KJV: Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.
YLT: Again he sent forth other servants, saying, Say to those who have been called: Lo, my dinner I prepared, my oxen and the fatlings have been killed, and all things are ready, come ye to the marriage-feasts;
Darby: Again he sent other bondmen, saying, Say to the persons invited, Behold, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and my fatted beasts are killed, and all things ready; come to the wedding feast.
ASV: Again he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them that are bidden, Behold, I have made ready my dinner; my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come to the marriage feast.
| Πάλιν | Again |
|
Parse: Adverb Root: πάλιν Sense: anew, again. |
|
| ἀπέστειλεν | he sent |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: ἀποστέλλω Sense: to order (one) to go to a place appointed. |
|
| ἄλλους | other |
|
Parse: Adjective, Accusative Masculine Plural Root: ἄλλος Sense: another, other. |
|
| δούλους | servants |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Plural Root: δοῦλοσ1 Sense: a slave, bondman, man of servile condition. |
|
| λέγων | saying |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: λέγω Sense: to say, to speak. |
|
| Εἴπατε | Say |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Imperative Active, 2nd Person Plural Root: λέγω Sense: to speak, say. |
|
| τοῖς | to those |
|
Parse: Article, Dative Masculine Plural Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| κεκλημένοις | having been invited |
|
Parse: Verb, Perfect Participle Middle or Passive, Dative Masculine Plural Root: καλέω Sense: to call. |
|
| Ἰδοὺ | Behold |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Imperative Active, 2nd Person Singular Root: ἰδού Sense: behold, see, lo. |
|
| ἄριστόν | dinner |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Neuter Singular Root: ἄριστον Sense: the first food taken early in the morning before work, breakfast. |
|
| μου | of me |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Genitive 1st Person Singular Root: ἐγώ Sense: I, me, my. |
|
| ἡτοίμακα | I have prepared |
|
Parse: Verb, Perfect Indicative Active, 1st Person Singular Root: ἑτοιμάζω Sense: to make ready, prepare. |
|
| ταῦροί | oxen |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: ταῦρος Sense: a bull or ox. |
|
| σιτιστὰ | fatlings |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Neuter Plural Root: σιτιστός Sense: fattened. |
|
| τεθυμένα | have been killed |
|
Parse: Verb, Perfect Participle Middle or Passive, Nominative Neuter Plural Root: θύω Sense: to sacrifice, immolate. |
|
| πάντα | all things [are] |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Neuter Plural Root: πᾶς Sense: individually. |
|
| ἕτοιμα | ready |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Neuter Plural Root: ἕτοιμος Sense: prepare ready. |
|
| δεῦτε | come |
|
Parse: Verb, Imperative, 2nd Person Plural Root: δεῦτε Sense: come hither, come here, come. |
|
| γάμους | wedding feast |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Plural Root: γάμος Sense: a wedding or marriage festival, a wedding banquet, a wedding feast. |
|
Greek Commentary for Matthew 22:4
It is breakfast, not dinner. In Luke 14:12 both αριστον ariston (breakfast) and δειπνον deipnon (dinner) are used. This noon or midday meal, like the French breakfast at noon, was sometimes called δειπνον μεσημβρινον deipnon mesēmbrinon (midday dinner or luncheon). The regular dinner In John 21:12, John 21:15 αρισταω aristaō is used of the early morning meal, “Break your fast” When αριστον ariston was applied to luncheon, like the Latin prandium, ακρατισμα akratisma was the term for the early breakfast. [source]
Verbal from σιτιζω sitizō to feed with wheat or other grain, to fatten. Fed-up or fatted animals. [source]
Not the principal meal of the day, but a noon -breakfast; luncheon. [source]
From σῖτος ,corn, grain, or food generally. Properly animals especially fed up orfatted for a feast. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Matthew 22:4
Marriage-feast, as Matthew 22:2, Matthew 22:3, Matthew 22:4; and so Rev. [source]
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]
The plural, as here (Matthew 22:2, Matthew 22:3, Matthew 22:4, Matthew 22:9), is very common in the papyri for the wedding festivities (the several acts of feasting) which lasted for days, seven in Judges 14:17. The very phrase here, γαμους ποιειν gamous poiein occurs in the Doric of Thera about b.c. 200. The singular γαμος gamos is common in the papyri for the wedding contract, but Field (Notes, p. 16) sees no difference between the singular here in Matthew 22:8 and the plural (see also Genesis 29:22; Esther 9:22; 1 Maccabees 10:58). [source]
This use of εν en “with” is common in the Septuagint like the Hebrew be, but it occurs also in the papyri. It is the same idiom as “in Christ,” “in the Lord” so common with Paul. In English we speak of our being in love, in drink, in his cups, etc. The unclean spirit was in the man and the man in the unclean spirit, a man in the power of the unclean spirit. Luke has “having,” the usual construction. See Matthew 22:43. Unclean spirit is used as synonymous with [source]
First in rank and importance. Matthew 22:36 has “great” See discussion there. Probably Jesus spoke in Aramaic. “First” and “great” in Greek do not differ essentially here. Mark quotes Deuteronomy 6:4f. as it stands in the lxx and also Leviticus 19:18. Matthew 22:40 adds the summary: “On these two commandments hangeth (κρεμαται krematai) the whole law and the prophets.” [source]
The opponents of Jesus are silenced, but he answers them and goes on teaching They no longer dare to question Jesus, but he has one to put to them “while the Pharisees were gathered together” (Matthew 22:41). The question is not a conundrum or scriptural puzzle (Gould), but “He contents himself with pointing out a difficulty, in the solution of which lay the key to the whole problem of His person and work” (Swete). The scribes all taught that the Messiah was to be the son of David (John 7:41). The people in the Triumphal Entry had acclaimed Jesus as the son of David (Matthew 21:9). But the rabbis had overlooked the fact that David in Psalm 110:1 called the Messiah his Lord also. The deity and the humanity of the Messiah are both involved in the problem. Matthew 22:45 observes that “no one was able to answer him a word.” [source]
See on Matthew 22:4. Supper ( δειπνον ) is the principal meal at evening, and corresponding to the modern late dinner. [source]
See on dinner, Matthew 22:4. The morning meal, immediately after the return from morning prayers in the synagogue. [source]
This language of Jesus clearly means that he treats David as the author of Psalm 110:1-7. The inspiration of this Psalm is expressly stated in Mark 12:36; Matthew 22:43 (which see) and the Messianic character of the Psalm in all three Synoptics who all quote the lxx practically alike. Modern criticism that denies the Davidic authorship of this Psalm has to say either that Jesus was ignorant of the fact about it or that he declined to disturb the current acceptation of the Davidic authorship. Certainly modern scholars are not agreed on the authorship of Psalm 110:1-7. Meanwhile one can certainly be excused for accepting the natural implication of the words of Jesus here, “David himself.” [source]
Without ει ei as in Matthew 22:45. On the basis of this definite piece of exegesis (ουν oun therefore) Jesus presses the problem (πως pōs how) for an explanation. The deity and the humanity of the Messiah in Psalm 110:1-7 are thus set forth, the very problems that disturbed the rabbis then and that upset many critics today. [source]
Note οπως hopōs rather than the common ινα hina Aorist active subjunctive rather than present, for a single meal. The verb is from αριστον ariston (breakfast). See distinction between αριστον ariston and δειπνον deipnon (dinner or supper) in Luke 14:12. It is the morning meal (breakfast or lunch) after the return from morning prayers in the synagogue (Matthew 22:4), not the very early meal called ακρατισμα akratisma The verb is, however, used for the early meal on the seashore in John 21:12, John 21:15.With him (παρ αυτωι par' autōi). By his side.Sat down to meat Second aorist active indicative of αναπιπτω anapiptō old verb, to recline, to fall back on the sofa or lounge. No word here for “to meat.” [source]
The masculine gender includes the feminine when both are referred to. But ην ēn is singular, not ησαν ēsan the normal imperfect plural in this periphrastic imperfect. This is due to the wide space between copula and participle. The copula ην ēn agrees in number with ο πατηρ ho patēr while the participle coming last agrees with both ο πατερ και η μητηρ ho pater kai hē mētēr (cf. Matthew 17:3; Matthew 22:40). If one wonders why they marvelled at Simeon‘s words after what they had heard from Gabriel, Elisabeth, and the Shepherds, he should bear in mind that every parent is astonished and pleased at the fine things others see in the child. It is a mark of unusual insight for others to see so much that is obvious to the parent. Simeon‘s prophecy had gone beyond the angel‘s outline and it was surprising that he should know anything about the child‘s destiny. [source]
Rather, breakfast. In Attic Greek ἄριστον signified the mid-day meal; the evening meal being known as δεῖπνον . The regular hour for the ἄριστον cannot be fixed with precision. The drift of authority among Greek writers seems to be in favor of noon. The meal described here, however, evidently took place at an earlier hour, and would seem to have answered more nearly to the ἀκρατίσμα , or breakfast of the Greeks, which was taken directly upon rising. Plutarch, however, expressly states that both names were applied to the morning meal, and says of Alexander, “He was accustomed to breakfast ( ἠρίστα ) at early dawn, sitting, and to sup ( ἐδείπνει ) late in the evening.” In Matthew 22:4, it is an ἄριστον to which the king's wedding-guests are invited. [source]
Logos. This expression is the keynote and theme of the entire gospel. Λόγος is from the root λεγ , appearing in λέγω , the primitive meaning of which is to lay: then, to pick out, gather, pick up: hence to gather or put words together, and so, to speak. Hence λόγος is, first of all, a collecting or collection both of things in the mind, and of words by which they are expressed. It therefore signifies both the outward form by which the inward thought is expressed, and the inward thought itself, the Latin oratio and ratio: compare the Italian ragionare, “to think” and “to speak.” As signifying the outward form it is never used in the merely grammatical sense, as simply the name of a thing or act ( ἔπος, ὄνομα, ῥῆμα ), but means a word as the thing referred to: the material, not the formal part: a word as embodying a conception or idea. See, for instance, Matthew 22:46; 1 Corinthians 14:9, 1 Corinthians 14:19. Hence it signifies a saying, of God, or of man (Matthew 19:21, Matthew 19:22; Mark 5:35, Mark 5:36): a decree, a precept (Romans 9:28; Mark 7:13). The ten commandments are called in the Septuagint, οἱ δέκα λόγοι , “the ten words ” (Exodus 34:28), and hence the familiar term decalogue. It is further used of discourse: either of the act of speaking (Acts 14:12), of skill and practice in speaking (Acts 18:15; 2 Timothy 4:15), specifically the doctrine of salvation through Christ (Matthew 13:20-23; Philemon 1:14); of narrative, both the relation and the thing related (Acts 1:1; John 21:23; Mark 1:45); of matter under discussion, an affair, a case in law (Acts 15:6; Acts 19:38). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- As signifying the inward thought, it denotes the faculty of thinking and reasoning (Hebrews 4:12); regard or consideration (Acts 20:24); reckoning, account (Philemon 4:15, Philemon 4:17; Hebrews 4:13); cause or reason (Acts 10:29). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- John uses the word in a peculiar sense, here, and in John 1:14; and, in this sense, in these two passages only. The nearest approach to it is in Revelation 19:13, where the conqueror is called the Word of God; and it is recalled in the phrases Word of Life, and the Life was manifested (1 John 1:1, 1 John 1:2). Compare Hebrews 4:12. It was a familiar and current theological term when John wrote, and therefore he uses it without explanation. Old Testament Usage of the TermThe word here points directly to Psalm href="/desk/?q=ps+33:6&sr=1">Psalm 33:6). The idea of God, who is in his own nature hidden, revealing himself in creation, is the root of the Logos-idea, in contrast with all materialistic or pantheistic conceptions of creation. This idea develops itself in the Old Testament on three lines. (1) The Word, as embodying the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry. Consequently divine attributes are predicated of it as being the continuous revelation of God in law and prophecy (Psalm 3:4; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:105). The Word is a healer in Psalm 107:20; a messenger in Psalm 147:15; the agent of the divine decrees in Isaiah 55:11. (2) The personified wisdom (Job 28:12sq.; Job 28). Even Death, which unlocks so many secrets, and the underworld, know it only as a rumor (Job href="/desk/?q=job+28:22&sr=1">Job 28:22). It is only God who knows its way and its place (Psalm 110:1-7). He made the world, made the winds and the waters, made a decree for the rain and a way for the lightning of the thunder (Job 28:25, Job 28:26). He who possessed wisdom in the beginning of his way, before His works of old, before the earth with its depths and springs and mountains, with whom was wisdom as one brought up with Him (Proverbs 8:26-31), declared it. “It became, as it were, objective, so that He beheld it” (Job 28:27) and embodied it in His creative work. This personification, therefore, is based on the thought that wisdom is not shut up at rest in God, but is active and manifest in the world. “She standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths. She crieth at the gates, at the entry of the city, at the coming in at the doors” (Proverbs 8:2, Proverbs 8:3). She builds a palace and prepares a banquet, and issues a general invitation to the simple and to him that wanteth understanding (Proverbs 9:1-6). It is viewed as the one guide to salvation, comprehending all revelations of God, and as an attribute embracing and combining all His other attributes. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (3) The Angel of Jehovah. The messenger of God who serves as His agent in the world of sense, and is sometimes distinguished from Jehovah and sometimes identical with him (Genesis 16:7-13; Genesis 32:24-28; Hosea 12:4, Hosea 12:5; Exodus 23:20, Exodus 23:21; Malachi 3:1). Apocryphal UsageIn the Apocryphal writings this mediative element is more distinctly apprehended, but with a tendency to pantheism. In the Wisdom of Solomon (at least 100 b.c.), where wisdom seems to be viewed as another name for the whole divine nature, while nowhere connected with the Messiah, it is described as a being of light, proceeding essentially from God; a true image of God, co-occupant of the divine throne; a real and independent principle, revealing God in the world and mediating between it and Him, after having created it as his organ - in association with a spirit which is called μονογενές , only begotten (7:22). “She is the breath of the power of God, and a pure influence flowing from the glory of the Almighty; therefore can no defiled thing fall into her. For she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness” (see chapter 7, throughout). Again: “Wisdom reacheth from one end to another mightily, and sweetly doth she order all things. In that she is conversant with God, she magnifieth her nobility: yea, the Lord of all things Himself loved her. For she is privy to the mysteries of the knowledge of God, and a lover of His works. Moreover, by the means of her I shall obtain immortality, and leave behind me an everlasting memorial to them that come after me” (chapter 9). In 16:12, it is said, “Thy word, O Lord, healeth all things” (compare Psalm 107:20); and in 18:15,16, “Thine almighty word leaped from heaven out of thy royal throne, as a fierce man of war into the midst of a land of destruction, and brought thine unfeigned commandment as a sharp sword, and, standing up, filled all things with death; and it touched the heaven, but it stood upon the earth.” See also Wisdom of Sirach, chapters 1,24, and Genesis href="/desk/?q=ge+39:21&sr=1">Genesis 39:21, they paraphrase, “The Memra was with Joseph in prison.” In Job 28:23Jehovah addresses the first verse to the Memra. The Memra is the angel that destroyed the first-born of Egypt, and it was the Memra that led the Israelites in the cloudy pillar. Usage in the Judaeo-Alexandrine PhilosophyFrom the time of Ptolemy I: (323-285 b.c.), there were Jews in great numbers in Egypt. Philo (a.d. 50) estimates them at a million in his time. Alexandria was their headquarters. They had their own senate and magistrates, and possessed the same privileges as the Greeks. The Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek (b.c. 280-150) was the beginning of a literary movement among them, the key-note of which was the reconciliation of Western culture and Judaism, the establishment of a connection between the Old Testament faith and the Greek philosophy. Hence they interpreted the facts of sacred history allegorically, and made them symbols of certain speculative principles, alleging that the Greek philosophers had borrowed their wisdom from Moses. Aristobulus (about 150 b.c.) asserted the existence of a previous and much older translation of the law, and dedicated to Ptolemy VI an allegorical exposition of the Pentateuch, in which he tried to show that the doctrines of the Peripatetic or Aristotelian school were derived from the Old Testament. Most of the schools of Greek philosophy were represented among the Alexandrian Jews, but the favorite one was the Platonic. The effort at reconciliation culminated in Philo, a contemporary of Christ. Philo was intimately acquainted with the Platonic philosophy, and made it the fundamental feature of his own doctrines, while availing himself likewise of ideas belonging to the Peripatetic and Stoic schools. Unable to discern the difference in the points of view from which these different doctrines severally proceeded, he jumbled together not merely discordant doctrines of the Greek schools, but also those of the East, regarding the wisdom of the Greeks as having originated in the legislation and writings of Moses. He gathered together from East and West every element that could help to shape his conception of a vicegerent of God, “a mediator between the eternal and the ephemeral. His Logos reflects light from countless facets.” According to Philo, God is the absolute Being. He calls God “that which is:” “the One and the All.” God alone exists for himself, without multiplicity and without mixture. No name can properly be ascribed to Him: He simply is. Hence, in His nature, He is unknowable. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Outside of God there exists eternal matter, without form and void, and essentially evil; but the perfect Being could not come into direct contact with the senseless and corruptible; so that the world could not have been created by His direct agency. Hence the doctrine of a mediating principle between God and matter - the divine Reason, the Logos in whom are comprised all the ideas of finite things, and who created the sensible world by causing these ideas to penetrate into matter. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The absolute God is surrounded by his powers ( δυνάμεις ) as a king by his servants. These powers are, in Platonic language, ideas; in Jewish, angels; but all are essentially one, and their unity, as they exist in God, as they emanate from him, as they are disseminated in the world, is expressed by Logos Hence the Logos appears under a twofold aspect: (1) As the immanent reason of God, containing within itself the world-ideal, which, while not outwardly existing, is like the immanent reason in man. This is styled Λόγος ἐνδιάθετος , i.e., the Logos conceived and residing in the mind. This was the aspect emphasized by the Alexandrians, and which tended to the recognition of a twofold personality in the divine essence. (2) As the outspoken word, proceeding from God and manifest in the world. This, when it has issued from God in creating the world, is the Λόγος προφορικός , i.e., the Logos uttered, even as in man the spoken word is the manifestation of thought. This aspect prevailed in Palestine, where the Word appears like the angel of the Pentateuch, as the medium of the outward communication of God with men, and tends toward the recognition of a divine person subordinate to God. Under the former aspect, the Logos is, really, one with God's hidden being: the latter comprehends all the workings and revelations of God in the world; affords from itself the ideas and energies by which the world was framed and is upheld; and, filling all things with divine light and life, rules them in wisdom, love, and righteousness. It is the beginning of creation, not inaugurated, like God, nor made, like the world; but the eldest son of the eternal Father (the world being the younger); God's image; the mediator between God and the world; the highest angel; the second God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Philo's conception of the Logos, therefore, is: the sum-total and free exercise of the divine energies; so that God, so far as he reveals himself, is called Logos; while the Logos, so far as he reveals God, is called God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- John's doctrine and terms are colored by these preceding influences. During his residence at Ephesus he must have become familiar with the forms and terms of the Alexandrian theology. Nor is it improbable that he used the term Logos with an intent to facilitate the passage from the current theories of his time to the pure gospel which he proclaimed. “To those Hellenists and Hellenistic Jews, on the one hand, who were vainly philosophizing on the relations of the finite and infinite; to those investigators of the letter of the Scriptures, on the other, who speculated about the theocratic revelations, John said, by giving this name Logos to Jesus: 'The unknown Mediator between God and the world, the knowledge of whom you are striving after, we have seen, heard, and touched. Your philosophical speculations and your scriptural subtleties will never raise you to Him. Believe as we do in Jesus, and you will possess in Him that divine Revealer who engages your thoughts'” (Godet). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- But John's doctrine is not Philo's, and does not depend upon it. The differences between the two are pronounced. Though both use the term Logos, they use it with utterly different meanings. In John it signifies word, as in Holy Scripture generally; in Philo, reason; and that so distinctly that when Philo wishes to give it the meaning of word, he adds to it by way of explanation, the term ῥῆμα , word. The nature of the being described by Logos is conceived by each in an entirely different spirit. John's Logos is a person, with a consciousness of personal distinction; Philo's is impersonal. His notion is indeterminate and fluctuating, shaped by the influence which happens to be operating at the time. Under the influence of Jewish documents he styles the Logos an “archangel;” under the influence of Plato, “the Idea of Ideas;” of the Stoics, “the impersonal Reason.” It is doubtful whether Philo ever meant to represent the Logos formally as a person. All the titles he gives it may be explained by supposing it to mean the ideal world on which the actual is modeled. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In Philo, moreover, the function of the Logos is confined to the creation and preservation of the universe. He does not identify or connect him with the Messiah. His doctrine was, to a great degree, a philosophical substitute for Messianic hopes. He may have conceived of the Word as acting through the Messiah, but not as one with him. He is a universal principle. In John the Messiah is the Logos himself, uniting himself with humanity, and clothing himself with a body in order to save the world. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The two notions differ as to origin. The impersonal God of Philo cannot pass to the finite creation without contamination of his divine essence. Hence an inferior agent must be interposed. John's God, on the other hand, is personal, and a loving personality. He is a Father (John 1:18); His essence is love (John 3:16; 1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16). He is in direct relation with the world which He desires to save, and the Logos is He Himself, manifest in the flesh. According to Philo, the Logos is not coexistent with the eternal God. Eternal matter is before him in time. According to John, the Logos is essentially with the Father from all eternity (John 1:2), and it is He who creates all things, matter included (John 1:3). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Philo misses the moral energy of the Hebrew religion as expressed in its emphasis upon the holiness of Jehovah, and therefore fails to perceive the necessity of a divine teacher and Savior. He forgets the wide distinction between God and the world, and declares that, were the universe to end, God would die of loneliness and inactivity. The Meaning of Logos in JohnAs Logos has the double meaning of thought and speech, so Christ is related to God as the word to the idea, the word being not merely a name for the idea, but the idea itself expressed. The thought is the inward word (Dr. Schaff compares the Hebrew expression “I speak in my heart” for “I think”). The Logos of John is the real, personal God (John 1:1), the Word, who was originally before the creation with God. and was God, one in essence and nature, yet personally distinct (John 1:1, John 1:18); the revealer and interpreter of the hidden being of God; the reflection and visible image of God, and the organ of all His manifestations to the world. Compare Hebrews 1:3. He made all things, proceeding personally from God for the accomplishment of the act of creation (Hebrews 1:3), and became man in the person of Jesus Christ, accomplishing the redemption of the world. Compare Philemon 2:6. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The following is from William Austin, “Meditation for Christmas Day,” cited by Ford on John:-DIVIDER- “The name Word is most excellently given to our Savior; for it expresses His nature in one, more than in any others. Therefore St. John, when he names the Person in the Trinity (1 John 5:7), chooses rather to call Him Word than Son; for word is a phrase more communicable than son. Son hath only reference to the Father that begot Him; but word may refer to him that conceives it; to him that speaks it; to that which is spoken by it; to the voice that it is clad in; and to the effects it raises in him that hears it. So Christ, as He is the Word, not only refers to His Father that begot Him, and from whom He comes forth, but to all the creatures that were made by Him; to the flesh that He took to clothe Him; and to the doctrine He brought and taught, and, which lives yet in the hearts of all them that obediently do hear it. He it is that is this Word; and any other, prophet or preacher, he is but a voice (Luke 3:4). Word is an inward conception of the mind; and voice is but a sign of intention. St. John was but a sign, a voice; not worthy to untie the shoe-latchet of this Word. Christ is the inner conception 'in the bosom of His Father;' and that is properly the Word. And yet the Word is the intention uttered forth, as well as conceived within; for Christ was no less the Word in the womb of the Virgin, or in the cradle of the manger, or on the altar of the cross, than he was in the beginning, 'in the bosom of his Father.' For as the intention departs not from the mind when the word is uttered, so Christ, proceeding from the Father by eternal generation, and after here by birth and incarnation, remains still in Him and with Him in essence; as the intention, which is conceived and born in the mind, remains still with it and in it, though the word be spoken. He is therefore rightly called the Word, both by His coming from, and yet remaining still in, the Father.”And the WordA repetition of the great subject, with solemn emphasis.Was with God ( ἦν πὸς τὸν Θεὸν )Anglo-Saxon vers., mid Gode. Wyc., at God. With ( πρός ) does not convey the full meaning, that there is no single English word which will give it better. The preposition πρός , which, with the accusative case, denotes motion towards, or direction, is also often used in the New Testament in the sense of with; and that not merely as being near or beside, but as a living union and communion; implying the active notion of intercourse. Thus: “Are not his sisters here with us ” ( πρὸς ἡμᾶς ), i.e., in social relations with us (Mark 6:3; Matthew 13:56). “How long shall I be with you ” ( πρὸς ὑμᾶς , Mark 9:16). “I sat daily with you ” (Matthew 26:55). “To be present with the Lord ” ( πρὸς τὸν Κύριον , 2 Corinthians 5:8). “Abide and winter with you ” (1 Corinthians 16:6). “The eternal life which was with the Father ” ( πρὸς τὸν πατέρα , 1 John 1:2). Thus John's statement is that the divine Word not only abode with the Father from all eternity, but was in the living, active relation of communion with Him.And the Word was God ( καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος )In the Greek order, and God was the Word, which is followed by Anglo-Saxon, Wyc., and Tynd. But θεὸς , God, is the predicate and not the subject of the proposition. The subject must be the Word; for John is not trying to show who is God, but who is the Word. Notice that Θεὸς is without the article, which could not have been omitted if he had meant to designate the word as God; because, in that event, Θεὸς would have been ambiguous; perhaps a God. Moreover, if he had said God was the Word, he would have contradicted his previous statement by which he had distinguished (hypostatically) God from the word, and λόγος (Logos) would, further, have signified only an attribute of God. The predicate is emphatically placed in the proposition before the subject, because of the progress of the thought; this being the third and highest statement respecting the Word - the climax of the two preceding propositions. The word God, used attributively, maintains the personal distinction between God and the Word, but makes the unity of essence and nature to follow the distinction of person, and ascribes to the Word all the attributes of the divine essence. “There is something majestic in the way in which the description of the Logos, in the three brief but great propositions of John 1:1, is unfolded with increasing fullness” (Meyer). [source]
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]
More correctly, the whole law. Comp. Matthew 22:40. [source]
Just the article with εν en “in the,” but it points at the quotation from Leviticus 19:18. Jews (Luke 10:29) confined “neighbour” (πλησιον plēsion) to Jews. Paul uses here a striking paradox by urging obedience to the law against which he has been arguing, but this is the moral law as proof of the new love and life. See also Romans 13:8, precisely as Jesus did (Matthew 22:40). [source]
Γάμος everywhere else in N.T. a wedding or wedding feast, often in the plural, as Matthew 22:2, Matthew 22:3, Matthew 22:4; Luke 12:36. Τίμιος honorableor held in honor. Often in N.T. precious, of gold, stones, etc., as 1 Corinthians 3:12; Revelation 17:4; Revelation 18:12; of life, Acts 20:24; the fruits of the earth, James 5:7; the blood of Christ, 1 Peter 1:19; the divine promises, 2 Peter 1:4. Rend. “let marriage be had in honor.” The statement is hortatory, as suiting the character of the entire context, and especially the γὰρ for“for whoremongers,” etc. Ἑν πᾶσιν in all respects,” as 1 Timothy 3:11; 2 Timothy 4:5; Titus 2:9; Colossians 1:18; Philemon 4:12. If as A.V., the more natural expression would be παρὰ πᾶσιν as Matthew 19:26; Acts 26:8; Romans 2:13; 2 Thessalonians 1:6; James 1:27. Ἑν πᾶσιν inall things appears in this chapter, Hebrews 13:18. There are many points in which marriage is to be honored besides the avoidance of illicit connections. See on 1 Thessalonians 4:6. [source]
Perfect active common use of the perfect for permanent record. This seventh quotation is proof of the Son‘s superiority as the Son of God (his deity) to angels and is from Psalm 110:1, a Messianic Psalm frequently quoted in Hebrews. Sit thou Second person singular imperative middle of κατημαι kathēmai to sit, for the longer form κατησο kathēso as in Matthew 22:44; James 2:3. On my right hand “From my right.” See Hebrews 1:3 for εν δεχιαι en dexiāi “at the right hand.” Till I make Indefinite temporal clause about the future with εως heōs and the second aorist active subjunctive of τιτημι tithēmi with αν an (often not used), a regular and common idiom. Quoted also in Luke 20:43. For the pleonasm in υποδιον hupodion and των ποδων tōn podōn (objective genitive) see Matthew 5:35. [source]
Condition of first class, assumed as true with ει ei and present active indicative of τελεω teleō old verb, to bring to completion, occurring in Romans 2:27 also with νομος nomos (law). Jesus used πληροω plēroō in Matthew 4:17. James has τηρεω tēreō in James 2:10.The royal law (νομον βασιλικον nomon basilikon). Old adjective for royal, regal (from βασιλευς basileus king), as of an officer (John 4:46). But why applied to νομος nomos The Romans had a phrase, lex regia, which came from the king when they had kings. The absence of the article is common with νομος nomos (James 4:11). It can mean a law fit to guide a king, or such as a king would choose, or even the king of laws. Jesus had said that on the law of love hang all the law and the prophets (Matthew 22:40), and he had given the Golden Rule as the substance of the Law and the prophets (Matthew 7:12). This is probably the royal law which is violated by partiality (James 2:3). It is in accord with the Scripture quoted here (Leviticus 19:18) and ratified by Jesus (Luke 10:28). [source]
Old adjective for royal, regal (from βασιλευς basileus king), as of an officer (John 4:46). But why applied to νομος nomos The Romans had a phrase, lex regia, which came from the king when they had kings. The absence of the article is common with νομος nomos (James 4:11). It can mean a law fit to guide a king, or such as a king would choose, or even the king of laws. Jesus had said that on the law of love hang all the law and the prophets (Matthew 22:40), and he had given the Golden Rule as the substance of the Law and the prophets (Matthew 7:12). This is probably the royal law which is violated by partiality (James 2:3). It is in accord with the Scripture quoted here (Leviticus 19:18) and ratified by Jesus (Luke 10:28). [source]
First aorist active indicative of πεμπω pempō used here in the same sense as αποστειλας aposteilas in Revelation 1:1 as his personal messenger. It is the Jesus of history here speaking, who is also the Christ of theology and the Lamb of God.For the churches (επι ταις εκκλησιαις epi tais ekklēsiais). For this use of επι epi see Revelation 10:11; John 12:16. It is not just for the seven churches (Revelation 1:4), but for all the churches in the world then and now.I am the root and the offspring of David See Revelation 5:5 for “the root of David,” to which John now adds το γενος to genos in the sense of “offspring” (Acts 17:28.), not of family or race (Acts 4:6; Acts 7:13). Cf. Matthew 22:42-45.The bright, the morning star (ο αστηρ ο λαμπρος ο πρωινος ho astēr ho lampros ho prōinos). The Davidic King is called a star in Numbers 24:17; Luke 1:78. This “day-star” (πωσπορος phōsphoros) is interpreted as Christ (2 Peter 1:19). In Revelation 2:28 the phrase “the morning star” occurs in Christ‘s words, which is here interpreted. Christ is the Light that was coming into the world (John 1:9; John 8:12). [source]
See Revelation 5:5 for “the root of David,” to which John now adds το γενος to genos in the sense of “offspring” (Acts 17:28.), not of family or race (Acts 4:6; Acts 7:13). Cf. Matthew 22:42-45.The bright, the morning star (ο αστηρ ο λαμπρος ο πρωινος ho astēr ho lampros ho prōinos). The Davidic King is called a star in Numbers 24:17; Luke 1:78. This “day-star” (πωσπορος phōsphoros) is interpreted as Christ (2 Peter 1:19). In Revelation 2:28 the phrase “the morning star” occurs in Christ‘s words, which is here interpreted. Christ is the Light that was coming into the world (John 1:9; John 8:12). [source]