486
s=here only ; see
Il.
4. ὃ δὲ Beds, "πλούσιος ὢν 'ἐν] " ἐλέει, διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀγάπην
ἢ. 1.7, 18, αὐτοῦ 2 "ἣν ἠγάπησεν ἡμᾶς, 5. καὶ ὄντας ἡμᾶς ὃ “ νεκροὺς τοῖς
tConstr.,1 αν A Tim. vi. παραπτωµασιν 18; James ana u Rom. ix. 23 al.; Luke i. passim. w Ver. 1. x Col. ii. 13 only {.
4x
1Omit εν Ν.
συνεζωοποίησεν ὃ τῷ χριστῷ (" xdpiti® ἐστε σεσωσ-
ν Ch. i. 7; Luke if. 8; John vii. ag; 1 Tim. i. 18 al. y=Rom. iii. 24, and Paul passim.
ἔαντον om. DFG 73, 118, d, 6, g, Lat. Fathers; insert before αγαπ. 30, 115-20.
ἕημας om. 73, 118, Cyr.-Jer.
4 For τοις παραπτ., ταις αµαρτιαις DE, etc.; εν τ. παραπτ. B, Syr., Copt., al.;
B adds και ταις επιθυµιαις.
δ Insert ev before τω Χριστω Β 17, 73, 118, tol, Copt., Arm., Chr., Dam., Victorin.,
etc.
ὃ Before χαριτι insert ον (=cujus), DEFG, d, e, {, g, Vulg., Victorin., Ambrosiast.,
Aug., etc. ; ov τη D*E.
The AV and other Versions give “ ful- filling”. The word θέλημα is of very rare occurrence, except in biblical and ecclesi- astical Greek. It denotes properly the thing willed, but is used also of the Divine purpose (e.g., Eph. i. 9), or mercy > ἰς Eph. v. 17), etc. Here, as also in ohn i, 13, it denotes inclination or desire. The pl. διανοιῶν is best rendered “thoughts,” with Wycl., Cov., Rhem. and RV margin; RV text, following the AV and other Ver- sions, gives “mind”, In the LXX the
singular represents the OT a, and de-
notes the mind in the large sense, inclusive of understanding, feeling and desiring. It is only the context that gives it the sense of wicked thoughts. Two sources of evil desire and impulse, therefore, are indi- cated here, viz., our fallen nature in general and the laboratory of perverted thoughts, impressions, imaginations, vo- litions, in particular.—at τέκνα φύσει ὀργῆς: and were children by nature of wrath. “Children,” rather than “the children,” as it is given by AV and all the other old English Ver- sions (except Wycl., who has ‘the sons’’). From what he and his fellow- Christians did in their pre-Christian life, Paul turns now to what they were then. The statement is so constructed as to throw the chief emphasis on the ἥμεν and the ὀργῆς. For ἦμεν the better attested form is ἤμεθα. Some good MSS. and Versions (ADGLP, Syr.-Harcl., Vulg.) read φύσει τέκνα, and that order is accepted by Lachmann, while a place is given it in the margin by Tregelles. The order τέκνα φύσει, however, which is that of 9 ΒΚ, Chrys., etc., and both the TR and the RV, is to be preferred. The ἦμεν makes it clear that it is no longer
doing (ποιοῦντες) simply that is in view, but bemg, condition. The τέκνα is the same kind of idiomatic phrase as the former viol, only, if possible, stronger and more significant. It describes those in view as not only worthy of the ὀργή, but actually subject to it, definitely under it. But what is this ὀργή itself? It is not to be identified with punitive righteous- ness (τιμωρία), punishment (κόλασις), future judgment, or the effect of God's present judgment of men, but denotes the quality or affectus of wrath. But is it man's wrath or God's? The word is certainly used of the passion of wrath in us (Eph. iv. 31; Col. iii. 8; Jas. i. το, etc.), and so the whole phrase is under- stood by some to mean nothing more than that those referred to were given to vio- lent anger or ungovernable impulse (¢.g., Maurice, Unity, p. 538). But this would add little or nothing to what was said of the lusts of the flesh and thoughts, and would strip the whole statement of its point, its solemnity, and its universality. It is the Divine wrath that is in view here; as it is, indeed, in thirteen out of twenty occurrences in the Pauline writings, and that, too, whether with or without the definite article or the defining Θεοῦ (cf. Moule, in loc.). This holy displeasure of God with sin is not inconsistent with His love, but is the reaction of that love αν μονος the denial of its sovereign rights of responsive love. The term φύσις, though it may occasionally be applied to what is habitual or to character as de- veloped, means properly what is innate, implanted, in one by nature, and this with different shades of meaning (6/., ¢.¢., Rom. ii. 14; Gal. ii. 15, 1v. 8, εἰς.). The clause means, therefore, that in their pre-Christian life those meant by