Were made (éppé0ncav). Rend. were spoken.
* See Clement, Ad Corinth. x., who enumerates the different forms of the promise to Abraham, citing Gen. xii. 1-3; xiii. 14-16; and Gen. xv. 5, 6. See also Gen. xy. 18; xvii. 8; xxii. 16-18,
Cx, IIl.] THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. cb |
To his seed (1@ omeppate airov). Emphatic, as making for his conclusion in ver. 17.. There can be no disannulling by the law of a promise made not only to Abraham, but to his seed.
Not—to seeds (od—Tois omdpuaciv). He means that there is significance in the singular form of expression, as pointing to the fact that one descendant (seed) is intended — Christ. With regard to this line of argument it is to be said, 1. The original promise referred to the posterity of Abraham generally, and therefore applies to Christ individually only as representing these: as gathering up into one all who should be incorporated with him. 2. The original word for seed in the O. T., wherever it means progeny, is used in the singu- lar, whether the progeny consists of one or many. In the plural it means grains of seed, as 1 Sam. viii. 15. It is evi- dent that Paul’s argument at this point betrays traces of his rabbinical education (see Schoettgen, Horae Hebraicae, Vol. I., p. 786), and can have no logical force for nineteenth-cen- tury readers. Even Luther says: “ Zum stiche zu schwach.” *
Of many (él wodkd@v). Apparently a unique instance of the use of és? with the genitive after a verb of speaking. The sense appears in the familiar phrase “to speak upon a subject,” many being conceived as the basis on which the speaking rests. Similarly éd’ évds of one.
17. And this | say (rodro dé Adyw). Now I mean this. Not strictly the conclusion from vv. 15, 16, since Paul does not use this phrase in drawing a conclusion (comp. 1 Cor. i. 12, and rotro 5é€ dn, 1 Cor. vii. 29; xv. 50). It is rather
* With this compare the words of Ellicott. ‘It may be true that similar arguments occur in rabbinical writers: it may be true that omépua is a col- lective noun, and that when the plural is used ‘grains of seed’ are implied. All this may be so, — nevertheless, we have here an interpretation which the apostle, writing under the illumination of the Holy Ghost, has deliberately propounded, and which therefore, whatever difficulties may at first appear in it, is profoundly and indisputably true.”’
SOUTRF CALIFORMA seHOGL, QF THEOLOS: UB tay
122 WORD STUDIES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. [Ca. IIL
the application, for which the way was prepared in ver. 16, of the analogy of ver. 15 to the inviolable stability of God’s covenant.
Four hundred and thirty years after. Bengel remarks: “The greatness of the interval increases the authority of the promise.” *
To make of none effect (xatapyfjoat). See on Rom iii. 3.
18. In the analogy of ver. 15 there was contemplated the double possibility of ¢nvalidation or addition. With relation to God’s promise, the Judaisers insisted on addition ; since, while they preached faith in the promise and in its fulfilment in Christ, they made the inheritance of the promise dependent upon the fulfilling of the law. Paul, on the other hand, holds that the Judaistic addition involves invalidation. Salvation must rest either upon the promise or upon the law. The Judaiser said, upon the promise and the law. For God gave the inheritance to Abraham by promise. It has been shown that the law did not abrogate the promise. Hence, if the inheritance be of the law it is no more of the promise. Comp. Rom. iy. 14.
Gave (xeydpiotat). Freely bestowed as a gracious gift. See on L. vii. 21.
19. Wherefore then serveth the law? (r/ ody 6 vdpmos;). Lit. what then is the law, or, why then the law? What is its meaning and object? A natural question of an objector, since, according to Paul’s reasoning, salvation is of promise and not of law.