{And why not} (kai m(885c)). We have a tangled sentence which
can be cleared up in two ways. One is (Lightfoot) to supply
gen(8874)ai after m(885c) and repeat 	i (kai ti m(8820)gen(8874)ai,
deliberative subjunctive in a question): And why should it not
happen? The other way (Sanday and Headlam) is to take m(885c) with
poi(8873)(936d)en and make a long parenthesis of all in between. Even
so it is confusing because hoti also (recitative hoti) comes
just before poi(8873)(936d)en. The parenthesis is necessary anyhow, for
there are two lines of thought, one the excuse brought forward by
the unbeliever, the other the accusation that Paul affirms that
very excuse that we may do evil that good may come. Note the
double indirect assertion (the accusative and the infinitive
h(886d)(8373) legein after phasin and then the direct quotation with
recitative hoti after legein, a direct quotation dependent on
the infinitive in indirect quotation. {Let us do evil that good
may come} (poi(8873)(936d)en ta kaka hina elth(8869) ta agatha). The
volitive aorist subjunctive (poi(8873)(936d)en) and the clause of
purpose (hina and the aorist subjunctive elth(8869)). It sounds
almost uncanny to find this maxim of the Jesuits attributed to
Paul in the first century by Jews. It was undoubtedly the
accusation of Antinomianism because Paul preached justification
by faith and not by works.