KJV: Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
YLT: Happy the poor in spirit -- because theirs is the reign of the heavens.
Darby: Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of the heavens.
ASV: Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Μακάριοι | Blessed [are] |
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: μακάριος Sense: blessed, happy. |
|
πτωχοὶ | poor |
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: πτωχός Sense: reduced to beggary, begging, asking alms. |
|
τῷ | in the |
Parse: Article, Dative Neuter Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
πνεύματι | spirit |
Parse: Noun, Dative Neuter Singular Root: πνεῦμα Sense: a movement of air (a gentle blast. |
|
αὐτῶν | theirs |
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Genitive Masculine 3rd Person Plural Root: αὐτός Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself. |
|
βασιλεία | kingdom |
Parse: Noun, Nominative Feminine Singular Root: βασιλεία Sense: royal power, kingship, dominion, rule. |
|
τῶν | of the |
Parse: Article, Genitive Masculine Plural Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
οὐρανῶν | heavens |
Parse: Noun, Genitive Masculine Plural Root: οὐρανός Sense: the vaulted expanse of the sky with all things visible in it. |
Greek Commentary for Matthew 5:3
The English word “blessed” is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal ευλογητοι eulogētoi as in Luke 1:68 of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle ευλογημενος eulogēmenos as in Luke 1:42 of Mary by Elizabeth and in Matthew 21:9. Both forms come from ευλογεω eulogeō to speak well of The Greek word here English has thus ennobled “blessed” to a higher rank than “happy.” But “happy” is what Jesus said and the Braid Scots New Testament dares to say “Happy” each time here as does the Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in Revelation 14:13. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. “Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love” (Vincent). Jesus takes this word “happy” and puts it in this rich environment. “This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult” (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word “happy” to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. “If you know these things, happy “Happy And Paul applies this adjective to God, “according to the gospel of the glory of the happy The term “Beatitudes” (Latin beatus) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by οτι makarioi It will repay one to make a careful study of all the “beatitudes” in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (Matthew 5:3-11), though the beatitudes in Matthew 5:10 and Matthew 5:11 are very much alike. The copula is not expressed in either of these nine beatitudes. In each case a reason is given for the beatitude, “for” That is of small moment. “The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces “ (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. [source]
Luke has only “the poor,” but he means the same by it as this form in Matthew, “the pious in Israel, for the most part poor, whom the worldly rich despised and persecuted” (McNeile). The word used here The other word πενομαι penēs is from πτωχος penomai to work for one‘s daily bread and so means one who works for his living. The word πενης ptōchos is more frequent in the New Testament and implies deeper poverty than penēs “The kingdom of heaven” here means the reign of God in the heart and life. This is the summum bonum and is what matters most. [source]
Three words expressing poverty are found in the New Testament. Two of them, πὲνης and πενιχρός , are kindred terms, the latter being merely a poetic form of the other, and neither of these occurs more than once (Luke 21:2; 2 Corinthians 9:9). The word used in this verse is therefore the current word for poor, occurring thirty-four times, and covering every gradation of want; so that it is evident that the New Testament writers did not recognize any nice distinctions of meaning which called for the use of other terms. Luke, for instance (Luke 21:2, Luke 21:3), calls the widow who bestowed her two mites both πενιχρὰν and πρωχὴ . Nevertheless, there is a distinction, recognized by both classical and ecclesiastical writers. While ὁ πένης is of narrow means, one who “earns a scanty pittance,” πρωχός is allied to the verb πτώσσειν , to crouch or cringe, and therefore conveys the idea of utter destitution, which abjectly solicits and lives by alms. Hence it is applied to Lazarus (Luke 16:20, Luke 16:22), and rendered beggar. Thus distinguished, it is very graphic and appropriate here, as denoting the utter spiritual destitution, the consciousness of which precedes the entrance into the kingdom of God, and which cannot be relieved by one's own efforts, but only by the free mercy of God. (See on 2 Corinthians 6:10; and see 2 Corinthians 8:9.) [source]
As this word and its cognates occur at least fifty-five times in the New Testament, it is important to understand its history, which is interesting because it is one of those numerous words which exhibit the influence of Christian association and usage in enlarging and dignifying their meaning. It is commonly rendered blessed, both in the A. V. and Rev., and that rendering might properly be given it in every instance. Its root is supposed to be a word meaning great, and its earlier meaning appears to be limited to outward prosperity; so that it is used at times as synonymous with rich. It scarcely varies from this meaning in its frequent applications to the Grecian gods, since the popular Greek ideal of divine blessedness was not essentially moral. The gods were blessed because of their power and dignity, not because of their holiness. “In general,” says Mr. Gladstone (“Homer and the Homeric Age”) “the chief note of deity with Homer is emancipation from the restraints of moral law. Though the Homeric gods have not yet ceased to be the vindicators of morality upon earth, they have personally ceased to observe its rules, either for or among themselves. As compared with men, in conduct they are generally characterized by superior force and intellect, but by inferior morality.”-DIVIDER- In its peculiar application to the dead, there is indicated the despair of earthly happiness underlying the thought of even the cheerful and mercurial Greek. Hence the word was used as synonymous with dead. Only the dead could be called truly blessed. Thus Sophocles (“Oedipus Tyrannus”):“From hence the lesson learn yeTo reckon no man happy till ye witness The closing day; until he pass the borderWhich severs life from death, unscathed by sorrow.”And again (“Oedipus at Colonus”):“Happiest beyond compare,Never to taste of life: Happiest in order next,-DIVIDER- Being born, with quickest speed-DIVIDER- Thither again to turnFrom whence we came.”Nevertheless, even in its pagan use, the word was not altogether without a moral background. The Greeks recognized a prosperity which waited on the observance of the laws of natural morality, and an avenging Fate which pursued and punished their violation. This conception appears often in the works of the tragedians; for instance, in the “Oedipus Tyrannus” of Sophocles, where the main motive is the judgment which waits upon even unwitting violations of natural ties. Still, this prosperity is external, consisting either in wealth, or power, or exemption from calamity. With the philosophers a moral element comes definitely into the word. The conception rises from outward propriety to inward correctness as the essence of happiness. But in all of them, from Socrates onward, virtue depends primarily upon knowledge; so that to be happy is, first of ail, to know. It is thus apparent that the Greek philosophy had no conception of sin in the Bible sense. As virtue depended on knowledge, sin was the outcome of ignorance, and virtue and its consequent happiness were therefore the prerogative of the few and the learned. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The biblical use of the word lifted it into the region of the spiritual, as distinguished from the merely intellectual, and besides, intrusted to it alone the task of representing this higher conception. The pagan word for happiness ( εὐδαιμονία , under the protection of a good genius or daemon)-DIVIDER- nowhere occurs in the New Testament nor in the Scriptures, having fallen into disrepute because the word daemon, which originally meant a deity, good or evil, had acquired among the Jews the bad sense which we attach to demon. Happiness, or better, blessedness, was therefore represented both in the Old and in the New Testament by this word μακάριος . In the Old Testament the idea involves more of outward prosperity than in the New Testament, yet it almost universally occurs in connections which emphasize, as its principal element, a sense of God's approval founded in righteousness which rests ultimately on love to God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Thus the word passed up into the higher region of Christian thought, and was stamped with the gospel signet, and laden with all the rich significance of gospel blessedness. It now takes on a group of ideas strange to the best pagan morality, and contradictory of its fundamental positions. Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love. For the aristocracy of the learned virtuous, it introduces the truth of the Fatherhood of God and the corollary of the family of believers. While the pagan word carries the isolation of the virtuous and the contraction of human sympathy, the Gospel pushes these out with an ideal of a world-wide sympathy and of a happiness realized in ministry. The vague outlines of an abstract good vanish from it, and give place to the pure heart's vision of God, and its personal communion with the Father in heaven. Where it told of the Stoic's self-sufficiency, it now tells of the Christian's poverty of spirit and meekness. Where it hinted at the Stoic's self-repression and strangling of emotion, it now throbs with a holy sensitiveness, and with a monition to rejoice with them that rejoice, and to weep with them that weep. From the pagan word the flavor of immortality is absent. No vision of abiding rest imparts patience and courage amid the bitterness and struggle of life; no menace of the destiny of evil imposes a check on human lusts. The Christian word blessed is full of the light of heaven. It sternly throws away from itself every hint of the Stoic's asserted right of suicide as a refuge from human ills, and emphasizes something which thrives on trial and persecution, which glories in tribulation, which not only endures but conquers the world, and expects its crown in heaven. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Matthew 5:3
Implying distinction in quality rather than numerical distinction ( ἄλλος ). For example, “whoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other ( τὴν ἄλλην ); i.e., the other one of the two (Matthew 5:39). At Pentecost, the disciples began to speak with other ( ἑτέραις ) tongues; i.e., different from their native tongues. Here the word gives the idea of two masters of distinct or opposite character and interests, like God and Mammon. [source]
All expressed by one word, ἐράπισαν , from ῥαπίς , a rod, and meaning to smite with rods, not with the palms. The same word is employed in Matthew 5:39. It came to mean generally to strike. [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
Note omission of “Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites” with this third woe. In Matthew 15:14 Jesus had already called the Pharisees “blind guides” (leaders). They split hairs about oaths, as Jesus had explained in Matthew 5:33-37, between the temple and the gold of the temple. [source]
Gulping or drinking down the camel. An oriental hyperbole like that in Matthew 19:24. See also Matthew 5:29, Matthew 5:30; Matthew 17:20; Matthew 21:21. Both insects and camels were ceremonially unclean (Leviticus 11:4, Leviticus 11:20, Leviticus 11:23, Leviticus 11:42). “He that kills a flea on the Sabbath is as guilty as if he killed a camel” (Jer. Shabb. 107). [source]
Turn back thy sword into its place. It was a stern rebuke for Peter who had misunderstood the teaching of Jesus in Luke 22:38 as well as in Matthew 5:39 (cf. John 18:36). The reason given by Jesus has had innumerable illustrations in human history. The sword calls for the sword. Offensive war is here given flat condemnation. The Paris Pact of 1928 (the Kellogg Treaty) is certainly in harmony with the mind of Christ. The will to peace is the first step towards peace, the outlawing of war. Our American cities are often ruled by gangsters who kill each other off. [source]
This is the marginal reading in Westcott and Hort which also adds “maketh her an adulteress” There seems to be a certain amount of assimilation in various manuscripts between this verse and the words in Matthew 5:32. But, whatever reading is accepted here, even the short one in Westcott and Hort Here, as in Matthew 5:31., a group of scholars deny the genuineness of the exception given by Matthew alone. McNeile holds that “the addition of the saving clause is, in fact, opposed to the spirit of the whole context, and must have been made at a time when the practice of divorce for adultery had already grown up.” That in my opinion is gratuitous criticism which is unwilling to accept Matthew‘s report because it disagrees with one‘s views on the subject of divorce. He adds: “It cannot be supposed that Matthew wished to represent Jesus as siding with the school of Shammai.” Why not, if Shammai on this point agreed with Jesus? Those who deny Matthew‘s report are those who are opposed to remarriage at all. Jesus by implication, as in Matthew 5:31, does allow remarriage of the innocent party, but not of the guilty one. Certainly Jesus has lifted the whole subject of marriage and divorce to a new level, far beyond the petty contentions of the schools of Hillel and Shammai. [source]
These quotations (Matthew 5:21, Matthew 5:27, Matthew 5:33) from the Decalogue (Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5) are from the Septuagint and use ου ou and the future indicative (volitive future, common Greek idiom). In Matthew 5:43 the positive form, volitive future, occurs In Matthew 5:41 the third person (δοτω dotō) singular second aorist active imperative is used. In Matthew 5:38 no verb occurs. [source]
Second aorist passive subjunctive in prohibition. “This is one of the clearest instances of the necessity of accepting the spirit and not the letter of the Lord‘s commands (see Matthew 5:32, Matthew 5:34, Matthew 5:38). Not only does indiscriminate almsgiving do little but injury to society, but the words must embrace far more than almsgiving” (McNeile). Recall again that Jesus is a popular teacher and expects men to understand his paradoxes. In the organized charities of modern life we are in danger of letting the milk of human kindness dry up. [source]
The English word “blessed” is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal ευλογητοι eulogētoi as in Luke 1:68 of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle ευλογημενος eulogēmenos as in Luke 1:42 of Mary by Elizabeth and in Matthew 21:9. Both forms come from ευλογεω eulogeō to speak well of The Greek word here English has thus ennobled “blessed” to a higher rank than “happy.” But “happy” is what Jesus said and the Braid Scots New Testament dares to say “Happy” each time here as does the Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in Revelation 14:13. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. “Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love” (Vincent). Jesus takes this word “happy” and puts it in this rich environment. “This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult” (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word “happy” to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. “If you know these things, happy “Happy And Paul applies this adjective to God, “according to the gospel of the glory of the happy The term “Beatitudes” (Latin beatus) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by οτι makarioi It will repay one to make a careful study of all the “beatitudes” in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (Matthew 5:3-11), though the beatitudes in Matthew 5:10 and Matthew 5:11 are very much alike. The copula is not expressed in either of these nine beatitudes. In each case a reason is given for the beatitude, “for” That is of small moment. “The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces “ (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
See on sa40" translation="">Matthew 5:3.sa40 [source]
The Rev., unfortunately, and against the protest of the American committee, retains devils instead of rendering demons. See on Matthew 4:1. The New Testament uses two kindred words to denote the evil spirits which possessed men, and which were so often east out by Christ: διάμων , of which demon is a transcript, and which occurs, according to the best texts, only at Matthew 8:31; and δαιμόνιον , which is not a diminutive, but the neuter of the adjective δαιμόνιος ,of, or belonging to a demon. The cognate verb is δαιμονίζομαι to be possessed with a demon, as in Mark 1:32. The derivation of the word is uncertain. Perhaps δαίω , to distribute, since the deities allot the fates of men. Plato derives it from δαήμων , knowing or wise. In Hesiod, as in Pythagoras, Thales, and Plutarch, the word δαίμων is used of men of the golden age, acting as tutelary deities, and forming the link between gods and men. Socrates, in Plato's “Cratylus,” quotes Hesiod as follows: “Socrates: You know how Hesiod uses the word? Hermogenes: Indeed I do not. Soc.: Do you not remember that he speaks of a golden race of men who came first? Her.: Yes, I know that. Soc.: He says of them,But now that fate has closed over this race,They are holy demons upon earth,Beneficent, averters of ills, guardians of mortal men.'”After some further conversation, Socrates goes on: “And therefore I have the most entire conviction that he called them demons, because they were δαήμονες (knowing or wise )Now, he and other poets say truly that, when a good man dies, he has honor and a mighty portion among the dead, and becomes a demon, which is a name given to him signifying wisdom. And I say, too, that every wise man who happens to be a good man is more than human ( δαιμόνιον ) both in life and death, and is rightly called a demon.” Mr. Grote (“History of Greece”) observes that in Hesiod demons are “invisible tenants of the earth, remnants of the once happy golden race whom the Olympic gods first made - the unseen police of the gods, for the purpose of repressing wicked behavior in the world.” In later Greek the word came to be used of any departed soul. In Homer δαίμων is used synonymously with θεός and θεά , god and goddess, and the moral quality of the divinity is determined by the context: but most commonly of the divine power or agency, like the Latin numen, the deity considered as a power rather than as a person. Homer does not use δαιμόνιον substantively, but as an adjective, always in the vocative case, and with a sorrowful or reproachful sense, indicating that the person addressed is in some astonishing or strange condition. Therefore, as a term of reproach - wretch! sirrah! madman! (“Iliad,” 2:190,200; 4:31; ix., 40). Occasionally in an admiring or respectful sense (“Odyssey,” xiv., 443; xxiii., 174); Excellent stranger! noble sir! Homer also uses δαίμων of one's genius or attendant spirit, and thence of one's lot orfortune. So in the beautiful simile of the sick father (“Odyssey,” 5:396), “Some malignant genius has assailed him.” Compare “Odyssey,” x., 64; xi., 61. Hence, later, the phrase κατὰ δαίμονα is nearly equivalent to by chance. We have seen that, in Homer, the bad sense of δαιμόνοις is the prevailing one. In the tragedians, also, δαίμων , though used both of good and bad fortune, occurs more frequently in the latter sense, and toward this sense the word gravitates more and more. The undertone of Greek thought, which tended to regard no man happy until he had escaped from life (see on Matthew 5:3, blessed )naturally imparted a gloomy and forbidding character to those who were supposed to allot the destinies of life. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In classical Greek it is noticeable that the abstract τὸ δαιμόνιον fell into the background behind δαίμων , with the development in the latter of the notion of a fate or genius connected with each individual, as the demon of Socrates; while in biblical Greek the process is the reverse, this doctrine being rejected for that of an overruling personal providence, and the strange gods, “obscure to human knowledge and alien to human life,” taking the abstract term uniformly in an evil sense. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Empedocles, a Greek philosopher, of Sicily, developed Hesiod's distinction; making the demons of a mixed nature between gods and men, not only the link between the two, but having an agency and disposition of their own; not immortal, but long-lived, and subject to the passions and propensities of men. While in Hesiod the demons are all good, according to Empedocles they are both bad and good. This conception relieved the gods of the responsibility for proceedings unbecoming the divine nature. The enormities which the older myths ascribed directly to the gods - thefts, rapes, abductions - were the doings of bad demons. It also saved the credit of the old legends, obviating the necessity of pronouncing either that the gods were unworthy or the legends untrue. “Yet, though devised for the purpose of satisfying a more scrupulous religious sensibility, it was found inconvenient afterward when assailants arose against paganism generally. For while it abandoned as indefensible a large portion of what had once been genuine faith, it still retained the same word demons with an entirely altered signification. The Christian writers in their controversies found ample warrant among the earlier pagan authors for treating all the gods as demons; and not less ample warrant among the later pagans for denouncing the demons generally as evil beings” (Grote, “History of Greece”). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- This evil sense the words always bear in the New Testament as well as in the Septuagint. Demons are synonymous with unclean spirits (Mark 5:12, Mark 5:15; Mark 3:22, Mark 3:30; Luke 4:33). They appear in connection with Satan (Luke 10:17, Luke 10:18; Luke 11:18, Luke 11:19); they are put in opposition to the Lord (1 Corinthians 10:20, 1 Corinthians 10:21); to the faith (1 Timothy 4:1). They are connected with idolatry (Revelation 9:20; Revelation 16:13, Revelation 16:14). They are special powers of evil, influencing and disturbing the physical, mental, and moral being (Luke 13:11, Luke 13:16; Mark 5:2-5; Mark 7:25; Matthew 12:45). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
As soon as Jesus appears in Galilee the Pharisees attack him again (cf. Mark 7:5; Mark 8:11). Gould thinks that this is a test, not a temptation. The word means either (see Matthew 4:1), but their motive was evil. They had once involved the Baptist with Herod Antipas and Herodias on this subject. They may have some such hopes about Jesus, or their purpose may have been to see if Jesus will be stricter than Moses taught. They knew that he had already spoken in Galilee on the subject (Matthew 5:31.). [source]
Matthew has kingdom of heaven, or of the heavens ( τῶν οὐρανῶν )a phrase used by him only, and most frequently employed by Christ himself to describe the kingdom; though Matthew also uses, less frequently, kingdom of God. The two are substantially equivalent terms, though the pre-eminent title was kingdom of God, since it was expected to be fully realized in the Messianic era, when God should take upon himself the kingdom by a visible representative. Compare Isaiah 40:9, “Behold your God. ” The phrase kingdom of Heaven was common in the Rabbinical writings, and had a double signification: the historical kingdom and the spiritual and moral kingdom. They very often understood by it divine worship; adoration of God; the sum of religious duties; but also the Messianic kingdom. The kingdom of God is, essentially, the absolute dominion of God in the universe, both in a physical and a spiritual sense. It is “an organic commonwealth which has the principle of its existence in the will of God” (Tholuck). It was foreshadowed in the Jewish theocracy. The idea of the kingdom advanced toward clearer definition from Jacob's prophecy of the Prince out of Judah (Genesis 49:10), through David's prophecy of the everlasting kingdom and the king of righteousness and peace (Daniel 7:14-27; Daniel 4:25; Daniel 2:44). In this sense it was apprehended by John the Baptist. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The ideal kingdom is to be realized in the absolute rule of the eternal Son, Jesus Christ, by whom all things are made and consist (John 1:3; Colossians 1:16-20), whose life of perfect obedience to God and whose sacrificial offering of love upon the cross reveal to men their true relation to God, and whose spirit works to bring them into this relation. The ultimate idea of the kingdom is that of “a redeemed humanity, with its divinely revealed destiny manifesting itself in a religious communion, or the Church; asocial communion, or the state; and an aesthetic communion, expressing itself in forms of knowledge and art.”-DIVIDER- This kingdom is both present (Matthew 11:12; Matthew 12:28; Matthew 16:19; Luke 11:20; Luke 16:16; Luke 17:21; see, also, the parables of the Sower, the Tares, the Leaven, and the Drag-net; and compare the expression “theirs, or yours, is the kingdom,” Matthew 5:3; Luke 6:20) and future (Daniel 7:27; Matthew 13:43; Matthew 19:28; Matthew 25:34; Matthew 26:29; Mark 9:47; 2 Peter 1:11; 1 Corinthians 6:9; Revelation 20:1-15 sq.). As a present kingdom it is incomplete and in process of development. It is expanding in society like the grain of mustard seed (Matthew 13:31, Matthew 13:32); working toward the pervasion of society like the leaven in the lump (Matthew 13:33). God is in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, and the Gospel of Christ is the great instrument in that process (2 Corinthians 5:19, 2 Corinthians 5:20). The kingdom develops from within outward under the power of its essential divine energy and law of growth, which insures its progress and final triumph against all obstacles. Similarly, its work in reconciling and subjecting the world to God begins at the fountain-head of man's life, by implanting in his heart its own divine potency, and thus giving a divine impulse and direction to the whole man, rather than by moulding him from without by a moral code. The law is written in his heart. In like manner the State and the Church are shaped, not by external pressure, like the Roman empire and the Roxnish hierarchy, but by the evolution of holy character in men. The kingdom of God in its present development is not identical with the Church. It is a larger movement which includes the Church. The Church is identified with the kingdom to the degree in which it is under the power of the spirit of Christ. “As the Old Testament kingdom of God was perfected and completed when it ceased to be external, and became internal by being enthroned in the heart, so, on the other hand, the perfection of the New Testament kingdom will consist in its complete incarnation and externalization; that is, when it shall attain an outward manifestation, adequately expressing, exactly corresponding to its internal principle” (Tholuck). The consummation is described in Revelation 21,22. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. Luke adopts the style of direct address; Matthew of abstract statement. [source]
A beatitude, the same adjective as in Matthew 5:3-11. A beatitude of privilege very much like that in Matthew 5:13-16. Jesus often repeated his sayings. [source]
Happy, same word in the Beatitudes of Jesus (Matthew 5:3). This pious platitude whether due to ignorance or hypocrisy was called forth by Christ‘s words about the resurrection. It was a common figure among the rabbis, the use of a banquet for the bliss of heaven. This man may mean that this is a prerogative of the Pharisees. He assumed complacently that he will be among the number of the blest. Jesus himself uses this same figure of the spiritual banquet for heavenly bliss (Luke 22:29). [source]
Another repeated saying of Christ (Matthew 5:32; Mark 10:11.; Matthew 19:9.). Adultery remains adultery, divorce or no divorce, remarriage or no marriage. [source]
Original meaning of this old word. See note on Matthew 5:3. The name Lazarus is from Eleazaros “God a help,” and was a common one. [source]
Matthew 5:39 has “right.” Old word meaning jaw or jawbone, but in the N.T. only here and Matthew 5:39, which see note for discussion. It seems an act of violence rather than contempt. Sticklers for extreme literalism find trouble with the conduct of Jesus in John 18:22. where Jesus, on receiving a slap in the face, protested against it. [source]
Present passive participle of ελεγχω elegchō an old verb meaning in Homer to treat with contempt, then to convict (Matthew 18:15), to expose (Ephesians 5:11), to reprove as here. The substantive ελεγχος elegchos means proof (Hebrews 11:1) and ελεγμος elegmos censure (2 Timothy 3:16). Josephus (Ant. XVIII. V.4) shows how repulsive this marriage was to Jewish feeling. Evil things Incorporated into the relative sentence. The word is from πονοσ πονεω ponosclass="normal greek">οπταλμος πονηρος poneō toil, work, and gives the active side of evil, possibly with the notion of work itself as evil or at least an annoyance. The “evil eye” In Matthew 6:23 it is a diseased eye. So Satan is “the evil one” (Matthew 5:37; Matthew 6:13, etc.). It is a very common adjective in the N.T. as in the older Greek. [source]
The poor, but “yours” Matthew 5:3 has “the kingdom of heaven” which occurs alone in Matthew though he also has the one here in Luke with no practical difference. The rabbis usually said “the kingdom of heaven.” They used it of the political Messianic kingdom when Judaism of the Pharisaic sort would triumph over the world. The idea of Jesus is in the sharpest contrast to that conception here and always. See note on Matthew 3:2 for discussion of the meaning of the word “kingdom.” It is the favourite word of Jesus for the rule of God in the heart here and now. It is both present and future and will reach a glorious consummation. Some of the sayings of Christ have apocalyptic and eschatological figures, but the heart of the matter is here in the spiritual reality of the reign of God in the hearts of those who serve him. The kingdom parables expand and enlarge upon various phases of this inward life and growth. [source]
, but “yours” Matthew 5:3 has “the kingdom of heaven” which occurs alone in Matthew though he also has the one here in Luke with no practical difference. The rabbis usually said “the kingdom of heaven.” They used it of the political Messianic kingdom when Judaism of the Pharisaic sort would triumph over the world. The idea of Jesus is in the sharpest contrast to that conception here and always. See note on Matthew 3:2 for discussion of the meaning of the word “kingdom.” It is the favourite word of Jesus for the rule of God in the heart here and now. It is both present and future and will reach a glorious consummation. Some of the sayings of Christ have apocalyptic and eschatological figures, but the heart of the matter is here in the spiritual reality of the reign of God in the hearts of those who serve him. The kingdom parables expand and enlarge upon various phases of this inward life and growth. [source]
Matthew 5:3 has “the kingdom of heaven” which occurs alone in Matthew though he also has the one here in Luke with no practical difference. The rabbis usually said “the kingdom of heaven.” They used it of the political Messianic kingdom when Judaism of the Pharisaic sort would triumph over the world. The idea of Jesus is in the sharpest contrast to that conception here and always. See note on Matthew 3:2 for discussion of the meaning of the word “kingdom.” It is the favourite word of Jesus for the rule of God in the heart here and now. It is both present and future and will reach a glorious consummation. Some of the sayings of Christ have apocalyptic and eschatological figures, but the heart of the matter is here in the spiritual reality of the reign of God in the hearts of those who serve him. The kingdom parables expand and enlarge upon various phases of this inward life and growth. [source]
Better, as Rev., blessed. See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. No article: to poor people. [source]
Literally, gave a blow. Interpreters differ as to whether it was a blow with a rod, or with the hand. The kindred verb ῥαπίζω , from ῥαπίς , a rod, is etymologically related to ῥαβδίζω , from ῥάβδος , a rod, and occurs Matthew 5:39, of smiting on the cheek, and Matthew 26:67, where it is distinguished from κολαφίζω , to strike with the fist. This latter passage, however, leaves the question open, since, if the meaning to smite with a rod can be defended, there is nothing to prevent its being understood there in that sense. The earlier meaning of the word was, undoubtedly, according to its etymology, to smite with a rod. So Herodotus of Xerxes. “It is certain that he commanded those who scourged ( ῥαπι.ζοντας ) the waters (of the Hellespont) to utter, as they lashed them, these barbarian and wicked words” (vii., 35). And again: “The Corinthian captain, Adeimantus, observed, 'Themistocles, at the games they who start too soon are scourged ( ῥαπίζονται )'” (viii., 59). It passes, in classical Greek, from this meaning to that of a light blow with the hand. The grammarian Phrynichus (A. D. 180) condemns the use of the word in the sense of striking with the hand, or slapping, as not according to good Attic usage, and says that the proper expression for a blow on the cheek with the open hand is ἐπὶ κόρρης πατάξαι . This shows that the un-Attic phrase had crept into use. In the Septuagint the word is clearly used in the sense of a blow with the hand. See Isaiah 50:6: “I gave my cheeks to blows ( εἰς ῥαπι.σματα ). Hosea 11:4, “As a man that smiteth ( ῥαπίζων ) upon his cheeks” (A.V. and Rev., that take off the yoke on their jaws ). In 1 Kings 22:24, we read, “Zedekiah - smote Micaiah on the cheek ( ἐπάταξε ἐπὶ τὴν σιαγόνα ).” The word in John 18:23, δέρεις , literally, flayest, hence, do beat or thrash (compare Luke 12:47), seems better to suit the meaning strike with a rod; yet in 2 Corinthians 11:20, that verb is used of smiting in the face ( εἰς πρόσωπον δέρει ), and in 1 Corinthians 9:27, where Paul is using the figure of a boxer, he says, “So fight I ( πυκτεύω , of boxing, or fighting with the fists ), not as one that beateth ( δέρων ) the air.” These examples practically destroy the force of the argument from δέρεις . It is impossible to settle the point conclusively; but, on the whole, it seems as well to retain the rendering of the A.V. and Rev. [source]
A different word from the blessed of Matthew 5:3( μακάριος ). This is the perfect participle of the verb εὐλογέω , to speak well of, praise, hence our eulogy. Matthew's word applies to character; this to repute. The ascription of praise here is from Psalm 118:25, Psalm 118:26. This Psalm, according to Perowne, was composed originally for the first celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles after the completion of the sacred temple. The words of the twenty-fifth verse were sung during that feast, when the altar of burnt-offering was solemnly compassed; that is, once on each of the first six days of the feast, and seven times on the seventh day. This seventh day was called “the Great Hosanna,” and not only the prayers for the feast, but even the branches of trees, including the myrtles which were attached to the palm branch, were called “Hosannas.” [source]
The preposition ἀντί originally means over against; opposite; before (in a local sense). Through the idea of placing one thing over against another is developed that of exchange. Thus Herodotus (iii., 59), “They bought the island, ἀντὶ χρημάτων , for money.” So Matthew 5:38, “An eye for ( ἀντὶ ) an eye,” etc. This idea is at the root of the peculiar sense in which the preposition is used here. We received, not New Testament grace instead of Old Testament grace; nor simply, grace added to grace; but new grace imparted as the former measure of grace has been received and improved. “To have realized and used one measure of grace, was to have gained a larger measure (as it were) in exchange for it.” Consequently, continuous, unintermitted grace. The idea of the development of one grace from another is elaborated by Peter (2 Peter 1:5), on which see notes. Winer cites a most interesting parallel from Philo. “Wherefore, having provided and dispensed the first graces ( χάριτας ), before their recipients have waxed wanton through satiety, he subsequently bestows different graces in exchange for ( ἀντὶ ) those, and a third supply for the second, and ever new ones in exchange for the older.” [source]
Perfect passive indicative of καταλαμβανω katalambanō (see John 8:3), caught and still guilty. In adultery Present passive participle of μοιχευω moicheuō “herself suffering adultery” (Matthew 5:32). Used of married people. Not in John. In the very act Old adjective (αυτοπωροσ αυτος autophōros class="normal greek">πωρ autos self, and phōr thief) caught in the act of theft, then extended to any crime in which one is caught. Old idiom, but not elsewhere in the Greek Bible. One example in a Berlin papyrus. [source]
Present passive participle of μοιχευω moicheuō “herself suffering adultery” (Matthew 5:32). Used of married people. Not in John. In the very act Old adjective (αυτοπωροσ αυτος autophōros class="normal greek">πωρ autos self, and phōr thief) caught in the act of theft, then extended to any crime in which one is caught. Old idiom, but not elsewhere in the Greek Bible. One example in a Berlin papyrus. [source]
It is not possible to tell whether Jesus is alluding to a rural proverb of which nothing is known about there being four months from seedtime to harvest (a longer time than four months in fact) or whether he means that it was then actually four months to harvest. In the latter sense, since harvest began about the middle of April, it would be December when Jesus spoke. There are yet four months The use of ετι eti (yet) and the fact that the space between seedtime and harvest is longer than four months “And the harvest First aorist active imperative of επαιρω epairō Deliberate looking as in John 6:5 where τεαομαι theaomai also is used as here. Fields Cultivated or ploughed ground as in Luke 21:21. White Ripened grain like grey hair (Matthew 5:36). Already unto harvest Probably ηδη ēdē (already) goes with John 4:36. The Samaritans could already be seen approaching and they were the field “white for harvest.” This is the meaning of Christ‘s parable. If it is the spring of the year and Christ can point to the ripened grain, the parable is all the plainer, but it is not dependent on this detail. Recall the parable of the sower in Matt 13. [source]
See on blessed, Matthew 5:3. [source]
For this use of εχω λογον echō logon with προς pros See note on Matthew 5:32; and note on Colossians 3:13. The town-clerk names Demetrius and the craftsmen (τεχνιται technitai) as the parties responsible for the riot. [source]
So, as I did. Necessity Toiling This verb common in the old Greek, but in the N.T. only in Luke 1:54; Acts 20:35; 1 Timothy 6:2. This noble plea to help the weak is the very spirit of Christ (1 Thessalonians 5:14; 1 Corinthians 12:28; Romans 5:6; Romans 14:1). In 1 Thessalonians 5:14 αντεχεστε των αστενουντων antechesthe tōn asthenountōn we have Paul‘s very idea again. Every Community Chest appeal today re-echoes Paul‘s plea. He himself said (αυτος ειπεν autos eipen). Not in the Gospels, one of the sayings of Jesus in current use that Paul had received and treasured. Various other Agrapha of Jesus have been preserved in ancient writers and some in recently discovered papyri which may be genuine or not. We are grateful that Paul treasured this one. This Beatitude (on μακαριον makarion see notes on Matthew 5:3-11) is illustrated by the whole life of Jesus with the Cross as the culmination. Aristotle (Etho. IV. I) has a saying somewhat like this, but assigns the feeling of superiority as the reason (Page), an utterly different idea from that here. This quotation raises the question of how much Paul personally knew of the life and sayings of Jesus. [source]
Not in the Gospels, one of the sayings of Jesus in current use that Paul had received and treasured. Various other Agrapha of Jesus have been preserved in ancient writers and some in recently discovered papyri which may be genuine or not. We are grateful that Paul treasured this one. This Beatitude (on μακαριον makarion see notes on Matthew 5:3-11) is illustrated by the whole life of Jesus with the Cross as the culmination. Aristotle (Etho. IV. I) has a saying somewhat like this, but assigns the feeling of superiority as the reason (Page), an utterly different idea from that here. This quotation raises the question of how much Paul personally knew of the life and sayings of Jesus. [source]
See note on Matthew 5:3 for makarios Blass notes that Paul, like Tertullus, begins with captatio benevolentiae, but absque adulatione. He says only what he can truthfully speak. For μακαριος hēgēmai see note on Philemon 3:7 and 1 Timothy 6:1 (perfect middle indicative of ηγημαι hēgeomai), I have considered. [source]
Directly opposite to the law of retaliation of the Pharisees as in Matthew 5:39; 1 Thessalonians 5:15; 1 Corinthians 13:5. Take thought of (προνοουμενοι pronooumenoi). “Taking thought beforehand.” Old word. See note on 2 Corinthians 8:21. [source]
See note on Matthew 5:3. [source]
More blessed is preferable. The word has a higher meaning than happy. See on Matthew 5:3.“Such, if on high their thoughts are set,Nor in the stream the source forget, If prompt to quit the bliss they know,-DIVIDER- Following the Lamb where'er He go,-DIVIDER- By purest pleasure unbeguiled-DIVIDER- To idolize or wife or child:-DIVIDER- Such wedded souls our God shall own-DIVIDER- For faultless virgins round His throne.”Keble, “Christian Year,” Wednesday before Easter. [source]
Referring to Christ's declarations respecting divorce, Matthew 5:31, Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:3-12. Not a distinction between an inspired and an uninspired saying. Paul means that his readers had no need to apply to him for instruction in the matter of divorce, since they had the words of Christ himself. [source]
Literally, wholly, altogether, like Latin omnino and Greek παντως pantōs (1 Corinthians 9:22). So papyri have it for “really” and also for “generally” or “everywhere” as is possible here. See also 1 Corinthians 6:7. With a negative it has the sense of “not at all” as in 1 Corinthians 15:29; Matthew 5:34 the only N.T. examples, though a common word. [source]
Not mere wish as in 1 Corinthians 7:7, 1 Corinthians 7:8. Not I, but the Lord (ουκ εγω αλλα ο κυριος ouk egō alla ho kurios). Paul had no commands from Jesus to the unmarried (men or women), but Jesus had spoken to the married (husbands and wives) as in Matthew 5:31.; Matthew 19:3-12; Mark 10:9-12; Luke 16:18. The Master had spoken plain words about divorce. Paul reenforces his own inspired command by the command of Jesus. In Mark 10:9 we have from Christ: “What therefore God joined together let not man put asunder” (μη χοριζετω mē chorizetō). That the wife depart not from her husband First aorist passive infinitive (indirect command after παραγγελλω paraggellō) of χοριζω chorizō old verb from adverbial preposition χωρις chōris separately, apart from, from. Here used of divorce by the wife which, though unusual then, yet did happen as in the case of Salome (sister of Herod the Great) and of Herodias before she married Herod Antipas. Jesus also spoke of it (Mark 10:12). Now most of the divorces are obtained by women. This passive infinitive is almost reflexive in force according to a constant tendency in the Koiné{[28928]}š (Robertson, Grammar, p. 817).sa120 [source]
Paul had no commands from Jesus to the unmarried (men or women), but Jesus had spoken to the married (husbands and wives) as in Matthew 5:31.; Matthew 19:3-12; Mark 10:9-12; Luke 16:18. The Master had spoken plain words about divorce. Paul reenforces his own inspired command by the command of Jesus. In Mark 10:9 we have from Christ: “What therefore God joined together let not man put asunder” (μη χοριζετω mē chorizetō). [source]
Perfect passive indicative of δουλοω douloō to enslave, has been enslaved, does not remain a slave. The believing husband or wife is not at liberty to separate, unless the disbeliever or pagan insists on it. Wilful desertion of the unbeliever sets the other free, a case not contemplated in Christ‘s words in Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:9. Luther argued that the Christian partner, thus released, may marry again. But that is by no means clear, unless the unbeliever marries first. [source]
Comparative of μακαριος makarios used in the Beatitudes (Matthew 5:3.). [source]
Some explain, external calamities; others, the things which are left out in the enumeration, as Matthew 5:32; Acts 26:29. Better, the latter, so that the literal meaning is, apart from the things which are beside and outside my enumeration: or, as Alford, not to mention those which are beside these. The word does not occur in classical Greek, and no instance of its usage in the former sense occurs in the New Testament or in the Septuagint. See Rev., margin. [source]
The climax of insult. Compare Matthew 5:39; Luke 22:64; Acts 23:2. Also the injunction to a bishop not to be a striker, 1 Timothy 3:3; Titus 1:7. Stanley notes the decree of the Council of Braga, a.d. 675, that no bishop, at his will and pleasure, shall strike his clergy. [source]
Only here in the New Testament. Primarily of abject poverty, beggary (see on Matthew 5:3), though used of poverty generally. “Became poor” is correct, though some render “was poor,” and explain that Christ was both rich and poor simultaneously; combining divine power and excellence with human weakness and suffering. But this idea is foreign to the general drift of the passage. The other explanation falls in better with the key-note - an act of self-devotion - in 2 Corinthians 8:5. The aorist tense denotes the entrance into the condition of poverty, and the whole accords with the magnificent passage, Philemon 2:6-8. Stanley has some interesting remarks on the influence of this passage in giving rise to the orders of mendicant friars. See Dante, “Paradiso,” xi., 40-139; xii., 130 sqq. [source]
Paul raises the question of fickleness about any of his plans. Yea yea (Ναι ναι Nai nai) - nay nay See a similar repetition in Matthew 5:37. It is plain in James 5:12 where “the yea” is “yea” and “the nay” is “nay.” That seems to be Paul‘s meaning here, “that the Yea may be yea and the Nay may be nay.” [source]
See a similar repetition in Matthew 5:37. It is plain in James 5:12 where “the yea” is “yea” and “the nay” is “nay.” That seems to be Paul‘s meaning here, “that the Yea may be yea and the Nay may be nay.” [source]
Purpose clause with ινα hina and first aorist active subjunctive of εκκοπτω ekkoptō old verb to cut out or off (Matthew 3:10; Matthew 5:30). See note on 2 Corinthians 5:12 for απορμην aphormēn [source]
Old word from πλουτος ploutos (wealth), to enrich. Spiritual riches Paul has in mind as in 1 Corinthians 1:5 (cf. Matthew 5:37). As having nothing and yet possessing all things (ως μηδεν εχοντες και παντα κατεχοντες hōs mēden echontes kai panta katechontes). Contrast between μηδεν mēden (nothing) and παντα panta (all things, cf. 1 Corinthians 3:22) and εχω echō (to have) and κατεχω katechō (to hold down, to hold fast). Play on words (simple and compound) as in 2 Corinthians 3:2; 2 Corinthians 4:8. Climax of Paul‘s panegyric on the Christian ministry. He now resumes the thread of the story broken off in 2 Corinthians 2:14. [source]
Late word from περισσευω perisseuō to overflow. Their deep poverty (η κατα βατους πτωχεια αυτων hē kata bathous ptōcheia autōn). Πτωχεια Ptōcheia is old word from πτωχευω ptōcheuō to be a beggar, as of Jesus in 2 Corinthians 8:9 (from πτωχος ptōchos cowering in fear and poverty, as in Luke 14:13, but ennobled by Christ as in Matthew 5:3; 2 Corinthians 8:9). Poverty down deep. Strabo (LX 419) has κατα βατους kata bathous down to the bottom. Liberality From απλους haplous single, simple (Matthew 6:22). “The passage from single-mindedness or simplicity to liberality is not quite obvious” (Plummer). Perhaps “heartiness” supplies the connecting link. See also 2 Corinthians 9:11-13. [source]
Πτωχεια Ptōcheia is old word from πτωχευω ptōcheuō to be a beggar, as of Jesus in 2 Corinthians 8:9 (from πτωχος ptōchos cowering in fear and poverty, as in Luke 14:13, but ennobled by Christ as in Matthew 5:3; 2 Corinthians 8:9). Poverty down deep. Strabo (LX 419) has κατα βατους kata bathous down to the bottom. [source]
For elements see on Galatians 4:3. For πτωχὰ beggarlysee on Matthew 5:3. The two adjectives express the utter impotence of these “elements” to do and to bestow what was done and given by God in sending his Son into the world. Comp. Romans 8:3; Hebrews 7:18. [source]
The poor Christians of Palestine. Comp. Acts 24:17; Romans 15:26, Romans 15:27; 1 Corinthians 16:3; 2 Corinthians 9:1. For the word, see on Matthew 5:3. In lxx ordinarily of those who are oppressors, or of those who are quiet in contrast with the lawless. [source]
Note μη mē with the aorist subjunctive (negative purpose) αποδωι apodōi from αποδιδωμι apodidōmi to give back. Retaliation, condemned by Jesus (Matthew 5:38-42) and by Paul in Romans 12:17, usually takes the form of “evil for evil,” rather than “good for good” Note idea of exchange in αντι anti [source]
Possibly, from the evil one. Τὸ πονηρόν evilis found Romans 12:9; Matthew 5:39; but general N.T. usage favors the masculine, personal sense. See Matthew 13:19, Matthew 13:38; Ephesians 6:16; 1 John 2:13, 1 John 2:14; 1 John 3:12; 1 John 5:18. In lxx, τὸ πονηρόν evil is very common: ὁ πονηρὸς a few times, but always of men. See Deuteronomy 24:7; Esther 7:6; Job 21:30. In Tobit 3:8,17, τὸ πονηρόν δαιμόνιον thewicked demon. The masculine is favored by the Jewish formularies, of which traces appear in the Lord's prayer; by the unanimous tradition of Greek interpreters; by the interpretations of Tertullian and Cyprian, and by the evidence of the Syriac and Sahidic Versions. [source]
More correctly, the gospel of the glory, etc. The phrase as a whole has no parallel in N.T. The nearest approach to it is 2 Corinthians 4:4. Gospel of God is a Pauline phrase; but μακάριος blessedis not used of God by Paul, is not used of God by Paul, nor elsewhere outside of the pastorals, where it occurs twice, here and 1 Timothy 6:15. For blessed is not used of God by Paul, nor elsewhere outside of the Pastorals, where it occurs twice, here and 1 Timothy 6:15. For blessed see on Matthew 5:3. The appearing of the glory of God in Jesus Christ is the contents of the gospel. Comp. Titus 2:13. [source]
A second scriptural quotation would seem to be indicated, but there is no corresponding passage in the O.T. The words are found Luke 10:7, and, with a slight variation, Matthew 10:10. Some hold that the writer adds to the O.T. citation a popular proverb, and that Christ himself used the words in this way. But while different passages of Scripture are often connected in citation by καὶ , it is not according, to N.T. usage thus to connect Scripture and proverb. Moreover, in such series of citations it is customary to use καὶ πάλιν and again, or πάλιν simply. See Matthew 4:7; Matthew 5:33; John 12:39; Romans 15:9-12; 1 Corinthians 3:20; Hebrews 1:5; Hebrews 2:13. According to others, the writer here cites an utterance of Christ from oral tradition, coordinately with the O.T. citation, as Scripture. Paul, in 1 Thessalonians 4:15; 1 Corinthians 7:10, appeals to a word of the Lord; and in Acts 10:35he is represented as quoting “it is more blessed to give than to receive” as the words of Jesus. In 1Corinthians href="/desk/?q=1co+9:14&sr=1">1 Corinthians 9:14) “even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel,” which resembles the combination here. This last is the more probable explanation. [source]
The phrase N.T.o Μακάριος blessedvery often in the Gospels. See on Matthew 5:3. In Pastorals, with the exception of this passage, always of God. In Paul, only of men, and so usually in the Gospels. Ἑλπίδα hopethe object of hope. Why the hope is called blessed, appears from 2 Timothy 4:8; Philemon 3:20, etc. Comp. Judges 1:21, and 1 Peter 1:13. [source]
Perfect active common use of the perfect for permanent record. This seventh quotation is proof of the Son‘s superiority as the Son of God (his deity) to angels and is from Psalm 110:1, a Messianic Psalm frequently quoted in Hebrews. Sit thou Second person singular imperative middle of κατημαι kathēmai to sit, for the longer form κατησο kathēso as in Matthew 22:44; James 2:3. On my right hand “From my right.” See Hebrews 1:3 for εν δεχιαι en dexiāi “at the right hand.” Till I make Indefinite temporal clause about the future with εως heōs and the second aorist active subjunctive of τιτημι tithēmi with αν an (often not used), a regular and common idiom. Quoted also in Luke 20:43. For the pleonasm in υποδιον hupodion and των ποδων tōn podōn (objective genitive) see Matthew 5:35. [source]
See the common formulas of swearing, Matthew 5:35, Matthew 5:36. [source]
But the correct reading is τῷ κόσμῳ , to the world; and the expression is to be explained in the same way as ἀστεῖος τῷ Θεῷ , fair unto God, Acts 7:20, and δυνατὰ τῷ Θεῷ , mighty through (Rev., before )God, 2 Corinthians 10:4. So Rev., poor as to the world, in the world's esteem. Poor, see on Matthew 5:3. [source]
“But a doer of work,” a doer marked by work (descriptive genitive εργου ergou), not by mere listening or mere talk.In his doing (εν τηι ποιησει αυτου en tēi poiēsei autou). Another beatitude with μακαριος makarios as in James 1:12, like the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:3-12. Ποιησις Poiēsis is an old word (from ποιεω poieō for the act of doing), only here in N.T. [source]
For τελειον teleion see James 1:17. See Romans 7:12 for Paul‘s idea of the law of God. James here refers to the word of truth (James 1:18), the gospel of grace (Galatians 6:2; Romans 12:2).The law of liberty (τον της ελευτεριας ton tēs eleutherias). “That of liberty,” explaining why it is “perfect” (James 2:12 also), rests on the work of Christ, whose truth sets us free (John 8:32; 2 Corinthians 3:16; Romans 8:2).And so continueth First aorist active articular participle again of παραμενω paramenō parallel with παρακυπσας parakupsas Παραμενω Paramenō is to stay beside, and see Philemon 1:25 for contrast with the simplex μενω menō Rather, “having become” (second aorist middle participle of γινομαι ginomai to become).Not a hearer that forgetteth (ουκ ακροατης επιλησμονης ouk akroatēs epilēsmonēs). “Not a hearer of forgetfulness” (descriptive genitive, marked by forgetfulness). Επιλησμονη Epilēsmonē is a late and rare word (from επιλησμων epilēsmōn forgetful, from επιλαντομαι epilanthomai to forget, as in James 1:24), here only in N.T.But a doer that worketh “But a doer of work,” a doer marked by work (descriptive genitive εργου ergou), not by mere listening or mere talk.In his doing (εν τηι ποιησει αυτου en tēi poiēsei autou). Another beatitude with μακαριος makarios as in James 1:12, like the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:3-12. Ποιησις Poiēsis is an old word (from ποιεω poieō for the act of doing), only here in N.T. [source]
First aorist active articular participle again of παραμενω paramenō parallel with παρακυπσας parakupsas Παραμενω Paramenō is to stay beside, and see Philemon 1:25 for contrast with the simplex μενω menō Rather, “having become” (second aorist middle participle of γινομαι ginomai to become).Not a hearer that forgetteth (ουκ ακροατης επιλησμονης ouk akroatēs epilēsmonēs). “Not a hearer of forgetfulness” (descriptive genitive, marked by forgetfulness). Επιλησμονη Epilēsmonē is a late and rare word (from επιλησμων epilēsmōn forgetful, from επιλαντομαι epilanthomai to forget, as in James 1:24), here only in N.T.But a doer that worketh “But a doer of work,” a doer marked by work (descriptive genitive εργου ergou), not by mere listening or mere talk.In his doing (εν τηι ποιησει αυτου en tēi poiēsei autou). Another beatitude with μακαριος makarios as in James 1:12, like the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:3-12. Ποιησις Poiēsis is an old word (from ποιεω poieō for the act of doing), only here in N.T. [source]
Another beatitude with μακαριος makarios as in James 1:12, like the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:3-12. Ποιησις Poiēsis is an old word (from ποιεω poieō for the act of doing), only here in N.T. [source]
The ethical dative of interest, as the world looks at it as in Acts 7:20; 1 Corinthians 1:18; 2 Corinthians 10:4; James 4:4. By the use of the article (the poor) James does not affirm that God chose all the poor, but only that he did choose poor people (Matthew 10:23-26; 1 Corinthians 1:26-28).Rich in faith (πλουσιους εν πιστει plousious en pistei). Rich because of their faith. As he has shown in James 1:9.Which he promised Genitive of the accusative relative ην hēn attracted to the case of the antecedent βασιλειας basileias (the Messianic kingdom), the same verb and idea already in James 1:12 Cf. the beatitude of Jesus in Matthew 5:3 for the poor in spirit. [source]
Genitive of the accusative relative ην hēn attracted to the case of the antecedent βασιλειας basileias (the Messianic kingdom), the same verb and idea already in James 1:12 Cf. the beatitude of Jesus in Matthew 5:3 for the poor in spirit. [source]
No connection with what immediately precedes. Probably an allusion to the words of Jesus (Matthew 5:34-37). It is not out of place here. See the same phrase in 1 Peter 4:8. Robinson (Ephesians, p. 279) cites like examples from the papyri at the close of letters. Here it means “But especially” (Ropes). [source]
Imperative active third singular of ινα μη υπο κρισιν πεσητε eimi late form (1 Corinthians 16:22) for ινα μη estō “Your yea be yea” (and no more). A different form from that in Matthew 5:37. [source]
“Burst into weeping (ingressive aorist active imperative of κλαιω klaiō as in James 4:9), howling with grief” (present active participle of the old onomatopoetic verb ολολυζω ololuzō here only in N.T., like Latin ululare, with which compare αλαλαζω alalazō in Matthew 5:38.For your miseries (επι ταις ταλαιπωριαις υμων epi tais talaipōriais humōn). Old word from ταλαιπωρος talaipōros (Romans 7:24) and like ταλαιπωρεω talaipōreō in James 4:9 (from τλαω tlaō to endure and πωρος pōros a callus).That are coming upon you Present middle participle of the old compound επερχομαι eperchomai to come upon, used here in futuristic prophetic sense. [source]
First aorist (constative) active indicative of ακουω akouō As in Matthew 5:21, Matthew 5:27, Matthew 5:33, Matthew 5:38, Matthew 5:43. Ropes suggests in the synagogues.Of Job (Ιωβ Iōb). Job did complain, but he refused to renounce God (Job 1:21; Job 2:10; Job 13:15; Job 16:19; Job 19:25.). He had become a stock illustration of loyal endurance.Ye have seen Second aorist (constative) active indicative of οραω horaō In Job‘s case.The end of the Lord (το τελος κυριου to telos kuriou). The conclusion wrought by the Lord in Job‘s case (Job 42:12).Full of pity Late and rare compound “Very kind.”Merciful (οικτειρω oiktirmōn). Late and rare adjective (from oikteirō to pity), in N.T. only here and Luke 6:36. [source]
Prohibition of the habit (or to quit doing it if guilty) with μη mē and the present active imperative of ομνυω omnuō The various oaths (profanity) forbidden The Jews were wont to split hairs in their use of profanity, and by avoiding God‘s name imagine that they were not really guilty of this sin, just as professing Christians today use “pious oaths” which violate the prohibition of Jesus.Let be (εστω ētō). Imperative active third singular of ινα μη υπο κρισιν πεσητε eimi late form (1 Corinthians 16:22) for ινα μη estō “Your yea be yea” (and no more). A different form from that in Matthew 5:37.That ye fall not under judgment Negative purpose with ινα μη κριτητε hina mē and the second aorist active subjunctive of Κρισις piptō to fall. See κρινω hina mē krithēte in James 5:9. κριμα Krisis (from krinō) is the act of judging rather than the judgment rendered (krima James 3:1). [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
εὖ , well, λόγος , a word. Well-spoken-of; praised; honored. Used in the New Testament of God only. The kindred verb is applied to human beings, as to Mary (Luke 1:28): “Blessed ( εὐλογημένη ) art thou.” Compare the different word for blessed in Matthew 5:3, etc. ( μακάριοι )and see notes there. The style of this doxological phrase is Pauline. Compare 2 Corinthians 1:3; Ephesians 1:3. [source]
Μη Mē and the present active participle of αποδιδωμι apodidōmi to give back. The same phrase in Romans 12:17 and the same idea in 1 Thessalonians 5:15. Peter may have obtained it from Paul or both from Proverbs 17:13; Proverbs 20:22, “an approximation to Christ‘s repeal of the λεχ ταλιονις lex talionis (Matthew 5:38.) which Plato first opposed among the Greeks” (Hart). Common use of αντι anti for exchange. [source]
The χαρτης chartēs was a leaf of papyrus prepared for writing by cutting the pith into strips and pasting together, old word, here only in N.T. Μελας Melas is old adjective for black (Matthew 5:36; Revelation 6:5, Revelation 6:12), and for black ink here, 3 John 1:13; 2 Corinthians 3:3. Apparently John wrote this little letter with his own hand.To come (γενεσται genesthai). Second aorist middle infinitive of γινομαι ginomai after ελπιζω elpizō I hope.Face to face “Mouth to mouth.” So in 3 John 1:14; Numbers 12:8. “Face to face” Or “our” (ημων hēmōn). Both true.That may be fulfilled Purpose clause with ινα hina and the periphrastic perfect passive subjunctive of πληροω plēroō as in 1 John 1:4, which see. [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
Because, like all the other early Christian churches, the majority of its members were of the poorer classes, and also, perhaps, with reference to their robbery by persecutors. See on poor, Matthew 5:3. [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
See on Matthew 5:3. [source]
As in Matthew 5:3. This endorses the book as a whole. [source]
This use of εν en after ομνυω omnuō instead of the usual accusative (James 5:12) is like the Hebrew (Matthew 5:34, Matthew 5:36). “The living one for ages of ages” is a common phrase in the Apocalypse for God as eternally existing (Revelation 1:18; Revelation 4:9, Revelation 4:10; Revelation 15:7). This oath proves that this angel is not Christ.Who created (ος εκτισεν hos ektisen). First aorist active indicative of κτιζω ktizō a reference to God‘s creative activity as seen in Genesis 1:1.; Exodus 20:11; Isaiah 37:16; Isaiah 42:5; Psalm 33:6; Psalm 145:6, etc.That there shall be time no longer Future indicative indirect discourse with οτι hoti But this does not mean that χρονος chronos (time), Einstein‘s “fourth dimension” (added to length, breadth, height), will cease to exist, but only that there will be no more delay in the fulfillment of the seventh trumpet (Revelation 10:7), in answer to the question, “How long?” (Psalm 6:10). [source]
Imperfect middle of κειμαι keimai old verb, used as passive of τιτημι tithēmi As the vision opens John sees the throne already in place as the first thing in heaven. This bold imagery comes chiefly from 1 Kings 22:19; Isaiah 6:1.; Ezekiel 1:26-28; Daniel 7:9. One should not forget that this language is glorious imagery, not actual objects in heaven. God is spirit. The picture of God on the throne is common in the O.T. and the N.T. (Matthew 5:34.; Matthew 23:22; Hebrews 1:3 and in nearly every chapter in the Revelation, Revelation 1:4, etc.). The use of κατημενος kathēmenos (sitting) for the name of God is like the Hebrew avoidance of the name επι τον τρονον Jahweh and is distinguished from the Son in Revelation 6:16; Revelation 7:10.Upon the throne (Επι epi ton thronon). επι του τρονου Epi with the accusative, as in Revelation 4:4; Revelation 6:2, Revelation 6:4.; Revelation 11:16; Revelation 20:4, but in Revelation 4:9, Revelation 4:10; Revelation 5:1, Revelation 5:7; Revelation 6:16; Revelation 7:15 we have επι τωι τρονωι epi tou thronou (genitive), while in Revelation 7:10; Revelation 19:4; Revelation 21:5 we have epi tōi thronōi (locative) with no great distinction in the resultant idea. [source]