not ‘renew yourselves” (Luth.). The verb expresses a eo change, a trans- formation from old to new. hether it
also conveys the idea of restoration toa former or a primal state is doubtful, so many compounds with ἀνά (ἀναπλη- ροῦν, ἀνακοινοῦν, ἀνισοῦν, ἀνιεροῦν, etc.) expressing nothing more than change. For the supposed distinction between
nar δ ἣν
22---24.
, τὸν ° φθειρόμενον κατὰ τὰς “ ἐπιθυμίας] 4 a a lal θαι" δὲ τῷ " πνεύματι τοῦ 5 νοὸς ὑμῶν 24. καὶ ἢ ἐνδύσασθαι ὃ τὸν
343
τῆς "ἀπάτης, 23. Γἀνανεοῦσ- car Cor. ἳ Cor. xi. 4; ude 10.
e Matt. xii. 22, Mark; Col. ii. 8; 2 Thess. ii. 10; Heb. iii. 13; 2 Pet. ii. 13 only,
g Here only; v.=Rom. i. 28, vii. 32,
ἃ Mark iv. το. constr., 2 Pet. ii. 10. f Here only; Job xxxiii. 24. xii. 2 al. h=Rom. xiii. 12, 14; 1 Cor. xv. 53, 54; Col. iii. ro.
Ἰ τὰς επιθυµιας Clem., Orig., Cyr., Hil.,
Tert., Luc., etc.
Aug., Jer., etc. ; την επιθυµιαν DE, d, e,
2 avaveovobe D*, το, 14, 17, 31, 33, 37, εἴς., d, 6, f, g, m, Sah., Copt., Syr., Clem.,
Chr., Cyr., etc.
3 ἐενδυσασθε with much the same authorities as ανανεουσθε,
ἀνανεοῦσθαι as expressing renovation, making new, or giving a fresh begin- ning, and ἀνακαινοῦσθαι as referring to regeneration or change of nature, see Haupt and Ell. im loc., and Meyer on Col. iii. το.---τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ νοὸς ὑμῶν : in the spirit of your mind. ‘The position of the ὑμῶν gives it a measure of em- phasis, ‘‘youry mind,” ‘‘the mind that is in you,” unless it be taken (with Haupt) to be placed last because it qualifies not the vods only but the whole idea in τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ νοός. This diffi- cult sentence has been understood to refer to the Holy Spirit, the vods being dealt with as some form of the poss. gen. or the gen. subj., and the πνεύματι as dat. insty. Thus the sense would be ‘‘renewed by the Holy Spirit bestowed on, or possessed by, your mind” ((ἔς,, Theophy., Bull, Waterland, Fritz., etc.). This proceeds on the NT doctrine that it is by the Spirit of God that we are regenerated or renewed. But it leaves the point of the addition of τοῦ νοός obscure. This ancient interpretation has been adopted by some recent exegetes with certain modifications. Thus Ellicott is of opinion that the πνεύματι refers not to the Holy Spirit distinctly and separ- ately as the Divine Agent, but to that Spirit as united with the human spirit. In this way he thinks the foss. gen. is in point, and the introduction of the νοός accounted for as the receptaculum of the πνεῦμα. But, while it is true that it is often difficult to say whether the re- generated mind of man or the Divine Spirit is particularly in view in the Pauline use of πνεῦμα, there seems to be no case in which the NT speaks of the Holy Spirit as man’s Spirit, or attaches to πνεῦμα in the sense of the Divine Spirit any such defining term as ὑμῶν or τοῦ νοὺς ὑμῶν. Nor can it be said that πνεῦμα, in the sense of the Divine Spirit in union with man’s spirit, has anywhere else any such designation as the one in the text. Nor, again, does
the interpretation which turns upon this idea of union between God’s Spirit and our spirit, and not simply on the indwell- ing of the Divine Spirit in us, really account in any satisfactory way for the vods. It is necessary, therefore, to take πνεῦμα here as = our spirit, and that as
“at once distinguished from and related
to the νοῦς. The πνεῦμα, then, appears to be the higher faculty in man, the faculty that makes him most akin to God, the organ of his spiritual life and his fellowship with God, under the bond- age of sin by nature, but set free from that and made fit for the purposes of the Divine life by the Holy Spirit. The vovs (cf. on ver. 17 above) is the faculty of understanding, feeling, and deter- mining, distinguished by Paul from the πνεῦμα (1 Cor. xiv. 14), represented as capable of approving the law, but incap- able of withstanding the motions of sin (Rom. vii. 23), and itself the subject or seat of renewal (ἀνακαίνωσις, Rom. xii. 2). Further the regenerate human spirit and the Divine Spirit are described as distinct and yet co-operant (Rom. viii. 16). Here then the πνεύματι must be taken not as the instrumental dative (for renewal does not take effect by means of our spirit), but as the dat. of vef., and the νοός will be the gen. subj. Thus the sense becomes ‘renewed in respect of the spirit by which your mind is governed” (Μεγ. that is, in respect of the spiritual faculty, the moral personality whose organ is the mind or reason. Some, holding by the inter- pretation of πνεῦμα as our spirit, take the νοός to be the gen. of appos. (e.g., August., de Trin., xiv., 16, sptritus quae mens vocatur), or the part. gen., = “τῆς governing spirit of your mind” (De Wette). But the above construction is better, and it is the one adopted sub- stantially by the AV and the other old English Versions, the RV, Mey., Haupt, Abb., and most commentators. : Ver. 24. καὶ ἐνδύσασθαι τὸν καιγον