Page images
PDF
EPUB

1849.]

Arguments for the Resurrection of the Dead.

39

Blir. Rck. Mey. to that which follows, so that it forms the parallel of the conditional clause to be supposed with {nei. ti zai] but why (Ro. 8: 24). Instead of tõv vexp. read avrov.

Vs. 30—32. Second argument : I should act foolishly to expose myself to death. This is an argument for immortality, but for such an one as is an object of hope. Cic. Tusc. 1, 15. : Nescio quomodo inhaeret in mentibus quasi seculorum quoddam augurium futurorum quo quidem demto, quis tam esset amens, qui semper in laboribus et periculis viveret? V. 30. xai nusis] we also, the apostles, not till in the following passage does Paul speak of himself alone. V. 31. dnoIrhoza] a strong expression for encountering dangers of death, cf. Wtst. Kpk. m znju ýuetegav ruóznouv] per gloriam (meam) de vobis. a well known Greek particle of affirmation, used only here in the N. T. úuer. is to be taken objectively, as sometimes the Gen., and as + raun x Cur Jno. 15: 9, 1 page 7 Eun Joo. 15: 11. according to the explanation of some, υμετέρω ελέει Ro. 11: 31, φόβω τω υμετέρω Thucyd. 1. 33, cf. Matthiae $ 466. 2. Rückert, but he reads husté av according to A 2 * * 4. all. Or. Thdrt. šv Xploro *. 1. 2.] in the communion (as it were in goods) with Christ, i. e. as apostles.

V. 32. xarà avtponov] after the manner of men, Bez. : humano impulsu, Mey. : in the interest of ordinary men ; more definitely indeed : without hope of the resurrection (Ambros. Oec. Schott). The explanation : ut hominum more loquar (Est.), or exempli causa (Hdrch. and others) is entirely untenable, since law or déyw is not in the clause. notouderon) is with Tert. Thphlet. Oec. Pelag. Bez. Grt. Est. Calov. Rsm. Schr. Rck. Olsh. Mey. to be taken in a figurative sense of any great danger encountered. Cf. Ignat. ep. ad Rom. c. 5, από Συρίας μέχρι Ρώμης θηριομαχώ-ένδεδεμένος δέκα λεοπάρδαις, ő éoni otpariwtixòv toyua. Other examples in Wtst. 2 Tim. 4: 17. For against the literal interpretation may be adduced : 1) the silence of the Acts and of Paul himself, 2 Cor. 11: 23; 2) that Paul as a Roman citizen was not exposed to such a punishment; 3) the improbability of deliverance. But what that danger was we do not know. Thpblct. Pelag. and others refer it perhaps to the commotion excited by Demetrius (Acts 19: 23 seq.), but on the one hand Paul, according to Luke, did not come immediately into danger; again, this event seems to be later than the composition of this Epistle (cf. Acts 20: 1). ti.) what advantage do I have from it? The aim and fruit of all

' De resurr. c. 48: depugnavit ad bestias Ephesi, illas sc. bestias Asiaticae pres. surae, 2 Cor. 1: 8.

. Adopted by Ambros. Cajet. Erasm. Lth. Calv. Corn. a Lap. Lghtf. Wif. Msh. FI. B'lr.

higher effort Paul found in blessedness with Christ, which he thought of as beyond the grave. ei-eyelo.] is best connected with what follows (Chrys. Thphlct. Bez. Bgl. Grb. d. N.), because if connected with what precedes (Thdrt. Bld. Grt. Est. Lth.--but he makes two questions), the pay. %. 1. seems too much isolated, and the conditional clause εi vexo. X. t. d. is contained already in the correctly explained xet. ävšo. gáy. 4. 7. 2.] words borrowed from Isa. 22: 13, LXX, concisely denoting the Epicurean, pleasure-loving levity, which results from unbelief in a higher life after death. Cf. Book of Wisdom 2: 1 seq. and classical parallel passages in Wtst.

Vs. 33, 34. Moral Warning. un hov.] 6: 9. preioxaxc] an Tambic verse (yet, instead of xongit' which is conformable to the metre, xenoré, with Grb. and others, is to be read) taken indirectly as a proverb, or directly from the Thais of Menander, as Tert. Jerome and others observe. See Menand. fragm. ed. Meinecke, p. 75. óphíai xamai] evil conversations, intercourse of pernicious society ; reference to the deniers of the resurrection, who then notwithstanding must have been frivolous people, whilst Paul, according to vs. 32, may give to the greatest part of his hearers credit for a still serious disposition. Differently Blir. Olsh., but Mey. thinks otherwise. - V. 34. éxvnwatɛ dixclos] be sober in the right way. They were already therefore, as it were, beclouded with that levity. Odyss. XIV, 90: Sicios uvão ia (Mey.) 4. un auaprovete] be not hurried on to sin. On the difference between the Aor. and Pres. in these imperatives, see Win. § 44. 5. dyvos. X. t. d.] for some have ignorance of God, those designated in v. 12; Blir. erroneously makes a distinction. Their doubts sprang from or were connected with a want of true knowledge of God, cf. v. 39. Matth. 22: 29 roos évtg. %. 7. 1.] 6: 5.

Vs. 35–50. After the apostle has shown that there is a resurrection of the dead, he enters upon the manner. V. 35. Propounding of the question in the form of an objection. Tõs] How? refers to the manner of the process of resurrection. nolo oduari] with what sort of, how constituted, body (cf. 11: 5), refers to the result of the process. Cf. Kling as cited above, p. 507. These are always the questions which the doctrine of the resurrection suggests, and indeed so much the rather, the more grossly it is apprehended; for so much the rather can one raise difficulties against it from the naturalistic point of view. Such an one the apostle seems to presuppose in his opponents, since he begins with natural analogies and then points to higher possibilities. xoxovtu) they come, appear. The Present represents the object as present in thought, cf. v. 42. Win.

p.

308. Vs. 36—41. Analogies for the resurrection. 1) V3.36–38. Anal

1849.]
Diversity of Organic Structures.

41 ogy of sowing and germinating with reference to the nos, whereby particular reference was had to the difficulty of the new life proceeding from death. appov] A B D G 47. all. Lehm. Tschdf. Rck. Mey. read: ügoor (Nom. instead of Voc. Win. p. 209), and Meyer connects oú with it “ because with the common connection an emphasis must be placed upon sú, which however the context does not furnish.” Coonosio far, to be quickened, awakened, used instead of: germinating, úno výcxeiv, to come into a state of dissolution (Jno. 12: 24), and in v. 37 couc body, instead of plant-general expressions and conceptions, in order to bring the figure and what is denoted by it nearer together. The reverse in v. 42.

V. 37. The construction, elucidated by no one but Mey., but not correctly by reference to Matthiae II. $ 478, is occasioned by that in the preceding verse, and becomes clear if we substitute &ï zı for ő, or if we suppose, in the clause succeeding, o'x xori instead of où oneigeis. From the resemblance of the verb and the object arises the advantage, that the subsequent or defining clause is more closely united with the preceding clause. Ei túyou, sirov) perhaps (14: 10) of wheat. των horor] sc. Onequátov, which the connection shows. – V. 38. ó de 1869] Paul regards this process of nature in the development of the plant so much the rather as an act of God, as he must attribute the resurrection to Divine omnipotence; but he considers it to be such an action as takes place by necessary laws, through the act of creation, to which idéante refers. Xal] and indeed. idov 6.] its own (peculiar, different from others) body.

2) Vs. 39–41. Analogy of the manifold diversity of organic structures (to which the idov owua, v. 38, forms the transition), by which the objection noin ouati, v. 35, is met. Those who doubted in Corinth, like the Sadducees, had narrow conceptions of the creative omnipotence of God and the richness of creation. V. 39. odos] animal organism. xtyvav] of the four-footed animals, properly, jumenta. - V. 40. και σώμ. επουρ.] sc. έστιν, αnd there are heavenly bodies, by which the ancient writers conceived of the blessed ; the moderns, according to modern conceptions, and according to v. 41 (but there another analogy comes in), the heavenly bodies; Meyer, correctly, the bodies of the angels. cou. éniy.] Bodies of men and animals. doğa] glory, is to be regarded, in reference to heavenly bodies, as brightness of light (cf. Matt. 28: 3. Acts 12: 7); in reference to earthly bodies, as beauty. – V. 41. The idea of doča leads the apostle to the analogy of the heavenly lights, whereby he would point, not to the diversity of the bodies of those who are raised, but to the possibility of new and unknown forms. arha 86. dotégor) another in comparison with the sun and moon) is the splendor of the stars ; at the same time also, by the plural dotégov, the diversity is indicated in the splendor of the stars as compared with each other, as is shown by the explanatory clause: dotie yào x. r. ..

Vs. 42—44 a. Application of the foregoing to the resurrection : the body of those who are raised will, notwithstanding death and corruption, be a much higher, a spiritual body. Vs. 42, 43. Gneiqeta) an expression for being buried, taken from the comparison in vs. 36, 37. The subject, omua, naturally supplies itself. XV Ogoog] in the state of corruption, (v. 50). Parallel : év áriuíq] in the condition of dishonor, contrast of Sóða, cf. 12: 23. εν ασθενεία] in the condition of weakness, in so far as the power of the human body is relatively small. After Chrys. Thdrt. Oec. Bez. Grt. and Hdrch. Meyer refers all these conditions to the dead corpse, which indeed is sown, i. e. buried. (Others, as Msh., erroneously assume a reference to different states, cf. Blir.); but as owuo wuycxóv does not denote the quality of the dead body as such, but of the living body, according to its organization, it seems better to refer the preceding qualities also to the latter (Calv. Est. Bgl. Rom. Fl. Rck.), so much the more, as the do téveic would be an idle predicate of the former. - V. 44. gõua quyizóv] a psychical body, in which the worn, i. e. the sensuous part of the inner life, predominates, and which is organized accordingly, cf. 2: 14. 6. AvEvpatıxóv] which is organized for the predominancy of the spirit.

Vs. 44 b.-50. Exposition and confirmation of the assertion, that those who are raised will receive a spiritual body. έστι-πνευμα.] there is a natural (psychical) body, and there is a spiritual bodyJustification of the paradoxical conception of a coua avevpe. by the express assertion, that there is just as well such a body as a common natural one. A B C D* F G 6. 10. all. Verss. Patrr. Lchm. T'schdf. Rck. read : si érti 6. %., xotiv xai %. 7. 2, and after these Luther. But it is plainly a pretended emendation, because the thought is brought into the form of an inference.

V. 45. Scriptural proof, which leads back to the above (vs. 21, 22) parallelism between Adam and Christ. oŭro) in harmony with this. The passage is Gen. 2: 7 according to the LXX (nai šy. o avio. eis w. 5.) with the insertion of ó apotos and ’A8du. But the proof does not lie in the proper passage itself, (for from the cis yuxin Gwoav, to a living soul [a psychical being] follows merely the existence of a Goue wuyuxóv, readily acknowledged without that) but in the addition of a Midrash (comment): ó éoyatos %. 7. 2, which rests upon the antitypical parallelism of Adam and Christ, having with the apostle the power of an axiom. ó 76%. 'Addu] is Christ, cf. Ro. 5: 14, not the risen

[ocr errors]

1849.] The Two Heads of Mankind contrasted.

43 man (Harduin, Teller W B., Jehne). είς πν. ζωοποιούν] to a lifegiving (others, resuscitating, cf. Jno. 5: 21 seq.) spirit (spiritual being). The question is, how far ? According to Bez., in his Divine nature; according to Calov. and Fl., in his human nature, by virtue of the communicatio hypostatica; according to Grt. (cf. Calv. ad v. 47) in consequence of his resurrection and ascension ; according to Est. in consequence of his resurrection ; according to the Socinians and Mey., in consequence of the ascension, because (according to the gospel accounts) his body during his earthly life, and even after the resurrection, was psychical ['natural']. Whether Paul acknowledged the latter, is the question, because he places the appearances of Christ, soon after the resurrection, in the same series with those of the heavenly Christ, which were made to him. With him also the resurrection of Jesus is too much the principal point in the whole subject, for him not to have perceived in that the sufficient cause. Jno. 5: 26, 27 appears to attribute to Jesus the resuscitative power, even in his earthly life, cf. Jno. 10: 18.

Vs. 46, 47. But that the spiritual (couce is not to be supplied to avevụatıxóv, as has been common since Thphlet.) is not earlier than the psychical, is shown in the form (úrad) of meeting an objection (Thphlct. Rck.) and is developed by analysis from v. 45. ó noros, ó dettepos) emphatic. ex yñs zoïxos] formed from earth, and consisting of dust, cf. Gen. 2: 7. This predicate is used instead of the above ψυχή ζ., in order to make clearer the quality of the σωμα ψυχ. ó xupos) is wanting in B C D E F G 17. all. Verss. Patrr. in Lchm. T'schdf., and is probably a gloss. If it is read, it must be understood as in opposition to ó deúr. avgg. Ég ovqavov] of heavenly origin, takes the place of avevu. &. That it refers to the corporeal nature of Jesus, cannot be maintained ; it denotes, like avevuce 5., the entire personality of Jesus, which, through its predominant spirituality, has also a spiritual body.

V. 48. Hence as there are two heads, so also there are two series or masses of mankind. ó zoirós] Adam. oi noixoi] the descendants of Adam, i.e. all men, in so far as they stand in connection with him and partake of his nature, Christians also not excluded in their nature as mortal. o επουράνιος] Christ. οι επουράνιοι] the Christians who have risen and are partakers of the kingdom of God.

V. 49. Application of what has been said to the reader. nai yoïxov] and as we have borne the image (form, organization) of the earthly (during our mortal life). popécouev %. 7. 1.) we shall also bear the image of the heavenly, attain the same nature as Christ. The reading gogérouer, for which there is, to be sure, preponderating evidence in A CDE

« PreviousContinue »