886
KN.T. hd.
; 3 ο) , 1 5 ay > S bos bh , ε , k , } : Chron. εἰπειν Κύριον * Ἰησούῦν” εἰ py "ἐν ' Πνεύματι Ἁγιῳ. 4. διαιρέσεις
XXVi. I; 2 Chron. Vili. 14; Ezra vi.
VE: , = δὲ ᾿Χαρισµάτων εἰσί, τὸ δὲ αὐτὸ Πνεῦμα: 5. καὶ * διαιρέσεις ™ δια-
, > , κονίων εἰσί, καὶ 6 αὐτὸς Κύριος: 6. καὶ * διαρέσεις ” ἐνεργημάτων
8 οφ A / 2 a a 18; -ρειν, εἶσίν, 6 δὲ 2 αὐτός 2 ἐστι ὃ Θεὸς 6 3 ἐνεργῶν } τὰ Ρὰ πάντα 3 ἐν 4 πᾶσιν.
ver. II. 1Seei.7. _ ; ΕΙ. only in this ch., Rom. xi. 29, xii. 6.
q xv. 28; Eph. i. 23; Col. iii. 11.
! h. m Pl, hl. ; Heb. i. 14; Rev. ii. το; 8 times in Acts; also Lk. x. 4ο. n Η.]. 5; Gal. il. 8, ili. 5, ν. 6; 8 times more in P.; also Jas. v.16; Mt. xiv. 2; Mk. vi. 14.
Xvi. 15, 2 Cor. passim, eight times more in P.; o 2 Cor. 1.6, iv. 12; Rom. vii. p See viii. 6.
‘Kuptos Inoovs: SABC, 17, 46, 67**, 73, vg. syrsch.
Κυριον Inoovv: DGKLP, etc.
autos δε: DG.
See note below. 2 «at ο αυτος (?): BC, 37, 46; W.H. tzt.
ο Se avros: ΝΑΚΙ.Ρ, vg. εντ. ασ.
°Om. εστι S*ACDGP, vg. Add after αυτος ΜΕΚΙ,, etc. ; after ενεργων, B.
Tim. ii. 26, Matt. xii. 29. With this agrees the qualifying ὡς ἂν ἤγεσθε (not ἀνήγεσθε, as Hf. and Hn. read; this gives an irrelevant sense—‘‘led up,” “led in sacrifice”), indicating the un- certainty and caprice of the directing powers—“‘ pro nutu ducentium”’ (Est.). For the right sort of ἄγεσθαι, see Rom. viii. 14, Gal. v. 18.—On the εἴδωλα, cf. viii. 4; the voicelessness of the idol is part of its nothingness (cf. Ps. cxv. 4-7, etc.); the Pagans were led by no in- telligent, conscious guidance, but by an occult power behind the idol (x. το ff.). Ver. 3. Their old experience of the spells of heathenism had not prepared the Cor. to understand the workings of God’s Spirit and the notes of His pres- ence. On this subject they had asked (r), and P. now gives instruction: “' Where- fore I inform you”. They knew how men could be ‘carried away ’’ by super- natural influences; they wanted a criterion for distinguishing those truly Divine. The test P. supplies is that of loyalty to Fesus Christ. ‘No one speaking in the Spirit of God says ΑΝΑΘΕΜΑ ΙΗΣΟΥΣ, and no one can say KYPIOZ ΙΗΣΟΥΣ except in the Holy Spirit.” $esus is anathema, Fesus is Lord, are the battle- cries of the spirits of error and of truth contending at Cor. The second watch- word is obvious, its inclusiveness is the point of interest; it certificates all true Christians, with whatever διαιρέσεις χαρισµάτων (4 Π.), as possessors of the Holy Spirit, since He inspires the con- fession of their Master’s name which makes them such (see i. 2, Rom. x. 9, Phil. ii. 11, etc.). Not a mystical “tongue,” out the clear intelligent confession “ Jesus is Lord” marks out the genuine πνευµα- τικός; cf. the parl. cry ᾿Αββᾶ 6 πατήρ, of Gal. iv. 6. “He shall glorify Me,” said
Jesus (John xvi. 14) of the coming Spirit: this is the infallible proof of His indwelling.—But who were those who might say at Cor., “ Jesus is anathema”? Faciebant gentes, says Bg., sed magis Fud@i. *Avdepa (see paris.) is Hebra- istic in Biblical use, denoting that which is cherem, vowed to God for destruction as under His curse, like Achan in Joshua’s camp. So the High Priest and the Jewish people treated Jesus (John xi. 49 f., Gal. iii. 13), using perhaps these very words of execration (¢f. Heb. vi. 6), which Saul of Tarsus himself had doubtless uttered in blaspheming the Nazarene (1 Tim. i. 13); this cry, so apt to Jewish lips, resounded in the Syna- gogue in response to apostolic preaching. Christian assemblies, in the midst of their praises of the Lord Jesus, would some- times be startled by a fierce Jew scream- ing out like a man possessed, “ Jesus is anathema!”—for unbelievers on some occasions had access to Christian meet- ings (xiv. 24). Such frenzied shouts, heard in moments of devotion, affected susceptible natures as with the pres- ence of an unearthly power; hence the contrast which Paul draws. This watch- word of hostile Jews would be taken up by the Gentile mobs which they roused against the Nazarenes; see Acts xiii. 45, xviii. 6, where βλασφημοῦντες may well include λέγοντες ᾿Ανάθεµα ᾿Ιησοῦς. Gd., ad loc., and W. F. Slater (Fatth and Life of the Early Church, pp. 348 f.) suppose both cries to originate in the Church; they ascribe the anathema to heretics re- sembling Cerinthus and the Ophites, who separated Fesus from Christ (cf. t John ii. 18 ff., iv. 1-6); but this identification is foreign to the situation and context, and is surely an anachronism.—The dis- tinction between λαλέω and λέγω is well