New Testament Word Studies
These articles were originally published in Precious Seed as part of a series called New Testament Word Studies from 1961–1962.
Noema
Part 1 of 10 of the series New Testament Word Studies (1961, Volume 12 Issue 1)
Introduction to Series
To discover the true meanings of New Testament words, two things are necessary: on the lower level a knowledge of the Greek language, and on the higher level a patient study of the Holy Spirit’s word-usage in both Old and New Testaments. The lower level is the province of the linguist, the higher is the concern of all Bible-students, whether they know Greek or not.
The series of notes, which is now beginning, is an attempt to offer help on the lower level to those who know no Greek. The words dealt with will be chosen for various reasons: because of their intrinsic interest, because of their importance in their contexts, or because of the obscurity or inaccuracy of their translation in the older English versions.
‘Noema’ means ‘thought’, not the process of thinking but the result of it, an idea, purpose or plan formed in the mind. The word occurs six times only in the New Testament. Five of these occurrences are found in 2 Corinthians, and are remarkable especially for what they tell us of Satan’s influence on the thoughts of both saved and unsaved people.
2 Corinthians 2:11: ‘. . . we are not ignorant of his devices’, i.e. his thoughts: not the things he has done in the past, but his present intentions as yet not carried out. Knowing his thoughts, we may take counter-measures in advance.
3:14: ‘But their minds [i.e. their thoughts] were blinded’. They do not stop reading the Scriptures, but their conclusions are dull and obtuse because their perception does not penetrate the veil.
4:4: ‘. . . the god of this world hath blinded the minds [i.e. the thoughts] of them that believe not’. They may still think about spiritual things and their mental processes may be quite logical, but all their thinking is done behind the screen which Satan has erected to stop them receiving the illuminating evidence of the gospel. Their conclusions, reached in absence of this evidence, are completely blind.
11:3: ‘. . . So your minds [i.e. thoughts] should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in [or rather, towards] Christ’. Just as a betrothed girl is no longer morally free to entertain serious thoughts towards another man, so believers are not free to entertain ‘other possibilities’ when it comes to the fundamental matters of our Lord’s person, work and word. But Satan, who insinuated thoughts of doubt into Eve’s mind by denying God’s warning and suggesting an alternative explanation of the situation (‘ye shall not die . . . ye shall be as God’, Gen 3:4–5), still tries to get believers to entertain alternative explanations of the person and work of Christ, ‘another Jesus whom we have not preached’ (2 Cor 11:4) as Paul calls it.
The remaining verses tell of God’s great power available to control our thoughts.
2 Corinthians 10:5: ‘. . . bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ’, so that no thought is formed and retained that contains disobedience to him.
Philippians 4:7: ‘And the peace of God . . . shall keep your hearts and minds [i.e. thoughts]’, which means that the power of God shall stand sentinel both over the deep ‘well’ of our subconscious minds (heart), from which suggestions rise into our conscious minds, and also over the thoughts that form in our conscious minds.
Phroneo and Sophrone
Part 2 of 10 of the series New Testament Word Studies (1961, Volume 12 Issue 2)
Phroneo
‘To think’ means not so much to use the critical faculty as:
- ‘to occupy one’s mind with’, e.g.
i. Colossians 3:2 ‘Set your mind [AV = affections] on things above.’
ii. Philippians 3:19 ‘. . . who mind earthly things . . .’
iii. Philippians 4:10 ‘. . . your care of me . . .’
- Since constant occupation with an object, goal or ideal will produce a certain mental attitude and outlook, phroneo can mean ‘to be minded in a certain way, to be of such and such an attitude’, e.g.
i. Philippians 2:2 ‘. . . of one mind’, literally, thinking the same thing, i.e., having the same attitude and outlook.
ii. Philippians 2:5 ‘. . . let this mind be in you . . .’, i.e., the attitude and outlook of Christ himself.
iii. Romans 12:16 ‘. . . mind not high things’, i.e., don’t get ‘big ideas’, don’t be haughty or high-minded.
- Again since our mental outlook will affect our approach to problems and people, phroneo can mean ‘to look at things in a certain way’, e.g.
i. First Corinthians 13:11 ‘I understood as a child . . .’, i.e., my mental approach to things was that of a child, I felt as a child.
ii. Matthew 16:23 ‘. . . thou savourest (mindest) not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men’, i.e., Peter’s conception of the Messiah’s path and his whole attitude to the question of rejection and suffering were those of a mere man.
The epistle to Philippians speaks much of this part of our mental make-up; it uses phroneo eleven times out of the New Testament’s total of twenty-nine.
Sophroneo
Sophroneo is a compound of phroneo meaning
- To be of a sane, healthy mind, to be compos mentis, e.g. Mark 5:15 ‘. . . clothed, and in his right mind’.
- To be sober, i.e., not the opposite of being drunk, nor yet to be gloomy and sombre-minded, but the opposite of being ecstatic, excitable, irresponsible, ‘flighty’; in fact to show good balance, self-control and due proportion in one’s thinking and behaviour. It is noticeable how frequently Paul found it necessary to use this word and its cognates in the pastoral epistles: sophroneo, Titus 2:6; sophronizo, 2:4; sophronismos, 2 Timothy 1:7; sophronos, Titus 2:12; sophrosyne, 1 Timothy 2:9, 15; sophron, 3:2; Titus 1:8; 2:2, 5.
Nous
Part 3 of 10 of the series New Testament Word Studies (1961, Volume 12 Issue 3)
‘Nous’, is ‘mind’ in the sense of the intellect, the reasoning faculty, the understanding. When Paul exclaimed ‘“Who hath known the mind [i.e., intellect and intellect in action, the dunking and planning] of the Lord?”’ (Rom 11:34), he had been surveying God’s ways in history and redemption and had seen behind them evidence of the same massive wisdom and skill as Isaiah had perceived in creation (Isa 40:13). Similarly, ‘We have the mind of Christ’ (1 Cor 2:16), means, not that we have the lowly attitude of Christ depicted in Philippians 2, but rather that in possessing the Spirit of God we have the very intelligence of Christ so that we may ‘know the things that are freely given to us of God’ and be able ‘to judge all things’. The believer’s intellect and understanding need proper use and development just as does his heart. It was the disciples’ intellect that the Lord opened so that they might understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:45). It is by the renewing of our intellect that we are transformed (Rom 12:2). Perhaps in no matter is it more important to exercise our reasoning faculty properly than in the question of the right use of spiritual gifts. ‘If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth but my intellect is unfruitful . . . I will pray with the intellect also . . . Be not children in mind [phrenes, a word similar in meaning to nous] . . . but in mind (phrenes) be adult’ (1 Cor 14:14, 15, 20). Let it be said at once that a wrongly used intellect is a bane in spiritual things. Some Paul describes as ‘vainly puffed up by his fleshly intellect and not holding the head’ (Col 2:18, 19). But true reason will realise and gladly own that there are many things that pass its powers of comprehension, not least among them the peace of God that passes all intellectual understanding (nous) and analysis (Phil 4:7).
Hypomeno, Hypomone
Part 4 of 10 of the series New Testament Word Studies (1961, Volume 12 Issue 4)
The verb hypomeno means
a. ‘to stay behind’ as in Luke 2:43—‘the boy Jesus tarried behind’;
b. ‘to remain’, i.e. not to recede or run away: hence ‘to endure’ trials and tribulations or rigorous tasks, e.g. Hebrews 10:32: ’you endured a great light of afflictions’; 1 Peter 2:20: ’ye take it patiently’. Similarly the noun hypomone is used of ‘patient enduring’ of suffering, 2 Cor. 1. 6; and of ‘patient endurance’, i.e., perseverance, in well doing, Rom. 2. 7. More frequently it stands by itself to denote ‘patience’, not as the opposite of impatience or short-temperedness, but as the opposite of giving up.
The Scriptures indicate that we need this quality at various levels of our Christian experience. We need it in trials so that God may use them as educative discipline: so Hebrew 12:7 (RV), ‘It is for chastening that ye endure’. We need it in face of rigours of service as did Paul who confessed that ‘he endured all things for the elect’s sake that they also might obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus’, and who further comforted Timothy with the promise that ‘if we endure [AV = ‘suffer’) we shall also reign with him’ (2 Tim 2:10–12).
But at the most basic level, we need endurance in refusing to abandon our faith in Christ and his Word whatever happens. So in the parable, Luke 8:15, the good seed is those who having heard the word, hold it fast and bring forth fruit with endurance (patience), without endurance it would, in fact, be impossible to bear any fruit at all.
In this context the words of Romans 5:3 are most encouraging. When a man has been justified by faith, he need not fear that tribulation may break his faith, for tribulation worketh patience, i.e., not long-temperedness or absence of irritability, but endurance in the faith. Knowing this we may joy in, i.e., exult confidently in, our tribulations even though we do not enjoy them.
Aphiemi, Charizomai
Part 5 of 10 of the series New Testament Word Studies (1962, Volume 13 Issue 1)
Both these words are used to express the idea of forgiveness. Aphiemi, the more common of the two, means basically to let go, to send away, and so when used to express forgiveness it signifies remission, as in Matthew 6:12. ‘Forgive us our debts [i.e., remit them, do not exact payment] as we have forgiven our debtors [i.e. as we have let go, not exacted payment of (the debts) where our debtors are concerned]’.
Charizomai, which also can mean, among other things, to forgive, is a more colourful word. Basically it means to show oneself to be gracious, then to give something freely or graciously as a favour: so in Luke 7:21: ‘and to the blind he granted sight’. So also in Galatians 3:18 we read that God has given the inheritance to Abraham by an act of grace and favour and altogether apart from the works of the law (see also Rom 4:13). Finally it is used for remitting a debt, forgiving a trespass, as in Colossians 2:13, where the emphasis is on the unmerited grace that cancels the debt.
Both words are used in the story in Luke 7:40–50. When the debtors were unable to pay, the creditor frankly forgave: charizomai is used because it was an act of undeserved grace and favour, a meaning that the Authorized Version attempted to bring out by adding ‘frankly’ to ‘forgave’. In verses 47 and 48 aphiemi is used and here the emphasis is on the remission and discharge. This remission, too, was of course an act of absolute grace and favour and not in any way earned by the woman’s love. The parable shows that the debtors loved because they had been forgiven: they were not forgiven because they loved. Similarly with the woman: the Lord said, ‘Wherefore I say unto you, Her sins, her many sins [not, as the Authorized Version, her sins which are many; there is no word representing ‘are’ in the Greek] have been forgiven [the tense is perfect]’. The ‘Wherefore’ is to be taken closely with the ‘I say unto you’. Christ is not telling Simon why the woman has been forgiven, but He was appealing to evidence that Simon could appreciate, to corroborate the truth of his statement that the woman had been forgiven. Thus: debtors, when forgiven their debts, love. This woman was a debtor, but now she loves. ‘Wherefore, on this showing, I say she has been forgiven.’
Brephos, Teknion, Paidion, Nepios
Part 6 of 10 of the series New Testament Word Studies (1962, Volume 13 Issue 2)
These words have in common that they all denote the very young child. Brephos is an unborn child (Luke 1:41), a babe new-born (Acts 7:19), and a child still in babyhood. So then the children brought to Christ, Luke 18:15, included the very young, and Timothy’s instruction in the Scriptures evidently began at the very earliest moment (see 2 Tim 3:15). The word is not used in the New Testament in any derogatory sense. Peter does not chide his readers for being like new-born babes, though he does remind them that they should desire their spiritual milk ‘that they may grow thereby unto salvation’ (1 Pet 2:2 RV), for there are things from which we cannot be saved unless we grow.
Teknion, ‘little bairn’, a diminutive of teknon, similarly denotes the very young (cf. Gal 4:19). In the New Testament it is used solely as an affectionate form of address by Christ to the apostles (see John 13:33), or by the apostles to their spiritual children. In his first epistle John thus addresses all his readers, though they included some who were spiritually mature, fathers (see 1 John 2:13–14).
Paidion, too is a diminutive and is used to denote a very young child (e.g., Matt 2:8), or a child as distinct from an adult. When used in reference to an adult it can have a derogatory sense, as when Christ reproached the Jews for adopting a childish attitude (Luke 7:32), or it can be used in an affectionate sense as by Christ in resurrection ‘Children, have you anything to eat?’ (John 21:5), and the apostle John (see 1 John 2:18).
Nepios literally means infant, i.e., one who cannot yet speak, though in Homer it is extended to cover those not yet able to bear arms and in legal contexts it means a minor. This latter is presumably the intended meaning in Galatians 4. 1, ‘As long as the heir is a minor . . .’ where Paul is describing the state of even godly Jews before the coming of God’s Son into the world. They were minors and little better than slaves.
In the figurative sense the state of a nepios is not in itself morally wrong. The description of the apostles as babes (Matt 11:25) was not meant to cast a slur upon them; it merely contrasted them with men who had had greater opportunities for education and learning, but who unfortunately had become proud in the imagined self-sufficiency of their intellects. But to remain a nepios when both time and opportunity have come to put away childish things is certainly blameworthy. It is helpful to notice what are some of the causes and marks of spiritual childishness. We learn from 1 Corinthians 3:1 that it is spiritual immaturity to be so impressed by and attached to a servant of God as to put him virtually in God’s place (vv. 5–6), or to be ‘puffed up for him against another’ (4:6); from Galatians 4:1, that it is a return to childhood to go back to the Law and its ceremonies for salvation; from Ephesians 4:14, that it is a mark of the immature that they are too easily impressed by any and every new-fangled idea and in consequence never know what they really believe and have no firm hold on the fundamentals of the faith; from Hebrews 5:11–14 that immaturity is prolonged by a culpable neglect to exercise one’s powers of discernment in the reading of Scripture and results, among other things, in being unable to understand the Old Testament types; and from 1 Corinthians 13:11–13 and 14:20 ff., that the mature person will perceive the far greater value of genuine, practical love, compared with the pursuit of the ‘miraculous’ for its own sake, quite apart from the consideration of its moral or spiritual benefit.
Teknon, Huios
Part 7 of 10 of the series New Testament Word Studies (1962, Volume 13 Issue 3)1
Since teknon etymologically means “a born-one, a bairn, a child’, and huios means a ‘son’, one may often hear it said that wherever in Scripture we read of the children (teknon) of God, it is a question of the relationship of life brought into being between God and the believer through the new birth, whereas when we read of the sons (huioi) of God, we are to think of the similarity of character existent between mature believers and God. Now certainly there are places where the difference between life and character is clearly apparent. In John 1:12, 13, for instance, ‘to them gave he the right to become children (teknon) of God . . . who were born . . .’ the relationship of birth and life is explicitly emphasized. On the other hand, the Lord’s words in Matthew 5:44–45, ‘Love your enemies and pray for them that persecute you, that ye may be sons [huioi] of your Father which is in heaven’, urge us to display in practical living the same character as our Father.
But it would not seem that this distinction in meaning between teknon and huios is uniformly maintained throughout the New Testament. It is, for example, very difficult to see any real difference in meaning between Galatians 3:7 where believers are described as ‘sons [huioi] of Abraham’ because they show the same character of faith as Abraham did, and 1 Peter 3:6 where women who show the same character as Sarah are called not ‘daughters’ but ‘children’ (tekna) of Sarah. Without doubt in this latter instance teknon is used of character, not of any birth/life relationship.
Again, while kotos is sometimes used of one whose character is developed as distinct from an immature child, witness Galatians 4:1–6: it is also used to describe one who enjoys the dignity of a life-relationship with the Father, as distinct from a slave who is not related by life to the Father (Gal 4:7). Moreover the veriest babe in Christ, whose character is quite undeveloped, can rightly claim to be a son of God, for so Galatians 3:26 explicitly calls him: ‘For ye are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus’. And the context makes it abundantly clear that the means by which we obtain this sonship and so become heirs of the inheritance covenanted to Abraham, is not development of Christian character, but baptism into Christ and this explicitly precludes distinctions of any kind between one believer and another.
Here then is an example that shows how unreliable etymology is when taken by itself. We must always take into account the general usage of a word with all its variations and let the context decide its particular shade of meaning; and often the final interpretation will rest with the theologian rather than the grammarian.
Parakoe and Apeitheia
Part 8 of 10 of the series New Testament Word Studies (1962, Volume 13 Issue 4)
Both these words convey the idea of ‘disobedience’. Parakouo, the verb related to the noun parakoe, means basically ‘to listen inattentively, to take no notice of what is heard’. It is used in this sense of the Lord in Mark 5:36 (RV), ‘But Jesus, not heeding the word spoken’, and again of the brother that has sinned (Matt 18:17): ‘if he neglect to hear thee’, i.e. if he refuses to take any notice of what you say. The word then takes on the further idea of disobedience that naturally issues from taking no notice of a command laid down. In this sense the word is used of Adam’s disobedience (Rom 5:19), of the disobedience of those who gave no heed to the commands of Moses’ law (Heb 2:2), and of the disobedience even of believers (2 Cor 10:6).
Apeitheia, while it too denotes disobedience, is a somewhat deeper and fuller word. We may sketch its background thus: the verb peitho means ‘to persuade’; peithomai means ‘to be prevailed on, won over, persuaded to comply’; apeitheo is the negative of peithomai and means ‘to refuse compliance, to be disobedient’; hence apeitheia is disobedience that springs not merely from carelessly or even wilfully taking no notice of command, but rather from a failure or refusal to be convinced, a rejection of attempts to persuade, a refusal to own the compelling claims of a message or command, a refusal to yield compliance.
It is this meaning that makes the word so suitable as a description of the attitude of the person who not merely neglects but deliberately rejects the Gospel and its implications. The contrast in John 3:36 (RV) is instructive: ‘He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life: but he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life’. Obviously the man described by the second part of the verse is an unbeliever. ‘Not obeying’ is here the opposite, not of keeping a set of detailed commandments, but of ‘believing on’. So again we read in Acts 19:9 of certain Jews, who, when they had had the gospel explained and urged upon them, were hardened and disobedient. We meet this class of person again in 1 Peter 2:8 (RV): ‘they stumble at the word being disobedient’. Here too the attitude described is that of deliberate rejectors of Christ, who stand in contrast to the ‘you which believe’ of verse 7.
This almost technical sense of ‘disobey, disobedience’ indicating a refusal of the Gospel, a rejection of God’s revelation in Christ and a repudiation of its implicit and explicit claims, should be borne in mind when reading the Revised Version translation of Hebrews 3:18; 4:6, 11. The Revised Version of Hebrews 4:6, for instance, says ‘they . . . failed to enter in because of disobedience’ and in 4:11 it exhorts us ‘that no man fall after the same example of disobedience’. In what sense disobedience? Is it referring to individual acts of disobedience on the part of people that are, nevertheless, genuine believers? Obviously not. The word is apeitheia and, consistent with its usage in the passages cited earlier, it means disobedience in the sense of rejecting the gospel. Thus in 3:18 the verb apeithesasin (‘them that were disobedient,’ RV) stands parallel in meaning to the phrase in the next verse ‘because of unbelief’, and in 4:2 we are explicitly told that what they disbelieved and disobeyed was the gospel message. Similarly the ‘disobedient’ of Hebrews 11:31 (RV). were not believers who had temporarily fallen into acts of disobedience, but unbelieving Canaanites who rejected and opposed what God was revealing and doing through Israel.
In all these passages in Hebrews the Authorized Version translators have used ‘unbelief, believed not’ for apeitheia and apeitheo rather than ‘disobedience, disobey’. This was not carelessness but a deliberate indication of what they considered the true interpretation.
Anatrepho, Ektrepho, Paideou, Paideia
Part 9 of 10 of the series New Testament Word Studies (1962, Volume 13 Issue 5)
These words describe the bringing up and education of children. Their difference in meaning can be clearly seen in the accounts of the education of Moses and Paul. Anatrepho has to do largely with the physical side of a child’s upbringing, its rearing, nourishing and physical development. So Moses was brought up (anatrepho) first by his parents and then by Pharaoh’s daughter (see Acts 7:20–21). But in addition he received an advanced education on the moral and intellectual side: he was educated (paideuo) in all the culture of the Egyptians (Acts 7:22). Similarly, Paul, though born in Tarsus, was brought up (anatrepho) in Jerusalem, and then at the feet of Gamaliel was educated strictly according to the law of his fathers (Acts 22:3). Incidentally, Jewish custom obliged his father to have him taught a trade as well as Bible-knowledge.
Both ideas are taken over and used of the education that God gives to us as his children either directly or through the agency of others. Ektrepho is used of Christ, who nourishes and nurtures the Church as a man cares for his own body (see Eph 5:29), and as a Christian father ought to nurture (ektrepho) his children (see Eph 6:4). Paideuo covers all his instruction which consists not merely in the impartation of knowledge but in the training and development of right attitudes and habits, the formation of character. So the word of God is profitable for instruction, i.e. (paideia) training in righteousness (see 2 Tim 3:16); and senior women are to train the young women (see Titus 2:4). Then because such training often requires the correction of wrong ideas as well as the inculcation of right ones, paideuo takes on the meaning ‘correction’. The Lord’s servant must in meekness ‘instruct’ (AV), ‘correct’ (RV) those that oppose themselves (2 Tim 2:25). And when God so corrects us, he may sometimes impose a strict discipline and that discipline may involve suffering, chastisement and scourging. We are told that God used the persecutions which the Jewish Christians suffered as an educative discipline: ‘It is for chastening, for educative discipline that ye endure’ (Heb 12:7); and on another occasion he used the attacks of Satan in order that Hymenaeus and Alexander might be taught not to blaspheme (1 Tim 1:20).
While such chastisement can never be enjoyable, we are assured it is an expression of the love of the Father (Heb 12:6, 11) and of Christ (Rev 3:19), who for our sakes not only permitted himself to be chastized by Pilate (Luke 23:16), but bore from God’s hand the chastisement that brought our peace (Isa 53:5).
Hypostasis, Elenchos, Plerophoria, Parrhesia, Tharreo
Part 10 of 10 of the series New Testament Word Studies (1962, Volume 13 Issue 6)
The epistle to the Hebrews, perhaps beyond all others, is designed to strengthen the faith, confidence and assurance of God’s people. This is everywhere apparent: the great quality that is extolled in chapter 11 is not zeal or godliness or love but faith; the Israelites, we are told, failed to enter into Canaan because of unbelief (3:19); the condition of our having become partakers of Christ is this same confidence of faith, and that not only at the beginning but all the way through (3:14); and the ministry of our High Priest is aimed at securing that we do not cast away our confidence (10:35), or our confession (4:14, RV), for if a man abandons his confession of faith in Christ, what is he? It will be helpful, therefore, to examine closely some of the words for confidence with which the Epistle abounds.
Hypostasis and elenchos are both used as descriptions of faith in chapter 11:1. Faith is the hypostasis of things hoped for. The word basically means ‘an underlying, support, foundation’. Then in one direction it develops the meaning ‘substance, substantial nature, essence, actual being, reality’ (so, for instance, Christ is the very image of God’s substance 1:3, RV); in another direction it develops the meaning ‘steadiness, firmness, conviction, assurance’, and from that it is an easy step to the meaning ‘a giving substance to, a guaranteeing’, and so ‘title-deeds’, which are an instrument of guarantee and security. The choice of meaning in chapter 11:1 is not easy—witness the differences in the versions—but it lies between giving hypostasis a passive meaning, i.e., ‘faith is the inwrought confidence and assurance that one day we shall possess the things we hope for’ and an active meaning, i.e. ‘faith gives substance to our hopes, turning them into solid realities’. If here the active meaning seems preferable, in 3:14 the passive meaning alone is possible. The expositor, rather than the grammarian, must decide.
A similar situation pertains to the word elenchos, which basically means ‘proof, proving, something which brings conviction’. It is perhaps possible to give it a passive meaning, ‘faith is the inner conviction about things not seen’, but the active meaning is grammatically easier, ‘faith is that which supplies the conviction and makes us certain of things not seen’.
Plerophoria comes from a verb which means ‘to fill completely’. It denotes the state of one who is filled fully with persuasion or assurance or certain hope so that doubt, questioning and wavering are completely ousted. It is used of the confidence with which we may draw near into the holiest (10:22), and of the unwavering hope we may show during our present waiting and testings (6:11). Such a happy and strong frame of mind comes not from our strugglings but from letting ourselves be filled to overflowing with a sense of the value of Christ’s sacrifice and priesthood on the one hand and of the unbreakable word and oath of God on the other.
Parrhesia means first ‘the right and freedom of free speech’ and then boldness of every kind that conceals nothing through fear of consequence from others. In the very holiest (10:19), and before the throne (4:16), God desires us to show this freedom and confidence. His perfect love, mercy and grace would cast out cringing fear, setting us at ease and making us not afraid to be honest with him and with ourselves. That same boldness he would have us show in our confession before the world (3:6; 10:35).
Tharreo (13:6), denotes the boldness and confidence of courage, the opposite of timidity and faintheartedness. In a very competitive world, where a man, who stands boldly for his faith and acts strictly by Christian principles, may at times lose financially, yet he may let his mind be free from the love of money and be content with what he has. The courage to do so comes first by observing that God has outspokenly committed Himself neither to leave nor fail us, and then by boldly and squarely facing the question: what can man, at the worst, do unto me?
1 Quotations in this article are from the Revised Version.