iCh.iirs ὅ καινὸν ᾿ ἄνθρωπον τὸν κατὰ θεὸν | κτισθέντα ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ
reff. δ κα Cor. vii.™ ὁσιότητι τῆς ἀληθείας.
9, 10, 11 only ; see note. 1 Ch. ii. 10 reff.
m Luke i. 75 only; Deut. ix. 5 al.
1 For της αλ., και αληθεια DFG, d, e, g, πι, Cyr., Hil., Lucif.
ἄνθρωπον: and put on the new man. For ἐνδύσασθαι the imper. ἐνδύσασθε is read by some authorities of consequence (NKB'D*, εἰς). The aor. is appro- priately used again, as before in ver. 22; ‘putting off’ and ‘putting on” being acts, while renewal (ἀνανεοῦσθαι) is a process. For καινὸς ἄνθρωπος see on li. 15 above.—rtdv κατὰ Θεὸν κτισθέντα: which after God was created. The aor. κτισθέντα suggests that the ‘new man” is regarded here not as a nature created anew for the individual, but as “ the holy form of human life which results from re- demption,” created once for all in and by Christ, and participated in by the indi- vidual convert. (See Ell., in loc., and Miller, Christ. Doctr. of Sin, ii., p. 392). The phrase κατὰ Θεόν has sometimes the simple sense of ‘godly,’ “in a godly manner” (2 Cor. vii. 9, 10, 11). Hence it is held by some to mean nothing more here than created “ divinely” (Hofm.) or “according to the will of God"’ (Abb.). But κατά is also used to express likeness (1 Kings xi. 10; Heb. viii. 8; Gal. iv. 28; 1 Pet. i. 15, iv. 6). Here, therefore, it may mean “like God" or “after the image of God", That this is the sense is confirmed by the use of κτισθέντα (which recalls Gen. i. 27), and by the fuller parallel statement in Col. ii. 10: τὸν veov, τὸν ἀνακαινούμενον εἰς ἐπίγ- νωσιν Kat’ εἰκόνα τοῦ κτίσαντος αὐτόν. The clause, therefore, affirms a new creation of man, and describes that crea- tion as being according to the image or likeness of God. It neither states nor suggests, however, that the image of God in which man was first created was lost and has been restored in Christ. What it does state is simply that this second creation, like the first, was in conformity with the Divine likeness or after the ex- ample of what God is.—év δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ ὁσιότητι τῆς ἀληθείας: in righteousness and holiness of the truth. For τῆς ἀληθείας some few authorities give καὶ ἀληθείᾳ (D'G, Cypr., Hil., εἰς). This clause specifies the things in which the new man was created and in which the likeness between him and God con- sisted. ἐν, therefora denotes the quality or ethical condition in which the creation
realised itself. δικαιοσύνη and ὁσιότης
are coupled again in Luke i. 75 (cf. also Wisd. ix. 3; Clem. Rom., First Corin- thians, xlviii., 4). Plato distinguishes in two ways between the idea of δίκαιος and that of ὅσιος. He defines δίκαιος as the generic term and ὅσιος as the specific (Euthyp., p. 12 Ε); and he de- scribes the former as having regard to our relations to men, the latter to our relations to God (Gorg., p. 507 B). The latter distinction is also given by other Greek writers (Polyb., xxiii., το, 8, etc.), It is not easy, indeed, to say how far this distinction holds good in the NT. But both in profane and in biblical Greek the two words, adjective, adverb or noun, are often combined in one statement (e.g., Plato, Protag., 329 ο; Theaet., 176 B; Rep., x., 615 8; Laws, ii., 663 B; Joseph., Antiq., viii., 9, 1; Luke i. 75; 1 Thess. ii. 10; Titus i. 8). In many of these cases the distinction between integrity and piety is certain, and it is suitable to all. The NT alsoclearly distinguishes be- tween δίκαιος and εὐλαβής (Luke ii. 25). It may be said, therefore, that δικ ύ and ὁσιότης are not used vaguely or interchangeably, but that, while both are of grace and both consequently have a new meaning Godward, the former ex- presses the right conduct of the Christian man more distinctively in its bearings on his fellow-men, and the latter the same conduct distinctively in its relation to God. τῆς ἀληθείας is not to be reduced to ‘true holiness” as in AV, but is to be taken as the gen. of origin and as quali- fying both nouns. Further, ἀλήθεια with the article, contrasting with τῆς ἀπάτης of ver. 22, seems to be more than Truth in the abstract or a quasi-personification of Truth. It may mean “ the truth” par excellence, the evangelical message, the objective truth given in the Gospel (4 ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίον, Gal. ii. 5, 14; or simply, as here, ἡ ἀλήθεια, John viii. 32, 40, xvii. 19; Gal. v. 7; 2 Cor. iv, 2, xiii. 8, etc.). The creation of the new man in the Divine likeness realises itself, therefore, in something better than the ceremonial rectitude of the Jew or the self-contained virtue of the heathen—in a righteousnes and a holiness born of the new truth contained in the Evangel.