4.5.
20. εἰ ὀπεθάνετε σὺν Χριστῷ ἀπὸ τῶν
στοιχείων τοῦ κόσμου, τί ὡς ζῶντες ἐν κόσμῳ ° δογματίζεσθε,
“fly in the air with nothing to rest upon” may have suggested the phrase to Paul. This emendation is accepted by West- cott and Hort, and regarded as the most probable by Zahn, who says that the text as it stands yields no sense. It in- volves the omission of a single letter, and although the province of conjectural emendation in the New Testament is very restricted, yet such a slip as is sug- gested may very easily have been made by Paul’s amanuensis or a very early copyist. Field urges as a fatal objection that ““κενεμβατεύων is a vox nulla, the inviolable laws regulating this class of composite verbs stamping κενεμβατεῖν as the only legitimate, as it is the only exist- ing, form” (loc. cit., p. 198). Lightfoot, on the contrary, asserts that it is unobjec- tionable in itself. Even if Field’s criti- cism be admitted, it would be better to read ἀέρα κενεμβατῶν than to retain the text. If the emendation is correct, Paul is asserting the baseless character of the faise teaching ; and all reference to visions disappears. —eixq should probably, in accordance with Pauline usage, be con- nected with the following rather than the preceding words. It may mean “ ground- lessly’? (Mey., Alf., Ell., Ol., Haupt, Abb.) or “without result” (Sod. and others). The latter is the sense in Gal. ii. αν τν. τη τ Cor. xv. 2, Rom: xiii. 4; but, since it does not suit φυσ., the former is to be preferred here.—qvorovpevos : cf. 1 Cor. viii. 1 yv@ous φυσιοῖ, xiii. 4. They were puffed up by a sense of spiritual and intellectual superiority.— ὑπὸ τοῦ νοὸς τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ: “ by the mind of his flesh”. The mind in this case is regarded as dominated by the flesh. Soden, followed by Abbott, says that the vots as a natural faculty is ethically indifferent in itself, and so may stand just as well under the influence of σάρξ as of πνεῦμα. But in the most important passage, Rom. vii. 22-25, it is the higher nature in the unregenerate which wages unsuccessful conflict with the σάρξ. At the same time we see from Eph. iv. 17 that it could become vain and aimless and even (Rom. i, 28) re- probate. The choice of the phrase here is probably dictated by Paul’s wish to drive home the fact that their asceticism and angel worship, so far from securing as they imagined the destruction of the flesh, proved that it was by the flesh that
they were altogether controlled, even to the mind itself, which stood farthest from it.
Ver. 19. Largely parallel to Eph. iv. 15, 16. Paul proceeds to point out that so far from securing spiritual growth of a higher order, the false teaching, by loosening the hold on Christ, prevented any growth at all, since it obstructed or severed the very channel of spiritual life. —kal οὐ κρατῶν τὴν κεφαλήν: ‘and not holding fast the head”. For this sense of xp. with the accusative cf. Song of Songs iii. 4, ἐκράτησα αὐτὸν καὶ οὐκ ἀφῆκα αὐτόν. It 15 clear from this that the false teachers were Christians. They did not profess to have no hold upon Christ, but their hold was not firm. All the supplies of life and energy flow from the Head, so that loose connexion with it involves serious loss and not progress in the spiritual life. It is significant that here each member is recognised as having an immediate relation to the Head.—éé οὗ: not neuter, referring to κεφ., for ἐξ ἧς would have been more natural, but ‘‘ from whom’’. It should be connected with both participles.—mwav τὸ capa: “the whole body’’. Alford takes it ‘‘the body in its every part,” but Ellicott denies that any distinction between τὸ wav σῶμα and πᾶν τὸ σῶμα can be safely drawn. It is the body as a whole that increases, and thus Paul condemns the tendencies to intellectual or spiritual exclusiveness, which cripple alike the body and the members who exhibit such tendencies. As this increase continues each member shares in the body’s Ρτορτεςς.---διὰ τῶν ἀφῶν καὶ συνδέσμων. Lightfoot givesa very full discussion of these terms and their use in medical writers. He trans- lates ‘through the junctures and liga- ments”. No doubt Paul’s language is popular, not technical. He is speaking of the means by which the various parts of the body are supplied and knit to- gether. Meyer takes ἀφ. to mean sensa- tions or nerve impulses, but we have no evidence for this meaning; nor is it suit- able here, for there is no reason for referring ad. to ἐπιχορ. and συνδ. to συνβιβ. No explanation is given of ad. κ. συνδ. Some think of the Holy Spirit, others of brotherly love, others of minis- ters. But probably in Paul’s mind they did not correspond to anything definitely. —émixopnyoupevov καὶ συνβιβαζόμενον: