Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Galatians 6:17 - 6:17
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Gal_6:17. Τοῦ λοιποῦ ] occurring only here in the N.T., very frequent in other authors; not ceterum, so that it would be a formula abrumpendi (Bengel, Zachariae, and others), equivalent to τὸ λοιπόν (2Co_13:11; Eph_6:10; Php_3:1, et al.), but the genitive of time (Kühner, II. p. 189): posthac, henceforward (Xen. Anab. v. 7. 34, vi. 4. 11; Plat. Legg. vii. p. 816 D, Demos, p. 385 B; Herod. ii. 109; and the passages in Wetstein); and that as denoting “repetitionem ejusdem facti reliquo tempore” (Hermann ad Viger. p. 706). The sense posthac might also have been expressed by the accusative ( τὸ λοιπόν , Mat_26:41; Mar_14:41; 1Co_7:29; Xen. Anab. ii. 2. 5, iii. 2. 8; Soph. Trach. 907, 917); but in this case a repetitio perpetua would be meant (Hermann, l.c.). Comp. Kühner, ad Xen. Anab, ii. 2. 5. Calvin explains: “as for the rest,” i.e. praeter novam creaturam. Comp. Wieseler: “quod restat.” In this case, either the genitive would stand absolutely: “as concerns what remains” ( ὃ δὲ λοιπόν , 1Co_4:2), see Heind. ad Charm. p. 89; Matthiae, p. 815; or it would be dependent on κόπους . But, looking at the frequent use of τοῦ λοιποῦ as a particle of time, both these explanations would be very unnecessarily far-fetched. This remark also applies to the view of Hofmann, who strangely attaches τοῦ λοιποῦ , notwithstanding the want of an antithetical particle, as genitive of the object to κόπους , and conceives Ἰσραήλ as again supplied: on account of the Israel, which is not the Israel of God. Respecting that Israel, in the apostle’s view, he has not to inquire whether it will be injured through the labour to which he is called. As if any such cold, remorseless renunciation could be justly attributed to the apostle who held his συγγενεῖς κατὰ σάρκα so painfully dear (Rom_9:1 ff; Rom_10:1), and strove in every possible way to gain them (1Co_9:20). But from the hostile annoyances and vexations, which the reader would readily understand to be referred to in these words, the apostle desires to remain henceforward exempt; and this he demands with apostolic sternness.
ἐγὼ γὰρ κ . τ . λ .] the emphasis is on ἐγώ : it is not the teachers who are hostile to me, these men afraid to suffer (Gal_6:12), but I who bear, etc. στίγματα ( στίγμα is paroxytone; see Lobeck, Paralip. p. 406) signifies marks branded or etched in, which, usually consisting of letters (Lev_19:28), were put on the body (especially on the forehead and hands) in the case of slaves, as the device of their masters;[272] of soldiers, as the badge of their general; of criminals, as a sign of their offence; and among some oriental nations also, as a token of the divinity which they worshipped (3Ma_2:29; and Grimm in loc). See Wetstein, p. 237 f.; Lipsius, Elect. ii. 15; Deyling, Obss. III. p. 423 ff.; Spencer, Legg. rit. ii. 14. 1; Ewald, in Apocal. p. 151 f. Here Paul has had in view the marks borne by slaves:[273] for, according to the immediate context (Gal_6:14; Gal_6:18), Christ is present to his mind as the Lord; and also in 2Co_11:23 he discerns, in the ill treatment which he has suffered, the proof that he is διάκονος Χιρστοῦ . Comp. also Rev_7:3. The genitive Ἰησοῦ denotes therefore the Ruler, whose servant Paul is indicated to be by his στίγματα ; and because in this case the feeling of fellowship with the concrete person of his Master has thoroughly pervaded him, he does not write Χριστοῦ , but Ἰησοῦ (comp. on 2Co_4:10). Others have explained: “notae corporis tales, quales ipse Christus gestavit” (Morus, comp. Borger); but against this it may be urged that Paul has not made use of a word which of itself conveys a complete idea (such as τὴν νέκρωσιν , 2Co_4:10), but has used the significant στίγματα , which necessarily prompts the reader to ask to whom the person marked ( στιγματίας , also στιγματοφόρος , Polyaen. Strat. i. 24) is described as belonging. Therefore Ἰησοῦ is not (with Gomarus and Rückert) to be considered as genitive auctoris.
But what was it that Paul bore in his body as the στίγματα Ἰησοῦ ? The scars and other traces of the wounds and mal-treatment, which he had received on account of his apostolic labours.[274] For in the service of Christ he had been maltreated (2Co_11:23), and that so that he must have retained scars or similar indications (see 2Co_11:24-25). Some expositors have, however, believed that Paul adduces these στίγματα by way of contrast to the scar of circumcision (Erasmus in his Annot., Beza, Schoettgen, Grotius; comp. Bengel and Michaelis); but this idea is arbitrarily introduced, and in its paltriness alien to the lofty self-consciousness which these words breathe.
Lastly, as regards the sense in which the reference of γάρ is to be taken, many expositors explain it, with Grotius: “satis aliunde habeo, quod feram.” So, in substance, Vatablus, Bengel (“afflicto non est addenda afflictio”), Morus, Winer. But what a feeble reason to assign would this be, either as fretful or as even bespeaking compassion, and wholly repugnant at all events to the proud feeling of being marked as the δοῦλος of Christ! (comp. 2Co_11:23 ff.) And the ἘΓΏ , so full of self-consciousness in opposition to the false teachers, is inconsistent with this view. No; Paul means (“veluti trophaea quaedam ostentans,” Erasmus, Paraphr.) to say: for I am one who, by being marked as the servant of Christ, is in possession of a dignity, which may justly exempt him from any repetition of molestations (such as had vexed him on the part of the Galatian churches).
On βαστάζω , comp. Chrysostom: ΟὐΚ ΕἾΠΕΝ ἜΧΩ , ἈΛΛᾺ ΒΑΣΤΆΖΩ , ὭΣΠΕΡ ΤΙς ἘΠῚ ΤΡΟΠΑΊΟΙς ΜΈΓΑ ΦΡΟΝῶΝ .
[272] In the East; but among the Romans only in the case of slaves who were suspected or had run away (as a sign of the latter offence, they were by way of punishment branded with Φ or F.U.G.).
[273] Not of soldiers, as Grotius (comp. Calvin), and Potter, Arch. II. p. 7, think; for this must have been suggested by the context. Wetstein understands sacras notas (Herod. ii. 113: στίγματα ἱρά ), so that Paul represents Christ “ut Deum, quem τὸν κύριον κατʼ ἐξοχήν vocat.” But these sacrae notae are only found among particular nations, such as the Persians and Assyrians (Plut. Lucull. p. 507 E; Lucian, de Dea Syra, 59; comp. also what is related in Herod. ii. 113 about a temple of Hercules in Egypt, and in the Asiatic Researches, vii. p. 281 f., about the Indians); hence so foreign a custom would not be likely to suggest itself to the apostle, nor could it be understood by his readers without some more special indication.
[274] Not as Luther, 1519 and 1524, following Augustine, thought: the taming of the flesh and the fruits of the Spirit; against which the ἐν τῷ σώματί μου is itself decisive. In the Commentary of 1538, he understands “plagas corpori suo impressas et passiones, deinde ignita tela diaboli, tristitiam et pavores animi,” which thus throws together very different elements outward and inward.