24—26.
f , 4 N a eer > ᾳ α Pe Μ. κ τα. 26. "Βλέπετε γὰρ τὴν “κλῆσιν ὑμῶν, ἀδελφοί, ὅτι “od " πολλοὶ *% 155 Rev
ΔΝ σοφοὶ ‘kata | σάρκα,
etc. 1, 19. XXV. 5.
h iv. 15; Acts i. 5, xxvii. 14.
working in the times of preparation (20), is thus at length brought to human recog- nition in Christ. On κλητοῖς see note to ver. 2: this term is preferable to ot σωζόμενοι, or ot πιστεύοντες, where the stress rests upon God’s initiative in the work of individual salvation; cf. vv. 9, 26, Rom. viii. 28 ff.
Ver. 25. What has been proved in point of fact, viz., the stultification by the cross of man’s wisdom, the Ap. (as in Rom. iii. 30, xi. 29, Gal. ii. 6) grounds upon an axiomatic religious principle, that of the absolute superiority of the Divine to the human. That God should thus confound the world one might ex- pect: “because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men”. Granted that the λόγος τ. σταυροῦ is folly and weakness, it is God’s folly, God’s weak- ness: will men dare to match themselves with that? (cf. Rom. ix. 20).—rTd µωρόν (not pwpta as before), τὸ ἀσθενές are concrete terms—the foolish, weak policy of God (cf. τὸ χρηστόν, Rom. ii. 4), the folly and weakness embodied in the cross.—ioyxvpds (ἰσχύς) implies intrinsic strength; δύναμις is ability, as relative to the task in view.
§ 5. THE OBJECTS OF THE GOSPEL CALL, i. 26-31. § 4 has shown that the Gospel does not come ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου (17b) by the method of its operation; this will further be evidenced by the status of its recipients. If it were, humanly speak- ing, a σοφία, it would have addressed itself to σοφοί, and won their adherence ; but the case is far otherwise.
Ver. 26. Βλέπετε γὰρ τὴν κλῆσιν ὑμῶν, ἀδελφοί,---'' For look at your call- ing, brothers”: God has called you into the fellowship of His Son (ο); if His Gospel had been a grand philosophy, would He have addressed it to fools, weaklings, base-born, like most of you? P.’s experience in this respect resembled his Master’s (Matt. xi. 25, John vii. 47-49, Acts iv. 13). This argument cuts two ways: it lowers the conceit of the readers (cf. vi. 9-11, and the scathing irony of iv. 7-13), while it discloses the true mission of the Gospel. On κλῆσιν see the note to κλητοῖς (2), also on vii. 20; it signifies not one’s temporal voca-
"od ®oddot “Suvarot, "od " πολλοὶ εὐγενεῖς
Impv. otherwise in 11, 1ο,
g vii. 20; Rom. xi. 29; Eph. iv. 1,4; Ph. iii, 14; 2 ΤΗ. i. 11; 2 Tim. i. 9; Heb. iii, τ; 2 Pet. ς i x. 18; 17 times besides in Ῥ.; cf. Jo. viii. 15, 1 Lk. xix, 12; Acts xvii. 11 (another sense) only; Job i. 3; 2 Macc, x. 13.
k Acts
tion in the order of Providence, but one’s summons to enter the kingdom of Grace; ἡμῶν is objective gen. For τ. κλῆσιν ὅτι, see note on ὅτι, ver. 5.— οὐ πολλοί (thrice repeated) suggests at least a few of each class amongst the readers: see Introd., p. 730.—ov πολλοὶ σοφοί: “ hinc Athenis numero tam exiguo lucrifacti sunt homines’’ (Bg.).—codot is qualified by κατὰ σάρκα (see parls., and cf. σοφία σαρκική, 2 Cor. i. 12), in view of the distinction worked out in § 4 between the world’s and God’s wisdom: the contrast implied resembles that be- tween ἡ κατὰ Θεὸν λύπη and ἡ τοῦ κόσμου λύπη in 2 Cor. vii. 9 ff. The “wise after the flesh’ include not only philosophers (20), “‘ but educated men in general, the πεπαιδευµένοι as opposed to the ἰδιῶται. The δυνατοὶ were men of rank and political influence, opp. to δῆμος. The evyeveis meant, in the aristocratic ages of Greece, men of high descent ;” but in later degenerate times “men whose ancestors were virtuous and wealthy, the honesti as opposed to the humiliores of the Empire. Few in- tellectual men, few politicians, few of the better class of free citizens embraced Christianity ’’ (Ed.). In a Roman colony and capital, the evyevets would chiefly be men of hereditary citizenship, like P. himself; the δυνατοί, persons asso- ciated with Government and in a posi- tion to influence affairs; the former word is applied in an ethical sense to the Bercean Jews in Acts xvii. 11. “That the majority of the first converts from heathenism were either slaves or freedmen, appears from their names” (Lt.); the inscriptions of the Cata- combs confirm this. The low social status of the early Christians was the standing reproach of hostile critics, and the boast of Apologists: see the famous passage in Tacitus’ Annals, xv., 44; Justin M., Apol., ii., 9; Origen, contra Celsum, ii., 79; Minuc. Felix, vit, 12 (indocti, impoliti, rudes, agrestes). As time went on and Christianity pene- trated the higher ranks of society, these words became less strictly true: see Pliny’s Ep. ad Trajanum, x., 97, and the cases of Flavius Clemens and Domitilla, cousins of the emperor Domitian (Ed.).