Calvary in the giving of His Son and shed abroad in the heart of the believer

by the Holy Spirit. Peter is reminding the believers to whom he is writing that they are divinely loved ones, divinely loved by God. What a comfort that is to the sorely tempted heart. The word “beseech” is from a Greek word which was used in the sense of “I ask, beseech, exhort, urge, I beg of you, please.” Think of the infinite condescension of God who when asking something of His blood-bought children, does not command but instead says, “I beg of you, please.” The word “strangers” refers to a person living alongside of someone else. It speaks of a temporary home. The word “pilgrims” is the translation of a word literally meaning, “to live alongside of the natives in a foreign land.” Christians are living in the midst of unsaved people in territory ruled over by Satan, for he is the god of this age. The believer’s home is in heaven. He sings, “I am a stranger here within a foreign land; My home is far away upon a golden strand; Ambassador to be of realms beyond the sea, I’m here on business for my king.” Living in the midst of a foreign population, representing our Sovereign, the Lord Jesus, we are exhorted by God to abstain from fleshly lusts. “Abstain” is literally “hold yourselves back from.” “Lusts” is confined today in its meaning almost entirely to an immoral desire. The Greek word means simply “a strong desire,” and in our context it refers to a strong desire coming from the evil nature. “Which” is literally “which are of such a nature.” The character of these cravings is emphasized. “War” is from a Greek word which was used in various ways, “to lead a military expedition, to lead soldiers to war or battle, to carry on a campaign.” These evil cravings are carrying on a campaign against the Christian. The word “against” is from a Greek word whose root meaning is “down.” We get a picture of these evil cravings hurling themselves down upon our souls in a campaign designed to cause their downfall. “Conversation” today refers to the interchange of words between two or more persons. When the Authorized Version was made, it meant what the Greek word means from which it is translated, namely, “behaviour,” or “manner of life.” “Having” in the Greek emphasizes action going on steadily, and so we translate by the word “holding.” “Honest” is from a Greek word meaning “good.” There are two words in Greek meaning “good,” one, “inner intrinsic goodness,” the other, “outer goodness,” namely the expression of this inner goodness as seen by the eye. Our Lord used the second word when he said (John 10:11) “I am the good shepherd.” A sheep knows its shepherd, not by what is in the shepherd’s heart, but by what it can see of the shepherd. So it is the beautiful fragrance of our Lord’s Person that attracts His sheep, and by which they know Him. Peter uses the same word. It is the beauty and fragrance of the Christian’s life which the unsaved see, not what is in his heart. The Bible they read is our lives. The word “whereas” is literally “in which,” and refers to the Christ-like life the believer is exhorted to live. The unsaved speak evil of the goodness of a Christian, defaming him as an evil worker. But the Christian is exhorted to hold his manner of life steadily beautiful in its goodness, so that even though the world may defame that beautiful life, many lost sinners beholding it, that is, viewing it carefully, might be led to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus, having been attracted to Him by the Christlike life of the believer. The word “visitation” is translated from the same Greek word rendered “overseer” in Acts 20:28, “bishop” in I Tim. 3:1, “visitest” in Heb. 2:6, and refers to the act of overseeing the spiritual welfare of another. It refers here to the time when God shall become the spiritual overseer of their souls, and that will be when the unsaved person appropriates the Lord Jesus as Saviour. God’s Word testifies to the power of a Christlike life, for it is able to

lead an unsaved person to the place where he has the desire to know the Lord Jesus, and the simple gospel story will tell him how he can be saved. Someone has said that the greatest power in the universe next to the power of God, is the power of a life definitely subject to the Holy Spirit, exhibiting the beauty of the Lord Jesus. And so God exhorts us, “Divinely loved ones, I beg of you as those who are living in the midst of a foreign population as strangers and pilgrims, I beg of you to hold yourselves back from the fleshly cravings, cravings of such a nature that, like an army waging an offensive warfare, they are hurling themselves down upon your soul; holding your manner of life among the nations steadily beautiful in its goodness, in order that in that thing in which they defame you as those who do evil, because of your works beautiful in their goodness which they are carefully viewing, they might glorify God in the day of His overseeing care.”

VI. Three Steps in a Sinner’s Salvation Peter, an ambassador of Jesus Christ with a commission to selected-out ones who are sojourners in a foreign land, those scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, selected out ones by the fore-ordination of God the Father to be recipients of the setting-apart work of the Spirit which results in obedience (of faith) and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. Grace to you (for daily living) and (heart) peace be multiplied (I Peter 1:1, 2). Word Studies in Authorized Version The First step is the sinner’s election according to the foreknowledge of God the Father. “Elect” is from a word which means “to pick out” or “select.” It refers here to the act of God in sovereign grace choosing individuals to salvation. The same word is translated “chosen” in Ephesians 1:4, and is literally “chosen out,” that is, the choice is made out of a number. God chose us out before the foundation of the world. In the eternity before the universe came into existence, yes, always, God had us in His heart for salvation. This election was according to the foreknowledge of God the Father. The word translated “foreknowledge” is from a Greek word which in a connection like this means more than mere previous knowledge. It is used in Acts 2:23, “delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God,” the words “counsel” and “foreknowledge” being in a construction in the Greek text which makes the latter word refer to the same thing to which the word “counsel” refers, and makes it a further description of that thing. The word “determinate” is the translation of a Greek word which in the form in which it is used here means “that which has been appointed or decreed.” The word “counsel” refers to an interchange of opinions, a mutual advising, the exchange of deliberative judgment. Thus the word “foreknowledge” refers to that counsel of God in which after deliberative judgment certain among mankind were designated to a certain position, that position being defined by the context. The same Greek word translated “foreknowledge” in verse two is translated by the word “foreordained” in verse twenty. Therefore the election of the saints was determined in the counsel of God which consisted of a judgment which was the outgrowth of deliberation, that judgment having for its purpose the designating of certain ones to a position defined in the context. The words “according to” are from a preposition which implies domination or control over something. Mere foreknowledge does not have

within it any compelling necessities which would require the election of certain individuals. The fact that the saints were elected, was part of God’s previous knowledge. The election or choice of the saints was therefore in accordance with or determined by the counsel of God the Father. That is the first step in our salvation. The second step is found in the words, “through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience.” The Greek word translated “sanctification” means literally “to set apart” or “to consecrate.” We must not confuse the act of dedication with that of consecration. A saint may dedicate himself and all he possesses to God. God consecrates a saint to a certain position, that is, He sets him apart. Here we have the act of God the Holy Spirit setting the individual apart, consequent upon his being selected out by God the Father. The idea in the Greek is that God the Father chose the saint to a certain thing, and that was, to be set apart by the Holy Spirit. Thus we have the Holy Spirit taking hold of the one chosen, for the purpose of bringing that lost sinner to the act of faith in the Lord Jesus and His precious blood. The obedience here is not that of the saint as engendered in the heart by the Holy Spirit, but the obedience of the sinner to the faith, as in Acts 6:7, where “a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.” Peter refers here to the act of placing faith in the Lord Jesus as the One who shed His precious blood on Calvary’s Cross to atone for man’s sin. The act of God the Spirit in setting apart the individual, is His work of bringing that lost sinner to the place where he puts his faith in the Saviour. There is nothing in the sin-darkened heart of a sinner which would reach out and appropriate the Lord Jesus as Saviour. The hand of faith must be energized or motivated by the Holy Spirit. He supplies the faith necessary. Salvation is a work of God from start to finish. And yet it is true that each lost sinner must by an act of his will place his faith in the Saviour. He has that responsibility. “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you” (John 15:16), is sublimely true. But “whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely” (Rev. 22:17), is also true. We cannot reconcile or understand these things, but we can trust God for them and believe them. The third step in our salvation is expressed by the words, “and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” The divine order is first, obedience, then the sprinkling of the blood. The latter expression is taken by Peter from Old Testament usage, the blood of sprinkling referring there to animal blood typical of the cleansing blood of our Lord. This act of faith results in the individual’s cleansing by the precious blood of Christ, the work of God the Son. This is justification, the removal of the guilt and penalty of sin and the imputation of a righteousness, Christ Himself, in whom the believer stands complete forever. Thus each believer is elected or chosen out, this choice determined by the deliberative counsel of God the Father. The individual chosen is set apart or consecrated by the Holy Spirit, this being the work of God the Spirit in imparting faith to him. This faith is answered by God the Son, who through His precious blood cleanses the believer and brings him unto salvation. God the Father chooses the individual, God the Spirit brings him to the act of faith, and God the Son cleanses him from sin. Put your faith in the Lord Jesus as your personal Saviour, and you will find that God the Father chose you to salvation, God the Holy Spirit brought you to the act of faith, and God the Son cleansed you from sin in His precious blood.

VII. Not With Wisdom of Words

Business, government, warfare, athletics, labor,—Paul the scholar draws from them all as he seeks to make clear the message of God. In business it may be a title deed, the credit and debit side of a ledger, the forfeiture of what was thought to be a gain, the earnestmoney paid down in the transference of property, the receipt “paid in full,” a last will or testament, a broken contract. In warfare, it is the soldier, his weapons, his armor, his shield, his wages. In government, the commonwealth, its citizens, their responsibilities and privileges, appear in the apostle’s writings. In the world of labor, the slave and the skilled artisan, the finished product, the possibility that a piece of work may be returned by the employer, rejected because of failure to meet specifications, all become illustrations which Paul uses. In athletics, the race course down which the runners speed, the crown of oak leaves that graces the brow of the winner, the desperate agonizing efforts of two wrestlers, the concerted team work of one group of athletes against another group, the Greek stadium with the watchers intent upon the outcome, the judge’s stand, all become for Paul illustrations familiar to the public of the Roman world, and because familiar, an ideal medium by which to preach the gospel. Paul, the scholar, the man of books, trained in the Greek schools, yet spoke and wrote the language of the average man when he preached the Word of God. Writing to the Corinthians he says in his first epistle (2:1–5), “And I having come to you, brethren, came, not having my message dominated by transcendent rhetorical display or by philosophical subtlety when I was announcing authoritatively to you the testimony of God, for after weighing the issues, I did not decide to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. And when I faced you, I fell into a state of weakness and fear and much trembling. And my message and my preaching were not couched in specious words of philosophy, but were dependent for their efficacy upon a demonstration of the Spirit and of power, in order that your faith should not be resting in human philosophy but in God’s power.” The words, “I did not decide,” are a literal rendering from the Greek, possibly a bit cumbersome in English but nevertheless a true representation of what Paul wrote. The tendency in the first century was that of the blending of religions. If someone embraced a new faith, his desire would be to bring over into its system some of the elements of the old. We see that in the case of Judaism. Another tendency was that of the new convert explaining his new found faith in terms of the old, or harmonizing the new with the old. This we observe in instances where Greeks embraced Christianity. Paul was faced with this situation when he was saved, and with respect to both Judaism and the Greek Philosophies, for he was well trained in both. Consequently when he said, “I did not decide to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified,” he meant that he, after weighing the issues, after reflecting on the matter of presenting the gospel to the Greeks in terms of their philosophy (for he said he wanted to become all things to all men, that is, adapt himself and his methods to their needs), decided not to do so, but to preach Christ not “with wisdom of words” (I Cor. 1:17), that is, not in specious words of a false philosophy, but in the every day language of the people. Thus we see him drawing from contemporary life, from the Greek games, the Roman armies, the language of government, the business world, and the life of the laboring classes. He uses a business term when he speaks of faith as the title deed of things hoped for (Heb. 11:1), the word “substance” being translated from a Greek word used in legal practice for a title deed. When he warns the Hebrews against the act of renouncing their

professed faith in Messiah and going back to the Old Testament sacrifices after having been led along by the Holy Spirit in His pre-salvation work up to and including repentance, he says that that renunciation would be like the act of a man breaking a contract which he had made (Heb. 6:6), for they would be breaking the contract which they had made with the Holy Spirit in allowing Him to lead them on towards Christ, the words “fall away” being the ones referred to here. When he desires to explain the necessity of the death of Christ in order that the New Testament might become effective, he uses the illustration of a will not being effective until the death of the testator (Heb. 9:16, 17). When he tells us (Rom. 8:17) that as heirs of God, we are also joint-heirs with Christ, he draws from Roman law which made all children, including adopted ones, equal heirs. Think of it, equal heirs with Jesus Christ! Should he wish to assure believers that they will receive their glorification, he uses the business term “earnest” a down-payment in kind, guaranteeing the full payment of the rest (Eph. 1:14). The Spirit is the down-payment in kind, His indwelling being part of our salvation. He explains to the Philippians (3:8) that when he trusted Christ as his Saviour, he “suffered the loss of all things.” He uses a business term which meant “to punish by exacting a forfeit.” The verb is in the passive voice, and should be rendered, “I have been caused to forfeit.” Paul took punishment in the business sense when he put his trust in Christ. It meant the forfeiture of all that he counted dear. That meant crucifixion of self, and self dies hard. He thanks the Philippians (4:15) for the gift which they had sent, and reminds them that when he left Macedonia, no church but theirs “communicated,” that is, “had partnership” with him “as concerning giving and receiving.” After the words “had partnership,” the Greek has “with respect to an account of giving and receiving,” the ledger with a credit and debit page. The Philippians kept a ledger in which they recorded the good things received from Paul on the credit page, and the debt they owed Paul on the debit side. He acknowledged the receipt of their gift in the words, “I have all,” using a business term meaning, “I have received in full” (4:18). The word “abound” in 4:17, is taken from the money market. It was used of the accumulation of interest. The word “account” is used here much as we would use the term “bank-account.” The fruit concerning which Paul is speaking is the reward accumulating on the bank-account of the Philippian saints in the bank of Heaven, reward given for the generosity of these believers in their support of Paul the missionary. When he desired a word that would give to the ordinary reader of the first century, what the Christian system of teaching included with respect to the individual believer’s relation to his Lord as a servant, he searched the vocabulary of the laboring man for the proper term. He had a choice of six words, all speaking of one who serves. One referred to a person captured in war or kidnapped, and sold as a slave. Another spoke of a household servant, as in Romans 14:4 and I Peter 2:18. Another was used as a designation of a servant in official capacity, with emphasis upon his activity in service. as in John 2:5, 12:26; Romans 13:4, 15:8, 16:1; I Corinthians 3:5; Philippians 1:1 (deacon). Still another referred to servants who were court officers, as in Matthew 26:58. Yet another word (Heb. 3:5) spoke of a servant who was an attend ant upon someone, the emphasis being upon the fact that his services are voluntary, whether as a freeman or as a slave. But he chose none of these. The word which the Holy Spirit led him to use is found in Philemon 16. Onesimus was the slave of Philemon, one bound to him, one born into slavery, one bound to his master in a permanent relationship which only death could break, one whose

will is swallowed up in the will of his master, one who is devoted to his master even to the disregard of his own interests. Onesimus did not before his salvation live up to the last two specifications, but the Greek word which Paul used to speak of the place he occupied among the various classes of slaves in the Roman world, included the above details. This was the word known to the average man of the first century, whose content of meaning as given above, would exactly fit Paul’s teaching regarding the believer’s relationship to the Lord Jesus, and the unbeliever’s relationship to Satan as well. The word was used as the exact opposite of the world for “freeman,” thus emphasizing the fact that the Christian is not his own, but is bought with a price. Again, the servile relationship is emphasized. These two conceptions were part of that “offence of the Cross” which confronted the first century sinner. The word meant “a slave.” Other words for the idea of one who serves were more noble and tender. But this one just referred to a common slave. This was the word Paul chose. To translate this word by “servant” in such passages as Romans 1:1 or 6:16–17, is just to miss the point in Paul’s teaching. The word should be rendered either by “slave” or “bondman.” Of course, to be a slave of a pagan master, with all that that implies of misery, cruelty, abject servitude, was one thing. To be a slave of the Lord Jesus, with all that that implies of wonderful fellowship with one’s Master, and the high privilege of serving the Lord of glory, is quite another. Nevertheless, the term “slave” or “bondman” is the idea presented. The first century world so understood Paul’s use of the word. And that is the way in which we of the twentieth century should use it. Again, Paul speaks to the laboring classes in his use of the Greek word which means, “to labor to the point of exhaustion,” which experience was a very common thing among the down-trodden masses of the Roman world. He speaks of a certain Mary “who was of such a nature as to have labored to the point of exhaustion with reference to many things for us” (Rom. 16:6). He speaks of himself in the words, “I labored more abundantly than they all” (I Cor. 15:10). Thus they understood Paul’s language. He spoke and wrote the tongue of the working man. He kept in mind that “Not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world … the weak things of the world … and base things, and things that are not” (I Cor. 1:26–28). Paul also borrows from the language of the soldier and of war. The instruments we are to put at the service of God in Romans 6:13 are referred to by the Greek word as weapons. The word was used of implements of war, either offensive or defensive, harness, armor, the heavy shield used by the Greek foot-soldiers. Its use here gives one the idea of two armies, Satan’s and God’s with the believer in God’s army. The word “wages” in 6:23 is from a Greek word which means “cooked meat.” At Athens it meant “fish.” It came to mean the “provision-money” which Rome gave its soldiers. The same word is used in I Corinthians 9:7, “Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges?” As the Roman soldier received provision-money with which to sustain life so that he could fight and die for Caesar, so the unsaved receive provision-money from sin, spiritual death, so that they can serve it, then physical death, and final banishment from the presence of God for all eternity. Neither receives wages, only enough sustenance to enable him to serve his master. In Ephesians 6 we have accoutrements of warfare, armor, breastplate, shield, arrows, illustrations which Paul took from the marching legions of Rome. See his reference to the expected endurance of a soldier in II Timothy 2:3, and to the man in verse 4, who raises an army for military purposes. In II Corinthians 2:14 in the words “causeth us to triumph,”

and in Colossians 2:15, in the word “triumphing” we have another instance where Paul draws from first century life. The translation should read, “leadeth us in triumph” and “leading them in triumph.” The word referred to a victorious general, home from the wars, leading a triumphal procession through the streets of Rome. The captives and spoils of war would precede him, and he would follow in a chariot, a slave holding over his head a jewelled crown. Then would come the victorious army. Paul’s readers were conversant with all this. They would understand his illustrations as well. In II Corinthians 2:14, it is God who leads Paul in a triumphal procession as His captive, by means of whom the knowledge and fame of the Victor is made manifest. He rejoices that he has been so used of God. In Colossians 2:15, our Lord through His victory over the hosts of evil is enabled to lead them in a triumphal procession as His captives. In II Corinthians 10:4, Paul again uses the illustration of war, and of a fortress. As to his use of terms taken from the language of government, we have Philippians 1:27, and 3:20. In the first passage, the words “let your conversation be,” are from a word which refers to the duty of citizens to the commonwealth in which they live, and in the second, “conversation” is translated from a Greek word meaning “commonwealth.” The illustration is taken from the fact that the city of Philippi was a Roman colony, its citizens possessing Roman citizenship with its privileges and responsibilities. So the Philippian saints are citizens of heaven, to live a heavenly life in that colony of heaven far from their commonwealth itself. Translate, “only conduct yourselves as citizens as it becometh the gospel of Christ,” “for the commonwealth of which we are citizens has its fixed abode in heaven.” The frequency with which Paul refers to the Greek athletic games far surpasses his illustrations from any other single department of first century life. The Greeks were an athletic-minded people. Paul himself, though a son of Hebrew parents who maintained their Jewish separation even to the point of refusing to read their Scriptures in the Septuagint translation (Acts 6:1, Phil. 3 :5), yet did not wash his hands of his Hellenistic training before his fellow-countrymen when he admitted that he was a native of the Greek city of Tarsus, for he used the milder of two Greek adversatives (Acts 22:3). He was influenced greatly by his Greek training, and he could not deny it. Part of that Greek culture included a familiarity with and interest in athletics. It is significant that when writing to the Romans, he uses terms borrowed from warfare, but his epistles to the Corinthians and Philippians, which were to churches composed of Greek Christians, and those to Timothy, whose father was a Greek (Acts 16:1), abound with illustrations from the Greek games. The great apostle was chosen by God for his Greek background as well as for his Jewish training. Truly, he was the apostle to the Gentiles. And his Greek training played no little part in his ministry to them. As to his references to the Greek athletic games so well known even in the Roman period, having such a background of history in the time when Greece was at the height of its glory, we have the following. Both the Christian life (Phil. 3:7–16), and Christian service (I Cor. 9:24–27) are illustrated by the stadium games and the desperate agonizing efforts put forth by the Greek athletes in their endeavor to win. He visualizes the stadium crowds intently watching the contest. He speaks of the garland or crown of oak leaves placed upon the winner’s brow. One of the classic passages in which Paul refers to the Greek games is I Corinthians 9:24–27. The isthmus of Corinth was the scene of the Isthmian games, one of the four great national festivals of the Greeks. During the period of the writing of the Pauline epistles, these games were still being celebrated. He was familiar with similar scenes in

Tarsus and in all of the great cities of Asia Minor, especially at Ephesus. The word “race” in this passage is from a Greek word which comes over into our language in the word “stadium” and “stade.” The stade was a race course 606 3/4 feet long, and the word came to mean a “race” because the track at Olympia was exactly that number of feet in length. Here Paul uses the figure of a race to illustrate the life of Christian service. “Striveth for the masteries” is from a Greek word which refers to an athlete contending or striving in the games. “Temperate” is from a word occurring only here and in I Corinthians 7:9. Here it refers to the ten months preparatory training, and the practice in the gymnasium immediately before the games under the direction of the judges who had themselves been instructed for ten months in the details of the games. The training was largely dietary. Epictetus says, “Thou must be orderly, living on spare food; abstain from confections; make a point of exercising at the appointed time, in heat and in cold; nor drink cold water or wine at hazard.” Horace says, “The youth who would win in the race hath borne and done much, he hath sweat and hath been cold: he hath abstained from love and wine.” Tertullian, commending the example of athletes to the persecuted Christians, says, “They are constrained, harassed, wearied” (Vincent). If an athlete goes through ten months of rigorous training which involves rigid selfdenia1 and much hardship in order that he might compete in a contest that may last a few minutes or a few hours at the most. and for a prize, a chaplet of oak leaves, should not a Christian be willing to subject himself to just as rigid a discipline and self-denial in order that he might serve the Lord Jesus in an acceptable manner? What soft flabby lives we Christians live. How little of stern soul-discipline do we know. The training period of a Greek athlete was a time of separation for him, separation from things which might in their place be perfectly proper but which would prevent him from running his best race, and separation most certainly from things that were of a harmful nature. If we Christians would exercise as much care and self-denial, and rigidly hold to a life of separation as did the Greek athlete, what powerful, successful, God-glorifying lives we would live. Illustrations such as these were not lost upon Paul’s Greek readers. Paul uses the chaplet or crown of oak leaves which fades, as an illustration of the unfading victor’s crown which the Christian will wear some day, given him for the service he rendered in the power of the Holy Spirit. He speaks of the Greek runner who speeds down the race course not uncertainly, but straight as an arrow for the goal. So should a Christian run his race, refusing to allow anyone or anything to turn him from the consuming desire that the Lord Jesus be preeminent in his life. In Philippians 3:13, 14, we catch a glimpse of Paul’s knowledge of racing technique. He uses the illustration of a runner “pressing toward the mark for the prize,” that is, literally, “pursuing down toward the mark for the prize.” See him flashing down the race course. He forgets the things which are behind. The word is a strong one, “completely forgetting.” Paul knew that the moment a Greek runner would think of the men behind him, the thud thud of their pounding feet, his speed would be slackened. So he presses home the lesson that when a child of God thinks of his past failures, the things he should have done and failed to do, the things he did which he should not have done, his onward progress in the Christian life is hindered. When a Christian has made things right with God and his fellow-man, the proper technique is to completely forget them. A similar idea is presented in Hebrews 12:1, 2, where Paul visualizes the stadium crowds, and the runners settling themselves for a race which they know will be a long grind and a real test of endurance. But they run entirely oblivious of the thousands of

onlookers, their attention diverted from every consideration except that of running the best possible race. We get that from the words “looking unto.” The word, “looking” has a prefixed preposition which implies abstraction. That is, the person’s attention is concentrated upon one thing to the total exclusion of everything else, It is, “looking off or away to Jesus,” as the Greek runner looks away from everything else and with eyes fixed upon the goal sees not the cheering crowds or even his own opponents. To turn his head ever so slightly toward the tiers upon tiers of spectators, means that his speed will be lessened, and he himself will be just that much behind. What a lesson for the Christian. The minute we turn our eyes toward our fellow-men and take them from out Lord, our pace is slackened. Pride, discouragement, envy, the desire for praise, these and other evils incapacitate the Christian runner as he looks at men instead of keeping his eyes fixed upon Jesus. The word “fight” (I Cor. 9:26, 27) is from a Greek word which means “to fight with the fists.” He speaks of the Greek boxer who beats the air, that is, practices without an adversary. This is called shadow-boxing. Or, he might purposely strike into the air in order to spare his adversary, or the adversary might evade his blow, and thus cause him to spend his strength on the air. But Paul says that he is not like the Greek boxer in these respects. In his conflict with evil, he strikes straight and does not spare. The words “keep under” are from a word which means “to strike under the eye,” or “to give one a black eye.” When we think that the Greek boxer wore a pair of fur-lined gloves covered with cowhide which was loaded with lead and iron, one can imagine the punishment to which the recipient of the blows is subjected. If a Christian would be as energetic against and unsparing of evil in his life as the Greek boxer was of his opponent, and would strike with the same devastating force, sin would soon be cleared out of his life and would stay out. What “softies” we Christians are with regard to sin in our lives. How we sometimes cherish it, pamper it, play with it, instead of striking it with the mailed fist of a Holy-Spirit inspired hatred of sin and a refusal to allow it to reign as king in out lives. As we consider this illustration of a boxer which Paul uses, we must remember that boxing among the Greeks was not the degraded form of pugilism such as we have today with all its attendant evils and associations, but was part of the great program of the stadium athletic games which included foot races, discus throwing, wrestling, and other forms of athletics, engaged in by athletes of splendid physique, expending their last ounce of energy, not for a money prize, but for a simple garland of oak leaves which would fade in a few days. Thus, this form of athletic competition while extremely brutal among the Greeks, and therefore to be condemned as a sin against the human body, yet was devoid of much which is associated with pugilism today. Finally, the word “castaway” is from a technical word used in the Greek games, referring to the disqualifying of a runner because he broke the training rules. He was barred from competing for the prize. Paul was apprehensive, that, if he did not live a life of separation from the world, if he did not live a victorious life over sin, God would disqualify him, that is, take away from him his position as apostle to the Gentiles. A Christian sometimes wonders, after years of fruitful service, why he should so suddenly see his usefulness gone, and his life powerless and without the joy of the Lord. The answer lies in the words, “disqualified, broke training rules.” Paul refers to this same matter of obeying training rules in I Timothy 4:7, 8 and II Timothy 2:5, where he says that if a Greek athlete is to be awarded the victor’s garland he must strive lawfully, that is, live up to the requirements prescribed for the preparation which the athlete makes and the life

which he lives while engaged in athletic competition. He warns Timothy regarding this, and then in II Timothy 4:8, uses the illustration borrowed from the act of the judges at the goal awarding the victor’s crown to the winning athlete. So will Timothy some day, like Paul, receive a crown of righteousness from the Lord Jesus. Then, there are passages where the background of the Greek games is not so evident in the English translation. For instance, in Philippians 1:27 “striving together,” and Philippians 4:3, “labored with” are from a Greek word used of athletes contending in concert with one another against the opposition, for the prize offered at the athletic games. The root of the word comes into English in our word “athlete.” In Romans 15:30 “strive together,” it from a Greek word which refers to the concerted action of a group of athletes working in harmony against opposition. The root of the word comes into our language in the word “agony.” What a plea this is for unity among the saints and the expenditure of agonizing effort in concert against evil rather than the use of that energy in contention against one another. In Philippians 1:30, “conflict,” Colossians 2:1, “conflict,” I Thessalonians 2:2, “contention,” II Timothy 4:7, “fight,” and Hebrews 12:1, “race” are all from the noun whose root gives us the word “agony,” referring in the Greek to the contests in the Greek athletic games. In Colossians 1:29, “striving,” 4:12, “laboring,” I Timothy 6:12 “fight,” II Timothy 4:7, “fought,” are all from the verb whose root comes into English in the word “agony,” and the meaning of which is “to contend in the Greek games for a prize.” Here we have instances where first-century Christians were striving in concert for the faith of the gospel; where some had labored with Paul in the extension of the gospel; where others were exhorted to strive in concert with Paul in prayer; where still others were having conflict, that is, were enduring persecution; and the case of Paul, where he fought the good fight; all these varied activities of the Christian life being referred to by the two Greek words used of an athlete engaged in the intense competition of the games even to the point of physical agony. What a commentary this is upon firstcentury Christianity. What intense lives these early Christians must have lived. With what desperate earnestness they must have worked for the Lord. What fervor and intensity there must have been in their prayers. These Christians did not have a long line of Christian ancestry back of them, nor centuries of Christian practice and tradition to encourage them. They were saved out of paganism. Yet they lived their Christian lives with an intensity of purpose which puts us of the twentieth century to shame. The secret of all this is in the fulness of the Holy Spirit, which results in a conscience sensitive to the slightest sin, the enthronement of Jesus as Lord of the life, and a love for Him that finds expression in a life of intense and purposeful service in His name. If there were more believers filled moment by moment with the Holy Spirit, controlled by Him in thought, word, and deed, there would be more first-century Christianity in the present day church. The secret of that fullness is in a desire for His control and a trust in the Lord Jesus for the same (John 7:37, 38). Paul, who seeks to become all things to all men that he might by all means save some, sets aside the language of the schools, the highly polished rhetoric, the philosophical subtleties which he learned in the Greek schools at Tarsus, and instead uses the every day words of the common people. He neither wrote above the understanding nor talked above the heads of those to whom he ministered. What an admonition this is to us who have the high privilege and great responsibility of ministering the Word. With us let utter simplicity be the watchword, “not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ be made none effect.”

VIII. About Crowns It Surprises one to see how much of the life and speech-expressions of the first century is reflected in the statements found in the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. The writers under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 2:13) constantly draw from contemporary life as they seek to bring to man the message of God. To understand something of first century life and its use of words, is to have a clearer understanding of the message they bring. That is why a knowledge of the Greek language, and a study of the early secular manuscripts, is of great help in the explanation of the New Testament. The one English word “crown” is used to translate two Greek words, each of which speaks of a different kind of crown, both of them being in common use in the first century in connection with the daily life of the people. To understand their difference and significance as they are related to the local customs, is to come into a fuller, clearer appreciation of those passages in the New Testament which contain them. One of the words is stephanos (stefano"). It was the crown giver to the victor in the Greek athletic games, the runner who first crossed the goal, the athlete who hurled the discus farthest, the wrestler who pinned his opponent to the mat. It was given to the servant of the State whose work deserved to be honored. It was worn at marriage feasts. A stephanos (stefano") was therefore a symbol of victory, of deserved honor, and of festal gladness. The crown was woven of oak leaves, of ivy, of parsley, of myrtle, of olive, of violets, of roses. The inscriptions give us concrete instances of its use. The emperor Claudius acknowledges the golden stephanos (stefano") sent him by the Worshipful Gymnastic Club of Nomads on the occasion of his victory over the Britons. An inscription of a.d. 138–161 may refer to this club, where “allowances” are made to an athlete on account of his “athletic stephanos (stefano").” The word was used in the sense of a reward other that a crown. An inscription of 2 b.c., speaks of Peteuris, who promises a reward (stephanos (stefano")) of five talents of copper, on account of some special service. The verb form of the noun stephanos (stefano") is found in a manuscript of 257 b.c., in which a certain Hierokles writes to Zenon regarding a boy who is Zenon’s nominee in the athletic games, “I hope that you will be crowned (i.e., be victorious) through him.” To us today, a crown is just a crown. The English word usually brings to our minds the picture of a large golden crown set with jewels, such as is or was worn by the crowned heads of Europe. But to impose this conception upon the passages in the New Testament where the word stephanos (stefano") is found, is to misconstrue and at the same time lose some precious truth. But when the first century reader found that word in the holy Scriptures, he recognized it as a word familiar to him by reason of its association in the ordinary secular life by which he was always surrounded. Thus he understood the full implication of this secular word brought over into the sacred text of the new Faith that was sweeping the Roman empire. And this ability to understand a word like this was not confined merely to the native Greek speaking population of the empire, for the Roman world was as to its culture, predominantly Grecian. The Greek language was the international language. There was more Greek spoken than Latin. The other word translated “crown” is diadema (diadema), from which we get our

word “diadem.” This Greek word is derived from a verb meaning “to bind around.” It referred to a blue band of ribbon marked with white which the Persian kings used to bind on a turban or tiara. It was the kingly ornament for the head, and signified royalty. A stephanos (stefano") is therefore a victor’s crown, whereas a diadema (diadema) is a royal crown. We will study those passages in which each one is found. Paul in I Corinthians 9:24–27 is speaking of Christian service in a context of Christian service that takes in the entire chapter. In verse 24, he is using the foot races held in the Greek athletic games as an illustration of the activity of a Christian in his work for the Lord. He uses the same illustration borrowed from contemporary life in Philippians 3:7– 14, where he speaks, not of Christian service but of progress in the living of a Christlike life. He says that the Greek athletes run a race in order to obtain a corruptible stephanos (stefano") of oak leaves that soon will wither and fade. But he speaks of a stephanos (stefano") which a Christian receives as a reward for his services, as an incorruptible crown. Then he tells us that he buffets his body and makes it his slave in order that after preaching to others he might not be a castaway. The word “castaway” comes from a Greek word which means, “to be put to the test and after being tested, to be rejected because of not meeting that test.” Paul draws this word from the Greek games where it was a technical expression meaning “to disqualify a runner from competing for the stephanos (stefano") because he broke the training rules.” If Paul did not practice what he preached, he would be disqualified, not allowed to compete for the crown given to those who rendered Christian service. He was afraid his apostleship would be taken away and given to another. The first century reader, having the historical background of the Greek games in his mind, would interpret this passage correctly. He would understand that Paul is not speaking of his eternal salvation here, for rewards are in view, and salvation is a gift. The same can be said of Philippians 3:7–14, where sanctification is referred to, not justification. It is the victor’s crown won through Christian service which Paul wants to win. In Philippians 4:1, Paul calls the Philippian saints his crown. As oak leaves were woven together to form a stephanos (stefano"), a chaplet or garland of victory or of civic worth, so Paul says in effect, “You Philippians are woven together into my crown of victor, an eternal symbol of my victory over the hosts of Satan at Philippi, and my reward for service in that place.” He speaks of the Thessalonian saints whom he also won to the Lord as his stephanos (stefano") of rejoicing. He will wear a victor’s crown at the coming of the Lord Jesus for the saints, his converts composing a more beautiful festal garland than ever graced the brow of a Greek athlete, even though that stephanos (stefano") were made of roses or violets (I Thes. 2:19). In II Timothy 4:8 we have the crown of righteousness. The imagery is again that of the Greek games. “I have fought” not “a good fight,” but “the good fight.” The indefinite article would indicate egotism on the part of the apostle. The definite article is used in the Greek, pointing to the good fight which each Christian is expected to wage. The picture here is taken from the Greek stadium where the huge crowd of spectators is keenly watching two Greek athletes as they engage perhaps in a wrestling contest. Here is not a race, but a tremendous contest of strength competing with strength. The words “fought” and “fight” come from the same Greek root. We get our word “agony” from this word. It refers to a contest in which the participants exert their strength to the point of agony. What for? For a stephanos (stefano") of oak leaves that will shortly fade away, and for the plaudits of a fickle crowd that may the next moment turn thumbs down. How this

should convict us of laziness, indolence, laxness in Christian service. The word “good” is from the Greek word meaning “goodness as seen from the outside by a spectator,” in contrast to another word which speaks of internal intrinsic goodness. The Greek spectators would say, “That was a beautiful display of skill and strength.” Paul says that the Christian life as it is related to the antagonism of the powers of evil, should display a beauty of skill and spiritual strength that will glorify the Lord Jesus. Such a battle he waged. Notice in passing, if you will, the composition of that word, “antagonism,” from our word “agony,” and “anti (ajnti)” which comes from the Greek, meaning “against.” That is, an antagonist is one who fights against one to the point of agony. But Paul also says, “I have finished my course.” The word “course” is from the Greek word meaning “a racecourse,” here used in connection with foot races. It is the “cinderpath” of college athletic fields. The word “finished” means “to come to the end.” It is in the perfect tense in the Greek which speaks of a past completed action with present existing results. Paul, awaiting martyrdom in Rome, looks back upon his life as a runner who, having won his race, is resting at the goal and is looking back down the cinder path over which he sped to victory, and sees the race as over, and its result, the stephanos (stefano") of righteousness awaiting him. The crowds leave the Greek stadium after the games are over, and the victors crowned with a garland of oak-leaves, are carried on the shoulders of rejoicing friends. So some day, the saints will leave the stadium of this life’s battles, and in heaven will rejoice with each other over the crowns they have won through the wonderful grace of God. In James 1:12 we have the stephanos (stefano") of life. “Blessed” is literally in this context, “spiritually prosperous.” “Temptation” is from a Greek word which has two meanings, to be used according to the context in which the word may be found. It means either “to put one to a test” as in Genesis 22:1 where God tempted Abraham, that is, tested him to see whether he would be obedient in relation to the request that he sacrifice his son (Septuagint, Greek translation of Old Testament), or “to solicit one to do evil,” as in our context in James. The word “endureth” is literally “to remain under,” and must be interpreted in its context, namely, the word “tried.” The word “tried” is from a technical Greek expression found in an early manuscript, where it referred to the action of an examining board putting its approval upon those who had successfully passed the examinations for the degree of Doctor of Medicine. The verb means “to test for the purpose of approving,” the noun, “the approved character of the one who has successfully met the test.” Here is a child of God who has been solicited to do evil. He has successfully met the test by refusing to sin. That is what James means by “enduring temptation.” The “stephanos (stefano") of the life” is his reward. This is not eternal life. He has that already, or he could not have overcome temptation. Furthermore, this is a reward given in recognition of what the believer has done, whereas salvation is a free gift given in view of what Christ has done on the Cross. The article in the Greek before “life,” points to a particular kind of life, here to that eternal life which is in Christ Jesus which enabled the believer to overcome temptation. Thus, this crown is a stephanos (stefano") given in recognition of the believer’s victory over sin, that victory having been procured by means of the eternal life he has, and which energizes his being. When we come to Peter’s use of stephanos (stefano") in his first epistle (5.4), we have another illustration of how Greek culture had stamped itself upon the life of the Roman world. Peter knew Greek, but he had not lived in a Greek city such as Tarsus, the

home of the apostle Paul. He was not schooled in Greek learning as was Paul. Yet this fisherman, reared in a Jewish environment, engaged in the fishing trade around the Sea of Galilee, was conversant enough with the life about and beyond his little world, that he used a typical illustration from a phase of first century life of which he as a Jew was not a part. The same can be said of John, and also of James the brother of our Lord, for they also use stephanos (stefano"). John, writing from the island of Patmos in the Aegean Sea to the church at Smyrna, a city which was in a region where Greek culture predominated, exhorts the Christians there who were undergoing severe persecutions, “Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee the stephanos (stefano") of the life.” The word “unto” does not mean “until.” The same Greek word is used in Philippians 2:8, where our Lord was obedient “up to the point” or “to the extent” of death. This Smyrna church represents the “Martyr Period” of church history, from a.d. 100–316 when ten bloody persecutions were hurled at the Christian church by Rome. This is the victor’s crown given to those who are martyrs to the Faith once for all delivered to the saints. The word “martyr” comes from the Greek word meaning “to bear witness to.” These Christians bore witness to the Christian faith by death (Rev. 2:10). It is touching to know that the name of the first recorded Christian martyr was Stephen, which comes from stephanos (stefano"). The Philadelphian church saints are exhorted to hold fast the little spiritual strength which they have (Rev. 3:11), lest they lose their stephanos (stefano"), namely, their victor’s crown, a reward for service. The elders (Rev. 4:4, 10) representing the redeemed in heaven, are seen, each with a golden stephanos (stefano") on their heads. Sometimes a stephanos (stefano") of gold, made in the form of an oak leaf garland for instance, was used in the first century. We saw that in the case of the golden stephanos (stefano") given to the emperor Claudias. Here the glorified saints wear such a victor’s crown, but not for long, for, overcome with gratitude, they cast their victor’s crowns at the feet of the One who through His victory at Calvary gave them the grace to overcome in their own lives. There are two riders on white horses in the Revelation, one in chapter 6:2, Antichrist, and the other, chapter 19:11, Jesus Christ. To Antichrist there is given a stephanos (stefano"), the victor’s crown. He goes forth conquering and to conquer. The superhuman beings of Revelation 9:7 have victor’s crowns on their heads. The woman clothed with the sun, representing Israel, has a stephanos (stefano") made of stars, indicative of Israel’s final victory over Satan and persecuting Antichrist when Jesus Christ comes to its rescue. Then in Revelation 14:14, we have the Lord Jesus with a victor’s crown on His head, coming in His second Advent to conquer Antichrist and set up His kingdom. The verb form of the noun stephanos (stefano") is used in II Timothy 2:5. Paul uses the illustrations of a soldier in verses 3 and 4, of an athlete in verse 5, and of a farmer in verse 6. In verse 5 the words “strive for masteries” is from a word which comes into our language in the word “athlete.” It means “to exert one’s self in a contest as an athlete, for a prize or reward.” “Is crowned” is from our word “stephanos (stefano"),” “is crowned with a victor’s crown.” The same verb is used in Hebrews 2:7, 9, where we see the Son of Man, made for a little time lower than the angels, now in His glorified state, crowned with the garland of victory. What shall we say when we come to the stephanos (stefano") of thorns which the soldiers placed on the head of our Lord (Matt. 27:29; Mark 15:17; John 19:2, 5)? While

there is an instance where the word stephanos (stefano") is used to signify royalty, as in “the crown-tax,” yet its predominant usage was that of a victor’s crown. The other word diadema (diadema) which refers to a royal crown, could hardly be used here, for it referred to a narrow ribbon-like band worn around the head. The crown of thorns was of inter-woven material like the stephanos (stefano") of oak leaves or ivy, and this word was probably chosen for that reason. But what the soldiers meant in mockery for a royal crown, became for our Lord in the hour of seeming defeat, the victor’s crown, for Paul could write (I Cor. 15:55) “Where, O death is your victory? Where, O death* is your sting?” The victor’s crown was placed on His brow before the victory was complete. So sure was the victory of the Cross. So sure will be the victory procured at the Cross for you and for me who are trusting in the Saviour’s precious blood poured out at Calvary as the God-appointed substitutionary atonement for sin. The other word translated “crown” is diadema (diadema). It comes from a verb which means “to bind around.” It referred to the narrow blue band of ribbon marked with white which the Persian kings used to bind on a turban or tiara. It was the kingly ornament for the head. Sometimes more than one diadema (diadema) was worn at the same time. When Ptolemy, king of Egypt entered Antioch in triumph, he set two crowns on his head, the diadema (diadema) showing his sovereignty over Asia, and the diadema (diadema) speaking of his kingly authority over Egypt (I Maccabees, XI 13). Satan (Rev. 12:3) has seven diadema (diadema) on his head, showing his close connection with and supremacy over the seven Roman emperors of Revelation 17:10. These are royal crowns, indicating imperial authority over the Revived Roman empire. Antichrist (Rev. 13:1) has ten kingly crowns upon his head, showing his sovereignty over the ten kings and their kingdoms in the Revived Roman empire (Rev. 17:12, 13). The Lord Jesus (Rev. 19:12), when He comes to bring in the Messianic Kingdom which will be world-wide, will wear many crowns. To one whose conception of a crown is limited to that of a large golden crown studded with jewels, this statement is unintelligible. But when one understands that these crowns consist of narrow bands of ribbon encircling the head at the forehead, one can appreciate the description. These diadema (diadema) represent all the kingdoms and other political units over which the Lord Jesus will rule as supreme Sovereign. He will truly be King of kings and Lord of lords.

IX. The Crucible of Christian Suffering “Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy. If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified” (I Peter 4:12–14). The word “beloved” is from a Greek word which speaks of the love of God. It is the same Greek word for “love” which is used in John 3:16; I Corinthians 13; I John 4:8, and Romans 5:5. It speaks of a love which is called out of one’s heart by the preciousness of the person loved, a love that is self-sacrificial in its essence, yes, the love that God is in His own essence. The word is an adjective in the plural number. While there may be in it a reflection of Peter’s love for these saints to whom he is writing, yet the full glow of the

word in this context seems to come from the idea that these saints are divinely loved by God. Peter says “Divinely loved ones.” These saints were undergoing severe suffering in the form of persecution by the world because of their testimony by life and word to the Lord Jesus. What a comfort it is when undergoing testing times, to know that each one of God’s saints is divinely loved by Him. It is a sweet pillow upon which to rest our weary heads and sorely tried hearts. God’s Word says (I John 4:18), “There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear, because fear hath torment.” This perfect love is God’s love for us, not our love for Him, which latter is always most imperfect. To realize that God loves His own with a perfect love, is to know assuredly that He will in His love for us not allow anything to come to us that would work us harm, and that whatever comes of pain or sorrow, of loss or cross, is only for our good. Therefore, “Divinely loved ones.” The words “think it not strange” are in a construction in the Greek text which forbids the continuance of an action already going on. These saints were thinking it strange that they as Christians were going through such trials, as if the Christian life procured for them an immunity from suffering. Peter says, “stop thinking it strange.” The Greek word translated “strange” means more than “unusual.” It means “alien” or “foreign.” Not only did these saints think it a thing unusual that they should be suffering, but they thought it a thing alien or foreign to them, a thing in which they as Christians were not to be at home. They thought that the Christian life was of such a character that suffering was not one of its natural constituent elements. These were first-century saints, people who had been saved out of paganism, who had had no background of a long line of Christian ancestors, and who had not learned as yet that suffering for righteousness’ sake was a natural result of a Christlike life, for the world hates the Lord Jesus and therefore hates the Christian in whose life the Lord Jesus is seen. The words “fiery trial” are from a Greek word which literally means “a burning.” The word occurs in the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament (Proverbs 27:21) in the phrase, “As the fining pot for silver, and the furnace for gold.” It is the word “furnace.” The word occurs also in Psalm 66:10, “For thou, O God, hast proved us: thou hast tried us, as silver is tried.” One translator renders it, “thou hast smelted us as silver is smelted.” Thus we could translate instead of “fiery trial,” “smelting process.” Peter says that suffering for righteousness’ sake is a smelting process. The illustration is that of the ancient goldsmith who refines the crude gold ore in his crucible. The pure metal is mixed with much foreign material from which it must be separated. The only way to bring about this separation is to reduce the ore to liquid form. The impurities rise to the surface and are then skimmed off. But intense heat is needed to liquefy this ore. So the goldsmith puts his crucible in the fire, reduces the ore to a liquid state and skims off the impurities. When he can see the reflection of his face clearly mirrored in the surface of the liquid, he knows that the contents are pure gold. The smelting process has done its work. Christian suffering, whether it be in the form of persecution because of a Christlike life, or whether it comes to us in the form of the trials and testings which are the natural accompaniment of a Christlike life, such as illness, sorrow, or financial losses, is always used by a God of love to refine our lives. It burns out the dross, makes for humi1ity, purifies and increases our faith, and enriches out lives. And like the goldsmith of old, God keeps us in the smelting furnace until He can see the reflection of the face of the Lord Jesus in our lives. God is not so much interested in how much work we do for Him, as He is in how much we resemble His Son. Sometimes we think that if God would remove the

present affliction or handicap which to us seems to put a limitation upon our usefulness to Him, we could do far more efficient work for Him. Our first answer to that would be that God knows what He is doing, and it is not for us to question His dealings with us. Our second answer is that all things being equal, we might be able to do more work for Him. But God is not interested in the quantity of work but in the quality. We may not be able to turn out as much work for the Lord Jesus as some other saint, but if the furnace of affliction has produced in us a more Christlike character, the service we do render, is of far more value than the service rendered by the saint who does not have so much of the Lord Jesus in his life. The third answer is that God is building Christian personality for eternity, which is far more important to Him than the amount of service one might render in this brief life. The word “happened” is literally “happened by chance.” Nothing happens by chance in the Christian life. Nothing is allowed to come to a saint which does not come through the permissive will of God. God built a fence around Job, and Satan could not touch him until God opened the gate. And then when Satan did come in, he was still acting under the limitations imposed upon him by God. Therefore Peter says “Divinely loved ones, stop entertaining the thought that the smelting process which is operated among you and which is for the purpose of testing you, is a thing alien to you, as if an alien thing were falling by chance upon you.” Instead of thinking that suffering is a thing alien to them, the saints are exhorted to rejoice that such is their lot. But this rejoicing has its limitations. They are to rejoice in the fact of this suffering only in as far as these sufferings are a natural consequence or a natural accompaniment of a Christlike life. The word “inasmuch” is from a Greek word which means “in as far.” They are not to rejoice when they suffer for evil doing, but there is good cause for them to rejoice when suffering as a Christian, for then they are coparticipants of the sufferings of Christ. He suffered for righteousness’ sake, and the saints experience the same kind of suffering. Not that we can be co-participant with Him in His expiatory sufferings which He endured on the Cross, but in His sufferings endured during His ministry on earth during which He suffered the abuse and persecution of sinners against Himself. This is what Paul refers to when he says (Col. 1:24), “And fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake which is the church.” It was the expiatory sufferings of Christ by which He purchased the Church with His own blood (Acts 20:28). It is the suffering for righteousness’ sake which is the natural accompaniment of the efforts of our Lord and His apostles and all the Christian witnesses down the centuries which had for their purpose the bringing of lost sinners to a saving knowledge of the Lamb of God who poured out His blood that sinners might be saved. Therefore, saints are to rejoice in the fact that they are co-participants of the sufferings of Christ. This persecution took the form sometimes of bitter ridicule and invective. The words, “if ye be reproached for the name of Christ” are in the Greek, “if, as is the case, ye are having cast in your teeth, reproach because of the name of Christ.” The word “reproach” in the Greek text is the same word translated “revile” in Matthew 5:11. The word “if” here represents a fulfilled condition. These saints were being reviled by their former pagan associates because they were now living such holy lives. Peter says that if that is the case, they are happy. The word “happy” is from a Greek word which literally means “prosperous.” The idea is that the fact that these saints were being persecuted, was an indication that they were in a happy or prosperous condition spiritually. John writes to

Gaius in his third epistle that he wishes above all things that his financial and physical condition might be as prosperous as the prosperity of his soul. Thus persecution by the world is an evidence of a good, healthy, spiritual state. But suffering for righteousness sake is also an indication, Peter tells us, that the spirit of glory and of God is resting upon us. The construction in the Greek indicates that it is the same spirit that is meant, namely, the Holy Spirit of God. He is the Spirit of the glory and at the same time the Spirit of God. As the Spirit of the glory, He is the reality of which the Shekinah Glory was the type. As the Spirit of God, He is the third Person of the Triune God. The word “resteth” is from a Greek word which is found in a manuscript of b.c. 103 as a technical term used in agriculture. It spoke of a farmer resting his land by sowing light crops upon it. The farmer thus relieved the land of the burden of producing a heavy crop that season, which gave the land an opportunity to recuperate and thus gain strength. The same word is used in Matthew 11:28–30, where it is translated from a verb form in verse 28 in the words “I will give rest,” and in verse 29 from the noun form in the word “rest.” Our Lord said, “I will rest you.” He takes the load and thus rests us. The word in both the Matthew and Peter passages means “to cause or permit one to cease from any movement or labor in order to recover and collect one’s strength.” In Matthew, the Lord Jesus causes the believer to cease from his own efforts at carrying the load of sin, taking it upon Himself at Calvary, allowing the believer in his new life power imparted, to function in the Christian life. In Peter, the Holy Spirit rests and refreshes the believer by Himself putting out sin in the life, keeping it out, and producing His own fruit. This in the life of the Christian is the target of the reproach of the world. The word “resteth” does not indicate a position of rest which the Holy Spirit has taken upon the Christian, for the Spirit does not come upon saints in this dispensation as He did in the dispensation of law. He comes into their hearts to make the saint His permanent residence, (James 4:5) “Do you think the scripture saith in vain, ‘The Spirit who has been caused to take up His permanent residence in us has a passionate longing to the point of envy?’ ” The word “resteth” refers to the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit in the saint who is subjected to His control, and this will result in persecution by the world, for the Spirit glorifies the Lord Jesus in the life of the believer, and the world hates the Lord of glory. Therefore Peter says, “In view of the fact that you have cast in your teeth as it were, reproach because of the name of Christ, consider yourselves as being in a spiritually prosperous condition, because that is an indication that the Spirit of the glory, even the Spirit of God is resting with refreshing power upon you.” The Holy Spirit in His ministry produces that spiritually prosperous condition. Peter again refers to Christian suffering as a smelting process in chapter one, verse seven, in the words, “That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honor and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ” (1:7). These saints had been put to grief in the experiencing of many kinds of temptations, the word “temptations” in the Greek, referring to trials, testings, and solicitations to do evil. These, Peter speaks of, as “the trial of your faith.” That is, these trials, testings, and solicitations to do evil constituted the trial of their faith. The word “trial” used here in connection with “faith” is from a different word than that translated “temptations.” It means “to test something for the purpose of approving it.” The word was used in secular documents of the testing of candidates for the degree of Doctor of Medicine, this test being given them for the purpose of approving them. It is in contrast to the word translated “temptations” in verse six which means “to try or tempt in

order to put to the proof to discover what good or evil is in a person.” From the fact that such a scrutiny 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 undergoing the test. Hence, Satan is called the “tempter,” this Greek word being used as a proper noun. God allows these testing times, trials, and solicitations to do evil to come to us in order that while Satan may try to discover what evil there is in us and try to bring it out in our experience, He might test our faith and approve it as a living God-given faith because by His grace we have exercised it in gaining victory over the very things which Satan desired to use in an effort at bringing about our downfall. Thus our faith is shown to be an approved faith. In addition to our faith being approved in the smelting process, it is also being purified. The self-dependence and unbelief to which saints are so prone, is burned away, and our faith strengthened. Thus it is the approval of our faith to which Peter refers in the words “the trial of your faith.” Then Peter brings in the illustration of the goldsmith as he refines the gold. He says that this approval of our faith is much more precious than perishable gold, even though that gold be approved by fire-testing. That is, the process of refining and purifying gold is compared with God’s process of purifying our faith. Purified and approved gold may be of value for a time, but our faith purified of all of its attendant unbelief and self-dependence is of eternal value. This faith will be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ. A fuller translation of this verse is as follows, “In order that the approval of your faith, which faith was examined by testing, that approval being much more precious than perishable gold even though that gold be approved by fire-testing, might be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.” Thus, Christian suffering, whether it be in the form of persecution by the world, trials and testings in the form of hardships, privation, illness, or any other kind of suffering that is a natural accompaniment of the Christian life, yes, temptations which Satan puts before us, are a potent means in the hands of God of purging the dross out of our lives, of purifying and strengthening our faith, and of conforming us to the image of His dear Son. Christian suffering is the crucible into which God places us, and in which He keeps us until He can see a reflection of the face of Jesus Christ in our lives. It is a mark of God’s especial favor towards and confidence in that saint who is exercised thereby.

X. The Self-Emptied Life A Quarrel between two saints in the church at Philippi (Phil. 4:2), and other minor dissensions, gave rise to one of the greatest Christological passages in the New Testament. The apostle is exhorting to humility among the believers in 2:3–4, and now in 2:5–8 presents our blessed Lord as the example. Humility of life is therefore our analytical key which will unlock the treasures of these wonderful verses. The words, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus,” could be variously translated: “Be thinking this in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus.” “Be having this mind in you which was also in Christ Jesus.” “Reflect in your own mind that which was also in Christ Jesus.” “Let the same purpose inspire you as was in Christ Jesus” (Way). Putting all these together, we have what the apostle means. He describes the mind of Christ in verses 5–8, presenting the controlling factor, humility, that made His mind what it was.

The word “form” comes from a Greek word which refers to the outward expression one gives of his inner being. It is used here as one would use it in the sentence, “The tennis-player’s form was excellent.” We mean that the expression he gave in action of his ability to play tennis was excellent. The word has no idea of physical form or shape. Here the word refers to that expression of the glory and majesty of His deity which our Lord gave to the angels before He came to earth in incarnation. This expression was through a spiritual medium, discernible only to the spiritual faculties of the angels. The same Greek word is found in Matthew 17:2 with a preposition prefixed which when in composition signifies a change. It is translated there, “transfigured,” but the sentence could be rendered, “His mode of expression was changed before them.” That is, our Lord’s usual mode of expression in His days of humiliation on earth was that of a servant (bond-slave [Greek], same word translated “servant” in Romans 1:1). That was an expression which came from His innermost being as the One who “came not to be ministered unto but to minister.” But now for a moment, the mode of His expression was changed. He gave expression to the essence of deity in which He is a co-participant with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. The splendor and majesty of His deity shone through the clay walls of His humanity, and by means of a medium discernible to the physical eyesight of the spectators. But the Philippian passage speaks of an expression of glory not discernible to our physical vision, but only to the spiritual capacities of angels. However, this expression of glory which the angels saw, will be discernible to the saints when they receive their glorified bodies, for then they will be spiritual intelligences with spiritual capacities like the angels. This is what John had in mind when he wrote (I John 3:2), “When He shall appear, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him just as He is.” But in the meanwhile, it is (I Peter 1:8), “Of whom not having had a glimpse, yet whom we love.” Thus our Lord in His preincarnate state manifested the glory of His deity to the holy angels in an outward mode of expression discernible to these spiritual intelligences. This is what is meant by the phrase, “Being in the form of God.” The word “being” is not from the usual verb of “being” in Greek, but from a word which refers to an antecedent condition which is protracted into the present. That is, our Lord’s being in the form of God was true of Him before He became Man and was true of Him at the time of the writing of this epistle, which tells us that in taking upon Himself humanity with its limitations yet without its sin, He lost nothing of His intrinsic deity, its attributes or its prerogatives. We could translate, “Who subsisting, being constitutionally, being by nature, in that mode of existence in which He gave outward expression of the essence of His deity.” The word “God” does not have the article, quality or essence being stressed. The word “thought” in the original, refers to a judgment based upon facts. The word “robbery” is from a Greek word which has two meanings, “a thing unlawfully seized,” and “a prize or treasure to be retained at all hazards.” The context decides which meaning is to be used here. If our Lord considered that equality with God in the expression of the divine essence was not a thing to be unlawfully seized, then He would be asserting His rights to the expression of Deity, for He would be claiming this as His rightful prerogative. But to assert one’s rights does not partake of humility. But if He did not consider this expression of His deity a prize or treasure to be retained at all hazards, He would be showing a willingness to relinquish His divine rights, which is the essence of humility. Paul is setting forth our Lord as an example of humility. Therefore, the second meaning is the one to be taken here.

That is, when He was marked out as the Lamb for sacrifice in the eternal ages before the universe was created, and when He was exercising His divine prerogative of giving expression to the glory of His deity, He did not at that time consider that equality with God such a treasure that its exercise would keep Him from setting aside that activity for the time being, so as to change His mode of expression from that of the glory of Deity to the humiliation of Deity incarnate in humanity. It was the King of Glory willing to step down to the place of a bondslave. But, instead of asserting His prerogative of giving expression to His deity, He “made Himself of no reputation.” The word in the Greek means either “to empty” or “make void.” Of what did He empty Himself? What did He make void? He emptied Himself of self, which is the essence of humility. He made self void, which is again the essence of humility. He set self aside when He set His legitimate desires aside. His rightful natural desire as Deity was to be glorified, to give expression of His glory to the angels. But to go to the Cross, He had to set that desire aside. Setting that desire aside, He set self aside, He emptied Himself of self, He made self void, the very Person who had the right to assert self, which is the prerogative of Deity alone. Here is the supreme example of the selfemptied life. The word “took” is an instrumental participle in the Greek, indicating the means by which the action in the main verb is accomplished. Our Lord set Himself aside by taking upon Himself the form of a servant. The word “form” has the same content of meaning as the word “form” in verse six. The word “servant” is literally “bondslave.” He changed His mode of expression from that of the glory of Deity to that of the humiliation of a bondslave, and in doing that, He set His legitimate desire of being glorified aside, thus setting self aside to express Himself as a bondslave, receiving instead of the worship of the angels, the curses and hatred of mankind. It was the Lord of Glory at the Passover feast (John 13) who laid aside His outer garments to wrap a towel about Himself and perform the duties of a slave. Those garments speak of the expression of glory given to the angels in His preincarnate state. That towel, symbol of His position as a bondslave, speaks of the humility with which He clothed Himself. One had to be laid aside if the other was to be taken up. While He was kneeling on the floor washing the disciples’ feet, He was still the Lord of Glory although He looked like a bondslave. The travel-stained, weary, homeless, itinerant preacher of Galilee looked like a man, yet He was the Lord from heaven. When He had finished the duties of a bondslave in an oriental household, He laid aside the towel and took His robes again. When He had finished His work of salvation wrought out on Calvary’s Cross, He took His robes of Glory again, resuming the expression of the glory of Deity to the angels. He “was made in the likeness of men.” The Greek for “likeness” refers to “that which has been made after the likeness of something else.” Our Lord’s humanity was a real likeness, not a mere phantom. But this likeness did not express the whole of Christ’s nature. His mode of manifestation resembled what men are. But His humanity was not all that there was of Him. He was not a man, but the Son of God manifest in the flesh and nature of man. He was “found in fashion as a man.” The Greek word for “fashion” refers to that which is purely outward and appeals to the senses. The contrast here is between what He was in Himself, God, and what He appeared in the eyes of man. “Likeness” states the fact of His real resemblance to men in mode of existence. “Fashion” defines the outward mode and expression. While on earth, He did not give expression to the glory of His deity except

on the Mount of Transfiguration. He appeared as the Man Christ Jesus to the world around Him. He was in His humiliation. In this lowly estate He humbled Himself. The Greek word translated “humbled” is used in an early document, of the Nile River at its low stage, in the sentence, “It runs low,” a good description of the humility of our Lord, who said of Himself, “I am meek and lowly of heart.” He became obedient, not to death, but obedient to the Father up to the point of death, even the death of a cross. The translation reads: “This mind be ye constantly having in you which also was in Christ Jesus, who has always been and at present still continues to be by nature in that mode of being in which He gives outward expression of His inmost nature, that of Deity, and who did not after weighing the facts, consider it a treasure to be clutched and retained at all hazards, to be equal with God (in the expression of His essential nature), but emptied Himself, having taken upon Himself that mode of being in which He gave outward expression of Himself as a bondslave, doing this by entering into a new state of existence, that of likeness to mankind. And being found to be in outward guise as a man, He brought Himself to a lowly place by having become obedient to the extent of death, even the death of a cross” (2:5–8). This is the self-emptied life, ever an example and a challenge to us as servants of the One who came not to be ministered unto but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many.

XI. Forsaken Our blessed Lord cried on the Cross, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matt. 27:46). The Greek word “forsaken” is a composite of three words, “to leave,” “down,” and “in.” The first has the idea of forsaking one. The second suggests rejection, defeat, helplessness. The third refers to some place or circumstance. The total meaning of the word is that of forsaking someone in a state of defeat or helplessness in the midst of hostile circumstances. The word means “to abandon, desert, to leave in straits, to leave helpless, to leave destitute, to leave in the lurch, to let one down.” All these meanings were included in that awful cry that came from the lips of the Son of God as He was about to die for lost humanity. Many believe, and with good reason, that our Lord uttered Psalm 22 in its entirety while hanging on the Cross, verses one to six speaking of His abandonment by Deity, verses seven to thirteen telling of the ridicule to which He was subjected, verses fourteen to eighteen describing His physical sufferings, verses nineteen to twenty-one being His prayer for resurrection, and verses twenty-two to thirty-one constituting His praise for answered prayer even before the prayer for resurrection was actually answered. The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, uses the same Greek word for “forsaken.” The word remained constant in meaning for three hundred years, and when Matthew wrote, was chosen by the Holy Spirit as the one that would adequately convey to the reader the content of the word uttered by our Lord in His native tongue. When our Lord uttered that cry, He was speaking as the Man Christ Jesus, Very God, yet true man, and therefore when recognizing God as His God, speaking in the capacity of His humanity. The cry was addressed to God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. The possessive pronoun “my,” tells us that while our Lord was bearing the sin of humanity, while He was charged by the High Court of Heaven with those sins just as if He had committed them, He yet had the consciousness that that indissoluble union between

Father and Son in the God-head was still a fact, that He still partook of the same essence of Deity as God the Father, and that He in His intrinsic purity and righteousness was still that spotless Lamb of God. But the fact still remains that He was abandoned and deserted by God the Father, and for the reason that God “appointed Him to be sin for us who knew no sin; that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (II Cor. 5:21). A fellowship had been broken that had always existed, a fellowship that had continued all during our Lord’s earthly life. But now the Father’s smiling face was turned away. Understand the “how” of it we cannot. Feel the awfulness of it, we may not. Believe the fact of it, we must. Our Lord said His God had abandoned Him, deserted Him. No words come from the skies in answer to the prayer of our Lord. He answers it Himself in Psalm 22:3 when He says that God abandoned Him because He was holy, whereas the Son was laden with the sin of mankind. This unanswered prayer of our Lord was predicted in type in Leviticus 5:11, where an offerer too poor to bring two turtledoves or two pigeons for a sin-offering, could bring the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour, just enough to bake one day’s supply of bread, the giving up of the flour typifying the giving up of life, thus pointing to our Lord’s death. But he was forbidden to include frankincense with the flour. Frankincense is a type of answered prayer. Flour without frankincense speaks of our Lord’s death and His unanswered prayer. These words, “Why hast thou abandoned Me” were addressed to God the Father. God the Father abandoned Him. Our Lord cried, “My God, My God, why hast thou left Me helpless, destitute, in the lurch, why hast thou let Me down,” These words were addressed to God the Holy Spirit. All through our Lord’s life on earth, as the Man Christ Jesus, He lived in dependence upon the Holy Spirit. That was part of His humiliation. To be God, and yet to live as a man in dependence upon God, that was His normal life on earth. The words, “Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness” (Luke 4:1), are characteristic of our Lord’s entire life. No prayer our Lord ever uttered, but was energized by the Spirit. No temptation He ever overcame, but He did so in the power of the Spirit. No miracle He ever performed, but it was done through dependence upon the Holy Spirit. No thought ever passed through His mind, no word ever left His lips, but it was originated by the Spirit. But now, when He needed the help of the Holy Spirit most, in the moment of His direst need, the Holy Spirit left Him helpless, destitute. He left Him in the lurch. He let Him down in a set of circumstances that were antagonistic, frightful, terrible. He was abandoned by Heaven, spurned by earth, laden with man’s sin, suffering the excruciating anguish of crucifixion. He suffered all alone. The same sin offering that forbade the inclusion of frankincense, forbade the provision of oil. Oil is a type of the Holy Spirit. No oil in the flour, speaks of the withdrawal of the Holy Spirit’s sustaining presence at the Cross. The Holy Spirit left our Lord. This fact will help us to understand I Peter 3:18, where our Lord is spoken of as being put to death with respect to the flesh, but quickened or made alive with respect to the spirit, His human spirit, from which the Holy Spirit had departed when He left our Lord helpless on the Cross. That is, our Lord died with respect to His human body, but in His human spirit, made alive again by the Holy Spirit after He had abandoned our Lord, He proceeded and made a proclamation to the fallen angels in Tartarus, (I Peter 3:18; II Peter 2:4; Jude 6; Gen. 6:1–4). Not only did God the Father and God the Holy Spirit abandon the Man Christ Jesus on

the Cross, but God the Son now turns against Himself. It was as if a man of high ideals who had lived an exemplary life, should at its close be guilty of a loathsome deed. From the exalted position of his high idealism, he looks down upon himself, loathes and repudiates himself. Our Lord as the Son of God, holy, spotless, repudiated His own humanity now laden will sin not His own. “The moral sense of His own deity revolted against His own humanity as the representative of sin.” Hear His words, “But I am a worm” (Psalm 22:6). “Mine iniquities have taken hold upon me, so I am not able to look up; they are more than the hairs of mine head: therefore my heart faileth me” (Psalm 40:12). In Him as He hung on the Cross, was the fullness of Deity. He was forsaken of the fullness of Deity. That is the meaning of that terrible cry, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Unsaved reader, have you some small conception now of what the Lord Jesus suffered for you? He would have endured it all for you alone, if you were the only lost soul in the universe. Does such love touch your heart, Do you see your own sinfulness and lost condition in view of all this? Will you not just now say to the Lord Jesus, “I trust Thee right now as my own personal Saviour, the One who died and poured out His precious blood for me as a sinner”?

XII. A Portrait of the Suffering Servant of Jehovah Household slaves, put yourselves in constant subjection with every fear to your absolute lords and masters, not only to those who are good at heart and reasonable, but also to those who are against you. For this subjection to those who are against you is something which is beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and is therefore commendable, namely, when a person because of the conscious sense of his relation to God bears up under pain, suffering unjustly. For what sort of fame would be yours if when ye fall short of the mark and are pummeled with the fist, ye endure this patiently. But when ye are in the habit of doing good and then suffer constantly for it, if this ye patiently endure, this is an unusual and not-to-be-expected action, and therefore commendable in the sight of God. For to this very thing were ye called, namely, to patient endurance in the case of unjust punishment, remembering that Christ also suffered on our behalf, leaving behind for you a model for you to imitate, in order that by close application you might follow in His footprints, who never in a single instance committed a sin, and in whose mouth, after careful scrutiny, there was not even found craftiness; who when His heart was being wounded with an accursed sting, and when He was being made the object of harsh rebuke and biting, never retaliated, and who while suffering never threatened, but rather, constantly committed all to the One who judges righteously; who Himself carried up to the cross our sins in His own body and offered Himself there as on an altar, doing this in order that we, having ceased to exist with respect to sins, might live with respect to righteousness, by means of whose bleeding stripes ye were healed. For ye were straying like sheep, but ye have turned back to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls (I Peter 2:18–25). Word Studies in Authorized Version Verse 18 “Servants” is from the Greek word referring to household slaves. Many of these were won to Christianity in the first century, and occupied positions of servitude in

heathen households. These are exhorted literally, “Put yourselves in subjection to your masters.” “Masters” is from a word which means “an absolute owner,” and which comes into our language in the word “despot.” There are two classes of these “despots,” the good and kind, and the froward. The word “good” in the Greek refers to intrinsic goodness, namely, good at heart. “Gentle” is from a word meaning “mild, yielding, indulgent.” It comes in its derivation from a word meaning “not being unduly rigorous.” Alford describes the master, “Where not strictness of legal right, but consideration for another, is the rule of practice.” The idea can be summed up in the word “reasonable,” a reasonable man. “Froward” is from a word which literally means “crooked.” The English word “froward” comes from the Anglo-Saxon “from-ward,” namely, “averse.” It describes a master whose face is averse to the slave, whose whole attitude is one of averseness to him. Household slaves are exhorted to put themselves in subjection to both classes. Verse 19 The word “this” refers to the phrase immediately preceding. “This thing,” it is in the Greek, namely, that of being obedient to masters whose faces are set against their slaves. “Thankworthy” is from the same word in Greek that is translated “grace” when referring to the grace of God as in Romans 5:20. The word when used in connection with a human being, refers to the doing of something which is out of or beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and is therefore commendable. What God did at Calvary is surely out of or beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected. All the human race could rightfully expect was divine wrath because of its sin. But it is offered grace instead. So Peter exhorts slaves to put themselves in subjection to these masters whose faces are set against them, and so do that which is out of or beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, namely, a surly obedience, and instead, offer them a willing subjection. This is grace, provided by God, and produced in the heart of the believer by the God of all grace. One can see what effect such an attitude would have upon many masters, leading them to the Lord Jesus. The words “conscience toward God” are interesting. The idea in the Greek is not that of conscientiousness in the ordinary sense, but of the conscious sense of one’s relation to God, a realization of God’s presence and one’s relationship to Him. Thus the slave is exhorted to perform his duties to his master “not with eyeservice as menpleasers” (Eph. 6:6), but with the consciousness that he is working under the all-seeing eye of God. “Endure” is from a Greek word which literally means “to be under a burden and to carry it.” Vincent says, “Suffering here is not because of a conscientious sense of duty, but because of a realization of one’s relation to God as a son, which involves suffering with Him no less than being glorified with Him.” “Wrongfully” is from the Greek word which means “justly,” with the Greek letter Alpha prefixed, making the word mean “unjustly.” That is, as the Just One suffered for the unjust on the cross, and suffered unjustly before the law which we broke, so slaves are exhorted to suffer unjustly if they are called upon to do so. Verse 20 “Glory” is not from the Greek word which is translated “glory” in other places in the New Testament, where it refers to the glory of God in each case. The word Peter uses is found only here in the New Testament. It was used in secular documents to refer to glory in the sense of “fame.” Peter says that a man will never become famous by patiently enduring punishment which is rightfully inflicted. “Buffeted” is from a Greek word which means “to strike with the fist.” The same word is used in Matthew 26:67, where the angry mob struck our Lord with their fists. The result of those brutal blows is referred to in Isaiah’s prophecy (52:14), “His visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men.” That is, the brutalities inflicted upon our Lord

marred His face so that it did not look human any more. Peter was there and saw it all. This passage bears the marks of his memories of that terrible night. So he says to the household slaves to whom he is writing, “What fame will come to you if when you are struck with the fist for your faults, ye take it patiently?” These slaves knew what it was to be beaten unjustly by the hard fists of their masters. Peter reminds them of their Saviour and Lord who was struck with the hard fists of an infuriated mob, not for His own sins, for He had none, but because He, the spotless Lamb of God, was going to the cross for our sins. The word “patiently” in this context speaks, not of the dull reluctance of a criminal who cannot avoid his punishment, but of a patient endurance, whether the suffering is endured justly or unjustly. The words “acceptable with God” are most precious. “Acceptable” is from the Greek word which means “grace,” and is the same word used when the Bible speaks of the grace of God. The same word is translated “thankworthy” in verse nineteen. The word, as we saw, refers to an action that is far above the usually expected thing, something worthy of meritorious mention. Peter says that patient endurance in suffering by the innocent is meritorious, is something worthy of commendation in the sight of God. The great example of that is our Lord. A bondslave is not greater than his Lord (John 15:20). If the Saviour thus suffered, so should each one of His saints be willing if necessary to patiently endure unjust suffering. Verse 21 “Hereunto” means literally, “unto this,” that is, “unto this circumscribed state,” that of suffering wrongfully. That is, Christian suffering is one of the very definite parts of the saint’s experience. The word “also,” Alford says, puts the wrongful suffering of a Christian slave on a new plane, for Christ suffered in the same way, and we participate with Him in those sufferings. The word “for” is from the preposition of substitution, referring to the act of one person taking the place of another. Christ took our place on the cross. He became sin who knew no sin. He paid the penalty which was justly ours. His sufferings were expiatory, ours are not. They are alike only in that both are examples of unjust suffering. The word “leaving” is literally “leaving behind.” “Example” is from a Greek word referring to a writing copy for one to imitate. It was used of the copy-head at the top of a child’s exercise book for him to imitate, and included all the letters of the alphabet. How that reminds one of our Lord’s words, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last” (Rev. 1:8). “Follow” is from a word which means “to follow closely upon,” and denotes close application. As a child follows closely the shape of the letters and by close application reproduces them for the teacher, so saints should follow closely “the writing copy” given us to imitate, the picture of our Lord in the sacred pages of Scripture. The copied character bears a closer likeness to the original when the student applies himself to his task. So the more closely a saint applies himself to the practice of imitating his Lord, the clearer the likeness will be in his life of the One Altogether Lovely. Verse 22 The word “guile” in the Greek refers to craftiness or trickery. Our Lord said, “I am the truth” (John 14:6). “Truth” comes from a Greek word meaning “not to hide,” or “that which is not hidden.” Our Lord’s words and actions were always out in the open. Nothing was covered. He employed no crafty or tricky methods in His ministry. His was a life open to the gaze of everyone. So should our behaviour be open and above-board. The words “was found,” indicate in the original something stronger than would be expressed by the simple verb of being. They indicate a guilelessness which stood the test of scrutiny (Matt. 26:60, John 18:38, 19:4, 6). Again, the words “did no sin” are from a tense that causes us to translate, “who never in a single instance committed sin.” Verse 23 “Revileth” is a strong word. The same word is used in I Corinthians 4:12. It

refers to a harsh railing which not only rebukes a man, but also sharply bites him, and stamps him with open contumely. It is to wound a man with an accursed sting. Thus was our Lord reviled, and His servant Paul likewise. In that manner were the household slaves treated, to whom Peter refers. When undergoing such treatment, a Christian should not resent it. When our Lord suffered, He did not keep on threatening. The word “but” in the original can be translated “yea, rather.” It removes the thing previously negatived altogether out of our field of view and substitutes something totally different. Instead of threatening, He kept on committing Himself and all these insults and injuries to God the Father, the One who judges righteously. Verse 24 “Bare” is a word in Scripture that belongs to the idea of sacrifice and is not to be disassociated from it. He “bore up to the cross as to an altar and offered Himself there.” The word “tree” here refers not to a literal tree nor merely to a piece of wood, but to something fashioned out of wood, in this case, a cross. The words “being dead,” come from a compound word which literally means “having become off,” that is, having ceased to exist with regard to sin. The idea is one of separation from the power of the sinful nature. Not only is the power of indwelling sin broken in the believer, but the divine nature is implanted in order that we should live with respect to righteousness. This is the result of our Lord’s work on the cross for us, which lays upon us an obligation to become free with respect to sin, to be done with sin, and to live a righteous life. The word “stripes” in the Greek, refers to a bloody wale which is found to issue from under a blow. Peter remembered the body of the Lord Jesus Christ after the scourging, the flesh so dreadfully mangled that the disfigured form appeared in his eyes like one single bruise. How often were these household slaves beaten by their masters, and frequently unjustly. Then they could remember the sufferings of their Lord and be comforted. Verse 25 They were sheep who had wandered away, but now had returned to the Shepherd and the Overseer of their souls. The word “bishop” in the Greek means literally, “one who oversees.”

XIII. The Divine Sculptor’s Masterpiece “Whom He did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first born among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29, 30). The glorious story is told in five words, “foreknow, predestinate, called, justified, glorified.” The first step in the salvation of a believer is God’s foreknowledge of him. The word is used seven times in the New Testament. In two instances it means simply “to know previously” (Acts 26:5, and II Peter 3:17). In the other five cases, it has a deeper broader meaning. In Acts 2:23 we have, “Him being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.” These words are in a construction in the Greek text which shows that the word “foreknowledge” refers to the same thing to which the word “counsel” refers. The Greek word for “foreknowledge” is translated in I Peter 1:20 by the word “foreordained,” and means “to designate before” to a position or function. The word “counsel” is from a Greek word which like the English word refers to the interchange of opinions, to deliberation together, to the exercise of deliberative judgment. The two verbs in Greek which have the same root have the following implications. The one refers to the exercise of the will but with premeditation, and is illustrated in the

sentence from the papyri, the latter term referring to the non-literary manuscripts of the early centuries of the Christian era which afford abundant illustrations of the usage of New Testament Greek words, “I wish to begin to practice the trade of a river-worker.” The other refers to an intention which is the result of reflection, and is used in the sentence “I have formed this intention.” The word “determinate” which describes “counsel” is from a word which literally means “to draw a boundary around,” thus “to divide or separate from,” and is used in the clause, “Since the boundaries of a piece of land are to be fixed.” It comes finally to mean, “to fix a limit” or “to set apart.” The words “counsel” and “foreknowledge” refer to the same act of God when as the result of the exercise of deliberative judgment, that judgment having been for the purpose of fixing a limit upon something, He designated the believer to the position of a saved person before this universe was created. The word “chosen” in Ephesians 1:4 speaks of the same act. The word “foreknow” in Romans 8:29, 11:2; I Peter 1:2, and Acts 2:23 means “to designate to a certain position or function, this act of designating being dictated by judgment that had found its basis in deliberation.” The sculptor had a wonderful son. He had many statues in his art gallery which he had cut out of rough granite in the course of his lifetime. But now he has come to the decision that he would like a group of statues all made in the very image of that son. So he goes to the stone quarry, and after some deliberation selects some large blocks of granite which the quarrymen have blasted out of the mountainside. One might wonder at his selection, for they appear to be the least promising of all those from which he had to choose. There they were, scarred by the weather, discolored, cracked. In the eternity before this universe was created, the Divine Sculptor had it in His heart to make some images of His Son, the Lord Jesus, not carved out of granite, but moulded from living personalities. He passed by fallen angels (Heb. 2:16 “Not of angels doth He take hold, but He taketh hold of the seed of Abraham”), and chose inferior material, lost human beings, creatures full of sin, rebellious toward Him, scarred and seamed with the deadly result of evil-doing. He chose the most unlikely material He could find. He gets more glory to Himself by choosing red clay into which He has breathed the breath of lives (Gen. 2:7) and conforming that inferior material into the very image of His Son than if He had taken hold of angels for salvation. In perfect justice and righteousness He passed by fallen angels and in infinite mercy chose fallen human beings. After the sculptor had selected the blocks of granite, he placed a tag upon each of them. On the tag was written, “to be conformed to the image of my son.” This sculptor had many blocks of granite coming from that quarry, some to be used for one purpose and others for another. But these which were labelled, “to be conformed to the image of my son,” were to be kept separate. They were labelled for this one destiny. So the Divine Sculptor, after designating certain out of lost humanity to be conformed to the image of His Son, predestinated them to this wonderful destiny. The word “predestinated” comes from a Greek word which means “to fix the limit to, to fix a boundary beforehand.” It was used in the sentence “Since the boundaries of a piece of land are to be fixed.” After God foreknew the sinner, He put a tag upon him, “to be conformed to the image of my Son.” The sinner was to be kept for just that purpose and no other. This is the meaning of the Greek word translated “predestinated.” It is the same Greek word translated “determinate” in Acts 2:23. After the sculptor had selected his blocks of granite at the quarry, and had put a label

upon each one, “to be conformed to the image of my son,” he returned to his home and sent his men with the large stone wagon and derrick to haul the granite to his studios. Just so, after He fore-knew us, that is, after He had chosen us to a certain destiny, and after He had predestinated us, that is, after He had put a label on us “to be conformed to the image of my Son,” which label answered to the specifications of the foreknowledge, the Divine Sculptor called us. This Greek word was used in the first century as a technical word in legal practice, and meant “an official summons,” as in the case of the summoning of a witness to court. The word means here more than a mere invitation. It is a divine summons. The one summoned is constituted willing to obey this summons, not against but with his free will and consent. It is an effectual call. The one called always responds. “By the grace are ye saved,” namely, that particular grace made possible of bestowal and thus operative at Calvary, “and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,” the word “that” in the Greek text referring not to the word “faith,” but to the idea of salvation which dominates the context. Salvation is all of grace. The faith we exercise in our appropriation of the Saviour is given by God, and is included in the salvation provided. Thus the call of the Divine Sculptor is a divine summons which is always answered by the one summoned (Eph. 2:8). After the sculptor has his chosen blocks of granite in his studios, he starts work on them. There they are, scarred, irregular, rough, cracked, discolored. A visitor comes in. “What, do you mean to tell me that you are using that poor looking material for the statues of your son?” “Yes,” replies the sculptor, “I receive far more satisfaction and fame from using inferior material and turning out a superior piece of work. And, after all, you are directing your criticism against these rough hewn blocks of granite. I do not see these when I work. I have in mind the finished product, and that will be perfect. You are not touching the statue of my son with your criticism, but rather, these rough blocks of granite. I stand here in their justification, for I see them as perfect, conformed already to the image of my son. In my reputation as a sculptor, I have assumed the responsibility for choosing such inferior granite. If my reputation is being maligned as a result, I cannot help it. I am doing it for the sake of the finished product and the increased fame which will finally come to me.” And so Satan enters the studios of the Divine Sculptor and prefers charges against the saints. How imperfect they are, how weak, how unfaithful, how prone to sin. But he is only looking at the unfinished product. His charges fall short of the mark, for the Divine Sculptor answers, “Your charges may all be true, but I am not looking at the material upon which I am working, but at the finished product. I took upon myself at Calvary all their sins. I made myself of no reputation (Phil 2:7). Their sins have been paid for and put away on the basis of divine justice. I see each saint right now, perfect, sinless, shining with all the beauty of my only begotten Son.” So God justifies us. His Son is our righteousness, our beauty, our adornment. The sculptor goes on, day after day with his work of cutting the granite. Rough corners are hewn off, discolorations disappear. Jagged surfaces are made smooth. The block of granite begins to assume the shape and contour of the sculptor’s son. But the sculptor does not see the unfinished block of granite before him. He sees the image of his son as he looks right through the rough edges, the weather scarred surface. God foreknew us, predestinated us, called us, justified us, and glorified us. We are already glorified in His eyes. The Divine Sculptor sees the finished product while He through the process of sanctification, namely, the work of the Holy Spirit, gradually conforms us to

the image of His Son. We are already glorified in His eyes. Some day we will be in actuality what the Divine Sculptor sees us to be now as He works upon us. In the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump, we shall be changed, the miracle of glorification completing the work which the process of sanctification began (I Cor. 15:52), and then “we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him just as He is” (I John 3:2). A sinner, saved by grace, conformed to the image of the wonderful Son of God, that is the Divine Sculptor’s masterpiece.

XIV. The Soul-Winner’s Adornment In I Peter 3:1–5 we have the case of Christian women of the first century seeking to win their unsaved husbands to the Lord Jesus as Saviour. These husbands are of that nonpersuasible type that will not listen to reason. Obstinacy, stubbornness, inflexibility are here personified. We see this in the use of the words “obey not” which come from a Greek word literally meaning, “non-persuasible.” The word “if” represents a fulfilled condition. There were such cases in those days, as there are such instances today. The Christian wife is exhorted to be in subjection to her unsaved husband, in order that he might without a word, not the Word, be won by the behaviour of the wife. “Behaviour” is from the Greek word rendered “conversation,” the latter having changed its meaning since the a.v. was translated. There is no definite article before the second use of the word “word.” No one has ever been won to the Lord Jesus apart from the Word of God. Peter is exhorting these wives who have given the gospel to their husbands time after time, to stop talking about it lest they start nagging, and instead, live the gospel before them. If the husband is so obstinate as to refuse to listen to her, well then, the next best thing is to keep quiet and let the gospel speak through a Christlike life. He may refuse to listen to her words, but he cannot but see the Lord Jesus in her life. But as the Christian wife thus seeks to live before her husband, the apostle warns her that she must not depend upon outward adornment in her effort to win her husband to the Lord. Her adornment must come from within, from a heart pervaded with the beauty and fragrance of Christ. Thus it is the presence of the Lord Jesus in the life of the soul-winner which the Holy Spirit uses to attract sinners to Jesus, not the adornment one puts on. This is the principle which Peter brings before us in verses three and four. The word “adornment” is from the Greek word kosmos (kosmo"). It means literally “an ordered system.” It speaks of that which is congruous, fitting. A Christian worker’s clothing should be in keeping with the simplicity, purity, and beauty of the Lord Jesus. What one wears on the outside of the body should be an expression of what is in the heart. Then the Spirit of God speaks of the three parts of a Christian woman’s adornment, the way she wears her hair, the jewelry she puts on, and the apparel she selects. First, she is not to depend upon the plaiting of the hair in her effort to win her husband to the Lord. Reference is made here to the extravagant and costly excesses to which women of the first century went in hair ornament. Quoting from an early manuscript we have this: “The attendants will vote on the dressing of the hair as if a question of reputation or of life were at stake, so great is the trouble she takes in quest of beauty; with so many tiers does she load, with so many continuous stories does she build up on high her head. She is as tall as Andromache in front, behind she is shorter. You would think her another person” (Vincent). Thus, extravagant excesses and intricate artificiality of hairdress are forbidden the Christian woman as adornment.

Second, the wearing of gold is forbidden. The word “wearing” is from a Greek word which means literally “to hang around,” as one hangs ornaments around a Christmas tree. The wearing of jewelry is not forbidden here, but the gaudy, conspicuous, extravagant, obtrusive display of the same as adornment Third, dependence upon apparel is forbidden. The purpose of clothing is for the protection of the body. The purpose of apparel is for the ornamentation of the person. That which is forbidden is the donning of apparel for the purpose of making ourselves pleasing in the eyes of the unsaved so that we may win them to a saving faith in the Lord Jesus. Why does not dependence upon outward adornment help us to win souls to the Lord Jesus? First, it is because the Holy Spirit does not use the styles of the world in winning a soul to the Lord, as He seeks to work through the believer. Second, it is because such an elaborate display satisfies the lust or desire of the eyes of the unsaved one whom we are seeking to win. When a Christian worker thus appeals to the fallen nature of the sinner, she cannot at the same time appeal to him to trust in the Lord Jesus. Third, it is because such a display destroys the personal testimony of the soul winner. We may be fundamental in our doctrine, and yet defeat the power of the Word we give out by the modernism of our appearance. The unsaved person will say, “What you appear to be on the outside speaks so loudly I cannot hear what you are saying.” For these reasons, no dependence must be placed upon outward adornment as we seek to win the lost. Instead of this, we are to depend upon the hidden man of the heart. The expression refers to the inner heart life of the Christian in which the Lord Jesus reigns supreme. When we depend upon that for our adornment, then the Lord Jesus is seen in the life, His beauty, His sweetness, His simplicity. This the Holy Spirit uses as He gently woos a soul to the Saviour. The more of the Lord Jesus which the sinner sees in the believer’s life, the more powerful is the latter’s testimony, the more usable her words, usable to the Holy Spirit. Alas, as someone has said, “What cheap perfume we sometimes use” This brings us to certain principles regarding adornment. If a personality is to be seen at its best, it must be seen alone, not merged with another personality. Either the Lord Jesus is seen in all His beauty, or the personality of the believer is seen and her adornment. The Holy Spirit attracts sinners to the Lord Jesus, not by displaying the latest styles in dress, but by exhibiting the Lord Jesus. If the sinner is attracted by the modernism of the believer’s adornment, the fundamentalism of the believer’s doctrine will be neutralized. When a Christian woman depends upon the Lord Jesus for her adornment, the manner of wearing the hair, the kind and amount of ornament she wears, and the kind of clothing she puts on, will all be in keeping with the purity, simplicity, and beauty of the Lord Jesus. All will be attractive without attracting from the Lord Jesus. All will be beautiful without detracting from Him. All will have character without attracting one to the person herself. Then the sinner will see the Lord Jesus in the heart and life of the believer, and in her adornment as well. Then will the Holy Spirit be able to work through the soul winner, attracting sinners to the Saviour.

XV. The Words for “Love” in the Greek New Testament There are four words in the Greek language for “love.” Stergein (Stergein) is a love that has its basis in one’s own nature. It speaks of the constitutional efflux of natural

affection. Eran (ÆEran) is a love that has its basis in passion, and its expression takes the form of a blind impulse produced by passion. Philein (Filein) is a love that has its basis in pleasurableness, and is the glow of the heart kindled the perception of that in the object loved which affords one pleasure. Agapan (ÆAgapan) is a love that has its basis in preciousness, a love called out of one’s heart by an awakened sense of value in the object loved that causes one to prize it. Stergein (Stergein) is used in the New Testament in its noun form, with the letter “Alpha” prefixed which negates the word, that is, makes it mean the opposite to what it meant in itself. It occurs in Romans 1:31 and II Timothy 3:3, and is translated in both instances by the words “without natural affection.” The word appears also in Romans 12:10 with the word philos (filo"), “love”, compounded with it, and is translated, “kindly affectioned.” Stergein (Stergein) designates “the quiet and abiding feeling within us, which, resting on an object as near to us, recognizes that we are closely bound up with it and takes satisfaction in its recognition.” It is a love that is “a natural movement of the soul,” “something almost like gravitation or some other force of blind nature.” It is the love of parents for children and children for parents, of husband for wife and wife for husband, of close relations one for another. It is found in the animal world in the love which the animal has for its offspring. It is a love of obligatoriness, the term being used here not in its moral sense, but in a natural sense. It is a necessity under the circumstances. This kind of love is the binding factor by which any natural or social unit is held together. The word as astorgos (ajstorgo") (Rom. 1:31; II Tim. 3:3) which denotes the absence of this kind of love, designates “the unfeeling and hard, whose heart is warmed by no noble sentiment; it is applied particularly to inhuman parents, but also to animals who do not love their young.” It is used in pagan writings, of women who have many love affairs and as a result do not have that nobler love for their husbands which they should have. Eran (ÆEran) is a word that is not found in the New Testament. The word “passion” describes it. It is passion seeking satisfaction. It is not intrinsically a base word. In its use it is found at the two extremes of low and high. It was used in pagan Greek writings of sex love. It was used in Christian writings of divine love. It was used of the love of children to their mother. This love is “an over-mastering passion seizing upon and absorbing into itself the whole mind.” Philein (Filein) is used forty-five times in its various forms of verb and noun. This is an unimpassioned love, a friendly love. It is a love that is called out of one’s heart as a response to the pleasure one takes in a person or object. It is based upon an inner community between the person loving and the person or object loved. That is, both have things in common with one another. The one loving finds a reflection of his own nature in the person or thing loved. It is a love of liking, an affection for someone or something that is the outgoing of one’s heart in delight to that which affords pleasure. The Greeks made much of friendship, and this word was used by them to designate this form of mutual attraction. “Whatever in an object that is adapted to give pleasure, tends to call out this affection.” It is connected with the sense of the agreeable in the object loved. The words which best express this kind of love are “fondness, affection, liking.” “It shows the inclination which springs out of commerce with a person or is called out by qualities in an object which are agreeable to us.” As an outgrowth of its meaning of fondness, it sometimes carries that sentiment over into an outward expression of the same, that of kissing.

Agapan (ÆAgapan) is used in its verb, noun, and adjective forms about three hundred and twenty times in the New Testament. It is a love called out of a person’s heart by “an awakened sense of value in an object which causes one to prize it.” It expresses a love of approbation and esteem. Its impulse comes from the idea of prizing. It is a love that recognizes the worthiness of the object loved. Thus, this love consists of the soul’s sense of the value and preciousness of its object, and its response to its recognized worth in admiring affection.” In contrasting philein (filein) and agapan (ajgapan), we might say that the former is a love of pleasure, the latter a love of preciousness; the former a love of delight, the latter a love of esteem; the former a love called out of the heart by the apprehension of pleasurable qualities in the object loved, the latter a love called out of the heart by the apprehension of valuable qualities in the object loved; the former takes pleasure in, the latter ascribes value to; the former is a love of liking, the latter a love of prizing. As to the reason why philein (filein) occurs only forty-five times in the New Testament in all forms, while agapan (ajgapan) is found three hundred and twenty times in its various forms, the following can be said. The principal reason for the more frequent use of agapan (ajgapan) in the New Testament as over against the infrequent use of philein (filein) is that philein (filein) was a commonly used word for “love” in the classics, and agapan (ajgapan) was used most infrequently, and when Attic Greek was spread over the world by the conquering armies of Alexander the Great, and remained in its simplified and modified form as the international language of the period between Alexander and Constantine, agapan (ajgapan) suddenly sprang into the ascendancy. Because it was the common word for “love” during these centuries, the New Testament writers naturally found it not only desirable but necessary to use it. It became the general word for love in the New Testament. But this does not mean that both words are used indiscriminately, the one for the other, without any conscious sense of the differences between them. Whenever philein (filein) is used, it means that the writer goes out of his way to use a word that was not in common use, and because he desired to convey a thought which agapan (ajgapan) did not contain. There was always a reason for such a selection although we may not always be able to see it. The writers (I Cor. 2:13) claim that their choice of words was taught them by the Holy Spirit. This being the case, we have an infallible use of the Greek words in their content of meaning and general usage in the Roman world at that period. The Holy Spirit used agapan (ajgapan) and philein (filein) advisedly in the places where they occur, and it is for us to find His reason and the truth He wishes us to have from His use of the terms. But there is another reason why agapan (ajgapan) is used so frequently. Agapan (ÆAgapan) never was a common word in classical literature, although it was in use from the beginning and occupied a distinctive place of its own. In Homer it is used only ten times, in Euripedes but three. Its noun form agapesis (ajgapesi") is rare. The form agape (ajgape), so frequently found in the New Testament, does not occur at all. Its first appearance is in the Greek translation of the Old Testament. It conveyed the ideas of astonishment, wonder, admiration, and approbation when connected with the word agamai (ajgamai) which meant “to wonder at or admire.” It was used in classical literature in the same sentence with philein (filein) and had its distinctive sense of “a love of prizing” as contrasted to philein (filein), “a love of liking.” But owing to the very infrequency of its use, it was an admirable word which could be put to use to convey

the new and higher conception of divine love which the New Testament presents. Its relative emptiness, so far as the general knowledge of the person was concerned who spoke Greek as his second language, made it the ideal receptacle into which the new moral and ethical content of Christianity could be poured. The pagan Greeks knew nothing of the love of self-sacrifice for one’s enemy which was exhibited at Calvary. Therefore they had no word for that kind of love. They knew nothing about the divine analysis of this love which Paul gives us in I Corinthians 13. So the New Testament writers seized upon this word as one that would express these exalted conceptions. Therefore, the word agapan (ajgapan) in the New Testament is to be understood in its meaning as given above, but also in the added meaning which has been poured into it by its use in the New Testament, the context of such passages as John 3:16; I Corinthians 13; I John 4:16, and Romans 5:5 giving us an adequate conception of its New Testament content of meaning. The English reader can see from this study the importance of knowing what Greek word lies back of the English word “love.” While the English student is able to come to a good understanding of the passages in which the words occur, yet a full-orbed view of the scripture under consideration is only possible when one knows what the distinctive Greek word for “love” is. It is to help the student who does not have access to the Greek New Testament, that this study has been written. It is impossible within the brief compass of this chapter to comment upon all of the passages, but a representative list will be treated, leaving the student the delightful task of studying the others for himself. It should be kept in mind, however, that all the shades of meaning in each word will not be applicable on each occasion of its use. A study of the context will guide one in ascertaining just what distinctive meaning the word will have in each passage. For this groundwork in the study of the Greek words for “love,” I am indebted to Benjamin B. Warfield’s excellent articles, “The Terminology of Love in the New Testament,” which appeared in The Princeton Theological Review of January and April of 1918. Agapan (ÆAgapan) occurs in John 3:16. The love exhibited at Calvary was called out of the heart of God because of the preciousness of each lost soul, precious to God because He sees in lost humanity His own image even though that image be marred by sin, precious to God because made of material which through redemption can be transformed into the very image of His dear Son. While it is a love based upon the estimation of the preciousness of the object loved, this from its classical usage, it is also a love of selfsacrifice, complete self-sacrifice to the point of death to self, and that for one who bitterly hates the one who loves. This latter is its added New Testament meaning. Include in that the constitutent elements as analyzed by Paul in I Corinthians 13 where “charity” should be translated “love,” and we have the full content of this love which should always be kept in mind when interpreting passages in the New Testament in which this word occurs, and where the love is shown either by God to man, or by the Christian to others. For instance, in interpreting “Husbands, love your wives (Eph. 5:25), the love of John 3:16 and I Corinthians 13 is meant. They already have a stergein (stergein) and philein (filein) love for them. These latter should be saturated and thus elevated, purified, and ennobled by agapan (ajgapan). But these Christian husbands are not left helpless in an attempt to obey this exhortation, for this very love is shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5) and is one of His fruits (Gal. 5:22). When saints are exhorted to love one another (I John 4:11) it is with this kind of love. When we come to “men loved darkness rather than light” (John 3:19), and “love not the

world” (I John 2:15), we come to some isolated instances where the classical meaning which has been brought over into the New Testament, can only be applied. Here it is no love of self-sacrifice for the benefit of the object loved. It is a love for sin and for the world system of evil that is called out of the sinful heart because of the estimation which that person puts upon the preciousness of the object loved. The saints are exhorted not to set a high value upon the world and thus love it. Aside from such exceptional cases like these, agapan (ajgapan) is to be given its full-orbed New Testament meaning. In order that the reader can make a study of agapan (ajgapan) in the New Testament, we append the following list containing the places where its verb occurs, and where the word “love” is in the translation. Matthew 5:43, 44, 46, 6:24, 19:19, 22:37, 39; Mark 10:21, 12:30, 31, 33; Luke 6:27, 32, 35, 7:5, 42, 47, 10:27, 11:43, 16:13; John 3:16, 19, 35, 8:42, 10:17, 11:5, 12:43, 13:1, 23, 13:34, 14:15, 21, 23, 24, 28, 31, 15:9, 12, 17, 17:23, 24, 26, 19:26, 21:7, 15, 16, (first occurrences only in verses 15 and 16), 20; Romans 8:28, 37, 9:13, 25, 13:8, 9; I Corinthians 2:9, 8:3; II Corinthians 9:7, 11:11, 12:15; Galatians 2:20, 5:14; Ephesians 1:6, 2:4, 5:2, 25, 28, 33, 6:24; Colossians 3:12, 19; I Thessalonians 1:4, 4:9; II Thessalonians 2:13, 16; II Timothy 4:8, 10; Hebrews 1:9, 12:6; James 1:12, 2:5, 8; I Peter 1:8, 22 (second occurrence only), 2:17, 3:10; II Peter 2:15; I John 2:10, 15, 3:10, 11, 14, 3:18, 23, 4:7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 19, 20, 21, 5:1, 2; II John 1, 5; III John 1; Revelation 1:5, 3:9, 12:11, 20:9. The noun form agape (ajgape) occurs in the following places where it is translated either by “love” or “charity.” Where the word “charity” appears, the translation should read “love.” There is no good reason for the change to “charity.” Matthew 24:12; Luke 11:42; John 5:42, 13:35, 15:9, 10, 13, 17:26; Romans 5:5, 8, 8:35, 39, 12:9, 13:10, 14:15, 15:30; I Corinthians 4:21, 8:1, 13:1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 13, 14:1, 16:14, 24; II Corinthians 2:4, 8, 5:14, 6:6, 8:7, 8, 24, 13:11, 14; Galatians 5:6, 13, 22; Ephesians 1:4, 15, 2:4, 3:17, 19, 4:2, 15, 16, 5:2, 6:23; Philippians 1:9, 17, 2:1, 2; Colossians 1:4, 8, 13, 2:2, 3:14; I Thessalonians 1:3, 3:6, 12, 5:8, 13; II Thessalonians 1:3, 2:10, 3:5; I Timothy 1:5, 14, 2:15, 4:12, 6:11; II Timothy 1:7, 13, 2:22, 3:10; Titus 2:2; Philemon 5, 7, 9; Hebrews 6:10, 10:24; I Peter 4:8, 5:14; II Peter 1:7; I John 2:5, 15, 3:1, 16, 17, 4:7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 16, 17, 18, 5:3; II John 3, 6; III John 6; Jude 2, 12, 21; Revelation 2:4, 19. The adjective form agapetos (ajgapeto"), translated “beloved” is found in Matthew 3:17, 12:18, 17:5; Mark 1:11, 9:7, 12:6; Luke 3:22, 9:35, 20:13; Acts 15:25; Romans 1:7, 11:28, 12:19, 16:5, 8, 9, 12; I Corinthians 4:14, 17, 10:14, 15:58; II Corinthians 7:1, 12:19; Ephesians 5:1, 6:21; Philippians 2:12, 4:1; Colossians 1:7, 4:7, 9, 14; I Thessalonians 2:8; I Timothy 6:2; II Timothy 1:2; Philemon 1, 2, 16; Hebrews 6:9; James 1:16, 19, 2:5; I Peter 2:11, 4:12; II Peter 1:17, 3:1, 8, 14, 15, 17; I John 3:2, 21, 4:1, 7, 11; III John 1, 2, 5, 11; Jude 3, 17, 20. We come now to a consideration of philein (filein) in the New Testament. We will examine a few representative passages. The hypocrites love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets (Matt. 6:5). Philein (Filein) is used here rather than agapan (ajgapan) because the inspired writer wishes to show that they take pleasure in that sort of thing, that it is part of their nature to desire to be seen of men. They love to do it. “Everyone that loveth and maketh a lie” (Rev. 22:15) uses philein (filein) in order to show that there is “a personal affinity with the false, inward kinship with it, leading to its outward practice.” Philein (Filein) is a love of liking. One likes someone because that person is like himself. The one loving in this way finds in the object loved a reflection of himself. Thus the one who loves a lie, loves it because he finds in a lie

that which is reflected in his own bosom. “He that loveth his life shall lose it” (John 12:25). It is a love that finds such pleasure in life that it becomes a fixed attitude in one’s outlook, and nothing else comes into consideration in comparison with it. “If the world hateth you, ye know that it hath hated me first; if ye were of the world, the world would love its own” (John 15:19). Philein (Filein) is most appropriate here. The words “the world would love its own,” speak of an inner affinity. They speak of a community of nature between the world and its own. Philein (Filein) is a love of liking, and we like that which is like us. But the world finds no community of nature in itself and the Christian, for the latter has been made a partaker of the divine nature (II Peter 1:4), and for that reason the world hates the Christian. Philein (Filein) is used of Jesus’ love for Lazarus (John 11:3, 36), the emphasis being upon the love of friendship which existed between the Man Christ Jesus and His friend Lazarus. It is the human heart of Jesus which we see here. Philein (Filein) shows the personal intimacy of the affection existing between them. How wonderful, that, included in the self-humbling of God the Son in the incarnation, there should be this capacity for human friendship. Of course, our Lord loved Lazarus with an agapan (ajgapan) love also, for He died for him on the Cross. But here the inspired writer wishes to present this particular kind of love. It fits the context. The appeal of the sisters was upon the basis of the mutual friendship existing between our Lord and Lazarus. When John speaks of Jesus’ love for Martha, and Mary, and Lazarus, he uses agapan (ajgapan), the general term for love. They were precious to Him. The non-use of philein (filein) is a good commentary upon the reserve which our Lord maintained toward womanhood. In the conversation between our Lord and Peter (John 21:15–19), our Lord uses agapan (ajgapan) twice and philein (filein) the third time, while Peter uses philein (filein) three times. Of the use of these two words for love in this passage, Warfield says, “That anyone should doubt that the words are used here in distinctive senses would seem incredible prior to experience.” He quotes Moulton and Milligan as saying that it is “supremely hard in so severely simple a writer as John, to reconcile ourselves to a meaningless use of synonyms, where the point would seem to lie in the identity of the word employed.” Our Lord said to Peter twice, “Simon, son of Jonas, dost thou have a love for Me that is called out of thine heart because I am precious to thee, a love of deep devotion that is sacrificial in its essence, a love that would make thee willing to die for Me?” Three times Peter said, “Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I am fond of Thee, thou knowest that I have an affection for Thee that is called out of my heart because of the pleasure I take in Thee.” Jesus asked for a love of complete devotion. Peter offers Him a love of personal heart emotion. Jesus asked for a love of surrendering obedience. Peter offers Him a love of personal attachment. Peter at the crucifixion had denied his Lord even in the face of his statements, “Though all men should be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended.” “Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee” (Matt. 26:33, 35). Peter had compared himself with the other disciples. Now our Lord asks, “Peter, dost thou have a personal devotion to Me to the point of self-sacrifice which is stronger than the personal devotion of these your fellow-disciples?” Peter answers in deep humility, remembering his denial of his Lord, and without comparing his love for Jesus with that of the other disciples. In our Lord’s second question the comparison is omitted, and Peter has the

opportunity to tell of his personal devotion for Jesus without comparing it with that of the other disciples. But he only speaks of his personal friendly affection for Him. The third time Jesus questions Peter He uses philein (filein), and asks with sharp directness and brevity whether Peter has any real affection for Him at all. Peter was grieved because Jesus used philein (filein), yet he only asserts his fondness and friendly affection for his Master. Then Jesus tells Peter that some day he will exhibit an agapan (ajgapan) love for Him in that he will die a martyr’s death for Him, for He tells him that he will die by crucifixion for his testimony to his Saviour. Philein (Filein) is used in John 16:27 where God the Father takes pleasure in and loves those believers who take pleasure in His Son and therefore love Him. It is a love of friendly affection. The Father finds the same kind of love for the Son in the hearts of the saints that is in His own heart for His Son, a love called out of the heart because of the pleasure one takes in the object loved. This is a natural love of complacency as agapan (ajgapan) in John 3:16 is a love of pity (John 16:27, 5:20). These instances of the use of philein (filein) will suffice as illustrations to guide the Bible student in his study of those places where philein (filein) occurs. Philein (Filein) in its verb form occurs in Matthew 6:5, 10:37, 23:6, 26:48; Mark 14:44; Luke 20:46, 22:47; John 5:20, 11:3, 36, 12:25, 15:19, 16:27, 20:2, 21:15, 16, 17; I Corinthians 16:22; Titus 3:15; Revelation 3:19, 22:15, and is translated by the words “love” or “kiss.” Its noun form philos (filo") is found in Matthew 11:19; Luke 7:6, 34, 11:5, 6, 8, 12:4, 14:10, 12, 15:6, 9, 29, 16:9, 21:16, 23:12; John 3:29, 11:11, 15:13, 14, 15, 19:12; Acts 10:24, 19:31, 27:3; James 2:23, 4:4; III John 14, where it is translated by the word “friend.” Interpret these passages in the light of the meaning of philein (filein). In II Timothy 3:4, III John 9, “love” is from philein (filein). In James 4:4, “friendship” is from philein. “Hospitality” (Rom. 12:13), “entertain strangers” (Heb. 13:2), “given to hospitality” (I Tim. 3:2), “lover of hospitality” (Titus 1:8), “use hospitality” (I Peter 4:9) are from a word made up of the word philein (filein) and “stranger,” thus, “showing one’s self friendly to those who do not belong in our own home.” “Philosophy” (Col. 2:8) and “philosopher” (Acts 17:18) are from a word made up of philein (filein) and “wisdom,” thus “a love of” and “a lover of wisdom.” “Be kindly affectioned” (Rom. 12:10) is from philein (filein) and a form of stergein (stergein), speaking of that natural friendliness which should be shown by the saints toward one another. “Love their husbands and their children” (Titus 2:4) uses philein (filein). ”A lover of good men,” better, “a lover of that which is good” (Titus 1:8), is from philein (filein) and the word for “intrinsic inner goodness.” “Brotherly love” and brotherly kindness” are from philein (filein) and the Greek word for “brother” which latter literally means “from the same womb” (Rom. 12:10; I Thess. 4:9; Heb. 13:1; I Peter 1:22; “love of the brethren;” II Peter 1:7, I Peter 3:8, “love as brethren,”). “Kindness” (Acts 28:2), “love toward man” (Titus 3:4), “courteously” (Acts 27:3) are from philein (filein) and the word for “man,” the Greek word for “man” here being the racial term for man, really, “love for mankind.” Our word “philanthropy” is a transliteration of this Greek word. “Lovers of their own selves” (II Tim. 3:2) is from philein (filein) and the pronoun “himself.” “Love of money” (I Tim. 6:10) and “covetous” (Luke 16:14, II Tim. 3:2) are from philein (filein) and the word “money.” ”So have strived” (Rom. 15:20), “labor” (II Cor. 5:9), and “study” (I Thess. 4:11) are

from a verb which is made up of philein (filein) and time (time), “honor,” literally meaning, “to be fond of honor, to be actuated by a love of honor.” In later Greek it came to mean “to strive earnestly, to make it one’s aim,” which latter two meanings we must understand for the three passages quoted above. But because Paul in other places uses terms taken from the world of athletics when he is speaking of intense effort, we conclude that in the background of his mind there is that thought of the maintenance of his honor and his testimony as an apostle of the Lord Jesus, and that was one of the motivating factors in his service for his Lord, as it should be of ours. “Courteously” (Acts 28:7) and “courteous” (I Peter 3:8) are from a word made up of philein (filein) and a Greek word speaking of “the faculty of perceiving and judging.” The courtesy spoken of here is that rare and beautiful combination of friendliness and tactful and delicate sense of perception and judgment which should be a part of every Christian’s spiritual equipment. We have in this section listed every occurrence of both agapan (ajgapan) and philein (filein) in the New Testament in all their forms and where they appear in composition with other words. The Bible student who is not conversant with Greek can thus know just what Greek word for “love” lies back of the English word, and can therefore interpret the passage more accurately. Note: The Scripture locations listed in this chapter do not appear in the “Index to Scripture References.” For the word “love” as it appears in the New Testament, please consult the lists in this section.

TREASURES FROM THE

GREEK NEW TESTAMENT

DEDICATED To My Students in Greek at the Moody Bible Institute—Lovers of the Greek New Testament

Preface A. T. Robertson in his book, The Minister and His Greek New Testament, says with reference to certain translations of the New Testament which he mentions: “We shall have many more. They will all have special merit, and they will all fail to bring out all that is in

the Greek. One needs to read these translations; the more the better. But when he has read them all, there will remain a large and rich untranslatable element that the preacher ought to know.… It is not possible to reproduce the delicate turns of thought, the nuances of language, in translation. The freshness of the strawberry cannot be preserved in any extract.” It is the purpose of this book to bring to the Bible student who does not have access to the Greek, some of the untranslatable richness of the greatest book in all the world, the Greek New Testament. We have called this small volume which follows Golden Nuggets from the Greek New Testament for the English Reader, and Bypaths in the Greek New Testament for the English Reader: Treasures from the Greek New Testament for the English Reader. It follows the plan of its predecessors in treating only those things which the student of the English Bible cannot obtain for himself, and in presenting that material in such a simple, non-technical way that the average Christian, even though he has had no formal training in Bible study, can easily follow the author’s thought. While the book can be read as a series of articles, it should also prove useful as a reference work when light from the Greek text is desired upon any verse commented upon in the book. For this, the “Index to Scripture References” will be helpful. Or, when one is looking for some fresh bit of truth for a message, the material from the Greek text will be found rich in suggestiveness. The English words treated are from the Authorized Version. The author’s justification in sometimes offering a fuller or a slightly different translation is found in the fact that no single translation is able to bring out all the delicate shades of meaning, all the expressions peculiar to the Greek language, and for the reason that the standard translations are held down to a minimum of words which would best express the thought of the Greek, and rightly so. Then there are a limited number of English words that have changed their meaning in the last three hundred years since the Authorized Version was made. Since the majority of Bible students still use this version, it is necessary to take care of these words. But we must not allow these facts to disturb our confidence in and dependence upon our reliable translations. We are concerned here with minor details, not with the great outstanding doctrines and facts in God’s Word. Most men have been saved and have grown in grace through faith in the Word in its translated form. The Holy Spirit owns and quickens the translated Word, and has always done so. Therefore, as we seek to bring out from the Greek text aspects of truth that the translations do not handle, let us thank God for these translations which He has given us, and receive with gratefulness any added light which the labors of Bible students have been able to gather from the Greek text. K. S. W. The Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

I. The Word “GRACE” in the New Testament Archbishop Trench in his Synonyms of the New Testament says of this word, “It is hardly too much to say that the Greek mind has in no word uttered itself and all that was at its heart more distinctly than in this.” This was his comment regarding the word “grace” as it was used in the language of pagan Greece. In the case of the use of the same word in the Greek New Testament, we can repeat this Greek scholar’s words, substituting the word

“God” for the word “Greek.” It is hardly too much to say that the mind of God has in no word uttered itself and all that was in His heart more distinctly than in this. We will look first at the way the word was used in pagan Greece, Greece with its philosophy, its athletics, its poetry and drama, its wonderful architecture and statuary, its blue skies and rugged mountains, its love of the beautiful. The word itself is a beautiful word, charis (cari"). It is pronounced as follows: ch as in Scotch loch, or as in our word chasm, a as in father, i as in police, and the s as in cerise. The voice is stressed on the first syllable. The Christian poet wrote “Grace! ’tis a charming sound, Harmonious to the ear; Heav’n with the echo shall resound, And all the earth shall hear. Saved by grace alone! This is all my plea: Jesus died for all mankind, And Jesus died for me.” But of the latter, the Greeks of the pre-Christian era knew nothing. Charis (Cari") referred first of all to “that property in a thing which causes it to give joy to the hearers or beholders of it.… After awhile it came to signify not necessarily the grace or beauty of a thing, as a quality appertaining to it; but the gracious or beautiful thing, act, thought, speech, or person it might be, itself—the grace embodying and uttering itself, where there was room or call for this, in gracious outcomings toward such as might be its objects … There is a further sense which the word obtained, namely, the thankfulness which the favor calls out in return.… In the ethical terminology of the Greek schools charis (cari") implied ever a favor freely done, without claim or expectation of return.… Thus Aristotle, defining charis (cari"), ‘lays the whole stress on this very point, that it is conferred freely, with no expectation of return, and finding its only motive in the bounty and free-heartedness of the giver’.”* Charis (Cari") was also used to describe an act that was beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and was therefore commendable. This word the inspired writers take over into the New Testament. In a few instances it has its distinctively classical meaning, but in the other places where it is used, it takes an infinite step forward to a deeper, richer, more wonderful content of meaning. Luke uses it in its purely classical meaning when he says (4:22), “And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth.” Here the word has its classical meaning of that property in our Lord’s words which caused them to give joy to the hearers. How wonderful it must have been to hear the Lord Jesus speak in human speech and human tones. Not only was the content of His words gracious and beautiful, but the tones of His voice must have reflected all the depth of His personality, the intensity of His convictions (John 2:17), the fervor of His desire to serve (Matt. 20:28), the pathos and tenderness of His sorrow (Matt. 23:37–39). It was the infinite God speaking with human lips and in human tones. Both Luke (17:9) and Paul in Romans 6:17 and II Corinthians 8:16 use charis (cari") in its classical meaning of “thankfulness.” Peter uses the word in its meaning of “that which is beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected, and is therefore commendable,” in his first epistle (2:19, 20), where the words “thankworthy” and “acceptable” are the translations of charis (cari") which appears in the Greek text. Surely, for a slave to manifest a spirit of patient submission toward a master who mistreats him, is an action beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected and is therefore commendable. The usual reaction on the part of a slave who is mistreated is to rebel against his master. But how this purely classical meaning of the word describes what took place at Calvary. All the human race could expect in view of its sin, was the righteous wrath of a

holy God, that and eternal banishment from His glorious presence. But instead, that holy God stepped down from His judgment seat and took upon Himself at Calvary’s Cross, the guilt and penalty of human sin, thus satisfying His justice and making possible the bestowal of His mercy. And this He did, not for those who were His friends, but His bitter enemies, unlovely creatures saturated with sin. Charis (Cari") in classical Greek referred to a favor conferred freely, with no expectation of return, and finding its only motive in the bounty and free-heartedness of the giver. This favor was always done to a friend, never to an enemy. Right here charis (cari") leaps forward an infinite distance, for the Lord Jesus died for His enemies (Rom. 5:8–10), a thing unheard of in the human race. Surely this was beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected and is therefore commendable. This is what John is speaking of in his first epistle (3:1) when he says, “Behold, what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called the children of God.” The words “what manner of” are from a Greek word which means “what foreign kind of.” That is, the love shown by God at the Cross is foreign to the human race. Man simply does not act that way (Rom. 5:7, 8, 10). That is why God’s action at the Cross in dying for lost humanity is an action beyond the ordinary course of what might be expected and is therefore commendable. Here is one of the strongest proofs of the divine source of the Bible. The substitutionary atonement never came from the philosophies of man but from the heart of God. Thus, the word charis (cari") comes to its highest and most exalted content of meaning in the New Testament. It refers to God’s offer of salvation with all that that implies, which salvation was procured at Calvary’s Cross with all the personal sacrifice which that included, offered to one who is His bitter enemy and who is not only undeserving of that salvation but deserves condign punishment for his sins, offered without any expectation of return, but given out of the bounty and free-heartedness of the giver. This means that there is no room for good works on the part of the sinner as a means whereby he could earn his salvation, or after salvation whereby he might retain that salvation. Paul sets grace over against works as things directly in opposition to one another so far as the means of salvation is concerned (Rom. 4:4–5, 11:6). But Paul is very careful to make plain that good works naturally issue from and are required by grace (Titus 2:11–12). Furthermore, he shows that this grace is unlimited in its resources. In Romans 5:20 he says, “Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” The word “abound” is from a different Greek word than that which is translated “abounded.” It is a compound word made up of a verb which means “to exist in superabundance,” and a prefixed preposition which means “above.” The translation could read “grace existed in superabundance and then more grace added to this superabundance.” Thus, salvation is a gift, to be received by the open hand of faith, not something to be earned. Dear reader, if you have been attempting to find acceptance with God by your good works, if you have been depending in the least upon any personal merit, will you not now cast aside all this, and accept the free grace of God by faith in Jesus Christ as your personal Saviour, the One who died on the Cross for you, pouring out His precious blood as the God-appointed sacrifice for sins? “For God so loved the world that He gave His Son, the only begotten One, that whosoever believeth in Him might not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).

II. Christian Optimism and a Carefree Mind “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.… Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (I Peter 1:3, 13). The English word “blessed” is the translation of two totally different Greek words in the New Testament. In Matthew 5:1–12 it is the rendering of a Greek word which means “prosperous.” Here the context limits its meaning to spiritual prosperity. That is, “spiritually prosperous are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Heaven’s blessings flood the soul of those saints who have a contrite and humble heart. Their prosperity consists of heaven’s blessings. Their spiritual condition is prosperous. The word “blessed” in the text under consideration is from a Greek word which means “to speak well of.” The word comes into our language in the words “eulogy” and “eulogize.” The idea is that of “praising.” However, there is another word in Greek which means “praise.” We could translate, “Let the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ be well spoken of.” The words “according to” are from a Greek word which literally means “down.” The idea is not “according to the measure or extent of His mercy,” but “impelled by His mercy.” God’s merciful heart impelled Him to do what He did at the Cross, die for a race of lost sinners. We were begotten again, the translation tells us. The word “again” is from a Greek word which has two meanings, “again,” and “from above,” the meaning to be used being determined by the context. Our Lord in John 3:3 uses it in its meaning “again,” since Nicodemus understands Him to speak of a second birth as he says, “How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?” There are two words in Greek meaning “again,” one refers to the mere repetition of an action, the other, to the repetition of an action, the repeated action having the same source as the first act. The latter is used here. The second birth has its source in the Spirit. The first act was the impartation of divine life to Adam. One result of being born from above is that the believer has a lively hope. The word “lively” is from the Greek word which speaks of the life principle. It is the word used when the inspired writers speak of eternal life. The word “lively” in the Greek text is not an adjective but a participle. A participle is a verbal adjective, having the action of a verb and the descriptive powers of an adjective. The word “hope” is described by an action. The word “lively” is an excellent translation. The margin gives “living.” But it is more than a hope that is alive. It is actively alive. This hope is an energizing principle, a spontaneous, overflowing, buoyant thing. It is a hopefulness, a spirit of optimism, a looking ever upon the bright side of things, a looking forward to only that which is good, an expectancy of continued blessing and joy. It is the opposite of that fear of the future which grips so many hearts. This Christian optimism, this exuberant hopefulness, leaves no room for worry. This lively hope should be the normal atmosphere of every Christian heart. How may we have it? By yielding to the One whose ministry it is to produce this hopefulness in our hearts, the Holy Spirit. This Christian optimism is a heaven-born thing, something supernatural. The secret of enjoying it is in the fullness of the Holy Spirit. The secret of the fullness of the Spirit is in a moment by moment desire for that fullness, and a

moment by moment trust in the Lord Jesus for the same (John 7:37, 38). And so Peter says, “Praised be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ who, impelled by His great mercy, begot us from above, so that we have a spontaneous, buoyant, exultant spirit of hopefulness, this begetting having been accomplished through the intermediate instrumentality of the resurrection of Jesus Christ out from among those who are dead.” In connection with and in view of this Christian optimism, Peter exhorts us to have a carefree mind. He says, “Gird up the loins of your mind.” The words “gird up” are from a construction in the Greek which is literally, “having girded up,” the God-expected duty of every saint. We have here an oriental expression which must be explained. The people to whom Peter addressed this letter wore long, flowing, loose, outer garments. Preparatory to engaging in physical exertion such as running, they would gather these garments about their loins so that they would not impede the free action of the limbs. Peter tells us that we are pilgrims on our way home to heaven, and as such, must ever be ready to be on the move, that is, in a spiritual sense. The exhortation therefore is to put out of the way all that disturbs our minds, things that would impede the free exercise of our spiritual faculties. We know how worry, fretfulness, fear, anger, and their related mental attitudes all freeze up the mind and make it unfit for the best kind of work and the highest type of Christian life. In view of the fact that the Holy Spirit is producing in the Christian’s heart that buoyant spirit of hopefulness, it is the responsibility of that Christian to put out of his mind everything that would disturb that Christian optimism which always hopes for the best and always looks on the bright side of things. The believer can do that by the same power of the Holy Spirit which produces this lively hope. This is what we mean by a carefree mind. It is not a mind which does not recognize the responsibilities of life, but a mind free from care, for Peter says, “Wherefore, having put out of the way all that disturbs your mind (thus allowing that buoyant Christian hopefulness to predominate), being mentally self-controlled and calm, set your hope perfectly, wholly, unchangeably, and without doubt and despondency upon the grace which is being brought to you upon the occasion of the revelation of Jesus Christ.” The words “be sober” in our translation refer to a mental self-control and calmness. The words “hope to the end” do not refer to the length of time this hope is held, but to the quality of this hope, a hope that is a perfect, unchangeable one. The hope in verse three is a subjective one, being an inner hopefulness, the normal Christian attitude towards life, whereas the hope of verse thirteen is an objective hope, resting itself upon some future happening, here the glorification of the believer at the return of the Lord into the air. This is the grace which is being brought to the believer. The word “brought” is not future in the Greek, but present. Our glorification is not looked upon as a future event which is isolated from the two other parts of our salvation, namely, our justification and our sanctification. It is part of our salvation. It is on the Divine Menu. When we sit down to a sumptuous repast, we are never concerned as to whether there will be dessert or not. We know it is on the menu. So why be in doubt as to whether you as a true believer in the Lord Jesus as your personal Saviour, will reach heaven and all that goes with the glories of that blessed place? It is all on the Divine Menu placed before us in God’s holy Word. The normal Christian life lived in the fullness of the Holy Spirit is a life in which a supernaturally produced Christian optimism and a carefreeness of mind make possible the most efficient use of our spiritual faculties, used to the glory of God. Do not allow Satan to rob you of this precious heritage.

III. “Golden Nugget” Promises The first one is, “He hath said, ‘I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee’ ” (Heb. 13:5). The translation says, “He hath said.” But it is intensive in the Greek. “He Himself hath said.” That is, the Lord Jesus Himself personally made this promise. The word “leave” is not from the usual Greek word which means “to leave,” but from a word which means “to uphold” or “sustain.” In the Greek there are two negatives before the word “leave,” presenting a very strong negation. The promise is, “I will not, I will not cease to uphold or sustain thee.” Thus Paul can say “I am strong for all things through the One who infuses strength in me” (Phil. 4:13). We are assured therefore of the sustaining grace of God as we go through trials and testing times. The word “forsake” is a composite of three words, “to leave,” “down,” and “in.” The first has the idea of forsaking one. The second suggests rejection, defeat, helplessness. The third refers to some place or circumstance in which a person may find himself helpless, forsaken. The meaning of the word is that of forsaking someone in a state of defeat or helplessness in the midst of hostile circumstances. The word means in its totality, “to abandon, to desert, to leave in straits, to leave helpless, to leave destitute, to leave in the lurch, to let one down.” There are three negatives before this word, making the promise one of triple assurance. It is, “I will not, I will not, I will not forsake thee.” Not only do we have the assurance of God’s all-sufficient sustaining power to hold us true to Him and in perfect peace as we go through testing times, but we have His promise that He will never abandon us, never desert us, never leave us in straits but will come to our help, never leave us destitute but will supply all our need, never leave us in the lurch but will see to it that we are rescued from the difficulties in which we sometimes find ourselves. He will never let us down. The second promise is, “Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out” (John 6:37). Here again we have two negatives before the verb: “I will not, I will not cast out.” The words “cast out” are from one word made up of two words, the word “to throw” and a preposition meaning “out from within.” That is, our Lord is speaking of those who are in salvation, in the Father’s house. He gives us a double-strength promise that He will not throw us out of that house. But there is another word in the Greek which does not appear in the English, the word “outside.” Literally, the promise reads, “The one who comes to Me, I will not, I will not throw out into the outside.” Imagine a heavenly Father throwing His own child out. That is exactly what the Greek word means. This word “outside” is found in Revelation 22:15, where it is translated “without.” The New Jerusalem is spoken of in the previous verse, but “without,” that is, “outside, are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.” We have the solemn promise of our Lord that the Christian will never be ejected from the Father’s house and thrown into the outside where those are who have rejected His grace. The third is, “If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you” (John 15:7). The words, “ye shall ask,” are in the you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto imperative mood, which makes them a command, and are to be taken in the sense of “I command you to ask.” “Abiding” implies fellowship with the Lord, “nothing between myself and my Saviour,” and dependence upon Him. To those who thus abide, God issues the gracious command, “ask whatever ye desire.” It is more than a command. It is a

challenge. It is as if God said, “You meet the conditions, and I challenge you to ask, and then see how faithful and able I am to answer your prayer.” The word “desire” implies a desire that proceeds, not from deliberate forethought, but from inclination. This is a perfectly safe command and promise, because when we live in close fellowship with Jesus, our desires and our inclinations are His desires and His inclinations. The word “ask” is in the middle voice which speaks of the subject of the verb acting in its own interest. Therefore we translate, “ask for yourselves.” But as we live in intimate fellowship with Jesus, those things which we ask for ourselves, we ask, not for the purpose of gratifying a selfish desire, but for the purpose of glorifying Him. Prayers of that kind are answered. The word “done” is not from the Greek word which means to do something in the sense of making something. That would imply taking something in existence and fashioning it to suit our needs. The word is from the Greek word meaning “to become, to come into existence.” God will if necessary bring into existence that for which we asked. The word “ask” is in the aorist tense which when used in a command means, “do at once what is commanded.” Thus as we are abiding in Jesus, we are commanded not to hesitate, but to ask at once. The translation reads, “If ye abide in Me, and my words abide in you, I command you to ask at once and for yourselves whatever ye desire, and it shall be yours.” The fourth promise is, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand. I and my Father are one” (John 10:27–30). The expression, “they shall never perish” is a very strong one in the Greek. There are two negatives before the word “perish.” “They shall not, they shall not perish.” In addition to the double negative, there are three words which follow the word “perish,” which are translated by the one word “never.” The phrase is found in John 6:51, where it is translated “forever.” The Greek papyri give an instance where the crowd in a public meeting cries repeatedly, “the emperors forever,”* using the Greek phrase found in this verse. The noun in the phrase means “eternal,” and has the same root as the adjective “eternal” in the words “eternal life” in verse 28. The English language creaks and groans in its effort to translate the Greek here. “They shall not, they shall not perish, no, not eternally.” The word “eternal” gives an infinite reach to the two negatives. The word “man is in italics, which means that it is not in the Greek text, and is supplied by the translators to complete the sense. There are two words in the Greek language meaning “a man,” but neither is used here. The word “any” is an indefinite pronoun in the Greek. and the word “one” would complete its meaning better than the word “man.” The translation “anyone” is truer to the sense of the original. That includes Satan. The word “pluck” is literally “snatch,” and is often used in a bad sense as when death snatches its victim or where someone carries something off by force. When we consider the size of God’s hand, large enough to hold all of the oceans on earth, wide enough to stretch from where the east begins and where the west ends (Isaiah 40:12), we can understand why no one, including Satan himself, is able to snatch the believer out of its protecting care. The word “gave” in verse 29 is in the perfect tense in Greek, which tense refers to a past completed action having present results. The aorist tense is the customary tense to use in Greek when the writer merely wishes to speak of the fact of the action. Whenever a writer uses another tense, he goes out of his way to do so, which means that he has some special information to convey to the reader. The perfect tense here is like a carpenter who

drives a nail through a board, and then to assure himself that it is there to stay, he clinches it on the other side. The Father gave believers to the Lord Jesus as a permanent gift to be retained permanently by Him. And then, not only are we in the clasp of the hand of our Lord, but we are safely resting in the hand of God the Father. Two hands of infinite proportions are holding us in salvation. And the owners of these hands are one in essence, two Persons of the Triune God. The fifth promise is, “Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: but whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life” (John 4:13, 14). The first occurrence of the word “drinketh” is in a construction in the Greek which refers to continuous action, and the second use of the word in the original presents the mere fact of the action without reference to the progress of the action. The fuller translation therefore reads, “Every one who keeps on constantly drinking of this water shall thirst again. But whosoever takes a drink of the water which I shall give him shall never thirst.” The words ”shall never thirst” are from a construction in the Greek in which there are two negatives before the verb, and a phrase which means “forever,” which comes after the verb. The idea is, “shall not, shall not thirst, ever.” A double negative in the Greek does not make a positive statement but only strengthens the negation. The word “forever” gives an infinite reach to the two negatives. In the Greek text, John reports the Samaritan woman as speaking of a well of water, and our Lord as speaking of a spring of water, while both words are translated by the one English word “well.” The person who keeps on drinking of the wells of the world, lifeless, dull, brackish, polluted, stale, will thirst again. The world with all its sin does not satisfy, never can. But the person who takes one drink of the spring of eternal life never thirsts again. The reason why one drink satisfies is that when the sinner takes one drink of eternal life, that one drink becomes in him a spring of water leaping up into a fountain of eternal life. The word “be” is in the Greek literally “become,” and the word “well” is from the Greek word meaning a “spring.” The one drink is itself a spring that ever keeps bubbling up, ever refreshing and satisfying the one who takes a drink of the water of life. This spring becomes a river of living water (John 7:37, 38), and this living water is just a symbol of the indwelling Holy Spirit who constantly ministers the Lord Jesus to the believer. And because Jesus completely satisfies, the person who takes one drink of this living water, never thirsts again. Have you experienced the truth of this promise?

IV. Greek Grammar and the Deity of Jesus Christ The New Testament in its English translation plainly teaches that Jesus Christ is the second Person of the Triune God, possessing the same essence as God the Father. It is interesting to know that a rule of Greek grammar brings out the same truth. The rule is as follows: When two nouns in the same case are connected by the Greek word “and,” and the first noun is preceded by the article “the,” and the second noun is not preceded by the article, the second noun refers to the same person or thing to which the first noun refers, and is a farther description of it. For instance, the words “pastors” and “teachers” in Eph. 4:11 are in the same case and are connected by the word “and.” The

word “pastors,” is preceded by the article “the,” whereas the word “teachers” is not. This construction requires us to understand that the words “pastors” and “teachers” refer to the same individual, and that the word “teacher” is a farther description of the individual called a “pastor.” The expression therefore refers to pastors who are also teachers, “teaching-pastors.” This rule also applies to the following passages where the names “God” and “Father” are in the same case and are connected by the Greek word “and,” while the word “God” is preceded by the article, and the word “Father” is not. The Greek word “and” can be translated by any of the following words, “and, even, also,” depending upon the context in which it is found. In the passages under discussion, it is translated by “and” or “even.” These passages are Romans 15:6; I Corinthians 15:24; II Corinthians 1:3, 11:31; Galatians 1:4; Ephesians 5:20; Philippians 4:20; I Thessalonians 1:3, 3:11, 13, where God and the Father are not two persons but one and the same, and the word “Father” is a farther description of the Person called “God.” In II Peter 1:11, 2:20, and 3:18, we have the phrase, “Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” Here we find the same construction in the Greek text. The same rule of grammar applies. The Lord and the Saviour are the same person, the word “Saviour” being a farther description of the Person described as “Lord.” This speaks of the deity of Jesus Christ, because the Greek word translated “Lord” was used as a name of Deity. The translators of the Septuagint version of the Old Testament (285–150 b.c.) used it to translate the august title of God, “Jehovah.” The word was used in the Roman empire as a name for the ruling Caesar who was worshipped as a god. Christianity challenged the imperialism of the Caesars by announcing that there was born “in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord” (Luke 2:11). The word “Lord” was an accepted title of Deity in the terminology of Israel, the Roman empire, and Christianity. Thus, a simple rule of Greek grammar teaches the deity of Jesus Christ. But to make the case still stronger, we find in II Peter 1:1 the expression, “God and our Saviour Jesus Christ,” where the same construction occurs, and the same rule of grammar applies. Solid ground for correct translation and interpretation is found in a careful application of the rules of Greek grammar. The inspired writers of the New Testament held to the grammar of the international Greek spoken throughout the Roman world. Only in that way could they expect to be correctly understood. Thus Greek grammar testifies that Jesus Christ is Lord, the Jehovah of the Old Testament, and Deity, the God of the New Testament. The apostles uniformly testify that Jesus Christ is God, and this is just another example of their statements challenging the Imperial Cult of the Caesar. The translation should read, “through the righteousness of our God and Saviour, Jesus Christ.” The Roman emperor was recognized by his subjects as their god and their saviour. Peter tells us that Jesus Christ is the God and the Saviour of Christians. In Titus 2:13 we have “the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” We find the same construction in the Greek, and the same rule of grammar requires us to interpret the phrase as teaching that Jesus Christ is the great God. Since the Greek word for “and” should be translated by the word “even” where the context demands such a meaning, we are justified in rendering this phrase “the great God, even our Saviour Jesus Christ,” for the grammatical construction demands that the two expressions, “the great God,” and “Saviour Jesus Christ,” refer to one individual. The word “even” brings out this meaning. The translation could also read, “our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ.” Thus the rules of Greek grammar teach the deity of Jesus Christ.

V. Is Future Punishment Everlasting? The Church has always held tenaciously to the teaching that the punishment of those who enter eternity unsaved, is unending. There is abundant evidence in the apocryphal literature of Israel to show that that nation believed and taught the same thing. Of late, however, the assertion is being made that this punishment is for a limited time only, this contention being based upon the statement that the two Greek words used to describe this punishment, refer to a limited period of time. These two words are, the noun, aion (aijon), and the adjective, aionios (aijonio"). We submit Moulton and Milligan in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament as our first authority. The work of these scholars is recognized as the latest advance in New Testament research, since it is based upon the study of the Greek secular documents known as “The Papyri.” These latter are the last court of appeal on the usage of Greek words in the first century. They give two uses for aion (aijon). In a phrase from one of these early manuscripts, “For the rest of your life,” aion (aijon) refers to a limited period of time. A public meeting at Oxyrhynchus was punctuated with cries of “The Emperors forever,” where aion (aijon) has the meaning of “unending.” They have this to say about aionios (aijonio"). “Without pronouncing any opinion on the special meaning which theologians have found for this word, we must note that outside the New Testament, in the vernacular as well as in classical Greek (see GrimmThayer), it never loses the sense of perpetuus. It is a standing epithet of the emperor’s power.” Webster’s International Dictionary derives our English word “perpetual,” meaning “continuing forever, everlasting, eternal, unceasing” (its own definition), from this Latin word perpetuus. They give as an illustration of the use of aionios (aijonio") the sentence, “I confess that I should show myself grateful for your loving-kindness forever.” Their closing comment on aionios (aijonio") is, “In general, the word depicts that of which the horizon is not in view, whether the horizon be at an infinite distance, or whether it lies no farther than the span of a Caesar’s life.” Our next authority is Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek, by Herman Cremer, D.D. He says of aion (aijon): “In early Greek especially, and still also in Attic, aion (aijon) signifies the duration of human life as limited to a certain space of time, hence the meanings, the duration of life, course of life, term of life, lifetime, life in its temporal form. From this original limitation of the conception to human life, it may be explained how it sometimes denotes the space of a human life, a human generation. Accordingly, the expansion of the conception of time unlimited was easy, for it simply involved the abstraction of the idea of limitation, and thus the word came to mean unlimited duration. Inasmuch, therefore, as aion (aijon) may denote either the duration of a definite space of time, or the (unending) duration of time in general, both future and past, according to the context, it was the proper term for rendering the Hebrew olam (ojlam),—for which the LXX (Greek translation of Old Testament) used it constantly, the only distinction being that the Hebrew word meant primarily, a remote, veiled, undefined, and therefore, unlimited time, past or future, and only secondarily, a definite (especially future) period whose limits must be ascertained by the context.” As to aionios (aijonio"), Cremer has but these brief words: “Aionios (ÆAionio") refers to time in its duration, constant, abiding, eternal.”

We come now to the testimony of A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament by Joseph Henry Thayer, D.D. He gives as the first meaning of aion (aijon), age, a human lifetime, life itself, and for the second meaning, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity. His meanings of aionios (aijonio") are, first, without beginning or end, that which has always been and always will be, second, without beginning, third, without end, never to cease, everlasting. When comparing the synonyms, aidios (aijdio") and aionios (aijonio") he says, “aidios (aijdio") covers the complete philosophical idea—without beginning and without end; also either without beginning or without end, as respects the past; it is applied to what has existed time out of mind. Aionios (ÆAionio") (from Plato on) gives prominence to the immeasurableness of eternity (while such words as suneches (sunece"), continuous, unintermitted, diateles (diatele"), perpetual, lasting to the end, are not so applicable to an abstract term, like aion (aijon)); aionios (aijonio") accordingly is especially adapted to supersensuous things.” Finally, we quote Liddell and Scott in their Greek-English Lexicon (classical). Aion (ÆAion) means a space or period of time, a lifetime, life, an age, generation, an indefinitely long time, a space of time, eternity. Aionios (ÆAionio") means lasting, eternal Dr. E. B. Pusey* quotes J. Reddel, the best Greek Oxford scholar of his day as stating that aionios (aijonio") in classical Greek was used strictly of eternity, an eternal existence, such as shall be, when time shall be no more. These authorities agree on the two meanings of aion (aijon), that of a limited space of time, and that of eternity, never ending, everlasting, the meaning to be used in any particular instance to be determined by the context in which it is found. They also agree upon the meaning of aionios (aijonio"), that it refers to time in its duration, constant, abiding, eternal, continuing forever, everlasting. Our next step will be to show that in certain passages in the New Testament where aion (aijon) appears, it cannot be used in its meaning of “a limited space of time,” but can only mean “eternal.” These passages have to do with the being of the Son of God, His reign, His glory, His throne, His priesthood, His post-resurrection life, none of which is of limited duration, for everything about God is of infinite proportions. These are Luke 1:33, 55; John 8:35 (second occurrence), 12:34; Romans 1:25, 9:5, 11:36, 16:27; II Corinthians 11:31; Galatians 1:5; Ephesians 3:11; Philippians 4:20; I Timothy 1:17; II Timothy 4:18; Hebrews 1:8; 5:6, 6:20, 7:17, 21, 24, 28; 13:8, 21; I Peter 4:11, 5:11; II Peter 3:18; Revelation 1:6, 18, 4:9, 10, 5:13, 7:12, 10:6, 11:15, 15:7. Instances where aionios (aijonio") is used, and where it can only mean “eternal,” because its context speaks of the being of God, the glory of God, and the covenant of blood are Romans 16:26; Hebrews 9:14; 13:20, I Peter 5:10. This establishes the fact that the New Testament usage of aion (aijon) and aionios (aijonio") includes their meaning of “eternal,” whatever other meanings the former might have in other contexts such as those of “a limited period of time” (Colossians 1:26), or “an age as characterized by a certain system of evil” (Ro mans 12:2). As to aionios (aijonio"), the only places in the New Testament where it is translated by any other words than “eternal” or “everlasting” are Romans 16:25, II Timothy 1:9, and Titus 1:2 where it is rendered by the word “world.” But even here it refers to “that which is anterior to the most remote period in the past conceivable by any imagination that man knows of” (Expositor’s Greek Testament), namely, to the eternity before time began as we know it, time which runs concurrently with the created universe and the affairs of the human race. Thus, both aion (aijon) and aionios (aijonio") are used in the New Testament in their meanings of “everlasting” and “eternal.”

Now we come to the passages in the New Testament where aionios (aijonio") is used in connection with the life God gives the believer when He saves him. We have seen that this word is used in connection with the being of God, and that it can only mean “eternal” in this case. But the life which God gives the believer is Christ (Col. 3:4), which means that aionios (aijonio") when it describes the life given the believer, must mean “eternal,” which agrees with the uniform meaning given by the four Greek authorities quoted. In all its occurrences in the New Testament, aionios (aijonio") never refers to a limited extent of time, but always to that which is eternal or everlasting. Even in Romans 16:25, II Timothy 1:9, and Titus 1:2, it refers to the eternity before time began. For the benefit of the student who does not have access to a Greek concordance, we list the passages where aionios (aijonio") is used in connection with the life given the believer; Mark 10:17, 30; Luke 10:25, 18:18, 30; John 3:15, 16, 36, 4:14, 36, 5:24, 39, 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68, 10:28, 12:25, 50, 17:2, 3; Acts 13:46, 48; Romans 2:7, 5:21, 6:22, 23; II Corinthians 4:17, 18; 5:1; Galatians 6:8; I Timothy 1:16, 6:12; II Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:2, 3:7; Hebrews 5:9, 9:12; I Peter 5:10; I John 1:2, 2:25, 3:15, 5:11, 13, 20; Jude 21. This brings us to the places where aion (aijon) is used in connection with this same life, and because this life is eternal, aion (aijon) must mean “eternal” here, not “an age”; Mark 10:17; John 4:14, 6:51, 58, 8:51, 52, 10:28, 11:26. We have found that the life God gives the believer is described by two words, aion (aijon) and aionios (aijonio"), both meaning “eternal.” We notice now the statement of our Lord in Matthew 25:46 “These shall go away into aionios (aijonio") everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life (aionios (aijonio")) eternal.” Aionios (ÆAionio") means “eternal” when used with the word “life.” Does it mean “eternal” when used with the word “punishment”? But now we will let Dr. E. B. Pusey speak,* as he quotes Augustine on this passage, and then adds his own comment. Augustine said of this text, “What a thing it is, to account eternal punishment to be a fire of long duration, and eternal life to be without end, since Christ comprised both in that very same place, in one and the same sentence, saying, ‘These shall go into eternal punishment, but the righteous into life eternal.’ If both are eternal, either both must be understood to be lasting with an end, or both perpetual without end. For like is related to like; on the one side, eternal punishment; on the other side, eternal life. But to say in one and the same sentence, life eternal shall be without end, punishment eternal shall have an end, were too absurd: whence, since the eternal life of the saints shall be without end, punishment eternal too shall doubtless have no end to those whose it shall be.” Dr. Pusey adds the following to Augustine’s words: “The argument is not merely from language. It has a moral and religious aspect. Any ordinary writer who drew a contrast between two things, would, if he wished to be understood, use the self-same word in the self-same sense. He would avoid ambiguity. If he did not, we should count him ignorant of language, or if it were intentional, dishonest. I ask, ‘In what matter of this world would you trust one who in any matter of this world, should use the self-same word in two distinct senses in the self-same sentence, without giving any hint that he was so doing?’ In none. Find any case in which you would trust a man who did so in the things of men, and then ascribe it to your God in the things of God. I could not trust man. I could not believe it of my God.” It remains for us to examine the New Testament passages where aion (aijon) and aionios (aijonio") are used of the future punishment of the lost. We will look first at

those passages which contain aionios (aijonio"). In Matthew 18:8 the phrase “everlasting fire” is in the Greek “the fire which is everlasting.” The use of the definite article shows that this passage does not refer to fire in general but to a particular fire (Rev. 20:10). This fire will burn forever and is unquenchable (Mark 9:43). Matthew 25:41 tells us that this everlasting fire is prepared for the devil and his angels. The word “prepared” in the Greek is in the perfect tense, which tense speaks of a past complete action that has present results. The Lake of Fire had been prepared before our Lord spoke these words, and is now in existence. The fires of this lake are not purifying but punitive. That is, their purpose is not to purify the wicked dead in order that they might be brought to repentance and faith with the result that they will all be finally saved, as those teach who advocate the universal restoration of the entire human race. They are for the punishment of Satan and his fallen angels, and for those of the human race who enter eternity in a lost condition. Matthew 25:46 has been dealt with above. As to Mark 3:29, the best Greek texts have “sin” instead of “damnation,” which latter word appears in the a.v., as the translation of a Greek word meaning “judgment,” and which is a rejected reading. The words “in danger of” are from a Greek word which refers to anyone “held in anything so that he cannot escape.” Thus the one who committed the sin referred to in this passage is in the grasp of an eternal sin, the sin being eternal, not in the sense of eternally repeating itself, but in that it is eternal in its guilt. Such a sin demands eternal punishment. In II Thessalonians 1:9 we have “everlasting destruction.” The Greek word translated “destruction” does not mean “annihilation.” Moulton and Milligan define its first century Biblical usage as follows: “ruin, the loss of all that gives worth to existence.” Thayer in his lexicon gives the meanings “ruin, destruction, death.” The word comes from the verb meaning “to destroy.” But to destroy something does not mean to put it out of existence, but to ruin it, to reduce it to such form that it loses all that gave worth to its existence. One may burn down a beautiful mansion. The materials which composed it are still in existence, a heap of ashes, but it is destroyed in that it cannot be used as a home any more. It is in such form that it has lost all that gave worth to its existence as a mansion. The eternal condition of the lost will be one of utter ruin, a condition in which the soul lives forever in a state devoid of all that makes existence worthwhile. In Hebrews 6:2 we have “eternal judgment.” The word “judgment” here is from a Greek word that refers to a condemnatory sentence, aionios (aijonio") being used to teach that this sentence is eternal in that the punishment it prescribes is unending. In Jude 7 we have lost human beings condemned to the same everlasting fire which has been prepared for Satan and the fallen angels, the latter in verse 6 being reserved for the Great White Throne judgment and the fire prepared for them (Matt. 25:41). We come now to the passages in which aion (aijon) is used. Because aionios (aijonio") describes the same future punishment which aion (aijon) does, aion (aijon) here cannot mean “a limited time,” but “eternal,” just as aionios (aijonio"). II Peter 2:17 tells us that “the mist of darkness” is reserved for those who reject the substitutionary atonement of the Lord Jesus. Jude 13 refers to those who like Cain refuse to place their faith in the blood of Jesus poured out on the Cross for sin, and who instead trust in their own good works. To these is reserved “the blackness of darkness forever.” The expressions in Peter and Jude are from the same words in the Greek text, except that the best Greek manuscripts omit aion (aijon) in the first passage. It however appears in the second which refers to the same darkness. The words “mist” and “blackness” come from

one Greek word for “darkness,” and the word “darkness” comes from another word meaning “darkness.” Archbishop Trench in his New Testament Synonyms says this about the word translated “mist” and “blackness”; “The zophos (zofo") (the former word) may be contemplated as a kind of emanation of skotous (skotou") (the latter). It signifies in its first meaning the twilight gloom which broods over the regions of the setting sun, and constitutes so strong a contrast to the life and light of that Orient where the sun may be said to be daily new-born.… But it means more than this. There is a darkness darker still, that, namely, of the sunless underworld.… This too it further means, namely, that sunless world itself, though indeed this less often than the gloom which wraps it.… It will at once be perceived with what fitness the word in the New Testament is employed, being ever used to signify the darkness of that shadowy land where light is not, but only darkness visible.” Such is the eternal fate of those who reject the precious blood of Jesus as the alone way of salvation from sin. We come to Revelation 14:9–11 where the unsaved who worship the Wild Beast, namely, the Roman emperor who is Satan’s regent in the revived Roman empire during the Great Tribulation, are said to be tormented, and where it is asserted that the smoke of their torment, that is, the smoke that issues from the cause of their torment, will ascend forever and forever, which means that their torment will be forever and forever. The Greek word translated “torment” was used in a secular document of the examination of slaves in the phrase “they under torture said.”* Thayer defines the word as follows, “to question by applying torture, to torture, to vex with grievous pains (of body and mind), in the passive sense, to be harassed, distressed.” In Revelation 20:10, the eternal torment of Satan is spoken of. Thus, God’s Word clearly teaches that the sufferings of the lost will be unending. How this fact speaks to us of the infinite holiness, righteousness, and justice of God, and of the awfulness of sin. But how it points us also to that Lonely Sufferer on Calvary’s Cross, and brings to our ears the dreadful pathos of that cry, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” What was it all for? The Lord Jesus suffered and died in order that by satisfying the righteous demands of the law which we violated, God might be able to offer us mercy on the basis of justice satisfied. That mercy He offers you now, unsaved reader, if you will accept it by faith in the atoning work of His Son on the Cross. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His Son, the only begotten one, that whosoever believeth in Him might not perish but have everlasting life.” Put your trust in Him now, for tomorrow may be too late.

VI. Hell, Hades, and Tartarus There are three Greek words in the New Testament translated by the one English word “hell,” which fact results in some confusion in our thinking. One of these is “Gehenna (Gehenna).” It is the Greek representative of the Hebrew “Ge-Hinnom (Ge-Hinnom),” or Valley of Hinnom, a deep narrow valley to the south of Jerusalem, where, after the introduction of the worship of the fire-gods by Ahaz, the idolatrous Jews sacrificed their children to the god Molech. After the time of Josiah, when this practice was stopped, it became the common refuse-place of the city, where the bodies of criminals, carcasses of animals, and all sorts of filth were cast. From its depth and narrowness, and its fire and ascending smoke, it became the symbol of the place of the

future punishment of the wicked. The word is used in Matthew 5:22 in the phrase “the hell of fire,” (Greek), and thus refers to the final abode of the wicked dead which is called in Revelation 19:20 “the lake of fire burning with brimstone.” This lake of fire is in existence now, for the word “prepared” in the Greek of Matthew 25:41 is in the perfect tense which refers to a past completed action having present results. Hell had been already prepared and was in existence when Jesus spoke these words. There is no one there now. The first occupants of that dreadful place will be the Beast and the false prophet, Satan following them 1000 years afterwards. Then at the Great White Throne Judgment, which occurs at the close of the Millennium, all lost human beings, the fallen angels, and the demons will also be sent there for eternity. Our word “hell” is the correct rendering of the word “Gehenna (Gehenna),” and should be so translated in the following passages, Matthew 5:22, 29, 30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mark 9:43, 45, 47; Luke 12:5; James 3:6. The second of these words is “Hades, (aJde",)” which is a transliteration, not a translation, of the Greek word. When we transliterate a word we take the spelling of that word over into another language in the respective letter equivalents, whereas when we translate a word, we take the meaning over into that language. The word itself means “The Unseen.” This was the technical Greek religious term used to designate the world of those who departed this life. The Septuagint, namely, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, uses this word to translate the Hebrew “Sheol, (Sheol,)” which has a similar general meaning. The “Hades (aJde")” of the pagan Greeks was the invisible land, the realm of shadow, where all Greeks went, the virtuous, to that part called Elysium (ÆElysium), the wicked, to the other part called Tartarus (Tartaru"). The difference between the pagan and Biblical conceptions of Hades is that the former conceives of Hades as the final abode of the dead, whereas the latter teaches that it is the temporary place of confinement until the Great White Throne Judgment in the case of the wicked dead, and until the resurrection of Christ, in the case of the righteous dead, the latter since that event going at once to heaven at death (Phil. 1:23). As the pagan conception of Hades included two parts, so the Biblical idea divided it into two parts, the one called paradise (Luke 23:43, but not II Cor. 12:4, and Rev. 2:7), or Abraham’s bosom (Luke 16:22), for the righteous dead, and the other part for the wicked dead having no specific designation except the general word “Hades (aJde")” (Luke 16:23). This Greek word is found in the following passages, to be translated and interpreted generally as “Hades, (aJde",)” the place of the departed dead, and for the reason that the translators of the Septuagint use this word to express in the Greek language what is meant in the Hebrew by the word “Sheol, (Sheol,)” the place of the departed dead. In Matthew 11:23 and Luke 10:15, Capernaum is to be brought down to the realms of the dead, presumably here to that portion of Hades reserved for the wicked, because of its rejection of the attesting miracles of our Lord. In Luke 16:23, the rich man was in Hades, that part where the wicked dead are kept until the judgment of the Great White Throne. In Acts 2:27, 31, our Lord at His death went to Hades, the passage in Acts being quoted from Psalm 16:, where the Hebrew is “Sheol. (Sheol.)” His soul was not left in Hades, the “paradise” portion, nor did His body in Joseph’s tomb see corruption, for He was raised from the dead on the third day. He as the Man Christ Jesus, possessing a human soul and spirit, as He possessed a human body, entered the abode of the righteous dead, having committed the keeping of His spirit to God the Father (Luke 23:46). The word “grave” in I Corinthians 15:55 is not from the word “Hades, (aJde",)” for the best

manuscripts have the word “death,” while “Hades (aJde")” is a rejected reading. The translation should read, “death.” In Revelation 6:8, Death and Hades follow in the wake of war and famine, Hades ready to receive the dead of the Great Tribulation period. In Revelation 20:13, 14, Death itself, and Hades with all the wicked dead are cast into the lake of fire. There are just two places where this Greek word should be translated rather than transliterated. In Revelation 1:18, our Lord has the keys or control of The Unseen and of death. That is, He is master of the unseen world which in the Christian system includes Hades, Tartarus, and the kingdom of Satan in the atmosphere of this earth. The other place is Matthew 16:18 where we translate “The Unseen.” The word “prevail” in the Greek means “to be strong to another’s detriment, to overpower.” The word “gates” is an orientalism for the idea of centralized legal authority. Lot sat in the gate of Sodom. Boaz went to the gate of Bethlehem to settle a legal matter with reference to his proposed marriage to Ruth. The word refers to a council. The word “hades” is out of the question here as an adequate translation, because the wicked dead in that place have no power to overcome the Church, and the righteous dead there at the time our Lord spoke these words had neither the desire nor power. The holy angels in heaven would have no such desire. All that is left in the unseen world are Satan and his demons. These constitute the Council in the Unseen that desires to bring about the destruction of the Church. The third word translated “hell” is in II Peter 2:4 where the Greek word is “Tartarus (Tartaru"),” the prison of the fallen angels that sinned at the time of the flood (Gen. 6:1– 4; I Peter 3:19, 20; Jude 6). This brief study contains all the passages where the word “hell” is used in the New Testament, and can be used as a guide to the correct translation in each case.

VII. The Christian’s “Thanatopsis” One of the passages in the English translation which presents difficulties in interpretation is John 8:51, where our Lord says, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.” We have called this “Golden Nugget,” “The Christian’s ‘Thanatopsis’.” The word “thanatopsis” comes from two Greek words which together mean “seeing death.” Our Lord here presents the Christian view of death. The assertion in the Greek is very strong. The idea is, “shall absolutely not see death.” Then the statement is made stronger by the addition of a phrase which in other places in the New Testament is translated “forever.” Thus, “If any man keep my saying, he shall absolutely not see death, never.” The key to the interpretation of the verse is found in the meaning of the word “see.” There are six words in the Greek language which mean “to see.” The first refers simply to the act of physical sight (Matt. 12:22). The second refers to physical sight that is accompanied by mental discernment (I John 1:1, “have seen”). The third means “to look upon, contemplate, view attentively,” used, for instance, of a civilian watching a military parade (I John 1:1, “looked upon”). The fourth means “to scrutinize with the purpose of bringing about the betterment of the person so observed” (Hebrews 2:6, “visitest,” Acts 20:28, “overseers”). The fifth word means “to fix one’s eyes upon,” metaph., “to fix one’s mind upon one as an example” (Acts 3:4, “fastening his eyes upon him with John,” ). Even

Peter and John judged their beggars as to their worthiness to receive alms. The sixth word is the one used in John 8:51. It is used, primarily, not of an indifferent spectator, but of one who looks at a thing with interest and for a purpose. It expresses a fixed contemplation and a full acquaintance. Now, the death spoken of here is physical death, for the Jews speak of Abraham as being dead, and our Lord does not correct them by saying that He was speaking of spiritual death. He therefore says that when a Christian is being put to sleep in Jesus (I Thess. 4:14, Greek), as he is dying, he will not look at Death with interest and for a purpose. He will be an indifferent spectator of Death, for he will have his eyes fixed on Jesus. The terrors of that awful thing called death, are not experienced by the one who puts his faith in the Lord Jesus. His attention will not be focused on death, nor will he feel its bitterness. This is what Paul means when he says (I Cor. 15:55), “O death, where is thy sting?” But those that go out of this life rejecting Him, have before them all the terrors of death. Oh, reader, are you sure that you are trusting in the precious blood of Jesus poured out in the substitutionary atonement on the Cross for you personally? We read in Hebrews 2:9 that Jesus tasted death for every man. That is, He not only died, but He experienced all the terror and bitterness of death in order that those who place their trust in Him as Saviour, will not experience the terror and bitterness of it all.

VIII. A Pauline Paradox and Its Solution The Greek inscriptions show that many technical terms in pagan religions and in governmental circles of the first century a.d., are also found in the terminology of Christianity. For instance, the expression, “slave of the emperor,” was in current use. There were imperial slaves all over the Roman world. This throws light upon Paul’s claim to be a “bondslave of Jesus Christ” (Rom. 1:1), the word “servant” coming from a Greek word literally meaning “bondslave,” the same Greek word being used in the inscriptions. Paul knew of this custom. The lord emperor was not only revered as a human ruler but also worshipped as a god. When Paul wrote these words to the Christians in the imperial city, he must have been conscious of the imperialistic challenge of Christianity proclaiming a Saviour whose bondslave he was, and who some day would come to displace the imperialism of Rome. Paul was some day to stand before Nero, not as a bondslave of the lord emperor, but as a bondslave of the King of kings, the One who came from the royal line of David. Another such technical expression is found in I Corinthians 7:22, “the Lord’s freeman.” The title, “freedman of the emperor,” is found frequently in the Greek inscriptions of the first century. To be a bondslave of the emperor, was a position of servitude with a certain degree of honor attached to it, but to be the emperor’s freeman, meant that the bondslave was liberated from that servitude and promoted to a position of a free man, which was a higher station. Paul in I Corinthians 7:22 says that the Christian is both the bondslave and the freeman of the Lord. How can he be both at the same time? The beautiful story can be told in three Greek words translated “bought” and “redeemed.” The first word means “to buy in the market place.” It was used of the purchase of slaves. Sinners are bondslaves of Satan and sin (Rom. 6:17, 18; Eph. 2:2). We were purchased in the slave market, the price paid, the precious blood of Jesus. I Corinthians

6:20 uses this word. We were bondslaves of Satan, and we became bondslaves of Jesus Christ. A slave cannot say that he belongs to himself, but to his master. We belong to Christ. The word is also used in II Peter 2:1, where false teachers who deny the Lord who purchased them in the slave market, refuse to avail themselves of the high privilege of becoming His bondslaves. In Revelation 5:9, the saints in heaven are singing a song which speaks of the Lamb who bought them in the slave market to become His own bondslaves. Thus, Paul tells his readers that those who have put their trust in Jesus as Saviour, were purchased in the slave market, and are bondslaves of the coming King of kings (I Cor. 7:22, 23). We are told in the same passage (I Cor. 7:22) that we are also the Lord’s freemen. This brings us to the other words translated “redeemed.” One means “to buy out of the market place.” Galatians 3:13, which uses this word, tells us that we were purchased in the slave-market, but in such a way that while we are bondslaves of the purchaser, the Lord Jesus, we are never again to be put up for sale in any slave market. We have been bought out of the slave market. This means that we are bondslaves of the Lord Jesus forever. He will never sell us or permit us to be sold as slaves to anyone else. A bondslave of Jesus Christ never becomes a bondslave of Satan again. The other word translated “redeemed” means “to release or liberate by payment of a ransom,” and is used in I Peter 1:18; Titus 2:14. The noun having the same root means “ransom money used to liberate a slave.” After our blessed Lord buys us in the slave market, the ransom money being His own precious blood, we become His private property. We are His bondslaves. Then He so arranges the details of the purchase that we will never be put up for sale in any slave market. He buys us out of the slave market. Then He sets us free. We are freemen, freed from the guilt, penalty, and power of sin, some day to be freed from the presence of sin. We are liberated from all that, so that we might realize in our lives that for which we were created, namely, to glorify God. It is the old story of the caged eagle, liberated to fly again in the pure air of the mountain tops. But how can we be His bondslaves and His freemen at the same time? After we have been purchased as His bondslaves, and have been liberated from our old master Satan, out of pure gratefulness of heart we say to our Lord, “Lord Jesus, we want to serve Thee as Thy bondslaves forever.” Our position as His bondslaves is not one of compulsion, but of free will energized by an imparted divine nature and a supernaturally imparted love. Therefore, we are His bondslaves and His freemen at the same time, a thing impossible in the case of earthly slaves. Thus is solved one of the delightful paradoxes of Holy Scripture.

IX. Paul the Scholar Sometimes a very slight shade of meaning in a word may speak volumes. Paul in Acts 22, is presenting his defence before his fellow-countrymen. He states that he is a man, Jewish by race, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, yet brought up in Jerusalem at the feet of Gamaliel (22:3). Tarsus was a city outside of Palestine, Greek in its culture. The fact that Paul was born there would put him in an unfavorable light with the Jerusalem Jews. We see that prejudice of the Jews against their fellow-countrymen who had absorbed Greek culture and who read the Old Testament in the Greek Septuagint version rather than in their native Hebrew, manifested in the early church (Acts 6), where those responsible for the poor were neglecting the widows of men who were pure-blooded Jews, yet who had imbibed Greek culture, and therefore were called Grecians (6:1). But Paul was strictly

honest in recounting his life. He said, “born in Tarsus,… yet brought up in this city.” The word “yet” is from the milder of two adversative particles in the Greek, both meaning “but.” He could have used the stronger adversative. Had he used the latter, he would have washed his hands of Tarsus and all Hellenistic culture. But he could not honestly do that. Saul of Tarsus had received training in the Greek language and literature. Indeed, he was well read in the latter, for in Acts 17:28 he quoted from two of the minor Greek poets, Aratus and Cleanthes, and in Titus 1:12 from one of the Cretan poets. Anyone might have a smattering of Homer or Plato without being considered well trained, but to quote some minor writers, shows that Paul was a Jew of Hellenistic background. But that he also acquired a thorough training in the Hebrew Old Testament and in rabbinical lore, is seen clearly by another word he uses. He was educated at the feet of Gamaliel. He could have used either one of three prepositions each meaning “at.” Had he used either of these, he would have had a position before the great teacher. But the preposition which he used means literally “beside, alongside,” and carries with it the idea of close personal connection. Cannot you see the eager young man, Saul, seated close to his teacher, at his side, drinking in every word that fell from his lips? This may be a very small touch, but it speaks volumes. Paul was a scholar.

X. Pauline Tactfulness An illustration of the tactfulness and delicacy of feeling of the apostle Paul is seen in his response to the gift which the Philippian saints sent to him, and which was the occasion for the letter. In 1:3–5 Paul says, “I thank my God … for your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now.” “Fellowship” is from a Greek word which means literally “to have in common with,” and speaks here of the joint-participation of the Philippians with Paul in the gospel. The word “in” is from a preposition of motion, and thus speaks of progress. Thus Paul thanks God for the joint-participation of the Philippians in the progress of the gospel. The Philippian saints were joint-participants with Paul in the work of the gospel in that they helped supply his needs as he preached. They had been helping him from the first day when Lydia the purple dye seller had opened her home for the preaching of the gospel until that present moment when they had sent a gift to the great apostle who was in prison. In the Greek text the definite article “the” occurs before the adverb “now,” which is a construction that we do not find in the English language. The definite article in Greek points out individual identity. It makes the thing referred to stand out in contrast to other things. Paul said that the Philippians had helped him in his missionary work from the first day until “the now.” The word “now” refers to the time at which Paul wrote, but the article particularizes that time as being characterized by the receipt of the gift. “Now” is not a mere point in time, but a point in time whose character was marked by the receipt of the gift. The article is a delicate finger pointing to the gift without referring to it in so many words. Paul in the closing sentences of his letter (4:10– 19) speaks of it in plain language, but he is so grateful for the gift that he cannot help but mention it at the very beginning. Yet with that rare tact and courtesy which was his, and which only our Lord can give, he thanked them for it without mentioning it by name. This joint participation of the Philippians in the progress of the gospel was the “good work” which God had begun in them. It was the grace of giving, and in this context, the grace of giving to missionary work.

XI. Amalgamated Love “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently” (I Peter 1:22). As one reads these words, the question arises as to why God exhorts saints who are already loving one another, to love one another. The answer to our question is found in the fact that the first word “love” comes from a Greek word referring to one kind of love, and the second word “love” is from another word speaking of a different kind of love. The first word “love” is from a Greek word which speaks of that glow of the heart which is kindled by the perception of that in the object loved which affords one pleasure. Whatever in an object is adapted to give pleasure when perceived, tends to call out affection, and this affection is what this word expresses. The Greeks were very much occupied with the topic of friendship. This was an ideal word for the expression of this form of affection. The word is used in such expressions as, “to be in a friendly way at one’s side,” “to interest one’s self in him in a friendly manner,” “a man showed himself friendly to men by keeping open house.” Thus this form of love is the response of the human spirit to what appeals to it as pleasurable. It speaks of a friendly affection. This is the kind of love which these saints had for one another. This love was the result of their obedience to the truth through their dependence upon the Spirit. That is, their obedience to God’s Word brought them all into right relationship to God in their personal lives, and into right relationship to one another in their fellowship with one another. This fellowship was a source of joy to them all, for the truth in the heart and life of each saint found its counterpart in and was attracted by the truth in the heart and life of the other saints. Each saint found in the heart of the other saint that which afforded him pleasure. He found a reflection of his own likes and dislikes, his own interests, his own thoughtworld in the life of his fellow-saint. It is like the attraction which one artist has for another artist, or one musician, for another musician. This mutual attraction results in a mutual love awakened by the sense of pleasure one finds in the company of the other. So it was with these saints. They loved each other with a mutual reciprocal love because of the pleasure each had in the other’s fellowship. It was a friendly love, a glow of the heart kindled by the perception of that in the other saint which afforded pleasure. Now, this kind of love is a perfectly proper and legitimate love. But it is a love which is non-ethical. That is, it sets no standards of right and wrong. It does not include within its constituent elements, the idea of self-sacrifice in the interest of the one loved. It could therefore degenerate into something selfish and self-centered. One saint may find so much in another saint with which to gratify his desire for fellowship, that he does not think of the other person, but merely of himself and of his own welfare. Thus what started out as a mutual and friendly love, would become a selfish self-centered thing. But God in His grace has provided a counter-balance which will make and keep this friendly love what it should be. The second use of the word “love” is from another Greek word. It speaks of that love which springs from an awakened sense of value in an object which causes one to prize the object loved. It expresses the love of approbation, of esteem, as over against the love of pure delight, which latter is our other word for love. It

springs from an apprehension of the preciousness of the object loved. It derives its impulse more from the notion of prizing than of liking. It is a love which springs from the soul’s sense of the value and preciousness of its object, and is the response of the heart to the recognized worth of the object loved. Our first word is found frequently in the pagan Greek authors, but the second word is used very sparingly. This rather obscure word, used so infrequently in the pagan Greek writings, the New Testament writers as guided by the Holy Spirit select, and pour into it as into an empty receptacle, all the content of meaning we find in John 3:16 and I Corinthians 13, where it is used. It is the response of the heart of God to the preciousness of each lost human soul that results in the infinite love God shows at Calvary. Each human soul is precious, first, because it bears the image of its Maker, even though that image be marred by sin, and second, because, it is composed of material, if you please, which God can through redemption, conform to the very image of His beloved Son. Thus, this love is a love of self-sacrifice based upon the preciousness of the object loved. God exhorts the saints who are already loving each other with a friendly love which is called out of their hearts because they find pleasure in each other’s fellowship, to love each other also with a self-sacrificial love because of the preciousness of the saint who is loved, as precious to God as Christ is precious to Him. Thus, this friendly love is amalgamated with the love of self-sacrifice. The two are fused. The first is made a thing of heaven because it is purified, ennobled, elevated by the second. Into this fellowship of the saints is introduced the love that sacrifices for the blessing of the other, the love that suffers long, the love that is kind, the love that does not envy, the love that does not vaunt itself and is not puffed up, the love that does not behave itself unseemly, the love that does not seek its own, the love that is not provoked, that thinks no evil, that does not rejoice in iniquity but rather in the truth, the love that bears, believes, hopes, and endures all things, the love that never fails. This love is the love spoken of in Galatians 5:22, produced in the heart of the saint who is definitely subjected to the Holy Spirit, by the Holy Spirit Himself. This is the love that God is. This is the love that should saturate the friendly love which saints have for each other. Without it, the fellowship of the saints with one another becomes a selfish unsatisfactory thing, but amalgamated with it, this friendly love becomes a thing of heaven. The secret of the fullness of this divine love, is in the fullness of the Holy Spirit. And this is why God exhorts saints who are already loving one another, to be loving one another. The translation reads as follows: “Wherefore, having purified your souls by means of your obedience to the truth, resulting in not an assumed but genuine love for the brethren, love that springs from your hearts by reason of the pleasure you take in them, from the heart love each other with an intense reciprocal love that springs from your hearts because of your estimation of the preciousness of your brethren, and which is self-sacrificial in its essence.”

XII. The Word “VISIT” in the New Testament By our English word “visit” we usually mean “the act of calling to see another, of paying a visit in the sense of a social call.” Consequently we sometimes attach this meaning to the word when we find it in Scripture. But the Greek word of which it is the translation means something more than that.

The word “visit” is the translation of two closely related verbs which have the following meanings: first, “to look upon or after, to inspect, to examine with the eyes;” second, “to look upon in order to help or benefit, to look after, to have a care for, to provide for.” The word visit is possibly the best single word translation of the Greek words, but the English reader can see that it does not adequately translate it. Take for instance, “Sick and in prison and ye visited me not” (Matt. 25:43).What a richer, fuller meaning we have when we go to the Greek text. It was no mere social call that would have met the need of the prisoner. Oriental prisons sometimes were cold and uncomfortable. Paul writes to Timothy from his prison in Rome, “The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee” (II Tim. 4:13). What a prisoner needed was ministering care like the help which the Philippians sent to Paul by Epaphroditus. Truly, the latter’s visit to Paul in his Roman prison is a good illustration of the meaning of the Greek word translated “visit” in Matthew 25:43. Zacharias, at the birth of his son John the Baptist, knowing that the latter would be the forerunner of the Messiah who would therefore shortly come, said, “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for He hath visited and redeemed His people” (Luke 1:68). When he used the word “visited,” he really said “for He has looked upon His people in order to help and benefit them, and provide for them.” Then in Luke 1:78 he said, “The day-spring from on high hath visited us.” That Dayspring is none other than the Lord Jesus, who looked upon Israel and had a care for His chosen people so that He came to their aid. And when Israel refused the aid of its Messiah, He laments over Jerusalem and its inhabitants, and speaks of its destruction, closing with the words “Thou knewest not the day of thy visitation” (Luke 19:44). The word “visitation” is from a noun whose root is the same as the stem of our verb. Israel did not perceive that the coming of Jesus of Nazareth was the day when God was looking upon His people in order to help them. We have the same meaning in Luke 7:16. The verb form is used of Moses in Acts 7:23 where Stephen speaks of him leaving the palace of Pharaoh to visit his Jewish brethren who were the slaves of the Egyptian king. “It came into his heart” to look after his brethren in order to help them. He had the consciousness that he was the God-ordained instrument to deliver Israel, and he was going to its aid. In Acts 15:14 we have a very significant statement, “Simeon hath declared how God for the first time (in the house of Cornelius) did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for His name.” And so we could translate more fully “how God for the first time did look upon the Gentiles in order to help them and provide for them.” After the first missionary journey, Paul said, “Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do” (Acts 15:36). Paul’s use of the verb “visit” included a tour of inspection and the giving of spiritual aid where that was needed. In Hebrews 2:6 we have, “What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?” The words “son of man” are here a designation of the human race. The Psalmist exclaims at the wonder of it all, that considering the insignificance of man, God would look upon him in order to help him and give him aid. I Peter 2:12 speaks of the fact that the unsaved who have been attracted to the Lord Jesus by the beautiful lives of Christians, and have put their faith in Him, will “glorify God in the day of visitation.” The word translated “visitation” is allied to our verb, and refers to the day when God looks after them and cares for their souls in salvation. In I Peter 2:25, the word

“Bishop” is from another word closely allied to the same verb. Thus God becomes the Bishop of the souls of the saints in that He looks after their spiritual welfare and gives them aid. In James 1:27 we have, “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.” Here again, the word “visit” does not refer to a social call, but to the act of looking after the fatherless and the widows in order to help them. The noun forms of this word are found in the following places and are translated by the words “overseer or bishop;” Acts 20:28; Philippians 1:1; I Timothy 3:1, 2; Titus 1:7; I Peter 2:25; and Acts 1:20 where the word “bishopric” should be translated “overseership.” The word has the following meanings, “an overseer, one charged with the duty of seeing that things to be done by others are done rightly, a guardian.” In the case of a church officer called a “bishop,” it means “one charged with the spiritual oversight and welfare of the local church, with the responsibility of giving spiritual help to the saints.” As a result of this study, the English reader can understand more clearly the passages where the word “visit” is found.

XIII. Here and There in the New Testament Paid in Full. Our Lord in Matthew 6:2 is speaking of hypocrites of His day who blew a trumpet in the synagogues and streets to call men’s attention to the alms they were giving, doing this in order that they may be glorified by men. His comment on this procedure is “They have their reward.” “Synagogue” is from a Greek word made up of a verb which means “to go,” and a preposition which means “with” and signifies “fellowship.” Thus the composite word refers to the action of people “going with one another,” thus congregating in one place. The word became the name for the place of worship where the Jews congregated. The word “hypocrite” was used of an actor on the Greek stage, one who played the part of another. These who made a display of giving alms were hypocrites in the sense that they played the part of a generous person who out of a heart of love would give to the poor. But their motive in giving was to have men glorify them, not from a desire to help the needy. They were actors on the stage of this life. They received the applause of the audience. Jesus said, “They have their reward.” The word “have” is from the verb which means “to have,” and a prefixed preposition which means “off” and implies separation. The combined idea is “to have off.” It speaks of the possession of something which is a full and final payment. It came to mean “I have received in full.” It was the technical expression regularly used in drawing up a receipt. Paul used it when he said (Phil. 4:18) “I have all.” He was acknowledging the gift of the Philippians brought by Epaphroditus, and sending them a receipt for the same. The Greek secular non-literary manuscripts give instances of its use all over the Hellenistic world. Our Lord’s words could be translated “They have received their reward in full.” These hypocrites had been paid in full, and they had no further claim for reward. So is it when we do Christian work to be seen of men, when we exalt ourselves instead of the Lord Jesus. We are paid in full on earth, our pay, the plaudits of men. We have no reward awaiting us over yonder. Playing Truant. In II Thessalonians 3:11, Paul speaks of certain Christian men in the local church who were walking disorderly. The English word “disorderly” means “confused, unmethodical, turbulent, unruly.” But none of these meanings exactly fits the

Greek word of which it is the translation. The use of the Greek word is clearly seen in an early account of a father who apprenticed his son to a weaver for one year. The contract provided for the details of food and clothing for the period of apprenticeship. Then the contract stated that if there were any days on which the boy failed to attend or played truant, the father must see that the boy report for work an equivalent number of days after the apprenticeship was over. The word translated “disorderly” is the Greek word in the contract which means “to play truant.” These Thessalonian saints were playing truant from their daily employment. The occasion for this is suggested in the context where Paul says, “The Lord direct your hearts into the love of God, and the patient waiting for Christ.” The doctrine of the immanent return of the Lord Jesus for His Church was firmly believed in this church. The saints looked from day to day for that event. Some argued, of course wrongly, that if the Lord might come the next day, that there was no need for earning one’s daily bread. But Paul, who had taught them this great truth of the immanency of the Lord’s return, and whose expectation was just as intense as that of the Thessalonian saints, calls their attention to the fact that he worked for his daily bread in order that he might not be obligated to anyone for support. His rule was that if anyone did not work, he should not eat. He defines what he means by “disorderly” in the words “working not at all.” Thus, the context agrees with the first century usage of the word, “to play truant.” Called Christians. It was at Antioch that the disciples were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). The name was coined by the pagans of the first century to identify the followers of the Christ from those who worshipped the Roman emperor who was called Caesar. The word “disciple” is the translation of a Greek word meaning “one who learns.” The word does not include within its meaning the idea of salvation. Thus, the disciples of the Christ could be either saved or unsaved. They merely had to be followers of Him, those who were under His instruction and adhered to Him as a leader or teacher. Judas was the one disciple of the twelve who was not a true believer. In John 6:66 we have, “From that time many of his disciples went back and walked no more with him.” They followed our Lord in His ethical teachings, but when He spoke of salvation through faith in a substitutionary blood sacrifice, they parted company with Him. Therefore, one must consult the context in which the word “disciple” is found, to find out whether the disciple mentioned is saved or unsaved. Here we have the case of many people following the Lord who were known as His disciples. The pagan world called them “Christians.” The Roman State was built around the Emperor not merely as the political but the religious head of the empire. Not only did the subjects of the empire render allegiance to the Caesar as the governing head, but they worshipped him as a god. Emperor worship, or as it is sometimes known, the Cult of the Caesar, bound together the empire’s far-flung colonies and widely different peoples. These followers of the Caesar, members of the Cult of the Caesar, were called in the Greek language, Kaisarianos (Kaisariano"), followers of the Kaisar (Kaisar) or Caesar. Now appears a rival claimant to world worship and dominion, the Christ of Israel. There was a widespread consciousness in the Gentile portion of the race that some day there would appear in Israel, a great leader, called the Messiah. This was probably part of the knowledge which the Magi had when they came to worship the new-born King of the Jews (Matt. 2:1–11). While He was not well known during His life-time on earth, a fact which is attested by the meagre notice given Him by the historians of His day, yet when the Gospel of Grace was being preached throughout the Roman empire, and He was being proclaimed as the Christ, with all that that name involved, Rome took notice. The name

“Christ” is the English spelling of the Greek word Christos (Cristo"), which in turn is the translation of the Hebrew word “Messiah.” It was the Messiah who had died, and had risen again, who was described as the sinner’s Saviour, and a king in His own right, coming from the famous line of Jewish kings, the Davidic. Here was a rival King and Priest, claiming the allegiance of the subjects of Rome. Those who put their faith in Him necessarily had to sever their allegiance to the ruling Caesar, so far as worshipping him was concerned. These who were once Kaisarianos (Kaisariano"), followers of the Caesar, now were known as Christianos (Cristiano"), followers of the Christ. Thus, the Roman world was divided into two rival cults, the Cult of the Caesar, and the Cult of the Christ. Paul, speaking of the Christ (the definite article appears before “Christ” in the Greek, indicating that the term “Christ” was well-known) before Agrippa the Roman ruler, preached the gospel to him (Acts 26). Agrippa says to Paul, “Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.” The literal Greek here is, “With but little persuasion thou wouldest fain make me a Christian.” Agrippa scoffed at the idea of becoming a Christian. He was a proud Kaisarianos (Kaisariano"), a worshipper of the Caesar. He knew that he would lose his government position and his head also if he ever renounced his allegiance to Caesar in order to become a Christianos (Cristiano"). The name “Christian” was a term of reproach in the Roman world. It was the name of the members of that despised and hated sect which worshipped the Christ. Peter in his first epistle (4:16) says, “If any man suffer as a Christian (a Christianos (Cristiano")), let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.” Thus, the persecution of the early Christians by Rome arose out of the antagonism of the empire against a rival supremacy, that of the Cult of the Christ. The world coined the term, but the Holy Spirit in I Peter takes it up as one of the designations of a believer in the Lord Jesus. In the first century it designated those who worshipped the Christ and refused to worship the image of the emperor. How that reminds us of John’s exhortation in his first epistle (5:21), “Little children, keep yourself from idols.” That injunction applies to Christians today. An idol today is anything that a Christian might possess that is not in harmony with what the Lord Jesus is, anything that occupies a place in his life which has a tendency to exclude Christ. We have no Roman emperor today whom the State might direct us to worship. But let us keep a watchful eye open for the little idols that would keep us from the closest fellowship with and usefulness to our Lord. In the Great Tribulation period, the Roman empire is again to rear its head. Emperor worship will be restored, and thus the Cult of the Caesar (Rev. 13). The Jewish remnant of 144,000 (Rev. 7:1–8) will proclaim the coming of the Christ, and the two rival supremacies will again be present in a revived Roman empire. There will be the Kaisarianos (Kaisariano") and the Christianos (Cristiano"), the followers of Caesar and the followers of the Christ. But the personal advent of the Christ will displace the supremacy of the Caesars, and His Messianic rule will bring universal righteousness, peace, and prosperity to this earth. Rebuke and Reprove. These two words are the usual translations of two closely related words in the Greek text. When we keep in mind the distinction between these Greek words, a flood of light is thrown upon the passages in which they occur. The word “rebuke” is the general translation of the word epitimao (ejpitimao). This word is used when one rebukes another without bringing the one rebuked to a conviction

of any fault on his part. It might be because the one rebuked was innocent of the charge, or that he was guilty but refused to acknowledge his guilt. Examples of the first are seen in the action of Peter rebuking the Lord Jesus (Matt. 16:23), the disciples rebuking the children for accepting the blessing of our Lord (Matt. 19:13), and the crowd rebuking the blind man for calling upon Jesus (Luke 18:39). Illustrations of the second are found in the case of the repentant robber rebuking his fellow malefactor (Luke 23:40), and Jesus rebuking the demon (Mark 9:25), neither rebuke having any effect upon the recipient. The second word is elegcho (ejlegco) and is usually translated by the word “reprove.” This word speaks of a rebuke which results in the person’s confession of his guilt, or if not his confession, his conviction of his sin. The word is used in Job 5:17 (Septuagint). “Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth.” It is God’s reproof of His own that results in conviction of sin and their confession. “Reprove” in Proverbs 19:25 (Septuagint) is from elegcho (ejlegco). The person who has spiritual understanding will respond to a rebuke from God by acknowledging his guilt and confessing it. Our Lord uses the word when He says, “Which of you convinceth me of sin?” (John 8:46). Elegcho (ÆElegco) is the correct word here, for it was used in the Greek law courts not merely of a reply to an opposing attorney, but of a refutation of his argument. No one could prove any charges of sin against our Lord. No one could bring charges against Him in such a way as to convince Him that He was guilty. But what a flood of light is shed upon the great passage, “And when he (the Holy Spirit) is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment” (John 16:8). What a commentary upon the work of the Holy Spirit in the case of the unsaved whom He brings to a saving faith in the Lord Jesus. Here epitimao (ejpitimao) would not do, for the unsaved are not guiltless nor do those whom the Holy Spirit reproves, refuse to acknowledge and confess their guilt. The word “world” here must be interpreted in a limited way because of elegcho (ejlegco). The word here refers to those of the unsaved who are brought by the Holy Spirit into the place of salvation. The reproof spoken of is an effectual one. The rest of the unsaved hate the light and do not come to the light, lest their deeds be proven to be evil and they be put under obligation to confess their guilt (John 3:20). With the help of these definitions and illustrations of epitimao (ejpitimao) and elegcho (ejlegco), the student of the English Bible is now prepared to study for himself the passages in which each is found. Epitimao (ÆEpitimao) occurs in the following places and is translated in the a.v., by the words “rebuke” and “charge”: Matthew 8:26, 12:16, 16:22, 17:18, 19:13, 20:31; Mark 1:25, 3:12, 4:39, 8:30, 32, 33, 9:25, 10:13, 48; Luke 4:35, 39, 41, 8:24, 9:21, 42, 55, 17:3, 18:15, 39, 19:39, 23:40; II Timothy 4:2; Jude 9. Elegcho (ÆElegco) is found in the following places and is translated by the words “reprove, convict, tell a fault, convince”: Matthew 18:15; Luke 3:19; John 3:20, 8:9, 46, 16:8; I Corinthians 14:24; Ephesians 5:11, 13; I Timothy 5:20; II Timothy 4:2; Titus 1:9, 13, 2:15; Hebrews 12:5; James 2:9; Revelation 3:19. Bastazo (Bastazo). This is one of the many colorful words in the Greek New Testament. It has a variety of meanings; to take up with the hands, to bear what is burdensome, to bear away, to carry off, to pilfer. Moulton and Milligan in their Vocabulary of the Greek Testament report the following uses of the word. The word appears in a secular manuscript of a.d. 117 in a formula about taxation, where it has the sense of “endure.” It appears in the sentence “No one will endure your cheek.” How this

latter phrase has remained with us. The Ephesian church could not bear (bastazo (bastazo)) them that are evil (Rev. 2:2, 3). It could not endure them in the same sense that no one could endure the cheek, the insults, sarcasm, gainsaying, cutting words, rudeness, and abuse of the unknown person mentioned in that early manuscript. A document of the third century speaks of the Emperor Trajan granting an audience to rival Greek and Jewish emissaries from Alexandria, “each bearing (bastazo (bastazo)) their own unique, private gods.” How like in usage is this to the words in Acts 9:15, “He (Paul) is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear (bastazo (bastazo)) my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel.” Closely allied to this usage of bastazo (bastazo) is that found in a papyrus manuscript which contains a spell in which the words occur, “I carry the corpse of Osiris … should so-and-so trouble me, I shall use it against him.” Compare Galatians 6:17 where Paul says, “From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear (bastazo (bastazo)) in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.” The word “marks” is from the Greek stigma (stigma), which comes over into the English language in our word “stigma,” and means, “a mark pricked in or branded upon the body.” According to ancient oriental usage, slaves and soldiers bore the name or stamp of their master or commander branded or pricked into their bodies to indicate to what master or general they belonged, and there were even some devotees who stamped themselves in this way with the token of their gods. Thus, Paul says that he bears branded on his body, the scars and marks left there by the perils, hardships, imprisonments, beatings and scourgings he endured for the Lord Jesus, and which proved him to be a faithful soldier of Jesus Christ. Thus he could exhort Timothy to endure hardness as a good soldier of Jesus Christ (II Tim. 2:3). In our Galatian passage, he says in effect that he has suffered enough from the Judaizers who dogged his footsteps for many long years, and that his body scarred as the result of suffering for his Lord, should be enough to cause them to let him alone in his declining years and give him a little time of peace and rest. So, as the bearing (bastazo (bastazo)) of a particular amulet associated with the god Osiris was used as a charm against an adversary, so the scarred body of the apostle should be enough to dissuade the Judaizers from their continued attacks upon him. And just as these Greek and Jewish emissaries bore their own unique private gods before Trajan in their dress, language, actions, and testimony, so Paul was to do the same before the Gentiles, kings, and children of Israel. A common use of bastazo (bastazo) was “to pilfer,” throwing a flood of light on John 12:6 where Judas is said to have “had the bag, and bare (pilfered bastazo (bastazo)) what was put therein.” In Matthew 3:11, we have “whose shoes I am not worthy to bear.” Bastazo (Bastazo) was firmly established in its usage of “to take off someone’s sandals,” and it has this meaning here. Compare Mark 1:7. It was not a question of wearing Messiah’s sandals, but of taking them off for Him, a slave’s duty. What humility on the part of John. The word also meant “to bear what is burdensome,” and is used in that meaning in the following places: Matthew 8:17, 20:12; Mark 14:13; Luke 7:14, 14:27, 22:10; John 10:31, 16:12, 19:17, 20:15; Acts 3:2, 15:10, 21:35; Romans 15:1; Galatians 5:10, 6:2, 5, 17; Revelation 2:2, 3. There is another Greek word which is the simple unqualified word meaning “to bear.” When bastazo (bastazo) is used, the writer wishes to add some detail to the simple idea of carrying something. One should always look for that additional idea. The reader should study these places listed for the additional light which the word bastazo (bastazo) sheds upon the meaning of the passage. It will paint many a vivid

picture in his mind’s eye. Deity and Divinity. There are two Greek words translated “Godhead” in the New Testament, occurring but once each, theiotes (qeiote") and theotes (qeote"). The Greek words are not however identical in meaning. Paul uses the first in Romans 1:20, where he speaks of the fact that mankind can see the theiotes (qeiote") of God as it looks at the created universe. Trench observes, “Paul is declaring how much of God may be known from the revelation of Himself which He has made in nature, from those vestiges of Himself which men may everywhere trace in the world around them. Yet it is not the personal God whom any man may learn to know by these aids: He can be known only by the revelation of Himself in His Son; but only His divine attributes, His majesty and glory … It is not to be doubted that St. Paul uses this vaguer, more abstract, and less personal word, just because he would affirm that men may know God’s power and majesty … from His works, but would not imply that they may know Himself from these, or from anything short of the revelation of His eternal Word.” Peter in his second epistle (1:3) uses the word theia (qeia) which is closely allied to theiotes (qeiote"), to describe God’s power. The word is translated “divine” in the a.v. Paul uses theion (qeion) in Acts 17:29 where it is translated “Godhead.” In Romans 1:20 he is speaking of what may be known of God through nature. In his message to the Greek philosophers at Athens, he argues that the fact that we are the offspring of God by creation, gives us a picture, though inadequate, of what God is like. However, He cannot be known in a personal way through this means. Thus, in these passages, he is speaking of the divine aspects of Deity, but not of Deity as in itself absolute. The word theiotes (qeiote") was used in classical Greek to speak of something in which there was a manifestation of the divine, of some divine attributes, but never of absolute deity. The word was used when a human being was raised to the rank of a god. He was therefore divine. But absolute deity was never ascribed to him by this word. The word theiotes (qeiote") should therefore be translated in such a way as to bring out the thought of divinity, namely, that state of being in which the individual has divine characteristics. Paul in Romans 1:19 uses the Greek word theos (qeo") which speaks of absolute deity, and then in the next verse says that the created universe shows His eternal power and divinity, using theiotes (qeiote"). The other word theotes (qeote") occurs in Colossians 2:9, where Paul says that “In him (the Lord Jesus) dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” The Greek is very strong here. One could translate, “For in Him corporeally there is permanently at home all the fulness of the Godhead.” That is, in our Lord Jesus in His incarnation and in the permanent possession of His human body now glorified, there resides by nature and permanently the fulness of the Godhead. The word “Godhead” is from our second word theotes (qeote"). The word expresses Godhead in the absolute sense. It is not merely divine attributes that are in mind now, but the possession of the essence of deity in an absolute sense. The Greek Fathers never use theiotes (qeiote") but always theotes (qeote") as alone adequately expressing the essential Godhead of the three several Persons in the Holy Trinity. The Latin Christian writers were not satisfied with divinitas which was in common use, but coined the word deitas as the only adequate representative of the Greek word theotes (qeote"). In these days when translators of the modernistic school will render the last sentence of John 1:1 “And the Word was divine,” translating the word theos (qeo") which means “absolute deity” by the word “divine,” it behooves those who believe in the absolute deity

of the Lord Jesus, to use the expression “deity of Jesus Christ,” rather than “divinity of Jesus Christ.” Paul never spoke of the divinity of Jesus Christ, always of His deity. Our Lord does have divine attributes, but He is also God the Son, possessing the same essence as God the Father, and is co-equal with the other two members of the Trinity in His deity. Baptize Unto Repentance. John the Baptist makes the statement, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance” (Matt. 3:11). Peter says, “Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). The word “unto” signifies “result.” For instance, “I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God unto salvation” (Rom. 1:16). The word “for” in our second text has the same meaning. Are we to understand that water baptism as administered by John the Baptist and Peter, resulted in the repentance of those who were the recipients of it, in the face of the fact that repentance is a work of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the unsaved, this repentance being “unto life,” that is, resulting in life (Acts 11:18)? The words “unto” and “for” in Matthew 3:11 and Acts 2:38 are from the Greek preposition eis (eij"). Dana and Mantey in their excellent treatment of Greek prepositions based upon the papyri findings, give as one of the uses of this word, “because of.”* This usage is found in Matthew 12:41 where the men of Nineveh repented at or because of the preaching of Jonah, and in Romans 4:20, where Abraham did not stagger in unbelief, because of the promise of God. In the case of the men of Nineveh, Jonah’s preaching was the cause of their repentance. In the case of Abraham, the reason why he did not stagger in unbelief, was because of the promise of God. The word “stagger” here is from a Greek word which means “to vacillate between two opinions.” Thus it was the repentance of those who received John’s message which was the cause of their baptism. The same was true of Peter’s at Pentecost. John’s words were, “I indeed baptize you with water because of repentance,” and Peter’s, “Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ because of the remission of sins.” That this is the correct translation and interpretation of our texts is also seen from the testimony of Josephus to the effect that John the Baptist baptized people only after they had repented: “Who (John) was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing (with water) would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away of some sins, but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness.” John’s words, “Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance” (Matt. 3:8), clearly show that he demanded some evidence of salvation before he would baptize a person. Thus, we have the scriptural meaning of water baptism. It is the testimony of the person to the fact of his salvation. The only proper recipient of water baptism therefore is one who has received the Lord Jesus as his personal Saviour, and is trusting in His precious blood for salvation from sin. The Greek text thus clears up a difficulty found in the English translation. Baptism is not the prerequisite of repentance, much less its cause, but the testimony of the one who has entered the door of salvation.

XIV. An Exposition of the Greek Text of Romans VI Paul wrote chapter six of Romans in answer to two questions: “Shall we continue in sin,

that grace may abound?” answering this question in verses 2–14; and “Shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace?” replying to this question in verses 15–23. These questions were raised, not by the apostle himself, but by his hearers in the first century who did not understand grace, and thus arrived at false conclusions concerning it. Paul answers the first question by showing that such a thing is impossible, since God’s grace makes provision for an inward change in the believer the moment he receives the Lord Jesus as his Saviour, a change in which the power of indwelling sin is broken and the divine nature implanted. This results in the liberation of that person from the compelling power of the Adamic nature, and his acquisition of the desire and power to live a holy life. This, Paul argues, makes impossible a life of sin. He replies to the second question by asserting that a Christian does not take advantage of divine grace, since he has ceased to be a bondslave of Satan and has become a bondslave of the Lord Jesus, having a nature whereby he hates sin and shuns the Devil, and loves to serve the Lord Jesus. In answering these objections to his teaching of pure grace without any admixture of law as a means of controlling the saint and causing him to live a life pleasing to God, Paul deals with the mechanical impossibility of going on in sin. We are occupied in Romans VI, not with the question of what kind of a life the child of God should live, a subject which he presents in chapters 12–16, but with the question of how or by what method the believer is to live that life. The reason why so many children of God who are earnestly trying to live a Christian life which would glorify the Lord Jesus, fail in that endeavor, is because they do not understand the truth of this chapter. Their experience is like that of Paul, who before he came into the truth of Romans VI said, “I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I do not understand: for what I would, that I do not; but what I hate, that do I” (7:15). Paul uses three words to designate the three spiritual classes of men, the natural man (I Cor. 2:14), namely, the unsaved person; the carnal man (I Cor. 3:1), the Christian who is not living the victorious life; and the spiritual man (I Cor. 2:15), the Christian who understands God’s prescribed method for the saint which results in his living a holy life. Our exposition of the Greek text of this wonderful portion of God’s Word should, under the blessing of God the Holy Spirit, solve the problem of some dear child of God who is not getting consistent victory over sin. It therefore should prove an intensely practical study. The first question found its occasion in Paul’s statement in 5:20, “where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” The words “much more abound” are from a word referring to a superabundance of something with an additional supply added to this superabundance. Paul’s teaching here is that no matter how much sin there might be committed, there are always unlimited resources of grace in the great heart of God by which to extend mercy to the sinning individual. The reaction of the heart that does not understand grace is seen in the question asked, “What shall we say then? Shall we continue habitually to live in the sphere and grip of the sinful nature, in order that this grace may be increasingly lavished in superabundant outgoings?” The verb used, refers to habitual action. The word “sin” refers here not to acts of sin, but to the sinful nature, since Paul is dealing here with the mechanics of the Christian life, not the outward actions of the individual. His first answer to this question is “God forbid.” The literal Greek is, “May it not become.” He dismisses the very thought as unthinkable. One could translate, “far be the thought.”

His second answer is, “How shall we who are dead to sin, live any longer therein?” The word “how,” leaves no room for the possibility of the continued habit of sin in the Christian life, for the Greek word means “how is it possible?” “We” is from a word that not only refers to the individuals concerned, but also to the quality or character of these individuals. The fuller translation is “such as we.” “Are dead” is from a past tense verb, which tense also speaks of finality, and we translate “died once for all.” “Sin” is in a construction in Greek which causes us to translate “with reference to sin.” The verb “live” is from a word which speaks here of the life principle, not the actions of the person. The translation thus far reads, “What shall we say then? Shall we habitually abide under the control of sin in order that this grace previously mentioned may be increasingly lavished in superabundant outgoings? Far be the thought. Such as we who died once for all with reference to sin, how is it possible for us to exist in the grip of its motivating energy any longer?” But let us look at the word “died.” Death is not extinction of being, but a separation. In the case of physical death, it is the separation of the individual from his physical body. In the case of spiritual death, it is the separation of the person from the life of God. Here the word refers to the separation of the believer from the power of the sinful nature. Before salvation, he was compelled to obey its behests. Since salvation, its power over him is broken. We must be careful to note that Paul is not teaching what is called “the eradication of the sinful nature,” namely, that that nature is taken away completely. The Bible teaches that this nature remains in the believer until he dies (Rom. 7:18, 21; I John 1:8), but the believer is not in it in the sense of being in its grip. Thus Paul answers the question as to whether a Christian should continue in habitual sin, by stating its impossibility, and on the ground that that nature which before salvation made him sin habitually, has had its power broken. It is a mechanical impossibility. We paraphrase the question: “Such as we who have been separated once for all from the power of the sinful nature, how is it possible for us to continue to exist in the grip of its motivating energy any longer?” Thus, when God justifies the believer, he also breaks the power of sin in the life. Grace does here what law never did. It not only forbids sin but also defeats its power in the person’s life. Then Paul proceeds to answer the question from another angle. In his first answer he showed the impossibility of habitual sin in a Christian’s life by reason of the fact that the power of the sinful nature was broken when the believer was saved. Now he shows its impossibility in that the believer is made a partaker of the divine nature (II Peter 1:4). The life of God, surging through his being, causes him to hate sin and love holiness, and produces in him both the desire and the power to do God’s will. Paul speaks of this in Philippians 2:11, 12, where he says “Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, carry to its ultimate goal your own salvation with fear and trembling, for God is the One who is constantly supplying you the impulse, giving you both the power to resolve and the strength to perform His good pleasure.” This truth Paul presents in verses 3 and 4 where we are taught that all believers were baptized into Jesus Christ and thus shared His death, in order that they also might share His resurrection life. We look first at the phrase “baptized into Jesus Christ.” It is set in a context of supernaturalism. In verse 2 we have the supernatural act of God breaking the power of indwelling sin for the believer. In verse 4 we have the supernatural act of God imparting

divine life to the believer. Verse 3 reaches back to the action spoken of in verse 2 and forward to that spoken of in verse 4. We were baptized into Jesus Christ so that we might be baptized into His death on the Cross, in order that through our identification with Him in that death, we might die with reference to sin, that is, have the power of indwelling sin broken. We were also baptized into His death so that we might share His burial, and thus His resurrection, and in that way have His divine life imparted to us. Thus this baptism accomplished two things. It resulted in the power of sin being broken and the divine nature being implanted, which operation took place at the moment the believer placed his faith in the Lord Jesus. Therefore, since the results were operative in the believer the moment he was saved, the baptism into Jesus Christ in which that person shared His death, burial, and resurrection, must have taken place, potentially, previous to his being saved, and actually, at the moment of salvation. Our Lord died, was buried, and arose almost 2000 years ago. In the mind and reckoning of God, each believer was in Christ then, in order that he might when he believed, participate in the benefits which His death, burial, and resurrection brought forth. Therefore, the baptism referred to here is not water baptism, but the baptism by means of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 12:13). Let it be said in passing, that the writer believes in the ordinance of water baptism as obligatory upon all believers on the Lord Jesus Christ, that it is their testimony to the fact of their salvation, and he finds plenty of scriptural warrant for it elsewhere. No ceremony of water baptism ever introduced a believing sinner into vital union with Jesus Christ. Furthermore, many true children of God never have fulfilled their obligation of testifying to their salvation in water baptism. And who is prepared to deny that they have been united to Christ? Paul is concerned here with the supernatural working of God resulting in an inner change in the spiritual mechanics of the believer’s life, and as a clear thinker who stays within the compass of his subject, Paul does not introduce the symbol where the supernatural alone is in view. But how are we to understand the word “baptism”? This word is the spelling in English letter equivalents of the word baptisma (baptisma), the verb of the same stem being baptizo (baptizo). The Greek word has two distinct uses, a mechanical one, and a ritualistic one, to be determined by the context in which it is found. Since the word “baptism” is only the spelling of the Greek word baptisma (baptisma), and not a word native to the English language, it has no meaning of its own and therefore must derive its meaning from the Greek word of which it is the spelling. Furthermore, it must be interpreted and translated in its two meanings just as the Greek word is. We will present usages of the Greek word as found in classical Greek, and in the Koine Greek of secular documents, the Septuagint, and the New Testament. For the following instances of the purely mechanical usage of baptizo (baptizo) in classical Greek, I am indebted to my honored and beloved teacher of Greek at Northwestern University, Professor John A. Scott, Ph.D., LL.D., classical Greek scholar who in the field of classical criticism has refuted the theory of Frederick August Wolf, who claimed that the Iliad and Odyssey were not written by the poet Homer but are a composite of the poetic expression of the Greek people, publishing the results of his findings in his book, The Unity of Homer, and who in the field of New Testament criticism has written the book, We Would Know Jesus, in which he demonstrates the historical accuracy of the four Gospels as confirmed by contemporary records, thereby rendering valuable assistance to the cause of evangelical Christianity in view of the destructive tendencies of that which passes for present day criticism of the New Testament: “The first

use of baptizo (baptizo) is in the ninth book of the Odyssey, where the hissing of the burning eye of the Cyclops is compared to the sound of water where a smith dips, baptizes, a piece of iron, tempering it. In the Battle of the Frogs and Mice it is said that a mouse thrust a frog with a reed, and the frog leaped over the water, baptizing it with its blood. Euripides uses the word of a ship which goes down in the water and does not come back to the surface. Lucian dreams that he has seen a huge bird shot with a mighty arrow, and as it flies high in the air it baptizes the clouds with its blood. An ancient scholium to the Fifth Book of the Iliad makes a wounded soldier baptize the earth with his blood. It is the ordinary word for staining or dyeing, and words derived from it meaning “dyer” and “dyes” are common. The most common meaning is to plunge into a liquid, but it is so common in other meanings that in each case the meaning must be determined by the context.” In Xenophon’s Anabasis we have an instance where the word baptizo (baptizo) has both a mechanical and a ceremonial meaning. Before going to war, the Greek soldiers placed (baptizo (baptizo)) the points of their swords, and the barbarians the points of their spears in a bowl of blood. In secular documents of the Koine period, Moulton and Milligan report the following usages: “a submerged boat, ceremonial ablutions, a person overwhelmed in calamities, a person baptizo (baptizo) upon the head.” We have in Leviticus 4:6 the words, “And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood seven times before the Lord,” where “dip” is from baptizo (baptizo) and “sprinkle” is from rantizo (rJantizo) (Septuagint), the first referring to the action of introducing the finger into the blood, and the second, speaking of the ritualism of sprinkling that blood. In the New Testament we find the word translated “washings” in Hebrews 9:10, speaking of the ablutions of Judaism; referring to ceremonial washing of cups, pots, brazen vessels, and of tables (Mark 7:4); and to the ceremony of water baptism (Matt. 3:7, 16; John 4:1; Acts 16:33; I Corinthians 1:14; I Peter 3:21). A purely mechanical usage is seen in Luke 16:24 where the rich man asks that Lazarus dip (baptize) his finger in water and cool his tongue. The usage of the word as seen in the above examples, resolves itself into the following definition of the word baptizo (baptizo) in its mechanical meaning: “the introduction or placing of a person or thing into a new environment or into union with something else so as to alter its condition or its relationship to its previous environment or condition.” And that is its usage in Romans VI. It refers to the act of God introducing a believing sinner into vital union with Jesus Christ, in order that that believer might have the power of his sinful nature broken and the divine nature implanted through his identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection, thus altering the condition and relationship of that sinner with regard to his previous state and environment, bringing him into a new environment, the kingdom of God. That is what Paul refers to when he says, “hath translated us into the kingdom of the Son of His love” (Col. 1:13). We have this same mechanical usage of baptizo (baptizo) in I Corinthians 12:13, “For by means of the instrumentality of one Spirit were we all baptized into one body,” where Paul speaks of the act of the Holy Spirit placing or introducing the believing sinner into the body of Christ, as in our Roman text he refers to the same act, but speaks of the Head of the Body rather than the Body itself. The word “Spirit” is in the instrumental case, which case designates the means by which the action in the verb is accomplished. The Holy Spirit is the divine agent who Himself baptizes (introduces) the believer into vital union with the

Lord Jesus. It should be clear from this that the baptism by means of the Spirit is not for power. Its sole purpose is to unite the believing sinner with his Saviour. Power for holy living and for service comes from the fullness of the Spirit. The baptism is an act which takes place at the moment the sinner believes, never to be repeated. The fullness is a moment by moment continuous state as the believer trusts the Lord Jesus for that fullness (John 7:37, 38). We are now ready for the further examination of verses 3 and 4. The words “so many of us as” in the Greek, do not imply that some were not baptized, but designate all collectively. This is checked up by I Corinthians 12:13 in the statement “were we all baptized.” This again points to the fact that Paul is speaking here of the baptism by the Spirit, for all believers are in Christ, and yet all have not fulfilled their obligation of conforming to the ordinance of water baptism. The words “know ye not,” in the original are literally “or are ye ignorant?”, the Greek showing that the persons addressed were not ignorant of these facts, but conversant with them. The word “into” is from a Greek word which denotes an “inward union.” The translation is as follows: “Or, are ye ignorant of the fact that all we who were baptized (introduced) into an inward union with Christ Jesus, into (a participation in) His death were baptized (introduced)?” We now consider verse 4. The words “newness of life” do not refer to the new kind of life we are to live before the world. They do not refer to our Christian testimony as seen in our thoughts, words, and deeds. They speak of the new life implanted which is a motivating energy, providing both the desire and the power to live a Christian life. We are to walk, that is, conduct ourselves in the power of the new life which is imparted to us in regeneration. Whereas, before salvation, we walked in the power of the Adamic nature which gave us the desire and power to sin, we now are to walk in the energy of the new life God has imparted, which gives us both the desire and power to live a holy life, The translation is as follows: “Therefore, we were buried in company with Him through the intermediate instrumentality of this baptism (introduction) into His death, in order that even as Christ was raised out from among the dead through the glory of the Father, thus also we by means of a new life (imparted) should conduct ourselves,” or “thus also we from the power of a new life (imparted) should derive the motivating energy for our walk (thoughts words, and deeds).” To sum up verses 2–4: It is not possible for a saint to continue living a life of habitual sin, because the Holy Spirit has baptized (introduced) him into vital union with Christ Jesus, this introduction having taken place potentially and in the mind and economy of God at the time our Lord died on the Cross, was buried in the tomb, and was raised from the dead, in order that the actual benefits of the believer’s identification with Christ in these might be his at the moment he puts his faith in Jesus Christ as his Saviour, these benefits being the breaking of the power of indwelling sin and the impartation of the divine nature. In verses 5–10 we have Paul’s “in other words.” He, master teacher that he is, seeks to make clearer his teaching in verses 2–4 by elaborating upon it in verses 5–10, and by presenting the same truth in a different way. We will look at verse 5. The word “if” in the Greek is not the conditional particle of an unfulfilled condition. It is a fulfilled condition here, its meaning being, “in view of the fact.” “Planted” is from a compound word, one part of the word meaning, “to grow,” and the other part implying close fellowship or participation on the part of two persons in a common action or state. The whole word speaks of an intimate and progressive union. The words “have been” are from a verb

which speaks of entrance into a new state of existence. The verb is in the perfect tense, which tense in Greek speaks of an action completed in past time having present results. The word “likeness” speaks of a likeness which amounts well nigh to an identity. The translation so far is as follows: “For in view of the fact that we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death with the present result that we are identified with Him in His death.” All believers from Adam’s time to the time of the Great White Throne judgment were baptized (introduced into vital union) into the Lord Jesus when He died on the Cross. This vital union with Him resulted in our participating in His death, He dying a vicarious death in our behalf, we dying with reference to our sinful nature. In the case of our Lord, the result was that, having died once for all with reference to our sins, He will never die again (6:9). In the case of the believer, the result was that, having died once for all with reference to the sinful nature, he is forever delivered from its compelling power. The words “we shall be,” are “a future of logical result.” They do not point to the future physical resurrection of the saint. Paul speaks of that in Romans 8:11. Here he is speaking of the spiritual resurrection of the believer which occurred potentially when Christ was raised out from among the dead, and actually, at the moment he believed. Thus, Paul argues that in view of the fact that believers have become united with Christ in the likeness of His death, the logical consequence of that identification with Christ in His death is identification with Him in His resurrection. The translation of verse 5 follows: “For, in view of the fact that we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, with the present result that we are identified with Him in His death, certainly we also (as a necessary consequence) shall be in the likeness of His resurrection.” As our Lord came out of the tomb in the same body in which He died, but with that body energized by a new life principle, (His precious blood having been poured out at Calvary, Levit. 17:11), and thus walked in newness of life, that is, walked in the energy of a new life, so the believer, identified with Him in His resurrection, leaves his old dead self in the tomb of his former life, and now walks in the energy of a new life principle surging through his being, the divine life imparted through his identification with Christ in His resurrection. Paul now takes up this two-fold result in verses 6–10, the breaking of the power of the Adamic nature in verses 6–7, and the impartation of the divine nature in verses 8–10. We will look first at verses 6–7. The word “man” is not translated from the Greek word for “man” which refers to an individual male member of the human race, but from the word for “man” that is racial in its implications. It refers to the human race as contrasted to animals. Here it refers to the individual man or woman, boy or girl, seen as a human being, a personality. There are two words in Greek which mean “old.” One refers to that which is old in the sense of having existed from the beginning, the emphasis being upon the length of time it has been in existence. The other refers to that which is antiquated, Out of date, belonging to a world of has-been, worn out. The second is used here. The expression, “our old man,” refers therefore to the old unrenewed self, that person which we were before salvation did its work in our being, a human being dominated entirely by the Adamic nature, having a heart darkened by sin, totally depraved in its entire being. It is the person when looked at from this side of salvation that is antiquated, out of date, belonging to a world of has-been. The words “is crucified” are more properly, “was crucified,” coming from a past-tense verb in the Greek. When we died with Christ, that old unregenerate totally depraved person we were before salvation died. The words “of sin” are in a construction in the

Greek called “the genitive of possession.” The body here is the physical body possessed by the sinful nature in the sense that the latter dominates or controls it. The word “destroyed” is from a Greek word which means “to render idle or inoperative, to put an end to, to make inefficient.” The words “serve sin” are from the verb whose stem is the same as the noun translated “bondslave.” It refers to habitual slavery to something. Our translation reads: “Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that the body (then) dominated by sin might be rendered inoperative (in that respect), and this for the purpose that we should no longer be habitually rendering a slave’s obedience to sin.” Thus God has put an end to the domination of the sinful nature over the believer, and has rendered the physical body idle, inoperative, in that respect. Verse 7 is an illustration of the truth taught in verse 6. The words “is dead,” are from a past tense in the Greek which speaks of the fact of a past action, the tense also speaking of finality, and should be translated “died once for all.” The word “freed” is from the Greek word which is usually translated “righteous” in its noun form, and “justify” in its verb. As a man who has died physically is freed from bondage to sin in which he was held, so a person who has died to sin in a spiritual sense, is released from its bondage. Thus the human body is released from bondage to sin in that the crucifixion of the old self results in the body being liberated from the power of sin. The word “freed” is in the perfect tense, which tense is so often used when the writer is speaking of God’s work of salvation in the believer, since this tense speaks of a past completed action having present, and in a context where salvation is spoken of, fixed and permanent results. Verse 7 therefore reads “For he who died once for all is in a permanent state of freedom from sin.” Having dealt with the breaking of the power of the Adamic nature in verses 6–7, Paul now turns to the matter of the impartation of the divine nature in verses 8–10. The first is the negative aspect of sanctification, where provision is made for the defeat of the sinful nature. The second is the positive side of sanctification, where provision is made for the introduction of a new life, Christ Jesus Himself (Col. 3:4), into the being and experience of the believer. We look first at verse 8. The “if” refers to a fulfilled condition. There is no doubt about the fact that each believer died with Christ. “Be dead” is again from a past tense verb speaking of an accomplished fact. “Believe” is not to be taken here in the sense of “trust,” which sense it has in contexts where the believer’s faith in the Lord Jesus is referred to, but in the sense of a dogmatic belief. It is a belief that rests upon the logic of “since such and such a thing is true, it naturally follows that such and such will be the case.” The future “shall” is not “a future of time,” but of “logical result.” The words “live with Him” do not refer to any fellowship in the sense of companionship which the believer may have with the Lord Jesus either in this life or in eternity. The preposition “with” is followed by the pronoun “Him” in the instrumental case. This case in Greek speaks of the means whereby the action or the state represented in the verb is accomplished. The word “live” here speaks of, not the experience of the believer, but the motivating energy which determines his conduct. That motivating energy is a Person, the Lord Jesus. He is the Life by means of which we live our new lives. He is our new existence. This is exactly what Paul means when he says, “F