KJV: And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
YLT: 'And now, glorify me, Thou Father, with Thyself, with the glory that I had before the world was, with Thee;
Darby: and now glorify me, thou Father, along with thyself, with the glory which I had along with thee before the world was.
ASV: And now, Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
| νῦν | now |
|
Parse: Adverb Root: νῦν Sense: at this time, the present, now. |
|
| δόξασόν | glorify |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Imperative Active, 2nd Person Singular Root: δοξάζω Sense: to think, suppose, be of opinion. |
|
| με | Me |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Accusative 1st Person Singular Root: ἐγώ Sense: I, me, my. |
|
| Πάτερ | Father |
|
Parse: Noun, Vocative Masculine Singular Root: προπάτωρ Sense: generator or male ancestor. |
|
| σεαυτῷ | Yourself |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Dative Masculine 2nd Person Singular Root: σεαυτοῦ Sense: thyself, thee. |
|
| τῇ | with the |
|
Parse: Article, Dative Feminine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| δόξῃ | glory |
|
Parse: Noun, Dative Feminine Singular Root: δόξα Sense: opinion, judgment, view. |
|
| ᾗ | that |
|
Parse: Personal / Relative Pronoun, Dative Feminine Singular Root: ὅς Sense: who, which, what, that. |
|
| εἶχον | I had |
|
Parse: Verb, Imperfect Indicative Active, 1st Person Singular Root: ἔχω Sense: to have, i.e. to hold. |
|
| πρὸ | before |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: πρό Sense: before. |
|
| τοῦ | - |
|
Parse: Article, Genitive Neuter Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| κόσμον | world |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Singular Root: κόσμος Sense: an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government. |
|
| εἶναι | existed |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Infinitive Active Root: εἰμί Sense: to be, to exist, to happen, to be present. |
|
Greek Commentary for John 17:5
“By the side of thyself.” Jesus prays for full restoration to the pre-incarnate glory and fellowship (cf. John 1:1) enjoyed before the Incarnation (John 1:14). This is not just ideal pre-existence, but actual and conscious existence at the Father‘s side It is small wonder that those who deny or reject the deity of Jesus Christ have trouble with the Johannine authorship of this book and with the genuineness of these words. But even Harnack admits that the words here and in John 17:24 are “undoubtedly the reflection of the certainty with which Jesus himself spoke” (What Is Christianity, Engl. Tr., p. 132). But Paul, as clearly as John, believes in the actual pre-existence and deity of Jesus Christ (Philemon 2:5-11). [source]
In fellowship with Thyself. So with Thee ( παρὰ σοί ). [source]
Actually possessed. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for John 17:5
μετά , denoting change or transfer, and μορφή , form. This latter word denotes the form regarded as the distinctive nature and character of the object, and is distinguished from σχῆμα , the changeable, outward fashion: in a man, for instance, his gestures, clothes, words, acts. The μορφή partakes of the essence of a thing; the σχῆμα is an accident which may change, leaving the form unaffected. Compare Mark 16:12; Christ “appeared in another form ” ( μορφή )and 1 Corinthians 7:31: “the fashion ( σχῆμα ) of the world passeth away.” The distinction passes into the verbs compounded with these two nouns. Thus, Romans 12:2, “Be not conformed to this world,” is μὴ συσχηματίζεσθε ;i.e., be not fashioned according to the fleetingfashion of this world. So Rev.,fashioned. See, also, 2 Corinthians 11:13, 2 Corinthians 11:14, 2 Corinthians 11:15, where the changes described are changes in outward semblance. False apostles appeared in the outward fashion of apostles of Christ; Satan takes on the outward appearance of an angel. All these changes are in the accidents of the life, and do not touch its inner, essential quality. On the other hand, a change in the inner life is described as a change of μορθή , never of σχῆμα . Hence, Romans 12:2, “Be ye transformed ( μεταμορφοῦσθε )the change taking place by the renewing of the mind. Compare Romans 8:29; 2 Corinthians 3:18; Philemon 3:21; and see, further, on Philemon 2:6, Philemon 2:7. Why, then, it may be asked, is a compound of μορφή employed in this description of the transfigured Saviour, since the change described is a change in his outward appearance? It may be answered, because a compound of σχῆμα , expressing merely a change in the aspect of Christ's person and garments, would not express the deeper truth of the case, which is, that the visible change gets its real character and meaning from that which is essential in our Lord - his divine nature. A fore-shadowing or prophecy of his true form - his distinctive character - comes out in his transfiguration. He passes over into a form identified, so far as revealed, with the divine quality of his being, and prophetic of his revelation “as he is” (1 John 3:2), in the glory which he had with the Father before the world was (John 17:5). In truth, there is a deep and pregnant hint in the use of this word, which easily escapes observation, and which defies accurate definition. The profound and overwhelming impression upon the three disciples was due to something besides the shining of Christ's face and garments, and the presence of Moses and Elijah; and was deeper and subtler than the effect of all these combined. There was a fact and a power in that vision which mere radiance and the appearance of the dead patriarchs could not wholly convey: a revelation of Deity breaking out in that glorified face and form, which appealed to something deeper than sense, and confirmed the words from heaven: This is my beloved Son. The same truth is illustrated in the use of μορφή in Mark 16:12, where it is said that Jesus appeared in a different form ( ἐν ἑτέρᾳ μορφῇ ) after his resurrection. The accidents of figure, face, pierced hands and feet, were the same; but an indefinable change had passed upon him, the characteristic of which was that it prefigured his passing into the condition peculiar and appropriate to his essential spiritual and divine being. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
Matthew proceeds to explain his statement in Matthew 1:16 which implied that Joseph, though the legal father of Jesus in the royal line, was not the actual father of Mary‘s Son. Betrothal with the Jews was a serious matter, not lightly entered into and not lightly broken. The man who betrothed a maiden was legally husband (Genesis 29:21; Deuteronomy 22:23.) and “an informal cancelling of betrothal was impossible” (McNeile). Though they did not live together as husband and wife till actual marriage, breach of faithfulness on the part of the betrothed was treated as adultery and punished with death. The New Testament in Braid Scots actually has “mairry‘t till Joseph” for “betrothed to Joseph.” Matthew uses the genitive absolute construction here, a very common Greek idiom.Of the Holy Ghost (ek pneumatos hagiou). The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She “was found with child” (heurethē en gastri echousa). This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2 Corinthians 8:9; Philemon 2:5-11; and involved in Colossians 1:15-19) and by John (John 1:14; John 17:5). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though John 1:14 seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world‘s Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God‘s will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. John 3:16 is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us. [source]
The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She “was found with child” This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2 Corinthians 8:9; Philemon 2:5-11; and involved in Colossians 1:15-19) and by John (John 1:14; John 17:5). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though John 1:14 seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world‘s Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God‘s will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. John 3:16 is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us. [source]
Literally, “of his taking up.” It is an old word (from Hippocrates on), but here alone in the N.T. It is derived from αναλαμβανω analambanō (the verb used of the Ascension, Acts 1:2, Acts 1:11, Acts 1:22; 1 Timothy 3:16) and refers here to the Ascension of Jesus after His Resurrection. Not only in John‘s Gospel (John 17:5) does Jesus reveal a yearning for a return to the Father, but it is in the mind of Christ here as evidently at the Transfiguration (Luke 9:31) and later in Luke 12:49.He steadfastly set his face (αυτος το προσωπον εστηρισεν autos to prosōpon estērisen). Note emphatic αυτος autos he himself, with fixedness of purpose in the face of difficulty and danger. This look on Christ‘s face as he went to his doom is noted later in Mark 10:32. It is a Hebraistic idiom (nine times in Ezekiel), this use of face here, but the verb (effective aorist active) is an old one from στηριζω stērizō (from στηριγχ stērigx a support), to set fast, to fix.To go to Jerusalem Genitive infinitive of purpose. Luke three times mentions Christ making his way to Jerusalem (Luke 9:51; Luke 13:22; Luke 17:11) and John mentions three journeys to Jerusalem during the later ministry (John 7:10; John 11:17; John 12:1). It is natural to take these journeys to be the same in each of these Gospels. Luke does not make definite location of each incident and John merely supplements here and there. But in a broad general way they seem to correspond. [source]
We have here one of John's characteristic terms, even as the idea is central to his Gospel - to show forth Jesus as the manifested glory of God (John 1:14). The beginning of our Lord's miracles was a manifestation of His glory (John 2:11). His glory was the expression of the Father's will (John 8:54). By His work He glorified the Father upon earth (John 12:28; John 17:4), and in this was Himself glorified (John 17:10). The sickness and resurrection of Lazarus were for the glory of God (John 11:4). The consummation of His work was marked by the words, “Now was the Son of man glorified, and God was glorified in Him” (John 13:31). His glory He had with the Father before the world was (John 17:5). It is consummated at His ascension (John 7:39; John 12:16). The passion is the way to glory (John 12:23, John 12:24; John 13:31). The fruitfulness of believers in Him is for the glory of God (John 15:8), and the office of the Spirit is to glorify Christ (John 16:14).sa40 [source]
His glory will be contained in and identified with the divine glory. Compare “the glory which I had with thee,” παρὰ σοί (John 17:5). Ἑν inindicates unity of being; παρά withunity of position. [source]
Reflexive pronoun. God is the source of the glory (John 17:5) and is the glory succeeding the Cross (the glory with the Father in heaven). And straightway No postponement now. First and quickly the Cross, then the Ascension. [source]
As in John 1:3, the creation was designated in its several details by πάντα , all things, so here, creation is regarded in its totality, as an ordered whole. See on Acts 17:24; see on James 3:6. Four words are used in the New Testament for world: (1) γῇ , land, ground, territory, the earth, as distinguished from the heavens. The sense is purely physical. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (2) οἰκουμένη , which is a participle, meaning inhabited, with γῆ , earth, understood, and signifies the earth as the abode of men; the whole inhabited world. See on Matthew 24:14; see on Luke 2:1. Also in a physical sense, though used once of “the world to come” (Hebrews 2:5). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (3) αἰών , essentially time, as the condition under which all created things exist, and the measure of their existence: a period of existence; a lifetime; a generation; hence, a long space of time; an age, era, epoch, period of a dispensation. On this primary, physical sense there arises a secondary sense, viz., all that exists in the world under the conditions of time. From this again develops a more distinctly ethical sense, the course and current of this world's affairs (compare the expression, the times ), and this course as corrupted by sin; hence the evil world. So Galatians 1:4; 2 Corinthians 4:4. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (4) κόσμος , which follows a similar line of development from the physical to the ethical sense; meaning (a) ornament, arrangement, order (1 Peter 3:3); (b) the sum-total of the material universe considered as a system (Matthew 13:35; John 17:5; Acts 17:24; Philemon 2:15). Compare Plato. “He who is incapable of communion is also incapable of friendship. And philosophers tell us, Callicles, that communion and friendship and orderliness and temperance and justice bind together heaven and earth and gods and men, and that this universe is therefore called Cosmos, or order, not disorder or misrule” (“Gorgias,” 508). (c) That universe as the abode of man (John 16:21; 1 John 3:17). (d) The sum-total of humanity in the world; the human race (John 1:29; John 4:42). (e) In the 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 (John 7:7; John 15:18; John 17:9, John 17:14; 1 Corinthians 1:20, 1 Corinthians 1:21; 2 Corinthians 7:10; James 4:4). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- This word is characteristic of John, and pre-eminently in this last, ethical sense, in which it is rarely used by the Synoptists; while John nowhere uses αἰών of the moral order. In this latter sense the word is wholly strange to heathen literature, since the heathen world had no perception of the opposition between God and sinful man; between the divine order and the moral disorder introduced and maintained by sin. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
No “what” in the Greek. Condition of third class with εαν ean and present active subjunctive, “if ye then behold.” Ascending Present active participle picturing the process. Where he was before Neuter articular adjective as adverb (accusative of general reference, at the former time as in John 9:8; Galatians 3:13). Clear statement of Christ‘s pre-existence in his own words as in John 3:13; John 17:5 (cf. 1:1-18). [source]
Literally, came into being, or became. Expressing the passage from nothingness into being, and the unfolding of a divine order. Compare John 1:14, John 1:17. Three words are used in the New Testament to express the act of creation: κτίζειν , to create (Revelation 4:11; Revelation 10:6; Colossians 1:16); ποιεῖν , to make (Revelation 14:7; Mark 10:6), both of which refer to the Creator; and γίγνεσθαι , to become, which refers to that which is created. In Mark 10:6, both words occur. “From the beginning of the creation ( κτίσεως ) God made ” ( ἐποίησεν ). So in Ephesians 2:10: “We are His workmanship ( ποίημα ), created ( κτισθέντες ) in Christ Jesus.” Here the distinction is between the absolute being expressed by ἦν (see on John 1:1), and the coming into being of creation ( ἐγένετο ). The same contrast occurs in John 1:6, John 1:9. “A man sent from God came into being ” ( ἐγένετο ); “the true Light was ” ( ἦν ). “The main conception of creation which is present in the writings of St. John is expressed by the first notice which he makes of it: All things came into being through the Word. This statement sets aside the notions of eternal matter and of inherent evil in matter. 'There was when' the world 'was not' (John 17:5, John 17:24); and, by implication, all things as made were good. The agency of the Word, 'who was God,' again excludes both the idea of a Creator essentially inferior to God, and the idea of an abstract Monotheism in which there is no living relation between the creature and the Creator; for as all things come into being 'through' the Word, so they are supported 'in' Him (John 1:3; compare Colossians 1:16sq.; Hebrews 1:3). And yet more, the use of the term ἐγένετο , came into being, as distinguished from ἐκτίσθη , were created, suggests the thought that creation is to be regarded (according to our apprehension) as a manifestation of a divine law of love. Thus creation (all things came into being through Him ) answers to the Incarnation (the Word became flesh ). All the unfolding and infolding of finite being to the last issue lies in the fulfillment of His will who is love” (Westcott, on 1 John 2:17). [source]
With evident allusion to the first word of Genesis. But John elevates the phrase from its reference to a point of time, the beginning of creation, to the time of absolute pre-existence before any creation, which is not mentioned until John 1:3. This beginning had no beginning (compare John 1:3; John 17:5; 1 John 1:1; Ephesians 1:4; Proverbs 8:23; Psalm 90:2). This heightening of the conception, however, appears not so much in ἀρχή , beginning, which simply leaves room for it, as in the use of ἦν , was, denoting absolute existence (compare εἰμί , I am, John 8:58) instead of ἐγένετο , came into being, or began to be, which is used in John 1:3, John 1:14, of the coming into being of creation and of the Word becoming flesh. Note also the contrast between ἀρχή , in the beginning, and the expression ἀπ ' ἀρχῆς , from the beginning, which is common in John's writings (John 8:44; 1 John 2:7, 1 John 2:24; 1 John 3:8) and which leaves no room for the idea of eternal pre-existence. “In Genesis 1:1, the sacred historian starts from the beginning and comes downward, thus keeping us in the course of time. Here he starts from the same point, but goes upward, thus taking us into the eternity preceding time” (Milligan and Moulton). See on Colossians 1:15. This notion of “beginning” is still further heightened by the subsequent statement of the relation of the Logos to the eternal God. The ἀρχή must refer to the creation - the primal beginning of things; but if, in this beginning, the Logos already was, then he belonged to the order of eternity. “The Logos was not merely existent, however, in the beginning, but was also the efficient principle, the beginning of the beginning. The ἀρχή (beginning ), in itself and in its operation dark, chaotic, was, in its idea and its principle, comprised in one single luminous word, which was the Logos. And when it is said the Logos was in this beginning, His eternal existence is already expressed, and His eternal position in the Godhead already indicated thereby” (Lange). “Eight times in the narrative of creation (in Genesis) there occur, like the refrain of a hymn, the words, And God said. John gathers up all those sayings of God into a single saying, living and endowed with activity and intelligence, from which all divine orders emanate: he finds as the basis of all spoken words, the speaking Word ” (Godet). [source]
Αρχη Archē is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew ην be reshith in Genesis 1:1. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing. Was Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of εγενετο eimi to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb The Word λεγω Logos is from Λογος legō old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. ανιμα μυνδι Logos is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world There is a possible personification of “the Word of God” in Hebrews 4:12. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2 Corinthians 8:9; Philemon 2:6.; Colossians 1:17) and in Hebrews 1:2. and in John 17:5. This term suits John‘s purpose better than σαρχ εγενετο sophia (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the προς τον τεον aeon Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos “became flesh” Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. παρακλητον εχομεν προς τον πατερα Pros with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In 1 John 2:1 we have a like use of προσωπον προς προσωπον pros “We have a Paraclete with the Father” See προς prosōpon pros prosōpon (face to face, 1 Corinthians 13:12), a triple use of το γνωστον της προς αλληλους συνητειας pros There is a papyrus example of προς pros in this sense παρα σοι to gnōston tēs pros allēlous sunētheias “the knowledge of our intimacy with one another” (M.&M., Vocabulary) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, Origin of Prologue, p. 8) that the use of και τεος ην ο λογος pros here and in Mark 6:3 is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is Koiné, not old Attic. In John 17:5 John has ο τεος ην ο λογος para soi the more common idiom. And the Word was God By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying ο λογος ho theos ēn ho logos That would mean that all of God was expressed in τεος ho logos and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality. [source]
Present perfect active of οραω horaō John repeats the statement of John 1:32 Have borne witness Perfect active indicative of μαρτυρεω martureō for which verb see John 1:32. This is the Son of God The Baptist saw the Spirit come on Jesus at his baptism and undoubtedly heard the Father‘s voice hail him as “My Beloved Son” (Mark 1:11; Matthew 3:17; Luke 3:22). Nathanael uses it as a Messianic title (John 1:49) as does Martha (John 11:27). The Synoptics use it also of Christ (Mark 3:11; Matthew 14:33; Luke 22:70). Caiaphas employs it to Christ as a Messianic title (Matthew 26:63) and Jesus confessed under oath that he was (verse Matthew 26:64), thus applying the term to himself as he does in John‘s Gospel (John 5:25; John 10:36; John 11:4) and by implication (the Father, the Son) in Matthew 11:27 (Luke 10:22). Hence in the Synoptics also Jesus calls himself the Son of God. The phrase means more than just Messiah and expresses the peculiar relation of the Son to the Father (John 3:18; John 5:25; John 17:5; John 19:7; John 20:31) like that of the Logos with God in John 1:1. [source]
See John 1:3 for this verb and note its use for the historic event of the Incarnation rather than ην ēn of John 1:1. Note also the absence of the article with the predicate substantive σαρχ sarx so that it cannot mean “the flesh became the Word.” The Pre-existence of the Logos has already been plainly stated and argued. John does not here say that the Logos entered into a man or dwelt in a man or filled a man. One is at liberty to see an allusion to the birth narratives in Matthew 1:16-25; Luke 1:28-38, if he wishes, since John clearly had the Synoptics before him and chiefly supplemented them in his narrative. In fact, one is also at liberty to ask what intelligent meaning can one give to John‘s language here apart from the Virgin Birth? What ordinary mother or father ever speaks of a child “becoming flesh”? For the Incarnation see also 2 Corinthians 8:9; Galatians 4:4; Romans 1:3; Romans 8:3; Philemon 2:7.; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 2:14. “To explain the exact significance of εγενετο egeneto in this sentence is beyond the powers of any interpreter” (Bernard). Unless, indeed, as seems plain, John is referring to the Virgin Birth as recorded in Matthew and Luke. “The Logos of philosophy is, John declares, the Jesus of history” (Bernard). Thus John asserts the deity and the real humanity of Christ. He answers the Docetic Gnostics who denied his humanity. Dwelt among us First aorist ingressive aorist active indicative of σκηνοω skēnoō old verb, to pitch one‘s tent or tabernacle First aorist middle indicative of τεαομαι theaomai (from τεα thea spectacle). The personal experience of John and of others who did recognize Jesus as the Shekinah glory John employs τεαομαι theaomai again in John 1:32 (the Baptist beholding the Spirit coming down as a dove) and John 1:38 of the Baptist gazing in rapture at Jesus. So also John 4:35; John 11:45; 1 John 1:1.; 1 John 4:12, 1 John 4:14. By this word John insists that in the human Jesus he beheld the Shekinah glory of God who was and is the Logos who existed before with God. By this plural John speaks for himself and all those who saw in Jesus what he did. As of the only begotten from the Father Strictly, “as of an only born from a father,” since there is no article with μονογενους monogenous or with πατρος patros In John 3:16; 1 John 4:9 we have τον μονογενη ton monogenē referring to Christ. This is the first use in the Gospel of πατηρ patēr of God in relation to the Logos. Μονογενης Monogenēs (only born rather than only begotten) here refers to the eternal relationship of the Logos (as in John 1:18) rather than to the Incarnation. It distinguishes thus between the Logos and the believers as children John clearly means to say that “the manifested glory of the Word was as it were the glory of the Eternal Father shared with His only Son” (Bernard). Cf. John 8:54; John 14:9; John 17:5. Full Probably indeclinable accusative adjective agreeing with δοχαν doxan (or genitive with μονογενους monogenous) of which we have papyri examples (Robertson, Grammar, p. 275). As nominative πληρης plērēs can agree with the subject of εσκηνωσεν eskēnōsen Of grace and truth Curiously this great word χαρις charis (grace), so common with Paul, does not occur in John‘s Gospel save in John 1:14, John 1:16, John 1:17, though αλητεια alētheia (truth) is one of the keywords in the Fourth Gospel and in 1John, occurring 25 times in the Gospel and 20 in the Johannine Epistles, 7 times in the Synoptics and not at all in Revelation (Bernard). In John 1:17 these two words picture the Gospel in Christ in contrast with the law of Moses. See Epistles of Paul for origin and use of both words. [source]
First aorist (note of urgency) active imperative of πνευμα doxazō and in the sense of his death already in John 12:16, John 12:23 and again in John 13:31; John 17:5. This is the prayer of the πσυχη pneuma (or σαρχ psuchē) as opposed to that of the ονομα sarx (flesh) in John 12:27. The “name” (πωνη εκ του ουρανου onoma) of God expresses the character of God (John 1:12; John 5:43; John 17:11). Cf. Matthew 6:9. A voice out of heaven (και εδοχασα και παλιν δοχασω phōnē ek tou ouranou). This was the Father‘s answer to the prayer of Jesus for help. See note on the Father‘s voice at the baptism of Jesus (Mark 1:11) and on the Father‘s voice at the transfiguration (Mark 9:7). The rabbis called the audible voice of God εδοχασα bath -δοχασω qol (the daughter of a voice). I have both glorified it and will glorify it again (kai edoxasa kai palin doxasō). This definite assurance from the Father will nerve the soul of Jesus for the coming ordeal. Cf. John 11:40 for edoxasa and John 13:31; John 17:5 for doxasō f0). [source]
Just before, John means, not twenty-four hours before, that is our Thursday evening (beginning of 15th of Nisan, sunset to sunset Jewish day), since Jesus was crucified on Friday 15th of Nisan. Hence Jesus ate the regular passover meal at the usual time. The whole feast, including the feast of unleavened bread, lasted eight days. For a discussion of the objections to this interpretation of John in connexion with the Synoptic Gospels one may consult my Harmony of the Gospels, pp. 279-84, and David Smith‘s In the Days of His Flesh, Appendix VIII. The passover feast began on the 15th Nisan at sunset, the passover lamb being slain the afternoon of 14th Nisan. There seems no real doubt that this meal in John 13:1-30 is the real passover meal described by the Synoptics also (Mark 14:18-21; Matthew 26:21-25; Luke 22:21-23), followed by the institution of the Lord‘s Supper. Thus understood John 13:1 here serves as an introduction to the great esoteric teaching of Christ to the apostles (John 13:2-17:26), called by Barnas Sears The Heart of Christ. This phrase goes with the principal verb ηγαπησεν ēgapēsen (loved). Knowing Second perfect active participle, emphasizing the full consciousness of Christ. He was not stumbling into the dark as he faced “his hour” See John 18:4; John 19:28 for other examples of the insight and foresight (Bernard) of Jesus concerning his death. See on John 12:23 for use before by Jesus. That he should depart Sub-final use of ινα hina with second aorist active subjunctive of μεταβαινω metabainō old word, to go from one place to another, here (John 5:24; 1 John 3:14) to go from this world (John 8:23) back to the Father from whom he had come (John 14:12, John 14:28; John 16:10, John 16:28; John 17:5). His own which were in the world His own disciples (John 17:6, John 17:9, John 17:11), those left in the world when he goes to the Father, not the Jews as in John 1:11. See Acts 4:23; 1 Timothy 5:8 for the idiom. John pictures here the outgoing of Christ‘s very heart‘s love (chs. John 13-17) towards these men whom he had chosen and whom he loved “unto the end” (εις τελος eis telos) as in Matthew 10:22; Luke 18:15, but here as in 1 Thessalonians 2:16 rather “to the uttermost.” The culmination of the crisis (“his hour”) naturally drew out the fulness of Christ‘s love for them as is shown in these great chapters (John 13-17). [source]
Perfect identity of his will with that of the Father in “this moment of spiritual exaltation” (Bernard), though in Gethsemane Jesus distinguishes between his human will and that of the Father (Mark 14:36). Where I am That is heaven, to be with Jesus (John 12:26; John 13:36; John 14:3; Romans 8:17; 2 Timothy 2:11.). That they may behold Another purpose clause with ινα hina and the present active subjunctive of τεωρεω theōreō “that they may keep on beholding,” the endless joy of seeing Jesus “as he is” (1 John 3:2) in heaven. Before the foundation of the world This same phrase in Ephesians 1:4; 1 Peter 1:20 and six other times we have καταβολη κοσμου katabolē kosmou (Matthew 25:34; Luke 11:50; Hebrews 4:3; Hebrews 9:26; Revelation 13:8; Revelation 17:8). Here we find the same pre-incarnate consciousness of Christ seen in John 17:5. [source]
That is και εαν kai ean a condition of the third class with the present active subjunctive μαρτυρω marturō Jesus means that his own witness concerning himself is true In this terse sentence with two indirect questions Jesus alludes to his pre-existence with the Father before his Incarnation as in John 17:5 and to the return to the Father after the death and resurrection as in John 13:3; John 14:2. He again puts both ideas together in one crisp clause in John 16:28 for the apostles who profess to understand him then. But here these Pharisees are blind to the words of Jesus. “But ye know not whence I come nor whither I go” He had spoken of his heavenly destiny (John 7:33). Jesus alone knew his personal consciousness of his coming from, fellowship with, and return to the Father. Stier (Words of the Lord Jesus) argues that one might as well say to the sun, if claiming to be the sun, that it was night, because it bore witness of itself. The answer is the shining of the sun. [source]
Originally, order, and hence the order of the world; the ordered universe. So in classical Greek. In the Septuagint, never the world, but the ordered total of the heavenly bodies; the host of heaven (17:3; Isaiah 24:21; 40:26). Compare, also, Proverbs href="/desk/?q=pr+17:6&sr=1">Proverbs 17:6, and see note on James 3:6. In the apocryphal books, of the universe, and mainly in the relation between God and it arising out of the creation. Thus, the king of the world (2 Maccabees 7:9); the creator or founder of the world (2 Maccabees 12:15). In the New Testament: 1. In the classical and physical sense, the universe (John href="/desk/?q=joh+17:5&sr=1">John 17:5; John 21:25.; Romans 1:20; Ephesians 1:4, etc.). 2. As the order of things of which man is the centre (Matthew 13:38; Mark 16:15; Luke 9:25; John 16:21; Ephesians 2:12; 1 Timothy 6:7). 3. Humanity as it manifests itself in and through this order (Matthew 18:7; 2 Peter 2:5; 2 Peter 3:6; Romans 3:19). Then, as sin has entered and disturbed the order of things, and made a breach between the heavenly and the earthly order, which are one in the divine ideal - 4. The order of things which is alienated from God, as manifested in and by the human race: humanity as alienated from God, and acting in opposition to him (John 1:10; John 12:31; John 15:18, John 15:19; 1 Corinthians 1:21; 1 John 2:15, etc.). The word is used here in the classical sense of the visible creation, which would appeal to the Athenians. Stanley, speaking of the name by which the Deity is known in the patriarchal age, the plural Elohim, notes that Abraham, in perceiving that all the Elohim worshipped by the numerous clans of his race meant one God, anticipated the declaration of Paul in this passage (“Jewish Church,” i., 25). Paul's statement strikes at the belief of the Epicureans, that the world was made by “a fortuitous concourse of atoms,” and of the Stoics, who denied the creation of the world by God, holding either that God animated the world, or that the world itself was God. [source]
Compare Colossians 1:15; John 17:5; Philemon 2:6; Philemon 3:21. Christ's light is also God's. Compare Hebrews 1:3, Rev., effulgence ( ἀπαύγασμα , compare αὐγάσαι shinein this passage). Theodoret says: “The effulgence is both from the fire and with the fire, and has the fire as its cause, yet is not divided from the fire; for whence comes the fire, thence also comes the effulgence.” [source]
In predicate and no article. On εικων eikōn see 2 Corinthians 4:4; 2 Corinthians 3:18; Romans 8:29; Colossians 3:10. Jesus is the very stamp of God the Father as he was before the Incarnation (John 17:5) and is now (Philemon 2:5-11; Hebrews 1:3). [source]
Προ Pro with the ablative case. This phrase makes Paul‘s meaning plain. The precedence of Christ in time and the preeminence as Creator are both stated sharply. See the claim of Jesus to eternal timeless existence in John 8:58; John 17:5. See also Revelation 22:13 where Christ calls himself the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning Paul states it also in 2 Corinthians 8:9; Philemon 2:6. [source]
Just as with Aaron. Jesus had divine appointment as high priest also. To be made First aorist passive infinitive of γινομαι ginomai High priest Predicate accusative agreeing with εαυτον heauton (himself) object of εδοχασεν edoxasen But he that spake unto him Ellipsis of εδοχασεν edoxasen to be supplied from preceding clause. God did glorify Jesus in appointing him priest as we see in Psalm 2:7 quoted already as Messianic (Hebrews 1:5). Jesus himself repeatedly claimed that the Father sent him on his mission to the world (John 5:30, John 5:43; John 8:54; John 17:5, etc.). Bruce holds that Christ‘s priesthood is co-eval with his Sonship. Davidson thinks it is merely suitable because he is Son. Clearly the Father nominated (Dods) the Son to the Messianic priesthood (John 3:16). [source]
Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of ειμι eimi) in contrast with γενομενος genomenos in Hebrews 1:4 like ην ēn in John 1:1 (in contrast with εγενετο egeneto in John 1:14) and like υπαρχων huparchōn and γενομενος genomenos in Philemon 2:6. The effulgence of his glory The word απαυγασμα apaugasma late substantive from απαυγαζω apaugazō to emit brightness The meaning “effulgence” suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John 1:1), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in 2 Corinthians 4:6. The very image of his substance (Χαρακτηρ charaktēr tēs hupostaseōs). χαρασσω Charaktēr is an old word from τηρ charassō to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending = χαραγμα tēr) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by χαρακτηρ charagma (Acts 17:29; Revelation 13:16.). Menander had already used (Moffatt) υποστασις charaktēr in the sense of our “character.” The word occurs in the inscriptions for “person” as well as for “exact reproduction” of a person. The word ψποστασις hupostasis for the being or essence of God “is a philosophical rather than a religious term” (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In Hebrews 11:1 μορπη τεου hypostasis is like the “title-deed” idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used Hebrews 1:1-4 in his controversy with Arius. Paul in Philemon 2:5-11 pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul‘s simpler phrase Λογος morphē theou (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of περων τε Logos in John 1:1-18 is parallel to Hebrews 1:1-4. And upholding (περω pherōn te). Present active participle of ων pherō closely connected with τε ōn (being) by τωι ρηματι της δυναμεως αυτου te and like Colossians 1:17 in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. By the word of his power (ρημα tōi rēmati tēs dunameōs autou). Instrumental case of ρηματι τεου rēma (word). See Hebrews 11:3 for αυτου rēmati theou (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here καταρισμον των αμαρτιων autou refers to God‘s Son as in Hebrews 1:2. Purification of sins (Καταρισμος katharismon tōn hamartiōn). καταριζω Katharismos is from ποιησαμενος katharizō to cleanse (Matthew 8:3; Hebrews 9:14), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, 2 Peter 1:9; Job 7:21. Note middle participle ευραμενος poiēsamenos like εκατισεν heuramenos in Hebrews 9:12. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle. Sat down (κατιζω ekathisen). First aorist active of της μεγαλοσυνης εν υπσηλοις kathizō “took his seat,” a formal and dignified act. Of the Majesty on high (μεγας tēs megalosunēs en hupsēlois). Late word from εν υπσηλοις megas only in lxx (Deut 32:3; 2Sam 7:23, etc.), Aristeas, Hebrews 1:3; Hebrews 8:1; Judges 1:25. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John 17:5). The phrase εν υπσιστοις en hupsēlois occurs in the Psalms (Psalm 93:4), here only in N.T., elsewhere εν τοις επουρανιοις en hupsistois in the highest (Matthew 21:9; Luke 2:14) or en tois epouraniois in the heavenlies (Ephesians 1:3, Ephesians 1:20). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God. [source]
The word απαυγασμα apaugasma late substantive from απαυγαζω apaugazō to emit brightness The meaning “effulgence” suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John 1:1), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in 2 Corinthians 4:6. The very image of his substance (Χαρακτηρ charaktēr tēs hupostaseōs). χαρασσω Charaktēr is an old word from τηρ charassō to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending = χαραγμα tēr) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by χαρακτηρ charagma (Acts 17:29; Revelation 13:16.). Menander had already used (Moffatt) υποστασις charaktēr in the sense of our “character.” The word occurs in the inscriptions for “person” as well as for “exact reproduction” of a person. The word ψποστασις hupostasis for the being or essence of God “is a philosophical rather than a religious term” (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In Hebrews 11:1 μορπη τεου hypostasis is like the “title-deed” idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used Hebrews 1:1-4 in his controversy with Arius. Paul in Philemon 2:5-11 pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul‘s simpler phrase Λογος morphē theou (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of περων τε Logos in John 1:1-18 is parallel to Hebrews 1:1-4. And upholding (περω pherōn te). Present active participle of ων pherō closely connected with τε ōn (being) by τωι ρηματι της δυναμεως αυτου te and like Colossians 1:17 in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. By the word of his power (ρημα tōi rēmati tēs dunameōs autou). Instrumental case of ρηματι τεου rēma (word). See Hebrews 11:3 for αυτου rēmati theou (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here καταρισμον των αμαρτιων autou refers to God‘s Son as in Hebrews 1:2. Purification of sins (Καταρισμος katharismon tōn hamartiōn). καταριζω Katharismos is from ποιησαμενος katharizō to cleanse (Matthew 8:3; Hebrews 9:14), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, 2 Peter 1:9; Job 7:21. Note middle participle ευραμενος poiēsamenos like εκατισεν heuramenos in Hebrews 9:12. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle. Sat down (κατιζω ekathisen). First aorist active of της μεγαλοσυνης εν υπσηλοις kathizō “took his seat,” a formal and dignified act. Of the Majesty on high (μεγας tēs megalosunēs en hupsēlois). Late word from εν υπσηλοις megas only in lxx (Deut 32:3; 2Sam 7:23, etc.), Aristeas, Hebrews 1:3; Hebrews 8:1; Judges 1:25. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John 17:5). The phrase εν υπσιστοις en hupsēlois occurs in the Psalms (Psalm 93:4), here only in N.T., elsewhere εν τοις επουρανιοις en hupsistois in the highest (Matthew 21:9; Luke 2:14) or en tois epouraniois in the heavenlies (Ephesians 1:3, Ephesians 1:20). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God. [source]
Genitive plural of the relative referring to γυναικων gunaikōn (wives). Κοσμος Kosmos has here its old meaning of ornament (cf. our cosmetics), not the common one of world (John 17:5) considered as an orderly whole. Mundus in Latin is used in this double sense (ornament, world). [source]
The preposition ἐκ outof occurs one hundred and twenty-seven times in Revelation, and its proper signification is almost universally out of; but this rendering in many of the passages would be so strange and unidiomatic, that the New Testament Revisers have felt themselves able to adopt it only forty-one times out of all that number, and employ of, from, by, with, on, at, because of, by reason of, from among. See, for instance, Revelation 2:7, Revelation 2:21, Revelation 2:22; Revelation 6:4, Revelation 6:10; Revelation 8:11; Revelation 9:18; Revelation 14:13; Revelation 15:2; Revelation 16:21. Compare John 3:31; John 4:13, John 6:13, John 6:39, John 6:51; John 8:23, John 8:44; John 9:6; John 11:1; John 12:3, John 12:27, John 12:32; John 17:5. Tree, lit., wood. See on Luke 23:31; see on 1 Peter 2:24. Dean Plumptre notes the fact that, prominent as this symbol had been in the primeval history, it had remained unnoticed in the teaching where we should most have looked for its presence - in that of the Psalmist and Prophets of the Old Testament. Only in the Proverbs of Solomon had it been used, in a sense half allegorical and half mystical (Proverbs 3:18; Proverbs 13:12; Proverbs 11:30; Proverbs 15:4). The revival of the symbol in Revelation is in accordance with the theme of the restitution of all things. “The tree which disappeared with the disappearance of the earthly Paradise, reappears with the reappearance of the heavenly.” To eat of the tree of life expresses participation in the life eternal. The figure of the tree of life appears in all mythologies from India to Scandinavia. The Rabbins and Mohammedans called the vine the probation tree. The Zend Avesta has its tree of life called the Death-Destroyer. It grows by the waters of life, and the drinking of its sap confers immortality. The Hindu tree of life is pictured as growing out of a great seed in the midst of an expanse of water. It has three branches, each crowned with a sun, denoting the three powers of creation, preservation, and renovation after destruction. In another representation Budha sits in meditation under a tree with three branches, each branch having three stems. One of the Babylonian cylinders discovered by Layard, represents three priestesses gathering the fruit of what seems to be a palm-tree with three branches on each side. Athor, the Venus of the Egyptians, appears half-concealed in the branches of the sacred peach-tree, giving to the departed soul the fruit, and the drink of heaven from a vial from which the streams of life descend upon the spirit, a figure at the foot of the tree, like a hawk, with a human head and with hands outstretched. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In the Norse mythology a prominent figure is Igdrasil, the Ash-tree of Existence; its roots in the kingdom of Eels or Death, its trunk reaching to heaven, and its boughs spread over the whole universe. At its foot, in the kingdom of Death, sit three Nornas or Fates, the Past, the Present, and the Future, watering its roots from the sacred well. Compare Revelation 22:2, Revelation 22:14, Revelation 22:19. Virgil, addressing Dante at the completion of the ascent of the Purgatorial Mount, says:“That apple sweet, which through so many branchesThe care of mortals goeth in pursuit of, Today shall put in peace thy hungerings.”“Purgatorio,” xxvii., 115-117. ParadiseSee on Luke 23:43. Omit in the midst of. Παράδεισος Paradise“passes through a series of meanings, each one higher than the last. From any garden of delight, which is its first meaning, it comes to be predominantly applied to the garden of Eden, then to the resting-place of separate souls in joy and felicity, and lastly to the very heaven itself; and we see eminently in it, what we see indeed in so many words, how revealed religion assumes them into her service, and makes them vehicles of far higher truth than any which they knew at first, transforming and transfiguring them, as in this case, from glory to glory” (Trench). [source]
Rev., correctly, rendering the two articles, “the glory and the dominion.” The articles express universality: all glory; that which everywhere and under every form represents glory and dominion. The verb be (the glory) is not in the text. We may render either as an ascription, be, or as a confession, is. The glory is His. Δόξα glorymeans originally opinion or judgment. In this sense it is not used in Scripture. In the sacred writers always of a good or favorable opinion, and hence praise, honor, glory (Luke 14:10; Hebrews 3:3; 1 Peter 5:4). Applied to physical objects, as light, the heavenly bodies (Acts 22:11; 1 Corinthians 15:40). The visible brightness in manifestations of God (Luke 2:9; Acts 7:55; Luke 9:32; 2 Corinthians 3:7). Magnificence, dignity (Matthew 4:8; Luke 4:6). Divine majesty or perfect excellence, especially in doxologies, either of God or Christ (1 Peter 4:11; Judges 1:25; Revelation 4:9, Revelation 4:11; Matthew 16:27; Mark 10:37; Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26; 2 Corinthians 3:18; 2 Corinthians 4:4). The glory or majesty of divine grace (Ephesians 1:6, Ephesians 1:12, Ephesians 1:14, Ephesians 1:18; 1 Timothy 1:11). The majesty of angels (Luke 9:26; Judges 1:8; 2 Peter 2:10). The glorious condition of Christ after accomplishing His earthly work, and of the redeemed who share His eternal glory (Luke 24:26; John 17:5; Philemon 3:21; 1 Timothy 3:16; Romans 8:18, Romans 8:21; Romans 9:23; 2 Corinthians 4:17; Colossians 1:27).| Trench remarks upon the prominence of the doxological element in the highest worship of the Church as contrasted with the very subordinate place which it often occupies in ours. “We can perhaps make our requests known unto God, and this is well, for it is prayer; but to give glory to God, quite apart from anything to be directly gotten by ourselves in return, this is better, for it is adoration.” Dr. John Brown in his Memoir of his father, one of the very finest biographical sketches in English literature, records a formula used by him in closing his prayers on specially solemn occasions: “And now unto Thee, O Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, the one Jehovah and our God, we would - as is most meet - with the Church on earth and the Church in heaven, ascribe all honor and glory, dominion and majesty, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end, Amen” (“Horae Subsecivae”). Compare the doxologies in |1 Peter 4:11|; |Galatians 1:5|; |Revelation 4:9|, |Revelation 4:11|; |Revelation 5:13|; |Revelation 7:12|; |Judges 1:25|; |1 Chronicles 29:11|.|Forever and ever ( εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων )|Lit., unto the ages of the ages. For the phrase compare Galatians 1:5; Hebrews 13:21; 1 Peter 4:11. It occurs twelve times in Revelation, but not in John's Gospel or Epistles. It is the formula of eternity.|Amen ( ἀμὴν )|The English word is a transcription of the Greek and of the Hebrew. A verbal adjective, meaning firm, faithful. Hence ὁ ἀμὴν , the Amen, applied to Christ (Revelation 3:14). It passes into an adverbial sense by which something is asserted or confirmed. Thus often used by Christ, verily. John alone uses the double affirmation, verily, verily. See on John 1:51; see on John 10:1.| [source]