關於西一15：基督是受造之物的第一個麼？（十一）

關於西一15：基督是受造之物的第一個麼？（十一）


十二、活泉新約希臘文解經

「是首生的，在一切被造的以先」（ πρωτοτοκος πασης κτισεως ＝ the firstborn of all creation；直譯作「一切被造的首生的」）。

本句是前句中「是」（εστιν）的另一個述語，並且也不帶冠詞，進一步解說「愛子」之所是。前句「不能看見之神的像」，描述愛子與神之間的關係；本句「是一切被造的首生的」，則描述愛子與所有被造之物的關係。與本句平行經文，請參考約一：1～18；來一1～4；及腓二5～11，所有這些經文的作者都一致認定愛子的高超位格。古今多少異端，如主後第四世紀的亞流派（Arianism），因著對這一節經文的誤解，而把基督的位格貶低，成為「一切被造之物」中之首生的。這是極大的錯誤。首先，論到「首生的」（πρωτοτοκος）一詞，「πρωτοτοκος」這個字在古碑銘和蒲紙文獻中常出現，所以不算是純「聖經」用字。但是，在這裡這個字所強調的乃其字首「πρωτος」（第一，首先，在上）之比較級或最高級的意義，如西一18的「首先復生的」；羅八29；來一6，十二23的「長子」；啟一5「首先復活」。這些詞原文都是「首生的」，不過所強調的都是「πρωτος」（第一）的最高級意義。從「πρωτοτοκος」（「首生的」）字源來看，這個字原由「πρωτος」（首先，第一）和「τικω」（生產）父合而成的晚期字，在七十士譯本中出現達一百三十次之多，原指人或動物的「頭胎」，但後來轉而為指與神的特殊親密關係，如出四22「以色列是我的兒子，我的長子」，所指乃「以色列是耶何華所揀選，所愛的」。在這種用法時，「πρωτος」和「τικω」這兩個字根已經失去其原始意義。誠然，在新約中，「πρωτοτοκος」這個字仍然保有其原始意義「頭胎」（見路二7），但不可以一看到這個字，就認為它必然是指「頭一個被生的」。Peter T. O’Brien的判斷是正確的，他認為無論就上下文的意義，或保羅神學的一致性而言，本節的「首生的」都不可以按其原始意義解，其所要強調的乃是基督之於萬有，無論時間上或位格上，都是最優越的。Lightfoot研究本節「首生的」一詞，他認為保羅在此用這個字，具有兩層意義：

1.基督先於萬有：

保羅使用「πρωτοτοκος」（首生），而不用指天使中最高階級的「πρωτοκτιστοι」（首先被造），表示基督並不在受造之列。再者「首生的」之後的「一切被造的」（πασης κτισεως），雖為所有格，確沒有必要將「首生的」解釋為屬於「一切被造的」之列（關於所有格之解釋，見下）；何況下文「萬有都是靠祂造的」（第16節）自然將基督排除於「萬有」之外。而第十七節的「祂在萬有之先」，則更顯示了基督的先存性與自存性。

2.基督統管萬有：

七十士譯本詩篇八十九27提到神要立他為「長子」（πρωτοτοκος）之後，接著就解釋，這乃是要立祂為「世上的君王」（筆者按應是「世上最高的君王」）。因為「長子」（即「首生的」）自然包括了「長子繼承權」的觀念，這也是「彌賽亞」一詞所含的一個重要的觀念。因此，本句話可以意譯為「愛子是長子，因而成為統管萬有之元首」。

至於「首生的」之後的所有格「一切被造的」（πασης κτισεως），Nigel Turner指出，它絕不可能是「部分所有格」（partiative genitive），故具「長子」身分的愛子絕不是被造之萬物中的一部分。這個所有格比較可能是屬於「受詞所有格」（objective genitive），即指「一切被造的」來自「首生的」；或「比較所有格」（a genitive of comparison），即指在時間上「首生的」是在「一切被造的」之先。F.F. Bruce也認定，這裡的這個所有格澄清了這句的意思，愛子不可能是一切被造之物中的首先被造者，相反的，這個所有格所強調的乃是，「一切被造的」都是因著祂才存在的。

故此，本節正確的翻譯應為：「是首生的，在一切被造的之上」；也因此之故，古今多少「亞流派」，無一能引用本節，而把耶穌基督的位格貶低。在當時，保羅乃是藉此駁斥諾斯底派主義所認為的，基督乃自神發出的系列之「愛安」（aeon）之一，地位只在天使之上卻仍在受造之列的謬論。（活泉新約希臘文解經，卷七，第426～428頁，美國活泉出版社，1991年8月初版）

評論：

1.「活泉新約希臘文解經」一書是根據A.T. Roberston 所著的「The Word Pictures in the New Testament」一書為主軸，刪其過時或不合時宜的資料，補進其他新增、新寫資料編譯而成，在中文解經著作中堪稱上乘著作，極具權威，備受各方稱道，也廣為援引。本書共十冊，從1986年開始動工編譯，到1998年完工，前後歷經十三年，可謂工程浩大、艱鉅，而編譯者皆是解經、翻譯界的佼佼者。

2.本文西一15下之註解頗值得參考，它把「首生的」（πρωτοτοκος）一字的用法、與「一切被造的」的關係，簡單扼要做了陳述，其中並引述四位學者的文章，亦值得注意。

其中Peter T. O’Brien所下的斷言是正確有力的，「他認為無論就上下文的意義，或保羅神學的一致性而言，本節的「首生的」都不可以按其原始意義解，其所要強調的乃是基督之於萬有，無論時間上或位格上，都是最優越的。」（摘錄1）

J.B. Lightfoot的文章我已在前面貼過其譯文，及我的評論，正如這裡所說的，他認為保羅在此用「首生的」一詞，具有兩層意義，一是「基督先於萬有」，一是「基督統管萬有」。

F.F. Bruce的論述有權威性，具參考價值，他說：這裡的這個所有格澄清了這句的意思，愛子不可能是一切被造之物中的首先被造者，相反的，這個所有格所強調的乃是，「一切被造的」都是因著祂才存在的。

至於Nigel Turner的部份，「活泉」認為他下的斷言是：『「首生的」和所有格「一切被造的」（πασης κτισεως）絕不可能是「部分所有格」（partiative genitive），故具「長子」身分的愛子絕不是被造之萬物中的一部分。這個所有格比較可能是屬於「受詞所有格」（objective genitive），即指「一切被造的」來自「首生的」；或「比較所有格」（a genitive of comparison），即指在時間上「首生的」是在「一切被造的」之先。』但我詳讀其文（摘錄2），發現雖然Nigel Turner在其文中引述T. K. Abbott的文章（摘錄3），確定同意的是「受詞所有格」（objective genitive）和「比較所有格」（a genitive of comparison），但他卻主張可以解釋為「部分所有格」（partiative genitive）。「活泉」引述其文顯然錯解其意，做了錯誤的判讀。不過，Nigel Turner雖主張「部分所有格」（partiative genitive），其意乃基督為了「救贖」之故與他所救贖的造物「認同為一」，作為他們的「原型」，如同羅八29所說的。換句話說，他之所以是他們的一部份，是因為他先做為「原型」，「一切造物」經過他救贖的工作，與他相像合一。但這樣解釋，就又落到Lightfoot所說的，會被迫把經文中西一15的「造物」和西一16的「創造」領會為屬靈的新造，就是林後五17和加六15的「新造」了！但即便這樣說，Nigel Turner也絕沒有說「基督是神的造物之一，且是第一項」！這種過度延伸解釋別人的文章，把作者沒有的意思強加其上，或引來為自己的錯誤做佐證，乃是自取其辱！Nigel Turner若是一個聖經希臘文的學者，絕不致於落入亞流的異端而不自知！這種說法見於「水流職事站」網站「真裡辯正」中：「回覆唐守臨、任鍾祥《為真道竭力爭辯》之十點爭議」，第二篇 關於「基督是受造之物的首生者」一文中。讀者可以自行上網瀏覽：

http://www.cftfc.com/com_chinese/apologetics/reading.asp?title_no=4-19#2

3. 即便如J.H. Thayer在「A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament」（希英新約辭彙字典）裡說，西一15這裡是作「部分所有格」用，如創四4、申十二17、出二二29那樣，好像他贊成基督是造物之一，但他同時說：「他是藉神而出，在全宇宙所有造物之先…，西一15這裡的經文無法確認保羅同意道是造物之一，…。」（摘錄4）可見他仍然謹慎避開亞流的異端，並不是像前述網站文中所說，似乎Thayer是贊成基督是造物之一，因該文說：『號稱這世紀以來最好的新約希臘文語文辭典之一的著者泰爾（Thayer）在其《新約原文辭彙字典》（The New Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament）中也說：「基督被稱為一切受造之物的首生者（partit. gen.）〔partitive genitive〕，與創四4…出二二29同。』這樣的引述只是該彙編作者就prototokos一字所寫文中非常少部分的文字。這麼簡短的引述會使讀者誤解、誤判！

另外，讀者也當知道，編寫聖經彙編的學者或文法專家未必就是聖經教師或解經家，因為他們也會有錯解之處或欠妥之文。解經必須合於整本聖經的啟示，就是合於整本聖經中聖靈所要傳達的思想。一處經文的解釋必須合於全本聖經，受其他許多處經文的牽制、平衡、約束，否則單就一處經文就直接下斷案，一點不顧及其他經文，或與聖經的中心思想、主要啟示相牴觸，就成了「私意解經」了！像基督的身位這麼重要的事，不可能單就西一15一處經文就可以做主軸來敲定的！若直解其意，卻不顧及他處經文，必要錯得離譜！

4.摘錄文章部分，讀者若有興趣，請自行瀏覽，我只能做部份翻譯或圈出重要段落，請讀者見諒。另外，【摘錄3】T. K. Abbott的文中有許多希臘文氣音、重音的符號，貼在本網站上會顯出亂碼，故本人將所有這些符號取消，請讀者一併知道。


【摘錄1】：Peter T. O’Brien

But the context makes it plain that the title cannot refer to him as the first of all created beings since the immediately following words, which provide a commentary on the title (oti), emphasize the point that he is the one by whom the whole creation came into being. Further, apart from the incompatibility of this thought with the teaching of Paul in general about the person and work of Christ, such an understanding is not required by the word “ prototokos” (“firstborn”) itself.

(Peter T. O’Brien, About prototokos of Col.1:15, Word Biblical commentary)

【摘錄2】：Nigel Turner

"Archetype of All Creation" (Col. 1:15)

It is not my present purpose to quarrel with whatever the mechanical computers may declare about the authorship of the epistle to the Colossians, but I refer to "St. Paul" for convenience sake.

The epistle was canonical from the earliest period of which there is any record and its contents are equally important at the moment when atheism often goes thinly disguised. St. Paul's theme is knowledge of God. He contrasts the Power of darkness with the Kingdom of God's beloved Son; deliverance from the first is achieved by "his blood." God's Son is "the image of the invisible God, the first born of every creature." "He is before all things."

The enemy, in St. Paul's opinion, was a humanist philosophy which had become fashionable at Colosse, all the more disquieting because it posed as the genuine Christian gospel. It was based on physical science and was materialistic, like the philosophy of our own age of Enlightenment, and like it too, it had its superstitious side: fixed holidays scrupulously observed, moral expediency, astrological curiosity, and the black arts.

Against it all St. Paul promoted Christ as sole deliverer from dark powers, for he is "the firstborn of every creature" (1:15), a phrase which is capable of two meanings in Greek. One of them is endorsed. She has already endorsed the check in the text of the N.E.B.: "His is the primacy over all created things." The alternative meaning is in the margin: "He was born before all created things." All turns on whether the reader understands the genitive ("all created things") as objective (therefore "over all created things"), or as a genitive of comparison, understanding the adjective "firstborn" as an adjective of the comparative degree, perfectly permissible in this kind of Greek (therefore "he is born before all created things "). Doubtless the two titles are equally appropriate for Christ: he is both "first in rank over all created things" and also "born before all created things." The former represents a primacy of status, while the latter is a temporal priority. The prototokos phrase has divided commentators into two camps. although a few make the attempt to unite both: e.g. "born first, before all the creation" (Moffatt).

Prototokos occurs in the Greek Old Testament, II Kingdoms (II Samuel) 19:43, where the context requires the interpretation, "I was born before you," but this is not really a parallel. Since prototokos is not followed by a genitive, it supplies no assistance in deciding which kind of genitive St. Paul was using with prototokos.

Bishop Lightfoot felt that St. Paul's construction could not be a genitive of comparison, for it would be straining syntax to connect the genitive with only the first part of the compound word prototokos; it ought to depend on the whole of the word, whatever it means. And what of the meaning? Is it primacy in status and sovereignty, or primacy only in time?

A new tendency among critics* favours the idea of status and sovereignty, and it well accords with an early conception of Christ as reflected in the literature of the New Testament. Christ is the Alpha (Rev. 1:11 2:16), the Beginning, and the context makes it clear that this is more than temporally understood, as when the seer wrote, "Jesus … is … the Prototokos of the dead and the prince of the kings of the earth.… To him be glory and dominion" (Rev. 1:5). St. Paul wrote of him, "He is the head of the Body, the Church: who is the Beginning, the Prototokos from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence" (Col. 1:18). So from every theological point of view, the word is dearly concerned with sovereignty, and the phrase should mean "Sovereign over all created things." As St. Theodore of Mopsuestia commented, "This concerns not time alone, but is also a matter of pre-eminence." It is what Dr. T. K. Abbott alleged was impossible (International Critical Commentary, p. 211), and he pre-ferred the view that only priority in time and distinction from creation itself was intended, quoting Theodoret and Chrysostom in favour. "The meaning is not of power and glory," wrote St. Chrysostom, "but only of time." This is commendable. Although the contexts of the word involve the theological conception of sovereignty, one must beware of importing it into the word itself. On the other hand, the construe which Dr. Abbott suggested is not the only alternative, for the genitive may be neither objective nor comparative, both of which, as our discussion reveals, leave much to be desired when taken closely with prototokos. Might it not rather be the partitive genitive? "Among all created things." I would retain the manifest meaning of prototokos, "firstborn"—but in the sense that the Messiah was said to be first-born—and interpret the word as closely identifying Christ with the family of which he is head, i.e. the whole of creation which looks eagerly for redemption. It has a parallel in the epistle to the Romans where St. Paul again described him as a new Adam, closely identified with believers as an Archetype of a fresh stage or leap forward in the collective evolution of all the creatures of God, in the onward march towards the goal of achieving what Christ is himself—the "icon of the invisible God." In I Corinthians the thought re-appears: he is the First-fruit of them that sleep in death.

Suppose then that prototokos does not express superiority so much as indentification, and it is little wonder if later, when the Church was facing the Arian heresy, her teachers felt that the title had its dangers. This was because the significance of Christ as the universal Archetype was not sufficiently realized. It had been St. Paul's answer to the speculative intellectuals of Colosse. It concerned salvation as well as christology. It was the characteristic way in which St. Paul linked salvation with christology—through him who was identified with humanity as its new Leader and all nature's First-fruit on the one hand, and as the "icon of the invisible God" on the other. When St. Paul immediately proceeds to say (1:16) that all things heavenly and earthly were created "in" Christ, the preposition must be taken literally and not instrumentally.* Christ embraces them all, having become their prototokos, so that they are his icon in the same sense that he is God's. For he is "in" God, and they are "in" him. There is much in common with the Johannine theology of true pantheism.

N.E.B. The New English Bible (New Testament), Oxford and Cambridge, 1961.

* Specimens of recent views include: A. W. Argyle, Expos. Times, LXVI, 2, p. 62 (in favour of temporal primacy); H. G. Meecham, ibid., LXVI, 4, p. 124; C. Masson, L'Epître de Saint Paul aux Colossiens, Paris, 1950, p. 99.

* See the discussion, pp. 118–122.

(Turner, N., Grammatical insights into the New Testament, pp. 122-24, 1966, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.)

【部份中譯】

全然反對之（筆者按，歌羅西流行的屬人哲學），聖保羅高倡基督是使我們脫離黑暗權勢中惟一的一位，因為他是「一切受造之物的首生」（一15），這詞在希臘文可以有二個意思。其中之一是N.E.B.（新英文聖經）正文中認可的：「祂是在一切造物之上居首位」（「He is the primacy over all created things」），另一個意思是在旁註：「祂在一切造物之先被生」（「He was born before all created things」）。打開這一切就在於讀者是否領會所有格（「一切造物的」）作為受詞（因此是「在一切造物之上」），或作為比較所有格，領會形容詞的首生」為比較程度的形容詞，在這一種希臘文裡是全然可以接受的（因此是「祂在一切造物之先被生」）。無疑的這二個頭銜都同樣合適用於基督身上：祂是「在一切造物之上居首位」（first in rank over all created things），同時也是「在一切造物之先被生」（born before all created things）。前者代表地位的卓越，後者代表時間上的居先。prototokos一詞使注釋者分成二派，雖然也有少數人嚐試把這二者連起來，就是說：「首生，在一切造物以先」（Moffatt）。…

Lightfoot主教認為聖保羅的構句不會是比較所有格（筆者按，不是指「祂在一切造物之先被生」），…是地位的卓越和主權，或時間上的居首位？

在批判學裡有一個新的趨勢，較中意地位和主權的思想，而這很合於新約著作中所傳達，早期關於基督的觀念。…T.K. Abbott博士…比較喜歡只是時間上的居先，而與造物絕對有別的觀點。…另一面，Abbott博士的分析所建議的，並不是唯一二而一的選擇而已，因為所有格也可以不是受詞（所有格）或比較（所有格），…它不能是部份所有格－「所有受造之物中」麼？我會保留prototokos這個字是「首生」的清楚的意思（但意思是彌賽亞是第一個生的），而詮釋這個字為基督與祂作為頭的家緊密地認同為一，就是說整個造物在熱切的等候救贖。在寫給羅馬人的書信裡有一個對照，那裡聖保羅再一次描寫祂作一個新亞當，在祂肉身階段所作為的原型，祂與信徒緊密地認同為一，或者跳往前去在神所有的造物整體的進化裡，在往前達到基督自己的所是－「不能看見之神的像」。這樣的思想在林前再度出現：他是睡了之人初熟的果子。

若是prototokos一字沒有表達超越過於認同，而若是是後者，則教會面對亞流異端時，她的教師們會覺得有危險。這是因為基督作為宇宙原型的意義沒有被充分了解。這是保羅對歌羅西那些投機知識分子的回答。連結救恩與基督論是保羅典型的方式，藉著他與人性的認同，一面作為新領袖和所有大自然的初熟果子，另一面作為「不能看見之神的像」。當保羅緊接著說（一16），萬有無論是天上的，地上的都是在他裡面造的，介系詞必須照原意領會，不是機械式的領會 。基督包含他們所有，成為他們的prototokos，所以他們才能成為他的像，如同他是神的像。這與使徒約翰的真正汎神主義（pantheism）神學非常相同。

【摘錄3】：T. K. Abbott

The genitive here is not partitive, as the following context clearly shows, for εν αυτω εκτισθη τα παντα. Setting this aside, commentators are not agreed as to the interpretation of πρωτοτοκος. Eadie, Hofmann, al., understand it of sovereignty. Alford and Lightfoot, while giving the first place to the idea of priority to all creation, admit sovereignty over all creation as part of the connotation. So Theodore of Mops., ουκ επι χρονον λεγεται μονον· αλλα γαρ και επι προτιμησεως (but he interprets κτισεως of the new creation). In defence of this interpretation of the word Ps. 88:28 is quoted, where after πρωτοτοκον θησομαι αυτον the explanation is added, υψηλον παρα τοις βασιλευσι της γης: also what appears as a paraphrase of this, εθηκεν κληρονομον παντων, Heb. 1:2: also Ex. 4:22; Rom. 8:29, εις το ειναι αυτον πρωτοτοκον εν πολλοις αδελφοις. Job 18:13, "the firstborn of death," for "a fatal malady"; and Isa. 14:30, "the firstborn of the poor," for "the very poor," are also referred to. Lightfoot quotes R. Bechai, who calls God Himself the firstborn of the world, and he concludes that the words signify "He stands in the relation of πρ. to all creation," i.e. "He is the Firstborn, and as the Firstborn the absolute Heir and Sovereign Lord of all creation."

The passages cited do not justify this interpretation. In Ex. 4:22 the word does not at all mean "sovereign," which would be quite out of place even apart from the prefixed "my," but "object of favour." In Ps. 88:28, again, the added words, if taken as an explanation of πρωτ. simply, would go too far; but it is the πρωτοτοκος of God, who is said to be "higher than the kings of the earth." θήσομαι αυτον πρ. is, "I will put him in the position of a firstborn," and the following words are not an explanation of πρ., but state the result of God's regarding him as such. Compare the English phrase, "making one an eldest son by will." By no means would the words of the psalm justify such an expression as πρωτοτοκος των βασιλεων, unless it were intended to include the πρ amongst the βασιλεις. As the context forbids our including the πρωτοτοκος here amongst the κτισις, the interpretation leaves the genitive inexplicable. It is called "the genitive of reference"; but this is too vague to explain anything, as will appear by substituting either κοσμου for κτισεως, or μεγας for πρωτ. Thus πρωτοτοκος του κοσμον for "sovereign in relation to the world," and μεγας πασης κτισεως are equally impossible. If by "genitive of reference" is meant "genitive of comparison," then we come back to the relation of priority in πρωτος. In fact, the genitive after πρ. must be 1st, genitive of possession, as "my firstborn," 2nd, partitive, "firstborn" of the class, or 3rd, of comparison, as in John 1:15, πρωτος μου ην. A moment's reflection will show that Isa. 14:30 is not parallel, for there "the firstborn of the poor". is included in the class. In Job 18:13 (which, moreover, is poetical) the genitive is possessive, "death's chief instrument." Rom. 8:29, there is no genitive, but πρ is included εν πολλοις αδελφοις.

Rabbi Bechai's designation of God as "firstborn of the world" is a fanciful interpretation of Ex. 13:2. R. Bechai probably meant by the expression "priority," not "supremacy." The firstborn were to be consecrated to God because He was the First of all. But it must be remembered that the Hebrew word is not etymologically parallel to πρωτοτοκος.

Hence the only tenable interpretation of the words before us is "begotten before πασα κτισις, " the genitive being like that in John 1:15, πρωτοτοκον του Θεου και προ παντων των κτισματων, Justin M. Dial. § 100. The only ideas involved are priority in time and distinction from the genus κτισις. ουχ ως αδελφην εχων την κτισιν, αλλα ως προ πασης κτισεως Tγεννηθεις, Theodoret; and so Chrysostom: ουχι αξιας κ. τιμης αλλα χρονου μονον εστι σημαντικον. Compare Rev. 3:14, η αρχη της κτισεως του Θεου. πρωτοκτιστος or πρωτοπλαστος would have implied that Christ was created like πασα κτισις.

Isidore of Pelusium, in the interests of orthodoxy, assigns an active meaning to πρωτοτόκος (to be in that case thus accented), not, however, a meaning corresponding to the signification of πρωτοτοκος in classical writers, which is "primipara," and could yield no tolerable sense, but as "primus auctor." His words are: ου πρωτον της κτισεως … αλλα πρωτον αυτον τετοκεναι τουτω εστι πεποιηκεναι την κτισιν ινα η τριτης συλλαβης οξυμενης, ως πρωτοκτιστος (EP. iii. 31). Basil seems to adopt the same view, for, comparing ver. 19, he says: ει δε πρωτοτοκος νεκρων ειρηται, δια το αιτιος ειναι της εν νεκρων αναστασεως, ουτω και πρωτοτοκος κτισεως, δια το αιτιος ειναι του εξ ουκ οντων εις το ειναι παραγαγειν την κτισιν (Contra Eunom. lib. iv. p. 292 D). (The true reading in ver. 19 is πρ. εκ των νεκρων, but πρ. των ν. is in Rev. 1:5.)

This interpretation is followed by Michaelis and some others. In addition, however, to the unsuitableness of τίκτειν in this connexion, πρῶτος is unsuitable, since there would be no possibility of a δευτεροτόκος.

(Abbott, T. K., A critical and exegetical commentary on the epistles to the Ephesians and to the Colossians, p. 211, New York: C. Scribner's sons., 1909)

【摘錄4】J.H. Thayer

Πρωτοτοκος

a. prop.:… Mt. i. 25;… Lk. ii. 7;… , the first-born whether of man of beast, Heb. xi. 28…

b. trop. Christ is called πρωτοτοκος πασης κτισεως( partiti. gen. [see below], as in …Gen. iv. 4;…Deut. xii. 17;…Ex. xxii. 29), who came into being through God prior to the entire universe of created things…, Col. i. 15;-this passage does not with certainty prove that Paul reckoned the λογος in the number of the created things…

(Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of The New Testament, 20th Zondervan Printing, 1979, p. 555)

（未完待續）20090119