How great the contrast between the plotting in the court of Caiaphas and the love-ministry of Bethany! Yet even there, a strain of needless sorrow was added to the cup of our Lord. While His foes were plotting His destruction, it became necessary for Him to speak on behalf of the devoted woman who was suffering criticism for His Name. It is probable that, of all people then living, Mary was the only one who had really entered into the meaning of the Lord's words and had realized the scenes of suffering that lay before Him. Through the succeeding hours the aroma of that ointment, lingering still on His person, must have sweetly reminded Jesus how dearly He was loved.
Mary is not named in this Gospel, perhaps because it was written during her lifetime and such a reference might have exposed her to suffering. But in the fourth Gospel she is named, because by that time the whole family had gone into the presence of Him whom they so devotedly loved. Do not be deterred by utilitarian calculations from the spontaneous expression of love to Jesus. [source]
Chapter Summary: Matthew 26
1Jesus foretells his own death 3The rulers conspire against him 6The woman anoints his feet 14Judas bargains to betray him 17Jesus eats the Passover; 26institutes his holy supper; 30foretells the desertion of his disciples, and Peter's denial; 36prays in the garden; 47and being betrayed by a kiss, 57is carried to Caiaphas, 69and denied by Peter
Greek Commentary for Matthew 26:5
A tumult [τορυβος] They feared the uprising in behalf of Jesus and were arguing that the matter must be postponed till after the feast was over when the crowds had scattered. Then they could catch him “by craft” (δολωι dolōi) as they would trap a wild beast. [source]
Matthew 27:38Robbers [ληισται] Not thieves (κλεπται kleptai) as in Authorized Version. See note on Matthew 26:55. These two robbers were probably members of the band of Barabbas on whose cross Jesus now hung. [source]
Matthew 26:69Thou also [και συ] Peter had gone within (εσω esō) the palace (Matthew 26:58), but was sitting without (εχω exō) the hall where the trial was going on in the open central court with the servants or officers (υπηρετων hupēretōn under rowers, literally, Matthew 26:58) of the Sanhedrin. But he could possibly see through the open door above what was going on inside. It is not plain at what stage of the Jewish trial the denials of Peter took place nor the precise order in which they came as the Gospels give them variously. This maid (παιδισκη paidiskē slave girl) stepped up to Peter as he was sitting in the court and pointedly said: “Thou also wast with Jesus the Galilean.” Peter was warming himself by the fire and the light shone in his face. She probably had noticed Peter come in with John the Beloved Disciple who went on up into the hall of trial. Or she may have seen Peter with Jesus on the streets of Jerusalem. [source]
Mark 11:17Of all nations [] Which rendering implies, shall be called by all nations. But render with Rev., a house of prayer for all the nations ( πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν )Thieves ( λῃστῶν )Rev., correctly, robbers. See on Matthew 21:13; and Matthew 26:55; and John 10:1,John 10:8. From ληίς or λεία , booty. In classical usage mostly of cattle. The robber, conducting his operations on a large and systematic scale, and with the aid of bands, is thus to be distinguished from the κλέπτης , or thief who purloins or pilfers whatever comes to hand. A den would be appropriate to a band of robbers, not to thieves. Thus the traveller to Jericho, in Christ's parable (Luke 10:30), fell among robbers, not thieves. [source]
Mark 11:17Which rendering implies, shall be called by all nations. But render with Rev., a house of prayer for all the nations [λῃστῶν] Rev., correctly, robbers. See on Matthew 21:13; and Matthew 26:55; and John 10:1,John 10:8. From ληίς or λεία , booty. In classical usage mostly of cattle. The robber, conducting his operations on a large and systematic scale, and with the aid of bands, is thus to be distinguished from the κλέπτης , or thief who purloins or pilfers whatever comes to hand. A den would be appropriate to a band of robbers, not to thieves. Thus the traveller to Jericho, in Christ's parable (Luke 10:30), fell among robbers, not thieves. [source]
Mark 14:47A certain one [εις τις] Mark does not tell that it was Peter. Only John 18:10 does that after Peter‘s death. He really tried to kill the man, Malchus by name, as John again tells (John 18:10). Mark does not give the rebuke to Peter by Jesus in Matthew 26:52. [source]
Mark 14:54Peter had followed him afar off [ο Πετρος απο μακροτεν ηκολουτησεν αυτωι] Here Mark uses the constative aorist (ηκολουτησεν ēkolouthēsen) where Matthew 26:58, and Luke 22:54 have the picturesque imperfect (ηκολουτει ēkolouthei), was following. Possibly Mark did not care to dwell on the picture of Peter furtively following at a distance, not bold enough to take an open stand with Christ as the Beloved Disciple did, and yet unable to remain away with the other disciples. [source]
Mark 14:60Stood up in the midst [αναστας εις μεσον] Second aorist active participle. For greater solemnity he arose to make up by bluster the lack of evidence. The high priest stepped out into the midst as if to attack Jesus by vehement questions. See notes on Matthew 26:59-68 for details here. [source]
Mark 5:9My name is Legion [Λεγιων ονομα μοι] So Luke 8:30, but not Matthew. Latin word (legio). A full Roman legion had 6,826 men. See note on Matthew 26:53. This may not have been a full legion, for Mark 5:13 notes that the number of hogs was “about two thousand.” Of course, a stickler for words might say that each hog had several demons. [source]
Luke 22:51Suffer ye thus far [] This is variously interpreted. I think the text requires that the words should be addressed to the disciples, and taken as the answer to the question, shall we smite, etc. The meaning then is, permit them to go so far as to seize me. The expression thus corresponds with Matthew 26:52,[source]
Luke 10:30Thieves [λῃσταῖς] See on Matthew 26:55; and Luke 23:39-43. These were not petty stealers, but men of violence, as was shown by their treatment of the traveller. The road from Jerusalem to Jericho passed through a wilderness (Joshua 16:1), which was so notorious for robberies and murders that a portion of it was called “the red or bloody way,” and was protected by a fort and a Roman garrison. [source]
Luke 22:6Opportunity [ευκαριαν] From ευκαιρος eukairos χωρις Ater is an old preposition, common in the poets, but rare in prose. Also in Luke 22:35. It means “without,” “apart from,” like chōris The point of Judas was just this. He would get Jesus into the hands of the Sanhedrin during the feast in spite of the crowd. It was necessary to avoid tumult (Matthew 26:5) because of the popularity of Jesus. [source]
Luke 22:6In the absence of the multitude [Ατερ] χωρις Ater is an old preposition, common in the poets, but rare in prose. Also in Luke 22:35. It means “without,” “apart from,” like chōris The point of Judas was just this. He would get Jesus into the hands of the Sanhedrin during the feast in spite of the crowd. It was necessary to avoid tumult (Matthew 26:5) because of the popularity of Jesus. [source]
Luke 22:50His right ear [το ους αυτου το δεχιον] Mark 14:47; Matthew 26:51 do not mention “right,” but Luke the Physician does. John 18:10 follows Luke in this item and also adds the names of Peter and of Malchus since probably both were dead by that time and Peter would not be involved in trouble. [source]
Luke 22:38Lord, behold, here are two swords [κυριε ιδου μαχαιραι ωδε δυο] They took his words literally. And before this very night is over Peter will use one of these very swords to try to cut off the head of Malchus only to be sternly rebuked by Jesus (Mark 14:47; Matthew 26:51.; Luke 22:50.; John 18:10.). Then Jesus will say: “For all that take the sword shall perish with the sword” (Matthew 26:52). Clearly Jesus did not mean his language even about the sword to be pressed too literally. So he said: “It is enough” It is with sad irony and sorrow that Jesus thus dismisses the subject. They were in no humour now to understand the various sides of this complicated problem. Every preacher and teacher understands this mood, not of impatience, but of closing the subject for the present. [source]
John 18:40Robber [λῃστής] See on Matthew 26:55; see on Mark 11:17; see on Luke 10:30. Matthew calls him a “notable prisoner” (Matthew 27:16). Mark states that he had made insurrection, and had committed murder (Mark 15:7), speaking of the insurrection as a well-known event. Luke says, “for some insurrection ( στάσιν τινὰ ) that had arisen in the city, and for murder” (Luke 23:19). Writing for Gentiles, Luke would not refer to the event as something familiar. Bandits of this kind were numerous in the neighborhood of Jerusalem under the Roman dominion. Their leaders were well known. Josephus describes them by the same word which Matthew uses, ἐπίσημοι , notable. Their depredations were often committed under patriotic pretenses, so that Barabbas might have had influential friends among the people. [source]
John 18:24Annas had sent [ἀπέστειλεν ὁ Ἄννας] The best texts insert οὖν , therefore. The rendering of the aorist by the pluperfect here is inadmissible, and is a device to bring this examination of Jesus into harmony with that described in Matthew 26:56-68, and to escape the apparent inconsistency between the mention of the high-priest (Caiaphas) as conducting this examination and the statement of John 18:13, which implies that this was merely a preliminary examination before Annas. Render, Annas therefore sent him. [source]
John 18:10Right ear [] Luke and John. The others do not specify which ear. For ear John and Mark have ὠτάριον , a diminutive; Luke, οὐς , and Matthew, ὠτίον , a diminutive in form, but not in force. See on Matthew 26:51. [source]
John 13:33Now [ἄρτι] In John 13:31, now is νῦν , which marks the point of time absolutely. Ἄρτι marks the point of time as related to the past or to the future. Thus, “from the days of John the Baptist until now ” ( ἄρτι , Matthew 11:12). “Thinkest thou that I cannot now ( ἄρτι ) pray to my Father?” though succor has been delayed all along till now (Matthew 26:53). Here the word implies that the sorrowful announcement of Jesus' departure from His disciples had been withheld until the present. The time was now come. [source]
John 1:1The Word [ὁ λόγος] 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 (Job 28:23). 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 Psalm 110:1-7Jehovah 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]
John 1:1Was 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. [source]
John 18:10Having a sword [εχων μαχαιραν] It was unlawful to carry a weapon on a feast-day, but Peter had become alarmed at Christ‘s words about his peril. They had two swords or knives in the possession of the eleven according to Luke (Luke 22:38). After the treacherous kiss of Judas (on the hand or the cheek?) the disciples asked: “Lord, shall we smite with the sword?” (Luke 22:49). Apparently before Jesus could answer Peter with his usual impulsiveness jerked out For ωταριον ōtarion diminutive of ους ous see Mark 14:47 (only other N.T. example), another diminutive ωτιον ōtion in Matthew 26:51 (Mark 14:47; Luke 22:51). [source]
John 18:12The chief captain [ο χιλιαρχος] They actually had the Roman commander of the cohort along (cf. Acts 21:31), not mentioned before. Seized Second aorist active of συλλαμβανω sullambanō old verb to grasp together, to arrest (technical word) in the Synoptics in this context (Mark 14:48; Matthew 26:55), here alone in John. Bound First aorist active indicative of δεω deō to bind. As a matter of course, with the hands behind his back, but with no warrant in law and with no charge against him. To Annas first Ex-high priest and father-in-law Genitive of time. [source]
John 10:1Verily, Verily [Αμην αμην] Solemn prelude by repetition as in John 1:51. The words do not ever introduce a fresh topic (cf. John 8:34,John 8:51,John 8:58). So in John 10:7. The Pharisees had previously assumed (Vincent) they alone were the authoritative guides of the people (John 9:24,John 9:29). So Jesus has a direct word for them. So Jesus begins this allegory in a characteristic way. John does not use the word παροιμια parabolē but εις την αυλην των προβατων paroimia (John 10:6), and it really is an allegory of the Good Shepherd and self-explanatory like that of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15. He first tells it in John 10:1-5 and then explains and expands it in John 10:7-18. Into the fold of the sheep (αυλη eis tēn aulēn tōn probatōn). Originally αω aulē (from αναβαινων aō to blow) in Homer‘s time was just an uncovered space around the house enclosed by a wall, then a roofless enclosure in the country where flocks were herded as here and John 10:16. It later came to mean the house itself or palace (Matthew 26:3,Matthew 26:58, etc.). In the papyri it means the court attached to the house. Climbeth up (αναβαινω anabainōn). Present active participle of αλλαχοτεν anabainō to go up. One who goes up, not by the door, has to climb up over the wall. Some other way (αλλοτεν allachothen). Rare word for old εκεινος allothen but in 4Macc 1:7 and in a papyrus. Only here in N.T. The same (κλεπτης εστιν και ληιστης ekeinos). “That one” just described. Is a thief and a robber (κλεπτω kleptēs estin kai lēistēs). Both old and common words (from ληιζομαι kleptō to steal, κλεπτης lēizomai to plunder). The distinction is preserved in the N.T. as here. Judas was a kleptēs (John 12:6), Barabbas a robber (John 18:40) like the two robbers (Matthew 27:38,Matthew 27:44) crucified with Jesus erroneously termed thieves like “the thief on the cross” by most people. See Mark 11:17. Here the man jumping over the wall comes to steal and to do it by violence like a bandit. He is both thief and robber. [source]
John 18:11Into the sheath [εις την τηκην] Old word from τιτημι tithēmi to put for box or sheath, only here in N.T. In Matthew 26:52 Christ‘s warning is given. The cup Metaphor for Christ‘s death, used already in reply to request of James and John (Mark 10:39; Matthew 20:22) and in the agony in Gethsemane before Judas came (Mark 14:36; Matthew 26:39; Luke 22:42), which is not given by John. The case of το ποτηριον to potērion is the suspended nominative for note αυτο auto (it) referring to it. Shall I not drink? Second aorist active subjunctive of πινω pinō with the double negative ου μη ou mē in a question expecting the affirmative answer. Abbott takes it as an exclamation and compares John 6:37; Mark 14:25. [source]
John 18:28They lead [αγουσιν] Dramatic historical present of αγω agō plural “they” for the Sanhedrists (Luke 23:1). John gives no details of the trial before the Sanhedrin (only the fact, John 18:24,John 18:28) when Caiaphas presided, either the informal meeting at night (Mark 14:53,Mark 14:55-65; Matthew 26:57,Matthew 26:59-68; Luke 22:54,Luke 22:63-65) or the formal ratification meeting after dawn (Mark 15:1; Matthew 27:1; Luke 22:66-71), but he gives much new material of the trial before Pilate (John 18:28-38). Into the palace For the history and meaning of this interesting Latin word, praetorium, see note on Matthew 27:27; note on Acts 23:35; and note on Philemon 1:13. Here it is probably the magnificent palace in Jerusalem built by Herod the Great for himself and occupied by the Roman Procurator (governor) when in the city. There was also one in Caesarea (Acts 23:35). Herod‘s palace in Jerusalem was on the Hill of Zion in the western part of the upper city. There is something to be said for the Castle of Antonia, north of the temple area, as the location of Pilate‘s residence in Jerusalem. Early Technically the fourth watch (3 a.m. to 6 a.m.). There were two violations of Jewish legal procedure (holding the trial for a capital case at night, passing condemnation on the same day of the trial). Besides, the Sanhedrin no longer had the power of death. A Roman court could meet any time after sunrise. John (John 19:14) says it was “about the sixth hour” when Pilate condemned Jesus. That they might not be defiled Purpose clause with ινα μη hina mē and first aorist passive subjunctive of μιαινω miainō to stain, to defile. For Jewish scruples about entering the house of a Gentile see Acts 10:28; Acts 11:3. But might eat the passover Second aorist active subjunctive of the defective verb εστιω esthiō to eat. This phrase may mean to eat the passover meal as in Matthew 27:17 (Mark 14:12,Mark 14:14; Luke 22:11,Luke 22:15), but it does not have to mean that. In 2 Chronicles 30:22 we read: “And they did eat the festival seven days” when the paschal festival is meant, not the paschal lamb or the paschal supper. There are eight other examples of πασχα pascha in John‘s Gospel and in all of them the feast is meant, not the supper. If we follow John‘s use of the word, it is the feast here, not the meal of John 13:2 which was the regular passover meal. This interpretation keeps John in harmony with the Synoptics. [source]
John 20:9For [γαρ] Explanatory use of γαρ gar The Scripture Probably Psalm 16:10. Jesus had repeatedly foretold his resurrection, but that was all forgotten in the great sorrow on their hearts. Only the chief priests and Pharisees recalled the words of Jesus (Matthew 27:62.). Must For this use of δει dei concerning Christ‘s death and resurrection see Mark 8:31; Matthew 26:54; Luke 9:22; Luke 17:25; Luke 22:37; Luke 24:7,Luke 24:26,Luke 24:44; John 3:14; John 12:34; Acts 1:16. Jesus had put emphasis on both the fact and the necessity of his resurrection which the disciples slowly perceived. [source]
John 18:36My kingdom [η βασιλεια η εμη] Christ claims to be king to Pilate, but of a peculiar kingdom. For “world” For the word see John 18:3 where it means the temple police or guards (literally, under-rowers). In the lxx always (Prov 14:35; Isaiah 32:5; Dan 3:46) officers of a king as here. Christ then had only a small band of despised followers who could not fight against Caesar. Was he alluding also to legions of angels on his side? (Matthew 26:56). Would fight Imperfect middle of αγωνιζομαι agōnizomai common verb (only here in John, but see 1 Corinthians 9:25) from αγων agōn (contest) with αν an a conclusion of the second-class condition (assumed as untrue). Christians should never forget the profound truth stated here by Jesus. That I should not be delivered Negative final clause with ινα μη hina mē and first aorist passive subjunctive of παραδιδωμι paradidōmi (see John 18:28,John 18:36). Jesus expects Pilate to surrender to the Jews. But now In contrast to the condition already stated as in John 8:40; John 9:41; John 15:22,John 15:24. [source]
John 7:30They sought therefore [εζητουν ουν] Imperfect active of ζητεω zēteō inchoative or conative, they began to seek. Either makes sense. The subject is naturally some of the Jerusalemites (Westcott) rather than some of the leaders (Bernard). To take him First aorist active infinitive, Doric form from πιαζω piazō from the usual πιεζω piezō occasionally so in the papyri, but πιαζω piazō always in N.T. except Luke 6:38. And Here = “but.” Laid his hand Second aorist active indicative of επιβαλλω epiballō to cast upon. Old and common idiom for arresting one to make him a prisoner (Matthew 26:50). See repetition in John 7:44. His hour In John 13:1 we read that “the hour” had come, but that was “not yet” “John is at pains to point out at every point that the persecution and death of Jesus followed a predestined course” (Bernard), as in John 2:4; John 7:6,John 7:8; John 8:10; John 10:39; John 13:1, etc. Was not yet come Past perfect active of ερχομαι erchomai as John looks back on the story. [source]
Acts 20:1After the uproar was ceased [μετα το παυσασται τον τορυβον] Literally, after the ceasing (accusative of articular aorist middle infinitive of παυω pauō to make cease) as to the uproar (accusative of general reference). Noise and riot, already in Matthew 26:5; Matthew 27:24; Mark 5:38; Mark 14:2; and see in Acts 21:34; Acts 24:18. Pictures the whole incident as bustle and confusion. [source]
Acts 20:30Perverse things [διεστραμμενα] Perfect passive participle of διαστρεπω diastrephō old verb to turn aside, twist, distort as in Acts 13:8,Acts 13:10. To draw away (του αποσπαιν tou apospēin). Articular genitive present active participle of purpose from αποσπαω apospaō old verb used to draw the sword (Matthew 26:51), to separate (Luke 22:41; Acts 21:1). The pity of it is that such leaders of dissension can always gain a certain following. Paul‘s long residence in Ephesus enabled him to judge clearly of conditions there. [source]
Acts 20:30To draw away [του αποσπαιν] Articular genitive present active participle of purpose from αποσπαω apospaō old verb used to draw the sword (Matthew 26:51), to separate (Luke 22:41; Acts 21:1). The pity of it is that such leaders of dissension can always gain a certain following. Paul‘s long residence in Ephesus enabled him to judge clearly of conditions there. [source]
2 Corinthians 10:2But I beseech you [δέομαι δὲ] In 2 Corinthians 10:1, παρακαλῶ is used for beseech. It is doubtful whether the two words can be strictly distinguished as indicating different degrees of feeling. It may be said that δέομαι and its kindred noun δέησις are frequently used of prayer to God, while παρακαλῶ occurs only twice in this sense, Matthew 26:53; 2 Corinthians 12:8. On the other hand, παρακαλῶ is used of God's pleading with men, while in the same passage δέομαι is used of men's entreating men; 2 Corinthians 5:20. Rev., in 2 Corinthians 10:1, renders entreat, which, according to older English usage, is the stronger word, meaning to prevail by entreaty, just as persuade, which originally meant to use persuasion, now signifies to prevail by persuasion. The construction of the passage is difficult. Literally it is: I pray the not showing courage when present, with the confidence, etc. The sense is: I pray you that you may not make it necessary for me to show, when I am present, that official peremptoriness which I am minded to show against those who charge me with unworthy motives. [source]
2 Corinthians 11:26In perils [κινδυνοις] Locative case of κινδυνος kindunos old word for danger or peril. In N.T. only this verse and Romans 8:35. The repetition here is very effective without the preposition εν en (in) and without conjunctions (asyndeton). They are in contrasted pairs. The rivers of Asia Minor are still subject to sudden swellings from floods in the mountains. Cicero and Pompey won fame fighting the Cilician pirates and robbers (note ληιστων lēistōn not κλεπτων kleptōn thieves, brigands or bandits on which see Matthew 26:55). The Jewish perils Travel in the mountains and in the wilderness was perilous in spite of the great Roman highways. Among false brethren (εν πσευδαδελποις en pseudadelphois). Chapters 2 Corinthians 10; 11 throw a lurid light on this aspect of the subject. [source]
Philippians 4:3Help these women [συνλαμβανου αυταις] Present middle imperative of συνλαμβανω sunlambanō to seize (Matthew 26:55), to conceive (Luke 1:24), then to take hold together with one (associative instrumental case), to help as here (Luke 5:7). “Take hold with them.” They laboured with me (συνητλησαν μοι sunēthlēsan moi). First aorist active indicative of συνατλεω sunathleō (for which see note on Phlippians 1:27) with associative instrumental case (μοι moi). With Clement also There is no evidence that he was Clement of Rome as the name is common. In the book of life (εν βιβλωι ζωης en biblōi zōēs). The only instance of this expression in the N.T. outside of the Apocalypse (Revelation 3:5; Revelation 13:8; Revelation 17:8, etc.). Hence real Christians in spite of their bickerings. [source]
2 Peter 1:6Patience [ὑπομονήν] Lit., remaining behind or staying, from μένω , to wait. Not merely endurance of the inevitable, for Christ could have relieved himself of his sufferings (Hebrews 12:2,Hebrews 12:3; compare Matthew 26:53); but the heroic, brave patience with which a Christian not only bears but contends. Speaking of Christ's patience, Barrow remarks, “Neither was it out of a stupid insensibility or stubborn resolution that he did thus behave himself; for he had a most vigorous sense of all those grievances, and a strong (natural) aversation from under going them; … but from a perfect submission to the divine will, and entire command over his passions, an excessive charity toward mankind, this patient and meek behavior did spring.” The same writer defines patience as follows: “That virtue which qualifieth us to bear all conditions and all events, by God's disposal incident to us, with such apprehensions and persuasions of mind, such dispositions and affections of heart, such external deportment and practices of life as God requireth and good reason directeth (Sermon XLII., “On Patience”). [source]
Revelation 9:5Torment [βασανισμος] Late word for torture, from βασανιζω basanizō in N.T. only in Revelation 9:5; Revelation 14:11; Revelation 18:7,Revelation 18:10,Revelation 18:15. The wound of the scorpion was not usually fatal, though exceedingly painful.When it striketh a man (οταν παισηι αντρωπον hotan paisēi anthrōpon). Indefinite temporal clause with οταν hotan and the first aorist active subjunctive of παιω paiō (Matthew 26:51), old verb, to smite, “whenever it smites a man.” [source]
Revelation 9:5When it striketh a man [οταν παισηι αντρωπον] Indefinite temporal clause with οταν hotan and the first aorist active subjunctive of παιω paiō (Matthew 26:51), old verb, to smite, “whenever it smites a man.” [source]
Revelation 13:10If any man shall kill with the sword [ει τις εν μαχαιρηι αποκτενει] First-class condition with future active of αποκτεινω apokteinō not future passive, for it is a picture of the persecutor drawn here like that by Jesus in Matthew 26:52.Must he be killed (δει αυτον εν μαχαιρηι αποκταντηναι dei auton en machairēi apoktanthēnai). First aorist passive infinitive of αποκτεινω apokteinō The inevitable conclusion (δει dei) of such conduct. The killer is killed.Here In this attitude of submission to the inevitable. For ωδε hōde see Revelation 13:18; Revelation 14:12; Revelation 17:9. “Faith” (πιστις pistis) here is more like faithfulness, fidelity. [source]
Revelation 9:5But that they should be tormented [αλλ ινα βασανιστησονται] Sub-final clause again with ινα hina but this time with the first future passive indicative (like Revelation 3:9; Revelation 6:4; Revelation 8:3; Revelation 13:12) of βασανιζω basanizō old verb, to test metals (from βασανος basanos Matthew 4:24) by touchstone, then to torture like Matthew 8:29, further in Revelation 11:10; Revelation 12:2; Revelation 14:10; Revelation 20:10.Five months (μηνας πεντε mēnas pente). Accusative of extent of time. The actual locust is born in the spring and dies at the end of summer (about five months).Torment Late word for torture, from βασανιζω basanizō in N.T. only in Revelation 9:5; Revelation 14:11; Revelation 18:7,Revelation 18:10,Revelation 18:15. The wound of the scorpion was not usually fatal, though exceedingly painful.When it striketh a man (οταν παισηι αντρωπον hotan paisēi anthrōpon). Indefinite temporal clause with οταν hotan and the first aorist active subjunctive of παιω paiō (Matthew 26:51), old verb, to smite, “whenever it smites a man.” [source]
What do the individual words in Matthew 26:5 mean?
They were sayinghoweverNotduringthefeastthata riotthere beamongthepeople
Greek Commentary for Matthew 26:5
They feared the uprising in behalf of Jesus and were arguing that the matter must be postponed till after the feast was over when the crowds had scattered. Then they could catch him “by craft” (δολωι dolōi) as they would trap a wild beast. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Matthew 26:5
Rev., correctly, robbers. See on Matthew 26:55; and Luke 10:30. [source]
Not thieves (κλεπται kleptai) as in Authorized Version. See note on Matthew 26:55. These two robbers were probably members of the band of Barabbas on whose cross Jesus now hung. [source]
Peter had gone within (εσω esō) the palace (Matthew 26:58), but was sitting without (εχω exō) the hall where the trial was going on in the open central court with the servants or officers (υπηρετων hupēretōn under rowers, literally, Matthew 26:58) of the Sanhedrin. But he could possibly see through the open door above what was going on inside. It is not plain at what stage of the Jewish trial the denials of Peter took place nor the precise order in which they came as the Gospels give them variously. This maid (παιδισκη paidiskē slave girl) stepped up to Peter as he was sitting in the court and pointedly said: “Thou also wast with Jesus the Galilean.” Peter was warming himself by the fire and the light shone in his face. She probably had noticed Peter come in with John the Beloved Disciple who went on up into the hall of trial. Or she may have seen Peter with Jesus on the streets of Jerusalem. [source]
Rev., better, robber. See on Matthew 26:55, and sa40" translation="">Mark 11:17.sa40 [source]
See on Matthew 26:51. [source]
A word found only here and at John 18:10. See on Matthew 26:51. [source]
Which rendering implies, shall be called by all nations. But render with Rev., a house of prayer for all the nations ( πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν )Thieves ( λῃστῶν )Rev., correctly, robbers. See on Matthew 21:13; and Matthew 26:55; and John 10:1, John 10:8. From ληίς or λεία , booty. In classical usage mostly of cattle. The robber, conducting his operations on a large and systematic scale, and with the aid of bands, is thus to be distinguished from the κλέπτης , or thief who purloins or pilfers whatever comes to hand. A den would be appropriate to a band of robbers, not to thieves. Thus the traveller to Jericho, in Christ's parable (Luke 10:30), fell among robbers, not thieves. [source]
Rev., correctly, robbers. See on Matthew 21:13; and Matthew 26:55; and John 10:1, John 10:8. From ληίς or λεία , booty. In classical usage mostly of cattle. The robber, conducting his operations on a large and systematic scale, and with the aid of bands, is thus to be distinguished from the κλέπτης , or thief who purloins or pilfers whatever comes to hand. A den would be appropriate to a band of robbers, not to thieves. Thus the traveller to Jericho, in Christ's parable (Luke 10:30), fell among robbers, not thieves. [source]
Mark does not tell that it was Peter. Only John 18:10 does that after Peter‘s death. He really tried to kill the man, Malchus by name, as John again tells (John 18:10). Mark does not give the rebuke to Peter by Jesus in Matthew 26:52. [source]
Here Mark uses the constative aorist (ηκολουτησεν ēkolouthēsen) where Matthew 26:58, and Luke 22:54 have the picturesque imperfect (ηκολουτει ēkolouthei), was following. Possibly Mark did not care to dwell on the picture of Peter furtively following at a distance, not bold enough to take an open stand with Christ as the Beloved Disciple did, and yet unable to remain away with the other disciples. [source]
Second aorist active participle. For greater solemnity he arose to make up by bluster the lack of evidence. The high priest stepped out into the midst as if to attack Jesus by vehement questions. See notes on Matthew 26:59-68 for details here. [source]
So Luke 8:30, but not Matthew. Latin word (legio). A full Roman legion had 6,826 men. See note on Matthew 26:53. This may not have been a full legion, for Mark 5:13 notes that the number of hogs was “about two thousand.” Of course, a stickler for words might say that each hog had several demons. [source]
See on Matthew 26:55; and Luke 10:30; sa40" translation="">Mark 11:17.sa40 [source]
See on Matthew 26:51. [source]
Lit., his ear, the right one. See on Matthew 26:51; and compare Mark 14:47. Both Matthew and Mark use diminutives. [source]
This is variously interpreted. I think the text requires that the words should be addressed to the disciples, and taken as the answer to the question, shall we smite, etc. The meaning then is, permit them to go so far as to seize me. The expression thus corresponds with Matthew 26:52, [source]
Lit., it is necessary, or it behoves. A word often used by Jesus concerning his own appointed work, and expressing both the inevitable fulfilment of the divine counsels and the absolute constraint of the principle of duty upon himself. See Matthew 16:21; Matthew 26:54; Mark 8:31; Luke 4:43; Luke 9:22; Luke 13:33; Luke 24:7, Luke 24:26, Luke 24:46; John 3:14; John 4:4; John 12:34. [source]
See on Matthew 26:55; Luke 10:30; Mark 11:17. [source]
See on Matthew 26:55; and Luke 23:39-43. These were not petty stealers, but men of violence, as was shown by their treatment of the traveller. The road from Jerusalem to Jericho passed through a wilderness (Joshua 16:1), which was so notorious for robberies and murders that a portion of it was called “the red or bloody way,” and was protected by a fort and a Roman garrison. [source]
From ευκαιρος eukairos χωρις Ater is an old preposition, common in the poets, but rare in prose. Also in Luke 22:35. It means “without,” “apart from,” like chōris The point of Judas was just this. He would get Jesus into the hands of the Sanhedrin during the feast in spite of the crowd. It was necessary to avoid tumult (Matthew 26:5) because of the popularity of Jesus. [source]
χωρις Ater is an old preposition, common in the poets, but rare in prose. Also in Luke 22:35. It means “without,” “apart from,” like chōris The point of Judas was just this. He would get Jesus into the hands of the Sanhedrin during the feast in spite of the crowd. It was necessary to avoid tumult (Matthew 26:5) because of the popularity of Jesus. [source]
Mark 14:47; Matthew 26:51 do not mention “right,” but Luke the Physician does. John 18:10 follows Luke in this item and also adds the names of Peter and of Malchus since probably both were dead by that time and Peter would not be involved in trouble. [source]
They took his words literally. And before this very night is over Peter will use one of these very swords to try to cut off the head of Malchus only to be sternly rebuked by Jesus (Mark 14:47; Matthew 26:51.; Luke 22:50.; John 18:10.). Then Jesus will say: “For all that take the sword shall perish with the sword” (Matthew 26:52). Clearly Jesus did not mean his language even about the sword to be pressed too literally. So he said: “It is enough” It is with sad irony and sorrow that Jesus thus dismisses the subject. They were in no humour now to understand the various sides of this complicated problem. Every preacher and teacher understands this mood, not of impatience, but of closing the subject for the present. [source]
Luke alone mentions “the house.” Though it is implied in Mark 14:53; Matthew 26:57. [source]
Imperfect, was following, as Matthew 26:58; John 18:15. Curiously Mark 14:54 has the aorist. [source]
Must signifies the eternal necessity in the divine counsels. Compare Luke 24:26, Luke 24:46; Matthew 26:54; Mark 8:31; John 12:34. [source]
On this necessity attaching in the divine counsel to the sufferings, death, and resurrection of Jesus, see Matthew 26:54; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22; Luke 17:25; Luke 22:37; Luke 24:7, Luke 24:26, Luke 24:44; John 3:14; John 12:34; Acts 1:16. [source]
See on Matthew 26:55; see on Mark 11:17; see on Luke 10:30. Matthew calls him a “notable prisoner” (Matthew 27:16). Mark states that he had made insurrection, and had committed murder (Mark 15:7), speaking of the insurrection as a well-known event. Luke says, “for some insurrection ( στάσιν τινὰ ) that had arisen in the city, and for murder” (Luke 23:19). Writing for Gentiles, Luke would not refer to the event as something familiar. Bandits of this kind were numerous in the neighborhood of Jerusalem under the Roman dominion. Their leaders were well known. Josephus describes them by the same word which Matthew uses, ἐπίσημοι , notable. Their depredations were often committed under patriotic pretenses, so that Barabbas might have had influential friends among the people. [source]
The best texts insert οὖν , therefore. The rendering of the aorist by the pluperfect here is inadmissible, and is a device to bring this examination of Jesus into harmony with that described in Matthew 26:56-68, and to escape the apparent inconsistency between the mention of the high-priest (Caiaphas) as conducting this examination and the statement of John 18:13, which implies that this was merely a preliminary examination before Annas. Render, Annas therefore sent him. [source]
See on Matthew 26:51. [source]
Luke and John. The others do not specify which ear. For ear John and Mark have ὠτάριον , a diminutive; Luke, οὐς , and Matthew, ὠτίον , a diminutive in form, but not in force. See on Matthew 26:51. [source]
In John 13:31, now is νῦν , which marks the point of time absolutely. Ἄρτι marks the point of time as related to the past or to the future. Thus, “from the days of John the Baptist until now ” ( ἄρτι , Matthew 11:12). “Thinkest thou that I cannot now ( ἄρτι ) pray to my Father?” though succor has been delayed all along till now (Matthew 26:53). Here the word implies that the sorrowful announcement of Jesus' departure from His disciples had been withheld until the present. The time was now come. [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 (Job 28:23). 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 Psalm 110:1-7Jehovah 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]
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. [source]
It was unlawful to carry a weapon on a feast-day, but Peter had become alarmed at Christ‘s words about his peril. They had two swords or knives in the possession of the eleven according to Luke (Luke 22:38). After the treacherous kiss of Judas (on the hand or the cheek?) the disciples asked: “Lord, shall we smite with the sword?” (Luke 22:49). Apparently before Jesus could answer Peter with his usual impulsiveness jerked out For ωταριον ōtarion diminutive of ους ous see Mark 14:47 (only other N.T. example), another diminutive ωτιον ōtion in Matthew 26:51 (Mark 14:47; Luke 22:51). [source]
They actually had the Roman commander of the cohort along (cf. Acts 21:31), not mentioned before. Seized Second aorist active of συλλαμβανω sullambanō old verb to grasp together, to arrest (technical word) in the Synoptics in this context (Mark 14:48; Matthew 26:55), here alone in John. Bound First aorist active indicative of δεω deō to bind. As a matter of course, with the hands behind his back, but with no warrant in law and with no charge against him. To Annas first Ex-high priest and father-in-law Genitive of time. [source]
Solemn prelude by repetition as in John 1:51. The words do not ever introduce a fresh topic (cf. John 8:34, John 8:51, John 8:58). So in John 10:7. The Pharisees had previously assumed (Vincent) they alone were the authoritative guides of the people (John 9:24, John 9:29). So Jesus has a direct word for them. So Jesus begins this allegory in a characteristic way. John does not use the word παροιμια parabolē but εις την αυλην των προβατων paroimia (John 10:6), and it really is an allegory of the Good Shepherd and self-explanatory like that of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15. He first tells it in John 10:1-5 and then explains and expands it in John 10:7-18. Into the fold of the sheep (αυλη eis tēn aulēn tōn probatōn). Originally αω aulē (from αναβαινων aō to blow) in Homer‘s time was just an uncovered space around the house enclosed by a wall, then a roofless enclosure in the country where flocks were herded as here and John 10:16. It later came to mean the house itself or palace (Matthew 26:3, Matthew 26:58, etc.). In the papyri it means the court attached to the house. Climbeth up (αναβαινω anabainōn). Present active participle of αλλαχοτεν anabainō to go up. One who goes up, not by the door, has to climb up over the wall. Some other way (αλλοτεν allachothen). Rare word for old εκεινος allothen but in 4Macc 1:7 and in a papyrus. Only here in N.T. The same (κλεπτης εστιν και ληιστης ekeinos). “That one” just described. Is a thief and a robber (κλεπτω kleptēs estin kai lēistēs). Both old and common words (from ληιζομαι kleptō to steal, κλεπτης lēizomai to plunder). The distinction is preserved in the N.T. as here. Judas was a kleptēs (John 12:6), Barabbas a robber (John 18:40) like the two robbers (Matthew 27:38, Matthew 27:44) crucified with Jesus erroneously termed thieves like “the thief on the cross” by most people. See Mark 11:17. Here the man jumping over the wall comes to steal and to do it by violence like a bandit. He is both thief and robber. [source]
Old word from τιτημι tithēmi to put for box or sheath, only here in N.T. In Matthew 26:52 Christ‘s warning is given. The cup Metaphor for Christ‘s death, used already in reply to request of James and John (Mark 10:39; Matthew 20:22) and in the agony in Gethsemane before Judas came (Mark 14:36; Matthew 26:39; Luke 22:42), which is not given by John. The case of το ποτηριον to potērion is the suspended nominative for note αυτο auto (it) referring to it. Shall I not drink? Second aorist active subjunctive of πινω pinō with the double negative ου μη ou mē in a question expecting the affirmative answer. Abbott takes it as an exclamation and compares John 6:37; Mark 14:25. [source]
Dramatic historical present of αγω agō plural “they” for the Sanhedrists (Luke 23:1). John gives no details of the trial before the Sanhedrin (only the fact, John 18:24, John 18:28) when Caiaphas presided, either the informal meeting at night (Mark 14:53, Mark 14:55-65; Matthew 26:57, Matthew 26:59-68; Luke 22:54, Luke 22:63-65) or the formal ratification meeting after dawn (Mark 15:1; Matthew 27:1; Luke 22:66-71), but he gives much new material of the trial before Pilate (John 18:28-38). Into the palace For the history and meaning of this interesting Latin word, praetorium, see note on Matthew 27:27; note on Acts 23:35; and note on Philemon 1:13. Here it is probably the magnificent palace in Jerusalem built by Herod the Great for himself and occupied by the Roman Procurator (governor) when in the city. There was also one in Caesarea (Acts 23:35). Herod‘s palace in Jerusalem was on the Hill of Zion in the western part of the upper city. There is something to be said for the Castle of Antonia, north of the temple area, as the location of Pilate‘s residence in Jerusalem. Early Technically the fourth watch (3 a.m. to 6 a.m.). There were two violations of Jewish legal procedure (holding the trial for a capital case at night, passing condemnation on the same day of the trial). Besides, the Sanhedrin no longer had the power of death. A Roman court could meet any time after sunrise. John (John 19:14) says it was “about the sixth hour” when Pilate condemned Jesus. That they might not be defiled Purpose clause with ινα μη hina mē and first aorist passive subjunctive of μιαινω miainō to stain, to defile. For Jewish scruples about entering the house of a Gentile see Acts 10:28; Acts 11:3. But might eat the passover Second aorist active subjunctive of the defective verb εστιω esthiō to eat. This phrase may mean to eat the passover meal as in Matthew 27:17 (Mark 14:12, Mark 14:14; Luke 22:11, Luke 22:15), but it does not have to mean that. In 2 Chronicles 30:22 we read: “And they did eat the festival seven days” when the paschal festival is meant, not the paschal lamb or the paschal supper. There are eight other examples of πασχα pascha in John‘s Gospel and in all of them the feast is meant, not the supper. If we follow John‘s use of the word, it is the feast here, not the meal of John 13:2 which was the regular passover meal. This interpretation keeps John in harmony with the Synoptics. [source]
Explanatory use of γαρ gar The Scripture Probably Psalm 16:10. Jesus had repeatedly foretold his resurrection, but that was all forgotten in the great sorrow on their hearts. Only the chief priests and Pharisees recalled the words of Jesus (Matthew 27:62.). Must For this use of δει dei concerning Christ‘s death and resurrection see Mark 8:31; Matthew 26:54; Luke 9:22; Luke 17:25; Luke 22:37; Luke 24:7, Luke 24:26, Luke 24:44; John 3:14; John 12:34; Acts 1:16. Jesus had put emphasis on both the fact and the necessity of his resurrection which the disciples slowly perceived. [source]
Christ claims to be king to Pilate, but of a peculiar kingdom. For “world” For the word see John 18:3 where it means the temple police or guards (literally, under-rowers). In the lxx always (Prov 14:35; Isaiah 32:5; Dan 3:46) officers of a king as here. Christ then had only a small band of despised followers who could not fight against Caesar. Was he alluding also to legions of angels on his side? (Matthew 26:56). Would fight Imperfect middle of αγωνιζομαι agōnizomai common verb (only here in John, but see 1 Corinthians 9:25) from αγων agōn (contest) with αν an a conclusion of the second-class condition (assumed as untrue). Christians should never forget the profound truth stated here by Jesus. That I should not be delivered Negative final clause with ινα μη hina mē and first aorist passive subjunctive of παραδιδωμι paradidōmi (see John 18:28, John 18:36). Jesus expects Pilate to surrender to the Jews. But now In contrast to the condition already stated as in John 8:40; John 9:41; John 15:22, John 15:24. [source]
Imperfect active of ζητεω zēteō inchoative or conative, they began to seek. Either makes sense. The subject is naturally some of the Jerusalemites (Westcott) rather than some of the leaders (Bernard). To take him First aorist active infinitive, Doric form from πιαζω piazō from the usual πιεζω piezō occasionally so in the papyri, but πιαζω piazō always in N.T. except Luke 6:38. And Here = “but.” Laid his hand Second aorist active indicative of επιβαλλω epiballō to cast upon. Old and common idiom for arresting one to make him a prisoner (Matthew 26:50). See repetition in John 7:44. His hour In John 13:1 we read that “the hour” had come, but that was “not yet” “John is at pains to point out at every point that the persecution and death of Jesus followed a predestined course” (Bernard), as in John 2:4; John 7:6, John 7:8; John 8:10; John 10:39; John 13:1, etc. Was not yet come Past perfect active of ερχομαι erchomai as John looks back on the story. [source]
Literally, after the ceasing (accusative of articular aorist middle infinitive of παυω pauō to make cease) as to the uproar (accusative of general reference). Noise and riot, already in Matthew 26:5; Matthew 27:24; Mark 5:38; Mark 14:2; and see in Acts 21:34; Acts 24:18. Pictures the whole incident as bustle and confusion. [source]
Perfect passive participle of διαστρεπω diastrephō old verb to turn aside, twist, distort as in Acts 13:8, Acts 13:10. To draw away (του αποσπαιν tou apospēin). Articular genitive present active participle of purpose from αποσπαω apospaō old verb used to draw the sword (Matthew 26:51), to separate (Luke 22:41; Acts 21:1). The pity of it is that such leaders of dissension can always gain a certain following. Paul‘s long residence in Ephesus enabled him to judge clearly of conditions there. [source]
Articular genitive present active participle of purpose from αποσπαω apospaō old verb used to draw the sword (Matthew 26:51), to separate (Luke 22:41; Acts 21:1). The pity of it is that such leaders of dissension can always gain a certain following. Paul‘s long residence in Ephesus enabled him to judge clearly of conditions there. [source]
In 2 Corinthians 10:1, παρακαλῶ is used for beseech. It is doubtful whether the two words can be strictly distinguished as indicating different degrees of feeling. It may be said that δέομαι and its kindred noun δέησις are frequently used of prayer to God, while παρακαλῶ occurs only twice in this sense, Matthew 26:53; 2 Corinthians 12:8. On the other hand, παρακαλῶ is used of God's pleading with men, while in the same passage δέομαι is used of men's entreating men; 2 Corinthians 5:20. Rev., in 2 Corinthians 10:1, renders entreat, which, according to older English usage, is the stronger word, meaning to prevail by entreaty, just as persuade, which originally meant to use persuasion, now signifies to prevail by persuasion. The construction of the passage is difficult. Literally it is: I pray the not showing courage when present, with the confidence, etc. The sense is: I pray you that you may not make it necessary for me to show, when I am present, that official peremptoriness which I am minded to show against those who charge me with unworthy motives. [source]
Locative case of κινδυνος kindunos old word for danger or peril. In N.T. only this verse and Romans 8:35. The repetition here is very effective without the preposition εν en (in) and without conjunctions (asyndeton). They are in contrasted pairs. The rivers of Asia Minor are still subject to sudden swellings from floods in the mountains. Cicero and Pompey won fame fighting the Cilician pirates and robbers (note ληιστων lēistōn not κλεπτων kleptōn thieves, brigands or bandits on which see Matthew 26:55). The Jewish perils Travel in the mountains and in the wilderness was perilous in spite of the great Roman highways. Among false brethren (εν πσευδαδελποις en pseudadelphois). Chapters 2 Corinthians 10; 11 throw a lurid light on this aspect of the subject. [source]
Lit., take hold with. Compare Luke 5:7. The verb is used of conception, Luke 1:24; arrest, Matthew 26:55; Acts 12:3; catching, as fish, Luke 5:9. Compare the compound συναντιλάμβανομαι help Luke 10:40(note); Romans 8:26. [source]
Present middle imperative of συνλαμβανω sunlambanō to seize (Matthew 26:55), to conceive (Luke 1:24), then to take hold together with one (associative instrumental case), to help as here (Luke 5:7). “Take hold with them.” They laboured with me (συνητλησαν μοι sunēthlēsan moi). First aorist active indicative of συνατλεω sunathleō (for which see note on Phlippians 1:27) with associative instrumental case (μοι moi). With Clement also There is no evidence that he was Clement of Rome as the name is common. In the book of life (εν βιβλωι ζωης en biblōi zōēs). The only instance of this expression in the N.T. outside of the Apocalypse (Revelation 3:5; Revelation 13:8; Revelation 17:8, etc.). Hence real Christians in spite of their bickerings. [source]
Lit. having been offered once for all. Note the passive in contrast with offer himself, Hebrews 9:25. He was appointed to die as truly as we. Comp. Luke 24:26; Matthew 26:53, Matthew 26:54; Psalm 40:7, Psalm 40:8. [source]
Lit., remaining behind or staying, from μένω , to wait. Not merely endurance of the inevitable, for Christ could have relieved himself of his sufferings (Hebrews 12:2, Hebrews 12:3; compare Matthew 26:53); but the heroic, brave patience with which a Christian not only bears but contends. Speaking of Christ's patience, Barrow remarks, “Neither was it out of a stupid insensibility or stubborn resolution that he did thus behave himself; for he had a most vigorous sense of all those grievances, and a strong (natural) aversation from under going them; … but from a perfect submission to the divine will, and entire command over his passions, an excessive charity toward mankind, this patient and meek behavior did spring.” The same writer defines patience as follows: “That virtue which qualifieth us to bear all conditions and all events, by God's disposal incident to us, with such apprehensions and persuasions of mind, such dispositions and affections of heart, such external deportment and practices of life as God requireth and good reason directeth (Sermon XLII., “On Patience”). [source]
See Revelation 12:7 for Michael and angels warring with the dragon, and also Matthew 26:53 for the angels at Christ‘s call, not to say Hebrews 1:6., Hebrews 1:14; Matthew 13:41; and Revelation 5:11. [source]
Late word for torture, from βασανιζω basanizō in N.T. only in Revelation 9:5; Revelation 14:11; Revelation 18:7, Revelation 18:10, Revelation 18:15. The wound of the scorpion was not usually fatal, though exceedingly painful.When it striketh a man (οταν παισηι αντρωπον hotan paisēi anthrōpon). Indefinite temporal clause with οταν hotan and the first aorist active subjunctive of παιω paiō (Matthew 26:51), old verb, to smite, “whenever it smites a man.” [source]
Indefinite temporal clause with οταν hotan and the first aorist active subjunctive of παιω paiō (Matthew 26:51), old verb, to smite, “whenever it smites a man.” [source]
First-class condition with future active of αποκτεινω apokteinō not future passive, for it is a picture of the persecutor drawn here like that by Jesus in Matthew 26:52.Must he be killed (δει αυτον εν μαχαιρηι αποκταντηναι dei auton en machairēi apoktanthēnai). First aorist passive infinitive of αποκτεινω apokteinō The inevitable conclusion (δει dei) of such conduct. The killer is killed.Here In this attitude of submission to the inevitable. For ωδε hōde see Revelation 13:18; Revelation 14:12; Revelation 17:9. “Faith” (πιστις pistis) here is more like faithfulness, fidelity. [source]
Sub-final clause again with ινα hina but this time with the first future passive indicative (like Revelation 3:9; Revelation 6:4; Revelation 8:3; Revelation 13:12) of βασανιζω basanizō old verb, to test metals (from βασανος basanos Matthew 4:24) by touchstone, then to torture like Matthew 8:29, further in Revelation 11:10; Revelation 12:2; Revelation 14:10; Revelation 20:10.Five months (μηνας πεντε mēnas pente). Accusative of extent of time. The actual locust is born in the spring and dies at the end of summer (about five months).Torment Late word for torture, from βασανιζω basanizō in N.T. only in Revelation 9:5; Revelation 14:11; Revelation 18:7, Revelation 18:10, Revelation 18:15. The wound of the scorpion was not usually fatal, though exceedingly painful.When it striketh a man (οταν παισηι αντρωπον hotan paisēi anthrōpon). Indefinite temporal clause with οταν hotan and the first aorist active subjunctive of παιω paiō (Matthew 26:51), old verb, to smite, “whenever it smites a man.” [source]