329
17. “ISe! σὺ ἸΙουδαῖος | ἐπονομάζῃ, καὶ ἐπαναπαύῃ τῷ νόµω, Kall Here only
καυχᾶσαι ἐν Θεῷ, 18. καὶ γινώσκεις τὸ θέληµα, καὶ δοκιµάζεις τὰ
™ διαφέροντα, " κατηχούµενος ἐκ τοῦ νόµου" 19. πέποιθάς τε σεαυτὸν τη Phil. το,
ὁδηγὸν εἶναι τυφλῶν, pas τῶν ἐν σκότει, 20. "παιδευτὴν ἀφρόνων, διδάσκαλον νηπίων, ἔχοντα τὴν µόρφωσιν τῆς Ὑνώσεως καὶ τῆς
n 1 Cor. xiv. 19. ο Heb. xii. g.
Ver δε NABD'K; ιδε DSL Syr. ει δε has probably been changed into ιδε (Alford)
to avoid the anacoluthon.
The Jew makes much of the possession of the law, but when we pass from possession to practice, he is not a whit better than the “‘ lawless” Gentile. The construction is not quite regular, but the meaning is clear, The natural order would be: If thou bearest the name of Jew, and restest upon the law, and yet in thy conduct settest the law at nought, art not thou equally under condemnation with sinners of the Gentiles? But the construction is interrupted at the end of ver; 20, and what ought in logic to be part of the protasis—if in thy conduct thou settest the law at nought—is made a sort of apodosis, at least grammati- cally and rhetorically: dost thou, in spite of all these privileges, nevertheless set the law at nought? The real conclusion, which Paul needs for his argument, Art not thou then in the same condemna- tion with the Gentiles ? is left for con- science to supply.
Ver.17. ᾿Ιουδαῖος ἐπονομάζῃ: bearest the name of ‘‘Jew’’. The ἐπὶ in the compound verb does not denote addition, but direction: *lovSatos is not conceived as a surname, but a name which has been imposed. Of course it is implied in the context that the name is an honourable one. It is not found in the LXX, and in other places where Paul wishes to indicate the same distinction, and the same pride in it, he says Ἴσρα- ηλεῖται (ix. 4, 2 Cor. xi. 22). The terms must have had a tendency to coalesce in import, though ᾿Ιουδαῖος is national, and σραηλείτης religious; for the religion was national. ἐπαναπαύῃ νόµῳ: gram- matically vép@ is law; really, it is the Mosaic law. The Jew said, We have a law, and the mere possession of it gave him confidence. Cf. Mic. iii. 11, ἐπὶ τὸν Κύριον ἐπανεπαύοντο. καυχᾶσαι ἐν θεῷ: boastest in God, as the covenant God of the Jews, who are His peculiar people. καυχᾶσαι = καυχᾷ: the longer form is the usual one in the κοινή.
Ver. 18. τὸ θέλημα is God’s will. Lipsius compares the absolute use ot
eravatavy Tw νοµῳ D®KL 17; om. τω SABD!.
686s, θύρα and ὄνομα. Cf. Acts ix. 2, πια. ο 2350 XIVe 27, Verge Also: τ΄ ῷοτ xvi. 12, where God’s will is meant, not the will of Apollos. The words δοκιµά- ζεις τὰ διαφέροντα κατηχούµενος ἐκ τοῦ νόµου are to be taken together. | In virtue of being taught out of the law (in the synagogue and the schools) the Jew possesses moral discernment: he does not sink to the νοῦς ἀδόκιμος, the mind which has lost all moral capacity (i. 28). But a certain ambiguity remains in δοκιµάζειν τὰ διαφέροντα: it may mean either (1) to distinguish, by testing, between things which differ—.e., to dis- criminate experimentally between good and evil; or (2) to approve, after testing, the things which are more excellent. There are no grounds on which we can decide positively for either.
Ver. 19 {. πέποιθάς τε «.t.A. The ve indicates that this confidence is the immediate and natural result of what precedes: it is not right, in view of all the N.T. examples, to say that πέποιθας suggests an unjustifiable confidence, though in some cases, as in the present, itvis¥sos) 6 2 Cor, (x. 7. eke νι οἱ The blind, those in darkness, the foolish, the babes, are all names for the heathen: the Jew is confident that the Gentiles must come to school tohim. παιδεντὴς has reference to moral as well as intel- lectual discipline: and ἄφρονες are, as in the O.T. (Ps. xiii. 1, LXX), persons without moral intelligence. For the other figures in this verse, cf. Mt. xv. 14, Is. xlix. 6, 9, xlii. 6. The confidence of the Jew is based on the fact that he possesses in the law ‘the outline of knowledge and truth’’. Lipsius puts a strong sense upon µόρφωσιν--άϊε leib- haftige Verkorperung: as if the Jew conceived that # the Mosaic law the knowledge and the truth of God were incorporated bodily. Possibly he did, and in a sense it was so, for the Mosaic law was a true revelation of God and His will: but the only other instance of µόρφωσις in the N.T. (2 Tim. iii. 5;