of demons comprised the O° YW (‘‘ hairy ones”), in reference to these the word φρίσσουσιν would be extremely appropriate (see further, on Jewish beliefs concerning demons, the writer’s articles in the Expositor, April, June, August, 1907).
Ver. 20. The words of this and the following verses, to the end of ver. 23, belong to the argument commenced by a supposed speaker—dAN’ ἐρεῖ τις---; it is all represented as being conducted by
ἐστιν; 21. ᾿Αβραὰμ ὁ πατὴρ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων ἐδικαιώθη, » 3 9 A ca > A 3 ‘\ A ἀνενέγκας Ἰσαὰκ τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ TO
εἰ ς 7 a »” - ‘ A 22. βλέπεις ὅτι ἡ πίστις ἢ συνήργει 1 τοῖς ἔργοις αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐκ τῶν
447
a ᾿ u Gen. xxii, θυσιαστήριον; 9-12. -
v Heb. xi. 17.
1 συνεργει ΝΑ, Ti., Treg., communicat ζ΄.
one man addressing another, the second person singular being used; with the ὁρᾶτε of ver. 24 the writer of the Epistle again speaks in his own name, and, as it were, sums up the previous argument. -“Θέλεις δὲ γνῶναι; “Dost thou desire to know,” i.e, by an incontro- vertible fact; the writer then, like a skil- ful disputant, altogether demolishes the position of his adversary by presenting something which was on all hands re- garded as axiomatic. As remarked above, the question of Abraham’s faith was a subject which was one of the common- places of theological discussion in the Rabbinical schools as well as among Hellenistic-Jews; this is represented as having been forgotten, or at all events, as not having been taken into account, so that the adversary, on being confronted with this fact, must confess that his argument is refuted by something that he himself accepts. It is this which gives the point to ὦ ἄνθρωπε xevé. For κενέ
the Peshitta has sworn “feeble,” in its primary sense, but also “ignorant,” which admirably expresses what the writer evidently intends. Both Mayor and Knowling speak of κενός as being equi- valent to Raca (Matt. v. 22), but the two words are derived from different roots, the former from a τίς. root meaning “ to be empty,” the latter from a Hebr. one mean- ing ‘‘to spit” [see the writer’s article in the Expositor, July, 1905, pp. 28 ff.]; κενός has nothing todo with Raca.—apyv%: the reading νεκρά is strongly attested; the Corbey MS. makes a pun by reading “vacua,” after having written “o homo vacue”. ᾿Αργή is not so strong as νεκρά; cf. Matt. xil. 36, wav ῥῆμα ἀργόν.
Ver. 21, ᾿Αβραὰμ ὁ πατὴρ ἡμῶν: A stereotyped phrase in Jewish literature—obK ἐξ ἔργων ἐδικαι- ώθη: the writer is referring to the
well-known Jewish doctrine of
(Zectith), on this subject see he tion IV., § ο.--- ἀνενέγκας Ἰσαὰκ : on this subject an example of Jewish haggadic treatment may be οἱ interest: “When Abraham finally held the knife over his beloved son, Isaac seemed doomed, and the angels of heaven shed tears which fell upon Isaac’s eyes,
9ο ο
causing him blindness in later life. But their prayer was heard. The Lord sent Michael the archangel to tell Abraham not to sacrifice his son, and the dew of life was poured on Isaac to revive him. The ram to be offered in his place had stood there ready, prepared trom the beginning of Creation (Aboth, v. 6). Abraham had given proof that he served God not only from fear, but also out of love, and the promise was given that, whenever the ‘Akedah [ =the “ bind- ing,” z.€., of Isaac] chapter was read on New Year’s day, on which occasion the ram’s horn is always blown, the descend- ants of Abraham should be redeemed from the power of Satan, of sin, and of oppression, owing to the merit of him whose ashes lay before God as though he had been sacrificed and consumed,” Pesik. R., 8 40 (quoted in ¥ewish Encycl., i. 87a). It is interesting to notice that even in the Talmud (e.g., Ta‘anit, 4a) the attempted sacrifice of Isaac is regarded also from‘a very different point of view, such words as those of Jer. xix. 5; Mic. vi. 7, being explained as referring to this event (see further Proceedings of the Soc. of Bibl. Arch., xxiv. pp. 235 ff.).