mediate connection between the two verses 80 and 31, and understands the whole of the latter to refer to the relation between Christ and his church. It then may be explained either in reference to the present, or the future. If to the present, the sense would be, ‘ We are members of Christ’s body, and, therefore, he left his Father and all dear to him in heaven that he might be united to his people.’ But how is it possible that the words, ‘a man shall leave his father and mother,” can mean Christ left God and heaven? If the passage be understood in reference to the future, the meaning will be, ‘ We are members of Christ’s body, and there- fore hereafter when he comes the second time, he will leave his Father’s throne, and take his church as his bride.’* But this view not only does the same violence to the meaning of the words, but is in direct contra- diction to the whole context. Paul does not say that hereafter the church shall be united to Christ as his bride, but that his people are now members of his body, flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bones.
The third explanation assumes that the first part of the verse has no reference to Christ and the church, and that the passage is quoted from Genesis solely for
* Deshalb, weil wir Glieder Christi, von seinem Fleisch und yon seinem Beinen sind, wird verlassen ein Mensch (d. i. Christus, bei der Parusie) sei- nen Vater und seine Mutter (d.i. nach der mystischen Deutung Pauli: er wird seinen Sitz zur Rechten Gottes verlassen) und vereiniget werden mit seinem Weibe (mit der Gemeinde), wnd (und dann) werden die Zwei (der Mann und die Frau, d. i. der herabgestiegene Christus und die Gemeinde)
zu Einem Fleische sein (Kine ethische Person ausmachen). Mryerr.