to some other. Hence, when it is used of the delivery of the Gospel, it implies the preaching of it in opposition to all other notions of religion, whether idolatry, or philosophical systems, or misrepresentations of the Mosaic Institution, and generally to all sinful sentiments and inclinations.

II. "The testimony which Christ sent me to give respecting the dealings of God with mankind.”- -What St. Paul here calls TO μαρτυριον του Θεου, is the same as what in ch. r. 6. he terms το μαρ TUGIOY TOU XGIOTOU, that is, in other words, the Gospel. By the latter periphrase we must understand him to describe it as testimony which he gave concerning Christ as the promised Messiah, and the Redeemer of mankind; by the former, as testimony concerning God. Now, this could relate only to his dealings with men as rational beings. That he was sent by Christ appears from ch. 1. 17. with which verse this one is properly connected.

III. "Not with the supposed excellence of arguing in support of my preaching on the principles of human reasoning, or of delivering a system planned according to human wisdom.” Ου καθ ̓ ὑπεροχην λόγου η σοφίας, literally, not according to excellence from reasoning or from wisdom. The meaning as I take it, is this. Having said at ch. 1. 17. that he was not commissioned to deliver a rule of life originating from human reasoning, he now recurs to that observation, and states that in conformity to this commission, neither had he supported his preaching by reasoning on principles limited to human views, nor was the subject of it a rule of life adapted to human views. Which things only, he intimates by the word regoX, are what would in general estimation be thought, though undeservedly, to possess any excellence. (See the next note.)

V. 2. I. "For I did not think," &c.- -St. Paul in this and the three following verses proceeds to shew that, as he states in the last verse, his preaching was not καθ' υπεροχην λόγου η σοφιας either supported by reasoning limited to human views, or founded on a

system adapted to such views. But he reverses the order in which these things are there mentioned; and accordingly, in this verse and the next, he asserts that he preached not a human system, but the divine message of the crucifixion as the primary principle for regulating the conduct. And in v. 4, 5, he declares that he did not enforce the truth of this principle by shewing its conformity to the reasonings of human philosophy, but by exhibiting supernatural power. (See v. 4. n. 1.). What he wishes to impress on their minds is this, that he did not deliver either a human system supported by human means, nor a human system supported by divine power, nor a divine system supported by human means, but a divine system supported by divine power.

11. "Even among you" av sv.This seems to be said in allusion to their study of philosophy.

III. "There was need of knowing" TOU EIDEVAL·

which appears

to be governed by some substantive understood expressing necessity. We have a similar phrase in English. When we speak of a thing which we judge to be unnecessary to be known, or done, we say, "I did not think of knowing, or doing that.”

IV. Any thing as a principle for regulating the conduct.". That

relates to the conduct may be inferred from what follows, since certainly the crucifixion was designed for its regulation.

V.

« That Jesus is the Messiah," Ιησούν Χριστον.

The sense

given in the paraphrase is implied in the word Xpiorov, which was originally an appellative signifying anointed, but denoting more particularly the Messiah, whence it came at length to be appropriated to our Lord as a proper name (see Campbell on the Gospels, 5 Diss. Part. 4). It is true that this sense would have been more emphatically expressed by the use of the article before Xgorov, as is done ch. 11. 11., but yet it is sufficiently signified without it. And the reason for omitting the article, I apprehend, was because the

proper name serves best to bring our Lord personally to mind, and so agrees best with the mention of his crucifixion. The literal rendering of the Greek, ει μη Ιησούν Χριστον και τούτον εσταυρωμένον, 18, except Jesus Christ, and the same crucified."

66

I am of opinion

VI. "And that he was as such crucified.": that St. Paul stated the subject of his preaching to consist only of the two propositions, that Jesus is the Messiah, and that he was as such crucified, because from these two, rightly considered, the purpose of his crucifixion, and all the other doctrines of the Gospel, necessarily follow. If he was the Messiah foretold by the prophets, and his character agreed with their description of the Messiah's perfect righteousness, then it follows that when the providence of God suffered him to be crucified, it could not be for his own sins, but for another purpose. That purpose St. Paul declares in ch. xv. 3. to be for the sins of mankind (see particularly Isaiah, ch. LIII.). As St. Paul is here stating only the elements of his preaching, he expresses them in the simplest form (see more on this subject in note on ch. III. 12.).

III. "With a scrupulous regard to my instructions, and much anxiety lest I should fail in a due adherence to them," ev po na EY TROμW TOW. Compare Eph. ch. vi. 5. Philip. ch. 11. 12.; εν τρομῳ πολλῳ.. and see the quotation from Chrysostom under the word треми in Scapula.

V. 4. I. « The enforcement of my doctrine,” ὁ λόγος μου και το xŋguyμa μiov: —literally, my reasoning and my preaching; but κηρυγμα according to the figure Hendiadys (see Glass. Phil. Sac. de nomine can. 42), the reasoning of my preaching. St. Paul means by these expressions the inducements which he used to persuade men to receive the Gospel; which figuratively he calls reasoning, because that is the usual mode of inculcating systems of morality.

II. "Was not by urging the topics which human wisdom employs

for persuasion,” ουκ εν πείθοις ανθρωπινης σοφίας λογοις :

literal

ly, "not by persuasive arguments of human wisdom." Now what should these be but an explanation of the reasonableness of the doctrine according to human expectations. But it is obvious from the nature of the Gospel scheme, that this could not be done (see the next note).

III. "By an exhibition of the power of the Holy Spirit" ev arodaCEL πνεύματος και δυναμεως: -literally, by an exhibition of spirit and power; but by the figure Hendiadys (see Glass. de nom. can. 6), by an exhibition of spiritual power, which, as we know, accompanied the first preaching of the Gospel; and this is the only method by which the Gospel scheme could be enforced. For since it is not a deduction of reason, but a divine revelation, and refers to a future different state of existence, it could not be urged on men for reception by the ordinary arguments of human reason, but necessarily required for its support the sanction of divine authority. It will be observed that what St. Paul says in this verse relates to the proving of the truth of the scheme of redemption, and not to the exposition of its particulars as a scheme founded on revelation. As to the particulars of the plan, the connexion of its different parts, and the consistency of the whole; in that respect, it was proper and necessary that it should be shewn to be reasonable. And such explanation as was in that respect requisite, has been given in the Scriptures. But as to the reasonableness of the institution of the scheme itself no explanation is given, and that for reasons stated in ch. 11. 6. -ch. III. v. 1, 2.

V. 6. I." We publish.".

-When St. Paul, in speaking of himself as an apostle, uses the plural, he means himself and his immediate assistants who, under his direction, preached his peculiar doctrine of the crucifixion.

II. "In the judgment of those who are perfect as to the disposition of their minds, and thereby qualified to appreciate it:" EV TOLS.

τελειοις. -The general term TEλes signifying perfect, has its meaning fixed by the occasion on which it is used. Sometimes it is employed to denote a Christian generally as in Matt. ch. xix. 21. This application of it is founded on the circumstance that Christianity is the perfection of Judaism. Hence, the Christian rule of life is called νομον τέλειον τον της ελευθερίας, a perfect law, the law of liberty, James, ch. 1. 25. Hence, also, our Lord applies the verb TEλHOW to his own teaching as the completion of the designs of God towards mankind, John, ch. 1v. 34. Sometimes TEλ05 and its derivatives are used to express a comparative advance in Christian knowledge, Heb. ch. v. 14. ch. vI. 1. In the present case I apprehend, from its connexion with σoplav, that it relates to the disposition of the mind and its consequent mode of thinking, and denotes those persons who are of a spiritual turn of mind. They are properly styled perfect as to the disposition of their minds, since they have that turn of mind which it is the design of Christianity to produce. It is the same as πVEUμatixos, spiritually-minded, in v. 13. 15. of this chapter, and ch. 111. 1.

ini. "Yet not a system of wisdom derived from our present state of existence, nor from those, who, for a time, had the lead in religious knowledge through the dispensations adapted to our present existence”; σοφιαν δε ου του αιώνος τούτου, ουδε των αρχόντων του αιώνος τούτου των καταργουμένων. The word, awv, signifies

duration of time generally, and is thence variously applied to express either time under different limitations, or the circumstances connected with it, the particular meaning being in each case determined by the words in connexion. In the first of these clauses, Tou αιωνος τουτου denotes simply our present limited existence ; and goQIAV TOU AIWYOS TOUTOU, literally, wisdom derived from this duration of time, is a periphrase for human philosophy. In the second, these words being coupled with αρχοντων καταργουμένων acquire thence a special meaning. Now the words αρχοντων καταργουμένων clearly allude to the Jews (see v. 8.). But I think the allusion is not (as may at first sight appear) to the Jewish rulers, but to the superior