a
13.
resumption we should expect not ἐν ᾧ καί, but ἐν ᾧ καὶ ὑμεῖς. But anacoloutha are quite in Paul’s way, and they are not all of one type or one extension (cf, Win.-Moul., p- 704), and the καί (minus the ὑμεῖς) is appropriate as giving an ascensive force to the πιστεύσαντες. This view of the construction has the advantage also of enabling us to retain substantially the same sense for the év @ in these three occurrences (vv. 11, 13), and it makes the defining participles ἀκούσαντες (with its clause) and πιστεύσαντες important preparations for the statement of privilege in the ἐσφραγίσθητε, each contributing something proper in its own place to the order of ideas. Hence both the first ἐν ᾧ and the second are to be connected with the ἐσφραγίσθητε = “in whom, on hear- ing and believing, ye were sealed’’; it being in Christ, in virtue of our union with Him, that we receive the gift of the Spirit—axovoavres: having heard (or, on hearing). This comes in its proper order, the first in the series of things, preparing the way for the sealing of the Spirit. In the narratives of cases of reception into the Christian Church in the Book of Acts we discover this order of grace: hearing, repentance, baptism, the gift of the Holy Ghost (ii. 37, 38), or hearing, faith, baptism, the gift of the Holy Ghost (viii. 6, 12, 17). Yet this is not an invariable order. Sometimes only hearing, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost (xix. 5, 6) are mentioned; and in such instances as those of Paul (ix. 17) and the men of Czesarea (x. 44-47), the gift of the Holy Ghost appears to have preceded the administration of baptism. On the importance of hearing, that is, access to the preached word, cf. Rom. x. 13-17, where the πιστεύειν is declared to come by the ἀκούειν.-- τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας: the word of the truth. The λόγος here is evidently the word of preaching, and it is said to be “οἵ the truth,” not with any particular reference, as Meyer justly observes, to the OT word as one that dealt with types and shadows rather than realities (Chrys.), or to the word of heathenism as the word of error (Corn, a Lap., etc.), but in the sense in which our Lord Himself spoke of the truth and the word (John xvii. 17; ο Col. τὸ ἘΠ᾿ 2. Lim, 1) το James η, τη). The gen. is not that of apposition (Harl.), but the gen. objecti, ‘the word concern- ing the truth;” or, as Ell. suggests, the gen. of ethical substance or ethical content, ‘‘the word of which the truth is the very essence, or content’’.—7rd εὐαγγέλιον τῆς σωτηρίας ὑμῶν: the