KJV: And 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;
YLT: and I became to the Jews as a Jew, that Jews I might gain; to those under law as under law, that those under law I might gain;
Darby: And I became to the Jews as a Jew, in order that I might gain the Jews: to those under law, as under law, not being myself under law, in order that I might gain those under law:
ASV: And to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, not being myself under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
| ἐγενόμην | I became |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Middle, 1st Person Singular Root: γίνομαι Sense: to become, i. |
|
| τοῖς | to the |
|
Parse: Article, Dative Masculine Plural Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| Ἰουδαίοις | Jews |
|
Parse: Adjective, Dative Masculine Plural Root: Ἰουδαῖος Sense: Jewish, belonging to the Jewish race. |
|
| ὡς | like |
|
Parse: Adverb Root: ὡς Sense: as, like, even as, etc. |
|
| Ἰουδαῖος | a Jew |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Ἰουδαῖος Sense: Jewish, belonging to the Jewish race. |
|
| ἵνα | so that |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: ἵνα Sense: that, in order that, so that. |
|
| Ἰουδαίους | Jews |
|
Parse: Adjective, Accusative Masculine Plural Root: Ἰουδαῖος Sense: Jewish, belonging to the Jewish race. |
|
| κερδήσω | I might win |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Subjunctive Active, 1st Person Singular Root: ἐπικερδαίνω Sense: to gain, acquire, to get gain. |
|
| τοῖς | To those |
|
Parse: Article, Dative Masculine Plural Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| ὑπὸ | under |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: ὑπό Sense: by, under. |
|
| νόμον | [the] Law |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Singular Root: νόμος Sense: anything established, anything received by usage, a custom, a law, a command. |
|
| ὢν | being |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: εἰμί Sense: to be, to exist, to happen, to be present. |
|
| αὐτὸς | myself |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Nominative Masculine 3rd Person Singular Root: αὐτός Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself. |
|
| τοὺς | those |
|
Parse: Article, Accusative Masculine Plural Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
Greek Commentary for 1 Corinthians 9:20
He was a Jew and was not ashamed of it (Acts 18:18; Acts 21:26). [source]
He was emancipated from the law as a means of salvation, yet he knew how to speak to them because of his former beliefs and life with them (Galatians 4:21). He knew how to put the gospel to them without compromise and without offence. [source]
The distinction between this class and Jews is differently explained. Some, Jews, viewed nationally; under the law, viewed religiously. Others, Jews by origin, and Gentile proselytes. Others understand by those under the law, rigid Jews, Pharisees. The first explanation seems preferable. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for 1 Corinthians 9:20
One of the phrases in Acts 20:15 for the coming day. Locative case of time. Purifying himself with them (συν αυτοις αγνιστεις sun autois hagnistheis first aorist passive participle of αγνιζω hagnizō). The precise language again of the recommendation in Acts 21:24. Paul was conforming to the letter. Went into the temple Imperfect active of εισειμι eiseimi as in Acts 21:18 which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. Declaring (διαγγελλων diaggellōn). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except Romans 11:17 (quotation from the lxx). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). Until the offering was offered for every one of them This use of εως ου heōs hou (like εως heōs alone) with the first aorist passive indicative προσηνεχτη prosēnechthē of προσπερω prospherō to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul‘s announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in 1 Corinthians 9:20 when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these “false apostles” over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul‘s accusers. So far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul‘s behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul‘s appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul‘s alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul‘s conduct about it. [source]
Imperfect active of εισειμι eiseimi as in Acts 21:18 which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. Declaring (διαγγελλων diaggellōn). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except Romans 11:17 (quotation from the lxx). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). Until the offering was offered for every one of them This use of εως ου heōs hou (like εως heōs alone) with the first aorist passive indicative προσηνεχτη prosēnechthē of προσπερω prospherō to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul‘s announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in 1 Corinthians 9:20 when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these “false apostles” over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul‘s accusers. So far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul‘s behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul‘s appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul‘s alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul‘s conduct about it. [source]
This use of εως ου heōs hou (like εως heōs alone) with the first aorist passive indicative προσηνεχτη prosēnechthē of προσπερω prospherō to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul‘s announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in 1 Corinthians 9:20 when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these “false apostles” over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul‘s accusers. So far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul‘s behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul‘s appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul‘s alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul‘s conduct about it. [source]
As one of the Gentiles. By intercourse with them, relinquishment of Jewish observances, and adapting his teaching to their modes of thought. See 1Corinthians href="/desk/?q=1co+9:20&sr=1">1 Corinthians 9:20, ὑπὸ νόμον underlaw, though with only a shade of difference in meaning. Ἔννομος means subject to the law, but in the sense of keeping within ( ἐν ) the law. [source]
Voluntary bondage, I enslaved myself to all, though free. Causative verb in οω ̇oō The more Than he could have done otherwise. Every preacher faces this problem of his personal attitude and conduct. Note κερδησω kerdēsō (as in 1 Corinthians 9:20, 1 Corinthians 9:21, 1 Corinthians 9:22, but once ινα κερδανω hina kerdanō in 1 Corinthians 9:21, regular liquid future of κερδαινω kerdainō) with ινα hina is probably future active indicative (James 4:13), though Ionic aorist active subjunctive from κερδαω kerdaō is possible (Matthew 18:15). “He refuses payment in money that he may make the greater gain in souls” (Edwards). [source]
Rather, I became. Supply ἐγενόμην or γέγονα . Become as I am, for I became a Gentile like you. Comp. Philemon 3:7, Philemon 3:8. For the phrase γινέσθαι ὡς tobecome as, see Matthew 6:16; Romans 9:29; 1 Corinthians 4:13; 1 Corinthians 9:20-22. [source]