Ver. 17. ‘Only, in each case as the Lord has apportioned to him, in each case as God has called him, so let him (the believer) walk.’’ Under this general rule the exceptional and guarded per- mission of divorce in ver. 15 was to be understood. For εἰ μὴ in this exceptive sense (= πλήν), cf. Rom. xiv. 14, Gal. i. © 7, 19; see Bm., p. 359. The repeated distributive ἕκαστος extends the principle pointedly to every situation in life; ο]. vv. 20, 24, iii. 5, 8-13. On µεμµέρικεν,
829
οὕτως ἐν "ταῖς " ἐκκλησίαις πάσαις "διατάσσομαι.ὶ 18. “repute. ὃ Εἱ-, xi. 16,
µηµένος τις "ἐκλήθη; μὴ "ἐπισπάσθω" Σἐκλήθη 7; μὴ περιτεμνέσθω: 19. ἡ ἔπεριτομὴ " οὐδέν ἐστι, καὶ
P.; Κεν. i. 4 ff., xxii. 16; Acts xv. 41, xvi. 5. In this connexion, xvi. 1. d e Η.Ι.; Isa. v.18. See note below.
25-20; often in P.; Jo. vii. 22 f., Acts vii. 8, x. 45, xi. 2.
18; Jo. viii. 54.
1 διδασκω, D*G, latt. vg. (doceo).
TIN BS Nes Xvi. I, 19; 7 times in 2'Cor.'s 5 times be- sides in
fév taxpoBuotia τις”
ο Mid., xi. 34; Tit.i.5; Acts vii. 44, xx. 13, xxiv. 23. Gal. ii. 3, v.2f., vi. 12f.; Col. di. 11; of. Actsyxv. 1, 5, xvi. 3, xxi. 21.
f Rom. iv. 10 ff. ακροβ. freq. in P.; Acts xi. 3. g Rom. ii. h xiii. 2; 2 Cor. xii. rr; Mt. xxiii. 16, %
Cf. iv. 17.
Ἔκεκληται τις: ΝΑΒΡ 17, 37, 46. τις κεκληται: D*G, Dam. (Western). τις εκληθη (as in parl. clause), DcKL, etc. (Syrian).
see ver. 33 and i. 12: the Christian’s secular status is a µέρος which “the Lord,”’ the Disposer of men’s affairs, has assigned him (cf. Matt. xxv. 14 f.).— ὡς κέκληκεν, on the other hand, refers not to the secular ‘‘vocation’’ but, as always (see 15, 18, 21 f., i. 9, 26, etc.), to the ‘‘call”’ of God’s grace in the Gospel, which came to the individual readers under these circumstances or those.— οὕτως περιπατείτω enjoins the pursuance of the Christian life in harmony with the conditions thus determined at its outset. P. does not mean to stereotype a Chris- tian’s secular employment from the time of his conversion, but forbids his re- nouncing this under a false notion of spiritual freedom, or in contempt of secular things as though there were no will of God for him in their disposition.
The last clause of the ver. shows that the tendency here reproved was wide- spread; cf. 1. 2, xi. 16, xiv. 33, 36.
Vv. 18,19. The rule of ver. 17 applied to the most prominent and critical dis- tinction in the Church, that between Few and Gentile: περιτετµηµέγνος τις ἐκλήθη κ.τ.λ.; “ Was any one called (as) a circumcised man? let him not have the mark effaced’”’.—émiowdo@w alludes to a surgical operation (ἐπισπάω, to draw ever) by which renegade Jews effaced the Covenant sign: see 1 Macc. i. 11 Π., Joseph., Ant., xii., 5,1; Celsus, vii., 25. 5; also Schiirer, Hist. of $ewish People, I., i., p. 203, and Wetstein ad loc. Such apostates were called m’shukim, recutiti (Buxtorf’s Lexic., p. 1274).—On the opp. direction to the Gentile, pa περιτεµνέσθω, the Ep. to the Gal. is a powerful com- mentary; here the negative reasons against the change suffice (17, 19).—The variation in tense and order of words in the two questions is noticeable: ‘Was any one a circumcised man at the time of his call (ἐκλήθη)2 ... Has any one been called (κέκληται) though in uncir-
cumcision ?’’—To clinch the matter (cf. i. 31, ili. 7) P. applies one of his great axioms ; “‘Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing; but keeping of God’s commands ”—that is everything. In Gal. v. 6, vi. 15 this maxim reap- pears, with πίστις δι’ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη and καινη κτίσις respectively in the antithesis: this text puts the condition of acceptance objectively, as it lies in a right attitude toward God (cf. Rom. ii. 25 ff.) ; those other texts supply the subjective criterion, lying in a right disposition of the man. In Gal. v., οὐκ ioyver—op- posed to évepyoupevn—signalises the im- potence of external states, the other two passages thgir nothingness as religious qualification$.—‘‘ Those who would con- trast the teaching of St. Paul with that of St. James, or exaggerate his doctrine of justification by faith, should reflect on this τήρησις ἐντολῶν Θεοῦ” (Lt.). Ver. 20. Diff. views are taken of this ver., 45 κλῆσις is referred to the religious call or secular calling of the man; andas ᾗ is accordingly rendered “ wherewith ” (instrum. dat.: cf. Eph. iv. 1, 2 Tim. 1. 9), or ‘‘ wherein ’’ (governed by the foregoing ἐν: cf. 15, 18, 24; see Wr., pp. 524 f.). The latter interpretation is negatived by the fact that it destroys the unity of sense between κλῆσις and ἐκλήθη (see note on 18: does κλῆσις in Gr. anywhere mean avocation ?). Besides,“‘circumcision” and “uncircumcision”’ are not “callings”. Yet P. is manifestly referring to outward conditions affecting the religious call. The stress of the sentence lies on µενέτω (cf. 24); and Gal. iii. 2 f., v. 2-6, give the clue to the Apostle’s meaning. A change of secular condition adopted under the idea that circumcision or uncircumcision is “something,” that it makes a diff. in the eyes of God, would be a change of re- ligious princple, an abandonment of the basis of our call to salvation by gracz: and through faith; cf. Gal. ii. 11-21.