‘expresses the process, the latter the re-
sult.—év ᾧ may refer either to Xp. or to Baw. The former view is taken by Chry- sostom (followed by Luther, Meyer and many others). The latter is taken by Calvin and most recent commentators (De W., Hofm., Alf., Ell., Lightf., ΚΙ., Sod., Haupt, Abb.). In favour of the former it is urged that the parallelism with ἐν ᾧ καὶ περιετμ. requires it. But the real parallel is with ‘buried with Him in baptism,” and this requires “raised with Him in baptism”. Since baptism is not the mere plunging into the water, but emersion from it too, ἐν is not against this interpretation,
526
αν.
* Not οἴαϑε. τῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ἐγείραντος αὐτὸν ἐκ τῶν] νεκρῶν" 13. καὶ
only Pa in N.T., exc. Acts
ὑμᾶς νεκροὺς ὄντας τοῖς παραπτώµασιν " καὶ τῇ " ἀκροβυστίᾳ τῆς
1 Oni here σαρκὸς ὑμῶν | συνεζωοποίησεν ὑμᾶς ὃ σὺν αὐτῷ, χαρισάμενος ἡμῖν
Eph. ii. 5 (par.) in class. or Bib. Gk.
1 So Ln., Tr. [Lft.], R.V., Ws. with BDEFG 17. των: omitted by T., W.H. with ΝΑΟΚΙ.Ρ, in conformity with more common usage.
2So T., Tr., W.H., Ws. with BL 17.
s2ACDEFGEP.
εν τοις παραπτωµασιν: Ln. with
3So edd. with N*ACKL. νµας: omitted by ΜΕΒΕΕΩΡ, to avoid repetition. ηµας: W.H. mg. with B 17, 37, under influence of ἡμιν.
and διά or ἐξ is not necessary to ex- press it.—ovvnyépOnre expresses the positive side of the experience. That death with Christ, which is the putting off of the body of flesh, has for its counterpart the putting on of Christ (Gal. iii. 27), which is followed by a walk with Him in newness of life. It is true that our complete redemption is attained only in the resurrection of the body (Rom. viit. 23, 2 Cor. v. 2-4). Butthereis clearly no reference here to the bodily resurrection at the last day, as some have thought; for that is altogether excluded by the whole tenor of the passage, which refers to an experience already complete. Nor can we, with Meyer, think of the bodily resurrection as already ideally accom- plished in baptism. For the preceding context 8 only of a spiritual experi- ence, and it is impossible to pass thus violently to one that is physical. Haupt agrees with this, but thinks the reference is not ethical, but religious, that is forensic. The rest of the passage, he argues, shows that it is not moral trans- formation, but justification, that Paul has in mind. But however true this may be
ergs + + + στανρῷ, it is at least questionable for the immediately suc- ceeding context. And since the union covers both ethical renewal and justifica- tion, it is natural to find both mentioned in connexion with it, and to hold fast the former here as the more natural interpre- tation of the words.—&a τῆς πίστεως τῆς ἐνεργείας : “through faith in the working”. Klépper (following Luth., Beng., De W. and others) makes τῆς ἐνερ. genitive of cause, “ faith produced by the working’. He argues that it is strange that in the experience already referred to the faith which proves itself in baptism must be thought of as directed towards the Person of Christ, and so cannot now be spoker of as faith in the working of
God ; and further, that the whole context has referred to a passive experience, and so this is fitly continued by the assertion that even the faith, which appropriates the death and resurrection of Christ, is the creation of God. But these argu- ments are insufficient to overthrow the force of Pauline usage, according to which elsewhere the genitive after πίστις, un- less it refers to the person who believes, expresses the object of faith. The view of Hofmann that τ. ἐνερ. is a genitive of apposition, and that whatis meant is “ faith, that is the working of God,” is je out of the question. For faith irected towards the working of God who raised Christ from the dead, ¢f. Rom. iv. 24. God is so characteri since the working by which He raised Christ will also be effective in our own spiritual experience. Our baptism is therefore not a sign of nothing, but of a real spiritual burial and resurrection with Christ.