Ιησού Χριστού, και ημείς εις Χριστον Ιησούν επιστεύσαμεν, ίνα δικαιωθώμεν εκ πίστεως Χριστού και ουκ εξ έργων νόμου, ότι εξ έργων νόμου ο Δικαιωθήσεται

16. διά πίστεως Χριστού Ιησού.

is covv] Not 'of Gentile descent, process which has led to the change but 'taken from, belonging to the of prepositions here. In Rom. iii. 30, Gentiles'; comp. Acts xv. 23.

on the other hand, an explanation is ápaprwiol] 'sinners. The word challenged by the direct opposition of was almost a synonyme for čovn in εκ πίστεως and διά της πίστεως. Both the religious phraseology of the Jews. prepositions are used elsewhere by See 1 Macc. ii. 44, Clem. Hom. xi. 16 St Paul with δικαιούν, δικαιοσύνη, inούτως ως ουχί 'Ιουδαίος, αμαρτωλός differently; though where very great K.T.A.; and compare Luke vi. 32, 33 precision is aimed at, he seems for an with Matt. v. 47, and especially Matt. obvious reason to prefer diá, as in xxvi. 45 with Luke xviii. 32. Here Ephes. ii. 8, 9, Phil. iii. 9 un éxwv αμαρτωλοί is used in preference to έμήν δικαιοσύνην την εκ νόμου αλλά Ovn, not without a shade of irony, as την διά πίστεως Χριστού κ.τ.λ., , which better enforcing St Paul's argument. words present an exact parallel to the See the note on ver. 17.

former part of this verse, ουκ έξ έργων 16. εαν μή] retains its proper νόμου, εάν μή διά πίστεως Ιησού Χριmeaning, but refers only to où dikai- OTOû. Faith is strictly speaking only oûtai, 'He is not justified from works the means, not the source of justifiof law, he is not justified except cation. The one preposition () through faith.' See the note on i. 19. excludes this latter notion, while the

kai queis] 'we ourseldes,' notwith- other (ék) might imply it. Besides stauding our privileges of race. Com- these we meet also with én miotel pare kaì avroi, ver. 17.

(Phil. iii. 9), but never dià níotiv, éTuotetoauev] became believers.' propter fidem,' which would involve See the note on 2 Thess. i. 10. The a doctrinal error. Compare the carephrase πιστεύειν είς or επί τινα is pe- ful language in the Latin of our Articuliarly Christian ; see Winer & xxxi. cle xi, per fidem, non propter opera.' p. 267. The constructions of the ori) is the best supported, and LXX are πιστεύειν τινί, rarely πιστεύειν doubtless the correct reading. The επί τινι Or έν τινι, and once only επί reading of the received text διότι has τινα, Wisd. xii. 2 πιστεύειν επί θεόν. probably been imported from the paThe phrase, which occurs in the re- rallel passage, Rom. iii. 20. vised Nicene and other creeds, To- ότι εξ έργων κ.τ.λ.] Α quotation στεύειν εις εκκλησίαν, though an intel- from the Old Testament, as appears ligible, is yet a lax expression, the from the Hebraism où nãoa, and propriety of which was rightly dis- from the introductory ori. This senputed by many of the fathers, who tence indeed would be an unmeaning maintained that floteúel eis should repetition of what has gone before, be reserved for belief in God or in unless the Apostle were enforcing his Christ. See the passages in Suicer own statements by some authoritative Thesaur. 8. V. TIOTEVELV, and Pearson declaration. The words are thereOn the Creed Art. ix.

fore to be regarded as a free citation εκ πίστεως Χριστου] It seems al- of Psalm cxliii. 2 ου δικαιωθήσεται most impossible to trace the subtle ενώπιόν σου πας ζών. For πας ζών, και

πάca cap. 17 ει δε ζητούντες δικαιωθήναι εν Χριστώ ευρέθημεν και αυτοι αμαρτωλοί, άρα Χριστος αμαρτίας διάκονος; μη γένοιτο: 18εί γαρ ά κατέλυσα ταύτα πάλιν οικοδομώ, παραβάτην εμαυτόν συνιστάνω» 19έγω

very common Hebrew synonyme, Taoa cáp (wwa-ba) 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 és épywv vóuou 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 ου πάσα see Winer 8 ΣΣvi. 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 Xplotós αμαρτίας διάκονος 28 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 ápa is preferable to άρα. .

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 nocessary 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 duaprw.oi (ʻsinners' from a Jewish point of view), which it had in ver. 15, and is more consistent with the indicative cúpédnuev, 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 Xplotós αμαρτίας 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 18. "If, after destroying the old best developes the subtle irony of law of ordinances, I attempt to build đuaprwhoi; 'We Jews look down upon it ap again, I condemn myself, I the Gentiles as sinners: yet we have testify to my guilt in the work of no help for it but to become sinners destruction. The pulling down and like them.' It agrees with the indi. building up have reference doubtless cative eupéonjev, and with St. Paul's to the Mosaic law, though expressed usage of μη γένοιτο which elsewhere as a general maxim (Taura). The difin argumentative passages always ne- ficulty however is to trace the congatives a false but plausible inference nexion in γάρ. . from premisses taken as granted. And With the interpretation of ver. 17 lastly, it paves the way for the words adopted above, it seems simplest to δια νόμου νόμω απέθανον which follow. . attach γάρ το μη γένοιτο, Νay verily, In this case åpa is to be preferred to for, so far from Christ being a minisåpa, because it at once introduces the ter of sin, there is no sin at all in inference as a questionable one. It abandoning the law: it is only conmay be added also in favour of åpa, verted into a sin by returning to the that elsewhere μη γένοιτο follows an law again. For this use of yàp after interrogation. 'Apa expresses bewil

un yévolto comp. Rom. ix. 14, 15, xi. 1. derment as to a possible conclusion. παραβάτην εμαυτόν συνιστάνω] I 'I Any attempt further to define its make myself out, establish myself, a meaning seems not to be justified transgressor.' It will have been seen either by the context here, or by its that much of the force of the passage usage elsewhere. 'Apa hesitates, while depends on the sense which the Jews äpa concludes.

attached to åpaprwlós. Having passed ευρέθημεν] involves more Or less

on from this to anapria, St Paul at prominently the idea of a surprise : length throws off the studied ambicomp. Rom. vii. 10, 2 Cor. xi. 12, xii. guity of ápaprwlós (“ a non-observer of 20. Its frequent use however must the law,' and 'a sinner') by substitutbe traced to the iufluence of the Ara- ing the plain term παραβάτης. . maic dialect: see Cureton Corp. Ign. έμαυτόν συνιστάνω is opposed to p. 271.

Χριστός αμαρτίας διάκονος, though from αμαρτίας διάκονος] while yet He is its position épautòv cannot be very δικαιοσύνης διάκονος, thus malking a emphatic. direct contradiction in terms.

συνιστάνω] I proce, like συμβιβάMen yévolto] ‘Nay, verily,'' Away with (w, as Rom. iii. 5, v. 8; comp. 2 Cor. the thought. This is one out of several Lxx renderings of the Hebrew 19. Establishing the statement of bobo 'ad profana' and so 'absit,' see the foregoing verse : For in abanGesenius Thes. p. 478). Another ron. doning the law, I did but follow the dering of the same is idews (sc. ó Deos) leading of the law itself.' which occurs Matt. xvi. 22 Cheas cou ya] Not 'I Paul' as distinguished Kúple, 'far be it from thee, Lord': see from others, for instance from the Glass. Phil. Sacr. p. 538. MY yévolto Gentile converts, but ‘I Paul, the is uot however confined to Jewish natural man, the slave of the old and Christian writings, but is frequent covenant. The emphasis on éyos is for instance in Arrian; see Raphel explained by the following verse, Annot. Rom. iii. 4

δε ουκέτι εγώ κ.τ.λ.

iii. 1.

[ocr errors]

γαρ δια νόμου νόμω απέθανον, ίνα θεω ζήσω 29 Xριστω συνεσταύρωμαι· ζω δε ουκέτι εγώ, ζη δε εν εμοί Χριστός· ο δε νυν ζω εν σαρκί, εν πίστει ζω τη του νέου του θεού του αγαπήσαντός με και παραδόντος εαυτόν

δια νόμου νόμο απέθανον] 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 παιδαγωγός εις Xplotóv. 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. Nóuos 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 διά νόμου νόμω απέθανον 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 fulól 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. cond stage (drà vóuov) is a necessary preparation for the third (vóng åréDavov). 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.

vóuæ áté Davov] 'I died to law.' For the dative comp. Rom. vi. 2, II (in duapria), and for the idea of 'dying to the law' Rom. vii, 1–6, esp. ver. 4 και υμείς έθανατώθητε τω νόμω, and ver. 6 κατηργήθημεν από του νόμου αποθα

The se

20. τη του θεού και Χριστού του αγαπήσαντος.

νόντες εν ώ κατευχόμεθα (literally, we ii. 12, ouvrapnival. Comp. Ignat. Rom. were nullified, i.e. discharged, by 8 7 ο έμός έρως έσταύρωται. The cordeath from the law in which we were relative idea of rising and reigning held').

with Christ is equally common in St 20, 21. “With Christ I have been Paul. crucified at once to the law and to sin.

oủkét éy6] The order is sigHenceforth I live a new lifeyet not nificant; When I speak of living, I I, but Christ liveth it in me. This do not mean myself, my natural being. new life is not a rule of carnal ordi

I have no longer a separate existence. nances; it is spiritual, and its motive I am merged in Christ.' See on éyo principle is faith in the Son of God

ver. 19. who manifested His love for me by ô 8ề vv Co] Not exactly in vov dying for my sake. I cannot then

(wńv, but ở limits and qualifies the despise God's grace. I cannot stultify idea of life: So far as I now live in Christ's death by clinging still to a the flesh, it is a life of faith': comp. justification based upon law.'

Rom. vi. το ο γαρ απέθανεν, τη αμαρτία 20. An expansion of the idea in απέθανεν εφάπαξ, ο δε ζή, ή τω θεώ, the last verse.

Plut. Mor. p. 100 F o kadeúdovol, toŐ Χριστώ συνεσταύρωμαι] I have

σώματος ύπνος έστι και ανάπαυσις. . been crucified with Christ. A new vûr] ‘now': his new life in Christ, turn is thus given to the metaphor of as opposed to his old life before his death. In the last verse it was the conversion; not his present life on release from past obligations ; here it earth, as opposed to his future life in is the annihilation of old sing. The heaven; for such a contrast is quite two however are not unconnected. foreign to this passage. Sin and law loose their hold at the

év tiotel]'in faith,' the atmosphere same time. The sense of feebleness, as it were which he breathes in this of prostration, to which a man is re- his new spiritual life. duced by the working of the law, the The variation of reading here is perprocess of dying in fact, is the moral

plexing. For toù vioù tou Ocoû may be link which unites the two applications pleaded the great preponderance of of the image: see Rom. vii. 5, 9-11, the older authorities: for toll Ocoû kai Thus his death becomes life.

Being Xplotoũ, the testimony of a few ancient crucified with Christ, he rises with copies, and the difficulty of conceiving Christ, and lives to God.

its substitution for the other simpler The parallel passage in the Romans reading best ilustrates the different senses Me... euoû] 'loved me, gave Himself given to death. See also, for a similar for me. He appropriates to himself, and characteristic instance of working as Chrysostom observes, the love which out a metaphor, the different applica- belongs equally to the whole world. tions of nuépa in i Thess. V. 2–8. For Christ is indeed the personal

For the idea of dying with Christ friend of each man individually; and etc., see Rom. vi. 6 ó malacós ýuwv is as much to him, as if He had died av Apwros ovvegravpoon: comp. Gal. v. for him alone. 24, vi. 14, Rom. vi. 8, Col. ii. 20, ato- 21. oủk ådet K.T.N.] 'I do not set baveiv oùv Xploto, and Rom. vi. 4, Col at nought the grace of God.


« 前へ次へ »