Vv.
h2 Pet. ἢ. " σπίλον ἢ ᾿ ῥυτίδα ἤ τι "τῶν τοιούτων, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ᾗ ἁγία καὶ ' ἄμωμος
13 only;
Jos.,
Antt., 3 με χ
xiii, 11,3. τὰ ἑαυτῶν σώματα. i Here
only; Aristoph., Plut., 1051; Plat., Symp., p. 191 a. m=Luke xvii. 10; John xiii. 14 al.; 1 Cor. xi. 10
1 Ch. i. 4 reff.
28. οὕτως ™ ὀφείλουσιν οἱ ἄνδρες ἀγαπᾷν τὰς ἑαυτῶν γυναῖκας ὡς ὁ ἀγαπῶν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γυναῖκα ἑαυτὸν ἀγαπᾷ ᾿
k gers} 32 al. Paul; 3 John 8.
1 και οἱ ανδρες οφειλονσιν ABDEFG 17, 213, It., Vulg., Syr., Copt., Clem., Jer.,
Aug., Pel. ; Method., Chr., Thdrt., al.
παραστήσῃ is not to be taken here to mean the presenting of the Church as an offering. It is true that the verb is so used in Rom. xii. 1; but the case is different here, in respect both of the ruling idea of the paragraph and of the introduction of ἑαντῷ. It would be incongruous with Paul's teaching to speak of Christ as pre- senting an offering to Himself. The idea, as the context suggests, is that of the bridegroom presenting or setting forth the bride; cf. 2 Cor. xi. 2. The anarthrous ἔνδοξον is a case of tertiary predicate (c/. Buttm., Gram. of N. T. Greek, p. 473). The rendering, therefore, is not ‘‘ present a glorious Church,” but “present the Church, glorious,” i.¢., in the aspect, or character of gloriousness. The presenta- tion in view, which is given here as the final object of Christ's surrendering of Himself to death, and is exhibited (by use of the aor.) as a single def. act, cannot be anything done in the world that now is (as is supposed by Beng., Harl., Hofm., etc.), but must be referred (with Aug., Jer., Riick., De Wette, Bleek, Mey., Ell., Alf. and most) to the future consummation, the event of the Parousia.—ph ἔχουσαν σπῖλον : not having spot. Explanation of what is implied on the negative side in the ἔνδοξον. The neg. μή ἰ5 in place, as the clause refers to the purpose in the mind of Christ. The word σπῖλος = sot, moral blemish, takes the place of the Attic κηλίς in later Greek writers (Dionys., Harl., Plut., Lucian, Joseph., etc.). It occurs only once again inthe NT (2 Pet. ii. 13). The “+” being short in compo- sition (ἄσπῖλος), WH, EIl., Alf., etc., accentuate it σπίλος; Lach., Tisch., Lip- sius, Mey., etc.,retain σπῖλος.---ἢ putida: or wrinkle. The word ῥυτίς occurs only this once in the NT, and is not found in the Apocrypha or in the LXX, but is not infrequent in profane Greek, whether classical (Aristoph., Plato, etc.), or late (Diod., Plut., Lucian, etc.). Attempts have been made (by Aug., Grot., etc.) to establish a distinction between σπίλον and ῥντίδα here, but without success.— ἥ τι τῶν τοιούτων : or any such thing.
κ. οφ. οι ανδρ. Arm.; ονυτως οφειλονσιν οι ανδρες Μ᾿ ΚΙ,, εἴς., Syr.,
The article gives this the force of any- thing belonging to the c/ass of such things as deform and defile.—@AX’ ἵνα ἦ ἁγία καὶ ἄμωμος: but that it should be holy and is see The regular construction would have taken some such form as ἀλλ᾽ οὖσαν, etc. It is changed here, perhaps with a view to bere as if the paragraph had begun with ἵνα μὴ ἔχῃ. Such oratio variata was common in Greek, and there are numerous examples of it in the NT generally (¢.g., Mark xii. 38; John viii. 53; Acts xx. 34, xxii. 17; 1 Pet. ii. 7), and especially in the Pauline writings (Rom. i. 12, iv. 12, xii. 6; 1 Cor. vii, 13, xiv. 1; 2 Cor. xi. 23; Phil. ii. 22). See Jelf, Greek Gram., § 909; Win.- Moult., p. 722; Buttm., Gram. of Ν. Τ. Greck, p. 241. On ἄμωμος see under i. 4 above.
Ver. 28. οὕτως ὀφείλουσιν [καὶ] of ἄνδρες ἀγαπᾷν τὰς ἑαυτῶν γυναῖκας : even so (also) ought husbands to love their own wives, The reading and the order vary somewhat. The ὀφείλουσιν precedes οἱ ἄνδρες in most manuscripts, Ν ΚΙ, 17, εἰς, ; in others (ADGP, etc.) it follows it. Lachm. prefers the latter; TrWHRV the former. The TR, supported by KL, etc., omits καί; which is inserted, how- ever, before οἱ ἄνδρες by BADFG 17, and most Versions, etc. It is accepted by TrRV, and is bracketed by WH. The οὕτως is taken by some (De Wette, etc.) to refer to the following ὡς, =" husbands ought to love their wives just as they love their own bodies”. To this there is no serious grammatical objection ; for οὕτως does not look always to what pr but may refer to what follows (e.g., 1 Cor. iii. ας, οὕτω δὲ ὡς διὰ πυρός ;