Exegesis and Exposition of Colossians 4:9-10

EXEGESIS AND EXPOSITION OF COLOSSIANS 4:9-10

Pastor William E. Wenstrom Jr. WENSTROM BIBLE MINISTRIES Marion, Iowa 2017 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries

Colossians 4:9

Onesimus

Colossians 4:7 As to all my affairs, Tychicus, our beloved brother and faithful servant and fellow bond-servant in the Lord, will bring you information. 8 For I have sent him to you for this very purpose, that you may know about our circumstances and that he may encourage your hearts 9 and with him Onesimus, our faithful and beloved brother, who is one of your number. They will inform you about the whole situation here. (NASB95) “And with him Onesimus” is composed of the following: (1) preposition sun (σύν), “with” (2) dative masculine singular form of the proper name Onēsimos (Ὀνήσιμος), “Onesimus.” The proper name Onēsimos means “useful” or “helpful” and was a common name for slaves in the first century in the Roman Empire. Paul employs the meaning of his name as a play on words in Philemon 11. This name identifies the individual who was Philemon’s runaway slave who was evangelized by Paul in Rome during his first Roman imprisonment. Paul is appealing to Philemon on his behalf. Onesimus is mentioned here in Colossians 4:9 as being a citizen of Colossae. In fact, he accompanied Tychicus in bearing Paul’s letter to the church at Colossae. The proper name Onēsimos is the object of the preposition sun, which means “along with” since it functions as a marker of accompaniment indicating that Onesimus would accompany Tychicus. Together, they would provide the Colossian Christian community information with regards to Paul’s circumstances in Rome.

Commendation of Onesimus

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 1 agapētos (ἀγαπητός), “beloved” (4) dative masculine singular form of the noun adelphos (ἀδελφός), “brother.” The noun adelphos means “brother” referring to Onesimus. The word refers to a “fellow-believer, fellow-Christian, spiritual brother” emphasizing with the faithful believers in Colossae their common familial relationship with Paul, Timothy, their companions in Rome, Epaphras, Tychicus and Onesimus. This word is modified by the adjective pistos which means “faithful” and is describing Onesimus’ service on behalf of Jesus Christ and His body, the church as remaining a loyal servant of Jesus Christ. This adjective describes him as firmly adhering to Paul’s apostolic teaching. The conjunction kai is adjunctive meaning it is introducing an additional word which describes Onesimus. The noun adelphos is also modified by the adjective agapētos which means “beloved” indicating the eternal spiritual relationship that existed between Onesimus, Tychicus, Paul, Timothy, their companions in Rome, Epaphras and the Colossians as a result of all of them exercising faith in Jesus Christ as their Savior. It describes the personal love and affection Paul, Timothy, their companions in Rome, Epaphras and Tychicus had for Onesimus indicating that they were all dear friends. The noun adelphos is functioning as a dative in simple apposition meaning it is apposite to the proper name Onēsimos indicating that it specifically identifies which Onesimus Paul was referring to since his name was a common name for slaves in the first century in the Roman Empire. The article preceding the phrase pistō kai agapētō adelphō (πιστῷ καὶ ἀγαπητῷ ἀδελφῷ) is in the first attributive position which is article-adjective-noun. Consequently, these two adjectives modifying the noun adelphos are receiving greater emphasis and this noun.

Onesimus is a Colossian

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 2 ek (ἐκ), “from” (4) genitive second person plural form of the personal pronoun su (σύ), “your.” The relative pronoun hos means “who” referring to Onesimus because it agrees in gender (masculine) and number (singular) with the proper name Onēsimos, “Onesimus.” The verb eimi means “to belong to a particular group of people.” The relative pronoun hos is in the nominative case and functions as a nominative subject meaning it is performing the action of the third person singular present active indicative form of the verb eimi (εἰμί), “is” indicating that Onesimus exists in the state or condition of belonging to the Colossian Christian community. The present tense of the verb eimi is a customary or stative present used to signal an ongoing state. This would indicate that Onesimus exists in the state of belonging to the Colossian Christian community. The active voice of this verb is a stative active meaning that the subject exists in the state indicating by the verb. This would indicate that that Onesimus exists in the state of belonging to the Colossian Christian community. The indicative mood is declarative presenting this assertion as a non-contingent or unqualified statement of fact. The genitive second person plural form of the personal pronoun su means “all of you” and refers of course to the Colossian Christian community as a corporate unit. This word is the object of the preposition ek, which functions as a partitive preposition indicating that this word su is the whole of which the head noun is a part indicating that Onesimus is a part of the Colossian Christian community.

Onesimus and Tychicus Will Inform the Colossians

Colossians 4:7 As to all my affairs, Tychicus, our beloved brother and faithful servant and fellow bond-servant in the Lord, will bring you information. 8 For I have sent him to you for this very purpose, that you may know about our circumstances and that he may encourage your hearts 9 and with him Onesimus, our faithful and beloved brother, who is one of your number. They will inform you about the whole situation here. (NASB95) “They will inform you about the whole situation here” is composed of the following: (1) accusative neuter plural form of the adjective pas (πᾶς), “whole” (2) dative second person plural form of the personal pronoun su (σύ), “you” (3) third person plural future active indicative form of the verb gnōrizō (γνωρίζω), “they will inform about” (4) accusative neuter plural form of the definite article ho (ὁ), “the situation” (5) adverb hōde (ὧδε), “here.” At this point in the verse, the apostle Paul is employing the figure of asyndeton in order to emphasize the declarative statement to follow.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 3

The verb gnōrizō means “to cause someone to know something, to cause information to be known by someone.” It refers to Tychicus and Onesimus causing the Colossians to receive information with regards to all of Paul’s circumstances in Rome. The future tense of this verb gnōrizō is a predictive future tense indicating that something will take place or come to pass. Therefore, it indicates that Tychicus and Onesimus “will certainly” cause the Colossians to know all about Paul’s circumstances in Rome. The active voice is a simple active meaning that Tychicus and Onesimus as the subject of this verb will perform the action of this verb in causing the Colossians to know all about Paul’s circumstances in Rome. The indicative mood of the verb is declarative meaning that it is presenting this assertion as a non-contingent or unqualified statement. The plural form of the personal pronoun su means “all of you” referring to the Colossian Christian community as a corporate unit. This word functions as a dative of advantage expressing the idea that the Colossians will benefit from Tychicus and Onesimus providing them information regarding Paul’s circumstances in Rome. The accusative neuter plural form of the definite article ho means, “circumstances, situation.” The word functions an accusative of respect or reference meaning it is restricting the reference of the verbal action indicating with reference to what the verbal action is represented as true. This would mean that Tychicus and Onesimus would certainly provide the Colossian Christian community information “with regards to” the entire situation in Rome. This article is modified by the adjective pas which is indicated by the fact that they both are in the accusative neuter plural form. This adjective means “entire” since the word denotes the totality of Paul’s circumstances in Rome in exhaustive detail. The adverb hōde means “here” since it pertains to a position or location relatively near the writer. Here it refers of course to the location of Paul’s house arrest when he wrote this epistle, which was Rome. We will insert into our translation the phrase “I have sent him” since if we fail to do so our English translation will be awkward. Verse 9 in the Greek does not start a new sentence but we will do so for the sake of making the English readable.

Translation of Colossians 4:9

Colossians 4:9 I have sent him along with Onesimus, a faithful as well as beloved brother, who is one of you. They will certainly provide all of you information with regards to the entire situation here. (Author’s translation)

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 4

Exposition of Colossians 4:9

Colossians 4:9 completes a subsection of the final section of this epistle which began in Colossians 4:7. Colossians 4:7-9 contains a reference to the messengers who carried this epistle to the Colossians, namely Tychicus and Onesimus. It also contains a commendation of these two men. More than likely, these two men would have traveled from Rome to Colossae by way of Ephesus and Laodicea. Ephesians 6:21-22 and Philemon 23-24 indicate that they carried not only Paul’s personal letter to Philemon but also the Ephesian epistle which is probably referred to in Colossians 4:16 as Paul’s epistle to the Laodiceans. The apostle Paul informs the Colossians that along with Tychicus, Onesimus would provide them detailed information regarding his house arrest in Rome while he awaited his appeal trial before Caesar. He also provides the Colossians a two- fold commendation of Onesimus. He describes him as “a faithful and beloved brother.” By calling him a “brother,” Paul is communicating the idea that this man was a “fellow-believer, fellow-Christian, spiritual brother.” With this word, he is emphasizing with the faithful believers in Colossae their common familial relationship with himself, Timothy, their companions in Rome, Epaphras, Tychicus and Onesimus. “Faithful” is describing Onesimus’ service on behalf of Jesus Christ and His body, the church as remaining a loyal servant of Jesus Christ. It describes him as firmly adhering to Paul’s apostolic teaching. “Beloved” indicates the eternal spiritual relationship that existed between Onesimus, Tychicus, Paul, Timothy, their companions in Rome, Epaphras and the Colossians as a result of all of them exercising faith in Jesus Christ as their Savior. It describes the personal love and affection Paul, Timothy, their companions in Rome, Epaphras and Tychicus had for Onesimus indicating that they were all dear friends. The last thing Paul says about Onesimus was that he was a Colossian. Paul’s epistle to Philemon also indicates that he was in fact a runaway slave of another Colossian, namely Philemon. Onesimus ended up in Rome by the providence of God and was evangelized by the apostle Paul. He responded to the apostle’s presentation of the gospel of Jesus Christ by exercising faith in Jesus Christ as his Savior. Paul asserts in the Philemon epistle that Onesimus was useful to him and has great affection for him. In this letter, to Philemon, Paul requests that Philemon accept Onesimus his runaway slave as a brother in Christ and welcome him into the fellowship of the Colossian church. The apostle’s two-fold commendation of Onesimus is another clear indication that Paul wanted the Colossian Christian community to accept him as a brother in Christ and welcome him into their fellowship.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 5

Philemon 10-19 gives us great insight into Paul’s attitude toward Onesimus and how much he valued this runaway’s slaves service on his behalf while he was awaiting his appeal trial before Caesar. Philemon 10 I appeal to you on behalf of my spiritual child whom I became the spiritual father of during my imprisonment Onesimus. (Author’s translation) The apostle Paul identifies his purpose for writing Philemon, namely, to appeal to him on behalf of his runaway slave Onesimus who he describes as his spiritual child because he communicated the gospel to him and Onesimus responded in faith. Interestingly, Paul does not use the name Onesimus until the end of the verse. This is deliberate of course since Paul wanted to first establish the fact that Onesimus was now a believer and now a fellow Christian of his and Philemon. The apostle is being tactful since this was probably the first time that Philemon had heard anything about Onesimus since he ran away. Thus, by first describing Onesimus as his spiritual child who he became the spiritual father of during his Roman imprisonment, the apostle Paul was softening the blow for Philemon since it was probably the first time he had heard about him since he ran away. Paul was also taking away any justification for Philemon being angry toward Onesimus as a result of reading this epistle. Furthermore, by describing Onesimus first as his spiritual child, Paul was telling Philemon that his runaway slave was now his spiritual brother. The implication is that Philemon is obligated to forgive Onesimus and accept him back with open arms. In fact, Paul had Onesimus deliver this letter personally to Philemon. Onesimus is no longer a piece of property but the spiritual child of Paul whom has great affection for. By describing Onesimus as his spiritual child and that he became spiritual father of Onesimus, Paul was telling Philemon that Onesimus was regenerated. At the moment of conversion, through regeneration, the Holy Spirit creates a human spirit for the imputation of eternal life by God the Father, which makes the believer a new spiritual species meaning he now possesses the divine nature. Philemon 11 The one who was formerly characterized as useless, of no benefit to you but now for your benefit and especially for my benefit, is characterized as useful. (Author’s translation) After telling Philemon that he was appealing on behalf of his runaway slave Onesimus, Paul proceeds to describe the dramatic change in the slave. He describes Onesimus as being an unprofitable and thus useless slave prior to his becoming a Christian but now after his conversion, Onesimus is not only a profitable and thus useful slave for Onesimus but also the slave was useful to Paul as well. Onesimus is useful now after his conversion for the simple reason that he is now able to serve the Father and be a profitable servant for Him. The apostle is

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 6 using a play on words to emphasize with Philemon this dramatic change in his runaway slave. The once unprofitable slave had now become profitable because Onesimus was now serving a greater master, the Lord Jesus Christ. By becoming a Christian, slaves were to obey their masters, doing the work as unto the Lord (Ephesians 6:6- 9; Colossians 3:22-24). This would result in making Onesimus profitable to Philemon, not to mention the Lord Jesus Christ. Prior to his conversion, Onesimus was legally the slave of Philemon, however after his conversion he had become a slave of the Lord Jesus Christ who must give an account of his service like all Christians, at the Bema Seat Evaluation of the church, which immediately follows the rapture, i.e. the resurrection of the church. At his conversion, the Spirit permanently indwelt Onesimus, providing the runaway slave with spiritual gift in order that he might have the capacity to be a profitable servant of the Lord Jesus Christ as well as Philemon and the rest of the body of Christ including Paul. Philemon 12 whom I have sent back to you himself, that is, my very own affections. (Author’s translation) In verse 12, Paul announces his intention to send Onesimus directly back to Philemon. He describes Onesimus as his very own affections, which expresses his deep personal love and affection for Philemon’s runaway slave. This description would serve to further soften the blow of coming into contact with Onesimus and serve to bring about a reconciliation between the two and assuage any anger Philemon might have towards his slave. Romans 12:10 Concerning affection among spiritual brothers and sisters, all of you must continue to make it your habit to be affectionate with one another. Concerning honor, all of you continue to make it your habit to regard one another more highly than yourselves. (Author’s translation) Affection is a tender attachment to someone or a fondness for someone. Outward affection between believers is a badge of discipleship as well since it demonstrates that they are obeying the Lord’s command in John 13:34 to love one another as He has loved them. It is a mark and characteristic of Christian fellowship. When believers outwardly express affection for one another it demonstrates to the world that they belong to Christ. The fact that Paul expresses his personal love and affection for Onesimus expresses the emotional attachment the apostle had for Philemon’s runaway slave. Indeed, he had led Onesimus to faith in Jesus Christ. The apostle Paul had already described Onesimus as his spiritual child and his spiritual father. By expressing his personal love and affection for Onesimus, Paul is telling Philemon how much he values his slave. By Paul telling Philemon that he has a personal love and affection for his runaway slave would make clear to Philemon that it was a difficult decision

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 7 for Paul to send Onesimus back to him. It was also painful for Paul to send Onesimus back to his master because Onesimus was rendering valuable service for Paul while he was under house arrest in Rome awaiting his appeal before Caesar as verse 13 indicates. True to form, Paul puts Philemon’s interests ahead of his own personal interests and comfort, which is an excellent lesson for pastors to follow and all Christians when dealing with each other (Philippians 2:2-4). The fact that Paul says to Philemon that he is sending his slave Onesimus back to him is in accord with the demands of Roman Law in the first century. However, his real reason for sending Onesimus back to Philemon is to bring about a reconciliation between the two and for Philemon to welcome his new spiritual brother into the fellowship of the church which met in his home. Paul also wanted Philemon of his own free will permit Onesimus to minister to him in Rome rather than order him to do so. Onesimus had accompanied Tychicus who then delivered this letter addressed to Philemon (Colossians 4:7-9). Onesimus would have been standing beside Tychicus awaiting Philemon’s response to Paul’s letter addressed to him. Legally, the first step in the manumission of Onesimus would have taken place when Paul sent Philemon’s runaway slave back to him accompanied by this letter. Philemon 13 whom I myself in contrast to this desire, could almost wish for my own benefit keep with myself in order that on your behalf, he could render service to me during my imprisonment with reference to the proclamation of the gospel. (Author’s translation) The apostle Paul conveys to Philemon his desire to keep Onesimus with himself in Rome in order that, on Philemon’s behalf, Onesimus could render service to the apostle during his imprisonment in Rome with reference to the proclamation of the gospel. This desire stands in direct contrast to what Paul actually did, which he communicated in verse 12, namely he sent Onesimus back to Philemon, while describing Onesimus as his very own affections. In Philemon 14, Paul tells Philemon that the reason why he does not act upon this desire to keep Onesimus with him in Rome was that he wanted Philemon’s consent to do so. This indicates that Paul’s motivation for sending Onesimus back to Philemon was not because Roman Law required him to do so. Paul’s statement here in verse 13 makes clear that he deliberated for quite some time as to whether or not he should send Onesimus back to Philemon. He weighed the consequences of not sending Onesimus back and keeping him and decided to send him back. He did not hesitate in sending Onesimus back because he was fearful that Philemon might punish him severely and physically harm him or even kill him since Paul had been teaching Christian masters to treat their slaves in love. Physically harming Onesimus or even killing him would be out of the question. Forgiveness was required. The apostle Paul makes clear why he hesitated, namely,

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 8 he had great affection for Onesimus since he was the slave’s spiritual father who since his conversion was of great use for him in Rome. The apostle viewed Onesimus service on his behalf as on behalf of Philemon himself in the sense that he viewed the slave as Philemon’s representative. If Philemon was in Rome with Paul he would have rendered helpful service to him but since he could not be in Rome, Paul viewed Onesimus as taking his place or serving Philemon in his place. Thus, tactfully, the apostle viewed Onesimus’ service as on behalf of Philemon. This would also serve to soften the blow when Onesimus returned to Philemon since Onesimus was doing something productive that would have been pleasing to him. What could be more pleasing to Philemon in that his slave got saved through Paul’s ministry and was now rendering service for Paul while he was suffering undeservedly under house arrest? Furthermore, this service was on behalf of the gospel of Jesus Christ, which is the greatest form of service a slave or any free man could render for another. How could Philemon be angry with his runaway slave rendering service for the proclamation of the gospel in Rome while Paul was imprisoned for the gospel? Paul mentions his circumstances once again to Philemon in order to emphasize with him that his desire to keep Onesimus in Rome with him was not selfish but one that fulfilled a need of his. He was not living a life of luxury but was suffering undeservedly for the gospel. He was chained to a Roman soldier. He did not mention these circumstances to “guilt” Philemon into letting Onesimus stay with him but to emphasize it was for a good and noble purpose that he wanted Onesimus with him. It fulfilled a great need and was not a selfish desire. Philemon 14 However, I prefer to do absolutely nothing without your consent in order that your good deed would not be as characterized on the basis of compulsion but rather on the basis self-determination. (Author’s translation) Paul tells Philemon why he is sending Onesimus back to him rather than keep him in Rome with himself. He wants Philemon to welcome and forgive Onesimus and give him his freedom to serve Paul in Rome on the basis of self-determination rather than ordering him to do so. Paul wants this good deed to be based upon Philemon’s response to God’s love for him which was demonstrated at the cross of Calvary. The apostle wants him to perform this good in response to God the Father forgiving him and freeing him from the bondage of sin and Satan through faith in His Son Jesus Christ. If God, because of His love for Philemon, had forgiven him and welcomed him into His family, freeing him from bondage to sin and Satan in order to serve Him, Philemon, because of God’s love, was obligated to forgive Onesimus and welcome him into the fellowship of the church in his home and free him to serve Paul in Rome who was a prisoner of Jesus Christ. Because of God’s love for him,

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 9

Philemon should respond to God’s love for Him and reflect that love toward Onesimus. He should willingly forgive and welcome him and give him his freedom to serve Paul in Rome because of what God had done for him out of love through His Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. Philemon manifested this love in the past to Christians as Paul acknowledged in verses 4-7 and now his Spirit inspired desire is that he would exercise this same love toward his runaway slave, Onesimus. Thus, if Philemon performs this good deed toward Onesimus it would be divine good of intrinsic quality and character.” In other words, it would be an action that is divine in quality and character because it is produced by the Holy Spirit. It would be divine good because it would be in accordance with the Father’s will because it is the result of being influenced by the Spirit. The Christian is filled with or influenced by the Spirit when they bring their thoughts into obedience to the teaching of the Spirit, which is heard through the communication of the Word of God. Therefore, these actions are divine in quality and character because the teaching of the Spirit as recorded in the Word is the basis for these actions. So, we can see that in Philemon 14 the Holy Spirit makes clear through the apostle Paul that God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ and He wants Christian service and love to be voluntary in response to God’s love for them and rather than based upon compulsion. When this takes place, the good performed by believers towards their fellow Christian and the unsaved becomes divine good of intrinsic quality and character. Philemon 15 Indeed, perhaps because of this he was taken away for a brief period of time in order that you would at this time receive him back in person forever. (Author’s translation) Paul goes from telling Philemon his personal reason for sending Onesimus back to him to a more important reason, namely he didn’t want to hinder the will of God by keeping Onesimus in Rome with him. He goes from telling Philemon he is sending Onesimus back to him because he did not want to detain him in Rome without his consent to giving the more important reason for doing so, namely, he did not want to hinder the will of God by keeping his slave in Rome with him. “Perhaps” refers to Philemon’s decision to accept Onesimus back as his spiritual brother or not. It does not refer to Paul yielded to the will of God but rather Philemon in the matter of his runaway slave, Onesimus. It expresses Paul’s respect for Philemon in the sense that he wants Philemon to make this decision for himself to receive his runaway slave back as a spiritual brother. It does not imply that Paul doubts that God sovereignly decided that Onesimus would run away from Philemon and would become Philemon’s spiritual brother. He knew that Onesimus could never have run away to Rome if God had not first sovereignly decided that this would take place. The apostle Paul was also of the conviction that Onesimus would never have gotten saved in Rome through Paul’s ministry if God in the first

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 10 place didn’t sovereignly decided for this to take place. Paul could never have become Philemon’s spiritual brother if God had not sovereignly decided that Onesimus’ decision to trust in His Son Jesus Christ would take place in time. “Forever” emphasizes that Philemon can now receive Onesimus back as more than a slave but as a spiritual brother now that Onesimus has become a Christian. Paul is not speaking of Philemon receiving Onesimus back in the sense that he will no longer run away and will be his servant till one or the other dies. Rather, it speaks of the eternal relationship they now share through faith in Jesus Christ. So, Paul is informing Philemon that Onesimus was taken away from him by God in the sense that God sovereignly decided to permit Onesimus to run away from Philemon in order that he could get saved through Paul in Rome. God used Onesimus bad decision to show him his need for the Savior. He used it to lead him to Paul who in turn would evangelize him. In His omniscience, God knew that Onesimus would exercise faith in Jesus Christ as a result of Paul giving him the gospel and sovereignly decided for Onesimus to make this decision. Paul is speaking of the providence of God which is the outworking of the divine decree. Philemon 16 No longer as a slave but rather, more than a slave, namely a divinely loved spiritual brother, especially for my benefit but how much more, for your benefit, both a human relationship and a relationship with the Lord. (Author’s translation) Verse 16 is connected to verse 15 since the two verses contain an object- complement double accusative construction. As we noted in verse 15, the intensive personal pronoun autos, “him in person” functions as the “object” in an object- complement double accusative construction and is receiving the action of the verb apecho in verse 15. The noun doulos, “a slave” in verse 16 is functioning as the “complement” in an object-complement double accusative construction. This means that the noun doulos, “a slave” is complementing the accusative form of the intensive personal pronoun autos, “him in person” in that it predicates or affirms something about it, namely that Philemon is never again to receive Onesimus back as his slave since they are now spiritual brothers through faith in Jesus Christ. In verse 15, Paul goes from telling Philemon his personal reason for sending Onesimus back to him to a more important reason, namely he didn’t want to hinder the will of God by keeping Onesimus in Rome with him. He goes from telling Philemon he is sending Onesimus back to him because he did not want to detain him in Rome without his consent to giving the more important reason for doing so, namely, he did not want to hinder the will of God by keeping his slave in Rome with him. In this verse, Paul is informing Philemon that Onesimus was taken away from him by God in the sense that God sovereignly decided to permit Onesimus to run away from Philemon in order that he could get saved through Paul in Rome. God used Onesimus bad decision to show him his need for the Savior. He used it to

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 11 lead him to Paul who in turn would evangelize him. In His omniscience, God knew that Onesimus would exercise faith in Jesus Christ as a result of Paul giving him the gospel and sovereignly decided for Onesimus to make this decision. Paul is speaking of the providence of God which is the outworking of the divine decree. Now, here in verse 15, the apostle emphasizes with Philemon that he can now receive Onesimus back as more than a slave but as a beloved spiritual brother now that Onesimus has become a Christian. Here in verse 16, Paul is reminding Philemon and not informing him (since Philemon and all believers were taught this by Paul; see Galatians 3:22-26) that his relationship to Onesimus has fundamentally changed. No longer is he to consider Onesimus his slave but more than that, he is to consider him a beloved spiritual brother, which is in fact a reality. Paul wants Philemon to view his runaway in light of that reality. Both Philemon and Onesimus are sons of God through faith in the Christ who is Jesus. They were both the recipients of the baptism of the Spirit which identified them both with Christ in His crucifixion, death, burial, resurrection and session. There are longer any social distinctions between the two because of their shared faith in Jesus Christ (cf. Gal. 3:26-28; Col. 3:11). In Philemon 16, Paul employs the logical argument of a fortiori to emphasize this with Philemon and the church which met in his home. Paul argues that if Onesimus is a beloved spiritual brother to Paul who is not Paul’s slave, then he is certainly more than that to Philemon since Onesimus is his slave according to the flesh. Paul never knew Onesimus as a slave but as a Christian whereas Philemon knew him according to the flesh as his slave. However, now that Onesimus has become a believer, Philemon’s relationship with his slave has fundamentally changed. The apostle emphasizes the reality that Philemon’s relationship to Onesimus is greater than the relationship between Paul and Onesimus in the sense that Paul’s relationship with Onesimus is purely spiritual whereas Philemon and Onesimus had a previous relationship in the human realm as master and slave prior to the latter’s conversion. So, Paul in Philemon 16 is reminding Philemon something he was taught by Paul in the past, namely that there are no social distinctions in the body of Christ. He is informing Philemon of the eternal spiritual relationship that now exists between he and Onesimus a result of Onesimus exercising faith in Jesus Christ as his Savior. He wants Philemon to receive Onesimus no longer as his slave but rather to receive him back with personal love and affection as one would a dear friend. The fact that Paul writes to Philemon that he should no longer receive Onesimus back as a slave but rather, more than a slave, namely a divinely loved spiritual brother makes clear that the apostle was not telling Philemon to free Onesimus. Rather, he is affirming this human relationship of slave and slave

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 12 master but reminding Philemon of this new spiritual relationship that he and his slave now share through faith in Christ. The apostle is instructing him to view Onesimus from the perspective of this new shared relationship that they now possess with each other as a result of Onesimus becoming a Christian and not merely from the human perspective as his slave. So, in effect Paul is teaching Philemon and the church which met in his home that this new spiritual relationship transcends human relationships whether between a slave and slave owner or man and woman or Jew and Gentile. There are no racial, social and gender distinctions in the body of Christ since all were saved based upon the merits of the object of their faith, Jesus Christ. Therefore, the master-slave relationship that Philemon and Onesimus possessed must now be viewed by Philemon and the church which met in his home from this new perspective. Onesimus’ faith in Christ and his resultant union and identification with Him did not change the social relationship between him and Philemon. However, it “would revitalize it, infuse it with a family warmth, and make for heightened respect and consideration on both sides.”1 Paul does not attack the institution of slavery by ordering Philemon to free Onesimus. He never orders Christian masters to free their slaves but treat them justly and fairly. However, he does infuse a new dynamic into human relationships, namely the identification and union with Jesus Christ that each sinner possesses eternally through faith in Jesus Christ as Savior. Also, this union and identification with Christ requires that each believer operate in the love of God toward each other. Thus, Paul is infusing Christian love into this human relationship between Onesimus and Philemon. This union and identification with Christ and the function of Christian love will transform this human relationship. It transformed the master- slave relationship in the Roman Empire in the first century and led to the eventual abolition of this legal institution. The gospel worked in the conscience of the slave master in the Roman Empire and destroyed the institution of slavery. Philemon 17 Therefore, if, and let us assume that it is true for the sake of argument you regard me as a partner and of course you do, then please, you yourself welcome him into the fellowship as you, yourself would certainly welcome me into the fellowship. (Author’s translation) Verse 17 is a first class conditional statement, which indicates the assumption of truth for the sake of argument. It contains two parts, namely a protasis and an apodosis. The protasis: “if, and let us assume that it is true for the sake of argument you regard me as a partner.” The apodosis: “then please, you yourself welcome him into the fellowship as you, yourself would certainly welcome me into the fellowship.” This first class conditional statement is

1 Dunn, D.G.; The New International Greek New Testament Commentary: The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon; page 336; William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company; Grand Rapids, Michigan/Cambridge, U.K.; The Paternoster Press Bletchley; 1996.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 13 designed to encourage Philemon to respond and come to Paul’s conclusion in the apodosis since Philemon would already agree with Paul with regards to his statement in the protasis. Paul is persuading Philemon with the first class conditional statement that based upon their partnership he is requesting that he welcome Onesimus into the fellowship of the church which met in his home as he would welcome himself. He wants Philemon to infer from this partnership that he should welcome Onesimus, a new Christian, into the fellowship of the church which meets in his home as he would welcome himself. If Philemon refused Paul’s request, then this would be inconsistent with his acknowledgement of their partnership. To accept the request, would be consistent with this partnership. Paul is linking his statements in verses 12-16 with his first class conditional statement in verse 17. The apostle is thus connecting Philemon’s new spiritual relationship with Onesimus to Philemon welcoming Onesimus into the fellowship of the church which met in his home as he would welcome Paul. In other words, Paul’s statement in verse 17 summarizes what he wrote about in verses 12-16. So only after these remarks in verses 12-16 does Paul communicate to Philemon the specific nature of his request. This partnership between Paul and Philemon is a reference to the following concepts: (1) Relationship with Christ: We are all permanently united together by the common (eternal) life that we share as a result of regeneration and the Baptism of the Spirit (Acts 2:42; 1 C. 1:9; 1 Jn. 1:3). (2) Partnership: We are to work together for a common purpose to obtain common objectives for the glory of God and the gospel of Jesus Christ (cf. Phil 1:27; Phlp. 1:5; Gal. 2:9; Heb. 1:9). (3) Companionship: We are to communicate with one another and have fellowship with one another sharing with one another the things (viewpoint and thinking) of Christ (Acts. 2:42; Heb. 10:25; 2 Tim. 2:2; 1 Thess. 5:11; Rom. 1:11-12; 2 Tim. 2:2; 1 Thess 5:11; Philem. 6). (4) Stewardship: We must recognize that all we have belongs to the Lord and has been given to us as trusts from God to invest for His purposes. Believers need to be willing to share their material possessions for the promotion of the gospel and to help those in need. Good stewardship stems from recognizing our relationship to Jesus Christ, but it also means recognizing our partnership in Christ’s enterprise on earth. (Rom. 12:13; 15:27; Gal. 6:6; Phil. 4:15; Rom. 15:26; 2 Cor. 8:4; 9:13; Heb. 13:16; 1 Tim. 6:18). Here in Philemon 17, “partner” refers to the fact to the fact that Paul and shared a common relationship with Jesus Christ through faith in Him. It also meant that they worked together for the propagation of the gospel and the care of the body of Christ. It also meant that they were communicating with one another and experienced fellowship with one another sharing with one another the things (viewpoint and thinking) of Christ. Lastly, it meant that they shared their material possessions with each other for the promotion of the gospel and to help those in

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 14 need. So here in verse 17, Paul appeals to the fellowship he and Philemon have shared as the basis for wanting Philemon to welcome Onesimus into the fellowship of the church which met in his home. By doing this, Philemon would not only be forgiving Onesimus but also reinstating him in his home or as a member of his household. This action would reconcile the two. Paul closely identifies Onesimus with himself when he requests that Philemon welcome him into the fellowship of the church which met in his home as he would welcome him. The apostle wants Philemon to treat his runaway slave as he would himself. This would indicate that with the same warmth he would welcome Paul into the fellowship of the church which met in his home, so he should welcome Onesimus. This would be a difficult test for Philemon, especially if Onesimus robbed him or defrauded him money. In order for Philemon to welcome Onesimus, he must remember that God the Father forgave him and accepted him into the fellowship of the Trinity and the body of Christ through faith in His Son Jesus Christ. He must forgive and accept and welcome Onesimus just as God the Father has forgave, accepted and welcomed him through faith in His Son Jesus Christ. Though Onesimus was his slave and deserving of severe punishment under Roman Law Philemon was to warmly welcome Onesimus back into his household as well as into the fellowship of the church which met in his home as he would Paul. Philemon was to treat Onesimus as the spiritual brother he now was to him. Although Paul had every right to order Philemon to welcome Onesimus as a spiritual brother into the fellowship of the church which met in his home, he does not do so. He renounces his “rights” or “prerogatives” as an apostle so as to appeal to Philemon as an equal as indicated by the fact that he refers Philemon and himself as partners. This approach is an imitation of the Lord Jesus Christ. Philemon 18 However, if, and let us assume that it is true for the sake of argument that he has wronged you at all or owes you anything, and we know this is the case, then please, at this time, charge that to my account. (Author’s translation) The apostle Paul employs another first class conditional statement which indicates the assumption of truth for the sake of argument and stands in contrast to the previous first class conditional statement he employed in verse 17. In verse 17, he employed a first class conditional statement to persuade Philemon to welcome Onesimus into the fellowship of the church which met in his home. Paul writes that if, for the sake of argument it was true Philemon regarded him as a partner and he did, then he wants him to welcome Onesimus into the fellowship of the church which met in his home, as he would certainly welcome him. Now, here in verse 18, he states that if, for the sake of argument it was true Onesimus wronged him in any way, or owes him anything, and this is the case, Philemon is to charge it to his account and he will repay it. So the apostle Paul is

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 15 contrasting Philemon welcoming Onesimus into the fellowship of the church which met in his home and Philemon not doing so because Onesimus wronged him in any way or owed him money. Here in verse 18, Paul is acknowledging to Philemon that Onesimus had in fact wronged him by running away and thus costing him money from the loss of his services or costing him money because he robbed him. The responsive first class condition in verse 18 acknowledges that Onesimus wronged Philemon and is the assumption of truth for the sake of argument in order that any obstacles to Philemon welcoming Onesimus will be dealt with and removed. The first class condition would seem to indicate that the protasis in this verse is not saying that Onesimus defrauded or owed Philemon money but rather Paul is portraying this reality and not saying that this is the reality of the situation. However, the fact that Onesimus did in fact run away from Philemon makes clear that he did wrong Philemon and as a result owed him money because of fleeing from him. In fact, in the first century, it would be considered an act of robbery for Onesimus to run away from Philemon since the loss of his services would cost Philemon money. So, we could class this a “responsive” first class condition. This would indicate that Paul is saying that “if and let us assume for the sake of argument that Onesimus has wronged you in any way or owes you anything and we agree he does because he ran away, then charge this financial debt to my account.” Paul is using the first class condition here in verse 18 in order to portray this reality that Onesimus wronged Philemon by running and thus costing him money because he wants to remove any obstacles which would legitimately hinder Philemon from welcoming Onesimus into the fellowship of the church which met in his home. Paul does not mention explicitly how Onesimus wronged Philemon or owed him money because the fact that Onesimus ran away did in fact wrong Philemon and ultimately would have cost him money. So, there is no need to mention explicitly that by running away he cost Philemon money and wronged him. It is all clear to both parties what the wrong is and how the wrong cost Philemon money. Did Paul have the financial means to take care of this debt? It appears he did since Acts 28 says that he had his own rented quarters in Rome for two years. Also, in Acts 24:26, Governor Felix was hoping for a bribe from Paul in order to release him but of course the apostle did not do so. Furthermore, Paul was a Pharisee whose father was a Pharisee who were very wealthy. Thus, it appears that Paul had the financial means necessary to assume this debt even though he was under house arrest in Rome awaiting his appeal before Caesar. So, Paul’s offer or request here in verse 18 is another imitation of Jesus Christ. Just as the Lord Jesus Christ reconciled us to God by willingly assuming our sin debt at the cross and paying it in full to the Father with His substitutionary spiritual

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 16 and physical deaths on the cross, so also Paul willingly assumed any financial debt Onesimus might have had with Philemon so as to reconcile the two. Just as the Son’s motivation to pay our sin debt was His love for the Father and us, so Paul’s motivation was his love for both Philemon and Onesimus. Just as the Son did not ignore our sins and forget about our debt of sin to the Father and to Him and the Spirit, so Paul did not ignore the financial debt Onesimus might have committed against Philemon. Just as the Lord Jesus Christ was sinless but yet incurred our sin debt and paid it in full at the cross to reconcile us to God so Paul who was not involved in any possible guilt on the part of Onesimus, assumed his debt to reconcile him with Philemon. Just as the Lord Jesus Christ paid our sin debt to God and thus provided us the forgiveness of sins so Paul assumed any possible sin debt that Onesimus might have incurred with Philemon so as to provide Onesimus forgiveness for any crimes he might have committed against Philemon. Paul is modeling the Christian way of life or Christian love to both Philemon, and the church which met in his home and Onesimus. The reconciliation which the Lord Jesus Christ accomplished for sinful mankind is being modeled or applied in the life of the apostle Paul. If Christ, from His attribute of love, reconciled sinful humanity to the Father by paying their sin debt with His substitutionary spiritual and physical deaths on the cross, so Paul felt obligated to reconcile Onesimus to Philemon by assuming any financial debt Onesimus might have incurred with Philemon. If Christ had reconciled Paul to the Father by paying his sin debt to the Father with His substitutionary spiritual and physical deaths on the cross, so Paul felt obligated to reconcile Onesimus to Philemon by incurring his financial debt and paying it back to Philemon. Thus, Paul is teaching Philemon and the church which met in his home along with Onesimus how this doctrine of reconciliation applies in the church or how it should be applied in their relationships with each other. Here in Philemon 18, by acting as Onesimus’ advocate with Philemon, Paul is imitating the Lord Jesus Christ advocacy on behalf of the church. Philemon 19 I, Paul am writing with my very own hand: I will make restitution in order to avoid mentioning to you that you owe even your very self to me. (Author’s translation) The apostle Paul emphasizes with Philemon that he will pay in full the financial debt which Onesimus owes him. This financial indebtedness was the result of Onesimus running away and costing Philemon money because of the loss of his services or Onesimus could have robbed Philemon to finance his flight or both could be in view. By stating his name, Paul wants Philemon to be assured that he and not an amanuensis is making this promise. This verse thus constitutes a promissory note from Paul to Philemon. Also, Paul points out Philemon’s indebtedness to him in order to encourage Philemon that he would be justified to

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 17 forgive Onesimus his debt to him and welcoming him into the fellowship of the church which met in his home. Philemon is now even further indebted to Paul since Philemon will now receive back Onesimus as a Christian and a useful Christian at that. Paul’s message to Philemon is clear in this verse. If Onesimus was indebted to Philemon financially then Philemon was even more indebted to Paul since not only was Philemon saved through Paul’s ministry but also he will receive Onesimus back as a useful Christian as well. Philemon would not be justified in being angry with Onesimus and not welcoming him into the fellowship of the church which met in his home since by receiving eternal salvation and the forgiveness of his sins Philemon himself was the recipient of God’s grace as well. He was thus obligated to forgive Onesimus and welcome him. Paul had not charged Philemon who is Paul’s spiritual child, thus Philemon should forgive Onesimus’ debt who is also Paul’s spiritual child. Thus, they are in fact spiritual brothers since they have the same spiritual father, Paul. So here in verses 18-19, Philemon went from being a creditor to a debtor! The fact that Paul mentions Philemon’s indebtedness to him indicates clearly that Philemon was saved through Paul’s ministry. It indicates that Paul was personally involved in the conversion of Philemon just as he was with Onesimus’ conversion. Now we know that the time Paul wrote Colossians and Philemon, he had never been to Colossae. Thus, Philemon must have come into contact with Paul and heard him teach somewhere outside the Lycus Valley. They might have come into contact with each other at Ephesus.

Colossians 4:10

Aristarchus

Colossians 4:10 Aristarchus, my fellow prisoner, sends you his greetings; and also Barnabas’s cousin Mark (about whom you received instructions; if he comes to you, welcome him). (NASB95) “Aristarchus, my fellow prisoner, sends you his greetings” is composed of the following: (1) third person singular present middle indicative form of the verb aspazomai (ἀσπάζομαι), “greets” (2) accusative second person plural form of the personal pronoun su (σύ) (see), “you” (3) nominative masculine singular proper name Aristarchos (Ἀρίσταρχος), “Aristarchus” (4) articular nominative masculine singular form of the adjective sunaichmalōtos (συναιχμάλωτος), “fellow prisoner” (5) genitive first person singular form of the personal pronoun ego (ἐγώ), “my.” The apostle Paul employs the figure of “asyndeton” in order to mark a transition from his discussion in Colossians 4:7-9 regarding Tychicus and Onesimus who

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 18 would carry this epistle to the Colossians to Paul passing along greetings to the Colossians from his companions in Rome. The proper name Aristarchos, “Aristarchus” was from Macedonia and was a traveling companion on Paul’s missionary journeys (Acts 19:29). The word functions as a nominative subject meaning that it is performing the action of the verb aspazomai (ἀσπάζομαι), “greets” indicating that Aristarchus was also in Rome with Paul extending his greetings to the Colossian Christian community. The adjective sunaichmalōtos means “fellow-prisoner” referring to one who has been arrested and imprisoned along with someone else. It does not appear in the Septuagint and only three times in the Greek New Testament (Romans 16:7; Colossians 4:10; Philemon 23). In Romans 16:7, it is used to describe Andronicus and his wife Junia describing them as “fellow-prisoners” of Paul indicating that this couple shared was incarcerated with him during one of his several imprisonments (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:32; 2 Corinthians 1:8; 4:8-11; 6:4-10; 11:23-28). In Philemon 23, it is used to describe Epaphras indicating that he was incarcerated along with Paul in Rome. In Colossians 4:10, Paul uses the word to describe Aristarchus and does not suggest that he was arrested along with Paul and then imprisoned along with him but rather it simply means that he voluntarily stayed with him in his own rented quarters as he was awaiting his appeal before Caesar. The word sunaichmalōtos functions as a nominative of simple apposition meaning it stands in apposition to the nominative form of the proper name Aristarchos clarifying the relationship between this individual and Paul. The articular construction of the word is used with the personal pronoun ego, “my” to denote possession. The personal pronoun ego means “my” and refers of course to Paul and is functioning as a genitive of possession indicating Paul possessed a particular relationship with Aristarchus, namely he voluntarily shared house arrest with Paul in Rome. The etymology of aspazomai is uncertain but it appears from Homer onwards and is used in classical Greek of the customary greeting upon entering a house, meeting someone on the street, or saying farewells. The basic meaning of the word is “to embrace.” It denotes the embrace of greeting as well as the erotic embrace of love. Gestures probably included embracing, kissing, offering the hand, or even doing homage as to an overlord or king. From this original concrete meaning the more general sense follows: (1) with a personal object, “to be fond of someone, to like someone, to agree to something, to pay one’s respects to someone” (2) with a material object, “to give oneself gladly to something, to accept with pleasure a situation or event, to welcome a given factor or a prospect.”

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 19

By extension, the word came to mean “to follow eagerly” and “to be glad” about something. Aspazomai in a letter is a greeting from a distance, which is a substitute for greeting and embracing someone in a personal encounter. It expresses sincere attachment in separation and thus serves to strengthen personal fellowship. The custom of epistolary greeting was only gradually adopted in the sphere of Greek and Roman culture. In letters of the pre-Christian period greetings are not too common and there are no long series of greetings. In the Septuagint, aspazomai appears 8 times in the Septuagint, 2 of which are canonical (Exodus 18:7; Esther 10:3). In Exodus 18:7, the word is used for the Hebrew phrase sha’al leshalom, “to inquire concerning the welfare or peace.” The whole passage introduces fully the customary greetings on a visit. The verb aspazomai appears about 59 times in the Greek New Testament. The Gospels echo the LXX usage of the word of inquiring about one’s welfare. Greetings were offered upon the first meeting (Mk. 9:15) and upon taking leave (Acts 20:1). Jesus taught His disciples to address a salutation to a hospitable household almost as a blessing (Mt. 10:13). As Jesus sent out His disciples, however, He cautioned them not to be sidetracked from their mission by greeting everyone along the way (Lk. 10:4). The greeting is also the first sign of the love of enemies in actual practice (Mt. 5:47), nevertheless, the practice of greeting should not hamper haste in the proclamation of the message (Lk. 10:4). For Jesus, the greeting becomes a first realization of Christian conduct. His own people should not expect a greeting (cf. Mk. 12:38) but instead a greeting should first be given by them. For the Jews in Jesus’ day, greeting was an important ceremony. This may be seen from Jesus accusation that the scribes love greetings in the market place (Mk. 12:38; Mt. 23:6f.; Lk. 20:46; 11:43). Like the seat of honor in the synagogue or at a feast, greeting in the market-place is one of the distinctions to which rabbis raise claim by reason of the dignity of their office. A greeting is given on the street first to the one who is to be honored, thus the rabbis desired to be addressed first, and therefore publicly recognized as superiors (Jos. Ant. 11, 331). Censuring the claim of the rabbis to aspasmos, Jesus does not wish His disciples to be honored by greetings but rather to greet others. It is known that this basic principle was taught and practiced by many rabbis, especially Jochanan ben Zakkai. The common use of aspazomai (over 40 times) is a formula at the close of the epistles conveying greetings to various churches and individuals (Rm. 16:3-16, 21- 23). The greeting between believers often included the embrace accompanied by a “holy kiss” (Rm. 16:16). Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains: (1)

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 20 to employ certain set phrases as a part of the process of greeting, whether communicated directly or indirectly – ‘to greet, to send greetings’.2 (2) to be happy about something, on the basis that it would prove particularly welcome (thus implying a type of future orientation) – ‘to be happy about, to anticipate with pleasure’.3 (3) to welcome something or someone, with focus upon the initial greeting – ‘to welcome, to accept gladly’.4 BDAG lists the following meanings for this word: ① to engage in hospitable recognition of another (w. varying degrees of intimacy), greet, welcome τινά someone Just., A I, 65, 2 ⓐ through word or gesture or both: of those entering a house Mt 10:12; Lk 1:40; Ac 21:19; Hv 5:1. Of those meeting others (Jos., Ant. 8, 321) Lk 10:4; welcome, greet someone (Philostrat., Vi. Apoll. 1, 12) Mk 9:15; Hv 1, 1, 4; 1, 2, 2; 4, 2, 2; AcPl Ha 7:38; 8:3. Of those departing take leave of (X., An. 7, 1, 8; Nicol. Dam.: 90 Fgm. 68, 7 Jac.; Plut., Aemil. P. 270 [29, 1] ἀσπασάμενος ἀνέζευξεν) Ac 20:1, 12 D; 21:6 v.l.; AcPl Ha 5, 13.—Mt 5:47 ἀ. here denotes more than a perfunctory salutation and requires some such rendering as spend time in warm exchange (cp. X., Cyr. 1, 4, 1; Ael. Aristid. 31, 6 K.=11 p. 128 D.; Aelian, VH 9, 4; Appian, Bell. Civ. 3, 79 §322 τ. ἐναντίους); w. ἀγαπάω (vs. 46), of which it is almost a synonym (as Plut., Mor. 143b; s. HAlmqvist, Plut. u. das NT, ’46, 34; Ptolem., Apotel. 1, 3, 17.—W. φιλέω: Hierocles 19, 460; opp. μισέω: Simplicius in Epict. p. 31, 6). See FPorporato, Verb. Domini 11, ’31, 15–22.—Freq. in written

2 33.20 3 25.130 4 34.55 Just Just , II A.D.—List 5 Hv Hv = Visions Jos. Jos. = Josephus. This abbr. used when follow by title; I A.D.—Lists 5 Philostrat Philostrat = Flavius Philostratus, the Sophist II–III A.D.—List 5 Vi. Vi. = Vita, Vitae Hv Hv = Visions AcPl Ha AcPl Ha = Acts of Paul, PHamb—List 1 X. X. = Xenophon, V–IV B.C.—List 5 Fgm. Fgm. = fragment, fragmentary Jac. Jac. = Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, ed. FJacoby—Lists 5, 6 Plut Plut , I–II A.D.—List 5 D D = Didache, except that in a list of manuscripts or as textual variant D refers to Codex Bezae—List 1 v.l. v.l. = varia lectio (variant reading) AcPl Ha AcPl Ha = Acts of Paul, PHamb—List 1 cp. cp. = compare, freq. in ref. to citation fr. ancient texts X. X. = Xenophon, V–IV B.C.—List 5 Ael. Aristid. Ael. Aristid. = Aelius Aristides, II A.D.—List 5 D D = Didache, except that in a list of manuscripts or as textual variant D refers to Codex Bezae—List 1 Aelian Aelian , II A.D.—List 5 Appian Appian , I–II A.D.—List 5 Plut Plut , I–II A.D.—List 5 Plut Plut , I–II A.D.—List 5 NT NT = New Testament Ptolem Ptolem , math., II A.D.—List 5 Hierocles Hierocles , Commentarius in aureum carmen, V A.D.—List 5 opp. opp. = opposed to, opposite Simplicius Simplicius , VI A.D.—List 5 Epict Epict , various works, I–II A.D.—List 5

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 21 greetings (cp. the exx. in Ltzm., Griech. Papyri [Kleine Texte 14]2 1910, nos. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13.—FZiemann, De Epistularum Graec. Formulis Soll., diss. Halle 1911, 325ff; FXJExler, The Form of the Ancient Gk. Letter 1923; ORoller, D. Formular d. paul. Briefe ’33, 67ff; HKoskenniemi, Studien z. Idee u. Phraseologie d. griech. Briefes ’56, 148ff); the impv. may be transl. greetings to (someone) or remember me to (someone); other moods than impv. may be rendered wish to be remembered, greet, send greetings Ro 16:3, 5ff; 1 Cor 16:19f; 2 Cor 13:12; Phil 4:21f; Col 4:10, 12, 14f; 2 Ti 4:19, 21; Tit 3:15; Phlm 23; Hb 13:24; 1 Pt 5:13f; 2J 13; 3J 15; IMg ins; 15; ITr ins; 12:1; 13:1; IRo ins; 9:3; IPhld ins; 11:2; ISm 11:1; 12:1f; 13:1f; IPol 8:2f. Another person than the writer of the letter sometimes adds greetings of his own Ro 16:22 (sim. POxy 1067, 25 κἀγὼ Ἀλέξανδρος ἀσπάζομαι ὑμᾶς πολλά). ἀ. πολλά (besides the pap just mentioned also PParis 18, 3 [Dssm., B 215]; POxy 930, 22; 935, 22; PGrenf II, 73, 4 [=Ltzm. Pap. nos. 13, 14, 15]) greet warmly 1 Cor 16:19; ἀ. κατʼ ὄνομα (PParis 18, 15 [Dssm., B 216]; POxy 930, 26 [=Ltzm. Pap. no. 13]) greet by name 3J 15; ISm 13:2 (πάντας κατʼ ὄνομα as PMich 206, 20ff [II A.D.]); ἄσπασαι τοὺς φιλοῦντας ἡμᾶς ἐν πίστει (PFay 119, 25ff cp. cp. = compare, freq. in ref. to citation fr. ancient texts exx. exx. = examples Ltzm. Ltzm. = HLietzmann, commentator and editor of various works diss. diss. = dissertation Gk. Gk. = Greek impv. impv. = imperative transl. transl. = translate, translation impv. impv. = imperative IMg IMg = Ignatius to the Magnesians—List 1 ins Ins, ins = Inscription, Inschrift, inscription(s). Without a period, esp. in lists, as at the beginning of entries; the capitalized form is used in titles. In conjunction with literary works this abbr. refers to the title or description of contents. ITr ITr = Ignatius to the Trallians—List 1 ins Ins, ins = Inscription, Inschrift, inscription(s). Without a period, esp. in lists, as at the beginning of entries; the capitalized form is used in titles. In conjunction with literary works this abbr. refers to the title or description of contents. IRo IRo = Ignatius to the Romans—List 1 ins Ins, ins = Inscription, Inschrift, inscription(s). Without a period, esp. in lists, as at the beginning of entries; the capitalized form is used in titles. In conjunction with literary works this abbr. refers to the title or description of contents. IPhld IPhld = Ignatius to the Philadelphians—List 1 ins Ins, ins = Inscription, Inschrift, inscription(s). Without a period, esp. in lists, as at the beginning of entries; the capitalized form is used in titles. In conjunction with literary works this abbr. refers to the title or description of contents. ISm ISm = Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, I–II A.D.—List 1 IPol IPol = Ignatius to Polycarp—List 1 sim. sim. = similarly POxy POxy = Oxyrhynchus Papyri—List 4 pap pap = papyrus, -yri PParis PParis = Notices et textes des papyrus (Paris)—List 4 Dssm. Dssm. = ADeissmann, various works—List 6 B B = Barnabas (the Letter of), II A.D., except in series of uncial witnesses, in which case B refers to Codex Vaticanus (s. also Vat.). When the abbrv. B would ambiguous, Vat. is used for the codex.—List 1 POxy POxy = Oxyrhynchus Papyri—List 4 PGrenf II PGrenf II = BGrenfell/AHunt, New Classical Fragments—Lists 4 Ltzm. Pap. Ltzm. Pap. = HLietzmann, Griechische Papyri—List 4 PParis PParis = Notices et textes des papyrus (Paris)—List 4 Dssm. Dssm. = ADeissmann, various works—List 6 B B = Barnabas (the Letter of), II A.D., except in series of uncial witnesses, in which case B refers to Codex Vaticanus (s. also Vat.). When the abbrv. B would ambiguous, Vat. is used for the codex.—List 1 POxy POxy = Oxyrhynchus Papyri—List 4 Ltzm. Pap. Ltzm. Pap. = HLietzmann, Griechische Papyri—List 4 ISm ISm = Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, I–II A.D.—List 1 PMich PMich = Michigan Papyri—List 4

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 22

ἀσπάζου τοὺς φιλοῦντες [sic] ἡμᾶς πρὸς ἀλήθιαν. Sim. BGU 814, 38) Tit 3:15. Among friends the greeting is accompanied by a kiss (Ps.-Lucian, De Asin. 17 φιλήμασιν ἠσπάζοντο ἀλλήλους; Heliod. 10, 6; φιλήματι Just., A I, 65, 2; cp. the apocryphal preface Ath. 32, 3 [Resch, Agrapha 137]), hence: ἀ. ἐν φιλήματι Ro 16:16; 1 Cor 16:20; 2 Cor 13:12; 1 Th 5:26; 1 Pt 5:14. Of homage to a king hail, acclaim (Dionys. Hal. 4, 39; Plut., Pomp. 624 [12, 4]; 13, 7; cp. Jos., Ant. 10, 211) Mk 15:18 (cp. Philo, In Flacc. 38). ⓑ of short friendly visits, ‘look in on’ Ac 18:22; 21:7; IRo 1:1. Of official visits pay one’s respects to (Sb 8247, 13; 15 [II A.D.]; BGU 248, 12; 347 I, 3 and II, 2; 376 I, 3; Jos., Ant. 1, 290; 6, 207) Ac 25:13 (OGI 219, 43 [III B.C.]) s. Schwyzer II 301, also 297. Of the greeting given to a priest in a liturgical service τοῦ ἀσπάσασθαι αὐτὸν ἐν εὐχῇ to greet him with prayer GJs 24:1. ② to express happiness about the arrival of someth., welcome, greet, fig. ext. of 1 in ref. to someth. intangible (Eur., Ion 587; Chariton 6, 7, 12; Alciphron 1, 3, 3; Diog. L. σοφίαν ἀσπαζόμενος; POxy 41, 17 τὴν παρʼ ὑμῶν τιμήν; CPR 30 II, 39; Philo, Det. Pot. Ins. 21; Jos., Ant. 6, 82; 7, 187; TestGad 3:3; Just.) τὰς ἐπαγγελίας the promises Hb 11:13.—DELG. M-M. TW.5

PFay PFay = Fayûm Towns and Their Papyri—List 4 sic sic = so, thus (indicating an error or extraordinary form transcribed from the original) BGU BGU = Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Museen zu Berlin: Griechische Urkunden—List 4 Ps.-Lucian Ps.-Lucian , after II A.D.—List 5 Heliod Heliod , III? A.D.—List 5 Just Just , II A.D.—List 5 cp. cp. = compare, freq. in ref. to citation fr. ancient texts Ath. Ath. = Athenagoras, II A.D.—List 5 Plut Plut , I–II A.D.—List 5 cp. cp. = compare, freq. in ref. to citation fr. ancient texts Jos. Jos. = Josephus. This abbr. used when follow by title; I A.D.—Lists 5 cp. cp. = compare, freq. in ref. to citation fr. ancient texts Philo Philo = P. of Alexandria, I B.C.–I A.D.—List 5 IRo IRo = Ignatius to the Romans—List 1 Sb Sb = Sammelbuch griechischer Urkunden aus Aegypten—Lists 3, 4 BGU BGU = Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Museen zu Berlin: Griechische Urkunden—List 4 Jos. Jos. = Josephus. This abbr. used when follow by title; I A.D.—Lists 5 OGI OGI = Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae—List 3 Schwyzer Schwyzer = ES., Griechische Grammatik—List 6 GJs GJs = Gospel of James (Protevangelium Jacobi), II A.D.—List 1 someth. someth. = something ext. ext. = extension ref. ref. = reference(s) someth. someth. = something Eur Eur , V B.C.—List 5 Chariton Chariton , scriptor eroticus (writer of romances) I–II A.D.—List 5 Diog. L. Diog. L. = Diogenes Laertius, III A.D.—List 5 POxy POxy = Oxyrhynchus Papyri—List 4 CPR CPR = Corpus Papyrorum Raineri—List 4 Philo Philo = P. of Alexandria, I B.C.–I A.D.—List 5 Jos. Jos. = Josephus. This abbr. used when follow by title; I A.D.—Lists 5 TestGad TestGad = Testament of Gad, s. Test12Patr—List 2 Just Just , II A.D.—List 5 DELG DELG = PChantraine, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque—List 6 M-M M-M = JMoulton/GMilligan, Vocabulary of Greek Testament—Lists 4, 6 TW TW = Theologisches Wörterbuch zum NT; tr. GBromiley, Theological Dictionary of the NT—List 6 5 Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 144). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 23

In Colossians 4:10, the verb aspazomai means “greet” or “gives one’s regards to someone” and is used of Aristarchus giving his regards or greeting to the Colossian Christian community through Paul’s letter to this church. The present tense of the verb is an instantaneous present used to indicate that the action of Aristarchus sending his greetings to the Colossian Christian community through Paul’s epistle to this church is completed at the moment of writing. The middle voice of the verb is an intensive or indirect middle since one can see the middle force of the word here in this passage. Some grammarians call this an indirect middle, dynamic, indirect reflexive, benefactive middle. The subject acts for (or sometimes by) himself or herself, or in his or her own interest. The subject thus shows a special interest in the action of the verb. Paul is stating to the Colossian Christian community who shall read this letter that he is passing along Aristarchus’ greetings to them. The middle voice emphasizes that it is Aristarchus’ greeting. So, what Paul is saying here with the middle voice is that Aristarchus, was giving his regards to the Colossians through Paul. The indicative mood is declarative presenting this assertion that Aristarchus sends his greetings to the Colossian Christian community as a non-contingent or unqualified statement. The personal pronoun su refers to these faithful Colossian believers as a corporate unit. The word is used in a distributive sense emphasizing no exceptions indicating that Aristarchus’s greeting is directed at all of these faithful believers without exception.

Mark

Colossians 4:10 Aristarchus, my fellow prisoner, sends you his greetings; and also Barnabas’s cousin Mark (about whom you received instructions; if he comes to you, welcome him). (NASB95) “And also Barnabas’s cousin Mark” is composed of the following: (1) conjunction kai (καί), “and” (2) nominative masculine singular proper name Markos (Μᾶρκος), “Mark” (3) articular nominative masculine singular form of the noun anepsios (ἀνεψιός), “cousin” (4) genitive masculine singular form of the proper name Barnabas (Βαρναβᾶς), “Barnabas’s.” The conjunction kai is adjunctive meaning it is introducing another companion of Paul’s companion in Rome whose greeting Paul is passing along to the Colossian Christian community which is in addition to the greeting he passed along from Aristarchus. The proper name Markos, “Mark” who Paul describes as the cousin of Barnabas. The word functions as a nominative subject meaning that it is

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 24 performing the action of the verb aspazomai (ἀσπάζομαι), “greets” indicating that Mark was in Rome with Paul extending his greetings to the Colossian Christian community. The noun anepsios means “cousin” since the word pertains to the child of one’s uncle and aunt, either on the father’s side or the mother’s side.6 This word functions as a nominative of simple apposition means it stands apposite to the nominative subject he proper name Markos, “Mark.” This indicates that the word is clarifying for the reader the identity of the Mark the apostle Paul is referring to when he uses this name since this name was a popular Latin name borne by prominent Romans such as Cicero. The articular construction of this noun anepsios indicates that this cousin is unique to Barnabas. The proper name Barnabas, “Barnabas” who Paul describes as Mark’s uncle. The word is in the genitive case and functions as a genitive of relationship expressing the familial relationship between Mark and Barnabas.

Instructions Regarding Mark

Colossians 4:10 Aristarchus, my fellow prisoner, sends you his greetings; and also Barnabas’s cousin Mark (about whom you received instructions; if he comes to you, welcome him). (NASB95) “About whom you received instructions” is composed of the following: (1) preposition peri (περί), “about” (2) genitive masculine singular form of the relative pronoun hos (ὅς), “whom” (3) second person plural aorist active indicative form of the verb lambanō (λαμβάνω), “you received” (4) accusative feminine plural form of the noun entolē (ἐντολή), “instructions” The relative pronoun hos means “whom” and refers to Mark since the word agrees in gender (masculine) and number (singular) with the nominative masculine singular proper name Markos (Μᾶρκος), “Mark.” This word is the object of the preposition peri which means “about, concerning” since the word is functioning as a marker of reference or relation indicating who these instructions are related to or in reference to. The noun entolē in classical Greek is derived from the deponent verb entellomai, “I order, I command.” The noun seldom appears in the Greek tragedians, or in Attic prose. The word is used often of a command of a king, high official or military commander to a subordinate. According to Esser, the verb and the noun appear from the fifth century B.C. in Aeschylus, Pindar and the historian

6 Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, p. 118). New York: United Bible Societies.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 25

Herodotus to denote chiefly the instructions given by a person of high social standing to a subordinate.7 The plural of the noun appears often in the expression entolas dounai, “to give instructions.” Aeschylus and Pindar used the verb and the noun for the commands of God in the sense of an imperial decree or edict. This usage appears in the papyri and other inscriptions. In the fourth century A.D. these words were used as technical terms for the power of attorney. The term entolē in classical Greek had the sense of pedagogic instruction.8 The noun entolē appears 230 times in the Septuagint. The word’s usage is highly concentrated in the Pentateuch where more than half the instances of the verb are found and especially in Deuteronomy. The noun’s most important usage is in Deuteronomy where it is equated with God’s commandments in the sense of His laws, statutes, ordinances and decrees, which are to be observed conscientiously. The word is used for the Ten Commandments in Exodus 24:12. It was also a technical term for the commandments of the Mosaic Law in general. This sense was not found in classical Greek. Entolē is seldom used for the Hebrew torah, “Law” since nomos was used instead. Josephus seldom used entolē but rather preferred nomos, “Law.” He used it only 9 times in his writings for the commands of God, 5 of which were the prescriptions of the Mosaic Law. Philo uses the Septuagint usage only 5 times in his writings. The noun entolē appears 67 times in the Greek New Testament. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature –Third Edition: (1) an order authorizing a specific action, writ, warrant (2) a mandate or ordinance, command.9 Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, “that which is authoritatively commanded – ‘commandment, order’.”10 The word is used often in the Greek New Testament for the commandments of the Mosaic Law in their totality (Mt. 5:19; 15:3; 19:17; 22:36, 40; Mk. 7:8, 9; 10:5, 19; 12:28, 29, 30, 31; Lk. 18:20; 23:56). It is used for commandments in the entire Old Testament canon (Mt. 15:6; Lk. 1:6; 18:20; 23:56). Entolē appears 5 times in Luke’s writings. It is used in Luke 15:19 for the commands of a father to his son. The word is used for the Ten Commandments in Luke 18:20 and for the commandment to keep the Sabbath in Luke 23:56. In Luke 1:6, entole is used for the 613 mandates in the Mosaic Law. In Acts 17:15, the noun entolē is used for Paul’s order to Timothy and Silas at Athens to come to him as soon as possible.

7 The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, volume 1, page 331 8 Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 2, page 546 9 Page 340 10 33.330

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 26

The noun entolē occurs 4 times in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 7:5, it refers to the commandment that the tribe of Levi receives a tithe from the nation of Israel. In Hebrews 7:16, the word refers to a physical “requirement” of being from the tribe of Levi to be a priest of God. The noun is used for the commandments of the Mosaic Law in Hebrews 9:15. Entolē is used of the entire body of Christian doctrine in 2 Peter 2:21 and 3:2. The word is a favorite of the apostle John since it appears 30 in his writings. The word is used in John 10:18 for the Father’s command to the Lord Jesus to of His own initiative to both lay down His life and take up again in resurrection. In John 11:57, it is used of the orders issued by the Pharisees to the people to report the whereabouts of the Lord Jesus in order to arrest Him. It is used the commandment of the Father to the Lord Jesus to the words of eternal life in John 12:49 and 50. The noun entolē is used in John 13:34; 14:15, 21; 15:10, 12 where the Lord issued the commandment to His disciples to self-sacrificially love one another as He had done for them. It is used of the Father’s commandments in John 15:10. John uses the word in 1 John 2:4, 7, 8; 2 John 5, 6 for the Lord Jesus’ command to self-sacrificially love one’s fellow believers as the Lord has done for all believers as well as all unbelievers. John uses the word in 1 John 3:22, 23, 24; 4:21; 5:2-3 for the commandments of the Father to trust in the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ and to imitate His self-sacrificial for all believers. The apostle John uses entolē in 2 John 4 for the command of the Father to walk by means of the truth which he defines explicitly as obeying the command of the Lord Jesus Christ to love one another as He loved, which is recorded in John 13:34 and was communicated to the church by the apostles such as John. The word appears in Revelation 12:17 and 14:12 for the commandments of God in general. It does not appear in the original autograph in Revelation 22:14 since the most ancient and best manuscripts do not contain the word in this passage. The noun entolē appears 14 times in the Pauline epistles. In Romans 7:8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, the noun is used specifically for the tenth of the Ten Commandments that appear in Exodus 20. In Romans 13:9, the noun entolē means “commandment” but does not refer explicitly to a specific commandment in the Mosaic Law. However, we know from a process of elimination that it is refers to the prohibition in Exodus 20:16, which is not mentioned by Paul in the previous list of commandments that are related to the believer’s conduct with his fellow human being. Paul uses the word in 1 Corinthians 7:19 for the commandments of God in general. In 1 Corinthians 14:37 the word is used in relation to the ordinances of the Lord Jesus for the orderly function of the worship service in a local assembly.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 27

It is used for the commandments of the Law in Ephesians 2:15. In Ephesians 6:2 it is used for the commandment to honor your father and mother. In 1 Timothy 6:14, the noun entolē means “commission” and refers to Timothy’s duties, which are directly related to his ministry in Ephesus. In Titus 1:14, the noun entolē the word is used for the commandments or traditions of men, which is indicated by the word, which modifies it, which is anthropos, “of men.” In Colossians 4:10, the noun entolē means “instructions” since the word pertains to an authoritative written instruction or direction regarding undertaking a particular action. Here it is used of Paul’s instructions to the Colossians to welcome Mark into their fellowship. This word is functioning as an accusative direct object meaning it is receiving the action of the second person plural aorist active indicative form of the verb lambanō, “you received” these authoritative instructions regarding Mark received the action of being received by the Colossian Christian community. The original etymological meaning of lambanō is “to grasp, to seize.” It is the principal component of numerous compounds in antiquity and is consequently a widely used term with a diverse range of meaning. It is attested since Homer and it developed in two directions: (1) “to take” (active sense) (2) “to receive” (passive sense). Lambanō appears 1,252 times in the LXX and translates over 30 Hebrew expressions. It used chiefly for the Hebrew laqach, “to grasp,” and more rarely nasa, “to receive.” The passive sense is rare and the active is predominate. Gerhard Schneider commenting on the word’s usage in the LXX, writes, “In the LXX lambanō most often renders Hebrew lqh (qal of the verb); in addition dechomai, as a translation of lqh, belongs to the word field ‘accept, receive.’ Two emphases emerge from this wide spectrum of meaning and from the unspecific usage: The motif of movement and tension is expressed in ‘take, take away,’ while the less active is expressed in ‘accept, take up.’ In both instances points of departure for the NT usage can be seen.”11 The word lambanō occurs in God’s instructions concerning the offerings and consecrations (Exodus chapter 29; cf. Numbers 16:6, 15, 17, 39, 46-47). The “seizing” of battle spoils is typically related to lambano (1 Maccabees 5:3, 22, 28, 35, 51). Lambanō appears 258 times in the Greek New Testament. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature-Third Edition lists the following meanings: (1) to get hold of someth. by laying hands on or grasping someth., directly or indirectly, take, take hold of, grasp, take in hand ἄρτον (Diod S 14, 105, 3 ῥάβδον; TestSol 2:8 D τὴν σφραγῖδα;

11 Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 2, page 336

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 28

TestJob 23:10 ψαλίδα) Mt 26:26a; Mk 14:22a; Ac 27:35. τ. βιβλίον (Tob 7:14) Rv 5:8f. τ. κάλαμον Mt 27:30. λαμπάδας take (in hand) (Strattis Com. [V b.c.], Fgm. 37 K. λαβόντες λαμπάδας) 25:1, 3. λαβέτωσαν ἀνὰ λαμπάδα GJs 7:2. μάχαιραν draw the sword (Gen 34:25; Jos., Vi. 173 [cp. JosAs 23:2 τὴν ῥομφαίαν]) Mt 26:52. Abs. λάβετε take (this) Mt 26:26b; Mk 14:22b.—Take hold of (me) GHb 356, 39=ISm 3:2.—ἔλαβέ με ἡ μήτηρ μου τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα ἐν μιᾷ τῶν τριχῶν μου my mother, the Holy Spirit, took me by one of my hairs GHb 20, 63. Ἐλισάβεδ … λαβουμένη (λαβοῦσα codd.) αὐτὸν ἀνέβη ἐν τῇ ὀρεινῇ E. took (John) and went up into the hill-country GJs 22:3. λαβών is somet. used somewhat pleonastically to enliven the narrative, as in Hom. (Od. 24, 398) and dramatists (Soph., Oed. R. 1391 et al.), but also in accord w. Hebr. usage (JViteau, Étude sur le Grec du NT 1893, 191; Dalman, Worte 16ff; Wlh., Einleitung2 1911, 14; B-D-F §419, 1 and 2; s. Rob. 1127; s., e.g., ApcBar 2:1 λαβών με ἤγαγε; Josh 2:4; Horapollo 2, 88 τούτους λαβὼν κατορύττει) Mt 13:31, 33; Mk 9:36; Lk 13:19, 21; J 12:3; Ac 9:25; 16:3; Hs 5, 2, 4. The ptc. can here be rendered by the prep. with (B-D-F §418, 5; Rob. 1127) λαβὼν τὴν σπεῖραν ἔρχεται he came with a detachment J 18:3 (cp. Soph., Trach. 259 στρατὸν λαβὼν ἔρχεται; ApcrEsd 6, 17 p. 31, 24 Tdf. λαβὼν … στρατιὰν ἀγγέλων). λαβὼν τὸ αἷμα … τὸν λαὸν ἐρράντισε with the blood he sprinkled the people Hb 9:19 (cp. ParJer 9:32 λαβόντες τὸν λίθον ἔθηκαν ἐπὶ τὸ μνῆμα αὐτοῦ ‘they crowned his tomb with a stone’; Mel., P. 14, 88 λαβόντες δὲ τὸ … αἶμα). Different is the periphrastic aor. ptc. use of λ. w. ἔχει: Dg 10:6 ἃ παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ λαβὼν ἔχει what the pers. has received fr. God (cp. Eur., Bacchae 302 μεταλαβὼν ἔχει; Goodwin §47; Gildersleeve, Syntax §295; Schwyzer I, 812). Freq. parataxis takes the place of the ptc. constr. (B-D-F §419, 5) ἔλαβε τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ ἐμαστίγωσεν (instead of λαβὼν τ. Ἰ. ἐ.) he had Jesus scourged J 19:1. λαβεῖν τὸν ἄρτον … καὶ βαλεῖν throw the bread Mt 15:26; Mk 7:27. ἔλαβον τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐποίησαν τέσσερα μέρη they divided his garments into four parts J 19:23.—In transf. sense ἀφορμὴν λ. find opportunity Ro 7:8, 11 (s. ἀφορμή); ὑπόδειγμα λ. take as an example Js 5:10; so also λ. alone, λάβωμεν Ἐνώχ 1 Cl 9:3.—Of the cross as a symbol of the martyr’s death take upon oneself Mt 10:38 (cp. Pind., P. 2, 93 [171] λ. ζυγόν). We may class here ἔλαβεν τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ he put his clothes on J 13:12 (cp. Hdt. 2, 37; 4, 78; GrBar 9:7 τὸν ὄφιν ἔλαβεν ἔνδυμα). Prob. sim. μορφὴν δούλου λ. put on the form of a slave Phil 2:7.—Of food and drink take (cp. Bel 37 Theod.) Mk 15:23. ὅτε ἔλαβεν τὸ ὄξος J 19:30; λαβὼν τροφὴν ἐνίσχυσεν Ac 9:19; τροφὴν … λα[βεῖν] AcPl Ha 1, 19. (βρέφος) ἔλαβε μασθὸν ἐκ τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ Μαρίας (the infant) took the breast of his mother Mary GJs 19:2.—1 Ti 4:4 (s. 10b below) could also belong here. (2) to take away, remove (τὴν ψυχήν ApcEsdr 6:16 p. 31, 23 Tdf.) with or without the use of force τὰ ἀργύρια take away the silver coins (fr. the temple) Mt 27:6. τὰς ἀσθενείας diseases 8:17. τὸν στέφανον Rv 3:11. τὴν εἰρήνην ἐκ τῆς γῆς remove peace from the earth 6:4 (λ. τι ἐκ as UPZ

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 29

125, 13 ὸ̔ εἴληφεν ἐξ οἴκου; 2 Ch 16:2; TestSol 4:15 D; TestAbr B 7 p. 111, 12 [Stone p. 70]; Mel., P. 55, 403). (3) to take into one’s possession, take, acquire τὶ someth. τὸν χιτῶνα Mt 5:40. οὐδὲ ἕν J 3:27. ἑαυτῷ βασιλείαν obtain kingly power for himself Lk 19:12 (cp. Jos., Ant. 13, 220). λ. γυναῖκα take a wife (Eur., Alc. 324; X., Cyr. 8, 4, 16; Gen 4:19; 6:2; Tob 1:9; TestSol 26:1; TestJob 45:3; ParJer 8:3; Jos., Ant. 1, 253; Just., D. 116, 3; 141, 4) Mk 12:19–21; 22 v.l.; Lk 20:28–31 (s. also the vv.ll. in 14:20 and 1 Cor 7:28). Of his life, that Jesus voluntarily gives up, in order to take possession of it again on his own authority J 10:18a. [ἀπολείπ]ετε τὸ σκότος, λάβεται τὸ φῶς [abandon] the darkness, seize the light AcPl Ha 8, 32. ἑαυτῷ τ. τιμὴν λ. take the honor upon oneself Hb 5:4.—Lay hands on, seize w. acc. of the pers. who is seized by force (Hom. et al.; LXX; mid. w. gen. Just., A II, 2, 10, D. 105, 3) Mt 21:35, 39; Mk 12:3, 8. Of an evil spirit that seizes the sick man Lk 9:39 (cp. PGM 7, 613 εἴλημπται ὑπὸ τοῦ δαίμονος; TestSol 17:2 εἰ λήμψομαί τινα, εὐθέως ἀναιρῶ αὐτὸν τῷ ξίφει; Jos., p 584 Ant. 4, 119 ὅταν ἡμᾶς τὸ τοῦ θεοῦ λάβῃ πνεῦμα; Just., A I, 18, 4 ψυχαῖς ἀποθανόντων λαμβανόμενοι).—Esp. of feelings, emotions seize, come upon τινά someone (Hom. et al.; Ex 15:15; Wsd 11:12; Jos., Ant. 2, 139; 14, 57) ἔκστασις ἔλαβεν ἅπαντας amazement seized (them) all Lk 5:26. φόβος 7:16. Sim. πειρασμὸς ὑμᾶς οὐκ εἴληφεν εἰ μὴ ἀνθρώπινος 1 Cor 10:13.—Of hunting and fishing: catch (X., Cyr. 1, 4, 9; Aelian, VH 4, 14) οὐδέν Lk 5:5=J 21:6 v.l. Fig. εἴ τις λαμβάνει (ὑμᾶς) if someone puts something over on you, takes advantage of you 2 Cor 11:20 (the exx. cited in Field, Notes, 184f refer to material plunder, whereas Paul appears to point to efforts of his opposition to control the Corinthians’ thinking for their own political purposes; also s. CLattey, JTS 44, ’43, 148); in related vein δόλῳ τινὰ λ. catch someone by a trick 12:16. (4) to take payment, receive, accept, of taxes, etc. collect the two-drachma tax Mt 17:24; tithes Hb 7:8f; portion of the fruit as rent Mt 21:34. τὶ ἀπό τινος someth. fr. someone (Plut., Mor. 209d, Aem. Paul. 5, 9) 17:25. παρὰ τῶν γεωργῶν λ. ἀπὸ τῶν καρπῶν collect a share of the fruit fr. the vinedressers Mk 12:2.—τὶ παρά τινος someth. fr. someone (Aristarch. Sam. p. 352, 4; Jos., Ant. 5, 275; Just., D. 22, 11; Tat. 19, 1) οὐ παρὰ ἀνθρώπου τὴν μαρτυρίαν λ. the testimony which I receive is not from a human being or I will not accept mere human testimony (PSI 395, 6 [241 b.c.] σύμβολον λαβὲ παρʼ αὐτῶν=have them give you a receipt) J 5:34; cp. vs. 44; 3:11, 32f. (5) to include in an experience, take up, receive τινὰ someone εἰς into (Wsd 8:18) lit. εἰς τὸ πλοῖον take someone (up) into the boat J 6:21. εἰς οἰκίαν receive someone into one’s house 2J 10. εἰς τὰ ἴδια into his own home J 19:27. Receive someone in the sense of recognizing the other’s authority J 1:12; 5:43ab; 13:20abcd.—οἱ ὑπηρέται ῥαπίσμασιν αὐτὸν ἔλαβον Mk 14:65 does not mean ‘the servants took him into custody with blows’ (BWeiss, al.), but is a colloquialism (s. B-D-F §198, 3, w. citation of AcJo 90 [Aa II 196, 1] τί εἰ ῥαπίσμασίν μοι ἔλαβες; ‘what if you had

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 30 laid blows on me?’ ) the servants treated him to blows (Moffatt: ‘treated him to cuffs and slaps’), or even ‘got’ him w. blows, ‘worked him over’ (perh. a Latinism; Cicero, Tusc. 2, 14, 34 verberibus accipere. B-D-F §5, 3b; s. Rob. 530f); the v.l. ἔβαλον is the result of failure to recognize this rare usage. καλῶς ἔλαβόν σε; have (the young women) treated you well? Hs 9, 11, 8. (6) to make a choice, choose, select πᾶς ἀρχιερεὺς ἐξ ἀνθρώπων λαμβανόμενος who is chosen fr. among human beings Hb 5:1 (cp. Num 8:6; Am 2:11; Just., D. 130, 3). The emphasis is not on gender but the human status of the chief priest in contrast to that of the unique Messiah vs. 5. (7) to accept as true, receive τὶ someth. fig. τὰ ῥήματά τινος receive someone’s words (and use them as a guide) J 12:48; 17:8; AcPl Ha 1, 6 (s. καρδία 1bβ). τὸν λόγον receive the teaching Mt 13:20; Mk 4:16 (for μετὰ χαρᾶς λ. cp. PIand 13, 18 ἵνα μετὰ χαρᾶς σε ἀπολάβωμεν). (8) to enter into a close relationship, receive, make one’s own, apprehend/comprehend mentally or spiritually (Soph., Pla. et al.) of the mystical apprehension of Christ (opp. κατελήμφθην ὑπὸ Χριστοῦ) ἔλαβον (i.e. Χριστόν) I have made (him) my own Phil 3:12. (9) Special uses: the OT is the source of λαμβάνειν πρόσωπον show partiality/favoritism (s. πρόσωπον 1bα end) Lk 20:21; Gal 2:6; B 19:4; D 4:3.—θάρσος λ. take courage s. θάρσος; πεῖράν τινος λ. try someth. (Pla., Prot. 342a; 348a, Gorg. 448a; X., Cyr. 6, 1, 28; Polyb. 1, 75, 7; 2, 32, 5; 5, 100, 10; Aelian, VH 12, 22; Dt 28:56; Jos., Ant. 8, 166; diff. Dio Chrys. 50, 6) Hb 11:29 (this expr. has a different mng. in vs. 36; s. 10b below).—συμβούλιον λαμβάνειν consult (with someone), lit. ‘take counsel’, is a Latinism (consilium capere; s. B-D-F §5, 3b; Rob. 109) Mt 27:7; 28:12; w. ὅπως foll. 22:15; foll. by κατά τινος against someone and ὅπως 12:14; foll. by κατά τινος and ὥστε 27:1. οὐ λήψῃ βουλὴν πονηρὰν κατὰ τοῦ πλησίον σου D 2:6. (10) to be a receiver, receive, get, obtain (a) abs. λαβών (of a hungry hog) when it has received someth. B 10:3. (Opp. αἰτεῖν, as Appian, Fgm. [I p. 532–36 Viereck-R.] 23 αἰτεῖτε καὶ λαμβάνετε; PGM 4, 2172) Mt 7:8; Lk 11:10; J 16:24. (Opp. διδόναι as Thu. 2, 97, 4 λαμβάνειν μᾶλλον ἢ διδόναι; Ael. Aristid. 34 p. 645 D.; Herm. Wr. 5, 10b; Philo, Deus Imm. 57; SibOr 3, 511) Mt 10:8; Ac 20:35; B 14:1; but in D 1:5 λ. rather has the ‘active’ sense accept a donation (as ἵνα λάβῃ ἐξουσίαν TestJob 8:2). (b) w. acc. of thing τὶ someth. (Da 2:6; OdeSol 11:4 σύνεσιν; TestJob 24:9 τρεῖς ἄρτους al.; ApcEsdr 5:13 p. 30, 11 Tdf. τὴν ψυχήν) τὸ ψωμίον receive the piece of bread J 13:30. ὕδωρ ζωῆς δωρεάν water of life without cost Rv 22:17. μισθόν (q.v. 1 and 2a) Mt 10:41ab; J 4:36; 1 Cor 3:8, 14; AcPlCor 2:36 (TestSol 1:2, 10). Money: ἀργύρια Mt 28:15; ἀνὰ δηνάριον a denarius each Mt 20:9f. ἐλεημοσύνην Ac 3:3. βραχύ τι a little or a bite J 6:7; eternal life Mk 10:30 (Jos., C. Ap. 2, 218 βίον ἀμείνω λαβεῖν); the Spirit (schol. on Plato 856e ἄνωθεν λαμβάνειν τὸ πνεῦμα) J 7:39; Ac 2:38; cp. Gal 3:14; 1 Cor 2:12; 2 Cor 11:4; forgiveness of sin Ac 10:43 (Just., D. 54, 1); grace Ro 1:5; cp. 5:17; the victor’s prize 1 Cor 9:24f; the crown of life Js 1:12 (cp. Wsd 5:16 λ. τὸ διάδημα). συμφύγιον/σύμφυτον καὶ ὅπλον

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 31

εὐδοκίας λάβωμεν Ἰησοῦν χριστόν the sense of this clause, restored from AcPl Ha 8, 23–24 and AcPl Ox 1602, 33–35 (=BMM recto 29–31) emerges as follows: and let us take Jesus Christ as our refuge/ally and shield, the assurance of God’s goodwill toward us. The early and late rain Js 5:7. ἔλεος receive mercy Hb 4:16 (Just., D. 133, 1). λ. τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ υἱοῦ (θεοῦ) receive the name of the Son of God (in baptism) Hs 9, 12, 4. διάδοχον receive a successor Ac 24:27 (cp. Pliny the Younger, Ep. 9, 13 successorem accipio). τὴν ἐπισκοπὴν αὐτοῦ λαβέτω ἕτερος let another man receive his position 1:20 (Ps 108:8). τόπον ἀπολογίας λ. (τόπος 4) 25:16. λ. τι μετὰ εὐχαριστίας receive someth. w. thankfulness 1 Ti 4:4 (but s. 1 above, end.—On the construction with μετά cp. Libanius, Or. 63 p. 392, 3 F. μετὰ ψόγου λ.). τί ἔχεις ὅ οὐκ ἔλαβες; what have you that you did not receive? 1 Cor 4:7 (Alciphron 2, 6, 1 τί οὐ τῶν ἐμῶν λαβοῦσα ἔχεις;). Of punishments (cp. δίκην λ. Hdt. 1, 115; Eur., Bacch. 1312. ποινάς Eur., Tro. 360. πληγάς Philyllius Com. [V b.c.] 11 K.; GrBar 4:15 καταδίκην; Jos., Ant. 14, 336 τιμωρίαν) λ. περισσότερον κρίμα receive a punishment that is just so much more severe Mt 23:13 [14] v.l. (cp. κρίμα 4b); Mk 12:40; Lk 20:47; cp. Js 3:1. οἱ ἀνθεστηκότες ἑαυτοῖς κρίμα λήμψονται those who oppose will bring punishment upon themselves Ro 13:2. πεῖράν τινος λ. become acquainted with, experience, suffer someth. (X., An. 5, 8, 15; Polyb. 6, 3, 1; 28, 9, 7; 29, 3, 10; Diod S 12, 24, 4 τὴν θυγατέρα ἀπέκτεινεν, ἵνα μὴ τῆς ὕβρεως λάβῃ πεῖραν; 15, 88, 4; Jos., Ant. 2, 60; Preisigke, Griech. Urkunden des ägypt. Museums zu Kairo [1911] 2, 11; 3, 11 πεῖραν λ. δαίμονος) μαστίγων πεῖραν λ. Hb 11:36 (the phrase in a diff. mng. vs. 29; s. 9b above). (c) Also used as a periphrasis for the passive: οἰκοδομὴν λ. be edified 1 Cor 14:5. περιτομήν be circumcised J 7:23 (Just., D. 23, 5 al.). τὸ χάραγμα receive a mark = be marked Rv 14:9, 11; 19:20; 20:4. καταλλαγήν be reconciled Ro 5:11. ὑπόμνησίν τινος be reminded of = remember someth. 2 Ti 1:5 (Just., D 19, 6 μνήμην λαμβάνητε); λήθην τινὸς λ. forget someth. (Timocles Com. [IV b.c.], Fgm. 6, 5 K.; Aelian, VH 3, 18 end, HA 4, 35; Jos., p 585 Ant. 2, 163; 202; 4, 304; Just., D. 46, 5 ἵνα μὴ λήθη ὑμᾶς λαμβάνῃ τοῦ θεοῦ) 2 Pt 1:9; χαρὰν λ. experience joy, rejoice Hv 3, 13, 2 ; GJs 12:2; ἀρχὴν λ. be begun, have its beginning (Pla et al.; Polyb. 1, 12, 9; Sext. Emp., Phys. 1, 366; Aelian, VH 2, 28; 12, 53; Dio Chrys. 40, 7; Philo, Mos. 1, 81 τρίτον [σημεῖον] … τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ γίνεσθαι λαβὸν ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ; Just., D. 46, 4 τὴν ἀρχὴν λαβούσης ἀπὸ Ἀβραὰμ τῆς περιτομῆς; Ath. 19, 2 ἑτέραν ἀρχὴν τοῦ κόσμου λαβόντος) Hb 2:3; ApcPt Rainer ln. 19.—λ. τι ἀπό τινος receive someth. from someone (Epict. 4, 11, 3 λ. τι ἀπὸ τῶν θεῶν; Herm. Wr. 1, 30; ApcMos 19 ὅτε δὲ ἔλαβεν ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ τὸν ὄρκον; Just., D. 78, 10 τῶν λαβόντων χάριν ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ) 1J 2:27; 3:22. Also τὶ παρά τινος (Pisander Epicus [VI b.c.] Fgm. 5 [in Athen. 11, 469d]; Diod S 5, 3, 4 λαβεῖν τι παρὰ τῶν θεῶν; TestAbr A 5 p. 82, 8 [Stone p. 12] λαβὼν τὴν εὐχὴν παρʼ αὐτῶν; Just., A I, 60, 3 ἐνέργειαν τὴν παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ λεγομένην λαβεῖν τὸν Μωυσέα.—παρά A3aβ) J

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 32

10:18b; Ac 2:33; 3:5; 20:24; Js 1:7; 2J 4; Rv 2:28. λ. τὸ ἱκανὸν παρὰ τοῦ Ἰάσονος receive bail from Jason Ac 17:9 (s. ἱκανός 1). λ. τι ὑπό τινος be given someth. by someone 2 Cor 11:24. κλῆρον καὶ μερισμὸν λαμβάνοντες AcPl Ha 8, 18//Ox 1602, 22f [λαβόντες]=BMM recto 23f (s. κλῆρος 2). λ. τι ἔκ τινος receive someth. fr. a quantity of someth.: ἐκ τοῦ πληρώματος αὐτοῦ ἐλάβομεν χάριν from his fullness we have received favor J 1:16. ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος αὐτοῦ ἐλάβετε Hs 9, 24, 4.—λ. ἐξ ἀναστάσεως τοὺς νεκροὺς αὐτῶν (s. ἀνάστασις 2a) Hb 11:35. On ἐν γαστρὶ εἴληφα (LXX) GJs 4:2 and 4 s. γαστήρ 2 and συλλαμβάνω 3.—B. 743. Schmidt, Syn. III 203–33. DELG. M-M. EDNT. TW. Sv.12 Louw and Nida list the following usages of lambanō in the Greek New Testament: (1) “to take hold of something or someone, with or without force- ‘to take hold of, to grasp, to grab’”13 (2) “to acquire possession of something- ‘to take, to acquire, to obtain’”14 (3) “to receive or accept an object or benefit for which the initiative rests with the giver, but the focus of attention in the transfer is upon the receiver- ‘to receive, receiving, to accept.’”15 (4) “to collect what is due (normally in terms of taxes and interest), with the possible implication of extortion- ‘to receive (interest), to collect (taxes).”16 (5) “to make a choice of one or more possible alternatives- ‘to choose, to select, to prefer.’”17 (6) “to come to believe something and to act in accordance with such a belief- ‘to accept, to receive, to come to believe.’”18 (7) “to take total advantage of someone- ‘to exploit completely, to take complete advantage of.’”19 (8) “to experience some event or state, often with the implication of something negatively valued- ‘to undergo, to experience.’”20 (9) to cause to experience normally implying something grievous – ‘to make experience’2122 (10) “to put on an article of clothing- ‘to put on.’”23 In Colossians 4:10, the verb lambanō means, “to receive” since the word pertains to receiving or accepting an object or benefit for which the initiative rests with the giver, but the focus of attention in the transfer is upon the receiver.24 The second person plural form of this verb means “all of you” and is a reference to the Colossians Christian community as a corporate unit. Therefore, this verb speaks of the Colossians receiving instructions from Paul regarding Mark.

12 pages 583-585 13 18.1 14 57.55 15 57.125 16 57.65 17 30.86 18 31.50 19 88.146 20 90.63 21 90.85 22 90.85 23 49.10 24 Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, p. 571). New York: United Bible Societies.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 33

The aorist tense of the verb lambanō is an epistolary aorist which is a use of the aorist indicative in which the author self-consciously describes his letter from the time frame of the audience. Here it is of course from the standpoint of the Colossian Christian community who read this epistle since the instructions Paul mentions giving to the Colossians regarding Mark are found in the apodosis of the third class conditional clause which follows. The active voice of this verb means that the Colossians as the subject produce the action of this verb indicating they received these instructions from Paul regarding Mark. The indicative mood of the verb is declarative presenting this Pauline assertion as a non-contingent or unqualified statement.

Welcome Mark

Colossians 4:10 Aristarchus, my fellow prisoner, sends you his greetings; and also Barnabas’s cousin Mark (about whom you received instructions; if he comes to you, welcome him). (NASB95) “If he comes to you, welcome him” is composed of the following: (1) conditional particle ean (ἐάν), “if” (2) third person singular aorist active subjunctive form of the verb erchomai (ἒρχομαι), “comes” (3) preposition pros (πρός), “to” (4) accusative second personal plural form of the personal pronoun su (σύ), “you” (5) second person plural aorist middle imperative form of the verb dechomai (δέχομαι), “welcome” (6) accusative third person masculine singular form of the intensive personal pronoun autos (αὐτός), “him.” The conditional particle ean is employed with the subjunctive mood of erchomai in order to form the protasis of a third class condition. In the apodosis is aorist imperative form of the verb imperative form of the verb dechomai, “welcome.” Dr. Daniel Wallace makes the following comments regarding the third class condition, he writes, “The third class condition often presents the condition as uncertain of fulfillment, but still likely. There are, however, many exceptions to this. It is difficult to give one semantic label to this structure, especially in Hellenistic Greek (note the discussion below). The structure of the protasis involves the particle ἐάν followed by a subjunctive mood in any tense. Both the particle (a combination of εἰ and the particle ἐάν and the subjunctive give the condition a sense of contingency. The apodosis can have any tense and any mood. This is a common category of conditional clauses, occurring nearly 300 times in the NT. The third class condition encompasses a broad semantic range: (a) a logical connection (if A, then B) in the present time (sometimes called present general condition), indicating nothing as to the fulfillment of the protasis; (b) a

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 34 mere hypothetical situation or one that probably will not be fulfilled; and (c) a more probable future occurrence. Technically, the subjunctive is used in the third class condition as well as the fifth class condition. Structurally, these two are virtually identical: The fifth class condition requires a present indicative in the apodosis, while the third class can take virtually any mood-tense combination, including the present indicative. Semantically, their meaning is a bit different. The third class condition encompasses a broad range of potentialities in Koine Greek. It depicts what is likely to occur in the future, what could possibly occur, or even what is only hypothetical and will not occur. In classical Greek the third class condition was usually restricted to the first usage (known as more probable future), but with the subjunctive’s encroaching on the domain of the optative in the Hellenistic era, this structural category has expanded accordingly. The context will always be of the greatest help in determining an author’s use of the third class condition. The fifth class offers a condition the fulfillment of which is realized in the present time. This condition is known as the present general condition. For the most part this condition is a simple condition; that is, the speaker gives no indication about the likelihood of its fulfillment. His presentation is neutral: ‘If A, then B.’ Because of the broad range of the third class condition and the undefined nature of the fifth class, many conditional clauses are open to interpretation. But for the most part, the present general condition addresses a generic situation in the present time (broadly speaking), while the more probable future addresses a specific situation in the future time.”25 As Wallace states “The third class condition encompasses a broad semantic range: (a) a logical connection (if A, then B) in the present time (sometimes called present general condition), indicating nothing as to the fulfillment of the protasis; (b) a mere hypothetical situation or one that probably will not be fulfilled; and (c) a more probable future occurrence.” Wallace cites Boyer in relation to the more probable future occurrence. Boyer gives the third class condition eight semantic categories from “fulfillment certain” and “fulfillment probable” to “fulfillment improbable” and “no indication of probability”; “no indication of fulfillment” followed by “fulfillment probable” in combination with “fulfillment certain.” In Colossians 4:10, the conditional particle ean plus the subjunctive form of the verb erchomai form the protasis of a third class condition which portrays some future event as a unitary action which occurs prior to the action of the verb in the apodosis. It expresses a higher degree of probability of fulfillment than would the present subjunctive. Here the action in the protasis is Mark entering into the company of the members of the Colossian Christian community. The action in the

25 Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics-Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament; pages 697-698

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 35 apodosis is the command for the Colossians to welcome him. Therefore, the third class condition portrays Mark entering into the company of the Colossians at some point in the future which occurs before the Colossians welcome him and expresses the probability of Mark visiting them in the future. The relationship between the protasis and the apodosis is “cause-effect.” The cause: if Mark enters into the company of the Colossian Christian community. The effect: then, they must welcome him. The verb erchomai means “to enter” since it is used with the prepositional phrase πρὸς ὑμᾶς, which speaks of Mark being “in the company of” the Colossian Christian community. Thus, this verb speaks of Mark “entering” into the company of the Colossian believers. The personal pronoun su is used of the faithful believers in Colossae in a corporate sense. It functions as the object of the preposition pros, which is used of the Colossian believers and speaks of Mark entering “into the company of” or “into the presence of” these Colossian believers. The aorist tense of the verb is ingressive used to stress the entrance into a state. Here it denotes Mark entering into the state of being in the company of the Colossian Christian community. The active voice of the verb means that the subject performs the action of the verb indicating Mark performing the action of entering into the company of the Colossians. The verb dechomai means “to welcome” since the word pertains to willingly permitting someone to have access to your company. The word means “to accept the presence of a person in a friendly manner.” Thus, the word is used with reference to hospitality. Here the verb speaks of the Colossians welcoming Mark into their fellowship. The aorist imperative form of this verb dechomai is a pure ingressive aorist imperative, which places stress on the beginning of an action that the context usually makes clear is not a momentary action. Here it expresses the idea of the Colossian Christian community entering into the action which is not momentary in welcoming Mark into their fellowship when, if he in fact does enter into their company. This is not a momentary action since Paul wants the Colossians to extend hospitality to Mark during the entire period of time in which Mark is in Colossae. The middle voice of the verb is a deponent middle which means that it has an active meaning even though it has a middle voice form. This would indicate that the Colossian Christian community must perform the action of welcoming Mark into their company when and if he visits them. The intensive personal pronoun autos means “him” referring to Mark and functions as an accusative direct object meaning that the word receives the action

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 36 of the verb dechomai indicating that Paul’s Spirit inspired desire is that Mark receives the action of the Colossians welcoming him into their fellowship.

Translation of Colossians 4:10

Colossians 4:10 Aristarchus, my fellow-prisoner, gives his regards as well as Mark, the cousin of Barnabas (about whom, all of you are receiving instructions: if he enters into your company, all of you must welcome him.) (Author’s translation)

Exposition of Colossians 4:10

Colossians 4:10 marks a transition. In Colossians 4:7-9, Paul identifies the messengers who he entrusted the responsibility of delivering this epistle to the Colossians. These verses also contain a commendation of both Tychicus and Onesimus. Colossians 4:10-14 presents greetings from Paul’s companions in Rome. Therefore, Colossians 4:10 marks a transition from Paul’s discussion regarding Tychicus and Onesimus who would carry this epistle to the Colossians to Paul passing along greetings to the Colossians from his companions in Rome, namely Aristarchus and Mark. “Aristarchus” was from Macedonia and was a traveling companion on Paul’s missionary journeys (Acts 19:29). He and Gaius were seized by the Ephesian mob during a riot provoked by the silversmiths of that city. He was a native of the city of Thessalonica (Acts 20:4; 27:2). Aristarchus accompanied Paul from Greece (Acts 20:4) and to Rome (Acts 27:2). Paul calls him a “fellow-prisoner” in Colossians 4:10 and is with Paul in Rome when the apostle pens Colossians. Church tradition says that he was martyred during the persecution of Nero in the mid to late sixties. A.F. Walls has the following article on this individual, he writes “All the references undoubtedly relate to the same person. The first, Acts 19:29, describes him as already Paul’s fellow-traveller when seized by the Ephesian mob (though it has been argued that this is proleptic). In Acts 20:4 he accompanies Paul to Jerusalem, probably as an official Thessalonian delegate with the collection; and in Acts 27:2 he is on Paul’s ship from Caesarea. W. M. Ramsay argued that he could have travelled only as Paul’s slave (SPT, pp. 315f.), though Lightfoot’s suggestion still deserves mention, that the manner of reference indicates that he was on his way home to Thessalonica. However (assuming a Roman origin for Colossians), he rejoined Paul, and became his ‘fellow prisoner of war’ (Col. 4:10), possibly alternating with Epaphras in voluntary imprisonment (cf. Col. 4:10–12 with Phm. 23-24). On the ‘Ephesian imprisonment’ theory he will have gone home after the

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 37 riot and the writing of Colossians (cf. G. S. Duncan, St Paul’s Ephesian Ministry, 1929, pp. 196, 237ff.). His association with the collection has suggested an identification with the ‘brother’ of 2 Cor. 8:18 (Zahn, INT, 1, p. 320). The most natural reading of Col. 4:10–11 implies a Jewish origin.”26 Eerdman’s has the following on Aristarchus, “A faithful traveling companion of Paul from Macedonia. He was dragged into the theater at Ephesus by an angry mob during a riot instigated by Demetrius, a silversmith who was losing business on account of Paul’s teaching (Acts 19:29). Because he continued his travels with the apostle, Aristarchus must not have been greatly harmed during the incident, perhaps because he was a Greek. When things had calmed down in the city, he joined a group of men in Greece who went to Troas, where they waited for the apostle (20:4, 6). According to 27:2 Aristarchus even accompanied Paul during his fourth missionary journey, possibly all the way to Rome. Sometime later Aristarchus is described as a ‘fellow prisoner’ with Paul (Col. 4:10). Whether he stayed with Paul during the resumption of his voyage or went home to Thessalonica, his birthplace, he was among those who shared Paul’s first imprisonment at Rome. He is called a ‘fellow worker’ by Paul, with whom he sends greetings to the church at Colossae and to Philemon (Phlm. 24).”27 In Colossians 4:10, Paul describes Aristarchus as his “fellow-prisoner” which does not suggest that he was arrested along with Paul and then imprisoned along with him but rather it simply means that he voluntarily stayed with him in his own rented quarters as he was awaiting his appeal before Caesar. This is clearly indicated by the book of Acts which records the account of Paul being arrested, unjustly incarcerated, then appealing to Caesar, arriving in Rome and allowed to have his own rented quarters until his case came before Caesar. This account does not mention any of these individuals as being arrested along with Paul. Douglas Moo writes “Paul does not characterize Aristarchus as a ‘dear brother’ or ‘minister’ or ‘fellow worker,’ but as a ‘fellow prisoner’ (synaichmalōtos). Interpreters are divided over whether this word should be understood literally— Aristarchus is ‘here in prison with me’ (NJB)28—or metaphorically—Aristarchus, like Paul, has been taken captive by the Lord to serve him.29 The word that Paul uses occurs only twice elsewhere in the New Testament: in Philemon 23, which simply duplicates the reference to Aristarchus, and in Romans 16:7, where it refers to two other co-workers of Paul, Andronicus and Junia. Some proponents of the

26 Walls, A. F. (1996). Aristarchus. In D. R. W. Wood, I. H. Marshall, A. R. Millard, J. I. Packer & D. J. Wiseman (Eds.), New Bible dictionary (D. R. W. Wood, I. H. Marshall, A. R. Millard, J. I. Packer & D. J. Wiseman, Ed.) (3rd ed.) (80). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. 27 Myers, A. C. (1987). The Eerdmans Bible dictionary (83). Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. NJB New Jerusalem Bible 28 E.g., O’Brien, 249–50; Abbott, 300; Dunn, 275–76; Lohse, 172; Barth/Blanke, 479; MacDonald, 180; Hübner, 119. 29 E.g., O’Brien, 249–50; Abbott, 300; Dunn, 275–76; Lohse, 172; Barth/Blanke, 479; MacDonald, 180; Hübner, 119.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 38 metaphorical interpretation claim that the word we find here would be inappropriate if taken literally, since it strictly connotes a military prisoner.30 Had Paul intended a reference to literal imprisonment, he would have used syndesmios, which is built on his usual word for ‘prisoner’ (desmios; see Eph. 3:1; 4:1; 2 Tim. 1:8; Phlm. 1, 9).31 But Paul seems to use the simple verb cognate to the word Paul uses here (aichmalōtizō) in a metaphorical sense, as, for instance, in 2 Timothy 3:6, where Paul speaks of women being ‘taken captive’ by false teachers (see also Rom. 7:23; 2 Cor. 10:5; the simple noun aichmalōtos occurs in Luke 4:18). Moreover, had a metaphorical meaning been intended, we would have expected Paul to say ‘fellow prisoners of Christ,’ or something of the sort. The literal interpretation is, then, to be preferred. We do not know how Aristarchus ended up in prison with Paul, but we can speculate that he volunteered to share the apostle’s imprisonment in order to be of help to him.32”33 Warren Wiersbe writes “This man was identified as Paul’s fellow prisoner and fellow worker (Col. 4:11). Aristarchus was from Macedonia and was one of Paul’s traveling companions (Acts 19:29). He was originally from Thessalonica (Acts 20:4) and willingly risked his life in that Ephesian riot (Acts 19:28–41). He sailed with Paul to Rome (Acts 27:2), which meant he also experienced the storm and shipwreck that Luke so graphically described in Acts 27. Aristarchus stayed with Paul no matter what the circumstances were—a riot in Ephesus, a voyage, a storm, or even a prison. It is not likely that Aristarchus was an official Roman prisoner. ‘Fellow prisoner’ probably means that Aristarchus shared Paul’s confinement with him so that he could be a help and comfort to the apostle. He was a voluntary prisoner for the sake of Jesus Christ and the Gospel. Paul could not have accomplished all that he did apart from the assistance of his friends. Aristarchus stands out as one of the greatest of Paul’s helpers. He did not look for an easy task. He did not run when the going got tough. He suffered and labored with Paul.”34 The proper name Markos, “Mark” is the author of the Gospel of Mark and the cousin of Barnabas. Mark accompanied Paul and Barnabas during their first missionary journey but deserted them in the middle of it. It was because of this that Paul and Barnabas parted ways during this missionary journey. Mark is also called “John-Mark” in Acts 12:22. The fact that Mark is with Paul in Rome when Paul was writing to Philemon and to the Colossians indicates that there was a reconciliation between Paul and Mark and that Paul had forgiven him. Also, the fact that Paul in 2 Timothy 2:11 directs Timothy to bring Mark along with him for his trip to Rome to visit him also indicates that Mark and Paul had reconciled.

30 E.g., Harris, 206. 31 G. Kittel, TDNT 1.196–97. 32 G. Kittel, TDNT 1.196–97. 33 Moo, D. J. (2008). The letters to the Colossians and to Philemon (p. 338). Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. 34 Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 2, p. 150). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 39

Douglas Moo writes “Mark, the cousin35 of Barnabas, is the same Mark who had a checkered career in Paul’s early missionary labors. Mark, whose other name was John, was the son of a woman in whose house the early Jerusalem Christian community met (Acts 12:12). After Barnabas and Saul had delivered the money collected by the church in Antioch to the Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 11:27–30), they took ‘John, called Mark,’ with them back to Antioch. He then accompanied Paul and Barnabas on the first missionary journey, only to abandon the trip in Pamphylia (Acts 15:38). It was for this reason that Paul refused to take Mark with him on the second missionary journey, creating a rift between himself and Barnabas (Acts 15:37–39). This split must have taken place around A.D. 49, and we hear nothing more about Mark until twelve years or so later. Paul’s simple conveyance of greetings here and in Philemon 24, along with his commendation of Mark in 2 Timothy 4:11, reveals that they must have become reconciled at some point. Mark apparently had a significant ministry in Rome, since Peter, writing from there, also mentions him (1 Pet. 5:13). And it was probably from Rome that Mark wrote the gospel bearing his name.36 Eerdman’s Bible Dictionary has the following excellent article on Mark, they write “The son of Mary of Jerusalem (Acts 12:12); a companion of the apostles Paul and Peter, believed to be the author of the gospel of Mark. The family of John Mark was apparently of some importance to the early Church in Jerusalem since Peter, after his miraculous escape from jail, went to the house of Mark’s mother, where he knew that many Christians would be gathered to pray (Acts 12:12). This house was a center for Christian gathering; that it also contained the upper room, the setting for the institution of the Lord’s Supper and the Pentecost event, as is often suggested, is far from certain Mark went with Barnabas and Paul first to the Gentile Christian community at Antioch (v 25) and then to Cyprus, where Paul’s first missionary journey began (13:25; “John”). But when Barnabas and Paul began to enter the interior of Asia Minor, Mark left them and returned to Jerusalem (v. 13). Mark’s departure later caused a dispute between Barnabas and Paul; Barnabas wanted Mark to accompany them on a new journey, but Paul did not. Paul took a new companion, Silas, and went into Asia Minor, while Barnabas and Mark went to Cyprus (15:36–41). John Mark, though perhaps not a central character in the early mission to the Gentiles, was, like Barnabas and Silas, one of those by whom the church of Jerusalem and the Gentile churches beyond Syria were linked together. Twice in Acts Mark is referred to as ‘John whose other name was Mark’ (Acts 12:12, 25; cf. 15:37) because of possible confusion with John the son of Zebedee and because John was a common name among Jews. Twice he is called John (13:15, 13) and once Mark (15:39), but confusion is ruled out by links

35 The Gk. ἀνεψιός means “cousin,” not “nephew” (as in KJV, “sister’s son”) (see BDAG). 36 Moo, D. J. (2008). The letters to the Colossians and to Philemon (pp. 338–339). Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 40 made in the course of the narrative. What is not so certain is that all of the other references to Mark in the New Testament refer to the same person. Marcus was a very common Latin name. It is, nonetheless, quite likely that ‘Mark the cousin of Barnabas’ (Col. 4:10; KJV “sister’s son”) was the same person as John Mark. Barnabas’ cousin was with Paul, probably at Rome, when Paul wrote to the Colossians, and it was expected that he might go to Colossae. This Mark is in all likelihood the Mark named at Phlm. 24; both are named with Aristarchus, and the two letters were written to the same city probably about the same time. It is possible that John Mark overcame his fear of venturing beyond the familiarity of Judea, Syria, and Cyprus (if that is what caused his turning back) and was reconciled to Paul. 2 Tim. 4:11 asks the recipient of the letter to send Mark, ‘for he is very useful in serving me.’ 1 Pet. 5:13 probably places ‘my son Mark’ at Rome (“Babylon”) with Peter. If John Mark was in Rome with Paul, he may well have been in the same city with Peter. ‘Son’ here certainly refers to a spiritual relationship (cf. Phil. 2:22; 1 Tim. 1:18) rather than to literal parentage. According to early Church tradition Mark accompanied Peter, for whom he was the ‘interpreter’ (Eusebius HE iii.39.15), and wrote the gospel of Mark at Rome. The reference to the ‘young man’ who fled naked from Gethsemane (Mark 14:51–52) has been thought of as a reference by the author of the gospel to himself, but there is no real ground for this; the young man’s flight is mentioned to emphasize that ‘all forsook [Jesus] and fled’ (v. 50). Church tradition also speaks of Mark as the first Christian preacher in Alexandria (Eusebius HE ii.16.1; ii.14), and later associates him with Venice.”37 Bill Warren commenting on Mark writes “Author of the Second Gospel and an early missionary leader. John Mark, as Luke calls him in Acts, was the son of Mary, in whose house the church was meeting when Peter was miraculously freed from prison in Acts 12. Commonly called by his Greek name, Mark, in the NT, John was probably his Jewish name. Mark was a Jew, Barnabas’ cousin (Col. 4:10), and a companion of Barnabas and Paul on their first missionary journey. On the first missionary journey Mark ministered with the group on Cyprus, the home territory of Barnabas, and also a place with family connections for Mark. However, when they left for Pamphylia, Mark returned to Jerusalem. Mark was the cause of the split between Paul and Barnabas when Mark’s participation in the second missionary journey was debated (Acts 15:39). Barnabas sided with his cousin, while Paul refused to take Mark since he had left them on the first journey. Later, however, Paul indicated that Mark was with him (in Rome likely) as Paul sent letters to the Colossians (Col. 4:10) and Philemon (Philem. 24). Mark was also summoned to be with Paul in 2 Tim. 4:11. Whatever rift existed earlier was healed

37 Myers, A. C. (1987). The Eerdmans Bible dictionary (692–693). Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 41 sometime and their friendship renewed. Mark is closely related to Peter. In 1 Pet. 5:13 Peter refers to Mark, his “son,” as being with him in Rome (Babylon). Early church tradition supports the strong association between Peter and Mark. In the early second century, Papias mentioned that Mark was Peter’s interpreter. Other early church figures associate Mark with Peter and note that the Gospel of Mark was based upon Peter’s preaching.”38 Peter Achtemeir writes that the name Mark is “a popular Latin name borne by prominent Romans from Cicero to the emperor Marcus Aurelius. Mentioned eight times in the nt (Acts and several Letters; never in the Gospels), it customarily names one who accompanied the apostles Paul and Peter. In the account in Acts, a Mark, surnamed John, was the son of a woman (Mary) in whose house in Jerusalem Christians from the earliest period met for prayer, and to which Peter went, apparently as a matter of course, on his miraculous release from prison (Acts 12:12). Mark accompanied Saul (Paul) and Barnabas on a journey from Antioch to Jerusalem with famine relief aid (Acts 12:25), but his untimely abandonment of a later missionary journey on which he accompanied Barnabas and Paul (Acts 13:5, 13) precipitated a dispute when Barnabas proposed taking Mark on another such journey. Paul’s opposition to that course of action led to independent missionary journeys undertaken by Barnabas with Mark, and Paul with Silas (Acts 15:36-40). That is the last mention of John Mark in Acts. A Mark is mentioned by Paul, however, as one of five Christians who sent greetings to Philemon and some other recipients of that Letter (Philem. 24). If this is the same Mark, it indicates a later reconciliation with Paul. The same five Christians are also among the group that sends greetings to Christians in Colossae (Col. 4:10), where Mark is identified as the ‘cousin of Barnabas,’ an apparent reference to the Mark mentioned in Acts. A Mark is also identified by the author of 2 Timothy (4:11) as ‘very useful in serving me,’ and as ‘my son’ in a Letter whose author is identified as the apostle Peter (1 Pet. 5:13). Later traditions, assuming that all nt references were to the same person, identified this Mark as the author of the second Gospel, who, serving as Peter’s interpreter in Rome, recorded, at the urging of Christians there, what he could remember of that apostle’s preaching. Still later traditions claim that the Gospel, originally reported as written after Peter’s death, was written during the apostle’s life, and eventually it was claimed that it was written at Peter’s urging. Other traditions make a ‘stub-fingered’ Mark the first to preach in Egypt and the founder of Alexandrian Christianity. Sixth-century legends identify Mark as one of the seventy disciples of Jesus (Luke 10:1), the one who bore the jar of water (Mark 14:13), and the one in whose house the events of Pentecost occurred (Acts 2:1-4).

38 Warren, B. (2003). Mark, John. In C. Brand, C. Draper, A. England, S. Bond, E. R. Clendenen & T. C. Butler (Eds.), Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (C. Brand, C. Draper, A. England, S. Bond, E. R. Clendenen & T. C. Butler, Ed.) (1080–1082). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 42

Later legends portray his martyr’s death and his reburial in Venice. That Mark 14:51-52 refers to the author of the Gospel is a modern conjecture.”39 R. A. Cole writes “Traditional author of the second Gospel, apparently a Jew and a native of Jerusalem. His Heb. name was the OT yōḥānān, ‘Yahweh has shown grace’ (cf. 2 Ki. 25:23, etc.), shortened in English to the familiar ‘John’. The reason for his adopted Lat. name of ‘Marcus’ is uncertain; sometimes Jewish families that had been captured as slaves in war, and later freed, took, as ‘freedmen’, the name of the Roman family to which they had been enslaved; but this is unlikely in his case, the more so as Marcus is a praenomen, not a family name. It was not uncommon for 1st-century Jews to bear a Gk. Or Rom. name in addition to their Heb. name, ‘in religion’; see Acts 1:23 for another such ‘surname’, again Lat. and not Gk. in origin. The same phenomenon is common among Jews today. If his early nickname of kolobodaktylos, ‘stumpy-fingered’, is a genuine tradition (see the anti-Marcionite prologue to Mark, dating from the later 2nd century, which is the earliest evidence for it), then it may refer either to a physical peculiarity on the part of the author or to some strange stylistic features of the Gospel which have puzzled critics of all ages. It may, however, be only a late conjecture, due to the confusion of ‘Marcus’ with the Lat. adjective mancus, ‘maimed’. Scripture gives some very clear evidence about his family, and there are also several conjectures of varying degrees of probability. His mother, named Mary, was related to Barnabas (Col. 4:10), the wealthy Levite from Cyprus, who was a landowner (Acts 4:36) and, whatever his country of origin, was a resident of Jerusalem in the days of the opening chapters of Acts. Mary herself appears to have been a woman of wealth and position, as well as a Christian; certainly her house was large enough to house a number of people, boasted at least one maidservant and was used as a meeting-place by the apostolic church even in time of persecution (Acts 12:12). It is significant that Peter, released from prison, has no doubt as to where he will find the Christians gathered. John Mark’s father is nowhere mentioned in Scripture, and, from the fact that the house of Acts 12:12 is called Mary’s, it has been inferred, probably correctly, that he was dead by that date, and Mary a widow. To John Mark himself there is no certain early reference, although the young man of Mk. 14:51, who saved himself by ignominious flight, is usually taken to be Mark. (Was he sleeping in a hut on the family property, guarding the fruit?) It would be neither safe nor customary for an author to mention his own name in such circumstances (cf. Jn. 21:24 for similar deliberate anonymity). Less likely, as partly dependent on the above tentative identification, is the theory that the Last Supper of Mk. 14 actually took place in John Mark’s

39 Achtemeier, P. J., Harper & Row, & Society of Biblical Literature. (1985). Harper’s Bible dictionary (1st ed.) (605). San Francisco: Harper & Row.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 43 house; the shadowy ‘goodman of the house’ of v. 14 would thus be John Mark’s father, still alive then, although dead before the date of Acts 12:12. John Mark apparently remained at home until brought to Antioch by Barnabas and Paul, who were returning from a relief mission to Jerusalem (Acts 12:25). When the two departed to Cyprus on the first missionary journey some time later he accompanied them, as travelling companion and attendant on the two older men (Acts 13:5). When, however, the party reached Perga, on the mainland of Asia Minor, John Mark left them, and returned to Jerusalem (Acts 13:13), while Barnabas and Paul continued alone. Paul apparently regarded this as desertion, and thus, when Barnabas suggested Mark as a travelling companion for the second journey, he refused point-blank (Acts 15:38). With both men, the attitude towards John Mark was no whim, but a point of principle (cf. Acts 9:27 and 11:25 for the character of Barnabas), so a separation was inevitable, Barnabas taking Mark back to Cyprus with him, and Paul taking Silas instead. After that, Mark is lost to view in Acts, but appears spasmodically in the Epistles. By the date of Col. 4:10 he is in the company of Paul the prisoner, presumably at Rome; Paul is apparently intending to send him on a mission to Colossae, so that he must have forgiven and forgotten the past. Phm. 24 also mentions him among the same apostolic group, which includes Luke. By the time of writing 2 Tim. 4:11 Mark is now away with Timothy, but there has been no rift; presumably this means that Paul had sent Mark on the mission to Asia Minor envisaged above, if Timothy was indeed in Ephesus. In the Petrine correspondence there is one significant mention, in 1 Pet. 5:13, where the wording shows the ‘paternal’ relationship existing between the older and younger disciples. If, as is probable, ‘Babylon’ in this verse stands for ‘Rome’, then the tradition of the Roman origins of Mark’s Gospel may well be true. The tradition that Mark later founded the church of Alexandria (Eusebius, EH 2. 16) lacks support. As ‘Mark’ was the commonest of all Roman names, some have argued that the biblical references concern more than one person. But, in such cases, the Bible differentiates (e.g. Jn. 14:22), so we may reject the objection.40 D. Partner has the following article, he writes “A member of a Jewish family in Jerusalem who were early believers in Jesus Christ, John Mark bore both a Jewish and a Roman name. The Roman name ‘Mark’ was perhaps a badge of Roman citizenship, as in Paul’s case, or was adopted when he left Jerusalem to serve the Gentile church in Antioch (Acts 12:25). When an angel of the Lord freed Peter from prison, the apostle went directly to ‘the house of Mary, the mother of John whose other name was Mark’ (Acts 12:12, nrsv). This house, described as having an outer gate, being of adequate size to accommodate a gathering of many

40 Cole, R. A. (1996). Mark (John). In D. R. W. Wood, I. H. Marshall, A. R. Millard, J. I. Packer & D. J. Wiseman (Eds.), New Bible dictionary (D. R. W. Wood, I. H. Marshall, A. R. Millard, J. I. Packer & D. J. Wiseman, Ed.) (3rd ed.) (731–732). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 44 believers, and served by a slave named Rhoda (Acts 12:12–13), was obviously the dwelling of a wealthy family. By the time of this event (c. a.d. 44) Mark may have already been converted through the personal influence of Peter (1 Pet. 5:13). The fact that he was chosen to accompany Barnabas and Saul (Paul) to Antioch indicates that Mark was held in high esteem by the church in Jerusalem (Acts 12:25). John Mark accompanied Barnabas and Saul to ‘assist them’ (Acts 13:5, nrsv) on their expedition into Asia with the gospel. He soon left the apostles, however, and returned to Jerusalem (Acts 13:13). Scripture does not reveal the cause of this desertion. Perhaps the rigors and hardships of the journey overwhelmed the young man. Another possible explanation was that at Paphos, shortly into the journey, Paul stepped to the front as leader and spokesman (Acts 13:13). Thereafter Acts (with the natural exception of Acts 15:12, 25) speaks of Paul and Barnabas rather than Barnabas and Paul. Perhaps it offended Mark to see his kinsman Barnabas, who had preceded Paul in the faith (Acts 4:36–37) and had ushered him into the apostles’ fellowship (Acts 9:27), take second place in the work of the gospel. But there may have been a deeper and more significant cause for Mark’s withdrawal. Like Paul, Mark was ‘a Hebrew born of Hebrews’ (Phil. 3:5, nrsv). Because of this Mark may have objected to Paul’s offer of salvation to the Gentiles based only on faith without the prerequisite of keeping the Jewish law. It is noteworthy that the Bible uses only the Hebrew name ‘John’ when recording Mark’s presence on the Gospel journey (13:5) and his departure at Perga in Pamphylia (Acts 13:13). Also important is the fact that John Mark returned, not to the Gentile church in Antioch, the site of his former service, but to the Jewish church in Jerusalem (Acts 13:13). Luke’s history records that later ‘the disagreement [between Paul and Barnabas over Mark] became so sharp that they parted company’ (Acts 15:39, nrsv). Nothing stirred Paul’s feelings more than the question of justification by faith, and Barnabas had already demonstrated his weakness on this point (Gal. 2:13). Therefore it may have been the cause of their separation: Barnabas and Mark to Cyprus, and Paul and Silas into Asia to strengthen the new churches (Acts 15:39–41). About eleven years pass before Mark again appears in the biblical record. In Colossians 4:10 and Philemon 24, he is in Rome with ‘Paul the aged,’ who is there as ‘a prisoner of Jesus Christ’ (Philem. 19). The fracture has been healed, such that Paul says that Mark and others are ‘the only ones of the circumcision [the Jews] among my co-workers for the kingdom of God’ (Col. 4:11, nrsv). Paul, in his last epistle, pays Mark his final tribute. He tells Timothy, ‘Do your best to come to me soon.… Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is useful in my ministry’ (2 Tim. 4:9, 11, nrsv, italics added). Although all had deserted Paul in his trial before Caesar Nero (2 Tim. 4:16), Mark, who in his youth had also deserted the apostle, traveled from Ephesus to Rome, endeavoring to come to the beloved Paul with Timothy. In

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 45

1 Peter 5:13 the apostle Peter sends Mark’s greeting along with that of the church in Babylon (signifying Rome), indicating Mark’s close relationship with the apostle to the circumcision (Gal. 2:9). The most important and reliable extrascriptural tradition concerning Mark is that he was the close attendant of Peter. The early church Fathers said this association produced the Gospel of Mark, inasmuch as Mark took account of Peter’s teachings about Jesus and then used them to shape his Gospel—perhaps written in Rome between a.d. 55 and 65.”41 “Barnabas” is a central figure in the early church before Paul came on the scene. He was an associate of Paul. In fact, it was Barnabas who sponsored Paul. The early church was suspicious of Paul because of his previous persecutions of the church. Everyone was frightened of him. But Barnabas demonstrated his leadership qualities, namely, his compassion, and removed the disciples’ distrust in Paul. He secured the admission of the former persecutor to their fellowship. He was called Barnabas as a testimony to his eloquence. The literal meaning of his name is “son of prophecy.” He was a Levite meaning he was descended from the priestly tribe of Levi. He was from the island of Cyprus and a cousin of the evangelist Mark according to Paul here in Colossians 4:10. Warren Wiersbe writes “Mark, the writer of the second Gospel, played a very important part in the early history of the church. He too was a Jew, a native of Jerusalem where his mother, Mary, kept ‘open house’ for the believers (Acts 12:12). John Mark was a cousin of Barnabas, the man who went with Paul on that first missionary journey (Acts 13:1–3). It is a good possibility that John Mark was led to faith in Christ through the ministry of Peter (1 Peter 5:13). When Paul and Barnabas set out on that first missionary journey, they took John Mark with them as their assistant. He probably took care of the travel arrangements, supplies, etc. But when the going got tough, John Mark abandoned the preachers and returned home to Jerusalem (Acts 13:5–13). Why John quit is not explained in Scripture. Perhaps he was afraid, for the group was about to move into dangerous territory. Perhaps he resented the fact that Paul was taking over the leadership of the mission and replacing his relative, Barnabas. Or maybe John Mark resented Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles. Whatever the reason or excuse, he left them and returned home. Later, when Paul and Barnabas wanted to go on a second journey, Paul refused to take John Mark along (Acts 15:36–41). Was Paul wrong in his assessment of this young man? Perhaps, but we cannot blame Paul for being cautious when John Mark had failed him in the past. Paul was not running a popular tour; he was seeking to win lost souls to Christ. No amount of danger or inconvenience could hinder Paul from reaching unbelievers with the Gospel. It was too bad that John Mark caused a division between Paul and Barnabas. However, we must admit that

41 Partner, D. (1992). Mark (John Mark). In J. Douglas & P. W. Comfort (Eds.), Who's Who in Christian history (J. Douglas & P. W. Comfort, Ed.) (454–455). Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 46

Paul did forgive John Mark and commend him: ‘Take Mark and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry’ (2 Tim. 4:11). Mark, Titus, and Timothy were young men who served as special representatives for the Apostle Paul. He could send them to churches that were having problems and trust them to help solve them. By the grace of God, John Mark had overcome his first failure and had become a valuable servant of God. He was even chosen to write the Gospel of Mark! John Mark is an encouragement to everyone who has failed in his first attempts to serve God. He did not sit around and sulk. He got back into the ministry and proved himself faithful to the Lord and to the Apostle Paul. He was one of the men who stayed. I might add that it is good to be a Barnabas and encourage younger Christians in the Lord. Perhaps John Mark would have made it without the help of cousin Barnabas, but I doubt it. God used Barnabas to encourage John Mark and restore him to service again. Barnabas lived up to his name: ‘son of encouragement’ (Acts 4:36, NIV).42 Melick writes “Mark had a significant place in the early advance of Christian missions. He accompanied Paul and Barnabas on the first missionary journey (Acts 13:5). For some unknown reason, he returned home after the group entered Asia (Acts 13:13), and this became the occasion for division between Paul and Barnabas before the second missionary journey (Acts 15:39). Most likely, Barnabas, who had discipled Paul in his early Christian years, discipled Mark from that point and saw him develop into an effective Christian minister. The Scriptures next speak of Mark in Rome, comforting Paul (Col 4:10, 11; Phlm 24). F. F. Bruce suggested that Mark went to Rome after the edict of Claudius against the Jews was reversed sometime in the mid-50s.43 He accompanied Peter and, perhaps, took up ministerial duties of his own.44 When Peter wrote his first letter, Mark was with him (1 Pet 5:13). Later tradition indicates that Mark wrote the Gospel of Mark45 and conducted a missionary endeavor to Egypt, where some think he founded the church at Alexandria.46”47 The apostle Paul informs the Colossians that they had received instructions from him regarding Mark. What are those instructions? They are found in the apodosis of the third class conditional statement which follows the mention of these instructions. The apodosis of the third class conditional statement contains a command which required that the Colossians welcome Mark into their fellowship if he does come to visit them. Therefore, these “instructions” were to welcome

NIV New International Version 42 Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 2, pp. 150–151). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books. 43 The edict was in A.D. 49, and it was surely repealed by the accession of Nero in A.D. 54. 44 Bruce, The Pauline Circle, 77–78. 45 Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3.39.15, who quoted a lost letter from Papias, Exegesis of the Dominical Logia, from the first quarter of the second century. 46 Ibid., 2.16.1. There is some question about his founding the church there, but he probably did go to North Africa with the gospel. 47 Melick, R. R. (1991). Philippians, Colossians, Philemon (Vol. 32, pp. 328–329). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 47

Mark into their fellowship. This command means that the Colossian Christian community was being ordered by Paul to extend Christian hospitality to Mark. Romans 12:13 All of you continue to make it your habit to contribute to the saints’ needs. All of you continue to make it your habit to eagerly seek out opportunities to practice hospitality. (Author’s translation) “Hospitality” is the articular accusative feminine singular form of the noun philoxenia (φιλοξενία), which is a compound word composed of the noun philos, “friend” and xenos, “stranger,” thus the word literally means “a friend of strangers” and thus one who entertains strangers and demonstrates hospitality towards them. This term means “hospitality” and was rare in classical Greek and appears only twice in the Greek New Testament (Romans 12:13; Hebrews 13:2). James Dunn makes the following insightful comment regarding this word, he writes, “The obligation to provide hospitality to the stranger was deeply rooted and highly regarded in ancient society; e.g., the tradition is very old of temples and altars being places of asylum; Zeus was frequently called Zeus Xenios, protector of the rights of hospitality (as in 2 Macc. 6:2); the legend of Philemon and Baucis (Ovid, Met. 8.613-70) characterizes the ideal. Within Judaism the memory of Israel’s experience as ‘strangers in Egypt’ was a powerful reinforcement of the impulse to hospitality (especially Lev. 19:34 and Deut. 10:19). Abraham was extolled as the model of hospitality because of his entertaining the three heavenly visitors in Genesis 18 (Philo Abr. 107-114; Josephus Ant. 1.196; 1 Clem. 10.7; probably Heb. 13:2, the only other NT occurrence of philoxenia) and Job also (Job 31:32; T. Job 10.1-3; 25.5; 53.3). Hospitality was a key feature of Jesus’ ministry, both in His dependence on it (Mark 1:29-31; 14:3; Luke 10:38-42) and in His practice and commendation of it as a model of divine generosity (Mark 2:15-17; Matt. 11:19//Luke 7:34; Luke 14:1-24). The early mission would likewise depend on such hospitality (e.g. Mark 6:8-11 pars.; Acts 16:15; 18:3; see also 16:1-2, 13, 23). Since inns were often held in bad repute (cf. Plato, Laws 918D) travelers and merchants would obviously hope for hospitality from fellow countrymen. The demand on the ethnic subgroups in Rome in this connection would probably be considerable, hence perhaps the need to press the obligation on his readers.”48 In the first century, there was a great need in the church to provide shelter and food to visitors who had been uprooted from their homes because of persecution. Furthermore, in the ancient world there were few motels or hotels, most of which were very undesirable. In the Roman Empire, inns were many times places of ill repute and travelers, whenever possible, stayed with friends, thus, the New Testament emphasizes hospitality to strangers (Romans 12:13; 1 Timothy 3:1-3; 5:9-10; Titus 1:7-9; Hebrews 13:2; 1 Peter 4:9).

48 Dunn, James D.G., Word Biblical Commentary, volume 38a, Romans 1-8 and 38b, Romans 9-16; Thomas Nelson, 1988

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 48

Since believers are members of the body of Christ according to 1 Corinthians 12:12-27, Ephesians 3:6 and Colossians 3:15 of which body, Christ is the head according to Ephesians 4:15, 5:23, Colossians 1:18, then when believers practice hospitality towards one another, they are in fact doing it to Christ. Matthew 25:40 “The King will answer and say to them (those Gentile believers who identified with Jewish believers during the Tribulation period), ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’” (NASB95) In the Old Testament, Abraham and his nephew Lot were examples of those who earnestly sought to demonstrate hospitality to strangers (Genesis 18:2-8; 19:1- 3). Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary has the following article regarding hospitality, they write, “The practice of entertaining strangers graciously. Hospitality was a very important trait in Bible times. In the New Testament, the Greek word translated as hospitality literally means ‘love of strangers.’ In the Old Testament, Abraham was the host to angels unaware; he invited strangers into his house, washed their feet, prepared fresh meat, had Sarah bake bread, and later accompanied them as they left (Gen 18:1-15). Even today a traditional greeting to the guests among the Bedouin people of the Middle East is ‘You are among your family.’ Hospitality was specifically commanded by God (Lev. 19:33-34; Luke 14:13-14; Rom. 12:13). It was to be characteristic of all believers (1 Peter 4:9), especially bishops (Titus 1:7-8; 1 Tim. 3:2). Jesus emphasized the importance of hospitality by answering the question of who should inherit the kingdom: ‘I was a stranger and you took Me in’ (Matt. 25:35). Several Old Testament personalities set a good example for all believers in the practice of hospitality. These included Abraham (Gen 18:1-8); David (2 Sam 6:19); the Shunammite woman (2 Kings 4:8-10); Nehemiah (Neh. 5:17-18); and Job (Job 31:17-20). Ps 23 concludes with a portrait of a host who prepares a table for the weary, anoints the head of the guest with oil, and shows every kindness so that the guest's cup runs over. The psalmist sees the Lord Himself as Host; His hospitality exceeds all others. The New Testament also gives examples of gracious hospitality: Mary (Matt. 26:6-13); Martha (Luke 10:38); the early Christians (Acts 2:45-46); Lydia (Acts 16:14-15); and Priscilla and Aquila (Acts 18:26).49 International Standard Bible Encyclopedia has the following article with regards to the subject of hospitality, they write, “When the civilization of a people has advanced so far that some traveling has become necessary, but not yet so far that traveling by individuals is a usual thing, then hospitality is a virtue indispensable to the life of the people. (1) Among Nomads: This stage of culture

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 49 was that represented in ancient Palestine and the stage whose customs are still preserved among the present-day Arabs of the desert. Hospitality is regarded as a right by the traveler, to whom it never occurs to thank his host as if for a favor. And hospitality is granted as a duty by the host, who himself may very soon be dependent on someone else's hospitality. But none the less, both in Old Testament times and today, the granting of that right is surrounded by an etiquette that has made Arabian hospitality so justly celebrated. The traveler is made the literal master of the house during his stay; his host will perform for him the most servile offices, and will not even sit in his presence without express request. To the use of the guest is given over all that his host possesses, stopping not even short of the honor of wife or daughter. ‘Be we not all,’ say the poor nomads, ‘guests of Ullah? Has God given unto them, God's guest shall partake with them thereof: if they will not for God render his own, it should not go well with them’ (Doughty, Arabia Deserta, I, 228). The host is in duty bound to defend his guest against all comers and to lay aside any personal hatred-the murderer of father is safe as the guest of the son. (2) In the Old Testament: An exquisite example of the etiquette of hospitality is found in Gen 18:1-8. The very fact that the three strangers have passed by Abraham's door gives him the privilege of entertaining them. When he sees them approaching he runs to beg the honor of their turning in to him, with oriental courtesy depreciates the feast that he is about to lay before them as ‘a morsel of bread,’ and stands by them while they eat. Manoah (Judg 13:15) is equally pressing although more matter-of-fact, while Jethro (Ex 2:20) sends out that the stranger may be brought in. And Job (Job 31:32) repels the very thought that he could let the sojourner be unprovided for. The one case where a breach of hospitality receives praise is that of Jael (Judg 4-5), perhaps to be referred to degeneration of customs in the conflicts with the Canaanites or (perhaps more plausibly) to literary-critical considerations, according to which in Judg 5 Sisera is not represented as entering Jael's tent or possibly not as actually tasting the food, a state of affairs misunderstood in Judg 4, written under later circumstances of city life. (For contrasting opinions see ‘Jael’ in Encyclopaedia Biblica and Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes). (3) The Table-Bond: It is well to understand that to secure the right to hospitality it is not necessary, even in modern times, for the guest to eat with his host, still less to eat salt specifically. Indeed, guests arriving after sunset and departing the next morning do not, as a rule, eat at all in the tent of the host. It is sufficient to enter the tent, to grasp a tent-pin, or even, under certain circumstances, to invoke the name of a man as host. On the other hand, the bond of hospitality is certainly strengthened by eating with one's host, or the bond may actually be created by eating food belonging to him, even by stealth or in an act of theft. Here a quite different set of motives is at work. The idea here is that of kinship arising from participation in a common sacrificial meal,

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 50 and the modern Arab still terms the animal killed for his guest the dhabichah or ‘sacrifice’ (compare Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes), II, 428). This concept finds its rather materialistic expression in the theory that after the processes of digestion are completed (a time estimated as two nights and the included day), the bond lapses if it is not renewed. There seem to be various references in the Bible to some such idea of a ‘table-bond’ (Ps 41:9, e.g.), but hardly in connection directly with hospitality. (4) In the City: In the city, naturally, the exercise of hospitality was more restricted. Where travel was great, doubtless commercial provision for the travelers was made from a very early day (compare Luke 10:34 and see INN), and at all events free hospitality to all comers would have been unbearably abused. Lot in Sodom (Gen 19) is the nomad who has preserved his old ideas, although settled in the city, and who thinks of the ‘shadow of his roof’ (verse 8) as his tent. The same is true of the old man in Gibeah of Judg 19:16 ff. And the sin of Sodom and of Gibeah is not that wanderers cannot find hospitality so much as it is that they are unsafe in the streets at night. Both Lot and ‘the old man,’ however, are firm in their duty and willing to sacrifice their daughters for the safety of their guests. (Later ideas as to the position of woman should not be read back into these narratives.) However, when the city-dweller Rahab refuses to surrender her guests (Josh 2), her reason is not the breach of hospitality involved but her fear of Yahweh (verse 9). When Abraham's old slave is in Nahor, and begs a night's lodging for himself and his camels, he accompanies the request with a substantial present, evidently conceived of as pay for the same (Gen 24:22 f). Such also are the modern conditions; compare Benzinger-Socin in Baedeker's Palestine (3), xxxv, who observe that ‘inmates’ of private houses ‘are aware that Franks always pay, and therefore receive them gladly.’ None the less, in New Testament times, if not earlier, and even at present, a room was set apart in each village for the use of strangers, whose expenses were borne by the entire community. Most interpreters consider that the kataluma of Luke 2:7 was a room of this sort, but this opinion cannot be regarded as quite certain. But many of the wealthier city-dwellers still strive to attain a reputation for hospitality, a zeal that naturally was found in the ancient world as well. (5) Christ and Hospitality: Christ's directions to the apostles to ‘take nothing for their journey’ (Mark 6:8, etc.) presupposes that they were sure of always finding hospitality. Indeed, it is assumed that they may even make their own choice of hosts (Matt 10:11) and may stay as long as they choose (Luke 10:7). In this case, however, the claims of the travelers to hospitality are accentuated by the fact that they are bearers of good tidings for the people, and it is in view of this latter fact that hospitality to them becomes so great a virtue-the ‘cup of cold water’ becomes so highly meritorious because it is given ‘in the name of a disciple’ (Matt 10:42; compare verse 41, and Mark 9:41). Rejection of hospitality to one of Christ's ‘least brethren’ (almost certainly to be

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 51 understood as disciples) is equivalent to the rejection of Christ Himself (Matt 25:43; compare verse 35). It is not quite clear whether in Matt 10:14 and parallels, simple refusal of hospitality is the sin in point or refusal to hear the message or both. (6) First Missionaries: In the Dispersion, the Jew who was traveling seemed always to be sure of finding entertainment from the Jews resident in whatever city he might happen to be passing through. The importance of this fact for the spread of early Christianity is incalculable. To be sure, some of the first missionaries may have been men who were able to bear their own traveling expenses or who were merchants that taught the new religion when on business tours. In the case of soldiers or slaves their opportunity to carry the gospel into new fields came often through the movements of the army or of their masters. And it was by an ‘infiltration’ of this sort, probably, rather than by any specific missionary effort that the church of Rome, at least, was rounded. But the ordinary missionary, whether apostle (in any sense of the word) or evangelist, would have been helpless if it had not been that he could count so confidently on the hospitality everywhere. From this fact comes one reason why Paul, for instance, could plan tours of such magnitude with such assurance: he knew that he would not have to face any problem of sustenance in a strange city (Rom 16:23). (7) In the Churches: As the first Christian churches were founded, the exercise of hospitality took on a new aspect, especially after the breach with the Jews had begun. Not only did the traveling Christian look naturally to his brethren for hospitality, but the individual churches looked to the traveler for fostering the sense of the unity of the church throughout the world. Hospitality became a virtue indispensable to the well-being of the church-one reason for the emphasis laid on it (Rom 12:13; 16:1 f; Heb 13:2). As the organization of the churches became more perfected, the exercise of hospitality grew to be an official duty of the ministry and a reputation for hospitality was a prerequisite in some cases (1 Tim 3:2; 5:10; Titus 1:8). The exercise of such hospitality must have become burdensome at times (1 Peter 4:9), and as false teachers began to appear in the church a new set of problems was created in discriminating among applicants for hospitality. 2 and 3 Jn reflect some of the difficulties. For the later history of hospitality in the church interesting matter will be found in the Didache, chapters xi, xii, Apology of Aristides, chapter xv, and Lucian's Death of Peregrinus, chapter xvi. The church certainly preferred to err by excess of the virtue. An evaluation of the Biblical directions regarding hospitality for modern times is extremely difficult on account of the utterly changed conditions. Be it said at once, esp., that certain well-meant criticism of modern missionary methods, with their boards, organized finance, etc., on the basis of Christ's directions to the Twelve, is a woeful misapplication of Biblical teaching. The hospitality that an apostle could count on in his own day is something that the modern missionary simply cannot expect and something that it

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 52 would be arrant folly for him to expect (Weinel, Die urchristliche und die heutige Mission, should be read by everyone desiring to compare modern missions with the apostolic). In general, the basis for hospitality has become so altered that the special virtue has become merged in the larger field of charitable enterprise of various sorts. The modern problem nearest related to the old virtue is the question of providing for the necessities of the indigent traveler, a distinctly minor problem, although a very real one, in the general field of social problems that the modern church has to study. In so far as the New Testament exhortations are based on missionary motives there has been again a merging into general appeals for missions, perhaps specialized occasionally as appeals for traveling expense. The ‘hospitality’ of today, by which is meant the entertainment of friends or relatives, hardly comes within the Biblical use of the term as denoting a special virtue.”50 The first century apostolic church practiced providing for the needs of its own (Acts 2:45; 4:32-37; 9:36-41; 11:27-30; Romans 15:25-28; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2; 2 Corinthians 8:1-4; 9:1-15). There was great poverty in the first century apostolic church due to persecutions. Therefore, it was critical for believers who were prospering or did have the essentials for maintaining a proper human existence to share their prosperity and abundance with those in the royal family of God who were destitute or poverty stricken. When the believer provides for the needs of those who are poverty stricken in the body of Christ whether they are in his or her own periphery or in different parts of the world, it produces thanksgiving to God (2 Corinthians 9:1-15). When the believer provides for the needs of those who are poverty stricken in the body of Christ whether they are in his or her own periphery or in different parts of the world, it is an expression of God’s love in their life (1 John 3:16-18; Galatians 6:9-10). Paul in Philippians 4:16-19 thanks the Philippians for providing for his needs while under house arrest in Rome awaiting his appeal before Caesar. In this passage, Paul teaches that because the Philippians provided for him in his need, God will also do the same for them. In fact, the Philippians who resided in the Roman province of Macedonia gave out of the poverty to other believers in need (2 Corinthians 8:1-15).

2016 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 53