This post is part of a series on meta-comments that began with this introduction. I have discussed Gal 1:9 and Romans 12:1 so far.
Though the form-critics have noted that such formulas occur at major seams of a text (i.e. between Romans 9-11 and 12-15), they are not only found in such contexts. Consider the impact that the meta-comment a few verses later in v. 3 has on the proposition that follows.
Paul began the chapter in v. 1 by urging the readers to present themselves as living sacrifices, followed by a point-counterpoint set of commands in v. 2 ( i.e. not to be conformed to this age, but to be transformed by the renewing of their minds). Verse 3 is introduced by γὰρ, indicating that what follows is intended to strengthen or support what precedes.
Rather than signaling a significant break in the discourse, the meta-comment of v. 3 functions to attract extra attention to the complex exhortation that it introduces. Just as Paul bases his appeal of v. 1 on the mercies of God, rather than on his own authority or something else, he makes a comparable appeal based upon the grace that he has received.
Paul could have more easily commanded them, “Do not think more highly of oneself… rather have sound judgment…” This command could have been simplified even more by omitting both the meta-comment andthe negative counterpoint. Stated as it is, the use of the meta-comments in vv. 1 and 3 have the effect of attracting extra attention to the propositions that they introduce They also mitigate the harshness that a simple imperative would have conveyed. The combination of meta-comment with the two bases of the exhortations introduced by διὰ likely carry more rhetorical force than using a simple imperative. It also avoids any sense of harshness or condescension. He makes a more powerful rhetorical impression even while using a mitigated grammatical form.
The images in these posts are drawn from the Discourse Greek NT, and the concepts from my forthcoming grammar.
