"έδεστιν, ἀλλ οὐκ ἐγὼ ’ ἐξουσιασθήσομαι ὑπό τινος.
919
b vii. 4; Lk. 3° τὰ XXil. 25;
"Βρώματα τῇ "κοιλίᾳ καὶ ἡ ἁ κοιλία τοῖς "βρώμασιν, ὁ δὲ Θεὸς ο στ ix. ‘ , a x my = Β καὶ "ταύτην καὶ "ταῦτα ΄ καταργήσει΄ τὸ δὲ σῶμα οὐ τῇ 5 πορνεία, 51 Tim. iv.
’
Heb.
ἀλλὰ τῷ Κυρίῳ καὶ 6 Κύριος τῷ σώματι’ 14. 6 δὲ Θεὸς καὶ τὸν ἵχ.το, xiii.
Κύριον » ἤγειρεν, καὶ ἡμᾶς 1 | ἐξεγερεῖ] διὰ τῆς δυνάµεως αὐτοῦ. 15. οὐκ | οἴδατε ὅτι τὰ σώματα ὑμῶν Σ " µέλη Χριστοῦ ἐστιν ;
Phil. iii. 19; Mt. xv. 17; Rev. x. gf.
ii.8; Heb: xi. 19; 1 Pet. i. 21, etc. 1 See iii. 16, vi. 2.
e For repetition, cf. vii. 7. h xv. 4 ff., 2 Cor. i. 9, iv. 14, v.15; Rom. passim; Gal. i. 1; i i Rom. ix. 17 (Exod. ix. 16), in diff. sense. m In like sense, xii. 12 ff.; Rom. xii. 4 f.; Eph. iv. 16, 25, v. 30.
9; Mt. xiv. 15; Mk. Vii. 19; Lk. ili. 11, d In this sense, f See i. 28. g See γ. 1. Eph. i. 20; Col. ii. 12; 1 Th.i. 10; 2 Tim. k See i. 18.
1 εξεγερει, NCD®KL, etc., syrr., cop., many Ff. ; εξεγειρει, αρ POL37. εξηγειρεν (2), B 6733 (a group preserving some valuable readings), cod. amiatinus
of vg. ; W.H. marg. ημων, ΝΔ.
ἐλευθερίας in Arr.-Epict., IV., i. For the play on ἔξεστιν, cf. ii. 15. The em-
phatic οὐκ ἐγὼ is the jealous self-assertion _
of the spiritual freeman, fearful of falling again under the dominion of the flesh: ο ite 26,1£.y¢ Gal. V.) α3. 16.
Ver. 13. The maxim “All things are lawful to me’ has been guarded within its province; now it must be limited to its province: ‘‘ Foods (are) for the belly, and the belly for its foods’”.—ra βρώ- para, the different kinds of food—about which Jewish law, ascetic practice (Rom. xiv. τ Π.), and the supposed defilement of the tdolothvta (viii., x. 25 ff.) caused many embarrassments. The Ap., adopt- ing the profound principle of Jesus (Mark vii. 15-23), cuts through these knotty questions at a stroke: the βρώματα are morally indifferent; for they belong to the κοιλία, not the καρδία (cf. Rom. xiv. 17). Food and the stomach are appro- priated to each other; the main question about the former is whether or no it suits the latter—A second reason for the moral indifference of matters of the table lies in their perishing nature ; κοιλία and βρώματα play a large and troublesome part in the existing order, “‘ but God will abolish both this and these”. For the somewhat rare antithetic repetition of otros, cf. vii. 7, also Josh. viii. 22 (LXX). The nutritive system forms no part of the permanent self; it belongs to the passing σχμα τ. κόσμου τούτον (vii. 31), to the constitution of “flesh and blood” (xv. 50) and the capa ψυχικόν; hence the indifference of foods (viii. 8): ‘‘quz destruentur, per se liberum habent usum” (Bg.; cf. Col. ii. 20 f.).—‘ But the body”’ has relations more vital and influential than those concerned with its perishing sustenance—it ‘‘is not for for-
Beza and Elzevir read νµας, with no certain MS. authority.
nication, put for the Lord and the Lord for the body’: the same double dat. clause of mutual appropriation links τὸ σῶμα with 6 Κύριος as τὰ Bpouara with ἡ κοιλία; each is made for the other and requires the other. ‘The body ”—re- garded as a whole, in contrast with its temporary apparatus—is fashioned for the Lord’s use; to yield it to harletry is to traverse Christ’s rights in it ana dis- qualify oneself for a part in His resurrec- tion (14). The Lord Jesus and πορνεία contested for the bodies of Christian men; loyal to Him they must renounce that, yielding to that they renounce Him. In Gr. philosophical ethics the distinc- tion drawn in this ver. had no place; the two appetites concerned were treated on the same footing, as matters of physical function, the higher ethical considera- tions attaching to sexual passion being ignored. Hence the degradation of woman and the decay of family life, which brought Greek civilisation to a shameful end.