Copyright
W. (William) Sanday.

A critical and exegetical commentary on the Epistle to the Romans online

. (page 42 of 71)
Online LibraryW. (William) SandayA critical and exegetical commentary on the Epistle to the Romans → online text (page 42 of 71)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


with the Divine Spirit of which he had spoken in the previous

chapter. Cf. viii. 16 airo t6 Ui'djpa avfifiaprvpel rw TTuevfiari Tjfxoiv.

St. Paul begins with a strong assertion of the truth of his
statement as a man does who is about to say something of the
truth of which he is firmly convinced himself, although facts and
the public opinion of his countrymen might seem to be against

him. Cf. Chrys. ad loc. nporepoi' 8e Sta/Se/SatoOrai Trept 5)V fieWfi
Xeyeti'* onep ttoXXois edos ttokIv orav fieWcoai Ti Xe-yftv napa Tols noWois
aincrTovpevov koX vnep ov (T(f)68pa iavTOvs ftfrt ireireiKores,

2. oTi ; ' that,' introducing the subordinate sentence dependent on
che idea of assertion in the previous sentence. St. Paul does not
mention directly the cause of his grief, but leaves it to be inferred
from the next verse.

XoTTij (which is opposed to x«P« Jn. xvi. 20) appears to mean
grief as a state of mind ; it is rational or emotional : oSurt] on the
other hand never quite loses its physical associations ; it implies
the anguish or smart of the heart (hence it is closely connected with
T3 Kapdia) which is the result of Ximj.

With the grief of St Paul for his countrymen, we may compare the grief
of a Jew writing after the fall of Jerusalem, who feels both the niisfortime
and the sin of his people, and who like St. Paul emphasizes his soriow by
enumerating their close relationship to God and their ancestral pride :
4 Ezra viii. 15-18 ei nunc dicens dicam, de omni homine tu nia^is sets, de
populo autem tuo, ob quern doleo, et de haertditate tua, propter quam lugeo, et
propter Israel, propter quern tristis sum, et de semine Jacob, propter qtiod
cotitwbor. Ibid. x. 6-8 non vides luctum nostrum et quae nobis contigeriint '/
quvniam Sion mater nostra omnium in tristitia contristatur. et humilitate
huiniliata est, et liiget ualidissirne . . . 21-22 vides enim quoniam sanctiji-
catio nostra deserta effecta est, et altare nostrum demolitum est, et templum
nostrum destructum est, et psalterium nostrum humiliatum est, et hymniis
noster conticuit, et exsultatio nostra dissoluta est, et lumen candelabri nostri
extinctum est, et area testamenti nostri direpta est. Apoc, Baruch. xxxv. 3
quomodo enim ingemiscam super Sione, et quomodo lugebo super lerusalem ?
quia in loco isto ubi frosiratus sum nunc, olim summut sacerdos offerebat
0Uatiotus tanctas.



228 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS [IX. 3.

3. This verse which is introduced by ydp does not give the
reason of his grief but the proof of his sincerity.

if)uxofjLtjv : 'the wish was in my mind' or perhaps 'the prayer
was in my heart.' St. Paul merely states the fact of the wish
without regard to the conditions which made it impossible. Cf. Lft.
on Gal. iv. 20 'The thing is spoken of in itself, prior to and
independently of any conditions which might affect its possibihty.'
See also Acts xxv. 22. and Burton, M. and T. § 33.

di-dGefxa : ' accursed,' ' devoted to destruction.' The word was
originally used with the same meaning as uvd6r]^a (of which it was
a dialectic variation, see below), ' that which is offered or consecrated
to God.' But the translators of the Old Testament required an
expression to denote that which is devoted to God for destruction, and
adopted dvadena as a translation of the Hebrew D"3n : see Levit. xxvii.

28, 29 nau 8e dvddena o iav dvn6rf avdpatnos Tw Kiipi'o) . . . o\jk ajroSoxrerat
ouSe "KyTpcoaeTai . . . Koi nav o iav dvaTedJ} dtro Tci>u dvdpooTrav ov XyrpuBij-
afTaiy dX}^a davdrui 6avaT(c6rj(T€Tai', Deut. vii. 26 J Josh. vi. I^ kui tcrrai
fj noXis dvddefia, avT^ Kal Trdura ocra iariv iu avrrj^ Kvpla (Ta^adad, And

with this meaning it is always used in the New Testament: Gal. i.
8, 9; I Cor. xvi. 22. The attempt to explain the word to mean
' excommunication ' from the society — a later use of the Hebrew in
Rabbinical writers and the Greek in ecclesiastical — arose from
a desire to take away the apparent profanity of the wish.

There is some doubt and has been a good deal of discussion as to the
distinction in meaning between dvdOe/xa and dvdOrjua. It was originally
dialectic, uvdOtjfia being the Attic form (dvaOrj/jia drTiKuii, dvadfixa (WrjvtKus
Moeris, p. 28) and dvdOefta being found as a substitute in non-Attic works
i^Anth. P. 6. 162, C.I.G. 2693 d and other instances are quoted by the
Dictioniries). The Hellenistic form was the one naturally used by the
writers of the LXX, and it gradually became confined to the new meaning
attached to the word, but the distinction seems never to have become
certain and MSS. and later writers often confuse the two words. In the
LXX (although Hatch and Redpath make no distinction) our present texts
seem to preserve the difference of the two words. The only doubtful passage
is 2 Mace. ii. 13; here A reads avaBina. where we should expect dvdOrjua,
but V ;the only other MS. quoted by Swcte) and the authorities in Holmes
and Parsons have avdOrjfia. In the N.T. dvdOrjfjui occurs once, Luke xxi. 5,
and then correctly ( but the MSS. vary, dvdOrjiJia B L, dvdOffia H A D). The
Fathers often miss the distinction and explain the two words as identical :
so Ps.-Just. Qtiaest. et Kesp. 121 ; Theod, on Rom. ix. 3, and Suidas; they
are distinguished in Chrys. on Rom. ix. 3 as quoted by Suidas, but not in
Field's ed. No certain instance is quoted ol dviiQi]txa for dvdQtjxa, but dvdQi\xa
could be and was used dialectically for dvdOrjfta. On the word generally
see esp. Trench Syn. i. § 5 ; Lft. Gal. i. 8 ; Fri. on Rom. ix. 3.

ouTos iyd. The emphasis and position of these words emphasizes
the willingness for personal sacrifice; and they have still more force
when we remember that St. Paul has just declared that nothing in
heaven or earth can separate him from the love of Christ. Chrys.

ad loc. Tt Xc'yctf, u) HavXc ^ and tov Xpiarov tov nodovfuvoVf ov lUjTt



IX 3, 4.] THE UNBELIEF OF ISRAEL 229

/3a<TtXeia <r«, ju^i"? ytfvva €;^coptff, /xijTf ra voovfitva, fir]Tf aWa Tocravra, ano
TOVTOV vvp fv^J} avddf^a (ivai '

diro ToG XpicrroO : 'separated from the Christ,' a pregnant use
of the preposition. The translation of the words as if they were
vTTo T. X. arises from a desire to soften the expression.

Karol aapKa : cf. iv. I 'as far as earthly relations are concerned';
spiritually St. Paul was a member of the spiritual Israel, and his
kinsmen were the d8e\(f)oi of the Christian society.

The prayer of St. Paul is similar to that of Moses : Exod. xxxii.
32 ' Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin — ; and if not, blot me,
I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written.' On this

Clem. Rom. liii. 5 comments as follows: w fifydXrji dyan-r/y, &> reXtio-
TrjTos avvntp^XrjTOv, Trapprjata^erat Bfpdnav irpos Kvpioir, airelrat a^ecrtJ' tw
nXfjdei rj (cat eavTou i^a\ei(f)6Tjvai fUT avrSdv d^ioi. In anSWer tO those

who have found difficulties in the passage it is enough to say with
Prof. Jowett that they arise from 'the error of explaining the
language of feeling as though it were that of reasoning and
reflection.'

There are one or two slight variations of reading in ver. 3, axnhi iydi was
placed before dvaO. (Tv. by C KL, Vulg., and later authorities with TR, and
VTTO (D E G) substituted for diro (NABC &c.). Both variations arise from
a desire to modify the passage.

4. oiTiK^s eiCTir: ' inasmuch as they are.' St. Paul's grief for Israel
arises not only from his personal relationship and affection, but
also from his remembrance of their privileged position in the Divine
economy.

'l(TpaT]\iTai : used of the chosen people in special reference to
the fact that, as descendants of him who received from God the
name of Israel, they are partakers of those promises of which it was
a sign. The name therefore implies the privileges of the race;

cf. Eph. ii. 12 dnTjWoTpiapevoi Trjs TToXireias tov 'irrparjX koI ^tvot tu>v

BiaSrjKav ttj? twayyfXias I and as such it could be used metaphorically
of the Christians (6 'lapnfjX tov Qtov Gal. vi. 16 ; cf. ver. 6 inf.) ; a use
which would of course be impossible for the merely national designa-
tion 'lovSalni.

' Israel ' is the title used in contemporary literature to express the
special relations of the chosen people to God. Ps. Sol. xiv. 3 on

T] pepls Ka\ Tj KXTjpovofiia tov 0eov ecrTiv 6 ^lapat]X : EccluS. xvii. 1 5 /uf/'is

Kvpiov 'l(Tpa!]\ fariv: Jubilees xxxiii. i8 ' For Israel is a nation holy
unto God, and a nation of inheritance for its God, and a nation of
priesthood and royalty and a possession.' Thus the word seems to
have been especially connected with the Messianic hope. The
Messianic times are 'the day of gladness of Israel' {Ps. Sol. x. 7),
che blessing of Israel, the day of God's mercy towards Israel

(ib. xvii. 50, 5' /^ataptoi o yu'd/ifj/o* iv raij fjfjifpais (Kfivms iSelp ra



230 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS [IX. 4.

aya6a 'laparjX tp awayayji (f)v\S)v, A iroifjati 6 0eof. raxvuat i Qebs «ri
'lapafjX TO eXfOf avToO). When therefore St. Paul uses this name he
reminds his readers that it is just those for whose salvation above
all, according to every current idea, the Messiah was to come, who
when he has come are apparently cut off from all share in the
privileges of his kingdom.

uloOeaia : * the adoption,' ' status of an adopted son ' : on the
origin of the word and its use in relation to Christian privileges see
above, Rom. viii. 15. Here it implies that relationship of Israel to

God described in Exod. iv. 22 rdde Xe-yet Kvpios Yl6s npoiroTOKO^ fiov

'Io-pn>/X : Deut. xiv. i ; xxxii. 6 ; Jer. xxxi. 9 ; Hos. xi. i. ^o Jubilees
i. 21 'I will be a Father unto them, and they shall be My children,
and they shall all be called children of the living God. And every
angel and every spirit will know, yea they will know that these are
My children, and that I am their Father in uprightness and
in righteousness and that I love them.'

T) Sd^a : ' the visible presence of God among His people * (see
on iii. 23). ho^a is in the LXX the translation of the Hebrew
nin) nins, called by the Rabbis the Shekinah (ni^SK'), the
bright cloud by which God made His presence known on earth ;
cf. Exod. xvi. 10, &c. Hence to koXKos t^s So^»jr avroC Ps. Sol. ii. 5,
ano dpovov bo^rji lb. ver. 20, Wisd. ix. 10, imply more than the mere
beauty of the temple, and when St. Stephen, Acts vii. 2, speaks of
o eeo? TJjf bo^rji his words Would remind his hearers of the visible
presence of God which they claimed had sanctified Jerusalem and the
temple. On late Rabbinical speculations concerning the Shekinah
see Weber Altsyn. Theol. p. 179.

at SiaO'^Kai : ' the covenants,' see Hatch Essays on Biblical
Greek, p. 47. The ])lural is used not with reference to the two
covenants the Jewish and the Christian, but because the original
covenant of God with Israel was again and again renewed
(Gen. vi. 18; ix. 9; xv. 18; xvii. 2, 7, 9 ; Ex. ii. 24). Comp. Ecclus.

xliv. 1 1 p-tTO. Toxi aTTtfyparos avrSiU Siapfffl ayaBr] KK-qpovopia, (Kyova avruv
(V Tois BiadrjKais ', Wisdom Xviii. 22 Xoy<» r6v KoXd^ovra vnera^fP, opKovs

naTfpojv Koi SiadrjKus vTropvfiaat. According to Irenaeus, III. xi. 1 1
(ed. Harvey) there were four covenants : koi Sm toito Tta-aapes eSo-

OrjfTav Ka6()\iKn\ diadrjKai rfj dpdpcoTTOTTjTi' pia ptv tov KOTaKKvapov tov
Naif, eVt TOW tc^ov' ^(VTfpa 8e tov 'A/3paa/i, (in tov arjpfiov rtjs TrepiTopfjs'
TpiTT] Si fj vnpoBicrln eVl tov Mcovcrcox* TfTaprr) di f] tov EiayycXtow, dia

Toil Kvpiov T)pS}V ^lr)<TOV XpiCTTOV *,

The Jews believed that they were bound to God and that God
was bound to them by a covenant which would guarantee to them
His protection in the future. According to St. Paul it was just
those who were not bound to Him by a covenant who would
receive the Divine protection. On the idea of the Covenant and

* In the Latin yersiGo the four corenants are Adam, Noah, Moses, Christ.



IX. 4,, 5.] THE UNBELIEF OF ISRAEL 231

its practical bearing on Jewish life see Schtirer Geachichte, ii.
p. 388.

iq I'OfAoSetrio : a classical word, occurring also in Philo. ' The
giving of the law.' ' The dignity and glory of having a law com-
municated by express revelation, and amidst circumstances so full
of awe and splendour.' Vaughan.

The current Jewish estimation of the Law (6 to/jos 6 inapxan'
fls Tov alawa Baruch iv. i) it is unnecessary to illustrate, but the
point in the mention of it here is brought out more clearly if we
remember that all the Messianic hopes were looked upon as the
reward of those who kept the Law. So Ps. Sol. xiv. i ttkttos Kvpioi

Tols dymrSyaiv avTOV iv aXrjBeia . . , rots iropevofievois iv Sixaiocrvvi] npoaray-
fiaTbiu avTov, iv vojjia) its everetXaro fjptv tls C'^tjv tipdv. It waS one of

the paradoxes of the situation that it was just those who neglected
the Law who would, according to St. Paul's teaching, inherit the
promises.

r\ Xorpeio : 'the temple service.' Heb. ix. i, 6; i Mace. ii. 19, 22.
As an illustration of Jewish opinion on the temple service may be
quoted Pirge Aboih, i. 2 (Taylor, p. 26) ' Shimeon ha-^addiq
was of the remnants of the great synagogue. He used to say. On
three things the world is stayed; on the Thorah, and on the
Worship, and on the bestowal of kindnesses.' According to the
Rabbis one of the characteristics of the Messianic age will be
a revival of the temple services. (Weber Altsyn. Theol. p. 359.)

ol Ina-yy/eKiaK : ' the promises made in the O. T. with special
reference to the coming of the Messiah.' These promises were of
course made to the Jews, and were always held to apply particularly
to them. While sinners were to be destroyed before the face of
the Lord, the saints of the Lord were to inherit the promises
(cf. Ps. Sol. xii. 8) ; and in Jewish estimation sinners were the
gentiles and saints the chosen people. Again therefore the
choice of terms emphasizes the character of the problem to be
discussed. See note on i. 2, and the note of Ryle and James on
Ps. Sol. loc. ctt.\ cf. also Heb.vi. 12; xi.13; Gal.iii.19; i Clem. x. 2.

al SiaOrJKat N C L, Vulg. code/. Boh. &c. has been corrected into ^ SiaOrjKr]
B D F G, Vulg. codd. pauc. ; also i-na-^ytkim into k-nayfiKia D E F G, Boh.
Both variations are probably due to fancied difficulties.

5. 01 irarepes: 'the patriarchs.' Acts iii. 13, vii. 32. On the
' merits ' of the patriarchs and their importance in Jewish theology
see the note on p. 330.

e| wi' 6 XpitTTOs TO KfirA. ad^pKO. Cf. I Clem, xxxii. 2 f^ avTov 6
Kvpios 'irjaovs to koto. adpKa. 6 Xp. is not a personal name, but must
be translated ' the Messiah.' Not only have the Jews been united
to God by so many ties, but the purpose for which they have been
selected has been fulfilled. The Messiah has come forth from
them;, and yet they have been rejected.



233 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS [IX. 8.

4 S)v iirX Ttdvroiv ©cos, k.t.X. : with X/Dtcrrrfr (see below), ' who is
God over all blessed for ever.' iravrcov is probably neuter, cf. xi. 36.
This description of the supreme dignity of Him who was on His
human side of Jewish stock serves to intensify the conception of
the privileged character of the Jewish race.



TAe Privileges of Israel.

By this enuireration of the privileges of Israel St. Paul fulfils two
purposes in his argument. He gives firstly the facts which
intensify his sorrow. Like the writer of 4 Ezra his grief is
heightened by the remembrance of the position which his country-
men have held in the Divine economy. Every word in the long
hst calls to mind some link which had united them, the Chosen
People, with God ; every word reminds us of the glory of their past
history; and it is because of the great contrast suggested between
the destiny of Israel and their actual condition that his grief is so
profound.

But the Apostle has another and more important thought to
emphasize. He has to show the reality and the magnitude of the
problem before him, and this list of the privileges of Israel just empha-
sizes it. It was so great as almost to be paradoxical. It was this.
Israel was a chosen people, and was chosen for a certain purpose.
According to the teaching of the Apostle it had attained this end :
the Messiah, whose coming represented in a sense the consum-
mation of its history, had appeared, and yet from any share in the
glories of this epoch the Chosen People themselves were cut off.
All the families of the earth were to be blessed in Israel : Israel
itself was not to be blessed. They were in an especial sense the
sons of God : but they were cut off from the inheriiance. They
were bound by special covenants to God : the covenant had been
broken, and those outside shared in the advantages. The glories of
the Messianic period might be looked upon as a recompense for
the long years of suffering which a f.iithful adhesion to ihe Law and
a loyal preservation of the temple service had entailed : the bless-
ings were to come for those who had never kept the Law. The
promises were given to and for Israel: Israel alone would not
inherit them.

Such was the problem. The pious Jew, remembering the
sufferings of his nation, pictured the Messianic time as one when
these should all pass away ; when all Israel — pure and without stain
— should be once more united ; when the ten tribes should be
collected from among the nations ; when Israel which had suffered
much from the Geniiles should be at last triumi)hant over them.
All this he expected. The Messiah had come: and Israel, the



IX. 5.] THE UNBELIEF OF ISRAEL 233

Messiah's own people, seemed to be cut off and rejected from the
blessings which it had itself prepared for the world. How was this
problem to be solved? (Cf. 4 Ezra xiii; Schiirer, Geschichte^
u. 452 sq.)

The Punctuation of Rom. ix. 5-

Koi (( Itiv 6 Xpiaroi to Kard aapKa, % uiv eitl v&vtwv, 0€os iiXoyryrhi efs rdhs
alSivaV aiir}V.

The interpretation of Rom. ix. 5 has probably been discussed at gieater Special
length than that of any other verse of the N.T. Besi' es long notes in literature
various commentaries, the following special papers may be mentioned :
Schultz, in Jahrbiicher filr deutsche Theologie, 1868, vol. xiii. pp. 462-506;
Grimm, Zwth., iSi'ip, pp. 311-322 ; Harmsen, ib. 1872, pp. 510, 521 : but
England and America have provided the fullest discussions — by Prof.
Kennedy and Dr. Gifford, namely. The Divinity of Christ, a sermon
preached on Christmas Day, 18S2, before the University of Cambridge, with
an appendix on Rom. ix. 5 and Titus ii. 13, by Benjamin Hall Kennedy,
D.D., Cambridge, 1883 ; Caesarem Appello, a letter to Dr. Kennedy, by
Edwin Hamilton Gifford, D.D., Cambridge, 1883; and Pauline Lnrisiology,
I. Examination of Rom. ix. 5, being a rejoinder to the Rev. Dr. Gifford''s
reply, by Benjamin Hall Kennedy, D.D., Cambridge, 1S83 : by Prof. Dwight
and Dr. Ezra Abbot, in J. B. Exeg. June and December, 18S1, pp. 22-55,
87-154; and 1S83, pp. 90-112. Of these the paper of Dr. Abbot is much
the most exhaustive, while that of Dr. Gifford seems to us on the whole to
show the most exegetical power.

Dismissing minor variations, there are four main interpretations (all of Alternativt
them referred to in the RV.) which have been suggested : interpret a-

(a) Placing a comma after aapKa and referring the whole passage to tions.
Christ. So RV.

{b) Placing a full stop after aapKa and translating ' He who is God over
all be blessed for ever,' or ' is blessed for ever.' So RV. marg

ic) With the same punctuation translating ' He who is over all is God
blessed for ever.' RV. marg.

{d) Placing a comma after crapKa and a full stop at -navToiv, ' who is over
all. God be (or is) blessed for ever.' RV. marg.

It may be convenient to point out at once that the question is one of The ori-
interpretation and not of criticism. The original MSS. of the Epistles were ginal MSS.
almost certainly destitute of any sort of punctuation. Of MSS. of the first without
century we have one containing a poition of Isocrates in which a few dots punctua-
are used, but only to divide words, never to indicate pauses in the sense; in tion.
the MS. of the XioXmia of Aristotle, which dates from the end of the first
or beginning of the second century, there is no punctuation whatever except
that a slight space is left before a quotation : this latter probably is as close
a representation as we can obtain in the present day of the original form of
the books of the N. T. In carefully written MSS., the work of professional
scribes, both before and during the first century, the more important pauses
in the sense were often indicated but lesser pauses rarely or never ; and, so
far as our knowledge enables us to speak, in roughly written MSS. such as
were no doubt those of the N.T., there is no punctuation at all until about
the third century. Our present MSS. fwhich begin in the fourth century)
do not therefore represent an early tradition. If there were any traditional
punctuation we should have to seek it rather in early versions or in second
and third century Fathers : the punctuation of the MSS. is interesting in
the history of interpretation, but has no other value.



234



EPISIXE TO THE ROMANS



[IX. 6.



History of
the inter-
pretation.

(1) The
Versions.

(2) The
Fathers.



(3) The
older MSS.



(4) Modem
tfititism.



The history of the interpretation must be passed over somewhat earsonly
For our earliest evidence we should naturally turn to the older versions, but
these seem to labour under the same obscurity as the original. It is however
probably true that the traditional interpretation of all of them is to apply the
doxology to Christ.

About most of the Fathers however there is no doubt. An immense pre-
ponderance of the Christian writers of the first eight centuries refer the word
to Christ. This is certainly the case with Iienaeus, Haer. III. xvii. a, ed.
Harvey; Tertullian, Adv. Prax. 13, 15; Hippolytus, Cont. A'oct. 6 (cC
Gifford, op. cit. p. 60) ; Novatian, Trin. 13 ; Cyprian, Test. ii. 6, ed. Hartel ;
Syn. Ant. adv. Paul. Sam. in Routh, Rel. Sacrae, iii. 291, 292 ; Athanasins,
Cont. Arian. I. iii. 10; Epiphanius, Haer. Ivii. 2, 9, ed. Oehler; Basil,
Adv. Eunom. iv. p. 282 ; Gregory of Nyssa, Adv. Eunom. 11 ; Chrysostom,
Horn, ad Rom. xvi. 3, &c. ; Theodoret, Ad Rom. iv. p. 100; Augustine, De
Trinitate, ii. 13 ; Hilarius, De Trinitate, viii. 37, 38 ; Ambrosius, De Spiritu
Sancto, i. 3. 46 ; Hieronymus, Ep. CXXI. ad Algas. Qu. ix ; Cyril Al., Cont.
lul. X. pp. 327, 328. It is true also of Origan iin Rom. vii. 13) if we may
trust Rufinus' Latin translation (the subject has been discussed at length
by Gifford, op. cit. p. 31 ; Abbot, y. B. Exeg. 1883, p. 103 ; \VH. ad ice).
Moreover there is no evidence that this conclusion was arrived at on dogmatic
grounds. The passage is rarely cited in controversy, and the word @(6s was
given to our Lord by many sects who refused to ascribe to him full divine
honours, as the Gnostics of the second century and the Arians of the fourth.
On the other hand this was a useful text to one set of heretics, the .Sabellians ;
and it is significant that Hippolytus, who has to explain that the words do
not favour Sabellianism, never appears to think of taking them in any
other way.

The strongest evidence againtt the reference to Christ is that of the leading
uncial MSS. Of these N has no punctuation, A undoubtedly puts a point
after aapua, and also leaves a slight space. The punctuation of this chapter
is careful, and certainly by the original hand ; but as there is a similar point
and space between Xpiarov and virip in ver. 3, a point between aapna and
oirtva, and another between 'laparjXiTai and Siv, there is no reason as far as
punctuation is concerned why 6 wv should not refer to Xpiffroy as much aa
oTni'ts does io adi\(pijv .* B has a colon after aapna, hwt leaves no space,
while there is a space left at the end of the verse. The present colon is
however certainly not by the first hand, and whether it covers an earlier
stop or not cannot be ascertained. C has a stop after aapKa. The difference
between the MSS. and the Fathers has not been accounted for and is certainly
curious.

Against ascribing these words to Christ some patristic evidence has
been found. Origen (Rufinus) ad loc. tells us there were certain persons
who thought the ascription of the word 0€oy to Christ difficult, for St. Paul
had already called him v\o% Qioiv. The long series of extracts made by
Wetsteia ad loc. stating that the words o (ti vdyTwv 0€oj cannot be used of
the Son are not to the point, for the Son here is called not o (m iravrwu ©eos,
but fnl vAvToov @t6s, and some of the writers he quotes expressly interpret the



Online LibraryW. (William) SandayA critical and exegetical commentary on the Epistle to the Romans → online text (page 42 of 71)