Ver. 7 puts the question under three figures—vyirtual arguments from nature— drawn from the camp, the vineyard, the flock. These figures had been similarly used by our Lord: (1) in Luke xi. 21 f., xiv. 31; (2) in Matt. xx. 1 Π., xxi. 28 ff.; (3) in Luke xii. 32, John x., and xxi. 15 ff. Cf.in Paul for (1) xiv. 8, Eph. vi. το: τ' Thess: ν.δ; (2) it. 6 Ἡ.ς 8) Acts xx. 28, Eph. iv. 11. On ὀψωνίοις, see Gm.: it denotes primarily “rations ” served out in lieu of pay; then military “stipends” of any kind; then “‘ wages” generally; see parls.—t8los ὀψων., not
§438
w See iii 3.7 ποίµνην καὶ ἐκ τοῦ γάλακτος τῆς ᾿ ποίµνης οὐκ ἐσθίει; 8. μὴ
Χ η Kat, XVI. 6(?); 2 Cor. i. 13;
"kata “dvOpwrov ταῦτα λαλῶ,] *% obxt? "καὶ ὁ νόμος ταῦτα
Rom. ii. λέγει ”; 9, ἐν γὰρ τῷ Μωσέως ὃ νόμῳ γέγραπται," “Od ” φιµώσεις ®
a ie χι, ff itf., xviii. oy.:2 a . ~ ae βοῦν * ἁλοῶντα μὴ terrog. as here, Rom. iv. ο; Lk. xii. 41. Mt. xxii. 12, 34; Mk. i. 25, etc. 1 Chron. xxi. 20. c See vii. 36.
Ὀπάντως λέγει; δι ἡμᾶς yap ἐγράφη, ὅτι
"τῶν Body "μέλει τῷ Θεῷ, 10. ἢ δι ἡμᾶς
4 ἐπ᾽ 3 ἐλπίδι ὃ © ὀφείλει ®
Υ κηµωσεις, if genuine, h.l. Φιµωσεις. Deut. xxv. 4; so 1 Tim. v. 18; 1 Pet. ii.15; See txtl. and exegetical notes. a See vii.21. With gen., N.T.A.1.; usually περι, Mt. xxii. 16, etc. d Rom. iv. 18, v. 2, viii. 20; Tit. i. 2; Acts ii. 26 (Psa. xvi. 9), xxvi. 6.
Ζ1 Tim. v. 18 (Deut. xxv. 4); b See v. 10.
1 λεγω, DG—characteristic Western alteration.
24 και ο νοµοςταυτα ov λεγει; NRABCD 46.
η ει και ο νομος ταυτα Άεγει ; G, arm.
Τ.Ε. απ. ΚΤ.Ε, είο.
ΣΜωῦσεως: all απος. but A. So passim. 4 γεγραπται yap (om. rest of clause): DG, Hil., etc.—Western emendation. γΕΥΡ γαρ
ὅκημωσεις (2), B*D*G, Chr., Thdrt., Cyr. See note 3 on last p.; on the other hand, «np. is 4./., and ip. might
marg. easily be borrowed from Deut. φιμωσεις, NAB*CDbcKLP, etc.
So Tisch., Tr., Al., El., Nestle, W.H.
So Lachm., W.H. ἐχί., and R.V.
ὄδοφειλει em ελπιδι (in this order): pre-Syrian non-Western uncc.
“at his proper pay,” but “at his private (as distinguished from public) charges”’: cf. xi. 21, Gal. ii. 2. The use of ποτὲ to widen negative, interr. (virtually nega- tive), and hypothetical propositions, com- mon in cl. Greek, is infrequent in N.T. —lIn the third question, a partitive ἐκ with gen. replaces the acc., the image sug- gesting a share: ‘the shepherd is still remunerated in the East by a share of the milk” (Mr.); or is P. thinking of the solid food (ἐσθίει) which comes “out of the milk”? For the cognate acc., ποι- µαίνει ποίµνην, cf. 1 Peter v. 2, also John x. 16.
Vv. 8-104. μὴ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον κ.τ.λ.; “Am I saying these things as any man might do”—in accordance with human practice (as just seen in 7) ἕ--κατὰ ἄνθρ., in contrast with what 6 vépos λέγει; cf. Gal. iii. 15 ff. This dialectic use of py, ἢ or ἢ καί, in a train of questions, is very Pauline ; ἢ καὶ recommends the second alternative; cf. Rom. iv. 9, Luke xii. 41. —‘ The law” is abolished as a means of obtaining salvation (Rom iii. το ff., etc.) ; it remains a revelation of truth and right (Rom. vii. 12 ff.), and P. draws from it guidance for Christian conduct; cf. xiv. 34, Rom. xiii. 8 Π., and (comprehensively) Rom. viii. 4. The ethics of the N.T. are those of the Old, enhanced by Christ (see Matt. v. 17 ff.). Paul speaks however here, somewhat distantly, of the “law of Moses” (cf. vv. 20 f., x. 2); but of “the law of Christ” in Gal. vi. 2 (ef. John i. 17, Vili. 17, κ. 34, Xv. 25).—OU φιμώσεις κ.τλ., “Thou shalt not muzzle a thresh-