296
Il.
e Rom. xii. καταλλάξῃ ' τοὺς ἀμφοτέρους ἐν "ἑνὶ σώματι τῷ θεῷ 3 Σδιὰ τοῦ
5:
al.
bor! x. 17 σταυροῦ, "ἀποκτείνας τὴν " ἔχθραν ἐν αὐτῷ»: 17. καὶ ' ἐλθὼν “edny-
{Col.i.20. Ὑελίσατο ἢ εἰρήνην ὑμῖν 4 τοῖς ' μακρὰν καὶ εἰρήνην ὅ τοῖς "' ἐγγὺς,
g=here only. 1m Ver. 13 reff.
1 αποκαταλλαξει KLP 72, 80, al. Σεν ενι πνευματι προς Tov θεον Thdrt.
h Rom. viii. 7 reff.
i= Matt. ii. 8, 9, 23, iv. 19 al.
k Rom. x. 15 only.
εν eavtw FG 115, Lat.-mss.-in.-Jer., Goth., Arm., Lat. Fathers (not Tert., Jer., al.).
4 vpiv om. 73; ἡμῖν 31, 44, al.g, Eth., Slav.-mss., Thl.-ms. Rec. om. εἰρηνὴν with KL, a Syr., al., Chr. Thdrt., Tert., Eus., Euth., Dam., εἰς. ; insert NABDEFGP 17, 71, 80, It., Vig., Copt., Eth., Arm., Eus., Procop., Cypr., Hil., all.
ὄεσχομεν NI.
ance (cf. Luke ii. 1; Acts xvi. 4, xvii. 7; Col. ii. 14; in Heb. xi. 23 it is a variant for διάταγμα). Hence it cannot have any such sense here as doctrines, evangelical teaching (Theod.), evangelical precepts (Fritz.), the faith (Chrys.). Some taking the ἐν as the instrumental ἐν make it = “having abolished the law by injunc- tions” (Syr., Vulg., Arab., Grot., Beng., etc.). But the NT uniformly speaks of the abrogation of the condemning law as being effected by Christ’s death, never by His teaching, or by evangelical pre- cepts. Another turn is given to the sentence by taking ἐν in the sense of “in respect of,” “on the side of” (Harl.), as if the idea were that the abrogation Οἱ the Law was limited to its mandatory side,—to the orders contained init. But this would require τοῖς before the δόγ- μασιν; nor is it the way of the NT to speak of the Mosaic Law as done away by Christ only on one side.—Tva τοὺς δύο κτίσῃ ἐν ἑαντῷ εἰς ἕνα καινὸν ἄνθρωπον: that He might create in Himself the two into one new man. Statement of the object of the καταργεῖν. The masc. δύο is introduced now, instead of the ἀμφό- τερα, with a view to the ἄνθρωπον. One man was to be made out of the two men. The κτίσῃ is better rendered create with the RV than make with the AV. A new creation is in view. For ἐν ἑαντῷ of the TR (with ΚΙΝ), etc.) αὐτῷ is to be preferred as the reading of Ν ΒΑΕ, etc.
(LTTrRV); WH gives αὑτῷ. In either case the sense is “in Himself"; not “by
it” (Grot.) as if the reference were to Christ's doctrine, nor “ through Himself” as ifit were δι’ αὐτοῦ. The new creation and the new union have their ground and principle im Christ. What was con- templated, too, was not simply the making of one man (ἕνα ἄνθρωπον) where formerly there were two, but the making of one new (καινὸν) man. The result was not
that, though the separation between them was removed, the Jew still remained Jew and the Gentile still Gentile. It was something new, the old distinctions be- tween Jew and Gentile being lost in a third order of ‘“‘man”—the Christian man,—tovwv εἰρήνην : making peace. The cpt is still peace between the estranged Jew and Gentile, and the ποιῶν (pres., not aor.) belongs to the object expressed by the tva. In carrying out that purpose He was to make peace the one with the other.
Ver. 16. καὶ ἀποκαταλλάξῃ τοὺς ἀμ- φοτέρους : and that He might reconcile them both, Further statement of object, the καί continuing and extending it. Only at this point is the prior and larger idea of the reconciliation to God intro- duced, and even now it is in connection with the idea of the reconciliation of Jew - and Gentile. For τοὺς δύο we now have τοὺς ἀμφοτέρους, not “the two” but “both of them together,” unity being the aspect in which they are now pre- sented. The ἄπο- in such compounds has sometimes simply va tas, hou ἀποθ iv, ἀποθαυμάζειν, ἄποκαρα- ο ο... ον. κα though less frequently, the sense of again (ἀποδίδωμι, ἀποκαθίστημι, ἄποκατο θόω, ἀποκαταλαμβάνω). It is doubtful which is the force of the ἄπο- here. In the context, it is true, so far as the rela- tions of Jew and Gentile to each other are dealt with, we have simply the idea of a state of separation into two hostile camps giving place to a state of unity. But in the present clause the larger truth of a reconciliation te God is in view, and this favours the idea of a restoration to a condition which had been lost. The form ἀποκαταλλάσσειν occurs in the NT only here and in Col. i. 20, 21. In the LXX and once in the NT (Matt. v. 24) we have also διαλλάττεσθαι. But