he Ἢ Αι «τις ee eaten The heat ας Reset saints mies yds " ἪΝ ¢ ° feta "ἢ ΩΣ . een ΟΣ Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2009 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library https://archive.org/details/criticalgrammati1856elli ene A CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL COMMENTARY ON THE PASTORAL EPISTLES, WITH A REVISED TRANSLATION, BY C. J. ELLICOTT, M.A. RECTOR OF PILTON, RUTLAND ; AND LATE FELLOW OF 51, JOHN’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. LONDON: _ JOHN W. PARKER AND SON, WEST STRAND. MDCCCLVL LONDON: SAVILL AND EDWARDS, PRINTERS, OHANDOS-STREET. PREFACE. Tue following Commentary is substantially the same, both in principles and execution, as those on the Galatians and Ephesians. I have, however, earnestly striven, on the one hand, to introduce improvements, and, on the other, to amend defects of which time, experience, and above all, the kind criticism of friends have not failed to convince me. I will briefly notice both. In the first place the reader will find the substance of the grammatical references more fully stated in the notes, while at the same time care has been taken to modify and repress the use of technical terms, as far as is consistent with the nature of the Commen- tary. I confess I cannot yet persuade myself that the use of technical terms in grammar, independently of subserving to brevity, does not also tend to accu- racy and perspicuity; still so many objections have been urged by judicious advisers, that I have not failed to give them my most respectful attention. This modification, however, has been introduced with great caution; for the exclusion of all technical terms would not only be wholly inconsistent with the lex operis, but would be certain to lead the way to a rambling inexactitude, which in Grammar, as in all other sciences, can never be too scrupulously avoided. iv PREFACE. I have also endeavoured, as far as possible, to em- body in the notes the sentiments and opinions of the dogmatical writers, more especially those of the great English Divines to whom I have been able to refer. Yet here again this has been subordinated to the peculiar nature of the Commentary, which to be trueto its title, must mainly occupy itself with what is critical and grammatical, and must in other subjects confine it- self to references and allusions. Still, as in the preface to the Ephesians, so here again, let me. earnestly en- treat my less mature readers not to regard as the mere bibliographical embroidery of a dull page the re- ferences to our English Divines. They have all been collected with much care; they are nearly in every case the aggregations of honest individual labour, and if they prove to the student half as beneficial and in- structive as they have been to the collector, they will not have been adduced in vain. Let us never forget that there is such a thing as the analogy of Scripture ; that it is one thing to generally unfold the meaning of an individual passage, and another to do so con- sistently with the general principles and teaching of Scripture. The first may often be done with plausi- ble success by means of acuteness, observation, and happy intuitions; the second, independently of higher aids, is only compatible with some knowledge of dog- matical theology, and some acquaintance with those masterpieces of sacred learning which were the glory of the seventeenth century. On verifying these re- ferences, the allusion to the individual passage of Scripture will, perhaps, sometimes be found brief and transient, but there will ever be found in the treatise itself, in the mode that the subject is handled, in the learning with which it is adorned, theology of the PREFACE. Vv noblest development, and not unfrequently, spiritual discernment of the very highest strain. With many deductions, the same observations may in part apply to the dogmatical treatises of foreign writers referred to in the notes. Several recent works on Christian doctrine, as enunciated by the Sacred writers, whether regarded individually or col- lectively, appear to deserve both recognition and con- sideration. I would here specify the dogmatical works of Ebrard and Martensen, the Pflanzung und Leitung of Neander, and the Théologie Chrétienne of Reuss, a work of no mean character or pretensions. By the aid of these references, I do venture to think that the student may acquire vast stores both of his- torical and dogmatical theology, and I dwell especially upon this portion of the Commentary, lest the neces- sarily frigid tone of the critical or grammatical dis- cussions should lead any one to think that I am in- different to what is infinitely higher and nobler. To coldly and bleakly expound the life-giving Word with- out supplying some hints of its eternal consolations, without pointing to some of its transcendent perfec- tions, its inviolable truths, and its inscrutable mys- teries,—to thus wander with closed eyes through the paradise of God, is to be guilty of a profanity, and amenable to a punishment, compared with which even his, who adds to, or subtracts from, that Word, may be light and endurable. Among semi-dogmatical treatises, I would earnestly commend to the attention of grave thinkers the recent contributions to Biblical Psychology which are occa- sionally alluded to in the notes (comp. 1 Zim. iil. 16). Without needlessly entrammelling ourselves with arbitrary systems, without yielding too prone an vi PREFACE. assent to quasi-philosophical theories in a subject that involves much that is equivocal or indemonstrable, it seems still our duty to endeavour to grasp the gene- ral principles of psychology, which appear to have been recognised by the Sacred writers, and to realize those aspects under which they viewed the parts and portions of our composite nature. No thoughtful man, after reading Philo, and observing how deeply psychological speculations, sufficiently consistent and harmonious, give their tinge to his writings, could hesitate to believe that a contemporary at least as well educated as the Jew of Alexandria, elevated by a higher consciousness, and illumined by a truer knowledge, both thought and wrote on fixed prin- ciples, and used language that is no less divinely inspired than humanly consistent and intelligible. It is but a false or otiose criticism that would per- suade us that the terms with which St. Paul desig- nated the different portions of our immaterial nature were vague, uncertain, and interchangeable. The rudiments of Biblical Psychology cannot be safely disregarded by any thoughtful expositor. A ‘alight addition haa been made to the purely critical notices. As in the former commentaries, the Text is that of Tischendorf, changed only where the editor did not appear to have made a sound decision. These changes, as before, are noted immediately under the text. In addition to this, however, in the present case, brief remarks are incorporated in the notes, ap- prizing the reader of any variations in the leading eritical editions which may seem to deserve his atten- tion. An elementary knowledge of Sacred Criticism can never be dispensed with, and it is my earnest hope that the introduction of criticism into the body s ΡΒΕΒΑΘΕ. vii of the notes may be a humble means of presenting this subject to the student in a form somewhat less repulsive and forbidding than that of the mere criti- cal annotation. Separate notes of this kind are, I fear, especially in the case of younger men, systema- tically disregarded: when, however, thus incorporated with grammatical and philological notices, when thus giving and receiving illustration from the context with which they are surrounded, it is my hope that I may decoy the reader into spending some thoughts on what seem to be, and what seem not to be, the words of inspiration, on what may fairly claim to be the true accents of the Eternal Spirit, and what are, only too probably, the mere glosses, the figments, the errors, or the perversions of man. Possibly a more interesting addition will be found in the citations of authorities. I have at last been enabled tc carry out, though to a very limited ex- tent, the long cherished wish of using some of the best versions of antiquity for exegetical purposes. Hitherto, though I have long and deeply felt their importance, I have been unable to use any except the Vulgate and the Old Italic. I have now, however, acquired such a rudimentary knowledge of Syriac, and in a less degree of Gothic, as to be able to state some of the interpretations which those very ancient and venerable versions present. ‘The Italic, the Syriac, and the Gothic have been somewhat carefully com- pared throughout these epistles. I know that my de- ficiency in the two latter languages will be lament- ably apparent, and I seek in no way to disguise it: this only I may be permitted to say in justice to my- self, that the Latin interpretations annexed to the words are not borrowed from current translations, vi PREFACE. assent to quasi-philosophical theories in a subject that involves much that is equivocal or indemonstrable, it seems still our duty to endeavour to grasp the gene- ral principles of psychology, which appear to have been recognised by the Sacred writers, and to realize those aspects under which they viewed the parts and portions of our composite nature. No thoughtful man, after reading Philo, and observing how deeply psychological speculations, sufficiently consistent and harmonious, give their tinge to his writings, could hesitate to believe that a contemporary at least as well educated as the Jew of Alexandria, elevated by a higher consciousness, and illumined by a truer knowledge, both thought and wrote on fixed prin- ciples, and used language that is no less divinely inspired than humanly consistent and intelligible. It is but a false or otiose criticism that would per- suade us that the terms with which St. Paul desig- nated the different portions of our immaterial nature were vague, uncertain, and interchangeable. The rudiments of Biblical Psychology cannot be safely disregarded by any thoughtful expositor. A slight addition has been made to the purely critical notices. As in the former commentaries, the Text is that of Tischendorf, changed only where the editor did not appear to have made a sound decision. These changes, as before, are noted immediately under the text. In addition to this, however, in the present case, brief remarks are incorporated in the notes, ap- prizing the reader of any variations in the leading eritical editions which may seem to deserve his atten- tion. An elementary knowledge of Sacred Criticism can never be dispensed with, and it is my earnest hope that the introduction of criticism into the body - wy PREFACE. vii of the notes may be a humble means of presenting this subject to the student in a form somewhat less repulsive and forbidding than that of the mere criti- cal annotation. Separate notes of this kind are, I fear, especially in the case of younger men, systema- tically disregarded : when, however, thus incorporated with grammatical and philological notices, when thus giving and receiving illustration from the context with which they are surrounded, it is my hope that I may decoy the reader into spending some thoughts on what seem to be, and what seem not to be, the words of inspiration, on what may fairly claim to be the true accents of the Eternal Spirit, and what are, only too probably, the mere glosses, the figments, the errors, or the perversions of man. Possibly a more interesting addition will be found in the citations of authorities. I have at last been enabled tc carry out, though to a very limited ex- tent, the long cherished wish of using some of the best versions of antiquity for exegetical purposes. Hitherto, though I have long and deeply felt their importance, I have been unable to use any except the Vulgate and the Old Italic. I have now, however, acquired such arudimentary knowledge of Syriac, and in a less degree of Gothic, as to be able to state some of the interpretations eich those very ancient and venerable versions present. The Italic, the Syriac, and the Gothic have been somewhat carefully com- pared throughout these epistles. I know that my de- ficiency in the two latter languages will be lament- ably apparent, and I seek in no way to disguise it: this only I may be permitted to say in justice to my- self, that the Latin interpretations annexed to the words are not borrowed from current translations, Vili PREFACE. but are fairly derived from the best glossaries and lexicons to which I have had access. Mistakes I know there must be, but at any rate these mistakes are my own. These it is perhaps nearly impossible for a novice to hope to escape; as in both the Syriac and Gothic, but more especially the former, the lexicogra- phical aids are not at present of a character that can be fully relied on. And it is here that, in the appli- cation of Ancient Versions, the greatest caution is required. It is idle and profitless to adduce the interpretation of a Version, especially in single words, unless the usual and current meaning of those words is more restricted or defined than in the original. Half the mistakes that have occurred in the use of the Peschito,—mistakes from which the pages of scholars like De Wette are not wholly free, are referrible to this head. It is often perfectly apparent that the partial interpretation supplied by the Latin translation appended to the Version, has caused the Version itself to be cited as supporting some restricted gloss of the original Greek words, while in reality the words both in the original and in the Version are of equal latitude, and perhaps both equally indeter- minate. i ; This error I have especially endeavoured to avoid; but that I have always succeeded is far more than I dare hope. In thus breaking ground in the Ancient Versions, I would here very earnestly invite fellow-labourers into the same field. It is not easy to imagine a greater service that might be rendered to Scriptural exegesis than if scholars would devote themselves to the hearty study of one or more of these Versions. I dwell upon the term scholars, for it would be per- PREFACE. ix haps almost worse than useless to accept illustrations from a Version, unless they were also associated with a sound and accurate knowledge of the original Greek. This applies especially to the Syriac; and the remark is of some moment: for it is now a common opinion among many Oriental scholars, that the language of the New Testament is yet to receive, in a mere gram- matical point of view, its most complete illustration from Syriac. That there are some points of simi- larity, no student in both languages could fail to observe; but it may be seriously doubted whether one-tenth of the suspected Syriasms of the N.T. are not solely referrible to the changing and deteriorated constructions of later Greek. To accumulate Syriac illustrations, which may only serve to obscure or supersede our accurate study of later Greek, is a very doubtful, and perhaps profitless application of labour. Under these, and perhaps a few other, limitations, the study of the ancient Vv. for exegetical purposes may be very earnestly recommended. The amount of labour will not be very formidable, and in some cases we have fair, if not good, literary appliances. There seems good reason for not going beyond the Syriac, the Italic, the Vulgate, the Gothic, the Coptic, and the Ethiopic. The remaining Vv. are of doubt- ful value. The Armenian, though so much extolled, is said to have undergone no less serious, than un- satisfactory alterations. The Arabic Versions are of very mixed origin; the Slavonic is late; the Georgian has been but little used, and is deemed to be of no great value; the Persian and Anglo-Saxon, as far as they extend, are not free from suspicion of depen- dence, the one on the Syriac, the other on the Vul- x PREFACE. gate. Jor the present, at any rate, the Syriac, Italic, Vulgate, Gothic, Coptic, and Ethiopic are all that need demand attention. Most of these are rendered perfectly accessible by the labours of recent scholars. The Syriac has been often reprinted; grammars in that language are common enough, but the Lexicons are but few and unsatisfactory.* The Italic I fear is only accessible by means of the large work of ~ Sabatier, or Tischendorf’s expensive edition of the Codex Claromontanus. The Gothic, independently of not being at all diffi- cult to the German or Anglo-Saxon scholar, has been admirably edited. In addition to the very valuable edition of De Gabelentz and Loebe, and the cheap Latin translation of that work in Migne’s Patrology, there is the available edition of Massmann, to which, as in the case of the larger work of De Gabelentz and Loebe, a grammar and perhaps glossary is to be added. In addition to the Lexicon attached to De Gabelentz and Loebe’s edition, we have also the Glossary of Schulze (Magdeb. 1848) both, as far as my very limited experience extends, works con- structed on sound principles of philology. In the Coptic there is a cheap and portable edition of the epistles by Boetticher; and with the Grammar by Tattam and the Glossary by Peyron, it is not very probable that the student will encounter much diffi- culty. Of the Ethiopic I know nothing; the version itself will be found in Walton’s Polyglott: it has been re-edited by Bode, and I believe again in a very ex- cellent way by Mr. Platt. An Ethiopic grammar * Tt is said that Professor Bernstein has for some time been engaged in the preparation of a new Syriac Lexicon, but I cannot find out that it has yet appeared. PREFACE. xl is announced by Dittmann, but I should fear that there is no better lexicon than that of Castell. The study of this language will be perhaps somewhat advanced by a forthcoming pentaglott edition of Jonah (Williams and Norgate), which is to include the Ethiopic, and to have glossaries attached. _ I sincerely trust that these brief notices may tempt some of our Biblical scholars to enter upon this important and edifying field of labour. The notes to the Translation will be found a little more full (see Introductory Notice), and, as the sub- ject of a Revised Translation is now occupying con- siderable attention, a little more explicit on the subject of different renderings and the details of translation generally. With regard to this very important subject, the revision of our Authorized Version, I would fain here make a few observations, as I am particularly anxious that my humble efforts in this direction should not be misinterpreted or misunderstood. What is the present state of feeling with regard to a revision of our present Version? It seems clear that there are now three parties among us. The first, those who either from what seem seriously mistaken views of a translation of the Holy Scripture, or from sectarian prejudice, are agitating for a new Trans- lation. The second, those who are desirous for a revision of the existing Version, but who somewhat differ in respect of the proposed alterations and the principles on which they are to be introduced. The third, those who from fear of unsettling the religious belief of weaker brethren are opposed to alterations of any kind; positive and demonstrable error in the representation of the words of Inspiration being in ΧΙ PREFACE. their judgment less pernicious than change. Of these three parties the first is far the smallest in point of numbers, but the most persistent in activities: the second class is daily increasing, yet at present greatly inferior both in numbers and influence to the third. Which of these three parties will prevail? We may fervently trust not the first. Independently of the extreme danger of unsettling the cherished con- victions of thousands, of changing language that has spoken to doubting or suffering hearts with accents that have been to them like the voice of God Him- self,—independently of reversing a traditional prin- ciple of revision that has gained strength and recep- tion since the days of Tyndale,—independently of sowing a strife in the Church of which our children and children’s children may reap the bitter fruits, — independently of all these momentous considerations, —have we any good reason for thinking that, in a mere literary point of view, it would be likely to be an improvement on the Old Translation? The almost pitiable attempts under the name of New Translations that have appeared in the last twenty years, the somewhat ‘low state of Biblical scholarship, the diminishing and. diminished vigour of the popular language of our day, are facts well calculated to sober our expectations and qualify our self- confidence. But are we unreservedly to join the third party? God forbid. If we are truly and heartily persuaded that there are errors and inaccuracies in our Version, if we know that though by far the best and most faithful translation that the world has ever seen, it still shares the imperfections that belong to every human work however noble and exalted,—if we feel PREFACE. xili and know that these imperfections are no less patent than remediable, then surely it is our duty to Him who gave that blessed Word for the guidance of man, through evil report and through good report to labour by gentle counsels to supply what is lacking and correct what is amiss, to render what has been blessed with great measures of perfection yet more perfect, and to hand it down thus marked with our reverential love and solicitude as the best and most blessed heritage we have to leave to them who shall follow us. It is in vain to cheat our own souls with the thought that these errors are either insignificant or imaginary. There are errors, there are inaccuracies, there ave mis- conceptions, there are obscurities, not indeed so many in number or so grave in character as the for- ward spirits of our day would persuade us of,—but there are misrepresentations of the language of the Holy Ghost, and that man, who, after being in any degree satisfied of this, permits himself to lean to the counsels of a timid or popular obstructiveness, or who, intellectually unable to test the truth of these allegations, nevertheless permits himself to denounce or deny them, will, if they be true, most surely at the dread day of final account, have to sustain the tre- mendous charge of having dealt deceitfully with the inviolable Word of God. But are we to take no thought of the weaker brethren whose feelings may be lacerated, or whose conscience may be offended by seeming innovations? That be far from us. We must win them by gentle wisdom, we must work conviction in their minds by showing how little, comparatively speaking, there is that is absolutely wrong,—how persuasively it may be ΧΙΥ PREFACE. amended,—how we may often recur to the expressions of our older Versions, and from those rich stores of language, those treasuries of pure and powerful English, may find the very rectification we would fain adopt, the very translation we are seeking to embody in words. No revision of our Authorized Version can hope to meet with approval or recog- nition that ignores the labours of those wise and venerable men who first enabled our forefathers to read in their own tongue of the marvellous works and the manifold wisdom of God. Let there be then no false fears about a loving and filial revision of our present Version. If done in the spirit and with the circumspection that marked the revision of that predecessor to which it owes its own origin and existence, no conscience, however tender, either will be or ought to be wounded. Nay, there seems intimation in their very preface that our last translators expected that others would do to them as they had done to those who had gone before them; and if they could now rise from their graves and aid us by their counsels, which side would they take? Would they stay our hands if they saw us seeking to perfect their work? “Would they not rather join with us, even if it led sometimes to the removal or dere- liction of the monuments of their own labour, in laying out yet more straightly the way of divine Truth? How this great work is to be accomplished in detail is not for such a one as me to attempt to define. This only I will say, that it is my honest conviction that for any authoritative revision we are not yet mature, either in Biblical learning or Hellenistic scholarship. There is good scholarship in this ‘ PREFACE. τν country, superior probably to that of any nation in the world, but it has certainly not yet been sufficiently directed to the study of the New Testament (for of the N. T. only am I now speaking) to render any national attempt at a revision either hopeful or lastingly profitable. Our best and wisest course seems to be this,—to encourage small bands of scholars to make independent efforts on separate books, to invite them manfully to face and court impartial criticism, and so by their very failures to learn practical wisdom, and out of their censors to secure coadjutors, and by their partial successes to win over the prejudiced and the gainsaying. If a few such attempts were to be made, and they were to meet with encouragement and sympathy, such a stimulus would be given to Biblical studies that a very few years would elapse before England might be provided with a company of wise and cunning craftsmen, into whose hands she might hopefully confide her jewel of most precious price. Under any circumstances we may devoutly hope that no party feeling will be allowed for one moment to outrage the sobriety of thought with which this subject ought to be approached. It is humiliating enough to reflect that there are among us religious parties and animosities, but it would be doubly humiliating to think that a great work,a work on which the hopes and salvation of thousands, aye, and tens of thousands depend, was either perversely obstructed or wilfully precipitated by the strife and turmoil of religious discord. If higher arguments do not pre- vail, let us remember that two good and learned men, who in their lifetimes were respectively claimed by very opposite parties, and who might not have had Xvi PREFACE, very many points in common,—the late Lady Mar- garet’s Professor of Divinity, and the late Greek Pro- fessor of the University of Cambridge, the one as transpires through his Lectures on the Duties of a Parish Priest, the other in his Hints for an Improved Translation of the N. T.,—appear to have held on the subject of the revision of our Version opinions that are very nearly identical. A single word only with regard to the translation which accompanies this volume. It is exactly similar in principles and construction to the former attempts, —attempts made at a time when the question of a revision of the Authorized Version had been but little agitated. It lays no presumptuous claim to be a sample of what an authoritative revision ought to be. It is only the effort of a fallible and erring man,* striving honestly and laboriously, and on somewhat fixed principles, to present to a few students of his own time a version for the closet, a version possibly more accurate than that which it professes to amend, yet depending on it and on the older Versions for all the life and warmth with which it may be animated or quickened. The time and pains I have bestowed on this translation aré excessive, and yet in the ma- jority of corrections I feel how little cause I have for satisfaction. Lastly, with regard to the Epistles themselves now * These are not mere words. I have been-made aware, by kind private com- munications, that in the Galatians especially my corrections in respect of the translations of the aorist and perfect have not been sufficiently persistent. These errors have been carefully avoided in the present volume. Even in the Galatians I was quite aware of the erroneous tendency of our version in this respect, and shall be found often to have advocated the rigorous translation in the note, though my hand has faltered in striking out the error from our version. To one of my public censors on this subject it is not too much to say, et tu Brute? ci, * PREFACE. xvii before us, it remains only to commend them to the reader’s most earnest and devout attention. They are distinguished by many peculiarities of language, and many singularities of expression, and are asso- ciated together by an inter-dependence of thought that is noticeable and characteristic. They seem all composed at atime when the earthly pilgrimage of the great Apostle was drawing to its close, and when all the practical wisdom of that noble and loving heart was spread out for the benefit of his own children of the faith, and for the edification of the Church in all ages. On the question of their genuineness, without entering upon investigations which would be foreign to the nature of this Com- mentary, it will not be perhaps presumptuous to say that a very careful study of their language and turns of expression has left on my mind a most fixed and most unalterable conviction that they came from no other hand and heart than those of the great Apostle of the Gentiles, and that it seems hard to understand how accomplished scholars like De Wette could so decidedly maintain the contrary hypothesis. This conviction has, however, never prevented me from freely and frankly calling attention to all the pecu- liarities in thoughts, words, and expressions which characterize the three epistles, but which, never- theless, when viewed in connexion with the age and experiences of the Sacred writer, and the peculiar nature of the errors he was opposing, can cause neither surprise nor difficulty. In the Commentary I am much less indebted to the labours of my predecessors than in the two former epistles. The commentary of Huther, except in the Prolegomena, is a sad falling off after the able b XVill PREFACE. and scholarlike expositions of Meyer. De Wette, owing to his doubts about the authorship, is often perplexed and unsatisfactory. I have derived benefit from the commentary of Wiesinger, which though somewhat prolix, and deficient in force and com- pression, may still be heartily commended to the student. The commentary of Leo is mainly sound in scholarship, but not characterized by any great amount of research. The commentary on the second epistle to Timothy was written some years after that on the first, and is a noticeable improvement. The commentatories of Mack, Matthies, and Heydenreich (of whom, however, I know very little), are useful in examples and illustrations, but perhaps will hardly quite repay the labour of steady perusal. Something less may be said of Flatt and Weegscheider. The Danish commentary of Bp. Moller is brief and sen- sible, but lays no claim to very critical scholarship. I have made far more use of the extremely good commentary of the distinguished Hellenist, Coray. It is written in modern Greek, under the somewhat curious title of Συνέκδημος ἱἹερατικός ( Vade-mecum Sacrum), and, with the exception of the somewhat singular fact that Coray only seems to have known the Greek commentators through the’ medium of Suicer, shows very extensive reading, and generally avery sound judgment. It is very remarkable that this able commentary, though more than five-and- twenty years before the world, should have attracted so little attention. As far as my observation extends, it is not referred to by any English or foreign commentator, and there are not many expositions on this group of epistles that more thoroughly de- serve it. PREFACE. xs These, with the Patristic commentators, the able ‘Romanist expositors, Justiniani, Cornelius a Lapide, and Estius, and a few other writers noticed in the preface to the epistle to the Galatians, are the prin- cipal authorities which I have used in the present commentary. I now commit this volume to the reader with the humble prayer to Almighty God that He may vouch- safe to bless this effort to expound and illustrate a most vital and most consoling portion of His holy Word; may He pity the weakness and forgive the errors of His servant. ΤΡΙΑΣ, MONAS, "EAEHZON. London, August 29th, 1856. 7. Δ ' RF ind = ie MO vesting one ὉΠ ἮΙ ὲ γεν THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. CHAPTER I. 1. Apostolic address and Salutation, 1. ἀπόστολος I. X] ‘an Apostle,’ in the higher and more especial sense ; see notes on Gal. i. 1., and on Eph. iv. 1r. For its connexion with the (possessive) gen., see notes on Eph. i. τι The use of this formal designa- tion does not seem intended to sup- port the authority of Timothy (Heydenr.) or to imply a destination of the Epistle for others (Calv.), or for the Church at large (comp. Bp. Miller), but simply to define and maintain the true nature of the docu- ment. As this epistle may be most naturally regarded as an official letter, the Apostle appropriately designates himself by his solemn and official title. Compare 2 Tim. i. 1. sq., and esp. Tit. i. 1. sq., where this seems still more apparent: in Philem. 1., on the other hand, the Apostle, in exquisite accordance with the nature and sub- ject of that letter, styles himself simply δέσμιος Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ. Kat ἐπιταγὴν Θεοῦ is not simply equivalent to the customary διὰ θελή- ματος Θεοῦ, 1 and 2 Cor., Eph., Col., 2 Tim. (Moller), but points more pre- cisely to the immediate antecedents of the Apostle’s call (the ἐπιταγὴ was the result of the θέλημα), and thus perhaps still more serves to enhance Ἷ Ὁ ae ἀπόστολος Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ, > ‘ = Ξ “εἰ Η͂ κατ᾽ ἐπιταγὴν Θεοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν καὶ the authoritative nature of his com- mission ; see Tit. i. 3, the only other passage where the expression occurs. σωτῆρος ἡμῶν] ‘our Saviour,’ not merely in reference to His preserving and sustaining power (compare Ζεὺς σωτήρ, &e.), but to His redeeming love in Christ, more distinctly expressed, Jude, 25 (Tisch., Lachm.) σωτῆρι ἡμῶν dia*I. X.; comp. 2 Cor. v. 19, and see Reuss, Theolog. Chret. iv. 9, Vol. II. p. 93. This designation of God is peculiar to the pastoral Epistles(1 Tim. Hy 2. ἰνὶ τον Tits: i. 30s ΤΟ; 11, 4), Luke i. 47, and Jude, 25, but is suffi- ciently common in the LXX. e. g. Psalm xxiv. 5, Isaiah xii. 2, xlv. 15, 2t. Its grammatical connexion with Θεὸς is slightly diversified in the N. T. In 1 Tim. iv. 10 σωτὴρ is added epexegetically in the relative clause, Θεῷ bs ἐστιν σωτήρ: in Luke ἢ. c., here, and Jude, 25, itstands in simple, or what is termed parathetic appo- sition (Kriiger, Sprachl. § 57. 9) to Θεός ; in the first passage with, in the two latter without, the article. In all the other places the formula is 6 σωτὴρ ἡμῶν Θεός ; the tenor of the sentence (esp. 1 Tim. ii. 3, 4) probably suggesting the prominence of the appellation. According to Huther, ᾿ Β 9 1 TIMOTHY I. 1—3 Χριστοῦ ᾿Ἰησοῦ τῆς ἐλπίδος ἡμῶν, 2 Τιμοθέῳ γνησίῳ , 5) , , ” 9s δ. as a ‘ 4 τέκνῳ εν TLOTEL. χάρις, ἔλεος, εἰρηνῆ απο Θεοῦ TAT Pos και “Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν. I exhort thee to still abide in Ephesus, and 3 Καθὼς παρεκάλεσά σε προσμεῖναι ἐν to repress teachers of other doctrine and would-be teachers of the law: the law is not for the righteous, but for open sinners and opponents of sound doctrine, as the spirit of the Gospel shows. the anarthrous σωτὴρ ἡμῶν is here an adjectival apposition appended to θεοῦ, while in Luke J. ¢., τῷ σωτῆρί pov, the article marks it as a substan- tive. Thisis very doubtful; the usage of Attic Greek in similar cases seems here correctly maintained ;—if the name of the deity have the article, the appellation has it also; if the former be anarthrous, so wswally is the latter ; see Kriiger, Sprachl. § 50. 8, το. τῆς ἐλπίδος ἡμῶν] ‘our Hope,’ not merely the object of it (Leo), or the author of it (Flatt), but its very sub- stance and foundation; ‘in eo solo residet tota salutis nostre materia,’ Calv. : see Col. i. 27, Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν, ἡ ἐλπὶς τῆς δόξης, and comp. Eph. ii. 14, αὐτὸς γάρ ἐστιν ἡ εἰρήνη ἡμῶν, where (see notes) the abstract subst. must be taken in a sense equally full and comprehensive. The same ex- pression occurs in Ignat.:7'rall. § 2. 2. Τιμοθέῳ κ. τ.λ.1 There is no necessity to supply χαίρειν; for as Miller rightly observes, the following wish forms really part of the saluta- tion. It is best, in accordance with the punctuation adopted in the former epp., to place a period after πίστει; for although in St. Paul’s salutations, with the exception of this passage, 2 Tim. i. 2, and Tit. i. 4, the resump- tion is made more apparent by the insertion of ὑμῖν after χάρις, yet this appears to have arisen either from the plurality of the persons saluted (e. g. Phil., Philem.) or the generic expres- sion (τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ 1 and 2 Thess, i. 1. ; ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις Gal, i. 2) under which they are grouped. Here the resump-_ tive pronoun would be unnecessary. On the form of salutation see notes on Gal. i. 4 and Eph. i. 2. ἐν πίστει] ‘in faith ; ‘in the sphere of faith.” De Wette (Ed. 2, 1847) cites Winer as connecting these words only with γνησίῳ. This is incorrect : Winer (ed. 5, 1844) admits the possi- bility of such a connexion (see Xenoph. Anab. IV. 3. 23), but rightly refers ἐν πίστει to the compound idea γνησίῳ τέκνῳ. Thus τέκνῳ denotes the affec- tionate (1 Cor. iv. 17, τέκνον ἀγα- πητὸν), as well as spiritual (Philem. 10), nature of the connexion; γνη- oy oly [papa [true] Syr. (with ὄντως dy, Plato Politic. 293, and opp. to νόθος, Philo, Somm. ii. § 6), specifies the genu- ineness and reality of it (Phil. iv. 3), τὴν ἀκριβῆ καὶ ὑπὲρ τοὺς ἄλλους πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁμοιότητα, Chrys., comp. Meyer on Phil. 1- ο. ; ἐν πίστει marks the sphere of it,—more generally, but not less suitably (De W.), expressed by κατὰ κοινὴν πίστιν, Tit. i. 4. ἔλεος] The addition of this substantive to the usual form of salutation, χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη, is peculiar to the Pastoral epp. (Tit. i. 4, Rec. Lachm., is how- ever doubtful) ; see 2 Joh. 3, and Jude 2. It here probably serves to individualize, and to mark the deep and affectionate interest of the Apostle in his convert ; καὶ τοῦτο ἀπὸ πολλῆς φιλοστοργίας, Chrys.: see notes on Eph. i. 2. 3. καθώς] ‘Lven as,’ protasis, to which there igno expressed apodosis ‘ ἘΚΕΙ͂. 9 ᾿Εφέσῳ, “πορευόμενος εἰς Μακεδονίαν, ἵνα παραγγείλῃς (neither at ver. 5, nor ver. 18, Beng.), but to which the obvious and natural one, οὕτω καὶ viv παρακαλῶ (comp. ch. ii. 1), can easily be supplied ; see Winer, Gramm. ὃ 64. τ. 2, p. 614, where there is a good list of the imagi- nary parentheses in St. Paul’s Epp. All other explanations, whether by an interpolation before ἵνα, e.g., ‘ita facito,’ Erasm., or an arbitrary change of reading προσμέινας, (Schneckenb. Beitr. p. 183), seem very forced and unsatisfactory. παρεκάλεσα) ‘TI besought,’ Auth. Ver. ; 2 Cor. viii. 6, xii. 18: dxove τὸ mpornvés.... οὐ yap εἶπεν" ἐπέταξα, οὐδὲ ἐκέλευσα, οὐδὲ παρήνεσα, ἀλλὰ τί; παρεκάλεσά σε, Chrys.; comp. Philem. 8, παῤ- ῥησίαν ἔχων ἐπιτάσσειν---μᾶλλον παρα- καλῷ. The observation is ποὺ in- validated by Tit. i. 5 (Huther), for the use of διεταξάμην was probably there suggested by the specific instruc- tions which follow the general order. It may be observed however that παρακαλ. is a word of most frequent occurrence in St. Paul’s Epp., being used above fifty times, while of the other words mentioned by Chrys., one only (érirdoow) is used by the Apostle, and that only once, Philem. 1.6. No undue stress, then (‘recommended,’ Peile), should be laid in translation. προσμεῖναι) ‘to abide still,’ ‘tarry on,’ ‘ut permaneres,’ Beza ; certainly not, in an ethical sense, ‘to adhere to a plan’ (Paulus), an interpretation framed only to meet supposed his- torical difficulties: see Wieseler, Chronol. p. 302. The tense cannot be pressed; as the aor. inf. is only used on the principle of the ‘ parity of tenses’ (Schefer, Demosth. Vol. Ill. p. 432). All that can be said is, that if the pres. inf. had been used (comp. Matth. xiv. 22), the contem- plated duration of Timothy’s stay at Ephesus would have been more espe- cially marked. In the present case no inference can be safely drawn. On the use of the inf. pres. and aor. after ἐλπίζειν, κελεύειν, παρακαλεῖν k.T.X., see Winer, Gr. § 45. 8. c, p. 385, comp. Lobeck, Phryn. p. 748 sq. ; and on the general distinction be- tween these tenses in the inf., con- sult the good note of Stalbaum on Plato, Euthyd. p. 140. πορευόμενος] ‘when Iwas on my way, ‘as I was going,’ Hamm. It is not grammatically possible, as De Wette seems to imagine, to refer this par- ticiple to Timothy ; see Winer, Gr. § 45. 2, p. 371. Such participial anacolutha as those cited by Matth., Eph. iii. 19, Eph. iv. 2, Col. iii. 16 (but see Meyer), are very dissimilar: there the distance of the part. from the words on which it is grammatically dependent, and still more the obvious prominence of the clause (see notes on Eph, iii. 18) render such a construction perfectly intelligible; here no such reasons can possibly be urged; see exx. in Winer, G7. ὃ 64. 2, p. 620. There is confessedly great difficulty in harmonizing this historical notice with those contained in the Acts. Three hypotheses have been proposed, to all of which there are very grave objections, historical and exegetical. These can here be only briefly noticed. (a.) If the journey here mentioned be that related Acts, xx. 1, 2 (Theodoret, Hemsen), how is it possible to reconcile the stay of Timothy at Ephesus with the fact that St. Paul despatched him a short time only before his own departure, to Macedonia (Acts xix. 22) and thence to Corinth (1 Cor. iv. 17), and that we further find him at the latter ΒΩ 4 τισὶν μὴ ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν place (2 Cor. i. 1) with the Apostle? Moreover, when St. Paul then left Ephesus, he certainly contemplated no speedy return (1 Tim. iii. 14); for see Acts xix. 21, xx. 3: compare Huther, Finleit. p. 13, 14; Wieseler, Chronol. p. 290 sq. (.) If St. Paul be supposed to have sent Timothy forward to Ephesus from Achaia (Matth.), having himself the intention of following ; can this be reconciled with Acts xx. 4, συνείπετο, and with the fact that when St. Paul was near Ephesus, and might have carried out his intention, he ἔκρινε παραπλεῦσαι τὴν ἜφΦ. 1 see Wieseler, p.294, Wiesin- ger, Hinleit. p. 370 sq. (6) Even Wieseler’s opinion (Chronol. p. 313, comp. p. 295 sq.), that this was an unrecorded journey during St. Paul’s 2-3 years’ stay at Ephesus, though more reconcilable with historical data, seemsinconsistent with the character of the epistle which certainly recognized (a) a fully developed form of error (con- trast the future εἰσελεύσονται, Acts xx, 29), (8) an advanced state of Church discipline, not wholly probable at this earlier date ; and (y) it gives instructions to Timothy which seem to contemplate his continued residence at Ephesus, and an uninterrupted per- formance of his episcopal duties ; see Huther, Zinleit. p. τῇ. These objections are so graye that we seem justified in remanding. this journey (with Theophyl., 2cum., and recently Huther and Wiesinger) to some time after the first imprisonment at Rome, and consequently, beyond the period included by St. Luke in the Acts. See Pearson, Ann. Paul. Vol. 1, p- 393, Guerike, Hinleit. § 48. 1, p- 396 (ed. 2), Paley, Hor, Paul. ch, xi. παραγγείλῃς] ‘ com- mand,’ not necessarily, openly (Matth.), 7 VIMO THY OSS. ¢4. 4 μηδὲ προσέχειν μύθοις καὶ but authoritatively: παρακαλεῖν is the milder, παραγγέλλειν the stronger word ; comp. 2 Thess. iii. 12. In the Ep. to Titus the Cretan character suggests the use of still more decided language; e.g. Tit.i. 11, ἐπιστομίζειν ; ver. 13, ἐλέγχειν ἀποτόμως. τισίν] So ver. 6; iv. 1; v. 15, 24; v. 21. We cannot safely deduce from this that the number of evil teachers was small (Huther); the indef. pro- noun is more probably slightly con- temptuous ; ‘le mot τινες a quelque chose de meprisant,’ see Arnaud, on Jude, 4, comp. Gal. ii, 12. ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν] ‘to be teachers of “π᾿ ν moO a other doctrine, [2 sseaaS0 Japa [diversas doctrinas] Syr.; dls Aeydu., here and ch. vi. 3. Neither the form nor meaning of this word presents any real difficulties. In form it is ana- logous with ἑτεροζυγεῖν, 2 Cor. vi. 11, and is the verbalized derivative of ἑτεροδιδάσκαλος (comp. καλοδιδάσκαλος, Tit. ii. 3); not ἑτεροδιδάσκειν, but ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν, ‘to play the ἑτεροδιδ.᾽ The meaning is equally perspicuous if we adhere to the usual and correct meaning of ἕτερος (distinction ofkind, — see notes on Gal. i. 6): thus érepodid. implies. ‘ teaching,—not necessarily ‘whatis doctrinally false,’ nor even so much as ‘what is strange,’ but ‘what is different to, what deviates from (‘afvi- gende,’ Moller), sound doctrine ;' see ch. vi. 3, where this meaning is especially confirmed. Just as the εὐαγγέλιον of the Galatians was ἕτερον from its assimilation of Judaical ele- ments, so here the διδασκαλία was érépa from its commixture with an unedifying (ver. 4), vain (ver. 6), and morbid (ver. 10) theosophy of simi- larly Jewish origination. It will thus be seen that with Chrysostom, Theo- ‘ 1 TIMOTHY I 4. 5 yeveadoyiats ἀπεράντοις, αἵτινες ζητήσεις παρέχουσιν μάᾶλ- doret, and the other Greek commen- tator, we regard the error which St. Paul was condemning, as not so much a settled form of heresy, pre- Marcionite or otherwise, as a profitless and addititious teaching which, arising from Jewish (comp. Tit. i. 14), per- haps Cabbalistic, sources, was after- wards an affluent of the later and more definite Gnosticism ; see esp. Wiesin- ger, Hinleit. § 4, p. 212; Huther, Hinleit. p. 41, and (thus far) Schleier- macher, iiber 1 Tim. p. 83 sq. 4. προσέχειν] ‘give heed to,’ Auth. Ver. ; a felicitous translation; so Tit. i. 14. Προσέχ. is not ‘ fidem ad- hibere,’ Heinr., nor synonymous with πιστεύειν (Krebs, Obs. p. 204), either here or elsewhere, Acts viii. 6, 11; xvi. 14, al., but indicates a prior and preparatory act, and is, as it were, a mean term between ἀκούειν and πιστεύειν ; comp. Polyb. Hist. Iv. 84. 6, διακούσαντες οὐδὲν προσέσχον ; Joseph. Bell. Jud. Vu. 5. 3, οὔτε προσ- εἶχον οὔτε ἐπίστευον. The examples adduced by Krebs and Raphel (Οὗ. Vol. τι. p. 113) only serve to confirm the strict interpretation. The canon of Thom. Mag. 'ἱπροσέχω σοι τὸν νοῦν᾽ κάλλιον ἢ ἱπροσέχω cot μόνον, is abun- dantly disproved by his commen- tators ; see p. 749 ed. Bernard. μύθοις Kal yeveadoylais] ‘fables and genealogies.” It is very doubtful whether the popular reference of these terms to the spiritual myths and ema- nations of Gnosticism (Tertull. Valent. 3, de Prescr. 33, Ireneus Her. (Pref.), Grot., Hamm., and most modern commentators) can be fairly sustained. The only two passages that throw any real light on the meaning of these terms are Tit. i. 14, iii. 9. In the former of these the μῦθοι are defined as ᾿Ιουδαϊκοί, in the latter the yevea- λογίαι are connected with μάχαι νομικαί ; in both cases then the words have there a Jewish reference. The same must hold in the present case ; for the errors described in the two epp. are palpably too similar to make it at all probable that the terms in which they are here alluded to have any other than a Jewish reference also ; so Chrys. Theodoret, al., comp. Ignat. Magn. 8: see esp. Wiesinger, Finleit. p.211sq., Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 342, ed. Bohn. μῶθοι will then most probably be, not specifically τὰ παράσημα δόγματα, Chrys., nor a supplementary ἑρμηνεία, a δευτέρωσις (Theodoret), but gene- rally, Rabbinical fables and fabrica- tions whether in history or doctrine. γενεαλογίαν will be “ genealogies’ in the proper sense, with which, how- ever, these wilder speculations were very probably combined, and to which an allegorical interpretation may have been regularly assigned; comp. Dihne in Stud. u. Krit. for 1833, p. 1008. It is curious that Polybius uses both terms in similarly close connexion, Hist. 1K. 2.1. ἀπεράντοις] ‘endless,’ ‘interminable ; πεδίον ἀπέ- pavrov, Pind. Nem. ὙΠ. 38, so 3 Mace. ii. 9, ἀπέρ. γῆν. It does not seem necessary to adopt either the ethical (areXelwrov Hesych., Chrysost. 2) or logical (λόγοι ἀπέραντοι opp. to λόγοι περαντικοί, Diog. Laert. Vil. i. 49, Sext. Emp. vii. iii. 429) meaning of this word. The genealogies were vague, rambling, interminable ; it was an ἄμετρος καὶ ἀπέρ. διήγησις (Philo, de Abrah. 3, Vol. π. p. 5, ed. Mangey) that had no natural or necessary conclusion; comp. Polyb. Hist. τ. 57. 3, where the simple sense appears similarly maintained. αἵτινες] ‘inasmuch as they,’ ‘ seeing 6 1 TIMOTHY I. 4,5. a . , ΄ A , λον ἢ οἰκονομίαν Θεοῦ τὴν ἐν πίστει" they ;’ explicative use of ὅστις, see notes on Gal. iv. 24. ζητήσεις] ‘questions ; either subjec- tively, ‘disputings,’ Actsxv. 2(Tisch.) ; or, more probably, in an objective sense, ‘questions of controversy,’ ‘en- quiries,’ essentially opposed to faith (Chrys. Theod.) and of which ἔρεις and μάχαν are the natural and specified results ; see ch. vi. 4, 2 Tim. ii. 23, Tit. iii. 9. οἰκονομίαν Θεοῦ] “ God’s dispensation,’ not “ edi- fying,’ Raphel, Wolf,—a translation which οἰκονομία cannot bear: in Polyb. Hist. tv. 65. 11 (cited by Raphel) the proper translation is ‘ exsecutio insti- tuti ; see Schweigh. Lex. Polyb. s.v. The exact meaning of theterm is, how- ever, doubtful. If οἰκονομία be ex- plained subjectively, ‘the steward- ship,’ i. e. ‘the exercising of the stewardship,’ Conyb. and Hows., ‘the discharge of the functions of an οἰκόνομος Θεοῦ’ (‘actum non statum,’ Beng.), comp. 1 Cor. ix. 17, iv. 1, the use of παρέχειν must be zeugmatic (‘preebere, promovere’) unless ζητήσεις be also explained actively, in which case παρέχειν will have a single mean- ing, but the very questionable one, ‘promovere.’ If, however, οἰκονομία Θεοῦ be taken objectively and pas- sively (Chrys.), the ‘dispensation of God’ (gen. auctoris,) i.e. ‘the scheme of salvation designed by God, and proclaimed by his Apostles,’ with only a remote reference to the οἶκος Θεοῦ (see notes on Eph. i. 10), the meaning of ζητ. and οἶκον. will be more logically symmetrical, and παρέχειν can retain its simple sense ‘ prebere’: the fables and genealogies supplied questions of a controversial nature, but not the essence and principles of the divine dispensation, τὴν ἐν πίστει then further defines the nature 5 τὸ δὲ τέλος τῆς of the οἰκονομία by stating the sphere of its action, ‘ faith, not a questioning spirit,’ making the contrast with ζητήσ. more clear and emphatic. The easier reading οἰκοδομίαν, found only in D*** or οἰκοδομήν, D* ; Iren. ap. Epiph. (though appy. supported by | several Vy. ; edificationem, Vulg., It., Syr. ; Syr. (Philox.) in marg., Goth., Ar(Erp), . . ...Ambr. Aug. Ambrst.,) cannot possibly be sustained against the authority of all the uncial MSS., and is probably only of paradiplomatic (Pref. to Gal. p. xvi) origin, ὃ and v being confused. How can Bloomf. ed. 9 adduce the Alex. MS. in favour of οἰκοδομίαν, and (except from a Lat. transl.) assert that Chrys. and Theod. were not aware of any other reading. These are grave errors. 5. τὸ δὲ τέλος κ. τ. λ.7 § But (not ‘now,’ Auth. Ver., Conyb., and Hows.) the end (aim) of the commandment, &e.’ There ought not to be here any marks of parenthesis, as Griesb. Lachm. : this verse does not commence a new train of thought, but stands in simple adver- sative relation (δέ) to ver. 4, forming an easy and natural transition to ver. 6 sq., wheré the errors of the false teachers are more particularly specified. Τέλος is thus not the συμπλήρωμα (Chrys., comp. Rom. xiii. ro), the ‘pal- marium, precipuum’ (Schoettg.), or the ‘sum,’ ‘die Hauptsumme’ (Luther), meanings scarcely lexically tenable, but the ‘ aim’ (Beza, Hamm. 2), as in the expression noticed by Chrys., τέλος ἰατρικῆς ὑγιεία ; see Rom. x. 4, and Chrys. in loc., where however the meaning does not seem equally certain. The distinction of Cassian (cited by Justiniani) between σκόπος ‘id quod artifices spectare solent’ and τέλος ‘quod expetitur ab arte’ is not fully satisfactory. - ἡ παραγγελία ΦΥῊΝ 1 TIMOTHY L. 5. 7 rl 9 A 9 , 9. θ lal δί αἱ υνει--: παραγγε (ag ἐστιν ayaTy εκ Ka apas καρ tag Και σ is not the ‘lex Mosaica’ (‘ pars pro toto,’ Calv.), nor even the ‘lex Evan- gelica,’ Corn. a Lap., both of which meanings are more inclusive than the context seems to require, or the usage of mapayyeNa in the N.T. (ch. i. 18, Acts v. 28, xvi. 24, 1 Thess. iv. 2) will admit of. On the other hand, to refer rapayy. simply to the preceding παραγγείλης (Theophyl. ἐὰν παραγγέλλῃς μὴ ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν, τοῦ- το κατορθώσεις, τὴν ἀγάπην) seems too narrow and exclusive. That it was suggested by the verb just preceding is not improbable; that it has how- ever a further reference to doctrine in a preceptive form generally, ‘ practical teaching’ (De W.), seems required by the context, and confirmed by the recurrence of the verb in this ep.; COMD ICR: Voi Ll, Vols View 3). 17s ἀγάπη] ‘love’; the ἕητήσεις engen- dered μάχας, 2 Tim. ii. 23. The love here mentioned is clearly love to men (ἡ ἐκ διαθέσεως καὶ τοῦ συναλγεῖν συνισταμένη, Theophyl.) not ‘love to God and men’ Matth.: ‘quum de caritate fit mentio in Scriptura, sepius ad secundum membrum restringitur’ Caly.: see esp. Usteri, Lehrb. 1. 1. 4, p- 242. ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας] ‘out of, emanating from, a pure heart; comp. Luke x. 27, τ Pet. i. 22. "Ex points correctly to the inward seat of the ἀγάπη (Winer, Gr. ὃ 51, p. 439.) The καρδία, properly the (imaginary) seat of the ψυχή (Olsh. Opuse. p. 155), appears very commonly used in Scrip- ture (like the Hebrew 125) to denote the ψυχὴ in its active aspects (f qua- tenus sentit et agitur et movetur duce spiritu vel carne,’ Olsh. éb.), and may be regarded as the centre both of the feelings and emotions (John xvi. 6, Rom. ix. 2 al.), and of the thoughts and imaginations (Matth. xy. 19, Mark ix. 4, 1 Cor. iv. 5 al.), though in the latter case more usually with the associated ideas of activity and practical application ; see Beck, Bibl. Seelenl. 111. 24. 3, Ῥ- 94 84.» and esp. the good collection of exx. in Delitzsch, Bibl. Psychol. τν. 12, p. 204. συνείδησις ἀγαθή here and ver. 19 (comp. τ Pet. iii. τό ; καλὴ Heb. xiii. 18; καθαρὰ 1 Tim. iii. 9, 2 Tim. i. 3) is connected with πίστις as the true principle on which its existence de- pends. Faith, faith ἀνυπόκριτος, though last in the enumeration, is really first in point of origin, It ren- ders the heart pure (Acts xv. 9), and in so doing renders the evil conscience ἀγαθή. Thus considered, συνείδησις dy. would seem to be, not the ante- cedent of the καθαρὰ καρδία (Hamm.), and certainly not identical with it (Corn. a Lap., comp. Calv.), but its consequent ‘conscientia bona nihil aliud est quam scientia et testimonium anime affirmantis se pure et sancte vivere,’ Menoch. ap. Pol. Syn. ; com- pare Pearson, Creed, Art. vu. Vol. i. p. 347 (ed. Burton). On the exact meaning of συνείδησις see Saunderson, de Obl. Conse. 1, 4 sq., Vol. IV, p. 3 (ed. Jacobs.); on its nature and power, Butler Serm. 11, ΠῚ ; and on its threefold character (an exponent of moral law, a judge, and a sentiment) the very clear discussion of M‘Cosh, Divine Gov. 1. i. 4, p. 291 sq. It must be remembered, however, that in Scripture these more exact defini- tions are frequently wholly inappli- cable ; the συνείδησις is spoken of not in its abstract nature but its practical manifestations, Harless, Zthik. § 9, β, Ρ. 358. ἀνυποκρίτου] ‘wn- feigned,’ ‘wndissembled ;’ an epithet of πίστις here and 2 Tim. i. 5; of ἀγάπη Rom. xii. 9, 2 Cor. vi. 6; of φιλα- 8 : TIMOTHY 1. 5---7. - , 3 a δήσεως ἀγαθῆς Kal πίστεως ἀνυποκρίτου, 4 , χήσαντες ἐξετράπησαν εἰς ματαιολογίαν, δελφία 1 Pet. i. 22; of ἡ ἄνωθεν σοφία James iii. 17, marking the absence of everything ἐπίπλαστον and ὑποκεριμένον (Chrys.). It was a faith not merely in mask and sem- blance, but in truth and reality: ‘notandum epithetum ; quo significat fallacem esse ejus professionem ubi non apparet bona conscientia,’ Calv. All these epithets have their especial force as hinting at the exactly oppo- site in the false teachers: they were διεφθαρμένοι τὸν νοῦν (ch. vi. 5), κεκαυτηριασμένοι τὴν συνείδησιν (ch. iv. 4), ἀδόκιμοι περὶ τὴν πίστιν (2 Tim. iii. 8). It may be remarked that the common order of subst. and epith. (see Gersdorf, Beitriige Vv, p. 334 54.) is here reversed in καθαρὰ kapd.; so 2 Tim. ii. 22, Heb. x. 22, comp. Rom. ii. 5 ; on the other hand contrast Luke viii. 15, and esp, Psalm. li. 10, καρ- diav καθαρὰν κτίσον ἐν ἐμοί. This is possibly not accidental; the heart is usually so sadly the reverse, so often a καρδία πονηρὰ ἀπιστίας, Heb, iii. 12, that the Apostle, perhaps designedly, gives the epithet a slightly distinctive prominence : see Winer, Gr. § 35. 4, Ῥ. 275. ᾿ 6. ὧν τινες κιτ. λ.1 The remark of Schleiermacher (iiber 1 Tim. p. 161), that this verse evinces an incapacity in the writer to return from a digres- sion, cannot be substantiated. There is no digression ; ver. 5. has an ad- versative relation to ver. 4: it states what the true aim of the παραγγελία was, and thus forms a natural tran- sition to ver. 6, which specifies, in the case of the false teachers, the general result of having missed it: ver. 7 supplies some additional cha- racteristics. “*Qy refers only to the three. preceding genitives, not to a Ω 6 ων τινες αστο- 7 θέλοντες εἶναι ἀγάπη also (De ὙΥ. ἢ: ἀγάπη, the principle emanating from them, forms the true aim, and stands in contrast with paraod., the state consequent on missing them and the false aim ; comp. Wiesing. i loc. ἀστοχήσαντες] ‘having missed their aim at. This word only occurs again in 1t Tim. vi. 21, 2 Tim. ii. 18, in both cases with περί : the meaning is opp. to ‘a scopo aberrare’ εὐστο- χεῖν, Kypke (comp. τέλος, ver. 4), and far from being ill chosen (Schleierm. Pp. 90), conveys more suitably than ἁμαρτόντες, the fact that these teachers had once been in the right direction, but had not kept it; καλῶς εἶπεν, ἀστοχ." τέχνης yap δεῖ ὥστε εὐθέα βάλλειν καὶ μὴ ἔξω τοῦ σκόπου, Chrys. ; see exx. in Kypke, Obs. Vol. 11. p. 348. ἐξετράπησαν] ‘swerved, turned themselves from,’ ἐξέκλιναν, Hesych,: ch. v. 15, vi. 20, 2 Tim. iv. 4, Heb. xii. 13. ᾿Εκτρέπεσθαι is properly ‘a via deflectere,’ Alberti, Obs. p. 392 ; comp. Joseph. Ant. xiii. 10. 5, τῆς ὁδοῦ ἐκτρεπόμενον, and simply, ib. Ant. vill. 10. 2, els ἀδίκους ἐξετράπη πράξεις. The ἐκ refers to the original direction from which they swerved ; ‘aversi sunt’ (Beng.) is thus a more exact transl. than ‘ con- versi sunt’ (Vulg.). ματαιολογίαν] ‘vaniloquiwm,’ or, in more classical Lat. (Livy xxxIv. 24, Tac. Ann. IU. 49), ‘vaniloquentia,’ Beza. This was an especial charac- teristic of the false teachers (comp. Tit. i. το, iii, 9), and is more exactly defined in the following verse. 7 θέλοντες] ‘desiring ; they were not really so. This and the following expressions, νομοδιδάσκαλοι, μὴ νοοῦντες κιτ.Ὰ., seem clearly to show,—and this much Schleiermacher (p. 80 sq.) 1 TIMOTHY I. 7, 8. 9 νομοδιδάσκαλοι, μὴ νοοῦντες μήτε ἃ λέγουσιν μήτε περὶ τίνων διαβεβαιοῦνται. has not failed to perceive, —that Judaism proper (Leo, comp. Theo- doret) cannot be the error here as- sailed. The νόμος is certainly the Mosaic law, but at the same time it was clearly used by the false teachers on grounds essentially differing from those taken up by the Judaists, and in a way which betrayed their thorough ignorance of its principles; see Huther in loc. The assertion of Baur (Pastoralbriefe, p. 15), that Antino- mians (Marcionites, &c.) are here re- ferred to, is opposed to the plain mean- ing of the words, and the obvious cur- rent of the passage ; comp. ver. 8 sq. μὴ νοοῦντες] ‘yet understanding not “ἢ the participle has a slight antithetical force ; the total want of all quali- fications on the part of these teachers is contrasted with their aims and assumptions. The correct trans- lation of participles will always be modified by the context ; see Winer, Gr. ὃ 46. 12, p. 413. On the negative with the part. comp. notes on ch. vi. 4. pare ἃ x. τ. λ.1 The negation bifurcates; the objects to which it applies, and with respect to which the ignorance of the false teachers extends, are stated in two clauses introduced by the adjunctive negatives μήτε---μήτε; comp. Matth. v. 34, James ν. 12, and Winer, Gr. ὃ 59. 7, p- 572. Their ignorance was thus complete, it extended alike to the assertions they made and the subjects on which they made them. περὶ τίνων SiaBeB.] ‘ whereof they afirm, Auth. Ver. i.e. ‘the subject about which (Syr., Vulg.) they make their asseverations ;’ not ‘what they maintain,’ Luther, Bretschn., comp. De Wette. διαβεβαιοῦσθαι does not here necessarily imply ‘contention,’ ” ow ‘ , 8 οἴδαμεν δὲ ὅτι καλὸς ὁ νόμος ἐάν Syr. wepaslico [contendentes], but asin Tit. iii. 8, is simply equivalent to λέγειν μετὰ βεβαιώσεως, Leo (comp. Pollux, Onomast. v. 152, διεγγυῶμαι, διαβεβ,, διϊσχυρίζομαι), περὶ referring to the object about which the action of the verb takes place (Winer, Gr. § 51. e, p. 447); compare Polyb. Hist. X11. 12. 6, διοριζόμενος καὶ διαβεβαιούμενος περὶ τούτων. Thus then ἃ and περὶ τίνων refer to different objects (contr. De W.); the former referring to the subjective assertions, the latter to the objects which called them forth: so Huther, Wiesinger. The union of the relative and inter- rogative in parallel clauses involves no difficulty ; see Winer, Gr. ὃ 25. 1, p- 194, Bernhardy, Synt. xu. 11, p. 443, and the copious list of exx, cited by Stalbaum on Plato, Crit. 48, A. 8. οἴδαμεν 8€] ‘Now we know,’ ὡσανεὶ ἔλεγεν ὡμολογημένον τοῦτο Kal δῆλον ἐστί, Chrys. (on Rom. vii. 14): comp. Rom. ii. 2, iii. 19, Vii. 14 (Lachmann Marg.), viii. 28. The δέ, though certainly ποῦ -- μέν, Miller (an unfortunate comment), is not directly adversative but μεταβατικόν (not ‘at’ but ‘autem,’ Hand, Zwrsell. Vol. 1. 562, comp. p. 425), and the whole clause involves a species of concession: the false teachers made use of the law ; so far well; their error lay in their im- proper use of it; οὐ τῷ νόμῳ μέμφομαι, ἀλλὰ τοῖς κακοῖς διδασκάλοις τοῦ νόμου, Theodoret. καλός] ‘good,’ morally; not ὠφέλιμος, Theodoret, De W. The object of the apostle seems to be a full admission, not merely of the usefulness, but the posi- tive excellence of the law; comp. Rom. vii. 12, 14, 16. 6 νόμος] ‘the law,’ surely not ‘law in the 10 τις αὐτῷ νομίμως χρῆται, 9 abstract,’ Peile; but as the preceding expression νομοδιδ. unmistakeably im- plies ‘the Mosaic law,’ the law which the false teachers improperly used and applied to Christianity. τις] Clearly ‘any teacher; ‘non de auditore legis [comp. Chrys. ] sed de doctore loquitur.’ Beng., and, after him, most recent interpreters. νομίμως] ‘lawfully,’ i.e. agreeably to the design of the law; an obvious paronomasia. The legitimate use of the law has been very differently de- fined, e.g. ὅταν [ris] ἐκπληροῖ αὐτὸν δι ἔργων, Chrys. 1, Theophyl. ; τὸ παρα- πέμπειν πρὸς τὸν Χριστόν, Chrys. 2, Theodoret, Theophyl.; ὅταν ἐκ πόλλης αὐτὸν φυλάττῃς τῆς περιουσίας, Chrys. 3, ἄο. The context, however, seems clearly to limit this legitimate use, not to a use consistent with its nature or spirit in the abstract (Mack., comp. Justiniani) but with the admission of the particular principle ὅτι δικαίῳ οὐ κεῖται ἀνόμοις δὲ καὶ ἀνυποτ. K.T.X. The false teachers, on the contrary, assuming that it was designed for the righteous man, urged their interpreta- tions of it as necessary appendices to the Gospel; so De W. abetomigh tals and, in effect, Peile. 9. εἰδώς (‘mit dem ee Wegsch.) refers, not ‘per enallagen numeri,’ to οἴδαμεν, Elsn. ( Obs. Vol. Ir. p. 288), but to the foregoing τις, and specifies the view which must betaken of the law by the teacher who desires to rightly use it. νόμος οὐ κεῖται] ‘the law is not or- dained.’ The translation of Peile, ‘no law is enacted,’ is fairly defensible, see Middleton, Greek Art. p. 385 sq. and comp. TI. 3. 5, p- 46 (ed. Rose) ; the absence of the article might be thought to imply that νόμος is taken indefinitely, and that the sentiment is LOTIMOTHY TiS; ¢: foe a δ , , €LOWS TOUTO, OTL ἐκαιῷ νομος perfectly general, 6. g. ὁ μηδὲν ἀδικῶν ovdevds δεῖται νόμου, Antiph. ap. Stobei Floril. rx. 16 (cited by Mack, al). As, however, it is now certain that νόμος, like many similar words both in the N.T. and elsewhere (see the full list in Winer Gr. § 18. 1, p. 137 sq.), even when anarthrous, can and commonly does signify ‘the Mosaic law’ (comp. Alford, on Rom. ii. 12), and as this sense is both suitable in the present passage, as defining the true functions of the Mosaic law, and is also coincident with St. Paul’s gene- ral view of its relation to the Christian (comp. Rom. vi. 14, Gal. iii. 19, al.), we retain with Chrys. and the Greek expositors the definite reference of νόμος ; comp. Iren. Her. Iv. 3: so De W., Huther, Wiesing. al. δικαίῳ] ‘a righteous man ;’ the exact meaning of δίκαιος has been somewhat differently estimated: it would seem not so much, on the one hand, as 6 δικαιωθείς, with a formal reference to δικαιοσ. ἐκ πίστεως, nor yet, on the other, so little as ὁ κατορθωκὼς τὴν ἀρετὴν, Theophyl., but rather, as the context seems to require and imply, ‘justus per sanctificationem,’ Croc. (comp. De W.), he who (in the lan- guage of Hooker, Serm. 11. 7) ‘has his measure of fruit in holiness ;’ comp. Waterl. Justif. Vol. vi. p. 7. κεῖται) No peculiar allusive force (‘ onus illud maledictionis’ Pise., comp. Schoettg., Heydenr.; ‘consilium et destinatio’ Kuttn. ap. Peile) is to be here assigned to κεῖσθαι, it being only used in its proper and classical sense of ‘enactment,’ &c. of laws ; comp. (even passively, Jelf, § 359. 2) Xenoph. Mem. κειμένους νόμους, and the numerous exx. in Alberti, Kypke, and the phraseological annotators, The origin ‘ IV. 4. 22, rods ὑπὸ τῶν θεῶν 1 TIMOTHY 9. 11 ’ a > » A COE: Pi 4 " , «ke OU KE€LTAL, AVOMOLS δὲ και AVUTOTAKTOLS, ἀσεβέσιν και αμαρ- of the phrase seems due rather to the idea of ‘fixity’ &c. (comp. Palm u. Rost, Lex. s.v. 12, Vol. 1. p. 1694) than of mere local position (‘in publico ex- poni ibique jacere,’ Kypke, Obs. Vol. II. p. 349) involved in the use of κεῖσθαι. ἀνόμοις δὲ κ. τ. A. | The reference of ἀνόμοις and ἀνυποτ. to violation of divine and human laws respectively (Leo) is ingenious but doubtful. Both imply opposition to law: the former perhaps, as the deri- vation seems to convey, a more passive disregard of it ; the latter, as its deriv. also suggests (ὑποτάσσεσθαι: 5Βροπίο submittere, Tittm. Synon. 11. p. 3), a more active violation of it arising from a refractory will; comp. Tit. i. ro, where ἀνυπότακτοι stands in near con- nexion with ἀντιλέγοντες. ἀσεβέσι καὶ apapr.| These epithets are also connected in 1 Pet. iv. 18, Prov. xi. 31. This second bracket points to want of reverence to God ; the third to want of inner purity and holiness; the fowrth to want of even the commonest human feeling. The list is closed by an enumeration of special vices. ἀνοσίοις] ‘unholy ; only here and 2 Tim, iii. 2. As ὅσιος and ὁσιότης seem in all the passages where they are used by St. Paul, to convey the notion of a ‘holy purity (comp. notes on Eph. iv. 24, and Harless in loc.), the same idea is probably involved in the negative. The ἀσεβὴς is unholy through his lack of reverence; the ἀνόσιος through his lack of inner purity. The use in classical authors is appy. somewhat different; it seems there rather to mark ‘impiety’ (Plato, Zuthyphr. 9 D, ὃ ἂν πάντες of θεοὶ μισῶσιν, ἀνόσιον), the violation of fas in contradis- tinction to jus, whether in its highest sense in relation to the Gods, e. g. Schol. Eurip. Hee. ὅσιος, ὁ περὶ τὰ θεῖα δίκαιος, or its lower sense in reiation to parents and kindred, e. g. Xenoph. Cyrop. vu. 8. 27, ἀνοσιω- tépous περὶ συγγένεις : see Tittmann, Synon. 1. p. 25. Hence the frequent combination of ἀνόσιος and ἄδικος, e.g. Plato, Gorg. 505 B, Legg. vi. 777 BE, Theet.176 8, Republ. τι. 363 D. πατρολῴαις] ‘smiters a bang’ 23 ao of fathers, «οσιᾶσι:9]} teen > “ὡς ki 4 [who strike their fathers] Syr.; not ‘murderers of fathers,’ Auth. Ver. Both the derivation (ἀλοάω, comp. Aristoph. Ran. 149) and the similar use of the word in good authors (e.g. Demosth. Zimocr. 732, Aristoph. Nub. 1327, compared with 1331, and esp. Lysias, Theomn. 116. 8.) will certainly warrant this milder transla- tion; comp. Suidas, πατροτύπτης᾽ καὶ πατραλῴας ὁ αὐτός, and Poll. Onomast. 01. 13, who even extends it to οἱ περὶ τοῦς γονεῖς ἐξα- paprdvoyvres: sim. Hesych. πατραλ. ὁ τὸν πατέρα ἀτιμάζων, τύπτων, 7 κτείνων. It seems too more consistent with the context, as the crime of par- ricide or matricide would naturally be comparatively rare, and almost (even in a pagan’s idea, comp. Cicero, pro Rose. ¢. 25) out of the special contem- plation of any law. Against the crime of the text the Mosaic law had made a provision, Exodus xxi. 15 (obs. there is no addition np}, as in ‘ver. 12), πατραλοίας, comp. Lev. xx. 9. The following ἀνδροφόνοις supplies no argument against this transl (De W.); St. Paul is obviously following the order of the commandments. The usual Attic form is πατραλοίας ; Thom, Mag. p. 695 (ed. Bern.), Alberti, Obs. Ρ. 394: 12 τ ΠΠΝΟΤΗΣ ΓΈ Ὁ» το. τωλοῖς, ἀνοσίοις καὶ βεβήλοις, πατρολῴαις καὶ μητρολῴαις, ἀνδροφόνοις, ἐξ το. ἀνδραποδισταῖς] ‘men-stealers ;᾽ ‘plagiariis’ (Cicero, Quint. Frat. 1. 2. 2.) i.e. ‘qui vel fraude vel aperta vi homines suffurantur ut pro man- cipiis vendant’ Vorst. ap. Pol. Syn. ; comp. Poll. Onomast. m1. 78, ἀνδραπ. ὁ τὸν ἐλεύθερον καταδουλούμενος ἢ τὸν ἀλλότριον οἰκέτην ὑπαγόμενος (ed. Bekk.) ; a repulsive and exaggerated violation of the eighth commandment, as ἀρσενοκοιτεῖν is similarly of the seventh : they are grouped with δραπεταὶ and μοιχοί, Polyb. Hist. x11. 9. 2, το. 6; comp. Rein, Criminalrecht, p. 386 sq. The penalty of death is attached to this crime, Exodus xxi. 16, Deut. xxiv. 7: so appy- in some pagan codes, Xenoph. Laced, iv: 36; see Sturz, Lex. Xenoph. 8.V. ἐπιόρκοις] ‘perjured persons’ Auth. Ver. : ‘ ἐπιόρκοι sunt et ii qui quod juraverunt non faciunt (Xenoph. Agesil. τ. 12, comp. 11) et ii qui quod falsum esse norunt jurato affirmant,’ Raphel. Perjury is specially men- tioned Deut. ix. 12. εἴ τι κι τι λ. is not for ὅ τι (Mack), but is a more emphatic and inclusive form of expression. It implies that ‘all forms of sinfulness had not been specifically mentioned, but that all are designed to be included: Raphel (Obs. Vol. τι.. p- 562) appositely cites Polyb. Hist. p- 983 [Xv. 18. 5], οἰκίας καὶ χώραν, καὶ πόλεις καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερόν ἐστι Μασσα- νίσσου. τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκ.} ‘the sound (healthful, not healthgiving, Mosh.) doctrine: καλῶς εἶπε, TH ὑγιαιν. διδασκαλίᾳ, ἐκεῖνα yap πάντα πάθη ψυχῆς qv διεφθαρμένης, Chrys.; comp. Plutarch, de Liber. Educ. § 9, τῆς ἀδιαφθόρου καὶ ὑγιαι- νούσης παιδείας, ib. ὃ 7, ὑγιαίνοντος καὶ τεταγμένου βίου. The formula is nearly identical in meaning with ἡ καλὴ διδασκαλία, ch. iv. 6, and ἡ κατ᾽ πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, ἀνδραποδισταῖς, εὐσέβειαν διδασκ., ch. vi. 3, and stands in clear and suggestive contrast to the sickly (ch. vi. 4) and morbid (2 Tim. ii. 17) teaching of Jewish gnosis. The present part. seems to convey the idea of present, existing healthiness, which was to be maintained and not de- praved: comp. Waterl. Trinity, Vol. 1Π. p. 400. The expressions ὑγιαινοῦσα διδασκαλία, 2 Tim. iv. 3, Tit. i. 9, li. r., and ὑγιαίνοντες λόγοι, τ Tim. vi. 3, 2 Tim. i. 13 (comp. Tit. ii. 8), are peculiar to the Pastoral epistles, and have frequently been urged as ‘un- Pauline :’ the answer of Wiesinger (on Tit. i. 9) seems very fair and satisfac- tory—viz., that it is idle to urge this, unless at the same time corresponding expressions can be produced out of St. Paul’s other epp., which might suitably take the place of the present: see in answer to Schleierm., Planck, Bemerk- ungen, Gott. 1808, Beckhaus, Speci- men Obss. Ling. 1810. The ma- jority of these objections are really fundamentally uncritical. If in these epp. the Apostle is characterizing a different form of error from any which he had previously described, and if the expressions he has made use of ad- mirably and felicitously depict it, why are we to regard them with suspicion because they do not occur in other epp. where really dissimilar errors are described? That there is a certain difference in the language of these epp. we freely admit, yet still it is not one whit more than is natural to expect from the form of errors described (see Huther, Finleit. p. 52), the date of the composition (see notes/on ver. 3), and, possibly, the age and experiences of the inspired author; comp. Guerike, Finleit. § 48. 2, p. 402 (ed. 2). It is to be regretted that so able a writer as 1 ΜΟΥ χτ6Ξε:τὸ: 19 , 3 , 4 ” 4 n~ e , ψεύσταις, ETLOPKOLS, Kal εἰ Tl ετέρον τη υγιαινουσὴ διδα- , ° , σκαλίιᾳ ἀντικειται; τ κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς δόξης TOU ’ Sat ae , ey μακαριου Θεοῦ, ο ἐπιστεύθην eyo. I thank Him who en- trusted that Gospel to 12 K 4 , ΕΣ ΄“ 9) δ ’ Ul αἱ χάριν ἔχω τῷ ενθουναμώσαντι μὲ me, and who was merciful to me in my ignorance and unbelief: to Him ΒΘ 8}} honour and glory. Reuss should still feel difficulties about the authorship of this ep. ; see his Gesch. des N.T.§ 90, p. 76. 11. κατὰ τὸ evayyéA.] There is some little difficulty in the connection. Three constructions have been pro- posed : the clause has been connected (a) with τῇ Uy. διδασκ., Beng., Leo, Peile, al.; (Ὁ) with ἀντίκειται, Mack, Matth., comp. Justin. 2; (c) with the whole foregoing sentence, ver. 9 86.» De W., Huther, Wiesing. Of these (a) seems clearly grammatically un- tenable; for the article [inserted in D* ; Bas.] cannot be dispensed with, as Theophyl., in his gloss, τῇ οὔσῃ κατὰ τὸ evayyéd., tacitly admits. Again (6) is exegetically unsatisfactory, as the sentence would thus be tauto- logous, the by. διδασκ. being obviously the import of the evayyén., if not even synonymous with it; comp. ch. vi. 1, 3. Thus then (c) is alone tenable : the Apostle substantiates his positions about the law and its application by a reference to the Gospel. His present assertions were coincident with its teaching and principles: so, very simi- larly, Rom. ii. 16 ; see Meyer in loc., and on κατά, comp. notes on Eph. 1. Ἐς τῆς δόξης is not a qualitative genitive (comp. Winer, Gr. § 34. b, p. 268), and only equiva- to ἔνδοξος, Beza, Auth. Ver. al., but is the gen. of the contents ; see Bern- hardy, Synt. 111. 44, p. 161, Scheuer, Synt. § 17. 1, p. 126, and notes on Eph. i. 13, and comp. 2 Cor. iv. 4. The glory of God, whether as evinced in the sufferings of Christ (Chrys.) or in the riches of his sovereign grace (De W.), is the import, that which is contained in, and revealed by the Gospel, ‘quod Dei majestatem et immensam gloriam [Rom. ix. 23, Eph. iii. 16] explicet,’ Justiniani, 2. The gen, τοῦ Θεοῦ is consequently not the gen. originis (τὴν μέλλουσαν δόξαν ἐπαγγέλλεται, Theodoret., comp. also Chrys.), but the simple possessive gen., the glory which essentially belongs to and is immanent in God. μακαρίου] This epithet (only here and ch. vi. 15) when thus applied to God, seems designed to still more exalt the glory of the Gospel dispensation. Μακάριος, indeed, was God,,not only on account of His own immutable and essential perfections (ὅς ἐστιν αὐτομα- καριότης, Theophyl. on 1 Tim. vi. 15), but on account of the riches of His mercy in this dispensation to man ; comp. Greg. Nyss. in Psalmos, I. 1, Vol. 1, p. 258 (ed. Morell), τοῦτο μόνον ἐστὶ μακάριον τῇ φύσει οὗ πᾶν τὸ μέτεχον μακάριον γίγνεται : see also Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. 11, p. 280. 6 ἐπιστεύθην] A common construction in St. Paul’s epp., especially in refe- rence to this subject ; e.g. 1 Cor. ix. 17,.Gal: ai. 7, ἃ Chess.1i_4,.'Tit.-1.3: As the context is simply referring to the past, not (as in Gal. ii. 7) also to the present fact of the Apostle’s com- mission, the aor. is perfectly suitable ; see notes on Gal. 1. ο. 12. χάριν ἔχω] It has been urged by Schleierm. (p. 163 sq.) in his argu- ments against the genuineness of this ep., that there is here a total want of connection. Wereiteven so, no argu- ment could be fairly founded on it, for what is more noticeable than St. Paul’s tendency to digression when- 14 τ ΜΙΝ ΟΣ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ Κυρίῳ ἡμῶν, ὅτι πιστόν με ἡγήσατο, 12. καὶ χάριν ἔχω] So Tisch. (ed. 2) with DJ K; great majority of mss. πον τος. Clarom. Goth. Syr. (both) al... ... Dam. (cum. (text); Lucif. Ambrst. (Rec., Griesb., Scholz, Wiesing.) The connecting καὶ is omitted in AFG; about to mss..... Boern. Vulg. Copt. Ath. Arm. ... . Chrys. Theodoret, al.; Pel. Vig. Bed. (Mill, Prolegom. p. Lxxxtv, Lachm., Huther, De Wette (e sil.), Tisch. ed. 1). The external authorities are thus nearly equally balanced. Internal arguments are also nearly in equipoise: for on the one hand the important critical principle ‘ proclivi lectioni prastat ardua’ (comp. Tregelles, Printed Text of N.T., p.221) seems here to find a legitimate applica- tion ; the insertion of καὶ is on the other hand distinctly in accordance with St. Paul’s use of that particle. As itis possible that the omission of καὶ may have arisen from a mistaken idea of the connection of ἐγὼ with χάριν ἔχω, and as the preponderance of external evidence is perhaps slightly in favour of the insertion, we retain, though not with perfect confidence, the reading of Tischendorf. ever anything connected with his mission and the mercy of God towards him comes before his thoughts? comp. 1 Cor. xv. 9 sq., Eph. iii. 8. There is, however, here scarcely any digres- sion; the Apostle pauses on the weighty words ὁ ἐπιστεύθην ἐγώ (what a contrast to the ignorance and un- certainty of the false teachers, ver. 7!), to express with deep humility (comp. Chrys.) his thankfulness; with this thankfulness he interweaves, ver. 13 sq., a demonstration, founded on his own experiences of the transforming grace of the Gospel, and the forgive- ness (not the legal punishment) of sin. Thus, without seeking to pursue the subject in the form of a studied con- trast between the law and the Gospel (he was not now writing against direct Judaizers) or of ἃ declaration how the transgressors of the law were to at- tain righteousness (Baumgarten, Pas- toralbr. p. 224 8q.), he more than implies it all in the history of his own case. Ina word, the law was for the condemnation of sinners ; the Gospel of Jesus Christ was for the saving of sinners and the ministration of for- giveness: verily it was an εὐαγγέλιον τῆς δόξης τοῦ μακαρίου Θεοῦ ; comp. Huther in loc. τῷ ἐνδυνα- μώσαντι] ‘to Him who strengthened me within,’ se. for the discharge of my commission, for bearing the \dfoupov (Chrys.) of Christ. The expressive word ἐνδυναμ., with the exception of Acts ix. 22, is only found in the N.T. in St. Paul’s epp. (Rom. iv. 20, Eph. vi. 10, Phil. iv. 13, 2 Tim. ii. 1, iv. 17) and Heb. xi. 34: comp. notes on Eph. vi. to. There does not seem any reference to the δυναμεῖς which at- tested the Apostleship (Macknight), nor specially to mere bravery in con- fronting dangers (comp. Chrys.), but generally to spiritual δύναμις, for the functions of his apostleship. πιστόν] ‘faithful, ‘trusty.’ Eadie, on Eph. i. τ, p. 4, advocates the par- ticipial translation ‘ believing τ᾿ this is manifestly untenable ; the addition of the words els διακονίαν show that the word is used in its ordinary ethical, not theological, sense. θέμενος els Stax.] ‘appointing me, or, in that he appointed me, for the ministry ? not ‘postquam,’ Grot., but ‘dum posuit, &e.’ Beng. The act, τὸ θέσθαι els διακ., furnished proof and evidence ὅτι πιστὸν ἡγήσατο: πῶς yap ἂν ἔθετό με εἰ μὴ ἐπιτηδειότητα εὗρεν ἐν ἐμοί ; Theophyl.; see Winer, Gr. § 46. 1. obs., p. 399. Schleiermacher 1 TIMOTHY I. ro—rzq. , » , θέμενος εἰς διακονίαν, 15 13 τὸ πρότερον ὄντα βλάσφημον A " 7 καὶ διώκτην καὶ ὑβριστήν' ἀλλὰ ἠλεήθην, ὅτι ἀγνοῶν ἐποίησα Ω 3 , ἐν ἀπιστίᾳ» takes exception at this expression ; why may we not adduce 1 Thess, Vv. 9, ἔθετο ἡμᾶς els ὀργήν ἵ 13. ὄντα] The participle seems to involve a concessive meaning, ‘ though T was,’ ‘cum tamen essem,’ J ustiniani. On the use of participles in concessive sentences, see Donaldson, Gr. ὃ 621. βλάσφημον] ‘dlasphemer:’ the full sense may be retained, as it was specially against the name of our Lord (Acts xxvi. 9, 11) that St. Paul both spoke and acted. Βλασφημεῖν (i.e. βλαψιφημεῖν, Pott, Ltym. Forsch. Vol.1. p. 47, Vol. 11. p. 49) is nearly equivalent to λοιδορεῖν (e.g. Martyr. Polye. 9, λοιδόρησον τὸν Χριστὸν, com- pared with the martyr’s answer πῶς δύναμαι βλασφημῆσαι; Clem. Alex. Pedag. τ. 8, p. 137, ed. Potter), but when in connection with God’s name has the more special and frightful meaning of ‘blasphemy,’ ἡ εἰς Θεὸν ὕβρις, Suidas: see Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 1, p. 696 sq. διώκτην] ‘persecutor ,᾽ οὐ μόνον ἐβλασφήμουν ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους διώκων βλασφη- μεῖν ἠνάγκαζον, Cicum.: see Acts xxii. 4, Gal. i. 13),23- ; ὑβρίστην] ‘doer of outrage,’ Conyb. and Hows.; only here and Rom. i. 30; ὑβρίστης (Th. ὑπέρ, Donalds. Cratyl. § 335, with verbal root, ἐ [ire], Pott, Ztym. Forsch. Vol. 1, p. 144) is one who displays his insolence not in words merely, but in deeds of violence and outrage: see Trench. -Synon. §29, ‘Paulus nequitiam quibusdam veluti gradibus amplificat. Primus geradus est maledicere, ideo se vocat blasphemum ; secundus insectari, ideo se appellat persecutorem; et quia potest insectatio citra vim consistere, addit tertio se fuisse oppressorem,’ 4 ὑπερεπλεόνασεν δὲ ἡ χάρις τοῦ Κυρίου Justiniani. The translation of the Vulgate ‘contumeliosus,’ is scarcely critically exact, as, although ‘con- tumelia’ (Th. perhaps ‘contumeo,’ Voss, Etymol. s. v., comp. Pott, Vol. I, p. 51) is frequently applied to deeds (e.g. Cesar, Bell. Gall., quamvis vim et contumeliam [fluctuum] per- ferre), ‘contumeliosus’ seems more commonly applied to words. The dis- tinction between drrepjpavos(thoughts), ἀλάζων (words), and ὑβρίστης (deeds), is investigated in Trench, l.c. ; see also Tittm. Synon. 1. 74. ἀλλὰ ἠλεήθην] ‘ still, notwithstanding, 7 obtained mercy.’ ’Addahas here its full and proper seclusive (‘aliud jam hoc esse, de quo sumus dicturi,’ Klotz, Devar., Vol. 1. p. 2), and thence often antithetical force : God's mercy and St. Paul’s want of it are put in sharp contrast. In the following words the Apostle clearly does not seek simply to excuse himself (De W.), but to illustrate the merciful procedure of divine grace. His igno- rance did not give him any claim on God’s ἔλεος, but merely put him within the pale of its operation. ἐν ἀπιστίᾳ (‘being yet in wnbelicf,’ Peile) then further defines theground of his ἄγνοια : hisignorance was dueto his ἀπιστία. How far that ἀπιστία was ex- cusable, is, as Huther observes, left un- noticed: it is only implied that the ἄγνοια which resulted from it was such as did not leave him wholly ἀναπολό- yntos; ov yap φθόνῳ βαλλόμενος ἐπολέμουν, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τοῦ νόμου δῆθεν ἀγωνιζόμενος, Theodoret.: comp. Acts ili. 17, Rom. x. 2, and see esp. the excellent sermon of Waterland, Part u, Vol. Vv. p. 731. 14. ὑπερεπλεόνασεν] ‘was (not 16 ε STIMOTHY πα 15: (een) A , 4A 9 , ΄“- ’ “ vf ΄“΄ ἡμῶν μετὰ πίστεως καὶ ἀγάπης τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿]ησοῦ. 15 A e , A , “5 δ ΄ Ε “ a. ‘ πιστὸς ὁ λόγος καὶ πάσης ἀποδοχῆς ἄξιος. ὅτι Χριστὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς ἦλθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἁμαρτωλοὺς σῶσαι, ὧν πρῶτός ‘hath been,’ Peile) exceeding abun- v - dant, hy «ὦ {magna fuit] Syr., comp. Rom. y. 20, ὑπερεπερίσσευσεν ἡ χάρις, 2 Thess. i. 3, ὑπεραυξάνει ἡ πίστις, There is not here any com- parative force in ὑπερεπλ., whether in relation to the Apostle’s former sin and unbelief (Mack.), or to the ἔλεος which he had experienced (ὑπερέβη καὶ τὸν ἔλεον τὰ δῶρα, Chrys.), as verbs compounded with ὑπὲρ are used by St. Paul in a superl. rather than a compar. sense, see Fritz. Rom. Vol. I. p- 350; the Apostle only explains more fully how, and in what measure, he obtained mercy. This he intro- duces, not by an epexegetic καί, or an explicative γάρ, but by δέ; a gentle adversative force being suggested by the last words, ἐν ἀπιστίᾳ : ‘yes, un- believing I was, but God’s grace was not on that account given in scanty measure:’ see especially Klotz, Devar. Ῥ. 363 sq., and compare the remarks in notes on Gal. iii. 8, 11, and al. pass. The word Uepri..is excessively rare ; it has at present only been Το πα in Psalt. Salom. v. 19, and Herme Fragm. ap. Fabric, Bibl. Gr., Book νυ. i, Vol. v. p. 12 (ed. 1712), where it is used with a semi-local reference, οὐ χωρεῖ ἐκεῖνο τὸ ἄγγος,. ἀλλ᾽ ὑπερ- πλεονάζει. On St. Paul’s frequent use of verbs compounded with ὑπέρ, see notes on Eph. ili. 20. μετὰ πιστ. kal dy.) Faith and love are ‘the concomitants of the grace of our Lord Jesus ;’ on this proper force of μετά, see notes on Eph. vi. 23, and comp. ib. iv. 2. Leo has felt this use of the prep. ‘verbis μετὰ x.7.d. indi- catur πίστ. κι dy. quasi comites fuisse illius χάριτος. Πίστις stands in obvious antithesis to ἐν ἀπιστίᾳ, ver. 13. On its more inclusive sense as also imply- ing ἔλπις, see Usteri, Lehrb. 11. 1. 4, p- 241. ᾿Αγάπη is clearly Christian love, love to man (Justin.) as well as to God ; ‘dilectio in Christo opponitur sevitie quam exercuerat adversus fideles,’ Calv. τῆς ἐν Xp. ] ‘which is in Christ,’ not ‘per Chris- tum,’ Justin. comp. Chrys. τὸ, ἐν, διά ἐστιν. Faith and love have their only true centre in Jesus Christ ; it is only when we are in union with Him that we can share in and be endowed with those graces. This proper mean- of ἐν has frequently been vindicated in these commentaries ; see notes on Gal, ii. τῇ, on Eph. i. 2, al, On the insertion of the article see notes on ch. 111. 13. 15. πίστος ὁ λόγος] ‘ Faithful is the saying. ‘Gravissima prefandi formula’ (Beng.), found only in the Pastoral epp. ; ch. iii. 1, iv. 9, 2 Tim. ii. τα, Tit. iii. 8; comp. the somewhat similar forms, οὗτοι οἱ λόγοι ἀληθινοὶ καὶ πιστοί, Rey. xxi. 6, xxii. 6, and addnOwds ὁ λόγος, 3 Kings, x. 6, 2 Chron..ix. 5. This is one of the many hints that may tend to confirm us in the opinion that the three epp. were written about the same time ; comp. Guerike, Hinleit. § 48. 1, p. 400 (ed. 2). πάσης ἀποδοχῆς] ΄“ all (i.e. every kind of) acceptation,’ Auth. Ver.; an excellent translation. ’Azro- δοχή, ‘exceptio studii et favoris plena,’ Schweigh. ex. Polyb. s.v. (comp. ἀποδεκτός, ch. ii. 3, v. 14), is used very frequently and in very similar constructions by later Greek writers ; e.g. dod. ἄξιος, Philo, de ‘ ΕΟΥΓΤΕΥ 1 τ. 16. "5 9 , εἰμι eyo" Prem. § 23, Vol. 1. p. 565, ib. de Profug. § 2, Vol. 1 p. 410, al. In Polybius (where it very frequently oc- curs), it is occasionally found in union with πίστις, e.g. Hist. 1. 43. 4, Vi. 2. 13; ‘etiam jides speciesest acceptionis,’ Beng., see the collections of Elsner and the phraseolog. annotators, by all of whom the word is abundantly illus- trated. On this use of πᾶς with ab- stract nouns, commonly denoting ez- tension (‘omnium totius animi facul- tatum,’ Beng.) rather than intension, see notes on Eph. i. 8. ἦλθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον] See John xvi. 28, and (according to the most probable con- struction) ib. i. 9. In these passages κόσμος is appy. used in its physical or perhaps rather (see Joh. iii. 16 sq.) collective sense ; comp. Reuss, Theol. Chret. iv. 20, p. 228, and notes on Gal. iv. 3. The allusion they in- volve to the προύπαρξις of Christ is clear and unmistakeable ; comp. Pear- son, Creed, Vol. 1. p. 141 (ed. Bur- ton). ὧν πρῶτός εἰμι] “ΟΥ̓ whom I am chief ; ‘antecedens omnes non tempore sed magnitudine,’ Au- gust. Psalm lxx. Justiniani and others, following a hint of Ambrose, endeavour to qualify these words, by referring the relative not to ἁμαρτωλοὺς absolutely, but ‘iis tantum qui ex Judaismo conversi erant in fidem ;’ ὧν se. σωζομένων, Wegsch ; similarly Mack, and, what is more singular, Waterland, Serm. 30, Vol. Vv. p. 729. As however the words Χριστὸς ἦλθεν ες σῶσαι must clearly be taken in their widest extent,—‘non solos illos Judzos sed et omnes omnino homines et peccatores venit salvos facere,’ Corn. a Lap.,—any interpretation which would limit either ἁμαρτωλοὺς or its relative seems exegetically un- tenable. Equally unsuccessful is any 17 " 4 A Lal 16 ἀλλὰ διὰ τοῦτο ἠλεήθην, ἵνα ἐν ἐμοὶ πρώτῳ grammatical argument deduced from the anarthrous πρῶτος, scil. ‘einer der Vornehmsten,’ Flatt ; for comp. Matth. x. 2 (De W. also cites ib, xxii. 38, but the reading is doubtful), and Middleton, Article vi. 3, p. 100 (ed. Rose). To thus explain away the force of this expression is seriously to miss the strong current of feeling with which the Apostle ever alludes to his conversion, and his state pre- ceding it ; see notes on Eph. iii. 8. εἰμί] Not ἣν ; ‘cave existimes mo- destiz caus& Apostolum mentitum esse. Veram enim non minus quam humilem confessionem edere voluit, atque ex intimo cordis sensu depromp- tam,’ Calvin, See the excellent ser- mons on this text by Hammond, Serm. 30, 31, p. 632 sq. (A.C. Libr.), 16. ἀλλά] “ Howbeit,’ Auth. Ver. Not resumptive (‘ respicit ad ver. 13,’ Heinr.) but, as in ver. 13, seclusive and antithetical, marking the contrast between the Apostle’s own judgment on himself and the mercy which God was pleased to show him: ἁμαρτωλός (μὲν) εἰμι, ἀλλὰ ἠλεήθην. Beza has here judiciously changed ‘sed,’ Vulg. into ‘verwm,’ see Klotz, Devar. Vol. II. p. 3, and compare some remarks of Waterland on this particle, Serm. 5 (Moyer’s Lect.), Vol. 11. p. 108. διὰ τοῦτο] ‘on this account,’ ‘for this end ;’ pointing to, and directing more especial attention to, the ἵνα. ἐν nol] ‘in me,’ not δι’ ἐμοῦ, Theo- doret ; the Apostle was to be as it were the substratum of the action, Exod. ix. 16; see exx. in Winer, (Gr. § 52. a, p. 462, and notes on Gal. i. 24. πρώτῳ] ‘the chief,’ not ‘ first,’ Auth. Ver.: ‘ alludit ad id quod nuper dixerat se primum esse inter peccatores,’ Calvy. ἐνδείξηται]. Dynamic middle: see σ 18 . TIMOTHY τῇ; ἐνδείξηται Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς τὴν ἅπασαν μακροθυμίαν, πρὸς « , ~ id , 29 τ nw 3 ‘A ὑποτύπωσιν τῶν μελλόντων πιστεύειν ET αὐτῷ εἰς ζωὴν notes on Eph. ii. 7, where this word and its uses are noticed and investi- gated. τὴν ἅπασαν paxp. | ‘the whole of His long-suffering ; i.e. ‘the fulness of long-suffering,’ Peile; οὐκ ἔφη, ἵνα évd. ἐν ἐμοὶ rip μακρ. ἀλλά, τὴν πᾶσαν μακρ. ὡς ἂν εἰ ἔλεγε: μᾶλλον ἐμοῦ ἐπ᾽ ἄλλῳ οὐκ ἔχει μακροθυμῆσαι, Chrys. The reading ἅπασαν (Lachm., Tisch.) is not quite certain ; the preponderance of uncial authority [AFG )( DJK] is perhaps slightly in its favour, but it may be remarked that the form ἅπας is only found once more in St. Paul’s epp., Eph. vi. 13 (Gal. iii. 28 ZLachm. is very doubtful), while the more com- mon form occurs about 420 times. St. Luke uses ἅπας far more (twenty- three times certain) than any other of the sacred writers. On the less usual position of the article, see notes on Gal. v. 14, and comp. Gersdorf, Beitrdge, p. 381, who has, however, omitted this instance and Acts xx. 18: comp. Green, Gramm. p. 194. We need not here modify the mean- ing of μακροθ. ; ‘ Deo tribuitur paxpod. quia poenas peccatis debitas differt propter gloriam suam, et ut detur peccatoribus resipiscendi locus,’ Suicer, Thesaur. 8, v. Vol. 1. p. 293. The distinction of Theophyl. (on Gal. v. 22) between μακροθυμία (τὸ σχολῇ ἐπιτιθέναι τὴν προσήκουσαν δίκην) and πρᾳότης (τὸ ἀφιέναι παντάπασι) cited by Suicer s.v., and Trench Synon. p. 199, may perhaps be substantiated by com- paring this passage with Tit. ii. 2. πρὸς ὑποτύπωσιν K.T.A.] ‘to exhibit a pattern for them, dc.,’ πρὸς ἀπό- δειξιν, CEcum. 2: ὑποπύπ., λα 2 =x 9 [ostensio, exemplum, 2 Pet. ii. 6] Syr., is a δὶς λεγόμ. ; here, and in asomewhat modified sense, 2 Tim. i. 13. St. Paul’s more usual expression is τύπος, Rom. γα Vie 07; αἰ ον x6; τὸ Phil: iii. 17, al.; here perhaps replaced by UoT., a8 it is not so much the mere passive example (τύπον) as the active- display of it on the part of God (‘ad exprimendum exemplar,’ Erasm.) which the Apostle wishes to specify. The usual explanation that the Apostle himself was to be the ὑπόδειγμα (2 Pet. ii. 6), the standing type and re- presentative, the ‘all embracing ex- ample’ (Moller) of those who were hereafter to believe on Christ (‘si credis, ut Paulus; salvabere ut Paulus,’ Beng.) is scarcely satisfactory. It was not so much the Apostle as the μακροθ. shown to him that was the ob- ject of the ὑποτύπ. ; comp. Wiesing. in loc. On the technical meaning (adumbratio et institutio brevis) see the notes of Fabricius on Sext. Empir. p- τ, and Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. Vol. ΤΙ. p- 1398. The gen. τῶν μελλόντων, (‘in respect of’ ‘pertaining to,’ see Donaldson, Gr. § 450) may be more specifically defined as the gen. of the point of view (Scheuerl. Synt. § 18, p. 129), or perhaps, more correctly, as an extended application of the gen. posses- sivus; the ὑποτύπτωσις was designed in reference to them, to be, as it were, their property ; so 2 Pet. ii. 6; comp. Soph. Gd. Col. 355, and see Scheuerl. Synt. § 13, 2, p. 112 sq., Matth. Gr. ἃ 342. I (not 2, where Soph. J. ¢. is misinterpreted, see Wunder in Joc.). If the dative had been used, the idea of the ‘convenience,’ ‘benefit’ of the parties concerned, ‘would have come more prominently into notice: con- trast Ecclus. xliv. 14 with 2 Pet. J. ¢. The explanation of Bretsch. ‘ut (hoe meo exemplo) adumbraret convey- t TIMOTHY ἘΠ τό, τ αἰώνιον. sionem futuram gentium’ is gramma- tically defensible but not exegetically satisfactory. πιστεύειν ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ] In this construction, which only occurs elsewhere in Luke xxiv. 25 (omitted by Huther) and (in one and the same citation from the LXX) Rom. ix. 33, x. 11, 1 Pet. ii. 6 (Matth. xxvii. 42 is doubtful), Christ is repre- sented as the basis, foundation, on which faith rests; ἐπὶ with dat. mark- ing ‘absolute superposition’ (Donalds. Gr. § 483), and thence the accessory notion of ‘dependence on,’ Bernhardy, Synt. V. 24, p. 250, Kriiger, Sprachl. § 68. 41, p. 541. If we adopt the usual explanation of Mark i. 15 (comp. John iii, 15 [Zisch., Lachm. marg.], Gal. iii. 26, Jerem. xii. 6, Ignat. Philad, ὃ 8) it may be observed that πιστεύω has five constructions in the N.T., (a) with simple dat.; (6) with ἐν; (c) with els ; (d) with ἐπὶ and dat. ; (e) with ἐπὶ and accus. It seems clear that the prepositional construc- tions have a fuller and more special force than the simple dative (see Winer, Gir. § 31. 2, obs., p. 241), and also that they all involve different shades of meaning. There may be no great difference in a dogmatical point of view (comp. Pearson, Creed, Vol. 11. p. 8, ed. Burt.), still the gramma- tical distinctions seem clearly marked. In a word, the exercise of faith is con- templated under different aspects: (a) expresses only the simple act ; (Ὁ) in- volves also the idea of union with ; (c) union with, appy. of a fuller and more mystical nature (comp. notes on Gal. iii. 27), with probably some accessory idea of moral motion, mental direction toward ; see Winer Gr. ὃ 53 a, p. 473; (d) repose, reliance on; (¢) mental direction with a view to it; Fritz. Rom. iv. 5, Vol. 1. p. 217, comp. 19 17 τῷ δὲ βασιλεῖ τῶν αἰώνων, ἀφθάρτῳ ἀοράτῳ Donalds. Gr. § 483. Of the four latter formule, it may be remarked in conclusion, that (Ὁ) and (d) are of rare occurrence; (6) only (John iii. 15 is doubtful) is used by St. John and St. Peter, by the former very frequently ; and about equally with (e) by St. Luke, and rather more than equally by St. Paul: a notice of these con- structions, but not of a completely satisfactory nature, will be found in Tholuck, Beitriige, p. 94, sq. εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον] Object to which the exercise of πίστις ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ was directed. It is singular that Bengel should have paused to notice that this clause can be joined with ὑποτύ- mwow: such a construction has no- thing to recommend it. 17, βασιλεῖ τῶν αἰώνων] ‘to the 2 ρ king of the ages,’ [Scss3 JaXsoS [regi seeculorum] Syr. ; a noticeable title, that must not be diluted into ‘the king eternal’ of Luth. and the Auth. Ver. (though such an interpr. may possibly be grammatically de- fensible, comp. Winer, Gr. ὃ 34. 2 Ὁ, Ῥ' 268)»; “compssHeb.) 1.2... Σ 1 2: Αἰῶνες seem to denote, not “the worlds’ in the usual concrete meaning of the term (Chrys., and appy. Theod. Theophyl.), but, in accordance with the more usual temporal meaning of αἰὼν in the N.T., ‘the ages,’ the tem- poral periods whose sum and aggrega- tion (αἰῶνες τῶν αἰώνων) adumbrate tne conception of eternity : see notes οὐ Eph. i. 21. will thus be ‘the sovereign dispenser and disposer of the ages of the world ;’ see Psalm cxlv. 13, ἡ βασιλεία cov t βασιλεία πάντων τῶν αἰώνων, καὶ ἡ The βασιλεὺς τῶν αἰώνων, δεσποτεία σου ἐν πάσῃ γενεᾷ καὶ γενεᾷ, and comp. Exod. xv. 18; so Hamm. 1, comp. Usteri, Lehrb.u. 2. 4,p. 315. cQ 20 τ ἹΜΟΈΕΓΥΣΊ ΣΕ, τ. , Θ - ‘ \ ag ’ ‘ a5 A 27 9 =F μονῳ EW, τιμὴ και ὀξα εἰς τους αἰῶνας Τῶν ALWYWY" AV. I charge thee, son Ti- mothy, to fight the 13 Ταύτην τὴν παραγγελίαν παρατί- good fight of faith, and not to make shipwreck of it as some have done. Any reference to the Gnostic xons (Hamm, 2) is untenable, and com- pletely out of place in this sublime doxology. The title does not occur again in the N.T., but is found in the O.T., Tobit xiii. 6, το ; comp. Ecclus. XXXV1. 17, 6 θεὸς τῶν αἰώνων. ἀφθάρτῳ] ‘incorruptible ; nearly equivalent to 6 μόνος ἔχων ἀθανασίαν, ch. vi. 16. This epithet is only found in union with Θεός, here and Rom. i. 23; comp. Wisdom.xii. τ. Both this and the two following epithets must be connected with Θεῷ, not βασιλεῖ (Auth. Ver., Conyb. and Hows., but not Peile), which is scarcely gramma- tically tenable. Huther urges against this the omission of the article before the epithet ; this, however, frequently takes place in the case of a title in ap- position, see Middleton, Article, p. 387 (ed. Rose). ἀοράτῳ] See Col. i. 15, and comp. 1 Tim. vi. 16; νῷ μόνῳ σκιαγραφούμενος καὶ τοῦτο λιὰν ἀμυδρῶς καὶ μετρίως, Greg. Naz. Orat. ΧΧΧΥΊΠ, t1 (a noble pas- sage) p. 615 D, ed. Morell. μόνῳ Θεῷ] comp. ch. vi. 15, ὁ μακάριος καὶ μόνος δυνάστης. It is not of seri- ous importance whether we refer this appellation with Pseud. Ambrose in loc. to the First Person (‘particula μόνῳ extraneas tantum personas, non autem divinas excludit,’ Just., comp. Basil, ELunom. Book Iv. ad fin.) or with Theodoret and Greg. Naz. (Orat. 36. 8, p. 586. B, ed. Morell) to the three persons of the blessed Trinity. The former seems most probable ; comp. John xvii. 3. ~The reading of the text, a ‘magnifica lectio,’ as Bengel truly calls it, is supported by such preponderating authority [AD*FG )( JK] that it seems difficult to imagine how Leo can still defend the interpolated σοφῷ. τιμὴ καὶ δόξα] This expression (in doxo- logy) is only found here and (with the art.) in Rey. v. 13, comp. iv. 9 sq. - St. Paul’s usual formula is δόξα alone, with the art.: see notes on (al. i. 5. εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας k.t.A.] See notes on Gal. i. 5. 18. ταύτην τὴν παραγγελίαν] ‘this command ; τί δὲ παραγγέλλεις, εἰπέ ; Chrys. The reference of these words has been very differently explained: they have been referred (a) directly to παραγγείλῃς, ver. 3, Calvin, Est., Mack; (ὃ) to παραγγελίας, ver. 5, Beng.; (ὁ) to πίστος ὁ λόγος k.T.A., Peile; (d) to ἵνα στρατ., Chrys., De Wette, al., comp. John xiii. 34. The objection to (a) lies in the fact that in ver. 3 the παραγγ. is defined and done with ; to (ὁ) that the purport of the παραγγ. is not defined, but only its aim stated; and to both that the length of the digression, and the dis- tance of the apodosis from the protasis is far too great; (c) is obviously un- tenable as ver. 15 involves no παραγ- yeria at all. It seems best then, with Chrys. and the principal modern ex- positors, to refer mapayy. directly to ἵνα orpar., and indirectly and allu- sively to ver. 3 sq., inasmuch as obedience to the command there given must form a part of the καλὴ στρατεία. This verse thusforms a gene- ral and appropriate conclusion ; ver. 3—1t convey the direct injunctions ; ver. 12—16 the authority of the Apostle; ver. 18 sq. the virtual sub- stance of his previous injunctions ex- pressed in the simplest form. παρατίθεμαι cov] ‘7 commit wnto thee, a / ἵνα στρατεύῃ K.T.X., τὸ TIMOTHY: Ἔ :18. 21 0 ’ , 4 iy .θ ‘ ‘ , ae | ‘ εμᾶαι σοὶ. TEKVOV ἰμοῦξεε,. KATA τὰς προαγουσας €7l GE / “ , τ ’ - A A , προφητείας, Wa στρατευὴ εν αὐταῖς τὴν καλὴν στρατειαν, as a sacred trust; τῆς φυλακῆς τὸ ἀκριβὲς δηλοῖ, Chrys., comp. 2 Tim. ii. 2. The use and force of the middle in such forms of expression may be per- haps felt by observing that the object is represented, as it were, emanating from, or belonging to, the subject of the verb; see Kriiger, Sprachl. 52. 8. 6, p. 365. κατὰ τὰς K.T.A.] ‘in accordance with the forerunning prophecies about thee.’ The introduction of this clause seems intended to add weight to the Apos- tle’s exhortation (ἀφορῶν πρὸς ἐκείνας . . παραινῶ σοι, Theophyl.), and to suggest to Timothy an additional ground of obligation ; ἐκείνων ἄκουσον, ἐκείναις πείθου... .. ἐκεῖναι σε εἵλοντο εἰς ὁ εἵλοντό σε, Chrys. There is thus no necessity for here assuming an hyperbaton, scil. va στρατεύῃ κατὰ τὰς k.T.X., Cicum. Moller; a very forced and untenable construction. προαγούσας] ‘forerunning,’ ‘precur- sory; see Heb. vii. 18, προαγούσης évro\fs. The order of the words might seem to imply the connection of ἐπὶ σὲ with προαγούσας (‘leading the way to, pointing to you as their object,’ Matth.), but as this involves a modification of the simple meaning of mpoayw, and also (see below) of προφητεῖαι as well; it is best, with De W., Huther, and most modern commentators, to connect ἐπὶ σὲ with προφητείας. It is not however neces- sary to give mpd a purely temporal sense (Syr.) ; the local or quasi-local meaning which nearly always marks the word in the N. T. may be fully retained; the prophecies went for- ward, as it were, the heralds and avant-couriers to the actions which they foretold ; comp. ch. v. 24. ἔπὶ σέ] ‘ upon thee,’ or, more in ac- cordance with our idiom, ‘concerning thee,’ ‘respecting thee,’ Peile. ᾿Επὲ marks the ethical direction, which, as it were, the prophecies took (see Winer, Gr. § 53.1., p. 485), and with its proper concomitant idea of ‘ultimate super- position,’ points to the object on whom they came down (from above) and rested ; see Donalds. Gr. § 483, and compare the exx. in Kriiger, Sprachl. § 68. 42. I, p. 543. τὰς προφητείας] Not ‘the premonitions of the Holy Spirit’ ἀποκάλυψιν τὴν χειροτονίαν ἐδέξω, Theodoret) which led to the ordina- tion of Timothy, Hamm. in loc., Thorndike, Gov. of Churches, ch. iv. 8,—an interpretation which involves a modification of the meaning of προφη- tela which the word can scarcely bear; but, in accordance with its usual meaning in the N. T., ‘ the pre- dictions suggested by the Spirit,’ ‘the prophecies’ which were uttered over Timothy at his ordination (and perhaps conversion, Fell, comp. Theophyl.), foretelling his future zeal and success in the promulgation of the Gospel. The plural may point to prophecies uttered at his circumcision and other chief events of his spiritual life (Theophyl.), or, more probably, to the several sources (the presbyters perhaps) from whence they proceeded at his ordination; comp. ch. v. 14, vi. 12. ἵνα στρατεύῃ] In this (06 110) use of ἵνα after verbs im- plying ‘command,’ ‘ exhortation,’ &c., the subjunctive clause is not a mere circumlocution for a simple infinitive, but serves to mark the purpose con- templated by the command as well as the immediate subject of it ; comp. Luke x. 40, al., and see Winer, Gr. ὃ 45. 9) Pp. 389. On the uses of ἵνα in (κατὰ θείαν 22 1 TIMOTHY L. 10. 19 », 7, A. ® A ὃ -“ "» ξ EXOV πίστιν και ἀγαθὴν συνειθησιν, ἣν τινες ἀπωσάμενοι the N. T. see notes on Eph. i. 16. ἐν αὐταῖς] ‘in them, as your spiritual protection and equipment ;’ emphatic. The translation of De W., ‘in the might of,’ is not sufficiently exact. The prep. has here its usual and proper force; it is not identical in meaning with διά (Mosh., comp. CEcum.j, or κατά (Kypke, Obs. Vol. Il. p. 351, and virtually Huther), but, in accordance with the image, marks, as it were, the armour iz which Timothy was to wage his spiritual warfare; so Mack, Matth., and Winer, Gr. § 52. a, p. 463: comp. also Green, Gr. p. 289. Huther ob- jects to this as artificial, but surely his own interpretation ‘within, in the bounds of their application,’ is more open to the charge, and scarcely so in- telligible. στρατείαν] ‘war- fare; not μάχην, Theodoret (‘Kampf,’ De. W.), but more comprehensively ‘militiam,’ the service of a στρατιώτης in all its details and particulars ; comp. Huther in loc. For examples of this simplest form of the cognate accus. (when the subst. is involved in the verb, and only serves to amplify its notion), see Winer, Gr., § 32. 2, p- 257, and for a correct valuation of the supposed rhetorical force, the ex- cellent article by Lobeck, Paralipom. Ῥ. 501 sq. 19. ἔχων] ‘having,’ Hamm. ; not ‘retinens’ (Beza) asa shield’or weapon (Mack, Matth.), in reference to the preceding metaphor, —this would have been expressed by a more precise word, e. g. ἀναλαβών, Eph. vi. 16,—or ‘inni- tens’ as a ship on an anchor (Priczeus), in reference to the succeeding meta- phor, but simply, ‘habens,’ i.e. as an inward and subjective possession: so Syr., where the verb is simply re- placed by the prep. 9 (in, with); see also Meyer, on Rom. xv. 4. ἀγαθὴν ocvvelS.] See notes on ver. 5 supra. ἥν] Sc. ἀγαθὴν συνείδησιν. ἀπωσάμενοι) ‘having thrust away; ἀπώσατο" μα- κρὰν ἔῤῥιψεν, Hesych.; see exx. in Wetst. on Rom. xi. 1. This expressive word marks the deliberate nature of the act, the wilful violence which the τινες (ver. 3) did, to their better na- ture. ᾿Απώσατο (λόγον, Acts xiii. 46, elsewhere in the N.T. with persons, Acts vii. 27, 39, Rom. xi. 1, 2, LXX.) occurs very frequently in the LXX., and several times with abstract nouns (διαθήκην, 2 Kings xvii. 15 (Alex.) ; ἔλπιδα, Jer. ii. 37; νόμον, Jer. vi. 19 ; ἑορτάς, Amos y. 21) as a transl. of ? ox. The objection of Schleierm. (ib. 1 Tim. p. 36) that St. Paul else- where uses this word properly (Rom. xi. I, 2) as in reference to something external, not internal, is pointless ; Rom. J. 6. is a quotation. Conscience is here suitably represented, as it were, another and a better self. Viewed practically the sentiment is of great moment; the loss of a good conscience will cause shipwreck of faith, Olsh. περὶ τὴν πίστιν] ‘concerning, in the matter of, the faith.’ Loesner com- pares Philo, de Somn., p. 1128 D [π.. ὃ 21, Vol. 1, p. 678 ed. Mang. }, ναναγήσαντας, ἣ περὶ γλῶτταν ἄθυρον, ἢ περὶ γαστέρα ἄπληστον ἣ περὶ τὴν τῶν ὑπογαστρίων ἀκράτορα λαγνείαν ; there is however some difference in the use of the prep. In Philo ἢ. 6. it marks really what led to the shipwreck; the accusatives properly representing the objects ‘around which the action or motion takes place,’ ‘see Winer, Gr. § 53, i. p. 483, Donalds. Gir. ὃ 482. c: in the present case merely the object in reference to which it happened, perhaps more usually expressed by the 1 TIMOTHY I. 109, 20. A ‘ , > ΄ πέρι τὴν πιστιν εναυαγησαν" gen., see Rost u. Palm, Lex. s.v. περί, I. 1. 6., Vol. Π. p. 821. At any rate it is surely an oversight in Huther to say that περὶ with the accus. is here used in the sense in which it usually stands with the dat.; for, in the first place, περὶ with dat. is rarely found in Attic prose and never in the N. T. ; and, secondly, περὶ with dat. (‘around and upon,’ Donalds. Gr. 482 b.), if more usual in prose, might have been suitable in Philo J. c. (the rock on which they split), comp. Soph. Frag. 149, περὶ ἐμῷ καρᾳ κατάγνυται τὸ τεῦχος, but certainly not in the present passage. Kypke (Obs. Vol. τι. p. 353) cites a somewhat different use, περὶ τὴν ΚΚώαν θάλασσαν vavayjoa, Diog. Laert. 1. 1. 7, where the acc. seems to mark the area where the disaster took place, see Rost u. Palm., Lea. s. v. περί, iii. 2, Vol. 11. p. 825. 20. ‘Ypévatos}] There does not seem any sufficient ground for denying the identity of Hymenzus, with the heretic of that name in 2 Tim. ii. 17. Mo- sheim, de Rebus, &c., p. 177 8q., urges the comparatively milder terms in which Hymenzus is spoken of, 2 Tim. l.c.; the one he says was the ‘ open enemy,’ the other ‘the insidious cor- rupter’ of Christianity. On comparing however the two passages, it will be seen that the language and even struc- ture is far too similar to render any such distinction either plausible or probable. The only difference is that here the Apostle notices the fact of his excommunication, there his funda- mental error; that error however was a βέβηλος κενοφωνία, 2 Tim. ii, τό. This certainly affords a hint (somewhat too summarily repudiated by Wieseler, Chronol. p. 314), infavour of the late date of this epistle ; see notes on ver. 3. ᾿Αλέξανδρος] It is more difficult to 23 > , ‘ 20 ὧν ἐστιν Ὑ μέναιος καὶ decide whether this person is identical (a) with Alexander, ὁ χαλκεύς, 2 Tim. iv. 14, or (5) with Alexander, Acts xix. 33, or (as seems most probable) different from either. The addition ὁ χαλκεύς in the second epistle, and the fact that he seems to have been more a personal adversary of the Apostle’s than an heretical teacher, incline us to distinguish him from the excommunicate Alexander, All that can be said in favour of (δ) is that the Alexander, Acts J. c., was probably a Christian; see Meyer i loc., and Wieseler, Chronol. p. 56. The com- monness of the names makes any his- torical or chronological inferences very precarious ; see Neander, Planting, Ῥ. 347, note (Bohn). παρέδωκα τῷ Latava] The exact meaning of this formula has been much discussed. Does it mean (q), simply, excommunication ? Theodoret in loc. and on 1 Cor. v. 5, Theoph. in loc. Balsamon, on Can. vit. Basilii, al.; or (6) simply, supernatural in- fliction of corporeal suffering, J. Johnson, Unbl. Sacr. ch. tv. Vol. 1. Ρ. 233 (Angl. Cath. Libr.,) Wolf on Cor. l. c., and appy. Chrys., who ad- duces the example of Job ; or (c) both combined, Meyer, and most modern interpreters? The latter view seems most in harmony with this passage, and esp. with 1 Cor. J. ¢., where simple exclusion from the Church is denoted by αἴρειν ἐκ μέσου. We con- clude then with Waterland, that ‘de- livery over to Satan’ was a form of Christian excommunication, declaring the person reduced to the state of a heathen, accompanied with the autho- ritative infliction of bodily disease or death; on Fundamentals, ch. Iv., Vol. m1. p. 460. The patristic views will be found in Suicer, Thesaur. 24 1 TIMOTHY Tiga ΠΥ, ᾿Αλέξανδρος, ous παρέδωκα τῷ Σατανᾷ ἵνα παιδευθῶσιν μὴ βλασφημεῖν. I exhort that prayers be offered for all, for this is acceptable to God, who willeth the salvation of all, and whose Gospel I preach. Vol. 1. p. 940, and Petavius Theol. Dogm. Vol. tv. p. 108. In this fearful formula, the offender is given over τῷ Σατανᾷ, the Evil One in his most distinct personality ; comp. notes on Eph. iv. 27. παιδευθῶσιν] “be disciplined,’ Hamm. ; ‘ taught by punishment,’ Conyb. and Hows. The true Christian meaning of παιδεύω, ‘per molestias erudire, is here dis- tinctly apparent ; see Trench Synon. § 32, and notes on Eph. vi. 4. CuaprTer II. 1. οὖν] ‘then; in pursuance of my general admonition (ch. i. 18) I proceed to special de- tails. It is singular that Schleierm., and after him De W., should find here no logical connection, when really the sequence of thought seems so easy and natural, and has been so fairly ex- plained by several older (comp. Corn. a Lap.), and most modern expositors. In ch.i. 18, the Apostle gives Timothy a commission in general terms, ἵνα στρατεύῃ κιτιλ. | This, after the very slight digression in ver. 19, 20, he proceeds to unfold in particulars, the first and most important of which is the duty of prayer in all its forms. The particle οὖν has thus its proper collective force (‘ad ea, que antea posita sunt, lectorem revocat,’ Klotz ; ‘continuationand retrospect,’ Donalds. Gr. ὃ 604), and could not properly be replaced by any other particle; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 717. For the use of this and similar par- ticles, the student is especially re- ferred to Euclid, e.g. Book 1: the careful perusal of three or four leading propp. will give him more exact views 17: Παρακαλῶ οὖν πρῶτον πάντων ποι- - , , ’ , 3 εἶσθαι δεήσεις, προσεύχᾶας, ἐντεύξεις, ευὐυχα- of the real force of ἄρα, οὖν x.7.X. than he could readily acquire in any other way. πρῶτον πάντων] ‘ first of all,’ ‘imprimis ᾿ not priority in point of time, sc. ἐν τῇ λατρείᾳ τῇ καθημερινῇ, Chrys. (comp. Conyb. and Hows.), ‘ diluculo,’ Erasm.,—but of dignity, Bull, Serm. xut. p. 243 (Oxf. 1844), comp. Matth. vi. 33. The adverb is thus more naturally con- nected with παρακαλῶ than with ποιεῖσθαι, as in Syr. and Auth. Ver. The combination πρῶτον πάντων only occurs in the N. T. in this place. δεήσεις κι τ.λ.}] ‘petitions, prayers, supplications, thanksgivings.’ It has been somewhat hastily maintained by Heinr. De W. (comp. Justin.) al. that the first three terms are little more than synonymous, and only cumula- tively denote prayer. hand several special distinctions (comp. Theodoret im loc. Greg. Naz. Carm. XV. Vol. 11. p. 200) and appli- cations (August. Δ ἴδ. 59, 12) have been adduced,-which certainly cannot be substantiated. Still there is a difference: δέησις seems a special form (rogatio) of the more general προσευχή (precatio), see notes on Eph. vi. 18 ; ἔντευξις (ch. iv. 5) is certainly not a δέησις els ἐκδίκησιν, Hesych., comp. Theod., but, as its derivation (ἐντυγχάνω) suggests, prayer in its most individual and urgent form (ἐντ. καὶ ἐκβοησεῖς, Philo, Quod. Det. Pot. § 25, Vol. I. p. 209), in which God is as it were sought in audience (Polyb. Hist. -v. 35. 4, I. 15. 4), and personally drawn nigh to; comp. Origen, de Orat. ὃ 44, ἐντευξεῖς τὰς ὑπὸ τοῦ παῤῥησίαν τίνα πλείονα ἔχοντος. On the other : ‘ ἘΡΙΓΜΌΤΗΥ ΤΕ 33 2; ριστίας, ὑπὲρ πάντων ἀνθρώπων, 5 25 ὑπὲρ βασιλέων καὶ , a ᾽ « =~ » A cA eee ’ U “παντῶν τῶν EV ὑπεροχῆ OVT@MV, LVa ρεμον Kal συχιον βίον Thus then, as Huth. observes, the first term marks the idea of our in- sufficiency [de?, comp. Beng.], the second that of devotion, the third that of childlike confidence. The ordinary translation, ‘intercessions,’ as Auth. Ver. (comp. Schoettg. in loc.), too much restricts ἔντευξις, as it does not per se imply any reference to others ; see iv. 5, where such a meaning would be inappropriate, and comp. Rom. ὙΠ 2750-34, XL Ὁ) Heb. vil.” 25, where the preposition, ὑπὲρ or κατὰ marks the reference and direction of the prayer; see esp. the examples in Raphel, Annot. Vol. 1. p. 567 8q., who has very copiously illustrated this word, εὐχαριστίας ‘ thanks- givings:’ it is scarcely necessary to say that the special translation ‘eucharists,’ J. Johnson, Unbl. Sacr. 1. 2. Vol. 11. p. 66 (Angl. Cath. Libr.), is untenable. Thanksgiving was to be the perpetual concomitant of prayer ; see esp. Phil. iv. 6, Col. iv. 2 ; Justin. Apol. 1. 13, 67 al., and comp. Harless, Ethik, § 31. a. ὑπὲρ πάντων avOp. is obviously to be connected not merely with the last but all the foregoing substantives ; raidra δὲ ποιεῖν ὑπὲρ ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων παρ- εγγυᾷ, ἐπειδὴ καὶ Χ. Ἴ. ἦλθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἁμαρτωλοὺς σῶσαι, Theodoret. To further encourage this universality in prayer (Justin, Apol. 11. 15), the Apostle proceeds to specify, nomi- natim, particular classes for whom it ought to be offered; comp. Chrys. ain loc. 2. βασιλέων] ‘kings,’ generally, without any special reference to the Roman emperors. It is an instance of the perverted ingenuity of Baur (comp.’ De W.) to refer the plural to the emperor and his associate in rule as they appear in the age of the An- tonines ; surely this would have been τῶν βασιλέων. On the custom, gene- rally, of praying for kings (Ezra vi. 10, Baruch 1. 11), see Justin, Apol. 1.17, Tertull. Apologet. 39, the pas- sages collected by Ottius, Spicil. p. 433, and Grinf. Schol. Hell. Vol. τι. Ῥ. 580. It is very noticeable that the neglect of this duty on the part of the Jews led to the commencement of their war with the Romans, see Joseph. Bell. Jud. τι. 17, 2. ἐν ὑπεροχῇ] ‘in authority; all who have any share of constituted autho- rity, the ἐξουσίαι ὑπερέχουσαι, Rom. xili. 1; comp. 2 Mace. iii. 11, ἀνδρὸς ἐν ὑπεροχῇ κειμένου ; Polyb. Hist. v. 41. 3, Tots ἐν ὑπεροχαῖς οὖσιν. ἵνα ἤρεμον κ. τ. λ.1 Contemplated end and object, not import of the inter- cessory prayer ; dpa τί φησι, καὶ πῶς τίθησι τὸ κέρδος ἵνα κἂν οὕτω δέξῃ τὴν mapalveow...... ἡ ἐκείνων σωτηρία ἡμῶν ἀμεριμνία ὑπάρχει, Chrys. The prayer has clearly not a purely sub- jective reference, ‘that we may lead a life of quietude and submission’ (Mack, comp. Heydenr.), nor again a purely objective reference, ‘that they may thus let us live in quiet,’ but in fact involves both, and has alike a per- sonal anda political application; ‘that through their good government we may enjoy peace :’ the blessing ‘the powers that be’ will receive from our prayers will redound to us in outward peace and inward tranquillity ; comp. Wiesinger. Ἤρεμος is a late form of adjective derived from the adv. ἠρέμα ; Lucian, Tragodopod. 209, Eustath. Zl, vu. p. 142, 9. Lobeck (Pathol. p- 158) cites a single instance of its usage in early Greek ; Inscr, Olbiopol. No. 2059. The correct adjectival 20 , ’ , " , ‘ , Ovary orev εν Taoy εὐσεβείᾳ και σεμνοτῆτι. form is ἠρεμαῖος. ἡσυχίον] ‘tranquil ; once only again, 1 Pet. lil. 4, τοῦ πραέος καὶ ἡσυχίου πνεύματος. The distinction drawn by Olsh. be- tween ἤρεμος and ἡσύχιος can appy. be substantiated; the former (con- nected appy. with Sanser. ram, ‘rest in a chamber,’—the fundamental idea according to Pott, Htym. Forsch. Vol. τ. p- 262) seems to denote tranquillity arising from without, ‘qui ab aliisnon perturbatur,’ Tittm.; comp. Plato, Def. 412, A, ἠρεμία ψυχῆς περὶ τὰ δεινά ; Plutarch, Sol. 31, τήν τε χώραν ἐνεργεστέραν καὶ τὴν πόλιν ἠρεμαιοτέραν ἐποίησεν : the latter (connected with ἪἫΣ-, ἣμαι, Benfey, Wurzel-lex, Vol. I. p. 418) tranquillity arising from within, τ Pet. l.c.; comp. Plato, Charm. 160, ἡσύχιος ὁ σώφρων βίος. So, in effect, Tittmann, except that he assigns to ἡσύχ. more of an active meaning, ‘qui -aliis nullas turbas excitat,’ Synon. I. p. 65. On the use of Bios for ‘manner of life,’ comp. Trench, Synon. 27. p. ΤΟΙ. ἐν εὐσεβείᾳ «.7.A.] ‘in all godliness and gravity; the moral sphere in which they were to move. Mera might have been ysed with σεμνότης (comp. ch. iii. 4), but would have been less appropriate with εὐσεβεία ; the latter is to be not merely an accom- paniment but a possession (comp. Heb. xi. 2, and Winer, Gr. ὃ 52 ἃ, p. 463), the sphere in which they were always to walk. It is proper to ob- serve that both these substantives are only used by St. Paul in the Pastoral epp. Σεμνότης (only here, ch. iii. 4, and Tit. ii. 7) appears to denote that ‘ decency and propriety of deportment,’ ‘morum gravitas et castitas,’ Estius (‘ehrbarkeit,’ Luther), which befits the chaste (Chrys. ; comp., in an ex- aggerated sense, Eur, Jph. Aul. 1350), Te LIMOTHT (obese, 3: - 4A 3 τοῦτο yap the young, (ch. iii. 4, Tit. ii. 7), and the earnest (Joseph. Bell. Jud. τι. 8. 2), and is, as it were, the appro- priate setting of higher graces and virtues ; compare Joseph. Vit. ὃ 49, μετὰ πάσης σεμν. Kal πάσης δὲ ἀρετῆς ἔνθαδε πεπολίτευμαι ; Ἑὐσέβεια, Ἰσιδὴ ἜΝ [timor Jehove] Syr., isa ae which occurs several times in these epp., e.g. ch. iii. 16, iv. 7, 8.1.2, 5.0; Ling, 2 Lum. αν 8. ΕΑ, a 1,see also Acts iii. 12, 2 Pet. i. 3, 6, 7, iii. 11. It properly denotes only ‘ well- directed reverence’ (Trench, Synon. § 48), but in the N.T. is practically the same as θεοσέβεια (ch. ii. 10), and is well defined by Tittmann, Synon. I. p. 146, as ‘vis pietatis in ipsa vita vel externa vel interna,’ and more fully but with accuracy by Eusebius, Prep. Evang. 1. p. 3, a8 ἡ πρὸς τὸν ἕνα καὶ μόνον ws ἀληθῶς ὁμολογούμενόν τε καὶ ὄντα Θεὸν ἀνάνευσις, καὶ ἡ κατὰ τοῦτον ζωή. Thus then εὐσεβ. conveys the idea, not of an ‘inward, inherent holiness,’ but, as Alford (on Acts iii. 12) correctly observes, of a ‘ practical, operative, cultive piety :’ see other, but less precise, definitions in Suicer, Thesaur, 5.0. Vol. 1. p. 1264, and esp. the discriminating remarks of Harless, Ethik, ὃ 37. 3. τοῦτο] Scil. τὸ εὔχεσθαι ὑπέρ πάντων. τοῦτο ἀποδέχεται ὁ Θεός, τοῦτο θέλει, Chrys. This verse stands in more immediate connexion with ver. 1, of which ver. 2 really only forms a semi- parenthetical illustration. To please God is the highest motive that can influence a Christian. Tap is omitted by Lachm. with A, |17. 67** ; Copt. Sahid. (not. Pesch., as Bloomf. as- serts),—evidence, however, far from — sufficient. The omission very pro- bably arose from_a want of perception ‘ . TIMOTHY ΤΕ 3, 4. 27 ‘ A 9 ‘ Sf fal A ec a - καλὸν καὶ ἀποδεκτὸν ἐνώπιον τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Θεοῦ, 4 ὃς πάντας ἀνθρώπους θέλει σωθῆναι καὶ εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας of the true connexion between ver. I, 2, and 3. καλὸν Kal ἀποδεκτόν] Not ‘good and accept- able before’-—Huther, Wiesing., but “ good (per se) and acceptable before God,’ Mack, De Wette, al. ; καὶ τῇ φύσει ἐστὶ καλόν... .. καὶ τῷ Θεῷ δὲ ἀποδεκτόν, Theophylact. Huther urges against this 2 Cor. viii. 21, προνοοῦμεν yap καλὰ οὐ μόνον ἐνώπιον Κυρίου κι τ. Χ. but there, as_ still more clearly in Rom. xii. 17, προνοούμενοι καλὰ [opp. to κακόν, ver. the latter clause ἐνώπιον x. 7.2. is not connected simply with καλά, but with mpov. καλά, see Meyer in loc. ’Aro- δεκτός (not ἀπόδεκτος, as Lachm., Tisch. ; see Lobeck Paralip. vu. τι. Ῥ. 490) is used in N.T. only here, and ch. v. 4; comp. ἀποδοχή, ch. i. 15. τοῦ σωτῆρος K.t.A.] See notes on ch. i. τ. The appropriateness of the title is evinced by the following verse. 4. ὅς πάντας k.T.A.] ‘whose, i. 6. seeing His will is (not ‘ whose wish is,’ Peile ; comp. notes on ch. v. 14) that all men should be saved,’ &c.; expla- natory and faintly confirmatory of the preceding assertion. On this slightly causal, or perhaps rather explicative force of ὅς, see Ellendt, Lex. Soph. 8.0. 1Π. 3, Vol. 11. p. 371, and comp. Bernhardy, Synt. VI. 12 a, p. 291 sq. πάντας) Emphatic, Rom. viii. 32; ‘Omnes, etiam non credentes, vult salvar? Beng.; μιμοῦ τὸν Θεόν" εἰ πάντας ἀνθρώπους θέλει σωθῆναι, θέλε καὶ σύ" εἰ de θέλεις εὔχου, τῶν γὰρ τοιούτων ἐστὲ τὸ εὔχεσθαι, Chrys. The various dogmatical expositions of this important verse will be found in Justiniani, Corn. a Lap., and Estius in loc.; comp. also Petav. Theol, Dogm. Vol. 1. Book X, 1, 2 sq., Vol. 16] ἐνώπιον πάντων ἀνθρώπων, v. Book xm. 1, 3, 4; Forbes, Jn- struct. Vu. 18, p. 415 sq. Without entering upon them in detail, or over- stepping the limits prescribed to this commentary, it seems proper to re- mark that all attempted restrictions (‘quosvis homines’ Beza, comp. Au- gust. Enchirid. § 103; see contr. | Winer, Gr. § 17 Ὁ, p. 133) of this vital text are as much to be repre- hended on the one hand, as that peril- ous universalism on the other, which ignores or explains away the clear de- claration of Scripture, that there are those whose ὄλεθρος shall be αἰώνιος (2 Thess. i. 9), and whose portion shall be the δεύτερος θάνατος (Rev. xxl, 8): the remarks of Usteri, Zehrb. II. B, p. 352 54. are very unsatisfactory. Setting aside all technical, though perhaps plausible, distinctions between the ‘voluntas antecedens’ and ‘vo- luntas consequens’ of God (Damasc. Orth. Fid. τι. 29), it seems enough io say, that Scripture declares in terms of the greatest latitude (see esp. Ham- mond, Fundamentals, xiv. 2, and comp. Pract. Catech. Ul. 2, p. 18, Angl. C. Libr.) that God does will the salvation (σωθῆναι not σώσαι) of all; all are rendered (through J. C.) ‘ ΠῚ vabiles’ and ‘ salvandi’ (Barrow, Serm. 72). That some are indisputably not “saved (Matt. XXV. 41 86., Rey, xx. 10, 15,.Xxil. 15 al.) is not due to any cceaet circumscription or inefficacy of the Divine θέλημα (Episcop. Jnst. Theol. tv. 2. 21), but_to man’s rejec- tion of the special means of salvation which God has been pleased to ap- point, and to which it is also His Divine θέλημα (Eph. i. 9) that man’s salvation should be limited ; comp. Miiller on Sin, m1. 2. 1, Vol. π. p. 211 (Clark). In a word, redemption ——— 28 ἐλθεῖν. is universal yet conditional; all may be saved, yet all will not be saved be- cause all will not conform to God’s appointed conditions ; see Hammond, l.c. § 15; and esp. Barrow, Works, Vol. rv. p. 1—97, who in four sermons (7t1—74) has nearly exhausted the subject. The two further momentous questions connected with this doctrine are fairly stated by Ebrard, Dogmatik § 557 sq., Vol. 0. p. 689, comp. also Martensen, Dogm. § 219 sq. Kal εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν K.T.A. (comp. 2 Tim. ii. 25, 111. 7) is not a hystero- proteron, but specifies the more im- mediate object and end; see Winer, Gramm. ὃ 65. 3. note, p. 637. The σωθῆναι is the ultimate, the εἰς ἐπίγν. ἀληθ. ἐλθεῖν, an immediate end leading naturally and directly to the former. The introduction of this latter moment of thought is suggested by, and suit- ably precedes, the enunciation of the great truth whichis contained in the fol- lowing verse. On ἐπίγνωσις (‘ cognitio certa et accurata’) see notes on Eph. i. 17, and on the omissions of the art. notes on 2 Zim. ii. 25. It may be re- marked that ἀλήθεια here, as com- monly in the N.T., implies no mere theoretical, but practical and saving truth, ‘veritas salvifica,’ as revealed in the Gospel; ἀληθ. ποίας ; τῆς els αὐτὸν πίστεως, Chrysost.; see Reuss, Theol. πν. 8) Vol.=s1. “p: 82. A special treatise on this word has been written by Baumann, Strasb. 1838. 5. εἷς yap Θεός] The particle yap has here its simple argumentative force, and connects this verse, not with ver. 1 (Leo, Mack), but with the verse immediately preceding. His and πάντας stand thus in correlation ; the universality of the dispensation is proved by the wnity of the Dispenser. The existence of different dispensa- 1 TIMOTHY IL 4, 5. 5 εἷς yap Θεός, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης Θεοῦ και avOpd- tions for different portions of the hu- man race, would seem inconsistent with the conception of one supreme all-ruling Creator; ‘unius Dei una providentia ;> comp. Rom, iii. 29, where a similar argument is intro- duced by the forcible (Hartung, Part. Vol. 1. p. 342) ἐπείπερ. els kal μεσίτης] In this and similar distinctions between the first and second Persons of the blessed Trinity (comp. 1 Cor. viii. 6, Eph. iv. 4—6), Reuss finds traces of a citra-Athana- sian view (so to speak) of the subordi- nation of the Son, Zheol. Chret. Iv. 10, Vol. 11. p. 102. This is not cor- rect: all that could reasonably be in- ferred from such a text as the present, is the catholic doctrine of a subordina- tion in respect of office; see Water- land, Second Vind, Vol. τι. p. 400. The position of De W. after Schleierm. (δον 1 Tim. p. 177) that this use of μεσίτης, without definite allusion to a διαθήκη, argues a compiler from the ep. to the Heb. (viii. 6, ix. 15, xii. 24), is not entitled to serious attention or confutation. The previous allusion to redemption (ver. 4.), and the an- tithesis of the els Θεός and πάντ. avOp. suggests the use of a term that best sustains that relation: see also Ebrard, Dogm. § 406. Θεοῦ kal ἀνθρώτων] Both anarthrous ; the former in accordance with its com- mon privilege of rejecting the article (see exx. Winer Gr. ὃ 18, p. 138), the latter, from a bare indication of the other party only being necessary. In both cases the omission is obviously suggested by the familiarity of both the terms connected by the conjunc- tion, see Green, G7. IV. 3, p. 181. &vOpwiros’ I. X.] ‘a man Jesus Christ.’ The human nature of Christ is specially mentioned as being the state in which τ: TIMOTHY IL 5, 6. > ~ πων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς, His mediatorial office was visibly per- formed ; ἄνθρωπον δὲ τὸν Χριστὸν ὠνόμασεν ἐπειδὴ μεσίτην ἐκάλεσεν" ἐπανθρωπήσας γὰρ ἐμεσίτευσεν, Theo- doret. On the duration of Christ’s mediation, see Pearson, Creed, Art. vi., Vol. 1. p. 334 (ed. Burton). The omission of the article (scarcely noticed by the modern German commentators) must be preserved in translation. Middleton (Greek Art. p. 388, ed. Rose) considers the article unneces- sary, and compares ἄνθρ. “I. X. with κύριος "I. X.; but the comparison fails, as κύριος has so unequivocally the character of a proper name ; comp. Winer, Gr. ὃ 18, p. 141. In a diffe- rent context Christ might clearly have been designated as ὁ ἄνθρ., ‘the (re- presentative) man of humanity,’ comp. Peile in loc. ; here, however, as the Apostle only wishes to mark the na- ture in which Christ ἐμεσίτευσεν but not any relation in which He stood to that nature, he designedly omits the article. 6. ἀντίλυτρον] ‘ransom,’ the ἀντὶ is here by no means redundant (Schleierm. p. 42, compare Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. I. p. 377), but serves to express the idea of exchange, ‘permutationem, qué veluti capite caput et vita vitam redemit,’ Just. ; comp. ἀντάλλαγμα, Matt. xvi. 26, ἀντίψυχον, Ignat. Smyrn. 10, and the valuable remarks on it of Pearson, Vind. Ign. ch. xv. p. 597, (Angl. C. Libr.) In this important word the idea of a substitution of Christ in our stead cannot be ignored, (see thus far, Reuss, Theol. Chret. τν. 17, Vol. τι. p. 185 sq.), especially when connected with passages of such deep significance as Rom. iii. 25 (our Lord’s death was a true ‘expiatorium,’ ‘a propitiatory sacrifice,’ see Meyer on Rom. 1. c.) and 29 © ὁ δοὺς ἑαυτὸν ἀντίλυ- Eph. v. 2; comp. also Meyer, on Rom. ν. 6, and for some calm and clear comments on this ‘satisfactio vicaria,’ Martensen, Dogmatik, ὃ 1 57 8q-, Ρ. 343. All the modern theories of atonement seem to forget that God hates sin as sin, not as a personal offence against Himself. How is a God thus holy and just to be recon- ciled? See M‘Cosh, Divine Gov. τν. 2.3, Ῥ- 475 (4th ed.) Waterland’s words are few but very weighty ; on Fundam. Vol. v. p. 82. ὑπὲρ πάντων]ὕ On the meaning of ὑπὲρ in dogmatical passages, see notes on Gal. iii. 13. Here ὑπὲρ (‘in commo- dum’) seems to point to the benefit conferred by Christ upon us, ἀντὶ to His substitution of Himself in our place. τὸ μαρτύριον κι το λ.1 ‘the (import of the) testimony (to be set forth) in its proper seasons ; ° v - a o Syr. MI>}> 22» ἸΖορ»» σι [testi- monium quod venit in tempore suo], not ‘the proof of it,’ &c., Middleton, Art. p. 389. Some little difficulty has been felt in these words, owing to the true nature of the apposition not having been recognised. Td μαρτύριον is an accusative in apposition to the preceding sentence, not to ἀντίλυτρον (ὅτι ἀντίλυτρον τὸ μαρτ. λέγω, τούτεστι τὸ πάθος, Theophyl. 2.), but to ὁ δοὺς εν πάντων, 501}. ‘que res (np. quod sui ipsius morte omnes _ homines redemisset, Luke xxiv. 46, 47) testimo- nit suo tempore (ab Apostolis) dicendi argumentum esset,’ Fritz. Rom. xii. 1, Vol. 1. p. 12, where this passage is very carefully investigated; see also Winer, Gr. § 48. 1, p. 422, and Scholef. Hints, p. 118. Thus there is no reason for modifying the text (Liicke, Stud. wu. Krit. for 1836, p. 651 sq.) ; the insertion of οὗ before τὸ 90 τρον ὑπὲρ πάντων, τὸ μαρτύριον καιροῖς ἰδίοις, 1 TIMOTHY It. 6,7. 7 εἰς ὃ ἐτέθην ἐγὼ κήρυξ καὶ ἀπόστολος (ἀλήθειαν λέγω, οὐ ψεύδο- μαι), διδάσκαλος ἐθνῶν ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀληθείᾳ. μαρτ., with DFG al., and οἵ ἐδόθη after ἰδίοις with D*FG are incorrect (comp. Fritz.), epexegetical additions. The omission of τὸ μαρτ. in A seems due to accident, at any rate not to any ‘reviser of the text of that ΜΗ. Bloomf.—whose critical remarks on this verse are very inaccurate. καιροῖς ἰδίοις] Scil. τοῖς προσήκουσι, Chrys. It is singular that Liicke should have felt any difficulty in this formula ; comp. Gal. vi. 16, and somewhat similarly Polyb. Hist. 1. 30. 10, XVIII. 34. 6. ‘Tempus testi- monio de Christi morte expiatorid hominibus ab Apostolis dicendo idoneum, illud tempus est quod a Spiritus Sancti adventu ad Apostolos (Acts i. 8) usque ad solemnem Christi reditum de colo (2 Thess. i. 10) labitur,’ Fritz. 7. c. The dative then is not a quasi dat. commodi (comp. Scholef., Peile), but the dat. of the space of time wherein the action takes place; comp. Rom. xvi. 25, χρόνοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου, and see exx. in Winer, Gr. ὃ 31. 5, p. 246. This form of temporal dative is more correctly accompanied by ἐν, see Sprachl. § 48. 2, Wannowski Constr. Abs. 1. 1, p. 88. The distinction between the temporal gen. and dat. is stated in a somewhat novel manner by Hartung, Casus, p. 77 ; more cor- rectly, however, by Donaldson, Gr., § 451, 459; comp. Kriiger, /.c. with § 47.2. The temporal gen., except in a few familiar forms, is rare in the ΝΙΝ 7. εἰς 8] ‘for which,’ scil. μαρτύ- prov; ‘cui testimonio dicendo consti- tutus sum preco,’ Fritz., Rom. xii. 1, Vol ΠΙ. p. 15, note. κήρυξ] ‘a herald,’ ‘ preco solemnis, a Kriiger, Deo missus,’ Beng. ; only here and 2 Tim. i. 11. There is no necessity for modifying (‘predicator,’ Vulg.) the primary meaning of the word; comp. Eeclus. xx. 15, ἀνοίξει τὸ στόμα αὐτοῦ. ὡς κήρ., and see esp. 1 Cor. ix. 27, where κηρύσσειν is used of the ‘ago- nistic herald’ in accordance with the tenor of the foregoing’ verses, see Meyer in loc. ἀπόστολος] ‘an apostle,’ in the higher sense of the word; μέγα τὸ τοῦ ἀποστόλου ἀξιώμα καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἀντιποιεῖται Theophyl. : see notes on Gal. i. 1. ἀλήθειαν κι τ.λ.}] De Wette seems clearly right in- maintaining that this protestation refers to the preceding word; the asseveration with re- gard to his apostleship was of course not intended for Timothy, but for the false teachers who doubted his aposto- lical authority. The third official de- signation, διδάσκ. ἐθνῶν, then follows with full climactic force. ἐν πίστει κ. τ. A. | The sphere iz which the Apostle performed his mission was one of faith and truth. The two sub- stantives are-commonly taken either both with objective reference (scil. ἐν τούτου, πίστει ἀληθινῇ, ---καὶ being epexegetic, Mack. comp. Peile, who inappositely cites 2 Thess. ii. 13), or both with subjective reference, ‘faithfully and truly’ (ἐν πιστ. κ. ἀλ. = πιστὸν καὶ ἀληθινόν), Grinf., Leo [miscited by De W.] It seems, however, more simple to refer πίστις to the subjective faith of the Apostle, ἀλήθ. to the objective truth of the doctrine he delivered ; ‘quidquid fides docet necessario est verum,’ Justin. ᾿Αλήθεια logically fol- lows πίστις, for as the same expositor remarks, ‘hee ad illam aditum re- cludit ;) comp. John viii. 31. =< ‘ 1 TIMOTHY ILI. 8. 31 I desire that the men pray reyerently, and that the women dress and comport themselves with naterty 8. διαλογισμοῦ] SoA DJK.... Vulg. and many Vv. . .. . Origen (3), Chrys. Theodoret (text), al. (Rec., Griesb., Matth., Scholz, Lachm., De Wette (8 sil.), Huther). The plural διαλογισμῶν is adopted by Tisch. with F G; 17, 67**, 73, 80, and many others; . . . . Boern. Copt. Syr. (both)... . Origen (4), Euseb. Macar. Basil. Theodoret (2), Damasc. (Comment.) ; Hieron, As the external authorities seem decidedly to preponderate in favour of the former, and as it seems more probable that the plural should be a correction of the less usual singular (only in Luke ix. 46, 47), than that the singular should have been altered from the plural for the sake of symmetry in number with 8 Βούλομαι οὖν προσεύχεσθαι τοὺς ἄνδρας ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ἐπαίροντας ὁσίους ὀργῆς, there appears full reason for adopting the reading of the text. 8. βούλομαι οὖν] ‘J desire then,’ | exprimitur auctoritas apostolica ; cap. v. 14, Berg. In ‘hoe verbo βούλομαι the active wish is implied ; it is no mere willingness or acqui- escence; on the distinction between βούλομαι and θέλω, see below on ch, v. 14, and comp. notes on Lph. i. 11, and especially the clear and satis- factory discussion of Donaldson, Cratyl. § 463, p. 650 sq. (ed. 2). οὖν] Not simply illative and in refe- rence to ver. 7 (Calv.), but partially resumptive ; recapitulating, and at the same time expanding, the desire ex- pressed in ver. 1, ‘in pursuance then of my general exhortation, I desire. The proper collective force of οὖν is thus not wholly lost: on the resump- tive use see Kiotz, Devar. Vol. τι. p. 718, and notes on Gal. iii. 5. προσεύχεσθαι) Emphatic; bringing the subject again forward, forcibly and distinctly. The allusion, as Huther properly contends, is clearly to public prayer; comp. ver. I. Τοὺς ἄνδρας is thus in antithesis to τὰς γυναῖκας, ver. 9, and marks, though here not with any special force, but rather allusively, the fact that the conducting of the public prayers more particularly belonged to the men; comp. ver. 12, 1 Cor. xi, 14,15. Had the Apostle said πάντας, it would not have seemed so consistent with his subsequent specific direction. ἐν πάντι τόπῳ must be limited to ‘every place of customary devotional resort, everywhere where prayer is | wont to be made’ (Peile); comp. Basil, de Bapt. τι. qu. 8. If the allusion had here been particularly to private prayer, then ἐν πάντι τόπῳ might have been referred to the in- differency of place in regard to prayer ; ‘omnis locus oratorium est,’ August. Serm. 130, comp. Schoettg. Hor. Vol. 1. p. 865. This however is not con- veyed by the present words. There is no polemical reference to the limita- tion of public worship among the Jews to the temple (Chrys. Wolf),—a fact moreover which is not historically true, comp. Est. in loc. ἐπαίροντας κ. T.A.] Modal clause, de- fining both the proper bodily gesture and the spiritual qualifications required in prayer. The Christian, as well as Pagan (Virg. dn. τ. 92) and Jewish (1 Kings viii. 2, Psalm xxviii. 2) custom of raising aloft the hands in prayer, is illustrated by Suicer, Thesaur. 5.0. εὐχή. Vol. π. p. 1276, Bingham, Antig. xm. 8. 10. It was, as it were, an oblation to God of the instruments of our necessities, Chrys. on Psalm exl. Vol. v. p. 431 (ed. Bened.). The folding together the hands in prayer has been appy. proved to be of Indo-Germanic origin ; 92 χεῖρας χωρὶς ὀργῆς καὶ διαλογισμοῦ: 1 TIMOTHY IL. 8, 9. e , 4 9 ὡσαύτως Kal a ? a ’ AD ἴδον ᾽ς ᾿ , γυναικας εν καταστολὴ κοσμιῳ μετα αἰδοῦς και σωφροσύνης see Stud. u. Krit. for 1853, Part1.p. go, and Vierordt’s special treatise on the subject, Carlsr. 1851 ὁσίους] ‘holy,’ opp. βέβηλοι χεῖρες, 2 Macc. v. 16. It is singular that Winer, ΟἿ. δ 11. 1, p. 79, should suggest the pos- sibility of so awkward a connection as ὁσίους (‘religione perfusos,’ Fritz.) with ἐπαίρ., and still more so that Fritz., Rom. Vol. ut. p. 1, should actually adopt it, when the common Attic use of adjectives in -ἰος, &e. (Elmsl. Eur. Heracl. 245), with only two terminations is’so distinctly found in the N. T. (ver. 9, see Winer /.c.), and gives so good asense. Contrary instances of similar ‘adjectiva minus mobilia,’ are collected by Lobeck, Phryn. p. 106. Wolf cites Demosth. Mid. 531, ὁσίας δεξίας dvicxovres, but the right reading is ἰδίας. On the true meaning of ὅσιος (holy purity), see Harless, on Eph. iv. 24. It may be remarked that ἁγνός, ἀμίαντος, and καθαρὸς are all similarly used with χεῖρες ; see Clem. Rom. Cor. i. 29, ἁγνὰς Kal ἀμιάντους χεῖρας αἴροντες, and exx. in Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. εὐχή. The first term perhaps denotes freedom from (inward) impurity; thé second, from stain (outwardly contracted), pollution ; the third, from alien ad- mixture; see Tittmann, Synon. 1. p. 26 sq. χωρὶς ὀργῆς k.T. A. ] ‘without (or apart from) anger and doubting, Auth. Ver. It does not seem proper either here or Phil. ii. 14, to import from the context a meaning of διαλογισμὸς (‘disceptatio,’ Vulg., and nearly all recent commentators except Meyer) unconfirmed by_good lexical authority. The explanation of Chrysost. and the Greek expositors, ἀμφιβολία (πιστεύων ὅτι λήψῃ, Theo- doret), ‘hesitationes,’ Vulg. in Phil. o 9 Ee, | Dsesao [cogitationes] Syr. is perfectly satisfactory and in accor- dance with the proper meaning of the word ; comp. Plato, Axioch. p. 367 A, φροντίδες... .. καὶ διαλογισμοί, and Clem. Rom. Cor. i. 21, where it is in connection with ἐννοιῶν ; so also Clem. Alex. Strom. 1v. 17, quoting from Clem. Rom. On the alleged distinc- tion ketween χωρὶς and ἄνευ, see notes on Eph. ii. 12. 9. ὡσαύτως k.t.d.] (I desire) like- wise that women also, in seemly guise, with shamefastness and discretion, do adorn themselves,’ &c. Omitting all evasive and virtually participial trans- lations (comp. Conyb. and Hows.) of the plain infin. κοσμεῖν, we have two constructions ; we may either supply (a) merely βούλομαι, the infin. κοσμεῖν being simply dependent on the supplied verb ; or (ὁ) βούλομαι προσεύχεσθαι, the infinitival clause κοσμεῖν k.7.X., being regarded as added ‘per asyn- deton’ (Mack), or epexegetically, comp. De W. The main objection to (a) is the less special meaning that must be assigned to ὡσαύτως; but comp. Tit. ii. 3, and appy. Rom. viii. 26, where ὡσαύτως introduces a state. ment co-ordinate with, but not purely similar to, what precedes; see also 2 Mace. ii. 12. The objection to (0) is the singularly unconnected position of κοσμεῖν : this is far less easy to surmount, for in all the instances hitherto adduced of unconnected in- finitives (ch. v. 14, vi. 18, Tit. iii. 1) the verbs all relate to the same subject, and the construction is easy and ob- vious. It seems best then to adopt (a),.and to find the force of ὡσαύτως in the continued but implied (ver. r1) reference to public prayers; see = mye ἘΠ ΟΥΥ ΤΗΣ 0. 99 - , 4 ad κοσμεῖν ἑαυτάς, μὴ ἐν πλέγμασιν καὶ χρυσῷ ἢ μαργαρίταις Miller im loc. Kal, moreover, has thus its full and proper ascensive force: the women were not mere supernumeraries ; they had also their duties as well as the men ; these were sobriety of deportment and simplicity of dress, at all times, especially at public prayers. It would seem almost as if the Apostle intended only to allude to demeanour and dress at the latter, but concluded with making the instructions general. ἐν καταστολῇ κοσμίῳ] ‘in seemly guise ;’ compare Tit. ii. ἱεροπρεπεῖς, and see notes im loc. ; not to be connected directly with κοσμεῖν, but forming with μετὰ σωῴφροσ. k.T.X. a kind of adjectival predication to be appended to γυναῖκας ; comp. Peile in loc., and see Matth. vi. 29, Tit. i. 6. Ἑαταστολὴ is not simply ‘dress’ (Lid- dell and Scott, Lex. 5. v. Huther, al.), a meaning for which there is no satis- factory authority, but ‘deportment,’ as exhibited externally, whether in look, manner, or dress, see Palm ἃ. Rost, Lex. s.v. Vol. 1. p. 655 ; comp. Joseph. Bell. Jud. τι. 8. 4, καταστολὴ καὶ σχῆμα σώματος, and esp. Hippocr. de Dec. Habitu, τ. 26, where κατα- στολὴ is associated with καθέδρα and περιστολή, thus appy. conveying the idea of something outwardly cog- nizable ; external appearance as prin- cipally exhibited in dress, comp. o* v o ἃ δ = σ᾿ Syr. acm» Jaa ᾿ϑωδϑ {in σχήματι casto vestitus]: ‘ guise’ thus perhaps approaches most nearly to the idea which the Apostle intended to convey. We cannot (with De W.) cite the Vulg. ‘habitus,’ as the fol- lowing epithet (ornato) seems to show that the translator referred it more definitely to ‘apparel.’ It would seem then not improbable that the glosses 3, ἐν καταστήματι of Hesychius (karaor. περιβολήν) and Suidas (καταστ. στολήν), and the use in later writers, e.g. Basil (see Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. I. 65), were sug- gested by a doubtful interpretation of this passage. In Isaiah, xi. 3, cited by Bretsch., the reading of the Cod. Vat. is στολὴν δόξης. κοσμίῳ] Only here and ch. iii. 2, “ seemly,’ ‘becoming,’ not “ ornato,’ Vulg., Luther: see Suicer, Thesaur. Bava Vole ἢ. ΤΩ. αἰδοῦς καὶ σωφροσύνης] ‘shamefastness and discretion ; the inward feelings which should accompany the outward bear- ing and deportment: both terms are found united, Arrian, Zpict. 1v. 8. Αἰδὼς (only here; Heb. xii. 28, cited by Trench, Synon. s.v., has but little critical support) marks the ‘innate shrinking from anything unbecoming ;’ σωφροσύνη (ch. ii. 15, Acts xxvi. 25), the ‘well-balanced state of mind re- sulting from habitual self-restraint ; comp. 4 Mace. 1. 31, σωφροσύνη ἐστὶν ἐπικράτεια τῶν ἐπιθυμιῶν, more com- prehensively, Plato, Republ. 11. 430 E, καὶ ἡδονῶν τινων καὶ ἐπιθυμίων ἐγκράτεια, similarly, Symp. 196 0, and more at length Aristotle, Ethics, 11. 13. Chrysostom is no less distinct, σωφροσ. ov τοῦτο μόνον ἐστί, τὸ πορνείας ἀπέχεσθαι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ τῶν λοιπῶν παθῶν ἐκτὸς εἶναι, on Tit. τι. 5, Ῥ. 822, see Trench, Synon. ὃ 20, and for the most plausible translation, notes on Transl. It may be remarked that σώφρων and its derivatives (ex- cept σωφρονεῖν and σωφροσύνη, Acts lic.) σωφρονίζειν, σωφρονισμός, σω- φρόνως, σωφροσύνη, occur only in the Pastoral epp. This is one among ‘many hints, afforded by the verbal characteristics of these three epp., that they were written by one hand [St. Paul], and probably at no dis- D 94 a he a ἢ ἱματισμῳ πολυτελεῖ, ι TIMOTHY ΤΠ. 9—1r1. 10 ἀλλ᾽ ὃ πρέπει γυναιξὶν ἐπαγ- γελλομέναις θεοσέβειαν, Ov ἔργων ἀγαθῶν. A woman must learn and not teach, for two II T ΡΝ μὴ ' θ , ’ ’ υνῇ ἐν ησύυχίιᾳ μανθανέετω εν πασῆ reasons ; she was second in respect of creation, and first in respect of transgression. tant period from one another. μὴ ἐν πλέγμασιν] ‘not with plait- ings :’ special adornments both per- sonal (πλέγμ.) and put on the person (χρυσῷ, μαργαρ., ἱματισμῷ) inconsis- tent with Christian simplicity ; comp. 1 Pet. iii. 3, ἐμπλοκὴ τριχῶν, and see esp. Clem. Alex. Padag. U1. 11. 62, Vol. I. p. 290 (Pott.), ai περιπλοκαὶ τῶν τριχῶν αἱ ἑταιρικαί x.T.d., where this and other kinds of personal decora- tion are fully discussed ; comp. Wakef. Sylv. Crit. Vol. m1. p. 133. What Clement approves of is ἀναδεῖσθαι τὴν κόμην εὐτελῶς περόνῃ τινὶ λιτῇ Tapa τὸν αὐχένα ἀφελεῖ θεραπείᾳ συναυξού- σαις (γυναιξὶν) εἰς κάλλος γνήσιον τὰς σώφρονας κόμας. On the subject gene- rally, see Smith, Dict. of Antig. Art. ‘Coma,’ and the plates in Montfaucon, L’ Antig. Expl. Vol. ut. p. 41, Suppl. Vol. 10, p..44. The remarks of Beng. on this use of μὴ are not satis- factory ; οὐ in peculiar forms of ex- pression is found after βούλομαι, the regular and natural particle after verbs of ‘will,’ is, however, of cqurse μή, see exx. in Gayler, Partic. Neg. p. 329 86. καὶ χρυσῷ] Scil. περιθέσει χρυσίων, 1 Pet. ili. 3; ear- rings, necklaces, bracelets ; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 1x. 35. το. GAN ὃ πρέπει κ. τ.λ.7 The con- struction is slightly doubtful: δὲ ἔργων ἀγαθῶν may be joined with ἐπαγγελλ. (Vulg., Theod.) ; in which case the relative 6 must be regarded as equivalent to ἐν τουτῷ ὅ (Matth.), or καθ᾽ ὅ (Hvther), both somewhat unsatisfactory explanations. It seems much more simple to connect δ épy. ay. with κοσμεῖν (Syr., Theophyl.), and to regard ὃ πρέπει k.7.d. as a comp. common relatival opposition ; Winer, Gr. § 23.2, p. 183, note. Theobjection of Huther to κοσμεῖν--- διὰ is not of moment: ἔργα ἀγαθὰ were the medium - of the κόσμος ; the prevenient and at- tendant graces of soul (comp. 1 Pet. iii. 3) were its actual constituents. ἐπαγγελλομέναις} ‘professing,’ ‘ pro- fitentes,’ ‘pre se ferentes,’ Justin. ; comp. ch. vi. 21, where this meaning is perfectly clear. Huther compares Xenoph. Mem. τ. 2. 7, ἀρετὴν ἐπαγ- γελλόμενος, and Ignat. Ephes. 14, πίστιν émayyerr.; add Joseph. Antiq. Procem. ὃ 2, Θεοῦ θεραπείαν ἐπαγγελ- λεσθαι (Grinf. Schol. Hell.), and see further exx. in Suicer, Thesaw. s.v. Vol, I. p. 1157. Θεοσέβεια, an ἅπ. λεγόμ., scarcely differs in sense from evoeBela, ver. 2; comp. notes. 11. γυνή] ‘a woman,’ i.e, any one of the class, or in accordance with the idiom of our language (Brown, Gramm. of Gr. τι. 2. obs. 6, p. 220) ‘the woman,’ see notes on Eph. v. 23. ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ] Scil. ‘ with- out speaking or attempting to teach in the Church; μηδὲ φθεγγέσθω, φησίν, ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ γυνή, Chrys. μανθανέτω] ‘learn,’ i.e., at the pub- lic ministrations; in antithesis to διδάσκ., ver. 12. It is obvious that the Apostle’s previous instructions, 1 Cor. xiv. 31 sq., are here again in his thoughts. The renewal of the prohibition in Concil. Carth. rv. Can. 99, (A.D. 398), would seem to show that a neglectof the apostolic ordinance had crept into the African Church. Wo- men were permitted, however, to teach privately those of their own sex, ib. Can. 12; see Bingham, Antig. XIV. ASB ἐν πάσῃ ὑποταγῇ] ΕΕΣΡΕΓ ER rrr. 35 € nw , uUTOTayN’ 12. διδάσκειν δὲ γυναικὶ οὐκ ἐπιτρέπω, οὐδὲ αὐθεντεῖν ἀνδρός, ἀλλ᾽ εἶναι ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ. 13 ᾿Αδὰμ γὰρ πρῶ- 12 διδάσκειν δὲ yuv.] So Lachm. and Tisch., ed. 1. with A DFG; τὸ mss. ; ΕΣ Vulg. It. Goth. al... .. . Cypr. Ambrst. Jerome (much appr. by Griesb., De Wette, Huther, Wiesing). It is difficult to understand what principle except that of opposition to Lachm. has induced Tisch., ed. 2, to adopt the reading of the Rec. γυναικὶ δὲ διδάσκειν, with J K, great majority of mss. ; . ... . Syr. (both), Theod. (Mops.), Chrys. Theod. Dam. al.; Ambr. (Mill Scholz), when the uncial authority is thus noticeably weak, and the context so plainly favours the reading of the text. The δὲ is thus not for γάρ (Syr.), and has certainly not ‘a vim copulativam,’ =‘ scilicet’ Leo, but properly and with its usual adversative force marks the opposition to μανθανέτω. We thus, with considerable confidence, reject Tischendorf’s present reading, ‘in all subjection,’ i.e. yielding it in αὐθεντεῖν] ‘to exercise dominion ; all cases, not ‘in voller Unterordnung,’ Fp ER OS UE Huth.; πᾶς is extensive rather ad Ss Qa SGSOS [andacter egere intensive ; see notes on Eph. i. 8. On | super] Syr. ; not ‘to wswrp authority,’ the position occupied by womanin the | Auth. Ver., a further meaning not early Church, it may be remarked | contained inthe word. Αὐθεντεῖν (dm. that Christianity did not abrogate the | \eyéu. in N.T.), found only in late primal law of the relation of woman | and 600]. writers (Basil, Zpist. 52), in- toman, While it animated and spiri- | volves the secondary and less proper tualized their fellowship, it no less de- | meaning of αὐθέντης (Lobeck, Phryn. finitely assigned to them their respec- | P- 120, but comp. Eur. Suppl. 442), tive spheres of action; teaching and 801]. δεσπότης, αὐτοδίκης, Meeris; so preaching to men, ‘mental receptivity | Hesych., αὐθεντεῖν. éfovciagev, The and activity in family life to women, | substantive av@evria occurs 3 Mace. Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 147 | li. 29; see Suicer, Thesawr. Vol. I. p. (Bohn). What grave argumentsthese | 573, where verb, adj., and substantive few verses supply us with against some | are explained and illustrated. The of the unnatural and unscriptural immediate context shows that the theories of modern times. primary reference of the prohibition 12. διδάσκειν δέ] Opposition to | is to public ministration (Beng.) ; the μανθανέτω ver. 11, see critical note. | succeeding arguments, however, de- Διδάσκειν is emphatic as its po- | monstrate it to be also of universal sition shows; it does not, however, | application. On this subject see the follow, as the Montanists main- | brief but satisfactory remarks of Har- tained from 1 Cor. xiv. 5, that a wo- | less, Ethik, § 52, note, p. 279. man might προφητεύειν in public. | GAN εἶναι κ. τ. Χ.1 Inf. dependent on Every form of public address or teach- βούλομαι or some similar verb (not ing is clearly forbidden as at variance κελεύω which St. Paul does not use), with woman’s proper duties and desti- | to be supplied from οὐκ ἐπιτρέπω, so nation; see Neander, Planting, l.c. | 1 Cor. xiv. 34; comp. 1 Tim. iv. 3, note. Wolf cites Democrates, Sentent. | Herm. Soph. Llectr. 72. This form [ap. Gale, Script. Myth.] γυνὴ μὴ of brachylogy occurs most commonly ἀσκείτω λόγον, δεινὸν γάρ. in the case of an antithesis (as here), D2 90 Tos ἐπλάσθη. εἶτα Kia. 14 introduced by an adversative con- junction, Jelf, Gr. § 805. h. σιγᾶν τ Cor. Llc. corresponding to ἐν ἧσυχ. ver. ΤΙ. The antithesis between each clause of this, and of the preceding verse is very marked. f 13. ᾿Αδὰμ γάρ] First confirmation of the foregoing command, derived from the Creation. The argument from priority of creation, to be com- plete, requires the subsidiary state- ment in 1 Cor. xi, 9, οὐκ ἐκτίσθη ἀνὴρ διὰ τὴν γυναῖκα, ἀλλὰ γυνὴ διὰ τὸν ἄνδρα : comp. Est. The remarks of Reuss, Theol. Chret. Vol. τι. p. 210, note, are unguarded ; there is here no ‘dialectique Judiique,’ but a simple and direct declaration, under the in- fluence of the Holy Spirit, of the typical meaning of the order observed in the creatien of man and woman. ἐπλάσθη] Proper and specific word ; ἐκ γαίης πλάσσε, Hesiod Op. γ7ο: comp. also Rom. ix. 20, and esp. Gen. ii. 7, ἔπλασεν (7%) ὁ Θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον χοῦν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς : so Joseph. Antig. I: τ. τ. ; 14. καὶ ᾿Αδάμ] Second confirma- tion, deduced from the history of the fall: ‘docet Apostolusfeminas oportere esse viris subjectas, quia et posteriores sunt in ordine et priores in culp4,’ Primas., cited by Cornel. a Lap. in loc. οὐκ ἠπατήθη] There is no necessity whatever to supply πρῶτος, Theodoret, Gicum. 1. The emphasis rests on ἀπατᾶν. Adam was not directly deceived, Eve was; she says to God, ὁ ὄφις ἠπάτησέμε; he εἶναι ἐν hovy. = only says, αὕτη μοι ἔδωκεν ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου, καὶ ἔφαγον. We can hardly urge with Beng. ‘mulier virum non decepit sed ei persuasit, Gen. iii. 17,’ for it can scarcely be doubted that the woman did deceive the man (comp. ι TIMOTHY ὙΠ. τὰ. καὶ ᾿Αδὰμ οὐκ ἠπατήθη, ἡ δὲ Chrys.) being in fact, in her very per- suasions, the vehicle of the serpent’s de- ceit : it is, however, the first entrance of sin which the Apostle is specially regarding ; this came by means of the serpent’s ἀπάτη; Eve directly suc- cumbed to it (ἀπὸ yur. ἀρχὴ ἁμαρτίας, Ecclus. xxv. 24), Adam only indirectly and derivatively. Hence observe in Gen. iii. the order of the three parties in the promulgation of the sentence ; the serpent (ver. 13), woman (ver. I5), man (ver. 16). According to the Rabbinical writers (Schoettg. Hor. Vol. 1. p. 867), Eve was addressed, because it was very doubtful whether man would have yielded. ἐξαπατηθεῖσα)] ‘being completely, patently, deceived.’ This reading, which is supported by AD*FG; 17, al. (Lachm., Tisch.), seems to confirm the foregoing explanation. To pre- clude appy. any misconception of his meaning, the Apostle adds a strength- ened compound, which serves both to show that the moment of thought turns on ἀπατάω, and also to tacitly define the limitation of meaning under which itis used. The prep. ἐκ here conveys the idea of completion, thoroughness, Palm u. Rost, Lex. s.v. ἐκ, Vol. 1. p. 820. ‘H γυνὴ is here clearly ‘the wo- man,’i. e., Eve, not the sex generally (Chrysost.) The generic meaning comes out in the next verse: Eve was the typical representative of the race. ἐν παραβάσει γέγονεν] ‘became involved in trans- gression,’ ‘ fell into transgression; the constr. γίγνεσθαι ἐν occurs occasionally (but not ‘frequently,’ Huther) in the N.T. (e.g., ἐν ἀγωνίᾳ, Luke xxii. 44 ; ἐν ἐκστάσει, Acts xxii. 17; ἐν δόξῃ, 2 Cor. iii. 7; ἐν ὁμοιώματι, Phil. ii. 7; ἐν λόγῳ κολακείας, τ Thess. ii. 5) to denote the entrance into, and existence me ΠΠΌΤΗ ΠΣ 15. ais - ’ , , yur” ἐξαπατηθεῖσα εν παραβάσει γέγονεν» in, any givenstate. On the distinction between εἶναι (esse) and γίγνεσθαι (existere et evenire), see Fritz, Fritzsch. Opusc. p. 284, note. 15. σωθήσεται δέ] “ Yet she shall be saved,’ not merely ‘ eripietur e noxd ill4,’ Beng., but in its usual proper and scriptural sense, ‘ad vitam eternam perducetur ;) comp. Suicer, Thesaur. s.v., Vol. 1. p. 1206. The transla- tion of Peile (founded on the tense), ‘shall be found to have been saved,’ is somewhat artificial; see notes on Gal. ii. 16. The tense here only marks simple futurity. The nom. to σωθή- σεται is γυνή, in its generic sense; ov περὶ τῆς Εὔας ἔφη, ἀλλὰ περὶ τοῦ κοινοῦ τῆς φύσεως, Theod. This is confirmed by the use of the plural, ἐὰν μείνωσιν K.T.r., see below. διὰ τῆς texvoyovlas] ‘by means of THE child-bearing.’ Setting aside all un- tenable or doubtful interpretations of διὰ (‘in’ Beza, ‘cum’ Rosenm.) and texvoyovias (=Téxva, Syr.; τὸ κατὰ Θεὸν [τέκνα] ἀναγαγεῖν, Chrys., Fell ; comp. Stier, Red. Jes., Vol. UI. 13; ‘matrimonium,’ Heinsius), we have two explanations; (a) ‘by child-bear- ing ; by fulfilling her proper destiny and acquiescing in all the conditions of woman’s life, Beng., De Wette, Huther, al.; comp. Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 334 (Bohn): (8) ‘by the child-bearing,’ i. e., by the relation in which woman stood to the Messiah, in consequence of the primal prophecy that ‘her seed (not man’s) should bruise the serpent’s head,’ Gen. iii. 16, Hammond, Peile: ‘the peculiar func- tion of her sex (from its relation to her Saviour) shall be the medium of her salvation.’ This latter interpretation has few supporters, and is either slighted or passed over in silence by the German expositors ; when, how- 97 15 σωθήσεται ever, we consider its extreme appro- priateness, and the high probability that the Apostle in speaking of wo- man’s transgression, would not fail to specify the sustaining prophecy which even preceded her sentence ;—when we add to this the satisfactory meaning which διὰ thus bears,—the uncircum- scribed reference of σωθήσεται (contr. DeW.),—the force of the article (passed over by most expositors),—and, lastly, observe the coldness and jejuneness of (a), it seems difficult to avoid de- ciding in favour of (8): see the clear and satisfactory note of Hammond in loc. ἐὰν μείνωσιν scil. αἱ γυναῖκες, or rather 7 γυνὴ, taken in its collective sense; Winer, Gr. ὃ 47, I. a, p. 415, Blackwall, Sacr. Class. Vol. 1. p.85: anecessary limitation of the previous declaration ; ἡ Texvoy. of itself could effect nothing. The plural is referred by Chrysost., and Syr. (as shown by the masc. termination) to réxva: this is grammatically admissi- ble (see Winer, Gr., § 65. 7. obs., p. 648), but exegetically unsatisfactory. On the use of ἐὰν with subjunct. (ob- jective possibility ; ‘experience will show whether they will abide’), see Hermann, de Partic. dv, τι. 7, Ῥ. 97» and notes on Gal.i. 9. In applying these principles, however, it must always be remembered that in the N.T. the use of ἐὰν with subj. has nearly entirely absorbed that of εἰ with the opt. ; see Green, Gr. p. 53- ἐν πίστει καὶ dy.] On the union of these terms, and the omission, but of course virtual inclusion, of ἔλπις, com- pare Reuss, Theol. Chret. Iv. 22, Vol. 1. p. 259. Πίστις here appro- priately points, not to ‘ eheliche Treue,’ Huth., but to faith in the cardinal promise. καὶ ἁγιασμᾷ] ‘La sanctification est done 98 x TIMOTHY ΤΠ τὸ: tes. A A ~ ‘ , ’ , ‘ 9 , δὲ διὰ τῆς τεκνογονίας:- ἐὰν μεινῶσιν εν πίστει Και ayaTy Save “ Ν , και αγιασμῳ μετὰ σωφροσύνης. Qualifications of a bi- shop; he must be of III. Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος: εἴ τις ἐπισκοπῆς aT irreproachable morals, a good father of his family, and of good report. l'état normal du croyant, Rom. vi. 22, τ Thess. iv. 3 sq.;’ Reuss, Theol. Chret. Iv. τό, Vol. τι. p. 167. On σωφροσύνη, see notes on ver. 9. CuHaprer III. 1. πιστὸς ὁ λόγος] ‘Hac veluti prefatiuncula attentio- nemcaptat,’ Justin. Chrysostom refers this to what has preceded (comp. ch. iv. 9) ; the context, however, seems clearly to suggest that, as in ch. i. 15, the reference is to what follows. The reading ἀνθρώπινος (D and a few Lat. Vy.) is of course of no critical value (it is not even mentioned by Tisch.), but is interesting as seeming to hint at a Latin origin. In ch. i. 15, ‘hu- manus’ is found in a few Lat. Vv. (see Sabatier), where it was probably a reading, or rather gloss, ad sen- sum (hum. = benignus). From that passage it was ignorantly and un- suitably imported here into some Lat. Vy., and thence perhaps into the important Cod. Claromont. Charges of Latinisms (though by no means fully sustained), will be found in the Edinburgh Rev., No. CXCI.; see Tregelles, Printed Text of N.T., p. 199 sq. ἐπισκοπῆς) ‘office of a bishop.’ Without entering into any discussion upon the origin of epi- scopacy generally, it seems proper to remark that we must fairly acknow- ledge with Jerome (Epist. 73, ad Ocean. Vol. Iv. p. 648), that in the Pastoral epp. the terms ἐπίσκοπος and πρεσβύτερος are applied indifferently to the same persons, Pearson, Vind. . Ign. xi. p. 535 (Angl. Cath. Lib.), Thorndike, Gov. of Churches, 11. 3, Vol. 1. p. 9 (ib.). The first was bor- rowed from the Greeks (ol map” Αθηναίους els Tas ὑπηκόους models ἐπισκέψασθαι τὰ παρ᾽ ἐκάστοις πεμπόμενοι, Suidas s.v. ἐπίσκ., Dion. Hal. Antig. τι. 76, see Hooker, Zecl. Pol. vu. 2. 2, and exx. in Elsner, Obs. Vol. II. p. 293), and pointed to the office on the side . of its duties : the second, which marked primarily the age of the occupant, was taken from the Jews (Hammond, on Acts xi. 30), and pointed to the office on the side of its gravity and dignity, comp. I Pet. v.1; Neander, Planting, Vol. I. p. 143 (Bohn). While this cannot be denied, it may be fairly urged on the other hand (1), That the ἰσοδυναμία of the two words in the N.T. appears of this kind, that while πρεσβύτερος, conjointly with ἐπίσκο- mos, refers to what was subsequently the higher order, it is rarely used in the N.T. (comp. James v. 141) to specially denote what was subse- quently the lower; comp. Hammond Dissert. tv. 6, Vol. Iv. p. 799 sq. ; to which may be added that in the second century no one of the lower order was ever termed an ἐπίσκοπος, Pearson, Vind. Jgn. ch. XuI. 2, and (2), That there are indelible traces in the N.T. of an office (by whatever name called, ἄγγελος x.7.d.) which, possibly, first arising from a simple προεδρία of a board of πρεσβύτεροι (comp. Jerome on Tit. i. 5, Vol. Iv. p. 413, ed. Ben.) grew under Apostolic sanction and by Apostolic institution into that of a single definite rulership ‘ overa whole body ecclesiastical ;’ see esp. Blunt, Sketch of the Church, Serm. 1. p. 7 sq.; and comp. Saravia, de Divers. Grad, ch. x. p. 11 sq. We may conclude by observing that the subse- quent official distinction between the ΤΥ ΕΠΕΕΥ TRE) Ὑ, 5. ’ ’ a oS 5 - ὀρέγεται, καλοῦ ἔργου ἐπιθυμεῖ. 99 2 a > ᾿ > of δεῖ OUVY TOV εἐπισκοῖτον 5) , > ΄“ " Ν» U , ἀνεπιλήμπτον εἶναι, μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα, νηφαλιον, σω- two orders (traces of which may be ob- served in these epp.) has nowhere been stated more ably than by Bp. Bilson, as consisting in two preroga- tives of the bishop, ‘singularity in succeeding, and superiority in ordain- ing,’ Perpet. Gov. XII. p. 334 Βα. (Oxf. 1842). Of the many treatises written on the whole subject, this latter work may be especially recom- mended to the student. Bilson is, indeed, as Pearson (Vind. Ign. ch. Ill.) truly says, ‘ vir magni in ecclesia nominis.’ ὀρέγεται) ‘seeketh after ; there is no idea of ‘ ambitious seeking’ couched in this word, De W. ; it seems only to denote the definite character, and perhaps manifestation, of the desire, the ‘stretching out of the hands to receive,’ whether in a good (Heb. xi. 16), or in a bad (ch. vi. 10) application ; comp. Wieseler, Chronol. p- 301, note. ἔργου] ‘work,’ not ‘ bonam rem,’ Castal., but defi- nitely ‘ function,’ ‘occupation,’ comp. 2 Tim. iv. 5, and see notes on Eph. iv. 12. 2. οὖν] “ then,’ continuative, Donalds. Gi. ὃ 604. The proper col- lective sense of this particle (Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 717) may, however, be clearly traced in the reference to the foregoing words, καλοῦ ἔργου: so acutely Bengel, ‘bonum negotium bonis committendum.’ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον] ‘every bishop’ or (ac- cording to our idiom) ‘a bishop ;’ the articleis not due somuch tothe implica- tion of ἐπίσκ. in ἐπισκοπῆς, ver. 1 (Green, Gr. p. 140), as to the generic way in which the subject is presented ; comp. Middleton, Art. 111. 2. 1, notes on Gal. iii. 20. Huther here calls attention to two facts in relation to ἐπίσκ. (1), That except here and Tit. i. 7, St. Paul only uses the term once, Phil. i. 1; we ought perhaps to add Acts xx. 28 ; (2), That the singu- lar is used here, and still more notice- ably in Tit. 1. 6. where πρεσβύτεροι had just preceded. Of these two points (1) seems referrible to the later date, as well as the different subject of these epp. ; (2) to the desire of the Apostle to give his instructions their broadest application by this generic use of the article. ἀνεπί- λημπτον] ‘irreproachable ;’ ἄμεμπτον, ἀκατάγνωστον, Hesych. There seems no authority for the assertion of Bloomf. (quoted by Peile), that ἀνεπίλ. is ‘an agonistic term ;’ it appears only used in an ethical sense, as ‘ qui nullum in agendo locum dat reprehen- sionis,’ Tittm., μὴ παρέχων κατηγορίας ἀφορμήν, Schol. Thucyd. v. 17, and differs from ἄμεμπτος as implying not ‘qui non reprehenditur,’ but ‘qui non dignus est reprehensione, etiamsi reprehendatur,’ Tittm. Synon. I. p. 30. Hence its union with ἄσπιλος, ch. vi. 14, and with καθαρός, Lucian, Pisce. 8; comp. Polyb. Hist. xxx. 7. 6, where, however, the sense seems simply privative: see further exx. in Elsner, and Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα] These much contested words have been explained in three ways ; (a) in reference to any deviation from morality in respect of marriage ; ‘whether by concubinage, polygamy, or improper second mar- riages’ [comp. 1 Cor. vii. 2], Matthies ; so appy. Theodoret, τὸν μιᾷ μόνῃ γυναικὶ συνοικοῦντα σωφρόνως ; (b) con- temporancous polygamy, which at that time still seems to have prevailed among the Jews, Joseph. Ant. XVII. I. 2, πάτριον yap ἐν ταὐτῷ πλειόσιν ἡμῖν συνοικεῖν ; Justin Mart., Trypho, 40 φρονα, κόσμιον, φιλόξενον, διδακτικόν, § 134: so Calv., Beng. ἃ]. : (οὐ suc- cessive polygamy, whether (a) speci- ally, after divorce, Hamm., Suicer (Thesaur. s.v. Svyaula); or (8) gene- rally, after loss of first wife, however happening, Fell, and appy. Huth., Wiesing, al. Of these (a) is clearly too undefitied ; (Ὁ) is in opposition to the corresponding expression in ch. v. 9; (c, a) is plausible, but when we consider the unrestrictedness of the formula,—the opinions of the most ancient writers (Hermas, Past. Mand. Iv., Tertull. de Monogam. xi1., Athe- nagoras, Legat. p. 37, ed. Morell, 1636, Origen, in Lucam, xvu., Vol. V. p. 157, ed. Lommatzsch ; see Heydenr. p- 166 sq., Coteler’s note on Herm. 1. c.),—the decisions of some councils, e.g. Neoces. (4.D. 314) Can. 3, 7, and the guarded language of even Laod. (A.D. 3637) Can. 1,—the hint afforded by paganism in the case of the wo- man (‘ wnivira’),—and lastly, the pro- priety in the particular cases of ἐπί- σκοποι and διάκονοι (ver. 8) of a greater temperance (mox νηφάλιον, σώφρονα) and a manifestation of that περὶ τὸν ἕνα “γάμον σεμνότης (Clem. Alexandr. Strom. mt. 1, Vol. 1. p. 511, Potter), which is not unnoticed in Scripture (Luke ii. 36, 37), we decide in favour of (c, 8), and consider the Apostle to declare the contraction of a second marriage to be a disqualification for the office of an ἐπίσκοπος, or διάκονος. The position of Bretschn., that the text implies a bishop should be mar- ried (so Maurice, Unity, p. 632), does not deserve the confutation of Winer, Gr. ὃ 17. 4, p- 126, note. ; νηφάλιον] ‘sober,’ either in a meta- phorical sense (σώφρων, Suidas) -as the associated epithets and the use of νήφω in good Greek (e. g. Xenoph. Conviv. viii, 21) will certainly war- ιν PIMOVIAY ὙΠ τυ... | , 3 μὴ Tapowvor, rant, or perhaps more probably (as μή mdpowos, ver. 3, is not a mere synonym, see notes) in its usual and literal meaning. Νήφειν, indeed (γρηγορεῖν, σωφρονεῖν βίῳ Hesych.) occurs six times in the N.T., 1 Thess. v. 6, 8, a Timo iy. Ὁ, Ὁ bebe τῷ ἵν ὦ wees and in all, except perhaps 1 Thess. l.c., is used metaphorically ; as how- ever the adj. both in ver. ΤΙ (see notes) and appy. Tit. ii. 2 is used in its literal meaning, it seems better to preserve that meaning in the present case; so De W., but doubtfully, for see ib. on Tit. l.c.- Under any cir- cumstances the derivative transl. ‘vigi- lant,’ Auth. Ver., διεγηγερμένος, Theo- doret, though possibly defensible in the verb (see Etym. M. s.v. νήφεων), is needlessly and doubtfully wide of the primary meaning; on the deriva- tion see notes on 2 Tim. iv. 5. σώφρονα, κόσμιον] ‘ sober-minded or discreet, orderly. The second epithet here points to the outward exhibition of the inward virtue implied in the first, ὥστε καὶ διὰ τοῦ σώματος φαίνεσθαι τὴν τῆς ψυχῆς σωφροσύνην, Theodoret: see notes on ch. ii.9. On φιλόξενον, see notes on Tit.-i. 8. διδακτικόν] ‘apt to teach,’ Auth. Ver., “lehrhaftig,’ Luther ; not only ‘ableto teach’ (Theod.), comp. Tit. 1. 9, but in accordance with the connexion ‘in 2 Tim. ii. 24, ‘ready to teach,’ Q v ‘skilled in teaching,’ BENS [dector] Syr.; τὸ δὲ μαλίστα χαρακτήριζον τὸν ἐπίσκοπον τὸ διδάσκειν ἐστίν, Theo- phyl. ; see Suicer, Thesaur. s-v., Vol. 1. Ῥ. 900, comp. Hofmann, Schriftb., Vol. 1. 2, p. 253. On the qualitative termination ~xés, see Donalds. Cratyl. ὃ 254, Ρ. 422. 3. πάροινον] ‘ violent over wine,’ Tit. i. 7; not simply synonymous eo ΤΕΥ ὙΠ 4; μὴ πλήκτην, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιεικῆ, ἄμαχον. ἀφιλάργυρον, 41 4 ποῦ fod ” a o , , x ᾽ « “ ἐθιου οἰκου καλῶς προιστάαμενον. TEKVA εχοόοντα εν ὑποταγὴ with φίλοινον or with οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσέχοντα, ch. iii. 8 (Ziegler, de Epise. p- 350), but including drunkenness and its manifestations : so appy. Syr. Ἰδοῦ WS aby Ἧς [‘a transgressor over wine,’ Etheridge, not ‘sectator vini,’ Schaaf. ; see Michaelis in Cast. Lex., and comp. Heb. x. 28]; comp. Chrys., τὸν ὑβριστήν, τὸν αὐθάδη, who, however, puts too much out of sight the origin, οἶνος : comp. παροίνιος Arist. Acharn. 981, and the copious lists of exx. in Krebs, Obs. p. 352, Loesner, Obs. p. 396. The simple state is marked by μέθυσος (1 Cor. v. ΤΙ, Vi. 10), the exhibitions of it by mdpowos ; τὸ παροινεῖν ἐκ τοῦ μεθύειν γίγνεται, Athen. x. § 62, p. 444. πλήκτην] ‘a striker,’ Tit. τ. 7; one of the specific exhibitions of παροινία. Chrysost. and Theodoret (comp. also Kypke, Obs. Vol. 1. p. 356) give this word too wide a reference (πλήττειν τῶν ἀδελφῶν τὴν συνείδησιν). Its connection both here and Tit. 1. ὁ. certainly seems to suggest the simple and strict meaning; see Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 11. p. 751, where both meanings are noticed. ἐπιεικῆ, ἄμαχον] ‘ forbearing, not con- tentious,’ Tit. iii, 2, but in a reversed order; generic opposites to the two preceding terms. The force of ἐπιεικὴς is here illustrated by the as- sociated adj. ; the duaxos is the man who is not aggressive (Beng. on Tt. l.c.) or pugnacious, who does not con- tend ; the ἐπεικὴς goes further, and is not only passively non-contentious, but actively considerate and forbear- ing, waving even just legal redress, ἐλαττωτικὸς καίπερ ἔχων τὸν νόμον βοηθόν, Aristot. Nicomach. Eth. v. 14. The latter word is also illustrated by Trench, Synon. 43, but the result is vitiated by the doubly erroneous derivation ‘from elkw, ἔοικα, cedo’ (sic). ἀφιλάργυρον] ‘not a lover of money ;’ ouly here and Heb. xiii. 5. This epithet is not under the vinculum of ἀλλά, but is co- ordinate with the first two negatived predicates, and perhaps has a retro- spective reference to φιλόξενον (Theo- phyl.). On the distinction between φιλαργυρία (‘avarice’) and πλεονεξία (‘covetousness’), see Trench, Synon. § 24. 4. ἰδίου] ‘his own,’ emphatic, and in prospective antithesis to Θεοῦ, ver. 5. On the use of téos in the N. T., see notes on Eph. v. 22, and on its derivation (from pronoun ἔ) comp. Donalds. Cratyl. § 139, 152. ἐν ὑποταγῇ is not to be connected closely with ἔχοντα (Matth.), but appended to ἔχοντα τέκνα, and is thus a kind of adjectival clause specifying the moral sphere in which they were to move ; see Tit. i. 6, comp. 1 Tim. ii. 9, Matth. vi. 29 al. had been used, though the meaning would have been nearly the same, the idea presented to the mind would have been different: in the one case ὑποταγὴ would have been noticed as a simple attribute, in the present case it is represented as the moral element with which they were surrounded. The transition from actual (Luke, vii. 25), to figurative environment (Matth. l.c.) and thence to deportment (ch. ii. 9), or, as here, to moral conditions seems easy and natural. μετὰ πάσης «.7.A.] Closely con- nected with ὑποταγῇ, specifying the attendant grace with which their obedience was to be accompanied ; see notes on ch. ii. 2. If ὑπότακτα 42 A , μετὰ πάσης σεμνότητος, 1 TIMOTHY IIL. 4—6. 5 (εἰ δέ τις τοῦ ἰδίου οἴκου προστῆναι οὐκ οἶδεν, πῶς ἐκκλησίας Θεοῦ ἐπιμελήσεται 3) ‘ , “ A 4 = - μη νεόφυτον, ἵνα μὴ τυφωθεὶς εἰς κρῖμα ἐμπέση τοῦ δια- 5. εἰ... οὐκ οἶδε] Τῦ is perhaps scarcely necessary to remark that there is here no irregularity ; ‘od arctissime conjungi cum verbo [not always necessarily a verb, compare Scheefer, Demosth. Vol. m1. p. 288] debet, ita ut hoc verbo conjunctum unam notionem constituat, cujusmodi est οὐκ olda nescio,’ Herm. Viger. No. 309. This seems more simple than to refer it here, with Green, (G7. p- 119) to any especial gravity or earnestness of tone. The use of εἰ οὐ in the N. T. is noticeably frequent ; see exx. in Winer, Gir. ὃ 59. 6, p. 568 sq., and fora copious list of exx., prin- cipally from later writers, Gayler, Part. Neg. V. p. 99 56. δέ] The reasonableness and justice of the re- quisition, τοῦ ἰδίου «.7.d., is paren- thetically confirmed by an adversative clause ; Winer, Gr. ὃ 57, 8, p. 531. The argument, as Huther observes, is ‘a minori ad majus.’ ἔπιμελήσεται) ‘can he take charge :’ ethical future, involving the notion of ‘ability,’ ‘ possibility ; πῶς δυνήσεται, Chrysost. ; see Winer, Gr. ὃ 41. 6, Ῥ. 323, Thiersch, de Pent. 11. 11 ἃ, Ῥ. 159, and notes on Gal, ii. 5. Similar uses of ἐπιμελεῖσθαι, ‘curam gerere,’ scil. ‘saluti alicujus prospi- cere,’ Bretschn. (comp. Luke, x. 35), are cited by Raphel in Joc. 6. μὴ νεόφυτον] ‘not a recent con- vert’ (τὸν νεοκατήχητον, Chrys., τὸν εὐθὺς πεπιστευκότα, Theod.), rendered somewhat paraphrastically in Syr. ~ oO a om, ScsoZ ly [‘puer discipulatu suo’ 7: the word is copiously illustrated by Suicer, Zhesawr., Vol. 11. p. 394. This and the following qualification are notspecified in the parallel passage, Tit. | or (δὴ) gen, objecti, | i. 6 sq.: there is, however, surely no reason for drawing from the present restriction any unfavourable inferences against the authenticity of this ep. ; comp. Schleierm. iiber 1 Tim. p. 46. If the later date of the ep. be ad- mitted, Christianity would have been - long enough established at Ephesus to make such a regulation natural and easy to be complied with: see Wiesing. in loc. tupwbels] ‘ besotted, or clouded, with pride ; only here, ch. vi. 4, and 2 Tim. iii. 4. Both the derivation (ΘΥπ-, τύφω, Benfey, Vol. II. p. 275, less probably τυφώς, Harpocr. 175. 16) and the combinations in which τυφόω is used (6. g. Polyb. Hist. Ill, 81. 1, ἀγνοεῖ καὶ τετύφωται ; sim. Demosth. Fals. Leg. 409, μαίνομαι καὶ τετύφωμαι; ib, Phil. m1. 116, ληρεῖν καὶ τετυφῶσθαι; Lucian, Nigrin. τ, ἀνοήτου τὲ καὶ τετυφωμένου, Kc.) seem to show that the idea of a ‘beclouded’ and ‘stupid’ state of mind must be associated with that of pride ; obmwubi- lation, however produced, seems the primary notion, that produced by pride or vanity (κενοδοξήσας, Syn. Hier.) the more usual application : so Hesychius τύφος" ddafovia, ἔπαρσις, κενοδοξία ; comp. Philo, Migr. Abrah. § 24, Vol. I. p. 457 (ed. Mang.), τύφου καὶ ἀπαιδευσίας καὶ ἀλαζονίας γέμοντες. κρῖμα τοῦ διαβόλου ‘judgment of the devil. The meaning of these words is somewhat doubtful. As κρῖμα, though never per se anything else than judicium, will stiltadmit of some modification in meaning from the context (comp. Fritz. Rom. ii. 3. Vol. I. p. 94), διαβόλου may be either (a) gen. subjecti, ‘the accusing judg- ment of the devil’ (Matth., Huther) ; ‘the judgment 1 TIMOTHY ΤῊΝ: 6—8. βόλου. 45 7 det δὲ καὶ μαρτυρίαν καλὴν ἔχειν ἀπὸ τῶν ἔξωθεν, A ‘ A “ ἵνα μὴ εἰς ὀνειδισμὸν ἐμπέση καὶ παγίδα τοῦ διαβόλου. The deacons must also be similarly irreproach- 8 Διακόνους ὡσαύτως σεμνούς, μὴ διλό- able, and of good report; the deaconesses too must be faithful. passed upon the devil.’ In the former case κρῖμα has more the meaning of ‘criminatio’ (Beza), in the latter of ‘condemnatio’ (Coray, al.). As the gen. διαβόλου in the next verse is clearly subjecti, interpr. (a) is cer- tainly very plausible. Stillas there is no satisfactory instance of an approach to that meaning in the N. T.—as κρῖμα seems naturally to point to God (Rom. ii. 2),—as it is elsewhere found only with a gen. objecti (Rom. iii. 8, Rev. xvii. 1; xviii. 20 is a peculiar use),—and as the position of τοῦ διαβ. does not seem here to imply so close a union between the substantives as in ver. 7, we decide, with Chrys. and nearly all the ancient interpreters in favour of (b), or the gen. objecti. Matthies urges against this the excess of lapse which would thus be implied ; the force of the allusion must, how- ever, be looked for, not in the extent of the fall, but in the similarity of the circumstances : the devil was once a ministering spirit of God, but by in- sensate pride fell from his hierarchy : comp. Jude 9, and Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. διάβ., Vol. 1. p. 851. On the meaning and use of διάβ, see notes on Lph., iv. 27 ; the translation ‘ calum- niatoris,’ Grinf. al., is not consistent with its use in the N. T. 7. ϑὲ καί] ‘But, instead of being a νεόφυτος, one of whose behaviour in his new faith little can be known, he must have a good testimony (not only from those within the Church, but) also from those without.’ ἀπὸ. τῶν ἔξωθεν] ‘ from those without ; the prep. certainly does not imply ‘among,’ Conyb. and Hows., but marks correctly the source from which the testimony emanates: on the dis- tinction between ἀπὸ and παρά, esp. with verbs of ‘receiving,’ see Winer, Gr. ὃ 51a, p. 443, note. Οἱ ἔξωθεν (in other places οἱ ἔξω, 1 Cor. v. 12, 13, Col. iv. 5, 1 Thess. iv. 12), like the Jewish mz, is the regular desig- nation for all not Christians, all those who were not οἰκεῖοι τῆς πίστεως, see Kypke, Obs. Vol. 11. p. 198, and the Rabbinical citations in Schoettg. Hor. (on Cor. l.c.) Vol. τ. p. 600. ὀνειδισμὸν «.t.A.} ‘The omission of the prep. before παγίδα is certainly an argument in favour of joining ὀνειδ. with τοῦ διαβόλου (De Wette). The isolated position, however, of ὀνειδ. and the connection of thought in ch. v. I4, 15, seem in favour of dved. being taken absolutely; ‘the re- proachful comments and judgment,’ whether of those without (Chrys.) or within the Church. On the termina- tion —(c)os (action of the verb pro- ceeding from the subject) and its pre- valence in later Greek, see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 511 ; comp. Donalds. Cra- tyl. § 253, p. 420. The expression, παγὶς τοῦ diaf. occurs again 2 Tim. ii. 26; so similarly τ Tim. vi. g: it is added to ὀνειδ. not epexegetically (τὸ els σκάνδαλον προκεῖσθαι πολλῶν παγίς ἐστι dia8., Theophyl.), but rather as marking the temptations that will be sure to follow the loss of character ; ‘quid spei restat ubi nullus est pec- candi pudor?’ Caly. 8. διακόνους] ‘deacons :’ only used again by St. Paul in this special sense Phil. i. 1, and (fem.) Rom. xvi. I, though appy. alluded to Rom. xii. 7, 1 Cor. xii. 28, and perhaps 1 Pet. iv. 11. The office of διάκονος (διήκω, 44 ΘΊΉΈΜΘΥΝΜΥ 5.10. Yous, μὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσέχοντας, μὴ αἰσχροκερδεῖς, la ‘ ~ , ᾿ς ΄ fs 9 ἔχοντας TO μυστήριον τῆς πίστεως ἐν καθαρᾷ συνειδήσει. Buttm. Lewil. § 40), originally that of an almoner of the Church (Acts, vi. I sq.), gradually developed into that of an assistant (ἀντιλήψεις, τ Cor. L.c.) and subordinate to the presbyters (Rothe, Anfénge, § 23, p. 166 sq.): their fundamental employment, how- ever, still remained to them; hence the appropriateness of the caution, μὴ aloxpoxepdets, Neander, Planting, Vol. I. p. 34 8q. (Bohn). On the duties of the office, see esp. Bingham, Antigq. Book 11. 20. 1 sq., Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. Vol. 1. p. 869 sq., and Thomassin, Discipl. Eccl. Part τ. 2. 29 sq. ὡσαύτως) ‘in like manner,’ as the foregoing class included in the τὸν ἐπίσκοπον, ver. 2: it was not to be ὡς ἑτέρως (Arist. Llench. Soph. 7) in any of the necessary qualifications for the office of a deacon, but ὡσαύτως as in the case of the bishops. διλόγους] ‘double-tongued,’ Auth. Ver. ; ‘speaking doubly,’ Syr.: ἅπαξ λεγόμ. ; mentioned in Poll. Onomast. 11. 118. The meaning is rightly given by Theodoret, ἕτερα μὲν τούτῳ ἕτερα δὲ ἐκείνῳ λέγοντες. Grinfield (Schol. Hell.) compares δίγλωσσος, Prov. xi. 13, Barnab. Epist. § 19 ; add διχόμυθος Eurip. Orest. 890. T poo eX ov- τας] ‘giving (themselves) up to ;’ προσ- éxew thus used is more commonlyfound with abstract nouns, e.g. ἀναγνώσει, ch. iv. £3, δικαιοσύνῃ, Job xxvii. 6. Here, however, οἶνος πολὺς (and so probably θυσιαστήριον, Heb. vii. 13, comp. θάλασσα, Plut. Thes. 17) ap- proaches somewhat to the nature of an abstract noun. This verb is only used in the Pastoral epp. aloxpokepdeis] ‘greedy of base gains ;’ only here and Tit. i. 7. The adverb occurs 1 Pet. v.2. Asinall these cases the term is in connection with an office in the Church, it seems most natural (with Huther) to refer it not to gains from unclean (comp. Syr.) or disgrace- ful actions (Theodor.), but to dis- honesty with the alms of the Church or any abuse of their spiritual office for purposes of gain, comp. Tit. i. rr. 9. ἔχοντας) ‘having,’ or (in the common ethical sense, Crabb, Synon. Ρ. 252, ed. 1826) ‘holding,’ Auth. Ver., ‘behaltend,’ De Wette: not for κατέχοντας, Grot., a meaning more strong than the context requires and the use of the simple form will jus- tify; see notes on ch. i. 19. The emphasis falls on ἐν καθ. cuvecd., not on the participle. τὸ μυστ. τῆς πίστεως) ‘the mystery of the faith.’ Owing to the different shades of meaning which μυστήριον bears, the genitive in connection with it does not always admit the same expla- nation ; see notes on Eph. i. 9, iii. 4, vi. 19. Here πίστεως is appy. a pure possessive gen. ; it was not merely that about which the pvor. turned (gen. objecti, Eph. i. 9), nor the subject of it (gen. of content ; this would tend to give πίστις an objective meaning, comp. exx, in Bernhardy, Synt. 11. 44. p. 161), nor exactly the substance of the μυστ. (gen. materia, Eph. iii. 5), but rather that to which the μυστήριον appertained: the truth, hitherto not comprehensible, but now revealed to man, was the property, object, of faith, that on which faith exercised itself. So very similarly ver. 16, τὸ μυστ. τῆς εὐσεβείας, ‘the mystery which belonged to, was the object contemplated by, godliness ; the hidden truth which was the basis of all practical piety :’ See Tittm. Synon. I. p. 147, and comp. Reuss, ἡ Theol. Iv. 9, Vol, τι. p. 89. Πίστις is ΜΟΥ ΠΡ ΤΟΣ τι. 45 Io Δ » δὲ ὃ , θ - > 3 , και OUTOL O€ οκιμαζέσ ωσαν TPWTOV, elTa taKOVELTWO AY, ο» , » ἀνεγκλητοι ὄντες. faith considered subjectively ; not ob- jective faith (‘doctrina fidei’), a very doubtful meaning in the N. T.: see notes on Gal. i. 24. On the meaning of μυστήριον, see Saunderson, Serm. 9 (ad Aul.), Vol. 1. p. 227 (Jacobs), and the notes on Eph. v. 32. ἐν καθαρᾷ συνειδ.] Emphatic; defining the ‘ratio habendi,’ and in close con- nection with the participle: the καθαρὰ συνείδ. was to be, as it were, the ensphering principle, see 2 Tim. i. 13. On cuvel5. see notes on ch. i. 5. 10. καὶ οὗτοι δέ] ‘And these also ; ‘and these moreover ; comp. 2 Tim. iii. 12, καὶ πάντες δὲ of θέλοντες k.T.X. These words. (appy. not clearly under- stood by Huther) admit only of one single explanation. In the formula καὶ --δέ, like the Latin ‘et—-vero,’ or the ‘et—autem’ of Plautus (see Hand. Twursell. Vol. 1. p. 588), while each particle retains its proper force, both together often have ‘ notionis quandam consociationem ;’ see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 1. p. 645. Thus while kalis copulative or ascensive, and δὲ adversative, the union of the two fre- quently causes δὲ to revert from its more marked, to its primary and less marked, adversative force, ‘in the second place’ (comp. Donalds. Cratyl. § 155. p. 256), so that the whole for- mula has more of an adjunctive cha- racter, and only retains enough of a faint retrospective opposition to more sharply define, expand, or strengthen, the tenor of the preceding words. Speaking roughly we might say, "καὶ conjungit, δὲ intendit ;’ the true rationale, however, of the construction is best seen when μὲν is found in the preceding clause, e.g. Xenoph. Cyrop. VII. 1. 30, compare Acts, 111. 22, 24. The formula then may be translated - e , , iT yuvaikas ὡσαύτως σεμνάς, μὴ διαβό- with sufficient accuracy, ‘ and—also,’ ‘and—too,’ the translation slightly varying according as the copulative or ascensive force of καὶ is most pre- dominant. In Homer καὶ δὲ is found united, in subsequent writers one or more words are interpolated ; Hartung, Partik. δέ, 5. 2, 3, Vol. 1. p. 181 sq., see also Liicke on τ John, i. 3, and comp. Matth. Gr. ὃ 616. St. Paul’s use of it is not confined to these epp. (Huther), for see Rom. xi. 23. It is used indeed by every writer in the N. T. except St. James and St. Jude, principally by St. Luke and St. John, the latter of whom always uses it with emphasis ; in several instances, how- ever (e.g. Luke, x. 8, John, vi. 51), owing probably to ignorance of its true meaning, MSS. of some authority omit δέ, δοκιμαζέσθωσαν] ‘let them be proved,’ not, formally, by Tim. or the elderhood (De W. com- pares Constit. Apost. vim. 4), but generally by the community at large among which they were to minister. The qualifications were principally of a character that could be recognised without any formal investigation. ἀνέγκλητοι bytes] ‘being wnaccused,’ ‘having no charge laid against them ἢ i.e. provided they are found so ; con- dition under which they were to under- take the duties of the office. The trans- lation of participles (as has frequently been observed) must be modified ac- cording to the context: see Winer, Gr. § 46. 12. p. 413. On the distinction between ἀνέγκλητος (‘qui non accu- satus est’) and ἀνεπίληπτος (‘in quo nulla justa causa sit reprehensionis’), see Tittm. Synon. I. p. 31, and comp. Tit. i. 6. TI. γυναῖκας ὡσαύτως) ‘women in like manner when engaged in the 40 1 TIMOTHY , 4 λους, νηφαλίους, πιστὰς ἐν πᾶσιν. Il. ττ----18. , »” 12 διάκονοι ἔστωσαν Cr 4 * , ~ eo , 4 ~ μιας γυναικος ἄνδρες, TEKVMV καλῶς προιστάμενοι καὶ τῶν δ x LOL@Y OLKWYV. same office.’ It is somewhat difficult to decide whether, with the Greek commentators, we are here to under- stand by γυναῖκας (a) wives of the deacons, Auth. Ver., Coray, Huth., and as dependent in structure on ἔχοντας, Beng.; or (b) deaconesses proper, γυναῖκες being used rather than διάκονοι (fem.), Rom. xvi. 1, to prevent confusion with masc. The other possible interpr. ‘wives of dea- cons and émick.’ (Beza, Wieseler, Chronol. p. 309) does not suit the context, which turns only on διάκονοι ; obs. ver. 12. Huther defends (a) on the ground that in one part of the deacon’s office (care of sick and destitute) their wives might be fittingly associated with them; this is plausi- ble; when, however, we observe the difference of class to which ὡσαύτως seems to point (ver. 8, ch. ii. 9, Tit. i. 3. 6),—the omission of airay,—the order and parallelism of qualifications in ver. 8. and 11, coupled with the suitable change of διλόγους to διαβό- λους, and the substitution of πιστὰς ἐν πᾶσιν for the more specific aloxpok. (deaconesses were probably almoners, Coteler, Const. Apost. 111. 15, but in a much less degree),—the absence of any notice of the wives of érleKomor,— and lastly the omission of any special notice of domestic duties, though it follows (ver. 12) in the case of the men, we can scarcely avoid deciding (with Chrys.) that (Ὁ) ‘ diaconisse’ are here alluded to. On the duties of the office, see Bingham, Antiq. 11. 22, 8 sq., Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. duax. Vol. 1. p. 864, Herzog, Real-Encycl. s.v. Vol. mi. p. 368, and the special treatise of Ziegler, de Diacon. et Diaconiss. Witeb. 1678. 13 of yap καλῶς διακονήσαντες βαθμὸν ἑαυ- διαβόλους] ‘slanderous,’ ‘traducers ,᾽ καταλάλους, Theophyl.; only in the Pastoral epp.: twice in reference to women, here and Tit. ii. 3; once in ref. to men, 2 Tim. iii. 3: see the good article on the word in Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. 1. p. 848 sq. ᾿ νηφαλίους κ. τ. Δ. ‘sober, faithful in all things. The evident parallelism between the qualifications in ver. 8. and the present, seem to imply that νηφάλ. has its literal meaning ; see notes on ver. 2. The last quali- fication, πίστας ἐν πᾶσιν, is stated very generally ; it does not, of course, preclude a ref. to domestic calls and cares (see Huther), but it certainly seems far more applicable to ecclesi- astical duties. 12. διάκονοι κ. τ.λ.1 Exactly the same qualifications in respect of their domestic relations required in the διάκονοι as in the ἐπίσκοπος : see notes on ver. 4. 13. γάρ] The importance of the office is a sufficient warrant for the reasonableness of the preceding requi- βαθμὸν καλόν] ‘a good degree, Auth. Ver. Βαθμός an dr. λεγόμ. in N.T. (not an Ionic form of βασμός, Mack., but the very re- verse: comp. ἀριθμός, ἀρθμός, and Donalds. Cratyl. § 253), has received three different explanations ; either (a) ‘an (ecclesiastical) step,’ in reference to an advance to a higher spiritual office, A&th., Jerome, and appy. Chrys. al. ; (b) ‘a post,’ in reference to the honour- able position a deacon occupied in the Church, Matth., Huther; (c) ‘a de- gree,’ in reference to the judgment of God, and to their reward ἐν τῷ μέλ- λοντι βίῳ, Theod., De Wette al. Of? these (a) appears, on exegetical sitions. ΤΥΡΙΜΟΤΗΥ ΠῚ» Ὁ9.. 14. 47 a A cal 4 A 9e ’ 9 tA τοῖς καλὸν περιποιοῦνται καὶ πολλὴν Tappyciav ev πίστει τῇ ev Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. I write this to guide th conduct in the chure ™%4 Tatra σοι γράφω, ἐλπίζων ἐλθεῖν of the living God; verily great is the mystery of godliness. grounds, clearly untenable ; for surely such a ground of encouragement as ecclesiastical promotion (were this even historically demonstrable, which ap- pears not the case in the first two centuries) seems strangely out of place in St. Paul's mouth, and preserves no harmony with the subsequent words. Against (Ὁ) the aor. d:axor. is not fairly conclusive, as it may admit a reference not necessarily to a remote, but to an immediate past ; the περιποίησις of a good position would naturally ensue after some discharge of the διακονία. The associated clause, however, and the use of the term παῤῥησία, especially with its modal adjunct ἐν πίστει κι τ. \., both seem so little in harmony with this ecclesiastical reference, while on the other hand they point so very naturally to the position of the Chris- tian with respect to God (see notes on Eph. iii. 12, and comp. Heb. iv. 16, 1 John ii. 28, iii. 21), and derive so very plausible a support from the appy. parallel passage, ch. vi. 19, that we decide somewhat unhesitatingly in favour of (c), and refer Ba@uds to the step or degree which a faithful dis- charge of the διακονία would acquire in the eyes of God. περιποιοῦνται ἑαυτοῖς) ‘ acquire, ob- tain for themselves,’ only here and Acts xx. 28 (a speech of St. Paul’s) ; compare also 1 Thess. v. 9, περιποίησιν σωτηρίας, which seems indirectly to yield considerable support to the fore- going interpretation of βαθμόν. For exx, of the reflexive pronoun with middle verbs, see Winer, Gr. ὃ 39. 6, p- 298. The insertion here perhaps makes the personal reference a little more certain and definite: the duties of the deacon had commonly reference to others. παῤῥησίαν] Properly ‘openness’ (Mark viii. 32, abl., and frequently in St. John), and thence ‘freedom—boldness (Acts iv. 13) of speech ;’ derivatively, that ‘con- fidence and boldness of spirit’ (ἄδεια, Suidas), with which the believer is permitted and encouraged (Heb. iv. 16) to approach his heavenly Father ; 1 John ii. 28, iii. 21, &c. The use of παῤῥ. in reference to the final reward, is clearly evinced in 1 John iv. 17. Huther urges that this derivative meaning always arises from, and is marked by, its concomitants, πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, 1 John iii. 21, &e. Here ἐν πίστει κι τ. Ὰ. does seem such an ad- junct ; at any rate, 2 Cor. vii. 4 (ad- duced by Huther), where there is no similar addition, cannot plausibly be compared with the present case: see De Wette in loc., whose note on this passage is full and explicit. ἐν πίστει κιτ.λ.7 ‘in faith which is in Christ J.’ By the insertion of the ar- ticle (2 Tim. i. 13, iii. 15), two moments of thought are expressed, the latter of which explains and enhances the former: ‘in fide (πίστις was the foun- dation, substratum, of the παῤῥ.) edque in Chr, Jes. collocata,’see Fritz. Rom. iii. 25, Vol. 1. p. 195. The article is not uncommonly omitted (Gal. iii. 26, Eph. i. 15, Col. i. 4) on the principle explained in notes on Eph.i. 15. On the meaning of mist. ἐν, comp. notes on ch. i. 16. 14. ταῦτα]ῇ ‘ These things; not ‘totam epistolam,’ Beng., but more probably ‘these foregoing brief direc- tions,, Hamm. If St. Paul had here adopted the epistolary aorist (comp. 48 , πρός σε τάχιον" ¥ VEEMOMEY: ΤΕ ΜΕ ΤΕΣ 15 ἐὰν δὲ βραδύνω, ἵνα εἰδῆς πῶς δεῖ ἐν Vd 7 ee) , “ 9 4 ’ , “ ~ οἴκῳ Θεοῦ ἀναστρέφεσθαι, ἥτις ἐστὶν ἐκκλησία Θεοῦ ζῶντος; notes on Gal. vi. 11), the latter refe- rence would have been nearly certain. The use of the present leaves it more doubtful, and remands us to the con- text; this (comp. ver. 15) certainly seems to limit ταῦτα to ‘superiora illa de Episcoporum, Diaconorumque officiis,’ Goth. ap. Pol. Syn. On the uses of γράφω and ἔγραψα, see Winer Gri §i4i. 5, Pp. 322. ἐλπίζων] ‘hoping,’ i.e., ‘though I hope,’ Leo, Winer Gr. § 36. 3, p. 280. The actual reason of his writing is implied in the following verse, ἵνα εἰδῇς κ.τ.λ. τάχιον] ‘more quickly.’ not, on the one hand, ‘ compar. absoluti loco posi-. tum,’ Beza, τάχιστα, Coray ; on the other, with marked compar. force, ‘souner than my letter reaches you,’ Winer, J.c., for why then ταῦτα γράφω! but probably with a more suppressed compar. reference, ‘ sooner than these instructions presuppose,’ ‘ sooner than I anticipate. Such com- paratives often refer to the suppressed feelings of the subject ; comp. Theano, ad Eubul. p. 86 (ed. Gale), παιδίον, ἂν μὴ τάχιον φάγῃ, κλάει. The reading ἐν τάχει (Lachm.) with ACD*, seems only an explanatory gloss. 15. βραδύνω] ‘should tarry; only here and 2 Pet. iii. 9. Wieseler (Chronol. p. 315) refers ‘this to the possibility of the Apostle’s journey perhaps to Crete (p. 347), or to some place he had not included in his origi- nalplan. This rests on the supposition that the epistle was written in the period included in the Acts, -which, however (see notes on ch. i. 3), does not seem probable. οἴκῳ Θεοῦ] This appellation, derived from the Old Test., where it denotes primarily the temple (2 Chron. v. 14, Ezra, v. 16, &c., even Matth. xxi. 13) nor, and secondarily the covenant - people (Numb. xii. 7, Hosea, viii. 1), those among whom God specially dwelt, is suitably applied in the N.T. to the Church ; either viewed as the spiritual” building which rests on Christ as the corner-stone (Eph. ii. 20), or as the true temple in which Christ is the true High Priest (Heb. iii. 6, 1 Pet. iv. 17); see Ebrard, Dogmatik, § 468, Vol. 11. p. 395. ἀναστρέ- φεσθαι] ‘walk, have (thy) conversation in.’ It is doubtful whether this verb is to be taken (a) absolutely, ‘how men ought to walk,’ Peile, Huther, al. ; or (b) specially, with reference to Timothy, ‘how thou oughtest to walk,’ Auth. Ver., De W. al. Huther urges against (b) that in what precedes Timothy has no active course assigned to him, but rather the supervision of it in others; as, however dvacrpéd. is a ‘vox media’ which does not mark mere activities, but rather conduct and deportment in its most inclusive re- ference (comp. Eph. ii. 3, where it closely follows the Hebraistie περιπα- retv),—as the explicative clause ἥτις ἐστὶν κ. τ. X. seems intended to impress on Timothy the greatness of his olkovoula,—and as the expansion of οἷκ. Θεοῦ from the special church over which Timothy presided, to the general idea of the universal Church, involves no real difficulty (see De W.), it seems ‘best to adopt (Ὁ) and limit dvacrp. to Timothy. ἥτις} ‘which indeed ; explicative use of the indef. relative: compare notes on Eph. i. 23, and esp. Gal. iv. 24, where the uses of ὅστις are explained at length. ἐκκλησία Θεοῦ ζῶντος] ‘Church of the living God; fuller definition of the οἶκος Θεοῦ, on the side of its internal and spiritwal glory : it was no material ἘΧΕΙΝΕΗΥ HIERL Ts, τό. 49 16 καὶ ὁμολογουμένως στῦλος καὶ ἑδραίωμα τῆς ἀληθείας. 16. ὅς] So Tisch., Lachm., Tregelles, and appy. the majority of modern critics. Θεὸς (Rec.) is adopted by Mill, Matth. Scholz, some commentt., Leo, Mack, Burton, Peile al., and, it ought not to be suppressed, some of our best English divines, Bull, Waterland (Vol. τι. p. 158). The state of evidence is briefly as follows. (1)"Osis read with A* [indisputably : after minute personal inspection ; see note, p. 100]. C* (Tisch. Prol. Cod. Ephr. § 7, p. 39] FG; 17. 73. 81; Syr. (Philox.) Copt. Sah. Goth. ; also (ὅς or 6) Syr. Ar. (Erp.) ith. Arm.;.... Cyr. Theod. (Mops.) Epiph. Gelas. (Cyzic.) Hieron. on Isaiah uur. 11. (2) 8, with D*... . ΕΓ δος with D*** J K nearly all mss... .. . , nearly all Latin Ff. «Arab. (Polygl.)! Slav. 7.0.2 Did. Chrys. (? see Tregelles, p. 227 note) Theod. Euthal. Damasc. Theophyl. GEcum. Ignat. Eph. 19 (but very doubtful). fane (‘opponitur fano Diane,’ Beng.) of false dead deities, but a living and spiritual community, a life stream (see Olsh. on Matth. xvi. 18), of be- lievers in an ever living God. ’Ex- κλησία appears to have two meanings, according to the context and point of view in which it is regarded. On the one hand, in accordance with its simple etymological sense (Acts xix. 39), it denotes a Christian congrega- tion, with a local reference of greater or less amplitude; see exx. in Pearson, Creed, Art. IX., Vol. I. p. 397 (ed. Burton): on the other, it involves the meaning and adaptations of ὅπῃ in the O.T., and’ denotes the New- Covenant people of God, with spiritual reference to their sacramental union in Christ and communion with one another; see esp. Bp. Taylor, Dis- suasive, Part 11. 1. 1, Ebrard, Dog- matik, § 467, Vol. 11. p. 392, and the various cited by Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. Vol. I. p. 1049. - στῦλος kal &p.] ‘pillar and basis of the truth ? no ἕν διὰ δυοῖν, = “ firmly- grounded,’ Beng., Peile, but ascensive and climactic apposition to éxx\. 0. ζῶντος, defining, with indirect allusion to the nascent and developing heresies (see ch. iv. 1 sq.), the true note, office, and vocation of the Church; στῦλον αὐτὴν καὶ édpalwua ἐκάλεσεν, ὡς ἄν usages On reviewing this evidence, as not ἐν αὐτῇ τῆς ἀληθείας τὴν σύστασιν ἐχούσης, Theodorus. Were there no Church, there would be no witness, no guardian of archives, no basis, no- thing whereon acknowledged truth could rest. Chrysostom adopts the right connexion, but inverts the state- ment, ἡ yap ἀληθ. ἐστὶ τῆς ἐκκλ. καὶ στῦλος καὶ édp., missing appy. the obvious distinction between truth in the abstract, and truth, the saving truth of the Gospel, as revealed to, and acknowledged by, men; comp. Taylor, Disswasive, Part 1.1. 1. 3. Episcopius (/nst. Theol. iv. 1.8, Vol. 1. p- 241) and others (it is to be feared mainly from polemical reasons) closely connect these words with what fol- lows; such a construction is alike abrupt (there being no connecting parti- cles), illogical (a strong substantival, being united witha weak adjectival pre- dication), and hopelessly artificial : see De Wette in loc. Στῦλος, and ἑδραίωμα (ἅπαξ λεγόμ. ; comp. θεμέλιος, 2 Tim. ii. 19) do not appy. involve any archi- tectural allusion to heathen temples, &c. (Deyling, Obs. Art. 66, Vol. τ. p. 317), but are only simple metaphorical expressions of the stability and perma- nence of the support: see the copious illustrations of this passage in Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. τι. p. 1042—1066. 16. Kal ὁμολογουμένως κ.τ.λ.7 E 50 1 FIMOTE Yo Τὰ ἡ ΣΟ ΤΥ , 2: A ‘ “ ἣν ’ , a 9 , 9 μέγα εστιν TO τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον. OF ἐφανερώθη ἐν only the most important Uncial MSS., but a// the Vv. older than the 7th century are distinctly in favour of a relative,—as 6 seems only a Latinizing varia- tion of és,—and lastly, as és is the more difficult, though really the more intelli- gible, reading (Hofmann, Schriftb. Vol. 1. p. 143), and on every reason more likely to have been changed into θεὸς (Macedonius is actually said to have been expelled for making the change, Liber. Diac. Brev. ch. 19) than vice versd, we uuhesitatingly decide with Zisch. in favour of ὅς. It is singular indeed that in the face of’such evidence Peile (1851) and Browne, Articles, p. 42 (1854) should still endorse and reproduce Berriman’s untenable assertion, made more than 100 years ago, that only three manuscripts read ὅς, and should also omit all notice of the almost unanimous opposition of the Vv. to the received Text. For further information on this subject, see Griesbach, Symb. Crit Vol. τ. p. 8—54, Tre- gelles, Pr. Text, p. 227, Davidson, Bibl. Criticism, ch. 66, p. 828. ‘And confessedly or indisputably great (i. 6. deep, Eph. y. 32) is the mystery, &e.’ ae Dal papa [vere magnum ] x= Syr.; ‘nemo eae of those to whom this μυστ. is revealed), cui mica sanz mentis inest de e& re potest contro- versiam movere,’ Altmann, Melet. το, Vol. τι. p. 268. The καὶ is not simply copulative, but heightens the force of the predication, ‘yes, confessedly great,’ &c.; comp. Hartung, Partik. καί, 5. 4, Vol.I. p. 145. Several exx. of a similar use of ὁμολ. are cited by Wetstein and’ Raphel in loc. ; add Joseph. Ant. I. 10, 2; ἢν δὲ τσιοῦτος ΤΙ, 9. 6, ὁμολογ. “EBpalwy ἄριστος ; see also Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. τι. p. 479, and Altmann, Joc. cit. where there is a discussion of some ὁμολογ., ib., merit on the whole verse. εὐσεβείας μυστήριον] ‘the mystery of godliness ; ‘ipsa doctrina ad quam omnis pietas sive religio Christiana referenda est,’ Tittmann, Synon. 1. p. 147: see notes on ver. 9, where the gen. is investigated. _8s ἐφανερώθη k.7.A.] The construction cannot be either satisfactorily -or grammatically explained unless we ‘agree to abide by the plain and proper meaning of the relative. Thus, then, ds is not emphatic, ‘He who,’ ᾿ Wiesinger. Tregelles (p. 278), nor ‘including in | itself both the demonstrative and rela- tive,’ Davidson, Bibl. Crit. p. 846 (a very questionable assertion, comp. Day, on the Relative, § 1. p. 3; § 60, 61. p. 98),—nor absolute ‘ecce! est qui,’ Matthies (John i. 46, iii. 34, Rom. ii. 23, 1 Cor. vii. 37, 1 John i. 3, are irrelevant, being only exx. of an ellipsis of the demonstr.),—nor, by a ‘constructio ad sensum,’ the rela- tive to μυστήριον, Olsh. (Col. i. 26, 27 is no parallel, being only a com- mon case of attraction, Winer, Gr. § 24. 3, Ρ. 191),—but is a relative to an omitted though easily recognised ak pelea viz., Christ; so De Wette, al. The rhythmical as well as anti- thetical character of the clauses (see the not improbable arrangement in Mack, and comp. notes to T'ransl.) and the known existence of such compositions (Eph. v. 19; compare Bull, Fid. Nic. τι. 3. 1), render it not improbable that the words are quoted from some well known hymn, or pos- 'sibly from some familiar confession of | faith, Winer, Gr. ὃ 66. 3, p. 660. Rambach, Anthologie, Vol. 1. p. 33, where Eph. v. 14 is also ascribed to the same source; so also Huth. and ἐφανερώθη] ‘was manifested ; comp. 1 John i. 1 TIMOTHY ΕΠ; τό. 51 σαρκί, ἐδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύματι, ὥφθη ἀγγέλοις, ἐκηρύχθη ἐν ἔθνεσιν, ἐπιστεύθη ἐν κόσμῳ, ἀνελήμφθη ἐν δόξη. 2, ἡ ζωὴ ἐφανερώθη ; iii. 5, ἐκεῖνος ἐφανερώθη. In the word itself, as Huther well suggests, there is a powerful argument for the pre-exist- ence of Christ. ἐδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύματι] ‘was justified (was shown to be, evinced to be, just, Matth. xi. 19, Luke vii. 35) ὧν spirit (in the higher sphere of His divine life).’ There is some little difficulty in these words, especially in πνεύματι. The meaning however seems fixed by the antithesis σαρκί, especially when com- pared with other passages in which the higher and lower sides of that nature which our Lord was pleased to assume are similarly put in contrast. The πνεῦμα of Christ is not here the Holy Spirit (comp. Pearson, Creed, Vol. 1. p. 163) nor ἡ θεία δύναμις, Coray (comp. Chrys., and see Suicer, Thes. Vol. τι. p. 777), but the higher principle of spiritual life (Schubert, Gesch. der Seele, § 48, Vol. 11. p. 498) which was, not itself the Divinity, Wiesing. (this would be an Apolli- narian assertion), but especially and intimately wnited (not blended) and associated with it. In this higher spiritual nature, in all its manifes- tations, whether in His words and works, or in the events of His life, He was shown to be the All-holy, and the All-righteous, yea, ‘ manifested with power to be the Son of God,’ Rom. i. 4, John, i. 14; compare 1 Pet. iii. 18 (Tisch., Lachm.), and Middleton, im Joc. p. 430, but esp. the excellent note of Meyer, on Rom. 1.6. The assertion of sume commentt. that the term σὰρξ includes ‘ the body, } soul, and spirit’ of Christ is not recon- ' cileable with the principles of biblical psychology; the σὰρξ may perhaps sometimes include the ψυχή, but never, in such passages of obvious antithesis, the πνεῦμα as well; see Liicke, on John i. 14. The student of St. Paul’s epp. cannot be too earnestly recommended to acquire some rudiments of a most important but very neglected subject—biblical Psychology. Much information of a general kind will be found in Schubert, Gesch, der Seele (ed. 2), and of a more specific nature in Beck, Bibl. Seelen- lehre (a small but excellent treatise), Delitzsch, Bibl. Psychol., and Olshau- sen, Opuscula, Art. 6. ὥφθη ἀγγέλοις] ‘was seen of Angels,’ Auth. Ver., 1. 6. ‘appeared unto, showed Himself unto, Angels.’ Both the use of ὀφθῆναι (occurring more than twenty times in the N.T., and nearly always with ref. to the self- exhibition of the subject), and the in- variable meaning of ἄγγελοι in N. T. (not ‘ Apostles,’ Leo, Peile, al., but ‘ Angels’) preclude any other trans- lation. The epoch, however, pre- cisely referred to cannot be defined with certainty. The grouping of the clauses (see notes to TZransl.), ac- cording to which the first two in each division appear to point to earthly re- lations, the third to heavenly, seem to render it very probable that the general manifestation of Christ to Angels through His incarnation,—not, inversely, the specific appearances of them during some scenes of His earthly life (Theophyl.), nor any (assumed) specific manifestation in heaven (De W.),—is here alluded to: see esp. Chrysost., ὠφθη ἀγγέλοις" ὥστε καὶ ἄγγελοι μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν εἶδον τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ πρότερον οὐχ ὁρῶντες ; so also Theodoret, τὴν γὰρ ἀόρατον τῆς θεότητος φύσιν οὐδὲ ἐκεῖνοι ἑώρων, σαρκώθεντα δὲ ἐθεάσαντο. Hammond EQ 52 In the latter times men shall fall away from the faith, and shall teach principles includes also evil angels ; this is pos- sible, but the antithesis of clauses seems opposed to it. ἐπιστεύθη] ‘was believed on,’ not ‘fidem sibi fecit,’ Raphel, but ‘fides illi habita est,’ Beza, 2 Thess. i. 10, see Winer, Gr. ὃ 40. I, p. 301. ἀνελήμφθη ἐν δόξῃ] ‘was received wp into glory.’ ’Ev appears here used not simply for εἰς (Rosenm.), nor with δόξῃ for ἐνδόξως (comp. Hamm.), but in a sort of ‘pregnans sensus’ for εἰς δόξαν καὶ ἐστὶν ἐν δόξῃ (Wahl, Huther), see Winer, Gr. ὃ 54. 4, Ῥ- 401 sq., and comp. Ellendt, Lex. Sophocl. Vol. 1. p. 598. The event here referred to is simply and plainly the historical ascent of Christ into heaven. Nov words can be more distinct ; compare ἀνελήμφθη, Mark xvi. 19, Acts i. 2, 11 (part.), 22; and ἀνεφέρετο εἰς Tov οὐρανόν, Luke xxiv. 51 (Lachm.). Cap. IV. 1. τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα] But, nevertheless, the (Holy) Spirit.’ The particle δὲ is here not metabatic (Auth. Ver., Conyb. and Hows.), but appears to have its proper adver- sative force; ‘great as is the mystery of godliness, the Holy Spirit has stil/ declared that there shall be-disbelief and apostacy :’ μὴ θαυμάσῃς, Chrysost. ῥητῶς] ‘ distinctly, ‘expressly’ (pave- pas, σαφῶς, ὁμολογουμένως, ws μὴ ἀμφιβάλλειν, Chrysost. ; ‘non obscure aut involute, ut fere loqui solent pro- phetz,’ Justiniani), not only in the prophecies of our Lord, Matth. xxiv. 11, &c., and the predictions, whether of the Apostles (comp. 1 John ii. 8, 2 Pet. iii. 3, Jude 18) or of the prophets in the various Christian churches (Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. τὸ TIMOTHY: Τὶ IV. To δὲ Πνεῦμα ῥητῶς λέγει ὅτι ἐν «ε , - ° , “ [ υστεροις καιροις ἀποστήσονταί TLVES THS TWl- of abstinence which are not approved by God. Ῥ. 340), but more particularly in the special revelations which the Holy Spirit made to St. Paul himself; comp. 2 Thess. ii. 3 sq. ὑστέροις καιροῖς] ‘latter times.’ This expression, used only in this place is not perfectly synonymous (Reuss, Vol: 1. p. 224) with ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις, 2 Tim. iii. 1; 2 Pet. iii. 3 (Zachm., Tisch.), James v. 3 (comp. καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ, 1 Pet. i. 5, ἔσχατος χρόνος, Jude 18): the latter expression, as Huther cor- rectly observes, points more speci- fically to the period immediately pre- ceding the completion of the kingdom of Christ ; the former only to a period future to the speaker, οἱ ἀκόλουθοι χρό- vot, Coray ; see Pearson, Conc. Iv., Vol. 11. p.42. Intheapostacy of the present, the inspired Apostle sees the commencement of the fuller apostacy of the future. In this and a few other passages in the N. T., καιρὸς appears synonymous with χρόνος ; comp. Lobeck, Ajax. p. 85. προσέχοντες] See notes on ch. i. 4. πνεύμ. πλάνοις} ‘deceiving spirits; certainly not merely the-false teachers themselves (Mack, Coray, al.),—a needless violation of the primary mean- ing of πνεῦμα, ---αὖ, as the antithesis τὸ IIveipa suggests, the deceiving Powers and Principles, the spiritual emissaries of Satan, which work in their hearts; comp. Eph. ii. 2, vi. 12 (see notes), 1 John iy. 1 sq. διδασκ. δαιμονίων] ‘doctrines of devils ; not ‘doctrines about devils,’ Mede, al., ‘demonolatry,’ Peile (dau. being gen. objecti), but ‘ doctrines emanating from, taught by, devils,’ gen. subjecti, Winer, Gr. § 30. obs., p. Si. ‘vox media’ (comp. Ign. Smyrn. 3), but has nearly Δαιμόνιον is not here a 1 TIMOTHY. IV. 1—3. 53 στεως. προσέχοντες πνεύμασιν πλάνοις καὶ διδασκαλίαις δαι- μονίων, sv ’ ἰδίαν συνείδησιν, its usual N.T. meaning, Pearson, loc. cit., Vol. τι. p. 46. Olshausen significantly remarks on this passage, that man never stands isolated; if he is not influenced by τὸ Πν. τὸ ἅγιον, he at once falls under the powers of τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς πλανῆς (1 John iv. 6). 2. ἐν ὑποκρίσει ψευδολόγων ‘in (through) the hypocrisy of speakers of lies,’ Hamm.; prepositional clause appended to προσέχοντες, defining the manner (pretended sanctity and ortho- doxy) in which τὸ προσέχειν κ-τ.Ἃ. was brought about and furthered ; év being instrumental, Leo and Matth. explain the clause as a second modal definition of the fallers away, parallel to προσέχοντες k.7.., and more im- mediately dependent on ἀποστήσονται: ‘habent in se eam ὑπόκρ., qualis est ὑπόκρ. Yevdor.,’ Heinr., and so appy. Auth. Ver. This is doubtful; the third clause κωλ, γαμεῖν seems far too direct an act of the false teachers to suitably find a placein such an indirect definition of the falsely taught. Matth. urges the absence of the art. before ὑποκρίσει, but this after the prep. (Huther needlessly pleads N.T. laxity) is perfectly intelligible (Winer, Gr. § 18. 2. Ὁ, p. 143), even if it be not referrible to the principle of correlation, Middleton, Art. ut. 3. 6. Thus then lying teachers will be the mediate evil spirits the immediate, causes of the apostacy. κεκαυτ. τὴν ἰδίαν συνείδ.1 ‘being branded on their own conscience: the ace. with the pas- sive verb (comp. ch. vi. 5, διεφθαρμένοι τὸν νοῦν, &c.) correctly specifies the place in which the action of the verb is principally manifested. The exact ev: ὑποκρίσει ψευδολόγων, κεκαυτηριασμένων τὴν 3 κωλυόντων γαμεῖν, ἀπέχεσθαι βρωμά- application of the metaphor is doubt- ful; it may be referred to the ἐσχάτη ἀναλγησία after cautery (Theodoret), or more probably to the penal brand which their depraved conscience bore, asit were, on its brow (Theophy]l.) ; ‘in- signite nequiti viros, et quasi scelerum mancipia,’ Justiniani. See the nume- rous and fairly pertinent exx. cited by Elsner, Obs., Vol. τι. p. 298, Kypke, Obs., Vol. 1 p. 357. ᾿Ιδίαν is not without emphasis; they knew the brand they bore, and yet with a show of outward sanctity (comp. ὑποκρίσει) they strove to beguile and to seduce others, and make them as bad as themselves. 3. κωλυόντων γαμεῖν] ‘forbidding to marry.’ This characteristic, which came afterwards into such special pro- minence in the more developed Gnos- ticism (see Clem. Alex. Strom. 11. 6, Ireneus, Her. τ. 22, &e.), first showed itself in the false asceticism of the Essenes (see esp. Joseph. Bell. τι. 8. 2, γάμου μὲν ὑπεροψία παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς, Antiq. XVIII. I. 5, οὔτε γαμετὰς εἰσά- γονται, Pliny, N. H. v.17) and Thera- peut, and was one of those nascent errors which the inspired apostle fore- saw would grow into the impious dogma of later times, ‘nubere et generare a Satand dicunt esse,’ Trenzus, /.c.: see Suicer, Thesaur., Wooler 02.788: ἀπέχεσθαι βρωμάτων] ‘ (bidding) to abstain from meats; κωλυόντων must: be resolved into παραγγελλόντων μή (see ch. 11. 12), from which παραΎΥ. must be carried on to the second clause ; see Winer, Gr. ἃ 66, iii. δ p. 678. Distinct notices of this abstinence and severity in re- spect of food are to be found in the 54 e a + , , >’ τῶν. ἃ oO Θεὸς EKTLOEV ELS μετάλημψιν μετα a κ oS , \ τ 6 τοις πιστοίς και επεγνώκοσιν τὴν aXy Ela. account of the Therapeute in Philo, Vit. Contempl. ὃ 4, Vol. τι. p. 477 (ed. Mang.) When there are thus such clear traces of a morbid and perverted asceticism in the Apostle’s own day, it is idle in Baur to urge these notices as evidences against the authenticity of the epistle. It may be remarked that the view taken of the errors com- batedin this and the other Pastoral epp. (see notes on ch. i. 3) appears to be confirmed by the present passage. St. Paul is alluding throughout, not to Judaism proper, but to that false spiritualism and those perverted as- cetical tendencies, which emanating from Judaism, and gradually mingling with similar principles derived from other systems (comp. Col. ii. 8 86.» and see Reuss, Theol. Chret., Vol. τι. p. 645, 646), at last, after the Apo- stolic age, became merged in a fuller and wider Gnosticism; see also Wiesinger 7m loc., whose indirect con- futation of Baur is satisfactory and convincing. On asceticism generally, and the view taken of it in the N.T., comp. Rothe, Theol. Lthik. § 878.54ᾳ., Vol. ILL. p. 120 8q. ἃ ὁ Θεὸς κ. τ. Χ.1 Confutation of the second error. The reason why the former error is left unnoticed has been diffe- rently explained. The most probable solution is that the prohibition of marriage had not as yet assumed so definite a form as the interdiction of certain kinds of food. The Essenes themselves were divided on this very point; see Joseph. Bell. Jud. τι. 8. 13, and comp. ib. 11. 8.2. This per- haps led to the choice of the modified term κωλυόντων. τοῖς πιστοῖς] ‘for the faithful,’ Hamm., Est. The dat. is not the dat. of refe- rence to, Beng. (comp. notes on Gal. 1 TIMOTHY IV. 3, 4. ’ , εὐχαριστίας 4 ὅτι πᾶν i. 22), still less for ὑπὸ τῶν πιστῶν, Bloomf., but marks the objects for whom the food was created. Βρώματα were, indeed, created for all, but it was only in the case of the πιστοί, after a receiving μετὰ evxap. (condition attached), that the true end of creation was fully satisfied. καὶ ἔπεγνωκόσιν κ.τ.λ.7 ‘and those having full knowledge of,’ &c. ; the omission of the article (Winer, Gr. ὃ 18. 4, p. 145) shows that the πιστοὶ and ἐπεγν. k.T.A. (not οἱ ἐπεγν., Heydenr.) con- stitute a single class, the latter term being little more than epexegetic of the former (Estius). (ἐπίγνωσις = ἀδίστακτος γνῶσις, Coray), see notes on Eph. i. 17, and Valck. on Luke, p. 14 sq. 4. ὅτι πᾶν «.t.d.] Not explana- tory of (Theophyl., Beng.), but con- Jirmatory of, the foregoing verse ; i.e. not what is called an _ objective (Donalds. Gr. ὃ 584), but a causal sentence. The Apostle has to sub- stantiate his former declaration that meats are intended to be enjoyed with thanksgiving: this he does by the positive declaration (comp. Gen. i. 31) πᾶν κτίσμα Θεοῦ καλόν (corresponding to ἃ ὁ Θεὸς ἔκτισεν), supported and enhanced by the negative sentence, καὶ οὐδὲν κ. τ. Χ. (parallel to εἰς werd. μετὰ εὐχ.), Which again is finally con- firmed by the declaration in ver. 5. Κτίσμα is only here used by St. Paul, his usual expression being κτίσις. The argument, however, of Schleiermacher based upon it is sufficiently answered by Planck, who cites several instances, 6.5. προσκοπή 2 Cor. vi. 3, ὀφείλημα Rom. iv. 4, &e., of words thus only once used when another and more usual synonym might have been ex- pected. κτίσμα Θεοῦ] On ἐπεγνωκότες τ ΠΙΌΤΗΝ POETS 4.) 5. 55 , na ‘ 4 KTLO PG Θεοῦ καλόν, καὶ οὐδὲν ἀπόβλητον μετα εὐχαριστίας λαμβανόμενον: 5 ἁγιάζεται γὰρ διὰ λόγου Θεοῦ καὶ ’ , ἐντεύξεως. ‘creature of God,’ ‘every creation of His hand designed for food :’ τῷ εἰπεῖν, κτίσμα, περὶ τῶν ἐδωδίμων ἁπάντων ἠνίξατο, Chrys. The fact of its being His creation is enough; εἰ κτίσμα Θεοῦ, καλόν, ib. ; comp. Ecclus. xxxix. 33, 34- ἀπόβλητον) Ex- pansion of the former statement ; not only was everything καλόν, whether in its primary (‘outwardly pleasing,’ καδ-λός, Donalds. Cratyl. § 324), or secondary and usual acceptation, but further, ‘nothing was to be rejected.’ It was a maxim even of the heathens that the good gifts of the gods were not to be rejected; so Hom. 71. ut. 65, comp. Lucian, Timon, ὃ 37, οὔτοι ἀπόβλητά εἰσι τὰ δῶρα τὰ παρὰ τοῦ Διός (cited by Kypke). The whole of this verse is well discussed by Bp. Sanderson, Serm. 5. (ad. Pop.), Vol. Ill. p. 145 sq. (ed. Jacobs.) μετὰ εὐχ. λαμβ.1] ‘if ithe received,’ Ke. : the context modifies the translation of the participle, Winer, Gr. ὃ 46. 12, p- 413. This clause specially con- ditions the assertion οὐδὲν ἀποβλὰ., and while it shows how the assertion is to be accepted serves also to echo and elucidate the previous limitation, μετὰ εὐχ. in ver. 3. Wiesinger considers καλὸν as also dependent on μετὰ evx. λαμβ., and not a positive and inde- pendent assertion. This, however, does not seem satisfactory: for as the previous verse virtually contains two assertions, viz., that Θεὸς ἔκτισεν els μετάλ., and that the μετάλημψις was to be μετὰ evxap., so the present verse contains two confirmatory clauses, viz., that the food being God’s creation is absolutely good (see Sanderson, Serm. 5, § 4), and also that if so, μεταλαμβ. μετὰ εὐχ. it is οὐκ ἀπόβλ., or relatively good as well. It is best then to retain the punctuation of Lachm. and Tisch. 5. ἁγιάζεται γάρ] ‘for it is sanc- tified,’ i.e. each time the food is partaken of ; present corresponding to μεταλαμβαν. This verse is con- firmatory of ver. 4, especially of the latter clause ; the general and compre- _ hensive assertion, that nothing is to be rejected or considered relatively un- clean if partaken of with thanksgiving, is substantiated by more nearly de- fining εὐχαριστία and more clearly showing its sanctifying effect. ‘A-yid- few is not merely declarative, ‘ to ac- count as holy,’ but effective, ‘to make holy,’ ‘to sanctify.” In some few things (e.g. εἰδωλόθυτα, Chrys.) the ἁγιασμὸς might actually be absolute in its character ; in others, whether pro- nounced legally ἀκάθαρτα, oraccounted so bya false asceticism (e.g. the Essenes avoided wine and flesh on their weekly festival, Philo, Vit. Contempl. Vol. 11. p- 483), the ἁγιασμὸς would be natu- rally relative. Estius and Wiesinger seem to take ἁγιάζεται as comprehen- sively absolute, and to refer the im- purity of the κτίσμα to the primal curse; but is this consistent with Matth. xv. 11, Rom. xiv. 14, 1 Cor. x. 25, 26, and can it be proved that the curse on the earth (Gen. iii. 17, observe esp. the reading of the LXX., ἐπικατάρατος ἡ γῆ ἐν τοῖς ἔργοις σου, and see also Joseph. Ant. I, I. 4) was to be understood as, so to say, per- meating the vegetable world? If so, would not a law such as that in Lev. xix. 24, which applied to the polluted land of Canaan, have been of universal application ? λόγου κ.τ. A. ] ‘the word of God and supplication.’ δ0 Reject all idle teach- ings and discussion, and practically exer- cise thyself in godli- ness, which is lastingly profitable. The regular and unvarying use of λόγος Θεοῦ in the N.T. precludes the gen. being taken as objecti, ‘oratio ad Deum facta,’ Wahl, or ‘by mention of God,’ Peile. The λόγος Θεοῦ is the word of God as uttered and revealed by Him in the Scriptures, and here, as the close union with ἔντευξις clearly suggests, must be referred not to any decree of God (Sanders. Serm. 5, ὃ 39), but to the contents of the prayer ; the word of God as involved and embodied in the terms of the prayer. Thus, as Wiesinger suggests, the idea of εὐχα- pioria is expressed in the fullest man- ner; on its objective side as to the contents of prayer, and on its subjective side (ἐντυγχάνειν) as to the mode in which it is made.’ notes ch. ii. I. 6. ταῦτα ὑποτιθ.1] ‘ By setting forth, i.e. ‘if thow settest forth, teachest (Syr.), these things: οὐκ εἶπεν ἐπιτάττων, οὐκ εἶπε παραγγέλλων, ἀλλὰ ὑποτιθ., On ἔντευξις, see τουτέστιν, ws συμβουλεύων On the construction and more exact transl. of the participle, see notes on ver. 16. The reference of ταῦτα is somewhat doubtful. As ὑποτίθεσθαι (dynamic middle ; i.e. application of the simple meaning of the active to mental and moral forces; see Kriiger, Sprachl. § 52. 8. 4) seems clearly to imply not merely ‘in memoriam revocare,’ Auth. Ver., but ‘docere,’ ‘instituere,’ whether ‘amice et leniter’ (Loesn. ; comp. Philo, Vit. Mos. τι. ὃ 9, Vol. τι. p- 142, ed. Mang., ὑποτίθεται καὶ παρηγορεῖ τὸ πλέον ἢ κελεύει; Hesych., ὑποθέσθαι: συμβουλεῦσαι), or, as in the present case, somewhat more positively and precisely, τὸ παραινεῖν καὶ βουλεύεσθαι, Budeus (comp. Joseph. ταῦτα ὑποτίθεδο, Chrysost. 1 TIMOTHY Ws 6. 6 Taira ὑποτιθέμενος τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς, καλὸς ἔση διάκονος Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ. ἐντρεφόμενος Bell. Jud. τι. 8. 7, τὴν αὐτὴν ὑποτί- θενται δίαιταν, see exx. in Krebs, Obs. Ρ. 355 54.), ταῦτα will most naturally refer to ver. 4, 5, and to the principles and dissuasive arguments which it involves. See esp. Raphel, Annot. Vol. π΄. p. 582, who well supports the latter meaning of ὑποτίθεσθαι. διάκονος] ‘minister: ‘thou wilt fitly and properly discharge thy διακονίαν, 2 Tim. iv. §; ‘tuo muneri cumula- tissime satisfacies,’ Just. ἐντρεφόμενος) ‘beiny nourished up? The present properly and specially marks a continuous and permanent nutrition in ‘the words of faith ;’ see Winer, Gr. § 46. 5, p. 404. So, with his usual acuteness, Chrysost., τὸ διηνεκὲς τῆς els τὰ τοιαῦτα προσοχῆς δηλῶν. Loesner aptly compares, among other exx. (p. 399, 400), Philo, Leg. ad Cai. § 29, Vol. 1.575 (ed. Mang.), οὐκ ἐνετράφης οὐδὲ ἐνησκήθης τοῖς ἱεροῖς γράμμασιν ; comp. also Vol. ΤΙ. p. 571, and see D’Orville, Chariton. p- 37: Similar exx. of ‘innutriri’ are cited in Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. Vol. 1. py itty: - λόγοις τῆς πίστεως] “τὐογ8 of faith, gen. sub- jecti ; “words, terms, in which, as it were, faith expresses itself,’ Huther. Πίστις, as Beng. suggests, involves a reference to Tim., ἡ καλὴ διδασκ. a reference to others, On the meaning of πίστις, see notes on Gal. i. 23, and Reuss, Theol. Chret. Vol. 11. p. 127, who, however, too much gives up the subjective reference which the word always seems to involve. In the following relative clause, if ἧς the reading of Lachm. [only with A, 80] be adopted, it must be regarded an instance of unusual, though defensible, attraction ; see Winer, Gi. ὃ 24. 1, rt TIMOTHY EWei6, 7. 57 τοῖς λόγοις τῆς πίστεως καὶ τῆς καλῆς διδασκαλίας ἢ παρη- κολούθηκας. Ῥ. 180. παρακολούθηκας] ‘hast closely followed (as a disciple), hast been a follower of ; 2 Tim. iii. 10; perf. in appropriate connexion with the pres., ἐντρεφόμ. κολουθεῖν (‘subsequi ut assequaris,’ Valck. on Luke i. 3) is frequently used with ethical reference (6. g. παρακολ. τοῖς πράγμασιν, Luke L.c., Demosth. de Coron. p. 285 ; παρακ. τοῖς χρόνοις, Nicom. ap. Athen. 291) to denote ‘tracing diligently out,’ ‘attending to the course of,’ and thence, by an intelligible gradation, ‘ understanding the drift and meaning’ of any facts or subjects presented for consideration ; see exx. of this latter meaning in Kypke, Obs. Vol. I. p. 207, and comp. Dissen, on Demosth. l.c. Both here, however, and 2 Tim. iii. 10, the meaning appears to be simply, ‘followed after,’ not merely in the sense of imitating a pattern (De W. on 2 Tim. l.¢.), but of at- tending to a course of instruction, ὡς μαθητὴς διδάσκαλον, Coray ; the καλὴ διδασκαλία was, as it were, a school of which Tim. ‘was @ disciple,’ see NE Peile inloc. TheSyr. La] Dada? Ilapa-- v - [quam didicisti] and the Vulg. ‘quam assecutus es’ (comp. Auth. Ver.) express rather too strongly the simple result, and too insufficiently the pro- cess by which it was attained. ἡ. τοὺς δὲ βεβήλ. k.7.A.] ‘But with the (current) profane and old-wives’ fables have nothing to do.’ The article (not noticed by the majority of exposi- tors) appears to allude to the weil known character and the general circulation which the μῦθοι had obtained. These Jewish fables (Chrys., see notes on ch. i. 4.) are designated βέβηλοι, ‘profane’ (ch. 1. 9, vi. 20, 2 Tim, ii. 7 Tods δὲ βεβήλους καὶ γραώδεις μύθους 16, Heb. xii. 16), in tacit antithesis to εὐσεβ., as bearing no moral fruit, as lying out of the holy compass, and, as it were, on the wrong side of the βηλὸς of divine truths (comp. Schoettg. in loc.),—and γραώδεις (dir. λεγόμ.) as involving foolish and absurd state- ments. Wetst. aptly compares Strabo, I. p. 32 A, THY ποιητικὴν ypawdn μυθο- λογίαν ἀποφαίνει. The assertion of Baur that γραώδης points to a γραῖα, the Sophia-Achamoth (comp. Gieseler, Kirchengesch. § 45) is untenable ; in- dependent of other considerations, it may be remarked that γραϊκὸς (Clem. Alex. Ped. τη. 4. p. 270, Pott.) would have been thus more grammatically exact than the present γραώδης (ypao- eldns). παραιτοῦ] ‘ decline, have nothing to do with,’ ἀπόφευγε, Coray, always similarly used in the second person in the Pastoral epp., ch. v. rr, Tit. iii. 10 (persons); 2 Tim. ii, 23 (things). apart. does not occur again in St. Paul's epp.; it is found three times in Heb. (xii. 19, 25, bis) and four times in St. Luke: comp. Joseph. Antig. τι. 8. 8, παραι- τησάμενος πᾶσαν τίμην. Loesner, Obs. p. 404, gives a copious list of exx. from Philo, the most pertinent of which is Alley. ut. § 48, Vol. 1. p- 115 (ed. Mang.), where προσιέμενος and παραιτούμενος are put in oppo- sition: see also notes on ch. v. 11. yopvate δέ] ‘and rather exercise ? so Auth. Ver., correctly marking the δέ, which serves to present antithe- tically the positive side of the conduct Timothy is urged to assume. He is first negatively παραιτεῖσθαι μύθους, then positively γυμνάζειν x.7.X. Γυμνάζειν (Heb. v. 14, xii. τι, 2 Pet. 11, 14)appropriately marks the strenuous effort which Timothy was to make, in 58 A , \ ‘ ‘ Στ παραιτου" γύμναζε δὲ σεαῦυτον προς εὐσέβειαν. 1 TIMOTHY IV. 7, 8. δ ἡ yap " , ‘ »~ 7 3 4 9 , ε ; σωματικὴ γυμνασία προς ολίγον εστιν ὠφέλιμος" ῃ δὲ contrast with the studied ἄσκησις of the false teachers. πρὸς εὐσέβ.] ‘for piety” εὐσέβεια, “Ῥτδο- tical, cultive, piety’ (see notes on ch. ii. 2), was the end toward which Timothy was to direct his endeavours. 8. γὰρ confirms the preceding clause by putting γυμνασία συματική, the outward and the visible, in con- trast with γυμνασία πρὸς εὐσέβ., the internal and the unseen. ἡ σωματικὴ yupv. | ‘the exercise, or Oo » training, of the body,’ Syr. aio, o o -. 9 [exercitatio corporis]. The linge? [ poral exact meaning of these words is somewhat doubtful. Τυμνασία may be referred, either (a) to the mere physical training ‘of the body, gym- nastic exercises proper, De W., Huth., and, as might be expected, Justin., Est., Mack. al.; or (Ὁ) to the ascetic training of the body (τ Cor. ix. 27) in its most general aspect (ἡ ἄκρα σκληραγωγία τὸ Coray), with reference to the theoso- phistie discipline of the false teachers, Thomas Aq., Matth., Wiesing. al. Of these, (a) is not to be summarily rejected, as it was maintained by Chrys., Theophyl. (though on mis- taken grounds), Theod., Gicum., and has been defended in- genuity by De Wette: see Suicer, Thesauwr. s.v. Vol. I. p. 804. As, however, γυμνασία is not uncommonly σώμ., with some used in less special references (e. g. Aristot. Zop. vitt. 5, Polyb. Hist: 1. I. 2),—as γύμναζε (ver. 7) prepares us for this modification,-—as the context seems to require a contrast between external observances and holiness, —and, lastly, as ascetic prac- tices formed so very distinctive a inward feature of that current Jewish Theosophy (Joseph. Bell. Jud. u. 8. 2 sq., Philo, Vit. Contempl. § 4 sq.) which in this chapter seem so dis- tinctly alluded to, it seems impos- sible to avoid deciding in favour of the latter interpr.; so Beveridge, Serm. 101, Vol. Iv. p. 408 (Angl. Cath. Libr.), Neander, Planting, Vol.1. p- 340 (Bohn), and appy. the majority of modern expositors. If it be urged that 7 σωματικὴ yuu. (in this sense) was unrestrictedly condemned in ver. 2, 3, and could never be styled even πρὸς ὀλίγον ὠφέλιμος, it seems enough to say that there the Apostle is speaking of its morbid developments in the ὕστεροι καίροι, here of the more innocent though comparatively profit- less asceticism of the present. πρὸς ὀλίγον taken per se may either refer to the duration (Syr., Theod. ; comp. James iv. 14) of the ὠφέλεια, or the extent to which it may be ap- plied (Huther, De Wette): not to both (Bloomf.), a combination not justifiable on ‘sound principles of exegesis. The context, however, and the antithesis πρὸς πάτα seem de- cidedly to preclude the temporal reference of ὀλίγον, and to limit its meaning to ‘alittle,’—‘the few objects, ends, or circumstances in life,’ toward which (πρὸς ὀλίγον, not ὀλίγῳ or ἐν ὀλίγῳ) bodily training and asceticism can be profitably directed. ἔχουσα] ‘as it has,’ ‘since it has ; causal use of the particle (comp. Donalds. Gr. § 615 sq.) in confirma- tion of the preceding assertion. On the practical of this clause, see Barrow, Serm. 2, 3. Vol. I. p. 23 sq. ἐπαγγελίαν Lots] ‘promise of life. The geni- tival relation is not perfectly clear. application Dewey} TVs 8:.τὉ0: 59 ) , \ , ’ , 1 " » , ” εὐσέβεια πρὸς TavTa ὠφέλιμος ἐστιν, ἐπαγγελίαν ἔχουσα a ~ ΄ A ~ , ζωῆς τῆς νῦν καὶ τῆς μελλούσης. πάσης ἀποδοχῆς ἄξιος. = If it be the gen. of identity or appo- sition (comp. Scheuerl, Synt. § 12. 1, Ῥ. 82), ἕωή, the import or rather object of the promise, would seem to involve either a suppressed qualitative (‘ true, holy, life,” Matth., Mack. al.), or suppressed quantitative (‘long life,’ Eph. vi. 3, De W.) reference. If it be the gen. of reference to (Huth.), or of the point of view (Scheuerl. Synt. § 18. τ, p. 129 sq.), ζωὴ retains its general meaning (‘ vital existence,’ &e.), but ἐπαγγελ. becomes inde- finite, and moreover is in a connexion with its dependent genitive not sup- ported by any other passage in the N.T. This last objection is so grave that it seems preferable to give ζωὴ its higher and more definitely scrip- tural sense, and to regard it as in- volving the idea, not of mere length | only, or of mere material blessings (‘bona et commoda hujus_ vite,’ Caly., contrast Mark x. 30, μετὰ διωγμῶν), but of spiritual happiness (εὐδαιμονία, Coray) and holiness ; in a word, as expressing ‘the highest blessedness of the creature; see Trench, Synon. § xxvii., whose phi- lology, however, in connecting it with dw is very doubtful ; it is rather con- nected with Lat. ‘vivere’ (Sanscr. ashiv); see esp. Pott, Etym. Forsch. Vol. I. p. 265, Benfey, Wurzellex. Vol. 1. p. 684. There is also a good treatise on ζωὴ in Olsh. Opuse. p. 187 sq. τῆς viv κι τ. Χ.1 The two independent parts into which the life promised to εὐσέβεια is divided, life in this world and that which is to come: the promises of the Old cove- nant are involved and incorporated in the New (Taylor, Life of Christ, m1. 13, Disc. 15.15), and enhanced, On the A ε ’ 4A 9 πιστὸς ὁ λογος Kat “, ΄ 4 ‘ [: εἰς TOUTO γὰρ καὶ κοπιωμεν use of the art., which thus serves to mark each part as separate, comp. Winer, Gr. § 19. 4, p. 159, 160. 9. πιστὸς ὁ λόγος κ. τ.λ. See notes on ch. i. 15; here the formula is confirmatory of what immediately precedes, τὸ, ὅτε ἡ εὐσέβ. ὠφελεῖ Kal εἰς τὴν παροῦσαν, καὶ εἰς τὴν μέλλ. ζωήν, εἶναι λόγος ἄξιος νὰ πιστεύεται. Coray [mod. Greek]. The particle γάρ, ver. 10, obviously precludes any reference to what follows, as Conyb. and Hows.; comp. notes on Gh: αἰ «- 10. εἰς τοῦτο γάρ] ‘ For looking to this’ (Col. i. 20, comp. Donalds. Cratyl. § 170), ‘in reference to this,’ viz. the realization of the promise in our own cases: τί δήποτε yap τόν πολὺν in τοῦτον ἀνεδεξάμεθα πόνον... εἰ μή τίς The ἐστι τῶν πόνων ἀντίδοσις, Theod. reference of εἰς τοῦτο (by no means synonymous with διὰ τοῦτο Grot.), to the following ὅτι, ‘therefore we both labour &c., because,’ Auth. Ver., sim. Theophyl. Beza, al., has been recently defended by Wiesinger ; but surely this interrupts the causal con- nexion (γὰρ) with ver. 8, and its con- firmatory sequel ver. 9. It is not necessary to restrict τοῦτο to ἐπαγγελ. ζωῆς τῆς μελλοῦσης (Wiesing.), for although this would naturally form the chief end of the κοπιᾶν and ὀνειδίζεσθαι, still ζωὴ (in its extended sense) ἡ viv might also suitably form its object, as being a kind of pledge and ἀῤῥαβὼν of ζωὴ ἡ μελλοῦσα. καὶ κοπιῶμεν κ. τ. Δ.} ‘we both labour | and are the objects of reproach ; not merely St. Paul alone (Col. i. 29), or St. Paul and Timothy, but the Apostles in general (τ Cor. iv. 12), and all Christian missionaries and 00 1--ΤἸἐΗΘΤΗΥ εν το. 4 ’ , “ ’ , ’ 4 a A “ 8 και ὀνειδιζόμεθα, οτι ἡλπίκαμεν επι Θεῴ ζῶντι, oS Ἔστιν A , , , ~ σωτὴρ πάντων ἀνθρώπων, μάλιστα πιστῶν. teachers. Κοπιάω is frequently used in reference to both apostolic and ministerial labours, Rom. xvi. 12, 1 Cor. xv. 10, Gal. iv. 11, &c., with allusion,, as the derivation [κοπ--, κόπτω, not Sanscr. kap, Benfey, Wurzellexr, Vol. 1. p. 268] suggests, to the toil and suffering which accom- panied them. The reading is not per- fectly certain ; the first καὶ is omitted in the important Mss., ACD; majority of Vv. ; Chrys.,! Dam. and Latin Ff. ; and ὀνειδ. is replaced by ἀγωνιζόμεθα (Lachm.) in ACFGK, but appy. with only one version, Syr. (Philox.), and with only seven mss. The latter reading is suspicious as being easier, and as having possibly originated from Col. i. 29.- The former (the omiss. of xal) is more specious ; the insertion, however (which is well supported, FGJK, and nearly all mss., see Zisch.), gives a force and emphasis which seems peculiarly ap- propriate, comp. 1 Cor, iv. 11; not only, ‘toil and shame’ (καί), nor ‘where toil, there shame’ (re+-Kal), but ‘as well the one as the other’ (xal—xat), both parts being simul- taneously presented in one predica- tion; see Winer, Gr. § 57. 3. note, p- 517, and comp. Donalds.. Cratyl. § 189, 195, ΡΡ. 322, 338. ἠλπίκαμεν] ‘have set our hope on,’ ‘have set and do set hope on,’ the perfect expressing the continuance and permanence of the ἔλπις, Bern- hardy, Synt. x. 6, p. 378; comp. ch. v. 5, Vi. 17, John v. 45, 2 Cor. i. To. Peile and Wiesinger compare 1 Cor, xv. 19, ἠλπικότες ἐσμέν, but it should not be forgotten that there ἠλπ. ἐσμὲν is not merely -- ἠλπίκαμεν ; see Meyer in loc. Ἐλπίζω, like πιστεύω (comp. notes on ch. i. 16), is found in the N. T. in connexion with different prepp.; (@) with ἐν, 1 Cor. xv. 19, ‘spes in Christo reposita ;’ (Ὁ) with εἰς, John v. 45, 2 Cor. i. 10, 1 Pet. ili. 5 (Lachm., Tisch.), marking the direction of the hope with perhaps also some faint (locative) notion of union or communion with the object of it, comp. notes on ch. 1. 16, and on Gal. iii. 27 ; (Ὁ) with ἐπὶ and dat., ch. vi. 17, Rom. xv. 12 (LXX), marking the basis or founda- tion on which the hope rests ; (d) with ἐπὶ and acc., ch. v. 5, marking the mental direction with a view to that reliance, comp. Donalds. Gir. ὃ 483. The simple dative is found (Lachmn., Tisch.) in Matth, xii. 21 (LXX.). ὅς ἐστι k.T.A.] Not either causal or explicative (this would more naturally be ὅστι5), but simply declaratory and definitive. The declaration is made to arouse the feeling that the same God who is a living, is a loving God, one in whom their trust is not placed in vain; the Saviour here and here- after (Chrys., Theoph.) of all men, chiefly, especially, of them that be- lieve. De Wette objects to the use of μάλιστα ; surely the primary notion of μάλα, ‘in a great degree’ [closely connected with uéyada,comp. ‘moles,’ Pott, Etym. Forsch. Vol. 1. p. 283], is here perfectly suitable and proper ; | τ God is the σωτὴρ of all men, in the greatest degree of the πιστοί ; i.e. the greatest and fullest exhibition of His σωτηρία, its complete realization, is seen in the case of the πιστοί ; comp. Gal. vi. το. There is involved in it, as Bengel observes, an argumentum @ minori ; ‘quanto magis eam (Dei bene- ficentiam) experientur pili qui in eum sperant,’ Caly. ν ΜΘ ΠΝ τ fe. Let not thy youth in- iI duce contempt; be ratheramodel. Neg- lect not thy spiritual gifts, but persevere in all thy duties. 1. ταῦτα] ‘these things,’ not merely the last statement, ὅς ἐστι κι τ. Ὰ. (Wegsch.), nor, on the other hand, too inclusively ‘omnia que dixi de magno pietatis sacram.,’ &c., but, τὸ ἐν εὐσεβ. γυμνάζεσθαι, τὸ προσμένειν τὰς ἀντιδόσεις, τὸ τὸν ἀγωνοθέτην ὁρᾶν, Theod.,—in fact all the statements in- -cluded between the last ταῦτα (ver. 6) and the present repetition of the pro- noun. παραγγέλλε] ‘command,’ Vulg., Goth., Auth. Ver.; not ‘exhort,’ Hamm., or ‘mone privatim,’ Grot., but in the usual and proper sense, ‘pre- cipe, ἐπίταττε, Chrysost., who thus ex- plains the use of each term : τῶν mpay- μάτων τὰ μὲν διδασκαλίας δεῖται, τὰ δὲ ἐπιταγῆς . .. οἷόν τι λέγω, τὸ μὴ ἰουδαΐζειν [comp. ver. δεῖται" 7] ἐπιταγῆς ἂν μέντοι λέγῃς ὅτι δεῖ τὰ ὑπάρχοντα κιτὰ. ἐνταῦθα διδασκαλίας χρεία, Homil. Χιττ. init. 12. μηδείς σου κιτ.λ.}1 ‘Let no one despise thy youth : Leo and others make gov dependent directly on καταῴφρ., ‘despiciat te ob juvenilem etatem,’ Bretsch. Ler, This is gram- matically tenable (Winer, G7. ὃ 30. 9, Ῥ- 232), but is not supported by the use of καταφρ. in the N. T., and is not required by the context. It has been doubted whether this com- mand is addressed (a) indirectly to the Church (Huth.), in the sense, ‘no man is to infringe on your authority,’ αὐθεντικώτερον παράγγελλε, Theoph. 1, Chrys. I, or (6) simply to Tim., in the sense, ‘let the gravity of thy life supply the want of years,’ Hamm., Chrys. 2, al. The personal application of the next clause, ἀλλὰ τύπος γίνου k.T.d., seems decidedly in favour of (Ὁ), ‘do not only, negatively, give no reason for contempt, but, positively, κενοῦν 61 , a Ilapayyedre ταῦτα καὶ δίδασκε. 12 μηδείς cov τῆς νεότητος καταφρονείτω, ο | , , 3 “ “ 9 , 9 ἄλλα τύπος γινὸυ τῶν πιστῶν, ἐν λόγῳ. ἐν be a living example.’ There is no difficulty in the term νεότης applied to Timothy. It is in a high degree probable (see Acts xvi. 1-3) that Timothy was young when he first joined the Apostle (A.D. 50, Wieseler): if he were then as much as 25 he would not be more than 38 (according to Wieseler’s chronology), or 40 (ac- cording to Pearson's) at the assumed date of this ep.—a relative νεότης when contrasted with the functions he had to exercise, and the age of those (ch. v. 1 sq.) he had to overlook. ἀλλὰ τύπος κ. τ.λ.7 ‘but become an example, &e., θέλεις, φησί, μὴ καταφρονεῖσθαι κελεύων, ἔμψυχος νόμος γενοῦ, Theo- doret. Τύπος is similarly applied ina moral sense, 1 Pet. v. 3, Phil. iii. 17, t Thess. i. 7, 2» Thess. iii. 9, Tit. ii. 7; comp. Rom. vi.17. The punctua- tion of ZLachm. and Tisch. is to be preferred to that of Mill, who puts no comma after πιστῶν : the qualities and conditions in which the example of Tim. was to be shown, are thus more distinctly enunciated. There is, as Huther suggests, a kind of order preserved in the five substantives which follow; Words, whether in teaching or in social intercourse ; con- duct (comp. notes on Transl. and on Eph. iv. 22), as evinced in actions ; Love and Faith, motive forces in that inner Christian life of which words and conduct are the outward manifes- ΕΣ Vv tations ; Purity (Syr. |Zou>5 not ‘castitate,’ Vule., Beng, either here or ch. v. 2,—on the meaning of ἁγνός, see notes on ch. y. 2), the prevailing characteristic of the life as outwardly manifested and developed. The omis- sions of the article in this list might 62 1 “TIMOTHY | ~ "ἢ > , - / 3 e , avast pops ev ayamy, ἐν πίστει. ἐν ayvela. IV. ‘12—14. 13 ἕως a , “ " , “ , ΄ ἣ 5 ερχομαι πρόσεχε τὴ αναγνώσει, TH παρακλήσει; TH οιθα- σκαλί ᾳ. be thought to confirm the canon of Harless, Zph. p. 29, ‘that abstracts which specify the qualities of a subject are anarthrous,’ if that rule were not wholly indemonstrable: see Winer, G7. § 18. 1, p. 136. The addition, ἐν πνεύματι, Rec. (only found in JK; Arab. (Polygl.)....Theod., Dam., al.) is rightly rejected by Lachm., Tisch., and most recent editors. To assert (Bloomf.) that it is omitted in a few MSS. and Vv. is surely a most incorrect statement. It might have crept into the text from 2 Cor. vi. 6, Mill, Prolegom. p. 61. 13. ἕως ἔρχομαι] ‘ Until I come? the present is perhaps used rather than ἕως ἂν ἔλθω (1 Cor. iv. 5), or ἕως ἔλθω (Luke xv. 4, xvii. 8, [Lachm. Tisch. ] al., comp. Herm. de Part. ἄν, 11. 9, p- [10 sq.,) as implying the strong expectation which the Apostle had of coming, ἐλπ. ἐλθεῖν πρός σε τάχιον, ch. iii. 14; comp, Luke xix. 2, John xxi. 22, and Winer, Gr. ὃ 41. 2, p. 307. On the constructions of ἕως see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 505 86. πρόσεχε] ‘apply (thyself), diligently attend to; comp notes on ch. i. 4. The meaning here and ch. iii. 8, ap- pears a little stronger than in’ch. i. 4. and iii. 8; comp. Herod. ix. 33, mpoo- éxew γυμνασίοισι, and the good list of exx. in Palm u. Rost, Lew., 8.0. 3. ¢, Vol. 11. p. 1192. τῇ ἀναγνώσει] ‘the (public) reading of the Scriptures, the Old, and pro- bably (comp. Col. iv. 16, 1 Thess. v. 27, and Thiersch, Hist. of Church, Vol. 1. p. 147, Transl.) parts of the New Testament: comp. Acts xiii. 15, τὴν ἀνάγν. τοῦ vowod; 2 Cor, iil. 14, ἐπὶ τή ἀναγνώσει τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης. 14 ‘ ς aN aA 3 ‘ , a 2060 μῆ ἀμέλει TOV EV σοι χαρίσματος: oO εοοῦϑῆ σοὶ On the public reading of the Scriptures in the early church, see Bingham, Antiq. xiii. 4, 2, and comp. notes on Gal, iv. 21. τῇ παρακλήσει κι τ. λ.7 ‘the exhortation, the teaching:’ both terms occur again together, Rom: xii. 7. The distinction usually made between παρακλ. and 66., as respec- tively ‘public exhortation’ and ‘pri- vate instruction,’ seems very doubtful. Both seem to mark a form of public address, the former (as the derivation suggests, comp. Theod.) possibly di- rected to the feelings, and appy. founded on some passage of Scripture (see esp. Acts xiii. 15, and Just. M. Apol. τ. 67, where, however, the true reading is mpécxAnots), the latter (ἡ ἐξήγησις τῶν γραφῶν, Coray) more to the wnderstanding of the hearers ; perhaps somewhat similar to the (now obscured) distinction of ‘sermon’ and ‘lecture.’ On διδασκ. compare notes on Eph. iv. 11, and Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. I. p. got. 14. μὴ ἀμέλει] “δὲ not neglectful of, i.e. ‘do not leave -unexercised ;’ comp. 2, Tim. i. χάρισμα. The following word χάρισμα, with the exception of 1 Pet. iv. 10, occurs only in St. Paul’s epp. where it is found as many as fourteen times, and in all cases denotes ‘a gift emanating from the Holy Spirit or the free grace of God.’ Here, as the context suggests, it probably refers to the special gifts of παράκλησις and διδασκ. Rom. xii. 6, 8. On the later use to denote Baptism (Clem. Alex. Peadag. τ. 6, Vol. I. p. 113, ed. Pott.), see Suicer Thesaw’. Vol. 11. p. 1503. ἐν σοί] The parallel passage, 2 Tim. i. 6, clearly developes the force of the 6, ἀναζωπυρεῖν τὸ 1 TIMOTHY IV. 14, 15.ὄ 63 διὰ προφητείας μετὰ ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τοῦ πρεσβυ- τερίου. prep.: the χάρισμα is as a spark of holy fire within him, which he is not to let die out from want of attention ; comp. Taylor, Forms of Litwrg. § 22, 23. διὰ προφητείας] ‘by means of, by the medium of prophecy.’ The meaning of this preposition has been needlessly tampered with: διὰ (with gen.) is neither for διὰ with acc. (Just.), for εἰς, or for ἐν (Beza), nor even, ‘under inspiration,’ Peile, but simply points to the medium through which the gift was given ; comp. Hof- mann, Schrifth. Vol. τι. p. 256. The close union of προῴ. with ἐπιθ. χειρῶν (μετὰ points to the concomitant act, Winer Gr. ὃ 51 ἢ, p. 451) renders the διὰ perfectly intelligible: prophecy and imposition of hands were the two coexistent (Kriger Sprachl. ὃ 68, 13, 1) circumstances which made up the whole process (comp. De W.) by the medium of which the χάρισμα was imparted. The association of διὰ with ἐπιθ. χειρ. is so perfectly regular (Acts viii. 18, 2 Tim. i. 6), that its use with mpop. gains by the association a kind of reflected elucidation. The ἐπίθεσις χειρῶν or χειροθεσία (Conc. Nic. rks Cone. Chalced. xv.) was a symbolic action, probably derived from the Jewish m0 (see Schoettg. Hor. Vol. τ. p. 874), the outward sign/ of an inward communication of the Holy Spirit (Acts viii. 17, ix. 17) for some spiritual office (Acts vi. 6) or under- taking (Acts xiii. 3), implied or ex- pressed: comp. Wiesing. in loc. Neand. Planting, Vol. τ. p. 155 (Bohn), and esp. Hammond's treatise, Works, Vol. I. p. 632—650, ed. 1684. In the early church only the superior orders of clergy, notthesub-deacons, readers, &c. (hence called ἀχειροτόνητος ὑπηρεσία) received χειροθεσίαν: see Bingham, 15 a λέ ? , ” 0 of ε TaVTaA MEAETA, εν τούτοις LOUL, LWA TOU ἢ Antiq. tr. 1, 6, and Iv. 6, ΤΙ. πρεσβυτερίου]) ‘presbytery,’ ‘ confra- ternity of presbyters’ at the place where Timothy was ordained (perhaps Lystra, if we assume that the ordination closely followed his association with St. Paul) who conjointly with the Apostle (2 Tim. 1, 6) laid their hands on him. Πρεσβυτέριον (used in Luke xxii. 66 and Acts xxii. 5 for the Jewish Sanhe- drim) occurs very often in the epp. of Ignatius, in the present sense (Z’rall. ἡ, 13, Philad. 7 al.), to denote the college of πρεσβύτεροι, the συνέδριον Gc00(Trall. 3) in each particular city or district: comp. Thorndike Prim. Gov. xii. 9, Vol. τὸ p. 75 (A. C. Libr.). 15. ταῦτα μελέτα] “ practise these things, exercise thyself in these things,’ Hammond, Scholef. Hints, p. 119; partial antithesis to μὴ ἀμελεῖ, ver. 14. Μελετάω only occurs again in the N.T. in a quotation from the LXX, Acts iv. 25, ἐμελέτησαν κενά: Mark xiii. 11, μηδὲ μελετᾶτε (rejected by Tisch. and bracketted by Lachm.) is very doubtful. As there is thus no definite instance from which its exact meaning can be elicited in the N.T., it seems most accurate to adopt the prevailing meaning of the word, not ‘meditari,’ Vulg., Syr. (though the idea of ‘thinking about’ really does form the primary idea of its root, Donalds. Cratyl. § 472) but ‘ exercere,’ ‘ diligenter tractare,’ Bretsch., ἀσκεῖν, Hesychk.; comp. Diog. Laert. Epicur. X. 123, ταῦτα πράττε καὶ μελέτα (cited by Wetst.), and see esp, the exx. in Raphel, Annot. Vol. τι. p. 586. The transl. of Conyb. and Hows., after De W., ‘let these things be thy care’ would be more appropriate to ταῦτα σοι μελέτω, comp. Hom, 7]. Vv. 490, XVIII. 463. ἐν τούτοις 64 προκοπὴ φανερὰ ἣ πᾶσιν. 16 :- TIMOTHY ΕΣ ” - κ ETTENE σεαυτῷ Και TH διδα- if a: 2 a “ ‘ “ A ν σκαλίᾳ, ETLUEVE AUTOS’ τοῦτο yp ποιῶν και GDEAVTOV ΄ \ vgs , ’ σώσεις και TOVS AKOVOYTAS σου. ἴσθι] ‘be occupied, spend thy time, in these things,’ Hamm.; ‘hoe age, his in rebus esto occupatus,’ Valck. on Luke 11.340, comp. Prov. xxiii. 17, ἐν φόβῳ Κυρίου ἴσθι ὅλην τὴν ἡμέραν, and exx. in Wakefield, Sylv. Crit. Vol. Iv. p. 198: astronger enunciation of the foregoing words, corresponding to ἐπίμενε x. 7.2. in ver. 16. προκοπή] ‘advance,’ ‘progress ; only here and Phil. i. 12, 25 (with a de- pendent gen.): ‘non immerito hee vox a Grammaticis contemta est, quee nullum antiquum nedum Atticum auctorem habet,’ Lobeck, Phryn., p. 85. The ‘advance’ may be in godli- ness generally, 2 Tim iii. 17 (De Wette), but more probably in all the particulars mentioned ver. 12—14; comp. Chrys., μὴ ἐν τῷ βίῳ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῷ διδασκαλικῷ, except that this throws the emphasis a little too much on διδασκαλία. It is curious that Raphel neither here nor on Phil. ll.-cc., should have ad- verted to the not uncommon use of the word by Polyb. e.g. Hist. 1. 12. 4, II. 45. 1, II. 4. 2 al. τό. ἔπεχε k.7.A.] ‘Give heed unto thyself (thy demeanour and conduct, ver. 12), and unto the doctrine which thou dost deliver, ver. 13.’ (‘to fix attention upon,’ ἐπικεῖσθαι, Hesych., Suid.) is somewhat similarly used in Luke xiv. 7, Acts iii. 5, comp. 2 Mace. ix. 25; not Phil. ii. 16 (Theo- doret), where λόγον ζωῆς ἐπέχοντες is either ‘ pretendentes,’ as Beza, al., or perhaps more probably ‘holding in possession,’ comp. Meyer in loc. St. Luke mainly uses the formula προσέ- xew ἑαυτῷ, Luke xii. 1, xvii. 3, xxi. 34, Acts v. 35, xx. 28. The difference ᾿Επέχειν in meaning is very slight; ἐπέχειν is perhaps rather stronger, the idea of ‘rest upon’ being probably united with ~ that of simple direction, see Palm u. Rost, Lex. s.v. 6. 3, Vol. 1. p. 1045. Timothy was to keep his attention jixzed both upon himself and his teach- ing ; his teaching was to be good (ch. iv. 6) and salutary (ch. i. 10), and he himself was practically to exemplify it both in word and deed (ver. 12). ἐπίμενε αὐτοῖς] ‘continue in them; comp. Col. i. 23, ἐπιμένετε τῇ πίστει, and similarly Rom. vi. 1, xi. 22, 23, Phil. i. 24: this tropical use of ἐπιμ. is thus peculiar to St. Paul. The re- ference of αὐτοῖς has been very diffe- rently explained. By comparing the above exx. of the Apostle’s use of ἐπιμ. with a dat., it would seem nearly certain that αὐτοῖς must be neuter : if masc. (Grot., Beng.), πρὸς with the ace. (τ Cor. xvi. 7, Gal. i. 18) would have been the more natural construc- tion ; comp. rCor. xvi. 7, Gal. i. 18. Αὐτὰ may then be referred either to the details implied in ἔπεχε x.7.X., or perhaps more probably to all the points alluded to in ver, 12 sq. (Matth., Huther), so as to form a final recapitulatory echo, as it were, of the ταῦτα and τούτοις, ver. 15. τοῦτο yap K.T.A.] ‘for by doing this,’ &e.; confirmatory clause. The pres. part. is used with a similarly gerundial force (comp. Herm. Soph. lect. 57) in ver. 6, where it is also better to preserve the more exact participial translation. This form of protasis involves a temporal reference (rather, however, too fully expressed by Syr. b to >Z 42>) and may perhaps be dis- 1 TIMOTHY V. 1—3. Behaviour of Timothy toward the elder and younger members of the church. Distinetions to be observed in the sup- port of widows. ous, ς ρας ὡς ἀδελφὰς ἐν πάση ἁγνείᾳ. tinguished from εἰ with pres. indic., or ἐὰν with pres. subj., with either of which it is nearly synonymous (Donalds. Gr. § 505), as connecting a little more closely the action of the verb in the protasis with that of the verb in the apodosis. It is sin- gular that De W. assigns a higher meaning to σώζειν in reference to Timothy, but a lower (‘ Befestigung’) in reference to his hearers. In both it has its normal and proper sense, not merely ‘servabis ne seducamini,’ Bengel (comp. Theod.), but ‘salvum facies,’ Vulg., and, as Wiesinger well remarks, conveys this important truth, ‘that in striving to save others, the minister is really caring for his own salvation.’ On the force of kal—xai, see notes on ver. 10. CHAPTER V. 1. πρεσβυτέρῳ] ‘an elder,’ Auth. Ver., i.e. ‘an elderly man,’ not ‘a presbyter; so Syr., Vulg.: dpa τὸ ἀξίωμα φησίν ; οὐκ οἶμαι, ἀλλὰ περὶ παντὸς γεγηρακότος, Chrysost. This interpretation is ren- dered nearly certain by the antitheti- cal νεωτέρους in the following verse, and by ὡς πατέρα in the adversative clause. The exhortation, as Leo ob- serves, follows very suitably after the reference (ch. iv. 12) to the νεότης of Timothy, ‘ita se gerat erga seniores ut revera deceat virum juniorem.’ μὴ ἐπιπλήξῃς} ‘do not sharply rebuke, reprimand. ᾿Ἐπιπλήττειν (an ar. 9 λεγόμενον in the N.T.), Syr. es [increpavit], νουθετεῖν μὲ παῤῥησίαν καὶ αὐστηρότητα, Coray (Romaic), seems to involve the notion of sharp- 65 V. Πρεσβυτέρῳ μὴ ἐπιπλήξης ἀλλὰ παρακάλει ὡς πατέρα, νεωτέρους ὡς ἀδελ- πρεσβυτέρας ὡς μητέρας, νεωτέ- 3 Χήρας τίμα τὰς ὄντως ness and severity : τὸ ἐπιπλ. καὶ κόπτειν λέγεται. . .. ἔτι δὲ καὶ μαστίζειν... ἀφ᾽ οὗ καὶ τὸ λόγοις ἐπιπλήσσειν εἴρηται, Kustath. on Hom. Jl. K. 500 (cited by Wetst.) The usual form in the N.T. is ἐπιτιμᾶν, used very frequently by the first three evange- lists, but only once by St. Paul, 2 Tim. iv. 2. νεωτέρους] The grammatical construction requires παρακάλει to be supplied. The con text, however, seems to suggest a more general word, e.g., νουθέτει (comp. 2 Thess. iii. 15, νουθετεῖτε ὡς ἀδελφόν), a mean term, as it were, be- tween ἐπίπληττε and παρακάλει. This, however, was probably not inserted on account of the following πρεσβυτέρας, where a milder term would again be more apppropriate. 2. ἐν πάσῃ ἁγνείᾳ refers solely to the νεωτέρας : the bishop was so to order his conversation to the younger women of his flock, with such purity, asnottoafford any ground even for sus- picion (Chrys.). The rule of Jerome (Zpist. 2) is simple; ‘omnes puellas et virgines Christi aut equaliterignora aut zqualiter dilige.’ 3. χήρας τίμα] ‘pay due regard to widows,’ Conyb. and Hows. The meaning of τιμάω and the connexion of the following verses, 3—16, has been from the earliest times so much a matter of dispute, that it is very difficult to arrive ata certain decision. On the whole, when we observe the economic terms, ἀμοιβὰς ἀποδιδ. (ver. 4), προνοεῖν (ver. 8), and esp. ἐπαρκ. ταῖς ὄντως χήραις (ver. 16), it seems best with De W. (after Theodoret al.) to give τίμα a somewhat extended F 66 χήρας. 1 TIMOTHY Υ͂. 3, 4. 3 , , , A + ” , 4 € δέ Tl χῆρα τεκνα ἢ εκγονα EXEL, μανθανέτω- σαν πρῶτον τὸν ἴδιον οἶκον εὐσεβεῖν καὶ ἀμοιβὰς ἀποδιδό- meaning,—‘ honour,’ not by a simple exhibition of respect (πολλῆς yap δεόνται τιμῆς μεμονωμέναι, Chrys.,—a somewhat insufficient reason), but also by giving material proofs of it ; ἐλέει καὶ τὰ ἀναγκαῖα χορήγει, Theophyl. The translation of Peile al., ‘support, provide for,’ τρέφε μὲ ἐλεημοσύνας, Coray (Romaic), involves too great a departure from the simple sense ; the context, however, does certainly seem to require some intermediate transla- tion, which, without obscuring the primary and proper meaning of τιμάω, may still leave the latter and less proper meaning fairly discernible: comp. τιμῆς ver. 17, Matth. xv. 4 sq. If this view be correct, ver. 3—8 will seem to relate specially to the support widows are to receive, ver. g—16 to their qualifications for an office in the church; see Wieseler, Chronol. p. 309, and notes on ver.g. On the position which widows occupied in the early church, see Bingham, Antigq. vil. 4. 9, Winer, R. W.B., Art. ‘ Wit- wen.’ Tas ὄντως χήρας] ‘who are widows indeed ; i.e. as ver. 4, 5, and esp. ver. 16, clearly explain it,—destitute and desolate, τὰς μὴ ἐχούσας ἀλλαχόθεν. οὐδεμίαν βοήθειαν, Coray. ΤΉΘΓΘ seems then no sufficient ground either (a) for assigning to χήρα its ecclesiastical sense (Baur, Paulus, p. 497, who compares Ignat. Smyrn. 13, Tas παρθένους τὰς λεγο- μένας χήρας ; see Coteler, in loc., Vol. Il. p. 38), so that ἡ ὄντως x. is ‘a widow proper,’ opp. to a χήρα in the official meaning of the term; or (ὦ) for giving ἡ ὄντως χήρα a strictly ethical reference, ‘bona vidua et proba,’ Leo, for the ‘nervus argu- menti’ in both cases, viz., the clause ἤλπικεν ἐπὶ τὸν Θεόν, does not mark exclusively the religious attitude, but the earthly isolation of 7 ὄντως χήρα, and her freedom from the distractions of ordinary domestic life ; comp. 1 Cor. vii. 33, 34, and, thus far, Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 154 (Bohn). 4. εἰ δέ τις χήρα] ‘But if any widow,’ i. e. ‘in every case in which a widow has,’ ὅσ, ; comp. Syr., where this evident opposition to ἡ ὄντως x. is still more distinctly maintained. Having spoken of the ‘widows in- deed,’ the apostle proceeds to show still more clearly his meaning by con- sidering the case of one who does not fall under that class. ἔκγονα) ‘descendants, i.e. as the context implies, ‘ grandchildren ; ‘children’s children,’ Syr., —‘nephews,’ Auth. Ver., in the original, but now antiquated, sense of the word ; comp. Thom. M. p. 850 (ed. Bern.) The term ἔκγονον only occurs here in the N.T., but is sufficiently common in the LXX, as well as in earlier Greek, see exx. in Palm u. Rost, Lex. s.v. μανθανέτωσαν)] ‘let them learn.’ Who? The χήρα: implied in the col- lectively-taken χήρα ᾿- or the τέκνα and ἔκγονα Ὁ. The former is supported by Vulg., Chrys., and Theod. ; the latter, however (Syr., see Theoph., (Ecum.), seems more in accordance with the context generally, and with the use of the special terms εὐσεβεῖν (see below) and ἀμοιβὰς droid. The explanation of Chrys., ἀπῆλθον ἐκεῖνοι (ol πρόγονοι) .... ἐν Tots ἐκγόνοις αὐτοῦ ἀμείβου, ἀποδίδου τὸ ὀφείλημα διὰ τῶν παίδων, seems very unsatis- factory. πρῶτον] ‘first,’ i.e. ‘before thow hast to do it,’ De Wette. εὐσεβεῖν) ‘to be dutiful,’ i.e. ‘to evince (filial) piety towards ; compare Acts xvii. 23, ὁ ᾿ς ΙΝ Be Wa 5 67 - , a , 3 " 4 ’ val τοις Tpoyovots TOUTO γαρ εστιν ἀποδεκτὸν ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ. © ἥν ὧν , ‘ ’ cA Cee 5 ἡ δὲ ὄντως χήρα και μεμονωμενὴ ἤλπικεν ἐπὶ ‘ ‘ ‘ , a“ , ‘ a a TOV Θεὸν και προσμένει ταις δεήσεσιν Kal Ταῖς προσεύυχαις ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε (Lachm., Tisch.) This verb can hardly be referred to the χήραι, as it certainly cannot be taken actively, ‘domum suam_regere,’ Vulg., and not very plausibly, ‘to practise piety in respect of,’ Matth. ; whereas when referred to the children, its primitive sense is but slightly ob- scured ; comp. Philo, de Dec. Orac. Vol. π. p. 20 (ed. Mang.), where storks are similarly said εὐσεβεῖν and γηροτροφεῖν. The expression τὸν ἔδιον οἶκον is somewhat singular in such a connexion, but the remark of De W. (who has elucidated the whole passage with great ability) that οἶκον was ex- pressly used to mark the duty as an act of ‘family feeling and family honour,’ seems fairly to meet the difficulty. Τὸν ἴδιον marks the con- trast between assistance rendered by members of the same family and that supplied by the comparative strangers composing the local church. Kal ἀμοιβὰς «.7.A.] Sand to requite their parents ; further explanation of τὸν ἴδ. olk. εὐσεβεῖν. The expression ἀμοιβὰς ἀποδιδόναι is illustrated by Elsner, and Wetst. im loc. (comp. Hesiod, Op. 188, τοκεῦσιν ἀπὸ Ope- πτήρια δοῖεν), and while perfectly suit- able in the case of children, would certainly seem very unusual in refe- rence to parents. The duty itself is enforced in Plato, Legg. Iv. 717 ; see also Stobzeus, Floril., p. 79, and esp. Taylor, Duct. Dub. 111. 5. 3. Πρόγονοι does not commonly refer ‘to living parents (De W. however, cites Plato, Legg. Xt. 931), but in the present case suitably balances the term ἔκγονα, and seems adopted as briefly compre- hending both generations, mothers or grandmothers. τοῦτο yap κι τ. λ.7 See notes on ch, ii. 3. 5. ἡ δὲ ὄντως χήρα] ‘But (not ‘now’ Auth. Ver.) she thatis a widow indeed ; sharpand emphatic contrast to the fore- going, serving to specify still more clearly to Timothy the characteristics of the ‘ widow indeed.’ Kal μεμονωμένη], ‘and left desolate :’ explanatory, not merely additional (Schleierm.), characteristic. Matthies urges that if this were an explanatory characteristic, it would have been either μεμονωμένη ἐστίν, or ἡ μεμονω- μένη. This does not seem necessary ; the apostle probably feeling and re- membering the adjectival nature of χήρα [ΧΑ- perhaps Sanser. ha ‘ de- serere,’ Pott., Htym. Vol. 1. p. 199, but comp. Donalds. Cratyl. § 280, 287, and Benfey Wurzel-lex., Vol. 11. p. 188], adds another epithet which explains, and more exactly marks, the characteristic (orbitas) which is in- volved in χήρα, and forms the principal subject of thought. ἤλπικεν «.T.A.] ‘hath placed her hopes on God ;’ ‘hath hoped and still hopes ; see Winer, Gr. ὃ 41. 4. a, p. 315. On the distinction between ἐλπίζω with ἐπὶ and accus. and ἐπὶ with dat. see notes on ch. iv. 10. προσμένει] ‘abides in; the prepo- sition here intensifies the meaning of the simple verb, Palm u. Rost, Lex. s.v., πρός, C. c., Vol. I. p. 1162; see Acts xi. 23, τῇ προθέσει τῆς καρδ. προσ- μένειν τῷ Κυρίῳ, xiii. 43, προσμένειν τῇ χάριτι; comp. τῇ προσευχῇ προσ- καρτερεῖν, Acts i. 14, Rom. xii. 12, Col. iv. 2. On the distinction be- tween δέησις and προσευχή, see notes on ch, ii. 1, and on Eph. vi. 18. It FQ 68 \ Ae nek ἢ» 6 VUKTOS και ἡμεραφςφ" = , “- 7 καὶ ταῦτα παραάγγελλε, ἵνα ἀνεπίλημπτοι ὦσιν. may be observed that the article is prefixed to both ; it clearly might have been omitted before the latter; St. Paul, however, chooses to regard prayer under two separate aspects; comp. Winer, Gr. ὃ 18. 5, p. note. 148, νυκτὸς Kal ἡμέρας] ‘night and day,’ i. e., grammatically considered, at some indefinite point of the continuous time expressed by the substantives: see Donalds. Gr. § 451, 459, and comp. notes on ch. ii. 6 ad fin. St. Luke, in the very parallel case of Anna, ch. ii. 37, uses the acc. νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν, but there the pre- vious occurrence of νηστείαις renders the accus., and perhaps the order (Fasts appy. began at eve, Winer, RWB, Art. ‘Fasten,’ compare Lev. xxiii. 32) perfectly appropriate; in Acts xxvi. 7 and in 2 Thess. iii. 8 (Tisch.) the acc. is appy. hyperbo- lical. On the order νυκτ. καὶ iu. (always in St. Paul), comp. Lobeck Paralip. p. 62 sq. It may be ob- served that St. Luke adopts the order νυκτ. καὶ ἡμ. with the acc. (comp. Mark iv. 27), and inverts it when he uses the gen. (opp. to Mark v. 5). St. John (Rev. iv. 8, vii. 15, xii. To, xiv. II, xx. 10) uses only the gen. and the order ju. καὶ νυκτός. Is the order always to be explained from internal considerations, and not rather to be referred to the habit of the writer ? 6. ἡ δὲ σπαταλῶσα] ‘ but she that liveth riotously ; one of the sins of Sodom and her daughters, Ezek.- xvi. 49, forming a sharp contrast to the life of self-denial and prayer of ἡ ὄντως χήρα. Σπαταλᾶν only occurs again in the N.T., James v. 5, ἐτρυ- φήσατε comp, Ezek. loc. cit. ἐν εὐθηνίᾳ ἐσπαταλῶν, καὶ ἐσπαταλήσατε ; A “ ἡ δὲ σπαταλῶσα, 1 TIMOTHY V. 5—3. ΄“. , ὥσα τέθνηκεν. , 8 εἰ δέ Ecclus. xxi. 15, ὁ σπαταλῶν. As the derivation of each word suggests, σπαταλάω [SI1A- cognate with σπαθάω] points more to the ‘prodigality’ and ‘wastefulness’ (Benfey, Wurzellex, Vol. 1. p. 562), the somewhat synony- mous word τρυφάω (θρύπτω), more to the ‘effeminacy and ‘ luxury’ of the subject: so also rightly Tittmann, Synon. I. p. 193. The present verb is thus, etymologically considered, more allied in meaning to ἀσώτως ζῆν, comp. notes on Eph. v. 18, though it is occa- sionally found (Theano, ad ELubul., p. 86, ed. Gale, τὰ σπαταλῶντα τῶν παιδίων) in a sense scarcely at all differing from τρυφᾶν. See also Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 1. p. 591. {aca τέθνηκε] ‘is dead while she liveth ° so Rev. ili. τ, (Hs, καὶ νεκρὸς el, comp. Eph. iv. 18. is rightly expressed by the Greek ex- positors, e.g. Theophyl. (most incor- rectly quoted by Huther), κἂν δοκῇ ζῆν The meaning ταύτην τὴν ζωὴν τὴν αἰσθητὴν [comp. Gal. ii. 20] τέθνηκε κατὰ πνεῦμα : simi- larly Theodoret, but with less theolo- gical accuracy of expression. Her life is merely a conjunction of soul and body, destitute of all union with the higher and truly quickening principle ; comp. Olshausen, Opuse. p. 196. Nu- merous quotations involving similar sentiments will be found in Wetst. in loc.; the most pertinent is Philo, de Profug., Vol. 1. p. 554 (ed. Mang.) ; ζῶντες ἔνιοι τεθνήκασι καὶ τεθνηκότες ζῶσι x.7.d., comp. Loesner, Obs. p. 404. >= ἡ. ταῦτα] ‘these things; what things? Those contained (a) in ver. 3-6 only, Theodoret (appy.), and Huth. ; or (6) in ver. 6 only, Chrys. ; or (ὦ) in ver. 5 and 6, De Wette and | Wiesing. Of these (a) is very plaus 1 TIMOTHY V.-. 8. 69 A ἐδί A , A . , 3 - ‘ τις TWVY LOL@MY Και μαλιστα τῶν OLKEL@MVY OU TPovoel, τὴν , Nh ov Saf , πιστιν ἤρνηται και ἐστιν απιστου χειρῶν. sible on account of the simple manda- tory force of παράγγελλε, but involves the difficulty that ἀνεπίλ. must then be referred to τέκνα and éyxova as well as the widows, whereas the latter seem manifestly the principal subjects. The use of καὶ (not simply ταῦτα as in ch. iv. 5) is in favour of (δ), but then again it seems impossible to disunite two verses so closely con- nected by the antithesis involved as ver. 5 and 6. On the whole, then, it seems best to adopt (c), and to refer the pronoun to the two foregoing verses: καὶ thus binds ver. 7 to ver. 5 and 6, while ver. 8 concludes the whole subject by a still more em- phatic statement of the rule involved in ver. 4, but not then further ex- panded, as the statement of the diffe- rent classes and positions of the widows would otherwise have been interrupted. παράγγελλε] “command ; see notes on ch. iv. 11: the choice of this stronger word seems to imply that the foregoing contrast and distinction between ἡ ὄντως χήρα and ἡ omar. was intended to form the basis for a rule to the church. ἀνεπίλημπτοι) ‘irreproachable ;’ the widows, not the widows and their descendants, seeabove. On the mean- ing of the word, see notes on ch. iii. 2. 8. εἰ δὲ κιτ.λ.}] Recurrence to the same subject and to the same persons, τέκνα καὶ ἔκγονα, as in ver. 4, but, as the τίς implies, in the form of a more general statement. The δὲ (not=ydp, as Syr.) is correctly used, as the subjects of this verse stand in a sort of contrast to the widows, the subjects of ver. 7. τῶν ἰδίων «.t.A.] ‘his own (relatives) and especially those of his own house ; ἴδιοι here marks the relationship, οἰκεῖοι, those who were not only relations, but also formed part of the family, τοὺς κατοικοῦντας τὴν αὐτὴν οἰκίαν συγγενεῖς, Coray ; ‘domestici, qualis vel maxime est mater aut avia vidua, domi,’ Bengel. Lachmann, on fair uncial authority (AD*FG), omits the second τῶν; this would bind the ἴδιοι and οἰκεῖοι more explicitly into one class ; Winer, Gr. ὃ 18.4. d. On οἰκεῖοι, comp. notes on Gal. vi. το. It is worthy of notice that the Essenes were not permitted to give relief to their relatives without leave from their ἐπιτρόποι, though they might freely do so to others in need ; see Joseph. Bell. 11. 8. 6. οὐ προνοεῖ] “does not provide for; only again Rom. xii. 17 (from Prov. iii. 4) and 2 Cor. viii. 21; in both cases with an accus. ret (61, Gr. ὃ 496, obs. t) in the former passage in the middle, in the latter (Lachm.) in the active voice. On the connexion εἰ ov (here perfectly intelligible as οὐ is in such close connexion with προνοεῖ), see the copious list of exx. in Gayler, Partic. Neg. p. 99—115, and notes on ch. iii. 5. τὴν πίστιν ἤρνηται) ‘he has denied the faith ; not ‘doctrinam Christianam,’ but ‘the (Christian) faith,’ considered as a rule of life ; comp. notes on Gal. i. 23. His acts are a practical denial of his faith; faith and love are in- separable, in not showing the one he has practically shown that he is not under the influence of the other. On the meaning of πίστις, see Reuss, Theol. Chret. Iv. 13, Vol. 0. p. 128 sq. ἀπίστου] Not a ‘mis- believer’ (2 Cor. iv. 4, Tit. i. 15), but an ‘unbeliever,’ opp. to ὁ πιστεύων, 1 Cor. xiv. 22 sq. Such aone, though he might bear the name of Christian, 70 Presbyteral widows must be sixty years of τ TIMOTHY V. 9. 9 Χήρα καταλεγέσθω μὴ ἔλαττον ἐτῶν age and of good character; refuse younger widows, whom I desire rather to marry and not to give offence. would be really worse than a heathen, for the precepts of all better heathe- nism forbad such an unnatural selfish- ness ; see Pfanner, Theol. Gent. XI. 22, p- 320, and comp. the quotations in Stobeeus, Floril. Tit. 79. 9. χήρα καταλεγέσθω k.t.A.] ‘As widow let no one be put on the list,’ &e. In this doubtful passage it will be best to consider (a) the simple meaning and grammatical structure; (ὁ) the interpretation of the clause. First, then, καταλέγειν (κατατάττειν, Suid.) simply means ‘to enter upon a list’ (see exx. in Palm u. Rost, Lew. s.v. Vol. 1. p. 1624), the contents and object of which must be deduced from the context. Next, we must observe that χήρα is in fact the predicate ‘als Witwe werde verzeichnet,’ Winer, Gr. § 66. 4. obs., p. 663. Grammar and lexicography help us no further. (Ὁ) Interpretation : three explanations have been advanced; (a) the some- what obvious one that the, subject of the preceding clause is simply con- tinued ; so Chrys. in loc., the other Greek expositors and the bulk of modern expositors. The objections to this are, grammatically considered, the appy. studied absence of any con- necting particle; exegetically con- sidered, the high improbability that when criteria had been given, ver. 4 8q., fresh should be added, and those of so very exclusive a nature: would the Church thus limit her alms? (8) That of Schleierm., Mack, and others, that deaconesses are re- ferred to: against this the objection | usually urged seems decisive,—that we have no evidence whatever that deaconesses and χήραι are synony- mous terms (the passage in Ignat. Trall. 13, cannot here fairly be made use of, first on account of the doubt- ful reading ; secondly, the suspicion which now hangs about the whole epistle, see Cureton, Corp. Ign. p. 333), and that the age of 60, though deriving a specious support from Cod. Theod. XVI. 2. 27 (comp., however, Conc. Chale. c. 1%, where the age is fixed at 40), is wholly incompatible with the active duties (comp. Bingham, Antiq. τι. 22. 8 sq.) of such an office. (vy) The suggestion of Grot., ably expanded by Mosh., and followed by De W., Wiesing., Huth. (Hinleitt. § 4), that an order of widows (χηρῶν χόρος, Chrysost. Hom. in Div. N.T. Loc. 31, compare Tertull. de Vel. Virg. 9, and the other reff. in Mosheim) is here referred to, whose duties appy. consisted in the exercise of superintendence over, and the mi- nistry of counsel and consolation (see Tertull. Z.¢.) to, the younger women ; whose office in fact was, so to say, presbyteral (πρεσβύτιδες) rather than diaconic. The external evidence for the existence (though not necessarily the special ecclesiastical organization) of such a body even in the earliest times is so fully satisfactory, and so com- pletely in harmony with the internal evidence supplied by ver. 10 sq., that on the whole (y) may be adopted with some confidence ; see the long note of Wiesing. in loc. and Huther, Einleit. § 4. p. 46. We thus find noticed in this chap. the χήρα in the ordinary sense; ἡἣ ὄντως x., the desolate and destitute widow; ἡ κατειλεγμένη χήρα, the ecclesiastical or presbyteral widow. γεγονυῖα is now properly referred by Lachm., Tisch., al. to μὴ ἔλαττον K.T.X., see exx. in Raphel, Annot. Vol. I. p. 592. The construction, ἔλαττον 7 ‘ τ TIMOTHY ἰδεμο, το. e , - [π᾿ ἍΝ , ἑξήκοντα γεγονυια, evos ἀνδρος γυνή» 71 10 ἐν ἔργοις καλοῖς μαρτυρουμένη, εἰ ἐτεκνοτρόφησεν. εἰ ἐξενοδόχησεν, εἰ ἁγίων πόδας ἔνιψεν, εἰ θλιβομένοις ἐπήρκεσεν, εἰ παντὶ ἔργῳ ἔτη ἑξήκοντα, would be perhaps more correct, but the somewhat concise gen. is perfectly intelligible. ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς γυνή] It is obvious that this can only be contrasted with swc- cessive polygamy, and cannot possibly be strained to refer to the legitimacy of the marriage (comp. Beng.). In plain terms the woman was to be univira: so Tertull. ad Uxor. τ. 7, ‘ prescriptio Apostoli viduam allegi in ordinem [ordinationem, Sez. | nisi univiram non concedit :᾿ comp. notes on ch. iii. 2, and the copious list of exx. Wetst. in loc. το. ἐν ἔργοις καλοῖς κ. T.A.] ‘ well-reported of in the matter of good works,’ i.e. ‘for good works ; comp. notes on Tit. ch. iii. 8. ᾿Εν denotes the sphere to which the woman's actions and the consequent testimony about them was confined. Huther cites Heb. xi. 2 as evincing the use of ἐν to mark the reason of the μαρτυρία, but there ἐν is simply ‘in ; ‘in hac fide constituti,’ Winer, Gr. ὃ 52 ἃ, p- 463 note. Μαρτυρεῖσθαι appears frequently used in the N. T., e.g. Acts vi. 3, X. 22, xvi. 2 al. in special reference to a good testimony. The simple meaning is retained by Syr. and Vulg. εἰ ἐτεκνοτρό- φησεν] ‘if she (ever) brought up chil- dren ; hypothetical clause, ultimately dependent on καταλ., but still also more immediately explanatory of épy. cad. Itis doubtful whether texvorpo- φεῖν is to be confined to the widow's own children(Vulg., Chrys. and Greek commentt.), or extended also to the orphans she might have brought up, ‘ecclesie commodo’ (Beng.). The latter seems most probable, especially as in two passages which have been adduced, Herm. Past. 1. 2, and Lucian, de Mort. Peregr. § 12, widows and orphans are mentioned in a suggestive connexion. In either case, τὸ εὐσεβῶς θρέψαι, Theod., is necessarily implied, though not expressed in the word. ἐξενοδόχησεν] ‘entertained strangers,’ dir. λεγόμ., but comp. Matth. xxv. 35. The sequence of duties may have been suggested by the relations of proximity, ὁρᾶς πῶς πανταχοῦ τῶν οἰκείων τὰς εὐεργεσίας τῶν ἀλλοτρίων προτίθησι, Chrys.; as the widow’s own children would clearly be com- prehended in, and even form the first objects of, the τεκνοτροφία. εἰ ἁγίων «.7.4.] An act not only connected with the rites of Oriental hospitality (Jahn, Archeol. § 149), but demonstrative of her humility (1 Sam. xxv. 41; it was commonly a servant's office, Elsner, Obs. Vol. I. p- 338), her love (comp. Luke vii. 38), and, it might be added, the practical heartiness (comp. Chrys.) of her hospitality: ‘non dedignetur quod fecit Christus facere Christianus,’ August. in Joan. Tract. 58. ἐπήρκεσεν] ‘relieved ; ἐβοήθησεν, Hesych., comp. Polyb. Hist. I. 51. 10, where it is used as nearly synon. with érBo70. It thus need not be restricted merely to alms (ἀπορίᾳ ἐπαρκεῖν, Clem. Alex. Strom. i. 10, comp. Vales. on Euseb. Hist. vil. 5), nor θλιβομ. to ‘paupertate pressis’ (Beng.), but, as appy- Syr. Dac] v [refocillavit], may refer to the relief of necessity in its most general form ; καὶ διὰ χρημάτων, καὶ διὰ προστασίας, καὶ μεσιτείας, Theophyl. 79 1, TIMOTHY τῆ: ἀγαθῷ ἐπηκολούθησεν. 1 Νεωτέρας δὲ χήρας παραιτοῦ" 1. καταστρηνιάσωσιν] SoCDJKal..... Chrys., Theodoret, Theophyl. (Ecum. (Griesb., Scholz, De W., e sil.). Lachm. and Tisch. here read καταστρη- νιάσουσιν with AFG, 31; Chrys. (Cod.) Though the future might fairly be borne with, as in Rev. iv. 9 (comp. pres. Mark xi. 25), the external authority does not seem sufficient, for it must be remembered that F and G, even in errors of transcription (‘mira est utriusque [codicis] consensio in lectionibus in ipsisque multis calami erroribus, Tisch. p. LXXt11.), are little more than one authority. Moreover the termination -ovow might have originated from the eye of the copyist glancing on to #é\—ovow. Lastly, too, the only correct principle- of explaining these usages of ἐὰν and ὅταν with the indic.,—viz., the restriction of the whole conditional force to the particle, and the absence of necessary internal connexion between the verb in the protasis and that in the apodosis— does not seem here to apply. St. Paul does not appy. desire to mark the mere relation of time, but the ethical connexion between καταστρ. and yay. θέλ. ; a weariness of Christ’s yoke involves a further and more decided lapse. On the use of ἐὰν and ὅταν with the indic., see the excellent remarks of Klotz, Devar. Vol. τι. p. 468—478. ἐπηκολούθησεν] ‘ followed after ; comp. 1 Pet. ii. 21, ἐπακολουθεῖν τοῖς ἴχνεσιν : the ἐπὶ does not appear to involve any idea of intensity, scil. προθύμως καὶ κατ᾽ ἴχνη, Coray, Auth. Ver. (comp. Steph. in Thesaur. s.v.), but only that of direction. The sense is thus not very different to that implied in διώκειν τὸ ἀγαθόν, 1 Thess. v. 15; comp. ‘Plato, de Rep. τι. p. 370 Ὁ, τῷ πραττομένῳ ἐπακαλούθεϊν, where the next words, μὴ ἐν παρέργου μέρει, supply the notion of προθυμία: see ib. Phado, 107 B, where the force of the compound also does not seem very strongly marked. The meaning rightly conveyed by Chrys., δηλοῦντος ἐστιν, ὅτι εἰ καὶ μὴ αὐτὴ αὐτὸ ἐργάσασθαι ἠδυνήθη, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως is ἐκοινώνησεν, ὑπούργησε. 11. νεωτέρας) Not necessarily, with studied reference to ver. 9, ‘widows under sixty years of age,’ Wiesing., but, as the context seems to imply, ‘younger’ with nearly a positive sense, ver. 2. παραιτοῦ] ‘shun,’ or as the contrast with καταλέγεσθω (ver. 9) seems to require, —‘ decline’ (‘ refuse,’ Auth. Ver., ἀπόβαλλε, Coray), scil. ‘to put on the κατάλογος of the presbyteral widows.’ They were not necessarily to be excluded from the alms of the Church (Taylor, Zpise., § 14), but were only to be held ineligible for the ‘collegium viduarum,’ comp. however ver. 16. On παραιτοῦ, comp. notes on ch. iv. 7: the-regular meaning (as Huther properly observes) suggested by ch. iv. 7, 2 Tim. ii. 23, Tit. iii. 10, need not. here. be lost sight of ; Timothy was to shun them, and not entertain their claims; ‘noli causam earum suscipere,’ Beng. ὅταν καταστρην.] ‘when theyhave come to wax wanton against Christ,’ Auth. Vers., ‘lascivieru{i|nt,’ Beza; the aor. subj. with ὅταν, marking an action which takes place at a single definite period distinct from the actual present, Madvig, Syntax, § 128; comp. also Winer, Gr. § 43. 5, p. 356. This trans- lation of καταστρ. may be fully re- tained if ‘lascivire’ be taken more in its simple (‘instar jumentorum que cum pabulo ferociunt,’ Scul. ap. Pol. 1 TIMOTHY V. 11—13. 73 “ἤ ‘ ’ “ xX “ A , ὅταν yap καταστρηνιάσωσιν Tov Δριστοὺυ, γαμεῖν θέλουσιν, 12 » - av 4 ’ ls 9 , ἔχουσαι κρίμα OTL THY πρώτην πίστιν ἠθέτησαν: 13 ἅ δὲ ae 4 6 , ’ ‘ 7 «© Ma OE Και apyat μανσανούυσιν περιέρχομεναι τὰς OLKLAS, Syn.) than in its merely sexual ref, (que fornicate sunt in injuriam Christi, Jerome, Lp. 11, al. 223) though this, owing to the γαμεῖν θέλουσιν, not simple fut. γαμήσουσιν {usual later form], cannot wholly be put out of sight. Στρηνιάω, a word of later comedy (see Lobeck, Phryn. p- 381), implies the exhibition of ‘ over- strength,’ ‘restiveness,’ and thence of ‘fulness of bread’ (Antiph. ap. Athen. 11. 127), and ‘wanton luxury ; comp. Rey. xviii. 7, 9. The adject. στρήνης is far more probably connected with the Sabine ‘strena’ (Donalds. Varron. tv. 2), and the Lat. ‘strenuus’ (Pott, Etym. Vol. τ. p. 198) than with topos, τρανός, which is suggested by Lobeck. The prep. κατὰ expresses the direction of the action (Palm u. Rost. Lex. s.v. κατά, Iv. 2), and points to the object against which the στρῆνος was exhibited: comp. κατακαυχᾶσθαι, James ii. 13. 12. ἔχουσαι κρῖμα] ‘having, bearing about with them a judgment that,’ &e.; comp. φόβον ἔχειν, ver. 20, ἁμαρτίαν ἔχειν, John χν. 22. The judgment or sentence is a load which they bear about with them (comp. Gal. y.-10) ; and this judgment is that ἠθέτησαν κιτιλ. Ὅτι is thus not causal, and must not, as in Mill, be preceded by a comma, a punctuation suggested by a misinterpretation of κρῖμα, which is notfor κατακρῖμα (κατά- κρισιν, Theophyl., Peile, Liddell and Scott, Lex. al.), much less = ‘ punish- ment’ (‘ beladen sich mit Strafbarkeit,’ Mack), but retains its usual and pro- per meaning. The context will alone decide the nature of the judgment, whether favourable or unfavourable ; comp. notes on Gal. v. 10, and Fritz. Rom. ii. 3, Vol. 1. p. 94. τὴν πρώτην K.T.A.] they broke their Jirst faith ; clearly, as it is explained by the Greek commentt., their en- gagement (συνθήκην, Chrys.) to Christ not to marry again, which they virtu- ally, if not explicitly, made when they attempted to undertake the duties of the presbyteral office, as ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς γυναῖκες ; so Theodoret, τῷ Χριστῷ συνταξάμενοι σωφρόνως ζῆν ἐν χηρείᾳ δευτέροις ὁμιλοῦσι γάμοις; The only seeming difficulty is πρώτην, not προ- τέραν, as the πρώτη πίστις was really to the first husband. ‘This is easily explained: there are now only two things put in evidence, faith to Christ and faith to some second husband. In comparing these two, the superl., according to a very common Gk. habit of speaking, is put rather than the compar.; see Winer, Gr. § 36. 5. 4, p. 283. The phrase ἀθετεῖν πίστιν, ‘fidem irritam facere,’ is illustrated by Wetst. and esp. Raphel in loc.; the latter cites Polyb. Hist. vim. 2. 5, ΧΙ. 29. 3, XXIII, 16. 5, XXIv. 6.7. The nume- rous illustrations that the language of St. Paul’s unquestioned epp. has re- ceived from Polybius are well-known and admitted. This persistent simi- larity, in the case of an ep. of which the genuineness has been (unreason- ably) doubted, is a subsidiary argu- ment which ought not to be lost sight of. 13. ἅμα δὲ κ. τ.λ.] There is some difficulty in the construction μανθαν. is usually connected with zepiepx., but, unless with De W. and Wiesing., we plainly assume that the participle is incorrectly used for the inf., we 74 gy TEMOTHY tVii aes 1.4} ov μόνον δὲ ἀργαί, ἀλλὰ Kat φλύαροι καὶ περίεργοι, λαλοῦ- 4 A / σαι τὰ μὴ δέοντα. tf > - 14. βούλομαι οὖν νεωτέρας γαμεῖν, - 5 ὃ “ μ A ’ ~ TEKVOYOVELV, OLKOVEOTOTELV, μηδεμίαν ἀφορμήν διδόναι τῳ shall have an incongruous sense, for μανθάνω περιερχόμενος can only mean ‘T learn that I am going about,’ Jelf, Gr. § 683. It seems best then, with Syr., Chrys., al., and recently Winer, Gr. § 46. 1. obs., p. 398, to connect μανθ. with ἄργαι, ‘they learn to be idle,’ esp. as this can be supported by Plato, Huthyd. 276 8, οἱ ἀμαθεῖς dpa σοφοὶ μανθάνουσιν, which Winer ap- positely cites; it is needless to say that Winer does not conceive ‘an ellipsis of οὖσαι for εἶναι,᾽ Bloomf.,—a mistake of which such a scholar could not be capable. If it be urged (De Wette, Wiesing.) that running about would be more naturally the conse- quence of idleness than vice versd, it may be said that περίερχ. may possibly refer to some portion of their official duties, in the performance of which, instead of rather acquiring spiritual experiences, they only contract idle and gossiping habits. ‘Tas οἰκίας might seem to- confirm this, ‘the houses of them they have to visit ;’ but comp. 2 Tim. iii. 6, where (as here) the article appears generic, or at most, ‘the houses of such as receive them ;’ comp. Winer, @r. § 18-1, p. 116, note. περιερχόμεναι] ‘going round to; the part. is certainly used with reference to an idle, wandering, way of going about, in Acts xix. 13; this meaning, however, is derived from the context, which does not oblige us necessarily to retain the same meaning -here. Other exx. of accusatives after the περὶ in the comp. verb are found in the N.T., 6. g. Mark vi. 6, Acts ix. 3 al. ; comp. also Matth. Gr. § 426, Bernhardy, Synt. v. 30 ad fin., p. 260. ἀλλὰ Kal φλύαροι k.T.A. | | © but also tattlers and busybodies ;’ ἐπανόρθωσις of preceding epithet ; be- side being merely idle, they also con- ἢ tract and display a ‘ mala sedulitas’ in both words and actions. Φλύαρος an ἅπ. λεγόμ. in N.T. (but see φλυαρεῖν, 3 John to), as its derivation [πλυ-, fluere, Pott, Htymol. Forsch., Vol. 1. 212] obviously suggests, points to a babbling, projlwent, way of talking. Tlepiépyos (see Acts xix. 19) marks a meddling habit, a perverted activity that will not content itself with mind- ing its own concerns, but must busy itself about those of others; comp. 2 Thess. iii. τι, μηδὲν ἐργαζομένους ἀλλὰ περιεργαζομένους, Demosth. (? ἢ Philipp. Iv. 150, ἐξ ὧν ἐργάζῃ καὶ περιεργάζῃ. λαλοῦσαι κ.τ. λ.} ‘ speaking things which they ought not,’ carrying things from one house to an- other : οὐδὲν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τὰ ταύτης πρὸς ἐκείνην φέρουσι, Theophyl. compare notes-on Tt. i. 11. T4. βούλομαι] “1 desire; not merely ‘I holdit advisable,’ De Wette, ‘velim,’ Beza, comp. notes on ii. 8. The comparison of this verse with ver. It is instructive; there the widows themselves θέλουσιν γαμεῖν ; their θελήματα lead them to it (Eph. περιοδεύουσαι yap Tas οἰκίας On τὰ μὴ δεόντα, - ii. 3); their will isto marry ; here St. Paul desires (deliberato et propenso animo,’ Tittm.) that (not being on the list) they would do so, Chrys. makes no distinction, ἐπειδὴ αὗται βούλονται βούλομαι κἀγὼ κιτ.λ. ΑΒ a general the distinction οἵ Tittmann, Synon. 1. p. 124, “ θέχειν nihil aliud rule, est quam simpliciter velle, neque in se habet notionem voluntatis propensze ad aliquam rem, sed βούλεσθαι denotat TSTEMOTHY ΤΣ 15. ? , , , αντικειμένῷ λοιδορίας χάριν" ipsam animi propensionem,’ will be found satisfactory, but in the applica- tion of it to individual cases proper caution must be used. It ought to be remarked that θέλω is by very far more frequently used by St. Paul than βούλ., the latter occurs only 1 Cor. xii. tr, 2 Cor. i. 15, and 17 (Lachm.), Phil. i. 12, 1 Tim. ii. 8, vi. 9, Tit. iii. 8, Philem. 13; once only 1 Cor. ἐ. ¢. in reference to God (the Holy Ghost). Βούλ. is most used by St. Luke in the Acts, where it occurs about fourteen times, and consequently if we except quotations, rather more frequently than θέλω. οὖν has here its proper collective force (Klotz, Devar. Vol. τι. p. 717), ‘in conse- quence of these things being so, I de- sire’ &c.; ‘igitur,’ Beza,—not an in- judicious change for ‘ergo,’ Vulg., as there is here no ‘grayior argumen- tatio;’ see Hand, Twursell. Vol. 11. p. 187. νεωτέρας] ΄“ younger widows,’ not merely ‘ younger women,’ as Auth. Ver.; still less ‘ Jung- frauen,’ as Baur. The context seems to confine our attention simply to widows. The true aspect of this-pre- cept is, as Wiesing. observes, defined by οὖν here, and γὰρ ver. 15 ; the pre- cept involves its own restrictions. The Apostle desires the younger widows to marry rather than attempt a course of duties which they might swerve from or degrade ; comp. Chrysost. texvoy., olkod.] ‘to bear children, to rule the house ;? obviously the regular inf. after verbs denoting ‘a motion of the will,’ Jelf, Gr. § 664; to supply els τὸ with Bloomf. is to commit a barbarism. Both words are dz. λεγόμ. in. the N.T., the substantive τεκνο- yovla occurs ch, ii. 15, and οἰκοδεσπότης several times in the first three gospels. Both the latter subst, and its verb be- 75 15 ἤδη yap τινες ἐξετράπη- long to later Greek, οἰκίας δεσπότης λεκτέον, οὐχ ὡς "Αλεξις, οἰκοδεσπότης, Phrynichus ; so Pollux, Onom. X. 21: further exx. are cited by Lobeck, on Phryn. p. 373. It is an untenable position that rexvorpod. is included in τεκνογον. (Miller) ; if included in any word, it would far more naturally be so in οἰκοδεσπ. (Leo), which points to the woman’s sphere of domestic duties. τῷ ἀντικειμένῳ] ‘to the adversary,’ not ‘the devil,’ Chrys., for though this application de- rives some plausibility from τοῦ car. ver. 15, yet the λοιδορ. χάριν seems far more naturally to suggest a refe- rence tohwman opponents,—the adver- sary of Christianity (Phil. i. 28, Tit. ii. 8) among the Jews or the Gentiles ; so Hamm., De W., Wiesing. On this word, and the possibly stronger ἀντιτασσόμενοι (‘qui in advers& acie stantes oppugnant’) see Tittmann, Synon. Ul. p. 11. λοιδο- ρίας χάριν) ‘ for reproach,’ lit. ‘to further, promote, reproach ;’ this is of course not ‘ for Nod. ἕνεκα, and that for εἰς od.,” Bloomf., but is added somewhat epexegetically to ἀφορμ. 6.6. to specify the manner in which the occasion would be used ; on the mean- ing of χάριν comp. notes on Gal. iii. 19, and Donalds. Cratyl. § 278. The ‘reproach’ must be understood as directed not merely against the widows, but Christianity generally, comp. Tit. ii. 5. 15. ἤδη yap τινες] ‘ For already some,’ sc. widows; ἀπὸ πείρας 7 νομοθεσία γεγένηται, Theod.: Matthies here gives the pronoun a more ex- tended reference, but without suffi- cient reason; γὰρ clearly confirms the command in the preceding verse, and thus naturally refers us to the special cases of those mentioned in it. 76 1 TIMOTHY V. 15—17. 16 ER “ ~ 6 ” | a SP oo σαν o7laW του aTava. ει Τίς WloTOS ἢ TWlOTH EXEL , ΕῚ , " a 4 ‘ ’ ε ’ , [2 χήρας, ἐπαρκείτω αὐταῖς, καὶ μὴ βαρείσθω ἡ ἐκκλησία, ἵνα ταῖς ὄντως χήραις ἐπαρκέση. Let the elders who rule 17 O; καλῶς προεστῶτες πρεσβύτεροι well receive double ho- nour; be thou guarded Ἢ = ἀξ ἢ fs . arti αἰ arabe διπλῆς τιμῆς ἀξιούσθωσαν, μάλιστα οἱ against them. Rebuke sinners, 16. πιστὸς ἢ πιστή] So Tisch., ed. 2, with DJ K, nearly all mss., Vulg. (Tol. Harl.**) Syr. (both), Ar. (all.) Slav... .. Chrys. (distinctly), Theodoret, Dam. al. (Griesb. De W., Wiesing.), and appy. rightly. The shorter reading εἴ Tis πιστὴ Supported by ACF G; 17, 47;..... Vulg. (Amit. Harl.*) Copt. Arm., and adopted by Lachm., deserves consideration ; but can be accounted for more easily than the longer reading. Huther urges the variation el τις πιστὸς ἔχει Vulg. (ed.) al., but surely this rather shows that the transcriber fancied that the grammar would be relieved by an omission of one of the substantives. ἐξετράπησαν;] ‘ (have) turned themselves out of the way, sc. of chastity, pro- priety, and discretion: 2 Tim.iv. 4. It is unnecessary to give this aberration a wider or more general reference, — ‘from the faith’ (Mosh.), ‘from right teaching’ (Heydenr.). The younger widows, to whom the Apostle alludes, had swerved from the path of purity and chastity, which leads to Christ, and followed that of sensuality, which leads to Satan: Christ was the true spouse, Satan the seduicer. 16. εἴ τις πιστὸς «.7.A.] This might fairly seem a concluding re- iteration of the precept in ver. 4 and ver. 8, or a species of supplementary command based on the same prin- ciples (comp. Mosh.). The connex- ion, however, and difference ‘of terms, ἐπαρκείτω not mpovoelrw, suggest a different application of the precept. In ver. 4, 8, the duties of children or grandchildren to the e/der widow are defined: here the reference is rather to the younger widows. How were such to be supported? If they married the question was at once answered; if theyremained unmarried, let their relatives, fathers or mothers, uncles or aunts, brothers or sisters, support them, and not obtrude them on the χηρικὸν τάγμα, ver. 9, when they might be unfit for the duties of the office, and bring scandal on the church by their defection. βαρείσθω] ‘be burdened,’ Luke xxi. 34, 2 Cor. i. 8, v. 4; later and less correct form for Bapivew. The asser- tion of Thom. M. s.v., πλὴν ἐπὶ τοῦ παρακειμένου οὐ βεβάρυγκα λέγουσιν, ἀλλὰ βεβάρηκα, issomewhat doubtful ; βεβαρηὼς (intrans.) is used by Homer, and βεβαρημένος certainly appears in Plato, Symp. 203 B, as well as in Aristides (cited by Thom. M.), but the latter passage is an imitation of Homer, and the fornver has a very poetical. cast; the use of βεβάρημαι as the regular Attic perfect (Huther), cannot therefore be completely sub- stantiated : compare Buttm. Zrreg. Verbs, s. V. βαρύνω. 17. καλῶς προεστῶτες] ‘whorule, preside, well” not in antithesis to those ‘who preside ill,’ but in distinction to other presbyters, to the presbyter as such (Wiesing.). The meaning of καλῶς προεστάναι is approximately given by Chrys. as μηδενὸς φείδεσθαι τῆς ἐκείνων κηδεμονίας ἕνεκεν ; this, however, too much obscures — the idea of rule and directive fune- tions (Bloomf.) implied in the par- Ἢ EIMOTHY ΠΥ 47; 18. κοπιῶντες ἐν λόγῳ καὶ διδασκαλίᾳ. ticiple προεστ., comp. ch. ili. 14. διπλῆς τιμῆς] ‘double honour, i.e. remuneration ; double, not in com- parison with that of widows or deacons (Chrys. 1, comp. Thorndike, Relig. Assembl. 1v. 22), nor even of ol μὴ καλ. προεστ. (comp. οἱ ἁμαρτά- νοντες, ver. 20) but, with a less defi- nite numerical reference, διπλῆς (not διπλασίας τιμῆς, as in Plato, Legg. v. 730 D)i.e. πολλῆς τιμῆς, Chrys. 2, τιμῆς, Theodoret. Τιμὴ again, as τίμα, ver. 3, includes, though it does not precisely express, ‘salary, remuneration,’ and is well paraphrased πλείονος by Chrys. as θεραπεία [καὶ] ἡ τῶν ἀναγκαίων χορηγία, comp. Clem, Rom. τ. i. Kypke (Obs. Vol. m1. p. 361) cites several instances of a similar use of τιμή, but in all, it will be ob- served, the regular meaning of the word is distinctly apparent: comp. Wakef. Sylv. Crit. Vol. Iv. p. 199. ἀξιούσθωσαν)] ‘be counted worthy,’ Auth. Ver., ‘digni habeantur,’ Vulg., comp. Syr., not merely ‘ be rewarded,’ Hammond. They were ἄξιοι διπλῆς τιμῆς, and were to be accounted as such. ot κοπιῶντες K. T.A. | ‘they who labour in word and doc- trine ; no hendyadys, scil. els τὴν διδαχὴν τοῦ λόγου, Coray, al., but with full inclusiveness, ‘in the general form of oral discourse (whether moni- tory, hortatory, or prophetic), and the more special form of teaching; see Thorndike, Prim. Gov. 1x. 3, Vol. 1. Ῥ. 42 (Ang. Cath. Libr.), Mosheim (de Reb. ante Const. p. 126 sq.) throws a stress upon κοπιῶντες, urging that the verb does not imply merely ‘ Christianos erudire, sed popu- los ver religionis nescios ejus cogni- tione imbuere,’ p. 127. We should then have two, if not three classes (comp. 1 Thess. ν. 12), the preachers 77 1S λέγει yap ἡ γραφή abroad, and rulers and preachers at home, the former of which might be thought worthy of more pay: this is ingenious, but it affixes a peculiar theological meaning to κοπιάω which cannot be fully substantiated ; comp. chy iv. ΤΟ n Gor? iv. 12) al.. The concluding words, ἐν λόγῳ καὶ didack., certainly seem to imply two kinds of ruling presbyters, those who preached and taught, and those who did not ; and though it has been plausibly urged that the differentia lies in κοπιῶντες, and that the Apostle does not so much distinguish between the functions as the execution of them (see esp. Thorndike, Prim. Gov. 1x. 7), it yet seems more natural to sup- pose the existence in the large com- munity at Ephesus of a clerical college of προεστῶτες πρεσβύτεροι (Thorndike, ib. 11. 2), some of whom might have the χάρισμα of eminently than others; see notes on Eph. iv. τι, and Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 149 sq. (Bohn). 18. λέγει γὰρ «.7.A.] The first quotation is taken from Deuteron. xxv. 4, and is quoted with a similar application in 1 Cor. ix. 9. The law in question, of which the purport and intention was kindness and conside- ration for animals (see Philo, de Human. ὃ 19, Vol. 1. p. 400 ed. Mang., Joseph. Antig. Iv. 8. 21), is applied with a kind of ‘argumentum a minori’ to the labourers in God’s service, The precept can hardly be said to be generalized or expanded (see Kling, Stud. u. Krit. 1839. p. 834 sq.), so much as reapplied and invested with a typical meaning. And this typical or allegorical inter- pretation is neither arbitrary nor of mere Rabbinical origin, but is to be referred to the inspiration of the Holy teaching more 78 ESTIMOVEH Yt ΕΣ Lig: Boty ἀλοῶντα ov φιμώσεις, καὶ "Αξίιος ὁ ἐργάτης τοῦ ~~ 9 ~ μισθοῦ αὐτοῦ. 19 Κατὰ πρεσβυτέρου κατηγορίαν μὴ , > ‘ ° ‘ ἣν , ΕἸ A , παραδέχου, EXTOS εἰ ΜῊ ETL δύο 7) Tplov μαρτυρῶν. Spirit, under which the Apostle gives the literal meaning of the words their fuller and deeper application ; comp. notes on Gal. iv. 23. βοῦν ἀλοῶντα] ‘an ox while tread- ing out the corn; not ‘the ox that treadeth,’ &c., Auth. Ver., an inexact translation, comp. Donalds. Gramm. § 492. Threshing by means of oxen was (and is) performed.in two ways ; either the oxen were driven over the circularly arranged heaps, and made to tread them out with the hoof (Hosea x. 11, comp. Micah iy. 13), or they were attached to a heavy threshing-wain (Heb, yr 3310, Isaiah XXVill. 27, or D771, Judges viii. 7, see Bertheau i Joc.), which they drew over them; see esp. Winer, RW2B., Art. ‘Dreschen,’ and Bochart, HMieroz. Vol. 1. p. 3x0. There is some little doubt about the order; Lachm. reads οὐ gu. B. dd. with AC ; seven mss. Vulg., Syr. (incorrectly claimed by Tisch.) Copt., Arm. .... Chrys. al. As this might have been a correction from 1 Cor. l.¢., and as the weight of MS. authority is on the other side, it seems best to retain the order of the text. οὐ φιμώσεις) ‘thow shalt not muzzle ; imperatival future, on the various usages of which see notes on Gal. v. 14, and Thiersch, de Pentat. iii. § r1, p- 157. The animals that laboured were not to be prevented from en- joying the fruits of their labours (Joseph. Antiq. Iv. 8. 21), as was the custom among the heathens in.the case of their cattle (comp. Bochart, ' Hieroz. Vol. τ. 401), and even (by means of a παυσικάπη, Poll. Onom. vil. 20), in the case of their slaves ; see Palm ἃ. Rost, Lex. s.v. παυσικ. Molieuenps 774% kal” Aévos κι τ. λ.1 Proverbial declaration (Stier, - Red. Jes. Vol. τ. p. 400) made use of by our Lord (Luke x. 7, comp. Matth. x. 10), and here repeated by St. Paul to enhance the force of, and explain the application of, the preceding quo- tation. There is nothing in the con- nection to justify the assertion that this is a citation from the N. T. (Theodoret), and thus necessarily to be connected with λέγει 7 γραφή, as is contended by Baur and others who deny the genuineness of this epistle : —~ypady, it need scarcely be said, is always applied by St. Paul to the Old Test.; comp. Wieseler, Chronol. p. 303, note. Though the connexion is similar, Mark vii. 10, Acts i. 20, compare Heb. i. 10, yet we must remember that this is not a case of two parallel citations, but that the second is only explanatory of the first; the comparison, therefore fails. Even De W. admits that Baur has only probability in his favour. 19. κατὰ πρεσβυτέρου] ‘ Against an elder,’ Vulg., Goth.; not ‘an el- derly man,’ Chrys., Theophyl., cum. The context is clearly only about presbyters. κατηγορίαν] ‘a charge, an accusation ; οὐκ εἶπε δέ, μὴ κατακρίνῃς, ἀλλά, μηδὲ παραδέξῃ ὅλως, Theophyl. It has been asked (De W.) whether Timothy is not to observe the judicial rule here alluded to (Deut. xvii. 6, xix. 5, comp. Matth. xviii. 16, 2 Cor. xiii. 1) in all cases as well as merely in the case of an elder. The answer is, that Timothy was not a judge in the sense in which 1 TIMOTHY 50. 21. 79 20 of fe A AD © 4 2b , ἘΝ “ 4 ε ous αμαρτανοντας ενώπιον πάντων € EYX®s tva Και Οἱ λοιποὶ φόβον ἔχωσιν. I solemnly charge thee be not partial or pre- cipitate ; some men’s sins are sooner, some the command contemplated the exer- cise of that office. He might have, been justified in receiving an accusa- tion at the mouth of only one witness ; to prevent, however, the scandals that would thus frequently occur in the church, the Apostle specifically directs that an accusation against an elder is only to be received when the evidence is most legally clear and satisfactory. ἐκτὸς εἰ μή] ‘except i be,’ 1 Cor. xiv. 5, xv. 2; a pleonastic really com- pounded of two exceptive formule ; comp. Thom. M. s.v. χωρίς, and see the exx. cited by Wetst. on 1 Cor’. l.c., and by Lobeck, Phryn. p. 459. ἐπὶ δύο K.t.A.] on the authority of [ ‘on the mouth of,’ Syr. ] two or three witnesses ° comp. Xenoph. Hell. vt. 5. 41, ἐπ᾽ ὀλίγων μαρτύρων, ‘paucis adhibitis testibus ; Winer, Gr. ὃ 51. g, p. 450. Huther finds a difficulty in this meaning of ἐπὲ with the gen. Surely nothing can be more simple. As ἐπὶ with a gen. properly denotes superposition (see Donalds. Cratyl. § 173), the κατηγορία is represented as resting upon the witnesses, de- pending on them to substantiate it ; comp. Hammond. The closely allied use, ἐπὶ δικαστῶν, δικαστηρίου, &e., in which the presence of the parties (coram) is more brought into promi- nence (1 Cor. vi. 1, 2 Cor. vii. 14), is correctly referred by Kiihner (Jelf, Gr. § 633) to the same primary mean- ing. The idea of ‘connexion or ac- companiment’ which Peile (following Matth. G7. $584.7) here finds in ἐπί, is not sufficiently exact: see further negation, “1 Διαμαρτύρομαι ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ 4 xX ΄σ ef ΄ 4 ~ " ~ 9 , Kal plaTou σου καὶ τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν ayye- later, in being found out; so their good works. exx. in Rost u. Palm, Lew. s.v. ἐπί, Vol. I. p. 1034. 20. τοὺς ἁμαρτάνοντας] that sin, sinners ;’ “them certainly not the offending presbyters (Huth.), as the expression is far too comprehensive to be so limited, but sinners generally, ‘ persistentes in peccato (Priceus ap. Pol. Syn.), whether presbyters or others. This very constant use of the article with the pres. part. as a kind of equivalent for the subst. is noticed in Winer, Gr. § 46. 4; see also notes on Gal. i. 23. ἐνώπιον πάντων must obviously be joined with ἔλεγχε, not with duapr. (Cajet.). This text is perfectly reconcileable with our Lord’s instruction, Matth. xvii, 15, not because ‘ Christus agit de peccato occulto, Paulus de pub- lico,’ Justiniani, but because, first, Timothy is here invested with special ecclesiastical authority (comp. Thorn- dike, Prim. Gov. ch. xiii), and se- condly, because the present participle (contr. ἐὰν ἁμαρτ. Matth. 1. c.) directs the thought towards the habitually sinful character of the offender (ἐπιμέ- vovras τῇ ἁμαρτ. Theoph.), and his need of an open rebuke ; see notes on Eph. iv. 28. 21. διαμαρτύρομαι) ‘7 solemnly charge thee,’ ‘ obtestor,’ Beza, or with fullaccuracy, ‘obtestando Deum (Dei mentione interposita) graviter ac serio hortor, Winer, de Verb. c. Prepp. Vv. p- 20; similarly used in adjurations, 2 Tim. ii. 14, iv. 1. In 1 Thess. iv. 6, the only other passage in which it is used by St. Paul[Heb. ii. 6], it has more the sense of ‘assure, solemnly 80 τ ΜΙ ΟΤΗ ν om λων, ἵνα ταῦτα φυλάξης χωρὶς προκρίματος. μηδὲν ποιῶν testify ;’ comp. Acts xx. 23. In this verb (frequently used by St. Luke), the preposition appears primarily to mark the presence or interposition of some form of witness, ‘intercessionis (Vermittlung) ad quam omnis testi- monii provincia redit, notionem,’ Winer, J. c., p. 21. On verbs com- pounded with διά, see the remarks of Tittmann, Synon. I. p. 223. τοῦ Θεοῦ κι τ. λ.} ‘God and Christ Jesus.’ With the present reading this text cannot possibly be classed under Granville Sharpe’s rule (Green Gr. p. 216), and even with the reading of the Rec. (kup. “I. X., with D***J K. al. Syr., Goth. al. .... Chrys. al), the reference of the two substantives to one person is in the highest degree doubtful and precarious: the Greek Ff. are here for the most part either silent, or adopt the usuai translation ; see notes on Hph. v. 5, Middleton, Art. p. 389 (ed. Rose), Stier on Eph. Vol. I. p. 250. ἐκλεκτῶν ἀγγέλων] ‘elect angels; ‘he adds ‘the elect angels’ because they in the future judgment shall be present as witnesses with their Lord,’ Bp: Bull: comp. Joseph. Bell. 11. 16. 4 (cited by Otto and Krebs), μαρτύρομαι δ᾽ ἐγὼ μὲν ὑμῶν τὰ ἅγια, καὶ τοῦς ἱεροὺς ἀγγέλους τοῦ Θεοῦ. There is some little difficulty in deciding, on the meaning of the term ἐκλεκτοί. It surely cannot be a mere ‘epitheton ornans, Huther, compare Caly., Wiesing. ; nor does it seem probable that it refers to those of a higher, as opposed to those of a lower, rank, Cathar. ap. Est. (comp. Tobit xii. 15), as such distinctions are somewhat scripturally precarious. With such “passages as 2 Peter ii. 4, Jude 6 be- fore us, it seems impossible to doubt that the ‘elect angels’ are those who kept their jirst estate (Chrys., Theoph., (Ecum.), and who shall form part of that countless host (Jude 14, Dan. Vili. ro) that shall attend the Lord’s second advent ; so Stuart, Angelology Iv. 2 (in Biblioth. Sacra 1843, p. 103); comp. also Twesten, Angelol. § 3 (translated in Bibl. Sacr. for 1844, p- 782). On the existence and minis- try of these Blessed Spirits see the powerful and admirable sermons of Bp. Bull, Engl. Works, p. 194—241. ταῦτα] ‘ these things’ which have just been said (ver. 19, 20) about caution in receiving accusations, and necessary exercise of discipline when sin is patent ; so Theodoret (expressly) and the other Greek commentt. De W. and Wiesing. refer ταῦτα only to ver. 20, but would not τοῦτο have thus been more natural? At any rate it seems clearly unsatisfactory to extend the reference to ver. 17 sq. (Huth. ? al.) : instruction about the exercise of discipline might suitably be connécted with the weighty adjuration in ver. 21, but scarcely mere semi-fiscal ar- rangements. —_ χωρὶς προ- κρίματος] ‘without prejudice, pre- judging (‘faurdomein,’ Goth.) ; ‘ Jw- dictum esse debet non prejudicium,’ Beng. In the participial clause the contrary aberration from justice is forbidden, scil. ‘inclinatio per favo- rem, κατὰ προπάθειαν προσκλινό- μενος τῷ ἑνὶ μέρει, Theophyl. The reading πρόσκλησιν (Lachm. with ADJ, al. 50; Copt.? Chrys. ?) though deserving some consideration on the principle, ‘proclivi lectioni prestat ardua,’ can scarcely be forced into yielding any natural sense. Both προκρ. and πρόσκλ. are dm. Ney. in the N.T.: the latter occurs also in Clem. Rom. i. 47, 50; comp. Polyb. Hist, V. 51. 8, VI. 10. 10, and is illus- ἘΜ ΘΟΤΗΥ Vin ax, 22: A , κατα πρόσκλισιν. 81 22 Xeipas ταχέως μηδενὶ ἐπιτίθει, δ ‘ μηδὲ κοινώνει ἁμαρτίαις ἀλλοτρίαις. σεαυτὸν ἁγνὸν τήρει. trated by Krebs Obs. p. 356 sq. On the alleged distinction between χωρὶς and ἄνευ see notes on Eph. 15 28 22. χεῖρας ταχέως K.T.A.] “Vay thy hands hastily on no man.’ Indis- putably the most ancient interpre- tation of these wordsis ‘ the imposition of hands in ordination,’ περὶ χειροτο- vay, Chrys.; so Theod., Theophyl., and (cum. The preceding warnings, however, and still more the decided language of the following clause (comp. ἁμαρτανόντας ver. 20) appear to point so very clearly to some disci- plinary functions, that it seems best with Hammond (so also De Wette, Wiesing.) to refer these words to the χειροθεσία on the absolution of peni- tents, and their to church-fellowship ; so appy. Taylor, Part 11. 1. 11, though otherwise in Episcopacy, ὃ 14. The prevalency in the apostolic age of the custom of imposition of hands gene- rally, and the distinct evidence of this specific application of the custom in very early times (Eusebius, ist. vit. 2, calls it a παλαιὸν ἦθος ; see Concil. Nic. Can. 8), seem to render such an assumption in the present case by no means arbitrary or indemonstrable ; see esp. Hammond in loc. and comp. Suicer Thesaur., Vol. 1. p. 1576, Bingham, Antiq. XVIII. 2. 1. μηδὲ kowave K.7.A.] ‘nor yet share in the sins of others,’ i.e. μηδέν σοι καὶ Tats a. ἀλλοτρ. κοινὸν ἔστω, Winer, αν. § 30. 8, p. 230; ‘donot share with them their sins, by restoring them to church-fellowship on a doubt- ful or imperfect repentance.’ The Auth. Vers. ‘be partaker of,’ ‘mache dich theilhaftig,’ De Wette, is scarcely sufficiently exact, as this would rather re-admission Dissuasive, imply agen. Kowwve is commonly used in the N.T. with a ‘dativus rei’ (see notes on Gal. vi. 6), and in this construction seems to involve more the idea of community than of simple participation ; see Winer /. c., Poppo on Thucyd. 1. 16, Vol. U1. 2, Ὁ. 77, and comp. notes on Eph. v. 11. On the continued negation pn—pndé, see notes on Eph. iv. 27, and the treatise of Franke, de Part. Neg. τι. 2, p. 6. The remark of De W. on this clause seems reasonable, that if the reference were to ordination, this sequence to the command would imply a greater corruption in the Church than is at all credible. To regard it a popular mode of speaking (Bloomf.), imme- diately after so solemn an exhortation, seems impossible. σεαυτὸν κι τ. λ.}] ‘ Keep thyself (emphatic) pure; ‘purum,’ Beza, not ‘castum,’ The position of the reflexive pronoun and the sort of antithesis in which it stands to ἀλλοτρ. seem to imply, ‘while thou hast to act as judge upon other men, be morally pure thyself” ‘Ayvés (ἄξω), as its termination suggests (‘ object con- ceived under certain Vulg. relations,’ Donalds. Cratyl. § 255), implies pro- perly ‘an outward, and thence an in- ward, purity,’ e.g.; ἀναστροφὴ ἁγνή, 1 Pet. iii. 2; σοφία ἁγνή, James iii. 17: ‘ayvovestin quo nihil est impuri,’ Tittmaun, Synon. 1. p. 22. The de- rivative sense of ‘ castitas’ (‘ puritas a venere,* ἁγνὸς γαμῶν Eur. Phen. 953 comes easily and intelligibly from the primary meaning ; comp. 2 Cor. xi. 2, Tit. ii. 5, and Reuss, Theol. Chret. Iv. 16, Vol. I. p. 170, except that he adopts this derivative meaning far too generally. On thedistinction between it and ἅγιος (‘in ἅγιος cogitatur po- G 82 τ TIMOTHY.) Wriey ea τ Ν "2 ~ 4 7 28. μηκέτι ὑδροπότει, ἀλλὰ οἴνῳ ὀλίγῳ χρῶ διὰ τὸν στό- 4 4 , 2) / μαχόν σου Καὶ τὰς σπυκνᾶας σου ἀσθενείας. 24 ΤΓ,νῶν ° id ce , δ (es) , “ , ἀνθρώπων αι αμαάρτιαι προ ηλοι εἰσιν προαγοῦύσαι εις Kploly, tissimum verecundia que ayv@ rei vel persone debetur’), compare Titt- mann, loc. cit. 23. μηκέτι ὑδροπ.] ‘be no longer a waterzdrinker.’ There is no neces- sity to supply ‘only,’ Conyb. and Hows., Coray, al.; ὑδροπότ. is not exactly identical with ὕδωρ πίνειν, but points more to the regular habit ; comp. Artemidorus, I. 68 (Wetst.), ὕδωρ ψυχρόν, ἀγαθὸν θερμὸν δὲ ὕδωρ νόσους ἢ ἀπραξίας σημαίνει τῶν ἔθος ἐχόντων ὑδροποτεῖν κιτ.λ., and see Winer, Gr. ὃ 59. 8 obs., p. 584, and the numerous exx. cited by Wetst. in loc. The some- what singular collocation of this pre- cept is suggested by the previous ex- hortation to which it acts as a kind of limitation ; ‘keep thyself pure, but do not on that account think it neces- sary to maintain an dowov ἅγνειαν [Plutarch, de Iside et Osir. § 6], and ascetical abstinences.’ We can scarcely admit that the Apostle puts it down here just as it came into his mind, fearing he might otherwise forget it, Coray im loc. It may be noticed that the Essenes were particu- larly distinguished for their avoidance of wine, especially on their weekly πίνειν πᾶσι festival ; ποτὸν ὕδωρ ναματιαῖον αὐτοῖς ἐστίν, Philo, de Vit. Cont. § 4, Vol. τι. p- 477, see ὃ 9, p. 483, and comp. Luke i. 15, Rom. xiv. 21. τὸν στόμαχόν σοῦ] Kypke and Wetst. very appropriately cite Liba- nius, Hpist. 1578, πέπτωκε καὶ ἡμῖν ὁ στόμαχος ταῖς συνεχέσιν ὑδροπο- σίαις. : 24. τινῶν ἀνθρώπων κ. τ. Δ. The connexion is not perfectly perspicuous. Heinsius (Lxercit. p. 491), not with- out some plausibility, includes ver. 23 with the last clause of ver. 22 ina parenthesis. This seems scarcely ne- cessary; σεαυτὸν κιτ.Ὰ. is a supple- mentary command in reference to what ἡ precedes; ver. 23 is a kind of limitation of it, suggested by some remembrance of Timothy’s habits. The Apostle then reverts to μηδὲ κοιν. auapt. with a sentiment somewhat of this nature. ‘There are two kinds of sins, the one crying and open which lead the way, the other silent which follow the per- petrator to judgment; so also there are open and hidden (τὰ ἄλλως ἔχοντα) good works: sins, however, and good works alike shall ultimately be brought to light and to judgment.’ The two verses thus seem mainly added to assist Timothy in his dia- gnosis of character ; ver. 24 appears to caution him against being too hasty in absolving others ; ver. 25 against being too precipitate in his censwres ; so Huther. πρόδηλοι] ‘openly manifest the preposition does not appear to have so much a mere temporal as an intensive refe- rence ; see Heb. vii. 14, where Theod. remarks, τὸ πρόδηλον ὡς ἀναντίῤῥητον τέθεικε ; comp. also προγράφω Gal. ili. τ, and notes im loc. So similarly Syr. and Vulg., both of which sup- press any temporal reference in the prep. Estius compares ‘propalam,’ a form in which Hand, similarly gives to ‘pro’ only an amplifying and intensive force, ‘ut palam pro- positam rem plane ~conspiciamus,’ Tursellinus, Vol. τν. p. 598. προάγουσαι K.T.A.] ‘yoing before, leading the way, to judgment,’ as heralds and apparitors (‘quasi ante- ambulones,’ Beza) proclaiming before the sinner the whole history of his 1 TIMOTHY V. 24, 25. ‘ A τισὶν δὲ καὶ ἐπακολουθοῦσιν" ΠῚ: 8ὃ9 25 e , A ΝΡ ‘ ὡσαύτως καὶ τὰ ἔργα τὰ καλὰ πρόδηλα, καὶ τὰ ἄλλως ἔχοντα κρυβῆναι οὐ δύνανται. Servants, for the sake of God's name, honour VI. Ὅσοι εἰσὶν ὑπὸ ζυγὸν δοῦλοι, τοὺς Η , , , ΄ τὶ , your masters, esp. if ἰδίους δεσπότας πάσης τιμῆς ἀξίους ἡγεί- they are believers and brethren. Teach this. guilt. The ‘judgment’ to which they lead the way is certainly not any ecclesiastical xplows,—for does any such κρίσις really bring all sins and good deeds thus to light ?—but either ‘judgment’ in its general sense with reference to men (Huth.), or, more probably, in reference to ‘the final judgment ;’ they go before the sinner to the judgment seat of Christ; see Manning, Serm. 5, Vol. 111. p. 72, in the opening of which this text is forcibly illustrated. Kal ἐπακολοθοῦσιν] ‘they rather follow after,’ sc. els κρίσιν ; not merely in- definitely, ‘they follow after, and so in their shorter or longer course be- come discovered,’ De W.,—an ex- planation which completely destroys image and apposition,—but, ‘the sins crying for vengeance follow the sinner to the very tribunal of Christ ν᾿ comp. Manning, l.c. On ἐπακολ. see notes on ver. 11: the antithesis προάγουσαι precludes the assumption of any special force in ἐπί, scil. ‘presse sequi,’ ἀδιασπάστως συνοδεύουν τὸν ὑποκρινόμενον, ὡς ἡ σκία τὸ σῶμα, Coray ; the only relations presented to our thoughts seem those of before and after. Kal clearly does not belong to τισι (Huther), but is attached with a kind of descensive force to ἐπακολ. ; see notes on Gal. iii. 4. 25. ὡσαύτως] ‘in like manner ; good works are in this respect not ὡς érépws to sins; the same characteristic division may be recognised : some are open witnesses, others are secret wit- nesses, but their testimony cannot be suppressed. Lachmann inserts δὲ after ὡσαύτως, with AFG... Boern. Goth. ; this reading is not improbable, but has scarcely sufficient external support. τὰ ἔργα τὰ καλά] ‘their good works ; the repetition "οὗ the article is intended to give pro- minence to the epithet and more fully mark the antithesis between the ἁμαρτίαι and the καλὰ ἔργα; see Middleton, Art. chap. VIII. p. t14 (ed. Rose), comp. Winer, Gr. § 19 a, p- 152. On the recurrent καλὰ ἔργα, comp. notes on 7 11. iii. 8. τὰ ἄλλως ἔχοντα) ‘they which are otherwise,’i. e. which are not πρόδηλα. To refer this to καλὰ alike mars sense and parallelism. In the con- cluding words the paraphrase of Huther, ‘they cannot always remain hidden’ (κρυβῆναι) is scarcely exact : the aor. inf., though usually found after ἔχω, δύναμαι, &c. (Winer, Gr. ὃ 45. 8. obs., p. 387), cannot wholly lose its significance, but must imply that the deeds cannot be concealed at all, They may not be patent and conspicuous (πρόδηλα), but they can- not be definitely covered up: they will be seen and recognised some time or other. CHap. VI. 1. ὑπὸ ζυγὸν δοῦλοι] ‘under the yoke as bond-servants ; not ‘servants as are under the yoke,’ Auth. Ver.; still less ‘under the yoke on v ΡΒ ‘ of slavery’ ({Zo => Ιμω Syr.,) a needless hendyadys. Δοῦλοι is not the subject, but an explanatory predicate appended to ὑπὸ ζυγόν, words pro- bably inserted to mark, not an ex- 6.2 84 ἘΜ ΟΤΗΥ ΓΟ; A ΄ ΄- σθωσαν, ἵνα μὴ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ ἡ διδασκαλία βλα- σφημῆται. 2 ε δὲ ‘ ” , ‘ Ol OE TLOTOUVUS EXOVTES δεσπότας. μὴ κατα- φρονείτωσαν, ὅτι ἀδελφοί εἰσιν ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον δουλευέ- treme case (‘the harshest bondage,’ Bloomf.),—for the language and ex- hortation is perfectly general,—but to point to the actual circumstances of the case? They were indisputably ὑπὸ ζυγόν, let them comport themselves accordingly. Similar exhortations are found Eph. vi. 5 sq., Col. iii. 22, Tit. ii. 9, comp. 1 Cor. vii. 21, all apparently directed against the very possible misconception that Chris- tianity was to be understood as put- ting master and bond-servant on an equality, or as interfering with the existing social relations. τοὺς ἰδίους Seam. | ‘their own masters,’ those who stand in that distinct per- sonal relation to them, and whom they are bound to obey ; see esp. the note on ἴδιος in comment. on Eph. v. 22, On the distinction between δεσπότης and κύριος [κύρ. γυναικὸς Kal υἱῶν ἀνὴρ καὶ πατήρ, δεσπ. δὲ ἀργυρω- νήτων, Ammonius], see Trench, Synon. § 28. St. Paul here correctly uses the unrestricted term δεσπότης as more in accordance with the foregoing ὑπὸ ζυγόν, comp. Tit. ii. 9; it is noticeable that in his other epp. he πάσης τιμῆς] ‘all honour ; honour-in every form and case in which it is due to them. On the true extensive meaning of πᾶς, see notes on Eph. i. 8. ἡ διδασκαλία] ‘the doctiine,;’ ‘ His doctrine,’ Syr., Auth. Ver.: comp. uses κύριος. Tit. ii. το, τὴν διδασκαλίαν τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Θεοῦ. Διδασκ. clearly points to the Gospel, the evangelical doctrine (‘Theodoret), would be evil spoken of, if it were thought to incul- cate insubordination; see Chrysost. in loc. which 2. πιστούς] ‘believing,’ i.e. Chris- tian masters; slightly emphatic, as the order of the words suggests. The slaves who were under heathen masters were positively to regard their masters as deserving of honour, theslaves under Christian masters were, negatively, not to evince any want of respect. The former were notto regard their masters as their inferiors, and to be insubordi- nate, the latter were not to think them their equals, and to be disrespectful. μᾶλλον δουλ.} ‘the more serve them ; μᾶλλον is not merely corrective, ‘potius serviant,’ Beza, but intensive, ‘the rather,’ Hamm., ‘magis serviant,’ Vulg., Goth. Beza’s correction, as is not unfrequently the case, is there- fore here unnecessary; see Hand, Tursell. s.v. ‘magis’ 1, Vol. ἅττ. p. Beas ὅτι πιστοὶ k. TA. | ‘because believing and beloved (of God) are they who,’ &c. There is some little difficulty in the construction and explanation. The article, however, shows that of ἀντιὰλ. is the subject, πιστοὶ καὶ ay., the predicate: the re- currence of the epithet πιστοί, and the harmony of structure still further suggest that the masters, and not the servants (Wetst., Bretschn.) are the subjects alluded to. The real diffi- culty lies in the interpretation of the following words. ot ἀν- τιλαμβανόμ..7 ‘they who are partakers of ; ‘qui participes sunt,’ Ital. Vulg., x x κ᾿. weasel 2505 [qui requie fruuntur] Syr. ᾿Αντιλαμβ. is used in two other passages in the N.T., both in the sense ‘succurrere,’ Luke i. 54 (LXX. Isaiah xli. g» Dim), Acts xx. 35. This is obviously inapplicable. The usual (ethical) meaning in classical Greek is ‘to take a part in,’ ‘to engage in,’ ‘ ΤΉ VE 2, 3 85 “ , “ Ἀ “ + ~ τωσαν, OTL πιστοί εἰσιν καὶ ἀγαπητοὶ οἱ τῆς εὐεργεσίας J ἀντιλαμβανόμενοι. If any one teach differently, he is besotted, fosters dis- putes, and counts godliness a mere gain. Let us be con- tented; riches area snareand a source of many sorrows, whether simply 6. g. Thucyd. τι. 8, ἀντιλ. (sc. τοῦ πολέμου), or with refe- rence to the primitive meaning, in a more intensive sense, ‘to cling to,’ and thence ‘secure, get possession of,’ e.g. Thucyd, 1Π|. 22, ἀντιλ. τοῦ ἀσφα- λοῦς. It does not thus seem ἃ very serious departure from the classical meaning of ἀντιλ. to take it, with a subdued intensive force, as ‘ percipere,’ ‘fru (see Euseb. Hist. v. 15, εὐωδίας τοσαύτης avreX., cited by Seholef. Hints, p. 120, and exx. in Elsner, Obs. Vol. τι. p. 306), if we may not indeed almost give ἀντὲ a formal reference to the reciprocal relation (comp. Coray) between master and servant, and translate ‘who receive in return (for food, protection, &e.) their benefit.’ In either of these latter meanings, ἡ evepy. will most simply and naturally refer to the ‘beneficium’ (not merely the evepyla, Coray) shown to the master in the services and εὔνοια (Eph. vi. 7) of the bondservant. Chrys. al. refer the εὐεργεσία to the kind acts which the masters do to the slaves; this, though perhaps a little more lexically exact, is contextually far less satisfactory ; and this seems certainly a case where the context may be al- lowed to have its fullest weight in de- termining the meaning of the separate words. To refer evepyecia to the divine benevolence, ‘ beneficentia Dei, nimirum in Christo,’ Beza, is mani- festly untenable. ταῦτα κιτ.λ.7 ‘these things teach and exhort; τὸ μὲν διδακτικῶς τὸ δὲ πρακτικῶς, Theod. Tisch. and Lachm. both refer ~ , . , ταῦτα δίδασκε καὶ παρακάλει. 3. Ei τις ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ καὶ μὴ προσέρχεται ὑγιαίνουσιν λόγοις τοῖς τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Inco Χριστοῦ καὶ TH κατ᾽ these words to the next clause; so appy. Chrys., but not Gicum. It is doubtful whether this is correct: the opposition between δίδασκε and ἑτεροδ. is certainly thus more clearly seen, but the prominent position of ταῦτα (contrast ch. iv. 11) seems to suggest a more immediate connexion with what precedes. of παράγγ., see notes ch. iv. 11. 3. ἑἕτεροδιδασκαλεῖ] ‘teaches other doctrine,’ ‘plays the ἑτεροδιδάσκαλος ;’ comp. λαθροδιδασκαλεῖν, Irenzeus, ap. Euseb. Hist. iv. 11, and see notes on ch, i. 3, the only other passage in the N.T. where the word occurs. προσέρχεται) ‘draws nigh to,’ ‘as- For the meaning 3 om sents to,’ Syr. wojoks [accedens ]. Bentley (Phileleuth. Lips. p. 72, Lond. 1713), objects to mpocépx. sug- gesting προσέχει or προσέχεται ; there is no reason, however, for any change in the expression. IIpooépx. when thus used with an abstract subst., appears to convey the ideas of ‘attention to,’ e.g. προσελθεῖν τοῖς νόμοις, Diod. Sic. 1. 95, προσ. τῇ φιλοσοφίᾳ, Philostr. Ep. Socr. τι. 16. and thence of ‘ assent to, adhesion to’ (comp. Acts x. 28, and the term προσήλυτοι) any principle or object, e.g. προσέλθοντες ἀρετῇ, Philo, Migr. Abr. § 16, Vol. 1. p. 449, and still more appositely, τοῖς τῶν ᾿Τουδαίων δόγμασι mpocepx., Irenzeus, Pragm. (Pfaff, p. 27). Bretsch. cites Ecclus. i. 30, but there φόβῳ Kup. is clearly the dat. of manner. See Loesner, Obs. p. 405 sq., where several other exx. are adduced from Philo. 86 εὐσέβειαν διδασκαλίᾳ, τ TIMOTHY VL 3, 4. 4 , δὲ 9 , τετύφωται, μηδὲν ἐπιστάμενος, Ε A A \ , ‘ , Ἂς fol , ἀλλα νοσῶν περὶ ζητήσεις και λογομαχίας, ἐξ ὧν γίνεται ὕγιαιν. λόγοις} ‘sound words; see notes on ch, i. Io. Tots τοῦ Κυρ.} ‘those of our Lord J. C. i.e. which emanate from our Lord, either directly, or through His apostles and teachers: not thé gen. objecti, ‘sermones qui sunt de Christo,’ Est., but the gen. originis; Hartung, Casus, p. 23. καὶ τῇ κατ᾽ εὐσέβ.] ‘and to the doctrine which is according to godliness ; clause, cumu- latively explanatory of the foregoing ; ‘verba Christi vere sunt doctrina ad pietatem faciens,’ Grot. The expres- sion ἡ Kar εὐσεβ. is not ‘que ad pietatem ducit,? Leo, Méller,—a meaning, however, which, with some modifications, may be grammatically defended, comp. 2 Tim. i. 1, Tit. i. 1, and see Winer, ΟὟ. s.v. κατά, ο, p. 479, Palm ἃ. Rost, Lex. ib. τι. 3, Vol. I. p. 1598,—but according to the usual meaning of the prep., ‘ que pietati consentanea est,’ Est.; there were (to imitate the language of Chrys. on Tit. i. 1) different kinds of διδα- σκαλία ; this was specially ἡ κατ᾽ εὐσέβ. διδασκαλία. Forthe meaning of εὐσέβ., see notes on ch. ii, 2. 4. τετύφωται] Not simply ‘su- perbus est,’ Vulg., but ‘he is be- clouded, besotted, with pride,’ see notes on’ ch. iii. 6. The apodosis begins with this verse: even if ἀφίστασο k.T.. (Rec.) were genuine it would be impossible to adopt any other logical construction. μηδὲν ἔπιστάμενος] ‘yet knowing nothing ; see notes on ch. i. 7. If it had been οὐδὲν ἐπιστ.. it would have been a little more emphatic statement of an absolute ignorance on the part of the ἑτεροδιδάσκ. : it must be always ob- served, however, that this is a less usual construction in the N. T., see Green, Gr. p. 122. The connexion of μὴ and οὐ with participles, a portion of grammar requiring some conside- ration, is laboriously illustrated by Gayler, Part. Neg. p. 274-293. vorav περὶ {nr.] ‘doting, ailing (opp. to ὑγιαιν, λόγοι), about questions: περὶ marks the object round about which the action of the verb is taking place ; comp. notes on ch. i. 19. In the use of περὲ with a gen., the deri- vative meanings, ‘as concerns, as regards,’ greatly predominate: the primary idea, however, still remains : περὶ with a gen. serves to mark an object as the central point, as it were, of the activity (e.g. 1 Cor. xii. 1, the πνευμ. δῶρα formed as it were the centre of the ἄγνοια); the further idea of any action or motion round it is supplied by περὶ with the accus. ; comp. Winer, Gr. § 51 e, p. 447, Donalds. Gr. ὃ 482. On ἕητήσεις, see notes on ch. i. 4. λογομαχίας] ‘debates about words, verbal controversies ° dm. λεγόμ. ; in Latin, ‘verbivelitationes,’ Plaut. Asin. Il. 2. 41, λόγον προσάντη, Greg. Naz. Carm. 15, Vol. 11. p. 200: ‘conten- tiosas disputationes de verbis magis quam de rebus,’ Caly. These idle and barren controversies degenerate into actual strife and contention, and give rise to bad feelings and bitter expressions of them: ὑπὸ δοξοσοφίας ἐπῃρμένοι ἐρίζοντες τελοῦσι, Clem. Alex. Strom. vil. p. 759 (cited by Huth.) βλασφημίαι} ‘evil speakings, ‘railings,’ not against God (Theodoret), but, as the context clearly implies, against one another : comp. Eph. iv. 31 and notes. On the derivation of βλασφημέω, see notes on ch. i. 13. ὑπόνοιαι πον. is similarly referred to God, by Ν t TIMOTHY ΓΝ 5. 87 φθόνος. ἔρις. βλασφημίαι, ὑπόνοιαι πονηραί, 5 διαπαρατρι- βαὶ διεφθαρμένων ἀνθρώπων τὸν νοῦν καὶ ἀπεστερημένων τῆς Chrys. and Theoph.; but the context here again seems clearly to limit tne words to ‘evil and malevolent sur- misings’ against those who adopt other views. ‘Yzov., an ἅπ. λεγόμ. in the N. T., occurs not unfrequently in classical Greek joined with epithets or in a context which convey an un- favourable meaning, e.g. Demosth. Olympiod. 1178, ὑπόνοιαι πλασταί Kal προφάσεις ἄδικοι; sometimes even alone, e.g. Polyb. Hist. v. 15. 1, ἐν ὑπονοίᾳ ἦσαν χαίροντες, Philo, Leg. ad Caium, Vol. 11. p. 551 (ed. Mang.), ἐξιώμενος τὰς ὑπονοίας τοῦ Τιβεριοῦ. 5. δϑιαπαρατριβαί) ‘lasting con- jlicts,’ ‘obstinate contests: ‘ conflic- tationes,’ Vulg., Syr. | en 4 [contritio, see Michael. in Cast. Lex. s.v.] The prep. διὰ has here its usual and primary force of ‘thoroughness,’ ‘completeness,’ intensifying the mean- ing of the binary compound zapa- τριβαί, scil. ἀμοιβαῖαι καὶ ἁμιλλητικαὶ mapatp., Coray; comp. Winer, (7. 8 16. 4. 13. B, p. 113. This latter word (raparp.), as its derivation sug- gests, properly signifies ‘ collisions,’ thence derivatively, ‘hostilities,’ ‘en- mities,’ comp. Polyb. Hist. τι. 36. §, ὑπόψιαι πρὸς ἀλλήλους Kai TaparpiBal, IV. 21. 5, παρατριβὰς καὶ φιλοτιμίας ; add ΧΧΙ. 13. 5, XXUI. 10.4 al. There is then no allusion to moral contagion (comp. Chrysost.), but to the collision of disputants whose mere λογομάχιαι had led at last to ‘truces inimi- citias.’ To retain παραδιατριβαί (Rec. ) (‘profitless disputations’), as is still done by Bloomf., following Tittmann, Synon. I. p. 233, 18 contrary to every principle of sound criticism: in the 1st place παραδιατρ. is found only in a few cursive mss. and Theoph., while διαπαρ. is found in ADFGJ ; great majority of mss. ; Clem. Basil (Griesb., Scholz, Lachm., Tisch.) ; andly, it is highly probable that the reading παραδιατρ. was a correction, as compounds of διὰ-παρὰ are rare ; and 3rdly, παραδιατρ. is in fact ex- pressed in Aoyouax. and superfluous, while the reading of the text is per- fectly natural and consistent. Such principles of criticism cannot be too earnestly deprecated. There are a few similar compounds, e.g. dvamapa- τηροῦμαι (2), 2 Sam. iii. 30, διαπαρα- κύπτεσθαι (2), τ Kings vi. 4, διαπα- pdyw, Greg. Nyss. Vol. Il. p 177, διαπαρασύρω, Schol. Lucian. Vol. 0. Ρ. 796 (Hemst.). διεφθαρμ. τὸν νοῦν] ‘corrupted in their mind.’ There is no reason whatever for translating νοῦς ‘intellect,’ as Peile, in loe., nor any scriptural evidence for the distinction he draws between the νοῦς ‘as the noetic (?) faculty, the understanding,’ and the φρὴν as ‘the reason.’ Νοῦς is here as not unfre- quently in the N. Τὶ, (comp. Rom. i. 28, Eph. iv. 17, Tit. i. 15 al.) not merely the ‘mens speculativa,’ but the willing as well as the thinking part in man, the human πνεῦμα in fact, not simply ‘quatenus cogitat et intelligit,’ (Olsh. Opusc. p. 156) but also ‘quatenus vult :’ φρὴν (φρένες) on the other hand only occurs twice, in 1 Cor, xiv. 20. For a detailed account of νοῦς, see Beck, Seelenlehre, 11. 18, p. 49 54.» Delitzsch, Bibl. Psych. IV. 5, Ρ. 139 sq., and comp. also Olshausen, Upusc. p. 156, whose definitions are however rather too narrow. The accus., it need scarcely be remarked, is an accus. ‘of the remoter object,’ and specifies that part of the subject i, or 88 1 TIMOTHY VI. ς- 7. oe ἘΣΎ , ‘ 3 ι δ ἀληθείας. νομιζόντων πορισμον εἰναι τὴν εὐσέβειαν. 6 » \ \ , ε ἈΝ Χ > , Ἐστιν δὲ πορίισμος μεγας 7] εὐσέβεια μετα αυταρκειᾶς. “δι A 5 / an \ , ~ “ ny: 7 οὐδὲν yap εἰσηνέγκαμεν εἰς τὸν KOTLOY, δῆλον ὅτι οὐδὲ on, which the action of the verb takes place, Winer, Gr. § 32. 5, p. 261, Scheuerl. Synt. § 1x. 2, p. 65. The origin of this construction is probably to be looked for in verbs with two accusatives which, when changed into the passive, retain the accus. rez unaltered ; thence the usage became extended to other verbs, Kriiger, Sprachl. § 52. 4. Hartung, Casus, p. 61 sq. amertep. τὴν ad.] ‘destitute of the truth,’ immediate consequence of the foregoing: they were not only ἐστερημ. Ths and. (στερέω, however, does not occur in N. T.), but ἀπεστερημ.; the truth was taken away from them ; comp. ch. i. 19, Tit. i. 14, where its first rejection is stated as the act of the unhappy men themselves. πορισμὸν K.T.A.] ‘that godliness is a source of gain ;’ clearly not, as the article proves, ‘that gain is godl., as Syr. and Auth. Ver. Topiouds ap- pears here and ver. 6 not so much ‘gain’ in the abstract, as ‘a source or means of gain’ (‘a gainfiwl trade,’ Conyb. and Hows.); comp. Plutarch, Cato Major, c. 25, δυσὶ κεχρῆσθαι μόνοις πορισμοῖς γεωργίᾳ καὶ φειδοῖ; and on the termination -μος, Donalds. Crat. § 253, Lobeck, Phryn. p. 511. The sentiment of the verse is ex- pressed more fully, Tit. i. 11, διδά- comp. 2 ISqs5 oKovTes ἁ μὴ δεῖ αἰσχροῦ κερδοῦς χάριν. The Rec. inserts ἀφίστασο ἀπὸ τῶν τοιούτων with JK, Syr. (both), al., but the authorities for the omission, AD*FG, Vulg., It., Goth., Copt. al., clearly preponderate. ‘6. πορισμὸς has here no imme- diate spiritual reference (Matth.) to future and heavenly gain (αἰώνιον πορίζει ζωήν, Theod.) but points rather to the actual gain in this life, and the virtual riches which godliness when accompanied by αὐταρκ. (comp. notes on ch. i. 14, and on Eph. vi. 23) unfailingly supplies; κέρδος ἐστιν ἣ εὐσέβεια ἐὰν καὶ ἡμεῖς μὴ πλειόνων ἐφιέμεθα [sic], ἀλλὰ τῇ αὐταρκείᾳ στοιχῶμεν ; (σοαμπη., similarly Chrys., Theoph. : ‘the heart, amid every out- ward want, is then only truly rich when it not only wants nothing which it has not, but has that which raises it above what it has not,’ Wiesinger. Pagan authors (see exx. in Suicer, Thes. Vol. 1. p. 575) have similarly spoken of αὐτάρκ. being gain; the Apostle associates αὐτάρκ. with evcép., and gives the mere ethical truth a higher religious significance. avtapKelas] ‘contentedness,’ not ‘competency,’ Hamm.; ‘suficientia est animus su&é sorte contentus, ut aliena non appetat nec quidquam extra se quierat,’ Justin. im loc. : compare the perhaps slightly more exact definition of Clem. Alex. Pad. 11. 12, Vol. 1. p. 247 (Potter), αὐτάρκ. ἕξις ἐστὶν ἀρκουμένη ols δεῖ [see Estius] καὶ δι’ αὑτῆς ποριστικὴ τῶν πρὸς τὸν μακάριον συντελούντων βίον. The subst. occurs again in 2 Cor. ix. 8, but objectively, scil. ‘ sufficiency, ’—a ~ meaning which obviously would not be suitable in the present case ; αὐτάρκης oceurs Phil. iv. 11. 7. οὐδὲν γάρ] Confirmation of the preceding clause, especially of the last words in it, μετὰ αὐταρκείας. As we brought nothing into the world, and as that very fact implies that we shall carry nothing out (comp. Job Ἷ. 21), our real source of gain must be some- 1 TIMOTHY VI. 7—o. ἐξενεγκεῖν τι δυνάμεθα: ὃ , , 9 , TATMATA, τούτοις ἀρκεσθησόμεθα. 89 ἔχοντες δὲ διατροφὰς καὶ σκε- 9 Οἱὲ δὲ βουλόμενοι a Ω , ς ‘ κ one πλουτεῖν εμπιπτουσιν εἰς πείράασμον Kal παγίδα και ἐπιθυ- thing independent of what is merely ad- dititious, ὥστε τὶ δεῖ ἡμῖν τῶν περίττων εἰ μηδὲν μέλλομεν ἔκει συνεπάγεσθαι, Theophyl.; we entered the world with nothing, we shall leave the world with nothing, why should we then grasp after treasures so essentially earthly and transitory ? οὐδὲ ἐξενεγκεῖν K.T.A.] ‘we cannot also take anything out ; these words are clearly emphatic, and contain the principal thought: ‘excutit natura redeuntem sicut intrantem,’ Senec., Epist. 102. It is this inability to take anything away which furnishes the most practical argument for the truth of the assertion. If we could take anything out there would be an end to αὐτάρκεια ; our present and future lots would he felt too nearly dependent on each other for a patient acquiescence in any assigned state: piety with contentment would then prove no great πορισμός. 8. ἔχοντες δέ] ‘but if we have ; the δὲ is not for οὖν, Syr.,—a particle which would give a different turn to the statement,—still less equiva- lent to καί, Auth. Ver., but points to a suppressed thought suggested by οὐδὲ ἐξενεγκεῖν κι τ. Δ. : “ something addititious we must certainly have while we are in this world, bué if,’ &e. The adversative force of the particle is thus properly preserved : ‘aliquid in mente habet ad quod respiciens oppositionem infert,’ Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 365, comp. notes on Gal, iii. 15. διατροφὰς καὶ σκ. ‘food and clothing; both words dz. λεγόμ. in the N. T. The prep. in the former subst. perhaps may hint at a fairly sufficient and per- manent supply, comp. Xen. Mem. 11. 7. 6, τὴν Te οἰκίαν πᾶσαν διατρέφει καὶ ζῇ δαψιλῶς. The latter substantive pro- bably only refers to ‘ clothing,’ Ital., not to ‘shelter,’ Goth. (?), Peile, or to both, as Vulg. (?), ‘quibus tegamur,’ De W. ; for see Aristot. Polit. vu. 17, σκέπασμα μικρὸν ἀμπισχεῖν (Wetst.), and compare the passage cited by Wolf out of Sect. Hmpir. 1x. 1, τροφῆς καὶ ἄλλης τοῦ σώματος ἐπιμελείας, where it similarly does not seem neces- sary (with Fabricius) to extend the reference: so also Chrys., all the Gk. expositors, and appy. Syr., as σκεπασμάτων Kal τῆς Daten ΙΔ 252 [tegumentum] occurs else- where, e.g. Acts xii. 8, in definite reference to a garment. ἀρκεσθησόμεθα] ‘we shall be satisfied : the use of the future is slightly doubtful. It does not seem exactly imperatival, Goth., Auth. Ver.,— though this meaning might be de- fended, see Winer, G7. ὃ 44. 3, Ρ. 363, nor even ethical ‘we ought to be, we must be so,’ comp. Bernhardy, Synt. X. 5, Ρ- 377,—but, as the fol- lowing verse seems to suggest, more definitely future, and as stating what will actually be found to constitute αὐτάρκεια ; ‘simul etiam aliquid intendit Apostolus,’ Estius, who with Hamm. refers (‘sufficient to us are’) where this view is more roughly expressed : so appy. Green, Gr. p. 27, and De W., who refers the future to what might ‘reasonably be expected.’ 9. ot δὲ «.7.A.] Class of persons opposed to those last mentioned. Chrysostom with his usual acuteness affirmare to Syr. 90 ΕΥΥΜΟΤΗΥ ΠΟ το; μίας πολλὰς ἀνοήτους καὶ βλαβεράς, αἵτινες βυθίζουσιν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους εἰς ὄλεθρον καὶ ἀπώλειαν. 12 ῥίζα γὰρ " ~ A , 4A e ᾿ς io \ 2 , TAVTOV τῶν KAKWY ETTLV ἢ pirapyupia, ἧς τινες OPEVOMEVOL calls attention to βουλόμενοι ; οὐκ ἁπλῶς εἶπεν, οἱ πλουτοῦντες, ἀλλ᾽ οἱ βουλόμ. ἐστὶ γάρ τινα καὶ χρήματα ἔχοντα καλῶς οἰκονομεῖν καταφρονοῦντα αὐτῶν. παγίδα] “α snare ; not ‘snares,’ Syr. (comp. Bloomf.), but ‘a snare,’ scil. τοῦ διαβολοῦ, which D*FG ; Vulg., It. al., actually add. ‘There is, of course, here no ἕν διὰ δυοῖν (Coray): the latter sub- stantive somewhat specifies and par- ticularizes the former. The form the temptation assumed was that of an entangling power, from which it was not easy for the captive to extricate himself; comp. Moller. ἀνοήτους] ‘foolish ; on the proper meaning of this word, and its dis- tinction from ἄφρων and ἀσύνετος, see notes on Gal. iii. τ. The Vulg., a few other Vv., and three mss. read ἀνονήτους, a wholly unnecessary cor- rection: the lusts involved elements of what was foolish as well as what was hurtful; Chrysostom explains specifically. αἵτινες] ‘which indeed,’ ‘ seeing they ; explanatory of the foregoing epithets, more especially of the last: on the force of ὅστις see notes on Gal. iv. 24. βυθίζουσιν] ‘drown,’ ‘whelm in’ only here and Luke vy. 7: βυθίζ. tristis gradatio,’ Beng. “ ἐμπίπτ.. The word, as Kypke suggests, ‘subinnuit © infinita et ineluctabilia esse mala in que precipites dantur avari,’ Obs, Vol. 11. Ὁ. 367; there is, however, no idea of ‘preceps dari,’ nor is it a metaphor from a ship ‘that is plunged head foremost into the sea,’ Bloomf., who cites Polyb. 11. 10. 2, where ἐβύθισαν means, as the verb always does, ‘caused to sink,’ without any reference whatever to direction. ὄλεθρον καὶ ἀπώλ. 7 ‘destruction and perdition. The force of the com- pound form (ἀπὸ marks ‘ completion,’ comp. amepydfoua al. Palm τι. Rost, Lex. s.Vv. ἀπό, Ἐ 4) and more abstract termination of the latter word perhaps afford a hint that a climactic force is intended: ὄλεθρος [on the termination, see Pott, Et. Forsch. Vol. 11. p. 555] is ‘ destruction,’ in a general sense, whether of body or soul; ἀπωλεία intensifies it by pointing mainly to the latter. ᾿Ὄλεθρος is only used by St. Paul, 1 Cor, v. 5, ὀλ. τῆς σαρκός, 1 Thess. v. 3, αἰφνίδιος 6X. ἐφίσταται, where it points more to temporal de- struction, and 2 Thess. i. 9 (Zisch.), where the epithet αἰώνιος is specially added to support its application to jinal ‘perdition.’ το. ῥίζα] ‘a root; φιλαργυρία in general (ἡ pur.) is not the root of all evils taken in its most general sense, comp. Plut. de Lib. Educ. ὃ 7, πηγὴ καὶ plf{a καλοκᾳγαθίας τὸ νομίμου τυ- The two are ποὺ con- vertible terms; there are other vices which might with equal justice be termed. ‘ roots of all evils,’ but at any rate avarice is one of them: see Mid- dleton, Gr. Art. iii. 4, I, p. 51 sq. (ed. Rose). The assertion of Bloomf. that the above translation ‘ violates xew παιδείας. the usus Joquendi’ cannot be main- 1 tained: surely it is doubly unsatis- factory to obtrude the article and to support the obtrusion by saying that πάντων ‘is a popular hyperbole’ for πόλλων, φιλαργυρία] ‘love of money ;’ dar. λεγόμ. in the N.T. ; the adject. occurs twice, Luke xvi. 14, 2 Tim. iii, 4. The kindred but more Ee TIMOTHY ΟΣ τ. 91 > oe ἘῸΝ A , , Ὁ ‘ , ἀπεπλανήθησαν απὸ τῆς πιστεῶς και EAUTOVUS περιέπειραν ὀδύναις πολλαῖς. Follow after righteous- ness and Christian vir- τι Σὺ δέ, ὦ ἄνθρωπε τοῦ Θεοῦ, ταῦτα tues, fight the good fight, and in Christ’s name keep His commands, eyen till His glorious coming ; glory to Him, amen, general and active sin πλεονεξία is that which is dwelt upon by the sacred writers. On the distinction between these words (which however is on the surface) see Trench Synon. § 24, but comp. notes on Lph. iv. το. The sentiment is illustrated by Suicer, Thesx Vol... pi 1427. ἧς ὀρεγομ.. ‘which some reaching out after. Commentators have dwelt much upon the impropriety of the image, it being asserted that φιλαρ- yupla is itself an ὄρεξις (De W). The image is certainly not perfectly cor- rect, but if the passive nature of φιλαργυρία (see Trench) be remem- bered, the violation of the image will be less felt. Under any circumstances ὀρεγόμενοι cannot be correctly trans- lated ‘giving themselves up to,’ Bretschn. al. Both here, ch. iii. 1, and Heb. xi. 16, the only passages in the N.T. where the word occurs, v δ ὠρέξατο, Syr. Sen AY? 2] [ ‘concupivit,’ ‘desideravit’] is simply ‘desired,’ ‘ coveted,’ literally ‘reached out the hands eagerly to take,’ comp. Donalds. Cratyl. § 477. On the de- rivation (6-pey, comp. ‘ rego’), see Donalds, ib. and Pott, Etym. Forsch., Vol. I. p. 219, Vol. 1. p. 167. περιέπειραν)͵ ‘pierced themselves through ; dm. Neyou. in N.T.; comp. Philo, in Flace., Vol. τι. p. 517 (ed. Mang.), ἀθρόους ἀνηκέστοις περιέπειρε κάκοις, and the numerous instances of a similar metaphorical use collected by Suicer, s.v. The prep. rept is of course not ‘for ém or éy,’ Bloomf., but conveys the idea of ‘ piercing,’ ‘going through,’ a meaning defended by Donalds. Cratyl. § 178, comp. Lucian, Gall. ὃ 2, κρέα---περιτεπαρμένα τοῖς ὀβελοῖς, Diod. Sic. xvi. 80, λόγ- χαις περιπειρόμενοι. The ὄδυναι here mentioned are not merely outward evils, ‘ gravissima mala hujus seculi,’ Estius, nor even the anxious cares (Justin.) or desires (Chrys.) which ac- company φιλαργυρία, but more pro- bably the gnawings of conscience,— ‘conscientiz de male partis mor- dentis,’ Beng. The word ὀδύνη, it may be remarked, is not derived from ὀδούς, Bloomf., but from a root ay, comp. δύη, with a vowel prefix, Pott, Etym. Forsch., Vol. τ. p. 210. 11. σὺ δέ] ‘ But thou,’ in distinct opposition to the preceding τινες, ver. Το. ἄνθρωπε τοῦ Θεοῦ] It is doubtful whether this is an official term (se. ‘Deiinternuncius,’ OFX Wx compare 2 Pet. i. 20), or merely a general designation. The former view is adopted by Theodoret, and is cer- tainly plausible, as the evangelists’ office (2 Tim. iv. 5) in the N.T. might be fairly compared with that of the prophets in the O.T.: as, however, the context is of a perfectly general character, it seems more natural to give the expression a more extended reference, as in 2 Tim. iii. 17 ; comp. Chrysost., πάντες μὲν ἄνθρωποι τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ κυρίως οἱ δίκαιοι, οὐ κατὰ τὸν τῆς δημιουργίας λόγον ἀλλὰ καὶ κατὰ τὸν τῆς οἰκειώσεως. ταῦτα] The reference of this pronoun is frequently a matter of difficulty in this epistle : it seems here most natu- rally to refer to ver. 9, 10, i.e. to φιλαργυρία, and the evil principles and results associated with it, ‘ avari- 92 pr CIMOTHY ENT aT. re “ ol δὲ ὃ ’ὔ "5 , , ’ , φεῦγε". LWKE O€ OLKALOGUYHY, εὐσέβειαν, πίστιν, ἀγαπῆν. , one, ὑπομονήν, πραὔπαθειαν' 12 5 , \ ‘ ΄ ἀγωνίζου τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα τῆς πίστεως, ἐπιλαβοῦ. τῆς αἰωνίου ζωῆς, εἰς ἣν ἐκλήθης, tiam et peceata que ex ill radice pro- cedunt,’ Estius. δικαιο- σύνην] ‘righteousness,’ not merely ‘justice,’ but the virtue which is op- posed to ἀδικία (Rom. vi. 13), and to the general tendency of the powers of evil (2 Cor. xi. 15), or, as appy. here and 2 Tim. ii. 22, iii. 16, in a more general sense, ‘right conduct confor- mable to the law of God’ (2 Cor. vi. 14, comp. Tit. ii. 12; see Reuss, Theol. Chret. iv. 16, Vol. 1. p. 169, Usteri Lehrb. 11. 1. 2, p. 190: on the more strictly dogmatic meaning see the excellent remarks in Knox, Re- mains, Vol, I. p. 276. πίστιν] ‘ faith,’ in its usual theological sense (ἥπερ ἐστὶν ἐναντία τῇ ζητήσει Chrys.), not ‘fidelity,’ ‘die einzelne christliche Pflicht der Treue,’ Usteri, Lehrb. ττ. 1. 1, p. 92 note. μονή, ‘ perseverantia,’ ‘brave patience,’ see notes on 2 Tim. ii. το, and on Tit. iii 2. πραὐπάθειαν] “ meekness of heart or feelings; ἃ word of rare occurrence (Philo de Abrah. Vol. τι. p. 31, Ignat. Z'rall. 8), perhaps On ὑπο- slightly more specific than mpairns, scil. πραὔτης ὅλων τῶν παθῶν τῆς ψυχῆς, Coray in loc. The reading of the Rec. mpaorjra (with DJ K, al. Chrys., Theod.) has every appearance of a correction, and is rejected even by Scholz. The virtues here mentioned seem to group themselves into pairs; d:cacoc. and ἐυσέβ. have the widest relations, pointing to general conformity to God’s law and practical piety ; πίστις and ἀγάπη are the fun- damental principles of Christianity ; ὑτομ. and πραυπ., the principles on which a Christian ought to act towards his gainsayers and opponents; comp. Huther. The article is occasionally omitted before abstract nouns, see exx. in Winer Gr. § 18. I, p. 137. 12. τὸν καλὸν ayava] ‘the good strife, Hamm.; the contest and struggle which the Christian has_ to maintain against the world, the flesh, and the devil; comp. 2 Tim. iv. 7. It is doubtful how far the agonistic metaphor is to be maintained in this verse. Grammatical considerations seem certainly in favour of the two im- peratives (here, on account of the em- phatic asyndeton, without καὶ) being referred both to the metaphorical con- test, ‘strive the good strife, and (in it and through it) seize hold on eternal life,’ Winer, Gir. § 44. 2, p. 362: it is, however, very doubtful whether the remaining expressions καλεῖν (as by the praco?) ἐνώπ. πολλ. μαρτ. (the spectators? see Hammond in loc.), can fairly be regarded as parts of the continued metaphor. In εἰς ἥν, as De W. has observed, there would thus be an impropriety; αἰών. ζωὴ is not the contest or the arena into which the combatants were called, but has just been represented as the βραβεῖον and ἔπαθλον (Theophyl.), the object for which they were to contend. Similar, but more sustained allusions to the Olympic contests occur in 1 Cor. ix. 24 sq., Phil. iii. 12. ἐπιλαβοῦ] ‘lay _hold of only here and ver. 1g in St. Paul's epp., three times in Heb., and frequently in St. Luke; Grot. cites Prov. iv. 13, ἐπιλαβοῦ ἐμῆς παιδείας, μὴ apis. per. must not be unnoticed; it was one act in the ἀγών ; see the exx. in Winer Gir. § 44. 5, p. 367. The usual sequence, jist pres. imp. then aor. The change to the aor, im- PeLIMOLHY ὙΠ ΩΣ τ. 99 καὶ ὡμολόγησας τὴν καλὴν ὁμολογίαν ἐνώπιον πολλῶν μαρ- τύρων. 13 IlapayyéAXrw σοι ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζωογονοῦντος τὰ πάντα καὶ Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ τοῦ μαρτυρή- imper. (Schoemann /swus, p. 235) is here observed: there are exceptions, however, e.g. I Cor. xv. 34. There is no impropriety in the application of the verb; ζωὴ αἰώνιος is held out to us as the prize, the crown, which the Lord will give to those who are faith- ful unto the end; comp. James i. 12, Rev. 11. ro. γησας)] ‘and thow confessedst,’ or ‘madest,’ dc., not ‘hast made,’ Scholef. Hints, p. 125, an inexact translation for which there is here no idiomatic necessity. Kal has here its simple copulative power, and subjoins to the foregoing words another and co-or- dinate ground of encouragement and exhortation; ‘thou wert called to eternal life, and thou madest a good profession.’ The extremely harsh construction, καὶ (eis ἣν) ὡμολόγησας κιτ.λ. Leo, al., is rightly rejected by De W. and later expositors. τὴν καλὴν Spodoy.] ‘the good confes- sion,—of faith’ (De W.), or,-—of the Gospel’ (Scholef.) ; good, not with re- ference to the courage of Tim., but its own import, Wiesing. But made Possibly on the occasion of some persecution or trial to which Kal ὡμολό- when? Timothy was exposed, ws ἐν κινδύνοις ὁμολογήσαντος τὸν Xp., Theophyl. τ ; more probably at his baptism, oon. τὴν ἐν βαπτίσματι λέγει, Cicum., Theoph. 2, and appy. Chrys.; but, perhaps, most probably, at his ordina- tion, Neander, Planting, Vol. 11. p. 162 (Bohn) ; see ch. iv. 14, and comp. i. 18. The general reference to a ‘confessio, non verbis concepta sed potius re ipsa edita; neque id semel duntaxat sed in toto ministerio’ (Calv., see also Theodoret), seems wholly pre- cluded by tbe definite character of the language. The meaning ‘ oblation’ urged by J. Johnson, Unbl. Sacr. τι. I, Vol. 1. p. 223 (Angl. Cath. Libr.), is an interpr. which ὁμολογία cannot possibly bear; see 2 Cor. ix. 13, Heb. bE, ἣν Tip Bie, 25: 13. παραγγέλλω σοι k.t.A.] The exhortation, as the epistle draws to its conclusion, assumes a yet graver and more earnest tone. The apostle having reminded Timothy of the confession he made, ἐνώπ. πολλ. μαρτ.; now gives him charge, in the face of a more tremen- dous Presence, ἐνώπ. τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ Swoy. κι τ.λ., not to disgrace it by failing to keep the commandment which the Gospel imposes on the Christian. τοῦ Lwoyovotvros | ‘who keepeth alive? ἕωογον. is not perfectly synonymous (De W., Huth.) with (woo. the reading of the Rec. ; the latter points to Godas the ‘auctor vitze,’ the former as the ‘ conservator ;’ comp. Luke xvii. 33, Acts vii. 19, and esp. Exodus i. 17, Judges viii. 19, where the context clearly shows the proper meaning and force of the word. Independently of external evi- dence [ADFG opp. to JK, which Bloomf. hastily calls insufficient au- thority], the reading of the text seems on internal grounds more fully appro- priate ; Timothy is exhorted to persist in his Christian course in the name of Him who extends His almighty pro- tection over all things, and is not only the Creator, but the Preserver of all His creatures; comp. Matth. x. 29 sq. μαρτυρήσαντος k.T.A. |} ‘who witnessed, bore witness to, the good confession. It seems by no means correct to regard μαρτυρεῖν τὴν 94 ΟΥΥΜΟΤΗΥ ES AVS, “1 4 , σαντος ἐπὶ Ilovriov [Πιλάτου τὴν καλὴν ὁμολογίαν, 14 A , \ ’ ΝΣ ” r 5) Χ , τηρῆσαι σε τὴν EVTOAHVY αἀσπιλον αἀνεπιλήμπτον μέχρι ὁμολ. as simply synonymous with ὁμολογεῖν τὴν duo. (Leo, Huther al.) ; the difference of persons and circum- stances clearly caused the difference of the expressions, ‘testar? confes- sionem erat Domini, confiteri confes- sionem erat Timothei,’ Beng. Our Lord attested by his sufferings and death (6: ὧν ἔπραττεν, Cicum.) the truth of the ὁμολογία, ‘martyrio com- plevit et consignavit,’ Est. ; Timothy only confesses that which his Master had thus authenticated. The use of μαρτ. with an accus. is not unusual (comp. Demosth. Steph. 1. p. 117, διαθήκην μαρτυρεῖν), but μαρτ. ὁμολο- γίαν is an expression confessedly some- what anomalous: it must be observed, however, that the ὁμολογία itself was not our Lord’s testimony before Caiaphas, Matth. xxvi. 64, Mark xiv. 62, Luke xxii. 69 (Stier, Red. Jes., Vol. vi. p. 386), nor that before Pilate, John xviii. 36 (Leo, Huther), but, asin ver. 12 (see notes) the Chris- tian confession generally, the good confession κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν. The expres- sion thus considered, seems less harsh. ἐπὶ ἹἸΠοντίου, in accordance with the previous expla- nation of ὁμολογία, is thus ‘sub Pontio Pilato, Vulg., Est., De Wette, not ‘before P. P.,’ Syr., Chrys., al.,—a meaning perfectly grammatically ad- missible (see notes on ch. v. 19, Herm. Viger, No 394, comp. Pearson, Creed, Vol. 11. p. 153, ed. Burt.), but irre- © concileable with the foregoing expla- nation of ὁμολογία. The usual inter- pretation of this clause, and of the whole verse, is certainly plausible, but it rests on the assumption that - μαρτ. THY ὁμολ. is simply synonymous with ὁμολογεῖν τὴν ὁμολ., and it in- volves the necessity of giving ἡ καλὴ ὁμολ. a different meaning in the two verses. Surely, in spite of all that Huther has urged to the contrary, the ὁμολογία of Christ before Pilate must be regarded (with De W.) a very in-- exact parallel to that of Timothy, whether at his baptism or ordination ; and for any other confession, before a tribunal, &c., we have not the slightest evidence either in the Acts or in these two epp. We retain then with Ital. (Tertull. Preser. 25) Vulg., Goth. and, if the translations can be relied on, Ath. and Ar., the temporal and not local meaning of ἐπί. 14. τηρῆσαι] Infin. dependent on the foregoing verb παραγγέλλω. The purport of the ἐντολὴ which Timothy is here urged to keep has been dif- ferently explained. It may be (a) all that Timothy has been enjoined to observe throughout the ep., Calv., Beza ; or, (Ὁ) the command just given by the Apostle, ταῦτα ἃ γράφω, Theo- doret (who however afterwards seems to regard it as = θεία διδασκαλία), and perhaps Auth. Ver. ; or most probably (c) the commandment of Christ ; not specially the ‘mandatum dilectionis,’ John xiii. 34, but generally the law of the Gospel (comp. 7 παραγγελία ch. i. 5), the Gospel viewed as a rule of life, Huth.; see esp. Tit. ii. 12, where the context seems distinctly to favour this interpretation. Any reference to a command so remote as ch, v. 22 (Bloomf.) is wholly out of the question, _and it is difficult indeed to see how such a view can be said ‘to bear the stamp of nature and truth.’ ἄσπιλον ἀνεπίλημπτον] “ spotless, irreproachable,’ i.e. so that it receive no stain and suffer no reproach ; μήτε δογμάτων ἕνεκεν μήτε βίου κηλῖδά τινα προστριψάμενον, Chrys. rm EIMORAY «Wiis 15; τῆς ἐπιφανείας τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, 95 = a] 15 ἣν - "5Δ), U e , ‘ , I e Καιροις ἰδίοις δείξει oO MaKaplos Kat Movog δυνάστης. oO βασι- [the usual dat. with προστρ. e.g. Plut. Mor. p. 89, 859, 869, is omitted, but seems clearly ἐντολῇ] ; comp. Theod. μηδὲν ἀναμίξῃς ἀλλότριον τῇ θείᾳ διδασκαλίᾳ. As both these epithets are in the N.T. referred only to persons (dom. James i. 27, 1 Pet. i. 19, 2 Pet. 111. 14 ; ἀνεπίλ. τ Tim. 111. 2, v. 7), it seems very plausible to refer them to Tim. (Copt., Beza, al.) ; the construction, however, seems so distinctly to favour the more obvious connexion with ἐντολήν (comp. ch. v. 22, 2 Cor. xi. 9, Jamesi. 27; Clem. Rom. Zp. τι., ὃ 8, tp. τὴν σφραγῖδα ἄσπιλον). and the ancient Vv., Ital., Vulg., Syr. (appy.) al., seem mainly so unanimous, that the latter reference is to be preferred ; so De W., Huther. The objection that ἀνεπίλ. can only be used with persons (Est., Heydenr.), is disposed of by De W., who com- pares Plato, Phil. 43 ©, Philo, de Opif. § 24, Vol. 1. p. 17; add Polyb. Hist. XIV. 2. 14, ἀνεπίλήπτος mpoal- pects. The more grave objection, that τηρεῖν ἐντολὴν means ‘to observe, not to conserve, a commandment’ (comp. Wiesing.), may be diluted by observing that τηρεῖν in such close connexion with the epithets may lose the normal meaning it has when joined with ἐντολὴν alone: it is not merely to keeping the command, but to keeping it spotless, that the atten- tion of Timothy is directed. This is a case in which the opinion of the ancient interpreters should be allowed to have some weight. For the meaning of ἀνεπίλ. see notes on ch. ribs τῆς ἐπιφανείας] ‘the appearing,’ the visible manifes- tation of our Lord at His second advent ; 2 Tim. iv. 1, 8, Tit. ii. 13, comp. Reuss, Theol. Chret. Iv. 21, Vol. I. p. 230. This expression, which, as the context shows, can only ke referred to Christ’s coming to judgment, not merely to the death of Timothy (μέχρι τῆς ἐξόδου, Chrys., Theoph.), has been urged by De W. and others as a certain proof that St. Paul conceived the Advent as near ; so even Reuss, Zheol. 111. 4, Vol. 1. p- 308. It may be admitted that the sacred writers have used language in reference to their Lord’s return (comp. Hammond, on 2 Thess. ii. 8), which seems to show that the longings of hope had almost become the convic- tions of belief, yet it must also be observed that (as in the present case) this language is often qualified by expressions which show that they also felt and knew that that hour was not immediately to be looked for (2 Thess. ii. 2), but that the counsels of God, yea, and the machinations of Satan (2 Thess. ib.) must require time for their development. 15. καιροῖς ἰδίοις] ‘ His own seasons ; see notes on ch. ii. 6, and on Tit. i. 3.‘ Numerus pluralis obser- vandus, brevitatem temporum non valde coarctans,’ Beng. δείξει) ‘shall display ; not a Hebra- ism for ποιήσει or τελέσει, Coray: the ἐπιφανεία of our Lord is, as it were, a mighty σημεῖον (comp. John ii. 18) which God shall display to men. 6 μακάριος] Com- pare notes on ch. i. 2. Chrysostom and Theophyl. regard the epithet as consolatory, hinting at the absence of every element of τὸ λυπηρὸν ἢ ἀηδές in the Heavenly king: Theod. refers it to the ἄτρεπτον of His will. The context seems here rather to point to His exhaustless powers and _ perfec- tions. μόνος δυνάστης] 90 1 TIMOTHY ~ 4 “ Ψ' λεὺς τῶν βασιλευόντων και Κύριος τῶν KUPLEVOVTOVs VI. 15—17. € 160.5 , “, ς , ~ es ° , ad δ 10 ‘ μόνος εχὼν ἀθανασίαν. φῶς οἰκῶν ἀπρόσιτον. ον €LOEV OQUOELS ἀνθρώπων οὐδὲ ἰδεῖν δύναται. ἜΝ ν᾽ ἀμήν. Charge the rich not to Vi trust in riehes, but in God, and to store up a good foundation. “only potentate ;» it is scarcely neces- sary to say that μόνος involves no allusion to the polytheism of incipient Gnosticism, Conyb. and Hows., Baur, al., but is simply intended to enhance the subst., by showing the uniqueness of the δυναστεία. God is the absolute va v 2) 9 δυνάστης, +2010 9 Aaa d> la pees [validus solus ille], Syr.; to to one save to Him can that predication be applied; comp. Eph. iii. 20, Jude 25. Δυνάστης occurs Luke i. 52, Acts vill. 27, and in reference to God, 2Macel ai. 245 πῆ Ἔν. ἃν 23: On the dominion of God, see Pearson, Creed, Art. 1., Vol. 1. p. 51-sq. (ed. Burton), Charnock, Attributes X11. p- 638 (ed. Bohn). βασι- λεύς κ. τ. Χ.1 Similarly βασιλεὺς βασι- λέων, Rev. xvii. 14, xix. 16 (in refe- rence to the Son, comp. Waterl. Def. BAY Oley Το. Deut. x. 17, Psalm exxxv. 3; formule added to still more heighten and illus- trate the preceding title. Loesner cites from Philo, de Decal. p. 749 [ Vol. 11. p. 187], a similar coacerva- tion; ὁ ἀγέννητος καὶ ἄφθαρτος καὶ αἴδιος, καὶ οὐδενὸς ἐπιδέης, καὶ ποιητὴς 320) ; κύριος κυρίων, τῶν ὅλων, καὶ εὐεργέτης, καὶ βασιλεὺς τῶν βασιλέων καὶ Θεὸς Θεῶν : comp. Suicer, Thesawr., Vol. 1. p. 670. τό. ὁ μόνος K.7.A.] ‘who alone hath immortality ; He in whom im- mortality essentially exists, and who enjoys it neither derivatively nor by participation : οὐκ ἐκ θελήματος ἄλλου ταύτην ἔχει καθάπερ οἱ λοιποὶ πάντες a ‘ ‘ , 2 ω τιμὴ και κρατος αἰώνιον. ἐ a , ’ la ΄ an Tots πλουσίοις εν τῷ νὺυν αιῶνι παράγγελλε μὴ ὑψηλοφρονεῖν, μηδὲ ἦλπι- ἀθάνατοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῆς οἰκείας οὐσίας, Just. Mart. Quest. 6τ, οὐσίᾳ ἀθάνατος οὐ μετουσίᾳ, Theodoret, Dial. 111. p. 145; see Suicer, Thesawr., Vol. 1. p. 109, Petavius, Theol. Dogm. 111. 4. 10, Vol. I. p. 200. φῶς οἰκῶν] In this sublime image God is represented, as it were, dwelling in an atmosphere of light, surrounded by glories which no created nature may ever approach, no mortal eye may ever contemplate ; see below. Somewhat similar images occur in the O.T.; comp. Psalm cili. 2, ἀναβαλλόμενος φῶς ws ἱμάτιον, Dan. ii. 22, καὶ τὸ φῶς per αὐτοῦ ἐστι. ὃν εἶδεν οὐδεὶς κι τ.λ.] So Exodus xxxiii. 20, Deut. iv. 12,-Johni. 18, τ John iv. 12 al. For reconciliation of these and similar declarations, with texts such as Matth. v. 8, Heb. xii. 14, see the excellent lecture of Bp. Pearson, de Invisibilitate Dei, Vol. τ. p. 118 sq. (ed. Churton). The positions laid down by Pearson are ‘ Deus est invisi- bilis (1), oculo corporali per potentiam naturalem (2), oculo corporali in statu supernaturali (3), oculo intellectuali in statu naturali,’ and (4), ‘ invisibilitas essentiz divine non tolit claram visionem intellectualem in statu super- naturali:’ Petay. Theol. Dogm. vu. I. I sq., Vol. ἂς p. 445 sq. 17. Tots πλουσίοις K.T.A.] “70 the rich in this world ; ‘multi divites Ephesi.’ Beng. be closely joined with τοῖς πλ., serving to make up with it one single idea ; see notes on Eph. i. 15, where the Ἔν τῷ νῦν αἰῶνι must ἘΝ ΟΤΗΥ Oo VEC, 18. 97 , A a ΄σ ΄ κέναι ἐπὶ πλούτου ἀδηλότητι; GAN ἐν τῷ Θεῷ τῷ παρέ- ἘΦ δὰ ’ , " ρὶ , χοντι ἡμῖν TavTa πλουσίως εἰς ἀπολαύσιν, εἰ 8 ἀγαθοερ- a A ’ + A “2 ὃ , > γεῖν, πλουτεῖν ἐν εργοις καλοῖς, EVILETAOOTOUS εἶναι; KOLYW- rules for the omission of the article with the appended noun are briefly stated ; see also Fritz. Rom. iii. 25, Volt. p. 195, and Winer Gr. ὃ 19. 2, p. 355. The clause is perhaps added to suggest the contrast between the riches in this world and the true riches in the world to come ; καλῶς εἶπεν ᾿Εν τῷ viv αἰῶνι, εἰσὶ γὰρ καὶ ἄλλοι πλούσιοι ἐν τῷ μέλ- λοντι, Chrys. to have a Hebraistic cast, phy xyoy see exx. in Schoettg. Hor., Vol. 1. p. 883. ἠλπικέναι]) ‘to set hopes, ‘to have hoped and continue to hope ;’ see Winer Gr. § 41. 4. a, p. 315, Green Gr. p. 21. On the construction of ἐλπίζω with ἐπί, see notes on ch. iv. Io. The attribute τῷ ζῶντι, added to Θεῴ, in Ree., though fairly supported (DEJ K al. Syr. (both), Ital al. see Tisch.), does not seem genuine, but is perhaps only a reminiscence of ch. iv. 10. — The expression appears πλούτου ἀδηλότητι] ‘the uncertainty of riches ; an expression studiedly more forcible than ἐπί τῷ πλούτῳ τῷ ἀδήλῳ ; comp. Rom. vi. 4. The dis- tinction between such expressions and ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ evayyeX. Gal. ii. 14, though denied by Fritz., Rom., Vol. τ. p- 368, is satisfactorily maintained by Winer, Gir. ὃ 34. 2, p. 267. In such cases the expression has a rhetorical colouring. In the following words, instead of ἐν τῷ Θ., Lachm. reads ἐπὶ τῷ Θὲ with AD*HG > al, (15). 4. . Orig. (mss.) Chrys. Theoph. The ex- ternal authority is of weight, but the probability of a conformation of the second clause to the first, and St. Paul’s known love for prepositional variation, are important arguments in favour of the text, which is supported by D***JK; great majority of mss. ; . . .. Orig. Theod. Dam. al. εἰς ἀπόλαυσιν] ‘for enjoyment,’ ‘to enjoy, not to place our heart and hopes in,’ comp. ch. iv. 3, εἰς μετάληψιν». ‘Observaautem tacitam esse antithesin quum przdicat Deum omnibus affatim dare. Sensus enim est, etiamsi plend rerum omnium copia abundamus, nos tamen nihil habere nisi ex soli Dei benedictione,* Calv. 18. ἀγαθοεργεῖν] ‘that they do good,’ ‘show kindness ; inf. dependent on παράγγελλε, enjoining on the posi- tive side the use which the rich are to make of their riches. The open form ἀγαθοεργΎ. only occurs here; the con- tracted dyafovp. in Acts xiv. 17. The distinction of Bengel between the adjectives involved in this and the fol- lowing clause is scarcely exact, “ἀγαθὸς infert simul notionem beatitudinis (Mark x. 18, not.) καλὸς connotat pulchritudinem.’ The latter word is correctly defined, see Donalds. Cratyl. § 324; the former as its probable de- rivation (~ya, cogn. with xa, Donalds. ib. § 323, comp. Benfey, Wurzellea, Vol. τι. p. 64) seems to suggest, marks rather the idea of ‘kindness, assis- tance ; comp. notes on Gal. v. 22. εὐμεταδ. κοινων.7 ‘free indistributing, ready to communicate; surely not ‘ to give liberally to the common good,’ Turnbull,—an extraordinary transla- tion. The transl. of the Auth. Vers., ‘ready to distribute’ (comp. Syr.), is perhaps scarcely exact, as it would rather imply the qualitative termina- tion --ἰκος : on the passive termination ros (here more laxly used) see Donalds. Cratyl. § 255. Κοινωνικὸς is not ὁμιλητικός, προσηνής, Chrys. ἘΠ 98 1 TIMOTHY , VLKOUS, ΜΠ 188-90. 10 ἀποθησαυρίζοντας ἑαυτοῖς θεμέλιον καλὸν εἰς μὴ , 6 τὶ , A + A τὸ μέλλον, ἵνα ἐπιλάβωνται τῆς ὄντως ζωῆς. Keep thy deposit, and ayoid all false knowledge. and the Greek expositors, ‘ facilis convictus,’ Beza, but as the context clearly shows, ‘ready to impart to others,’ see Gal. vi. 6. Both adjec- tives are ἅπ. λεγόμ. in the N.T. 19. ἀποθησαυρίζοντας] ‘laying up in store, Auth. Ver. There is no necessity for departing from the regu- lar meaning of the word; the rich are exhorted to take from (ἀπὸ) their own plenty, and by devoting it to the service of God and the relief of the poor to actually treaswre it up as a good foundation for the future: in the words of Beveridge, ‘their estates will not die with them, but they will have joy and comfort of them in the other world, and have cause to bless God for them to all eternity,’ Serm. cxxvul. Vol. Iv. p. 439 (Angl. Cath. Libr.). The. preposition ἀπὸ does not exactly mean ‘seorsum;’ ‘in longinquum,’ Beng., but seems to point to the source from which, and the pro- cess by which (‘ seponendo thesaurum colligere,’ Winer, de Verb. Comp. Iv. 11), they are to make their θησαυρούς ; compare Diodor. Sic. Bibl. v. 75, πολλοὺς τῶν ἐκ τῆς ὀπώρας κάρπων ἀποθησαυρίζεσθαι. θεμέλιον καλόν] ‘a good foundation ; τοῦ πλούτου τὴν κτῆσιν ἐκάλεσεν ἄδηλον, τῶν δὲ μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν τὴν ἀπό- λαυσιν θεμέλιον κέκληκεν" ἀκίνητα γὰρ ἐκεῖνα καὶ ἄτρεπτα, Theodoret. Θεμέλ. is not either for θέμα (comp. Tobit iv. 9), or, like Heb. 7py, equivalent to συνθήκη (Hamm.), but retains its usual and proper meaning; a good foundation (contrast ἀδηλότης πλούτου) is, as it were, a possession which the rich are to store up for themselves ; comp. ch. 111. 13, βαθμὸν ἑαυτοῖς 29 Ὦ Τιμόθεε, τὴν παραθήκην φύλαξον, There is not here, as Wiesinger remarks, any con-, fusion, but only a brevity of expres- sion which might have been more fully, but less forcibly, expressed by ἀποθησαυρ. πλοῦτον καλῶν ἔργων ws θεμέλιον (Miller): the rich out of their riches are to lay up a treasure ; this treasure is to be a θεμέλιος καλός, on which they may rest in order to lay hold on τῆς ὄντως ζωῆς. The form θεμέλιος is properly an adj. (comp. Arist. Aves, 1137, θεμελίους λίθους), but is commonly used in later writers as a subst., e.g. Polyb. Hist. 1. 40. 9, comp. Thom. M. s. v. τῆς ὄντως ἵωῆς)] ‘the true life,’ ‘that which is truly life; ‘celle qui merite seulecenom, parcequela perspective de la mort ne jette plus d’ombre sur ses jours,’ Reuss, Theol. Chret. Iv. 22, Vol. 1. p. 252: that life in Christ (Tit. i. 1) which begins. indeed here but is perfected hereafter ; τὸ κυρίως καλὸν περιποιοῦνται. ζῆν παρὰ μόνῳ τυγχάνει τῷ Θεῷ, Origen, on John τι. ὃ 11, Vol. Iv. p. 71, see notes on ch. iv. 8. On the meaning of (wy, see Trench, Synon. § 27, and the deeper and more philo- sophical treatise of Olshausen, Opus- cula, p. 187 sq. The reading αἰωνίου (Rec.) with D***E** JK, rejected even by Scholz, has every appearance of being a gloss. 20. ὦ Τιμόθεε] The earnest and individualizing address is a suitable preface to the concluding paragraph, which, as in 2 Cor: xiii. rr al., con- tains the sum and substance of the ep., and brings again into view the salient points of the Apostle’s pre- vious warnings and exhortations. τὴν παραθήκην] ‘the deposit; only ἊΕΙΜΟΤΗΥ Ι 20, 99 ἐκτρεπόμενος τὰς βεβήλους κενοφωνίας καὶ ἀντιθέσεις τῆς (a) here and (β), 2 Tim. i. 12, δυνατός ἐστὶν τὴν παραθήκην μου φυλάξαι, and (y) 2 Tim. i. 14, τὴν καλὴν παραθήκην φύλαξον διὰ Πνευμ. ἁγίου. In these three passages the exact reference of παραθήκη is somewhat doubtful. It seems highly probable that the mean- ing in all three passages will be fundamentally the same, but it is not necessary to hamper ourselves with the assumption that in all three passages it is exactly the same, the unneces- sary assumption which interferes with De Wette’s otherwise able analysis. What is this approximately common meaning? Clearly not either ‘his soul,’ t Pet. iv. 19, Beng. on (8), or his ‘soul’s salvation,’ for this inter- pretation, though plausible in (j), would by no means be suitable either in (a) or (y); nor again τὴν χάριν τοῦ Πνεύματος, Theodoret h.l., for this would in effect introduce a tautology in (y). Not improbably, as De W., Huther, al., ‘the ministerial office,’ i.e. ‘the apostolic office ’ in (a), ‘the office of an evangelist’ in (8) and (y); there is, however, this objection, that though not unsuitable in (8) it does not either here or in (y) present any direct opposition to what follows, βεβήλους κενοφωνίας kal ἀντιθ. κ.τ.λ. On the whole the gloss of Chrys. on (8), ἡ πίστις, τὸ κήρυγμα (comp. Theoph. 1, Gicum. r), or rather, more generally, ‘the doctrine delivered (to Timothy) to preach,’ ‘Catholic fidei talentum,’ Vincent. Lirin. (Common. xxi. ed. Oxf. 1841), seems best to preserve the opposition here and to harmonize with the context in (y), while with a slight expansion it may also be applied to (8), see notes in loc. Compare τ Tim. i. 18 and 2 Tim. ii. 2, both of which, especially the former, seem satisfactorily to con- firm this interpretation ; on παραθήκη and παρακαταθήκη (Rec., but with most insufficient authority), the latter of which is appy. the more idiomatic form, see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 312; see also the numerous exx. in Wetst. in loc. ἐκτρεπόμενος] ‘avoiding,’ Auth. Ver., ‘devitans,’ Vulg., the middle voice, esp. with an accus. objecti, may sometimes suitably be rendered by a word of different meaning to that conveyed by the act. voice : see Winer, Gr. ὃ 39. 3, p- 294. Kevohwvias! ‘babblings,’ ‘empty talk- ings, ‘vanos sine mente sonos,’ Raphel, only here and 2 Tim. ii. 16; scarcely different in meaning from ματαιολογία, τ Tim. i. 6; comp. Deyling, Obs. Vol. Iv. 2, exerc. 3, p. 642. On βεβήλους (which as the omission of the article shows belongs also to dvriéoes) and the prefixed art., comp. notes on ch. iv. 7. ἀντιθέσεις kK. T.A.] ‘oppositions of the falsely-named Knowledge,’ ‘of the Kn. which falsely arrogates to itself that name,’ ‘non enim vera scientia esse potest que veritati contraria est,’ Est. The exact meaning of ἀντιθ., | ee δι [contorsiones, oppositiones ] Syr., is somewhat difficult to ascer- tain. Baur (Pastoralbr. p. 26 sq.), for obvious reasons, presses the special allusion to the Marcionite oppositions between the law and the Gospel (see Tertull. Mare. τ. 19), but has been ably answered by Wieseler, Chronol. p. 304. Chrysostom and Theophyl. (comp. GEcum.) refer it to personal controversies and to objec- tions against the Gospel; ais οὐδὲ ἀποκρίνεσθαι xph; this, however, is scarcely sufficiently general. The language might be thought at first sight to point to something specific te 2 100 , , ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως, A / 3 , TYVY TLOTLY YOTOXNTAV. Benediction (comp. Huther); when, however, we observe that κενοφωνίας and ἀντιθέσεις are under the vinculum of a single article, it seems difficult to maintain a more definite meaning in the latter word than the former. These ἀντιθέ- σεις, then, are generally the positions and teachings of the pseudognosis which arrayed themselves against the doctrine committed to Timothy, τὰς ἐναντίας θέσεις, Coray; so even De Wette. This use of the peculiar term γνῶσις seems to show that it was becoming the appellation of that false and addititious teaching which, taking its rise from a Jewish or Cabbalistic philosophy (Col. ii. 8), already bore within it the seeds of subsequent heresies, and was preparing the way for the definite gnosticism of a later century: comp. Chrys. and esp. Theod. in loc., and see notes on ch. i. 4. 21. ἐπαγγελλόμενοι] ‘making a profession of ;’ ‘pre se ferentes,’ Beza ; see notes on ch. il. Io. . Ἢ χάρις μετὰ σοῦ. τ SCIMOTHY τι. 21 ἥν τινες ἐπαγγελλόμενοι περὶ ἠστόχησαν] ‘missed their aim ; Wiesinger here urges most fairly that it is perfectly incredible than any, forger in the second century should have applied so mild an expression to followers of the Marcionite Gnosis. On ἀστοχέω see notes on ch, i. 6, and for the use of περί, see notes on ch. a μετὰ σοῦ] So Tisch. with DEJK; nearly all mss. ; majority of Vv., and many Ff, Lach. reads ὑμῶν with AFG; 17; Boern., Copt. al. ;—very probably a correction from 2 Tim. iv. 22, or Tit. iii. 15 ; at any rate, even if ὑμῶν be retained, no stress can safely be laid on the plural as implying that the epistle was addressed to the Church as well as to Timothy. All that could be said would be that St. Paul sent his benediction to the Church in and with that to its Bishop. Huther somewhat singularly maintains σοῦ in his crit.- notes, and as it would_seem, ὑμῶν in his commentary. Note on τ Tim. iii. 16. The results of my examination of the Cod. Alex. may be thus briefly stated. On inspecting the disputed word there appeared (a) a coarse line over, and a rude dot within, the O, in black ink; (6) a faint line across O in ink of the same colour as the adjacent letters. It was clear that (a) had no claim on attention, except as being possibly a rude retouching of (6): the latter demanded careful examination. After inspection with a strong lens it seemed more than probable that Wetstein’s opinion (Prolegom. Vol. 1. p. 22) was correct. Careful measure- ments showed that the first ε of εὐσέβεια, ch. vi. 3, on the other side of the page, was exactly opposite, the circular portion of the two letters nearly entirely coinciding, and the thickened extremity of the sagitta of ε being behind what had seemed a ragged portion of the left-hand inner edge of Ὁ. It remained only to prove the identity of this sagitta with the seeming line across O. This with the kind assistance of Mr. Hamilton, of the Brit. Museum, was. thus effected. While one of us held up the page to the light and viewed the O through the lens, the other brought the point of an instrument (without of course touching the MS.) so near to the extremity of the sagitta of the eas to make a point of shade visible to the observer on the other side. When the point of the instrument was drawn over the sagitta of the ε, the peint of shade was seen to exactly trace out the suspected diameter of the O. It would thus seem certain that (2) is no part of O, and that the reading of A is certainly ὅς. THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. CHAPTER τὶ Apostolic address and salutation. ζωῆς τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, [ Ὁ ἀπόστολος Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ διὰ θελήματος Θεοῦ κατ᾽ ἐπαγγελίαν 2 Τιμοθέῳ ἀγαπητῷ τέκνῳ. χάρις, ἔλεος, εἰρήνη ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς καὶ Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν. I bear thee ever in my memory, and call to mind the faith that is in thee and thy family. Stir up thy gift. 1. διὰ θελήματος] ‘Apostolatum suum voluntati et electioni Dei adscribit non suis meritis,’ Est. ; so t Cor. i. 1, 2 Cor. i. t, Eph. i. 1 (where see notes), Col. i. 1. In the former epistle the A postleterms himself ἀπόστ. X.’1. κατ᾽ ἐπιταγὴν Θεοῦ, perhaps thus slightly enhancing the authority of his commission, see notes ; here, pos- sibly on account of the following κατά, he reverts to his usual formula. κατ᾽ ἐπαγγελίαν must be joined, as the omission of the article clearly decides, not with διὰ θελήματος, but with ἀπόστολος (comp. Tit. i. 1) ; the prep. κατὰ denoting the object and intention of the appointment, ‘to fur- ther, to make known the promise of eternal life,’ ἀπόστολόν με προεβάλετο ὁ δεσπότης Θεός... γελθεῖσαν αἰώνιον ζωὴν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις κηρύξαι, Theodoret, Gicum. ; see Tit. i. I, κατὰ πίστιν, and comp. Winer, Gr. 8.V. κατά, ο, p. 479, and notes on 1 Tim. vi. 3. On the expression ἐπαγγελ. ζωῆς, and the nature of the ὥστε με τὴν ἐπαγ- 3 Χάριν ἔχω τῷ Θεῷ, ᾧ λατρεύω ἀπὸ προγόνων ἐν καθαρᾷ συνειδήσει. ὡς ἀδιάλει- genitival relation, see notes on 1 Tim. iv. 8. 2. ἀγαπητῷ] Soin 1 Cor. iv. 17, butiin)) 1, Limi) 1) 2yandy Tit. i. 4, γνησίῳ τέκνῳ ; ‘illud quidem (γνησ.) ad Timothei commendationem et laudem pertinet ; hoe vero Pauli in illum benevolentiam et charitatem declarat, quod ipsum tamen, ut monet Chrysost., in ejus laudem recidit,’ Justiniani. It is strange in- deed in Mack here to find an insi- nuation that Timothy did not now deserve the former title ; see ver. 5. On the construction see notes on 1 Tim..i. 2. χάρις, ἔλεος k.7. A. See notes on Eph. i. 2 ; compare also on Gal. i. 3, and on τ Tim. i. 2. On the scriptural meaning of χάρις see the brief but satisfactory observations of Waterland, Zuch. ch. x. Vol. Iv. p- 666 sq. 3. χάριν ἔχω] More commonly εὐχαριστῷ, but see τ Tim. i. 12, and Philem. 7 (Tisch.). The construction of this verse is not perfectly clear. 102 > TIMOTHY ΕΞ ἢ, x A κι a , ’ a ᾿ ἢ στον εχω τὴν περι σου μνειᾶὰν ἐν ταις δεήσεσίν μου VUKTOS ‘ 8 / καὶ ἡμέρας; The usual connexion χάριν ἔχω ὡς k.7.. in which ws is taken for ὅτι (Chrys. Vulg.), or guoniam (Leo), in- dependently of its exegetical difficul- ties,—for surely neither the prayers themselves, nor the repeated mention of Timothy in them (Leo), could form a sufficient reason for the Apostle’s returning thanks to God,—is open to the grammatical objections that ws could scarcely thus be used for ὅτι (see Klotz, Devar., Vol. 1. p. 765, comp. Ellendt Lex. Soph., Vol. τι. p. 1002), and that the causal sense is not found in St. Paul’s epp. (see Meyer on Gal. vi. 10): still less tena- ble is the temporal meaning, ‘ quoties tui recordor,’ Calvin, Conyb. and Hows. (comp. Klotz, Vol. 11. p. 759), and least of allso the adverbial mean- ing assigned by Mack, ‘recht unab- lissig.’ In spite then of the number of intervening words (De W.), it seems most correct, as well as most simple, to retain the usual meaning of ὡς, ‘as,’ Germ. ‘da,’ i. 6. ‘as it happens I have,’ to refer χάριν ἔχω to ὑπόμν. λαβών, ver. 5, and to regard ws ἀδιάλ. k.T.X. as marking the state of feelings, the mental circumstances, as it were, under which the Apostle expresses his thanks; ‘I thank God... as thou art ever uppermost in my thoughts and prayers when thus put in remembrance,’ ὅθ, This seems also best to harmonize with the position of the tertiary predicate, ἀδιάλειπτον ; see below. Under any circumstances, it seems impossible with Coray to suppose an ellipsis of καὶ μαρτύρομαι before as; Rom. i. g is very different. notes on Gal. vi. το. On ὡς, compare ἀπὸ προγόνων] ‘from (my) forefathers,’ ‘with the feelings and principles in- ω bel 9 A , ΄-- 4 ἐπιποθῶν σε ἰδεῖν, μεμνημένος σου τῶν herited and derived from them,’ not ‘as my fathers have done before me,’ Waterland, Serm. 111., Vol. V. p. 4543 see Winer, Gr. ὃ 51, ἀπό, p. 446. - These were not remote (Hamm.), but more immediate (comp. 1 Tim. v. 4) progenitors, from whom the Apostle had received that fundamental religi- ous knowledge which was common to both Judaism and Christianity; comp. Acts xxii. 3, xxiv. 14. ἐν καθαρᾷ συνειδ.] See notes on 1 ΤΊ. 1. 5. ὡς ἀδιάλειπτον] “as unceasing, unintermitted, is,’ ὅτο., not ‘unintermitted as is,’ &c., Peiie ; the tertiary predicate must not be ob- scured in translation; see Donalds. Cratyl. § 301, ib. Gr. Gr. § 489 sq. νυκτὸς Kal ἡμέρας must not be joined with ἐπιποθῶν ce ἰδεῖν (Matth.), and still less, on account of the absence of the article, with δεήσεσίν μου (Syr.), but with ἀδιαλ. ἔχω, which these words alike explain and enhance. On the expression see notes on t- Tim. v. 5. 4. ἐπιποθῶν] ‘longing; part. de- pendent on ἔχω μνείαν, expressing the feeling that existed previously to, or contemporaneous with, that action (comp. Jelf, Gr. ὃ 685), and connected with the final clause ta πληρωθῶ. The following participial clause, με- μνημένος κιτ. Δ. ('memor tuarum lachrymarum,’ Vulg.), does not refer to χάριν ἔχω, as the meaning of iva would thus be wholly obscured, but further illustrates and explains éuro- θῶν; to which it is appended with a faint causal force; ‘longing to see thee, in remembrance of (as I remem- bered) thy tears, in order that I may,’ &e. The ἐπὶ in ἐπιποθῶν might at first sight seem to be intensive, ‘ vehe- menter optans,’ Just., ‘greatly de- siring,’ Auth. Ver., both here and 2 TIMOTHY I. 4, 5. δακρύων, ἵνα χαρᾶς πληρωθῶ, 109 5 ὑπόμνησιν λαβὼν τῆς > \ ’ , , 4 5 ( A ’ a εν σοι ανυποκρίτου TLOTEWS, NTIS EYWKYTEV 7 PWTOV εν Τὴ μάμμη σου Λωίδι καὶ τῆ μητρί σου Εὐὐνίκη, πέπεισμαι δὲ 5. λαβών] So Lachm. with AC FG; al. 3. Tisch. χαμβ. with DEJ K ; nearly all mss..... Chrys. Theod. al. Apparently a conformation to the pres. ἐπίποθ. Rom. i. 11,1 Thess. iii. 6. As, how- ever, the simple form ποθέω is not used in the N.T., and as this inten- sive force cannot by any means be certainly substantiated in authors, ἐπὶ will be more correctly taken as marking the direction (Palm u. Rost, Lex. s.v. ἐπί, c. Ὁ.) of the πόθος, comp. Psalm xh. 2, ἐπιποθεῖ other ἐπὶ Tas πήγας : see esp. the good note of Fritz., Rom., Vol. I. 31. σου τῶν δακρύων] ‘the tears which thou sheddest,’ probably at separation ; εἰκὸς ἣν αὐτὸν ἀποσχιζόμενον κλαίειν καὶ ὀδύρεσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ παίδιον τοῦ μαστοῦ καὶ τῆς τιτθῆς ἀποσπώμενον, Chrysost. : Coray compares the case of the πρεσβύτεροι at Ephesus, Acts xx. 37; see also Wieseler, Chronol., p: 463. 5. ὑπόμνησιν λαβών] ‘being put im remembrance ;’ literally, ‘having received reminding,’ not, with a neg- lect of tense, ‘dum in mem. revoco,’ Leo (who reads λαβών). The asser- tion of Bengel, founded on the distinc- tion of Ammonius (ἀνάμνησις ὅταν τις ἔλθῃ εἰς μνήμην τῶν παρελθόντων. ὑπόμν. δὲ ὅταν ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρου εἰς τοῦτο προάχθῃ, see Ammonius, p. 16, ed. Valck.), that St. Paul might have been reminded of Timothy’s faith by some ‘ externa occasio aut nuncius,’ is not to be dismissed with Huther’s summary ‘ unbegrundet ;’ it is plausi- ble, harmonizes with the tense, and lexically considered, is very satisfac- tory ; comp. 2 Pet. i. 13, iii. 1, the only other passages in the N.T. where the word occurs. The intrans. meaning is fully defensible(urjuny, καὶ ἰδιωτικῶς εἰπεῖν ὑπόμνησιν, Eustath. 71. xxi. p. 1440, see also Polyb. Hist. I. 1. 2, II. 31.6), and 2 Pet.i. 9, λήθην λαβών, is certainly analogous, still, on the whole the transitive meaning seems preferable ; comp. Eph. i. 15, where the construction is similar. τῆς ἐν σοὶ κι τ. λ.} ‘the unfeigned faith that abideth in thee,’ more exactly ‘que est in te non ficta,’ Vulg.; object which called forth the Apostle’s thank- fulness; on ἀνυπόκριτος, see notes on 1 Tum, 1. 5. πρῶτον] * first; not for τὸ πρῶτον, nor again for mpé- τερον, ‘prius quam in te,’ Leo, but simply ‘first:’ the indwelling of faith in Timothy’s family, first began in the case of Lois. The relative ἥτις here seems used, not as often, explicatively, but differentially, ‘this particular ἀνυπόκρ. πίστις, no other, dwelt first,’ &e., see notes on Gal. iv. 24, and comp. Jelf, Gr. § 816. μάμμῃ] ‘grandmother; the Atticists condemn this form, the correct expres- sion being τήθη (not τίτθη), Lobeck, Phryn. p. 134, Thom. Mag. s.v. τίθη. The mother, Eunice (possibly the daughter of Lois), is alluded to Acts ἘΠ Te καὶ ἐν σοί] Sc. ἐνοικεῖ ; De W. seems inclined to favour the supplement of Grot. al., ἐνοικήσει, on the highly precarious hypothesis that Tim. had become weak in faith, ver. 13, ch. iii. 14, comp. Grot. The transition to exhortation does not at all favour such a supposition ; ‘imo quo certius Paulus de Timothei fide persuasus erat, eo majorem habebat causam adhortandi ut aleret τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ Θεοῦ, quo gauderet,’ Leo. 104 7 ta , OTL Καὶ €V σοί. 2 TIMOTHY AY 57. , “ 9. 6 Δι᾽ ἣν αἰτίαν ἀναμιμνήσκω σε ἀναζω- n \ , A Θ A “ ’ " A ὃ \ a TUPELV TO χάρισμα του €O0U, O E€OCTLY EV COL ta Τῆς ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν μου. 6. δι᾽ qvairlav] ‘For which cause,’ 8c. διότι οἷδά σε ἀνυπόκριτον ἔχοντα πίστιν, Theophyl., ταῦτα περὶ cov πεπεισμένος παρακαλῶ κ.τ. λ., Theod., comp. notes on ver. 12: asthe Apostle knew that this faith was in Timothy, he reminds him (‘in memoriam re- digit,’ Just., comp. 1 Cor. iv. 17) to exhibit it in action, It is by no means improbable that this ἀνάμνησις was suggested by a knowledge of the grief, and possibly despondency, into which Timothy might have sunk at the absence, trials, and imprisonment of his spiritual father in the faith ; ὅρα πῶς δείκνυσιν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀθυμίᾳ ὄντα πολλῃ, πῶς ἐν κατηφείᾳ, Chrys. ἀναϊζωπυρεῖν] ‘to kindle up,’ ἀεὶ ζῶσαν καὶ ἀκμάζουσαν ἐργάζεσθαι, Theophyl., na πυρσεύειν, Theodoret, gels [ut excites] Syr.; see Suicer, Thesaur. 8.v. Vol. 1. p. 265. There is no lexical necessity for pressing the meaning of this word, ‘sopitos ignes suscitare,’ Grot. al. ’Avatwarupety (dr. λεγόμ. in N. T.) is not here neces- sarily ‘vesuscitare,’ Vulg., ‘wieder anfachen,’ Huther, but ‘ exsuscitare,’ Beza, ‘anzufachen,’ De Wette, the force of ava being up, upwards, e.g. ἀνάπτειν, ἀναπνεῖν, dveyelpew K.T.X., see Winer, de Verb. Comp. ul. p. 1, note, Rost u. Palm, Lew. s.v. avd, Ἐν I; comp. Plutarch, Pomp. 41, αὖθις p , ». 4 ἀναζωπυροῦντα καὶ παρασκευαζόμενον. The simple form ἑωπυρεῖν is ‘to kindle to flame’ (τοὺς ἄνθρακας φυσᾶν, Suidas), the compound ἀναζωπυρεῖν is either (a) to ‘7ekindle,’ and in a ‘metaphorical sense ‘ revivify,’ Joseph. Antig. VI. 8. 5, ἀναζωπυρῆσαι τὴν δέξιαν (Jeroboam’s hand), comp. Plato, 7 ΕἸ A ἔδ Cy ¢ ov yap edwKey ἡμίν O Charm. 156 ο, ἀνεθάῤῥησά τε---καὶ ἀνεζωπυρούμην ; or (Ὁ) as here, “ to kindle up’ (ἀνεγεῖραι, ἐκζωπυρῆσαι, Suidas), ‘to fan into a flame,’ without any necessary reference (comp. 1 Tim. iv. 4) to a previous state of higher ardour or fuller glow: comp. Mare. Anton. VIL. 2, ἀναζωπυρεῖν φαντασίας )( σβέννυναι, and appy. Plato, Republ. VII. 527 Ὁ, ἐκκαθαίρεταί τε καὶ dvafw- πυρεῖται. As has been before said, it is not wholly improbable that Timothy might now have been in a state of ἀθυμία, but this inference rests more on the general fact of the ἀνάμνησις than on a meaning of the isolated word, Numerous exx. of the use of for. and ἀναζωπ. will be found in Wetst. im loc., Krebs. Obs. p. 360, Loesner, Obs. p. 412; see also Pier- son, Mer. p. 170. τὸ χάρισμα] ‘the gift, the charism,’ not the Holy Spirit generally, τὴν χάριν τοῦ Πνεύματος, Theodoret, and appy. Waterland, Serm. χχτ Vol. Vv. p. 641 (whose clear remarks, however, on the concurrence of our spirit with the Holy Spirit are not the less worthy of attention), but the special gift of it in reference to Timothy's duties as a bishop and evangelist, εἰς προστασίαν τῆς ἐκκλησίας, εἰς σημεῖα, εἰς λατρείαν ἅπασαν, Chrysost.: compare Hooker, Eccl. Pol. ν. 77.5. > διὰ τῆς ἐἔπιθ.] ‘through the laying on,’ &c.; the hands were the medium by which the gift of the Holy Spirit was imparted. On the ἐπίθεσις χείρων see notes on 1 Zim. iv. 14, where it is mentioned that the presbytery joined Ὁ with the Apostle in the performance of the solemn act. . 7. Πνεῦμα δειλίας] ‘the Spirit of x TIMOTH ¥ 1°. 73'S. Θεὸς Πνεῦμα σωφρονισμοῦ. Do not then shrink from aftlictions, for the sake of Him who made death powerless. I am His preacher, and know that He will keep my deposit. cowardice, οὐ διὰ τοῦτο τὸ Πνεῦμα ἐλάβομεν, ἵνα ὑποστελλώμεθα, ἀλλ ἵνα παῤῥησιαζώμεθα, Chrys.; not ‘a spirit, a natural and infused character,’ Peile: see notes on Eph. i. 17, and on Gal. vi. 1. By comparing those two notes it will be seen that in such cases as the present, where the πνεῦμα is mentioned in connexion with διδόναι k.T.X., it is better to refer it directly to the per- sonal Holy Spirit and the abstract gen. to His specific χάρισμα ; where, however, as in 1 Cor. iv. 21, Gal. J.c. the connexion is different, the πνεῦμα may be referred tiamediately to the human spirit (comp. Olshausen, Opusc. Ῥ. 154), though even then ultimately to the Holy Spirit as the inworking power. In such formule, then, whether it be the human spirit as wrought on by the Holy Spirit, orthe Holy Spirit as working on the human spirit, will be best deduced from the context ; with the present passage comp. Rom. vill. 15, Gal. iv. 6. On the omission of the article with πνεῦμα, see notes on Gal. v. 5. σωφρο- δακ« o Δ γισμοῦ] ‘self-control ,᾿ ] 20342550 [institutio] Syr., ‘sobrietatis,’ Vulg. ; ἅπ. λεγόμ. in N. T., but compare Tit. li. 4. Σωφρονισμός, as its termination suggests (Donalds. Cratyl. § 253, Buttm. Gr. § 119. 7, see exx. Lobeck, Phryv. p. 511), has usually a tran- sitive force, e.g. Plutarch. Cat. Maj. 5, ἐπὶ σωφρονισμῷ τῶν ἄλλων, comp. Joseph. Antiq. XVII. 9.2, Bell. 1.1.3; as, however, both the substantives with which it is connected are abstract and intransitive, and as the usual 105 δειλίας, ἀλλὰ δυνάμεως καὶ ἀγάπης Kal 8 Μὴ οὖν ἐπαισχυνθῆς τὸ μαρτύριον τοῦ U ἘΠῚ οἷς δὲ Sr uk \ δέ 5) - Κυρίου μῶν. MPHOE EME TOV εσμιὸον AUTOU, Guard thine, meaning of nouns in -pos (‘action proceeding from the subject,’) is sub- ject to some modifications (e.g. xp7- σμός, comp. Buttm. /.c.), it seems on the whole best, with De W., Wiesing. al., to give it either a purely intran- sitive (Plutarch, Quest. Conviv. vil. 3, σωφρονισμοῖς τισιν ἢ μετανοίαι5), or perhaps rather reflexive reference ; ἵνα σωφρονίσωμεν τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν κινου- μένων παθημάτων τὴν ἀταξίαν, Theo- doret, Chrysost. 2; comp. Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 11. 1224, Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 486 (Bohn). 8, μὴ οὖν «.7.A.] Exhortation, immediately dependent on the fore- going verse; ‘as God has thus given us the spirit of power, love, and self- control, do not therefore be ashamed of testifying about our Lord’ On the connexion of αἰσχύνομαι and simi- lar verbs with the accus., see Bern- hardy, Synt, 111. 19, p. 113, Jelf, Gr. δ 550. The compound form ἐπαισχ. [ἐπὶ probably marks the imaginary point of application, that on which the feeling is based, Rost u. Palm, Lex, s.v. C. 3] is frequently thus used in the N. T., both with persons, Mark viii. 38, Luke ix. 26, and with things, ch. i, 16, Rom. i. 16, but not the simple form. Observe the aor. subj. with μή, ‘ne te pudeat unquam,’ Leo ; Timothy had as yet evinced no such feeling, Winer, G7. ὃ 60 I, p. 587. τοῦ Κυρίου] ‘of the Lord,’ i.e. ‘about the Lord,’ gen. objectt ; see Winer, Gr. ὃ 30. 1, p. 213, and esp. Kriiger, Sprachl. § 47. 7-1 sq. The subject of this testimony was not merely the sufferings and 100 2 TIMOTHY I. 8, 9. ἀλλὰ συγκακοπάθησον τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ κατὰ δύναμιν Θεοῦ, fal ᾿ς las 4 , , ε ΄ 9 ‘ 9 τοῦ σώσαντος ἡμᾶς Kal καλέσαντος κλήσει ayia, οὐ κατὰ AL ὦν ς A , ‘ 9 INP , A ’ \ Ta epya ἡμῶν adda κατ ἰδίαν πρόθεσιν καὶ χαριν τὴν crucifixion of Christ (Chrysost. and the Greek commentt.), but generally ‘omnis predicatio vel confessio que de Christo fit apud homines,’ Est. ; comp. Acts 1. 8, ἔσεσθέ μοι μάρτυρες. Bengel remarks on the rareness of the formula, 6 Kup. ἡμῶν, in St. Paul, with I. X.; add, however, 1 Tim. i. 14: see also Heb. vii. 14, but not 2 Pet. ili. 15, where the reference appears to the Father. The formula is omitted by Rose in his append. to Middleton, p. 490 sq. δέσμιον αὐτοῦ) ‘His prisoner; i.e. whom He has made a prisoner, gen. auctoris, see notes on δῆ. 1, and also Harless im loc. p. 273. ‘Ne graveris vocari discipulus Pauli hominis captivi,’ Est., Gicum. ἀλλὰ συγκακοπάθησον K.T.A.] ‘but (on the contrary) join with mein suffer- ing ils for the Gospel ; ἀλλὰ seems to mark the full opposition bétween this clause and the words immediately preceding (comp. Klotz, Devar. Vol. I. p. 2, 3), ‘don’t be ashamed of me, but rather suffer with me:’ it is thus perhaps better with Zachm. to retain the comma after ἡμῶν. The prepo- sition σὺν must be referred, not to εὐαγγελ. (Syr.,Theod.) as this would in- volve a very unusual and unnecessary prosopopeeia (πάντας τοὺς Tod evayy. κήρυκας καὶ μύστας, Theoph. 2), but to μοι supplied from the preceding ἐμέ. The dat. evayyeX. is then either the dat. of reference to (see notes on Gal. i, 22; comp. the fuller expression Phil. iv. 3, ἐν τῷ evayy. συνήθλησάν po, and below, ch. ii. 9), or more probably and more simply the dat. commodi, ὑπὲρ τοῦ εὐαγγ. πάσχειν, Chrys., Theoph. 1. κατὰ iil. δύναμιν] ‘in accordance with, cor- respondingly to that δύναμις which God has displayed towards us in our calling and salvation,’ ver. 9 sq. (Wiesing.), not with any reference to the spiritual δύναμις infused in us, ver. 7 (De W., Huth.). The prep. κατὰ has thus its usual meaning of norma (Winer, Gr. ὃ 53 d,-p. 477); the δύναμις, as ver. g shows, was great, our readiness in κακοπαθεία ought to be proportionate to it. It need scarcely be added this clause must be connected with συγκακοπάθ. not with εὐαγγελίῳ, Heinrich, al. ; ἐπεὶ φορτικὸν ἣν τὸ κακοπάθ., mapa- μυθεῖται αὐτόν, μὴ γάρ φησι δυνάμει τῇ σῇ ἀλλὰ τῇ τοῦ Xp. [Θεοῦ], Theo- phyl., GEcum. 9. σώσαντος ἡμᾶς] ‘who saved us,’ ‘exercised His saving agency to- wards us ;’ ‘servatio hec est applica- tiva non tantum acquisitiva, eam ipsam ob causam quod tam arcte cum voca- tione connectitur,’ Beng., comp. also Green, G7. p. 318 ; we must, however, in all cases be careful not to assign too low a meaning to this vital word (comp. notes on “ph. iii. 8); the con- text will generally supply the proper explanation ; see the collection of pas- sages in Reuss, Theol. Iv. 22, Vol. 11. p- 250. On the act of σωτηρία ap- plied to God, see notes on-1 Tim. i. 1. Mosheim and, to a certain degree, Wiesinger, refer ἡμᾶς to St. Paul and Timothy; this is very doubtful; it seems much more satisfactory to give ἡμεῖς here the same latitude as in ver. 7. καλέσαντος) The act of calling is always regularly and solemnly ascribed to God the Father, see notes on Gal. i. 6, and compare . 2 TIMOTHY I. 9, τό. 107 δοθεῖσαν ἡμῖν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων, το φανερωθεῖσαν δὲ νῦν διὰ τῆς ἐπιφανείας τοῦ σωτῆρος e “ ΕῚ “ A , A ‘ , ἡμῶν ᾿]ησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καταργήσαντος μὲν TOV θανατον, Reuss, Theol. ἘΝ: 15, Wol. Il. p. 144 sq. This κλῆσις is essentially and in- trinsically ayia; it is a κλῆσις εἰς κοινωνίαν τοῦ Xp., τ Cor. i. 9. On the ‘ vocatio externa and interna,’ see esp. Jackson on the Creed, Book X11. 7 (init.) κατὰ τὰ ἔργα ἡμ.] ‘according to owr works; comp. Tit. 111. 5, οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων. . . ἔσωσεν. The preposition κατὰ may certainly be here referred to the motives (Beza, De W.) which prompted the act; see exx. in Winer, Gr. § 53. a, p. 478: it seems, however, equally satisfactory, and perhaps more theologically exact, es- pecially in the latter clause, to retain (with Vulg.) the more usual meaning ; comp. Eph. i. 11, iii. 11, al. ἰδίαν πρόθεσιν] ‘His own purpose ;’ observe the ἰδίαν ; ‘that purpose which was suggested by nothing outward, but arose only from the innermost depths of the divine εὐδοκία ; οἴκοθεν ἐκ τῆς ἀγαθότητος αὑτοῦ ὁρμώμενος, Chrys. ; comp. Eph. i. 5. The nature of the πρόθεσις is further elucidated by the more specific καὶ χάριν κ.τ.λ. ; there. is, however, no ὃν διὰ δυοῖν, ‘propositum gratiosum’ (comp. Bull, Prim. Trad. vi. 38), but simply an explanation of the πρόθεσις by a state- ment of what it consisted in, and what it contemplated. τὴν δοθεῖσαν κ. τ. Χ.7 ‘which was given to ‘usin Christ Jesus.’ The literal mean- ing of these words must not be in- fringed on. Δοθεῖσαν is simply ‘ given,’ not ‘destined ;’ it was given from the beginning, it needed only time for its manifestation: ἐν Xp., again, is not ‘per Christum,’ Est., but ‘in Christo,’ ‘in His person,’ ἀνάρχως ταῦτα mpo- τετύπωτο ἐν Xp. Ino. γένεσθαι, Chrys. ; comp. I Pet. i. 20, see notes on Eph. i. 7, and the good remarks of Hofmann, Schriftb., Vol. I. p. 205. πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων] ‘before eternal times comp. 1 Cor. il. 7, πρὸ τῶν 11, πρόθεσιν τῶν The exact meaning of the term αἰώνιοι χρόνοι (Rom. xvi. 25, Tit. i. 2) must be de- termined from the context; in the present case the meaning seems obvi- ously ‘from all eternity,’ somewhat stronger perhaps than πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, Eph.i.4, ‘before times marked by the lapse of unnumbered ages,’ times, in a word, which reached from eternity (ἀπ᾽ αἰῶνος), to the coming of Christ (see Meyer, on Rom. xvi. 25), im and during which the μυστήριον lay σεσιγημένον, Rom. l.c. In Tit. l.c., however, this meaning, as the αἰώνων, Eph. iii. αἰώνων, and see notes. context seems to show, is by no means so certain; there αἰώνιος seems only to point to the primary and simple meaning of αἰών, ‘avery long space of time’ (comp. Olsh. on 1 Cor. ii. 7), and the reference appears limited to ‘times marked by the lapse of more circum- scribed ages ; ‘very ancient times ;’ see Wiesinger in loc. To. φανερωθεῖσαν] ‘made mani- fest, not ‘realized,’ Heydenr. The word implies what is expressed in other passages, 6. g. Rom. xvi. 25, Col. i. 26, that the eternal counsels of mercy were not only formed before all ages, but hidden during their lapse, till the appointed νῦν arrived; comp. notes on Eph. iii. 9. τῆς ἐπιφανείας), ‘the appearing ; not merely the simple act of the incarna- tion, τῆς ἐνανθρωπήσεως, Theodoret, but as the context and the verb 108 2 TIMOTHY? Στ. φωτίσαντος δὲ ζωὴν καὶ ἀφθαρσίαν διὰ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, II ἐθνῶν" 12 ἐπεφάνη, Tit. iii. 4, seem to suggest, the whole manifestation of Christ on earth (ἔνσαρκος οἰκονομία, Zonaras, Lex., Vol. τ. p. 806), the whole work of redemption, sc. ‘ tota commoratio Christi inter homines,’ Bengel: so Wiesing. and De W. τὸν θάνατον] ‘death,’ either regarded (a) objectively, as a personal adversary and enemy of Christ and His kingdom, t Cor. xv. 26, ἔσχατος ἐχθρὸς καταρ- γεῖται ὁ θάνατος ; or (b) as a spiritual state or condition, including the notions of evil and corruption, 1 John iii. 14, μεταβεβήκαμεν ἐκ τοῦ θανάτου εἰς τὴν ζωήν ; or, more probably (c) as a power and principle, (τοῦ θανάτου τὰ νεῦρα, Chrys.), pervading and overshadowing the world, comp. Heb. ii. 14, ἵνα διὰ τοῦ θανάτου καταργήσῃ τὸν τὸ κράτος ἔχοντα τοῦ θανάτους The objection to (a) lies in the fact that 1 Cor. xv. 26 refers specially to the second advent of Christ, when Death and the powers of evil, aggregated, asit were, into per- sonalities (comp, Rev. xx. 13, 14), will be individually ruined and over- thrown. In (0) again, the usual and proper force of karapyéw (‘render in- operative,’ Rom. iii. 3, iv. 14 al., or ‘destroy,’ 1 Cor. xv. 24, 2 Thess. ii. 8), is too much obscured ; while in (ὁ) this is fully maintained, and in the op- posed clause (uév-dé) the force of φωτίσ. (not προμηνύσαντος, Theod., but els φῶς ἀγάγοντος, Suid., comp. 1.Cor, iv. 5; the principle of death cast a shade over the world, Matt. iv. 16) is more distinctly felt. On καταρ- yéw, comp. notes on Gal, v. 4. ᾿ ζωὴν καὶ ἀφθαρσίαν] ‘life and incor- ruption, of course no éy διὰ δυοῖν, as Coray, and Wakefield, Sylv. Crit., εἴ εἰς ὃ ἐτέθην ἐγὼ κήρυξ καὶ ἀπόστολος καὶ διδάσκαλος ov a ° , A lod , oy: ᾿] >) t ἢν αἰτίαν καὶ TavTa πάσχω; ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ Vol. Iv. p. 208: the latter substantive characterizes and explains the former, not with any special reference to the resurrection of the body (1 Cor. xy. 42), as this would mark ἀφθαρσία as a condition (‘conditio illa felicissima,’ Leo), but with a reference to the es- sential quality of the ζωή, its imperish- able and incorruptible nature (1 Pet. i. 4), and its complete exemption from death (Rev. xxi. 4): comp. Rom. ii. 7. Itmay be observed that θάνατος, as a known and ruling power, has the article, ζωὴ and ἀφθαρσία as only re- cently revealed, are anarthrous. διὰ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου is appy. correctly explained by Wiesing. as loosely ap- pended to the whole foregoing sen- tence, expressing the more remote medium of the φανέρωσις ; the more immediate being the ἐπιφάνεια. It thus also serves suitably to introduce ver. II sq. Ir. εἰς 8] Scil. εὐαγγέλιον; ‘ad quod evangelium predicandum,’ Est., not ‘in quo,’ Ital., Vulg. On the re- maining words, see notes on 1 Tim. il. 7, where there is the same designa- tion of the Apostle’s offices, though, as the context shows, the application is somewhat different. There the Apostle is speaking of his office on the side of its dignity, here in reference to the sufferings it entailed on him who sustained it: the ἔγω is thus here not: ‘dignitatem predicantis,’ but ‘co- hortantis :᾿ μὴ καταπέσῃς τοίνυν ἐν τοῖς ἐμοῖς παθήμασι᾽ καταβέβληται τοῦ θανάτου τὰ νεῦρα, Chrysost. ἐτέθην] ‘J was appointed; comp. Τ᾿ Dima ὙΖ: 12. δι ἣν αἰτίαν] ‘Kor which cause; scil. because I am thus ap- By -ἘΠΟΤΉΥ ἐν 39, ΠΩ: 109 = 4 > a> ἢ ᾿ , Φ ἐπαισχύνομαι" οἶδα γὰρ ᾧ πεπίιστευκα. Καὶ πεπεισμαι OTL , ’ A , , Ρ “ “ Ἕ ‘ δυνατός εστιν τὴν παραθήκην μου φυλάξαι εἰς ἐκείνην τὴν ἡμέραν. pointed as a herald and Apostle ; comp. ver. 6. This formula is only used by St. Paul in the Pastoral epp., ver. 6 and Tit. i. 13: see also Heb. li. 11, and Acts xxviii. 30; comp. also Acts x. 21, xxii. 24, xxiii. 28. καὶ ταῦτα] ‘even these things ;’ bonds, imprisonment, and sufferings, see ver. 8, to which the following ἐπαισχύνομαι shows a distinct reference. ᾧ πεπίστευκα] ‘in whom I have put my trust, and still do put it’ (comp. notes on Eph. ii. 8), literally, ‘to whom I have given my πίστις, scarcely ‘on whom I have reposed my faith and trust’ (Bloomf.), as this would rather imply ἐπὶ with the dative, see notes on 1 Tim. i. 16, where these constructions are dis- cussed, It need scarcely be said that @ refers to God the Father (ver. 10) not to Jesus Christ. δυνατός ἐστι] ‘7s able,’ has full and sufficient δύναμις, in evident reference to the δύναμις Θεοῦ, ver. 8. τὴν παραθήκην μου] ‘the trust committed unto me,’ ‘my deposit, τὴν πίστιν φησὶ καὶ τὸ κήρυγμα, Theophyl. 1, after Chrys. 1; or here, perhaps, with a slight expansion, ‘the office of preaching the Gospel,’ ‘the steward- ship committed to the Apostle ;’ see notes on 1 Zim. vi. 20. The meanings assigned to παραθήκην are very nume- rous, and it must be confessed that not one of them is wholly free from difficulty. The usual reference to the soul, whether in connexion with μου as what the Apostle had entrusted to God (Beng., comp. 1 Pet. iv. 19, Luke xxiii. 46), or as a deposit given by God to man (Bretschn., comp. Whitby), is at first sight very spe- cious ; but if, as the context would I € , + € , , a > 95 ὑποτυπωσιν εχε ὑγιαινόντων λόγων, ὧν παρ then seem certainly to require, it had any reference to life, surely eis ἐκείνην τ. Nu. must be wholly incon- gruous; and if again we refer to 1 Thess. v. 23, the prayer for the entire preservation of the personality is there intimately blended with one for its ἀμεμφία, a moral reference, which finds no true parallel in φυλάξαι. It is an interpr. moreover unknown to the Greek expositors. Less pro- bable seems the idea of an ἀντιμισθία, Theophyl. 3, maintained also by Wiesing., i.e. στέφανον ζωῆς x.T.d., ch. iv. 7, 8, for how can this con- sistently be termed ὦ deposit? We retain, therefore, the meaning advo- cated in notes on 1 Tim. l.c., with that expansion only which the context here seems itself adequately to supply. The only difficulty is in φυλάξαι, which is certainly more suitably applied to the holder than the giver of the deposit. The gen. μοῦ is thus the possessive gen., ‘the deposit which is definitely mine.’ The other interpr. are fairly discussed in the long note of De Wette in loc. ; for the connexion of thought, comp. Maurice, Unity, p. 646. εἰς ἐκείνην τὴν ἡμ. ‘against that day,’ Auth. Ver., i.e. to be produced and forthcoming when that day, not τοῦ θανάτου (Coray), but of final reckoning comes ; I shall then render up my trust, through God’s preserving grace, faithfully discharged and in- violate. Eis does not seem here merely temporal (John xiii. 1), but has its more usual ethical sense of ‘destination for,’ comp. Eph. iv. 30, Phil. i. 10, ii. 16, al. 13. ἔχε] ‘have,’ as a possession, ‘let the ὑποτ. be with thee,’ Syr.; 110 oo TIMOTEHY 5 Mateo er 5 aA oS ’ ’ 4 " , a) rn) A εμου ἠκούυσας. EV πιστει Και αγαπῇη Uap #eV Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ: 14 πὴν καλὴν παραθήκην φύλαξον διὰ Πνεύματος ἁγίου n° A 9 a TOU EVOLKOUVTOS ἐν ἡμῖν. They which are in Asia all deserted me. The 15 Oidas τοῦτο, ὅτι ἀπεστράφησάν Lord give mercy at the last day unto Onesiphorus. ΄ not for κάτεχε, Huth., Wiesing., though somewhat approaching it in meaning ; see notes on 1 Tim. iil. 9, and comp. 7b. ch. i. 19. ὑποτύπωσιν] ‘the delineation, pat- 2 v tern,’ |3c.se [‘ formam ad quam in rebus fidei et vite respicitur,’ Schaaf] Syr. The meaning of ὑποτύπ. is here only slightly different from that in 1 Tim. i. 16; see notes. In both cases ὑποτ. is little more than τύπος (see Palm u. Rost, Lex: s.v.); there, how- ever, as the context seems to require, the transitive force is more apparent, here the word is simply intransitive ; comp. Beveridge, Serm. vi, Vol. 1. p. 111 (Angl. Cath. Libr.). What St. Paul had delivered to ‘Timothy was to- be to’ him a ‘pattern’ and ‘exemplar’ to guide him ; ὑπετυπω- σάμην ταύτην τὴν ὑποτύπ. τούτεστι τὸ ἀρχέ- εἴκονα καὶ ἀρχέτυπον. τυπον ἔχε, κἄν δεῇ ζωγραφῆσαι ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς λάμβανε καὶ ζωγράφει, Theophyl. after Chrys. and Theod. The subst. ὑποτύπ. dispenses with the article on the principle of correlation (see Middl. Art. 11. 3. 6, p. 48, ed. Rose), and is moreover sufficiently defined by the following gen.; comp. Winer, Gr. Sy Ge2ysb,) pay raes before the latter words seems properly accounted for (De W.) by the pro- bable currency (comp. νόμος) of the formula, comp. 1 Tim. vi. 3. ὑγιαινόντων λόγων] ‘sound words ,᾽ comp. notes on 1 Tim. i. 10. ἐν πίστει κ. τ. Δ. specify the principles in which the ὑποτύπ. is to be held. Ἔν is not to be joined with ἤκουσας, The omission and regarded as equivalent to περί (Theod., comp. Chrys,), still less with ὑγιαινόντων (Matth.) but obviously with ἔχε ὑποτ., marking, as it were, the sphere and element to which the holding the ὑποτ. was to be restricted ; comp. I Tim. iii. 9. τῇ ἐν Xp. *Ino.] Specification of the nature of the πίστις and ἀγάπη. The anarthrous nouns (contrary to the more usual rule) have an article in the defining clause, as the object is to give that defining clause promi- nence and emphasis; ‘in Christo omnis fides et amor nititur, sine Christo [extra Christum] labitur et ἡ corruit,’ Leo: see Winer, Gr. § 19. 4, p- 159, and notes on 1 Tim. 111. 13. Huther joins τῇ ἐν Xp. only with ἀγάπη, but is thus inconsistent with himself, on 1 Tim. i. 14. 14. τὴν καλὴν παραθήκην] ‘the good deposit,’ ‘the good trust com- mitted (unto thee) ;’ the doctrine de- livered to Timothy to preach, ‘ catho- licee fidei talentum,’ as in 1 Tim. vi. 20 ; compare above, ver. 12, and see notes on both passages. It is here termed the good trust, as 7 Kady διδασκαλία, τ Tim. iv. 6, ὁ καλὸς ἄγων, t Tim. vi. 12. διὰ II vev- ματος] The medium by which Timothy was to guard his deposit was the Holy Spirit, still further specified (not without a slight hortatory notice and emphasis) as Tod ἐνοικοῦντος ἐν ἡμῖν ; see notes on ver. 13; σπούδασον οὖν φυλάττειν τὸ Πνεῦμα καὶ αὐτὸ πάλιν τηρήσει σοι τὴν παρακαταθήκην, Theophyl. ᾽ 15. οἷδας τοῦτο] The Apostle ΠΟΥ τύ. 111 εκ - A με TAVTES OL ἐν TH ᾿Ασίᾳ, ὧν ἐστιν Φύγελος και ᾿Ἑρμογένης. © Δῴη ἔλεος ὁ Κύριος τῷ λάκις με ἀνέψυξεν καὶ τὴν now, with a slight retrospect to ver. 8, stimulates and evokes the energy of his disciple by reminding him of the defection of others. What pos- sibly might have been a cause of depression to Timothy is actually made by the contrast which St. Paul implies and suggests (σὺ οὖν τέκνον μου, ch. il. 1), an inspiriting and quickening call to fresh efforts in the cause of the Gospel. ἀπεστράφησάν pe] from me: not an apostasy from the faith (Erasm.), but, as the context im- plies (comp. ver. 8, 16), defection from the cause and interests of St. Paul; aversion instead of sympathy and co- operation ; comp. ch. iv. 16, πάντες με ἐγκατέλιπον. ‘The aorist passive has here, as in Matth. v. 42, the ‘turned away force of the aor. middle; ἀποστρέ- ῴφομαι with an ace. persone (Heb. xii. 25), or an accus. rez (Tit. i. 14), being both of them legitimate and intelli- gible constructions ; comp. Winer, Gr. § 39. 2, p. 293. πάντες οἱ ἐν TH ᾿Ασίᾳ] These words can imply nothing else than that those of whom the Apostle is speaking were in Asia at the time this epistle was written; it being impossible (with Chrys., Theophyl., CEcum. al.) to so invert the meaning of the prep. (év= ἐξ or ἀπὸ), as to refer it to Asiatic Christians then at Rome. The ἀποστροφή, however, may have taken place in Asia cr elsewhere; it may have been a neglect of the absent Apostle in his captivity (Leo), or a personal manifestation of it during a sojourn at Rome (De W., Wiesing., Huth.). The context, coupled with ch. iv. 16, seems most in favour of the latter ᾿Ονησιφόρου οἴκῳ, ὅτι πολ- e ’ ’ » fi ἁλυσίν μου οὐκ ἐπαισχύνθη, supposition ; so also Wieseler, Chio- nol. p. 405. Of Phygelus (‘ Fygelus,’ Ttal., see Tisch.) and Hermogenes nothing is known, On the geographical limits of ᾿Ασία (Acia ἰδίως καλουμένη, ‘ Asia propria’) and the wider (Acts xx. 16, 1 Pet. i. 1, Rey. i. 4) or narrower (Acts ii. 9, xvi. 6?) applications of the term, see Winer, RWB. Art. ‘Asia,’ and espe- cially Wieseler, Chronol. p. 31-35, where the subject is very satisfactorily investigated. 16. δῴη] On this form see notes on Eph.i. 17. The term διδόναι ἔλεος (Luke i. 72, x. 37. ποιῆσαι ἔλεος) only occurs in this place. Onesiphorus showed ἔλεος to St. Paul; the Apostle in turn prays that ἔλεος may be granted to his household. From the use of the form ‘Ovyc. οἴκῳ here and ch. iv. 19, but still more the terms of the prayer in ver. 18, it has been con- cluded, not without some show of pro- bability, that Onesiphorus was now dead ; so De W., Huth., Wiesing., and, as might easily be imagined, Estius and Mack. It does not, how- ever, at all follow that the Romanist doctrine of praying for the dead is in any way confirmed by such an admis- sion, see Hammond in loc., and comp. Taylor, Sermon vu. (on 2 Sam. xiv. 14). avéputev] ‘refreshed 7 the verb is an dz. λεγόμ. in N.T., the subst. ἀνάψυξις occurs, Acts iii. 10, Te Cone συ". VIS: Neither from the derivation [yixw,— not ψυχή, Beza, itself a derivative from the verb, comp. Orig. de Princ. 11. 8] nor from the prevailing use of the word elsewhere have we sufficient reasons for limiting the ἀνάψυξις comp. ἀνέπαυσαν, hi 2 TIMOTHY. ΜΕ ΠΕ 17 ἀλλὰ γενόμενος ev Ῥώμη σπουδαιότερον ἐζήτησέν με καὶ εὗρεν. merely to bodily refreshment (Mosh., De W.); comp. e.g. Xenoph. Hell. VIL. 1. 16, ταύτῃ ἀνεψύχθησαν οἱ τῶν γὴν ἅλυσίν μου] ‘my chain; on the sin- gular ‘catenam meam,’ Vulg. Ital., but not appy. Syr. [comp. Mark v. 4, Luke vii. 29] or Goth. ; comp. notes on Eph. vi. 20. Asis there remarked, an allusion to the ‘ custodia militaris,’ though not certainly demonstrable, is not improbable; comp. Wieseler, Chronol. p. 405. ἔπαι- σχύνθη]) The evidence of the MSS. is here decidedly in favour of this irre- Λακεδ. σύμμαχοι. gular form; comp. however, Winer, Gr. § 12, p. 83, obs. On the meaning of the compound, see notes on ver. 8. 17. ἀλλὰ γενόμενος K.T.A.] ‘ But on the contrary (far from being ashamed of my bonds) when he had arrived in Rome; the ἀλλὰ evidently points to οὐκ ἐπαισχ. ver. 8. The correction of Beza, ‘cum esset Rome,’ for ‘cum Romam venisset,’ as Vulg. and Ital., 2) wh Ξ ᾿ (12] t> Syr.) is uncalled for, and inexact. Nor is γενόμενος ‘being at Rome’ (Hamm.), still less ‘after he had been at R.’ (Oeder, Conject. de diff. 5. S. loc. p. 733), but- literally ‘when he arrived and was there;’ comp. Xenoph. Anab. Iv. 3. 29, ὃς ἂν πρῶτος ἐν τῷ πέραν γένηται, ib. Cyrop. VIII. 5. 13, ἀπιὼν ἐγένετο ἐν Μήδοις. σπουδαιότερον] ‘ with greater’ dili- gence,’ not merely ‘with diligence,’ Syr., nor even ‘very diligently,’ Auth. Ver., both of which obscure the tacit comparison. The comparative does not imply any contrast between Onesiphorus and others, nor with ‘ the diligence that might have been ex- pected’ (Huther), but refers to the in- creased diligence with which Onesi- 18 δῴη αὐτῷ ὁ ἸΚύριος εὑρεῖν ἔλεος παρά Κυρίου phorus sought out the Apostle when he knew that he was in captivity. He would have sought him out σπουδαίως in any case, now he sought for him σπουδαιότερον ; comp. Winer, 7. ὃ 36. - 3, p. 279. και εὗρε] ‘In carcerem conjicitur et arcta cus- todid tenetur, non ut antea in domo conducté omnibus not&; unde Onesi- phorus non nisi postquam sollicite quesivisset invenit eum,’ Pearson, Annal, Paul., Vol. 1. p. 395 (ed. Churton). 18. ὁ Κύριος «.t.4.] The repe- tition of Κύριος is certainly not to be explained away as a Hebraistic peri- phrasis for the pronoun, Coray, Peile ; the exx. cited in Winer, Gr. § 22. 2, p. 168, are, asallrecent commentators seem agreed, quite of a different na- ture. Itis, however, doubtful whether the first Κύριος is Christ, and the second God, or vice versé. The ex- press allusion-in ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ to that day when all judgment is com- mitted to the Son (John v. 22), seems certainly in favour of the latter sup- position: as however in ver. 16 6 Κύρ., in accordance with the prevail- ing use in these and St. Paul’s epp. generally (see Winer, Gr. § 18. 1, p. 141), seems to be ‘ our Lord,’ ὁ Κύριος can scarcely be otherwise in the present verse, see Wiesing. It may be added too, that if the idea of the judicial function of our Lord were intended to be in especial prominence, we should rather have expected παρὰ Κυρίῳ, 2 Pet. ii. 11, see Winer, Gr. § 52. ἃ, p. 471. Even if this be not pressed, it need scarcely be said that judgment is not unfrequently ascribed to the Father, Rom. 11. 5, Heb. xii. 23 al. It may be observed that some Mss., D* E*; d.e al., read Θεῷ, which, how- > TIMGIAY wh τ; lid Sere 113 oh, wotuae ΄ , . ce , , , ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ. καὶ ὅσα ἐν Εφέσῳ διηκόνησεν, βέλτιον A σὺ γινώσκεις. Be strong, faithful, and endurant. No one, whe- ther soldier, athlete, or husbandman, reaps re- ward without toil, ἤκουσας παρ᾽ ever, can only be alleged as showing the opinion of the writer, or possibly the current interpr. of the time. διηκόνησεν] ‘he ministered,’ not spe- cially ‘unto me,’ Syr., Auth. Ver., for then βέλτιον would be out of place, or ‘to the saints at Ephesus,’ Flatt, Heydenr., but simply and generally, “how many good offices he performed,’ ‘quanta ministravit, Vulg. The as- sertion of Wieseler, Chronol. p. 463, that Onesiphorus was a deacon at Eph. cannot be safely deduced from this very general expression. βέλτιον] ‘better than I can tell you,’ Beza, Huther al.; see above, and Winer, Gr. § 36. 3, p. 279. CuapTerR IT. τ. σὺ οὖν] ‘ Thou, then; the reference of the conclusive οὖν is somewhat doubtful: it would scarcely seem resumptive, and merely in continuation of the precepts in ch. i, 1—14 (Matth., Leo), as the σὺ would thus be otiose ; nor yet can it refer immediately to 16 sq., as One- siphorus would scarcely have been propounded as an example (Miller) for Timothy. It is surely much more natural to refer it to ver. 15 sq., to the general defection from St. Paul, which, however, is not merely to pre- pare Timothy for suffering after his teacher’s example (εἰ ὁ πολλῷ μᾶλλον ὁ μαθητής, Chrys.), but rather to stimulate him to present in his own conduct a notable contrast, and to make up by his own strength in grace for the cowardice and weak- διδάσκαλος ness of others ; see notes on ch. i. 15. χάριτι τῆ ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, 11. Σὺ οὖν, τέκνον μου, ἐνδυναμοῦ ἐν TH ‘ A καὶ α ἐμοῦ διὰ πολλῶν μαρτύρων, ἐνδυναμοῦ] ‘be inwardly strengthened ; not middle, ‘exert thyself vigorously,’ Bloomf. (a meaning which it never has in the N.T.), but pass.: see notes on Eph. vi. το, and Fritz., Rom. iv. 20, Vol. 1. p. 245. The element and principle in which his strength is to be sought for is immediately subjoined ; comp. Eph. vi. τὸ sq. ἐν τῇ χάριτι] ‘in the grace; not διὰ τῆς The prep., as its involution in the verb also con- firms, points (as usual) to the spiritual sphere or element in which all spiritual strength is to be found. clearly not to be explained as the ‘preaching of the Gospel,’ Hammond on Heb, xiii. 9, nor regarded as merely equivalent to τὸ χάρισμα, ch. i. 6 (comp. Leo), but has simply its more usual reference to the grace of ‘inward sanctification’ (comp. Hooker, Append. to Book V., Vol. τ. p. 696), and be- tokens that element of spiritual life ‘which enables a man both to will and to do according to what God has com- manded,’ Waterland, Euch. x., Vol. Iv. p. 666. It is further specified as τῇ ἐν τῷ Xp. |] (‘the grace) which is in Christ Jesus,’ which is only and truly centered in Him, and of which He is the mediator to all who are in fellow- ship and union with Him ; ‘ docet non aliunde contingere quamasolo Christo, et nemini Christiano [qui est in Christo] defuturam,’ Calvin: comp. Reuss, Theol. Chr. tv. 9, Vol. τι. p. 92, and Meyer on Rom. viii. 39. 2. καὶ &«.7.A.] The connexion, though not at first sight very imme- [ χάριτος, Chrys., Beza. Χάρις is 114 2 TIMOTHY ; 41: *ay's; A , - 5 , , Si noe ταυτα παραθου πιστοις ἀνθρώποις, οἵτινες ἱκανοὶ ἔσονται καὶ ἑτέρους διδάξαι. diate with ver. 1, is sufficiently per- spicuous., Timothy is to be strong himself in grace, and in the strength of it is to provide for others: he has received the true doctrine (comp. ch. 1. 13); he is to be trusty himself in dis- pensing it, and to see that those to whom he commits it are trusty also. διὰ πολλῶν papt.| ‘among, in the presence of, many witnesses, ‘coram multis testibus,’ Tertull. Prescr. ch. 25; nearly = ἐνώπιον, 1 Tim. vi. 12 (Coray in metaph.): so Chrys. πολλῶν παρόντων, correctly in point of verbal interpr., but too vague in his explana- tion, οὐ λάθρα “ἤκουσας οὐδὲ κρυφῇ. The prep. διὰ has here its primary meaning somewhat obscured, though it can still be sufficiently traced to warrant the translation, Timothy heard the instruction by the mediation of many witnesses (‘intervenientibus multis testibus’); their presence was deemed necessary to attest the enun- ciation of the fundamentals of Chris- tian doctrine (scarcely ‘a liturgy,’ J. Jobns. Unbl. Sacr., Part 1. Pref., Vol. 11. p. 20, Angl. Cath. Libr.) at his ordination ; they were adjuncts to the solemnity, comp. Winer, Gr. § 51 i, p. 453. There is some doubt who the πολλοὶ μάρτυρες were, and what is The least probable opinion is that they were ‘the law and the prophets,’ (Keum., after Clem. of Alex. in his {now fragmentary] Hypot. Book vit. ; the most probable is that they were the presbyters who were present and assisted at Timothy’s ordination ; comp. 1 Tim. i. 18, iv. 14, vi. 3, 2 Tim. i. 16; see Scholef., Hints, p. 122. πιστοῖς] ‘faithful,’ not ‘believing :’ the context evidently requires the the exact occasion referred to. former meaning ; the παραθήκη was 3 Συυγκακοπάθησον ws καλὸς στρα- to be delivered to trusty guardians, τοῖς μὴ προδιδοῦσι τὸ κήρυγμα, Chrys. ; see notes on 1 Tim. 1. 12. The verb παράθου seems clearly to point to the παραθήκη alluded to in ch. i. 12, 14, and 1 Tim. vi. 20. οἵτινες does not appear to have here any explicative force, but to refer to the πιστοὶ ἄνθρωποι as belonging to a particular class ; ‘to faithful men of such a stamp as shall be able,’ &c. : δύο πράγματα ζητεῖ ὁ ᾿Απόστολος ἀπὸ τὸν ἐκκλησιαστικὸν διδάσκαλον, πρῶτον πίστιν διὰ νὰ μὴ φθείρῃ τὴν παρακατα- θήκην" δεύτερον ἱκανότητα διδάξῃ, Coray (Romaic). See notes on Gal. ii. 4, and on iv. 24. The future ἔσονται does not necessarily point to Timothy’s departure (Beng., Leo), but to the result that will naturally Though this verse certainly does not refer to any παράδοσις of doctrines of a more mystical character (Theophyl.), and can never be fairly urged as reco- enizing any equal and co-ordinate authority with the written Word (comp. Mack), it still may be said that the instructions seem to definitely contemplate a regular, orderly, and successive transmission of the funda- mentals of Christian doctrine to Chris- tian and teachers, see Mosheim, de Rebus Christ. p. 130. On this subject generally, see the calm and sensible remarks of Water- land, Doctr. of Trin. vu. 5. sq., Vol. Il. p. 610 sq. 3. συγκακοπάθησον] ‘suffer afilic- tions with me ; compare notes on ch. i. 8. This reading, supported as it is νὰ τὴν follow the παράδοσις. ministers Syr. (Philox. in marg.), and appy. Syr., Vuig., It., Copt., Arm. (Lachm. Tisch.) is now rightly adopted by all » TIMOTHY “I: 3; 4: τιώτης Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ. 115 4 οὐδεὶς στρατευόμενος ἐμπλε- κεται ταῖς τοῦ βίου πραγματείαις, ἵνα τῷ στρατολογήσαντι recent critics and commentators ex- cept Leo ; so also Mill, Prolegom. p. cxxxvi. It is singular on what grounds Bloomf. (ed. 9) can assert that the Syr. (Pesch.) must have read x= Oo σὺ οὖν (Rec.) when the Nero hal [tu igitur] of ver. 1, is omitted in the present verse; and wholly incon- ceivable how it can ‘be found in the Vat. B,’ when, as is perfectly well known, this ep. with τ Tim. Tit. Philem. are not found in that vene- rable MS. at all; comp. Tisch. Pro- legom. p. LXX. These are very grave errors, and in so important a subject as the text of the Greek Test. not to be passed over without comment. στρατιώτης I. X.] ‘a soldier of Jesus Christ,’ ‘miles quem Christus 510] obstrinxit,’ Leo ; on the gen. compare notes on Eph.i.t. The nature of the service and its trials and sufferings are vigorously depicted by Tertall. ad Mart. ch. iii, sq.: the scriptural and Pauline (e.g. 1 Cor. ix. 7,2 Cor. x. 3 sq.) character of the image is vin- dicated by Baumg. Pastoralbr. p. τοῦ: ᾿ 4. στρατευόμενος] ‘serving as a v soldier,’ a2 [serviens] - Syr. ; Scholef. Hints, p. 122. On this use of what Kriiger terms the dynamic middle,—in which while the active simply has the intransitive sense of being in a state, the middle also sig- nifies to act the part of one in such a state,—see his Sprachl. ὃ 52. 8. 7, and the exx. (esp. of verbs in -eJw) in Jelf, Gr. § 362. 6. ἐμπλέκεται] “entangleth himself,’ ‘implicat se,’ Vulg. ‘Hoc versu commendatur 76 abstine, versu seq. τὸ sustine,’ Beng., comp. Chrys. on ver. 5. There does not seem any necessity for pressing the meaning of the verb beyond that of ‘being involved in,’ ‘implicari’ (Cic. Off. τι: 11); comp. 2 Pet. 1]. 20, τούτοις [μιάσμασιν] ἐμπλακέντες, Polyb. Hist. XXV. 0. 3, τοῖς ᾿Ελληνικοῖς πράγ- μασιν ἐμπλεκόμενος, and (with εἰς) 2b. ἘΠῚ 7:3, παντί; Ὁ. τ: βίου πραγματείαις] ‘affairs of life,’ ‘negotiis vite civilis,’ Leo; on the distinction between βίος and the higher term ζωή, see Trench, Synon. § 28. It does not seem necessary to restrict πραγμ., an ἅπαξ λεγόμ. in the N. T., to ‘mercatura’ (Schoettg. Hor. Vol. 1. p. 887, comp. πραγμα- τεύεσθε, Luke xix. 13); as the con- trast seems to require, it includes rather all the ordinary callings and occupations of life, which would neces- sarily be inconsistent with the special and seclusive duties of a soldier ; comp. Philo, Vit. Mosis, 11. 27, Vol. 1. p. 167 (ed. Mang.), ἔργων καὶ τεχνῶν τῶν els πορισμόν, Kal πραγματ. ὅσαι κατὰ βίου ζήτησιν, ib. ib. p. 168, τέχναι καὶ πραγμ.- καὶ μάλιστα οἱ περὶ πορισμὸν καὶ βίου ζήτησιν (Wetst.). Compare Beveridge, Can. Apost. VI. Annot. p. 17, who specifies what were considered ‘ secularia negotia.’ τῷ στρατολογήσαντι) ‘who enrolled him as ὦ soldier: orpatoX. an ἅπαξ Ney. n N. T. and a λέξις τοῦ παρακ- μάζοντος ᾿Ελληνισμοῦ (Coray), is pro- perly ‘milites conscribere,’ Plutarch, Mar, § 9, al., comp. Dorvill. Charit. I. 2, p. 29, thence by a very easy Qo transition ‘deligere militem,’ [> [elegit] Syr. ; comp. Joseph. V. 9. 4, βοηθὸν ἐστρατολόγησε. 5. ἐὰν δὲ καὶ κ. τ.λ.7 ‘again τ α man also contend in the games; comp. Tr 2 116 ν΄.» ἀρέσῃ. νομίμως ἀθλήση. © Schol. Hints, p. 123; δὲ introduces a fresh image (‘quasi novam rem unam- quamque enuntiationem affert,’ Klotz, Devar, Vol, τι. p. 362, ‘in the second place,’ Donalds. Cratyl. § 155) derived from athletic contests, 1 Cor. ix. 24 sq. In the former image the Chris- tian, as the soldier, was represented as one of many; here, as the athlete, he is a little more individualized, and the personal nature of the encounter a little more hinted at ; comp. notes on Eph, vi. 12: Bengel (comp. Chrys.) gives a little different turn to the union of the two images. The καί, as usual, has its ascensive force, point- ing to the previous image of the soldier; what applied in his case applies also in the case of the athlete ; comp. Klotz, Devar. Vol. τι. p. 638. Of the two forms, ἀθλέω and ἀθλεύω, it is said that (in the best Attic Greek) the latter is more conmmon in agonistic allusions, the former in more general references (Rost u. Palm, Lex, 8.v. ἀθλεύω) ; comp., however, Plato, Legg. vit. 830, with ib. 1x. 873. ney ,»γομίμως] “according to rule,’ MLOSCAS [in lege sud] Syr. ἡ ἀθλητικὴ νόμους ἔχει τινάς, καθ᾽ ots προσήκει τοὺς ἀθλητὰς ἀγω- νίζεσθαι, Theodoret. This, however, must not be restricted merely to an observation of the rules when in the contest, but, as the exx. adduced by Wetst. seem certainly to prove, must be extended to the whole prepa- ration (πάντα τὰ τοῖς ἀθληταῖς προσή- κοντα, Chrys.), before it as well; comp. Arrian, Epict. 11. 10, εἰ νομίμως HOrAnoas, εἰ ἔφαγες ὅσα δεῖ, εἰ ἐγυ- μνάσθης, εἰ τοῦ ἀλείπτου ἤκουσας (Wetst.), and see Suicer, Zhesaur, s.v. Vol. 11. p. 414, where the force 2 TIMOTHY © If. 4—6. 8 A κ Ε ΄σ Ε ΄ S58 ‘ 5 ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἀθλῆ TLS, OU στεφανοῦται εαν μὴ τὸν κοπιῶντα γεωργὸν δεῖ πρῶτον of this word is well illustrated by pa- tristic citations. The tacit warning διαπαντὸς ἐν ἀσκήσει εἷναι (Chrys.), thus has its full force. 6. τὸν κοπιῶντα κ. τ. d.] There is some little difficulty in (a) the con- nexion and (Ὁ) the application of this With respect to (a) it seems wholly unnecessary to admit an hyper- verse, baton, sc. τὸν τῶν καρπ. μεταλ. θέλοντα yewpy. δεῖ πρῶτον κοπιᾶν, a gram- matical subterfuge, which it is sin- gular to find advocated by Winer, Gr. § 65. 4, p. 640; so Wakefield, Sylv. Crit. Vol. 1. p. 155. The ex. which Winer adduces, Xenoph. Cyr. I. 3. 5, ὁ σὸς πρῶτος πατὴρ τεταγ- μένα ποιεῖ, is surely very different, being obvious and self explanatory. The meaning of the words seems sufficiently clear if a slight emphasis be laid on κοπιῶντα (οὐχ ἁπλῶς yewpy. εἶπε ἀλλὰ τὸν κοπ., Chrys.), and if πρῶτον (certainly not ‘ita demum,’ Grot.) be referred to other partici- pators ; ‘the labowring husbandman (not the idle one) ought to partake first (before all others) of the fruits :’ it is his inalienable right (‘lex quedam nature,’ Est.) in consequence of his κόπος. If κοπιῶντα and πρῶτον had been omitted, it would have been a mere general and unconnected sen- timent ; their insertion, however, turns the declaration into an indirect exhortation, closely parallel to that of ver. 5: ‘only the athlete who νομιμῶς ἀθλεῖ, στεφανοῦται ; only the husband- man who κοπίᾳ has the first claim on the fruits.’ On the derivation, and in- tension implied in kom. (οὐχ ἁπλῶς τὸν κάμνοντα ἀλλὰ τὸν κοπτόμενον, Chrys.) compare notes on 1 Tim. iv. 1o. The real difficulty is in (Ὁ) the application: what are the καρποί ? 2 TIMOTHY II. 6—8. - A , τῶν καρπῶν μεταλαμβανειν. 117 7 γόει ὃ λέγω" δώσει γάρ ε ik , ? “ σοι Oo υριος συνεσιν εν πασίιν- Remember Christ and His resurrection ; 8 Μνημόνευε ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐγηγερ- I suffer in His Gospel for the sake of the elect; if, however, we endure, He will reward us. Clearly not the support which must be given to ministers (Mosh.), as this would be completely alien to the con- text ;—nor the fruits of his labour and instruction which St. Paul was to reap from Timothy (Beng.),—nor the spiritual gifts which Timothy imparted to others and was to show first in him- self (comp. Greg. Nyss. ap. Gicum.), —hbut, as the context seems to require and even suggest, —the future reward (comp. στεφανοῦται) which the faith- ful and laborious teacher is to pre- eminently receive in the world to come (comp. Matth. v. 12, xiii. 43. χίχ. 21), not perhaps excluding that arising from the conversion of souls (Theod. and appy. Syr. w270312 [fructus ejus], comp. Hamm.) to be partaken of even in the present world. 7. νοεῖ] ‘understand, grasp the meaning of ; not ‘perpende,’ Beza, or ‘attende,’ Beng.,—translations of νοέω which can hardly be substantiated in the N. T., but, ‘intellige,’ Vulg., SS Lo] [intellige] Syr., as the con- y σι text and prevailing meaning of the word (see esp. Beck, Bibl. Seelenl. τι. 19. p. 56) evidently require: ἐπειδὴ αἰνιγματωδῶς πάντα εἶπε, τὰ τοῦ στρατ., τὰ τοῦ ἀθλητοῦ, τὰ τοῦ γεωργοῦ, νοεῖ φησι, Theophyl. The reading in the following clause is not quite cer- tain ; δῴη yap κ. τ. Ἃ. (Rec.) deserves some consideration on the principle, ‘proclivi lectioni prestat ardua;’ the uncial authority [AC*DEFG] seems, however, so distinctly to preponderate as to leave it scarcely defensible. If it be retained, yap may be taken in its most simple and primary meaning, ‘sane pro rebus comparatis,’ Klotz, Devar. Vol. τι. p- 232, comp. notes on Gal. τι. ὁ, OF, more probably, in its usual argumen- tative sense (De W., Peale); the com- mand being explained by the prayer. σύνεσιν] ‘understanding ;’ according to the somewhat elaborate definition of Beck, (Bibl. Seclenl. τι. 19, p. 60), the faculty by which we mentally ap- prehend and are enabled to pass judgment upon what is presented to us; comp. notes on Eph. iii. 4, and Schubert, Gesch. d. Seele, § 40, notes, Vol. 1. p. 345 (ed. 4). 8. μνημόνευε] ‘ bear brance, here (only) with an ace. persone, with an acc. ret, Matth. xvi. 9, τ Thess. ii. g, Rev. xviii. 5; usually with a genitive. The distinction be- tween the two cases seems to be that with the gen. the meaning is simply ‘to remember;’ with the accus. the meaning is rather to ‘keep in remem- brance,’ ‘to bearin mind ;’ see Winer, Gr. ὃ 30. το, p. 234, comp. Bernhardy, Synt. Ut. 51, p.177. The exhortation does not seem dogmatical (πρὸς τοὺς im remem- aiperixods ἀποτεινόμενος, Chrys., Est.), nor even directly hortatory (‘recordare, ita ut sequare,’ Beng.), but intended to console and encourage. Timothy was to take courage, by dwelling on the victory over death and the glory of his Master,—his Master who was indeed once a man, yet, as the word of promise had declared, of the kingly seed of David. ἐγηγερμ.- ἐκ νεκρῶν must obviously be connected immediately with “I. X.; not ‘that He was raised,’ &c., Vulg., Auth. Ver., but ‘as one raised,’ &c. (Goth. ‘urrisanana’), compare Winer, ar. § 118 2 ΤἸΙΜΟΤΗΥ 11. 8, ο. μένον ἐκ νεκρῶν, ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυίδ, κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου, 46. 1, p. 396. On the use of the perf. in this and other events in our Lord’s life as marking their permanent character, see Green, G7. p. 22. ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυίδ] Scil. γενόμ- ενον, not τὸν γενόμενον, De W. The meaning of this clause, thus placed (appy. with studied emphasis) out of its natural order, can only be properly understood by comparing Rom. i. 3. From that passage it would seem that it can here scarcely be intended to point to Christ merely on the side of His human nature (Mosh.), and as a bare antithesis to éynyepu.: much less has it any reference to current Docetist doctrines (De W., Baur, Pastoradlbr. p. 102). It points, in- deed, as the context here suggests, and the words κατὰ σάρκα in Rom. l.c. render certain, to Christ’s hu- man nature, but it points to it at the same time as derived through the greatest of Israel’s Kings, and, as in the fulfilment of the sure word of pro- phecy, Jer. xxiii. 5, Matth. xxii. 42, John vii. 42; see Wiesing. in loc., who has very ably elucidated the force and meaning of this clause. κατὰ τὸ evayy. μου] ‘according to my Gospel,’ i. e. ‘ the Gospel entrusted to me to preach, τὸ εὐαγγέλ. ὁ εὐαγγελί- ΟΜΝ r Cor. xv. 1, comp, Rom. ii. 16, xvi. 25; ‘suum vocat ratione ministerii,’ Calv. on Rom. l.c. The remark of Jerome, ‘ quotiescunque in epistolis suis dicit Paulus juxta evang. meum, de Luce significat volumine,’ noticed by Fabricius (Cod. Apocr. N.T. p. 372, and here pressed by Baur (Pastoralbr. p. 99), cannot be substantiated. There may be an allu- sion to the τινες ἕτερα εὐαγγελιζόμενοι, Theophyl., but it here scarcely seems intended. 9 ἐν ᾧ κακοπαθῶ μέχρι δεσμῶν ὡς κακοῦργος. ἀλλὰ 9. ἐν ᾧ] ‘in which,’ as the official sphere of action, scil. ‘in quo predi- cando,’ Méller, not ‘on account of which,’ Beza 2: comp. Rom. i. 9, 2 Cor. x. 14, Phil. iv. 3. Wiesinger hesitatingly proposes to refer ἐν @ to Christ; such a construction is of course possible (comp. Eph. iv. 1), but involves a departure from the or- dinary rule of connexion, which does not seem required by the context. μέχρι δεσμῶν] ‘wp to bonds ; comp. Phil. ii. 8, μέχρι θανάτου ; Heb. xii. 4, μέχρις αἵματος. The distinction between μέχρι and ἄχρι, urged by Tittmann, Synon. 1. p. 34, according to which ‘in ἄχρι cogitatur potissi- mum totum tempus [ante], in μέχρι potissimum finis temporis [wsque ad], in quo aliquid factum est,’ indepen- dently of being appy. exactly at vari- ance with the respective derivations [connected with ἀκρός, μακρός, see Donalds, Cratyl. § 181], has been fully disproved by Fritz. Rom. v. 14, Vol. I. p. 308, note. sonable and natural distinction is that The only rea- suggested by derivation, viz., that ἄχρι, In some passages, seems to pre- serve an ascensive, μέχρι, an extensive reference (see esp. Klotz, Devar., Vol. 1. p. 225), yet still usage so far con- travenes this, that the real difference between the particles seems only to consist in this, that ἄχρι is also an ad- verb, μέχρι not so; that μέχρις οὗ is used with a gen. (Herm. Viger., No. 251), but not so ἄχρις οὗ ; and finally, that the one occurs in certain formule more frequently than the other, and yet that this again seems only fairly referrible to the ‘usus scribendi’ of the author. The note of Fritzsche, Rom, l.c. on these particles, and the good article by Klotz, Devar., Vol, τι. 5 TIMOTHY II. 9, το. ὁ λόγος ποῦ Θεοῦ οὐ δέδεται. 119 A ~ fe 10 διὰ τοῦτο πάντα e , A A 2 , εὐ ‘ ΕῚ ‘ , , UT OMEVO διὰ Tous ἐκλεκτοὺς, tva και QUTOL σωτηρίας TUXWOLY Ῥ. 224-231, will both repay the trouble of consultation. κακοῦργος] ‘a malefactor,’ only here and Luke xxiii. 32, 33, 39. Iten- hances the preceding words, Ta τῶν κακούργων ὑπομένω πάθη, Theodoret : there may be too perhaps a parono- masia, κακοπαθ. κακοῦρ., ‘mala patior tanquam malefactor,’ Est. οὐ δέδεται] ‘is not (has not been and is not) bound ;’ with evident allusion (per paronomasian) to the preceding δεσμῶν. The reference must not be limited to the Apostle’s particular case (δεσμοῦνται αἱ χεῖρες, ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ἡ γλῶττα, Chrys.; ‘this hath not re- strained me in mine office,’ Hamm.), but seems perfectly general, whether in reference to himself or others, ἡμῶν δεδεμένων λέλυται Kal τρέχει, Theo- phyl.; comp. Phil. i. 12. The full adversative force of ἀλλά, ‘ yet, never- theless,’ must not be left unnoticed ; comp. Klotz, Devar., Vol. τι. p. 3. 10. ϑιὰ τοῦτο] Scarcely ‘quia me vincto evangelium currit,’ Beng., still less a πλεονασμὸς ἑβραϊκός, Coray, but rather ‘ propter hoc, id est, ut evange- lium disseminetur, ut verbum Dei eurrat et clarificetur,’ Est., the nega- tive statement οὐ δέδεται being treated as if it had been a positive statement of the προκοπὴ of the Gospel. Having mentioned the bonds which his preach- ing had entailed on him, he adds with increasing emphasis, πάντα ὑπομένω ; bonds,—yea all things, death. ὑπομένω] “ endure,’ ‘sustain,’ ‘sustineo,’ Vulg., not ex- actly ‘am content to suffer anything,’ Peile (πάσχω, Chrys.), as this too much obscures the normal meaning of trou. in the N.T., which is rather that of a brave bearing up against suf- ferings (‘animum in perferendo sus- sufferings, tinet,’ Tittm. Synon, I. p. 194) than a mere tame and passive sufferance (ἀνέχεσθαι) of them; see ch. ii. 12, Rom. xii. 12, James i. 12 al., and contrast ἀνεχόμεθα, τ Cor. iv. 12 (Urecxov, Psalm lxxxviii. 51), where a meek suffering is intended to be specially depicted. Even in the case of παιδεία, the Christian ὑπομένει (Heb. xii. 7, Tisch., comp. 1 Pet. ii. 20); it is to be the endurance of a quick and living, not the passiveness of a dead and feelingless soul. Thus then the meaning assigned to ὑπομονὴ by Reuss, Theol. Chret. Iv. 20, Vol. 11. p. 225, as its primary one, viz., ‘la soumission pure et simple qui accepte la douleur,’ seems certainly too passive, and is moreover not substantiated by the exx. adduced, Rom. viii. 25, xv. 4, 2 Cor. i. 6; see Meyer on 1 Cor. xiii. 17, Fritz. Rom., Vol. I. p. 258. τοὺς ἐκλεκτούς] ‘the elect,’ those whom God in His infinite mercy, and in ac- cordance with the counsels of His ‘voluntas liberrima,’ has been pleased ἐκλέξασθαι; see notes on Lph. i. 4. There appears no reason whatever for here limiting the ἐκλεκτοὶ to those who had not yet received the message of the Gospel (De W.), ‘qui adhue ad Christi ovile sunt adducendi,’ Menoch. ap. Pol. Syn., and still less for con- fining it to those who had already re- ceived it (Grot.) ; the reference is per- fectly general, timeless, and unre- stricted. On St. Paul’s use of ἐκλεκ- τοί, comp. Reuss, Z'heol. Chret. Iv. 14, Viol. τὴς Ὁ... 132. καὶ αὐτοί] ‘they too,’ they as wellasI; ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς" Kal yap καὶ ἡμᾶς ὁ Θεὸς ἐξελέξ- ato, Chrysost. The reference advo- cated by De W., ‘ they as well as those who already believe,’ seems certainly untenable,—on this ground, that it 120 An Lal A 4 τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ μετὰ δόξης αἰωνίου. ὁ λόγος" εἰ γὰρ συναπεθάνομεν, καὶ συνζήσομεν' 2 TIMOTHY. Il. τοΞ ἰςσ, 1 Πιστὸς “ 12 εἰ e , \ , . 9 , τ a UT OMEVOMEV, και συμβασιλεύσομεν" εἰ ἀρνησόμεθα, κακεινος would imply a kind of contrast between the πιστοὶ and ἐκλεκτοί ; whereas the πιστοί, as Wiesinger fairly observes, must both be and remain ἐκλεκτοί. The tacit reference of the Apostle to himself does not involve terms of greater assurance than the date of the ep. and its language elsewhere (ch. iv. 8) fully warrant. τῆς ἐν Χρ.᾽1.1 Emphatic; τῆς ὄντως σωτηρίας, Chrys. On the use of the article, see notes on ch. i. 13. pera δόξης αἰων. is appended to σωτηρία, and while serving to enhance it, also marks it as in its highest and com- pletest realization belonging to the future world; ἡ ὄντως δόξα ἐν οὐρα- νοῖς ἐστιν, Chrys. Thus then, though there were sufferings in this world, there was in the world to come salva- tion and glory. 11. πιστὸς ὁ λόγος] Compare notes on 1 Jim. i. 156. Here, as in 1 Tim. iv. 9, the use of yap in the following clause seems to suggest a reference to the preceding words ; πιστ. ὁ λόγ. ποῖος : ὅτι of ἐκλεκτοὶ ἐνδόξου καὶ αἰωνίου σωτηρίας ἐπιτεύξ- ονται, Theophyl. after Chrys.; simi- larly @cumen. If with Huth., Leo al., the formula be referred to what follows, the proper force of yap can scarcely be maintained; even in its most decidedly explicative uses, the conclusive force (the dpa portion, see Klotz, Devar., Vol. 11. p. 232), though subordinated to the affirmative, is never so completely obscured (‘ vide- licet,’ Peile, ‘nimirum,’ Leo), as must be the case in the present passage. In Matth. i. 18, noticed by De W., the use of yap was suggested by the preceding οὕτως ; see Kiihner, on Xenoph, Mem. 1. 1. 6. εἰ γὰρ κι τ. λ.1 It has been asserted by Minter (Christi. Poes. p. 29), Mack, Conyb. and Hows. al., that the latter part of this, and the whole of the two following verses are taken from some Christian hymn. Though the dis- tinctly rhythmical character of the clauses (see the arrangement in Mack, who, however, erroneously includes the first γὰρ in the quotation), and the apparent occurrence of another specimen in 1 Tim. iii. 16, certainly favour such a supposition; still the argumentative yap (Lachm., Tisch., with all the uncial Mss. except K) in ver. 13, seems so far opposed to the hymnal character of the quotation as to leave the supposition perhaps more than doubtful. It is not noticed in Rambach’s Anthologie, Vol. 1. p. 33, where it would scarcely have been omitted if the hypothesis had not seemed untenable. el συναπεθάνομεν] ‘cf we died with (Him)? the σὺν obviously refers to "Ino. Xp. ver. 10. The death here alluded to must, in accordance with the context, be simply ὁ διὰ παθημάτων θάνατος, not also ὁ διὰ τοῦ λουτροῦ, Chrysost., and the Greek expositors. In the very similar passage, Rom. vi. 8, the reference, as ver. 11 sq. clearly show, is ethical ; here, however, such a reference would seem inconsistent with the general current of the argu- ment, and esp. with ver. 12. The aorist must not be passed over; it marks a single past act that took place when we gave ourselves up to a life that in- volved similar exposure to sufferings and death ; the Apostle died when he embraced the lot of a daily death (καθ᾽ ἡμέραν ἀποθνήσκω, τ Cor. xv. 31), and of a constant bearing about »ΜΘΤΕΥ LEY 12; 113. ἀρνήσεται ἡμᾶς" 121 " 5 A ’ a \ , 13 εἰ ἀπιστοῦμεν, ἐκεῖνος πιστὸς μένει" , , A e A "5 1 ier ἀρνήσασθαι γὰρ E€AUTOV OU δύναται. the νέκρωσιν τοῦ ᾿Τησοῦ, 2 Cor. iv. Io. συνζήσομεν] ‘we shall live with (Him),’ not in an ethica! sense, but as the an- tithesis necessarily requires, with phy- sical reference to Christ's resurrection (comp. ἐγηγερμένον, ver. 8) ; by virtue of our union with Him in His death, we shall hereafter share with Him His life ; comp. Phil. iii. ro. 12. ὑπομένομεν] ‘endure,’ scil. with Him; present; this was a con- tinuing state. On the meaning of ὑπομ.., see notes on ver. Io. συμβασιλεύσομεν)] ‘we shall reign with (Him) ,; extension of the previous idea συνζησομ.; not only shall we live, but be kings with Him, Rom. v. 17, Vili. 17. Συμβασ. is only a dls λεγόμ. in N.T., here and £ Cor. iv.8 ; comp. Polycarp, Phil. 5. ἀρνη- σόμεθα] “ shal deny,’ ‘aut facto, aut verbo, aut etiam silentio,’ Est.; comp. Matth. x. 32, 33: οὐκ ἐν τοῖς χρηστοῖς μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἐναντίοις ai ἀμοιβαί, Chrys. The futwre conveys the idea of the ethical possibility of the action; comp. Winer, ΟἿ. ὃ 41. 6, p. 423: we have thus in the hypo- thetical clauses, aorist, present, and future. The precedence of ἀρνεῖσθαι to ἀπιστεῖν is not to be ascribed to the fact that ‘abnegatio fidem qui fuerat extinguit,’ Beng., but rather to this fact, that a persistent state of un- belief (ἀπιστοῦμεν) is far worse than a denial which might be (as in the case of St. Peter) an act committed in weakness and bitterly repented of; comp. Leo. The reading is not quite certain: ἀρνούμεθα (Rec.) is well sup- ported [DEJK al.], but seems, on the whole, more probably corrected to harmonize with the pres. ὑπομένομεν, than altered to balance ἀρνήσεται. 13. εἰ ἀπιστοῦμεν] ‘if we be un- believing’—or to preserve the parono- masia ‘be fuithless,’ ἄπιστοι ἐσμεν (comp. Fritz. Rom. iii. 3),—not speci- fically ‘on Him’ (Syr)., or ‘on His resurrection,’ ὅτε ἀνέστη (Chrys.), or ‘on His divinity,’ ὅτι Θεὸς ἐστί (Gicum. 2),—but generally, ‘if we ex- hibit unbelief,’ whether as regards His attributes, His promises, or His Gos- pel; ‘infidelitas positiva significatur, que est eorum qui veritatem auditam recipere nolunt, aut semel receptam deserunt,’ Estius. De W., Wiesing. and others following Grot. translate ἄπιστ. ‘untreu sind,’ ‘are unfaithful ’ (Alf. on Rom. iii. 3), appealing to the similar passage, Rom. iii. 3. This is certainly plausible on account of the following πιστός, still neither there (see esp. Meyer in luc.) nor here is there sufficient reason for departing from the normal meaning of ἀπιστεῖν (Mark xvi. rr, 16, Luke xxiv. 11, 41, Acts xxviii. 24), which, like ἀπιστία, seems always in the N. T. to imply not ‘untrueness,’ ‘unfaithful- ness,’ but definitely ‘unbelief.’ This is still further confirmed by the species of climax, ἀρνησόμ., ἀπιστοῦ- μεν ; see above, on ver. 12. πιστός] ‘ faithful,’ both in His nature and promises; comp, Deut. vii. 9. Though we believe not Him and His promises, yet He remains unchanged in His faithfulness and truth ; πιστός ἐστι καὶ αὐτός, ὀφείλων πιστεύεσθαι ἐν οἷς ἂν λεγῇ καὶ ποιῇ, αὐτὸς ἄτρεπτος μένων καὶ μὴ ἀλλοιούμενος [κ.τ.λ.], Athan. Cont. Arian. τιτ, Vol. 1. p. 377 (Paris, 1627). οὐ δύναται) “He cannot’ deny Himself, or be untrue to His own essential nature ; δύναται Kab’ ἡμᾶς πάντα ὁ Θεός, ἅπερ δυνάμενος, τοῦ Θεὸς εἶναι, καὶ τοῦ ἀγαθὸς εἶναι, καὶ τοῦ σόφος εἶναι οὐκ 122 Charge men to avoid babblings which really lead to the subversion of faith. od knows His own, ἐξίσταται, Origen, Cels. cap. 70, Vol. XVII. p. 34, ed. Lomm.: see also Pearson, Creed, Art. VI. Vol. I. p. 339 (ed. Burt.). 14. ταῦτα ὑπομίμν.]} ‘put (them) in remembrance of these things,’ scil. of the truths mentioned in ver. 11—13; comp. Wit. ii. x, 2 Pet. i. 12: |The most natural supplement to ὑπομί- pnoxeis not ἄλλους (Theoph., Gicum.), but αὐτούς (Syr.), whether generally ‘eos quibus prees,’ Beng., or, as the meaning of the verb seems to suggest, ‘the faithful,’ those who already be- lieve, but require to be reminded of these eternal truths. Stapaptupdpevos] ‘ solemnly charging them ; similarly with an inf. Polyb. TERS Bes 18. wee io Vip ὙΠ ae ae see notes on 1 Tim. v. 21. μὴ Aoyopaxetv] ‘not to contend about words,’ ‘not to indulge in λογομα- χίαι ; 1 Tim. vi. 4, where see notes. The reading is somewhat doubtful : Lachm. reads Χογομαχεῖ with AC*; Vulg., Ital, Aith.; Latin Ff.; so also Tisch. ed. 1, who, however, in ed. 2 has (as it would seem rightly) restored the inf. with C***DEFGJK ; nearly all mss. ; Syr. (both) Goth. ; Clem., Chrys., Theod., al. ; so- Mill, Prolegom. p. XuIxX. Though the change from the imper. to the in- finitive might be thought not wholly improbable as the inf. might seem an easier reading (comp., however, ch. iv. 2), yet a conformation of the inf. to the preceding and succeeding imp., seems equally plausible. The preponderance of external authority may thus be allowed to decide the question. If the imper. be adopted, a stop must be placed after Κυρίου. εἰς ‘ovdtv χρήσιμον] (‘a cowrse) useful 2 TIMOTHM τ. 14 ΠΣ A A , ὃ , αὐυτα υπομιμνῆσκε,. ιαμαρτυρομεένος 3 ’ἢ A“ K , A - ° ἐνώπιον TOU uptouv my Aoyouayxeiv, εἰς Follow practical religion, be meek and eschew contentions, for nothing, not an independent clause, ‘ad nihil utile est, nisi,’ &c., Vulg., sim. Ital., but in opposition to the preceding sentence, comp. Mark vii. 19, and see Winer, Gr. § 66, 111. h, p. 680. The reading is here again by no means certain ; Lachm. adopts ἐπ᾽ οὐδὲν with AC 17 (ἐπ᾿ οὐδένι γὰρ, FG), so Huther. It is possible that εἰς might have been changed to avoid the seeming difficulty of ἐπὶ twice used thus contiguously, and the ἐπ᾽ οὐδένι of KG might have been a cor- rection: still, itis also not improbable that the eye of the writer might have been caught by the following ἐπί, and the substitution accidental. The MSS authority [DEJ K] and St. Paul’s love of prepositional variation (comp. notes on Gal. i, 1) incline us to the reading of the Text (Zisch. ed. 2); so De W. and Wiesing. In εἰς οὐδὲν the idea of destination is marked perhaps a little more laxly (comp, Acts xvii. 21, and Winer, Gr. ὃ 53. ἃ. δ, p. 473), in ἐπ᾽ οὐδέν (comp. ἐφ᾽ 6, Matth. xxvi. 50, scil. τὸ κατὰ σκόπον πράττέ, Huthym. ; Demosth. (?) Aréstog..779, ἐπὶ καλὸν πρᾶγμα χρήσιμος) a little more strin- gently. It is singular that χρήσιμον is an ἅπαξ λεγόμενον in the N. T.; eUxpnoros, however, is found with εἰς injeh, ἀν, τα, ἐπὶ κατα- στροφῇ] ‘for the subversion,’ not, as it ought to be, for the edification (οἰκοδομή) of the hearers ; comp. eds Ἐπὶ here seems to include with the idea of purpose and object (comp. notes on Gal. ν. 13, and on ZLph. ii. 10) that also of the result to which the λογο- μαχίαι inevitably led, ‘subversionem pariunt,’ Just. The primary object of ἡ the false teachers, in accordance with Ν καθαίρεσιν, 2 Cor. xiii. Io. o TIMOTHY ΠΙ. 14, 15. ΔΑ , Wa “ A 9 , οὐδὲν χρήσιμον, επι καταστροφὴ τῶν ακουοντῶων. 129 , 15 σπού- δασον σεαυτὸν δόκιμον παραστῆσαι τῷ Θεῷ, ἐργάτην >: ἐν ΩΣ nw A , ~ . , ἀνεπαίσχυντον, ὀρθοτομοῦντα τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας. their general character, might have been to convince, or to make gain out of the hearer (comp. Tit. i. 11), the result, contemplated or no, was his καταστροφή. These ideas of purpose and result are frequently somewhat blended in this use of ἐπὶ with the dat.; comp. ἐπὶ βλάβῃ, Xenoph. Mem. ττ. 3. 19, the formula τὴν ἐπὶ θανάτῳ, Arrian, Anab. vil. 8. 7 (Xenoph. ib. I. 6. 10), and see Winer, Gr. ὃ 52 6, p. 470, Bernhardy, Synt. V. 24, p. 251. 15. ϑόκιμον] ‘ approved,’ one who can stand the test (comp. δόκιμον ἀργύριον, Poll. Onomast. 111. 86), as ἀδόκιμος (ch. iii. 8, Tit. i. 16) is one who cannot; Rom. xiv. 18, xvi. To, 1 Cor. xi. 19, al.; explained more fully in the following clause, but ob- viously not to be joined with ἐργάτην (Mack). The termination -cpos (the first part of which points to quality, the second to action, Donalds. Cratyl. § 258) is annexed according to some- what differmg analogies, Buttm. Gr. § 113. 13. παραστῆσαι τῷ Θεῷ] “ exhibere Deo,’ Ital., Vulg. ; comp. Rom. vi. 13, 1 Cor. viii. 8, Eph. v. 27: the assertion of Tholuck (on Rom. l.¢.) that παριστάνειν τινί τι is ‘jemandem freiem Gebrauch vorlegen,’ cannot be sub- stantiated; it is simply ‘sistere, exhibere, alicui aliquid,’ Fritz. Rom. Vol. I. p. 403, the context defining the application and modifying the translation. ἐργάτην] ‘a workman,’ not perhaps without refe- rence to the laborious nature of the etwas zu work, the ἔργον εὐαγγελιστοῦ, ch. iv. 5, &c.: similarly, but in a bad refe- rence, 2 Cor. xi. 13, Phil. iii, 2; comp. Deyling, Obs. Vol. Iv. 2, p. 623. ἀνεπαίσχυντον] ‘not ashamed ;’ ἅπ. λεγόμ. : not with active or middle force, ὁ ἐργάτης οὐδὲν αἰσχύνεται πράττειν, Chrys., with refe- rence to feeling shame in the cause of the Gospel (Theoph., Gicum.), comp. μὴ ἐπαισχυνθῇς, ch. i. 8, but passively, ‘non pudefactum,’ Bengel; comp. Phil. i. 20, ἐν οὐδενὶ αἰσχυνθήσομαι. ὀρθοτομοῦντα͵) ‘cutting, laying out, straightly,’ as a road, &c.; comp. Theodoret, ἐπαινοῦμεν καὶ τῶν γεωργῶν τοὺς εὐθείας τὰς αὔλακας ἀνατέμνοντας. Various interpretations have been assigned to this passage, in most of which the idea of τέμνειν, ---Θ. g. τέμνε τὰ νόθα, καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα ἔκκοπτε, Chrys.; ‘translatio sumpta ab illa legali victimarum sectione,’ Beza; ‘acsi pater alendis filiis panem in frustra secando distribuat,’ Calv.,—is unduly pressed and arbitrarily ex- plained. The real emphasis, however, rests rather on the dp@éds; comp. ὀρθοποδεῖν, Gal. ii. 14, and the force of the adj. in καινοτομεῖν, Plato, Legg. 797 B, &c.; but this again must not be pressed to the complete exclusion of the verbal element, as in Greg. Naz. Orat. 11. p. 23, where ὀρθοτ. is nearly=6p0Gs ὁδεύειν, see Kypke, Obs. Vol. τι. p. 370. Thus, then, it will be most correct to adhere closely to the primary meaning ‘to cut ina straight line,’ Palm u. Rost, Lew. s. v., and to regard it as a metaphor from laying out a road, comp. Prov. iii. 6, ἵνα ὀρθοτομῇ Tas ὁδούς σου, or drawing a furrow, Theod., the merit of which is to consist in the straightness with which the work of cutting or laying out is performed, The word of truth 124 2 TIMOTHY (UH x6, 57. 16 Tas δὲ βεβήλους κενοφωνίας meptiaraco: ἐπὶ πλεῖον γὰρ προκόψουσιν ἀσεβείας, 17 \ ux Ne 5 τὰ ε καὶ ὁ ογος αὐτῶν WS γάγγραινα νομὴν ἕξει. ὧν ἐστιν Ὑμέναιος καὶ Φίλητος. is, as it were, an ὅδος (comp. De W.) which is to be laid out straightly and truly. The meaning is rightly re- 7) ~ Ν tained by Syr. διαὶ 122 |gaSo [pree- dicans recte] and Vulg. ‘recte trac- tantem verbum veritatis,’ but the metaphor is thus obscured. For the various interpretations of this passage, see Wolf in loc., Vol. IV. p. 513 sq, and esp. Deyling, Obs. Vol. Iv. 2, exerc. III. 10 sq., p. 618 sq., where this expression is very elaborately investigated. τῆς ἀληθείας] ‘of Truth,’ not the gen. of apposition, but substantice, Scheuerl. Synt. § 12. I, p. 82 ; see notes on Eph. i. 13. τό. βεβηλ. kevod.] ‘profane bab- blings ; only here and 1 Tim. vi. 20, where see notes. περιΐστασο] ‘withdrawn from,’ ae) \]de] σι -ν om [subduc te....a] Syr.; περίφευγε, Hesych.,- not ‘cohibe, ne ulterius grassarentur,’ Raphel, Beza, and even Suicer, Thesaur.s.v. Vol. It. p. 673, a meaning lexically untenable. It occurs in the N.T. (im the present form) only here and Tit. iii. 9 ; comp. Lucian, Hermot. ὃ 86, ἐκτραπήσομαι καὶ περιστήσομαι, but not Polyb. Hist. 11. 84. 11 (cited by Raphel), as there the verb has its usual meaning. The expression περιίστασθαί τι or τινα (the latter [in the sing. ] condemned by Lucian, Pseudos. 4, and Thom. Με: s.v. p. 708 (ed. Bern.), but defended by Lobeck, Soph. Aj. 82, p. 109) in’ the sense of ‘making a circuit so as to avoid,’—surely not ‘to hedge one- self in,’ Peile,—occurs occasionally in later wrilers ; see exx. in Elsner, Obs. ‘Vol. 11. ἢ. 314, Palm u. Rost, Lex. s.v. Vol. 11, p. 846, and comp. Dorville, Chariton, 1. 13, p. 136, by whom this use of περιιστ. is fully illustrated. προκόψουσιν] ‘they will make ad- vance,’ scil. ‘the false teachers,’ those who utter the xevopwrias, Coray, comp, αὐτῶν, ver. 17, and ch. iil. 9, 13, not the κενοφώνιαι themselves, Luther, al.; observe the future, which shows that the error of the false teachers in its most developed state had not yet appeared ; see notes on 1 Tim. 1. 3. The form προκόπτω, though demned by Lucian, Pseudos. § 5, is rightly maintained by Thom. M. and Phrynichus ; the subst. προκοπὴ is however indefensible, see notes on 1 Tim. iv. 15. It is used in the N. T. de bono (Luke ii. 52), de malo (here, and ch. iil. 9, 13) and de newtro (Rom. xiii. 12). ἀσεβείας] ‘of impiety,’ or better to preserve the antithesis to εὐσεβ. ‘of wngodliness ; gen. dependent om πλεῖον, and either the gen. of the point of view, Scheuerl. Synt. § 18. 1, p. 129, or more pro- bably the gen. materic, as in the gen. after τοῦτο, τοσοῦτο κ.τ. Δ.; comp. Joseph. Bell. vi. 2. 3, προύκοψαν εἰς τοσοῦτον παρανομίας (De W.), and see Kriiger, Sprachl. § 47. 10. 3. In such cases, as Kriiger observes, the gen. is commonly anarthrous, and a preposition (as here) not unfrequently precedes. 17. γάγγραινα] ‘a gangrene, “an eating sore,’ according to Galen on Hippocr. de Artic. Vol. x1. p. 407, intermediate between the φλεγμονὴ and the o@dxedos, and leading the way to the latter. The expression νομὴν ἕξει, ‘pastionem habebit,’ ἡ Erasm., and the deriv. οἵ γαγγρ. Ν con- > TIMOTHW ΓΝ re. 18 125 [4 A 2s) κ᾿ , >] , , \ οἵτινες περί τῆν ἀλήθειαν ἡστοχήσαν: λέγοντες τὴν ° , , ‘A ° ’ὔ Ly ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι. καὶ ἀνατρέπουσιν τὴν τινῶν γράω, γραίνω, connected with Sanscer. gras, ‘devorare,’ comp. Pott, tym. Forsch. Vol. I. p. 278) both point to the evil as being extensive in its nature (comp. Gal. v. 9, and notes in loc.) rather than intensive (Mack), though it is not improbable that the -yay was primarily an intensive reduplication, Bopp, Gr. p. 569. So also distinctly, though somewhat paraphrastically, m= y N 5 Syr. Haas ea) Cael Z {apprehen- det multos]; comp. Ovid, Metam. 11. 825, ‘solet immedicabile cancer, Ser- pere, et illeesas vitiatis addere partes.’ The error of these teachers was spreading, and the Apostle foresees that it was ordained to still further spread, and to corrupt the Ephesian community to a still more lamentable extent; ‘res miserabili experimento notior quam ut pluribus verbis decla- rari debeat,’ Estius. μεν. καὶ Φιλ.] Two false teachers of whom nothing certain is known; Vitringa (Obs. Sacr. Iv. 9, Vol. 1. p. 926) thinks that they were Jews, and probably Sadducees. The latter supposition seems very doubtful; comp. next note, and Burton, Bampt. Lect. p. 135 sq. Hymenzus is probably the same as the false teacher mentioned in 1 Tim. i. 20 ; see notes in loc. 18. οἵτινες] ‘men who,’ pointing to them with a very faint explicative force as members of a class; see notes on Gal. ii. 4. περὶ τὴν GA. κι τ. λ.1 ‘as concerning the truth missed their aim: so 1 Tim. vi. 20. On ἠστόχ. compare notes on 1 Tim. i. 6, and on the use of περί, notes on ib. i. 19. λέγοντες K.T. Δ. Characteristic and distinguishing fea- ture of theirerror. All recent com- mentators very pertinently adduce Tren. Her. It. 31, ‘esse resurrectionem a mortuis aguitionem ejus que ab ipsis dicitur veritatis ;> Tertull. de Resurr. 19, ‘ asseverantes ... . re- surrectionem eam vindicandam qua quis adita [addita, Rhen. Semi. | veri- tate redanimatus et revivificatus Deo, ignorantiz morte discussd, velut de sepulchro veteris hominis eruperit ;’ August. Hpist. 119, ‘nonnulli... arbitrati sunt jam factam esse resur- rectionem, nec ullam ulterius in fine These quotations both verify the Apostle’s prediction, and serve to define with some show of probability, the specific nature of the error of Hymenzus and Philetus. The false asceticism which is so often tacitly alluded to and con- temporum esse sperandam.’ demned in these epp., led very pro- bably to an undue contempt for the body (developed fully in the hylic theory of the Gnostics, Theod. Her. I. 7, comp. Neand. Hist. of Ch., Vol. 1. p. 116, Clark), to false views of the nature of death (see Tertull. /. ¢.), and thence equally false views of the re- surrection : death and resurrection were terms which had with these false teachers only a spiritual meaning and application; ‘they allegorized away the doctrine, and turned all into figure and metaphor,’ Waterl. Doct. of Trin. Iv. Vol. 111. p. 459. Grinfield, Schol. Hellen. p. 603, cites Polye. Philipp. 7, but there the heterodoxy seems of a more fearful and antino- mian character. The error of Marcion to which Baur, Pastoralbr. p. 38, here finds an allusion, was of a completely different kind; ‘ Marcion in totum carnis resurrectionem non admittens, et soli anime salutem repromittens, non qualitatis sed substantie facit questionem,’ Tertull. Marc. v. το. 126 ' σπιστιν. 2 TIMOTHY II. 18, 10. 4 fol “ὦ 19 Ὃ μέντοι στερεὸς θεμέλιος τοῦ Θεοῦ ἕστηκεν, ἔχων τὴν σφραγῖδα ταύτην "ἔγνω Κύριος τοὺς ὄντας " lol art) , Ἕ A oe) , ΄σ « " Ge 4 QUTOU, Και ᾿Αποστήτω απὸ QOULKlag πὰς 0 ὀνομάζων το The reference to the renewal of gene- rations ἐκ, παιδοποιΐας (Theodoret), or to the resurr. at the crucifixion, Matth. xxvii. 52 (Schoettg.) scarcely need be alluded to. Further notices of this early heresy will be found in Walch, Gesch. der Ketz., Vol. 1. p. 129, Burton, Bampt. Lect., Note 59, Ῥ. 428; comp. Usteri, Lehrb. τι. 2 B, P- 344. ἀνατρέπουσιν K.7.A.] ‘subvert the faith of some » see Tit. i. rr. We cannot safely infer from this use of τινων that the number of the subverted was small (comp. Chrys. οὐ πάντων ἀλλά τινων) ; τινὲς 15 simply ‘sundry persons, ’the old Germ. “etwelche,’ Kriiger, Sprachl., § 51. 16. 14; comp. Meyer, on Rom. ili. 3. 1g. μέντοι] ‘however,’ “ neverthe- less;) this compound particle which primarily conveys ‘ majorem quandam asseverationem’ (Klotz, Devar., Vol. Ir. p. 663), and as. its composition shows, unites both confirmation (μὲν) and restriction (rol), ‘certe quidem’ | (Hartung, Partik., Vol. τ. p. 593), frequently, as in the present case, in- volves an opposition to a preceding clause, and meets a possible objection ; ‘though some may be subverted, yet assuredly the firm foundation of God stands unshaken as ever;’ ‘ quamvis quorundam subvertatur fides, non tamen fundamentum Dei,’ Est. The particle only occurs here in St. Paul’s epp., five times in St. John, ch. iv. στ; 19, Xill142, XX. |S) Σιν, ONCE in St. James, ch. ii. 8, and once in St. Jude, ver. 8. μέντοι ἴ5 perhaps most correctly printed as one word, as in Lachm., Tisch., especially when other enclitics are joined with it; see Ellendt, Lez. As a general rule, Soph., Vol. τι. p. 80. 6 στερ. θεμέλ. τοῦ Θεοῦ] ‘the firm foun- dation of God; i.e. ‘laid by Him,’ not so much a possessive gen. asa gen. see Scheuerl. Synt. ὃ 17. I, p. 125, compared with Ῥ. 115. It is unnecessary to recount the different and very arbitrary inter- pretations which this expression has received. The only satisfactory in- terpr. is that adopted by Est. 1, Tirin. (ap. Pol. Syn.), and now nearly all modern commentators, according to which the θεμέλ. τοῦ Θεοῦ is the Church, not individually the orepeat ψυχαί (Chrysost.), the ἀπερίτρεπτοι (Gicum.), viewed separately, and in contrast with the subverted (comp. Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 492, Bohn), but collectively, the ἐκκλησία It is here called a θεμέλιος, not ‘per metony- mian’ for οἶκος, Coray, al., but (a) to mark the Church of Christ and His Apostles as-a foundation placed in the world on which the whole future οἰκοδομὴ rests, (comp. Eph. ii. 20 sq.); and (Ὁ) to convey the idea of its firm- ness, strength, and solidity; comp. especially 1 Tim. iii. 15. On θεμέλ. compare notes on 1 Zim. vi. 10. Notices of the various aberrant inter- pretations will be found in De W. in loc. ἔχων] “ seeing it hath "ἢ part., with a very faint causal force, illustrating the previous declaration : comp. Donalds. Gr. ὃ 615. τὴν σφραγῖδα ταύτην] ‘ this seal,’i. e. ” comp. Rey. xxi. 14, where each θεμέλιος had the name of an apostle inscribed - thereon. There may possibly be, as De W. suggests, an allusion, to Deut. auctoris or originis, ὑπὸ Θεοῦ τεθεμελιωμένη. ‘this impression, inscription ; Ἀν ΘΠ ΠΟΥΤΥ MEL ro; 80. ὄνομα Κυρίου. 29 127 9 , Oc ΠΡ ΕῚ x , εν μεγαλῃ € οἰκιᾷᾳ οὐκ εστιν μονον ’ lo A ete! “ τ' ἣν A , A 9 , σκευὴ χρυσᾶ Kal ἀργυρᾶ, ἀλλα καὶ ξύλινα καὶ ooTpakwa, vi. 9, xi. 20. The term σφραγῖδα is used rather than ἐπιγραφὴν to convey the idea of its solemn, binding, and valid character. Of the two inscrip- tions, the first ἔγνω κ. τ. Δ. seems cer- tainly an allusion to Numb. xvi. 5, ἔγνω ὁ Θεὸς τοὺς ὄντας αὐτοῦ [ Heb. vt], and is in the language of grave consolation, John x. £4, 27; ‘He knoweth (not necessarily ‘novit amanter,’ Beng., comp. notes on Gal. iv. 9) who are His true servants, and will separate them from those who are not.’ On the practical aspects of this declaration, comp. Taylor, Life of Chr. 1. 13, disc. 16, and the brief but consolatory remarks of Jackson, Creed, xtl. 6. 3. The second καὶ ἀποστ. κ. τ. λ. is possibly in continued allusion to Numb. xvi. 26, ἀποσχί- σθητε ἀπὸ τῶν σκηνῶν τῶν ἀνθρ. τῶν σκληρῶν τούτων, though expressed in a wider and more general form (comp. Isaiah lii. tr) and is in the language of warning. ὁ ὀνομάζων] ao. ‘who nameth,’ not }ro9 [qui vocat] Syr. ‘qui invocat,’ Wahl, but ‘qui nominat,’ Vulg. (misquoted by Beza), Goth., scil., as his Lord and God, ‘qui rogatus cujus sit discipline Christum nominat ut magistrum, Grot.; comp. Isaiah xxvi. 13, Κύριε ἐκτός σου ἄλλον οὐκ οἴδαμεν. τὸ ὄνομά σου ὀνομάζομεν. ἀδικίας] ‘unrighteousness ;> the opposite of δικαιοσύνη, Aristot. Rhet. I. 9. 7, joined by Plato, Gorg. 477 ©, with σύμπασα ψυχῆς πονηρία. In its Christian usage and application, it is similar in meaning to, but of wider reference than, ἀνομία, comp. τ John v. 17; “ ἀδικία de quacunque impro- bitate dicitur, quatenus τῷ δικαίῳ re- pugnat,’ Tittmann, Synon. 1. p. 48; as δικαιοσύνη is συναγωγὴ Kal ἕνωσις πάντων τῶν καλῶν kal ἀγαθῶν (Chrys. Caten. in Jobt.) so ἀδικία is the union and accumulation of all that is the re- verse: comp. notes ov Zit. 11. 14. 20. δὲ is certainly not ‘for’ (Bloomf.), but, with its proper adver- sative meaning, notices a tacit objec- tion which the implied statement in the last clause of the preceding verse, viz., ‘that there are ἄδικοι in the Church of Christ,’ might be thought to suggest: this it dilutes by showing it was really in accordance with the counsels and will of God ; ‘ the Church is indeed intrinsically holy, but in a large house,’ &c., comp. notes on Gal. iii. τι. The connexion and current of the Apostle’s thought will be best recognised, if it be observed that in ver. 19 the Church is regarded more as an tnvisible, in the present verse more as a visible community: on the true import and proper application of these terms, see Jackson, Creed XII. 7. 6, and Field on the Church, τ. το, p. 14. ἐν μεγάλῃ οἰκίᾳ] ‘in ὦ large house ; observe the epi- thet, and its position, Winer, Gr. § 35.4, p. 275. The οἰκία is not the world (Chrys., Theoph.), but in con- tinuation of the previous image, the visible Church of Christ (Cypr. Zp. 55); the Apostle changes, however, the term θεμέλιος, which marked the inward and essential character of the Church, into οἰκία, which serves better to pourtray it in its visible and out- ward aspect. The Church was μεγαλή, it was like a net of wide sweep (σαγήνῃ, Matth. xiii. 47) that in- cluded in it something of every kind ; see especially, Field 1. 7 sq., p. 11 sq., Pearson, Creed, Art. 1x., Vol. 1. p- 405 (ed. Burton), and Hooker, 128 sa ‘ Β ἃ ΓΝ ah γ,5 ’ 21 και ἃ MEV εἰς τιμὴν, A OE εἰς ατΤιμιαν" 2 TIMOTHY MII. 20, 21. 98 3 εαν Ouv τις ’ , e bs! τ A , a4 ~ ᾽ , ἐκκαθαρῃ €AUTOV ATO TOUTWY, ETTAL GKEVOS εἰς τιμὴν, Eccl. Pol, 1, τ. 8. σκεύη χρυσᾶ κιτ.λ.}] By this image the genuine and spurious members of the Church are represented as forming two distinct classes, each of which, as the terms χρυσᾶ, ἀργυρᾶ and again ξύλ., and ὀστράκ. seem to imply, may in- volve different degrees and gradations ; the former the σκέυη els τιμήν, who are called by a ‘vocatio interna,’ and are united in heart to the Church ; the latter the σκεύη εἰς ἀτιμίαν, who are called by a ‘vocatio mere externa,’ and who pertain not to the ‘ compages domus’ (August. de Bapt. ντί., 6. 99, a chapter that will repay consulting), belong to it merely outwardly and in name; comp. Jackson, Creed, XI. 7. 1 sq., Neander, Planting, Vol. τ. p. 492 (Bohn), and on the whole subject, esp. the great work of Field, supr. cit., particularly Book 1. ch. 6—1rr. Thus then the τιμή and ἀτιμία have no reference to the honour or dis- honour that redound to the olxia or to the οἰκοδεσπότης (comp. Mack, Matth.), but as in Rom. ix. 21 (see Meyer in loc.), simply appertain to, and qualitatively characterize, the vessels themselves. Méller (p. 106) finds in this image thus left to Timothy’s spiritual discernment, (see ver. 4 sq.), a mark of genuineness ; a forger would have hardly left it thus unexpanded and unexplained, 21. ἐὰν οὖν tisk.T.A. |] Anencourag- ing and consolatory exhortation, gene- ral in form, yet not without special reference to Tim.; ἐάν τις = ‘si quis, verbi gratia, Timotheus,’ Beng. ἐκκαθάρῃ éavt.| ‘shall have purged himself from,’ ‘expurgarit,’ Beza ; not παντελῶς καθάρῃ, Chrys., but (in sensu pregnanti) ‘purgando — sese exierit de numero horum,’ Beng. ,— the ἐκ referring to those whose com- munion was to be left, comp. ver. 19, ἀποστήτως The verb ἐκκαθ. occurs again in 1 Cor. v. 7, where the force of the prep., in allusion to the ‘ purg- ing-out’ from the houses of the παλαιὰ ζύμη (see Schoettg. Hor., Vol. 1. 598) is fully apparent. Theodoret (comp. Chrys.) calls attention to τῆς γνώμης ἐξηρτημένην τὴν τοῦ κρείττονος αἵρεσιν, here fully conveyed by the act. verb with the reflexive pronoun (Beng.), and very unconvincingly de- nied by Beza. On the great practical principle involved in this verse, ‘no communion with impugners of funda- mentals,’ see the sound remarks of Waterland, Doctr. of Trin. ch. Iv., Vol. m1. p. 456 sq. ἀπὸ τούτων seems clearly to refer to ἃ εἰς ἀτιμίαν, i.e. the persons included in that simile,—not to the βεβήλους κενο- φωνίας mentioned in ver. 16 (Est.), nor to ἀδικίας, ver. 19 (Coray), which certainly seems a very far-fetched re- ference. In using the terms ἃ εἰς ἀτιμ., the thoughts of the Apostle were in all probability dwelling on the ψευδοδιδάσκαλοι to whom he had been recently alluding. εἰς τιμὴν is not to be connected with ἡγιασμένον, Syr., Chrys., Lachm., Leo (who, however, adopts in his text a contrary punctuation), but as the pre- vious connexion in verb. 20 obviously suggests, immediately with σκεῦος, the three defining clauses more fully ex- plaining the meaning of the term. εὔχρηστον] ‘serviceable, ch. iv. 11, Philem. 11; dpa ἐκεῖνα ἄχρηστα, el καί τινα χρείαν. ἐπιτελεῖ, Chrysost. The εὐχρηστία, as the following clause shows, is ‘per opera bona, quibus et suze et aliorum saluti ac necessitati ad Dei gloriam subserviant,’ Estius. 5 ΠΙΘΈΠΥ || 51.ΞΞ.:29. 129 e , yy ” ’ τι la av ; Ss A NYLATMEVOV, εὔχρηστον TH δεστότη, εἰς παν Epyoy ἀγαθὸν , ἡτοιμασμένον. 22 Tas δὲ νεωτερικὰς ἐπιθυ- a A , μίας φεῦγε; δίωκε δὲ δικαιοσύνην, πίστιν, ἀγάπην, εἰρήνην A A 93 , \ , 9 ἴῳ. , META τῶν ἐπικαλουμένων τον Κύριον €K καθαρᾶς καρδίας. 23 Tas δὲ μωρὰς καὶ ἀπαιδεύτους ζητήσεις παραιτοῦ, εἰδὼς 22. τὰς νεωτερικὰς ἔπιθ.} ‘the lusts of youth,’ ‘juvenilia desideria,’ Vulg. ; certainly not ‘ cupiditates no- varum rerum,’ Salmas., nor ‘acres,’ ‘vehementes,’ Loesner, Obs., p. 417; see esp. Pearson, Vind. Jgn. (ad lect.), Vol. 1. p. 7 sq. (Angl. Cath. Libr.). The previous indirect exhortation is con- tinued in a direct form both negatively and positively: the δὲ (which must not be omitted as in Auth. Vers., Conyb. and Hows.) marks the contrast between vewr. ἐπιθ. and ἑτοιμασία els The ἐπιθυμίαι do not merely refer to πορνεία, but as the Greek commentators remark, include πᾶσαν ἐπιθυμίαν ἄτοπον (Chrysost.), τρυφήν, γέλωτος ἀμετρίαν, δόξαν κενήν, καὶ τὰ τούτοις προσόμοια (Theod.), in a word, all the lusts and passions which particularly characterize youth, but which of course might be felt by one who was not a youth in the strictest sense of the term. On the compara- tive youth of Timothy, comp. notes on x Tum. v. 12. δίωκε] So, exactly similarly, 1 Tim. vi. 11; comp. also Rom. ix. 30, 31, xii. 13, xiv. τὸ, 1 Cor. xiv. 1, 1 Thess, v. 15 (Heb. xii. 14,) where διώκειν [Heb. HT) Prov. Ἐπὶ 212 salma xxxiv. 15] is used by St. Paul in the same characteristic way with abstract sub- stantives ; the correlative term is καταλαμβάνειν, Rom. ix. 30, Phil. ili. 12.” On δικαιοσ. and πίστις, see notes on 1 Tim. vi. ὅταν λέγῃ « δικαιοσύνην᾽ νοεῖ ὅλας τὰς ἀρετάς, Coray. εἰρήνην must be joined with μετὰ τῶν ἐπικαλ., not with δίωκε, Heydenr.: comp. Heb. πᾶν K.T.X.. {τς Xil. I4, εἰρήνην διώκετε μετὰ πάντων. It denotes not merely ‘peace’ in the ordinary sense, i.e. absence of con- tention, but ‘concordiam illam spiri- tualem’ (Caly.) which unites together all who call upon (1 Cor. i. 2) and who love their Lord; comp. Rom. Xe) 12, eb pha ἵν 3. ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδ. (see notes on 1 Tim. i. 5) belongs to ἐπικαλ. τὸν Kup., and tacitly contrasts the true believers with the false teachers whose καρδία like their νοῦς and συνείδησις (Tit. i. 15) was not καθαρά, but μεμιασμένη. 23. τὰς pwpasK.T.A.] ‘the foolish and ignorant questions which the false teachers especially loved to entertain and propound ;’ comp. Tit. iii. 9. ᾿Απαί- devros (an dm. λεγόμ. in N.T.) is not exactly ‘sine disciplina,’ Vulg. (comp. Syr.), but in accordance with its usual lexical meaning (Suid. ἀνόητος, Hesych. ‘indoctus,’ and thence, as here, ‘ineptus,’ ‘insulsus,’ Goth. ‘dvalons,’ [cognate with ‘ dull’]; comp. Proy. viii. 5, xv. 14, and esp, Ececlus. x. 3, where βασιλεὺς ἀπαί- δευτος stands in a kind of contrast to κριτὴς σοφός, ver. 1; comp. Winer, Gr..§ 16. 3, p. 108. ζητήσεις] ‘ questions (of controversy) ; see notes on 1 Zim. i. 4; on παραιτοῦ see notes 2b. iv. 7. εἰδὼς ὅτι κιτ. Δ. ‘knowing (as thou dost) that they engender contentions ; comp. t Tim. vi. 4, ἐξ ὧν γίγνεται ἔρις, Tit. lil, 9, μάχας voukds. The use of μάχη in such applications is more ex- tended than that of πόλεμος ; “ dicitur autem μάχεσθαι de qudcunque con- tentione etiam animorum etiamsi non K ἀμαθής) 190 2 TIMOTHY ~ Ly! ὅτι γεννῶσιν μαχας II. 22.--:--95. 24 δοῦλον δὲ Kupioy οὐ δεῖ μάχεσθαι, Cy 4 U GAN ἤπιον εἶναι πρὸς πάντας: διδακτικόν, ἀνεξίκακον, 25 2 sf ὃ , ou ὃ θ , , εν πραυτητι παιοευοντα TOUS AVYTLOLATLUEMEVOUS, μὴ ποτε ad verbera et czedes [πόλεμον] perve- nerit,’ Tittm. Synon. τ. p. 66: comp. Eustath. on Hom. 71. 1.177, μάχεται μέν τις Kal λόγοις, ὡς καὶ ἣ λογομαχία δηλοῖ, Both terms are joined in James iv. 1, but there the conflicts are not, as here, upon abstract ques- tions between rival teachers or rival sects, but turn upon the rights of pro- perty, compare ver. 2, 3. It need scarcely be said that μάχη has no connexion with dx,—‘ sharpness’ (Liddell and Scott, Lex. s.v.); the most plausible derivation seems Sanscr. maksh, ‘irasci’ (x=ksh), see Benfey, Wurzellex, Vol. U. p. 42; ‘si recte suspicamur, propria ab initio illi verbo fuit notio contentionis seu impetus quo quis se in alium infert,’ Tittmann, Synon. lL. 6. 24. ϑοῦλον Κυρ.] ‘a servant of the Lord,’ not merely in a general re- ference (comp. Eph. vi. 6, 1 Pet. ii. 16), but, as the context seems -to re- quire, with a more special reference to Timothy’s office as a bishop and evangelist, τὸν ἐπίσκοπον λέγει, Coray ; comp. Tit. i. 1, James i. 1 al. Hmov] ‘gentle,’ ‘mild’ (‘ mitem,’ Ttal., not very happily changed into ‘mansuetum,’ Vulg.), both in words and demeanour ; only found here and (if we adopt the reading of Rec., Tisch.) in 1 Thess. ii. εἶναι... 7, δυνάμενοι ἐν βάρει . ἐγενήθημεν ἤπιοι. Ἤπιος (derived probably from ᾿ἜΠΩ, comp. ἤπια φάρμακα, Hom. 71. Iv. 218 al., with primary ref. perhaps to healing by incantation) appears to denote an outward mildness and gentleness, es- pecially in bearing with others : ἐπρᾷος (when not in its specific scrip- tural sense, comp. notes on Lph. v. 2) ipsam animi lenitatem indicat, ἤπιος qui hance lenitatem in aliis ferendis monstrat,’ Tittm. Synon. I. p- 140. The subst. ἠπιότης is placed between ἡμερότης and φιλανθρωπία in Philo, Vol. 11. p. 267. διδακτικόν] ‘apt to teach; ready to teach rather than contend ; see notes on 1 Tim. iii. 2. There seems no reason (with De W.) to give διδακτ. here a different shade of meaning ; the servant of the Lord was not to be merely ‘lehrreich,’ but ‘lehrhaftig,’ Luther, ready and willing, dudxws προσφέρειν τὰ θεῖα παιδεύματα, Theo- doret. avetlkakov] ‘patient of wrong,’ ‘ forbearing? ἀνεξικακία, ἡ ἀνοχὴ τοῦ κακοῦ, Hesych.; comp. Wisdom ii. 19, where it is in connexion with ἐπιείκεια, and see Dorvill. Charit. VII. 4, p. 616. 25. πραὔτητι] ‘meckness ;’ see notes on Gal. v. 23, and on Eph. iv. 2. Ἂν mpair. is obviously not to be connected with ἀνεξικ., as Tynd., Cran., Gen., but with the part., de- fining the manner in which the παιδεύειν is to be conducted. ἀντιδιατιθεμένους] ‘ those who wre con- tending against him ;’ ‘ those that are of different opinions from us,’ Hamm., ‘qui diversam sententiam fovent,’ Tittmann, Synon. ΤΙ. p. 9, who distin- guishes between ἀντιδ., the perhaps stronger ἀντιλέγοντες, Tit. i. 9, and the more decided ἀντίδικοι. The allu- sion is thus not so much to positively and wilfully heretical teachers, as to the νοσοῦντας περὶ ζητήσεις (1 Tim. vi. 4), those of weak faith and morbid love of ἀντιθέσεις (Theod.), and contro- versial questions. The definite heretic was to be admonished, and, in case of 5 TIMOTHY IL. 25, 26. ὃ ’ 9. - e Θ A ’ = 9. , Ἂ , wy αὐτοῖς ὁ Θεος μετανοιαν εἰς ἐπιγνωσιν ἀληθείας. stubbornness, was to be left to himself (Tit. iii. ro); such opponents as the present were to be dealt with gently, and to be won back to the truth: comp. Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 343, note (Bohn). μή ποτε κι τ. λ.7 ‘if perchance at any time God might grant to them,’ &e. ; ‘in the hopes that,’ &c., see Green, Gramm. p. 83. Μὴ is here used, somewhat irregularly, in its dubitative sense; ποτέ, with which it is united, is not otiose, but ‘adfert suam indefi- niti temporis significationem’ (Klotz, Devar., Vol. τι. p. 674), and while marking clearly the complete contin- gency of the change, still leaves the faint hope that at some time or other such a change may, by God’s grace, be wrought within ; ὥστε ἐκείνων μόνον ἀφίστασθαι χρή, σαφῶς πεπείσμεθα ὅτι οὐδ᾽ ἂν ὁτιοῦν γένηται, μεταστήσονται, Chrys. The optative δῴη (see notes on Eph. i. 17), with ACD* FG, al., is not here treated simply as a subjunctive (Wiesing.), but seems used to convey an expres- sion of hope and subjective possibility, comp. Winer, Gr. ὃ 42. 4. c, p. 346. On the construction of the dubitative μή, see the good article in Palm τι. Rost, Lex. s.v., C, Vol. τι. p. 226. μετάνοιαν] ‘repentance,’ certainly not ‘conversion from paganism to Chris- tianity,’ Reuss, Theol. Chret. tv. 16, Vol. π. p. 163, but ‘ peenitentiam’ in its usual and proper sense, scil. an ἀπόστασιν ἀπ᾽ ἀδικίας, and an ém- στροφὴν πρὸς Θεόν (see esp. Taylor on, Repent. τι. 1), a change of heart wrought by God’s grace within, It may be observed that μετανοέω (only 2 Cor. xii. 21) and μετάνοια (only Rom. ii. 4, 2 Cor. vii. 9, 10) occur less frequently in St. Paul’s epp. than περὶ ὧν δυνάμεθα ἀποφήνασθαι, καὶ ὑπὲρ ὧν 191 A 26 καὶ we might otherwise have imagined, being not unfrequently partially re- placed by καταλλάσσω and καταλλαγή, terms peculiar to the Apostle; see Usteri, Zehrb. 1. 1. 1, p. 102, and comp. Taylor, Repent. ΤΙ, 2. 11. ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθ.} ‘full knowledge of the truth,’ i.e. of the gospel-truth, Beza: the Gospel is the truth κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν, it contains all the principles and elements of practical truth; see Reuss, Theol. Chret. Iv. 8, Vol. τι. p. 82. The omission of the article before ἀλ. is due to the principle of correlation, the article before émlyv. being omitted in consequence of the prep.; see Middleton, Art. UI. 3. 7, p- 49 (ed. Rose). 26. Kal ἀνανήψωσιν κ. τ. Δ. ‘and they may return to soberness out of the snare of the devil, being held captive by him, to do His [God's] will. The difficulty of this verse rests entirely in the construction. Of the various interpretations, three deserve conside- ration ; (a) that of Auth. Ver., Vulg. and Syr. (appy.), followed by De W.., Huth., and the majority of modern commentators, according to which αὐτοῦ and ἐκείνου both refer to τοῦ διαβόλου ; (ὁ) that of Wetst., Beng. al., according to which αὐτοῦ is referred to the δοῦλος Kup., ἐκείνου to God, and ἐζωγρημένοι to the spiritual capture and reclaiming of sinners, Luke v. 10, comp. 2 Cor. x. §; (c) that of Beza, Grot., Hammond, al., according to which dvay. .. . παγίδος is to be con- nected with εἰς τὸ ἐκ. θέλ. ; αὐτοῦ re- ferring to the devil, ἐκείνου to God, and éfwpy. ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ being an expla- natory clause to ἀναν. ἐκ may. (almost, ‘though held captive,’ &c.), marking more distinctly the state preceding the ἀνάνηψις. The reference of αὐτοῦ to “ Domini servus’ (Wakefield, Sylv. Ke: 2 192 2 TIMOTHY IL. 26. ἀνανήψωσιν ἐκ τῆς τοῦ διαβόλου παγίδος, ἐζωγρημένοι es τὰ fal , \ ’ , / ὑπ᾿ αὐτοῦ, εἰς TO ἐκείνου θέλημα. Crit. Vol. Iv. p. 209), does not seem to require notice. Ofthese (a) labours under the almost insurmountable ob- jection of referring the two pronouns to the same subject, esp. when a few verses below, ch. iil. 9, they are used correctly. De W. and his followers imperfectly quote Plato, Cratyl. 430 E, aS an instance of a similar use of the pronouns, but if the passage be properly cited, e.g. προσελθόντα ἀνδρί τῳ... . καὶ δεῖξαι αὐτῷ, ἂν μὲν τύχῃ ἐκείνου εἰκόνα, ἂν δὲ τυχῇ γυναικός, it will be seen that the antithesis of the last clause (omitted by De W.), sug- gests some reason for the irregular in- troduction of the more emphatic pro- noun; the other instances referred to in Kithner, Gr. ὃ 629 (add Bernhardy, Synt. VI. 5, p. 277), in which éxew. precedes and αὐτὸς follows, do not apply. The sense, moreover, con- veyed by this interpr. is singularly flat and insipid. The objections to (b) are equally strong, for 1st, ζωγρη- θέντες (as indeed it is used by Theoyph.) which marks the act (comp. δῴη éxyny.) would certainly have been used rather than the perf. part. which marks the state: and 2ndly, αὐτοῦ is separated from its subject by. two interposed substt., with either of which (grammatically considered) the connexion would have seemed more natural and perspicuous, The only serious objection to (c) is the isolation of éfwyp. ὑπ αὐτοῦ; this, however,. may be diluted by observing that the simile involved in παγὶς did seem to - require a semi-parenthetical illus- tration. As, then, (c) yields a very good sense, as avav..... els is simi- | IIL. ¢, p. 677. lar and symmetrical to μετάνοιαν εἰς ἐπίγν., as the force of the perfect is unimpaired and the ‘proprietas utri- usque pronominis’ (Beza) is thus fully preserved, we adopt, with but little hesitation, the last interpretation : see Hammond, in loc., and Scholef. fints, Ὁ. 123 (ed. 3). We now notice a few individual expressions. ἀνανήφειν, an ἅπαξ λεγόμ. in the N. T. (comp., however, ἐκνήφειν, 1 Cor. xv. 34), implies ‘a recovering from drunkenness,—not necessarily the sleep of drunkenness,’ Bloomf.,— to a state of former sobriety,’ ‘crapu- lam excutere’ (Porphyr. de Abst. Iv. 20, ἐκ τῆς μέθης ἀνανῆψαι), and thence metaphorically ‘ad se redire, e.g. ἐκ τῶν θρήνων, Joseph. Antiq. VI. τι. ro; see further exx. in Wetst., Kypke, and Elsner, in loc. There is appy. a slight confusion of meta- phor, but it may be observed that ἀναν. ἐκ παγίδος is really a ‘constructio pregnans,’ scil. ‘come to soberness and escape from,’ see Winer, G7. ὃ 66. - ζωγρεῖν] is properly ‘to capture alive,’ (fwypel ζῶντας λαμβάνει, Suid.) e.g. Polyb. Hist. 111. 84. το, δεόμενοι ζωγρεῖν, in contrast with διαφθείρειν, and with ἀποκτείνειν, Thucyd. Hist. ΤΙ. 92, al. ; thence ‘to capture,’ in an ethical sense,-Luke vy. το. In the LXX it is used several times in the sense of vi. 25, Numb. xxxi. 15, ὅτι, comp. Hom. 71. X. 576; see Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol..I. p. 1302. τοῦ διαβόλου] See τ Tim. iii. 7, and on the use of the term d.a8., see notes on Eph. iv. 27. 2 SIMON Rls 1,2: 199 In the last days there shall be every form of me: » : ᾿ A « = 4 4 ae yor pare ἥμεραις ἐνστήσονται καιροί χαλεποί. 7 ἔσον- ever strive to seduce others and thwart the truth. II. Totro δὲ γίνωσκε, ὅτι ἐν ἐσχάταις 1 γίνωσκε) Lachm. reads γινώσκετε with AFG; 3 mss. (Ε 1); .... Boern. Aith. Slav..... Aug. (Tisch. ed. τ, Huther). Being a more difficult reading, it has some claim on our attention; as however the reading of the text is so strongly supported—viz., by CD EJ Καὶ nearly all Vv... . Syr. Copt. Aith. Vulg. Goth. Ar. (Polygl.) al. .... many Greek and Latin Ff. (Rec., Griesb., De Wette, Griesb.)—and as it is possible that the following ὅτε may have given rise to the reading [γίνωσκε ὅτι being changed by an ignorant or careless writer into γινώσκετε), it would seem that Tisch. (ed. 2) has now rightly reversed his former opinion. Cuap. III. τ, τοῦτο δέ] The δὲ is not metabatic, but continues the subject implied in ch. iii. 26, in an adversative relation: ver. 26 mainly referred to the present and to recovery from Satan’s snare ; ver. 1 sq. refers to the future and to a further progress in iniquity. ἐν ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις] ‘in the last days,’ the last period of the Christian era, the times preceding the end, not merely ‘at the conclusion of the Jewish state,’ Waterl. (Serm. 111. Vol. v. p. 546), but at a period more definitely future (ὕστερον ἐσόμενον, Chrys.), as the tense ἐνστήσονται seems plainly to suggest; comp. 1 Pet. i. 5, 2 Pet. iii. 3, Jude 18, and see notes on I Tim. iv. 1. It would seem, however, clear from ver. 5, that the evil was be- ginning to work even in the days of Timothy ; see Bull, Serm. xv. p. 276 (Oxford, 1844). On the omission of the article, compare Winer, Gr. § 18, p- [41, where a list is given of similar words found frequently anarthrous. évotyoovTat] ‘will ensue,’ ‘will set im 7 not ‘imminebunt’ (‘will impend,’ Bloomf., who, however, mixes up ᾿ ~ both), but ‘aderunt,’ Beng., .Ο2} [venient] Syr., i.e. will become pre- sent (évecr@res) ; see notes on Gal. i. 4. De Wette objects to Vulg. ‘in- stabunt’ [advenient, Ital.], but ‘in- stare’ appears frequently used in Latin to denote present time, com- pare Cic. Tusc. Iv. 6, and esp. Auct. ad Herenn. τι. 5, ‘ dividitur [tempus] in tempora tria, preteritum, instans, consequens.’ It is possible that the choice of the word may have been suggested by the Apostle’s prophetic knowledge, that the evil which was more definitely to work in times farther future was now beginning to develop itself even in the early days of the Gospel ; ἐστὶν εὑρεῖν ἐν ἣμιν ἃ προηγόρευσεν ὁ θεῖος ἀπόστολος, Theo- doret: comp. 2 Thess. ii. 7. καιροὶ χαλεποί] ‘dificult, grievous, times ; not merely in respect of the outward dangers they might involve (‘periculosa,’ Vulg.), but the evils that marked them; οὐχὶ τὰς ἡμέρας διαβάλλων λέγει οὐδὲ τοὺς καιρούς, ἀλλὰ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους τοὺς τότε ὄντας, Chrysost.; comp. Gal. i. 4, αἰὼν πονηρός, Eph. v. 16, ἡμέραι πονηραί. The χαλεπότης of the times would be felt in the embarrassment in which a Christian might be placed how to act (‘ubi vix reperias, quid agas,’ Beng.), and how to confront the various spiritual and temporai dangers of the time; comp. 2 Mace. iv. 16, περίεσχεν αὐτοὺς χαλεπὴ περίστασις. 2. οἱ ἄνθρωποι] ‘men, generally :’ 194 2 TIMOTHY IIL. 2, 3. ται yap οἱ ἄνθρωποι φίλαυτοι, φιλάργυροι. ἀλαζόνες, ὑπερή- φανοι, βλάσφημοι, γονεῦσιν ἀπειθεῖς, ἀχάριστοι, ἀνόσιοι, 9 ἄστοργοι, ἄσπονδοι, διάβολοι., ἀκρατεῖς, ἀνήμεροι; ἀφιλά- the article must not be overlooked ; it does not point merely to those of whom the Apostle is speaking (Mack), but clearly implies that the majority of men should at that time be such as he is about to describe. φίλαυτοι] ‘lovers of self,’ dar. λεγόμ. ; φιλαυτία properly occupies this προεδρία in the enumeration, being the represser of ἀγάπη (τὴν ay. συστέλλει βραχὺ συνάγει, Chrys.), the true root of all evil, and the essence of all sin ; see esp. Miiller, ON PSU lease Ola Tey θ᾽ τ38 Ξη: (Clark), and for an able delineation of its nature and specific forms, Barrow, Serm. 60-63, Vol. 111. p. 333 sq. The Aith., if correctly translated ‘ dili- gentes crapulam,’ appears to have read φίλοινοι. On φιλάργυροι, which here very appropriately follows φίλαυτοι (φιλαργυρία θυγάτηρ τῆς φιλαυτίας, Coray), comp. notes on 1 Tim. vi. το. Graldves, ὑπερήφανοι] ‘ boastful, haughty,’ Rom. i. 30, where ὑβρισταί is also added. The distinction be- tween these terms (Ἢ ἀλαζονεία in verbis magis est, ostentatio, ὑπερηφανία, su- perbia, cum aliorum contemtu et contumelia conjuncta,’ Tittm.) is in- vestigated by Trench, Synon. § 20, and Tittmann, Synon. 1. p. 73. The derivation of the latter word is toa certain extent preserved in the Syr. καὶ els ies [alti], the Lat. ‘ superbi,’ and the Engl. ‘haughty.’ In the case of the former word, the transl. of the Vulg. ‘elati’ [fastidiosi, Ital.], is judiciously changed by Beza into ‘gloriosi.’ See notes to 7ransl. . βλάσφημοι)] ‘blasphemers,’ or ‘evil speakers, κατηγορίαις χαίροντες, Theod. Mops.; most probably the former, both ‘ vi ordinis’ (Calov.), and because διάβολοι follows in ver. 3; comp. notes on 1 Tim. i. 13. The ὑπερη- φανία, a vice of the mind (see Trench, l.c.), develops itself still more fearfully in ὕβρις against God; ὁ γὰρ κατὰ ἀνθρώπων ἐπαιρόμενος, εὐκόλως καὶ The tran- sition to the following clause is thus also very natural and appropriate ; They alike reviled their heavenly father, and disobeyed their earthly parents. ἀχάριστοι (Luke vi. 35) naturally follow ; ingratitude must necessarily be found where there is ἀπείθεια to parents; ὁ δὲ γονεῖς μὴ κατὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, Chrysost. τιμῶν καὶ πρὸς πάντας ἔσται ἀχάριστος, Theoph. On ἀνόσιος, see notes on I Tim. i. 9. 3. ἄστοργοι] ‘without natural affections,’ dts Neybu., here and Rom. i. 31; περὶ οὐδένα σχέσιν ἔχοντες, Theod. Mops., μὴ ἀγαπῶντες τίνα, _ Hesych., but most exactly CEcum., ἄφιλοι πρὸς. τοὺς οἰκείους, destitute of love towards those for whom nature herself claims it. Στέργω (a word of uncertain deriv., possibly connected with στερ--, and Sanscr. sprih, ‘ desi- derare,’ Pott, Ztym. Forsch. Vol. τ. p- 284) denotes primarily and properly the love between parents and children (compare Plato, Legg. vi. 754 B, Xenoph. @eon. vit. 54), and thence between those connected by similar or parallel relations. Like ἀγαπάω (the usual word in the N. T.) it is rarely used in good authors of mere sensual love. It does not occur in the N.T. or LXX; only Ecclus. xxvii. 17, - στέρξον φίλον (Ecclus, viii. 20, is more than doubtful). ἄσπονδοι 2 TIMOTHY III. 3—s. yabou, μᾶλλον ἢ φιλόθεοι, ‘implacable,’ ἅπ. λεγόμ., Rom. i. 31 (Rec.), being more than doubtful. The difference between ἄσπον. and ἀσύνθετοι (Rom. i. 31), as stated by Tittmann, Synon. p. 75, ‘ ἀσύνθ. qui non ineunt pacta, dom. qui redire in gratiam nolunt,’ is lexically doubtful. The former seems to denote one who “does not abide by the compacts into which he has entered,’ μὴ ἐμμένων ταῖς συνθήκαις, Hesych. (comp. Jerem. ili. 8, 10; Demosth. Fals. Leg. 383, connected with ἀστάθμητος) ἄσπονδος, one who will not enter upon them at all. This and the foregoing epithet are omitted in Syr. On διάβολος, comp. notes on 1 Tim. 111. 11. ἀκρατεῖς) ‘incontinent, ἥττους τῶν Theod. Mops., ‘intempe- rantes,’ Beza ; da. λεγόμ. : the oppo- site ἐγκρατὴς occurs Tit. i. 8. The subst. ἀκρασία (Lobeck, Phryn. p. 524) occurs 1 Cor. vii. 5. ἀνήμεροι] ‘savage,’ ‘ brutal,’ literally ‘untamed,’ ἅπ. λεγόμ.; θήρια ἀντὶ ἀνθρώπων, Theophyl., comp. Syr. παθῶν, mo tagagss [feri]: ‘ ungentle’ (Peile), seems far too mild a translation, ὡμότης and ἀπήνεια (Chrysost., comp. (icum.) are rather the characteristics of the ἀνήμερος. ἀφιλά- γαθοι] ‘haters of good,’ ἔχθροὶ πάντος ἀγαθοῦ, GEcum.; Theoph.; another ἅπ. λεγόμ., the opposite φιλάγαθοι occurs Tit. i. 8, where see notes; comp. Wisd. vii. 22. It does not seem necessary, with Beza and Auth. Ver., to limit the reference to persons, either here or Tit. l.c.; comp. Suicer, Zhe- saur. Vol. 11. p. 1426. So appy. Goth. ‘unseljai,’ [cognate with ‘selig’], Vulg., ‘sine benignitate,’ perhaps Syr., and if the translations in Walton can be relied on, ith. and Copt. 195 4 προδόται, προπετεῖς, τετυφωμένοι, φιλήδονοι 5 ἔχοντες μόρφωσιν εὐσεβείας, τὴν These are cases in which the best ancient Vy. may be profitably con- sulted. 4. προδόται] ‘betrayers,’ most pro- bably of their (Christian) brethren and friends ; φιλίας καὶ ἑταιρείας, Gicum.: comp. Luke vi. 16, Acts vii. 52. προπετεῖς) ‘headstrong,’ headlong in action, not merely in words (Suid. προπετής, OTpoyAwocos), or in thoughts (comp. Hesych., πρὸ τοῦ λογισμοῦ) ; see Acts xix. 36, μηδὲν προπετὲς πράττειν, and comp. Herodian, Hist. Le 8. πὸ τολμᾶν mon eae οὐκ οὔσης εὐλόγου προφάσεως προπετὲς καὶ θρασύ. The partial synonym προαλής, Ecclus. xxx. 8, is condemned in its adverbial use by Phryn. p. 245 (ed. Lob.), and Thom. M. p. 744 (ed. Bern.). On τετυφωμένοι, see notes on 1 Tim. iii. 6. φιλήδονοι κ. τ. λ.} ‘lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God; both words da. λεγόμ.: Wetstein cites very appo- sitely Philo, de Agricult. § το, Vol. 1. p- 313 (ed. Mang.), φιλήδονον καὶ φιλο- παθῆ μᾶλλον ἢ φιλάρετον καὶ φιλόθεον ἐργάσηται. 5. μόρφωσιν εὐσεβείας] ‘an (owt- ward) form of godliness,’ 1Scoo20] [σχῆμα] Syr., ‘speciem pietatis,’ Vulg.; μόρφωσιν, ἄψυχον καὶ νεκρόν, καὶ σχῆμα μόνον καὶ τύπον καὶ ὑπόκρι- σιν δηλοῦν, Chrys. Μόρφωσις occurs again in Rom. ii. 20, but as Chrys. rightly observes, in a different appli- cation; here, as the context clearly shows, it implies the mere outward form as opposed to the inward and pervading influence (δύναμι). The more correct word would be μόρφωμα, (Asch. Agam. 873, Hum. 412), μόρ- gwots being properly active, e.g. σχηματισμὸς καὶ μόρφωσις τῶν δένδρων, Theophr. Caus. Plant. UI. 7. 4: there 190 \ , 5S. 59 , A , " , δὲ δύναμιν αὐτῆς ἡρνήμενοι" και τουτοὺυς αποτρετπου. 2 TIMOTHY IIL. 5, 6. 3 6 ἐκ , , 9 Cone δύ 9 ‘ eet 2 A 9 τούυτων γαρ εἰσιν οἱ EVOUVOVTES ELS TAS OLKLAS και αἰχμαλω- is, however, a tendency in the N. T., as in later writers, to replace the verbal nouns in -wa by the corres- ponding nouns in -σις ; comp. ὑποτύ- πωσις, ch. i. 13. Fora plausible dis- tinction between μόρφη and σχῆμα, the former as what is ‘intrinsic’ and ‘essential,’ the latter as what is ‘ out- ward’ and ‘accidental,’—hence μόρ- φωσις here (an aiming at, affecting, μόρφη) not pdppy,—see Lightfoot in Journ. Class. Philol. No. 7, p. 115. On the meaning of εὐσέβεια, see notes on t Tim. ii. 2. This enumera- tion of vices may be compared with Rom. i. 29 sq.; there absolute heathenism is described, here a kind of heathen Christianity; both lists however have, as indeed might well be imagined, several terms in com- mon. ‘The various attempts to por- tion out these vices into groups (comp. Bloomf., Peile) seem all unsuccessful ; a certain connexion may be observed, in some parts, e.g. addfoves κ.τ.λ., βλάσφημοι x.T.r., but it seems so evidently to give way to paronomasia or similarity of composition (e. g. mpod. mpom.) in other parts, that no prac- tical inferences can safely be deduced. τὴν δὲ δύναμιν κ.τ.λ.}] “Τὸ deny the power of godliness, is for a man by indecent and vicious actions to con- tradict his outward show and _ pro- fession of godliness,’ Bull, Serm. xv. Engl. Works, p. 279 (Oxf. 1844): comp. Tit. i. 16. The term δύναμις appears to mark the ‘practical in- - fluence’ which ought to pervade and animate the εὐσέβεια ; comp. 1 Cor. iv. 20. Kal τούτους ἀποτρ. | ‘from THESE turn away.’ The καὶ seems here to retain its proper force by specifying those particularly who were to be avoided ; there were some - ©prees. pro futuro,’ of whom hopes might be entertained (ch. ii. 25), these, however, belonged to a far more depraved class, on whom instruction would be thrown away, and who were the melancholy types of the more developed mystery of iniquity of the future; ponimus si duas personas taciti con- tendimus,’ Klotz, Devar. Vol. τι. p. 636, by whom this and similar usages of καὶ are well illustrated. Heydenr. seems to have missed this prelusive and prophetic reference, when he applies all the evil characteristics above mentioned, specially and par- ticularly to the erroneous teachers of the present: these latter, as the fol- lowing verses show, had many evil elements in common with them, but the two classes were not identical. ᾿Αποτρέπ. (an dm. λεγόμ.) is nearly synonymous with ἐκτρέπ., 1 Tim. vi. 20, and joined similarly with an accu- sative. ‘kal 6. ἐκ τούτων γάρ] The γὰρ (not to be omitted in transl. as Conyb. and Hows.) serves clearly and distinctly to connect the future and the present. The seeds of all these evils were germi- nating even at the present time ; and Timothy, by being supplied with criteria derived from the developed future (some, indeed, of which ἔχοντες μόρφωσιν x.7.., applied obviously enough to the teachers of his own days). was to be warned in regard of the developing present: comp. Chrys. in loc. There is thus no reason what- ever with Grot. to consider εἰσὶν a ἐνδύ- νοντες] ‘creeping into,’ like serpents (M@ller) or wolves into a fold (Coray) ; εἶδες τὸ ἀναίσχυντον πῶς ἐδήλωσε διὰ τοῦ εἰπεῖν, ἐνδ. ; τὸ ἄτιμον, τὴν ἀπάτην, τὴν κολάκειαν ; Chrysost.: compare ‘ 2 TIMOTHY III. 6, 7. 137 - , τίζοντες γυναικαρια σεσωρευμένα ἁμαρτίαις, ἀγόμενα ἐπιθυ- re i Μμίαις ποικίλαις, Jude 4, παρείσεδυσαν, where the covertness and furtive character of the intrusive teachers is yet more fully marked. The verb is (in this sense) an dm. Ney. in N.T., but used suffi- ciently often in classical Greek in similar meanings, both with εἰς e.g. Aristoph. Vesp. 1020, ἐνδ. εἰς γαστέρας, and with a simple dat., Xenoph. Cyr. II. 1. 13, €vd. ταῖς ψυχαῖς τῶν ἀκουόν- αἰχμαλωτίζοντες] ‘leading captive,’ Luke xxi. 24, Rom. vil. 23, 2 Cor. x. 5; this word is said to be one of those in the N.T. of Alexandrian or Macedonian origin, comp. Fischer, Prolus. xxi. 2, p. 693 ; it is condemned by the Atticists (Thom. M. p. 23 ed. Bern, Lobeck, Phryn. p. 442), the Attic expression being αἰχμάλωτον ποιῶ; Exx. of the use of the word in Joseph., Arrian, &c., are given in the notes on Thom. Mag. J. ¢. γυναικάρια] “ silly women, ‘mulierculas,’ Vulg., Goth. “ quineina,’ [literally ‘ muliebria,’ an abstr. neut. |; the diminutive expressing contempt, γυναικῶν δὲ τὸ ἀπατᾶσθαι, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδὲ γυναικῶν, ἀλλὰ γυναι- των. καρίων, Chrys.: compare ἀνδράρια, Aristoph. Acharn. 517, ἀνθρωπάρια, ib. Plut. 416. This mention of wo- men in connexion with the false teachers is, as might be imagined, not passed over by those who attack the genuineness of this epistle; comp. Baur, Pastoralbr. p. 36. That the Gnostics of the second and third cen- turies made use of women in the dis- semination of their heresies is a mere matter of history; comp. Epiphan. Heer, xxvi. 11, ἀπατῶντες τὸ αὐτοῖς πειθόμενον γυναικεῖον “γένος, add Tren. Her. τ. 13. 3, al. Are we, however, to hastily conclude that a course of actions, which was in effect as old as 7 , 4 , A δέ 3 πάντοτε μανθανοντα Kal μῆθεποτε εἰς the fall of man (1 Tim. ii. 14), be- longed only to the Gnostic era, and was not also successfully practised in the Apostolic age? MHeinsius and Elsner notice the somewhat similar course attributed to the Pharisees, Joseph. Antig. XVII. 2. 4. Justiniani adduces a vigorous passage of Jerome, [Epist. ad Ctesiph. 133. 4] on the female associates of heresiarchs, which is, however, too long for citation. cerwpevpéva] ‘laden,’ ‘up-heaped with owpevew (connected probably with oépos) occurs again, in a quota- tion, Rom. xii. 20, and forcibly de- picts τὸ πλῆθος τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν, καὶ τὸ ἄτακτον καὶ συγκεχυμένον, Chrys. On the instrumental dative in connexion with ἄγεσθαι, see notes on Gal. v. 18, and on the form ποικίλος (π1κ-, con- nected with πικρός), see Donalds. Crat. § 266, Pott, Etymol. Forsch., Vol. τι. p. 600. 7. πάντοτε μανθ. ] ‘ever learning,’ not necessarily in ‘conventibus Chris- tianorum,’ Grot., but from any who will undertake to teach them. It was no love of truth that impelled them to learn, but only a morbid love of novelty ; ‘ pre curiositate et instabili- tate animi semper nova querunt, eaque suis desideriis accommoda,’ Kstius. καὶ μηδέπ. κ.τ.λ.7 ‘and yet never able to come to the full knowledge of the truth ; comp. notes on ver, 11, where the faint antithetic force of kal is more strongly marked. The δυνάμενα is not without some significance ; in their better moments they might endeavour to attain to some knowledge of the truth, but they never succeed ; ἐπωρώθη ἡ καρδία, Chrys. The conditional negative μηδέπ. is used with the participle, as the circumstance of their inability to 198 ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν δυνάμενα. 8 σι TIMOTHY |) Ni 7, 8. εἴ , ‘ ον τροπον δὲ Ἵ ~ 4 "I A ’ ’ M ee “- e A a αννῆς Και αμβρῆς αντεστῆσαν @MUGEL, OUTWS και οὔτοι attain the truth is stated not as an absolute fact, but as a subsequent characteristic of their class, and of the results which it led to; though they were Constantly learning, and a knowledge of the truth might have been ultimately expected, yet they never did attain to it: see Winer, Gr. ὃ 59. 4, p- 561, and the copious list of exx. in Gayler, Partic. Neg. ch. Ix: p. 284 sq. In estimating, how- ever, the force of μὴ with participles in the N.T., it must not be forgotten that this usage is the prevailing one of the sacred Writers; see Green, Gr. p. 122. The subject generally is largely illustrated by Gayler, chap. 1x., but it is much to be regretted that a work so affluent in examples should often be so deficient in perspicuity. On ἐπίγνωσιν x.T.d., see reff. in note on i Tim. ii. 4. 8. ᾿Ιαννῆς καὶ ᾿Ιαμβρῆς] ‘ Jannes and Jambres ;? τὰ τούτων ὀνόματα οὐκ ἐκ τῆς θείας γραφῆς μεμάθηκεν ὁ θεῖος ἀπόστολος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῆς ἀγράφου τῶν Τουδαίων διδασκαλίας, Theod. in loc. Jannes and Jambres (Ἰωάννης C*, and Μαμβρῆς FG, Vulg. al.), according to ancient Hebrew tradition, were chief among the magicians who opposed Moses (Exodus vii. 11, 22), Αἰγύπτιοι ἱερογραμματεῖς ἄνδρες οὐδενὸς ἥττους μαγεῦσαι κριθέντες εἶναι, Numerius in Orig. Cels. Iv. 51 ; see Targum Jonath. on Exod. i. 15, and vii. ΤΙ, and comp. Euseb. Prep. 1x. 8. They are fur- ther said to have been sons of Balaam, and to have perished either in the. Red Sea, or at the slaughter after the worship. of the golden calf; see the numerous passages cited by Wetst. in loc. It is thus probable that the Apostle derived these names from a current and (being quoted by him) true tradition of the Jewish Church. The supposition of Origen (on Matth. xxvii, Tr. 35) that the names were de- rived from an apocryphal work called ‘Jamnis et Mambris Liber,’ cannot be substantiated. Objections urged against the introduction of these names, when gravely considered, will be found of no weight whatever; why was the inspired Apostle not toremind Timothy of the ancient traditions of his country, and to cite two names which there is every reason to suppose were too closely connected with the early history of the nation to be easily forgotten? For literary notices, &c., see Winer, RWB, Art. ‘Jambres,’ Vol. 1. p. 535. There is a special treatise on the subject by J. G. Michaelis, 4to, Hal. 1747. οὕτως καὶ οὗτοι] The points of com- parison between the false and depraved teachers of the present, and the sor- cerers of the past, consist in (@) an opposition to the truth, ἀνθίστανται τῇ ἀληθείᾳ (comp. Acts xiii. 8, ἀνθίστατο αὐτοῖς “EXvmas); and (6) ἃ pro- fitless opposition, and a notorious betrayal of folly ; ἄνοια αὐτῶν ἔκδηλος K.T.r. ws καὶ ἡ ἐκείνων ἐγένετο. At the same time, without insisting on a further ‘tertium comparationis,’ it is certainly consistent both with this passage (comp. γόητες ver. 13), and other passages of Scripture (e. g. Acts viii. 9 sq, xiii. 6 sq., xix. 13, 19) to assume that, like Jannes and Jambres, these false teachers were permitted to avail themselves of occult powers incommunicable and inacces- sible to others, see Wiesing. in loc., and comp. Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 216, note. κατεφθαρ-. μένοι τὸν νοῦν] ‘corrupted in their mind ; comp. 1 Tim. vi. 5, διεῴθαρμ. TIMOTHY | Tis 8, ο. 139 ἀνθίστανται TH ἀληθείᾳ, ἄνθρωποι κατεφθαρμένοι τὸν νοῦν, Le ‘ ‘ ' ἀδόκιμοι περι τὴν πιστιν. 9 ἀλλ᾽ οὐ προκόψουσιν ἐπὶ a ¢ ‘ cA as ΝΜ ὃ ww lan ε δ᾽, ἃ πλεῖον" 7 yap avola αὐτῶν εκ nos ἔσται πᾶσιν, ὡς καὶ η "5 ld ? , EKELVWV eyeveTo. τὸν νοῦν, and see notes and references. The νοῦς, here the human spirit viewed both in its intellectual and moral as- pects, is represented as corrupted, Delitzsch, Bibl. Psychol. Iv. 15, p. 244; the medium of communication with the Holy Spirit of God is cor- rupted ; the light that is within is be- coming, if not become, darkness, comp. Eph. iv. 17 sq. The difference between the compounds διαῴθ. (1 Tim. ἐ. 6.) and καταφθ. is very slight ; both are intensive, the former pointing perhaps more to the pervasive nature, the latter to the prostrating character of the φθορά. So somewhat similarly Zonaras, καταφθορά, ἣ παντελὴς ἀπώ- Neca” διαφθορὰ δέ, ὅταν ἄλλη οὐσία δι᾽ ἑτέρας ἀφανίζεται, ὥσπερ τὸ σῶμα ὑπὸ σκωλήκων, Lex. p. 1154. ἀδόκιμοι K.t.A.] ‘reprobate concern- ing the faith ; unapproved of (‘un- probehaltig,’ DeW.), and consequently ‘rejectanei’ in the matter of the faith ; the active transl. ‘ nullam probandi facultatem habentes,’ Beng., is plainly opposed both to St. Paul’s and the prevailing use of the word; comp. Rom. i. 28, 1 Cor. ix. 27, 2 Cor. xiii. 5, Tit. i. 16, and see notes on ch. ii. 15, and Fritz. Rom. Vol.1.81. On this use of περί, see notes on 1 Tim. 1. 10, 9. GAN οὐ προκόψ.} “ Notwith- standing they shall not make further advance ; ἀλλὰ with its full adversa- tive force (ubi gravior queedam oppo- sitio inter duo enuntiata intercedit, Klotz, Devar., Vol. 1. p. 3), here contrasts the opposition and its ulti- mate results, and thus introduces a ground for consolation: ‘ fiducia vic- tori Timoth. animat ad certamen,’ Caly. There is, however, no contra- dictory statement to ch. ii. 16, and ili. 13 (De W.) ; all the Apostle says in fact is, that there shall be no real and ultimate advance, κἂν πρότερον ἀν- θήσῃ τὰ τῆς πλάνης, εἰς τέλος οὐ δια- μένει, Chrysost. The gloss of Bengel, ‘non proficient amplius; non ita ut alios seducant; quanquam ipsi et eorum similes proficient in pejus, ver. 13, is obviously insufficient to meet the difficulty ; comp. ch. ii. ver. 17, νόμην ἕξει, and ch. iii. 13, πλανῶντες. The advance is not denied, but the successful advance, i.e. without de- tection and exposure, is denied ; οὐ λήσουσι μέχρι πολλοῦ σχηματιζόμενοι τὴν εὐσέβειαν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι τάχιστα γυμνω- θήσονται, Theodoret, see Est. in loc. ἄνοια]ὔ ‘senselessness,’ ‘wicked folly,’ ‘amentia,’ Beza ; comp. Luke vi. 11, ἐπλήσθησαν ἀνοίας, where the meaning is nearly the same, and is not ‘rage of an insensate kind,’ De W., Alford, in loc.,—as the passage cited by both, Thucyd. 111. 38 (where ἄνοια is opp. to εὖ βουλεύεσθαι), tends to disprove, but, as in the present case, ‘senselessness’ in a moral as well as intellectual point of view, ‘ wicked,’ as well as insensate, folly,’ compare Beck, Bibl. Seelent. 11. 18, p. 51, and see 2 Mace. xiv. 5, esp. xv. 3, and Joseph. Antig. στ. 13. I, where ἄνοια is joined with πονηρία, and ascribed to Ahab. The remark of Coray is very near the truth, τῆς αὐτῆς γενεᾶς καὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ αἵματος εἶναι ἡ κακία καὶ ἡ μωρία. ἔκδηλος] ‘openly manifest,’ ἀδιστάκτως φανερός, Coray; comp. Exod. viii. 18, ix. 11; ἅπ. Ney. in N.T., but found in 140 o TIMOTHY ail: vio. Thou knowest alike my faith and sufferings. Avil men shall increase, but do thou hold fast to the Holy Scriptures, which will make thee wise and perfect. to Σὺ de παρηκολούθησάς μου τῆ διδασκαλίᾳ, τῇ ayoyn, τῆ προθέσει, a , an ἢ rn “ , TH πίστει, TH μακροθυμίᾳ, TH ἀγάπη; 10. παρηκολούθησας] So Tisch. δα. τ, with ACFG (F G ἠκολούθησας); τ7;. (Lachm., Huther, Wiesing., Leo). In his second edition Tisch. adopts παρηκολού- θηκας with DEJ K; appy. nearly all mss.; . . . . Chrys., Theodoret, Dam., al. (Rec., Gfiesb., Scholz). The change does not seem for the better, The external evidence is perhaps slightly in favour of the perfect, but internal evidence seems certainly in favour of the aorist; for in the first place, as παρήκολ. is a noticeable word, it is not very unlikely that a remembrance of the perf. in 1 Tim. iv. 6 might have suggested an alteration in the present verse ; and again, the hortatory tone of the chapter (comp. ver. 5, 14) seems most in harmony with the aorist. The perfect would imply that the conduct of Timothy noticed in ver. 10 sq. was continuing the same (‘argumento utitur ad incitandum Timotheum,’ Calv.) ; the aorist alluding to it as past conveys the latent exhortation to maintain it unchanged during the present. earlier (Hom. 71. v. 2), and of common occurrence in later writers, 3 Macc. iii. 19, Vi. 5, Polyb. ΕΠ 10 GI 12: ἢν iii. 48. 5, al. 10. ἘΠΡΗΚΟ Σου iar) ‘wert a fol. lower of,’ Syr. sh> hed] [venisti post]; i.e. i fallpwedah as a j disciple and thence, though rather too distant from the primary meaning, ‘ hast fully known,’ Auth. Ver. ; ‘see notes on τ Tim. iv. 6, where the meaning of this word is investigated. On the force of the aor., see critical note. In the following words, μου τῇ didack., the pronoun, though not necessarily al- ways so (see Winer, Gr. ὃ 22. 7, Obs. I, p. 229), seems here in emphatic opposition to the subjects of the pre- ceding verse. τῇ ἀγωγῇ] “my manner of life, conduct,’ τῇ διὰ τῶν ἔργων πολιτείᾳ, Theodoret, nearly τὰς ὁδούς μου τὰς ἐν Xp., 1 Cor. iv. 17. The word is an dz. λεγόμ. in N.T.; see Esther ii. 20, οὐ μετήλλαξε τὴν ἀγωγὴν αὑτῆς (‘ vite suze rationem,’ Schleusn.), and comp. 2 Macc. iv. τύ, vi. 8, xi. 24: Sim. Hesych. ἀγωγή᾽" τρόπος, ἀναστροφή; see also Suicer, Thesaur. 8.v. Vol. 1. p. 72. Leo re- ᾿ ἂν γῆς fers ἀγωγὴ to the ‘doctrine ratio,’ followed by the Apostle, referring to Diod. Sic. Hist.1. 52, 92, but both reff. are false. τῇ προθέσει] ‘my purpose, scil., as the following word πίστις seems to hint, of remain- ing true to the Gospel of Christ and the great spiritual objects of his life, ‘ propositum propagandi Evangelii, et credentes semper meliores reddendi,’ Grot. In all other passages in St. Paul's epp., πρόθεσις is used with re- ference to God, Rom. viii. 28, ix. ΤΙ, Eph. i. 21, iii, 11,'2 Tim. i. 9. The peculiar and ecclesiastical meaning is noticed in Suicer, s.v. τῇ πίστει is referred by some com- mentators to ‘ faith’ in its usual ac- ceptation, τῇ ἐν τοῖς δόγμασιν, Theoph. I., on account of the near position of ἀγάπη, by others to ‘trust’ in God, TH μὴ ἀπογιγνώσκειν ποιούσῃ, Ccum., Theoph. 2, so also Usteri, ZLehrb. τι. Ῥ. 240. Perhaps the gloss of Theodoret, ὁποίαν ἔχω περὶ τὸν δεσπό- την διάθεσιν, is the most inclusive and satisfactory. τῇ μακρο- θυμίᾳ] ‘my long-suffering,’ forbearing patience, whether towards sinners generally (Theod.), or the ἀντιδιατι- Ν 2 TIMOTHY - ε an TH ὑπομονῇ. ἊΣ Πη| 6-19. 141 a a = @r τοῖς διωγμοῖς, τοῖς παθήμασιν, οἷα pp At: ᾽ ᾽ ’ Ὁ ᾽ , > , μοι EVEVETO εν Ἀντιοχείᾳ. εν Ikovio, εν Λύστροις, eo ὃ A ε , ‘ > , See ε olous LwWYyKous ὑπήηνεγκα" καὶ εκ παντῶν με ερβρυσατο ο Κύριος. θέμενοι (ch. ii. 25) specially: see notes on Eph. iv. 2, and on the distinction between μακροῦ. (τὸ σχολῇ ἐπιτιθέναι τὴν προσήκουσαν δίκην τῷ πταίοντ᾽) and πραὕτης (τὸ ἀφιέναι παντάπασι), the definitions of Theophyl. on Gal. v. 22, cited by Trench Synon. p. 199. The definition of Zonaras (Lex. p. 1330) is brief, but pithy and sugges- tive ; μακροθυμία, πέψις λύπης. The concluding word ὑπομονὴ marks fur- ther the brave patience in enduring not only contradiction and opposition, buteven injuryand wrong, and leads on naturally to τοῖς διωγμ. K.T.d., ver. 11. On ὑπομ., see notes on ch. 11. 11, Thita ααις 2: 11. τοῖς διωγμ.} ‘my persecutions,’ ‘injurias complectitur quas Judei et ethnici Christianis propter doctrinz Christ. professionem imposuerunt, ut verbera, delationes, vincula, relega- tionem,’ Fritz. Rom. viii. 35, Vol. 11. Pp. 221: οἷά μοι κ.τ.λ.] “such (sufferings) as befel me in Antioch (Acts xiii. 50), a Iconiwm (Acts xiv. 2sq.) ὧν Lystra (Acts xiv. 19) ; on the repetition of παθήματα in transla- tion, see Scholef., Hints, p. 124. It has been doubted why these particular sufferings have been specified. Chry- sost. refers it to the fact of Timothy’s acquaintance with those parts of Asia (‘utpote ex Lystris oriundi,’ Est.) ; this is not at all improbable, especially if we suppose that these sufferings had been early known to Timothy, and had led him to unite himself to the Apostle ; it is, however, perhaps equally likely that it was their severity which suggested the particular men- tion, comp. Acts xiv. 19, νομίσαντες 4 lf A ¢ , " ~ ζω “, 12 καὶ πάντες δὲ οἱ θέλοντες εὐσεβῶς ζῆν ἐν αὐτὸν [Παῦλον] τεθνάναι. οἵους διωγμ.} ‘such persecutions as I endured ; as these (particularly at Lystra) were especially διωγμοί, not merely general παθήματα, but sharp and active inflictions, by stoning, &c., St. Paul repeats the word, joining it emphatically with οἷος to still more specify the peculiar cases which he is mentioning as examples, It is scarcely necessary to refute Heydenr., Mack, who regard the clause as an exclama- tion, nor is there any occasion for supplying ‘thou hast seen’ what &c., Conyb. and Howson, which in fact vitiates the construction. καὶ ἐκ πάντων] ‘and out of all; ἀμφότερα παρακλήσεως, ὅτι Kal ἔγω προθυμίαν παρειχόμην γενναίαν, καὶ οὐκ ἐγκατελείφθην, Chrys. : this is no ‘Hebraica constructio pro ex quibus omnibus, Grot.; καί, with its usual ascensive force, gives the opposition, involved in the clause which it intro- duces, a distinct prominence, ‘my persecutions were great, and yet God delivered me out of all; compare Eurip. Herc. Fur. 508, ὁρᾶτέ με ὅσπερ ἣν περίβλεπτος. . . . καὶ μ᾽ ἀφείλεθ ἡ τύχη, see Palm τι. Rost, Lex. s.v. i. 1.c, Vol. 1. p. 1540, and further exx. in Hartung, Partik. καί, 5. 6, Vol. I. p. 148. 12. Kal πάντες δέ] ‘and all too,’ or sufficiently approximately, ‘yea and all,’ Auth. Ver.; see esp. notes on τ Tim. iii. 10, where this construc- tion is investigated. De Wette is here slightly incorrect on two points ; first, “et omnes autem,’ Beng., is a trans- lation of καὶ---δὲ which need not be rejected, see Hand, TZwrsell., Vol. τ. 142 eSTIMOTHY “UR. δ. 45: Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ διωχθήσονται. 138 ΙΠονηροὶ δὲ ἄνθρωποι ‘ Is , DLS \ a A 4 Kal γοητες προκόψουσιν CTL ATO: XELPOVs πλανῶντες και p. 584; secondly, καὶ δὲ (even sup- | ver. 1 of that noble chapter, Ec- posing τ Tim. iii. ro be not taken into | clus. ii. account) occurs elsewhere in St. Paul’s 13. πονηροὶ δὲ dvOp.] ‘ But evil epp.; viz., Rom. xi. 23. The verse | men,’ immediate contrast with oi θέλ. involves a“perfectly general declara- tion (Calv.), and seems intended in- directly to prepare Timothy for en- countering persecutions, and may be paraphrased, ‘but such persecutions are not confined to me or to a few; they will extend even to all, and con- sequently to thee among the number;’ comp. Lucke on 1 John i. 3. ot θέλοντες) ‘whose will is to, &e.; ‘computa igitur an velis,’ Beng.: the verb θέλ. is not pleonastic, but points to those whose will is enlisted in the matter, and who really have some de- sires to lead a godly life; see Winer, Gram. ὃ 64. τ. 4, p. 698. The Vulg. by altering the order of Ital., appy. desires to mark the connexion of this participle with εὐσεβῶς, ‘qui pie volunt vivere;’ it need scarcely be said the adv. belongs to ζῆν, comp. Tit. ii. 12. On the meaning of εὐσεβῶς, compare notes on 1 Tim. ii. 2. ἐν Χρ. Ἴησ.} ‘in Christ Jesus,’ in fel- lowship, in union with Him ; ‘modum exponit sine quo non contingit pie vivere,’ Est. ; ‘extra Christum Jesum nulla pietas,’ Beng.: compare notes on Gal. ii. 17, Eph. ii. 6. 7, and else- where. διωχθήσονται] St. Paul is here only reiterating the words of his Master, εἰ ἐμὲ ἐδίωξαν καὶ ὑμᾶς διώξουσιν, John xv.20; comp. Matth. x. 22, 1 Thess. iii, outward persecutions which the Apostles and their followers were to undergo ; it may be extended, how- ever, in a practical point of view to all true Christians; comp. August. Epist. 145, de Civit. xvi. 51, and 3, &e. This declaration clearly refers to the evo. ζῆν ; the subject of the verse, how- ever, reverts to ver. 10 sq., and, as ver. 14 seems to hint, to the con- trast between Timothy and the false teachers. The latter are included in the general and anarthrous πονηροὶ dvOp.; evil men, and, consequently, they among the number. γόητες] ‘deceivers, Goth. “ liutai’ [deceivers,—cogn. with Angl. Sax. lytig]; sim. though slightly less ex- act, Syr., fassfidco [seducentes]. 4 The καὶ appends to the general πονηροί, apparently somewhat epexegetically, a more specific and definite appellation, comp. Fritz. on Mark, i. 5, p. 11. Téns (derived from yodw) has properly +reference to incantations by howling ; εἴρηται ἀπὸ τῶν γόων τῶν περὶ Tadpous γινομένων, Suidas s.v. (comp. Soph. Ajax 582, Herod. Hist. vu. τοι): thence to the practice of magic arts ’ generally, γόης καὶ φαρμακεύς, Plato, Symp. 203 D, and thence by a very natural transition to deception and imposture generally, appy. the pre- vailing meaning; Ztymol. M. γόης, ψεύστης, ἀπατεών, Pollux, Onom. Iv. 6, γόης, ἀπατεών, similarly Timeus, Lex. Plat. s.v.; comp. Demosth. de Fals. Leg., 374, ἄπιστος, γόης, πονηρός, Joseph. contr. Ap. 11. 16, οὐ γόης οὐδ᾽ ἀπατεών. ‘This general meaning then (opp. to Huther) seems fully substan- tiated. | We cannot indeed definitely infer from this term that magic arts were actually used by these deceivers, but there is certainly nothing in such ~ a supposition inconsistent either with the context, the primary meaning of 2A MOTO Y ὙΠ re γε, 148 , A A ’ 9 e » δ ν ’ πλανώμενοι. 14 Σὺ δὲ μένε ἐν οἷς ἔμαθες καὶ ἐπιστώθης, εἰδὼς παρὰ τίνος ἔμαθες, 18 καὶ ὅτι ἀπὸ βρέφους τὰ 14. παρὰ τίνος]. It seems best on the whole to retain the reading of Tisch, τίνος C***D EJ K; nearly all mss.;..... Vulg. Goth. Copt. Syr. (both) ..... Chrys. Theod. al. (Mill, Griesb., Scholz, Wiesing.). "The reading τίνων adopted by Lachm. is well supported—viz., by A C*¥FG; 17. 71 (Matthies, Huther) ; as however the evidence of the Vss. seems to counterbalance the possible preponderance of uncial authority for the latter reading,—as the plural has somewhat the appearance of an ‘ explicatio’ (Mill, Prolegom. p. LXxv) by referring appy. to Lois and Eunice, ch. 1. 5, as the singular gives an excellent sense, and by its union with ἀπὸ Bped. k.7.X. points to the two sources of Timothy’s instruction, St. Paul, who taught him the Gospel, and his relatives who had previously taught him the Old Testament,—there seems sufficient reason for Tisch’s alteration of the reading of his first edition. the word, or the description of similar | opponents mentioned elsewhere in the N.T.; see notes on ver. 8. In the | eccl. writers γόης and γοητεία are fre- quently (perhaps commonly) used in this primary and more limited sense of the word, see Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. Vol. I. p. 776. προκό- ourw κ. τ. Δ.7 ‘will make advance toward the worse: ἐπὶ points to the χεῖρον as the degree to which the wickedness was, as it were, advancing | and ascending; compare Winer, Gr. 53.1, p. 485. The προκοπὴ is here considered rather as intensive, in verse g rather as extensive. On the appa- rent contradiction in the two verses, see notes i loc. πλανῶντες καὶ πλ.] ‘deceiving and being de- ceived ;’ certainly not middle, ‘letting themselves be deceived,’ Beng., but passive, It is the true προκοπὴ ἐπὶ τὸ χεῖρον; they begin by deceiving others, and end in being deceived themselves. Deceit, as De Wette re- marks, is never without self- deceit. 14. σὺ δὲ κ, τ. λ.7 “ But do thow abide, &c.; σὺ in sharp contrast to the ‘ deceivers’ of the foregoing verse ; μένε in antithesis to πρόκοπτε. In the following words the relative ἃ taken out of ἐν οἷς (-- ἐν ἐκείνοις ἃ), must be supplied, not only to ἔμαθες | ἐπιστ. ; but ἐπιστώθης, which governing an accus. in the active (Thucyd. tv. 88), can also in the passive have an accus. appended to it according to the usual rule, Winer, Gram. § 32. 5, p. 26r. Bretschneider (Lex. s.v. πιστ.), and perhaps Syr., connect ἐν οἷς with this can be justified, see | Psalm Ixxvii. 37, but involves a less | satisfactory meaning of the verb. ἐπιστώθης] ‘wert assured of,’ ampli- fication of ἔμαθες ; not ‘credita sunt tibi,’ Ital., Vulg., Goth. (‘gatrauaida,’ a hint perhaps of the occasional Latin- izing of this Vers.), which would re- quire ἐπιστεύθης, but ‘quorum firma fides tibi facta est,’ Fuller, ap. Pol. Syn. ; μετὰ πληροφορίας ἔμαθες, Theo- phyl. ; comp. Luke i. 4, ὧν τὴν ἀσφάλειαν ἐπέγνως. Πιστοῦν is pro- perly ‘to make πιστός, 1 Kings i. 36, πιστώσαι ὁ Θεὸς τὸ ῥῆμα, thence in the pass. ‘stabiliri,’ ‘confirmari,’ 2 Sam. vii. 16, πιστωθήσεται ὁ οἶκος αὐτοῦ, comp. Psalm Ixxvii. 14, and with an accus. objecti ‘plene cer- tiorari,’ Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. Vol. τι. P- 744, where this meaning of the verb is well explained and illustrated. εἰδώς] ‘knowing as thow dost,’ comp. ch. ii. 23. On παρὰ τίνος, see critical note. 15. καὶ ὅτι κ. τ. Δ. does not seem parallel to and coordinate with εἰδὼς 144 2 TIMOTHY) Snir 5. e ‘ , io Ν δ , ’ i? ’ , leona γραμματα OLOaS τὰ Οουνᾶάμενα σε σοφίσαι εἰς TWTHPLAVs Kir Nes) CACIEDS aie vs, α et quia nosti,’ Vulg., Beng.,—é7c having the mean- ing ‘because,’ and the participial con- struction per ‘orationem variatam’ (comp, Winer, Gr. § 64. 111. p. 626), passing the indicative, —but rather simply dependent upon εἰδώς, the particle ὅτε retaining its more into ‘usual meaning ‘ that,’ and the direct ‘sentence presenting a second fact which Timothy was to take into con- sideration: δύο αἰτίας λέγει τοῦ δεῖν αὐτὸν ἀπερίτρεπτον μένειν, ὅτι τε οὐ παρὰ τοῦ τύχοντος ἔμαθες ὶ ὅτι οὐ χθὲς καὶ πρώην ἔμαθες, Theoph. Both constructions are, grammatically considered, equally possible, but the latter seems most satisfactory: the former is well-defended by Hofmann, Schriftb. Vol. I. p. 572. ἀπὸ βρέφους] ‘from a very child,’ ‘from infancy ; ἐκ πρώτης ἡλικίας, Chrys. The expression is perhaps used rather than παιδιόθεν, Mark ix. 21 (Rec.; Tisch. ἐκ παιδιόθ.), to mark still more definitely the very early age at which Timothy’s instruction in the Holy Scripture commenced ; comp. ch. i. 5. Βρέφος in two instances in the N. T.- (Luke i. 41, 44) has its primary meaning, ἔμβρυον, Hesych., in all others (Luke ii. 12, 16, xviii. 15, Acts vii. 19, 1 Pet. ii. 2, ἀρτιγέν- νητα Bp.) it points to a very early and tender age. This remark is of some little importance in reference to Luke Xvili. 15, where the ascensive or rather descensive force of καὶ is not to be overlooked. τὰ ἱερὰ γράμμ.7 ‘the sacred writings,” i.e. of the Old Test., or possibly more lexi- cally exact, ‘sacras literas,’ Vulg.: ‘the principles of scriptural learning’ (surely not Jetters, in the ordinary educational sense, Hervey, Serm. on Insp. p. 11), comp. John vii. 15, Acts ὃ. 5 et el, fe xxvi. 24, and see Meyer on both pas- sages. It is doubtful, however, whether this latter meaning is here suitable to the context, and whether. γράμματα does not simply mean ‘writings’ (see Suicer, Thesawr. 5. v. Vol. 1. p. 780), with perhaps the as-, sociated idea, which seems always to have marked this usage of the word in good Greek, of being expressed in solemn or formal language ; see esp. Plato, Legg. 1x. 858 E, where it is in contrast with συγγράμματα, and ib. Gorg. 484 A, where comp. Stalbaum’s note. Thus then the statement in Etym. M., γράμματα παλαιοὶ τὰ συγγράμματα, will require modification. The expression is an ἅπαξ λεγόμ. in N. T., but comp. Joseph. Antig. Pref. ὃ 3, τῶν ἱερῶν γραμμάτων, and the numerous exx. in Wetstein in loc. The usual terms are ἡ γραφή, αἱ γραφαί, once γραφαί ἅγιαι, Rom. i. 2; see below. ἐκαλοῦν οἱ τὰ δυνάμενα] ‘which are able, ποῦ ‘que poterant,’ Beng. is used conformably with the virtual | The present — present oidas, to denote the perma- | nent, enduring, property of the Holy Scriptures. σοφίσαι] “ἐο΄ make wise ;) comp. Psalm xviii. 8, σοφίζουσα νήπια ; civ. 22, τοὺς πρεσ- βυτέρους σοφίσαι, and with an acc. rei, cxviil. 98. This meaning must be - retained without any dilution ; σοφίζω is not merely equivalent to διδάσκω, but marks the true wisdom which the Ὁ Holy Scriptures impart. The two | prepositional clauses which follow, further specify the object contem- plated in the σοφίσαι, and the limita- tion under which alone that object could be attained. els σωτηρίαν must be joined immediately with σοφίσαι, pointing out the direc- tion and destination of the wisdom, ) ᾿ : oF TIMOTHY) ΠΕ ἘΣ: τό. διὰ πίστεως τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. the object at which it aimed; ἡ ἔξω γνῶσις σοφίζει τὸν ἄνθρωπον els ἀπάτην καὶ σοφίσματα καὶ λογομαχίας .. ἀλλὰ αὐτὴ [ἡ θεία γνῶσις) σοφίζει εἰς σωτηρίαν, Theophyl. διὰ πίστ. τῆς K.T.A.] ‘per fidem, eamque in Ohristo Jesu collocatam; 566 notes on 1 Tim. iii. 132. This clause cannot be joined with σωτηρίαν (Heydenr.), as the article in such a ease could not be dispensed with before διά ; comp. notes on Eph. i. 15, where the only cases in which such an omission can take place are recounted. Theclause obviously limits the previous assertion ; ‘those Scriptures he [the Apostle] granteth were able to make him wise to salvation, but he addeth through the faith which is in Christ,’ Hooker, Eccl. Pol. τ. 14. 4 (quoted by Bloomf. and Peile). In the same section the difference between the two Testaments is thus stated with admi- rable perspicuity ; ‘the Old did make wise by teaching salvation through Christ that should come, the New by teaching that Christ is come.’ On πίστις ev Xp. see notes on 1 Tim. i. 16. 16. πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπν. ‘ Zvery Scripture inspired by God is also useful, d&c.; so Origen expressly, πᾶσα yp., θεόπν. οὖσα, ὠφέλ. ἐστίν, Hom. Xx. Jos. Vol. ΧΙ. p. 169 (ed. Lomm.) Syr. [both however omit καί], Hammond, and the Vv. of Tynd. and Cranmer. In this important and much contested passage we must notice briefly (a) the construction, (b) the force and meaning of the separate words. It may be first remarked that the reading is not perfectly cer- tain: καὶ is omitted in some Vy. (Vulg., Copt., Syr., Arr.) and Ff., but it seems highly probable that this is due rather to non-observance of 145 16 πᾶσα γραφὴ the true ascensive force of the par- ticle than to any real absence in the original MSS. With regard then to (2) construction, it is very difficult to decide whether (a) θεόπν. is a part of the predicate, καὶ being the simple copula (Auth. Ver., al.) ; or whether (8) it is a part of the subject, καὶ being ascen- sive, and ἐστι being supplied after ὠφέλιμος (as Syr. Philox., Ital., al.). Lexicography and grammar contri- bute but little towards a decision : for on the one hand, as γραφὴ here appy. does mean Scripture (see below), the connexion by means of καὶ copula- tivum is at first sight both simple and perspicuous (see Middleton, in loc.) ; on the other hand, the epithet thus associated with πᾶς and an anarthrous subst., is in a position perfectly usual and regular (e.g. 2 Cor. ix. 8, Eph. i. 3, 1 Thess. v. 22, r Tim. vy. 10, mein, 1 ΤῸ ΤΠ ΤΣ iv. 18: ΠῚ ἢ 16, iii. 1, comp. iii. 2, al.), and in that appy. always assigned to it by St. Paul: contrast James iii. 16, 1 Pet. ii. 13, where the change of position is appy. to mark the em- phasis, see Winer, Gr. § 35. 4, p. 275. Weare thus remanded wholly to the context: and here when we observe (1), on the negative side, the absence of everything in the preceding verses calculated to evoke such a statement,—the θεοπνευστία of Scrip- ture had not been denied even byimpli- cation, comp. Huther ; (2) that if καὶ be copulative, it would seem to asso- ciate two predications, one relating to the essential character of Scripture, the other to its practical applicabilities, which appear scarcely homogeneous ; and (3), on the positive side, that the terms of ver. 16 seem in studied and illustrative parallelism to those in ver. 15, γραφὴ being more specific than L 140 2 TIMOTHY ΠῚ: 16. θεόπνευστος καὶ ὠφέλιμος πρὸς διδασκαλίαν, πρὸς ἔλεγχον, γράμματα, θεόπν. than ἱερός (see Tittm. Synon. I. p. 26), and καὶ ὠφελ. k.T.\., Showing the special aspects of the more general τὰ δυν. ce σοφίσαι, and with καὶ ascensive detailing, what σοφίσαι might have been thought to fail to convey, the various practical applications of Scripture. When (4) we add that Chrysost.,—whose asser- tion πᾶσα οὖν ἡ [see below], would really be pointless if the declaration in the text were explicit, and not, as it is, amplicit— Theodoret (ἐπειδὴ κ. τ.λ., Kal τὴν ἐξ αὐτῶν ὠφέλειαν διδάσκει), and cer- tainly the great majority of Vv., viz., Syr. (both), Ital., Vulg., Goth., Arab., Copt.; appy. Auth., and Slav. (22), all adopt construction (8), we | have an amount of external evidence, ' which coupled with the internal | evidence, it seems impossible to resist. We decide, therefore, not without some confidence, in favour of (8); so Huth., Wiesing., but not De Wette. We now notice (0), some individual expressions. _ πᾶσα γραφή] ‘every Scripture,’ not ‘tota Scriptura,’ Beza, Auth. Ver.,—a needless de- parture from the regular rules of grammar. Hofmann (Schriftb. Vol. I. p. 572) and others~ (Hervey, al.) still defend this inexact translation, adducing Eph. ii. 21 ; but it may be observed, that in Eph. /.c. there are strong reasons for a deviation from the correct transl. which do not apply to the present case ; see notes im loc, Here πᾶσα yp.; implies every indivi- dual γραφὴ of those previously alluded toin theterm ἱερὰ γρ.; πᾶσα, rola; περὶ "ἧς εἶπον, φησί, πᾶσα ἱερά. ... οὖν ἡ τοιαύτη θεόπνευστος Chrys., see (thus far) Middleton, Greek Art. p. 302, ed. Rose, comp. also Winer, G7. § τῇ. τὸν 6, p. 131. γραφὴ τοιάυτη θεόπνευστος πᾶσα has by some interpreters been trans- lated ‘ writing ; so appy. the τινες noticed by Theoph., and perhaps Theodoret, τῷ διορισμῷ χρησάμενος ἀπέκρινε τὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης σοφίας συγγράμματα. This, however, owing to the perpetual m meaning of γραφὴ: in p the N.T., seems very doubtful. It may be observed, indeed, that with the exception of this and four other pas- | sages (John xix. 37, Rom. i. 2, xvi. 26, 2 Pet. i. 20), γραφὴ or γραφαὶ always has the article, so that its absence might warrant the translation. As, however, in John xix. 37, γραφὴ clearly involves its technical meaning, ‘another passage of Scriptae,’ and as the context requires the same in 2 Pet. ἢ. ὁ. (comp. Huth.), so here and in Rom. ll. cc. there is no reason te depart from the current qualitative interpretation, especially as the as- sociated epithets, and here moreover the preceding ἱερὰ ypdup., show that that special meaning was indisputably intended by the inspired writer. θεόπνευστος is a passive verbal, see ‘Winer, Gr. ὃ 16. 3, p. 108 5 it simply denotes ‘inspired by God’ (comp. Phoceyl. 121, θέόπνευστος σοφίη, Plu- tarch, Mor. p. 9004 F, τοὺς ὀνείρους τοὺς θεοπνεύστους, comp. θεόπνοος, Porphyr. de Antr. Nymph. p. 116), and only states what is more definitely = pressed by Syr. «ΞΔ52] Ἰώο 5; [quod a Spiritu με τ τς a) and still more by 2 Pet. i. 21, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὸ πνεύ- ματος ἁγίου φερόμενοι ἐλάλησαν ἀπὸ Θεοῦ ἄνθρωποι. Thus, then, without overstepping the proper limits of this commentary, it may be said, that while this pregnant and inclusive epi- thet yields no support to any artificial theories whether of a ‘dynamical’ ora ‘mechanical’ inspiration, it certainly Ν ' | | ΠΟΥ ΤΣ γό, 7. 5 , A ὃ , A 5 ὃ ’ προς ἐπανόρθωσιν, προς TALOELAY τῆν EV tKALOOUVN, seems fairly to imply (comp. Chrys., —in the other translation it would enunciate) this vital truth, that every separate portion of the Holy Book is ᾿ inspired, and forms a living portion of a living and organic whole ; see (thus far) Hofmann, Schriftb. Vol. τ. p. 572, Reuss, Theol. Chret. iii. 3, Vol. 1. p. 297. While, on the one hand, this expression does not exclude such verbal errors, or, possibly, such trifling historical inaccuracies as man’s spirit, even in its most exalted state, may ‘not be wholly exempt from (comp. Delitzsch, Bibl. Psychol. v. 5, p. 319), and human transmission and trans- criptions may have increased, it still does certainly assure us, on the other, that these writings, as we have them, are individually pervaded by God's Spirit, and warrants our belief that they are τὰς ἀληθεῖς [ῥήσεις] Πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου, Clem. Rom. τ. 45, and our assertion of the full Inspiration of the Bible ; comp. Pref. to Galatians, p. πρὸς διδασκαλίαν refers, as De Wette observes, to the theoretical or rather doctrinal appli- cation of the Holy Scriptures; the concluding expressions refer rather to their practical uses; see Beveridge, Serm. 60, Vol. mr. p. 150 (Angl. Cath. Libr.). Beza refers the two former ‘ad dogmata,’ the two latter ‘ad mores,’ but πρὸς ἐλεγμ. seems certainly to belong more to the latter, comp. ch. iv. 2, 1 Tim. v. 20, Tit. ii. nibh πρὸς ἔλεγχον] ‘for reproof, confutation,’ ἐλέγξαι τὰ ψευδῆ, Chrys., or better more gene- rally, ἡμῶν τὸν παράνομον βίον, Theo- doret; comp. Eph. ν. 11. The read- ing ἐλεγμὸν (Lachm. with ACFG ; 4 mss.) deserves consideration; it oc- curs several times in the LXX, e. g. Lev. xix. 17, Numbers v. 18, 2 Kings viii. 147 17 ta xix. 3 al.: the weight of external authority seems, however, in favour of the text. ἐπανόρθωσιν] “ cor- δρλ rection,’ Syr. I ο ἡ [directionem, emendationem]; παρακαλεῖ τοὺς παρα- τραπέντας ἐπανελθεῖν εἰς τὴν εὐθεῖαν ὅδον, Theodoret. This word is an dr. λεγόμ. in N.T., but sufficiently common elsewhere, e.g. Philo, quod Deus Imm. ὃ 37, Vol. I. p. 299, ἐπανόρθωσις τοῦ βιοῦ, Arvian, Epict. II. 16, ἐπὶ παιδείᾳ καὶ ἐπανορθώσει τοῦ βιοῦ, Polyb. Hist. 1. 35, 1, ἐπανόρ- θωσις τοῦ τῶν ἀνθρώπων βίου, comp. also 111. 7. 4, V. 88. 3, ΧΧΎΙΙ. 6. 12 al. The prep. ἐπὶ is not. directive but on epee ὃ tensive, implying restoration to a ee κω previous and better state, Plato, Republ. x. 604 D, ἐπανορθοῦν τὸ πεσόν τε καὶ νοσῆσαν ; see Palm τι. Rost, | Lex. ἘΝ αν, ¢. 5, Vok 1 p- 1046. The distinction between ἐλεγμ. and ἐπαν. is thus not incor- rectly stated by Grot., “ἐλέγχονται inverecundi, ἐπανορθοῦνται teneri, fra- giles.’ παιδείαν k.T..] ‘discipline which is m righteousness ; not exactly ‘que veram perfectamque justitiam affert,’ Just., comp. Theoph., but which has its proper sphere of action in righte- ousness, —in that which is conformable to the law of God. Conyb. and Hows., in translating the clause ‘righteous discipline,’ seem to regard ἐν merely equiv. to the ‘Beth es- sentiz ;’ this appears wholly untena- ble; comp. Winer, Gr. ὃ 47. 3, p. 420. On the proper meaning of παιδεία (‘disciplinary instruction,’ a meaning which Theodoret al., here un- necessarily obscure), see notes on Eph. vi. 4; and on δικαιοσύνη, see notes on I Tim. vi. τι. Thus to state the uses of Holy Scripture in the briefest way; Ei 2 148 a ἄρτιος ἣ ἐξηρτισμένος. I solemnly charge thee to be active and urgent, for evil teachers will abound. Discharge thy 2 TIMOTHY ΠΡ: EVE a: ε A a \ nit ts s ny ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἄνθρωπος, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ΤΥ. Διαμαρτύρομαι ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ τοῦ μέλλοντος κρίνειν ministry: mine is well nigh done, and my reward is ready. it διδάσκει the ignorant, ἐλέγχει the evil and prejudiced, ἐπανορθοῖ the fallen and erring, and παιδεύει ἐν dix. all men, esp. those that need bringing to fuller measures of per- fection. 17. ὃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦ Θεοῦ] The very general reference of the context seems to show clearly that here at least this is certainly not an official designation, ‘the servant of God,’ ‘the evangelist’ (Beng., De Wette), but, the Christian generally, ‘qui se Deo penitusdevovit, Just.; see Philo, de Nom. Mut. § 3, Vol. 1. p. 583, where ἄνθρ. Θεοῦ is used in a similar extended reference, and comp. notes on 1 Tim. vi. It. ἄρτιος] ‘complete,’ in all parts and proportions (‘in quo nihil mutilum,’ Galv.); ex- plained more fully by ἐξηρτισμένος, an dm. λεγόμ. in N.T.: comp. Greg. Nyss. in Eccl. v. Vol. 1. p. 432, ἄρτιος πάντως ἐκεῖνός ἐστι, ᾧ τελείως ὁ τῆς φύσεως συμπεπλήρωται λόγος: thus ἄρτιος is opposed to χωλὸς and κολο- Bés, comp. Lucian, Sacrif. ὃ 6, where he speaks of Vulcan as οὐκ ἄρτιος τῷ πόδε, and see Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. Vol. 1. 515. It is not easy to state positively the distinction between τέλειος and ἄρτιος, as in practice both seen nearly to interchange meanings, comp. e.g. Philo, de Plant. Noe, § 29, Vol. I. p. 348, ἄρτιον καὶ ὁλόκληρον with James i. 4, τέλειοι Kal ὁλόκληροι ; as a general rule ἄρτιος seems to point to perfection in regard of the adaptation of parts (‘quisuam retinet compagem, ’ \. Just.) and the special aptitude for any | given uses; τέλειος, like ‘ perfectus’ (comp. Doederl. Synon. Vol. Iv. 366), seems to imply amore general and abso- lute perfection ; comp. Matth. v. 48. πρὸς πᾶν K.T.A.] ‘fully made ready for, furnished for, every good work ; ἐξαρτ. (πληροῖ, τελειοῖ, Hesych.) is a δὶς λεγόμ. in N. T. here and Acts xxi. 5, where, however, it is used some- what differently, in reference appy. to the completion of a period of time ; see Meyer im loc. It occurs in its present sense, Joseph. II. 2. 2, καλῶς ἐξηρτισμένους, comp. Lucian, Ver. Hist. τ. 33, τἄλλα ἐξήρτιστο. The compound καταρτίζω is of frequent occurrence. In accordance with the view taken of ὁ ἄνθρ. τ. Θεοῦ, the words πᾶν ἔργ. dy. must obviously be referred, not specially to the ἔργον εὐαγγελιστοῦ, ch. iv. 5 (De Wette), but to any good works generally ; so Huth., Wiesing., and Leo. Cap. IV. 1. διαμαρτύρομαι] “7 solemnly charge thee; see notes on Tim. v.21. The words οὖν ἐγώ, in- serted after d.au.in Rec. (with D*K ;— Syr. (Philox.), Theod. omit ἐγώ, others οὖν), are rightly rejected by Griesb., Tisch., Lachm., as ‘injecta ob cohzren- tiam,’ Mill, Prolegom. p. cxxix. The insertion of τοῦ Kup. before Xp. “Inc. [1. X. Rec.], is similarly_untenable. τοῦ μέλλοντος K.T.A.] ‘who shall hereafter judge the quick and dead ? clearly those alive at His coming and the dead, Chrys. 2 (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52, t Thess. iv. 16, 17), not ‘the spiritually alive and dead,’ ἁμαρ- τώλους λέγει καὶ δικαίους, Chrys. τ: Peile. The mention of the solemn 3 EEMOTERY ἘΠ :1}0. 149 “ Si A A A 9 , ’ A A \ ζῶντας και veKpous και τὴν ἐπιφανειαν QUTOU και Τὴν βασι- , " a λείαν αὐτοῦ, 2 account which a// must render is not without emphasis in its application to Timothy; he had a weighty office in- trusted to him, and of that His Lord εὐθύνας ἀπαιτήσει (Chrys.). καὶ τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν] ‘and (I solemnly charge thee) by His manifestation,’ ‘per adventum ejus,’ Vulg. The reading of the Rec. κατὰ [D***EJK ; Goth. Syr. (both); Theod. al.] is here rightly rejected by Griesb., Lachm., Tisch., with ACD*FG ; 17. 67**Am. Harl. al., for the less easy καί. The most natural construction seems to be the connexion of τὴν ἐπιῴ. with διαμαρτ. as the usual accus. in adju- ration, Mark v. 7, Acts xix. 13, 1 Thess. v.27. As the foregoing ἐνώπιον could not be joined with ἐπιῴ. x.7.X. the nouns naturally pass into the accusative; so Vulg., ‘per adventum ejus, comp. 1 Cor.xv. 31. De Wette regards τὴν ἐπιῴ. as the accus. objecti, 6.5. Deut. iv. 26, dau. ὑμῖν τόν τεοὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν ; this seems undesirable, as it involves a change of meaning of the verb in the two clauses. καὶ tiv Bao. αὐτοῦῇ ‘and by His kingdom ; no ὃν διὰ δυοῖν, ‘ the revela- tion of His kingdom,’ Syr., Beng., nor an expression practically equivalent to τὴν ἐπιφ. avr. (Calv.), but introductory of a second subject of thought,—‘ and by His kingdom’ (observe the rhe- torical repetition of αὐτοῦ), that king- dom (regnum glorice) which succeeding the ‘modificated eternity’ of His me- diatorial kingdom (regnum gratic) is to commence at His ἐπιφάν., and to know neither end nor modification ; see Pearson, Creed, Art. vi. Vol. 1. p- 335 (ed. Burt.). 2. κήρυξον] ‘Notanda est dili- genter illatio, qué apte Scripturam (ch. iii. 16) cum predicatione con- , aN , 3 , ° , κήρυξον τὸν λόγον, ἐπίστηθι εὐκαίρως nectit,’ Calv. The solemn charge is not succeeded asin 1 Tim. ν. 21 by iva with the subj., nor by the inf. as in 2 Tim. ii. 14, but with unconnected yet emphatic aorfsts; compare the very similar ἘΠΕ in 1 Thess. v. 14; examples of such asyndeta are, as might be expected, not uncommon ina style so forcible and sententious as that of St. Paul; see the list in Winer, Gr. ὃ 66. Iv. p. 682. The aor. is here used rather than the present, as in 1 Thess. l.c., being more suitable to the vivid nature of the address ; see Winer, Gr. ὃ 44. 6, p- 367. The distinction in the N. T. between the imper. aor. and pres. can usually be satisfactorily explained, but it must not be forgotten that even in classical authors the change of tense seems often due to the ‘lubitus aut affectus loquentis,’ see Schee- mann, Jseus, p. 235. ἐπίστηθι) ‘be attentive,’ ‘be ready,’ a Υ » }Zafsaua> yoaoo [et sta in Oo x diligentii] Syr. This, on the whole, seems the simplest translation of ἐπιστῆναι: while it scarcely amounts quite to ‘instare,’ Vulg., it is cer- tainly stronger than ἐπίμενε, τ Tim. iv. 16, and appears to mark an atti- tude of prompt attention that may at any moment pass into action; comp. Demosth. Phil. τι. 70 (cited by De W.), ἐγρήγορεν, ἐφέστηκεν, Polyb. Hist. τ. 83. 2, ἐπιστὰς δὲ---μεγάλην ἐποιεῖτο σπουδήν. It naturally points to the preceding κήρυξον (comp. Theod.), which it slightly strengthens and ex- pands; ‘preach the word, and be alive to the importance of the duty, ever ready to perform it, in season and out of season ;’ so, in effect, Theophyl. μετὰ ἐπιμονῆς καὶ ἐπιστασίας λάλησον, 150 2 TIMOTHY! ¥¥:! 5. 5 lA 3, 9 , , 3, Ψ' ἀκαίρως, ἔλεγξον, ἐπιτίμησον, παρακάλεσον, ἐν TATH μακρο- except that the action, rather than the readiness to action, is made somewhat too prominent. De Wette and Huth. (after Bretschn. Lew.) retain the semi- local use ‘accede ad ccetus Chris- tianos,’ a meaning lexically tenable (see exx. in Schweigh. Lex. Polyb. 5.0. p. 211), but involving an ellipsis which St. Paul would hardly have made, when ἀδελφοῖς κ.τ.λ. could so easily have been supplied: see Leo in loc. εὐκαίρως ἀκαίρως} ‘in season, out of season ;᾿ an oxymoron, made still more emphatic by the omission of the copula ; comp. ‘nolens volens, ultro cito,’ &c., Winer, Gr. § 66. Iv. p. 683. De Wette cites, as from Wetst. Nicetas Choniat. (a Byzantine historian), evcalpws ἀκαίρως ἐπιπλήττειν, but the’ citation is due to Bengel. The Greek commentators principally refer the τοῖς εὐκαιρία and ἀκαιρία to Timothy; μὴ καιρὸν ἔχε ὡρισμένον, ἀεὶ σοὶ καιρὸς ἔστω, Chry- sost.: Calv., Beng., and others to both Timothy and his hearers. The context seems to show that the latter (comp. ver. 3) are principally, if “not entirely, in the Apostle’s thoughts, and that the adverbs will be referred most naturally alone to them; comp. August. Psalm cxxviii., *sonet ver- bum Dei volentibus opportune, holen- tibus importune.’ ἔλεγξον] ‘reprove,’ ‘ convict them of their want of holiness and truth ; comp. ch. iii. 16, πρὸς ἐλεγμόν : the stronger term, ἐπιτίμησον (Jude 9), ‘rebuke as blame- worthy,’ suitably follows. There is some parallelism between the verbs here and the nouns ch. iii. 16, but it. is not by any means exact ; ἐπιτίμησον cannot tally with ἐπανόρθωσις, nor in- deed παρακαλ. with παιδεία (Leo), if the usual orce of the latter word be ‘retained. The change of order in FG al.; Vulg. It. Copt. Goth. al., ἔλεγξ. ἐπιτ. seems due to a desire to preserve a kind of climax. ἐν πάσῃ K.T.A.] ‘in all long-suffering and teaching,’ ‘in every exhibition of long-suffering and every method of παρακ., teaching ; clause appended ποῦ merely to παρακάλ. (Huth.), but as in Zachm., Tisch. (so also Chrys.), to the three preceding verbs, to each one of which, especially the first (Chrys., Calv.), it prescribes suitable restrictions. The extensive rather than the intensive (Chrys. ἢ force of πᾶς may be clearly seen in this combination; it gives both abstract nouns, esp. the former, a concrete application, see notes on Eph. i. 8. There is thus no reason for sup- posing an ὃν διὰ δυοῖν (Grot.), or for tampering with the normal meaning of διδαχή, scil. ‘teaching,’ not ‘studium docendi,’ Heinr., Flatt, ‘readiness to teach,’ Peile. It may be remarked that διδαχὴ is only used twice in the Past. epp., here and Tit. i. 9, while διδασκαλία occurs no less than fifteen times. Asa very general rule, διδαχὴ (teaching) seems to point more to the act, διδασκαλία (doctrine) more to the substance or result of teaching, comp. e.g. Thucyd. Iv., 126, where διδαχὴ is joined with a verbal in --σις, παρακέ- λευσις. This distinction, however, cannot be pressed in the N.T., for comp. 1 Cor. xiv. 26, and observe that all the other writers in the N.T. (except Jam., Pet., Jude, who use neither) use only διδαχή; Matth. xv. g and Mark vii. 7 are quotations. It is just possible that the more fre- quent use of διδασκαλία in these epp. may point to their later date of com- position, when Christian doctrine was assuming a more distinct form ; but we must be wary in such assertions, as ~ in St. Paul’s other epp. (we do not ‘ 2 TIMOTHY θυμίᾳ καὶ διδαχῆ. IV. 2—a, 151 lj A \ “ 3 ἔσται yap καιρὸς ὅτε τῆς ὑγιαινούσης >) ’ὔ Ἄ A A A διδασκαλίας οὐκ ἀνέξονται, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὰς ἰδίας ἐπιθυμίας e a » , ὃ ὃ , , ‘ " , EQUTOLS ETLTWPEVTOVTLY OL ackadous κνηθόμενοι THY ἀκοήν, 4 A “ δ A n~ i] , A ° A 5" , 5 4A καὶ ἀπὸ μεν τῆς ἀληθείας THY ἀκοὴν ἀποστρέψουσιν, επί include Heb.) διδαχὴ and διδασκ. occur exactly an equal number of times. 3. ἔσται γάρ] Argument drawn from the future to urge diligence in the present ; πρὶν ἢ ἐκτραχηλισθῆναι, προκατάλαβε πάντας αὐτούς, Chrys. It is singular that Beng. should force ἔσται ‘erit et jam est,’ as the allusion to the future is distinctly similar to that in t Tim. iv. 1, 2 Tim. ii. 16, 17, ἢ]. τ. On ὑγιαινοῦσα διδασκ., see notes on 1 Tim. i. τὸ. avéfovrar] ‘will not endure, put up with ; ‘sordet iis doctrina vera quia eorum cupiditatibus adversatur,’ Leo. ᾿Ανέχομαι occurs several times in St. Paul’s epp., but usually with persons ; comp. however2 Thess. 1. 4, ταῖς θλίψε- ow ais ἀνέχεσθε. Inthe following words observe the force of ἰδίας ; their selfish lusts (surely not ‘inclinations,’ Conyb. and Hows.) are what they follow in the choice of teachers. ; ἔπισωρεύσουσι] ‘will heap up,’ ‘ will gather round them a rabble, a συρῴε- τόν, of teachers ;’ τὸ ἀδιάκριτον πλῆθος τῶν διδασκάλων διὰ τοῦ σωρεύσουσι ἐδήλωσε, Chrys. The compound form (ἐπὶ -- ‘hinzu ; addition, aggregation, Palm τῷ Rost, Ler: isavi eal, 0:14) only occurs here ; the simple, ch. iii. 6, and Rom. xii. 20; add Cant. ii. 4 (Symm. ). κνηθόμενοι τὴν ἀκοήν] ‘having itching ears,’ Auth. Ver., ‘prurientes auribus,’ Vulg., both excellent translations ; phora desumpta a scabiosis quibus cutis prurit adeo ut scalpendi libidine ardeant,’ Suicer, Thesawr. s.v.: this itch for novelty, the false teachers gratified, comp. Philo, Quod. Det. ‘meta- Pot. ὃ 21, Vol. 1. p. 205 (ed. Mang.), ἀποκναίουσι γοῦν [οἱ σοφισταὶ] ἡμῶν τὰ Κνήθω (connected with κνάω, Lobeck, Phryn. p. 254) in the active is ‘to scratch,’ in the middle ‘to scratch oneself,’ Arist. Hist. An. IX. I, in the pass. ‘to be scratched or tickled,’ and thence (as appy. here) ‘prurire’ in a tropical sense, ζητεῖν τὶ ἀκοῦσαι καθ᾽ ἡδονήν, Hesych., τέρπον- ὦτα. Tas τὴν ἀκοὴν ἐπιζητοῦντες, Chrys. Here Theod. and Theoph. (not Chrys., as De W. asserts), and so, it would seem, Goth., al.,—unless they read κνηθόντας, takexvn@om. as purely pass., paraphrasing it by τερπόμενοι : this does not seem so forcible; the Apostle does not appear to desire merely to notice the fact that they were having their ears tickled, but to mark the uneasy feeling that always was seeking to be gratified. A word of similar meaning, γαργαλίζω, is found occa- sionally in similar applications, comp. Lucian, de Calumn. 21, cited by Wetst. in loc. On the accus. ἀκοήν, see notes on 1 Tim. vi. 5. 4. καὶ ἀπὸ κ. τ. Δ. The result is ἃ. complete turning away from every doctrine of Christian truth ; ὁρᾶς ὅτι οὐχ ws ἀγνοοῦντες σφάλλονται ἀλλ᾽ ἕκοντες, Theophyl. On the μῦθοι, compare notes on i Tim. i. 4; it must be observed, however, that as the re- ference is future, their nature cannot be specifically defined ; throughout these epp., the errors of the future seem represented only as exaggerations and expansions of the present, the allusion is probably sub- stantially the same. The use of the article (as in Tit. i. 14) is thus also still, as 152 \ ‘ , δὲ TOUS μύθους ἐκτραπήσονται. κακοπάθησον, ἔργον ποίησον more intelligible. ἐκτραπή- σονται] ‘ will turn themselves aside,’ pass., appy. with a middle force, as in 1 Tim. i. 6, v. 15; see Winer, Gr. § 40. 2, p.“ 303, Kriiger, Sprachl. § 52. 6, p. 361 sq., and the exx. in notes on 1 Tim. 1. ο. 5. σὺδέ] ‘Butdothow; inmarked contrast to the false teachers ; comp. ch. iii. 10. νῆφε ἐν πᾶσιν] ‘be sober in all things, ‘sobrius esto,’ Ital., Goth., not ‘be watchful,’ Syr., Vulg. Νήφειν is connected with γρηγορεῖν, 1 Thess. v. 6, 1 Pet. v. 8, but is by no means synonymous with it (Huth.) ; both here and in all other passages in the N.T., it implies ‘sobriety’ literal or metaphorical ; comp. notes on 1 Tim. iii. 2. Theo- doret here, and the Greek expositors on other passages, all seem to refer it to ‘wakefulness,’ appy. of an intensive nature, ἐπίτασις ἐγρηγόρσεως τὸ νήφειν, Cicum. on 1 Thess. l.c., νήφειν καὶ διεγηγέρθαι, ib. im loc., and there are a few passages in later writers (e.g. Polyb. Hist. XVI. 21. 4, ἐπιστά- σεως καὶ νήψεως), which seem to favour such a meaning; still, in the present case, and in the N.T. generally, there seem no sufficient grounds for de- parting from the regular use and ap- plications of the word. The deriva- tion is doubtful, but it does not seem improbable that the idea of drinking is involved in the root. Benfey (Wurzellex, Vol. 11. p. 74) derives it from v7 and ἐῴ. compared with Sanscr. > ap, ‘water; comp. eb-rius. κακοπάθησον] ‘suffer afilictions,;’ aor. imp. following the pres. imp., possibly with some degree of emphasis; see notes on ver. 2, and on 1 Tim. vi. 12. εὐαγγελιστοῦ] ‘of an evangelist the εὐαγγελισταί did not form a special 2 TIMOTHY IV. 4, 5. A A ~ , “ 5 σὺ δὲ νῆφε ἐν πᾶσιν. 3 a ‘ if εὐαγγελιστοῦ. THY διακονίαν and separate class, but were, generally, preachers of the Gospel in different countries, subordinates and mission- aries of the Apostles ; comp. Euseb. Hist. Eccl, 1. 27, ἀποδημίας σπελλό- μενοι, ἔργον ἐπετέλουν εὐαγγελιστῶν, and see Suicer, Thesawr. s.v., Vol. 1. p- 1234, and notes on Eph. iv. 11. This was the work to which Timothy was called when he journeyed with St. Paul, Acts xvi. 3; the same duties, as far as preaching the Gospel to all within the province of his minis- tration, still were to be performed. The sphere was only more circum- scribed, but there would be many oc- casions on journeys, &c., ver. 9, when Timothy could resume the functions of an evayyeX. in their fullest sense ; comp. Taylor, Hpiscopacy, ὃ 14, Hof- mann, Schriftb. Vol. τι. 2, p. 250. The term ἔργον has probably an allu- sion to the laborious nature of the duties, see notes on ch. ii. 15, and comp. exx. in Raphel, Obs., Vol. τι. p. 622. πληροφόρησον διακονίαν] ‘fully perform thy mi- nistry ; ‘ministerium tuum imple,’ Vulg.; πληροφ. τουτέστι πλήρωσον, Chrys. Beza translates m)npod¢. somewhat artificially, ‘ministerii tui plenam fidem facito;’ i.e. ‘veris ar- gumentis comproba τ᾿ this is unneces- sary, it is here nearly synonymous with, though perhaps a little stronger v than πλήρωσον, yoNe [absolve, adimple], ‘usfullei,’ Goth. ;— comp. τὴν διακονίαν πληροῦν, Acts xii. 25, Col. iv. 17, see Suicer, Thesaur. s.v., Vol. τι, p. 753. It appy. differs only from the more simple form in being a little more intensive in meaning. 6. ἐγὼ γάρ] ‘For J,’ éyw, with emphasis in reference to the preceding 2 TIMOTHY IV. 5, 6. σου πληροφόρησον. σύ. The force of γὰρ is differently explained ; it does not enforce the ex- hortation by showing Timothy he must soon rely on himself alone (‘natare incipis sine cortice’ Calvy.), nor urge him to imitation, comp. ver. 7 (Heinr.), but as the concluding words of ver. 5 seem to confirm, urges him to additional zeal on account of the Apostle’s departure ; ‘tuum est per- gere quo ccepi,’ Leo. ἤδη σπένδομαι] ‘am already being poured out as a drink-offering ; his present sufferings form the commencement of the ‘libatio ; not ‘I am now ready to be offered,’ Auth. Ver., which slightly infringes on the exact force of ἤδη and σπένδ. The particle ἤδη is not simply equivalent to νῦν, but in its primary use appears rather to de- note what is ‘near to the here’ (comp. Herod. ut. 5, ἀπὸ ταύτης ἤδη Αἴγυ- mros), and thence by an intelligible transition, ‘what is near to the now,’ calling attention to what is taking place ‘on the spot’ and ‘at the mo- ment,’ e.g. Aristoph. Ran. 527, οὐ τάχ᾽ ἀλλ᾽ ἤδη ποιῶ; see esp. Palm u. Rost, Lex. s.v. 6, where this particle is well discussed. Klotz (Devar. Vol. 1. p. 598) is thus far right in not referring ἤδη originally to time, but his derivation from ἤδη, ‘novi,’ is as hopeless as that of Hartung, Partik. Vol. I. p. 223, who refers the δὴ to the Sanscr. dina ‘a day,’ and makes the particle originally temporal; comp. Donalds. Cratyl. ὃ 201. Σπένδομαι, delibor, Vulg. (not middle ‘sanguinem meum libo,’ Wahl), and certainly not ‘aspergor vino,’ sc. ‘preparor (ad mortem,’ Grot.), is not synon. with Oo ay mn θύομαι, 1a] loa LSo [ jugulor, sacri- ficor], Syr., but points to the drink- offering of wine which among the Jews 159 6 Ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπένδομαι, καὶ ὁ accompanied the sacrifice (Numb. xv. 5, XXviii. 7), and was poured περὶ τὸν βωμόν (Joseph, Antig. 111. 9. 4, comp. Ecclus. i. 15), while among the heathen it was commonly poured upon the burning victims, (Smith. Dict. Antiq, Art. ‘Sacrificium’). Seethe very similar passage Phil. ii. 17, in which, however, there is no reason to refer the allusion to this latter Gentile practice, asJahn, A ntiq. ὃ 378, and appy. Suicer, Thesaur. s.v.; see Meyer, im loc. Chrysostom urges the use of σπένδ. not θύομαι, because τῆς μὲν θυσίας οὐ τὸ πᾶν ἀναφέρεται τῷ Oe, τῆς δὲ σπονδῆς τὸ ὅλον : the allusion seems rather to the Apostle’s anticipated bloody death, Waterl. Distinct. of Sacr. § 10, Vol. v. p. 264. ἀναλύσεως] ‘departure ; not ‘resolu- tionis,’ Vulg., [> Dues [ut dissulvar] Syr. comp. Goth., ‘disvissais,’ but ‘discessus e vita,’ Loesn., ἀπὸ τὸν παρόντα εἰς ἄλλον (Romaic); comp. Phil. i. 23, ἐπι- θυμίαν ἔχων eis τὸ ἀναλῦσαι. There is no reason whatever for adopting the explanation of Elsner (Obs. Vol. 1. p. 317) who refers ἀνάλ. to ‘disces- sus e conyivio,’ comp. Luke xii. 36, and σπένδομ. to the libations of the parting guests: the term is perfectly general, comp. Philo, Flacc. ὃ 21, Vol. 1. p. 544 (ed. Mang.), τὴν ἐκ τοῦ βίου τελευταίαν ἀνάλυσιν, Joseph. Antiq. XIX. 4. 1, Clem. Rom. 1. 44; see Deyling, Obs. Vol. 1. No. 46, p. 540, who has commented upon the whole of this, and the following verse, with his usual ponderous learning. His interpr. of σπένδ., scil. θυσιάζομαι, is, however, incorrect. Lachm. reads ἀναλύσεως μου with ACFG; al. (5) ; τάξον. Wulg. (ed.) Copt. Arm... Euseb., Ath. al. The authorities are κόσμον, Coray 154 Ν An de ἂὶ ° , 5 , καιρὸς τῆς ἐμῆς ἀναλύσεως ἐφέστηκεν. 2 TIMOTHY IY. 6---ὃ. " A 8 ~ 3, {τὸν aywva τον Ἅ ’ , \ ὃ , , \ ’ , καλον ἡγώνισμαι, TOV ὁρομον τετέλεκα, τὴν πιστιν TETY- puka* of considerable weight, but perhaps scarcely sufficient to make it necessary to change’ the reading of Tvsch. Nearly exactly the same may be said of τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα (Lachm.) in the next verse; see the crit. notes in Tisch. ἐφέστηκεν) ‘is at hand,’ Auth. Ver.; surely not ‘hath been nigh at hand,’ Hamm., nor ‘ ist vorhanden,’ Luther, comp. Goth. ‘atist’ [adest], but ‘stands by’ (Acts xxii. 20), ‘is all but here,’ ‘steht nihe bevor,’ Huther; comp. Acts xxviii. 2, and notes on ver. 2. 4, τὸν ἀγῶνα τὸν καλόν] ‘the good strife,’ scil. πίστεως; see 1 Tim. vi. 12, The repetition of the article with the epithet gives force and em- phasis; οὗτος ὁ ἀγὼν καλός ; val, φησίν" ὑπὲρ yap Xp. γίγνεται, Chrys. : comp. Green, Gramm. p. 165. The metaphor itself is thus nobly expanded by Chrys. ; οὐδὲν τούτου βέλτιον τοῦ ἀγῶνος" οὐ λαμβάνει τέλος ὁ στέφανος οὗτος" οὗτος οὐκ ἀπὸ κοτίνων ἐστίν, οὐκ ἔχει ἄνθρωπον ἀγωνοθέτην, οὐκ ἔχει ἀνθρώπους θεατάς" ἀπὸ ἀγγέλων σύγ- κειται τὸ θεάτρον. How amply does this great expositor repay perusal. ἠγώνισμαι] ‘J have striven ;’ the full force of the perfect is here very dis- tinctly apparent; the struggle itself was now all but over, little more than the effects were remaining; ‘notat actionem plane preteritam, que aut nune ipsum, seu modo finita est, aut per effectus suos durat,’ Poppo, de emend. Matth. Gr. p. 6: his character and claim to the crown were now fully established, see Green, Gr. ΤΠ. I, p. 23. The more general agonistic meta- phor then passes into the more specific ’ one of the course ; πῶς de τετέλεκε τὸν iS A ᾿] ’ , « an ὃ ᾽ὔ ’ λοιπὸν ἀπόκειται μοι O τῆς OLKAaLOTUYNS στέφανος; δρόμον ; τὴν οἰκουμένην ἅπασαν περι- ἤλθεν, Chrys.; ‘jfinivi cursum non tam vite quam muneris,’ Leo. See esp. Acts xx. 24, where the Apostle expresses his resolution to do, what now he is able to speak of as done, sc. τελειῶσαί τὸν δρόμον μου καὶ THY δια- κονίαν ἣν ἔλαβον παρὰ τοῦ ἸΚυριοῦ *Inood (Tisch.) τετήρηκα τὴν πίστιν] ‘Ihave kept the faith ; the faith entrusted to me I have kept as a sacred and inviolable deposit ; comp. 2 Tim.i. 14. Πίστις is not ‘fidelity’ (Kypke, Obs. Vol. 1. Ῥ. 375, Raphel Annot. Vol. 11. p. 623), but ‘faith’ in its usual and proper sense; ‘res bis per metaphoram ex- pressa nunc tertio loco exprimitur proprie,’ Beng. In this noble passage, so calculated to cheer the sorrowing heart of Timothy (Chrys.), yea, so full of unutterable consolation to every thoughtful Christian, Chrysostom confesses to have long felt a difficulty (ἀπορῶν διετέλουν) ; and even still De Wette finds in it only an opposition to the Apostle’s usual humility (1 Cor. iv. 3 sq.), and but a doubtful adapta- tion of Phil. iii. 12 sq. It is true in both passages the same metaphor is used; but the circumstances and ap- plication are wholly different ; in the one case it is the trembling anxiety of the watchful, labouring minister, in the other, it is the blessed assurance vouchsafed to the toilworn, dying ser- vant of the Lord ; see esp. Waterl. Sermon Xxv., Vol. v. p. 679, Ham- mond, Pract. Catech. I. 3, p. 41 (Angl. Cath. Libr.), also Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 346 (Bohn). 8. λοιπὸν is not for τοῦ λοιποῦ or τὸ λοιπόν, aS any reference, whether Ἂ 2 TIMOTHY IV. 8. 155 a ’ ὯΝ ε i > a) xe We e δὴ ον ATOOWTEL μοι O υριος εν EKELVY) TH KEP A, O οικαιος to a period in the future, or to dura- tion in the future (see notes on Gal. vi. 17), would not accord with the present passages; nor can it be for ἤδη, which, if admissible in later writers (Schefer, Longin. p. 400, cited by De W.), is not demonstrable in St. Paul's epp. The contextseems to show that it is in its most literal meaning, ‘ quod reliquum est’ (Beza), sufficiently exactly preserved in transl. o°o by the Syr. lan —o [a nunc], “henceforth, Auth. Ver. This adver- bial adjective is very frequently used in Polybius; often, as here, at the be- ginning of sentences, e.g. Hist. τι. 68. 9, IV. 32. 5, X. 45. 2, but usually in the sense ‘ proinde igitur,’ and an- swering to our ‘further,’ ‘further- more ;’ a more distinctly temporal use occurs Hist. I. 12. 4, where it is car- ried on by τὸ δὲ τελευταῖον. ἀπόκειται] ‘is reserved; the verb ἀποκεῖσθαι is applied both to future rewards, as here and Col. i. 5, ἐλπίδα τὴν ἀποκειμ. ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς (comp. Matth. vi. 20, xix. 21), and to future punishments (Plato, Locr. § 12, p. 104 D), and in fact to anything which is set aside, as it were a treasure, for future uses and applications ; comp. Philo, Quod. Det. Pot. § 34, Vol. 1. p. 216 (ed. Mang.). καθάπερ τὰ ἀπο- κειμένα ἐν σκότῳ κέκρυπται, comp. Kypke, Obs. Vol. τι. p. 360. © τῆς δικαιοσύνης στέφ.] ‘the crown of righteousness,’ resumption of the former metaphor. The genitival rela- tion is not perfectly clear, owing to the different meanings which δικαιοσύνη may receive. As this subst. appears in all cases in these epistles to have not a dogmatical, but a practical re- ference (see notes on 1 Tim. vi. 11), sc. τὴν καθόλου ἀρετήν, Chrys. the gen. will most naturally be objecti, ‘the crown for which (so to speak) δικαιοσύνη has a claim,’ βραβεῖον διδό- μενον eis τὴν δικαιοσύνην, Coray (Romaic), and is in fact a sort of (pro- leptic) gen. possessivus ; comp. Kriiger, Sprachl. ὃ 47. 7. 6sq. Huther and Leo, with less probability, make it the gen. of apposition, comparing James i. 12, 1 Pet. v. 4, Rev. ii. 10, where, however, {wi and δόξα are not strictly analogous with the present use of δικαιοσύνη. ἀπο- δώσει] ‘will give,’ ‘reddet,’ Vulg. There is not in ἀπὸ necessarily any sense of due, ὡσανεί τινα ὀφειλὴν καὶ χρεός, Theophyl., though this meaning might be grammatically sustained, comp. Winer, de Verb. Comp. Iv. p. 13. The preposition only seems to allude to the reward as having been laid up, and taken as out of some re- served treasures; ‘ibi hujus verbi sedes propria est, ubi quid de aliqua copia das,’ 12; comp. in a contrary sense, Rom. ii. 6, and see notes on Gal. iv. 5. ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ Hp.) ‘in that day,’ scil. of final retribution, The expression ἐκείνη ἡ ἡμέρα is used three times in this epistle, ch. i. 12, 18, and once in 2 Thess. i. 10, there referring more exclusively to the coming of the Lord; see Reuss, Theol. Chret. tv. 21, Vol. II. p. 243. The following words, ὁ δίκαιος κριτής, stand in apposition to ὁ Κύριος with great weight and empha- sis; how this declaration of God’s justice is out of harmony with St. Paul’s views of grace (De W.), it is difficult to conceive. The Apostle, as Huther well observes, uses the δικαία κρίσις Θεοῦ not only as a ground of warning, but even of consolation ; see 2 Thess. i. 5. Tots ἠγαπηκόσιν «.t.d.] ‘who have loved Winer, p. 150 ο᾽ TIMOTHY αὐ: Ξτο: , 5 , δὲ Εν tl ee) 4 κ᾿ rn ee) , : κριτής: οὐ μόνον de ἐμοῖ ἀλλὰ Kal πᾶσιν τοῖς ἡγαπηκοσιν τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν αὐτοῦ. Come to me; all except Luke are absent on mis- sions. Beware of Alex- ‘ander. At my defence my friends de- serted me, but the Lord stood by me. (and do love), His appearing,’ scil. His second ἐπιφάνεια : not His first coming in the flesh (ch. i. 10), nor the first and second (Beng.), but, as the con- text requires, only the latter. The perf. is not here ‘in the sense of a present, Huther; it is only thus far present that it points to the persis- tence of the feeling ; it was a love év ἀφθαρσίᾳ (Eph. vi. 24, and see notes), that beginning in the past was alike present and enduring ; comp. Green, Gramm. p. 319. There is no need to give ἀγαπᾶν the sense of ‘longing for’ (Beza, Wiesing.), it is simply ‘ diligere,’ and implies a combined feeling of reverence and love, ‘ inest notio admirandi et colendi,’ Tittm. Synon. I. p. 55; see also Trench, Synon. § 12. In a practical point of view, the remark of Caly. is gravely suggestive; ‘e fidelium numero ex- cludit, quibus formidabilis est Christi adventus:’ thus then we may truly say with Leo, ‘habemus hic lapidem Lydium, quo examinemus corda nostra.’ 9. σπούϑασον) ‘earnestly endea- vour, ‘do thy best,’ Mods [cure sit] Syr.; comp. ver. 21, Tit. iii. 12. There is scarcely a pleonasm in the expression σπούδασον--ταχέως (Winer, Gr. ὃ 67, p. 685), as σπου- δάζειν involves more the idea of earnest and diligent endeavour than that of mere haste (σπεύδειν), though the latter meaning is also sometimes found, e.g. Aristoph. Thesm. 572, ἐσπουδακυϊαπροστρέχει, al.: thus then, asa generalrule, “σπεύδειν est festinare 9 Σπούδασον ἐλθεῖν πρός με ταχέως. TO Δημᾶς γάρ με ἐγκατέλιπεν, ἀγαπήσας A ΄ ΓΟ 4 , , 5 Θ TOV νὺυν αιῶνα. KGL ἐπορεύθη εἰς εσσα- (de tempore) σπουδάζειν properare, i.e, festinanter et sedulo aliquid facere,’ Tittm. Synon. I. p. 190. According to Pott, Ltym. Forsch. Vol. 1. p. 239, the fundamental idea of both verbs is ‘premere,’ ‘pressare.’ On the strengthened vowel (guna), see Donalds. Cratyl. § 223. ταχέως] More fully explained in ver. 21, πρὸ χειμῶνος. It is singular that so intelligent a commentator as De W. should represent this invitation as the main object of the letter (Hinlett. § 3); surely the solemn and prophetic warnings of the previous chapters cannot be merely ‘ obiter dicta.’ to. Anpas] Mentioned with St. Luke (Col. iv. 14) as sending salu- tations to the Colossians, and with the same evangelist and others, as a συνεργός (Philem. 24). Mournful and unmanly as the conduct of Demas is here described to be, there seems no just reason for ascribing to him utter apostacy (Epiph. Her. 51. 6); he left the Apostle in his trials and sufferings (ἐγκατέλιπεν) because he loved safety and ease and the fleeting pleasures of this world (τὸν νῦν αἰῶνα), and had not the Christian fortitude to share the dangers, or the Christian love to minister to the sufferings of the nearly . desolate Apostle; τῆς ἀνέσεως ἐρα- σθείς, τοῦ ἀκινδύνου καὶ τοῦ ἀσφαλοῦς, μᾶλλον εἴλετο οἴκοι τρυφᾶν ἢ μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ ᾿ ταλαιπωρεῖσθαι καὶ συνδιαφέρειν μοι τοὺς παρόντας κινδύνους, ΟἾΓΥΒ. ; see Mosheim, de Reb. Christ. § 60, p. 174, and comp. Taylor, Duct. Dub. I. 2. 5..19, who, however, makes the singular mistake of asserting (from Ν ZOEIMOVAY EV! 0711: ey λονίκην, ΚΚρήσκης εἰς Τ᾽ αλατίαν, Τίτος εἰς Δαλματίαν: Μάρκον ἀναλαβὼν ἄγε Ir A ~ 9 ’ “ἝΝ π Lal ουκας €OTL KOVOS MET εμου. rr. eye], Sac CD EEG KK; Chrys. al... ... (Griesb., Scholz, Lachm., (ed. maj.) Huther and appy. Wiesing). The aor. ἄγαγε is adopted by Tisch. (ed. 1 and 2) on the authority of A; 31. 71 al. Theodoret Dam. ......, (Lachm. stereotype ed.) It can scarcely be doubted that this is insufficient authority for the change, and that Zachm. was quite right in the alteration ‘adopted in his larger edition. Col. and Philem.) that Demas re- turned to his duty. The name is probably a shortened form of Deme- trius ; comp. Winer, RWB. s.v. Vol. I. p. 264. ἐγκατέλιπεν] ‘forsook,’ the compound form seems here to imply leaving behind in his troubles and dangers; comp. ver. τύ, 2 Cor. iv. 9, and esp. Plato, Symp. 179 A, ἐγκαταλιπεῖν ἢ μὴ βοηθῆσαι κινδυνεύοντι. This meaning, however, must not always be pressed, as there are several instances, esp. in later Greek, in which seems scarcely different from xatad.; see Ellendt, on Arrian, Alex. I. 20. 6, p. 100. ἀγαπήσας] ‘ because he loved’ causal participle, Donalds. Gr. § 616 ; his love of the world was the cause of his leaving. There is an apparent contrast between this clause ἐγκαταλ. and ἠγαπηκόσιν τὴν ἐπιῴ., ver. 8; ‘luctuosum antitheton,’ Beng. Tov viv αἰῶνα] ‘the present world,’ ‘the present (evil) course of things.’ On the meaning of αἰών, see notes on Eph. ii. 2. Beside the regular tem- Φ poral meaning [Syr. sass] which is always more or less apparent in the word, an ethical meaning (as here) may often be traced; see Reuss, Theol. Chret. Iv. 20, Vol. τι. p. 228. Θεσσαλονίκην] Probably his home ; εἴλετο οἴκοι τρυφᾷν, Chrysost. Κρήσκης)] Of Crescens nothing is known ; the accounts of his having been a preacher in Galatia (Const. Cot.), or in Gaul (Epiph.) and having founded the church of Vienna are mere legendary glosses on this pas- sage. The reading Γαλλίαν in C, al. (§);...Amit.* Aith. . . . Euseb. Theod.(Mops.), Epiphan., Hier., is pro- bably due to these current traditions. Δαλματίαν] A part of Illyria on the eastern coast of the Adriatic, lying south-east of Liburnia, and mainly bounded by the Bebii Montes on the north and the river Drinus to the east: the principal cities were Salona (on the coast), and Narona inland ; comp. Plin. Nat. Hist. m1. 26, Cellarius, Notit. Lib. τι. 8, Vol. I. p. 614, and Forbiger, Alt. Geogr. § 121, Vol. 111. p. 838. 11. «Λουκᾶς] Comp. Col. iv. 14, Philem. 24; the evangelist accom- panied St. Paul on his second mis- sionary journey, Acts xvi. Io ; again goes with him to Asia (Acts xx. 6), and Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 15), and is with him during bis captivity at Cesarea (Acts xxiv. 23), and his first captivity at Rome (Acts xxviii. 16). Of the later history of St. Luke nothing certain is known; according to Epiphanius (Her. 11. τι), he is said to have preached principally in Gaul ; see Winer, RWB. s.v. Vol. τι. p- 35, and comp. the modern con- tinuation of the Acta Sanct. (Octr. 18) Vol. vill. p. 295 sq. The name . is probably a contraction of Λουκανός, and is said to indicate that he was either a slave or a ‘libertus;’ see Apost. vil. 46, Vol: 1. p. 385, ed. | Lobeck’s article on substantives in 158 2 TIMOTHY IV. 11—13. A A , »᾿ ᾿] μετὰ σεαυτοῦ: ἔστιν γὰρ μοι εὕχρηστος εἰς διακονίαν. 12 Τυχικὸν δὲ ἀπέστειλα εἰς "Εφεσον. -ds, in Wolf, Analecta Lit. Vol. 11. p. 47 56. Μάρκον] The Evangelist St. Mark was converted appy- by St. Peter (1 Pet. v. 13); he, however, accompanied St. Paul and his ἀνεψιός St. Barnabas on their first missionary journey (Acts xii. 25), but departed from them (Acts xv. 38) and was the cause of the dissension between the Apostle and St. Barnabas (ver. 39). He was again with St. Paul (Col. iv. 10), and, lastly, here is invited to again come to him, haying been a short time previously (if we adopt Wieseler’s date for τ Pet., a.D. 62) with St. Peter (1 Pet. v. 13). Of his after history nothing certain is known; the most current tradition assigns his latest labours to Egypt and Alexandria, Epiph. Her. 51 ; comp. Acta Sanct. (April) Vol. 11. Ῥ. 351: ἀναλαβών] ‘having taken (to thee); in this present use of the compound the primary local force of ἀνὰ (more clearly seen Eph. vi. “13, - 16) is what obscured (comp. dvadcddvar), though still not to be wholly passed over ; Timothy was to take to himself as a companion the evangelist; see Winer, de Verb. Comp. Fasc. 111. p. 1, who very clearly defines the. two uses of this prep. in composition, (a) the usual physical sense; (ὁ) the derivative sense, involving the ideas of return or repetition. εὔχρηστος] ‘serviceable, ch. ii. 215 some- possibly, as Grot. suggests, on account. of his knowledge of Latin; though, more probably in reference to assist- Ὁ ance in preaching the Gospel ; εἰς τὴν διακονίαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου" Kal γὰρ ἐν δεσμοῖς ὧν οὐκ ἔληγε [Παῦλος] κηρύττων, Chrysost. The translation of the Auth. Vers. ‘for the ministry’ (objected to 13 Tov φελόνην, by Conyb. and Hows.), may thus be defended ; the omission of the art. (after the prep.) of course causing no difficulty, Winer, Gr. § 18. 2. b. On the whole, however, it is perhaps more exact to retain a neutral trans- lation ‘for ministering,’ which, while it does not exclude other services, may still leave the idea of the εὐαγγελικὴ διακονία fairly prominent. 12. Τυχικὸν δέ] ‘but Tychicus ;’ the δὲ appears to refer to a suppressed thought ; not, however, to one sug- gested by ver. r1 (Wieseler, Chronol. Ῥ. 428), but, as the more immediate context seems to require, by ver. 12, εὔχρηστος x.T.r.; ‘bring Mark, I need one who is εὔχρ. ; I had one in Tychicus (Eph. vi. 21), but he is gone.’ The chronology is here not without difficulty. Tychicus, who was with the Apostle on his third missionary journey, and went before him to Troas (Acts xx. 5), is mentioned (Eph. vi. 21, Col. iv. 7) as sent by St. Paul into Asia to comfort the hearts of his converts. Now, as the epp. to the Eph. and Coloss. can- not with any show of reason be as- sumed as contemporaneous with the present ep., we must assume that this was a second mission to Ephesus, the object of which however is un- known. The first mission took place at thé Apostle’s first captivity at Rome; this, it would seem, takes place at a second and final captivity. We thus take for granted that the Apostle was twice in prison at Rome. Without entering into a discussion which would overstep the limits of this commentary, it may be enough to remark that though denied by Wieseler (Chronol. p. 472 sq), and but doubtfully noticed by Winer, \ 2 TIMOTHY IV. 13. 159 ὃν ἀπέλιπον ἐν Τρωάδι παρὰ Κάρπῳ, ἐρχόμενος φέρε. καὶ RWB. Vol. τι. p. 220 (ed. 3), the an- cient opinion of a second imprisonment (Euseb, Hist. 11, 22) is in such perfect harmony with the notices in these epp., and has, to say the least, such very plausible external arguments in its favour, that it does seem to remain far the most satisfactory of all the hypo- theses that have as yet been advanced ; see esp. Neander, Planting, ch. x. Vol. τ. p. 331 sq. (Bohn), Wiesinger, Finleit. § 3, p. 576. eis” Ederov] These words have been urged by Theodoret and De W. as affording a hint that Timothy was not then at Ephesus ; comp. Tit. iii. 12, πρὸς σέ. This is perhaps doubtful ; comp. Wieseler, Chronol. p. 462. This latter writer taking ἀπέστειλα as an epistolary aor. conceives that Tych. was the bearer of this letter (see Chronol. p. 428); this, again, is very doubtful, and in many respects a very unsatisfactory hypothesis. Does the language wholly forbid the con- jecture that Tychicus was the bearer of the jirst epistle? It has been fre- quently remarked in these notes-that the first ep. seems to have been written at no great distance of time from the second. 13. φελόνην] ‘ cloke,’ Auth. Ver., ‘penulam,’ Vulg., Goth., a long thick and appy. sleeveless cloke, with only an opening for the head, Smith, Dict. Antig. s.v.; φελόνην ἐνταῦθα τὸ ἱμάτιον λέγει" τινὲς δέ [Syr. al.] φασι τὸ γλωσσόκομον, ἔνθα τὰ βιβλία ἔκειτο, Chrys. There seems no reason to depart from the former and usual sense; the second interpr. noticed by. Chrysost., ‘case for writings,’ (mAs δ Syr., Wieseler, Chronol. Oo σι p- 423), was probably only an interpr. suggested by the connexion, and by the thought that the Apostle would not have been likely to mention an article so comparatively unimportant as a cloke, esp. when near his death. One reason, at any rate, seems sug- gested by ver. 21, mpd χειμῶνος. The word is found in several other pas- sages, e.g. Poll. Onomast. vit. 65, Athen. Deipn. WI. p. 97, Arrian, ELpict. tv. 8 ; see also Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 11. p. 1422, who, however, with but little probability seems to advocate two forms, φαινόλης and φελόνης (comp. Hesych.) deriving appy. the former from φαίνω and the second from φελλός, ‘pellis.” There is indeed an almost hopeless confusion among the Greek lexicographers on this word or words, some making φαιλώνης (Suid.), aliter φελόνης (Ltym. M.), to be the γλωσσόκομον, and φαινόλης (Suid.), or yet again, φενόλης (Suid.), to be the cloke. On the whole, it seems probable that the true form is φαινόλης, and that it is derived from the Latin ‘pznula ;’ Rost ἃ. Palm, Ler. s.v., not vice versa, as in Voss, Ztymol.s.v. Here Tisch. rightly adopts the orthography best supported by MS. authority, There is a special treatise on the ‘penula’ by Bartholinus in Grevius, Antig. Rom. Vol. vi. p. 1167 sq., and abundant archeological notices and references in Wolf, Cur. Phil. in loc. καὶ τὰ βιβλία] Τί δὲ αὐτῷ τῶν βιβλίων ἔδει μέλλοντι ἀποδημεῖν τρὸς τὸν Θεόν ; καὶ μάλιστα ἔδει, ὥστε αὐτὰ τοῖς πιστοῖς παρα- θέσθαι, καὶ ἀντὶ τῆς αὐτοῦ διδασκαλίας ἔχειν αὐτά, Chrysost.: more probably, perhaps, books generally, Bull, Serm. Xv. p. 180 (Oxf. 1844). It is, how- ever, useless to guess at either the contents of the βιβλία, or the reasons for the request. μάλιστα 100 2 TIMOTHY τὰ βιβλία, μάλιστα Tas meuBpavas. lh το 14 ᾿Αλέξανδρος ὁ \ , Ν 3 Ψ 3 ld 2 ee, , χαλκεὺς πολλά μοι κακὰ évedelEaTo: ἀποδῴη αὐτῷ ὁ Κύριος A A v , ΄ κατὰ Ta ἔργα αὐτοῦ. τὰς μεμβρ. | ‘especially theparchments;’ the former were probably written on papyrus, the latter on parchment, ‘membrana’ (membrum, membrana cutis), Hug, Hinl. Vol. 1. ὃ 11. See also Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. and Smith, Dict. Antig. s.v. It is not wholly improbable, as the μάλιστα seems to indicate, that the parchments were writings, whether ‘adversaria’ or otherwise, of the Apostle himself, Bull, Serm. xv. p. 183. Of Carpus nothing is known, nor of the journey to Troas ; it certainly could not have been that mentioned Acts xx. 6, a visit more than six years anterior. 14. ᾿Αλέξανδρος) See notes on 1 Tim. i. 20; whether this evil man was then at Ephesus or not cannot be determined ; the former supposition is perhaps most probable ; see Wieseler, Chronol. p. 463. πολλὰ κι τ. λ.7 ‘showed me much il treat- ment ; ‘multa mihi mala ostendit,’ Ttal., Vulg. [mala mihi]; ἔθλιψέ με διαφόρως, Chrys. The transl. ‘hath (?) shown much ill feeling’ (Peile), is unnecessarily restricted, and that of Conyb. and Hows., ‘charged me with much evil’ (forensic use of the active), in a high degree improbable. The ‘dynamic’ middle (Kriiger, Sprachl. 8. 52. 8. 5), ἐνδείξασθαι with a dat. persone and ace. rei is frequently used both in a good (e.g. Demosth. (?) Halonn. 87) and a bad sense (Gen. l. 15, 17), and seems clearly to point to the exhibition of outward acts of injury and wrong to the Apostle. ἀποδῴη] ‘may the Lord reward him according to his works; πρόῤῥησις ἐστιν, οὐκ dpd, Theodoret. Even this limitation is not necessary: St. | | cording to his works. 15 ὃν καὶ ov φυλάσσου, λίαν γὰρ Paul might properly wish that one - who had so withstood the cause of the Gospel (ἡμετέροις λόγοις, see below, ver. 15), and who had as yet shown no symptom of repentance (ὅν καὶ σὺ κ. τ. Δ.) might be rewarded ac- On the late and incorrect form ἀποδῴη for ἀποδοίη, comp. Lobeck, Phryn. p. 345, Sturz, de Dial. Maced. p. 52. The reading is not perfectly certain; the future ἀποδώσει is supported by very strong external authority, ACD*E*FG ; 15 mss.;... Boern., Vulg., al. (Griesb., Scholz, Lachm.); still as dogmatical reasons might so very naturally sug- gest the change of the opt. into the fut., while no plausible reason can be alleged for the converse,—as again, there are no paradiplomatic argu- ments (Pref. to Gal. p. xvi) in favour of the change to the fut., while there are some for the change to the opt. (the reading, -δωσει may have been a cor- rection of -dwet, comp. Mill, Prolegom. Ῥ. 49), we seem justified in retaining ἀποδῴη, with D***E**JK ; great majority of mss. ...... Clarom., Sangerm., Amit. al. Tischendorf (ed. 2) has thus appy. with judgment reversed the reading of his first ed. ; so De W. and Wiesing. 15. ὃν καὶ σὺ κ. τ. λ.} This seems to confirm the supposition that Alex- ander was then at Ephesus (see ver. 14); unless we also adopt the not very probable opinion of Theod., noticed in notes on ver. 12, that Timothy was not now at Ephesus. λίαν γὰρ κι τ. Δ. Reason why Timothy should beware of Alexander. λόγοι may allude to the defence which St. Paul made, and which Alexander The ἡμέτεροι ΕΟ Y Ve ae — 27. ’ , - e /, , ἀνθέστηκεν τοῖς ἡμετέροις λογοις. 161 16 Ἔν TH rs 9. Γ : Ἑ , 9 Ν πρώτη μου ἀπολογίᾳ οὐδείς μοι cunTapeyeveTo, ἀλλα , ’ / A " - / πάντες μὲ ἐγκατέλιπον" μὴ αὐτοῖς λογισθείη" 17 ὁ δὲ Kd , , A 9 ὃ , , ef δι " ~ ‘ vptos μοι παρέστη καὶ ενεουναμῶσεν ME, νὰ OL μου TO opposed (see Wieseler, Chronol. p. 464); Alexander must then be con- ceived (if originally from Ephesus) to have gone to Rome and returned again. It must be observed, how- ever, that the studied comnexion of this clause with ὅν καὶ σὺ κ. τ. Δ. rather than with πολλά μοι κ.τ. Δ., seems rather to militate against this suppo- sition, and to suggest a more general reference; τοῖς Tod εὐαγγελίου λόγοις. 16. ἐν τῃ πρώτῃ κ.τ.λ.] Sat my Jirst defence ; comp. Phil. i. 7, but observe that there τῇ ἀπολ., on ac- count of the article, must be connected with τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, and that the cir- cumstances alluded to are in all pro- bability wholly different. Timothy was then appy. with him (Phil. i. 1); now he is informing him of something new, and which happened at his last imprisonment, see Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 334 (Bohn). This dzok. πρώτη was in all probability the ‘actio prima,’ after which, as a ‘non liquet’ (see Smith, Dict. Antig. s.v. ‘ Judex’) had been returned, an ‘ampliatio’ (comp. ἀνεβάλετο, Acts xxiv. 22), had succeeded, during which the Apostle is now writing; see esp. Wieseler, Chronol. p. 409 8q., and comp. Rein, Rom. Privatrecht, v. 2. 6, Pp. 450. συμπαρεγένετο] ‘stood forward with me,’ ‘adfuit,’ Vulg., scil. as a ‘patronus’ to plead in my defence, or more probably as an ‘.advocatus’ to support by his counsel; comp. Demosth. (ἡ Neer. 1369, συμπαραγενόμενος αὐτῷ δοκιμα- fouévw,and, as regards the practice of Christians supporting and comforting their brethren in prison, Lucian, de Morte Peregr. § 13. Examples of the similarly forensic expressions παρα- γίγνεσθαί τινι, παρεῖναί τινι, are cited by Elsner, δε: Vol. 1. p. 319. On the respective offices and duties of ‘advocatus’ and ‘patronus’ (not appy. apprehended rightly by Conyb. and Hows., Vol. 1. p. 487), see Rein, Rom. Privatrecht, Vv. 1. 3, Ὁ. 425. ἐγκατέλιπον] On the meaning of this compound, see notes on ver.10o. The reason of the desertion was obviously fear; οὐ κακοηθείας ἣν ἀλλὰ δειλίας ἡ ὑποχώρησις, Theod. The knowledge of this suggests the clause, μὴ αὐτοῖς λογισθείη, in which the Apostle’s par- don is blended with his charitable prayer; ‘may God forgive them even as I do.’ The reading of ACD***FGJ, appears simply duetoitacism ; soagain, ἀπέλειπον, with CJ al. in ver. 20: see Tisch. Prolegom., p. xxii. 17. ὃ δὲ Κύριος] In marked con- trast to ver. 16; ‘man, even my friends, deserted me; nevertheless, my Lord stood by me.’ ἐνεδυνάμωσεν] ‘gave me inward strength,’ i.e. παῤῥησίαν ἐχαρίσατο, οὐκ ἀφῆκε καταπεσεῖν, Chrysost. ; see notes on τ Tim. i. 12. The purpose of the ἐνδυνάμωσις then follows. As ever, the Apostle loses all thought and feeling of self, and sees only in the gracious aid ministered to him a higher and a greater purpose ; so Chrys., and after him Theophyl. and (cum. πληροφορηθῇ] ‘might be fully performed, fulfilled,’ ‘adimpleatur,’ Ital., Syr., not ‘might be fully known,’ Auth. Ver., ‘ certio- raretur,’ Beza. There seems no reason to depart here from the meaning M 162 o TIMOTHY ‘LV. ry, 188 , “ A ΨΦ 7, , Ν eZ A κήρυγμα πληροφορηθῆ καὶ ἀκούσωσιν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη: καὶ 235 04, 9 ’ Ψ ἐῤῥύσθην ἐκ στόματος λεοντος. assigned to πληροῴ. in verse 5 (see notes) ; the κήρυγμα (observe not εὐαγγέλιον) was indeed fully per- formed, when in the capital of the world, at the highest earthly tribunal, possibly in the Roman forum (Dio. Cass. LVI. 7, LX. 4,—after Claudius however, doubtful), and certainly be- fore a Roman multitude, Paul the prisoner of the Lord spake for him- self, and for the Gospel ; see Wieseler, Chronol. p. 476, who has illustrated and defended this application with much ability. Kal ἀκούσωσιν] Further amplification of the preceding words ; not in reference to any preach- ings after his first captivity (comp. Theodoret, De W.), but simply in connexion with his public ἀπολογία in this his second captivity. The posi- tion of ἵνα, after παρέστη καὶ éved. rather than after ἐῤῥύσθην, seems cer- tainly to confirm this: see Wieseler, Chronol. p. 476. The reading of Rec. ἀκούσῃ (with JK ; al. Chrys. Theod.), is only a grammatical correction. Kal ἐῤῥύσθην] ‘and 7 was rescued ;’ second and further act of the Lord towards His servant ; He inspired him with strength, and further, rescued him. The aor. is purely passive ; several of these ‘deponentia media,’ e.g. θεάομαι, ἰάομαι, χαρίζομαι κ.τ. Δ. have besides an aor. med., an aor. in the pass. form which (unlike ἠβουλήθην, ἠδυνήθην κ. τ. Δ.) is completely passive in sense; comp. ἐθεάθην, Matth, vi. 1, Mark xvi. 11, ἰάθην, Matth. viii. 13, ἐχαρίσθην, τ Cor. ii. 12, Phil. i. 29, and see further exx. in Winer, Gr. § 39. 7, ΒΥ 400. ἐκ στόματος λέοντος is very differently explained. The least probable in- terpr. seems a reference to the lions of the amphitheatre (Mosheim, and 18 ῥύσεταί με ὁ Κύριος even Neand. Plant., Vol. I. p. 345, note), the most probable, perhaps, that of the later expositors (De W., Huth. al.), that it is a figurative ex- pression for the greatest danger, ‘generaliter periculum,’ Caiv.. comp. 1 Cor. xv. 32, ἐθηριομάχησα (see Meyer in loc.), Ignat. Rom. ὃ 5, ἀπὸ Συρίας μέχρι Ῥώμης θηριομαχῶ, where the somewhat parallel allusions are The most cur- rent interpr. is that of the Greek commentt., who refer the expression to Nero ; λέοντα yap τὸν Νέρωνά φησι διὰ τὸ θηριῶδες, Chrys. al., but it is doubtful whether he was then at Rome ; see Pearson, Ann. Paul., Vol. 1. p. 395 (ed. Churton), who consequently transfers it to Helius Czsareanus. Wieseler finds in λέων the principal accuser (Chronol. p. 476); alii alia. Leo, with very good sense, retracts in his preface, p. xxxviil., his previous reference of λέων to Nero: the omis- sion of the article (which might have been expected as J oseph. Antiq. XVIII. 16. το, τέθνηκεν ὁ λέων) cannot indeed be pressed as it might be due to corre- lation (Middleton, 417. II. 3. 7, p. 49, ed. Rose); it may be said, how- ever, that it is highly probable that if Nero, or a definite person (human or spiritual, e. g. Satan), had been here meant, it would have been inserted, as in the exx. in Winer, G7. ὃ 18. 2. b, p. 143. The most pertinent re- mark is that of Huth., that it is to the στόμα λέοντος (LGwenrachen), not to the λέων that the attention is prin- cipally directed. 18. ῥύσεται K.t.A.] ‘The Lord shall rescue me from every evil work ν᾿ continuation of the foregoing declara- tion, in a somewhat changed applica- tion: καί, which would make the con- Ν similarly figurative. Δὲ ΠΙΜΙΘΤΗΥ ΜΝ 18; iro: 168 ἊΝ ‘ A a» “ A , ΕῚ A , απὸ TaVTOS epyou πονήρου καὶ σώσει εἰς THV βασιλείαν ’ A A ᾽ ὯΝ ἃ ὃ rs 3 \ aA “- 4.2, QuTOU τὴν ἐπουράνιον" ῳ 7] d&a εἰς TOUS αἰῶνας τῶν αιωνῶνς ΡΟΝ ἢ αμην. Salutations and per- sonal notices. nexion more close, is rightly omitted by Lachm. and Tisch., with ACD*; d.e. Vulg., Copt., Arm., al. The change of prep. (curiously enough not noticed by appy. any commentator) points more generally to the removal from (see Winer, Gr. ὃ 51, s.v. p. 443, comp. with p. 437) all the evil efforts that were directed against the Apostle and the evil influences around him,—not merely all that threatened him personally, but all that, in his person, thwarted the Gospel. Thus πόνηρος retains its proper sense of “active wickedness’ (see Trench, Synon. § rr), and ἔργον its more usual sense. Most modern commentators (except Wiesing.), following Chrys. al., either explain παντὸς ἔργ. πον. as παντὸς ἁμαρτήματος, in reference to St. Paul, —a change from the objective in ver. 17 to the subjective which is not very satisfuctory,—or take ἔργον as = πρᾶγμα, χρῆμα, a meaning which, though defensible (see exx. in Palm u. Rost, Lex. s.v.), is not necessary. There is no declaration that the Apostle shall be rescued out of his dangers, which would be inconsistent with ver. 6; it is only said in effect in ver. 7, 8, that he shall be removed from the sphere of evil in every form: ‘decol- labitur? liberabitur, liberanteDomino, ’ Beng. The transition to the next clause, from the ἀπὸ to the εἰς, is thus very easy and natural. σώσει εἰς] ‘shall save me into: a pregnans constructio, ‘shall save and place me in,’ comp. ch. ii. 26, and see further exx. in Winer, Gr. ὃ 66, 11. e, p. 677. There is no reason for modifying σώζειν (scil. ἄξει me eis 19 "Agracat Ipicxay καὶ ᾿Ακύλαν καὶ κιτ.λ., Coray, comp. Eurip. Jph. 7. 1069), or for referring it merely to preservation from earthly troubles, as Reuss, Zheol. Chret. 1v. 22, Vol. 11. Ῥ. 251. In the following words, it has been urged by De Wette and others that we have a thought foreign to St. Paul. Surely this is an ill-con- sidered statement: though the mere expression 7) βασιλ. 4 ἐπουρ. may not occur again in the N.T., yet the idea of a present sovereignty and kingdom of Christ in heaven is conveyed in some passages (Eph. i. 20, Col. iii. 1), and expressed in others (1 Cor. xv. 25, βασιλεύειν) too plainly to give any cause for difficulty in the present case ; comp. Pearson, Creed, Art. τι. and vi., Vol. 1. p. 124, 328 (ed. Burt.) Had this expression appeared in any other than one of the Past. epp., it would have passed unchallenged. On the term ἐπουράνιος, comp. notes on Eph. i. 3. ᾧ ἡ δόξα κ. τ.λ.] Observe especially this doxology to Christ ; ἰδοὺ δοξολογία τοῦ Tiod ws καὶ τοῦ ἸΤατρός, οὗτος yap ὁ Κύριος, Theo- phyl. Waterland might have added this, Def. of Queries, XvII., Vol. 1. p. 423. On the expression εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, see notes on Gal. nor 19. Πρίσκαν kal’ Ακύλαν] Prisca or Priscilla (like Livia or Livilla, Drusa or Drusilla, Wetst. on Rom. xvi. 2) was the wife of Aquila of Pontus. They became first known to the Apostle in Corinth (Acts xviii. 2), whither they had come from Rome on account of the edict of Claudius ; the Apostle abode with them as being ὁμότεχνοι, and took them with him to M 2 104 2 TIMOTHY TOV ᾿Ονησιφόρου οἶκον. Τρόφιμον δὲ ἀπέλιπον ἐν Μιλήτῳ ἀσθενοῦντα. δασον πρὸ χειμῶνος ἐλθεῖν. Syria (ver. 18). They were with him at Ephesus (surely not at Corinth! Huther) when he wrote 1 Cor. (see ch. xvi. 19), and are again noticed as being at Rome (Rom. xvi. 3) where they had probably gone temporarily, perhaps for purposes of trade ; of their after history nothing is known, see Winer, RWB. s.v. ‘Aquila,’ Vol. 1. p. 73, and Herzog, Real-Encycl. Vol. I. p. 456, who, however, ascribes their migrations to the difficulties and troubles encountered in preaching the Gospel. τὸν ᾽Ονησ. οἶκον] See notes on ch. i. τό. Onesiphorus is said to have been bishop of Corone in Messenia ; Fabricius, Lux Evang. p. 117 (cited by Winer). This however must be considered highly doubtful. 20. “Epacros] A Christian of this name is mentioned as οἰκονόμος (arca- rius) of Corinth, Rom.,xvi. 23. Men- tion is again’'made of an Erastus as having been sent from Ephesus to Macedonia with Timothy, Acts xix. 22. Whether these passages relate to the same person cannot be positively determined ; but it may be said, in spite of the positive assertion of Wieseler (Chronol. p. 471) to the con- trary, that the identity of the Erastus of Corinth and Erastus the missionary seems very doubtful. likely that the οἰκονόμος of Corinth would be able to: act as a διακονῶν (Acts l.c.); see Meyer, Rom. l.¢., and Winer, RWB. s.v. Vol. I. p. 335°; 80 also Neand. Planting, Vol. 1. p. 334 (Bohn). Itis perhaps more probable, from the expression ἔμεινεν ἐν Koplv0y, that the present Erastus was iden- tical with Erastus of Corinth ; comp. Huther. All however is conjecture, It is scarcely TV. 19—21. 20 "Epactos ἔμεινεν ἐν Κορίνθῳ, 21 Σ),'᾽ηού- ’ , ᾽Ασπά ζεταί σε τρόφιμον] ‘ Zrophimus ; a Gen- tile Christian of Ephesus, who ac- companied St. Paul (on his third missionary journey) from Troas (Acts xx. 4) to Miletus, Syria, and ulti- mately, Jerusalem, where his presence was the cause of an uproar (Acts xxi. 29). Legendary history says that he was beheaded under Nero, Menolog. Grec. Vol. 11. p. 57 (cited by Winer). ἀπέλιπον] ‘J left; certainly not plural, ‘ they left,’ scil. ‘his comrades,’ an artificial interpretation (Winer, RWB. 5.ν. Troph.) which would never have been thought of, if the doubtful hypothesis of a single imprisonment of St. Paul at Rome had not seemed to require it. The supposition of Wieseler (Chronol. p. 467) that he accompanied St. Paul on his way to Rome (Acts xxvii.), but falling sick returned to Miletus in the Adramyt- tian ship from which St. Paul parted at Myra (Acts xxvii. 6), may be ingenious, but seems in a high degree improbable, and is well answered by Wiesinger in his notes on this verse, Ῥ. 684 sq. Still more hopeless is the attempt to change the reading, with the Arab. Vers., to Μελίτῃ, or to refer it to Miletus on the N. coast of Crete, near which St. Paul never went. If we suppose this some journey later than the period recorded in the Acts (see notes on 1 Tim. i. 3)pall difficulty ceases. 21. πρὸ χειμῶνος] ‘before winter,’ not necessarily ‘ before the storms of winter,’ Wieseler, Chronol. p. 472. The expression seems only an amplifi- cation of ver. 9; πρὸ χειμῶνος, iva μὴ κατασχεθῇς (Chrysost.), whether by dangers on the sea (Coray), or diffi- a ΤΙΜΟΤΗΥ Τᾶ. Ἐὔβουλος, καὶ Ilovdns, καὶ Λίψος, καὶ Κλαυδία, καὶ of ΕῚ A , ἀδελφοὶ παντες. 51. 2. 165 Benediction. 22 Ὁ Κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματός TOV. ἡ χάρις μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν. 22. Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός] So Rec., Griesb., Scholz, with CDEJK, al. Syr. Vulg. al. Lachmann reads ὁ Kip. ᾿Ιησοῦς with A ; 31. 114; Tisch. reads only Κύριος with FG; 17. al. Boern. Alth. Though an interpolation is not improbable, yet the uncial authority for the omission seems very weak; F and G it must be remembered are little more than equivalent to one authority. culties of travelling on the land. In this repeated desire of St. Paul to see his son in the faith, in this mention of a possible cause which might detain him, we see tokens of the Apostle’s prescience of his approaching death ; διὰ πάντων μηνύει τὴν τελευτήν, Theodoret. Εὔβουλος k.t.A.] Of Eubulus, Pudens, and Claudia, nothing certain is known; they were not companions of the Apostle (ver. 11), but only members of the Church at Rome. The identity of the two latter with the Pudens and Claudia of Martial (Zpigr. iv. 13, xi. 34) seems very doubtful ; comp. Conyb. and Hows. St. Paul, Vol. τι., p. 501. Linus is in all probability the first Bishop of Rome of that name; see Ireneus, Her. 11. 3, Euseb. Hist. 111. 2. 22. μετὰ τοῦ πνεύμ.}] ‘with thy spirit , so Gal. vi. 18, Philem. 25. The Apostle names the ‘spirit’ as the ‘potior pars’ in our nature, see notes on Gal. l.c. There is no allusion to the Holy Spirit (Chrys. al.), nor to πνευματικὴ χάρις (icum.) ; the πνεῦμα is the human πνεῦμα (not merely the ψυχή, Coray), the third and highest part in man; compare Olshausen, Opusc. V1., p. 145 84. μεθ’ ὑμῶν] ‘with you,’ not exactly ‘tecum et cum tota ecclesia tibi com- missa,’ Mill, Prolegom. p. 86, as there is no mention throughout the epistle of the Church at Ephesus ; but simply ‘with thee and those with thee.’ This benediction is somewhat singular as being twofold, to Timothy sepa- rately, and to Tim. and those with him: 1 Cor. xvi. 23, 24, is also two- fold, but to the same persons. ΕΣ 1 {1} EPISTLE, TO.TITUS. CHAPTER I. 1. Apostolic address and AYAO®S δοῦλος Θεοῦ, ἀπόστολος δὲ salutation, 9 I : A Χ A Ny ; ’ A 40 OU βίιστου κατα πιστιν ἐκλεκτῶν 1. Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ] So Lachm. with D*¥**EFGHJK &c. (Rec., Griesb.; Scholz, De W., and Huth. (e sil.) ; the order is inverted by Tisch. only with A 3) HEE oleae Tol. (al.) Copt. Syr.(Philox.) ..... Ambrst. (ed.) Cassiod. There certainly does not seem sufficient authority for this change of the received Text in the present case ; indeed it may be remarked that Tisch. appears to have been somewhat precipitate in always maintaining the sequence door. Xp. Inc. in St. Paul’s introductory salutations. In 1 Cor. i. 1. and 2 Tim. i. 1. certainly, in Col. i. τ. and 1 Tim, i. 1. probably, and perhaps in Eph. i. τ. and Phil. i. τ. (δοῦλοι) this order may be adopted, but in Rom. i. 1 (δοῦλος), 2 Cor. i. 1, and here, it seems most insufficiently supported, and is rightly rejected by Lachmann. It is not perhaps too much to say that some passing thought in the Apostle’s mind may have often suggested ‘a variation in order ; in ver. 4, for example, Xp. “Ino. (Tisch.) seems more probable, Ἰησοῦ and σωτῆρος being thus brought in more immediate contact. It is not well to be hyper- critical, but variations even in these frequently recurring words should not wholly be passed over. CHapterR I. 1. δοῦλος Θεοῦ] ‘a | and ina slightly different application, servant of God; the more general | 1 Pet. ii. 16, Rev. vil. 3. designation succeeded by dmogr. | ἀπόστολος δέ] ‘and further an apos- k.T.. the more special. On all | fle,’ dc, ; more exact definition. The other occasions St. Paul terms himself | δὲ here has not its full adversative δοῦλος “I. X., Rom. i. 1, Phil. i. 1; | force (Mack), but, as in Jude 1, ap- comp. Gal. i. 10; so also James i. 1, | pears only to distinguish and specify 2 Pet. i. 1, Jude 1, comp. Rev. i. 1. | by the notice of another relation in Surely a forger would not have made | which the subject stood to another a deviation so very noticeable: in | genitive ; see esp. Klotz, Devar, Vol. salutations more than in anything else | 1. p. 359; comp. Winer, Gir. ὃ 57. 4. peculiarities would have been avoided. | b, p. 521, and the list of exx. (though The expression itself occurs Acts xvi. | not very critically arranged) in El- 17, Rev. xv. 3, compare ib. x. 7; | lendt, Lex. Soph. Vol. τι. p. 388. \ ἘΒΒΙΡΤΙ͂Σ, a 4 ΕἸ , ἣν if ~ " 2 , Θεοῦ καὶ επιγνωσιν ἀληθείας τῆς κατ᾽ εὐσέβειαν. Forgetfulness of this common, per- haps even primary (comp. Donalds. Oratyl. ὃ 155, p- 256), use of δὲ has led several expositors (e.g. Bloomf.) into needlessly artificial and elliptical translations ; comp. even Peile in loc. κατὰ πίστιν K.T. A. | ‘for the faith of God’s elect; the πίστις τῶν ἐκλ. is the destination of the apostleship: not ‘secundum fidem,’ Ital., Vulg., which, though defended by Matthies, seems very un- satisfactory ; the faith or knowledge of individuals cannot without much explaining away (comp. Peile) ever be the rule or norma of the Apostle’s office. The meaning is thus nearly as enunciated by Theophyl., πρὸς τὸ πιστεῦσαι τοὺς ἐκλεκτοὺς δι᾿ ἐμοῦ, scarcely so much as νὰ διδάσκω τοὺς ἐκλ. τὴν εἰς αὐτὸν πίστιν (Coray), and the sentiment is parallel to Rom. i. 5. Though it may be admitted that the idea of ‘ object,’ ‘intention,’ is more fully expressed by εἰς and πρός (Matth.), it seems still hopeless to deny that κατὰ in such exx. as κατὰ θέαν, Thucyd. VI. 31, Kad’ ἁρπὶαγήν, Xenoph. Anad. 11. 5. 3, &c., plainly points to and implies some idea of purpose ; see Palm ἃ. Rost, Lex. Ἦν ΠΣ Vol. inp. 1508, Jeli, Gr. § 629. If it be not undue refine- ment, we may say that in the three prepp., εἰς, πρός, κατά, ‘object’ is expressed in its highest degree by the former, and in its lowest by the latter ; but that the two first are very near to each other in meaning, while κατὰ does not rise much above the idea of “special reference to,’ ‘ destination for.’ We might thus perhaps say εἰς rather marks immediate purpose, πρὸς ultimate purpose, κατὰ destination ; comp. notes on Hph. iv. 12. These distinctions must however be applied with great caution. It need scarcely be said that there is here no parenthesis, as Bloomfield, al.; see Winer, Gr. § 64. I. 2, p. 614. ἐκλεκτοὺς Θεοῦ] ‘the chosen of God.’ There is nothing proleptic in the expres- sion, sc. THs ἐκλογῆς τοὺς ἀξίους, Theo- doret, and more expressly, De Wette : ‘the faith of the elect’ forms one com- pound idea, itis on the πίστις τα που than the defining gen. that the moment of thought principally rests. Nay, fur- ther, Acts xiii. 48 shows this, that election is not in consequence of faith, but faith in consequence of election ; comp. Eph. i. 4, and notes én loc. ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθ.] ‘ full knowledge of the truth; i.e. of evangelical truth, comp. Eph. i. 13; ‘in hoc, inquit, missus sum Apostolus ut electi per me credant et cognoscant veritatem,’ Estius. ἀληθεία has thus reference to the object (surely not to be resolved into a mere adj., τῆς ἀληθινῆς εὐσεβ., Coray), ἐπίγνωσις to the subject; on the latter (‘accurata cognitio’) see notes on Eph. i. 17. This ‘truth’ is defined more exactly by the clause τῆς κατ᾽ εὐσέβειαν, comp. notes on 2 Tim. 1 15. ΤΠ). 11. 12. κατ᾽ εὐσέβειαν may be translated ‘according to godliness’ (see notes on 1 Tim. vi. 3), but as Gospel truth can scarcely be said to be conformable to εὐσέβεια, and as it is not probable that the prep. would be used in the same sentence in different senses, the more natural meaning seems, ‘ which leads to god- liness,’ scil. which is ‘most naturally productive of holy living and a pious conversation,’ South, Serm. 5, Vol. mm. p. 214 (Tegg). The meaning adopted by Huther, ‘ which is allied to’ (‘bezeichnet die Angehorigkeit’), even in such passages as Rom. x. 2, is more than doubtful ; see Winer, 108 TITUS ΤΌΣ ΤΟ. ἐλπίδι ζωῆς αἰωνίου. ἣν ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ ἀψευδὴς Θεὸς πρὸ , Ἂν , Xpovev ALWYVLWYV, 3 ἐφανέρωσεν δὲ καιροῖς ἰδίοις τὸν λόγον β β 7 3 Lol ’ , a) 9 Ψ > A 9 5 A “ αὐτοὺ εν κηρύγματι ὃ ἐπιστεύθην eyo κατ επιταγὴν τοῦ Gr. ὃ 53 ἃ, p. 479. On the meaning of εὐσέβεια, see notes on τ Tim. ii. 2. 2. ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι κ.τ. λ.Ἴ ‘resting on hope of eternal life,’ not ‘in spem,’ Vulg., Goth. (‘du’): comp. Rom. iv. 18, viii. 20, t Cor. ix. 10; hope is the basis on which all rests, see Winer, Gir. ὃ 52 ὁ, p. 469. The con- nexion of the clause is not perfectly clear ; it can hardly be connected with ἀπόστολος, as it would thus form a co- ordinate clause to κατὰ πίστιν k.T.X., and would more naturally be intro- duced by some specifying particle ; nor can it be attached to ἐπίγνωσιν k.T.., as this would violate the close union of πίστις and ἐπίγν. We must then, with De W. and Huther, and, as it would seem, Chrys. and Theod. refer it to the whole clause, κατὰ πίστιν---εὐσέβειαν : the Apostle’s call- ing had for its destination the faith of the elect and the knowledge of the truth, and the basis on which all this rested was the hope of eternal life. ἐπηγγείλατο] ‘promised,’ “γτο- claimed, se. in the way of a promise,’ so Rom. iv. 21, Gal. iii. τὸ. The force and truth of the ἐπαγγελία is then enhanced by the unique expres- sion (in the N.T.), ἀψεύδης Θεός ; comp., however, for the sentiment, Heb. vi. 18, and for the expression, Eurip. Orest. 364, TAatxos ἀψευδὴς θεός. πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων can hardly be considered equivalent to πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, or πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων (Theod.). Though it may be truly said that God loved us from all eternity (Gicum.), it still cannot be said (without explainings away) that ζωὴ αἰώνιος was promised before all eternity: see Hammond in loc. The expression then only seems to mean ‘very ancient times,’ πόλλους καὶ μακροὺς χρόνους, Coray; ‘ docet multa secula preteriisse ex quo salus fuit promissa,’ Caly. See notes on 2 Tim. i. 9, where the expression is more fully investigated. 3. ἐφανέφωσεν δέ] ‘but mani- fested ; in practical though not verbal antithesis to ἐπηγγείλατο, ver. 2; the primary ἐπαγγελία (Gen. iii. 15), yea, even the cardinal ἐπαγγελία to Abraham (Gal. iii. 8), required some further revelation to make it fully φανερόν. The more strict antithesis occurs in Col. i. 26, where, however, the allusion is different ; comp. Rom. xvi./ 25, 26, 2 Tim. 1) ope.) “Whe accus. objecti after ἐφανέρωσεν is clearly τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ [not αὑτοῦ, Huth., see notes on ρα. i. 4], not ζωήν (Hecumen. al.), or ἔλπιδα ζωῆς (Heinr.). The Apostle changes the accus. for the sake of making his lan- guage more exact; ζωὴ αἰώνιος was, strictly speaking, in regard of its ap- pearance, future: the Gospel included both it and all things, whether re- ferring to the present or the future ; see Theophy]l. in loc. who has explained the structure clearly and correctly. καιροῖς ἰδίοις] ‘in His own,’ i.e. ‘in due Tots ἁρμόζουσι τοῖς ὠφελημένοις, Theophyl. On the ex- pression and the peculiar-nature of the dat., see notes on I Z%m. ii. 6. Here and in r Tim. vi. 15 (comp. Acts i. 7), the reference to the subject, God, is so distinct that the more seasons ; literal translation may be maintained. τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ] ‘ His word,’ i.e. as more fully defined by ἐν κηρύγματι k.T.A., the Gospel, which was the re- ἘΠ ΘΙ Tag. A CAA an σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Θεοῦ, 109 4 ΠΝ / , X A τῷ γνησίῳ τεκνῷ κατα κοινὴν , U A La 5) \ Θ a \ A ΄ TLOTLV. χάρις και εἰρ1)Μ1) απο εου TAT Pos Kal Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν. pos iu velation both of the primal mystery (Rom. xvi, 26), and all succeeding ἐπαγγελίαι, and was announced to | | Ephesus, to Corinth (2 Cor. vii. 6), man in the κήρυγμα of the Lord and His Apostles. To refer it to the Logos, with Jerome, (cum., and others, is wholly unsatisfactory. On the change of construction, see Winer, Gr.§ 64. τι. 1, p. 616, where numerous exx. are cited of far more striking anacolutha. 6 ἐπιστεύθην ἐγώ] ‘ with which I was intrusted ; on this construction, see Winer, G7. ὃ 32. 5, p. 261, and comp. notes on Gal. eye κατ᾽ ἐπιταγὴν K.T.A. |} “according to the commandment of our Saviour God ; so, only with a slight change of order, 1 Tim.i. 1. It has been suggested that the Second Person of the blessed Trinity may be here in- tended ; comp. notes on ch. iii. 5, and Usteri, Lehrb. τι. 2. 4, p. 310: the analogy of 1 Tim. i. 1, renders this, and perhaps also ch. ii. 11, very doubtful. The ἀξιόπιστον implied in the ὁ ἐπιστεύ- θην (Chrys.) is further defined and en- hanced by the declaration that it was not ‘proprio motu,’ but in obedience to a special command ; see notes on 1 Tim. l.c., where the clause is consi- dered more at length. 4. Tite, γνησίῳ τέκνῳ] ‘to Titus, my true (genuine) child.’ The receiver of this epistle is far too distinctly mentioned to make the supposition ad- missiblethatit was addressed (comp. iii. 15) tothe Church, see Wiesing. Linleit. I. 1, p. 260. Of Titus comparatively little is known. His name does not occur in the Acts, but from the epp. we find that he was a Greek (Gal. ii. 3), converted, as the present verse seems to imply, by St. Paul himself, and with the Apostie at Jerusalem on his third visit (notes on Gal. ii. 1). He was sent by St. Paul, when at on some unknown commission (Meyer on 2 Cor. p. 3), possibly with some reference to a collection (2 Cor. viii. 6, προενήρξατο); is again with the Apostle in Macedonia (2 Cor. ii. 13, comp. with vii. 5), and is sent by him with the second ep. to Corinth (2 Cor. viii. 6., 16sq.). The remaining notices of Titus are supplied by the Pastoral epp., 2 Tim. iv. 10, Tit. 1. 5 sq., iii. 12. According to tradition, Titus was bishop of Crete (Euseb. Hist. 111. 4), and died on that island (Isid. de Vit. Sanct. 87); see Winer, RWB ys Vitasie Viol it. ps 625, and comp. Acta Sanct. (Jan. 4), Vol. I. p. 163. τέκνῳ, see notes on I Tim. i. 2. κατά κοινὴν πίστιν] ‘in respect of (our) common faith; ‘ fidei respectu que quidem et Paulo pairi et Tito filio communis erat,’ Beza, τὴν ἀδεὰλ- On the expression γνησίῳ φότητα ἠνίξατο, Chrys.: a reference to the faith that was common to them and all Christians (Beng., Wiesing.) would, as Jerome suggests, be here too general. Grotius finds in κοινὸς a reference to the Greeks in the person of Titus, and to the Jews in the per- son of St. Paul; this seems ‘ argutius quam verius dictum.’ χάρις Kal εἰρήνη] For an explanation of this form of .Christian salutation, see notes on Gal. i. 2, and on Eph. i. 2. There seems enough authority to justify Zisch. in his insertion of καὶ, and omission of the more individual- izing ἔλεος, with C*DEFG; 73. 137; Vulg. Ital. Copt. Syr. 4ith. Arm... 170 T left thee in Crete to ordain elders, who must have all high moral qualities and teach sound doctrine. Chrys. (expressly), and many others. The reading, however, cannot be pro- nounced certain, as ἔλεος (Rec.) is re- tained in AC** JK ; Syr.(Philox.) al. ; Theod. al., and is adopted by Lach- mann. The addition τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν to Xp. “Ino. (comp. iii. 6), is peculiar to this salutation. 5. ἀπέλιπόν σε «.7.A.] “7 left thee in Crete.’ When this happened can only be conjectured. The various attempts to bring this circumstance within the time included in the Acts of the Apostles Chronol. p. 329 sq.), seem all unsatis- factory, and have been well investi- gated by Wiesinger, Hinleit. 1. 4, p. 262 sq., and (in answer to Wieseler) p. 360. Language, historical notices, and the advanced state of Christianity in that island, alike seem to lead us to fix the date of the ep. near to that of 1 Tim., and of this journey as pos- sibly soon after the Apostle’s release from his first imprisonment at Rome ; see Neander, Planting, Vol. τ. p. 338 sq. (Bohn), Conyb. and Hows. St. Paul, Vol. τι. p. 557, Guerike, Hinleit. § 48. τ, p. 396 (ed. 2). There seems no sufficient reason for suppos- ing, with Neander (p. 342), that Christianity was planted in Crete by St. Paul on this occasion ; reorganized it might have been, but planted by him it scarcely could have been, as the whole tenor of the ep. leads to the supposition that it had been long esta- blished, and had indeed taken sufficient root to break out Christianity might have been planted there after one of the early disper- sions; Cretans were present at the Pentecostal miracle (Acts ii. 11) : see esp. Wiesing. on ver. 5. τὰ λείποντα] ‘the things that are (comp. Wieseler, into heresies. TITUS: diese 5 'Γούτου χάριν ἀπέλιπόν σε ἐν Κρήτη, A ’ A ἵνα τὰ λείποντα ἐπιδιορθώσῃ καὶ KaTa- lacking , ‘que ego per temporis brevitatem non potui expedire,’ Beng. The more special directions at once_ follow. ἐπιδιορθώσῃ] ‘further set in order ; the prep. ἐπί, according to its common force in compos., denotes ‘insuper;’ St. Paul © διορθώσατο, Titus ἐπιδιορθοῦται, Beng. The reading is far from certain, but on the whole Tisch. seems to have rightly adopted the middle; the form ἐπιδιορθώσῃς (Lachm.), though well supported (AE*, comp. D* ἐπαν- ορθώσῃς, and FG deophdcys), might have had its termination suggested by καταστήσῃς below. The middle it must be owned has here scarcely any force (Winer, Gr. § 39. 6, p. 299), unless it be taken as an instance of Kriiger’s ‘dynamic’ middle; see Sprachl. § 52. 8 sq., and comp. notes on 1. Tim. Iv. 6. πόλιν] ‘in every city,’ ‘from city to city” ‘oppidatim,’ Calvin ; comp. Acts ‘xiv. 23, ἐκκλησίαν πρεσβυτέρους, and as regards the expression, Luke viii. 1, Acts xv. 21, xx. 23. The deduction of Bp. Taylor, ‘oné in-one city, many in many’ (Zpise. § 15), is certainly pre- carious. On the connexion between κατὰ and ἀνά, both in this distributive, and in other senses, see Donalds. Cratyl. § 183 sq. ὡς ἐγὼ κι τ. λ.} ‘as I directed thee ; in refe- rence, as De W. says, not only to the ‘Dass,’ but the ‘ Wie,’ as the follow- ing requisitions further explain; the Apostle not only bid Titus perform this duty, but taught him how to do it wisely and efficiently. This verb is more commonly (in the N.T.) active when joined with a dat. (Matt. xi. 1, I Cor, ix. 14, xvi. 1); the middle, however (with dat.), occurs Acts xxiv. Ν κατὰ χειροτονήσαντες κατ᾽ TITUS I. 5»-- 7. 171 , A } , e 2) A A ὃ , στήσης κατὰ πολιν πρεσβυτέρους. ὡς eyw σοι ιεταξάμην, 6 , A ’ ’ πὰ , \ 3 , πιστὰ, μὴ EV κατηγορίᾳ ἀσωτίας ἢ αἀνυποτακτα. 4 ς᾽ 4 ° , tes , ° [4 , 4 εἰ τις ἐστιν AVEYKANTOS, μιᾶς γυναικὸς AVP, τέκνα ἔχων 7 δεῖ ‘ Ni ome ey, > e Θ a 9 , \ γὰρ TOV εἐπισκοπον aveyKAnT ov εἰναι ὡς εου οἰκονομον. μῇ 23. This again seems more a ‘dynamic’ middle than the ordinary middle ‘of interest.’ The force of the compound διατάσσω may be feltin the ‘ dispositio 5011, eorum quz incomposita vel im- plicata et perplexa erant’ (comp. 1 Cor. xi. 34), which a directive com- mand tacitly involves: see Winer, de Verb. comp. V., p. 7. 6. εἴ τις κ. T.A.] “ὁ any one be unaccused, have nought laid to his charge; εἰ μηδεὶς ἔσχεν ἐπισκῆψαι ἐν τῇ ζωῇ, Chrysost. The form of ex- pression certainly does not seem in- tended to imply that it was probable few such would be found (comp. Heydenr.) ; it only generally marks the class to which the future presbyter was necessarily to belong. For the exact meaning of ἀνεγκλὰ. (‘sine crimine,’ Vulg.), see notes on 1 7 ἴηι. ill. το, and Tittm. Synon. 1. p. 31. μιᾶς γυναικός ἀνήρ] ‘a husband of one wife,’ for the meaning of this ex- pression see notes on 1 Zim. iii. 2. The remark of Chrysost. may be here adduced, as certainly illustrative of the opinion held in the early Church ; ἴστε yap ἅπαντες, ἴστε, ὅτι εἰ μὴ κεκώ- λυται παρὰ τῶν νόμων τὸ μὴ δευτέροις ὁμιλεῖν γάμοις, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως πόλλας ἔχει τὸ πρᾶγμα κατηγορίας. τέκνα κι τ. Δ. ‘having believing chil- dren ; the emphasis seems to rest on πίστα ; the Christian πρεσβύτερος was not to have heathen, Judaizing, or merely nominally-believing children ; comp. I Tim. ili. 4, 5, where this re- The expression has, not perhaps without reason, been urged as a hint that Christianity had been established in quisition is more fully expressed. Crete for some time. év κατηγορίᾳ k.T.A.] ‘not in accusation of dissoluteness,’ i. 6. ‘not accused of,’ &e., Auth. Ver. The κατηγορία (John xviii. 29, 1 Tim. y. 19) is, as it were, something im which they might be in- volved, and out of which they were to take care to be always found: οὐκ εἶπε μὴ ἁπλῶς ἄσωτος [εἶπεν ἁπλῶς μὴ ἀσ., conject. Bened.], ἀλλὰ μηδὲ δια- βολὴν ἔχειν ποιαύτην, Chrysost. On the meaning and derivation οἵ ἀσωτία, see notes on βρῆ. v. 18. ἢ ἀνυπότακτα] ‘or wnruly,’ scil. dis- obedient to their parents; the reason is more fully given, 1 Tim. iii. 5, para- phrased by Theophyl., ὁ yap τὰ οἰκεῖα τέκνα μὴ παιδεύσας, πῶς ἄλλοις ῥυθ- μίζει. see notes on 1 Tim. i. 9. 7. τὸν ἐπίσκοπον] ‘every bishop,’ or, according to our idiom, “ὦ bishop ;’ on the article see notes on Gal. iii. 20 ; and on the meaning of the term ἐπίσκ., and its relation to πρεσβύτερος, see notes on 1 Tim. iii. 1. The Apostle here changes the former designation into the one that presents the subject most clearly in his oficial capacity, the one in which his relations to those under his rule, would be most neces- sary to be defined. The excellent treatise of Bp. Pearson, Minor Works, Vol. 1. p. 271 sq., may be added to the list of works on episcopacy noticed on 1 Tim. /.¢.;-his positions are that episcopal government was sub Aposto- lis, ab Apostolis, in Apostolis, p. 278. ὡς Θεοῦ οἰκον. ‘as being God's steward ; Θεοῦ not without prominence For the meaning of ἀνυπότ., and emphasis. While the previous title is enhanced and expanded, the 172 ἀν κε τὶς; 157,18: +} , 4 τ ν᾿ A , A , ‘ 9 αὐθάδη, μὴ ὀργίλον, μὴ πάροινον; μὴ πλήκτην; μὴ αἰσχρο- κερδῆ, leading requisition (dveyxd.) is made more evidently necessary from the position occupied by the subject: he must indeed be ἀνεγκὰλ., as he is a steward of the οἶκος Θεοῦ, the Church of the living God (1 Tim. iii. 15). On this use of ws, see notes on Eph. v. 28. Both on this account, and the more pregnant meaning of οἰκονόμος, 1 Cor. iv. t (compare I Pet. iv. ro) is not a strict parallel of this passage. μὴ αὐθάδη} ‘not self-willed ,᾿ not, in a derivative sense, ‘haughty,’ Goth. (‘hauh-hairts’), but as Syr., correctly, though somewhat paraphrastically, ”~ Ν ρ ων 7,9. NADI «αὶ por MSc [ductus voluntate sui-ipsius]: τὴν δ᾽ αὐθάδειαν αὐταρέσκειαν λέγω, Greg. Naz., Vol. IL p. 199. The adj., as its derivation suggests (αὐτός, ἤδομαι), implies a self- loving spirit, which in seeking only to gratify itself is regardless, of others, and is hence commonly ὑπερήφανος, θυμώδης, παράνομος, Hesych. ; rightly defined as ‘qui se non accommodat aliis, ideoque omnibus incommodus est, morosus,’ Tittm. Synon. I. p. 74; see esp. Theophrast. Charact, Xv., Aristot. (?) M. Moral. τ. 29, the essay on this word in Raphel, Annot., Vol. 1. p. 626, and the numerous exx, in Weitst. zn loc., and Elsner, Obs. Vol. Ir. p- 320. It occurs in the N.T. only here and 2 Pet. ii. το, τολμηταὶ αὐθάδεις. With the foregoing adjec- tives, μὴ is properly used, not οὐ, as the qualities are marked which the assumed model bishop ought to have to correspond to his office ; see Winer, Gr. § 59. 4. obs., p. 566. ὀργίλον] ‘soon angry,’ ‘irascible ; dm. λεγόμ. in N.T.; thus specially defined by Aristotle (Zthics Iv. 11- οἱ 8 ἀλλὰ φιλόξενον, φιλάγαθον, σώφρονα, δίκαιον. μὲν οὖν ὀργίλοι ταχέως μὲν ὀργίζονται καὶ οἷς οὐ δεῖ καὶ ἐφ᾽ οἷς οὐ δεῖ καὶ μᾶλλον ἢ δεῖ, παύονται δὲ ταχέως. The lengthened termination --λος, esp. in --ηλός, --ωλός, denotes ‘habit,’ ‘ cus- tom,’ Buttm. Gr. ὃ 119. 13. On the two following epithets, πάροινον and ; πλήκτην, see notes on I Tim. iii. 3, and on αἰσχροκερδῆ, ib. iii. 8, and comp. below ver. 11. 8. φιλόξενον] ‘hospitable; so τ Tim. iii. 2, comp. v. Io, 3 John 5, 6. This hospitality, as Conyb. and Hows. remark, would be especially shown when Christians travelling from one place to another were received and forwarded on their journey by their brethren. The precept must not, however, be too much limited ; comp. Heb. xiii. 2. φιλάγαθον] ‘a lover of good,’ ‘benignum,’ Ital., Vulg.; see notes on 2 Tim. ii. 3, Here at first sight the masculine refe- rence , ‘bonorum amantem,’ Jerome, might seem more plausible as follow- ing φιλόξενον (Est.); 5.11, on the other hand, the transition from the special to the general, from hospitality to love of good and benevolence, would appear no less appropriate; see Wis- dom vii. 2, where the ref. (though so asserted in Schleusner, Lez. s.v.) does not seem to persons. Both meanings are probably admissible (Palm ἃ. Rost, Lex. s.v.), but the analogy of similar compounds (e. g. φιλόκαλος) would point rather to the neuter. σώφρονα] ‘discreet,’ or “ sober- minded ; see notes on 1 Tim. ii. 8, where the meaning of σωφροσύνη is briefly investigated. δίκαιον, ὅσιον] ‘righteous, holy ,” comp. 1 Thess. ii. το, Eph. iv.-25. The ordinary distinction recapitulated by Huth., περὶ μὲν ἀνθρώπους δίκαιος, ; Ν TITUS I. 8, 0. ὅσιον; ἐγκρατῆ: 179 3 , - ‘ A Α 9 ἀντεχόμενον τοῦ κατὰ τῆν διδαχὴν “ , 6 \ > aX a Ε] la σπιστου λόγου: «να δυνατὸς ἢ και παρακαλεῖν εν TY διδα- t? σὸν 8 ’ < A 5 , Ε] , σκαλιᾳ TH υὑγιαινουση Kat τοὺς αντιλεγοντας ἐλεγχειν. περὶ δὲ θεοὺς ὅσιος (see Plato, Gorg. 507 B), does not seem sufficiently ex- act and comprehensive for the N.T. Δίκαιος, as Tittmann observes, ‘recte dicitur, et qui jus fasque servat, et qui facit quod honestum et zequum postulat,’ Synon. I. p. 21: ὅσιος, as the same author admits (p. 25), is more allied with ἁγνός, and, as Har- less has shown (Ephes. p. 427), in- volves rather the idea of a ‘holy purity,’ see notes on Eph. iv. 24. The derivation of ὅσιος seems very doubt- ful, see Pott, Htym. Forsch., Vol. 1. Ῥ. 126, compared with Benfey, Wur- zellex, Vol. I. p. 436. ἐγκρατῆ] ‘temperate; dr. λεγόμ. in N.T., but the subst. occurs in Acts xxiv. 25, Gal. v. 23, 2 Pet. i. 6, and the (nearly unique) verb in 1 Cor. vil. 9, ix. 25. The meaning is sufficiently clear from the derivation (τὸν παθοῦς κρατοῦντα, Tov καὶ γλώττης Kal χειρὸς καὶ ὀφθαλμῶν ἀκολάστων, Chrys.), and though of course very pertinent in: ΤΘ- spect of ‘libido’ (comp. De W.), need in no way be limited in its application ; comp. Suicer, Thesawr. s.v., Vol. 11. p. 1000. 9. ἀντεχόμενον) “ holding fast ; comp. Matth. vi. 24, Luke xvi. 13, and in a somewhat more restricted sense 1 Thess. v. 14, ἀντεχ. τῶν ἀσθε- νῶν. The ἀντὶ appears to involve a faint idea of holding out against some- thing hostile or opposing (Palm u. Rost, ex. s.v.), which, however, passes into that of steadfast applica- tion to, δι; e.g. THs Oaddoons, Thucyd. 1. 13, Polyb. 1. 58. 3; ἐλπί- δος μηδεμιᾶς, Polyb. 1. 56. 9, in which latter author the word is very com- mon ; see Schweigh. Lew. Polyb. s.v. τοῦ κατὰ K.T.A.] ‘the faithful word according to the teaching,’ i.e. the true, Christian doctrine set forth, and agreeing with, Apostolic teaching ; comp. 2 Tim. i. 13, λόγων, ὧν παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἤκουσας, ib. ili. 14, μένε ἐν ols ἔμαθες. There is some slight difficulty in the explanation. The position of the words shows plainly that there are not two distinct specifications in respect of the λόγος (Heydenr.), but one in re- spect of the πιστὸς λογός, viz., that it is κατὰ διδαχήν: the only doubt is what meanings are to be assigned to κατὰ and διδαχή; is it (a) ‘ sure with respect to teaching others’ (‘verba ipsius sint regula veritatis,’ Jerome), διδαχὴ having thus an active refe- rence? or (0) ‘sure in accordance with the teaching received’ (‘as he hath been taught,’ Auth. Ver.), διδαχὴ being taken passively? Of these (ὁ) seems certainly to harmonize best with the normal meaning of πιστός ; the faithful word is so on account of its accordance with A postolic teaching. Of the other interpr. that noticed by Flatt. 2 (compare Calv.), erudiendis hominibus _ inserviens,’ seems as unduly to press κατὰ (comp. ver. I) as that of Raphel (Anznot., Vol. τι. p. 681), ‘sermo doctrine,’ unduly obscures it. ‘doctrina καὶ παρακαλεῖν K.T.A.] ‘as well to exhort . with the sound doctrine as,’ &c.: on the connexion καὶ---καί, see notes on τ Tim, iv. 10. Ἣν mental, a construction perfectly natu- ral, especially in cases like the present, when ‘the object may be conceived as existing in the instrument or means,’ Jelf, Gr. ὃ 622. 3; see Winer, ΟἿ. ὃ 52. a, p. 564. On what grounds does is here instru- 174 There are many evil teachersandseducers; the Cretan character has always been bad, so rebuke and warn them. In the un- ἐκ περιτομῆ believing and polluted pP eran? there is neither purity, faith, nor obedience. Bloomf. assert that “ἐξ is evident that the Syr. took ἐν for per,’ when the original language is here equally am- biguous with the Greek ? διδασκ. see notes on 1 Tim. i. το. ἐλέγχειν] ‘to confute;’ the words of Chrysostom are definite, ὁ γὰρ οὐκ εἰδὼς μάχεσθαι τοῖς ἐχθροῖς . . καὶ λογισμοὺς καθαιρεῖν... πόῤῥω ἔστω θρόνου διδασκαλικοῦ. The clause leads on to the subject of ver. το. On τοὺς ἀντιλέγοντας (‘ gainsayers’), see notes on ch. il. 9. 10. γάρ] In confirmation, more especially, of the preceding clause. πολλοὶ καὶ ἀνυπ.} ‘many wnruly ναΐη- talkers and inward deceivers.’ In his second edition Z%sch. has here made two improvements; he has restored καὶ with DEFGJK al. ... It., Vulg. . . Chrys. Dam., its omis- sion being so obviously referable to an ignorance of the idiomatic πολὺς καί (Jelf, Gr. ὃ 759. 4. 2); he has also removed the comma (Lachm.) after ἀνυπ., as that word is clearly a simple adjective, prefixed to ματαιολ. and φρεναπ., which serves to enhance the On ὑγιαιν. necessity for ἐπιστομίζειν. ΤῊ ματαιολ. (ἅπ. λεγόμ., but see τ Tim. i. g) and φρεναπάται (dar. Neyou., but see Gal. vi. 3) are the leading substantival words. On φρεναπάτης (‘mentis de- ceptor,’ Jerome, ‘making to err the minds of men,’ Syr.), which seems to mark the inward-working, insinuating character of the deceit (‘mentes homi- num demulcent et quasi incantant,’ Calv.), see notes on Gal. vi. 5, and on ‘the case of deceivers and deceived’ generally, Waterl. Sem, xx1x., Vol. V. p. 717 sq. οἱ ἐκ περι- τομῆς defines more particularly the PEGS: Ἢ: ΠΟ ΠΕ 4 10 Kicw yap πολλοὶ καὶ ἀνυπότακτοι , ’ ματαιολόγοι καὶ φρεναπαται, μάλιστα οἱ ἘΣ a ὃ - 3 t/ ous δεῖ ἐπιστομίζειν, origin of the mischief; comp. ver. r4. - The deceivers here mentioned were obviously not unconverted Jews, but Judaizing Christians, a state of things not unlikely when it is remembered that more than half a century before this time Jews (perhaps in some num- bers) were living in Crete, Joseph. Antig. XVII. 12. 1, comp. ib. Bell. Jud. 1. 7. τ. On the expression οἱ ἐκ περιτ., comp. notes on Gal. 111. 7. 11. οὖς δεῖ k.7.A.] ‘whose mouths must be stopped,’ Auth. Ver.; a good idiomatic translation, very superior to the Vulg. ‘redargui,’ which, though making the reference to τοὺς ἀντιλ. ἐλέγχ., ver. 9, a little more evident, is not sufficiently exact. ’Emucro- μίζειν has two meanings; either (a) ‘frenis coercere,’ ἐπιστομιεῖ καὶ ἐγχα- λινώσει, Philo, Leg. Alleg. m1. 53, Vol. 1. p. 117 (ed. Mang.);' comp. James iii. 3, and-the large list of exx, Observ. p. 445: ; or (6) a» ‘obturare os,’ Beza, soaa ° game [occludere os] Syr., Theoph.,—the meaning most suitable in the present case, and perhaps most common ; see the exx. in Wetst. and Elsner, in Joc., the most pertinent of which is perhaps Lucian, Jup. Trag. ὃ 35, ἰχθύν ce ἀποφανεῖ ἐπιστομίζων. οἵτινες] ‘inasmuch as they; expli- cative force of ὅστις, see notes on Gal. iv. 24. ὅλους κ. τ. A. ] ‘overthrow whole houses,’ 1.6. ‘subvert the faith of whole families,’ the em- phasis resting appy. on the adjective. ἀνατρέπω occurs again 2 Tim. ii. 18, but here, from its combination with οἴκους, is a little more specific: exx. of ἀνατρέπ., the meaning of which how- ἣν in Loesner, ECS: OL. 254 πρὶ 175 4 δ 3 bd) , ὃ ὃ , cA b) ὃ a OLTLVES ὅλους OLKOUS AVAT PETOUGLV ἰοασκοντες A μῆ εἰ 12 αἰσχροῦ κέρδους χάριν. δ ῥ᾽ 9 ον σα τὃ . A €lLTEV τις ἐξ αὑτῶν ιοιος αὐτῶν ~ cm a x , ’ προφήτης Κρῆτες ael ψεῦσται. κακα θηρία, γαστερες ever is quite clear, are cited by Kypke, Obs. Vol. τι. p. 378. The formula is adopted in Cone. Chalced. Can. 23. ἃ μὴ Set] ‘things they should not ; μή, not οὐ (as usually in the N. T.), after the relative és ; the class is here only spoken of as conceived to be in existence, though really that existence was not doubtful; see Winer, Gr. § 59. 5. ὁ, p. 566. Winer there refers to Gayler, Part. Neg. p. 240, ob- serving that the distinction between ἅ οὐ δεῖ and ἃ μὴ δεῖ will be clear from the exx. he has cited. As that very ill-arranged list will probably do little for the reader, it may be further said that ἅ od δεῖ points to things which are definitely improper or forbidden, ἃ μὴ δεῖ to things which are so, either in the mind of the describer, or which (as here) derive a seeming contingency only from the mode in which the sub- ject is presented : on the use of οὐ and μὴ with relatives see the brief but perspicuous statement of Herm. on Viger, No. 267, and Kriiger, Sprachl. § 67. 4. 3. αἰσχροῦ κέρδους] ‘base gain,’ marking emphatically the utterly corrupt character of these teachers. It was not from fanatical motives or a morbid and Pharisaical (Matth. xxiii. 15) love of proselytizing, but simply for selfish objects and dirty gains.. The words may also very probably have had reference to the general Cretan character ; the remark of Polybius is very noticeable; καθόλου δ᾽ ὁ περὶ τὴν αἰσχροκέρδειαν καὶ πλεονε- ξίαν τρόπος οὕτως ἐπιχωριάζει παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς, ὥστε παρὰ μόνοις Κρηταιεῦσι τῶν ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων μηδὲν αἰσχρὸν νομίζεσθαι κέρδος, Hist. V1. 46, 3; see Meursius, Creta, Iv. 10, p. 231. 12. ἐξ αὐτῶν can only refer to those whom the Apostle is about to mention by name,—the Cretans ; τῶν Κρητῶν διελέγχων τὸ τῆς γνώμης ἀβέβαιον, Theodoret. To refer the pronoun to the preceding οἱ ἐκ mepir., or πόλλοι k.7T.A. (as appy. Matth.), would involve the assumption that the Cretan Jews had assimilated all the peculiar evil elements of the native Cretan (see De W.), a somewhat un- necessary hypothesis. The Cretans deserved the censure not as being themselves false teachers, readily giving ear to such, ἴδιος αὐτῶν mpod.] ‘their own pro- phet.’ but as There is here no redundancy ; αὐτῶν states that he belonged to them, ἴδιος marks the antithesis ; he was a prophet of their own, not one of another country, οὐ yap ᾿Ιουδαίων mpo- φήτης, Theod.; see Winer, Gr. § 22. 7, p. 178. The prophet here alluded to is not Callimachus (Theod.), but Epi- menides (Chrys. al.) a Cretan, born at Cnossus or Gortyna, said to have been priest, bard, and seer among his countrymen, to have visited Athens about 596 B.c., and to have died soon afterwards above 150 years old. He appears to have deserved the title προφ. in its fullest sense, being termed a θεῖος ἀνήρ, Plato Legg. 1. 642, and coupled with Bacis and the Erythrean Sibyl by Cicero, de Div. τ. 18. The verse in question is referred by Jerome to the work of Epim., περὶ χρησμῶν. For further details see Fabricius, Bibl. Greca, τ. 6, Vol. τ. p- 36 (ed. 1708), and Heinrich, Zpi- menides (Leipz. 1801). ἀεὶ ψεῦσται] Repeated again by Callimachus, Hymn. ad Jov. 8. and if 176 apyat. TITUS: dewey rs: 13 ἡ μαρτυρία αὕτη ἐστὶν ἀληθής. Ov ἣν αἰτίαν + 5 ‘ Ω , of ε ᾽ cas ἢ ἔλεγχε QUTOUS αποτομῶὼς. ινὰ VYLALYWOLV εν TH TLOTELs antiquity can be trusted, a character only too well deserved: hence the current proverb, πρὸς Κρῆτα κρητίζειν, Polyb. Hist. vit. 21. 5, see also 7b. View θέ“, Ovid, Art. Aim. 1, 208; comp. Winer, RWB. s.v. ‘Kreta,’ Vol. I. p. 676, Meursius, Creta, Iv. 10, p. 223. Coray regards this despicable vice as perhaps a bequest which they received from their early Pheenician colonists ; comp. Heeren, Histor. Researches, Vol. U. p. 28 (Transl.). κακὰ θήρια] “evil beasts,’ in reference to their wild and untamed nature (comp. Joseph. Antig. XVII. 5. 5, πονηρὸν θήριον in ref. to Archelaus, and the exx. in Weist. and Kypke), and _ possibly, though not so pertinently, to their αἰσχροκέρδεια and utter worthlessness, Polyb. Hist. vt. 46. 3. They formed the first of the three bad καππά᾽ς (Κρῆτες, Καππάδοκαι, Κίλικες, τρία καππὰ κάκιστα) and appy. deserved their position. ᾿ς γαστέρες ἀργαί] ‘idle bellies,’ i. 6. “ do-nothing gluttons,’ Peile, comp. Phil. ii. 19 ; in ref. to their slothful sensuality, their dull gluttony and licentiousness; ‘cule et inerti otio dedite,’ Est. The Cretan character which transpires in Plato, Legg. Book 1, in many points confirms this charge, esp. in respect of sensuality. Further examples of ἀργὸς in the fem. form, nearly all from late writers, are given by Lobeck, Phryn. p. 105. 13. ἡ μαρτυρία x. τ. A.] It is very hasty in De W. to find in this expres- sion anything harsh or uncharitable. The nature of the people the Apostle knew to be what Epimenides had declared it; their tendencies were to evil (‘dubium non est, quin deterrimi fuerint,’ Calv.), and for the sake of truth, holiness, and the Gospel, the remedy was to be firmly applied ; see some wise thoughts of Waterland on this subject, Doctr. of Trin. ch. iv. Vol. 111. p. 460 sq. δι᾿ ἣν αἰτίαν | ‘for which cause,’ on account of these national characteristics ; ἐπειδὴ j ἦθος αὐτοῖς ἐστιν ἰταμὸν καὶ δολερὸν καὶ ἀκόλαστον, Chrys. Compare notes on ἔλεγχε kK. T. A. ] ‘confute them, set them right, with severity ,᾿ not the deceivers so much as the deceived, who also by their ready acquiescence in the false teaching (ὅλους οἴκους, ver. 11) might tend to propagatetheerror. The adverb ἀποτό- 2 Tim. i. 12. pws (σκληρῶς, ἀπαραιτητῶς, Hesych.) only occurs again in 2 Cor. xiii. 10, (ἀποτομία, Rom. xi. 22, in opp. to xpnoTrorns), and, as the derivation suggests, marks the asperity (‘asperum et abscissum castigationis genus,’ Valer. Max. 11. 7. 14) of the rebuke : in Dion. Hal. vit. 61, the substantive stands in opp. to τὸ ἐπιεικές, and in Diod. Sic. xxxitl. frag. 1, to ἡμερότης. See further exx.in Westst. Vol. 11. p. 75, and esp. Kypke, Obs. Vol. 11. p.179, compared with Fritz. Rom. Vol. 11. p- 508. ἵνα κι τ.λ.] Object, intent, of the recommended course of De Wette here modifies the meaning of ἵνα as if it were used to action. specify the substance of the reproof: such an interpr. is grammatically ad- missible (Winer, Gi. § 45. 9, see notes on Eph. i. 17), but in the present case not necessary ; the Cretan disciples were doctrinally sick (νοσοῦντες, 1 Tim. vi. 4); the object of the sharp reproof was to restore them to health ; comp. Theodoret. The sphere and element im which that doctrinal health was to be enjoyed was πίστι. Ν PERS Feag, 15. 177 ™ μὴ προσέχοντες ᾿Ιουδαϊκοῖς μύθοις καὶ ἐντολαῖς ἀνθρώ- - ’ κ " , πων ἀποστρεφομένων τὴν ἀλήθειαν. 1. πάντα καθαρὰ a a κ ‘ , Ne Rey, NN τοις καθαροῖς" τοις δὲ μεμιαμμένοις καὶ ἀπιστοις οὐδὲν 14. μὴ προσέχοντες] ‘not giving heedto; seenoteson 1 Tim.i. 4; andon the μῦθοι, here specially characterized as ᾿Ιουδαϊκοί, ib., ib., where the nature of the errors condemned by these epp. is briefly stated. ἐντολαῖς] ‘commandments of men’ (comp. Matth. xv. 9, Col. ii. 22), in antithesis to the commandments of God (Wiesing.), though this, owing to the absence of the art. before ἀποστρ. (Donalds. Gr. § 492, see also below), must not be too strongly pressed. The context shows very clearly that these ἐντολαὶ were of a ceremonial character, and involved ascetical restrictions, τὰς παρατηρήσεις They had, moreover, an essentially bad origin, τῶν βρωμάτων, Theophyl. viz., ἀνθρ. ἀποστρ. τὴν ἀλήθ. : ἃ γυ- μνασία σωματική, based not on the old ceremonial law, but on the rules of a much more recent asceticism, formed the background of all these command- ments. On ἀποστρέφ., comp. notes on 2 Tim. i. 1%, and on the absence of the article before ἀποστρ. (which is perfectly according to rule), see Winer, Gr. ὃ το. 4,p.159. Ifthearticle had been prefixed to the two substantives, and to the participle, then the two thoughts, that they were ordinances of men, and also of very bad men, would ave been made more prominent ; comp. notes on Gal. iii. 26: if the art, had been only before the part., then the ἄνθρωποι would be considered an undefined class, which it was the ob- ject of the participial clause more nearly to specify ; see notes on 1 Tim. ili. 13. 15. πάντα] ‘all things,’ not merely in reference to any ‘ ciborum discrimen,’ Caly., but with a greater comprehensiveness (comp. οὐδὲν be- low), including everything to which the distinction of pure and impure could be applied. Here, however, Chrysostom seems unduly inclusive when he says, οὐδὲν ἀκάθαρτον, εἰ μὴ ἁμαρτία μόνη ; the statement must necessarily be confined to such things and such objects as can be the materials and, as it were, the substrata for ac- tions (De W.); comp. Rom. xiv. 20. The insertion of μὲν after πάντα is rightly rejected by Tisch. and Lachm., with ACD*E*FG, al. ; being so very probably occasioned by the following δέ. Winer (Gr. ὃ 65. 5. obs., p. 643) urges its juxtaposition to a word with which it is not naturally connected (Acts xxii. 3, 1 Cor. 11. 15) as a rea- son why it was struck out; this is plausible, the Uncial authority, how- ever, seems too decided to admit of this defence. τοῖς καθαροῖς] ‘for the pure,’ scil. ‘for them to make use of ;’ dat. commod?, not dat. judicii, ‘in the estimation of,’ which, though admissible in this clause (see exx. in Scheuerl. Synt. § 21.5, p. 163, Winer, Gr. § 31. 3. b, p. 245), would not be equally so in the second ; the μεμιαμ- μένοι and ἄπιστοι do not merely ac- count all things as impure (παρὰ τὴν μεμιασμ. γνώμην ἀκάθαρτα γίγνεται, (Ecum.), but convert them into such; ‘pro qualitate vescentium et mundum mundis et immundum contaminatis fit,’ Jerome. Their own inward im- purity is communicated to all external things; the objects with which they come in contact become materials of sin, comp. De W. in loc. ἀπίστοις] ‘unbelieving; a frightful addition to the preceding μεμιαμμένοις. N 178 BAUS? ΕΟ: , , Ν 9a At ree “ Oe OG "ὃ καθαρόν, ἀλλα MEMLAVTAL αὐτῶν και O VOUS Και ἢ σύνει σις. A A Ξ κ τό Θεὸν ὁμολογοῦσιν εἰδέναι. τοις δὲ ἔργοις apvouvTat, ὃ \ » 4 “3 A 4 A lal »” Ε A βδελυκτοὶ ὄντες Kat ἀπειθεῖς καὶ πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθον 5 , ἀδόκιμοι. Not only are they deficient in all moral purity, but destitute of all πίστις. The former epithet stands in more exact antithesis to καθαροῖς, while the latter heightens the picture. Practical unbelief (ver. 16) is only too commonly allied with moral pollution. On the form μεμιαμμ. (with ACD* [μεμιανμ.] JK, and others), Lobeck, Phryn. p. 35. ἀλλὰ μεμίανται κ. T.A.] ‘but both their mind and conscience have been pol- luted ; declaration on the positive side of what has just been expressed on the negative, and indirect confirmation of it: ἀλλὰ is, however, by no means equivalent to ydp; the latter would give a reason why nothing was pure to the polluted ; the former states with full oppositive force the fact of an internal pollution, which makes the former statement, ‘that nothing ex- ternal was pure to them,’ feeble when contrasted with it; see esp. Klotz, Devar.,. Vol. τι. p..g. On the more emphatic enumeration xal—kal; see notes on 1 Tim. iv. 10, and Donalds. Gr. ὃ 550 sq. Νοῦς is here not merely the ‘mens speculativa’ (comp. Sander- son de Obl. Conse. ὃ 17, Vol. Iv. p. 13, ed. Jacobs.), but the willing as well as the thinking part of man, (Delitzsch.. Psychol. Iv. § 5, p. 140, Beck, Bibl. Seelenl. τι. 18. Ὁ, p. 54); see also the notes on 1 Tim. vi. 5. comp. Συνείδησις is the conscience, the moral consciousness, within (see esp. notes on τ Tim, i. 5); the two united thus represent, in the language of Beck, the ‘ Lebenstrom in seinem Aus- und Einfluss zusammen,’ p. 49, note. Bp. Taylor (Ductor Dub, 1. 1. 1. 7), somewhat infelicitously regards the two terms as identical. 16. ὁμολογοῦσιν] ‘they profess ; they make an open confession of God, but practically deny it, being deficient in all true earnestness ; ‘ quotiescum- que vincimur vitiis atque peccatis, toties Deum negamus,’ Jerome. a&pvotvrat] ‘deny (Him) ; in oppo- sition to duo\. The Vulg. (perhaps) and a few commentators (Wiesing., al.) supply εἰδέναι after ἀρνοῦνται. This does not seem necessary; the use of ἀρνεῖσθαι with an accus. persone is so extremely common, that it is best, with Syr., to retain the simpler construction. Though so common in the N.T., ἀρνεῖσθαι is only used by St. Paul in the Past. epp.; add Heb. βδελυκτοί] “ abomi- nable; dam. λεγόμ. in N.T.; comp. - Prov. xvii. 15, ἀκάθαρτος καὶ βδελυ- xrés (mayin), 2 Macc. i. 27, ἐξού- θενημένους καὶ βδελυκτούς. There is no oblique reference to idolatry (βδελύγματα, Deut. xxix. 17 al.), nor necessarily to the abomination in which certain animals, &c., were for- merly held (Lev. xi. 10), and which they might have still maintained, though this is more plausible, comp. Wiesing. It is simply said that their actions and principles made them ‘abominable’ (μισητοί, Hesych.) in the sight of God. The verb is used metaphorically in Attic writers, but not in a sense so far removed-from the primary notion (βδέω) as in the LXX. andecel. writers; comp.Aristoph. Vesp. 792. ἀδόκιμοι] ‘reprobate ;’ not actively ‘qui bonum probare non possunt,’ Bengel, but passively, ‘re- ΧΙ. 24- TITUS Charge the aged men to be sober and faith- ful; the aged women to be holy themselves and to school the younger women, διδασκαλίᾳ" πο Ὁ , nm e σ΄ TY ayaTns TH UT OMOVI. probi,’ Vulg., Goth. (‘uskusanai,’— cogn. with ‘choose’), as in 2 Tim. 11]. δ, and elsewhere in the N.T. ; see notes inloc. The useof the word, if weexcept Heb. vi. 8, is confined to St. Paul. Cuap. II. τ. σὺ δέ] ‘But dothou,;’ address to Titus in contrast to these false teachers; so 2 Tim. iii. Io, iv. 5. Chrys. has here missed the force of the contrasted address, αὐτοί εἰσιν ἀκάθαρτοι, ἀλλὰ μὴ τούτων ἕνεκεν συιγήσῃς, comp. also Theodoret ; Titus is not tacitly warned not to be de- terred or disheartened, but is exhorted to preach sound doctrine in opposition to their errors. λάλει] ‘speak,’ ‘utter ° ‘ore non cohibito,’ Bengel. On the difference between λαλεῖν, ‘vocem ore mittere’ [λαλ--, Germ. Jallen, comp. Benfey, Wur- zellex. Vol. τι. p. 9], λέγειν “ dicere, sc. colligere verba in sententiam’ (comp. Donalds. Cratyl. § 453) and εἰπεῖν, ‘verba facere,’ see Tittmann, Synon. I. p. 80 sq. τῇ ὕγιαιν. διϑασκ. | ‘the sound doctrine ; see notes on 1 Tim. i. το. 2. πρεσβύτας] ‘aged men; not πρεσβυτέρους, in an official sense: ‘ duas classes νεωτέρων et πρεσβυτέρων dividunt Apostoli populum Chris- tianum in undquaque Ecclesia,’ Pear- son, Vind. Ign. (ad Lect.) p. 12 (Angl. C. Libr.). The inf. with the accusatives specifies the substance of the order which was contained what Titus was to enuntiate ; comp. Madvig, Synt. § 146. νηφαλίους] ‘ sober,’ Ital., Vulg., not = in in ‘watchful,’ Syr. cages [excitati] ee: 179 II. Σὺ de λάλει ἃ πρέπει TH ὑγιαινούση 2. πρεσβύτας νηφαλίους εἶναι: ’ὔ fe « , “ , σεμνοὺς. σώφρονας. υγιαινοντας τὴ πίστεις 9 πρεσβύτιδας ὡσαύτως ἐν κατα- and even Chrys. ; see notes on 1 Tim. ill. 2, and on 2 Tim.iv. 5. On the meaning of σεμνός, comp. notes on I Tim. ii. 2, and on that of σώφρων, ib. ii. Ὁ: τῇ πίστει] “ὧν respect of faith ; dative ‘ of reference to,’ see notes on Gal. i. 22, and Winer, Gr. § 31. 3, p. 244. It may be observed that this expression may almost be interchanged with ἐν and the dat. as in ch. i. 13 ; this seems to confirm the remark in Gal. l.c., that these sort of datives not uncommonly may be considered as species of the local dat. ethically used. Here the 76 ὑγιαίνειν of the aged men was to be shown in their faith; it was to the province of that virtue that the ex- hibition of it was to be limited. ὑπομονῇ} ‘endurance; ‘in ratione bene considerata stabilis et perpetua mansio,’ Cicero, de Invent. 11. ὃ 54. It is here joined with πίστις and ἀγάπη as in 1 Tim. vi. 11 (comp. 1 Thess. i. 3), and serves to mark the brave patience, the enduring fortitude, which marks the true Christian character ; see notes on 2 Tim. ii. 10, and comp. Usteri, Zehrb. τι. 1. 4, p. 240. 3. πρεσβύτιδας]) ‘aged women ; synonymous with the πρεσβύτεραι, 1 Tim. v. 2. On ὡσαύτως, comp. notes on τ Tim. iii. 8; the aged women were not to be ws ἑτέρως in respect of any of the foregoing quali- fications. ἐν καταστήματι ρ ‘in demeanour,’ {Sa.nm1> [ἐν =x π᾿ σχήματι] Syr.; in meaning a little, but a little only, different from kara- στόλη, τ Tim. ii. 9. In the latter text the prevailing idea is perhaps N 2 180 PTUS. OHS eae | στήματι ἱεροπρεπεῖς, μὴ διαβόλους, μὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ δεδου- A Awuevas, καλοδιδασκάλους, + ἵνα σωφρονίζωσιν τὰς νέας 4. σωφρονίζωσιν] So Rec. with CD EJ K al. (Griesb., De Wette, Huther al.). Both Tisch. and Lachm. read σωφρονίζουσιν with AF GH, al. This does not seem sufficient evidence for a solecism so very glaring, especially when in the very next iva is used again and correctly. In 1 Cor. iv. 6, Gal. iv. 17, this may be more easily accounted for; see notes on Gal. l.c., and comp. Winer, Gr S42, ΒΡ. 335. outward deportment as enhanced by pure externals, dress, &c., in the present case outward deportment as dependent on something more internal, e.g. manner, gesture, dc., ‘incessus et motus, vultus, sermo, silentium,’ Jerome ; see also Coray in loc. It is manifestly contrary to the true mean- ing of the word to refer it to the mere externals of dress on the one hand (τὰ περιβολαῖα, Cacum.), and it seems inexact, without more exact adjuncts in the context, to limit it solely to internals (‘ ornatus virtutum,’ Beng.), on the other. Wetst. cites Porphyr. de Abst. 1v. 6, τὸ δὲ σεμνὸν κἀκ τοῦ with which comp. Ignat. Trall. § 3, οὗ αὐτὸ τὸ KaTDOTHUATOS ἑωρᾶτο, κατάστημα μεγάλη μαθητεία, very vaguely interpreted by Jacobson im loc. Plutarch uses somewhat simi- larly the curious adjective καταστη- ματικός, e.g. Tib. Gracch. § 2, ἰδέᾳ προσώπου, καὶ βλέμματι, Kal κινήματι On the most suitable translation, see notes in loc. ἱεροπρεπεῖς ] ‘holy-beseeming,’ ‘as be- cometh holiness,’ Auth. Ver.; the best gloss is the parallel passage, 1 πρᾷος Kat KaTaoT. ἢν. Tim. ii. 10, ὁ πρέπει γυναιξὶν ἐπαγ- γελλομέναις θεοσέβειαν ; comp. Eph. The word is an dar. λεγόμ. in the N.T., but not very elsewhere, e.g. Xenoph. Sympos. Vil. 40, Plato, Theages, 122 D: see these and other On διαβόλους, see notes ont Zim. iil. 11. μὴ οἴνῳ «.7.A.] ‘not enslaved to much ν. 3, καθὼς πρέπει ἁγίοις. uncommon exx. in Wetst. wine ; an expression a little stronger than τ Tim. iii. 8, μὴ οἴνῳ mod\dG προσέχοντες, and possibly due to the greater prevalence of that vice in Crete: this transpires clearly enough in Plato, Legg. 1. and 11., comp. Book 1 Sri, ps O4n- καλοδιδα- σκάλους] ‘teachers of what is good,’ ‘honestatis magistre,’ Beza, not by public teaching, but as the context im- plies by its specifications, in domestic privacy, ἐπ᾽ οἰκίας, Chrysost. On καλὸς compare notes on 1 Tim. iv. 4. 4. ἵνα σωφρονίζωσιν k. τ. λ.] ‘that they may school the young women to be, &e. ἢ Theoph., — not exactly ‘prudentiam doceant,’ Vulg. (comp. Syr.), which, though perfectly correct per se, would here, on account of the following σωφρόνας, be somewhat tautologous : Ὶ παιδεύωσιν, numerous exx. of this less special sense of σωφρ. are cited by ' Loesn. Obs. p. 427, from Philo, all appy. confirmed byits connexion with, and juxtaposition to, the weaker vou- It may be remarked that in the corresponding passage, 1 Tim. v. 2, Timothy is himself directed to exhort the vewrépas, here it is to be done by others: this was probably in consequence of the greater amount of practical teaching and exhortation which the Cretan women required. Tt does not seem necessary with Tisch. to advocate a solecistic reading when the correct mood is fairly supported ; φιλάνδρους] ‘lovers of their husbands; τὸ κεφά- θετεῖν. see crit. notes. ΠΟΘ. The Ἢ 5: φιλάνδρους εἶναι. φιλοτέκνους. 18] 5 ’ὔ e , ’ σώφρονας. ἁγνάς, οἰκου- , ΕΣ , ε , a ἰδέ 2 U er A βους. ἀγαθας, ὑποτασσομενας τοις LOLOLS ἀνδράσιν, να fy ὁ λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ βλασφημῆται. λαιον τοῦτο τῶν κατὰ τὴν οἰκίαν ἀγαθῶν, Chrys. This and the adjec- tives which follow, are, as further suggests, dependent on the verb immediately preceding, and serve more specifically to define the nature and ‘substance of the σωφρονισμός. If the connexion had been with λάλει as in ver. 3, the infinitive, as there, would more naturally have been omitted. Calvin evades this objection by referring φιλάνδρ. and φιλοτέκν. to the νέαι, but σωφρόνας κ.τ. λ., to the πρεσβύτιδες : this, however, wholly mars the natural sequence of epi- theis. The νέαι are here, as the immediate context shows, primarily the young married women, but of course not exclusively, as four out of these epithets can belong equally to married or single ; comp. notes on εἶναι ver. 6. 5. σώφρονας] ‘discreet ; see notes on 1 Tim. ii. 0. The more general is then followed by the more special ἁγνάς, which here, as the subject and the context seem to require, has reference, not to a ‘ sober - minded,’ purity from mvevmarixds μολυσμός (Coray), but more particularly to ‘chastity ; καὶ σώματι καὶ διανοίᾳ κα- θαρὰ ἀπὸ τῆς τῶν ἀλλοτρίων καὶ μίξεως καὶ ἐπιθυμίας, Theophyl. οἰκουρούς) ‘keepers at home,’ Auth. Ver. ‘domisedas,’ ‘casarias,’ Elsner ; more literally, Ital. ‘domum custo- dientes,’ similarly Vulg., Syr., ‘domus curam habentes.’ According to Hesych. οἰκουρὸς is ὁ φροντίζων τὰ τοῦ οἴκου καὶ φυλάττων, the Homeric οὖρος, watcher’ [possibly from ΟΡ.- ‘ watch’ (Ὁ Pott, Htym. Forsch. Vol. 1. p. 123, comp. φρουρὰ) giving the compound its definite meaning: see Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. and the large collection of exx. in Elsner, Obs. Vol. 1. p. 324 sq. The reading (Lachm.), though well supported, viz., by ACD*(E* ἢ FG, is doubtful, as no other example of its use has yet been adduced ; the verb occurs Clem. Rom. I. 1, and appy. in reference to this passage. It has also been found in Soranus (A. Ὁ. 120 2) de Arte Obst. Vill. 21, but its association with καθέδριον makes the reading very doubtful. If it be adopted here, the meaning will be ‘workers at home,’ and the exhortation practically the same ; there is to be no περιέρχεσθαι, 1 Tim. ν. 13 ; home occupations are to preclude it. ἀγαθὰς is not to be joined with οἰκουρούς, as appy. Syr. and Theophyl., but regarded as an independent epithet = ‘ benignas,’ Vulg.; comp. Matth. xx. 15. On the distinction between ἀγαθὸς (‘ qui commodum aliis preestat ’) and δίκαιος (‘qui recti et honestilegem sequitur’), see Tittm. Synon. 1, p. 19 sq. ; comp. also notes on Gal. v.21. The interpr. of Bloomf., ‘ good managers,’ accord- ing to which it is to be considered as ‘exegetical of the preceding,’ is wholly untenable. It is rather added with a gentle contrast ; the οἰκουρία was not to be marred by ‘austeritas,’ sc. ‘in servulos’ (Jerome), or improper thriit (Heydenr.). ὑποτασσο- μένας κ. τ. Χ] ‘submitting themselves to their own husbands.’ On the dis- tinction between ὑποτασσ. (sponte) and πειθαρχεῖν (coactus), see Tittmann, Synon. Part 11. p. 3, aud on the proper force of the pronominal ἴδιος (Donalds. Cratyl. § 139) when thus olkoupyovs 182 Exhort young men to be sober, being thy- self a pattern; exhort servants to please their masters and to be trusty. σωφρονεῖν, connected with ἀνήρ, see notes on Eph. vy. 22. The concluding words of the verse, ἵνα μὴ k.T.X., are most naturally connected with this last clause (Est.); the λόγος τοῦ O. (the Gospel) would be evil spoken of if it were practically apparent that Chris- tian wives did not duly obey their husbands; comp. 1 Tim. vi. I. Theodoret refers it, somewhat too narrowly, to the fact of women leaving their husbands προφάσει θεοσεβείας : the implied command here, and the expressed command, Eph. v. 22, are perfectly general and inclusive. 6. νεωτέρους) ‘the younger men,’ in contrast with the πρεσβύτας, ver. I; just as the νέαι form a contrasted class to the πρεσβύτιδες. There is thus no good reason for extending it, with Matth., to the young of both sexes. It seems to have been the Apostle’s desire that the exhortations to the Cretan νέαι should be specially administered by those of their own sex ; contrast 1 Tim. v. 2. 5 σωφρονεῖν] ‘to be sober-minded ; in this pregnant word a young man’s duty is simply but comprehensively enunciated ; οὐδὲν yap οὕτω δύσκολον καὶ χαλεπὸν τῇ ἡλικίᾳ ταύτῃ γένοιτ᾽ ἄν, ὡς τὸ περιγενέσθαι τῶν ἡδονῶν τῶν ἀτόπων, Chrys.: comp. Neand. Plant- ing, Vol. I. p. 486 (Bohn). The repeated occurrence of this word in different forms in the last few verses, would seem to hint that ‘immoderati affectus’ were sadly prevalent in~ Crete, and that the Apostle had the best of reasons for his statement in I. 13, which De W. and others so improperly and unreasonably presume to censure. TITUS II. 6, 7. 6 ΠῚ A , e , , ους νεωτερους ὡσαύτως παρακάλει A , A ερὶ TavTa σ παρε- 7 περὶ τα σεαυτὸν παρε χόμενος τύπον καλῶν ἔργων, ἐν TH διδα- 7. περὶ πάντα is not to be con- nected with σωφρονεῖν (‘ut pudici sint in omnibus,’ Jerome), but with the Syr., Vulg., Chrys., and in fact all the leading commentt. ancient and modern, with σεαυτ. παρεχόμενος. It can scarcely be necessary to add that πάντα is neuter ; for the uses of περί, see notes on 1 Tim. i. 19. σεαυτὸν παρεχ. ] ‘ exhibiting thyself ;’ reflexive pronoun with the middle voice ; see Winer, Gr. § 39. 6, p. 298. In this use, not without precedent in earlier Greek, e.g, Xenoph. Cyrop. VIII. 1. 39, Plato, Legg. x, 890 ©, emphasis and perspicuity are gained by the special addition of the pronoun. Here, for instance, without the pro- noun the reference might have seemed doubtful ; the τύπον might have been referred to one of the νεώτεροι and the use of the middle to the interest felt by Titus in making him so. In such cases care must be taken to discri- minate between what is now termed a ‘dynamic’ middle (Kriiger, comp. notes on 1 Tim. iv. 6) and a simple reflexive middle: in the former case the pronoun would seem generally admissible, in the latter (the present) case, it can only legitimately appear, when emphasis or precision cannot be secured without it; see Kriiger, Sprachl. § 52. 10. 10, and on the uses of παρέχ. comp. Kuster, de Verb. Med. ὃ 40. καλῶν epy. | On this expression, which is perfectly comprehensive and inclusive, comp. notes on ch. iii. 8. Few will be dis- posed to agree with Caly. in his con- nexion of these words with ἐν τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ. ἀφθορίαν] ‘uncorruptness,’ “ sincerity,’ sc. παρε- TITUS II. 7—0. σκαλίᾳ ἀφθορίαν, σεμνότητα; 189 8 Na ε a ? , ἀμ uy!y pee ἡ τ στον, ἵνα ὃ ἐξ ἐναντίας ἐντραπῆ: μηδὲν ἐ ἔχων λέγειν περὶ ἡμῶν φαῦλον. χόμενος ; ‘integritatem,’ Vulg. : Syr. paraphrases. The associated word σεμνότης as well as what would other- wise be the tautologous λόγον ὑγιῆ, seem to refer ἀφθορίαν not objectively to the teaching (scil. διδασκαλίαν ἀδιάφθορον, Coray), but subjectively to the teacher, comp. 2 Cor. xi. 3 ; in his διδασκαλίᾳ he was to be ἄφθορος (Artemid. v. 95), in his delivery of it ceuvés: a chaste sincerity of mind was to be combined with a dignified σεμνότης of manner. is rendered perhaps still more probable by the reading of the text (Lachm. Tisch.): of two similarly abstract sub- stantives, it would seem hardly natural to refer one to the teaching and the other to the teacher. The addition ἀφθαρσίαν (Rec., but not Rec. of Elz.) is not well supported, viz., only by D***E(**?] JK; about thirty mss.; and a few Vv. The variety of reading in this passage is This connexion considerable, see Tisch. On σε- μνότης, see notes on 1 Tim, ii. 2, and on the practical applications of the verse, Bp. Taylor, Serm. x. x1. 8. λόγον ὑγιῆ] ‘sound discourse,’ not merely in private life (“in con- suetudine quotidiana,’ Beng.) but, as the context seems to require, in the exercise of his public duties, more especially in preaching, comp. 1 Tim. vy. 17: ‘inter docendum nihil aliud loquere quam quod sanz fidei con- veniat,’ Estius. Several exx. of this use of ὑγιὴς arecited by Raphel. Annot. Vol. τι. p. 636. The λόγος is more- over to be not only intrinsically ὑγιής, _ but so carefully considered and ex- pressed as to be dxardyvworos, open to neither contempt or animadversion ; 9 Δούλους ἰδίοις δεσπόταις ὑποτάσσεσθαι. ‘nihil dignum reprehensione dicat aut faciat, licet adversarii sint ad repre- hendum parati,’ Jerome: comp. I Tim. vi. 14. ὁ ἐξ ἐναντίας, sc. χώρας (Bos, Ellips. p. 562 (325) ed. Schef.), if indeed it be thought necessary to supply the ellipsis at all. The reference is doubtful; the ‘ad- versary’ (‘he who riseth ages us,’ Syr.), seems certainly not ὁ 6 διάβολος (Chrys.), ὁ ἐκείνῳ διαπονούμενος, whether the opposing false teacher, or the guainsaying heathen. On the whole, the allusion in ver. 5, compared with the nearly but rather mds certain reading ἡμῶν (us Christians), makes the latter reference (to the heathen) the most plausible ; comp. 1 Tim. v. 14. The statement of Matth. that ACDEFG read ὑμῶν is completely erroneous ; all the above, with the exception of A, read ἡμῶν; see Tisch. in loc. ἐντραπῇ] ‘may be ashamed,’ ‘erubescat,’ Beza; not middle ‘sich schime,’ Huther, but appy. here with a purely passive ν -“ sense (comp. Syr. Zour’ ‘pudefiat,’ ‘erubescat’), as in 2 Thess. ill. 14, comp. τ Cor. iv. 14, Psalm xxxiv. 26, αἰσχυνθείησαν καὶ ἐντραπείησαν. φαῦλον] ‘bad, lam [odiosum] Syr. ; John iii. 20, v. 29 (in opp. to ἀγαθὸς), James iii. 16; Rom. ix. rr, 2 Cor. v. το, are both doubtful. This adjective, in its primary meaning ‘light,’ ‘blown about by every wind’ (Donalds. Cratyl. § 152), is used with a distinct moral reference in earlier as well as later writers (see exx. in Palm ἃ. Rost, Lex. s.v.); in the latter, how- ever, it is used in more frequent anti- 184 TERS? αν τ ΡΣ ΠΣ ΣῈ 4 μη ’ὔ 9 δ os ’ 9 / ° , νοσφιζομένους. ἀλλὰ πᾶσαν πίστιν ἐνδεικνυμένους ἀγαθήν, 9 ial οὶ , > A ° , Io εν Taolv EVADE TOUS εἰναι. fy ἀντιλέγοντας, 10. πᾶσαν πίστιν]. So Lachm. with ACD E; al.5..... Clarom. Sangerm. al.;.... Lat. Ff. The order is reversed by Tisch. with J K ; great majority of mss. ..... Copt., and many others ..... Chrys. Theod. Dam. al. (Rec., Griesb., Scholz), but the weight of uncial authority seems certainly in favour of the reading of the text. It may be also remarked that appy. in every other instance in St. Paul’s epp. (except Eph. iv. 19) where πᾶς is in connexion with an abstract and anarthrous substantive, it does not follow but precede the noun. thesis to ἀγαθός, and comes to mean little less than κακὸν (Thom. M. p. 889, ed. Bern.) or πονηρόν, comp. Fritz, Rom. Vol. 11. p. 297. 9. δούλους] It does not seem necessary to refer this construction to ver. 1 (Matth.); the infin. is depen- dent on παρακάλει, ver. 6, the two following verses being dependent on the participle mapex. and practically parenthetical. On the general drift of these exhortations to slaves, and on the meaning of some particular terms (ἴδιοις, δεσπόταις), see notes and reff. on i Tim. vi. 1 sq. The deportment and relations to the οἰκοδέσποται of women and servants were to practically teach and edify the heathen ; ov yap ἀπὸ δόγματος δόγματα ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ mpay- μάτων καὶ βιοῦ τὰ δόγματα κρίνουσιν Ἕλληνες, Chrysost., who, however, in an interesting passage, speaks very despondingly of the moral and re- ligious opportunities of δοῦλοι. εὐαρέστους] “ well pleasing ; a term frequently used by St. Paul, Rom. xii. I, 2, xiv. 18, 2 Cor. v. Ὁ: al., but in all other passages with relation to God or our Lord. Fritz. (Rom. l.e. Vol. m1. p. 31) rightly objects to the translation ‘obsequiosus,’ Bretschn. ,— comp. Syr. ΚΨΕΙ͂ΨΕΙ [placentes se prebeant], but doubtfully advocates a purely passive or rather neutral translation, ‘is cui facile satisfacias,’ “vii. 1, 2 Macc. iv. 32. ‘homo contentus,’ similarly Jerome, ‘complacentes conditioni sue.’ This certainly does not seem necessary, the reference is more naturally to δεσπόταις, ‘well pleasing to them,’ i.e. ‘approved by them (comp. Phil. iv. 18) in all things ; comp. Clem. Alex. Strom. v1. 13 (83), p. 883 (ed. Pott.), πρὸς τὸν Κύριον εὐάρεστος ἐν πᾶσι γένηται, καὶ πρὸς τὸν κόσμον ἐπαινετός, where this passage seems to have been faintly alluded to. ἀντιλέγοντας] ‘gainsaying,’ ‘ contra- dicting,’ ‘ contradicentes,’ Vulg., and even more definitely Syr. wepee [obsistentes], thwarting, or setting themselves against their masters’ plans, wishes, or orders; opp. to ὑπείκοντας ἐν τοῖς ἐπιτάγμασι, Chrys. The Auth. Vers., ‘not answering again’ (‘non responsatores,’ Beza), seems too narrow ; comp. John xix. 12, ἀντιλέγει τῷ Καίσαρι, Rom. x. 21, λαὸν ἀπειθοῦντα καὶ ἀντιλέγοντα, and in this same epistle, ch. i. 9; where ἀντιλέγειν probably involves some idea of definite opposition ; comp. Tittm. Synon. 11. p. 9. 10. νοσφιζομένους] ‘ purloining ; Acts v. 2, 3, with ἀπὸ of the thing from which purloined; comp. Josh. This use of νοσφιζ. -ε στερῶν, κλέπτων (Hesych.), or with more accurate reflexive refe- rence, ἐδιοποιούμενος (Suidas), requires SITUS). PH. το ΤΙ: 185 e ‘ ὃ ὃ , A A A ia) Θ A ~ “va τῆν οι ασκαλίιαν TyV TOU σωτῆρος HILWV εου κοσμῶωσιν > r εν πασιν. The grace of God has appeared, and teaches ἘῈ ᾿Ἐπεφάνη γὰρ ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡ us to be godly in this world, and to look forward to our Redeemer’s coming. no illustration ; exx. if needed will be found in Wetst. πᾶσαν πίστ. ἐνδεικν.] ‘showing forth all good jidelity ; ἐνδεικν. is only used by St. Paul, and in Heb. vi. 10, 11; see notes on Eph. ii. 7, where the word is briefly noticed. The added epithet ἀγαθὴν scarcely can refer to the ac- tions, ‘in rebus non malis,’ Beng., but seems merely to specify the ’ ‘fidelity’ as true and genuine, opposed to a mere assumed, eye-serving πίστις, comp. Eph. vi. 6. On the various meanings of πίστις in the N.T., comp. Usteri, ZLehrb. 11. 1. I, p. gt, note, and on the use of πᾶσαν, ‘ every form of’ (comp. ἐν πᾶσιν below), see notes on Eph. i. 8. ἵνα. κοσμῶσιν) Definite object and pur- pose contemplated by such conduct. The Apostle knew well the force of practical teaching ; a δοῦλος, ἐν Χριστῷ φιλοσοφῶν, to use the words of Chrys., must in those days have been, even though a silent, yet a most effective, preacher of the Gospel. The. con- cluding words, which refer to God (t ΠΤ αι ἢ 5, ἰν.- τὸ, ita i. 3) ποῦ Christ, specify the διδασκ. as being ‘the doctrine of salvation,’ ‘the Gospel,’ an expression at which De W. unnecessarily takes exception. 11. yap gives the reason for the foregoing practical exhortations, and seems immediately suggested by the last words of ver. 10, which, though specially referring to slaves, may yet be extended to all classes. It is thus really a reference to ver. 9, 10, but virtually to all that precedes from ver. tsq. The saving grace of God had among its objects the ἁγιασμὸς of man- kind; comp. Eph. i. 4, and the four good sermons by Beveridge, Serm. go—9g3, Vol. Iv. p. 225 sq. (Angl. Cath. Libr.) This χάρις need not be limited to the incarnation (Theod., Jerome, al.), though this, as the con- text and perhaps ἐπεφάνη show, is the leading reference ; ‘the grace of God doth not so bring salvation as to ex- clude the satisfaction of Christ for our sins,’ Beveridge, l.c., p. 229. ᾿᾽Επι- φαίνειν (ch. iii. 4, Luke i. 79) and ἐπιφάνεια are normal words in connex- ion with our Lord’s first or second ad- vents (Waterl. Moyer’s Lect. vi. Vol. Il. p. 134), possibly with a metaphori- cal reference, comp. Acts xxvii. 20; the dogmatical reference involved in the compound, ἵνα τὴν ἄνωθεν ὕπαρξιν μηνύσῃ (Zonaras, Lex. Vol. 1. p. 831), seems clearly indemonstrable. ἡ σωτήριος k. τ. A.] ‘the saving (grace) to all men,’ ‘that grace of God whereby alone it is possible for mankind to be saved,’ Beveridge, ἴ. 6. p. 229. The reading is doubtful: Zachm., with AC*D* rejects the article, Tisch., with C***D***EJK, retains it, and appy- rightly. If the article were wanting, we should have a further predication, scil. ‘and it is a saving grace to all men’ (Donalds. G7. ὃ 404), which would subjoin a secondary refe- rence that would mar the simplicity of the context, παιδεύουσα clearly involving the principal thought. Huther, in contending for the omission of theart. on thesame grounds, does not appear to have been fully aware of the nature and force of these predicates. In either case, on account of the fol- lowing ἡμᾶς, the dative πᾶσιν ἀνθρ. is 1860 σωτήριος πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις, THUS BL τὰ τὸ 12 δεύ ἜΣ " παιόοευουσα Has, «να 5 , A J , A A A 93 Pr ἀρνησάμενοι την ἀσέβειαν Kat τὰς κοσμικας ἐπιθυμίας ’ A ὃ "3 A ΕῚ ~ , 9 Las ~ σωφρόνως καὶ δικαίως καὶ εὐσεβῶς ζήσωμεν ἐν τῷ νῦν most naturally and plausibly appended to σωτήριος; joined with ἐπεῴ., it would be, as Wiesinger remarks, aim- less and obstructive. 12. παιδεύουσα] ‘disciplining us.’ The normal force of this word in the N.T., ‘per molestias erudire’ (see notes on Eph. vi. 4, Trench, Synon. § 32), preserved in Ital., ‘ corri- piens,’ must not here be lost sight of or (as in Bloomf.) obscured. Grace exercises its discipline on us (1 Cor. xi. 32, Heb. xii. 6) before its benefits can be fully felt or thankfully ac- knowledged: the heart must be recti- fied and the affections chastened before sanctifying grace can have its full issues ; comp. (on the work of grace) the excellent sermon of Waterland, No. 26, Works, Vol. v. p. 688. ἵνα «.t.d.] ‘to the intent that; not merely the substance (De W., Huth.) but the direct object of the παιδεία. De W. considers iva with the subj. as here only tantamount to an infin. ; this is grammatically admissible after verbs of ‘command,’ ‘entreaty;’ al. (see Winer, Gr. ὃ 45. 9, comp. notes on Eph.i. 17), but doubtful after a verb so full of meaning as παιδεύειν. The opinion of Chrys. seems definite with regard to ἵνα, but he is appy. in- clined to join it with the finite verb, ἦλθεν ὁ Xp. ἵνα ἀρνησώμεθα τὴν ἀσέ- βειαν: this does not appear admissible. ἀρνησάμενοι] Comp. notes on ch. i. 16. The participle, as Wiesinger re- marks, states on the negative side, the purpose of the παιδεία, which is fur- ther expressed onthe positive in σοῴρ. ζήσωμεν. ᾿Ασέβεια, here not εἰδωλολα- Τρεία kal τὰ πονηρὰ δόγματα, Theo- phyl., but ‘ practical impiety’ (‘ what- soever is offensive or dishonourable to God,’ Beveridge, Serm. go, Vol. Iv. Ῥ. 239 sq.), is the exact antithesis to εὐσέβεια, on which latter word see notes on 1 Tim. ii. 2. τὰς κοσμ. ἔπιθ.} ‘the lusts of the world,’ “all inordinate desires of the things of this worid,’ Beveridge, 7. c., comp. 1 John ii. 16; βίον ἡμῖν χρησμεύει, κοσμικαί εἰσιν ἐπι- ὅσα πρὸς τὸν πάροντα θυμίαι, πάντα ὅσα ἐν τῷ πάροντι βίῳ συγκαταλύεται κοσμική ἐστιν ἐπιθ., Chrysost. The adj. κοσμικὸς is only a δὶς Aeyou. in N.T., here and (in a different sense) Heb. ix. 1, being com- monly replaced in such combinations as the present by words or expressions of a more distinct ethical force, Gal. v. 16, Eph. ii. 3, 1 Pet. ii. 11, 2 Pet. ii- 10, al. It is here probably used in preference to σαρκικός (1 Pet. l.c.) as more general and inclusive, and as ἡ enhancing the extent of the abnega- tion: all ἐπιθυμίαι are here included, which, in a word, els τοῦτον μόνον τὸν κῦσμον γεννῶνται καὶ ὄχι εἰς ἄλλον, Coray ; comp. esp. 1 John ii. 15. In later writers the moral reference is very decided; κοσμικούς, τοὺς els τὴν γῆν ἐλπίζοντας καὶ Tas σαρκικὰς ἐπιθυ- μίας, Clem. Alexand. Strom. 11. 378, Suicer, Zhesaur. Vol. 11. p. 147. On the various meanings of κόσμος, comp. notes on Gal. iv. 3. σωφρό- vas κι τ. λ.} ‘soberly, righteously, and godly.’ The meanings assigned to gwpp. (notes on τ Tim. il. 90), δικαίως (notes on ver. 5), and εὐσεβῶς must not be too much narrowed, still in a general way they may be conceived as placing Christian duties under three aspects, to owrselves, to others, and to God; comp. Beveridge, Serm. 91, ΠΣ Ἢ res 15. αἰῶνι 13 προσδεγό 3 ροσδεχόμενοι 157 A , 9 , 4a THY μακαρίαν ἐλπίδα καὶ ἐπιφάνειαν τῆς δόξης τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Vol. Iv. p. 253. The terms, indeed, are all general and comprehensive,— δίκαιος, for example (‘qui jus fasque servat,’ Tittm. Synon. I. p. 21), in- cludes more than duty to others, but the order, as well as the meanings, alike hint that the distinction is not to be wholly ignored; comp. Raphel, Annot. Vol. 11. p. 639, Storr, Opuse. Vol. I. p. 197 sq. viv αἰῶνι] ‘in the present world,’ ‘this present cowrse of things.’ On the meaning of αἰών, see notes on Eph. li, 2, comp. also notes on 2 Tim. iv. Io. ἐν TO 13. προσϑεχόμενοι k.T.A.] ‘look- ing for the blessed hope; comp. Acts xxiv. 15, Gal. v. 5, ἐλπίδα ἀπεκδεχ., where see notes. In this expression, which, on account of the close union of ἐλπίδα with ἐπιῴ., is slightly diffe- rent to Gal. l.c., ἐλπίς is still not purely objective, the ‘res sperata,’ 76 ἐλπιζόμενον (Huth., al.), but is only contemplated under objective aspects (‘ objectivirt’), our hope being con- sidered as something definite and sub- stantive, comp. Col. i. 5, ἐλπίδα τὴν 3 3 ων 2 -“ ἀποκειμένην ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, see Meyer | The* in loc., and notes on Eph. i. 18. nature of the hope is more fully de- fined by the gen. δόξης with which it is associated : see below. Theodoret seems to regard the whole expression as a mere ἕν διὰ δυοῖν, scil., τῆς ἐν δόξ- ov παρουσίας αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐλπίδα : this is not satisfactory ; though the mean- ing may sometimes be practically not very different, yet such systems of in- terpretation are at best only evasive and precarious ; see Fritzsche’s good Excursus, in his Comm. on Matth. p. 853 sq. The different objects of ἔλπις e.g. δόξης, δικαιοσύνης, k.T.X., are grouped together by Reuss, ἀναστάσεως Theol. Chret. IV. 20, Vol. IL p. 221. τῆς δόξης is cer- tainly not to be explained away as a mere epithet, ‘glorious appearing,’ Auth. Vers., Scholef., but is a true and proper genitive, see notes on Eph. i. 4: there is a twofold ἐπιφάνεια, the one an ἐπιῴ. τῆς χάριτος, ver. 11, the other an ἐπιῴ. τῆς δόξης, see Beveridge, Serm. 92, Vol. Iv. p. 271 (Angl. Cath. Libr.). It is also plainly dependent on ἐλπίδα, as well as on ἐπιῴ. (De W., Wiesing.), the two substantives being closely united, and under the vinculum of a common article; see Winer, Gr. § 18. 4. ἃ p. 145. It is singular that Scholef. Hints, p. 126 (ed. 3), should not have given this interpr. more prominence. τοῦ μεγάλου «.7.A.] ‘of owr great God and Saviour Jesus Christ; μέγαν δὲ Θεὸν ὠνόμασεν Tov Χριστόν, Theod., sim. Chrys. It must be candidly avowed that it is very doubtful whether on the grammatical principle last alluded to the interpretation of this pas- sage can be fully settled ; see Winer, Gr. § 18. 5. obs., p. 148, and comp. notes on Eph. v.5. Thereis a preswmp- tion in favour of the adopted interpr., but, on account of the (defining) gen. ἡμῶν (Winer, p. 142), nothing more. When, however, we turn to exegetical considerations, and remember (a) that ἐπιφανεία is a term specially and peculiarly applied to the Son, and never to the Father, see esp. Water- land, Divin. of Christ, Serm. 6, Vol. Il. p. 134, comp. Beveridge, Serm. 92, Vol. Iv. p. 268; (ὁ) that the im- mediate context so specially relates to our Lord; (¢) that the following men- tion of Christ’s giving Himself up for us,—of His abasement, does fairly ac- count for St. Paul’s ascription of a 188 Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, TS Laas ra, 14 εἴ 26, ς ‘ enn cna 4 OS E€OWKEVY εαῦτον ὑπερ ημὼν, ινὰ r , ε las ς A , , , A , « lol UTPWONTAL μας ATO TAGCHS αἀνομιᾶς και καθαρίσῃ EaUT@ title, otherwise unusual, that specially and antithetically marks His glory ; (d) that μεγάλου would seem uncalled for if applied to the Father, see Usteri, Lehrb. UW. 2. 4, p. 310, Hofmann, Schriftb. Vol. τ. p. 127 ; and (6) lastly, observe that appy. two of the ante- Nicene (Clem. Alexand. Protrept. 7, [ed. Pott. ], and Hippolytus, quoted by Wordsw.), and the great bulk of post- Nicene writers (see Middleton, Gr. Art. p. 393, ed. Rose, Wordsworth, Six Letters, Ὁ. 67 sq.) concurred in this interpretation, —when we candidly weigh all this evidence, it does seem difficult to resist the conviction that this text is a direct, definite, and even studied declaration of the divinity of the Eternal Son. It ought not to be suppressed that some of the best Vv., Vulg., Syr. al. (aot however appy. Ath.) and some Fathers of undoubted orthodoxy adopted the other interpr. ; in proof of the latter assertion, Reuss refers to Ulrich, Num Christus in (το. Deus appellatur, Tig. 1837, a treatise which the present editor has'not seen. The note of De W., in keeping in the background the palmary argument (a) scarcely reflects his usual candour ; that of Conyb. and Hows. is even still more unsatisfactory ; a text of such importance is not to be so summarily dismissed. 14. ὃς ἔδωκεν] ‘who gave Himself,’ Gal. i. 4, Eph. v. 25; expansion of the preceding word σωτῆρος, with a distinct retrospective reference to 7 χάρις ἡ owr., ver. 11. The forcible ἑαυτὸν ‘ Himself, His whole self, the greatest gift ever given,’ must not be overlooked; comp. Beveridge, Ser: 93, Vol. Iv. p. 285. ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν] ‘for us,’ on the meaning of this expression which must not be here too hastily asserted as equivalent to ἀντὶ ἡμῶν (Beveridge /. c.), see notes on Gal. ili. 13. λυτρώ- σήται] ‘ransom,’ ‘pay for us a λύτρον,᾽ that λύτρον being His precious blood; see notes on Eph. i. 7, and comp. Matth. xx. 28, Mark x. 45. Not only does our Lord’s death in- volve our reconciliation and our justi- fication, but, what is now often too much lost sight of, our ransoming and redemption (Beveridge, Serm. go, Vol. IV. p. 230), whether, as here, from the bondage, or, as elsewhere, from the penalties of ἀνομία: see Reuss, Theol. Chret. Iv. 17, Vol. I. p. 182 sq., who, with some deductions, has expressed himself clearly and satisfac- torily. ἀνομίας] ‘iniquity ;’ properly ‘lawlessness,’ the state of moral licence (ἀκαθαρσία καὶ ἀνομία, Rom. vi. 19) which either knows not or regards not law, and in which the essence of sin abides, 1 John iii. 4; ‘in ἀνομίᾳ cogitatur potissimum legem non servari, sive quod ignota sit lex, sive quod consulto violetur,’ Tittmann, Synon. 1. p. 48,-where a distinction between ἀνομία and the more inclusive ἀδικία (see notes on 2 Tim. ii. 19) is stated and substantiated. καθαρίσῃ k.7.A.] ‘purify unto Him- self a peculiar people; affirmative statement (according to St. Paul's habit) and expansion of what has been just expressed negatively. The tacit connexion of ἀνομία and ἀκαθαρσία (see last note) renders καθαρίζω very pertinent and appropriate. It does not seem necessary with Syr. (here incorrectly translated by Etheridge) De W., Wiesing. al., to supply ἡμᾶς and understand λαὸν as an accus. ‘of the predicate,’ scil., ‘for a peculiar people:’ the Greek commentt. (see TITUS IL. 34, 15. λαὸν περιούσιον, ζηλωτὴν καλῶν ἔργων. 189 15 Tatra λάλει κ , \ of ᾿ , ’ A , Kal παρακάλει και ἔλεγχε μετὰ πάσης ἐπιταγῆς" μηδείς σου ’ περιφρονείτω. esp. Theod.), all seem clearly to re- gard it a plain accus. objecti ; so Ital., Vulg., and (ifthe transll. in Walton, Polygl. can be trusted) Aith. and Arab. περιούσιον] ‘ pecu- liar,’ Auth. Ver., οἰκεῖον, Theod. ; very doubtfully interpreted by Syr. v ον [Zeca [ScS [populum novum], and but little better by Vulg., ‘ accepta- bilem,’ and Chrys. ἐξειλεγμένον, both of which seem to recede too far from the primary meaning. Themost satisfactory commentary on this word (ἅπ. λεγόμ. in N.T.) is supplied by τ Pet. ii. 9, λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν, compared with the mp oy of the Old Test., trans- lated λαὸν περιούσιον, Deut. vii. 6, comp. Exod. xix. 5 al.; comp. notes on Eph. i. 14. It would thus seem that the primary meaning, ‘what re- mains over and above to’ (comp. Bretsch. Lewx.),—a little too coarsely expressed by the ‘ populum abundan- tem’ of the Ital.,—has passed, by an intelligible gradation into that of περι- Hesych., ἔγκτητον, Suid., and thence, a little more specially, ‘peculiar,’ οἰκεῖον ; the connexion of thought being that indicated by Steph. (in Thesaur. s. v.), ‘ que supersunt a nobis reconduntur.’ On the derivation (from περιοῦσα) see Winer, Gr. ὃ 16. 3, ποιητόν, p- 108, and on the general meaning see Suicer Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 11. p. 678, and Hammond i loc. In this clause the sanctifying, as in the former the redeeming, purpose, of the atoning death of Christ comes mainly into prominence; see Hammond, Pract. Catech. τ. 2, p. 24 (Angl. C. Libr.) καλῶν ἔργων] gen. objecti; objects about which the ζῆλος was displayed, Acts xxi. 20, xxii. 3, 1 Cor. xiv. 12, Gal. i. 14. 15. ταῦτα «.t.A.] Retrospective exhortation (ver. 1), serving as an easy conclusion to the present, and a preparation for a new portion of the epistle. Tatra inay be united with παρακαλεῖ (comp. 1 Tim. vi. 2), but on account of the following ἔλεγχε is more naturally attached only to λάλει; Titus is, however, not to stop with λαλεῖν, he is to exhort the faithful, and reprove the negligent and way- ward: on the practical duties of Titus’s office, comp. South, Serm. 5, Vol. τ. p. 76 (Tegg). ἐπιταγῆς} ‘authority; μετὰ αὐθεντίας καὶ μετὰ ἐξουσίας, Chrysost., who also remarks on the inclusive πάσης ; ἐπιταγὴ occurs 1 Tim. i. 1, Tit. i. 3, in the more specific sense of ‘ com- mandment ;’ it is only in the N. T. used by St. Paul, viz., Rom. xvi. 26, 1 Cor. vii. 6, 25, and 2 Cor. viii. 8. This clause is probably only to be connected with the last verb (as Chrysost. and Theoph.), thus far cor- responding to ἀποτόμως, ch. i. 13. σου περιφρονείτω] ‘despise thee,’ ‘slight thee ; not ‘give no one just cause todoso,’ Bloomf. (comp. Jerome), a meaning which is here purely im- ported ; contrast 1 Tim. iv. ΤΙ, where the context supplies the thought. All the Apostle says here is, as Hamm. rightly paraphrases, ‘permit not thy admonitions to be set at nought,’ ‘speak and act with vigour; the Cretan character most probably re- quired it. The verb. περιῴρ. is an da. λεγόμ. in the N. T., probably somewhat milder (comp. Thucyd. 1. 25) than the more usual καταφρονεῖν. 190 Teach men to be obe- dient: we were once the contrary, but have been saved and re- ΠΙ. generated through God’s mercy in Jesus Christ. The ethical distinction urged by Jerome, that περιῴρ. means an im- proper, while καταῴρ. may mean a proper, contempt (e.g. of sufferings, &c.,) does not seem tenable. Bloomf. asserts that Titus was a ‘ much older man than Timothy; on what authority ? CuHapTerR IIT. τ. ὑπομίμνησκε] ‘put ὧν mind,’ ‘admone,’ Vulg. It is almost perverse in the opponents of the genuineness of these epp. to call attention to this word; it occurs several times in the N. T., and though not elsewhere in St. Paul’s epp., ex- cept 2 Tim. ii. 14, is nearly the only word which suitably expresses this peculiar part of the teacher's office : in £ Cor. iv. 17, another compound, ἀναμνήσει, is properly used as implying (Meyer in loc.) that previous instruc- tions had been forgotten. ἀρχαῖς ἐξουσίαις ‘ powers, rities,” Luke xii. 11; general, in- cluding all constituted governors, Roman and others. It is fat from improbable that there is here an allusion to an insubordinate spirit which might have been showing itself not merely among the Cretan Jews (Conyb. and Hows.), but the Cretans generally (Wetst.). They had been little more than 125 years under Roman (Metellus subjugated Crete B.C. 67), their previous institu- tions had been of a democratic tone (δημοκρατικὴν ἔχει. διάθεσιν, Polyb. Hist. ντ. 46. 4), and their own pre- datory and seditious character was only too marked; στάσεσι καὶ φόνοις καὶ ᾿ πολέμοις ἐμφυλίοις ἀναστρεῴφο- μένους, Polyb. vi. 46.9; see Meur- autho- rule i ey Ὁ ὩΣ , > παν εργον ἀγαθὸν ετοιμοὺς ELVAL, TITUS?) TUE ah: Ὑπομίμνησκε αὐτοὺς ἀρχαῖς 9 ’ € , A ‘ ἐξουσίαις ὑποτάσσεσθαι. πειθαρχεῖν, προς 2 μηδένα sius, Creta, Iv. 8, p. 226. This, per- haps, may be rendered further plau- sible by the use of πειθαρχεῖν (‘coactus obsequi’) as well as ὑποτάσσεσθαι (‘lubens et sponte submittere’), see Tittm. Synon. ΤΙ. p. 3, and comp. Syr., which by pasha [subditus ἢ ττ τς est=7re0. | and ea [audivit=v7or. | seems to observe a similar distinction : contr. Ital., Vulg. When πειθαρχ. stands alone, this meaning must not be too strongly pressed, comp. Acts v. 32, XXvil. 21; the idea of okeying a superior power, seems, however, never wholly lost, comp. Ammonius. p. 121: The omission of καὶ is justified by preponderant uncial autho- rity, ACD*E*FG, al., and is adopted by Lachm. and Tisch. If this distinction be correct, and the words really do involve somewhat different ideas, we may suitably account for the omission of καί. πειθαρχεῖν may be connected with ἀρχαῖς, Theo- doret, Huth., al., but on account of the preceding ἀρχαῖς, seems more naturally taken absolutely ; so Vulg., Syr. (appy.), and most modern com- mentators. Coray extends the refe- rence to τὴν αὐτοῦ els ἑαυτὸν ὑποταγήν (comp. Aristot. Nic. Eth. x. 9), but this is scarcely in harmony with the immediate context. 2. μηδένα βλασφ.] ‘ to speak evil of no man, μηδένα ἀγορεύειν κακῶς, Theodoret ; extension of the previous injunctions. Not only rulers; but all men are to be treated with considera- tion both in word and deed; on βλασῴφ. comp. notes on 1 Tim. i. 13. And on the practical applications and necessary limitations of the precept, TIRES" I Τῇ, rE Ν a ς , > 9 a κ 9 ὃ , B ασφημεῖν, αμαχοὺυς ELVAL, ETTLELKELS, πασὰαν EV ELKVUKEVOUS πρᾳὕτητα πρὸς πάντας ἀνθρώπους. 3 ἣμεν γάρ ποτε καὶ «ς a Ε] , ς θ a , ὃ , ’ , ἡμεῖς ἀνόητοι; ἀπειθεῖς, πλανώμενοι. δουλεύοντες ἐπιθυμίαις the exhaustive sermon of Barrow, Serm. τό, Vol. 1. p. 447 sq. ἀμάχους ἐπιεικεῖς] ‘not contentious, forbearing » on the distinction be- tween these two words, see notes on I Tim. iii. 3. < The ἐπιεικὴς must have been, it is to be feared, a somewhat exceptional character in Crete, where an ἔμφυτος πλεονεξία, exhibited in outward acts of aggression, καὶ ἰδίᾳ καὶ κατὰ κοινόν (Polyb. vi. 46. 9), is described as one of the prevailing and dominant vices. πραὕτης] ‘meekness,’ a virtue of the inner spirit, very insufficiently represented by the Syr. |20Scam> [benignitas]; see notes on Eph. iv. 2, Gal. v. 23, and Trench, Synon. ὃ 42. On ἐνδεικν. see notes on Eph. ii. 7, and on the prac- tical doctrine of universal benevolence involved in πάντας ἀνθρ. (καὶ ᾿Τουδαίους καὶ Ἕλληνας, μοχθήρους καὶ πονηρούς, Chrys.), Waterl. Serm. 11. 1, Vol. v. Ρ. 438. 3. Thpev γάρ] ‘For we WERE; ἦμεν put forward emphatically, and forming a sharp contrast to the better present (ver. 4). The yap supplies a reason for the foregoing command, especially for its concluding words ; be meek and forbearing to others, for we once equally needed mercy and forbearance ourselves, and (ver. 4) have now experienced it. Ἡμεῖς, as the context shows (comp. ver. 5), implies the Apostle and all believers ; comp. Eph. ii. 3, where the reference is equally comprehensive. ἀνόητοι] ‘ foolish ; see notes on Gal. The meaning is said to be here somewhat more specific, nearly ill. 1. approaching to ἐσκοτισμένοι διανοίᾳ, Eph. iv. 18 (De W., Huth.); this, however, is not involved in the word itself (Hesych. ἀνόητ. μωρός, ἠλίθιος, ἀσύνετος), but only reflected on it from the context. πλανώ- pevor] ‘going astray,’ “ errantes,’ Vulg., Syr. ; not ‘led astray,’ Conyb. and Hows. The associated participles as well as the not uncommon similar use of πλανᾶσθαι in the N. T. (simply Matth. xvii. 12, 1 Pet. 11: 25, al-.; metaphorically Heb. v. 2, James v. 19), seem in favour of the neutral meaning. In 2 Tim. iii. 13, the an- tithesis suggests the pass. meaning. ἡδοναῖς) ‘pleasures; a word not elsewhere used by St. Paul (a fact not lost sight of by De W.), and only somewhat sparingly in the N. T. (see Luke viii. 14, James iv. I, 3, 2 Pet. il. 13), but possibly suggested here by the notorious character in that respect of those indirectly alluded to ; comp. Chrysost. loc. Jerome (1) illustrates the clause by references to St. Paul ‘in his Saulship’ (to use Hammond’s language, Serm. 30): the vices enu- merated were, however, far more probably those of the people with whom, for the time being, the Apostle is grouping himself. On the deriva- tion of ποίκιλ. (only in Past. epp.), see notes on τ Tim. iii. 6. κακίᾳ] ‘malice ; evil habit of the mind as contrasted with πονηρία, which rather points to the manifestation of it ; see notes on Eph. iv. 31 (Transl.), Trench, Synon. XI. It is surely very hasty in Huther to assert that in 1 Cor. v. 8, it is merely synonymous with πονηρία ; see Taylor, on Repent. Iv. 1, who, however, is too narrow in his inter- pretation of κακία, though correct in 192 TETUS | EL ese 4 e ΄- f > , , , καὶ ἡδοναῖς ποικίλαις, ἐν κακίᾳ καὶ φθόνῳ διάγοντες, στυγητοί, μισοῦντες ἀλλήλους: 4 ὅτε δὲ ἡ χρηστότης καὶ ἡ φιλανθρωπία ἐπεφάνη τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Θεοῦ, 5. οὐκ > x A 5 , a » , ε a . κ ἐξ ἐργων τῶν εν δικαιοσύνη ὧν εποιήσαμεν ἡμεῖς, ἀλλα 5. ὧν ἐποιήσαμεν] So Tisch. with C**D***E J K; nearly allmss.;.... Ath. Chrys. Theod. al. (Rec., Griesb., Scholz); and perhaps rightly, as the law of attraction seems so very regularly preserved in the N.T. Lachm. reads - ἃ ἐποιήσ. with AC*D*FG; al..... Clem. al. (Huther),—a reading that is not hastily to ‘be rejected, but still appy. slightly less probable than the former. Huther urges the probability of a correction from the acc. to the gen., but it is doubtful whether transcribers were so keenly alive to the prevailing coincidence of the N. T. in this respect with classical Greek as to have made the change from the intelligible accusative. Winer (Gr. § 24. 1, p. 288) cites as similar violations of the ordinary rule, John iv. 50, vii. 39, Acts vii. 16: the first and second passages have fair critical support for the acc., the third, however, scarcely any. We retain then the reading of Tisch. that of πονηρία. The verb διάγειν is a δὶς λεγόμ., here and (with βίον) 1 1 ΠῚ ie Ὁ: στυγητοί] ‘hateful,’ μισητοί, Hesych., ‘odibiles,’ Vulg.; it forms, as Wiesing. ob- serves, a species of antithesis to μισ. ἀλλ. Their conduct was such as to awaken hatred in others. 4. ἡἣ χρηστότης) ‘the kindness,’ “ benignity,’ ‘benignitas’ Vulg., sc. “que in dandis beneficiis. cernitur,’ Fritz. Rom. ii. 4, Vol. 1, p. 98; used in reference to God, Rom. ii. 4,-xi. 22, Eph. ii. 7 (comp. Clem. Rom. i. 9, Epist. ad. Diogn. 9); in reference to man 2 Cor. vi. 6, Gal. v. 22, Col. iii. 12. See notes on Gal. l.c. where it is distinguished from ἀγαθωσύνη. ἡ φιλανθρωπία] ‘ the love,’ ‘philan- thropy,’ ‘humanitas,’ Vulg.; used only again, in ref. to men, Acts xxviii. 2; comp. Philo, Leg. ad Cai. ὃ το, Vol. 11. p. 556 (Mang.) where both words are associated, Raphel. im loc., and for the general sentiment, John iii. 6. The article is repeated with each subst. to give prominence to each attribute, Green, Gr. p. 213. On ἐπεφάνη, comp. notes on ch. ii. 11, and on σωτῆρος Θεοῦ, see notes on I Tim. i. 1, and Middleton, Gr. Art. p- 396, who remarks that it may be questioned whether in this place, as 7611 38. ch. 1. 3, 31) 10}. slimy 11) 2. the σωτὴρ Θεός, be not Christ, though usually referred to the Father. In the present verse this surely cannot be the case (see ver. 6, and comp. Usteri, Lehrb. ii. 2. 4, p. 310), still we seem bound to mark in translation the different collocation of the words. 5. οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων] ‘not by works,’ i.e. in consequence of .works; see notes on Gal. ii. 16, where this and other uses of ἐκ are compared and in- vestigated. The negative is emphatic, and, as Bengel observes, refers to the whole sentence ; οὔτε ἐποιήσαμεν ἔργα δικαιοσύνης, οὔτε ἐσώθημεν Ex τούτων, ἀλλὰ τὸ πᾶν ἡ ἀγαθότης αὐτοῦ ἐποίησε, Theophyl. The works are further de- fined as τὰ ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ, works done in a sphere or element of δικαιοσύνη, in the state of a δίκαιος, comp, Winer, Gr. § 52. a. obs., p. 466. ἐποιήσαμεν ἡμεῖς] ‘we did: ἡμεῖς emphatic; the pronoun being added to make the contrast, with αὐτοῦ ἔλεος PUSS fs: 199 A Ν >) -~ DS yt e lad A ~ κατὰ TO αὐτοῦ ἔλεος ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς διὰ λουτροῦ παλιγγενε- still more clear and forcible. In the following clause κατὰ denotes the in- direct reason that an agreement with a norma suggests and involves, = ‘in consequenceof,’ ‘quaest misericordia,’ Fritz. Rom. ii. 4, Vol. I. p. 99; so Acts ili. 17, κατὰ ἄγνοιαν, τ Pet. i. 3, κατὰ τὸ ἔλεος, comp. Phil. ii. 3, see Winer, Gr. § 53. d, p. 479. The transition from the regular meaning of the ‘model’ to that of the ‘ course of things in accordance with it,’ is sufficiently easy and intelligible; comp. Phil. ii. 3, where κατ᾽ ἐρίθειαν stands in a kind of parallelism to the dative, τῇ παπεινοφροσύνῃ, and still more de- finitely Arrian, Alex. I. 9g (cited by Winer), κατ᾽ ἔχθος τὸ Πόρου μᾶλλον ἢ φιλίᾳ τῇ ᾿Αλεξάνδρου : see also Bern- hardy, Syntax v. 20. Ὁ, p. 240. Huther on 1 Pet. i. 2 draws a distine- tion between this use of κατὰ and ἐξ, but a bare remembrance of the pri- mary meanings of the two prepp. origin (immediate) and model will render such distinctions almost self- evident. ἔσωσεν] ‘ saved us,’ ‘ put us into a state of salvation,’ Hammond; see esp. 1 Pet. iii. 21, andcomp. Taylor, Life of Chr. τ. § 9, Disc. vi. 29. In this important dog- matical statement many apparent difficulties will completely vanish if we remember (1) that no mention is here made of the subjective conditions on man’s side (διὰ τῆς πίστεως, Eph. ii. 8, comp. 1 Pet. J. ¢.), because the object of the whole passage is to enhance the description of the saving mercy of (od, see Wiesing. in loc. ; (2) that St. Paul speaks of bap- tism on the supposition that it was no mere observance, but that it was a sacrament in which all that was inward properly and com- pletely accompanied all that was out- ward: he thus can say in the fullest sense of the words, that it was a λοῦτρον παλιγγενεσίας, as he had alsu said, Gal. iii. 27, that as many as were baptized into Christ, Χριστὸν ἐνεδύσασθε, definitely put Him on, entered into vital union with Him,—a blessed state, which as it involved remission of sins, and a certain title, for the time being, to resurrection and salvation, so, if abided in, most surely leads to final σωτηρία ; see Neander, Planting, Vol. τ. p. 495 (Bohn), and esp. the brief but most perspicaous remarks of Waterl. Huchar. VI. 3, Vol. Iv. Ὁ. 578 (comp. 7b. Ix. 3, p. 645), compared with the fuller state- ments of Taylor, Life of Chr. τ. 9, Disc. vI. 14 sq. On the meaning of σώζω, comp. (with caution) Green, Gramm. (Append.) p. 318, but obs. that ‘to embrace the Gospel’ (p. 317) falls short of the plain and proper meaning of σώζειν (‘salvum facere’), which even with ref. to present time can never imply less than ‘to place in a state of salvation ;’ comp. Beveridge, on Church Cat. qu. 4, and notes on Eph. ii. 8. διὰ λουτροῦ παλιγγ. | ‘by means of the ἰωανον of re- generation ; the Noutp. παλιγγ. is the “causa medians’ of the saving grace of Christ, it is ‘the means whereby we receive the same, and the pledge to assure us thereof; ‘partam a Christo salutem Baptismus nobis ob- signat,’ Calv.: Jess than this cannot be said by any candid interpreter. The gen. παλιγγ. appy. marks the at- tribute or inseparable accompaniments of the λοῦτρον, thus falling under the general class of the possessive gen., Scheuerl. Synt.§ 16. 3, p. 115: forexx. in the N.T. of this sort of gen. of ‘inner reference,’ see esp. the collection in Winer, Gr. ὃ 30. 2. b, p. 215. As O 194 , ΑἹ 39 , Il 4 cA , 6 σιας και ανακαιίινώσεως νευματος ylous TITUS IIL. 5, 6. a or OU ἐξέχεεν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς πλουσίως, διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν, for any unexegetical attempts (Matth. al.) to explain away the plain force and lexical meaning of λοῦτρον (see notes on Eph. v. 26), it may be enough to say, in the words of Hooker on this subject, that ‘where a literal con- struction will stand, the farthest from the letter is commonly the worst,’ Eccl. Pol. Vv. 59.2; see John iii. 5, the reff. in Waterland, Works, Vol. Iv. p. 428, and comp. the fair com- ments of Hofmann, Weiss. u. Erf. τι. p- 233 sq., and Schriftb. τι. 2, p. 170 sq. On the true meaning of παλιγγε- σι o 4 νεσία (Syr. wad? S09 ᾿Ξ ἘΞ "oO partus qui de principio, de novo]; οὐκ ἐπεσκεύασεν ἡμᾶς ἀλλ᾽ ἄνωθεν κατεσκεύα- σεν, Chrysost., see the able treatise on this text by Waterland, Works, Vol. Iv. p. 427 sq., a tract which, though extending only to thirty pages, will be found to include and to supersede much that has been written on this subject: Bethell on Regen. (ed. 4) may also be profitably consulted. Kal ἀνακαιν. K.t.A.] ‘and renewing of the Holy Spirit, i.e. ‘by the Holy Sp.,’ the second gen. being that of the agent, more definitely expressed by Ὁ ΕἾ ΕΟ al., ἀνακαιν. διὰ πν. ay... . Ital. (‘renov. per Sp. sanctum’) and some Latin Ff. The construction of the first gen. dvaxaw. is somewhat doubtful. It may be regarded as either (a) dependent on the preceding διά, as in Syr., Jerome (‘per renova- tionem’) al.; see John iii. 5, and comp. Blunt, Lect. on Par. Priest, p. 56; or (b) as dependent on λουτροῦ, Ital., Vuig., and appy. Copt. On the whole the latter seems most simple and satisfactory: dvaxaw. x.r.d. must not, however, be considered as merely explanatory of παλιγγενεσίας (De W., Huther), but as co-ordinate with it, παλιγγ. and dvaxaw. (only here and Rom. xii. 2) ‘being nearly allied in end and use, of one and the same original, often going together, and perfective of each other,’ Waterland, Regen. Vol. Iv. p. 428; see Hofmann, Schriftb. τι. 2, p. 171. The exact genitival relation παλιγγ. and ἀνακαιν. cannot be very certainly or very con- fidently defined. The gen. is most probably an obscured gen. of the con- tent, representing that which the λοῦτρον involves, comprises, brings with it, and of whick itis the ordinary and appointed external vehicle ; comp. Mark i. 4, βάπτισμα μετανοίας (‘which binds to rep.’), which, grammatically considered, is somewhat similar, and for exx. of these obscurer uses of the gen., see Winer, Gr. ὃ 30. 2, p. 214, 215. The distinction between Rege- neration and Renovation (preserved in our Service of Confirmation), in respect of (a) the ‘ causa efficiens,’ (0) duration, and (c) recurrence,—three important theological differentie, is nowhere more perspicuously stated than by Waterl. l.c. p. 436; comp. notes on Eph.iv. 23, and there observe the force of the tenses. Lastly, for a comparison between ‘regeneratio’ and ‘conversio,’ see Ebrard, Dogmatik, § 454, Vol. 11. p. 357. 6. od] Scil. Πνεύματος ἁγίου ; not dependent on λουτροῦ (Calv.), or on an omitted prep. (Heydenr.), but, accord- ing to theusual rule of attraction, on the gen. immediately preceding: οὐ μόνον yap δι’ αὐτοῦ ἀνέπλασεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ δαψιλῶς τούτου μετέδωκεν, Theophyl. ἐξέχεεν] ‘powred out,’ ‘shed,’ ‘non dicit dedit sed effudit,’ Corn. a Lap.; in simi- lar reference to the Holy Spirit, Acts ii. 17, 18, 33. There does not, however, TITUS ΤΥ. 195 τῇ 4, ὃ , a 9 , ’ , A wa δικαιωθέντες TH ἐκείνου χάριτι κληρονόμοι γενηθῶμεν πὶ Ἐν , n~ 94 , κατ᾽ ἐλπίδα ζωῆς αἰωνιου. appear to be here any special reference to the Pentecostal effusion (Olsh.), nor to the communication to the Church at large (Est., comp. De W.), but as the tense and context (ver. 7) seem rather to imply, to individuals in baptism. The next clause points out through whose mediation this blessed effusion is bestowed. διὰ *Ino. Xp. is not to be separated, as in Mill, Griesb., Lachm., by a comma from the clause ἐξέχεεν k. T.X., but connected closely with it: if the words be referred to ἔσωσεν, there will be not only a slight tautology ἔσωσεν---διὰ σωτῆρος, but the awk- wardness of two clauses with διὰ each dependent on the same verb. Thus then the whole is described as the work of the Blessed Trinity. The Father saves us by the medium of the outward laver which conveys the inward grace ot the regenerating and renewing Spirit ; that Spirit again is vouchsafed to us, yea, poured out abundantly on us only through the merits of Jesus Christ. So the Father is our σωτήρ, and the Son our σωτήρ, but in different ways ; ‘Pater nostre salutis primus auctor, Christus vero opifex, et quasi artifex,’ Justiniani. 7. ἵνα κ. τ. Χ.7 Design of the more remote ἔσωσεν (De W.), not of the nearer ἐξέχεεν (Wiesing.). The latter construction is fairly defensible, but appy. not so simple or satisfactory. Though some prominence is given to ἐξέχεεν, both by the adv. πλουσίως, and by the defining words διὰ Τησ. Xp., yet the whole context seems to mark ἔσωσεν ag the verb on which the final clause depends. We were once ina hopeless and lost state, but we were rescued from it by the φιλανθρωπία of God, who not merely saved us from the δουλείω of sin, but associated with it the gracious intent that we should become κληρονόμοι of eternal life. δικαιωθέντες] ‘justified,’ in the usual and more strict theological sense ; not, however, as implying only a mere outward non-imputation of sin, but as involving a ‘mutationem status,’ an acceptance into new privileges and an enjoyment of the benefits thereof, Waterl. Justif. Vol. vi. p. 8: in the words of the same writer ‘justification cannot be conceived without some work of the Spirit in conferring a title to salvation,’ ib. p. 6. ἐκείνου may be referred to the Holy Spirit (Wiesing.), but is appy. more correctly referred to God the Father. The Holy Spirit is undoubtedly the efficient (1 Cor. vi. 11), as our Lord is the meritorious cause of our justifica- tion; the use, however, of the ex- pression χάρις, which in reference to δικαιοσύνη and δικαιόω seems almost normally connected with the principal cause, the Father (Rom. iii. 24), and its apparent retrospective reference to ἐξ ἔργων, ver. 5, renders the latter interpr. much more probable ; comp. Waterl. Justif. Vol. vi. p. 9. The pron. ἐκείνου seems to have been used to preclude a reference to’Incod Xp., which so immediately precedes. κατ᾽ ἐλπίδα] ‘in respect of hope,’ ‘according to hope, surely not ‘through hope,’ Conyb. and Hows.,—a most needless violation of the usual force of the prep. These words are not to be connected with {wis αἰωνίου (Coray, Matth.), as κληρον. γενηθ. would thus be left isolated, but is more naturally united as a restrictive addition to the latter words ; καθὼς ἠλπίσαμεν, οὕτως ἀπολαύσομεν, Chrys. The κληρονομία §. aiwy. is really future (comp. Rom. Oe 190 TITUS Teach men to main- tain good works; avoid idle questions, and shun an obstinate he- retic. viii. 24, where ἔλπιδι is probably a dat. modi, see Meyer in loc.), though present in respect of hope; εἰ yap οὕτως ἀπεγνωσμένονς, ws ἄνωθεν γεννη- θῆναι, ὡς χάριτι σωθῆναι, ὡς μηδὲν ἔχοντας [Cod. Colb.] ἀγαθόν, ἔσωσε, πόλλῳ μᾶλλον ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι τοῦτο ἐργάσεται, Chrysost. The re- mark of De W. that St. Paul does not elsewhere specifically join κληρον. or even ἔλπις with ζωὴ αἰών. is true, but can scarcely be considered of moment, as substantially analogous sentiments (comp. Eph. i. 18, 1 Thess. y. 8,) can be adduced without diffi- culty ; comp. Wiesing. 7n loc. 8. πιστὸς ὁ λόγος] ‘ Faithful is the saying,’ in emphatic reference to what has been asserted in the pre- ceding vers. 4-7, and to the important doctrines they involve ; ἐπειδὴ περὶ μελλόντων διαλεχθῇ καὶ οὔπω παρόντων, ἐπήγαγε τὸ ἀξιόπιστον, Chrysost. On this formula see notes on 1 Tim.i. 5. 15. περὶ τούτων διαβεβ.1 ‘make asseve- ration concerning these things; not ‘ hee asseverare,’ Beza, ~ Auth. Ver., De W., but as in 1 Tim. i. 7 (where see notes), ‘de his [non de rebus frivolis, Beng. ] affirmare,’ Ital., changed for the worse in Vulg. to ‘confirmare: comp. Scholef. Hints, p- 127 (ed. 3). The translation of Turnb., ‘that thou be confirmed,’ esp. as he takes 6.a8. middle in 1 Tim. l.c., is singularly unfortunate. The object and intent of the order is given in the following clause. φροντίζωσιν] ‘be careful; ἅπ. eye in N. T.; ἔργον καὶ σπούδασμα διηνεκὲς ἔχωσι, Theophyl. ; ‘ Vult eos studium suum curamque hue appli- care, et videtur quum dicit ¢povr. eleganter alludere ad inanes eorum Il. 8. 8 Ἰ]Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος. καὶ περὶ τούτων βούλομαί σε διαβεβαιοῦσθαι, ἵνα φροντίζω σιν καλῶν ἔργων προΐστασθαι οἱ πεπιστευ- contemplationes, qui sine fructu et extra vitam philosophantur,’ Calv. The constructions of ¢@povr. and éxppovr. are noticed by Thomas M. p. 289 (ed. Bern.) προΐστασθαι] ‘to be forward in, to practise,’ Syr. ee [operari, facere]; so προΐστ. τέχνης, Athen. XII. 612, see Palm τ. Rost, Lez. sive Violet, ἢ, τύ. {ΠΠῸ Vine. (‘bonis operibus preesse’) and some other translations endeavour to retain the primary meaning of the verb; Justiniani compares ‘prefectus an- similarly Est., ‘ tanquam operum exactores et prefecti,’ and Priceus (ap. Poli Syn.) ἡγεμόνας εἶναι ; alii alia. All this perhaps is slightly forced ; the word seems chosen to mark a ‘prompt sedulous attention to (comp. Polyb. Hist. VI. 34. 3, προΐστανται χρείας), and practice of, good works,’ but, as the exx. adduced appear to show, scarcely involves any further idea of ‘bene agendo precedere, Beza, al.: see the nume- rous exx. quoted by Kypke, Obs. Vol. 11. 381, Loesner, Obs. p. 430. καλῶν ἔργων] ‘good ποῦ merely with reference to works of mercy (Chrys.), but (as in ch. ii. 7) perfectly generally, and comprehen- sively. The recurrence of this expr. in the Pastoral epp. (ver. 14, 1 Tim. γ. I0, 25, vl. 18, comp. 1 Tim. ii. 10, Tit. 111. 1) has been all that need be said is, that the nature of the errors con- demned in these epp. was exactly such as required the reiteration of such It was not to bea hollow, specious, falsely ascetic, and Christianity, but one that none,’ works,’ . πη. αἱ. 20; often noticed ; a command. sterile TITUS II. 8—1o. 197 “ “ \ AY gx! , “- 5 κότες Θεῷ: ταῦτα ἐστιν καλὰ Kat ὠφέλιμα τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. A A A la 9 μωρὰς δὲ ζητήσεις καὶ γενεαλογίας καὶ ἔρεις καὶ μάχας \ he 4 A τ᾿ a 5, [A νομικας περιϊστασο" εἰσὶν γὰρ ἀνωφελεῖς καὶ μάταιοι. 19 Αἱρετικὸν ἄνθρωπον μετὰ μίαν καὶ δευτέραν νουθεσίαν Io. δευτέραν νουθεσίαν] So Rec. with ACJ Κ ; &c...... Vulg.al..... many Gr. and Lat. Ff. (Griesb., Scholz, Lachm., Huth., De W. e sil). The reading adopted by Tisch., μίαν νουθεσίαν (DEFG.... It. Syr. (Philox.) Chrys. Theodoret (1) ; Lat. Ff.) καὶ δευτέραν, though fairly supported, does not seem so satisfactory ; transcribers appear to have felt a difficulty about the close union of μίαν and δευτέραν (DE .... Clarom. Sangerm. Copt. read δύο) and to have introduced in consequence variations in the text. showed itself in outward actions ; comp. Wiesing. Hinleit. § 4, Neander, Planting, Vol. τ. p. 343 (Bohn). πέπιστ. Θεῷ] ‘who have believed God, —God, not perhaps without some slight emphasis; ‘non dixit qui credunt hominibus sed qui credunt Deo,’ Jerome. The expression is cer- tainly not to be limited to the heathen Christians (Mack), but includes all who by God’s grace had been led to embrace His λόγον and διδασκαλίαν (chi τ 5. τ: 10), De: ΝΥ; Wiesing: On the constructions of πίστις and πιστεύω, see notes on τ Tim. i. 16. ταῦτα] ‘these things,’ scil. these in- structions, this practical teaching (Fell), to which the μωραὶ ζητήσεις in the next verse form a sharp and clear contrast. Wiesing. refers the pro- noun to καλὰ ἔργα ; this, however, even if it escapes tautology, does not equally well maintain the antithesis to the meaning here assigned to ζητήσεις. On καλὰ (‘good,’ per se, opp. to μάταιοι, ver. 9) καὶ ὠφελ., comp. notes on 1 7%m. 11. 3. 9. ἵητήσεις) ‘questions (of con- troversy) ; exactly as in τ Tim. i. 4, where see notes. In the latter pas- sage De W. here assigns the meaning ‘Streitigkeiten,’ and yet in his note on the passage adopts the present meaning ‘Streitfragen,’—a self-contra- diction by no means usual in that careful commentator. The word is only used by St. Paul in the Pastoral Gijon of 1Ἰπ 1 Ὁ; Aa 4: Σ ΠΙΠῚ re 23. On γενεαλογίας, see notes on 1 Tim. i. 14, where the expression is investigated: it is here associated with ¢y7. as probably marking the principal subject among these con- troversial discussions ; comp, Winer, Gra ἃ 57. 2. ΘΗΝ Ρ' 518: ἔρεις καὶ pax. νομ.] ‘strifes, and con- tentions about the law’ are the results of these foolish and unpractical ques- tions ; see t Tim. vi. 4, 2 Tim. ii. 23. The adj. νομικαὶ is not to be referred to both substantives (Heydenr.), but only to the latter ; the μάχ. vow. were a special and prevailing form of the ἐρεῖς, just as the γενεαλ. were of the ζητήσεις, Wiesing. The contentions perhaps turned on the authority and application of some of the precepts in the law ; comp. 1 Tim. i. 14. περιΐστασο] ‘avoid, yo out of the way of ° see notes on 2 Tim, ii. 16, the only other passage in St. Paul’s epp. where the word occurs. μάταιοι] ‘vain,’ from which nothing of true value results, in opp. to καλά, ver. 8. Μάταιος is here and James i. 26, as in Attic Greek, of two ter- minations ; the fem. occurs 1 Cor. xy. 17, 1 Pet. i. 18. On the distinction 198 maparrov, ἴἴ between κένος (contents, —‘ das Gehalt- lose’) and μάταιος (results,—‘ das Erfolglose’) see Meyer on 1 Cor. xv. 17: Tittmann (Synon. 1. p. 173) com- pares them with the Lat. ‘inanis’ and ‘vanus.’ 10. αἱρετικὸν ἄνθρωπον] ‘An heretical man,’ ‘a man who causeth divisions; ‘quisquis sua protervia unitatem ecclesie abrumpit,’ Calvy. The exact meaning here of this word (an ἅπ. λεγόμ. in N. T.) must not be deduced from the usage of later writers, but simply from the Apostle’s use of the subst. from which it is derived. The term αἱρέσεις occurs (not ‘often,’ Huther, but) twice in St. Paul’s epp., 1 Cor. xi. 19, where it denotes appy. something more aggra- vated than σχίσματα, ‘dissensions of a more matured-character’ (‘nullum schisma non aliquam sibi confingit heresim,’ Jerome), and Gal. v. 20, where it is enumerated after διχο- στασίαι. In neither case, however, does the word seem to imply specially ‘the open espousal of any funda- mental error’ (the-more definite eccles. meaning, comp. Origen. on Tit. Vol. v. p. 285, Lomm., Waterl. Doct. of Trim. ch. 4, Vol. 111. p. 461), but, more generally, ‘divisions in church matters,’ possibly, of a somewhat matured kind, τὰς φιλονεικίας λέγει, Theod. on 1 Cor. l.c., see Suicer, Thesawr. 8.v.1. 3, Vol. 1. p. 120. Thus, then, aiperixds ἄνθρ. will here be one who gives rise to such divisions by erroneous teaching, not necessarily of a fundamentally heterodox nature, but of the kind just described, ver. Ὁ ; comp. ch. i. 14. If we adopt this appy. fair and reasonable interpre- tation, the objections of De W. and others, founded on the later and more TITUS: UT. τὸ; τὰ. fda Ὁ, ΞΡ e “ 4 ELOWS OTL ἐξέστραπται Ο TOLOUTOS Και U ‘ 3 , ἁμαρτάνει ὧν QUTOKATAKPLTOS. special meanings of αἵρεσις and aipe- τικός, wholly fall to the ground. μετὰ play K.7.d.] ‘after one and a second [unavailing | admonition ;’ Titus is not to contend, he is only to use νουθεσία, if that fail he is then to have nothing further to do with the offender. On the distinction between νουθεσία (‘quee fit verbis’) and παιδεία (‘que fit per paenas’), see notes on Eph. vi. 4; and on the use of εἷς for πρῶτος, here associated with δευτέρος, and consequently less peculiar and Hebra- istic than when alone, as in Matth. xxviii. 1, Mark xvi. 2, al., see Winer, Gr. § 38. 1, p. 287. παραιτοῦ] ‘shun,’ S] Δα] = ΩΣ [lit. ‘ask off from’] Syr., ‘devita,’ Vulg. ; ‘monere desine; laterem lavares,’ Beng.: see notes on 1 Tim. iv. 7. There is nothing in this or the asso- ciated words which favours any de- finite reference to formal excommu- nication, = ἔκβαλλε, Vitringa (de Vet. Syn. 111. 1. 10, p. 756), who compares the νουθεσία to the ‘correptio’ or ‘excommunicatio privata’ of the Jews; sim. Taylor, pisc. § 15. This, however, is imperting into a general.word a special meaning. As we certainly have such expressions as παραιτεῖσθαι τὴν γυναῖκα (repudiare), Plut. Apoth. 206 a, and even ἀπω- θεῖσθαι καὶ τῆς οἰκίας παραιτεῖσθαι, Lucian, Abdic. ὃ 19 ; we perhaps may say with Waterland, Doctr. of Trin. ch. 4, Vol. 111. p. 466, that παραιτοῦ ‘implies and infers a command to ex- clude them ;’ but St. Paul’s previous use of the word does not appy. justify our asserting that it is here formally expressed : see notes in Translation. 11. εἰδώς] ‘as thow knowest,’ by the ill success of thy admonitions ; TITUS Come to me at Nico- polis; bring Zenas and Apollos. Ourbrethren must not be unfruitful. reason for the injunction to have nothing to do with him: ὅταν δὲ δῆλος ἢ πᾶσι καὶ φανερός, πυκτεύεις εἰκῇ ; Chrysost. ἐξέστραπται)] ‘is perverted,’ τίνος ἕνεκεν Syr. yaasto [perversus], lit. ‘hath been turned, thoroughly, inside out ;’ Schol. on Arist. Nub. 88, ἀπὸ μεταφορᾶς τῶν ῥυπουμένων ἱματίων καὶ ἐκστρε- φομένων" ἐκστρέψαι δὲ ἀλλάξαι τὸ πρὸς τὸ ἔσω μέρος ἔξω (cited by Wetst.): so Deut. xxxii. 20, γενέα The strengthened compound thus appears to denote the complete inward cor- ruption and perverseness of character which must be predicated of any man who remains thus proof against twice repeated admonitions. Baur (it is to be feared), only to support his mean- ing of αἱρετικός, refers ἐξεστρ. to the outward act of the man, ‘has gone away from us τ᾿ this, as Wiesing. pro- perly remarks, would more naturally be ἀποστρέφεσθαι. κατάκριτος) ‘ self-condemned : the reason why he is to be left to himself ; he has been warned twice and now sins against light, οὐ yap ἔχει εἰπεῖν, e , ἱμάτιον τὸ ἐξεστραμμένη, Heb. npn Wy αὐτο- ὅτι οὐδεὶς εἶπεν, οὐδεὶς ἐνουθέτησεν, Chrysost. The aggravating circum- stance is not that the man condemns himself directly and explicitly, as this might be a step to recovery, but that he condemns himself indirectly and implicitly, as acting against the law of his mind, and doing in his own particular case what in the general he condemns; see esp. Waterland, Doct. of Trin. ch. 4, Vol. 11, p. 464, where this expression is fully in- vestigated. 12. Τυχικόν] On Tychicus, whom the Apostle (Col. iv. 7) terms 6 dya- III. 12. 199 12 “Ὅγαν πέμψω ᾿Αρτεμᾶν πρός σε ἣ Τυχικόν, σπούδασον ἐλθεῖν πρός με εἰς "τητὸς ἀδελφός, καὶ πιστὸς διάκονος καὶ σύνδουλος ἐν Κυρίῳ, see the notes on 2 Tim. iv. 12, Eph. vi. 21. It would seem not improbable that either Arte- mas or Tychicus were intended to sup- ply the place of Titus in Crete during his absence with the Apostle. Of Artemas nothing is known. Νικόπολιν] There were several cities of this name, one in Cilicia (Strabo XIV. 676), another in Thrace on the river Nestus, a third in Epirus (Strabo XII. 325), built by Augustus after the battle of Actium. It is extremely difficult to decide which of these cities is here alluded to; Schrader (Paulus, Vol. 1. p. 118) fixes on the first; the Greek commentt., the sub- scription at the end of the ep. (Nixor. τῆς Μακεδονίας, to which country it was near, comp. Theodoret), and some modern writers, on the second ; Wieseler (Chronol. p. 335) and others on the third. Perhaps the second may seem to harmonize better with the scanty notices of the last journey from Asia Minor to the West in 2 Tim. iv. to sq. (Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 344, Bohn), but as the city in Epirus appears to have been a place of much more importance, and not unsuitable as a centre for missionary operations, it may perhaps be assumed as not im- probably the place here alluded to ; see Conyb. and Hows. St. Paul, Vol. II. p. 481. κέκρικα] “7 have determined,’ with dependent inf., a form of expression used elsewhere by St. Paul, 1 Cor. vii. 37 (perf.), 2 Cor. ii. © (aor.) παρα- χειμάσαι] Demosth, Phorm. 909. 14, παραχειμάζοντι ἐκεῖ, ib. Dionys. 1292, Polyb. Hist. 11. 64. I, UI. 33. 5 al.: in this compound the prep. παρὰ seems to mark the locality ‘to winter ; 200 Νικόπολιν: ἐκεῖ γὰρ κέκρικα παραχειμάσαι. ἍΠΕΡ ΤΙ ΄σ ‘ 13 Znvav τὸν 4 νομικὸν καὶ ᾿Απολλὼ σπουδαίως πρόπεμψον, ἵνα μηδὲν »" ἊΣ ᾽ν αὐτοῖς λειπη. at which the action was to take place, comp. Palm u. Rost, Lex. s.v. Iv. 1, Vol. 11. p. 670. There does not ap- pear anything in the expression from which any historical deduction can be safely drawn ; possibly the winter was drawing near, and the Apostle on his way (ἐκεῖ, ‘non dicit hic,’ Beng.) to Nicopolis. 13. Ζηνᾶν] A name perhaps con- tracted from Ζηνόδωρος : of the bearer of it nothing is known. It is doubt- ful whether the term voysxds implies an acquaintance with the Roman (Grot.) or Hebrew law (De W.). The latter is the opinion of Chrys., Jerome, and Theoph., and is perhaps slightly the more probable; comp. Matth. xxii. 35. For notices of an apocryphal work, assigned to Zenas, ‘ De vita et actis Titi,’ comp. Fabric. Cod. Apocr. Vol. 11. p. 831. ᾿Απολλώ] ‘ Apollos,’ sc. Apollonius, as in cod. D [Acts xviii. 24], or possibly A pollo- dorus, an eloquent (λόγιος, Acts J. c. see Meyer in loc.) Jew of Alexandria, well versed in the Scriptures, and dis- ciple of St. John the Baptist ; he was - instructed in Christianity by Aquila and Priscilla (Acts xviii. 26), preached the Gospel with signal~ success in Achaia and at Corinth, and appears to have maintained relations of close inti- macy with St. Paul, comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 12. There appears no good reason for supposing any greater differences between the teaching of St. Paul and Apollos (Neander, Planting, Vol. i. p- 230 8sq., Bohn), than may be re- ferred to the mere outward form in which that teaching possibly might | have been communicated, and which comes from that one and the same | ἄκαρποι] 14 (a) 4 δὲ Ν δ ᾿ς A MAVUGVETWOQAY OE KA OL ἡμέτεροι καλῶν Spirit which διαιρεῖ ἰδίᾳ ἑκάστῳ καθὼς βούλεται (τ Cor. xii. 11ὴ ; see Winer, ΑΓΒ, Art. ‘Apollos,’ Vol. 1. p. 68. Much that has been recently advanced on the differences between St. Pau and Apollos is very doubtful and very unsatisfactory. The tendency of later criticism is to assign the ep. to the Heb., to Apollos, and it is cer- tainly a supposition that deserves seri- ous consideration ; see Lunemann, on Heb. p. 21, 22, Reuss, Gesch. des NEEDS 153% πρόπεμψον] ‘conduct,’ “ forward on their journey,’ with the further idea, as the context seems to require, of supplying their various needs ; comp. 3 John 6. 14. οἱ ἡμέτεροι] ‘our brethren in Crete,’ not ‘nostri ordinis homines’ (Beza), scil. ‘Apollos, Tychicus, et alii quos mittimus si quoin loco resederint’ (Grot.), as this would imply a com- parison between them and St. Paul, and would involve a meaning of προΐστ. Kar. ἔργ. (‘ habere domi offici- nam aliquam, me imitantes, Acts xx. 34, Grot.), somewhat arbitrary, and wholly different to that in vér. 8. The ἡμέτεροι are rather of περὶ σέ (Theoph.), the καὶ tacitly comparing them not with heathens (Hofmann, Schriftb. Vol. τι. 2, p. 429), but with Titus ; ‘let these Cretan brethren of ours be not backward in cvoperating with thee in these acts of duty and benevolence.’ On προΐστ. x.7.X., see notes on ver. 8. εἰς τὰς ἀναγκ. χρείας] ‘with reference to the necessary wants ; i. e. to supplythem : comp. Phil. iv. τύ, εἰς τὴν χρείαν μοι ἐπέμψατε.ς The article appears to mark the known and existing wants. ‘unfruitful, solely and ἜΠΕΞ 11. 145.05: 201 A af 94 A τὶ ' [2 6 A => epyov προΐστασθαι εἰς τὰς avaykalasg XPELaSs «να μὴ WOLV ad akap7ol. Salutations and Bene- diction. 15 ox , , e Cae “ , σπάζονταί σε οἱ MET ἐμοῦ παντες" + A lal « “ 3 , e , Ν ἄσπασαι TOUS φιλοῦντας ἡμὰς εν πίστει. ἡ χάρις μετὰ i (J Gs πάντων UMW. specially with reference to the wants of their teachers, ‘ quicunque evange- listis non ministraverint,’ Just., but more with reference to their own moral state, i.e. without showing practical proofs of their faith by acts of love. 15. οἱ μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ] ‘those with me,’ in my company, journeying or abiding with me; comp. Gal. i. 2, οἱ σὺν ἔμοι, where the idea of union in action (coherence), rather than mere local union (co-existence), seems intended to be expressed; Kriiger, Sprachl. § 68. 13. 1. τοῦς φιλοῦντας k.t.A.] ‘those who love us in faith,’ those who love me in the sphere of faith; not merely πιστῶς καὶ ἀδόλως, Theoph.! or διὰ πίστεως, Gicum., but ‘in faith,’ as the common principle which bound together and hallowed their common love. From the con- cluding words, ἡ χάρις μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν (Col. iv. 18), there is no reason to infer that the epistle was intended for the church as well as Titus. It is merely an inclusive benediction that comprehends the ἐπίσκοπος, and those committed to his oversight, Titus and all the faithful in Crete. ᾿Αμὴν (Ree. with D***KFGHJK) here, as well as) in) 1 Lime vis 21, 2 Dimer iv. 22) seems an interpolation, though in this case supported by stronger external evidence. It is bracketted by Lachm. and rejected by Giriesb. Scholz, Tisch., with ACD* 17; Clarom., A‘th., Hier. In the conclusion of all St. Paul’s epp., except Rom. (om. only by 1 ms, and Am.), Gal. (om. G. g, Ambrst), variations. The omission seems certainly less probable than the insertion. there are similar TRANSLATION. ΝΘ THE same principles are observed in this translation as in those of the GaLATIANS and Erpnesrans. The Authorised Version is only altered where it appears to be incorrect, inexact, insufficient or obscure. ‘There are however a few cases in which I have ventured to introduce another correction—viz., where our venerable Version seems to be inconsistent in its renderings of important or less usual words and forms of expression. These peculiarly occur in this group of Epistles, and the process of translation made me feel the necessity of preserving a certain degree of uniformity in the mean- ings assigned to some of the unusual yet recurrent terms and expressions. This modification has been introduced with great caution, for, as the reader is probably aware, our last Translators state very explicitly that they have not sought to preserve a studied uniformity of translation, and have not always thought it necessary to assign to the same word even in very similar combinations the same meaning. ‘To affect then a rigorous uniformity would be to reverse the principles on which that Version was constructed, and would not be revision but reconstruction. I have trusted then to my own judgment; where it has seemed necessary to be uniform I have been so; where this necessity has not been apparent, I have not ventured to interfere with the felicitous variety of expression which characterises our admirable Version. Whether in azew translation some few general rules and principles might not be thought desirable is fairly open to discussion ; in a revision of an old trans- lation, however, such rules can only be laxly observed, and must yield to individual judgment and be modified by the characteristics of the original. I dare not hope to have been always consistent, but I have striven to be cautious and circumspect, and I trust I may not be found too often to have been arbitrary or capricious. The notes will be found a little fuller, as I have been assured by several friends that a greater interest is felt in the collations of the older Versions than I could have at all expected. These Versions are exactly the same as those in the previous epistles, and are detailed in the Notice to the Transl. of the Galatians. THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. CHAPTER I. 1. 5 an apostle of Christ Jesus, according to the com- mandment of God our Saviour and Christ Jesus our Hope, ? unto Timothy, my true child in the faith. Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. 8. Eyen as I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I was on my way into Macedonia, that thou mightest command some not to be teachers of other doctrine, 1. Christ Jesus} *Jesus Christ, Auth. According to| So Rhem., Cov. (both), and Auth. Rom. xvi. 26, and Tit. i. 3; ‘by the,’ Auth., Wiel. and remaining Vv. Christ Jesus] *Lord J. C. Auth. The trans- lation of ἐπιταγὴν adopted by Cran., Gen., Bish., attention ; but, perhaps, too much obscures the idea of the divine ordi- ‘commission,’ deserves nance and command under which the apostle acted; comp. Acts ix. 16, ὅσα δεῖ x.7.X., and £ Cor. ix. 185. It may be remembered too that ‘com- mand’ originally seems to have meant ‘power’ or authority, Synon., ed. by Whately, p. 91. Our Hope] So Wicl., Rhem., Cov. (Test.) ; Auth., prefixes ‘which is’ with remaining Vv. 2. True child} ‘My own son,’ Auth. ; ‘beloved sone,’ Wicl., Rhem., Cov. (Test.), ‘naturall sonne,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish. It seems desirable to retain the more literal 4 nor translation of τέκνον : the distinction between τέκνον and υἷος is occasionally of considerable importance. The Father] * ‘Our Father,’ Auth. Christ Jesus] ‘Jesus Christ,’ Auth. al., though doubtful on the authority of what edition. 3. Even as] ‘As,’ Auth., and the other Vv. Was on my way] ‘Went,’ Auth., Wicl., Cov., (Test.), Rhem.; ‘departed,’ Zynd. and re- maining Vv. Command] So Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish., and by far the most usual translation of the word elsewhere in Auth.; ‘charge,’ Auth.; ‘denounse,’ Wicl., Rhem. ; ‘warne, Cov. (Test.). The full autho- ritative meaning of the word should not be here impaired in translation ; see notes. Not to be teachers, &c.] ‘That they teach no,’ 4uth., and sim. the other Vv., except Cran., ‘folowe no straunge, &c.;’ Cov. (Test.), ‘ preache none otherwyse.’ 4. Neither] So Auth., andall Vv., 200 1 TIMOTHY I. 4—7. yet to give heed to fables and endless genealogies, seeing they minister questions rather than God’s dispensation, which is in faith—so I do now. 5 But the end of the commandment is love out of a pure heart, and a good con- science, and faith unfeigned: ὅ from which some having gone wide in aim turned themselves aside unto vain babbling ; 7 willing to be teachers of the law; yet not understanding either what they say, or about what they make asseveration. except Rhem., ‘nor.’ This is perhaps a case where it may seem necessary to adopt a more rigorous translation of μηδέ: where the things prohibited are not very different in their charac- ter, the ordinary translation will per- haps be sufficiently exact ; here, how- ever, the tues are not merely to ab- stain from teaching others such pro- fitless subjects, but are themselves not to study them. On the full force of οὐδέ or μηδὲ after οὐ and μή, see Franke’s very good treatise de Part. Neg. τι. 5, and illustrate his remark,— that οὐδὲ hints at an indefinite num- ber of consequent terms, by Judges i. 27, where οὐ is followed by fourteen clauses with dvdé. To give] ‘give,’ Auth. Seeing they] ‘which,’ Auwth., and all Vv. God’s dispensation] ‘ Godly edifying,’ Auth., and the other Vv. except Wicl., ‘edifacioun of God,’ and sim. Rhem., Cov. (Test.) I do now] ‘1 do,’ Auth. 5. But] So Bish., Rhem.; ‘now,’ Auth.; ‘for,’ Wicl. and remaining Vv. Love] So all Vv. ex- cept Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Rhem., and Auth. Itis curious why this change was made, except for variation from ver. 14, comp. Vulg. Our last trans- lators were by no means uniform in their translation of ἀγάπη: even in cases where itis associated with πίστις and they might have wished to have marked a quasi-theological meaning, it is not uncommonly translated love ; compare ch, vi. 11,1 Thess. iii. 6. al. 6. Gone wide in aim] ‘Swerved,’ Auth.; ‘have erred,’ Wicl. and the other Vv. except Cov. (Test.), ‘errynge; Bish., ‘having erred;’ Rhem., ‘straying.’ Itseems clear our translators made the change from a desire to preserve the proper construc- tion ἀστοχεῖν with a gen., and yet not as Cov. (Test.), to fall into barbarous English, or as Wicl. al., to change the part. into a finite verb,—an inexact- ness which Conyb. and Hows. have not avoided. To ‘go wide from,’ is according to the exx. in Johnson, s. v. ‘wide,’ perfectly correct. Turned themselves} ‘Have turned,’ Auth., and the other Vv. except Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Rhem., ‘are turned: it is perhaps desirable to retain here the medial force of the passive form ἐξετράπησαν. Babbling] ‘Jangling,’ Auth., and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘speche ; Rhem., ‘talke.’ The change seems required, as ‘jangling’ might be understood in its secondary sense. It is found in Gower, Chaucer, al., as here, in the sense of ‘ prating,’ ‘idly talking.’ 7. Willing] So Wicl., Cov., (both) ; ‘desiring,’ Auth.; ‘they woke be,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen.; ‘covetyng,’ Bish. ; § desirous,’ Rhem. Thoughit is not always possible in the N. T. to keep up the exact distinction between θέλω and βούλομαι (see notes on ch. ii. 8, and y. 14), this perhaps is a case τι TIMOTHY I. 8—z4. 207 * Now we know that the law zs good, if a man use it lawfully, * knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and unruly, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for smiters of fathers and smiters of mothers, for manslayers, ‘ for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to the sound doctrine, " according to the gospel of the glory of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust. * And I thank Him who gave me inward strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, that He counted me faithful, having appointed me for the ministry, "ἢ though formerly I was a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and a doer of outrage: still I obtained mercy, because I did ἐξ ignorantly in unbelief, “ yea the where it may be maintained: the false teachers were quite willing to undertake the office though they had really no claims. Yet not un- derst.| Sim. Tynd., Cran., Gen., ‘and yet understonde ποὺ: Awth., Cov. (Test.), Bish., Rhem., ‘notunderstand- ing.’ Either—or| ‘ Neither, nor, Auth. About what, &c.] ‘Whereof they affirm,’ Auth. and all Vy. except Wicl., ‘of what thing is; ‘of what,’ Rhem. 8. Now] ‘But, Auth., Cov., (both), Bish., Rhem. ; other Vv. omit except Wicl., ‘and.’ 9. Unruly] So Auth. in Tit. i. 6, 10, but here ‘ disobedient,’ with Tynd. and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘not suget.’ Sinful] ‘ For sin- ners,’ Auth. and all Vv. (some ‘to’ instead of ‘for’) ; perhaps it is a little more exact to retain the adjective. For the unholy] ‘For unholy,’ Auth. : the idiomatic English repeated for the sake of consistency. Smiters, (bis)] ‘Murderers’ (bis), Auth. and all Vv. except Wicl., Cov., (Test.), ‘sleers ; Rhem., ‘killers.’ το. The sound doctrine] Auth. article is omits the art. with Zynd., Cov. (Test.), Gen., Bish., Rhem.; the remaining Vv. (Wicl., Cov., Cran.), properly insert it. 11. Gospel of the glory] So rightly all the Vy. (Bish., ‘of glory’), except Auth., Gen., ‘ glorious gospel.’ 12. Him who, &c.] Similarly as to order Gen., Rhem., and it may be added, Syr. and Vulg., rightly pre- serving the more emphatic position ; Auth., “Ὁ. J. our Lord who hath enabled me,’ and sim. remaining Vv., except with variations in the trans- lation of ἐνδυν. e.g., ‘hath made me strong,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish. ; ‘strengthened,’ Rhem. That] ‘ For that,’ Auth. ‘Having appointed, «6. ‘ Putting me into,’ Auth., Bish., and similarly the other Vv. 13. Though formerly| ** Who was before,’ Auth. A doer of outrage] Sim. Cov. (Test.), ‘ doer of injury’: ‘Injurious,’ Auth. ; ‘ful of wrongis,’ Wiel ; ‘tyraunt,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran.; ‘oppresser,’ Gen., Bish.; ‘ contume- lious,’ Rhem. Still] ‘But,’ Auth., and all Vv. except Bish., ‘but yet.’ 208 1 TIMOTHY I. 14—20. grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. ” Faithful is the saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom 1 am chief. "ἢ Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me as chief Christ Jesus might show forth the whole of His long-suffering, to display a pattern for them which should hereafter believe on Him to life everlasting. ™ Now unto the King of ages, the immortal, invisible, only God, de honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen. 15 This‘charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, in accord- ance with the forerunning prophecies about thee, that thou mayest war in them the good warfare; ™ having faith, and a good conscience ; which some having thrust away, made ship- wreck concerning the faith: * of whom is Hymenzus and 14. Yea] ‘And,’ Auth., Rhem.; | to the prophecies which went before ‘but,’ Wicl., Cov. (Test.) ; ‘never- | onthee,’ Auth., Bish., and sim. Wicl., thelater,’ Tynd.; ‘nevertheless,’ Cov., | Rhem.; ‘proph. which in time past Cran., Bish. ; ‘yet,’ Gen. were prophisied of the,’ Tynd., Cov., 15. Faithful is, &c.] ‘This is a faithful saying,’ Auth., Bish.; ‘this is a true s.’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen. ; ‘a trewe word,’ Wiel.; ‘a faithful s.’ Cran., Gen. Mayest war | ‘By them mightest war,’ Auth. ; ‘shuldest, &c,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen,, Bish. Change necessary to Rhem. 16. As chief] ‘First,’ Auth., and all Vv. (Bish. inserts art.) except Cov., ‘principally’ and Cov. Bek which omits the word. Christ Jesus] **J. C,,’ Auth. The whole of | ‘All,’ Auth. and all Vv. To display a pattern] Similarly ‘to declare an ensample,’ Cran. ; ‘For a pattern to,’ Auth. ; ‘to enfourmynge of,’ Wicl., sim. Cov. (Test.), Rhem. ; ‘unto the example,’ Tynd., Cov. (‘to the’) Gen., Bish. (to the). 17. Of ages] Sim, worldes,’ Wicl. (omits art.), ‘eternal,’ Auth. ; ‘everlastyng, Tynd., and remaining Vv. The immortal, &c.| ‘Immortal, invisible, the only *wise God,’ Auth. In accordance with, &e.] ‘According ‘of the Rhem. ; preserve law of the succession of © tenses ; see Latham, Engl. Lang. $616. In them] So all Vv. except Auth., which changes (not for the better) the ἐν into ‘by;’ see notes. The good] ‘A good,’ Auth, and all other Vy. 19. Having] So Wiel. and all Vv. except Auth., which adopts ‘hold- ing.’ Thrust] ‘Put,’ Auth. and the other Vy. except Wiel., ‘Resten aweie,” Rhem., ‘repelling.’ The faith] So Wicl., Rhem. ; ‘faith,’ Auth., and remaining Vy. When the article is inserted after a preposition, it should never be overlooked in trans- lation, if the English idiom will per- mit it to be expressed. Made] ‘Have made,’ Auth., and all other Vv. except Wiel., ‘perischiden about.’ 1 TIMOTHY I. 20. RE or 2: 209 Alexander; whom I delivered unto Satan, that they might be taught by chastisement not to blaspheme. Cuarrer II. I pxuort then first of all, that petitions, prayers, supplica- tions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; ἢ for kings, and for all that are in authority ; that we may lead a 20. Delivered] ‘Have delivered,’ Auth., andall Vv. except Wiel. ‘I be- took,’ where the aoristic form is main- tained as inthe Greek. There are cases where the idiom of our language may seem positively violated by an aoristic translation, esp. in cases where νῦν or ἤδη is found with the aor. ; these are, however, cases in which we do not rashly assert that the aor. is used for the perf., but in which we only re- cognise an idiomatic power in the Greek aorist which does not exist in our English past tense. Where idiom requires us to insert ‘have,’ it must be inserted, but these cases are far fewer than modern translators seem generally aware of. Might be taught, &c.| ‘May learn,’ Auwth., and sim. all Vv. except T'ynd., ‘be taught.’ The addition ‘by chastise- ment,’ is necessary to convey the true meaning of παιδεύω. Cuapter II. 1. Then] ‘There- fore,’ Auth., and all Vv. On this particle see notes im loc. It may be observed that, as a very general rule, it is better to translate οὖν ‘ then,’ dpa ‘therefore.’ The present seems certainly an instance where the dis- tinction ought to be preserved ; still it is not wise in the N. T. generally to press this rule too rigorously, as in many cases the context and in many more the usus scribendi of the sacred author must be allowed to have due weight in fixing on the translation. For example, St John’s use of οὖν appears to deserve considerable atten- tion, especially, too, as he never uses dpa; and even St. Paul, it should be remembered, uses οὔν, on an average, four times more than he does dpa. A really faithful translation must take all these things into account. First] ‘That first,’ Awth., and all Vv. except Wicl., Coverd. (Test.), Cran., which adopt the order of text. Petitions, prayers, &c. | ‘Supplications, prayers, intercessions,’ Auth., Gen.; ‘prayers, supplications, intercessions,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Bish.; ‘bese- chingis, axyngis,’ Wicl.; ‘earnest desires, praiers, requestes,’ Cov. (Test.), ‘obsecrations, praiers, postulations,’ Ahem. ‘ Supplication’ is by no means a bad translation for deno. (Eph. vi. 18); but as this is a technical passage, it seems more suit- preiers, able to reserve it for ἐντεύξεις ; see notes. 2. Quiet and tranquil] ‘ Quiet and peaceable,’ Auth. Ver. and all other Vv. ‘Perhaps ‘tranquil’ expresses the idea of the rest ‘arising from within’ (see notes) a little more fully than ‘peaceable ;’ comp. 1 Pet. 11]. 4. Gravity] ‘ Honesty,’ Auth. and all Vv. except Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Rhem. ‘chastity.’ In the preceding word, εὐσέβεια, the transl. of Auth. has been retained. exactly θεοσέβ., yet it is used in all the older Vv. (except only Wéel., Rhem., ‘piety’) as the translation of εὐσέβ., and seems to fairly suit all the Pe Though ‘ godliness’ is more 210 x TIMOTHY II. 2—o. quiet and tranquil life in all godliness and gravity. * For this is good and acceptable in the sight of our Saviour God ; * whose will is that all men should be saved, and should come unto the full knowledge of the truth. ° For there is one God, one mediator also between God and men, a man Christ Jesus; ° who gave himself a ransom for all,—the testi- mony ¢o de set forth in its own seasons. 7 Whereunto I was appointed a herald, and an apostle, (I speak the truth, I lie not,) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity. * I desire then that men pray in every place, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting: 9 likewise that women also in modest guise, with shamefastness and sober- passages where it occurs. The devia- tion of Auth. in Acts iii. 11 is not for the better. 3. Our Saviour God] So Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘God our Sav.,’ Auth. and remaining Vv. 4. Whose will is, ὧς. ‘Who will have,’ Auth. and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘that wole,’ and sim. Cov. (Test.), Rhem. The translation of Scholef., ‘who willeth,’ is perhaps rather too strong. -Should be] ‘To be,’ Auth. Should come] ‘To come,’ Auth. The full knowledge| ‘The knowledge,’ Auth, and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘the knowynge.’ 5. One med. also] Sim. ‘Rhem., ‘one also med. ;’ Auth. and all other Vv. (except Wicl., here erroneous), “and one med.’ A man| So Wicl. ; ‘man,’ Rhem.; Auth. and remaining Vv. ‘the man.’ 6. The testimony, de.) ‘To be testified in due time,’ Auth., and sim. Tynd., Cran., Cov. (‘be preached’). The true construction appears to have been observed in Gen., ‘ which is that testimonie appointed at,’ and perhaps Bish., ‘a testimony in due tymes.’ All the Vv., except Auth., Bish., re- tain a more literal transl. of ἴδιος, ‘ his tymes.’ 7. Was] ‘Am’ Auth. and all Vv. Appointed] Rhem., and so Auth. in 2 Tim.i.1t. Auth. and all other Vv., except Wiel. (‘sette’), ‘have ordained.’ Truth] ‘Truth* in Christ,’ Auth. 8. Desire then] ‘Will therefore,’ Auth. and all Vv. In every place] So Cov. (Test.), Rhem. ; ‘everywhere,’ Auth. and remaining Vv., except Wicl., ‘in al place.’ 9. Likewise, &c.] So Tynd., Cov. (both) Cran., Gen., Bish., except that they insert ‘also’ immediately after- wards. Awth., ‘in like manner also.’ In modest guise] ‘ Adorn themselves in modest apparel,’ Auth. ; ‘that they araye themselves in comely app.,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish. Shamefastness| So Auth. in the origi- nal edition, following Wicl., Tynd., Cov., Cran., &c. ; we may agree with Mr. Trench (Synonyms, p. 78) in re- egretting that this spelling has been displaced in the modern editions for ‘ shamefacedness,’ a word in which the true etymology is perverted. Sobermindedness] ‘Sobriety,’ Auth., Rhem.; ‘sobirnesse,’ Wicl., Cov. (Test.); ‘discrete behaviour,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Bish.; ‘modestie,’ Gen. It is very difficult to select a transla- tion for σωφροσύνη. Our choice seems ‘| to lie between ‘sober-mindedness’ and τ TIMOTHY II. 9—15. ΠΙ.1. 211 mindedness do adorn themselves,—not with braided hair and gold, or pearls, or costly apparel, " but (which becometh women professing godliness) through good works. 1 Tet the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 2 But I suffer not the woman to TEACH, nor yet to have authority over the man, but to be in silence. ™ For Adam was first formed, then Eve. ™“ And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being plainly deceived fell into transgression. % Yet she shall be saved by means of her childbearing, if they continue in faith and love and holiness with sober- mindedness. Cuaprer III. Farrurvt is the saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, ‘discretion ᾿ the latter, more espe- cially in the adjective (see two perti- nent exx. in Richardson, Dict. s.v., from Chaucer, Persones Tale, and Milton, Par. Reg., Book 11.), is very suitable in ref. to women (and is so used by Tynd., Cov., Cran., in ver. 15), but the former seems best to pre- serve the etymology of the original word. Braided] So Tynd. (broyded) and other Vv., except Auth. ‘broidered’ (not a felicitous correction), Wicl., ‘writhun,’ Rhem. “ plaited.’ And| ** Or’ Auth. Apparel] Rhem. ; ‘array’ Auth. and other Vv., except Wicl. and Cov. (Test.), ‘precious cloth.’ το. Through] So Tynd., Cov. (both), Cran., Bish.; ‘with’ Auth., Gen.; ‘bi’ Wicl., Rhem. 12. The woman] ‘A woman,’ Auth. The insertion of the article seems required by our idiom, as in verse 12 : see notes im loc.” 13. Nor yet] ‘Nor,’ Auth. As the command seems to have also a general reference (see notes), it is per- haps better to be exact in οὐδέ; see notes on ch. i. 4 (Zransl.) Have auth.] So Tynd., Cov., Cran., | Gen., Bish., Wicl., ‘have lordschip ;’ Cov. (Test.), ‘use authority ; ‘usurp authority,’ Auwth.; Rhem., ‘have do- minion. 14. Plainly deceived] *‘ Deceived’ Auth. Fell into] ‘ Was in the,’ Auth., Cov. (Test.), Bish., and sim. Tynd.; ‘in brekinge of the lawe,’ Wicl.; ‘brought in the,’ Cov. ; ‘sub- dued to the,’ Cran. ; ‘ was made giltie of, Gen.; ‘was in prevarication,’ Rhem. 15. Yet] So Rhem.; ‘notwithstand- ing,’ Auth. and the other Vv., except Wicl., Cov. (Test.), ‘ but.’ By means of her| ‘In child-bearing,’ Auth.; ‘bigeneracioun,’ Wicl., Rhem. ; ‘thorowe bearinge of ch.,’ Zynd., and remaining Vv., except Cov. (Test.), ‘by engendrynge of.’ Love] So all Vv., except Auwth., ‘charity,’ see notes on ch. i. 5 (7ransl.). Sobermindedness|] ‘Sobriety,’ Auth. ; see notes on ver. 9 (Z’ransl.). Cuaprer III. 1. Faithful is the saying] ‘This is a true saying,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.; ‘this is a faithful s.,’ Bish., sim. Cov, (Test.). pee 212 he desireth a good work. 1 TIMOTHY I. 1—7: * A bishop then must be irre- proachable, a husband of one wife, sober, soberminded, orderly, a lover of hospitality, apt to teach; * not fierce over wine, no striker, but forbearing, averse to contention, not a lover of money, * one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; ° (But if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) * not a new convert, lest being besotted with pride he fall into the judgment of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good report also from them which are without, lest he fall into reproach and the devil’s snare. 2. Irreproachable] Similarly Wicl., ‘without repreef ;’ ‘blameless,’ Awth., Cov., Cran., Bish.; ‘fautlesse,’ Tynd., Gen. ; ‘unrebukeable,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘irreprehensible,’ Rhem. If the de- finition of Webster (Dict.) is. right, ‘irreproachable = that cannot be justly reproached,’ this seems the translation needed ; see notes zn loc. A husband] ‘The husband’ Auth. Sober, soberminded] ‘ Vigilant, sober,’ | Auth. ; ‘sobre, - prudent,’ Wicl., “sober, wyse,’ Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘sober, discrete,’ Tynd., Cov.; “ dili- gent, sober,’ Cran.; “ watching, sober,’ Gen., Bish. If there be any objection to this juxtaposition, may adopt Zynd.; the transl. in text has, however, ‘this-advantage, that it implies that νηφάλιον is not “taken metaphorically ; see notes. Orderly] ‘Of good behaviour,’ Auth. ; ‘honestly appareled,’ we crete,’ Cranmer; ‘ modest,’ Gen. ; ‘comely,’ Lem. A lover of hosp.|] So Bish., and also Auth. on Tit. i. 8; ‘given to hosp. ;’ ‘holdynge hosp.,’ Wiel. ; ‘harberous,’—a notice- able transl., Z’ynd., Cov. (both), Gen. ; ‘a man of hosp.,’ Khem. 3. Fierce over wine] wine,’ Auth., Wicl., and sim. other Vy., except Tynd., ‘drunken ; Cov. ‘Given to Tynd., sim. | Bish. ; ‘manerly,’ Cov. (both) ; ‘dis- | (Test.), ‘a dronkharde.’ The margi- nal note shows that our last translators saw correctly the meaning of the word, though they have not expressed it. But, &c.| Auth. pre- fixes *‘not greedy of filthy lucre.’ Forbearing] ‘ Patient,’ Auth.; ‘ tem- perate’ Wicl.; ‘gentle,’ TZynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘styll,’ | Cov. (Test.) ; ‘modest,’ Rhem. Averse to contention] So Tit. iii. 2; ‘not a brawler,’ Auwth.; ‘not ful of chidynge,’ Wiclif; ‘ abhorring fightynge,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish., and sim. Cov. (‘abh. stryfe.’). A lover of money] ‘ Covetous,’ Auth., and sim. all other Vv. It is better to keep ‘ covetous’ for πλεονέκτης. 4. His] Auth. not in italics. 5. But] So Cov. (both), Rhem. ; ‘for’ Auth. and the other Vv. 6. New convert] Sim. Wicl., ‘newe conuerted to the feith;’ ‘novice’ Auth. ; ‘yonge skoler,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘neophyte,’ Rhem. | Besotted with] ‘Lifted up with,’ Auth. ; ‘he swel,’ Zynd., Cran., Gen., ‘be puft up,’ Cov., Bish. The idea of a stupid, insensate, pride ought to be | conveyed in translation ; see notes. | Judgment] So Tynd., Cov.—(both), Cran., Rhem. ; ‘condemnation,’ Auth., Gen., Bish.; ‘dome,’ Wicl. 7. Also from] ‘ Of,’ Auth.; the 1 TIMOTHY III. 8—16. 218 8 Deacons in like manner must be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre ; ἡ holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. And let these also first be proved ; then let them serve as deacons, if they be under no charge. ' The women in like manner must be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things. 2 Tet the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children well and their own houses. “ For they that have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus. 4 These things write I unto thee, though I hope to come unto thee somewhat quickly ; 6 but if I should tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which indeed is the church of the living God, the pillar and basis of the truth. word ‘moreover,’ Auth., may be pro- perly assigned to δέ, which, as has been observed several times in the notes (comp. on ver. 10), often appears to revert to its primary meaning. The devil’s snare] So Cov. (Test.) ; see notes; ‘the snare of the devil,’ Auth., Wicl., Gen., Bish., Rhem. ; ‘snare of the evyll speaker,’ Z'ynd., Cov., Cran. 8. Deacons, &c.] Similarly Rhem. ; ‘likewise must the deacons be,’ Auth. ; ‘mynisters,’ Coverd. (both), Cran., Bish.; the rest, ‘deacons,’ either with (Tynd.) or without (Wicl., Gen.) the article. The transl. of αἰσχροκερδεῖς is retained as being that of all the Vv., except. Wicl. 10. If they be, dc.] Similarly Cov., ‘if they be blameless;’ Zynd., Gen., ‘if they be found, &c.:’ ‘ being found blameless,’ Auth. ; ‘being bl.,’ Bish. ; “having no crime,’ Rhem. Serve as deacons] ‘ Use the office of a deacon,’ Auth. This periphrasis might be avoided by ‘minister,’ as in all the other Vv.; we seem, however, to re- quire in ver. 13 an allusion to the office ‘ nominatim.’ 6 And 11. The women, &c.] Sim. Wicl., Rhem., Cov. (Test.), after Vulg.; ‘even so must their wives be,’ Auth., and all the remaining Vv. 12. Well] So, in the same place, all Vy.; Auth. places the adverb at the end of the verse. Where there is no liability to mistake, it seems better to keep, as far as possible, the order οἱ the Greek. 13. Served well as, ἀ0.1 ‘ Used the office of a deacon well,’ Awth. Obtain for] ‘ Purchase to themselves,’ Auth., Rhem.; ‘get themselves,’ Tynd. and all the remaining Vv. 14. Though I hope] ‘ Hoping,’ Auth., and similarly all other Vv. Somewhat quickly] ‘ Shortly,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov. (both), Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘very shortly,’ Gen.; ‘ quickly,’ Rhem. 15. Should tarry] ‘Tarry,’ Auth., and all Vv. Which indeed] ‘Which,’ Auth., and all other Vv. except Wicl., ‘that is.’ 16. Confessedly] ‘ Without con. troversy,’ Awth.; ‘without naye,’ Tynd., Cov. (both), Gen.; * without doute,’ Cran., Bish. Who] 214 x ΤΠΘΕΠΎΡΓΠΕΡΗΝΙ IV. 1—3. confessedly great is the mystery of godliness; “who was manifested in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.” Cuapter LY. Howser the Spirit saith expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils, ° through the hypocrisy of speakers of lies, men bearing a brand on their own conscience, ὁ forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, **God,’ Auth. Was manifested] So Rhem.; ‘was mani- fest,’ Auth. ; ‘shewed,’ Wicl. and re- maining Vy. We may here briefly remark that the six concluding clauses of this verse may be arranged stichometrically in the following way :— "Os ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί, Εδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύματι, Ὥφθη ἀγγέλοις" ᾿᾽Εκήρυχθη ἐν ἔθνεσιν, ᾿ἘἘπιστεύθη ἐν κόσμῳ, ᾿Ανελήμφθη ἐν δόξῃ. Without urging too strongly the me- trical character of the clauses, it would still seem that the supposition advanced in notes in loc. does not ap- pear wholly without plausibility. CuapteR IV. 1. Howbeit] Simi- larly Wicl., Cov. (Test.), ‘but ;’ see notes ; ‘now,’ Awth., Bish.; the re- maining Vv. omit. Saith] So Wicl., Coverd. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘speaketh,’ Awth. and the other Vv. All the Vv. except Rhem. preserve the order of verb and adverb adopted in the text, and appy. correctly ; the slight emphasis is thus retained on ῥητῶς. Depart| So Auth. and all Vv. 2. Through the hyp., &c.| Simi- larly as to ἐν ὑὕποκρ., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., ‘which speak false thorow hyp.’ ; Wevdor. is, however, by some (Wicl. and appy. Gen.) referred to δαιμονίων : Auth., ‘speaking lies in hyp.,’ is ambiguous. The above, it must be said, is a somewhat lax trans- lation of ἐν ; it seems, however, posi- tively required by the idiom of our language. Whether we connect ἐν ὑποκρ. with ἀποστήσονται or προσέ- χοντες, it seems scarcely nglish to say ‘by the hypocrisy.’ Men bearing &c.] ‘ Having their con- science seared with a hot iron,’ Auth., and similarly all Vv. except Wicl., ‘have their conscience corrupt,’ and Rhem., which omits ‘hot iron.’ The insertion of men in the text seems to make the construction a little more clear. 3. Created] So Rhem., similarly Wicl., ‘madé;’ ‘hath created,’ Auth. and all other Vy. For them which, &e.] ‘To be received with thanksgiving of them,’ Awth. and similarly all other Vv. except Wiécl., ‘with doyinge of thankis to,’ and Rhem., which mainly accords with text, ‘to receaue with thankes-giuing for the faithful and them that have knowen,’ &c. It is very difficult to τ TIMOTHY IV. 3-- Τ. ΟἹ which God created for them that believe and have full know- ledge of the truth to partake of with thanksgiving. ἡ For every creature of God is goed, and nothing is to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving; ° for it is sanctified by the word of God and supplication. ὁ If thou settest forth these things to the brethren, thou wilt be a good minister of Christ Jesus, being nourished up in the words of Faith and of the good doctrine, of which thou hast been a disciple. 7 But eschew profane and old-wives’ fables : preserve both the correct translation | be] ‘Shalt be,’ Auth. and all Vv. of the words and the order of the Christ Jesus] *‘ Jesus Christ,’ Auth. original; the latter must appy- here | Being nourished] So Cov. (Test.); be sacrificed. Have full ‘nourished,’ Awth., Wicl., Rhem. ; knowledge] ‘Know,’ Auth. and all | ‘which hast bene n.,’ Zynd. and the other Vv. except Wicl., Cov. (Test.), | remaining Vv. The good] Rhem., which express the perf. ‘ have So Rhem. ; ‘good,’ Auth. and all the known,’ Vulg. ‘cognoverunt.’ The | other Vv. ‘The article ought, per- transl. of πιστοῖς is perhaps not per- haps, also to be inserted before ‘Faith’ fectly satisfactory, but any change (τῆς ristews) but it would tend to will involve an insertion of the article give it an objective meaning which before the next words, which is cer- does not seem desirable ; see notes. tainly very undesirable ; see notes. Of which, &e.] ‘Whereunto thou 4. Isto be| So Wiel., Cov, (Test.), | hast attained,’ Awth. and sim. Cov. and similarly Gen. ‘oght to be;’ | (Test.), Rhem. ; ‘has gete, Wiel. ; simply ‘to be,’ Auth. and the other | ‘which thou hast continually fol- Vv. lowed,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish. ; 5. Supplication] ‘Prayer, Auth. | ‘hast folowed hither to,’ Cov. and all Vv.; it seems, however, 7. Eschew] So Wicl. and Cov. necessary, as ἔντευξις occurs only twice | (Test.) ; ‘refuse, Auth.; ‘ avoid,’ in the N.T., here and ch. ii. 1 (see Rhem.; ‘cast away,’ Tynd. and the notes in loc.), to mark it by a special | remaining Vv. Exercise, &c.] and uniform translation. . So Cran., Bish.; ‘and exercise thyself 6. Settest forth] Similarly Wiel., rather,’ Auth. Tynd. omits both Coverd. (Test.), ‘ puttinge forth,’ and | ‘and’ and ‘rather ; Gen. and Rhem. Rhem. ‘proposing’ Auth. and re- | only the latter. The transl. of Cov., maining Vv. ‘put the brethren in re- | ‘as for ungoostly and, &e., cast them membrance of,’ which from the exx. | awaye, put, &c.,’ is good, but in thus of ὑποτίθεσθαί τινι by Krebs and | preserving the second δὲ it misses the Loesner (see notes), seems certainly | first. The punctuation of Lachnv. too weak. The translation ‘ if thou,’ | and Zisch., who place a period after &e, is perhaps not quite so critically παραιτοῦ, is perhaps not an improve- correct as ‘by setting forth,’ &c., or ment on the ordinary colon: though ‘in setting forth,’ &c., or (see notes the ‘and’ of Auth. is appy. better on ch. iv. 16), but may still be left | omitted, the antithesis between the unchanged, as it certainly cannot be | two members ought not to be too . termed definitely ¢nexact. ΤΕ ) much obscured. 216 1: SE MODAY + Ves 72 Sra exercise thyself rather unto godliness. * For the exercise of the body is profitable unto a little, but godliness is profitable unto all things, as it hath a promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. ἣ Faithful is the saying and worthy of all acceptation. “™ For looking to this we both labour and suffer reproach, because we have placed our hope on the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, especially of believers. “ These things command and teach. 15 Let no man despise thy youth ; but become an example unto the believers, in word, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity. Pal {1 come give attention to the reading, to the exhortation, to the doctrine. 8. The exercise, &c.] ‘ Bodily ex- ercise,” Auth., and similarly all other Vy.: it seems desirable to try to retain the article, ‘the bodily exercise these teachers affect to lay such stress upon.’ As it hath] ‘Having,’ Auth., Cov. (Test.), Bish., Rhem.; ‘that hath,’ Wicl.; “which hath,’ Zynd., Cov., Cran., Gen. Ξ 9. Faithful is the] ‘This is a faithful,’ Auth.; ‘this is a sure s.,’ Tynd., Cov. (Test. ‘ faithful’), Cran., Gen.; ‘a trewe word,’ Wicl.; ‘a faithful saying,’ hem. 10. Looking to this] ‘Therefore,’ Auth. and the other Vv. except Wicl., ‘and in this thing ;’ Rhem., ‘to this purpose.’ Have placed, &c.| ‘We trust,’ Auth.; ‘we hopen in,’ Wicl., Cov. (both); ‘we beleve,’ Tynd., Cran.; ‘have sure hope in,’ Gen.; ‘have hopen in,’ Bish. Believers} As Auth. in ver. 12; here ‘those that believe,’ with Zynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish. ; a transla- tion which is perhaps a little too emphatic for the simple anarthrous ‘Faithful’ (Wicl., Rhem.) is by very far the more usual translation in Auth.; there are cases, however (e.g. ch. v. 16, vi. 2), where per- πιστῶν. “ Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was spicuity seems to require the change. It is noticeable, too, that πιστοὶ (per se, not ἐν Xp. Ἴησ., Eph. i. 1, &e.) in these epp. (as our Translators appear to have clearly felt) seems to have become a more definite expression for ‘believers,’ i.e. Christians, and to have almost displaced οἱ πιστεύοντες, the expression which so greatly pre- dominates in the Apostle’s earlier epistles. 12. Become] ‘Be thou,’ Auth., Wicl., Cov., Bish.; ‘be,’ Tynd. and remaining Vy. Unto] So Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.; ‘of,’ Auth., Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Rhem., Bish. Conduct] ‘Conversation,’ Auth. and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘lyuynge.’ Change made only to obviate a pos- sible misunderstanding owing to the preceding ‘ word.’ Love} Soall Vv. except Auth., Rhem., ‘charity ; see notes on ch. i. 5 (Transl.). Auth. inserts spirit’ after ‘ charity.’ 13, A ttention] ‘Attendance,’ Auth. and the other Vv. except Wiel. ‘take tent ;> ‘geue hede,’ Coverd. (Test.); ‘attend unto,’ hem. ~ ‘The reading, d&c.] Auth. and all Vv. omit the articles. 14. Through] So Tynd., Cov., * ‘in τι ΤΠ ΠΥ} T4760 τ-.--.ὕ.Ἅὔὕ0{. 917 given thee through prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. ™ These things practise, in these things be occupied—that thy advance may be manifest to all. * Give heed unto thyself and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt save both thyself and them that hear thee. CHAPTER V. Do not sharply rebuke an elder, but exhort him as a father ; the younger men as brethren ; ἢ The elder women as mothers ; the younger as sisters, in all purity. ° Pay due regard to widows that are widows indeed. * If, however, any widow have children or grandchildren, let them learn first to show piety towards their own family, and to requite their parents: Cran., Bish.; ‘by,’ Auth.and re- ‘Reprimand’ would perhaps be the maining Vy. most exact translation. 15. These things, «(0.1 Similarly | Exhort] So Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen. ‘These | Bish.; ‘intreat,’ Auth.; ‘beseche,’ thynges exercise ᾿ ‘meditate upon | Wicl., Rhem. It does not appear these things,’ Auwth.; ‘thenke thou | clear why the Auth. made this change. these thingis,’ Wicl.; ‘think upon,’ 2. In] So Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Cov. (Test.); ‘these doe thou medi- | Bish., Rhem.; ‘with,’ Auth. and the tate,’ Rhem. It seems best here to | remaining Vv. It may be observed maintain the order of the original: so | that in the original edition of Auth. also Syr., Vulg. In these | (soalso Wicl., Cov.) there is no comma things, &c.| ‘Give thyself wholly to | after sisters ; see notes. them,’ Auth. and the other Vv. ex- 3. Pay due regard] ‘Honour,’ cept Wicl., Rhem., ‘be in; Cov. | Auth. and all Vv. (Test.), ‘be diligente in,’—a good 4. If however] ‘But if, Auth., transl., though perhaps a little more | Wicl., Bish., Rhem.; ‘and if,’ Cov. periphrastic than that in the text. (Test.) ; the rest ‘if’ only. To ali] So Auth.—though, as Marg. | Have] So Auth. and all Vv. except shows, it read ἐν πᾶσιν. Wicl., Cov. (Test.), which, probably "τό. Give] ‘Take,’ Auth. and all | following Latin ‘habet,’ use the Vv. except Rhem., ‘attend to.’ indicative; so Conyb. and Hows. Save both} So Cov. (Test.), Rhem., and | This, however, does not appear cor- sim. Wiclif; ‘both save,’ Auth., | rect English; see Latham, Lng. Lang. Bish. ; the remaining Vv. omit the | ὃ 537 (ed. 4). The English and first καὶ in translation. Greek idioms are here different. Grandchildren] ‘ Nephews,’ Auth. CuHarTeR V. 1. Do not sharply, | and all other Vv. except Wéicel., ὧς. ‘Rebuke not,’ Auth. and all Vy. | ‘children of sons,’ Cov. (Test.), except Wicl., ‘blame thou not.’ | ‘chyldes chyldren. Though ar- 218 for this is acceptable before God. TIMOTHY. 3. 4—I0. 5 But she that is a widow indeed, and desolate, hath turned her hopes toward God, and abideth in her supplications and her prayers night and day. 6 But she that liveth riotously is dead while she liveth. 7 And these things command, that they may be irreproach- able. 8 But if any one provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an unbeliever. 9 Let no one be placed on the list as a widow under three- score years old, the wife of one husband, ” being well reported’ of in good works ; if she ever brought up children, if she entertained strangers, if she washed the saints’ feet, if she relieved the afflicted, if she followed after every good chaisms as such are not removed from this transl., yet here the antiquated (nepotes) might he mis- understood. Towards, &c.] “At home,’ Auth.; ‘rule their owne houses gedly,’ Tynd., and sim. the ‘nephews’ other Vv. This is accept- able] ‘That is * good and acceptable,’ Auth. 5. But] So Cov. (both), Rhem. ; ‘now,’ Awth.; ‘and,’ Wicl., Bish.; omitted in Tynd., Cran., Gen. Hath turned, &c. | ‘Trusteth in,’ Auth. ; ‘putteth her trust in,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen. ; ‘hopeth in,’ Bish. The force of ἐλπίζω with ἐπὶ .and the accus. should not be left unnoticed ; see notes on ch. iv. Io. Abideth] ‘Continueth,’ Auth. vad all Vv. except Wicl., ‘be bisie in’ A somewhat neice translation seems required by προσμένει with a dat. ‘ Her suppl., &c.] Auth. and all the Vv. leave both articles unnoticed. 6. Liveth riotously|] ‘ Liveth in pleasure,” Auth. and other Vv. except Wicl., ‘is lyuynge in delicis ; Cov. (Test.), ‘is in deliciousness,’ Rhem. 7. Command] So all Vv. except Auth., Irreproachable] Cm 7 ᾽ give in charge. ‘ Blameless’ Auth., ‘that hath pleasures ;’ Bish., Rhem., sim. Cov., ‘without blame,’ Cov. (Test.), ‘unblameable ;’ Wicl., ‘without repreef; Tynd., Gen., ‘without faut; Cran., ‘without rebuke. See notes on ch. iii. 2 (Transl.). 8. Any one] ‘Any,’ Auth. Unbeliever| ‘ Infidel,’ Auth. and all Vy. except Wicl., ‘an unfaithful man.’ g. Let no widow, dc.] ‘Let not a widow be taken into the number,’ Auth.; somewhat similarly to text, Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., ‘let no widow be chosen ;’ except that they appear to miss the fact that χήρα is a predicate. Old] So Auth., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Bish.; ~ the archaism is not changed, being per- fectly intelligible. - The wife] ‘Having been the w.,’ Auth., Bish. ; ‘as was, &c., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen. Husband] So Wicel., Cov. (Test.) ; ‘man,’ Auth. and the other Vv. 10. Jn] So all the Vv. except Auth., ‘for.’ Ever brought up| ‘Have brought up,’ Auwth.; change only made to endeavour to preserve the force of the aorist. Wied. alone omits the ‘ have.’ LEnteriained | ‘Have lodged,’ Auth., Cran., Bish., and sim. Cov. (Test.); ‘bene liberall ἘΕΙΜΟΤΕΓΥΤ Ὑ. tes—17. 219 work. ™ But younger widows refuse: for when they have come to wax wanton against Christ their will is to marry ; ® bearing about a judgment that they broke their first faith. 8 Moreover they learn withal to de idle, going round from house to house ; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busy- bodies, speaking things which they ought not. ™“ I desire that younger widows marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary for revilmg. "ἢ For some have already turned themselves aside after Satan. “If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be burdened, that it may relieve them that are widows indeed. “ Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and to,’ Tynd., Gen.; ‘bene harberous,’ | Similarly (though not in respect of Cov., sim. Wicl., ‘resceyued to herbor- | construction) TZynd., Cran., Gen., we.’ Washed] ‘Have washed,’ Auth. | ‘learn to goo from,’ &c. ; ‘wandering,’ Relieved] ‘Have relieved,’ Auth. Auth., sim. Bish.; ‘runne about,’ Followed after] Similarly Wicl., Rhem., | Cov. All Vv. except Auth. connect ‘folowid,’ Coverd. (Test.), ‘followed | μανθάνουσιν with περιερχόμεναι. upon; ‘diligently followed,’ Auth. ; 14. Desire then] ‘ Will therefore,’ ‘continually given unto,’ Tynd. and | Auth. and all Vv. Younger remaining Vy. widows] So Wicl.; ‘the younger ττ- Tounger| So Wicl.; ‘the | women,’ Auth. and all the other Vv. younger,’ Auth. and all the other | except Rhem., ‘the yonger.’ ivi: Have come, &c.| ‘Have | For reviling] ‘To speak reproachfully,’ begun,’ Auth, and the other Vv., | Auth. [in Marg. ‘for their railing’]; except Wicl., ‘han done lecheri; | ‘to speake evill,’ Tynd., Cov. (both), Cov. (Test.), ‘are waxen wanton; | Cran., Gen., Rhem.; ‘slanderously,’ Rhem., ‘shall be w.’ _ Their | Bish. Very singularly Wiel., ‘be- will is, de,] ‘They will marry,’ Auth. | cause of cursed thing,’ misunder- and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘wolen be | standing the Vulg. ‘ maledicti gratia.’ wedded.’ Change to prevent a con- 15. Have already, dc.) ‘ Are al- fusion with the simple future; see | ready turned,’ Awth., and similarly all notes. other Vy. It seems, however, de- 12. Bearing about, &c,] ‘Having | sirable to retain the medial force which damnation,’ Auth. and all Vy. seems involved in the passive form That] ‘ Because,’ Auth. and all Vv. ἐξετρ. ; see notes on ch. iv. 20, and Broke] Similarly Tynd., Cov., Gen., | 2 Tim. iv. 4. The aorist cannot here ‘have broken ;’ ‘they have cast off,’ | be translated without inserting ‘have; Auth., sim. Cov. (Test.), Cran., Bish.; | the Greek idiom permits the union of ‘han made void,’ Wicl., Rhem. aor. with ἤδη x.7.d., the English does 13. Moreover] ‘And withal they | not ; see notes on ch. 1. 20 (Zransl.). learn,’ Auth. Going round | “πὸ Burdened] So Rhem., ‘be 220 © TIMOTHY 7 ΞΟ. doctrine. ™ For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle an ox while he is treading out the corn. And, The labourer as worthy of his hire. ™ Against an elder receive not an accusation, except on the authority of two or three witnesses. Ὁ Them that sin rebuke before all, that the rest also may have fear. ™ I solemnly charge thee before God, and Christ Jesus, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without forejudgment, doing nothing by partiality. ἢ Lay hands hastily on no man, nor yet share in other men’s sins. Keep TuyseLF pure. ™ Be no longer a waterdrinker, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities. * Some men’s sins are openly manifest, going before to judgment ; and some men they rather follow after. charged,’ Awth. and all the other Vy. except Wicl., ‘be greved.’ 18. An ox, ὧδ. ‘The ox.that,’ Auth, and all Vv. except Wicl. and Cov. (Test.), which retain the bare participle. fire] So Wicl., Rhem. ; ‘reward,’ Auth. and the other Vy. except Cov. (Test.), “ wages.’ - 19. xcept] ‘ But,’ Auth., and all Vvy.; the strong formula ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ perhaps requires a little more dis- tinctness. On the authority of | All the Vy. appy. with a similar meaning, ‘under ; Auwth., alone, ‘ be- fore,’ but in margin.‘ under.’ 20. The rest, &c.] So Lhem., and similarly Cov. (Test.); ‘others also may fear,’ Awth., and sim. all remain- ing Vv. 21. Solemnly charge] ‘Charge,’ Auth. ; ‘testifie,’ Tynd., and all other Vv. except Wicl., ‘preie before.’ The translation ‘adjure,’ Conyb. and Hows., is better reserved for ὁρκίζω, Mark. v. 7, Acts xix. 13, 1 Thess. v. 24. Christ Jesus] **The Lord Jesus Christ,’ Awth. : Forejudgment| So Cov, (Test.), and similarly Wicl., Rhem., ‘prejudice ;’ ‘without preferring one before an- other,’ Auth., sim. Gen.; ‘hasty judgment,’ Tynd., Cov., andsim. Cran. ‘hastiness of j.’ There seems no rea- son for rejecting the genuine Engl. translation adopted by Cov. (Test.) ; ‘forejudgment’ is also used by Spen- ser. 22. Hastily] So Cov. (Test.) ; ‘suddenly,’ Awth., and the other Vy. except Wiclif, ‘anoon; Jhem., ‘lightly.’ Nor yet, &e. | ‘Neither be partaker of,’ Auth., and the other Vy. except Wicl., ‘comyne thou with ;’ Cov. (Test.), ‘be partener of,’ Zhem., ‘ communicate with.’ 23. Be no longer, &c.| ‘Drink-no longer water,’ Auth., and the other Vv. except Wicl., ‘drymke water,’ Vov., (Test.), ‘drink no more w. ;’ Rhem. ‘ drink not yet w.,’ not a very felicitous translation. 24. Openly, manifest] ‘Open beforehand,’ Awth., and other Vv. except Wicl., ‘opene befor ;’ Cov. (Test.), Rhem., ‘manifest ;’ Cov., ‘open.’ Rather follow | ‘Follow,’ Auth. : Coverdale (Test.), is the only one of the older translators who has preserved (though not quite correctly) the kal; ‘and the (synnes) of some do followe also.’ r TIMOTHY Υ̓. 25. ὙΠ ἀξ. 228 5. In like manner the coop works also of ‘some are openly manifest ; and they that are otherwise cannot be hid. Cuapter VI. Ler as many as are under the yoke as bond-servants count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and His doctrine be not blasphemed. 2 They again that have believing masters, let them not slight them, because they are brethren ; but the rather serve them, because believing and beloved are they who are partakers of their good service. These things teach and exhort. 3 If any man is a teacher of other doctrine, and assenteth not to sound words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, 25. also,’ Auth., and all other Vv. except Wicl., ‘and also; Rhem., ‘in like | manner also. Works also] | ‘Works,’ Auth. Openly manifest] ‘Manifest beforehand,’ Auth. CHAPTER VI. 1. 48 many as are] ‘ As many servants as are,’ Auth., and allthe Vv. (sim. Wicl. Cov. (Test.), ‘whatever servants are’) except Rhem., ‘ whosoever are servantes under yoke.’ 2. They again] ‘Andthey,’ Auth., Wicl., Bish.; ‘but they,’ Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; the remaining Vv. omit the particle. In a case like the present, the omission in translation is certainly to be preferred to ‘and,’ as the con- trast between the two classes, those who have heathen, and those who have christian, masters is thus less obscured. In such cases the transla- tion of δὲ is very trying ; ‘but’ is too strong, ‘and’ is inexact; omission or some turn like that in the text, seem the only ways of conveying the exact force of the original. Slight] ‘Despise,’ Auth., and all Vy. except Rhem., ‘contemn.’ The rather] So Gen., Rhem., and similarly Wécl., ‘more serve, Tynd., In like manner] ‘Likewise | ‘so moche the rather,’ Auth., and remaining Vv., ‘rather.’ Serve them] So Wicl., Cov. (Test.), and Rhem. (om. ‘them’); ‘do them service,’ Auth.; ‘do service,’ Tynd., and remaining Vv. Believing, ἀς Similarly Wicl., Rhem.; ‘ They are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit,’ Auth.; ‘ they are believing and beloved and p. of the ben.’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., (‘faithful’), Bish.; ‘they are f. and bel., for they are, &c.,’ Cov. (Test.) 3. Be ateacher &c.] ‘Teach other- wise,’ Auth., Wicl., Tynd., Cov., (both), Bish., ‘folowe other doctrine,’ Cran.; ‘teache other doctr.’ Gen. ; see notes on ch. i. 3. The εἴ τις, as the context here shows (comp. ch. i. 3), contemplates a case actually in exist- ence; we use then in Engl. the indica- tive after ‘if;? see Latham, Lngl. Lang., ὃ 531 (ed. 4). Assenteth | ‘Consent, Auth., Bish., Rhem.; ‘accordith,’ Wicl.; ‘agreeth,’ Cov. (both), ‘ is not content,’ Tynd., Gen., ‘enclyne,’ Cran. The transl. of Turnbull is indeed singular, ‘comes not with.’ Sound! So Auth. everywhere else in these epp. ; Auth. and all Vv. except Khem. (* sound’) here adopt ‘ wholesome.’ 999 1 TIMOTHY VI. 3~. and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; * He is besotted with pride, though knowing nothing, but ailing about questions and contentions of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, ° obstinate contests of men corrupted in their mind and destitute of the truth, supposing that godliness is a means of gain. ° But godliness with con- tentment Is a great means of gain. 7 For we brought nothing into the world, and it is certain we can also carry nothing out. ὅ If however we have food and raiment, therewith we shall be content. ° But they that desire to be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful 4. Besotted with pride] ‘He is proud’ Auwth., Wicl., Cov., (Test.), Rhem.; ‘puft up,’ Tynd., and the remaining Vv., see notes on ch. ili. 6. Though knowing | ‘Knowing,’ Auth., Cov. (Test.), Bish., Rhem.; ‘and knoweth,’ Tynd., and the remaining Vv. except Wiel., ‘and can nothing,’—a noticeable ex- pression. Ailing] ‘Doting,’ Auth., Bish.; “langwischith,’ Wicl., Rhem.; ‘is not sounde,’ Cov. (Test.) ; ‘ wasteth his braynes,’ Zynd., and the remaining Vy. Contentions] ‘Strifes,’ Auth. ; see notes on 2 Tim. fi. 25. 5. Obstinate contests} *‘ Perverse disputings,’ Auth. ; Cor- rupted in their mind] So Rhem., and similarly Wicl. ; ‘of corrupt minds,’ Auth., Bish. ; ‘with corrupt minds,’ Tynd., Gen.; ‘as have, &c.,’ Cov., Cran.; ‘are corrupt-minded,’ Cov. (Test.) Godliness, &c.] ‘Gain is godliness,’ Awih., and simi- larly all other Vv. (‘lucre is godli- ness,’ Zynd., Cran., Gen., ἄς.) ex- cept only Cov. (both), who preserves the correct order ‘ godliness is lucre.’ This is not the only instance in which this very able translator stands alone in accuracy and good scholarship. Though he used Tyndale’s translation as his basis, his care in revision still entitles him to be considered as a sepa- rate authority of great importance ; see Bagster’s Hexapla, p. 73. ᾿ His Duoglott Testament (Test.), being from the Lat., has not the same claim on attention. Gain] After this word, *Auth. inserts ‘from such withdraw thyself.’ 6. The] So Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘this,’ Auth., Wicl., Cov., (Test.), Rhem. Can also] ‘Can,’ Auth., and the other Vy. The translation of Tynd., Cov., is here somewhat curious ; ‘and it is a playne case.’ 7. If, however, we have] Some- what similarly Cran., ‘but when we have,’ so also Tynd., Cov., Gen., omit- ting ‘but; ‘and having,’ Auth. ; ‘but having,’ Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Rhem. Auth. thus stands alone in its translation of δέ, ‘and.’ 8. herewith, de.] ‘Let us be therewith content,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov. (both) Gen. ; ‘we schulen be,’ Wiel. ; ‘we must be,’ Cran. , Rhem. 9. Desire] ‘Will,’ Auth., and all other Vv., see notes on ch. v. 14. Into many] So Auth., and all the other Vv., Cov. (Test.), and Rhem., omit ‘into.’ This insertion of the preposition where not expressed is sometimes particularly undesirable ‘we are,’ 1 TIMOTHY VI. 9—13. 223 lusts which truly drown men in destruction and perdition. 1 For the love of money is a root of all evils: which while some were coveting after, they erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. 1 But thou, O man of God, flee these things ; and follow after righteousness, of heart. godliness, faith, love, patience, meckness % Strive the good strife of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou wert called, and thou confessedst the good confession before many witnesses. 15 T charge thee before God, who preserveth alive all things, and before Christ Jesus, who under Pontius Pilate bore testimony to the good (comp. John iil. 5, and see Blunt, Lect. on Par. Priest, p. 56); here, however, it would seem permissible ; πειρασμὸν and παγίδα thus stand in closer union (see notes), and the rela- tive becomes better associated with its principal antecedent. Which truly] Similarly Coverd. (Test.), ‘ye whych do,’ marking the force of the αἵτινες, though in the Lat. it is only ‘que ;’ ‘which,’ Auth., and all the other Vv. A root] ‘The root,’ Auth,, and all Vv. The omission of the article might possibly be justified as being after ἐστίν ; there is, however, no good reason for inserting it in trans- lation ; see notes. Were coveting | ‘Coveted,’ Auwth., and sim. Tynd., Cov., Cran., Bish.; ‘ coveting,’ Wicl.; ‘lusting,’ Cov. (Test.) The sentence is somewhat awkward, but seers pre- ferable to the diluted translation, ‘and some through coveting it, have, &e.,’ as Conyb. and Hows. and others. Erred] So all Vv. except Auth., Cov. (Test.), and Rhem., which insert ‘have.’ the translation ‘wandered or strayed away’ (comp. notes on Tit. iii. 3), may be thought a little preferable. ir. And follow] So Auth., Bish., Rhem.; the extreme awkwardness of ‘but,’ so closely following ‘but thou,’ Perhaps and Cov. (Test.) boldly retain ‘but’ in both cases ; Zynd. and the remain- ing Vv. omit the second. Patience] So Auth., and all Vv. As this is the regular translation of ὑπομονὴ in the N. T. except only in Rom. ii. 7, 2 Cor. i. 6, 2 Thess. iil. 5, while it occurs above thirty times, it seems undesirable to make any change ; on the true meaning see notes on 2 Tim. ii. το, and on Tit. 111. 2. Meckness of heart) ** Meekness,’ Auth. 12. Strive the good strife] Similarly Wicl., ‘a good strife; Auth. and all other Vv. (except Coverd. (both), ‘a good, &c.’) have ‘fight the good fight.’ The transl. in the text is undoubtedly not satisfactory, but is perhaps a little more exact than that of Auth. Wert called] “ Art* also called,’ Auth. Thou confessedst] ‘ Hast confessed,’ Auth., and the other Vv., except Wicl., Coverd. (Test.), ‘hast know- leched ;’ Rhem. ‘hast conf.’ The] ‘A,’ Auth., and all Vv. Confession] So Rhem. ; ‘ profession,’ Auth., and all Vv. except Wicl., Cov. (Test.), ‘knowledge.’ 13. Charge thee] ‘Give thee charge,’ Auth., and all Vv. except Wicl., Coverd. (Test.), Rhem., ‘com- mand.’ Before] So Wiel., may justify this inexactness. Wicl. | Cov. (both), Rhem. ; ‘in the sight of,’ ’ | "294 1 TIMOTHY VI. 13—17. confession, “ That thou keep the commandment without spot, without reproach, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: ” which in His own seasons He shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords; * Who only hath immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable; whom never man saw, nor can see: to whom Je honour and power eternal, Amen. % Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor place their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but in God, who giveth us all things richly for enjoy- ἡ 4 Auth., and remaining Vv. It cer- tainly here seems desirable to preserve a uniform translation of ἐνώπιον ; comp. notes. Preserveth alive] ** Quickeneth,’ Auth, Under] So all Vv., except Auth. and Cov. (Test.). Bore wit- ness to] ‘ Witnessed,’ Auth., Bish., (‘profession’); ‘ yielded a witnessing,’ Wicl.; ‘gave testimony,’ Rhem.; ‘Tynd. and the rest ‘witnessed a good witness, or witnessing.’ The] ‘A,’ Auth., and all Vv. 14. The] So all the Vv., except Auth., Gen., ‘ this.’ Without reproach] Similarly Wicl., ‘with out repref ;) ‘unrebukeable,’ Auwth., Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘ unre- proveable,’ Cov. ; ‘unblameable,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘blameless,’ Rhem. The con- nexion of the adjectives with ἐντολὴν is perhaps made a little clearer by the change ; so Syr., ‘ without spot, with- out blemish ; comp. notes. 15. His own] ‘His,’ Auth., and all Vv. except 7γηά., Gen., ‘when the tyme is come ;’ ‘due,’ Rhem. Seasons] So Cov. (Test.); ‘times,’ Auth. and the remaining Vv. except Tynd., Gen. (see above) ; ‘tyme,’ Cov. Who is] So Auth., following all the older Vv. except Cov. (Test.), which, however, retains the order, ‘whom shall shewe at hys seasons the blessed,’ and Wicl., Rhem., which put the nominative first. It would seem that the insertion of ‘ who is,’ is here a far less evil than the loss of order. Conyb. and Hows. change the active into pass., ‘be made manifest (?) by the only, &c.,’—a diluted translation that wholly falls short of the majesty of the original. 16. Immortality] Wicl. alone has the noticeable translation ‘ undeed- lynes.’ Light] So Wicel., Tynd., Rhem.; ‘the light,’ Auth., and the remaining Vv., except Cov., “a light.’ Unapproachable} Similarly Cov. (Test.), ‘not approach- able;’ Rhem. ‘notaccessible ; ‘which no man may approach unto,’ Auth. ; ‘to whiche no man mai come,’ Wicl. ; ‘that no man can attayne,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., and.Gen., Bish. (‘att. unto). ~ Never man saw] So Tynd., Gen.; ‘no man hath seen,’ Auth., Cov., Cran., Bish.,.; ‘no man saie’ Wicl.; ‘no man dyd euer se,’ Cov. (Test.). Lternal) ‘Everlasting,’ Awth., and all Vy. ex- cept Wicl., “withouten end.’ 17. Place their hopes on] ‘Trust in,? Auwth., and all the Vv. except Wicl., ‘hope in.’ The un- certainty of | So Cov. (Test.), Rhem., and similarly Wiel. and Auth. (Marg.), ‘in uncerteynte of; ‘uncertain,’ Auth., Oran., Bish. ; ‘the uncertayne,’ Tynd., Cov., Gen. God] Dern ey WT 17-257, 225 ment ; That they do good, that they be rich in good works, free in distributing, ready to communicate; " laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on the true life. Ὁ O Timothy, keep the trust committed to thee, avoiding the profane bab- blings and oppositions of the falsely-called knowledge ; * which some professing went wide in aim concerning the faith. Grace Je with thee. ‘The *living God,’ Auth. All things richly] ‘*Richly all things,’ | Auth. For enjoyment | ‘To enjoy,’ Auth., Cov. (Test.), Gen., Bish., Rhem.; ‘to use,’ Wicl.; ‘to enjoy them,’ Tynd.,.Cov., Cran. 18. Free in &c.] ‘ Ready to distri- bute,’ Auth.; ‘lightly to geue,’ Wiel. ; ‘redy to geve,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish. ; ‘that they geve and distribute,’ Cov.; ‘to geue with a good wyll,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘to give easily,’ Rhem. 19. The true] ** Eternal,’ Auth. 20. The trust, ἀς.1] ‘That wh. is committed to thy trust,’ Auth.; ‘the thing betakun to thee,’ Wécl.; ‘that which is geven the to kepe,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish. ; ‘that which is committed unto the,’ Cov. (Test.); “ depositum,’ Rhem. The| Auth. and all Vy. except Rhem. omit art. The translation of βεβήλους, ‘un- gostly,’ Tynd., Cov. (both), Cran., Gen., deserves recording. Profane] ‘ Profane and vain babblings,’ Auth. The falsely called, cc. | Similarly Rhem. (omit art.); ‘science falsely so called,’ Auth., and all the other Vy. except Wicl., ‘ of fals name of kunnynge;’ Cov. (Test.), ‘of a false name of knowledge.’ 21. Went wide, &c.] ‘Have erred ; Auth.’ and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘fellen doun;’ Cov. (Test.), ‘are fallen awaye;’ Cran. ‘erred.’ After thee Auth. inserts *‘ Amen.’ THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. Cuapter I. AUL, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, ογ΄ the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus, ἢ to Timothy, my beloved child: Grace, mercy, peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. 3.1 thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with a pure conscience, as unceasing is the remembrance which 1 have of thee in my prayers night and day, * longing to see thee, being mindful of thy tears, that I may be filled with joy; ἢ being put in remembrance of the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice, and I am persuaded that at dwelleth also in thee. ° For which cause I remind thee to stir up the gift of God, which is in thee through the laying on of 1. Christ Jesus| ‘Jesus Christ,’ Auth. For the] Similarly but more periphrastically, Zynd., Cov., ‘to preache the,’ &e. ; ‘ accord- ing to the,’ Auth., Cov. (Test.), Cran., Gen., Bish.,. Rhem.; ‘bi the beheest of life,’ Wicl. ~ : 2. Beloved child] ‘ Dearly beloved son,’ Auth.; ‘his most dereworthi sone,’ Wicl.; ‘his beloved s.,’ Tynd., Cran.; ‘my dear s.,’ Cov.; ‘ moost deare s.,’ Cov. (Test.) ; ing I have remembrance,’ Auth., Gen., Bish.; ‘that with outen ceesynge I haue mynde,’ Wiel.; ‘that without ο. I make mencion,’ Zynd., Cov. (both), Cran. ; ‘without intermission I have «a memorie,’ Rhem. 4. Longing] ‘And longe,’ Cov. ; so also, without any intensive force in ἐπί, all Vv. (‘desiring’), ‘except Auth., ‘ creatly desiring.’ my 5. Being put, &c.] *‘ When I call ‘my | to remembrance,’ Auth. beloved s.,’ Gen.; ‘a beloved s.,’ Bish.; ‘my deerest 5.,᾿ Rhem. On the translation of τέκνῳ, comp. notes on 1 Tim.i. 2 (Transl.) Peace] ‘And peace,’ Auth. 3. A pure] So Cov. (both), Rhem. ; ‘pure,’ Auth., and the remaining Vv. except Wicl., ‘ clene consciens.’ As unceasing, &c.| ‘That without ceas- That it, ὧς. So Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish., except that they put ‘also’ last ; ‘that in thee also,’ Auth. Coverd. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘that also in thee,’ Wicl. Perspicuity seems to require in English the repetition of the verb. 6. For which cause] So Wicl., and Cov. (Test.), hem. (‘the which’) ; 5. LIMOLHY I. 6=—1o; my hands. 227 ’ For God gave us not the Spirit of cowardice, but of power, and of love, and of self-control. δ. Be not thou ashamed then of the testimony of our Lord, nor yet of me His prisoner: but rather suffer afflictions with me for the Gospel in accordance with the power of God. 9 Who saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and the grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before eternal times. Ὁ But is now made manifest through the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who made death of ‘wherefore,’ Auth. and remaining Vy. Comp. ver. 12, where Auth. preserves the more literal translation. I remind thee to| ‘I put thee in re- membrance that thou,’ Auth., Bish.; ‘I warne the that thou,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.; ‘I moneste thee that thou,’ Wicl., Rhem. (‘admonish’) ; ‘I exhorte thee that thou,’ Cov. (Test.). Though all the Vv. adopt this periphrasis, it still seems desira- ble to preserve the simple inf., if only to distinguish it from ἵνα with subj., which the transl. of Conyb. and Hows., ‘I call thee to remembrance, that thou mayest,’ &c., seems still more decidedly to imply. Through the] ‘By the,’ Auth., and all Vv. Laying on] So Cov. (Test.); ‘putting on,’ Auth., and the other Vv., except Wiel., “settynge on;’ Rhem. ‘ imposition.’ 7. Gave us not| So Wiel.; ‘hath not given us,’ Auth., and all the other Vive Cowardice] “ Fear,’ Auth., and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘drede. It may be remarked that the Genevan is the only version which uses a capital to ‘ Spirit.’ Self-control] ‘A sound mind,’ Auth., Gen., Bish.; ‘sobirnesse,’ Wacl., Cov. (Test.), Cran., and sim. Tynd., ‘sobreness of mind; Rhem. ‘sobriety ;’ ‘right understondynge,’ Cov. 8. Ashamed then] ‘Therefore ashamed,’ Auth., Cov. (Test.), Cran., Gen., Bish., Rhem. ; ‘ashamed there- fore,’ Cov.: οὖν omittedin Tynd. Nor yet] ‘Nor,’ Auth., Cov. (Test.), Rhem. ; ‘neither,’ Wicl. and remain- ing Vv. But rather, &e.| ‘Be thou partaker of the afflictions of,’ Auth. Gen.; ‘suffre adversite with the,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran.; ‘ traveile thou to gidre in the,’ Wiel.; ‘labour with the,’ Cov, (Test.); ‘travail with the, Rhem. In accordance with| ‘According to,’ Auth., Cran., Cov. (both), Bish., Rhem.; ‘bi the vertu of,’ Wiel.; ‘through,’ Tynd., Gen. 9. Saved] So Tynd., Cran., Gen., and sim. Wicl., ‘delyuerid; ‘hath saved,’ Awth., Cov., Bish.; ‘hath de- lyured’ Cov. (Test.), Rhem. The Grace] ‘Grace,’ Auth., and all Vv.: Wicl. alone puts a comma after ‘ pur- pose.’ See Scholef. Hints (in loc.) Eternal times] ‘ Before the world be- gan,’ Auth., Cran., Bish., and simi- larly Yynd., Gen. (‘world was’) ‘ worldli times,’ Wicl.; ‘the tyme of the worlde,’ Cov.; ‘the everlastynge times,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘the secular times,’ Rhem. to. Through] ‘ By,’ Auth., and all Vv. Though ‘by’ has appy. often in English the force of ‘by means of,’ yet here, on account of the διὰ below, it seems best to be uniform in transla- Made death, &c.| Q 2 tion, 228 “ TIMOTHY I. το---τό. none effect, and brought to light life and incorruption through the gospel: ἡ whereunto I was appointed a herald, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles. For which cause I suffer also these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed : for I know in whom I have put my trust, and am persuaded that He is able to keep the trust committed unto me against that day. " Hold the pattern of sound words, which thou heardest from me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. “The good trust committed unto thee keep through the, Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us. * Thou knowest this, that all they which are in Asia turned away from me; of whom are Phygelus and Hermo- genes. *° The Lord give mercy unto the house of Onesipho- ‘ Hath abolished death,’ Auth. ; 13. Hold] ‘ Hold fast,’ Auth. ; ‘distried death,’ Wicl., and sim. Cov. (Test.), Rhem. (‘hath’); ‘hath put away, Tynd., Cran., Gen.; ‘hath taken awaye,’ Cov. Brought to light] ‘Brought life and imm. to light,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish.; change made only to preserve more clearly the connexion of διὰ τοῦ evayy. with the whole fore- going sentence: see notes. Incorruption] So Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘immortality,’ Auwth., and the remaining Vv. 11. J was] ‘Lam,’ Auth., and all the other Vv... Herald] ‘Preacher,’ Auth., and all theother Vv. 12. Which] As in ver. 6; 80 Wicl.; ‘the which,’ Awth. and re- maining Vy. Suffer also} ‘Also suffer, Auth., and all the Vv. except Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Rhem., ‘also 1 suffer,’ In whom &e.] So Cran., ‘whom I have believed,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov. (both) Gen., Bish., Rhem., and similarly Wicel., ‘to whom T haue bil.’ The trust, dc.) Simi- larly Wiel., ‘that is taken to my kepynge ; Rhem., ‘my depositum: ‘that which I have committed unto Him,’ Auth, and remaining Vy. ‘have thou,’ Wicl., Coverd. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘se thou have,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘hold the [thee] after,’ Cov. The transl. of Auwth., thus at variance with the old versions, is still retained by Conyb. and Hows., but is clearly inexact. The pat- tern] So Bish.; ‘the form,’ Auth., Wicl.; ‘the ensample,’ Zynd., Cov., (both), Cran., Gen.; ‘a form’ Rhem. Heardest] So Wiel., Tynd., Cov., Gen.; ‘Hast heard,’ Auth., and the remaining Vv. From me] ‘Of me,’ Auth., and all Vive \ 14. The good trust] ‘That good thing which was, Auth., Tynd., Cran., Brsh.; ‘the good takun to thi kepynge,’ Wiécl.; ‘ this hye charge,’ Cov.; ‘the good thing comm. unto the,’ Cov. (Test.) ; ‘that worthy thing which was,’ &c., Gen.; ‘the good depositum,’ Rhem. Through] So Coverd. (both), Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘by, Auth. Weel, Rhem. ; ‘in,’ Tynd. 15. Thou knowest this] So Rhem., and sim. Wiel. ; ‘this thou knowest,’ Auth., and remaining Vv. Turned] ‘Be turned,’ Auth., and all 2 TIMOR Y et) 16-18) Th 7—4, 229 rus; for he oft refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my cham: ” but on the contrary, when he arrived in Rome, he sought me out the more diligently, and found me. ** The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day: and in how many things he ministered at Ephesus, thou knowest better than I. Cuapter II. Tou therefore, my child, be inwardly strengthened in the grace that is m Christ Jesus. * And the things that thou heardest from me among many witnesses, these commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also. * Suffer with me afflictions as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. * No man serving as a soldier entangleth himself with the affairs of life; that he may please him who chose him to be Vy. except Cov. (Test.), ‘are turned ;’ Rhem. ‘be averted.’ Phygelus| ** Phygellus,’ Auth. 17. Arrived in] ‘ Was in,’ Auth., Bish.; ‘came to,’ Wicl.; ‘was at,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.; ‘was come to,’ Cov. (Test.), Rhem. The more dil.| ‘Very diligently,’ Auth., and the other Vv., except Wiel., ‘bisili; Cov. (Test.), ‘dili- gently ; Rhem., ‘carefully.’ 18. Ministered] ‘ Ministered unto me, Auwth.. and all Vy. except Cov. (Test.), ‘ hath served.’ Better than I] ‘Very well,’ Auth., and all Vv. except Wicl., Rhem., ‘better,’ Cov. (Test.), ‘best.’ Cuap. II. 1. Therefore] So Auth., and all Vv. Here, perhaps, this translation may be retained’: ‘then,’ may be thought slightly too weak, as the meaning seems to be, ‘as others have fallen away do thou make up for their defection:’ comp. notes on 1 Tim. ii. τ. (Transl.) Child] ‘Son,’ Auth., and other Vy. Inwardly strengthened| ‘Be strong,’ Auth., and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘be conforted,’ where the passive force is | rightly preserved. 2. Heardest from] ‘Hast heard of,’ Auth. Among] So Auth., ‘bi many,’ dc., Wicl., Cov. (both), Cran., Rhem., Bish., Rhem.; ‘many bearynge witness,’ TZynd., Gen. Perhaps ‘in the presence of,’ or ‘with many to bear witness,’ may convey the idiomatic use of διὰ a little more exactly; as both translations are, however, somewhat periphrastic, the Auth. is retained. These| So Rhem., and in a different order, Wicl.; ‘the same,’ Auth., and remaining Vy. 3. Suffer, ὧς.) Auth. prefixes *¢thou therefore.’ Suffer afilictions| So Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish., omitting, however, ‘ with me ; ‘endure hardness,’ Auth. (but comp. ch. iv. 5); ‘traueil,’ Wicl.; ‘labour,’ Cov. (Test.), Rhem. Christ Jesus] ** Jesus Christ,’ Auth. Serving as, dc.) ‘That warreth,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov. Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘holdinge knyghthood,’ Wicl. ; ‘warrynge,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘being a souldiar,’ Rhem. Life} 290 a soldier. 2 TIMOTHY II. 4—10. ° Again, if a man also strive in the games, he is not crowned, except he strive according to rule. ° The LABOURING husbandman ought to partake first of the fruits. 7 Understand what I say, for the Lord will give thee appre- hension in all things. * Bear in remembrance Jesus Christ as raised from the dead, born of the seed of David, according to my gospel: * in the which I suffer afflictions as an evil doer even unto bonds ; howbeit the word of God hath not been bound. ” For this cause I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus ‘This life,’ Auth., Bish.; ‘worldli nedis, Wiel. ; ‘worldly busynes,’ Tynd., Cov. (both plural), Cran., Gen. ; ‘secular businesses,’ Rhem. Chose] ‘ Hath chosen,’ Auth., and the other Vv. except Wicl., ‘to whom he hath preued hym self ;’ ‘hath allowed hym,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘hath approved him self,’ Rhem. 5. Again] ‘And,’ Auwth., and all Vv. except Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Rhem., ctor - Strive m, éc.] ‘Strive for masteries,’ Auth. and similarly Cov. (both), Tynd., Cran., Gen., Khem.; ‘figtith in bateile,’ Wicl.; ‘wrestle,’ Bish. He 18] ‘ Yet is he,’ Auth., and the other Vv. except Wicl., Cov. (Test.), ‘schal not be,’ ‘ is not.’ According to rule] ‘ Lawfully,’*Auth., and all the other Vy. except Gen., ‘as he oght to do.’ 6. The labouring, &c.] So Cov. (Test.), Bish.; ‘the husb. that laboureth,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Rhem.; ‘an erthetilier,’ Wicl.; ‘must first by laboryng receaue,’ Gen. Ought to, &c.] ‘must be first par- taker,’ Auth., and sim. Bish. (‘first be’); ‘it behoueth &c. to resceyue first,’ Wicl.; ‘must fyrst receave,’ Tynd., Cov. (Test.), Cran. ; sim. Gen. (see above); ‘must first enjoye,’ Cov. 7. Understand] So Wiel., Rhem.; ‘consider,’ Auth., and the remaining Vv. except Cov. (Test.), ‘marke.’ For the Lord, &c.j ‘And the Lord *give.’ Apprehension] ‘Understanding, Awth., and all Vv.; change made only to avoid the re- petition ‘ underst.—understanding,’ as in Wiel., Rhem., al. 8. Bearin remembrance] ‘Remem- ber that,’ Awth., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Bish., Gen.; and similarly Wicl., fhem., ‘be thou (om. Rh.) myndeful that ;’ ‘remember the Lord to be,’ &c., Cov. (Test.). As raised, (6.1 ‘Of the seed of David was raised from the dead, &c.’ Auth., and so similarly, with slight variations, all the other Vv. except Rhem., which inverts the order, ‘is risen againe from the dead, of the seede of D.’ 9. In the which] So-Cov. (Test.) and Wicl. (omits ‘the’); ‘wherein,’ Auth., and the remaining Vv. A fictions] ‘Trouble,’ Auth., and the other Vv., .except Wicl., ‘ traueil ;’ Cov. ‘suffre;’ Cov. (Test.), Rhem., ‘labour.’ Houbeit} ‘ But,’ Awth., and all Vv. Hath not been] * Is not,’ Auth. 10. For this cause] So Auth. in 1 Thess. ii. 13, iii. 5; ‘therefore,’ Auth., and all Vv. except TZynd., * herefore.’ Sake of, ke. ] ‘The elects’ sakes, Auth., and the οἱ TIMOTHY ΠῚ ro 16, 231 with eternal glory. ” Faithful is the saying: For if we be dead with Him, we shall also live with Him: ” if we endure, we shall also reign with Him: if we shall deny Him, He also will deny us: "if we be faithless, ye¢ He continueth faith- ful; for He cannot deny Himself. *“ Of these things put them in remembrance, solemnly charging them before the Lord not to contend about words, a profitless course, to the subverting of the hearers. * Study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman not ashamed, rightly dividmg the word of truth. ” But avoid profane babblings: for they will advance to greater other Vv. except Wicl., ‘for the chosen; Cov. (Test.), ‘for the chosen’s sake ;’ Rhem. ‘for the elect.’ They also may] So Cov. (both), Rhem. ; ‘they may also,’ Auth., and similarly the rem. Vv. 11. Faithful i3 the] ‘It is a faith- ful saying,’ Auth., Bish., ‘a trewe word,’ Wicl.; ‘it is a true saying,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen.; ‘ this is a true s.,’ Cov. (both) ; ‘a faithfulsaying,’ Rhem. 12. Endure] ‘Suffer,’ Auth., Wicl., Gen.; ‘be pacient,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Bish.; ‘have pacience,’ Cor. (Test.) ; ‘sustaine,’ Rhem. A change of meaning in two verses so contiguous as this and ver. ro, does not seem desirable. Shall deny] *‘ Deny,’ Auth. 13. Be faithless] Similarly Bish., ‘be unfaithful,’ to preserve the paro- nomasiaof the original: ‘believe not,’ Auth., and all the remaining Vv. Continueth| So Rhem.; ‘abideth,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov., Cran. ; ‘ dwel- lith,’ Wicl. The transl. in the text is perhaps that best suited to the context ; ‘abideth,’ seems too strong, ‘remaineth’ too weak; the latter, as Crabb (Synon. p. 291), remarks, is often referred to involuntary, if not compulsory, actions. For He cannot] *‘ He cannot,’ Auth. 14. Solemnly charge] ‘ Charge,’ Auth.; ‘and testifie, Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish., (omits ‘ and’); ‘testifyenge,’ Cov. (Test.). Not to contend] ‘That they strive not,’ Auth.;an unnecessary periphra- sis for the inf., appy. caused by follow- ing Tynd., Cran., al. where, however, it was required after ‘testify:’ see above. On the true meaning of μάχομαι, see notes on ver. 23. A profitless course] ‘To no profit,’ Auth., Bish.; ‘for to no thing it is profitable,’ Wéicl., sim. Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘which is to no proftet,’ Tynd., Cov., Gen., similarly Cran. To the, (6.1 ‘ But to the, &c.,’ Auth., and all Vy. except Cov. (Test.), ‘save to, &c.’ 15. Present] So Rhem.; ‘shew,’ Auth., and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘to geve the self.’ Not ashamed] ‘That needeth not to be ash.,’ Auth., Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘without shame,’ Wicl.; ‘laud- able,’ Cov.; ‘not beynge ash.,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘not to be confounded,’ Rhem. 16. Avoid] So Rhem. and Auth., Tit. ii. og; here ‘shun,’ Awzth.; “eschewe,’ Wicl., Cov. (both); ‘passe over,’ Tynd., Cran., Bish.; ‘sup- presse, Gen. Profane] Auth, adds.‘and vain,’ with Wéel., Tynd., Coverd. (both), Gen., Rhem.; 292 , 2 TIMOTHY ID. 16——202. measures of ungodliness. ™” And their word will spread as doth a gangrene: of whom is Hymenzus and Philetus ; “men who concerning the truth have missed their aim, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrow the faith of some. ™ Nevertheless the firm foundation of God doth stand, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are His, and, Let every one that nameth the name of the Lord depart from unrighteousness. ™ But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. *™ If a man then shall purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, meet for the every good work. ‘vanytyes of voyces,’ Cran.; ‘ voyces of vanite,’ Bish. Advance, ce. | unto Auth.; ‘profeten myche to,’ Wicl.; ‘help moch to,’ Cov.; ‘avail much unto,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘encreace unto greater,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘doe much grow to,’ Rhem. 17. Gangrene] So Auth. (Marg.); ‘canker,’ Auth., Wicl., Tynd., Cran. (similarly), Gen., al. Spread] So Rhem. and sim. Wicl., ‘crepith; ‘fret,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran. 18. Men who] ‘Who,’ Auth., and sim. all other Vy. _ Missed their aim] ‘Have erred,’ Auth., and all Vv. except Wicl., ‘felen doun fro ; Cov. (Test.), ‘are fallen away.’ The connexion of the aor., with the pre- sent part., seems to require in Hng- lish an insertion of the auxiliary verb ; see notes on 1 Tim. i. 20 (Transl.). 19. Firm foundation] ‘ Founda- tion,’ Awth., only ; the rest insert an epithet, e. g. ‘sad foundement,’ Wicl. ; “sure grounde,’ T'ynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.; ‘sure foundamente,’ Cov. (Test.), sim. Rhem.; ‘strong found.,’ Bish. Doth stand] So Coverd. (Test.), sim. Wicl., Rhem., ‘standeth;’ ‘standeth sure, Auth.; ‘remayneth,’ Tynd., ‘Will increase more,’ master’s use, prepared unto * But flee the lusts of Gen. ; ‘stondeth fast,’ Cov.; ‘standeth still, Cran., Bish. Of the Lord] *‘Of Christ,’ Auth. Unrighteousness] ‘Iniquity,’ Auth., and the other Vy. except Wicl., Cov. (Test.); the prevailing translation of ἀδικία throughout 4: ὐτὺΞ - τὸϊ * For there are many unruly vain talkers and imward deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: " whose mouths must be stopped, seeing they overthrow whole houses, teaching things which they should not, for the sake of base gain, ™“ One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slothful bellies. ™ This witness is true. For which cause refute them sharply, in order that they may be sound in the faith ; 14 not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men that turn themselves away from the truth. * For the pure all things ave pure: but for them that are defiled and unbelieving there zs nothing pure; but both their mind and their conscience is defiled. Inward deceivers] Similarly Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish., ‘disceavers of myndes;’ ‘deceivers,’ Auth., Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Rhem. Ir. Seeing they, d&c.] ‘Which subvert,’ Auth. and the other Vv., except Jynd., Cov., Cran., ‘which pervert.’ It seems desirable to pre- serve the more exact translation of οἵτινες and the simpler transl. of dvatpérovew adopted by Auth. in 2 Tim. ii. 18. Should not] ‘Ought not,’ Awth. and all the Vv., except Wicl., ‘it bihoueth not.’ For the sake of, d&c.| ‘¥or filthy lucre’s sake,’ Auth., Bish.; ‘for the loue of foule wynnynge,’ Wicl. ; ‘ be- cause of filthy lucre,’ Tynd.,. Cov. (both), Cran., Gen. ; ‘ for filthy lucre,’ Rhem. 12. Slothful] So Rhem.; Auth. and all the remaining Vy. ‘slow.’ 13. Lor which cause] Similarly Wiel. (‘what’), Rhem. (‘the which’); Auth. and all other Vv. ‘wherefore.’ Refute| ‘Rebuke,’ Auth. and the other Vv., except Wicl., ‘blame.’ In order that] ‘That,’ Auth. and all Viv. 14. Turn themselves, &c.] Simi- larly Cov., ‘which tourne them away, &e.,’ and so Wiel. and Rhem., © 'They profess ‘auerting themselves from; ‘that turne from,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov., Gen.; ‘that turne away the trueth,’ Cran. The translation on account of the absence of the article is not critically exact; a second participle, however, as in Cov. (Test.), Bish., ‘turning from,’ and Rhem. (above), seems somewhat awkward. If there be any truth in the distinction between ‘ that’ and ‘which’ alluded to in the notes to the Transl. of Zph., the substitu- tion of ‘who’ (Conyb, and Hows.) for ‘that’ is far from an improvement. 15. or (bis)] ‘Unto’ (bis), Awth. and all the other Vv.; Wiéicl. and Rhem. (‘to’). There 15] So Cov.; ‘is nothing,’ Auth. and the remaining Vy., except Wicl., Rhem., ‘nothing is.’ ‘ Both] So Cov., Rhem. ; ‘even,’ Auth. and the rem. Vy., except Wicl. and Cov. (Test.), which omit the first καί. Their conscience] Auth. and all Vv. omit ‘their,’ but in Tynd., al. the clause is translated slightly differently, ‘the very myndis and consciences of them.’ 16. Their works} So Rhem. ; ‘in works,’ Auth.; ‘bi dedis,’ Wiel: ; ‘with the dedes,’ Tynd., Cov. (both), Cran., Gen.; ‘with works,’ Bish, TUE Sos 16. Tes. 243 that they know God; but in their works they deny Him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. Cuarter II. Bur do tHov speak the things which become the sound doctrme: * that the aged men be sober, grave, discreet, sound in faith, in love, in patience. * The aged women likewise, that in demeanour they beseem holiness, not slan- derers, not enslaved to much wine, teachers of good things ; * that they may school the young women to be loving to their husbands, loving to their children, ° soberminded, chaste, keepers at home, good, submitting themselves to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blas- phemed. Cuap. II. 1. Do thou] So Rhem. , “speak thou,’ Auth. and all the other Vv. The sound] ‘Sound,’ Auth., Rhem.; ‘holsum’ (without art.), Wiel. and remaining Vv. 2. Discreet] So Cov., Tynd., Cran., Gen.; ‘temperate,’ Auth.; ‘pru- dent,’ Wicl.; ‘wyse, Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘sober,’ Bish. The usual translation ‘soberminded’ would per- haps too much limit the preceding νηφαλίους to ‘sober’ in the primary sense ; contrast 1 Tim. iii. 2, and see notes on that passage. Love| ‘Charity,’ Awth.; see notes on 1 Tim. i. 5 (Transl.). ἶ 3. That in demeanour, 5 6.1 ‘That they be in behaviour as becometh holiness,’ Auth. and sim. Gen., Bish. (‘in such beh.’); ‘in ΠΟΙ] abite,’ Wiel. ; ‘insoche rayment as becommeth hol.,’ Tynd., Cran.; ‘that they use holy apparel,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘that they shewe themselves as it becommeth,’ &e., Cov.; ‘in holy attire,’ Rhem. Slanderers| So Wicl., and also Auth. in τ Tim. 111. τὰ ; Auth. (here) Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish., ‘false ac- cusers ;’ Cov. (Test.), ‘accusers; ‘il speakers,’ Rhem. Enslaved] Similarly Zynd., ‘seruynge;’ ‘given,’ Auth. and all the other Vv. 4. School] ‘Teach the, &e., to be sober,’ Auth.; ‘monest thou yunge w., Wicl.; ‘to make the, &c., sobre- minded,’ Tynd., Bish.; ‘enfourme the &c. to be,’ Cov.; ‘that they teache wisdom, Coverd. (Test.), and sim. Rhem.; ‘that they teache honest thinges to make the, &c., sobre- minded,’ Cran. ; ‘that they may in- struct the, &c., to be, &c.,’ Gen. 10 be loving, ὧς. ‘To love their husbands, to love their children, Auth. and sim. the other Vy. Change made to preserve the sequence of adjectives. 5. Sober-minded] ‘ To be discreet,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov.; ‘that thei ben prudent,’ Wicl.; ‘wyse,’ Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘that they be disce.,’ Gen.; ‘discreet,’ Bish. Keepers at home| The translation of Tynd., Cran., ‘huswyfly,’ deserves notice. Submitting themselves] So Auth., Eph. v. 21; ‘obedient to,’ Auth. and all Vv. except Wicl., Rhem., ‘suget to,’ Rhem. 244 TITUS 1]. 6—12. 5 The younger men likewise exhort to be soberminded. 7 Tn all respects showing thyself a pattern of good works, in thy doctrine showing uncorruptness, gravity, * sound discourse that cannot be condemned, that he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say ofus. *° Exhort bond-servants to submit themselves unto their own masters, in all things to be well pleasing fo them, not gainsaying, ἢ not purloining, but showing forth all good fidelity ; that they may adorn the doctrine of our Saviour God in all things. " For the grace of God that bringeth salvation to all men appeared, ® disciplining us to the intent that having denied ungodliness and worldly lusts we should live soberly, 6. The younger] ‘Young men,’ Auth. and all the Vv., except Cov. (both), ‘the young men.’ 7. Inall respects] ‘in all things,’ Auth. and the other Vv., except Cov., Tynd., Gen., ‘above all thynges.’ Thy doctrine] Similarly ‘the doctr.’ Cran., Bish. ; Auth., Rhem.; ‘techinge,’ Wiel.; ‘with un- corr. doctrine,’ Zynd., Cov., Gen.; ‘learnynge,’ Coverd. (Test.). After ‘thy doctr.,’ Auth. adds ‘shewing.’ Gravity] Auth. adds ** sincerity.’ 8. Discowrse] ‘Speech,’ Auth.; all the other Vy. ‘word.’ A transla- tion should be chosen which will not limit λόγον too much to ‘ speech’ in private life: see notes. Us] *©Vou,’ Auth. 9. Bond-servants] As in Eph. vi. 5; ‘servants,’ Auth. and all the other Vv. Submit themselves] As in ver. 5; ‘ be obedient,’ Auth. In all things, &e.] ‘And to please them well in all things,’ Awth.; ‘in alle thingis ; plesynge not,’ &c., Wicl.; “and to pl. in all things,’ Z'ynd., Cov.; ‘to be pleasynge them, &c.,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘and to please them in all things,’ Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘in al things pleasing,’ Rhem. Gainsaying] So Rhem. and Auth. * doctrine,’ (Marg.); ‘answering again,’ Auth. and the other Vv. except Wécl., ‘agenseiynge.’ το. Showing forth] ‘Shewing,’ Auth., Wicl., Coverd. (Test.), Bish., Rhem.; ‘that they shewe,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen.; ‘to shewe,’ Cov. Our Saviour God] So Tynd., Gen. Rhem.; ‘God our Saviour,’ Auth., and remaining Vv. 11. Salvation to all men] So Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Auth. (Marg.), and similarly Bish., ‘ health- ful to all; ‘hath app. to all men,’ Auth.; ‘of God oure Sauyour,’ Wiel., Cov. (Test.), Rhem. Ap- peared] ‘Hath appeared,’ Auth. and all. Vv. ὶ 12. Disciplining us| ‘ Teaching us,’ Auth., Cov. (Test.), Bish.; ‘and taughte,’» Wicl.; ‘and _ teacheth,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.; ‘instruct- ing us,’ Rhem. ‘Teaching by disci- pline,’ would be perhaps. a more easy translation (comp. 1 Tim. i. 20) ; the verb, however, is found used (as here) absolutely in our older writers, 6. g. Shakspeare and Milton. To the intent, &c.] ‘That denying,’ Auth. Bish., Rhem.; ‘that we for- sake,’ Wicl.; ‘that we shuld deny,’ Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.; ‘that we TITUS IL. 12—15. MY. i—9. 228 righteously, and godly, im the present world; "ἢ looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ ; 4 who gave HIMSELF for us, that He might ransom us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. “ἢ These things speak, and exhort, Let no man despise thee. and reprove with all authority. Cuartrer III. Pur them in mind to submit themselves to rulers, to autho- rities ; to be obedient, to be ready to every good work, 2 to speak evil of no man, to be averse to contention, for- bearing, showing forth all meekness unto all men. * For we WERE once ourselves also foolish, disobedient, going astray, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and deny,’ Cov. (Test.). The present] ‘This present,’ Auth. and the other Vv., except Wicl., Cov. (both), and hem., who omit ‘ present.’ 13. The blessed] So Wicel., Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘that blessed,’ Auth. and the remaining Vv. And appearing, &c.] So Cov., Cran., Gen. (‘notable app., &e.’), Bish., Rhem. (‘advent’), and similarly Wicl., Cov. (Test.), ‘the comynge of the glorie;’ ‘the glorious appearing,’ Auth., and similarly Tynd., omitting article. It is noticeable how our older Vv. have avoided a doubtful interpre- tation of the gen. into which even ac- curate scholars, like Green (Gramm. p- 215), have allowed themselves to be betrayed. And Saviour | Similarly in sense Gen., ‘ which is of our Saviour; ‘and our S.,’ Auwth., Cov. (Lest.), Bish., Rhem.; ‘and of our 8.3’ Wicl., Tynd., Cov. (but no preceding comma), Cran. 14. Ransom] ‘Redeem,’ Auth. and all Vv., except Wiel., ‘agenbie.’ 15. Reprove] So Wiel. ; ‘rebuke,’ Auth. and all the other Vv. Cap, IIT. 1. Submit themselves to] So Cov., Tynd., Cran., Gen.; ‘be subject to,’ Auth., Wiclif, Bish., Rhem.; ‘be obediente to,’ Cov. (Test.). To rulers, to auth.) ‘ Principalities *and powers,’ Auth. ; ‘princis and powers,’ Wicl., Cov. (Test.); ‘rule and power,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish., ‘prynces and to the hyer auctorite,’ Cov.; ‘princes and potestates,’ Rhem. The occasional use of the term ‘ prin- cipalities’ in the A.V., with reference to angelical orders, makes a change desirable. To be obedient] Sim. Gen., ‘to obey;’ ‘to obey magistrates,’ Auth., and sim. 2. Averse to contention) ‘No brawlers,’ Auth.; ‘not ful of chidynge,’ Wicl.; ‘no fyghters,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen, Bish.; ‘no stryvers,’ Coverd. (both) ; “ litigious,’ Rhen. Forbearing| ‘ But gentle,’ Auth., Cran., Bish. ; § but temperat,’ Wiel. ; ‘but softe,’ Tynd., Cov. (both), Gen. Shewing forth] Asin τ Tim. 1. 16 al.; ‘shew- ing.’ Auth. 3. Were once] ‘We ourselves also were sometimes,’ &c., Auth., and in 240 envy, hateful, hating one another. TITUS IIL. *3—8. 4 But when the kindness and the love toward man of our Saviour God appeared, ἢ not by works of righteousness which we did, but after His mercy He saved us, by the laver of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost; ° through Jesus Christ our Saviour ; which He poured out upon us richly 7 that being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs of eternal life, according to hope. δ᾽ Faithful is the saying, and about these things I desire that thou make asseveration, to the imtent that they which have believed God may be careful to practise good works. similar order majority of Vv. Going astray] Sim. Wicl., Rhem., ‘erring; ‘deceived,’ Auth., Tynd., -Cran., Gen. [The ccllation of Cov. (both), Bish., has here been accident- ally omitted. | Hating] ‘And hating,’ Auth. 4. When] So Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘after that,’ Auth. and re- maining Vy. The love to- ward man, &e.| In sim. order Rhem.; “love of God our Saviour toward man,’ Auth. Wicl. has here a singular transl., ‘the manhed of, &c.’ Our Saviour God] So all Vv. except Auth., Cov., ‘God our Saviour.’ 5. Wedid] So Wicl., Rhem., and sim. Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., ‘we wrought ;’ ‘we have done, Auwth., Cov. (Test.); ‘which be in right, we oughte,’ Bish. After] So OCov.; ‘according to,’ Auth., Cov. (Test.), Cran. Bish., Rhem.; ‘bi,’ Wicl. ; ‘of,’ Tynd., Gen. Laver] So Rhem.; ‘washing,’ Auth., Wicl. ; ‘fountain,’ Zynd., al. The comma after ‘regeneration,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., is not found in Wicl., Cov. (Test.), Bish., Rhem. 6. Poured out upon) ‘Shed on,’ Auth., and the other Vv., except Wicl., ‘schedde in to;’ Cov. (Test.), ‘poured forth; Rhem., ‘poured upon us,” Richly] So Bish., Auth. (Marg.); ‘abundantly,’ Auth., Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Rhem.; ‘plenteousli,’ Wiel.; “ plentyfully,’ Cov. (Test.). 4. Heirs of, &c.| So Cov., and similarly in respect of order, Zynd., ‘heirs of et. lyfe, thorowe hope; ‘heirs according to the hope of,’ &c., Auth., Coverd. (Test.), Cran., Gen., Bish.; ‘eeris bi hope of,’ Wiel. ; ‘heires acc. to hope of,’ Rhem. 8. Faithful is the saying] ‘ This is a faithful saying,’ Auth. Bish.; ‘a trewe word is,’ &e., Wicl.; ‘thisisa true saying,’ Zynd., Cov., Cran., Gen.; ‘it is a faythful worde, Cov. (Test.), sim. Rhem. (‘ saying’). About these things] Sim. all Vv., ‘of these things,’ except Auth., ‘these things.’ ' Desire] ‘ Will,’ Auth., Wicl., Cran., Gen., Bish., Rhem.; ‘ wolde,’ Tynd., Cov. (both). Make asseveration.] ‘Affirm con- stantly,’ Awth.; ‘conferme other,’ Wiel. ; ‘ certifie,’ Tynd., Cran., Gen. ; ‘speak earnestly, Cov.; ‘strengthen them,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘ confirm,’ Bish. ; ‘avouch,’ Rhem. To the intent that] ‘That,’ Awth., and all the other Vvy.; the addition in the text seems necessary to obviate misconcep- tion of the meaning. Be- lieved God] So Tynd., and sim. Wicl., ‘bel. to God ;’ Auth., Tynd., Cran., TITUS These things are good and profitable unto men. Hie τ 247 *. But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and strifes, and con- tentions about the law ; for they are unprofitable and vain. * A man that is an heretick, after a first and second admo- nition, shun ; knowing that he that is such is perverted, and sinneth being self condemned. * When I shall send Artemas unto thee, or Tychicus, use diligence to come unto me to Nicopolis: for there I have determined to winter. * Forward zealously on their journey Zenas the lawyer and Apollos, that nothing be wanting &e., ‘bel. in God.’ May} ‘might,’ Auth. Practise] ‘Maintain,’ Auth., Gen.; ‘to be abouen other,’ Wicl.; ‘to go forwarde in,’ Tynd., Cram.; ‘excel in’ Cov. (both), Rhem.; ‘shewe forth,’ Bish. Are good, &c.| So Auth., but observe that in Rec. the reading is Ta καλὰ k.T.\., Which should have been trans- lated ‘the things which are, &c.,’ comp. Scholef. Hints, p. 128 (ed. 3.) 9. Strifes, and contentions] ‘ Con- tentions and strivings,’ Auth. All the Vv. except Wicl., Tynd., Cov., place a comma after pecs. 1o. A first] ‘The first,’ Auwth., Tynd., al.; ‘oon and the second,’ Wicl.; ‘once or twise admonition,’ Gen. Shun] So similarly Wicl., Coverd. (Test.), ‘eschew’ [‘scheuen’]; ‘ reject,’ Auth., Cran. ; ‘avoyde,’ Tynd., Cov., Gen., Bish., Rhem. The translation of Auth., though lexically tenable, appears stronger than the use of παραιτεῖσθαι in these epp. will fully warrant ; see notes. The transl. ‘refuse,’ 1 Tim. v. 11 (Auth.), would not here be suit- able, as the context affords no clue to the character of the refusal; the meaning is simply ‘have nothing to do with,’ ‘monere desine, quid enim juvat? laterem lavares.’ 11. Perverted] So Tynd., Cran., Gen. ; ‘subverted,’ Auth., Wicl., Rhem. Self-condemned | ‘Condemned of himself,’ Auth., sim. Bish. ; ‘dampned bi his owne dome,’ Wicl., and similarly Tynd. (‘by his owne judgment’), and remaining Vy. 12. Shall send] So Auth. and nearly all Vv. ; Coverd. (Test.), with scrupulous accuracy, ‘ shall have sent.’ This latter translation, though usually critically exact (see Winer, Gr. § 43. 5, p- 356), appearsto have been very rarely adopted by our Translators, comp. Matth. xxi. 40, Mark viii. 38, John iv. 25, xvi. 13, Acts xxili. 35, Rom. xi. 27, 1 Cor. xvi. 3, and except where strict accuracy may be required, or where an idiomatic turn (as in 1 Tim v. 11) adds force and perspicuity, is perhaps best avoided as not fully in accordance with our usual modes of expression. Use diligence | ‘Be diligent,’ Auwth., Tynd., Cran., Gen., Bish. ; ‘high thou to,’ &c., Wicl. ; ‘make spede,’ Cov.; ‘make hast,’ Cov. (Test.); ‘hasten,’ Rhem. There I have| So Cov. (Test.), Rhem. ; ‘T have determined there,’ Auth. and the remaining Vv. ; ‘ dwelle in wynter there,’ Wicd. 13. Forward zealously, &e.] ‘Bring Z. ὅτ... . . on their journey diligently,’ Auth., and in similar order, the other Tynd., Cov., Cran., al., ‘bisili bifor sende,’ Wicl.; ‘set forward... fully,’ Rhem.: the rest mainlyas A uth. care- 248 unto them. TITUS: ἘΠ. was ers. “And let ours also learn to practise good works for the necessary wants, that they be not unfruitful. ® All that are with me salute thee. love us in the faith. Grace be with you all. 14. Ours] So Auth. and all Vv., except Rhem., ‘our men.’ Practise] ‘Maintain,’ Awth.; ‘excel in,’ Tynd. and the other Vv., except Wicl., ‘be governouris in ;’ ‘ exercise,’ Gen. The necessary wants| ‘ Necessary uses,’ Auth., and the other Vv., except Tynd., Cran., Gen., ‘as far forth as Salute them that nede requyreth.’ 15. Salute] So Coverd. (Test.), Rhem.; ‘greet,’ Auth., Wicl. (but ‘grete’ above), Tynd., Cov., Cran., Gen., Bish. As the same word (ἀσπάζεσθαι) is used in both cases, a change seems scarcely desirable. All] Auth. adds ** Amen,’ THE END. β BS2735 .E46 A critical and grammatical commentary on Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library logic 1 1012 00068 4623 | | ~~ OH ees Laan ᾿ i ae Fs ἢ ᾿ Ἀπ, j + oe Poa ἊΜ» ὦ ὃ. ». ὍΝ ᾿ a es ae ᾿ aps : ᾿ i - ato, ee eX 4 <," ἣ δ᾿ 7 ΡΥ ἘΠ ἘΔ N68 Ὁ καἰ Ser te G Me ἼΠΠ ἌΝ. ft ΧΉΤΗ ἌΝ : ( δῆ ἤν ΡΉΒΗΙ ¢ UA Jee ΗΝ ot ; ΠΗ͂Σ ΜΉ ue Ca P ; i i ᾿ εἰ hi ἢ ‘ ΠΛΉΡΗ $ Ἧ CPP hol, Μ᾿ trey ' H ᾿ WEBS BT el rte a ou tos d J t tig ἣ SU AAAS are ’ 2 ray) ' ὕ : Ἡ Ἢ Ἐν 4 ΚΝ “ if ἢ ng. Σ \ NDEs ,ἅ, ᾿ ἢ ni rs ἅς HE i ΠΡ it Ke stanton iped ht Fedele pene Beate Fy PAS F hie othe ΡΝ wt ΟΣ ΣΕ ΜΕΙ ΠΗ Η ele iia! i Δὸν a κε feats er aae e Plat bi ἀ δεν We we Pee ty oe ao Sind ΠῚ ΗΠ teri Ray vanes] ἢ ΠΝ ΠΕΝΝ ῊΙ ἫΝ The ten pee ἀσφόγτιΣ " “ ᾿ Peewee a Hise Gs ey Ue Pd ΣΣΜ ΜῊ aay Pir rent tare ‘ wy Wy ana WVU ore tyre PME Neste p NaN e sack a ste ᾿ τ ἐμ ἐν ΜΔΗΝ ΗΝ b $ ‘ ‘ ᾿ ᾿ ΜΈ Ἷ heh ΠΝ siti b ᾿ ΗΝ } f Ὁ] teeta j : δ ; ΝΗ ΜΗ ᾿ Ν Δα έν ον τῷ ἐφ εν npn i + i ΠΡ ΛΗ Sr : ΜΉΝ reso! wh OTR ΗΝ Hey αν : wy ve iy usa ΙΝ ἐν het ioriaty bs Thea Tate Ay PaO i h ‘ COUN arn as He Md ἤν ἡ ἘΠ ΡΡΗΣ 4 t Wea ew Why. ἢ Crea ἢ ths whet pan eels, Ha