Examples in Romans

OM 1Rom. 1:1-7. I do not know that this passage needs other notice, than the remarkable confirmation it gives to the rule laid down:-First, a series of anarthrous words, attached as characters of the name of Paul;-Christ as an object, περὶ τοπυ Υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ. Υἱοῦ θεοῦ verse 4, characteristic, has it not.
14. This kind of persons, not the body of persons themselves as an object.
17. is important. It is not the righteousness of God, as a known theological object presented to the mind, but righteousness which is of God. That is what man wants, and makes the Gospel a subject of boast, not shame. It is not man's presented, or claimed, but God's revealed.
18. The same remark on ὀργὴ θεοῦ. Wrath from God; this characterizes the revelation. It will often be found, that when a second noun is the most important, and is characteristic, it gives its characteristic form to the other, and forms one characteristic idea. Here the whole expression, ὀργὴ θεοῦ, δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ, characterizes the revelation; but when it is ἡ ὀργὴ, it must be τοῦ θεοῦ; properly, that particular kind of wrath which belongs to that being. The wrath is a wrath designated as an object, and then is of that being-Himself an object therefore too. But if wrath characterizes the revelation, I add, as characterizing the wrath, θεοῦ. Τοῦ θεοῦ, would suppose some wrath (or other thing) objectively known, which was of that being. θεοῦ gives a character merely to some instance of the thing. A wrath (a kind of wrath) which is of God, was revealed.
OM 2Rom. 2:4. Εἰς μετάνοιαν. The character of the leading: actually, it did not lead εἰς τὴν μετανοιαν.
5. τὴν σκλγρότητά σου καὶ 'μετανόητον καρδίαν:-σου gives, as in every case of a personal pronoun, the article; but I notice it as another case of the article with two nouns, completing the description of the one mental object, which accounts for ἀμετανόητον καρδίαν. ἐν ἡμέρα ὀρῆς κ.τ.λ.: the case already spoken of, a noun of time characteristic, not a date.
7. All the nouns characterize the seekers, or the search. Ζωὴν αἰώνιον, the gift as heretofore noticed.
8. τοῖς δὲ ἐξ ἐριθείας, καὶ ἀπειθοῦσι μὲν τῆ ἀληθεία, πειθομένοις δὲ κ.τ.λ.: several ideas completing the character of τοῖς, as verse 5.
There is a change of grammatical structure from ἀποδώσει to ἔσται.
9. τοῦ κατεργαζομένου, is attracted to ἀνθρώπου, but really governed by πᾶσαν ψυχὴν, as παντὶ τῶ ἐργαζομένω (verse 10).
12. ἐν νόμω, characteristic, evidently answering to ἄνομας; so διὰ νόμου.
13. τοῦ νόμου, the law.
14. ἔθνη, characteristic, Gentiles; not the Gentiles: such persons as they. They have no law, no such thing. τοῦ νόμου, the law, known well to a Jew.
15. Note here, the work, not the law, is written in the heart.
16. ὄτε κρινεῖstill only characterizes.
17. τῶ νόμω, presented as an object to designate the Jewish, law. Εν θέω, characterizes the boast.
Rom. 2:18. Τὸ θέλημα is remarkable as that will, namely of God, known only to a Jew; τοῦ νόμου. The Jewish known law.
19, 20, are plain; they characterize what the man is.
23. In law, in having law. Thou breakest the law.
25. περιτομὴ has been noticed; νόμον, a law-keeper, a law-transgressor, characterizes the parties: ἡ περιτομὴ, the thing; σοῦ also necessitates this.
26. ἡ ἀκροβυστία, the class: ἡ ἀκροβυστία αὐτοῦ, the actual state of such an one.
27. διὰ γράμματος καὶ περιτομῆς, character. δ.γ.κ.π. παραβάτην νόμου, is all characteristic of τόν. I notice this, for it takes the article from νόμου, which otherwise would have it.
OM 33: 5. ἡ ἀδικιά ἠμῶν θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην. This is a remarkable case. The first part is very simple; but the second, which seems the same grammatically, is changed by the sense. Our unrighteousness is a definite objective thing. Divine righteousness is characteristically opposed, not a defined object: τὴν ὀργὴν, the wrath implied in it. Whereas, verse 3, it is τὴν πίστιν τοῦ θεοῦ, because there it is not an opposed characteristic quality, but the actual faithfulness already known and shown, the faithfulness of God-Divine righteousness.
9. Jews and Greeks as characteristic classes, not τοὺς, the members of them.
11. οὐδὲ εἷς (verse 10) gives the ὁ to συνιῶν, and ἐκζητῶν τὸν θεόν. Not that one who, if there had been one, could have been pointed out objectively. As we say in English, there is not" the man living who could do it." This is a matter of style, and stronger than "a man," or συνιῶν, though both would be right. Hence we have (verse 12), οὐκ ἔστι ποιῶν, which must be used here, because it is added, οὐκ στιν ἔ ω ς ἑ ν ό ς. ὁ ποιῶν with this would have been out of place, for ἔως ἑνὸς was said in that form already. Hence we have δίκαιος αὐδὲ εῖς, and ὁ ἐκζητῶν.
17. ὁδὸν, any way.
19. ὁ νόμος...τῶ νομῶ, the known Jewish law.
20. διὰ νόμου, by law is knowledge of Win; ἐξ ἔργων νόμου, by law-works.
21. Without law, any law, not the Jewish: τοῦ νόμου, that particular known law. Also we have another example of a righteousness of GOD, of that character.
Rom. 3:22. It is added that it is by faith of Jesus: that is the manner of it. ἐπὶ πάντας, still characteristic, being of GOD. It is towards all in character: ἐπὶ τοὺς πιστεύοντας, actually on them objectively considered.
25. The question of τῆς before πίστεως amounts to this. Is it the character or manner of being a mercy-seat? or is it the faith in the person who comes? Both would be true. εἰς ἔνδειξιν is the character of the thing. Αὐτοῦ gives the article to δικαιοσύνης. Διὰ τὴν πάρεσιν was an actual overlooking.
26. πρὸς not here εἰς, as it was not the immediate simple object or aim, but merely a collateral particular form, or circumstance, of the object marked in ἐν τῶ νῦν καιρῶ (compare Eph. 4:12), included in the completion of that aim. Τὀν ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ, one so characterized.
27. Διὰ ποίου cannot have the article, for it inquires what is the law? Τῶν ἔργων makes it precise and objective: τοὺ νόμου τῶν ἐργῶν, is it that of works? The article disappears in διὰ νόμου πίστεως. It was excluded in that manner-a faith-law. There was no particular known law of this kind to refer to; it was the character of the excluding power: so 28, law-works; πίστει, in that manner.
29. Of Jews only: that character of persons, not " the Jews"; so Gentiles.
30. More remarkably in περιτονὴν, that state, not the Jews called ἡ περιτομὴ, though they are the people alluded to; but the apostle refers to the condition and character, not the people. Hence ἐκ πίστεως, in that manner-ἀκροβυστίαν διὰ τῆς πίστεως, because being in that manner, the uncircumcision having actually faith would be justified: hence faith, their faith, becomes a positive object to the mind.
Law, and again, law- not "the law." He did not establish that as a system; but he gave its full authority to law, in all its extent and requirement by the doctrine of faith.
OM 44: 2. ἐξ ἔργων in that manner.
5. τὸν δικαιοῦντα, a person known and supposed as an object, before the mind
11. offers a peculiar construction: more naturally it would seem to be περιτομὴν. Τὸ σημείου τῆς would not do, as σημεὶαν of anything, would specially mean what indicated that thing, not the thing's being a sign; σημεῖον regularly has not the article after ἔλαβε, as we have heretofore remarked. This, too, takes it away before περιτομὴν: δικαιοσύνης gets it from the following words, which make it a positive objective thing. Περιτομὴς is the character of the sign; but δικαιοςύ is a particular righteousness, characterized by the words which follow it.
4:12. Πατέρα περιτομὴς, his character; τοῖς ἐκ περιτομῆς, one class so characterized; τοῖς στοιχοῦσι τοῖς ἴχνεσι another class so characterized, namely believing Gentiles; τῆ ἀκροβυστία, that condition already spoken of.
13. διὰ νόμου, "not by law, but by faith-righteousness,' or "righteousness [which is] of faith."
14. οἱ ἐκ νόμου, those who adopt the principle.
16. τῶ ἐκ τοῦ νόμου, as a fact, the Jews under the law; τζ ἐκ πίστεως Ἀβραὰμ., of Abraham-faith, noticed before not of the faith which he had, but of that kind of faith.
OM 55:2. Τὴν προσαγωγὴν. The difficulty of this phrase is as to which reason is the true one for the use of τὴν. It might be that particular access there was by faith but I suspect, from its use in the three places it is found in, that it is a technical word for admission into some favored place; as we say, "those who have the entree," ἐπ' ἐλπίδι τῆς δόξης, and, verse 5, διὰ Πνεύματος ἁγίου τοῦ δοθέντος. These examples shows that a preposition, with an anarthrous noun, can be used characteristically, though there be added that which depends on it as a positive object. Ἐπ'ἐλπίδι characterized the joy, but τοῦ θεοῦ necessarily makes ἁγίοι a positive objective glory. So Πνεύματος ἁγίοι was the manner of the pouring forth in the heart, but when spoken of as given, the objective person must be marked.
6. κατὰ καιρὸν, seasonably: ὑπὲρ ἀσεβῶν, for such characters: so
7. ὑπὲρ δικαίου, not for all the persons, but for such a character; whereas τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ, points out in a special manner, a remarkable person; as in English, "for the goodman."
13. δμαρτία. There was sin: δμαρτία δὲ οὐκ ἐλλογεῖται is more obscure, but the obscurity arises only in an English mind. It is not reckoned (the real force ἐλλογεῖται, Philem. 1:18), as sin, μὴ ὄντος νόμου, is clear. Indeed, the οὐκ more naturally takes the article away, as in general it does not admit an existing object, never in a general proposition.
Rom. 5:15. Οἱ πολλοὶ is in contrast with ὁ εῖς: the fault does not rest in the individual doer, but involves the body connected with him.
16. εἰς κατάκριμα, the characteristic tendency or bearing of it: so εἰς δικαίωμα.
18. rather by one offense - towards all for condemnation, having that character and bearing; so by one accomplished righteousness towards all for justification of life. It was the bearing that characterizes this
accomplished righteousness. Life-justification expressed the bearing of this δικαίωμα.
19. οἱ πολλοὶ again contrasted with the ὁ εῖς, with which it is connected.
20. But law, not the law. " There entered"...What? "Law,"
21. ἐν τῶ θανάτω, in that actually well-known present thing. Διὰ δικαιοσύνης εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον, the bearing of the reign of grace.
OM 66: 4. θάνατον takes the article, because it is an actual known thing about which they were speaking, into which they were baptized. In verse 3, αὐτοὔ; gives it necessarily.
[Up to this point it may be remarked, that Χριστὸς and Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς never have the article, being used historically as the name of a person, not a proper subject of theological teaching].
13. ὄπλα ἀδικίας...ὄπλα δικαιοσύνης, affirmed about τὰ μέλη. "As," in English, often best renders the anarthrous noun.
9, 14. Θἀνατος and ἁμαρτία are taken as Names, by reason of κυριεύω.
14,15. "Under law...under grace;" the state they were in, not the law.
16. All these words are characteristic, dependent on ἑαυτοὺς already spoken of.
17. τῆς ἁμαρτίας, the plain moral fact; and note δοῦλοι, characteristic of the persons spoken of in ῆτε: τῆς ἁμαρτίας, that which the discussion had already introduced.
19. εἰς τὴν ἀνομίαν, because ἀνομία had been already mentioned, and it ended in that very ἀνομία. The first, with ἀκαθαρσία, are abstract nouns in their moral totality; εἰς ἁγιασμὸν, the characterizing tendency of the δικαιοσύνη to which they served. The remaining cases are easy, from the principles stated.
OM 7Rom. 7:1. " who know what law is,"-not the law. Ὁ νόμος is put abstractedly here from the evident necessity of the argument; this thing, law, that we are speaking of. Τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, the man we suppose to be under it, whom κυριεύει.
2. "is legally bound." 3. Τοῦ νόμου, the law we ate speaking of.
4. τῶ νόμω. The Jewish law, or law abstractedly: which, is a question of spiritual interpretation. Further, we have here, for the first time, τοῦ Χριστοῦ; whence I judge that ὁ νόμος means the Jewish law, and that that well-known. subject of Jewish theology, the Messiah, is contrasted with the law. There was the law and the Messiah, both well known, and having their proper respective αἰὼν: hence ὁ νόμος and ὁ Χριστὸς. It is not merely an historical person.
ἑτέρω τῶ, rightly translated, even to him"; τῶ ἑτέρω τῶ would be " to the other who"; but it is another than the law--" Whom? Him who," etc.
6. I judge ἀποθανόντες, compare 4.
7. "but by law." 8. " for without law;"ἁμαρτία is, I apprehend, used as a name, exactly from its use in a pithy proverbial saying, as in other exact languages, as French; a short affirmation about a principle which does not stop to put an object before the mind. So indeed, in German. See note on proverbial sayings at the end.
21. τὸν νόμον...ὄτι. This, or the law that.
25. νόμω θεοῦ νόμω ἁμαρτίας, is special, like δικαιοσύνη ὀργὴ θεοῦ. It characterizes the service-it is service to God-law, i.e. Divine law, or sin-law, that is the state of the mind of me myself It was not presenting one or other as a definite object, but explaining the state of the mind serving. It is a mind that serves GOD'S law, a mind that serves sin's law.
OM 88: 3. We may notice the character of Christ's mission. Περὶ ἁμαρτίας is not affirming that it was about certain sin but that his mission was such, and, by a well-known phraseology, that this characterized his sacrifice.
4, 5. Κατὰ σάρκα...κατὰ πνεῦμα, their character, and principle of life and being. I notice this, as chewing that it does not raise the question of what Spirit, which the following words fully show to be the Hoy Spirit Himself. So verse 9, ἐν σάρκι ἀλλ'ἐν Πνεύματι, their state.
'We will examine all the texts before going further:-
SPIRIT.
Matt. 3:16. Clearly a definite object, even of sight.
10:20. So here one speaking-not they.
12:28. The manner of casting out.
Luke 1:17. Not the Spirit of GOD, but manner " according to."
4:18. A quotation of a prophetic title. It is the constant form of prophetic announcement. See Matt. 2:18;3. 3.
John 14:17. A personal object-one who was to remain with them. 15:26. The same evidently.
Acts 5:9. The Spirit of the LORD is a definite person presented. Κυρίου., I take to be a name; otherwise it would be used, as the name of GOD may be, to characterize an object.
8:39. first calls for special remark. And here I doubt not it is designed, in rapidity and abruptness, and intentionally, to drop the idea of the person. It is not as if the Holy Ghost as a person came and took him. He was rapt, not by man, nor by human means, but by the sovereign power of the Holy Spirit. This was the character and manner of his rapture. He was rapt in spirit from the Eunuch's sight; hence it is only said he was found at Azotus. The article is intentionally and expressly excluded. I do not think when it is Πνεῦμα θεοῦ, or Κυρίου, God's spirit, Jehovah's spirit, that the object is to present a person, but a power or agent emanating thence, as the spirit of a man.
16:16. is on usual principles.
Rom. 1: 4. Evidently characteristic of how.
8: 2. The grammar is regular and ordinary as to sense. Though doubtless the Holy Ghost is really the power of it, the object is not to present Him as a Divine person, but like Christ breathing that communication of life from Him which they had by and from a present Spirit. It was the power of life by the Spirit. Hence John 22:22, there is no article. Πνεῦμα ἄγιον, the Holy Ghost, I doubt not was there, but it was as more abundant life, and the power of it. It was not the Comforter sent. He that is joined, to the Lord is one spirit. This comes out more importantly in verse-
Rom. 8: 9. (compare verse 10), where, though doubtless personally the Holy Spirit, it is spoken characteristically of the state. You are ἐν πνεύματι, in that state, if such a spirit dwell in you, namely, GOD'S. If any man have not Christ's, he is none of His. So Χριστός: ὁ Χριστὸς would be his person as an object: here he is a life characteristic of the person, and we get σῶμα and πνεῦμα, two contrasted definite objects. The body is not the spring of living movement; it is a corpse: the Spirit is to such a one.
On the other hand, in verse 11, we find this Spirit brought forward (necessarily) as a definite personal object, for it is on account of His being there that we are raised; so τὸν Χριστὸν. It is Christ who was personally raised; so our bodies, because of the Spirit of Him who raised him dwelling in us. He could not, if such a one (even the Spirit of that life-giving Power or Being who raised the Head, Jesus) dwelt in us, leave us under death who were the members. Could the Spirit remain thus? It would belie His nature as the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus. But this is not characteristic. It is a living being.
14. characterizes the leading.
15. Πνεῦμα δουλείας is evidently characteristic, and a common case; so πνεῦμα υἱοθεσίας.
15:19. The character of Christ's working.
1 Cor. 2:10. Here it is evidently a personal object, one acting. In verse 11, τὸ πνεῦμα ἀνθρώπου is marked out definitely as an object, and indeed personified. Τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ, is clear. In verse 12, τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ κόσμου, it follows the ordinary rule, that when a genitive follows, it commonly marks out that particular case of the first noun, and hence is necessarily a definite object of the mind-not spirit, or any spirit, but the spirit of the world: so τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἐκ τοὺ θεοῦ.
3:16. He is the personal inhabitant, and definitely presented as such, not characterizing a man, but one dwelling in a temple.
1 Cor. 4:21. Clearly the character of His coming. 12:10. is plain. It is the manner of speaking; so
2 Cor. 3:3. The manner of writing.
17. οῦ δὲ τὸ Πνεῦμα Κυρίου. The Holy Ghost Himself personally. Κυρίου, I suppose here, is a name; or else it is used to characterize Πνεῦμα, τὸ πνεῦμα Κυρίου being as one word: in verse 16. Πρὸς Κυρίου, the direction in which it turns. But the Lord in question was actually the spiritual revelation of Him by the Holy Ghost, called τὸ πνεῦμα, verse 17: for there is not a setting aside of the person of the Holy Ghost, but often an introduction of Him into that in which He works. "The words I speak are spirit and life." " The letter killeth, the Spirit giveth life." But He is there, and there is liberty. Ὁ δὲ Κύριος τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν, is then-that the Lord (Jesus) is the thought and mind of the Spirit referred to (verse 6), actually known in Christ, revealed by a present Holy Ghost; so verse 8.
Matt. 1:18. Evident manner with ἐκ.
20. Ditto. 3:11. Ditto
1. Person objectively.
3. Their spirit as men; rightly, in English, 'In spirit." Ἐν πνεύματι would have much rather referred to the Spirit of God, as 22:43. (See 26:41).
12:31, 32. The person as an object.
22:43. The manner of his speaking. (Compare Mark 12:36).
26:41. Their spirit as men.
27:50. His spirit as a man.
28:19. A person objectively.
Mar. 1: 8. The character of the baptism.
10. The spirit objectively. 12. Ditto.
3:29. Ditto.
12:36. Ditto. (Compare Matt. 22:43).
These cases are important as to the article with πνεῦμα, and confirm the doctrine as to the force of the article, the presence of which is no proof of its application to the Holy Ghost. As to that or man's spirit, it follows the usual rule.
Luke 1:15 characterizes the condition of John; so verse 41, of Elisabeth.
Luke 1:17 gives us another example of a preposition with a mere characterizing anarthrous noun, followed by a specific genitive, which gives its force to the anarthrous characteristic.
41. "Filled with the Holy Ghost" could hardly be used with an article, for the Holy Ghost would characterize this filling. Ile could hardly, as a person, be limited to a man's fullness. If used with an article, it would be rather the filling power, than that which filled. Of this there is but one example, viz. Acts 4:31; and then it is τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, not πνεύματος ἁγίου, the force resting specially on ἀγόυ, the Holy Spirit having filled them; and this gives it personal objectiveness. The expression, " filled, or full of the Holy Ghost," is found only in Luke's portion of the Scriptures (Gospel and Acts). Eph. 5:18 is ἐν πνεύματι (see Acts 4:31**). I believe if we are to read, with some, τ.α.π., the difference will be easily found. It is not merely the state of the persons which is in question, hut that the Holy Child, or Servant, Jesus, whom God had anointed, being owned when dishonored by the opposition of kings and rulers, the Holy Ghost comes to fill and bear testimony with those who suffered according to their prayer in testimony to the name of GOD'S holy servant Jesus; and they do speak the word with boldness, so that we have the holy Child (Servant) Jesus, God's word, and the Holy Ghost filling and enabling the servants of Him who made heaven and earth, to bear the testimony. Hence we have the person of the Holy Ghost objectively brought forward.
(** All this is based on the fact -that I was using Tischendorf. All the other editors give ε.α.π.α., and it comes under the common term.)
Note here, the remarkable difference of the millennial consequences and address of Psa. 2, and that founded on it here in connection with the presence of the Holy Ghost.
The following are the passages where the phrase is used:-
15. καὶ Πνεύματος ἁγίου πλησθήσεται.
41. καὶ ἐπλήσθη Πνεύματος ἁγίου. Tischendorf reads τ.α.π.
67. Ἰησοὺς δὲ Πνεύματος ἁγίου πλήρης.
Acts 2:4. Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν ἄπαντες Πνεύματος ἁγίου.
4: 8. Πέτρος πλησθεὶς Πνεύματος ἁγίου.
31. Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν ἄπαντες Πνεύματος ἁγίου. See Tischendorf.
6:3. ἑπτὰ, πλήρεις Πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ σοφίας.
5. ἄνδρα πλήρη πίστεως καὶ Πνεύματος ἁγίου.
7:55. Πλήρης Πνεύματος ἁγίου.
9: 17. Καὶ πλησθῆς Πνεύματος ἁγίου.
11: 24. Καὶ πλήρης Πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ πίστεως.
13: 9. Πλησθεὶς Πνεύματος ἁγίου.
52. ἐπληροῦντο...Πνεύματος ἁγίου.
Eph. 5:18. ἀλλὰ πληροῦσθε ἐν Πνεύματι.
This last, " by the power of." Were it their spirit as a man, it would be, I am satisfied, τῶ πνεύματι. The man's spirit, as an object, contrasted with the body.
So Matt. 26:41; 27. 50; John 19:30; Matt. 5:3. So Mark 8:12 (with ἁγίου, however). So Mark 14:38. (I have no doubt also Luke 10:21; some editions add τῶ ἁγίω). John 11:33; 13:21; Acts 18:5, " pressed in spirit" (i.e., his, for I have no doubt of the ordinary reading). Acts 19:21, "in his mind;" 20:22, "in his spirit within him." Hence Rom. 8:15, 16, the sense is plain: " We have not received a spirit of bondage, but of adoption, crying Abba Father. The Spirit itself, or Himself, beareth witness with our spirit." We have the nature, or character, of our spiritual condition; then the Holy Ghost; then our spirit, or inner man. Note, such statements may suppose (but do not touch the question of) the renewal of our natures, that it should be so. See 1 Thess. 5:23, where the use of τὸ πνεῦμα for the spirit of a man, contrasted with mere soul and body, is evident. See 1 Cor. 14:14, seq.; we have the man's spirit distinct from his intelligence; the vessel of the action, or power of the Holy Ghost.
Note also, in connection with θεοῦ Χριστοῦ, Κυρίου, there is an absence of the article, which is worthy of note. We have δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ, ὀργὴ θεοῦ, πνεῦμα θεοῦ, πνεῦμα Κυρίου, πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ: but in all these cases it is characteristic power, righteousness, etc., not an objective thing, separately considered from God, but the nature of the person characterizing something else; a refinement of language which English hardly bears; though it does by using divine in some cases-" for wrath divine is revealed," " divine righteousness." In the case of spirit, it does not. Θεοῦ; attached to πνεῦμα, evidently characterizes the man's state contrasted with flesh.
2 Cor. 3:18. Τὴν δόξαν Κυρίου, I notice as again an instance of the remark above.
ἀπὸ Κυρίου Πνεύματος is, as regards our rule, the manner of the change. As to the passage, I should rather translate "the Lord the Spirit," perhaps more nearly conveyed in English by i the Lord in Spirit."
Moses looked at the Lord and was changed. We look at our Moses and see the glory of the Lord unveiled. We are changed into it thus as by the Lord. But it is only in spirit, that is, the Lord is to us known in the spiritual revelation of Him. It is really and solely (and indeed much more excellently) the revelation of the Spirit, whose presence and power is there; but as revealing, by which we know or see, the Lord. Compare verse 3.
Gal. 4:6. It is one crying, - a proper personal object.
6: 1. is the manner, and indeed, means also disposition.
Eph. 1:17. A case already spoken of, δώη. It was not the whole person of the Holy Ghost as an object, was given. What was given was a spirit of wisdom; doubtless the power of this was the Holy Ghost.
4:23. requires no remark.
Phil. 1:19. Here the Spirit objectively as a person, or at any rate as a power, working in him. The remarkable point as to the article in this case is, one article with the request and reply for its common subject, - τῆς ὑμῶν δεήσεως καὶ ἐπιχορηγίας. These two made up the means of its turning to salvation; they could not be separated in the apostle's thought.
2 Thess. 2:8. calls for no remark. It is an allusion to Isaiah, governed by ordinary rules.
Heb. 10:29. does not either. The Spirit is specially set up as an object. The sin was worse by His being the spirit of grace.
1 Peter 1:11. It was a personal Spirit working in them as an object, not of the Christ as a mystic head, but of that person as a name.
4:14. calls for no lei-nark, but that it skews that it is not merely a state, but one who is pointed out who rested on them. Further, it distinguishes the Holy Ghost as the Spirit of Glory and power on them, and the Spirit of God, or at any rate of Glory. The Spirit of Glory and the Spirit of God; not two spirits. but distinct objects in the mind. If we read δυνάμεως, δόξης and δυνάρεως are the united character connected with the object; θεοῦ, a distinct one. This reading, adopted by Scholz and Griesbach, I prefer.
1 John 4:2. calls for no remark. We see, what has been remarked before, that the Holy Ghost is spoken of in that in which he acted. The doctrine as to this is fully taught in 1 Cor. 12 -the one Spirit that is in these various gifts. I say this, because of πᾶν πνεῦμα, where it is taken as it stands, as a πνεῦμα, in the man. Further, πᾶν cannot have the article, because τὸ giving, as we have seen, the object in its entirety, πᾶν τὸ πνεῦμα would be all the spirit, and the distributive πᾶν, every, cannot have the article. No passage in the Revelation calls for notice, as far as I am aware, unless 10:11, where it follows the case which gave rise to this examination. This was what characterized what entered, to set them on their feet,-a Spirit of life. It was not to present the Spirit as an object, but what characterized this sudden event in its source.
It would have been going too far to say, τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ζωῆς: that would have amounted to a declaration that the Holy Ghost came and dwelt in them; but this was not the object, but, merely, that, of God, this living power changed the whole state of things. It is not a spirit, as- if there were many, nor the Spirit, as if it marked specifically the Holy Ghost. A spirit of life, or the spirit of life, may either be used in English; the latter giving emphasis to life only, and so making it characteristic, and a leaving indefinitely, with its force in life. Neither represents the extreme and perfect accuracy of the Greek, specially from a in English being a special sign of distributive unity. It was a man, not a woman; or, it was a man, not two men.' But we can hardly say, "spirit of life from God." So Luke 24:39. Here we have πνεῦμα, "spirit hath not," a thing of that nature: τὸ πνεῦμα would have been evidently quite another sense, either from habit of Scripture- thought, the Holy Ghost, or else the abstract idea-spirit (hardly, from the ordinary use of πνεῦμα, a legitimate expression); but the abstract idea would he quite out of place to affirm anything about. Hence "a spirit," or "spirits," is the nearest in English.
Luke 1:35. We have a remarkable case of the absence of the article; but I judge, though no other than the Holy Ghost is meant, yet it is looked at as power characteristic of the act. So δύναμις, as we have seen, δικαιοσύνη, ὀργὴ, and other cases. We have seen another case in the rapture of Philip (Acts 8:39; compare Acts 5.9), where the. Spirit is personally presented. So-
2: 25. We have the principle of what characterizes, in power, the man; whereas, in verse 26, it is a revealing person: So in 27, ἐν πνεύματι would have merely been his state when he came in: ἐν τῶ πνεύματι, he came, led by the Spirit there, as I judge. So in 4:2.
11:13 is the already noticed case of characterizing the gift. So John 1:33, the baptism. So Acts 11:16. So John 3:5, the birth: 4:24, the character of the worship; but that was by the Holy Ghost: in 7:39, it depends evidently on οὔπω ῆν, on principles already stated as to a negative. There was no Holy Ghost yet; not therefore an object, its presence being denied. 11:33; 13:21; 19:30, have been already noticed-His Spirit as a living man.
We have, then, an important passage in John 20.22. Here it was not the Holy Ghost, come down as a distinct person, as on the day of Pentecost, or in 1 Cor. 12, distributing to every man severally as He will; but the communication of living power, in connection with Jesus, which would act in them (in manner) as it acted in Him. It is not that it was any other than by the Holy Spirit; but as God breathed into Adam's nostrils the πνεῦμα ζωῆς, and he became a living soul, so the second Adam, who is the Lord from heaven, and a quickening Spirit, breathes into them, so that there should be communion of life, and they have life and spiritual energy through Him. Τὸ ἄγιον πνεῦμα would have been, if we may so speak, the whole Holy Ghost in person; but then He would have been in such sort communicated and received. Sent He was afterward, and come He did; but then it was personally acting, and willing.
Acts 1:2,5 require no comment: it is the manner of the giving commandments, and of the baptism.
5: 9. Here the Holy Ghost is presented as a person to whom the lie was really addressed, and who was tempted (i.e., wickedly put to the test), as if he could be deceived. For what was Peter? The Lord, or one Spirit of the Lord, was there. Πνεῦμα Κυρίου is taken as one title, Κυρίου being really the name of Jehovah. It was not man's spirit they had essayed to deceive, but Jehovah, the Lord's. This often gives an adjectival force to the words GOD, LORD, etc., seeing they give the whole bearing to the nature of the thing they are thus affixed to, in a way which nothing else could.
1 Cor. 2:4. The whole passage is evidently characteristic of the preaching, and therefore no article is in it; and yet it is evidently the Spirit of God which is in question, in contrast with man.
10, 11, 12 present a collection of cases, which, as very simple on the principles presented, require no remark, though confirmatory of them. We may notice τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ κόσμου as presenting the case of the genitive following, as usually presenting a precise object, and showing that TD does not involve a person, but the way in which the word is used.
13. Here we have again most clearly the Holy Ghost in person, and yet there is no article, because the whole phrase is merely characteristic of these speaking.
5: 3. Τῶ σώματι, τῶ πνεύματι, objectively presented as in contrast, but not going beyond himself, as is confirmed by the next verse. So vii. 34, where it has not the article, because it only characterizes the extent of the holiness.
7: 40 is a remarkable case, but instructive. The apostle did not mean to say that he possessed the Holy Ghost objectively spoken of. So Acts 19:2. We have seen always that such an accusative characterizes the possession, or receiving. There more especially, as in this case, this possession of the Holy Ghost was characteristic of the judgment he had given. I notice
12:3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, only to remark the former as manner; the latter as evidently the Spirit as a person objectively, the force being otherwise the same. Compare also verse 11, where the personality of the Blessed Spirit is so plainly and peculiarly stated, with verse 13, where the same spirit is, without controversy, meant, but there is no article as being characteristic of the baptism.'
Another remarkable case is found 14:14, 16, if we receive the reading of many ancient manuscripts. The first is already noticed; he is speaking of his spirit under the power of the Holy Ghost, in contrast with his mind; but this contrast existing no longer, he uses ἐν πνεύματι, as characteristic of the blessing spoken of. This reading, however, is not adopted by Griesbach nor Scholz.
2 Cor. 3:3. is a strong case of what characterizes ἐπιστολὴ ἐγγεγραμμένη. So verse
6. The character of the ministry; and τὸ πνεῦμα is not the Holy Ghost as a person, but the πνεῦμα he is speaking of, as an objective abstraction contrasted with γράμμα.
17. The same; but in the close of the verse he changes to the power which gives it that character.
6: 6. Rightly, I judge, translated "by the Holy Ghost." It has no article, as being the manner of approving himself as a minister of God.
2 Cor. 7:1. is evidently the manner of defilement,-not contrast as objects, but two ways of doing it. Μολυσμοῦ is distributive, "every defilement," and so cannot have the article.
Gal. 3:2. demands notice, because after ἐλάβετε it has τὸ, which we have seen often wanting; but here it is not merely the characteristic of the gift, and a possession marking their state. It became important to mark out a well-known and all-distinctive object which was then amongst them, and therefore τὸ πνεῦμα alone could be properly used. Verse 3 we have πνεύματι, characteristic of the manner of their beginning. Verse 5 is governed by the evident reason already given. Verse 14, it is a given promise of this Spirit,-not receive " a promise," but " the promise" already made. So Eph. 1:13.
4:29. follows the common rule. Chapter 5:17,18, afford illustrations which confirm the proofs already given. Verse 25, "in the Spirit," hardly renders it.
Eph. 1:17. The condition of the man characterizes the gift.
2:22. ἐν πνεύματι, the manner of God's dwelling there; but it is the Holy Ghost himself; as iii. 5.
4:3. Rightly, "the unity of the Spirit," not "of Spirit." Verse 4 is really an impersonal use of the verb substantive.
Phil. 2:1. Rightly, I believe, "of the Spirit." Εῖ τις necessarily precludes the article pointing to an object.
Col. 2:5. I should translate "in Spirit;" the article contrasts it with σαρκί.
1 Thess. 1:5. Rightly " the Holy Ghost." It is the manner of the
Gospel's presence. So verse 6, of the joy.
4:8. Here πνεῦμα ἄγιον has the article, however connected with δόντα, both as linked with αὑτοῦ, and as necessarily presented in the argument as an object as personally there, showing the gravity of the fault referred to.
1 Tim. 3:16. "In the Spirit" is difficult to understand: ἐν πνεύματι, the manner or character of the justification. ἐν has constantly the force of the virtue, efficacy, power of; and ἐν πνεύματι would be the power of the Holy Ghost.
Heb. 1:7. The, translation is clearly right: τοὺς ἀγγέλους is in sense equivalent to a subject; and " being made spirits" is affirmed about them.
2:4. Is a clear case of the manner of witness.
6:4. Μετόχους πνεύματος ἁγίου. Here, too, I judge it characterizes their condition, like the cases of " filled with the Spirit;" not the directing the mind to the person of the Holy Ghost as a complete object. In passing, we may note here another noticeable case in this verse, γευσαμένους with the genitive has the article τῆς. The heavenly gift being to be tasted of, is necessarily presented as a definite object in itself; and this was the object of the apostle, contrasting the heavenly gift with what the Jews had had as such. It is not merely of such a thing, but of this as contrasted with the earthly. Whereas, when in the subsequent words, they are nouns, qualifying with the verb their actual condition, they have it not, as γευσαμένους καλὸν θεοῦ ῥῆμα.
1 Peter 3:4. We have two adjectives with an article, as forming on character of spirit. The τοῦ is at any rate necessary from the ὄ ἀστιν which follows.
18. I doubt not the reading which omits τῶ; is the right. Σαρκ and πνεύματι are not two distinct parts of one being, contrasted, as σῶμα and πνεῦμα, but the manner respectively of putting to death and being quickened, that in respect of, or as to, which it so took place. Were the τῶ πνεύματι to be read, it would then speak of the person of the Holy Ghost, as the one by whom the resurrection took place. It is, at any rate, the Holy Ghost; but without the article it is the manner of the quickening, and does not draw attention to the personal power. Were it τῆ σαρκὶ, τῶ πνεῦματι, I should look at it as the Spirit of Christ as a man which was quickened, which is quite foreign to the testimony of God: σαρκὶ, τῶ πνευματι would have looked at the Holy Ghost as an extrinsic agent; σαρκὶ, πνεύματι are flesh and spirit, as we have said, as the character of the two acts; although the divine character of the latter is undoubted in its power. Compare 4:6.
2 Peter 1:21. It is evidently the manner of their being borne along, though we know it to be the Holy Ghost.
1 John 4:6. I notice merely, as giving an example of the transition (from undoubted example of the Holy Ghost and evil spirits personally) to the general idea of its effect or power in operation. Yet we have τὸ πνεῦμα induced by the definiteness afforded by the genitives added, forming definite distinctive contrast.
And yet when the Spirit is spoken of by itself, then the article points out the Holy Ghost, because it is to the mind the well-known" object, whose presence in power distinguished the saints. So v. 6, where I apprehend the try is added to Own and dawn, not as reference to these words previously used without it as the manner of the coming, but in an abstract sense, as definitely presenting the thing in its nature to the mind. This 6th verse also shows how completely the Spirit so spoken of--if a multitude of other passages had not shown it to us -is in the mind of the church, then -the Spirit known, dwelling and acting among them down on earth. Thus, it can be said, the Spirit is truth. No flesh, or fleshly communication, or wisdom, ever was such,-only what the Spirit said or did. Truth and It were absolutely coincident terms. So John 7, " The Holy Spirit was not yet (given), because that Jesus was not yet glorified." And Acts 19, "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost, or whether the Holy Spirit is."
I have now noticed every case, having only not cited those evidently based on the principles explained and confirmed by other examples. I felt it worth while, on a point so important, and where the article so eminently affects the interpretation, to go through all the cases in the New Testament. The Revelations afford us no case which presents a difficulty, unless 11:11, where it is not τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ζωῆς, as if it was some particular or well-known thing, but merely that which was such had this character in its work in them (not exactly a spirit of life, which would imply there were several, nor the, though that is better), "from God" giving it in English a general character: a certain power so to be characterized, acting in them from God. I return to examine the cases occurring in the Epistle to the Romans.
OM 8Rom. 8:23. υίοθεσίαν characterizes their expectation; ἀπολύτρωσιν the definite object fulfilled then; ἡμῶν makes this even necessary.
24. ἐλπὶς βλεπομένη is the kind of hope, or characterizes such a hope as is no hope. It is one of many kinds, and thus characterizes the abstract idea. This is often the effect of an adjective or participle.
33. Against such as are this-ἐκλεκτῶν.
35. θλίψις, etc., any of this kind of things, such things as these; ὡς, as in 36, makes this use constantly very plain.
OM 99:4. All these are well-known particular things, presented as objects.
5. I do not doubt θεὸς applies to Christ.
8. ταῦτα τέκνα. τέκνα is a regular predicate; τοῦ θεοῦ is a personal Being, and an object contrasted with σαρκός.
I have already remarked that this should be, "for this word is of promise."
24. "Not only of Jews" (such kind of persons); so, " of Gentiles."
30. "Gentiles," not "the Gentiles."
31. "A law of righteousness;" such a thing; not "the." So they did not attain to any.
32. "The stumbling-stone," not " that."
OM 1010:4. All this is descriptive of Christ; Χριστὸς all through is an historical name.
OM 11Rom. 11:12, 13. Τοὶς ἔθνεσι, ἐθνῶν; the first, the actual people; the second characterizes the apostleship.
19. κλάδοι, "branches," not οἱ, which would have been all or some mentioned before; κατὰ φύσιν, itself characteristic, marks these particular ones out, as objects, with τῶν (verse 21),
22. χρηστότητα καὶ ἀποτομίαν, not abstractedly these qualities, but cases of it; divine goodness and severity; τῆ χηστότητι, the goodness spoken of.
24. τῆς κατὰ φύσιν...ἀγριελαίου; here again κατὰ φύσιν leads to the pointing out that olive tree, which, according to nature, was graffed into καλλιέλαιον, a good olive; παρὰ φύσιν being here connected with ἐνεκεντρἰσθης.
33. Ὠ βἀθος I judge to be spoken of this example not abstractedly, though the Ὠ may affect it. Τὰ κρίματα...αἱ ὁδοὶ "all his judgments and ways."
OM 1212:8. If τῆ παρακλήσει, that spoken of in παρακαλῶν, ἐν ἁπλότητι the manner of giving. Verse 7 explains this clearly in δ. and δ δ.
17. κακόν, any evil act, such a thing.
21. ὑπὸ τοῦ κακοῦ, the abstract thing; evil as contrasted with τῶ ἀγαθπω.
OM 1313:1 ἐξουσίαις, things of this character, higher powers, not the higher.
3. οἱ ἄρχοντες, these rulers, whose existence he now supposes, so that he can point them out, or all rulers.
4. εἰς ὀργὴν, "for wrath;" this character of dealing; but δία τὴν ὀργὴν, just spoken of (verse 5).
5. διὰ τὴν συνείδησιν, an express object here, because in contrast with τὴν ὀργὴν.
8. νόμον πεπλήρωκε, " has accomplished law", i.e. whatever law can demand.
10. πλὴρωμα νόμου is a regular predicate; τὸ πλήρωμα would have made it reciprocal.
12. τὰ /ργα τοῦ σκότους, all the works which belong to the darkness which the night implies. Rather it is abstract, as opposed to φωτὸς here, and not to be taken alone.
OM 1414:9. "Both of dead and living;" these two kinds of persons. I note in passing, that I little doubt 16:25, 26, 27, come in at the end of this chapter.
OM 1515:2. Εἰς τὸ ἀγαθὸν, is emphatic as contrasted with mere self-pleasing, and specially set before the mind as an object; for good, ἀγαθὸν, being abstract, οἰκοδοωὴν, merely characterizes the conduct by the actual thing sought: that which was good was in his mind; he should act for edification. Compare Eph. 4:12.
7. εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ, the manner of reception.
Rom. 15:8. Περιτομῆς, not of the Jewish people as a body, but on this principle.
12. ἐθνῶν, ἐθνῆ, are remarkable; but it is over this class of
persons, not Jews. It is a quotation from the LXX.
18. Gives a notable example of anarthrous words, describing the manner of Paul's work.
16:1. Τὴν ἀδελφὴν ἡμῶν, points out the person, and is objective. They would not know which Phoebe else; in every analogous case, it points her out as contrasted with other Phoebes: the οῦσαν itself gives a mere quality to διάκονον, but τὴν διάκονον, if indeed admissible, or τὸν διάκονον, would distinguish her by this quality from others at Cenchrea, and make her the only διάκονον there; οῦσαν διάκονον is
.a quality and character she had (there might be others), and hence has no article. So verse 3, τοὺς συνεργούς μου.
7. We have τοὺς συγγενεῖς μου καὶ συναιχμαλώτους μου, two common qualifications of these persons which marked them out. Hence the first has the article, as in every other case, the second not, according to the rule amply discussed, as making up with the other the complete amount.
17. τὰς διχοστασίας καὶ τὰ σκάνδαλα, all the divisions and offenses that might be. The article gives completeness and extent to the idea. Without the article, it would have merely characterized. The men cause divisions; any, be they what they may.
26. διά τε γραφῶν προφητικῶν, "by prophetic writings." That character of writings was the means of making it known, not "the Scriptures of the prophets."
Here I close. Enough has now been given to show the use and application, which is in itself perfectly simple. To my mind it is fully confirmed and proved. I trust it may be the means of throwing light upon, and giving the full force and character to many passages of the blessed word. The subject of the Spirit, and specialty of that case, will render the full examination of every instance, I hope, useful.
Proverbial Expressions.
There is a class of expressions to which it may be well to allude-short, pithy, or proverbial sayings, which, in many languages, make exception to ordinary grammar, and only claim a metaphysical explanation. It would be said. in French, "Chat echaude craint leau froide;" " force lui fut;" in German, Unvieffenheit und Unichuldigfeit find Shwefiern. It is not merely, I judge, the rapidity of expression which gives occasion to it, or not always, but a peculiar state of mind which takes up the thought characteristically, and neither abstractedly nor objectively and it becomes, though an appellative noun, a kind o proper name. It is a stronger way of putting it than a mere descriptive statement. The object is so present to the mind that it does not require an article of any kind. Hence in prophetic oracles we have it φωνὴ βοῶντος. As in English, if the Queen were coming, the cry would be, " Queen! Queen!" it characterizes what produces the impression, gives a reason for the effect produced or intended to be produced; so 1 Thess. 2:5, Θεὸς μάρτυς, which stated historically, Phil. 1:8, is μάρτυς γάρ μου ἐστὶν ὁ Θεὸς. This is not perceived so much in English. All abstract nouns are without the article in whatever way they are used, and names never have it. The definite article is always allusive or distinctive.