604
b Ch. v.8; κρίνεσθαί σε”. αἴδοτσι ος κ 4, νι. Irs τι έρουµεν ; Gal. ii. 1
Ill.
5. εἰ δὲ ἡ ἀδικία ἡμῶν Θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην " συνίστησι, ; μὴ ἄδικος 6 Θεὸς 6 ἐπιφέρων τὴν ὀργήν; κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγω. 6. μὴ γένοιτο" ἐπεὶ πῶς κρινεῖ ὁ Θεὸς τὸν κόσμον; 7. εἰ
yap? ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐν τῷ ἐμῷ ψεύσματι ἐπερίσσευσεν cis τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, τί ἔτι κἀγὼ ὡς ἁμαρτωλὸς κρίνοµαι; 8. καὶ μὴ καθὼς
ε1 6ογ «10 "βλασφημούμεθα, kal? καθώς φασί τινες ἡμᾶς λέγειν, Ὅτι ποιήσωµεν τὰ κακὰ ἵνα ἔλθῃ τὰ ἀγαθά; ὧν τὸ κρίµα ἔνδικόν ἐστι.
‘ec γαρ BDEGKLP, etc.; ει δε ΝΑ vulg. (some MSS., though others si enim).
This case is to be decided by the same considerations as the last.
Tischdf. and W.
and Ἡ. put ει δε in their text; W. and H. put ει yap in marg. On the strange but frequent exchange of δε and yap see Weiss, Textkritik, 66 f.
2 kat καθως; om. και BK. W. and H. bracket.
judge”. The quotation from Ps. cxvi. 12, Tas ἄνθρωπος ψεύστης, is not important: the main thing, as the formal quotation which follows shows, is the vindication of God from the charge of breach of faith with the Jews in making Christianity the fulfilment of His promises to them.
Ver. 5 f. Here another attempt is made to invalidate the conclusion of chap. Π., that the Jew is to be judged ‘according to his works,” exactly like the Gentile. Ifthe argument of ver. 3 f. is correct, the unbelief of the Jews actually serves to set off the faithfulness of God: it makes it all the more con- spicuous; how then can it leave them exposed to judgment? This argument is generalised in ver. 5 and answered in ver.6. ‘If our unrighteousness” (in the widest sense, ἀδικία being generalised from ἀπιστία, ver. 3) demonstrates (cf. v. 8) God’s righteousness (also in the widest sense, δικαιοσύνη being general- ised from πίστις, ver. 3), what shall we say ? 1.6., what inference shall we draw? Surely not that God, He who inflicts the wrath due to unrighteousness at the last day (i. 18), is Himself unrighteous, to speak as men speak. Away with the thought! If this were so, how should God judge the world? That God does judge the world at last is a fixed point both for Paul and those with whom he argues; hence every inference which conflicts with it must be summarily set aside. God could not judge at all if He were unjust; therefore, since He does judge, He is not unjust, not even in judging men whose unrighteousness may have served as a foil to His righteousness. It is not thus that the conclusions of chap. ii. can be evaded by the Jew. ὁ ἐπιφέρων τὴν ὀργήν: the “attributive participle equivalent to a relative clause,
may, like a relative clause, convey a subsidiary idea of cause, purpose, con- dition or concession” (Burton, Moods and Tenses, § 428, who renders here: is God unrighteous, who (because He) visiteth with wrath ?). κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγω: cf. Gal. iii. 15, Rom. vi. 1ο, 1 Cor. ix. 8. There is always something apologetic in the use of such expressions. Men forget the difference between God and themselves when they contemplate such a situation as that God should be unrighteous; obviously it is not to be taken seriously. Still, in human lan- guage such suppositions are made, and Paul begs that in his lips they may not be taken for more than they really mean.
Ver. 7 f. These verses are extremely difficult, and are interpreted variously according to the force assigned to the τί ἔτι κἀγὼ of ver. 7. Who or what sup- plies the contrast to this emphatic “I also’? ? Some commentators, Gifford, for instance, find it in God, and God’s interest in the judgment. If my lie sets in relief the truth of God, and so magni- fies His glory, is not that enough ? Why, after God has had this satisfaction from my sin, ‘‘ why further am J also on my side brought to judgment as a sinner?” It is a serious, if not a final objection to this, that it merely repeats the argument of ver. 5, which the Apostle -has already refuted. Its very generality, too—for any man, as Gifford himself says, may thus protest against being judged,—lessens its relevance: for Paul is discussing not human evasions of Ged’s judgment, but Jewish objections to his previous ar- guments. Lipsius finds the contrast to κἀγὼ in the Gentile world. A Jew is the speaker, or at all events the Apostle speaks in the character of one: “if my unbelief does magnify His faithfulness,