ég évŵv] Not 'of Gentile descent,' but 'taken from, belonging to the Gentiles'; comp. Acts xv. 23.

ἁμαρτωλοί] ‘sinners. The word was almost a synonyme for ovŋ in the religious phraseology of the Jews. See I Macc. ii. 44, Clem. Hom. xi. 16 οὕτως ὡς οὐχὶ Ἰουδαῖος, ἁμαρτωλός K.T.λ.; and compare Luke vi. 32, 33 with Matt. v. 47, and especially Matt. xxvi. 45 with Luke xviii. 32. Here ἁμαρτωλοὶ is used in preference to čov, not without a shade of irony, as better enforcing St Paul's argument. See the note on ver. 17.

16. ἐὰν μή] retains its proper meaning, but refers only to ov dikaioûtal, 'He is not justified from works of law, he is not justified except through faith.' See the note on i. 19.

kai nμeîs] 'we ourselves,' notwithstanding our privileges of race. Compare καὶ αὐτοί, ver. 17.

¿TIOтEvσaμev] 'became believers.' See the note on 2 Thess. i. 10. The phrase πιστεύειν εἴς or ἐπί τινα is peculiarly Christian; see Winer § xxxi. p. 267. The constructions of the Lxx are πιστεύειν τινί, rarely πιστεύειν ἐπί τινι οἱ ἔν τινι, and once only ἐπί τινα, Wisd. xii. 2 πιστεύειν ἐπὶ Θεόν. The phrase, which occurs in the revised Nicene and other creeds, πστεύειν εἰς ἐκκλησίαν, though an intelligible, is yet a lax expression, the propriety of which was rightly disputed by many of the fathers, who maintained that πιστεύειν εἰς should be reserved for belief in God or in Christ. See the passages in Suicer Thesaur. S. V. TIσtevew, and Pearson On the Creed Art. IX.

ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ] It seems almost impossible to trace the subtle

process which has led to the change of prepositions here. In Rom. iii. 30, on the other hand, an explanation is challenged by the direct opposition of ἐκ πίστεως and διὰ τῆς πίστεως. Both prepositions are used elsewhere by St Paul with δικαιοῦν, δικαιοσύνη, indifferently; though where very great precision is aimed at, he seems for an obvious reason to prefer diá, as in Ephes. ii. 8, 9, Phil. iii. 9 μn exwv ἐμὴν δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐκ νόμου ἀλλὰ τὴν διὰ πίστεως Χριστοῦ κ.τ.λ., which words present an exact parallel to the former part of this verse, οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου, ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Faith is strictly speaking only the means, not the source of justification. The one preposition (dtà) excludes this latter notion, while the other (ex) might imply it. Besides these we meet also with ἐπὶ πίστει (Phil. iii. 9), but never dià mioriv, 'propter fidem,' which would involve a doctrinal error. Compare the careful language in the Latin of our Article xi, 'per fidem, non propter opera.'

OT] is the best supported, and doubtless the correct reading. The reading of the received text dióri has probably been imported from the parallel passage, Rom. iii. 20.

ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων κ.τ.λ.] Α quotation from the Old Testament, as appears from the Hebraism οὐ πᾶσα, and from the introductory or. This sentence indeed would be an unmeaning repetition of what has gone before, unless the Apostle were enforcing his own statements by some authoritative declaration. The words are therefore to be regarded as a free citation of Psalm cxliii. 2 οὐ δικαιωθήσεται ἐνώπιόν σου πᾶς ζῶν. For πᾶς ζῶν, &

very common Hebrew synonyme, яâσа σáp (-) is substituted by St Paul. In Rom. iii. 20 the passage is quoted in the same form as here. In both instances St Paul adds § pywv vóμov as a comment of his own, to describe the condition of the people whom the Psalmist addressed. In the context of the passage in the Romans (iii. 19) this comment is justified by his explanation, that 'whatever is stated in the law applies to those under the law.'

For ou nãoa see Winer § xxvi. p. 214 sq.

17, 18, 19. Thus to be justified in Christ, it was necessary to sink to the level of Gentiles, to become ‘sinners' in fact. But are we not thus making Christ a minister of sin? Away with the profane thought. No! the guilt is not in abandoning the law, but in seeking it again when abandoned. Thus, and thus alone, we convict ourselves of transgression. On the other hand, in abandoning the law we did but follow the promptings of the law itself. Only by dying to the law could we live unto God.'

17. Among a vast number of interpretations which have been given of this verse, the following alone deserve consideration.

First; We may regard XPLOTòs ἁμαρτίας διάκονος as a conclusion logically inferred from the premisses, supposing them to be granted; ‘If in order to be justified in Christ it was necessary to abandon the law, and if the abandonment of the law is sinful, then Christ is made a minister of sin.' In this case apa is preferable to apa.

If the passage is so taken, it is an attack on the premisses through the conclusion which is obviously monstrous and untenable. Now the assumptions in the premisses are two

fold: (1) 'To be justified in Christ it is necessary to abandon the law,' and (2) 'To abandon the law is to become sinners'; and as we suppose one or other of these attacked, we shall get two distinct meanings for the passage, as follows: (1) It is an attempt of the Judaizing objector to show that the abandonment of the law was wrong, inasmuch as it led to so false an inference: "To abandon the law is to commit sin; it must therefore be wrong to abandon the law in order to be justified in Christ, for this is to make Christ a minister of sin': or (2) It is an argument on the part of St Paul to show that to abandon the law is not to commit sin; 'It cannot be sinful to abandon the law, because it is necessary to abandon the law in order to be justified in Christ, and thus Christ would be made a minister of sin.'

Of these two interpretations, the latter is adopted by many of the fathers. Yet, if our choice were restricted to one or other, the former would seem preferable, for it retains the sense of ȧuaproλoí ('sinners' from a Jewish point of view), which it had in ver. 15, and is more consistent with the indicative evpéonμev, this proposition being assumed as absolutely true by the Jewish objector. But on the other hand, it forms an awkward introduction to the verse which follows.

It is probable therefore that both should be abandoned in favour of another explanation: For

Secondly; We may regard Xploròs ἁμαρτίας διάκονος as an illogical conclusion deduced from premisses in themselves correct; 'Seeing that in order to be justified in Christ it was necessary to abandon our old ground of legal righteousness and to become sinners (i.e. to put ourselves in the position of the heathen), may it not be argued that Christ is thus made a

minister of sin?' This interpretation best developes the subtle irony of ἁμαρτωλοί; ‘We Jews look down upon the Gentiles as sinners: yet we have no help for it but to become sinners like them.' It agrees with the indicative evpéonμev, and with St Paul's usage of μὴ γένοιτο which elsewhere in argumentative passages always negatives a false but plausible inference from premisses taken as granted. And lastly, it paves the way for the words διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον which follow. In this case apa is to be preferred to ǎpa, because it at once introduces the inference as a questionable one. It may be added also in favour of åpa, that elsewhere μὴ γένοιτο follows an interrogation. Apa expresses bewilderment as to a possible conclusion. Any attempt further to define its meaning seems not to be justified either by the context here, or by its usage elsewhere. 'Apa hesitates, while ἄρα concludes.

εὑρέθημεν] involves more or less prominently the idea of a surprise: comp. Rom. vii. 10, 2 Cor. xi. 12, xii. 20. Its frequent use however must be traced to the influence of the Aramaic dialect: see Cureton Corp. Ign. p. 271.

ἁμαρτίας διάκονος] while yet He is δικαιοσύνης διάκονος, thus making a direct contradiction in terms.

un yévoiro] 'Nay, verily,' 'Away with the thought.' This is one out of several LXX renderings of the Hebrew nb (‘ad profana' and so ‘absit,' see Gesenius Thes. p. 478). Another rendering of the same is λews (sc. ó eòs) which occurs Matt. xvi. 22 news σoL Kúpie, 'far be it from thee, Lord': see Glass. Phil. Sacr. p. 538. Mǹ yévolto is not however confined to Jewish and Christian writings, but is frequent for instance in Arrian; see Raphel Annot. Rom. iii. 4.

18. If, after destroying the old law of ordinances, I attempt to build it up again, I condemn myself, I testify to my guilt in the work of destruction.' The pulling down and building up have reference doubtless to the Mosaic law, though expressed as a general maxim (Taura). The difficulty however is to trace the connexion in γάρ.

With the interpretation of ver. 17 adopted above, it seems simplest to attach γὰρ τὸ μὴ γένοιτο, ‘Nay verily, for, so far from Christ being a minister of sin, there is no sin at all in abandoning the law: it is only converted into a sin by returning to the law again. For this use of yàp after un yévolтo comp. Rom. ix. 14, 15, xi. 1.

παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν συνιστάνω] make myself out, establish myself, a transgressor. It will have been seen that much of the force of the passage depends on the sense which the Jews attached to ἁμαρτωλός. Having passed on from this to duapria, St Paul at length throws off the studied ambiguity of aμaprwλós ('a non-observer of the law,' and 'a sinner') by substituting the plain term παραβάτης.

ἐμαυτὸν συνιστάνω is opposed to Χριστὸς ἁμαρτίας διάκονος, though from its position éμavròv cannot be very emphatic.

συνιστάνω] ‘I prore, like συμβιβά (w, as Rom. iii. 5, v. 8; comp. 2 Cor. iii. 1.

19. Establishing the statement of the foregoing verse: For in abandoning the law, I did but follow the leading of the law itself.'

yw] Not 'I Paul' as distinguished from others, for instance from the Gentile converts, but 'I Paul, the natural man, the slave of the old covenant.' The emphasis on yw is explained by the following verse, ( δὲ οὐκέτι ἐγώ κ.τ.λ.

20

διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον] In what sense can one be said through law to have died to law? Of all the answers that have been given to this question, two alone seem to deserve consideration. The law may be said in two different ways to be παιδαγωγὸς εἰς Χριστόν. We may regard

i. Its economical purpose. "The law bore on its face the marks of its transitory character. Its prophecies foretold Christ. Its sacrifices and other typical rites foreshadowed Christ. It was therefore an act of obedience to the law, when Christ came, to take Him as my master in place of the law.' This interpretation however, though quite in character with St Paul's teaching elsewhere, does not suit the present passage; For (1) The written law-the Old Testament -is always ó vóuos. At least it seems never to be quoted otherwise. Nópos without the article is 'law' considered as a principle, exemplified no doubt chiefly and signally in the Mosaic law, but very much wider than this in its application. In explaining this passage therefore, we must seek for some element in the Mosaic law which it had in common with law generally, instead of dwelling on its special characteristics, as a prophetic and typical dispensation. Moreover, (2) the interpretation thus elicited makes the words διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον an appeal rather to the reason and intellect, than to the heart and conscience; but the phrases 'living unto God,' 'being crucified with Christ,' and indeed the whole tenour of the passage, point rather to the moral and spiritual change wrought in the believer. Thus we are led to seek the explanation of this expression rather in

ii. Its moral effects. The law reveals sin; it also provokes sin; nay, in

a certain sense, it may be said to create sin, for sin is not reckoned where there is no law' (Rom. v. 13). Thus the law is the strength of sin (1 Cor. xv. 56). At the same time it provides no remedy for the sinner. On the contrary it condemns him hopelessly, for no one can fulfil all the requirements of the law. The law then exercises a double power over those subject to it; it makes them sinners, and it punishes them for being so. What can they do to escape? They have no choice but to throw off the bondage of the law, for the law itself has driven them to this. They find the deliverance, which they seek, in Christ. See Rom. vii. 24, 25, and indeed the whole passage, Rom. v. 20-viii. 11. Thus then they pass through three stages, (1) Prior to the law-sinful, but ignorant of sin ; (2) Under the law-sinful, and conscious of sin, yearning after better things; (3) Free from the law-free and justified in Christ. This sequence is clearly stated Rom. v. 20. The second stage (dià vóμov) is a necessary preparation for the third (vou déBavov). Proinde,' says Luther on iii. 19 (the edition of 1519), ‘ut remissio propter salutem, ita praevaricatio propter remissionem, ita lex propter transgressionem.'

What the Mosaic ordinances were to the Jews, other codes of precepts and systems of restraints were in an inferior degree and less efficaciously to other nations. They too, like the Jews, had felt the bondage of law in some form or other. See iv. 9, v. I, and the note on iv. II.

νόμῳ ἀπέθανον] ‘I died to law. For the dative comp. Rom. vi. 2, II (Tŷ quapríą), and for the idea of 'dying to the law' Rom. vii. 1-6, esp. ver. 4 καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐθανατώθητε τῷ νόμῳ, and ver. 6 κατηργήθημεν ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου ἀποθα

νόντες ἐν ᾧ κατειχόμεθα (literally, ‘we were nullified, i.e. discharged, by death from the law in which we were held').

20, 21. 'With Christ I have been crucified at once to the law and to sin. Henceforth I live a new life-yet not I, but Christ liveth it in me. This new life is not a rule of carnal ordinances; it is spiritual, and its motive principle is faith in the Son of God who manifested His love for me by dying for my sake. I cannot then despise God's grace. I cannot stultify Christ's death by clinging still to a justification based upon law.'

20. An expansion of the idea in the last verse.

Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαι] ‘I have been crucified with Christ! A new turn is thus given to the metaphor of death. In the last verse it was the release from past obligations; here it is the annihilation of old sins. The two however are not unconnected. Sin and law loose their hold at the same time. The sense of feebleness, of prostration, to which a man is reduced by the working of the law, the process of dying in fact, is the moral link which unites the two applications of the image: see Rom. vii. 5, 9—11. Thus his death becomes life. Being crucified with Christ, he rises with Christ, and lives to God.

The parallel passage in the Romans best illustrates the different senses given to death. See also, for a similar and characteristic instance of working out a metaphor, the different applications of pépa in 1 Thess. v. 2-8.

For the idea of dying with Christ etc., see Rom. vi. 6 ó maλaιòs μwv ἄνθρωπος συνεσταυρώθη: comp. Gal. v. 24, vi 14, Rom. vi. 8, Col. ii. 20, áñоBaveiv ovv Xplore, and Rom. vi. 4, Col

ii. 12, σvvτaþηval. Comp. Ignat. Rom. § 7 ὁ ἐμὸς ἔρως ἐσταύρωται. The correlative idea of rising and reigning with Christ is equally common in St Paul.

ζῶ δὲ οὐκέτι ἐγώ] The order is significant; 'When I speak of living, I do not mean myself, my natural being. I have no longer a separate existence. I am merged in Christ.' See on ¿yw ver. 19.

ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ] Not exactly ἣν νῦν ζῶ Conv, but limits and qualifies the idea of life: 'So far as I now live in the flesh, it is a life of faith': comp. Rom. vi. 1o ὃ γὰρ ἀπέθανεν, τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ἀπέθανεν ἐφάπαξ, ὃ δὲ ζῇ, ζῇ τῷ Θεῷ, Plut. Μor. p. 100 F ὃ καθεύδουσι, τοῦ σώματος ὕπνος ἐστὶ καὶ ἀνάπαυσις.

vûv]'now': his new life in Christ, as opposed to his old life before his conversion; not his present life on earth, as opposed to his future life in heaven; for such a contrast is quite foreign to this passage.

év TioTel]' in faith,' the atmosphere as it were which he breathes in this his new spiritual life.

The variation of reading here is perplexing. For τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ may be pleaded the great preponderance of the older authorities: for τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ, the testimony of a few ancient copies, and the difficulty of conceiving its substitution for the other simpler reading.

μe...éμoû] 'loved me, gave Himself for me.' He appropriates to himself, as Chrysostom observes, the love which belongs equally to the whole world. For Christ is indeed the personal friend of each man individually; and is as much to him, as if He had died for him alone.

21. οὐκ ἀθετῶ κ.τ.λ.] ' I do not set at nought the grace of God. Setting