<- Previous   First   Next ->

range of the writer's argument. And further the present ( ajnakainivzein ) suggests continual effort. Some divine work then may be equivalent to this renewing though not identical with it (Matt. 19:26). The change in such a case would not be a new birth, but a raising from the dead.

jAnakainivzein is found here only in the N. T. It occurs five times in the later books of the LXX. and in Herm. Sim. 8.6, 3; 9:14, 3. Compare ajnakainou'n 2 Cor. 4:16; Col. 3:10; ajnakaivnwsi" Rom. 12:2; Tit. 3:5, where the idea is simply that of ‘making new,’ not of ‘making again new.’
to; kainou;" poih'sai , Chrysostom says from one point of sight, tou' loutrou' movnon ejstiv . Comp. Herm. Sim. 8.6; 9:14.

The end of this renewal is metavnoia , a complete change of mind consequent upon the apprehension of the true moral nature of things. It follows necessarily that in this large sense there can be no second metavnoia (comp. Heb. 6:1). There may be, through the gift of GOD, a corresponding change, a regaining of the lost view with the consequent restoration of the fulness of life, but this is different from the freshness of the vision through which the life is first realised. The popular idea of repentance, by which it is limited to sorrow for the past, has tended to obscure the thought here. ajnastaurou'nta" ... kai; paradeigmativzonta" ] Vulg. rursum crucifigentes (de recruciantes , Tert. refigentes cruci ) et ostentui habentes. The present participles (contrast parapesovnta" of the definite past act of apostasy) bring out the moral cause of the impossibility which has been affirmed. There is an active, continuous hostility to Christ in the souls of such men as have been imagined.

The two words express the main idea under different aspects. The first ( ajnastaurou'nta" ) marks specially the wrong done to Christ: the second
(
paradeigmativzonta" ) the effect which is produced upon others in deterring them from the Faith.
ajnastaurou'nta" ] seeing they crucify again. Tiv de; ejsti;n ajnastaurou'nta" ; a[nwqen pavlin staurou'nta" (Chrys.), and so the other ancient interpreters with the versions (comp. Hier. ad Gal. 5.24 ajnastaurou'nte" ...quod nos interpretari possumus recrucifigentes ). In classical Greek however the word has the sense of ‘raising on the cross,’ crucifying with the additional notion of exposure: e.g., Herod. 7.194, 238
(
ejkevleuse ajpotamovnta" th;n kefalh;n ajnastaurw'sai ). There is the same double meaning in other similar compounds: e.g., ajnablevpw . The word is illustrated by the phrase attributed to the Lord which is quoted by Origen ( In Joh. 20.12) from ‘the Acts of Paul’: a[nwqen mevllw staurwqh'nai . Compare Resch, Agrapha , p. 430.

It was through faithlessness, by clinging to selfish prepossessions instead of yielding to divine guidance, that the Jews first crucified Christ. Those who fall away practically repeat the act as often as their unbelief is shewn, and by the notoriety of their apostasy put Him to open shame.

Perhaps there is the further thought in the image of crucifixion that Christ dwells in the believer. To fall away from the faith is therefore to slay Him. Contrast Gal. 6:14.

This new crucifixion of Christ is said to be eJautoi'" , that is to their own loss and condemnation (Tert. in semetipsis , Vulg. sibimetipsis ). Compare Rom. 13:2; Matt. 23:31; Gal. 6:14. The Fathers present the impossibility as


<- Previous   First   Next ->