sacrifice, if it were morally possible. Others, however, explain the imperfect as stating an actual wish formerly entertained.*
Accursed from Christ (avaSeua amo rod yputtov). Compare Gal. i. 8, 9; 1 Cor. xii. 3; xvi. 22. See on offerings, Luke xxi. 5. Set apart to destruction and so separated from Christ (Philip. i. 21; iii. 8, 20). An expression of deep devotion. “It is not easy to estimate the measure of love in a Moses and a Paul. For our limited reason does not grasp it, as the child cannot comprehend the courage of warriors” (Bengel). Compare Moses, Exod. xxxii. 32.
4. Who (ofrwves).. The double relative characterizes the Is- raelites with their call and privileges as such that for them he could even wish himself accursed.
Israelites. See on Acts iii. 12.
Adoption. See on ch. viii. 15. Israel is always represented as the Lord’s son or first-born among all peoples. Exod. iv. 22; Deut. xiv. 1; Hos. xi. 1.
The glory. The visible, luminous appearance of the divine presence was called by the Israelites the glory of Jahveh, or, in rabbinical phrase, the Shekinah. See Exod. xxiv. LG sexs 34, 85; Ezek. i. 28; Heb. ix. 5. Not the final glory of God’s kingdom; for this belongs to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews.
The covenants (ai Sia 9fxas). See on Matt. xxvi. 28. Those concluded with the patriarchs since Abraham. See Gal. ii. 16, 17; Eph. ii. 12. The plural never occurs in the Old Testament. See on Heb. ix. 16.
* Some make the words ‘“‘I could wish—from Christ,’ parenthetical, and suppose Paul to refer to his own attitude toward Christ before his conversion, by way of illustrating the sad spiritual condition of his countrymen, and thus accounting for his sorrow of heart. Others retain the Same sense with- out the parenthesis. The word may also mean “I prayed” (2 Cor. xiii. 7; Jas. v. 16). In classical Greek, though not in the New Testament, it has the meaning ‘‘vow.” Lange renders ‘‘I made a vow,” saying that he probably made some fearful pledge when he received authority to persecute the Christ- ians. The student will find the various interpretations fully discussed in Morison’s monograph on Romans ix. and x., and in Schaff’s Lange.
Cu. IX.] THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 101
The giving of the law (7) vouod_ecia). The act of giving, with a secondary reference to the substance of the law; degista- tion.
The service (1) AXatpeia). See on John xvi. 2; Luke i. 74; Apoe. xxiil.3; Philip. iii. 3. Here the sum-total of the Levitical services instituted by the law.
The promises. ‘The collective messianic promises on which the covenants were based. The word originally means an- nouncement. See on Acts i. 4.
5. Of whom (€€ ov). From the midst of whom. But in order to guard the point that the reference is only to Christ’s human origin, he adds, as concerning the flesh.
Who is over all, God blessed for ever (6 av éml mdvtwv @cds evAoynTos eis Tovs aiw@vas). Authorities differ as to the punctuation ; some placing a colon, and others a comma after flesh. This difference indicates the difference in the interpre- tation ; some rendering as concerning the flesh the Christ came: God who is over all be blessed for ever ; thus making the words God, etc., a doxology: others, with the comma, the Christ, who as over all, God blessed forever ; i.e. Christ is God. (For minor variations see margin of Rev.) *
Amen. See on Apoc. i. 6.
6. Not as though (ovy ofov dé 6rv). Rev., but tt 7s not as though. ‘The thought is abruptly introduced. I am not speak- ing of a matter of such a nature as that the doctrine of faith involves the failure of God’s promises to Israel.
*T incline to the doxological view, but the long and intricate discussion cannot be gone into here. For the doxological view the student may consult Meyer’s note, Professor Ezra Abbot, ‘‘Journal of the American Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis,” 1881 (also ‘‘Critical Essays”), and Beet’s ‘‘Commentary on Romans.” Also G. Vance Smith, ‘‘ Expositor,” first series, ix , 397, to which are appended answers by Archdeacon Farrar and W. San- day. On the other side, President Dwight’s note inthe American Meyer. He refers in this to his own article in the same number of the ‘‘ Journal of Bibli- cal Literature” in which Professor Abbot’s article appears. See, also, Farrar in ‘‘ Expositor” as above, p. 217, and Godet on Romans.