John 5:47

Writings [γ ρ α μ μ α σ ι ν]. It is important to understand the precise sense of this word, because it goes to determine whether Jesus intended an antithesis between Moses ' writings and His own words, or simply between Moses [ε κ ε ι ν ο υ] and Himself [ε μ ο ι ς].

Gramma primarily means what is written. Hence it may describe either a single character or a document. From this general notion several forms develop themselves in the New Testament. The word occurs in its narrower sense of characters, at Luke 23:38; 2 Corinthians 3:7; Galatians 6:11. In Acts 28:21, it means official communications. Paul, with a single exception (2 Corinthians 3:7), uses it of the letter of scripture as contrasted with its spirit (Romans 2:27; Romans 2:29; Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6). In Luke 16:6; Luke 16:7, it denotes a debtor's bond (A. V., bill). In John 7:15; Acts 26:24) it is used in the plural as a general term for scriptural and Rabbinical learning. Compare Sept., Isaiah 29:11; Isaiah 29:12) where a learned man is described as ejpitamenov grammata, acquainted with letters. Once it is used collectively of the sacred writings - the scriptures (2 Timothy 3:15), though some give it a wider reference to Rabbinical exegesis, as well as to scripture itself. Among the Alexandrian Greeks the term is not confined to elementary instruction, but includes exposition, based, however, on critical study of the text. The tendency of such exegesis was often toward mystical and allegorical interpretation, degenerating into a petty ingenuity in fixing new and recondite meanings upon the old and familiar forms. This was illustrated by the Neo - Platonists' expositions of Homer, and by the Rabbinical exegesis. Men unacquainted with such studies, especially if they appeared as public teachers, would be regarded as ignorant by the Jews of the times of Christ and the Apostles. Hence the question respecting our Lord Himself : How knoweth this man letters (grammata John 7:15)? Also the comment upon Peter and John (Acts 4:13) that they were unlearned [α γ ρ α μ μ α τ ο ι]. Thus, too, those who discovered in the Old Testament scriptures references to Christ, would be stigmatized by Pagans, as following the ingenious and fanciful method of the Jewish interpreters, which they held in contempt. Some such feeling may have provoked the words of Festus to Paul : Much learning [π ο λ λ α γ ρ α μ μ α τ α] doth make thee mad (Acts 26:24). It is well known with what minute care the literal transcription of the sacred writings was guarded. The Scribes [γ ρ α μ μ α τ ε ι ς] were charged with producing copies according to the letter [κ α τ α τ ο γ ρ α μ μ α].

The one passage in second Timothy cannot be urged in favor of the general use of the term for the scriptures, especially since the best texts reject the article before iJera gramma, so that the meaning is apparently more general : "thou hast known sacred writings." The familiar formula for the scriptures was aiJ grafai aJgiai.. A single book of the collection of writings was known as biblion (Luke 4:17), or biblov (Luke 20:42); never grafh, which was the term for a particular passage. See on Mark 12:10; Mark 12:27 It seems to me, therefore, that the antithesis between the writings of Moses, superstitiously reverenced in the letter, and minutely and critically searched and expounded by the Jews, and the living words (rJhmasin, see on Luke 1:37), is to be recognized. This, however, need not exclude the other antithesis between Moses and Jesus personally. :John 6

CHAPTER VI

1 - 14. Compare Matthew 14:13-21; Mark 6:30-44; Luke 9:10-17.