^{page 204 note 1} Cf. Barth, Karl, A Shorter Commentary on Romans (London, 1959), pp. 88f.Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 2} op. cit., p. 95f.

^{page 205 note 1} Cf. Michel, O., Der Brief an die Römer (Göttingen, 2nd ed., 1957), p. 180.Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 2} The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians, translated by Mackenzie, R. (Edinburgh, 1961), p. 179.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 1} Cf. Michel, op. cit., p. 181.

^{page 206 note 2} J.-P. Migne, Patrologia Graeca (cited below as P.G.) XIV, cols. 1121–2. The Greek fragments of his commentary (given in J.T.S. XIII-XIV) do not include his comments on this verse.

^{page 206 note 3} Knox, W. L., St. Paul and the Church of the Gentiles (Cambridge, 2nd ed., 1961), p. 105, n. 2Google Scholar, has suggested a further possibility—that the Chester Beatty Papyrus variant for might point to an original = ‘the Universe co-operates’; but it seems more likely that this variant is simply a slip.

^{page 207 note 1} LX, p. 110f.

^{page 207 note 2} Neotestamentica et Patristica (Leiden, 1962), pp. 16gff. On p. 171 he quotes Test. Gad 4.7 as support for interpretation (vi); but, while the quotation is interesting for the two occurrences of , it is difficult to see how it supports this interpretation, since neither nor denotes the Holy Spirit. Bruce, F. F., The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1963), p. 176Google Scholar, also regards the N.E.B. translation as ‘attractive’.

^{page 208 note 1} On the subject of conjectural emendation in the New Testament Metzger, B. M., The Text of the New Testament: its transmission, corruption and restoration (Oxford, 1964), pp. 182–185Google Scholar, should be consulted.

^{page 208 note 2} op. cit., p. 168.

^{page 209 note 1} Cf. Xcnophon, Mem. III.5.6; Polybius XI.9.1; Plutarch, Moralia 769D; Heliodorus IX. 11.

^{page 209 note 2} Though (Bauer,) Arndt and Gingrich do quote a close parallel from the 2nd/3rd century A.D. writer Alexander Aphrodisiensis (de fato 31) for (understood as accusative of respect) .

^{page 209 note 3} In Rom. 3.19 the subject () is placed in the relative clause; in 2 Cor. 5.1 the subject is indicated by the first person plural verb. In every other case the subject is expressed.

^{page 209 note 4} xxv. 3, Robinson, J. A., The Philocalia of Origen (Cambridge, 1893), p. 229.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 5} The Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh, 5th ed., 1902), p. 215.Google Scholar

^{page 210 note 1} P.G. LX, col. 541. His Greek is: .

^{page 210 note 2} P.C. LXXXII, col. 140. Pace the Latin translation given in Migne, which three times renders Theodoret's by the singular cooperatur, the original Greek does not, as far as I can see, give any clear indication that he understands God to be the subject of Paul's sentence.

^{page 210 note 3} P.G. CXVIII. col. 488.

^{page 210 note 4} P.G. CXXIV. col. 452.

^{page 210 note 5} It is interesting to compare the way in which Thomas Aquinas in his commentary on Romans (Opera VI (Venice, 1725), p. 103f), though he is expounding the Latin in which it is inescapably clear that the subject of the verb is ‘all things’, speaks of the Holy Spirit helping us, and then of God turning all things to good for those who love Him.

^{page 210 note 6} The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1932), pp. 137–139.Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 1} op. cit., p. 104.

^{page 211 note 2} Cf. Liddell & Scott, and (Bauer,) Arndt and Gingrich, s.v.; and also Chrysoslom's use of as a synonym in the sentence from his commentary quoted above.

^{page 212 note 1} Calvin, op. cit., p. 179.

^{page 213 note 1} op. cit., p. 180.

^{page 214 note 1} P.G. XIV, col. 1126.

^{page 214 note 2} P.G. LX, col. 541.

^{page 214 note 3} P.G. LXXXII, col. 141.

^{page 214 note 4} P.G. CXVIII, col. 489.

^{page 214 note 5} J.-P. Migne, Patrologia Latino XXXV, col. 2076. He says: ‘Propositum autem Dei accipiendum est, non ipsorum.’

^{page 214 note 6} He says: ‘ … nec praedestinavit aliquem, nisi quem praescivit crediturum et secuturum vocationem suam. …’

^{page 214 note 7} Expositio in Romanos on 8.29 (Souter, A., Pelagius's Expositions of Thirteen Epistles of St. Paul II (Cambridge, 1926), p. 68)Google Scholar: ‘… quos praescierat credituros ….’