666
k Here
(and
μα). ο. Mark xill.
or κατάλειμμα |" σωθήσεται ᾿ 28. λόγον γὰρ συντελῶν! καὶ συντέµνων”' ἐν _ δικαιοσύνῃ * ὅτι λόγον συντετμηµένον 3 ποιήσει Κύριος ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς”. 20. Καὶ καθὼς προείρηκεν Ἡσαΐας, “Ei μὴ Κύριος Σαβαὼθ ἐγκατέ-
4; Luke λιπεν ἡμῖν σπέρµα, ὡς Σόδοµα ἂν ἐγενήθημεν, καὶ ὡς Γόμοῤῥα ἂν
ἵνα πα. © m Here only in Ν. Τ.
1 For καταλειµµα (which is the reading of the LXX) DFKLP, read with ΜΙΑ ΕΒ.
υπολειµµα.
2 ev δικαιοσυνη οτι λογον συντετµηµενον Om. NAB 47.
“Western and Syrian”
authorities have the words, in agreement with the LXX. But the yap after the first λογον makes the whole sentence, in this case, untranslatable; and though Weiss and Alford defend the received text, and Treg. brackets the words in question in
marg., most edd. omit them.
Ver. 27 f. From the calling of the Gentiles, as foretold in prophecy, Paul passes now to the partial, but only partial, calling of Israel, as announced by the same authority. The Jews cannot quarrel with the situation in which they find themselves when it answers so exactly to the Word of God. ὑπὲρ is here indistinguishable from περί: it is not a loud intercession on Israel’s be- half, but a solemn declaration concern- ing Israel, that the prophet makes; see Grimm, S.v., i., 5. The quotation in ver. 27 is from Isa. x. 22 f., but the opening words are modified by recollection of Hos. i. το just quoted. The LXX reads καὶ ἐὰν γένηται 6 λαὸς “lopand ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τῆς θαλάσσης, τὸ κατάλειμμα αὐτῶν σωθήσεται. λόγον συντελῶν καὶ συντέµνων [év δικαιοσύνῃ, ὅτι λόγον συντετμημµένον] κύριος ποιήσει ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ ὅλῃ. The words bracketed are omitted by most editors, but the sense is not affected. τὸ ὑπόλειμμα has the emphasis: only the remnant shall be saved. This doctrine Paul apparently finds confirmed by the words λόγον γὰρ συντελῶν Kal συντέµνων ποιήσει κύριος ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. It is doubtful whether any one could assign meaning to these words unless he had an idea beforehand of what they ought to or must mean. Cheyne renders the Hebrew to which they answer, ‘*For a final work and a decisive doth the Lord execute within all the land’’; and there is the same general idea in Sanday and Headlam’s version of Paul: ‘‘For a word, accomplishing and abridging it, that is, a sentence conclusive and concise, will the Lord do upon the earth”. Weiss, who retains the words bracketed, makes λόγον = God’s promise: God fulfils it indeed (συντελῶν), but He at the same time limits or con- tracts it (συντέµνων), {.ε., fulfils it to some of Israel, not to all. This, no doubt, is the sense required, but can any
one say that the words convey it? We should rather say that Paul put his own thought into the words of the LXX, in which a difficult passage of Isaiah was translated almost at haphazard, and in doing so lent them a meaning which they could not be said to have of them- selves.
Ver. 29. But his last quotation is in verbal agreement with the LXX Isa. i. g, and transparently clear. The oméppa or seed which God leaves is the same as the ὑπόλειμμα. The figure is not to be pressed. The remnant is not the germ of a new people; Paul expects Israel as a whole to be restored.
With this the theodicy proper closes. The unbelief of the Jews was a great problem to the Apostolic age, and one which easily led to scepticism concern- ing the Gospel. The chosen people without a part in the kingdom of God —impossible. This chapter is Paul’s attempt to explain this situation as one not involving any unrighteousness or breach of faith on the part of God. It is not necessary to resume the various stages of the argument as they have been elucidated in the notes. The point of greatest difficulty is no doubt that pre- sented by vers. 22 and 23. Many good scholars, Meyer and Lipsius for example, hold that Paul in these verses is not withdrawing from, but carrying through, the argument from God’s absoluteness stated so emphatically in ver. 21. They hold that the σκεύη ὀργῆς κατηρτισµένα. eis ἀπώλειαν would not be σκεύη ὀργῆς at all, if their repentance and amendment were conceivable ; and although God bears long with them—that is, defers their destruction—it is only in order that He may have time and opportunity to manifest the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy. But the answer to this is plain. It assumes that human. life, in its relation to God, can be inter-