Ver. 14 is parl. to ver. 136 (‘God ” the agent in both), as ver. 13c to ver. 13a: the previous δὲ contrasted the several natures of Bpdywara and σῶμα; this the Opp. issues, καταργήσει and ἐξεγερεῖ. 6 Κύριος is the determining factor of both contrasts. ‘‘God will abolish both the belly and its foods . . . but God both raised up the Lord, and will raise up us also through His power.” P. substitutes, “us,” in the antithesis, for “our bodies,” since the man, including his body (see xv. 35, 49), is the subject of resurrection. The saying ἀπαρχὴ Χριστός, of xv. 23, supplies the nexus between τ. Κύριον ἤγειρεν and ἡμ. ἐξεγερεῖ; cf. also 2 Cor. iv. 14, Rom. viii. 11, xiv. 9, Col. iii. 1, Phil. iii. 21; John v. 20-30, xiv. 2 ff., etc.
820
n See v. 2.
ο Heb. xi.
“ 31; Jas. it. ψένοιτο ° 25; Rev. x sls Xvii. 1 ff. H σῶ α ἐστιν . Micki ο j
ες”
gif; ἘΚ.Σ7. 6 δὲ Σκολλώμενος τῷ Κυρίῳ Ev πνεῦμά ἐστι.
XV. 30. p Rom. xii.
9; Acts v. 13, etc.; Lk. x. 11, xv. 15; esp. Mt. xix. 5 (Gen. ii. 24). rx.14; 1 Tim. vi. 11; 2 Tim. ii. 22; Sir. xxi. 2.
parenthetic use.
lapa ουν, CP, and several minusce.
16. 1% οὐκ | οἴδατε ὅτι 6 Εσονται yap,”
"Gpas) οὖν τὰ "µέλη τοῦ Χριστοῦ ποιήσω "πόρνης "µέλη; μὴ
Ῥκολλώμενος τῇ "πόρνη ev αΦφησίν, “oi δύο eis σάρκα μίαν" 18. * φεύγετε
q 2 Cor. x. 10; Heb, viii. 5, in
Final σ of αρας easily lost in following ο;
and αρα ουν is plausibly Pauline (G, η αρα ονγ).
The prefix in ἐξ-εγερεῖ is local—out of (sc. the grave; cf. ἐξ-ανάστασις, Phil. iii. 11); not de massa dormientium (Bg.). The raising of Christ (cf. Eph. 1. το Π.), then of Christians, from the dead is the supreme exhibition of God’s supernatural “power ”’ (see Rom. iv. 17-24, Matt. xxii. 29, Acts xxvi. 8, etc.). Christ is raised as “Lord,” and will rule our life yon side of death more completely than on this (Acts ii. 36, Col. i. 18, Phil. iii. 20 f.).
Vv. 15-17 unfold in its repulsiveness, by vivid concrete presentment, the op- position between the two claimants for bodily service already contrasted: the rival of Christ is η πόρνη! ‘Or (if what I have said is not sufficient) do you not know that your bodies are Christ’s limbs ? Should I then take away the limbs of Christ and make them a harlot’s limbs ? . Far be it!”’—Atpw is to remove, carry off, as in v. 2 (see parls.), Wg. tollens, im- plying ‘‘a voluntary and determined act’”’ (Ed.); for the introductory aor. ptp., see Bn., §§ 132, 138. ποιήσω, either (de- liberative) aor. sbj. or fut. ind.—‘ Am I to make, etc.?’’ or, “Am I going to make?’ The former idiom suits an act of choice ; this question the tempted Cor. Christian must put to himself: cf. the interrog. form of Rom. vi. 1, 15 (-ωμεν).
What is true of Christian men in-' dividually, that they are µέλη Χριστοῦ and parts of the σῶμα Χριστοῦ, is true specifically of the physical frame of each ; similarly invv. το f. Paul applies to the Christian man’s body the glorious truth stated respecting the Christian society in il. 16 f. In the Hellenic view, the body was the perishing envelope of the man; in the Scriptural view, it is the abiding vehicle of his spirit. To devote the body to a harlot, one must first with- draw it from Christ’s possession: to do that, and for such a purpose—the bare statement shows the infamy of the pro- posal. The Biblical formula of depreca- tion, μὴ Ὑένοιτο, is frequent also in Epictetus; cf. Odyssey, vii., 316, μὴ τοῦτο φίλον Art πατρὶ γένοιτο.
Ver. 16 justifies the strong expression πόρνης µέλη (15), implying that the alliance is a kind of incorporation: “ Or (if you object to my putting it in this way), do you not know that he who cleaves to the harlot is one body (with her)?” 6 κολλώμενος (see parls.), gui agglutinatur scorto (Bz.), indicates that sexual union constitutes a permanent bond between the parties. What has been done lives, morally, in both; neither is henceforth free of the other. The Divine sentence (uttered prophetically by Adam) which the Ap. quotes to this effect was pronounced upon the first wedded pair, and holds of every such union, whether lawful or unlawful— honourably true (vii. 4, Heb. xiii. 4), or shamefully. In Eph. v. 31 the same Scripture is cited at length, where the Ap. is making out the correspondence between wedlock and Christ’s union with the Church: in that place the spiritual union is treated as parl. to the natural union, where this follows the Divine order ; here it stands out as prohibitory to a natural union which violates that order. Here only Paul uses the parenthetical φησίν (“says He,” sc. God) in citing Scripture ; it is common in Philo, and in the Ep. of Barnabas.—éoovrat . . . ets (Hebraism) = γενήσονται.