BLTC Press Titles


available for Kindle at Amazon.com


Mortal Coils

Aldous Huxley


The Diplomatic Background of the War

Charles Seymour


The Secret Doctrine, Volume II Anthropogenesis

H. P. Blavatsky


The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes

A. Conan Doyle


Critical and exegetical handbook to the Epistle to the Romans

by Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer

Excerpt:

hand; for it is in the heart, as in the central laboratory of the personal self-conscious life (comp. Delitzsch, Psychol, p. 254), that the praying Spirit sighs, Gal iv. 6. — on] Not for, as many think, including Tholuck, Kuckert, de Wette, Philippi, Ewald, and Umbreit. What follows in fact conveys no real ground, since God would in every case know the purpose of the Spirit, and to take oiSe in the pregnant sense: understands and hears (so Riickert, following Calvin), is utterly unjustifiable, especially after 6 epevv. K.t.x. The on is rather that, annexed by way of explanation: that He, namely. Comp. Grotius, Estius, Benecke, Iieiche, Fritzsche, Maier, Ejehl, Baumgarten-Crusius, Bisping, Keithmayr, van Hengel, and Hofmann. See on Phil. i. 27, ii. 22, al. Kara 6e6v] This, explained by Origen " secundum divinitatem," does not mean: on the instigation of God (Tholuck, appealing improperly to 1 Cor. xii. 8), but: in accordance with God, i.e. so as God desires it, Kara yvwfiTjv avrov, Theodore of Mopsuestia. Comp. 2 Cor. vil 9, 10; 4 Mace. xv. 2; Plat. Apol. pp. 22 A, 23 B. The sense: in pursuance of the divine disposal, more common in classic usage (see Wetstein on the passage, and Valcken. ad Herod, iii. 153), is here foreign. Bohme, Reiche, and Fritzsche render it before God, with God (" in Deum quasi conversus "). This is indeed justifiable from a linguistic point of view (Bernhardy, p. 240), comp. Wisd. v. 1, Ecclus. xxxiv. 6; but how superfluous and unsuited to the emphasis of the prominent position assigned to it! With the emphasis on Kara Geov it cannot appear strange that Paul has not written /car' avrov, but has rather named the subject. Comp. Xen. Mem. i. 3. 2: ev%ero Be 7rpos row 6eovs, . . . ti>9 Toi/? 6eov<; KaWtara eiSoTa<! K.t.x. The omission of the article, which does not render the expression adverbial (against Hofmann), establishes in the case of 0eo? no difference of sense (Winer, p. 115 f. [E. T. 151])..— vrrep cvyUov] for saints, without the article because qualitative; "sancti sunt et Deo propinqui et auxilio digni, pro quibus intercedit," Bengel. On evrvyx- inrep rivoi, to pray for any one, see Bahr on Plut. Flamin. p. 83. , Ver. 28. Third ground of encouragement; comp. on ver. 26. __.—- oXZauev Be] It is known to us, however (as in ver. 22). This 8e is not: on the other hand, however, in contradistinction to the sighing discussed since ver. 22, as Hofmann thinks—a reference, that must have been marked in some way or other (at least by the stronger adversative dXXa). It is the usual fierafiaTiicov, and carries us from the special relation discussed in ver. 26 f. over to a general one, the consciousness of which must finally place the good courage of the believer on a footing all the more sure. — Tok affair, r. Geov] the dative of communion. Paul characterizes as lovers of God (/car ego^.) the true Christians (comp. 1 Cor. ii. 9, iii. 8; Eph. vi. 24; Jas. i. 12), as is plain from rots Kara K.t.x.1 Trdvra] everything, i.e., according to the context, all fajuuA wyfft own *riftfle, fujl otjain not excepted (ver. 351. On the thought, comp. Plat. Rep. p. 613 A. — <jweg2ft] icorlcs along vrith, that is, contributes; j3or}6eZ, Hesychius. See Wetstein. The aw does not refer to the common working together of the elements contained in rrdvra (comp. ver. 22), but to the idea of the fellowship in which he who supports necessarily stands to him who is supported. Comp. on ver. 26. — d<s agaBev] Jnde^nitejy: for good; it works beneficially. Comp. Theogn. 161; Horn. II. x. 102; Plat. Rep. I.e.; Ecclus. xxxix. 27; Ttnm, ^rjjfc 4 Beiche erroneously takes it as: "the good of the Christians, their eternal welfare." In that case, the article at least must have been used as in xiv. 16; and some witnesses in reality add it. Bengel has the right view: "in bonum, ad glorificationemusque" (ver. 30).—rol<; Kararrpod. /eXijTot? ovaiv] These words may mean either {ovaiv as predicate, joining on): "since they are the called according to His purpose" (so Hofmann), or (taking To« in conjunction with ovaiv), as to those who (guippe qui, i.e. since they indeed) are the called according to His purpose. J5o usually; and this latter is the true rendering, because otherwise ovaiv would be put not only quite superfluously, but als~o~ih a way very liable to misconception, since it would occur to every reader, at the first glance, to join roii with ovaiv.

1 In this very description of the Christian estate there is implied a rprnmtf. iff convkthn_ol_X\ie «3mt the certainty of which is thereupon still more precisely explained. Hofmann finds a retrospective glance at v. 1 ff., but only by means of his incorrect view of A iyi*n Tcu &itZ, v. 5.

Had Paul meant what Hofmann thinks he did, he would have written simply Toft if. K\rrroi<{ without ovaiv, or possibly oiTives el<rtv ol K. It. Kkijtol — Respecting the idea itself, there is causally involved in the relation of being the called according to His purpose (for the emphasis rests on /rX^Tot?), the certainty tlwi to tJicm all things, etc.; for otherwise that high distinction, which God has conferred upon them according to the purpose of His grace, would be vain and fruitless, which is impossible (ver. 30). The irpoOeo-^ here meant is the free decree formed by God in eternity for imparting bliss to believers through Christ (ix. 11; Eph L 11, iil 11; 2 Tim. i. 9; Eph. i. 9). In accordance with that decree, the call of God to the Messianic salvation through the preaching of the gospel (x. 14; 2 Thess. ii. 14) has gone forth to those comprehended in that decree. Therefore, when Paul terms the Christians K\t)toi, it is selfevident that in their case the call has met with success (1 Cor. i. 24), consequently has been combined with the converting operation of the divine grace,—without the latter, however, being found in the word itself, or the word being made equivalent to iickeKToL Comp. Lamping, Pauli de praedest. decrcta, Leovard. 1858, p. 40 f. Christians are at the same time K\7)toi, iickeicTol (ix. 11), aytot. K.t.x.; but the significations of these predicates correspond to different characteristic qualities of the Christian state. Consequently, just as it was quite a mistaken view to interpret trpodeait of the personal self-determination of the subjects (Chrysostom, Theodoret, and others), so also it was an unbiblical and hazardous distinction (see against this, Calovius) to put the called Kara, Trpodeatv in contrast with those who are called firj Kara, irp60. (Augustine, Estius, Eeithmayr, and others). Weiss aptly observes, in the Jahrb. f. Deutsche Theol. 1857, p.^WT*" Efectjifln ftfld falling are inseparable correlative ideas; where the one takj3&»$»Lace, /there the other takes place also; only we cannot take cogf nizance of the former as an act before all time and within the divine mind, while the latter becomes apparent as a historical fact." Comp. also his Mbl. TJuol. p. 386 f.

Vv. 29, 30. More detailed development and expression of rot? K. irp60. K\. ovaiv,—as a continued confirmation of the oiBa/tev, on K.t.x. "For this divine plan cf salvation advancing from the irpodecns to the -rr\fjai<i, leads the Christian safely and surely to the So£a;" hence it is not conceivable that anything whatever, in opposition to this plan, should exercise other than a beneficial influence upon them (ver. 31 ff.). — nrpoeyvto] foreknew, namely, as those who should one day, in the way of the divine plan of salvation, become o-6fifju>p<j>oi Tt}? eln6vo<: r. vlov avrov.1 That this character, in which they were foreknown by God, presupposes the subjection to faith (the vvaKot] irio-Tea><; L 5), was self-evident to the Christian reader. Erasmus aptly remarks: "Non temere elegit Deus quos elegit, novit suos multo antequam vocaret." The text merely gives the terminus of the irpo in TTpoeiyvas and irpoapiae quite indefinitely, namely: before their calling. More precise definitions, therefore {e.g. that of Tholuck: "before the foundation of the world," though in itself correct, Eph. i. 4, iii. 11), should not be here given. The taking of the irvoeyvco in the sense of prescience, demanded by the signification of the word, has been followed (though with various, and in part very arbitrary, attempts to supply that, as which the persons concerned were foreknown by God) by Origen, Chrysostom, Augustine, Ambrosiaster, Jerome, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Erasmus, Paraphr., Toletus, Calovius, and others, including Eeiche, Neander, Tholuck, Eeithmayr, Maier, Philippi, van Hengel, Hahn, Ewald, Weiss, and others. The question whether this exposition or the other of the preelection (Calvin and others, including Eiickert, Usteri, Kbllner, de Wette, Fritzsche, Krehl, Baumgarten-Crusius, and Lamping), is the true one, cannot be got rid of by mixing up the two conceptions (Umbreit); nor is it to be decided by dogmatic presuppositions, but simply by the usage of the language, in accordance with which irpoy. never in the N. T. (not even in xi. 2, 1 Pet. i. 20) means anything else than to know before


... from the RetroRead library, using Google Book Search, and download any of the books already converted to Kindle format.

Browse the 100 most recent additions to the RetroRead library

Browse the library alphabetically by title

Make books:

Login or register to convert Google epubs to Kindle ebooks

username:

password:

Lost your password?

Not a member yet? Register here, and convert any Google epub you wish


Powerd by Calibre powered by calibre