iving us the filial mind, leading us by His Spirit, translating us into the liberty of the glory of His children (Rom. vii. 12, 14, 21; Gal. iv. 6).—«ls αὐτόν: unio Himself, that is, not unto Christ, as De Wette, V. Soden, etc., still think, but unto God. Here, as in ver. 4, we read αὐτοῦ, not αὑτοῦ (as Stephens, Mill, Griesbach, etc., put it), the writer iving it as from his own standpoint. ow is this to be understood? It may mean simply that God Himself is the Father to whom we are brought into filial rela- tion by adoption. In that case the point would be the glory of the adoption, in- asmuch as it is God Himself and none less than He who becomes our Father by it and to whom the foreordination into the position of sons looks. Or it may be the deeper idea that God Himself is the end of the foreordination, as Christ is its medium or channel. The εἰς is not to be confused with év, nor would the idea thus be reduced to that of simple possession. Here the εἰς may rather have its most definite force, ex- pressing the goal of all. The final object of God’s foreordination of us to the standing of sons is to bring us to Himself, into perfect fellowship with Him, into adoring, loving relation to Himself as the true End and Object of our being.—xata τὴν εὐδοκίαν τοῦ θελήματος αὐτοῦ : according to the good pleasure of His will. Wycl. gives “by the
faction (2 Thess, i. 11).