The Meaning of Matthew 1:2 Explained

Matthew 1:2

KJV: Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

YLT: Abraham begat Isaac, and Isaac begat Jacob, and Jacob begat Judah and his brethren,

Darby: Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob, and Jacob begat Juda and his brethren;

ASV: Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judah and his brethren;

KJV Reverse Interlinear

Abraham  begat  Isaac;  and  Isaac  begat  Jacob;  and  Jacob  begat  Judas  and  his  brethren; 

What does Matthew 1:2 Mean?

Context Summary

Matthew 1:1-17 - The Line By Which Messiah Came
The enumeration of our Lord's ancestors, with its threefold division into fourteen generations and evident gaps, was probably so arranged to aid the memory. Notice that, in unison with the general purpose of the writer, the line is traced to Abraham through David the king. Of course we know that Joseph was only the reputed father of Jesus, Matthew 1:18; but in any case this genealogy conformed to Hebrew usage and explained how the birth took place in David's city.
In this list of names the patriarchs, Gentiles, women of doubtful character, good men and bad men, the wise, the illustrious, the unknown-all supply important links. It is as though to teach us that in the Son of man there is a blending of all classes, that He might be the representative and helper of all. Each of us may find some point of contact in this genealogy. Jesus Christ belongs to our race. He knew what was in man by that subtle and intimate knowledge which comes of kinship. In Him, therefore, is neither Jew nor Greek exclusively, but all are one in Him. [source]

Chapter Summary: Matthew 1

1  The genealogy of Jesus from Abraham to Joseph
18  He is miraculously conceived of the Holy Spirit by the Virgin Mary
19  The angel satisfies the doubts of Joseph,
21  and declares the names and office of Jesus;
25  Jesus is born

Greek Commentary for Matthew 1:2

Begat [εγεννησεν]
This word comes, like some of the early chapters of Genesis, with regularity through Matthew 1:16, until the birth of Jesus is reached when there is a sudden change. The word itself does not always mean immediate parentage, but merely direct descent. In Matthew 1:16 we have “Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was begotten Jesus who is called Christ” The article occurs here each time with the object of “begat,” but not with the subject of the verb to distinguish sharply the proper names. In the case of David the King (Matthew 1:6) and Joseph the husband of Mary (Matthew 1:16) the article is repeated. The mention of the brethren of Judah (Matthew 1:2) and of both Phares and Zara (Matthew 1:3) may show that Matthew was not copying a family pedigree but making his own table. All the Greek manuscripts give Matthew 1:16 as above save the Ferrar Group of minuscules which are supported by the Sinaitic Syriac Version. Because of this fact Von Soden, whose text Moffatt translates, deliberately prints his text “Jacob begat Jesus ” But the Sinaitic Syriac gives the Virgin Birth of Jesus in Matthew 1:18-25. Hence it is clear that “begat” here in Matthew 1:16 must merely mean line of descent or the text has been tampered with in order to get rid of the Virgin Birth idea, but it was left untouched in Matthew 1:18-25. I have a full discussion of the problem in chapter XIV of Studies in the Text of the New Testament. The evidence as it now stands does not justify changing the text of the Greek uncials to suit the Sinaitic Syriac. The Virgin Birth of Jesus remains in Matthew 1:16. The spelling of these Hebrew names in English is usually according to the Hebrew form, not the Greek. In the Greek itself the Hebrew spelling is often observed in violation of the Greek rules for the ending of words with no consonants save n, r, s. But the list is not spelled consistently in the Greek, now like the Hebrew as in Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, now like the Greek as in Judah, Solomon, Hezekiah, though the Hebrew style prevails. [source]

Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Matthew 1:2

Matthew 1:23 They shall call [καλὲσουσιν]
In Matthew 1:21, it is thou shalt call. The original of Isaiah (Isaiah 7:14) has she shall call; but Matthew generalizes the singular into the plural, and quotes the prophecy in a form suited to its larger and final fulfilment: men shall call his name Immanuel, as they shall come to the practical knowledge that God will indeed dwell with men upon the earth. [source]
Matthew 1:22 Through the prophet [διά]
So the Rev. rightly, instead of by. In quotations from the Old Testament, the writers habitually use the preposition διὰ (through ) to denote the instrumentality through which God works or speaks, while they reserve ὑπὸ (by ) to express the primary agency of God himself. So here the prophecy in Matthew 1:23was spoken by the Lord, but was communicated to men through his prophet. [source]
Matthew 6:14 Trespasses [παραπτώματα]
The Lord here uses another word for sins, and still another ( ἁμαρτιας ) appears in Luke's version of the prayer, though he also says, “every one that is indebted to us.” There is no difficulty in supposing that Christ, contemplating sins in general, should represent them by different terms expressive of different aspects of wrong-doing (see on Matthew 1:21). This word is derived from παραπίπτω , to fall or throw one's self beside. Thus it has a sense somewhat akin to ἁμαρτία , of going beside a mark, missing. In classical Greek the verb is often used of intentional falling, as of throwing one's self upon an enemy; and this is the prevailing sense in biblical Greek, indicating reckless and wilful sin (see 1 Chronicles 5:25; 1 Chronicles 10:13; 2 Chronicles 26:18; 2 Chronicles 29:6, 2 Chronicles 29:19; Ezekiel 14:13; Ezekiel 18:26). It does not, therefore, imply palliation or excuse. It is a conscious violation of right, involving guilt, and occurs therefore, in connection with the mention of forgiveness (Romans 4:25; Romans 5:16; Colossians 2:13; Ephesians 2:1, Ephesians 2:5). Unlike παράβασις (transgression )which contemplates merely the objective violation of law, it carries the thought of sin as affecting the sinner, and hence is found associated with expressions which indicate the consequences and the remedy of sin (Romans 4:25; Romans 5:15, Romans 5:17; Ephesians 2:1). [source]
Matthew 21:3 The Lord [ὁ κύριος]
From κῦρος , supreme power, authority. Hence κύριος , one having authority, lord, owner, ruler. In classical Greek, used of the gods, and in inscriptions applied to different gods, as Hermes, Zeus, etc.; also of the head of the family, who is lord ( κύριος ) of the wife and children (1 Timothy 6:1, 1 Timothy 6:2; Titus 2:9; 1 Peter 2:18), and κύριος (Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1). In the Septuagint it is used by Sarah of her husband (Genesis 3:6). Joseph is called lord of the country (Genesis 18:27; Exodus 4:10). In the New Testament it is a name for God (Matthew 1:20, Matthew 1:22, Matthew 1:24; Matthew 2:15; Acts 11:16; Acts 12:11, Acts 12:17; Revelation 1:8). As applied to Christ, it does not express his divine nature and power. These are indicated by some accompanying word or phrase, as my God (John 20:28); of all (Acts 10:36); to the glory of God the Father (Philemon 2:11); of glory (1 Corinthians 2:8); so that, as a title of Christ, Lord is used in the sense of Master or Ruler, or in address, Sir (Matthew 22:43, Matthew 22:45; Luke 2:11; Luke 6:46; John 13:13, John 13:14; 1 Corinthians 8:6). Ὁ κύριος , the Lord, is used of Christ by Matthew only once (Matthew 21:3) until after the resurrection (Matthew 28:6). In the other gospels and in the Acts it occurs far oftener. Nevertheless, in the progress of Christian thought in the New Testament, the meaning develops toward a specific designation of the divine Saviour, as may be seen in the phrases Jesus, Christ our Lord, Our Lord Jesus Christ, Our Lord, Jesus our Lord. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
[source]

Matthew 1:24 Took unto him his wife [παρελαβεν την γυναικα αυτου]
The angel had told him not to be afraid to “take to his side” Mary his wife (Matthew 1:20). So when he awoke from his sleep he promptly obeyed the angel and “took his wife home” (Moffatt). One can only imagine the relief and joy of Mary when Joseph nobly rose to his high duty toward her. I have tried to sketch Mary‘s problems in Mary the Mother of Jesus: Her Problems and Her Glory. [source]
Matthew 1:1 Jesus Christ []
. Both words are used. The first is the name It was used often in the Septuagint as an adjective like “the anointed priest” (1 Kings 2:10) and then as a substantive to translate the Hebrew word “Messiah” So Andrew said to Simon: “We have found the Messiah, which is, being interpreted, Christ” (John 1:41). In the Gospels it is sometimes “the Anointed One,” “the Messiah,” but finally just a proper name as here, Jesus Christ. Paul in his later Epistles usually has it “Christ Jesus.”The Son of David, the son of Abraham (υιου Δαυειδ υιου Αβρααμ — huiou Daueid huiou Abraam). Matthew proposes to show that Jesus Christ is on the human side the son of David, as the Messiah was to be, and the son of Abraham, not merely a real Jew and the heir of the promises, but the promise made to Abraham. So Matthew begins his line with Abraham while Luke traces his line back to Adam. The Hebrew and Aramaic often used the word son (βην — bēn) for the quality or character, but here the idea is descent. Christians are called sons of God because Christ has bestowed this dignity upon us (Romans 8:14; Romans 9:26; Galatians 3:26; Galatians 4:5-7). Matthew 1:1 is the description of the list in verses 2-17. The names are given in three groups, Abraham to David (Matthew 1:2-6), David to Babylon Removal (Matthew 1:6-11), Jechoniah to Jesus (Matthew 1:12-16). The removal to Babylon (μετοικεσιας αβυλωνος — metoikesias Babulōnos) occurs at the end of Matthew 1:11, the beginning of Matthew 1:12, and twice in the resume in Matthew 1:17. This great event is used to mark off the two last divisions from each other. It is a good illustration of the genitive as the case of genus or kind. The Babylon removal could mean either to Babylon or from Babylon or, indeed, the removal of Babylon. But the readers would know the facts from the Old Testament, the removal of the Jews to Babylon. Then Matthew 1:17 makes a summary of the three lists, fourteen in each by counting David twice and omitting several, a sort of mnemonic device that is common enough. Matthew does not mean to say that there were only fourteen in actual genealogy. The names of the women (Thamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba the wife of Uriah) are likewise not counted. But it is a most interesting list. [source]
Matthew 1:1 The Son of David, the son of Abraham [υιου Δαυειδ υιου Αβρααμ]
Matthew proposes to show that Jesus Christ is on the human side the son of David, as the Messiah was to be, and the son of Abraham, not merely a real Jew and the heir of the promises, but the promise made to Abraham. So Matthew begins his line with Abraham while Luke traces his line back to Adam. The Hebrew and Aramaic often used the word son Matthew 1:1 is the description of the list in verses 2-17. The names are given in three groups, Abraham to David (Matthew 1:2-6), David to Babylon Removal (Matthew 1:6-11), Jechoniah to Jesus (Matthew 1:12-16). The removal to Babylon (μετοικεσιας αβυλωνος — metoikesias Babulōnos) occurs at the end of Matthew 1:11, the beginning of Matthew 1:12, and twice in the resume in Matthew 1:17. This great event is used to mark off the two last divisions from each other. It is a good illustration of the genitive as the case of genus or kind. The Babylon removal could mean either to Babylon or from Babylon or, indeed, the removal of Babylon. But the readers would know the facts from the Old Testament, the removal of the Jews to Babylon. Then Matthew 1:17 makes a summary of the three lists, fourteen in each by counting David twice and omitting several, a sort of mnemonic device that is common enough. Matthew does not mean to say that there were only fourteen in actual genealogy. The names of the women (Thamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba the wife of Uriah) are likewise not counted. But it is a most interesting list. [source]
Matthew 1:2 Begat [εγεννησεν]
This word comes, like some of the early chapters of Genesis, with regularity through Matthew 1:16, until the birth of Jesus is reached when there is a sudden change. The word itself does not always mean immediate parentage, but merely direct descent. In Matthew 1:16 we have “Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was begotten Jesus who is called Christ” The article occurs here each time with the object of “begat,” but not with the subject of the verb to distinguish sharply the proper names. In the case of David the King (Matthew 1:6) and Joseph the husband of Mary (Matthew 1:16) the article is repeated. The mention of the brethren of Judah (Matthew 1:2) and of both Phares and Zara (Matthew 1:3) may show that Matthew was not copying a family pedigree but making his own table. All the Greek manuscripts give Matthew 1:16 as above save the Ferrar Group of minuscules which are supported by the Sinaitic Syriac Version. Because of this fact Von Soden, whose text Moffatt translates, deliberately prints his text “Jacob begat Jesus ” But the Sinaitic Syriac gives the Virgin Birth of Jesus in Matthew 1:18-25. Hence it is clear that “begat” here in Matthew 1:16 must merely mean line of descent or the text has been tampered with in order to get rid of the Virgin Birth idea, but it was left untouched in Matthew 1:18-25. I have a full discussion of the problem in chapter XIV of Studies in the Text of the New Testament. The evidence as it now stands does not justify changing the text of the Greek uncials to suit the Sinaitic Syriac. The Virgin Birth of Jesus remains in Matthew 1:16. The spelling of these Hebrew names in English is usually according to the Hebrew form, not the Greek. In the Greek itself the Hebrew spelling is often observed in violation of the Greek rules for the ending of words with no consonants save n, r, s. But the list is not spelled consistently in the Greek, now like the Hebrew as in Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, now like the Greek as in Judah, Solomon, Hezekiah, though the Hebrew style prevails. [source]
Matthew 2:1 Now when Jesus was born [του δε Ιησου γεννητεντος]
The fact of the birth of Jesus is stated by the genitive absolute construction (first aorist passive participle of the same verb γενναω — gennaō used twice already of the birth of Jesus, Matthew 1:16, Matthew 1:20, and used in the genealogy, Matthew 1:2-16). Matthew does not propose to give biographic details of the supernatural birth of Jesus, wonderful as it was and disbelieved as it is by some today who actually deny that Jesus was born at all or ever lived, men who talk of the Jesus Myth, the Christ Myth, etc. “The main purpose is to show the reception given by the world to the new-born Messianic King. Homage from afar, hostility at home; foreshadowing the fortunes of the new faith: reception by the Gentiles, rejection by the Jews” (Bruce). [source]
Matthew 21:3 The Lord [ο κυριος]
It is not clear how the word would be understood here by those who heard the message though it is plain that Jesus applies it to himself. The word is from κυρος — kuros power or authority. In the lxx it is common in a variety of uses which appear in the N.T. as master of the slave (Matthew 10:24), of the harvest (Matthew 9:38), of the vineyard (Matthew 20:8), of the emperor (Acts 13:27), of God (Matthew 1:20; Matthew 11:25), and often of Jesus as the Messiah (Acts 10:36). Note Matthew 8:25. This is the only time in Matthew where the words ο κυριος — ho kurios are applied to Jesus except the doubtful passage in Matthew 28:6. A similar usage is shown by Moulton and Milligan‘s Vocabulary and Deissmann‘s Light from the Ancient East. Particularly in Egypt it was applied to “the Lord Serapis” and Ptolemy and Cleopatra are called “the lords, the most great gods” Even Herod the Great and Herod Agrippa I are addressed as “Lord King.” In the west the Roman emperors are not so termed till the time of Domitian. But the Christians boldly claimed the word for Christ as Jesus is here represented as using it with reference to himself. It seems as if already the disciples were calling Jesus “Lord” and that he accepted the appellative and used it as here. [source]
Luke 2:5 Espoused []
Not merely betrothed. See Matthew 1:20, Matthew 1:24, Matthew 1:25; also see on Matthew 1:18. [source]
Luke 2:11 A Saviour []
See on Matthew 1:21. [source]
Luke 11:4 Sins [ἁμαρτίας]
See on Matthew 1:21. Compare debts, Matthew 6:12. [source]
Luke 1:31 Jesus []
See on Matthew 1:21. [source]
Luke 1:31 Jesus [Ιησουν]
As to Joseph in Matthew 1:21, but without the explanation of the meaning. See note on Matthew 1:21. [source]
Luke 2:5 To enrol himself with Mary [απογραπσασται συν Μαριαμ]
Direct middle. “With Mary” is naturally taken with the infinitive as here. If so, that means that Mary‘s family register was in Bethlehem also and that she also belonged to the house of David. It is possible to connect “with Mary” far back with “went up” The Syriac Sinaitic expressly says that both Joseph and Mary were of the house and city of David. Betrothed Same verb as in Luke 1:27, but here it really means “married” or “espoused” as Matthew 1:24. shows. Otherwise she could not have travelled with Joseph. [source]
John 8:21 In your sin [ἐν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ὑμῶν]
See on Matthew 1:21. Note the singular, sin, not sins. It is used collectively to express the whole condition of estrangement from God. [source]
John 5:14 Sin no more [μηκέτι ἁμάρτανε]
No longer continue to sin. See on Matthew 1:21. Jesus thus shows His knowledge that the sickness was the result of sin. [source]
John 4:42 The Savior [ὁ σωτὴρ]
John uses the word only here and 1 John 4:14. See on Jesus, Matthew 1:21. It is significant that this conception of Christ should have been first expressed by a Samaritan. [source]
John 3:29 The bride []
A common figure in the Old testament prophecies, of the relation between Jehovah and His people (Hosea href="/desk/?q=ho+2:19&sr=1">Hosea 2:19; Malachi 2:11). See also on Matthew 1:21, concerning Hosea. [source]
John 14:3 And receive [παραλήψομαι]
Here the future tense, will receive. Rev., therefore, much better: I come again and will receive you. The change of tense is intentional, the future pointing to the future personal reception of the believer through death. Christ is with the disciple alway, continually “coming” to him, unto the end of the world. Then He will receive him into that immediate fellowship, where he “shall see Him as He is.” The verb παραλαμβάνω is used in the New Testament of taking along with (Matthew 4:5, note; Matthew 17:1, note; Acts 16:33, note): of taking to (Matthew 1:20; John 14:3): of taking from, receiving by transmission; so mostly in Paul (Galatians 1:12; Colossians 2:6; Colossians 4:17; 1 Thessalonians 2:13, etc. See also Matthew 24:40, Matthew 24:41). It is scarcely fanciful to see the first two meanings blended in the use of the verb in this passage. Jesus, by the Spirit, takes His own along with Him through life, and then takes them to His side at death. He himself conducts them to Himself. [source]
John 1:3 By Him [δἰ αὐτοῦ]
Literally, through him. The preposition διά is generally used to denote the working of God through some secondary agency, as διὰ τοῦ προφήτου , through the prophet (Matthew 1:22, on which see note). It is the preposition by which the relation of Christ to creation is usually expressed (see 1 Corinthians 8:6; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2), though it is occasionally used of the Father (Hebrews 2:10; Romans 11:36, and Galatians 1:1, where it is used of both). Hence, as Godet remarks, it “does not lower the Word to the rank of a simple instrument,” but merely implies a different relation to creation on the part of the Father and the Son. [source]
John 11:13 Had spoken [ειρηκει]
Past perfect of ειπον — eipon The disciples had misunderstood Christ‘s metaphor for death. That he spake Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse after the secondary tense Of taking rest in sleep Only use of κοιμησις — koimēsis (from κοιμαω — koimaō) in the N.T., but it also was used of death (Sirach 46:19). υπνου — Hupnou (in sleep) is objective genitive of υπνος — hupnos (sleep, Matthew 1:24). [source]
John 4:42 Not because of thy speaking [ουκετι δια την σην λαλιαν]
“No longer because of thy talk,” good and effective as that was. Λαλια — Lalia (cf. λαλεω — laleō) is talk, talkativeness, mode of speech, one‘s vernacular, used by Jesus of his own speech (John 8:43). We have heard Perfect active indicative of ακουω — akouō their abiding experience. For ourselves Just “ourselves.” The Saviour of the world See Matthew 1:21 for σωτηρ — sōseiused of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term sōtēr to Jesus again in 1 John 4:14. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (John 4:22). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (John 4:26) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: “At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah.” But why “merely”? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their “Saviour,” Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on John 4:42: “That in the first century Messiah was given the title sōtēr is not proven.” The use of “saviour and god” for Ptolemy in the third century b.c. is well known. “The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East” (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 5:31; Acts 3:23; Philemon 3:20; Ephesians 5:23; Titus 1:4; Titus 2:13; Titus 3:6; 2 Timothy 1:10; 2 Peter 1:1, 2 Peter 1:11; 2 Peter 2:20; 2 Peter 3:2, 2 Peter 3:18). All these are writings of the first century a.d. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world. [source]
John 4:42 We have heard [ακηκοαμεν]
Perfect active indicative of ακουω — akouō their abiding experience. For ourselves Just “ourselves.” The Saviour of the world See Matthew 1:21 for σωτηρ — sōseiused of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term sōtēr to Jesus again in 1 John 4:14. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (John 4:22). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (John 4:26) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: “At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah.” But why “merely”? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their “Saviour,” Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on John 4:42: “That in the first century Messiah was given the title sōtēr is not proven.” The use of “saviour and god” for Ptolemy in the third century b.c. is well known. “The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East” (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 5:31; Acts 3:23; Philemon 3:20; Ephesians 5:23; Titus 1:4; Titus 2:13; Titus 3:6; 2 Timothy 1:10; 2 Peter 1:1, 2 Peter 1:11; 2 Peter 2:20; 2 Peter 3:2, 2 Peter 3:18). All these are writings of the first century a.d. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world. [source]
John 4:42 For ourselves [αυτοι]
Just “ourselves.” The Saviour of the world See Matthew 1:21 for σωτηρ — sōseiused of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term sōtēr to Jesus again in 1 John 4:14. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (John 4:22). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (John 4:26) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: “At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah.” But why “merely”? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their “Saviour,” Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on John 4:42: “That in the first century Messiah was given the title sōtēr is not proven.” The use of “saviour and god” for Ptolemy in the third century b.c. is well known. “The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East” (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 5:31; Acts 3:23; Philemon 3:20; Ephesians 5:23; Titus 1:4; Titus 2:13; Titus 3:6; 2 Timothy 1:10; 2 Peter 1:1, 2 Peter 1:11; 2 Peter 2:20; 2 Peter 3:2, 2 Peter 3:18). All these are writings of the first century a.d. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world. [source]
John 4:42 The Saviour of the world [ο σωτηρ του κοσμου]
See Matthew 1:21 for σωτηρ — sōseiused of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term sōtēr to Jesus again in 1 John 4:14. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (John 4:22). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (John 4:26) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: “At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah.” But why “merely”? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their “Saviour,” Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on John 4:42: “That in the first century Messiah was given the title sōtēr is not proven.” The use of “saviour and god” for Ptolemy in the third century b.c. is well known. “The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East” (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 5:31; Acts 3:23; Philemon 3:20; Ephesians 5:23; Titus 1:4; Titus 2:13; Titus 3:6; 2 Timothy 1:10; 2 Peter 1:1, 2 Peter 1:11; 2 Peter 2:20; 2 Peter 3:2, 2 Peter 3:18). All these are writings of the first century a.d. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world. [source]
John 5:14 Findeth him [ευρισκει αυτον]
Dramatic present as in John 1:45, possibly after search as in John 9:35. Sin no more “No longer go on sinning.” Present active imperative with μηκετι — mēketi a clear implication that disease was due to personal sin as is so often the case. Jesus used the same words to the woman taken in adultery in the spurious passage (John 8:11). He had suffered for 38 years. All sickness is not due to personal sin (John 9:3), but much is and nature is a hard paymaster. Jesus is here living up to his name (Matthew 1:21). Lest a worse thing befall thee Negative final clause with second aorist middle subjunctive of γινομαι — ginomai Χειρον — Cheiron is comparative of κακος — kakos bad. Worse than the illness of 38 years, bad as that is. He will now be sinning against knowledge. [source]
Acts 7:45 Jesus []
Joshua. The names are the same, both signifying Saviour. See on Matthew 1:21. [source]
Acts 25:8 Have I offended [ἥμαρτον]
See on the kindred noun ἁμαρτία , sin, Matthew 1:21. [source]
Acts 7:45 With Joshua [μετα Ιησου]
With Jesus, the Greek form of Joshua (contracted from Jehoshua, Matthew 1:21), as in Hebrews 4:8. [source]
Acts 7:45 In their turn [διαδεχαμενοι]
First aorist middle participle of διαδεχομαι — diadechomai to receive through another, to receive in sucession or in turn. Late Greek, only here in N.T. Deissmann (Bible Studies, p. 115) argues from a second century b.c. papyrus that διαδοχος — diadochos means rather deputy or court official than successor. With Joshua (μετα Ιησου — meta Iēsou). With Jesus, the Greek form of Joshua (contracted from Jehoshua, Matthew 1:21), as in Hebrews 4:8. When they entered on the possession of the nations Literally “in (or at the time of) the possession of the nations.” See note on Hebrews 7:5 for the only other N.T. instance of κατασχεσις — kataschesis Which (ων — hn). The nations, genitive by attraction to case of ετνων — ethnōn Thrust out First aorist active indicative of εχωτεω — exōtheō to push out, common verb, here, only in N.T. save some MSS. in Acts 27:39. [source]
Romans 4:17 Calleth [καλοῦντος]
The verb is used in the following senses: 1. To give a name, with ὄνομα name Matthew 1:21, Matthew 1:22, Matthew 1:25; Luke 1:13, Luke 1:31; without ὄνομα Luke 1:59, Luke 1:60. To salute by a name, Matthew 23:9; Matthew 22:43, Matthew 22:45. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
2. Passive. To bear a name or title among men, Luke 1:35; Luke 22:25; 1 Corinthians 15:9. To be acknowledged or to pass as, Matthew 5:9, Matthew 5:19; James 2:23. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
3. To invite, Matthew 22:3, Matthew 22:9; John 2:2; 1 Corinthians 10:27. To summon, Matthew 4:21; Acts 4:18; Acts 24:2. To call out from, Matthew 2:15; Hebrews 11:8; 1 Peter 2:9. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
4. To appoint. Select for an office, Galatians 1:15; Hebrews 5:4; to salvation, Romans 9:11; Romans 8:30. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
5. Of God's creative decree. To call forth from nothing, Isaiah 41:4; 2 Kings 8:1. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
In this last sense some explain the word here; but it can scarcely be said that God creates things that are not as actually existing. Others explain, God's disposing decree. He disposes of things that are not as though existing. The simplest explanation appears to be to give καλεῖν the sense of nameth, speaketh of. Compare Romans 9:7; Acts 7:5. The seed of Abraham “which were at present in the category of things which were not, and the nations which should spring physically or spiritually from him, God spoke of as having an existence, which word Abraham believed” (Alford). In this case there may properly be added the idea of the summons to the high destiny ordained for Abraham's seed. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
[source]

Romans 2:23 Transgression [παραβάσεως]
Trench remarks upon “the mournfully numerous group of words” which express the different aspects of sin. It is ἁμαρτια themissing of a mark; παράβασις theoverpassing of a line; παρακοή thedisobedience to a voice; παράπτωμα afalling when one should have stood; ἀγνόημα ignoranceof what one should know; ἥττημα adiminishing of what should be rendered in full measure; ἀνομία or παρανομία non-observanceof law; πλημμέλεια discord. The primary sense of the preposition παρά 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. Thus, in the sense of going beyond, Romans 12:3, to think more highly than he ought ( παρ ' ὃ δεῖ ), where the sense of beyond is fixed by ὑπερφρονεῖν to think beyond or over.” So Luke 13:2. In the sense of falling short, Thucydides, 3,49: “Mitylene came near such peril” ( παρὰ τοσοῦτο κινδύνου ), as if parallel to the danger but not touching it. Hence παραβάσις differs from the Homeric ὑπερβασία transgressionin that the latter carries only the idea of going beyond or over. A mark or line as a standard is thus implied. Transgression implies something to transgress. With the law came in the possibility off transgressing the law. “Where there is no law there is no transgression” (Romans 4:15). Hence Adam's sin is called a transgression (Romans 5:14), because it was the violation of a definite command. Paul habitually uses the word and its kindred παραβάτης transgressorof the transgression of a commandment distinctly given (Galatians 3:19; 1 Timothy 2:14, Romans 2:25, Romans 2:27). Hence it is peculiarly appropriate here of one who boasts in the law. It thus differs from ἁμαρτία sin(see on sins, Matthew 1:21), in that one may sin without being under express law. See Romans 5. Sin ( ἁμαρτία ) was in the world until the law; i.e. during the period prior to the law. Death reigned from Adam to Moses over those who had not sinned ( ἁμαρτήσαντας ) after the similitude of Adam's transgression ( παραβάσεως ). The sin is implicit, the transgression explicit. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
[source]

Romans 1:2 By [δια]
Through, by means of, intermediate agency like Matthew 1:22 which see. In the holy scriptures (εν γραπαις αγιαις — en graphais hagiais). No article, yet definite. Perhaps the earliest use of the phrase (Sanday and Headlam). Paul definitely finds God‘s gospel in the Holy Scriptures. [source]
Romans 1:3 According to the flesh [κατα σαρκα]
His real humanity alongside of his real deity. For the descent from David see Matthew 1:1, Matthew 1:6, Matthew 1:20; Luke 1:27; John 7:42; Acts 13:23, etc. [source]
1 Corinthians 1:21 To save [σῶσαι]
The word was technically used in the Old Testament of deliverance at the Messiah's coming; of salvation from the penalties of the messianic judgment, or from the evils which obstruct the messianic deliverance. See Joel 2:32; Matthew 1:21; compare Acts 2:40. Paul uses it in the ethical sense, to make one a partaker of the salvation which is through Christ. Edwards calls attention to the foregleam of this christian conception of the word in the closing paragraph of Plato's “Republic:” “And thus, Glaucon, the tale has been saved, and has not perished, and will save ( σώσειεν ) us if we are obedient to the word spoken, and we shall pass safely over the river of forgetfulness and our soul will not be defiled.” [source]
Galatians 1:1 And God the Father []
The genitive, governed by the preceding διὰ byor through. The idea is the same as an apostle by the will of God: 1 Corinthians 1:1; 2 Corinthians 1:1; Ephesians 1:1. Διὰ is used of secondary agency, as Matthew 1:22; Matthew 11:2; Luke 1:70; Acts 1:16; Hebrews 1:2. But we find διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ bythe will of God, Romans 15:32; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 2 Corinthians 1:1, etc., and διὰ θεοῦ byGod, Galatians 4:7. Also δἰ οὗ (God), 1 Corinthians 1:9; Hebrews 2:10. [source]
Ephesians 2:1 Trespasses - sins [παραπτώμασιν - ἁμαρτίαις]
See on Matthew 1:21; see on Matthew 6:14. Trespasses, special acts. Sins, all forms and phases of sin: more general. [source]
Philippians 2:9 A name []
Rev., correctly, the name. This expression is differently explained: either the particular name given to Christ, as Jesus or Lord; or name is taken in the sense of dignity or glory, which is a common Old-Testament usage, and occurs in Ephesians 1:21; Hebrews 1:4. Under the former explanation a variety of names are proposed, as Son of God, Lord, God, Christ Jesus. The sense of the personal name Jesus seems to meet all the conditions, and the personal sense is the simpler, since Jesus occurs immediately after with the word name, and again Jesus Christ in Phlippians 2:11. The name Jesus was bestowed on Christ at the beginning of His humiliation, but prophetically as the One who should save His people from their sins, Matthew 1:21. It was the personal name of others besides; but if that is an objection here, it is equally an objection in Phlippians 2:10. The dignity is expressed by above every name. He bears the name in His glory. See Acts 9:5. See on Matthew 1:21. [source]
Colossians 1:15 Of the invisible God [του τεου του αορατου]
But the one who sees Jesus has seen God (John 14:9). See this verbal adjective Predicate adjective again and anarthrous. This passage is parallel to the Λογος — Logos passage in John 1:1-18 and to Hebrews 1:1-4 as well as Philemon 2:5-11 in which these three writers (John, author of Hebrews, Paul) give the high conception of the Person of Christ (both Son of God and Son of Man) found also in the Synoptic Gospels and even in Q (the Father, the Son). This word (lxx and N.T.) can no longer be considered purely “Biblical” (Thayer), since it is found In inscriptions (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 91) and in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, etc.). See it already in Luke 2:7 and Aleph for Matthew 1:25; Romans 8:29. The use of this word does not show what Arius argued that Paul regarded Christ as a creature like “all creation” (πασης κτισεως — pāsēs ktiseōs by metonomy the act regarded as result). It is rather the comparative (superlative) force of πρωτος — prōtos that is used (first-born of all creation) as in Colossians 1:18; Romans 8:29; Hebrews 1:6; Hebrews 12:23; Revelation 1:5. Paul is here refuting the Gnostics who pictured Christ as one of the aeons by placing him before “all creation” (angels and men). Like εικων — eikōn we find πρωτοτοκος — prōtotokos in the Alexandrian vocabulary of the Λογος — Logos teaching (Philo) as well as in the lxx. Paul takes both words to help express the deity of Jesus Christ in his relation to the Father as εικων — eikōn (Image) and to the universe as πρωτοτοκος — prōtotokos (First-born). [source]
Colossians 1:15 The first born [πρωτοτοκος]
Predicate adjective again and anarthrous. This passage is parallel to the Λογος — Logos passage in John 1:1-18 and to Hebrews 1:1-4 as well as Philemon 2:5-11 in which these three writers (John, author of Hebrews, Paul) give the high conception of the Person of Christ (both Son of God and Son of Man) found also in the Synoptic Gospels and even in Q (the Father, the Son). This word (lxx and N.T.) can no longer be considered purely “Biblical” (Thayer), since it is found In inscriptions (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 91) and in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, etc.). See it already in Luke 2:7 and Aleph for Matthew 1:25; Romans 8:29. The use of this word does not show what Arius argued that Paul regarded Christ as a creature like “all creation” It is rather the comparative (superlative) force of πρωτος — prōtos that is used (first-born of all creation) as in Colossians 1:18; Romans 8:29; Hebrews 1:6; Hebrews 12:23; Revelation 1:5. Paul is here refuting the Gnostics who pictured Christ as one of the aeons by placing him before “all creation” (angels and men). Like εικων — eikōn we find πρωτοτοκος — prōtotokos in the Alexandrian vocabulary of the Λογος — Logos teaching (Philo) as well as in the lxx. Paul takes both words to help express the deity of Jesus Christ in his relation to the Father as εικων — eikōn (Image) and to the universe as πρωτοτοκος — prōtotokos (First-born). [source]
1 Thessalonians 1:10 Jesus which delivered [Ἱησοῦν τὸν ῥυόμενον]
More correctly, delivereth. See on Matthew 1:21. Ῥύεσθαι todeliver, mostly in Paul. Lit. to draw to one's self. Almost invariably with the specification of some evil or danger or enemy. Σώζειν tosave is often used in a similar sense, of deliverance from disease, from sin, or from divine wrath: see Matthew 1:21; Mark 6:56; Luke 8:36; Acts 2:40; Romans 5:9: but σώζειν is a larger and more comprehensive term, including not only deliverance from sin and death, but investment with all the privileges and rewards of the new life in Christ. [source]
1 Thessalonians 1:1 Unto the church of the Thessalonians [τηι εκκλησιαι Τεσσαλονικεων]
The dative case in address. Note absence of the article with Τεσσαλονικεων — Thessalonikeōn because a proper name and so definite without it. This is the common use of εκκλησια — ekklēsia for a local body (church). The word originally meant “assembly” as in Acts 19:39, but it came to mean an organization for worship whether assembled or unassembled (cf. Acts 8:3). The only superscription in the oldest Greek manuscripts (Aleph B A) is Προς Τεσσαλονικεις Α — Pros Thessalonikeis A (To the Thessalonians First). But probably Paul wrote no superscription and certainly he would not write A to it before he had written II Thessalonians (B). His signature at the close was the proof of genuineness (2 Thessalonians 3:17) against all spurious claimants (2 Thessalonians 2:2). Unfortunately the brittle papyrus on which he wrote easily perished outside of the sand heaps and tombs of Egypt or the lava covered ruins of Herculaneum. What a treasure that autograph would be! In God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (εν τεωι πατρι και κυριωι ησου Χριστωι — en theōi patri kai kuriōi Jēsou Christōi). This church is grounded in (εν — en with the locative case) and exists in the sphere and power of God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. No article in the Greek, for both τεωι πατρι — theōi patri and κυριωι ησου Χριστωι — kuriōi Jēsou Christōi are treated as proper names. In the very beginning of this first Epistle of Paul we meet his Christology. He at once uses the full title, “Lord Jesus Christ,” with all the theological content of each word. The name “Jesus” (Saviour, Matthew 1:21) he knew, as the “Jesus of history,” the personal name of the Man of Galilee, whom he had once persecuted (Acts 9:5), but whom he at once, after his conversion, proclaimed to be “the Messiah,” This position Paul never changed. In the great sermon at Antioch in Pisidia which Luke has preserved (Acts 13:23) Paul proved that God fulfilled his promise to Israel by raising up “Jesus as Saviour” Now Paul follows the Christian custom by adding Χριστος — Christos (verbal from χριω — chriō to anoint) as a proper name to Jesus (Jesus Christ) as later he will often say “Christ Jesus” (Colossians 1:1). And he dares also to apply κυριος — kurios (Lord) to “Jesus Christ,” the word appropriated by Claudius (Dominus, Κυριος — Kurios) and other emperors in the emperor-worship, and also common in the Septuagint for God as in Psalm 32:1. (quoted by Paul in Romans 4:8). Paul uses Κυριος — Kurios of God (1 Corinthians 3:5) or of Jesus Christ as here. In fact, he more frequently applies it to Christ when not quoting the Old Testament as in Romans 4:8. And here he places “the Lord Jesus Christ” in the same category and on the same plane with “God the father.” There will be growth in Paul‘s Christology and he will never attain all the knowledge of Christ for which he longs (Philemon 3:10-12), but it is patent that here in his first Epistle there is no “reduced Christ” for Paul. He took Jesus as “Lord” when he surrendered to Jesus on the Damascus Road: “And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said to me” (Acts 22:10). It is impossible to understand Paul without seeing clearly this first and final stand for the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul did not get this view of Jesus from current views of Mithra or of Isis or any other alien faith. The Risen Christ became at once for Paul the Lord of his life. Grace to you and peace (χαρις υμιν και ειρηνη — charis humin kai eirēnē). These words, common in Paul‘s Epistles, bear “the stamp of Paul‘s experience” (Milligan). They are not commonplace salutations, but the old words “deepened and spiritualised” (Frame). The infinitive (χαιρειν — chairein) so common in the papyri letters and seen in the New Testament also (Acts 15:23; Acts 23:26; James 1:1) here gives place to χαρις — charis one of the great words of the New Testament (cf. John 1:16.) and particularly of the Pauline Epistles. Perhaps no one word carries more meaning for Paul‘s messages than this word χαρις — charis (from χαιρω — chairō rejoice) from which χαριζομαι — charizomai comes. Peace This introduction is brief, but rich and gracious and pitches the letter at once on a high plane. [source]
1 Thessalonians 1:1 God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ []
. No article in the Greek, for both τεωι πατρι — theōi patri and κυριωι ησου Χριστωι — kuriōi Jēsou Christōi are treated as proper names. In the very beginning of this first Epistle of Paul we meet his Christology. He at once uses the full title, “Lord Jesus Christ,” with all the theological content of each word. The name “Jesus” (Saviour, Matthew 1:21) he knew, as the “Jesus of history,” the personal name of the Man of Galilee, whom he had once persecuted (Acts 9:5), but whom he at once, after his conversion, proclaimed to be “the Messiah,” This position Paul never changed. In the great sermon at Antioch in Pisidia which Luke has preserved (Acts 13:23) Paul proved that God fulfilled his promise to Israel by raising up “Jesus as Saviour” Now Paul follows the Christian custom by adding Χριστος — Christos (verbal from χριω — chriō to anoint) as a proper name to Jesus (Jesus Christ) as later he will often say “Christ Jesus” (Colossians 1:1). And he dares also to apply κυριος — kurios (Lord) to “Jesus Christ,” the word appropriated by Claudius (Dominus, Κυριος — Kurios) and other emperors in the emperor-worship, and also common in the Septuagint for God as in Psalm 32:1. (quoted by Paul in Romans 4:8). Paul uses Κυριος — Kurios of God (1 Corinthians 3:5) or of Jesus Christ as here. In fact, he more frequently applies it to Christ when not quoting the Old Testament as in Romans 4:8. And here he places “the Lord Jesus Christ” in the same category and on the same plane with “God the father.” There will be growth in Paul‘s Christology and he will never attain all the knowledge of Christ for which he longs (Philemon 3:10-12), but it is patent that here in his first Epistle there is no “reduced Christ” for Paul. He took Jesus as “Lord” when he surrendered to Jesus on the Damascus Road: “And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said to me” (Acts 22:10). It is impossible to understand Paul without seeing clearly this first and final stand for the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul did not get this view of Jesus from current views of Mithra or of Isis or any other alien faith. The Risen Christ became at once for Paul the Lord of his life. Grace to you and peace (χαρις υμιν και ειρηνη — charis humin kai eirēnē). These words, common in Paul‘s Epistles, bear “the stamp of Paul‘s experience” (Milligan). They are not commonplace salutations, but the old words “deepened and spiritualised” (Frame). The infinitive (χαιρειν — chairein) so common in the papyri letters and seen in the New Testament also (Acts 15:23; Acts 23:26; James 1:1) here gives place to χαρις — charis one of the great words of the New Testament (cf. John 1:16.) and particularly of the Pauline Epistles. Perhaps no one word carries more meaning for Paul‘s messages than this word χαρις — charis (from χαιρω — chairō rejoice) from which χαριζομαι — charizomai comes. Peace This introduction is brief, but rich and gracious and pitches the letter at once on a high plane. [source]
1 Thessalonians 1:10 Whom he raised from the dead [ον ηγειρεν εκ των νεκρων]
Paul gloried in the fact of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead of which fact he was himself a personal witness. This fact is the foundation stone for all his theology and it comes out in this first chapter. Jesus which delivereth us from the wrath to come (Ιησουν τον ρυομενον ημας εκ της οργης της ερχομενης — Iēsoun ton ruomenon hēmās ek tēs orgēs tēs erchomenēs). It is the historic, crucified, risen, and ascended Jesus Christ, God‘s Son, who delivers from the coming wrath. He is our Saviour (Matthew 1:21) true to his name Jesus. He is our Rescuer (Romans 11:26, ο ρυομενος — ho ruomenos from Isaiah 59:20). It is eschatological language, this coming wrath of God for sin (1 Thessalonians 2:16; Romans 3:5; Romans 5:9; Romans 9:22; Romans 13:5). It was Paul‘s allusion to the day of judgment with Jesus as Judge whom God had raised from the dead that made the Athenians mock and leave him (Acts 17:31.). But Paul did not change his belief or his preaching because of the conduct of the Athenians. He is certain that God‘s wrath in due time will punish sin. Surely this is a needed lesson for our day. It was coming then and it is coming now. [source]
1 Thessalonians 1:10 Jesus which delivereth us from the wrath to come [Ιησουν τον ρυομενον ημας εκ της οργης της ερχομενης]
It is the historic, crucified, risen, and ascended Jesus Christ, God‘s Son, who delivers from the coming wrath. He is our Saviour (Matthew 1:21) true to his name Jesus. He is our Rescuer (Romans 11:26, ο ρυομενος — ho ruomenos from Isaiah 59:20). It is eschatological language, this coming wrath of God for sin (1 Thessalonians 2:16; Romans 3:5; Romans 5:9; Romans 9:22; Romans 13:5). It was Paul‘s allusion to the day of judgment with Jesus as Judge whom God had raised from the dead that made the Athenians mock and leave him (Acts 17:31.). But Paul did not change his belief or his preaching because of the conduct of the Athenians. He is certain that God‘s wrath in due time will punish sin. Surely this is a needed lesson for our day. It was coming then and it is coming now. [source]
Titus 3:11 Sinneth [ἁμαρτάνει]
See on 1 John 1:9; see on Matthew 1:21, and see on trespasses, Matthew 6:14. [source]
Hebrews 8:12 Their sins and their iniquities [τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν]
Omit and their iniquities. For ἁμαρτία sinsee on Matthew 1:21; and for both ἀδικία and ἁμαρτία , see on 1 John 1:9. Comp. 1 John 5:17. [source]
Hebrews 4:8 Jesus [Ἰησοῦς]
Rend. Joshua, and see on Matthew 1:21. [source]
Hebrews 4:12 Of the thoughts and intents of the heart [ἐνθυμήσεων καὶ ἐννοιῶν καρδίας]
The A.V. is loose and inaccurate. Ἐνθύμησις rare in N.T. See Matthew 9:4; Acts 17:29. Comp. ἐνθυμεῖσθαι , Matthew 1:20; Matthew 9:4. In every instance, both of the noun and of the verb, the sense is pondering or thinking out. Rend. the reflections. Ἔννοια only here and 1 Peter 4:1. It is the definite conception which follows ἐνθύμησις Rend. conceptions. [source]
Hebrews 13:12 That he might sanctify the people [ἵνα ἁγιάσῃ τὸν λαόν]
Ἁγιάζειν tosanctify had a peculiar significance to Jews. It meant to set them apart as holy. Hence, the Israelites were called ἅγιοι , as separated from other nations and consecrated to God. Our writer extends the application of the word to Christians. For Christ's work he claims the same efficacy which the Jew claimed for the special call of God to Israel, and for the operation of the Jewish sacrificial system. The office of his atoning work is to sanctify; to make for himself a holy nation ( ἔθνος ἅγιον ), a people “prepared for the Lord” (Luke 1:17); a true Israel of God. Ὁ λαός thepeople, or λαός mypeople, occurs constantly in O.T. as a designation of Israel, and also in N.T. See, in this epistle, Hebrews 5:3; Hebrews 7:5, Hebrews 7:11, Hebrews 7:27; Hebrews 9:7, Hebrews 9:19. The N.T. extends the title to all who, under the new dispensation, occupy the position of Israel. See 1 Peter 2:10; Matthew 1:21; Luke 2:10; Hebrews 4:9; Hebrews 8:10; Hebrews 10:30; Hebrews 11:25. [source]
1 John 4:17 Our love [ἡ ἀγάπη μεθ ' ἡμῶν]
The A.V. construes μεθ ' ἡμῶν withus, with love, making with us equivalent to our. In that case it might mean either the love which is between Christians, or the love which is between God and Christians. The Rev. construes with us with the verb: love is made perfect with us. The latter is preferable. I do not think it would be easy to point out a parallel in the New Testament to the expression ἀγάπη μεθ ' love that with us = our love. The true idea is that love is perfected in fellowship. The love of God is perfected with us, in communion with us, through our abiding in Him and He in us. “Love is not simply perfected in man, but in fulfilling this issue God works with man” (Westcott). Compare 2 John 1:3, “grace shall be with us ” (true reading); and Acts 25:4, “what things God had done with them.” See also Matthew 1:23; 1 Corinthians 16:24; Galatians 6:18. Μετά withis used constantly in the New Testament of ethical relations. See Matthew 20:2; Matthew 2:3; Luke 23:12; Acts 7:9; Romans 12:15; 1 John 1:6. [source]
1 John 1:8 That we have no sin []
Ὅτι thatmay be taken merely as a mark of quotation: “If we say, sin we have not.” On the phrase to have sin, see on John 16:22, and compare have fellowship, 1 John 1:3. Sin ( ἁμαρτίαν ) is not to be understood of original sin, or of sin before conversion, but generally. “It is obvious that this ἔχειν ἁμαρτίαν (to have sin ), is infinitely diversified, according to the successive measure of the purification and development of the new man. Even the apostle John does not exclude himself from the universal if we say ” (Ebrard). Heathen authors say very little about sin, and classic paganism had little or no conception of sin in the Gospel sense. The nearest approach to it was by Plato, from whose works a tolerably complete doctrinal statement might be gathered of the origin, nature, and effects of sin. The fundamental idea of ἁμαρτία (sin ) among the Greeks is physical; the missing of a mark (see on Matthew 1:21; see on Matthew 6:14); from which it develops into a metaphysical meaning, to wander in the understanding. This assumes knowledge as the basis of goodness; and sin, therefore, is, primarily, ignorance. In the Platonic conception of sin, intellectual error is the prominent element. Thus: “What then, I said, is the result of all this? Is not this the result - that other things are indifferent, and that wisdom is the only good, and ignorance the only evil?” (“Euthydemus,” 281). “The business of the founders of the state will be to compel the best minds to attain that knowledge which has been already declared by us to be the greatest of all - they must continue to rise until they arrive at the good” (“Republic,” vii., 519). Plato represents sin as the dominance of the lower impulses of the soul, which is opposed to nature and to God (see “Laws,” ix., 863. “Republic,” i., 351). Or again, as an inward want of harmony. “May we not regard every living being as a puppet of the gods, either their plaything only or created with a purpose - which of the two we cannot certainly know? But this we know, that these affections in us are like cords and strings which pull us different and opposite ways, and to opposite actions; and herein lies the difference between virtue and vice” (“Laws,” i., 644). He traces most sins to the influence of the body on the soul. “In this present life, I reckon that we make the nearest approach to knowledge when we have the least possible communion or fellowship with the body, and are not infected with the bodily nature, but remain pure until the hour when God himself is pleased to release us. And then the foolishness of the body will be cleared away, and we shall be pure, and hold converse with other pure souls, and know of ourselves the clear light everywhere, which is no other than the light of truth” (“Phedo,” 67). -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
We find in the classical writers, however, the occasional sense of the universal faultiness of mankind, though even Plato furnishes scarcely any traces of accepting the doctrine of innate depravity. Thus Theognis: “The sun beholds no wholly good and virtuous man among those who are now living” (615). “But having become good, to remain in a good state and be good, is not possible, and is not granted to man. God only has this blessing; but man cannot help being bad when the force of circumstances overpowers him” (Plato, “Protagoras,” 344). “ How, then: is it possible to be sinless? It is impossible; but this is possible, to strive not to sin” (“Epictetus,” iv., 12,19). [source]

Revelation 12:2 And she was with child [και εν γαστρι εχουσα]
Perhaps εστιν — estin to be supplied or the participle used as a finite verb as in Revelation 10:2. This is the technical idiom for pregnancy as in Matthew 1:18, Matthew 1:23, etc. [source]
Revelation 21:3 And he shall dwell with them [και σκηνωσει μετ αυτων]
Future active of σκηνοω — skēnoō already in Revelation 7:15 from Ezekiel 37:27; Zechariah 2:10; Zechariah 8:8 and used of the Incarnate Christ on earth by John (John 1:14), now a blessed reality of the Father. The metaphor stands for the Shekinah Glory of God in the old tabernacle (Revelation 7:15; Revelation 13:6; Revelation 15:5), the true tabernacle of which it was a picture (Hebrews 8:2; Hebrews 9:11). God is now Immanuel in fact, as was true of Christ (Matthew 1:23). [source]
Revelation 12:1 A woman [γυνη]
Nominative case in apposition with σημειον — sēmeion “The first ‹sign in heaven‘ is a Woman - the earliest appearance of a female figure in the Apocalyptic vision” (Swete).Arrayed with the sun (περιβεβλημενη τον ηλιον — peribeblēmenē ton hēlion). Perfect passive participle of περιβαλλω — periballō with the accusative retained as so often (9 times) in the Apocalypse. Both Charles and Moffatt see mythological ideas and sources behind the bold imagery here that leave us all at sea. Swete understands the Woman to be “the church of the Old Testament” as “the Mother of whom Christ came after the flesh. But here, as everywhere in the Book, no sharp dividing line is drawn between the Church of the Old Testament and the Christian Society.” Certainly she is not the Virgin Mary, as Revelation 12:17 makes clear. Beckwith takes her to be “the heavenly representative of the people of God, the ideal Zion, which, so far as it is embodied in concrete realities, is represented alike by the people of the Old and the New Covenants.” John may have in mind Isaiah 7:14 (Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:31) as well as Micah 4:10; Isaiah 26:17.; Isaiah 66:7 without a definite picture of Mary. The metaphor of childbirth is common enough (John 16:21; Galatians 4:19). The figure is a bold one with the moon “under her feet” (υποκατω των ποδων αυτης — hupokatō tōn podōn autēs) and “a crown of twelve stars” (στεπανος αστερων δωδεκα — stephanos asterōn dōdeka), a possible allusion to the twelve tribes (James 1:1; Revelation 21:12) or to the twelve apostles (Revelation 21:14). [source]
Revelation 12:1 Arrayed with the sun [περιβεβλημενη τον ηλιον]
Perfect passive participle of περιβαλλω — periballō with the accusative retained as so often (9 times) in the Apocalypse. Both Charles and Moffatt see mythological ideas and sources behind the bold imagery here that leave us all at sea. Swete understands the Woman to be “the church of the Old Testament” as “the Mother of whom Christ came after the flesh. But here, as everywhere in the Book, no sharp dividing line is drawn between the Church of the Old Testament and the Christian Society.” Certainly she is not the Virgin Mary, as Revelation 12:17 makes clear. Beckwith takes her to be “the heavenly representative of the people of God, the ideal Zion, which, so far as it is embodied in concrete realities, is represented alike by the people of the Old and the New Covenants.” John may have in mind Isaiah 7:14 (Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:31) as well as Micah 4:10; Isaiah 26:17.; Isaiah 66:7 without a definite picture of Mary. The metaphor of childbirth is common enough (John 16:21; Galatians 4:19). The figure is a bold one with the moon “under her feet” (υποκατω των ποδων αυτης — hupokatō tōn podōn autēs) and “a crown of twelve stars” (στεπανος αστερων δωδεκα — stephanos asterōn dōdeka), a possible allusion to the twelve tribes (James 1:1; Revelation 21:12) or to the twelve apostles (Revelation 21:14). [source]

What do the individual words in Matthew 1:2 mean?

Abraham begat - Isaac Isaac then Jacob Jacob Judah and the brothers of him
Ἀβραὰμ ἐγέννησεν τὸν Ἰσαάκ Ἰσαὰκ δὲ Ἰακώβ Ἰακὼβ Ἰούδαν καὶ τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ

Ἀβραὰμ  Abraham 
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular
Root: Ἀβραάμ  
Sense: the son of Terah and the founder of the Jewish nation.
ἐγέννησεν  begat 
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular
Root: γεννάω  
Sense: of men who fathered children.
τὸν  - 
Parse: Article, Accusative Masculine Singular
Root:  
Sense: this, that, these, etc.
Ἰσαάκ  Isaac 
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Singular
Root: Ἰσαάκ  
Sense: the son of Abraham and Sarah.
Ἰσαὰκ  Isaac 
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular
Root: Ἰσαάκ  
Sense: the son of Abraham and Sarah.
Ἰακώβ  Jacob 
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Singular
Root: Ἰακώβ  
Sense: was the second son of Isaac.
Ἰακὼβ  Jacob 
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular
Root: Ἰακώβ  
Sense: was the second son of Isaac.
Ἰούδαν  Judah 
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Singular
Root: Ἰούδας 
Sense: the fourth son of Jacob.
ἀδελφοὺς  brothers 
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Plural
Root: ἀδελφός  
Sense: a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother.
αὐτοῦ  of  him 
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Genitive Masculine 3rd Person Singular
Root: αὐτός  
Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself.