Bible Commentaries

Matthew 10:13 — 13. ἡ εἰρήνη ὑμ . ] The peace mentioned in the customary Eastern salutation שָׁלוֹם לָךְ . Luke has εἰρήνη τῷ οἴκῳ τούτῳ ( Mat 10:5 ). Compare with the spirit of Matthew 10:10-13 , ch. Matthew 7:6 . Stier remarks (Reden Jesu, i. p. 355, Exodus 2:0 ), that the spirit of these commands binds Christian ministers to all accustomed courtesies of manner in the countries and ages in which their mission may lie. So we find the Greek χαίρειν instead of the Jewish form of greeting, Acts 15:23 ; James

Matthew 10:4 — ὁ καναν . ] This is not a local name, but is derived from קַנִאָן (Hebr. קַנָּא ) = ζηλωτής (Luke, Gosp. and Acts). We may therefore suppose that before his conversion he belonged to the sect of the Zealots, who after the example of Phinehas ( Num 25:7-8 ) took justice into their own hands, and punished offenders against the law. This sect eventually brought upon Jerusalem its destruction. Ἰούδας ὁ ἰσκ . ] Son of Simon (John 6:71 ; ( Mat 12:4 v. r.) Matthew 13:2 ; Mat 13:26 ). Probably a native

Matthew 17:4 — that we disciples are here: let us make,’ &c. Surely the words καλόν ἐστιν ἡμᾶς ὧδε εἶναι will not bear this. It is one of those remarkable coincidences of words which lead men on, in writing, to remembrances connected with those words, that in 2 Peter 1:14-15 , σκήνωμα and ἔξοδος have just been mentioned before the allusion to this event: see note there. κύριε = ῥαββεί Mark, = ἐπιστάτα Luke.

Matthew 24:36 — 36. ] ἡμ . ἐκ ., viz. of heaven and earth passing away; or, perhaps referring to Matthew 24:30 ff. ἡμ . κ . ὥρ ., the exact time as we say, ‘the hour and minute.’ The very important addition to this verse in Mark, and in some ancient MSS. here (but see digest), οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός , is indeed included in εἰ μὴ ὁ πατήρ [ μου

Matthew 27:65 — if they had one, why go to Pilate? Perhaps we must understand some detachment placed at their disposal during the feast but there does not seem to be any record of such a practice. That the guards were under the Sanhedrim is plain from ch. Matthew 28:11 , where they make their report (‘ut mos militiæ, factum esse quod imperasset,’ Tacitus, Ann. i. 6), not to Pilate , but to the chief priests : or 2), as De Wette and Meyer take it, imperative; which doubtless it may be, see 2Ti 1:13

Mark 14:53 — 53. ἀρχιερέα ] Caiaphas, de facto , and in the view of our narrator; so Matt. and Luke: but Jesus was first taken before Annas , who was de jure the high-priest: see John 18:12-23 . It is not easy to interpret συνέρχονται αὐτῷ . Meyer, relying on the fact that the dative after συνέρχεσθαι is always one of companionship, maintains that αὐτῷ refers to our Lord ‘ there come with him .’ And so Winer, Exodus 6:0

Luke 18:5 — eyes, signifies literally to smite in the face; and proverbially (see reff.), to mortify or incessantly annoy. It answers exactly to the Latin obtundo , which Terence has in this sense, ‘ Ne me obtundas hac de re sæpius ,’ Adelph. i. 2. 33; and alli [103] . fr. Livy, ‘ Neque ego obtundam, sæpius eadem nequicquam agendo ,’ ii. 15. The Greek word does not appear to be any where used in this sense; so that the use of it here may be a Latinism, as Grotius thought. Meyer interprets

John 10:16 — 16. ] The ἄλλα πρόβ . are the Gentiles; not the dispersion of the Jews, who were already in God’s αὐλή . By these wonderful words, as by those in Acts 18:10 , and by the conclusion of Matthew 25:0 . (see notes there), our Lord shews that, dark and miserable as the Gentile world was, He had sheep even there . Observe they are not in other folds , but scattered: see ch. John 11:52 . Cf. also Ephesians 2:14 ff. δεῖ με ἀγ .… ] i.e. in the

John 10:24 — 24. ] ψυχὴν αἴρεις is generally explained, ‘ keep us in doubt ,’ αἰωρεῖς , ἀναρτᾷς μεταξὺ πίστεως κ . ἀπιστίας , Euthym [150] But there is some question whether ψ . αἴρ . is ever so used. In Josephus, it signifies ‘ to uplift the

John 15:21 — 21. ] ἀλλά nay, so far is this from being so, that it is on this very account, because ye belong to Me, that they will thus treat you. ταῦτα πάντα all that is implied in μισεῖν and διώκειν . τ . π ., ‘these things, all of them:’

John 15:6 — unfruitful branch , which the Father takes away (in judgment): but of one who will not abide in Christ, becomes separate from Him: (1) is cast out (of the vineyard, or of the Vine) like a ( τὸ κλῆμα , scil. τὸ ἄχρηστον , Euth.) branch in such a case: (2) becomes dried up , having lost the supply of life-giving sap (“quenched the Spirit,” 1Th 5:19 ): (3) is gathered up with other such ( Mat 13:40 ) by the angels at the great day: (4) is cast into the fire, as the result of that judgment;

John 17:19 — Meyer, the emphatic correlation of αὐτῶν ἐγὼ ἐμαυτόν καὶ αὐτοί . It is clear against all Socinian inferences from this verse, that all that part of ἁγιάζειν implied in ch. Joh 10:36 is here excluded: and only that intended which is expressed Heb 2:10 by διὰ παθημάτων τελειῶσαι . Of this, His death was the crowning act, and was also the one to which the ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν most directly applies; but the whole is included. The confining the meaning to His sacrifice (Chrys., Euthym [236] ), and the ἵνα

John 20:29 — 29. ] The ὅτι ἑώρ . blames the slowness and required ground of the faith: the πεπίστευκας recognizes and commends the soundness of that faith just confessed. Meyer remarks on the perf. πεπίστευκας , “ thou hast become believing and now believest

John 8:49 — 49. ] The former term of reproach Jesus passes over (“cum jam inter Samaritanos haberet, qui in eum credebant.” Lampe; but qu.?), and mildly answers ( 1Pe 2:23 ) the malicious charge of having a devil, by an appeal to his whole life and teaching (see ch. Joh 4:34 ), which was not the work of one having a devil. There is no retort of the charge in the emphatic ἐγώ , as Cyr [136] and Lücke; this, as Meyer

Acts 1:9 — 9 .] This appears (see Prolegg. Vol. I. ch. iv. § iv. 2) to be an account of the Ascension given to Luke subsequently to the publication of his Gospel , more particular in detail than that found in it. He has not repeated here details found there; see Luke 24:50-52 . On the Ascension in general, see note

Acts 2:46 — 46 .] καθ ʼ ἡμ … ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ see Luke 24:53 . The words need not mean, though they may mean, that they were assembled in Solomon’s porch, as in ch. Act 5:12 but most probably, that they regularly kept the hours of prayer, ch. Acts 3:1 . κατ ʼ οἶκον ] domi , ‘privatim’

Romans 9:19 — Hesych [79] interprets it αἰτιᾶται , ἐξουθενεῖ , καταγινώσκει : see the apocryphal reff. Thol.)? For who resists (not, ‘ hath resisted :” ἀνθέστηκεν , like ἕστηκεν , is present , see Winer, edn. 6, § 40. 4. b, and compare ἐφέστηκεν , 2Ti 4:6 ) His will (i.e. if it be His will to harden the sinner, and the sinner goes on in his sin, he does not resist but goes with the will of God)? Yea rather ( μενοῦνγε , see reff., takes the ground from under the previous assertion and supersedes

1 John 1:1-4 — given. The simplest view, and that generally adopted (Syr., Vulg., Œc., Bullinger, Calv., Beza, Socinus, Grot., Calov., Fritzsche, Lücke, De Wette, Huther, &c.) is, that in 1 John 1:1 a sentence is begun, which is broken off by the parenthetical 1Jn 1:2 inserted to explain 1 John 1:1 , and carried on again in 1 John 1:3 , some words being, for the sake of perspicuity, recited again from 1 John 1:1 . This construction was doubted by Winer in the earlier editions of his Grammar, but has now in the 6th

2 John overview — CHAPTER VI 2 & 3 JOHN SECTION I AUTHORSHIP 1. THE question of the authorship of both Epistles is one which will require some discussion. On one point however there never has been the slightest doubt: viz., that both were written by one and the same person. They

3 John overview — CHAPTER VI 2 & 3 JOHN SECTION I AUTHORSHIP 1. THE question of the authorship of both Epistles is one which will require some discussion. On one point however there never has been the slightest doubt: viz., that both were written by one and the same person. They