the former view of the gen. ap to be preferable. It is suggested that what Paul really expresses then is the fact that the legal system, which was meant primarily to protect the Jewish people against the corruption of heathen idolatry, became the bitter root of Jewish exclusive- ness in relation to the Gentiles. This is to give the φραγμός here the sense of something that fences im or encloses, which it occasionally has (Soph., Gd. Tyr., 1387). But that is a rare sense, and the idea seems to be simpler. It is doubtful, too, whether Paul had in view here any material tition with which he was familiar. It could scarcely be the veil of the Temple that was rent at the Crucifixion; for that veil did not serve to separate the Gentile from the Jew. It might rather be (as Anselm, Bengel, and many more have thought) the wall or screen that divided the court of the Gentiles from the sanctuary proper, and of which Josephus tells us that it bore an inscription forbidding any Gentilefrom penetrating further (Few. Wars, v., 5, 2; vi., 2, 4; Antiq., vill., 3, 2; XV-, IX, 5). But even this is questionable, and all the more so as the wall was still standing at the time when this was written. For the use of λύσας cf. John ii. 19.
14---τῦ,
τῶν " ἐντολῶν ἐν " δόγμασιν " καταργήσας,! ἵνα τοὺς δύο ” κτίσῃ * ἑαυτῷ “eis ἕνα ἢ καινὸν 5 " ἄνθρωπον, “ποιῶν εἰρήνην, 16. καὶ " ἀπο-
only; Dan. vi. 9. z=Here only. see 2 Cor. v.17; Gal. vi. 15.