Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Abbott - Romans9 - 5

    Uploaded by

    apostol luis oscar
    3 views54 pages
    ensayo

    Original Title

    Abbott - Romans9_5

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    ensayo

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    3 views54 pages

    Abbott - Romans9 - 5

    Uploaded by

    apostol luis oscar
    ensayo

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 54
    xv, ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROMANS IX. 5. ‘We sll understand Ltr the passaze to be discussed, Af we consider its relation to what precedes and fllows and the circumstances undar which it was written Tn the frst igi chapters of the Epitle to the Romans, the Apoutle has set forth the noel and the value of the fuapel ae the. powst of God unto salvation to very one that blivcoth; 10 the Jew Bre, and also to the Greek” Ta iw of the present Blessings and the glorious hopes of the Christian Deliver, he cles this purt of the Epistle with an evatant sug of tamph Tat the dnctrine of Paul was in divest opposition tothe stiongest peculices of the Jows and their most cherished fspeetations It placed then on a levs, as to the cond tions of saleation, with the despised and hated. Gentiles The true Messiah, the king of eas, the spiritual King fof men, hal come; but the ralors of theie nation had fracified the Lord of glory, and the great ass ofthe people had rejected him. They hal this set themselves indirect opposition to Got Thay ha become intone a sts feom the Messiah and his kingdom. Chstians, ity of them Gentiles by birth, were now the rue Israel, No rite of circumcision, no observance of the Jew: ish Law, war noquted, ae the condition of acceptance with Gol and the cnjeyment of the Messianic blessings ; ne sc rice but Solf sacrifice: the only condition was fui, as Paul sce the trmm—a practic” lif and tri Christ, and (Ov THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROMANE I § 338 ‘thus an God reveael ia his paternal character a faith that carried wit it the alfetions nd will rw 8 ie po How could these things be? How was this gospel af Paul toe reconciled with the promises of Gal tothe “holy vation"? how with hi justice, wislom, ad goodness? Hal God ‘cast off is. people, “Isract ie servant, Jacob bis chosea, the seed of Abraham his friend"? Theie are the treat questions which the Apostle answers in the ninth, feat, and clventh chapters of this Epistle The fist five verses are to be reganlel a8 4 comilatory intod ton to Tis treatment of thas abject, on which he had 40 much fo ‘iy that was not oaly hard Tar the wnbslesing Jews but for Jewish Christians, to understand am accep ‘The unbelieving Jews regatded the Apostle as an apo tate from the true religion and as an enemy of their race Five times already he bad receive fom them forty stipes save one; he bad becn “in perils from bis own country. men” at Damascus at Antioch in Psi, at Teoniue 0 Tystra, at Thesealonica, Heres, an Corinthe—olt in perl of bis life. By a great part of the believing Jews, he was rozardot with distnstand aversion, (See Acts svi 20, 21) His doctrines were inleod revolutionary. “Though he was aboat to go te Jerusalem to cary a liberal contribution from the churches of Macedonia ani Achaia to the poor Cvstians in that ety, he expresses in this Epistle great anxiety about the reception he shoul moot with (ansisty fully justiied by the result, and begs the prayers of the brethren at Rome in his Beall (Rom, st, 30-32). As the Jews hated Pas, they vatoraly believed that he ate ther ‘These circumstances explain the exceelingly strong as severation of is afsction for his countryaen and of his deep sorrow for thelr estrangement from Gol, with which this introduction begins So far from being 4» euemy of Fis people, he cold) make any sacrifce to win them to Christ They were bis brethren, his Kinsmen, as tothe flesh. He gloved in sharing with them the prod name of Iaclite. He delights to enumerate the maguifcent piv leges by which God ad distinguished thea from all other the glory, and the giving of rations,~—“the adoption, service, and the peo jaca” ‘Theirs wore the fathers; and, from among. them, a5 the crowaing distinction af al the Measish was born, the supeeme gt of Goals lve amt metey not tothe Jews alone, tutto al wankind. AW Gas dealings with bis chosen people were designe to prepare the way, and ha prepared the vay, for this grand consummation. How natal th shen, his rapid recital of thelr bistori glories, the As tle reaches this highest distintion of the Jews and greatest ‘lesing of Goa’s mercy to men, he should express his Over Mowing: gratitule to God as the Ruler over all; that he should “thank Gad for his unspeakable gift"! T believe that he has lone so, and that the Bith verse of the passage wwe are considcring should be translated, "whose are the Suthers and from wom the Messiah as to the lesb: he who ie over al Gin be Blessed forever. Amen," or “he Who is Got over all be Bisse forever. Amen.” The dox- ‘logy springs Irom the sume festing and the same view of the graciow providence of God which prompted the faler ‘outburst at the cal of the cleventh chapter, where, on com ting the trsatmout of the subject which he here intro luce, the Apostc exclaims: "O the depth of the riches and ‘wisdom and Knowledge of God! How unsearchable are is Fndgiente and ontracable his ways... For from bim, find hough him, and to him are all things to him be (ovis) the glory forever. Amen [ielove that there are no abjctions to this construction ‘the passage which do nat betray their weakness when triticlly examined; si that the abjections against most of the other constrictions which have been proposed are fatal ‘The posse it romarkable fr the diferent ays im which ic ine been amd may Be punctuated, and forthe consequent arity of constructins which have been. given i The Greek 28 follows :— Te grammatically admits of being punctuated and com strusd in a least seven diferent ways 1. Maia comma afer sine and also alter 80, we may transite the last clause, “who (or he wh) is God over a Heal for even . 2. Palting the secomf comms after iw instead of “who (rhe wh) i overall, God blessed for ever 4 With a comma after sor and also after * who or 5. Pacing a comm afer ss nal 9 Se ar i ever.” So Andrews Norton. a tion of the word in either case. = wn. Nu 6 aa 7, + Satrodess an indepemlent se teed an we denotes Ga, the Father.” Nos refers the fate part ofthe sentence debate tos yor the lst part to Gu Ths awa of chi interest He eheter in this pssage the Spe haved Chiat God Among those who hold tM hee hes, the rent majority adopt one rte other Sethe contests tal aml 35 a i810 these, Gd eapecaly to Ne llawed bath fa King James's ver fon apd the Revised Version st, that faba give special Saniong those who slo the st prt ofthe sem tence to God ant Cit the great majority of scholars Mot wither No-g or No.3. Lave alta expressed my Proferce fr the later construction, alt is generally prcireed by tow wh find here a doxslygy to Go 1. We will fist come the objections that ave been eg aginst the cinstrastion which makes the 1st pat of the sentence; beginning with Ss ftroduce a dosolygy 0 Goan T shall then state the aegoments which seem to me fo favor this eunstrostinn, and at the same time to render the constructions nmabercl + (04 cach and all untenable, Dither vcws of the passage will be briey noticed. Some fevmarka will be wkd on the Bistory of its interpretation, ‘hhh mo fll account of thi wll be attempted. fete objected that aowoogy bere is wholly out of places Mist the Apstle is overwhelmed with grief a the Jeureh rejection of the Messiah aint ite consequences td wr funeral disuse eawbot be changed abruptly am le into a hymn” He 3s fled, decply grieved atthe wnbeliet din Hindwess of the reat majo of is eountrymin Dat Ui wrroweis wt hopeless, Hle knows al the while that “the front of Goa! hath not filed,” that “God hath not cast off Tie pple whom he forckiew,” that at lst all Trl shall the ved" al nothing stems to me more natura han the Hay nf ang feolings wick the passage present. griet Tee srencne temporary alienation of bis countrymen from (Chist joy aid thanksgiving at the thought of the priceless sings of which Christ wat the sinister to oan and in which hs counteymen should loately share Prat, Seurt,and others pt the atjecton fa 3 very pointed form. ‘They represent dusnlogy 26 raking Pa Sy. in fect: "he apedalpriveges of the Jews have coiuibuted greatly to enhance the gut and punishment of the Jewish nation; Gad be thanked tit he has given they sch prvegea™ Dt they sip real info the posge tot isnot thers, There fe oothing i the content sg fet thatthe Apostle staking thie view of the favor wh Ext shows the Jewish natin. He fs me donomcing Diontaymenfr hr gun ejeting th Messy ad teling them that this galt and ie punishment are aggre ated bythe pricges they have abteel.” So tender = he othr feng that he doc noteven sine the ease of his grit, but leaves ito be infercd. He fe sesering bis Couttymen, who. regarded bins ther enemy tf the Sncorhy and strengthrat his lve for them. "They arv fis bretheens the very name "Isaete” ts to Sina tile of toner and he recounts in ta, certainly not inthe Imanner of one touching pain! subject, the. glorious Gitinctons which thee nation hal enjoyed through the favor of God.” Calvin, who 20 often in bis commentaries ‘tmicably traces the connecton of thonght, here is the tail on the ea: "Hace digitatis clog etimontn sant ore Won enim sslems eo benign Toul it del qrovamenesf "At the isk of being teow, I wil ake some notice of Dr. Gifont's remark Io ht cent and lua Conmen- tary.on the Elsie to the Romane He saya: "Pauls Suis is deepened bythe memory of tei prvleges, most fal bythe thought that thot ace gave bith tothe Divine Savin, whom they have fjecte” Dt in Pass ena tation if the privileges of the Jews he has in view not merely thir present condition, bat hele whole past istory, lutte asi had boon by light feom heaven. Wilt be sriously sntintainad that Paul did not regard the peculiar Iileges which the Jewish nation bad enjoyed for 30 many sues a gills of Gals goodness for which eternal gratibde wis de? But “his anguish is deepened most of al bythe Towght tat theie ace gave birth to tbe Divine Saviow, whom they have vjoetal "1" Pauls grief for his wnbelieving Comtryinen, then, had estinguished his gratitude Tor the inestimable Hessings which he personally owed to Christ: ft had extingwished bis ratitade for the fat thatthe God ‘who rea over all ad set hie Son tobe the Saviour of the Wworll! The dark clad which hi the Tight just then from the mass of is countrymen, but which be believed was 00” furs away, fad bloted the aun from the heavens The iisent of Christ was no cate for thanksgiving: he could fnly bow bis head in anguish deepened most ofall by the ‘houglt thatthe Messiah had sprung from the race to which Ia hiself belong “Ili anginh Is dcepened by the memory of their pric leges”” Pan doce not say this; and jz Dr. Gifford quite ture tit this woe the May in which these. pivlages pre enti theimsclws to bie mind? May we not as natorally Sopose thatthe thought of God's favor to his peopa in the pst wat he hal so often eae from their wanderings, ‘Missa sone sound for the hope that they had no! stm Well suas to Lil ant perish but that their presont aliens tion fro Cirat, contributing, ae it bal done, in the ov ruling provileuce of Gol to the wider and more rapid Sprcal Wf the xospel among the Gentiles, was only tmp tary? If we will ht Paul be bis own interpreter instead of ealing unhatural thoughts between his lines, we shall take his view. "God Bath wot cast of mig Peoree, whom be forckoen,” “whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covomant, andthe peomizen” "A hardrigpagt ath etalon Torch” tnt only "util the fulness of the Gentiles ‘be come in and (or then) all Tsracl shall be saved" It Js not for nothing that there are th fathers"; tht they Ind such ancestors as Abram, the friend of Gad.” at Tenae, and Jacob. "As touching the gospe, they are ene nies Tor the sake of the Genes, bit a tacking the eee tion" as the chosen people of Gay they are beled for the fathers sake" "If the fast exit y_holy, <0 bs the Jumps and, ifthe root is holy, so are the branches.” Ged doth not repent af is calling and his gift” Gon hath Sut up all [Jews and Geatiles} mato dlanhatienes, that he might have merey upon all” For the ancient poophecy is how fulled: the Deliver fath come out of Zions and ‘he shall torn away ungoliness from Jacob” "0 the Ath of the riches," etc. Such were the thoughts which ‘the past privileges of the Jems in connection with the a vent of Christ, a# we aoe frum the eleventh chapter of this Epistle actly suggested to the wind of Pau* ‘Can we, then, ressonably say that, when, isis grand hisoric survey and ennmeration of the distinctive prvieges af the Jews, the Apostle reaches the culminating poitt in the advent of the Messiah, sprang from that race, devout thanksgiving to God as the beneficent ruler over all ie wholly out of place? Might we sot rather ask, How cond It be tepressed? Wemay then, I conceive, dismiss the pepcholegical objec: tion tothe dosology, on which many have laid great tres, 8 founded on 4 narrow an superficial view of what We nay reasonably suppose to hive been in the Apostles mini ‘And Tam happy to see that 80 faieanintd and clearsighte 4 scholar as Professor Dwight taker essentially the sime Wiew of the matter. (See foun Soe, Bi8l Lit, eh, ae above, p48) 2 Avsscond objection to a dosclogy here is founded on the rclation of the list five versee of the chapter to what follows. A dosology, it is thought, wanatwally beaks the conection between the sath verse and whit precedes ‘This angninent i ately adduced, at Tsou hardly have he i worlly of hotice, were Ht pot that De Daight coms tata: some weight tH, though apparealy et mc, (Sve ae alums, at The fst ve verses the chapter, a8 we have seen, are * conciliatory intenletion #0 the treatment of a delicate vd many subject. This treatment begins with the sisth verse, which és introduced by the particle, “bat Whether thelist pct of verse 5 i a dasology to’ God, o simply the ena of the privileges of the Jews the t cana ofr tu what swomcfintleprocedsa In either eset refers {6 what fe implied in verses 3 and j.amd meets the most omic objection ta the dostrine st forth bythe “Apostle Tin the procaling pit of the Epistle. The thought in Phe essen condition uf te great mast wf my counteymen i indeed a sid one, and not the Jows a4 nation, but Chris tians, are the true people of Go; fur ie te mot as if the promises of Gol have hile, (Camp. ti. 3-4) This sim He statement uf the connection of verse @ with what pre files seems to ane al that fs noted t0 meet the objection The argument tit 2 dasdogy is inconsistent with, the Apoatic state of tind has already boon answered "A third objection, angel Uy many, is founded on the alleged abruptness of the desoligy and the absence of any ‘mention of God in what procwles” Some also think that 2 Aboxology hete woul nee! to be intended by the patil Teuiotregurd this objection a4 having any force, Th «quite in accordance sith the babi af Paul thos to tue aside Stuldcaly to give expression tobi feelings af alortion ad sratitude tart Gok See Rom. 1.254 sii 25 (here the enuineness uf six very doubtful); 2 Cor. bs a5, where tte the omission wf sin the gentine tests 1 Timm here vay is sugestol by the mention af Christ, The doxolagy x. 36, hus alrealy been noticed (p. $34 sompletely parallel in thought, Far more abrupt is the orology 2" Cor XL pt, i won Penge ly re fiir fe Where te ascrption of pase ‘is interposed between =v and nan exteaondinary manner {is very strange that i should be urge aw argoment sugainat the dosolgy that Got is not mevtioned nthe pre fling context, The mnie docs not occur, bt almost every word in verses 4 and § suggests the thought of Gad So, to 4 Jew, the very name “Iraclites"; 20 "the avloption and the glory and the giving of the Law and the covenants and the service and the promises"; and s0, above ally oer the Anointed of God, the Blesiah: as to the Mes, sprame from the Jews tite this bly spirit, the Son of God the messenger of (t's Tove and meres, not t0 the Jews alone butt al the mations ofthe earth That the mention of Cheat jn such a connection as this should Bring vivily to the min of the Apostle the thought ‘of Gon and bis goodness, and thus lead to = dosology, is dunce sith the conception of the lation of Chest to God which appears everysere tn this Eyal, and inal bis Epistles. While Christ, «wre the eam, ‘of communtcation of our spiritual Mssings, Paul constantly ews them in relation to Gin, Sue sien as the orginal ‘Author and Source, “The gorpel i “the goepat of God ‘a power of Gad unto salation"; the righteousness which 't reveals is "a righteousness whichis of God"; iis God who hs st forth Christ at eerie, who eoanmleh love toward us fm thi, hile ie were yet sinncry Chiat tied for us” who spared. not his own Son, but Frely gave hin for ws all”; ifs "God who raised int from the deat ‘what the Law cil] not doin that it was weak though the Acab, God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinfl flesh, and om account of sin,” as done the glory to which CChistans are destined, as sone and heirs of God) and joint heirs with Christ, is “the glory of God"; ia short, all things are of Gull who hath reconciled as to himscl through Jesus Chris" and "aothing sball separate us from the Tove Of God, which isin Christ Josus one Lord.” Though no one can doubt that Paul was full of love and trait to Christ, 30 shat we aight expoct frequent scr tions tu hin of praise ad glory, i sa remarkable fact that deseo wo davology or thanksgiving to Christin ay of ts Flats eet those to Tisothy, the genuineness of while has been questioned by axany annem. scholars. These jist, at any rate, present marked peenfartes of syle aul lange, anki wsiten by Ba, were probably iter nat the close of ‘bi Iie, And jn then theve ta But one Avsolagy to Christ and that ot absolutely erty on ae out of the ambiguity of the mond ne (2 Tim 18) while the thanksgiving Is 9 single expression of thank, rss (1 Tim i 13), teri gdies be {a ago) One reason fur this general abseneo of such ascriptions to Chet fa the prt of the Apostle seem to have been that habit of mind of which T have just spoken, ai which makes fr {prise ste yeobble thatthe dasology in Rom, i's belonge "us Gonl. ut this isa matter which will be more pyrene: ately treated i atc pace Aa ti the which Selilts insists would be necessary. fone seas uly to Took fairly at the passage to ave that i ‘would be whl aut of plage; that 4 dovology to Gat in wolves no auttietic contrast betwen Goal an Christ, a Schulte and some others strangely imagine, Nor dacs yg & particle of transition, sem natoral here, much Tess re- ‘qined. Te"wald make the dovology too formal 4. Tis wig that", grammatically considered is more catily and naturally eonstrded in connection with sere than athe subject of a new and dosological clause” "(See Dr Dooigt’s article as above, ph 2a 35 Much stronger language than this is often used. De Hoag, for evan assming that se mast be equiva tos ‘or says tat the interpretation which refers the words to Christi the waly ate “thich can, withthe leat regard to pa) Dr, Dwight, whuse artice fs i ‘emstriction, be maintained.” (Gon fa ne ener $9 admirable for lei ao Simie of ting spud the ssjer of bate a senemable Iniecon sal be proce, Tm te which act grammatical cover, oly tlt to fined ont, Till seh a case, o Weceing subject sve Chien te hee prevented in which, 24 De Dvight ats there atte most only a presumption ia vor af tis Construction af the chse as aginst the ott” re 35 But it De, Duigt's satemsnt means of nicl imply thats wh te aunt on a gene, te pate bie the ari, let sry r= dst assertion fb fatally incorrect. "The Ltt axe not only ‘ery commen, tt fn the New Testaments a lyf freon thn the form We have) in oven the tominative a the subject ofan indepenent sentence, Mac igor Mak si 1 ese rce) Lake vie) tery Tach), N25; John i 3t4 vu 6s will a7; 1% 40s Acts sao; Rom, vil 5,8. Contre QD relerring to a peeveling subject, on ‘exreaL 603 and foraing 8 T understand i, an atpesitona cause, John W485 ii 13 et tee); (Mets 17)29 Con a 312 Re $f); liming elas, Joho x31 ie tps Acts at these may be alded 3 Cor. 4 Eph ii t3, where the slause is in apposition with or describes jus or nen, dese or ersten; and perhaps John si, 57 1 is uncertain ether Cot a. fe belongs under (6 or Ses Ayer inf. For the example Serf hae Tad on Benka’s Concordat, pay3r No. Vie thew is thing peclar inthe toe o this partic ark ciple with the article so far as the ‘present qucstion is con serve have, withthe a Troe, | examined the occur reacs of the til nga nthe nominative, with the artic, in the Guspcl of Matthew, the. pet ew, the Epistle to the Romans, and the First Epistle to the Coviathana, Kons ‘Covi find Sw eightysixesimpleso ighty-ss exunples of Its se (a) a the subject, or in vary fee cases (nic) as the prolicate of a vesb ox Dressed or uolrstond and only thirty-eight of is use () ip 2 descriptive ur limiting el 5 ig chuse, annexe to-a preceding suby Jeet; in the Kpsle co the Romans, twenty-eight ecsaples ofthe former kind agsinse twelve the laters and fa the First Epistle» the Corinthians, thitty-nine of the former Tn gone iti cla thatthe aoe af he ene fo THs consraveriow oF ROME HES gS who ix” The force of the article i not lost. While in ome ofits uses it may seem interchangeable with ie, i Ailfers in thie: that it ix generilly employed either in appo- ‘tional or in Tinting lanes, in distinction from descriptive fr adiitive clases; white with the fnte verb is appro pate forthe latter” For examples ofthe former, soe Jobu Pig ait 175 of the latter, Rom 143.2 Cor, ig. To litastate the diference by the pustage before wt: if 5 here refers to 4 yer, the clause woul be more exactly translated as apposition, not “seh 8" ete, it “fe who is God overall, Messed forever," implying tht he was well Known to the readers of the Hpistle a2 God, or atleast marking this prelate with special emphasiy while would be mose appropeiste if i were simply the purpose of the Apostle to predicate deity of Christ, and sould sao be perfectly unambiguous There i nothing, then, either in the proper meaning of 3 orn is usaze which makes it more easy and natural to rler it to game than to take it a Introducing an independent Sentence. Ie is nest to>be observed that there are cicam Seances which make the later constriction easy, and which Aistingulah the passage from neary all others in which & a participle withthe seticl is sed oe an atteibutive. Ty All the other instances in the New Testament of this use af Eis cor aires im the nominative, wih the single exception of the parentbetic insertion in 2 Cor, xi 31 ce ave, page JHU it tmmeiately follows the subject to which 3 relites The same is gencrally trac of other examples of the yar ciple with the article. (The strongest casos of exception which T have noticed ace John vi. go and 2 John 7.) "But here ein separated from # amie By sean, wich fa realing must bo followed by a pause —a pause which is Tengthened by the special emphasis given tothe =i ane by the wit and the sentence which precedes is complete in ae fxunest, sans ist grammaticly, and requires nothing urterIaglal for it was oly abc the Res that Chrat was fram te Jee (the her hand we Rave seen (p95), the cnumeintion Iessings which aumetistely precedes comme! hy the incatinaite Messin st the alent of Ch mtarll seg sestva ascpsion of pave sd thanking fo al oe ekg ar wh ny ln sated by the"tow atthe ul of the sentonce® "Front erect coe af Sew thereon the dong eonatacion sence nd nat The lip othe verbs oe sek ey i simiy acoing to ule The tonstesion named alee ibe p33) abo perictly emp and nate tone tually fue Cun ate 2 eb ay ‘The naturalness ofa pate ater sen i frter indicated by the fat that we find's pin ae his wand to aoe chest MSS. that ely inthe ease namely ALG Lane And in atleast ight euisives thong the ctl have ean ‘ary examined with reac tothe pnctanion Tes tro ge thst ifthe wher didnot tend ha 4 shouldbe Setered to Chis, he wool hate lope nether constuction for his sentence, which would be psd to no such missppretonson, Bt ths argument io ‘ert Me Tt hi cea Conmeotty on fe tle tothe Romans (31 ely. 371f) wel aye oy te ‘other hand: — : ae z cate, ts nd language which atonal dob Ad ia ein Many writers, ike De. Gitord speak ofthat cosstration which felers sete, to Chiat av "the natal Sad simple" fone, “hich every Greek scholar would adopt without hes tation, fae doctrine were involve” Tt might be ssid in reply, that the natural and simple construction nf words Considered apart trom the doctrine it iovalves, and with feference to merely lexical and grammatieal considerations, fe by no meas alvtaye the true one. For example, accord Ing tthe natural construction of the Worle rt 170 ‘tke tda fr (Joh vi 44, their meaning Is "you are rom the father of the devil™; and probably no Greek scholar would think of potting auy other meaning on them, ino ‘question of doctrine were involved. Again a Latke i. 38, “she gave thanks ante Gol, and spake of his fo all them that were aking forthe relemption of Jerusen.” How ‘unnatural it may be stb to tor the histo any subject ‘bat "Ged," there Ising no other possible antecedent nin tioned in this or in the three proveding verses But Ido not make or uced to make this reply, We have already considered the grammatical side of the question, and have seen, T trast, that the construction which makes #31 ete Ie subject of a new sentences perfectly simple and easy T only ald here that the messing of words often dkpends on the way they are read,—on the pases, and toncs of voice. (If we could only have heard Past dictate this xe sage to Tertius!) And itis matter of course that, when 4 person fais long been accustom, rons whatever cause, to read and understand a passige in a partic Way, any other mode of reading i fll gcem to him unnatoral,” But tions of doctrine, and cll attetion onl to the use of lan gige When we abserve ut everwhere el in this Epistle the Wnts has wae the word > of the Pater , tit is ically a proper tome that this balan tive of the Epistles, previously rriten —those bythe Theselanans, Galatians, Corinthians, ow can we renamably doubt that ithe verbal ambiguity that ths word dvignted the being very ese de noted by this nae in the Apostles writings, and would five the piss ge the constuction thus sugested? But this place ae The objection hat, i we mike the Lt clase a don n last clase a dosology to Gat,the purses is supertaous and whoa" wil te notice below umes No.6 od tore fall in another Tei urtherunged tht 74 cin quire an anit ei wich ean to Ue sappy wha flo his burn nator and therfore reve a5 an a Al Chris But the prope theres nothing in the pase sl to sugges but often donors a physical relatina, such, for example, as dcpents on bith or ether outwan cincamatance, in contrast with > spiritual relation "We nced only refer to the tind ese of this very chapter, which certainly docs not inply that Past of hie “insien ost sia” had 2 divine nature Guo, The phrase rayon undoubtedly implies an antithe iets to the flesh” Uy vs natural birch and in his merely Stew elution the Messiah, the Som of David was from fhe Jews: and in this they might ry; but as Son of Go Sito ha ‘higher, sptitaal rolations, be belonged, 10 al Mankind, ewas not to the post’ purpose bo descibe (That he was sean a8 he ie speaking of the poe dis: Tnctions of the Jews, Indea, the antithesis t0 0:1 ris 1 Gee for example, Row. it. wary offen nt ere weet Gon tae. vb; 2 Car, # 26; Kp. vi. 5 Col fk By se that Alora juaiiously saya: "Lao not feckon mong the objections the want of any anlithesis to a reMbcinse that might hive wall een left fo he readers CEMAINc We hive an exsnole strikingly pvallel tothe resect Ta the Epistle of Clnont of Rome 11 the Corin Thums (@ gah fst adlucod, a0 far as 1 know, by Dr Whirtysin his eer Thome, which at east denonsteats thar ig’ cake Tike this the expression ofan antithesis is fot rejuited. Speaking of the high disiaetions of the parriaeth Jacob, Clement says: "For from hinn were all the Pcsts aad Levites that ministered to the altar of Gi From him waa the Lari Joss as te oh fsb (ursoun) from him were Kings avi rales and faders in the Tine of Judah" "See also ieen. Hcr 3.4. § 12 i2unae pe nard seus ftranstated 10 the ‘AME Nicene Christan Library); and Frag. wi, Stere, Baggp tetine nan ae 73 urs asp hh a Ser ‘helemment Dotch commentator, Van Hagel, maintains {hat the fort ofthe restrietive pase bere se 72 mi With the usutcratile prefised, absolutely regres a pause fer cons am docs not smi, according to Greek sae, of the rapreiae of an antthes aftr it 30 that the following pars of the verse mast by rstreed to Goi (Comp, Rom. Pe Gila) He represents his view as supported by the Uxihorty of the very dutingushed Professor C. G. Cobet of Legon, who asa master of the Groek language has per haps no superior among European shale Jk may be teue that Greek sage in tespect to such re Steictive espressios, when ura preted, necorhe wre, the statement of Van Henge, indorsed by Gobet ine Timited researc T have fon = "0 exception. ‘The two pa ages cited by Meyer in opposition (Nett Cor. $n tr Pan Win, 320 C_) seem 10 me wholly intelevunty the formee cause we have ws with the wisn which of course oe quires an antiietic clause with; the litter, beoneee te essential ement in the case the ror doce not stare before wns ie Hat T mnie agree with De Dwight at P. 28) that Van Hengel's argument is not conclnae, “Our the supposition that sete, eles to Chiat we hove ten & formal antithesis, seh as would he eacladed by Veo Henget's rae but sinply an apponitional, descriptive cance, setting forth the exalted dignity of him vo a tothe Mea sprang feom the Jews. T cannot belive that there ie aap law of the Grock Langaage which forbids this We may say however, and it is remark of some impor. face, thatthe" Buore wr ins laying stess on the heen ton, and sugesting an antithesis which therfore dd a need tv be express, indicates thatthe writer hae lone wah that point, and makes a pause hater It makes it esp to take the ras intacing an independent senence, trelgh it dies not, as Theliowe, make tneteanay to take an ali, frtce th ie assume thee te We conception ot Gist a6 Gol wis familiar to the realers of the Byes sul expec we suppose that they ha often ea hit salle so by the cary preachers of Christianity: tre arpa Vian of the is etcy 10 Chiat here would be natant oa ss very suitable tthe object of the Apostle in thie poe wie, Tam ollige to say however, that this fs annie lit i6 not favorad by Poa's use of language or by toe record of the apostolic preaching in the Bank of ets me hes wa oa sch sp oto seas have only tr comer the ean dignity wih which the mane othe Messiah was invested ine mind of a Jews and thes higher glory aed gy oe with «igen, inthe mind o's Chatan a ee Bin the indo a iis furthr jected ht, 8 sentences which teen with & dossgy oF an sirtbn. of Blsaig, my fr anw)alapa precedes he sojects amt tha "the ows eras of grammar” (ier Alor) ruite that i Should do ste sly the constuction ropes. Sy inthe Nf wars san feat in the dowlnges Lake 52 Coo i Eph ny, t Pet 3) anh anne and srvene pec he sbject ina nuit of places inthe Scpngiat (Sc Tiommav's Concordance and Wal la Pu hibon Vee Tse apsenptori) Cie rest has bt on ths een by many at Thelve tat cr etamination wil show ati as mo ral weigh We wil begin by conshesing 3 mis meaning of firs corswine which bas Ted to untenable ob jection ogsinat the doxolgieal cogtclion, and Ras pe tented the reason forthe poston of yi from being Cleary seen," hase assumed Uy many thatthe pase iesinply equivalent to the Supreme Goa” Go Wad nc ema taperir, rte temic" 9 the Afeste ws contrasting Gud with Chast repect to dg Mend of simply describing Godan beng wh rc over BL This misunderstanding ofthe expresion sccaroned the chit seu fel hy De Wetter slaying the Con StruSion which lates 2 clon or pared SKer ste. fecal to hen Iike“throving Crist ight Int the shale" thou ‘say spec team, wen we boul Taber expect ception of the something said in antithesis ta rors cunu to set forth is Aignity; though he adits that this bjection is removed if we aceept Fritzschs's explanation of the pasrage® On tis, fatse vet is founded Sehult's notion (se above p. 342) that ® woud be needed here to indicate the aitheia On itis also growided the ubjection of Alford, Farrar, and others that the & Is perfectly superfious,” ay indeed, it would toy if that were simply the meaning tended, To express ‘he ies of * the God overall" the Supeeme Gad" in com tiaat with a xing e» whom the term “"God” might indoed te applied, but only in a lower some we should need only fess toon phase which fs thus stat numberless times in the writings of the Christian Fathers; 20 for ew amples, Wetsten’s note on Kom ie 5. Buty af nnderstand the pasage, thes hy no means superfitots.Mt not only ives an impressive flacss to the expression, but eamverts That would otherwise bea mere epithet of Gaal Sate a sub Stance designation of hit, equivalent to “the Raler over AAIL"on which the mind rests for a moment Ly self, before ie reaches the mr qualified by it; or tw may be regarded a ade by way of apposition or more precise definition. The positan of this substantive designation of ta, between the Brtile and its now, gives it special prominence. Comp. T (Coe, i 3, gr Do etne i Addi fal Eth, vit Lp ni cory doaran yo IL 8, 35) Tach Smee ni i Justin Marts pol 13; 4 marie te wre id i 36. In epressions ofthis Kind, the definite Aiticle falls, T coneive, a double function ii com nected with the purtiiple or other adjunct which immelt ately follows, just a it would be i the substantive at the fend wore mitt; bt, st the save time, if makes that sub Stantive debite, so that the article in effect belongs to the sulstantive as wall as to the participle. Thus,

    You might also like