Ver. 9. εἰδώς refers to τις, as know- ing this (R.V.). For the expression cf. οἶδας τοῦτο, 2 Tim. i. 15 and Eph. v. 5. νόμος : Although νόμος when anarthrous may mean the Mosaic Law, the state- ment here is perfectly general (so R.V.). The Mosaic Law does not differ in the range of its application, though it may in the details of its enactments, from law in general, of which it is a sub- division. Law is not enacted for
κεῖται, ΄ ἀνόμοις δὲ καὶ 5 ἀνυποτάκτοις, ἢ ἀσεβέσι "
95
\h - καὶ " ἁμαρτωλοῖς, ee xv.
ἀνοσίοις καὶ " βεβήλοις, ᾿ πατρολῴαις καὶ ™ μητρολῴαις, "dvBpo- Luke 3 Σ Kxii. 37= φόνοις, το. πόρνοις, ° ἀρσενοκοίταις, ἢ ἀνδραποδισταῖς, " ψεύσταις, Is. liii. τα, τ 2 , \ o>» 9 ase , 8 , AY Acts 11.23, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ TL ἕτερον TH " ὑγιαινούσῃ " διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται, 1 Cor. ix.
21 (4), 2
: Thess. ii. 8, 2 Pet. ii. 8. g Tit. 1. 6, το, Heb. ii. 8, not LXX. h Prov. xi. ου τρος iv. 18. 12 Tim. ili. 2, only, N.T. k t Tim. iv. 7, vi. 20, 2 Tim. ii. 16, Heb. xii. 6 only, N.T. 1 Here only, not LXX. m Here only, not LXX. n Here only N.T., 2 Macc. ix. 28. ΟΙ Cor. vi. 9,
not LXX. _ p Here only, not LXX. τ Here only N.T., cf. Matt. v. 33. (iit. 11, ὃν Dita d ται 41. 2:
a naturally law-abiding man (dative of reference). δίκαιος is used here in the popular sense, as in “1 came not to call the righteous’’. It is unnecessary to suppose that St. Paul had his theory of justification in his mind when writing this ; though of course those who ‘‘ are led by the Spirit’ are δίκαιοι of the highest quality, κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστιν νόμος (Gal. v. 18 sqq., 23). The enumeration of those whom legislators have in view when enacting laws natur- ally begins with ἄνομοι, of whom the ἀνυπότακτοι, unruly, those who deli- berately rebel against restriction of any kind, are the extreme type. There is no special class or quality of crime involved in the terms ἄνομος and ἀνυπότακτος. As the series advances, the adjectives indicate more definite and _ restricted aspects of lawlessness: the first three pairs represent states of mind; then follow examples of violations of specific enactments. Since St. Paul is here dealing with the law of natural religion, it is not safe to deepen the shade of ἀσεβής, κ.τ.λ. by looking at the concep- tions they express in the light of the Lord.
ὁ ἀσεβὴς καὶ ἁμαρτωλός is a pair of epithets familiar from its occurrence in Prov, xi. 31 (quoted 1 Pet. iv. 18. See also Jude 15). The ἀσεβής is one whose mental attitude towards God Himself is that of deliberate irreverence ; the βέβη- λος acts contumeliously towards recog- nised expressions or forms of reverence to God.
Alford and Ellicott, following a hint from Bengel, suppose that in the series commencing πατρολῴαις St. Paul is going through the second table of the Decalogue. It is an argument against this that when St, Paul is unquestion- ably enumerating the Commandments, Rom. xiii. 9, he places the command against adultery before that against murder (so Luke xviii. 20; Jas ii. 11; Philo, De Decalogo, xxiv. and xxxii. ; Tert.de Pudic, v., all following LXX (B)
q Rom. iii. 4, Tit. i. 12, Rev. xxi. 8? John (2), 1 John (5). ΒΤ τῆι. ἵν. sy Lats ἢν Ὁ, πο τ Lamly Vieng, ο Lam. Ίο τα,
of Deut. chap. v.). There is therefore no necessity to give πατρολῴας the weak rendering smiter of a father (R.V. m.) in order to make the word refer to normal breaches of the Fifth Commandment, It can, of course, both by derivation and use, be so rendered, The Greek word, like parricide in Latin and English, may be applied to any unnatural treatment of a parent.