YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY THE LIBRARY OF THE DIVINITY SCHOOL EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. COMMENTARY, CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL, ON ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, REVISED TRANSLATION. BY CHARLES J. ELLICOTT, B.D. PROFESSOR OP DIVIKITT, KING'S COLLEGE, LONDON, AND LATE FELLOW OF ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. BT CALVIN E. STOWE, D.D. ^ BOFESSOE IN AKDOVEE THEOLOGICAL SEHMART. ANDOYER: WARREN F. DRAPER. BOSTON: CROSBY, NICHOLS, LEE & Co. NEW YORK: JOHN WILEY. PHILADELPHIA: SMITH, ENGLISH & CO. 1860. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1860, by WAEEEN F. DEAPEE, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. Andover : Electrotyped and Printed by W. F. Draper. INTRODUCTORY NOTICE AMERICAN EDITION. The Commentaries of Professor Ellicott, modest and unas suming as they are in tone, really mark an epoch in English sacred literature. They are as different from other English commentaries as De Wette's are from the Germans who pre ceded him ; and what De Wette has been to German exegesis, Ellicott is and will be to the English. I speak of scholarship and mode of exhibition mainly ; but the remark is also true in another respect, for, as De Wette was in his time the soundest and most favorable type of German rationalism as applied to the exposition of Scripture, Ellicott now most fitly represents the clear common sense and reverential piety so happily char acteristic of the best biblical expositors in the English church. Protestant Germany only could have produced a De Wette, and Protestant England only, an Ellicott. It is the professed object of both these writers, by a severe and purely grammatical analysis of the language of the sacred penmen, to ascertain precisely the ideas which they meant to convey ; and to express the results of this analysis in the simplest and briefest manner possible, without reference to theological systems, or ecclesiastical prepossessions, or practical inferences. This method must lie at the foundation of all true exegesis, and, to those who receive the Bible as the word of God, must form the basis of all Christian theology. , Yet it is a method very seldom followed with any good degree of strict ness, and it is not a method which is generally particularly interesting to theologians and preachers. It differs from the usual style of commentary as pure wheat differs from rner- ¦ II INTRODUCTORY NOTICE. chantable flour. Though the ascertainable purity of the wheat is acknowledged to be a great advantage, there is the trouble of grinding it before it can be made into bread. Theologizing and sermonizing commentary, though everywhere intermingled with the speculations and prepossessions of the commentator, is generally preferred td a severe and strictly linguistic exege sis, because, though less pure, it furnishes the material more ready for immediate use. But which method is it that really takes the Bible as the sufficient and only authoritative rule of Christian faith and practice, and follows out to its legitimate results the fundamental principle of Protestantism ? There can be but one answer to this question ; and it is this, the only truly biblical and Protestant method of commentary, which Professor Ellicott has conscientiously, consistently, and suc cessfully pursued. It is the crowning excellence of these commentaries, that they are exactly what they profess to be, critical and gram matical, and therefore, in the best sense of the term, exe- getical. It is no part of the author's object to theologize or to sermonize, or to make proof-texts, or to draw inferences or to repel them, but simply to interpret the language of the sacred writers ; and this object he accomplishes. He first, with the utmost care and the most conscientious laboriousness, gives the reader a correct text, by means of a widely extended comparison of original MSS., ancient translations, and the best editions. The amount of hard work evidently expended on this part of his undertaking is, to one who knows how to appreciate it, almost appalling. His results are worthy of all confidence. He is more careful and reliable than Tischendorf, slower and more steadily deliberate than Alford, and more patiently laborious than any other living New Testament critic, with the exception, perhaps, of Tregelles. Having thus ascertained the text, he then goes to work lexically and grammatically upon every word, phrase, and sentence which it offers ; and here again is everywhere seen the real labor limae of the untiring and conscientious scholar. Nothing escapes his diligence, noth ing wears out his patience. His exegetical conclusions are stated briefly and modestly, and with the utmost simplicity. INTRODUCTORY NOTICE. Ill His references to other opinions and other writers, and to all the requisite authorities, are abundantly copious for the purposes of the most thorough study. The marginal indications of the course of thought are exceedingly judicious and helpful ; and the full translations given at the close of each Commentary harmonize with all the other parts of the work. Here the constant marginal quotations from the older translators give the reader the best possible opportunity for an extensive com parison, which would otherwise, in most cases, be quite impos sible, for want of access to the books. The reader will be gratified to learn something of the his tory of the unpretending scholar who has already done so much, and who gives promise of so much more. Charles John Ellicott is of an old Devonshire family, a branch of which early emigrated to America, and still has descendants here. He was born in 1819, the son of Rev. Charles Spencer Ellicott, Rector of Whitwell in Rutlandshire. He studied at the grammar schools of Oakham and Stamford, and afterwards entered St. John's College, Cambridge, of which society he be came a Fellow in 1844. In 1848 he married and took the Rectorship of Pilton, in Rutlandshire, which he held till the beginning of 1856 ; when, for the sake of having access to large public libraries, he resigned his living and returned to Cambridge. In 1858 he was appointed one of the select preachers before the University, and prepared and published a volume of sermons on the "Destiny of the Creature" (Rom. 8 : 19 ff.). He received the same appointment again the next year, and was also made Hulsean Lecturer. In this capacity he delivered a course of lectures on the connection of the events in the life of Christ, which are now in press, and will soon be published. In 1858, also, he was appointed to succeed Professor Maurice in the professorship of Divinity at King's College, London, which office he still holds. On the 20th of February, 1860, while on a journey from Cambridge to London, in fulfilment of the duties of his office, he came very near losing his life by a shocking accident on the Eastern Counties Railway. Three persons in the same compartment with him IV INTRODUCTORY NOTICE. were instantly killed, and he had both legs broken, and his arm and head were severely scalded. His life was saved by his throwing himself upon the bottom of the carriage at the moment when the shock was greatest. He has now recov ered from his injuries and is pursuing his work with undimin ished zeal and success. He has already published on all the epistles of Paul, except Corinthians and Romans, and these he has now in hand, and will in due time complete. The American publisher will issue the successive volumes, as rapidly as circumstances will permit, in the same order with the English (the next being the epistle to the Ephesians), till the whole series is in the hands of our scholars. It is to be hoped also that the American publishers of Alford's work on the Greek Testament will speedily complete that, as the last volume is now in press in England. It is a different kind of commentary from EUicott's, though equally useful in its own way. It includes the whole of the New Testament, and has more of what critics call introduction in the shape of extended and elaborate prolegomena to the several books, and is design edly of as popular a cast as, from the nature of the case, a scholarly commentary on a Greek book can be. The two works cannot at all interfere with each other. Both are an honor to the English theological literature of the present generation ; each in its own sphere supplies an urgent want ; and they both ought to be accessible to American students at as cheap a rate as possible. C. E. STOWE. Theol. Sem., Attdover, Mass. Aug. 30, 1860. 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 present 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 philology has scarcely been applied with sufficient rigor to the interpretation of the New Testament. Our popular commentaries are too exclusively exegetical,1 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 stumbling-blocks in his path, when he first maturely enters upon the study of the Holy Scripture. 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 lancruaire in which they wrote ; — his exclusive attention to a single dialect, informed, for the most part, by a single and prevailing spirit, ill pre pares him for the correct apprehension of writings in which the tinge of na tionalities, and the admixture of newer and deeper modes of thought are both distinctly recognizable ; — his familiarity with modes of expression, which had arisen from the living wants of a living language, ill prepares 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 enter ing 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 1 1 must explain the meaning in which, I use this word when in contradistinction to " grammatical." By a grammatical commentary, I mean one in whicli the principles of grammar are either exclusively or principally used to elucidate the meaning: by an exrget- ical commentary, one' in which other considerations, such as the circumstances or known sentiments of the writer, etc., are also taken into account. I am not quite sure that I am correct in tlnis limiting " exegetical," but I know no other epithets that will serve to con vey my meaning. VI PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. are enshrined. No better example of the general truth of these observations could be adduced than that of the illustrious Hermann, who, in his disquisi tion 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 previous exercise, to the interpretation of the New Testament. A second stumbling-block that the classical student invariably finds in his study of the New Testament, is the deplorable 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 N. T. to form any conception of the aberrant and unnatural meanings that have been assigned to the prepositions and the particles ; many of which cling to them in N. T. lexicons to this very day.1 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 hidden helper in all need,' as LuVke 3 calls it — has had to sustain ; and how genera tions 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 distor tion ; enallage, hendyadys, metonymy, have been urged with a freedom in the N. T. which would never have been tolerated in any classical author, however ill-cared for, and however obscure. Here and there in past days a few pro testing voices were raised against the uncritical nature of the current inter pretations ; but it is not, in Germany, till within a very few years, till the days of Fritzsche and Winer, that they have met with any response or recog nition ; 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 N. T., it is with such an irrepressible feeling of repugnance to that laxity of language, which he is led to believe is its prevailing characteristic, that he either loses for the language of inspira tion that reverence which its mere literary merits alone may justly claim ; or else, under the action of a better though mistaken feeling, he shrinks from applying to it that healthy criticism to which all his previous education had inured his mind. The more difficult the portion of Scripture, the more sen sibly are these evils felt and recognized. It is under these feelings that I have undertaken a commentary on St. Paul's Epistles, which, by confining itself to the humbler and less ambitious 1 That this language is in no way overstrained may be easily seen by the notices in Winer's Grammar, on any leading preposition or conjunction. 'Ej/ is a difficult preposition in the N T , but it would requiie a considerable amount of argument to make us believe it could ever, even in Help. xiii. 9, bear the meaning otex! See Winer, Gr. § 52, a, p. 466 (Ed. 6). 2 .Lucke, on John iii. 20, vol. iii. p. 241. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. VII 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 distinctions between grammar and exegesis, we are still to recognize the necessity, — of first endeavoring 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 im part. Too often this process has been reversed ; the commentator, on the strength of some ' received interpretation' or some dogmatical bias, has stated what the passage ought to mean, and then has been tempted, by the force of bad example, to coerce the words 'per Hebraismum,' or 'per enallagen,' to yield the required sense. This, in many, nay, most cases, I feel certain, has been done to a great degree unconsciously, yet still the evil effects remain. God's word, though innocently, has been dealt deceitfully with ; 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. Where that has seemed 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-honored inter pretation, I have joyfully and emphatically 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. 1 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 candor and singleness of heart, all the details of interpretation with which I have come in contact. I have sought to support no particular party, I have desired to yield counte nance to no peculiar views. I will candidly avow that on all the fundamen tal points of Christian faith and doctrine my mind is fully made up. It is not for me to sit in judgment upon what is called the liberal spirit of the age, but, without evoking controversies into which I have neither the will nor the abil- 1 Amidst all these details, I have, I trust, never forgotten that there is something higher than mere critical acumen, something more sure than grammatical exactitude; something which the world calls the '' theological sense,'- but which more devout thinkers recognize as the assisting grace of the Eternal Spirit of God. Without this, without also a deeper and more mysterious sympathy with the mind of the sacred writer whom we are presuming to interpret, no mere verbal discussions can ever tend truly to elucidate, no investigation thoroughly to satisfy. I trust, indeed, that I have never been permitted to forget these golden words of him whom of all commentators I most honor and revere : — ovSe yap Set ra prjiittra yvfiva dzerd^em, irrel iroWa et|/6Tai ra aroit t),uara' ouSe t-J/i/ \4£iv Kay iavrfyv fSaoaviCmv, aWa. ttj S tavoia ir poo &¦)(_* lv rov ypdfoyros. Chrysost. torn. x. p. 674 B (ed. Bened.) VIII PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION, ity 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 con victions, 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 vapor still hinder from beholding 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 bitter ness of the prophet's lamentation, only 'waters that fail;' — I fuel it and en tertain it, and I trust that no ungentle word of mine may induce them to cling more tenaciously to their mournful convictions, yet still I am bound to say, to prevent the nature of my candor being misunderstood, that through out this commentary the full 1 inspiration of Scripture has been felt as one of those strong subjective conyictions to which every hour of meditation adds fresh strength and assurance. Yet I have never sought to mask or disguise a difficulty: I have never advanced an explanation of the truth of which I do not, myself 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 difficul ties 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 wis dom 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 interpretation which I have endeav ored to follow. I am well aware that the current of popular opinion is now steadily setting against grammatical details and investigations. It is tbouo-ht, 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 weed 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 can not confront a world; but, in the particular sphere of Holy Scripture, I may, perhaps, be permitted to say, that if we would train our younger students to be reverential thinkers, earnest Christians, and sound divines, we must habit uate them to a patient and thoughtful study of the words and language of 1 1 avoid using any party expressions. I would not wish, on the one hand, to class myself with such thii.kers as Calovius, nor could I subscribe to the Formula Consensus Htlvetici ¦ but I am far indeed from recognizing that admixture of human imperfection and even error, which the popular theosophy of the day now finds in the Holy Scripture. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. IX Scripture, before we allow them to indulge in an exegesis for which they are immature 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 language, every variety of inflec tion, to analyze and to investigate, to contrast and to compare, until he has obtained some accurate knowledge of those outward elements which are per meated by the inward influence and powers of the Holy Spirit of God. As he wearisomely traces out the subtle distinctions that underlie some illative particle, or characterize some doubtful preposition, let him cheer himself with the reflection that every effort of thought he is thus enabled to make, is (with 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 crit ical and grammatical. I rejoice rather that the awakening and awakened interest for theology in this country is likely to afford me a plea and a justifi cation for confining myself to a single province of sacred literature. Al ready, I believe, theologians are coming to the opinion that the time for compiled commentaries is passing away. Our resources are now too abun dant for the various details of criticism, lexicography, grammar, exegesis, his tory, archaeology, and doctrine, to be happily or harmoniously blended in one ma^s. One mind is scarcely sufficiently comprehensive to grasp prop erly these various subjects; one judgment is scarcely sufficiently discrim inating to arrive at just conclusions on so many topics. The sagacious critic, the laborious lexicographer, the patient grammarian, the profound exegete, the suggestive hi.-torian, and the impartial theologian, are, in the present state of biblical science, never likely to be united in one person. Excel lence in any one department is now difficult ; in all, impossible. I trust, then, that the time is coming when theologians will carry out, especially in the New Testament, the principle of the division of labor, and selecting that sphere of industry for which they are more particularly qualified, will, in others, be content to accept the results arrived at by the labors of their con temporaries.1 1 In the present Epistle, there are distinct and instructive instances of the application or this princip'e I-liigenteld has published a recent edition of the Epistle to the Galatiai.s, in which distinct prominence is given to historical and chronological investigations. Dr. Brown has lately devoted some expository discourses nearly exclusively to the doctrine and practical teaching of the Epistle; while Mr. Veitch has supplied him with grammatical annotations. Both of these works have their demerits as well as their murks, but, at any rate, thev show that their authors had tlie good sen>e to confine themselves to those depart ments of interpretation for which they felt tlie greatest aptitude. 2 X PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. The most neglected portion of the New Testament literature is its lexicog raphy ; 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 department, and to leave my own more immediate subject to discuss points which I should have gladly found done to my hand, I have also had the thankless task of perpetually putting my readers on their guard against the overhasty and inaccurate classifications of Bretschneider and others. I have generally found Bret- schneider's Lexicon the best; but the pages of my commentary will abun dantly show how little reliance I have been able to place upon him. I rejoice to say that Dr. Scott, master of Baliol College, is engaged on a Lex icon to the N. T. ; 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 will be executed. 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 Palm and Rost, which I cannot help thinking is by very far the best lexicon, in a mode rate compass, 'hat we at present possess. The prepositions, in particular, are treated remarkably well, and very comprehensively. 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 agree able 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 contribu tion to the subject. We may fairly trust that an author who has begun so well will continue his labors in a more extended and comprehensive form. As Mr. Trench's work came too late into my hands, I have principally used the imperfect work of Tittman ; but I perfectly agree with Mr. Trench in his estimate of its merits. In the Grammar of the N. T. we are now in a fairly promising state. The very admirable work of Winer 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 successfully handled. The great fault of the book is its superabundance 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 consider a work of great PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. XI 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.1 My object has been throughout to make my references more to grammars and professed repertories of similar information, than to notes or commentaries on classical 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 a context, frequently supplies little real information. I have allowed myself greater latitude in references to the notes of commentators on the N. T., for here the similarity of language, and frequently of subject, constitutes a closer bond of union. In particular, I have used Fritzche's edition of the Romans nearly as a grammar, so full is it and so elaborate in all details of language. As a grammarian, I entertain for him the highest respect ; but I confess my sympathy with him as a theologian is not great, nor can I do otherwise than deplore the unjust levity with which he often treats the Greek Fathers, and the tone of bitterness and asperity which he 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 sys tematic 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's Bull's Harmonia Apostolica, Waterland's Works, and such other of our great English divines as I have the good fortune to be ac quainted with. I have used with profit the recent and popular treatise on St. Paul's doctrine by Usteri, and that by Neander in his Planting of Chris tianity; both of which, with, perhaps, some reservations, may be recom mended 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 1 1 have especially used the admirable and (in my opinion) wholly unrivalled syntax of Bernhardy, the good compendious syntax of Madvig, the somewhat heavy treatise on the same subject by Scheuerlein, Jelf's Grammar, and the small Greek grammar by Dr. Donaldson, which, though unpretending in form and succinct in itB nature, will never be consulted, even by the advanced student, without the greatest advantage. On the particles, I have principally used the somewhat clumsy though useful work of Hartung, and the very able and voluminous notes of Klotz on Dn-arius. This latter work the student will rarely consult in vain. 1 have also derived some assistance from Thiersch's very good dissertation on the Pentateuch,. XII PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. advanced knowledge and of fully fixed principles. The other books and authorities which I have cited will sufficiently speak for themselves. I desire briefly, in conclusion, 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:1 the only deviations from it that I have felt compelled 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 labor which I venture to advocate. It has always seemed to me that it is at least a very hazardous, if not a presumptuous undertkaing, for any man, however good a scholar, to construct an original text without eminent qualifi cations for that task. Years of patient labor must have been devoted to those studies ; an unflagging industry in collecting, and a persistent sagacity in sifting evidence, must be united in the biblical critic, or his labors will be worse than useless. Those who have not these advantages will do well to rely upon others, reserving, however, to themselves (if they are honest men and independent thinkers) the task of scrutinizing, testing, and, if need be, of expressing dissent from the results arrived at by those whom they follow. I have humbly endeavored thus to act with regard to the text of the present epistle ; where there has seemed reason to depart from Tischendorf (and he is fur 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 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 MSS., unless the internal evidence be of a most strong and decisive character. I have always endeavored, first, to ascertain the exact nature of the diplomatic evidence; secondly, that of what I have termed parailiplomatic arguments (I must apologize for coin ing 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 usus 1 It was long with me a subject of anxious thought whether I should adopt the text of Lachmann (for whose critical abilities I have a profound respect), or that of Tischendorf. The latter I consider inferior to Lachmann in talent, scholarship, and critical acumen. But as a palaeographer he stands infinitely higher, as a man of energy and industry he is unrivalled, and as a critic he has learnt from what he has suffered. Moreover, he is with us, still learning, still gathering, still toiling; while Lachmann's edition, with all its excel lences and all its imperfections, must now remain as he has left it to us. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. XIII scribendi of the sacred author, or the propensio, be it critica, dogmalica, or epexegetica, on the part of the copyist. 1 have also endeavored 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.), cur sive manuscripts (mss.), versions (Vv.), and Fathers (Ff.), Greek and Latin, and in some measure familiarizing the uneducated eye to comprehend these perplexing, 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 I can recom mend him no better general instructor than Dr. Davidson, in the second vol ume of his excellent treatise on Biblical criticism. (H) With regard to the notes, I would wish first to remark, that they neither are, nor pretend to be, original. I have consulted all the best modern, and, 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 endeavored to confine myself principally to critical and gram matical details, numerous authors of high position and merit in other prov inces of interpretation have unavoidably 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 strong est 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 have, I trust, rarely done it except where the contrast seemed more distinctly to show out what I conceived 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 reverence I entertain for the very letter of Scripture, has required me to raise my voice, feeble as it is, against mis chievous interpretations and rash criticism. The more pleasant duty of quoting in bonam partem has also been regulated by a system ; first and fore most, of endeavoring to give every man his due ; secondly, of supporting myself by the judgments and wisdom of others. I have, however, in no case sought to construct those catena? of names, which it seems now the fashion XIV PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. of commentators1 to link together in assent or dissent; for whenever I have examined one in detail, I have invariably found that the authors, thus hud dled together, often introduced such 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 particles, 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 has completed the work he projected. If in the discussions on the particles I may have seemed wearisome or hypercritical, let me crave the reader's indulgence, and remind him of the excessive difficul ties that have ever been felt and acknowledged in the connection 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 dis uniting 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 difficult an epistle, after all possible curtailing, they must still 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 comprehensive summary of the interpre tations advanced in the notes. The profound respect I entertain for our own noble version would have prevented me, as it did Hammond, from attempting 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 Demosth.) in the opinion that the former is most suitable for the general run of classical authors ; while the latter may possibly 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 dogmatical and theo logical significance, and to qualify them by a popular turn or dilute them by a paraphrase, is dangerous in the extreme. It is here that the excellence of our Authorized Version is so notably conspicuous ; while it is studiedly close 1 1 regret to find that Professor Eadie, in his learned and laborious commentary on the Ephesians, has adopted this method; in some cases, „. g. p. 15, his authorities occupy five full lines of the commentary. H ",B PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. XV 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 idio matic 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 incoirect, in exact, insufficient, or obscure, whether from accident or (as is alleged) from design. The citations I have appended from eight other versions will, per haps, prove interesting, and will show the general reader what a " concordia discors" prevails among all the older English Versions,1 and how closely and • how faithfully the contributors to the Authorized Version adhered to their in structions to consult certain of the older translations, and not to depart from the Standard Version which had last preceded them except distinctly neces sitated. Thus the Authorized Version is the accumulation, as well as the last and most perfect form of the theological 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 circumspection. (IV.) Finally, I feel myself bound to specify a few of the commentators to whom I am more specially indebted. Of the older writers I have paid the most unremitting attention to Chrys ostom and Theodoret : for the former especially, 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 consulted 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 ex planation of v6p.os without the article ; but I have always found him an accu rate scholar, and especially useful for his well-selected citations from Calvin. To the late lamented Professor Scholefield's Hints for a New Translation I have always attended. The translation of Conybeare and Howson has been of some use ; but, as far as my experience goes, it appears 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. Bloomfield, though he has not been of so much use to me as I could have wished. To the recent Ger- 1 1 have also consulted Abp. Newcome's, and all the later versions of any celebrity, even the Unitarian, but have derived from them no assistance whatever. XVI PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. man commentators I am under the greatest obligations, both in grammar and exegesis, though not in theology. Meyer more as a grammarian, De Wette more as an exegete, command the highest attention and respect ; to the for mer especially, though a little too Atticistic in his prejudices, my fullest ac knowledgments 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. Ruekert, 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 preju dices, always writes in a reverent spirit, and is commonly remarkable for his good sense, and not unfrequently his candor. Baumgarten-Crusius I have found of very little value. Hilgenfeld is very useful in historical questions, but has a bad tone in exegesis, 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, for my own satisfaction, and the guidance of younger stu dents, I should wish to specify. I have now only to commit this first part of my work, with all its imperfec tions, faults, and errors, to the charitable judgment of the reader. I have written it, alone and unassisted, with only a country clergyman's scanty supply of books, in a neighborhood remote from large libraries and literary institutions; and though I have done my uttermost to overcome these great disadvantages, I can myself see and feel with deep regret 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 receive and acknowledge with great thankfulness any rectifications of errors or any suggestions that may be addressed to me at the subjoined direction. 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 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 warnings, and the exhaustless consolations of the Book of Life. To Him be all honor, all glory, and all praise. C. J. ELLICOTT. Glastoh, TJppihsham, September, 1854. PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. The present edition is but little different from the first in the results arrived at, and in the statement of the principles on which those results mainly rest ; but, in the details and construction of many of the notes, it will be found to involve 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 found to be sound and trustworthy, do not appear in some cases to have been applied with sufficient ease and simplicity, or to have received a sufficiently extended range of application. It is use less to disguise the fact, that what at first professed to be only purely critical and purely grammatical, has by degress 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 ex tremely kind reception that the different portions of this series have met with, has led in two ways to these gradual alterations. On the one hand, the not unnatural desire to make each portion more worthy of the approval that had been extended towards its predecessor, has been silently carrying me onward into widening fields of labor; 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 somemhat less technicality of lan guage 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 connection 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, too 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 may seem to need it) may be brought up, and future portions conformed. XVIII PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. The present edition, then, is an effort to make my earliest and decidedly most incomplete work as much as possible resemble those which apparently have some greater measures of maturity and completeness. It has involved, and I do not seek to disguise it, very great labor — labor, 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 former opinions, except in about four or five debatable and contested passages,1 I have still found that the interpolation 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 tho weary and irksome task of total re-writing, and reconstruc tion. I rejoice, however, now 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 Versions ; he will, I trust, find but few links missing in the continuous illustration of the arrangement, scarcely any omission of a comment on important differences of reading, and on points of doctrinal difficulty no serious want of references to the best treatises and sermons of our great English divines. At the same time he will find the mode of interpretation and tenor of grammatical discussions precisely the same. Though the details may be often differently grouped, the principles are left wholly 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 earlier portions of this series, more especially to those prefixed to the third, fourth, and fifth volumes, in which the different component elements of the notes above alluded to will be found noticed and illustrated at some leno-th. This only may be added, that particular care has been taken to adjust the various references, especially to such authorities of frequent occurrence as Winer's Grammar of the New Testament, to the paging of the latest edition.2 Where, from inability to obtain access to the last edition of works previously 1 These changes of opinion will be found noticed in their different places. I believe the only passages are chap. ii. 6, irpotraueSrevro ; iii. 4, eire&eTe ; iii. 19 (jn part), iv. 17, 4icic\eTo-ai ; vi. 17 (slightly), t3ao-rd(ai. 2 I have also retained the references to the translation of Neander's Planting as published by Mr. Bohn, and of Muller's Doctrine of Sin, as published by Messrs. Clark, simply be cause the presence of these volumes in two justly popular series makes it probable that many readers may have these works, who have not, and, perhaps, may not be in the habit of consulting the originals. The translation of the latter of these works has, I believe been somewhat severely criticized. I fear 1 am unable to defend it; but, as the allusions to Miiller in my notes relate more to general principles than to individual passages I do not think the general reader will suffer much from the inaccuracies or harshness of the transla- PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. XIX 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 sentences of introduction, giving a sum mary 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 farther received so much valuable illustration from the excellent Life of Saint 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 commentary 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 lexicography, and in what may be termed phraseological annotations. The third of these works differs so much from the present in its plan and general construction, as to make the points of contact between us so much fewer than I could wish ; but I may venture to express the 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 overlooked ; 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 systems of interpretation are so radically different, as to make a 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 harmonious. 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 1 In the note on op^orroSovotv (chap. ii. 14), I have still been unable to verify the refer ences to Theodoras Studita. The best edition, I believe, is that of Sirmond, and this I have used, as well as one or two others, but without effect. I should be glad if some reader, experienced in Bibliography, could direct me to the edition probably referred to. XX PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. this aid I have been enabled to correct whatever 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 progress. While I may presume to offer to them the humble assurance 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 appearance 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 impossible 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 answer before the dread tribunal of God with more terrible strictness, than for having attempted to explain the everlasting Words of Life with haste and precipitation. When we consider only the errors and failures that mark every stage in our most deliberate and most matured progress, even 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 honor, and His praise. Camebidge, 28th Jahuaky, 1859. INTRODUCTION. This animated, argumentative, and highly characteristic Epistle 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 raxews (ch. i. 6) seems to suggest (but comp. notes, and see contra, Conyb. and Hows. St. Paul, Vol. n. 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, 1 Cor. xvi. 8), forming apparently the first of that series of Epistles (Gal., 1 Cor., 2 Cor., Rom.) which intervenes between the Epp. to the Thessalonians and the four Epp. of the first captivity (Col., Eph., Philem., 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. 1. The Epistle was not improbably 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 already solemnly protested (ch. i. 9), but, as this Epistle shows, with at present so little abiding effect, that the Judaizing teachers in Galatia, possibly recruited with fresh emissaries from Jerusalem, were now not only spreading dangerous error, but assailing the very apostolic 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 contro versial 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 inde pendence of all human authority (ch. i. 11 — ii. 10), — nay, his very opposi- XXII INTRODUCTION. tion to it in the person of St. Peter, when that Apostle had acted with incon sistency (ch. ii. 11 — 21). In the second, or what may be called tha polemical portion (ch. iii. iv.), the Apostle, both by argument (ch. iii. 1, sip), appeal (ch. iv. 12 — 20), and illustration (ch. iv. 1—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. 1 — 10), and a vivid recapitulation (ch. vi. 11— 16). The genuineness and authenticity are supported by distinct external testi mony (Irenaeus, Hmr. 111. 7. 2, Tertull. de Prozscr. § 6 ; see Lardner, Credi bility, Vol. ii. p. 163 sq., Davidson, Introduction, Vol. n. 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 Einleit. p. 8. THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. CHAPTER I. 1. Apostolic address and sal utation, coucludmg wiui a doxology. nA Y A02 aTro'erToXo?, ovk air aiFbpomwv oiiBe Bo aifepw-rrov, aXKa hia, 'Irjcrov 1. airoo-ToAos] 'an Apostle,' in the higher and more especial meaning of the word ; and as such (particularly when en hanced by the succeeding clause), a forci ble protest against the Judaists, who prob ably refused to apply it in this particular sense to any out of the significant number of the Twelve ; comp. Hilgenf Galater- brief, p. 107. It may be observed (comp. Maurice, Unity of N. T. p. 402) that the question involved more than mere per sonal slander (rty yeytirnpAv-nv Siai3o\^v, Theod.) : in asserting the preeminence of the Twelve over St. Paul, they were practically denying Christ's perpetual rule over His church. With regard to the meaning of a.ir6trro\os in St. Paul's Epp., we may remark that in a few in stances (e. g. 2 Cor. viii. 23, and most probably Phil. ii. 25, see notes in loc), it appears to be used in its simple etymo logical sense. In 2 Cor. xi. 13, 1 Thess. ii. 6, the meaning may be thought doubt ful ; but in Rom. xvi. 7, o'vrivh flirty iirio-nnot £y rots arroo; Z\ois (commonly cited in this sense, Conyb. and Hows. St. Paul, Vol. i. p. 463), the correct trans lation appears certainly that of Pritzsche, ' quippe qui in Apostolorum collegio bene audiant : ' compare Winer, R WB. s. v. Apostel, Vol. i. p. 69, note 2. The va rious applications of this word in eccles. writers are noticed by Suicer, Thesaur. s. v. Vol. i. p. 475 sq., Hamm. on Rom. xvi. 7. oiiKair'ay&pt&irtoy ob fit 8 1 ' hvSrptiirou"\ ' not from men nor by man,' ' not from men as an ultimate, nor through man as a mediate authority,' — the prep, hirh here correctly denoting the causa remotior (Winer, Gr. § 47. b, p. 331, Bernhardy, Syntax, v. 12, p. 222), did, the causa medians; see Winer, § 50. 6, p. 372, Green, Gr. p. 299. 'Airb is thus not ' for faro,' Brown in loc. (comp. Ruck., Olsh.), as the use of dirb for iir6, especially after passives, though found apparently in some few instances in earlier writers (Poppo, Thucyd. I. 17, Vol. I. p. 158), occasionally in later (Bernhardy, Synt. v. 12, p. 224), and frequently in Byzantine Greek, does not appear in St. Paul's Epistles, nor in any decisive instance in th? N. T. ; comp. Winer, Gr. § 47. b, p. 332, note. In all cases the distinction be tween the prepp. seems sufficiently clear : iirb points to an action which results from 24 GALATIANS. Chap. I. 1. Xpiarov Kal Qeov irarpoy appears regularly omitted in this and similar phrases, except Eph. v. 14, and (with &7rb) Matth. xiviXxxviii. 7, al. - see Winer, Gr. § 19, p. 112. Chap. L 2—4. GALATIANS. 25 2 ko.1 ol aiiv efiail irdvre<; dBeXtpoi, Tat? eiac\'rio~lai<; rrji Taktnlwi. 8 ftapK Vfuv Kal elprjvrj dirb Oeov irarpbs Kal Kvpiov rjfiojv 'Irjcrov Xptarov, 4 rov Bovros eavrov irepl ra>v ap,aprta)v rjiidv, oVoj? 2. rrdrres] Emphatic : ' ceteros qui secum erant omnes commotos adversus eos ostendit,' Ps. Ambr. St. Paul fre quently adds to his own name that of one or more of his companions, v. g. Sos thenes, (1 Cor. i. 1), Timothy, (2 Cor. i. 1, Phil. i. 1, Cok i. 1), Silvanus and Timothy, (1 Thess i. 1, 2 Thess. i. 1) : here, however, to add weight to his ad monitions, and to show the unanimity ( Chrysost. ) that was felt on the subject of the Epistle, he adopts the inclusive term rriyres a5eA0oi, defining it more closely by ai evv ipjti (Phil. iv. 21), — 'all the brethren who are my present companions in my travels and my pn ach ing.' There is, then, no necessity for re stricting aSe\tpol to ' official brethren ' (Brown, comp. Beza), nor for extending ol obr ifiol to the whole Christian com munity of the place from which the Epistle was written (Erasm., Jowett) : in this latter case we should certainly have expected ' with whom I am,' rather than ' who are with me ; ' see TJsteri in loc. rats 4 kk\i) trials ttjs TaK.] ' to the churches of Galatia ;' plural, and with a comprehensive reference, (irarTaxov yap elptpev r\ v6aos, Theod., comp. Chrys.), the epistle probably being an encyclical letter addressed to the different churches (of Ancyra, Pessinus, Tavium, and other places) throughout the province. The omission of the usual titles of honor or affection seems undoubtedly intentional (Chrys.), for in the only other Epistles where the simple rrj iKKkvo-icf. is used, (1 Cor. i. 2, 2 Cor. i." 1, 1 Thess. i. 1, 2 Thess. i. 1), there is in the two former passages the important and qualifying addition tov &eov, and in the two latter iv 0e<5 irarpi k. -, . A. 3. %dpis vp.7v ical elp-tjvn] 'Grace 4 to you and peace : ' not merely a union of two ordinary forms of Jewish saluta tion (Fritz. Rom. i. 7, Vol. x. p. 23), or of the Greek xa^Pflv> an(l 'he Hebrew "V ci'V-a , but a greeting of full spiritual significance ; x as Oh-h. observes, beingthe divine love manifesting itself to man, elpi]vrr the state that results from a reception of it. The Oriental and Occi dental forms of salutation are thus bond ed and spiritualized in the Christian greeting ; see notes on Eph. i. 2, and comp. Koch on 1 Thessal. p. 60. Kal Kupiou k.. t. K.]?and (from) our Lord Jesus Christ. Strictly speaking, Christ is the mediating importer of grace, God the direct giver ; but just as in verse 1, Sia was applied both to the Father and the Son, so here, in this customary falu- tation see on Phil. i. 4), Stirb is applied both to the Son and the Father. Ols- hausen (on Rom. i. 7) justly remarks that nothing speaks more decisively for the divinity of our Lord than these jux tapositions with the Father, which per vade the whole language of Scripture. 4. tov S 6 vt o s eauToy]' who gave Himself,' scil. to death ; more fully ex pressed 1 Tim. ii. 6, b Sobs eavrbr avriKv- rpor, comp. Tit. ii. 14. The participial clause serves at the very outset to specify the active principle of the error of the Galatians. The doctrine of the atoning death of Jesus Christ, and a recurrence to the laws of Moses, were essentially incom patible with each other. it e pi toiv ap-apT . r\ p.ur] 'for our sins,' scil. to atone for them, Rom. iii. 25, Gal. iii. 13. The reading virep (Rec ) has but little external support, and is, perhaps, due to dogmatical correction, or to that interchange of irepl and u7rcp (Fritz. Rom. Vol. x. p. 28) of which the MSS. of the 26 GALATIANS. Chap. I. 4. e%k\r)Tvo<; rrovrjpov Kara ro ^sekrjixa N. T. present so many traces. Strictly speaking, vrrep, in its ethical sense, retains some trace of its local meaning, ' bending over to protect' (p.dxea$tai virep twos; Donalds. Gr. Gr. § 480), and thus points more immediately to the action, than to the object or circumstance from which the action is supposed to spring. The latter relation is more correctly defined by irepi, — e. g. fyofSeltrhai irepi Tiros ; see AViner, Gr. § 47. e, p. 334, Scharfer. De- mosth Vol. i p. 189, 190. Ilepl will thus be more naturally used with the thing, 'sins,' imep with the person, 'sinners;' and this, with a few exceptions (e. g. 1 Cor. xv. 3, Heb. v. 3), appears the usage of the N. T. ; comp. 1 Pet. iii. 18, where both forms 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 appre ciable; see notes on Eph. vi. 19, and on Phil. i. 7. '6 ir cos i^e\r]Tat] ' in order that he might deliver us ; ' not ' eximeret,' Beza, but 'eriperet,' Vulg., — the verb i^aipelaSrai (only here in St Paul's Epp. ) deriving from the context the idea of rescuing (Svrap.iv tn\p.aivei tov bvcrap.e- rov, Theod. Mops ) as from danger, etc. ; comp. Acts xii. 11, xxiii. 27, and appy. xxvi. 17, and see Eisner. Obs. Vol. ii. p. 170. On the force of SVws in the N. T , and its probable distinction from "ra, see notes on 2 Thess. i. 12. 4k t ov 4r etTT wt os k.t.a.]' out of the pres ent evil world;' not exactly 4k toiv irpd- \eoiv Ttar icornptav, Chrysost., still less tov iraporros j3iov, Theod., but simply, — ' the present evil state of things,' see notes on Eph. i. 21, where the meaning of altir is briefly discussed. It is doubtful whether 6 4reoTi>s aliir is (a) simply equivalent to 6 vvr altir (2 Tim. iv. 10, Tit ii. 12, see notes), and therefore in opposition to 6 aiicr 6 fieWay (comp. Clem. Cor. n. 6, eorir Se ovros b aliiiv Kal b p.e\\ojy Svo e'x&poi), or whether (b) it denotes in a more restricted sense 'the commencing age,' the age of faithlessness and the de veloping powers of Antichrist that had already begun ; see Meyer in loc. The participle 4vetrTths will appy. admit either meaning (comp. Rom. viii. 38, 1 Cor. iii. 22, with 2 Thess. ii. 2, and see exx. in Rost u. Palm, Lex., s. v. Vol. i. p. 929, Schweigh. Lex. Polyb. a. v.) ; the order of the words, however, — not rov iroy. aitovos tov ivetrr., — and the general and undogmatical character of the passage seem decidedly in favor of (a) : so dis- » c en tinctly Syr. poT. |V« W [hoc saeculo], Vulg., Clarom., 'prsesenti saeculo,' and sim. the best of the remaining Vv. In either case the influence of the article appears to extend only to 4rearr. ; alaivos irovnpov forming an explanatory apposi tion, in effect equivalent to a tertiary predication (Donalds. Gr. § 489), 'an evil age as it is,' and pointing out either (a) more generally, or (b) more specifi cally, the corrupting influences of the world and its works : see esp. Donalds. Journal of Sacr. and Class. Philol. No. II., p. 223. The reading alaros tov 4retrr., adopted by Lachm , has but weak external support JAB ; 39; Orig. (3), Did. al.], and is internally suspicious as a grammatical correction. 0 € ov Kal iraTpbs fiti£>v] ' God and our Father,' ' Dei et patris nostri,' Vulg., — not ' God, even our Father' (Brown), Kai being only the simple copula ; see Middleton, Greek Art. p. 292, 367 (ed. Rose), and comp. notes on 1 Thess. iii. 11. The august title S Bebs /ra! irar^p occurs several times in the X. T , both alone (1 Cor. xv. 24, Col. iii. 17, James i. 27), and with o dependent genitive viz. (a) tov Kvpiov r\p.av 'I. X., Rom. xv. 6, Eph. i. 3, 2 Cor. i. 3, xi. 31, Col. i. 3, Chap. I. 5, 6. GALATIANS. 27 rov &eov Kal 7raT/3os rjficbv, Ct) ¦>) Sofa eis row; atu>va<; ro>v atcovcov • a/u,r)v. I marvel at your speedy « iCi "* rf 'i ' 'C\ C\ lapse to another p.spel, &aV/J,a& OTI OUTto? TC^etO? /i,6TaTl ^6(7^6 which if an angel were to preach, let him he anathema. It is not man hut God whom I strive to please. 1 Pet. i. 3, and (6) r)p.mv only, as here, Phil. iv. 20, 1 Thess. i. 1, iii. 11, 13, and 2 Thess. ii. 16. Whether in these latter formulae the gen. depends on both, or only on the latter of the two nouns, cannot be positively decided. No gram matical arguments based on the absence of the article are here applicable, as irariip is anarthrous according to rule (Middl. Gr. AH. m. 4, § 2, Winer, Gr. § 19, 4, p 116) ; nor will the most careful inves tigation of the separate passages afford any sure grounds for deciding on exeget ical principles; contr. Fritz Rom. Vol. m. p. 234. This, however, may be said, that as the term irariip conveys necessa rily a relative idea, which in theological language admits of many applications (see Suicer, Tkesaur. s. v. Vol. n. p. 629 sq.), while Qebs conveys only one abso lute idea, it would not seem improbable that the connection of thought in the mind of the inspired writer might lead him in some passages to add a defining gen. to irariip which he did not intend necessarily to be referred to 0e6s. 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. ii 8] 'I marvel;' 'mani- festatis beneficiis, mirari se dicit quod ab Mo potuerint separari,' Ps. Jerome. The idea of wondering at something blameworthy is frequently implied in this word : see Rost u. Palm. Lex. s. v., and compare Mark vi. 6, John vii. 21, 1 John iii. 13. The further idea which Chrys. 28 GALATIANS. Chap. I. 6. dirb rov KaXeaavros vfiai ev %apm Xpiarov eh erepov evayyektov, finds in the address, ov p.6ror irrpemar fyiou Se Kal SetKrbs o'iar exei irepl avriav vir6roiav, on p.eyd\r]r rtra Kal 4tr- irovSaap.err)v, — does not seem intended. oStsis tox£»s] 'so quickly.' After what ? In our ignorance of the exact time when the Galatians were converted, as well as the circumstances of their de fection, this question cannot be satisfacto rily answered. Of the proposed answers, — (a) their conversion, 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 following verse seems to show who .the Apostle had in his thoughts. At any rate the reference of the adverb seems decidedly rather to time than manner (2 Thess. ii. 2, 1 Tim. v. 22, compare Conyb. and Hows, in loc), however that time be defined. Still all historical de ductions from such a passage (Wieseler, Chronol. p. 285, Davids. Introduct. Vol. n. p. 297) must obviously be debatable and precarious. Grotius appositely cites, in illustration of the levity of the Gallic character, Cassar, Bell. Gall. iv. 5, 'sunt (Galli) in consiliis capiendis mobi les, et novis plerumque rebus student ; ' comp. ib. ii. 1, in. 10, 19: see Eisner, Observ. Sacr. Vol. n. p. 172. fieTaT(&6ir&E] * are going over from, are falling away from : ' present (ouk elire p.eTe£recr&e, aAAa, p.eTaTL&€a&e, Chrys., — the defection was still going on), and middle, not passive, as Theod. Mops. (jueToyeo'&e, us eir'i cupbxtav ', comp. Heb. vii. 12), Vulg., Clarom., al. While in earlier writers /MeTarlSrepiai is used both with and without an accusative (yvtip.r)v), in the sense of ' changing an opinion ' (see exx. in Rost u. Palm, Lex. s. v.), it is as frequently used in later writers in the sense ' descisco,' with prepp. eis, irp6s, iirl of the party, etc., to whom — e. y. Polyb. ill. 118, 8, neTariSterrSrai irpbs robs KapxvSorlovs — and 4k, 0.116 (or a simple gen., Diod. Sic. xvi. 31), of the party, etc., from whom the defection has taken place; so Appian, Bell. Mithr. 41, a7r!> 'ApxeAaou irpbs SuAAae p.eiaTi&eo~&ai '. comp. 2 Mace. vii. 24, and see further exx. in Kypke, Obs. Vol. 11. p. 273, and in Wetst. in loc. rov Ka\e- iraVTOs] ' Him who called you,' scil. God the Father (Chrys., Theod.), to whom the calling of Christians appears regularly ascribed by St. Paul (verse 15, Rom. viii. 30, ix. 24, 25, 1 Cor. i. 9, vii. 15, 17, 1 Thess. ii. 12, 2 Thess. ii. 14, 2 Tim. i. 9), — not ' Christ who called you,' Syr., Jerome, al., the correct theo logical distinction being, ri fiev x\ycris ecm rov IlaTpos, tt)s 8e K\rjtreccs i] aiVia, tou tiov, Chrys. : comp. Rom. v. 15. Brown (p. 39), excepts Rom. i. 7, but scarcely with sufficient reason ; see Fritz, and De AV. in loc , and comp. Reuss, Theol. Chret. iv. 15, Vol. 11. p. 144, TJsteri, Lehrb. 11. 2, 3, p. 269, 279 sq. The passages cited by Alford on Rom. I. c, viz. John v. 25, 1 Tim. i. 12, do not seem fully in point. 4v xapiT 1 ] 'by the grace of Christ ; ' holy instrument of the divine calling, the prep. 4r 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 by which (imma nent instrumentality, Jelf, Gr. § 622. 3, comp. notes on Eph. ii. 13) the calling was vouchsafed unto mankind ; see notes on 1 Thess. iv. 18, and comp. Winer, Gr. § 48. a, p. 347. De AVette and Meyer both adduce 1 Cor. vii. 15, 4v Se eip^rn KeKr\.vKev r)p.us o ®e6s, but not pertinently, as both there and in the two other pas sages in which /taAeiV is joined with 4v, viz., Eph. iv. 4, 1 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 Chap. I. 7. GALATIANS. 29 7 b ovk eariv aXXo, ei p,rj rives elaiv ol rapdaaovres vp,ds Kal we are called to move. In the present case, however, the dogmatical considera tion, that the Grace of Christ, in the sense it here appears used by St. Paul, denotes an active and energizing influ ence rather than a passive clement, seems distinctly to suggest the instrumental sense ; comp. Rom. v. 15, and see Meyer and Hilgenf. in A. 1. The usual explanation, according to which 4r is used 'in sensu praegnanti' for eis ('vo- cavit in gratiam,' A'ulg., Auth.), is more than doubtful, as xaXea implies no idea of motion (comp. Winer, Gr. § 50. 4. a, p. 367), while that of Wieseler ( Chronol. p. 285, note), according to which ir x<*p. = x&pf (L'h. iii. 19), is alike inconsistent with the usage of iv, and the regular meaning of xdpis Xpto-Tov. Ire por] ' another sort of,' Fell. If we compare the very similar passage, 2 Cor. xi. 4, in which erepos and &XXos occur in juxtaposition, and apparently in senses exactly identical with those in the present passage, it will not seem necessary to lay any stress on erepov as implying either (a) 'bad,' 'perverted' (comp Plato, Phileb 13 A, e-repor iropjr., Pind Pyth. HI. 34 [60] Saipaav erepos ; see Rost u. Palm. Lex s. v. Vol I. p. 1202, AVctst. on 1 Tim. v. 25), or even (b) 'strange,' Scholef. Hints, p. 88 (ed. 3), comp. Jude 7, — as both here and 2 Cor. I c. erepos appears only to refer to distinction of kind, dxXos of individuality ; ' erepos non tantum alium sed diversum significat,' Tittm Synrm. p. 155 ; comp. Plato, Sym- pos. 185 n, erepdy re Kal av6fioiov. It must be admitted, however, that this distinction is not always kept up in the N. T. ; see Matth. xi. 3, 1 Cor. xv 39. 7. o ovk ecrriv &XXo ei p.'r) k.t.X.] ' which is not another, save that,' etc. The various interpretations of these words turn mainly on the antecedent assigned to '6 ; this may be (a) the whole sentence, Sti — evayyiXiov, 'quod quidem (scil. vos deficere a Christo) non est aliud nisi,' AViner ; (4) the preceding el>ayye\iov, 'which Gospel is, admits of being, no other,' De AV. (compare Syr., Chrys., Theod ), and appy. the majority of ex positors ; (c) the preceding compound expression erepor evayyeXiov, Meyer, Alf. Of these (c) is clearly to be preferred, as best preserving the natural and gram matical sequence of the words, and the distinction between erepos and dxXos. To prevent the words erepov evayyeXiov 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 &\\os rather than the ambiguous erepos, and throwing the emphasis on ovk : ' which (erepor evayyeXtor) is not another (a second) Gospel, except (only in this sense, that) there are some who trouble you,' i v., the Judaists bring you another gospel, but it is really no Gospel at all ; comp. Ilamm. and Meyer in loc. In a word, as Ililgenf. correctly observes, the seeming paradox lies in this fact, that evayyeXiov is understood after aXXo in its strictest meaning, but expressed after eTepov in one more lax. e 1 p. r) ] ' save that ' The gloss ei nty = dAAa can be distinctly impugned in even what seem the strongest passages, e. g. Matth. xii. 4 (see Fritz, in loc), 1 Cor. vii. 17 (see Meyer in loc ) : consult Klotz. Devar. Vol. n p. 524, Hartung, Part'ik. pAi, 3. 6, Vol. n. p. 120, compared with Dindorf in Steph Thes. Arol. in p. 190. The first distinct evidences of this interchange appear only in very late writers. of rapdtrcrorTe s] ' who are troubling you;' ' qui vos conturbant,' Vulg. The definite article might at first Fight seem inconsistent with the indef. rices : when thus used, however, it serves to particu larize, and in the present case specifies, 30 GALATIANS. Chap. I. 8. SAoyre? [leraarpe-^ai rb evayyeXiov rov Xpiarov. " dXXa Kai edv 77/iet? r) dyyeXos e% ovpavov evayyeXi&rai vfiiv irap' b evrjyye- the Ttves as those whose characteristic was troubling the Galatians, ' some who are your troublers ; ' comp. Luke xviii. 9, Tiras tous ireirot^iras, Col. ii 8, /x-r) rts vp.us tcrrai b crvXaytayuir. AViner ( Gr. \ 18. 3, p. 100) adduces some exx. from classical Greek, and compares the com mon expression eltrir ol Xeyovres : see also Bernhardy, Synt. vi. 23, p. 318. AVe cannot, therefore, with Riickert definitely pronounce this as an instance of Asiatic Hellenism. The article must, of course, be carried on to SreXavres ; see Kiihner's valuable note on Xen. Mem. i. 1. 20. rb eii ayyeXlov tov Xp ict ov] It is doubtful whether XpttrTov is the gen. subject i, • the Gospel preached by Christ,' or the gen. objecti, ' the Gospel of or con cerning Christ.' From the fuller expres sion, Rom. i. 3, evayyeX. tov Qeov irepl rov viov avTov, we may, perhaps, here decide on the latter interpretation : see Winer, Gr. § 30. 1, p. 160. According to Meyer (on Mark i. 1), when the gen. after evayyeX. is otorvpias, tSaoiXelas, k t.X. it is gen. objecti; when Qeov, gen. sub- jecti; but when Xpiotou, gen. objecti or subjecti, to be determined only by the context. 8. /cai 4dv] 'even if;' not, however, necessarily ' supposing » case which has never occurred' (Alf.), but, as usual, conveying the idea of condition with the assumption of objective possibility ; see Herm de Partic. &r, 2 . 7, p. 95, and esp. the very-clear distinctions of Schmalfeld, Synt. d. Gr. Verb. § 93, 94. It may be further observed that, as the order shows, Kal belongs not to r)p.e1s or to the sentence, but to 4dv (etiam si), to which it gives force and prominence ; see Herm. Viger, No. 307, Hartung, Partic. Kai, 3. 3, Vol. i. p. 141, and notes on Phil. ii. 17. il p. e < s J ' we.' Though i)p.e1s here seems to refer mainly to St. Paul, and is fre quently so used elsewhere, yet, as oi crbv 4p.ol ir. aSeX. may very reasonably be here included (Mey), it does not seem desira ble, with De AV., Conyb., and others, to limit the term specially to the Apostle. The use of ripeTs, or of the simple plural, must always depend on the context; comp. notes on 1 Thess. i. 2. reap' o] ' contrary to that which.' The meaning of the prep, has been the subject of considerable controversy ; the Luther ans having urged the meaning prceter- quam (Vulg., and appy. Chrys.), the Romanists that of contra (Theod., al.). This latter meaning is perfectly correct (opp. to Brown, p. 45 ; see Donalds. Gr. § 485, and exx. in AViner, Gr. § 49. g, p. 360, esp. Xen. Mem. i. 1. 18, where irapd tovs v6p.ovs and Kara t. y. 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 an erepor evayy., and in its very essence opposed to the true Gospel. avd&epia] 'accursed;' strictly considered, nothing more than the Hellenistic form of the Attic ardSrn- p.a, Moeris (cited by Lobeek, Phryn. p. 249), the original meaning of both forms being to atpieposuieror Qew, Theodoret on Rom. ix. 3. The prevailing use, how ever, of avd&eua in malam partem com pared with the command, Lev. xvii. 29, seems (esp. in the LXX and the N. T. ) to have gradually led to a distinction in meaning ; b.rdSrrip.a being used in the sense of donarium (2 Maec. ix. 16, Luke xxi. 25), avd2>ep.a (Rom. ix. 3, 1 Cor. xii. 3, xvi. 22) as ' aliquid divince irm sacra- turn;' Hesych. avdgTepia- 4wtKa-rdpaTos, aKoivtirnros. ardfrnp-a- Kicrp.riixa. This distinction, though very generally, is still Chap. I. 9. GALATIANS. 31 Xiaap.e'&a v/uv, dvd&efia earco. 9 a>? trpoeiprjKapiev, Kai dpn irdXiv Xer/a), ei Tt? 17/a? evayyeXi^erai irap b rrapeXdfiere, dvd- not universally observed : see Theod. and esp. Chrys. on Rom. ix. 3, who, even whde he asserts two distinct meanings, seems to regard the forms as interchange able. In the eccles. writers (see Sui- cer, Thes. Arol. x. p. 268, Bingham, xvi. 2), artLbepia, like the Hebrew c-in (see AAriner, RWB. Art. Bann) was applied to excommunication ; though even here, it may be observed, accompanied some times with distinct execration ; see Bing ham, ib. 2. 17. This milder sense has been frequently maintained in the present passage (Hammond in loc, AVaterland, Doct. Trin. ch. 4, A'ol. in. p 458), but is distinctly opposed to the usage of the N. T. ; compare irriKardparos, ch. iii. 10, Kardpa, ch. iii. 13. For further reff. see the good note of Fritz. Rom. ix. 3, A'ol. n. p. 253 sq. 9. 7rp o eipfi Kap, ev] 'we have said before.' To what does irpb here refer? Is it (a) solely to the preceding verse, as Chrys., Theod., Jerome (comp. Neander, Planting, Vol. x. p. 214, Bohn), or (b) to a declaration made at the Apostle's last visit, as Syr. (appy.), and recently, TJVt., De W., Mey., al. ? Grammatical consid erations do not contribute to a decision : for neither, on the one hand, can the use of the perfect rather than the aor. irpoel- irop.ev (ch. v. 21, 1 Thess. iv. 6) be pressed in favor of (a), — eXp-nKa at most only marking the continuing validity of what was said (comp. 2 Cor. xii. 9, and AViner, 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 7rpiS (TJst.), for see 2 Mace. iii. 7, irpoeitrnp-evtav xPVru^Ta"' ( where the subject referred to is mentioned no further back than the beginning of the preced ing verse), 3 Mace. vi. 35, and compare 2 Cor. vii. 3 with 2 Cor. vi. 12. Con textual reasons, however, viz. the inser tion of &prt as marking an antithesis to wdiat was distinctly past, and the appar ent identity of time marked by the two plural verbs euav-yeA., irpoeip. (Alf), seem so distinctly in favor of (b), that in this case we do not hesitate to maintain that reference even in opposition to the opin ion of the Greek expositors ; comp. 2 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. A'ol. ii. p. 305. k al ci pr L K . 'I . X . ] 'so now I say again:' undoubtedly a consecutive sentence. Riickert and B. Crus., by making it part of the antece dent sentence, retain the more Attic meaning of &pri, but suppose an intoler ably harsh ellipsis before eX tis. "hprt is not used in Attic Greek for purely present time, — comp. Plato, Meno, 89, where iv rip yvv is in opp. to ev Tip apri, — but is not uncommonly so used in later Greek ; see esp. Lobeck, Phryn. p. 18 sq. el . . . e vayyeXi feral] ' if any one preacheth; simply and purely conditional ( ' el cum indie, nihil significat praeter conditionem,' Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 455), 'if, as a matter of fact, preaching is a course of action pursued by any one,' be such an assumption reasonable or the contrary ; see esp. Schmalfeld, Sgntc.x, § 91, p. 195. This change from the more restricted ear with subj., verse 8, appears here intentional ; comp. Acts v. 38, 39. Still 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 observed ; see Madvig, dr. ij 125. 1. It is certainly noticeable that, in Euclid («. g. Book I.. Prop. 4), ear with subj. is nearly always 32 GALATIANS. Chap. I. 10. 'Septa eara. 10 dpn yap dv^pcuTrov; ¦n-efeco r) rbv ¦ Qeov ; rj t,r/ra> dv^pujiroit; dpeaKeiv ; el en dv'hpdjiroi'i fjpeaKov, Xpiarov 00OA.09 ovk dv rjjxtjv. used in mathematical hypotheses, where there can be no accessory idea, but where experience must prove the truth or fal lacy of the supposition : see AViner, Gr. § 41. 2, p. 260, note. This use of evay- yeXiCouai with an accus. persona), is an fiira| Xeyip.. in St. Paul's Epp., but oc curs elsewhere both in the N T. (Luke iii. 18, Acts viii. 25, 40, xiii. 22, xiv. 15, 21, xvi. 10, 1 Pet. i. 12), and in later writers: comp. AViner, Gr. § 32. 1, p. 199, and Lobeck, Phryn, p. 267 sq. 10. apn ydp] 'For now;' not con trasting his present conduct and former Pharisaism (Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 222 [Bohn], AVieseler, Chronol. p. 178), but emphatically repeating the "dpri of the preceding verse, and calling especial attention to his present words ; — 'Now, — when I am using such unhesitating! language.' The exact force of yap seems more open to question : it may be plausibly taken as in abrupt and ironical reference to the charges of the Judaists ; ' well ! am I now,' etc. (on this idio matic use of ydp, see esp. Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 245), but is perhaps more naturally regarded as argumentative, — not, however, so much with reff. to the seeming harshness of his previous words (Mey., All'.), as to their unquestionable truth, the best proof of which lay in his being one who was making God his friend, and not men ; see Olsh. and Ilil genf in loc. iret&oi] 'am I per suading,' . m . q Vn QUI [sum persua- dens] Syr., ' suadeo,' Vulg., Clarom. ; scil. - am I making friends of;' the slight modification of meaning, viz. ' persua- dendo mihi concilio,' 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. ¦jreib-ai rbv Qe6v (with inf.), Joseph. Antiq. rv. 6. 5, vi. 5. 6, viii. 10 3. The usual comment, that ireiSru is here used de conatu (Ust., al.), is very questionable. Of the pas sages cited in support of this meaning, Acts xxviii. 23, certainly proves nothing, and iElian, Var. Hist. 11 fi, is not to the point, ' attempt ' being implied not by the verb but its tense. The same obs. seems applicable to Xenoph. Hell. vi. 5, 16, Polyb. Hist. rv. 64 2, cited in Steph. Thess. s. v. % Cvrd, k. t. X.] ' or am I seeking to please,' etc ; not merely a different (De AV.), 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. 11. p. 139 (ed. 1849). e'n avStp. ijpetr- kov] ' were still pleasing men.' It is not necessary either to press the use of the imperf de conatu, or to modify the mean ing of apeo-Kw, ' studeo placcre,' — a mean ing which it never bears ; see Fritz. Rom. xv. 2, A'ol. in p. 221, note. The apos tle says, ' I am not pleasing men ; and a clear proof is, that I am Christ's servant, whose service is incompatible with that of man.' The emphasis thus rests on ert (Mey., Brown) which is not merely logical (De A\rette), but temporal, with ref. to the preceding &pri. The Rec. inserts yap after el, with D^EJK ; Syr., and other Vv. ; Chrys., Theod., al., — but with but little plausibility, as the authority for the omission is stron°- [ABDiFG; 5 mss.; Vulg., Clarom" Copt., Arm.; Cyr. (?,), Dam.], and the probability of interpolation to assist the argument, by no means slight. 1l A"l " ] This form of the imperf., so com mon in later writers, is found, Xen. Cyr. vi 1. 9, Lysias, 111. 17, but is unequivo cally condemned by the Atticists. Buttm. Chap. I. 11, 12. GALATIANS. 33 The Gospel I preach is not " rVOOpi^OO Be VfUV, dBeXtjjOl, TO eVOyyeXlOV of mau; and I will confirm \ , » rv \ r » ) ^ ti s >/ \ this by stating my mode of to evayyeXuraev inr e/xov, on ovk ear iv Kara life before my conversion. >'c\ 12 > £ * \>\ \ . c\ ' avSpoyirov ovoe yap eyo> rrapa avapanrov 11. Se] Tisch. ydp. The external authorities for 8e are AD8EJK ; many Vv. (iEth.-Pol. and others omit entirely) ; Chrys., Theod., al. ; Ambrst. (Rec, Griesb., Schoh., Lachm., De W., Mey.). For ydp, BD'FG; 17s al Vulg., Cla rom. ; Dam., Hier. Aug., al. ( Tisch. ; commended by Griesb). The permu tation of Se and yap is so common that internal considerations become here of some importance. The question is, does St. Paul here seem to desire to carry out further his previous remarks, to explain, or to prove them ? In the first case we could only have, as Ruck observes, 8e'; in the second, yap or Se (Se retaining a faint oppositive force, Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 3 ) ; in the third, only ydp. The context seems decisively in favor of the first hypoth., and therefore of Se'. remarks that it is commonly found when in combination with iv, this, however, is doubtful ; so Lobeck, Phryn. p. 152. 11. yrtapiQa Se'] 'Now I certify, make known unto you;' commencement of what may be termed the apologetic portion of the epistle, ch. i. 11 — ch. ii. 21. The present formula, TJsteri ob serves, is always used by St. Paul as the prelude of a more deliberate and solemn avowal of his opinion ; comp. 1 Cor. xv. 1, 2 Cor. viii. 1, 1 Cor. xii. 3 (Sib yv.). Ae is consequently here (see crit. note) what is termed y.eraBariK6v, Bekk. Anecd. p. 958 (cited by Hartung, Vol. I. p. 165), *. ¦>., 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 at traction tA evayy. .... bWi, see AViner, Gr. 66. 6, p. 551. ovk ecrrtv Kara, ar ft p air ov]' is not after man,' i. e., ' is of no human strain :' ' Kara. complectitur vim prepositionum curb (?), Sia et mpd,' Bengel. This remark, if un derstood exegetically rather than gram matically, is perfectly correct. Kara &vStp., taken per se, implies ' after the fashion, after the manner of man ' (AViner, Gr. § 49. d, p. 358), but in the present context amounts to the more comprehen sive declaration that the eua-y-Ye'Aioi' was not avStptbrctvov, either in its essence or 5 object ; ovx birb avSrpunrlvwv crvyKenai Xoyiapiwv, Theod. : compare Plato, Phileb. 12, to 8' ipibr Sebs ovk itxri Kara &r&p. ; where the true qualitative nature of the expression is shown by the further explanation, aXXa irepa tov pieyitrrov tp6- /3ou. The different shades of meaning under which this formula appears in St. Paul's Epp. (ch. iii. 15, Rom. iii. 5, 1 Cor. iii. 3, ix: 8, xv. 32) must be re ferred to the context, not to the preposi tion; see Fritz. Rom. iii. 5, Vol. I. p. 159 sq. and comp. Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. x. p. 351. 12. ovSe yap 4yii] 'for neither did I receive it, etc. ;' proof of the preceding assertion. The true force of ovSe has here been frequently misunderstood, but may be properly preserved, if we only observe ( 1 ) that in all such cases as the present (comp. John v. 22, viii. 42, Rom. viii. 7), the particle must receive its ex act explanation from the context ( ' ad- sumpta extrinsecus aliqua sententia,' Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 707), and (2) that ovSe ydp, in negative sentences, stands in strict parallelism and bears corresponding meanings with koI yap in positive sentences ; see Hartung, Par- tik. oiiSe, 2. a. 2, Vol. x. p. 211, and comp. Ellendt, Lex. Soph. s. v. Vol. n. p. 2 1 sq. AVe may thus correctly trans late, either (a) nam ne ego quidem, ' even 34 GALATIANS. Chap. I. 12. TrapeXafiov avro ovre eBiBd^rrjv, dXXa oV drroKaXvtyeax; "Irjaov I who so naturally might have been taught of men,' Hilgenf., AViner in loc, and Gr. § 55. 6, p. 436 ; or (b) neque enim ego, ' I as little as the other Apos tles ' ( Olsh. ) ; or perhaps a little more inclusively, '/ (distinctly emphatic) — as little as any others, whether Xpio-ToSi- SaKTOi or ar&panroSiSaKToi.' Of these (b) is to be preferred not only from con textual but even grammatical reasons; for independently of seeming too con cessive, (a) would also have been most naturally expressed by ouSe 4yi> ydp, or Kal yap oiiS' iyci (Ruck). This last ob jection Meyer considers invalid on ac count of the normal position of ydp, — but inexactly ; for though ydp generally occupies the 2nd place, yet when the 1st and 2nd words are closely united (which would here be the case) it occu pies the 3rd : see Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 251. irapb. a.r& ptljir ov] 'from man ;' not synonymous with a7rcJ avSrptlnrov, the distinction between these prepositions after verbs of receiving, etc. (irapa more immediate, aicb more remote source), being appy. regularly main tained in St. Paul's Epp. -. comp. 1 Cor. xi. 23, irapeXafior curb tov Kvplov, on which AViner (de Verb. Comp. Fasc. n. p. 7) rightly observes, 'non 7rapa tov Kvpiov, propterea quod non ipse Christus praesentem docuit ;' see Schulz, Abendm. p. 218 sq. aire iSiSdx&nv] ' nor was I taught it ;' slightly different from the preceding irapeXafior, the e'SiS. pointing more to subjective appropriation, while irapeX. only marks objective recep tion (AVindischm.) : so appy. Beng., ' al terum (irapeX. ) fit sine labore, alterum cum labore discendi.' On the sequence ou'Se — oure, see AViner, Gr. § 55. 6, p. 436, and esp. Hartung, Partik. aire, i. 9, Arol. i. p. 201 sq., where this un usual, but (in cases like the present) de fensible collocation is fully explained. In all such passages, 8e refers to the forego ing words or sentences, so that aire is used as if ov or ovk had preceded ; Se', in negative sentences, having often much of the force and functions which Kal has in affirmative sentences; see especially AVex. Antig.Noh n. p. 157, and comp. Klotz. Devar. A'ol. n. p. 71 1. The read ing oiiSe (Rec. and even Lachm.) is only supported by AD'FG ; a few mss. ; Eus., Chrys., al., and, as a likely repe tition of the preceding ovSe, or a correc tion of a supposed solecism, is more than doubtful. 'Intro v X p i rjV irore iv to 'Iov- Baia/j,a>, on Ka& inrepfSoXrjv eBlcoKov rr)v eKKXrjaiav rov Oeov Kal errop'&ovv avrrpj. /<.u Kal fpoeKoirrov ev ra> 'IovBaia/J.q> virep rroX- that (in accordance with the laws of our spiritual nature) its deepest mysteries and profoundest harmonies should be seen and felt through the practical ex periences of his apostolical labors. The question is partially entertained by Au gustine, de Gestis Pelag. ch. xrv. (32), A'ol. x. p. 339 sq. (ed. Migne, Par. 1845). 13. ^KOiio-aTe ydp] 'For ye heard;' historical proof, by an appeal to his former well known (eVoucr. emphatic) zeal for Judaism, that it was no hu man influence or human teaching that could have changed such a character ; ov ydp 6.V, el p.e Qebs i)r b 4KKaXvirTwr, otirttis a&p6ar etrxov ftera&oXiiv, Chrys. t ij v avao-Tpotpiiv irore, k. t. X.] ' my conversation in time past,' etc. Auth. Vers. These words are taken by most interpreters as simply equivalent to Tt)v irore (rrporepav) avatrr. This is not critically exact. As Dr. Donald son suggests, the position of ttotc is due to the verb included in avaarpo- tpiiv : as St. Paul would have said av- fo-Tpetp6p.rir irore, he allows himself to write Tr)r 4p.iir avatrTpotfrr)r rrore. Meyer aptly cites Plato, Leg. in. 685 D, r\ rrjs Tpoias dXtaais rb Sebrepov. Tip 'IouSaiff|U] ' the Jews' religion,' i. e. ' Judaism ;' see 2 Mace. ii. 21, xiv. 38, 4 Mace. iv. 26. On the specializing force of the art. with abstract nouns, see Scheucrlein, Syntax. $ 26. 2. c, p. 219. 4ir6pSovr] ' was destroying it,' ' ex- pugnabam,' Vulg., Clarom. : see Acts ix. 21, b iropSr)aas 4v 'lepovcraXiip. tovs iiriKa\ovp.evovs, and comp. iEsch. Sept. 176. It is not necessary either to mod ify the meaning of irop&elr with Syr. (A Anwi ^ajjj eram vastans), Copt. (desolabam), and other Vv., or to ex plain the imperf. as de conatu (o-$eoax eVexefpei, Chrys.), with the Greek com mentators. As Meyer justly observes, St. Paul previous to his conversion was actually engaged in the work of destruc tion : he was not a Verwi'ister merely, or a VerstSrer, but a ZerstSrer : comp. Acts xxii. 4, e'Siwfa &XP1 Sardrov. The im perfects accurately denote the course of the Apostle's conduct, which commenced and continued during the time of his Judaism, but, owing to his conversion, was never carried out ; contrast i8ita£a, Acts, I. c, 1 Cor. xv. 9, and see Bern hardy, Synt. x. 3, p. 372 sq., where the three principal uses of the imperf. (sim ultaneity, duration, and non-completion) are perspicuously stated, and comp. the more elaborate notice of Schmalfeld, Synt. § 55, pp. 97—111. 14. trvvn XiKit&Ta s] 'contempora ries' SvvnX. is an oVaf Xey6p. 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. vn. p. 1378. The compound form (compare o~vp.p.eToxos, Eph. iii. 6, v. 7 ; trvyKoiva- v6s, 1 Cor. ix. 23) is condemned by the Atticists; Attic writers using only the simple form; see Thomas Mag. p. 208 (ed Bern.), Herodian, p. 433 (ed Koch.) irepirrcroT. £ij A a> t }) s vir dpx-] being from the first more exceedingly a zealot or contender; modal participial clause serving to define more particularly the peculiar nature of the advance which St. Paul made in Judaism. The com parison ireptcrcr. is obviously with those just mentioned, the iroAAo! trvvnX. ir rip yevet uov. r icy ir ar pinSjr piov irapaS6creaiv] 'for the traditions of my fathers ;' gen. objecti after £nXar4is, 36 GALATIANS. Chap. I. 15, 16. Xoix; avvrjXiKid>Ta<; iv rd> yevei fiov, rrepiaaorepm ^nXourr}^ vrrapx^v rwv irarpiKm) fiov 7rapat>oaea)v. 15 "Ore Be evBoKr/aev 6 Oeos, 6 dapio-aios, uibs *apio-aiW, and more expressly Acts xxii. 3, KaTa. tt/v aKpi&effTdriiv a'tpetriv tt)s T}p.eTepas frprjcrKeias efocra $aptcraios. 15. ore Se evS6K. *. t. A.] ' But when it pleased God ;' notice of the time subsequent to his conversion, in which the Apostle might have been thought to have conferred with men, but did not. On the meaning of euSo/ce'eu, — here marking the free, unconditioned, and gracious will of God, see notes on 1 Thess. ii. 8, and on its four constructions in the N. T., notes on Col. i. 19. iKKoiXlas firiT po s p.ov] 'from my mother's loomb,' i. c ' from the moment I was born,' — not as Calv., ' nondum genitum,' Jer. i. 5 ; ix being temporal both here and Matth. xix. 12, Luke i. 15, Acts iii 2, xiv. 8, and marking the point from which the temporal series is reckoned : see AViner, Gr. § 47. b, p. 328. The verb Htpopiaas, as Jowett observes, has two meanings, the first physical (iEth.-Pol.), the second and predomi nant one, ethical and spiritual ( ' segre- gavit,' Vulg., Clarom.) ; comp. Rom. i. 1. Kal KaXetras n.. t. A.] ' and called me by means of His grace ;' scil. at the Apostle's conversion (Acts ix. 3 sq.), — not with any reference to a calling, undefined in time, which de pended on the counsels of God, as Riick- ert in loc. : compare Rom. viii. 30, where the temporal connection between irpoti- pirre and iKaXecre (on the force of the aorists see Fritz, in loc.) is exactly simi lar to that between atpopitras and KaXetras in the present passage. The KXrjais in both cases has a distinct origin in time ; au*roV \Qebr] t\- irias auTou -rrjs acpaTou, Chrys. The moving cause of the call was the Divine euSoKfa, the mediating cause, the bound less grace of God, the instrument, the heaven-sent voice ; comp. Winer, Gr. § 47, p. 337. 16. -airo Ka X btyat] 'to reveal;' de pendent on the preceding euSomjo-ey, not Chap. I. 16. GALATIANS. 37 iv ifioi, iva evayyeXifyofiai avrbv iv toi? e^veaiv, eifcea)<; ov ivpoa- on the particles (Est.), — a connection that would involve the unexampled con struction (in the N. T.) evS6x. — 'ira euayv., and would impair the force of 'Iva. iv ipioi] 'within me;' not ' per me,' Grot., ' in my case,' Green, or ' coram me,' Peile, but simply ' in me,' Vulg., t. e. ' in my soul ; Xpiarbv eixec iv eauTip AaAouera, Chrys. It may be admitted, that, owing partly to linguis tic (see on 1 Thess. ii. 16), and partly to dogmatical reasons (Winer, Gr. { 47. 2. obs., p. 322), there is some difficulty in satisfactorily adjusting all St. Paul's varied uses of the preposition iv ; still, wherever the primary meaning gives a sense which cannot be objected to dog matically or exegetically, we are bound to abide by it.- Here this meaning is especially pertinent. Both subjectively, by deep inward revelations, as well as objectively, by outward manifestations, was the great apostle prepared for the work of the ministry ; see Chrysost. in loc. On the arbitrary meanings as signed to iv in theffl7*JS. see AViner, Gr. § 48. a, p. 348. evayyeX- i £cu p. a i] Present : the action was still going on. evSretos ov irpoa- ave&epnjv] 'straightway I addressed,' etc. ; the ev&eas standing prominently forward and implying that he not only avoided conference with men, but did so from the very first ; ovk eiirev air- Xus, ' ov irpotravehep.riv ' aXX' ' ebSews, it. i . A:' Chrys. According to the com mon explanation, ev&etus is to be con nected in sense with cnrqX&ov, though in mmediate structure with irpocrave&efiriv ; Apostolus, — quae fuit ejus alacritas, interponit negativam sententiam quae ipse in mentem venit,' AViner, comp. Jowett, and Alf. It seems more correct to say that ebSieais belongs to the whole sentence, from ov irpooav. to 'Apafilav, which, by means of the antithesis be tween its component negative and af firmative clauses, in fact expresses one single thought ; ' immediately I avoided all conference and intercourse with man ;' comp. Meyer in loc. ov ir poa- ave&uriv\ ' I addressed no communi- ¦ A , , ... cation to ; not exactly ' non acquievi, Vulg., Clarom., nor quite so much as A .V U [non revelavi] Syr., but more simply, ovk ayeKowao-dp.-nv, Theod., ' I made no communication to, and held no counsel with,' ' non contuli,' Beza. The prep, irpbs does not imply that the Apostle ' did not in addition to that con fer,' (comp. TJst ), but, as not uncom monly in composition, simply indicates direction towards : compare icpoaavarl- heaSiai rots pArreai (Diod. Sic. xvn. 116) with irpotravafyepeiv rois pLavretri (ib. ib.), in which latter verb the idea of direction is made more apparent ; see Fritz., Fritzsch. Opusc p. 204. rrapKl Kal a'luaT i] 'jlesh 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 ex pression occurs four times in the N.T?., apparently under the following modifi cations of meaning : (a) Man, in his mere corporeal nature, 1 Cor. xv. 50, Heb. ii. 14 ; (b) Man in his weak in tellectual nature, contrasted with God, Mattt. xvi. 17 (contr. Mey.), comp. Chrys. Vol. x. 675 e, ed. Ben.; (c) Man, in his feeble human powers, con trasted with spiritual natures and agen cies, Eph. vi. 12. The present passage seems to belong to (b) ; the apostle took not weak men for his advisers or in structors, but communed in stillness with God. Chrys., in referring the words to the Apostles, himself seemed 38 GALATIANS. Chap. I. 17. ave^tefirjv aapKi Kal aifiari, i 17 ovBe drrriX^ov et? 'lepoaoXvfia Trpb- 19. ei p.}] 'I aK iv pov] ' save James,' i. e., no other OTiJcrToAoi/ save him. It may be fairly said, that every principle of grammatical perspicuity requires that, after these words, not merely eTSav, but elSov rbr air6trToXov be supplied ; comp. 1 Cor. i. 14, ovSeva vp.a>r 4@dirTicra el p.i] Kpia-iror Kal rd'ior. This is distinctly ad« mitted both by Mey , Hilgenf, and the best recent commentators, even though they differ in their deductions : so very clearly Chrys. St. James, then, was an airoVroAos ( whatever be the meaning as signed to the word), — a fact somewhat confirmed by the use of airoo-TiiAous, Acts ix. 28. The additional title, 6 ctSeAtpbs too Kupiou (rb trep.roX6yrip.a, as Chrys. terms it), was probably added (TJst.) to distinguish this James from the son of Zebedee, who was then liv ing. Whether it follows from this pas sage, that Jacobus Frater and Jacobus Alphmi are identical (by no means such a fiction as Meyer somewhat hastily terms it), and that James was thus one of the Twelve, is a question which falls without the scope of this commentary. This consideration only may be sug gested ; whether in a passage so circum stantial 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 aSeXtp6s, in its less proper sense (Kupiou aretyt6s, Theod.), is not more plausible than the similar one — of an-iio-ToAoy. The most weighty coun ter-argument is derived from John vii. 5, ou5e yap oi aSeXtpol avrov 4icicnevor eis avr6r ; but it deserves careful consider ation whether 4irlaTevov really means more than a proper, intelligent, and rightful belief; see even De AVette on John I. c, and comp. John vi. 64, where ov iriareveir is predicated of some of the /xa&i)Tai, and where ver. 67 implies some doubt even of oi StiSeKa. The stu dent who desires to examine this diffi cult question, may profitably consult Mill, on the Brethren of our Lord, Schneckenburger, on St. James, p. 144, sq., Arnaud, Recherches sur I'Epitre de Jude, and the review of it by Deitlein in Reuter, Repert. (Aug. 1851), Ne ander, Planting, Vol. i. p. 351, note (Bohn); Blom's Disputation, (in Vol- beding, Thesaur. Comment. Vol. i.) ; Credner, Einleitung, Vol. I. p. 571 ; AVieseler, Stud. u. Krit. (Part I. 1842) ; and Hilgenf. Galaterbr. p. 219. The most recent monographs are those by Schaff, Berlin, 1842; and Goy, Mont. 1845. 20. a Se ypdtpa k. r. X.] 'but as to what I write unto you;' not paren- 'thetical, but a strong and reiterated as surance of the little he had received from the Apostles, a Se ypdtpm vp.1v being an emphatic anacoluthon ; comp. AVan- nowski, Constr. Abs. p. 54 sq., where this and similar constructions are fully discussed. 8 t « ov tf/evSop.at] ' (I declare) that I lie not;' strong con firmatory 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 Liicke on 1 Joh. iii. 20, p. 245, ed. 2), a verb consonant with the context is commonly supplied before Sti ; comp. Acts xiv. 22. Accordingly, in the present case, ypdipw (Mey.), Xeya, (De W.), ,?o-t! (Ruck.), ip.rvp.i (TJst.), have been proposed as suppletory ; the first three are, however, obviously too weak, the last too strong — €Vco7noi' tou Qeov not being any more than ri-jn- -<:eV, a formal oath (Olsh ). If any definite word was in the Apostle's thoughts, it was perhaps Siap.apTvpop.ai (Acts x. 42, with SVi) ; especially as, in three out of the five places in which Chap. I. 21—23. GALATIANS. 41 iriov rov 6eov on ov -tyevBofiai. * 21 eireira fy&ov 64? rd KXi/j,ara Try? Svpias Kal rrjs KiXiKias. 22 tffirjv Be dyvoovfievos toj irpoacbircp rais eKKXrjaiais rijs 'IovBaias rais iv Xpiartp, a fibvov Be aKovovres ivtlm. tou 0eou occurs, this verb (though in slightly different senses and construc tions) is found joined with it ; seeiTim. ii. 14, v. 21, 2 Tim. iv. 1. On this use of Sti in asseverations, see Fritz. Rom. ix. 2, A'ol. ii. p. 242. 21. to KXipiara] 'the regions;' 'regiones,' Vulg., 'partes,' Clarom.; a word only used in the N. T. by St. Paul, here and Rom. xv. 23, 2 Cor. xi. 10. The primary meaning, as deri vation indicates, is ' inclinatio ' or « de- clivitas,' e. g. KXipiara opar, Eustath. p. 1498. 47 (comp. Polyb. Hist. vn. 6. 1), thence with ref. to the inclination of the heavens to the poles, ' a tract of the sky,' KXlpia ovpavov, Herodian, xi. 8, and lastly, — its most usual meaning, — a tract of the earth, whether of greater (comp. Athen. xn. p. .523 e) or, as in the present case, of more limited ex tent; comp. Polyb. Hist. v. 44. 6, x, 1. 3. On its accentuation (usually KXtpia, but more correctly jcA7^a), 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. x. p. 115. 2vpias] Not the lower part of Syria, called Phcenice (AViner, TJst, al.), but 'Syria proper' (i) &va Supia, Strabo), as St. Paul's object is to show the distance he was from any quarter where he could have received instruction from the Apos tles ; see Meyer in loc. In Acts xxi. 3, Supfa is used merely in a general way to denote the Roman province bearing that name : on its divisions, see Forbiger, Ilandb. Geogr. Vol. n. p. 640. rijs KiAiki'os] Occasionally mentioned in combination with Svpi'a (Acts xv. 23, 41) as geographically conterminous (Alf.), and as serving to define what 6 portion of the larger province is espe cially alluded to. For a general notice of this province, see Strabo, Geogr. xiv. 5, p. 668 sq., Mannert, Geogr. vi. 3, p. 32 sq., Forbiger, Alt. Geogr. § 67, Vol. n. p. 271 sq. 22. r$ ir p o rr ti ir tp] 'in respect of personal appearance,' scil. ' by face ;' ovSe airb tltyews yvtbpipios %v avrols, Chrys. The general Emiting nature of the da tive (Scheuerl. Synt. \ 20, Donalds. Gr. § 458) may here be fully recognized: the Apostle was not unknown to the Churches in every sense, but only in regard to his outward appearance. This particular dative, commonly called the dative ' of reference to,' must be care fully distinguished both from the in strumental and the modal dat. (1 Cor. xi. 5), and may be best considered as a local dative ethically used. Here, for instance, the Apostle's appearance was not that by which, hut as it were the place in which, their ignorance was evinced ; see esp. Scheuerl. Synt. § 22. a, p. 179, and comp. AViner, Gr. § 31. 6, p. 193, Bernhardy, Synt. in. 8, p 84. ttjs 'IouSaias] The Church of Jeru salem is, however, to be excepted, as there the Apostle was elo"iropev6fievos Kal iKiropevbfievos, irapfiiio'ia£6p.evos iv t$ bv- uyxaTi tou Kvplov, Acts ix. 28. tois 4v Xpicrrip] Not merely a peri phrasis for the adjective ' the Christian churches,' but ' the churches which are in Christ ;' i. e„ which are incorporated with Him who is the Head : comp. Eph. i. 22, 23. 23. aKOtioi'Ter %aav] 'they were hearing;' scil. the members of these Churches; see Winer, Gr. § 67. 1, p. 555. This periphrasis, which probably owes its prevalence in the New Testa- 42 GALATIANS. Chap. I. 23, 24.— II. I. ^o-ai; on 6 Bicokcdv rjptds irore vvv evayyeX%erai ttjv irlanv rjv • iirop^ei- M ical iBoga&v ev ifiol rbv Oeov. i went up to jem- jj_ " ^rreira $l(\ BeKareaadpav eraiv iraXiv rroreWhensalem, I communicated my Gospel both in public and private: I resisted the false brethren, and was accredited by the Apostles. ment to the similar formula in Aramaic (0001 .VV» a.), serves to express A - \ i O * the idea of duration more distinctly than the simple tense; see AViner, Gr. § 45. 5, p. 311. In the LXX it seems principally limited to those cases in which the participle is used in the original; see Thiersch, de Pent. in. 11, p. 113. Examples are found in Attic Greek (see Jelf, Gr. § 375. 4), but com monly under the limitation that the participle expresses some property or quality inherent in the subject; see Stalbaum, Plato, Rep. vi. 492 A. Sti b SiiiKinv k. t. A.] ' our former persecutor;' the participle being here, by means of the art., turned into a species of subst, and losing all temporal force ; see the exx. collected by AViner, Gr. § 57, p. 317, and comp. the very bold form, rbr eavrrjs exorra, Plato, Phccdr. 244, jj, cited by Bernhardy, Synt. VI. 22. obs. p. 316. "Oti is here not the ' oti recifi^avum ' (Schott), — a use of the particle not found in St. Paul's Epp., except in citations from the O. T. (Mey.), — but preserves its usual relatival force, the ' oratio indi- recta ' which it introduces, passing after wards into the ' oratio directa ' in the pronoun. This latter assumption Mey. deems unnecessary, as St. Paul might call himself, being now a Christian, ' our former persecutor.' This, however, seems forced and artificial. t ii v irlaTir] 'the faith,' objectively repre sented as a rule of life (De AV.) ; comp. ch. iii. 23, 1 Tim. i. 19, iv. 1, al. In the Eccles. writers ttio-tis is frequently used in the more distinctly objective sense, ' the Christian doctrine,' ' doc- trina fidem postulans' (e. g., Ignat. Eph. § 16, rritrTir Qeov iv Kauri SiSaaxa- \ia, tpSreipy ; Concil. Laod. can. 46, 7rfo-- tic iKuarSrdveir ; see Suicer, Thes. s. V. 7ri'o-Tis, 2. a), but it seems very doubtful whether this sense ever occurs in the N. T. In Acts vi. 7, uraa-oueii' t?) iricr- Tei seems certainly very similar to uira- Koveiv rip evayyeXitp, Rom. x. 16 (see Fritz. Arol. I. 17), but even there 'the faith,' as the inward and outward rule of life (see Meyer in loc), yields a very satisfactory meaning. On the various uses of tti'o-tis, see TJsteri, Lehrb. n. 1. 2, p. 91 sq. 24. 4 v 4 p. o i] ' in me,' not ' on account of me' (Brown), or ' for what he had done in me' (Jowett), but simply 'in me' Vulg., Clarom.), 'ut qui in me in- venissent celebrationis materiam,' AViner in loc. : comp. Exod. xiv. 4, eVSo|ao"&^- tropat iv &apa'2. God, as Windisch. ob serves, 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 sphere in which (Eph. i. 17), or the substratum on which (1 Cor. vii. 14, see Winer, Gr. p. 345 ; compare Andoc. de Myster. p. 33, ed. Schiller) the action takes place. The transition from this to the common usage of 4v 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, Synt. v. 8. b. p. 210. Chapter II. 1. Sib. SeKareo-crA- poiv 4Ta>r] 'after an interval of 'post,' Vulg., Clarom., Copt, Armen. ; SeKaTetrtrdpur irapeX&6rTur iTwr, Chrys. : comp. Acts xxiv. 17, Si' eVtoi/ irXeidvav. The meaning of the prep, has here been unduly pressed to suit preconceived his- Chap. II. 1, 2. GALATIANS. 43 uve/3r)v eis ' IepoaoXvfia fierd Bapvdfia, avfiirapaXa/3d>v Kal Tirov 2 dvef3rjv Be Kara diroKaXv^iv, Kal dve'irefirjv avrols torical views. Airi, in its temporal sense, denotes an action enduring throuyh 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, Sia iravrbs tov j^ju), or occurrence at the end of the period most prominent. Thus Sia iroX- Xov xp^vou °"e etapojca is correctly ex plained by Fritz. (Fritzsch. Opusc. p. 163, note), 'longo temporis spatio de- curso (quo te non vidi) te vidi ; ' comp. Herm. on Vig. No. 377, b. This is the correct use of Sia. There are, however, a few indisputable instances of a more lax use of the prep, in the N. T., to de note an action which took place within, not during the whole of a period ; e. g. Acts v. 19, SA tijs WKrbs ijvoi^e, where both the tense and the occurrence preclude the possibility of its being ' throughout the night ' ( contr. Meyer), — so also Acts vi. 9 — xvii. 10 is perhaps doubtful; see Fritz. Opusc p. 165, AViner, Gr. § 57. i. p. 337. Grammatical considerations, then, alone are not sufficient to justify Dr. Peile's paraphrase, ' not till after ; ' but on exegetical grounds it may be fairly urged that the mention of four teen years, thus undefined by a termi nus ad quern as well as a quo, would be singularly at variance with the circum stantial nature of the narrative. AVith regard to the great historical difficulties in which the -passage is involved, it can here only briefly be said ; — ( 1 ) The terminus u quo of the fourteen years, being purely a subjective epoch, does certainly seem that time which must have ever been present to the Apostle's thoughts, — the time of his conversion (Anger, AVieseler) ; especially as the trn Tpia, ch. i. 18, appear so reckoned. (2) Exegetical as well as grammatical (irdXiv) considerations seem to show it was St. Paul's second journey ; — for how, when misconstruction was so pos sible, could it be passed over ? and how can St. Peter's conduct be explained ? But (3) chronolog. arguments, based on historical coincidences, make it impos sible to doubt that Irenants (Hcer. in. 13) and Theodoret (in loc.) are right in supposing this the journey mentioned Acts xv., and therefore, according to St. Luke's account, the third. In a com mentary of this nature it is impossible to allude to the various efforts (even to the invalidation of an unquestionable text) to reconcile (2) and (3) : it may be enough to say that both chronological and historical deductions seem so certain, that (2) must give way: see the sensi ble explanation and remarks of Thiersch. Apost. Age, Vol. i. p. 120 sq. (Transl). A complete discussion will be found in the chronological works of Anger and AVieseler, Davidson, Introd. Vol. II. p. 112 sq., Winer, RWB. Art. 'Paulus,' Conyb. and Howson, St. Paul, ch. vii. : see also Meyer in loc, Alford, Vol. ii. Prolegom. p. 26. trvpiirapaX- afjiiv Kal T it ov] ' having taken with me also Titus;' the aseensive Kal per haps alluding to his being uncircum^ cised ; comp. Acts xv. 2, nauAox Kal Baprdfiav ko.1 t iras dXXovs e'| avrur. St. Paul was now the principal person (trvpiirapaXa Ptir); at the preceding (sec ond) visit Barnabas seems to have taken. the lead ; see Meyer in loc 2. u.v4f}i)v Se] 'I went up too ;' Se having its 'vim exponendi' (Fritz, in loc), or, as we might perhaps more ex actly say) its reiterative force (Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 361, Hartung, Par- tik. Se, 2. 7, Vol. i. p. 168), and repeat ing, not without a slight opposition, the preceding ave^nv. The native force of 44 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 2, rb evayyeXiov b Kr/pvaaco ev rois eSsveaiv, Kar IBiav Be rots the particle may just be traced in the (Fritz.), as opp. to tois SoKovtrtr, the faint contrast which the explanation and Apostles ; comp. Matth. xii. 15, Luke introduction of fresh particulars give rise v. 17, and see Winer, Gr. § 22. 3. 1, p. to. Kara air o KdXvxp iv] 'by, 131, Bernhardy, Synt. VI. 11. b, p. 288. scil. in accordance with, revelation, — The reference to the Apostles collectively not for my own purposes ;' KaTa as usual (Schott, Olsh.), or to the Elders of the implying the rule, the ' normamagtmdi ;' Church, is not by any means probable. see Bernhardy, Synt. v. 20. b, p. 239, Kar' IS lav 8 e] 'but privately,' i.e. in 241. Hermann's translation 'explica- a private conference ; comp. Mark iv. 34 ; tionis causa' must, on exegetical, and the Apostle communicated his evayyeXiov perhaps even on grammatical grounds to the Christians at Jerusalem openly and (see Fritzsch. Opusc p. 169), certainly unreservedly, but Kar' iSiav (between me be rejected. For ( 1 ) iz7roKaAuiI/is is never , *• k ' ? v a \ ,J. 4,. . ( ' .T , c. and them> .orrCiO ^.JUS. Syr.) en- used in this lower sense, either by ot. \ Paul or any other of the sacred writers ; tered probably more into its doctrinal and (2) the current of the Apostle's aspects; compare Theod. in loc The argument is totally at variance with meaning assigned to Se ('I mean') by such an explanation. His object is here Alf., who appy. denies any second and 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 transla- separate communication, seems here very doubtful (see ver. 4), and that to kot' ISiav ('preferably,' ' specially,') by Olsh., distinctly untenable, as kot' iSiav occurs sixteen times in the N. T., and in all tion would require Kard nva airoKdXvtyiv cases is used in a directly, or ( as here) (Herm.), may be neutralized by the ob servation that Kara airoKoAwJw is in effect used nearly adverbially ; see Eph. iii. 3. a.reib-4 unr] 'I communicated ;' ' contuli cum eis,' Vulg., Clarom., compare Syr. [patefeci] ; ' enarravi,' Fritz. ; ' ipsa col- latio unam doctrinae speciem exclusa omni varietate monstrabat,' Beza. The meaning assigned by Green (Gramm. indirectly local sense ; see Mark ix. 28, xiii. 3, Luke x. 23, etc., and compare Neand. Plant. Vol. i. p. 104. (Bohn). toIs Sokovctiv] 'to those who were hiyh in reputation,' Scholef. Hints, p. 88 ; see Eurip. Hec 292 (where oi So- Kovrres is opp. to oi a8o|ouVTes), and the exx. collected by Kypke and Eisner, esp. Eur. Troad. 608, and Herodian, N. T. p. 82) ' to leave altogether in the vi. 1, tovs SoKovvras Kal ijXiKia aepiroTd- hands of, or at the pleasure of another,' tous, — in all of which oi Sok. appears is more than doubtful ; in the only other simply equivalent to 4irlo-nuoi (Theod.). place in the N. T. where the word oc- There is not then, as Olsh. conceives, curs, Acts xxv. 4, t£ fiacriXel aveStero to any shade of blame or irony (Alf.) in Kara rbr TlavXov, the meaning is clearly, the expression, but as Chrys. correctly as here, ' communicated : ' see Fritz, observes, • tois Sokouo-i,' cp-ncrl, aera rqs Opusc p. 169, and the exx. in Wetst. IoutoD Kal rr)v Koivijv airdvToiv Xeyuv in loc. auTois] 'to them,' scil. tyijcpov. see OEcum. in loc. p.4, to the inhabitants of 'iepocr6Xvp.a (ver. 1), iras els Kevbv Tpexti,^ 4Spauov] or rather (as the sense obviously requires 'lest I might be running, or have (al- a certain limitation), to the Christians ready) run in vain;' i. „. 'lest I mis 4irelpaoev . . . Kal els Kerbr yer-qTai k.t. A., it would certainly seem that Tpexa is pres. subj. (see AATiner, Gr. $ 56. 2, p 448, where both passages are investigated) ; but there is a diffi culty both in mood and tense. The former may be explained away by the observable tendency of the New Testa ment and later writers to lapse from the optat. into the subjunct. (Winer, § 41. b. 1, p. 258, Green, Gr. p. 72) ; the latter, either by considering rpexto a 'then- present,' opp. to eSpapiov, a 'then-past,' or as pointing to the continuance of the action. (j8) ut) rctas 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. (y) eS pa pov may be explained in two ways; either (with Fritz.) as an indie. after a 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 nt)wa>s (fear ing lest), the change of mood implying that the event apprehended had now taken place ; see AViner, Gr. § 56. 2, p. 446 : compare Scheuerl. Synt. § 34. a. p. 364, Matth. Gr. § 520. 8. We have then two possible translations ; ( 1 ) Purpose ; avedepinv . •. pfr)ira>s eSpauov, I communicated . . . that I might not per chance have run in vain (as I' should have done if I had not, etc.) (2) Appre hension; ave&epiiiv . . . (tpofiobpievos) pjj- irus eSpap-oy, I communicated . . being ap prehensive lest perchance I might really have, etc. ; the verb ' timendi ' being idiomatically omitted ; see Gayler, de Part. Neg. p. 327, Schmalfeld, Synt. $ 152. Of these (2) seems most in ac cordance with St. Paul's style ; see 1 Thess. I. u„ and ch. iv. 11. To both translations, however, there are very grave objections ; to ( 1 ) on logical, to ( 2 ) on exegetical grounds : to ( 1 ), because it was not on the communica tion or non-communication of his Gos pel that St. Paul's running in vain really hinged, but on the assent or dis sent of the Apostles: to (2), because it is incredible that he who went up Kar' airoKdXvtyiv could have 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 be ing rejected by the Church if he had not communicated ; or ( which is most probable), subjectively, with the Greek commentators, to the opinions of others ; 'tva SiSd$ti> Tobs ravra viroirTevovras Sti ovk els Kevbr rpextii, Chrys. ; see Ham mond in loc. If others deemed St. Paul's past and present course fruit less, it really must in that respect have amounted to a loss of past and present labor. 3. a.XX' ovSe] 'But (to distinctly prove, a fortiori, that I had not run in vain) not even,' etc. The emphasis rests on Titos, — Titus, whom the apostles might have required to be circumcised, even while in general terms they ap proved of St. Paul's preaching. On this gradational force of aXX' oiiSe ('at ne — quidem,' 'indicant, silentio oblit- terata re leviore, afferri graviorem'), see Fritz, in loc. (Opusc. p. 178), and comp. Luke xxiii. 15, Acts xix. 2. The true separative force of ctAAa ('aliud jam esse quod sumus dicturi,' Klotz, Devar. 46 'GALATIANS. Chap. II. 3, 4. 4 Bid Be 'roiis irapeiaaKrovs ylrevBaBeXcpovs, o'irives irapeiarjX^sov KaraaKoirrjaai rijv iXev^epiav tjfiojv r)v exofiev iv Xpiarcp Irjaov, Vol. n. p. 2) is here distinctly apparent. "EAAijr &r) 'being a Greek' scil. in asmuch as, or though he was a Greek,' Katroi "EXXwv &v, Theodoret; not 'and was a Greek,' Alf., the appended parti cipial clause not being predicative, but concessive, or suggestive of the reason why the demand was made ; compare Donalds. Cratyl. § 305, Gr. 492 sq. rivayKdcrSrri] 'was compelled.' The 2, but the uses seem clearly different ; there the insertion of avrols naturally suggests a contrast, while here the naked statement ovk ijyayK. ireptrp.. as naturally prepares us for a restrictive explanation. irapeitrdKTovs] ' insidiously brought in,' Scholef. This word appears to have two meanings, (a) advena, adven- titius, aAAoVpios (Hesych., Suid., Phot.); comp. Georg. Al. Vit. Chrys. 40 (cited choice of this word seems clearly to by Hase, Steph. Thes. Vol. viii. p. 187). imply that the circumcision of Titus irapeltraKTe T7Js irixetos ripSv ; (B) irrep- was strongly pressed on St. Paul and titius ; compare Prol. Sirach, irpiJAo-yos St. Barnabas; see Baur, Paulus, p. 121. irapeltraKros, — a meaning still further It does not, however, by any means ap- enhanced by irapeia riXSrov ; compare pear that the Apostles were party to it ; 2 Pet. ii. 1, Jude 4. The compound in fact, if we assume the identity of this tyevSdSeXQoi designates those -vho did not journey with the third, the language acknowledge the great principle of faith of Acts xv. 5 seems distinctly to imply in Christ being the only means of sal- the contrary. vation (Neander, Plant. Vol. n. p. 114, 4. Sia Se robs ir apeitrdKT ov s Bohn), while their intrusive character if-euSaSeArpous] ' and that, or now it was, because of the false brethren insid iously brouyht in,' scil. ovk rivayKdtr&n ireptTp.riS>r)rai; explanatory statement (Se explicative ; see below) why Titus was not compelled to be circumcised, viz., is well marked by the compounds ira- petariXSrov and irapeioditTovs ; compare Polyb. Hist. I. 18, 3, 7rapeio-a7£cr»ai Kal irapetcrirlirTeiv els tois iroXlopKovpiras ircf- Aeis. oi rives] 'men ioho,' 'a set of men who,' — not simply equiva- because the ¦tyevSdSeXipoi were making it lent to ol (TJst.). 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 oo-tis are more fully discussed. The translation of Fritz., ' quippe qui' (comp. Herm. (Ed. R. 688), is here unduly strong ; even in classical a party matter. The construction is not perfectly perspicuous, but it does not appear necessary either to regard it as a positive anacoluthon (Rink, Lucubr. Crit. p. 171, Hilgenf. in loc), or an anacol. arising from two blended 'con structions (Winer, Gr. § 63, p. 502,)still Greek, whatis commonly termed a causal less a connection of ver. 4 with ver. 2 mav be more correctly considered an ex- (Bagge, al.). The difficulty, as the plicative sense; see Ellendt, Lex Soph. Greek expositors seem to have felt, is B. v. 3, Vol. n. p. 383. This, too, is the really in the S4 : this, however, is neither prevailing sense in the later writers ; see ireptTris (Theod. compare Theod. M.), Dindorf in Steph. Thesaur. s. v. nor equivalent to ouSe (compare Chrys., ^ Theoph., 05cum.), but simply explica- Kara"Koirrio-ai]'tospyout;^Lii^\;^ tive (< declarat et intendit,' Beng ), and [ut explorarent] Syr., ' explorare,' Vulg. ; faintly ratiocinative ; see Klotz, Devar. not ' ut dolose eripiant libertatem Chrls- Vol. 11. p. 362. Alford comp. Si, ver. tianam,' (Dindorf, Steph. Thes. s. v. Chap. II. 5, 6. GALATIANS. 47 iva rifids KaraBovXmaovatv s ots ovBe irpbs &pav e'i^afiev rfj vrro rayy, 'iva r\ dXff&eia rov evayyeXiov Biafielvrj irpbs vfids. airo 5. ots ouSe] These words are omitted by the first hand of D (Tisch. Cod. Cla rom. p. 568) E; Irenaeus (p. 200, ed. Bened.), and, according to Jerome, in some Latin manuscripts : TertuUian and Ambrose appear only to have rejected the rela tive; see adv. Marc. v. 3. It is obvious that such an omission would greatly simplify the structure, but this very fact in a critical point of view makes it sus picious. AVhen to this we add the immense preponderance of external authority, we can entertain but little doubt that oTs ouSe' is genuine ; see Bagge in loc, who has well discussed this reading. Vol. rv. p. 1232), kotoo-koit. being here used in the same (hostile) sense as ko- TaaKOirevoai, Josh. ii. 2 ; bpits iras Kal Ty Tar KaTOOK6irar icpooiryopla 4Sr]Xao~e rbr w6xep.ov 4xelvav, Chrys. e5 v X p i o- t £] Not ' per Christum,' a mean ing it may bear (Fritz, p. 184) but in the fuller and deeper sense ' in Christ ;' see notes on ver. 17. "va iip.as KaTa5ouAo$(rou(rti>] ' that they may succeed in enslaving us ;' the tense point ing to the result, the compound to the completeness of the act; comp. 2 Cor. xi. 20. Although this reading is con firmed by a decided preponderance of uncial authority [ABCDE], and the improbability of a correction very great, still the instances of iVa with a future are so very few (Gayler, Part. Neg. p. 169), and these, too, so reducible in number (Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 631), that we are not justified in saying more than this, that the future appears used to convey the idea of duration (AViner), or perhaps, rather, of issue, sequence (Schmalfeld, Synt. § 142 ; comp. Alf.), more distinctly than the more usual aorist subj. Though excessively cloubt- ful in classical writers (Herm. Partic. av, n. 13, p. 134), a few instances are found in later authors ; see AViner, Gr. § 41, b. 1, p. 259. 5. ttj v ir o t ay fi] 'by yielding them the subjection they claimed;' dative of manner; see AArincr, 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. r\ aXii&eLa tov ev ayy eXiov] ' the truth of the Gospel; the true teaching of the Gospel, as opposed to the false teaching of it as propagated by Juda izers, i. e., as in verse 16, the doctrine of justification by faith. The distinc tion drawn by AViner ( Gr. § 34. 3, p. 211) between such .expressions as the present, — where the governing noun is a distinct element pertaining to the gov erned, and such as 7rAouVou aSriX6Tr}S, 1 Tim. vi. 17, Kaiv6rris fonjs, Rom. vi. 4, — where it is more a rhetorically expressed attribute, though denied by Fritz. Rom. Vol. I. p. 368, seems per fectly just. A doctrinal import is con tained in r) aX^Aeta tov eua7y., which is entirely lost by explaining it as merely t!> aX-n^es evayyeXiov. S lafieivn irpbs vpias] ' might remain steadfast with you,' ' permaneat[-eret] ' Vulg., Clarom. ; the Sia obviously being inten sive, as in Heb. i. 11, 2 Pet. iii. 4 ; comp. Chrys., 'Ira . . . tovto Sia ruv epyar 0e- &aiditrap.ev. ir pbs b p.as] See on ch. i. 18. 6. airb Serar Sokovvt wv elvai t i k. t. A.] 'But from those who were high in reputation ;' — interrupted de claration of his independence of the oi SoKovvres. The meaning of this verse 48 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 6. Se rav SoKOvvrosv elvai ri (ovoiol irore ^aav oi/Bev fioi Biacpepef irpbaavwov Qebs dv^pojirov ov Xapifidvei) ifiol yap ol BoKovvres is perfectly clear, but the structure is somewhat difficult. According to the common explanation, airb — elvai ti is a sentence that would naturally have ter minated with ouSec eAa/Soy or irpoaeXa- fiopriv (not e'BiSax&l") AViner, § 47. p. 331), or more correctly still, ouSeV /xoi irpotraveTeSrn ; owing, however, to the parenthesis cWoioi — Xaptfiavet, the natu ral structure is interrupted, and the sen tence, commenced passively, is concluded actively with 4pol yap k. t. X. ; see AViner, Gr. § 63. 1. 1, p. 502. The real diffi culty of the sentence, however, lies in the following ydp. That it is (a) merely resumptive, Scholef. (Hints, p. 74), Peile, al., is indemonstrable ; as, of the pas sages usually cited in favor of this force, viz. Acts xvii, 28, 1 Cor. ix. 19, 2 Cor. v. 4, Rom. xv. 27, the first three are clearly instances of the argumentative force (see AViner, Gr. I 53. 10. 3, p 403, Meyer on Cor. II. cc), while in the fourth the words evS6Ki\aav yap are merely emphatically repeated. That it is (b) argumentative, either as giving a reason for ouSeV poi Siatpepet k. t. A. (Alf.), or for rcpitraicov Qebs k. t. X. (Mey.), is logically and contextually improbable, as parenthetical and non-parenthetical parts would thus be confused and inter mingled. If, however, yap be regarded as (c) explicative, the whole seems clear and logical. To avoid the words Sokovv- rav elvai ti being misunderstood, and supposed to assign an undue preemi nence to these Apostles, St. Paul hastily introduces the parenthetical comment, leaving the former sentence incomplete : then, feeling that its meaning was still so farAobvious as to need some justifica tion, he reverts to it, slightly qualifying it by the emphatic tpol, slightly justify ing it by the explicative ydp , 'to me (whatever they might have done for others) it is certainly a fact that,' etc. On this explicative force of 7ap, see Donalds. Gr. § 618, Klotz. Devar. Vol. n. 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. has here a lacuna), who connect dirb tSv SoKovvray immediately with ovSev poi Siatpepei in the sense of ovSep.la uot cppov- tis irepi rav Sow. (Theoph.), but thus assign ah untenable meaning to a.ir6, and dislocate the almost certain connection of Srroloi ttot' %trav with what follows. Further detaUs will be found in Meyer, De AVette, and Fritzsche (Opusc. p 201 sq.). The Vv. are for the most part perplexingly literal (comp. Vulg.); the Syr., however, by its change of yap into * « seems certainly in accordance with the general view adopted above. tuv Sokovvtwv elvai Ti]'whowere deemed to be somewhat,' . ; >-> A w^< N £ a *• [qui reputati erant] Syr., ' qui videban- tur,' Vulg ; used with reference to the judgment of others (contrast ch. vi. 2), and so, perfectly similar in meaning to to?s SoKoucriy, ver. 2 ; comp. Plato, Gorg. 572 A, vrcb rtoXXav ko\ Sok. elvai ti ', Euthyd. 303 c, toiv trepivav koi Sok. ti elvai. biroloi irore] ' qual- escumque ;' irore not being temporal, ' olim,' Beza (perhaps suggested by the 'aliquando' of Vulg.), but connected with eWoibi, which it serves to render more general and inclusive; compare Demosth. Or. de Pace, rv. 15 (p. 60), bwola ttot' eVtIk avri), cited by Bloomf. and Fritz, in. loc ?,aav may certainly refer to the period of the Apostles' lives when they were uncon- Chap. II. 6, 7. GALATIANS. 49 ovBev 7rpoaave'§evro, 7 dXXa rovvavriov IBovres on ireiriarevfiai ro evayyeXiov rrjs aKpofSvarias Karoos Uerpos ttj? irepirofirjs , verted, or when they were in attendance on our Lord ( a view strongly supported by Hilgenf.) ; it seems, however, far more natural to refer the tense to a past, relative to the time of writing the words. ovSev p.oi 8 1 a cp.] ' it maketh no mat ter to me.' For examples of this less usual, but fully defensible insertion of the dative, see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 384, and comp. AVetst. in loc. irpAa uirov Q eb s k. t. X.] * God ac- cepteth no man's person ' — irpotrairor put forward with emphasis, while bebs and avAp. form a suggestive contrast (Mey.) ; ' God looketh not to the outward as men do, and judgeth on no partial prin ciples, and no more did I his servant.' This and the equiv. expression pxeiretv els irp6aair. av&p. are in the N. T. al ways used with a bad reference; see Matth. xxii. 16, Mark xii. 14, Luke xx. 21. The corresponding expression in the O. T. c-:S S3: (translated some times Savud£eiv irpbiaicov ', comp. Jude 16) is used occasionally in a good sense; see Gen. xix. 21, and comp. Fritz, and Schott in loc icpocrave&evTo] ' communicated nothing? ' addressed no communication to ;' ' contulerunt,' Vulg., Clarom., and more distinctly ' dixerunt,' ,55th. -Pol. ' notum fecerunt,' Arm. ; as in ch. i. 16. In spite of the authority of the Greek expositors (pdSrovres ra i/ta ovSev irpooefrnKav, ovSev Si&p&acrar, Chrys ), and appy of Syr. in a w^j adjecerunt), Copt, [ououah.], Goth. (' an- a'insokun'), al., it still seems more safe to retain the same meaning in both pas sages. There is weight in the argument urged in ed. 1 (see, too, Wieseler. Chro- nol. p. 195 note), that irpoaave&. here may seem to specify addition, as in con trast with aveSrepLnv ver. 2, still the ten dency of later Greek to compound forms 7. ........ (compare notes on ch. iii. 13), and the perfect parallelism of this with the sim ilarly negative formula in ch. i. 16, are tacit arguments which seem slightly to preponderate. In the passage commonly referred to (Xen. Mem. n. 1. 8), irpocrava&eoSai merely implies * etiam sibi adjungere, scil. suscipere ' (see Kiihner in loc), and so proves nothing, except that Bretschn., Olsh,, Ruck., al., must be incorrect in trans lating * nihil mihi prasterea imposuerunt,' as this expresses a directly opposite idea. Under any circumstances, there is noth ing either in this word, or in the whole paragraph, to substantiate the extraor dinary position of Baur, that the Apos tles only yielded to St. Paul's views after a long struggle. 7. &AAa t ovv avT iov] 'but on the contrary;' scil. so far from giving in structions to me, they practically added the weight of their approval : t£> ivav- Tlor tov piepjtyacr&ai Tb 4iraiv4aai, Chrys. Surely this was not exactly leaving St. Paul 'to fight his own battle,' Jowett, Alf. 7re7rio-Teu/xai] The prin cipal instances in the New Testament of this well-known structure will be found, AViner, Gr. § 32. 5, p. 204. On the use of the perfect as indicating per manence, duration, 'concreditum mihi habeo,' see ib. § 40. 4, p. 242. TJsteri calls attention to the accurate use of the perf. here, compared with the aorist in Rom. iii 2, iiriOTebfrntrav ('lovSaloi) t& X6yta tov Qeov. t ri s aKpo- fi vtrr tas] 'of the uncircumcision,' scil. Trior a.Kpo$vtrTav ', ov to irpdypara AeT'toj' avrd aXXa to airb rovrar yvapii\op.eva i§vn, Chrys. ; comp. Rom. iii. 30. The derivation of a,Kpo0. (not axpov, $vu, but an Alexandrian corruption of aKpoirocr- S-ia) is discussed by Fritzsche, Rom. ii. 26, Vol. i. p. 136. KaSriis Tie- 50 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 8, 9. 8 (6 ydp ivepyrjaas Uerptp els diroaroXrjv rr)s irepirofirjs evrjpyrjaev Kafiol els rd e"bvrj), 9 Kal yvovres rrjv X"P0V T^v S0^6'0""" r10^ 'IaKO)f3os Kal Krjipds Kal ,Io>dvvr}s, ol BoKovvres arvXoi eivai, oe£- t pos n. t. A.] 'even as Peter was of the circumcision.' St. Peter here appears as the representative of the ' Judenapostel ' (Meyer; comp*. Grot.), on the principle that ' a potiori fit denominatio ;' for though originally chosen out as the first preacher to the Gentiles (Acts xv. 7), his subsequent labors appear to have been more among Jews ; compare 1 Pet. i. 1. On the use of KaAtis, see notes on ch. iii. 6, and on its most suitable translation, compare notes on 1 Thess. i. 5 ( Transl.). 8. o 7ap ivepy. k. t. X.] 'For He who wrought (effectually) for Peter,' j a «->V Syr., ' Petro,' Vulg., Clarom. ; not ' in Petro,' Grot. ; historical con firmation of what precedes, added paren thetically. There are four constructions of irepyea in St. Paul's Epp. ; (a) 4vep- 7e'w ti, 1 Cor. xii. 11 ; (b) 4vepyea ev tivi, Eph. ii. 2 ; (c) 4vepyetc ri ev nvi, ch. iii. 5 ; (d) 4vepyia tivi els ti, here ; comp. Prov. xxxi. 12. In this latter case the dative is not governed by 4vep- yem, as the verb is not a pure compound [there is no form 4pyea], but is the dat. commodi. 'O 4vepyf)tras, it may be observed, is not Christ (Chrys., Aug.), but God (Jerome) ; for, in the first place, St. Paul always speaks of his Apostleship as given by God ( Rom. xv. 15, 1 Cor. xv. 10, Eph. iii. 2) through Christ (Rom. i. 5 ; compare ib. xv. 18, and ch. i. 1 ) ; and secondly, this ivepyeiv is distinctly ascribed to God, 1 Cor. xii. 6, Phil. ii. 13. eis airoo-ro- X'fiv] '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 (Rost u. Palm, Lex. s. v.-eis, v. 2, Vol. I. p. 804), and in the N. T. (AViner, Gr. § 49. a, p. 354) but here contextually insufficient, as the sense seems almost obviously to require the more definite notion of pur pose, or contemplated object ; compare 2 Cor. ii. 12, eis rb evayyeXiov (to preach the Gospel), Col. i. 29. The second els is joined with to e&vn by what is called 'comparatio compendiaria,' Jelf, Gr. § 781. 9. koI yv6vTes] 'and having be come aware ;' continuation of the inter rupted narrative; iSoWes (Ver. 7) . . . . Kal yr6rres. The former participle ap pears to refer to the mental impression produced, wdien 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 ch. iv. 9. 'ldica/los] 'James,' the Brother of our Lord (ch. i. 9), Bishop of Jerusalem, — and as such placed first in order in the recital of acts that took place in that Church. Irenaeus (Haer. in. 12, ad fin.) in noticing this subject, uses the strong expression ' qui circa Jacobum Apostoli;' see Grabe in loc The reading rieVp. Kal 'la*, has but weak external support [DEFG ; Clarom., Goth., Theod. (4), Greg. Nyss., al.], and on internal grounds is highly sus picious. Oi SoKOVVTeS K. i. X.] ' who have the reputation of being,' oils irarres rcavraxov irepitpepovaiv, Chrys. ; SoKea not being pleonastic, but retaining its usual and proper meaning ; see exx. in AViner, Gr. § 65. 7, p. 540. The metaphor is illustrated by Suicer Thes. s. v. o-tvXos, Vol. n. 1044, AAretst. in loc, and (from Rabbinical writers) by Schoettg. Hot. Hebr. Vol. i. p. 728, 729. Chap. II. 9, 10. GALATIANS, 51 ids eBwicav ifiol Kal Bapvdfiq Koivoivlas' "va rjfiels els rd e^rvrj, J \ V. \ J \ '10' " r. 1/ / avroi oe eis rijv rrepirofirjv fiovov rtav irra>xaiv lva fivrjfiovevco- fiev, b Kal iairovBaaa avro rovro troifjaai. '(' The most apposite quotations are per haps, Clem. Rom. x. 5, ol SiKaioVaTot otuaoi, Euseb. Hist. vi. 41, arepbol «al poKaptoi otvXoi. Sepias. . . koi- vavlas] ' right hands of fellowship,' scil. in the Apostolic office of teaching and preaching ; comp. Schulz, Abendm. p. 190 sq. The remark of Fritzs. ( Opusc. p. 220, comp. Mey.), — ' articulum tcis 8e|ias ttjs Koivavias non desiderabit, qui 8e{. koiv. dextras so dale s, i. e. dex- tras ejusmodi, quibus societas confletur valere reputaverit,' is scarcely necessary. As 8e|ias in the phrase Se|ias SiSoVai (1 Mace. xi. 50, 62, xiii. 50) is usually anarthrous, the principle of correlation (Middleton, Gr. Art. in/ 33) causes it to be omitted with Koivavlas ; compare AViner, Gr. § 18. 2. 6, p. 142. The sep aration of the gen. from the subst. on which it depends occurs occasionally in St. Paul's Epistles, and is usually due either to explanatory specification (Phil. ii. 10), correction (1 Thess. ii. 13), em phasis (1 Tim. iii. 6), or, as appy. here, merely structural reasons, — the natural union of 8e|ias and eSaxav, and of eScu- Kav and its dative; comp. AAlner, Gr. 30. 3. 2, p. 172. 'Iva rip., els to sjnj] 'that we — to the Gentiles' not ebayyeXiCt&P-&a (AViner, Gr. p 518), as this verb is not found with eis in St. Paul's Epp. (Mey.), but either simply icopevSrapev, or perhaps better airio-To- Xoi yertip-eSra, 'apostulatu fungeremur,' Beza. It is scarcely necessary to add that this compact was intended to be rather general than specific, and that the terms e^rn and ireptTop.\i have more of a geographical than a merely personal reference. St. Paul knew himself to be the Apostle of the Gentiles (comp. Rom. xi. 13) ; but this did not prevent him (koto to elahis, Acts xvii. 2), while in Gentile lands, preaching first to the Jews; see Acts xvii 10, xviii. 5, xix. 8. The insertion of per after ^p.eis [with ACDE ; more than thirty mss. ; Copt , Syr.-Philox. ; Chrys. al.] seems certainly a grammatical insertion. 10. p.6rov Tar tttw^wv k.t.X.] ' only that toe should remember the poor ;' limiting clause dependent on 8e|ias eSto- Kai' and expressive of the condition at tached 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. Rom. xv. 26, 27, 1 Cor. xvi. 3. There is thus no ellipsis of aiToiVTes, 7rapaKaAouVTes, or indeed of any verb ; the p.6vor carries its own ex planation ; ' imperium ipsA voce p.6vov adsignificatum, ut id sit quod koi irap- ¦fiyyeiXar,' Fritzsche, Matth. Excurs. x. p. 839. % Kal 4 tr irovS atra k. t. X.] ' which very thing I was also forward to do,' literally ' which, namely, this very thing, I was also,' etc. ; avrb touto ()5tri ,_^ei Syr.) not being redun dantly joined with 8, ' per Hebraismum ' (Ruck., B. Crus., and even Conyb.), but simply forming an emphatic epexegesis of the preceding relative; see AViner, Gr. § 22. 4, p. 134. Occasionally in the N. T. (Mark i. 7, vii. 25, Rev. vii. 2 al., and (as might bo conceived) not uncommonly in the LXX., there seem to be clear instances of a Hebraistic re dundancy of the simple outo's, but appy. never of this stronger form auTbs olros ', see AAlner, Gr. I. v., and comp. Bornem. Schol. Luc p. LIV. e'o-irolJSao-a] ' -T was forward,' ' I evinced tmovSri ;' with an appended object-infin. ; comp. 52 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 11. 11 "Ore Bd rjX^iev Kr/cpas els ' 'Avnoxeiav, When Peter dissembled, I withstood and rebuked hiin, urging that to observe the law as a justifying principle is to make void the grace of God. Eph. iv. 3, 1 Thess. ii. 17. The aor. is here correctly used, not for the perfect (Conyb.), nor even for the pluperf, nor yet exactly as expressing the habit ( com pare Alf.), — this usage being somewhat doubtful in the N. T. (see AViner, Gr. § 40. 5. 1, p. 248, and notes on Eph. i. 3), — but simply an historical fact that belongs to the past, without its being affirmed or denied that it may not con tinue to the present ; See Fritz, de Aor. Vi, p. 17, and on 1 Thess. ii. 16. The passages usually adduced (Rom. xv. 27, 1 Cor. xvi. 1 sq., 2 Cor. viii. 1 sq , compare Acts xi. 17 sq, xxiv. 17) illustrate the practice, but not the tense, being subsequent to the probable date of this Epistle. All historical deductions from this passage, except, perhaps, that Barnabas had recently left St. Paul (hence the sing. ; see AViner, in loc), seem very precarious. 11. ore Se JiXSrev K v tp u. s] 'But when Cephas came,' etc. Still further proof of the Apostle's independence by an historical notice of his opposition to, and even reproval of St. Peter's incon sistent conduct at Antioch : see some good remarks on this subject in Thiersch. History of Church, Vol. I. p. 123 sq. (Transl.). The reading Tlerpos ( Rec. ) is fairly supported [DEFGJK ; Demid., Goth.; mss. ; Chrys., al.], but still even in external authority inferior to Krjtpas, [Lachm., Tisch., with ABCH ; a few mss. ; Syr., Copt , Sahid. ; Clem., al.],not to mention the high probability of neVpos having been an explanatory change. Kara irp6 tr oiir ov] 'to the face,' Auth. 'in faciem,' Vulg., _kjio»sLo [in fa- ciem ejus] Syr., — not ' coram omnibus, aperto Marte' (Elsn., Conyb., al.), this being specified in ipirpotrhev irdvrav, ver. 14 : comp. Acts xxv. 16, and perhaps ib. iii. 1 3, koto TpSoairov Uixdrov, ' to the face of Pilate.' The preposition has here its secondary local meaning, 'e regione ;' the primary idea of horizontal direction (Donalds, (ir. § 479) passing naturally into that of local opposition. This may be very clearly traced in the descriptions of the positions of troops, etc., by the later military writers ; e. g. Polyb. Hist. I. 34. 5, oi Karri robs 4XetpavTas rax&iv- Tes ', ib. ib. 9, oi Kara to Xatbv ; with irp6crairov, ib. in. 65, 6, xi. 14. 6 : see Bernhardy, Synt. v. 20, b, p. 240, Do- bree, Adcers. Vol. i. p. 114. The gloss Kara trxhp-a (in appearance, — not in reality) adopted by Chrys., Jerome, and several early writers, is wholly un tenable, and due only to an innocent though mistaken effort to salve the authority of St. Peter, appy. first sug gested by Origen [Strom. Book x.] : see Jerome, Epist. 86 — 97, esp. 90, the appy. unanswerable objections of Augus tine (Epist. 8 — 19), the sensible remarks of Bede in loc, and for much curious information on the whole subject, Dey- ling, Obs. Sacr. Vol. n. p. 520 sq. (No. 45). Sti k aT e y v a tr p. e v o s ?l v] ' because he had been condemned ; ' not ' reprehensibilis,' Vulg., nor even ' reprehensionem incurrerat,' AViner, but simply 'reprehensus erat,' Clarom., Goth., Syr.-Phil. (Syr. paraphrases), al. As this clause has been much encum bered with glosses, it will be best to notice separately both the meaning of the verb and the force of the participle. (1) KaTa7<7>'ojo-Keie (generally with Tivis ti, more rarely, Tiua twos) has two prin cipal meanings ; (a.) ' to note accurately ;' usually in a bad sense, e. g„ ' detect,' Prov. xxviii. 11 (Aquil. 4SiXrtdirei) 'think ill of Xen. Mem. x. 3, 10: (0) 'to note judicially,' — either in the lighter sense of accuse (probably 1 John iii. 20 ; see Chap. II. 11, 12. GALATIANS. 53 Kara irpoaanrov avrtp avrearijv, on Kareyvosafievos ijv. irpo rov ydp iX&elv nvas dirb 'Iaiccbfiov fierd rcov £irva)v awrja'^iev ore Be rjXBov, vireareXXev Kai dtpoopi^ev eavrov, o/3ovfievosj rovs eK Liicke tn toe.), or the graver of condemn (the more usual meaning). (2) The perf. part. pass, cannot be used as a pure verbal adjective. The examples adduced by Eisner in loc. will all bear a different explanation; and even those in which the use of the participle seems to ap proach that of the Hebrew part. (Gesen. Gr. § 131. 1), such as Rev. xxi. 8 (perf. part.), Jude 12 (aor.), or Heb xii. 18 (pres), can all be explained grammat ically; see Winer, Gr. § 45. 1, p. 307. The only tenable translations, then, are (o) * he had been accused,' or (b) ' he had been condemned;' and of these (4) seems obviously most in accordance 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- Judaical party, feels himself author ized to rebuke him, and that too (ver. 14), publicly. 12. nvas airb 'laKti /Sou may be connected together, and grammati cally translated, ' some of the followers of James;' see Jelf, Gr. 620. 3, Bern hardy, Synt. v. 12, p. 222. As, how ever, in the New Testament, this mode of periphrasis (oi curb n. -•. A.) appears mainly confined to places (Mark xiii. 22, Acts vi. 9, xxvii. 24, al. I, or abstract substantives (Acts xv. 5), it will seem most exact to connect dirb 'lax. with iXSielr. So distinctly iEth.-Pol., omit ting, however, the Tice's : 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 airb does occur (comp. Matth. xxvi. 47 with Mark xv. 43, and see Fritz. Matth. Vol. i. p. 779), yet the common meaning of the prep, in such constructions is local rather than ethical, — separation rather than mission from : compare Knapp, Script. Var. Argum. p. 510. The men in question probahly represented them selves as rigid followers of St. James, and are thus briefly noticed as having come airb 'lcuctii3ov, rather than awb 'lepoooXvpar. trwr)cr&tev] ' was eating with them,' i. e. again followed that course which in the case of Cor nelius similarly called forth the censure of oi 4k irepiTopiris (Acts xiii. 3), but was then nobly vindicated. Of the two following verbs vrriar. and acpcbp. (both governing eauTnV), 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 ^A- &ev (Lachm.) has insufficient external authority [BDiFG ; 2 mss. ; Clarom.], and is a not improbable confirmation to the sing, which follows. cpo- fiovuevos' ' fearing,' ' because he feared,' |081 \.^»« ^-A^fi [v. 0s Kal ouk 'IouS., with DEJK ; nearly all mss. ; majority of Vv. ; Chrys., Theod., Dam., Theophyl., CEcum., (Rec, Scholz, Alf.) External authority thus appears decidedly in favor of the text, and is but little mollified by internal arguments, for a correction of the perspicuity (4Srv. j//s) is quite as probable as the assumed one 'for elegance.' (Alf.) rcas] It is difficult to imagine pressed remarks on this subject will be found in South, Serm. xxviii. Vol. ii. p. 476 (Tegg). 13. trvvvireKp. a u t cp] 'joined with him in dissimulation ;' result of the bad example, — the secession of the rest of the Jewish Christians at Antioch from social communion with the Gentile con verts. The meaning of avrvrreKp. 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 rejoiced at (Acts xv. 31) the practically contrary decision of the Coun cil. A good ' praelectio ' on this text will be found in Sanderson, Works, Vol. iv. p. 44 (ed. Jacobs). Sxrie] ' so that,' — as a simple matter of fact. In this form of the consecutive sentence the distinction between Sore 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, when it is stated by the writer (the subjective form) as a simple and unconditioned fact ; see Klotz, De var. Vol. n. p. 772, and esp. Schmal feld, Synt. § 155 sq., and Ellendt, Lex. Soph. s. v. Vol. n. p. 1101 sq„ where the uses of this particle are well dis cussed. Here, for example, St. Paul notices the lapse of Barnabas as a fact, without implying that it was a neces sary consequence of the behavior of the others. This distinction, however, is appy. not always observed in the N. T., nor indeed always in classical writers ; comp. Winer, Gr. $ 41. 5. 1, p. 269. avvarcfix^ri avrav ry vir o k pi- ore i] ' was earned away with them by their dissimulation,' scil. into dissimu lation : ' cum dativo persona* trvvairdy. simul cum aliquo abduci,' etc., declarat ; cum dativo rei, simul per rem abduci, etc., significat,' Fritz. Rom. xii. 16, Vol. m. p. 88 sq. 'S.bv thus refers to the companions in the to a7roryeo-&ai ; biro- Kpioei to the instrument by which, — not 'rei ad quam' (Bretsch., comp. Alf.), a questionable construction even in poetry (Bernhardy, Synt., in. 12, p. 95),— and, by obvious inference, the state into which they were carried away ; see 2 Pet. iii. 17. Fritzsche cites Zosim. Hist. v. 6, koi avT-r) Se ri ^Trdprv avvairr)- yero tt} koivt} ttjs 'EAAaBos aXa'tret k. t. X. ; add Clem. Alex. Strom, i. p. 311, -rf fiSorfj trvrairay6p.eros. Tirditpiais is well paraphrased by AVieseler ( Chro- nol. p. 197), as 'a practical denial of their better [spiritual] insight,' — and (we add) of their better feelings and knowledge ; see above, on trvvvireKp. 14. bp&oiroSovtrtv] 'walk up- riyhtlg ;' an SVa| Ae70>. in the N. T., and very rare elsewhere; Dindorf and Chap, II. 14. GALATIANS. 55 ore elBov on ovk dp^oiroBovaiv irpbs rrjv dXrj^eiav rov evayyeXiov, elirov toj KrjKpa efiirpoa^ev iravrcov El aii 'IovBalos virdp^cov e^- vikSjs Kal ovk 'IovBaiKoos $s ; his former con duct, however (piera Twy iSrvav trvrt)cr- &iev, ver. 12), is justly assumed by St. Paul as his regular and proper course of living (comp. Neand. Planting, Vol. n. p 83, Bohn), and specified as such to give a greater force to the reproof ; see TJsteri in loc. ar ay Kd£e is] ' constrainest thou ;' not ' invitas exem- plo,' Grot., nor even ' wouldest thou con strain,' Conyb., but simply and plainly ' cogis,' Vulg., . V] 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 oi airb 'laK. in actual outward coercion (Wieseler, Chronol. p. 198), is neither required by the word (see remarks in Sturz, Lex. Xenoph. Vol. I. p. 186) nor in any way to be inferred from the con text. 'lov5ai£e ir] 'to Judaize,' ' Judaizare,' Vulg., Clarom., ' iudaivis- kon,' Goth. ; not merely synonymous with 'IouSai'KiSs £fj» (Schott, comp. Syr.), but probably a little more definite and inclusive, and carrying with it the idea of a more studied imitation and obe dience ; compare Esth. viii. 17. 56 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 15, 16. / 15 rjfieis (piaei 'IovBaioi Kal ovk ii; e'bvwv dfiaprcoXoi- i 1S elBores Se 16. irio-Teios Xpio-roO] Tisch. omits Xpiarov, with FG ; Boern. ; Tert. Theod. (1), — but here again on insufficient external authority, and not without the omis sion seeming to be intentional, to avoid the thrice- repeated Xp. in one verse. In favor of the text are ABCDE; mss.; Clarom., Vulg., al. ; Chrys. (2), (Rec, Griesb., Scholz, Lachm., De II7.). 15. rjpiels k.t.X.] 'We,' scil. 'you and I, and others like us ;' Koirairoiei rb Xey6peror, Chrys. St. Paul here begins, as Meyer observes, with a concessive statement : ' AVe, I admit, have this ad vantage, that by birth we are Jews, not Gentiles, and consequently (koI consecu tive, comp. notes on 1 Thess. iv., 1 and Klotz, Devar. Vol. i. p. 107) as such, sinners.' In the very admission, how ever, there seems a gentle irony; 'born Jews — yes, and nothing more — sinners of the Jews at best ;' comp. Stier, Ephes. Vol. I. p. 257. With regard to the construction, it seems best with Herm. to supply itrpkv to this verse, which thus constitutes a concessive protasis, ver. 16 (eiSoVes Se k. t. A.) supplying the apo- dosis. It is now scarcely necessary to add, that in sentences of this nature there is no ellipsis of pev : ' recte autem ibi non ponitur (pev) ubi aut non sequi tur membrum oppositum, aut scriptores oppositionem addere nondum eonstitue- rant, aut loquentes alterius membri op positionem qu&cunque de causa non indixerunt,' Fritz. Rom. x. 19, Vol. ir. p. 423 ; compare Jelf, Gr. § 770, and Buttmann, Mid. (Excurs. xn.) 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 ( Jow ett), — but with but little plausibility. The speech seems clearly continued to the end of the chapter (Chrys., Theod., Jerome), and to be the substance of what was said : it is not, however, unnatural also to suppose that it may here be ex pressed in a slightly altered form, and in a shape calculated to be more intel ligible, and more immediately applicable to the Apostle's present readers. For a paraphrase, see notes to Transl., and also TJsteri, Lehrb. ii. 1. 2, p. 161. tpbtrei] 'by nature ;' not merely by habit and custom as the proselytes ; iK yevovs Kal ov irpoo-r)XvToi, Theod. Mops. This passage is important as serving to fix the meaning of tpvais in loci doymat- ici, such as Eph. ii. 3 : see esp. Stier, Ephes. Vol. 1. p. 257. ap-apTa- Xol] The point of view from which a Jew must naturally consider them ( Eph. ii. 12) ; perhaps with slight irony (Stier, Red. Jes. Vol. vi. p. 307). That they were so regarded needs no other proof than such expressions as TeAawai «al ap-apraXol ; comp. Tobit xiii. 6. 16. eiSoVes 8 e'] ' but as we know,' , * *S, ¦» ^_^se [quia novimus] Syr. ; causal participle (Jelf, Gr. § 697, Schmalfeld, Synt. § 207) attached to eVio-Teuo-a,u.ei', and introducing the apo- dosis to the concessive sentence. Recon sideration seems, still to show that of the many explanations of this difficult passage, this is appy. the simplest. Ac cording to the common interpret., eiS. Se .... Xpiarov forms an interposed sen tence between ver. 15 and the latter part of ver. 16; but here 8e is a serious ob stacle, as its proper force can only be brought out by supplying although (De AV.) to ver. 15, unless, indeed, with Alf. we venture on the somewhat doubtful translation 'nevertheless,' or fall back [with AD3K; some Vv. ; Greek Ff. (Rec)] on the still more doubtful omis- Chap. II. 16. GALATIANS. 57 oti oi) BiKaiovrai dv'irpojiros e'£ epyoov vofiov idv firj Bid iria- reojs Irjaov Xpiarov, Kal r}jj,eis els Xpiarbv ^Ir/aovv iiriarev- sion. / SiKaiouTai] ' is justified,' 'Deoprobatus redditur;' to SiKaiouo-&ai being in antithesis to to eupio-Keo-&ai ap.apTux6r, ver. 17; see Schott in loc, where the different meanings of SiKaiova- &ai are explained with great perspicuity. The broad distinction to be observed is between (a) the absolute use of the verb, whether with regard to God (Luke vii. 29), Christ (I Tim. iii. 16), or men (Rom. iv. 2, James ii. 21) ; and (J) the relative use ( ' ratione habita vel contro- versiae, cui obnoxius fuerit, vel peccato- rum, quae vere commiserit'). In this latter division we must again distinguish between the purely judicial meaning (Matth. xii. 37) and the far wider dog matical meaning, which involves 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 consult Homily on Salv. m. 1, Jackson, Creed, Book iv. 6, 7, Waterland on Justif. Vol. vi. p. 1 sq. and esp. the admirable explanations and distinctions of Hooker, Serm. n. Vol. m. p. 609 sq. (ed. Keble). ej epyar vApov] 'by the works of the law;' as the cause of the SiKaiovadat ; comp. Bull, Harm. Apost. Ch. i. § 8, with the notes of Grabe, p. 16 (ed. Burt.). AArith regard to the exact force of iK, it may be observed that in its primary ethical sense it denotes (a) ori gin ( more immediate, airb more remote) ; from which it passes through the inter mediate ideas of (fi) result from, and (7) consequence of, to that of (S) nearly direct causality (Rost u. Palm, Lex. ix, iv. 1), thus closely approximating to birb with a gen. (a common use in Herod.) and 81a with a gen. (Fritz. Rom. v. 16, Vol. 1. 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 ix is here in its simple causal sense ; the whole object of the speech being to show that the works of the law have no 'causalis ivepyeia' in man's justification. On the contrary, in the antithetical pas sage in St. James (ch. ii. 24) just as SiKaiouo-ftai has a slightly different (more inclusive) meaning (see Hooker, Serm. 11. 20), so also has the prep., — which proportionately recedes from ideas of more direct, to those of more remote causality (causa sine qu!i non) ; comp. Hamm., Pract. Caiech. p. 78 (A. C. L.). v A p.ov] Gen. objecti : ' deeds by which the requisitions of the law are fulfilled,' ' eorum praestationem qua? lex praecipit ' (Beza), — the C— lipn c'sisn of the Rabbinical writers, and the directly antithetical expression to apapTripara vopov. Wisdom ii. 12 (Mey.) ; see exx. in Winer, Gr. § 30. 1, p. 167. The vApos 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. m. 20, Vol. 1. p 179. iar pit)] Two constructions here seem to be blended, ov Sik. &v&p. 4£ epywv vApov, and ov Sik. av'Sp. iar p.r) Sia irltrreas 'I. X. The two particles, though apparently equivalent in meaning to aXXd, never lose their proper exceptive force : see Fritz. Rom. xiv. 14, Vol. in. p. 195, and notes on ch. i. 7. Sia irltr reas 'lijcrov Xp iff rov] 'by faith in or on Jesus Christ ;' ' per fidem in Jesu 58 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 16. aafiev, iva BiKaia&iZfiev iK miareas Xpiarov koi ovk i% epycov vbfiov, Bion i% epywv vbfiov ov BiKaiu&rjaerai irdaa aap%. Christo collocatam,' Rom. iii. 22. Stier (Ephes. Vol. I. p. 447) explains tti'o-t. 'Itjo-. Xp. both here and (esp.) eh. iii. 22, in a deeper sense, ' faith which belongs to, has its foundation in Christ ' (comp. Mark xi. 22, Ephes. iii. 12), the gen. 'Intr. Xp. being the gen. subjecti. This view may deserve consideration in other places, but here certainly the context and preceding antithesis seem decidedly in favor of the more simple gen. objecti. It may be observed that Sia here closely approximates in meaning to 4k below, the same idea of causality being (as Meyer suggests) expressed under two general forms, origin and means. AVe must be careful, then, not to press un duly the distinction between the prepp. ; the antithesis is here not so much be tween the modes of operation, as between the very nature and essence of the prin ciples themselves. As to the doctrinal import of Sia irltrTeas, AVaterland (on Justif. p. 22) well remarks, 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 justifi cation,' Serm. n. 31: consult also Forbes, Consid. Mod. Book i. 3. 10—13. The order Xpiorou 'Iijo-ou is adopted by Lachm., but on external authority [AB ; Aug.] that cannot be deemed sufficient. Kal ijp els] 'we also ;' ' nos etiam quanquam natalibus Judaei, legi Mosis obnoxii,' Schott. e'Trio-Teuo-a- pev eis Xp. 'In a.] ' put our faith in Jesus Christ ;' not ' have become be lievers,' Peile, but simply aoristic, the tense pointing to the particular time when this act of faith was first man ifested : see Windischm. in loc. In the formula mtrrebeir eis with ace, — less usual in St. Paul's Epp. (Rom. x. 14, i. 29), but very common in St. John, — the preposition retains its proper force, and marks not the mere direc tion of the belief (or object toward which), but the more strictly theological ideas of union and incorporation wifh ; compare notes on ch. iii. 27, AViner, Gr. \ 31. 5, p. 191, and for the various construc tions of icio-reva in the New Testament, notes on 1 Tim. i. 17, and Reuss, Theol. Chret. iv. 14, Vol. n. p. 129. The dis tinction drawn by Alf. between Xp. 'Intr. in this clause and 'Irjo-. Xp. above seems very precarious, esp. in a passage where there is so much diff. of reading. 8 1 A t i] ' because that,' ' propter quod,' Vulg.. 5,\_^LLo Syr.; scarcely 'for' (it is an axiom that), Alf, — for though SioVi [properly quam ob rem, and then quoniam] is often used by later writers in a sense little, if at all, differing from oti (see Fritz. Rom. i. 19, Vol. i. 57), it does not also appear to be interchangeable with 7ap, 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 supported by CD'EJK; very many mss., Vv., and Ff. , — and is perhaps to be preferred, as Sti [Lachm. with ABDIFG ; 5 mss.] seems more probably a correction of the longer SidVt, than the reverse. ov S i k aia&'ho- er at n. r. A. 'shall not he justified,' 'non justifieabitur om- nis caro,' Vulg. ; Rom. iii. 20, curnp. Psalm cxliii. 2, ov SiKaia^crerai 4vtijiri6v trov iras (av : a somewhat expressive He braism (see Ewald, Gr. p. 657), accord ing to which ov is to be closely associated with the verb, and the predication re garded as comprehensively and em phatically negative; non-justification is Chap. II. 17. GALATIANS. 59 17 el Be ^r/rovvres BiKaio&fjvai iv Xpiara) evpe^rrjfiev Kal ai/rol predicated of all flesh; see AViner, Gr. § 26. 1, p. 155, A'orst, de Hebraismis, p. 519, Fritz. Rom. iii. 20, Vol. i. p. 179, and comp. Thol. Beitrdge, No. 15, p. 79. The future is here ethical, i. e. it indicates not so much mere futurity as moral possibility, — and with ou, some thing that neither can nor will ever happen : see esp. Thiersch, de Pent. in. 11, p. 148 sq., where this and similar uses of the future are well illustrated ; comp. Bernhardy, Synt. x. 5, p. 377, AViner, Gr. $ 40. 6, p. 251. On the doctrinal distinctions in St. Paul's Epp. between the pres., perf, and fut. of 8iKaiouo-&ai with irforis, see TJsteri, Lehrb. ii. 1. 1, p. 90 ; compare Peile, Append Vol. n. note d. The order ov Sik. e'£ epyav vop. (Rec.) is only found inJK; mss.; Goth., al. ; Theod. (1), al, and is rejected by all recent critics. 17. ei 5 e'] ' But if, in accordance with these premises of thine, assuming the truth of these thy retrogressive principles ; 0"uAAo7ifeTai to eipnpeva, Theod. (nr ovvt es] ' qumren- tes — inventi sumus ;' nervosum antithe- ton, Beng. 4 v X p i a t oj] 'in Christ; not 'through Christ,' (Peile), but 'in Christ,' — in mystical union with him ; see AViner, Gr. § 48. a, p. 346, note. It is right to notice that this ; distinction between ev nvk and 8m Tiros is strongly opposed by Fritz. ( Opusc. p. 184, note), and considered merely gram matically, his objections deserve consid eration ; but here, as only too often (comp. Rom. Vol. n. p. 82 sq.), he puts out of sight the theological meaning which appears regularly attached to 4v Xpio-rtp. In the present passage the meaning is practically the same, which ever translation 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. e u p e' S- n p. e v] ' were found to be, after all our seeking ;' not either a Hebraism, or a periphrasis of the verb substantive (Kypke, 06s. A'ol. I. p. 2). The verb evpicrK. has always in the N. T. its proper force, and indicates not merely the existence of a thing, but the man ifestation or acknowledgment of that existence ; ' if we are found (deprehendi- rnur), 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. AViner, in loc, and Gr. § 65. 8, p. 542. Kai lirtl] 'ourselves also,' as much as those whom we proudly regard only as Gentiles and sinners. a. p a | ' ergone ' I ' are we to say, as we must on such premises ? ' ironical and interrogative: — not &pu (Chrys., TJst. al. ) ; for though in two out of the three passages in which Spa occurs ( Luke xviii. 8, Acts viii. 38) it anticipates a negative, and not as here, an affirmative answer, it must still be retained in the present case, as (pJi yevoyro in St. Paul's Epp. is never i i found except after a question. The par- tide has here probably an ironical force, ' are we to say pray,' i. e. in effect, ' we are to say, I suppose,' see Jelf, Gr. 873. 2. It is thus not for ap' ov — at all times a very questionable position, as in most if not all of such cases, it will be found that there is a faint irony or politely as sumed hesitation, which seems to have suggested the use of the dubitative Spa, even though it is obvious that an affirm ative answer is fully expected. The same may be said of ' ne' for ' nonne :' see esp. Kiihner, Xen. Mem. ii. 6, and ib. Tuscul. Disput. n. 11, 26 ; compare Stalb. Plato, Rep. vm. 566 a. The original identity of apa and Spa ( Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. 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. 60 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 17, 18. dfiaproiXol, dpa Xpiarbs dfiaprias BidKOVos ', firj yevoiro. yap a KareXvaa ravra irdXiv oUoBofia), irapafSdrrjv ifiavrbv apapr I as StdKovos\ 'a minister of sin;' scil., in effect, a promoter, a fur- therer of it (comp. 2 Cor. xi. 15), one engaged in its service ; apapria being al most personified, and, as its position sug gests, emphatically echoing the preceding apapraXol, — 'of sin (not of righteous ness), — 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 ? ' Ei Se oti rbv vApor KaraXlirAvTes rtp Xpttrrip irpocreXriXvbapev .... irapdQatris [or rather, c^uapTia] tovto vevApitjTtu, eis avrbv ri atria x^P^O'el rbv SecricArnv Xpttr- rAv, Theod. ; comp. Chrys. in loc The argument is in fact a reductio ad absur- dum : if seeking for justification in Christ is only to lead us to be accounted sinners, — not merely as being without law and in the light 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 posi tively, a minister of sin ; see De AVette in loc pi] y 4 v o it o] ' be it not so,' 'far be it,' ' absit,' Vulg., w.. o [propitius fuit; compare Matth. xvi. 22 ] Syr., i. e. in effect ( esp. in a context like the present), ' God forbid,' Auth. This expressive formula, though not uncom mon in later writers (see exx. in Raphel, Annot. Vol. n. p. 249, compare Sturz. Dial. Maced. p. 204), only occurs in the N. T. in St. Paul's Epp. ; viz. Rom. iii. 4, 6, 31, vi. 2, 15, vii. 7, 13, Lx. 14, xi. 1, 11, 1 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 revul sion of thought (Taxe'ais b.ironriSq, Dam.) either more or less apparent, and will usually suggest the best mode of trans lation. 18. ei yap] 'For if;' direct con firmation of the immediately preceding p.r) yevoiro (TJsteri, Lehrb. n. 1. 2, p. 162, note), and indirect and allusive ex pansion of the evpe&npev apapraXoi : ' 1 say pi/ yevoiro 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 personally, which 'dementias causA' is expressed in this rather than in the second person (Alf., Mey. ) ; it must not be forgotten, how ever, that the fervor as well as the intro spective character of St. Paul's writings leads him frequently to adopt this per- acrxripaTicrp.bs els eavrAv, see esp. Rom. vii. 7 sq. ; so also 1 Cor. iii. 5 sq. iv. 3 sq. vi. 12, x. 29, 30, xiii. 11, 12, etc.: comp. Knapp, Scripta Var. Argum. No. 12, p. 431, 437. ravra] 'these — and nothing better in their place," Meyer. The emphasis rests on toCto, not on 4pavrAv (Olsh.), the position of which [jrapajS. eVxauToV, not e'/iauT. irapafi.] shows it clearly to be unemphatic. irapafSdriiv] 'a transgressor,' scil. tou ' !' " *¦ « v v ° vApov; pjjas ^ia. t-^^ [trans gressor mandati] Syr. But in what particular manner? Surely not, 'in having formerly neglected what I now reassert' (De AV., Alf.), — a somewhat weak and anticlimactic reference to evp4S)ripev apiapTaXol, — but, as the following 7ap, and the unfolding argu- Chap. II. 18, 19. GALATIANS. 61 avviardveo. 19 iyco ydp Bid vbfiov vofup diri&avov 'iva Gem tyiao). ment seem dearly to require, ' in recon structing what I ought to perceive is only temporary and preparative. Re construction of the same materials is, in respect of the law, not only a tacit avowal of an apaprla (ebpeb. apapT.) in having pulled it down, but is a real and definite wapdBatris of all its deeper principles. So, very distinctly, Chrys., 4Ke1vot 5e?£ai 4f3ovXovro, Sri b pn rnpav rbv vApov irapajSaTTjs* outos eis TouyavTioi' irepieVpeu/e rbv xAyov, SelKVvs Sri b rrfpar rbr rAp.vv, irapajSctTTjs, ou T7JS irio"Tews aAAa Kai avrov rov vApov. The counter- argument that the I of ver. 18 has ' given up ' faith in Christ, and so could never consider the law as prepara tive (Alt'.), is of no real force; for in the first place the 4y&> 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 a real though unconscious irapa$drr)v. ipavrbv ctvvictt dv a] 'set myself forward,' ' demonstrate myself to be : ' Hesych. trvvtardveiv ircaivelv, tpav e- povv, fiefiaiovv, iraparfoevai. This mean ing, 'sinceris Atticis ignotum,' Fritz, Rom. iii. 5, Vol. i. p. 159), deduces from the primary notion componendi; ' ut esset avviaTnp.1 ti, compositis collec- tisque qua? rem contineant argumentis aliquid doceo -.' see exx. in AVetst. Rom. iii. 5, Schweigh. Lex. Polyb. s. v. The form ovvitrrnpi (Rec), only found in D3(E?)JK; mss. and Ff., seems a mere grammatical gloss. 19. e 7 i 7 a p] ' For I truly :' ex planatory confirmation of the preceding assertion ; the explicative yap showing how this rehabilitation of the law actually amounts to a transgression of its true principles, while the emphatic 4yi> adds the force and vitality of personal experi ence. In the retrospective reference of irapa$drris adopted by De W. and Alf. (see above), the yap loses all its force; it must either be referred, most awkwardly, to pi) yevoiro (D. AV.), or, still worse, be regarded as merely transitional. Sict rApov vApa lire e&avov]' through the law died to the laic' Of the many explanations of these obscure words the following ( derived mainly from Chrys. ) appears by far the most tenable and satisfactorj-. The result may be summed up in the following positions : — ( 1 ) Nd"- pos in each case has the same meaning. (2) That meaning, as the context re quires, must be the Mosaic law (ver. 16), no grammatical arguments founded on the absence of the article (Middleton in loc ) having any real validity ; comp. exx. in AViner, Gr. § 19, p. 112. (3) The law is regarded under the same aspect as in Rom vii. 6 — 13, a passage in strictest analogy with the present. (4) Aia vAp. o v must not be confounded with Sia rop ov or Kara vApov ', it was throuyh the instrumentality of the law (Sict i. 4vroXrjs, Rom. vii. 8) that the sinful principle worked within and brought death upon all. (5) 'ATre'JWoi' is not merely 'legi valedixi' (comp. Karnpyfi- Snv airb tov vApov), but expresses gener ally what is afterwards more specifically expressed in ver. 20 by trwetnabpapai. ( 6 ) NoVoi is not merely the dative ' of reference to,' but a species of dative ' commodi ;' the expressions £> nvi and airubav tivi having » wide application ; see Fritz. Rom. xiv. 7, Vol. in. p. 176 ; — ' I died not only as concerns the law, but as the law required.' The whole clause then may thus be para phrased : ' /, throuyh the law, owing to sin, was brought under its curse ; but having undergone this, with, and in the person of Christ (ch. iii. 13, compare 2 Cor. v. 14), I died to the law in the full est and deepest sense, — being both free from its claims, and having satisfied its 62 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 19, 20. 20 Xpiard) awearavpurfiai- t,m Be ovKen eyd>, %fl Se iv ifioi Xpia rbs- o Be vvv £co ev aapKi, iv iriarei £& rfj rov vlov rov Qeov, curse.' The difference between this and the common interpretations lies princi pally in the fuller meaning assigned to direbavov, and its reference to trvvetrr. A careful investigation will be found in TJsteri, Lehrb. n. 1. 2, p. 164 sq. (^ri era] 'may live;' not a future (Alf), — an anomalous usage (see notes on ver. 4) that it is surely unnecessary to ob trude on the present passage — but the regular aor. subj. (1 Thess. v. 10), the tense of the dependent clause being in idiomatic accordance with that of the leading member ; compare Schmalfeld, Synt. § 144. 1, p. 296. 20. Xptcr tqj tr v v e err. ' I have been and am crucified with Christ;' more exact specification of the preceding a7re- bavov. This crvvearavp. it need scarcely be said, did not consist merely in the crucifixion of the lusts (ch. v. 24, Grot.), but in that union with Christ according to which the believer shares the death of his crucified Lord ; iireiSn ivrip (Sair- Tiffpari tov re bavdrov Kal rrjs dvacr- raffeas rviror iuXrjpovv, trvcrravpovcrbai iXeyovTo rip Xpttrra, Theod. Mops, in loc. £a Se ovk4ti iyti] 'I live however no lonyer myself,' i. e. my old self; see Rom. vi. 6, and compare Neand. Plant., Vol. x. p. 422 (Bohn). The familiar but erroneous punctuation of this clause (£« Se', ovk4ti 4ytb, (fi Se it. t. A.) has been rightly rejected by all recent editors except Scholz. The only passing difficulty is in the use of Se' : it does not simply continue (Ruck., Peile), or expand (TJst.) the meaning of Xp. crvvetrr. but reverts with its proper ad versative force to 'Ira Qeu (riaa, trwear., being not so much a link in the chain of thought, as a rapid and almost paren thetical epexegesis of direbavov. £ij Se] The Se does not introduce any opposition to the preceding negative clause (it would then be aXXd), but simply marks the emphatic repetition of the same verb (Hartung, Partik. Se, 2. 17, Vol. I. p. 168), just retaining, however, that sab-adversative force which is so common when a clause is added, expressing a new, though not a dissimilar thought ; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 361. On the doctrinal import of £rj 4v 4piol 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. 1, Vol. in. p. 764 sq. (ed. Keble.) o Se vvv {Si] ' yes, the life which now I live ;' explan atory and partially concessive clause, obviating the possible objection arising from the seeming incompatibility of the assertion Qj 4r 4pol Xp. with the fact of the actual £i)j/ ir o-apm : ' it is true,' says the Apostle, ' I do yet live in the flesh, an earthly atmosphere is still around me, but even thus I live and breathe in the pure element of faith, — faith in him who loved me, yea and (koI) gave such proofs of his love.' AVith regard to the construction it is only necessary to observe that 6 is not 'quod attinet ad id quod' (AViner), but simply the accus. objecti after (a, scil. rijv Se £ar)v %v vvr £3 : comp. Rom. vi. 10, o yap direbare, and see Fritz, in loc, Vol. ,. p. 393. Se is thus not merely continuative (De AV.), but serves both to limit and explain the preceding words (comp. 1 Cor. i. 16, and.A\riner, Gr. § 53. 7. b, p. 393), its true opposi tive force being sufficiently clear when the suppressed thought (see below) is properly supplied; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 366. vvv] The refer- Chap. II. 20, 21. GALATIANS. 63 rov ayairr/aavros fie Kal irapaBovros eavrov inrip ifiov. 21 ovk d^serdj rrjv x^Ptv T0V ©eou- el yap Bid vdfiov BiKaioaiivr], apa Xpiarbs Bcopedv diriisavev. ence 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, ' haec vita mea terrestris;' see Phil. i. 22. In the former case the qualitative and tacitly contrasting iv trapKl ('earthly existence,' ' life in the phenomenal world,' alcrbnrii (art), Chrys. ; comp. Miiller, on Sin, Vol. i. p. 453, Clark) would seem wholly superfluous. iv irltrrei] 'in faith.' The instrumental sense, ' by faith,' adopted by Theodoret, and seve ral ancient as wdl as modern expositors, is, though inexact, not grammatically untenable. The deeper meaning of the words is, however, thus completely lost. On this ' life in faith ' see the middle and latter portion of a profound paper, 'Bemerk. zum Begriffe der Reliyion,' by Lechler, Stud. u. Kritik. for 1351, Part rv. ry rov vlov rov 0 e o u] ' namely that of the Son of God;' distinctive, and with solemn emphasis, — the insertion of the article serving both to specify and enhance, ' in fide, eaque Filii dei ' (see notes on 1 Tim. i. 13, and on 2 Tim. i. 13), while the august title, by intimating the true fountain of life (John v. 26) tends to add confirmation and assurance ; orav irepl tov Tiou roelr ibeXns, pabar rtra iarl Ta ir rip Harpl ravra Kal 4v rip flip elvai irltrreve, Athan. on Matth. xi. 27, Vol. i. p. 153, (ed. Bened.). The reading of Lachm. rrj tov beov Kal Xpttrrov, rov 07. is supported by BD'FG ; Clarom., — but has every appearance of being a gloss ; see Meyer (critical notes), p. 29. Kal TrapaSifi'Tos k. t. A.] ' and (as a proof of his love) gave Him self,' etc. ; the koI being i^nynriKAr, and illustratively subjoining the practical proof; see Fritz. Rom. ix. 23, A'ol. n. p. 339, and on this and other uses of Kal, notes on Phil. iv. 1 2. virep ipiov] 'for me,' ' 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. ouk a&eTto] '/ do not make void,' ' nullify ;' not ' abjicio,' Vulg., still less dTipd, Theod., — but ' non irratam facio,' scil. 'ut dicam per legem esse justitiam,' Aug. : compare 1 Cor. i. 19, t^u trvvecriv twu crvverav aber'titra ; ch. iii. 15, dberel (SiabiiKnv) ; so 1 Mace. xv. 27, riberrjcre irdvra otra trvribero aiira ; and frequently in Polyb., see Schweigh. Lex. s. v. The verb is sometimes found in the milder sense of ' despising,' ' re jecting,' etc. — with persons (Luke x. 16, John xii. 48, 1 Thess. iv. 8); but this obviously falls short of the meaning in the present context. t ); v Xa piv tou 0 e o u] ' the grace of God,' as shown in the death of Christ, and our justification by faith in Him ; not ' the Gospel,' as Hamm. on 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 grace and mercy ; upon Christ's part the satisfaction of God's justice; and upon our part true and lively faith in the merits of Jesus Christ, on Salvat. Parti. ydp explains and jus tifies the preceding declaration ; ' I say ovk dbera, for it is an immediate in ference that if the law could have been the medium of SiKaioo"., Christ's death would have been purposeless.' Sid v A p.ov] 'by means of the law,' as a medium of SiKaiotrvvi) : emphatic, as the position shows, and antithetical to 61 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 21— III. 1. III. ' D. dvb-nroi TaXdrai, ris vfids efida- rcceived an evidence that justification is by faith, and not by the works of the law? O foolish Galatians, is not the Spirit which ye have Xpio-Tbs in the succeeding clause. In the present verse it is in effect asserted that the vApos is not a medium of SiKaiorrvvn (els KTrjatv StKaiotrvvqs dpKel, Theod.) ; in ch. iii. 11, it is asserted not to be the sphere of it, and in ch. iii. 21, not the oriyin. SiKaiotrvvn] 'riyht- eousness,' I^o^a'1 Syr., 'justitia,' Vulg. ; not equivalent to SiKaiatris (AAlately, Dangers, etc., § 4) nor yet, strictly considered, the result of it, but ¦appy. in the most inclusive meaning of the term — righteottsness, whether im puted, by which we are accounted Si- koioi, or infused and inherent, by which we could be found so ; see Hooker, Serm. n. 3, 21, where the distinction between justifying and sanctifying righteousness is drawn out with admirable perspicuity. On the meaning of the word, see An- drewes, Serm. v. Vol. v. p 114 (A. C. L. ), Waterland, Justif. Vol. vi. p. 4, and for some acute remarks on its lexical as pects, Knox, Remains, Vol. n. p. 276. dp a] ' then,' i. u. 'the obvious inference is.' On the meaning of Spa, see notes, ch. v. 1 1 . Sap ear] 'for nought, without cause ,-' not here ' frustra' (Grot.), 'sine effectu,' — but ' sine justa causa,' Tittm. Synon. I. p. 161 ; irepiTTbs o tou Xpio-Tou bdraros, Chrys., ' superflue mor- tuus est Chr.,' Jerome: comp. John xv. 25, iplcrncrdv pe Sapedr ; Psalm xxxiv. (xxxv.) 7, Sapedv %Kpwpdv pot Siatpbopdv (Symm. dratrius). So cart, which the LXX frequently translate by Scopeau, has the meaning ' in nullum bomim finem,' as well as ' gratis' and ' frustra :' comp. Gesen. Lex. s. v., Vorst, de Hebraism. vn. 6, p. 228, 229. Chapter III. 1. dvAriroi TaX.] 'foolish Galatians ; ' fervid and indig nant application of the results of the preceding demonstration to the case of his readers. The epithet dvAnros is used in three other passages by St. Paul, — Rom. i. 14, opp. to trotpAs ; 1 Tim. vi. 9, joined with QXafiepAs ; Tit. iii. 3, with direibris and irXavtipevos, — and in all seems to mark not so much a dulness in ( ' insensati,' Vulg.), as a deficiency in, or rather an insufficient application of, . y • the vovs ; comp. Syr. M^V. .A;llA,rtijt [destituti mente], and Luke xxiv. Hi, where while PpaSbs rfj KapSi'a denotes the defect in heart, ivAvros seems to mark the defect in head; comp. Tittm. Synon. i p. 144, where this word is' de fined somewhat artificially, but rightly distinguished from dtppav and dtrvveros which seem to point respectively rather to ' senselessness' and ' slowness of under standing.' It cannot then be as serted (Brown) that the Galatians were proverbially stupid; compare Callim. H. Del. 184, dtppovi tpvXa. Themistius, who himself spent some time in the (then extended Forbig. Geogr. Vol. n. p. 364) province, gives a very different character : oi Se avSpes tare oti ojeis Kai dyxlvoi Kal evpdberrrepot rav &yav 'EAA^- vav Kal rptt3aviov irapatpavevros intcpe- pavri evbvs, atrirep rrjs Xibov to ciS^pia, Orat. 23, ad fin. p. 299 (ed. Harduin). Versatility and inconstancy, as the Epis tle 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 unnatural con comitant, ufias ipdffKavev] ' did bewitch you,' ' fascinavit vos,' Vulg , Clarom. The verb $atrKaira is derived from $d(w, ftdo-Ka (Pott. Etym. Forsch. . Vol. i. p. 271), and perhaps signified originally 'mala lingua nocere;' comp. Benfey, Wurzellex. Vol. n. p. 1 04. Here, however, the reference appears rather to Chap. III. 1, 2. GALATIANS. 65 Kavev, ois Kar difiisaXfiovs 'Ir/crou? Xpiarbs Trpoeypdiprj ip vfiiv iaravpcofievos ) 2 tovto fibvov SeXw fia!iteiv d vfioov, i% the bewitching influence of the evil eye (compare Ecclus. xiv. 8, fiao-Kaivav orp- baXp.§, and see Eisner, in loc , AViner, RWB. Art. 'Zauberei') though not necessarily ' the evil eye of envy,' ( Chrys. ; comp. Syr. V* m^l as in this latter sense /3ao-K. is commonly with a dat. (but in Ecclus. xiv. 6, Ignat. Rom. 3, with accus.); see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 462, Pierson, Herodian, p. 470. The addition, ry dXifbeia p.i) ireibecrbai [Rec. with CD^JK; mss.; Vulg. (but not all mss), JEth.-Pol., al. ; Ath , Theod.], is rightly rejected by most modern edi tors, both as deficient in external author ity [omitted in ABDiE'FG ; 2 mss. ; Syr., and nearly all Vv.], and as an apparent gloss from ch. v. 7. Tpoe7paeu>a] 'the Spirit,' rijv rotravr-nv lo-xu"i Chrys. ; ' de Spiritu miraculorum loqui hie apostolum patet,' Bull, Harm. Ap. Part n. 11. 8. Is it not, however, necessary to under stand this as the exclusive meaning, much less to explain it, with Baur, Apost. Paulus, p. 515, as 'das Christ liche Bewusstseyn :' see next verse. aK07js irltrr ea s may be translated, either (a) ' the hearing of faith,' i. e. the reception of the Gospel (Brown), or (0) ' the report or message of faith,' i. e. the preaching which related to, had as its subject rclcrTis (gen. objecti), according as oko!) is taken in an active or passive sense. The former might seem to pre serve a better antithesis to epyav vApov, — 'hearing the doctrine of faith, opp. to doing the works of the law' (Schott, Peile; comp. iEth.), but is open to the decided lexical objection that aKoii ap pears always used in the N. T. in a pas sive sense (so both in Rom. x. 17 [see Fritz ], and in 1 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, o vApos vpiv eSaKer rov beiov Tlvebparos ivepyelav, % pAvn i) iirl rbv Kvpiov irlans, Theod. We may, then, with some confidence, adopt (/3) ; so Goth, ('gahauseins'), Arm., and recently De AVette, Meyer, and the best modern commentators. 3. ovras dvAnroi] 'to so high u degree, so very foolish,' — with reference to what follows : ' quum oSras cum ad- jectivo nomini aut adverbio 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. 43 d, outb iae7aAas, Xen. Cyr. ii. 216, outw iroXe- piov. 4vap%dp.evoi] ' after having begun;' temporal participle re ferring to the previous fact of their first entrance into Christian life. On the temporal force of the participle, see notes on Eph. iv. 8, but reverse the accident ally transposed 'subsequent to' and 'preceding;' and on the force of the compound (more directly concentrated action), see notes on Phil. i. 6. Uvevpiar i] ' with the Spirit;' dat. of the manner (modal dat.) in which the action took place; see AViner, Gr. § 31. 6, p. 193, Bernhardy, Synt. in. 14, p. 100, Jelf, Gr. § 603. The meaning of irvevpa and o-apf in this verse has been the subject of considerable discussion. Of the earlier expositors, Theodoret par aphrases irv. by ri x^pis, o"ap| by ij Kard vApov TtoXtreia (so AVaterl. Distinct, of Sacr. n. § 10, Vol. v. p. 262), while Chrys. finds in o-ap| a definite allusion to the circumcision ; comp. Eph. ii. 11. Alii alia. The most satisfactory view is that taken by Miiller, Doct. of Sin, ch. 2, Vol. i. 355 sq. (Clark), — viz., that when irvevpa is thus in ethical con trast with o-dp£, it is to be understood of the Holy Spirit, regarded as the govern ing and directing principle in man, o-ap|, on the contrary, as the worldly tendency Chap. III. 3, 4. GALATIANS. 07 ecre ; ivap^dfievoi Uvevpiar i vvv aapKi iirireXeia^e; * roaavra of human life, ' the life and movement of man in things of the phenomenal world.' If this be correct irv. and crap£ are here used, not to denote Christianity and Judaism per se, but as it were the essence and active principle of each. e'lriTeAeio-fte] ' are ye brought to com pletion f ' Not middle, as often in Hel lenic Greek (see Schweigh. Lex Polyb. s. v.), but pass. (Vulg., Clarom., Chrys ), as in 1 Pet. v. 9, comp. Phil. i. 6. The meaning of the compound must not be neglected ; it does not merely imply • finishing ' (Hst., Peile), as opposed to 'beginning,' but appears always to in volve the idea of bringing to a complete and perfect end; comp. 1 Sam. iii. 12, fipfouai Kal 4iriTeXecra ; see further exx. in Bretsch. Lex. s. v., and the good col lection in Rost u. Palm. Lex. s. v. Vol. I. p. 1 123, — the most definite of which seems, Herod, ix. 64, ^ SIki) rov tpArov 4k MapSorlov 4irereX4ero. 4. e'ira&eTe] 'Did ye suffer,' 'passi > v estis,' Vulg., Clarom., « J\ «-< . w) [sus- X ^ tinuistis] Syr , iEth. (both). The mean ing of this word has been much discussed. The apparent tenor of the argument, as alluding rather to benefits than to suf ferings, has led Kypke ( 06s. ATol. n p. 277, compare Schoettg. Hnr. Vol. i. p. 731) and others to endeavor to substan tiate by exx. that Trao-xeif is not only a word of neutral meaning, but, even without ed or dyabAv, actually signifies ' beneficiis affici,' — a usage, however, of which Steph. ( Thes. s. v.) rightly says 'exemplum desidero.' For the neutral meaning ('experienced,' ed. 1), as in cluding a reference to all the spiritual dispensations, whether sufferings or blessings, which had happened to (Arm. I, 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 us now to revert to the regular meaning, suffered, and to refer it to the labors (Copt.), and persecutions which, in one form or other, must have certainly tried the early converts of Ga latia ; see Chrys., Jerome, and the good note of Alford in loc. All these suffer ings were a genuine evidence of the eVap|- dperoi Xlveipan, and would be regarded and alluded to by the Apostle as blessed tokens of the Spirit's influence; comp. 1 Thess. ii. 13 sq., and the remarks of August, in h.l. eXye Kal eiKij] ' 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 etye and koi. eXye must not be confounded with eJVep (Tholuck, Beitrdge, p. 146) : the latter, in accordance with the extensive, or perhaps rather intensive force of 7rep (Donalds. Crat. § 178, compare Klotz. Devar. Vol. n. p. 723), implies 'si om- nino ;' the former (etye), in accordance with the restrictive 7c', is ' si quidem,' and if resolved, turn certe, si ; ('ye ita tantummodo ad tollendam conditionem facit, quia turn certe, si quid fiat, aliud esse significat, non ut ipsam conditionem confirmet,' Klotz, Devar. Arol. n. p. 308), comp. p. 528. No inference, however, of the Apostle's real opinion can be drawn merely from the 76 (elye 'usur- patur de re quae jure sumpta,' Herm. Vig. No. 310), as it is the sentence and not the particle which determines the rectitude of the assumption. Kal must closely be joined with eiVr), and either (a), with its usual ascensive force ('quasi ascensionem ad earn rem quo pertineat particula;' Klotz, Devar. 68 GALATIANS. Chap. III. 5, 6. iird&ere e'lKr) ; e'i ye Kal elicfj. 6 6 ovv eVt^opiY&ji/ ifiiv ro Uvevfia Kal ivepyoiv Bvvdfieis iv vpiiv, e'f epycov vbpov rj i!; aKofjs iriareas ; KaStios 'AfSpadfi iiriarevaev rat Qem, Kal As Abraham was justified by fuith; so shall his spir itual children be justified, and share his blessing. Vol ii. p. 638), gives to the clause the meaning, ' if at least it amount to, i. e. be really in vain,' or (b), with what may be termed its descensive force ( Odyss. ±. 58, see Hartung, Partik. Kal, § 2. 8, Vol. i. p. 136), serves to imply, 'if at least it be only in vain, i. c. has not proceeded to a more dangerous length, ' videndum ne ad perniciem valeat,' August., Cocceius. Of these (b) is the most emphatic and pungent (so Mey.; De AV.), 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. o o v v 4irixopnyar] ' He then who is bestowing,' etc. : resumption by means of the reflexive abv (see below, and notes on Phil. ii. 1 ) of the subject of ver. 2 ; ver. 3 and 4 being in effect quantitatively considered. For exx. of the use of iirtxop. in later writers see the collection of Hase, in Steph. Thes. s. v. Vol. in. p. 1902. On the present resumptive use of odv after a (logical) parenthesis, which has been incorrectly pronounced rare in Attic writers, see Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 718, Hartung, Partik. oSv, 3. 5, Vol. n. p. 22. It may be remarked that, as a general rule, o3p is continuative and retrospective rather than illative, and is in this respect to be distinguished from Spa (Donalds. Gr. § 601), but it must not also be forgotten that as in the New Testament the use of abv is to that of apa nearly as 11 to 1, the force of the former particle must not be unduly re stricted. In St. Paul's Epp. where the proportion is not quite 4 to 1 , the true distinction between the two particles may be more safely maintained ; see, however, notes on 1 Tim. ii. 1 (Transl.) parenthetical The subject of this verse is not St. Paul (Lomb. Erasm.,al), but, "¦""""•*] '»*«•*>«• P°-».' \U~ as the context, the meaning of Surap-eis, [virtutes] Syr., ' virtutes,' Vulg., Cla- the nature of the action specified (4m- Xopnyav), and the permanence of the action implied by the tense pres. imxo- priyar (comp. Winer, Gr. § 45. 1, p. 304, Schmalfeld, Synt. § 202, p. 405), all obviously suggest, — God : b QeAs, tpntriv, b eirixopiryibv vpiv rb Tlvevpa, Theoph. The force of 4*1 in ihrixap. does not ap pear additive, but -directive (see Rost u. Palm, Lex. ». v., and ib. s. v. 4wl, C. 3. any idea of the freedom or ample rom. This more restricted meaning, which may be supported by 1 Cor. xii. 28, and probably Matth xiv. 2, seems best to accord with the context. Kai is then 4%rrY0TiKov, and 4v vpiiv retains its natural meaning with ivepyea, ' in you,* ' within you ;' comp. Matth. I. c. at Svvd- jueis ivepyovaiv 4v avr$. 4 £ ep yav vApov] 'from the works of the law ;' not exactly ' as following upon,' Alf. 2, — but, in more strict accordance nature of the girt (AViner, Peile), being with the primary force of the due solely to the primary meaning of the simple verb ; see notes on Col. ii. 1 9, and compare 2 Cor. ix. 10, where both Xopnyea and iirixopnyea occur in the same verse, and appy. in the same sense prep. from.' 'out of ('ex,' Vulg.), as the originating or moving cause of the iirixop^yno-ts ; compare notes on Gal. ii. 16. 6. «a&(us] 'Even as.' The answer Chap. III. 6, 7. GALATIANS. 69 iXoyia^rr) airrw els BiKaioaiivrjv. T yivcoaKere apa on ol ck iria- is so obvious, that St. Paul proceeds as if it had been expressed. The com pound particle Kadis is not found in the purer Attic writers, though sufficiently common in later writers ; see exx. col lected by Lobeck, Phryn. p. 426. Em. Moschop., the Byzantine Grammarian, cited by Fabricius, Bibl. Grteca, Vol. vi. p. 191 (ed. Harles), remarks that this is an Alexandrian usage ; rb k ab d oi 'AttikoI xPwvrai, rb Se Kabt&s ouSe- irore, &.XX' ij rav 'AAefavSpeW StaAeKTOs Kab' %v n bela ypatpi] yeypairrai '. see esp. Sturz de Dialect o Maced. § 9, s. v. (Steph. Thes. ed. Valpy, p. clxx.) On the most suitable translation, compare notes on 1 Thess. i. 5 (Transl.). ixo- ylcrbij outoj eis SiKaiotrbvtiv] ' it was accounted for to him,' or ' was reckoned to him, as righteousness,' scil. to irio-reuo-ai ; see AViner, Gr. § 49. -2, pr427-fed-5). The phrase Xoyl£eral ti eis ti, Acts xix. 27, Rom. ii. 26, iv. 3, ix. 8, is explained by Fritzsche (Rom. Vol. I. p. 137), as equivalent to Xoyi^eral n els rb eivai ti, ' ita res aestimatur ut res sit,' h. e. ' ut pro re valeat ;' hence 'tribuitur alicui rei vis ac pondus rei.' In such cases, the more exact idea con veyed by els, of destination for any object or thing (Rost u. Palm, Lex. s. v. «'$, v. 1), is blended with that of sim ple predication of it. In later writers this extended so far that eis, is often used as a mere index of the accus., hav ing lost all its prepositional force ; e. g. &yeiv els yvvalKa '. see Bernh. Synt. v. 11. b. 2, p. 219. With the present semi- Hebraistic use of \oyt£. els, it is instructive to contrast Xen. Cyr. in. 1. 33, xf4l*aTa eis dpybpiov Xoyurbevra, where els has its primary ethical mean ing of measure, accordance to. On the doctrinal meaning of iXoyhbn «. t. A., see Bull, Harm. Apost. n. 12. 22, and for an able comparison of the faith of Abraham with that of Christians, Hammond, Pract. Catech. Book I. 8. 7. ytvtitr Ker e dp a] 'Know ye therefore? nV< [eognoscite] Syr., Vulg., Clarom., 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 laboring to prove ; iv KetpaXala SiSdtrKei rbv 'APpadp ix Trlareas SiKatabevra, Kai rovs rpotpipovs rrjs irlareas vlovs rov 'Afipadp xPW-rKovras, Theod. ; see Olsh. in loc. The objections of Ruck., and even of Alf. to the use of apa with the imperf. are distinctly invalid ; not only is the union of the imperfect with &pa logically admissible, and borne out by usage (comp. Horn. II. x. 249), but further, in perfect harmony with the true lexical force of the particle : ' rebus ita comparatis (Abraham's faith being reckoned to him as righteousness) coy- noscite,' etc. ; see Klotz. Devar. Vol, n. p. 167. ol iK 7rfo-Teojs] 'they who are of faith,' not 'they who rest on faith' (Green, Gr. p. 288), but, in accordance with the primary mean ing of origin, 'they who are spiritually descended from, whose source of spir itual life is — irlans : comp. Rom. ii. 8, oi e'f ipibeias, ' qui a malarum fraudum machinatione originem ducunt,' ' qui malitiam tanquam parentem habent,' Fritz, in loc, Vol. I. p. 105. oSr oi] ' these (and none other than these),' 'exclusis ceteris Abrahamo na- tis,' Beng. ; see James i. 25. This retro spective and emphatic use of the pro noun is illustrated by AViner, Gr. § 23. 4, p. 144 ; see also Bernhardy, Synt. vi. 8. d, p. 283, Jelf, Gr. $ 658. 70 GALATIANS. Chap. III. 8, 9. revs, ovroi elaiv viol 'Afipadfi. 8 irpo'iBovaa Be r) ypaqbrj on eK irlareas BiKaioi rd e^vrj b Qebs, irpoevrjyyeXiaaro rat Appaafi on evevXoyifirrjaovrai ev aoi irdvra ra eitrvrj. recos, evXoyovvrai aiiv ra> iriarcp Af3paafi. 8. 7rpoi8ouo-a Se i) y patp"r)] 'More over the Scripture foreseeing :' further statement that the faithful, who have already been shown to be the true chil dren of Abraham, are also the only and proper participators in his blessing. This sort of personification is noticed by Schoettg. (Hor. Hebr. Vol. i. p. 732) as a ' formula Judaeis admodum solemnis,' u. g., aiinsn ns-i ~» ' Quid vidit scrip ture?' Kan ns-t nn 'Quid vidit Ule, h. c. quidnam ipsi in mentem venit?' see also Surenhus. Bi/3A. KaTaAA. p. 6, sq. In such cases ri ypatpii stands obvi ously for the Author of the Scriptures — God, by whose inspiration they were written ; compare Syr., where j | a a\ [Aloha] is actually adopted in the trans lation. Se appears to be here pera&ariKAv, i. e. indicative of transition (Hartung, Partik. Se, 2. 3, Vol. I. p. 165, AViner, Gr. § 53, 7. b, p. 393) ; it does not merely connect this verse with the preceding (Auth. Ver., Peile, Co nyb., al.), but implies a further consid eration of the subject under another aspect ; ' Se earn ipsam vim habet ut abducat nos ab ea re quae proposita est, transferatque ad id, quod, missa ill!! priore re, jam pro vero ponendum esse videatur,' Klotz, Devar. Vol. ii. p. 353. The exact force of Se, which is never simply connective (Hartung, Partik. Vol. x. p. 163) and never loses all shades of its true oppositive character, deserves almost more attentive consider ation in these Epp. than any other par ticle, and will often be found to supply the only true clue to the sequence and evolution of the argument. Sikoioi] 'justifieth;' not 'would jus tify,' Auth. ('praesens pro future,' Grot.), nor present with ref to what is now taking place (De W.), but what is termed the ethical present, with sig nificant reference to the eternal and immutable counsels of God ; dvabev ravra Kal fapitre Kal irponyApevffev 6 QeAs, Theod. ; comp. Matth. xxvi. 2, irapaSl- SoTai; see Winer, Gr. § 40. 2, p. 237, and for the rationale of this usage, Schmalfeld, Synt. § 54. 2, p. 91. 7rpoeu7)77eAio"aTo] ' made known the glad tidings beforehand ;' compare Gen. xii. 3, xviii. 18, xxii. 18. The com pound irpoeua77. is somewhat rare ; it occurs in Schol. Soph. Trach. 335, Philo, de Opif. § 9. Vol. i. p. 7, de Mut. Norn. § 29, Vol. I. p. 602 (ed. Mang.) and the eccles. writers. Uri ivevXo 7.] ' shall be blessed in ;' quo tation, by means of the usual Sti reei- tativum, from Gen. xii. 3 (compare ch. xviii. 18, xxii. 18), though not in the exact words ; the here more apposite but practically synonymous icdrra to ebvn being used (perhaps from ch. xviii. 18) instead of the mural at tpvXai tt/s yrjs of the LXX : compare Surenhus. Bi,3A. KaTaAA. p. 567. The simple form evXoyrib. is adopted by Elz. (not Steph.), but only with FG and cursive mss. iv aoi] '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 substratum, foundation, on which, and in which, the blessing rests ; compare 1 Cor. vii. 14, and AViner, Gr. § 48. a, p. 345. 9. So-Te] 'So then,' 'Consequently,' see notes on ch. ii. 13. "atrre states the Chap. III. 9, 10. GALATIANS. 71 Oaoi jap il; epyoyv vofiov eiGiv, virb They who are of the works io " of the Law lie under a hl^frced'nsT'havii^'en! Ka-rdpav elalv yeypairrai yap on iiriKardparos h^ofi;" th° ™? os oi,K ififievei iv irdaiv rois yey pa fifie'vois result from the emphatic ivevXoy. (avX- Xoyi£6pevos 4iriiyayev, Chrys.) : it is from the fact of the blessing having been promised to Abraham and his chil dren, that oi 4k irlcrreas share it, inas much as they are true children ( ver. 7 ) of Abraham ; evXoynpevoi elalv oi . . . t?7 irtoTei irpotriovres, acrrrep Kal 6 mtrrbs 'Af3p. nvXAyriTO, Theoph. crvv] ' toyether with ;' not ' similiter,' Grot., but, in accordance with the regular meaning of the prep., 'with,' 'in asso ciation with' (Winer, Gr. § 48. b, p. 349), the jrio-Ttp serving to hint (Mey., Alf. ) at that to which this association is truly to be referred ; ei tis roiwv rrjs 4Kelvov trvyyevelas d^iabrivai irobel, ri]r iKelrov ir 1 tr r ir faXobra, Theod. The change of prep, introduces a correspond ing change in the aspect in which Abra ham is regarded : under iv he is regarded as the Patriarch, the spiritual ancestor in whom, — under trbr he is regarded as the illustriously faithful individual with whom, all oi ix iritrr. share the blessing ; see AVindischm. in loc. Schott cites a similar use of perd (with Gen.) Psalm cv. 6, iipapropiev perd rar irarepar ', Eccles. ii. 16, dirobarelrai 6 troepbs pierd tou dtppovos ; but in both cases a simi larity of lot rather than a strict commu nity and fellowship in it, seems implied ; as a general rule, pierd Tiros implies rather coexistence, trvv ran, coherence ; see Kriiger, Sprachl. § 68. 13. 1, and comp. notes on Eph. vi. 23. 10. So- oi yap /t. t. a.] Proof of the justice of the conclusion in ver. 9 with regard to oi ix irlareas ; yap intro ducing e contrario — a confirmatory no tice of the acknowledged state of the other class, oi il; epyav rApov : not only are they not blessed with Abraham, but they are actually under a curse. St. Paul's love of proving all his assertions has been often noticed ; comp. David son, Introd. Vol. ii. p. 145. o I 4 J epyav vA pov] ' they who are of, i. e. appertain to, rest upon, the works of the law,' ' qui in lege justitiam quae- runt,' Bull, Harm. Ap. n. 7. 12; the primary force of 4k, owing to the nature of the expression, being here slightly less obvious than in ver. 8, and suggest ing more the secondary and derivative idea of dependence on than of direct origination from ; see AViner in loc, and comp. 1 Cor. xii. 16, ovk eip.1 4k tou rrtiopaTos. virb KaTa^ai'] ' un der a curse ;' not ' under the curse,' but almost simply and generally, 'under curse ' = iiriKardparos ', comp. btp' apap- rlav, Rom. iii. 9 : the proof drawn from the O. T. becomes thus more cogent. "Tirb, it may be remarked, has appy. here no quasi-physical sense (KaTttpa being viewed in the light of a burden, Ruck., Windschm.), but its common ethical sense of ' subjection to ;' see AViner, Gr. § 49. k, p. 362. AVith regard to the argument, it is only neces sary to observe that the whole obviously rests on the admission, which it was im possible not to make, that no one of ol e'£ ep7i»i' vApov can fulfil all the requisi tions of the law ; see esp. Bull, Harm. Apost. n. 7. 11, and comp. with it TJs- teri, Lehrb. 1. 4. b, p. 60. y e- ypairrai ydp] Confirmation from Scripture of the preceding words. The quotation is from Deut. xxvii. 26, though not in the exact words either of the Heb. or LXX ; comp. Surenhus. Bi'jSAos KaTaAA., p. 569, and Bagge in loc. The following Sti is omitted by Rec, but only with JK ; mss.. and some 72 GALATIANS. Chap. III. 10, 11. iv rd> BifSXicp rov vdfiov, rov iroirjaai avrd. u on Be ev vofiat ohBels BiKaiovrai irapa ra> ®ea> BrjXov,-ort, 6 Bixaios iK marecos/ , Ff. tou iroirjtrai avr d] 'to do them,' 'ut faciat ea,' Vulg., Clarom. ; purpose contemplated and involved in the ipperei. This use of the infin. to denote design, intention, is (with the exception of a few instances from the other writers in the N. T., Mark iv. 3 [.Rec], James v. 17) confined to St. Paul and St. Luke; see Fritz. Matth. Excurs. n. p. 485, AViner, Gr. § 45. 4. b, p. 377. The construction is not, properly considered, Hebraistic, but be longs to later Greek, and may be cor rectly explained as an amplification of the use of the gen., which serves first to mark the result or product (e. g. II. $. 397, Kbpara irarrolar dr4par, Scheuerl. Synt. § n. 1, p. 79), then further, the purpose of the working object, and lastly (e. g. in LXX, where the Hebr. idiom would naturally cause this development) becomes little more than explanatory and definitive; comp. Gen. iii. 6, apalAv 4trn rod Kararor/trai, Exod. ii. 18, 4raxvrare rov irapayevetrbai. In this latter case the first verb commonly marks a more general action, the second, one more limiting and special ; comp. Gen. xxxiv. 17, eltraKoveiv iipav rov ireptrepetrbai, and see esp. Thiersch, de Pent. in. 12, p. 173 sq., where this usage is well inves tigated. The progress of this structure in classical Greek is briefly noticed by Bernhardy, Synt. ix. 2, p. 357. 11. Sti Se k. t. A.] 'But (further) that in the law,' etc.:' continuation of the reasoning ; Se subjoining to the ' ar- gumentum e contrario,' — 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 Be may thus be felt in the incidental reply which the verse affords to a deduction that might have been obviously made from ver. 10 ; ' but — lest any one should imagine that if a man did so ippievetv k. ¦>. X. he would be blessed — let me add,' etc. ; compare De AVette in loc. i v vAp.a] 'under the law;' i. e. in the sphere and domain of the law; Acts xiii. 39, Rom. ii. 12, iii. 19. The in strumental meaning is grammatically tenable (object existing in the means, Jelf, Gr. § 622. 3, see notes on 1 Thess. iv. 18), and even contextually plausible, owing to the prominence of iv vAp.a and its apparent opposition to XpiarAs, ver, 13 (see Meyer) : as, however, owing to the inversion of the syllogism, the op position between the clauses is much obscured, the simpler and more usual meaning is here to be preferred : comp. notes on 1 Thess. ii. 3. The more in clusive iv is thus perhaps chosen design edly, as the Apostle's object is appy. to show that the idea of justification falls wholly out of the domain of the law, and is incompatible with its very nature and character. irapd rip 0 e £] ' in the sight of;' i. e. ' in the judgment of God' (Rom. ii. 13, xii. 16, 1 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 sufficiently common in classical writers ; see Bern hardy, Synt. v. 17. b, p. 257, and exx. in Palm u. Rost, Lex. s. v. rrapd, n. 2, Vol. n. p. 667. Sti b Sikoios it. t. A.] ' because, The just shall live by faith,' Habak. ii. 4, again cited in Rom. i. 17, Heb. x. 38, — this second oti be ing causal, the first simply declarative. It is extremely difficult to decide whether e« irto-T. is to be joined with o SIk. ('the just by faith'), or with the verb. The Chap. III. 12, 13. GALATIANS. 73 fyjaerar 12 6 Be vdfios ovk eanv e« iriareeos, dXX' 6 iroifjaas avra gijaerai ev avrois. v Xpiaros rjfias egtjyopaaev eK rrjs former is perfectly correct in point of grammar, though doubted by Bp. Middl. (see Winer, Gr. § 20. 2, p. 123), and is adopted by Hammond, Meyer, and other careful expositors. As, however, it seems certain (opp. to Baumg.-Crus.) that the original Hebrew (see Hitzig in loc, KI. Prophet, p. 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 (b 4k Trior. Sik.) most favorable to such a transl, — as the argument seems best sustained by the other construction (see Middl in loc, and comp. Bull, Exam. Cens. Animadv. in. 5), — and lastly, as (h,aerai 4k Trior, thus stands in more ex act opposition to £r/o\ iv avrois, it seems best with Copt, Arm. (appy.), Chrys. (appy.), and the bulk of the older ex positors, to connect 4k irlareas with tflfferai. 12. o Se vopos K. r. A.) ' but the law is not of faith,' scil. does not spring from it, has no connection with it in point of principle or origin ; propositio minor of the syllogism, 6 Sik. 4k irltrr. <$o-. being the prop, major, iv vAp.. ovS. Sik. the conclusion. The Auth. Vers. by translating 8e ' and ' obscures the argumentation. b ir o ft)o~ as avrd] ' he who hath done them,' scil. to; TrpotrrdyptaTa and to Kplpara, mentioned in the former part of the verse here re ferred to, — Lev. xviii. 5. rioi^o-as is emphatic ( ' praecepta legis non sunt de credendis, sed de faciendis,' Aquin.), and is prefaced by the adversative dxx' as expressing a sentiment directly oppo site to what has preceded. There is thus no ellipse of yeypairrai (Schott) or \e7e1 (Bagge) ; comp. Fritz. Rom. Vol. 11. p. 284. The insertion of &vbpa- iros after aura (Rec.) has only the author- 10 ity of D3EJK and mss., and is rightly rejected by most modern editors. iv a b r 0 Is] 'in them,' i. e., as AViner paraphrases, < ut in his legibus, vitae fons quasi insit. 13. Xpio-Tos i]p.as k.t.X.] 'Christ ransomed us,' etc. ; vivid and studiedly abrupt contrast to the declaration in volved in the two preceding verses ; the law condemned us, Christ ransomed us ; ' non dissimile asyndeton, Col. iii. 4, ubi item de Christo,' Beng. ft pas] Jews; not Jews and heathens; ' Judaeos praecipue pressit maledictio,' Beng., compare Chrys. For (1) the whole context implies that the law is the Mosaic law: see Usteri in loc. (2) This law had, strictly speaking, no force over the Gentiles, but was, in fact, the petrAroixos between the Jews and Gen tiles : Eph. ii. 14, 15. For a further 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. x. p. 438, Bohn), cannot be urged against the more limited meaning which the context seems obviously to require. e,£?77o'pao-ec] ' ran somed,' 'redeemed.' Christ 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 diroxbrpaats, will be found in Hst. Lehrb. 11. 1. 1, p. 107, and n. 1. 3, p. 202. The force of the preposition (4k) need not be very strongly pressed, e. g. ' emtione nos inde eruit,' Beng. ; see Polyb. Hist. III. 42. 2, 4%r)yApatre irap' avrav rd re povA^vXa icXola K. t. X., where the prep, has no marked mean ing. This tendency to use verbs com- 74 GALATIANS. Chap. III. 13, 14. Kardpos rov vbfiov yevbfievos virep rjfiav Kardpa, on yeypairrai 'EiriKardparos irds b Kpefidfievos eirl gi/Xov, " iva els rd ebi/ry t? pounded with prepp. without any obvious increase of meaning, is one of the char acteristics of later Greek ; Thiersch, de Penlat. Vers. Alex. n. 1, p. 83. yevApevos virep ijpu v kot.] 'by haviny become a curse for us ,-' dependent participle expressing the manner of the action, which again is more distinctly elucidated in the quotation ; Ae'761 8e ko! rbv rpArrov, Theod. The abstract Kardpa (not, ' an accursed thing,' Peile, — which dilutes the antithesis) is proba bly chosen, as Meyer suggests, instead of the concrete, to express with more force the completeness of the satisfaction which Christ made to the law. On the doc trinal import of the expression (KaTapa tlKovffe Si' 4pe, 0 rifr 4pi\v Xvar Kardpav, Greg. Naz.) see the quotations in Suicer, Thes. s. v. Kardpa, \o\. 11. p. 57 sq., and for a few words of great force and elo quence on the ' maledictum cruris,' An- drewes, Serm. in. Vol. 11. p. 174 (A. C. Libr. ). virep Tip a v] 'for us,' ' salu tis nostra; reparandae causa,' Schott. In this and similar passages the exact mean ing of the prep, has been much contested. Is it (a) ' in commodum (alicujus),' or (13) ' in loco (alicujus)?' The following seems the most simple answer. 'TVe'p, in its ethical sense, has principally and primarily (see note, ch. i. 4) the first meaning, especially in doctrinal passages, where the atoning death of Christ is al luded to, e. y. 2 Cor. v. 21, rbv uii yrAria apapriav vitep rjpav 4irolriffer dpaprlav. But as there are general passages in the N. T. where u7rep has eminently the sec ond meaning, e. g. Philem. 13, 'Iva virep aov pot SiaKorfj (comp. Plato, Gorg. 515 C, 4yai virep aov diroKpirovpai), — so are there doctrinal passages (as here) where uirep may admit the second meaning united with the first, when the context (e. g. in 1 Cor. xv. 3 it would be inad missible), and nature of the argument seem to require it, though probably never (AViner Gr. § 48. 1, p. 342) the second exclusively : see Magee, Atonement, No. 30, Vol. 1. p. 245 sq., and Usteri, Lehrb. III. 1, p. 115 sq., where the meaning of the prep, is briefly discussed Sti 7e'7pa7TTai] 'foiasmuch as it is written;' parenthetical confirmation of the assertion involved in the preceding participial clause, yerAp.. k. t. a. The passage in Deut. (ch. xxi. 23) here ad duced does not allude to crucifying, but to exposure after death on stakes or crosses (Josh. x. 26), but is fully per tinent as specifying 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. 1. p. 248 sq. (Burt.). It is in teresting to notice that the dead body was not hanged by the neck, but by 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. Theolog.-Philol. ATol. n. p. 614, Jahn, Archceol. § 258, and B'ahr, Stud. u. Krit. for 1849, p. 924 sq. The reading of Rec, yeypairrai ydp, has only the support of D^EJK; mss.; Syr. (both) Copt., al., and bears every appearance of a confirmation to the more usual mode of citation, ver. 10. 14 "ra els rl' ^brn] 'in order that unto the Gentiles : ' divine purpose involved in the 4£iryApatrev 4k ttjs Karapas re. 1 . A. The first purpose was the ran som of the Jews from the curse; the second, which was involved in the first (oti ii aarripia 4k toju '\ovSalar 4arl, John iv. 22), was the extension of Abra ham's blessing to the Gentiles, but that, Chap. III. 14, 15. GALATIANS. evXoyta rov Afipaap, yevr/rai iv Xpiard) 'Irjaov, "va rrjv iirayye- Xiav rov Uveiifiaros Xdftoifiev Bid rrjs iriarecos. Even the customs of men 15 ' ,4 £ -\ _l ' VJ'C\ -,' ri must sh,™ that the prom- AoeXcpoi, Kara avApairov Xeyco- opuos ise of God to Abraham cannot be annulled by the law whioh was so long afterwards. not through the law but in Jesus Christ. Eis with aecus. is here neither simply identical with dat. (comp. AViner, Gr. § 31. 5, p. 191), nor in its more lax sense of ' in reference to ' (Piele ; comp. Bern. Synt. v. 11, p. 219), but retains its proper local meaning, with refer ence to the metaphorical arrival of the euA07>a; see AViner, Gr. § 49. a, p. 353. jj euAo7fa tou 'A/3p.] 'the blessing of Abraham,' scil. the blessing announced to and vouchsafed to Abraham (ver. 8), il evXoyla ij 4k irlffTeas, Theoph. ; the gen. bring the gen. objecti; comp. Rom. XV. 8, rds 4irayyeXias rav icarepav, and see AViner, Gr. \ 30. 1. p. 167 sq., Kriiger, Sprachl. § 47. 7, 1 sq. 4v Xpio-To? '1 7io\] 'in Christ Jesus,' 'in Christo Jesu,' Vulg., Clarom., Copt, Arm ; not 'propter,' jEth., or for Sid, Grot. (comp. Chrys.), as this instru mental use of iv with persons, though found in a few passages (comp. Matth. ix. 34, eV Top dpxovri, — he was the causa 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. tva ri\v re. v. A.] 'in order that we might receive; second statement of purpose, not subordinated to, but co ordinate with the preceding one. Meyer cites as instances of a similar parallel ism of Ira, Rom. vii. 13, 2 Cor. ix. 3, Eph. vi. 19. The Apostle advances with his subject, till at last under xd&a- per he includes all ; ' nos, omnium gen tium homines, sive Juda3i, sive Barbari.' T^ye7ra77eAlai/Tou Tlrev paros] ' the promise of the Spirit ;' not merely to eVa77eA&ei/ Xlvevpa (Fritz. Rom. 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 AViner, Gr. § 34. 3, p. 211. Gram matically considered, tou Tirevp. may be a gen. subjecti, sc. * promissionem a Spiritu profectam,' or a gen. objecti, as above. Doctrinally considered, how ever, the latter is distinctly to be pre ferred ; the Spirit being usually repre sented by the Apostle as not so much the source, as the pledge of the fulfil ment of the promise ; see Usteri, Lehrb. n. 1. 2, p. 174 note. After a won drous chain of arguments, expressed with equal force, brevity, and profund ity, the Apostle comes back to the sub ject of ver. 2 ; the gift of the Holy Ghost came thiough faith- in Jesus Christ. 15. ctSeArpol k. r. x.] Proof that the promise was not abrogated by the law : o'Ara 8ef|as rijv irltrrtr irpetr(Svrepar rov vAtxov, SiSdfficei irdXiv as b vApos ipnroSav ov Svvarai yevetrbai rals Qeov iirayyeXi- ais, Theod. Kara dvbpairor] ' after the manner of men ;' 4£ avbpairl- vav rcapabeiypdrav, Chrys., dvbpairlvots irpdypaai Kexpripai, Theod. ; see notes, ch. i. 11. AVith 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 exemplum ex hominum vita depromptum,' Fritz. Rom. iii. 5, Vol. i. 160, — where the various mean ings of this formula will be found briefly noticed. Up, as dvb pdrrov re. i . A.] ' though it be but a man's cove nant, yet when confirmed,' etc. : logically inexact, but not idiomatically uncommon 76 GALATIANS. Chap. III. 15, 16. dv^ptmrov KeKvpo)fievr]v Bu&fjKTjv ovBels dSerei rj iinBiardaaerai. / 16 toj Be 'AfSpadft ip'p&rjaav al iirayyeXiai, Kal rep airepfian transposition of opms, which, as the sense shows, really belongs to ouSefs. Both Spas and other adverbs (e. g. del, icoXXd- kis, en), are occasionally thus, as it were, attracted out of their logical or der, when the meaning is otherwise distinct; see AViner, Gr. § 61. 4, p. 488, and Ellendt, Lex. Soph. s. v. Spas, who observes that this transposition is most frequently found with participles ; ' Sfiois cum participio ita componitur, ut inclu- sum protasi tamen ad apodosin pertineat,' Vol. n. p. 318 : compare Plato, Phcedo, 91c. tpofrelrai pi) f/ tyvxb 'daas Kal beiore- pov Kal xdXXtor ov tov aaparos irpoairoX- Autjtoi, and see Stalbaum, in loc 8 tab'fiKvv] 'a covenant.' It maybe true, doctrinally considered, that it is not of much moment whether Stab, be interpreted ' contractum an testamentum ' ( Calv. ) ; considered however exegeti cally, it is obvious that (a) the order of the words, and (b) the comparison be tween the SiabiiKii of man and the 5ia- frflicri of God (ver. 17), tacitly instituted by the emphatic position of dvbptiirov (sing, to make the antithesis more ap parent), both require exclusively the former meaning ; so jEth. (kidan), and appy. Theoph. Siab-tiKiiv Kal trvptparlar : the other Vv. either adopt Sio&tjktj (Syr., Copt.), or are ambiguous. A paper on the uses of this word in the N. T. will be found in the Classical Museum, Vol. vn. p. 299 ; see also Bagge in loc. iirtSiardcrfferai] ' adds new condi tions,' ' superordinat,' Vulg., Clarom., 'novas addit constitutiones,' Bretsch. Lex. s. v., or, in effect, as it is neatly paraphrased by Herm., ' additamentis e , , d^uc1 ¦ vitiat ; comp. Joseph. Antiq. xvii. 9, 4, and esp. Bell. Jud. ii. 2. 3, d\iav ttjs imStabiiKns ri]r SiabijKriv ehai Kvpiare- par. 16. rip Se 'AjSpaaiu] 'Now to Abra ham ;\ parenthetical argument designed to make the application of this particu lar example to the general case perfectly distinct, and to obviate every misappre hension. The Apostle seems to say; ¦ this, however, is not a case merely of a StabiiKri, but of an 4irayyeXla, — yea, of 4irayyeXi a t ; nor was it made merely to a man Abraham (arb. Stab.), but to Christ. According to the usual inter pretation, Se introduces the prop, minor of a syllogism, which is interpreted by the parenthetical comment ob Xeyei . . . Xpiarbs, but resumed in ver. 17, ' atqui Abraamo et semini,' etc., 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 divine nature of the promises to Abraham by some such term as Qebs 8e Xp 'A/3p. k. t . A. ; see also Alf in loc. a 1 e'Tra77eAlai] ' the promises ;' plural, as being several times repeated (Est.), and couched in different forms of ex pression ; comp. Gen. xiii. 15, xv. 18, xvii. 8, xxvi. 4, xxviii. 14. They in volved, as Bengel well observes, not only earthly but heavenly blessings, ' terrae Canaan et mundi, et divinorum bonorum omnium. The latter were more dis tinctly future, the former paulo- post- future. On the exact spiritual nature of these promises, see Hengstenberg, Christol. Vol. I. p. 38 (Clark). The so-called Ionic form ipbebriffav has the support of the best uncial MSS., and is adopted by most of the recent editors; see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 447. Kal Top o-irepiuaTi avr ov\ ' and to his seed;' emphatic, as pointing to Christ, and forming as it were the ful crum of the argument which follows. Chap. III. 16. GALATIANS. 77 avrov. oi) Xeyei Kal rois airepfiaaiv, o>? iirl iroXXu>v, dXX rhs e evds Kal rm airepfiari aov, o? ianv Xpiarbs. The passages of Scripture referred to are here 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. ). AVe may here pause to make a brief remark on the great free dom with which so many commentators have allowed themselves to characterize St. Paul's argument as either artificial ( ' Schulkunst,' Ewald) or Rabbinical (Mey. ; comp. Surenhus. Bt$K. KaraXX. p. 84), or, as Baur, Apost. Paul. p. 665, has even ventured to assert, ' plainly arbitrary and incorrect.' It may be true that similar arguments occur in Rab binical writers (Schoettg. Hor. Vol. I. p. 736) ; it may be true that trireppa (like sir) 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 interpretation which the Apos tle, writing under the illumination of the Holy Ghost has deliberately pro pounded, and which, therefore (whatever difficulties may at first appear in it), is profoundly and indisputably true. We hold, therefore, that there is as certainly a mystical meaning in the use of yit in Gen. xiii. 15, xvii. 8, as there is an ar gument for the resurrection in Exod. iii. 6, though in neither case was the writer necessarily aware of it. As si.t in its simple meaning generally (except Gen. iv. 25, 1 Sam. i. 11) denotes not the mere progeny of a man, but his posterity viewed as one organically-con nected whole; so here in its mystical meaning it denotes not merely the spir itual posterity of Abraham, but Him in whom that posterity is all organically united, the irX-lipapa, the xetpaX't), even Christ. This St. Paul endeavors faintly to convey to his Greek readers by the use of aireppa and trrreppara '. see Olsh. and AVindischm. in loc, both of whom may be consulted with profit. ov X e 7 e i] ' He saith not;' not 77 ypajrr) (Bos, Ellips. p. 54), as in Rom. xv. 10, — where this subst. is supplied from 767pavTTat, ver. 9, — or to irrevpa (Ruck., AViner, Gr. § 39. 1), which appears ar bitrary, but the natural subject o QeAs, as in Eph. iv. 8, v. 14, and (tpntrl) 1 Cor. vi. 16, Heb. viii, 5. So appy. Syr., which here inserts «V [illi] after Ae'7ei. as 4 irl iroXXar] 'as (speaking) of many.' Apparently a solitary instance in the N. T. of this meaning of eirl with gen. after verbs ' dicendi,' etc. ( 2 Cor. vii. 14 [Ruck.], is not in point, as iirl Titou is there ' coram Tito'), though not uncommon in classical Greek ; compare Plato, Charm. 155 D, eYi tou KaXov Ae- yar iratSAs, and ib. Gorg. 453 E, ttoAij' 8' el eVi Tar aviav rexvuv Xeyoper. In this use of eVi, a trace of the local mean ing (superposition, Donalds. Gr. § 483) may be distinctly perceived, the gen. representing as it were the stibstratum on which the action rests ; comp. John vi. 2 ; and see Bernhardy, Synt. v. 23, p. 248, AViner, Gr. § 47. g, p. 335, and for a comprehensive notice of this prep., AVittmann, de Natura etc. em ( Schweinf. 1846). Ss ianv XptarAs] 'Christ (Jesus)' not Christ and his Church, as Hammond in loc. : this ap pears evident from the emphasis which St. Paul lays on the use of the singu lar ; trireppa Se avrov Kara crapxa iarlv b XptarAs, Chrys. Some useful remarks on this passage will be found in the Theol. Critic, No. iv. p. 494 sq. 78 GALATIANS. Chap. III. 17. 17 rovro Be Xeyay- BiaSr/Kriv irpoKeKvptofievrjV virb rov Geov [els Xpiarbv] b fierd rerpaKoaia Kal rpidmvra err] yeyovibs vbfios ovk 17. ei's XpicrroV] 'for Christ,' i. e., to be fulfilled in Christ : not ' usque ad tem pera Christi,' or 'in reference to Christ' (Peile), but as in ver. 24. These words are omitted by ABC; 17. 23*. 67**. 80; Vulg., Copt, .Eth. (both) ; Cyr. (2), Dam.; Jerome, Aug. (often), Pel., Bed. (Lachm., Tisch., Mey.), — and it must be fairly owned have some appearance of being a gloss, still the authority for the insertion, — viz., DEFGJK ; most mss.; Syr. (both), Clarom., Arm. [correct Griesb.] ; Chrys., Theod., Theoph., CEcum. (Rec, Scholz), is so strong that we seem justified in an insertion in brackets. See Bagge in loc. (p. 95), who has argued with ability in favor of the Received Text. 17. touto Se Ae'710] 'This, how ever, I say,' 'hoc autem dico,' Vulg., Clarom. Instead of using the collective obr, which might obscure the exact posi tion which ver. 16 holds in the argument, St. Paul uses the explanatory formula touto Se Xiya. The Se thus serves to re sume the argument (ffatpnveias xdptv ava- XapPdvet rbv XAyov, 03cum.) after the short digression, KaT' avbp. Ae/ycu — touto Se Ae'710, and also to mark the application of the particular case to the general prin ciple. 6 perd rerpaKAaia re. i. A.] 'which came (so long a time as) four hundred and thirty years after wards ;' perd irXelarov xP^vovi 1'heod. The chronological 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. c. the same period, and in Gen. and Acts I. <--. the round number 400 is assigned to the sojourn in Egypt alone. The ancient mode of explanation seems perfectly sat isfactory, — viz., that the 430 years in clude the sojourn in Canaan (about 215 years) as well as that in Egypt ; the whole period of abode 4v yrj ovk ISia (Gen. xv. 13); comp. August. Qucest. in Heptat. n. 47 (Vol. in. p. 611, Migne), Usher, C/wo- nol. Sacr. ch. 8. This is confirmed by the addition of the words Kal iv yfj Xavadv (Exod. 1. c.) in the LXX, and Samar. Pent. : see Petav. Rat. Temp. n. Book 2, 4, Vol. n. p. 71, Hales, Chron. Vol. n. p. 153 (ed. 1811). It may be ob served that the records of the family of Levi appear to render so long a so journ in Egypt as 430 years impossible. Amram, grandson of Levi, marries his father's sister Jochebed (Exod. vi. 20; comp. Exod. ii. 1, Numb. xxvi. 59). Now, as it appears probable by a com parison of dates that Levi was born 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 horn in the last year of Levi's life, she must at least have been 256 years old when Moses was born, if the sojourn in Egypt be 430 years : see AVindischm. in loc The transposition ern rerpaK. k. t. X. (Rec.) has against it the author ity of all the uncial MSS. except J K, and is certainly to be rejected. els t b k ar a py rj tr a t k. t. X.] ' that it should render the promise of none effect,' ail evacuandam promissionem,' Vulg., Clarom. (compare iEth., Syr.- Philox) ; eis to with the infinitive here retaining its usual primary force of object or intention : to Karapy. was the object aimed at by the invalida tion. It may be remarked that as the prep, alone may point to consequence as Chap. III. 18, 19. GALATIANS. 79 aKvpoi, eis ro Karapytjaai ti)v eirayyeXiav.f ei yap eK vopov i) KXrjpovofiia, ovKeri e'£ eirayyeXias' rip Be 'Afipadfi oV iirayyeXlas Kexdpiarai b @ebs. The law was to bring tlie 19 ml i? ov eX^r, rb airepfia a> eirrty- iSAbn, Chrys. Tf is not for Sia rl (Schott, Brown), but is the idiomatic neuter expressive of the abstract nature, etc., of the subject ; see Bernhardy, Synt. vn. 4, p. 336, and comp. Madvig, Synt. § 97, note. Meyer cites 1 Cor. iii. 5, rl ovv icrnr 'AiroXXtis, but the MSS. evidence [CDEFGJ opp. to AB] seems there fairly in favor of tis. rav it apafSda e av X^P Lv) * on aG~ count of ' because of, the transgres sions,' 'propter transgressiones,' Vulg., |^aX».As&0 ^-^lo [propter trans- gressionem] Syr., Copt, (ethbe), and appy. Arm. (vasn), — scil. to manifest, awaken a conviction of, and give as it were a distinctive existence to the trans gressions of it (which existed but were not properly recognized as such), whether previous or subsequent to its introduc tion; comp. Rom. v. 13, &xpi ydp rApov dpaprla V 4r KAtrpa, the more generic dpapria being there used, as sin is not contemplated (as here) specially in the light of a transgression of a fixed or dinance. Owing to the various shades of meaning that have been assigned to xdpiv, the exact significance of these words is somewhat debatable. Of the many interpretations that have been proposed, three deserve consideration, (a) ' ad coercendas transgressiones ;' as Chrys. (drTl xaXivov b vApos), Theoph. CEcum., Jerome, and most of the older expositors: (#) ' transgressionum gratia,' scil. to call them forth, to multiply them, and, as it were, bring them to a head, Rom. v. 20, vii. 7 ; so appy. Clarom., 'factorum (?) gratia,' very distinctly iEth. (both), 'ut multiplicarent pec- cata,' and some modern expositors, Meyer, Alf, al. : (7) ' transgressionum causa.; i. e. 'ut transgressiones palam faceret, eoque modo homines cogeret ad agnitionem sui reatus,' Calv. ; Rom. iii. 20 ; so appy. Vulg., Syr., Copt, Arm., Aug., Beza, AA'iner (appy.), and also in part Hofmann (Schriftb. Vol. n. 2, p, 48) who objects both to (a) and the- ex treme view of (j8). Of these in terpretations we must, in spite of the authority of the Greek commentators, plainly reject (a) on lexical grounds, as no satisfactory exx. (Soph. (Ed. Col. 443 [see Herm.] is not to the point, nor 1 John iii. 12, nor even Clem. Horn. xi. 16, rav irapanrapdrav x<*P"' V ripapla eirerat) have as yet been adduced of such a practically reversed meaning of xdpiv. The second (/3) is more plausi ble, but still open to the grave objection, that in a comparatively undogmatical passage it ascribes a purpose directly to God ( contrast Rom. v. 20, vApos trapeitr- rjXbev 'iva k.t.X.), 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 office of the law was to make transgressions palpable, to awaken a conviction of sin in the heart (to 7reio"ai eiSeVai Ta oiKeia dpapr't)- para, Chrys.), and make man feel his need of a Saviour. It was thus also necessarily temporary (&xpts ov k. t. A.), 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*Plv (^P- m later writers) does not always mean ' in gratiam,' but in cludes all shades of meaning, from in gratiam to causa and propter, just as those of evexa range from causa to quod attinef ad; see Bernh. Synt. v. 16, p. 233, Ellendt, Lex. Soph. s.v. x^pfi an^ comp. exx. in Ast, Lex. Plat, and Rost. u. Palm, Lex. ». v. A discussion of this passage and the general scope of the law will be found in Petav. de Chap. IH. 19. GALATIANS. 81 yeXrai, Siarayels Bi dyyeXcov, iv XelP^ fiealrov. Pradest. x. 25. 1, Vol. x. p. 461 ; com pare also Bull, Exam. Cens. xix. 6, and more recently Baur, Apost. Paul. in. 5, p. 581 sq., but observe that all these writers adopt the negative meaning of xdpiv. irpotrerebi,] ' was su peradded,' 'su/w-addita est,' Herm.; it was, however, as Meyer observes, no imSiabriKi), but a totally fresh institu tion. The reason is given by 03cum., Iva Seifyj rbv vApuov pij uvra irparArvirov aorrep al iicayyeXial eitrlv. The present reading is supported by ABCD3 EJK; most mss.; Theod. (2), Dam., Theoph., CEcum., and is distinctly to be preferred to irebn (Rec), which has both less external authority [D'FG ; 5 mss. (Vulg., Clarom., appy., — but in such cases Vv. can hardly be cited) Clem., Orig., Euseb.], and also seems to have been a very natural substitution for a more difficult word. &xpis ov eXby] 'until the seed shall have come ; ' ' terminus ad quem ' of the duration of the newly introduced in stitution (Mey), involving the obvious query, rl irepairepu xai irapd xatpbv avrbv eXKets, Chrys. This use of the sub- junct. after an aor. in temporal sen tences, 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. 1, p. 257 sq., comp. Schmalf, Synt. § 128. 2, Klotz. Devar. Vol. n. p. 618. It must, however, be applied with caution both in the N. T. and in later Greek, owing to the gradual dis use of the opt. and the tendency of the subj. to take its place. Meyer calls at tention to the omission of av as evincing the idea in St. Paul's mind of all absence of obstacles; see Herm. de Partic. dv, 11. 9, p. 110, Klotz, Devar. 11 Vol. 11. p. 568, Schmalf. Synt. § 121. $ e,7r^77€ATai]'to whom the prom ise has been made ;' irepl Xpiarov Xeyav, Chrys.; comp. ver. 16, ipbebrjcrav — toj oireppari. It does not seem desirable to destroy the parallelism of these two clauses by translating iirr)y., sc. 0 QeAs, actively. Siarayels] ' ordained ;' not 'promulgated,' TJst., AViner, but simply ' ordinata,' Vulg., Copt, ' dis- posita,' Clarom. ; see Philo, Op. Mund. I. 1, Stareraypievav birb rav vopoberav, and comp. Hesiod, Op. 274, ropor Sie'- Ta|e Kpovlav, where one Scholiast (Pro clus) paraphrases it by the simple verb. The participial clause serves to add accessory details and distinctions to irpoaer., and is not prior to, but con temporaneous 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 Bern hardy, Synt. x. 9, p. 383, and the more elaborate notice of Schmalfeld, Synt. § 205 sq. It would certainly seem that, esp. in later Greek writers, the part, is often associated with the finite verb, where two verbs united with a copula would have seemed more natural and even more intelligible ; see the exx. in Herm. Vigor, No. 224. On the best mode of translating th^se sort of partici ples, see notes on Phil. ii. 30 (Transl.) Si' a 7 7 4 X a v] ' throuyh angels,' per angelos,' Vulg., Clarom., ]ojl^o . * S [in manu angelorum] Syr., scil. a77e'Aajj' virovpyobvrar, Theod. : third character istic of the law (see next note) serving to show the distinction, in point of man ner and circumstance, between its en actment and the giving of the Promise : ' per angelos, in manu mediatoris, du- plicitcr mediate,' Beng. ; comp. Baur, Paulus, p. 582. There is thus no reason 82 GALATIANS. Chap. III. 19, 20. Be fieairrjs ivbs ovk eanv, b Be Qeos eis eanv. whatever for modifying this meaning of Sia ; it points simply and plainly to the media and intervenient actors, by whose ministry the law was enacted ; see Joseph. Antiq. xv. 5, 3, iipav to koA- AlOTa To}** Soypdruv xal to: btrtaraTa rav iv tois vApois St' ayye'Atoi' Trapa rod Qeov pabAvrav, Deut. xxxiii. 2 (LXX), and see AViner, Gr. § 47. 1, p. 339, note. i v xetpl pea ir ov] 'in the hand of a mediator,' 'in manu mediatoris,' Syr., Arulg., Clarom., Copt, Arm. ; fourth and most important distinction (see below) between the law and the Promise, and to which the argument of ver. 20 specially refers. The ir is not instrumental ' 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 Ara maic idiom both suggest, combines with Xeipl as = -ra, scil. 'ministerio (media toris) ;' rrj tovtov betret Mavtreas Siaico- vovvtos, Theodoret ; see 2 Chron. xxxiii. 8, Josh. xiv. 2, Wisdom xi. 1. That Muses is the mediator here referred to (Deut. v. 5), seems now so generally admitted, that we may reasonably won der how the early expositors (Basil and Theodoret are exceptions) could have so generally coincided in the perplexing view of Origen (Vol. v. p. 273, ed. Lomm ), that the ptefflrns here, men tioned was Christ. Great difference of opinion, however, exists as to St. Paul's object in recounting these details. 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 the ylorious nature (Mey.), such an object would appear seriously at variance with the context. The more natural view is, that it was to mark the fundamental differences be tween the law and the Gospel, and thence, as a natural result of the contrast, the transitory and provisional nature of the former. The law was an institution (1), rar irapafidaeav x&P1"' restricted and conditioned; (2), axpis ov k. t. X., temporary and provisional ; ( 3 ), 8iaTa7eis 8i' ayyeXav mediately (not immediately) given by God; (4) 4v xe'pl Meo"., medi ately (but not immediately) received from God: see Olsh. and Windischm. in loc. 20. o Se pefflrns] 'Now every mediator,' or, according to our English idiom, ' a mediator ;' the Se being transi tional (perafrariKAv, see notes on ch. iii. 8), and the article referring, not to the mediator previously mentioned, ' this mediator' (Brown), but to the generic idea of a mediator ; ' articulus definit indefinita, idque duobus modis, aut de- signando certo de multis, aut quae multa sunt, cunctis in unum colligendis,' Herm. Iph. Aul. p. xv. (Pref.) ; see AViner, Gr. § 18. 1, p. 97. evbs ovk etr- r i r] ' appertains not unto 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 em phasis on the eVos, which the Greek seems both to require and suggest ; con trast Hofmann, Schriftb. Vol. n. 2, p. 48, who. appy. without any just ground, asserts the contrary. This idea of tiii- gleness and isolation is really our only clew. AVith regard to this and the remaining words it is necessary to pre mise 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 the MSS. or mss., either in the words or their order. o 8e Qebs e'ts 4arlv] 'but God is one;' 'God (not without slight emphasis, comp. ver. 21), the direct and personal giver of the Chap. III. 20. GALATIANS. 83 Promise, does stand single and isolated, — dealt singly with Abraham (to? Se 'AiSp. Si' ^7ra-v7eAfas Kexdpttrrat 6 QeAs, ver. 18), — and, by consequence, is (in the promise) mediatorless ;' prop, minor of a syllogism, of which the conclusion, being obvious, is omitted ; see below. Out of the mass of interpretations of this terse sentence (said positively to exceed 400), Schleiermacher, AViner, and Meyer best deserve attention. A brief notice of these will serve to illus trate the precise nature of the difficul ties. In the first part of the verse all are agreed ; ' now every mediator in volves the idea of more than one :' in the concluding clause they thus differ. (1) Schleiermacher, adopted by Hsteri, Lehrb. n. 1. 2, p. 179; 'but God is one ' — in reference to His promises, free, unfettered by conditions. (2) AViner; ' but God is one ' — one part only (com pare JEth.-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. Schl. and Win. thus connect ver. 20 with ver. 19 as an epexegesis ; Mey. joins it with ver. 21, making it St. Paul's own statement of a difficulty that might arise in a read er's mind. Meyer's interpretation has this advantage ov p- 61. So also in ver. 12, tfitreTai (= £ar)v alcbviov e|ei, Olsh. on Rom. i. 17) similarly in volves the ideas of life and blessedness. ovras k. r. X.] ' verily,' etc. ; ' ap- prime notanda est emphasis egregia in adverbio Svras, vere,' Bull, Exam. Cens. xix. 6. It has been asked whether St. Paul is here reasoning (a) from the effect (faoir.) to the cause (Sikuioo-.) ; or, conversely (5), from the cause (faoir., assumed to mean a new moral life) to the effect (SiKaioer.); compare Neander, Plant. Vol. I. p. 418 (Bonn). Cer tainly the former; SiKaioer. is really, as Hst. properly observes, the middle mem ber of between vApos and (a-r), 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, Ex. Cens. I. <.-. The order adopted in Rec ovras dv 4k vApov i)v, has only the support of D3EJK ; mss. ; Chrys., Theod., al., and is rejected by most critical editors. €'k vApov] ' 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, Selv, apTacrSai, etc., and docs not appear to be very common out of Herodot. ; comp. Bernhardy, Synt. v. 13, p. 227. The order in Rec, dv ix vApov r)v, with DSEJK; mss.; Chrys., Theod., al.], has not sufficient authority, though, Chap. III. 22. GALATIANS. 85 fj BiKaioavvrj- M dXXa avveKXetaev ij ypatprj ra irdvra virb dfiap- Tiav, iva rf iirayyeXia iK iriarecos 'Irjaov Xpiarov Bdiir/ rois it must be admitted that, owing to the variations in the leading MSS. (B 4v vbptp, D om. &v, FG om. Sv fjv), the text is not wholly free from suspicion. 22. a A Aaj 'But on the contrary ;' not Se', as there is a marked adversative re lation between the clauses, and as a statement in ref. to the law is about to be made exactly contrary to the result of the foregoing assumption ; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 2, 3. In Latin, this distinction can usually be maintained by the more distinctly adversative sed (Vulg., Clarom.), not the more simply oppositive autem, in which the latter particle, ' discrimen proprie indicatur, non diversitas,' Hand, Tursell. Vol. x. p. 555, comp. Klotz, Vol. i. p. 361. cruveKAeio-ei' r) y p atprf]' the Scrip ture shut up ;' not equivalent to b vo/tos (Jowett, al.), but with a kind of per sonification, 77 beta ypatjrf) (Theod.), the Scripture of the Old Test, as the repre sentative of Him by whom it was in spired; comp. ver. 8. AVith regard to the meaning of avyxXeletv (' concludi sub peccato is dicitur, qui peccati reatu adhuc obstrictus tenetur,' Bull, Ex. Cens. xix. 6), it may be observed ( 1 ) that the declaratory sense ('conclusos declaravit,' Bull, comp. Baur, Paulus, p. 581), does not lie in the verb (see Rom. xi. 32, where the act is ascribed to God), but in the context ; and ( 2 ) that the prep. ovv does not imply the similarity of situation of all (Beng.), but simply the idea of contraction (Mey.), ' ab omni parte clausit,' Schott 2 ; comp. avame- feiv, trvpirvtyetv ¦ see Fritz, Rom. xi. 32, Vol. n. p. 545, and exx. in Rost u. Palm, Lex. s. v. Vol. n. p. 1395. where instances are cited of 0-U7KA. being used in reference to a single person. On this text and on the general relation of the law to sin, see the weighty sermon of Usher, Serm. v. Vol. xiu. p 60 sq. (ed. Elringt). to Trcii'Ta] 'all.' The neuter cannot safely be pressed (non modo onmes sed omnia Beng.), as if it were specially chosen to include not only men, but all their actions, etc, 'humana omnia,' Jowett (comp. Alf, Windischm.); this being 7 required by the context (comp. ver. 23), nor justified by St. Paul's usus loquendi : see Rom. xi. 32, where, in a passage exactly similar, the masc. is used, and comp. Theodoret in loc , who divides the Ta irdvra into robs 7rpb vApov, and tovs 4v vbpa. The exact difference between rovs irdvras and Tct TrcSira is, perhaps, here no greater than between ' all men ' and 'all mankind' (see Ust. ) : the neu ter is idiomatically and instinctively chosen, as best suiting the generality of the declaration; compare AViner, Gr. § 27. 5, p. 160, Seidler on Eur. Troad. 426. iva ii eVa77.] ' in order that the promise ;' object and intent, — not the mere recognized consequence (' quo appareat dari,' AViner) of the o-u7KAeicris, on the part of 77 ypatpi) and God its author. The abstract iirayyeXia is here, as the context suggests, practi cally equivalent to the concrete ' res promissa' (Schott), scil. KXnporopla ', see ver. 18, Heb. *.. 36, xi. 39, and comp. Test. xn. Patr. p. 725, b Qebs eitrd^ei vpds els tV 4irayyeXiar (cited by Bretsch. Lex. s. v. ), where this concrete notion is taken in its widest extent as = i) yrj rijs 4irayyeXlas ; so xXripovopia, 2 Mace. ii. 4. 4k ir I areas 'l.X.]'by faith in Jesus Christ,' ' resulting from faith as its source and origin (notes, eh. ii. 16) ; 4x trior, being in close union, — not with Sobrj (Riick., Conyb.), but with e,7ra77eAia (compare AViner, Gr. § 20. 2, 8G GALATIANS. Chap. III. 23. iriarevovaiv. irpb rod Be kX^reiv rr/v irlanv, inrb vbfiov icppov- povpte^a avyneKXeiafievoi els rrjv fieXXovaav irianv diroKaXvcffoi)- p. 123, notes on Eph. i. 15), and forming a retrospective antithesis to 4k vApov, ver. 21. The genitive 'I770-. Xp. is perhaps here to be taken in its most comprehen sive sense ; not only ' faith on Christ ' (gen. objecti), but 'faith as given by Him' (gen. subjecti); comp. notes on ch. ii. 16. In the N. T. especially, the connection of the nom. and gen. must often be explained solely from exegetical considerations; see Winer, Gr. § 30, 1, p. 168 ToTs7rio-Tei5ouo*ii'] ' to them that believe ;' not ' qui erant credituri' (Grot. Peile), but 'eis qui credunt,' Clarom., al., ' tredentibus,' Vulg., the apparent tautology not being intended merely as emphatic (Winer), but as suitably echoing the 4k irlareas 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 interposes the limitation in ref. to the thing promised (r) 4irayy. 4k irltrr.), 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. irpb tou 8e re. 1. A.] 'But be fore Faith (above mentioned) came;' further account of the relation in which the law stood to faith, Se not being here distinctly oppositive, but with some tinge of its primary enumerative force (see Donalds. Crat. § 155), adding a further explanation, though in that ex planation serving to introduce a con trast ; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 362. AVith regard to the position of the par ticle, it may be remarked that there is nothing unusual (opp. to Riick. ), in Se thus occupying the third place after a prep, and its case ; see exx. in Hartung, Partik. Se, 1. 6, Vol. 1. p. 190. The common-sense principle is, that Se does not necessarily occupy the second place, but the first possible place which the internal connection of the sentence will admit of; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 378. u7to v A piov 4tppovpov- peba k. t. A.] ' we were kept in ward shut up under the law ,-' o-u7KeKA. being joined, not with eis nlerriv (see follow ing note), but, in a construction similar to that of the preceding verse, with uiri vApov (Arm., al.) ; the law, in fact, is here (as dpapria in ver. 22) represented as a kind of gaoler into whose custody we were delivered ; see Koster, Stud. u. Krit. 1854, p. 316. The meaning of tppovpeltrbai is thus not merely ' asser- vari' (AViner, Schott), much less ' ob- striugi ad obedientiam' (Bretsch. ), but, as the definite expression o-u7KeK\. dis tinctly requires, ' custodiri,' Vulg., Cla rom., Copt., ^Fth.), acirep 4r retxlip rtvl Karexeabai, Chrys. ; compare AVisdom xvii. 15, 4tppovpe1ro els ri)V dalSnpov eipKTr/v KaTaKA€io-&eis. The perf. part, it may be observed, correctly expresses the permanent, completed state of the captivity, and is thus not only on criti cal but exegetical grounds to be pre ferred to the pres. trvyKXeiApievoi [Lachm. with B(Mai)DiFG ; 2 mss. ; Clem. (1), Cyr. (3),' Dam.], which was not im probably a conformation to the imperf. 4tppovp. : so rightly De W., Mey., and the majority of recent critics. eis rijv pieXXovtrav k.t.X.] 'for the faith about to be revealed;' object contemplated in the action of tppovpnots, els not being temporal, 'usque ad' (Riick., Hst., comp. Copt, iEth ), — a meaning comparatively rare in the New Test, (compare John xiii. 1), and here certainly superfluous after the predica- Chap. III. 24, 25. GALATIANS, 87 vai. 2i ware b vofios iraiBayaybs rjfiwv yeyovev els Xpiarov, "va iK irlareas BiKaia^dofiev K ty^ By faith in Christ we 25 ' TT'Ca. <_ S^ _rt / » ' ' -> have become freed from HfSOVarjS 06 TTJS TTtCTTea)? OVKBTl VTTO the pedagogy of the law, and are thus all children of God, Abraham's seed, and heirs of the promise. tion of time in irpb rov 4xbe1v, — but in its usual ethical meaning of ' destination for' ('in fidem,' Vulg., Clarom ) ; com pare AViner, Gr. § 49. a, p. 353. The clause is thus naturally connected with the finite verb, not with ovyKX. ( ' con- elusi, adeoque adacti ad,' Beng.), — a construction certainly admissible (see exx. in Schweigh. Lex. Polyb. s. v. 0-U7KA., or Raphel, Annot. A'ol. 11. p. 440 sq.), but open to this serious exe getical objection, that faith is not yet represented as existing ; see Meyer in loc. pieXX ova av it I or. a ir ok.] The unusual order seems in tended to give prominence to peXXovaav, and to present more forcibly the contrast between former captivity and subsequent freedom ; comp. Rom. viii. 1 8, Trpbs tV fieXXovtrav S6£av diroKaXvtpbr)vai, where the future glories are set in strong con trast to present calamities ; see Fritz, in loc, Vol. n. p. 148. 24. So-Te] 'So then,' 'itaque,' Vulg., Clarom. ; consequence from the preceding statement ; see notes, ch. ii. 13. 7rai8a7iD7<(s] 'pedagogue;' 'pEedago- gus proprie notat eum qui puerum manu prehensum ad magistrum dueit,' Schoett. (Hot. Arol 1. p. 741 ), who remarks, how ever, that the word was adopted by Rab binical writers, but with some additional notions of care and guardianship : even among the Greek and Latin writers the idea of guardianship and also of strict ness and severity is distinctly prominent ; see esp. the exx. in Eisner, Obs. Vol. 11. p. 186. The mere idea of leading to Christ (' via? dux ' [shau-moit], Copt., •ductor,' JEth.) must not, then, be re tained to the exclusion of those of actual teaching (Arm., Auth.), tutelage, and disciplinary restraint. This pedagogic function of the law was displayed posi tively, in warnings and threatenings ; negatively (the prevailing idea in this place), in awakening the conscience, and bringing a conviction of sin ; compare Usteri, Lehrb. 1. 5, p. 66. The patristic comments will be found in Suicer, The- saur. s. v. vApos, Vol. 11. p. 921 ; see also Petav. de Pradest. x. 26. 1 sq. Vol. I. p. 464. els Xp tar Av] 'for Christ ;' not temporal (&XP'S ov eA*b? Xp. see ver. 23), still less local, 'to Christ' as a SiSdtrKaXos (7rpos rbv Xp. dir'Tjye, Theoph., comp. Chrys.), as Christ would thus be represented under two offices, Teacher and ('Iva 4k Trior. Sik.) Atoner, in the same verse. If any trace of a local meaning be retained in translation, e. g. ' unto,' Auth. Ver., it must be un-4 derstood of an ethical arrival (compare 2 Cor. x. 14), as eis with persons is not simply equivalent to 7rprfs, but involves the idea of mingling with and associa tion ; comp. Rom. v. 12, and see AViner, Gr. §49. a, p. 353. Ir a 4 k irlar. 8iKaio>&.] 'to the intent that we might be justified by faith ;' more distinct and specific explanation of the preceding eis Xpiarov, the emphatic 4k irlareas serving to suggest and enhance the contrast with the non-justifying and merely pedagogic vApos. On the proper force of the Sikoiouv 4k, see notes on ch. ii. 16. 25. i\bovar\s Se] 'but now that (this) faith is come :' contrast between the present freedom and the past ped agogy ; iXbobans, tpnffl, Tijs iritrTeas, ttjs TfXeiov drSpa iroiovtrris, ovk dr IVt elnpev bub iraiSayayAr, Theoph. The connec tion is so close throughout this latter GALATIANS, Chap. III. 26, 27. iraiBayaybv iafiev. w irdvres yap viol ©eov eare Bia rrjs iria- Tew? eV Xpiard) 'Irjaov- 27 oaoi yap els Xpiarbv ifSairria^trjTe, portion of the chapter, that it is difficult to subdivide it into paragraphs. Meyer, Conyb., al. place a paragraph after ver. 22 : it seems, however, more natural here, as ver. 23, 24, carry out the idea expressed in avveKXeiaev, ver. 22. birb 7^18071070* v] 'under a peda gogue.' The article is not here latent after the prep. (comp. AViner, Gr. § 19. 2 b, p. 114), but appears studiously omitted (so rightly Copt.), the words being in fact equivalent to ' under tute lage, ' unter Padagogengewalt,' Meyer. 26. irdvres ydp] 'For ye all;' con firmation, e contrario, of the truth of the foregoing words ; they were now not TraiSes, but viol ('filii emancipati, remoto custode,' Beng.), and that too not sons of Abraham merely (comp. ver. 7), but sons of God; irpArepov eSet£ev Sti vlovs eVoiei [7; mffTts rov] 'A/3p. . . . vvv Se airotpalvei Sti koi tou Qeov, Chrys. The uiol Qeov, as Theod. Mops, well observes, includes the idea of TeAeioVTjs, which the preceding metaphor might serve to suggest. The reading dnavres adopted by Lachm. is not im probable, but not supported by AB. ttjs 7rfo-T. 4v Xp. '1 770-.] 'through the faith in Jesus Christ ;' so rightly Syr., Arm. (ed. Zohr.), Syr.-Philox., and Chrys. (ed. Field). Several com mentators (Ust, al. : see Hofm. Schriftb. Vol. n. 2, p. 152) join 4v Xp. 'Intr. with viol 0. e'o-Te, on the ground that the words would be a superfluous addition to nltrns, and that ver. 27 contains the amplification of the expression. But, independently of the awkwardness of adding a second modal clause to viol e'o-Te, the recurrence of the formula irio-Tis eV Xp. 'I7J0-. (Eph. i. 15, Col. i. 4) its grammatical accuracy (Winer, Gr. § 20. 2, p. 123, notes on Eph. i. 15), and the natural coherence of the words. all seem distinctly to suggest the simpler and less dislocated construction If the article had been inserted, we should then have two ideas conveyed, the latter of which would be explanatory of the former ; ' per fidem, eamque in Chr. Jes. collocatam,' see Fritz. Rom. iii. 25, Vol. 1. p. 195. 27. So" 01 7 rip] 'for as many as;' 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 Qeov, and base the argument on the fact that Christ was the Son of God : eVeSt!- ffaabe rbv Xp. rbv dXljbas vibv rov Qeov, 4Kelvov Se ^eVSeSujtieVoi eirtoVcos uiol Qeou XP7?|UaTi'£eTe, Theodoret ; see also Chrys. in loc. els Xpio-Tov] ' into Christ;' not 'in Christo,' Vulg., Cla rom., but 'in Christum,' Beza (compare Copt, pichr) ; scil. ' ut Christo addicti essetis,' Schott, or more strictly, into communion with Him, and incorpora tion in His mystical body. The mean ing of eis with 0airTl(a appears twofold ; (a) 'unto,' object, purpose: Matth. iii, 11, Acts ii. 38, see AA'iner, Gr. § 49. a, p. 354, Bernhardy, Synt. v. 11. b. 3, p. 220; (0) 'into,' union, and communion with : the context always showing whether it be of the most complete and most mystical nature, as here and Rom. vi. 3 (comp. 1 Cor. xii. 13), or, as in 1 Cor. x. 3, necessarily less compre hensive and significant. We may, in conclusion, observe that the expression PairT. els rb Svopa (Matth. xxviii. 19, Acts viii. 16, xix. 5, al.) is not identi cal in meaning with tdairr. 4v rep bvAp.. (Tholuck, Beitrdge, No. 8, p. 49 sq.), but ever implies a spiritual and mystical union with Him in whose name the Chap. III. 27, 28. GALATIANS. 89 Xpiarbv iveBiiaaa^e. 28 ovk evi ^lovBaios oiiBe "TiXXrjv, ovk evi BovXos ovBe iXeifeepos, ovk evi dpaev Kal *2sr>Xv irdvres ydp vfiels sacrament was administered ; see esp, Stier, Reden Jesu, ATol. vi. p. 899. The meaning of t3airrl(eir nre efs Tiva (efs ti) and jSariT. eis to oropd nvos is discussed at length by Fritz, (/iron. vi. 3, Vol. i p. 359 sq.), in opp. to Bindseil, Stud, u Krit. 1832, p. 410 sq., — but by no means satisfactorily, as he regards eis as only implying ethical direction ('ali- quem aquae ita immergere ut ejus eogi- tationes in aliquem dirigas'), instead of that mystical incorporation which the passage seems certainly to convey. The patristic comments on this expression will be found in Suicer, Thes. Arol. i. p. 624 sq., but are not sufficiently ex act Xp i o- t 8 v e'veSuo-acr&e] 'ye put on Christ,' scil. at your baptism ; Strot ydp els Xpiarbv itiairrlabnTe iK rov ©eou iyevviibriTe, Chrys. There appears here no allusion to Heathen (toga virilis), Jewish (whether at the High Priest's inauguration, Deyling, Obs., A'ol. in. p. 406 sq., No. 42, or in a cabalistic sense, comp. Schoettg. on Rom. xiii. 14, Vol. I. p. 571), or, even, though very plausible, Christian customs (at baptism, Bingham, Antiq. Book xn. 4. 1 sq ). From the instances Wetst. has collected on Rom. xiii. 14, it would appear that evSuetrdai Tiva is a strong expression, denoting the complete assumption of the nature, etc., of another ; e. g. Dion. Halicar. A. R. xi. 15. 5, (tov TapKuviov 4xe1vor eVSuo'u.. ), Tac. Ann. xvi. 28. Thus eVS. XpurrAr implies a union with Christ of so true and so complete a nature, that we are brought eis ui'av o-u77e'veiav xa'i plav ISeav (Chrys.) with Him, and, as it is beautifully paraphrased by Calv., ' coram Deo nomen ac personam Christi geramus, atque in Ipso magis quam nobis- rruJ^Ipsis epnseamur:' comp. Bp. Barlow, ciud by AVaterl. Works, Vol. iv. p. 604, 12 and see Suicer, Thesaur. s. v. 4vS., Vol. i. p. 1112. For a good sermon on this text, see Donne, Serm. lxxxvii. Vol. iv. p. 102 (ed. Alf), and for a notice of the perversion of this text by heretics, Forbes, Instruct, x. 111. 32 sq., p. 448. 28. ovk evi k.t.X] 'There is amony (such) neither Jew nor Greek;' digres sive statement of the practical result of the Xp. eVeS. : the new and holy 'habitus' causes all other distinctions, whether of nation (compare Rom. x. 12), condition, or even sex, to be wholly lost sight of and forgotten. The form evi is not for evetrri, but according to Buttm. (see AViner, Gr. § 14. 2, p. 74), is the lengthened form of the adverbi- alized prep., to which the requisite person of the auxiliary verb must be supplied. This explanation has in its favor the similar use of irapa, which can scarcely be called a contraction for irdp- eo-Ti ; but against it those exx. where e'v and evi are used in the same sentence, e. g. Plat Phced. 77 E, Icras evi Kal 4v vpiv Thecet. 186 n, and, according to best reading, 1 Cor. vi. 5. In such eases, however, evi would seem to mean little more than 4arl (evi- 4arlr, uirapxei, Zonar. Lex. Vol. I. p. 748), the prepo sitional force being wholly lost; comp. Col. iii. 11. In either case the explana tion of the present passage remains the same ; eVl TrAeTov Striyelrai tJjv ayabArrira rov Qeov oirov ye irutrt rijr tcrnv SeSaKe Sapedr, Damasc. Deyling illustrates this by reference to the various personal, etc., distinctions among the Jews ; 06s. Sacr. Vol. I p. 312 sq., No. 64 ; Eisner (in loc) notices also the customary exclu sion of slaves from certain Heathen rites and temples, 06s. Vol. n. p. 187. dpaev Kal b%Xv]' male and female; ' masculus et femina,' Clarom., but not 90 GALATIANS. Chap. III. 29.— IV. 1. els iare iv Xpiarm 'Iijaov. a el Be iifieis Xpiarov, apa rov AfSpaap, airepfia iare, Kar iirayyeXiav KXrjpovbfioi. XlVbc^ cllnll IV. Akya Be, i oaov Xpovov b KXVpovb- came we all were under bondage, but now have become free sons and inheritors. Vulg., Goth., Copt, al., which do not preserve the slight change of particle. While the alterable political and sociable distinctions are contrasted by ovSe, the unalterable human one of sex is ex pressed by ko( ; Mark x. 6, dirb Se apxrjs KTlaeas dptrer Kal bijXv 4rrolritrev avrobs, compare 1 Tim. ii. 13. This latter dis tinction is of course noticed not in its mere physical, but its ethical aspect, — the subordination of the wife to the husband (Olsh.). This, though an un changeable law of our species when considered koto oapKa, Eph. v. 22, al., is lost sight of in this iyyvrepa irpbs rbv Xpurrbv evaais, Chrys. irdvres ydp] 'for ye all;' proof of the preceding statement ; rip erarbwor Kal plav poptpijv ivSeSvabai, rifr tov Xp., Gicum. The reading diravr. (Lachm.) seems an early gloss. e'ts] 'one,' i.e. one per son ; rb eis dvrl tou ev trapa, Theodoret : compare Lucian, Toxar. 46 (cited by Wetst), els drbpairos vrres o'Ara fitovpev. The concluding words iv Xpiortp 'I770-0S obviate all mistakes by defining in whom, and in whom alone, this union was fully realized. 29. ei Se 0 fie is] 'But if ye f re sumption of the argument after the short digression of ver. 28, the empha sis resting slightly on vpeis : ' 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 efs e'o-Te e'v X. 'Intr. instead of Xpio-Tou, though found in DiEFG ; Clarom Ambrst. is clearly an ex egetical gloss. tou 'APp ad p. trireppa] 'Abraham's seed ;' tou 'AjSp. being put forward with a slight empha sis, and standing in correlation to Xpio-- tou to give force and perspicuity to the conclusion ; ei Se vpeis iare Xpiarov p.optpii xal aapa, eiKdVojs tov 'Ay3p. iare atrepua, QSeum. ; comp. Theod. in loc, and esp. Theod. Mops. (p. 126, ed. Fritz ) who has well elucidated the ar gument, kot' i ir ay y. KXn- povApoi] ' heirs according to, or by way of promise ;' not by any legal ob servances. The xXripovopla is now stated absolutely ; they were KXnpovopoi, not merely of Abraham, nor even ttjs eVa7- yeXlas (Theod. Mops.), but simply of all that which was involved in it, salva tion and the kingdom of Christ ; comp. Meyer in loc. The declaration of ver. 7 is now at length substantiated and expanded by 22 verses of the deepest, most varied, and most comprehensive reasoning that exists in the whole com pass of the great Apostle's writings. The koI before kot. eirayy., adopted by Rec. with FGJK ; mss. ; Syr. (both), Goth , JEth. ; Chrys., Theod., is now rightly omitted by most critical editors. Chapter' IV. 1. Ae'7w 8e'] 'Now I say ;' further and more explanatory proof of the assertion that we are heirs, suggested by the term KXnpovApoi (eh. v. 29), and the comparisons it involves ; comp. ch. v. 16, Rom. xv. 8, where the use of Ae'7to Se in introducing a con tinued explanatory argument rather than merely elucidating a statement or ex pression that had preceded (comp. ch. iii. 17, touto 8e Ae'70), 1 Cor. i 12, Xeyta Se touto, 1 Cor. vii. 29, touto Se' tpnpi), seems analogous to the present 0 KA77povo*/ios]' the heir,' i. e. ' every heir;' compare b peairns, ch. iii. 20, Chap. IV. 1, 2. GALATIANS. 91 fios vtjTTios ianv, ovhev Biatpspei BovXov, Kvpios irdvrav av, aXXa vwo eirtrpoirovs ianv Kal oUovofiovs dxpi rfjs irpd&ea- AViner, Gr. § 18. 1, p. 97. There are some exegetical difficulties in this and the following • verse, arising from the fact, Uiat, while the nature of the com parison (see Brown), as well as the words Sxpi Tijs irpobeaplas rov irdrpos, would seem to imply that the father was alive, the expression xvptos irdrrar av, and the term iirlTponovs ( but see be low) 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 com mentators ; the former is ably advocated by Neubour, .B16/. Brem. Class. Vol. v. p. 40 (cited by AVolf), and also many recent expositors. Grotius endeavors to escape the difficulty by representing the father absent on travel ; comp. JElian, Var. Hist. in. 26, cited below in note ver. 2. The question, however, is really of little moment : St. Paul is engaged so entirely in the simple comparison of the circumstances of the nonage of the earthly KXinpovAp.os, with those of the nonage of believers who lived under the law (ver. 3), that the subordinate ques tion of the life, death, or absence of the father of the xXvpovApos passes wholly out of sight ; comp. Alf. in loc. vr)ir io s] 'an infant, u minor ; aV77j8os, as opposed to ecpnfios, the technical term for one who had attained his majority ; see Smith, Diet. Antiq. s. v. etpnB., and Reff. in Rost u. Palm, Lex. ATol. I. p. 1282. There does not seem any suf ficient reason for departing from this usual view of vr)mos (opp. to Bagge in loc), or with Chrys., al , for introducing any reference to the ethical meaning of weakness of understanding. ouSev 8 i a

v] ' though he be lord of all ;' concessive use of the participle ; comp. Donalds. Gr § 621, Kruger, Sprachl. § 56. 13. 1 sq. It does not seem neces sary for the sake of preserving the image of a living father to understand these words as prospective ; the heir was the Kvpios ( Grot, compares the use of ' herus minor' in Lat. comedy), in right of birth and condition. 2. e'7riTpd'7rous) ' overlookers, guar dians' The latter is the usual meaning of the word in relation to children). (comp. Isams, Hmr. Cleonym. \ 10, p. 4 (ed. Schom. ), tov exSrtaror tSv olxelav irrlrpoirov KaraXtirelv ; ib. Hcer. Dices. § 10 ; Plut. Lycurg. § 3, robs rar bptpavuv PaaiXeav iirtTpAirovs), and that in which it appears to have been adopted by He brew writers ; compare Schoettg. Hor. Hebr. in loc, Selden, de Success, ch. 9, Vol. n. p. 25. It seems here, however, better to adopt the more general mean ing ' overlooker, one entrusted with the charge of anything' (comp. Aristoph. Eccl. 1YI, iirnpAirois xal raplaiat, Xen. CEcon. xii. 2, b iv rois dypols iirlrpoiros), and not to embarrass the passage with terms which might bring in irrelevant considerations (the father's being alive or dead) into the present simple com parison. AVe may, however, not un suitably comp. vEHan, Var. Hist. m. 16, eVifp. koi tou iraiSAs, Kal twv xPVP-aTtavi where the context distinctly shows that the father was alive, though absent. oiKovApovs] ' stewards,' ]^_S [dominos domus] Syr., ' acto- 92 / GALATIANS. Chap. IV. 2, 3. filas rov irarpbs. ' 3 ovras Kal rjfiels, ore fjfiev vijinoi, inrb rd res,' Vulg., Clarom. [compare Plin. Ep. in. 19], less accurately, Goth, fauragag- gam [Vorsteher] ; managers of the prop erty of the KXnpovApos, and standing in the same relation to his estate as the eVi- TpoTroi did to his education and general bringing up ; comp. Plutarch, Educ. § 7, SovXav . . . robs Se o'lKOvApovs, robs Se Sa- veiards. Most commentators not inaptly cite the case of Eliezer, Gen. xv. 2, comp. xxiv. 2 ; illustrations from Roman law (Bagge, al.) do not seem here in point, as the comparison is simple and general. ttjs irpobea pias] ' the time appointed (beforehand),' ' praefinitum tempus,' Vulg. The term irpobeapla, scil. Spa or r/pepa (for the distinction between these, see Bagge in loc), is properly the term limited for bringing actions or prosecu tions, the time fixed by the statute of limitations, ' Tag der Verjahrung :' see Smith, Diet, of Antiq. s. v., and exx. in Rost u. Palm, Lex. s. v. ; — thence, any pre-appointed time or day ; see the numerous exx. in Wetst. in loc, Kypke, 06s. Vol. n. p. 279, Krebs. 06s. p. 322. In eccles. writers, irpobeap. is sometimes used for the time assigned for repentance before excommunication ; see Bingham, Antiq. xvi. 2. 7. It may be ob served that as the termination of nonage ¦was fixed in Hebrew (13 years and a day for males; 12 years and a day for fe males, Selden, de Success, eh. 9, Vol. n. p. 25), as well as Greek and Roman law, the dependence of the 77 irpobeapla on the father, must be explained, — either (a) by the very reasonable as sumption that St. Paul is here speaking theologically rather than juridically, — or (b) less probably, by the supposition that he was here referring, with techni cal exactness, to an extended parental authority which the Galatians appear to have possessed ; see Gdttl. Gesch. d. Rom. Staatsverf. p. 109, 517 (cited by B. Crus.), and comp. Caesar, Bell. Gall. vi. 19. 3. o'iras koI 77 p. e 1 s] 'So we also ;' application of the preceding statements ; Kal, as usual in comparative sentences, bringing into prominence and throwing a slight emphasis on the contrasted member of the comparison ; see notes on Eph. v. 23. It has been doubted whether the Spiels are Jews (Chrys., Theod.), Gentiles (Aug.), or both equally (Win., Mey.). The most nat ural reference seems to be (a) to Jews, primarily and principally, as the nature of the preceding argument seems dis tinctly to require ; but also (b) seconda rily, Gentiles, in accordance with the nature of the succeeding argument. to o-Toixeia tou kAop-ov] 'the rudiments of the world.' It is very difficult to decide on the exact mean ing of these words. Taken separately, oTotxeiov is used in the N. T., both in a physical (2 Pet. iii. 10, 12) and an ethical sense (Heb. v. 12). KoVuos, again, has, practically at least, three meanings; physical (Matth. xxv. 34), collective (mankind, Joh. iii. 16), and ethical (1 Cor. ii. 12). From the com bination of both words, a great variety of interpretations have arisen, all, how ever, separable into two general classes, ( 1 ) Physical ; elementa mundi, either, (a) festivals of Judaism, Chrysost. ; (b) Zabianism, August. ; or (c) abstractedly, religion in sensible forms, Neand. Plant ing, Vol. 1. p. 465, Bonn. (2) Ethical ; rudimenta mundi, first, but not neces sarily erroneous (comp. 2Eth.), princi ples of religious knowledge among men, whether (a) Jews (De AV.) ; or (6) Jews and heathens (Meyer). Grammatical considerations seem in favor of ( 1 ) ; for o-7oiKeia, in a sense rudimenta, would Chap. IV. 3, 4. GALATIANS. 93 aroixeia rov Koafiov fifiev BeBovXafievot' 4 ore Be rjX&ev rb irXn- pafia rov xpbvov, i^aireareikev b &ebs tov vlov aiirov, yevbfievov appear to require, as in Heb. v. 12, a gen. objecti, and not as here a gen. sub jecti (see Neander I. c.) ; still koodoo need not be considered a pure gen. subj., the connection between the nom. and gen. being often somewhat lax ; see AViner, Gr. § 30. 2, p. 214 sq. Exe getical considerations must be also ex tended 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 TrapaSoo-is rav dvbptirtav, seems so distinct, and so palpably in fa vor of (2), as to outweigh the argument drawn by Schneckenb. from the sup posed physical use of xAap.os in ver. 20. The use of the term tptXoaocpla seems also there to point slightly more to heathen rudiments (see notes in loc), while on the contrary in Col. ii. 20, and below, ver. 9, the reference seems mainly to Jewish rudiments. All these conflicting views being considered, we seem here justified in deciding in favor of (2) generally ; assigning, however, to the words (as both ripiels and the nature of the argument require) a primary, but by no means exclusive reference to the Jews. For further notices of this doubtful expression, see Baur, Paulus, p. 594 sq., and for a defence of the physical meaning, Schneckenburg. in Theol. Jahrb. 1848, p. 444 sq., and Hilgenf. Galat. p. 68 sq. The applica tion to the ceremonial law will be found, Petav. de Prtedest. x. 23. 12, Vol. i. p. 456. SeSovXwpevoi] 'in a state of slavery ;' the perf. pass. part. marking the permanent nature and con tinuance of the SouAeia ; comp. Winer, Gr. § 45. 1, p. 305. The verb ^,uev may be regarded either as in union with BeSouA. and as forming a compound tense, or as in more immediate con nection with bitb tA o-t. : the latter is most probable, as forming the best par allel to btrb 4niTpAirovs 4artv; so dis tinctly Copt., and perhaps Vulg., Clarom., 'sub elementa eramus servi- entes ;' see Meyer in loc. 4. to irX-iipapa rov xpbvov] ' the fulness of the time,' i. e. the mo ment which makes the time complete, answering to the &xpt rrjs npobeaplas rov irarpAs, ver. 2 ; see Stier, Ephes. Vol. I. p. 203, and compare TJsteri, Lehrb. n. 1, p. 83. These words have been the subject of considerable discussion. Taken in its most general view irXvpapa has two meanings ; ( 1 ) Active ; to irX-r)pn icoielv, implendi actio, not id quod implet, as Fritz. ( on Rom. xi. 12) has satisfacto rily proved against Storr, Opusc. I. p. 144. ( 2 ) Passive ; either in the less usual sense (a) id quod impletum est, or the more common and regular sense (j8), id quo res impletur ; compare 1 Cor. x. 26, Mark viii. 20. Hence rb irXt)- paipa rov XP- W'H seem to be ' id quo temporis spalium impletur, sc. expletur ;' the idea being rather that of a temporal space (so to speak) filled up, as it were, by the flowing in of time ; see Olsh. in loc, and comp. Herod, in 22, ^SoSkovto 8' erea £Ar]s irXvpapa avSpl paKpArarov. Fritz., on the contrary, but with less probability, regards irXJipapa as the ab stract notion of the concrete idea ttXt)- p?7s, ' temporis plenitas,' i. q. ' plenum tempus ;' see, however, his very valua ble note, Rom, I. c Vol. n. p. 469 sq. The doctrinal meaning of this term is investigated at length in Hall, Bampt. Led. for 1797* 'esp. Serm. viii. p. 211 sq. ; see also the good sermons on this text by Andrewes, Serm. vi Vol. I. p. 49, and Donne, Serm. in. A'ol. i. p. 39 (ed. Alf). s vfieis, me not even in my infirmity, but evinced towardB me the deepest reverence and warmest love. (Scheuerl. Synt. § 49. 2, p. 507) e. g. Acts xv. 36, imoKetydpieba rovs dSeXtpovs .... iras exovai : see exx. in AViner, I. o. and Kypke, 06s. Vol. i. p. 375. It will be best then, with Lachm., Buttm., al. to place a comma after upas, and to regard pfaas k. t. A. as a separate, ex planatory clause. prj iras — KeKon i a k a] ' lest haply I have (actu ally) labored in vain : ' 'p.i) etiam indica- tivum adjunctum habet, ubi rem a nobis pro vera haberi indicare volumus,' Herm. Viger, No. 270 ; see also AViner, Gr. § 56. 2, p. 446, Klotz, Devar. Vol. i. p. 129, and notes on ch. ii. 2. Chrysost, not having appy. observed this idiom, has unduly pressed cpofiovpai and pt)iras, and implied nearly a contrary sense ; ovSeira, tpyalv, il;e(3r) rb vavdytov, dXX' en rbv x€LP®ra tovto aSlvovra fiXeiru ; contrast Theod., piepvnpevos p,ev rdv iro- vav, rbv Se Kapirbv ovx bpwv. eis vpds] ' upon you ;' not ' in vobis,' Vulg., Clarom., Arm , but ' propter vos,' iEth., or more exactly, ' in vos, emphatica lo- cutio,' Beng. ; compare Rom. xvi. 6, iKOiclaaev eis Tipcts. The meaning of eis ('looking towards,' Donalds. Crat. § 170) is thus not so much simply ethical, ' in reference to,' and hence 'for you ' (De AV.), — this being more naturally expressed by a dat. commodi (Ecclus. xxiv. 34), — as ethically-focaJ, 'upon you,' Auth. ; comp. Bernhardy, Synt. v. 10, p. 217: the Apostle's labor was directed to the Galatians, actually reached them, and so had passed on to them. 12. ylveabe as iya] '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 reverence for him. Sti Kdya as bpels] ' since I have become as ye are ;' dis suasive from Judaism urged on the ground of his own dereliction of it ; comp. 1 Cor. ix. 20, 21. The exact sentiment conveyed by these words has received several different explanations. Of these (a) that of the Greek expos itors — ' I was once a zealot for Judaism, as ye now are' (ravra irpbs robs e| 'Iou- SaiW, Chrys. ) — is open to the objection that 77,t«jv ( 'fui, nee amplius sum ' ) would have thus seemed almost a neces sary insertion (Mey.) ; comp. Just, ad Grate. 5 (AVetst), ylveabe its iyti, 'An xdyw tfpriv ws vp.e1s. Again (6) that of Bengel, Fell, al., that it is only a scrip tural mode of expressing warm affection (1 Kings xxii. 4), i. e. 'love me as I love you,' is certainly not in harmony with the use of ylveabe, and still less with the context, where apprehension (tpo$ovpai 6/iSs) rather than love is what is at present uppermost in the Apostle's thoughts. It seems best then, (e) with Fritz., De W., and most modern expos itors, to regard the clause as urging a course of reciprocity on the part of the Galatians corresponding to that which had been pursued by the Apostle ; ' be come free from Judaism like me, for I, though a native Jew, have become (and am ) a Gentile like you,' ' I am to?s dvA- piois as dvopos ( 1 Cor. ix. 21 ) now, though ireptaaorepas (nXariis x. r. X. (ch. i. 14) then;' see Neand. Planting, Vol. i. p. 223 (Bohn), and Fntzsch. Opusc. p. 232 sq., where the passage is fully dis cussed. aSeAipoi Seopal vpav] ' brethren, I beseech you ;' earnest entreaty ('verba TrepiTro&i),' Grot) be longing not to what follows, — though so taken by Chrys., al., and all the an cient Vv., — but with what precedes, as the SeV-is is in the first and not in the last portion. This passage is curious as one in which the best ancient, and the Chap. IV. 12, 13. GALATIANS 101 dBeXipoi, Beopai vfiav ovBev fie rjBiKrjaare- n otBare Be on Bi da^eveiav rfjs aapws evrjyyeXiadfirjv ifiiv rb irpbrepov, best modern interpreters, are, as happens but very rarely, in direct opposition to each other. ouSe'v pe tjSik^j- ¦ O^.J [abominati estis] Syr. : ' plus est eK7TTUeiv quam ii;ovbeve1v, hoc enim con- temptum, illud et abominationem sig- nificat,' Grot. ; see Kypke, Observ. Vol. 11. p. 280. Of the compounds of tttuw, those e'v and eV are only used in the natural, and not, as Karairr., Starrr., dwtnrr., in the metaphorical sense ; see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 15 sq. Probably, as Fritz, suggests, eYm-. was here used rather than the more common diroirr. by a kind of alliteration after i f ouS-evrjirare, ' non 7-eprobastis aut respuistis,' more esp. as a repetition of the same prep, in com position appears to be an occasional characteristic of the Apostle's style; compare Rom. ii. 17, xi. 7. De AVette feels a difficulty in 4£ovb. and e*{e7rT. be ing applied to iretpaapbs on the part of the Galatians. Yet surely, whether referred to St Paul or to the Galat, the expression is equally elliptical, and must in either case imply despising that which formed or suggested the iretpaapAs. as Xpiarbv 'I 77 cr o u 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 Apos- Chap. IV. 15. GALATIANS. 103 ' Irjaovv. f 15 ris ovv b fiaKapiapibs vfiav ; fiaprvpa ydp vfilv tie not only as an angel, but as One higher and more glorious (Heb. i. 4), even as Him who was the Lord of angels. 15. tis obv] 'Of what kind then,' scil. 9jv [inserted in DEK(t)FG) : mss. ; Chrys.]; ' qualis (not quanta), h. e. quam levis, quam inconstans, igitur erat; Fritz. ; sorrowful enquiry, expres sive of the Apostle's real estimate of the nature of their paxapiapAs ; olxerai, dirio- Xero- koAojs ovk a.7rorp7jvajuevos, ctAAa Si' 4parr\aeas 4vSei£dpevos , Theod. Mops. If 7rou he adopted, for which there is greater external authority [ABCFG; 6 mss. ; Boern., Syr. Vulg , Copt, Arm. al. ; Dam., Hier. al.], but which seems to bear every appearance of having been a correction (to ris dvrl rov irov rebetKev, Theod.), then 4arlv must be supplied, and oov taken in its ' vis collectiva,' whereas in the present case, what has been called the vis refiexiva ( ' takes up what has been said and continues it,' Donalds. Crat. § 192) is more apparent; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 719, and notes on Phil. ii. 1. p. ax apt o- pAs vpav] ' the boasting of your blessedness,' 'beatitatis vestrae praedica- tio,' Beza; the Galatians themselves being obviously both the paxaplGovres (not St. Paul and others, G5cum., comp. Theoph.) and the p.axapt£Apevoi : see Rom. iv. 6 (where Ae'7ei tov paxapiapAv = ptaxapi(ei), and compare Fritz, in loc. The word is occasionally found in ear lier writers (e. g. Plato, Rep. ix. 59 D, Aristot. Rhet. I. 9. 4) and is of common occurrence in the Greek liturgies; see Suicer, Thesaur. s. v. Vol. n. p. 290 sq. robs ocpbaXpovs vpav) ' your eyes,' ' oeulos vestros,' Vulg., Clarom. ; not ' your own eyes,' Auth. (robs i'Si'ous btpbaXpobs), as the article and pronoun are found in the N. T. constantly asso ciated with btpb., where no emphasis is intended; compare Joh. iv. 35, and see the numerous exx. in Bruder, Concord. s. v. p. 667. All inferences then from this passage that the oo-fte'veia of the Apostle was a disease of the eyes, are in the highest degree precarious ; see Alf. in loc. 4£opb£avres] ' having plucked out,' ' eruissetis et de- dissetis,' Vulg., Clarom. ; participle ex pressive of an act immediately prior to, and all but synchronous with that of the finite verb ; comp. Hermann, Viger, No. 224. That the verb 4^opvrreiv ( ' usgraban,' Goth. ) is a ' verbum so- lemne' (Mey.) for the extirpation of the eye (I Sam. xi. 2, Herod, vm. 116, etc. ) may perhaps be doubted, as 4kkAtt- reiv btpbaXpbv 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. 247. 11, Aris- toph. Nub. 24 (Af&o>), Plutarch, Lycurg. 11 (j3aKT7)pi'a). The Greek vocabulary on this subject is very varied ; see the numerous synonymns in Steph. Thes. s. v. bqbaXpAs. 4SaKare] 'ye would have given;' the &v [Rec. with D3EJK ; mss.] being rightly omitted with great preponderating evidence [AB CD!FG ; 2 mss.] ; comp. John xv. 22, xix. 11. This omission of theLarticle has a 'rhetorical' force (Herm)., and differs from the past tense with dv, as marking more definitely the certainty that the event mentioned in the apodo- sis would have taken place, if the re striction expressed or implied in the protasis had not existed ; see Herm. de Partic. dv, p. 58 sq., Schmalfeld, Synt. § 79, p. 185. Whether this distinction can always be maintained in the N. T. is perhaps doubtful, as the tendency to omit &v in the apodosis (especially with the imperf.) is certainly a distinct fea ture of later Greek; see Winer, Gr. § 104 GALATIANS, Chap. IV. 16, 17. on el Bvvarbv rovs bcf&aXfioiis vfiav i^opv^avres fyk iBa aare i-^pbs vpiav yeyova dXnf&evav vpiv ', 17 ZrjXovaiv vpds oil KaXas, 16 Your false teachers only court you for selfish ends: and ye are fickle. Would that I were witli you, and could alter my tone, aKare fioi. dXXa 42. 2, p. 273, and comp. Ellendt, Lex. Soph. s. v. x. 1, Vol. i. p. 125. 16. fio-Te] 'So then?' 'Ergo?' Vulg., Clarom., consequence (expressed interrogatively) from the present state of things as contrasted with the past, — ' so then, as things now stand, am I become your enemy?' ou^ bp.e1s iare ol itepieiton es Kal bepairebovres, ko\ rav oipbaXpar npttlirepov dyorres; Ti rol- v v v 7e'70ve ; irAbev r\ exbpa, Chrys. The consecutive force of Sore is more strongly pressed by Meyer, who accord ingly connects the particle with the interrogation tis ovv paKap., of which it is to be conceived as expressing the special consequence, ' is it in consequence of the unstable nature of your paKap., that,' etc., — but this seems to involve the necessity of regarding paprvpa ydp k. -, . A. as parenthetical, and seems less in accordance with the context than the general and more abrupt reference to present circumstances ; see De AVette in loc The use of aare with in- terrog. sentences is briefly noticed by Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 776. i X& pb s vpav yeyova] ' am I be come your enemy,' i. e. ' hostile to you,' . o p j «"i«-i \ S^\ [dominus inimicitiae] Syr. (both), ' inimicus vobis,' Vulg , Clarom., 'fijands' [Feind], Goth., Copt., ttlh., Arm., — nearly all regarding ixbpbs as used substantively, and appy. actively, as in most of the languages above cited there are forms which would have distinctly conveyed the passive meaning. This latter meaning is adopted by Mey., Alf., al., and is not only grammatically ad missible (^x^pos, as the gen. shows, act ing here as a substantive), but even contextually plausible, as the opposition between the former love of the Galatians and their present aversion would thus seem more fully displayed. Still 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 ixbpbs dvbpairos ( Clem. Recogn. i. 70, 71, 'ille inimicus homo') was actually a name by which the Ju- daists designated the Apostle, the active meaning is to be preferred ; see Hilgenf. Clem. Recogn., p. 78, note, AVieseler, Chronol. p. 277. dXnbebav] ' by speaking the truth,' scil. ' because I speak the truth ; ' ovk olSa dxxijv ahlav, Chrys. To what period does the par ticiple refer ? Certainly not (a) to the present Epistle, as' the Apostle could not now know what the effect would be (Schott) ; nor (6) to the first visit, when the state of feeling (ver. 15) was so very different, but (c) to the second (Acts xviii. 23), when Judaism had probably made rapid advances ; see AVieseler, Chronol. p. 277. No objec tion can be urged against this from the use of the present (imperf.) participle, as the action was still lasting ; see Winer, Gi: § 45. 1, p. 304, Schmalfeld, Synt. § 202, p. 406. 17. £77 A o u o- 1 v u p.] ' 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 similar use of CnXoiiv (' sich eifrig um Jem. kummern, Rost. u. Palm, Lex. s. v.), — here Chap. IV. 18. GALATIANS. 105 iKKXeiaai vpds 'beXovaiv, 'iva airrovs tyjKovre. neither exclusively in its better sense (2 Cor. xi. 2) nor yet in its worse (Acts vii. 9; compare Chrys.), but in the neutral meaning of ' paying court to' ('studiose ambire,' Fritz.), — see Plut. vn. 762 (cited by Fritz.), inrb XP*las TO irpiorov eirovral Kal ("t/Aou- aiv, varepov Se koI ipiAouoiv. a A A d e'KKAeio'at k. r. X.] ' nay, they desire to exclude you ;' they not merely follow the positive and less dis honorable course of including you among themselves [Syr. reads ^kA., but appy. only from mistake] but the baser and more negative one of exclud ing you from others to make you thus court them. The omission of a gen. after €kkA. (see Kypke, 06s. n. 181) makes it difficult to determine the ob jects 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. rijs reXelas yraaeas (Chrys.), 'a Christo et fiducia ejus' (Luther), 'ab aliis omni bus* (Schott), ' e circulis 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 abrobs, which suggests a marked personal an tithesis, and the use of iKKXeiaai, which seems more naturally to refer to num bers or a community (Mey.) than to anything abstract or individual. Combining these two observations, we may perhaps with probability extend the reference from St. Paul (ed. 1, 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, however, rests really on the verb, not on the objects to 14 which it may be thought to refer. The Galatians were courted, and that ou KaAais, in every way ; direct proselytiz ing on the part of these teachers (if they had been sincere in their convic tions) might have worn a semblance of being xaXAv ; their course, however, was rather (ciAAa) indirect, it was to isolate their victims, that in their isolation they might be forced to affect those who thus dishonestly affected them. 'AXXa thus preserves its proper force, and becomes practically corrective ; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 2, 3, Hartung, Partik. Vol. ii. p. 35. The reading \ipds which has still some few defenders (Scholef. Hints, p. 96, comp. De AV.) appears to have been a conjecture of Beza. Though said to have been since found in a few mss., the assertion of Scholz, ' 77/ias e codd. recent, fere omnibus ' is a com plete mis-statement. £nXovre] 'in order that ye may zealously affect them ;' purpose of the f7)Aouo-iv ov xaXas, iva not being adverbial ( ' ubi, quo in statu,' Fritz., Mey.), hut the simple conjunction, here as also in 1 Cor. iv. 6, associated with the indie, per solascis- mum ; see AViner, Gr. § 41. 5. p. 259, and Green, Gr. p. 73, who calls atten tion to the fact that both soloecisms ap pear in a contracted verb, where they might certainly have more easily oc curred. Hilgenfeld cites as a parallel Clem. Horn. xi. 16 (read 6), "va birripxev, but the preceding clause, ei beXere avrbv irotrjaai, seems, structurally considered, in effect equivalent to ei iirolnaer, and urrlpxev only the imperf. ' in re irrita vel infecta,' — a usage appy. not fa miliar to this expositor (see p. 131, and comp. notes on ch. ii. 2), but perfectly regular and idiomatic; see Madvig, Synt. § 131, Schmalfeld, Synt. § 143, p. 294. It may be remarked that the 103 GALATIANS. Chap. IV. 18, 19; KaXov Be to tfrXova'Sai i\ KaXw irdvrore, Kal fir) fibvov . iv r& ?..„,' ..,. - — >.„ .'...;:„ is TeKvla fiov axis irdXiv aBlva TriiAis, Eisner, al.) as this is inconsistent with the foregoing vuv, nor yet temporal ( ' the ancient Jerus., the Salem of Melchize- dek,' Michael al), as such a ref. is in consistent with a context which only points to later periods, — but has sim ply its usual ethical reference, ' above,' ' heavenly,' ' quae sursum est,' Vulg., Clarom., ^ VV» Syr.-Phil. ; compare 'lepovoaXijp iirovpdvios, Heb. xii. 22, 'lepova. Katvfi, Rev. iii. 12, xxi. 2 ; see the rabbinical quotations in AVetst, and comp. Ust. Lehrb. n. 1. 2, p. 182. As Jerusalem 77 vvv was the centre of Ju daism and the ancient theocratic king dom, so Jerusalem 77 dva is the typical Chap. IV. 27, 28. GALATIANS. 113 fiijTTjp i)fiav 2T yeypairrai ydp, Evcppdv'brjn areipa rj ov tIk- rovaa, pf]\ov Kal fSdr/aov ij o'ok dSivovaa, on iroXXa ra rexva rijs iprjp.ov fiaXXov rj rfjs e^oiJo-r/? toi> avBpa. 28 vp,eis Be, dBeXtpoi, representation of Christianity, and the Messianic kingdom. On the three fold meaning of 'lepova. in the N. T. (scil. 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 'Iepou A77POVOU7J0-77] 'shall in no wise be heir;' emphatic: 'liberi autem ex concubina conditionis servilis aut extra- nea seu gentili a successione plane apud Ebraeos excludebantur,' Selden, de Suc cess, cap. 3, ATol. 11. p. 11. Hammond cites the instance of Jephthah, who was thrust out by his brethren, under the second condition of the law, as the son of a strange woman ; Judges xi. 2. AVith regard to the use of ob pr) with the subj. [KA7jpovo/j7^o-ei BDE ; mss. ; Theoph.], it may be observed that the distinction drawn by Hermann ((Ed. Col. 853) between ov pi/ with future indie (duration or futurity) and with aor. subj. (speedy occurrence) is not ap plicable to the N. T., on accouut of ( 1 ) the varyings (as here); (2) the decided violations of the rule where the MSS. are unanimous, e. g. 1 Thess. iv. 15 : and (3) the obvious prevalence of the subjunctive over the future, both in the N. T. and • fatiscens Graecitas ;' see Lo beck, Phryn. p. 722, Thiersch, Pentat. n. 15, p. 190, and exx. in Gayler, p. 433. On the general use of the united particles see Winer, Gr. § 56. 3, p. 450, and esp. Donalds. Crat. § 394, Gayler, Partic. Neg. p. 405, exx. p. 430, and on the best mode of translation, notes on 1 Thess. iv. 15 (Transl.) 31. S 1 A] ' Wherefore ;' commencement of a short semi-paragraph stating the consolatory application of what has pre ceded ( ' quumobrem ; aptius duas res conjungit,' Klotz. Devar. Vol. n. p. 173), and passing into an exhortation in the following verse. It is very difficult to decide on the exact connection, as St Paul's use of SiA does not appear to have been very fixed. Sometimes, as Rom ii. 1, Eph. ii. 11, iii. 13, iv. 25, it begins a paragraph ; sometimes ( es pecially with Kal) it closely connects clauses, as Rom. i. 24, iv. 22, 2 Cor. iv. 13, v. 9, Phil. ii. 9 ; while in 2 Cor. xii. 10, 1 Thess. v. 11 (imperat), it closes a paragraph, though not in a way 116 GALATIANS. Chap dBeXipol, ovk iafiev iraiBlaKrjS reKva dXXa rrjs eXev^ef Chap. IV. 30 — V. 1. {pas. V. 1 ti; 1. ttj eAeuftepi'a k. t. A.] The difficulty of deciding on the true reading of this passage, owing to the great variation of MSS., is very great. The reading of Lachm., rfj 4Xevbepia ijpus Xpiarbs iiXevbepaaev ariiKere obv, is plausible, and well supported, as y is omitted by ABCD1 ; mss. ; Copt, Damasc, al. ; still the doubt ful meaning of the dat. 4xevbep. (not the article, at which Riick. stumbles), and the abrupt character of the whole, make it, on internal grounds, very difficult to admit. Tisch. (so Matth., Scholz, Rinck, Riick., Olsh., al., though differing in other points) seems rightly to have retained p with D'JEJK (FG fj eXevb. r,p. ; com pare ATulg., Clarom.) ; mss. Syr. ; Chrys., Theod. (2), al., as the H is less likely to have arisen lrom a repetition of the first letter of HMA2 (Mey.), than to have strictly similar to the present. On the whole, it seems most probable that St. Paul was about to pass on to an appli cation of, not a deduction from, the previous remarks and citation. He commences with SiA, but the word 4Xeubipas suggesting a digression (see Davidson, Introd. A'ol. n. p. 148), he turns the application by means of ttj 4Xevbep(a, into au inferential exhortation (-vEth. erroneously makes the first clause a reason 'quia Christus'), ver. 1, and recommences a new parallel train of thought with ISe iyti. AVe thus put a slight pause after iv. 30, and a fuller one after v. 1. If impels Be be adopted [AC; mss.; Copt; Cyr. (1), Damasc, al.] the connection 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 KXnpov. ; ' 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 dpa(Rec), which would perhaps imply a little more decidedly than Sib a continuance of what was said (Donalds. Crat. § 192), the external evidence [.IK (apa o8v FG, Thcodrt] is very weak, and the proba bility of correction not inconsiderable. tt a 1 8 1 a k 7j s] 'of a bond-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 princi ple of correlation, whereby when the governing article is anarthrous (here pos sibly so after the predicative 4ap.er, Middl. p. 43) the governed becomes anarthrous also ; see Middl. Gr. Art. in. 3. 7, p. 50 (ed. Rose), comp. Winer, Gr. § 19. 2. b, p. 113 sq. As, however, 7raiSio-K77 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 as designed to give a general char acter to the Apostle's conclusion ; see Peile in loc Tijs e'Aeu.o-epas cannot, however, be translated ' of a iree woman.' Chapter V. 1. tt? 4Xevbepitf k. t. X.] 'Stand firm, then, in the free dom for which; etc. ; inferential exhor tation from the declaration immediately preceding. Of the many explanations which the expression rrj 4\evbepla arri- Keir has received, the two following appear to be the most probable; (a) ' libertati stare, quam deserere est nefas,' Fritz. Rom. xii. 12, Vol. in. p. 80, AViner, Gr. § 31. 3. obs. p. 244 (ed. 5 ; less distinctly p. 188, ed. 6) ; (0) 'quod attinet ad libertatem, stare,' Bretschn., Meyer on 2 Cor. i. 24. The objection to (a) is, that such expressions as tt/ Chap. V. 1. GALATIANS. 117 ek.ev'&epia y rjuds Xpiarbs rfkev'ixepaaev arrjKere ovv, Kal firj iraXiv Qjya BovXeias eVe'vea^e. been omitted from having been accidentally merged in it. His omission of oov, however, with DE; ATulg„ Clarom., Syr. (Philox.) ; Theodrt. (2) against ABC1 FG; 10. 17. 31. 37, al. ; Boern., Augiens., Goth., Copt, al. ; Cyr., Aug., al. — does not seem tenable. The order Xpioros ijpas (Rec.) has but weak external support [CJK; mss.; appy. some Vv. ; Chrys., Theod.], and is reversed by most recent editors. SAtyei bitopieveiv are not strictly similar, as the idea of a hostile attitude (dat. incommodi) is involved in the dative, 'calamitatem non subterfugientes,' etc., so urroo"T7)vai tivi, p.4veiv tivi (Bernh. Synt. m. 13. b, p. 98), and Horn. II. xxi. 600, o-T7)vai tivi. The latter inter pretation seems thus the most correct ; the dative, however, must not be trans lated too laxly ( ' as regards the free dom'), as it serves to call attention to the exact sphere in which, and to which, the action is limited, e. y. earn rij Siavola, Polyb. xxi. 9. 8 ; see Scheuerl. Synt. § 22. 2, p. 179, and notes on ch. i. 22. It may be remarked that we sometimes find an inserted e'v (1 Cor. xvi. 13, compare Riiek. ) without much apparent 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; compare AViner, Gr. § 31. 8, p. 194. On the meaning of ar-fiKeiv, which per se is only 'stare' (Vulg., Clarom.), but which derives its fuller meaning from the context ; comp. Chrys., ariiKere eiVojv, tov o-dAov eSei|e, and see notes on Phil. i. 27. y] 'for which ,-' dat. commodi. The usual ablatival explana tion 'qua nos liberavit' (Vulg.), scil. 77V iip.1v eSaxev (so expressly Conyb.), may perhaps be justified by the common constructions ^ai'peiv xaP?> etc-» ^ut as it is very doubtful whether this con struct, occurs in St. Paul's Epp. (1 Thess. iii. 9 seems an instance of at traction; see notes in loc), it seems safer to adhere to the former explana tion; see Meyer in loc. (obs.) For a good sermon on the notion of Chris tian liberty, see Bp. Hall, Serm. xxvi. Vol. v. p. 339 sq. (Talboys). tt ci A 1 v refers to the previous subser vience of the Galatians to heathenism ; see notes on ch. iv. 9. (off SouAeias] ' the yoke of bondage,' not 'a yoke,' etc., Copt, Ewald, al. ; the anarthrous SouAela (comp. AViner, Gr. §19. 1, p. 109) being appy. used some what indefinitely to mark the general character of the (vyAv, and by the principle of correlation causing the gov erning noun to lose its article ; see Mid dleton, Gr. Art. in. 3. 6, and compare notes on ch. v. 31. It will be observed that ttoAiv is more easily explained on the hypothesis of £vytp being taken in definitely ; the present view, however, seems most in accordance with the defi nite statement in ver. 2 ; (vybv Se Sou Aeias T7jv koto vApov £of/v, 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. 115, and compare Soph. Aj. 944, ofa SouAeias £170, -35sch. Agam. 365, SovXelas ydyyapov. 4 v 4- Xeabe] 'be held fast ;' not exactly > y q1 «-, S S [mancipemini, subjiciatis vos], but simply ' implicamini,' Beza, with ref. perhaps to the tenacity of the hold, and the difficulty to shake it off; comp. Beng. For exx. of the use of 118 GALATIANS. Chap. V. 2, 3. 2 "ISe iyd) navXos Xe'yw vpiv on idv ire- If ye submit to circum cision, ye are bound to the ShS^o™ piripvVa^e ^ Xpiarbs vfids oiiBev ajeXfjaei- 8 fiaprvpopai Be irdXiv iravrl dtfispairq rrepnep.vop.eva on oipei- the verb both in a physical (Herod, n. 121, 4v4xopat rrj irayrj), and in an ethi cal sense (Plutarch Symp. n. qu. 3. 1, ivixeabai SAypaatv HvbayapiKols), see Kypke, 06s. Vol. n. p. 285, and AVetst. in loc. 2. IfSe iya ITauAos] 'Behold I Paul;' emphatic and warning declara tion (rAan diretXii, Chrys.) of the dan gerous consequences, and worse than uselessness of undergoing circumcision. The Apostle's introduction of his own name (compare 2 Cor. x. 1, Eph. iii. 1), prefaced by the an'esting lf8e ( ' atten- tionem excitantis est,' Grot), has been differently explained. The most natu ral view seems to be that it was to in crease conviction (dop^ouvros t)v ofs Ae'- yei, Chrys., comp. Theod.) and to add to the assertion the weight of his Apos tolic dignity ; ttjs tou irpoaairov a£io- 7rio-Tias dpxovons dvrl iraans diroSeitleas, Chrys. On the accentuation of iSe, which, according to the grammarians, is oxytone in Attic and paroxytone in non- Attic Greek, see Winer, Gr. § 6. 1, p. 47. idv ireptrepv.] 'if ye be circumcised;' i. ©. 'if you continue to follow that rite,' the present marking the action as one still going on. On the use of ^av with pres. subj., compare notes on ch. i. 8, 9. ovSev utp e Xii a e t] ' shall profit you nothing ;' the fut, having no ref. whatever to the nearness of the Lord's irapovaia (Mey.), but simply marking the certain result of such a course of practice ; ' Christ ( as you will find ) will never profit you any thing ;' see AViner, Gr. § 40. 6, p. 250, and compare Schmalf. Synt. § 57, p. 116 sq. 3. paprvpo pat Se] ' yea I bear witness,' testificor autem,' Vulg., Cla rom., not ' enim,' Beza ; further and slightly contrasted statement ; the Se not being merely connective, but as usual implying a certain degree of op position between the clause it introduces and the preceding declaration ; ' not only will Christ prove no benefit to you, but you will in addition become debtors to the law ;' see Klotz, Devar. Vol. n. p. 362, Hermann, Viger, No. 343. b, and for a notice of the similar use of ' autem,' Hand. Tursell. Vol. i. p. 562. The verb paprvpopiai, a Sis XeyAp., in St. Paul's Epp. (Eph. iv. 24, compare Acts xx. 26), is here used in the sense of paprvpovpcu, appy. involving the idea of a solemn declaration, as if before witnesses ; comp. notes on Eph. iv. Si^. ' ", That there is no ellipsis of 0e8v (Hil genf, Bretschn.) appears plainly from Eph. I. v., and from the similar usage of the word in classical Greek, e. g. Plato, Phileb. 47 D, touto 8e rAre pev ouk 4paprvpdpeba, vvv 5e XeyApev. Dindorf in Steph. Thess. s. v. cites Eustath. II. p. 1221. 33, as al iaropiai ptaprvpovrat. irdXiv 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 ttovt! dv- bptbira appears a more expanded appli cation of vpiv, ver. 2 ; ovx vpiv Xeya pjivov, tpnalv, aAAa Kal 7rovrl av&pcoTr&> irepirepv., Chrys. ; see Neander, Plant ing, Vol. I. p. 214 note (Bohn). 7repiT€jUvOjU.evij)] ' submitting to be circumcised,' ' undergoing circumcision,' ' circumcidente se,' Vulg., Clarom., or, more idiomatically ' qui curat se cir- cumcidi,' Beza, — but less accurately, as the participle is anarthrous, and what is called a tertiary predicate ; see Don alds. Crat. § 306, ib. Gr. § 495. Chap. V. 4, 5. GALATIANS. 119 Xerrjs eanv oXov rov vbpov iroirjaai. * KarrjpyrfisTjre dirb rov Xpiarov oinves iv vdfia BiKaiova^e, rrjs p^a/ioTO? i^erreaare. 5 rjfieis yap Uvevp-an iK irlareas iXirlBa BiKaioavvrjs drreKBexbfie^a. The tense irepnepv., not irepirpi)bivTi or irepirerpiTipeva, must not be overlooked : it was not the circumcised, as such, that had become in this strict sense orpeiAe'Tai SAov tov vApov iroiijaai, but he who was designedly undergoing the rite. "OAov, as its position shows, is emphatic ; 8A7)v itpeiXxvaa ri]V Seairorelav, Chrys. 4. k ar n pyr)bi]T e dirb rov Xp.] ' Ye were done away from Christ,' ' Your union with Christ became void,' scil. ' when you entered upon the course which now ye are pursuing ;' further and forcible explanation of Xpiarbs bpas ovSev atpeXiiaei (ver. 2), the absence of all connecting particles serving to give the statement both vigor and emphasis. The construction is what is called ' praeg- nans' (Rom. vii. 2, 6, see AViner, Gr. § 66. 2, p. 547) ; dirA, strictly considered, not belonging to KaT-npyiSrnre in the sense of ifXevbeptibnTe diro, but to some word which can easily be supplied, e. g. KaTi)pyr]biii% koi ixwplobrjT e O7T0 Xp., 'nulli estis redditi et a Christo avulsi ;' comp. 2 Cor. xi. 3, tpbelpeabat dirA, and Fritz. Rom. 1. e'. Vol. ii. p. 8, 9. The verb Karapyea is a favorite word with St. Paul, being used in his Epp. (the Ep. to the Hebrews not being in cluded) 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 in Esdras. It is rare in ordinary Greek ; see Eurip. Phmniss. 753, and Polyb. Frag. Hist. 69. The tou is omitted by Lachm. with BCDiFG; 2 mss.; Theoph.,— but, as being less usual, esp. when pre ceded by a prep., is more probably re tained, with AD3EJK ; nearly all mss. ; Chrys., Theod., Dam., al. (Tisch.). iv vi p. a SiKaioucr&e] ' are justified in the law,' ' in lege,' Vulg., Clarom. ; 4v not being instrumental (Ewald), but pointing to the sphere of the action ; compare notes on ch. iii. 11. The pres. Sixatovabe is correctly referred by the principal ancient and modern commentators to the feelings of the sub ject (us inroXap$dveTe, Theophyl., 'ut vobis videtur,' Fritz. Opusc. p. 156) ; compare Goth. ' garaihtans qi ti I> i'zvis ' [justos dicitis vos]. On this use of the subjective present (commonly employed to indicate certainty, prophetic confi dence, expectation of speedy issue, etc.), see Bernh. Synt. x. 2, p. 371, Schmal feld, Synt. § 54. 2, p. 91. r ij s xdpiros 4 ^e ire a are] 'ye fell away from grace;' the aor., as in the first clause, referring to the time when legal justification was admitted and put for ward ; see, however, notes to Transl. On the meaning of 4xiriitreiv twos ( ' al- iqua re excidere, scil. ejus jaeturam facere') see Winer, de Verb. Comp. Fasc. n. p. 11, and comp. Plato, Rep. vi. 496, iKiseaelv tptXoaotplas, Polyb. xii. 14, 7, EKTriTrreiv tou KobiiKovros. The Alex andrian form of aor. e'£e7re'o-OTe is noticed and illustrated by exx. in AViner, Gr. § 13. 1, p. 68 sq. ; compare Lobeck, Phryn. p. 724. 5. 777ieTs ydp] 'For we;' proof of the preceding assertion by a declaration e contrario of the attitude of hope and expectancy, not of legal reliance and self-confidence, which was the charac teristic of the Apostle and of all true Christians. If Se had been used, the opposition between iipels and oi'nves (77,0.615) would have been more prominent than would seem in harmony with the context and with the conciliatory char acter of the present address. 120 GALATIANS. Chap. V. 5. Tlvevpari] 'by the Spirit,' 'Spiritu,' A'ulg., Clarom., with an implied con trast to the o-ctpj which was the active principle of all legal righteousness ; comp. ch. iii. 3, and notes in loc. The dative is not equivalent to iv Tlvevpari (Copt), still less to be explained as merely adverbial, 'spiritually' (Middl. in loc), but, as the context suggests, has its definite ablatival force and dis tinct personal reference ; our hope flows from faith, and that faith is imparted and quickened by the Holy Spirit. No objection can be urged against this in- terpr. founded on the absence of the article, as neither the canon of Middle- ton (Gr. Art. p. 126, ed. Rose), nor the similar one suggested by Harless (Ephes. ii. 22.), — that to riveu^ia is the personal Holy Spirit, 7rveup.a the indwelling in fluence of the Spirit (Rom. viii. 5), can at all be cqnsidered of universal applica tion ; see ver. 16. It is much more natural to regard riveiiua, Ilveuua dyiov, and Ilveup.a Qeov as proper names, and to extend to them the same latitude in connection with the article ; see Fritz. Rom. viii. 4, Arol. n. p. 105. 4 k itla reus] 'from faith,' as the origin and source (comp. notes on ch. iii. 22), — in opposition to the 4v vAp.ce of the preceding clause, which practically in cludes the more regular antithesis e'| %pyav. 4 Xit IS a StKaioa v- rvs] ' the hope of righteousness.' This is one of those many passages in the N. T. (see AViner, Gr. § 30. 1, p. 168) in which it is difficult to decide whether the genitive is subjecti or objecti ; the ev Sia Sooiv, 'spem et justitiam (seternam),' suggested by Aquinas, being clearly in admissible. If (a) the gen. be subjecti, 4Xicl5a StKaioa. must be 'ipsum prae- mium quod speratur, se. vitam aster- nam' (Grot), ' coronam glorire quanjus- tificatos manet' (Beza), f'A7t1s being used perarvptKus, for the thing hoped for : if (j3 ) objecti, then simply ' speratam justitiam,' the hope which turns on SiKaioavrri as its object, — fairly para phrased by JEth., ' we hope we may be justified;' sim. Tynd., Cran. Of these (£) seems clearly most in accordance with the context, as this turns not so much upon any adjunct to SiKatoavvn as upon SiKatoavvn itself; 'Ye,' says St. Paul, in ver. 4, ' think that ye are al ready in possession of StKaioa. (Sikoi- oiiabe) , we on the contrary hope for it.' There is no difficulty in Sikoioo-uvt) thus being represented future. For in the first place this view necessarily results from the contrast between Judaism, and Christianity. The Jew regarded StKaioa. as something outward, present, realiza ble ; the Christian as something inward, future, and, save through faith in Christ, unattainable. And in the second place, SiKaioavvn 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 ; obs e'SiKai- aaer rovrovs Kal 4SAt)aaev, Rom. viii. 30 ; see Neand. Planting, Vol. i. p. 478 note (Bohn). 4XirlSa air e k- SexApeba] 'tarry for,' 'patiently wait for.' This expressive compound has two meanings (a) local, with refer ence either to the place fi om 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,' AViner), — a decided trace of which meaning may be observed in Phil. iii. 20 : (6) ethical, with ref. to the assiduity of the expectation, ' studi- ose constanter expectare,' — the mean ing in the present case and appy. in all the remaining passages in the N. T. ; comp. viii. 19, 23, 25, 1 Cor. i. 7, Heb. ix. 28, 1 Pet. iii. 20 (Lachm., Tisch.), and see Tittmann, Synon. p. 106, Fritz. Chap. V. 6. GALATIANS. 121 ev yap Xpiard) 'Irjaov ovre irepirop.fi n laxvei oiire aKpofiva- ria, aXXa mans Bi dydirrjs ivepyovfievrj. Opusc. p. 156, Winer, Verb. Comp. St' dy dir ns 4vepyov p.4vn] ' ener- Fasc. iv. p. 14. It may be added gizing, displaying its activity throuyh that the expression e'ATrlS. a7reK8. is not pleonastic for ^A7r. Sik. exopev (Ust, comp. -Eth.), but, as Fritz, observes, forcible and almost poetical (Eur. Alcest. 130, e'A7ri8a 7rpoo-Se'xGtyiai), e*A7rf8a being the cognate accus. ; comp. Acts. xxiv. 15, e'ATrfSa ... 77V koi outo! ootoi irpoaSexov- rat, Tit. ii. 13, TrporrSexoVievoi ri\v paKa- love,' (uaa SeUrvrai Theoph., ' efficax est,' Bull, Andrewes (Serm. v. Vol. in. p. 193) ; comp. 1 Thess. i. 3, rou koVou T7,s 070^775, Polyc ad Phil. § 3, 7tio-tiv .... e7raKoAoUAJOuo"77S rrjs 4XirlSos irpoayovans ttjs 0.70^77$, and see esp. Ust. .Lehrb. n. 1. 4, p. 236 sq., and reff. in notes on 1 Thess. I. c. The verb eVep7e7o&ai may piov iXwlSa. The whole clause may be have two meanings, (a) passive, 'is made thus paraphrased : ' by the assistance of . , » r ¦* the Holy Spirit we are enabled to cher- pafiet> l«^^>? &™ perflcitur. ish the hope of being justified, and the Schaaf, but see Capell. in loc] Syr., source out of which that hope springs ' adschueyhyal,' Arm., — maintained by the older Romanist divines, Bellarm. al. (see Petav. de Incarn. viii. 12. 15, Vol. v. p. 407), as well as several Protestant interpreters, Hammond, al., and even the recent editors of Steph. Thesaur. s. v. ; or (5) active, ' is operative,' Vulg., Clarom., Goth., Copt, — as maintained by nearly all recent commentators. Of these (a) is perfectly lexically tenable (Polyb. Hist. 1 13, 5, ivepyelrat irAXe- pos), but distinctly at variance with the usage of the word in the N. T. (see Meyer, 2 Cor. i. 6, Bretsch. Lex. s. v.), while (6) harmonizes with the prevail ing usage, and can be correctly distin guished from the active ; ivepyeiv being ' vim exercere,' and commonly applied is faith;' comp Ust Lehrb. n. 1, p. 90 sq., and for a fuller explanation of the verse, Chillingworth, Works, p. 402 sq. (Lond. 1704), Manton, Serm , Vol. iv. p. 927 sq. (Lond. 1698). 6. iv ydp X pia Tip '1 770-.] 'For in Christ Jesus ;' confirmation of the pre ceding statement that the direKSoxn was 4k irlareas ; when there is a union with Christ, neither circumcision or uncir cumcision avails anything, but faith only ; it is clear, then, why we entertain the hope of righteousness from faith. The solemn formula iv Xp. 'Ina. is not to be explained away, as 'in Christi regno, ecclesia ' (Paroeus), ' Christi re- ligione' (Est.), 'Christi lege' (Grot), -all of which fall utterly short of the to persons, ivepyelabat 'ex se (aut suam) true meaning, — but, as the regular use of e'v Xp. and the addition of 'Itjo-ou distinctly suggest, conveys the deeper idea of ' union, fellowship, and incorpo ration' in Christ crucified : comp. notes on ch. ii. 17. For an elaborate but vim exercere,' a species of what has been called the 'dynamic' middle (Kriiger, Sprachl. § 52. 8), and commonly applied to things, see Fritz. Rom. Vol. n. p. 17, AViner, Gr. § 38. 6, p. 231. Al though the pass, meaning is not now wholly insufficient explanation of the maintained by the best critical scholars vital expression ivXp., comp. Fritz. Rom. of the Church of Rome, the passage is viii. 1, Vol. n. p. 82, and contrast with no less strongly claimed as a testimony it the deep and spiritual illustrations of to the truth of the Tridejitine_^(j;rine Bp. Hall, Christ Mystical, ch. 2, 3. (Sess. vi. u. 7) of fides formata; see 16 122 GALATIANS. Chap. V. 7, 8. Who perverted you? 7 * Whosoever they are they shall be punished, for their *-\ C\ / *> "C\ C\ doctrine is not mine. Yea' oKlfAeia flTj TTeiW^al J I wish they would cease from all communion with you. Erpexere KaXas' ris vpJzs iveKoyfrev rfj rj ireiafiovr) ovk iK AArindischm. in loc, and comp. Mohler, Symbolik, § 16, p. 131 note, § 17, p. 137. 7. ir pex*r e KaAios] 'Ye were running well;' forcible and yet natural transition from the brief statement of the characterizing principle of Christian life, once exemplified in the Galatians, but now lost sight of and perverted ; iirairel rbv SpApov xal bpr/rel rod SpApov rijv TrauAav, Theod. ris vpds 4 r 4 k o y- e v] ' who did hinder you ;' not without some expression of surprise, iras 6 roaovros 4reKAirn SpApos ; tis o too-outov iax"aas, Chrys. ; comp. ch. iii. 1. The primary meaning of the verb 4yxAwTeir (Hesych. iveKonrApnv iveiro- Si£Apnr, Suid. dvaxairifei- avoTroSi'^ei- 4yH.Airrai) appears to be that of hinder ing by breaking up a road (e. g. Greg. Nazianz. Or. xvi. p. 260, f) koki'os e'7K07r- roperijs Svairabela twv irovripav, i) dperr)s 6Soiroiovpevi)S evnabela rav fieXnAvav ; comp. ' intercidere,' e. g. Caes. Bell. Gall. n. 9, pontem, etc.) ; while that of avaKdV- Teiv (Rec) is rather that of hindrance with the further idea of thrusting back ; compare Horn. Odyss. xxi. 47, bvpeav dvexonrev bxyaas. The reading of Rec. (dveKoipev) is, however, opposed to all the uncial MSS., and appy. to nearly all mss. and Ff., and neither on internal (opp. to Bloomf.) nor external grounds has any claim on attention. The accus. is similarly found with 4yKAirretv, Acts xxiv. 4, 1 Thess. ii. 18 ; see also The mist. Or. xiv. p. 181 c. tt; dXnb. pif irelbeabai] ' that ye should not obey the truth;' infin. ex pressive of the result or effect, with some trace of the purpose or end con templated, this being one of those forms of the ' consecutive' sentence, which may be regarded as partly objective and as partly final; see Donalds. Gr. § 602. The popular explanation that pi) with the infin., after certain negative and prohibitive verbs, is pleonastic (Meyer compare Herm. Viger, No. 271), is now justly called in question (see esp. Klotz, Devar. A'ol n. p. 668), the true expla nation being that the /x7> is prefixed to the infinitive, whether in its more sim ply objective form (Donalds. Gr. § 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 in volved in the action which specially contemplated or tended to the effect expressed by the infinitive; see esp. Schmalfeld, Synt. § 181. 2, p. 359, and for an illustrative example compare Aristoph. Pax, 315, ^u.7roSaSv riplv 7e'v7j- toi T7jv bebv pi) e'|eAKoi , ei irepirofirjv en Krjpvaaa, ri en BidoKopai ; apa Karrjpyrjrai replication 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 circumci sion ;' see esp. Theoph. in loc. ei iceptr. en Kijpvoaa] 'If I preach circumcision; ' if, as is assumed to be a matter of fact ( compare notes on ch. i. 9), circumcision is still what I preach ;' the emphasis resting not on Knpvaau (rovriariv ovk ovto KeXeva irta- reveir . . irepterepov p))v ydp [rbv TipA- beor], ovk e'K77pu|a Se itepiropi)r, Chrys.), but on the prominently placed irepiropiiv. The 6ti does not suggest any contrasted reference to the period before the coming of Christ ('still — as in the ante- Chris tian times,' Olsh.), — a reference which would here be very pointless, nor again to any special change in the Apostle's teaching since he had become a Chris tian, — for which there is not the slight est grounds, but simply to the period prior to his conversion, ' still, in contrast to my former Judaism ;' comp. AVieseler, Chronol. p. 206 note. The Apostle might not have ' preached ' circumcision before his conversion, but he strenuously advo cated (irepioo'oTepoJS £l)Xari)S vTrdpxmr rar TrarptKar pov rrapaSAaear, ch. i. 14 ) all the principles of Judaism ; comp. Neander, Planting, p. 304, note. The present tense is probably used, as Schott ob serves, from his having the present ac cusation of his adversaries in his mind. ri sn SiuK0,uai] 'why am I still persecuted; almost 'why am I to be,' etc. ; this second 4ri being, as De AVette observes, logical; see Rom. iii. 7, rl en Kaya as apapraXos Kpiropai, ' what fur ther ground is there for,' etc., Rom. ix. 19, al. dp a] 'then after all,' 'ergo,' Vulg., Clarom. (see Hand, Tur- sell. Vol. n. p. 450 sq.) ; inference from what has preceded, not perhaps here without some tinge of ironical nference to a conclusion that could not have been expected. The fundamental idea of apo is ' distance or progression ( to another step in the argument) ' ; from which the derivative meaning, — that at the advanced point at which we have ar rived, our present view is different to our antecedent one, can easily be de duced ;' see esp. Donalds. Crat. § 192. That this, however, is the normal and primary idea of the particle (see Har tung, Partik. apo, I. 3, A'ol. I. p. 422) cannot now be maintained ; see Klotz, Devar. Arol. n. p. 160 sq., where the whole question is discussed at great length. According to this writer, dpa involves ' significationem levioris cujus- dam ratiocinationis, quae indicat rebus ita eomparatis, aliquid ita aut esse aut fieri,' in Devar. p. 167. The inter rogatory form (apa), as adopted by Syr., Ust, al., seems here less forcible and appropriate. to a x dvSaXor rov aravpov] ' the offence of the cross,' ' offendiculum cruris,' Beza ; the offence which the Jews took at Chris tianity, because faith in a crucified Saviour, — faith without legal observ ances, was alone offered as the means of salvation ; ovSe ydp ovras o aravpbs •tir axarSaXi^av rovs 'lovSaiovs as rb pil Seir irelbeabat rois irarpyots vApots, Chrys. ; compare 1 Cor. i. 18, etc., see Brown, Galat. p. 278, Usteri, Lehrb. n. 2. 1, p. 253. 2KavSa\ov, though occur ring (quotations included) 15 times in the N. T. and 25 times in the LXX and Apocrypha, is scarcely ever found ' apud profanos.' 2KavSoA77.&pov to 4vtardpe- vov rals pvdypats, Poll. Onomast. a. 34, occasionally occurs ; e. g. in a metaphor ical sense, Aristoph. Acharn. 687. 126 GALATIANS. Chap. V. 12. to aKavBaXov rov aravpov. 12 ScpeXov Kal airoKotyovrai oi avaa- rarovvres Vfias. 12. iitpeAov] '/ 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 com pare ch. ii. 21. This word is used purely as a particle, both in the N. T. (see 1 Cor. iv. 8, 2 Cor. xi. 1), and in the LXX, e. g. Exod. xvi. 3, Numb. xiv. 2, xx. 3, Psalm cxviii. 5 ; see AViner, Gr. § 41. 6. 2, p. 270, Sturz, de Dialect. Maced. s. v. § 12. Its construction, therefore, here with a future, though unusual and (appy. according to Lucian, Solcee. 1) solcecistic, need not have caused Bengel to alter the punctuation (to o-kuvSoAov tou aravpov' btpeXor.), and to connect AtpeXov as a kind of ex clamation ('velini ita sit!') with what precedes. On the similar use of HtpeXor and titpeXe in later writers, comp. Matth. Gr. § 513. obs. 3, and on the correct and classical use (' HcpeXor non nisi turn adhi- beri, quum quis optat, ut fuerit aliquid, vel sit, vel futurum sit, quod non fuit, aut est, aut futurum est'), see Herm. Viger, No. 190. Kal ottoko'- i|/ o v t a i] * they would even cut themselves off (from you).' The exact meaning of these words has been much discussed. The usual passive translation ( ' abscin- dantur,' Vulg., Goth., appy. Syr. [Schaaf], JEth.-Platt, Arm.), cannot be defended, as the N. T. furnishes no certain instance of a similar enallage. The most plausible is 1 Cor. x. 2, koI 7ravTes iflairrlaavTO, but even here the middle voice (sc. ' baptismum suscepe- runt,' Beng.) may be correctly main tained ; see AViner, Gr. § 38. 4, p. 228, and exx. in Jelf, Gr. § 364. 4. a. AVe have thus only two possible translations, (o) 'I would that they would even cut themselves off (plane discedant) from communion with you,' Bretschn. ; or (73) 'I would that they would (not only circumcise, but) even castrate them selves;' pi) irepirepveabaaav pApor, aAAa Kal diroKoirreabaaav, Chrys., ottokoVous eauTous iitolnaav, (Ecura. . see exx. in AVetst. in loc. This latter reference to bodily mutilation is adopted by the prin cipal patristic expositors, as well as by most modern writers ; and it must be admitted that thus not only ra! is more readily explained, and the expression of the wish (StpeXor) more easily accounted for, but that there is also a species of parallelism in the use of Kararopiir, Phil. iii. 2. Still as there seems no cer tain trace of this corporeal reference in any of the ancient Vv., — as in some (iEth.-Platt, and perhaps Arm.) the reference seems plainly ethical, — as there is a seeming contrast in the KaXelr iirl of the confirmatory clause which follows, and as this seems alone suited to the earnest gravity with which St. Paul is here addressing his converts, we adopt somewhat unhesitatingly the former in terpretation. The Apostle's deep in sight into the exact spiritual state of the Galatians, and the true affection that throughout the Epistle tempers even his necessary severity, leads him here to ex press as a wish, what he might have (as in 1 Cor. v. 11) urged as a com mand : comp. AAraterl„ Works, Vol. in. p. 458. oi avao-ToT. bpas] ' they who are unsettliny you,' Hamm., sc. ' your subverters ;' the participle with its case becoming by means of the arti cle a kind of substantive ; see notes and reff. on ch. i. 23. The verb draaraTovr (Hesych. avaTpeVeiv) occurs three times in the N. T. (Acts xvii. 6, xxi. 38) as an equivalent of the more usual drdara- ror Troieiv, but is of rare occurrence Chap. V. 13, 14. GALATIANS. 127 'Tp-eis yap iir iXev^tepia iKXrforjTe, aSeX- Do not misuse your freo- 13 dom, but love one another. Love is tlie fulfilment of i I i \ \ u. r\ '/ " > » t \ n the law; hatred brings de- 90t" rlovov M Trlv eXev^epiav et? a (AVetst. on Acts 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 meaning than rapdaaa, and is admirably paraphrased by Chrys., dirb riis dva 'lepovaaXijp. Kal rrjs iXevbe- pas ix&aXAvres, &ta£Apevoi Se Ka&arrep oiXjUoaiotous Kal /ieTavao"Tas TrAavao^al. 13. vpeis ydp] 'For ye;' com mencement of a new paragraph, and according to Olsh., De AV., al., of a ^new portion (the hortatory) of the Epis tle; "evTaui5o Aonrov Soxel pev eis rbv ilbixbv 4pi3aiveir xAyov, Chrys. St. Paul knew so well the human heart, its ten dencies and temptations, and saw so clearly how his own doctrine of Chris tian liberty might be perverted and adulterated, that he at once hastens, with more than usual earnestness, to trace out the ineffaceable distinction be tween true spiritual freedom, and a car nal and antinomian license. There is, however, no marked or abrupt division, but one portion of the epistle passes in sensibly into the other. y d p is thus not illative (Turner), nor a mere particle of transition (Browm), but stands in immediate connection with the pre ceding. 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 com mon.' The reading Se', found in FG ; 80 ; Chrys., Aug., al., seems a very pal pable correction. 4ir' e'Aeu&e- pla] ' for freedom ;' eVl here denoting the purpose or object for which they were called ; compare 1 Thess. iv. 7, ob ydp 4xd\eaev bpas b Qebs 4irl dxabapota, where see notes in loc. Further exx. will be found in AViner, Gr. § 48. c, p. 351, and in Rost. u. Palm, Lex. s. v. it. 2. f, A'ol. i. p. 1040. pi, tt)v 4Xevbeplar] ' make not your liberty ;' scil. TroieiTe, rpeirere [not, however, used in N. T.], SioTe (FG ; Boern., al), or some similar verb. Instances of this very intelligible and idiomatic omission of the verb after pi) are cited by Har tung, Partik. pi), 6. b. 4, Vol. n. p. 153, Klotz. Devar. Vol. n. p. 669, AViner, Gr. § 66. I. 5, p. 663 : compare Hot. Epist. i. 5. 12, ' Quo mihi fortunas, si non coneeditur uti.' Such ellipses must of course be common in every cultivated language. Sid rijs dy duns] ' by the love ye evince ,' ' by your love ;' not 'in your love' (Peile), with any reference to state or condition (compare Rom. iv. 11, 8i' aKpot3varlas, viii. 25, Si viropovrjs, al. ; AViner, Gr. § 47. i, p. 339), but simply 'per caritatem,' Vulg., Armen. [instrumental case], Copt. ; love was to be the means by which their re ciprocal SouAeio was to be shown. The reading rrj dydny rov Tlrevparos, found in DEFG; 81; Clarom., Goth.|; Copt. [AVilk., but not Bdttich.] ; Bas.,i al., is in addition suggested by the pre-| ceding aapxAs. SovXeb er e~§. ' be in bondage; ' servite,' Arulg., Cla rom. ; in antithesis to the preceding 4Xevbeplav : ovk elitev a7a7raTe aAA^Aous, ottAws, aAAa SouAeueTe, t?/V eVtTeTa- /xevTjv 577A0JV tptXlav, Chrys. 14. 6 ydp irds vo'uos] 'For- the whole law;' confirmation from Scripture of the command immediately preceding, Sia ttjs a7aTT7js k. t. A. A few instances of this order occur in the N. T. ; see 128 GALATIANS. Chap. V. 14, 15. ' Ayairfjaeis rbv irXrjalov aov &>9 aeavrbv, ls et Be aXXrjXovs BaK- vere Kal Karea'&iere, fiXewere fir) virb dXXrjXav dvaXafyrjre. 14. aeavrAv] Tisch. (ed. 2) here adopts the more difficult, though not wholly unusual reading coutov (see AViner, Gr. § 22. 5) too much in defiance of external authority. 2eauTov is supported by ABCDEK ; very many mss. ; Marc. ap. Epiph., Theodoret, Dam. (Rec, Griesb., Scholz, Tisch. ed. Lachm.). "Zavrbv ap pears only in FGJ ; appy. the majority of mss. ; Theophyl., OScum., (Mey., Tisch.). Usteri very plausibly suggests the falling away of one of the contiguous sigmas in the course of transcription. Middl. Greek Art. ch. vn. p. 104, note the passage, and also is at variance with where Rose cites Ads xx. 18, 1 Tim. i. the regular meaning of irXnp. in the 16 (sing.), Acts xix. 7 (plural); add N. T. ; see Matth. iii. 15, Rom. viii. 4, xxvii. 37. e'v evl ArJ7a>] 'in xiii. 8, Col. iv. 17. 070-1-75- one word,' scil. in one declaration or a eis]' Thou shalt love.' The use of the commandment: comp. Rom. xiii. 9. imperativalXuture appears in the N. T. rreTr Xiiparat] ' hath been (and isjful- under three forms; (a) as a mild im- filled.' This reading is supported no perative, in simple prohibition ; compare less by external evidence [ABC; 6 Matth. vi. 5, ovk eay us oi biroKptral; (b) mss.; Marc, in Epiph., Damasc. (2), as a strong imperative, including pro- Aug.] than by internal probability, hibition and reproof ; compare Acts xiii. AVhile TrATjpouTai (Rec.) would imply 10, ov icavay Staarpetpav rds bSobs Ku- that the process of fulfilment was still pi'ou ; (c) as a legislative imperative, — going on, the perfect ireirX^parai suita- both negatively (Matth. vT~21r;-Rom. vii. bly points to the completed and perma- 7, al ), and positively, as here, andjtqm. nent act ; comp. Rom. xiii. 8, o a-yoTraiv xiii. 9. The two former usages (which t8v eTepov vApov ireirXiipaKev, — a mean- in fact may be considered as one, varied ing of the perf. which Marcion (accord- only by the tone of the speaker) are ing to Tertull. adv. Marc. v. 4 ) appears, common in classical Greek, see Jelf, Gr. either ignorantly or wilfully, to have § 413. 1, 2, Bernh. Synt. x. 5, p. 378: misunderstood, ' adimpleta est, quasi jam the latter, seems distinctly Hebraistic ; non adimplenda.' It may be ob- comp. Gayler, Part. Ney. n. 3. 3, p. 75, served that there is no discrepancy AViner, Gr. § 43. 5, p. 282. The uses between this passage and Matth. xxii. of the future in the LXX appear to be 38, Mark xii. 29 ; for, as Meyer observes, very varied, and serve to express, nega- St Paul here takes a lofty spiritual tively, quod non convenit (Gen. xx. 9), eminence, from which, as it were, he quod non potest (Gen. xxxii. 12: comp. sees all other commands so subordinated Matth. iv. 4, al.), and positively, quod to the law of love, that he cannot con- licet (Numb, xxxii. 24), quod solet sider the man who has fulfilled this in (Deut. ii. 11). These are almost purely any other light than as having fulfilled Hebraistic ; see esp. Thiersch, de Pentat. the whole law : comp. Usteri, Lehrb. 11. in. § 1 1 sq. 1. 4, p. 242, Reuss, Theol. Chret. iv. 19. 15. SowveTe ko! xare abler e] Vol. II. p. 204 sq. The explanation of < bite and devour;' ovk eiire, 8 d x v e r e, Vorstius and others TrATipouo-dai = avaxe- p.Avov oirep 4arl bvpovpevov, aAAa Kal, k a- a7JTe. The meaning is sufficiently explained by Chrys., 77 ydp Sidaraats Kal 77 udx^J tpbopoicoibr Kal avaAwTtKOV Kal twv Sexoaevav outt^v, KaX eiaayAvrav. 16. A e' 701 Se'] 'Now / say.' The Apostle now reverts to the first portion of the command in ver. 13, p% rrjv iXev- beplav els dtpoppijr ry aapici. riveup-oTi] 'by the Spirit ;' not exactly ' in (khen) the Spirit,' Copt, still less ' Spiritui vitam consecrate ' ( dat. corn- modi; Fritz. Rom. Vol. 1. p. 225), but simply ' Spiritu,' A'ulg., Clarom., — the dative being here what is called the dat. normcc, and indicating the metaphorical path, manner, or rule of the action ; compare ch. vi. 16, Acts xv. 1, Phil. iii. 16, and see Hartung, Casus, p. 79, AViner, Gr. § 31. 6. b, p. 193, Bernh. Synt. 111. 14, p. 102, and exx. collected by Fritz. Rom. xiii. 13, Vol. in. p. 142. It is necessary to observe that Tlrevpan is not « after a heavenly or spiritual man ner,' Peile (koto tos Trveu/ioTiKds eVToAas, Schol. ap. Matth.), — a very insufficient paraphrase, nor even, ' in accordance with indwelling grace ' (irvevpa Se tJjv irotKovaar x^Plvi avrn 7ctp 4rrl rd Kpelrra iroSnyel tt> il/ux^v, Theod.), as all such cases tend to obscure the true nature of the contrast between riveu/ia and adp%. AVhenever these two words stand thus opposed, it has been satisfac torily shown by Miiller ( On Sin, Vol. 1. p. 354 sq., Clark,) that the nveu,ua is not either the spiritual part of man (das 17 Geistige), or the human spirit, if even always strengthened by the Holy Spirit, — the ' divinized spiritual ' ( das Geist- liche; comp. Reuss, Thdol. Chrit. Vol. 11. p. 54), but the Holy Spirit itself, in so far as it is conceived the governing principle in man, the active and ani mating principle of Christian life, the Tlvevpa rr)s {arjs ir Xp. 'Ina. Rom. viii. 2, the riv. Xpio-Tou, Ilv. Qeov, ib. ver. 9 ; see also Neander, Plantiny, Vol. 1. p. 467 (Bohn), and esp. Hofmann, Schriftb. Vol. 1. p. 254 sq. On the omission of the article, see notes on ver. 5, and on the meaning of irepiirareiv as imply ing life in its regular and practical manifestations, see notes on Phil. iii. 12, and on 4 Thess. iv. 12. iiribvplav aapKAs] 'the desire of the flesh; scil. all the motions and desires of the merely natural man, all that tends to earth and earthliness. The meaning of rropl 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 the N. T., rrap£ is not merely the carnal as opposed to the spiritual, — the purely sensational part of man, but comprehends in a more general notion the whole ' life and move ment of man in the world of sense ' (Mid ler), or perhaps, to speak a little more precisely, the ' whole .principle and realm of earthliness and earthly relations' (adpxa ivravba rbr Xoytapbv KaXei tov yetiSn, Chrys.) ; selfishness, as Miiller has well observed, ever appearing in the background. The transition from this to the more definitely ethical notions of weakness, sin, and sensationalism, 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. a. Krit. for 1855, p. 130 GALATIANS. Chap. V. 17. 'bvfiiav aapKos oi prj reXearjre. 17 r) ydp adp% iirfcvp.ei Kara 17. ravra ydp] So Lachm. and Tisch. (ed. 1), with BD'EFG ; 17; Vulg., Clarom., Copt., Arm. ; Latin Ff. (Mey., Alf, Bagge), — and appy. correctly, as Se', though strongly supported, viz., by ACD3JK; nearly all mss.; Syr. (both), JEth. (both) ; Chrys., Theodoret, Dam., al. (Rec, Griesb., Scholz) is much more likely to have been a change from ydp (to avoid the seeming awkwardness of a repetition of the particle) than vice versa. There is also some weight in the in ternal evidence ; the repetition of 7ap being so well-known a characteristic of the Apostle's style. 485—488, Miiller, Ore Sin, Vol. i. p. 350 sq. (Clark), and compare Beck, Seelenl. n. 18, p. 53, Delitzsch, Bibl. Psychol, v. 6, p. 325 sq. ov p,i) reXiaijre] 'ye shall not accomplish ;' ' non perficietis,' Vulg., Clarom. ; comp. Matth. x. 23, ov pi) reXea-nre rds irAxets. This clause may be translated either (a) imperatively; xal being the simple copula joining two imperatival clauses, the first expressed affirmative])', the second negatively (Copt, Arm., jEth., and more recently Hamm., Mey., al.), or (6) as a future, in which case koI will be consecutive, and nearly equiv. to ' ita fiet ut ;' compare notes on Phil. iv. 42. Of these (a) is perfectly admissible on grammatical grounds ; for the general principle — that ou pii with the 2nd pers. fut. is prohibitive, and that, with the other persons of the future and all persons of the subj., it enounces a ne gation, and not a prohibition (Hermann onElmsl. Med. 1120, p. 391) — includes so many scarcely doubtful exceptions even in classical Greek (see exx. in Gayler, Partic. Neg. p. 435), that it may be sometimes doubted whether the first negative both in ov pii and pii ov may not really be 'oratorium magis quam logicum' (Gayler). Be this as it may, it seems certain that in the later Greek and esp. in the LXX, this use of ou pii in nearly all combinations, but esp. with subj., 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 distinct in stance of such a construction in the N. T., and still more as the next verses seem more naturally to supply the rea sons for the assertion than for the com mand, it seems best with Vulg., Clarom., Syr., and appy. Goth, (see De Gabel. Gr. Goth. § 182. 1. 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 2 sermons by Howe, Works, Vol. in. p. 123 sq. (ed. Hewlett). 17. i) yap o-cipf k. t. A.] 'for the flesh lusteth against the Spirit ;' reason- for the foregoing declaration that walk ing after the Spirit will preclude the fulfilling the lusts of the flesh ; ' merito hoc addit cum in uno et eodem homine regenerato sit caro et Spiritus : cujus certamen copiosissime explicatur, Rom. vn. [15 — 20],' Beza. In the following words the order ovti'k. dxxdxots [Rec with JK ; mss. ; Ff] is rightly reversed with greatly preponderating authority. 'Iva p.ij] 'to the end that ye may not ;' not 'so that ye cannot do,' Auth. (owe errl airias etrrev, aAA' ojs oko'Aou&ov Kara rb omelor ISiapa, Theod.), but with the usual and proper (telic) force of 'Iva ' ut non quaecunque vultis ilia (ista, CI.) faciatis,' Vulg., Clarom., compare Goth., .lEth. ; the object and end of the to av- TiKeio&ai on the part of each Principle Chap. V. 17, 18. GALATIANS. 131 rov nvevfiaros, to Be Uvevpa Kara rrjs aapKos- ravra yap dXXrj- Xois avrUeirai, 'iva p,rj a dv 'beXr/re ravra iroirjre. 18 et Be Uvev- is to prevent man doing what the other Principle would lead him to ; ' t8 Tlrevpa impedit vos, quo minus perficiatis to ttjs aapxAs, contra 77 oi, idv Kal irpoXeficffefj avdpa iros ev nvi irapairrdofiari, vp,eis ol irvevfiariKol Polyb. Hist. i. 46. 11, irpoxaXovpevos robs iroXeplovs. The meaning of ip&ovouvTes has been modified by some commentators, ' withholding out of envy' (Olsh.), 'hating' (Brown). This is not necessary; tpboveiv is the correlative act on the part of the weak, to the irpoKaXelabai 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 tpboveiv does not occur elsewhere in N. T. ; in James iv. 2, the correct reading is tpovevere. Chapter AT!. 1. dSeAoi] 'Breth ren;' conciliatory mode of address in troducing the more directly admonitory portion ; ' latet in hoc etiam uno verbo argumentum,' Beza. 7repl avrbv BauViAeiav) or intransitive. The verb has three constructions in the N. T. ; (a) with gen. of the thing ; only Heb. ii. 14 ; (6) with dat. of thing, the common construction, Rom. xii. 13, xv. 27, 1 Tim. v. 22, 1 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 present case : for though the transi tive constr. is lexically admissible (Thorn. Mag. xotvava aoi &v exw, dvri tou pera- SlSapi), and yields a perfectly good sense, still the prevailing use of Koivavelv in the N. T., the analogy of construction between this passage and Phil. iv. 15, obSepla poi 4KKXi]ala iKoivtavnaev eis xAyov SAoeas ko.1 XJiptyeus, and the general con text supply arguments in favor of the intransitive meaning, which seem dis tinctly to preponderate. o Ka- tti x o u p.. tSv A o" 7 o v] 'he that is instructed in the word; scil. in the Gos pel (see Acts XV. 7, rbr xAyor rov evay yeXiov, and compare Luke i. 2), tSv Ao^yov being the accus. of reference, or what is termed the ' qualitative object ' (Hartung, Casus, p. 55, 61) after the pass. part. Karr/xovperos (Acts xviii. 25) ; see AViner, Gr. § 32. 5, p. 104, and esp. Schmalfeld, Synt. § 25, compared with § 16, and fin. AVith regard to the mean ing of KoT7jxe'w which has here been somewhat- unduly pressed, we may ob serve that the word appears to have four meanings; (a) sono ; dvrl rov iixm, Sui- das; (@) sono impleo ; compare Lucian, Jup. Tray. 39, Kartj.Sovai xal xarnxovai ', (y) viva voce erudio, irporpenopat xal irapaira, Suid. ; compare Syr. ^.*-fl ^« A a • [qui audit], _ a r a v p $] 'on account of the cross ;' not exactly ' in cruce' (Copt), but ' ob cru cem' (Beza), scil. 'for preaching the doctrine of the cross of Christ.' The dative points out the ground or cause of the persecution ; compare Rom. xi. 20, e£eKAa(r&77o'av ry dwiarla, and see AViner, Gr. § 31. 6, p. 193, Bernhardy, Synt. in. 14, p. 102. The ablatival explana tion, that they may be persecuted with the cross of Christ (' perpessiones Christi,' 2 Cor. i. 5, Grot., comp. Vulg. ' crusis Christi persecutionem '), either, on the one hand, involves an unsatisfactory ex planation of b aravpAs, — which, as Brown (p. 359) rightly observes, in such expressions as the present always implies the fact of the atoning death of Christ, — or, on the other, causes a still more untenable meaning to be assigned to SitoKaivTai, viz. ' lest the doctrine of Christ wear a hostile aspect to them,' as Neand. Planting, Vol. i. p. 220 (Bohn). The meaning, ' that they may not follow after,' Arm. (comp. yEth. 'ut non ad- haereatis '), is wholly untenable. 13. ovSh 7 dp . . . out ol] 'For' not Chap. VI. 13, 14. GALATIANS. 151 (jivXaaaovaiv, dXXa ^fiXovaiv v/j,ds irepirepvea^rai iva iv rfj vpe- repa aapKi Kavx'jo-avrai. " ipiol Be fir) yevoiro Kavxda^ai el p,r) even they,' < nam ne ipsi quidem,' Beza, — they of whom it might reasonably have been expected ; confirmation of the preceding by a statement of the openly lax conduct of the Judaizers, and of the true motives by which they were influ enced ; tantum abest, ut illorum intersit, a vobis legem observari,' Beng. On the force of oaSe — dAAi£, see on ch. i. 17. oi TreptTejuvo'uevoi] ' those who are having themselves circumcised,' ' qui cir- cumciduntur," A'ulg. ; pres. part., with reference to the prevailing practice of the false teachers either in respect of themselves or others. The explanation of Pede, Hilgenfeld, al., according to which the pres. part, irepirepv. loses its precise temporal reference (AViner, Gr. § 45. 7, p. 316) and combines with the article to form a kind of subst, ' the party or advocates of the circumcision ' (comp. oStoi oi irepirepvApevoi, Acta Pet. et Paul. § 63, cited by Hilgenfeld), is plausible, but perhaps not necessary ; as the use of the pres. may be fairly ex plained 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 endeavor thereby to draw others into the same state, which is a present and continuing act. It must be admitted that the reading, TrepireTpnpevoi [Lachm., Scholz, Rinck, Mey., with BJ ; 40 mss. ; Clarom., al. ; Lat. Ff.] would give a more appropriate sense ; the external authorities, however [ACDEK; Vulg., Syr. (both), al. ; Marcion, ap. Epiph., Chrys., Theodoret, al.], are distinctly in favor of the more difficult reading, irepirepvApevoi. vApov] ' the law.' Middleton here ex plains the anarthrous rApos as ' moral obedience' ('the principle of Law,' Peile), adducing the parallel passage, Rom. ii. 25 ; but there also, as here, vApos is the Mosaic law : see Alford on Rom. I. v. The reason why these Ju daizers did not keep the law is not to be referred to their distance from Jerusalem (Theod.), nor to any similarly extenuat ing circumstances, but, as the context seems to show, is to be attributed simply to their consummate hypocrisy ; see Meyer in loc. iv,ry vper4pa a a p k i] 'in your flesh,' — ' your bodily and ritualistic mutilation;' i.e. 4r rtj> KaTaKon-Teiv tt/v vperepav adpKa, 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 enforcement of the circumcision. The second, as Usteri observes, states positively what the first did negatively. They boasted that they had not only made Christian, but Jewish converts ( ' quod vos Judaismo implicuerint,' Beza), and thus sought to escape perse cution at the hands of the more bigoted Jews. 14. ip. ol 8e pi) ye v. «o»x,]'^ from me far be it that I boast;' con trasted statement (Se) of the feelings of the Apostle and the substratum on which his koucto-is alone rested. For exx. of this use of yevoiro with an infin., see Gen. xliv. 7, 17, Josh. xxii. 29, al., and Polyb. Hist. xv. 10. 4, pnSevl ye voiro irelpav bp.av Aa/3eiv. i v r tp ar av piii] 'in the cross :' i. e. in the principle of the sufferings and death of Christ being the only means whereby we are justified and reconciled unto God (Rom. v. 9, 10) ; real ti 4an rb Kabxn/Ja rod aravpov ; "Oti <5 Xpiarbs 8i' ipe rbv SovXov, rbv ixbpAv, rbv dyvtipova' dXX' oSra pe iiydnnaev as Kal eavrbv ixSovvai ap#, Chrys. See a sound sermon on this 152 GALATIANS. Chap. VI. 14, 15. iv ra aravpa rov Kvplov rjfiav 'Irjaov Xpiarov, Bi ov efioi Koa- fios earavparai Kaya ra Koafio)' ovre yap rrepirofirj ri eanv 15. ofiVe ydp] So Tisch. with B ; 17 ; Syr. (both), Goth., Sah , jEth., Arm. ; Chrys., Syncell. ; Hieron., Aug. (De. W., Mey., Bagge, Alf.) much commended by Griesb.; approved by Mill (Prolegom. p. 85). The longer reading, 4v 7dp Xptara 'Inaov is found in ACDEFGJK ; Vulg., Clarom., Copt, ^th.-Platt, Syr.- text by Beveridge, Serm. xxi. Vol. i. p. 396 sq. A. C. Libr.). 8i' of] ' by whom ;' scil. by whose crucifixion.' The relative may refer either to aravpAs (Theodoret), or to 'I770-. Xpio-Tiis. It is curious that Baumg. Crus. in adopting the latter reference, and AVindischm. the former, should both urge that, on the contrary supposition, St. Paul would have writien iv a instead of 81' ou. As far as this argument goes, both are right (see AViner, Gr. $ 48. a, p. 346, 347), though probably the frequent use of e'v in the N. T. with reference to Christ is slightly in favor of AVindischm. comp. Eph. i. 7. The context, however, is a far surer guide, and here, as the impor tant and indeed emphasized subject tou Kup. f/u. 'I7J0-. Xp. immediately precedes, the relative will more naturally seem to refer to those words. k A a p 0 s] 'the world;' rdfiiar tied irpdypara, Chrys.; not 'res et rdigio Judaica,' Schoettg. The full meaning has been well expressed by Calvin, ' mundus procul dubio op- ponitur novae creaturae ; quicquid ergo contrarium est spirituali Christi regno mundus est, quia ad veterem hominem pertinet. Mundus est quasi objectum et scopus veteris hominis' (cited by Peile). The present omission of the article with KAapos is very unusual, and only to be accounted for by the supposi tion that Kvapos was sometimes prac tically regarded in the light of a proper name : in all other places in the N. T., except the present, 2 Cor. v. 9. and, somewhat differently, 2 Pet. ii. 5, the omission is only found after » preposi tion (1 Cor. viii. 4, Phil. ii. 15, Col. ii. 20), or when the noun is under the regi men of a preceding substantive (John xvii. 24, Rom. i. 28, iv. 13, xi. 12, 15, Eph. i. 4, al ) ; see Middl., Gr. Art. p. 350 (ed. Rose), AViner, Gr. 19. p. 112. AVhether in the concluding member the article is to be retained or rejected (Lachm.) is very doubtful. The exter nal authority (ABC1D1FG; 17, Orig. (3), Ath., al.] for xAopa is very strong; still as an omission to conform with the preceding member seems highly proba ble, and the external authority [C3C3E JK; nearly all mss.; Clem., Orig. (7), and many Ff.] of considerable weight, we retain with Tisch , Mey., al., the longer reading to? xAap/f. 4 po i] ' to me ;' dative of what is termed ' eth ical relation,' — a usage of this case which is more fully developed in the dat. commodi or incom. ; see AViner, Gr. § 31. 4, p. 190, Bernhardy, Synt. in. 9, p. 85, Kriiger, Sprachl. § 48. 5. This reciprocal crucifixion is a forcible mode of expressing the utter cessation of all communion between the Apostle and world : as Schott well observes, ' alter pro mortuo habet alterum ;' compare John vi. 56, 2 Thess. i. 12, 1 Cor. vi. 13. On the profound significance of these expressions of union with Christ, comp. Reuss, Theol. Chret. iv. 16, Vol. 11. p. 164. 15. oiire 7ap] 'For neither;' ex planatory confirmation of the preceding words Si' ov x. r. X. , elSes aravpov Suvo- p-iv ou 7ap 8)7 uAvov rd rov xAapov irpdypara ireKpuoer ai>r§ ttovto, a\xd to Chap. VI. 15, 16. GALATIANS. 153 ovre aKpofSvaria, dXXd Kaivr) Kriais. 16 koi oaoi ra Kavbvi rovra Phil, with asterisk; Theod., Dam.; Ambrst, al. (Rec, Scholz, Lachm.). The external evidence is thus very strong ; still, the probability that the longer reading is a gloss from ch. v. 6, seems so great that, supported as we are by ancient Vv., we do not hesitate in adhering to the shorter reading. The reading iVxuei ( Rec. with DsjK ; mss. ; al.), has less claim on attention. rrjs iroXirelas rijs ttoAoios dviitrepov iroX- \$ Karearnae, Chrys. On the reading, see critical note. k a I v ii Kri ais] 'anew creature.' Ktio-is has two meanings in the N. T. ; active, ' the act of creation' (Rom. i. 20) passive, '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, perhaps (comp. 2 Cor. v. 17, et ris iv Xpiara, Katvi) Kriais is most probable. The form of expression may possibly have originated from the use of the similar term -iin ---i:, to denote proselytes (Schoettg. Hor. Hebr. Arol. I. p. 328) ; the meaning, however, and application, is here, of course, purely Christian. On these words see an ad mirable sermon by Hammond, Serm. xxvn. Part. n. p. 380 sq. (A. C. Libr.), comp. also Beveridge, Serm. xix. A'ol. I. p. 342 sq. (A. C. Libr.), and five ser mons by Tillotson, Serm. A'ol. in. p. 324 sq. (Lond. 1752). 16. Kal oooi] 'and as many as walk;' prominent specification of the personal subjects in regard of whom the prayer is offered, the nominatival clause standing isolated, and passing kot' dvo- xoXovbiav into another structure ; see Jelf. Gr. § 477. 1. The reading is doubtful. On the one hand, the fut. arotx'fiaovaiv is fairly supported [B (Mai.) C2JK; mss.; Vulg.; Chrys., Theod], and perhaps not quite so likely to have been changed from the pres. as vice versa. Still, on the other, as the ex ternal evidence [ACiDEFG ; mss. ; Cla- 20 rom. ; Syr. (both), Goth., Copt, (appy.), Arm. ; Chrys., Jerome, Aug., al ] is very strong, and a change to a future, as pointing out the course the Galatians were to follow, not wholly improbable, we adopt with Tisch., De W., al. the present otoixouo-iv. r ip ko- v Av i tout to]' according to th is rule,' scil. of faith ; xavAva ixdXeoe rr)v rrpo- Keip4vr)v SiSaaKaXlav, Theod. It is per haps slightly doubtful whether we are here to adopt the more literal meaning of Kavav, 'directing line' (Mey.), jj a«i n [Semitam] Syr.) or the more derivative meaning < maxim,' ' norma vivendi' (garaideinai, Goth., heg [lex] JEth. ) ; the former seems, at first sight, in better accordance with o-toixouo-iv, but as this verb is used above (ch. v. 16), with but little tinge of its physical meaning (contrast Rom. iv. 12). and as koviov may very naturally be referred to the principle stated in ver. 15, the latter and metaphorical meaning (ra Kaviivi Kal TJ;Bi5ax!? rainy, CEcum.) is here to be preferred. On the derivative mean ing of koviov, see an article by Planck, in Comment. Theol. Vol. i. 1 , p. 209 sq. and for exx. Eisner, 06s. Arnl n. p. 201. The dat. is obviously the dativus normce; see notes on ch. v. 16, Winer, Gr. 5 31. 6, p. 193, Fritz. Rom. xiii. 13, A'ol. in. p. 142. eip77VTj ^7r' o»Toiii] ' peace be upon them,' ' super illos,' Vulg., Clarom., not perhaps without some idea of peace and mercy coming down upon them from heaven (Mey.); comp. Acts xix. 6, 2 Cor. xii. 9. It has 154 GALATIANS. Chap. VI. 16, 17. aroixovaiv, elpfjvn eV avrovs Kal eXeos, Kal iirl rbv 'laparfk rov Qeov. 17 toO Xoiirov koitovs fioi pirjBels irapexera- iya yap rd ariyfiara rov 'Iijaov iv ra aapari fiov fSaard^a. Trouble me not : I am Christ's accredited ser vant. been urged (De AV.) that iarlv or eo-Toi (Syr. |ootJ comp. Chrys.) is here to be supplied rather than e!frj, and that the verse is to be regarded as declaratory, and not benedictory. Both the position of the verse, however, and the signifi cant union of ei'pf)«7 and eAeos ( 1 Tim. i. 2, 2 Tim. i. 2, 2 John 3, Jude 2) seem in favor of the ordinary construction ; e'7r7ju|aTo rbv iXeov xal ri)V eipiirnr, Theod. The order (contrast 1 Tim. i. 2, 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.) as more in harmony with the reassuring character of the benediction, or arises merely from the feeling that in the absence of x *'p4i>V formed the more natural commencement. Jude 2 is rather different, owing to the addition of dydirri. On the meaning of eXeos, as involving not only 'misericordia' (oik- tiptio's), but 'ipsum miseris succurrendi studium,' see Tittmann, Synon. p. 69, sq. Kale'TrlTov'Io-poTjA tou Qeov] ' and upon the Israel of God.' It is doubtful whether ko! is ex plicative, ' namely, upon the Israel of God,' or simply copulative. The ex planatory xal, though needlessly ob truded on several passages of the N. T., is still distinctly found in St. Paul's Epp. (contr. De AVette), see Fritz. Rom. ix. 23, Vol. n p. 339, AViner, Gr. § 53. 3, p. 388. Still, as it is doubtful whether Kal is ever used by St. Paul in so marked an explicative force as must here be as signed (the exx. cited by Meyer, 1 Cor. iii. 5, viii. 11, xv. 38, do not seem con clusive), and as it seems still more doubt ful whether Christians generally could be called ' the Israel of God ' ( contrast Brown, p. 382), the simple copulative meaning seems most probable (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 (Rom. ix. 3), he pauses to specify those who were once Israelites according to the flesh (1 Cor. x. 18), but now are the Israel of God ('tou Qeou auctorem in- nuit, quem Deus veluti peculium suum reddidit,' Schott), — true spiritual chil dren of Abraham. 17. tou Aoittou] 'Henceforth ;' not for dirb rov Xoiirov (Bos, Ellips. p. 461, Brown), or for Aoi7roV (Bloomf), though commonly used both for it and to Aoittov in later writers (Bernh. Synt. in. 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; compare Madvig, Synt. § 66. a. Thus, taken strictly, rov Xoiirov k. t. A. is, ' let no one at any time in the future,' etc., to Aoittov k. -i . A., ' let no one during the future,' etc. ; comp. Herm. ad Vig. No. 26, ' rb Aoittov dicitur et tou Xoiirov, hoc discrimine, quod to Aoittov continuum et perpetuum tempus significat ; tou Aoi7rou autem repctitionem ejusdem faeti reliquo tempore indicat' The general temporal 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 antecedence (Hartung, Casus, p. 34, Jelf, Gr. § 523), or of possession (Alf.) ; Chap. VI. 17, 18 Benediction. GALATIANS. 155 18 'H %«/«? tov Kvpiov r/fiav 'Irjaov Xpia rov fiera rov irveifiaros vpiav, dBeXtpoi' dfirjv. Bee Scheuerl. Synt, § 15, p. 100, Donalds. Gr. § 451. kAwovs tt a p e x e' t oj] ' cause trouble ;' surely not by obliging the Apostle to send further letters, but by troubling his spirit by their inability (o-oAeuo'/xevoi, Q2cum.), and still more, as the next clause shows, by thwarting his apostolic authority. iya yip] 'for I ;' reason for the command ; the iya being emphatic and in opposition to the false teachers, — not to pnSels (De AV.), un less considered as one of them, — and the 7op introducing the fact that he was a fully accredited servant of Christ : els (pA)3ov irXeiAva ip.0dXXar Kal irnyvbs tovs irap' abrov rebivras vApovs, Chrys. to arlyptara]' the marks ;' the local addition iv Tip adparl pov necessarily referring the term to the wounds and scars and outward tokens of the persecu tions and sufferings which the Apostle 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 whom they belonged to; compare Herod, vn. 233, ean&v arlyp. tJaaiXifia, Martial, Epigr. xn. 61, 'stigmate non meo,' and espe cially Deyling, Observ. Sacr. A'ol. in. No. 43, p. 423 sq., where the various classes of anyparotpApoi are enumerated, and the whole subject copiously illus trated. The gen. '1 77 a 0 u thus indicates, neither origin (' auctore Christo,' Gom.), nor remote reference to ( ' propter Chris tum,' Pise. ; compare Olsh., — a most doubtful translation both here and 2 Cor. i. 5), but simply the owner; the marks attested who the Apostle's Master was ; and were the ' signa militia? Christi qua; me comprobant ejus esse,' Gloss. Interl. (cited by Bagge). The insertion of Kvplov before 'Itjo-ou (Rec.) is fairly supported [OT>3EJK ; mss. Vulg., Cla rom., Syr. (both), Goth., iEth.-Platt), but owing to the variations ( D^FG, ripav 'I. X. ; Copt., iEth.-Pol., al., tou Xp. ; al. aliter) rightly rejected by Lachm., Tisch. [ABC1 ; mss. ; Amit., — but not -, dAAd*, fiaordfa, aairep ris eirl rpoiraiots jue7a tpporav % anp-elois fiaaiXiKols, Chrys. ; compare Acts ix. 15, /3oo-toW t8 bropd pov, and Clem. Horn. ap. Coteler, Vol. I. p. 692, eixAva Qeov fiaord^eiv. 18. i) x^P's k.t.X.] On the varied nature of the Apostle's concluding bene dictions, see the exx. and illustrations in notes on 1 Thess. v. 28. perd rov ir v e u par 0 s b p. a v] 'be with your spirit;' not appy. with any allu sion to the o-ap| (airdyav avrobs rav aap- kik&v, Chrys.), but simply with reference to the irvevpa as the ' potior pars ' of man ('hominem a potior; parte sic antiquis diei Theologis, nee novum nee inusita- tum 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 ; rfj uVuxj? tt,v xfy'v iirebxerai yeveabai, GJcurn. ; compare Philem. 25, 2 Tim. iv. 22, and notes in loc. dS e Xtpol] Here the un usual position of the word seems to be intentional : they were indeed brethren, and though for a while severed from the Apostle, and the subjects of his censure, still brethren in their common Lord. TRANSLATION 1ST O T IC E The general principles on which this translation has been drawn up are explained in the Preface. I will here only again remind the reader that, as a general rule, I have not departed from the Authorized A7ersion, unless it appears to be either incorrect, inexact, insufficient, obscure, or (see notice to Transl. of Past. Epp.) noticeably inconsistent in its translations of more im portant expressions. These deviations are all stated in the notes, and if not there specially alluded to, or self-evident, will be found to depend on reasons assigned in the Commentary. I have also subjoined, in all the more impor tant cases, citations from eight of the older versions, viz., those of Wiclif, Tyndale, Coverdale, (Bible), Coverdale (Testament), Cranmer, Geneva, Bishops', and Rheims. For the citations from five of these ( Wiclif 's, Tyn- dale's, Cranmer's, the Genevan and Rhemish Versions), I am indebted to The English Hexapla, of Messrs. Bagster. Those from Coverdale have been taken respectively from the first edition of his Bible in 1535 (now made accessible to the general reader by the reprint of the same publishers), and from the same venerable translator's Duglott Testament of 1538, which, though expressly taken from the Latin, still contains some interesting and suggestive translations. The citations from the Bishops' Bible are derived from the second and slightly amended edition of 1572, a copy of the N. T. portion of which, in small portable quarto, appy. differing only from the folio edition in the modes of spelling, has been sometimes used for the sake of con venience. All these extracts, though but of doubtful authority in disputed texts, will still be found frequently to suggest useful alternative renderings, and will also give the reader such a practical acquaintance with the princi ples on which the Authorized 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 cita tion from the Authorized Version, the deviation in the text has arisen from a different reading. In the text, the italics (which slightly differ from those 160 NOTICE. in the first edition of the Auth. Vers ) denote, as usual, words not in the original; the small capitals mark words which are emphatic in the original, but which could not occupy an emphatic position in the translation, without harsh inversions. In the present edition, a few emendations (especially in reference to the aorist) have been introduced into the translation, and a few additional com ments, 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 Thessalonians. p. 132.* 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 follows is only one designed for the closet (see Pref. to Pastoral Epp. p. xvi.), and that it is in no way to be con sidered as a specimen of what might be thought » desirable form of an authoritative Revision. The more experience I gain in the difficult task of revising, the more convinced am I of the utter insufficiency and hopelessness of any single translator's efforts to produce a Version for general purposes. The individual may sometimes suggest something more or less worthy of pass ing consideration, but it is from the collective wisdom of the many that we must alone look for any hopeful specimen of a revision of the noble Version at present in use. * English Edition. THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. CHAPTER I. PAUL, an apostle, not from men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father who raised Him from the dead, — 2and all the brethren which are with me, unto tbe churches of Galatia. s Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us out of the present evil world, according to the will Chapter I. 1. From] 'Of Auth. and the other Vv. Though it does not seem desirable 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 diro : where, on the other hand, 4k is used, ' of ('out of) will often be found a very convenient translation; see notes on chap. iii. 16. AVith regard to Siii, it is nearly impossi ble to lay down any fixed principles of translation : where the idea of medium is designed to be expressed with especial distinctness, we may adopt 'through,' but where this is not the case, the inclu sive 'by' ('agent, instrument, cause, means,' Johnson) will be found suffi ciently exact, and commonly much more idiomatic. 2. Which] It may be here observed that archaisms, as such, are not removed from the Authorized Version except where 21 a positive error is involved. Here there is none ; ' which' is not merely the neu ter of ' who,' but is a compound word ; Latham, Engl. Lang. § 305. 4 (ed. 3). 3. And our] 'And from our,' Auth. and the other Vv. except WicL, ' of It seems desirable to leave out the prep osition in the second member, as more true to the original; see notes on Phil. i. 2 (Transl.). 4. Out of] So Coverd. (Test.) : 'from,' Auth, and the remaining Vv, In the next words it seems better to retain Auth. (changing 'this' into 'the'), as the transl. 'world of evil' (ed. 1), though better preserving the unusual order of the Greek, might be thought to imply in the original the existence of u. gen. of quality. Neither of the usual transla tions, ' world,' or ' age ' (though the for mer perhaps more nearly) give the exact meaning of aMv; the best paraphrase seems, ' spirit of the age ; ' see notes on 162 GALATIAN! Chap. I. 4.— 9. of God and our Father : 6 to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen. 6 1 marvel that ye are so soon changed over from Him that called you in the grace of Christ, unto a different gospel : ' which is NOT another ; save that there are some who trouble you, and desire to. pervert the Gospel of Christ. s Howbeit even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach any gospel unto you contrary to that which we preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so say I now again, If any man preacheth any gospel unto you contrary to that which ye received, let him be accursed. 10 For NOW am I making men my friends, or God ? or Eph. ii, 2. God and our Father] Scholefield (Hints on 1 Cor. xv. 24), while fully admitting the reference of the gen. only to the latter noun, suggests the omission of the copula in translation (so Syr., iEth.) as more conformable to the idiom of our language. As, how ever, 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.-Philox. 5. The glory] ' Glory,' Auth. As the art. is appy. here used kot' i&xhv (see notes), and may be inserted in this pas sage without seriously violating English idiom, it seems best to follow here the usage of Auth. in Matth. vi. 13 (fee). 6. Changing over] ' Removed,' Auth.; ' moved,' Wicl; ' turned,' Tynd., Cov. (both), Cran., Gen., Bish.; 'transferred,' Rhem. By] So Cran.: 'into,' Auth., Wicl., Rhem.; 'in,' Tynd., Cov., Bish.; 'unto,' Cov. (Test.) Gen.: see notes. A different] ' Another,' Auth. and all the other Arv. 7. Save that] So Cov. (Test.) : 'but there be some that,' Auth.; ' but that there be some,' Wicl., Tynd., Cov., Cranmer, Gen., Bish.; ' unless,' Rhem. The present participle might at first sight seem to suggest the use of the auxiliary ' are troubling ; ' as, however, oi rapdaaovres 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). 8. Howbeit] Similarly Cov., Bish., ' neuerthelesse : * ' but,' Auth. and the re maining Vv. Even if] ' Though,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Rhem., 'although.' Should preach] 'Preach,' Auth. and all the other Vv. The idea of future contingency involved in the use of idv with subj. (Herm Viger, No. 312), may here be suitably expressed by inserting should. A ny gospel, etc.] ' Any other gospel unto you than,' Auth., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Bish.; ' other- waies than,' Gen.; ' beside that,' Wicl., Rliem. Preached] ' Have preached,' Auth. and the other Vv. 9. Have said] So Cov. (both), Rhem: 'said,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. Preacheth] ' Preach,' Auth.; change to the indicative to preserve the opposition of moods in original ; see notes on 2 Thess. iii. 14. (Transl.). Any gospel, etc.] ' Other gospel unto you than that,' Auth. Received] ' Have received,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl., 'han undirfongen.' 10. Now am I making, etc.] ' Do I now Chap. I. 10—15. GALATIANS. 163 am I seeking to please men ? if I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ. 11 Now I certify you, brethren, touching the gospel which was preached by me that it is not after man. 12 For neither did I re ceive it from man, neither was I taught it, but through revelation from Jesus Christ. 13 For ye heard of my conversation in time past in Judaism, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and was destroying it ; 14 and made advance in Judaism beyond many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceed ingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when it persuade men,' Auth, Bish.; Rhem.: 'counceil,' Wicl.; 'preach man's doc trine,' Tynd., Gen.; ' preach I men,' Cov.; ' speak fayre,' Cov. (Test.) ; ' speak unto,' Cran.; 'use persuasion,' Rhem. The change to the more definitely present, 'am I making,' seems required by the emphasis which evidently rests on dpn. On the nature of the English present, comp. Latham, Engl. Lang. § 573, 579 (ed. 3). If] So Wicl., Tynd., Rhem.: 'for if,' Auth , Cran., Gen. Am I seeking] 'Do I seek,' Auth., Wicl., Coverd. (Test.), Rhem.; 'go I about,' Tynd., and the remaining Vv. Were still pleasing] ' Yet pleased, ' Auth. A] 'The,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl., ' Christis servant.' 11. AW] 'But,' Auth., Cov.; omitted in Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish. Touching the Gospel, etc.] ' That the Gos pel which was, etc is not,' Auth. Perhaps the text, which is more exactly in accordance with the order of the Greek, makes the denial a little more emphatic. By] ' Of,' Auth. and all the other Vv. 12. Did I receive] So Rhem.: 'I nei ther received it,' Auth., Cov.. Cran.; 'ne I took it of man, ne lerned,' Wicl.; ' ne ther received I it,' Tynd., Gen.; 'I did not receive it nor learned it,' Coo. (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. The insertion of the auxiliary perhaps par tially effects this, as it places the 'nei ther ' a little further from the verb, and still leaves it in that prominence which it seems most naturally to occupy. In ed. 1 ('for I indeed received it not'), this latter point was perhaps too much sacrificed. From man] ' Of man,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl., 'bi man.' Through rev. from] 'By the rev. of,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl., ' bi rcuelacioun.' 13. Ye heard] ' Ye have heard,' Auth. and the other Vv. Judaism] So Rhem.: 'the Jews' religion,' Auth., Gen. ('the Jewishe rei.'), Bish.; 'the Ju lie,' Wicl.; 'the Jews' wayes,' Tynd.; ' the Jewshippe,' Cov. Was de stroying it] ' Wasted it,' Auth.; ' faughte agen it,' Wicl.; ' spoyled it/ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish.; 'drove them out,' Cov. (Test.); ' expugned it,' Rhem. This change is in consequence of the strong meaning ofiropbea, which it seems desirable to maintain. To resolve also the other imperfects would make the sentence heavy and cumbrous, and add but little to the sense. 14. Made advance, etc.] 'Profited in [Wicl., Gen., Bish., Rhem.) the Jews' religion above,' Auth; 'prevayled in,' Tynd., Coverd., Cranmer. For] ' Of,' Auth. 1 5. Set me apart] ' Separated me,' 164 GALATIANS. Chap. I. 15—23. pleased God, who set me apart from my mother's womb, and called me through His grace, 1G to reveal His Son within me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles ; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood : 1? neither went I away to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me ; but I went away into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. 1S Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and I tarried Avith him fifteen days. 19 But other of Lite apostles saw I none, save James the brother of the Lord. 20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. 21 Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia ; 22 and remained unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ : x but they were hearing only That he who was our persecutor in times past is now preach- Auth. and the other ATv. except Wicl., 'departid me,' and Cov. (Test), 'sun dered me.' The change is made to pre vent ' from' being understood as local : see notes. Through] ' By,' Auth. and the other Vv. In this passage, it seems desirable to adopt the more rigorous translation of Sid, as suggesting more distinctly the fact that xap's was not the instrument, but the ' causa medians ; ' see notes. 16. Within] 'In,' Auth., Wicl, Cov-, Bish., Rhem.; 'by,' Tynd., Cov. (Test.), Cran.; 'to,' Gen., Rhem.: 'heathen,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. Conferred] So Auth. This translation is not wholly adequate, but it is not easy to fix upon a more exact one. The original word seems to involve two ideas, addressing one's self to (irpAs, direction), and taking counsel with. Most of the older transla tions give prominence to the latter and more important idea, e. g. 'I commened not of the matter,' Tynd, Con., Cran., Geneo.; some of the moderns, e. g. Meyer, Lcwin, express more distinctly the for mer. It seems difficult to combine both without paraphrasing. The singular translation in Cov. (Test.), 'I did not graunt' (comp. Rhem, 'I condescended not,'), results from the Vulg. 'acquievi.' 17. Away (bis)]* 'Up,' Auth. In the concluding clause it seems better to maintain the order of Auth. 'returned again,' not as the Greek order might seem to suggest, ' again returned ' ; for the ttoAiv is only idiomatically added to the verb, and is appy. without any special emphasis; comp. Acts xviii. 21, and see exx. in Kiihner on Xenoph. Mem. n. 4. 4. 18. Visit Cephas] ' See *Peter,' Auth. and all the other Vv. / tarried] Sim. Rliem.: ' abode,' Auth., Tynd., Cov. (both), Cran., Gen., Bish.; ' dwellid,' Wicl. 19. The brother of the Lord] Sim. Rhem., 'the brother of our Lord:' 'the Lord's brother,' Auth. and other Vv. This latter mode of translation is perhaps more appropriate when neither substan tive has the article. 22. Remained] ' Was unknown,' Auth. and all the other Vv. 23. Were hearing] ' Had heard,' Auth., Cov , Rhem., Bish.; ' hadrlen oonli an hearynge,' Wicl; 'heard,' Tynd., Cran., Gen. Conybeare and Howson have given a good paraphrase : ' tidings only were brought them from time to time ; ' comp. Erasm., ' rumor apud illos erat.' Who was our persecutor] ' Which perse cuted us,' Auth., Tynd., Cran., Gen., Chap. II. 1—5. GALATIANS, 165 ing the faith which once he destroyed. M And they glorified God in me. CHAPTER II. Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus also with me. 2 And I went up by reve lation, and communicated unto them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputa tion, lest by any means I might be running, or have run, in vain. 3 Howbeit not even Titus, who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: 4 and that, because of the false brethren craftily brought in, men who came in stealthily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage : " to whom we gave place by our sub mission, no, not for an hour ; that the truth of the gospel might Bish., Rhem.; ' that pursued us,' Wicl.; ' that persecuted us,' Cov.; ' that did per secute us,r Coo. (Test.). Is now preaching] ' Now preacheth,' Auth.' Tynd., Coo. fpr. now'), Cran., Gen., Bish.; ' doth now preach,' Coo. (Test. ) ; ' doth now evangelize,' Rhem. The change is made to mark more definitely the present act ; comp. notes and ref. on ch. i. 10. Chapter II. 1. After fourteen years] So Rhem : ' fourteen years after,' Auth. and the other Vv. ( Tynd., Cov., ' after that;' Cran., ' thereafter'). The change is perhaps desirable as it slightly tends to prevent the last-mentioned events being considered as the terminus a quo of the fourteen years. Titus also] So Rhem ¦• ' Titus with me also,' Auth., Tynd., Cov., Gen.; ' Titus also beynge taken with me,' Cov. (Test.) ; the rest omit koI in translation. 2. The Gospel] So all Vv. except Auth., ' that Gospel.' Might be running, etc.] ' Should (om. Wicl.) run or had run,' Auth. and all Vv. The text seems to preserve more exactly, and per haps also more grammatically, the con trast between the pres. (subj.) and past tense. It may be observed that should ' simpliciter futuritionem indicat •' might 'tie rei possibilitate dicitur;' AVallis, Gram. Angl. p. 107. 3. Howbeit not even] Sim. Cov. (Test.), 'neuerthelesse nother:' 'but neither,' Auth., Rhem : ' and neither,' Wicl.; ' also,' Titus . . . yet, etc' Tynd., Cran., Gen. Though he was] 'Being,' Auth. 4. The false, etc.] Similarly Rhem.: ' false brethren unawares brought in, who,' Auth.; ' and that because of (' eer- tayne,' Cov.) incommers beynge falce br.,' Tynd., Cran., Bish. Stealth ily] 'Privily,' Auth., Cov. (Test.) Cran., Gen., Bish ; Wicl. omits ; ' amonge other,' Tynd., Cov.; 'craftily,' Rhem. Perhaps the change is desirable as avoiding repetition, and as harmonizing slightly better with the action described by the verb. 5. By our submission] 'By subjection,' Auth., Bish; ' to subjeccioun ;' 'as con cerning to be brought into subjection,' Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.; 'yelded not subjection,' Rhem.; Cov. (Tost.) omits. 166 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 6—9. continue with you. " But from those who were high in reputation, — whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me ; God accept- eth no man's person, — to me certainly they who were of reputa tion communicated nothing ; 7 but contrariwise, when they saw that I was entrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter was with that of the circumcision, 8 (for He that wrought for Peter towards the apostleship of the circumcision, the same wrought for me also towards the Gentiles), 9 and became aware of the grace that was given unto me, James, and Cephas, and John, who are accounted as pillars, gave to me and Barnabas right hands of fellowship ; that we should be apostles unto the Gentiles, and 6. From] ' Of,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Cov., ' as to them ; ' Cov. (Test.), ' as for them.' The change here seems necessary to prevent 'of being considered a mere sign of the gen. case. Were high, etc.] ' Seemed to be some what,' Auth., Cran., and sim. Cov. (Test); 'that seemed to be great.' Cor., and sim. Tynd., Gen. The very slight distinction between SoKovvres and Sok. elvai ti, 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. To me certainly, etc.] 'Eor they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me,' Auth.; ' added nothynge,' Tynd., Cran., Bish., Rhem.; ' taught me nothing,' Cov ; ' avayled me nothing,' Cov. (Test. ) ; ' dyd communicate nothing with me,' Gen. 7. / was entrusted, etc.] 'The gospel .... was committed unto me as the Gos pel of the circumcision was unto Peter,' Auth., and sim. the other Vv. The change of order is made, for the sake of keeping the emphasis on ire irlare vpat : see Meyer. Even as] ' As,' Auth. and all the other Vv. On the translation of Kabibs, see notes on 1 Thess. i. 5. 8. Wrouqht] So Wicl, Cov. (Test), Rliem. : ' wrought effectually,' Auth. ; 'was mighty,' Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish. The idea of effectual working, though to a considerable extent involved in 4vepye1v, is perhaps scarcely sufficiently prominent to be expressed definitely; see, however, notes on 1 Thess. ii. 13. For] Similarly Wicl., 'to Peter:' 'in,' Auth., Tynd , Cran., Bish., Rhem.; 'with,' Cov.; 'by,' Cov. (Test.), Gen. Towards] ' To,' Auth., Wicl., Cov., Bish., Rhem.; ' in,' Tynd. and the remaining Vv. Wrought] ' Was mighty in me toward,' Auth. All the other Vv. give the same translation to 4vepy4a in the second clause that they adopt in the first. 9. And became aware, etc.] Similarly, as to older, Wicl., Tynd., Cran., Bish., Rhem., except that they repeat the idio matic ' when ' in the translation of the tem poral participle "yvo'vTes, but thus slightly impair the natural sequence of the ISovres . . . koI yvAvres. Auth. inverts, 'and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be,' etc. ; Coo. turns into a finite verb, ' they perceived.' And Cephas] Sim. Wicl., Rhem.: Auth. and the remaining Vv. omit ' and.' Are accounted as] ' Seemed to be,' Auth. and all the Vv. except Wicl., 'weren seyn to be ; ' Gen., ' are taken to be.' Right hands] ' The right hands,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, 'right hond.' Be apostles] So Cran., Bish.: ' should go,' Auth.; ' that we among Chap. II. 9—15. GALATIANS. 167 they unto the circumcision. 10 Only they would that we should remember the poor ; which very thing I also was forward to do. 11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he had been condemned. " For before that certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles ; but when they came, he began to withdraw and separate himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also dissembled with him ; insomuch that even Barnabas was carried away with by their dissimulation. " Howbeit when I saw that they were not walking uprightly according to the truth of .the gospel, I said unto Cephas before all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, how is it that thou constrainest the Gentiles to keep the customs of the Jews ? 1S We truly are by nature Jews, and not sinners of the Gentiles; the hethen,' Wicl ; ' shuld preach,' Tynd., Cov. (both), Gen ; 'that we unto,' Rhem. Gentiles] So Gen., Rhem.: 'heathen,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. 10. Which very thing] ' The same which,' Auth.; ' the whiche thing,' Wicl, Cov. Test, ('thing also') ; 'whiche thing also,' Tynd., Cov., Gen.; 'wher in also,' Cran., Bish.; ' the which same thing also,' Rhem. 11. Cephas] * * Peter,' Auth. Came] So Cov. (Test.) : 'was come,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. Had been condemned] ' Was to be blamed,' Auth., Bish.; ' was worthy to be blamed,' Tynd., Cov., Cran, Gen., and similarly Wicl, ' to be undirnomen ;' ' was blame- able,' Cov. (Test); 'was reprehensible,' Rhem. 12. Certain men came] ' Certain were come,' Auth. Was eating] ' Did eat,' Auth, Cov. (both), Cran., Bish., Rhem.; 'ete,' Wicl., Tynd., Gen. Began to, etc.] ' Withdrew and separated,' Auth. and all Vv. The imperf. denotes the commencement and continuance of the act, or as Bengel, ' subducebat paullatim.' 13. The rest of the] So Cov. (Test.), Rhem: ' the other,' Auth and the remain ing Vv. Also dissembled] ' Dis sembled likewise,' Auth., Tynd., Cran., Bish.: the other Vv. omit the Kal in translation. Even Barnabas] ' Barnabas also,' Auth By their] Auth. omits ' by ; ' ' into,' Wicl and the remaining Vv. 14. Howbeit] 'But,' Auth. and all the other Vv. Were not walking] ' Walked not,' Auth. Cephas] 'Peter,' Auth All] So Cov. (both), and sim. Wicl, Tynd , Gen., 'all men : ' ' them all,' Auth., and the remain ing Vv. How Cometh it, etc ] * ' Why compellest thou,' Auth., and sim. Rhem., 'dost thou compel;' 'hou con- streynest thou,' Wicl; ' why causest thou,' Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish. Keep the customs, etc ] ' To live as do the Jews,' Auth., and sim. the other Vv. ex cept Rhem., 'Judaize.' 15. We (truly) are, etc.] Similarly Rhem : ' we who are Jews by nature,' Auth, Tynd, Cran., Gen.; 'though we be, etc' Cov.; 'we which are . . . know,' Bish. This address of St Paul to St. Peter involves so many difficulties both in meaning and connection, that it will be perhaps best to subjoin a free para- 168 GALATIANS. Chap. II. 15—17. 6 but as we know that a man is not justified by 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. 17 But if, while we seek to be justified in Christ, we are found ourselves also to be sinners, is Christ therefore a phrase of the whole. 'We, I concede, are by birth Jews, not Gentiles, and con sequently, from our point of view, sin ners ; but as we know that a man is not justified by the works of the law, in fact is not justified at all, except through faith in Christ ; — even we, with all our privi leges, believed in and into Christ, that we might be justified, etc. But what, if, while we are seeking to be justified in Christ, the result show that we, with all our privileges, are sinners like the Gen tiles ; is Christ the minister of a dispen sation 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 better in its place, it is thus, and not in seeking to be justified in Christ, that I show myself (vox horren- da!) a transgressor of the law; yes, a, violator of its deeper principles. For I (to adduce a proof from my own spiritual experience) through the medium of the law, and in accordance with its higher principles, died unto 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 reanimated by Christ ; yes, the life which now I live, this earthly, mundane life, Hive in tho element of faith in Christ, who so loved me that He gave His own life for me. Thus I do not, like these Judaists, regard the <:race of God as a principle that could be dispensed with ; for if, as they preteml, tho law is suffi cient to make men righteous, the obvious inference is, there was no object in the death of Christ. 16. Bat as we know] ' Knowing,' Auth., Wicl, Cov. (Test), Rhem.; 'we which . . . knowe,' Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish.; ' yet insomuche as we knowe,' Cov. Save only through, etc.] ' But by the faith 'of Jesus Christ,' Auth and the other Vv. except Cov., 'on J. C.;' Cov. (Test.), ' save by the faith by J. C We too believed] ' Even we have believed in J. C.,' Auth.; ' and we bileucn,' Wicl; 'we have believed also,' Cov.; 'we also beleue,' Cov. (Test), Rhem.; 'and we have bel. on,' Cran., Bish., Tynd; ('and therfbr') 'even we I say have bel. in,' Gen. Faith in] ' The faith of,' Auth. and all Vv. Since] ' For,' Auth.; ' because that,' Tynd., Cov. (both), Cran., Gen.; ' wherfor,' Wicl.; ' because,' Bish.; ' for the which cause,' Rhem. 17. In Christ] So Wicl, Cov. (Test), Rhem.: ' by Christ,' Auth. and remaining Vv. We are found, etc.] ' We ourselves also are found sinners,' Auth. English idiom here, in consequence of the union with the pres. part., seems to require the pres. ' are found " as the translation of evpebnv. The aorist in the original has an idiomatic reference to a discovery past and done with, and about which no more need be said, which can not be expressed without paraphrase; comp. Donalds. Gr. § 433. Is Christ, etc.] ' Is therefore Christ the,' Auth. God forbid] Auth. and all Vv. except Cov. (Test.), 'thatbefarre.' On reconsideration it would seem best, and even practically most exact, that 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 Auth. Chap, III. 1. 2. GALATIANS. 169 minister of sin? God forbid ! 1S For if the things that I destroyed these again I build up, I prove myself a transgressor. w For I through the law died to the law, that I might live unto God. 20 1 have been crucified with Christ : it is, however, no longer I that live, but Christ 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, and gave Himself for me. a I do not make void the grace of God ; for if righteousness eowie through the law, then for nought did Christ die. CHAPTER III. 0 foolish Galatians, who did bewitch you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was evidently set forth among you, crucified. 2 This only would I learn of you, Was it by the works of the law that ye 18. The things that I destroyed] 'I build again the things which I destroyed,' Auth., Cran , Bish.; ' that which,' Tynd., Cov., Gen. ; ' the same things againe which,' Rhem. The inversion, though involving a slight irregularity in struc ture, seems here needed, as serving both to keep the emphasis on the right words, and to exhibit the true point of the argu ment. Prove myself] 'Make myself,' Auth. and all the other Vv. 19. Died] 'Am dead,' Auth. and the Other Vv. except Cran., ' haue bene deed.' 20. Have been crucified] ' Am cruci fied,' Auth, and sim., as to the auxiliary, all the other Vv. Of the two modes of expressing the Greek perfect ( ' am ' and 'have been '), the latter seems here most appropriate, as the associated aor. ren ders the ref. to past time more prominent than one to present effects ; see notes on Col. i. 16 (Transl). It is, how ever, etc.] 'Nevertheless I live; yet not I,' Auth, sim. Cov, Cran.; 'I live verely, yet now not I,' Tynd., Gen. Yea] ' And,' Auth., Gen., Cran., Bish., Rhem.; 'for,' Tynd., Cov.; 'but,' Wicl, Cov. (Test). Now I] ' I now,' Auth. 22 In faith, etc.] 'By ('in,' Wicl, Cov. (both), Rhem.), the faith of,' Auth, Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish. 21. Make void] 'Frustrate,' Auth; ' cast not awei,' Wicl, Cov. (both), Rhem.; ' despyse not,' Tynd., Cran.; ' do not ab rogate,' Gen ; ' reject not,' Bish. Through] So Wicl: 'by,' Auth, Cov. (both), Rhem.; 'of,' Tynd., Gen., Cran., Bish. For nought] 'In vain,' Auth., Tynd, Cov., Cran., Bish., Rhem; 'without cause,' Wicl, Gen. ('a cause.') Did Christ die] ' Christ is dead,' Auth., Bish.; 'died,' Wicl, and the remaining Vv. The slight change in the text seems to give the due prominence to Sapedr, and also to preserve a, better rhythm than the unresolved ' died.' Chapter III. 1. Did bewitch] 'Hath bewitched,' Auth. and the other Vv. *Auth inserts after ' you,' ' that ye should not obey the truth.' 2. Was it, etc.] Similarly Rhem., 'by the workes of the law did you receiuc :' ' received ye the Spirit by the,' etc. Auth., and sim. as to order all the remaining Vv. 170 GALATIANS, Chap. III. 3—10. received the Spirit, or by the hearing of faith ? s Are ye so very foolish ? having begun with the Spirit are ye now being made per fect with the flesh ? * Did ye suffer so many things in vain, if indeed it really be in vain. * He then, / say, that ministereth to you the Spirit and worketh mighty powers within you, doeth he it by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith ? 6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. 7 Know ye then that they which are OF faith, the same are the sons of Abraham. 8 Moreover the Scrips ture, foreseeing that God justifieth the Gentiles by faith, pro claimed beforehand the glad tidings unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all the nations be blessed. 9 So then they which be of faith are blessed together with the faithful Abraham. 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under curse : 3. So very] ' So,' Auth and the other Vv. except Cov., ' such fooles.' Begun with] So Rhem.: ' begun in' Auth. and the other Vv. except Cov., ' by.' Being made perfect with] ' Made peifect by,' Auth., Genev. ('in'); 'ben ended,' Wicl; 'nowe ende,' Tynd., Cov. (Test); ' ende now then,' Cov.; ' ende in,' Tynd., Cran.; ' be consummate with,' Rhem. 4. Did ye suffer] ' Have ye suffered,' Auth., Cov. (both), Bish., Rhem., and sim. the other Vv., except that they do not adopt the interrogative form. Indeed it really be] ' It be yet,' Auth., Bish; 'if that be vayne,' Tynd., Gen.; ' yf it be also in vayne,' Cran.; ' if yet without cause,' Rliem. 5. He then, elc] ' He therefore,' Auth., Cov. (Test ), Gen., Bish., Rhem.; 'more over, he, etc.,' Cran.; Wicl, Tynd., Cov. omit o8v in translation. Mighty powers, etc.] ' Miracles among you,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, ' vertues in you ;' Cov., ' great actes.' 7. Then] 'Therefore,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Cov., 'thus I know,' and Gen , ' so yc know.' The only other version that takes 7ivdVi«TE indicatively is that of Cranmer. Sons] So Wicl: ' children,' Auth and the remain ing Vv. 8. Moreover] ' And,' Auth., Wicl, Cov. (Test.) , Rhem.; 'for,' Tynd. and remain ing Vv. (Cov. omits). Justifieth] So Wicl, Cov. (Test), Rhem.: 'would justify,' Auth, Tynd., Cran., Gen ; ' jus- tifyed,' Cov. The Gentiles] So Gen., Rhem.: 'the heathen,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. By faith] So Cov. (Test.), Rhem., and sim. Wicl, ' of faith :' ' through faith,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. Proclaimed be forehand, etc.] Sim. Tynd., Cov., Cran.: ' preached before the Gospel,' Auth., Gen. ( ' before hand ' ) ; ' told to for;' Wicl; 'told,' Cov. (Test ) ; ' shewed . . . before,' Rhem. All the nations] Sim. Wicl, Cov., ' alle the hethen :' ' all na tions,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. ex cept Gen., ' all the Gentiles.' The change in the translation of to ebrn in the same verse seems required by a kind of chron ological propriety. 9. Together with] ' With,' Auth. and all the other Vv. The faithful] So Bish., Rhem.: 'faithful,' Auth. and all the remaining ATv. 10. Curse] So Wicl, Rhem., and sim- Chap. III. 11— 17. GALATIANS. 171 for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. u 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. 12 Now the law is not of faith ; but, He that doeth them shall live in them 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us, — because it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree, — 14 that unto the Gentiles the blessing of Abra ham might come in Christ Jesus ; that we might receive the prom ise 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 hath been confirmed, no man annul- leth it, or addeth new conditions. 16 Now to Abraham were the promises made, and to his seed. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many ; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 Now this I say, A covenant, that hath been before confirmed by ilarly Tynd., 'under malediccion : ' 'the curse,' Auth, Cov. (both), Cran., Gen., Bish 11. But further, etc.] ' But that no man is justified by the law,' Auth. Be cause] So Rhem.: 'for,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. 12. Now] ' And,' Auth, Cov. (Test), Gen., Bsh; Tynd., Cov., Cran., omit ; ' but,' Wicl , Rhem. He] * ' The man,' Auth. 13. Redeemed] Similarly Wicl, ' agen- bought :' ' hath redeemed,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. except Cov., 'hath de- lyucred.' Having become] 'Be ing made,' Auth, Bish., Rhem.; ' and was made,' Wicl, Tynd.; ' when he became,' Cov; 'beynge become,' Cov. (Test.); ' inasmoch as he was made,' Cran. ; ' when he was made,' Gen. Be cause] So Rhem : ' for,' Auth. and the re maining Vv. 14. Unto the Gentiles,' Auth 'Through *J. C. Gen., Bish; 'in Rhem. Come on the In Christ J] Auth, Tynd., Cran., Wicl, Cov. (both), 1 5. Yet when it hath been] ' Yet if it be,' Auth. The temporal translation in the text is adopted by Tynd., Cov.; the hypothetical by Auth. with Cran., Bish: the remaining Vv. adopt purely particip ial translations. Annulleth it, etc.] ' Disannulleth or addeth thereto,' Auth., Bish.; ' ordeyneth above,' Wicl: 'addeth anything thereto,' Tynd. Cov. (sim. Test.), Cran., Gen.; ' further disposeth,' Rhem. 16. Were the promises, etc.] Sim. Rhem., Wicl: ' and his seed were the promises,' etc., Auth. and the remaining Vv. 17. Now this] ' And this,' Auth., Gen., Rhem.; 'but,' Wicl, Cov. (Test ) ; Tynd., Cov., Bish., omit Se. The translation of Se is here somewhat difficult. Though 'now' has just preceded, it must appy. be adopted again as the only translation which seems to preserve the resumptive force. A covenant] ' The cove nant,' Auth and the other Vv. except Wicl and Cov. (both), 'this.' Huth been before confirmed] 'Was con firmed before,' Auth., Tynd, Cov., Cran., Gen; 'was given,' Cov. (Test.); 'the test, being confirmed,' Rhem.; Wicl, 172 GALATIANS. Chap. III. 17—23. God [for Christ] , the law, which was four hun.lred and thirty years after, doth not invalidate, that it should make void the promise. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise : but to Abraham God hath freely given it through promise. 19 What then is the object of the law ? It was added because of the transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise hath been made ; and was ordained by means of angels, in the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. ' Is the law then against the promises of God ? God foibid ! for if there had been given a law which could have given life, verily by the law would righteousness have come. 22 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. K Now before that faith came, we were kept in ward wholly inverts. By God, etc.] ' Of God in Christ,' Auth. Doth not, etc.] Sim. Tynd, Cran., Bish.: 'can not disannul,' Auth., Gen.; ' makith not veyn,' Wicl; 'is not disannulled,' Cov.; 'makith not void,' Rhem.; Cov. (Test), confuses. Make void] Similarly Wicl. ('to avoide away') and Cov. (Test): ' make tho promise of none effect,' Auth., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish.; 'to frus trate,' Rhem. 18. But to Abraham, etc.] 'But God gave it to Abraham by promise,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Cov., 'gave freely ;' Wicl, 'grauntide.' Through] 'By,' Auth. and all the other Vv. 19. What then, etc.] 'Wherefore then serveth,' Auth., Tynd., Cov. (sim. Test.), Cran., Gen., Bish ; ' what thanne the law,' Wicl. ; ' why was the law then,' Rhem. The transgressions] Auth. and all the other ATv. omit the article ; in a passage, how ever, of this dogmatical importance, it ought appy. to be retained. Hath been made] ' Was made,' Auth, Tynd., Cran., Gen.; 'He hadde made beheest,' Wicl; ' He had promised,' Cov. (Test.), R.hem. And was] 'And it was,' Auth. By means of] 'By,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Cov., 'of an gels.' 21. Given a law] ' A law given,' Auth. Verily by the, etc.] ' Verily ( Wicl.) right eousness should have been by the law,' Auth.; ' then no doute,' Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen , Bish.; ' shuld have come,' Tynd., Gen. 22. But on the contrary] ' But,' Auth. and all the other Vv. The addition of the words "on the contrary " seem here required in translation to preserve the true force of aAAa, and to show clearly the nature of the reasoning. Shut up all] Similarly, as to the omission of 'hath,' Tynd., Cran., 'concluded all things :' .' hath concluded all,' Auth., Bish.; 'hath concluded all things,' Wicl, Gen., Rhem. Faith in] 'Faith of,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Cov., 'faith on.' 23. Now] 'But,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, ' and ;' Tynd. and Cov. omit. Before that] So Tynd., Cran., and similarly Wicl, 'to for that;' Cov. (Test), 'afore that:' ' before,' Auth and the remaining Vv. Kept in ward, etc.] 'Kept under the law shut up,' Auth.; 'kept under the lawe, en- Chap. III. 23—29. GALATIANS, 173 shut up under the law for the faith which afterwards was to be revealed. 24 So then the law hath been our schoolmaster unto Christ, that we may be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith is come, we are no longer under a school master. 2e For ye are all sons of God through the faith in Christ Jesus. * For as many of you as were baptized into Christ put on Christ. M There is among such neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is no male and female : for ye all are one in Christ Jesus. M But if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abra ham's seed, heirs according to promise. closid,' Wicl; 'kept and shut up, etc.,' Tynd., Cov., Gen.; 'kept under the law and were shut up,' Cran., Bish. For] ' Unto,' Auth. Afterwards was, etc.] ' Which should aft. be rev.,' Auth, Gen., Bish. ; sim. Tynd., Cov., Cran. ('be declared'). 24. So then] ' Wherefore,' Auth, Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish. ; ' and so,' Wicl ; 'thus,' Cov.; 'therefore,' Cov. (Test.), Rhem. Hath been our school master unto] ' Was our schoolmaster to bring us unto,' Auth., Gen.; ' undir mais- ter in Christ,' Wicl; ' scoleraaster unto the time of,' Tynd.; 'scolemaster unto,' Cow. (both), Cran., Bish.; 'pedag. in,' Rhem. There is much difficulty in fix ing on the most suitable translation of this word. The term ' schoolmaster ' certainly tends to introduce an idea (that of teaching) not in the original and also serves to obscure the idea of custodia ('custos incorruptissimus,' Hor. Sat. i. 6. 81 ), which seems the prevailing one of the passage. Still as the same objection applies in a, greater or less degree to 'pedagogue' (ed. 1) and 'tutor,' it will be perhaps better, in so familiar a pas sage, to return to Auth. May be] ' Might be,' Auth.: change to preserve what is called the succession of tenses, Latham, Engl. Lang. § 616 (ed. 3). 25. Now that] 'So Coy..- 'after that,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Cov. (Test), 'whan the fayth did come;' Rhem., ' when the faith came.' 26. Sons] So Tynd., Gen : Auth. and the remaining Vv., ' the children.' Through the faith] 'By faith,' Auth, Gen., Bish, Rhem. ; ' thorugh bileue,' Wicl; 'by the fayth which is in,' Tynd., Cov. (Test.); ' because ye believe in,' Cran. 27. Were baptized] ' Have been bap tized,' Auth; 'are baptized,' Tynd. ( Wicl, ' ben') and all the remaining Vv. Put on] ' Have put on,' Auth. and the other A^v. except Wicl , ' ben clothid.' 28. There is among such, etc.] ' There is neither, etc.,' Auth No mule and female] 'Neither male nor female,' Auth. None of the other Vv. seem to have marked the change. All are] 'Are all,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Rhem., ' al you arc' 29. But] So Cov. (Test): 'and,' Auth., Wicl, Rhem. The rest omit the particle. Heirs] So Rhem.: * ' and heirs,' Auth. 174 GALATIANS. Chap. IV. 1—8. CHAPTER IV Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth in nothing from a bond-servant, though he be lord of all ; 2 but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed of the father. 3 Even so we, when we were children, were kept in bondage under the rudiments of the world : * but when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 5 that He might redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. 6 And to show that ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba Father. 7 So then thou art no more a servant, but a son ; and if a son, an heir also through God. 8 Howbeit, at that time, truly, not knowing God, ye were in Chapter IV. 1 . In nothing] ' Noth ing,' Auth., Wicl, Cov. (Test), Bish, Rhem.; ' differeth not,' Tynd., Cran., Gen.; ' there is no diff.,' Cov. Bond servant] ' Servant,' Auth and all the other Vv. It seems desirable to keep up the idea of 'bondage' and 'slavery' which pervades the whole simile. 2. Guardians] ' Tutors,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, 'kepers;' Cov., 'rulers.' It seems desirable to make a change in translation to preserve a dis tinction between 4irlrpoiros here and ttoi- Sayaybs in the preceding chapter. Steioards] ' Governors,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, 'kepers and tu tores.' 3. Kept in bondage] ' AVere in bondage under,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, 'serueden undir;' Cov. (Test), Rhem., ' were seruynge under.' Rudiments] So Gen., Bish.: 'elements,' Auth., Wicl , Rhem.; 'ordinances,' Tynd., Cran.; ' tradtcions,' Cov. (both). 4. dime] So Wicl , Rhem.: ' was come,' Auth. and sim. the remaining Vv. Born . . . born] 'Made . . . made, Auth., Wicl , Rhem., Bish. ( ' and made under ' ) ; 'born . . . made bonde unto,' Tynd., Cran.; < borne and put under,' Cov.; ' made . . . made bonde unto,' Gen. The meaning preferred by Scholef. (Hints, p. 96), 'made subject to the law,' involves a change of meaning in yevApevov, which does not appear necessary or natural. 5. That he might] So Rliem., and sim. Wicl, Cov. (Test): 'to redeem,' Auth and the remaining A'v. Here as in ch. iii. 14 it seems most exact to indicate the repeated i'va by the same form of trans lation. 6 To show that] ' Because,' Auth and the other Vv. except Wicl, ' for ye ben ;' Cov., ' forsomuche then as.' Sent forth] Sim. Wicl., Cov. (Test), 'sente:' 'hath sent forth,' Auth; 'hath sent,' Tynd., Cov., Cran., Rhem.; 'hath sent out,' Gen. Our hearts] ' * Your hearts,' Auth. 1. So then] ' Wherefore,' Auth., Gen., Bish.; ' and so,' Wicl; ' wherefore now,' Tynd., Cov., Cran.; 'therefore,' Cov. (Test.), Rhem. An heir, etc] ' Then an heir # of God through Christ,' Auth. 8. At that time, etc.] ' Then when ye know (sic in Bagst.) not,' Auth.; ' thanne ye unknowynge,' Wicl; ' when ye knewe not,' Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish.; ' but then truely not knowynge,' Cov. Chap. IV. 8— 15. GALATIANS. 175 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 rudi ments, whereunto ye desire to be again anew in bondage. 10 Ye are carefully observing days, and months, and seasons, and years. 11 1 am apprehensive of you, lest haply I have bestowed upon you labor in vain. 13 Brethren, I beseech you, become as I am, for I also have become as ye are. Ye injured me in nothing : 13 yea ye know that it was on account of weakness of my flesh that I preached the gospel unto you the first time ; " and your temptation in my flesh ye despised not, nor loathed, but received me as an angel of God, yea as Christ Jesus. u Of what nature then was the boasting of (Test.) ; 'then in deede knowing,' Rhem. The change in the translation of rAre is to prevent ' then' being mistaken for the inferential particle. Were in bond age] ' Ye did service,' Auth. Not gods] *' No gods,' Auth. 9. Now that ye have come to know] 'Now, after that ye have known,' Auth Have been known] 'Are known,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Gen., ' are taught' By God] 'Of God,' Auth, and all the other Vv. How is it that] So Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.: 'how,' Auth, Wicl, Cov. (Test.), Bish, Rhem. Ye turn back] So Cov.: ' turn ye,' Auth and the other Vv. except Gen., ' are turned backward unto.' Rudiments] So Bish.: ' elements,' Auth., Wicl, Rhem.; ' cerimonies,' Tynd., Gen.; 'tradicions,' Cov. (both); 'ordinaunees,' Cran. Again anew] Sim. Tynd , Cov., Cran., Bish., ' againe afresshe : ' 'again,' Auth., and sim. Cov. (Test), Rhem.; ' as from the begynnyng ye wil be in bondage backwardly,' Gen. 10. Can-fully observing] ' Observe,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, 'taken kcpe to.' Seasons] 'Times,' Auth. and all the other Vv. 11. Am apprehensive] 'Am afraid,' Auth; 'Idrede,' Wicl.; ' am in feare of Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish; 'feare me,' Cov. (Test); 'fear,' RJiem. 12. Become as, etc.] ' Be as I am; for I am as ye are : ye have not injured me at all,' Auth., Bish.; 'ye have not hurte me at all,' Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen. 13. Yea ye know, etc.] ' Ye know how through infirmity, etc.,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl , Rhem., ' bi ,in- firmyte ; ' Cov., ' in weakness.' The slight changes made by substituting the simpler word 'weakness' for 'infirmity,' and ' my ' for ' the,' seem to make the reference of the Apostle to some bodily affliction or illness slightly more appar ent. The first time] ' At the first,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, ' now bifbr ;' Cov. ( Test. ), ' a whyle ago :' this translation leaves the meaning am biguous ; see notes. 14. Your] *'My,' Auth.; see notes. In my flesh] So Wicl, Cov. (Test), Rhem.; 'which was,' Auth., Cran. Gen., Bish., and sim. Tynd. Loathed] ' Rejected,' Auth., Rhem. ; ' forsaken,' Wicl; ' abhorred,' Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish. Yea] So Tynd, Cov. (Test), Gen.: ' even,' Auth., Cov., Cran., Bish.; Wicl, Rhem. omit. 15. Of what nature, etc.] ' Where* is then the blessedness ye spake of,' Auth; 176 GALATIANS. Chap. IV. 15—24. your blessedness ? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possi ble, ye would have plucked out your eyes, and have given them to me. I6 So then, am I become your enemy, by speaking to you the truth ? 17 They pay you court in no honest way ; yea, they desire to exclude you, that ye may pay them court. 18 But it is good to be courted in honesty at all times, and not only when I am present with you ... 19 My little children, of whom I am again in travail, until Christ be formed in you, 20 1 could indeed wish to be present with you now, and to change my tone, for I am perplexed about. you. 21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law ? 22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons ; one by the bond-maid, and one by the free-woman. ® Howbeit, he who was of the bond-maid was born after the flesh ; but he of the free-maid was through the promise. M All which things are allegorical ; for 'your blessynge,' Wicl. ; 'how happy were ye then,' Tynd., Cov.; ' your hap- pynesse,' Cov. ( Test ) ; ' your felicitie,' Cran., Bish.; ' boasting of your fel.,' Gen; ' your blessedness,' Rhem. Your] So Wicl, Cov. (Test), Rhem..- 'your own,' Auth and the remaining Vv. 1 6. So then] ' Am I therefore,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, Rhem., ' thanne.' By speaking] ' Because I tell,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, 'seiynge;' Cov. (Test), Rhem., ' telling.' 17. Pay you court, etc.] 'Zealously affect you, but not well,' Auth.; ' gelous over you amysse,' Tynd. and other Vv. except Wicl, ' loucn you not well ; ' Rhem., ' emulate.' Desh to] ' Would,' Auth., Wicl, Cov., Rhem. ; 'intende to,' Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish.; 'wyll,' Cov. (Test.). May pay them court] ' Might affect them,' Auth. 18. To be courted, etc.] 'To be zeal ously affected always in a, good thing,' Auth.; ' to be fervent,' Tynd., Cov., Cran.; ' to love earnestly,' Gen.; ' to be zelous,' Bish. 19. Am again] ' Travail in birth again,' Auth 20. / could indeed wish] 'I desire,' Auth.; 'but I desire,' Bish.; ' I wolde I wore/ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., and similarly the remaining Vv. Tone] ' Voice,' Auth. and all the other Vv. Am perplexed, etc.] ' I stand in doubt of you,' Auth., and similarly Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish; 'am ashamed of you,' Cov. ( Test. ) ; ' am confbundid,' Wicl, Rhem. 22. One — and one] So Wicl, Rhem.: ' the one — the other,' Auth. and the re maining Vv. except Cov. (Test), 'the one — and one.' The bond-maid . ... the free-woman] Sim. Rhem. . ' A bond-maid ... a free-woman,' Auth., and sim. the remaining Vv. 23. Howbeit] 'But,' Auth, Wicl, Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; 'yee and,' Tynd, Cran., Gen. ; Cov. omits. Bond-maid] ' Bond-woman,' Auth. Through] ' By,' Auth., and sim. remaining Vv. except Cov. (Test), 'after.' 24. All which, etc.] ' Which things are an allegory,' Auth.; ' ben seide bi anothir Chap. IV. 24 — 31. GALATIANS. 177 these women are two covenants, — the one from Mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage ; and this is Agar. M For the word Agar signifieth in Arabia Mount Sinai; — and she ranketh with Jerusalem which now is, for she is in bondage with her children. 26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, and she is our mother. 27 For it is written, Rejoice thou barren that bearest not ; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not : for many children hath the desolate one more than she which hath an husband. 28 But ye, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. 29 Still as then, he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. m Nevertheless 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. S1 Where fore, brethren, we are not children of a bond-maid, but of the free- woman. Chap. V. Stand fast then in the liberty for which understondinge,' Wicl; 'betoken mys tery,' Tynd.; ' betoken somewhat,' Cov.; 'are spoken by an allegory,' Cran., and sim. Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; 'by the which thinges another thing is ment,' Gen., Bish Two] * ' The two,' Auth These women] So Tynd., Cov.; 'these,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. except Gen., 'these mothers.' Bearing children, etc.] ' Which gendereth to,' Auth and the other Vv. except Wicl, Rhem., 'gendrynge;' Cov. (Test.), ' engendrynge.' And this] ' Which,' Auth 25. The word, etc] ' This Agar is Mount Sinai in Arabia,' Auth., Bish. ('the mount'); 'for mounte S. is called A. in Arab.,' Tynd.; 'for Agar is called in Arabia the Mount Sin.,' Cov.; 'for Sin. is » mountaine in Ar.,' Gen., Cov. (Test.), Rhem. Ranketh with] ' Answereth to,' Auth., Gen.; ' is joyned to it,' Wicl, Cov. (Test); 'bordereth upon,' Tynd., Cran., Bish. (see notes) ; 'reacheth unto,' Cov.; 'hath affinitie to,' Rhem. For she] * ' And she,' Auth. 26. And she, etc.] 'Which is the mother of us all,' Auth. 23 27. For many more, etc] Sim. Rhem.: ' for the desolate hath many more chil dren than she which hath,' A uth An husband] So Auth. and all the other Vv. Idiom seems to require this less accurate translation. 28. But ye] 'Now * we,' Auth. Children] So Tynd., Gen.: ' the children,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. except Wicl, 'sones.' 29. Still] 'But,' Auth. and all the other Vv. 30. Bond-maid (bis)] 'Bondwoman,' Auth Shall in no wise] So Bish. (ed. 2): 'shall not,' Auth. and all the other Vv. This seems one of the cases in which we may press the translation ol ou pi): see notes on 1 Thess. iv. 1 5. 31. Wherefore] * ' So then,' Auth. A bond-maid] ' The bondwoman,' Auth. and all the other Vv. Free-woman] ' Free,' Auth Chapter V. 1. Then] ' Therefore,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl., Rhem., which omit. For which] ' Wherewith,' Auth., Tynd., Cran., Bish: Wicl, Gen., follow different readings. 178 GALATIANS. Chap. V. 1—7. Christ made us free, and be not held fast again in a yoke of bondage. 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, CHRIST will profit you nothing. s Yea I testify again to every man who has himself circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Ye have been done away with from Christ, whosoever of you are being justified in the law ; ye are fallen away from grace. a For we, by the Spirit, are tarrying for the hope of righteousness from faith. e For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith working through love. 7 Ye were running well ; who did hinder you that ye should not Made us] ' Hath made,' Auth. Held fust, etc.] 'Entangled again with a,' Auth, 'wrappe not yourselves in the,' Tynd., Cran., and sim. Cov., Gen.; ' be not holden with (in the,' Wicl), Cov. (Test.) Rliem. 2. Will] ' Shall,' Auth and the other Vv. except Cov. (present) ; simple predi cation of result : ' in primis personis shall simpliciter prsedicentis est, will quasi promittentis aut minantis ; in secundis et tertiis personis shall promittentis est aut minantis, will simpliciter prsedicen tis,' Wallis, Gr. Angl. p. 106. 3. Yea] ' For,' Auth., Gen., Bish. ; 'and,' Wicl, Cov. (Test), Rhem.; Tynd., Cov., Cran. omit. Who has him self, etc.] ' That is circumcised,' Auth., and similarly Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish. ; ' circumcidith hym silf,' Wicl; sim. Cov. (Test.), Rhem. 4. Ye have, etc.] ' Christ is become of no effect unto you,' Auth.; ' and ye ben voidid aweic fro,' Wicl; ' are gone quyte from,' Tynd., Cov., Gen.; ' Christ is be come but in veyne unto,' Cran., Bish. ; ' are evacuated from,' Rhem. Here idiom seems to require the English perfect :' the pure aoristic translation, 'ye were done away with from Christ,' stands in too marked a contrast with the following present, and to the English reader too completely transfers the action to what is purely past; see notes on 1 Thess. ii. 16 (Transl.). Are being justified] ' Are justified,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Cov., ' wyll be made ryghteous ;' Cov. (Test), 'are made ryghteous.' In the] So Wicl, Rhem.: ' in the,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. Fallen away] 'Fallen,' Auth. 5. By the Spirit, etc.] ' Through the Spirit wait for the hope of right, by faith,' Auth, Bish.; ' we loke for and hope in the sprite to be justified thorow,' Tynd.,Cran.; ' in the sprite of hope to be made ryght- uous by faith,' Cov.; ' in sprite by faythe we wayte for,' Cov. (Test); 'we wayt for (by the Spirit through faith) the hope of,' Gen. Are tarrying for] ' Wait for,' Auth. Cov. (Test.), Gen. Bish; ' abiden,' Wicl; ' loke for,' Tynd., Cran.; ' wayte,' Cov.; ' expect,' Rhem. 6. Working] ' Which worketh,' Auth. and the other A'V. except Wicl, Rhem., ' that worketh ;' Cov., ' which by loue is mighty.' The practice of inserting the relative before the anarthrous participle, even when idiom can scarcely be urged in its favor, is an inaccuracy that is not un- commonlyfound in the older Vv. Per haps even in Eph. ii. 1 , Col. ii. 13, it might seem better to adopt the concessive trans lation, ' though, etc' : see, however, notes in locc. (Transl). Through] 'By/ Auth: and all tho other Vv. 7. Were running] 'Did run,' Auth., Chap. V. 8—16. GALATIANS. 179 obey the truth ? 8 The persuasion cometh not of Him that calleth you. 9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. 10 I, for my part, have confidence in you in the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded ; but he that troubleth you shall bear his judg ment, whosoever he be. u But I, brethren, if I still preach cir cumcision, why do I still suffer persecution ? then is the offence of the cross done away with. 12 1 would that they who are unset tling you would even cut themselves off 'from you. 13 For ye were called unto liberty, brethren ; only use not your liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by your love serve one another. " For the whole law is fulfilled in one saying, even in this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another. 16 Now I say, Walk by the Spirit and ye shall in no wise fulfil Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish. ; ' run- nen,' IT7e/.,- 'ranne,' Cov. (both), Rhem. 8. The] Cran., Rhem.; 'this,' Wicl, Auth, Cov. (Test), Gen.; 'that,' Tynd.; ' such,' Cov. That calleth] So rightly Auth. : not 'called,' Tynd., Gen., or 'is calling,' as the iterative force involved in the English present more nearly ap proaches to the idiomatic use of the par ticiple than either the past tense or the resolved present; comp. notes on Phil. iii. 14, (Transl), and Latham, Engl Lang. § 578 (ed. 3). 10. I for my part] '1/ Auth. and all the other Vv. In] So the other Vv. except Auth, Gen., ' through the.' 11. But I] So Cov. (Test.): 'and I,' Auth. Still (bis)] 'Yet,' Auth Done away with] ' Ceased,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, ' voidid ;' Rhem., ' evacuated.' 12. Are unsettling] ' Trouble,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, ' dis- turblen ;' Gen., ' do disquiet.' Would even, etc.] ' I would they were even cut off which trouble you,' Auth., and similarly Rhem.; ' kuttc aweie,' Wicl., Cov. (Test); ' were seperated,' Tynd., Cran.; 'were roted out,' Cov.; 'were cut off from you,' Gen. 13. For ye, etc.] 'For brethren ye have been,' etc., Auth, and sim. all the other Vv. as- to the forward position of ' brethren.' The aor. 4KXribnTe is trans lated by different auxiliaries, ' ye are,' Wirl, Cov. (both), Rhem.; ' were,' Tynd., Cran.; 'have been.' Gen., Bish., Auth. Your liberty] So Tynd, Cov. (both), Cran., Gen . ; ' liberty,' Auth, Bish. ; ' fredom,' Wirl. ; ' this liberty,' Rhem. Your love] ' Love,' Auth., and the other Vv. except Wicl, Rhem., charite ; Cov., 'the loue.' 14. The whole] 'All the,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, ' everi lawe.' Saying] ' Word,' Auth. and the other Vv. 16 Now I say] ' This I say then,' Auth; 'Isaye,' Tynd., Cov, Cran.; 'then ('and,' Wicl.) 'I say,' Gen., Bish. By] 'In the,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, Cov. (Test), which omit the article. Shall in no ivise] 'Shall not,' Auth, Cov, (Test.) Gen., Bish; ' ye schalen not parfourme,' Wicl; 180 GALATIANS. Chap. V. 17—24. the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh : for these are opposed the one to the other, that ye may not do the things ye may wish. ie But, if ye' be led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law. 19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, of which kind are, — fornication, uncleanness, wantonness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatreds, strife, jeal ousy, deeds of wrath, caballings, dissensions, factions, 21 envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like : of the which I tell you beforehand, as I also told you beforehand, that they which do all such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, benevo lence, goodness, trustfulness, ** meekness, temperance : against all such things there is no law. M Now they that are Christ's have 'and fulfill not' (imper.), Tynd., Cran.; ' so shall ye not fulfyll,' Cov.; ' shal not accomplish,' Rhem. 17. Are opposed] 'Are contrary,' Auth. and all Vv. except Wicl, Rhem., ' ben adversaries togidre.' That ye may not] Comp. Wicl: ' so that ye cannot do, etc.,' Auth and the remaining Vv. except Cov. (Test), 'that the thynges that ye will, ye do not the same ;' Rhem., ' that not what things soever you wil, these 3-ou doc' For] *'And,' Auth. Ye may wish] ' The things that ye would,' Auth., Gen ('tho same'); 'that ye wyl- lcn,' Wicl; ' that which yc wolde,' Tynd., Cov.; ' the thynges that ye wyll,' Cov. (Test.); 'whatsoever ye wolde,' Cran; ' what ye wolde,' Bish. ; ' what soever you will,' Rhem. 18. By] So U7cZ, Cov. (Test), Rhenu ¦' of,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. 19. Of which kind are] 'Which are these,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, and Cov. (Test.), 'which are.' Fornication] * ' Adultery, fornication,' Auth. Wantonness] 'Lascivious- ness,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, Cov. (Test), Rhem ' leecherie.' 20. Sorcery, etc.] ' Witchcraft, hatred, * variance, * emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,' Auth , Gen.; ' witche- craft . . . variance, zele . . . sectes,' Tynd., Cran., Bish. 21. Tell you beforehand] 'Tell you before,' Auth. and the other Vv. ( Cov. Test, 'afore') except Wicl, 'seie;' 'foretell you,' Rhem. Told you beforehand ] ' Have also told you in time past.' Auth.; 'haue told you to for,' Wicl; 'haue tolde you in tyme past,' Tynd., Cm:., Cran. ; ' haue tolde you,' Gen., Bish.; 'haue foretold you,' Rhem. All such things] ' Such things,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Cov. (both), 'such.' 22. Benevolence] ' Gentleness,' Auth., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish.; 'benyng- nite,' Wicl, Rhem. Trustfulness] ' Faith,' Auth and the other A'v. except Tynd., Cov., Cran., 'faithfulness.' 23. AU such things] ' Such,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl, ' suche thingis.' 24. Now they] 'And they,' Auth., Wicl, Rhem.; 'but,' Cov. (both) ; 'for,' Gen.; ' they truly,' Bish.: Tynd and Cran. omit. Have crucified] So Auth. and all the other Vv. Here again it seems desirable to preserve the perfect in translation, as the English aor. tends to refer the crucifixion too exclusively to the past ; see notes on verse 4. Chap. VI. 1—7. GALATIANS. 181 crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. 2G Let us not become vain-glorious, provoking one another, envying one another. CHAPTER VI. 1 Brethren, if a man should be even surprised in a fault, ye which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of meekness ; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. 2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and thus shall ye fulfil the law of Christ. 8 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth his own mind. 4 But let each man prove his own WORK, and then shall he have his ground of boasting only in what con- cerneth himself, and not in what concerneth the other. * For each man must bear his own load. 6 But let him that is taught in the word share with him that teacheth in all good things. 7 Be not deceived ; God is not mocked : for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. 8 For he that soweth unto his own flesh shall of the flesh reap 25. By the . . . by the] So Wicl. ('bi. Spirit') : Auth. and the remaining Vv. 'in the ... in the.' 26. Become] So Cov. (Test.): 'be,' Auth, Tynd, Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish.; 'be made,' Wicl, Rhem. Vain glorious] So Tynd, Cov.. 'desirous of vain glory,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. except Wicl , ' coueitous of veyne glory.' Chapter VT. 1. Should be even sur prised] 'Be overtaken.' Auth., Cov. (both); 'be occupied,' Wicl; 'befallen by chance,' Tynd. ; ' be taken,' Cran. ; ' by occasion,' Gen., Bish. ; ' be predccu- pated,' Rhem. 2. Thus shall ye, etc.] *'So fulfil,' Auth, Tynd., Cran., Gen. 3. Deceiveth his own mind] So Cran. ; 'deceiveth himself,' Auth., Cov. (both); ' bigilith hym silf,' ' Wicl. ; ' deceaveth hym silfe in his ymaginacion,' Tynd., Gen.; 'in his own fansie,' Bish.; 'se- duceth himself,' RJiem. 4. Each] So Wicl. ; ' every,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. His ground of boasting etc.] 'Bejoicing in himself alone and not in another,' Auth., and similarly, Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish; ' haue glorie,' Wicl ; '• so shall he rejoice only in himself,' Cov. (Test); 'have the glorie,' Rhem. 5. Each] So Wicl ; ' every,' Auth. and all the remaining Vv. Must bear] ' Shall bear,' Auth and all the other Vv. Load] ' Burden,' Auth. and the other Arv. except Wicl, ' charge.' 6. But let him] So Cm: (both): 'let him,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. ex cept Rhem., ' and let him.' 8. Unto his own flesh] ' To his flesh,' Auth., Gen.; ' in his floisch,' Wicl, Tynd., Coverd. (Test), Cran., Rhem.; 'upon the flesho,' Cov. Unto the Sp] ' To the Spirit,' Auth. ¦ Eternal life] ' Life everlasting,' Auth. and tlie other Vv. except Wicl, Cov., (Test), which pre serve the more correct order ' everlasting 182 GALATIANS. Chap. VI. 9—15. corruption ; but he that soweth unto the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap eternal life. 9 But let us not lose heart in well-doing ; for in due season we shall reap, if now we faint not. 10 Accordingly, then as we have opportunity, let us do what is good unto all men, but especially unto them who are of the household of faith. 11 See in what large letters I have written unto you with mine own hand. u As many as desire to make a fair show in the flesh, THEY constrain you to be circumcised ; only that they should not suffer persecution for the cross of Christ. 1S For not even do they, who are being circumcised, themselves keep the law ; but they desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh. M But far be it from me to glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. M For neither doth circumcision avail any thing, life.' It is not desirable to invert the or der in English except when the adjective in the original occupies the emphatic, i. e. the first place ; comp. Winer, Gr. § 59, 2, p. 464. On the translation of alavios, comp. notes on 2 Thess. i. 9 (Transl). 9. But] 'And,' Auth, Wicl, Cov. (Test.); the rest omit Se in translation. Let us not lose heait] 'Let us not *be weary,' Auth., and sim. Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish.; 'faile/ Wicl, Rhem.; ' faynte,' Cov. ( Test. ) If now] ' If,' Auth., Gen., Bish ; ' not failynge,' Wicl, Rhem.; ' without werynes,' Tynd., Cran.; 'without ceassynge,' Cov.; 'not ceas- synge,' Cov. (Test). 10. Accordingly then, etc.] 'As we have therefore,' Auth. ; ' therefor while,' Wicl, and similarly the remaining Vv. What is good] ' Good,' Auth. But especially] So Rhem., Coverd. ( ' spe cially'), and sim. Wicl, 'but moost;' Cov. (Test.), 'but moost of all:' 'and specially,' Tynd., Cran., Gen.; Auth., Bish. alone omit 5c in translation. If by the fine idiomatic turn ' of the house hold,' etc., nothing more be meant than close and intimate union, it may be advan tageously retained : see, however, notes. 11. See] So Wicl ('se ye'), Rhem.. ' ye see,' Auth , Cran., Gen., Bish. ; ' be- holde,' Tynd, Cov. (both). In what, etc.] ' How large a. letter,' Auth., Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish. ; ' with how many words,' Cov. ; ' with what manner of let ters, Rhem., and sim. Wicl; 'with what letters,' Cov. (Test). 1 2. That they, etc.] ' Lest they should,' Auth., Cov. (both), Cran.; 'that thei suffre,' Wicl; because they wolde not,' Tynd., Gen. ; ' that they may not,' RJiem. 13. Not even, etc.] ' Neither they them selves who are circumcised,' Auth, and all the other Vv. ' The circum cision-party,' is far from an improbable translation ; see notes. They desire] ' De sire,' Auth. 14. Far be it] So Wicl, Cov., (Test): ' God forbid that I should glory,' Auth. and the remaining Vv. To glory] ' That I should glory,' Avth, Bish, Rhem. ; ' to haue glorie,' Wicl ; ' that I shuld rejoyce.' Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.; 'to rejoyce,' Cov. (Test ). 15. For neither, etc.] 'For *in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth,' Auth. Chap. VI. 16—18. GALATIANS. 183 nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. 10 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God. 17 Henceforth let no man trouble me : for I bear in my body the marks of Jesus. 18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brethren. Amen. 16. Upon] So Cov.,Rhem.: 'on, Auth. and the remaining Vv. except Cov. (Test), 'unto them;' Gen., 'shal be to them. 17. Henceforth] .'From henceforth,' ' and here aftir.' Of Jesus] ' Of the * Lord Jesus,' Auth. 18. Tlie grace] ' Brethren, the grace,' Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl., Cov. (Test), Rhem., which adhere to Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl., the order in the original. THE END,