² A short study read at the St Andrews meeting of S.N.T.S. on Thursday, 7 September 1961.

³ J.-P. Migne, Patrologia Graeca, XIV, col. 1211.Google Scholar

⁴ Migne, P.G. LX, col. 599.

⁵ Ibid. LXXXII, col. 188.

⁶ Ibid. CXVIII, col. 565.

⁷ Ibid. CXXIV, col. 501.

⁸ D. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimar), LVII, 103. (I was unable to consult the previous volume which contains the Vorlesung on Romans.)Google Scholar

⁹ Corpus Reformatorum, LXXVII, col. 237.

¹⁰ Synopsis Criticorum aliorumque S. Scripturae Interpretum, IV, Pars, Posterior (London, 1676), cols. 267–8.Google Scholar

¹¹ Gnomon Novi Testamenti (1742; 3rd ed. reprinted London, 1862), p. 553.Google Scholar

¹² Beet, J. A., A Commentary on St Paul's Epistle to the Romans (1877; 10th ed.London, 1902), pp. 318f.Google Scholar

¹³ The Epistle of St Paul to the Romans (The Expositor's Bible; London, 1894), pp. 329 f.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Sanday, W. and Headlam, A. C., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh, 1895; 3rd ed. 1898), p. 355.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Denney, J. in The Expositor's Greek Testament, II (London, 3rd ed. 1904), p. 689.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Lagrange, M.-J., Épître aux Romains (Paris, 1916; reprinted 1950), p. 296.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Pallis, A., To the Romans: A Commentary (Liverpool, 1920), p. 134.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Schlatter, A., Gottes Gerechtigkeit: Ein Kommentar Zum Römerbrief (1935; 3rd ed. Stuttgart, 1959), pp. 336f.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Althaus, P., Der Brief an die Römer (1935; 6th ed.Göttingen, 1949), pp. 107 f.Google Scholar

¹ Brunner, E., The Letter to the Romans (1938; English transl. of 1956 ed. London, 1959), pp. 103 f.Google Scholar

² Gaugler, E., Der Brief an die Römer, II (Zurich, 1952), 240 f.Google Scholar

³ Michel, O., Der Brief an die Römer (Göttingen, 1955), p. 265.Google Scholar

⁴ Leenhardt, F.-J., L'Épître de Saint Paul aux Romains (Neuchâtel, 1957), pp. 173 f.Google Scholar

⁵ Barrett, C. K., The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1957), p. 235.Google Scholar

⁶ Huby, J., Saint Paul: Épître aux Romains (new ed. by Lyonnet, S., Paris, 1957), pp. 415 f.Google Scholar

⁷ Lietzmann, H., An die Römer (4th ed.Tübingen, 1933).Google Scholar

⁸ Dodd, C. H., The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1932).Google Scholar

⁹ Fr. 1 (in Diels, H., Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, 11).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Leges, IV, 716c.Google Scholar

¹¹ I, iii, 18.

¹² Ethica Nicomachea, 1170b, 30.Google Scholar

¹³ On μέτρον Liddell, cf. H. G. and Scott, R., A Greek–English Lexicon (revised ed. Oxford, 1940), p. 1123;Google ScholarArndt, W. F. and Gingrich, F. W., A Greek–English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature (Cambridge, 1957), p. 516;Google ScholarDeissner, K. in T. W.N. T. IV 635–8.Google Scholar It is interesting to compare Jastrow, M., A Dictionary of the Targumim, etc. (New York, 1950), p. 732,Google Scholar on �ℸdoubt; and also Kuhn, K. G., Konkordanz zu den Qumrantexten (Göttingen, 1960), p. 115, where seven occurrences of �ℸℸℑ in the Dead Sea Scrolls are listed.Google Scholar

¹ T.W.N.T. VI, 214.Google Scholar

² Op. cit. p. 1408, under πíστις, III.Google Scholar

³ Unless we are going to accept Venema's conjecture that τι has fallen out after ōντι—a course which it would be extremely hard to justify.

¹ Chrysostom might seem to avoid this difficulty by putting the emphasis on ó Θegr;ός έμέριsgr;εν; but, after the idea of μετρεīν has been so much emphasized in the earlier part of the sentence (μή úπερπαρ’ ő δει, and, in this context, σωϕρονεĩν), μέτρ:ον can hardly be used unemphatically. A different way out of the difficulty would be to assume that Paul was thinking of all the μέτρα as being equal; but this must be rejected, since Paul clearly recognized that some Christians have more, and some less, faith (cf., for example, Rom, . xiv. 1; II Cor. x. 15).Google Scholar

² Equally improbable is the variation of (c), according to which πιστεως stands for χάριτος by metonymy (so Theodoret: τήν ξάριν ένταũθα πίστιν έκάλεσδιά γάρ πίστεως ή τής ξάριτος δóσς, και πρòς τ:ò μέτρον τñς πíστεως ξορ:ηγεīται τ:ά δώρα τής ξ:άριτολ. κελεúει δέ τ:ή δοθείση ξάριτι μετρεīν τό ϕρóνημα τς ψυξñς. Cf. Origen: ‘…hoc est, ut sciat unusquisque et intelligat quae in eo sit mensura gratiae Dei, quam consequi meruit per fidem.’) On the variant reading χάριτος for πιστεως here in Rom. xii. 3 see Zuntz, G., The Text of the Epistles (London, 1953), p. 76.Google Scholar

³ Abelard's comment (Migne, Patrologla Latina, CLXXVIII, col. 939: ‘Sieut Deus divisit mensuram fidei, id est prout credit faciendum esse, ita hoc impleat’) might suggest that he understood mensura in this sense, but the sequel makes this doubtful.

¹ Bywater, I., Aristotelis Ethica Nicomachea (Oxford, 1890), p. 249.Google Scholar

² T.WJ.f.T. IV, 635.Google Scholar

³ There is an interesting occurrence of �ℸℸℑ apparently meaning ‘standard’ in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 1QS viii. 4: … лу�ℸ |⌉⊃лℶ⌉ лℑℵ�ℸ лℑℵ�ℸ лℸℑℶ 'ℸ▭ℶ ℑу 'ℸ�ℸл�ℸ'ℸ▭⃜ (An original лℸℑ'ℶ has been corrected to лℸℑℶ.)

¹ έκάστω κ.τ.λ. would seem to be equivalent to έκαστος κατά τò μέτρον τής, πίστεως, ő έμέρισεν αύτώ ό Θεóς.

² T.W.N.T. 1, 350f.Google Scholar

³ Barth, K., Der Römerbrief (2nd ed. reprinted Munich, 1929), p. 429,Google Scholar allows for an identification of the μέτρον πιστες with Jesus Christ, but he translates μέτρον Ziel (‘1st der gekreuzigte Christus das “Ziel des Glaubens, das Gott einem Jeden (und zwar Jedem gerade in seiner Einzelnheit!) zugewiesen hat”…‘). In his Kurze Erklärung des Römerbriefes (Munich, 1956), p. 186, he has: ‘…daß er daraufsinne, besonnen zu seim, was dann sofort damit erklärt wird: daß er den ihm von Gott bestimmten Lauf seines christlichen Glaubens antrete und vollende (v. 3).’ But in neither commentary does he anywhere, as far as I can see, make absoluteiy clear exactly how he understands the phrase μέτρον πιστεως.Google Scholar