wee / - q Luke viii. µίαις καὶ “ ἡδοναῖς ἢ ποικίλαις, ἐν * κακίᾳ καὶ "φθόνῳ " διάγοντες,
14, Jas.iv. I, 3,2 Pet. ii. 13. é τ Rom.i. 29, ἡ φιλανθρωπία * ἐπεφάνη τοῦ πρεϊ ii. degen : 41 sSeerTim. τῶν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ ἃ 11. 2.
t
στυγητοί, " μισοῦντες “ ἀλλήλους.
ἐποιήσαμεν ἡμεῖς ἀλλὰ " κατὰ
4. ὅτε δὲ ἡ “ χρηστότης καὶ ἡ
Σσωτῆρος "ἡμῶν “Θεοῦ, 5. οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων
Στὸ * αὐτοῦ
t Hereonly,” ἔλεος 2 ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς διὰ ὃ " λουτροῦ Ὀπαλινγενεσίας καὶ “ ἀνακαι-
not LXX. u Matt.xxiv.
ν Rom. ii. 4, xi. 22 {εγ., Eph. ii. 7 (Paul elsewhere 4 times). x See Tit. ii. 11. a Eph. v. 26 only, N.T., Cant. iv. 2, vi. 5, Ecclus. xxxi. (xxxiv.) 25.
c Rom. xii. 2 only, not LXX, cf. 2 Cor. iv. 16, Col. iii. 1Ο.
10. ΝΎ, Esth. (1). 2 Macc. (2), 3 Macc. (2). 1.3. ΟΝ not LXX. 1 ὧν CbDcKLP. amples of this latter sense in the Ν.Τ.
ποικίλαις : See note on 2 Tim. ili. 6.
διάγοντες : sc βίον, as in 1 Tim. 11. 2.
στυγητοί κ.τ.λ.: odibiles, odientes invicem (Vulg.). This marks the stage of degradation, before it becomes hope- less: when vice becomes odious to the vicious, stands a self-confessed failure to produce happiness.
Ver. 4. χρηστότης καὶ φιλανθρωπία: (benignitas . . . humanitas) is a con- stant combination in Greek. See many examples supplied by Field. Here it ex- presses the notion of John ili. 16, οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὃ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον κ.τ.λ. and of Eph. ii. 4-6. von Soden suggests, the kindness of God is here contrasted with the unkindness of men to each other; cf. Eph. iv. 31, 32.
χρηστότης is a Pauline word, used of God also in reff. φιλανθρωπία is especi- ally used of the beneficent feelings of divine beings towards men; more rarely of the relations between man and man, as in Acts xxviii. 2. Diogenes Laert., quoted by Alf., distinguishes three kinds of Φιλανθρ. (τ) geniality of manner, (2) helpfulness, (3) sociability.
ἐπεφάνη : See note on 1 Tim. vi. 14.
τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν θεοῦ : θεοῦ, as in 1. 3, ii. το, is epexegetical οἵ σωτῆρος.
Ver. 5. The ἡμεῖς and ἡμᾶς refer to the same persons as those mentioned in verse 3, #.e., the apostles and those who have had a similar experience. The verse may be paraphrased as a state- ment of fact thus:—God saved us by Baptism, which involves two complemen- tary processes, (a) the ceremony itself which marks the actual moment in time of the new birth, and (δὴ) the daily, hourly, momently renewing of the Holy Spirit, by which the spiritual life is sup- ported and fostered and increased. And the moving cause of this exceeding kind- ness of God was not any merits of our own, but His mercy
2 τὸν . . « ἔλεον WheKL,
Perhaps also, as‘
w Acts xxviii. 2 only, y See 1 Tim.i. 1. Ζπ Pet. b Matt. xix. 28
3 Ins. τοῦ A.
οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων : ἐκ here, as in Rom iii. 30, expresses the source. See also the emphatic repetition in Gal. 11. 16 of οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόµου. The δικαιοσύνη here is that which we can call our own, 4 ἐκ νόμον (Phil. iii. ϱ). Its existence as δικαιοσύνη must not be denied; but it does not pass as current coin in the kingdom of God. It has indeed no saving value whatever. Accordingly there is no question here as to whether we did, or did not do, works which are ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ. ‘‘ Not the labours of my hands can tulfil Tiy law’s demands.” See note on 2 Tim. I. 9.
Bengel, comparing Deut. ix. 5, refers the negative to each term in the clause: we had not been ἐν δικ.; we had not done ἔργα ἐν δικ.; we had no works through which we could be saved. But this exegesis is too much affected by the controversies of the sixteenth century. The A.V., which we have done, con- fuses the thought by a suggestion that the works referred to are those “after justification”.