m^ 
 
 
 i 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tiiis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029294118 
 
M^ pfcows ieiien. this Voluiiine was taken. 
 
 torenew;t>is bOoWcon ' 
 
 tbe^aU Nd. aad B-'vi to 
 -:rmn. " ''»'.t 
 
 HOME USE RULES. 
 
 ^ All Books siihieit tolQIcair,''' ' 
 
 . Books not use4 for 
 
 in^traction orresearcfi 
 
 axe returnable ^within 
 
 4 weeks. 
 
 Volmnes of periodi- 
 cals and of pampHlets 
 are held in &e library 
 as rduch as possible. 
 For spedar-piirposes 
 they are given out for 
 a ttmited time. 
 
 Borrowers should 
 not use their library 
 privileges f or^the bene- 
 fitwof other'ljer^ons, 
 
 B^oks not • iieMSLd 
 durinl^ recess period, 
 should be retumeii to :, 
 the library, or arrarrge- 
 r ments niade for their 
 \return during borrow^ 
 6r'sahsence,lf wanted. ^ 
 vBooks needed by ■ 
 mcire than one person 
 are held on the reserve : 
 •list. - 
 
 : ,, Bot^ks of special 
 ' yalue and gift books, 
 when the giver wishes-' 
 it, are not allowed to 
 dicnlate. 
 
 Readei^ are ,^]E^d 
 to report all cases' of 
 books marked or muti- 
 lated. '-:■?. 
 
 Do not deface baNkfcs by marks and wrltlnarr 
 
15 S 
 
Cornell University Library 
 BS2685 .E46 1867 
 
 St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatlans : wl 
 
 olln 
 
 3 1924 029 294 118 
 
By the same Author. 
 
 ST PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS, 
 
 COLOSSIANS, and PHILEMON: Greek Text, with a Critical and 
 Grammatical Commentary, and a Bevised English Translation, Third 
 Edition, in 8vo. price los. 6d. 
 
 EPHESIANS, Third Edition, 83. 6d. 
 
 GALATIANS, Fourth Edition, 8s. 6d. 
 
 PASTOEAL EPISTLES, Third Edition, los. 6d. 
 
 THESSALONIANS, Third Edition, 7«. 6d. 
 
 Historical Lectures on the Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 Fourth Edition, price 103. 6d. 
 
 The Destiny of the Creature: and other Sermons, Fourth 
 
 Edition, post 8vo. 5 s. 
 
 The Broad and the Narrow Way. Two Sermons, Second 
 
 Edition, 8vo. 2s. 
 
ST PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 a 3 
 
FEINTED BY C. J. CLAY M.A. 
 AT THE TJNrVEESrTY PRESS. 
 
ST PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE 
 GALATIANS: 
 
 WITH A CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL 
 
 COMMENTARY, 
 
 AND A REVISED TRANSLATION, 
 
 BY 
 
 CHARLES J. ELLICOTT D.D. 
 
 BISHOP OF GL0T7CBSTBE AND BRISTOL. 
 
 THE FOURTH EDITION, CORRECTED. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 LONGMANS, GREEN, READER, & DYER. 
 
 1867 
 
 @ 
 
^/'30//^^ 
 
 /j 
 
 UNlVLi-^SlTYi 
 
NOTICE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 T)UT little alteration has been made in the notes to the 
 text since the Second Edition. Quotations however, 
 and references, especially to Scripture, have been verified, 
 and some slight improvements in typography introduced. 
 In this Fourth Edition the citations of the older Versions 
 in the notes to the Translation have been verified and re- 
 arranged, and the whole in every respect brought up to 
 the standard adopted in the Third Edition of the Pastoral 
 Epistles, to which the other parts of my Commentary except 
 Ephesians are already conformed. 
 
 The testimony of the Codex Sinaiticus has been noticed, 
 wherever the reading adopted in my text differs from that 
 of Tischendorf s seventh edition, or the Textus Receptus. 
 
 Bbistol, 
 
 November, 1866. 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 ''pHE present edition is but little different froni the first in 
 the results arrived at, and in the statement of the princi- 
 ples on which those results mainly rest ; but in the details 
 and construction of many of the notes I have introduced 
 changes both of diction and arrangement. 
 
 These changes have been found to be wholly unavoidable. 
 The first edition was not only written with a scanty supply 
 of books, and with a very limited knowledge of the contents 
 of the Ancient Versions, but was constructed on principles 
 which, though since proved to be sound and trustworthy, 
 appear in some cases not to have been applied with sufficient 
 ease and simplicity, or to have received a sufficiently ex- 
 tended range of application. It is useless to disguise the 
 fact that what at first professed to be purely critical and 
 purely grammatical has by degrees become also exegetical ; 
 and has so far intruded into what is dogmatical, as to give 
 systematic references to the leading treatises upon the points 
 or subjects under discussion. The extremely kind recep- 
 tion that the different portions of this Commentary have met 
 with has led in two ways to these gradual alterations. On 
 the one hand, the not unnatural desir^ to make each portion 
 more worthy of the approval that had been extended towards 
 
X PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 its predecessors has been silently carrying me onward into 
 widening fields of labour : on the other hand, the friendly 
 criticisms that I have received from time to time have led 
 me to retrench what has seemed unedifying, to dwell with 
 somewhat less technicality of language on the peculiarities of 
 grammar and construction, and yet at the same time to enter 
 more fully upon all that has seemed to bring out the con- 
 nexion of thought and sequence of argument. 
 
 The latter portions of my work have been based on these 
 somewhat remodelled principles, and — if I may trust the 
 opinions of perhaps top partial and friendly judges — so far 
 successfully, that I shall apparently be wise to keep them as 
 the sort of standard to which, if God mercifully grant me life 
 and strength, former portions of the series (wherever they 
 seem to need it) may be brought up, and future portions 
 conformed. 
 
 The present edition then is an effort to make my earliest 
 and decidedly most incomplete work as much as possible re- 
 semble those which apparently have some greater measures 
 of maturity and completeness. It has involved, and I do not 
 seek to disguise it, very great labour — labour perhaps not 
 very much less than writing a new commentary. For though 
 the notes remain substantially what they were before, and 
 though I have found no reason to retract fonner opinions 
 except in about four or five debateable and contested pas- 
 sages', I have still found that the intetpolation of new matter 
 and the introduction of exegetical comments have obliged me 
 in many cases to alter the arrangement of the whole note, 
 and occasionally even to face the weary and irksome task of 
 total re- writing and reconstruction. I rejoice however now 
 
 1 These changes of opinion will be 6, irpoaaviBevTo- iii. 4, ivaBeTe- iii. 19, 
 found noticed in their different places. in part; iv. 17, tKKKuaaf vi. 17, 
 I believe the only passages are, chap. ii. ^aariiu, slightly. 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. xi 
 
 at length to feel that the reader of the later portions of this 
 series will find no very appreciable difference when he turns 
 back to this edition of the first portion. He will now no 
 longer be without those invaluable guides, the Ancient Ver- 
 sions; he will I trust find but few links missing in the 
 continuous illustration of the argument, scarcely any defici- 
 ency of comment on important difi"erences of reading, and 
 on points of doctrinal difficulty no serious want of refer- 
 ences to the best treatises and sermons of our great English 
 divines. At the same time he will find the mode of inter- 
 pretation and tenor of grammatical discussion precisely the 
 same. Though the details may be often differently grouped, 
 the principles are left whoUy unchanged : and this, not from 
 any undue predilection for former opinions, but simply from 
 having found by somewhat severe testing and trial that they 
 do appear to be sound and consistent. 
 
 For a notice of details it will be now sufficient to refer to 
 the Prefaces to other portions of this series already published, 
 in which the different component elements of the notes above 
 alluded to will be found noticed and illustrated at some 
 length. This only may be added, that particular care has 
 been taken to adjust the various references, especially to 
 authorities of such frequent occurrence as Winer's Grammar 
 of the New Testament, to the paging of the latest edition'. 
 Where from inability to obtain access to the last edition of 
 
 1 I have also retained the references The translation of the latter of these 
 
 to the translation of Neander's Plant- works has I believe been somewhat 
 
 ing published by Bohn ; and of Miil- severely criticized. I fear I am unable 
 
 ler's Doctrine of Sin published by to defend it ; but as the allusions to 
 
 Clark ; simply because the presence of MiiUer in my notes relate more to 
 
 these volumes in two justly popular general principles than to individual 
 
 series makes it probable that many passages, I do not think the general 
 
 readers may have these works, who reader will suffer much from the inac- 
 
 have not, and perhaps may not be in curacies or harshness of the transla- 
 
 the habit of consulting, the originals. tion. 
 
xii PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 works previously quoted this has not been done, the reader 
 will commonly find some allusion to the continued use of the 
 authority in its earlier form. 
 
 I may also remark that in deference to the wishes of 
 some of my critics I have prefixed to the Epistle a few sen- 
 tences of Introduction, giving a summary account of the 
 results of recent historical criticism. This portion of sacred 
 literature has been so fully treated both by Dr Davidson 
 and Dean Alford, and has further received so much valuable 
 illustration from the excellent Life of 8t Paul by Messrs 
 Conybeare and Howson, that I feel it now unnecessary to do 
 more than to group together a few remarks for the benefit, 
 not of the critical scholar, but of the general student, to 
 whom these brief notices sometimes prove acceptable and 
 suggestive. 
 
 I must not conclude without expressing my hearty sense 
 of the value of several commentaries that have appeared 
 since the publication of my first edition. I desire particularly 
 to specify those of my friends Dean Alford and Mr Bagge, 
 and the thoughtful work of my kind correspondent Dr 
 Turner of New York. Of the great value of the first of 
 these it is unnecessary for me to speak; my present notes 
 will show how carefully I have considered the interpretations 
 advanced in that excellent work, and how much I rejoice 
 to observe that the results at which we arrive are not 
 marked by many differences of opinion. The edition of Mr 
 Bagge will be found very useful in critical details, in the 
 careful and trustworthy references which it supplies to the 
 older standard works of lexicogi-aphy, and in what may be 
 termed phraseological annotations. The third of these works 
 diffei-s so much from the present in its plan and general con- 
 struction, as to make the points of contact between us much 
 fewer than I could wish ; but I may venture to express the 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. xiii 
 
 opinion that the reader who finds himself more interested 
 in general interpretation than in scholastic detail will rarely 
 consult the explanatory notes without profit and instruction. 
 The recent edition of Professor Jowett has not been over- 
 looked ; but after the careful and minute examination of his 
 Commentary on the Thessalonians which I made last year, I 
 have been reluctantly forced into the opinion that our sys- 
 tems of interpretation are so radically different, as to make 
 systematic reference to the works of this clever writer not 
 so necessary as might have been the case if our views on 
 momentous subjects had been more accordant and harmo- 
 nious. 
 
 Before I draw these remarks to a close, I must not fail 
 gratefully to return my heartfelt thanks for the numerous 
 kind and important suggestions which I have received from 
 private friends and from public criticism. By this aid I have 
 been enabled to correct much that has seemed doubtful or 
 erroneous, and to these friendly comments the more perfect 
 form in which this commentary now appears before the 
 student is in many respects justly due. From my readers 
 and those who are interested in these works I fear I must 
 now claim some indulgence as to the future rate of my pro- 
 gress. While I may presume to offer to them the humble assur- 
 ance that while life and health are spared to me the onward 
 course of these volumes will not be suspended, I must not 
 suppress the fact that the duties to which it has now pleased 
 God to call me are such as must necessarily cause the ap- 
 pearance of future commentaries to take place at somewhat 
 longer intervals. Those who are acquainted with studies of 
 this nature will I feel sure agree with me that it is im- 
 possible to hurry such works ; nay more, I am convinced 
 that all sober thinkers will concur in the opinion that there 
 is no one thing for which a writer will have hereafter to 
 
xiv PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 answer before the dread tribunal of God "with more terrible 
 strictness than for having attempted to explain the ever- 
 lasting Words of Life with haste and precipitation. When 
 we consider the errors and failures that mark every stage in 
 our most deliberate and most matured progress in merely 
 secular subjects, we may well pause before we presume to 
 hurry through the sanctuary of God with the dust and tur- 
 moil of worldly, self-seeking, and irreverent speed. 
 
 May the great Father of Lights look down with mercy on 
 this effort to illustrate His word, and overrule it to His 
 glory, His honour, and His praise. 
 
 Caubbidge, 
 
 Janua/ry 28, 1859. 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 THE following Commentary is the first part of an attempt 
 to elucidate St Paul's Epistles by systematically applying 
 to the Sacred Text the latest and best principles of grammar 
 and criticism. 
 
 It is the result of several years' devotion to the study 
 of biblical Greek, and owes its existence to the conviction 
 that in this country the present very advanced state of philo- 
 logy has scarcely been applied with sufficient rigour to the 
 interpretation of the New Testament. Our popular commen- 
 taries are too exclusively exegeticaP, and presuppose in the 
 ordinary student a greater knowledge of the peculiarities of 
 the language of the New Testament than it is at all probable 
 he possesses. Even the more promising student is sure to 
 meet with two stumblingblocks in his path when he first 
 maturely enters upon the study of the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 In , the first place, the very systematic exactitude of his 
 former discipline in classical Greek is calculated to mislead 
 him in the study of writers who belonged to an age when 
 change had impaired, and conquest had debased, the language 
 in which they wrote: his exclusive attention to a single 
 dialect, informed for the most part by a single and prevailing 
 spirit, Ul prepares him for the correct apprehension of writ- 
 ings in which the tinge of nationalities and the admixture of 
 
 1 I must explain the meaning in other oonsiderationa, such as the cir- 
 
 which I use this word in contra- cumstances or known sentiments of 
 
 distinction to grammatical. By a the writer, <Scc. are also talcen into 
 
 grammatical commentary, I mean one account. I am not quite sure that I 
 
 in which the principles of grammar am correct in thus limiting exegeHcal, 
 
 are either exclusively or principally but I know no other epithets that will 
 
 used to elucidate the meaning : by an serve to convey my meaning. 
 ezegeticaZ commentary, one in which 
 
xvi PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 newer and deeper modes of thought are both distinctly re- 
 cognizable: his familiarity with modes of expression which 
 had arisen from the living wants of a living language ill pre- 
 pares him correctly and completely to understand their force 
 when they are reproduced by aliens in kindred and customs, 
 and strangers, and even more than strangers, in tongue. Let 
 all these diversities be fairly considered, and then, without 
 entering into any more exact comparisons between biblical 
 and classical Greek, it will be difficult not to admit that the 
 advanced student in Attic Greek is liable to carry with him 
 prejudices, which may for a time at least interfere with his 
 full appreciation of the outward form in which the Sacred 
 Oracles are enshrined. No better example of the general 
 truth of these observations could be adduced than that of the 
 illustrious Hermann, who, in his disquisition on the first 
 three chapters of this very epistle, has convincingly shown, 
 how even perceptions as accurate as his, and erudition as 
 profound, may still signally fail when applied without previ- 
 ous exercise to the interpretation of the New Testament. 
 
 A second stumblingblock that the classical student inva- 
 riably finds in his study of the New Testament is the de- 
 plorable state in which, till within the last few years, its 
 grammar has been left. It is scarcely possible for any one 
 unacquainted with the history and details of the grammar of 
 the New Testament to form any conception of the aberrant 
 and unnatural meanings that have been assigned to the pre- 
 positions and the particles, many of which cling to them in 
 New Testament Lexicons to this very day'. It requires a 
 familiar acquaintance with the received glosses of several 
 important passages to conceive the nature of the burdens 
 hard to be borne, which long-suffering Hebraism — that hid- 
 den helper in all need, as Liicke^ calls it — has had to sustain ; 
 and how generations of excellent scholars have passed away 
 without ever overcoming their Pharisaical reluctance to 
 touch one of them with the tip of the finger. Then again 
 grammatical figures have suffered every species of strain and 
 distortion ; enallage, hendyadys, metonymy, have been urged 
 with a freedom in the New Testament which would never 
 have been tolerated in any classical author, however ill-cared 
 
 ' That this language is in no way siderable amount of argument to make 
 
 overstrained may be easily seen by us believe it could ever, even in Heb. 
 
 the notices in Winer's Grammar on xiii. 9, bear the meaning of ex. See 
 
 any leading preposition or conjunc- Winer, Gr. § 48. a, p. 348. 
 tion. 'Be is a diflacult preposition in '' Liicke, on John iii, 20, Vol. ui. 
 
 the N. T., but it would rer(uire a con- p. 241. 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xvii 
 
 ■for, and however obscure. Here and there in past days a few- 
 protesting voices were raised against the uncritical natiire of 
 the current interpretations ; but it was not, in Germany, till 
 within a very few years, till the days of Fritzsche and Winer, 
 that they met with any response or recognition ; and among 
 ourselves, even now they have secured only a limited and 
 critical audience. 
 
 It thus only too often happens that when a young man 
 enters for the first time seriously upon the study of the New 
 Testament, it is with such an irrepressible feeling of repug- 
 nance to that laxity of language which he is led to believe is 
 its prevailing characteristic, that he either loses for the lan- 
 guage of Inspiration that reverence which its mere literary 
 merits alone may justly claim ; or else, under the action of a 
 better though mistaken feeling, shrinks from applying to 
 it that healthy criticism to which all his previous education 
 had inured his mind. The niore difl&cult the portion of 
 Scripture, the more sensibly are these evils felt and recog- 
 nized. 
 
 It is under these feelings that I have undertaken a com- 
 mentary on St Paul's Epistles, which, by confining itself to 
 the humbler and less ambitious sphere of grammatical details, 
 may give the student some insight into the language of the 
 New Testament, and enable him with more assured steps 
 to ascend the difficult heights of exegetical and dogmatical 
 theology. My own studies have irresistibly impelled me to 
 the conviction that, without making any unnecessary distinc- 
 tions between grammar and exegesis, we are still bound to 
 recognize the necessity, first of endeavouring to find out what 
 the words actually convey, according to the ordinary rules of 
 language ; then secondly of observing the peculiar shade of 
 meaning that the context appears to impart. Too often this 
 process has been reversed ; the commentator, on the strength 
 of some received interpretation or dogmatical bias, has stated 
 what the passage ought to mean, and then has been tempt- 
 ed by the force of bad example to coerce the words per 
 Hebraismum or per enallagen to yield the required sehse. 
 This in many, nay most cases, I feel certain has been done 
 to a great degree unconsciously, yet still the evil effects re- 
 main. God's word, though innocently, has been dealt with 
 deceitfully ; and God's word, like His Ark of the Covenant, 
 may not with impunity be stayed up by the officiousness of 
 mortal aid. 
 
 I have then in all cases striven humbly and reverently 
 to elicit from the words their simple and primary meaning. 
 
 b 
 
xviii PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 Where that has seemed to be at variance with historical or 
 dogmatical deductions, — where in fact exegesis has seemed to 
 range itself on one side, grammar on the other, — I have 
 never failed candidly to state it; where it has confirmed some 
 time-honoured interpretation, I have joyfully and emphati- 
 cally cast my small mite into the great treasury of sacred 
 exegesis, and have felt gladdened at being able to yield some 
 passing support to wiser and better men than myself \ This 
 however I would fain strive to impress upon my reader, to 
 whatever party of the Church (alas ! that there should be 
 parties) he may chance to belong, that, as God is my witness, 
 I have striven to state in perfect candour and singleness of 
 heart all the details of interpretation with which I have 
 come in contact. I have sought to support no paiticular 
 party, I have desired to yield countenance to no peculiar 
 views. I will candidly avow that on all the fundamental 
 points of Christian faith and doctrine my mind is fuUy made 
 up, It is not for me to sit in judgment upon what is called 
 the liberal spirit of the age, but, without evoking controver- 
 sies into which I have neither the will nor the ability to 
 enter, I may be permitted to say that upon the momentous 
 subject of the Inspiration of Scripture I cannot be so untrue 
 to my own deepest convictions, or so forgetful of my anxious 
 thoughts and investigations, as to affect a freedom of opinion 
 which I am very far from entertaining. I deeply feel for 
 those whom earth-born mist and vapour still hinder from be- 
 holding the full brightness and effulgence of divine truth; I 
 entertain the most lively pity for those who still feel that the 
 fresh fountains of Scripture are, in all the bitterness of the 
 Prophet's lamentation, only waters that fail; — I feel it and 
 entertain it, and I trust that no ungentle word of mine may 
 induce them to cling more tenaciously to their mournful con- 
 victions. Yet I am bound to say, to prevent the nature of 
 my candour being misunderstood, that throughout this com- 
 
 ^ Amidst all these details I trust to interpret^ no mere verbal discus- 
 
 I have never forgotten that there is sions can ever tend truly to elucidate, 
 
 something higher than mere critical no investigation thoroughly to satisfy, 
 
 acumen, something more sure than I trust indeed that I have never been 
 
 grammatical exactitude ; something permitted to forget these golden words 
 
 which the world calls the theological of him whom of all commentators I 
 
 sense, but which more devout thinkers most honour and revere : oiiSi ykp Set 
 
 recognize as the assisting grace of the t4 ^-/niara yv/uib. i^erA^eu), iirel jro\\4 
 
 Eternal Spirit of God. Without this, i^j/erai rd, droTij/iiOTa' aiU t^v Xi^o) 
 
 without also a deeper and more mya- Ka$' iaur^v /SaffoWfew, dXX4 Tjj Sta- 
 
 terious sympathy with the mind of the vol<f rpoffix^^" ''<'" ypd<popros 
 
 sacred writer whom we are presuming Ohrysost. torn. x. p. 675 B (ed. Bened.). 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xix 
 
 mentary the full' Inspiration of Scripture has been felt as one 
 of those strong subjective convictions to which every hour of 
 meditation adds fresh strength and assurance. Still I have 
 never sought to mask or disguise a difi&culty : I have never 
 advanced an explanation of the truth of which I do not, my- 
 self at least, feel convinced. I should shrink from being so 
 untrue to myself, I should tremble at being so presumptuous 
 towards God ; as if He who sent the dream may not in His 
 own good time send the interpretation thereof. That there 
 are difficulties in Scripture, that there are difficulties in this 
 deep Epistle, I both know and feel, and I have in no case 
 shrunk from pointing them out; but I also know that there 
 is a time — whether in this world of unrest, or in that rest 
 which remaineth to God's people, I know not — when every 
 difficulty will be cleared up, every doubt dispersed: and it is 
 this conviction that has supported me, when I have felt, and 
 have been forced to record my conviction, that there are 
 passages where the world's wisdom has not yet clearly seen 
 into the depth of the deep things of God. 
 
 Before I wholly leave this momentous subject, I would 
 fain plead its importance in regard to the method of inter- 
 pretation which I have endeavoured to follow. I am well 
 aware that the current of popular opinion is now steadily 
 setting against grammatical details and investigations. It is 
 thought, I believe, that a freer admixture of history, broader 
 generalizations, and more suggestive reflections, may enable 
 the student to catch the spirit of his author, and be borne 
 serenely along without the weariness and toil of ordinary 
 travel. Upon the soundness of such theories in a general 
 point of view I will not venture to pronounce an opinion ; I 
 am not an Athanase, and cannot confront a world; but in the 
 particular sphere of Holy Scripture I may perhaps be per- 
 mitted to say that if we would train our younger students to 
 be reverential thinkers, earnest Christians, and sound divines, 
 we must habituate them to a patient and thoughtful study 
 of the words and language of Scripture, before we allow them 
 to indulge in an exegesis for which they are immatijr© and 
 incompetent. If the Scriptures are divinely inspired, then 
 surely it is a young man's noblest occupation patiently and 
 lovingly to note every change of expression, every turn of 
 
 ^ I avoid using any party expres- I am far indeed from recognizing that 
 
 sions. I would not wi^ on the one admixture of human imperfection and 
 
 hand to class myself with such thinkers even error, which the popular theo- 
 
 as Calovius, nor could I subscribe to sophy of the day now finds in the 
 
 the Formula Comensm Hdeetici : but Holy Scriptures. 
 
XX PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 language, every variety of inflexion, to analyze and to inves- 
 tigate, to contrast and to compare, until he has obtained 
 some accurate knowledge of those outward elements which 
 are permeated by the inward influence and powers of the 
 Holy Spirit of God. As he labours in tracing out the subtle 
 distinctions that underlie some illative particle, or charac- 
 iferize some doubtful preposition, let him cheer himself with 
 the reflection that every effort of thought he is thus enabled 
 to make is by God's blessing a step towards the inner 
 shrine, a nearer approach to a recognition of the thoughts 
 of an Apostle, yea a less dim perception of the mind of 
 Christ. 
 
 No one who feels deeply upon the subject of Inspiration 
 will allow himself to be beguiled into an indifference to the 
 mysterious interest that attaches itself to the very grammar 
 of the New Testament. 
 
 I will then plead no excuse that I have made my notes so 
 exclusively critical and grammatical. I rejoice rather that 
 the awakening and awakened interest for theology in this 
 country is hkely to afford me a plea and a justification for 
 confining myself to a single province of sacred literature. 
 Already I believe theologians are coming to the opinion that 
 the time for compiled commentaries is passing away. Our 
 resources are now too abundant for the various details of cri- 
 ticism, lexicography, gi-ammar, exegesis, history, archaeology, 
 and doctrine, to be happily or harmoniously blended in one 
 mass. One mind is scarcely sufficiently comprehensive to 
 grasp properly these various subjects; one judgment is scarcely 
 sufiiciently discriminating to arrive at just conclusions on so 
 many topics. The sagacious critic, the laborious lexicogra- 
 pher, the patient grammarian, the profound exegete, the 
 suggestive historian, and the impartial theologian, are in the 
 present state of bibhcal science never Kkely to be united in 
 one person. Excellence in any one department is now diffi- 
 cult, in all impossible. I trust then that the time is coming 
 when theologians will carry out, especially in the New Tes- 
 tament, the principle of the division of labour, and, selecting 
 that sphere of industry for which they are more particularly 
 qualified, wUl in others be content to accept the results ar- 
 rived at by the labours of their contemporaries'. 
 
 1 In the present Epistle there are which distinct prominence is given to 
 
 distinct and instructive instances of ^historical and chronological investiga- 
 
 the application of this principle. Hil- tions. Di Brown has lately devoted 
 
 genfeld has published a recent edition some expository discourses nearly ex- 
 
 of the Epistle to the Galatiana, in clusively to the doctrine and practical 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xxi 
 
 The most neglected portion of the New Testoment litera- 
 ture is its lexicography, and this is the more inexcusable as 
 the excellent concordance of Bruder has been now twelve 
 years before the world. I have here suffered greatly from 
 want of sound help, and in addition to having frequently to 
 draw solely from my own scanty resources in this depart- 
 ment, and to leave my own more immediate subject to dis- 
 cuss points which I should have gladly found done to my 
 hand, I have also had the thankless task of perpetually put- 
 ting my readers on their guard against the overhasty and 
 inaccurate classifications of Bretschneider and others. I have 
 generally found Bretschneider's Lexicon the best; but the 
 pages of my commentary will abundantly show how little 
 reliance I have been able to place upon him. I rejoice to 
 say that Dr Scott, master of Balliol CoUege, is engaged on a 
 Lexicon to the New Testament ; and those who know his 
 eminent qualifications for the task must feel, as I do, the 
 most perfect confidence in the way in which it wiU be exe- 
 cuted. I regret that it was too little advanced to be of any 
 use to me in this commentary. The general lexicon (beside 
 that of Stephens) which I have chiefly used is the edition of 
 Passow's Lexicon by Rest and Palm, which I cannot help 
 thinking is by very far the best lexicon in a moderate 
 compass that we at present possess. The prepositions in 
 particular are treated remarkably well and very compre- 
 hensively. 
 
 The synonyms of the Greek Testament, a most important 
 subject, have been greatly neglected. We have now a genial 
 little volume from one who always writes felicitously and 
 attractively upon such subjects; but the agreeable author will 
 not I am sure be offended when I say, that it can scarcely be 
 deemed otherwise than, as he himself modestly terms it, a 
 slight contribution to the subject. We may fairly trust that 
 an author who has begun so well will continue his labours in 
 a more extended and comprehensive form. As Trench's work 
 came late into my bands, I have principally used the imper- 
 fect work of Tittman; but I perfectly agree vyith Trench in 
 bis estimate of its merits. 
 
 In the Grammar of the New Testament we are now in a 
 fairly promising state. The very admirable work of Winer 
 
 t-aching of the Epistle, whUe Mr show Wiat their authors had the good 
 
 Veitch has supplied him with gram- sense to confine themselves to those 
 
 matical annotations. Both of these departments of interpretation for 
 
 works have their demerits as well as which they felt the greatest aptitude, 
 their merits, but at any rate thejr 
 
xxii PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 has completely rehabilitated the subject. It is a volume that 
 I have studied with the closest attention, and to -which I am 
 under profound obligations. Still it would not be candid if I 
 did not admit that it has its weak points. I do not consider 
 the treatment of the particles (a most important subject in 
 St Paul's epistles) at all equal to that of the prepositions, or 
 by any means commensurate with our wants on this portion 
 of grammar : the cases also might perhaps be more success- 
 fully handled. The great fault of the book is its superabund- 
 ance of reference to the notes and commentaries on classical 
 authors. In many cases these are of high importance ; but in 
 a vast quantity of others, as I have often found to my cost, 
 but little information is to be derived from the source to 
 which the reader is referred. Mr Green's Grammar I con- 
 sider a work of great ability, but too short and unsystematic 
 to be of the use it might otherwise have been to the student. 
 I have therefore been obliged to use freely other grammatical 
 subsidies than those which more particularly bear upon the 
 New Testament*. My object has been throughout to make 
 my references more to grammars and professed repertories of 
 similar information than to notes or commentaries on clas- 
 sical authors; for I am convinced that a good reference to a 
 good grammar, though not a very showy evidence of research, 
 is a truly valuable assistance; while a discursive note in an 
 edition of a classic, from its want of context, frequently sup- 
 plies little real information. I have allowed myself greater 
 latitude in references to the notes of commentators on the 
 New Testament, for here the similarity of language, and fre- 
 quently of subject, constitutes a closer bond of union. In 
 particular I have used Fritzsche's edition of the Romans 
 nearly as a grammar, so full is it and so elaborate in all de- 
 tails of language. As a gi-ammarian I entertain for him the 
 highest respect; but I confess that my sympathy with him as 
 a theologian is not great, nor can I do otherwise than de- 
 plore the unjust levity with which he often treats the Greek 
 fathers, and the tone of bitterness and asperity which he 
 
 1 I have especially used the admi- by the advanced student without the 
 
 rable and (m my opinion) wholly un- greatest advantage. On the particles 
 
 rivalled syntax of Bemhardy, the I have principally used the clumsy 
 
 good compendious syntax of Madvig, though useful work of Hartung, and 
 
 the somewhat heavy treatise on the the very able and voluminous notes of 
 
 same subject by Soheuerlein, Jelf's Klotz on Devarius. This latter work 
 
 (Jrammsu-, and the small Greek gram- the student will rarely consult in vain, 
 
 mar by Dr Donaldson, which, though I have also derived some assistance 
 
 unpretending in form and succinct in from Thiersch's very good dissertation 
 
 its nature, will never be consulted even on the Pentateuch. 
 
PKEFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xxiii 
 
 assumes towards the learned and pious Tholuck. It is a sad 
 evidence of an untouched heart and unchastened spirit, when 
 a commentator on the New Testament leaves the written 
 traces of his bitterness on the margins of the Covenant of 
 Love. 
 
 The same principle that has induced me to refer to 
 repertories and systematic treatises on grammar has also 
 influenced me whenever I have been led into dogmatical 
 questions. I have sought in most cases information from 
 writers who have made the whole subject their study. I 
 have freely used Bishop BuU's Harmonia Apostolica, Water- 
 land's Works, and such other of our great English divines as 
 I have the good fortune to be acquainted with. I have em- 
 ployed with profit the recent and popular treatise on St Paul's 
 doctrine by Usteri, and that by Neander in his Planting of 
 Christianity; both of which, with perhaps some reservations, 
 may be recommended to the student. I regret that I cannot 
 speak with so much freedom of the discussions of the clever 
 and critical Ferdinand Baur in his Apostel Paulus. I have 
 referred to him in a few cases, for his unquestionable ability 
 has seemed to demand it, but it has been always cautiously 
 and warily; nor do I at all wish to commend him to the 
 notice of any student except of advanced knowledge and of 
 fuUy fixed principles. The other books and authorities which 
 I have cited will sufficiently speak for themselves. 
 
 I desire in conclusion briefly to allude to the general 
 principles which I have adopted in the construction of the 
 text, the compilation of the notes, and the revision of the 
 translation, and to record my many obligations. 
 
 I. The text is substantially that of Tischendorf 's seventh 
 edition'; the only deviations from it that I have felt com- 
 pelled to make form the subject of the critical notes which 
 are at intervals appended to the text. Changes have been 
 made in punctuation; but these, generally speaking, have 
 not been such as to require special notice. I have here applied 
 the principle of division of labour which I venture to advo- 
 cate. It has always seemed to me that it is at least a very 
 
 * It was long with me a subject of of energy and industry he is unrivalled, 
 
 anxious thought whether I should and as a critic he ha:a learnt from what 
 
 adopt the text of Lachmann (for he has suffered. Moreover he is with 
 
 whose critical abilities I hare a pro- us, still learning, still gathering, still 
 
 found respect) or that of Tischendorf. toiling ; while Lachmann's edition. 
 
 The latter I consider inferior to Lach- with all its excellences and all its im- 
 
 mann in talent, scholarship, and criti- perfections, must now remain as he has 
 
 cal acumen. But as a palaeographer left it to ua. 
 he stands infinitely higher, as a man 
 
xxiv PKEFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 hazardous, if not a presumptuous undertaking, for any man 
 however good a scholar to construct an original text without 
 eminent qualifications for that task. Years of patient labour 
 must have been devoted to those studies : an unflagging in- 
 dustry in collecting and a persistent sagacity in sifting evi- 
 dence must be united in the Biblical critic, or his labours will 
 be worse than useless. Those who have not these advantages 
 will do well to rely upon others, reserving however to them- 
 selves (if they are honest men and independent thinkers) the 
 task of scrutinizing, testing, and if need be expressing dissent 
 from, the results arrived at by those whom they follow. I 
 have humbly endeavoured thus to act with regard to the 
 text of the present epistle: where there has seemed reason 
 to depart from Tischendorf (and he is far from infallible) I 
 have done so, and have in all cases acted on fixed principles 
 which time and above all failures have taught me. For a 
 novice like myself to obtrude my critical canons on the 
 reader would be only so much aimless presumption. I will 
 only say that I can by no means assent to a blind adherence 
 to external evidence, especially where the preponderance is 
 not marked, and the internal evidence is of importance : still 
 on the other hand I regard with the greatest jealousy and 
 suspicion any opposition to the nearly coincident testimony 
 of the uncial Manuscripts unless the interna] evidence be of a 
 most strong and decisive character. I have always endea- 
 voured to ascertain first the exact nature of the diplomatic 
 evidence ; secondly that of what I have termed paradi2)loniatio 
 arguments (I must apologize for coining the word), by which 
 I mean the apparent probabilities of erroneous transcription, 
 permutation of letters, itacism, and so forth; thirdly and 
 lastly the internal evidence, whether resting on apparent 
 deviations from the usv^ scribendi of the sacred author, or 
 the propensio, be it critica, dogmatica, or epexegetica, on the 
 part of the copyist. I have also endeavoured to make the 
 critical notes as perspicuous as the nature of the subject will 
 permit, by grouping the separate classes of authorities, uncial 
 Manuscripts (MSS.), cursive Manuscripts (mss.). Versions (Vv.) 
 and Fathers (Ff) Greek and Latin, and in some measure 
 familiarizing the uneducated eye to comprehend these per- 
 plexing yet deeply interesting particulars. The symbols I 
 have used are either those of Tischendorf (to whose cheap 
 and useful edition I refer the reader), or else self-explanatory. 
 I cannot leave this part of the subject without earnestly 
 advising the younger student to acquire, at least in outline, a 
 knowledge of the history and details of sacred criticism, and 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xxv 
 
 I can recommend Him no better general instructor than 
 Dr Davidson, in the second volume of his excellent treatise 
 on this subject. 
 
 II. With regai-d to the notes, I would wish first to 
 remark that they neither are nor pretend to be original. I 
 have consulted all the best modem, and, as I believe, the best 
 ancient authorities, wherever they seemed likely to avail me 
 in the line of interpretation I had marked out to myself But 
 as I have endeavoured to confine myself principally to critical 
 and grammatical details, numerous authors of high position, 
 and merit in other provinces of interpretation have unavoid- 
 ably been, though not unconsulted, still not generally cited. 
 Hence, though I entertain a deep reverence for the exegetical 
 abilities of some of the Latin Fathers, I have never been able 
 to place that reliance on their scholarship which I thankfully 
 and admiringly recognize in the great Greek commentators. 
 Many of our popular English expositors I have been obliged 
 from the same reasons to pass over; for to quote an author 
 merely to find fault with him is a process with which I have 
 no sympathy. I have studied to make my citations in malam 
 partem on a fixed principle. In the first place I hope I have 
 always done it with that quick sense of my own weakness, 
 imperfection, and errors, that is the strongest incentive to 
 charitable judgments ; and with that gentleness which befits a 
 commentator on one whose affections were among the warmest 
 and deepest that ever dwelt in mortal breast. In the second 
 place I trust I have rarely done it except where the contrast 
 seemed more distinctly to show out what I conceived to be the 
 true interpretation ; where in fact the shadow was needed to 
 enhance the light. Thirdly I have sometimes felt that the 
 allegiance I owe to Divine Truth, and the profound reverencs 
 I entertain for the very letter of Scripture, have required me to 
 raise my voice, feeble as it is, against mischievous interpreta- 
 tions and rash criticism. The more pleasant duty of quoting 
 in bonam partem has also been regulated by a system ; first 
 and foremost of endeavouring to give to every man his due ; 
 secondly of supporting myself by the judgment and wisdom 
 of others. I have however in no case sought to construct 
 those catenae of names which it seems now the fashion of 
 commentators' to link together in assent or dissent; for when- 
 ever I have examined one in detail, I have invariably found 
 that the authors thus huddled together often introduced such 
 
 '" I regret to find tliat Professor adopted this method; in some cases, 
 Esidie, in his learned and laborious e.g. p. 15, his authorities occupy five 
 commentary on the Ephesians, has full lines of the commentary. 
 
xxvi PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 countervailing statements as made their collective opinion 
 anything but unanimous. This easy display of erudition— 
 and of error — cannot be too much reprobated. 
 
 The portions upon which I have most dwelt are the par- 
 ticles, the cases, the prepositions, and, as far as I have been 
 able, the compound verbs; but on this latter subject I have 
 keenly felt the want of help, and have abundantly regretted 
 that Winer never completed the work he projected. If m 
 the discussions on the particles I may have seemed wearisome 
 or hypercritical, let me crave the reader's indulgence, and re- 
 mind him of the excessive difficulties that have ever been felt 
 and acknowledged in the connexion of thought in St Paul's 
 Epistles. I hope no one will think my pains have here been 
 misplaced. That my notes have visibly overlaid my text will 
 I fear be urged against me. This I could have avoided by a 
 more crowded page, or by disuniting the text and the notes; 
 but I prefer bearing the charge to perplexing the reader's eye 
 with close typography, or distracting his attention by refer- 
 ences to an isolated text. The notes have been pared down 
 in some cases to the very verge of obscurity; but in so diffi- 
 cult an epistle, after all possible curtailing, they must stiU be 
 in disproportion to the text. 
 
 III. The last portion I have to notice is the Translation. 
 This it seemed desirable to append, as a brief but comprehen- 
 sive summary of the interpretations advanced in the notes. 
 The profound respect I entertain for our own noble version 
 would have prevented me, as it did Hammond, from attempt- 
 ing any performance of this nature, if I had not seen that a 
 few corrections made on a fixed principle would enable the 
 Authorized Version adequately to reflect the most advanced 
 state of modern scholarship. The Authorized Version has 
 this incalculable advantage, that it is a truly literal translation, 
 — the only form of translation that can properly and reverently 
 be adopted in the case of the Holy Scriptures. Of the two 
 other forms of translation, the idiomatic and the paraphrastic, 
 I fully agree with Mr Kennedy (Preface to Transl. of Demos- 
 thenes) in the opinion that the former is most suitable for the 
 general run of classical authors; while the latter may pos- 
 sibly be useful in some philosophical or political treatises, 
 where the matter, rather than the manner, is the subject of 
 study. But in the Holy Scriptures every peculiar expression, 
 even at the risk of losing an idiomatic turn, must be retained. 
 Many words, especially the prepositions, have a positive dog- 
 matical and theological significance, and to qualify them by 
 a popular turn, or dilute them by a paraphrase, is dangerous 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xxvH 
 
 in the extreme. It is here that the excellence of our Autho- 
 rized Version is so notably conspicuous ; while it is studiedly 
 close and literal, it also for the most part preserves the 
 idiom of our language in the most happy and successful way. 
 It has many of the merits of an idiomatic translation, and 
 none of the demerits of what are popularly called literal 
 translations, though they commonly only deserve the name 
 of un-English metaphrases. A paraphrastic translation, such 
 as that adopted by Messrs. Conybeare and Howson, I cannot 
 but regard as in many ways unfitted for Holy Scripture. I 
 have then adopted the Authorized Version, and have only 
 permitted myself to depart from it where it appeared to be 
 incorrect, inexact, insufficient, or obscure, whether from acci- 
 dent or (as is alleged) from design. The citations I have 
 appended from eight other versions will perhaps prove inter- 
 esting, and wiU show the general reader what a concordia 
 discors prevails among all the older English Versions', and 
 how closely and faithfully the contributors to the Authorized 
 Version adhered to their instructions to consult certain of the 
 older translations, and not to depart from the Standard Ver- 
 sion which had last preceded them, except on distinct neces- 
 sity. Thus the Authorized Version is the accumulation, 
 as well as the last and most perfect form, of the theologi- 
 cal learning of fully two hundred and thirty years. From 
 such a translation he must be a bold and confident man who 
 would depart far, without the greatest caution and circum- 
 spection. 
 
 IV. Finally, I feel myself bound to specify a few of the 
 commentators to whom I am more especially indebted. 
 
 Of the older writers I have paid the most unremitting 
 attention to Chrysostom and Theodoret : for the former espe- 
 cially, often as a scholar, always as an exegete, I entertain 
 the greatest respect and admiration. Of our older English 
 commentators Hammond has been of the greatest service to 
 me; his scholarship is generally speaking very accurate, and 
 his erudition profound. The short commentary of Bishop 
 Fell I have never considted without profit. Bengel's Gnomon 
 has of course never been out of my hands. Of later writers 
 I should wish to specify Dr Peile, from whose commentary I 
 have derived many valuable suggestions. I frequently differ 
 from him in the explanation of v6fw<; without the article ; but 
 I have always found him an accurate scholar, and especially 
 
 1 I have also consulted Alip. New- have derived from them no assistance 
 corae's, and all the later versions of whatever, 
 any celebrity, even the Unitarian, but 
 
xxviii PEEFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 useful for his well-selected citations from Calvin. To the 
 late lamented Professor Scholefield's Hints for a New Trans- 
 lation I have always attended. The translation of Conybeare 
 and Howson has been of some use ; but, as far as my experi- 
 ence goes, it is the least happily executed portion of their 
 valuable work. Dr Brown's Expository Discourses on the 
 Galatians is a book written in an excellent spirit, of great use 
 and value in an exegetical point of view, but not always to be 
 relied upon as a grammatical guide. I cannot pass over Dr 
 Bloomheld, though he has not been of so much use to me as 
 I could have wished. To the recent German commentators 
 I am under the greatest obligations, both in grammar and 
 exegesis, though not in theology. Meyer more as a gram- 
 marian, De Wette more as an exegete, command the highest 
 attention and respect; to the former especially, though a 
 little too Atticistic in his prejudices, my fullest acknowledg-' 
 ments are due. The commentaries of Winer and Schott are 
 both excellent; to the latter Meyer seems to have been 
 greatly indebted. Usteri has generally caught most happily 
 -the spirit of his author; his scholarship is not profound, but 
 his exegesis is very good. Ruckert, more voluminous and 
 more laborious, has always repaid the trouble of perusal. 
 The two works in the best theological spirit are those of 
 Olshausen and Windischmann : the latter, though a Romanist, 
 and by no means uninfluenced by decided prejudices, always 
 writes in a reverent spirit, and is commonly remarkable for 
 good sense, and not unfrequently for candour. Baumgarten- 
 Crusius I have found of very little value. Hilgenfeld is very 
 useful in historical questions, but has a bad tone in exe- 
 gesis, and follows Meyer too closely to be of much use as an 
 independent grammatical expositor. 
 
 These are not more than one-third of the expositors I 
 have consulted, but are those which I should wish to specify, 
 for mj'' own satisfaction, and the guidance of younger stu- 
 dents. 
 
 I have now only to commit this first part of my work, 
 with all its imperfections, faults, and errors, to the charitable 
 judgment of the reader. I have written it alone and unas- 
 sisted, with only a countiy clergyman's scanty supply of 
 books, in a neighbourhood remote from large Hbraries and 
 literary institutions; and though I have done my uttermost 
 to overcome these great disadvantages, I can myself see and 
 feel with deep regi-et how often I have failed. I commend 
 myself then not only to the kind judgment, but I will also 
 venture to add the kind assistance of my readers; for I shall 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xxix 
 
 receive and acknowledge with great thankfulness any recti- 
 fications of errors or any suggestions that may be addressed 
 to me. 
 
 I will conclude with earnest prayer to Almighty God in 
 the name of His ever-blessed Son, that He may so bless this 
 poor and feeble effort to disclose the outward significance, 
 the jots and the tittles of His word, that He may make it a 
 humble instrument of awakening in the hearts of others the 
 desire to look deeper into the inward meaning, to mark, 
 to read, and to understand, and with a lowly and reverent 
 spirit to ponder over the hidden mysteries, the deep warn- 
 ings, and the exhaustless consolations of the Book of Life. 
 
 To Him be all honour, all glory, and all praise. 
 
 Glaston, Uppiitgham, 
 September, 1854. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 THIS animated, argumentative, and highly characteristic Epi- 
 stle would appear to have been written by St Paul not very 
 long after his journey through Galatia and Phrygia (Acts xviii. 
 23), and as the Tay^eio^ (eh. i. 6) seems to suggest (but comp. notes, 
 and see contra, Conyb. and Hows. Si Paid, Vol. 11. p. 164, ed. 2), 
 towards the commencement of the lengthened abode at Ephesus 
 (Autumn 54 or 55 to Pentecost 57 or 58 ; comp. Acts xix. 10, 
 XX. 31, I Cor. xvi. 8), forming apparently the first of that series 
 of Epistles (Gal., i Cor., 2 Cor., Eom.) which intervenes between 
 the Epp. to the Thessalonians and the four Epp. of the first cap- 
 tivity -(001., Eph., PhUem., Phil.). It was addressed to the 
 churches of the province of Galatia (ch. i. 2), — a province of which 
 the inhabitants could not only boast a Gallic origin, but also 
 appear to have retained some of the peculiarities of the Gallic 
 character; see notes on ch. i. 6, iii. i. The Epistle was not im- 
 probably encyclical in its character (see Olshaus. on ch. i. 2, and 
 notes on ch. vi. 17), and was called forth by the somewhat rapid 
 lapse of the Galatians into the errors of Judaism, which were now 
 being disseminated by unprincipled and self-seeking teachers 
 (comp. ch. vi. 12, 13) with a dangerous and perhaps malignant 
 activity. Against these errors the Apostle had solemnly protested 
 already (ch. i. 9), but, as this Epistle shows, with at present so 
 little abiding efiect, that the Judaizing teachers in Galatia, pos- 
 sibly recruited with fresh emissaries from Jerusalem, were now not 
 only spreading dangerous error, but assailing the very Apostolic 
 
xxxii INTKODUCTION. 
 
 authority of him. who had founded these churches (comp. ch. iv. 13), 
 and who loved them so well (ch. iv. 19, 20). 
 
 In accordance with this the Epistle naturally divides itself into 
 two controversial portions, and a concluding portion which is more 
 directly hortatory and practical. The first portion (ch. i. ii.) the 
 Apostle devotes to a defence of his office, and especially to a proof 
 of his divine calling and of his independence of all human authority 
 (ch. i. II — ii. 10), nay, his very opposition to it in the person 
 of St Peter, when that Apostle had acted with inconsistency 
 (ch. ii. II — 21). In the second, or what may be called the 
 polemical portion (ch. iii. iv.), the Apostle, both by argument 
 (ch. iii.), appeal (ch. iv. 12 — 20), and illustration (ch. iv. i — 7, 
 21 — 30), establishes the truth of the fundamental positions that 
 justification is by faith, and not by the deeds of the law (ch. 
 iii. 5, 6), and that they alone who are of faith are the inheritors of 
 the promise, and the true children of Abraham; comp. notes on 
 ch. iii. 29. The third portion (ch. v. vi.) is devoted to hortatory 
 warning (ch. iv. 31 — v. 6), illustrations of what constitutes a real 
 fulfilment of the law (ch. v. 13 — 26), practical instructions (ch. vi. 
 I — 10), and a vivid recapitulation (ch. vi. 11 — 16). 
 
 The genuineness and authenticity are supported by distinct 
 external testimony (Irenseus, c. Har. iii. 7. 2, Tertnll. de Prmscr. 
 § 6: see Lardner, Credibility, Vol. 11. p. 163 sq.; Davidson, IrUro- 
 duetion, Vol. 11. p. 318 sq.), and, as we might infer from the 
 strikingly characteristic style of the Epistle, have never been 
 doubted by any reputable critic; comp. Meyer, Eirdeit. p. 8. 
 
nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 Apostolic address and 
 salutation, concluding 
 with a doxology. 
 
 n 
 
 AYAOS aTTocTToiXoi, ovK air av- I. 
 dpwvwv ovSe ^t' avOpanrov, aWa 
 
 I. diroffToXos] ' an Apostle,' in the 
 higher and more special meaning of 
 the word; and as such (particularly 
 when enhanced by the succeeding 
 clause) a forcible protest against the 
 Judaists, who probably refused to 
 apply it in this particular sense to any 
 out of the significant number of the 
 Twelve; comp. Hilgenf. Galaterbrief, 
 p. 107. It may be obseiTed (comp. 
 Maurice, Unity of N. T. p. 402) that 
 the question involved more than mere 
 personal slander (t^v yeyevriiih-qv 
 Sia^oXiv, Theod.) : by asserting the 
 pre-eminence of the Twelve over St 
 Paul they were practically denying 
 Christ's perpetual rule over His 
 clmrch. With regard to the 
 
 meaning of diroffToXos in St Paul's 
 Epp., it may be remarked that in a 
 few instances (e.g. 1 Cor. viii. 23, and 
 most probably Phil. ii. 25, see notes 
 in loc.) it appears to be used in its 
 simple etymological sense. In 2 Cor. 
 xi. 13, I Thess. ii. 6, the meaning 
 may be thought doubtful; but in 
 Kom. xvi. 7, o'iTwii dam Maimoi, h 
 Tois dTrooriXois (commonly cited in 
 this sense, Conyb. and Hows. St Paul, 
 Vol. 1. p. 463), the correct translation 
 appears certainly that of Fritzsche, 
 'quippe qui in Apostolorum coUegio 
 bene audiant:' comp. Winer, IIW£. 
 
 s.v. 'Apostel,' Vol. I. p. 6g, note 2. 
 The various applications of this word 
 in eccles. writers are noticed by 
 Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. Vol. i. p. 47s 
 sq. ; Hamm. on Bom. xvi. 7 : see also 
 note on Eph. iv. 11. 
 OVK dir* dvOpuirtov 0^8^ Sb dvBpc^irov] 
 'not from men nor by man;' 'not 
 from men as an liltimate, nor through 
 man as a mediate authority,'— the 
 prep, dn-6 here coiTectly denoting the 
 causa remotior (Winer, Gr, § 47. b, 
 p. 331 ; Bemhardy, Syntax, v. 12, p. 
 222), Sih the causa medians; see 
 Winer, § 50. 6, p. 372 ; Green, 6r. 
 p. 299. 'Ajri is thus not for iirb 
 (Brown in loc; comp. Riick., Olsh.), 
 as the use of &Trb for m6, especially 
 after passives, though found appa- 
 rently in some few instances in earlier 
 writers (Poppo, Tkucyd. I. 1 7, Vol. I. 
 p. 158), occasionally in later (Bem- 
 hardy, Synt. V. 12, p. 224), and fre- 
 quently in Byzantine Greek, does not 
 appear in St Paul's Epistles, nor in 
 any decisive instance in the N. T. ; 
 comp. Winer, Gr. § 47. b, p. 332 
 note. In aU cases the distinction 
 between the prepp. seems sufficiently 
 clear: ivb points to an action which 
 results from a more immediate and 
 active, i,irb to a less immediate and 
 more passive cause; comp. Herm. 
 
nP02 rAAATAS. 
 
 Sia 'Itja-ov Xpicrrov koi Oeov -warpoi tov iyeipavTOi 
 
 Soph. Elect. 65, and see Eom. xiii. j, 
 where St Paul's correct use of these 
 two prepp. raay be contrasted with 
 that of ChrysoBtom m loc. There are 
 indeed few points more characteristic 
 of the Apostle's style than his varied 
 but accurate use of prepp., esp. of 
 two or more in the same or in imme- 
 diately contiguous clauses (e.g. els... 
 irl, BiOm. iii. 22; ^|...Sii...eIs, xi. 
 36; ^iri...Sti...fr,Eph.iv.6; fr...5(&... 
 els, Col. i. 16) for the purpose of more 
 precise definition or limitation; comp. 
 Winer, Gr. I. v. p. 372. 
 81' dv6p(iirav] ' through man,' oix 
 ivBpiiTiji XPW^I''^''^ iirovpy^, Theod., 
 — not with any studied force in the 
 singular as pointing to any particular 
 individual (Mosheim, deSeb. ante Con- 
 stant, p. 70), nor yet for solemnity's 
 sake, as more exclusive (AU.), but 
 simply as thus forming a more natural 
 antithesis to the following Sii, 'ItjitoO 
 
 Kol ©60B iroTp6s] 'and God the 
 Father;' in noticeably close union 
 with 'Ijjff. Xp., both being under the 
 vinculum of the single preposition Sid, . . 
 comp. ver. 3. We might here not un- 
 naturally have expected Kal iirb Oeov 
 varpbs, as forming a more exact anti- 
 thesis to what precedes, and as also 
 obviating a ref. of iih to the causa 
 principalis (Gal. i. 15); comp. how- 
 ever I Cor. i. g; and see Winer, Gr. 
 § 47. i, p. 339; and the list in Fritz. 
 Rom. i. 5, Vol. I. p. 15, — but exclude 
 from it I Pet. ii. 13, 14. In the 
 present case the use of Sia seems 
 due pai'tly to a brevity of expression, 
 which is obviously both natural and 
 admissible where it is not necessary 
 to draw strict lines between agency, 
 origin, and medium (comp. Bom. xi. 
 36, and even Plato, Sympos. p. 186 E, 
 Sid ToO 6eo\) KVpepmrai), and partly to 
 
 an instinctive association of the two 
 Persons of the blessed Trinity in his 
 choice and calling as an Apostle. To 
 urge this as a direct evidence for the 
 6/ioo«iT(a of the Father and the Sim 
 (Chrys., Theod.) may perhaps be 
 rightly deemed precarious; yet still 
 there is something very noticeahle in 
 this use of a common preposition with 
 both the first and second Persons of 
 the Trinity by a writer so cumu- 
 lative, and yet for the most part so 
 exact, in his use of prepositions as 
 St Paul. 0€oS iraTp6s] 
 
 ' God the Father;' not in the ordinary 
 inclusive reference to all men (DeW., 
 Alf.), nor with more particular refer- 
 ence to Christiana, soil. ' our Father ' 
 (TJst. al.), but, as the associated clause 
 seems rather to suggest, with special 
 and exclusive reference to the preceding 
 subject, our Lord Jesus Christ: so, 
 
 perhaps too expressly, Syr. •— lOlQ^ | 
 
 [patrem ejus] ; comp. Pearson, Creed, 
 Art. I. Vol. I. p. 42 (ed. Burt.). 
 ToB «Y<CpavTOS K.T,X.] ' v;ho raised 
 Him from the dead.' The addition of 
 this designation has been very differ- 
 ently explained. While there may 
 probably be a remote reference to the 
 fact that it is upon the Resurrection 
 of Jesus Christ that our faith rests 
 (1 Cor. XV. 17 ; comp. Usteri, Paul. 
 Lehrbegr. 11. 1. 1, p. 97, gS), and 
 from it all gifts of grace derived 
 (Alf.), the context seems clearly to 
 suggest that the more immediate refer- 
 ence is to the fact that the Apostle's 
 call was received from Christ in His 
 exalted and glorified position (i Cor. 
 ix. I, I Cor. XV. 8) ; ' verax etiara 
 novissimus Apostolus qui per Jesum 
 Christum totum jam Deumpost resur- 
 rectionera ejus missus est,' August. 
 in loc. ; see Brown, on Galatians, p. 
 
I. 2, 3, 4- 3 
 
 avTov eK veKpwv, Ka\ oi <tvv e/uLoi -Travres aSe\if)oi raii 3 
 
 Qeou TTarpoi kuI Kvpiov ^/j.u>v 'Iija-oy Xpia-roO, rov a 
 
 12. The article with veKpCiv appears 
 to be regularly omitted in this and 
 similar phrases, except in Eph. v. 14, 
 and (with i,irb) Mattb. xiv. 2, xxviii. 
 7, al. ; see Winer, Ch: § 19, p. 112. 
 
 2. irdvTes] Emphatic: 'ceterosqni 
 secum erant omnes commotos adversus 
 eos ostendit,' Ps.-Ambr. St Paul 
 frequently adds to his own name that 
 of one or more of his companions, 
 e.ff. Sosthenes (i Cor. i. i), Timothy 
 (2 Cor. i. I, Phil. i. I, Col. i. i), Sil- 
 vanus and Timothy (i Thesa. 1. 1, 
 2 Thess. i. i) : here however, to add 
 weight to his admonitions, and to 
 show the unanimity (Chrys.) that was 
 felt on the subject of the Epistle, he 
 adopts the inclusive term irdvTes 
 aSe\(pol, defining it more closely by 
 oi aiv ifiol (PhU. iv. 22), — 'all the 
 brethren who are my present compa- 
 ni' ms in my travels and my preaching. ' 
 There is then no necessity for re- 
 stricting iSeXipol to ' official brethren ' 
 (Brown; comp. Beza), nor for extend- 
 ing oi <7iii> i/Mol to the whole Christian 
 community of the place from which 
 the Epistle was written (Brasm., 
 Jowett) : in this latter case we should 
 certainly have expected ' with whom 
 I am,' rather than ' who are with me ;' 
 gee Usteri in loc^ 
 
 Tats eKKXijo-fais rfjs TaX.] ' to ike 
 churdies ofGalatiaj' plural, and with 
 m. comprehensive reference {travTaxov 
 ya.p etpyf/iv rj vdcros, Theod., comp. 
 Chrys.), the epistle probably being an 
 encyclical letter addressed to the dif- 
 ferent churches (of Ancyra, Pessinus, 
 Tavium, and other places) throughout 
 the province. The omission of the 
 usual titles of honour or affection 
 seems undoubtedly in femfo'onaZ (Chrys.), 
 
 for in the only other Epistles where 
 the simple tjJ iKK\7)<rlq. is used (i Cor. 
 i. 2, 2 Cor. i. I, I Thess. i. i, 2 Thess. 
 i. i) there is in the two former pas- 
 sages the important and qualifying 
 addition rod Qeov, and in the two 
 latter iv Gey Tarpl k.t.\. 
 
 3. x'^pi'S ^V'^v Kttl cipi]vi^] ' Grace 
 to you and peace :' not merely a union 
 of two ordinary forms of Jewish salu- 
 tation (Fritz. Bom. i. 7, Vol. i. p. 23), 
 or of the Greek xalpew and the Hebrew 
 ^? '^'I't^, but a greeting of full spiri- 
 tual significance ; X"^/"') ^^ Olsh. ob- 
 serves, being the divine love manifest- 
 ing itself to man, elprivri the state that 
 results from a reception of it. The 
 Oiiental and Occidental forms of salu- 
 tation are thus blended and spiritualized 
 in the Christian greeting; see notes 
 on Eph. i. 2, and comp. Koch on i 
 Thess. p. 60. Kal KupCou 
 K.T.X.] 'and (frorii) our Lord Jesus 
 ChrisV Strictly speaking, Christ is 
 the mediating imparter of Grrace, God 
 the direct giver ; but just as in verse 
 I Sia was applied both to the Father 
 and the Son, so here, in this customary 
 salutation (see on Phil. i. 2), Airb is 
 applied both to the Son andthe Father. 
 Olshausen (onRom. i. 7) justly remarks 
 that nothing speaks more decisively 
 for the divinity of our Lord than 
 these juxtapositions with the Father 
 which pervade the whole language of 
 Scripture. 
 
 4. ToO SovTOs eauTov] ' who gave 
 Simself,' scil. to death; more fully 
 expressed in i Tim. ii. 6, i Sois iavriv 
 ivrlXvTpov comp. Tit. ii. 14. The 
 participial clause serves at the very 
 outset to specify the active principle 
 of the error of the Galatiana. The 
 
 B 2 
 
nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 SovTOS eavTov irepi roov dnapriu)v ^/jlwv oirwi e^eXijTat 
 ;5;uas eK tov evearooTOi alwvoi irovtjpov Kara to Oekrifxa 
 
 doctrine of the atODing death of Jeaua 
 Christ was easentially incompatiblewith 
 a recurrence to the law of Moses. 
 irepl T«v d|iopT. T)|j.av] 'for our siiis,' 
 soil, to atone for them, Bom. iii. 25, 
 Gal. iii. 13. The reading inrip (Rec.) 
 has the support of ES* ; mss. al. ; but 
 it may be due to that interchange of 
 trepl and iir^p fFritz. Earn. i. 8, Vol. I. 
 p. 28) of which the Manuscripts of the 
 N. T. present so many traces. Strictly 
 speaking vTrip in its ethical sense re- 
 tains some trace of its local meaning 
 'bending over to protect' {p.dxe<TBai 
 liirip TivoV Donalds. Gr. Or. § 480. 
 J), and thus points more immediately 
 to the action than to the object or 
 circumstance from which the action 
 is supposed to spring. The latter re- 
 lation is more correctly defined by 
 irepl, — e.g. ^o/ScicrSai ivepl rims' see 
 Winer, Gr. § 47. e, p. 334 ; Schaefer, 
 Demosth. Vol. I. p. 189, 190. Hepl 
 will thus be more naturally used with 
 the thing, 'sins,' — irip with the per- 
 son, ' sinners ;' and this, with a few 
 exceptions {e. g. 1 Cor. xv. 3, Heb. 
 v. 3), appears to be the usage of the 
 N.T. ; comp. i Pet. iii. 18, where 
 both prepp. occur. Still it must be 
 admitted that both in the N. T. and 
 even in classical Greek (Buttm. Ind. 
 ad Mid, p. 188) the distinction between 
 these two prepp. is often scarcely ap- 
 preciable; see notes on Eph. vi. 19, 
 and on Phil. i. 7. 
 
 oirois e|4Xi]TOi i)|iias] ' in order that he 
 might deliver «s ;' not ' exiraeret, ' 
 Beza, but 'eriperet,' Vulg.,— the verb 
 i^aipeiaOai (only here in St Paul's 
 Epp.) deriving from the context the 
 idea of rescuing (Sipafuv arj/iatnei toO 
 jivjapivov, Theod.-Mops.) as from dan- 
 ger, <£'C. comp. Acts xii. 11, x.\iii. 27, 
 
 and appy. xxvi. 17, and see Eisner, 
 Obs. Vol. II. p. 170. On the force <if 
 Sttws in the N. T., and its probable 
 distinction from Km, see notes on 2 
 TJiess. i. 12. 
 
 CK TOV evetTTCoTos K.T,X.] ' out of the 
 present evil world ; ' not exactly ix tCiv 
 irpd^euv tuv vovrjpSir', Chrys., still 
 less TOV vap6vT0s ^lov, Theod., but 
 simply ' the present evil state of 
 things;' see notes on Eph. 1. 21, where 
 the meaning of alwv is briefly discussed . 
 It is doubtful whether i heaTuis aliiv 
 is (a) simply equivalent to 6 vw aliSiv 
 (2 Tim. iv. 10, Tit. ii. 12, see notes), 
 and therefore in opposition to & aliiv 
 6 /iAXwi' (comp. Clem. Cor. n. 6, (anv 
 Si Jtos 4 aliiv Kal 6 /iiWuv S60 ixSpol), 
 or whether (S) it denotes in a more 
 restricted sense ' the commencing age,' 
 the age of faithlessness and the deve- 
 loping powers of Antichrist that had 
 already begun ; see Meyer in Zoc. The 
 participle {vetrTtSis will appy. admit 
 either meaning (comp. Rom. viii. 38, 
 I Cor. iii. 22, with 2 Thess. ii. 2 ; and 
 see exx. in Host u. Palm, Zex. a. v. 
 Vol. I. p. 929 ; Schweigh. Lex. Polyb. 
 8. V.) ; the order of the words how- 
 ever, — not ToO TTov. alQvos tov ivear,, 
 — and the general and undogmatical 
 character of the passage seem decided- 
 ly in favour of (a) : so distinctly Syr. 
 
 POI 1^^*^ [hoc sseculo], 'prse- 
 senti sseculo,' Vulg., Clarom., and sim. 
 the best of the remaining Vv. In 
 
 either case the influence of the article 
 appears to extend only to ivearOnos 
 alQvos, Tovripov forming an explanatory 
 apposition, in effect equivalent to a 
 tertiary predication (Donalds. Gr. § 
 489), ' an evil age as it is,' and point- 
 ing out either (a) more generally, 01 
 
■I- 4. 5. I 
 
 Tov Qeov KOI Trarpos ^fJ-wv, iS fj So^a ei'y tovj aiwvas 5 
 TO))/ alwvdiiv' afjLijv. 
 
 (b) more spedfioally, the corrupting 
 influences of the world and its works : 
 seeesp. Donaida. Journal of Class, and 
 Saer. Philol. No. 11. p. 223. The 
 reading tov alcSvos tov iveiTT.f adopted 
 by Zachm., has the support of ABN'; 
 39; Orig. (3), Did., al. tov 
 
 0£oC Kal irarpos ii|«5v] ' God and 
 our Father,' 'Dei et patris nostri,' 
 Vulg. ; — ^not 'God even our Father' 
 (Brown), Kal being only the simple 
 copula; see Middleton, Greek Art. p. 
 292, 367 (ed. Eose), and comp. notes 
 on I Thess. iii. 11. The august title 
 6 9eAs Kal irariip ocours several times 
 in the N. T., both atone (r Cor. xv. 
 24, Eph. V. 20, James i. 27), and with 
 a, dependent genitive, viz. (o) tov 
 Kvptov ■/jii.wv 'I. X., Rom. xv. 6, Eph. 
 i. 3, 2 Cor. i. 3, I Pet. i. 3 (of. 2 Cor. 
 xi. 31, Col. i. 3); and (6) iiixiSv only, 
 as here, Phil. iv. 20, r Thess. iii. 1 1 , 
 13, and 2 Thess. ii. 16 {Rec., Tisch.). 
 Whether in these latter formulse the 
 gen. depends on both, or only on the 
 latter of the two nouns, cannot be 
 positively decided. No grammatical 
 arguments based on the absence of the 
 article are here applicable, as war^p 
 is anarthrous according to rule (Middl. 
 C/r. Art. III. 4, § 2 ; Winer, Gr. § 19. 4, 
 p. 116); nor will the most careful 
 investigation of the separate passages 
 afford any sure grounds for deciding 
 on exegetical principles; contr. Fritz. 
 Som. Vol. III. p. 234. This however 
 may be said, that as the term irar^p 
 conveys necessarily a relative idea, 
 which in theological language admits 
 of many applications (see Suioer, 
 Thesaur. a. v. Vol. 11. p. 629 sq.), 
 while 6eis conveys only one aisolide 
 idea, it would not seem improbable 
 that the connexion of thought in the 
 
 mind of the inspired writer might 
 lead him in some passages to add a 
 defining gen. to Trar^p which he did 
 not intend necessarily to be referred 
 to ©eis. The Greek commentators, 
 whose opinion on such a point would 
 be of great value, do not appear to be 
 unanimous. Theod.-Mops. in loc. and 
 Theodoret on Rom. xvi. 6 refer the 
 gen. to the last nom. ; Chrys. on Eph. 
 i. 3 leaves it doubtful; see notes on 
 Eph. i. 3. 
 
 5. 1] Sd^a] ' the glory, ' soil, efi; not 
 IffTW see on Eph. i. 2. In this and 
 similar forms of doxology, — excepting 
 that of the angels in Luke ii. 14, and 
 of the multitude in Luke xix. 38,— 
 Sijo regularly takes the article when 
 used alone, e.g. Eom. xi. 36, xvi. 27, 
 Eph. iii. 21, Phil. iv. 20, 2 Tim. iv. 18, 
 Heb. xiii. 21, 2 Pet. iii. 18. When 
 joined with one or more substantives 
 it appears sometimes with the art. 
 (i Pet. iv. r t, Rev. i. 6, vil. 12), some- 
 times without it (Rom. ii. 10, i Tim. 
 i. 17, Jude 25). It is thus difficult 
 to determine whether we have here 
 (a) the 'rhetorical' form of the article 
 (Bernhardy, Synt. vi. 22, p. 315), 
 ' the glory which especially and alone 
 belongs to God ' (comp. Winer, Gr. 
 § 18. I, p. 97), or (6) whether 8ii|a 
 takes the article as an abstract noun 
 (Middl. Or. Art. v. i). On the whole, 
 (a) seems the most natural, and best 
 suited to the context. 
 Tois oioovas tcov oi<iv«v] ' the ages of 
 the ages,' 'ssecula sseculorum,' Vulg.; 
 
 less precisely Syr. . Vn\v SnXv. 
 
 [sseculam sjeculorum] : a semi- Hebrais- 
 tic expression for a duration of time 
 superlatively (infinitely) long; comp. 
 Winer, Gr. § 36. 2, p. 220. The 
 
nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 T/0e<70e airh rov /caXeVai/TO? vm5? iv "^^'/S^geYwe 
 
 to preach, let him be anathema. It is not man but God whom I strive to please. 
 
 same phrase occurs in Phil. iv. ■20, 
 I Tim. i. 17, 2 Tim. iv. 18, and fre- 
 quently in the Apocalypse. Occa- 
 sionally we meet with the singular 
 aliSv Tuv altivoiv (Eph. iii. ^i, comp. 
 Dan. vii. 18), and the perhaps more 
 distinctly Hebraistic aliSiv toD alQi/os, 
 Heb. i. 8 (quotation), Psalm oxi. 10, — 
 but with scarcely any appreciable dif- 
 ference of meaning ; see notes on Eph. 
 iii. 21. "Vorst {de ffebraUmis N.T. 
 p. 325) investigates both this and the 
 similar expression •yeveal yeveCov, but 
 his remarks must be received with 
 caution, as on the subject of Hebra- 
 isms he cannot now be considered a 
 safe guide. 
 
 6. @av|idt<i>] 'I wander;'' 'mani- 
 festatis beneficiis mirari se dicit quod 
 ab lUo potuerint separari,' Ps.- Je- 
 rome. The idea of wondering at 
 something blameworthy is frequently 
 implied in this word: see Kost u. 
 Palm, Lex. s. v., and compare Mark 
 vi. 6, John vii. 21, i Jchn iii. 13. 
 The further idea which Chrys. finds in 
 the address, od /j.6vov ivTpi7rojv...6fji.ov 
 5^ Kal deLKvvs o'iav l^et irepl airuv 
 iirbvoiav, Sri neyaKtiv Tivk Kal iinrov- 
 Saaixirrpi, — does not seem intended. 
 olJTCos Tax^Ms] 'so qvMkly.' After 
 what ? In our ignorance of the exact 
 time when the Galatians were con- 
 verted, as well as the circumstances 
 of their defection, this question cannot 
 be satisfactorily answered. Of the 
 proposed answers — (a) their conver- 
 sion, Mey., Alf. ; (6) the Apostle's last 
 visit, Beng., Flatt; or (c) the entry of 
 the false teachers, Chrys., Theoph. — 
 the first appears the least, and the 
 last the most probable, as the follow- 
 ing verse seems to show whom the 
 Apostle had in his thoughts. At any 
 
 rate the adverb seems decidedly to 
 refer rather to time than manner 
 (2 Thess. ii. 2, i Tim. v. 22, comp. 
 Conyb. and Hows, in loc), however 
 that time be defined. StUl all histori- 
 cal deductions from such a passage 
 fWieseler, Chronol. p. 285, Davids. 
 Introd. Vol. n. p. 297) must obviously 
 be debateable and precarious. Grotius 
 appositely cites, in illustration of the 
 levity of the Gallic character, Caesar, 
 Bell. Gall. iv. s, 'sunt (Galli) in 
 consiliis capiendis mobiles, et novis 
 plerumque rebus student;' comp. ib. 
 
 II. i, III. 10, 19 : see Eisner, Observ. 
 Sacr. Vol. II. p. 172. 
 ]i,(Tarli((r6f] ' ye are going over from, 
 falling away from:' present (oi5k elTre 
 fierideffde &\\a iieTaTldiffOe^ Chrys., — 
 the defection was stUl going on), and 
 middle, not passive, as Theod.-Mops. 
 {fiETayiffBe, (tts itrl d^xlxoiV comp. 
 Heb. vii. 12), Vulg., Clarom., al. 
 While in earlier writers fierarldefiaL is 
 used both with and without an accusa- 
 tive {yviiiirjv) in the sense of ' chang- 
 ing an opinion ' (see exx. in Eost u. 
 Palm, Lex. s. v.), it is as frequently 
 used in later writers in the sense ' de* 
 Bcisoo,' with prepp. els, irp6s, iirl, of 
 the party, <fcc. to whom — e. jr. Polyb. 
 
 III. 118. 8, neraTldeaSai irpis Tois 
 Ka/yxv^ovtovs — and ix, d7r6 (or a simple 
 gen., Diod. Sic. xvi. 31), of the party 
 ttc. from whom the defection has taken 
 place; so Appian, Bell. Mithr. 41, 
 dtrb 'AjOxeXdou Tpbs SiJXXai' ^erarWe- 
 affar comp. 2 Mace. vii. 24; and see 
 further exx. in Kypke, Obg. Vol. 11. 
 p. 273, and in Wetst. in loc. 
 
 Tov KoX^o-avTos iJ(ids] ' Sim who called 
 yon,'' soil. God the Father (Chrys., 
 Theod.), to whom the calling of 
 Christiana appears regularly ascribed 
 
I. 6, 7. ? 
 
 yapiTi ^piaTov eii exepov evayyiXiov, t> ovk ^(rriv J 
 
 in the Epistles (ver. 15, Rom. viii. 30, 
 ix. 24, I Cor. i. 9, vii. 15, 17, 
 ' Thess. ii. is, 2 Thess. ii. 14, 2 Tim. 
 i. 9, I Pet. i. 15, V. 10),— not 'Christ 
 who called you,' Syr., Jerome, al., 
 the correct theological distinction be- 
 ing i] niv K\ij<rls iari toS Jiarphs Tijs 
 Si Kkifdeiii's 7] alrla tov Tiou, Chrys. ; 
 comp. Rom. v. ij. Brown (p. 39) 
 excepts Rom. i. 6, but scarcely with 
 sufficient reason; see Fritz, and De 
 W. in loc, and comp. Reuss, Thiol. 
 Chrit. IV. 15, Vol. II. p. 144; Usteri, 
 Lehrh. 11. 2. 3, p. 269, 279 sq. The 
 passages cited by Alford on Rom. i. 6, 
 viz. John V. 25, i Tim. i. 12, are not 
 fuUy in point. kv X'^P'-''''' Xp.] 
 
 'ly the grace of Christ;' holy instru- 
 ment of the divine calling, the prep. 
 hi being here used in its instru- 
 mental sense (Eph. ii. 13, vi. 14, al.), 
 and marking not so much the element 
 in which, as the principle hy which 
 (immanent iustrmnentality, Jelf, Gr. 
 % 622. 3, comp. notes on Eph. ii. 13) 
 the calling was vouchsafed to man- 
 kind; see notes on i Thess. iv. 18, 
 and comp. Winer, Gr. § 48. a, p. 
 347. De Wette and Meyer both 
 adduce i Cor. vii. 15, h' ii dp'fivi) 
 KisXriKev i/i.ai 6 &e6s, but not per- 
 tinently, as both there and in the two 
 other passages in which KaXeiy is 
 joined with ^c, viz. Eph. iv. 4, i 
 Thess. iv. 7 (see notes in loc), the 
 prep, retains its simple and primary 
 force of 'permanence in,' and marks, 
 as it were, the element in which we 
 are called to move. In the present 
 case however the dogmaiical consi- 
 deration that the Grace of Christ, in 
 the sense in which it appears to be 
 here used by St Paul, denotes an 
 active and energizing influence rather 
 than a passive element, seems dis- 
 tinctly to suggest the instrumental 
 
 sense; comp. Rom. v. 15, and see 
 Meyer and Hilgenf. in loc. 
 The usual explanation, according to 
 which & is used 'in sensu prsegnanti' 
 for eh ('vocavit in gratiam,' Vulg., 
 Auth.), is more than doubtful, as 
 KoKiw implies no idea of motion 
 (comp. Winer, 6r. § jo. 4. a, p. 367), 
 while that of Wieseler [Chronol. p. 
 285, note), according to which iv 
 X'ip.^x^'P^" i'^^- "'• 19^1 is alike in- 
 consistent with the usage of iv, and 
 with the regular meaning of x^P^' 
 Xpia-ToS. irepov] 'another 
 
 sort of,' Fell. If we compare the very 
 similar passage 2 Cor. xi. 4, in which 
 fre/jos and AXKos occur in juxtaposi- 
 tion, and apparently in senses exactly 
 identical with those in the present 
 passage, it will not seem necessary to 
 lay any stress on ^repov as implying 
 either (a) 'bad,' 'perverted' (comp. 
 Plato, Phileh. p. 13 A, irepov 6vo/jt,a' 
 Find. Pyth. iii. 34 [60] Saliiav 'ire- 
 pos' see Rost u. Palm, Lex. s.v. Vol. 
 I. p. 1202; Wetat. on i Tim. v. 25), 
 or even (i) 'strange,' Scholef. Hints, 
 p. 88 (ed. 3), comp. Jude 7 ; — as both 
 here and in 2 Cor. I. c. Irepos appears 
 to refer only to distinction of Mnd, 
 SXKos of indimduality ; 'Srepos non 
 tantum alium sed diversum signifi- 
 cat,' Tittm. Synon. p. 155; comp. 
 Plato, Sympos. p. 186 B, IrepSp re xal 
 ivS/ioiov. It must be admitted how- 
 ever that this distinction is not always 
 kept up in the N.T. ; see Matth. xi. 
 3, I Cor. XV. 39. 
 
 7. 6 OVK 'itrnv dXXo, ei ^r\ k.t. X.] 
 ' which is NOT another, save that, &c. ' 
 The various interpretations of these 
 words turn mainly on the antecedent 
 assigned to o^ this may be (a) the 
 whole sentence Sri — eliayyiXiov, 'quod 
 quidem (soil, vos deficere a Christo) 
 non est aliud nisi,' Winer; (J) the 
 
3 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 ^\\o, ei fi^ Tivei eicriv ol Tapacraovrei vfias Kai OeXov- 
 
 8 Tey /JLeTacTTOe-^ai to evayyekiov toO XpicrTOv. aWa 
 
 Koi iav ^fieis rj ajyeXof e^ ovpavov evayyeXl^tirai vfuv 
 
 preceding eiayyi\iov, ' which Gospel 
 is, admite of being, no other,' De W. 
 (comp. Syr., Chrya., Theod.) and 
 appy. the majority of expositors; (c) 
 the preceding compound expression 
 irepov euay){Ku>v, Meyer, A If. Of 
 these (c) is clearly to be preferred, as 
 best preserving the natural and gram- 
 matical sequence of the words, and 
 the distinction between Srepos and 
 dXXos. To prevent the words irepov 
 tiayyiKiov being misconstrued into 
 the admission that there could really 
 be any other gospel than the one 
 preached to them, St Paul more fully 
 explains himself, using SXXos rather 
 than the ambiguous frepos, and throw- 
 ing the emphasis on ofe, 'which 
 (Srepov eiayyiXiov) is not another (a 
 second) Gospel, except— only in this 
 sense that — there are some who 
 trouble you,' i.e. the Judaists bring 
 you another gospel, but it is really no 
 Gospel at all; comp. Hamm. and 
 Meyer in loc. In a word, as Hilgeu- 
 feld correctly observes, the seeming 
 paradox lies in this fact, that eiayyi- 
 }iiov is understood after SXKo in its 
 strictest meaning, but expressed after 
 Irepov in one more lax. cl |iij] 
 
 'save that.' The gloss cl fj,ii = d.\\d 
 can be distinctly impugned even in 
 what seem the strongest cases, e.g. 
 Matth. xii. 4 (see Fritz, in loc.), 1 
 Cor. vii. 17 (see Meyer in loc): con- 
 sult Klotz, Devar. Tol. 11. p. 524; 
 Hartung, Partik. /iij, 3. 6, Vol. n. p. 
 1 20, compared with Dindorf in Steph. 
 Thes. Vol. III. p. 190. The first dis- 
 tinct evidences of this interchange 
 appear only in very late writers. 
 ol Tapdo-o-ovTEs {|j,ds] ' who an trou- 
 you;' 'qui vos conturbant,' 
 
 Vulg. The definite article might at 
 first sight seem inconsistent with the 
 indef. rwa' when thus used however 
 it serves to particularize, and in the 
 present case specifies the ru/is aa those 
 whose cha/racterialic was troubling the 
 Galatians, 'some who are your trou- 
 blers ; ' comp. Luke xviii. 9, raiks Tois 
 ireToiSbras' Col. ii. 8, iiij t(s i/tas 
 tarai i avKayuyuv. Winer (Gr. § 18. 
 3, p. 100) adduces some exx. from 
 classical Greek, and compares the 
 common expr. elffty ol 'KiyovreV see 
 also Bernhardy, Syni. vi. 23, p. 318. 
 We cannot therefore with Ruckert 
 definitely pronounce this to be an 
 instance of Asiatic Hellenism. The 
 article must of course be carried on to 
 6iKovTes' see Kiihner's valuable note 
 on Xen. Mem, i. i. 20. 
 t6 iiayy(Kiov toB Xpiirroil] It is 
 doubtful whether XpurroD is the gen. 
 subjecti, 'the Gospel preached by 
 Christ,' or the gen. objecti, 'the Gos- 
 pel of, or concerning, Christ.' Prom 
 the fuller expression in Kom. i. i, 3, 
 6^077^101' GeoC.Trepi tov viov airrov, 
 we may perhaps here decide on the 
 latter interpretation : see Winer, Gr. 
 % 30. I, p. 160. According to Meyer 
 (om Mark i. i), when the gen. aftsr 
 eiayyiK. is aurriplas, /3a<rtXe£a:, k. t. X. 
 it is gen. objecti; when 6eou gen. 
 subjecti; but when XpurroS gen. objecti 
 or siuhjecti, to be determined only by 
 the context. 
 
 8. Kal Wv] 'even if,' not how- 
 ever necessarily ' supposing a case 
 which has never occurred ' (Alf.), but, 
 as usual, con veying the idea of condi- 
 tion with the assumption of objective 
 possibility; see Herm. de PwrUc. dp, 
 '^- 7> P- 95> ^"<1 6^P- the very clear 
 
I. 8, 9. S 
 
 yap o evt]yye\iara/u.eda vfuv avaOefxa eaTW, wy irpoei- a 
 
 distinctions of Schmalfeld, Syvt. d. Gr. 
 Verb. § 93, 94. It may be further 
 observed that, as the order shows, koJ 
 belongs not to V«s or to the sen- 
 tence, but to iiv (etiam si), to which 
 it gives force and prominence; see 
 Herm. Yiger, No. 307; Hartung, 
 Partic. KcU, 3. 3, Vol. i. p. 141 ; and 
 notes on Phil. ii. 1 7. 
 i^|jLcts] ' we.' Though fi/ieis here seems 
 to refer mainly to St Paul, and is fre- 
 quently so used elsewhere, yet, as oi 
 ffiif ifiol IT. dSeX. may very reasonably 
 be here included (Mey.), it does not 
 seem desirable, with De W., Conyb., 
 and others, to limit the term specially 
 to the Apostle. The use of V"s. or 
 of the simple plural, must always de- 
 pend on the context; comp. notes on 
 I Theas. i. 2. irop' o] 
 
 'contrary to that which,' The mean- 
 ing of the prep, has been the subject 
 of considerable controversy; the Lu- 
 therans having urged the meaning 
 prcsterquam (Vulg. and appy. Chrys.), 
 the Bomanists that of contra (Theod., 
 aL). The latter meaning is perfectly 
 correct (opp. to Brown, p. 45 ; see 
 Donalds. Cfr. § 485, and exx. in Winer, 
 Gr. § 49. g, p. 360, esp. Xen. Mem. 
 I. I. 18, where irapi, rois vSfiovs and 
 Kari, T. r. are in antithesis), and is 
 appy. required by the context and 
 tenor of the argument. The Apostle 
 implies throughout the Epistle that 
 the Judaical gospel was in the strict 
 sense of the words a h-epoi/ eiayy., 
 and in its very essence opposed to the 
 true Gospel. livaBena] 
 
 'accursed.' The word, strictly con- 
 sidered, is nothing more than the 
 Hellenistic form of the Attic ivd6ri/i,a, 
 Moeris (cited by Lobeck, Phryn. p. 
 149), the original meaning of both 
 forms being t6 d^iepoj/ifroi' Geiy- Tlje- 
 odoret (m Bom. ix. 3. The prevailing 
 
 use however of ivdOe/jia in malam 
 partem, compared with the command 
 in Lev. xxvii. 28, seems (esp. in the 
 LXX and the N. T.) to have gra- 
 dually led to a distinction in meaning ; 
 dvdBrifia being used in the sense of 
 dona/rium (1 Mace. ix. 16, Luke xxi. 
 5, but of. var. lect.), iudSe/ia (Rem. 
 ix. 3, I Cor. xii. 3, xvi. 22) as 'ali- 
 quid divince irce sacratv/m;' Hesych. 
 &.v6.dep.a' iTTLKaTdparoSj dKotvdivrp-os... 
 dvdOiiiia' KStr/iij/ia. This distinction, 
 though very generally, is still not 
 universally observed : see Theod. and 
 esp. Chrys. on Mom. ix. 3, who, even 
 while he asserts two distinct mean- 
 ings, seems to regard the forms as 
 interchangeable. In the Eccles. 
 
 writers (see Snioer, Thesawr. Vol. i. 
 p. ■268, Bingham, xvi. ■2) AvdOefia, like 
 the Hebrew D^PI (see Winer, HWB. 
 Art. ' Bann '), was applied to excommu- 
 nication ; though even here, it may be 
 observed, accompanied sometimes with 
 distinct execration; see Bingham, z6. 
 2. 17. This milder sense has been 
 frequently maintained in the present 
 passage (Hammond in loc, Water- 
 land, Doct. of ike Trin. ch. 4, Vol. 
 III. p. 458), but is distinctly opposed 
 to the usage of the N. T. ; compare 
 iTTLKardpaTOS, ch. iii. 10 ; Kardpa, ch. 
 iii. 13. For further reff. see the good 
 note of Fritz. Eom. ix. 3, Vol. II. p. 
 
 253 sq. 
 
 9. irpoEipTfKa|j,€v] 'we heme said 
 before. ' To what does irpb here refer ? 
 Is it (a) solely to the preceding verse, 
 as Chrys., Theod., Jerome (comp. 
 Neander, Planting, Vol. I. p. ■214, 
 Bohn), or (b) to a declaration made at 
 the Apostle's last visit, as Syr. (appy.), 
 and recently, TJst., De W., Mey., 
 al. ? Grammatical considerations do 
 not contribute to a decision : for nei- 
 ther, on the one hand, can the use of 
 
10 
 
 nP02 TAAATAZ. 
 
 p^KUfiev, Kai apri iraKiv Xeyoo, el rti v/J.as evayyekl^e- 
 10 rat Trap o irapeXd^ere avaQe^a ecrTW. apri yap 
 
 the perfect rather than the aor. (which 
 ia used in oh. v. 21, i These, iv. 6) be 
 pressed in favour of (a), — etpriKa at 
 most only marking the continuing va- 
 lidity of what was said (comp. 2 Cor. 
 xii. 9, and Winer, Gr. § 40. 4, p. 243), 
 — nor, on the other hand, can the 
 reference to what has just been said 
 be urged as inconsistent with the 
 usage of Trp6 (Ust.), for see 2 Mace, 
 iii. 7, Tpoei,pi)ii,ivoip x/'W^'''^'' (where 
 the subject referred to is mentioned 
 no further back than the beginning of 
 the preceding verse), 3 Mace, vi, 35 ; 
 and compare 2 Cor. vii. 3 with 2 Cor. 
 vi. II. ConteiAiml reasons however, 
 viz. the insertion of S,pTi as marking 
 an antithesis to what was distinctly 
 put, and the apparent identity of 
 time marked by the two plural verbs 
 firiyytX,, wpoeip. (Alf.), seem so dis- 
 tinctly in favour of (b), that in this 
 case we do not hesitate to maintain 
 that Teference even in opposition to 
 the opinion of the Greek expositors ; 
 comp. I Cor. xiii. 2. This passage 
 has been pressed into the controversy 
 relative to the state of the Galatian 
 church at the Apostle's second visit; 
 see Davidson, Introd. Vol. 11. p. 305. 
 Kal A'pTi K.T.\.] ' so now ajain I say ;' 
 undoubtedly a consecutive sentence. 
 Kiickert and B.-Crus., by making it 
 part of the antecedent sentence, re- 
 tain the more Attic meaning of &pTi, 
 but suppose an intolerably harsh el- 
 lipsis before ei tis. 'Apri. is not used 
 in Attic Gi'eek for purely present 
 time — comp. Plato, Memo, p. 89 0, 
 where iv T(f mv is in opp. to in rep 
 &pTi — but is not uncommonly so used 
 in later Greek; see esp. Lobeuk, 
 Phryn. p. 18 sq. 
 £l! Tis K.T.X.] 'if any one preacheth to 
 
 you;' simply and purely conditional 
 {'el cum indio. nihil significat pneter 
 conditionem,' Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. 
 P' 4S5)> ''fj ^8 * matter of fact, 
 preaching is a course of action pur- 
 sued by any one,' be such an assump- 
 tion reasonable or the contrary; see 
 esp. Sohmalfeld, Syntax, § 91, p. 195. 
 This change from the more restricted 
 i(i,v with subj. in ver. 8 appears to be 
 intentional; comp. Acts v. 38, 39. 
 8tiU such distinctions must not be 
 overpressed, as there is abundant evi- 
 dence to show that not only in later, 
 but even sometimes in earlier writers, 
 they were not always carefully ob- 
 served; see Madvig, Gr. § 125. 1. It 
 is certainly noticeable that in Euclid 
 {e.g. Book I. Prop. 4) iiw with subj. 
 is nearly always used in mathematical 
 hypotheses, where there can be no 
 accessory idea, but where experience 
 must prove the truth or fallacy of the 
 supposition : see Winer, Gr. §41.2, 
 p. 260, note. This use of 
 
 eiayyM^op.ai with an accus. personce 
 is a &Tai \cy6pL. in St Paul's Epp., 
 but occurs elsewhere both in the N.T. 
 (Luke iii. 18, Acts viii. 25, 40, xiii. 
 32, xiv. 15, 21, xvi. 10, I Pet. i. 12), 
 and in later writers: comp. Winer, 
 Gr. § 32. i, p. 199, and Lobeck, 
 Phryn. p. 267 sq. 
 
 10. tfpxi 7dp] 'For now;' not 
 contrasting his present conduct and 
 former Pharisaism (Neander, Plant- 
 ing, Vol. i. p. 222 [Bohn]; Wieseler, 
 Chronol. p. 178), but emphatically 
 repeating the Uprt of the preceding 
 verse, and calling especial attention 
 to his present words; 'iVojo,— when 
 I am using such unhesitating lan- 
 guage.' The exact force of y&p seems 
 more open to question: it may be 
 
I. 10, II. 
 
 11 
 
 •KelQao 
 
 1 3f 
 
 ei eTt av 
 
 t} Tov Kjeov 
 avOpwTTOC^ rjpeo'KOV 
 
 V ^ijTW avdpanrois 
 XjOJCTToC SovXos 
 
 avOpanrovg 
 apetTKeiv ; 
 ovK av >]fiiv. 
 
 The Gospel I preach 
 is not of man; and I 
 will show this by stating my mode of life before my conversion. 
 
 II. Si] The external authorities for thia reading are AD^EKLN'K^ ; many 
 Vv. (jEth.-Pol. and others omit entirely) ; Chrya., Theod., al. ; Ambrst. {Bee, 
 
 Vvwpi^o) de vfjiiv, aSeXcbol, to evay- 1 1 
 
 plausibly taken as in abrupt and iron- 
 ical reference to the ohargea of the 
 Judaists; *well! am I now, <fcc.' (on 
 this idiomatic use of ydp, see esp. 
 Klotz, Devar. Vol. u. p. 245) but is 
 perhaps more naturally regarded as 
 argumentative, — not however so much 
 with reference to the seeming harah- 
 ness of his previous words (Mey., 
 Alf.) as to their unquestionable truth, 
 the best proof of which lay in bis 
 being one who was making God his 
 friend, and not men: see Olsh. and 
 Hilgenf. in he. ir(C9ai] ' am I 
 
 persuading!' (j] ■ m . giVn OOTI 
 
 [sum persuadens] Syr., 'suadeo,' Vulg., 
 Clarom. ; soil. ' am I making friends 
 off the slight modification of mean- 
 ing, viz. 'persuadendo mihi ooncilio,' 
 as suggested by the latter words of 
 the clause, being easily supplied from 
 the context; see Acts xii. 20, 2 Mace, 
 iv. 45, and comp. irelffai rbv Qebv 
 (with inf.), Joseph. Antiq. TV. 6. 5, 
 VI. 5. 6, vili. 10. 3. The usual com- 
 ment that ircWw is here used de 
 conatu (tJst., al.) is very questionable. 
 Of the passages cited in support of 
 this meaning, Acts xxviii. 23 cer- 
 tainly proves nothing, and jElian, Var. 
 Hist. II. 6 is not to the point, 'at- 
 tempt ' being implied not by the verb 
 but its tense. The same obs. aeema 
 applicable to Xen. Hell. TI. 5. 16; 
 Polyb. Hist. IV. 64. 2 ; cited in Steph. 
 Thes. a. v. ^ SitS k.t.\.] 
 
 'or am I seeking to please men;' not 
 merely a different (De W.), but a 
 
 more general and comprehensive 
 statement of the preceding clause. 
 The student will find a sound sermon 
 on this verse by Farindon, Serm. xxi. 
 Vol. II. p. 139 (ed. 1849). 
 tl ?Ti dvSp. if|pE(rKOv] ' if I were still 
 pleasing men.' It is not necessary 
 either to press the use of the imperf. 
 de conatu, or to modify the meaning 
 of &piaKa to 'studeo placere,' — a 
 sense which it never bears ; see Fritz. 
 Bom. XV. 2, Vol. III. p. 221, note. 
 The Apostle says, ' I am not pleasing 
 men ; and a clear proof is that I am, 
 Christ's servant, whose service is in- 
 compatible -with that of man.' The 
 emphasis thus rests on h'l (Mey., 
 Brown) which is not merely logical 
 (De Wette), but temporal with ref. to 
 the preceding S-prt. Bee. and Tisch. 
 (ed. 7) insert yhp after el, with D'E 
 KL ; Syr., and other Vv. ; Chrys., 
 Theod,, al., — but' with little plausi- 
 bility, as the authority for the omis- 
 sion is strong [ABD'FGS ; 5 mss. ; 
 Vulg., Clarom., Copt., Arm. ; Cyr. 
 (3), Dam.], and the probability of in- 
 terpolation to assist the argument is 
 by no means slight, 
 fd"!"] '^^^ form of the imperf., so 
 common in later writers, is found in 
 Xen. Cyr. vi. 1. 9, Lysias, Areop. p. 
 III. 17 (ed. Steph.), but is unequivo- 
 cally condemned by the Atticists. 
 Buttm. remarks that it is commonly 
 found in combination with S,v thia 
 however is doubtful; see Lobeck, 
 Phryn. p. 152. 
 
 II. rvMpCJd) 8^ vjitv] ' Now I cer- 
 
12 
 
 nP02 TAAATAX 
 
 yeXtov TO evayyeXiaOev vtt efxov 8ti ovk ea-riv Kara 
 13 avOpwirov ovSe yap iyw irapa avOpwirov irapeXa^ov 
 
 Giieah., Schok, Lachm., De W., Mey., Tisch. ed. 7). 'For yip, BD'FGX'; 
 
 17. al. ; Vulg., Clarom., Dam., Hier., Aug., al. (Tisch. ed. 1; commended by 
 Grieah.). The permutation of 3^ and ^ip ia so common that internal con- 
 siderations become here of some importance. The question is, does St Paul 
 here seem to desire to carry out further his previous remarks ? to eisplain ? or 
 to prove them? In the first case we could only have, as Kiick. observes, S^" 
 in the second, ylip or 8^ {Si retaining a, faint oppositive force, Klotz, Devar. 
 Vol. ir. p. 3) ; in the third y&p only. The context seems to be in favour of 
 the first hypothesis, and therefore of Si. 
 
 tify, make hnovm, to you;' commence- 
 ment of what may be termed the 
 apologetic portion of the epistle, ch. 
 i. II — ii. 21. The present formula, 
 as Usteri observes, is always used by 
 St Paul as the prelude of a more 
 deliberate and solemn avowal of his 
 opinion; oomp. i Cor. xv. i, 2 Cor. 
 viii. I, I Cor. xii. 3 {Sib yv.). M is 
 consequently here (see critical note) 
 what is termed /lerapaTwdv, Bekk. 
 Anecd. p. 958 (cited by Hartung, Vol. 
 I. p. 165), i.e. it indicates a transition 
 from what has been already said to 
 the fresh aspects of the subject which 
 are now introduced. For examples 
 of the very intelligible attraction rb 
 eiayy....STi, see Winer, Or. §66.5, 
 p. 551. OVK ?OTiv Kard 
 
 £v6p(i>irov] 'it is not after man,' i.e. 
 'is of no human strain:' 'Kari, com- 
 plectitur vim prepositionum dwb (?) 
 Bict et irapd,' Bengel. This remark, 
 if understood exegetioally rather than 
 grammatically, is perfectly correct. 
 KaT& &v0p. taken per se implies ' after 
 the fashion, after the manner, of 
 man' (Winer, Gr. §49. d, p. 358), but 
 in the present context amounts to the 
 more comprehensive declaration that 
 the eiayyiXiov was not &v6pibTnvov, 
 either in its essence or object; oix 
 inrb AyBpuvlvav aiyKenat \oyiap.uv, 
 Theod. : compare Plato, Phileb. p. 120, 
 tA 5' ipJbv Sebt,..oiK tan Kara, dvOpui- 
 
 irov where the true qualitative na- 
 ture of the expression is shown by 
 the further explanation &Wa iripa 
 Tov fieylcTTov (jib^ov. The different 
 shades of meaning under which this 
 formula appears in St Paul's Epp. 
 (ch. iii. 15, Rom. iii. 5, i Cor. iii. 3, 
 ix. 8, XV. 32) must be referred to the 
 context, not to the preposition ; see 
 Fritz. Bom. iii. 5, Vol. I. p. 159 sq. ; 
 and comp. Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. i. 
 
 p. 351- 
 
 12. o«S^ Yap K.T.X.] 'for neither 
 did 1 receive it;' proof of the pre- 
 ceding assertion. The true force of 
 oiSi has here been frequently mis- 
 understood ; but may be properly pre- 
 served, if we only observe (i) that 
 in all such cases as the present (comp. 
 John V. 22, viii. 42, Rem. viii. 7) the 
 particle must receive its exact expla- 
 nation from the context ('adsumptS 
 extrinsecus aliquS, sententi^,' Klotz, 
 Devar. Vol. n. p. 707) ; and (2) that 
 oiSi y&p in negative sentences stands 
 in strict parallelism to, and bears cor- 
 responding meanings with, xal y&p 
 in positive sentences; see Hartung, 
 Partik. oiSi, 2. B. 2, Vol. I. p. 211, 
 and comp. EUendt, Lex. Soph. s. v. 
 Vol. II. p. 21 sq. We may thus cor- 
 rectly translate, either (a) nam, ne ego 
 quidem, * even I who so naturally 
 might have been taught of men,' 
 Hilgenf., Winer in loc, and Or. 
 
I. 12. 
 
 13 
 
 avTO oure eSiSa-)(6»]v, aWa §i a7roKa\iJ\|/-ecoy ^Itjcrov 
 
 § 55- 6. P- 436; or (/S) neqv£ enim 
 ego, ' I as little aa the other Apostles' 
 (Olsh.) ; or perhaps a little more in- 
 clusively, '/ (distinctly emphatic) — as 
 little as any others, whether XpurroSl- 
 5aKToi or dvOpajwodiSaKTOL.* Of these 
 (|S) is to be preferred not only from 
 contextual but eren grammatical rea- 
 sons ; for (a), independently of seem- 
 ing too concessive, would also have 
 been most naturally expressed by o6Si 
 iyii ydp, or xal ykp ovb' iy<i (Ruck.). 
 This last objection Meyer considers 
 invalid on account of the normal 
 position of ydp, — ^but inexactly; for 
 though y&p generally occupies the 
 2nd place, yet when the ist and 2nd 
 words are closely united (which would 
 here be the case) it occupies the 3rd : 
 see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 251. 
 icapd. dvBpc^irov] 'from man:'' not 
 synonymous with dirb 6.v6p(jiirov, the 
 distinction between these prepositions 
 after verbs of receiving, <Scc. {iraph 
 more immediate, &Tb more remote 
 source) being appy. regularly main- 
 tained in St Paul's Epp. : corup. t Cor. 
 xi. 23, TraplKa^ov dir6 toO Kuplou' on 
 which Winer (de Verb. Gomp. Faso. 
 II. p. 7) rightly observes, ' non ttb/joi 
 ToO Kvplov, propterea quod non ipse 
 Christus prsesentem docuit ;' see Schulz, 
 Abendm. p. 218 sq. 
 oiJt€ eSiBdxB'HvJ 'nor was I tatight it/ 
 slightly different from the preceding 
 irapiKa^ov, the iSiZ. pointing more to 
 subjective appropriation, while Trap{\, 
 only marks objective reception (Win- 
 disohm.): so appy. Beng., 'alteram 
 (ira/)A.) fit sine labore, alteram cum 
 labore discendi.' On the sequence 
 oiSi-.-oilre, see Winer, Gr. § 55. 6, 
 p. 436, and esp. Hartong, Partik. ovre, 
 I. 9, Vol I. p. 201 sq., where this un- 
 usual but (in cases like the present) 
 defensible collocation is fully explain- 
 
 ed. In all such passages. Si refers to 
 the foregoing words or sentence, so 
 that offre is used as if oi or oi)k had 
 preceded; Si in negative sentences 
 having often much of the force and 
 functions which Kal has in a£Srmative 
 sentences : see especially Wex, Antig. 
 Vol. II. p. 157, and comp. Klotz, Devar, 
 Vol. II. p. 711. The reading, oiSi 
 
 (Rec. and even Lachm.) is support- 
 ed by AD^FGX; a few mss. ; Eus., 
 Chrys., al. ; but, as a likely repeti- 
 tion of the preceding oiS4, or a correc- 
 tion of a supposed solecism, is open to 
 doubt. 'Itjctou XpicTTOij] 'from 
 
 Jesus Christ/ gen. subjecti, forming 
 an antithesis to the preceding irapi, 
 &vffpi!)7rov Christ was the source and 
 author of it (Fell, Hamm.): comp. 
 2 Cor. xii. 1, and notes on i Thess. i. 
 6. In expressions similar to the pre- 
 sent (comp. etp^vTj Qeov, eimyy. tov 
 XpiffToB) it is only from the context 
 that the nature of the gen., whether 
 subjecti or dbjecti, can be properly 
 determined; see Winer, Gr. § 30. i, 
 p. 168, and comp. notes on ver. 7. 
 The peculiar revelation here alluded 
 to may be, as Aquinas supposes, one 
 vouchsafed to the Apostle soon after 
 his conversion, by which he was fitted 
 to become a preacher of the Gospel ; 
 comp. Eph. ill. 3, where however 
 iyvwplaBii {Lackm., Tisch.) is less deci- 
 sive than Bee. iyviipure. It is 
 a subject of continual discussion whe- 
 ther the teaching of St Paul was the 
 result of one single illumination or of 
 progressive development ; comp. Eeuss, 
 Theol. Ckret. IV. 4, Vol. 11. p. 42 sq.; 
 Thiersch, Apost. Age,Yo\. I. p. iiosq. 
 (Transl.). The most natural opinion 
 would certainly seem to be this ; that 
 as, on the one hand, we may rever- 
 ently presume that all the fundamental 
 truths of the Gospel would be fully 
 
14 
 
 EPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 13 Xpia-Tov. ^Kova-are yap rhv e/xijv avaa-rpotp^v m-ore 
 ev TOO 'lovSaccTfJiw, on icaQ' inrep^oX^v iSiwKOP rhv 
 
 14 eKKXrta-lav tov Qeov Kal eiropQovv avrnV koI irpoeKO- 
 VTOV ev Tw 'lovSaier/j.w inrep ttoWous avvt]\iKia)Tai ev rep 
 
 revealed to St Paul before he com- 
 menced preaching; so, on the other, 
 it might have been ordained that (in 
 accordance with the laws of our spiri- 
 tual nature) its deepest mysteries and 
 profoundest harmonies should be seen 
 and felt through the practical expe- 
 riences of his Apostolical labours. The 
 question is partially entertained by 
 Augustine, de Gesiis Pelag. ch. xiv. 
 (32), Vol. X. p. 339 sq. (ed. Migne, 
 Par. 1845). 
 
 13. i^Kovo-are Y"*?] ' ^or ye Jieard;' 
 historical proof, by an appeal to his 
 fonner well known [■!iKoi<r, emphatic) 
 zeal for Judaism, that it was no human 
 influence or human teaching that 
 could have changed such a charac- 
 ter ; oi jhp S,v, el /i^ Qe&s ijv 6 iKKO,- 
 XivTuv, oilrus &6pbav itrxov /neTOjSoX^i', 
 Chrys. Tijv ^(liiv dva<rTpo<j>'>iv 
 
 iroTt] 'my conversation in time past,^ 
 Auth. These words are taken 
 
 by most interpreters as simply equiva- 
 lent to T-^v TTOTe {irporipav) AvoffT. 
 This is not critically exact. As Dr 
 Donaldson has suggested, the position 
 of TriTe is due to the verb included in 
 ivaarpo^iiv as St Paul would have 
 said &ve(TTp€^6fnjv iron, he allows 
 himself to write t^v ipJ>)ii Avacrpoipi/iv 
 TTOTe. Meyer aptly cites Plato, Legg. 
 III. p. 685 D, ■^ T^s Tpo/as aKaais t& 
 Seirepov. kv t^ 'Iov8ai(r|i,u] 
 
 ')'» the Jews' religion,' i. e. 'Judaism;' 
 see 2 Maoc. ii. 21, xiv. 38, 4 Mace. iv. 
 26. On the specializing force of the 
 art. with abstract nouns, see Soheuer- 
 lein, Syntax, § 26. 2. c, p. 219. 
 liropSovv oiniv] 'was destroying it,' 'ex- 
 pugnabam,' Vulg., Clarom. ; see Acts 
 
 ix. 2 1, 3 TTopB-^ras & 'ZepovffdKini Tois 
 iiriKoKov/iifovs' and comp. jEsch. Sept. 
 176 (194). It is not necessary either 
 to modify the meaning of wopSew with 
 
 Syr. (AjOOI <2;-m eram vastaus), 
 
 Copt, (desolabam), and other Vv., or 
 to explain the imperf. as de conatu 
 {o'Piffai ivexeipef Chrys.) with the 
 Greekoommentators. AsMeyerjustly 
 observes, St Paul previous to his con- 
 version was actually engaged in the 
 work of destruction: he was not a 
 Yervrilster merely, or a Terst'orer, but 
 a ZerstSrer; comp. Actsxxii. 4, ISlio^a 
 &xpi Bavirov. The imperfects accu- 
 rately denote the course of the Apo- 
 stle's conduct, which commenced and 
 continued during the time of his Ju- 
 daism, but owing to his conversion 
 wos never carried out; contrast iblw^a, 
 Acts I. c, I Cor. XV. 9 ; and see Bern- 
 hardy, Synt. X. 3, p. 37'j sq., where 
 the three principal uses of the imperf. 
 (simultaneity, duration, and non-com- 
 pletion) are perspicuously stated, and' 
 comp. the more elaborate notice of 
 Schmalfeld, Synt. § 55, pp. 97 — iii. 
 
 14. (rvvi)XiKUJTas] ' contemporanes.' 
 '2,wrjK. is a ajrol \e7(S/i. in the N. T., 
 and is only found occasionally in a 
 few later writers, e.g. Diod. Sic. i. 53, 
 Dion. Halic. X. 49 ; see Wetst. in loc, 
 and the exx. collected by Dindorf 
 and Hase in Steph. Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 
 VII. p. 1378. The compound form 
 (compare itv/i/j.4toxos, Eph. iii. 6, v. 
 7; avvKoivwvbt, I Cor. ix. 23) is con- 
 demned by the Attioists ; Attic writers 
 using only the simple form ; see 
 Thom. Mag. p. 208 (ed. Bern.), 
 
I. 13, 14, 15. 
 
 15 
 
 yevei fxov, TrepicraoTepoos ^ijKwr^i vTrapywv twv irarpi- 
 
 Koov fiov TrapaSocrewv. 
 
 I wui conflrm this by "Ore ^e evSoKritrev o Qeo'y, o acbopl- i >; 
 
 a recital -of the places ' T r ^ 
 
 ?o'!intries*^°n''^teh"l <^«? '"^ ^'<^ KOlXlUi fllJTpOS fi-OV KOI 
 
 travelled. The churches of Judsea knew of me only by report. 
 
 15. 6 Qe6s] So ADEKLN ; mss. ; many Vv., but Syr.-Phil. with ast. ; Orig. 
 (i), Chrys. (i), Theod. (3), al. ; Iren. (i), Aug., al. {Sec, Griesb. marked with °°, 
 Scholz, Lachm. in brackets, Mey.). Tisch. omits these words with BFG; some 
 mss.; Boern., Vulg., Syr.; Orig. (2), Clirys. (/), Theod. (2), Iren. (i), Orig. 
 (interp.), Faust, ap. Aug., Ambrst., Hier., al. {De W., approved by Mill, 
 Prolegom. p. 47). The accidental omission however seems probable on para- 
 diplomatic considerations (see Pref. p. .\xii), 6 having immediately before, 
 and soon after it. 
 
 Herodian, p. 433 (ed. Koch.). 
 ir«pi<r<roT, JijXuiti^s virdpx.] ' heing 
 jrom the first mare exceedingly a 
 zealot or contender/ modal participial 
 clause serving to dffine more particu- 
 larly the peculiar nature of the ad-, 
 vance which St Paul made in Ju- 
 daism. The comparison {Trepiaff.) is 
 obviously with those just mentioned, 
 the TroXXoi (TwrjK. hi Ttj. yha /wv. 
 T<5v irarpiKoiv (lov irapaS6o'Euv] 'for 
 the traditions of my fathers;'' gen. 
 ohjecti after fijXwr^s, — object about 
 which the f^Xos was displayed ; comp. 
 Acts xxi. 20, xxii. 3, i Cor. xiv. 1 2, 
 Tit. ii. 14. The insertion of /iov 
 qualifies the more general term irarpi- 
 kSs, making it equivalent to the more 
 special irarpoTapiiSoTos, and thus cer- 
 tainly seeming here to limit the vapa- 
 S6ireis to the special ancestral tradi- 
 tions of the sect to which the Apostle 
 belonged (Meyer), i. e. to Pharisai- 
 cal traditions ; comp. Acts xxiii. 6, 
 iapiaaios vlbi iapiaalav and more 
 expressly Acts xxvi. 5, /tari t-!;:' 
 iKpi^eariTtiv a'lpeaiv r^s ifiieripas Bpri- 
 (TKelas ffijira #ap«rafos. 
 
 15. "On Sk eiSoK. 6 0.] ' But when 
 God was pleased / notice of the time 
 subsequent to his conversion, in which 
 
 the Apostle might have been thought 
 to have had conference with men, but 
 had not. On the meaning of ciSoK4a, 
 — here marking the free unconditioned 
 and gracious will of God, see notes on 
 I Thess. ii. 8, and on its four con- 
 structions in the N. T., notes on Col. 
 i. 19. Ik KoiXCas |JLi]rp6s 
 
 (101)] 'from my mother'' s womb,'' i. e. 
 'from the moment I was born,' — not 
 as Calv., ' nondum genitum,' Jer. i. 
 5 ; iK being temporal both here and in 
 Matth. xix. 12, Luke i. 15, Acts iii. 
 ■i, xiv. 8, and marking the point of 
 time from which the temporal series 
 is reckoned : see Winer, Or. § 47. b, 
 p. 328. 
 
 The verb dtpoptiras, as Jowett ob- 
 serves, has two meanings, the first 
 physical (^Eth.-Pol.), the second and 
 predominant one ethical and spiritual 
 (' segregavit,' Vulg., Clarom.); comp. 
 Eom. i. I. Kal KaX^o-as K.T.X.] 
 
 ' and called me by means of Sis 
 grace/ soil, at the Apostle's conver- 
 sion (Acts ix. 3 sq.), — not with any 
 reference to a calling undefined in 
 time, which depended on the counsels 
 of God, as Eiickert in loc: compare 
 Eom. viii. 30, where the temporal 
 connexion between wpodpure and iKd- 
 
16 
 
 nPOS TAAATAZ. 
 
 i6 KaXicras Sia rSjs yapiTOi avrov, aTroKa\v\lfai tov 
 vlov avrov ev e/JLOc tva evayyeXl^wjULat avTov ev 
 TOii edveaiv, evOewi ov irpocraveOe/iijv trapKi Kat 
 
 Xeire (on the force of the aorists see 
 Fritz, in loc.) is exactly similar to 
 that between i^oplxras and KaXiaas in 
 the present passage. The K\rins in 
 both oases has a distinct origin in 
 time ; airbv [SeJc] S0i; Koi wpb aliivwn 
 Trpoeyvuxhai Kol /lerdi, ravra kskXt]- 
 KhiM KaB' bv Kaipiv iSoKlficure, 
 Theod. ; comp. TJsteri, Zehrh. il. 2. 
 ■1, p. 269. Bid Tijs X''P* 
 
 ouToS] 'hy means of Sis grace:' 
 grace was the ' causa medians ' of the 
 Apostle's call; iravraxoO ttjs x^/^'^^s 
 eTvat ^ijcri tA irav Kal t^s <pC\ai>0piinTlas 
 airov t^s dipdrov, Chrys. The moving 
 cause of the call was the divine eiSo- 
 Kla, the mediating cause the boundless 
 grace of God, the instrum,ent the 
 heaven-sent voice: comp. Winer, Or. 
 
 § 47, P- 337- 
 
 16. diroKaXvi|/ai] 'to reveal;' de- 
 pendent on the preceding eidd/fqcrev, 
 not on the participles (Est.), — a con- 
 nexion that would involve the un- 
 exampled construction (in the N. T.) 
 eiS6K...iia eiayy,, and would impair 
 .the force of tva. iv l|jio£] 
 
 V ' viithin me ;' not ' per me,' Grot., 
 ' in my case,' Green, or ' coram me,' 
 Peile ; but simply ' in me,' Vulg., i. e. 
 ' in my soul ;' 'Kpurriv elxc iv iavr:} 
 \a\owTa, Chrys. It may be ad- 
 ' niitted that, owing partly to linguis- 
 tic (see ore 2 Thess. ii. 16) and partly 
 to dogmatical reasons (Winer, Gr, 
 § 47. i. obs., p. 322), there is some 
 di6Boulty in satisfactorily adjusting all 
 St Paul's varied uses of the prep, iv 
 still wherever the primary meaning 
 gives a sense which cannot be objected 
 to dogmatically or exegetioaUy we 
 are bound to abide by it. Here this 
 meaning is especially pertinent. Both 
 
 svj>}ectively by deep inward revela- 
 tions, as well as objectiveh/ by out- 
 ward manifestations, was the great 
 Apostle prepared for the work of the 
 ministry ; see Chrys. in loc. 
 On the arbitrary meanings assigned 
 to iv in the N. T., see Winer, Or, 
 § 48. a, p. 348. EiaryeXC- 
 
 £ci>)iai] Present: the action was still 
 going on. cvSlus] 
 
 ' straightway ;' the word standing pro- 
 minently forward, and implying that 
 he not only avoided conference with 
 men, but did so from the very first ; 
 otiK eTirev cLttXws oi irpoffavedifitjVf 
 &\\' eiS.ius oi T. Chrys. According 
 to the common explanation, eiBias 
 is to be connected in sense with 
 &T^\8ov, though in immediate struc- 
 ture with TrpoiraveOifirir ' Apostolus, — 
 quae fuit ejus alacritas, — interponit 
 negativam sententiam quae ipsi in 
 meutemvenit,' Winer; comp. Jowett 
 and Alf. It seems more correct to 
 say that eiSiois belongs to the whole 
 sentence from oi wpoaav. to 'Apa^Lav, 
 which, by means of the antithesis 
 between its component negative and 
 affirmative clauses, in fact expresses 
 one single thought; 'immediately I 
 avoided all conference and intercourse 
 with man ;' comp. Meyer in loc. 
 o-i irpoiravc64|jiT|v] 'I addressed no 
 communication to ;' not exactly ' non 
 acquievi,' Vulg., darom., nor quite 
 
 so much as ^ > N 11 |J [non revelavi] 
 
 Syr., but more simply, oiK iveKoivu- 
 adlirjv, Theod., ' I made no communi- 
 cation to, and held no counsel with,' 
 'non contuli,' Beza. The prep, jrpds 
 does not imply that the Apostle * did 
 not in addition to that confer' (comp. 
 
I. i6, 17. 
 
 17 
 
 aifiuTi, ovoe (xtt^XOov eis 'lepotroXv/xa ttooj Toiy ttoo 17 
 efiou aTTOCTToXou?, aWa airriXQov els ^Apa^iav, Koi 
 
 17. dT^XBoi/] So BDEFG; mss. (Zachm.). Tisch. ed. 7 reads Avrj\eoi> 
 with AKLN; mss.; Vulg., Clarom. {Rec), which not improbably may be a 
 correction. 
 
 Ust.), but, as ndt uncommonly in 
 composition, simply indicates direction 
 towards : compare irpoa-avaTlSardat 
 ToTs /idvTea-i (Diod. Sic, xvir. 116) 
 with irpoffowa^ipeiv to!s liavren {ib.), 
 in which latter verb the idea of di- 
 rection is made mo~re apparent; see 
 Fritz. Fritzsch. Opusc. p. 204. 
 o-apicl Kal aVjioTi] 'flesh and blood;' 
 a Hebrew circumlocution for man, — 
 generally with the accessory idea of 
 weakness or frailty; see Hammond 
 and Lightfoot on Matt. xvi. 17. The 
 expressioti Occurs four times in the 
 N. T., apparently under the following 
 modifications of meaning; (a) Man 
 in his mere Corporeal nature, i Cor. 
 XV. 50, Heb. ii. 14; (6) Man in his 
 weak iuteUectilal nature, contrasted 
 with God, Matt. xvi. 1 7 (contr. Mey.), 
 comp. Chrys. Vol. X. 675 E, edi 
 Bened. ; (c) Man in his feeble human 
 powers, contrasted with spiritual na- 
 tures and agencies, Eph. vi. 12. I'he 
 present passage seems to belong to 
 (b) ; the Apostle took not weak men 
 for his advisers or instructors, but 
 communed in stillness with God. 
 Chrys. In referring the words to the 
 Apostles seemed himself to feel the 
 application too limited, as he adds ei 
 di Kal Trepl IfdvTtav dvdpWTrojv tovt6 
 (pTiaip oiSi iifiets ivrepoOfiev. 
 
 17. 01)8^ airijXBov] 'nor did I go 
 away,' sell, from Damascus, — to which 
 place the mention of his conversion 
 naturally leads his thoughts. It does 
 not here seena necessary to press oi)5^ 
 in translatiofn ('nor yet did I, (fee' 
 Conyb.), as the context does not ap- 
 pear to be olimactio; see notes on 
 
 I Thess. ii. 3 (Transl,). In the present 
 case it has appy. only that {"osi-con- 
 junctive ftece (see notes on ver. 12) by 
 which it appends one negation to 
 another, — ' non apte oonnexa, Bed 
 potius fortuito concursu aocedentia,' 
 Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 707 ; see 
 notes on Eph. iv. 27, Winer, Gr. § SS. 
 6, p. 432, and esp. Franke, de Part. 
 Neg. II. 1, p. 6. aXXa] The 
 
 particle has here its usual force after a 
 negation, and implies such an oppo- 
 sition between the negative and affir- 
 mative clauses, that the first is as 
 it werfc obliterated and absorbed by 
 the second ; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. II. 
 p. II, Fritz. Mark, Excurs. 2, p. 773. 
 Schrader is thus perhaps justified in 
 pressing the opposition between 01) 
 irpoffavi and dXXci dTr^X^. as an evi- 
 dence that St Paul went into Arabia 
 ioT seclusion ; contr. Anger, Bat. Temp. 
 ch. IV. p. 123. In estimating however 
 the force of dXXA in negative sentences, 
 caution must always be used, as ou/c... 
 dXXcJ (not Si) is the regular sequence, 
 like 'nicht...sondern ' (not ' aber ') in 
 German; see Donalds. Cratyl. § 201. 
 els 'ApapCav] 'into AraMa;' possi- 
 bly the Arabian deseirt in the neigh- 
 bourhood of Damascus, 'Apa^la being 
 a term of somewhat vague and com- 
 prehensive appilioation ; see Conyb. 
 and Hows. St Paul, Vol. I. p. 105, 
 and for the various divisions of Arabia, 
 Forbiger, Alt. Geogr. § 102, Vol. II. 
 p. 728 sq. This brief but circum- 
 stantial recapitulation of St Paul's 
 early history is designed to show that 
 in the early period after his conver- 
 sion he was never in any place where 
 
 C 
 
18 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 1 8 "TToXiv vxetTToexfra eis Aa/iacrKov. evreira fAera ert] 
 Tjo/a av^XOov ejj 'lepoaoXvfia i<TTop>j(rai K.Jj(pav, Kai 
 
 he could have learned anything from 
 the other Apostles. A discuBBion 
 of the object (probably religious me- 
 ditation) and duration (probably a 
 large portion of three years) of this 
 abode in Arabia, — both, especially the 
 latter, greatly contested points, will 
 be found in Schrader, Paulus, Part I. 
 p. 54 Bq.; Wieseler, Chronol. p. 141 
 sq. ; Davidson, Inirod. Vol. 11. p. 7s, 
 80. Aa)ia<rK<Sv] 
 
 ' Damascus' This most ancient city 
 certainly existed as early as the days 
 of Abraham (Gen. xiv. 15, xv. 2), 
 and is supposed even at that remote 
 period to have had an independent 
 government (see L. Mtiller, Orig. 
 Eegn, Damasc, in Iken, Thesaur. Vol. 
 I. p. 72 1 sq. ). After being subdued 
 by David (2 Sam. viii. 5, 6) it re- 
 volted under Solomon (i Kings xi. 
 24), formed the seat of a very widely 
 extended government (comp. i Kings 
 XX. i), vras recovered by Jeroboam 
 the son of Joash (3 Kings xiv. 28), 
 united in alliance with the kingdom of 
 Israel, but was afterwards taken by 
 Tiglath Pileser (2 Kings xvi. 9). After 
 falling Buocessively under the Babylo- 
 nian, Persian, and Seleucid sway, 
 it passed at last under that of the 
 Bomans (b. 0. 64 ; see Diod. Sic. 
 XXXIX. 30), and at the time of the 
 Apostle formed a part of the depend- 
 ent kingdom of Aretaa (2 Cor. xi. 
 32). For further notices of the history 
 of this ancient city, see Winer, R WB. 
 Vol. I. p. 244 sq. ; Pauly, Real-Encycl. 
 Vol. 11. p. 847 sq.; Conyb. and How- 
 son, St Paul, Vol. I. p. 105. 
 
 18. iTi\ TpCo] 'three years;'' soil, 
 after his conversion, that being the 
 obvious and natural termirms a quo 
 to which all the dates in the narrative 
 are to be referred; see notes on oh. 
 
 ii. I. How much of this time was 
 spent in Damascus, and how much in 
 Arabia, is completely uncertain. The 
 only note of time in Acts ix. 23, 
 ^liipM Uaval, which appears to include 
 this stay in Arabia, has by recent 
 expositors been referred solely to the 
 time of preaching at Damascus,— 
 though appy. with less probability; 
 see Anger, Rat. Temp. p. 122; Wie- 
 seler, Chronol. p. 143. 
 loTopijo-oi] 'to visit, to become ac- 
 qiminted with;'' scarcely so little as 
 'videre,' Vulg., Syr., Copt., al., but 
 more in the sense of ' coram cogno- 
 scere,' — to visit and make a personal 
 acquaintance with. As the meaning 
 of this verb has been somewhat con- 
 tested, we may remark that it is 
 used by later writers with reference 
 to (a) places, things, — in the sense of 
 'visiting,' 'making a journey to see;' 
 Plutarch, Thes. 30, Pomp. 40 ; Polyb. 
 Hist. III. 48. 12; compare Chrys. 
 oTrep ol rds fieydXas •jr6\eLi Kal \afivpAs 
 KaraiiavBavovrei Xiyovaiv (J) persons, 
 —in the sense of 'seeing,' 'making 
 the acquaintance of;' Joseph. Antiq. 
 VIII. 2. 5, IcTTopijffai. 'E\ea<rapov Bell. 
 J'ud.Vi.I.8,oriyi^ io-ropiicra' somewhat 
 curiously, in reference to the pillar of 
 salt into which Lot's wife was changed, 
 Antiq, I. 22, t(rr6/)i;/ca 5i ain-fiv see 
 also Clem. Horn. vili. 24 (p. 196, ed. 
 Dressel), larop^aai rois ttjs Oepairelas 
 iirirvyxdvonTas' ib. I. 9, p. 32, xix. 6, 
 p. 376 ; and exx. collected by Hilgenf. 
 Gal. p. 122, note. There ib thus no 
 lexical necessity for pressing the pri- 
 mary meaning (Hesych. Icropet' ipwr^) 
 advocated by Bagge in loo. The 
 
 reading n^poK {Rec), instead of K7;0ai< 
 [ABXi; 3 mas.; Syr., Copt., ^th. 
 (both), Syr.-Phil. in marg., al.], is 
 supported by good external authority 
 
I. 1 8, 19. 
 
 19 
 
 ewefieiva irpos avrbv ^/J.epas SeKavivTe' erepov ^e 19 
 Titiv avoa-ToXtev ovk eiSov ei /itj 'Icmcw/Sov tov aSe\- 
 
 [DEFGKLN^; msa.; Vulg., Clarom., 
 al. ; many Ff.], but is rightly rejected 
 by moat modern editors as an ex- 
 planatory gloss. en-^ficiva 
 irpis avTov] '/ tarried with him;' 
 comp. oh. ii. 5, Siaiielvq wpos i/ias' 
 Matt. ixvi. 55 {LsKhm.), Tpdi iitas 
 ^KaSe^d/iriV i Cm'. xvi. 6, irpbs i/ms Si 
 Tvxi" vapafierS)' ver. 7, iiriiieti>ai %pis 
 ii/ias' al. : usually with persons ; 'asepe 
 nostri seriptores, ut ipsorum Grsecorum 
 poetae passim, jrp&s cum accus., ad- 
 jecto verbo quietis, sic oollocaut, nt 
 non sit nisi optu^, i. q. irapd cum da- 
 tivo,' Fritz. 01s Mark, p. 202. We 
 may compare vrith this the legal 
 forms, irphs dLaiTijrijv Xaxeti', Demosth, 
 p. 602. §36; Tas SIkhs elvai Trpbs Toiis 
 Apxavras, ib. 1074. § 95; dsc. where 
 the original notion of 'going to,' <fcc. 
 has passed into that of mere direction. 
 The iwl in iTi/nsiva is not per se 
 'intensive' (AM. on Col. i. 23), but 
 appy. denotes rest at a place; see 
 Eoat u. Palm, Zex. s. v. iwl, G. 3, 
 Vol. I. p. 1045. The verb itself has 
 two constructions in the N. T., — with 
 a simple dative (Eom. vi. 1, xi. 22, 23, 
 Col. i. 23, I Tim. iv. 16); and with 
 prepp. ivl (Acts xxviii. 14), irpds 
 (here and i Cor. xvi. 7), iy (PhiL 
 i. 24); see notes on Col. i 23, and 
 Winer, Vert. Comp. II. p. 11. 
 tj|i^pas 8eKaTr«VT€] The reason for 
 this shortatess of St Paul's stay is 
 mentioned in Acts ix. 29. The Apostle 
 specifies the exact time of his stay 
 at Jerusalem, to show convincingly 
 how veiy slight had been his oppor- 
 tunities of receiving instruction irom 
 St Peter or any one else there. 
 
 19. el (ii) 'loKuPov] 'save James,'' 
 i.e. no other AvbaToXov save him. 
 It may fairly be said that every prin- 
 ciple of grammatical perspicuity re- 
 
 quires that after these words not 
 merely etSov, but eXSov rbv 6,ir6aTo\ov 
 be supplied; comp. i Gor. i. 14, ovSiva 
 ifiwu ipdrrura el fjii] Kplffirov xal Faioc. 
 This is distinctly admitted by Mey., 
 HUgenf., and the best recent com- 
 mentators, even though they differ 
 in their deductions: so very clearly 
 Chrys, St James then was an iwi- 
 CToXos (whatever be the meaning as- 
 signed to the word), — a fact somewhat 
 confirmed by the use of diroffriXous in 
 Acts ix. 27. The additional title 4 
 dSektpds TOV Kvpiov (ri (re/ii'6\6yTjfia^ 
 as Chrys. terms it) was probably 
 added (Ust.) to distinguish this James 
 from the son of Zebedee, who was 
 then living. Whether it follows from 
 this passage that Jacobus Prater and 
 Jacobus Alphcei are identical (ly no 
 means such a fiction as Meyer some- 
 what hastily terms it), and that James 
 was thus one of the Twelve, is a 
 question which falls without the scope 
 of this commentary. This considera- 
 tion only may be suggested; whether 
 in a passage so circumstantial as the 
 present, where St Paul's whole object 
 is to prove that he was no emissary 
 from the Apostles (comp. ver. 17), the 
 use of &Se\tj>bs in its less proper sense 
 (¥^vplov i,ve\j/i6s, Theod.) is not more 
 plausible than the similar use of &t6- 
 (TToXos. The most weighty counter- 
 argument is derived from John vii. 5, 
 oiSk ydp ol ddeXtpol airoO iTrlffrevov ds 
 airbv but it deserves careful con- 
 sideration whether irlarevov really 
 means more than a proper, intelligent, 
 and rightful belief; see even De Wette 
 on John I. c, and comp. John vi. 64, 
 where oi Tnarcieiv is predicated of 
 some of the /uidijTal, and where ver. 
 67 implies some doubt even of ol Sii- 
 SeKO. See also Life of our Lord, 
 
 C2 
 
20 
 
 nPOS rAAATAS. 
 
 20 (pov rod Kvplov. a Se ypdcpa) vfxiv, iSov 
 
 a I TOW Geo? on ov y^evSofiai. eveira fiXQov 
 
 22 Kkl/jiaTa rns lEvpta^ koi t?? KiXiKias. rjMv ^e ayvoov- 
 
 evwwiov 
 
 p. 97, note. The student vho de- 
 sires to examine this dlfiBoult question 
 may profitably consult Mill, on the 
 Brethren of our Lord; Schneoken- 
 burger, on St James, p. 144 sq.; 
 Arnaud, Recherches mr VEpitre de 
 Jude, and the review of it by Dietlein 
 in Keuter, Repert. (Aug. 185 1); Ne- 
 ander. Planting, Vol. I. p. 351, note 
 (Bohn) ; Blom's Disputation (in Vol- 
 beding, Thesaw. Comment. Vol. I.); 
 Oedner, Mnleitung, Vol. I. p. 571; 
 Wieseler, Stud. u. Erit. (Parti. 1842); 
 and Hilgenf. Galaterbr. p. 219. The 
 most recent monographs are those by 
 Schaff, Berlin, 1842; and Goy, Mont. 
 1845. 
 
 20. & S^ Ypa<{>ii> K.T.X.] 'But as 
 to what I write to you;' not paren- 
 thetical, but a strong and reiterated 
 assurance of the little he had received 
 from the Apostles, S Si ypd(j>a i/uv 
 being an emphatic anacoluthon : comp. 
 Wannowski, Constr. Abs. p. 54 sq., 
 where this and similar constructions 
 are fully discussed. 8n ov 
 
 t|/Ev8o|i.ai] 'I declare that I lie not;' 
 strong confirmatory asseveration of 
 the truth,— not of ver. 12 sq. (Winer), 
 but of ver. 17, 18. In passages 
 marked with this sort of abruptness 
 and pathos (see Lticke on i Joh. iii. 20, 
 p. 245, ed. 2) a verb consonant with 
 the context is commonly to be supplied 
 before 8ti, comp. Acts xiv. 22. Ac- 
 cordingly in the present case, ypd<f>ia 
 (Mey.), X^vw (De W.), iarl (EUck.), 
 iianiiu (TJst.), have been proposed as 
 Buppletory ; the first three however 
 are obviously too weak, the last too 
 strong, — iviiiriov tov 6eoO not being 
 any more than n^^ni *JD7, a formal 
 oath (Olsh.). If any definite word 
 
 was in the Apostle's thoughts, it was 
 perhaps 5ia/xo/)Ti)/)Oynai (Acts x. 42, 
 with Sti), especially as in three out of 
 the five places in St Paul's Epp. in 
 which iyiliT. TOV GeoO occurs in a simi- 
 lar sort of connexion to the present 
 this verb is found joined with it ; see 
 I Tim. V. 21, " Tim. ii. 14 {ivibir. 
 TOV Ku/).), iv. I. On this use of Sti in 
 asseverations, see Fritz, on Rom. ix. 2, 
 Vol. n. p. 242. 
 
 21. TO KXCfiara] 'the regions;' 
 'partes,' Vulg. ; a word only used in 
 the N. T. by St Paul, here, Eom. xv. 
 23, and 2 Cor. xi. 10. The primary 
 meaning, as derivation indicates, is 
 'inclinatio' or ' declivitas,' e.g. kKI- 
 fiara dpwif, lEustath. p. 1498. 47 
 (comp. Polyb. Hist. vn. 6. i), thence 
 with ref. to the inclination of the 
 heavens to the poles, 'a tract of the 
 sky,' KXc/ia ovpopov, Herodian, xi. 8, 
 and lastly, — its most usual meaning, — 
 a tract of the earth, whether of 
 greater (comp. Athen. xrt. p. 523 e) 
 or, as in the present case, of more 
 limited extent : comp. Polyb. Hist. v. 
 44. 6, X. J. 3. On its accentuation 
 (usually k\1/m, but more correctly 
 (cXi/xa) see Lobeck, Paralip. p. 418. 
 The journey here mentioned is appy. 
 identical with that briefly noticed in 
 Acts ix. 30 ; see Conyb. and Hows. 
 St Paul, Vol. I. p. 115. 
 •riis SupCas] Not the lower part of Sy- 
 ria, called Phoenioe (Winer, Ust., al.), 
 bu t ' Syria proper ' (^ fivo; S upia, Strabo), 
 as St Paul's object is to show the dis- 
 tance he was from any quarter where 
 he could have received instruction 
 from the Apostles ; see Meyer in loc. 
 In Acts xxi. 3 "Sivpla is used merely 
 in a general way to denote the Koman 
 
I. 20 — 23. 
 
 21 
 
 ev XptcTTw, ixovov Se aKOuovres ^trav on 6 SiWKWu 23 
 
 province bearing that name : on its 
 divisions, see Forbiger, Handh. Geogr. 
 Vol. II. p. 640. TTJs KiXiKfas] 
 
 Occasionally mentioned in combina- 
 tion with Svpia (Acts xv. 23, 41), 
 'from their geographical affinity' 
 (Alf.), and as serving to define what 
 portion of the larger province is 
 especially alluded to. For a general 
 notice of this province, see Strabo, 
 Geogr. xiv. 5, p. 668 sq. ; Mannert, 
 Geogr. vi. 1,, p. 33 sq. ; Forbiger, Alt. 
 Geogr. § 67, Vol. n. p. 271 sq. 
 
 22. T^ -irpoo-cuiru] *m respect of 
 personal appearance,' sciL ' by face ; 
 ouS^ &ir6 6\p€ias yvibpifios ijv oiJrots, 
 Chrys. The general limiting nature 
 of the dative (Scheuerl. Synt. § 20, 
 Donalds. Gr. % 458) may here be fully 
 recognised : the Apostle was not un- 
 known to the Churches in every sense, 
 but only in regard to his outward ap- 
 pearance. This particular dative com- 
 monly called the dative ' of reference,' 
 must be carefully distinguished both 
 from the instrumental and the modal 
 dat. (i Cor. xi. 5), and may be best 
 considered as a local dative ethically 
 used. Here, for instance, the Apo- 
 stle's appearance was not that by which, 
 but as it were the place in which, 
 their ignorance was evinced : see esp. 
 Scheuerl. Synt. § 22. a, p. 179; and 
 comp. Winer, Gr. § 31. 6, p. 193 ; 
 Bemhardy, Synt. ni. 8, p. 84. 
 TTJs 'louSaCas] The Church of Jeru- 
 salem is to be excepted, as there the 
 Apostle was dffTopev6/iaios Kal iKvo- 
 pevb/ievoi, ■irappri<Tiafb/J,evos iv Tif ivb- 
 nari. Toi; 'Kvplov, Acts ix. 28. This 
 however was not always the limit of 
 the Apostle's preaching in Judsa : 
 see Acts xxvi. 20. 
 
 Tats hi Xpio-T^] Not merely a peri- 
 phrasis for the adj., 'the Christian 
 
 churches,' but 'the churches which a/re 
 in Christ;' i.e. which are incorporated 
 with Him who is the Head : comp. 
 Eph. i. 22, 23. 
 
 23. aKoiiovTes TJ"''"'] '^^sy were 
 hearing;' soil, the members of these 
 Churches ; see Winer, Gr. § 67. i, p. 
 655. This periphrasis, which proba- 
 bly owes its prevalence in the N. T. 
 to the similar formula in Aramaic 
 
 (OOOl ■ I S V) ■ ), serves to express 
 
 the idea of duration more distinctly 
 than the simple tense ; see Winer, Or. 
 § 45- 5) P- 311- 1° the LXX it seems 
 principally limited to those cases in 
 which the participle is used in the 
 original ; see Thiersch, de Pent, m. 1 1, 
 p. 113. Examples are found in Attic 
 Greek (see Jelf, Gr. § 375. 4), but 
 commonly under the limitation that 
 the participle expresses some property 
 or quality inherent in the subject ; see 
 Stallbaum, Plato, Rep. VI. p. 492 A. 
 oTi 6 SiuKuv, K.T.X.] ' our former per- 
 secutor;' the participle being here by 
 means of the art. turned into a spe- 
 cies of subst., and losing all temporal 
 force ; see the exx. collected by Winer, 
 Clr. § 45. 7, p. 316, and comp. the very 
 bold form rbv iauTTjs ^ovra, Plato, 
 Phmdr. p. 244 B, cited by Bernhardy, 
 Synt. VI. 22. obs. p. 316. "Otj 
 
 is here not the 'Sn recitativum' 
 (Schott), — a use of the particle not 
 found in St Paul's Epp. except in 
 citations from the 0. T. (Mey.), — but 
 preserves its usual relatival force, the 
 ' oratio indirecta ' which it introduces 
 passing afterwards into the 'oratio 
 directa ' in the pronoun. This latter 
 assumption Mey. deems unnecessary, 
 as St Paul, being now a Christian, 
 might call himself ' our former perse- 
 cutor.' This however seems forced 
 
22 
 
 EPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 ^fMas iroTe vvv evayyeXi^erai rrjv irterrtv tjv irore eirop- 
 34 Bei' KoX eSo^aCpv ev e/xoi top Oeov, 
 II. 'ETretra Sia SeKaTeara-dpcDV 
 
 eroov 
 
 When I went up to 
 Jerusalem, I commu- 
 nicated my Gospel 
 both in public and private: I resisted the false 
 brethren, and was accredited by the Apostles, 
 
 and artificial. nlv moTiv] 
 
 ' tlie faith,' ohjeotively represented as 
 a rule of life (De W.) ; oomp. oh. iii. 
 43,1 Tim. i. ig, iv. i, al. In the Eccles. 
 writers Trfo-Tis is frequently used in the 
 more distinctly objective sense, 'the 
 Christian doctrine,' 'dootrina Jidem, 
 postulans ' {e.g. Ignat. Epk. § 16, id.11 
 irlanv 9eoC hi xaxy SiSa<TKaXl(f <j>Bdp-Q' 
 Ooncil. Laod, can. 46, wlffTiv iicfiavdd' 
 vuv see Suicer, Thes. s. v. irlans; 2. a,}, 
 but it seems very doubtful whether 
 this sense ever occurs in the N. T. In 
 Acts vi. 7, iroKoieiv rp wIittu seems 
 certainly very similar to iwaKoiav t^ 
 eiay^Mif in Rom. x. 16 (see Fritz. 
 Vol. I. 17), but even there 'the faith,' 
 as the inward and outward rule of life 
 (see Meyer in loc), yields a very satis- 
 factory meaning. On the various uses 
 of tt/o-tis, see Usteri, Lehrh. 11. i. 2, 
 p. 91 sq. 
 
 44. iv if.oC\ 'in me,'' not 'on ac- 
 count of me' (Brown), or 'for what 
 he had done in me' (Jowett) ; but sim- 
 ply 'in me' (Vulg., Clarom.), 'ut qui 
 m me invenissent celebrationis mate- 
 riam,' Winer in loc: compare Exod. 
 xiv. 4, ivSo^aaB'^ro/j.at iv iapa^. God, 
 as Windisch. observes, was working 
 in St Paul, and so was praised in him. 
 The prep, in such cases as the present 
 points to the object as being as it were 
 the iphere in which (Eph. i. 17), or the 
 mhatratam on which (i Cor. vii. 14, 
 see Winer, Gr. p. 34S ; comp. Andoo. 
 de Mysltr. p. 33, ed. Schiller) the ac- 
 tion takes place. The transition from 
 this to the common usage of iv in the 
 sense of ' dependence on, ' is easy and 
 obvious ; see exx. in Rost u. Palm, 
 Lex. s. V. A. 2. b, Vol. i. p. 909, and 
 
 comp. Bernhardy, 9ynt. v. 8. b, p. 210. 
 
 Chaptee II. I. 8i«t] 'after an in- 
 terval of,' 'post,' Vulg., Clarom., 
 Copt., Armen. ; deKarecrffdpav irapeX- 
 66vTuv iruv, Chrys. : comp. Acts 
 xxiv. 1 7, SC irSiv ttKetivaii. The mean- 
 ing of the prep, has h«re been unduly 
 pressed to suit preconceived historical 
 views. Aicf, in its temporal sense-, 
 denotes an action enduring throvgh 
 and out of a period of time ; and may 
 thus be translated during; or after, 
 according as the nature of the action 
 makes the idea of duration through 
 the whole of the period (Heb. ii. 15, 
 Sict TTco'Tds Tov ^^)i or occurrence 
 at the end of the period, most promi- 
 nent. Thus 81& TToXXoC ■xfikvov ae 
 idpaKa is correctly explained by Fritz. 
 (Fritzsch. Opusc. p. 163, note), 'long© 
 temporis spatio decurso qua te non 
 vidi te vldi :' comp. Herm. on Vig. 
 No. 377, b. This is the correct use 
 of Sii. There are however a few 
 indisputable instance? of a more lax 
 use of the prep, in the K. T., to 
 denote an action which took place 
 within, not during the whoh of a pe- 
 riod : c. g. Acts v, 19, 5(4 yi/xris 
 dcolfas, where both the tense and the 
 occurrence preclude the possibility of 
 its being ' throughout the night ' 
 (contr. Meyer) ; so also Acts xvi. 9 : 
 Acts xvii. 10 is perhaps doubtful ; see 
 Fritzsch. Opusc. p. 165 ; Winer, dr. 
 § 47. i, p. 337. Grammatical const- 
 derations alone are thus not sufficient 
 to justify Dr Peile's paraphrase, ' not 
 till after ;' but on exegetical grounds 
 it may be fairly urged that the mention 
 of fourteen years, thua undefined by 
 
1, 24, II. I, 2. 
 
 23 
 
 "TToXtv avi^ijv eis 'lepoeroXvfia fiera ^apvd^a avv- 
 irapaXajSwv koc Tirov ave^tjv Se Kara avoKaXv^tv, a 
 
 a terminus ad quem, as well as a guo, 
 would be singularly at variance with 
 the circumstantial nature of the nar- 
 rative. With regard to the great 
 historical difficulties in which the pas- 
 sage is involved, it can here only briefly 
 be said ; (i) The terminus a quo of the 
 fourteen years, being purely a subjec- 
 tive epoch, does certainly seem that 
 time which must have ever been pre- 
 sent to the Apostle's thoughts, — the 
 time of his conversion (Anger, Wiese- 
 ler) ; especially as the (rti rpla, ch. i. 
 i8, appear so reckoned. (2) Exegetical 
 as weU as grammatical (Ti\ai) con- 
 siderations seem to show that it was 
 St Paul's second journey; — for how, 
 when misconstruction was so possible, 
 could it be passed over? and how can 
 St Peter's conduct be explained? But 
 (3) chronological arguments, based on 
 historical coincidences, make it impos- 
 sible to doubt that Irenseus (adv. Hcer. 
 III. 1 3) and Theodoret (in loc.) are right 
 in supposing this the journey mention- 
 ed in Acts XV., and therefore, accord- 
 ing to St Luke's account, the third. 
 In a commentary of this nature it is 
 impossible to allude to the various 
 eftorts (even to the invalidation of an 
 unquestionable text) to reconcile (2) 
 and (3) : it may be enough to say that 
 both chronological and historical de- 
 ductions seem so certain, that (2) must 
 give way: see the sensible explana- 
 tion and remarks of Thiersch, Apost. 
 Age, Vol. I. p. 120 sq. (Transl.). A 
 complete discussion will be found in 
 the ohronolog. works of Anger and 
 Wieseler; Davidson, Introd. Vol. ir. 
 p. 112 sq. ; Winer, RWB. Art. 'Pau- 
 lus;' Conyb. and Howson, St Paul, 
 ch. VII. : see also Meyer in loc, ; Al- 
 ford. Vol. II. Prolegom. p. 26. 
 orvinrapaXaPuv Kal TCtov] 'hwving 
 
 taken with me also Titus ;' the ascen- 
 sive Kal perhaps alluding to his being 
 unoircumcised ; oomp. Acts xv. 2, 
 TlaO^ov Kal Bapvipav Kal rivas ftX- 
 X u s ^1 airOv. St Paul was now the 
 principal person ((rvvTrapaXapdv): at 
 the preceding (i.e. the second) visit 
 Barnabas seems to have taken the 
 lead : see Meyer in loc. 
 
 2. dvi^rpr 8^] '/ went up too;' 
 Si having its 'vim exponeudi' (Fritz. 
 in loc.), or, as we might perhaps more 
 exactly say, its reiterative force (Klotz, 
 Devar. Vol. 11. p. 361 ; Hartung, 
 Partus. SS, 2. Jr, Vol. I. p. 168), and 
 repeating, not without a slight opposi- 
 tion, the preceding ivipriii. The native 
 force of the particle may just be 
 traced in the faint contrast arising 
 from the explanation and introduction 
 of fresh particulars. 
 Kard diroKaX.vi|fi.v] 'ly, scil. in ac- 
 cordance mith, revelation, — not for my 
 own purposes;' itarct as usual imply- 
 ing the rule, the ' normam agendi ;' 
 see Bernhardy, Synt. v. 20. b, p. 239, 
 241. Hermann's translation 'expli- 
 cationis caus^' must on exegetical, 
 and perhaps even on grammatical 
 grounds (see Fritzsoh. Opusc. p. 169), 
 certainly be rejected. For (i) iwoKd- 
 Xu^is is never used in this lower sense 
 either by St Paul or any other 
 of the sacred writers ; and (2) the 
 current of the Apostle's argumeut is 
 totally at variance with such an ex- 
 planation. His object is here to show 
 that his visit to Jerusalem was not to 
 satisfy any doubts of his own, nor 
 even any suggestions of his converts, 
 but in obedience to the command of 
 God. The objection, that the current 
 translation would require /card ripa 
 6,iroKii\v\(/iv (Herm.), may be neu- 
 tralized by the observation that Karb, 
 
u 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 Kai aveOifJLtiv avToh to evayyeKiov o Kijpuartrw ev TOig 
 edvecrtv, Kar iSlav Se rois Sokouctiv, f/.fi Trtoj eiy nevov 
 
 iToxdKvfiv is in effect used nearly 
 as an adverb ; see Eph. iii. 3. 
 dv£6^|iT|v] '/ communicated;' 'con- 
 tuli cum illis,' Vulg., Clarom., comp. 
 Syr. [patefeoi]; 'enarravi,' Fritz.; 
 ^Ipsa collatio unam doctriniE speoiem 
 exclus^ omni varietate monstrabat,' 
 Beza. The meaning assigned by 
 Oreen {Gramm. N.T. p. 82) 'to leave 
 altogether in the hands of, or at the 
 pleasure of another,' is more than 
 doubtful; in the only other place in 
 the N. T. where the word occurs, 
 Acts XXV. 14, Tip /Sao"iXet dvidero rot 
 Kara t6v TlaOXov, the meaning seems 
 to be clearly, as here, 'communicated:' 
 see Fritz. Opusc. p. 169, and the exx. 
 in "Wetst. in loc. avTois] 
 
 'to them,' soil, to the inhabitants of 
 Jerusalem (ver. i), or rather (as 
 the sense obviously requires a certain 
 limitation) to the Christians residing 
 there, — ' Christianis gregaiiis' (Fritz.), 
 as opp. to Tois doKoOffLv, the Apo- 
 stles; comp. Matth. xii. 15, Luke v. 
 17; and see Winer, Gr. % 22. 3. i, 
 p. 131 ; Bernhardy, Synt. VI. 11. b, 
 p. 288. The reference to the Apostles 
 collectively (Schott, Olsh.), or to the 
 Elders of the Church, is not by any 
 means probable. 
 
 KWT tSCav 8^] 'but privately,' i.e. in 
 a private conference ; comp. Marl^ iv. 
 34 : the Apostle communicated his 
 c^a77eXioi' to the Christians at Jeru- 
 salem openly and unreservedly, but 
 Kar' ISiav (between me and them, 
 
 ■X . r y y 
 
 ^01^0 »■ I 1 I *~), Syr.) entered 
 
 probably more into its doctrinal as- 
 pects ; comp. Theod. in loc. The 
 meaning assigned to di ('I mean') by 
 Alf., who appy. denies any second 
 and separate communication, seems 
 here very doubtful (see ver. 4) ; and 
 
 that to Kar ISiav ('preferably,' 'speci- 
 ally') by Olsh., distinctly untenable, 
 as Kar Idlar occurs 16 times in the 
 N. T., and in all cases is used in a 
 directly, or (as here) indirectly local 
 sense; see Mark ix. 28, xiii. 3, Luke 
 X. 23, <fco. and comp. Neand. Plant. 
 'Vol. I. p. 104 (Bohn). 
 TOls 8oKoti<riv] ' to those who were 
 high in reputation,' Scholef. Hints, 
 p. 88 ; see Eurip. Mec. 292 (29s)— 
 where ol SoKovm-es is opp. to oi d- 
 SofoOvTes — and the exx collected by 
 Kypke and Eisner, esp. Eur. Troad. 
 608, and Herodian, vi. i, 7-oi>s Sokovv- 
 ras Kal T}\iKtq. ffefivoTdrovs, — in 
 all of which oE 3ok. appears simply 
 equivalent to iTrlarmai (Theod.). There 
 is not then, as Olsh. conceives, any 
 shade of blame or irony (AK.) in the 
 expression, but as Chrys. correctly 
 observes,To?s 5oKov(yt <pT]ffl, fierd. ttjs 
 iauTov Kal rijv Koivi]v airdvrojv Xe7&»' 
 ^Tjtpov see CEcum. in loc. 
 |iij ircos els K6viv rpi\ui tj {8pa|iov] 
 ' lest I might be running, or have 
 already run in rain;' i.e. 'lest I 
 might lose my past or present labour' 
 (Hamm.) by leaving others to deem 
 that it was fruitless and unaccredited. 
 This passage presents combined gram- 
 matical and exegetioal difficulties, both 
 of which must be briefly noticed. 
 (a) Tp^u. By comparing the very 
 similar passage i Thess. iii. 5, /jtJttms 
 hrelpaffa'...Kal eis K€tf6v yevTfrai k.t.\. 
 it would certainly seem that r/je'xw is 
 pres. Bubj. (see Winer, Gr. % 56. 2, 
 p. 448, where both passages are in- 
 vestigated) ; but there is a difficulty 
 both in mood and tense. The former 
 may be explained away by the observ- 
 able tendency of the N.T. and later 
 writers to lapse from the optat. into 
 the subjunct. (Winer, §41. b. i,p.258; 
 
ii: 3. 4. 
 
 25 
 
 Tpeyw r] eSpafiov. AW ovSe Titos 6 trvv efioi, 3 
 EXXiji/ wv }]vayKaarOtj TrepiT/xtiOrjvai' Sia Se tov? Traa-.' 4 
 
 Green, Oi: p. 72) ; the latter, either 
 by considering rp^x" a ' then-present,' 
 opp. to Idpa/iov a 'then-past,' or aa 
 pointing to the continuance of the ac- 
 tion, (p) (irf ircos then is not num forte 
 (an opinion formerly held by Fritzsche; 
 and still by Green, p. 82, but well 
 refuted by Dr Peile), but ne forte. 
 (7) i8pa|iov may be explained in two 
 ways; either (with Fritz.) as an indio. 
 after » non - realized, etc. hypoth. 
 (Herm. de Partic. &v, 1. 10, p. 54), 
 — a structure at which, strange to say, 
 Hilgenf. seems to stumble;— or indie, 
 after /a^ttws (fearing lest), the change 
 of mood implying that the event 
 apprehended had now taken place ; 
 see Winer, Or. § 56. 2, p. 446 ; oomp. 
 Scheuerl. Synt. § 34. a. 5, p. 364; 
 Matth. Or. § 520. 8. We 
 
 have then two possible translations ; 
 (i) Purpose; dv£d^fn]V...fi-^Trcas ^5pa- 
 fiovj I communicated... that I might 
 not perchance have run in vain (as I 
 should have done if I had not, tkc). 
 (2) Apprehension; 6,vediiJ,riv...{<j>opoi- 
 lievoi) fi^Tojs '^dpafMOf, I ctymmunicated 
 ...being apprehensive lest perchance I 
 might really have, &c., the verb 
 ' timendi' being idiomatically omitted ; 
 see Gayler, de Part. Neg. p. 327 ; 
 Schmalfeld, Synt. § 152. Of these 
 (1) seems most in accordance with 
 St Paul's style; see ch. iv. 11, and i 
 Theas. iii. 5. To both translations 
 however there are very grave ob- 
 jections ; to (1) on logical, to (2) on 
 exegetical grounds: to (i), because it 
 was not on the communication or non- 
 communication of his Gospel that St 
 Paul's running in vain really hinged, 
 but on the assent or dissent of the 
 Apostles: to (2), because it is incre- 
 dible that he who went up (car djro- 
 k£Kv\j/i,v could hare felt any doubt 
 
 about his own course. To escape these 
 difficulties we must adopt one of two 
 explanations (neither wholly free from 
 objections) : either we must refer the 
 words objectively to the danger St 
 Paul's converts might have run of 
 being rejected by the Church if he 
 had not communicated ; or (which is 
 most probable) subjectively, with the 
 Greek commentators, to the opinions 
 of others; &a SiSdJa rois raSra 
 iiroTTeiopras 8ri oiK eh Kivbv Tf)ix<^i 
 Chrys. ; see Hammond in loc. If 
 others deemed St Paul's past and 
 present course fruitless, it really must 
 in that respect have amounted to a 
 loss of past and present labour. 
 
 3. 'AXX' oii8^] ' But (distinctly to 
 prove d fortiori that I had not run 
 in vain) not even, — &c. The emphasis 
 rests on Tiros, — Titus, whom the 
 Apostles might have required to be 
 circumcised, even while in general 
 terms they approved of St Paul's 
 preaching. On this gradational force 
 of &\X oiSi (' at ne...quidem,' 'indi- 
 cant, silentio oblitteratS re leviore, 
 afferri graviorem'), see Fritz, in loc. 
 {Opusc. p. 178), and compare Luke 
 xxiii. 15, Acts xix. 2. The true sepa- 
 rative force of dXX4 (' aliud jam esse 
 quod suraus dicturi,' Klotz, Devar. 
 Vol. II. p. 2) is here distinctly appa- 
 rent. "EXXt^v tu'v] 'being a 
 Greek,' soil, 'inasmuch as, or though, 
 he was a Greek,' khItoi, "EXXtji/ liv, 
 Theod. ; not ' and was a Greek,' Alf., 
 the appended participial clause not be- 
 ing predicative, but concessive, or sug- 
 gestive of the reason why the demand 
 was made ; comp. Donalds. Oratyl. § 
 305, Gr. § 492 sq. 
 
 TJva^KdcrOT]] 'was compeUed.'' The 
 choice of this word seems clearly to 
 imply that the circumcision of Titus 
 
26 
 
 nPOS rAAATAS. 
 
 ettraKTOVs y^revSaSiXipovi, o^nves TrapeKrrjXOov KaraaKO- 
 irija-ai t>]v iXevOepiav ^/xwv tiv 'i-^ofiev ev Xpicrrw 'Irja-ov, 
 
 was strongly pressed on St Paul and 
 St Barnabas; see Baur, Paulm, p. 
 121. It does not however by any 
 means appear that the Apostles were 
 party to it ; in fact, if we assume 
 the identity of this journey with the 
 third, the language of Acts xv. 5 
 seems distinctly to imply the con- 
 trary. 
 
 4. SicL 84 Tofps TrapEio-aKTOvs ijreu- 
 SaSeXcjiovs] ' and that, or now it was, 
 hecause of the false irethren insidiously 
 hrovbght in,'' soil, oix iji/ayKiirBri ircpi. 
 THriSTJvai' explanatory statement (S^ 
 explicative ; see below) why Titus was 
 not compelled to be circumcised, viz, 
 because the ^cuSdSeX^ot were making 
 it a party matter. The construction 
 is not perfectly perspicuous, but it 
 does not appear necessary either to 
 regard it as a positive anacoluthon 
 ^Einok, Lucubr. Crit. p. 171, Hilgenf. 
 in loc), or as an anacol. arising from 
 two blended constructions (Winer, Gr. 
 § 63, p. 502) ; still less a connexion of 
 ver. 4 with ver. 2 (Bagge, al.). The 
 difficulty, as the Greek expositors seem 
 to have felt, really lies in the Se • this 
 however is neither irepiTrds (Theod., 
 comp. Theod. M.), nor equivalent to 
 oiSe (comp. Chrys., Theoph., CEcum.), 
 but simply explicative ('declarat et 
 intendit,' Beng.), and faintly ratio- 
 xsinative; see Klotz, Deea/r. Vol. 11. 
 p. 362. Alford compares H in ver. 2, 
 but the uses seem clearly different : 
 there the insertion of oiirofs naturally 
 suggests a contrast, while here the 
 naked statement oin ijvayK. vepiT/i. 
 as naturally prepares us for a restric- 
 tive explanation. irapcio-aK- 
 Tons] ' insidioitsly irought in,' Scholef. 
 This word appears to have two mean- 
 ings, (o) advena, adventitius, &\\&Tpios 
 (Hesych., Suid., Phot.) ; comp. Georg. 
 
 Al. Vit. Chrys. 40 (cited by Hase, 
 Steph. Thes. Vol. vin. p. 187), irap- 
 elaanTe TTji Tri\eus Tjfiuiv (fi) irrep- 
 titius ; comp. Prol. Sirach, irpSKoyoi 
 irapelraKTOS, — a meaning still further 
 enhanced by irapenTTjX&ov' compare 
 2 Pet. ii. I, Jude 4. The compound 
 \j/evSdSe\<poi designates those who did 
 not acknowledge the great principle 
 of faith in Christ being the only means 
 of salvation (Neander, Plant. Vol. il. 
 p. 114, Bohn), while their intrusive 
 character is well marked by the c"m- 
 pounds irapeurfjKBov and irapeia-dicTovs' 
 comp. Polyb. Mist. i. 18. 3, wap- 
 eiffdyeffOat Kal irapeunriinHV els rds 
 ■iro\iopKQvp,hai irSKeis. oSItivm] 
 
 ' men who,' 'a set of men who,' — not 
 simply equivalent to ot (XJst.), but 
 specifying the class to which they 
 belonged : see Matth. Gr. § 483 ; 
 Jelf, Gr. § 816; and notes on ch. iv. 
 24, where the uses of Sans are more 
 fully discussed. The translation of 
 Fritz., 'quippequi' (comp. Herm. CEd. 
 S. 688) is here unduly strong; even 
 in classical Greek what is conmionly 
 termed a causal may be more correctly 
 considered an explicative sense ; see 
 Ellendt, Lex. Soph. o. v. 3, Vol. II. 
 p. 383. This too is the prevailing 
 sense in the later writers ; see Din- 
 dorf in Steph. Thesaur. s.v. Kora- 
 
 CTKOirijo-ai] 'to spy out,' ." » ,■ << 
 
 [ut explorarent] Syr., ' explorare,' 
 Vulg. ; not ' ut dolose eripiaat liber- 
 tatem Christiauam' (Dindorf, Steph. 
 Thes. s.v. Vol. iv. p. 1232), Kara- 
 (TKOTT. b^ng here used in the same 
 (hostile) sense as KaTaaKoireOaai, Josh, 
 ii. 2 ; 6pas irujs Kal xj? tHu KaraaKliirwv 
 Tpoariyoptf ^SiJXuo-e rdp TrAXe/aoK ixel- 
 vwv, Chrys. 4v XpioT^] 
 
 Not 'per Christum,' a meaning it may 
 
II. 5, 6. 
 
 27 
 
 iva tjfiSi KaraSovXoofrovcriv ots ovSe Trpos wpav el^afiev K 
 Tj; viroTay^, 'iva fi aXriQeia too evayyeXlov SiafjLelvtj 
 "n-pos v/xai. aTTo ^e twv Sokovvtoov eivai ti — ottocoI 6 
 
 bear (Fritz, p. 184), but in the fuller 
 and deeper sense 'in Christ;' see 
 notes on ver. 1 7. iva iqfids 
 
 KaraSovXtto-ovcriv] 'that they may 
 succeed in enslaving us;' the tense 
 pointing to the result, the compound 
 to the completeness of the act ; comp. 
 1 Cor. xi. 20. Although this reading 
 is confirmed by a decided preponder- 
 ance of uncial authority [AB'CDEN], 
 and the improbability of a correction 
 is very great ; still the instances of tva 
 with a future ajpe so very few (Gayler, 
 Part. Neg. p. 169), and these too so 
 reducible iu number (Klotz, Devwr, 
 Vol. n. p. 631), that we are not jus- 
 tified in saying more than this, that 
 the future appears used to convey the 
 idea of duration (Winer), or perhaps 
 rather of issue, sequence (Schmalfeld, 
 Synt. § 142; comp. Alf.), more dis- 
 tinctly than the more usual aorist 
 Eubj. Rec. has imTa5ov\iiaiainai, with 
 K al (L -aovTai). Though the usage 
 with a future is excessively doubtful 
 in classical writers (Herm. Pa/rtic. &v, 
 n. 13, p. 134), a few instances are 
 found in later authors; see Winer, 
 Gr. § 41. b. 1, p. 259. 
 
 5. ots oiS^] These words are 
 omitted by the first hand of D (Tisch. 
 Cod. Clarom. p. 568); Clarom., Sang.; 
 IrenaBUS (p. 200, ed. Bened.), and 
 according to Jerome in some Latin 
 Manuscripts : Tertullian and Ambrose 
 appear only to have rejected the rela- 
 tive; see ad/i>. Marc. v. 3. It is obvi- 
 ous that such an omission would 
 greatly simplify the structure, but 
 this very fact in a critical point of 
 view makes it suspicious. When to 
 this we add the immense preponder- 
 ance of external authority, we can 
 
 entertain but little doubt that ofs o^5^ 
 is genuine; see Bagge in loc, who 
 has well discussed this reading. 
 Tfj iiroTaTfj] 'by yielding them, tJie 
 subjection they claimed;' dative of 
 manner; see Winer, Gr. § 31. 7, p. 
 194, comp. Scheuerl. Synt. § 22. 6, 
 p. 180. The article is not merely the 
 article with abstract nouns (Green, 
 Gr. p. 146), but is used to specify the 
 obedience which the false brethren 
 (not the Apostles, Fritz.) demanded in 
 this particular case. if 
 
 d\i]6ei.a Tou cvaYveXCov] ' the truth of 
 the Gospel;' the true teaching of the 
 Gospel, as opposed to the false teaching 
 of it as propagated by Judaizers, 
 i.e. as in verse 16, the doctrine of 
 justification by faith. The distinction 
 drawn by Winer {Gr. § 34. 3, p. 311) 
 between such expressions as the pre- 
 sent, — where the governing noun is a 
 distinct element pertaining to the go- 
 verned ; and such as irXoihov &dii\6Tijs, 
 I Tim. vi. 17, Katvdrtjs fu^s, Kom. 
 vi. 4, — where it is more a rhetorically 
 expressed attribute, though denied by 
 Fritz. Bom. Vol. 1. p. 368, seems per- 
 fectly just. A doctrinal import is 
 contained in ij dX-^deta tov e^ayy., 
 which is entirely lost by explaining it 
 as merely equivalent to ri dXrjBis 
 eiayyikiov. SiafuCvD Trpis lilias] 
 
 'might remain steadfast with you,' 
 'permaneat [eret],' Vxilg., Clarom. ; 
 the Sii, being obviously intensive, as in 
 Heb. i. 11,2 Pet. iii. 4 ; comp. Chrys., 
 
 ha Tovro did, rwv Ipyuy j3e/3aii6<ru- 
 
 fief. n'p^s ii|i.''s] See notes on ch. 
 
 i. 18. 
 
 6. diri 8^ TOV SoKovvTiDv etvaC ti 
 K.T.X.] 'But from those who were high 
 in reputation;' — interrupted deolara- 
 
28 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 TTore rjaav ovSev /jloi Siacbepei' 'irpocrwirov 0eoy avOpco- 
 
 tion of his independence of the oJ 
 SoKoOvres. The meaning of this verse 
 is perfectly clear, but the structure is 
 somewhat difficult. According to the 
 common explanation, iirb — ehal ri is 
 a sentence that would naturally have 
 terminated with oiSiv IXo/3ov or irpoae- 
 \apbfi,riv (not i5iSdx8vii,'WineT, Gr. § 47, 
 P- 331)) O'' more correctly still, oiSh 
 lioi irpoiraveTiffi]- owing however to 
 the parenthesis ofoioi — "Kaix^dvei, the 
 natural structure is interrupted, and 
 the sentence, commenced passively^ is 
 concluded actively with i/iol ydp k.t.\. 
 see Winer, Gr. § 63. I. i, p. SO'Z. The 
 real difficulty of the sentence how- 
 ever lies in the following yap. That 
 it is (a) merely resumptive, Scholef. 
 (Hints, p. 74), Peile, al., is indemon- 
 strable; as of the passages usually 
 cited in favom- of this force, viz. Acts 
 xvii. 28, I Cor. ix. 19, 2 Cor. v. 4, 
 Eom. XV. 27, the first three are clearly 
 instances of the argumentative force 
 (see Winer, Gr. § 53. 10. 3, p. 403; 
 Meyer on Cor. U. ce.); while in the 
 fourth the words eiidK-qcav yap are 
 merely emphatically repeated. That 
 it is (6) argwmeniative, either as giving 
 a reason for oiSin p,oi Siatpipu k. t. X. 
 (Alf.), or for irpbaiinraii Qebs k. t. X. 
 (Mey.), is logically and contextually 
 improbable, as parenthetical and non- 
 parenthetical parts would thus be 
 confused and intermingled. If how- 
 ever ycip be regarded as (c) explica- 
 tive, the whole seems clear and logical. 
 To avoid the words doKodvruv etvai rt 
 being misunderstood, and supposed to 
 assign an undue pre-eminence to these 
 Apostles, St Paul hastily introduces 
 the parenthetical comment, leaving 
 the former sentence incomplete : then, 
 feeling that its meaning was still so 
 far dubious as to need some justifica- 
 tion, he reverts to it, slightly qualify- 
 
 ing it by the emphatic ifioi, slightly- 
 justifying it by the explicative -/dp' 
 'to me (whatever they might have 
 done for others) it is certainly a fact 
 that,' etc. On this explicative force 
 of ydp, see Donalds. GV. § 618 ; Klotz, 
 Devar. Vol. 11. p. 233 sq. ; Hartung, 
 Partik. ydp, § 2 ; and comp. Liicke, 
 John iv. 44. Of the other 
 
 interpretations of this difficult passage 
 none appear to deserve special notice 
 except that of the Greek writers 
 (Chrys. however is silent, and Theod. 
 here deficit), who connect dwi tuv Sok. 
 immediately with oidh puu, diat/>. in 
 the sense of oide/iia p.0L <l>povTls vepl 
 rOiv Sok. (Theopli.), but thus assign 
 an untenable meaning to d7r6, and 
 dislocate the almost certain connexion 
 of OTTOLoi Tore ^ffav with what fol- 
 lows. Further details will be found 
 in Meyer, De Wette, and Fritzsche 
 iOpusc. p. 201 sq.). The Vv. 
 
 are for the most part perplexingly 
 literal (comp. Vulg.); the Syr. how- 
 
 ever by its change of ykp into __»J 
 
 seems certainly to accord with the 
 general view adopted above. t<uv 
 
 SoKou'vTMV elvaC ti] 'those who were 
 
 deemed to be somewhat. 
 
 '^ .-'^AmVij 
 17 * 
 [qui reputati erant] Syr., ' qui vide- 
 bantur esse aliquid,' Vulg. ; used with 
 reference to the judgment of others 
 (contrast ch. vi. 3), and so perfectly 
 similar in meaning to rots SoKovo-tf in 
 ver. 2 ; comp. Plato, Gorg. p. 472 A, 
 iirl) TroXXiSc xai Sok, etval Tf Euthyd. 
 p. 303 0, Tuv tre/U'wv Kal Sok. ti elvai, 
 6iroioC iroTs] ' qualeseanque ;' jrore not 
 being temporal, 'olim,' Beza (per- 
 haps suggested by the 'aliquando' of 
 Vulg.), but coimeoted with iTrotoi, 
 which it serves to render more general 
 and inclusive: comp. Demosth. Or. 
 
II. 7. 
 
 29 
 
 "TTov ov Xafij3avet — efiol yap oi aoKovvTei ovSev irpoa- 
 aveOevTO, aWa TOvvavTiov iSovrei on TreTria-Tev/uLai to 7 
 evwyyeXiov t^j aKpoj3vcrTiai Kadm Tlerpos t^s TrepiTO- 
 
 de Pace, iv. 1 3 (p. 60), iirola tU tot' 
 iarlv avrri, cited by Bloonif. and 
 Fritz, in loc. ijorttv] The tense 
 
 may certainly refer to the period of the 
 Apostles' lives when they were uncon- 
 verted, or when they were in attend- 
 ance on our Lord (a view strongly 
 supported by Hilgenf. ) ; it seems 
 however far more natural to refer 
 it to a past time, relative to the 
 moment of writing the words. 
 ovScv (101 Sia<f>,] ' it mahes no matter 
 to me.' For examples of this less 
 usual but fully defensible insertion of 
 the dative, see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 384, 
 and comp. Wetst. in loc. 
 irpdo-uirov 0e6s k.t.X.] 'God accepts 
 no man's person' — irpbata-wov put for- 
 ward with emphasis, while 6e6s and 
 ixdp. form a suggestive contrast 
 (Mey.) ; ' God looks not to the out- 
 ward as men do, and judges on 
 no partial principles, and no more 
 did I bis servant.' This and the 
 equiv. expression pX^Tretv els Trp6<r- 
 0ir. 6,v0p. are in the N. T. always 
 used with a bad reference; see 
 Matth. xxii. 16, Mark xii. 14, Luke 
 XX. 21. The corresponding expres- 
 sion in the O. T. D»3S Kfc>J (trans- 
 lated sometimes Baufid^etv Trph(7biiraVf 
 comp. Jude 16) is used occasionally 
 in a good sense ; see Gen. xix. 2 1, 
 and comp. Fritz, and Schott in 
 loc. ovBkv irpo<rav^9evTo] ' com- 
 
 mwnicated nothing,' 'addressed no 
 camnmnicaiion ;' 'oontulerunt,' Vulg., 
 Clarom. ; and more distinctly, 'dixe- 
 runt,' JEth.-Pol., 'notum fecerunt,' 
 Arm. ; as in oh. i. 16. In spite of the 
 authority of the Greek expositors 
 (putOovres ri, ipii oiSh irpoaiOriKav, 
 oiSiv duipBua-av, Chrys.) and appy. of 
 
 71 > 
 Syr. ( n o>m o| adjeceruut), Copt. 
 
 7 
 [ououafi], Goth. (' anaisokun '), al., 
 
 it still seems more safe to retain the 
 same meaning in both passages. There 
 is weight in the argument urged in ed. 
 I (see too Wieseler, Chronol. p. 195, 
 note), that vpoTavid. here may seem 
 to specify addition^ as in contrast with 
 dvedep-tju ver. 2 ; still the tendency of 
 later Greek to compound forms (comp. 
 notes on ch. iii. 13), and the perfect 
 parallelism of this with the similarly 
 negative formula in ch. i. 16, are tacit 
 arguments which seem slightly to pre- 
 ponderate. In the passage com- 
 monly referred to (Xen. Mem. II. i. 8), 
 irpoiravaBiaBai merely implies 'etiam 
 sibi adjungere, soil, suscipere' (see 
 Kiihner in loc), and so proves nothing, 
 except that Bretachn., Olsh., Eiick., 
 al., must be incorrect in translating 
 ' nihil mihi prseterea impomerwnt,' as 
 this expresses a directly opposite idea. 
 Under any circumstances, there is 
 nothing either in this word or in the 
 whole paragraph to substantiate the 
 extraordinary position of Baur, that 
 the Apostles only yielded to St Paul's 
 views after a long struggle. 
 
 7. dXXd TOvvaVTioV] 'hut on the 
 contra/ry ;' soil, so far from giving in- 
 structions to me, they practically added 
 the weight of their approval : rh hiav- 
 riov Tov p.4p.^paa6ai t6 iiraiviaai, Chrys. 
 Sorely this was not exactly leaving 
 St Paul 'to fight his own battle,' 
 Jowett, Alf. irelrCoTCTiJioi.] 
 
 The principal instances in the N. T. 
 of this well-known structure will be 
 found in Winer, Gr. § 32. J, p. 204. On 
 the use of the perfect as indicating 
 permanence, duration, ' concreditum 
 
30 
 
 nPOS FAAATAS. 
 
 8 /n^s, 6 yap evepy^cras Tierptj) etV ofTrocrToiXh" T?? vepi- 
 
 9 TOfMrji evfipytjcrev KafjLol elf ra edvij, Kai yvovres t>]v 
 X'^P^" Tnv SoOeiadv fioi, 'laKOo/Sot kuI K.i]<pois koI 'Ioduv- 
 
 mihi habeo,' see ib. § 40. 4, p. 242. 
 TJsteri calls attention to the accurate 
 use of the perf. here, compared with 
 the aorist in Kom. iii. 2, iiriaTeiSiiiiar 
 (0! 'louSaioi) Tb, "Kbyia toO GeoO. 
 Ttjs dKpo|3v(rTCas] 'of the uncwcum- 
 vision,' scil. tuv ixpopiffTuv oii t4 
 irpiyiMTa "Kiyav aird, dXXck tA (l7r4 
 ro&ruv yvapiibij,eva tOvri, Chrys. ; 
 comp. Rom. iii. 30. The derivation 
 of dK/30j3. (not &Kpov, /3i!m, but an 
 Alexandrian corruption of iiKpoToaBla) 
 is discussed by Fritzsche, Horn. ii. 26, 
 Vol. I. p. 136, 
 
 KaSus n^pos K,T.X.] 'even as Peter was 
 with that of the cvrcwmmion.' St Peter 
 here appears as the representative of 
 the ' Judenapostel ' (Meyer; comp. 
 Grot.), on the principle that 'a potior! 
 fit denomination' for though originally 
 chosen out as the first preacher to the 
 Gentiles (Acts xv. 7), his subsequent 
 labours appear to have been rather 
 among Jews ; comp. i Pet. i. i. 
 On the use of /cadus, see notes on ch. 
 iii. 6 ; and on its most suitable trans- 
 lation, comp. notes on 1 Thess. i. j 
 {Transl.). 
 
 8. 6 y&p IvepY. k.t.X.] 'for Se 
 who wrought ^ectually for Peter,' 
 
 ^la^^ Syr., 'Petro,' Vulg., Cla- 
 
 rom. ; not 'in Petro,' Grot.; historical 
 confirmation of what precedes, added 
 parenthetically. There are four con- 
 structions of hiepyiu in St Paul's Epp. ; 
 ifl) ifepyea ri, i Cor. xii. 11; (6) ivep- 
 yea St> twl, Eph. ii. 2 ; (c) hcpyeu rt 
 h rm, oh. iii. 5 ; (d) ipepyia tiw efs 
 Ti, here ; oomp. Prov. xxxi. 12. In 
 this latter case the dative is not 
 governed by ivepytu, as the verb is 
 not a pure compound [there is no form 
 
 iprfiij)\ but is the dat. commodi, 
 ivepy/icras, it may be observed, is 
 not Christ (Chrys., Aug.), but God 
 (Jerome); for in the first place St 
 Paul always speaks of his Apostlesbip 
 as given by God (Rom. xv. 15, i Cor. 
 XV. 10, Eph. iii. 2) through Christ 
 (Rom. i. 5 ; comp. ib, xv. 18, and ch. 
 i. i); and secondly this ivepyeiv is 
 distinctly ascribed to God in i Cor. xii. 
 6, Phil. ii. 13. els dirooToX.iiv] 
 
 'for or towards the Apostleship,' i. e, 
 for the successful performance of it 
 (Hamm.) ; not merely 'in respect of it' 
 (Mey.), — a meaning lexically admissi- 
 ble both in classical writers (Kost u. 
 Palm, Lex, s. v. els, v. 2, Vol. I. p. 
 804), and in the N. T. (Winer, Gr. 
 § 49. a, p. 354), but here contextually 
 insufficient, as the sense seems almost 
 obviously to require the more definite 
 notion of purpose, or contemplated 
 object; comp. 2 Cor. ii. 12, eU rb eiay- 
 y4\ioi' (to preach the Gospel), Col. i. 
 29. The second els is joined with ri, 
 iBvri by what is called 'comparatio 
 compendiaria,' Jelf, Gr. § 781. The 
 form Kifiol is given by ACD'FG, Kal 
 i?/*oibyBD'EK:LN(iJec.). 
 
 9. Kal TvdvTts] ' and having become 
 aware;' continuation of the interrupt- 
 ed narrative; ISbmei (ver. 7)...Kai 
 yvivres. The former participle appears 
 to refer to the mental impression pro- 
 duced, when the nature and success 
 of St Paul's preaching was brought 
 before them ; the latter to the result 
 of the actual information they derived 
 from him ; but see notes on oh. iv. 9. 
 'I({k(i>Pos] 'James,' the Brother of our 
 Lord (ch. i. 19), Bishop of Jerusalem, 
 — and as such placed first in order in 
 the recital of acts that took place in 
 
II. 8, 9, lo. 
 
 31 
 
 vt]i 01 6oKOvvT€i OTTvXoi etvat, Se^iag eSwKav e/iot Koi 
 joapva^cf. KOivoDvlai' Iva ^fieii els ra eOvt], avrol Se els 
 TTjv TrepiTOfJLtiv. /jLovov Toav TTTwywv iva fivt]fji.oveuu)fiev, lo 
 o Kat ea"7rovSa(Ta avTO tovto voitjcrai. 
 
 that Church. IrenaeuB {adv. ffcer. III. 
 12, ad fin.) in noticing this subject uses 
 the strong expression ' qui circa Jaco- 
 bum Apostoli ;' see Grabe in loc. 
 The reading Hh-p. Kal 'Uk. has but 
 weak external support [DEFG-; old- 
 Lat. Vt., Goth., al.], and on internal 
 grounds is highly suspicious. 
 oi 8oKovvT€5 K.T.X.] 'who JiMvc the re- 
 putation of hnng pillars ;' ous TrdvTes 
 iravraxov irepupipovuLv, Chrys. ; Sok^oj 
 not being pleonastic, but retaining its 
 usual and proper meaning: see exx. 
 in Winer, Gr. § 65. 7, p. 540. The 
 metaphor is illustrated by Suicer, Thes, 
 s. V. (7tC\os, Vol. n. p. 1044 ; Wetst. in 
 loc; and (from Kabbinical writers) by 
 Schoettg. Sor. Eebr. Vol. I. pp. 728, 
 729. The most apposite quotations 
 are perhaps, Clem. Kom. i. 5, 0! ixi- 
 yiffTOL Kal St/catiraTot ' orOXot* Euseb, 
 ffist. VI. 41, o2 (TTeppol Kal ^ajcdptoi 
 ffrCXoi Tov Kvptov. 
 
 Se£ids...Koiv<<>vCas] 'right hands of 
 fellowship,' scil. in the Apostolic office 
 of teaching and preaching ; comp. 
 Sohulz, Ahendm. p. 190 sq. The re- 
 mark of Fritzsche (Opusi. p. 220; 
 comp. Mey.), — 'articulum ris Scftis 
 TTJs Koivavias non desiderabit, qui 66|. 
 Koa>. dextras sociales, i.e. dextras 
 ejusmodi quibus societas confletur, va- 
 lerereputaverit,' is scarcely necessary. 
 As Se^ii,! in the phrase 5e|(ds SiSdfai 
 (i Mace. xi. 50, 62, xiii. 50) is usually 
 anarthrous, the principle of correlation 
 ^Middleton, Gr. Art. III. 33) causes 
 the article to be omitted with koivo)- 
 vlaf comp. Winer, Or. § 18. vs. 6, p. 
 142. The separation of the gen. from 
 the subst. on which it depends occurs 
 ocoasionaEy in St Paul's Bpp., and is 
 
 usually due either to explanatory spe- 
 cification (Phil. ii. 10), correction (i 
 Thess. ii. 13), emphasis (i Tim. iii. 6), 
 or, as appy. here, merely structural 
 reasons, — the natural union of Sc|(d$ 
 and ISuiKav, and of ISiaKav with its 
 dative; comp. Winer, 6r. § 30. 3. 2, 
 p. 172. iva, rjii, els tA ?8vt]] 
 
 ' that we — to the Gentiles,' not eiayye- 
 Xtfiiyitefia (Winer, Gr. p. 518), as this 
 verb is not found with els in St Paul's 
 Epp. (Mey.), but either simply iropev- 
 ^fflftex, or perhaps better dirrfo-roXoi 
 7ew6/4e9a, 'apostolatu fungeremur,' 
 Beza. It is scarcely necessary to 
 
 add that this compact was intended to 
 be rather general than specific, and 
 that the terms l$iiri and TepiTop.ii have 
 more of a geographical than a merely 
 personal reference. St Paul knew 
 himself to be the Apostle of the Gen- 
 tiles (comp. Eom. xi. 13), but this did 
 not prevent him (/cori rb eluBos, Acts 
 xvii. 2) while in Gentile lands from 
 preaching first to the Jews ; see Acts 
 xvii. 10, xviii. 5, xix. 8. The 
 
 insertion of ij.ii> after rip.ets [with AC 
 DEK^ ; more than 30 mss. ; Copt., Syr.r 
 Phil.; Chrys., al.] seems certainly a 
 grammatical insertion. 
 
 10. f,6vov Tuv iTTWxalv K.T.X.] ' Only 
 that we should remember the poor^ 
 limiting clause dependent on Se^i&s 
 ISuKav and expressive of the condition 
 attached to the general compact : ' we 
 were to go to the Gentiles, they to the 
 circumcision, with this stipulation 
 only, that we were not to forget the 
 poor (in Judaea) ;' comp. Bom. xv. 26, 
 27, I Cor. xvi. 3. There is thus no 
 ellipsis of alrovvTes, irapaKoKovvTes, or 
 indeed of any verb ; the pbvov carries 
 
32 
 
 nPQ2 TAAATAS. 
 
 II 
 
 "r\ 'S'^\o V J. " ''A ' When Peter dissem- 
 
 yJre oe iJAfei/ JV);0aj eig AvTioveiav, bieii withstood and 
 
 , , , , , „ rebuked him, urging 
 
 Kara irpoawKOV avrw avrecTTiv, oTt icare- that to observe the 
 
 principle is to make void the grace of Go' 
 
 its own explanation: 'impermm ipsa 
 voce nomv adsignifioatum, ut id sit 
 quod Kal wap-fiy^eiKaD,'' Fritz. Matth. 
 Excurs. I, p. 839. 
 
 fi Kal lo-irovSao-a k.t.X.] ' which very 
 thing I was also forward to do,' lite- 
 rally ' which, namely this very thing, 
 
 I was also, <fcc.' airi toCto (. . m 
 
 (jCTl Syr.) not being redundantly 
 joined with 8 ' per Hebraismum ' 
 (Riiok., B.-Crus., and even Conyb.), 
 but simply forming an emphatic epex- 
 egesis of the preceding relative; see 
 Winer, Cfr. % 22. 4, p. 134. Occasion- 
 ally in the N. T. (Mark i. 7, vii. 25, 
 Eev. vii. c, al.) and, as might be sup- 
 posed, not uncommonly in the LXX, 
 there seem to be clear instances of a 
 Hebraistic redundancy of the simple 
 aiirds, but appy. never of this stronger 
 form aMs ovtos' see Winer, Gr. I. c, 
 and oomp. Bornem. Schol. Luc. p. LlVi 
 IcnrovSao-a] ' / was forward,' ' I 
 evinced (TTrouSi)"' with an appended 
 object-infinitive; comp. Eph. iv. 3, 
 1 Thess. ii. 17. The aor. is here Cor- 
 rectly used, not for the perfect (Conyb.), 
 nor even for the pluperf., nor yet 
 exactly as expressing the habit (oomp. 
 Alf.), — this usage being somewhat 
 doubtful in the N. T. (see Winer, Or. 
 § 40. 5. 1, p. ■248 ; and notes on Eph. 
 i, 3); — but simply as marking an 
 historical fact that belongs to the past, 
 without it being affirmed or denied 
 that it may not continue to the pre- 
 sent; see Fritz, de Aor. Vi, p. 17, and 
 notes on, i Thess. ii. 16. The 
 
 passages usually adduced (Rom. xv. 
 if, 1 Cor. xvi. I sq., 2 Cor. viii. 2 sq., 
 comp. Acts xi. 17 sq. , xxiv. 1 7) illus- 
 trate the practice, but not the tense, 
 being subsequent to the probable date 
 
 of this Epistle. All historical deduc- 
 tions from this passage, except perhaps 
 that Barnabas had recently left St 
 Paul (hence the sing. ; see Winer, in 
 loc), seem very precarious. 
 
 II. "Ore 8^ i5X9«v KT](t)as] 'But 
 when Cephas came, &o.' Still further 
 proof of the Apostle's independence 
 by a historical notice of his opposi- 
 tion to, and even reproval of, St Peter's 
 inconsistent conduct at Antioch : see 
 some good remarks on this subject in 
 Thiersch, Nist. of the Church, Vol. I. 
 p. 123 eq. (Transl.). The reading 
 
 liirpos {Rec.) is fairly supported [DE 
 FGKL ; many mss. ; Uemid., Goth., 
 al.], but still even in external authority 
 is inferior to Krjipas [Lachm., Tisch., 
 with ABCHX; a few mss.; Syr., 
 Copt. ; Clem., al.], not to mention the 
 high probability of Uh-pos having been 
 an explanatory change. 
 Kara Trpdo-iairov] ' to the face,' Auth., 
 
 'in faciem,' Vulg., ._i'Cna2)]i£2 pu 
 
 ~ 7 7 
 faciem ejus] Syr., — not ' coram omni- 
 bus,' ' aperto Marte ' (Elsn., Conj'b., 
 al.), this beirtg specified in iiiirpoirBai 
 ■n-dvToiv, ver. 14: comp. Acts xxv. 16, 
 and perhaps ib. iii. 13, Kard irpdactiirov 
 XliKdrov, ' to the face of Pilate.' The 
 preposition has here its secondary local 
 meaning, 'e regione;' the primary idea 
 of horizontal direction (Donalds. Gr. 
 § 479) passing naturally into that of 
 local opposition. This may be very 
 clearly traced in the descriptions of 
 the positions of troops, <fcc by the later 
 military writers ; e. g. Polyb. Hist. I. 
 34. 5, 0! Kard Tois iXi^avras ra^ff^i'- 
 Tcs' ib. 9, oJ Kard rb \ai6i'' with irpdj- 
 (DTroK, ib. III. 65. 6, XI. 14. 6: see 
 Bernhardy, Synt. V. 20. b, p. 240; 
 Dobree, Advers, Vol. I. p. 114. 
 
II. 
 
 33 
 
 yvwa-fiivoi hv- "TjOo Tov yap eXOeiv rivai airo 'IaKai/3ov 13 
 fiera tSov e6vS)v trvv^a-Qiev ore oe ^XOov vTearTeXXev 
 
 The gloBS Kara irxw" (™ appearance, 
 — not in reality) adopted by Chrya., 
 Jerome, and several early writers, is 
 wholly untenable, and due only to an 
 innocent though mistaken e£Fort to 
 salve the authority of St Peter, appy. 
 first suggested by Origen [Strom. 
 Book X.] : see Jerome, Bpiet. 86 — 97, 
 esp. 89, the appy. unanswerable ob- 
 jections of Augustine (JEpist. 8 — 19), 
 the sensible remarks of Bede in loc, 
 and, for much curious information on 
 the whole subject, Deyling, Obs. Sacr. 
 Vol. n. p. 520 sq. (No. 4S). 
 OTi KaTeYvuor|ji^vos ^v] 'because he 
 h/id been condemned ;^ not 'reprensi- 
 bilis,' Vulg., nor even ' reprehensionem 
 incurrerat,' Winer, but simply 're- 
 prehensus erat,' Clarom., Goth., Syr.- 
 Phil. (Syr. paraphrases), al. As this 
 clause has been much encumbered 
 with glosses, it will be best to notice 
 separately both the meaning of the 
 verb and the force of the participle, 
 (i) KaTayiyviiaKeiv (generally with ti- 
 v6s Ti, more rarely with rtvti tivos) has 
 two principal meanings ; (o) 'to note 
 accurately/ usually in a bad sense, 
 e.g. 'detect,' Prov. xxviii. 11 (Aquil. 
 i^iXndaei), ' think ill of,' Xen. Mem. 
 I. 3. 10 : (/S) ' to note judicially,' — 
 either in the lighter sense of accuse 
 (probably i John iii. 20 ; see Liicke 
 in loc), or the graver of condemn, 
 the more usual meaning. (2) The 
 perf. part. pass, cannot be used as 
 a pure verbal adjective. The ex- 
 amples adduced by Eisner in loc. will 
 all bear a different explanation; and 
 even those in which the use of the 
 participle seems to approach that of the 
 Hebrew part, (see Gesen. Or. § 131. 
 i), such as Eev. xxi. 8 (perf. part.), 
 Jude 12 (aor.), or Heb. xii. 18 (pres.), 
 can all be explalAed grammatically; 
 
 see Winer, Gr. § 45. i, p. 307. 
 The only tenable translations then 
 are (a) 'he had been accused,' or (J) 
 'he had been condemned;' and of these 
 (5) seems obviously most in accord- 
 ance with the context and the nature 
 of the case. As St Peter's conduct 
 had been condemned, not merely by 
 himself (Alf.), but, as seems more 
 natural, generally by the sounder 
 body of Christians at Antioch, St 
 Paul, as the representative of the 
 anti-Judaioal party, feels himself au- 
 thorized to rebuke him, and that too 
 (ver. 14) publicly. 
 
 12. TivoLs c£iro 'luKuPov mMy be 
 connected together, and grammati- 
 cally translated ' some of the fol- 
 lowers of James : ' see Jelf, Gr. § 620. 
 3; Bernhardy, Synt. v. 12, p. 222. 
 As however in the N. T. this mode 
 of periphrasis (0! &ir6 k.t.X) appears 
 mainly confined to places (Mark iii, 
 22, Acts vi. 9, xxvii. 44, al.), or abs- 
 tract substantives (Acts xv. 5), it will 
 seem most exact to connect iiri 'laK. 
 with i\9etv. So distinctly ^th.-Pol., 
 omitting however the nvh' the other 
 Vv. mainly preserve the order of the 
 Greek. We certainly cannot deduce 
 from this that they were ' sent by 
 James' (Theoph., Mey., Alf.), for 
 though this use of Arb does occur 
 (comp. Matt, xxvi. 47 with Mark 
 xiv. 43, and see Fritz. Maith. Vol. I. 
 p. 779), yet the common meaning of 
 the prep, in such constructions is local 
 rather than ethical, — separation rather 
 than mission fromj compare Knapp, 
 Script. Va/r. Argum. p. 510. The 
 men in question probably represented 
 themselves as rigid followers of St 
 James, and are thus briefly noticed as 
 having come &rb 'Ia/ci6|8ou rather than 
 Airb 'lepoffoXifiap. 
 
 D 
 
34 
 
 nPOS TAAATAZ. 
 
 KOI oKpwpil^eu eavTov, ^o^ovft.evoi rovs bk vepirofirji' 
 
 13 kai a-vvvTreKpiOtjcrav avrcp Kal 01 XotTraii ^lovSaioi, wcrre 
 
 14 KOI Bapvd^ai a-vvair^x^^ avTwi/ t^ {nroKpicrei. aX\' 
 
 OTivi^cflitv] ' was eating with,' i. e. 
 again followed that course which in 
 the case of Cornelius similarly called 
 forth the censure of o£ & irepiTonTJs 
 (Acts xi. 2), but was then nobly vindi- 
 cated. Of the two follow- 
 ing verbs iiriar. and d^iip. (both 
 governing kavrbv) the first does not 
 mark the secret, the second the open 
 course (Matth.), but simply the initial 
 and more completed acts respectively : 
 the second was the result of the first, 
 De Wette in loc. The reading 
 TJ\Bev (Lachm.) has very strong ex- 
 ternal authority [BD'FGK ; 2 mss. ; 
 Clarom.], but is not improbably a 
 conformation to the sing, which fol- 
 lows. (l>opoi!|i.€- 
 vos] ' fea/ring,'' 'became he feared,' 
 
 '\0O^ ^-»J?? ^ Q*^ [quia time- 
 
 bat] ; causal participle explaining the 
 feeling which led to the preceding acts ; 
 'timens ne culparetur ab ipsis,' Ire- 
 nseus, adv. Seer. in. n (ad fin.). The 
 Greek commentators [there is a lacuna 
 in Theod.] and others (see Poll 
 Synops. in loc.) have endeavoured to 
 niodify the application of this word, 
 but without lexical authority. As on 
 a different occasion (Matt. xiv. 30), 
 BO here again the Apostle drew back 
 from a course into which his first and 
 best feelings had hastily led him. 
 Some strongly expressed remarks on 
 this subject will be found in South, 
 Serm. xxviii. Vol. 11. p. 476 (Tegg). 
 To4s in irtpiT.] See Col. iv. 1 1, Titus 
 i. 10. 
 
 13. oTJVUirtKp. a«T(p] 'joined with 
 him Ml dissimulation;' result of the 
 bud example, — the secession of the 
 rest of the Jewish Christians at An- 
 tiooh from social communion with the 
 
 Gentile converts. The meaning of 
 (Twvireicp. is softened down by Syr. 
 [subjecerunt se cum illo], Clarom. 
 (' consenserunt cum illo'), al., but 
 without reason ; these very Christians 
 of Antioch were the first who knew 
 and rgoiced at (Acts xv. 31) the 
 practically contrary decision of the 
 Council. A good 'praelectio' on this 
 text will be found in Sanderson, 
 Wori:s, Vol. IV. p. 44 (ed. Jacobs). 
 (u'cTTe] 'so that,' — as a simple matter 
 of fact. In this form of the consecutive 
 sentence the distinction between uittc 
 with the indie, and the infin. can 
 scarcely be maintained in translation. 
 The latter (the objective form, as it is 
 termed by Schmalfeld) is used when 
 the result is a necessary and logical 
 consequence of what has previously 
 been enunciated ; the former (the sub- 
 jective form) when it is stated by the 
 writer as a simple and unconditioned 
 fact : see Klotz, Devar. Vol. II. p. 
 772; and esp. Schmalfeld, Synt. § 155 
 sq., and BUendt, Zex. Soph. s. v. Vol. 
 n. p. nor sq., where the uses of this 
 particle are well discussed. Here, 
 for example, St Paul notices the 
 lapse of Barnabas as a fact, without 
 implying that it was a necessary con- 
 sequence of the behaviour of the 
 others. This distinction however is 
 appy. not always observed in the 
 N. T., nor indeed always in classical 
 writers : comp. Winer, Or. § 41. .s. 
 I, p. 269. o-vvairrfxAT) 
 
 oOtwv rfl ■iiroKp£o-6i] 'was carried 
 away with them by their dissimula- 
 tion,' sell, into dissimulation : 'cum da- 
 tive personEe cvvairdy, simul cum aliquo 
 abduci, etc. declarat ; cum dativo rei 
 simul per rem abduci, etc. significat : ' 
 Fritz. Rom. xii. 16, Vol. III. p. 88 sq. 
 
II. 13, H- 
 
 35 
 
 ore eiSov on ovk opQoTroSova-iv irpos rtjv aX^Oetav 
 Tov evayyeXiov, eiirov tw Krjcba e/nrpo(r6ev iravTWV 
 El arv 'loi/^ajoy inrdp)(wv eOi/iKoiis koi ovk 'loi/oai'/cmy 
 
 14. 'lovSoiKiSs fijs] This order is maintained by ABCFGN ; 4 mss. ; Aug., 
 Boern., Amiat., Demid., al. ; Or., Phil. (Carp.); many Lai Ff. (but Koi 
 ovk'IovS. is omitted in Clarom., Sang., Ambrst., Sedul., Agap.): so Lachm., 
 Meyer. Tisch. reads idi>. fjs xal ovk 'IouS., with BEKL ; nearly all mss. ; 
 majority of Vt. ; Chrys., Theod., Dam., Theophyl., OEoum. (Rec, Scholz, Alf.). 
 External authority is thus decidedly in favour of the text, and is but little 
 modified by internal arguments, for a correction for perspicuity {iBv. fjs) on the 
 one hand is quite as probable as the assumed one 'for elegance' (A If.) on the other. 
 
 2i>y thus refers to the companions 
 in the t4 AiriyeaBai' iiroKplaa to 
 the instrument hy which, — not 'rei 
 ad quam' (Bretach., comp. Alf.), a 
 questionable construction even in 
 poetry (Bernhardy, Synt. III. 12, p. 
 95), — and, by obvious inference, the 
 state into which they were carried 
 away: see 1 Pet. iii. 17. Fritzsche 
 cites Zosim. Hist. v. 6, koI airii Bi ii 
 XirdpTTj ffVvaiT'^eTo r^ /coic^ t^s'EX- 
 \d5os dXcSirci, k.t.X. add Clem. Alex. 
 Strom. I. p. 311, Tg ijSovy avvaira- 
 yS/io'os. 'TirSxpto'is is well 
 
 paraphrased by Wieseler {Ckronol. 
 p. 197), as 'a practical denial of their 
 better [spiritual] insight,' — and (we 
 add) of their better feelings and know- 
 ledge; see above, on o'ln/VTeKpldtja'av. 
 
 14, OVK opSoiroSova-iv^'walJced not 
 v/prightly;' a fcaf \eybii. in the N. T., 
 and very rare elsewhere : Dindorf and 
 Jacobs in Steph. Fhesaur. s. v. cite a 
 few instances from later writers, e. g. 
 Theodor. Stud. p. 308 B, 443 D, 473 
 D, 509 D, 5751: (Sirmond, Op. Var. 
 Vol. V. Venet. 1728). The meaning 
 however is suflSeiently obvious, and 
 rightly expressed by the ' recte ambu- 
 lare' of Vulg., Syr., and the best Vv. : 
 comp. dpdSwovs, Soph. Antig. 972 (985), 
 the similar verb dpffoTop.eTi' in 2 Tim. ii. 
 1 5, and notes in lac. 
 On the idiomatic use of the present in 
 
 the narration of a past event, when 
 'continuance' or 'process' is implied, 
 see Winer, Gr. § 40. 2. c, p. 239, and 
 esp. Schmalfeld, Synt. § 54. 6, p. 96. 
 irpJs Ti]v <)iX'*]0.] 'according to the 
 truth,' i. e. ' according to the rule of 
 the truth ; ' the prep, here seeming to 
 mark not so much the aim or direction 
 (Hamm., Mey., Alf.), as the rule or 
 measwe of the dpBoiroSuv' comp. 2 Cor. 
 V. 10, KopUffrp-ai. . .Trpbs a ^wpa^ev, and 
 see Winer, Gr. § 49. h, p. 361. The 
 objection of Meyer, that St Paul 
 always expresses 'rule,' 'measure,' (fee. 
 after verbs eimdi by (card not irpoj, 
 does not here fully apply, as motion 
 is much more obscurely expressed in 
 SpdoTodety than wepiiraretv (St Paul's 
 favourite verb of moral motion), which 
 appears in all the instances that 
 Meyer has adduced, viz. Bom. viii. 4, 
 xiv. 15; I Cor. iii. 3. Er|(|>$] 
 
 Rec. reads II^p^ with DEFGKL ; al., 
 but E^0^ is decidedly to be retained 
 with ABCN ; Vulg. (Amiat.), Syr. 
 Spirpoo-BEV irdvTCDv] 'before all men;* 
 'publicum scandalum non poterat 
 private curari,' Jerome ; comp. i Tim. 
 V. 20. The speech which 
 
 follows (ver. 14 — 21) is appy. rightly 
 regarded as the substance of what was 
 said by the Apostle on this important 
 occasion; see on ver. 15. 
 e0vi.Kus....£ijs] 'livest after u, Gentile 
 
 D2 
 
36 
 
 npo2 taaata: 
 
 15 ^^y, TTw? ra edvri avayKci^eis 'lovSdi^eiV, fi/xeii (fjvcrei 
 
 TTus] It IB diflSoult to imagine -why Tisch. rejected this reading, supported as 
 itis byABCDEFGK; mss.; majority of Vv.; Or., Dam., and Lat. Ft.{Griesb., 
 ScTiolz, Lachm,, Be W., Mey., approved by Mill, Prolegom. p. 123). Por tI, 
 which seems very much like an interprctatinn, the authorities are KL ; great 
 majority of mss. ; Syr.-Phil., al.; Chrys., Theod., Theoph., CEcum. {Rec, Tisch.). 
 
 n,' soil, in thy general and 
 habitual way of living. The tense 
 must not be overpressed. St Peter 
 was not at that exact moment living 
 iBviKur his former conduct however 
 (HiTo, Tuv eSviSv ffw/icBuv, ver. 12) is 
 justly assumed by St Paul as his 
 regular and proper course of living 
 (comp. Neand. Planting, Vol. II. p. 
 83, Bohn), and specified as such to 
 give a greater force to the reproof; 
 see Usteri in loc. dvay/Kaius] 
 
 ' consirainest thou;' not 'invitas ex- 
 emplo,' Grot., nor even ' wouldest 
 thou constrain,' Conyb., — but simply 
 
 and plainly 'cogis,' Vulg., ^ \| 
 
 Syr., with reference to the moral 
 influence and practical constraint 
 (Hamm., Fell) which the authority 
 and example of an Apostle like St 
 Peter could not fail to have exercised 
 on the Christians at Antioch. To 
 suppose that the Apostle joined with 
 o2 &T6'laK. in actual outward coercion 
 (Wieseler, Chronol. p. 198) is neither 
 required by the word (see remarks in 
 Sturz, Lex. Xenoph. Vol. 1. p. 186) 
 nor in any way to be inferred from 
 the context. 'lovSat^civ] ' to 
 
 Judaize,' 'Judaizare,' Vulg., Clarom., 
 'iudaiviskon,' Goth. ; not merely syn- 
 onymous with 'louSa'iKiSs fifx (Sohott ; 
 comp. Syr.), but probably a little 
 more definite and inclusive, and carry- 
 ing with it the idea of a more studied 
 imitation and obedience; comp. £sth. 
 viii. 17. 
 
 15. i^ficis K.T.X,] 'We,' soil, 'you 
 and I, and others like us;' /cpii'OTroier 
 
 rh \ey6fii,eiiov, Chrys. St Paul here 
 begins, as Meyer observes, with a 
 concessive statement: 'We, I admit, 
 have this advantage, that by birth we 
 are Jews, not Gentiles and conse- 
 quently [Kal consecutive, comp. notes 
 on I Thess. iv. j, and Elotz, Devar. 
 Vol. I. p. 107) as such sinners.' In 
 the very admission however there 
 seems a gentle irony; 'born Jews — 
 yes, and nothing more — sinners of the 
 Jews at best;' comp. Stier, Ephes. 
 Vol. I. p. 2S7- With regard to 
 
 the construction, it seems best with 
 Heim. to supply iff/j.iv to this verse, 
 which thus constitutes a concessive 
 protasis, ver. 16 [elddres Si k.t.X.) 
 supplying the apodosis. It is now 
 scarcely necessary to add that in sen- 
 tences of this nature there is no 
 ellipsis of /liv 'recte autem ibi uou 
 ponitur (ju^j') ubi aut non sequitur 
 membrum oppositum, aut scriptores 
 oppositionem addere nondum consti- 
 tuerant, autloquentes alterius membri 
 oppositionem qu^cunque de caus^ non 
 indixerunt,' Fritz. Rom. i. 19, Vol. 
 II. p. 423; comp. Jelf, Or. § 770, 
 and Buttmann, Mid. (Excurs. xii.) 
 p. 148. This verse and what 
 
 follows have been deemed as addressed 
 to the Galatians either directly (Calv., 
 Grot.), or indirectly, in the form of 
 meditative musings (Jowett), — but 
 with little plausibility. The speech 
 seems clearly continued to the end of 
 the chapter (Chrys., Theod., Jerome), 
 and to be the suistance of what was 
 said: it is not however unnatural 
 also to suppose that it may here be 
 
II. 15, 1 6. 
 
 37 
 
 lovoaioi KOI ovK e^ edvcov dfiapTociXol' elSore^ ie on l6 
 ov oiKaiovrai avdocairos e^ epywv vofiov iav firj Sia 
 
 expressed in a, slightly altered form, 
 and in a ehape calculated to be more 
 mtblligible, and more immediately 
 applicable to the Apostle's present 
 readers. For a paraphrase, see notes 
 to Transl., and also Usteri, Lehrb. n. 
 I. 2, p. i6i. <|>vVei,] 'hy 
 
 nature;' not merely by habit and cus- 
 tom as the proselytes; ix yimvs Kal 
 oi irpo(Ti)KvToi, Theod.-Mops. This 
 passage is important as serving to fix 
 the meaning of ^licris in loci dogmatici, 
 such as Eph. ii. 3: see esp. Stier, 
 Eph^. Vol. I. p. 257. 
 d|iapT(i>Xo(] The point of view from 
 which a Jew must naturally consider 
 them (Eph. ii. 12); perhaps with 
 slight irony (Stier, Sed. Jes. Vol. VL 
 p. 307). That they were so regarded 
 needs no other proof than such ex- 
 pressions as reKuvat, xal afiafyroKoL' 
 comp. Tobit xiii, 6. 
 
 16. elBoTEs Be] 'iut as we Jcnow,' 
 
 1 - ^ , -^ ^!^iD [quia novimus] 
 
 Syr. ; causal participle (Jelf, Gr. § 697, 
 Schmalfeld, Synt. § 207) attached to 
 iwurTeiaaiiev, and introducing the 
 apodosis to the preceding concessire 
 sentence. Keconsideration seems still 
 to show that of the many explanations 
 of this difficult passage this is appy. 
 the simplest. According to the com- 
 mon interpret., elddres S^ — "Kpurrov 
 forms an interposed sentence between 
 ver. 15 and the latter part of ver. 16; 
 but here Si is a serious obstacle, as its 
 proper force can only be brought out 
 by supplying althorugk (De W.) to 
 ver. 15, unless indeed with Alf. we 
 venture on the somewhat doubtful 
 translation ' nevertheless,' or fall back 
 [with AD'K ; some Vv. ; Greek Ff. 
 (Rec.)] on the still more doubtful 
 omission. SikoioStbi] 'is 
 
 justified,^ ' Deo probatus redditur ;' tJ 
 SiKdiovirdai being in antithesis to ri 
 eiplaxeffdai, i/iaproASs, ver. 17 : see 
 Schott in loc, where the different 
 meanings of SiKaioOa-dai are explained 
 with great perspicuity. The broad 
 distinction to be observed lies between 
 (a) the absolute use of the verb, whe- 
 ther with regard to God (Luke vii. 
 29), Christ (i Tim. iii. 16), or men 
 (Rom. iv. 2, James ii. 21) ; and (6) the 
 relative use (*ratione habits vel con- 
 troversise cui obnoxius fuerit, vel 
 peccatorum quae vere oommiserit '). 
 In this latter division we must again 
 distinguish between the purely yjidja'a? 
 meaning (Matth. xii. 37) and the far 
 wider dogmatical meaning, which in- 
 volves the idea not only of forgiveness 
 of past sins (Rom. vi. 7), but also of 
 a spiritual change of heart through 
 the in-working power of faith. See 
 more in Schott in loc, and in Bull, 
 Harm. Apost. Ch. I. § 2 (with Grabe's 
 notes) : and on the whole subject con- 
 sult Homily on Salv. m. i ; Jackson, 
 Creed, Book IV. 6, 7 ; Waterland ore 
 Jastif. Vol. VI. p. I sq, ; and esp. the 
 admirable explanations and distinc- 
 tions of Hooker, Serm, II. Vol. Jil. 
 p. 609 sq. (ed. Keble). 
 e| ?pY<i)V v6|j,ov] ' hy the worlcs of the 
 law;'' as the cause of the SiKaiouffdai' 
 comp. Bull, Sarm. Apost. Ch. i. § 8, 
 with the notes of Grabe, p. 16 (ed. 
 Burt.). With regard to the exact 
 force of ix it may be observed that in 
 its primary ethical sense it denotes (a) 
 origin (more immediate, iirb more re- 
 mote) ; from which it passes through 
 the intermediate ideas of (fi) result 
 from, and (7) consequence of, to that 
 of (5) nearly direct causality (Eost u. 
 Palm, Jjex. ix IV. i), thus closely 
 approximating to {iirb with a gen. (a 
 
38 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 iria-rews 'Irjcrov Xpicrrov, Koi ^fieti eh Xpia-rov 'Itjcrovv 
 
 1 6. 'It/o-oO XpiffToO] So lachm. and Tisch. (ed. 2) with CDEFGKLN ; 
 majority of msa. ; nearly all Vv. ; Chrys., Theod., al. The order Xpt<TTov 'Ir,- 
 ffoO, now adopted by Tisch. (ed. 7), has the support of AB ; Viotorin., August. 
 {Lachm. ed. min.), but was perhaps suggested by the following Xpiarbv 
 '1tj(ToOv. 
 
 common use in Herod.) and 6ii with 
 a gen. (Fritz. Bom. v. 16, Vol. I. p. 
 332). In many cases it is hard to 
 decide between these different shades 
 of meaning, especially in a writer so 
 varied in his use of prepp. as St Paul : 
 here however we are guided both by 
 the context and by the analogy of 
 Scripture. From both it seems clear 
 that iK is here used in its simple causal 
 sense ; the whole object of the speech 
 being to show that the works of the 
 law have no 'causalls ivipyeia* in 
 man's justification. On the contrary, 
 in the antithetical passage of St James 
 (cb. ii. 24), just as bmaiowBai, has a 
 slightly different and more inclusive 
 meaning (see Hooker, Serm. II. 20), so 
 also has the prep., — which proportion- 
 ately recedes from ideas of more direct 
 to those of more remote causality (causa 
 sine qua non) ; comp. Hamm., Pract. 
 Catech. p. 78 (A.-C. L.). 
 ip7<i)V v<j(i<«)] Gen. oijecti : ' deeds by 
 which the requisitions of the law are 
 fulfilled,' 'eorum prsestationem quae 
 lex prsecipit' (Beza), — the D*B'3?D 
 D''''^l^l^ of the Rabbinical writers, 
 and the directly antithetical expression 
 to i./MapT'/i/MTa vbiiov. Wisdom ii. 12 
 (May.) ; see exx. in Winer, 6r. § 30. 1, 
 p. 167, The v6/tos here, it need scarcely 
 be said, is not merely the ceremonial 
 (Theod., al.) but the whole law, — the 
 Mosaic law in its widest significance ; 
 see Fritz. Rom. iii. 20, Vol. i. p. 179. 
 Ictv i<.i^] Two constructions here seem 
 to be blended, oi Sik. &v9p. i^ (pywv 
 vi/iov, and oi Sik. &v6p. itv juj) S(& 
 itlnreus 'I. X. The two particles, 
 
 though apparently equivalent in mean- 
 ing to dWd, never lose their proper 
 exceptive force : see Fritz. Jiom. xiv. 
 14, Vol. III. p. 19s ; and notes on ch. 
 i. 7. 8ia irCoTtcos 'Iiiiro« 
 
 XpioToO] ' by faith in or on Jesus 
 Christ;' 'per fidem in Jesu Christo 
 coUooatam:' Eom. iii. 22. Stier {Ephes. 
 Vol. I. p. 447) explains t/itt. '1170-. 
 Xp., both here and esp. ch. iii. 22, in 
 a deeper sense, ' faith which belongs 
 to, has its foundation m Christ' (comp. 
 Mark xi. 22, Ephes. iii. 12), the gen. 
 'I^cr. Xp. being the gen. snljecti. This 
 view may deserve consideration in 
 other places, but here certainly the 
 context and preceding antithesis seem 
 decidedly in favour of the more simple 
 gen. objecti. It may be 
 
 observed that Si4 here closely approxi- 
 mates in meaning to iK below, the 
 same idea of causality being (as Meyer 
 suggests) expressed under two general 
 forms, origin and meaTis. We must 
 be careful then not to press unduly 
 the distinction between the prepp. : 
 the antithesis here is not so much 
 between the modes of operation, as 
 between the very nature and essence 
 of the principles themselves. As to 
 the doctrinal import of Sid, irWews, 
 Waterland {on Jnstif. p. 22) well re- 
 marks that ' faith is not the mean by 
 which grace is wrought or conferred, 
 but the mean whereby it is accepted 
 or received;' it is 'the only hand,' as 
 Hooker appropriately says, 'which 
 putteth on Christ to justification,' 
 Serm. 11. 31: consult also Forbes, 
 Gytisid. Mod. Book i. 3. 10—13. 
 
II. 
 
 17- 
 
 39 
 
 67ri(rTei/cra/iei', Iva StKatwOuifiev eK iricrTewi XpiarTov 
 Kai ovK e^ epywv vofiov, Sion e^ epywv vo/xov ov SiKaiw- 
 Oi^a-tTai iraa-a crap^. et §e ^rjToOvTes SiKatcoO^vai «/ I7 
 
 Kol TJn'ts] 'we also;' 'nos etiam quam- 
 quam uatalibuB Judsei, legi Mosis ob- 
 noxii,' Schott. eis Xp.'Irio-. 
 
 4iria-Tcv(ra)i.«v] 'put our faith in Christ 
 Jesus;' not 'have become believera' 
 (Peile), but simply aoristic, the tense 
 pointing to the partioular time when 
 this act of faith was first manifested ; 
 see Windischm. in he. In the for- 
 mula viffTeietv els with aco. — less usual 
 in St Paul's Epp. (Rom. x. 14, Phil, 
 i. ■2gi) but very common in St John, — 
 the prep, retains its proper force, and 
 marks not the mere direction of the 
 belief (or object toward which), but 
 the more strictly theological ideas of 
 union and incorporation with; comp. 
 notes on ch. iii. 27 ; Winer, Gr. § 31. 
 5, p. igi; and for the various con- 
 structions of TruTTfiiii) in the N. T., 
 notes on i Tim. i. 16; and Keuss, 
 TMol. GhrU. iv. 14, Vol. 11. p. 129. 
 The distinction drawn by AU. between 
 X/j. 'Iijir. in this clause and 'Iijo-. Xp. 
 above seems very precarious, esp. in a 
 passage where there is so much differ- 
 ence of reading. Sioti] 
 'because that,' 'propter quod,' Vulg., 
 
 J^-^iO Syr. ; scarcely 'for' (it is an 
 
 axiom that), Alf., — for though 5i6ti 
 [properly quam ob rem, and then quo- 
 niam] is often used by later writers in 
 a sense little, if at all, differing from 
 Stc (see Fritz. Bom. i. 19, Vol. i. 57), 
 it does not appear to be interchange- 
 able with ydp, but always to retain 
 some trace of its proper causal force ; 
 comp. notes on 1 Thess. ii. 8. 
 The reading is doubtful. The text is 
 only supported by CD'EKL; very 
 many mss., Vv., and Ff.,— but is per- 
 haps to be preferred, as Sti [Lachm. 
 
 with ABD^FGS; j mss.] seema more 
 probably a. correction of the Idnger 
 Si(5r(, than the reverse. 
 ov 81.K. iraca iri^pl] 'all flesh shall 
 NOT be ju,stifl£d' 'non justificabitur 
 omnis caro,' Vulg. ; Eom. iii. 20, 
 comp. Psalm cxliii. '.:, 01) BtKaittiB'^aeTat, 
 ivibindv aov Tcis ftSv a somewhat ex- 
 pressive Hebraism (see Ewald, 6r. p. 
 657), according to which oi is to be 
 closely associated with the verb, and 
 the predication regarded as compre- 
 hensively and emphatically negative ; 
 non-justification is predicated of all 
 flesh; see Winer, Gr. § 26. i, p. 155 ; 
 Vorst, de Bebraiamis, p. 519; Fritz. 
 Eom. iii. 20, Vol.1, p. 179; and comp. 
 Thol. Beitrage, No. 15, p. 79. The 
 future is here ethical, i. c. it indicates 
 not so much mere futurity as moral 
 possibility, — and with 01) something 
 that neither can nor will ever happen : 
 see esp. Thiersch, de Pent. III. 11, p. 
 158 sq., where this and similar uses of 
 the future are well illustrated ; comp. 
 Bernhardy, Synt. X. 5, p. 377 ; Winer, 
 Gr. § 40. 6, p. 251. On the 
 
 doctrinal distinctions in St Paul's Epp. 
 between the pres., perf., and fut., of 
 SiKaiovaffai with TrtffTis, see XJsteri, 
 Lehrb. 11. i. 1, p. 90; comp, Peile, 
 Append. Vol. 11. note D. The order 
 06 Slk. i^ ipyav vbi),. (Rec.) is only 
 found in KL ; mss. ; Goth., al. ; Theod. 
 (i), al., and is rejected by all recent 
 critics. 
 
 17. A Zi] 'But if, in accordance 
 with these premises of thine, assuming 
 the truth of these thy retrogressive 
 principles;' (rvWoyij^erat tA clpr]fi.ha, 
 Theod. ^T)TOuvT€s] 'qucerentes 
 
 — invenii sumus, nervosum antithe- 
 ton,' Bang. ev Xpurru] 'm 
 
40 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 XjOJcTTw evpeOijfxev Kal avTol dfiapraiKol, Spa XptaToi 
 18 dfjiaprlai StaKovo?', jJi-h yevoiro. el yap a KareXvera 
 
 Christ;'' not ' through Christ ' (Peile), 
 but 'm Christ,' — in mystical union 
 with him; see Winer, Gr. g 48. a, p. 
 346, note. It is right to notice that 
 this distinction between Iv rivi and 
 Sii, TWOS is strongly opposed by Fritz. 
 {Opusc. p. i8,(, note), and his objec- 
 tions, considered merely grammati- 
 cally, deserve consideration ; but here, 
 as only too often (comp. Som. Vol. II. 
 p. 82 sq.), he puts out of sight the 
 theological meaning which appears re- 
 gularly attached to iv Xpi<rT(fi. In 
 the present passage the meaning is 
 practically the same, whicheyer trans- 
 lation be adopted ; but in the one the 
 deep significance of the formula (union, 
 fellowship, with Christ) is kept in view, 
 in the other it is obscured and lost 
 sight of; comp. notes on Eph. i. 3, 
 ii. 6. cvpl6i)|iEv] 'were found 
 
 to he, after all our seeking;'' not either 
 a Hebraism, or !>■ periphrasis of the 
 verb substantive (Kypke, Obs. Vol. I. 
 p. 2). The verb eiplaK. has always in 
 the N. T. its proper force, and indicates 
 not merely the existence of a. thing, 
 but the manifestation or acknowledg- 
 ment of that existence ; ' if we are 
 found (deprehendimur) in the eyes of 
 God and men to be sinners;' comp. 
 Matth. i. 18, Luke xvii. 18, Acts viii. 
 40, Rom. vii. 10, al. ; and see esp. 
 Winer in loc., and Gr. § 65. 8, p. 542. 
 Kal a^ToC] 'ourselves also,* as much as 
 those whom we proudly regard only 
 as Gentiles and sinners. Spa] 
 
 'ergoneV ' are we to say, as we must 
 on such premises ? ' ironical and inter- 
 rogative: not fipa (Chrys., Ust., al.); 
 for though in two out of the three 
 passages in which Spa occurs (Luke 
 xviii. 8, Acts viii. 30) it anticipates a 
 negative, and not, as here, an affirm. 
 answer, it must still be retained in 
 
 the pi'esent case, as p.T) yimtro in St 
 Paul's Epp. is never found except 
 after a question. The particle has 
 here probably an ironical force, 'are 
 we to say pray!' i. e. in eflfect, 'we 
 are to say, I suppose ;' see JeU, Gr. 
 §873.2. It is thus not /or ap' ofi— at 
 all times a very questionable position, 
 as in most if not all such ca*ies it 
 will be found that there is a faint irony 
 or politely assumed hesitation, which 
 seems to have suggested the use of 
 the dubitative Spa, even though it is 
 obvious that an affirmative answer is 
 fully expected. The same may be said 
 of 'ne' for ' nonne:' see esp. Ktihner, 
 Xen. Mem. n. 6, and id. TuscvX. Bis- 
 put. II. II, 26 ; comp. Stallb. Plato, 
 Rep. VIII. p. 566 A. The original iden- 
 tity of Spa and ipa (Klotz, Devar. 
 Vol. II. p. 180) is impugned (appy. 
 with doubtful success) by Dunbar, 
 Class. Museum, Vol. v. p. 102 sq., see 
 Shepherd, ib. Vol. v. p. 470 sq. 
 dfiaprCas 8ic{kovos] 'a minister of 
 sin ;' soil, in effect, a promoter, » fur- 
 therer of it (comp. 2 Cor. xi. 15), one 
 engaged in its service ; ct/iapria being 
 almost personified, and, as its position 
 suggests, emphatically echoing the 
 preceding a/iapruiXol, — ' of sin (not 
 of righteousness), — of a dispensation 
 which not only leaves us where we 
 were before, but causes us, when we 
 exclusively follow it, to be for this very 
 reason accounted sinners.' Bi Si Sri 
 rhv v6/j.ov KaToKiirdvTes ry 'K.piffTQ 
 irpoaeKtfKidaii.ev. . . irapd^ao'is [or rather 
 Sp.apTia'] TOVTO vev6fU(TTai, els ainhv ?; 
 alrla x^P'^f^^^ rbv defftrSrTji' ^ptffrdv, 
 Theod. ; comp. Chrys. in loc. The 
 argument is in fact a reductio ad ab- 
 surdum : if seeking for justification in 
 Christ is only to lead us to be accounted 
 sinners,— not merely as being without 
 
11. i8. 
 
 41 
 
 Tavra TraXtv oikoSo/ulw, irapa^oLTriv ifiavrov arvviarravM. 
 
 law and in the posiition of Gentiles 
 (Mey .), but as having wilfully neglected 
 an appointed means of salvation, — 
 then Christ, who was the cause of our 
 neglecting it, must needs be, not only 
 negatively but positively, a minister 
 of sin ; see De Wette in loc. 
 (Ill yivoiToi] 'he it not so,' 'far he it,' 
 
 •absit,' Vulg., »CDjj [propitius f uit ; 
 
 p 
 comp. Matth. svi. 22] Syr., i. e. in 
 effect (esp. in a context like the pre- 
 sent), 'God forbid,'' Auth. This ex- 
 pressive formula, though not uncom- 
 mon in later writers (see exx. in Ka- 
 phel, Annot. Vol. II. p. 239, comp. 
 Sturz, J)ial. Maced. p. 204), only oc- 
 curs in the If. T. in St Paul's Epp. ; 
 viz. Kom. iii. 4, 6, 31, vi. i, 15, vii. 
 7, 13, ix. 14, xi. I, 11; I Cor. vi. 15; 
 Gal. iii. 21. In all these cases it is 
 interjectional, and in all except the 
 last rebuts (as Conyb. has remarked) 
 an inference drawn from St Paul's 
 doctrine by an adversary. The nature 
 of the inference makes the revulsion of 
 thought {Taxi<^s dTTOTnjSp, Dam.) either 
 more or less apparent, and will usually 
 suggest the best mode of translation, 
 
 18. «t ■y'ip] '^or if/ direct con- 
 firmation of the immediately preced- 
 ing /i^ yivoiTo (CJsteri, Lehrb, II. i. 2, 
 p. 162, note), and indirect and allu- 
 sive expansion of the eOpedTjfiev dfiap- 
 riaXoi 'I say p,^ yimiTO in ref. to 
 Christ, for it is not in seeking to 
 be justified in Him, but in seeking to 
 rebuild the same structure that I have 
 destroyed (though nobler materials 
 now lie around) that my sin, my 
 transgression of the law's own prin- 
 ciples, really lies.' In the change to 
 the first person sing, there may be a 
 delicate application to St Peter per- 
 sonally, which 'qlementise causfi,' is 
 expressed in this rather than in the 
 
 second person (Alf., Mey.) : it must 
 not be forgotten however that the 
 fervour as weE as the introspective 
 character of St Paul's writings leads 
 him frequently to adopt this nerairxv- 
 fiaTur/Mts els iavrbv see esp. Eom. vii. 
 7 sq. ; so also i Cor. iii. 5 sq., iv. 3 sq., 
 vi. 12, x. 29, 30, xiii. II, ,12, &c. 
 comp. Knapp, Script. Var. Argum. 
 No. 12, p. 431, 437. Tavra] 
 
 ' these — and nothing better in their 
 place,' Meyer. The emphasis rests on 
 Tavra, not on ifiavrdv (Olsh.), the 
 position of which [TropajS. I/mvt&v, 
 not e/iavrdp Tapa^.] shows it clearly 
 to be unemphatic. 
 irapapdTTjv] 'a transgressor,' soil. toD 
 
 vbinov PrOaa ^^ (ni [trans- 
 gressor mandati] Syr. But in what 
 particular manner! Surely not 'in 
 having formerly neglected what I now 
 reassert' (De W., Alf.), — a somewhat 
 weak and anticlimactic reference tu 
 eitp407ip>ev ap,apr(a\oi, — but, as the 
 following yip and the unfolding ar- 
 gument seem clearly to require, 'in 
 reconstructing what I ought to per- 
 ceive is only temporary and prepara- 
 tive.' JReconstruction of the same 
 materials is in respect of the law 
 not only a tacit avowal of ifiapria 
 {eip48. ap,apT.) in having pulled it 
 down, but is a real and definite irapd- 
 /Sairis of aJl its deeper principles. So, 
 very distinctly, Chrys., incipoi Sei^ai 
 i^oiXovTo Hrt d fiif TTjpuv rbv vbjiov 
 irapa^drTiS' ovtos els Toivavrlov irepU- 
 Tpeype rbv \byov, detKvbs Srt b T7]p6jv 
 rbv vb/wv TapapdTr}s, ov rijs wlffTeois, 
 cEXXd Kal avToS toO vbfwv. 
 The counter-argument that the / of 
 ver. 18 has 'given up' faith in Christ, 
 and so could never consider the law 
 as preparative (Alf.), is of no real 
 force J for in the first place the iyi) 
 
42 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 19 iyu) yap Sea vofiov vofiu) awiOavov tva Geto X^^crw. 
 
 had not given it up, but had only 
 added to it, and in the next place, 
 even had he done so, he might equally 
 show himself to be a real though un- 
 conaoious Tapa^drris. 
 lltavTov OTivKTrdvu] '/ set myself for- 
 ward,' 'demonstrate myself to he:' 
 Hesych. ffvvi0T6.veLv' iwatvetv, tpave- 
 povv, /Se/SatouK, vapariSivai. This 
 meaning, 'sinceris Atticis ignotum,' 
 Fritzsche {Rom. iii. 5, Vol. 1. p. 159) 
 deduces from the primary notion 
 compomndi ; ' ut esset ovvlaTrnd n, 
 -Compositis collectisque quae rem con* 
 tineant argumentis aliquid doceo : ' 
 see exx. in Wetst. Horn. iii. 5, 
 Schweigh, Lex, Polyh. B. v. The 
 form ffviitarriiu (Rec), only found in 
 D'(E?)KL, mss. and Ff., seems to be 
 merely a grammatical gloss. 
 
 19. lyw 7dp] 'For I truly:'' ex- 
 planatory confirmation of the pre- 
 ceding assertion ; the explanatory yi,p 
 showing how this rehabilitation of the 
 law actually amounts to a transgres- 
 sion of its true principles, while the 
 emphatic lyi) adds the force and vi- 
 tality of personal experience. In 
 the retrospective reference of irapa- 
 pdrrj! adopted by De W. and Alf. 
 (see above) the yip loses all its force : 
 it must either be referred, most awk- 
 wardly, to /4JJ yivoiro {De W.), or, 
 still worse, be regarded as merely 
 transitional. Sid v6|jiov 
 vd(i,(p dir^Oavov] ' through the law died 
 to the law.' Of the many explanations 
 of these obscure words the following 
 (derived mainly from Chrys.) ap- 
 pears by far the most tenable and 
 satisfactory. The result may be 
 summed up in the following posi- 
 tions : (1) Ni/uo: in each case has 
 the same meaning: {2) That mean- 
 ing, as the context requires, must be 
 the Mosaic law (ver. 16), no gram- 
 
 matical arguments founded on the 
 absence of the article (Middleton in 
 loc.) having any real validity ; comp. 
 exx. in Winer, Gr. § 19, p. 112 : 
 (3) The law is regarded under the 
 same aspect as in Bom. vii. 6 — 13, a 
 passage in strictest analogy with the 
 present : (4) A(& vS/iov must not be 
 confounded with Sict i>6 /iov or xarii, 
 v6/iOV it was through the instrumen- 
 tality of the law {Si& ttjs ivToXijs, 
 Buom. vii. 8) that the sinful principle 
 worked within and brought death 
 upon all : (s) ' kiridavov is not merely 
 ' legi valedixi ' (comp. Kar-qpylfdiiv dTri 
 Tov vd/iov), but expresses generally 
 what is afterwards more specifically 
 expressed in ver. 20 by ffweo-Taipia/iai' 
 (6) 'SSfup is not merely the dative ' of 
 reference,' but a species of 'dativus 
 commodi ;' the expressions i^v rait 
 and iirodavelp rivi having a wide ap- 
 plication ; see Fritz. Rom. xiv. 7, Vol. 
 III. p. 176 ; — 'I died not only as con- 
 cerns the law, but as the law required.' 
 The whole clause then may thus be 
 paraphrased: '/, through the law, 
 owing to sin, was brought under its 
 curse ; but having undergone this with 
 and in the person of Christ (ch. iii. 
 13, comp. 2 Cor. v. 15), I died to the 
 law in the fullest and deepest sense, — 
 being both free from its claims, and 
 having satisfied its curse.' The dif- 
 ference between this and the common 
 interpretations lies principally in the 
 fuller meaning assigned to iiriSavov, 
 and its reference to a-vp€aTaipojp.at. 
 A careful investigation will be found 
 in tJsteri, Lehrb. 11. 1. 2, p. 164 sq. 
 Jtfo-o)] 'may live;' not a future (Alt), 
 — an anomalous usage (see notes on 
 ver. 4) which it is surely unnecessary 
 to obtrude on the present passage — 
 but the regular aor. suhj, (i Thess. v. 
 10), the tense of the dependent clause 
 
II. 1 9, 20. 
 
 43 
 
 XpioTTW a-vve<TTavpw/j.af TS> Se ovKeri eyco, T^ Se ev 20 
 efioi XjOtcTTO?" o ^e vvv IQa ev craoKi ev irlcrTei Xw T? 
 
 being in idiomatic accordance with 
 that of the leading member ; comp, 
 Sohmalfeld, Synt. § 144. i, p. 296. 
 
 20. XpiiTT^ oTJveoT.] '/ have been 
 and am crucified with Christ ;' more 
 exact specification of the preceding 
 i,iriBavov. This avvearaip., it need 
 scarcely be said, did not consist mere- 
 ly in the crucifixion of the lusts (ch. v. 
 24, GTrot.), but in that union with 
 Christ according to which the believer 
 shares the death of his crucified Lord ; 
 eiretS?; iv rQ ^airrifffiaTi tov re davd- 
 rov Kal TTJs dvoffTiiffecas riwov iirX'^pow, 
 ffvtrravpovadai iKeyopro r(^ Xptffry, 
 Theod.-Mops. in loc. ifi &k ovk^ti 
 l7<o] ' and it is no longer I that live;' 
 i.e. my old self; see Kom. vi. 6, and 
 comp. Neand. Plant. Vol. I. p. 422 
 (Bohu). The familiar but erroneous 
 punctuation of this clause (fw S^, 
 ovKSTL iyiiJf Sv ®^ K.r.X.) has been 
 rightly rejected by all recent editors 
 except Scholz. The only parsing 
 difficulty is in the use of Si • it does not 
 simply continue (Kiickert, Peile) or 
 expand (Ust.) the meaning of Xp. 
 avvear., but reverts with its proper 
 adversative force to ha Qe(f fijffw, 
 <rvi'e<yr. being not so much a, link in 
 the chain of thought, as a rapid and 
 almost parenthetical epexegesis of 
 d.iriBai'OV. l^ 8g The 
 
 S^ does not introduce any opposition 
 to the preceding negative clause (it 
 would then be dXX(£), but simply 
 marks the emphatic repetition of the 
 same verb (Hartung, Partih. hi, 2. 
 17, Vol. I. p. 168), just retaining 
 however that sub-ad/versative force 
 which is so comraou when a clause is 
 added, expressing a new, though not 
 dissimilar thought ; see Klotz, Deva/r. 
 Vol. n. p. 361. On 
 
 the doctrinal import of f5 ^i" ^M^o^ Xp. 
 
 ('Christ and His Spirit dwelling in 
 them, and as the soul of their souls 
 moving them unto such both inward 
 and outward actions as in the sight 
 of God are acceptable'), see Hooker, 
 Serm. in. i, Vol. in. p. 764 aq. (ed. 
 Keble). 6 h\ vvv tiS] 'yes, 
 
 the life which now I Uve;' explauatory 
 and partially concessive clause, obviat- 
 ing the possible objection arising from 
 the seeming incompatibility of the 
 assertion fi; in i/iol X/>. with the fact 
 of the actual i^ iv ffapKl' ' it is true,' 
 says the Apostle, ' I do yet live in the 
 flesh, an earthly atmosphere is still 
 around me, iwt even thus I live and 
 breathe in the pure element of faith, 
 — faith in Him who loved me, yea and 
 (koO gave such proofs of His love.' 
 With regard to the construction it is 
 only necessary to observe that 8 is 
 not 'quod attinet ad id quod' (Winer), 
 but simply the acous. ohjecti after fu, 
 soil. tV SJ ia^v ^V v\iv fffl" comp. 
 Rom. vi. 10, S yhp diriOavev, and see 
 Fritz, in loc. Vol. I. p. 393. 
 6k is thus not merely continuative 
 (De W.), but serves both to limit and 
 explain the preceding words (comp. 
 I Cor. i. 16, and Winer, Gr. § 53. 7. 
 b, p. 393), its true oppositive force 
 being sufficiently clear when the sup- 
 pressed thought (see below) is pro- 
 perly supplied : see Klotz, Deva/r, 
 Vol. II. p. 366. vCv] The 
 
 reference of this particle is doubtful. 
 It may specify the period since the 
 Apostle's conversion, but is much 
 more plausibly referred by Chrys., 
 Theod., al. to the present life in the 
 flesh, 'hsec vita niiea terrestris;' see 
 Phil. i. 22. In the former case the 
 qualitative and tacitly contrasting iv 
 aapKl ('earthly existence,' 'life in the 
 phenomenal world,' alaffijTii fu^, 
 
44 
 
 IIPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 Tov viov Tov Qeov Tov ayair^aavTOg fie Kai irapaSov- 
 31 TO? eavTOv virep ifiov. ovk aOerw rrjv xapiv tov Qeov- 
 el yap Sta vofiov SiKaiocrvvi}, apa Xpiaros owpeav 
 aireOavev. 
 
 Chrys. ; comp. Miiller, on Sin, Vol. I. 
 p. 453, Clark) would seem wholly 
 Buperfluoua. Iv irio-reij 
 
 'in, faith.' The instrumental sense, 
 '5^ faith,' adopted by Theodoret and 
 several ancient as well as modern ex- 
 positors, is, though inexact, not gram- 
 matically untenable. The deeper 
 meaning of the words is however 
 thus completely lost. On this 'life 
 in faith' see the middle and latter por- 
 tion of a profound paper, ' Bemerh. 
 zum Begriffe der Seligion,' by Leohler, 
 Stud. ». Kritih. for 1851, Part iv. 
 TQ TOV Tiioii TOW ©fiov] * namely that 
 of the Son of God;' distinctive, and 
 with solemn emphasis, — the insertion 
 of the article serving both to specify 
 and to enhance, 'in fide, e^que Filii 
 Dei' (see notes on i Tim. iii. 13, and 
 on 1 Tim. i. 13), while the august 
 title, by intimating the true fountain 
 of life (John v. 26), tends to add con- 
 firmation and assurance ; 6tiiv irepl 
 TOV TloO voeiv i6i\Tis, liaBiiv rlva larl 
 rh, h T<fi Harpi, raDra Kal h ti$ 'Tl<fi 
 etj/ai iria-Teve, Athan. ore Matth. xi. 
 1-j, Vol. I. p. 153 (ed. Bened.). 
 The reading of Lachm. ry tov Qeov 
 Kal XpuTTOv ToO iyair. is supported 
 by BD^FGr ; Clarom. , — but has every 
 appearance of being a gloss ; see 
 Meyer (critical notes), p. tg. 
 Kal irapaSovTOS k.t.\,] ' and as a 
 proof of his love gave Himself,' &o. 
 the Kal being i^ir/i)Ti-K6v, and illus- 
 tratively subjoining the practical 
 proof; see Fritz. Rom. ix. 23, Vol. 
 n. p. 339, and on this and other uses 
 of Ko(, notes ore Phil. iv. 12. 
 virip i|i.ov] 'forme,' ' pro me,' Vulg. ; 
 to atone for me and to save me. On 
 
 the dogmatical meaning of this prep. , 
 see notes on ch. iii. 13. 
 
 21. OVK d9€T(3] '/ do not make 
 void,' 'nullify;' not ' non abjicio,' 
 Vulg., still less oix inixti^w, Theod.,— 
 but ' non irritam facio, ut dicam per 
 legem esse justitiam,' Aug. in loc; 
 comp. I Cor. i. 19, t^v cimeaiv tS>v 
 avviTwv dScT'^W ch. iii. 15, {SiaBiKifii) 
 iSerei- so I Mace. xv. 27, ii64TT)<re 
 vdvTa Sja cwideTo airri^ ' and fre- 
 quently in Polyb., see Sohweigh. iea. 
 s. V. The verb is sometimes found in 
 the milder sense of 'despising,' 're- 
 jecting,' iSsc. with persons (Luke x. 
 16, John xii. 48, i Thess. iv. 8) ; but 
 this obviously falls short of the mean- 
 ing in the present context. 
 Ti]v X^P''" '"'^ 0€ov] ' the grace of 
 God,' as shown in the death of Christ 
 and our justification by faith in Him ; 
 not 'the Gospel,' as Hamm. ore Heb. 
 xiii. 9. In our justification, 
 
 as it is well said in the Homilies, there 
 are three things which go together, — 
 on God's part His mercy and grace ; 
 upon Christ's part the satisfaction of 
 God's justice ; and upon our part true 
 and lively faith in the merits of Jesus 
 Christ, Horn, on Salvation, Part I, 
 ■yap explains and confirms the preced- 
 ing declaration ; ' I say oi5k iderQ, for 
 it is an immediate inference that if 
 the law could have been the medium 
 of SiKaiocripY] Christ's death would 
 have been purposeless.' Sicl 
 
 vdpiov] 'by means of the law' as a 
 medium of SLKaioaivri' emphatic, aa 
 the position shows, and antithetical to 
 ^pMT&s in the succeeding clause. In 
 the present verse it is in effect as- 
 serted that the vdp.os is not a m-ediwn 
 
II. 21, III. I. 
 
 45 
 
 O foolish Galatians, is 'Q avOlJTOl VoXaTai tU VfJ.ag e/Sct- III. 
 
 not the Spirit which „ t ■> n ^ >T -xr 
 
 CTidencrthlT'^u^tm" f'^^''^") ok KUT o<pda\itiovs lri<rovs Xpi- 
 
 cation is by faith, and not by the works of the law ? 
 
 of StKaio(rii>ri {els KTTJffiv SiicatoinJcijs 
 dpKei, Theod.), in ch. iii. ii it is 
 asserted not to be the sphere of it, and 
 in ch, iii. 21 not the origin, 81- 
 
 Kaioo-vvT)] ' righteoumess,' y nr> . j] 
 
 Syr., 'justitia,' Vulg. ; not equivalent 
 to S(/ca/(inri: (Whately, Dangers, &o. 
 § 4), nor yet, strictly considered, the 
 result of it; hut appy. in the most 
 inclusive meaning of the term — 
 righteousness, whether imputed, by 
 which we are accounted dUaiot, or 
 infused and inherent, hy which we 
 could be found so ; see Hooker, 
 Serm. n. 3, 21, where the distinction 
 between justifying and sanctifying 
 righteousness is drawn out with admi- 
 rable perspicuity. On the meaning of 
 the word, see Andrewes, Serm. v. 
 Vol. V. p. 114 (A.-C. L.) ; Waterland, 
 Justif. Vol. VI. p. 4; and for some 
 acute remarks on its lexical aspects, 
 Knox, Remains, Vol. II. p. 276. 
 dpa] ' then,'' i. e. ' the obvious infer- 
 ence is.' On the meaning of S,pa, see 
 notes on ch. v. 11. Swpeav] 
 
 'f(/r naught, mthout camse;' not here 
 'frustra' (Grot.), 'sine effectu,' — but 
 'dnejustd causd,' Tittm. Synon. i. p. 
 161 ; weptrrbs 6 rov ^pitrToO ddvaros, 
 Chrys. ; 'superflue mortuus est Chr.,' 
 Jerome: comp. John rv. 25, i/ilffr/- 
 ffdv lie Supedv Fsalm xxxv. 7, Sa>- 
 pe&v {dvaiTiias, Symm.) Sxpv^dv fioi 
 SMifiBopip. So DSn, which the LXX 
 frequently translate by Siopedv, has 
 the meaning 'in nullum bonum finem, ' 
 as weE as ' gratis ' and ' frustra : ' 
 comp. Gesen. Lex. s. v. ; Vorst, de 
 Hebraism, vii. 6, p. 228, 229. 
 
 Chapter III. 1 . 'fl dv6r]Toi FoX.] 
 ' Witless Galatiams;' fervid and indig' 
 
 naut application of the results of the 
 preceding demonstration to the case 
 of his readers. The epithet dc6i;ros 
 is used in three other passages by St 
 Paul, — Kom, i. 14, opp. to <ro06s* 
 I Tim. vi. 9, joined with /3\a;8e/pds' 
 Tit. iii. 3, with direL0iis and v\avili- 
 p.epos' — and in all seems to mark not 
 so much a dulness in (' insensati,' 
 Vulg.), as a dejicienm/ in, or rather 
 an insufficient application of, the vovs' 
 
 comp. Syr. ^ij_^5 >_i^ V ffl k» 
 
 [destituti mente], and Luke xxiv. 25, 
 where while PpaSis rf KapSli} denotes 
 the defect in heart, drbriTos seems to 
 mark the defect in head; comp. 
 Tittm. Synon. I. p. 144, where this 
 word is defined somewhat artificially, 
 but rightly distinguished from &<j>pu)v 
 and (iffiiyeTos which seem to point 
 respectively rather to 'senselessness' 
 and ' slowness of understanding.' 
 It cannot then be asserted (with 
 Brown) that the Galatians were pro- 
 verbially stupid; comp. Callim. H. 3el. 
 184, &<ppovi (piXiji. Themistius, who 
 himself spent some time in the (then 
 extended, Forbig. Geogr. Vol. II. 
 p. 364) province, gives them a very 
 different character: 0! Si dvdpes tare 
 Sti d^eTs Kal dyxivoi Kal eifiad^ffrepoi 
 Tuiy Ayav'^Wrpiav Kal rpi^avlov ira- 
 pa(j>avivTos iKKpip,avrai ei)6M, iSiTTep 
 TT]s \i6ov ri fytbitpLa, Orat. 23, ad fin. 
 p. 299 (ed. Harduin). Versatility and 
 inconstancy, as the Epistle shows 
 (comp. notes on ch. i. 6), were the 
 true characteristics of the Galatian. 
 Foolishness must have been often, 
 as in the present case, not an un- 
 natural concomitant. vjias 
 ipdcTKavev] 'did bewitch you,' 'vos 
 fascinavit,' Vulg., Clarom. The verb 
 
46 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 % (TTOj '>rpoeypd(p^ ev v/uliv ea-Tavpw/j-ivos ; tovto ftovov 
 
 jSoffKohid) is derived from iScifu, ^da-KW 
 (Pott, Etym. Forsch. Vol. i. p. 271), 
 and perhaps signified originally 'malS. 
 lingu^ nocere;' comp. Bentey, Wmr- 
 zellex. Vol. 11. p. 104. Here liowever 
 reference is made rather to the be- 
 witching iufluenoe of the evil eye 
 (comp. Boelus. xiir. 8, ^ajKaivay dtj)- 
 6a\iuf, and see Eisner in loc, Winer, 
 BWB. Art. 'Zauberei'), though not 
 necessarily 'the evU eye of envy'' 
 
 (Chrys. ; comp. Syr. jaOm k»), as 
 
 in this latter sense jSoitk. is commonly 
 used with a dat. (but in Ecolus. xiv. 
 6, Ignat. Rom. 3, with accus.): see 
 Lobeck, Phryn. p. 462; Pierson, 
 Herodian, p. 470. The addi- 
 
 tion, T^ iXriBcif /htJ irdBecrBai. [Rec. 
 with CD'E^KL; mss. ; Vulg. (but 
 not aU mss.), Syr.-PhU., Mtti. (both), 
 al. ; Ath., Theod.], is rightly rejected 
 by most modem editors, both as de- 
 ficient in external authority [omitted 
 in ABD'E'FGK; 2 mss.; Syr. and 
 nearly all Vv.], and as being probably 
 a gloss from ch. v. 7» irpoe- 
 
 Ypdilii)] 'was openly set forth,'' 'prse- 
 scriptus est,' Vulg., Clarom. The 
 meaning of this word has been much 
 discussed. The ancient (comp. Syr.) 
 and popular gloss ia i^aypa^-fiBii 
 (Theoph., CEcum., and appy. Chrys., 
 Theod.), but without any lexical au- 
 thority ; for common as is the use of 
 ypd(pw in a pictorial sense, there ap- 
 pears no certam instance of irpoypi- 
 0u being ever so used: see Eettig, 
 Stvd. v.. Knt. 1830, p. 96sq. We can 
 then only safely translate irpoeypaipr) 
 either (a) 'antea serif tus est,' or (fi) 
 'palam scriptm est.' Between these 
 it is difficult to decide. Considered 
 Imcally (a) seems the most probable ; 
 for though ifi) is appy. the more com- 
 mon meaning in Hellenic writers 
 
 (Plutarch, Camill. § 11, comp. Polyb. 
 Hist. XXXII. 21. 12, al.), yet in the 
 three other passages in the N.T. in 
 which irpoypicj}!!} occurs, viz. Bom. xv. 
 4, Eph. iii. 3, Jude 4, it is used in the 
 former sense. Both meanings occur 
 in the LXX: (o) in i Esdr. vi. 32 
 {Aid.); (/3) in i Mace. x. 36. Con. 
 textual considerations however seem in 
 favour of (/3) ; as this meaning not 
 only harmonizes best with the promi- 
 nent and purely local kot' d^SoK/ioijs 
 (comp. kot' 6p.p.aTa, Soph. Antig. 756), 
 but also best iUustrates the peculiar 
 and suggestive i^daicava', which thus 
 gains great force and point ; ' who 
 could have bewitched you by his gaze, 
 when you had only to fix your eyes 
 on Christ to escape the fascination ? ' 
 comp. Numb. xxi. 9. iv v^lv] 
 
 'among you;' not a Hebraistic pleo- 
 nasm ('construi debet iv oU vp.tv,' 
 Grot.), but a regular local predicate 
 appended to rpoeypd(j>r], and appy. 
 intended to enhance the preceding oTs 
 Kar' 6(t>0. by a still more studied speci- 
 fication of place: not only had the 
 truth been presented to them, but 
 preached among them with every cir- 
 cumstance of individual and local ex- 
 hibition. According to the usual con- 
 nexion iv ipuv is joined with iaravp. 
 (com. Chrys.), but in that case both 
 perspicuity and emphasis would have 
 required the order iaravp. iv ijuv, 
 while in the present the isolation of 
 iaravp. is in accordance with the 
 natural order, and adds greatly to the 
 pathos and emphasis; see i Cor. i. 
 23, and comp. i Cor. ii. 2. On the 
 force of the perf. part, as implying the 
 permanent character of the action, 
 see Winer, Or. § 45. i, p. 305 ; Green, 
 Gr. p. 308. It may be observed 
 
 that Lachm. (Griesb. marks with°°) 
 omits ^i- i/uv with ABCN; 10 mas. ; 
 
III. 2, 3, 4. 
 
 47 
 
 veXta fjLaOetv a(f) vfiZv, i^ epywv vofiou to Jlvevfia 
 eXa^ere jj e^ aKOtjs Trio-Tew? ; ovTWg avotjTol eare ; 3 
 evap^dfievoi Wvevfiari vvv aapKi e-TrtTeXelcrOe ', Toaravra 4 
 
 Vulg. (Amiat., Tol.), Syr., al. ; but 
 with less plausibility than the strong 
 evidence might warrant, as the omis- 
 sion of such a seemingly superfluous 
 expression can easily be accounted for, 
 but not the insertion. 
 
 2. TOUTO julvov] ' This only,' — not 
 to mention other arguments which 
 might be derived from your own ad- 
 missions ; ' de eo quod promptum est 
 sciscitor,' Jerome. (laOetv 
 
 <i<j>* v)iwv] 'to learn of you,' Auth.; 
 not for irapA, i/iuv (Eiick.), which 
 would imply a more immediate and 
 direct communication, but with the 
 pioper force of diro, which as a 
 general rule (Col. i. 7 seems to be an 
 exception) indicates a source less ac- 
 tive and more remote: contrast 2 
 Tim. iii. 14, and see Winer, Or. §47, 
 dTTo, p. 331 note; comp. also notes on 
 eh. i. 12. For exx. of this use of 
 HaBeiv, not 'to learn as a disciple,' 
 with an ironical reference (Luth., 
 Beng.), but simply 'to arrive at a 
 knowledge,' see exx. in Bost u. Palm, 
 Lex. S.V., and comp. Acts xxiii. 27. 
 TO IIvev)i,a] ' the Spirit,' rip' rorairriv 
 l<rx'^> Chrys. ; 'de Spiritu miracnlo- 
 rum loqui hie Apostolum patet,' Bull, 
 Harm. Ap. Part n. 1 1 . 8. It is not 
 however necessary to understand this 
 as the exclusive meaning, much less 
 to explain it with Baur, Apoat. Pavlus, 
 p. 515, as 'das Chiistliche Bewusst- 
 seyn : ' see next verse. aKoijs 
 
 icioT&as may be translated, either (a) 
 'the hearing of faith,'' i.e. the recep- 
 tion of the Gospel (Brown); or (/S) 
 ' the report or message of faith^ i. e. 
 the preaching which related to, had 
 as its subject, Trlarts (gen. oijecti) ; ac- 
 cording as iKoii is taken in an active 
 or pass, sense. The former might 
 
 seem to preserve a better antithesis to 
 Ipyuv vofiov, — ' hearing the doctrine 
 of faith, opp. to doing the works of 
 the law ' (Schott, Peile ; comp. JEth.), 
 but is open to the decided lexical ob- 
 jection that Akoij appears always used 
 in the N. T. in a passive sense (so both 
 in Rom. x. 17, where see Fritz.; and 
 in I Thess. ii. 13, where see notes), 
 and to the contextual objection that 
 the real opposition is not between the 
 doing and the hearing, but between 
 the two principles, faith and the law, 
 — the question in effect being d voiios 
 ifuy SduiKOf Tou delov Hveifiaros hfip- 
 7«a»', 7j fiovT] 17 iwl rbv 'K.6ptov Triffrts ; 
 Theod. We may then with some con- 
 fidence adopt (j3); so Goth, ('gahaa- 
 seins'). Arm., and recently De W., 
 Mey., and the best modem commen- 
 tators, 
 
 3. ovTUS dvdT|T0i.] 'to so high a 
 degree, so very witless, foolish,' — with 
 reference to what follows: 'quum 
 ovTu: cum adjectivo nomini aut ad- 
 verbio copulatur, reddes non solum 
 ita, adeo, verum etiam usque adeo,' 
 Steph. Thesaur. s. v. Vol. v. p. 2433, 
 where several exx. are cited; e.g. Isoc. 
 Paneg. p. 43 d, outoi ntyiXar Xen. 
 Cyr. II. 2. 16, oiJru iroXiiuov. 
 lvap|d|<,evoi] ' after having begun ;' 
 temporal participle referring to the 
 previous fact of their first entrance 
 into Christian life. On the temporal 
 force of the participle, see notes ore 
 Mph. iv. 8; and on the force of the 
 compound (more directly concentrated 
 action), see notes on Phil. i. 6. 
 IIveu(j.ttTi.] 'roith the Spirit;' dat. of 
 the manner {m^daZ dat.) in which the 
 action took place: see Winer, Gr. 
 § 31. 6, p. 193; Bemhardy, J^nt. iii. 
 14, p. 100; Jelf, Or. § 603. The 
 
48 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS 
 
 5 eirdQere eiKrj ; et "ye Koi elKrj. 6 oiiv eTri^^opiyciov vfilv 
 
 meaning of Tvevfia and skp^ in this 
 verse has heen the subject of consider- 
 able discussion. Of the earlier ex- 
 positors Theodoret paraphrases w, by 
 ^ Xap'S, cAp^ by ^ /card v6iu>v iroXireio 
 (so Waterl. Distinct, of Sacr, II. § lo, 
 Vol. V. p. 262), while Chrys. finds in 
 <ri,pi a definite allusion to the circum- 
 cision; comp. Eph. ii. ii. Alii alia. 
 The most satisfactory view is that 
 taken by Muller, Doct. of Sin, ch. 2, 
 Vol. I. 355 sq. (Clark),— viz. that 
 when TveC/ia is thus in ethical con- 
 trast with <r&pj it is to be understood 
 of the Holy Spirit, regarded as the 
 governing and directing principle in 
 man; ffipl, on the contrary, as the 
 worldly tendency of human life, 'the 
 life and movement of man in things of 
 the phenomenal world.' If this be 
 correct ■m'. and (rA/)| are here used, 
 not to denote Christianity and Juda- 
 ism per se, but as it were the essence 
 and active principle of each. 
 «iriT€\eC(rfle] 'are ye brought to com- 
 pletion?' Not middle, as often in 
 Hellenic Greek (see Sohweigh. Lex. 
 Polyb. s. v.), but passive (Vulg., Cla- 
 rom., Chrys.), as in x Pet. v. 9, comp. 
 Phil. i. 6. The meaning of the com- 
 pound must not be neglected ; it does 
 not merely imply 'finishing' (Dst., 
 Peile) as opposed to 'beginning,' but 
 appears always to involve the idea of 
 bringing to a complete and perfect end ; 
 comp. I Sam. iii. 12, Hp^o/Mi Koi iin- 
 TsKiiTU)' see further exx. in Bretsch. 
 Lex. S.V., and the good collection in 
 Bostu. Palm, Lex. s.v. Vol. i. p. 11 2 3, 
 —the most definite of which is Herod. 
 IX. 64, i] iUii ToO <j>umv...iK MapSovlov 
 iirereXiero. 
 4. liraStre] 'Didye iufferV 'passi 
 
 <.. 7 
 
 estis,' Vulg., Clarom., ^L;£Xx.SD 
 
 7 
 [sustinuistis] Syr., jEth. (both). The 
 
 meaning of this word has been much 
 discussed. The apparent tenor of the 
 argument, as alluding rather to bene- 
 fits than to sufferings, lias led Kypke 
 {Oba. Vol. II. p. 277, comp. Schoettg. 
 Hor. Hehr. Vol. I. p. 731) and others 
 to endeavour to substantiate by exx. 
 that irdaxeiv is not only a word of 
 neutral meaning, but, even without eJ 
 or &ia66v, actually signifies ' beneficiis 
 affici,' — a usage however of which 
 Steph. {Thes. s.v.) rightly says 'ex- 
 emplum desidero.' For the neutral' 
 meaning ('experienced,' ed. i), as in- 
 cluding a reference to all the spiritual 
 dispensations, whether sufferings or 
 blessings, which had happened to 
 (Arm.) or had been vouchsafed to the 
 Galatians, much may be said both 
 lexically and contextually, — still, on 
 the one hand, the absence of any direct 
 instance in the N.T. [even in Mark 
 V. 26 there is an idea of suffering in 
 the background], and, on the other, 
 the authority of the ancient Vv. and 
 Greek expositors lead me now to revert 
 to the regular meaning suffered, and 
 to refer it to the labours (Copt.) and 
 persecutions which in one form or 
 other must have certainly tried the 
 early converts of Galatia; see Chrys., 
 Jerome, and the good note of Alford 
 in loc. All these sufferings were a 
 genuine evidence of the ivap^afuvoi 
 Xlvei/iaTi, and would be regarded and 
 alluded to by the Apostle as blessed 
 tokens of the Spirit's influence ; comp. 
 I Tbess. ii. 13, 14, and the remarks 
 of August, in h. I. tt yt Kal 
 
 elKtj] ' if indeed, or if at least, it really 
 be in vain.' The sense of this clause 
 has been obscured by not attending to 
 the true force of ef ye and Kal. 
 A YC must not be confounded with 
 eiTrep (Tholuok, ISeiirage, p. 146): the 
 latter, in accordance with the exten- 
 
III. 5- 49 
 
 TO IlvevfMa Koi evepywv Svvd/J.eis ev vfiiv, i^ epywv v6- 
 fxov >] i^ aKotjs TTicTTeMi ; 
 
 sive, or perhaps rather intensive force 
 of Trep (Donalds. New Grot. § i78,comp. 
 Klotz, Devar. Vol. ir. p. 723), implies 
 'si omnino;' the former {e(ye), in ao- 
 oordanoe with the restrictive 7^, is ' si 
 quidem.,' and if resolved turn certe 
 si {'yi ita tantummodo ad toUendam 
 conditionem faoit, quia turn cei-te, si 
 quid fiat, aliud esse significat, non ut 
 ipsam conditionem confirmet,' Klotz, 
 Devar. Vol. 11. p. 30S), comp. 528. 
 No inference however of the Apostle's 
 real opinion can be drawn merely from 
 the 7e (et^e ' usurpatur de re qvufi jure 
 sumpta creditur,' Herm. Vig. No. 3 10), 
 as it is the sentence and not the par- 
 ticle which determines the rectitude 
 of the assumption. Kal 
 
 must closely be joined with eUri, and 
 either (a), with its usual ascensive force 
 ('quasi ascensionem ad earn rem quo 
 pertineat particula,' Klotz, Devar. 
 Vol. II. p. 638), gives to the clause 
 the meaning ' if at least it amount to, 
 i. e. be really in vain ; ' or (6), with'what 
 may be termed its descensive force 
 Ifldyss. I. 58, see Hartung, Partik. 
 Kal, § 2. 8, Vol. I. p. 136), serves to 
 imply ' if at least it be only in vain, 
 i. e. has not proceeded to a. more dan- 
 gerous length,' videndum ne ad per- 
 niciem valeat, Aug. in loc, Cocceius. 
 Of these (6) is the most emphatic and 
 pungent (so Mey., De W.), but (a) 
 most characteristic of the large heart 
 of the Apostle, and of the spirit of 
 love and tenderness to his converts 
 (ch. iv. 19) which is blended even with 
 the rebukes of this Epistle ; so Chrys., 
 and the Greek expositors; comp. 
 Brown, p. 112. 
 
 5. 6 o^v kirvytfifny^av] 'He tJien 
 who is bestowing, &c.' resumption by 
 means of the rejleidve odv (see below, 
 and notes on Phil. ii. i) of the sub- 
 
 ject of ver. 2 ; ver. 3 and 4 being in 
 effect parenthetical. The subject of 
 this verse is not St Paul (Lonib., 
 Erasm., al.), but, as the context, the 
 meaning of Swd/ieis, the nature of the 
 action specified (^«xo/)j;7u)i'), and the 
 permanence of the action implied by 
 the present tense iirixopvy^" (comp. 
 Winer, Gr. § 45. i, p. 304; Schmal- 
 feld, Si/nt. §202, p. 405), all obviously 
 suggest, — God: Qe6s, (prjcrtv, 6 ^Trt- 
 XopTjyiav iifuv Th IlpeOjUa, Theoph. 
 The force of ^Tri in iTiXop. is probably 
 not additive, but directive (see Kost u. 
 Pahn, Lex. s.v., and ib. s.v. iirt, C. 
 3. cc), any idea of the freedom or 
 ample nature of the gift (Winer, 
 Peile) being due solely to the primary 
 meaning of the simple verb : see notes 
 on Col. ii. 19, and comp. 2 Oor. ix. 
 10, where both xopvy^'^ and iirixopV' 
 yiu occur in the same verse, and 
 appy. in the same sense quantitatively 
 considered. For exx. of the use of 
 iinxop. in later writers see the collec- 
 tion of Hase, in Staph. Thes. s.v. 
 Vol. ni. p. 1902. On the pre- 
 
 sent resumptive use of oZn after a 
 logical parenthesis, which has been 
 incorrectly pronounced rare in Attic 
 writers, see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 
 718; Hartung, Partik. odv, 3. 5, Vol. 
 II. p. 22. It may be remarked that 
 as a general rule oSi/ is continuative 
 and retrospective rather than illative, 
 and is in this respect to be distin- 
 guished from dpa (Donalds. Gr. § 
 604), but it must not also be forgotten 
 that as in the N.T. the use of oB;" is 
 to that of dpa nearly as II to i, the 
 force of the former particle must not 
 be unduly restricted. In St Paul's 
 Epp. where the proportion is not quite 
 4 to I, the true distinction between 
 the two particles may be more safely 
 E 
 
50 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 -. TT /\\ 7 \ a ^ '' -^ As Abraham was justi- 
 
 O XVaaaJS Appaau. eTntTTSVaev TU> fled by faith ; so shall 
 
 ' ' his spiritual children 
 
 Qew, Koi eXoyla-Orj avTw els SiKatO(rv- hL^biSSng.^"**^^*" 
 7 V}]V. yivuKTKeTe apa brt oi eic iricrTews outoi elcriv vioi 
 
 maintained ; see however notes on 
 1 Tim. ii. i (TransL). 
 
 SvvajiEis] 'miraculous powers,' |I.i_»j 
 
 •71 7 
 
 [virtutes] Syr., 'virtutes,' Vulg., 
 Clarom. This more restricted mean- 
 ing, -whioli may be supported by 
 I Cor. xii, iS, and probably Matth. 
 xiv. 2, seems best to accord with the 
 context. Koi is then i^tjyiijnKdv, and 
 if ifuu retains its natural meaning 
 with ivepy^oj, 'in you,' 'within you;' 
 comp. Matth. 2.C., al dvvdfieis ivepyov- 
 (Tiv iv a&rip. t| '4py<av 
 
 vd|j,ov] 'from the worJcs of the law;' 
 not exactly ' as following upon,' Alf. 
 (bis); but, in more strict accordance 
 with the primary force of the prep., 
 'from,' 'out of ' ('ex,' Vulg.), as the 
 originating or moving cause of the 
 iTixop'fnriai^' comp. notes on ch. ii. i6. 
 6. KaBus] 'Even as.' The answer 
 is so obvious, that St Paul proceeds 
 as if it had been expressed. The com- 
 pound particle KaffOis is not found in 
 the purer Attic authors, though suf- 
 ficiently common in later writers ; see 
 exx. collected by Lobeck, Phryn. p. 
 4j6. Em. Moschop., the Byzantine 
 Grammarian, cited by Fabricius, Bibl. 
 Grceca, Vol. vi. p. 191 (ed. Harles), 
 remarks that this is an Alexandrine 
 usage; t6 Ka6a ol 'AttikoI xpC^vrai, 
 rh S^ Ka.6^s oiidiirore, dXX' ij ruv 
 ' AXe^avSpioiv Si.d\€KTOS Ka6' tjv r) deia 
 •ypatp')] fiypaTTTai,' see esp. Sturz de 
 Dialecto Maced. § g, s. v. (Steph. 
 Thes. ed. Valpy, p. clxx). On the 
 most suitable translation, comp. notes 
 0)1 I Tliess. i. 5 (Transl.). 
 l\o7((r6r| avTu A% SiKaio(n7vr|v] 'it 
 was accounted for to him, or ^ous 
 reckoned to him, as righteousness,' soil. 
 
 t6 TrwreDirai" see Winer, Gr. § 49. -^j 
 p. 427 (ed. 5). The phrase Xoyll^eral 
 n ets ri. Acts xix. 27, Rom. ii. 26, 
 iv. 3, ix. 8, is explained by Fritzsche 
 {Rom. Vol. I. p. 137) as equivalent 
 to Xoyl^eTal Ti els rb etval ri, 'ita res 
 zestimatur ut res sit, h. e. ut pro re 
 valeat;' hence 'tribuituralicui rei vis 
 ac pondus rei.' In such cases the 
 more exact idea conveyed by els of 
 destination for any object or thing 
 (Eost u. Palm, Lex. s. v. e^s, v. i) is 
 blended with that of simple predica- 
 tion of it. In later writers this ex- 
 tended so far that els is often used as 
 a mere index of the accus., having 
 lost all its prepositional force ; e. g. 
 Sr/ew els ymaiKa' see Bernh. Synt. 
 V. II. b. 2, p. 219. With the present 
 semi-Hebraistic use of \oyl^. els, it is 
 instructive to contrast Xeu. Cyr. m. 
 '■ 33) XPVI''aTa...els apyipiov Xoyi- 
 cd^vra.' where els has its primary 
 ethical meaning of measure, accord- 
 ance to. On the doctrinal mean- 
 ing of iXoylffSri k.t.X. see Bull, Harm. 
 Apost. II. 12. 22; and for an able 
 comparison of the faith of Abraham 
 with that of Christians, Hammond, 
 Pract. Catech. Book i. 3. 
 
 7. •yiv(o(rK«Te dpa] 'Know ye there- 
 
 V 
 
 fore,' QA) [cognoscite] Syr., Vulg., 
 
 Claxom., Armen., — not indicative, as 
 Jerome, Ps.-Ambr., al., and most re- 
 cently Alf. : the imper. is not only 
 more animated, but more logically 
 correct, for the declaration in the 
 verse is really one of the points which 
 the Apostle is labouring to prove; 
 h Ke(pa\al(p SiSdffKei rbv ' k^pakfi 4k 
 Titrretas diKaLud^i/Ta, Kal roi/s rpo^tfiovs 
 TTJs TrdrTCMS vlois toO 'APpah/i XPVf-a- 
 
III. 6, 7, 8. 
 
 51 
 
 A/Sjoaa/i. Trpoi'Sova-a Se fj ypatpri on eK irlcrTewi Si- 8 
 Kaioi Ta eOvrj 6 Geo? TrpoevijyyeXlcraTO t<S 'A^paafi 
 
 r/fon-as, Theod. ; see Olsh. in he. 
 The objections o£ Eiiok., and even of 
 Alf., to the use of S.pa with the im- 
 perative are distinctly invalid : not 
 only is the union of the imper. with 
 &pa logically admissible, and borne out 
 by usage (comp. Hom. II. x. 249), 
 but further in perfect harmony with 
 the true lexical force of the particle : 
 ' rehus ita comparatis (Abraham's faith 
 being reckoned to him as righteous- 
 ness) cognoscite, Sic.;' see Klotz, 
 Devar. Vol. n. p. 167. 01 Ik 
 
 irCirreus] ' they who are of faith,' not 
 ' they who rest on faith ' (Green, Gr. 
 p. 288), but, in accordance with the 
 primary meaning of origin, 'they who 
 are spiritually descended from, whose 
 source of spiritual life is — Trforis'' com- 
 pare Eom. ii. 8, ol i^ ipiBelas, ' qui a 
 malarum fraudum machinatione origi- 
 nem ducunt,* 'qui malitiam tanquam 
 parentem habent,' Fritz, in loc., Vol. 
 I. p. 105. 
 
 o^Toi] 'these, and none other than 
 these,' 'ezclusis ceteris Abrahamo 
 natis,' Beng. ; see James i. 25. This 
 retrospective and emphatic use of the 
 pronoun is illustrated by Winer, Gr. 
 § 23. 4, p. 144 : see also Bernhardy, 
 Synt. VI. 8. d, p. 283 ; Jelf, Gr. § 658. 
 The order vloi elffiy has the support of 
 BN'; al. 
 
 8, irpoiSoOcra S^ ij -ypacln]] 'More- 
 over the Scripture foreseeing :' further 
 statement that the faithful, who have 
 already been shown to be the true 
 children of Abraham, are also the 
 only and proper participators in his 
 blessing. This sort of pereonification 
 it noticed by Schoettg. {Sor. Bebr. 
 Vol. I. p. 732) as a, 'formula Judaeis 
 admodum solemnis,' e.g. HKT ilD 
 linDil * Quid vidit scriptura ? ' HD 
 Kin nxn '>Quid vldit iUe, h. e. quid- 
 
 nam ipsi in mentem veuit ? ' see also 
 Surenhus. B(/3\. KaraW. p. 6 sq. In 
 such cases ^ ypatp^ stands obviously 
 for tbe Author of the Scriptures — 
 God, by whose inspiration they were 
 
 written : comp, Syr., wbere |0T.^\ 
 
 [i q. Elohim] is actually adopted in 
 the translation. S^ appears to 
 
 be here p^sra^ariKtv, i. e. indicative of 
 transition (Hartung, Partih. S4, i, 3, 
 Vol. I. p. 165; Winer, (?»■.§ 53. 7. b, 
 p. 393): it does not merely connect 
 this verse with the preceding (Auth., 
 Peile, Conyb., al.), but implies a 
 further consideration of the subject 
 vmder another aspect; ' Sk earn ipsam 
 vim habet ut abducat nos ab est re 
 quie proposita est, transferatque ad id 
 quod missS iM priore re jam pro 
 vero ponendum esse videatur,' Klotz, 
 Devar. Vol. II. p. 353. The exact 
 force of 5^, which is never simply 
 connective (Hartung, Partih. Vol. I. 
 p. 163), and never loses all shades of 
 its true oppositive character, deserves 
 almost more attentive consideration 
 in these Epp. than any other particle, 
 and will often be found to supply the 
 only true clue to the sequence and 
 evolution of the argument. 
 jSiKaiot] 'justifies;' not 'would jus- 
 tify,' Auth. ('praesena pro future,' 
 Grot.), nor present with ref. to what 
 is now taking place (De W.), but what 
 is termed the ethical present, with 
 significant reference to the eternal and 
 immutable counsels of God ; 6.vo3d€v 
 Tavra Kal fSptffe Kal irpotiybpcwrev 6 Geis, 
 Theod.; camp. Matth. xxvi. 2, irapa- 
 Sidoraf see Winer, Gr. §40. 2, p. 237, 
 and for the rationale of this usage, 
 Sohmalfeld, Synt. § 54. 3, p. <)i. 
 irpo6vi)'Y7€X£(roTo] 'made kaown the 
 glad tidings heforekaxtd ;' comp. Gen. 
 E 2 
 
52 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 lO 
 
 9 oti '^vevXaytiO^arovrai iv crol 'iravra tu eOvt] 
 eic TTicTTews euXoyovvrai crvv t(S incrTM 'Appaafi 
 "Oo-ot yap e^ epyoov vofiov ela-h '^^l^^t 
 
 tOCTTe 01 
 
 'JniMi.Mi uAiinii clrriv They who are of the 
 epywv VOflOV eiaiV ^orks of the Law lie 
 
 under a curse, from which Christ has freed us, having 
 ensured to all in Himself the blessing of Abraham. 
 
 xii. 3, xviii. i8, xxii. i8. The com- 
 pound Tpoevayy. is somewhat rare ; it 
 occurs in Sohol. Soph. Track. 33S ; 
 Philo, de Opif. § 9, Vol. I. p. 7, de 
 Mut. Nom. § 29, Vol. I. p. 602 (ed. 
 Mang.) ; and the eccles. writers. 
 Sti k. t. X.] 'shall he blessed in thee:' 
 quotation, by means of the usual Sn 
 recitaiimt/m, from Gen. xii. 3 (oomp. 
 ch. xviii. 18, xxii. 18), though not in 
 the exact words ; the here more appo- 
 site but practically synonymous irAvra 
 Tct idvij being used (perhaps from ch. 
 xviii. 18) instead of the Tratrat al 0t5- 
 Xm Trjs 7^s of the LXX : comp. Su- 
 renhua. Bi/3X. KoraXX. p. 567. 
 The simple form (iXoyriB. is adopted 
 by Elz. (not Steph.), but only with TG- 
 and cursive mss. Iv <roC] 
 
 ^in thee,'' as the spiritual father of 
 all the faithful; not 'per te,' Schott, 
 but simply and plainly ' in te,' Vulg., 
 Clarom., — the prep, with its usual 
 force specifying Abraham as the mi- 
 stratum, foundation, on which and in 
 which the blessing rests; comp. i Cor. 
 vii, 14, and Winer, 6V. §48. a, p. 345. 
 9. wo-Tc] 'So then,' ' Consequently ;' 
 see notes on ch, ii. 13. "Qare states 
 the result from the emphatic ivevkoy. 
 (ffuXXoyifi^ei'os iirijyayev, Chrys.) : it 
 is from the fact of the blessing having 
 been promised to Abraham and his 
 children that ol 4k iriaTcus share it, 
 inasmuch as they are true children 
 (ver. 7) of Abraham; eiXoyrj/ihoi elalv 
 ol...T^ Tr/ffrei irpoffidmes, iS<nrep Kal 6 
 jncrris 'A^p. TjiMyiyro, Theoph. 
 <r6v] 'together withj' not 'similiter,' 
 Grot., but, in accordance with the 
 regular meaning of the prep., ' with,' 
 'in assoeiation with' (Winer, Or. § 48. 
 
 b, p. 349), the ■i!-i.aT<f serving to hint 
 (Mey., Alf.) at that to which this 
 association is truly to be referred ; et 
 Tis Tolitvv TTjS iKeiyou (Tvyyeveias d^LOj- 
 Bijvai. iroSei, Ttp eKelvov iriaTLV ^-q- 
 "Koira, Theod. The change of prep, 
 introduces a corresponding change in 
 the aspect in which Abraham is re- 
 garded ; under eV he is regarded as 
 the Patriarch, the spiritual ancestor 
 in whom, — under aiiv he is regarded 
 as the illustriously faithful individual 
 with whom all ol eV naT. share the 
 blessing ; see Windischm. in loc. 
 Schott cites a similar use of /leri. with 
 gen. in Psalm cv. 6, ij/idproii.ev fierli, 
 tS>v TaripuiV Eccles. ii. 16, awoffaveT- 
 Tttt 6 ffo06s /teri tov dtppovos' but in 
 both cases a similarity of lot, rather 
 than a strict community and fellow- 
 ship in it, seems implied : as a general 
 rule /ierd Tivos implies rather coexist- 
 ence, trill Tici coherence; see Kriiger, 
 SpracM. § 68. 13. i, and comp. notes 
 o» Eph. vi. 23. 
 
 10. "Offoi \dp K.T.X.] Proof of the 
 justice of the conclusion in ver. 9 with 
 regard to ol ex irlaTias' ydp intro- 
 ducing e contrark) a confirmatory no- 
 tice of the acknowledged state of the 
 other class, oi i^ ipyav vbp.ov not only 
 are they not blessed with Abraham, 
 but they are actually under a curse. 
 St Paul's love of proving all his as- 
 sertions has been often noticed ; com- 
 pare Davidson, Introd. Vol. n. p. 145. 
 8<ro(...l$ SpYuv v6|j,ov elo-tv] 'all they 
 who are of, i. e. appertain to, rest up- 
 on, the worhs of the law,' ' qui in lege 
 justitiam quserunt,' Bull, Harm. Ap. 
 u. 7. 12; the primary force of 4k, 
 owing to the nature of the expression". 
 
III. 9, lo, II. 
 
 53 
 
 viro KUTapav ' eicriv 
 
 TTiKara- 
 
 yiypaiTTai yap ore 'E 
 paTOS Tray oj ovk i/mfiivei iv vatriv TOty yeypaf/L- 
 fievoii ev T(S ^ij3\i(p Tov vofiov tov iroi^a-at avra. 
 OTi Se ev vofiw ovSeh SiKaiovrai -jrapa rcS Qem SrjXov, ii 
 
 being here slightly less obvious than 
 in ver. 8, and suggesting more the 
 secondary and derivative idea of de- 
 pendence on than of direct origination 
 from; see Winer in he, and comp. 
 I Cor. xii. 1 6, oiK el/il iK tov o-iijKttTos. 
 ■iiro Kardpav] 'imder a curse;' not 
 'under the curse,' but almost simply 
 and generally, 'under curse' = iiriKa.- 
 rdparoSf comp. i^^' afiapriav, Rom. iii. 
 9 : the proof drawn from the 0. T. 
 becomes thus more cogent. 'Tiri, it 
 may be remarked, has appy. here no 
 quasi-^A^sica^ sense {Kardpa being 
 viewed in the light of a burden, 
 Eiick., Windischm.), but its common 
 ethical sense of subjection to; see 
 Winer, Gr. % 49. k, p. 362. 
 With regard to the argument, it is 
 only necessary to observe that the 
 whole obviously rests on the admis- 
 sion, which it was impossible not to 
 make, that no one of ol i^ ipyinv i/dfiov 
 can fulfil all the requisitions of the 
 law ; see esp. Bull, Harm. Apost. n. 
 7. II, and compare vrith it Usteri, 
 Lehrb. 1. 4. B, p. 60. 
 yiyipOkirrai. 7ap] Confirmation from 
 Scripture of the preceding words. 
 The quotation is from Dent, xxvii. 26, 
 though not in the exact words either 
 of the Heb. or LXX ; comp. Surenhus. 
 Bi^Xos KoraXX., p. 569, and Bagge 
 in he. The following on is omitted 
 by Rec, but only with KL ; msa., and 
 some Ff. Toi! 7roii]<rai ovrd] 
 
 'to do them' 'ut faciat ea,' Vulg., 
 Olarom. ; purpose contemplated and 
 involved in the ifiiihei. This use of 
 the infiu. to denote design, intention, 
 is (with the exception of a few in- 
 stances from the other writers in the 
 
 N. T., Mark iv. 3, James v. 17) con- 
 fined to St Paul and St Luke: see 
 Fritz. Maith. Excurs. II. p. 485 ; 
 Winer, Gr. § 44. 4. b, p. 290. The 
 construction is not, properly speak- 
 ing, Hebraistic, but belongs to later 
 Greek, and may be correctly explained 
 as an amplification of the use of the 
 gen. which serves first to mark the 
 result or product (e. g. II. II. 397, ki)- 
 /iara iravroittiv dpifiuv' Scheuerl. Sj/nt. 
 § II. I, p. 79), then further the pur- 
 pose of the working object, and lastly 
 {e.g. in LXX, where the Hebr. idiom 
 would naturally cause this develop- 
 ment) becomes little more than ex- 
 planatory and definitive; comp. Gen. 
 iii. 6, wpalbv iffTi TOV KaravoTJa'aL' 
 Exod, ii. 18, ^rax'^foi'Te rov Trapaye- 
 viaSai. In this latter case the first 
 verb commonly marks a more general 
 action, the second verb one more 
 limiting and special; comp. Gen. 
 xxxiv. 17, elcraKoiietv •rjp.ujv tou irepiTe- 
 p,iff8af and see esp. Thiersch, de Pent. 
 III. 12, p. 173 sq., where this usage is 
 well investigated. The progress of 
 this structure in classical Greek is 
 briefly noticed by Bemhardy, Synt. 
 K. 2, p. 357. 
 
 II. OTi Si K.T.X,] 'Sut farther 
 that in the law, &c.' continuation of 
 the reasoning; di subjoining to the 
 argumentum e contra/rio (that those of 
 the law are under the curse, ver. 10) 
 the supplementary argument derived 
 from Scripture that no one under 
 any circumstances is justified by the 
 law. The oppositive force of 5^ may 
 thus be felt in the incidental reply 
 which the verse affords to a deduction 
 that might have been obviously made 
 
M 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 13 OTi 'O otKaioi e/c Tr/o-Tewy ^ija-erai' 6 Se v6/xos ovk 
 
 from ver. lo; 'but — lest any one 
 should imagine that if a, man did so 
 i/i/iheiv K.T.\. he would be blessed — 
 let me add, <fcc.' comp. De Wette 
 in loc. iv Mtf-a] ' under the 
 
 law;' i. e. in the sphere and domain of 
 the law; Acts xiii. 39, Eom. ii. 12, 
 iii. 19. The instrumental meaning is 
 grammatically tenable (object existing 
 hi the means, Jelf, Gr. § 622, 3, see 
 notes on i Thess. iv. 18), and even 
 contextually plausible, owing to the 
 prominence of ii> pd/xip and its apparent 
 opposition to Xpurrds, ver. 13 (see 
 Meyer) : as however, owing to the 
 inversion of the syllogism, the oppo- 
 sition between the clauses is much 
 obscured, the simpler and more usual 
 meaning is here to be preferred ; comp. 
 notes on i Thess. ii. 3. The more in- 
 clusive iv is thus perhaps chosen 
 designedly, as the Apostle's object is 
 appy. to show that the idea of justifi- 
 cation falls wholly out of the domain 
 of the law, and is incompatible with 
 its very nature and character. 
 irapd T(p 0e^] ' in the sight of, i. e. 
 in the judgment of God' (Eom. ii. 13, 
 xii. 1 6, I Pet. ii. 20) ; the idea of 
 locality suggested by the prep, being 
 still retained in that of judgment at 
 a tribunal ; see notes on 2 Thess. i, 6. 
 This usage is sulEoiently common in 
 classical writers ; see Bernhardy, Si/nt. 
 V. 27. b, p. 257, and exx. in Rost u. 
 Palm, Lex. a, v. irapd, 11. 2, Vol. 11. 
 p. 667. OTi 'O SCxaios K.T.X,} 
 
 ' hecause The just shall live by faith,' 
 Habak. ii. 4, again cited in Eom. i. 
 17, Heb. X. 38, — this second Sn being 
 causal, the first simply declarative. 
 It is extremely difficult to decide whe- 
 ther & ir/irr. is to be joined with d 
 Uk. ('the just by faith') or with the 
 verb. The former is perfectly correct 
 
 in point of grammar, though doubted 
 by Bp Middleton (see Winer, Gr. § 
 20. 2, p. 123), and is adopted by 
 Hammond, Meyer, and other careful 
 expositors. As however it seems cer- 
 tain (opp. to Baumg.-Crus.) that the 
 original Hebrew (see Hitzig im, loc, 
 Kl. Prophet, pp. 263, 264) does not 
 bear this meaning, — as St Paul is 
 quoting the words in the order in 
 which they stand in the LXX, not in 
 that (4 iK irlffT. 51k.) most favourable 
 to such a transl.,— as the argument 
 seems best sustained by the other 
 construction (see Middl. in loc., and 
 comp. Bull, Exam. Cens. Animadv. III. 
 6), — and lastly, as ^■^fferai ix irhr. 
 thus stands in more exact opposition to 
 fiiir. iv airdls, it seems best with Copt., 
 Arm. (appy.), Chrys. (appy.), and the 
 bulk of the older expositors, to con- 
 nect iK 7ri(7Teus with fijcerai. 
 
 12. 6 Si v6)ii.o$ K.T.X.] 'hut {lie law 
 is not of faith,' scil. does not spring 
 from it, has no connexion with it in 
 point of principle or origin ; propositio 
 minor of the syllogism, 6 5Lk. iK vltrr. 
 'Cfjir. being the prop, major, iv vd/i. oid. 
 SiKawOrai the conclusion. Auth. by 
 translating Si 'and' obscures the ar- 
 gument. 6 iroiTJo-as ovrdj 
 'he who hath'done them,' scil. tA irpoff- 
 riyfiUTa and t& Kplfiara, mentioned 
 in the former part of Lev. xviii. 5, 
 the verse here referred to. IIoii)o-as is 
 emphatic ('priEcepta legis non sunt de 
 credendis sed de faciendis,' Aquin.), 
 and is prefaced by the adversative 
 d\X& as expressing a sentiment directly 
 opposite to what has preceded. There 
 is thus no ellipse of yiypaTrrai (Schott) 
 or \iyei (Bagge) ; comp. Fritz. Som. 
 Vol. II. p. 284. The insertion 
 of SjiOpitiTTOs after airi, (Rec.) has only 
 the authority of D'EKL; and mss., 
 
III. 12, 13. 
 
 65 
 
 avTo7s. Xpia-Tos VM-^i e^tjyopaerev e/c t^? Kardpa^ 13 
 Tou vofjLov yevofievos iirep tjfxwv KUTapa, on yeypainai 
 
 and is rightly rejected by most modem 
 editors. Iv ourots] 'in them,' 
 
 i. e., as Winer paraphrases, ' ut in his 
 legibus vitEe fous quasi insit.' 
 
 13. XpiCTTOS iinas K.T.X.] 'Christ 
 ransomed us, &c.' vivid and studiedly 
 abrupt contrast to the declaration in- 
 volved in the two preceding verses; 
 the law condemned ua, Christ ran- 
 somed us: 'non dissimile asyndeton 
 Col. iii. 4, ubi item de Christo,' 
 Beng. ■'lliSs] Jews; not 
 
 Jews and heathens; 'Judajos praeoi- 
 pue pressit maledictio,' Beng., comp. 
 Chrys. Por (t) the whole context 
 implies that the law is the Mosaic 
 law; see TJsteri in loc: (2) this law 
 had, strictly speaking, no force over 
 the Gentiles, but was in fact the 
 ti.e<T6Toixo! between the Jews and 
 Gentiles (Eph. ii. 14, 15). For a fur- 
 ther discussion of this, consult Meyer 
 and TJsteri in loc., and Brown, Galat. 
 p. 129 sq. The doctrinal deductions 
 made from this and similar passages, 
 though perfectly just and true (comp. 
 Neand. Plant. Vol. i. p. 438, Bohn), 
 cannot be urged against the more 
 limited meaning which the context 
 seems obviously to require, 
 tln-yopao-cv] 'ransomed,'' 'redeemed.' 
 Cfaiist ransomed the Jews from the 
 curse of the law, by having taken it 
 upon Himself for their sakes and in 
 their stead. An accurate explanation 
 of this and the cognate idea dTroXti- 
 Tptiiuit will be found in list. Lekrh. 
 II. I. I, p. 107, and II. I. 3, p. 202. 
 The force of the preposition iK need 
 not be very strongly pressed, e. g. 
 'emtione nos inde eruit,' Beng.: see 
 Polyb. Sist. III. 42. 1, i^riy6pa(re Trap 
 aiL/Twy rd T€ fiov6^v\a TrXoTa k.t.\., 
 where the prep, has no marked mean- 
 ing. This tendency to use verbs 
 
 compounded with prepp, without any 
 obvious increase of meaning is one of 
 the characteristics of later Greek: 
 Thiersch, de Pentat. vers. Alex. ii. i, 
 p. 83. YEvo|ievos iir\p 
 
 ijliiSv Kax.] 'hi having become a curse 
 for us/ dependent participle express- 
 ing the manner of the action, which 
 again is more distinctly elucidated in 
 the quotation ; X^yei S^ Kal rhv rpdirov, 
 Theod. The abstract Kardpa (not 
 'an accursed thing,' Peile, — which 
 dilutes the antithesis) is probably 
 chosen, as Meyer suggests, instead of 
 the concrete, to express with more 
 force the completeness of the satisfac- 
 tion which Christ made to the law. 
 On the doctrinal import of the expres- 
 sion (/cardpa TJKOvae 5l ifi^ 6 t-tjv i/j.^v 
 \6jiv Kardpav, Greg. Naz ) see the 
 quotations in Siiicer, Thes. s. v. Kard- 
 pci, "Vol. II. p. 57 sq., and for a fcw 
 words of great force and eloquence on 
 the 'malediotum crucis,' Andrewes, 
 Scrm. lit. Vol. II. p. 174 (A.-C. L.). 
 iirep ijiiuv] 'for ws,' 'salutis nostrEe 
 reparandie caus^,' Schott. In this 
 and similar passages the exact mean- 
 ing of the prep, has been much con- 
 tested. Is it (a) in commodum ali- 
 cvjus, or (/3) in loco alicujus? The 
 following seems the most simple 
 answer. 'Tw^p in its ethical sense 
 has principally and primarily (sue 
 note on ch. i. 4) theirs* meaning, espe- 
 cially in doctrinal passages where the 
 atoning death of Christ is alluded to, 
 e.g. 'Z Cor. v, 21, riiv fi-jj yv6vra ^p-ap.. 
 tIclv iiT^p Tip.S)v ap.apTlatf iwolTjaev. 
 But as there are general passages in 
 the N. T. where irip has eminently 
 the second meaning, e g. Philem. 13, 
 W iirip croS jioi Siaicoxg (comp. Plato, 
 Gurg. p. 515 0, iyi> iwip <rov AiroKpi- 
 vovp,ai), — so are there doctrinal pas- 
 
56 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 14 'Exz/f araoaTO? tto? o Kpe/nd/nevoi sttI ^vXov, 'iva eti ra 
 eQvri fj evXoyla tov 'A^paa/u. yevrjTai ev ApiaTO) Iriaov, 
 Iva T^v ivayyeXlav tov TlvevfxaTOS Xa/Soofiev oia t5? 
 TTiCTTeajy. 
 
 sages (as here) where iw^p may admit 
 the second meaning united with the 
 first, when the context {e.g. in i Cor. 
 XV. 3 it would be inadmissible) and 
 nature of the argument seem to re- 
 quire it, though probably never (Winer, 
 Gr. § 47. 1, p. 342) the second ex- 
 clusively: see Magee, Atonement, No. 
 30, Vol. I. p. 245 sq., and TJsteri, 
 Lehrb. in. i, p. 115 sq., where the 
 meaning of the preposition is briefly 
 discussed. 8ti •ye-ypairTai.] 
 
 'fm-asmuch as it is written; parenthe- 
 tical confirmation of the assertion in- 
 volved in the preceding participial 
 clause yev&fi. k.t.\. The passage in 
 Deut. xxi. 23 here adduced does not 
 allude to crucifying, but to exposure 
 after death on stakes or crosses (Josh, 
 X. 26), yet is fully pertinent as speci- 
 fying the 'ignominious particularity 
 to which the legal curse belonged,' 
 and which our Redeemer by hanging 
 dead on the cross formally fulfilled; 
 see esp. Pearson, Creed, Art. IV. Vol. 
 I. p. 248 sq. (Burt.). It is interesting 
 to notice that the dead body was not 
 hanged by the neck, but iy the hands, 
 and not on a tree, but on a piece of 
 wood ('non ex arbore sed ligno,* 
 Dassov.) : see the treatise of Dassovius 
 in Thesaur. Theo'og.-Philol. Vol. 11. 
 p. 614; Jahn, Archceol. § 258; and 
 Bahr, Stud. u. Krit. for 1849, p. 924 
 sq. The reading of Eec., 
 
 ykypairrai ydp, has the support of 
 D»E=KLN; most mss. ; Syr. (both), 
 Copt., al., but bears every appearance 
 of being a conformation to the more 
 usual mode of citation, ver. 10. 
 
 14. tva els Tol 86vT]] 'in order that 
 unto the Gentiles;' divine purpose in- 
 
 volved in the i^riySpaaev ix rffS Kard- 
 pa.i K.T.\. The first purpose was the 
 ransom of the Jews from the curse ; 
 the second, which was involved in the 
 first (6tl ii (Toirripta ix tC>v 'louSaluK 
 iariv, John iv. 22), was the extension 
 of Abraham's blessing to the Gentiles, 
 but that, not through the law, but in 
 Jesus Christ. EJs with accus. is 
 
 here neither simply identical with dat. 
 (comp. Winer, Gr. § 31. 5, p. 191), 
 nor in its more lax sense of ' in refer- 
 ence to' (Peile; comp. Bernh. Synt. 
 V. II, p. 219), but retains its proper 
 local meaning, with ref. to the meta- 
 phorical arrival of the 6^Xo7ta' see 
 Winer, Gr. § 49. a, p. 353. 
 1^ EuXoYCa TOV 'App.] 'the ilessing 
 of Abraham,' soil, the blessing an- 
 nounced to and vouchsafed to Abra- 
 ham (ver. 8), 7] eiiXoyia i] ^k irluTeuji, 
 Theoph. ; the gen. being the gen. 6b- 
 jecti; comp. "Rom. xv. 8, t&s iiray- 
 yeXlas tQv irarepwv and see Winer, 
 Gr. § 30. I, p. 167 sq. ; Kriiger, 
 Sprackl. § 47. 7. I sq. 
 Iv Xpio-r<5 "Ii)ir.] 'in Christ Jesus,' 
 'in Christo Jesu,' Vulg., Clarom., 
 Copt., Arm. ; not ' propter,' JSAh., 
 or for SlA., Grot. (comp. Chrys.), as 
 this instrumental use of h with per- 
 sons, though found in a, few passages 
 (comp. Matth. ix. 34. iv rtf 8,pxovTi, 
 — he was the caiisa efficiens), is here 
 certainly not necessary. It was 'in 
 Christ,' in the knowledge of Him 
 and in His death, that the Gentiles 
 received the blessing. 
 Iva, K.T.X.,] 'in order that we might 
 receive ;' second statement of purpose, 
 not subordinated to, but co-ordinate 
 with the preceding one. Meyer cites 
 
III. 14, 15- 
 
 57 
 
 Even Hie customs of 'AoeX.(i)o/, KOTa avOoWTTOV \eyw I K 
 
 men show that the ^ 
 
 ib'ralfam"^^ be °l^'^^ avQpWTTOV KeKVp()3HeVV}V CiaO^Kl^V 
 
 annxUled by the law which came so long afterwards. 
 
 as iBstances of a similai- parallelism 
 with 'iva, Eom. vii. 13, 2 Cor. ix. 3, 
 Eph. vi. 19, 10. The Apostle ad- 
 vances with his subject, till at last 
 under \dpafiev he includes all; 'nos, 
 omnium gentium homines, sive Judaei 
 sive Barbari.' 
 
 Ti)v €iroyye\£av tov nvev|i.aTos] 'the 
 promise of the Spirit:^ not merely rb 
 iTrayyeXOh UpeOfia (Fritz. Horn, vi. 4, 
 "Vol. I. p. 368), but 'the realization of 
 the promise of the Spirit,' iirayy. being 
 taken in a partially concrete sense ; 
 comp. Luke xxiv. 49, Heb. x. 36, and 
 see Winer, Gr. § 34. 3, p. 211. 
 Grammatically considered, toO Hvein. 
 may be a gen, subjecti, sc. 'promis- 
 sionem a Spiritu prof ectam,' or a gen. 
 objecti, as above. Doctrinally con- 
 sidered however, the latter is dis- 
 tinctly to be preferred ; the Spirit 
 being usually represented by the 
 Apostle as not so much the source, as 
 the pledge of the fulfilment of the 
 promise, see Usteri, Lehrb. n. i. 2, 
 p. 174, note. After a wondrous 
 
 chain of arguments, expressed with 
 equal force, brevity, and profundity, 
 the Apostle comes back to the subject 
 of ver. 2 ; the gift of the Holy Ghost 
 came through faith in Jesus Christ. 
 
 15. 'AS£X4>oC K.T.X.] Proof that 
 the promise was not abrogated by the 
 law: ovt(j3 deltas t^v iritTTtv irpea^u- 
 r^pav roO v6fiov, dtSdaKeL irdXiv ccs 6 
 vSfios efiToBfbv oil 56vaTai yevecrdai reus 
 9eoO iirayyeKlaif, Theod. 
 Kara avflptairov] 'after the manner of 
 mjCn* i^ d.vdptiiirlvdjy TrapadetyfidTtav, 
 Chrys. ; dvBpoiwLvois TpdypLcuri k4xpv- 
 p-ai, Theod.; see notes on ch. i. 11. 
 With this expression the Apostle 
 here introduces an argument which 
 rests on mere human analogies, and 
 
 which he uses as men might ('tan- 
 quam inter homines,' Syr.) one to 
 another : 'afFero exemplura ex homi- 
 num vita depromptum,' Fritz. Rom. 
 iii. 5, Vol. I. p. 160, where the various 
 meanings of this formula will be 
 found briefly noticed. 
 8|ji<i>s dvBpciiroD K.T.X.] 'though it be 
 hut a man's covenant, yet when con- 
 firmed, &c.' logically inexact but not 
 idiomatically uncommon transposition 
 of S/iois, which, as the sense shows, 
 really belongs to oiSels. Both H/ius 
 and other adverbs {e.g. dei, iroWdKis, 
 Iti) are occasionally thus as it were 
 attracted out of their logical order, 
 when the meaning is otherwise dis- 
 tinct; see Winer, Gr. § 61. 4, p. 488, 
 and EUendt, Lex. Soph. s.v. 6p,ois, 
 who observes that this transposition 
 is most frequently found with parti- 
 ciples; 'SiJ,as cum participio ita com- 
 ponitur, ut inclusum protasi tamen 
 ad apodosin pertineat,' Vol. ir. p. 318 : 
 cooip. Plato, Phcedo, p. 91 0, (po^elTcu 
 fjt.71 i] ^vxh 5/^ws Ktd deidrepoif Kai /cdX- 
 \iov OP ToD (TW/faros irpoaTroXK^rjrai' 
 and see Stallbaum in loc. Sia6iJKi]v] 
 'a covenant.' It may be true, doc- 
 trinally considered, that it is not of 
 much moment whether Scad, be inter- 
 preted ' contractum an testamenium ' 
 (Calv.) ; considered however exegeti- 
 cally, it is obvious that (a) the order 
 of the words, and (6) the comparison 
 between the SmS'qK'i] of man and the 
 SiaBiiKTi of God (ver. 1 7), tacitly insti- 
 tuted by the emphatic position of 
 dvBpiSiirov (sing, to make the antithesis 
 more apparent), both require exclu- 
 sively the former meaning; so jEth. 
 (hidan), and appy. Theoph. SiaBiiKTjv 
 Kai (Tvpupuvlav the other Vv. either 
 adopt SiaB-fiKii (Syr., Copt.), or are 
 
58 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 1 6 ovoeis aOerei »/ eTriSiaTdarareTat. tm oe 'A^paafi eppe- 
 Oriaav ai iirayyeXlac Ka\ tw a-jripfiaTi avTov. ov 
 \eyei Kaj to?? a-'Trepfiacrtv wj stt] ttoWwv, aX\ w? 
 i(p' evos Kai Tf <nrepfjLaTl crov, oy ecmv Apiarroi. 
 
 ambigaouB. A paper on the uses of 
 this word in the N. T. will be found 
 in the Classical Museum, Vol. VII. p. 
 299 ; see also Bagge in loc. 
 eiriSiaTa'o-creTai] 'adds new condi- 
 tions,' 'superordinat,' Vulg., Clarom., 
 'novas addit oonatitutiones, ' Bretsch. 
 Lex. s.T. or, in effect, as it is neatly 
 paraphrased by Herm., 'additamentis 
 vitiat;' compare Joseph. Antiq. xvii. 
 9. 4, and esp. Bell. Jud. II. 2. 3, 
 d^LWf T^s iTrtSiad-^KTjs r^v bMOiiKtiv 
 etvat KvptuTdpav. 
 
 16. T^ 8 J 'APpad|j.] 'Now to Abra- 
 ham ; ' parenthetical argument designed 
 to make the application of this par- 
 ticular example to the general case 
 perfectly distinct, and to obviate every 
 misapprehension. The Apostle seems 
 to say; *this however is not a case 
 merely of a Stad-qKij, but of an iiray- 
 yeXia, — yea, of itrayyeXiaL' nor was 
 it made merely to a man Abraham 
 {av8p. Staff.), but to Christ.' Accord- 
 ing to the usual interpretation, 8^ in- 
 troduces the prop, minor of a syllo- 
 gism, which is interrupted by the 
 parenthetical comment oi> T^iya — 
 Xpi(7T6s, but resumed in ver. 17, 
 ' atqui Abraamo et semini, <fcc.' Herm. 
 To this however the objection of 
 Meyer seems very just, that in that 
 case St Paul would have undoubtedly 
 given a greater logical prominence to 
 the dinne nature of the promises to 
 Abraham by some such turn as ' God 
 promised,' not 'the p>: were spohen:' 
 see Alf. in loc. at eira^YeXCai] 
 
 ' the promises ; ' plural, as being several 
 times repeated (Est ), and couched in 
 different forms of ejfpression ; comp. 
 Gen. xiii. 15, xv. 18, xvii. 8, xxvi. 4, 
 
 xxviii. 14. They involved, as Bengel 
 well observes, not only earthly but 
 heavenly blessings, 'terrffi Canaan et 
 mundi et divinorum bonorum om- 
 nium.' The latter were more dis- 
 tinctly future, the former paulo-post- 
 f uture. On the exact spiritual nature 
 of these promises, see Hengatenberg, 
 Chnstol. Vol. I. p. 38 (Clark). 
 The so called Ionic form ippeBijaav has 
 the support of the best uncial manu- 
 scripts, and is adopted by most of the 
 recent editors ; see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 
 447. Mec. gives ipp'/jBriBav but only 
 with D^EKL. Kal t<3 
 
 o-ir^p|iaTi avToii] 'and to his seed;' 
 emphatic, as pointing to Christ, and 
 forming as it were the fulcrum of the 
 argument which follows. The pas- 
 sages of scripture here referred to are 
 appy. Gen. xiii. 15 and xvii. 8, but 
 not Gen. xxii. 18 : so Iren. v. 32 ; 
 Origen on Rom. iv. Vol. v. p. 276 
 (ed. Lomm.). I may 
 
 here pause to make a brief remark 
 on the great freedom with which so 
 many commentators have allowed 
 themselves to characterize St Paul's 
 argument as either artificial ('Schul- 
 kunst,' Ewald) or Eabbinical (Mey. ; 
 comp. Surenhus. BI;8X. KaraXX. p. 84), 
 or, as Baur, Apost. Paul. p. 665, has 
 even ventured to assert, 'plainly arbi- 
 trary and incorrect. ' It may be true 
 that similar arguments occur in Rab- 
 binical writers (Schoettg. Hor. Hehr. 
 Vol. I. p. 736) ; it may be true that 
 aweppia (like JJ^.T) is a collective noun, 
 and that when the plural is used, as in 
 Dan. i. 12, 'grains of seed' are 
 implied. All this may be so, — 
 nevertheless we have here an inter- 
 
in; 16, 17. 
 
 59 
 
 •TOVTO Se "Kiyw SiaQ^K)]v ■jrpoKeKvpwfi.ivijv inro tov 17 
 Qeov Tels XjOJO-Twl 6 fxera TerpaKoa-ia Koi rpid- 
 
 17. eU XpL(TT6i>] 'for Christ,' i.e., to be fulfilled in Christ: not 'usque ad 
 tempora Christi,' or ' in reference to Christ ' (Peile), but as in ver. 24. These 
 words are omitted by ABGN; 17. 23*. 67**. 80; Vulg., Copt., .^ilth. (both); 
 Cyr. (2), r>am. ; Jerome, Aug. (often), Pel., Bed. {Lachm., Tisok., Ma/.), — 
 and it must be fairly owned have some appearance of being a gloss : still the 
 authority for the insertion, viz. DEFGK ; most mss. ; Syr. (both), Clarom., 
 Ai-m. [correct Oriesb.]; Chrys., Theod., Theoph., CEoum. {Xec, iSchoh), is 
 perhaps sufficiently strong to warrant an insertion in brackets. See Bagge in 
 loc. (p. 95), who has argued with ability in favour of the Received Text. 
 
 pretation which the Apostle, writing 
 under the illumination of the Holy 
 Ghost, has deliberately propounded, 
 and which therefore (whatever diffi- 
 culties may at first sight appear in it) 
 is profoundly and indisputably true. 
 We must then hold that there is as 
 certainly a mystical meaning in the 
 use of J?"1t in Gen. xiii. 15, xvii. 8, as 
 there is an argument for the resurrec- 
 tion in Exod. iii. 6, though in neither 
 case was the writer necessarily aware 
 of it. As JJll in its simple meaning 
 generally (except Gen iv. 25, i Sam. 
 i. 11) denotes not the mere progeny 
 of a man, but his posterity viewed as 
 one organically-connected whole ; so 
 here in its mystical meaning it denotes 
 not merely the spiritual posterity of 
 Abraham, but Him in whom that 
 posterity is all organically united, the 
 irX7ipw/ia, the KecjioXi], even Christ. 
 This St Paul endeavours faintly to 
 convey to his Greek readers by the use 
 of awipiia and (riripfmra' see Olsh. 
 and Windiscbm. in loc, both of whom 
 may be consulted with profit. 
 oi5 Xiya] ' He saith not/ not ij ypa^-^ 
 (Bos, snips, p. 54), as in Rom. xv. 10, 
 
 where this subst. is supplied from 
 
 yejpaiTTai, ver. 9, — or rb HveS/ia 
 (Ruck.), which appears arbitrary, but 
 the natural subject 6 Qe6s, as in Eph. 
 iv. 8, V. 14, and {<l>v<'l) i Cor. vi. 16, 
 Heb. viii. 5 : see Winer, Gr. § 58. 9, 
 
 p. 463. So appy. Syr., which here in- 
 serts 01^ [illi] after Xe-yei. us tirl 
 
 iroXXwv] 'as speaking o/ma»2/.' Ap- 
 parently a solitary instance in the 
 N. T. of this meaning of irl with 
 gen. after verbs 'dicendi,' cfcc. (2 Cor. 
 vii. 14 [Rtiok.] is not in point, as iirl 
 lirov is there 'coram Tito") though 
 not uncommon in classical Greek; 
 comp. Plato, Gharm. p. 155 D, iirlroO 
 KoKou Xe7Wi/ TraidSs' and Gorff. p. 
 453 E, iraKiv 5' eL iirl rdv aiTdv Texv(J^v 
 'Keyop.eii. In this use of eTri a trace 
 of the local meaning {super-position, 
 Donalds. Gr. § 483) may be distinctly 
 perceived, the gen. representing as it 
 were the mbstratum on which the 
 action rests ; comp. John vi. 2 ; and 
 see Bernhardy, Synt. v. 23, p. 248 ; 
 Winer, Gr. § 47. g, p. 335; and 
 for a comprehensive notice of this 
 prep., Wittmaun, de Naturd, &c. tir[ 
 (Schweinf. 1846). os Io-tiv 
 
 XpicTTos] ' Christ {Jesus),' not Christ 
 and His Church, as Hammond in loc. : 
 this appears evident from the emphasis 
 which St Paul lays on the use of the 
 singular; aireppta di airov Kard, <rdpKa 
 iarlv 6 "S-purrbs, Chrys. Some useful 
 remarks on this passage will be found 
 in the Theol. Critic, No. IV. p. 494 sq. 
 1 7. ToiJTO 8e X^7«] ' This however 
 I say,' 'hoc autem dico,' Vulg., Cla- 
 rom. Instead of using the collective 
 
60 
 
 EPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 KovTa ert} yeyovwg vo/jlo? ovk uKvpoc, et? to KUTap- 
 i8 y^a-ai t^v eirayyeXiav. el yap e/c vofiov ^ KXrjpovofua, 
 
 65;', which might obscure the exact 
 position which ver. i6 holds in the 
 argument, St Paul uses the explana- 
 tory formula tovto Si \iyoi. The 5^ 
 thus serves both to resume the argu- 
 ment {ira<p7]pelas X'^P^' AvaKaf^pdva 
 riv \byov, CEcum. ) after the short 
 digression narh dvBp. \iya — tovto Si 
 \iy<i!, and also to mark the applica- 
 tion of the particular case to the 
 general principle. 
 
 6 |j.6Td TCTpaKoo-ia k.t.X.] 'which 
 came so long a time as four hundred 
 and thirty years afterwards ;' /iCTi 
 vXeidTov xpipov, Theodoret. The chro- 
 nological difficulty involved in this 
 passage when compared with Gen. xv. 
 13, Exod. xii. 40, and Acts vii. 6, 
 can only be briefly noticed. Here the 
 period from the promise to the Exodus 
 is stated to be 430 years ; but in Exod. 
 I. u. the same period, and in Gen. and 
 Acts I. c. the round number 400, is 
 assigned to the sojourn in Egypt 
 alone. The ancient mode of explana- 
 tion seems perfectly satisfactory, — 
 viz. that the 430 years include the 
 sojourn in Canaan (about 215 years) 
 as well as that in Egypt ; the whole 
 period of abode iv yij oOk tSiq., Gen. 
 XV. 13; comp. August. Qucest. in 
 jffep«a«. II. 47 (Vol. in. p. 6ii,Migne); 
 Usher, Ohronol. Sacr. oh. 8. This is 
 confirmed by the addition of the 
 words Ktti iv yg Xai/ackp (Exod. I. c.) 
 in the LXX and Samar. Pent. ; see 
 Petav. Rat. Temp. 11. Book 'z. 4, 
 Vol. II. p, 7 1 ; Hales, Ghron. Vol. 11. 
 p. 153 (ed. 1811). It may be observed 
 that the records of the family of Levi 
 appear to render so long a sojourn in 
 Egypt as 430 years impossible. Am- 
 ram, grandson of Levi, marries his 
 father's sister Joohebed (Exod. vi. 20; 
 comp. Exod. ii. i, Numb. xxvi. 59). 
 
 Now as it appears probable by a com- 
 parison of dates that Levi was bom 
 when Jacob was about 87, Levi would 
 have been 43 when he came into 
 Egypt ; there he lives 94 years (Exod. 
 vi. 16). Assuming then even that 
 Jochebed was bom in the last year 
 of Levi's life, she must at least have 
 been 256 years old when Moses wafi 
 born, if the sojourn in Egypt be 430 
 years : see Windischm. in loc. 
 The transposition ^rTjTerpaK. KalrpidK. 
 (Bee.) has against it the authority of 
 all the uncial MSS. except KL, and 
 is certainly to be rejected. 
 els tA KaTapY<i<rai Tr[v lir.] 'that it 
 should render the promise of none 
 effect,' 'ad evacuandam promissionem,' 
 Vulg., Clarom. (comp. j^th., Syr.- 
 Pbil.) ; els tS with the infinitive 
 here retaining its usual primary force 
 of object or intention; tS Karapy. was 
 the object aimed at by the invalida- 
 tion. It may be remarked that as 
 the prep, alone may point to conse- 
 quence as well as intention (see exx. in 
 Host u. Palm, Lex. s. v. iirl, v. I), 
 we must not abruptly deny what is 
 termed the ecbatic force of els t6' 
 still usage seems to show that in St 
 Paul's Epp. the final els rb so much 
 predominates (opp. to JeH, Gr. § 625. 
 3. a), that even in passages like 2 Cor. 
 viii. 6 we must not conceive all idea 
 of purpose wholly obliterated; comp. 
 Winer, Gr. § 44. 6, p. 294 sq., and 
 see notes on i Thcss. ii. 12. 
 
 18. tl 709 ix vi5|io«] Confirmatory 
 expansion of the preceding words ; ' I 
 say advisedly els t4 Karapy. k.t.X. for 
 if the inheritance be of the law, the 
 promise must plainly be reduced to 
 inoperativeness and invalidity;' see 
 Theoph. in loc. The prep. iK here 
 preserves its primary meaning of ori- 
 
III. 1 8, 19. 
 
 61 
 
 ovKSTi 6^ eTrayyeXiai' t(S §e 'A^paafi Si eVa'yyeXtay 
 
 Ke-)(api(TTai 6 Geo?. 
 
 The law was (positive HH/ 
 
 ajiswer) to bring the 
 
 conviction of sin ; and was not (iiegative answer) against the 
 
 promises of God, to which it was a preparative dispensation. 
 
 ovv o vofxo's ; Twv ira. 
 
 •pa^aa 
 
 19 
 
 gin under the slight modification of 
 result or consequence; gee notes on ch. 
 ii. 16. ij KXiipovoiiCa] ' the 
 
 inheritance;' here used by the Apostle 
 in its higher meaning to denote that 
 inheritance of the blessings of the 
 Messiah's kingdom, the inheritance of 
 the heavenly Canaan, which vfas typi- 
 fied by the lower and primary mean- 
 ing, the inheritance of the earthly 
 Canaan ; comp. Acts vii. S, Heb. xi. 
 8, and see Brown, p. 147. 
 ovK^Ti e| lirayyeXias] 'it is no more 
 of promise ;' the latter supposition is 
 excluded by the former ; comp. Kom. 
 vii. 20, xi. 6, and see Winer, Gr. % 65. 
 10, p. 545. OiKiri is thus used in its 
 simple logical sense without any tem- 
 poral reference. 8l* lira'y'YC- 
 X£as] 'hy means of promise;' not 'in 
 the form of a promise' (Peile, Euck.), 
 nor as uniting with Kix°.fi. as a mere 
 equivalent to ^7nj77e{Xaro (.,3jjth. 
 both); but simply and plainly 'per 
 promissionem,' Beza, 'by virtue and 
 by means of promise.' The enjoyment 
 of the inheritance depended on no 
 conditions, came through no other 
 medium, save that of promise. 
 Kex*P ''"■"•'■] '^'»*^ ffedy given it,' 
 'gratia dedit,' Copt.; 'notanda est 
 emphasis in voce kcx- quae a x<ipis 
 deducitur, adeoque a Beza (?) recte 
 vertitur gratificatus est, confer Kom. 
 iv. 13, 14, 15,' Bull, JTarm. Ap. II. 
 5. 5. Kexdp. may be translated in- 
 transitively 'Abrahamo grata fecit 
 Deus' (Schott, Olsh., Bretsch.); but 
 as the verb is nearly always used 
 transitively in the N. T., and as logi- 
 cal perspicuity requires that the subject 
 of the first member of the conditional 
 
 syllogism (Beng.) should be supplied 
 in the second, it appears most natural 
 to supply tacitly KXr/povo/ilav as the 
 obvious object-accusative. With the 
 present use of the perf., implying the 
 duration of the x'^pi'^t contrast Phil, 
 ii. 9, ^apiaaro aOrtp tvopa, where the 
 action is represented as a simple his- 
 torical fact. 
 
 19. T£ ofiv 6 v<i)ios] ' What then is 
 the law?' i.e. 'what is the meaning, 
 the object of the law?' Answer to 
 the not unnatural objection that the 
 Law must according to the Apostle's 
 reasoning be deemed a useless insti- 
 tution (irepiTTUs iridri, Theod.), by 
 a statement of its real use, ofiice, cha- 
 racteristics, and relation to the cove- 
 nant of grace : Xva p/r} tls popitrj] ireptr- 
 rhv rbv vbpov, Kal tovto SwpOovTai t& 
 /i^pos, SeiKvis Stl oiK elKTJ, aXKci ir&iiv 
 Xpw^pi'^s iibdri, Chrys. T/ is not for 
 Sta tI (Schott, Brown) but is the 
 idiomatic neuter expressive of the 
 abstract nature, <fcc. of the subject; 
 see Bemhardy, Synt. VII. 4, p. 336, 
 and comp. Madvig, Synt. § 97, note. 
 Meyer cites i Cor. iii. 5, tI oSp iariv 
 'AvoWiis, where the MSS. evidence 
 [CDBFGL opp. to ABK] is divided. 
 Tiov TTttpapdo-ewv X'^P''*'] ' "" eieeount 
 of, became of, the transgressions,' 
 'propter transgressiones,' Vulg., 
 
 IZni ■ 5fflV) ^-feiO [propter 
 
 transgressionem] Syr., Copt, {ethbe), 
 and appy. Arm. (vasn) ; sail, to mani- 
 fest, awaken a conviction of, and give 
 as it were a distinctive existence to, 
 the transgressions of it (which existed 
 but were not properly recognized as 
 such), whether previous or subsequent 
 
62 
 
 EPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 '^(apiv irpocreTeQri, d-^ii ov eXOr/ to cnrepfia w eTctjy- 
 
 to its introduction ; comp. Rom. v. 1 3, 
 &xpi- yoip vdfiou aftaprla ^v h Khffpufi' 
 the more generic aiiaprla, being there 
 used, as sin is not conteniplated (as 
 here) specially in the light of a. trans- 
 gression of a fixed ordinance. Owing 
 to the various shades of meaning that 
 have been assigned to x<i/)"', the exact 
 significance of these words is some- 
 what debateable. Of the many inter- 
 pretations that have been proposed 
 three deserve consideration, (a) ' ad 
 coercendas transgressiones ;' as Chrys. 
 (ivrl xoXcoD 6 v6fj.os), Theoph., OEcum., 
 Jerome, and most of the older exposi- 
 tors : (/3) ' transgressionum gratid,' acil. 
 to call them forth, to multiply them, 
 and as it were bring them to a head, 
 Horn. V. 20, vii. 7; so appy. Clarom., 
 ' factorum (?) gratia ;' very distinctly 
 jBth. (both), 'ut multiplicarent peo- 
 cata;' and some modern .expositors, 
 Meyer, Alf., al. : (7) 'tramsgressiomim 
 causd,' i. e. ' ut transgressiones palam 
 faceret, eoque modo homines cogeret 
 ad agnitionem sui reatus,' Calv. ; Bom. 
 iii. 20; so appy. Vulg., Syr., Copt., 
 Arm., Aug., Beza, Winer (appy.), and 
 also in part Hofmann (Schriftb. Vol. 
 II. 2, p. 48) Tvho objects both to {a) 
 and the extreme view of (^). Of 
 
 these interpretations we must, in spite 
 of the authority of the Greek com- 
 mentators, plainly reject (a) on lexi- 
 cal grounds, as no satisfactory exx. 
 {Soph. (Ed. Col. 443 [see Herm.J is 
 not to the point, nor i John iii. r?, 
 nor even Clem. Horn. xi. 16, tS>v ira- 
 pairTuiiidTuv x^P'-" '7 Ti/j,apta Iwerai) 
 have as yet been adduced of such a 
 practically reversed meaning of x^P^"- 
 The second (/3) is more plausible, but 
 still open to the grave objection, that 
 in a comparatively undograatioal pas- 
 sage it ascribes a purpose directly to 
 God (contrast Kom. v. 20, pd/ios rap- 
 
 eiarjKBiv Xva k.t.\.) which would have 
 certainly needed a fuller explanation. 
 We may retain therefore with some 
 confidence (7), which is both lexically 
 defensible (see below), and yields a 
 good and pertinent sense. The ofiioe 
 of the law was to make transgressions 
 palp.ible, to awaken a conviction of 
 sin in the heart (rd ireto-at elb^vai rd. 
 otKeta a^apTrifiara, Chrys. ), and make 
 man feel his need of a Saviour. It 
 was thus also necessarily temporanj 
 {dxp^s 0" K.T.X.); for when the Seed 
 did come, higher influences began to 
 work within. It only remains 
 
 briefly to answer the lexical objection 
 of Meyer, by stating that X^P*-^ (esp. 
 in later writers) does not always mean 
 in gratiafn, but includes all shades 
 of meaning from in gratiam to causd 
 and propter, just as those of IveKa 
 range from causd to quod atiinet ad; 
 see Bernh. Synt. v. 16, p. 233 ; El- 
 lendt. Lex. Soph. a. v. x''/""" and 
 comp. exx. in Ast, Lex, Plat, and 
 Host u. Palm, Lex. s. v. 
 A discussion of this passage and the 
 general scope of the law will be found 
 in Petav. de Prcedest. X. 25. i. Vol. I. 
 p. 461; compare also Bull, Exam. Cens. 
 XIX. 6, and more recently Baur, Apost. 
 Paul. m. 5, p. 581 sq., but observe 
 that all these writers adopt the nega- 
 tive meaning of X^P^^' 
 ■irpo(reri9it\] 'was superadded,' 'super- 
 addita est,' Herm. ; it was however, 
 as Meyer observes, no ^TrtSiaSiJici;, but 
 a totally fresh institution. The reason 
 is given by QSoum., tva Sci^xi ■""o" vS/iov 
 fi^ 6vra Tpwrdrutrov tliffTrep al iwayye- 
 X(ai slcrtv. 'EriSii is the reading 
 
 ofUTG; 5 mss. 
 
 ofxpis K.T.X.] 'until the seed shall have 
 come;' 'terminus ad quem' of the 
 duration of the newly introduced in- 
 stitution (Mey.) involving the obvious 
 
III. 20. 
 
 63 
 
 yeXrai, StUTayets St" ayyeXoov, ev X^-'i"* l^ecriTOv. 6 Se ao 
 
 query t/ irepaiTipia /col Trapi Kaiphv 
 airbv SXiceis; Chrys. This use of the 
 subjunct. after an aor. in temporal 
 sentences can be fully defended, on 
 the recognized principle that the past 
 is contemplated by the writer as a 
 present, from which as it were he is 
 taking his survey of what would be 
 then future, though now past; see 
 exx. in Winer, Gr. § 41. i, p. 257 sq.; 
 comp. SchmaH. Synt. § 128. 2; Klotz, 
 Devar. Vol. II. p. 618. It must how- 
 ever be applied with caution both in 
 the N. T. and in later G-reek, owing 
 to the gradual disuse of the opt. and 
 the tendency of the subj. to take its 
 place. Meyer calls attention to the 
 omission of hp as evincing the idea 
 in St Paul's mind of all absence of 
 obstacles; see Herm. de Panic, df, 
 II. 9, p. no; Klotz, Devar. Vol. II. p. 
 568; Sohmalf. Synt. § 121. 
 ^ l'ini7Y£\Tai] ' to whom the promise 
 has been made;* irepl "KpiffTou \4yuv, 
 Chrys.; comp. ver. 16, ippi6ric7av...Ti^ 
 air4pp.a.TL. It does not seem desirable 
 to destroy the parallelism of these two 
 clauses by translating iwriyy. (so. 6 
 6e6s) actively. SiaraYcCs] 
 
 'ordainedy not 'promulgated,' Ust., 
 Winer; but simply 'ordinata,' Vulg., 
 Copt., 'disposita,' Clarom. ; seePhilo, 
 Op. Mund. 1. I, diaTeray/iinav inri 
 Twv vo^oBerGiv' and comp. Hesiod, 
 Op. 274, vbiiov 5ch-a^e Kpovibjv, where 
 one Scholiast (Proclus) paraphrases it 
 by the simple verb. The participial 
 clause serves to add accessory details 
 and distinctions to Tpoaer., and is not 
 prior to, but contemporaneous with 
 the action described by the finite verb ; 
 comp. Col. ii. 15, and see notes in loc. 
 On the union of the part, with the 
 finite verb, see the brief but pertinent 
 remarks of Bernhardy, Synt. I. 9. p. 
 383, and the more elaborate notice of 
 
 Schmalfeld, Synt. % 205 sq. It would 
 certainly seem that, esp. in latter 
 Greek writers, the part, is often asso- 
 ciated with the finite verb, where two 
 verbs united with a copula would have 
 seemed more natural and even moie 
 intelligible; see the exx. in Herm. 
 Viger, No. 224. On the best mode of 
 translating such participles, see notes 
 on Phil ii. 30 (Transl.). 81.' 
 
 dyyA-wv] ' throngh angels,' 'per ange- 
 
 los,' Vulg., Clarom., lijIKj fjt£5 
 
 T, 7 7 '7 
 
 [in manu angelorum] Syr., scil. 077^- 
 Xwc iwovpyoivTuv, Theod. : third cha- 
 racteristic of the law (see next note) 
 sei-ving to show the distinction, in 
 point of manner and circumstance, 
 between its enactment and the giving 
 of the Promise ; ' per angelos, in manu 
 mediatoris, duplioiter mediate,' Eeng.; 
 comp. Baur, Paulus, p. 582. There 
 is thus no reason whatever for modify- 
 ing this meaning of Sid' it points 
 simply and plainly to the media and 
 intervenient actors, by whose ministry 
 the law was enacted ; see Joseph. 
 Aniiq. xv. 5. 3, ruiSv rb. KdWurra 
 Twv Soy/idTuv Kal ra daidyrara twv ^v 
 rots ydpiois Si' dyyiXuv irapii rod 
 Qeov pmBdnTav Deut. xxxiii. 2, LXX; 
 and see Winer, Gr. § 47. i, p. 339, 
 note. ev X^''P'' }i'f<''iTOv] 'in 
 
 the hand of a mediator,' 'in manu 
 mediatoris,' Syr., Vulg., Clarom., 
 Copt., Arm. : fourth and most import- 
 ant distinction (see below) between 
 the law and the Promise, and to 
 which the argument of ver. 20 spe- 
 cially refers. The h is not instru- 
 mental 'by the hand,' Mey. (on the 
 ground that Moses received the law 
 from God, and gave it to the people ; 
 comp. Baur, Apost. Paul. p. 583), 
 but, as the use of the singular and 
 the Aramaic idiom both suggest, com- 
 
64 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 31 fieaiTtji evos ovk eariv, 6 Se Oeos eh eariv. 
 
 dvv 
 
 bines with x"/)l as = T3, soil, 'minis- 
 terio (mediatoris) ; ' rf roirov Biaei 
 jMwuff^ws biaKovoxivToSj Theodoretj see 
 1 Chron. xxxiii. 8, Josh. xiv. 2, 
 Wisdom xi. i. That Moses is the 
 
 mediator here referred to (Deut. v. 5) 
 seems now so generally admitted, that 
 we may reasonably wonder how the 
 early expositors (Basil and Theodoret 
 are exceptions) could have so gene- 
 rally coincided in the perplexing view 
 of Origen (Vol. v. p. 273, ed. Lomm.) 
 that the /lefftrris here mentioned was 
 Christ. Great difference 
 
 of opinion however exists as to St 
 Paul's object in recounting these de- 
 tails. If it was to prove the lowliness 
 of the law, such a recital would in 
 several parts rather seem to convey 
 the contrary. If it was to show its 
 glorious natwre (Mey.), such an object 
 would appear seriously at variance 
 with the context. The more natural 
 view is that it was to mark the fun- 
 damental differences between the law 
 and the Gospel, and thence^ as a natu- 
 ral result of the contrast, the trans- 
 itory and provisional nature of the 
 former. The law was an institution, 
 (t) ri^v irapa^dffecijv x^P^^j restricted 
 and conditioned ; (2) Hxpi-s oS k. t. X., 
 temporary and provisional ; (3) Smra- 
 7eis Si' iyyi'Kav, mediately, not im- 
 mediately, given by God ; (4) iv xei.pl 
 /ieff., mediately, not immediately, re- 
 ceived from God: see Olsh. and 
 Windischm. in loc. 
 
 20. 6 SJ (16o-Ctt)s] 'Now every me- 
 diator,' or, according to our English 
 idiom, 'a mediator;' the 5^ being 
 transitional (ii,ejapari,K6v, see notes on 
 ch, iii. 8), and the article referring, 
 not to the mediator previously men- 
 tioned, 'this mediator' (Brown), but 
 to the generic idea of a mediator: 
 'artioulus definit indefinita, idque 
 
 duobus modis, aut designando certo 
 de multis, aut quee multa sunt cunctis 
 in unum coUigendis,' Herm. Iph. Aul. 
 Pref., p. XV.; see Winer, 6r. § t8. i, 
 p. 97. IVOS OIJK ?<rTtv] 
 
 'appertains not to one,' 'does not 
 belong to any single one, — any one 
 who stands isolated and by himself, 
 but implies two parties ; ' so Copt, and 
 Arm., both of which throw that slight 
 emphasis on the iv6i which the Greek 
 seems both to require and suggest: 
 contrast Hofmann, Schriftb. Vol. II. 
 ■i, p. 48, who, appy. without any just 
 ground, asserts the contrary. This 
 idea of singleness and isolation is 
 reaUy our only clue. With regard 
 
 to this and the remaining words it is 
 necessary to premise that all idea of 
 the verse being a gloss (Michaelis; 
 Liicke, Stud. u. Krit. for 1828, p. 83 
 sq.) must be summarily dismissed, as 
 there is no variation found in uncial 
 or cursive Manuscripts either in the 
 words or their order. 6 Zi 
 
 ©eos tts IotCv] 'but God is one;' 
 'God (not without slight emphasis, 
 comp. ver. 21), the direct and personal 
 giver of the Promise, does stand single 
 and isolated, — dealt singly with Abra- 
 ham (t1() 5^ 'A^p. Si iirayyeXlas (ce- 
 xdpKTTat 6 Oeos, ver. 18),— and by 
 consequence is in the promise medi- 
 atorless:' prop, minor of a syllogism, 
 of which the conclusion, being obvi- 
 ous, is omitted; see below. Out of 
 the mass of interpretations of this 
 terse sentence (said positively to ex- 
 ceed 400) those of Schleiermacher, 
 Winer, and Meyer, best deserve at- 
 tention. A brief notice of these will 
 serve to illustrate the precise nature 
 of the difficulties. In the first part of 
 the verse all are agreed ; 'now every 
 mediator involves the idea of more 
 than one : ' in the concluding clause 
 
III. 21. 65 
 
 vofAos Kara twv eTrayjeKmv rov Qeov ; fit] yivoiTo. el 
 
 they thus diflFer: (i) Schleierm., a- 
 dopted by TJsteri, Zehrb. n. i. 2, 
 p. 179; 'but God is one' — in refer- 
 ence to His promises, free, unfettered 
 by conditions. (2) Winer ; 'but God is 
 one' — one part only (oomp. ^th.- 
 Pol., ' unus est duorum') ; the people 
 of Israel must be the other part : hence 
 they are bound to the law. (3) Meyer ; 
 'but God (on the contrary) is one, 
 and one only (ein Einziger) ; ' there is 
 then a fundamental difference in the 
 number of parties concerned in the 
 law and the promise. Schleierm. and 
 Winer thus connect ver. 20 "with ver. 
 19 as an epexegesis; Mey. joins it 
 with ver. 2 1, making it St Paul's own 
 statement of a, difiBculty that might 
 arise in a reader's mind. Meyer's in- 
 terpretation has this advantage over 
 Schleiermacher's, that it preserves the 
 numerical idea which plainly belongs 
 to els' and this over Winer's, that 6 
 Geis, which is clearly the subject, is 
 not practically turned into the pre- 
 dicate. In the undue stress how- 
 ever which it places on the idea of 
 unity as opposed to that of plurality, 
 and more esp. in the assumption that 
 6 Si 0e4s K.T.\. is in fact a mono- 
 theistic ' locus communis ' (comp. 
 Jowett), it cannot be pronounced 
 wholly satisfactory. Perhaps the 
 
 following simple explanation is less 
 open to objections. The context 
 states briefly the four distinctive 
 features of the law (see above) with 
 tacit reference to the iirayyeXlct. 
 Three of these are passed over ; the 
 last, as the most important, is noticed ; 
 'the law was with, the promise was 
 without a mediator.' Verse 20 thus 
 appears to be a syllogism of which the 
 conclusion is omitted : 'Now a mediator 
 does not appertain to one, standing 
 
 or acting alone; but in the promise 
 God is one, does stand and act alone : 
 THEREFORE in the promise A medi- 
 ator DOBS NOT APPERTAIN TO GoD. 
 Is then the law, a dispensation which, 
 besides other distinctions, involved a 
 mediator, opposed to the promises which 
 rested on God, and involved no medi- 
 ator? God forbid.' According to 
 this view the only real difficulty is 
 narrowed to the propositio minor. 
 Sow was God one ? And the answer 
 is, — not because He is essentially 
 unity (comp. De W.)'; nor because 
 He is one by Himself, and Abraham 
 is one by himself (Baur, Paul. p. 
 583); nor yet because He is both the 
 giver (the Father) and the receiver 
 (the Son) united (ed. 1, Windiscbm.), 
 an interpr. too devoid of simplicity 
 and too expressly theological; but, 
 with the aspect that the last clause of 
 verse 18 puts on the whole reasoning, 
 — because He dealt with Abraham 
 singly and directly, stood alone, and 
 used no mediator. The almost 
 
 obvious objection to this explanation 
 is that it implies and involves a 
 limitation ('in the promise') in a 
 clause which seems a, mere 'locus 
 communis;' but the answer does not 
 seem unreasonable, that even assum- 
 ing that the minor was really sug- 
 gested to the Apostle as being a, 
 general axiomatic statement, his pre- 
 vious declaration of God's having 
 dealt with Abraham with no other 
 medium than His own gracious pro- 
 mise (Si' ^7ra77eX(os) showed what he 
 really regarded as the present verifica- 
 tion of it. The reader who desires 
 to examine some of the other interpre- 
 tations may consult for the earlier 
 Bonitz, Plv/r. de Gal. iii. 20 Sentent. 
 Eocaminatce, Lips. 1800; for the later 
 
 P 
 
66 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 7a/) ۤ66>] vofioi 6 Svva/xevos ^woTTOi^a-ai, ovtohs eK 
 
 Winer's Excursus and Meyer in loc. 
 
 21. 6 oSv v6f.o9 K.T.\.] 'Is the 
 law then against the promises of God } ' 
 the oSn with its full collective force 
 (Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 717) ga- 
 thering up the previous reasoning, 
 and immediately applying its obvious 
 though omitted result; 'does then 
 a confessedly distinctive cerenionial 
 and mediatorial system stand in oppo- 
 sition to the promises vrhioh God 
 gave to Abraham without a mediator 
 and without any distinctive ceremo- 
 nies?' ToO 0€o{i is not 
 without emphasis ; ' the promises 
 which rest immediately on God, and 
 were attested by no mediator.' The 
 plural a! iirayyeK. is used, as in ver. 
 16, in ref. to different repetitions of 
 the promise, and to hint at the various 
 ways of fulfilment which it contem- 
 plated. Lachm. places rov 
 Geou in brackets, in consquence of its 
 omission in B ; Clarom., Sangerm., — 
 authority hardly sufficient. 
 A 7ap eSoSt)] '/"'' */ there had been 
 given;' proof of the justice of the 
 foregoing declaration /i^ yivoiTO' irpd- 
 Tov fih &Tayope6ei elirdjv fi^ yivoiTOy 
 ^ireira Kal KaroffKevd^ec, Chrys. On 
 the use of /ii] yivono see notes on ch. 
 ii. 17. vd|j.os o Svvd)i£vos] 
 ' a law {as the principle) which could 
 ham, &c.' This is one out of many 
 instances, both in the N. T. and else- 
 where, in which, to give prominence 
 to the defining clause, the anarthrous 
 noun is followed and defined by the 
 article attached to a. participle, c. g. 
 Kom. ii. 14, idiiti ri /iJ; vkixov fx""''''' 
 see further exx. in Winer, Ch: § 20. 
 4, p. 126 ; Bllendt, Lex. Soph. s. v. i, 
 yol. II. p. 241. 
 
 ^ooiroi.'jjirai] 'to give life {and hlessed- 
 ness) ; ' ' viviflcare, sive vitam dare, 
 
 idem est quod dare KKfipovoi^lav, here- 
 ditatem vitse caelestis atque seternse,' 
 Bull, Exam. Cens. xix. 6: see 2 Cor. 
 iii. 6, and comp. TJst. Lehrh. I. 4. § 
 B, p. 61. So also in ver. 12 fijo-erat 
 (=furji' al<ivtoi> l|ct, Olsh. on Rom. i. 
 17) similarly involves the ideas of life 
 and blessedness. ovtus 
 
 K.T.X.] 'verily, &c.' 'apprime no- 
 tanda est emphasis egregia in adverbio 
 ivTus vere,' Bull, Exam. Cens. xix. 
 6. It has been asked whether St 
 Paul is here reasoning (a) from the 
 effect (fwoTT.) to the caiise (SiKaioa.) ; 
 or (6) conversely from the cause (^uott., 
 assumed to mean a new moral life) 
 to the ^ect {SiKaioa.) ; compare Ne- 
 ander, Plant. Vol. I. p. 418 (Bohn). 
 Certainly the former : di,Kaioa. is 
 really, as Ust. properly observes, the 
 middle member between rd/ios and 
 fail), without which the law could not 
 have given life. St Paul however 
 thus states his argument : 'lex vitam 
 dare non potest, proinde neque veram 
 justificationem,' Bull, Exam. Cens. I.e. 
 Ik yo)i,ou civ ijv] 'would have resulted 
 from the law,' 'would have come from 
 the law as its origin ;' not 'would have 
 been suspended on law' (Peile), — a 
 meaning which usually arises from the 
 associated verb. Sew, iprairBai, <fec. 
 and does not appear to be very com- 
 mon out of Herodotus ; comp. Bern- 
 hardy, /Ss/ni. V. 13, p. 227. The order 
 in Rec, &v ix vi/iov rjv [with D^D^E 
 KL; most mss. ; Chrys., Theod., al.], 
 has not sufficient authority, though it 
 must be admitted that owing to the 
 variations in the leading Manuscripts 
 (B iv v6iJUi>, D om. iv, FG om. &v ijv, 
 a 6vTWS ix vb^ov fiv S.V) the text is not 
 wholly free from suspicion. 
 
 22. aW<{] 'hut on the contrary:'' 
 not 8^, as there is a marked adversa- 
 
III. 
 
 22. 
 
 67 
 
 vofjLov uv ?)/ ^ SiKaio<Tijvri' aWa (rvveKXeia-ev ^ ypatprj 2,2, 
 Ta TravTa viro dfiapriav, iva ^ eTrayyeXia eK xio-rew? 
 
 tive relation between the clauses, and 
 as a statement in reference to the law 
 is about to be made, exactly contrary 
 to the result of the foregoing assump- 
 tion ; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. II. p. -i, 
 3. In Latin this distinction can 
 usually be maintained by the more 
 distinctly adversative $ed ( Vulg. , Cla- 
 rom.), not the more simply oppositive 
 autem, in which latter particle 'dis- 
 crimen proprie indicatur, non diver- 
 sitas,' Hand, Tursell. Vol. i. p. 555, 
 comp. Klotz, Vol. 1. p. 361. 
 oT)V€KXeiir€v TJ •ypacjnj] 'the Scripture 
 shut up;' not equiv. to o yi/ios 
 (Jowett, al.), but with a kind of per- 
 sonification, ii 6ela ypaipi] (Theod.), 
 the Scripture of the Old Test, as the 
 representative of Him by whom it was 
 inspired ; comp. ver. 8. With regard 
 to the meaning of avvKKiUiv {' con- 
 cludi sub peceato is dieitur qui pec- 
 cati reatu adhuc obstrictus tenetur,' 
 Bull, Exam,. Cens. xix. 6), it may be 
 observed (i) that the declaratory sense 
 ('concIusoB declaravit,' Bull, comp. 
 Baur, PavZus, p. 581) does not lie 
 in the verb ^see Kom. xi. 32, where 
 the act is ascribed to God) but in the 
 context; and (2) that the prep, ffiv 
 does not imply the similarity of situa- 
 tion of all (Beng.), but simply the 
 idea of contraction (Mey. 5 'ab omni 
 parte clausit,' Schott 2); comp. (tv/ji- 
 ■nU'^eai, aviiirvlyeiv' see Pritz. Sam. 
 xi. 32, Vol. II. p. 545, and exx. in 
 Bost u. Palm, IiCX. s.v. Vol. n. p. 
 1395, where instances are cited of 
 ovvkK. beiag used in reference to a 
 single pereon. On this text and on 
 the general relation of the law to sin, 
 see the weighty sermon of Usher, Serm. 
 V. Vol. Xin. p. 60 sq. (ed. Elrington). 
 T(i irovTo] 'all.' The neuter cannot 
 
 safely be pressed ('non mode omnes sed 
 etiam omnia,' Beng.) as if it were 
 specially chosen to include not only 
 men, but all their actions, tfcc. 'hu- 
 mana omnia,' Jowett (comp. Alf., 
 Windisoh.); tMs being neither re- 
 quired by the context (comp. ver. 23), 
 nor justified by St Paul's nsus lo- 
 quendi: see Rom. xi. 32, where in 
 a passage exactly similar the masc. 
 is used, and comp. Theodoret in loc, 
 who divides the rot irivra into Tois 
 Tpb v6fiov and roiis h vS/iij). The 
 exact difference between Tois iravrat 
 and rk ■n-ivTo. is perhaps here no 
 greater than between 'all men' and 
 'all mankind' (see TJst.): the neuter is 
 idioma;ticalIy and instinctively chosen, 
 aa best suiting the generality of the 
 declaration : comp. Winer, Gr. § 27. 5, 
 p. 160 ; Seidler'offl Eur. Troad. 426. 
 tva ■^ lira^'Y.] 'in order that the pro' 
 mise;' object and intent, not the 
 mere recognized eomeqwence ('quo ap- 
 pareat dari,' Winer), of the ainKXems, 
 on the part of i] ypa(f)ii and God its 
 amthor. The abstract irayyeXla is 
 hare, as the context suggests, practi- 
 cally equivalent to the concrete 'res 
 promissa* (Schott), scil. Kkripovo/iia' 
 see ver. 18, Heb. x. 36, xi. 39, and 
 eomp. Test. xn. Pair. p. 725, 6 Seos 
 elffd^si i/icis els r^i> iirayyMav (cited 
 by Bretsch. icic. s. v.), where this con- 
 crete notion is taken in its widest ex- 
 tent, as=^ 7? r^s ^7ro77cWos" so 
 KXTjpovo/da in 2 Mace. ii. 4. 4k 
 
 irCcrnas 'I. X.] 'iy faith in Jems 
 Christ,' 'resulting from faith as its 
 sov/rce and origin' {see notes on ch. ii. 
 16); iK vlar. being in close union, — 
 not with SoSj; (Ruck., Conyb. ), but with 
 ^?ra77£Xia (comp. Winer, 6r. § 20. -i, 
 p. 123 ; notes on Eph. i. 15), and form- 
 
 P 2 
 
68 
 
 nP02 rAAATA2. 
 
 23 'Irjcrov XpicTTOv So6^ TOig iria-Tevovcriv. irpo rov Se 
 iXOeiv Trjv Trlcrriv vtto vo/jlov eippovpovfieda avvKe- 
 
 ing a retrospective antithesis to iK 
 i/A/iouin ver. 21. The genitive 'Itjit. X/3. 
 is perhaps here to be taken in its most 
 comprehensive sense; not only 'faith 
 on Christ' (gen. objedi), but 'faith as 
 given by Him' (gen. subjecti) ; comp. 
 notes on ch. ii. 16. In the N. T. es- 
 pecially the connexion of a noun with 
 a gen. must often be explained 
 solely from exegetioal considerations ; 
 see Winer, Gr. § 30. i, p. 168. 
 Tois TTwrreiJOVo'iv] 'to them that 6e- 
 lieve;' not 'quierant credituri' (Grot., 
 Peile), but ' eis qui credunt,' Clarom., 
 al., 'credentibus,' Vulg. ; the apparent 
 tautology not being intended merely 
 as emphatic (Winer), but as suitably 
 echoing the ix Tlareas above. The 
 Galatians were ready to admit that 
 those who believed would be saved, 
 but they doubted whether faith alone 
 was sufficient ; hence the Apostle in- 
 terposes the limitation in ref. to the 
 thing promised (i) ^7ro77. iK Trlar.), 
 and virtually repeats it in ref. to the 
 recipients. The promise was of faith, 
 not of the law ; the receivers were not 
 doers of the law, but believers ; comp. 
 Meyer in loc. 
 
 23. irpi ToB 8^ K.T.X.] 'But lefore 
 the Faith (above mentioned) cajne;' iur- 
 ther account of the relation in which 
 the law stood to faith, Si not being 
 here distinctly oppositive, but with 
 some tinge of its primary enumerative 
 force (see Donalds. Crat. § 155), add- 
 ing a further explanation, though in 
 that explanation serving to introduce 
 a contrast ; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. rr. 
 p. 362. With regard to the position 
 of the particle, it may be remarked 
 that there is nothing unusual (opp. to 
 KUck.) in Si thus occupying the third 
 place after a prep, and its case; see 
 
 exx. in Hartung, Parlik. Si, i. 6, 
 Vol. I. p. 190. The common-sense 
 principle is that 5^ does not neces- 
 sarily occupy the second place, but the 
 first possible place which the internal 
 connexion of the sentence will admit 
 of; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. ir. p. 378. 
 vird voiiov l<|>povpovfjieOa ctuvkckX.] 
 'we were kept in ward shut up under 
 the law;' o-vyKCKX. being joined, not 
 with els T. Ii. irlariv (see following 
 note), but, in a construction simi- 
 lar to that of the preceding verse, 
 with iirh vbnov (Arm., al.): the law 
 in fact is here (as a/iaprla in ver. 22) 
 represented as a kind of gaoler into 
 whose custody we were delivered ; see 
 Koster, Stud. a,. Krit. 1854, P- S'^- 
 The meaning of tppovpeiadai is thus 
 not merely 'asservari' (Winer, Schott), 
 much less 'obstringi ad obedientiam' 
 (Bretsch.) ; but, as the definite ex- 
 pression ffvifKeK\. distinctly requires, 
 'custodiri' (Vulg., Clarom., Copt., 
 JEth.), iSffvep iv reixl(i> rivl Kari- 
 XeaBai, Chrys. ; comp. Wisdom xvii. 
 15, iippovpeiTO els T'^v afflStjpov elpKriiv 
 KaraKXeurffels. The perf. part., it may 
 be observed, correctly expresses the 
 permanent and completed state of the 
 captivity, and is thus on exegetical 
 grounds to be preferred to the pres. 
 <r\ryK\ei6p.evoi [^Lachm. with ABD^ 
 FGN; 2 mss.; Clem, (i), Cyr. (3), 
 Dam .], which, though so well support- 
 ed, may be a conformation to the 
 imperf. itppovpoiixcBa' so rightly De 
 W. , Mey., and the majority of recent 
 critics. els "rffv y,QO\ava-av k.t.X.] 
 
 'for the faith about to be revealed;'' 
 object contemplated in the action of 
 tppoipyjiTis, els not being temporal, 
 ' usque ad' (Riick., Ust., comp. Copt., 
 j35th.), — a meaning comparatively rare 
 
III. 23, 24. 
 
 69 
 
 KXeierfjLevoi ejy Trjv /xiWovcrav irla-nv airoKaXvipOijvai. 
 woTTe 6 vofioi "TraiSaywyoi ^fiwv yiyovev els XpiarTOV, 24 
 "va e/c Triarewi SiKai(i)Oa>/Ji,ev, 
 
 in the N.T. (oomp. John xiii. i), and 
 here certainly superfluous after the 
 predication of time in irpA toO i\8eiv, — 
 but in its usual ethical meaning of 
 'destination for' ('in earn fidera,' 
 Vulg., Clarom.) ; comp. Winer, Gr. 
 § 49. a, p. 353. The clause is thus 
 naturally connected with the finite 
 verb, not with o-wi/kekX. ('conolusi, 
 adeoque adacti ad,' Bang.),— a con- 
 struction certainly admissible (see exx. 
 in Sohweigh. Lex. Polyi. s.v. (ruy/tX., 
 or Eaphel, Annot. Vol. II. p. 440 sq.), 
 but open to the serious exegetical 
 objection that faith is not represented 
 as existing ; see Meyer in loe. 
 t)[v ji^XXovo-ov irltrr. diroK.] The un- 
 usual order seems intended to give 
 prominence to fiiWovaav, and to pre- 
 sent more forcibly the contrast be- 
 tween former captivity and subsequent 
 freedom: compare Kom. viii. 18, irp&s 
 TTjv fiO<\ovtrav S6^av &iroKa\u<pd7]vaij 
 where the future glories are set in 
 strong contrast to present calamities ; 
 see Fritz, in loc. Vol. 11. p. 148. 
 
 24. (SoTc] 'So t/ten,' 'itaque,' Vulg., 
 Clarom. ; consequence from the preced- 
 ing statement; see notes on ch. ii. 13. 
 nai.Sa7(i>7ds] 'pedagogue;' 'psdagogus 
 proprie notat eum qui puerum manu 
 prehensum ad magistrum duoit,' 
 Schoettg. (Hor. Sebr. Vol. I. p. 741); 
 who remarks however that the word 
 was adopted by Rabbinical writers, 
 but with some additional notions of 
 care and guardianshijp : even among 
 the Greek and Latin writers the idea 
 of guardianship and also of strictness 
 and severity is distinctly prominent; 
 see esp. the exx. in Eisner, 06s. Vol. 
 II. p. 186. The mere idea of leading 
 
 to Christ ('vise dux' [sha/u-moit'], Copt., 
 'ductor,' .(Eth.) must not then be 
 retained to the exclusion of those of 
 actual teaching (Arm., Auth,), tute- 
 lage, and disciplinary restraint. This 
 pedagogic function of the law was 
 displayed positively in warnings and 
 threatenings ; negatively (the prevail- 
 ing idea in this place) in awakening 
 the conscience, and bringing a con- 
 viction of sin : oomp. Usteri, Zehrb. I. 
 S, p. 66. The patristic comments will 
 be found in Suicer, Thesaur. s. v. vd/ios. 
 Vol. II. p. 921; see also Petav. de 
 Prcedest. x. 26. i sq. Vol. i. p. 464. 
 els XpioTo'v] 'for Christ;' not tem- 
 poral (Sxpi! off Si^j; X/j. see ver. 23), 
 still less local, 'to Christ' as a Si5d- 
 CKoCKos {wpbs rbv Xp. diriiye, Theoph., 
 comp. Chrys.), as Christ would thus be 
 represented under two o£Bces, Teacher 
 and (foa ix irlar. Sik.) Atoner, in the 
 same verse. If any trace of a local 
 meaning be retained in translation 
 {e.g. 'to bring us unto,' Auth.), it 
 must be understood of an ethical 
 arrival (comp. 2 Cor. x. 14), as els 
 with persons is not simply equivalent 
 to wpSs, but involves the idea of 
 mingling with and association ; oomp. 
 Kom. V. 12, and see Winer, Gr. § 49. 
 a. P- 353- iva Ik itCctt. 
 
 8iKaui>6.] ' to the intent that we might 
 be justified by faith;' more distinct 
 and specific explanation of the pre- 
 ceding eh 'S.pwTbv, the emphatic iK 
 irijTcus serving to suggest and enhance 
 the contrast with the non-justifying 
 and merely pedagogic vip-os. On the 
 proper force of the SiKaiovv Ik, see 
 notes on ch. ii. 16. 
 
70 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 35 
 
 EXOovornS oe T?9 irlo'TeWQ OVKCTI ^y f^ith in Cfhrist we 
 
 have become freed from 
 
 26 iirh 'wai8a<ya>j6v icr/^ev. TraVre? yap Sf/at^Tu^aUcSrn 
 
 t\r\^^yn\ « / 9 of God, Abraham's seed, 
 
 VlOl Oeou eO-Te OJa TJ;? TTttTTewy ep andheirsofthepromise. 
 
 37 ^puTTW 'lt](rov' ocrot yap eii Xpicrrov e^aTTTiaQriTe 
 
 25. 'E\9oD'(n]s Se Ttjs IT.] '5«i morfl 
 t^a< the faith is come;' contrast between 
 the present freedom and the past 
 pedagogy ; i\do'^(njs, ^at, t^s -Triareijis 
 T^s r0^€iov dvSpa IrotodffTji, oiiK hv ^re 
 ctifnai iith iraiSayaybv, Theoph. The 
 connexion is so close thrcmghout this 
 latter portion of the chaptet, that it is 
 difficult to subdivide it into paragraph's. 
 Meyer, Conyb., al., place a paragraph 
 after ver. 22r it seems however more 
 natural to place it here, as ver. 23 and 
 24 carry out the idea expressed in 
 cmiKkucev in ver. 12. 
 ■Ciri irtti8o7<i)7(iv] 'under a pedagogue.' 
 The article is not here latent after the 
 prep. (comp. Winer, Gr. § 19. -i. b, p. 
 114), but appears studiously omitted 
 (so rightly Copt.) ; the words being in 
 fact equivalent to ' under tutelage,' 
 • unter Padagogengewalt,' Meyer. 
 
 16. irdvTes vap] ' P(»' ye all / con- 
 firmation e contrario of the truth of 
 the foregoing words; they were now 
 notTralSes, but vlot {'filii, emancipati, 
 remoto oustode,' Beng.), and that too 
 not sons of Abraham merely (comp. 
 ver. 7), but sons of God; irpirepov 
 ISei^ev Sti [ij irlarii] v!oi>s e?ro(e( toO 
 'A§p...vvv Si dTroipalrei Stc Kal tov Geob, 
 Chrys. The ulol 9eoC, as Theod. -Mops, 
 well observes, includes the idea of 
 Te\eL6T7]s, which the preceding meta- 
 phor might serve to suggest. 
 8itt TTJs irCoT. Iv Xp. 'lT|tr.] ' througJe 
 the faith in Christ Jesus;' so rightly 
 Syr., Arm. (ed. Zohr.), Syr.-Phil., and 
 Chrys. (ed. Field). Several commen- 
 tators (Ust., al. ; see Hofm. Schriftb. 
 Vol. II. 2, p. 15c) join ii> Xp. 'Itjo-. 
 with viol Q. iffri, on the ground that 
 
 the words would be a superfluous 
 addition to tIcftl^, aBd that ver. 27 
 contains the amplification of the ex- 
 pression. But, independently of the 
 awkwardness of adding a second 
 modal clause to viol iffre, the recur- 
 rence of the formula TriffTis h rQ Kvp. 
 {Xp.) 'lri<r. (Eph. i. 15, Col. i. 4), its 
 grammatical accuracy (Winer, Gr. § 
 20. 2, p. 123, notes on Eph. i. 15), 
 and the natural cerherence of the words, 
 all seem distinctly to suggest the sim- 
 pler and less dislocated construction. 
 If the article had been inserted, we 
 should then bave two ideas conveyed, 
 the latter of which would be explana- 
 tory of the foriner, — 'per fidem, eam- 
 qiie in Chr, Jes. collocatam ;' see Fritz. 
 Bom,, iii. 25, Vol. i. p. 195. 
 
 27. 80-01 ydp] 'for all of you who;'' 
 proof and confirmatory explanation of 
 the preceding assertion. The force of 
 the particle is best explained by the 
 Greek commentators, who refer it to 
 viol 0eo0, and base the argument on 
 the fact that Christ was the Son of 
 God: iyeSia-eurBe rhv Xp. rbv i\r]6Sis 
 vlbv TOV OeoO, iKeivov dk ivSeSvpL^voi 
 eUdrajs viol Qeov xP'?M^^^f^^j Theo- 
 doret; see also Chrys. in loc. 
 «ls XpioT^v] 'into Christ;' not 'in 
 Chriato,' Vulg., Clavom., but 'in Chris- 
 tum,' Beza (compare Copt, pichr); 
 scil. 'nt Christo addicti essetis,' Schott, 
 or more strictly, into communion with 
 Him, and incorporation in His mysti- 
 cal body. The meaning of eis with 
 /SaTrr/fw appears twofold ; (a) ' unto, ' 
 object, pinrpose, Matth. iii. 11, Acts 
 ii. 38 ; see Winer, Or. § 49. a, p. 354 ; 
 Bemhardy, Synt. V. it. b. 3, p. 220: 
 
III. 25—28. 
 
 71 
 
 XpicTTov eveSva-aa-de. ovk evi ^lovSaios ovSe "EXXj;)/, 38 
 
 (P) 'into,^ union and communion with ; 
 the context always showing whether 
 it be of the most complete and most 
 mystical nature, as here and Eom. vi. 
 3 (comp. I Cor. xii. 13), or, as in i Cor. 
 X. -2, necessarily less comprehensive 
 and significant. We may in conclu- 
 sion observe that the expression jSottt. 
 els t4 Smfia (Matth. xxviii. ig, Acts 
 viii. 16, xix. 5, aL) is not identical in 
 meaning with /Sottt. iv Tif dm/i. (Tho- 
 luck, Beitrdge, No. 8, p. 49 sq.), but 
 ever implies a spiritual and mystical 
 union with Him in whose name the 
 sacrament was administered ; see esp. 
 Stier, Seden Jesu, Vol. VI. p. 899. 
 The meaning of ^airrl^eLp rivk ets riva 
 (cfs Tt) and /Sottt. els rb 6voiJ.& twos is 
 discussed at length by Fritz. (Rom. vi. 
 3, Vol. I. p. 359 sq.) in opp. to Bind- 
 seil, Stud. u. Krit. 1832, p. 410 sqq. ; 
 but by no means satisfactorily, as 
 he regards els as only implying ethical 
 direction ('aliquem aquae ita immer- 
 gere ut ejus cogitationes in aliquem 
 dirigas'), instead of that mystical in- 
 corporation which the passage seems 
 certainly to convey. The patristic 
 comments on this expression will be 
 found in Suicer, Thei. Vol. i. p. 624 
 sq., but are not sufficiently exact. 
 XpwTTOV IveSuo-.] 'didputon Christ,' 
 soil, at your baptism ; flffot yoLp els 
 Xptrrbv i^awTl(TB-i)Te iK tou 6eoO iyev- 
 vfidTfTe, Chrys. There appears here 
 no allusion to Heathen (toga virilis), — 
 to Jewish (whether at the High Priest's 
 inauguration, Deyling, Ohs. Vol. III. 
 p. 406 sq., No. 42, or in a cabbalistic 
 sense, comp. Schoettg. on Rom. xiii. 
 14, VoL I. p. S/i), — or even, though 
 the idea is plausible, to Christian 
 customs (at baptism, Bingham, Antiq.. 
 Book xn. 4. I sq.). From the instances 
 Wetst. has ooEected on Rom,, xiii. 14, 
 it would appear that ivSiea-Bal Ttra is. 
 
 a strong , expression, denoting the 
 complete assumption of the nature, cfcc. 
 of another; e.g. Dion. Halicar. A. R. 
 XI. 15. 5 (tAi/ tapKiviov iKetvov ivivbix.), 
 Tac. Ann. xvi. 28. Thus ivS. Xpurriv 
 implies a union with Christ of so true 
 and so complete a nature, that we are 
 brought els p,tav avyyiveiav Kal //.lav 
 IS^av (Chrys.) with Him, and, as it 
 is beautifully paraphrased by Calvin, 
 ' coram Deo nomen ac personam Christi 
 geramus, atque in Ipso magis quam in 
 nobismet ipsis censeamur:* comp. Bp. 
 Barlow, cited by Waterl. Works, Vol. 
 IV. p. 604, and see Suicer, Thesaur. 
 B. V. ivS., Vol. I. p. 1 1 12. For a good 
 sermon on this text, see Donne, Serm. 
 ixxxvn. Vol. IV. p. 102 (ed. Alf.), 
 and for a notice of the perversion of 
 this text by heretics, Forbes, Instruct. 
 X. III. 32 sq., p. 448. 
 
 28. OVK Svi K.T.X.] ' There is among 
 (such) neither Jew nor Greeh;' digres- 
 sive statement of the practical result 
 of the Xp, iveS. : the new and holy 
 'habitus' causes all other distinctions, 
 whether of nation (comp. Kom. x. 12), 
 condition, or even sex, to be wholly 
 lost sight of and forgotten. The form 
 Sm is not for iveari, but, according to 
 Buttm. (see Winer, (xr. § 14. 2, p. 74), 
 is the lengthened form of the adver- 
 biaUzed prep., to which the requisite 
 person of the auxiliary verb must be 
 supplied. This explanation has in its 
 favour the similar use of irdpa, which 
 can scarcely be called a contraction 
 for irapedTi' but against it those exx. 
 where iv and (vi, are used in the same 
 sentence, e.g. Plat. Phcedo, p. 77 E, 
 taas in ris xal h i/uv Thecet. p. 186 
 D ; and, according to the best reading, 
 I Cor. vi. 5, In such cases how- 
 
 ever Im would seem to mean little 
 more than iarl (hf iarlv, iTrApxei, 
 Zonar. Lex. Vol. i. p. 748), the pre- 
 
72 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 OVK evi SovKot ovSe eXevOepos, ovk evi apa-ev Kat 6>j\v 
 29 "jravTEi yap v/aeii eig ecne iv Xpiarw ^Iritrov. el Se 
 vfiets ICpiaTOv, apa tow 'A.^paaiUL a-irepfia ecrre, kut 
 eTrayyeXiav KXtjpovofJLOi. 
 
 positional force being wholly lost; 
 comp. Col. iii. 1 1 . In either case the 
 explanation of the present passage re- 
 mains the same ; iirl irXetov SnjyeLTai 
 T^v &yad6T7jTa tov Qeov 6irov ye ircttrt 
 tV ((^V SiSioKe Sapedv, Bamasc. Dey- 
 ling illustrates this by reference to 
 various personal and other distinctions 
 among the Jews ; Obs. Sacr. Vol. i. 
 p. 312 sq., No. 64 : Eisner {in loc.) 
 notices also the customary exclusion 
 of slaves from certain Heathen rites 
 and temples; Obs. Vol. II. p. 187. 
 apmv Kal BrjXu] 'male and female;" 
 'masculus et femina,' Clarom., but 
 not "Vulg., Goth., Copt., al., which do 
 not preserve the slight change of par- 
 ticle. While the alterable political 
 and social distinctions are contrasted 
 by oiSi, the unalterable human one of 
 sex is expressed by Kal' Mark x. 6, 
 dTrA Si ApxH^ Krlaeus &p<rev Kal 0t]Kv 
 iTotrjirev airois' comp. i Tim. ii. 13. 
 This latter distinction is of course 
 noticed, not in its mere physical, but 
 in its ethical aspect, the subordination 
 of the wife to the husband (Olsh.). 
 This, though an unchangeable law of 
 our species when considered Kara 
 ffdpKa, Eph. V. 22, al., is lost sight of 
 in this iyyvripa irphs rbv Xpiarbp 
 haa-is, Chrys. irovres "ydp *|i..] 
 
 'for ye all:' proof of the preceding 
 statement; t(^ tva Tiiirov koI fiiav 
 liop(priv ivSeS0(r8ai, rV tov Xpto-roO, 
 Qioum. The reading Utivt. {Lachm.) 
 may be an early gloss. tts] 
 
 'one,' i.e. one person ; t4 els &vtI toB 
 h <r(op.a, Theodoret: comp. Lucian, 
 Toxar. 46 (cited by Wetst.) els ivSpa- 
 iros Sires ovtu piovfiev. The concluding 
 words iit XpuTT<fi 'Itjo-oD obviate all 
 
 mistakes, by defining in whom, and 
 in whom alone, this imion was fully 
 realized. 
 
 29. A Si vjitts] 'But if ye;' re- 
 sumption of the argument after the 
 short digression of ver. 28, the em- 
 phasis resting slightly on i/ieis' 'as 
 ye, to whom I am speaking, and who 
 have felt such doubts on the subject, 
 have put on Christ, ye must be what 
 He is (ver. 16), the seed of Abraham.' 
 The reading eh iffre in Xp. 'Itjo: in- 
 stead of XptffTov — though found in 
 D'EEGK^ (cm. 'Iijo-.) ; Clarom. ; Am- 
 br.'it. — is clearly an exegetical gloss. 
 ToB 'Appaa)! cnr^pfia] 'Abraham's 
 seed;' tov 'A/3p. being put forward 
 with a slight emphasis, and standing 
 in correlation to XpttrroO to give force 
 and perspicuity to the conclusion; el 
 Si ijpi,eis itTTi XpiffTOV fioptp^ Kal o'tofia, 
 eUbTus TOV 'A)3/3. ijTi airipfiay OEcum. ; 
 comp. Theod. in loc, and esp. Theod.- 
 Mops. (p. 126, ed. Fritz.), who has 
 well elucidated the argument. 
 KOT iita.fi. kXt|pov<S|ioi.] 'heirs ac- 
 cording to, or by way of, promise;' not 
 by any legal observances. The kXij/jo- 
 vop,la is now stated absolutely; they 
 were (cXij/jovi/iot, not merely of Abra- 
 ham, nor even t^s ^7ra77e\tas (Theod.- 
 Mops.), but simply of all that which 
 was involved in it, salvation and the 
 kingdom of Christ; comp. Meyer in 
 loc. The declaration of ver. 7 has 
 now at length been substantiated and 
 expanded by 22 verses of the deepest, 
 most varied, and most comprehensive, 
 reasoning that exists in the whole 
 compass of the great Apostle's writ- 
 ings. The icoi before kot' ^ira77., 
 adopted by Bee. with EGKL ; mss. ; 
 
III. 29, IV. I, 2. 
 
 73 
 
 As every heir is nn- A ' i' 'J.' "_ ' ' ^ TT7 
 
 der tutelage, so be- Ae^ft) 06 em OCTOV ^OOVOV O KAtJOO- 1 V . 
 
 fore Christ came we , , , , 'i' ? J, ' i ' 
 
 all were under bond- VOUOS Vn-TTIOS BCTTIV OVOeV OlaCPepei 001/- 
 
 age, but now have T r 
 
 inheritors'" '™' "'"^ ^"^ '^''/"o? 'Jrai/TWi' tiV, aXXa iiTTo eVt- a 
 
 Syr. (both), Goth., ^th.; Chrys., 
 Theod., is now rightly omitted by 
 moat critical editors. 
 
 Chaptek IV. I. Aiya hi] 'Now I 
 say;' further and more explanatory 
 proof of the assertion that we are 
 heirs, suggested by the term k\tipov6ij,oi 
 (ch. iii. 29) and the comparisons it in- 
 volves: comp. ch. V. 16, Eom. xv. 8 
 (Sec), where the use of X^7u 8^ in 
 introducing u, continued explanatory 
 argument rather than merely eluci- 
 dating a statement or expression that 
 had preceded (comp. ch. iii. 17, ToCro 
 5^ X^7W' I Cor. i. 12, X^7w Sk tovto' 
 I Cor. vii. 29, TOVTO 5^ 4'Vf^^) seems 
 analogous to the present. 
 
 6 K\T]pova|i.os] 'the heir,' i.e. 'every 
 heir:' compare 6 fiea-lrTjs, ch. iii. 20, 
 Winer, Gr. § 18. i, p. 97. There are 
 some exegetical difficulties in this and 
 the following verse, arising from the 
 fact that, while the nature of the com- 
 pai'ison (see Brown), as well as the 
 words &XP^ T^s irpodefffiias rod irarphs, 
 would seem to imply that the father 
 was alive, the expression Kipioi iriiv- 
 Tuv wv and the term iirh-poiros (but 
 see below) might be thought to imply 
 that he was dead. The latter view is 
 taken by Theodoret and the majority 
 of ancient (silet Chrys.), with several 
 modern commentators; the former is 
 ably advocated by Neubour, Bibl. 
 Brem. Class. Vol. v. p. 40 (cited by. 
 Wolf), and also many recent exposi- 
 tors. Grotius endeavours to e.soape 
 the difficulty by representing the 
 father absent on travel; compare 
 jElian, Var. Hist. in. 26, cited below 
 in note ver. 2. The question how- 
 ever is really of little moment: St 
 
 Paul is engaged so entirely in the 
 simple comparison of the circum- 
 stances of the nonage of the earthly 
 K\r)povbiioi with those of the nonage 
 of believers who lived under the law 
 (ver. 3), that the subordinate question 
 of the life, death, or absence, of the 
 father of the K\ripov6p,os passes wholly 
 out of sight ; comp. Alf . in loc. 
 vrfmo<i\ ' an infant, a minor;' S,vrtPos, 
 as opposed to l^ij/Sos, the technical 
 term for one who had attained his 
 majority; see Smith, Diet. Antiq. 
 s. V. S0)7/3., and reff. in Host u. Palm, 
 Lex. Vol. I. p. 1282. There does 
 not seem any sufficient reason for 
 departing from this usual view of 
 vfirios (opp. to Bagge in loc.), or with 
 Chrys., al., for introducing any refer- 
 ence to the ethical meaning of weak- 
 ness of understanding. 
 oiSiv Si.a<|>^pEt SouXov] 'differs in 
 nothing from a hond-servant;' 'imo 
 servo [ 7rai8a7W7(p ] subjectua est,' 
 Erasm. The very apposite quotation 
 from Dio Chrys. xv. p. 240, adduced 
 by Wetst. in, loc, is too long for 
 citation, but is worth referring to. 
 Klip log irdvT<ov oiv] ' though he he lord 
 of all;" concessive use of the par- 
 ticiple : comp. Donalds. Gr. § 62 1 ; 
 Krtiger, Sprachl. § 56. 13. i sq. It 
 does not seem necessary for the sake 
 of preserving the image of a living 
 father to understand these words as 
 prospective; the heir was the Kiipios 
 (Grot, compares the use of 'hems 
 minor' in Lat. comedy) in right of 
 birth and condition. 
 
 2. Iirirpdirovs] ' overlooTcers, guar- 
 dians' The latter is the usual mean- 
 ing of the word in relation to children 
 (comp. Isseus, Heer. Gleonym. % 10, 
 
74 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 Tpoirovf ea-Tiv Kal oiKovofiovi ('i-XP'- ''"^^ TrpoQecrfua^ 
 3 Tov "Trarpos. ovrwf Kac ^/neis, ore ^fiev v^iriot, viro 
 
 p. 4, ed. Sohom., Thv Ix^'"''''"' ™'' 
 olxduv iirlTpoTrov KaTaXnreiv ib. Hmr. 
 Dicceog. § lo; Plut. Lycurg. § 3, 
 ToiJs Tdv Spfpavwv ^a(TL\icijv iirirpd- 
 vovs), and that in which it appears to 
 have been adopted by Hebrew writers ; 
 comp. Schoettg. Sor. Sebr. in loc. ; 
 Selden, de Success, oh. 9, Vol. n. p. 
 25, It seems here however better 
 to adopt the more general meaning 
 'overhoher, one entrusted with the 
 cha/rge of (myihing ' (oomp. Aristoph. 
 Bed. 212, iirirpdirois Kal rafiiatffi' 
 Xen. CEcon, XJI. 2, iirirpdirovs h Tots 
 iypots), and not to embarrass the pas- 
 sage with terms which might bring in 
 irrelevant considerations (the father's 
 being alive or dead) into the present 
 simple comparison. We may however 
 not unsuitably compare .^lian, Var. 
 Hist. III. 26, iTrlrp, Kal tov 7rai54s Kal 
 Twv xp'OP'^'^oiVf where the context dis- 
 tinctly shows that the father was 
 (dive, though absent. oIko- 
 
 vo^iovs] 'stewm-ds,' |AJ^,2 « V *^ ? 
 
 •n 7 7 
 
 [dominos domorum] Syr., 'actores,' 
 Vulg., Clarom. [comp. • Plin. Ep. III. 
 19], less accurately Goth, fauragag- 
 gam [ Vorsteher] ; managers of the pro- 
 perty of the K\7]pov6/xos and standing 
 in the same relation to his estate as the 
 iirlTpoToi did to his education and 
 general bringing up ; comp. Plutarch, 
 Educ. % 7, 5oi\wp...Toiis Si oIkov6hovs, 
 Tods Sk SavetffTds. Most commenta- 
 tors not inaptly cite the case of 
 Eliezer in Gen. xv. 2; comp. xxiv. 2. 
 Illustrations from Koman law (Bagge, 
 ah) are here hardly in point, as the 
 comparison is simple and general. 
 TTJs irpoBeciiCasJ ' the time appointed 
 (beforehand),' 'praefinitum tempus,' 
 Vulg. The term TpoSefffda, soil. <Spa 
 or riiiipa (for the distinction between 
 
 these, see Bagge in loc), is properly 
 the term limited for bringing actions 
 or prosecutions, the time fixed by 
 the statute of limitations, ' Tag der 
 Verjahrung ' (see Smith, Diet, of 
 Antig. s.v., and exx. in Host u. Palm, 
 Lex. s.v.) ; thence any pre-appointcd 
 time or day: see the numerous exx. 
 in Wetst. in loc; Kypke, Obs. Vol. 
 II. p. 279 ; Krebs, Obs. p. 322. In 
 eccles. writers Tpodea-fi. is sometimes 
 used for the time assigned for repent- 
 ance before excommunication; see 
 Bingham, Jntiq. xvi. 2. 7. It 
 
 may be observed that as the termina- 
 tion of nonage was fixed in Hebrew 
 (13 years and a day for males, 12 
 years and a day for females ; Selden, 
 de Success, ch. 9, Vol. 11. p. 25), as 
 well as in Greek and Koman law, the 
 dependence of the ij Tpo$ea-pi.la on the 
 father must be explained, either (a) 
 by the very reasonable assumption 
 that St Paul is here speaking theo- 
 logically rather than juridically; or, 
 (b) less probably, by the supposition- 
 that he was here referring, with tech- 
 nical exactness, to an extended pa- 
 rental authority which the Galatians 
 appear to have possessed; see Gtittl. 
 Gesch. d. Rom. Staatsverf p. 109, 517 
 (cited by B.-Crus.), and comp. Csesar, 
 £eU. Gall. vi. 19. 
 
 3. oijTws Kal ij(iets] ' So we also;'' 
 application of the preceding state- 
 ments; Kat, as is usual in comparative 
 sentences, bringing into prominence 
 and throwing a slight emphasis on 
 the contrasted member of the com- 
 parison ; see notes on Eph. v. 23. 
 It has been doubted whether the ^jueis 
 are Jews (Chrys., Theod.), Gentiles 
 (Aug.), or both equally (Win., May.). 
 The most natural reference seems to 
 be (a) to Jews primarily and princi- 
 
IV. 3. 4. 
 
 75 
 
 Ta cTTOi'xeia tow Kocrfiov ^fxev SeSovXti)fJt,ivoi. ore Se 4 
 ?\0ei/ TO TrXi^pwfJLa Tou ■^povov, i^airecrTeiXev 6 Geoy 
 
 pally, as the nature of the preceding 
 argument seems distinctly to require ; 
 but also (6) secondarily to Gentiles, in 
 accordance with the nature of the 
 succeeding argument. to otoi- 
 
 X«ia Tov K6trfun>] 'the rudiments of 
 the world.' It is very difficult to de- 
 cide on the exact meaning of these 
 words. Takeii separately, aToix^iov 
 is used in the N. T. both in a physical 
 (2 Pet. iii. 10, 12) and an ethical 
 sense (Heb. v. 12). Kitrjiios again has 
 practically at least three meanings^ 
 physical (Matth. xxv. 34), collective 
 (mankind, Job. iii. 16), and ethical 
 (i Cor. ii. 12). From the combina- 
 tion of both words a great variety of 
 interpretations have arisen, ail how- 
 ever separable into two general classes, 
 (i) Physical; elementa mundi, either, 
 (a) festivals of Judaism, Chrys. j 
 (6) Zabianism, August. ; or (c) abs- 
 tractedly, religion in sensible forms, 
 Neand. Planting, Vol. 1. p. 463 
 (Bohn) : (2) Ethical ; rudimenta imm- 
 di, first, but not necessarily erroneous 
 (comp. .(Eth.) principles of religious 
 knowledge among men, whether (a) 
 Jews (De W.), or (J) Jews and 
 heathen (Meyer). Grammatical con- 
 siderations seem in favour of (i) ; for 
 ffTotx^Ta, in the sense rudimenta, 
 would appear to require, as in Heb. 
 V. 12, a gen. ohjecti, and not as here a 
 gen. subjecti (see Neander I. c.) ; still 
 Kiafiov need not be considered a pure 
 gen. subj., the connexion between the 
 nom. and gen. being often somewhat 
 lax; see Winer, Gr. § 30. 2, p. 168 
 sq. Exegetical considerations must 
 be also extended to ver. 9, and to Col. 
 ii. 8, 20, where the same words occur. 
 These we can only briefly notice. In 
 Col. ii. 8, the parallelism with Tapa- 
 
 Sogis Tuv AvSpiiiruv seems so distinct, 
 and so palpably in favour of (2), as 
 to outweigh the argument drawn by 
 Sohneokenb. from the supposed phy- 
 sical use of Kdff/ios in ver. 20. The 
 use of the term ^t\o(70^ia seems also 
 there to point slightly more to heathen 
 rudiments (see notes in loc), while on 
 the contrary in Col. ii. 20 and below 
 in verse 9 reference is made mainly 
 to Jewish rudiments. All these 
 
 conflicting views being considered, we 
 seem here justified in deciding in 
 favour of (2) generally; assigning 
 however to the words (as both ii/ieTs 
 and the nature of the argument re- 
 quire) a primary, but by no means 
 exclusive, reference to the Jews. For 
 further notices of this doubtful ex-. 
 pressioHj see Baur, Paulus, p. 594 sq.; 
 and for a defence of the physical 
 meaning, Schneckenburg, in Theol. 
 Jahrb. 1848, p. 444 sq., and Hilgenf. 
 Galai. p. 68 sq. The application to 
 the ceremonial law will be found in 
 Petav. de Prcedest. X. 23. 12, Vol. I. 
 
 p. 456. S£Sov\(D|l,^VOl] 
 
 'in a state of slavery ;' the perf. pass, 
 part, marking the permanent nature 
 and continuance of the SouXelo" comp. 
 Winer, (?r. § 45. i, p. 305. The verb 
 fjn^v may be regarded either as in 
 union with 5e5oi^A. and as forming a 
 compound tense, or as in more imme- 
 diate connexion with iirb t4 arotx^Xa' 
 the latter is most probable, as forming 
 the best parallel to iwb (TiTp6irovs 
 iarlv so distinctly Copt., and perhaps 
 Vulg., Clarom., 'sub elementis mundi 
 eramiis servientes ; ' see Meyer in loc. 
 4. T& irXijpcoixa TOV ^^pdvov] 'ih& 
 fulness of the time,' i, e. the moment 
 which makes the time complete, an- 
 swering to the dtx|0' T^s Tpodcffixlat 
 
76 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 TOP viov avTov, yevo/JLevov e/c yvvaiKog, yevofievov viro 
 5 vo/J-ov, Iva Toiii virb vofAov e^ayopdcrr], Iva Trjv vio- 
 
 ToO jrarphs in ver. 2 ; see Stier, Ephes. 
 Vol. I. p. 203, and oomp. Usteri, 
 Lehri. II. i, p. 83. These words 
 have been the subject of considerable 
 discussion.' Taken in its most general 
 ■view irMipoina has two meanings ; (r) 
 Active ; rd TK-^fyrt ■jrotetv, implendi 
 actio, not id quod impkt, as Fritz. 
 {Rom. xi. 12) has satisfactorily proved 
 against Storr, Opusc. I. p. 144: (2) 
 Passive; either (a) in the less usual 
 sense id quo impletum est, or (/3) 
 in the more common and regular 
 sense id quo res impletw; comp. i 
 Cor. X. 26, Mark viii. 20. Hence rb 
 vKijpaixa toO xp. will seem to be 'id 
 quo temporis spatium ittipletur, sc. 
 expletwr;' the idea being rather that 
 of a temporal space so to speak filled 
 up by the flowing in of time; see 
 Olsh. in loc, and oomp. Herod, iir. 
 22, iyStjjKovTa. S' ^ea ^6t]S ir'K'/jptafAa 
 &vdpl fiaKpliraTOj'. Fritz, on the con- 
 trary, but with less probability, re- 
 gards irk^pwiia as the abstract notion 
 of the concrete idea wK-^pTjs, ' temporis 
 plenitas, i. q. plenum tempus;' see 
 however his very valuable note, Bom. 
 xi. 12, Vol. II. p. 469 sq. The doc- 
 trinal meaning of this term is investi- 
 gated at length in Hall, Bamp. Led. 
 for 1797, esp. Serm. VIII. p. 211 sq.; 
 see also the good sermons on this text 
 by Andrewes, Serm. IV. Vol. I. p. 49, 
 and Donne, Serm,. III. Vol. I. p. 39 
 (ed. Alf.). eJair^oTTeiXev] 'sent 
 
 foHli,' 'emisit, ex ooelo a sese,' Beng. ; 
 comp. Acts vii. 12, xi. 22, xvii. 14. 
 On the doctrinal questions connected 
 with this word, see Petav. Trin. VIII. 
 I. 10. ■Y6vi!(i.. 4k y''voik6s] 
 
 'bom of a woman;' defining parti- 
 cipial clause added to attest the pure 
 manhood of Christ, and to obviate any 
 
 misconception of the meaning of the 
 clause that follows ; comp. Usteri, 
 Lehrb. 11. i. 4, p. 311 sq. No doctri- 
 nal stress is thus to be laid either on 
 ymaiKSs (' absque virili semine,' Est.), 
 or on the prep. {t6 Si (k l/ieWe...Tra- 
 paSij'XoOv T^v KOivttivlav t^s (jyiaews rod 
 tlktojjAvov irpos tV yevv^tracrav, Basil, 
 de Sp. Sanct. v. 1 2 ; compare Theoph., 
 OEcum.) ; ywaiKis being only used to 
 mark our Lord's true humanity, and 
 iK having only its usual and natural 
 ref. to the circumstances of birth : 
 comp. Matth. i. 16, John iii. 6; and 
 see Eost u. Palm, Lex. s.v. ill. -i, 
 Vol. I. p. 818; Winer, Gr. § 47. b, 
 p. 327, 328. For a sound and strik- 
 ing sermon on this verse, and on the 
 general relation of woman to man, see 
 Jackson, Creed, Vol. vi. p. 226 (Oxf. 
 1844). The reading yetniibiievov 
 
 (found in some cursive mas., Ath., 
 Theod., al.) has every appearance of 
 being an explanatory gloss. 
 7£v6(ii6vov viro vi|iov] ' Soi'm under the 
 law,' ' natum inter Judaeos legi Mosis 
 obnoxios,' Schott ; second defining 
 clause added to show that not only 
 was Christ truly man [y^v. iK ymaiKbs), 
 but also a true member of the Jewish 
 nation (yen. iirb vijiov), and standing 
 in the same religious relations as aE 
 other Israelites; see Olshaus. and 
 Turner in loc., and oomp. Andrewes, 
 Smre. I. Vol. I. p. 13 (A.-C. L.). On 
 the most suitable rendering of yevbfie- 
 vov, see notes to Transl, 
 
 5. iva, Tois viri v6|jiov elay-] 'in 
 order that He might ransom those 
 under the law;' first gracious purpose 
 of God's having sent forth His Son 
 thus yevd/i. iic yvvatK. and thus yevbiJ.. 
 iirb vbiiov, — the ransom of those who 
 were under the religious obligations 
 
IV. 5. 6. 
 
 77 
 
 Oecriav aTToXct/Sftj/uev. on Se ecrre vioi, e^aTricTTeiXev 6 
 
 under which our Lord vouchsafed to 
 be bom. The redemption was, as De 
 W. (after Berg.) rightly maintains, 
 not merely from the curse, but from 
 the bondage of the law ; oomp. ver. 3. 
 On the meaning of i^ayop. see notes 
 on ch. iii. 13. 
 
 tva niv vtoSeo-. diroX.] 'in order that 
 vie might receive the adoption of sons ; 
 second gracious purpose of God, re- 
 sulting from the first, the adoption 
 as sons not only of Jews, but of all 
 men {i]/i,eis), of all those whose nature 
 our Lord vouchsafed to assume. The 
 first iva thus, by a kind of x"'<'^M^5 
 (Jelf, Gr. § 904. 3) found occasionally 
 elsewhere in the Apostle's writings 
 (comp. Philem. 5), refers to the 
 second participial member yevSfi. i/irb 
 v6fiov, while the second ^a refers to 
 the first and less circumscribed yevSfi. 
 ^K yvvaiKbs. For examples of a double 
 Xva thus appended to a single finite 
 verb, comp. ch. iii. 14, Eph. v. 56, 27. 
 •n\v ■uioBeo-Cav] 'the adoption of sons;'' 
 comp. Kom. viii. 15, 23, ix, 4, Eph. 
 i. 5. The interpretation, 'conditio 
 filiorum, sonship,' adopted by several 
 commentators (see Ust. in loc. and 
 Lehrb. 11. i. 2, p. 186, note) both here 
 and Rom. viii. 15, has been convinc- 
 ingly refuted by Fritz. Horn. I. c., Yol. 
 ir. p- 137 sq. We were formeriy in 
 the light of servants, but now have 
 been adopted and are free sons. 
 Neander traces a threefold gradation 
 in this adoption; (a) as existing hut 
 not appropriated ; (6) as appropriated 
 through faith in Christ; (c) as per- 
 fected by a full communion in his 
 blessedness and glory. Planting, Vol. 
 1. p. 477 (Bohn). 
 
 diroXaP(ii|i.ev] ' we might receive.' The 
 special force of the prep, has been some- 
 what differently explained. Of the two 
 more ancient interpretations, (a) that 
 
 of Chrys., Ka\&s eXirev diroXdjS. 
 SeiKfis i4>eCKoixirr]v, though lexically 
 admissible (see Winer, de Verb. Comp. 
 Fasc. IV. p. 13) does not harmonize 
 with the context, as the vlo8e<Tla is 
 not here alluded to as the subject of 
 promise: again (6), that of Aug., 'non 
 dixit accipiamus sed recipiamus,' 
 though equally admissible on lexical 
 grounds (opp. to Meyer ; comp. Herod. 
 I. 61, and see Roat u. Palm, Lex. s. v. 
 &t6, e, and ib. s. v. &iro\afi^. 2. a.), is 
 more than doubtful in point of doc- 
 trine, as the correct dogmatical state- 
 ment ' ut quod perdideramus in Adam 
 ...hoc in Christo reciperemus' (Iren. ; 
 see Bull, State of Man, p. 492, Oxf. 
 1844) can only be applied to what 
 Adam had before his fall, and not to 
 a gracious gift which was not bestowed 
 on him. It seems best then to fall 
 back on the general local meaning of 
 &w6, and to regard the verb as hinting 
 at receiving from an imaginary place 
 where the things given might be con- 
 ceived as having been laid up in store ; 
 ' diroXanp. dicuntur imprimis illi, qui 
 quae ipsis destinata et quasi reposita 
 sunt accipiunt. Col. iii. 24, 2 Joh. 8,' 
 Winer, I.e.; add Luke xvi. 25, dire- 
 'Ka^es ri, iyaSd aov, which the context 
 shows could scarcely receive any other 
 interpretation. 
 
 6. OTi 8e K.T.X] 'And as a proof 
 that ye are sons,' 'quemadmodum 
 autem' [fcamasa], jEth., the 5^ intro- 
 ducing with a faintly oppositive force 
 the demonstration of the assertion. It 
 is difficult to decide whether Sri is 
 here causal ('quoniam,' Vulg., Clarora., 
 Syr.-Phil.) or, more probably, de- 
 mMistrative (irbdev SrjKov 8ti, Chrys., 
 Theoph., (Ecum., and by obvious 
 inference Theod. and Theod.-Mops.). 
 Independently of the authority of the 
 Greek commentators, which in such 
 
78 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 6 Geo? TO Hveufxa rod vlov avrov eis rag Kapocas 
 7 ^fiwv, Kpd^ov 'A/3/8a o varrip. ware ovKeri ec SovXos 
 aXXa VLos' ei §e vio?, Koi. K\tjpou6/xog ota Qeov. 
 
 cases is very great, we seem justified 
 by the context in adopting the latter 
 view; since, on the one hand, the 
 causal interpretation seems to interfere 
 with the easy transition from the de- 
 claration of ver. 4, 5, to the conse- 
 quence in ver. 7; and, on the other 
 hand, the demonstrative dfri seems to 
 accord better with the emphatic posi- 
 tion and the tense of icrr^. The 
 sentence is thus what is called braohy- 
 logioal, ' and as a proof that ye really 
 are sons,' — a construction to which 
 De W. and Alt object, but which 
 still seems perfectly correct and ad- 
 missible; see Winer, Gr. § 66. 1, p. 
 546; Fritz. Horn. ii. 14, Vol. I. p. 117; 
 Liloke on i JoJm v. 9. ToB QeoS 
 
 inserted after viol,ia. DEFG; Clarom., 
 Demid., ToL, Goth., al., and Lat. Ff., 
 seems to be an obvious explanatory 
 addition. t6 Ilveifia toi! 
 
 vioS aiJToi)] 'the Spirit of His Son,' 
 scil. the Holy Spirit (' Spiritus Chiisti 
 quia per Christum obtinetur, Joh. xiv- 
 16,' Grot.), here suitably thus desig- 
 nated in harmony with the preceding 
 mention of our relation to God as sons 
 (tTst.) ; comp. Eom. viii. 9, where Xlv. 
 Qeov and Jlv. 'S.piffTov appear to be 
 interchangeable. On the doctrinal 
 significance of this passage — that it is 
 the 'substantia' and 'persona' of the 
 Spirit which dwells in the hearts of 
 believers (i Cor. vi. 19), comp. Petav. 
 Trin. vm. 4. 6, Vol. 11. p. 459 ; and 
 on the heart as the seat of the in- 
 working power of God, Beck, Seelenl. 
 § 27, p. ro?. In the 
 
 following words Hec. reads i/iSv with 
 D^BKL ; mss. ; several Vv. and Ff. : 
 but iiii&j' has far better authority, 
 being found in ABCDiFGN; many 
 
 mss.; Amiat., Clarom.; Ath. (2), and 
 many Ff., and is adopted by the best 
 recent editors. 
 
 'Appd 6 iraTijp] ' Aiha father / Maik 
 xiv. 36, Kom. viii. 15. In this solemn 
 expression 6 irar^p (nom. for vooat., 
 Winer, Gr. § 29. 2, p. 164) does not 
 seem appended to the Aramaic 'A^^S, 
 as a mere explanation of it, ' Abba, id 
 est Pater' (Beza); nor yet united with 
 it to indicate the union of Jews and 
 Gentiles ('Hebraeum verbum ad Ju- 
 dges, Grsecum ad gente3...pertinet,' 
 Aug.; comp. Andrewes, Serm. iv. Vol. 
 
 I. p. 60); but is appy. blended with 
 it as making up the 'solemnis formula' 
 of the early Christian prayers. The 
 Aramaic title under which our Lord 
 addressed His heavenly Father was 
 probably at a very early period (hence 
 Mark, I. e.) vmited to the Greek syno- 
 nym in reverent and affectionate re- 
 membrance of Him who had taught 
 and enabled us truly to call God Our 
 Father, and thence used a« a single 
 form in all more fervent addresses to 
 God; comp. Schoettg. Hor. Hebr. 
 Vol. I. p. 252, where instances are 
 given of addresses to God in which 
 Hebrew and Greek words are some- 
 what similarly united. Whether there 
 is here any allusion to the fact that 
 among the Jews a freedman might 
 by addressing any one with the title 
 Abba prepare the way for adoption 
 by him (Selden, de Success, ch. 4, Vol. 
 
 II. p. 15) seems wry doubtful. 
 
 7. ttioTs K.T.X,] 'So then,' 'Conse- 
 quently;' conclusion from the state- 
 ments in the two preceding verses, 
 liSffTe with its usual and proper force 
 denoting the ' consemtioiiem, alicujus 
 rei ex antecedentibus,' Klotz, Devar. 
 
IV. 7, 8. 
 
 79 
 
 How then can ye now 
 turn back again to the 
 bondage of rudiments, as alas ! ye are doing ? 
 
 'AXXa Tore /xev ovk eiSores Qeov 8 
 
 Vol. n. p. 771. On the force of this 
 particle witli the indie, and infin., see 
 notes on ch. ii. 1 3 ; and for its use with 
 the imperative, notes o» Phil. ii. 12. 
 ovK^Ti (t] 'thou art no more, as thou 
 wert when in bondage under rudiments 
 of the world.' Meyer finds a chmax 
 of person in dTroXd^ufiev ver. 5, iiyre 
 ver. 6, el ver. 7, the mode of address 
 becoming more and more personal and 
 individualizing: for further exx. of this 
 use of the second person in more 
 cogent addresses, see Kom. xi. 17, xii. 
 20, xiii. 4, xiv. 4, I Cor. iv. 7, al., 
 and comp. notes on ch. ii. 18. 
 (I Sk wio's, Kttl kXt]povo)jios] ' but if a 
 son (not a slave), then also an heir;' 
 comp. Rom. viii. 17, d di riiaa, xal 
 Kkqpovbiioi. Both these passages must 
 appy. be explained on the principles 
 of the Koman, and not of the Hebrew 
 law. According to the latter, only 
 tons (legitimate, 'ex concubinis,' or 'ex 
 incestu,' but not 'ex ancillis et Gen- 
 tilibus,' Seld. de Succ. ch. 3) succeeded 
 to the inheritance ; the firstborn having 
 double: according to the former all 
 children, male or female ; 'nee interest 
 utrum naturales sint an adoptivi;' 
 Gajus, Com. Inst. m. § 2 (cited by 
 Fritz.). It is scarcely necessary to 
 observe that vlbs is not to be pressed, 
 being simply, as Fritz, observes, 
 antithetical to dov\os' women are dis- 
 tinctly included in oh. iii. 28, The 
 whole subject is ably investigated by 
 Fritzsdhe, Fritssch. Opusc.-p. 143 — 149. 
 Sid 0«ov] This reading, which 
 Lachm. and Tisch. have adopted [with 
 ABOiN(FG SiA Gedv); 17; Aug., 
 Boem., Vulg., Copt.; Clem., Bas., 
 Cyr., Did. ; Ambr., Aug., Pel., Bed., 
 Ambrst.], appears on the whole the 
 most satisfactory. Fritz, (flpusc. p. 
 148) supports the Bee. — Qeov Sid, 
 
 XpurroB — on paradiplomatic consider- 
 ations (Xp. and Qe. being confused 
 with one another, hence omission of 
 Sii, XpuTToS' then Sia Qe. by omission 
 of Xp.) which seem somewhat pre- 
 carious. In answer to the internal 
 objection of Usteri that the inherit- 
 ance is never represented by St Paul 
 as coming 5ta Qeou (comp. however 
 ver. 5), it may be remarked that 6eoff 
 may fairly be taken in its widest 
 sense, as including the three Persons 
 of the blessed Trinity, just separately 
 mentioned ; see Windischm. in loc. 
 
 8. 'AXXd] '5bm5ei<;' appeal based 
 on the preceding statements, and in- 
 volving a strong cmitraat between 
 their past and present states. The 
 adversative iXKk has thus here no 
 species of affirmative force (Ust.), — a 
 meaning however which may be jus- 
 tified, see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 1 4, 
 — but introduces an explanation of 
 the words oinhi el k.t.\. by the very 
 contrast which it states ; ' now ye are 
 free childien of God, — Ihen (before 
 the time of your vloBecla) ye knew 
 Him not, and were the bond-servants 
 of demons.' It need scarcely be added 
 that rSre does not refer to ver. 3 (Wi- 
 ner, Schott), still less is to be regarded 
 as equivalent to irtiXoi (Koppe), but 
 merely marks the period when they 
 were not, as they now are, sons ; 
 'quasi digito intento designat omne 
 tempus quod ante vocationem Gala- 
 tarum exierat,' Grot. 
 o«K elSores] 'ignoranf.es,''- — an historic 
 fact; contrast i Thess. iv. 5, ri, /j.ii 
 elddra rhv QeSv, where they are- only 
 so characterized by the writer; and 
 see Winer, Gr. § 55. 5, p. 428 sq. It 
 may be observed that with certain 
 participles 01) regularly and formally 
 coalesces, so as to express one single 
 
80 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 9 eoovXeua-aTe roii (bvcrei fii] ovcriv Oeoh' vvv Se yvov- 
 rey Qeov, /uloXXov Se yvwcrOivTes v-tto Geo?, Trwy 
 
 idea; see G-ayler, Part. Neg. p. 287. 
 ISovXclScraTc] ^ye were slaves;^ em- 
 phatic, and, as in ver. 9, in a lad sense. 
 The proper force of the aoriat, as 
 marking an action that took place in 
 and belongs wholly to the past, is here 
 distinctly apparent ; comp. the exx. in 
 Kruger, Sprachl. § 53. 5. i; Scheuerl. 
 Synt. § 32. i, p. 331 sq. ; and for gome 
 excellent remarks on the use of this 
 tense, Sohmalf. Synt. d. Gr. Verh. 
 § 60 sq., and esp. Fritz, de Aor. Vi, 
 Frankf. 1837. This passage has 
 
 been pressed into the controversy re- 
 specting Sov\ela and \arpeia, and is 
 noticed in Forbes, Instruct, vil. i, p. 
 331 sq. Tots ^vtra k.t.X.] 
 
 'to them which hy nature are not 
 gods:' (pia-ei being emphatic, and 
 serving to convey an unconditioned 
 denial of their being gods at all; comp. 
 I Cor. X. 20. The order in Eec. tois 
 nil (pOaeioSffi Seois [D'iFGKL ; mss.; 
 Syr.-Phil. ; Chrys., Theod., al.] is much 
 less expressive, as implying that the 
 false gods were thought to be true 
 gods, though not naturally so, and is 
 decidedly inferior in external autho- 
 rity to that adopted in the text, which 
 has the support of ABCDiD^EK; 6 
 ms3.; Syr. (plural), Vulg., Goth., Copt.; 
 Athan. (4), Nyss. (4), al., and is adopt- 
 ed by the best recent editors. On 
 the meaning of ipija ' substantially, ' 
 'essentially,' and the connexion of 
 the verse with the argument for the 
 divinity of Christ, see Waterl. Second 
 Def. Qu. 24, Vol. II. p. 722. 
 |iij oviri is a subjective negation, and 
 states the view in which they were 
 regarded by the writer; see above, 
 and comp. the numerous exx. cited by 
 Winer, Gr. § 55. 5, p. 428. The stu- 
 dent must be reminded that /iij with 
 participles is ' the prevailing usage in 
 
 the N. T., so that while 01! with par- 
 ticiples may be pressed, it is well to 
 be cautious with regard to /t^" see 
 notes on i Thess. ii. 15. 
 
 g. ■yvovTSs 0«ov] 'after hamng 
 Tcnown God;' temporal participle here 
 expressing an action preceding that 
 specified by the finite verb ; see Winer, 
 Gr. % 45. I, p. 306, and notes on Eph. 
 iv. 8. Olsh. finds a climax in 
 
 c^56res, 'yvdvres, and yvcaad^res' the 
 first, merely outward knowledge that 
 God is; the second, the inner essen- 
 tial knowledge in activity ; the third, 
 the passive knowledge of God in love. 
 The distinction between the two lat- 
 ter (see below) seems correct, but that 
 between el5. and 7c. very doubtful, 
 especially after the instances cited by 
 Meyer, viz. John vii. 27, viii. 55, 
 2 Cor. V. 16. |jiaWov S^] 
 
 ' imo vera' ' vel potius,' Rom. viii. 34 ; 
 ' corrigentis est ut siepissime,' Stallb. 
 Plat. Symp. p. 173 B: see exx. col- 
 lected by Raphel in loc. 
 7Vu<r6e'vT«s] ' ieing known ;' 'cogniti,' 
 Tulg., Clarom. [oognoti] ; not ' appro- 
 bati' (Grot.), nor even 'acknowledged 
 as His own' (TJst., comp. Ewald), still 
 less 'scire facti' (Beza); but simply, 
 in the usual and regular meaning of 
 the word in the N. T., 'known,' 're- 
 cognized: ' see 1 Cor. viii. 3, xiii. 12 ; 
 and comp. Winer, Gr. § 39. 3, p. 235. 
 Before the time of their conversion 
 the Galatians were not known by God, 
 had not become the objects of His 
 divine knowledge; now they were 
 known by Him and endowed with 
 spiritual gifts ; airis i/ias iireSTrdffaTO, 
 Chrys. The distinction drawn by Olsh. 
 (above) between yvSvres, cognitio activa, 
 knowledge, which must be, if genuine, 
 preceded by yvoiaO., cognitio passiva, 
 love (hence the corrective li&Wov Si), 
 
IV. 9, lo. 
 
 81 
 
 ewKTrpeipeTe ttoKiv eTTt ra aaQevij Kai iTTwya cttoj- 
 "Xela, oh iraXiv avcoOev SovXeveiv OeXere ', ^fxepas irapa- lo 
 
 seems borne out by 1 Cor.' I. c. (on 
 ■which seeBeng.) ; comp, Neand.PZairf. 
 Vol. I. p. 157, note (Bohn). 
 irSs] ' quijU utV 'luno cmaeth it that?' 
 see oh. ii. 14, Imcrrpi- 
 
 <}>er€ iroXiv] 'ye tumhack again :' oon- 
 vertimini iterum,' Vulg., Clarom., 
 
 ^AsSOl »QoZ [iterum eonversi 
 
 estis] Syr. ; ir&Xw not being the Ho- 
 meric ajid Heaiodic 'retro' (an idea 
 involved in iiri(rTp4<j>eTe, Matth. xii. 
 44, 2 Pet. ii. 22), but deniw, iterum, 
 the more common meaning in the 
 N. T. ; see exx. in Bretach. Lex. s. v. 
 The lapse of the Galatians into Ju- 
 daism is thus represented as a relapse 
 into those ffroix^ta among which Ju- 
 daiam was included : • irdXiv non rem 
 eandem respicit sed similem,' Glass. 
 ap. Pol. Syn. in loc. 
 TO. do-Sevtj K.T.X.] ' the weak and leg- 
 ga/rly elements;' d.<r6evri as having no 
 power to justify or promote salvation, 
 VTUxii as having no rich dowry of 
 spiritual gifts and bleaaings; comp. 
 Heb. vii. 18, and see Grot, m loc. 
 xaXiv avdiSfv] 'again anew,' 'aftra 
 lupana,' Goth. ; not pleonastic like 
 iri\i.v iK Sevripov (Matth. xxvi. 42), 
 iireira fieri roSro (John xi. 7), but 
 expreaaive of two diatinct ideas, re- 
 lapse to bondage and recommencement 
 of ita principles. The Galatians had 
 been slaves to the oroix"" ™ the form 
 of heathenism ; now they were desiring 
 to enslave themselves again to the 
 aroix^ia, and to commence them anew 
 in the form of Judaism : compare 
 ' rursnm denuo,' Plant. Oas. Prol. 33 
 (Wetst.), and see Hand, Tursell. Vol. 
 II. p. 279. 
 
 10. i)|icpas] 'days,' sciL Jewish 
 Sabbaths, fasts, dec. (comp. Rom. xiv. 
 
 5, 6, Col. ii. 16); appy. emphatic, and 
 not improbably placed forward as 
 marking what they observed with 
 most scrupulosity ; see Alf. in loc. It 
 however can scarcely be considered 
 exegetically exact to urge this verse 
 agEunst 'any theory of a Christian 
 Sablath' (Alf.), when the Apostle is 
 only speaking of legal and Judaizing 
 observances ; see notes on Col. ii. 17. 
 irapaTiipetirOe] 'ye a/re studiously ob- 
 serving,' comp. .^h. tetaqabu [where 
 the oonjug. (ill. 3, DiUm.) does not 
 seem to lack its force]; the force of 
 the compound being appy. 'sedido' 
 (Meyer) not ' mperstitiose observatia' 
 (Bretach.), — a meaning which the pas- 
 sages adduced, e.g. Joseph. Ant. III. 
 5. 5, Tapar7ipeu> tAs ipSofiMas' Cod. 
 A. RelatPilat. (Thilo, Cod.Ap.y. 806), 
 rh ffd^^aroy irapaTTjpeLffdai' do not 
 Bubatantiate. It may be obaerved 
 that the primary use of Trapi, in this 
 verb ia appy. local, and by implication 
 intensive, soil.- — ' standing close beside 
 for the purpose of more ^ect'ually ob- 
 serving ' (comp. Acts ix, 24, and see 
 Kost u. Palm, Lex. s.v. Vol. 11. p. 720) : 
 the secondary force is more distinctly 
 ethical, but appy. restricted to the idea 
 of hostile observation (Mark iii. 2, 
 Luke vi. 7, xiv. l) ; compare Polyb. 
 Sist. XVII. 3. 2, heSpeieiy Kal vaparri- 
 peiv and see exz. in Schweigh. Lex. 
 Polyb. s. T., and in Steph. Thes. s. v. 
 VoL VI. p. 410. The 
 
 punctuation of this verae is doubtful. 
 Lachm., Tisch., Mey., Alf., al., place 
 a mark of interrogation after intavrois, 
 but appy. with somewhat less con- 
 textual probability than the simple 
 period ; as in this latter case the verse 
 supplies a natural verification of the 
 statement implied in the preceding 
 
 G 
 
82 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 II T^peiaOe koi firjva'S Koi Kaipovi koI ivtavTOvg. (jio^ovfxai 
 v/jLUi, fi^TTWS eiKij KeKOTTiaKa en vf/.as. 
 
 question, explaining rfs t^s SovKelas 
 rpliirot (Theod.), and forming a natu- 
 ral transition to the sadder tone of 
 ver. I r. To derive a hint merely from 
 the use of the pres. tense that the 
 Galatiana were then celebrating a sab- 
 batical year (Wieseler, Chron. Apoat. 
 p. 286 note), seems very precarious. 
 Kaipoils] 'seasons,' i.e. of the festi- 
 vals; compare 2 Chron. viii. 13, toD 
 di>a(pipeiv Kari, ras ^vroXis MuCir^ iv 
 Tots (ra/S/Sdrois Kal iv rots iJ,r]<rl Kal iv 
 Tols ioprals rpeis Kaipoiis toC hiiavTov' 
 and Lev. xxiii. 4. 
 
 cviavTc^s] ' years,' — the sabbatical 
 years, and (according to the usual ex- 
 planation) the yewrs of Jubilee. Meyer 
 asserts, on the authority of Kranold 
 {de Anno Jubil. p. 79), that these 
 latter were never really celebrated ; 
 contrast however the direct command 
 in Lev. xxv. 2 — 5, and comp. the dis- 
 tinct allusions to it in other places 
 (e. g. laai. Ixi. i, 2). Whether the year 
 of Jubilee is here alluded to may be 
 a matter of opinion; but that both 
 hefore (opp. to Winer, RWB. Art. 
 ' Jubeljahr,' Vol. I. p. 626) and after 
 the Captivity it was fully observed, 
 there seems no sufficient reason to 
 doubt; see Kitto, Bibl. Cyclop. Art. 
 ' Jubilee,' Vol. n. p. 162. 
 
 1 1. <|>opov|j,ai v|i.as] ' / a/m appre- 
 hensive of you,' ' res vestrae mihi ti- 
 morem inoutiunt,' Grot. ; definite and 
 independent statement receiving its 
 further explanation from what follows ; 
 comp. Col. iv. 17, |3X^7re t^v SiaKovlav 
 ...ii/a airitv irXripots, and see notes in 
 loc. To regard this verse as an ex- 
 ample of the kind of attraction where 
 a word really belonging to the sub- 
 ordinate clause is made the objeot of 
 and assimilated by the principal clause 
 
 (TJst.; Winer, Cfr. § 66. 5, p. 55^) does 
 
 not seem grammatically exact, as in 
 
 such cases the object of the former 
 
 clause is nearly always the subject of 
 
 the latter (Scheuerl. Synt. § 49. 2, p. 
 
 507), e. g. Acta xv. 36, iiria-Ke^difteBa 
 
 Tois d8eX0oi)s...7rfis Sx"""''' see exx. in 
 
 Winer, I. c. and Kypke, Obs. Vol. I. 
 
 p. 375. It will be best then with 
 
 Lachm. , Buttm., al. to place a comma 
 
 after ft/iSs, and to regard ^^irois k.t.X. 
 
 as a separate explanatory clause. 
 
 (ii^iras eUij KSKOirCaKa] ' lest haply I 
 
 have actually laboured in vain:' ' p-i) 
 
 etiam indicativum adjunctum habet, 
 
 ubi rem a nobis pro verd hab&ri indi- 
 
 care volumus,' Herm. Yiger, No. 270; 
 
 see also Winer, Gr. § 56. 2, p. 446; 
 
 Klotz, Devar. Vol. I. p. 129; and 
 
 notes on ch. ii. 2. Chrys., having 
 
 appy. failed to observe this idiom, has 
 
 unduly pressed tpo^oB/iai and /iiiTrus, 
 
 and implied nearly a contrary sense ; 
 
 oiSiTTW, ^tialv, i^i^t) t6 vavi-yiov, dXV 
 
 in Thv xei;ttciiva tovto Ci^lvovTa )3\^7rW 
 
 contrast Theod., pspvii/iivos ph> rue 
 
 vbvuv Thv 5i Kapirhv oix iipHv. 
 
 €ls i!|ids] 'upon you;' not 'invobis,' 
 
 Vulg., Clarom., Arm., but 'propter 
 
 Tos,' JEth., or more exactly, 'in vos, 
 
 emphatica locutio,' Beng. ; comp. 
 
 Kom. xvi. 6, iKoirlaatv els ii/ias. The 
 
 meaning of eh ('looking towards,' 
 
 Donalds. Crat. § 170) is thus not so 
 
 much simply ethical, ' in reference to,' 
 
 and hence 'for you' (De W.), — this 
 
 being more naturally expressed by a 
 
 dat. commodi (Ecclus. xxiv. 34), — as 
 
 ethioally-ZocoZ, ' upon you,' Auth. ; 
 
 comp. Bemhardy, Synt. v. to, p. 217 : 
 
 the Apostle's labour was directed to 
 
 the Galatiana, actually reached them, 
 
 and so had passed on to them. 
 
IV. II, 12. 
 
 83 
 
 despised me not, even in^j>o/ f'> 50/ »? 
 
 m my infirmity, but aoeAfflOtj OeOHai VflWV. OVOeV Ue tjOl- 
 evinced towards me ' 
 
 the deepest reverence and warmest love. 
 
 1 2. TCvvrBt us hju} ' Become as I 
 am;' affectionate appeal calling on 
 them to treat their Apostle with reci- 
 procity (see below), and reminding 
 them of their former love and reve- 
 rence for him. on Kd^co us 
 ii)iEis] ' dnce I also have become as ye 
 are;' dissuasion from Judaism, urged 
 on the ground of his own dereliction 
 of it; oomp. i Cor. ix. 20, 21. The 
 exact sentiment conveyed by thisse 
 words has received several different ex- 
 planations. Of these {a) that of the 
 Greek expositors — ' I was once a, 
 zealot for Judaism as ye now are* 
 {raSra irpbs rois i^ 'lovSalav, Chrys.) 
 — is open to the objection that i7/ii)i' 
 {'fill, nee amplius sum') would have 
 thus seemed almost a necessary inser- 
 tion (Mey.) ; comp. Just, ad Grcec, s 
 (Wetst.), yiveade ws ^(6, 6ti. K&yij ijii-qv 
 Ck iixeXs. Again (b) that of Sengel, 
 Fell, al., that it is only a scriptural 
 mode of expressing warm affection 
 (i Kings xxii. 4), i.e. 'love me as I 
 love you, ' is certainly not in harmony 
 with the use of ytve<r6e' and still less 
 with the context, where apprehension 
 (0o/3oi;/tai £yuas)rather than love is what 
 is atpresent uppermost in the Apostle's 
 thoughts. It seems best then (c) with 
 Fritz., De W., and most modern ex- 
 positors to regard the clause as urging 
 a course of reciprocity on the part of 
 the Gralatians corresponding to that 
 which had been pursued by the Apo- 
 stle ; ' become free from Judaism like 
 me, for I, though a native Jew, have 
 become and am a Gentile like you, 1 
 am Tots AfS/iois lis dvofws (i Cor. ix. 
 2i) now, though I was Tepuraor^pias 
 fijXuT-^s K.T.'K. (oh. i. 14) then:' see 
 Neand. Planting, Vol. i. p. z'ZS (Bohn), 
 and Fritz. Fritzich, Opusc. p. 232 sq., 
 
 where the passage is fully discussed. 
 dS€X<|>oC, S^0)i,ai v|xuv] 'hnth/ren, I 
 beseech you ;' earnest entreaty ('verba 
 irepmaBrj,' Grot.) belonging, not to 
 what follows, — though so taken by 
 Chrys., al., and all the ancient Vv., 
 — but to what precedes, as the Siijais 
 occurs in the first and not the last 
 portion of the verse. This passage is 
 curious as one of the very few in 
 which the best ancient and the best 
 modern interpreters are directly op- 
 posed to each other. 
 oiiS^v (le ij8iKif<raTe] 'ye injwed me 
 in nothing;' allusion to their past be- 
 haviour as a reason and motive why 
 they should now accede to the en- 
 treaty just urged; * ye did not injure 
 me formerly, do not injure me now by 
 refusing to act as I beseech you to 
 act.' The connexion is thus — as the 
 parallel aorists iJSiK^traTe, i^ovQevq- 
 aare, i^en-Tvc-are, seem distinctly to 
 suggest — very close with what follows, 
 ver. 1 3 and 14 (which really make up 
 a single period) forming a sort of an- 
 tithetical member (see below) to the 
 present clause, and the aor. referring 
 to the Apostle's first visit. The 
 
 usual interpretation ' there is nothing 
 personal between us' (SijXw Sn oi 
 /iiffovs oiSi ^x^/"" V" ■'■^ elpri/jiipa, 
 Chrys.) is both exegetioally untenable 
 (there was no Ix^pa in what he had 
 said, but the reverse) and grammati- 
 cally precarious as implying in ^Siki}- 
 aare the force either of a present or a 
 perfect. The interpr. reproduced by 
 Kettig, Stud. u. Krit. 1830, p. 109, 
 ' ye have not injured me, but Christ ' 
 ('nihil me privatim Isesistis,' Grot.) 
 implies an emphasis on /te which does 
 not seem to exist {oiSh is surely 
 the emphatic word), and equally 
 G2 
 
84 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 13 K^crare' o'loaTe Se on Si affdeveiav t?? (raoKOS evijy- 
 
 14 yeXccra/xriv vfuv to vpoTepov, Kot top wetpacrfJi.ov vfiiiv 
 
 14. ifiSipJi So Lachm. and Tiach, (ed. i) with AB(C'' adds t(5c)D'FGK1; 17. 
 ,39. 67««; Vulg., Clarom., Copt. ; Cjr., Hieron., Aug., Ambrst., Sedul. {Meyer, 
 
 Sagge). Tisch. now (ed. 2, 7) reads /iov rbv with D''D'EK:L(^<■' om. /tou); 
 ,*PPy- gfeafc majority of msB. ; Syr. -Phil. (appy. Syr., Goth.), Arm.; Chrys., 
 
 Theod., Dam., CEoum. (Rec., SchoU, Fritz, [om. /*oi/], Alf.). Independently 
 
 tends to infringe on the force of the 
 aorist. 
 
 13. oISaTE S^ ' yea yehnow,' 'aa.&a 
 potius ;' opposition, not so much of 
 clauses (this would be oi5k. . , iXKd, comp. 
 Chrys.), as of the sentiments conveyed 
 in the preceding clause and in the 
 two verses which here follow ; ' when 
 I first came among you, and that 
 under circumstances trying to you, 
 far from wronging me, ye received me 
 as an angel of God.' 
 Si" do-Bc'veiav rijs <rapK(5s] 'on account 
 of weaJmess of the flesh ;' i. e. on ac- 
 count of some sickness or bodily weak- 
 ness, which caused the Apostle to 
 stay longer with the Galatians than he 
 had originally intended, and of which 
 we know nothing beyond the present 
 allusion: see, as to lexical usage, 
 Winer, Or. § 49. u, p. 356 ; Fritz. 
 Som. iii. 25, Vol. i. p. 197 ; and as to 
 the historical probability, Wieseler, 
 Chron. Apost. p. 30, and Conyb. and 
 Hows. St Paul, Vol. I. p. 294 (ed. i). 
 Though on the one hand it may be 
 admitted that the line of demarcation 
 between 5i4 with the gen. and with 
 the accus. is occasionally so faint that 
 in some few passages (esp. with per- 
 sons) an interchange seems really to 
 have taken place (see exx. in Stepfa. 
 Thes. B.v. collected by Dindorf, and 
 in Bretsch. Lex.' s. v. — but except 
 Heb. v. 12, Eev. iv. 11, and appy. Eev. 
 xii. 11); still in the present case there 
 is nothing so irreconcileable with the 
 context (Peile, Bagge), or so improba- 
 
 ble in itself, as to lead us to adopt 
 either of the two only possible (?) 
 alternatives, (a) an enallage of case 
 (Ust., al.), or (J) a temporal use of Sid, 
 soil ' during a period of sickness.' To 
 the first of these there is the great 
 objection that no certain instance has 
 yet been adduced from the N. T., 
 neither John vi. 57 (see Liicke inloc.) 
 nor Phil. i. 15 (see notes in loc.) being 
 exx. in point ; and to the second the 
 equally valid objection that this species 
 of temporal, or, more correctly speak- 
 ing, local meaning (e.g. dii. viKra, comp. 
 5ti irhvTov, bib. ffrifia, t&c.) is only 
 found in poetry, and that rarely Attic ; 
 comp. Bernhardy, Synt. v. 18, p. 236 ; 
 Madvig, Ch: § 69, We seem bound 
 then to maintain the simple meaning 
 of the words, and to refer to our 
 ignorance of the circumstances (Green, 
 Gr. p. 300) any diflSculties the expres- 
 sion may appear to involve. 
 TO irpJTcpov may be translated either 
 'formerly' (Deut. ii. 12, Josh. xi. ro, 
 Joh. vi. 62, ix. 8), or ' the first time ' 
 (Trp&Tcpov, Heb. iv. 6, vii. 27). The 
 latter is preferable ; for, as Meyer ob- 
 serves, the words would be superfluous 
 if St Paul had been only once. Still 
 no historical conclusions can safely be 
 drawn from this expression alone ; see 
 Wieseler, Chron. Apost. p. 30, 277. 
 
 14. riv ireipao-fidv vjuuv] 'your 
 temptation,' soil, 'your trial which 
 arose, or might reasonably have a- 
 risen, from the bodily infirmity on 
 account of which I ministered among 
 
IV. 13, 14, 15- 
 
 85, 
 
 61/ t5 (TapKi fiov ovK e^ovOev^aaTe owe e^sTTTVcraTe, 
 aWa wy ayyeXov QeoO eSe^acrdi fxe, ws Xpia-Tov 
 'Ii]a-ovv. t/j ouv 6 fi.aKapi(rfA,oi v/jloiv', fiaprvpoo yap 15 
 
 of the preponderance of external authority, the change from the easier to the 
 more diflBcult reading seems so very probable, that, in spite of the internal ob- 
 jections of JFritzsche (Opusc. p. 24S sq.), we can here scarcely hesitate to adopt 
 the reading, though not the punctuation (see note), of Lachmann. Mill [Ap- 
 pend, p. 51) retracts his former opinion, and distinctly adTocates inSai. 
 
 you;' h> tJ aapxlp^v coalescing with, 
 and forming an explanatory addition 
 to the otherwise seemingly ambiguous 
 rbv iretpatriihv iifiuv comp. 2 Cor, x, 
 10, i] dk irapovjio. toD ffdj/iaros daBev^s 
 Kal 6 'K6yos i^ovBevtiiiivos' and see 
 MUl, Append, to N. T. p. 51. The 
 objection to this interpretation found- 
 ed on the absence of the art. before 
 iv Tj trapxl jiov (Uttck.) is here not 
 valid, as irupa^eiv Iv tiki (comp. 
 Eoclus. xxvii. 5) is appy. an ad- 
 missible construction ; see Winer, 6r. 
 § 20. 2, p. 123, and notes on Eph. i. 
 15. Lachmann places a period after 
 ff.fioVf and connects rbv ireipoff/xby iifiwv 
 ■with ver. 1 3 ; but this does very little 
 to remove the difficulty in the former 
 part of this verse, and makes the 
 latter part intolerably 'harsh and ab- 
 rupt. i^ftrritraTt] 
 'loathed,' 'respuistis,' Vulg., Clarom., 
 
 .0Z.rJ [abominati estis] Syr. ; 'plus 
 
 est iKwrieu) quam i^ovBeveJi>, hoc enim 
 contemptum, illud et abominationem 
 significat,' Grot. ; see Kypke, Obaerv. 
 Vol. II. p. 280. Of the compounds of 
 TTTiSw, those with h> and in are only 
 used in the natural, and not, as Kar- 
 (tTT., diaTTT., dirojrr., in the meta- 
 phorical sense ; see Lobeck, Ph/ryn. p. 
 15 sq. Probably, as Fritz, suggests, 
 ixTT. was here used rather than the 
 more common dwoTrr. by a kind of 
 alliteration after i ^ ovffer^ffare, "non 
 reprobastis aut respuistis,' more esp. 
 
 as a. repetition of the same prep, in 
 composition appears to be an occa- 
 sional characteristic of the Apostle's 
 style; comp. Kom. ii. 17, xi. 7. De 
 Wette feels a difficulty in i^ovd. and 
 i^eiTT. being applied to Teipafffiis on 
 the part of the Galatians. Yet surely, 
 whether referred to St Paul or to the 
 Galatians, the expression is equally 
 elliptical, and must in either case 
 imply despising that which formed 
 or suggested the Teipa(Tfi,&s. 
 «os XpioTov 'lT]<roi!v] 'yea as Christ 
 Jesus;' climactic, denoting the deep 
 affection and veneration with which 
 he was received ; comp. 2 Cor. v. 20: 
 the Galatians received the Apostle 
 not only as an angel, but as One 
 higher and more glorious (Heb. i. 4), 
 even as Him who was the Lord of 
 
 15. Tis o5v] 'What then?' scil. 
 ^v [inserted in DEK(i7 FG) ; mss. ; 
 Chrys. (iJec.)] ; ' qualix (not quaidd) 
 h. B. quam levis, quam ineonstans, igi- 
 turerat,' Fritz. : sorrowful enqtiiry, ex- 
 pressive of the Apostle's real estimate 
 of the nature of their /iaKapur/i,6r 
 otx^Tai, iTiiXero' KoKHs oix &iro<jyrivd.- 
 /ievos, SKKa Si' ipwT'^jeus ipSei^dpiepos, 
 Theod.-Mops. If toS be adopted 
 for which there is greater external 
 authority [ABCFGN ; 6 mss. ; Boem., 
 Syr., Vulg., Copt., Arm., al. ; Dam., 
 Hier., al.], but which seems to bear 
 every appearance of having been a cor- 
 rection (t6 rlt &vtI toO tt rideiKey,' 
 
86 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 daX/xovi vfiwv e^opv^avreg 
 16 iSdoKari fioi. ware i^dpoi vfiHv yeyova a\>]6evwv vniv; 
 
 vfJiiu oTi ei ouvaTOV rovs oc 
 
 Theod.), then ivrlv must be supplied, 
 and offc taken in its 'via collectiva/ 
 whereas in the present case what has 
 been called the vis reflexiva (' takes 
 up what has been said and continues 
 it,' Donalds. Crat. § 192) is more 
 apparent; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. II. 
 p. 719, and notes on Phil. ii. i. 
 6 )i,aKapur)i.is «(u!v] 'tJie hoasting of 
 
 your 
 
 ' beatitatia vestrse 
 
 praedicatio,' Beza ; the Galatians 
 themselves being obviously bpth the 
 naKapll^orres (not St Paul and others, 
 CEcum. ; oomp. Theoph.) and the 
 /toKO/3if4/*e»oc see Eom. iv. 6 (where 
 \iyei, rbv naKapuriiiv toO &ii6pil)Tov = 
 /MKaplj^ei riy &v0puTrov) and comp. 
 Fritz, in loc. The word is occa- 
 sionally found in earlier writers (e. g. 
 Plato, Sep. IX. p. 591 d; Ariatot. 
 Mhet. 1. 9. 4) and is of common oc- 
 currence in the Greek liturgies; see 
 Suicer, Thesau/r. s.v. Vol. 11. p. 290 
 sq. Tois iS4>6(iiX|jiovs 
 
 viiuv] 'your eyes,' 'oculos vestros,' 
 Vulg., Glarom. ; not 'your own eyes,' 
 Auth. (Tois ISlovs i^SaXfjbois), as the 
 article and pronoun are found in the 
 K. T. constantly associated with 6<pd, 
 where no emphasis is intended ; comp. 
 Joh. iv. 35, and see the numerous 
 exx. in Bruder, Concord, a. v. p. 667. 
 All inferences then from this passage 
 that the iirdiyeui of the Apostle was 
 a disease of the eyes are in the highest 
 degree precarious ; see Alf. in loc. 
 4gopv|avTcs] 'hamng plucked out,' 
 'eruissetis et dedissetis,' Vulg,, Gla- 
 rom. ; participle expressive of an act 
 immediately prior to, and all but syn- 
 chronous vrith, that of the finite verb ; 
 comp. Hermann, Viger, No. 224. 
 That the verb i^opirTeai (' usgrabau,' 
 Goth.) is a 'verbum solemne' (Mey.) 
 for the extirpation of the eye (i Sam. 
 
 xi. 2, Herod, vm. 116, (fee.) may 
 perhaps be doubted, as iKK6wTeiv 
 dipSd\pi,6v is used in cases apparently 
 similar (Judges xvi. 21, comp. Lucian, 
 Toxaris, 40), though more generally 
 applicable to the simple destruction 
 of the organ: see Demosth. p. 247. 
 § 82; Aristoph. Nuh. 24 (MSifi); Plu- 
 tarch, Lycurg. 11 {^axTTipli}). The 
 Greek vocabulary on this subject is 
 very varied; see the numerous syno- 
 nyms in Steph. Thea. s. v. i4>8a\ii6s. 
 kSiaKartJ 'ye would have given;' the 
 &p before it [Rec. with D'EKL ; mss.] 
 being rightly omitted with greatly pre- 
 ponderating evidence [ABCD'FGX; 
 2 mss.]; comp. John xv. 22, xix. 11. 
 This omission of the particle has a 
 'rhetorical' force (Herm.), and diflfers 
 from the past tense with S,v as mark- 
 ing more definitely the certainty that 
 the event mentioned in the apodosis 
 would have taken place, if the re- 
 striction expressed or implied in the 
 protasis had not existed; see Herm. 
 de Partic. S,v, p. 58 sq. ; Schmalfeld, 
 Synt. § 79, p. 185. Whether this dis- 
 tinction can always be maintained 
 in the N. T. is perhaps doubtful, as 
 the tejidency to omit ai" in the apo- 
 dosis (especially with the imperf.) is 
 certainly a distinct feature of later 
 Greek; see Winer, Gr. §42, 2, p. 273, 
 and comp. Ellendt, Lex. Soph. a. v. 
 X. 1, Vol. I. p. 125. 
 
 16. (!!<rr«] 'So then?' ' ErgoV 
 Vulg., Clarom. ; consequence (ex- 
 pressed interrogatively) from the pre- 
 sent state of things as contrasted with 
 the past, — 'so then, as things now 
 stand, am I become your enemy ? ' 
 oiix ilieh iiTTe o2 TepiiirovTes kuI 6epa- 
 TreiJox'Tes Kal rup 6(p$aKfiwv rinuitTepov 
 d70i'T6s; T/ Tolvvv yiyove; irbBiv ij 
 (x^pa ; Chrya. The consecutive force 
 
IV. i6; 17. 
 
 87 
 
 S.rt^tou'*to?'?ems'2 ZnXova-iv vrxSi ov KaXcSf, aXXa e/c- 17 
 
 ends : and you are fickle. Would that I were with you^ and could alter my tone. 
 
 of tffo-Te is more strongly pressed by 
 Meyer, who accordingly connects the 
 particle with the inteiTogation tIs oiv 
 6 f-axap. ; of which it is to be conceived 
 as expressing the special consequence, 
 ' is it in consequence of the unstable 
 nature of your j^aKap. that cfcc. ' — ^but 
 this seems to involve the necessity of 
 regarding /toprupS yip k.t.X. as paren- 
 thetical, and seems less in accordance 
 with the context than the general and 
 more abrupt reference to present cir- 
 cumstances ; see De Wette in he. 
 The use of (Jjre with interrog. sen- 
 tences is briefly noticed by Elotz, 
 Decar. Vol. 11. p. 776. 
 ^6pos v|uiiy ^eyova] *am / liecomA 
 ymir enemy V i. e. 'hostile to you:^ 
 
 (*~l*~li > SO [dominus inimicitise] 
 
 Syr. (both), 'inimicus vobu,' Tulg., 
 Clarom., 'fijands [Feind], Goth., Copt., 
 ^th.. Arm., — nearly aU regarding 
 4x^p^^ ^ used substantively, and 
 appy. actively, as in most of the lan- 
 guages above cited there are forms 
 which would have distinctly conveyed 
 the passive meaning. This latter 
 meaning is adopted by Mey., A If., 
 al., and is not only grammatically 
 admissible (ix^pis, as the gen. shows, 
 acting here as a substantive), but 
 even contextually plausible, as the 
 opposition between the former love of 
 the Galatians and their present aver- 
 sion would thus seem more fully dis- 
 played. StUl as the active meaning 
 yields a good sense, and is adopted by 
 most of the ancient Vv., and as there 
 is also some ground for believing that 
 6 ix^pis S,v$piaTros {Clem. Becogn. I. 
 70, 71, 'ille inimicus homo') was ac- 
 tually a name by which the Judaists 
 designated the Apostle, the active 
 meaning is to be preferred ; see 
 Bilgenf. aim,. Becogn. p. 78, note; 
 
 Wieseler, Chronol. p. 277. 
 aXtjOevuv] 'hy speaking the truth,' 
 scil. ' because T speak the truth ; ' oix 
 oTSa. i\X^i> ahlav, Chrys. To what 
 period does the participle refer? Cer- 
 tainly not (a) to the present Epistle, 
 as the Apostle could not now know 
 what the effect would be (Schott); 
 nor (i) to the first visit, when the 
 state of feeling (ver. 15) was so very 
 different, — but (c) to the second (Acts 
 xviiL 23) when Judaism had probably 
 made rapid advances; see Wieseler, 
 GhrOTiol, p. 277. No objection can 
 be urged against this from the use of 
 the pres. (imperf.) participle, as the 
 action was still lasting; see Winer, 
 Gr. § 45. i, p. 304; Schmalfeld, Synt. 
 § 202, p. 406. 
 
 17. ZijXovo-iv v|jias] 'They are pay- 
 ing you court,' scil. they are showing 
 an anxious zeal in winning you over 
 to their own party and opinions ; con- 
 trast between the honest truthfulness 
 of the Apostle towards his converts, 
 and the interested and self-seeking 
 court paid to them by the Judaizing 
 teachers. For an example of a si- 
 milar use of ^rfKovv ('sich eifrig um 
 Jem. kiimmem,' Bost u. Palm, Lex. 
 B.V.), — here neither exclusively in its 
 better sense (2 Cor. xi. 2), nor yet in 
 its worse (Acts vii. 9, comp. Chrys.), 
 but in the neutral meaning of 'paying 
 court to' ('studiose ambire,' Fritz.), — 
 see Pint. vii. p. 762 (cited by Fritz.), 
 i/Trb XP^^^S r6 wpiarov ^iroirrai nal ^7j~ 
 \ouaiv, varepov Si koI ^CKovaiv. 
 aXXd cKKXcio-ai K.T.X.] 'nay they de- 
 sire to exclude you;' they not merely 
 follow the positive and less dishonour- 
 able course of including you among 
 themselves [Syr. read ivKK., but appy. 
 only from mistake], but the baser 
 and more negative one of esccluding 
 you from others to make you thus 
 
88 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 18 KXeicrai iifj.as 6e\ov(Ttv, ha avrovs ^>]\ovTe. koXov Se 
 
 court them. The omission of a gen. 
 after IkkS. (see Kypke, 06s. ir. 181) 
 makes it difScuIt to determine the 
 objects from, which the false teachers 
 sought to exclude those whom they 
 affected, and has caused the ellipsis to 
 be supplied in various ways; e.g. t^s 
 Te\etas yviiaeois (Chrys.), 'a Christo 
 etfiducia ejus' (Luther), 'ab aliis om- 
 nibus' (Sohott), "e ciroulia suis,' i.e. 
 'by affecting exclusiveness to make 
 you court them' (Koppe, comp. 
 Brown), — the last ingenious, but all 
 more or less arbitrary. The only 
 clue afforded by the context is the 
 position of airois, which suggests a 
 marked personal antithesis, and the 
 use of iKKKeTffai, which seems more 
 naturally to refer to numbers or a 
 community (Mey.) than to anything 
 abstract or individual. Combining 
 these two observations, we may per- 
 haps vrith probabilitj' extend the refer- 
 ence from St Paul (ed. i; Fritz.) to 
 that of the sounder portion of the 
 Church with which he in thought 
 associates himself and from which he 
 reverts back again to himself in ver. 
 18. The moment of thought how- 
 ever rests really on the verb, not on 
 the objects to which it may be thought 
 to refer. The Galatians were courted, 
 and that oi koKQs in every way: 
 direct proselytizing on the part of 
 these teachers (if they had been sin- 
 cere in their convictions) might have 
 worn a semblance of being Ka\6ir 
 their course however was rather (dXXd) 
 indirect, it was to isolate their victims, 
 that in their isolation they might be 
 forced to affect those who thus dis- 
 honestly affected them. 'AXXA thus 
 preserves its proper force, and be- 
 comes practically cotTective; see Klotz, 
 Deva/i: Vol. II. p. 2, 3; Hartung, 
 ParWc. Vol. 11. p. 35. The reading 
 
 4jitas {Eec. not Steph.) which has still 
 some few defenders (Scholef. Hints, p. 
 96, comp. De W.) appears to have 
 been a conjecture of Beza. Though 
 said to have been since found in a few 
 msB., the assertion of Scholz, 'iifias e 
 codd. recent, fere omnibus,' is a com- 
 plete mis-statement, 
 tva avTovs JijXoCt*] ' in order that ye 
 may zealously affect them,;' purpose of 
 the tv^O"^'" "^ Kd\Cis, iva not being 
 adverbial ('ubi, quo in statu,' Fritz., 
 Mey.), but the simple conjunction, 
 associated here, as also in i Cor. iv. 6, 
 with the indie, per aolcecismum; see 
 Winer, Gr. § 41. b. i, p. 259, and 
 Green, Or. p. 73, who calls attention 
 to the fact that both solecisms appear 
 in contracted verbs, where they might 
 certainly have more easily occurred. 
 Hilgenfeld cites as a parallel Clem. 
 Horn. XI. 16 (read 6), ha inriipxev, but 
 the preceding clause el 9Aere airif 
 voiija'ai seems structurally considered 
 to be in effect equivalent to el iirolriffev, 
 and iTripxev only the imperf. 'in re 
 ii-rita vel infectS,' — a usage appy. not 
 familiar to this expositor (see p. 131, 
 and comp. notes on oh. ii. 2), but per- 
 fectly regular and idiomatic; see 
 Madvig, Synt. § 131 ; Sohmalfeld, 
 Synt. § 143, p. 294. It may be 
 
 remarked that the MSS. and mss. 
 (113, 2I9** [fijXOre], only excepted) 
 are unanimous in giving the indie, 
 and that all the ancient Vv. appeal' 
 to have regarded tva as a conjunction. 
 18. KoXiv Si T& Ji)\oiio-6ai K.T.X.] 
 ' But it is good to le courted in a good 
 way at all timM;' contrasted states 
 ment of what it is to be courted in a 
 good and lasting manner. There is 
 some little obscurity in this verse 
 owing to the studied and characteristic 
 vapovop,a<rla (comp. Winer, Or. § 68. 
 I, p. 560) which marks the terms in 
 
IV. i8, iQ. 
 
 89 
 
 To l^t]\ov(T6ai iv KoXip irdvTore, koi furi julovov iv tm 
 •Trapeivai /xe vpos v/xaf. reKVia fxov, ovs ttoXiv wSivw 19 
 
 which it is expressed, Aa the expla- 
 nations of the verse are somewhat 
 varied, we may perhaps advantageous- 
 ly premise the following limitations: 
 (i) All interpretations which do not 
 preserve one uniform meaning of f7)X4u 
 in hoth verses (e. g. BUck., and even 
 De W. and Fritz.) may be rejected : 
 from which it would seem to follow 
 that Iv KoX^ does not point to the 
 sphere of the !^tj\oS(r0ai, in the sense 
 of the virtues which called out the 
 feeling {irl t^j TeXmSrijTt, Theoph., 
 comp. De W.), — as this would prac- 
 tically cause i^XoCv to pass from its 
 neutral meaning 'ambire' to the more 
 restricted 'admirari,' — but is to be 
 regarded as simply adverbial (comp. 
 Bemhardy, Synt. V. 8. b, p. 211), and 
 perhaps as varied only from the pre- 
 ceding KoXws to harmonize structurally 
 with the following ex Tip irapercoi" 
 
 (2) Jr|Xovo-8ai must be regarded as 
 pass. (comp. Syr.), not as a middle 
 equiv. in sense to active (Vulg., Cla- 
 rom., Goth.), as no evidence of such 
 a use of ^riKoSffdai has yet been found : 
 
 (3) the object of fijXoCo-flat must be 
 the Galatians, as in ver. 17, and not 
 St Paul (Ust.) : (4) Iv t^ irapsivai is 
 not to be translated prospectively 
 (Peile), but must mean simply ' when 
 I am with you.' Thus narrowed 
 then the meaning would seem to be 
 • But it is a good thing to be the object 
 of f^Xos, to be courted in an honest 
 way (aa you are by me, though not by 
 them) at all times, and not merely just 
 when I happen to be with you.' Thus 
 ^XoOffSat if icaXif forms as it were 
 a compound idea=fi;XoC(rffoi xaXus 
 (Peile), and is in strict antithesis to 
 the act. ^X. oi5 koXws in the preceding 
 verse; see Wieseler, Chron. Apost. 
 p. 278. irpis iin"s] ''"'**^ 
 
 you;' the primary idea of direction is 
 frequently lost sight of, especially 
 with persons ; comp. John i. 1 , i Thess. 
 iii. 4, 2 Thess. ii. 5, and see notes on 
 oh. i. 18. 
 
 ig. T€KvCtt [lou] 'My little children;'' 
 appropriate introduction to the tender 
 and affectionate address which follows. 
 Usteri, Scholz, Lachmann, and other 
 expositors and editors connect these 
 two words with ver. 18, putting a 
 comma only after i/ias. By such a 
 punctuation (suggested probably by 
 a difficulty felt in the idiomatic Si in 
 ver. 20) the whole effect of the pre- 
 sent address is lost, and the calm and 
 semi-proverbial comment of ver. 18, 
 to which it now forms such a sudden 
 and tender contrast, is weakened by the 
 addition of an incongruous appeal. 
 The appropriate and affectionate TeKvta 
 (only here in St Paul, but often in St 
 John) is changed by Lachm. (non 
 marg.) into riicva [with BFGN»], but 
 retained by the majority of recent 
 editors. uSCvca] '/ am in 
 
 travail;'' not 'in utero gesto' (Hein- 
 sius, Exerc. p. 424, comp. Alf.), — a 
 meaning for which there is no satis- 
 factory authority in the N. T. or the 
 LXX, but simply 'parturio,' Vulg., 
 
 Clarom., Vi*'^ >»V) [sum parturiens] 
 
 f 7 
 Syr., with the idea not so much of the 
 pain, as of the long and continuous 
 effort of travail : see exx. in Loesner, 
 Obs. p. 333, and observe the tender 
 touch in the iniKtv, soil. tSffre tCjv 
 ToKaiwv liSivoiii &yayeii> els fiv^iiijii. 
 The use of liSlvio in eccl. writers is 
 illustrated by Suioer, Thes. Vol. 11. 
 p. 1595. fixP«o^'«'T''^-] 
 
 'until Christ he formed,' 'until the 
 new man, Christ in us (oh. ii. 20, 
 comp. Eph. iii. 17), receive as I doubt 
 
90 
 
 nP02 rAAATAS. 
 
 ao a)(^pii ov fiop(l)w6!j XjOttrroj ev v/uv, riOeXov de vapeivat 
 irpos vfiai apn Koi aWa^ai rrjv (pwv^v ■//■ov, on airo- 
 povfjLai ev vfuv. 
 
 not he will (h.v perhaps designedly 
 omitted; see ch. iii. 19, and Herin. 
 de Partic. &v, p. 40), his completed 
 and proper form ; ' the obvioua mean- 
 ing of this word (^|eiKOJ'ifeffflai, ciSo- 
 TToieiirffai, see Heinsius, Exerc. p. 424) 
 seeming to show that the metaphor is 
 continued, though In a. changed ap- 
 plication. The doctrinal meaning of 
 /iop^. is alluded to by TJst. Lehrb. 11. 
 I. 3, p. 225 sq., but see esp. Water- 
 land, on Begen. Vol. it. 445, who 
 satisfactorily shows that this passage 
 cannot be urged in favour of n. second 
 regeneration. On the meaning 
 
 of &xpi. and its distinction from f-ixPh 
 see notes on i Tim. ii. 9. 
 
 20. iJ9«\ov8^] 'I could indeed wish;' 
 imperf. without Hv, comp. Kom. ix. 3, 
 Acts xxT. 11. In all such cases the 
 simple imperf., which here appears in 
 the true distinctiTe character of the 
 tsnse (Bemh. Synt. X. 3, 373), must 
 be referred to a suppressed conditional 
 clause, veUem sc. si possem, si liceret 
 (Fritz. Som. ix. 3, Vol. 11. p. 345), 
 but must be distinguished from the 
 imperf. with dtc, which involves a 
 thought ('but I will not') which is 
 here not intended : see Herm. de Par- 
 tic. Sm, p. 56; Winer, Gr. § 41. 1, p. 
 153. The distinction drawn by Schij- 
 mann(/a£Et(s,x.r,p. 435, cited by Win.) 
 between ■qSeKov or ipovKS/iiiv with &11 
 ('significat voluntatem a conditione 
 suspensam, sc. vellem si liceret') and 
 without i,v ('vere nos illud voluisse, 
 etiam si omittenda fuerit voluntas, 
 scilicet quod frustra nos velle coguo- 
 vimus,' — in such oases often with a 
 preparatory fiin) is subtle, but appy. 
 of limited application, even in earher 
 Greek : in later Greek it is still more 
 precarious; see notes on ver. 15. The 
 
 omission of &v in cases of ' objective 
 necessity' is well treated by Stallbaum 
 on Plato, Sympos. p. 190 o, p. 130. 
 Se has caused some difficulty to be 
 felt in the connexion. Scholef. (Hints, 
 p. 77) proposes to regard 5^ as redun- 
 dant ; Hilgenfeld commences with ijSe- 
 \ov Si a new clause, leaving ver. 20 an 
 unfinished address. This is not neces- 
 sary ; the present use of Sk is analogous 
 to its use with personal pronouns after 
 vocatives or in answers (Bemhardy, 
 Synt. ni. 5, p. 73; Pors. Orest. 614), 
 the principle of explanation being the 
 same, 'adseveratio non sine opposi- 
 tione;' see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 
 365 sq. This ' opposition ' Meyer 
 traces in the tacit contrast between 
 the subject of his wish, to be present 
 with them, and his actual absence and 
 separation. apri] 'now;' 
 
 see notes on ch. i. 9. 
 dXXdlai n^v <|>uviiv )iov] 'to change 
 my voice,' soil, to a milder, not neces- 
 sarily to a more mournful (Chrys.), 
 still less to a more severe tone (Mi- 
 chael.), which would be wholly at 
 variance with the preceding affection- 
 ate address. There does not however 
 seem to be any historical allusion to 
 the tone which the Apostle used at 
 his last visit (Wieseler, Chron. Apost. 
 p. ■280 note), but only to the severity 
 of tone adopted generally in this 
 epistle. The peculiar meanings of 
 dWdlot adopted by Theodoret (nSv 
 
 fliv T^V iKTpOTT^V dpiJVTJffai TiSy 5i 7-6 
 
 pi^aiov 6avndaai' comp. also Theod.- 
 Mops.), Greg.-Nyss. {/liXKuv /xerori- 
 6^ai tV IffTopLav eU rpoTiK^v Bsupiav), 
 Grotius ('modo asperius modo lenius 
 loqui'), Whitby ('temper my voice'), 
 a1., — are all artificial, and certainly 
 are not confirmed by the two exx. 
 
IV. 20, 21, 22. 
 
 91 
 
 You understand not 
 the deeper meanings 
 
 the deeper meanings AiyCTG fXOt 01 VTTO VOfXOV OiXoVTe^ 21 
 
 of the Law, as I shall « ^ , ? i / / 
 
 prove by the allegory 6£l/ai, TOV VOfXOP OVK aKOV€T€ I yeypa^ 23 
 
 of Abraham's two ' » o \ 
 
 other of the heavenly Jerusalem. 
 
 cited by Wetst., -viz. Artemidor. II. 20, 
 and Dio Chrys. 59, p. 575, in both of 
 which there are qualifications which 
 render the meaning more apparent. 
 The change of tense Trapeivat, dXX(i|at, 
 must not be overpres3ed (Peile), such 
 a change being only due to the essen- 
 tial difference of meaning between the 
 two verbs, and even in the case of 
 other verbs being far from uncommon ; 
 see Jelf, Gr. § 401. 5 ; Winer, Gr. § 40. 
 ■i, p. 238. diropov|i,ai] '/ 
 
 am perplexed,'' Ann., (J| 01 » V) Z. 
 
 [obstupesco] Syr., iwop. being a pass. 
 in a deponent sense ; comp. John xiii. 
 22, Acts XXV. 20, 2 Cor. iv. 8. Fritzsche 
 {Opusc. p. 257) still adopts the pure 
 pass, sense, 'nam in vestro coetu de 
 me trepidatur, i. e. sum vobis suspectua ' 
 (comp. Vulg., CJlarom., 'confundor'), 
 but this is at variance with the regu- 
 lar use of the verb in the N. T., and 
 ill harmonizes with the wish which 
 the Apostle has just expressed. He 
 feels perplexed as to how he shall 
 bring back the Galatians to the true 
 faith; by d\ri$e6ap he had called out 
 their aversion, perhaps a change of 
 tone might work some good. 
 iv i5|iiv] 'in you,^ soil, 'about you/ 
 h> as usual marking as it were the 
 sphere in which, or substratum on 
 which, the action takes place ; see 
 Winer, Gr. § 48. a, p. 345, and com- 
 pare 2 Cor. vii. 16, Bappu iv ipXv. 
 Other constructions of iirop. are found 
 in the N. T., e.g. with vepl in John 
 xiii. 22, and with els in Acts xxv. 20. 
 21. A^7er^ (loi K.T.X.] Illustration 
 of the real difference between the Law 
 and the Promise as typified in the 
 history of the two sons of Abraham ; 
 
 see notes on ver. 24. 
 fl^XoVTes] 'willing, desirous ;'' not with- 
 out emphasis and significance ; 01) yhp 
 TTis tQv irpayii&Tuy AKo\ov8las iWd, 
 Tijs iKelvuv AKatpov ipiKoveiKlas rb 
 irpay/ia ^v, Chrys. t!>v vojjiov oi5k 
 
 ciK.] 'do ye not hear ike law V 'do ye 
 not give ear to what it really saysl' 
 Various shades of meaning have been 
 given to this verb. Usteri and Meyer 
 retain the simplest meaning, with ref . 
 to the custom of reading in the syna- 
 gogues (Luke iv. 16), — an interpr. to 
 a certain degree countenanced by the 
 ancient gloss AvayuubcTKeTe [DEFG; 
 3 mss. ; Vulg., Clarom., al. {Lachm. 
 marg.)]. As however (i) it is fairly 
 probable that the Law was not as 
 commonly read in Christian commu- 
 nities as in the Jewish ; — Justin Mart. 
 Apol. I. p. 83, mentions only tIl i.Tro- 
 fuirifiove6f/,aTa TiSv iitoarbXav ij rb, 
 ffVYYpdfifiara tu>v irpo^yyriov' but this 
 must not be pressed, as the earliest 
 congregations probably to some extent 
 adopted the practice of the synagogue ; 
 see Bingham, Anliq. XIII. 4 ; — and (2) 
 as ol BiXovres refers rather to persons 
 Judaically inclined than confirmed 
 Judaists; the meaning 'give ear to' 
 (scwrcely so much as 'attento animo 
 percipere,* Schott) seems most suit- 
 able in the present case ,' comp. Matth. 
 X. 14, Luke xvi. 29, 31. 
 
 22. Yi^ypaiTTOi ^ap] 'For it is 
 written;' explanatory proof from the 
 Law of the justice of the negation 
 involved in the foregoing question. 
 The particle y&p has here the mixed 
 argumentative and explanatory force 
 which it so often bears in these 
 Epp., and approaches somewhat in, 
 meaning to the more definite profecto: 
 
92 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 33 eva eK rtjs iratSiff'Kijs Kot eva ck rijs eXevOepaf. aXK 
 
 o fiei/ eK T>]i iraWKTKrii Kara crapKa yeyevvtirai, o 
 
 Sh 
 
 34 eK Tiji eXevdipai Sia Ttjs exayyeX/af. ariva ecrriv 
 
 see Hartung, Pwrtilc, yip, 2. i, Vol. I. 
 p. 464 Bq. ; Klotz, Devar. Vol. It. p. 
 234 sq.; and oomp. Hand, Tursell. 
 Vol. II. p. 376. The Apostle explains 
 by the citation the meaning of his 
 question, while at the same time he 
 slightly proves the justice of putting 
 it; see notes on i Theas. ii. i. 
 TTJs iroi8C(rKT|s] 'the hond-maidj' the 
 well-known one, Hagar. The word 
 is not always used in this restricted 
 sense; see Lobeck, Phryn, p. 239. 
 
 23. oW] ' ffowheit.' The full force 
 of this particle may be felt in the 
 statement of the complete opposition 
 of character and nature between the 
 two sons which it introduces ; 'Abra- 
 ham had two sons; though sprung 
 from a common father, they were not- 
 wUhstanding of essentially different 
 characters.' On the force of this par- 
 ticle, see the good article by Klotz, 
 Devar. Vol. 11. p. i sq. 
 Kara o-dpKa] 'according to the flesh,' 
 soil, "after the regular course of 
 nature,' Bloomf., Kortk ^iaeus AkoXov- 
 6lav, Chrys. ; not perhaps without 
 some idea of imperfection, weakness, 
 •fee. and, as the next clause seems to 
 hint, some degree of latent opposition 
 to TveO/ia' see Mailer, Ooctr. of Sin, 
 Vol. I. p. 355 (Olark) ; Tholuok, Stud. 
 u. Krit, for 1655, p. 487 ; and comp. 
 notes on ch. iii. 3. Si& rtjs 
 
 lirayyeXCtts] 'hy means of, hy virtue of 
 (Hamm.) the promise,'' not ' under the 
 promise' (Peile) ; the prep, here mark- 
 ing not merely the 'condition,' 'cir- 
 cumstances' (Si' iTro/tOK^s, Eom. viii. 
 25), but, as Usteri justly remarks, de- 
 noting the causa mediwM of the birth 
 of Isaac. Through the might and by 
 virtue of the promise (see Gen. xviii. 
 
 10) Sarah conceived Isaac, even as 
 the Virgin conceived our Lord through 
 the divine influence imparted at the 
 Annunciation ; see Chrys. in loc, who 
 however reads /cot' ivayyeKlav. 
 
 24. arivo] 'All which things viewed 
 in their most general light;' Col. ii. 
 23, &Ti,ti, iarir XSyor fiiv ^X'"'''''- I' 
 is very doubtful whether Usteri is cor- 
 rect in maintaining that Sriva is here 
 simply equivalent to a. The differ- 
 ence between 8s and iforis may not be 
 always very distinctly marked in the 
 N. T., but there are certainly grounds 
 for asserting that in very many of the 
 cases where Sirris is apparently used 
 for Ss it will be found to be used 
 either, — (i) Indefinitely, i. e. where the 
 antecedent is more or less indefinite, 
 either (o) in its own nature, from in- 
 volving some general notion (Pape, 
 Lea;, a. v. Sam, 2), or (6) from the way 
 the subject is presented to the reader ; 
 e.g. Phil. i. 28 .(where the subject is 
 really a portion of a sentence). Col. ii. 
 23, al. : in such cases the relative fre- 
 quently agrees with the consequent, 
 see exx. in Winer, Gr. § 24. 3, p. 150: 
 the present passage appears to fall 
 under this head, as the subject is not 
 merely the facts of the birth of the 
 two sons, but all the circumstances 
 viewed generally: — (2) Class\fically, 
 i.e. where the subject is represented as 
 one of a class or category, e.g. ch. ii. 
 4, I Cor. iii. 1 7 (see Mey. in loc.) ; 
 comp. Matth. Or. g 483 j Jelf, Gr. § 
 816. 4 : — (3) Explicatively, e.g. Eph. i. 
 23 (see Harless in loc.) ; not merely in 
 a causal sense, as is commonly assert- 
 ed; see EUendt, Lex. Soph. s. v. 3, 
 Vol. II. p. 385, comp. Herm. (Ed. Sex, 
 688 (714): — or lastly (4) Differentially 
 
IV. 23, 24- 
 
 93 
 
 aX\)jyopoviJi,eva' avrai yap elcriv Sua otaO^Kat, fila fiev 
 awo opovs 2(va, eis SovXeiav yevvwtra, ijns iarTh "Ayap. 
 
 i.e. where it denotes an attribute 
 Vf hich essentially belongs to the nature 
 of the antecedent ; comp. i Cor. v. i ; 
 see Jelf, 6r. % Si6. J, and Krilger, 
 Sprachl. § 51. 8. i sq. 
 Great difference of opinion however 
 still exists among scholars upon this 
 subject. After the instances cited by 
 Struve (who has said all that can be 
 said in favour of an occasional equiva- 
 lence), Qucat. Herod, i. p. 2 sq., it 
 seems best to adopt the opinion of 
 Ellendt, I. c, that though the equiva- 
 lence of £(rris and Ss has been far too 
 generally applied, there are still a, few 
 instances even in classical Greek. In 
 later Greek this permutation took 
 place more often, see Bost u. FaUn, 
 Lex. s.v. n. Bb. 2, Vol. n. p. 547 ; 
 still it must never be admitted unless 
 none of the above distinctions can 
 fairly be applied. Iotiv 
 
 aXXr]'yopov|i,Eva] 'are aUegorked,' ' are 
 allegorical,' 'by the which things 
 another thing is ment, ' Geneva Bible, 
 1560; eripus /iin Xcydfieva, ir^pus Si 
 vooip.eva, Schol. ap. Matth. ; dXXi;- 
 •yoplav iKdXeire t^v ix TrapaBiceas tuv 
 ■ijSri yiyovlnuiv wpbs tA irapivra (rlrfxpi- 
 ffiv, Theod.-Mops. As the simple 
 meaning of the word in this passage 
 has been somewhat obscured by exe- 
 getical glosses, it may be observed 
 that dXXjfyopeii' properly means to 'ex- 
 press or explain one thing vmder the 
 image of another' (comp. Plutarch, de 
 Jsid. et Osir. § 32, p. 363, "EXXiji/es 
 Kp6mw iXKifyopoSai rbv xp^vov), and 
 hence in the pass., 'to le so expressed 
 or explained;' comp. Clera. Alex. 
 Strma. v. 11, p. 687, iWityopacBal 
 Tiva ix T&v dvopidTUV 6(Tul>T€poV ib. 
 Protrept. 1 1, p. 86, 6<l>t! AXhriyopehcu. 
 rjiov^ iirl yaiTTipa Ipirovffa' Porphyr. 
 rU. Pythag. p. 185 (Oantabr. 1655), 
 
 where dtWiyyopetaBai stands in antithe- 
 sis to KoaioXor/cidBac see exx. in Wetst. 
 inloc. and in Kypke, 068. Vol.11, p. 181. 
 The explanation of Chrys. is thus per- 
 fectly clear and satisfactory ; oi rovro 
 Si fihiov {i) Iffropla) irapaST/Xoi Sttc/j 
 ipalvsTM dXXi KoL dXXa Twh Avayo- 
 peiet. The remarks made above on ch. 
 iii. 16 apply here with equal force to 
 the late attempts of several modem 
 expositors {e.g. Meyer, De Wette, 
 Jowett) to represent this as a subjec- 
 tive, i. e, to speak plainly, an erroneous 
 interpretation of St Paul arising from 
 his Rabbinical education. It would be 
 well for such writers to remember 
 that St Paul is here declaring, under 
 the influence of the Holy Spirit, that 
 the passage he has cited has a second 
 and a deeper meaning than it appears 
 to have: that it has that meaning 
 then is a positive objective and in- 
 disputable truth : see Olshausen's note 
 in loo. ; Hofmann, Schriftb. Vol. n. i, 
 p. 59; and the sound remarks of 
 Waterland (Pre/, to Script. Vol. IV. 
 p. 159) on the general nature of an 
 allegory. ovrai] ' these women ;' 
 
 Tuv TaiSltav ixelvuv at fnjTipes 7} ^dppa 
 Kal 7? 'Ayap, Chrys. The insertion of 
 oi before Sio (Rec.) is opposed to the 
 authority of all the uncial MSS. ex- 
 cept X^, and is rejected by nearly all 
 modem editors. )i,ia fiiv k.t.X.] 
 
 'one indeed from Mount Sinai,' soil, 
 originating from, taking its rise from ; 
 &ir6, with its usual local force, mark- 
 ing the place or centre (Alf.) whence 
 the 5iofli}/tij emanated ; comp. Kriiger, 
 Sprachl. § 68. 16. 5. The iih has 
 here no strictly correlative Si, as that 
 in ver. 16 refers to rg vOv 'lepovff. 
 in the verse immediately preceding; 
 comp. Winer, Or. § 63. i. e, p. 508. 
 cls SovXtCov ya/vaa-a] ' bearing chU- 
 
94 
 
 nPOS rAAATAS. 
 
 25 TO yap "Ayap Hiva opoi ecn^v ev Tp 'Apa/Sla' <rvv- 
 
 dren unto bondage,' i. e. to pass under 
 and to inherit the lot of bondage; 
 SoiiX); ijv ["Ayap] Kal els SovKetav 
 lyivva, Theoph. 'f|Tis eCTiv 
 
 "A^ap] ' and this is Bagair' The use 
 of iitrris here seems to fall under (4) : 
 it is this covenant peculiarly, this one 
 of which the differentia is that it ori- 
 ginates from Sinai, which is allegori- 
 cally identical with Hagar ; see above, 
 and esp. Jelf, GV. § 816. 4. 
 
 25. TO 7iip "A^yap Stva] The 
 reading adopted by Lachm. (non 
 raarg.) viz. rb yhp Sixa [with CFGK; 
 1 7 ; Aug., Boern., Vulg., jEth., Arm. ; 
 Cyr,, Epiph., Dam., Orig. (interpr.), 
 Hieron., al. {Ust.,DeW., Gnesb. 'for- 
 sitan ;' see Hofm. Schriftb. Vol. II. 2, 
 p. 6'j)] is plausible and gives a very 
 satisfactory sense. Still Tisch. ed. 
 1, 7 (see Mill, Mey., SchoU), appears 
 to have rightly returned to the read- 
 ing of Rec, as the juxtaposition of yhp 
 and 'Ayap would render (on paradi- 
 plomatic considerations, Pref . p. xxii) 
 the omission of the latter word very 
 probable. The conversion of yi,p 
 into Si [Tisch. ed. i, Lachm. marg., 
 with ABDB; 37. 73. 80, Copt. (Wilk., 
 not Bott.), Cyr. i] was perhaps sug- 
 gested by the piv in ver. 24. t6 
 •ydp "A7ap k.t.X.] 'For the word 
 Haga/r is mount Sinai in Arabia,' 
 i. e. among the Arabians ; ri Si Zivo 
 Spos ol'Tiit p.e0€ppL7jvsieTat rf itrixuplifi 
 air&y yXiirrrQ, Chrys.: etymological 
 reason, added almost parenthetically, 
 for the foregoing statement of the 
 allegorical identity of Mount Sinai 
 and Hagar, t4 not agreeing with 
 "A70P bat referring to it in its abs- 
 tract form (Jelf, Gr. § 457. i), and iv 
 r^ 'Apapig, not supplying a mere to- 
 pographical statement (comp. Syr., 
 Copt.), but serving to define the peo- 
 ple by whom Sinai was so called ; 
 
 rovTO Ty Tuv 'Apd^iav y\il>(T<rri 'Ayap 
 Ka'KeiTai, Schol. ap. Matth. 
 It is thus obvious that this interpre- 
 tation presupposes that 'Ayap was a 
 provincial name of the mountain. Nor 
 does this seem at all Improbable ; 
 though we are bound to say that the 
 corroborative evidence from the mo- 
 dern appellations of the mountain is 
 less strong than the appeals to it 
 (Bloomf. ; Forster, Geogr. of Arabia, 
 Vol. I. p. 181) would seem to imply. 
 The best authority for the assertion 
 seems to be the careful and diligent 
 Busching {Erdbeschr. Vol. v. p. 535), 
 who adduces the statement of Harant 
 that Sinai was still called ' Hadschar ' 
 in his time (' Hadsch heisst bekannt- 
 lich auch Fels,' Eitter, Erdhwnde, 
 Vol. 171. Part I. p. 1086), though 
 now it is commonly called either 
 ' Dschebel Musa ' (in a more limited 
 reference), or 'Dschebel et Tflr:' see 
 Ritter, Erdk. Vol. xiv. Part i. p. 535 ; 
 Martiniere, Diet. Geogr. et Crit. s.v. 
 'Sinai.' It must also be said that 
 the evidence from etymology is not 
 very strong, as the Arabian word 
 'Hadjar' (comp. Chald. nV Gen. 
 xxxi. 47), appeal's certainly only to 
 mean 'a stone' (see Freytag, Lex. 
 Arab. s.v. Vol. i. p. 346), stUl, — even 
 if we leave unnoticed the fact of there 
 having been a town called 'Ayap in 
 the vicinity (Ewald ; comp. Assem&nn, 
 Bibl. Orient. Vol. m. 2, p. 753), — 
 there are so many analogous instances 
 of mountains bearing names in which 
 the word 'stone' is incorporated (e.g. 
 ' Weissenstein,' al.), that there seems 
 nothing unnatural in supposing that 
 'Ayap actually was, and possibly may 
 be now, the strictly provincial name 
 of the portion of the mountain now 
 commonly called 'Dschebel Musa.' 
 This St Paul might have learnt during 
 
IV. 25, 26. 
 
 95 
 
 (TTOf^ei oe Ty vvv 'lepovaaX^fi, SovXevei yap fiera tuiv 
 TeKvwv avTij?. ^ Se avw 'lepova-aXrjfjL eXevOepa ea-Tiv, 2,6 
 
 his stay in that country. It must 
 
 be admitted that we escape all^this il 
 we adopt the reading of Lachmann : 
 t6 7ip Sica — 'Apa^if will then form 
 a parenthesis, and the emphasis will 
 rest on iv tj 'Apo^if 'for Mount 
 SinaiisTOjdraSt'a,' — Arabia, the home 
 of the bond-maid's children, the viol 
 'Ayap, Baruoh iii. 23 ; comp. Hofmann, 
 Schriftb. Vol. II. i, p. 62. In this 
 case also SiadiiKi] becomes the subject 
 of ffwoToix" (opp. to Hofm.), and we 
 avoid the grammatical distortion in- 
 volved in making Hagar the subject. 
 Still there is a difficulty in the cove- 
 nant being said awffToix^'Lv' as SouXeia 
 (SouXeiiei yip) is plainly the tertium 
 comparationU between Hagar and Je- 
 rusalem, and the assertion iJtis larlv 
 'Ayap is really not so much supported 
 by the sentence which follows, as by 
 the emphasis which is assumed to rest 
 on iv T-g 'Apa^, , the last words of it. 
 I have therefore nothing better to offer 
 than the former interpretation. 
 OTJvtrroixei Se] * she stands too in ihe 
 same jUe or rank with,' 'is conform- 
 able with,' Arm., — the nominative ob- 
 viously being 'Ayap {'qum consonat,' 
 Clarom.), not 2wa ipos (Vulg.), nor 
 even /da SiaBiiKti (De W.), as there 
 would thus be no point of comparison 
 (SovKda) between the subject of aw- 
 OToix" *"<! 4 "^ 'J-epova. (Mey.) ; see 
 above. The S^ ('und zwar,' Hilgenf.) 
 appears to add a fresh explanatory 
 characteristic, and retains its proper 
 force in the latent contrast that the 
 addition of a new fact brings with it ; 
 see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 362. 
 ZwrToiX''" is I'sst illustrated by Polyb. 
 Sist X. 21 (cited by Wetst.), avtvyow- 
 Tas Koi ffi/OTOixoCcTas Sia/iineui' where 
 o-ufuy, evidently refers to soldiers in 
 
 the same ranh, crvsTotx- to soldiers in 
 the same file; see Fell in loc, where 
 the two lists are drawn out; each 
 name in which a-vtrToix^T with those in 
 the same list, but duTttrToix^i with 
 those in the opposite list. 
 The geographical gloss of Chrys. ^eiT- 
 ctdfet, iLirreTai ('qui conjunctus est,' 
 Vulg., 'gamarko' [comp. 'marge'] 
 Goth.), due probably to the assump- 
 tion that Xtva 6poi is the nom. to 
 (rvvaroix^i, is not exegetioally tenable, 
 and has been rejected by nearly all 
 modem expositors. 
 
 Tn v5» 'I«p-] ' the present Jerusalem,' 
 scil. Ty ivTaOda, t-q iirl yrfs, Schol. ap. 
 Matth. : "antitheton supema; nunc 
 temporis est, supra loci,' Bengel. 
 SovXevEi. yap] 'for she is in iondage,' 
 scil. ra?s vofiiKOis TapaTtjp'^aeffiv, Schol. 
 ap. Matth. ; comp. Hofmann, Schriftb. 
 Vol. II. 2, p. 61 ; the nom. being ^ vSv 
 *lep., and the yap serving to confirm 
 the justice of the assertion of avarotxla. 
 The reading bi [JRec. with D^EKL; 
 al. ; Syr.-Phil. (marg.), al. ; Ff.] in 
 place of y&p is rightly rejected by most 
 recent editors. 
 
 26. 11 SI d'vM 'IspoiKToXiJii] 'Bui 
 the Jerusalem above;' contrast to the 
 i] vw 'lep. of the preceding verse : the 
 correspondence of Sarah, i. e. the other 
 covenant, with the heavenly Jerusa- 
 lem is assumed as sufficiently obvious 
 from the context. The meaning of 
 £vo> can scarcely be considered doubt- 
 ful. It cannot be local (Mount Sion, 
 T\ llvui irAXit, Eisner, al.), as this is in- 
 consistent with the foregoing vvt>, nor 
 yet temporal ('the ancient Jerus., the 
 Salem of Melchizedek,' Michael., al.), 
 as such a ref. is inconsistent with a 
 context which only points to later 
 periods, — but has simply its usual 
 
9Q 
 
 nPOS rAAATAS. 
 
 27 >]Tii icrrlv fJ^^Ttjo riixwv. yiypaiTTai yap Ev<ppav6ijTi 
 (Treipa fi ov TiKTOVcra, pTjcpv koL /36>iitoi' 17 ovk woivovcra, 
 OTi waiWa Ta reKva Ttjs ep^fiov fiaXXov t] rrji eyovtrrn 
 
 ethical leterence, 'above,' 'heavenly,' 
 'quae sursum est,' "Vulg., Clarom., 
 
 " ^ \' Syr.-Phil.; comp. 'lepoujaXri/i 
 
 iwovpdvios, Heb. xii. 21, 'lepovr. Kaiv^, 
 Ber. iii. 12, xxi. 2; see the Babbinical 
 quotations in Wetst., and comp. Ust. 
 Zekrb. 11. 1. i, p. 182. As Jerusalem 
 i] vSv was the centre of Judaism and 
 the ancient theocratic kingdom, so 
 Jerusalem i] dvia is the typical repre- 
 sentation of Christianity and the Mes- 
 sianic kingdom. On the 
 threefold meaning of 'lepovtr, in the 
 N. T. (soil, the heavenly community 
 of the righteous, the Church on earth, 
 the new Jerus. on the glorified earth), 
 and the distinction observed by St 
 John between "le/DOwaXij/i (the sacred 
 name) and 'Ie/30(r6\u/ia, see Hengstenb. 
 on tlie Apocal. Vol. n. p. 319 (Clark); 
 and on the general use and meaning 
 of the expression, the learned treatise 
 of Schoettgen, Hor. Heir. Vol. I. p. 
 1205 sqq. fJTis K.T.X.] 'ond 
 slie (this &I/W 'lepovj.) is owr mother;' 
 ijVts being used appy., as in ver. 34, 
 in its 'differential' sense (see notes 
 on ver. 24) and retaining the empha- 
 sis, which, as the order of the words 
 seems to imply, does not rest on -rifiuv 
 (Winer). The addition of 
 ■irdvToji> before fi/iuv {Sec. with AC'K 
 LN*; mss.; Arab. -Pol., al.) is rightly 
 rejected by Tisch., al., with BC^DE 
 FGK^; 5 mas., and majority of Vv. 
 and Ff. Lachm. inserts it in brackets. 
 27. yiypwiTTCLi ■ydp] 'For it ia writ- 
 ten,;' proof of the clause immediately 
 preceding, rjns k.t.X., from the pro- 
 phetic consolation of Isaiah (ch, liv, 
 l), which though addressed primarily 
 to Israel and Jerusalem (Enobel, Jes. 
 
 p. 380), was directed with a further 
 and fuller reference to the Church 
 of which they were the types, 
 prjiov] ' hreale forth into a cry.' The 
 ellipsis is usually supplied by (piavipi, 
 see Eost u. Palm, s. v. jiriyv., and the 
 numerous examples of ^^foy 4"^" 
 cited by Wetst. in loc. The critical 
 accuracy of Schott leads him to sup- 
 ply ei<l>po(rii>riv (Isaiah xlix. 13, Iii. 9), 
 reverting to eiippivBifTi, on the prin- 
 ciple that the ellipsis is always to be 
 supplied from the context; compare 
 ' erumpere gaudium,' Tereut. Eun. iii. 
 5. 2. It is perhaps more simple to sup- 
 ply ^oTpi, derived from pbufcroi/ with 
 which pTj^ov is so closely joined ; or 
 still more probably we may regard 
 ^ri^ov as understood from long usage 
 to be simply equivalent to Kpa^ov 
 p^^arOj Kpa^druif Sesych. 
 8ti 7oWd...|xdX\ov k.t.X.] 'for many 
 are the children of the desolate more 
 than of her thai hath the hvsband,' 
 'multi filii desertae magis quam, ifcc.' 
 Vulg., Clarom., Goth.; TroXXi ^loXXoi/ 
 being not simply equivalent to irXefo- 
 »a ^, but implying that both should 
 have many, but the desolate one 
 more than the other (Mey.). The 
 compound expression ttjs ^x""'"''?' ^bv 
 AvSpa answers to the simpler n51J?3 
 (l^N 1 Sn, Syr.; sini. .aith., Arm.) 
 
 z 
 
 in the original, and is thus little more 
 than ' the married one,' the force of 
 the art. {rbv llySpa) being perhaps, as 
 AJf. observes, too delicate to be ex- 
 pressed in English. This pro- 
 phecy is somewhat differently applied 
 by Clem. Cor. n. i, and Orlg. in Ram, 
 vi. Vol. II. p. 33 (ed. Lomm.) ; ^ areipa. 
 being referred more peculiarly to the 
 
IV. 27 — 30. 
 
 97 
 
 Tou avSpa. v/j.eis Se, a.Se\(poi, Kara 'laaaK ivayyeKiag 28 
 TEKva ecrxe. aXX' uxrirep tots o kutu crapxa 'yevv^Oeli 39 
 eSiwKev Tov Kara Hvevfia, ovrtos Kal vvv. aXKa tI Xiyei 30 
 
 Gentile church as opposed to the Jew- 
 ish church (ti3i» SoKoivriar Ix"" 6^^'') j 
 whereas St Paul understands under 
 the image of Sarah {ii.ifr7ip ^ii.av) the 
 church as composed both of Jews 
 and Gentiles, and thus as standing in 
 contradistinction to the children of the 
 Law, the bond-children of the, ancient 
 theocracy. 
 
 28. vfiEis 8^] 'Bwt ye;'' applica- 
 tion of the foregoing allegory to the 
 case of those whom the Apostle is now 
 addressing; the S^ being here /uera- 
 PariKbv (Hartung, Pwrtik, Si, i. 3, 
 VoL I. p. 165, see notes on ch. i. 11), 
 and marking a l^ansitum to the 
 readers while also hinting at their con- 
 trast to the children of Tfi% ixoiarjs 
 rbv &v5pa. If the reading of Eec. 
 
 ^nets...iiTfiiv be adopted, which how- 
 ever, though wall supported [ACD* 
 EKLN; mss. ; Aug., Syr., Vulg., 
 Copt., Goth., jEth.-Platt, Arm.; 
 Chrys., Theod., Theoph., al.], is op- 
 posed to good external evidence [BD^ 
 FG; 4 msa. ; Clarom., Sah., ^th.- 
 Pol. ; Orig., Iron., Ambr., Ambrst., 
 al.], and is suspicious as appy. being 
 a conformation to ver. 31; then 5^ 
 must be considered as indicating a 
 resumption of ver. c6, after the paren- 
 thetical quotation in ver. 27: see 
 KlotZjiJwar. Vol. II. p. 377 ; Hartung, 
 Pwrtik. Si, 3. i, Vol. I. p. 173. 
 Kord 'Io-ook] 'after the eoccumple of 
 Isaac;' Kari. pointing to the 'norma' 
 or example which was furnished by 
 Isaac; so 1 Pet. i. 15, Kari, rhv KoKi- 
 aavTa' Eph. iv. 24, Col. iii. 10: see 
 Winer, Gr. § 49. d, p. 358. Several 
 exx. of this usage are cited by Kypke, 
 Obs. Vol. n. 284, and Wetat.JB loe. 
 firayyeXCos reicva] 'children of pro- 
 mise.' These words admit of three 
 
 interpretations; — (a) 'children who 
 have God's promise;' or (6) 'children 
 promised by God,' i.e. the seed pro- 
 mised by God to Abraham ; or (c) 
 'children of, i.e. by virtue of, pro- 
 mise.' Both the emphasis, which 
 appears from the order to rest on 
 iTrayy., and the words Sia ttjs ^7ra77., 
 ver. 23, seem decisively in favour of 
 the last interpretation; comp. Eom. 
 ix. 8, and see Fritz, in he. 
 
 29. dXV ua-TTcp] 'Sowbdt as;' 
 special notice of an instructive and 
 suggestive comparison between the 
 circumstances of the types and of the 
 antitypes, &\\a with its usual adver- 
 sative force directing the reader's, 
 attention to a fresh statement, which 
 involves a species of contrast to the 
 former; "ye are children of promise 
 it is true, howbeit ye must expect 
 persecution:' see esp. Chrys. in loc, 
 and comp. Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 29. 
 l8£oi>K6v] 'persecuted,' 'persequebatur,' 
 Vulg., Clarom., al.; imperf., as desig- 
 nating an action which still spiritually 
 continues ; see Winer, Or. § 40. 3, 
 p. 240. Whether the reference is to be 
 regarded as {a) exclusively to Genesis 
 
 xxi. 9, pnsp...njn-i3-ns! nnB> sngi 
 
 (Alf., Ewald, at), or (6) to an ancient 
 and, since it is thus cited by St Paul, trvs 
 tradition of the Jewish Church (see 
 below), will somewhat depend on the 
 meaning assigned to pHX in Gen. I.e. 
 That it may mean 'mocked' (opp. to 
 Knobel in loc.) seems certain from 
 Gen. xxxix. 14, 1 7, and indeed from the 
 command in Gen. xxi. 10. As however 
 it does appear to mean no more than 
 'playing like a child,' ira/fo»ra, LXX, 
 'ludentem,' Vulg. (see Tisch. in loc, 
 and Gesen. Lex. s. v.), and as Joseph. 
 {AnUq^. I. 12. 3) says only KaKovpyeTv 
 H 
 
98 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 ri ypad)^; ''Eff/SaXe r^v TraiSlcrKjjv Koi top vlov avr^f, 
 ou yap yu^ KXrjpovo/nL^cri^ 6 vios t?? TraiolcrKtii /jlctu tov 
 
 aMv Suvdnevov, it seems on the whole 
 best to adopt (I): see Beresch. Mil. 15 
 (Wetst.), 'Ismael tulit arcum et 
 sagittas et jaculatus eat Isaaoum, et 
 prse se tulit ao si luderet ; ' and Studer 
 (in Ust.), who alludes to a similar 
 rabbinical interpretation founded on 
 the cabbalistic equivalence in numbers 
 of the letters in pHS and the explicit 
 "Ijn ; comp. Hackspan, Notes on 
 Script. Vol. I. p. 220. 
 TOV Karci Ilveiipia] ' him thai was ac- 
 cording to the Spirit,' soil. yevrqBivra, 
 supplied from the preceding clause. 
 It need scarcely be said that the prep, 
 does not here point to the cause or 
 medium, 'Dei opera' (Vatabl.), but 
 simply means 'according to,' i.e. in 
 accordance with the working by pro- 
 mise of the Holy Spirit ; comp. Rom. 
 iv. ig, 20. Kari (rdpKa refers to the 
 natural laws according to which Ish- 
 mael was born; Kar^ Tiveufia to the 
 supernatural laws according to which 
 Isaac was conceived and born. 
 ovTtiiS Kal vvv] ^so also is it now;' 
 scil. those descended from Abraham 
 /caTci aipKa (the Jews) still persecute 
 the free children of promise (the 
 Christians). The sentiment is ex- 
 pressed in general terms, but perhaps 
 may here be conceived as pointed at 
 the pernicious efforts of the Judaizers, 
 which probably involved persecution 
 both spiritual and material ; comp. 
 Meyer in loc. A good sermon 
 
 on this text, though with a somewhat 
 special application, will be found in 
 Farindon, Serm. XI. Vol. I. p. 287 sq. 
 (ed. 1849). 
 
 30. ciXXa] 'Nevertheless:' strongly 
 consolatory declaration (Trapa/uiBla. 
 i/coxi), Chrys.) introducing a distinct 
 contrast with the preceding declai-a- 
 tion of the persecution, and calling 
 
 away the thought of the reader to a 
 totally fresh aspect ; 'avooat taentem 
 ab illis tristibua ad illam rem quam 
 jam opponit,' Klotz, Bevar. Vol. II. 
 p. 6. if Ypa<jhj] 'the 
 
 Scripture.' The following words are 
 really the words of Sarah to Abraham, 
 but confirmed (ver. 12) by God Him- 
 self; ' ejecta est Agar Sar^ postulante 
 et Deo annuente,' Est. The inteiTO- 
 gative form which introduces the 
 citation gives it force and vigour ; 
 comp. Eom. iv. 3, x. 8, xi. 4. 
 
 oiJ [11^ KXiipovop.ijo-T3] 'shall in 
 
 no vAse he heir;' emphatic: 'liberi 
 autem ex concubinS, conditionis servilis 
 aut extraneS seu gentili a successione 
 plane apud Bbraeos excludebantur,' 
 Selden, de Success, cap. 3, Vol. n. p. 
 II. Hammond cites the instance of 
 Jephthah, who was thrust out by his 
 brethren under the second condition 
 of the law, sls being the son of a strange 
 woman : Judges xi. -z. With 
 
 regard to the use of oi fii) with the 
 aor. subj. [/cXiypoTO/iiJiret BDEX ; mss. ; 
 Theoph.] it may be observed that the 
 distinction drawn by Hermann {CEd, 
 Col. 853) between 01) fiii with future 
 indie, (duration or futurity) and with 
 aor. subj. (speedy occurrence) is not 
 applicable to the N. T., on account of 
 ( I ) the varying readings (as here) ; (2) 
 the decided violations of the rule 
 where the MSS. are unanimous, e.g. 
 I Thess. iv. 15 ; and (3) the obvious 
 prevalence of the use of the sub- 
 junctive over the future, both in the 
 N. T. and in 'fatiscensGrsecitas: ' see 
 Lobeck, Phryn. p. 722 ; Thiersch, 
 Pentat. 11. 15, p. 109; and exx. in 
 Gayler, p. 433. On the general use 
 of the united particles see Winer, Gr. 
 § 56- Sj P- 450 ! ^^^ ssp. Donalds. Crat. 
 § 394; Gayler, Partic. Neg. p. 405, 
 
IV. 31, V. I. 
 
 99 
 
 tet'SiyoJir'eeS '"'<'" "^^^ iXevOipas. Alo, iSeXcjJol, 31 
 
 ovK 6<TfJLev iraiSla-Ktii reKva aXKa Trjg eXev- 
 6epai. T^ eXevOepia § ^fJ-as Xpicrroi ^Xevdepw- V. 
 
 "V. I. tJ iXevScplq. K. T.X.] The difficulty of deciding on the true reading of 
 this passage, owing to the great variation of MSS., is very great. The reading 
 
 exx. p. 430 ; and on the best mode of 
 translation, notes on i Thess. iv. 15 
 (Transl.). 
 
 31. Aio] 'Wherefore;* commence- 
 ment of a short semi- paragraph stating 
 the consolatory application of what 
 has preceded {'quamohrem; aptius 
 duaa res eonjungit,' Klotz, Devar. 
 Vol. II. p. 173), and passing into an 
 exhortation in the following verse. 
 It is very difficult to decide on the 
 exact connexion, as St Paul's use of 
 Sid does not appear to have been very 
 fixed. Sometimes, as in Kom. ii. 1, 
 Eph. ii. II, iii. 13, iv. 25, it begins a 
 paragraph ; sometimes (especially with 
 Kal) it closely connects clauses, as 
 in Bom. i. ^24, iv. 22, 2 Cor. iv. 13, 
 V. 9, Phil. ii. 9 ; while in 2 Cor. xii. 
 10, I Thess. v. II (imperat.), it closes 
 a paragraph, though not in a way 
 strictly similar to the present: see 
 reff. in notes on PhUem. 8. On the 
 whole it seems most probable that 
 -St Paul was about to pass on to an 
 application of, not a deduction from, 
 the previous remarks and citation. 
 He commences with Sii, hut the word 
 iXeuSipas suggesting a digression (see 
 Davidson, Introd. Vol. II. p. 148), he 
 turns the application by means of ry 
 iXevBeplt} into an inferential exhorta- 
 tion (.Slth. erroneously makes the 
 first clause a reason, ' quia Christus '), 
 ver. I, and recommences a new paral- 
 lel train of thought with ?5e iyii. We 
 thus put a slight pause after ch. iv. 30, 
 and a fuller one after ch. v. i. If 
 ^ix€is U be adopted [AC ; mss. ; Copt. ; 
 Cyr. (i), Damasc, al.] the connexion 
 will be more easy. Ver. 30 describes 
 
 the fate of the bond-children ; ver. 3 1 
 will then form a sort of consolatory 
 conclusion, deriving some force from 
 the emphatic Kk-qpov.; 'but we shall 
 have a different fate; we shall be 
 inheritors, for we are children, not of 
 a bond-maid, but of a free-woman.' 
 This reading is however more than 
 doubtful, as appearing to be only a 
 repetition from ver. 28. For &pa 
 (Rec), which would perhaps imply a 
 little more decidedly than St6 a con- 
 tinuance of what was said (Donalds. 
 Crat. % 192), the external evidence 
 [KL; S.pa ovv FG, Theodrt.] is very 
 weak, and the probability of correc- 
 tion not inconsiderable. 
 iraiSfo-KTis] 'of a hond-maid,' scil. ' of 
 any bond-maid.' The omission of the 
 article may be accounted for, — not by 
 the negative form of the proposition 
 (Middleton in loc), but by the prin- 
 ciple of correlation, whereby when the 
 governing word is anarthrous (here 
 possibly so after the predicative ia^iv, 
 Middl. p. 43), the governed becomes 
 anarthrous also; see Middl. Qr. Art. 
 III. 3. 7, p. 50 (ed. Rose), comp. Winer, 
 6r. § 19. 2. b, p. 1 13 sq. As how- 
 ever TaiSlffKrj appears in every other 
 place with the art. (even after the 
 prep, in ver. 23), the present omission 
 is perhaps more probably regarded as 
 intentional, and designed to give a 
 general character to the Apostle's 
 'conclusion; see Peile in loc. lijs 
 iXeutiepas however cannot be trans- 
 lated 'of a free-woman.' 
 
 Chapter V. i. tjj cXcuScpC^ k.t.X.] 
 
 ' Stand Jim then in the freedom for 
 H2 
 
100 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 crev (TT^Kere ouv, Koi /jl>] iraXiv X'JJ'? oovXelai ive'^ecrOe' 
 
 of Lachm., rg iXevBeplf rjiias Xpurrbs ijKevBipatTiv ar^Kere oJc, is plausible, and 
 well supported, as ^ is omitted by ABCD'K ; 8 mss. ; Copt., Damasc, aL ; still 
 the doubtful meaning of the dat. iXevSep. (not the article, at which Ruck. 
 stumbles), and the abrupt character of the whole, make it on internal grounds 
 very difficult to admit. Tisch. (so Matth., Scholz, Rinck, Rilclc., Oleh., al., 
 though diflFering in other points) seems rightly to have retained y with D^EKL 
 (FG y i\ev6. Tip,., comp. Vulg., Clarom.); mss.; Syr.; Chrys., Theod. (2), al., 
 as the H is less likely to have arisen from a repetition of the first letter of HMAS 
 {Met/,) than to have been omitted from having been accidentally merged in 
 it. His omission of ovd however, with DE; Vulg., Clarom., Syr.-Phil. ; 
 Theod. (2); against ABC'FGS; lo mss.; Boem., Aug., Goth., Copt., al. ; 
 Cyr., Aug., al. — does not seem tenable. The order Xpurrbs 'f/pas (Rec.) 
 
 has but weak external support [CKL; mss.; appy. some Vv.; Chrya., Theod.] 
 and is reversed by most recent editors. 
 
 which, &o.' inferential exhortation 
 from the declaration immediately pre- 
 ceding. Of the many explanations 
 which the expression t^ eXevBcplif 
 <XT-fiKeiv has received, the two follow- 
 ing appear to be the most probable ; 
 (a) ' liiertati stare, quam deserere est 
 nefas,' Fritz. Rom. xii. 12, Vol. III. 
 p. 80; Winer, 6r. § 31. 3. obs. p. 244 
 (ed. 5; less distinctly p. 188, ed. 6); 
 (fi) 'quod attinet ad libertaUm stoure,^ 
 Bretschn., Meyer, on t Cor. i. 24. 
 The objection to (a) is that such ex- 
 pressions as Tji 6\i\pet hiropMieiv are 
 not strictly similar, as the idea of a 
 hostile attitude (dat. incommodi) is 
 involved in the dative, 'calamitatem 
 non subterf ugientes ; <fcc.' so ii-ooT^i/oi 
 Tivi, p,iveiv Twl (Bernh. Synt. lii. 13. 
 b, p. 98), and Horn. II. xxi. 600, 
 arrival rm. The latter interpretation 
 seems thus the most correct ; the dative 
 however must not be translated too 
 laxly ('as regards the freedom'), as it 
 serves to call attention to the exact 
 sphere in which and to which the 
 action is limited, e.g. iarri tJ Siavolf, 
 Polyb. XXI. 9. 3; see Soheuerl. Synt. 
 § 22. a, p. 179, and notes on oh. i. 22. 
 It may be remarked that we some- 
 times find an inserted if (i Cor. xvi. 
 
 13, comp. fliick.) without much ap- 
 parent difference of meaning, still it 
 does not seem hypercritical to say 
 that in this latter case the Idea of the 
 'sphere or element in which' was 
 designed by the writer to come more 
 distinctly into view; comp. Winer, 
 GV. § 31. 8, p. 194. On the meaning 
 of ariiKeai, which per se is only 'stare' 
 (Vulg., Clarom.), but which derives 
 its fuller meaning from the context, 
 comp. Chrys., (TTT^KfTc cZir(!iK riv 
 ffd\oi> ?3«|c' and see notes on Phil. i. 
 27. ■§] 'for which;' dat. corn- 
 
 modi. The usual ablatival explana- 
 tion 'quS nos liberavit' (Vulg.), scU. 
 ijv itiuv ISuKev (so expressly Conyb.), 
 may perhaps be justified by the com- 
 mon constructions xalpetv x^-P^t <fcc,,* 
 but as it is very doubtful whether 
 this oonstmotion occurs in St Paul's 
 Epp. (i Thess iii. 9 seems to be an 
 instance of attraction; see notes in 
 he), it is safer to adhere to the 
 former explanation ; see Meyer in loc. 
 (obs.). For a good sermon on 
 
 the notion of Christian liberty, see 
 Bp. Hall, Serm. xxvi. Vol. v. p. 339 
 sq. (Talboys). iraXiv refers to 
 
 the previous subservience of the Gala- 
 tians to heathenism ; see notes on oh. 
 
V. 2, 3. 
 
 101 
 
 If you submit to cir- "I^e e'Vw UavXos XeVw v/Aiv on edv a 
 
 cumcision, you are ' ' / ' " 
 
 whoi*Uw, and''you? irepiTef/.vtifQe Xpta-TOi v/xcii ovSev (iS<j)e- 
 
 union with Clirist ia^, / ^*'"v ^ 
 
 entirely void. A)j(7eJ. fiaOTVOOfiai oe TTaMV iravTi 3 
 
 iv. g. Jv-y^ SovXcCas] 'the 
 
 yoke of londage,' not 'a yoke cfcc' 
 Copt., Ewald, al. ; the aaarthrous 
 SovXeta (comp. Winer, Or. § 19. I, p. 
 109) being appy. used somewhat inde- 
 finitely to mark the general character 
 of the flryiv, and by the principle of 
 correlation causing the governing noun 
 to lose its article; see Middleton, Or. 
 Art. III. 3. 6, and comp. notes on ch. iv. 
 31. It will be observed that irdXi;' is 
 more easily explained on the hypo- 
 thesis of f 1/7 V being taken indefinitely ; 
 the present view however seems 
 most in accordance with the definite 
 statement in ver. 2 ; t^'uybp di douKdas 
 tV icaTck v6iiov iwfpi, Theod. On the 
 use of the gen. as denoting the pre- 
 dominant nature or quality inherent 
 in the governing noun, see Scheuerl. 
 Synt. § 16. 3, p. IIS ; s^d comp. Soph. 
 Aj. 944, ofa SovKeias fu7i£' .^sch. 
 Agam. 360, Sou\elas ydyyafioif. 
 Iv^tcrBe] 'beheld fast;' not exactly 
 
 ^p 1,*">/ / [mancipemini, subjicialis 
 
 vos], but simply 'implicamini,' Beza^ — 
 with ref. perhaps to the tenacity of 
 the hold, and the difiSculty of shaking 
 it oflf ; comp. Beng. For exx. of the 
 use of the verb both in a physical 
 (Herod. II. 121, h/^xo/uu Tg irdyrf), 
 and in an ethical sense (Plutarch, 
 Symp, II. qu. 3. I, ivixfadai S6yiw,(ri,p 
 HvdayopiKois), see Kypke, Obs. Vol. 
 II. p. 285 , and Wetst. m loc. 
 
 ■i. "ISe tyd IlaiiXos] ' Behold I 
 Paul;' emphatic and warning decla- 
 ration (iroari dTreiXi}, Chrys.) of the 
 dangerous consequences and worse 
 than uselessness of undergoing cir- 
 cumcision. The Apostle's introduc- 
 tion of his own name (comp. 2 Cor. 
 
 X. I, Eph. iii. i) prefaced by the 
 arresting tSe (' attentionem excitantis 
 est,' Grot.) has been difierently ex- 
 plained. The most natural view 
 seems to be that it was to increase 
 conviction {BappovnTos rjv ots \4yei, 
 Chrys.; comp. Theod.) and to add to 
 the assertion the weight of his Apo- 
 stolic dignity ; rijs rov Tpoathirov A|to- 
 •Kiffrlas &pKoijo'7ji dvrl wdo-tji d7roSe/|€WS, 
 Chrys. On the accentuation of 
 
 ISe, which according to the gramma- 
 rians is oxyton in Attic and paroxy- 
 ton in non-Attic Greek, see Winer, 
 Gr- § 6. 1, p. 47. 
 
 Idv irepiT^jjiv.] ' if ye be circumcised;' 
 i.e. 'if you continue to follow that rite,' 
 the present marking the action as one 
 still going on. On the use of edv with 
 pres. subj., comp. notes on ch. i. 8, 9. 
 vfjias oiSlv tu<j).] 'shall profit you 
 nothing;' the fut. having no ref. 
 whatever to the nearness of the Lord's 
 irapov(ria (Mey.), but simply marking 
 the certain result of such a course of 
 practice; 'Christ (as you will find) 
 will never profit you anything;' see 
 Winer, Gr. § 40. 6, p. 250, and comp. 
 Schmalf. Synt. § 57, p. Ii6sq. 
 
 3. |ji.apTupo|iai. 8^] ' Tea I hear 
 witness,' 'testificor aiitem' Vulg., 
 Clarom.; not 'enim,' Beza; further 
 and slightly contrasted statement; the 
 ik not being merely connective, but as 
 usual implying a certain degree of 
 opposition between the clause it intro- 
 duces and the preceding declaration ; 
 ' not only will Christ prove no benefit 
 to you, hit you will in addition be- 
 come debtors to the law:' see Elotz, 
 Devar. Vol. 11. p. 362; Hermann, 
 Yigeir, No. 343. b; and for a notice 
 of the similar use of 'autem,' Hand, 
 
102 
 
 nPOS rAAATAS. 
 
 avdpunrw vepirefj.voft.evw on 6cj)ei\erti9 ea-Tii> o\ov rov 
 
 4 vofhov -Trotyja-ai. KaTrjpjriQrire airo rod Xpiarov otTJCe? 
 
 5 eV vofiip SiKaiovcrde, rrji yapiro^ e^cTreVare. fjixei^ yap 
 
 Twsell. "Vol. I. p. 562. The 
 
 Terb iiapripofiai., a 51s \eyoii,. in St 
 Paul's Epp. (Eph. iv. 1 7, oomp. Acta 
 XX. 26), is here used in the sense of 
 liapTvpov/xai, appy. involving the idea 
 of a solemn declaration, as if before 
 witnesses ; comp. notes on Eph. iv. 1 7. 
 That there is no ellipsis of Oeliv 
 (Hilgenf., Bretschn.) appears plainly 
 from Eph. I. c, and from the similar 
 usage of the word in classical Greek, 
 e.g. Plato, Phileb. p. 47 c, raOra Sk 
 Tore liiv oiic e/wprvpdiieBa, vvv ii 
 Xiyo/ieu. Dindorf in Steph. Thes. 5. v. 
 cites Eustath. II. p. 1221. 53, us al 
 IffTopiat iiapripovrai, iraXiv 
 
 may refer to the preceding verse, or 
 to a previous declaration of the same 
 kind made by word of mouth. The 
 former is more probable, as wavrl &v- 
 0punr<p appears to be a more expanded 
 application of ipui/, ver. 2 ; oix ifu" 
 X^yw p.6vov ^Tjffiifj ctWoi Kal ■na.vrl 
 duBpiiirip irepiTejivoiiivip, Chrys. ; see 
 Neander, Planting, Vol. I. p. 214 note 
 (Bohn). 
 
 •ntpvnf.vo^iva] 'mimitting to be cir- 
 cumcised,' 'undergoing circumcision,'' 
 ' circumcidenti se,' Vulg., Clarom., or 
 more idiomatically 'qui curat se cir- 
 cumoidi,' Beza, — but less accurately, 
 as the participle is anarthrous, and 
 what is called a tertiary predicate; 
 see Donalds. Crat. % 306, and Gr. 
 § 495. The present participle, not 
 irepiT/iriBhTi. or jrepiTeTfnjp,ii/<j>, must 
 not be overlooked; it was not the cir- 
 cumcised as such that had become 
 in this strict sense i}0«Xfroi SXov Tim 
 v6fwv TroiTJffai, but he who was de- 
 signedly undergoing the rite. "OXoc, 
 as its position shows, is emphatic; 
 o\rii> i^eCKxiau t^v SeawoTelav, Chrys. 
 
 4. KaTr\pyrfir{n diri toC Xp.] ' Ye 
 were done away from Christ,' 'your 
 imion with Christ became void,' soil, 
 'when you entered upon the course 
 which you are now pursuing ;' further 
 and forcible explanation of Xpiirris 
 ifiSs oiSiv io^eKi<TH (ver. 2), the 
 absence of all connecting particles 
 serving to give the statement both 
 vigour and emphasis. The construc- 
 tion is what is called 'praegnans' 
 (Rom. vii. z, 6, see Winer, Gr. § 66. 
 ■i> P- 547) I ■i"'") strictly considered, 
 not belonging to KUTTipyfiBriTe in the 
 sense of ■fiXevBepiidriTe d,ir6, but to 
 some word which can easily be sup- 
 plied, e.g. KaTTipyfiBtire Kal ixap't-nBriTe 
 6.irii T. Xp., ' nulli estis redditi et a 
 Christo avulsi;' comp. ■z Cor. xi. 3, 
 ^BelpeaBai. &ir6, and see Fritz. Mom. 
 I.e. Vol. II. p. 8, 9. The verb 
 
 icarapyia is a favourite word with St 
 Paul, being used in his Epp. (the Ep. 
 to the Hebrews not being included) 
 twenty-five times. In the rest of the 
 N.T. it is used only twice, Luke xiii. 
 7, Heb. ii. 14, and in the whole LXX 
 only four times, all iu Esdras. It is 
 rare in ordinary Greek ; see Eurip. 
 Phceniss. 753, and Polyb. Frag. Hist. 
 69. The ToC is omitted by 
 
 Lachm. with BCD'FGX ; 2 mss. ; 
 Theoph. ; but, as being less usual, 
 esp, when preceded by a prep., may 
 perhaps be retained, with AD'EKL ; 
 nearly all mss. ; Chrys., Theod., 
 Dam., al. (Tisch.). iv 
 
 v6|iij) Si.KaiovT6c] ' are being justified 
 in the law,' 'in lege,' Vulg., Clarom.; 
 ii> not being instrumental (Ewald), 
 but pointing to the -sphere of the 
 action; comp. notes on ch. iii. 11. 
 The pres. iiKUOviBe is correctly re- 
 
V. 4, 5. 103 
 
 llvevfxaTi e/c Tr/orTetoy iXTrlSa SiKaiocrvvtji o.TreKoe'^ofJ.eOa. 
 
 ferred by the principal ancient and 
 modern oommentatora to the feelings 
 of the subject (Js iTroXa/i^dvsTe, 
 Theophyl. ; 'ut vobis videtur,' Fritz. 
 Opusc. p. 156) ; comp. Goth. ' ga- 
 raihtans cj\yi\) izvis' [justoa dicitis 
 vos]. On this use of the subjective 
 present (commonly employed to in- 
 dicate certainty, prophetic confidence, 
 expectation of speedy issue, <fcc.), see 
 Eernh. Si/nt. x. 1, p. 371, and Schmal- 
 feld, Synt. § 54. z, p. 91. 
 Tfjs xtipiTOs lleir^o-aTe] ' ye fell away 
 from grace;' the aor., as in the first 
 clause, referring to the time when 
 legal justification was admitted and 
 put forward; see however notes to 
 Transl. On the meaning of iKiriirreiy 
 Tivos ('aliquS re excidere, soil, ejus 
 jacturam facere') see Winer, de Verb, 
 Comp. Paso. II. p. II, and comp. 
 Plato, Sep, VI. p. 496 0, iK7re<Tetv ipiXo- 
 co^ias' Polyb. XII. 14. 7, eKirliTTeiv 
 Tov Kad-riKOvTos. The Alexandrian form 
 of aor. €^eir4(raT€ is noticed and illus- 
 trated by exx. in Winer. Gr. § 13. 
 I, p. 68 sq. ; comp. Lobeck, Phryn. 
 p. 724. 
 
 5. i](i6ts 7dp] ' For we;' proof of 
 the preceding assertion by 1 decla- 
 ration e contrario of the attitude of 
 hope and expectancy, not of legal 
 reliance and self-confidence, which 
 was the characteristic of the Apostle 
 and of all true Christians. If 5^ had 
 been used, the opposition between 
 il/ias and oh-we^ (i. q. Ci/ieis) would 
 have been too prominent to hp.rmo- 
 nize well with the context and with 
 the conciliatory pharacter of the pre- 
 sent address. 
 
 IIv6V(i.aTi] 'by the Spirit,' 'Spiritu,' 
 Vulg., Olarom., — with an implied con- 
 trast to the ffijof which was the active 
 principle of all legal righteousness; 
 comp. oh. iii. 3, and notes in loo. 
 
 The dative is not equivalent to Iv 
 Iliiei/j.aTi. (Copt.), still less to be ex- 
 plained as merely adverbial, 'spiri- 
 tually' (Middl. in loc.); but, as the 
 context suggests, has its definite abla- 
 tival force and distinct personal refer- 
 ence ; our hope flows from faith, and 
 that faith is imparted and quickened 
 by the Holy Spirit. No objection can 
 be urged against this interpr. founded 
 on the absence of the article, as neither 
 the canon of Middleton [Gr. Art. p. 
 126, ed. Eose), nor the similar one 
 suggested by Harless (c» Ephes. ii. 
 ■22), — that t6 Ui-eB/ia is the personal 
 Holy Spirit, irpeO/Ma the indwelling in- 
 fluence of the Spirit (Eom. viii. S), — 
 can at all be considered of universal 
 application; see ver. 16. It is much 
 more natural to regard JlveO/ia, IlceC/ia 
 dyiov, and Xiveufia. Qeov as proper 
 names, and to extend to them the 
 same latitude in connexion with the 
 article; see Fritz. Som. viii. 4, Vol. 
 II. p. 105. 
 
 eK mo-T€<i)s] 'from faith,' as the origin 
 and source (comp. notes on ch. iii. 
 22), — in opposition to the ev vbfjj^ 
 of the preceding clause, which prac- 
 tically includes the more regular an- 
 tithesis i^ 'ipyuv, IXirCSa 
 SiKaio(rvvi]s] 'the hope of righteous- 
 ness.' This is one of those many 
 passages in the N. T. (see Winer, Gi: 
 § 30. I, p. 168) in which it is difScult 
 to decide whether the genitive is sub- 
 jecti or objecti; the Sc 5ia Svdiv, ' spem 
 et justitiam (aeternam),' suggested by 
 Aquinas, being clearly inadmissible. 
 If (a) the gen. be subjecti, eXirlSa 
 SiKaioff. must be 'ipsum prsemium 
 quod speratur, so. vitam aeternam' 
 (Grot.), 'coronam gloriae quae justi- 
 ficatos manet' (Beza), eXirls being 
 used iJ,eTuvv/UKws for the thing hoped 
 for: if (/3) objecti, then simply 'spera- 
 
104 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 6 ev yap Hpia-Tw 'Itjcrov oure ireptrofA^ ri ia"xyei ovre 
 aKpoj3va-Tia, aXXa tt/ctt/? Si ajairri'} evepyovfievij. 
 
 tain justitiam,' the hope which turns 
 on SiKaioffivti as its object, — fairly 
 paraphrased by ^th., ' we hope we 
 ma,y be justified;' sim. Tynd., Cran., 
 ' we loke for and hope in the sp. , to 
 be iustified thorow fayth.' Of these 
 (|3) seems clearly most in accordance 
 with the context, as this turns not so 
 much upon any adjunct to iMaioeivij 
 as upon SiKaioaiirq itself ; ' Ye,' says St 
 Paul in ver. 4, ' think that ye are already 
 in possession of SiKaioa. {diKaioS<r8e), we 
 on the contrary Tiope for it.' There 
 is no difficulty in Si,KaiO(r6pT] thus being 
 represented as /atitrc Por in the first 
 place this view necessarily results 
 from the contrast between Judaism 
 and Christianity. The Jew regarded 
 SiKaioff. as something outward, pre- 
 sent, realizable : the Christian as 
 something inward, future, and, save 
 through faith in Christ, unattainable. 
 And in the second place iSi/coioiriJi'ij 
 is one of those divine results which, 
 as Neander beautifully expresses it, 
 'stretch into eternity:' it conveys 
 with it and involves the idea of future 
 blessedness and glorification ; ovs e3i- 
 Kaliiiaev to6tovs koI ^bh^atreVj Hom, 
 viii. 30 ; see Neand. Planting, Vol. 
 I. p. 478 note (Bohn). 
 air€KSE)(^d|icSa] ' ta/rry for' 'patiently 
 wait for.' This expressive compound 
 has two meanings, (a) local, with 
 reference either to the place from 
 which the expectation is directed to 
 its object ('in quo locatus aliquem 
 expectes,' Fritz.), or, more usually, 
 the place whence the object is expected 
 to come (' unde quid expectaretur,' 
 Winer), — a decided trace of which 
 meaning may be observed in Phil. iii. 
 20 : (4) ethical, with ref. to the 
 assiduity of the expectation, ' studiose 
 constanter expeotare,' — the meaning 
 
 in the present case and appy. in all 
 the remaining passages in the N. T. ; 
 comp. Eom. viii. ig, 23, 25, i Cor. 
 i. 7, Heb. ix. 28, i Pet. iii. 20 
 (not Mec.) : and see Tittmann, Synon. 
 p. 106 ; Fritz. OpvM. p. 156; Winer, 
 Verb. Comp. Fasc. IV. p. 14. It 
 
 may be added that the expression 
 e\ir. SiK. iircKS. is not pleonastic for 
 e\T. SiK. Ixof-^ (Ust. ; comp. JEth.), 
 but, as Fritz, observes, forcible and 
 almost poetical (Eur. Alceat. 130, ^\- 
 irlda 7r/)oirS^xw/"")> ^^''''Sa being the 
 cognate accus.; compare Acts xxiv. 
 15, i\vlda... rjv xal aCrrol oVTOi irpoa- 
 Sixovrai; Tit. ii. 13, TrpotrS^Stiaioi t^v 
 IMKaplav. iXvlSa. The whole clause 
 then may be thus paraphrased : ' by 
 the assistance of the Holy Spirit we 
 are enabled to cherish the hope of 
 being justified, and the source out of 
 which that hope springs is faith:' 
 comp. Ust. Lehrb. n. i, p. 90 sq.; 
 and for a. fuller exposition of the 
 verse, ChiUingworth, WorJca, p. 402 sq. 
 (Lond. 1 704) ; Manton, Serm. Vol. iv. 
 p. 927 sq. (Lond. 1698). 
 
 6. Iv 7<ip Xpi<rT^'lT](r.] 'For in 
 Christ Jeius ;' confirmation of the pre- 
 ceding statement that the direKSoxil 
 was eK iriareus" where there is a union 
 with Christ, neither circumcision nor 
 unoircumcisiou avails anything, but 
 faith only; it is clear then why we 
 entertain the hope of righteousness 
 from faith. The solemn formula iv 
 Xp. 'Iijcr. is not to be explained away, 
 as 'in Christi regno, eoolesili,' (Parseus), 
 'Christi religione' (Est.), 'Christi 
 lege' (Grot.), — all of which fall utter- 
 ly short of the true meaning ; but, as 
 the regular use of iv Xp. and the 
 addition of 'Ii)<roC distinctly suggest, 
 it conveys the deeper idea of ' union, 
 fellowship, and incorporation,' in Christ 
 
V. 6, 7. 
 
 105 
 
 Erpejfere koXws' t/? vfjt.ai ej/eVo\|^ei/ 7 
 
 Who perverted you? 
 
 "Whosoever they are • - - 
 
 they shall be punished, for their doctrine is not mine. Yea, 
 
 1 vnsh they would cease from all communion with you. 
 
 crucified : comp. notes on oh. ii. 17. 
 For an elaborate but wholly insufficient 
 explanation of the vital expression iv 
 Xp., comp. Fritz. Som. viii. i. Vol. n. 
 p. 82 ; and contrast with it the deep 
 and spiritual illustrations of Bp. Hall, 
 Christ Mystical, ch. ■.*, 3. 
 Si' dycmrfs lv«p70U|i^vi)] 'energizing, 
 displaying its activity, throvgh love,' 
 'fCo-o Sekvurat, Theoph. ; 'efficax est,' 
 Bull, Andrewes (Serm. v. Vol. in. p. 
 193) ; comp. I Thess. i. 3, toC kSwov 
 T^s dydwris' Polyc. ad Phil. § 3, irUrTtv 
 . . .iiraKoKovBoiarii rrji iXirldos, irpoa- 
 yoiffTisTijs iydTrjs' and see especially 
 Uat. Lehrh. ir. 1. 4, p. 236 sq., and 
 references in notes on i Thess. I. c. 
 The verb ivepyetaffai may have two 
 meanings, (0) passive, 'is made perfect,' 
 
 ((lO^aASO} [quse perfioitur, Sohaaf, 
 
 but see Capell. in loci Syr., 'adschwe- 
 ghyal,' Arm., — maintained by the 
 older Komanist divines, Bellarm., al., 
 (see Petav. de Incam. viii. 12. 16, 
 Vol. V. p. 407), as well as several 
 Protestant interpreters, Hammond, 
 al., and even the recent editors of 
 Steph. Thesaur. s.v. ; or (i) active, ' is 
 operative,' Vulg., Clarom., Goth., 
 Copt., — as maintained by nearly all 
 recent commentators. Of these (a) is 
 quite lexically tenable (Polyb. Hist. 
 I- 1 3- 5) ivepyeiToi jrSKefioij, but dis- 
 tinctly at variance with the usage of 
 the word in the N.T. (see Meyer, 
 2 Cor. i. 6 ; Bretsoh. Zex. s. v.), while 
 (6) harmonizes with the prevailing 
 usage, and can be correctly distin- 
 guished from the active ; ii/epyeTv being 
 'mm exercere,' and commonly applied 
 to persons, ivepyet<r8ai 'ex se (or 
 swam) mm exercere,' a species of what 
 has been called the ' dynamic ' middle 
 (Krtiger, SpraoU. § 52. 8), and com- 
 
 monly applied to things, see Fritz. 
 Mom. Vol. n. p. 17, and Winer, Gr. 
 § 38. 6, p. 231. Although the passive 
 meaning is not now maintained by 
 the best critical scholars of the Church 
 of Kome, the passage is no less 
 strongly claimed as a testimony to 
 the truth of the Tridentine doctrine 
 (Sess. VI. c. 7) of fides fcrrmala ; see 
 Windischm. in loc, and comp. Mohler, 
 SyniboUk, § 16, p. 131 note, § 17, 
 P- 137- 
 
 7. 'ErpextTj KoXus] 'Ye were run- 
 ning well;' forcible and yet natural 
 transition from the brief statement of 
 the characterizing principle of Chris- 
 tian life, once exemplified in the Gala- 
 tians, but now lost sight of and per- 
 verted; liraaiet rhv Spo/iov Kal Bpijvel 
 ToD dpd/iov Ti)c 7^aC^o^', Theod. 
 tCs iSnas iviKo^ev] 'who did hinder 
 you!' not without some expression of 
 surprise, irffls TOffoSros ivixlnrri Sp6- 
 fios ; tIs 6 ToaovTov l(rxi<ras ; Chrys. ; 
 comp. ch. iii. 1. The primary mean- 
 ing of the verb ivKbirTti.v (heKoitrl)- 
 Hrjv iviiroSiibp.'riv, Hesyoh. ; dvaxant- 
 ^ec&vairoUiei, iy/coirTei, Suid.) appears 
 to be that of hindering by breaking up 
 a road (c. g. Greg. Nazianz. Or. xvi. 
 
 p. 260, 17 KttKiaS iyKOTTTO/J.^l'TJS SuffTTa- 
 
 del^ ruv Trovtjpwv, rj Aperijs oSoTrotov- 
 fihris eiwaBelif rav ^eKTibvuv comp. 
 'intercidere,' e. g. Caes. Bell. Gall. n. 
 9, pontem, <fcc.) ; while that of ivaKb- 
 irreiv {Rec.) is rather that of hindrance 
 with the further idea of thrusting 
 bach; comp. Hom. Odyss. xxi. 47, 
 Bvpiup S' iviKOTTSf ix^as. The read- 
 ing of jftec. (d.v4Koij/(v) is however op- 
 posed to all the uncial MSS. and appy. 
 to nearly all mss. and Ff., and neither 
 on internal (opp. to Bloomf.) nor ex- 
 ternal grounds has any claim to 
 attention. The accus. is similarly 
 
106 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 8 T^ akf}9ela //.rj irelOeadai ; fi ireicrfiovri ovk ck tov 
 
 found with ivKhirTcw in Acts xxiv. 4, 
 I These, li. i8; see also Themiet. Or. 
 XIV. p. 181 0. rfj diXT|6EC<^ 
 
 [iij ir«£66ir6ai] ' that ye should not obey 
 the truth;' infin. expressive of the 
 remit or effect, with some trace of the 
 purpose or end contemplated ; this 
 being one of those forms of the ' con- 
 secutive' sentence which may be re- 
 garded as partly objective and partly 
 final; see Donalds. Gr. § 602. The 
 popular explanation that p,^ (with the 
 infin.) after certain negative and pro- 
 hibitive verbs is pleonastic (Mey. 
 comp. Herm. Yiger, No. 271) is now 
 justly called in question (see esp. Elotz, 
 Devar. Vol. 11. p, 668), the true ex- 
 ■ planation being that the /ti^j is prefixed 
 to the infinitive, whether in its more 
 simple objective form (Donalds. Gi: 
 § 584 sq.), or its more lax and general 
 ref. to result (Bernh. Synt. ix. 6. b, 
 p. 364; Madvig, Synt. § 156. 4), to 
 indicate the further idea of some latent 
 purpose involved in the action which 
 specially contemplated or tended to 
 the effect expressed by the infinitive ; 
 see esp. Sohmalfeld, Synt. § 181. 2, p. 
 3S9, and for an illustrative example 
 comp. Aristoph. Paxc, 315, iniroSiiiv 
 ijfiiv yivTiTOit. T^v debv fi-^ '^eXKiiaai' see 
 Madvig, Synt. § 2 10. The elliptical 
 mode of explanation adopted by Gay- 
 ler (de Partic. Neg. p. 359) in the 
 parallel expressions dpKoC/iai n^ Spa- 
 ffot, so. 'nego, et dico me non feoisse' 
 is appy. doubtful in principle, and 
 certainly is not here applicable. 
 Lachm. (ed. min.) omitted the article 
 before dXijA. with AB ; and appy. a few 
 mss. ; and is now supported by t<i, 
 
 8. ij ireto-piovij] 'The persuasion,' 
 'suasio,' Olarom., scil. '.aervandi lega- 
 lia, ' Lyra ; the snbst. being regarded 
 as active, and the article (not 'this 
 pers.,' Arm., Auth., — a most doubtful 
 
 usage in the N.T., see Winer, Gr. 
 § 18. 1, p. 97 sq.) marking the parti- 
 cular counter-persuading of the false 
 teachers implied in the rfs i/tSs h4- 
 Koffv. Owing to the apparent paro- 
 nomasia, and the nature of the termi- 
 nation (comp. Donalds. Cratyl. § 255), 
 the meaning of ireiir/iovr) is slightly 
 doubtful. As the similar form TrKriffixo- 
 v}j means both satietas (the state) and 
 expletio (the act). Col. ii. 23, Plato, 
 Symp. p. 186 c, rt. /to! Kipoitris, — so 
 TTEiff/iovT) may mean (a) the state of 
 being persuaded, i. e. 'conviction' 
 (GeoO rb Ka\eiv rb Si ireWeadai twv 
 im-HKOvitrrav, Theod.), or (J) the act 
 of persuading, 'persuadendi soUertia,' 
 Schott ; comp. Chrys. on i Thess. i. 
 4, oil Tret(r/j.ovTj &v6puTrlvTj...'^v 7}...7ret-' 
 ffovja. Of these (a) has here thesupport 
 of the Greek expositors (rb Treurdijvai 
 rois "K^yovtriv, CEcum., comp. Chrys., 
 Theoph.), and certainly on that account 
 deserves consideration ; (b) however is 
 to be preferred, as lexically defensible 
 (see below), and as in harmony with 
 the active tov koKovvtos' tj Teto-fi. 
 pointing to a gracious act in which 
 the human will is regarded more as 
 subjected to the divine influence (John 
 vi. 44), TOV KaXovvTos to one in which 
 it is regarded more as free ; comp. Mey. 
 in loc. In three out of the four in- 
 
 stances cited by Wetst. from Eustath. 
 {ad II. u, p. 21. 46 ; 99. 46, II. 1, p. 
 637- 5). tlie prevailing meaning ap- 
 pears to be 'pervioaoia ; ' but in Justin 
 Mart. Apol. I. 53, airrapKcU els xei- 
 (T/iov^v Epiphan. Hoires. xxx. 21, els 
 ireuriiov^v rijs iiwTioy TrXijpo^opios' 
 ApoUon. de Synt. p. 195. 10, tV i^ 
 dW-^Xuv irpbs dXXiJXovs treta/iovi^Vy the 
 active meaning is sufficiently distinct. 
 Ignat. Horn. 3, is commonly adduced, 
 but here Cod. Colb. reads aioiirijs. 
 OVK Ik tov KaX. iSnas] 'is not from 
 
V. 8, 9, 10. 
 
 107 
 
 KaXowi'TO? v/xai. /xiKoa Vvfiri o\oi> to (pvpafia Yvfj-ol. 9 
 eyui ireiroiOa els v/jLas iv Kvo/y OTi ovoev aXXo (bpov^' lO 
 
 him who calleth you^^ i. e. does not 
 emanate, does not result from, see 
 note on eh. ii. i6 ; not an answer to 
 the preceding question, — which is 
 rather an expression of surprise than 
 a mere interrogation, — but a warning 
 declaration. The A KaXGv is obviously 
 not St Paul (Locke), nor even Christ 
 (Theoph.), but as usual God ; the act 
 of calling in St Paul's Epp. (e.g. Eom. 
 ix. II, 24; 1 Cor. i. 9, vii. 15, al.) 
 being regularly ascribed to the Father ; 
 see notes and reff. on ch. i. 6. The 
 tense of the participle need not be 
 pressed either as a definite pres. (' non 
 desinit etiam nunc vooare,' Beza), or 
 still less probably, as an imperf. ('qui 
 vos vocabat,' Beng.), — 6 KaXuv, as 
 Chrys. appears to have felt {oijk iicdXe- 
 <r€v i/iSs & KaXSv), being only the 
 common substantival participle ; see 
 the numerous exx. collected by Winer, 
 ^- § 45- 7> p. 316 ; comp. Bemhardy, 
 Synt. VI. 23, p. 318 ; Madvig, Syntax, 
 § 180. b ; and notes on i Tliess. v. 34. 
 g. jiiKpa Sviii] K.T.X.] 'A little lea- 
 ven leaveneth the whole lump;' a pro- 
 verbially expressed warning (comp, 
 I Cor. V. 7), forming a sort of anti- 
 thetical continuation of what has pre- 
 ceded. It is somewhat doubtful 
 whether '0/1.7) is to be considered as (a) 
 having an ahstraet reference to the 
 false teaching (t4 fuaptiv touto Kaxdv, 
 Chrys. ; comp. Theoph.), or as (6) 
 pointing in the concrete ('hi pauci,' 
 Parseus ; comp. Aug., Jerome) to those 
 who disseminated it ; see Clem. Horn. 
 viil. 17 (cited by Hilgenf.), where the 
 race of men living befca-e the flood are 
 characterized as a /ca/cj) fi)/«i;. On the 
 one hand, (a) yields a pertinent sense, 
 and is appy. confirmed by Matth. xvi. 
 II, and by i Cor. I.e. where ver. 8 
 seems distinctly to show that t^jiTi 
 
 does not mean the individual so much 
 as his sin ; on the other, the active 
 meaning assigned to Trenr/xoc^ and still 
 more the seeming quantitative limita- 
 tion hinted at in the use of the in- 
 dividualizing singular in ver. 10 (comp. 
 Beng.) appears to preponderate in 
 favour of (6). I adopt therefore the 
 concrete reference, and necessarily 
 continue it to the following tpipa/jia' 
 'vel pauci homines perperam docentes 
 possent omnem [totom] ccetum corrum- 
 pere,' Winer in loc. 
 
 10. e7»] '7/or my pariy' emphatic, 
 and not without a reassuring contrast. 
 The insertion of Si [CFG ; a few mss. ; 
 Demid., Aug., Syr.-Phil., al.] is due 
 to the desire to make this contrast 
 still more apparent, 
 sis vjias] 'with regard to you;' this 
 more lax use of ds is noticed by Winer, 
 Gr, § 49. a, p. 354, and Bernh. Synt. v. 
 II. 3, p. 220. The addition of 
 
 the words iv Kvptiji (sc. 'IijioO, Eom. 
 xiv. 14, comp. Winer, 6r. § 19. i, p. 
 113) serves to designate the ground 
 of the hope, and to show that it was 
 not an earthly and doubtful, but a 
 heaveidy (Phil. ii. 24) and certain as- 
 surance which St Paul entertained; 
 comp. 2 Thess. ill. 4, irevolBan^v Si iv 
 'Kvpiif i<p' ipias, where i-rrl is used in a 
 sense but little differing from that of 
 els here, to denote the objects about 
 whom the hope was felt, iv Ki/p. the 
 nature of that hope; see notes on 2 
 Thess. I. c, vphere distinctions are 
 drawn between the ethical uses of e/s, 
 iirl, and irpds. ov'S^v aXXo] 
 
 'nothing else' — than what ?. Either 
 specially, than the subject and pur- 
 port of the words immediately preced- 
 ing; or generally, than the doctrines 
 which St Paul had propounded. The 
 latter accords best with the future 
 
108 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 o-ere* o Se rapaa-eroov Vfiag ^aerTaa-ei to Kplfia, oirrii 
 11 av §. iyu) Se, aSe\<pol, el irepiroMV en Ktipva-crw, tI en 
 
 10. ia-Tis &] Tisch. (ed. J) reads Sar. iiw with ABN; 3 mss. 
 
 ippov-^ffeTe, which seems more naturally 
 used in reference to the general issue 
 (St4 Siop$ii(Te(r6e, Chrys.), than merely 
 to the time when the words would be 
 read. Alf. refers to Phil. iii. ig (eomp. 
 Usteri, 'no novel sentiments'), but 
 there the word is Mpois' see notes imZoc. 
 6 Sirapao-o-uvvix.] ' but he that disturb- 
 eth you:' contrast, not with the pre- 
 ceding iyi!) (Etick.), but generally with 
 the expression of confidence which haa 
 just preceded; 6 rapdirff. not being 
 used on the one hand for oi rapAa- 
 (roKTes (Brown), nor on the other in 
 ref . to some one particular false teacher 
 (Olsh.; contrast Davids. Introd. Vol. 
 II. p. 315), but, in accordance with 
 the exact selective and definitive force 
 of the article, to the one who for the 
 time being comes under observation. 
 Oi Tapdffffovres i/ias (ch, i, 7) are the 
 class generally, 6 Tapdffffuv is the in- 
 dividual of the class who may happen 
 to call forth the Apostle's censure ; 
 iir^pe t6v \6yov, Chrys. ; comp. Mad- 
 vig, Synt. § 14. Pao-rdo-ci 
 
 tA KpC|ia] 'shall hear ('ut grave onus,' 
 Bei^.) tJie judgment he deserves;' 
 Kpi/ia not being equivalent to Kard- 
 Kpifia, nor used as cause for effect, so. 
 'punishment' (Sohott, Olsh.), but re- 
 taining its proper meaning both here 
 and in Bom. ii. 3, al. and with app. ref. 
 to the judgment which he will receive 
 from God; Sixas d^eiXouiri Ty Oev, 
 Theod. The idea of 'punishment' or 
 'condemnation' is conveyed by, and 
 to be deduced from the context; see 
 Fritz. iJom. I. c. Vol. i. p. 94. 
 SoTisflv^] 'whoever he may he;' not 
 with any reference to the dignity of 
 the momentarily-selected individual 
 {kSi> ^c7((Xo( Tivis SoKuai. Kal i^id- 
 
 inaToi, Theoph.), but simply with the 
 usual inclusive reference of the for- 
 mula ; comp. Acts iii. 23. 
 
 II. l7wSI,dSEX<f>oC] 'But I,hrethren,' 
 — with abrupt reference to what might 
 have been said of himself. The con- 
 nexion between this and the preceding 
 verse is not perfectly clear. The use 
 of the expression 4 rapiaaav appears 
 to have suggested the remembrance 
 that he himself was open to the charge 
 of being a subverter, inasmuch as he 
 had circumcised Timothy. The reply 
 is final and decisive ; ' But if it be 
 a, fact that I really do still preach 
 circumcision, what further ground is 
 there for persecuting me?' i.e. 'the 
 very fact of my persecution is a proof 
 that I am not a preacher of circum- 
 cision ;' see esp. Theoph. in loc. 
 elirepiT. ?ti KTjpvo-crii)] ' if I still preach 
 circumcision;' 'if, as is assumed to be 
 a matter of fact (comp. notes on ch. 
 1.9), circumcision is still what I preach; ' 
 the emphasis resting not on Kijpiaaia 
 {rovT^ffTiv oiK ovTia KeKeOta irurreijetv.,, 
 TepiiTC/iov lih ydp [rbv HiiiiSeov], oix 
 iK-/ipv^a Si vepiToix-fp, Chrys.) but on 
 the prominently placed irepiTop,iiv. The 
 in does not suggest any contrasted 
 reference to the period before the 
 coming of Christ ('still — as in the 
 ante-Christian times,' Olsh.), — a re- 
 ference which would here be very 
 pointless, nor again to any special 
 change in the Apostle's teaching since 
 he had become a Christian, — for which 
 there is not the slightest ground ; but 
 simply to the period prior to his con- 
 version, 'still, in contrast to my 
 former Judaism;' comp. Wieseler, 
 Chronol. p. 206, note. The Apostle 
 might not have 'preached' circum- 
 
V. II, 12. 
 
 109 
 
 6iwK0iJ.ai ; dpa Kar^pytirai to crKavSaXov rov a-ravpov. 
 o(fie\ov Kot airoKo-^ovTai oi avaaTaTOvvres v/xas. 12 
 
 ciaion before his conversion, but he 
 strenuously advocated {repLffa-oripas 
 ^T/XuT^s i/wdpxojv ruv iraTpLnGtv fiov 
 ■irapaS6(reai>, oh. i. 14) all the principles 
 of Judaism; comp. Neander, Plant- 
 *"S'i P- 304) note. The present tense 
 is probably used, as Schott observes, 
 from his having the present accusation 
 of his adversaries in his mind. 
 tC ?Ti SuaKOfuti] 'why am I still per- 
 secuted ¥ almost ' why am I to be, &c.' 
 this second in being, as De Wette 
 observes, logical; see Eom. iii. 7, t£ 
 ft-t Ki,yi> is &impTaKbs Kpfcofini ; ' what 
 further ground is there for, cfcc' Eom. 
 ix. 19, al. d'pa] 'then after 
 
 all,' 'ergo,' Vulg., Clarom. (see Hand, 
 Tursell. Vol. u. p. 450 sq.) ; inference 
 from what has preceded, not perhaps 
 here without some tinge of ironical 
 reference to a conclusion that could 
 not have been expected. The funda- 
 mental idea of 3,pa. is 'distance or 
 progression (to another step in the 
 argument) ;' from which the derivative 
 meaning, that at the advanced point 
 at which we have arrived our present 
 view is diflFerent to our antecedent 
 one, can easily be deduced; see esp. 
 Donalds. Crat. § 192. That this how- 
 ever is the normal and primary idea 
 of the particle (see Hartung, Parlih. 
 dpa, I. 3, Vol. I. p. 422) cannot now 
 be maintained ; see Klotz, Devar. 
 Vol. n. p. 160 sq., where the whole 
 question is discussed at great length. 
 According to this writer &pa involves 
 'significationem levioris cujusdam ra- 
 tiocinationis, quae indicat rebus ita 
 eomparatis aliquid ita aut ease aut 
 fieri,' Deva/r. p. 167. The 
 
 interrogatory form (Spa) as adopted 
 by Syr., Ust., al. seems here less for- 
 cible and appropriate. 
 t6 o-kcCvSoXov rov crravpoS] 'tJie of- 
 
 fence of the cross,' 'offendiculum cru- 
 cis,' Beza; the offence which the Jews 
 took at Christianity, because faith in 
 a crucified Saviour, faith without 
 legal observances, was offered as the 
 alone means of salvation ; oidi ylip 
 oi/tws 6 aravpis. TJv aKavSaXl^av toi>! 
 'lovSalovs uis t6 /ijj Seiv Td8e(r0ai toTs 
 irarpi^ois viiiois, Chrys. ; comp. i Cor. 
 i. 18, ifcc. see Brown, Galat. p. 278, and 
 Usteri, Lehri. 11. i, i, p. 253. SKdv 
 SaXov, though occurring (quotations 
 included) 15 times in the N. T. and 
 20 times in the LXX and Apocrypha, 
 is scarcely ever found ' apud profanes.' 
 2fKavSd\ri$pov (tA ivurrd/ieiioi' rats 
 fiudypais, Foil. Onomast, x. 34) occa- 
 sionally occurs ; e. ^r. in a metaphorical 
 sense, Aristoph. Achwm. 687. 
 
 12. £iJ>e\ov] ' Would that;' indig- 
 nant wish called forth by the last 
 deduction, and by the thought of the 
 antagonism of circumcision to the 
 cross of Christ ; see Ewald in loc, and 
 comp. ch. ii. 21. This word is used 
 purely as a particle, both in the N, T. 
 (see 1 Cor. iv. 8, 2 Cor. xi. i), and in 
 the I/XX, e.g. Exod. xvi. 3, Numb, 
 xiv. 2, XX. 3, Psalm cxix. 5 ; see Winer, 
 G^»-. § 4 1 . 5 . 2, p. 2 70, and Sturz, de Dia- 
 lect. Maced. s. v. § 12. Its construction 
 therefore here with a future, though 
 unusual and (appy. according to Lu- 
 cian, Solcec. i) solecistic, need not 
 have caused Bengel to alter the punc- 
 tuation (r6 GKdvtaXw rod ffravpov' 
 6^e\ov.), and to connect 6ipe\ov as a 
 kind of exclamation (' velim ita sit!') 
 with what precedes. On the similar 
 use of (S<j>e\oi> and li^Ae in later 
 writers, compare Matth. Or. § 513. 
 obs. 3 ; and on the correct and classical 
 use {'(S<pe\ov non nisi tum adhiberi 
 quum quis optat ut fuerit aliquid -vel 
 sit vel futurum sit quod non fuit 
 
110 
 
 nPOS rAAATA2. 
 
 10 'Yuets yap eir eXevBepla eKXriOrire, Do not misuse your 
 
 J ' ' I r r ' # * ^ freedom, but love 
 
 one another. Love is the fulfilment of 
 the law; hatred brings destruction. 
 
 aut est aut futurum est'), see Herm. 
 Viger, Ko. 190. koI 
 
 diroK6i|rovTai] 'they would even cut 
 themselves off from you.' The exact 
 meaning of these words has been much 
 discussed. The usual passive transla- 
 tion ('abscindantur,' Vulg., Goth., 
 appy. Syr. [Schaaf ], .^th. - Piatt, 
 Arm.) cannot be defended, as the 
 N. T. furnishes no certain instance of 
 a similar enallage. The most plausible 
 is I Cor. X. 2, Kal vdvrti i^airrliravTO, 
 but even here the middle voice (sc. 
 ' baptismum susoeperunt,' Beng.) may 
 be correctly maintained; see Winer, 
 Gr. § 38. 4, p. 128, and exx. in Jelf, 
 Gr. % 364. 4. a. We have thus only 
 two possible translations, (a) 'I would 
 that they would even cut themselves off 
 (plane discedant) from communion 
 with you,' Bretschn. ; or (fi) ' I would 
 that they would (not only circumcise, 
 but) even castrate themselves ;^ /i^ irept- 
 rEfivia6o3(raV' fj.6vov dXXoL Kal dwoKO- 
 TTT^ffOctJaav, Chrys. ; &TroK6nous iavrois 
 iTToiTjffav, CEcum. : see exx. in Wetst. 
 in loc. This latter reference to bodily 
 mutilation is adopted by the principal 
 patristic expositors, as well as by most 
 modern writers; and it must be ad- 
 mitted that thus not only Kal is more 
 readily explained, and the expression of 
 the wish {StpeXov) more easily account- 
 ed for, but that there is also a species 
 of parallelism in the use of KaTaTonijv 
 in Phil. iii. i. Still as there seems no 
 certain trace of this corporeal refer- 
 ence in any of the a,ncient Vv., — as in 
 some (^th.-Platt, and perhaps Arm.) 
 the reference is plainly ethical, — 
 as there is a seeming contrast in the 
 KoKeiy iwl of the oonfirmatoiy clause 
 which follows, and as this seems alone 
 Buited to the earnest gravity with 
 which St Paul is here addressing his 
 
 converts, I adopt somewhat unhesi- 
 tatingly the former interpretation. 
 The Apostle's deep insight into the 
 exact spiritual state of the Gralatians, 
 and the true affection that throughout 
 the Epistle tempers even his necessary 
 severity, lead him here to express as 
 a wish what he might (as in i Cor. v. 
 11) have urged as a command: comp. 
 Waterl. WorJcs, Vol. iii. p. 458. 
 ot dvaoTar. vfids] 'who are un- 
 settling you,' Hamm., sc. 'your sub- 
 verters;' the participle with its case 
 becoming by means of the article a 
 kind of substantive ; see notes and reff. 
 on oh. i. 23. The verb ivaffrarovv 
 (Hesych. AvaTpiireai) occurs three times 
 in the N.T. (Acts xvii. 6, xxi. 38) as 
 an equivalent of the more usual &v6,- 
 (TTarov TTQieiv, but is of rare occurrence 
 (Wetst. on A cts xvii. 6), and is said to 
 belong to that somewhat numerous 
 class of words (Tittm. Synon. p. 266) 
 which are referred to the Macedonian 
 dialect; see Sturz, de Dial. Maced. §9, 
 p. 146. It has a stronger meaniug 
 than rapdirffw, and is admirably para- 
 phrased by Chrys., dx6 ttjs dva 'lepov- 
 aaX^/i Kal t^s i\evB4pas iK^aXdpres, 
 /3iaf6/tc(iai 6^ Kaddirep aixMoXiii-ous Kal 
 jueravairrds irKavdffBai, 
 
 13. 'Y|i«is7dpJ 'Ji'or ye/ commence- 
 ment of a new paragraph, and according 
 to Olsh., De W., al., of a new portion 
 (the hortatory) of the Epistle ; 4vTaSda 
 \om-bv SoK€i pLif ds rbn i)BiKbv iji^alveiv 
 XSyov, Chrys. St Paul knew so well 
 the human heart, its tendencies and 
 temptations, and saw so clearly how 
 his own doctrine of Christian liberty 
 might be perverted and adulterated, 
 that he at once hastens, with more 
 than his usual earnestness, to trace out 
 the ineffaceable distinctions between 
 true spiritual freedom, and a carnal 
 
V. 13, 14- 
 
 111 
 
 adeXcpOL' julovov imj Trjv e\ev9epiav eis a(bop/j.^v rrj 
 (TapKi, aXXa 8ia, Tiji ayaTTJjs Sovkevere aW^Xois. 6 yap 14 
 Tray vo/xof ev evl Xoyw vevKripwTai, ev tw 'AyaTriJo-etj 
 
 and antinomian licence. There is 
 however no marked or abrupt division, 
 but one portion of the epistle passes 
 insensibly into the other. ^^P 
 
 is thus not illative (Turner), nor a 
 mere particle of transition (Brown), 
 but stands in immediate connexion 
 with the preceding words, which it 
 serves to confirm and justify; 'and I 
 may well wish that they would cut 
 themselves off from your communion, 
 for ye were called to a state with 
 which they have nothing in common. ' 
 The reading 8^ for ydp, found in FG ; 
 80; Chrys., Aug., al., appears to be a 
 correction. eir IXEvScpta] 
 
 'for freedom;'' iirl here denoting the 
 purpose or object for which they were 
 called; comp. i Thess. iv. 7, oi 701/3 
 ixiXeaev ifias 6 9e6s ijrl aKaBap(rlg,' 
 where see notes in loc. Further exx. 
 win be found in Winer, Gr. § 48. c, 
 p. 351, and in Kost u. Palm, Zex. 
 s.v. ir. 2. f, Vol. I. p. 1040. 
 |iij Tijv E\(v6epiav] ' maJce not your 
 liberty;' soil. ToietTe, rpiwere [not how- 
 ever used in N. T.], dure (FG; Aug., 
 Boern., al.), or some similar verb. 
 Instances of this very intelligible and 
 idiomatic omission of the verb after 
 /li) are cited by Hartung, Pwrtih. /i^, 
 6. b. 4, Vol. n. p. 153; Klotz, Devar. 
 Vol. II. p. 669; Winer, Gr. § 64. i. 6, 
 p. 526: comp. Hor. £pi»t. I. 5. is, 
 ' Quo mihi fortunam, si non conceditur 
 uti ? ' Such ellipses must of course be 
 common in every cultivated language. 
 Sid Ttjs d7t£irris] 'by the love ye 
 evince,' 'by your love/ not 'in your 
 love' (Peile) with any reference to 
 state or condition (comp. Eom. iv. 1 1, 
 Sii iKpopvartar viii. 25, Si' iirofioinjs' 
 al. ; Winer, Gr. § 47. i, p. 339) ; but 
 
 simply fper charitatem,' Vulg., Ar- 
 men. [instrumental case], Copt. ; love 
 was to be the means by which their 
 reciprocal Sov\da was to be shown. 
 The reading t^ aydiri] roO Tlve^fiaros 
 for Sih TTJS Ay., found in DEF6; 31 ; 
 Clarom., Sang., Boern., Goth., Copt. 
 [Wilk., but not Bottioh.]; Bas., al., 
 may have been suggested by the pre- 
 ceding aapKi. 8ovXev€TE] 
 'be in bondage,'' 'servite,' Vulg., 
 Clarom. ; in antithesis to the preced- 
 ing iXevBeplaii' oiK elirev AyaTwre iX- 
 \^\ovs cLttXws, d\X& SovXeiierc, t^v 
 iTnT€Tap.4vf]v St/Xwi/ (piklav, Chrys. 
 
 14. 6 7dp irds v6|ios] 'For the 
 whole law;' confirmation from Scrip- 
 ture of the command immediately pre- 
 ceding, Sib, T^s A,ydTri)s k. t. X. A few 
 instances of this order occur in the 
 N. T. ; see Middl. Greek Art. ch. vn. 
 p. 104, note, where Hose cites Acts 
 XX. iS, I Tim. i. 16 {UTraaav), Acts 
 xix. 7 (plural); add xxvii. 37. 
 «v Ivl Xd^cji] 'in one word' scil. in 
 one declaration or commandment: 
 comp. Eom. xiii. 9. 
 TcirXifpcoTai] 'liath been and is ful- 
 filled.' This reading is supported no 
 less by external evidence [ABCX ; 6 
 mss. ; Marc, in Epiph., Damasc. (2), 
 Aug.] than by internal probability. 
 While irK-qpourai {Rec.) would imply 
 that the process of fulfilment was still 
 going on, the perfect TreirX^/jwroi 
 suitably points to the completed and 
 permanent act; comp. Bom. xiii. 8, 6 
 iyairuv rhv irepov vSjiOV ireirXiipuKiV 
 — a meaning of the peif. which Mar- 
 cion (according to TertuU. adv. Ma/rc. 
 V. 4) appears, either ignorantly or 
 wilfully, to have construed 'adim- 
 pleta est, quasi jam non adimplenda.' 
 
112 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 15 Tov irXtjcrlov aov tos a-eavTov' el Se aXXf}\oi/f oaKvere 
 Kai Karea-dleTe, jSXeVeTe fiii iiro oKK^Xwv avdKwQ^Te. 
 
 16 AeVft) ^e YlvevaOTl "TrepiirareiTe, KOC Walk according to the 
 
 ' ' Spirit, whose fruits no 
 
 law condemns ; and not according to the flesh, the 
 works of which exclude from the Kingdom of God. 
 
 It may be observed that there is no 
 discrepancy between this passage and 
 Matth. xxii. 38, Mark xii. 29; for, as 
 Meyer observes, St Paul here takes a 
 lofty spiritual eminence, from which, 
 as it were, he sees all other commands 
 so subordinated to the law of love, 
 that he cannot consider the man who 
 has fulfilled this in any other light 
 than as having fulfilled the whole 
 law: comp. Usteri, Lehrb. 11. i. 4, 
 p. 242, andReuss, TMol. ChrU. iv. 19, 
 Vol. 11. p. 204 sq. The explanation 
 of Vorstius and others, ir\7;/)o0(r9ai= 
 &vaKe<i>aXaLo\iaBtu, Rom. xiii. 9, here 
 falls far short of the full spiritual 
 meaning of the passage, and also is at 
 variance with the regular meaning of 
 vK'qp. in the N.T. ; see Matth. iii. 15, 
 Rom. viii. 4, xiii. 8, Col. iv. 1 7. 
 cf70inj<reis] 'Thou shalt love.' The 
 use of the imperatival future appears 
 in the N. T. under three forms ; (a) as 
 a mild imperative, in simple prohibi- 
 tion, comp. Matth. vi. 6, ofe iaeaBe 
 (is 0! iiroKpvral' (b) as a strong impe- 
 rative, including prohibition and re- 
 proof, comp. Acts xiii. lo, 01) irafo^ 810- 
 <rTpi^m> Tcks iSois Kvplov ; (c) as a legis- 
 lative impeiatWe, — both negatively, as 
 Matth. V. 21, Rom. vii. 7, al., and 
 positively, as here and Rum. xiii. g. 
 The two former usages (which in fact 
 may be considered as one, varied only 
 by the tone of the speaker) are com- 
 mon in classical Greek, see Jelf, Ch: 
 § 413. I, 2 } Beruh. Synt. x. 5, p. 378 : 
 the latter seems distinctly Hebraistic ; 
 comp. Gayler, Part. Neg. u. 3. 3, p. 75, 
 and Winer, Qr. § 43. 5, p. 282. The 
 uses of the future in the LXX appear 
 to be very varied, and serve to express 
 
 negatively quod non convenit (Gen. 
 XX. 9), quod non potest (Gen. xxxii. 
 12: comp. Matth. iv. 4, al.); and 
 positively quod licet (Numb, xxxii. 
 24), qv^d solet (Dent. ii. 11). These 
 are almost purely Hebraistic : see esp. 
 Thiersch, de Pentat. III. § 1 1 sq. 
 ceavTov] For this Rec. reads ^avriv, 
 which appears only in FGL; appy. 
 the majority of mss.; Theoph., (Ecum, 
 (Mey.). TJateri very plausibly sug- 
 gests the falling away of one of the 
 contiguous sigmas in the coiu:se of 
 transcription. 
 
 ig. SaKvere Kal KarEO-SCerc] 'hite 
 and devov/r/ oiiK eXwe SdKvere ij.6- 
 vov, Sirep iffri 9vii.ovii.ivov, dXXct Kal 
 Ka.TeiT0ltTe, Sirep iarlv i/iiihovros ttJ 
 TTOvriplf 6 liiv y&p SiIkvuv jipyijs irX-fi- 
 paae irdBos, 6 Si KareaBluv BiipiuUas 
 i<rxdTtjs irap4trx^^ dvddei^iVf Ghrys. 
 Instances of a similar use of ddKvia 
 are cited by Kypke, Obs. Vol. II. p. 
 287, and Wetst. in loc. 
 civaXuSriTc] 'be consumed,' 'oonsuma- 
 mini,' Vulg., Clarom. : continuation 
 of the metaphor, there being appy, » 
 species of climax in the three verbs 
 Sd/txere, KoreffWere, and dvaXuS^re. 
 The meaning is sufficiently explained 
 by Chrys., ^ "^kp Sidaraais Kal i/ /J.dx'n 
 ijtBopovoihv Kal iMoKuTiKiiv Kal rSni Se- 
 Xop.iyinv aMiv Kal el(Tay6pTav. 
 
 i6. Aiya Si] 'Now I say.' The 
 Apostle now reverts to the first por- 
 tion of the command in ver. 13, /ijj 
 rije iXevBepLav els d^opii^v tj aapKl. 
 nvetSjiaTi] ' by the Spirit;' not exactly 
 ' in (khen) the Spirit,' Copt., still less 
 ' Spiritui vitam consecrate ' (dat. 00m- 
 modi, Fritz. Rom. Vol. i, p. 225), 
 but simply 'Spiritu,' Vulg., Clarom., 
 
V. 15. i6, 17. 113 
 
 eTTtOv/uilav crapKOi ov /mrj TeXea-tjre. ^ yap <rapt^ eiridv^ 17 
 
 — the dative being here what is called 
 the dat. norma, and indicating the 
 metaphorical path, manner, or rule of 
 the action ; comp. ch. vi. 16, Acts 
 XV. r, Phil. iii. 1 6 : and see Hartung, 
 Casm, p. 79; Winer, Gr. § 31. 6. b, 
 p. 193; Bernh. Si/nt. in. 14, p. 102; 
 and exx. collected by Fritz. J!om. xiii. 
 13, Vol. ni. p. 142. It is necessary 
 to observe that Ui/einari is not ' after 
 a heavenly or spiritual manner,' Peile 
 (Kara rds iri/eujuarifccts itn-o\dSj Schol. 
 ap. Matth.), — a very insufficient para- 
 phrase, nor even 'in accordance with 
 indwelling grace' {rveS/ia Si t^v inoi- 
 KovtFav X'^P'-^i avTTj yhp iirl ri KpeirTat 
 -roSriyei Tjji/ xj/vx^", Theod.), as all 
 such glosses tend to obscure the' true 
 nature of the contrast between IlveS/M 
 and <Tiip^. Whenever these two words 
 stand thus opposed, it has been satis- 
 fectorily shown by Miiller {Doctr. of 
 Sin, Vol. I. p. 354 sq., Clark) that 
 Xlvevfia is not either the spiritual part 
 of man (das Greistige), or the human 
 spirit, even if strengthened by the 
 Holy Spirit,— the 'divinized spiri- 
 tual' (das Greistliche ; comp. Reuss, 
 TMol ChrU. Vol. II. p. 54), but the 
 Holy Spirit itself, in so far as it is 
 conceived to be the governing princi- 
 ple in man, the active and animating 
 principle of Christian life, the IlveO/ia 
 T^s fuijt ir Xp. 'I7)(r., Bom. viii. 2, the 
 Ilr. XptcTToS, Uv. GeoC, ib. ver. 9 : see 
 also Neander, Planting, Vol. I. p. 467 
 (Eohn), and esp. Hofmann, Schrifth, 
 Vol. I. p. 254 eq. On the omis- 
 
 sion of the article, see notes on ver. 5 ; 
 and on the meaning of xepiiraTeiv as 
 implying lite in its regular and prac- 
 tical manifestations, see notes on Phil. 
 iii. 18, and on i Thess. iv. 12. 
 4iri.ev|ji,Cai' o-opKOs] ' the desire of the 
 Jleth ;' soil, all the motions and desires 
 of th^ .merely natural man, all that 
 
 tends to earth and earthliness. The 
 meaning of jip^ in this important and 
 deeply suggestive passage deserves the 
 reader's careful consideration. The 
 context seems clearly to show that 
 here, as in many other passages in tl.e 
 N. T. , (rd/)| is not merely the carnal as 
 opposed to the spiritual, i.e. the purely 
 sensational part of man, but compre- 
 hends in a more general notion the 
 whole ' life and movement of man in 
 the world of sense' (Muller), or per- 
 haps, to speak a little more precisely, 
 the ' whole principle and realm of 
 earthliness and earthly relations' (crap- 
 Ka ivravBa rbv 'Koyiap.bv KoKeX rbv 
 VeciSi;, Chrys.) ; selfishness, as Muller 
 has well observed, ever appearing in 
 the background. The transition from 
 this to the more definitely ethical 
 notions of weakness, sin, and sensa- 
 tionalism, which Muller has too much 
 lost sight of (see notes on Col. ii. 11), 
 is thus easy and natural : see esp. the 
 good article of Tholuck, Stud, n. Krit.. 
 for 185s, p. 485 flF.; Muller, Doctr. 
 of Sin, Vol. I. p. 350 sq. (Clark) ; and 
 comp. Beck, Seelenl, II. 18, p. 53;' 
 Delitzsch, Biil. Psychol, v. 6, p. 325 
 sq. 01) |iij TfK(<ri\re\ 'ye- 
 
 shall not accomplish;' 'non perficietis,' 
 Vulg., Clarom. ; comp. Matth. x. 23, 
 oi p,ii Te\4ariTe ris TriXeis. This 
 clause may be translated either (a) 
 imperatively, "koI being the simple 
 copula joining two imperatival clauses, 
 the first expressed affirmatively, th& 
 second negatively (Copt., Arm., ^th., 
 and more recently Hamm., Mey., al.) ; 
 or (6) as a future, in which case /cai 
 will be consecutive, and nearly equiv. 
 to ' ita fiet ut ;' comp. notes on Phil, 
 iv. 12. Of these (a) is perfectly ad- 
 missible on grammatical grounds ; for 
 the general principle — that 01) p.i] with 
 the 2nd pers. fut. is prohibitive, and 
 
114 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 fxei Kara rod IXi/ey/xaTO?, to ^e Hvai^a Kara rijs crap-, 
 Kor ravra yap aXX^Xoig avrUeirai, "iva /aj? a av OeXrjre 
 
 17. toCto ydp] So Lack, and Tisck. (ed. i), with BDiEFG^i ; 17 ; Vulg., 
 Clarom., Copt., Arm.; Latin Ff. {Mey., Alf., Bagge), and appy. correctly, as 
 TuOra 5^, though weU supported, viz. by ACD^KLK^ ; nearly all mas. ; Syr. 
 (both), M\h. (both) ; Chrys., Theodoret, Dam., al. [Rec, Griesh. Scholz, Tisch. 
 ed. 2, 7) is much more likely to have been a change to avoid the seeming 
 awkwardness of a repetition of y(i,p than vice versa. There is also some weight 
 in the internal evidence ; the repetition of 7iip being so well-known a character- 
 istic of the Apostle's style. 
 
 that with the other persons of the 
 future and all persons of the subj. it 
 enounces a negation and not a prohi- 
 bition (Hermann on Elmsl. Med. 1120, 
 p. 391) — includes so many scarcely 
 doubtful exceptions even in classical 
 Greek (see exx. in Gayler, Partic. 
 Neg. p. 4.3s), that it may be some- 
 times doubted whether the first nega- 
 tive both in oi ijJi] and yiij) oi may not 
 really be ' oratorium magis quam 
 logioum' (Gayler). Be this as it may, 
 it seems certain that in later Greek, 
 and esp. in the LXX, this use of oi fi^ 
 in nearly all combinations, but esp. with 
 the subjunctive is so very abundant (see 
 exx. in Gayler, p. 440), that no gram- 
 matical objections (opp. to Bloomf.) 
 can be urged against the prohibitive 
 usage. As however there is no dis- 
 tinct instance of such a construction 
 in the N. T., and further as the fol- 
 lowing verses seem more naturally to 
 supply the reasons for 'the assertion 
 than for the command, it seems best 
 with Vulg., Clarom., Syr., and appy, 
 Qoth. (see De Gabel. Gr. Goth. § 182. 
 I. b. 3), to adopt the future translation. 
 On the use of the subj. aor. for the 
 future in negative enunciations, see 
 notes and reff. on ch. iv. 30; and on 
 the subject of the verse as limited to 
 religious contentions, see two sermons 
 by Howe, Worha, Vol. ill. p. 123 sq. 
 (edi Hewlett). 
 
 17. ij 7dp o-dpl K.T.X.] 'For the 
 flesh lusteth against the Spirit;'' reason 
 for the foregoing declaration that 
 walking after the Spirit will preclude 
 the fulfilling the lusts of the flesh ; 
 'merito hoc addit cum in uno et 
 eodem homine regenerate sit caro et 
 Spiritus, cujus certamen copiosissime 
 explicatur Bom. vii. [15 — 20],' Beza. 
 In the following clause the order 
 i.vTlK. dXXiJXois [Rec. with KLX ; mss. ; 
 Ff.] is rightly reversed with greatly 
 preponderating authority. 
 Iva. [Ill] ' to the end that ye may not;' 
 not 'so that ye cannot,' Auth. (oi)k 
 iirl ahlas d-rrev, dW us &k6\ovBov 
 Karb. rh oIkuov ISla/ia, Theod.), but 
 with the usual and proper telio force 
 of ha, 'ut non queecumque vultis ilia 
 (ista, CI.) faciatis ;' Vulg., Clarom., 
 comp. Goth., JEth.: the object and 
 end of the rb A.vriKeto'Bai on the part 
 of each Principle is to prevent a man 
 doing what the other Principle would 
 lead him to ; ' ri liuev/ia impedit vos 
 quo minus perfioiatis rd t^s aapKis, 
 contra tj o-opf adversatur vobis ubi 
 tA tov Uveifiaros peragere studetis,' 
 Winer; see Fritz. Excurs. in Matth, 
 p. 838; Baur, Paulus, p. 533 sq. ; 
 and comp. the very good remarks of 
 Hammond, Serm. vii. Part i. p. 123 
 (Angl.-Cath. Libr.), where, although 
 he quotes the eventual (ecbatic) sense 
 of Im in translation be almost appears 
 
V. 18. 
 
 115 
 
 TavTa TTOi^Te. el Se TLveu/iaTi ayetrde ovk ecrre vxb 18 
 
 to adopt the final sense in his remarks 
 and deductions. On the use of ha. in 
 the N. T., see notes on Eph. i. I'j; 
 Fritz. Excurs. I. c. ; and Winer, Or. § 
 63. 6, p. 406 : and for a notice and 
 example of its secondary-telio or sub- 
 final use, notes on i Tliess. v. 4. 
 Neither this derivative sense however, 
 nor any assumed eventual force (opp. 
 to Ust. and De W.), is here to be as- 
 cribed to the particle, both being appy. 
 inconsistent with the probable meaning 
 of BiX-qTi' see next note. 
 & av 6A.r|T6] 'whatsoever ye may wish.' 
 This latter clause will admit of three 
 different explanations according as 
 OiKriTe is referred to (a) the carnal 
 will, John viii. 44, i Tim. v. 1 1 ; (h) 
 the moral or better will; or (c) the 
 free-will in its ordinary acceptation. 
 Of these explanations, the first (a), 
 though supported both by Ghrys., 
 Theod., and several distinguished mo- 
 dern expositors (Bull, Harm. Ap. 11, 
 9, 25 sq. ; Neander, Planting, Vol. i. 
 p. 468, ed. Bohn), must still be pro- 
 nounced logically inconsistent with 
 TaOra yap d\X. dvrlK., which seems 
 rather to point to the opposition in- 
 curred than the victory gained by the 
 Spirit. The second (6), though per- 
 haps in a leas degree, is open to the 
 same objection, notwithstanding the 
 support it may be thought to receive 
 from Horn. vii. 15 sq., where ffiXeiv 
 seems to point to the imperfect though 
 better will; see Calv., Schott, De W., 
 who conceive that St Paul is here ex- 
 pressing biiefly what in Eom. I. c, he 
 is stating more at length. The simple 
 and logical connexion of the words 
 however is much better supported by 
 (c), subject only to this necessary and 
 obvious limitation, that this ladppowos 
 /jdx^must be only predicated in its 
 
 full extent of the earlier and more 
 imperfect stages of a Christian course ; 
 see Olsh. in loc. The state of the 
 true believer is conflict, but with final 
 victory; a truth that was felt even 
 by the Jews, among whom Abraham, 
 Isaac, Jacob, and more especially 
 Joseph, were ever cited as instances 
 of a victorious issue : Schoettg. de 
 Lucta Camis et Spiritus, iii. 10, 11 
 (Vol. 1. p. 1204). 
 
 18. cL 8^ K.T.X.] ' But if ye are led 
 hy the Spirit;' contrasted state to the 
 struggle described in the preceding 
 verse; 'ubi vei-o Sp. vineit, acie res 
 decernitur,' Beng. When the Spirit 
 becomes truly the leading and guiding 
 principle, then indeed the doubtful 
 struggle has ceased ; there would be 
 no fulfilling of the works of the flesh, 
 and by consequence no longer any 
 bondage to the law; comp. Maurice, 
 Uniiy of the N. T. p. 510, and Baur, 
 Paulus, p. 534 note, 
 nvcvfiaTi] 'hy the Spirit;' instru- 
 mental dative; comp. 2 Tim. iii. 6, 
 dydfieva iindvplais iroLKiKaii' and see 
 Winet, 6r. § 31. 7, p. 194, and exx. 
 collected by Kypke, Ols. Vol. 11. p. 
 172. Who can doubt, says Miiller 
 (Doctr. of Sin, Vol. i. p. 355, Clark), 
 that Jlv. iycaO, here entirely corre- 
 sponds in the mind of the Apostle with 
 Som. viii. 14, Ili/e6p,aTi &eov dyovrai, 
 and that thus the fuller and deeper 
 meaning of TlpeO/M -must be maintain- 
 ed throughout this paragraph ? 
 o^Klcrri iSiro voptov] 'ye are not under 
 the law/^not, on the one hand, be- 
 cause there is now no need of its 
 beneficial influences (oi5 SeiToi t^s Airb 
 Tov v6ftov /3oi)9e(tts, Chrys., al.), nor, 
 on the other, because it is now become 
 an alien principle (Usteri, Lehrh. 1. 4. 
 •*) P- 57); l"it simply 'because it finds 
 I 2 
 
116 
 
 nP02 TAAATAZ. 
 
 19 voiXov, '(buvipa Se ecrriv tu epya r^y arapKog, ariva 
 30 eaTiv TTopvela, aKaOapcria, acreXyeta, eiSwXoXaTpeia, 
 
 nothing in jfou to forbid or to con- 
 demn;' see ver. 23. It may seem 
 that the more obvious conclusion 
 would have been 'ye are not under 
 the influences of the flesh ;' but as the 
 lav? was confessedly the principle 
 which was ordained against the in- 
 fluences and Ipya rijs irapKSs (Rom. 
 vii. 7 sq.), the Apostle (in accordance 
 with the general direction of his ar- 
 gument) draws his conclusion rela- 
 tively rather to the principle, than to 
 the mere state and influences against 
 which that principle was ordained. 
 
 19. (|>avepd S^] ' But, to explain 
 and substantiate more fully the last 
 assertion odK iffrk iirh vdfiov, the open 
 difference between the worJes of the 
 flesh, against which the law is ordained, 
 and the fruit of the Spirit, against 
 which there is no law, shall now be 
 ihanifested by special examples.' 
 ^Tiva «<rTiv] 'of which class are;' not 
 quite so much as 'quippe quae,' De 
 Wette, 'quffi quidem,' Schott, — but 
 merely 'such for instance as,' Scrris 
 having appy. here its classifying iorce; 
 See notes on ch. iv. 24. 
 iropvefa] 'fornication.' Observe the 
 prominence always given to condem- 
 nation of this deadly sin, it being one 
 of the things which the old pagan 
 world deemed merely dSid^opa' see 
 Meyer on Acts xv. 20. Moix«'o 
 
 inserted by Hec. with DE(FG «ai)KL ; 
 Clarom., Goth., Syr.-Phil. ; Gr. and 
 Lat. Ff., is rightly rejected by the 
 best recent editors with ABCN'; 3 
 mss., Syr., Copt., ^th. (both) ; Ff. 
 aKaSapcCa, do-^X^eia] ' uncleanness, 
 wantonness;' comp. Rom. xiii. 13, 
 2 Cor. xii. 21 (the 2 are connected 
 with tropv.), Eph. iv. 19. The dis- 
 tinction between these words is drawn 
 
 by Tittmann, Synonym, p. 151, — d/to^. 
 (more generic) 'quffilibet vitse animi- 
 que impuritas ;' &(r0^y. 'protervitas et 
 impudens petulantia hominis d<reX7oOr 
 qui nullam vereoundise pudorisque ra- 
 tionem habet, non obscoenitas aut 
 foeditas lubidinis;' comp. Etym. Mag., 
 ' &cri\y£ia' ^toc/i6t7js irpds Trdaav t^Bov^v 
 see Trench, Synon. § 16, where this 
 latter word is defined as 'petulance 
 or wanton insolence,' as somewhat 
 stronger than ' protervitas, ' and more 
 nearly approaching 'petulantia.' The 
 derivation is very doubtful : it is 
 hardly from BiXyay (Trench), but 
 perhaps from do-- (satiety) and i\y. 
 connected with d\7. (Beufey, Wur- 
 zellex. Vol. 11. p. 15), or more pro- 
 bably (Donalds.) from d priv. and 
 (70X07- [cO'^ayiu), fffl^as], the primary 
 idea being 'dirtiness,' 'foulness.' 
 Winer observes that the vices hero 
 enumerated may be grouped into four 
 classes; (i) sensuality; (2) idolatry, 
 not merely spiritual, but actual, — 
 amalgamation of Christianity with 
 heathenism (i Cor. viii. 7); oomp. 
 Neander, Planting,Yo\. I. p. 243 note 
 (Bohn); (^malice; (4) excesses. Bengel 
 similarly divides them as 'peccata 
 commissa cum proximo, ad versus 
 Deuni, adversus proximum, et circa 
 se ipsum ; cui ordini respondet enume- 
 ratio fruotus Spiritus.' There does not 
 however appear any studied precision 
 in the classification ; St Paul, as 
 Aquinas remarks, 'non intendit enu- 
 merare omnia vitia ordinate et secun- 
 dum artem, sed ilia tantum in quibus 
 abundant et in quibus exoedunt illi ad 
 quos Rcribit.' 
 
 [magia] Syr. This word, like the. 
 
V; 19, 20. 117 
 
 (papfianeia, ey(6pai, epif, ^^Xo?, Oufiol, ipiOetat, Siy^oa-ra- 
 
 Lat. 'veneficia' (Vulg., Clarom.), may 
 either imply (a) poisoning, as ^th,, 
 perhaps Goth., 'lubjalelsei' [oomp. 
 Angl.-Sax. lib], al. ; or (j3) sorcery, as 
 Syr. (both), Copt, (appy.), Arm., al. 
 The former is not improbable on ac- 
 count of its juxtaposition to Ix^P"' 
 (see exx. in Sohleusn. Lex. in LXX. 
 B. v., Exod. vii. II, al.); the latter how- 
 ever seems here more probable, sor- 
 cery, as Meyer notices, being espe- 
 cially prevalent in Asia ; see Acts xix. 
 ig. On the subject generally, see De- 
 litzsch, Biil. Psychol. IV. 17, p. 262 sq. 
 Both in this and the following words 
 there is much variation between the 
 sing, and plural forms. Eec. gives 
 ^peis, <^ij\oL' the singulars ^pis [AB 
 D'S ; mss.] and f^Xos [(A latet) 
 BDiE(FG fiiXous); 17. Goth.] seem 
 however to have the critical prepon- 
 derance, and are adopted by Lachm., 
 Tisch., and most modern editors. 
 6u)ioC] ' displays of wrath ;' both this 
 and the associated plurals serving to 
 denote the various concrete forms of 
 the abstract sins here specified: see 
 exx. of 0u/i,ol noticed by Lobeck, .4^00!, 
 716; Bernhardy, Synt. II. 6, p. 62; 
 and esp. the good note of Heinicheu 
 on Euseb. ITist. Bed. Vlll. 6, Vol. III. 
 p. 18 sq. The meaning of Sufids, as 
 its derivation implies [fl6o, perhaps 
 connected with Sanscr. dhu, 'agitare,' 
 Pott, Elym. Forsch. Vol. i. p. 211], is 
 not so much ' inimicilia hominis acerbi 
 et iracundi' (Tittm. Synon.-p. 133), as 
 iracundicc, or rather excandescentia, 
 the principal idea being that of ' eager 
 motion towards/ 'impulse;' see esp. 
 Donalds. Crat. §47.3, — where however 
 the derivation of 6io> is plausibly re- 
 ferred to OB-, on the principle of ' sug- 
 gestion by contrast.' It thus differs 
 from dpy^, both in its rise, as more 
 sudden (Luke iv. 28, Acts xix. 28), 
 
 and its nature, as less lasting (oom- 
 pai'e Ecclus. xlviii. 10, Kowd(rai dp-y^v 
 irpb Buixov): see Trench, Synon. § 37; 
 Fritz. Rom. Vol. I. p. 105 ; and notes 
 on Bph. iv. 31. IpiBetai] 
 
 ^ p r -71 
 ' caballinr/s ;' comp. Syr., p • t S 
 
 [rebellio, calumnia]. The accurate 
 meaning of the word ipTBeia appears 
 to have been missed by most of the 
 older, and indeed most of the modern 
 expositors, by whom it is commonly 
 connected with Spis (see QScum.), 
 comp. 'rixse,' Vu)g., 'inritationes,' 
 Clarom. Its true etymological con- 
 nexion is however with the Homeric 
 word Spl&os, * a day-labourer,' and 
 thence either with fyiov (rjjx ipyat^op^- 
 vqv rk ^pia, Phavor. Bclog. p. 201, ed. 
 Dind.), or more probably with "EPO, 
 fySoi, ipida, comp. Lobeck, Patholog. 
 p. 365. Its meaning then is (a) La- 
 bour fur hire; comp. Suidas, s. v. 867 
 Kd^eirBai' (/3) Scheming or intriguing 
 for office, 'ambitus;' oomp. Aristot. 
 Pol. V. J. 3, p. 1302 (ed. Bekk.) ; 
 (7) Party-spirit, a contentious spirit 
 of faction; oomp. Schol. ap. Matth. 
 ipid. • iiiipCKbiieiKoi irpd^eis, and Steph, 
 Thes. s. v., where there are also traces 
 of a right perception of the true 
 meaning. Of tliese (7)' seems to be 
 the prevailing meaning in the N. T., 
 where ipiB. occurs no less than 7 
 times, and in the following combina- 
 tions: in Rom. ii. 8, oi i^ ipiS. are 
 defined as d,ire(,Sovi>Tes ry AXridelf, and 
 are opposed to oi Ka8' iiTro/wvijv Ipyou 
 dyaBov k.t.'X.' in 2 Cor. xii. 20, ipiBeTai 
 are enumerated between Bv/iol and 
 KardXaXiai- in PhU. i. 16, 17, ipiB. is 
 antithetical to iydrii' ib. ii. 3, it is 
 connected with Kenodo^ta, and in James 
 iii. 14, 16, with f^Aos. In Ignat. 
 Philad, 8, ipiB. is opposed to xP^ffTOr 
 naBla, It would thus seem that in all 
 
118 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 3T <rlai, aipecrets, (pdovot, <p6voi, fxeQai, Kwfioi, Kai ra o/xoia 
 TOVTOti' a vpoXeyo) vjMV, kuOms nai Trpoeiirov, on ot 
 
 21. ^6voi\ Omitted by Tiscfi. with BN; 17. 33. 35. 57. 73; Augiens.*, 
 Demid., Clem., Maroion ap. Epiph., Iren., Cypr., Hieron. (distinctly), Ambrst., 
 Aug. (Mill). It is inserted in brackets by Lachm. The authorities for the 
 text are ACDEFGKL; great majority of mss. ; Clarom., Boem., Vulg., Syr. 
 (both), Copt., al. ; Chrys., Theod., al. {Rec, Grieib., Schoh, Mey., Alf., Bagge). 
 These so decidedly preponderate, the characteristic paronomasia is 30 probable, 
 and the omission in transcription owing to the similarity in words so very likely, 
 that (jibvoi may be safely retained. 
 
 these passages, with the exception 
 perhaps of Bom. I.e. and Phil. I.e., — 
 where the context points less to party- 
 spirit than to the eontentioumesa it ex- 
 cites (see notes on Phil. i. 1 7, Transl.) 
 — the meaning of ipiB. is fairly covered 
 by the definition of Fritz, as ' summa 
 invidia pectore inclusa proclivitasque 
 ad machinationes,' see Eiickert on 
 Rom. il. 8, and esp. Fritz. Excursus 
 on ipiBoi, ipiBela, ipideio/iat, Comm. 
 on Rom. Vol. I. p. 143 sq. 
 Sixoirraa-Cai, oipl<reis] 'divisions, par- 
 ties;' the 'standings apart' (comp. 
 ' tvisstasseis,' Goth.) and divisions 
 (Rom. xvi. 17) implied in the former 
 word leading naturally to the more 
 determinate choice (' electio praesertim 
 disciplinse cujusdam,' Schott) exercised 
 in the formation of the latter; comp. 
 Theoph. and Bagge in loc., and notes 
 on Tit. iii. 10. 
 
 21. |t46ai, Kujjioi,] 'drunkennesses, 
 
 revellings,^ 'ebrietates, comessationes,' 
 Vulg., Clarom. ; the latter being the 
 more generic and inclusive, to which 
 the former was the usual accompani- 
 ment. On the nocturnal ku/^oi (t4 
 &<reKy9i Kal iropviKh &apiaTa, av/jiirdffia, 
 Hesych.) of the ancients, see Schwarz. 
 de Comisa.Vet., Ahdorf, i744;Welcker 
 in Jacobs, PhUoetr. l. 2, p. 202 sq. ; 
 and on the derivation of the word 
 [appy. connected with Kotixda, and 
 
 from a root /ci-] Benfey, Wumellex. 
 Vol. ir. p. 1 50. & vpokiyia 
 
 vfitv] ' about which I tell you before- 
 hand;' either 'prsemoneo priusquam 
 veniat dies retributionis sive judicii 
 quem hie respicit,' Est., or more 
 simply, 'prcedico, ante eventum,' 
 Beng. ; comp. i Thess. iii. 4. It is 
 not necessary to refer & to irpiatrovTes, 
 as an . accus. derived by attraction 
 from the accus. olyecti after that word 
 (Sohott, Olsh.) ; the ordinary expla- 
 nation 'quod attinet atl ea quae' 
 (Camerar.) being perfectly satisfac- 
 tory. In such cases the relative is 
 really governed by the finite verb as a 
 species of ' quantitative ' accus. ; its 
 prominence in the sentence, and appy. 
 absolute use, being designed to call 
 attention to that on which the thought 
 or action principally turns; comp. 
 John viii. 54, and see Scheuerl. Synt. 
 § 8. 4, p. 55. Such sentences often 
 involve a, slight but perfectly intelli- 
 gible anacoluthon; see Fritz. Rom. 
 vi. 10, Vol. I. p. 393, and comp. notes 
 on oh. ii. 20. 
 
 Ka6us Kol irpoEtirov] 'as I also told 
 you beforehand,' so. when I was with 
 you; the Kal appy. reminding them 
 that these were warnings not new to 
 them. The particle is omitted in 
 BFGXi ; Amiat., Demid. ; Chrys. (i), 
 al., and bracketted by Lachm., but 
 
V. 21, 22. 
 
 119 
 
 Ta TOiavra iraaaaovTSi ^acriXelav Qeov ov KKripovofxij- 
 (Tovaiv. 6 3e KaoTTos tou Tlpev/xaTOi eanv ayairrj, ^apa, 0,1 
 elpfivr\, fiaKOoQvfi'ia, 'XpiarTOTtji, dyaOoicrvvi], tt/o-ti?, 
 
 rightly retained as part of the text by 
 most recent editors, the external evi- 
 dence in its favour [ACDEKLK*; 
 nearly all mss., and most Vv. ; Clem., 
 -Chrys., Theod,] being decidedly pre- 
 ponderant, rd ToiavTa] 
 'such things as tliese,' 'all such things.' 
 The article with rotoCros denotes a. 
 known person or thing or the whole 
 class of such, but hot an undefined 
 individual out of the class ; as in that 
 case ToiovTos is anarthrous : see Kiih- 
 ner on Xen. Mem. i. 5. 2, and Kriigei', 
 Sprachl. § 50. 4. 6. 
 
 Pao-iX. @€ov ov k\t)pov.] 'shall not 
 inherit the kingdom of God;' comp. 
 Eph. V. s, where with equal pertinence 
 the declaration is made of present 
 time. On the meaning of the inclu- 
 sive term ^aaiKda Qeou, — that king- 
 dom which was completely established 
 at the Ascension (see Jackson, Creed, 
 X. 45. 2), of which Christ is the 
 founder, and Christ (and God, Kev. 
 xi. 15, xii. 10) the King, and of which 
 the true Christian even while here on 
 earth is a subject, — see esp. Tholuck, 
 £ergpred. p. 72 sq. ; Bauer, Comment. 
 Theol. II. p. 107 sq.; Heemskerk, iVbfa'o 
 TTJs paa: k.t.'K. (Amst. 1839); and the 
 comments of Eeuss, Thiol. ChrSt. ir. 
 -4, Vol I. p. 180 sq. On its distinction 
 (whether 'in sensu initiali or finali') 
 from the more collective and, so to 
 say, localized iKKKriala, see Stier, 
 Ephes. Vol. II. p. 252 sq. 
 
 22. Kapiros] 'fruit;' used appy. 
 with a significant reference to the 
 organic development from the root, the 
 Spirit (OLsh., Bloomf.), flverf/ioToj be- 
 ing a gen. originis, see notes on 1 Thess, 
 i. 6; Sib. tI Si Kapirbv KoKei toD Ilyeii- 
 /iaros ; Sti rck /iJc wovripi. Ipya i^ rmuv 
 
 ytyverai iibvov, SiS Kxl Ipya (caXei, t4 
 5^ KoXa o{/ T'Tji iifiGripas iTnfie\€ias Set- 
 rat pMvov, dX\d KaX ttjs tou Qeou tpi\- 
 avBpairlixs, Chrys. It is possible that 
 no marked distinction may be intended 
 (Mey.), still, as Knpiri^s is nearly always 
 used by St Paul 'in honam partem' 
 (Rom. i. 13, vi. 22, xv. 28, Eph. v. 9, 
 Phil. i. ir, 22, iv. 17), and as even in 
 Rom. vi. 2 1, where it is used in ref. to 
 e«il works, the same meaning ('what 
 fruit, i. e. what really beneficial result 
 had ye ?' &c.) appears to be preserved, 
 we may safely press the peculiar mean- 
 ing and significance of the term : see 
 an excellent sermon on this text by San- 
 derson, Serm. xvil. (ad Aul.) p. 594 sq. 
 (Lond. 1689). dYairi), x°'P°^] 
 
 ' love, joy ;' Ayiinj, as Mey. observes, 
 standing at the head, as the moving 
 principle of all the rest (comp. i Cor. 
 xiii. I sq. ) ; and x"/'"' following, as 
 that special gift of the Spirit (comp. 
 I Thess. i. 6) which ought to be the 
 pervading principle of Christian life 
 (Phil. iv. 4) ; comp. Reuss, Thiol. 
 Chret. IV. 18, Vol. 11. p. 202. 
 eiprjvt)] 'peace;' not so much here in 
 ref. to peace with God (Phil. iv. 7, see 
 notes in loc.), as — in accordance with 
 the associated and partially contrasted 
 terms l^^pat k.t,\. (ver. 20), — peace 
 with one another; comp. i Thess. v. 
 15. On the meaning of |j.aKpo6v|i,Ca 
 {ckm,entia, 'quS. irae temperans delic- 
 tum non statim vindices,' Fritz. Horn, 
 Vol. I. p. 98), see notes on Eph. iv. 2, 
 and for its distinction from vvo/xov^, 
 notes on Col. i. 11. XPI'"'"'"!*! 
 
 dYafltixnfvt)] ' kindness, goodness,' 
 These words are nearly synonymous. 
 Xpija-TdTr]! (defined in [Plato] Mef. 
 p. 41a E, aa i^dovs airXairrta p^er ei\o- 
 
120 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 23 -TrpavTti^, eyKpareia' Kara toiv tolovtwv ovk ecrriv vofios. 
 
 yuTTtas) may perhaps denote that be- 
 nevolence and sweetness of disposition 
 ('benignity,' Wicl., Ehem.) which 
 finds its sphere and exercise in our 
 intercourse with one another ; comp. 
 Tit. iii. 4, where it is joined with 
 (jiCKavBpiiivla,, and see Tittm. Synon. 
 p. 140 ; Planck, Comment. Theol. Part i. 
 p. 197; and the citation from Jerome 
 in Trench, Synon. §50. 
 ' AyaBuaivri, a, somewhat rare word, 
 though occurring in three other places 
 in St Paul's Epp. (Rom. xv. 14, Eph. 
 V. 9, 2 Thesg. i. 1 1), seems more than 
 ^ ivripnaiiivTi dpcTT} (Phavorinus, Zo- 
 ■naras), or even than ' animi ad optima 
 <iuseque propensio' (Gom. on Rom. xv. 
 14), and may not improbably be ex- 
 tended to that • propensio' as exhibited 
 in action, the propension hoth to will 
 and do what is good ; see Stier, Epkes. 
 Vol. II. p. •265, and comp. Suicer, 
 ■Thesaur. Vol. I. p. 16. The idea of 
 ' bountifulness,' Nehera. ix. 25, is 
 •necessarily included. It may .thus be 
 distinguished from the somewhat late 
 word dyaBdrris (Lob. Phryn. p. 350), 
 ■which rather denotes 'goodness in its 
 essence,'' and is thus commonly used in 
 Teference to God. ir^oTis] 
 
 'faith;' not merely 'fideKtas, veraci- 
 tas in promissis' (Men. ap. Pol. Syn.), 
 i.e. 'good faith' (Matth. xxiii. 23 ; 
 Tit. ii. 10, ?r/i7Tts ayaBii), but trnitful- 
 -ness (Oonyb.), faith in God's promises 
 and mercies and loving trust towards 
 men ; comp. [ Cor. xiii. 7 {Tdvra 
 
 ■ iricTTEiici), where -with /jiaKpoevfila. and 
 •XpijffTiTTjs (ver. 4) it stands as a cha-, 
 
 ■ raoteristic of iydir'ri, 
 
 23. irpavTT)s] 'meehrwss,' 'mode- 
 stia,' Vulg. The irpaiis is defined by 
 Tittmann, Synon. p. 140, as ' mansue- 
 • tus, qui aequo animo omnia fert (aanft- 
 ' miUhig),' comp. Aristot. Etli. iv. 11. 
 
 This however seems wholly insuffi- 
 cient : the Christian grace of irpavrtfi 
 is not mere gentleness or dra/>a|fa (tA 
 dvaKivTyroi/ elvai. irpiis tAs dpyds, Stob. 
 Fiord. I. 18), but appy. denotes i» 
 submissiveuess to God as well as man, 
 and may be distinguished from iwiel- 
 Keia as having its seat in the inner 
 spirit, while the latter seeks to embody 
 itself in acts ; see Trench, Synon. § 43, 
 and notes on Col. iii. 12. On the 
 orthography ir/iaSrijs (appy. the more 
 Attic form. Phot. Lex. p. 386) or 
 ■rpavTTis, comp. Lobeck, Phryn. p. 
 403. eYKpareia] ' temperance,^ 
 
 the exercise of control over passions 
 and desires ; comp. Acts xxiv, 25, 
 2 Pet. i. 6 : iyKp. 54 iffrtv dper^ tov 
 iiridvp-riTiKou KaO' 7}V Karixovffi Ttp Xo- 
 yi(T/ufi tAs iwi9vp,las opii.il>aas iirl rets 
 0ai)Xas iiSovds, Stob. Floril. I. 18. It 
 is distinguished by Diog.-Laert. from 
 (ru0pocri5n) as implying a control over 
 the stronger passions, whereas the 
 latter implies a self-restraint in what 
 is less vehement ; i) (rto(ppo(riji>Tj ijpe- 
 p.cUas ^x^i Tis iviOvfilas, i] Si iyKpdreui, 
 4!<j>oSpd's, Suid. Lex. a. v. Vol. i. p. 
 1 138 (ed. Gaisf.). The addition of 
 i.yvda (DiEFG; Clarom., Vulg. [not 
 Amiat., Fuld.], Bas., al.) is rightly 
 rejected by appy. all editors. 
 Tcov TOLOvTwv] ' oll such things f not 
 maso. (Theod.), but as seems much 
 more natural, and is perhaps suggested 
 by the art. (Olsh.), ncut. in reference 
 to the preceding virtues ; comp. the 
 somewhat parallel passage, Stobseus, 
 Floril. I. 18, fin. dKoXovBS U ryAper^ 
 XPijcttAttjs, iwielKiia, ei^ywo/ioffiScij, i\- 
 iris d7a9i), fri 5i Koi rd rotaOra. 
 Brown's argument (p. 307) is certainly 
 not convincing, ' Toioirwv not roiatS- 
 tijsv,' — a curious oversight. o^k 
 
 80TIV vo|i.o$] ' there is no oondem- 
 
v. 23, 24. 
 
 121 
 
 flt de Toy XjOJCTOU T^r aaoKa eaTavptaarav <tvv rati va- 34 
 
 24. ToO XpioTou] Tisch. adds 'IijiroC with ABCX'N''(Ni toO Kvplov Xp. 'Itjct.) ; 
 ms3. ; Copt., Sahid., ^th. (botli) ; Cyr. (often), Doroth., Bas., Prooop., Dam., 
 al., Aug. [Lachm.]. The external authorities for the omission are DEFGKL 
 (FG add wres, soil. o</rts) ; Vulg., Clarom., Syr. (both), Goth., Arm. ; Chrys., 
 Theodoret, Pseud. -Ath., al. ; very many Lat. Ff. {Rec, Griesb., Schoh, Alf.). 
 Owing to the importance of ABCN, the external evidence may be consider- 
 ed to be favourable to the addition ; the order however is so unusual (Epb. 
 iii. r, Col. ii. 6, but in both with var. readings), and the external evidence 
 for and against so nearly balanced, that I decide in favour of the shorter 
 reading. 
 
 jiatory law.' The explanation per 
 meiosiTi, 'tantum abest ut iis legis 
 Mosaicae terrores sint metuendi, ut 
 potiua Deo sint grati,' Rosenm. (cited 
 by Brown) is not satisfactory. St 
 Paul draws a contrast between the 
 legal judgment under which the former 
 class lay, and the freedom from it 
 which those who are led by the Spirit 
 enjoy; comp. Bull, Exam. Genmrce, 
 XVII. 16, where however the masc. 
 interpr. of Toioirwv is adopted. 
 
 24. 01 Z\ rov Xp.] 'Now they 
 .that are Christ's;' slightly contrasted 
 application of the whole foregoing par- 
 ticulars to the special case of Chris- 
 tians, di not being simply continuative 
 (Auth.), nor yet resumptive in ret. to 
 ver. 16 (De W.) or to ver. 18 (Beng.), 
 but almost syllogistic, the application 
 to Christians forming a sort of prac- 
 tical 'propositio minor' to the fore- 
 going group of verses. The connexion 
 then of the whole paragraph from 
 ver. 16 appears to be as follows ; ' The 
 Spirit and the flesh are contrary to 
 each other ; if the flesh prevail, man 
 is given over to all sin, and excluded 
 from the kingdom of God : if the 
 Spirit be the leading principle, man 
 brings forth good fruit, and is free 
 from the curse of the law. Now the 
 distinguishing feature of the true 
 ;Christian is the crucifixion of the flesh ; 
 
 consequently, as must be obvious from 
 what has been said, the living in and 
 being led by the Spirit ;' see KUckert 
 in loc. 
 
 l(rTaiip(i>(rav] ' crucified,' soil, when 
 they became Christians, and by bap- 
 tism were united with Christ in His 
 death ; comp. Rom. vi. 3. Though this 
 ethical crucifixion is here designated 
 as an act past (comp. Rom. vi. 6, 6 
 TaXaihs ^fjujjv dvOponros ffweffravpiodtj), 
 it really is and must be a continuing 
 act as well ; comp. Rom. viii. 13. This 
 however the aor. with its usual and 
 proper force leaves unnoticed ; it sim- 
 ply specifies, in the form of a general 
 truth, the act as belonging to the past, 
 without affirming or denying any re- 
 ference to the present: see Fritz, de 
 Aor. Vi, p. 17; notes on i Thess. ii. 
 16; and comp. Soph. Antig. 13 18 (last 
 line) ^Si'Sof ac, on which Wex remarks, 
 ' uuum exemplum quod aliquando eve- 
 nerit tanquam norma proponitur:' see 
 also Schmalfeld, Synt. § 60. 2, p. 128. 
 In all such cases the regular reference 
 of the tense to the past may be felt 
 in the almost summary way in which 
 the action is stated, — ^the sort of im- 
 plied dismissal of the subject, and 
 procedure to something fresh; comp. 
 Donalds. Or. § 433. On the 
 
 vital truth that our crucifixion of the 
 flesh is included and involved in that 
 
122 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 25 Oijfiacnv Kal Tai? eTrtdufxlatf- el l^cofAev IIveu/xaTt, Ilveu- 
 
 26 fJLari Kai a-TOf)(oiiJ.ev. m yivw/neda KevoSo^oi, dWi^Xovi 
 irpoKoXovfievoi, dXX^Xon (pQovovvTei. 
 
 of Him with whom we are united, 
 comp. Uiteri, Lehrh. II. I. 3, p. 203 
 eq. ; and on the whole verse read the 
 good sermon of South, Serm. xxill. 
 Vol. IV. p. 338 sq. (Lond. 1843). 
 
 25. AyifjevTi.veoy.wn'] 'If we live 
 hy the Spirit;' — 'if, as a matter of 
 fact (see notes on oh. i, 9), we live 
 (emphatic) by the efficacy and opera- 
 tion of the Spirit ;' assmnption natu- 
 rally arising from the preceding decla- 
 ration of crucifixion of the opposing 
 principle, the flesh ; ' enecatS. in ho- 
 m'inibus Christianis tJ aapxl, necesse 
 est in iisdeui vivat suamque vim 
 libere exserat rb Hyeu/ia,' Schott. The 
 omission here of all illative particles 
 makes the exhortation more forcible 
 and emphatic; comp. i Cor. iii. 17. 
 There is some little difficulty in the 
 explanation of the dative JIveifi.aTi. 
 It is certainly not (o) a dat. of man- 
 ner, sell, 'spiritually,' Middl. ; as thus 
 hot only the force of the verse, but 
 the connexion with what precedes, 
 arising from the opposition of the 
 n^/EC/ia and the <rdp^, is completely 
 lost. Nor again (b) is it a dative of 
 relation, — 'si vitam nostram ad Spi- 
 ritum referimus, ad Spiritum etiam 
 dirigamus vitam,' Fritz. (Rom. xiii. 13. 
 Vol. III. p. 142) ; for though Rom. xiv. 
 6 — 8 supplies a somewhat parallel 
 sentiment, the antithesis between the 
 two clauses is thus obviously deprived 
 of all force and pertinence. On the 
 whole then the ordinary explanation 
 (c) would seem to be most satisfactory, 
 according to which Uuei/iari is to be 
 regarded as a form of the instrumental 
 or dblatival dative (Winer, Gr. § 31. 
 7, p. 194), and here adopted rather 
 than Sii with the accus. (John vi. 57, 
 
 comp. "Winer, p. 356) as thus forming 
 » sharper antithesis to the dative 
 which follows, — 'if we live by the 
 Spirit (if the Spirit is our principle of 
 life), by the Spirit let us also walk ;' 
 comp. 2 Cor. iii. 6, ri Si TlveSfjia fwo- 
 TTotei- andseeNeand. Planting, Vol. I. 
 p. 469 sq. (Bohn). The second 
 
 nveii/jLari. is obviously the dat. normw, 
 soil. (tarA Tois indvov fd/novs voXirevS- 
 /iemi, Chrys. ; see notes on ver. 16. 
 Fritz, explains it as a dat. commodi, 
 'Spiritui vitam consecrate' (Rom, iv. 2, 
 Vol. 1. p. 225) ; but this [Rom. xiii. 
 1 3) he appears to have retracted. 
 o-Toi\(S)icv] ' lei us walk.' The horta- 
 tory imperative is not without some 
 doctrinal significance (Ust.) ; the Apo- 
 stle evidently assuming the union and 
 co-existence of the Divine and human 
 powers in the heart of the true Chris- 
 tian ; comp. Beck, Seelenl. i. 8, p. 20, 
 11. 13, p. 32 sq., and Usteri, Lehrb. 
 11. I. 3, p. 218 note. The command is 
 substantially the same as that in ver. 
 16, except perhaps that o-roix"" ["''"'X"] 
 may imply n, more studied following 
 of a prescribed course than the more 
 general TipnraTelv (notes on Phil. iii. 
 18); comp. Polyb. Hist, xxviil. 5. 6, 
 ffTOLX^iv T-§ TTJi avyKk-rjTov Trpoftiaet' 
 Dion.-Hal. Antiq. vi. 65, aroixiivTots 
 irXilodi ■yvdi/j.ais' and the somewhat 
 unusual expression aToix^tv puif yv- 
 vaiKl, Schol. Arist. Plut. 773. 
 
 26. (Ill 7ivu(i.e9a] ^ Let xis not 
 become;' not ' let us not be,' Auth. 
 (comp. Syr.), but 'non efficiamur," 
 Vulg., Clarom., ' vairf;amma, ' Goth. ; 
 there being appy. no less in the verb 
 than in the person an intentional 
 mildness, which seems to imply that 
 the sin of KevoSo^la had not yet taken 
 
V. 25, 26, VI. I. 
 
 bear : examine your- - ^ f t ^ t 
 
 selves before you judge C/OWTTOJ eV TlVl TrapO.'irTOO/J.aTl, l/yWei? 01 
 
 others. 
 
 root, though the very warning sug- 
 gests that it was to be expected. The 
 verse thus forma a suitable concluding 
 warning against those particular sins 
 of the Galatians to which the Apostle 
 alluded in ver. 13 — 15 and at the close 
 of ver. 20, and belongs to chap, v., 
 though it also serves very naturally to 
 connect the doctrinal with the more 
 directly admonitory portion of the 
 Epistle which begins with the next 
 chapter. A close connexion with chap, 
 vi. (Mey., al.) seems clearly at variance 
 with the introductory ciSeKipol (comp. 
 ch. iv. 12) and the change of person. 
 dWi^X. irpaKaXoiJ)i.cvoi] ' provohing 
 each other ;^ soil, els fptXoveiKias koX 
 Ipeis, Chrys., 'calling one another out 
 to the field of controversy,' Brown ; 
 see Herodian, Hist. VI. 9 (Oxon. 
 ! 704), TrpoKaKeirai. ^/iSs els jiaxv' aud 
 simply, Polyb. Hist. I. 46. 11, vpo- 
 KoKoifievos Toiis iroXe/jciovs. 
 The meaning of <j>8ovoSvTes has been 
 modified by some commentators, ' with- 
 holding out of envy' (Olsh.), 'hating' 
 (Brown) . This is not pecessary ; (pSo- 
 vein is the correlative act on the part of 
 the weak to irpoKokeXaOai on the part 
 of the strong. The strong vauntingly 
 challenged their weaker brethren: the 
 weak could only retaliate with envy. 
 It may be remarked that ipSoveh does 
 not occur elsewhere in the N. T. ; in 
 James iv. 2 it lacks support. 
 
 Chapter VI. i. 'AS«X<|>o£] 'Bre- 
 thren;' conciliatory mode of address 
 introducing the more directly admo- 
 nitory portion: 'latet in hoc etiam 
 uno verlo argumentum,' Beza. 
 iav Kol irpoXT)(jnj)flxj av8p.] 'if a man 
 he even swrprised or caught;'' " praaoo- 
 cupatus fuerit,' Vulg., CUrom., Syr., 
 'gafauhaidan,' Goth. The verb ir^o- 
 
 \riiJiip8ij has received several different 
 interpretations, in accordance with the 
 different meanings assigned to Trp6. 
 The more strict temporal meaning 
 'antea,' whether referred to the ar- 
 rival of the Epistle (Grot.), to a re- 
 currence of the offence (Winer), or to 
 the attempt at restoration, — the Xo/i- 
 pdvecdai taking place before the Karap- 
 rifere (Olsh.), — is unsatisfactory, as 
 the emphatic position of Trp6\riix<p8y 
 and the force of Kal are thus both 
 obscui'ed. The common reference to 
 the unexpectedness of the sin (' notat 
 improvisam occupationem,' Vorst. ; 
 ^cti' avvapiray^j Chrys.) is also incon- 
 sistent with Kal, as this meaning of 
 irph would tend to excuse and qualify, 
 whereas Kal seems to point out an 
 aggravation of the offence. If how- 
 ever irpb be referred to the power of 
 escape, — 'be caught before he could 
 escape,' 'flagrante delicto,' — not only 
 the intensive force of kuJ., but the em- 
 phatic position of irpoKriixtpB^ and the 
 general tenor of the exhortation is 
 fully preserved. This meaning of 
 ir/jo\o/i(3., it must be admitted, is rare, 
 but see exx. in Kypke, Obs. Vol. 11. 
 p. 289, and esp. Wisdom xvii. 16, 
 TpoXrj^deU TTiv 5vff6.\\jKTov ^fxevev 
 aviyKTiv. On the Alexandrian 
 
 form Trp'oXijuipS^, see Winer, Or. § 5. 
 4, p. 46; Tisch. Prolegom. p. xlvii; 
 and on the difference between ihv xal 
 and Kal idv, see note on ch. i. 8: 
 Herm. Tiger, No. 307; Klotz, Devar. 
 Vol. II. p. 519. iv TlVl 
 
 irapairTW|jiaTi] ' in any transgression,' 
 in any particular act of sin, esp. on 
 the side of error, stumbling, or trans- 
 gression of a command. On the dis- 
 tinction between irapdirruixa (more 
 particular) and ip-apria (more gene- 
 ral), see notes on Eph. ii. L, 
 
124 
 
 nP02 TAAATAZ. 
 
 TTvevfiaTiKoi KarapTi^eTe rov toiovtov ev weifxaTi irpav- 
 2 Ti]TOs, aKOTTKiv (TeavTOV /xrj Kai (TV TTeipacrO^s- aX\^- 
 
 v)uts 01 nvevjjiariKoC] ' ye the spirittial 
 ones,' 'ye that are spiritual.' The 
 tenor of the exhortation, coupled with 
 the similar distinctions which St Paul 
 seems elsewhere to have recognized in 
 his converts (e.g. i Cor. iii. i), ap- 
 pears in favour of the opinion that 
 the Apostle is here designating not 
 merely those who were subjectively 
 TTvev/iaTiKol, i.e. who thought them- 
 selves such (oomp. Windisohin.), but 
 those who were objectively irceuyuar., 
 those who had remained true to him 
 and his doctrines ; see Olsh. in loc. 
 That the teachers are mainly addressed 
 in ver. i — 5, and the hearers and laity 
 in ver. 6 — ip, is also probable. 
 KarapTCJtTe] 'restore.' The technical 
 meaning d-Trb twv i^apOpTifidrtoVj *re- 
 ponere in artu luxata membra' (Steph. 
 ITies. Vol. IV. p. HI 3), adopted by 
 Beza, Bloomf., Brown, al., does not 
 seem to be here alluded to, as examples 
 of the simple ethical sense {SiopBovre, 
 Chrysost.) are sufficiently oominon; 
 comp. Herodot. v. 28, KaraprL^'eiv 
 (W.i\riT0i>)' Stob. Floril. I. 85, Karapr. 
 <f>l\ovs Siaipepopirnvs' Greg.-Naziauz. 
 Oi-at. XXVI. Vol. I. p. 443 B, Tr4Sei» 
 odv dp^ofiat KarapTl^eiv up.ds, dSeX^oi; 
 cited by Dindorf. 
 
 €V irvei5|»aTi irpauTtiTOs] ' in the spirit 
 of meekness;' not merely 'a meek 
 spirit, ' — a wholly inadmissible dilution 
 of the true meaning of the words, — 
 but a spirit of which the piincipal 
 constituent (comp. Bemhardy, Synt. 
 III. 44, p. 161) or characterizing qua- 
 lity (Scheuerl. Synt. § 16. 3, p. 1 15) is 
 irpouTTjs, compare !Winer, Gr. § 34. 3. 
 b, p. 212. The anarthrous TrccC^a 
 {but after a prep.) refers ultimately, aa 
 Chrysostom felt, to the Holy Spirit, 
 one of whose especial x"/''"'/"'^'' is 
 'gentleness;' see ch. v. 23. This re- 
 
 ference however must not be over- 
 stated, or expressed by the use of a 
 capital letter; for, as in i Cor. iv. 21 
 (where irf. irpavr7]Tos is joined with 
 dydTTi), so here th. seems immediately 
 to refer to the state of the inward 
 spirit as wrought upon by the Holy 
 Spirit, and ultimately to the Holy 
 Spirit as the in working power; comp. 
 Rom. i. 4, TTp. dyLiaatiPTit' viii. 15, ttv. 
 vlodejias' 2 Cor. iv, 13, irv. ttjs 7ri- 
 (Treus' Eph. i. 17, tv. aotpias' in all 
 which cases wv. seems to indicate the 
 Holy Spirit, and the abstract gen. the 
 specific x^P^f^f^^' see Hamm. in loc, 
 and notes ore 2 Tim. i. 7. 
 o-KO-irtuv o-eavTOv] ' loohing to thyself;* 
 temporal clause stating the proper 
 concomitants of the action ('consider- 
 ing all the time thy own case') or 
 perhaps with a secondary-causal force 
 hinting at the reasons for it: see 
 Kriiger, Sprachl. § 56. 12. i ; Schmal- 
 feld, Synt. § 207; and comp. Donalds. 
 Gr. § 615. For instances of the em- 
 phatic and individualizing enallage of 
 number, see Bemhardy, Synt. xii. 5, 
 p. 421. Lachm. connects this clause 
 with ver. 2, putting a fuU stop after 
 irviip,. TTpouTijTos, and a comma after 
 ireipaaBfs, but thereby obviously 
 weakens the whole force and point of 
 the address. The irveviiaTiicol were 
 reminded of their own liability to fall 
 into temptation: why? Surely not to 
 urge them merely generally to bear one 
 another's burdens, but particularly to 
 evince their Christian spirit by re- 
 storing one who had fallen only after 
 all as they themselves might. 
 (IT) K.T.X.] 'lest thou also shouldst be 
 tempted, ' soil, in a like case ; subjunc- 
 tive Cvereutis est ne quid nunc sit, 
 simulque nescire se utrum sit necne 
 signifioantis,' H§rm. Soph. Ajax, 272), 
 
VI. 
 
 2. 
 
 125 
 
 \a>v TO j3apri ^acrTa^ere, Koi outcoj a.vaTrX)]pa>crere rov 
 
 2. &iiair\7ipii(reTe\ Tisch. (ed. 2, 7) reada ivarXripuaaTe with ACDEKLK; 
 appy. nearly all mss. ; Syr. -Phil., perhaps Goth, [but conjunct, acts both for 
 fut. and imper. ; De Gabel. Gr. § 182, 186]; Clem., Ath., Chrys., Theodoret, 
 Dam., al. {Bee, Griesb., Scholz). The authorities for the text are BFG; 2 mss. ; 
 "Vulg., Clarom., Syr., Arm., Copt., Sahid., iEth. (both); Theodoret (ms.), 
 Cypr., al. {Lachm. [non marg.], Tisch. ed. i, Meyer, Be Wette, approved by 
 Mill, Prolegom. p. 123). The preponderance of Manuseript evidence is thus 
 plainly in favour of the imper. ; still the testimony of the "Versions joined with, 
 the extreme probability of a change from the fut. to the imp. (see Mill, I.e.) 
 seems sufficient to authorize the rejection of a reading which on strict gram- 
 matical principles may be pronounced somewhat suspicious. 
 
 and in the eior., in reference to an 
 event still impending ; see Winer, Gr. 
 § 56. 2, p. 447, and the copious list of 
 exx. of this and similar constructions 
 in Gayler, Part. Neg. p. 325. 
 
 ■i. ciXXi|Xuv rd Papt]] 'the iwr- 
 dens of one another;' the dXXijX., as 
 Meyer rightly observes, being em- 
 phatic, not however with any oblique 
 reference to the burden of the Law 
 (Alf.)i but simply in opposition to 
 that selfish feeling which would leave 
 each one to bear his own ; contrast 
 the Apostle's own example, 2 Cor. 
 xi. 29. The meaning of this expres- 
 sive word must not be too much 
 circumscribed. It seems chosen with 
 inclusive ref. to all forms of weak- 
 nesses (iffSeD^iiara, Bom. xv. i), suf- 
 ferings, and perhaps more especially 
 tins; the purport of the command 
 being tpipeiv t4 twv T\r]<rlov iXarrii- 
 fiara, Chrys., or, with more exact- 
 ness, ^TTOCou^tfefV rijv ^vxhv itrb t^s 
 ToO afiapT'juaTos (niceiS^o-eus pepaprj- 
 Hivriv, Theod.-Mops. p. 129. 
 ^turratfri] 'tear,' i.e. sustain as a 
 superimposed burden. On the parti- 
 cular use and meaning of jSaffrdfew 
 in the important doctrinal statement 
 of Matth. viii. 17 as exemplified by 
 this passage, see Magee, Atonement, 
 No. XLII. Vol. I. p. 415 sq. 
 Kai ovTuis dvairXigpuiTETe] 'and thus 
 
 shall ye fv,lfil,' — thus, in this way and 
 no other, viz. by following the exhor^ 
 tation just given. Future after impe- 
 rat., as in ch. v. 16, On the whole 
 (see crit. note) the future seems the 
 more probable, as well as perhaps the 
 more strictly grammatical reading ; for 
 though no opposing argument can be 
 founded on the use of the imper. aor,. 
 combined with the imper. present (the 
 former often stating the general com- 
 mand, the latter some of the details;- 
 comp. Sohomann, Isceus, p. 235), still 
 in the case of this particular verb the 
 use of the present (comp. Bamab. Bp. 
 21, dyOTrXij/soOre iraaav (irroXipi) is 
 much more natural. The compound 
 &.vaTrKtipow is not simply synonymous 
 with ifKripoSv (Eiick., al.), but appears' 
 in all cases to denote a compile filling 
 up, and to point to & partial rather 
 than an entire vacuum ; ' hsec demum 
 erit perfeota legis impletio,' Winer, 
 Verb. Comp. Taso. in. p. 11; comp. 
 Hut. Poplic. § II, dyeirX^pwij-e ttji/ 
 /SouXr)!' iKifayBpoSaav ('made up the 
 full number of), and see notes on 
 Phil. ii. 30. The explanation of. 
 Chrys., Kotvy iravres 7r\ijpdi<raTf, is 
 not satisfactory. 
 
 Tov vifiov ToO Xp.] 'the law of 
 Christ ;' not generally ' le mobile des 
 aotes du Chretien' (Reuas, Thiol. Chr. 
 IV. 16, Vol. II. p. i§8), but dpfinitelj. 
 
126 
 
 nPOS rAAATAS. 
 
 3 vo/nov Tov Xpia-Tov. et yap SoKei m eival re fxrjSev wv, 
 
 4 (ppevavaToi eavrov. to Se epyov eavrov SoKifiwCerw 
 
 ' the law of love ' {tt]v Aydirriv (p^qalv, 
 Theod.-Mops.), which He gave (John 
 xiii. 34, ivToX^v Kaw^v SiSani ijilv ha 
 i,yaira,Te d\Xi)\ous' I Johniii. 23, dya- 
 Tio^ev dXX^Xous KaBdi^ ^8ujk£v ivTo\-^v 
 iliuv), and which He so graciously 
 exemplified, airii yap rhs anaprias 
 if/jiwv df^XajSe Kal rds v6ffous i^daTatrev, 
 Sohol. ap. Matth. The peculiar term 
 cii«os is perhaps here chosen with some 
 reference to the case of the Galatians : 
 they affected an observance of the law 
 of Moses, here was a law of Christ in 
 which was included the fulfilment of 
 the whole law ; comp. ch. v. 14. This 
 'novum praiceptum Christi' is illus- 
 trated and explained by Knapp, Script, 
 Var. Arg. No. x. p. 369 sq. 
 
 3. A ydp K.T.X.] ' Fm' if any one 
 ihinka Sec' oonfinnation of the fore- 
 going exhortation to gentleness and 
 humility, by showing the evils of the 
 opposite course. The best motive to 
 indulgence towards others is, as Olsh. 
 remarks, the sense of our own weak- 
 ness. |j.i]Sev <4'v] ' wlien he is 
 nothing,' ' being all the time nothing ;' 
 temporal, or in the more accurate lan- 
 guage of Sohmalfeld, 'temporal-con- 
 cessive' participle, stating what the 
 man after all is, in spite of his opinion 
 of himself J see the exx. in Sohmalfeld, 
 Si/nt. § 207. i, p. 415. Alford finds 
 in this use of the subjective iiriSh ra- 
 ther than oiSiv (absolute) a fine ironj', 
 — 'being, if he would come to himself 
 and look on the real fact.' This how- 
 ever is somewhat precarious, as the use 
 of the subjective negation with par- 
 ticiples is the prevailing usage in the 
 N. T. ; see Green, Or. p. 122. While 
 then we may press oi when so con- 
 nected, we must be careful in over- 
 pressing /ii}, see notes on i Tliess, ii. 
 i£, iii. I. For illustrative exx. 
 
 of the general fonn of expression, see 
 Welst. in loc, and Kypke, Obs. Vol. 
 II. p. ^gi ; one of the most apposite 
 is Plato, Apol. p. 41 B, ii.v 60/cfiffi 
 Ti eTvai ;ii/5^i' 6vt€s. 
 ApevairaTa eavrov] ' he deceiveth his 
 own mind,' 'inwardly deceiveth him- 
 self;' comp. Goth., 'frajjja-marzeins 
 1st' [intellectus deceptio est]. The 
 verb is a OTraf Xeyo/*. in the N. T. ; 
 comp. however (ppevaTrdTTjs, Tit. i. 10, 
 and diraruiy Kapdlav iavrou, James i. 
 26. This last passage may perhaps 
 enable us to draw a distinction be- 
 tween aTar^ ^avrbi/ and tppefairar^ 
 iavrSv. The former may imply a de- 
 ception which had something objective 
 to rest upon ; the latter a more studied, 
 inward- working, and purely subjective 
 deception ; comp. notes on Tit. i. 10. 
 Hence the force of the command 
 which follows, t6 Ipyov SoKip,a^4To>, 
 let him put to the proof his outward 
 acts, and form his judgment upon 
 them. The glosses of Hesych. (x^^"- 
 dfei), and even Zouaras (5ia7ra(fei), 
 consequently seem to be insufiScient. 
 The order iavrbv <ppeyaw. [Ecc. with 
 DEFGKL ; al.] is fairly supported, but 
 inferior in point of critical authority 
 to that of the text (Lachm., Tisch., 
 with ABCN; 80, al.), and not im- 
 probably a correction to give kavrbv 
 studied prominence. 
 
 4. Td...Sp'Yov lavTov SoKiji.] 'prove 
 his own work;' put to the test all that 
 he is particularly engaged on; 'rem 
 non opinionem de se,' Beng. The 
 singular with the article is appy. here 
 used collectively (De W., Mey.), soil. 
 t4s iavroxj vpd^en, Theophyl. ; ri 
 jSe^iU/u^va airif, CEcum. ; ' universam 
 agendi rationem oompleotitur,' Schott: 
 comp. Rom. ii. 15, i Pet. i. 17; and 
 see Winer, Gr. § 27. i, p. J57. On 
 
VI. 3, 4, 5. 
 
 127 
 
 eKauTOi, Ka\ Tore eh eavrov fiovov to Kavx>]f-« e^ei, Koi 
 ovK ek Tov ereoov e/cacTTOj yap to 'ISiov (popTiov ^ 
 ^aaTaa-et. 
 
 the meaning of SoKi^ofeiK (jner' iapi- 
 /Se/as i^crd^eiv, Theoph. ), see notes on 
 Phil. i. lo; Suicer, Thesaur. a. v. Vol. 
 
 1. p. 936; and for a good practical 
 sermon on this and the preceding 
 Terse, Usher, Serm. ill. Vol. xiii. p. 
 31 sq. (ed. Elrington). 
 
 TO Kavx'ni'^] ' ^^ ground of toasting.' 
 The true meaning of this passage has 
 been somewhat obscured by a neglect 
 of the exact meaning and force of the 
 diflferent words. (i) The concrete 
 KaixW't gloriandi mcUeries (Rom. iv. 
 
 2, I Cor. ix. 15, 16, al.), must not be 
 confounded with Kavxriais, gloriatio 
 (Rom. iiL 27, al.), the distinction be- 
 tween these words being appy. always 
 observed in the N. T., even in 2 Cor, 
 V. 12, ix. 3, al. : (2) the article is not 
 used kot' i^ox^v, but pronominally 
 (Middleton, oh. v. 3), 'his ground of 
 boasting,' the (coiJxw which properly 
 belongs to him; comp. i Cor. iv. 5, 
 Tire 6 liraivoi yev^(TeTai. eKaarif (3) 
 the prep. eU must in each clause bear 
 the same meaning (opp. to De Wette); 
 the most simple and suitable appear- 
 ing to be, 'with regard to,' 'in rela- 
 tion to,' not 'contra,' Schott (which 
 can be justified, e.g. Luke xii. 10, but 
 connected with iavr. would involve an 
 artificial explanation); comp. 2 Cor. 
 xi. 10, :^ /foi5xi7<"s avrri oi (jipay/jaeTai 
 els i/ii' Eph. iii. 16, KpaTaiwSijvai.... 
 els rbv lirw &v8pu>Trov' comp. Winer, 
 Gr. § 49, a., p. 354; Bernh. Synt. v. 
 li, p. 220: (4) the force of rbv Hrepov 
 (not irepov, as implied by Auth.) must 
 not be overlooked, Bcil. ' tke one with 
 whom he is contrasting himself ;' ' his 
 neighbour,' Copt., Arm. The 
 meaning of the whole clause then will 
 be, ' If any one wishe.i to find matter 
 for boasting, let it be truly searched 
 
 for in his own actions, and not derived 
 from a contrast of his own fancied vir- 
 tues with the faults of others f comp. 
 Hammond in loc. True Christian 
 Koi^xW) I'l^s St Paul's, must be 
 found either in a deep and thankful 
 acknowledgment of blessings and suc- 
 cesses {h 'K.vplip KavxdffBu, 2 Cor. *. 
 17), or in afflictions and weakness 
 (2 Cor xi. 30, xii. 5), which still' more 
 show forth both the mercy and the 
 mighty power of the Lord; comp. 2 
 Cor. xii. 9. 
 
 5. ^KdoTos 7ap] 'for each man;' 
 confirmatory clause standing in close 
 connexion with the last words of ver. 
 4, and assigning the reason why a 
 man would have little real or just 
 ground for claiming spiritual supe- 
 riority over bis- neighbour : he had 
 only to look at himself to see that he 
 had his own burden to bear; Kal <ri/ 
 K&Keivos t4 tbiov (jioprlov paffrdaere, 
 (Ecum. <f>opTCov] ' load;' 
 
 not identical with the preceding pd- 
 pos, ver. 2 (Vulg., Clarom., Arm., but 
 not any of the other Vv.), which 
 perhaps is used as a more general term 
 in reference to the community at 
 large, while 0o/)t. has a more indi- 
 vidualizing reference to the particular 
 load of sins and infirmities which each 
 one, like a wayfarer (comp. Ecclus. 
 xxi. 16; Xen. Mem. III. 13. 6), had 
 to carry; 'alia sunt onera partici- 
 pandee infirmitatis, alia reddendae ra- 
 tionis Deo de actibus nostris: ilia 
 cum fratribus sustentanda communi- 
 cantur, hsec propria ab unoquoque por- 
 tantur,' August, de Consens. Evang. 
 II. 30. 72. The qualitative and hum- 
 bling distinction of Chrys. (tois dvifiairi 
 TOV tjtopriov KoX TTjS &,xGo<t>opl().s irU^ojif 
 air&v Tb avveiSbs), and the quantita. 
 
128 
 6 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 Koivwi^eha, Sk 6 KarriXovfMepoi To^ gLhers :1 %uTw 
 
 now, whether it be to the flesh or to the Spirit, so shaU you reap. 
 
 tive of Beng. {'^oprloi/ par ferentis 
 viribua: jSrfpi; qute excedunt'), do not 
 appear so natural or probable. The 
 allusion which Conjb. here finds to 
 jEaop'B well-known fable (the Iliipai 
 Si)o, ? p. 1 6s, ed. De Furia) is not very- 
 plausible, as the point of the fable 
 and the tenor of this verse are far 
 from being identical. PooToo-ei] 
 
 ' shall bear,' aoil. 'has to bear,' 'must 
 bear.' ' The future does not here refer 
 to the day of judgment (Theod., al. ; 
 see ch. v. lo), nor even (like ?fei) to 
 the future period when the conviction 
 is arrived at, ' will find he has to bear ' 
 (Windisoh., al.) ; but is appy. used 
 ethically in ref. to what according to 
 the nature of things must be the case ; 
 comp. notes on Eph. v. 3 1 ; Thiersch, 
 de Pent. ill. 11, p. 158 sq. ; and see 
 exx. in Jelf, Gr. § 406. 3, and Bern- 
 hardy, Synt. X. 5, p. 377. It was not 
 so much from a sense of future respon- 
 sibility, as from a consciousness of 
 present unavoidahle d-xSotpopla, that a 
 man would be led to think humbly of 
 himself and kindly of his neighbour. 
 The observation of Fritzsche on the 
 use of the future is worthy of citation ; 
 'Futurum in sententi^ general! recte 
 ponitur, quandoquidem rei quse in 
 nullum tempus nou convenire videatuv 
 etiam futuro tempore locum futurum 
 esse jure sumitur,' Rom. vii. 3, Vol. 
 11. p. 9. 
 
 6. Koiv<dvc(tu S^ K.T.X.] 'But let 
 him, that is instructed. . .share with, &o.' 
 exhortation to the duty of sharing 
 temporal blessings with others, placed 
 in contrast (S^) to the foregoing decla- 
 ration of individual responsibility in 
 spiritual matters. With regard to 
 the construction there ia some little 
 doubt whether icoii'wi'eri' is here transi- 
 tive ('sit benignua in magistrum in 
 
 omni bonorum genere,' Fritz. Eom. 
 I.e. ; comp. Chrya. Troiroi' iTiSeiKviaSta 
 T£pl airbv ba\j/CKeiav), or intranaitive. 
 The verb has three constructions in 
 the N. T. ; (a) with gen. of the thing, 
 only Heb. ii. 14; (b) with dat. of 
 thing, the common construction, Eom. 
 xii. 13, XV. 77, I Tim. v. 22, i Pet. 
 iv. 13, 2 John 11; (c) dat. of person, 
 the thing under the regimen of a prep., 
 Phil. iv. 15. In all these instances 
 (even in Rom. xii. 13) the meaning 
 seems clearly intransitive. The same 
 appears to be the meaning in the pre- 
 sent case: for though the transitive 
 constr. is lexically admissible (koikutu 
 ffoi (Jk ?X"> '^'"'' '''"^ /ieTddlSai/jU, 
 Thom.-Mag.), and yields a perfectly 
 good sense ; still the prevailing use of 
 Koivupetv in the N. T., the analogy 
 of construction between this passage 
 and Phil. iv. 15, oiScula /loi iKK\T](7la, 
 iKowiLrqirev els X6701' 86ircii)S Kal Xii/t- 
 }j/eas, and the general context, supply 
 arguments in favour of the intransitive 
 meaning which distinctly seem to 
 preponderate. 
 
 6 KaTT]xo«n. Tov XiS^ov] 'he that is 
 instructed in the Word,' scil. in the 
 Gospel (see Acta xv. 7, rbv 'Kiycy toC 
 e6ayye\lov, and comp. Luke 1. 2), rbv 
 X(S70» being the accus. of reference, 
 or what is termed ' the qualitative ob- 
 ject' (Hartung, Casus, p. 55, 61) after 
 the pass. part. Karrixoilievos (Acta 
 xviii. 25) ; see Winer, Gr. § 32. 5, p. 
 204, and esp. Schmalfeld, Synt. § 25, 
 compared with § 16 ad fin. With 
 regard to the meaning of Karrixii^; 
 wliich has here been somewhat unduly 
 pressed, we may observe that the word 
 appears to have four meanings; (a) 
 sono; ivrl toO iix^, Suidas; (|8) sono 
 impleo; comp. Lucian, Jup. Trag, 
 39, Kar^Sowi Kal KariiX'-iai' (7) vivd 
 
VI. 6, 7. 
 
 129 
 
 \6yov Tip Kartf^ovvTi ev iraaiv dyaOoii. firj TrXavaa-de, 7 
 Geoff ou nvKTripiYerai o yap eav (Tireiprt avdpteiroi, 
 
 voce erudio, irpoTpiiroijt,ai, Kal vapaaiw, 
 Suio. ; oomp. Syr. MVi»? [qvii audit], 
 
 7 P 
 
 jEth. ; and see Joseph. Vit. § 6g, 
 where this meaning seems confirmed 
 by the context dXijAaaK iptapripa, and 
 lastly (S), with a more general and un- 
 restricted reference, edoceo (SiSdiTKU), 
 Hesych., Zonaras), — appy. the mean- 
 ing in the present case (' sa lajsida,' 
 
 Goth., ]ZjZALD> [qui instituit] 
 
 ff 7 •» 
 
 Syr.Phil.), and in the majority of 
 the passages in the N. T. (Lvike i. 4, 
 Acts xviii. 25, Bom. ii. 18, perhaps 
 even i Cor. xiv. 19, Acts xxi. 21, 24) 
 in which it occurs; the idea of oral 
 teaching being merged in that of ge- 
 neral instruction however communi- 
 cated. On the use of the word, esp. 
 in EccL writers, see Suicer, Theaaw, 
 a. V. Vol. 1. p. 69 aq., where it is 
 fully explained. iv irdiriv 
 
 d7a6als] 'in (sphere of the action of 
 Kowiavuv) all good things,' i.e. 'all tem- 
 poral blessings ;' compare i Cor. ix. 
 II, There does not seem sufficient 
 reason for leaving the ancient in- 
 terpretation, KeXei)« Toh TvevftaTiKuv 
 AwoXaiovo't iieraSMvai ruv aapKiKuv, 
 CEcum. : see Neand. Planting, Vol, i. 
 p. 152 note (Bohn). The usual objec- 
 tions are based on the isolation of the 
 verse from ver. 5 and 7, which this 
 interpretation is thought to cause. 
 This however does not appear to be 
 the case. The concluding words of 
 ver. S, if left without any further ad- 
 dition, might have been misconstrued 
 into an implied declaration that it was 
 not right to be chargeable on anybody. 
 This the Apostle specially, but almost 
 parenthetically, obviates, indicating 
 with S^ (see above) the contrast be- 
 
 tween the spiritual and the temporal 
 application. 
 
 7. lii) irXavdo-Oc] ' Se not deceived :' 
 continuation of the subject in a more 
 general and extended way, though 
 still not without reference to the sub- 
 ject of the special command. This 
 solemn and emphatic mode of admo- 
 nition is used by St Paul in two 
 other passages, i Cor. vi. 9, and xv. 
 33 ; in the former with reference to 
 an evil act, in the later to an evil 
 conclusion, just mentioned. In the 
 present case the reference is rather to 
 what follows; though a reference to 
 what precedes (' praestringit tenaoes," 
 Parseus) need not be excluded. Igna- 
 tius uses the same phrase, ad Eph, 5, 
 16, Philad. 3, Smyrn. 6. 
 01) |i,vKTT|pCScTai.] 'is not (actually, or 
 with impunity) mocked;' 'non irride- 
 tur,' Vulg. This emphatic word is 
 used several times in the LXX, and 
 occasionally in later classical writers : 
 liVKTiipli^eui Xiyo/iev tovs & T<f Siairal- 
 fto' nvhs Tourb rrus tA iiipoi (/ivKT^pa) 
 iiruTir&vTas, Etym. M. s. v. /ii/Krijp, 
 p. S94 (ed. Gaisf.). Eisner (OU. Vol. 
 II. p. 199) has illustrated this meaning 
 by a few examples, e. g. Quintil. Inst. 
 VIII. 6. 59 ; Sueton. Au^uaA. 4 ; Cicero, 
 Epist. JFam. xv, 19, In Hippoc. 
 p. 1240 s, it occurs in the sense of 
 ' bleeding at the nose.' 
 3 yap Idv k.t.X.] 'for whatsoever u, 
 mem sovieih;' confirmation of the truth 
 of the preceding assertion by means of 
 a significant image (comp. Matth. xiii. 
 39) derived from the natural world. 
 TovTO KaV 6EpC(rci] ' this — and nothing 
 else than this— sAaZJ he also reap; 
 the Kal with its asceosive force point- 
 ing to the regularly developed issues. 
 Wetst. (irj loo.) aptly cites Cic. de Oral. 
 
 S 
 
130 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 8 TOVTO KOI Bepla-eC on 6 airelpm eh rhv <rapKa eavrov 
 eK tSj trapKoi Oepia-ei (pOopdv, 6 Se a-tre'ipwv eh ro 
 
 9 Hvev/xa e/c toC Hvevfiaros Oeplcrei ^wjji/ aiuviov. to ^e 
 
 II. 65, ' ut sementem feoeris ita metes. 
 On this text see two sermons by Fa- 
 rindon, Serm, Lll. LXII. Vol. i. p. i'2 
 sq. (Lond. 1849). 
 
 8. 3ti 6 <rff«Cp<i)v] ' iecause he that 
 is sowing/ reason for the concluding 
 TOVTO (col $epl<rei, and exemplification 
 of it in spiritual things ; he that is 
 sowing one kind ol seed (the Spirit) 
 will reap the regular products and de- 
 Telopmenta of that seed ; he that is 
 sowing another (the flesh) those of 
 that other : iSairep yiip iirl ruiv aircp- 
 H&Tov oiiK ht (TTelpovra dpi^ovs 
 (vetches) crTrov i/irjirat, Set yhp toO 
 aiiroG y^vovt kclI rbv airhposr thrat. KoX 
 rbv &/friT6v, Chrys. els 
 
 ■nqv o-iipKa lauroi)] 'unto, or for, his 
 own flesh,' not 'im came suS,' Yulg., 
 Clarom. ; for though the flesh and the 
 Spirit are represented under the image 
 of two corn-fields, in which seed is 
 sown, and from which the harvest is 
 gathered, the meaning of eJj is still 
 not local (' in, tanquam in agrum,' 
 Beng.), but, in accordance with its 
 more usual meaning, ethical ('carni 
 suae,' Beza, comp. Copt.) ; the prepp. 
 used in the N. T. in a strictly local 
 sense being appy. in and iirl, the 
 former in reference to the enclosure in 
 which the seed is sown (Matth. xiii. 
 24, 2'j, 19, and metaphorically, Mark 
 iv. 15, Rec), the latter to the spot on 
 which it is cast (Matth, xiii. 20, 23, 
 Mark iy. 16, 20, 31). In the expres- 
 sion els tol: &Kdv8as (Matth. xiii. 22, 
 Markiv. 1 8) eis rather means 'among;' 
 comp. Plato, Leg. vili. p. 838 B. 
 The force of the pronoun iavToO must 
 not be overlooked, selfishness being 
 implied as well as carnality ; ■ caro 
 suitati dedita est,' Beng.: compare 
 
 Aquinas (cited by Windisch.), 'sed 
 hota quod cum agit de seminations 
 carnis dicit in came sua, quia caro eat 
 nobis de naturS nostr& ; sed cum loqui- 
 tur de semine Spiritus non dicit sua, 
 quia Spiritus non est nobis a nobis, sed 
 a Deo.' <j>9opav] 'corruption,' — 
 
 of the whole man, both body and soul ; 
 not merely in the narrower physical 
 sense of 'decay' {kuI y&p ai5ra tpffei- 
 povrai xal (rv/i^Selpei t6 aSifui, Chrys.) ; 
 but also in the fuller ethical sense 
 of 'corruption of soul,' in which of 
 course eternal death and 'destruction' 
 (Heaych. ipBopd' iXeSpos) are involved 
 and implied; see 2 Fet. i. 4, ii. 12, 19, 
 and comp. Kom. vi. 21, 22. The use 
 however of ijiBopi. rather than d)r(6- 
 Xeio (Phil. iii. 19) — though it possibly 
 may be introduced as more applicable 
 to ffdpl (Schott)— seems to preclude 
 our adopting 'destruction' as i\ie pri- 
 mary meaning; see Stier, Ephes. Vol. 
 n. p. 180. £cin]v aluviov] 
 
 'ete)"nal life;' ffeiii"', in contrast to the 
 preceding tj>9opiit (comp. Psalm ciii. 4, 
 Jonah ii. 7), and that too, — as the 
 nature of the principle to which the 
 sowing is made diatinctly suggests, — 
 alibviov. On the meaning of the term 
 oMwos, comp. notes on, 2 Thess. i. 9. 
 
 9. TO 8^ KoXdv iroiouvres] ' But in 
 well-doing let vs, &c.' exhortation to 
 perseverance in the form of sowing 
 just mentioned, the 8^ idiomatically 
 introducing an address after foregoing 
 details (comp. Eurip. Jlhes. 165, vat, 
 Kal Sl/cata toCto . . . rdjoi Sf puaBiv 
 K.T.X.), and, though practically ap- 
 proaching in meaning to ovv (' so let us 
 not'), still presei-ving its proper force 
 in the contrast between the corrupted 
 class just prominently mentioned and 
 
VI. 8—10. 
 
 131 
 
 KaXov voiouvres fi^ evKaK&fJLev Kaipw yap iSltp Oepicro- 
 fiev fi.fi eKXuofJLevoi. dpa ovv, w? Kaipov e)(OfJLev, epya^w- lO 
 
 the better class wliioh is now ad- 
 dressed : see exx. in Hartung, Pairtik. 
 Si, L. 5, VoL I. p. i66. On the general 
 and inclusive meaning of rd Kakhv, see 
 notes on ver. lo. y«\ lvKaKc5|j,ev] 
 
 'let Its not loee heart.' Both here and 
 in the other passages where the word 
 occurs (Luke xviii. I, 2 Cor. iv. i, i6, 
 Eph. iii. 13, 2 Thess. iii. 13) Lachm. 
 and Tiach. read ivKaK. (iyK.) instead 
 of (kkclk. (Sec., aL), and rightly; as it 
 seems very doubtful whether ixKaK. is 
 a genuine word at all, and whether its 
 occurrence in lexicons and use in later 
 writers (see exx. collected by h. Dind. 
 in Steph. Thes. a. v. Vol. v. p. 430) is 
 not, as Usteri thinks, entirely due to 
 these doubtful readings. At any rate, 
 if ixKaK. exist, the difference wiU be 
 very slight: iKxaKeiv may perhaps 
 mean ' to retire from fear ovt of any 
 course of action' (nearly =(l7roKa/c£&); 
 iiiKaKuv 'to behave with cowardice, 
 to lose hsart, when m it.' In Kost u. 
 Palm, Lex. (Vol. L p. 833), Polyb. 
 BiM. IV. ig, 10 is cited in favour of 
 iKKaxeiv. This is an oversight ; the 
 reading is iveKdKtjirei'f and is actually 
 so cited by Kost u. Pahn under ^7x0- 
 xiia, see p. 762. 'Bkkok. is here sup- 
 ported by CD'EKL, and FG giving 
 iKKaK'fiffuiuev. Kaip^ yap ihlif] 
 
 'far im due, proper, time;' 'tempore 
 praestituto' (Beza), the time appointed 
 by God for the reward to be given: 
 comp. Katpocs IStois, J Tim. ii. 6, vi. 
 15. On the present use of the dative 
 to denote the space of time within 
 which the action takes place, — more 
 correctly expressed with an inserted 
 h> (Kom. iii. 26, 2 Thess. ii. 6, al.), — 
 see notes on i Tim. ii. 6, and comp. 
 Eph. ii. 12. H'^ IkXvohwoi] 
 
 ' if now we faint not' in our weU-dbing ; 
 .'provided that we do not;' hypothe- 
 
 tical use of the temporal participle, the 
 present tense pointing to the state in 
 which they must now be if they would 
 reap hereafter: see Kriiger, Sprachl. 
 § 56. 1 1, and exx. in Schmalfeld, Synt. 
 % 207. 5, p. 415. Neither the simple 
 predicative connexion with Oeplaoiiev 
 
 _X ^ji^l^ X^O [et uon erit 
 
 molestum nobis] Syr., nor the more 
 practically adverbial, 'without faint- 
 ing' (surely not ' unweigerlich,' 
 Ewald), Bcil. vbvov Stxa Beplffo/nev 
 (Theod., Theoph., al., who thus draw 
 a contrast between the toilsome nature 
 of the earthly and the unwearying na- 
 ture of the heavenly harvest), seems 
 satisfactory. For though this inter- 
 pretation cannot be pronounced gram- 
 inaticaUy incorrect on account of the 
 use of /lii rather than oi (Buck., 
 Schott),— the connexion of ^^j with 
 participles being so distinctly the pre- 
 vailing usage in the N. T. and later 
 writers (see notes on ver. 3, and comp. 
 exx. in Winer, Gr. § 55. 5, p. 428 sq., 
 and in Gayler, Parlic. Neg. p. 36), — 
 it still must be rejected on exegetieal 
 grounds, as adding no particular force 
 to the general exhortation; whereas 
 the conditional meaning serves fully 
 to bring out the mingled warning and 
 encouragement (Tporpijra Kal iip(\Ke- 
 rai, Chrya.) which seems to pervade 
 the verse. The 
 
 distinction drawn by Beng. between 
 iKKaxetv {Bee.) in velle, said ixXieaSai 
 in posse, the foi-mer referring to the 
 faintness of heart, the latter to the 
 vimtrvmg state and the ' (interna) viri- 
 um remissio,' seems fairly tenable: 
 see exx. in Steph. Thesav/r. a. v., from 
 which we may select (though with a 
 more simply physical ref.), Plutarch, 
 Moral. VI. 613, iKKeKvp.ipos xal ks- 
 K2 
 
132 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 HeOa TO dyaOov irpos Travras, fxaXicrra Se vpog tovs 
 
 OtKCtOVS Ttjt TTKTTetOy. 
 
 KpiriKiis. A sensible seiinon on this 
 verse will be found in Sherlock, Serm. 
 XXXIX. Vol. II. p. 275 sq. (ed. Hughes). 
 10. apa o6v] ' A ccordingly then,' 
 'So ihm;' ooUeotive and inferential 
 exhortation arising immediately out of 
 the preceding statements, and bring- 
 ing to a natural close the section be- 
 ginning with ver. 6, and the more 
 directly hortatory portion of the epistle. 
 The proper meaning of &pa, rebus ita 
 compa/ratis, and its primary reference 
 to simple ' progression to another step 
 in the argument' (Donalds. Orat. 
 § 192), are here distinctly apparent; 
 its weaker ratiocinative force being 
 supported by the collective power of 
 ovv 'as things are so, let us in conse- 
 quence of their being so, ' t&c. In Attic 
 Greek this combination is only found 
 in the case of the interrogative Spa' 
 see Herm. Viger, No. 292 ; and on the 
 general distinction between &pa and 
 oSv, see Klotz, Deva/r. Vol. n. p. 177, 
 but oomp. Donalds. Gr. § 604, and 
 notes on ch. iii. 5. us Kaipiv 
 
 £\o|j,Ev] 'OS we have opportunity,' i.e. 
 'an appointed season for so doing;' 
 not merely ' prout, i.e. quandocunque 
 et quotiescunque occasio nascatur' 
 (Wolf), but, 'as, in accordance with 
 the circumstances ;' see Meyer in loo. 
 The particle di is thus neither causal, 
 'quoniam' (TJst., al.), nor temporal, 
 'dum' (Vulg., Clarom., Syr. -Phil.), 
 as appy. I^n. Smym. 9, lis In xaiphv 
 ^o/iEK (both, esp. the latter, very 
 doubtful meanings in St Paul's Epp., 
 though not uncommon in classical 
 writers ; see Klotz, Deoar. Vol. 11. 
 p. 759), but has only its simple rela- 
 tive force ; the true link between this 
 and the preceding verse being supplied 
 by KMplii (Brown, p. 348) ; ' as there 
 is a KoipAs for tA Beplt^eiv, 30 is there 
 
 one for tJ airelpeiv as we have it 
 then, let us act accordingly and make 
 the most of it;' Kareirelya koI awa- 
 Bei, Chrys. Hammond (on Phil. iv. 10) 
 translates Kaipbv ' ability,' but the exx. 
 cited by Wetst. in loc. will show this 
 modification to be quite unnecessary. 
 TO ci7a6dv] 'that which is good;' 
 ' the thing which in each case is good,' 
 whether considered in a spiritual or 
 temporal sense. The distinction be- 
 tween rh KaXhv as implying good in its 
 highest sense, and t6 &ya6bv as refer- 
 ring more particularly to Icindness, &c. 
 (Baum.-Crus.), does not seem tenable 
 in the N. T. As rh KoKbv includes what 
 is beneficent (Matth. xii. 12) as well as 
 what is morally good (i Thess. v. 21), 
 so tA d7a0d>' includes what is moi'ally 
 and essentially good (Bom. ii. 10) as 
 well as what is merciful (Philem. 14, 
 comp. Eph. iv. 28), i.e. iyaduxriviiv 
 as well as eiTroCtcw, Heb. xiii. 16; 
 comp. notes on i Thess. v. 21. 
 irpos ToOs oIk«£ous tijs ttCot.] 'unto 
 them who iehng to the faith.' The 
 meaning of irpis is here not merely 
 the general ethical one vrith regard to, 
 but the particular one erga; comp. 
 Eph. vi. 9, I Thess. v. 14 (notes), and 
 exx. in Winer, Or. § 49. h, p. 361. The 
 meaning, whether erga or contra (this 
 latter rare if a hostile notion is not 
 implied in the verb, Joseph, 0. Apian. 
 I. 31), will result from the context. 
 With regard to the peculiar phrase 
 oi/ceioi rris wtareus, it may be observed 
 that it does not appear to involve any 
 allusion to oIkos in the peculiar sense 
 of the 'house of God' (Schott), or to 
 any especial idea of composing a single 
 family (Eeuss, TMol. Chrit. iv. 13, 
 Vol. II. p. 124) ; as the numerous exx. 
 from later writers of this use of o^xetos 
 with an abstract subst. {e.g. vIkSoi 
 
VI. II. 
 
 133 
 
 YoS'f aSe'traSiiers seek "^^^''"^ V^XlKOli VfJUV JpCLflHaaiV ejpa- II 
 
 to have you circumcised, to avoid persecution, and to boast of your submission. 
 All true boasting however must be in Christ and His Cross. 
 
 <t>CKo<ro(j)lat, SKiyapxlai, yeaypa<plas, 
 TpvipTJs) all seem to show that the ad- 
 jective has lost its meaning of pecu- 
 liar, and only retains that of general 
 though close connexion ; see Schweig- 
 hseuser, Zex. Polyh. a. v., and Wetst. 
 in loc. A sermon on this and the pre- 
 ceding verse, but of no marked cha- 
 racter, will be found in Tillotson, 
 Sei-m. Lxxxix. Vol. n. p. 592 (Lend. 
 1752). 
 
 II. in|\iKois vfiiv 7pa|i|i.a(riv 
 ^Ypaiffa] ' in what large letters I have 
 written to you,. ' The only possible way 
 of arriving even approximately at the 
 meaning of this much debated clause 
 is to adhere closely to the simple lexi- 
 cal meanings of the words. These it 
 will be best to notice separately. 
 irrjXCKos strictly denotes geometrical 
 magnitude ' how large ' (comp. Plato, 
 Meno, p. 82 D, T7j\Utj tis l<rrai iKeivov 
 ■q ypa/ufi'^ ; so too Zachar. ii. i. tr-ifKl- 
 Kov rb T\dTos...Tn]\lKoi' r6 fiiJKOs) in 
 contradistinction to arithmetical mag- 
 nitude expressed by irSaos ' how many.' 
 This meaning and distinction appear 
 to have been observed in the N.T., as 
 in the only other passage in which 
 tttjKIkos occurs, Heb. vii. 4, vrjKlKOS 
 ovTos, the same primary idea of mag- 
 nilude (though in an ethical sense) is 
 distinctly recognisable. To assume 
 then in the present case (a) any con- 
 fusion of TrrjkiKOS with irinros (Schott ; 
 Neander, Planting, Vol. i. p. 22 1, 
 Bohn), when there is no trace of such 
 a usage either in the N. T. or LXX, 
 seems distinctly uncritical; nor can 
 (J) any assumed equivalence with 
 jroio! Cqualibus Uteris,' Vulg., Cla- 
 rom.. Arm., ' wileikaini, ' Goth. ; comp. 
 Hesych. H-qKUov ohv, oiroiov' and see 
 Tholuck, Anzeig. 1834, No. 32), and 
 
 any reference to the &p,op<l>la of the 
 letters (Chrys., Theoph., CEoum., 
 Theod. 2 ; comp. Zonar. Lex. s. v. inj- 
 
 XUoV t4 iv d/lO/>0^9 Sv, (lis TTO/Jct T<fi 
 
 'AiroffT-iXifi' iSere k.t.X, Vol. II. p. 
 1547), be pronounced otherwise than 
 purely cwftifo'aj'i/; for magnitude does 
 not imply shapelessness. We can have 
 then no other correct translation than 
 sirmplj' how large:' &yav p-ei^onv ^XP^' 
 (TOTo ypdii/maiv, Theod., who however 
 appears to limit the autographic por- 
 tion to what follows. 
 7pd|i|JiaTa may be interpreted ' an 
 epistle;' see Acts xxviii. 21, comp. 
 I Maoc. V. 10, Ignat. Eom. 8 : but 
 (o) St Paul in no other passage so 
 uses it, though he has occasion to use 
 a word denoting a, letter (lirwrroXi}) 
 seventeen times; and (5) this species 
 of cognate dative ypdipai ypdp./Xacrip 
 (comp. dirk \6yifi, Matth. viii. 8) is not 
 found in St Paul's Epp.; nor has here 
 any of the additional force which the 
 usage implies (Bernh. Synt. m. 16, 
 p. 107), and which alone could ac- 
 count for the introduction of a third 
 dative (instead of the natural accus.) 
 in a sentence of eight words. We 
 seem therefore forced to adhere to the 
 simple meaning, 'letters, characters,'' 
 as in Luke xxiii. 38 (Sec.), 2 Cor. iii. 7 : 
 so Copt, han-skhai, and appy. Arm. ; 
 the other Vv. are ambiguous. 
 £7pai|ra] '/ wrote,' or in idiomatic 
 English '/ have written,' in ref. to 
 the whole foregoing epistle, not ' I 
 write' (Scholef. Hints, p. gj; Conyb., 
 al.), epistolary aorist. The real diffi- 
 culty lies in this word, owing to the 
 different oonclusiona to which histori- 
 cal and grammatical considerations 
 appear respectively to lead us. On 
 the one hand it appears distinctly 
 
134 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 12 yjfa r^ e/i^ X"P'' "'"''" 9eXov(Tiv evirpocrw-K^a-ai ev 
 
 (Rom. xvi. 22, I Cor. xvi. 2i, Col. iv. 
 1 8, 2 Theas. iii. 17) that St Paul was 
 in the habit of using an amanuensis, 
 and of adding only the concluding 
 words. From ver. 11 to end would 
 seem then very probably such an ad- 
 dition. But on the other hand it is 
 very doubtful whether St Paul or any 
 of the writers of the N. T. ever use 
 the epistolary aor. iyi>a\j/a exclusively 
 in reference to what follows. The 
 aorist in aJl cases appears to have its 
 proper force, either (a) in reference to 
 a former letter (i Cor. v. 9, 2 Cor. ii. 
 3, 4, 9, vii. 12, 3 John 9 [see Luoke 
 in Zoc.]); or (6) in reference to an 
 epistle now brought to its conclusion 
 (Eom. XV. 15,: Pet. v. 12); or (c) to 
 a foregoing portion of the epistle 
 (i Cor. ix. 15, I John ii. 21 [seeLiicke 
 and Huther in loe.l, comp. Philem. 
 19), even standing in a, species of 
 antithesis, to ypiipu in reference to 
 what has already been written (i John 
 ii. 13, 14, where see Huth.); see Winer, 
 Ch\ % 40. 5. 2, p. 249, and notes on 
 Philem. 19. With this partially con- 
 flicting evidence it seems impossible 
 to decide positively whether St Paul 
 wrote the whole epistle or only the 
 concluding portion. On the whole 
 however, the use of iypa\j/a, especially 
 when contrasted with ypdipu (2 Thess. 
 iii. 17), leans to the former supposi- 
 tion ; and we may thus conclude that 
 to prevent any possible mistake as to 
 the authorship of the epistle (Chrya. ; 
 comp. 2 Thess. ii. 2) — especially as 
 this was an encyclical missive (oh. i. 
 ■i, where see Olsh.) — St Paul here de- 
 viated from his usual custom, and wrote 
 the whole letter with his own hand 
 (Chrys., Theod., Theoph., (Rcum.), 
 and in characters, whether from design 
 or inexpertness, larger than those of 
 the ordinary amanuensis. 
 
 12. Ko-oi eAowo-iv] '.4s many as 
 desire;' concluding warning against 
 the false Teachers whose true motives 
 are here exposed, and contrasted with 
 those which influenced the Apostle 
 (ver. 14). evTrpocrcoTrritrai. 
 
 iv o-apKC] 'to make a fair show 
 in the flesh;' not so little as 'placere 
 in carne,' Vulg., Clarom., or even 
 ^JOldAjtJj [ut glorientur] Syr., 
 
 but rather 'pulchram faciem assu- 
 mere' \shi skenho^ Copt., soil, 'to 
 wear a specious exterior' in the earthly 
 unspiritual element in which they 
 move. The verb eiirporuTreTv is not 
 used by any earlier writer: but from 
 the use of the adj. einrpStrbjiros, 'fair 
 and specious' (Herod, vii. 168 ; De- 
 mosth. de Cor. p. 277; see Eisner, 
 Obs. Vol. II. p. 200), and the similar 
 compounds (re/jwoirpoaurreiv (Aristoph. 
 Nui. 363) and ^au>OTrpo(XtoTreTi> (Cic. 
 ad Att. VII. 21) cited by the commen- 
 tators on this verse, the meaning 
 would appear to be correctly stated 
 by Chrys. as ciSoKi/iecD, though not 
 necessaiily irapi iyBpilm-otV see below. 
 The appended words iv aapKl are 
 commonly explained, either (a) 'in 
 observatione reram camalium,' with 
 physical reference to circuaicislon ; or 
 (J) ' apud homines,' with reference to 
 the judgment and opinions of others, 
 — &a dvffpiiirots ipijucrt, Chrys. ; 
 tJji' rapd, A,v6pil>vav Bijpiinem. S6|o», 
 Theod. Both interpretations how- 
 ever seem distinctly insufficient, as 
 they put out of sight that mere pro- 
 found and far-ieaching meaning of 
 ffd/jf, ' the earthly existence and con- 
 ditions of man,' ' notio universa rerum 
 externarum' (Schott), which pervades 
 this whole epistle : see notes on ch. v. 
 16, and MiiUer, Doctr, of Sin, oh. II. 
 ad fin., Vol. i. p. 353 (Clark). 
 
VI. 12, 13. 
 
 135 
 
 (rapKi, oSrot dvayKa^ovcriv vfxoii irepiTefivecrQai, fiovov 
 iva Tip (TTOupw ToO XpioTOv firi SicaKUVTai. ovSe yap la 
 01 TrepiTefivQ/j.evoi avroi vofiov <pv\a(T(rov(Tiv, oKKa deXov- 
 
 12; Si(!iK<jivTai] Tisch. SuiKorrai, with ACFGKL; many mss. : few soholara 
 however will hesitate to consider this an improbable soloecism. The text ia 
 rightly adopted by Qriesh., Sckoli, Lachm. (non marg.), Alf., with BDEN, and 
 appy. many mss. The transposition ha /iij tQ ar. toO Xp. {Bee, with FGKL ; 
 mss.) ia rightly rejected by nearly aE recent editors. 
 
 ovTOi] ' these ;' it ia this class and this 
 pre-eminently, that are engaged in 
 constraining you, <fec. see notes on 
 ch. iii. 7. T^ o-ravp^] 'on 
 
 account of the cross;' not exactly 'in 
 cruce' (Copt.), but ' ob crucem' (Beza), 
 soil. ' for preaching the doctrine of the 
 cross of Christ.' The dative points out 
 the ground or cause of the persecu- 
 tion; comp. Kom. xi. 20, tJ dtruTTtif 
 i^eK\d(r8iii<rav and see Winer, Or. § 31. 
 6, p. 193; Bernhardy, Synt. III. 14, 
 p. 102. The ablatival explanation, that 
 they may be persecuted vrith the cross 
 of Christ Cperpesaiones Chriati, 1 Cor. 
 i. 5,' Grot. ; comp. Vulg. 'crucis Christi 
 persecutionem non patiantur'), either, 
 on the one hand, involves an unsatis- 
 factory explanation of 4 aravpbi, — 
 which, as Brown (p. 359) rightly ob- 
 serves, in such expressions as the pre- 
 sent always implies the fact of the 
 atoning death of Christ, — or, on the 
 other, causes a still more untenable 
 meaning to be assigned to SuiKiavrai, 
 viz. ' lest the doctrine of Christ wear a 
 hostile aspect to them,' as Keand. 
 Planting, Vol. i. p. 226 (Bohn). The 
 meaning 'that they may not follow 
 after,' Arm. (comp. .^th. 'ut non ad- 
 hsereatis ') is wholly untenable. 
 
 13. oiiSJ 7dp . . . oiiToC] 'For not 
 even... themselves,' 'nam ue ipsi qui- 
 dem,' Beza, — they of whom it might 
 reasonably have been expected; con- 
 firmation of what precedes by a state- 
 ment of the openly lax conduct of the 
 
 Judaizers, and of the true motives by 
 which they were influenced ; ' tantum 
 abest ut illorum intersit a vobis legem 
 obaervari,' Beng. On the force of 
 oiSi...iWd, see notes on ch. i. 17, 
 ot irepirtf.v6\i.€voi,] 'those who are 
 halving tltemselves drcwmcised, "qui 
 circumciduntur,' Vulg. ; pres. part., 
 with reference to the prevailing prac- 
 tice of the false teachers either in 
 respect of themselves or others. The 
 explanation of Peile, Hilgenf., al., 
 according to which the pres. part. 
 Treptre/w. loses its precise temporal 
 reference (Winer, Gr. § 45. 7, p. 316) 
 and combines with the article to form 
 a kind of subst. ' the party or advo- 
 cates of the circumcision' (comp. ovtoi 
 ol irepirefivdfi.ei'oi. Acta Pet. el Paul. 
 § 63, cited by Hilgenf) is plausible, 
 but perhaps not necessary ; as the use 
 of the pres. may be fairly explained on 
 the ground that St Paul includes in 
 the idea not merely their conformity 
 to the rite (which strictly becomes a 
 past act), but their endeavour thereby 
 to draw others into the same state, 
 which is a present and continuing act. 
 It must be admit' d that the reading 
 wepiTernTinimi [Lachm,. (non marg.), 
 Scholz, Einch, Mey., with BL ; 40 
 mss.; Clarom., al.; Lat. Ff.] would 
 give a more appropriate sense; the 
 external authorities however [ACDE 
 KK; Vulg., Syr. (both), al. ; Mar. 
 oion ap. Epiph., Chrys., Theodoret, 
 al.] are distinctly in favour of the 
 
136 
 
 IIPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 <Tiv vficii wepiTe/ivea-dai Iva ev tj vfieTepa vapKi Kav)(ri- 
 
 14 croovTai. efioi Se fi.fl yevoiTO Kav)(a<Tdai ei firi ev rtp 
 
 (rravpip tov Kvplov ^fiwv 'Ij;(70v Xpta-Tov,, 01 ov e/ioi 
 
 more difficult reading, ■n-epiTe/t,t'6fji,evoi. 
 v6fu>v] ' the law. ' Middleton here ex- 
 plains the anarthrous v6tu>s as 'mo- 
 ral obedience' ('the principle of Law,' 
 Peile), adducing the parallel passage, 
 Horn. ii. 25 ; but there also as here 
 vii/ios is the Mosaic law: see Alford 
 on Horn. I. c. The reason why these 
 Judaizers did not keep the law is not 
 to be referred to their distance from 
 Jerusalem (Theod.), nor to any simi- 
 larly extenuating circumstances, but, 
 as the context seems to show, is to be 
 attributed simply to their consummate 
 hypocrisy ; see Meyer in he. 
 iv TTJ v|i,erip<2, o-apKC] ' in your flesh,' 
 — 'your bodily and ritualistic mutila- 
 tion ;' i. e. iv Tifi KaTOKbirTea/ t^v i/u- 
 Tipav adpKU, Theoph., — not their own 
 observances of that law for which they 
 are affecting so zealously to contend. 
 There is no contradiction between the 
 two motives assigned for their en- 
 forcement of the circumcision. The 
 second, as Usteri observes, states posi- 
 tively what the first stated negatively. 
 They boasted that they had not only 
 made Christian but Jemsh converts 
 ('quod vos Judaismo implicuerint,' 
 Beza), and thus sought to escape per- 
 secution at the hands of the more 
 bigoted Jews. 
 
 14. Ijiol 8^ (it) ■y^v. KttDX.] 'Sut 
 from me far he it to boast;' contrasted 
 treatment (Si) of the feelings of the 
 Apostle and the substratum on which 
 his Kaiixijiris alone rested. For exx. 
 of this use of ^^oiro with an inf., see 
 Gen. xliv. 7, 17, Josh. xxii. 29, al., 
 and Polyb. Hist. xv. 10. 4, /jijSecl 
 yimiTO retpap ip.av \a^etv. 
 iv T<p irraup^] ' in the cross .' i. e. in 
 ttiat suffering, humiliation, and here 
 
 more especially self-abnegation (Gal. 
 ii. 20 sq.), which is essentially involved 
 in the idea of the Kedeemer's cross : 
 Kal t( iari rh Kaixriiia tov uravpov ; 
 Sti. 6 Xptaris Si' ipii Tim SovKov Tbv 
 ix9pbv Tbv iyvii/iova' iW ovrto p.e 
 Tjydirria'ev (is Kal iairrbv iKSoOvai dpf, 
 Chrys. See a sound sermon on this 
 text by Beveridge, Sei-m. xxi. Vol. I. 
 p. 396sq. (A.-C. L.). Si' oS] 
 
 'by whom;' soil, 'by whose cruci- 
 fixion. ' The relative may refer either 
 to <rTavp6s (Theodoret), or to 'Ii}<t. 
 XpuTTos. It is curious that Baumg.- 
 Crus. in adopting the latter reference, 
 and Windischm. the former, should 
 both urge that on the contrary suppo- 
 sition St Paul would have written ii> ip 
 instead of 5i' off. As far as this argu- 
 ment goes, both are right (see Winer, 
 Gr. § 48. a, p. 346 f.); though pro- 
 bably the frequent use of iv in the N. T. 
 with reference to Christ is slightly in 
 favour of Windischmann ; comp. Eph. 
 i. 7. The context however is a far surer 
 guide, and here, as the important and 
 indeed emphasized subject toO Kvp. 
 iip,. 'I?j<r. X/). immediately precedes, the 
 relative will more naturally seem to 
 refer to those words. K^a-fios] ' the 
 
 world;' t4 /SiutikcI rpdynara, Chrys. ; 
 not 'res et religio Judaica,' Schnettg. 
 The full meaning has been well ex- 
 pressed by Calvin, 'mundus procul 
 dubio opponitur novse creatures ; quic- 
 quid ergo oontrarium est spiritual! 
 Christi regno mundus est, quia ad 
 veterem hominem pertinet: mundus 
 est quasi objeotum et scopus veteris 
 hominis' (cited by Peile). The pre- 
 sent omission of the article with 
 Kbaixos is very unusual, and only to be 
 accounted for by the supposition that 
 
VI. 14, 15, i6. 
 
 137 
 
 Koerfxoi ea-TavpwTai Kayoa Koa-fntp' oure yap irepirofi-ri 15 
 rt eaTiv ovre aKpo^va-ria, o\Xa Katvij ktio-is, kui 16 
 
 14. (t6(r/4^)] So Zachm. The article is inserted before K6(rnif by Sec, 
 Tisch., but only on the authority of C'D'EKL ; nearly all msa. ; Ff. 
 
 15. otfre yap] So Tisch. with B ; 17 ; Syr., Goth., Sah., M,h., Arm.; Chrys., 
 Syncell., Hieron., Aug. {De W., Mey., Bagge, Alf.), much commended by 
 Griesb.; approved by Mill, Prolegom. p. 84. The longer reading, h> yhp X/jktti? 
 'Iijo-oO offTe is found in ACDEFGKLK; Vulg., Clarom., Copt., jEth.-Platt, 
 Syr.-Phil. Tirith asterisk; Theod., Dam., Ambrst., al. (Sec., Scholz, Lachm,.). 
 The external evidence is thus very strong ; still the probability that the longer 
 reading is a gloss from oh. v. 6 is so great, that, supported as we are by 
 ancient Vv., we do not hesitate in adhering to the shorter reading. The 
 reading iirxfe {Sec. with D'KL ; mss., al.) for iarui has small claim to attention. 
 
 Kbatusi waa sometimes practically re- 
 garded in the light of a proper name : 
 in all other places in the N. T., — ex- 
 cept the present, 2 Cor. v. 19, and, 
 somewhat differently, 2 Pet. ii. 6, — 
 the omission is only found after a pre- 
 position (i Cor. viii. 4, Phil. ii. 15, Col. 
 ii. 20), or when the noun is under the 
 regimen of a. preceding substantive 
 (John xvii. 24, Eom. i. 20, iv. 13, 
 xi. 12, 15, Eph. i. 4, al.) : see Middl. 
 Gr. Art. p. 350 (ed. Rose); Winer, 
 Gr. § 19, p. 117,. l(io£] 
 
 ' to me;' dative of what is termed 
 'ethical relation,' — a usage of this 
 case which is more fully developed in 
 the dat. commodi or incomm. . see 
 Winer, ffr. § 31. 4, p.190; Bernhardy, 
 Synt. III. 9, p. 85 ; Krtiger, Sprachl. 
 § 48. 5. This reciprocal crucifixion is 
 a forcible mode of expressing the utter 
 cessation of all communion between 
 the Apostle and the world : as Schott 
 well observes, 'alter pro mortuo habet 
 alterum;' comj). Johnvi. 56, 2 Thess. 
 i. II, I Cor. vi. 13. On the profound 
 significance of these expressions of 
 union with Christ, comp. Keuas, 
 ThSol. ChrU. IV. 16, Vol. 11. p. 164. 
 
 Ij. oij'« I"*?] '/'"' neither/ ex- 
 planatory confirmation of the preced- 
 ing words 5i' ov k.t.\. : etSes aTavpov 
 
 Sivaiuv...oi yi,p Sjj ptdvov t4 toB Khcjutv 
 Tpdyfiara iv4Kp(t}ffev aiT(^ vavra, d\Xa 
 rb. T^s iroXireLas rrjs TraXoias dviirepov 
 Tr6\\(^ Ka,Ti<!Ti\ce, Chrys. On the 
 reading, see critical notes. 
 Kaivi] KTio-is] 'a new creatwre.' 'K.rim.i 
 has two meanings in the N. T. ; active 
 'the act of creation' (Kom. i. 20), 
 pasxive 'the thing created,' — whether 
 personal and individual (2 Cor. v. 17), 
 or impersonal and collective (Rom. 
 viii. 19). Either meaning will suit 
 the present passage; the latter per- 
 haps (comp. 2 Cor. v. 17, 6? rts iv 
 'Kpurrif, KMvi] icrtats) is most probable. 
 The form of expression may possibly 
 have originated from the use of the 
 similar term nCIPI n*"l3, to denote 
 proselytes (Schoettg. Sor. Eebr. Vol. 
 I. p. 328); the meaning however and 
 application is here of course purely 
 Christian. On these words see an 
 admirable sermon by Hammond, Serm. 
 XXVII. Part II. p. 380 sq. (A.- C. L.); 
 comp. also Beveridge, Serm. xix. Vol. 
 I. p. 342 sq. (A.-C. L.) ; and five ser- 
 mons by Tillotson, Serm. Vol. iii. p. 
 324 sq. (Lond. 1752). 
 
 16. Kol 0(roi...o-TOix.] 'And as 
 many as walk;' prominent specification 
 of the personal subjects in regard of 
 whom the prayer is offered, the nomi- 
 
138 
 
 nP02 TAAATAS. 
 
 oaoi T(p Kavovi tovto) (ttoi-j^ovctiv, etptjv^ eir avTOvs Kai 
 17 eXeoj Koi etri tov ^IcrpatjX rod Qeou. 
 
 TOW 
 
 Datival clause standing isolated, and 
 passing Kar AvaxoKovBlav into another 
 structure; see Jelf, Or. § 477. 1. 
 The reading is doubtful. On the one 
 hand, the fut. aTO\.xh<">^<"-^ '^ "wesH 
 supported [BC^KLX ; mss. ; Vulg. ; 
 Ghrys., Theod.], and perhaps not 
 quite so likely to have been changed 
 from the pres. as vice versa. Still, on 
 the other, as the external evidence 
 [ACiDEFG; mss.; Clarom.; Syr. 
 (both), Goth., Copt, (appy.). Arm.; 
 Cyr., Jerome, Aug., al.] is strong, 
 and the change to a future, as pointing 
 out the course the GaJatians were to 
 follow, not wholly improbable, we 
 retain with Tisch., De W., al., the 
 present (ttoix^^^^^ (-Rec). 
 Tu Kavovi TOiiTu] ' accoTiUng to this 
 rule,' soU. of faith ; Kavbva iKoXeae 
 rijv TrpoKetjihiiv SiSaaKoXlav, Theod. 
 It is perhaps slightly doubtful whether 
 we are here to adopt the more literal 
 meaning of Kavihvy ' directing line ' 
 (Mey.), ]i ■ ''^ " [semitam] Syr. ; or 
 
 P X 
 
 the more derivative meaning 'maxim,' 
 'norma vivendi' (garaideinai, Goth., 
 hcg pex] v5Eth.) ; the former seems at 
 first sight in better accordance with 
 aroixomiv, but as this verb is used 
 above (oh. v. 25) with but little tinge 
 of its physical meaning (contrast Kom. 
 iv. 12), and as Kavd>v may very na- 
 turally be referred to the principle 
 stated in ver. 15, the latter and meta- 
 phorical meaning (ry Kovivi. xal rg 
 SiSaxS '''"■'Hr'Ht CEcum.) is here to be 
 preferred. On the derivative mean- 
 ing of Kaviiv, see an article by Planck, 
 in Comment. Tlieol. Vol. i. i, p. 209 
 sq., and for exx., Eisner, Ohs. Vol. 11. 
 p. 201. The dat. is obviously the 
 
 dativua norma; see notes on ch. v. 
 
 16; Winer, Gr. § 31. 6, p. 193; Fritz. 
 Rom. xiii. 13, Vol. in. p. 142. 
 elprfvij kit' o.v■ta^is\ 'peace he upon 
 them,' 'super illos,' Vulg., Clarom., 
 not perhaps without some idea of 
 peace and mercy coming down upon 
 them from heaven (Mey.) ; comp. Acts 
 xlx. 6, 2 Cor. xii. g. It has been 
 urged (De W.) that laThi or (arai (Syr. 
 |001J, comp. Chrys.) is here to be 
 
 supplied rather than cfi;, and that the 
 verse is to be regarded as declaratory, 
 and not benedictory. Both the posi- 
 tion of the verse however, and the 
 significant union of elpi^vrj and f\eos 
 (i Tim. i. 2, 2 Tim. i. 2, 2 John 3, 
 Jude 2), seem in favour of the ordinary 
 construction; iirrii^aro rbv (\eoy Kal 
 T7IV efpijxTji', Theod. The order (con- 
 trast I Tim. i. 2, ' Tim. i. 2, Jude 2) 
 may be due to the fact that the 
 Apostle desires to put the effect before 
 the 'causa efficiens' (Mey.), in order 
 to sustain the re-assuring character 
 of the benediction; or may arise 
 merely from the feeling that, in the 
 absence of X"^/"'; elp'/ivri formed the 
 more natural commencement. Jude 
 a is rather different owing to the addi- 
 tion of dydirtj. Ol the meaning of 
 ikeos, as involving not only ' miseri- 
 cordia' (olKTtp/ibs) but 'ipsum miseris 
 succurrendi studium,' see Tittmann, 
 Synon. p. 69 sq. Kal iit\ 
 
 rdv 'lo-paijX. toC 0tov] 'and upon the 
 Israel ofOod.' It is doubtful whether 
 Kal is explicative, 'namely upon the 
 Israel of God,' or simply copulative. 
 The explanatory Kal, though needlessly 
 obtruded on several passages of the 
 N.T., is still distinctly found in St 
 Paul's Epp. (contr. De Wette), see 
 Fritz. Rom. ix. 23, Vol. II. p. 339 ; 
 
VI. 17. 
 
 139 
 
 S^° Chris"/ a?^'ekt -^""roi; KOTTOVS fioi f».>]§ets irapexeTO)- iylo 
 
 ed servant. «^ ^ / ^>t^» *-. 
 
 yap TO o'Tiynara rov itja-ov ev ra> 
 a-wfjLaTi fiov ^oo-Tct^o). 
 
 Winer, Or. § 53. 3, p. 388. Still 
 as it is doubtful whether Kal is ever 
 used by St Paul in so ma/rked an ex- 
 plicative force as must here be assigned 
 (the exx. cited by Meyer, i Cor. iii. 5, 
 viii. 12, XV. 38, do not seem conclu- 
 sive), and as it seems still more doubt- 
 ful whether Christians generally could 
 be called 'the Israel of God' (con- 
 trast Brown, p. 382), the simple 
 copulative meaning seems most pro- 
 bable (Ps.-Ambr., Grot., Est.). St 
 Paul includes all in his blessing, of 
 whatever stock and kindred ; and 
 then, with his thoughts turning as 
 they ever did to his own brethren 
 after the flesh (Eom. ix. 3), he pauses 
 to specify those who were once Israel- 
 ites according to the flesh (i Cor. x. 
 18), but now are the Israel of God 
 ('toS 9eoO auctorem innuii, quern 
 Deus veluti peculium suum reddidit,' 
 Schott), true spiritual children of 
 Abraham. 
 
 1 7. ToC Xotirou] ' Henceforth ;' not 
 for dTri toO XoiTroO (Bos, Ellips. p. 
 461, Brown), or for 'Koiiriv (Bloomf.), 
 though commonly used both for it and 
 tA 'Konriv in later writers (Bernh. 
 Synt. III. 36, p. 145), but the correct 
 temporal genitive, denoting 'the time 
 within which,' or at some epoch of 
 which, the action is represented as 
 taking place; oomp. Madvig, Synt. 
 § 66. a. Thus, taken strictly, tou 
 \oivov K.T.X. is 'let no one at amy 
 time in ike futiwre,' dhc, ri \onrbi> k.t.X. 
 'let no one during the future,' tfcc. 
 comp. Viger, No. 26, 't4 \oi-irbi' dici- 
 tur et TOU XoiToO hoc disorimine, quod 
 ri Xoiirbv continuum et perpetuum 
 tempus significat, rou Xoittou autem 
 repetitionem ejusdem facti reliquo 
 
 tempore indicat.' The general tem- 
 poral genitive, it may be remarked, 
 appears to be more correctly referred 
 to the partitive force of that case, than 
 to ideas either of origination or ante- 
 cedence (Hartung, Casus, p. 34 ; Jelf, 
 Gr. § 523), or of possession (Alf.); 
 see Scheuerl. Synt. § 15, p. 100 J 
 Donalds. GV. § 451. 
 Koirovs-.-irapcx^Tu] 'cause troulle;' 
 surely not by obliging the Apostle to 
 send further letters, but by troubling 
 his spirit by their instability {jaXeu- 
 dinevoi, CEcum.), and still more, as the 
 next clause shows, by thwarting his 
 apostolic authority. iyi) yap] 
 
 'for Ij' reason for the command ; the 
 iyii being emphatic and in opposition 
 to the false teachers, — not to /iriSels 
 (De W.), unless treated as referring to 
 one of them, — and the yi,p introducing 
 the fact that he was a fully accredited 
 servant of Christ : els (pb^ov vXelova 
 i/ipdWom Kal irityvis rois vap airod 
 fedhras vi/ious, Chrys. 
 TO. oT^YjiaTo] ' the marlcs/ the local 
 addition iv T(p ffii/iarl /iov necessarily 
 referring the term to the wounds and 
 scars and outward tokens of the perse- 
 cutions and suffeiings which the Apo- 
 stle had undergone in the service of 
 Christ ; comp. 2 Cor. xi. 23 sq. There 
 is appy. further a distinct allusion to 
 the marks burnt on slaves to denote 
 to whom they belonged ; comp. Herod. 
 VII. 233, fffTifw ffTly/uiTa j3ainXi)ia' 
 Martial, Epigr. XII. 61, 'stigmatenon 
 meo;' and especially Deyling, Observ. 
 Sacr. Vol. lu. No. 43, p. 423 sq., 
 where the various classes of aTiynaTO- 
 (popoi are enumerated, and the whole 
 subject copiously illustrated. The gen. 
 'Iijo-oii thus indicates neither origin 
 
140 
 
 i8 
 
 nPOS TAAATAS. 
 
 'H Xa'jf"? TOV Kvplov ^nSv 'Il](rOV Xpi- Benediction. 
 
 (TTOv fiera rod -TrvevfMaTOS vfioav, dSe\<poi, ^Aft>]P. 
 
 ('auotore Christo,' Gom.), nor remote 
 reference to (' propter Chriatum,' Pise; 
 comp. Olsh., — a most doubtful trans- 
 lation both here and 2 Cor. i. 5), but 
 simply the owner: the marks attested 
 who was the Apostle's Master, and 
 were the ' signa militise Christi quse me 
 coraprobant ejus esse,' Ghss. Interl. 
 cited by Bagge. The insertion of 
 TUvplov before 'X-qaoS (See.) is support- 
 ed by C^D'EKLN (adding X/j.); mas.; 
 Vulg., Clarom., Syr. (both), Goth., 
 iEth. -Piatt, but owing to the varia- 
 tions (D^FG, ^/j.iSi' 'I. X. ; Copt., .(Eth.- 
 Pol., al., ToC Xp.; al. aliter) rightly re- 
 jected by iocAm.jriscA. iu favour of the 
 text, which rests on ABC^ ; mss. ; 
 Amiat., — ^butnot Arm., as Tisch., Alf. 
 Pao-rdjai] ' / hear ; ' either iu the 
 ' sensus molestus' of ch. v. 10, vi. S> 
 or perhaps, with some solemnity, in 
 ref. to the dignifying nature of his 
 Master's marks: oiK ctrev ^x'^t dXXct 
 ^OffTcSfw, cJWepTis iTrl TpoTatois /iiya 
 tppmiSni ij {rriiieloii PairiXiKois, Chrys. ; 
 comp. Acts ix. 15, ^atrTdaai. rb Bvo/id 
 liov and Clem. Horn. ap. Coteler. Vol. 
 I. p. 69a, eMva 0eoC jSao-Tclfciv. 
 
 18. 'H xopw K.T.X.] On the varied 
 nature of the Apostle's concluding 
 benedictions, see the exx. and illus- 
 trations in notes on i Thess. r. 28. 
 fktrd, T0« irvrfpuiTos viuuv] ' be with 
 yow spirit y' not appy. with any allu- 
 sion to the aipi (iirayav airois rav 
 aapKiKuv, Chrys.), but simply with re- 
 ference to the irveiJ/ia as the ' potior 
 pars' of man ('hominem a potion 
 ■ parte sic antiquis dici Theologis, nee 
 novum nee inusitatum est,' Heinsius, 
 Exerc. p. 429), and not improbably 
 to the fact that it is in the spirit of 
 man that the operations of grace make 
 themselves felt ; ry i/xixS '"'i" X^P"' 
 ^TreiJ^erat yev^trOaif CEcum. ; comp. 
 Philem. 25, 2 Tim. iv. 22, and notes 
 m loc. ciScX<|>oC] Here 
 
 the unusual position of the word seems 
 to be intentional : they were indeed 
 brethren ; and though for a while se- 
 vered from the Apostle, and the sub- 
 jects of his censure, stiU brethren in 
 their common Lord. 'Ajiijv 
 
 is here omitted only by G; Boern.; 
 Ambrst. See note on Tit. iii. 15, 
 
TRANSLATION. 
 
NOTICE. 
 
 npHE general principles on ■which, this translation has been 
 drawn up are explained in the Preface to the First Edition. 
 I will here only again remind the reader that as a general rule I 
 have not departed from the Authorized Version, unless it appears 
 to be either incorrect, inexact, insufficient, ohscwre, or (see Notice 
 to the Translation of the Pastoral Epistles) noticeably inconsistent 
 in its rendering of important words. These deviations are all 
 stated in the notes : when no reason is there assigned for the 
 change, it is because it is either self-evident, or given in the Com- 
 mentary. I have also subjoined, in aU the more important cases, 
 citations from eight of the older versions, viz. those of Wyolif 
 1380, Tyndale 1534, Ooverdale's Bible 1535, Coverdale's Testa- 
 ment 1538, Cranmer 1540, Geneva 1560, Bishops' 1568 and the 
 B,hemish Testament. I have cited Tyndale, the Rhemish Test. 
 and the Authorized Version from the well known English Heooapla. 
 Those from Coverdale have been taken respectively from the first 
 edition of his Bible in 1533 (now made accessible to the general 
 reader by the reprint which I cite), and from his Latin-English 
 Testament printed at Paris in 1538, which, though the renderings are 
 generally taken from the Latin, contains many interesting and sug- 
 gestive translations. All these extracts, though but of doubtful 
 authority in disputed texts, will still frequently be found to suggest 
 useful alternative renderings, and will also give the reader such a 
 practical acquaintance with the principles on which the Autho- 
 rized Version was drawn up, as will tend to make him thankfully 
 acknowledge, that it is truly what Selden termed it the best 
 translation in the world. 
 
 The abbreviations in the notes will, I think, easily explain 
 themselves. It may be only necessary to remark, that where an 
 asterisk is affixed to a citation from the Auth. Version, the de- 
 viation in the text has arisen from a change of reading. In the 
 text the italics denote as usual words not in the original. 
 
144 
 
 In this edition some emendations (especially in reference to the 
 aorist) have been introduced into the translation; the citations 
 from the older Vv. have all been verified and revised; and addi- 
 tional comments, either on the reasons for the changes, or on 
 general principles of translation, inserted in the notes : see Notice 
 to Translation of the Epp. to the Thessodonians. 
 
 As the subject of a revision of the Authorized "Version is now 
 becoming more and more one of the questions of the day, I again 
 desire to remind the reader that the Revised Version which fol- 
 lows is only designed for private use (see Preface to the Pastoral 
 Epistles), and that I do not ofier it as a specimen of what might be 
 thought desirable in an authoritative Revision. The more expe- 
 rience I gain in the difficult task of revising, the more convinced 
 I am of the utter insufficiency and hopelessness of any single 
 translator's effi)rts to produce a Version for general purposes. 
 The individual may sometimes suggest something more or less 
 worthy of passing consideration, but it is to the collective wisdom 
 of the many that we can alone look for any hopeful specimen of a 
 revision of the noble Version at present in use. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
 
 PAUL an apostle, not from men neither by man, but I. 
 by Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him 
 from the dead, and all the brethren which are with me, 2 
 to the churches of Galatia. Grace be to you and peace 3 
 from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ who 4 
 gave Himself for -our sins, that He might deliver us out 
 of the present evil world, according to the will of God 
 
 I. From] Of, Auth. and all Vv. 
 Though it does not seem desu-able in 
 every case to change the familiar of 
 of Auth. into the now more usual 
 from, it is perhaps better to do so in 
 most of the cases where it is used as 
 a translation of AttA' where on the 
 other hand ix is used, of (out of) will 
 often be found a very convenient 
 translation; see notes on ch. iii. 16. 
 With regard to Sii it is nearly impos- 
 sible to lay down any fixed principles 
 of translation : where the idea of me- 
 dium is designed to be expressed with 
 especial distinctness, we may adopt 
 through, but where this is not the 
 case, the inclusive hy (agent, instru- 
 ment, cause, means, Johnson) will be 
 found sufficiently exact, and commonly 
 much more idiomatic. 
 
 ■i. Which] It may be here observed 
 that archaisms as such are not re- 
 moved in the revised Version except 
 where a positive error is involved. 
 Here there is none; toAmA is not 
 merely the neuter of who, but is a 
 
 compound word ; Latham, Engl. Lang. 
 § 305. 4 (ed. 3). 
 
 3. And our] So WioL., Gov., 
 Ehem, : and from our, Adth. It 
 seems desirable to leave out the pre- 
 position in the second member, as 
 more true to the original; see notes 
 on Phil. i. 2 (Transl.). 
 
 4. Out of] From, Auth. and all 
 "Vv. In the next words it seems better 
 to retain Auth. (changing this into 
 the), as the transl. world of evil (which 
 I adopted in the first edition), though 
 better preserving the unusual order of 
 the Greek, might be thought to imply 
 in the original the existence of a gen. 
 of quality. Neither of the usual 
 translations, world or age, (though 
 the former perhaps more nearly) gives 
 the exact meaning of aliiv the best 
 paraphrase seems to be spirit of the 
 age; see notes on Eph. ii. 1. 
 
 God and our Father] Soholefield {Hints, 
 I Cor. XV. 24), while fully admitting 
 that the gen. refers only to the latter 
 noun, suggests the omission of the 
 L 
 
146 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 5 and our Father: to whom be the glory for ever and ever. 
 Amen. 
 
 6 I wonder that you are so soon changing over from Him 
 that called you by the grace of Christ unto a different 
 
 7 gospel: which is not another; save that there are some 
 who trouble you, and desire to pervert the Gospel of 
 
 8 Christ. Howbeit even if we, or an angel from heaven, 
 should preach a gospel to you contrary to that which 
 
 9 we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have 
 said before, so say I now again, If any man preacheth 
 
 copula in translation (so Syr., ^th.) 
 as more conformable to the idiom of 
 our language. As however there are 
 several cases where the copula is 
 omitted in the Greek, and others, as 
 here, where it is inserted, it seems 
 best, in so solemn a designation, to 
 preserve the distinction by a special 
 and even peculiar translation: so 
 Vulg., Clarom., Copt., Arm., and 
 Syr.-PhiL 
 
 J. The glory] Olory, Auth. As 
 the article is appy. here used kixt 
 ii^XV" (see notes), and may be inserted 
 without seriously violating English 
 idiom, it seems best in this case to 
 retain it. 
 
 6. Wonder\ So WiOL. : marvel, 
 Auth. and remaining Vv. 
 Changing over] Removed, Auth. ; re- 
 moved away, Gkn. ; home ouer, WiOL.; 
 turned, Ttnd., Gov. (both), Ckan., 
 BiBH. ; transferred, Ehem. 
 
 By] So Cran. : mio, Adth., Wiol., 
 
 Ehem. ; vnto, Gov. Test. ; in, Ttnd., 
 
 Gov., Gen., Bibh. ; see notes. 
 
 A different] Another, Auth. and all 
 
 Vv. 
 
 7. Sam that] So Gen. : hut that, 
 EisH. ; hut, Auth. ; rnles, Ehem. The 
 clause is translated which is notJdnge 
 els, hut that, &c. by Ttnd., Gov., 
 Gov. Test, {tlie i)ih....saue that), Gban. 
 The present participle might at first 
 sight seem to suggest the use of the 
 
 auxiliary are troubling; as however 
 ol rapdacrovTes is equivalent to a kind 
 of substantive, and serves to mark the 
 characteristic of the false teachers, the 
 iterative present is more appropriate; 
 comp. Latham, Engl. Lang. § 573 
 (ed. 3). I>esire lo] Sim., 
 
 mtende to, Ttnd., Gov. (both), Ckan., 
 Gen., B18H. : would, Auth. 
 Pervert] There is no occasion for 
 altering this, though inuert, Ehem., 
 comes nearer to the meaning of fxera- 
 
 8. Howheif] Similarly, neverthe- 
 lesse, Ttnd., Gov., Ckan., Bish. ; hvt, 
 Auth. and remaining Vv. 
 
 Even if] Although, Ehem. ; thogh 
 that, Gen. ; though, Auth. and re- 
 maining Vv. Should preach] 
 No version inserts should: but the 
 idea of future contingency involved in 
 the use of iiiv with subj. (Herm. 
 Viger, No. 312) may here be suitably 
 expressed by it. 
 
 A gospel — that] Any other Gospel 
 unto you than that, Auth., Ttnd., 
 Gov. (putting vnto you first), Gean., 
 Bish. ; mto you other wise, then y'. 
 Gen. ; to you iisidis that, WioL., 
 Ehem. Preached] AU Vv. 
 
 insert have. 
 
 9. Have said] So Gov., Ehem. : 
 said, Auth. and remaining Vv. 
 Preacheth] Preach, Auth. ; change to 
 the indicalive to preserve the opposi- 
 
Chap. I. 5 — 13. 
 
 147 
 
 a gospel to you contrary to that which ye received, 
 let him. be accursed. For now am I making men my lo 
 friends, or God? or am I seeking to please men? if I 
 were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of 
 Christ. 
 
 Now I certify you brethren, touching the Gospel 11 
 which was preached by me that it is not after man. For 12 
 neither did I receive it from man, neither was I taught it, 
 but through revelation from Jesus Christ. For ye heard 13 
 of my conversation in time past in Judaism, that be- 
 yond measure I persecuted the Church of God and was 
 
 tion of moods in the original : see notes 
 
 on 2 Thess. iii. 14 (Transl.). 
 
 A gospel — whichi Any other Gospel 
 
 unto you than, that, Auth. 
 
 Jiecdved] Hane taken, WlOL. ; have 
 
 received, Acts, and remaining Vv. 
 
 10. Now— friends'] So Auth. in 
 Acts xii. 20 : do I now persuade men, 
 Auth., Cean., Bish. ; do I now vse 
 persuasion to m., Ehem. ; now covmseyl 
 I to men, WiOL. ; preache I mannes 
 doctrine, Tynd., G-en. (now pr.); 
 preach I men now. Gov. The change 
 to the more definitely present am I 
 making seems to be required by the 
 emphasis which evidently rests on 
 &pri. On the nature of the English 
 present, comp. Latham, Enc/l. Lang. 
 § 573, 579 (ed. 3)- ^m I seeking] 
 So I seek, Auth. If] *For if, 
 
 . Auth. Were still pleasing] 
 
 Yet pleased, Auth. A servant] 
 
 The ser., Auth. and all Vv. 
 
 11. Now] So Gen., lut, Auth., 
 Gov. ; omitted in Ttnd., Gkaw., Bish. 
 Touching the Gospel. ..that it is not] 
 That the Gospel. ..is not, Auth. The 
 text, which is more exactly in accord- 
 ance with the order of the Greek, 
 makes the denial more emphatic. 
 
 By me] Of me, Auth. and all Vv. 
 
 12. Neither did 1 receive] So Khem. : 
 I neither received, AuiH., Gov., Cbast., 
 
 Bish. ; nether r. I, Tynd., Gen. ; 
 nether I took, WiCL. ; / dyd not re- 
 ceaue, Gov. Test. There is here some 
 little difficulty in both preserving the 
 emphasis on I, and also indicating 
 that the first negative is not strictly 
 correlative to the second. Perhaps 
 the insertion of the auxiliary partially 
 efifects this, as it places the neither a 
 little further from the verb, and still 
 leaves it in that prominence which it 
 seems most naturally to occupy. In 
 ed. I {for I indeed received it not) this 
 latter point was perhaps too much 
 sacrificed. From, man] Of man, 
 
 Auth. and all Vv. Through 
 
 revelation from] By the rev. of, Auth. 
 and all Vv. (om. the, WiOL.). 
 
 13. Heard] So WiOL. : have heard, 
 Auth. and remaining Vv. 
 Judaism] So Ehem. : the Jews Reli- 
 gion, Auth., Bish. ; the lewish rel., 
 Gen. ; iewerie, WiOL. ; the lewes wayes, 
 Tynd., Cean. (waye); the leweshippe. 
 Gov. (both). That] So Ehem. : 
 
 how that, Auth. Was destroying 
 
 it] Wasted it, Auth., Gen. ; faugte 
 agenes it, WiOL. ; spoyled it, Tynd., 
 Gov., Gean., Bish. ; droue them out. 
 Gov. Test. ; expugned it, Ehem. This 
 change is made in consequence of the 
 strong meaning of vopffiw, which it 
 seems desirable to maintain. To re- 
 
148 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 14 destroying it ; and made advance in Judaism beyond 
 many ray equals in standing in my nation, being more 
 exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 
 
 15 But when it pleased God, who set me apart from my 
 
 16 mother's womb, and called me through His grace, to re- 
 veal His Son within me, that I might preach Him among 
 the Gentiles ; immediately I communicated not with flesh 
 
 17 and blood: neither went I away to Jerusalem unto them 
 which were apostles before me; but I went away unto Ara- 
 
 18 bia, and returned again unto Damascus. Then after three 
 years I went up unto Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and abode 
 
 solve the other imperfects would malce 
 the sentence heavy and cumbrous, 
 and add but little to the exactness 
 of the rendering. 
 
 14. Made advance] Premyled, 
 Ttnd., Gov. (both), Cran. ; profited, 
 AuTH. and remaining Vv. 
 Judaism] The Jews Religion, AtJTH. 
 and so other Vv. as in ver. 13 [Ttnd. 
 here, lewes laye (?)] Beyond] 
 A bove, AUTH. and all Vv. 
 
 Equals in standing] Equals, Auth., 
 Ehem. ; companions, Tynd., Gov., 
 Gran., Gen., Bish. ; fellovxs, Gov. 
 Test. My nation] Mine men n., 
 
 Auth. Fm'] Of, Auth. 
 
 15. Set me apart] Departide me, 
 WiOL. ; hadde sundered me, Cov. 
 Test. ; separated me, Auth. and the 
 other Vv. {had s., Gen.). The 
 change is made to prevent /rom Tjeing 
 understood as local : see notes. 
 Through] By, Auth. and all Vv. In 
 this passage it seems desirable to 
 adopt the more rigorous translation 
 of Sii., as suggesting more distinctly 
 the fact that x<^/"S was not the instru- 
 ment, but the causa medians; see notes. 
 
 16. Within] In, Auth., "Wicl., 
 Gov., Gen., Ehem. ; hy, Ttnd., Gov. 
 Test., Gran., Bish. Gentiles] 
 So Gov. Test., Gen., Ehem. : heathen, 
 Auth. and remaining Vv. (h. men. 
 
 WiCL.). Communicated] 
 
 Conferred, Auth. Neither transl. is 
 wholly adequate, but it is not easy to 
 fix upon an exact one. The original 
 word seems to involve two ideas, ad- 
 dressing oneself to (irpSs, direction), 
 and taking counsel with. Most of the 
 older translations give prominence to 
 the latter and more important idea, 
 e.g. I commened not of the matter with, 
 Ttnd., Gov., Gran.; some of the 
 moderns, e.g. Meyer, Lewin, express 
 more distinctly the former. It seems 
 difficult to combine both without para- 
 phrasing. The translations in Gov. 
 Test., / did not leane vnto; and 
 Ehem., / condescended not to, result 
 from the Vulg. non acquievi. 
 
 17. Away (i)] *Up, Auth. In 
 the concluding clause it seems better 
 to maintain "the order of Auth. re- 
 turned again, not as the Greek order 
 might seem to suggest, again re- 
 turned; for the TdXiv is only idioma- 
 tically added to the verb, and appy. 
 without any special emphasis ; comp. 
 Acts xviii. 2 1, and see exx. in Kuhner 
 on Xen. Mem. II. 4. 4. 
 Away {2)] Auth. omits, neglecting 
 the dirb in &.Trij\$oi'. 
 
 t8. Visit] So Gen.: see, Auth. 
 and remaining Vv. Cephas] 
 
 'Peter, Auth. 
 
Chap. I. 14 — II. 3. 
 
 149 
 
 •with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw 19 
 I none, save James the brother of the Lord. Now the ao 
 things which I write to you, behold before God I lie 
 not. Then I came into the regions of Syria and Ci- 31 
 licia; and remained unknown by face to the churches of. as 
 Judaja which were in Christ : but they were hearing only 33 
 that He who was our persecutor in times past is now 
 preaching the faith which once he destroyed, j^d they 24 
 glorified God in me. 
 
 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jeru- II. 
 salem with Barnabas, and took Titus also with me. 
 And I went up by revelation, and communicated to a 
 them the Gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but 
 privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any 
 means I might be running or have run in vain. How- 3 
 
 19. The brother of the Lord] So 
 WlCL., Cov. Teat., and siin. Ehbm. 
 (pur L.): the Lords brother, AuTH. 
 and other Vv. This latter mode of 
 translation ia perhaps more appro- 
 priate when neither substantive has 
 the article. 
 
 21. Then] Afterwards, Adth. It 
 is as well to preserve a uniform 
 transl. for Sjreiro in ver. i8, 21, ch. 
 ii. I. 
 
 22. Remained unTaiovm] Was un- 
 known, AUTH. and all Vv. 
 
 23. Were hearing] Sad heard 
 AuTH., Gov., Gen., Bish., Ehem. ; 
 hodden herynge, WiOL. ; hearde, Ttnd. , 
 Cov. Test., Cean. Couybeare and 
 Howson have given a good para- 
 phrase, tidings only were brought them 
 from time to time; comp. Erasm., 
 rumor apyd illos erat. Who 
 was our persecutor] That pwrsuede vs, 
 WiOL. ; which persecuted us, Adth. 
 and remaining Vv. (that, Gov.). 
 
 Is now preaching] Now preacheth, 
 Adth., Ttnd., Cov. {pr. now), Cban., 
 Gen., Bish.; doth now preach, Cov. 
 Test.; doth novv euangelize, Khem. 
 
 The change is made to mark more de- 
 finitely the present act; comp. notes 
 and ref. on ch. i. 10 (Transl.). 
 
 Ghaptek II. I. After fourteen 
 years] So WioL., Cov. (both), Ehem. : 
 fourteen years after, Auth. and remain- 
 ing Vv. (after that, Ttnd. ; thereafter, 
 Ckan.). The change is perhaps de- 
 sirable aa slightly tending to prevent 
 the last mentioned events being con- 
 sidered aa the terminus u. giio of the 
 fourteen years. Titus also with 
 
 me] So Ehem. : Titus with me also, 
 Adth. 
 
 2. The Gospel] So all Vv. except 
 Adth., tltat Gospel. Might be 
 rurming or have run] Should run or 
 had run, Adth. and aU Vv. The 
 text seems to preserve more exactly, 
 and perhaps also more grammati- 
 cally, the contrast between the pres. 
 subj. and the past tense. It may be 
 observed that should svmplmter futu- 
 ritionem indicat, might de rei possibi- 
 htate dicUw, Wallis, Gram. Angl. 
 p. 107. 
 
 3. Sowbeit not even] Sim., neuer- 
 
150 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 belt not even Titus, who was with me, though he was a 
 
 4 Greek, was constrained to be circumcised : and that be- 
 cause of the false brethren craftily brought in, men who 
 came in craftily to spy out our liberty which we have 
 in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: 
 
 5 to whom we gave place by our submission, no not for an 
 hour; that the truth of the Gospel might continue with 
 
 6 you. But from those who were high in reputation, — 
 whatsoever they were it maketh no matter to me; God 
 accepteth no man's person, — to me certainly they who 
 
 7 were of reputation communicated nothing; but con- 
 trariwise, when they saw that I was entrusted with the 
 Gospel of the uncircumcision even as Peter was with 
 
 thehsse...not, Gov. Test.: but neither, 
 AuTH., WlOL., BiBH., Rhbm. ; but 
 nether yet, Gen. Though he was] 
 
 So Ttnd., and Gov., Cean., Gen., 
 giving were: where as he was. Gov. 
 Test., Ehbm. ; hdng, Adth., Bish. 
 Constrained] Compelled, Auth. : see 
 ver. 14 and oh. vi. 12. 
 
 4. The false] So Ehbm. : false, 
 Adth. Craftily (i)] So 
 Bhbm. : vmawares, Auth. 
 
 Men who] The whiche, WiOL. : who, 
 Adth. Craftily (2)] So 
 
 Ehem. : privily, Auth. The proximity 
 of 7rap€L(rdKrovs ...TrapeitrijXBov is so 
 marked that it is as well to preserve 
 (so Ehem. alone) a uniform transla- 
 tion. 
 
 5. By our suhmission] By subjec- 
 tion, Auth., Gen., Bish. ; as con- 
 ceminge to be brought into subieccion, 
 Ttnd., Gov., Gov. Test, {bondage). 
 
 6. Fi'om those] As for the. Gov. 
 (both) ; of these, Adth. ; of them, the 
 six remaining Vv. The change here 
 seems necessary to prevent of being 
 considered a mere sign of the gen. 
 case. Were high in reputation] 
 Seemed to be somewliat, Auth., Gran., 
 Bish. ; weren seen for to be s., WioL.; 
 dyd seme to he s., Gov. Test. ; seemed 
 
 to be something, Ehem. ; seme to he 
 great, Ttnd. and (giving semed) Gov., 
 Gen. The very slight distinction 
 between BoKoOvres etvai ri and boKOvvres 
 (see below), and the apparent ref. to 
 the judgment of others (see notes), 
 are appy. both conveyed more nearly 
 by this translation than by the more 
 literal rendering of Auth. 
 Whatsoever] All Vv. except Auth. 
 regard ttote as temporal and so Vulg. 
 ('aliquando'). Tome — 
 
 rmthing] For they who seemed to be 
 somewhat, in conference added nothing 
 to me, Auth., showing by the italics 
 the omission of eXval ti. The words 
 i/iol. . . oiSiy irpoaavidaiTo are translated 
 by the remaining Vv. as follows: No 
 thing to me gauen to gedir, WioL. ; 
 added nothynge to me, Ttnd., Cov. 
 Test., Cean., Bish., Ehem. (putting 
 to me first) ; taught me nothinge, Cov. ; 
 did communicate nothing imth me, 
 Gen. 
 
 7. I was entrusted — circumc.] The 
 Oospd of the uncirc. was committed 
 unto m« as the Gospel of the Circ. was 
 unto Peter, Adth., and so as to the 
 construction all Vv. The change of 
 order is made for the sake of keeping 
 the emphasis on irewliTTeviiaf see 
 
Chap, II. 4 — 12. 
 
 151 
 
 that of the circumcision; for He that wrought for Peter 8 
 towards the apostleship of the circumcision wrought for 
 me also towards the Gentiles ; and became aware of the 9 
 grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John 
 who are accounted to be pillars gave to me and Barnabas 
 right hands of fellowship; that we should he apostles unto 
 the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision. Only they 10 
 would that we should remember the poor; which very 
 thing I also was forward to do. 
 
 But when Cephas came unto Antioch, I withstood 
 him to the face, because he had been condemned. For 
 before that certain came from James, he did eat with 
 the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to with- 
 
 II 
 
 la 
 
 Meyer. Even as] As, AuTH. 
 
 and all Vv. On the translation of 
 KaBiis, see notes on i Thess. i. 5 
 (Transl.). 
 
 8. Wrought] So WiOL., Ehem.: 
 wrought effectually, Auth. ; waa 
 myghty, Ttnd., Gov. (both), Ckan., 
 Gen., Bish. The idea of effectual 
 working, though to a considerable ex- 
 tent involved in hepyeiv, is perhaps 
 scarcely sufficiently prominent to be 
 expressed definitely ; see however notes 
 on I Th^ss. ii. 13 {Transl.}. For 
 
 Peter] Similarly, topetre, WiCL. ; in P., 
 AUTH., Tynd., Cbait., Bish., Ehem.; 
 imth P., Gov. (both); by P., Gen. 
 Towa/rds (i)] To, Auth., Gov. (both), 
 Bish., Ehem. ; in, Tynd., Chan., 
 Gen. Wrought for me also] 
 
 Was mighty in me, AuTH. All the 
 other Vv. give the same translation to 
 ivepyeiv in the second clause as they 
 adopt in the first. Before the verb 
 Auth. inserts the same, perhaps as an 
 equivalent to Kal which it omits to 
 translate. So Tynd., Gov. (inserting 
 also), Gean., Bish. 
 
 9. And iecame aware, &c.] So as 
 to order and construction, WlOL., 
 Tynd., Gban., Bish., Ehem., except 
 that they repeat the idiomatic when in 
 
 the translation of the temporal partici- 
 ple yvbvres, but thus slightly impair 
 the natural sequence of the ISovres... 
 Kal yvbvres. A0TH. inverts, and when 
 James, Cephas and John, .. .perceived ; 
 Gov. turns into a finite verb, they per- 
 ceaued. And Cephas] And is 
 
 omitted by Adth. Are 
 
 accounted] Weren seen, WiOL. ; are 
 counted. Gen. ; seemed, Auth. and all 
 the other Yv. Right 
 
 hands] The right hands, AuTH. and 
 all Vv. Be apostles] So 
 
 Ckan., Bish. : go, AuiH. ; preache, 
 Tynd., Gov. (both). Gen. 
 Gentiles] So Gen., Ehem. : heathen, 
 Auth. and remaining Vv. {h. men, 
 
 WlOL.). 
 
 10. Which very thing] The same 
 which, Auth.; which .thinge, Tynd., 
 Cov. (both). Gen.; the which same 
 thing, Ehem. 
 
 11. Cephas] * Peter, Auth. 
 Came] So Wioi., Cov. Test.: was 
 come, Auth. and six remaining Vv. 
 Had heen condemned] Was to be blamed, 
 Auth., Got. Test., Gen., Bish. ; was 
 worthy to be blamed, Tynd., Gov., 
 Ckan., and similarly, was reproudble, 
 WiCL. ; mas reprehensible, Ehem. 
 
 12. Came] So Wiol. : were come, 
 
152 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 draw and separate himself, fearing them which were of 
 
 13 the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews also dis- 
 sembled with him ; insomuch that even Barnabas was 
 
 14 carried away with them by their dissimulation. Howbeit 
 when I saw that they were not walking uprightly accord- 
 ing to the truth of the Gospel, I said to Cephas before 
 all, If thou being a Jew livest after the manner of Gen- 
 tiles, and not as do the Jews, how is it that thou con- 
 strainest the Gentiles to keep the customs of the Jews? 
 
 15 We truly are by nature Jews, and not sinners of the 
 
 AUTH. and remaining Vv. 
 Began to &c.] Withdrew and sepa- 
 rated, Adth. The imperf. denotes 
 the commencement and continuance 
 of the act, or according to Bengel, 
 aubducehat, pa/idlatim. 
 
 13. The rest of tW] SoCov. Test., 
 Khem. : the other, Auth. and the re- 
 maining Vv. (om. the, WiOL.). 
 
 Aha dissembled] Dissembled likewise, 
 AtJTH., Ttnd., Gov., Gen., Bish. 
 Even Barnahas'] Barnabas also, Auth. 
 and all Vv. except WlOL. (which 
 omits also). With themj The adv 
 
 of ixwaTiixBTi is not translated by 
 Auth. By] With, Auth. ; 
 
 into, WiCL. and the remaining Vv. 
 
 14. Howbeit] But, Adth. and all 
 Vv. Were not walhing] Walked 
 not, Adth. Cephas] *Peter, 
 Auth. All] So Gov., and 
 similarly, aU men, WiOL., Ttnd., 
 Gen.: them alt, Auth. and remain- 
 ing Vv. How is it that thou c.} 
 *Why comp. thou, Adth. Ctin- 
 strainest] So WiOL., Gen. . compel- 
 lest, Adth.; doest. . .copel, Gov. Test., 
 Ehem. ; causest, Tind., Gov., Gban., 
 BiBH. Keep — Jews] ludaize, 
 Ehem. ; live as do the Jobs, Auth., 
 Ttnd., Gov., Gov. Test. (om. do), 
 Gran., Bish. ; bicome iewes, WiOL. ; 
 do like the Iewes, Gen. 
 
 15. We truly are] We who are, 
 Auth. This address of St Paul to 
 
 St Peter involves so many difficulties 
 both in meaning and connexion, that 
 it will be perhaps best to subjoin a 
 free paraphrase of the whole. We, I 
 concede, are by birth, Jews, not Gentiles 
 and consequently from our point of 
 view sinners; but as we know that a 
 man is not justified by the works of tlie 
 law, in fact is not justified at all, except 
 through faith in Christ; even we, with 
 all our privileges, believed in and into 
 Christ, that we might be justified.. ..But 
 what, if, while we are seeking to be 
 justified in Christ, the result shows that 
 we with all our privileges are sinners 
 like the Gentiles ? is Christ the minister 
 of a dispensation that after all only leads 
 to sin ? God forbid. For if I {or you) 
 build up again the system I pulled down 
 and set up nothing belter in its place, it 
 is thus, and not in seeking to be justified 
 in Christ, that I show myself {vox hor- 
 rendaf) a transgressor of tlie law; yes 
 a violator of its deeper principles. For 
 I {to adduce a proof from my own 
 spiritual experience) through the me- 
 dium of the law, and in accordance 
 with its higher principles, died to it 
 in regard to its claims and its curse: 
 I have been and am crucified with 
 Christ. Though I live then, it is no 
 longer as my old self, but as reami- 
 mated by Christ; yes, the life which 
 now I live, this earthly life in the flesh, 
 I live in the element of faith in Christ, 
 
Chap. II. 13 — 20. 
 
 153 
 
 Gentiles ; but as we know that a man is not justified by 16 
 the works of the law, save only through faith in Jesus 
 Christ, we too believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be 
 justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the 
 law; since by the works of the law shall no flesh be 
 justified. But if, while we seek to be justified in Christ, 17 
 we are found ourselves also to be sinners, is Christ there- 
 fore a minister of sin? God forbid. For if the things i8 
 that I destroyed, these again I build up, I prove myself a 
 transgressor. For I through the law died to the law, 19 
 that I might live to God. I have been crucified with 20 
 Christ : and it is no longer I that live, but Christ 
 
 ■who so loved me that He gave His ovm 
 life for me. Thus I do not, like these 
 Judaists, regard the grace of God As 
 a principle that can ie dispensed vfith; 
 for if, as they pretend, the law is suf- 
 ficient to make men righteous, the ob- 
 vious inference is that there was no 
 object in Christ dying at all. 
 
 16. But as we know'] *Knov>ing, 
 AuTH. Save only through faith 
 in] But by the faith of, Adth. and 
 all Vv. (no bwt..., WiOL. ; /. on, 
 Cov.). We too believed'] Even 
 we have believed, AuiH. ; even we, I 
 say, haue bel.. Gen. Christ Jesus] 
 Jesus Christ, Adth. Faith 
 in (2)] The faith of, Adth. and all 
 Vv. Since] For, Adth.; because 
 that, Tynd., Cov. (both), Cban. (om. 
 that). Gen. ; wherfore, WlOL. ; because, 
 BiSH. ; for the vohich cause, Ehbm. 
 
 17. In Christ] So WiCL., Cov. 
 Test., Ehbm:.: by Christ, Adth. and 
 remaining Vv. We are found, &c.] 
 We our selves also are found sinners, 
 Adth. English idiom here, in conse- 
 quence of the union with the pres. 
 part., seems to require the pres. are 
 found as the translation of eipiSrui.ei'. 
 The aorist in the original has an idio- 
 matic reference to a discovery past 
 and done with, and about which no 
 more need be said : this cannot be 
 
 expressed without paraphrase ; comp. 
 Donalds. Gr. § 433. Is Christ 
 
 therefore a] Is therefore Christ the, 
 Adth. 
 
 God forbid] So Adth. and all Vv. 
 except WlOL., fer be it. It seems 
 best, and even practically most exact, 
 in a passage of the present nature, 
 where the revulsion of feeling and 
 thought is very decided, to retain the 
 familiar and idiomatic translation of 
 Adth. 
 
 18. The things — buildup] I build 
 again the things which I destroyed, 
 Adth., Cran., Bish. The inversion, 
 though involving a slight irregularity 
 in structure, seems here needed, as 
 serving both to keep the emphasis on 
 the right words, and to exhibit the 
 true point of the argument. Prove] 
 Make, Adth. and all the other 
 Vv. 
 
 1 9. Died] Haue bene deed, Cean. ; 
 am dead, Adth. and remaining Vv. 
 
 20. Have been] Am, Adth. and 
 all Vv. Of the two modes of express- 
 ing the Greek perfect (am and have 
 been) the latter seems here most appro- 
 priate, as the associated aor. renders 
 the ref. to past time more prominent 
 than one to present effects ; see notes 
 on Col. i. 16 (Transl.). And it 
 is — live] Nevertheless, I live, yet not I, 
 
154 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 liveth in me ; yea the life which now I live in the flesh 
 
 I live in faith, faith in the Son of God, who loved me 
 a I and gave Himself for me. I do not annul the grace 
 
 of God; for if righteousness come through the law, then 
 
 for naught did Christ die. 
 III. foolish Galatians, who did bewitch you, before whose 
 
 eyes Jesus Christ was evidently set forth among you, 
 2, crucified. This only would I learn of you. Was it by 
 
 the works of the law that ye received the Spirit, or by the 
 
 3 report of faith? Are ye so very foolish? having begun 
 with the Spirit are ye now being made perfect with the 
 
 4 flesh ? Did ye suffer so many things in vain ? if indeed it 
 
 5 really be in vain. He then, / say, that ministereth to 
 
 AtlTH. : no Version translates this 
 
 rightly ; see notes in loc. 
 
 Tea] And, Auth., Gen., Bish., 
 
 Rhem. ; for, Ttnd., Gov. 
 
 Now I] I now, Auth. In 
 
 faith, faith in] In the f. of, WiOL., 
 
 Gov. (both), Khem. ; by the f. of, 
 
 Auth., Ttnd., Ck4.n., Bish. ; by the 
 
 f. in, Gen. 
 
 21. Annul] Frustrate, Ajitk. ; caste 
 ...awey, WiOL., Gov. (both), Rhem.; 
 despyse, Ttnd., Cean. ; abrogate, Gen. ; 
 rdect, Bish. Through} By, 
 
 Auth., Wiol., Gov. (both). Gen., 
 Rhem. ; of, Tynd., Cban., Bish. 
 For naught] With oute cause, WlOL., 
 Gen. (o c); in vain, AUTH. and six 
 remaining Vv. Did. ..die] 
 
 Is dead, Auth., Gban., Bish.; died, 
 Wiol. and the remaining Vv. The 
 change of order seems to give its due 
 prominence to Soipedv {then Chr. is 
 dead in vain, Auth.), and did die 
 preserves a better rhythm than the 
 unresolved died. 
 
 Chapteb III. I. Foolish] It may 
 almost be doubted whether witles, the 
 excellent rendering of Wiol., should 
 not displace this, the transl. of Auth. 
 and all other Vv. except Rhem. {sens- 
 
 les). Did bewitch] Deceyuede, 
 
 Wiol. : hath bewitched, Auth. and re- 
 maining Vv. Auth. inserts 
 after you, *that ye should not obey the 
 truth. Was] Hath been, Auth. 
 Among you, crucijied] Cruci- 
 fied among you, Auth. 
 
 ■i. Was it — Spirit] Similarly, £y 
 the worJces...did you receiue the Sp., 
 Rhem. : received ye the spirit, by the 
 works, Auth., and, as to order, the 
 remaining Vv. Report] Hearing, 
 
 Auth. : see notes in loc. 
 
 3. So very] So, Auth. 
 With...wil}i,] So Rhem.: by ...by, 
 Wiol.; in. ..by, Auth., Gen.; in... 
 in, the five remaining Vv. 
 
 Being made] Made, Auth. 
 
 4. Did ye suffer] Have ye suffered, 
 Auth. // indeed it really be] 
 If it be yet, Auth., Bish.; if that be, 
 Ttnd. ; yf it be els. Gov. ; yf it be, 
 Gov. Test. ; yf it be also, Gran. ; if so 
 be it be eum. Gen. ; if yet, Rhem. A 
 singular variety, which however often 
 occurs in the case of particles. 
 
 5. He then, I say] He therefore, 
 Auth., Gov. Test., Gen., Bish., 
 Rhem. ; therfore he, Wiol. ; more- 
 over, he, Cean. : ovv is omitted in 
 translation by Ttnd. and Gov. 
 
Chap. II. 21— III. 12. 
 
 155 
 
 you the Spirit and worketh mighty powers within you, 
 doeth he it by the works of the law or by the report of 
 faith? 
 
 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted 6 
 to him for righteousness. Know ye then that they 7 
 which are of faith, these are sons of Abraham. More- 8 
 over the Scripture, foreseeing that God justifieth the 
 Gentiles by faith, proclaimed beforehand the glad tidings 
 to Abraham, saying In thee shall all the Gentiles be 
 blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed toge- 9 
 ther with the faithful Abraham. 
 
 For as many as are of the works of the law are under 10 
 curse: for it is written Cursed is every one that con- 
 tinueth not in all things which are written in the book 
 of the law to do them. But further that in the law no 
 man is justified in the sight of God, it is evident ; because 
 The just shall live by faith. Now the law is not of faith ; 
 
 II 
 
 12 
 
 Mighty ^o«wa] Vertues, WiCL. ; soch 
 greate actes, Cov. ; miracles, Auth. 
 and remaining Vv. Seport] 
 
 Searing, AuTH. : see ver. 2. 
 
 7. Then] Thus, Gov.; therefore, 
 Auth. and remaining "Vv. Cov. and 
 Cban. take yiviiffKere indicatively. 
 These] The same, Auth. 
 
 Sons of A.] So WiOL. : Alrahams 
 children, Cov. (both) ; the children of 
 A., Auth. and remaining Vv. 
 
 8. Moreover'] And, Auth. 
 Justifieth] So WiCL., Cov. (both), 
 Khem. : would justify, Adth. , Tynd., 
 Cea^., Gen., Bish. 
 
 Gentiles l^ia)'] So Gen.: hey then (yia), 
 Cov.; Oentils... nations, Ehbm. ; hethea 
 mm..folhis, WiCL. ; lieathen .. .nations, 
 AuiH. and four remaining Vv. It is 
 better thus to preserve a, uniform 
 transl. of t(l i8i/T], although a change 
 might seem to be required by a kind 
 of chronological propriety. 
 By faith] So Cov. Test., JRhbm., and 
 aim. WiOL. (of /.) : through faith, 
 Auth. and remaining Vv. 
 
 Proclaimed... tidings'] Shewed hefore 
 honde glad tydimges, Tynd., Cban., 
 Bish.; shewed. ..g. t. afore, Cov.; 
 preached hefore the Gospel, Auth., 
 Gen. ; tolde bifore, WioL., Cov. Test. 
 (afore); shewed... hefore, Ehem. 
 
 9. Together with] With, Auth. 
 and all Vv. The faithful] 
 So Bish., Ehem. : faithful, Auth. 
 and remaining Vv. 
 
 10. Under cmrse] S<3 WlOL., 
 Ehem., and similarly, vnder maledic- 
 cion, Ttnd. ; under the curse, Auth., 
 Cov. (both), Gen., Bish.; suhiecte to 
 the c, Cean. 
 
 I r. But further] But, Auth. In 
 the law no man is justified] So Ehem.: 
 mo man is made rigtwise in the- I., 
 Wioii. ; no man is justified hy the Law, 
 Auth. and six remaining Vv. 
 Because] So Ehem. ; for, Auth. and 
 remaining Vv. 
 
 12. Now] And, Auth., Cov. Test., 
 Gen., Bish. ; hut, Ehem. ; omitted by 
 Tynd., Cov., Cean. Of faith] 
 
 Auth. 1611 (as given in the Hexapla) 
 
156 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 13 but He that doeth them shall live in them. Christ 
 redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become 
 a curse for us, — because it is written Cursed is every 
 
 14 one that hangeth on a tree, — that unto the Gentiles the 
 blessing of Abraham might come in Christ Jesus; that 
 we might receive the promise of the Spirit through 
 faith. 
 
 15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; though it 
 be but a man's covenant, yet when it bath been con- 
 firmed, no man annuUeth it, or addeth new conditions. 
 
 J 6 Now to Abraham were the promises spoken, and to his 
 seed. He saith not And to seeds, as of many; but, as 
 
 17 of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. Now this I 
 say, a covenant before confirmed by God [for Christ] the 
 law which was four hundred and thirty years after doth 
 not invalidate, that it should make void the promise. 
 
 omits of. Ee\ *The man, 
 
 AUTH. 
 
 13. Redeemed'] Hath r. , Axtk. 
 Having become]. Being made, Auth., 
 BiSH., Ehem. ; made, WlOL. ; and was 
 mxide, TlND. ; whan he became, Gov. 
 (both) ; in as mocke as he was made, 
 Ckan. ; when he was made, Gen. 
 Because] So Ehem. . for, Auth. and 
 the remaining Vv. A tree] AuTH. 
 161 1 omits a. 
 
 14. Unto the Gentiles — come] The 
 bl. corns on the Gentiles, Auth. In] 
 SoWioL., Gov. (both), Ehem.; iATO»(//i., 
 Auth. and remaining Vv. 
 
 Christ Jesus] Jesus Christ, Auth. 
 
 15. Yet when it hath been] Yet if 
 it be, Auth. A temporal translation 
 (as in the text) is adopted by Tynd., 
 Gov. (both), Gen. ; a hypothetical by 
 Auth. with Cban., Bish.: while WroL. 
 and Ehem. give purely participial trans- 
 lations. AnnuUeth — con- 
 ditions] Disannulleth, or addeth 
 thereto, AUTH. ; dispisith...or aboue 
 ordeyneth, WiOL. ; despiseth it, or add- 
 eth eny things ther to, Tynd., Gov. 
 
 (both), Gkan., Gen. (doeth abrogate 
 it or &c.) ; despiseth, or further dispos- 
 eth, Ehem. 
 
 16. To Abraham were — seed] So 
 as to the order, WiOL. and Ehem. : to 
 A . and his seed were the promises made, 
 Auth. and remaining "Vv. 
 
 Spoken] Seyde, WioL., Ehem. : made, 
 Auth. and six remaining Vv. 
 
 17. Now] Andy Auth., Gen., 
 Ehem, ; S^ is omitted by Ttnd., Gov. 
 (both). Gran., Bish. The translation 
 of S^ is here somewhat difficult. Though 
 now has just preceded, it must appy. 
 be adopted again, as the only transla- 
 tion which preserves the resumptive 
 force. Say] Say, that, Auth. 
 A] So WiOL. : this, Gov. (both) ; the, 
 Auth. and remaining Vv. 
 
 Before confirmed] That was confirmed 
 before, Auth. By God for 
 
 Christ] Of God in Christ, Auth. 
 Doth not invalidate] Doth not dis- 
 anuU, Tynd., Gov. Test., Gran., 
 Bish.: cannot disannul, Auth., Gen. ; 
 maJceth not void, Ehem. 
 Make void the promise] Malce the pro- 
 
Chap. III. 13—23. 
 
 157 
 
 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of pro- 
 mise : but to Abraham God hath given it freely through 
 promise. 
 
 What then is the object of the law? It was added be- 
 cause of the transgressions, till the Seed should come to 
 whom the promise hath been made; being ordained by- 
 means of angels, in the hand of a mediator. Now a 
 mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. Is 
 the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: 
 for if there had been given a law which could have given 
 life, verily by the law would righteousness have come. 
 But on the contrary the scripture shut up all under sin, 
 that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given 
 to them that believe. Now before faith came, we were 
 kept in ward shut up under the law for the faith which 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 2,1 
 
 11 
 
 23 
 
 mjse of none effect, AuTH., Tynd., 
 Cran., Gen., Bisb. ; fi-mtrate thepr., 
 Bhem. 
 
 18. ffath given... freely] So Gov. 
 Test., and sim. Gov. {gaue...f): gave, 
 AuTH. and six reraaining Yv. The 
 order also of Auth. is different, but 
 God gave it to Abraham. 
 
 Through] By, Adth. and all Vv. 
 
 19. What then — law] Wherefore 
 then serveth the I., Auth., Tynd., 
 Gov., Gran., Gen., Bish. ; where to 
 than doth Hie I. seme, Gov. Test. ; 
 why was the L. then, Kheu. 
 
 The transgressions] So Gen. : Auth. 
 and all other Vv. omit the article : in 
 a passage however of this dogmatical 
 importance it ought to be retained. 
 The pr. hath been made] God byhigte, 
 WlOL. ; he had promysed it. Gov. Test., 
 Bheu. (ora. it) ; the promise was made, 
 Auth. and five remaining Vv. 
 Being] And it was, Auth. and all 
 Vv. except WiOL., Khem., which give 
 the bare participle. By means of] 
 
 Of, Gov. ; by, Auth. and all other Vv. 
 11. Given u, law] A Law given, 
 Auth. Would... have come] 
 
 Shuld have come, Tynd. ; shulde come, 
 
 Gov. (both), Ckaw. ; should have been-, 
 Auth., Gen., Bish. ; should be, Ehem. 
 As to the order, Auth. gives right, 
 should have been by the Law, and so 
 in regard to the position of in rS/iov 
 all the Vv. 
 
 22. But on the contrary] But, 
 Auth. and all Vv. The addition of 
 the words on the contrary seems here 
 required in translation to preserve the 
 full force of dWa, and to show clearly 
 the nature of the reasoning. 
 Shut up] Hath shut vp. Gov. (both) : 
 enclosyde, WicL. ; hath concluded, 
 AuiBL, Gen., Bish., Khem.; con- 
 cluded, Tynd., Chan. All] 
 Here WiOL., Tynd., Ckan., Ehem., 
 add thingis, but it is better to trans- 
 late tA irdnTa quite indefinitely. 
 Faith in] Faith of, Auth. ; the f. on. 
 Gov. ; the f. of, the seven remaining 
 Vv. 
 
 33. Now] Forsothe, WiCL. ; hut, 
 Auth. and five other Vv. : Tynd. and 
 Gov. omit. Kept — law] 
 
 Kept and shut vp vnder the I., Tynd. , 
 Gov. (both): Jcepl under the Law, shut 
 up, Auth., Gen. {and sh.); hepte vn- 
 dir the lawe, schitte to gedir, Wicl. ; 
 
158 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 34 was afterwards to be revealed. So then the law hath 
 been our schoolmaster unto Christ, that we may be justi- 
 fied by faith. 
 
 25 But now that faith is come, we are no longer under 
 
 36 a schoolmaster. For ye are all sons of God through 
 
 37 faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were bap- 
 
 38 tized into Christ put on Christ. There is among such 
 no Jew nor Greek, there is no bond nor free, there is no 
 male and female : for ye all are one man in Christ Jesus. 
 
 39 But if ye he Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, heirs 
 according to promise. 
 
 Tcepte vnder the lawe and were shut vp, 
 Ckan., Bibh. For] So Cov. 
 
 Test. : into, WiOL. ; unto, Auth. and 
 six remaining Vv. Was after- 
 
 wards to 5e] Was to le, WioL., Khem.: 
 should afterwards he, AtlTH. and six 
 remaining Vv. 
 
 24. So then'] Wlierefore, Auth., 
 Tthd., Cean., Gen., Bish. ; and so, 
 WioL. ; thus. Gov.; therfore, Cov. 
 Teat., Khem. Hath been] 
 
 Was, Auth. and all Vv. 
 Schoolmaster unto Clir.] So Gov., 
 Ckan., Bish. : Schoolmaster to bring 
 113 unto Ohr., Auth., Gen. (to Chr.) ; 
 litil tnayster in crist, WiCL. ; scolemaster 
 imto the tyme of Chr., Ttnd. ; scoole 
 master in Chr., Cov. Test. ; Pedagogue 
 in Chr., Khem. There is much diffi- 
 culty in fixing on the most suitable 
 translation of this word. The term 
 schoolmaster certainly tends to intro- 
 duce an idea (that of teaching) not 
 contained in 7rat5a7W")'6s, and also 
 serves to obscure the idea of custodia 
 (mslos'incorruptissimus, Hor. Sat. i. 6. 
 81), which seems the prevailing one 
 of the passage. Still as the same ob- 
 jection applies in a greater or less 
 degree to pedagogue (which I adopted 
 in the first edition) and tutor, it will 
 be perhaps better, in so familiar a 
 passage, to retain the rendering of 
 Auth. May he] So Eheh. ; 
 
 might he, Auth. : change to preserve 
 what is called the succession of tenses : 
 Latham, Engl. Lang. § 616 (ed. 3). 
 
 25. Now that f. is come\ So Cov. 
 (both) : where the f. came, Wiol. ; 
 when the f. came, Rhem. ; after that f. 
 is come, Auth. and four remaining Vv. 
 
 16. Sons] The sonnes, Tynd., Gen.; 
 tJie litil sones, WiOL. ; chyldren, Ckan. ; 
 the children, AUTH. and four remain- 
 ing Vv. Through faith in] 
 Byf. in, Auth., Wiol., Gen., Bish., 
 Khem. ; hy the f. in. Gov. ; by the f. 
 which is in, Ttnd., Gov. Test. ; be- 
 came ye beleue in, Gban. 
 
 2 7. Were] Save been, Adth. ; are, 
 Ttnd. and remaining Vv. {ben, WiOL.). 
 Put on Christ] Sane clothide crist, 
 WiCL. ; have put on Ohr., AUTH. and 
 the other Vv. 
 
 28. There is among such] There is, 
 Auth. No. . .nor (bis)] 
 Neither... nor, AvTK. No male 
 and female] Neither male nor female, 
 Auth. None of the Vv. have marked 
 the change. Ye all are] Alle 
 ye hen, WiOL. ; al you are, Kheu. ; ye 
 are all, Aum. and six remaining Vv. 
 One mail] One thinge, Ttnd. ; one, 
 Auth. and all the other Vv. 
 
 29. But] And, Auth., Gen., 
 Khem.; forsothe, Wiol. The rest 
 omit the particle. Heirs'] 
 *Andlmra, A.v'cu. Promise] 
 
Chap. III. 24— IV. 7- 
 
 159 
 
 Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, dif- IV. 
 fereth in nothing from a bond-servant, though he be lord 
 of all ; but is under guardians and stewards until the time % 
 appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were chil- 3 
 dren, were kept in bondage under the rudiments of the 
 world: but when the fulness of the time came, God sent 4 
 forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 
 that He might redeem them that were under the law, 
 that we might receive the adoption of sons. And to show 
 that ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son 
 into our hearts, crying Abba Father. So then thou art 
 no more a bond-servant, but a son; and if a son, an heir 
 also through God. 
 
 5 
 6 
 
 So Ttnd., Gen., Ehem. ; the pr., 
 Adth. and remaining Vv. (tlie hiheste, 
 WlOL.). 
 
 Chapter IV. 1. Jn notJiing] No- 
 thing, AUTH., Gov. Test., Gen., Bish., 
 Ehem. ; not, WiOL., Ttnd., Ckan. 
 Bond-servantl Servant, Auth. and all 
 Vv. It is desirable to keep up the 
 idea of bondage and slavery wliioh per- 
 vades the whole simile. 
 
 2. Guardians and stewards^ Tutors 
 and governors, AtiTH. and all other 
 Vv. except WiCL., tutours & autours 
 (tutor, et actoribus, Vulg.). It seems 
 desirable to make a change in transla- 
 tion, to preserve a clear distinction 
 between MrpoToi (guardians) here 
 and iraiSayiaybs in ch. iii. 24, 25. 
 
 3. Kept in bondage^ Seruynge, 
 WiOL., Bheu. ; in bondage, AuTH. 
 and six remaining Vv. 
 Hudiments] So AuTH. Marg., Gen., 
 Bish. : elements, Auth., Wioii., Rhem.; 
 ordinawnces, Tynd., Oban.; tradicions, 
 Gov. (both). 
 
 4. Came] So "WiOL., Ehem.: was 
 come, Adth., Gov. Test., Gen., Bish. 
 Bom . . . born} Made . . . made, Atjth. , 
 WiOL., Gen., Bish., Ehem.; borne... 
 
 put, Gov. (both). The meaning pre- 
 ferred by Soholef. (Hints, p. 96), made 
 subject to the law, involves a change of 
 meaning in yevd/icvov which does not 
 appear necessary or natural, but 
 Ttnd. and Ckan. give and made bonde 
 vnto the lawe. 
 
 5. That He might] So Gen., Ehem.: 
 that he schulde, WlOL. ; to, AuTH. and 
 five remaining Vv. Here, as in ch. 
 iii. 14, it seems most exact to indicate 
 the repeated Ua by the same form of 
 translation. Adoption of sons] 
 Though adoption alone is a sufficient 
 rendering for vloOeaia, it is better to 
 keep the full translation of Auth. here 
 on account of vlode(rLa...vlQl occurring 
 in such close proximity. 
 
 6. And to show that] Forsothe for, 
 WiOL. ; for so moch the as. Gov. ; and 
 JecaMse,AnTH.,Cov.Test.,GEN.,EHEM.; 
 because, Ttnd., Cean., Bish. 
 
 Sent forth] Senie, WiOL.; hath sent 
 forth, AuTH., Gen. ; hath sent, the six; 
 remaining Vv. Our hearts] 
 
 • Your hearts, Auth. 
 
 7. So then] And so, WiOL. ; ther- 
 fore. Gov. Test., Ehem. ; wherefore, 
 Adth. and five remaining Vv. 
 Bond-servant] Servant, AuxH. : see 
 
160 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 8 Howbeit at that time indeed, not knowing God, ye 
 were in bondage to them which by nature are not gods. 
 
 9 But now that ye have come to know God, or rather have 
 been known by God, how is it that ye turn back again to 
 the weak and beggarly rudiments, whereunto ye desire 
 
 10 to be again anew in bondage? Ye are carefully observ- 
 
 1 1 ing days and months and seasons and years. I am afraid 
 of you, lest haply I have bestowed upon you labour 
 in vain. 
 
 12 Brethren, I beseech you, become as I am, for I also 
 
 13 have become as ye are. Ye injured me in nothing: yea 
 ye know that it was on account of weakness in my flesh 
 
 note on ver. 1. An heii — God] 
 
 Then an heir 'of God through Christ, 
 AuTH. 
 
 8. At that time indeed] Tlien in 
 deede, Khem. ; thanne sothely, WiOL. ; 
 eiien then, Gen. ; then, Auth. The 
 change in the trans! . of rdre is to pre- 
 vent then being mistaken for the in- 
 ferential particle. Not hnowing] 
 So Bhem. ; vnhnowyng, WicL. : when 
 ye knew not, Abth. and six remaining 
 Vv. (Auth. 16 ii ex errore Icnow). 
 Were in bondage] Did sere ice, Auth. 
 Kot gods] *No gods, Auth. 
 
 9. Now iJiat ye hare come to hnow] 
 Now after that ye have lenown, Auth. 
 Mave been hnown] Are hnown, Auth. 
 and aU Vv. {ben, Ten., WlCL.). 
 
 By Gcd] Of God, Auth. and all Vv. 
 How is it thai] So Ttnd., Cov., Cran. : 
 how happmeth it, that, Gov. Test. ; 
 how, Auth., Wiol., Gen., Bish., 
 Ehem. The order of Auth. is hmo 
 turn ye again. Back again] 
 
 So Gov. : eftesone, Wiol. ; again, 
 Auth. and six remaining Vv. 
 Rudimenti] So Auth. Marg., Gen., 
 Bish. ; elements, Auth., Wiol., Ehem. ; 
 cerimonies, Ttnd. ; iradicions, Cov. 
 (both) ; ordinauntes, Gran. ; see ver. 
 3 ; Ttnd. alone varies his rendering in 
 the two places. Again anew] 
 
 Similarly, agayne...afresshe, Ttnd., 
 Cov. (both), Cean., Bish. : again, 
 Adih. ,Khek. ; eftesone, WiCL. ; as from 
 tlie beginning. ..againe, Gen. The order 
 of Auth. is desire again to be in b. 
 
 10. Are carefully obserring] Kepen, 
 WiOL. ; ehserve, Auth. and all the 
 other Vv. Seasons] 
 Times, Auth. and all Vv. 
 
 11. Lest haply] Zeste paraveniure, 
 Wiol.; lest perhaps, Ehem.: lest, 
 Auth, and six remaining Vv. 
 
 12. Become... have become] Be.. .urn, 
 Auth. and all Vv. except WiCL. -which 
 omits am. Injured me in nothing] 
 Have not injured me at all, Auth., 
 Bish.; have not hurts me ai all, Ttnd., 
 Gov., Cov. Test. (om. at all), Cran., 
 Gen. 
 
 13. Tea 3/e] Sothely yee, Wicl. ; 
 for ye, Gov. ; but ye, Cov. Test. ; and 
 ye, Gen., Ehem. (3/ow); ye, Auth., 
 Ttnd., Gran., Bish. That] 
 Eow, Auth. /* was on account 
 of. ..thai,] By,'WiOh., Ehem.; in. Gov.; 
 through, Auth. and five remaining Vv. 
 Weak-ness in my flesh] Weahies after 
 thcfl.. Gov.; w. ofthefl., Cov. Test.; 
 infirmity of the flesh, Auth. and six 
 remaining Vv. (om. the, WioL.). The 
 slight changes made by substituting 
 the simpler word weahness for infirmity. 
 
Chap. IV. 8—20. 
 
 161 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 that I preached the Gospel to you the first time; and 
 your temptation in my flesh ye despised not nor loathed, 
 but received me as an angel of Godj yea as Christ Jesus. 
 Of what nature then was the boasting of your blessed- 
 ness? for I bear you record, that if it had been possible 
 ye would have plucked out your eyes, and have given 
 them to me. So then am I become your enemy by speak- 
 ing to you the truth ? 
 
 They pay you court, in no honest way; yea they de- 17 
 sire to exclude you, that you may pay them court. But it 1 8 
 is good to be courted in honesty at all times, and not 
 only when I am present with you. My little chil- 19 
 
 dren, of whom I am again in travail, until Christ be 
 formed in yoii, I cohld indeed wish to be present with 2,0 
 
 and my for the, seem to make the 
 Apostle's reference to some bodily 
 afiliction or Ulness rather more appa- 
 rent. The first time] Notb 
 iifore, "WiOL. ; a whyle ago, Cov. 
 Test. ; heretofore, Ehem. ; at the first, 
 AuTHi and fi-ve remaining Yv. ; this 
 translation leaves the meaning am- 
 biguous ; see notes. 
 
 14. Tour] 'My, Adth. ; see notes 
 in loc. In] So WicL., Cov. 
 Test., Rhem. ; which was in, AuTH., 
 Cean., Gen,, Bish. ; which I suffered 
 hy reason of, Ttnd. ; which I s. after, 
 Cov. Zoathed] Rejected, 
 AuTH., Ehem. ; fmsoTcen, WicL. ; ab- 
 horred, the six remaining Vv. i)iaue 
 ye abh., Cov. Test.). Yea] So 
 Ttnd., GbN: ; yee euert, Cov. (both) ; 
 even, AuTH., Ckan., BiSh. ; omitted 
 by WiOL., Rhem. 
 
 15. Of what nature then was] 
 * Where is then, Auth. 
 
 The bodsiing of yow blessedness] Youfe 
 blessynge, WiCL. ; the good case that yt 
 were in, Cot. Test. ; youre felidte, 
 CEANi, GfcNi, B18H. ; yoit/r blessednes, 
 Ehem.j; tht Uessedness you spake of, 
 Ahth. ^fhe clause is strangely teii- 
 dered by TtND. and Cov. how kdppy 
 
 were ye then ? 
 
 Your eyes] Sd WiCL., CoV; Test., 
 Rheu. : your own eyes, AuTH. and re- 
 maining Vv. 
 
 16. So then am I] Am I then, 
 Rhem. ; therfore am I, WiOi. ; am I 
 therefore, Auth. and the other Vv. 
 By speaJcing to you] Seyinge.i.to you, 
 WiCL. ; tellynge you, Cov. Test., 
 Rhem. ; because I tell you, Auth. and 
 remaining Vv. 
 
 1 7. Pay — well] Zealously affect you, 
 but not well, Auth. ; lou^n not you wel, 
 WiOL. ; are gelous over you amysse, 
 Ttnd., Cov., Cban., Gen,, Bish.; 
 emulate you not livel; Rhem. 
 
 Desire to] Would, AuTH;, WlOL. (wo- 
 ien), Cov., Gbn;, Rhem. ; intende to, 
 Ttnd., Ceah., Bish. ; wyll, Cov. 
 Test, May pay them comt] 
 
 Might affect them, AuiHi 
 
 18. To bedtimes] To be zealously 
 affected alwayeS in a good thing, Auth. 
 The clause is curiously rendered by 
 Cov. Test. : But cauet alwaye the 
 thynge that good is, feruently in good- 
 nesse, <fc not onely &o. 
 
 19. Am again in travail] Travail 
 in birth againe, Auth. 
 
 20. / could indeed wish] I desire, 
 
 M 
 
162 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 you how, and to change my tone, for I am perplexed 
 
 about you. 
 a I Tell me ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not 
 22 hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two 
 
 sons; one by the bond-maid, and one by the free-woman. 
 
 33 Howbeit he who was of the bond-maid was bom after 
 the flesh; but he of the free-woman through the pro- 
 
 34 mise. All which things are said in the way of allegory; 
 for these women are two covenants, — the one from Mount 
 Sinai, bearing children unto bondage; and this is Agar; — 
 
 25 for the word Agar signifieth in Arabia Mount Sinai ; — and 
 she ranketh with the Jerusalem which now is, for she is in 
 
 Atjth. Tone] Yoke, Auth. 
 
 and all Yv. Am perplexed about 
 
 yovil Stand in doubt of you, Auth., 
 Gov. (st. I doute), BisH. ; stonde in u, 
 doute of you, Ttnd., Cran. ; am in d. 
 of you, Gen. ; am ashamed of you, 
 Gov. Test. ; am confounded in you, 
 Ehem. 
 
 22. One. ..and one] So WiOL., Gov. 
 Test, (omitting the first one by mis- 
 take), Gen., Ehem. : the one ...the 
 other, Auth. and remaining Vv. 
 The iond-maid...the free-woman] A 
 hondmaid...afreewoman, AuTH.WiOL. 
 and Bhem. are the only Vv. that give 
 the definite articles. 
 
 23. Sowbeit] But, Auth., Gen., 
 BiSH., Ehem.; yee and, Ttnd., Gran. 
 Bond-maid] Bondwoman, Auth. 
 Through] After, Gov. Test.; by, Auth. 
 and all the other Vv. Auth. gives 
 he of the f. was by pr. 
 The promise] So Gov. Test., Rhem. : 
 Adth. and all other Vv. omit the. 
 
 24. All which, &c.] Which things 
 are an Allegory, Adth.; the whiche 
 th. ben seyde by allegoric, Wicl. ; wh. 
 th. are spoJcen by an alleg., Gov. Test., 
 Gean., Bish., Rhem. {said); wh. th. 
 betoken mystery, Ttnd. ; these wordes 
 betoJcen somwhat. Gov. ; by the which 
 things another thing is ment. Gen. 
 These women] So Ttnd., Gov. : these 
 
 mothers. Gen. ; thes thingis, WiCL. ; 
 these, Auth. and remaining Vv. Vulg. 
 gives hjec.testamienta. Two] 
 
 *The two, Adth. Mount] 
 
 The m., Auth. Bearing 
 
 children] Gendrynge, Wicl., Ehem. ; 
 engedrynge. Gov. Test. ; which gen- 
 dereth, Adth. and five remaining Vv. 
 {that, Coy.). And this] 
 
 The whych. Gov. Test. ; that, Wiol. ; 
 which, Auth. and remaining Vv. 
 
 25. The word — Sinai] Tliis Agar 
 is mount Sinai in Arabia, Auth., 
 Bish. {Agar. ..the m.) ; mounte S. is 
 called A. in Arab., Ttnd., Gran. (om. 
 called); Agar is called in Arabia y" 
 mount Sina, Gov. ; Agar or Sina is a 
 mountaine in Ar., Gen. The Vv. 
 which, following the Vulg., adopt the 
 easier reading and omit ''Ayap give, 
 Sina is a mountayne in Ar., Gov. 
 Test., Rhem., and so Wicl. {an hit). 
 Ranketh v>ith] Is in the same ranlce 
 with, Auth. Marg. : answereth to, 
 Auth., Gen. ; bordreth vpon, Ttnd., 
 Gran., Bish. (see notes) ; reacheth 
 vnto. Gov.: and, following the Vulg. 
 conjunctus est, is ioyned to, WiOL., 
 Gov. Test, {vnto) ; hath affinitie to, 
 Ehem. The Jerusalem] 
 
 Auth. omits the. 
 
 And is, Auth. 
 
 For she is] 
 
Chap. IV. 21— V. 3. 
 
 163 
 
 bondage with her children. But the Jerusalem which is 26 
 above is free, and she is our mother. For it is written .37 
 Rejoice thou barren that bearest not ; break forth and cry 
 thou that, travailest not : for many children hath the deso- 
 late one, more than she which hath an husband. But ye, a8 
 brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. Still as 29 
 then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that 
 was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless 30 
 what saith the scripture? Cast out the bond-maid and 
 her son: for the son of the bond-maid shall in no wise be 
 heir with the son of the free- woman. Wherefore, brethren, 31 
 we are not children of a bond-maid, but of the free- 
 woman. Stand fast then in the liberty for which Christ V. 
 made us free, and' be not again held fast in a yoke of 
 bondage. 
 
 Behold I Paul say to you that if ye be circumcised 2 
 Christ will profit you nothing. Yea I testify again to 3 
 
 26. The Jerusalem,'} That i/rlm, 
 WiCL., Gov. Test., Ehem.; Jerm., 
 AuTH. and five remaining Vv. 
 
 And she, &c.] Which is the mother of 
 us *all, AuTH. 
 
 27. Many — which hath} Similarly 
 (following the Vulg.) many sones of 
 the lefte womman, more that of hire that 
 hath, WlOL. ; many are the children 
 of the desolate, more then of her that 
 hath, Khem. : for the desolate hath 
 many more children than she which 
 hath, AuTH. An husbamd] 
 So AuTH. and all Vv. Idiom seems 
 to require this less accurate transla- 
 tion of rbv dvSpa. 
 
 ■28. But ye] Now 'wee, Auth. 
 Children] So Ttnd., G-en. : the sones, 
 Wioii. ; the children, Auth. and five 
 remaining Vv. 
 
 29. StUr\ But, Auth. and all Vv. 
 
 30. Bond-maid (bis)] Bondwoman, 
 Auth. : see ver. 22. Shall in no 
 imse] Shall not, Auth. and all Vv. 
 This seems to be a case in which we 
 may press the translation of oi ii.i\- 
 
 see notes on i Thess. iv. 15 [Transl.). 
 
 31. Wherefore] 'So then, Auth. 
 A bond-m^aid] The bondwoman, Auth, : 
 see ver. 22. Free-woman] 
 
 Free, Auth. 
 
 Chapter V. i. Then] Therefore, 
 Auth. and the other Vv. except Gov. 
 Test,, Ehem., which omit it. 
 For which] Wherewith, Auth., Ttnd., 
 Gov., Gran,, Gen., Bish. Wiol., 
 Gov. Test., Rhem., follow the connec- 
 tion of the Vulg. Made] 
 Math made, Auth. and all Vv. 
 Be not... held fast] Be not intangled, 
 Auth., Gen., Bish. ; wrappe not 
 youre selves, Ttnd., Cean. ; be not 
 wrapped, Gov. (both) ; be not holden 
 in, Ehem. Again held fast] 
 Auth. gives the order entangled a- 
 gain. In] So WlOL., 
 Ttnd., Gov., Gkan. : with, Auth. and 
 remaining Vv. A yoke] The 
 yoke, Auth. and all Vv. except Wicl. 
 (^oh). 
 
 2. Will profit] Profiteth, Gov.; 
 
164 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 every man who has himself eircumoised, that he is a 
 
 4 debtor to do the whole law. Ye have been done away 
 with from Christ, whosoever of you are being justified 
 
 5 in the law; ye are fallen away from grace. For we, by 
 the Spirit, wait for the hope of righteousness from 
 
 6 faith. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth 
 any thing, nor uncireumcision, but faith working through 
 love. 
 
 7 Ye were running well; who did hinder you that ye 
 
 8 should not obey the truth? The persuasion cometh not 
 
 9 of Him that calleth you, A little leavgn leaveneth the 
 
 shall profit, ArfH. a^d all the other 
 Vv. The simple predication of re- 
 sult : In primis personis shall simpli- 
 citer prcedicentis est, will qitasi promit- 
 tentis aut mitiantis; in secundis et ter- 
 tiis personis shall promittentis est aut 
 minantis, will simpliciier prcedicentis, 
 Wallis, Gr, Ancjl. p. io6. 
 
 3. Yea\ For, Atiih., Gen., Bish. ; 
 sothely, 'VViCL. ; and, Cov. Test., 
 Ehsm. ; omitted by Ttnd., Cov., 
 Cban. Who has himself circ.'\ 
 That is circumcised, 4-DTH., Ttnd., 
 Cov., Ckan., Gen., Bish. (all but 
 AuTH. giving which) ; cirQuinf,cidynQe 
 hym self, WiOL., Cov. Test,, Ehejt. 
 (Vulg. circumddenti se). 
 
 4. Ye — Ohrist] Christ is Jfcpijve 
 of no effect unto you, Auth. ; yee ten 
 avoydide fro crist, WiOL. ; ye are gone 
 quyte from Chr., Tynd., Cov. (both); 
 Christ is become hut in veyne vnto you, 
 CEAipf., BiSB. (om. in) ; yc are abolisJied 
 from ChX; Gen.; you are euacuated 
 from Chr., E^ek. Here idiom seems 
 to require the English perfect : the 
 pure gristle translation would stand 
 in too qiarjsed a, contrast with the 
 following present, and to the English 
 reader tpo conipletely transfer the 
 action to what is entirely past: see 
 notes on } Thess. ii. 16 (Transl.). 
 
 A re heing] Wylbe, Cov. (both) ; are. 
 
 AniH. and six remaining Vv. 
 In the] So WiCL., Ehem. : by the, 
 Auth. and six remaining Vv. 
 fallen awoty] So Wici,. : fallen, Aoiu. 
 and all the other Vv. 
 
 5. By] So WiCL. -. through, Auth., 
 Gen., Bish.; m, the five remaining 
 Vv. From faith] I'y 
 faith, Auth. 
 
 6. Christ Jesus] Jes. Chr., Auth. 
 WorMngJ Which... is mighty in opera- 
 cion, Ttnd., Cov.; which worketh, 
 Auth. and the other Vv. {that, Wicl., 
 Ehem.). The practice of inserting 
 the relative before the anarthrous 
 participle, even when idiom can 
 scarcely be urged in its favour, is an 
 inaccuracy that is not nnconmionly 
 found in the older Vv. Perhaps even 
 in Eph. ii. i. Col, ii. 13, it might seem 
 lietter to adopt the concessive transla- 
 tion, though &c. see however notes in 
 locc. (^Transl.). ITirough] 
 J3t/, Auth. and all Vv. 
 
 y. Were rui(ming] Sid run, Auth., 
 Tynd., Cov., Ckan., Gen., Bish.; 
 rar\,ne, Cov. (both), Ehem. 
 
 8. The] So Cban., Gen., Ehem. : 
 this, Auth., Wiol., Cov. Test.; that, 
 Ttnd.; socfe, Cov. Calkth] So iight\y 
 Auth.: not called (as Ttnd.), or is 
 calling, as the iteirative force involved 
 in the English present more nearly 
 
Chap. V. 4 — 17. 
 
 165 
 
 wliole lump. I, for my part, have confidence toward you in xo 
 the Lord, that you will be none otherwise minded; but he 
 that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he 
 be. But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why 1 1 
 do I still suffer persecution?' then has the offence of the 
 cross been done away with. I would that they who are la 
 unsettling you would even cut themselves off/rom you. 
 
 For ye were called unto liberty, brethren; only use not 13 
 your liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by your love 
 serve one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one 
 word, even in this. Thou ehalt love thy neighbour as 
 thyself But if ye bite and devour one another, take 
 heed ye be not consumed one of another. 
 
 Now I say; Walk by the Spirit, and ye shall in no wise 
 fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against 17 
 the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh : for these are 
 opposed the one to the other, that ye may not do the. 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 i5 
 
 approaches to the idiomatic use of the 
 participle than either the past tense 
 ' or the resolved present ; comp. notes 
 on Phil. iii. 14 {Trwml,), and Latham, 
 Engl. Lang. § 578 (ed. a). 
 
 10. I for my part\ I, AuTS. 
 Toward] SoTy^t)., Gov., Cu an., Bish. : 
 in, Adth., Gen., Khem. /»] 
 So the other Vv. except Acth., Gen., 
 through. 
 
 1 1. But /] And I, AuTH. 
 
 Still (bis)] Yet, AniH. Bos... 
 
 heen] Is, AniH. Done away with] 
 
 Avoydide, WiCL., Gov. Test, (voyded) ; 
 abolished, Gen. ; evacuated, Khem. ; 
 ceased, Adth. and remaining Vv. 
 
 12. That they, kc] They were even 
 cat off which trouble you, Adth. 
 
 Are unsettling] Distourblen, WiCL. ; 
 do disquiet, Gen. ; trotible, Adth. 
 and remaining Vv. except Gov. Test, 
 which has Wolde god that also were 
 cut awaye, which troubleth you. 
 Would... cut themselves off from you] 
 Were.. .cut off, Adth., Gen., Bish., 
 Rhbm. ; were seperaied from yon, 
 
 Ttnd., Cean. ; werv roted out fro 
 amoge you. Coy. 
 
 13. For ye. ..brethren] For ire- 
 thren, &o. Adth. : and so all Vv. as 
 to the forward position of brethren. 
 Were] So Ttnd., Cean.; hen, WiOL.; 
 are, Gov. (both), Ehem. ; hofue bene, 
 Adth., Gen., Bish. Yow liberty] 
 So Ttnd., Gov. (both), Cean., Gen. . 
 liberty, Adth., Wicl., Bish. ; this I., 
 Ehem. Your love] Love, Adth. 
 
 14. The whole] Eueri, Wiot. ; all 
 the, Adth. and all other Vv. 
 
 16. Now I say] This I say then, 
 Adth. ; / saye, Ttnd., Gov., Ckan. ; 
 then I say. Gen., Bish. By] In, 
 Adth. and all Vv. In no 
 wise] Not, Adth. and all Vv. 
 
 17. For these] "And th., Adth. 
 Are opposed] Ben aduersaries, WicL., 
 Ehem. ; are contrary, Adth. and the 
 other Vv. Ye may not do] 
 Ye cannot do, Adth. and all Vv. 
 exceT^ifWiOL^yee done not; and Ehem. 
 which translates the clause not what 
 things soeuer you vvil, these you doe. 
 
166 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 1 8 things ye may wish. But if ye be led by the Spirit, ye 
 
 19 are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are 
 manifest, of which kind are fornication, uncleanness, 
 
 20 wantonness, idolatry, sorcery, hatreds, strife, jealousy, 
 31 deeds 0/ wrath, contentions, dissensions, factions, envyings, 
 
 murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the 
 which I tell you beforehand, as I also told you before- 
 hand, that they which do such things shall not inherit 
 
 23 the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, 
 joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithful- 
 
 23 ness, meekness, temperance: against such things there 
 
 34 is no law. Now they that are Christ's have crxicified 
 
 35 the flesh with the affections and lusts. If we live by 
 
 36 the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. Let us not 
 become vainglorious, provoking one another, envying one 
 another. 
 
 "VI. Brethren, if a man should be even surprised in a fault. 
 
 The things ye may wish^ Thes thingis 
 what euer thingis yee wolen, WlOL. ; 
 that which ye violde, Ttnd., Gov. ; 
 the th. y' ye will, Gov. Test. ; what- 
 soeuer ye wolde, Cean. ; what ye 
 woulde, BiSH. ; tlie things that ye 
 would, Adth. ; for Kheu. see above. 
 
 iS. By the Sp.'l So WicL., Gov. 
 Test., Gen., JRhem.: 0/ «Ae sp., Auth. 
 and the remaining Vv. 
 
 19. Of which Mnd are] TJie whiche 
 ten, WiOL.; whych are, Gov. Test., 
 Gen., Bhedc. ; which are these, Auth. 
 and remaining Vv. Fornication] 
 
 "Adultery, fornication., Auth. 
 Wamtonness] So Tynd., Gov., Gban., 
 Gen., Bish.; leccherie, Wiol., Gov. 
 Test., Rhem.; lasciiyion^nesse, Auth. 
 
 30. Sorcery— factions] Witchcraft, 
 hatred, "variance, 'emulations, wrath, 
 strife, seditiana, heresies, Auth. 
 
 21. Beforehand (bis)] Before (bis), 
 Gen.; heforc.in time past, Auth., 
 Ttnd., Gov. (both), Cban,, Bish. 
 7 also told] I have also told, Auth. 
 No Version besides Wiol. omits the 
 
 have. 
 
 12. Kindness] So Adth. al' 
 except here; benyngnyte,'W ich., Ehem.; 
 gentleness, Auth. and remaining Tv. 
 Faithfulness] So Ttnd., Gov., Cean.; 
 faith, Auth. and remaining Vt. 
 
 24. Now they] And they, Adth., 
 Khbm. ; bvi they, Gov. (both) ; for 
 they, Gen. ; they trulye, Gean.,^Bish. ; 
 they, Ttnd. Save crucified] 
 So Adth. and all Vv. Here again it 
 seems desirable to preserve the per- 
 fect in translation, as the aorist in 
 English refers the crucifixion too 
 exclusively to the past ; see notes on 
 ver. 4. 
 
 25. By. ..by] So WiCL.: in. ..in, 
 Adth. and all the other Vv. 
 
 26. Become] So Gov. Test.: be... 
 made, Wicl., Ehem.; be, Adth. and 
 five remaining Vv. Vainglorious] 
 So Ttnd., Gov. : coiieytovse of veyne 
 glorie, Wiol.; desirous of vaine glory, 
 Adth. and the five remaining Vv. 
 
 Ghapteb VI. I. Should be even] 
 
Chap. V. i8— VI. 9. 
 
 167 
 
 ye which are spiritual restore siich a one in the spirit of 
 meekness, considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. 
 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so shall ye fulfil a 
 the law of Christ. For if a man think himself to be 3 
 something when he is nothing, he deceiveth his own 
 mind. But let each man prove his own work, and then 4 
 shall he have his ground of boasting only in what con- 
 cerns himself, and not in what concerns the other. For 5 
 each man shall bear his own load. 
 
 But let him that is taught in the word commtmicate 6 
 with him that teacheth in all good things. Be not deceiv- 7 
 ed; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, this , 
 shall he also reap. For he that soweth unto his own flesh 8 
 shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth 
 unto the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap eternal life. But 9 
 let us not lose heart in well-doing ; for in due season we 
 
 SJwuld be, AUTH. Only three Vv. 
 express the Kai, WiOL. and Rhem. by 
 giving and yif; Cban., if... also. 
 Surprised in] Overtaken in, AuTH., 
 Gov. (of), Gov. Test.; hifore ocupiede 
 (or ouercomen) in, WiCL. ; fallen hy 
 chaunce into, Ttnd. ; taJcenin, Ckan., 
 'BlSB..; fallen it/ occasion into, G-BN. ; 
 preoccupated in, Rhem:. 
 
 ■2. Shall ye fulfil] 'Fulfill, A.vi^. 
 
 3. Deceiveth his own mind] Sp 
 Gkan.: deceivethhimself, Auth.,Wiol., 
 Gov. (both); deceaveth hym silfe in 
 Ms ymaginacion, Tynd., Gen. ; dec. 
 hymselfe in his owne fansie, BiSH. ; 
 sedMceth him self, Rhem. 
 
 4. Each] So WiOL. ; every, Adth. 
 and all the other Vv. 
 
 His ground of boasting] Bejoicing, 
 AuTH., Ttnd., Gov., Gran., Gen., 
 BiSH. Only — other] In 
 
 himself alone, and not in an other, 
 AuTH. 
 
 5. Bach] So WiOL. ; every, Auth. 
 and all remaining Vv. Zoad] 
 Charge, WiOL. (and in verse 2) ; 
 burden, Auth. and all the other Vv. 
 
 6. But] So Gov.: fforsothe, Wicl.; 
 and, Rhem. ; omitted by Axjth. and 
 the remaining Vv. Communicate 
 loith] Cormm. unto, Auth. , Rhem. (to) ; 
 comyne to, WiOL. ; minister vnto, 
 Ttnd., Gov. (both), Gkan. ; the 
 words are translated by Gen., maie 
 him that hathe taught him, partaker 
 of all his goods. 
 
 7. This] That, Auth. Bish. 
 
 8. His own flesh] His flesh, Auth. 
 Eternal life] Life everlasting, Auth. 
 and the other Vv. except WlOL. and 
 Gov. Test., which preserve the more 
 correct order euerlastynge liif. It is 
 not desirable to invert the order in 
 English except when the adjective in 
 the original occupies the emphatic, 
 i. e. the first, place ; comp. Winer, Or. 
 § ,^9. 1, p. 464. On the translation 
 of alilmos, comp. notes on 2 Tliess. i. 9 
 (Traml). 
 
 9. But] And, Auth., Rhem. ; for- 
 sotlie, WiOL. ; therefore. Gen. ; the 
 rest omit to translate 8^. Lose 
 heaH] Fayle, WiOL., Rhem.; be weary, 
 Auth. and six remaining Vv. All 
 
168 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 10 shall reap, if now we faint not. Accordingly then, as we 
 have opportunity, let us work that which is good unto all 
 men, but especially unto them who are of the household 
 of faith. 
 
 1 1 See in what large letters I have written to you with 
 
 1 2 mine own hand. As ma,ny as desire to make a fair shpw 
 in the flesh, these constrain you to be circumcised ; only 
 that they may not suffer persecution for the cross of 
 
 13 Christ. For not even do they, who are being circum- 
 cised, themselves keep the law ; but they desire to have 
 
 14 you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh. But 
 God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world has been crucified 
 
 15 to me, and I to the world. For neither doth cir- 
 cumcision avail anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new 
 
 t6 creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, 
 peace he upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel 
 of God. 
 
 however read lKKaK(iiiei> not ivKax, 
 If now] If, AuTH., Gen., Bish. 
 
 10. Accordingly — have\ As we have 
 therefore, Auth. ; therefore the while 
 we have, WlCL., Khbm. ; whill we 
 heme therfore, the six remaining Vv. 
 Work] So WicL., Ehem. : do, Auth. 
 and six remaining Vvi That 
 which is good] Good, Auth. 
 
 BiU] So Gov. (both). Gen., Rhem.; 
 forsothe, WicL.; and, Tynd., Cran. : 
 omitted by Auth. and Bish. only. If 
 by the fine idiomatic turn of the house- 
 hold of faith nothing more be meant 
 than close and intimate union, it may 
 be advantageously retained: but see 
 notes in lot. The actual rendering 
 is due to Tynd., but WioL. had 
 given the housholde mcyne of the 
 feith. 
 
 11. See] So EheM.: see yee, Wiol.; 
 heholde, Tynd., Gov. (both); ye see, 
 Auth., Cran., Gen., Bish. In 
 what large letters] How large a letter. 
 
 Auth., Ty.nd., Ckan., Gen., Bish.; 
 with how many toordes. Gov. ; with 
 what maner lettris, WicL., Ehem. 
 {maner of); with what letters,Cov. Test. 
 
 12. 2%ese] So WiCL. : (ici/, Auth. , 
 Tynd., Gen., Rhem. That — not] 
 Lest they should, Auth., Cov;, Cran., 
 Bish.; because they wolde not, Tynd., 
 Gen. ; that they shulde not, Gov. 
 Test. ; that they may not, Rhem. 
 
 13. Not even — themselves] Neither 
 they themselves who are circumcised, 
 Auth. In this place the circumcision- 
 party would be a not unsuitable trans- 
 lation ; see notes. They desii-e] 
 Desire, Auth. 
 
 14. Has been] Is, AutB. and all 
 Vv. 
 
 15. For neither — avail] For "in 
 Christ Jesus neither circumcision avail- 
 eth, Auth. 
 
 16. Upon] So Wiol., Gov., Gen., 
 Rhem.; vnto, Cov. Test.; on, Auth. 
 and remaining Vv. 
 
Chap. VI. lo— 18. 169 
 
 Henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my 17 
 body the marka of Jesus. 
 
 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your 18 
 spirit, brethren. Amen. 
 
 17. Henceforth] From henceforth, the grace, AvTB, and six other Vv.; 
 AuTH. and all Vv. Of Jesus] the order of the original is preserved 
 Of 'the Lord Jema, Auth. by WiOL., Rhem. 
 
 18. The grace .. .hrcthreni Brethren, 
 
 THE END. 
 
 CAMBKIDOE; 
 
 PEINTBD BY C. J. CLAY M,A. AT THE UNIVEKSITY PRESS. 
 
Works Published by Messrs. LONGMANS and CO. 
 
 A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St Paul's Epistles. 
 By C. J. Ellicott, D.D. Lord Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. 8vo. :— 
 Galatians, Fourth Edition, 8s. 6d 
 Ephesians, Third Edition, 8s. 6d. 
 Pastoral Epistles, Third Edition, 10s. Qd. 
 Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon, Third Edition, 10s. 6d. 
 Thessalonians, Second Edition, 7s. dd. 
 
 Historical Lectures on the Life of our Lord Jesus Christ : being 
 the Hulsean Lectures for 1859. By the same Author. Fourth Edition. 8vo. 
 price 10s. Gd. 
 
 An Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles, Historical and Doc- 
 trinal. By E. Harold Bbowne, D.D. Lord Bishop of Ely. Seventh Edition. 
 8to. 16s. 
 
 An Outline of the Necessary Laws of Thought: a Treatise on 
 Pure and Applied Logic. By the Most Eev. W. Thomson, D.D. Archbishop of 
 York. Crown 8vo. 5s. 6d. 
 
 The Life and Epistles of St Paul. By W. J. Conybeaee, M.A. 
 late FeUotr of Trinity College, Cambridge, and J. S. Howsou, D.D. late Prin- 
 cipal of Liveipool College : — 
 
 LiBKAKX Edition, with all the Original Illustrations, Maps, Landscapes on 
 Steel, Woodcuts, &o. 2 vx)ls. 4to. 48s. 
 
 Inteemediate Edition, with a Selection of Maps, Plates, and Woodcuts. 
 2 vols, square crown Svo. 31s. 6d. 
 
 People's Edition, revised and condensed, with 46 Illustrations and Maps. 
 2 vols, crown Svo. 12s. 
 
 The Voyage and Shipwreck of St Paul ; with Dissertations on the 
 Life^nd Writings of St Luke and the Ships and Navigation of the Ancients. 
 By James Smith, of Jordanhill, F.E.S. Third Edition, with Frontispiece, 
 4 Charts, and 11 Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 10s. 6(J. 
 
 The Acts of the Apostles; with a Commentary, and Practical and 
 Devotional Suggestions for Readers and Students of the Etiglish Bible. By 
 the Bev. F. C. Cook, M.A. Canon of Exeter, &c. New Edition. Svo. 12s. 6d. 
 
 The Conversion of the Roman Empire; the Boyle Lectures for 
 the year 1864, delivered at the Chapel Eoyal, Whitehall. By Chables Meei- 
 VALE, B.D. Chaplain to the Speaker. Second Edition. Svo. 8s. 6d, 
 
 The Conversion of the Northern Nations; the Boyle Lectures 
 for 1865. By the same Author. Svo. 8s. 6(Z. 
 
 From Sunday to Sunday: an Attempt to consider familiarly the 
 Weekday LJie and Labours of a Country Clergyman. By E. Gee, M.A, Vicar 
 of Abbott's Langley and Eural Dean. Fcp. Svo. 5s. 
 
 Our Sermons: an Attempt to consider familiarly, but reverently, 
 the Preacher's Work in the present day. By the same Author. Fop. Svo. 6s. 
 
 The English Reformation. By F. C. Massingberd, M.A. Chan* 
 cellor of Lincoln and Eeotor of South Ormsby. Fourth Edition, revised. 
 Fcp. Svo. 7s. ed. 
 
 History of the Reformation in Europe in the Time of Calvin. 
 By J. H. Mekle D'Aubigne, D.D. Vols I. and II. Svo, 28s. and Vol. III. 12s, 
 Vol. IV. 16s. 
 
 The Treasury of Bible Knowledge; being a Dictionary of the 
 Books, Persons, Places, Events, and other matters of which mention is made 
 in Holy Scripture: intended to establish its Authority and illustrate its Con- 
 tents. By the Eev. J. Aybe, M.A. With about 300 Woodcuts, 15 Plates, and 
 5 Maps. Fcp. Svo. 10s. &d. 
 
 London: LONGMANS, GREEN, and CO, Paternoster Row.