De Moor I:5: Synonyms of "Theology"

Among other Synonyms of the term Theology found in Scripture, our AUTHOR observes what is called the Form/Type of doctrine, Romans 6:17, ὑπηκούσατε δὲ ἐκ καρδίας εἰς ὃν παρεδόθητε τύπον διδαχῆς, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form/type of doctrine unto which ye were delivered for instruction, τύπον/type[1] in the place of τύπῳ/type,[2] because the relative ὃν/which precedes; what it has subjoined to itself here, it attracts to its own case; compare Acts 21:16, ἄγοντες παρ᾽ ᾧ ξενισθῶμεν, Μνάσωνί τινι Κυπρίῳ, bringing one, with whom we should lodge, Mnason of Cyprus, etc.:[3]  see GLASSIUS’ Grammaticorum Sacrorum tractatum II, canon 20, page 209.

Johannes a Marck

              Our Most Illustrious AUTHOR also adds as a Synonym, μόρφωσιν τῆς γνώσεως καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας, the form of knowledge and of the truth, out of Romans 2:20, διδάσκαλον— ἔχοντα τὴν μόρφωσιν τῆς γνώσεως καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας ἐν τῷ νόμῳ, a teacher…having the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.  It is evident that, while μορφὴ is the form of a thing, both external, by which it is discerned, and internal, by which it is constituted; μόρφωσις (a verbal noun from μορφόω, to form, to shape, to delineate, to give form) is nothing other than delineation, formation.  Therefore, when Paul says that the Jew “is confident that he is a guide of the blind, a light to those that are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, ἔχοντα τὴν μόρφωσιν τῆς γνώσεως καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας ἐν τῷ νόμῳ, having the form of knowledge of the truth in the law;” this μόρφωσις/form/formation shall denote, not a vain and empty sort of knowledge, nor the informing of others, but the form, or delineation, of saving wisdom and truth, exhibited in the Scriptures and also its Legal part:  or you might read, having a representation of knowledge, etc., with the sense continued, so that these things might perhaps have regard unto the persuasion of the Jew:  or with BEZA you might translate it, because thou hast, so that these things might declare the foundation of the prior confidence:  see our AUTHOR’S Exercitationes Miscellaneas, Disputation VII, text XVII, page 349.

              But also unto the same purpose our AUTHOR relates the other passage in which the term μόρφωσις/form/formation is found, namely, 2 Timothy 3:5, where μόρφωσις εὐσεβείας, a form of godliness, occurs.  This phrase many refer to an external and hypocritical show and mask of Piety; which Paul would set over against its true exercise and power, through which alone one prevails before God, and which is of the integrity of the heart.  Our AUTHOR rather translates it, the representation of piety, yet not in an active sense with Erasmus, Vatablus,[4] Estius,[5] as if they were ἔχοντες μόρφωσιν εὐσεβείας, having a form of godliness, that shape others in piety and prescribe what is needful to be done, although they themselves do not at all apply those things; to such an extent that μόρφωσις/form would be education:  but in a passive sense, in such a way that μόρφωσις εὐσεβείας, a form of godliness, would be ὑποτύπωσις, a delineation, pattern, doctrine, form, norm of Piety, which they, concerning whom the Apostle speaks, were holding as having been made known to themselves, and were professing externally.  For the confirmation of this exegesis he observes, 1.  that this signification of the term μορφώσεως is especially natural in context, and singular in the Scripture of the New Testament, by a comparison with that passage, Romans 2:20, which has just now been explained.  2.  That the Apostle continues in this verse 5 a description of the men, concerning whom he had also treated in verses 2-4; but those are openly impious, and impudently attached to disgraceful acts of every sort, to such an extent that to them no appearance, either common, or extraordinary, of piety is able to be attributed in any way; it is indeed rendered correctly, to have a ὑποτύπωσιν/sketch of piety, while many impious men of this sort are among them, that hear, read, and profess themselves to accept the doctrine of Piety, while they take the name of true Christians, in comparison with Titus 1:16.  3.  That in this way plain and without any difficulty is the opposition between μόρφωσιν εὐσεβείας, a form of godliness, and δύναμιν αὐτῆς, the power of it, whether of Godliness, or of the same μορφώσεως/form.  Since this is the power, which saving doctrine, commending and declaring piety through the work of the Spirit, has in the faithful, that it converts the soul, and draws it from vices unto virtues.  Now, this power they deny in their persons and by their example, who, although hearing and professing this doctrine, yet are unwilling to yield to it.  4.  He observes that this is supported by the admonition which is subjoined to these words, καὶ τούτους ἀποτρέπου, and from these turn away.  For this, α.  supposes that these men are able to be identified, which concerning hypocrites is often quite difficult; β.  appears to involve a certain opposition to those that were described in 2 Timothy 2:16-18, 23, 25, namely, heretics and those opposing sound doctrine, who consequently were not receiving the doctrine and true form of Piety.  But in addition to these the Apostle wishes those to be avoided that were retaining pure doctrine, but were dishonoring it by wicked behavior:  see again our AUTHOR’S Exercitationes Miscellaneas, Disputation VII, text XVII, page 345-354.

[1] In the Accusative case.

[2] In the Dative case.  The verb ὑπακούω, to obey, normally takes the Dative case.

[3] The verb ἄγω, to lead, normally takes an accusative object, but, because the preceding relative ᾧ/whom is Dative, Μνάσωνί/Mnason has also been set down in the Dative.

[4] Francis Vatablus (c. 1485-1547) was a prominent Hebrew scholar, doing much to stimulate Hebraic studies in France.  He was appointed to the chair of Hebrew in Paris (1531).  Because of some consonance with Lutheran doctrine, his annotations (Annotationes in Vetus et Novum Testamentum), compiled by his auditors, were regarded with the utmost esteem among Protestants, but with a measure of suspicion and concern by Roman Catholics.  Consequently, the theologians of Salamanca produced their own edition of Vatablus’ annotations for their revision of the Latin Bible (1584).

[5] William Estius (1542-1613) labored first as a lecturer on Divinity, then as the Chancellor at Doway.  Theologically, he bears the imprint of the modified Augustinianism of Michael Baius.  In his commentary writing, as exemplified in his Commentarii in Sacram Scripturam and Commentarii in Epistolas Apostolicas, he focuses on the literal meaning of the text; and he is widely regarded for his exegetical skill and judgment.