Ver. 7. ἐν ᾧ ἔχομεν τὴν ἀπολύτρω-
254
ow: in whom we have the redemption. Here and in the parallel passage in Col. i. 14 the readings vary between
v and ἔσχομεν. In the present κι ας sd πω... has the sup- port of some good authorities (ΝΕ, Copt., Eth., etc.), the weight of documen- tary evidence is largely on the side of ἔχομεν (BSQSADDEFGKL, Vulg., Syr., Goth., etc.). What is in view, therefore, is something possessed now, and the writer describes that as τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν —‘ the redemption,” i.¢., the redemption familiar to every Christian, long expected and now accomplished. This ἀπολύτρω- σις is viewed sometimes as a thing of the future (Luke xxi. 28; Rom. viii. 23; Eph. iv. 30; and probably also Eph. i, 14; 1 Cor. i. 30); sometimes as a present possession (as here; Rom. iii. 24; οὐ, Ἱ. χὰ; Heb. xx. τῇ, That. the ἀπολύτρωσις here is a redemption not from the power or pollution of sin, but from its guilt, its condemnation, its penalty, is made plain by the defining clause which follows, identifying it with the forgiveness of sins. This is not the only aspect in which it is presented in the Pauline Epistles. The verb λυτροῦσθαι is applied there to a redemption from “all iniquity,” Tit. ii. 14, as in 1 Pet. i. 18 it is used of a redemption from a ‘*vain manner of life’’. ut it is the primary aspect of the word and its cognates, and the one that is at the foundation of the other. The noun ἀπολύτρωσις is of rare occurrence, found only in a few passages in profane Greek (Plut., Pomp., xxiv., 2; J h., Antiq., xii., ii, 3; Diod., Frag., lib. xxxvii., 5, 3 (Dindorf.); Philo, Quod omn. prob. lib. sit., § 17); and in the NT itself only ten times in all. The verb ἀπολντροῦσθαι is not found in the NT at all; the simple λντροῦν, λυτροῦσθαι thrice (1 Pet. i. 18; Luke xxiv. 21; Tit. ii. 14) and the noun λύτρωσις thrice (Luke i. 68, ii. 38; Heb. ix. 12). The proper idea is that of a re- lease, deliverance, or redemption effected by payment of a price or ransom (λύτρον). It is argued indeed that this idea cannot be said to be the essential or primary idea of ἀπολύτρωσις, because it is used in connections in which the notion of a payment is not in view (so Abbott) ; and that, therefore, we are not entitled to say that it means more than deliverance. It is true that, as is the case with most words, the definite, specific sense passes at times into the more general sense of “ deliverance’ (Heb. xi. 35; cf. Exod. τὰν But in profane Greek and in the LXX the primary sense of the verb, the