20. ὑπὲρ” Χριστοῦ οὖν ᾿ πρεσβεύομεν, *
a Rom.
73
Eph. νι. 20; Phil. 3 , 3 =z τὰ ο. i. 20. δεόμεθα ὃ * ὑπὲρ τον ᾿ μα τῇ ) ἧ ἧ 20 only. μὴ γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν ὑπὲρ cere 1o;chaps, Viii. 4, Χ. > 2; Gal. i. 17, 111, 5, 21, 22, X. 3; Jas. i. 20; 2 Pet. i. 1 only
1 D*EG, g have (του) εναγγελιου Tov λογον- 2 D*G, d, e, g have ον υπερ Χρ. for υπερ Χρ. ovve
3 D*G, ἆ, e, g have δεοµενοι. 4 D*G, d, e, g and the Harclean margin
give καταλλαγηναι.
5 $cDcEKLP and the Syriac vss. insert yap; better om. yap with *BCD*G 17,
the Latins and Bohairic. ὁ Only a few minuscules give γινωμεθα ;
Χριστοῦ οὖν πρεσβεύομεν κ.τ.λ.: we are ambassadors therefore, sc., because to us 4 has been committed the Ministry of Reconciliation, on behalf of Christ, as Christ’s representative (see on ver. 15 above for the force of ὑπέρ), as though God were entreating by us (cf. vi. 1 and see on i. 4). The construction of ὡς followed by a genitive absolute is found also at 1 Cor. iv. 18, 2 Pet. i. 3.---δεόμεθα ὑπὲρ Xp. κ.τ.λ.:; we beseech you on behalf of Christ, Be ye reconciled to God. The imperative καταλλάγητε is much more emphatic than the infinitive καταλ- λαγῆναι (see crit. note) would be; all through we perceive the Apostle’s anxiety that the Corinthians should turn from the sin which beset them, whatever it might be in any individual case (cf. ii. 16, iv. I, vi. I, xi. 3). Note that the appeal, ‘Be ye reconciled to God,” is based on the fact (ver. 18) that God has already? ‘reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ ”.
Ver. 21. The very purpose of the Atonement was that men should turn from δἱΠ.-- τὸν μὴ γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν κιτιλ.: Him who knew no sin (observe μή rather than ov, as it is not so much the bare fact of Christ’s sinlessness that is emphasised, as God’s knowledge of this fact, which rendered Christ a possible Mediator) He made to be sin on our behalf. Two points are especially deserv- ing of attention here: (i.) That any man should be sinless (cf. Eccl. viii. 5) was an idea quite alien to Jewish thought and belief; and therefore the emphasis given to it by St. Paul, and the absolutely unqualified way in which it is laid down in a letter addressed to a community con- taining not only friends but foes who would eagerly fasten on any doubtful
all the uncials have γενωμεθα.
statement, show that it must have been regarded as axiomatic among Christians at the early date when this Epistle was written. The claim involved in the chal- lenge of Christ, τίς ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐλέγχει pe περὶ ἁμαρτίας (John viii. 46), had never been disproved, and the Apostolic age held that He was χωρὶς aGpaptias... ἀμίαντος, κεχωρισμένος ἀπὸ τῶν ἅμαρ- τωλῶν (Heb. iv. 15, vii. 26), and that ἁμαρτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν (1 John iii. 5; cf. St. Peter’s application of Isa. ΠΠ. ο at 1 Pet. ii. 22). That He was a moral Miracle was certainly part of the primitive Gospel. (ii.) The statement ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν is best understood if we recall the Jewish ritual on the Day of Atone- ment, when the priest was directed to “εἰ place’ the sins of the people upon the head of the scapegoat (Lev. xvi. 21), ἁμαρτία cannot be translated “' sin-offer- ing’’ (as at Lev. iv. 8, 21, 24, 34, v. 0-12), for it cannot have two different meanings in the same clause; and further it is contrasted with δικαιοσύνη, it means ‘sin’? in the abstract. The penalties of sin were laid on Christ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, “on our behalf,” and thus as the Representa- tive of the world’s sin it becomes possible to predicate of Him the strange expression ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν (ποιέω being used here as at John v. 18, villi. 53, x. 33). The nearest parallel in the N.T. is γενό- μενος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν κατάρα (Gal. iii. 13); cf. also Isa. liii. 6, Rom. viii. 3, 1 Pet. 11, 24.—tva ἡμεῖς γενώμεθα κ.τ.λ.: that we might become, sc., as we have be- come (note the force of the aorist), the righteousness of God in Him (cf. Jer. xxiii. 6, 1 Cor. i. 30, Phil. iii. g, and reff.). ‘“‘Such we are in the sight of God the Father, as is the very Son of God Him- self. Let it be counted folly or frenzy or