- di ~ cree rt et 
 one κϑν (καὶ «πιά, τς, κι tiretel 7 
 
 a eer merat «μα, 
 
 ρτννο- Se eae 
 
 
 
 asst RORPM ret hea eer candi ° - 
 - ν ο- ἀλλὰ on 
 ~ ORB. hee a ar er ea ate “π: “παν petite 
 
Library of The Theological Seminary 
 
 PRINCETON - NEW JERSEY 
 
 Ὁ ΞΞ 
 
 PRESENTED BY 
 The Widow of George Dugan, '96 
 
 
 
ea ae 
 ὌΝ 4 He 
 
 * ᾿ 
 ΤΙΝ 
 
 ὅταν ἶ 
 ἴα 
 
 ui) 
 
 
 

 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2009 with funding from 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 https://archive.org/details/pastoralepistlesOOelli 
 
fi 
 
 ᾿ i ᾿ itd " a 
 
 y 1 
 amen 
 i Δ 
 
 ᾿ , δι." 
 
 
 
{}: at Ὁ ς 
 , 
 \ 
 
 THE PASTORAL EPISTLES 
 OF ST PAUL: 
 
 WITH A CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL 
 COMMENTARY, 
 AND A REVISED TRANSLATION, 
 
 BY 
 
 CHARLES J. ELLICOTT DD. 
 
 BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL. 
 
 THE FIFTH EDITION, CORRECTED. 
 
 LONDON: 
 LONGMANS, GREEN & CO. 
 1883 
 

 
 Cambridge : 
 PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. & SON, 
 AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
 
PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION. 
 
 HE present edition has been carefully revised in all parts, 
 and especially in the Notes to the Translation. In this 
 latter portion the citations of the older English Versions 
 have been verified, and in many cases rearranged’; the whole, 
 in short, has been brought up to the exact standard which 
 will be in future adopted throughout my Commentary on 
 St Paul’s Epistles. Some difficulty has been experienced in 
 deciding between various editions, but it is believed that 
 those now definitely selected have the best claim to the 
 names they bear. I may mention that the Wiclifite Version 
 made use of in this edition is the earlier, and that the 
 Genevan Version is taken from the edition of 1560: see 
 Preface to the Hphesians. For the general revision of the 
 work and the verification of the Notes to the Translation 
 I am indebted to my friend and chaplain, the Rev. H. 
 Bothamley, of Lyde House, Bath. 
 
 GLOUCESTER, 
 Aug. 1864. 
 
 1 In the present (the 5th) edition, citations have been added to this por- 
 tion of the work from the Revised Version of 1881. 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 | gen second edition of the Epistles contained in this 
 volume has been thus long delayed, that it might not 
 appear before the reader till the interpretations advanced in 
 the first edition had been fully and maturely considered with 
 reference to the opinions of more recent interpreters. 
 
 The result of the revision is but a very slight amount of 
 change in the interpretations formerly proposed, and, it may 
 not perhaps be improper to add, an increasing confidence in 
 a system of interpretation which has thus apparently stood 
 the test of the rigorous and lengthened reconsideration to 
 which its details have been subjected in the preparation of 
 this edition. Though but little substantial change has been 
 made, it will still be found that improvements and slight 
 additions appear on nearly every page, and that the edition 
 has some claim to be entitled revised and enlarged. I may 
 briefly specify that the references to ancient Versions are 
 increased, that the grammatical notices’ are occasionally 
 expanded, and that the references, especially to Scripture, 
 have been nearly all verified anew. 
 
 For further details and comments I may now refer to 
 the Preface to the first edition of this Commentary, and to 
 the Preface to the second edition of the Commentary on the 
 Ephesians, where the general standard which I have latterly 
 attempted to reach is more fully stated. To this standard 
 each succeeding volume has naturally tended to approach 
 somewhat more nearly than that which preceded it. What 
 
 1 T may here remark that all the references to Winer’s Grammar have been 
 altered and conformed to the lamented author’s 6th and last edition. 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. Vv 
 
 was once almost purely critical and grammatical has now — 
 confessedly become also exegetical; yet still to no further 
 extent than to enable the student to grasp the general con- 
 nexion of the holy and inspired Original, as well as to under- 
 stand the force of isolated words and expressions, 
 
 May God’s blessing go with this volume, and mercifully 
 enable it in these our days of doubt and trial to minister to 
 the Truth as it is in His Blessed Son, and, in its humble 
 measure and degree, to set forth the blessed teachings and 
 warnings and consolations of the inspired and saving Words 
 
 of Life. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE, 
 May, 1861. 
 
 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 HE 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 Commentary. I confess I cannot yet persuade 
 myself that the use of technical terms in grammar, independ- 
 ently of subserving to brevity, does not also tend to accuracy 
 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. 
 
 I have also endeavoured, as far as possible, to embody 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 true to its title, must mainly occupy itself with 
 what is critical and grammatical, and must in other subjects 
 confine itself to references and allusions. Still, as in the pre- 
 face to the Ephesians, so here again, let me earnestly entreat 
 my Jess mature readers not to regard as the mere biblio- 
 graphical embroidery of a dull page the references 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 instructive as they have been to the collector, 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. vil 
 
 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 generally to unfold the meaning of an 
 individual passage, and another to do so consistently with 
 the general principles and teaching of Scripture. The first 
 may often be done with plausible success by means of acute- 
 ness, observation, and happy intuitions; the second, inde- 
 pendently of higher aids, can only be done by some know- 
 ledge of dogmatical theology, and some acquaintance with 
 those masterpieces of sacred learning which were the glory 
 of the seventeenth century. On verifying these references, 
 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 noblest development, and not unfrequently, spiritual 
 discernment of the very highest strain. 
 
 With many deductions, the same observations may 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 in- 
 dividually or collectively, appear to deserve both recog- 
 nition and consideration. I would here specify the dogma- 
 tical 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 historical and dogmatical theology, 
 and I dwell especially upon this portion of the Commentary, 
 lest the necessarily frigid tone of the critical or grammatical 
 discussions should lead any one to think that I am indiffer- 
 ent to what is infinitely higher and nobler. To expound 
 the life-giving Word coldly and bleakly, without supplying 
 some hints of its eternal consolations, without pointing to 
 some of its transcendent perfections, its inviolable truths, 
 and its inscrutable mysteries,—thus to wander with closed 
 eyes through the paradise of God, is to forget the expositor’s 
 highest duty, and to leave undone the noblest and most sanc- 
 tifying work to which human learning could presume to 
 address itself. 
 
 Among semi-dogmatical treatises, I would earnestly com- 
 mend to the attention of grave thinkers the recent contribu- 
 tions to Biblical Psychology which are occasionally alluded 
 to in the notes (comp. 1 Zim. 111. 16). Without needlessly 
 entrammelling ourselves with arbitrary systems, without 
 yielding too prone an assent to quasi-philosophical theories 
 
 b2 
 
vill PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 in a subject that involves much that is equivocal or inde- 
 monstrable, it seems still our duty to endeavour to grasp the 
 general principles of psychology which appear to have been 
 recognised by the Sacred writers, and to realize the aspects 
 under which they viewed the parts and portions of our com- 
 posite 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 con- 
 sciousness, and illumined by a truer knowledge, both thought 
 and wrote on fixed principles, and used language that is no 
 less divinely inspired than humanly consistent and intel- 
 ligible. It is but a false or otiose criticism that would per- 
 suade us that the terms by which St Paul designated the 
 different portions of our immaterial nature were vague, un- 
 certain, and interchangeable: it is indeed an idle assertion 
 that Biblical Psychology can be safely disregarded by a 
 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, apprizing the reader of any variations in the 
 leading critical 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 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 critical annotation. Separate notes of this kind are, I 
 fear, especially in the case of younger men, systematically dis- 
 regarded: when however thus incorporated with grammatical 
 and philological notices, when thus giving and receiving illus- 
 tration 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 to carry 
 out, though to a very limited extent, the long cherished wish 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. ΙΧ 
 
 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 Vul- 
 gate and the Old Latin. 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 
 Latin, the Syriac, and the Gothic, have been somewhat care- 
 fully compared throughout these Epistles. I know that my 
 deficiency in the two latter languages will be plainly ap- 
 parent, and I seek in no way to disguise it: this only I may 
 be permitted to say in justice to myself, that the Latin in- 
 terpretations annexed to the words are not borrowed from 
 current translations, but are fairly derived from the best glos- 
 saries 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 lexicographical aids are not at 
 present of a character that can be fully relied on. And it 
 is here that in the application of Ancient Versions the great- 
 est caution is required. It isidle and profitless to adduce the 
 interpretation of a Version, especially in single words, unless 
 the usual and current meaning of those words is more re- 
 stricted or defined than in the original, Half the mistakes 
 that have occurred in the use of the Peshito—mistakes from 
 which the pages of scholars like De Wette are not wholly 
 free,—are referable to this head. It is often perfectly appa- 
 rent 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 per- 
 haps both equally indeterminate. 
 
 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 than might be 
 rendered to Scriptural exegesis if scholars would devote them- 
 selves to the hearty study of one or more of these Versions. 
 I dwell upon the term scholars, for it would be perhaps 
 almost worse than useless to accept illustrations from a Ver- 
 sion, unless they were also associated with a sound and accu- 
 rate knowledge of the original Greek. This applies especially 
 to the Syriac; and the remark is of some moment: for it 
 
x PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 is now a common opinion among many Oriental scholars, that 
 the language of the New Testament is yet to receive, in a 
 mere grammatical point of view, its most complete illustra- 
 tion from Syriac. That there are some points of similarity, 
 no student in both languages could fail to observe; but it 
 may be seriously doubted whether nine-tenths of the suspected 
 Syriasms of the N.T. are not solely referable to the changing 
 and deteriorated constructions of later Greek. ‘To accumu- 
 late Syriac illustrations, which may only serve to obscure or 
 supersede our accurate study of later Greek, is a very doubt- 
 ful, 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 Old Latin, the Vulgate, the Gothic, the 
 Coptic, and the Ethiopic. The remaining Vv. are of doubtful 
 value. The Armenian, though so much extolled, is said to 
 have undergone no less serious than unsatisfactory 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 dependence, the 
 one on the Syriac, the other on the Vulgate. For the present, 
 at any rate, the Syriac, Old Latin, 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 Old Latin I fear is only acces- 
 sible 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 difficult 
 to the German or Anglo-Saxon scholar, has been admirably 
 edited. In addition to the very valuable edition of De Ga- 
 belentz and Loebe, and the cheap Latin translation of that 
 work in Migne’s Patrologia, 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 Ga- 
 belentz and Loebe’s edition, we have also the Glossary of 
 Schulze (Magdeb. 1848), both, as far as my very limited ex- 
 
 1 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 TO THE FIRST EDITION. x1 
 
 perience extends, works constructed on sound principles of 
 philology. In the Coptic there is a cheap and _ portable 
 edition of the Epistles by Bétticher; and with the Grammar 
 by Tattam, and the Leaicon by the same author, or the 
 Glossary by Peyron, it is not very probable that the student 
 will encounter much difficulty. Of the Ethiopic, there is 
 an early but not very satisfactory edition in Walton’s Poly- 
 glott, the Latin translation of which has been re-edited by 
 Bode. The original Version has been recently edited by 
 Mr Platt with great care, but unfortunately without any pre- 
 liminary specification of the manuscripts that formed the 
 basis of the work. An Ethiopic grammar is announced by 
 Dillmann, 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 tetraglott edi- 
 tion 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 subject of a Revised 
 Translation is now occupying considerable 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 parti- 
 cularly 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 revi- 
 sion 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 Translation. 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 demon- 
 strable error in the representation of the words of Inspiration 
 being in their judgment less pernicious than change. Of 
 these three parties the first is far the smallest in point of 
 
 1 See however preface to the Commentary on the Philippians, &e. p. vii. 
 [The grammar of Dillmann, and the edition of Jonah above referred to, have 
 now been for some time in the hands of students. 1864.] 
 
ΧΙ PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION, 
 
 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 convictions of thousands, 
 of changing language that has spoken to doubting or suffer- 
 ing hearts with accents that have been to them like the voice 
 of God Himself,—independently of reversing a traditional 
 principle of revision that has gained strength and reception 
 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 mo- 
 mentous considerations, have we any good reason for think- 
 ing 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 diminished and diminishing 
 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 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 per- 
 fection 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 vain to cheat our own souls with the thought that 
 these errors are either insignificant or imaginary. There are 
 errors, there are inaccuracies, there are misconceptions, there 
 are obscurities, not indeed so many in number or so grave in 
 character as the forward spirits of our day would persuade 
 us,—but there are misrepresentations of the language of 
 the Holy Ghost, and that man, who, after being in any de- 
 gree satisfied of this, permits himself to lean to the counsels 
 of a timid or popular obstructiveness, or who, intellectually 
 
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. ΧΗ 
 
 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 tremendous 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 con- 
 viction in their minds by showing how little, comparatively 
 speaking, there is that is absolutely wrong,—how persuasively 
 it may be amended,—how we may often recur to the expres- 
 sions 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 recognition 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 Authorized 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 ex- 
 istence, 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 dereliction 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 me to attempt to define. This only I will say, that 
 it is my honest conviction that for any authoritative re- 
 vision we are not yet mature, either in Biblical learning or 
 Hellenistic scholarship. There is good scholarship in this 
 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 
 
XIV PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 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. 
 
 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 presumptu- 
 ous 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 are excessive, and yet in 
 the majority of corrections I feel how little cause I have for 
 satisfaction. 
 
 Lastly, with regard to the Epistles themselves now 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 ex- 
 pression, and are associated together by an inter-dependence 
 of thought that is noticeable and characteristic. They seem 
 all composed at a time 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 in the faith, and for the 
 edification of the Church in allages. On the question of their 
 genuineness,—without entering upon investigations which 
 would be foreign to the nature of this Commentary, 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 
 
PREFACE ΤῸ THE FIRST EDITION. XV 
 
 how accomplished scholars like De Wette could so decidedly 
 maintain the contrary hypothesis. This conviction however 
 has never prevented me from freely and frankly calling 
 attention to all the peculiarities in thoughts, words, and 
 expressions which characterize the three Epistles, but which 
 nevertheless, 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 present 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 Pro- 
 legomena, is a sad falling off after the able and scholarlike 
 expositions of Meyer. De Wette, owing to his doubts about 
 the authorship, 15 often perplexed and unsatisfactory. I have 
 derived benefit from the commentary of Weisinger, 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 com- 
 mentary on the second Epistle to Timothy was written some 
 years after that on the first, and 15 a noticeable improvement. 
 The commentaries of Mack, Matthies, and Heydenreich (of 
 whom however I know very little), are uséful in oe 
 and illustrations, but perhaps will hardly quite repay the 
 labour of steady perusal. Something less may be said of 
 Flatt-and Wegscheider. The Danish commentary of Bp. 
 Moller is brief and sensible, but lays no claim to — “πῇ τὶ 
 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 “lepatixos (Vade-mecum Sacrum), and, with the 
 exception of the somewhat singular fact that Coray seems 
 only to have known the Greek commentators through the me- 
 dium of Suicer, shows very extensive reading, and generally 
 a very sound judgment. It is very remarkable that this able 
 commentary, though it has now been more than five-and- 
 twenty years before the world, should have attracted so little 
 attention. As far as my observation extends, it is not re- 
 ferred to by any English or foreign commentator, and there 
 are not many expositions on this group of Epistles that more 
 thoroughly deserve it. 
 
 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 
 
ΧΥΪ PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 Galatians, are the principal 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 vouchsafe to bless this 
 effort to expound and illustrate a most vital and most consol- 
 ing portion of His holy Word; may He pity the weakness 
 and forgive the errors of His servant. 
 
 TPIAZ, MONAZ, ’EAEHZON, 
 
ΠΡΟΣ TIMOOEON A. 
 

 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 HE date and general circumstances under which this and the 
 
 accompanying Epistles were written have long been the sub- 
 jects of discussion and controversy. 
 
 As our opinion on these points must first be stated, it may 
 be said briefly,—(a) that when we duly consider that close con- 
 nexion in thought, subject, expressions, and style, which exists 
 between the First Epistle to Timothy and the other two Pastoral 
 Epistles, it seems in the highest degree incredible that they could 
 have been composed at intervals of time widely separated from each 
 other. When we further consider (0) the almost insuperable diffi- 
 culty in assigning any period for the composition of this group 
 of Epistles in that portion of the Apostle’s life and labours in- 
 cluded in the Acts; (c) the equally great or even greater difficulty 
 in harmonizing the notes of time and place in these Epistles 
 with those specified in the Apostle’s journeys as recorded by 
 St Luke; and add to this the important subsidiary arguments 
 derived from (d) the peculiar and developed character of the false 
 teachers and false teaching alluded to in these Epistles (1 Tim. 
 i 4Sq.; iv. 18q.; Vi. 3.8q.; 2 Tim. 11. τῷ 56. ; ii. 68q.; iv. 4; Titus 
 1, IOSq.; ill. gsq.), and from (e) the advanced state of Church 
 organization which they not only imply but specify (1 Tim. iii. 
 I 8q.; Vv. 38q.; Titus i. 5 sq.; 11. 1sq.), it seems plainly impossible 
 to refuse assent to the ancient tradition that St Paul was twice 
 imprisoned at Rome (Euseb. Hist. Zccl, 11. 22), and further to 
 the simple, reasonable, and highly natural opinion that the First 
 Epistle to Timothy and the other two Epistles which stand thus 
 closely associated with it are to be assigned to the period between 
 these two imprisonments, 
 
ΧᾺ INTRODUCTION. 
 
 This being premised we may now express the opinion that 
 the present Epistle to Timothy was written by the Apostle 
 towards the close of the above-mentioned period (perhaps A.D. 
 66 or 67), while he was passing through Macedonia (ch. i. 3), 
 after a probable journey to Spain (Conybeare and Howson, 
 St Paul, Vol. u. p. 548, ed. 2) and a return to Ephesus (comp. 
 ch. i. 3), at which city he had left Timothy in charge of the 
 local Church. 
 
 The object of the Epistle may be clearly inferred from ch. i. 
 3, 4, and ili. 14, 15, and may be roughly defined as two-fold; first, 
 to exhort Timothy to counteract the developing heresies of the 
 time, and secondly, to instruct him in all the particulars: of his 
 duties as overseer and Bishop of the important Church of Ephesus. 
 With this design the contents of the Epistle, which are very 
 varied and comprehensive, have been well shown by Dr Davidson 
 to accord in all respects most fully and completely: see Jntro- 
 duction, Vol. 111. p. 398q., where the Student will also find a 
 good summary of the contents of the Epistle. 
 
 In reference to the genuineness and authenticity of this Epi- 
 stle, with which that of the other Pastoral Epistles is intimately 
 connected, we may briefly remark, (a) that there was never any 
 doubt entertained in the ancient Church that these Epistles 
 were written by St Paul (see the testimonies in Lardner and 
 Davidson), and (Ὁ) that of the objections urged by modern scepti- 
 cism the only one of any real importance,—the peculiarities of 
 phrases and expressions (see Huther, Linleitwng, p. 50, and the 
 list in Conybeare and Howson, δὲ Paul, Vol. 11. p. 663 sq. ed. 2) 
 may be so completely removed by a just consideration of the 
 dates of the Epistles, the peculiar nature of the subjects discussed, 
 and the plain substantial accordance in all main points with the 
 Apostle’s general style (admitted even by De Wette), that no 
 doubt of the authorship ought now to be entertained by any 
 calm and reasonable enquirer: see the very elaborate and able 
 defence of Davidson, Introduction, Vol. 111. p. 100 sq. 
 
ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 Apostolic address 
 and salutation. 
 
 TIMOOEON A. 
 
 AYAOZ ἀπόστολος Χριστοῦ *Iy- I. 
 
 A 3 49 4 A A 
 σοῦ, κατ ἐπιταγὴν Θεοῦ σωτῆρος 
 
 I. ἀπόστολος Χ΄.᾽1.1] ‘an Apostle 
 of Christ Jesus;’ an Apostle (in the 
 higher and more especial sense, see 
 notes on Gal. i. 1, and on Eph. iv. 11), 
 who not merely derived his commis- 
 sion from, but belonged to Christ (gen. 
 possess.) as His minister and servant; 
 see notes on Eph, i. 1. The use of 
 this formal designation does not seem 
 intended merely to support the au- 
 thority of Timothy (Heydenr,), or to 
 imply a destination of the Epistle for 
 others (Caly.), or for the Church at 
 large (comp. Bp. Mller), but simply 
 to define and maintain the true na- 
 ture of the document. As this epistle 
 may be most naturally regarded as 
 * an official letter, the Apostle appro- 
 priately designates himself by his so- 
 lemnand officialtitle : compare 2 Tim. 
 i. 1 sq., and esp. Tit. i. r sq., where 
 this seems still more apparent. In 
 Philem. 1, on the other hand, the 
 Apostle, in exquisite accordance with 
 the nature and subject of that letter, 
 styles himself simply δέσμιος Χριστοῦ 
 ᾿Ιησοῦ; see notes in loc. 
 
 Kar ἐπιταγὴν Θεοῦ] ‘according to 
 the commandment of God;’ not simply 
 equivalent to the customary διὰ θελή- 
 ματος Θεοῦ (1 and 2 Cor. i.1, Eph.i.1, 
 Col. i. r, 2 Tim. i. 1; comp. Méller), 
 but pointing more precisely to the 
 
 immediate antecedents of the Apo- 
 stle’s call (the ἐπιταγὴ was the result 
 of the θέλημα), and thus perhaps still 
 more serving to enhance the authori- 
 tative nature of his commission: see 
 Tit. i. 3,and comp. Rom. xvi. 26, the 
 only other passages where the ex- 
 pression occurs. σωτῆρος 
 ἡμῶν] ‘our Saviour;’ not merely in 
 reference to His preserving and sus- 
 taining power (compare Ζεὺς σωτήρ, 
 εἰς.) but to His redeeming love in 
 Christ, more distinctly expressed in 
 Jude 25, σωτῆρι ἡμῶν διὰ᾽ 1. X. (Tisch, 
 Lachm.) ; comp. 2 Cor. y. 19, and see 
 Reuss, Théol. Chrét. 1v. 9, Vol. τι. 
 p. 93. This designation of God is 
 peculiar to the Pastoral Epistles (1 
 Tim. ii. 3, iv. ro, Tit. i. 3, ii. ro, iii. 4), 
 Luke i. 47, and Jude 25, but occurs 
 many times in the LXX, e.g. Psalm 
 xxiv. 5, Isaiah xii. 2, xlv. 15, 21, al. 
 Its grammatical connexion with Θεὸς 
 is slightly diversified in the N.T.: in 
 1 Tim. iv. 10 σωτὴρ is added epexe- 
 getically in the relative clause, Θεῷ... 
 ὅς ἐστιν σωτήρ; in Luke l.c., here, 
 and Jude 25, it stands in simple, or 
 what is termed parathetic apposition 
 (Kriiger, Sprachl. § 57. 9) to Θεός, -- 
 in the first of these passages with, 
 in the two latter without the article. 
 In all the other places the formula is 
 
 B 
 
bo 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOOEON A. 
 
 2 ἡμῶν Kat Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ τῆς ἐλπίδος ἡμῶν, 'Τιμοθέῳ 
 
 .} 4 ~ 
 γνησίῳ τέκνῳ ἐν πίστει. χάρις, ἔλεος, εἰρήνη ἀπὸ Θεοῦ 
 
 πατρὸς καὶ Χριστοῦ Incod τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν. 
 ρ ρ 5 ρ 
 
 ὁ σωτὴρ ἡμῶν Θεός ; the tenor of the 
 sentence (esp.1 Tim. ii. 3, 4) probably 
 suggesting the prominence of the ap- 
 pellation. According to Huther, the 
 anarthrous σωτὴρ ἡμῶν is here an ad- 
 jectival apposition appended to Θεοῦ, 
 while in Luke l.c. (τῷ σωτῆρί pov) 
 the article marks it as a substantive. 
 This is 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 usually is the 
 latter; see Kriiger, Sprachl. ὃ 50. 8. Io. 
 τῆς ἐλπίδος ἡμῶν] ‘our Hope,’—not 
 merely the object of it (Leo), nor 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 yap ἐστιν ἡ εἰρήνη ἡμῶν, 
 where (see notes) the abstract subst. 
 must be taken in a sense equally full 
 and comprehensive. The same ex- 
 pression oceurs in Ignat. Magn, 11, 
 Trall. Inser, and 2. 
 
 2. Τιμοθέῳ x.7.d.] ‘to Timothy 
 my true child.’ There is no necessity 
 to supply χαίρειν ; for,as Méllerrightly 
 observes, the following wish forms 
 really part of the salutation. It is 
 best, in accordance with the punctua- 
 tion adopted in the former Epp., to 
 place a period after πίστει ; for al- 
 though in St Paul’s salutations, with 
 the exception of this passage, 2 Tim, 
 i. 2, and Tit. i. 4, the resumption is 
 made more apparent by the insertion 
 of ὑμῖν after χάρις, yet this appears to 
 have arisen eitherfrom the plurality of 
 the persons saluted (e.g. Phil., Philem.) 
 or the generic expression (τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ 
 
 y and 2 Thess. i. 1, ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις 
 Gal.i. 2) under which they are grouped. 
 Here the resumptive pronoun would 
 be unnecessary. On the form of sa- 
 lutation see notes on Gal. i. 3, and 
 Eph. i. 2. ἐν πίστει] ‘in 
 (the) faith,’ ‘in the sphere of Christian 
 faith ;’ notto be connected merely with 
 γνησίῳ (a grammatically admissible, 
 though not natural connexion; see 
 Winer, Gr. § 20. 2. a, p. 124), or merely 
 with τέκνῳ (comp. Alf.), but with the 
 compound idea γνησίῳ τέκνῳ. Every 
 part of the appositional member has 
 thus its complete significance: τέκνῳ 
 denotes the affectionate (1 Cor. iv. 17, 
 τέκνον ἀγαπητὸν) as well as spiritual 
 (Philem, 10) nature of the connexion ; 
 γνησίῳ (not ‘dilecto,’ Vulg., but 
 
 ρ y 
 132 [true] Syr.; joined with ὄντως 
 
 ὦν, Plato, Politic. p. 293 E, and opp. 
 to νόθος, Philo, Somn. 11. 6, Vol. 1. 
 p- 665, ed. Mang.) specifies the ge- 
 nuineness and reality of it (Phil. iv. 3), 
 -- τὴν ἀκριβῆ καὶ ὑπὲρ τοὺς ἄλλους 
 πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁμοιότητα, Chrys.; ἐν πί- 
 ore. marks the sphere in which such a 
 connexion is alone felt and realized, — 
 more generally, but not less suitably 
 (De W.) expressed by κατὰ κοινὴν 
 πίστιν, Tit. i. 4. ἔλεος] The 
 insertion of this substantive in the 
 Apostle’s usual form of salutation, 
 χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη, is peculiar to the 
 Epp. to Timothy (in Tit. i. 4, ἔλεος 
 [Rec., Lachm.] is appy. not genuine): 
 see however 2 Joh. 3, and Jude 2. 
 It here probably serves to individual- 
 ize, and to mark the deep and affec- 
 tionate interest of the Apostle in his 
 convert; καὶ τοῦτο ἀπὸ πολλῆς φιλο- 
 στοργίας, Chrys.: see notes on Eph. 
 i, 2. 
 
I exhort thee to abide 
 still in Ephesus, and 
 to repress teachers of 9 
 
 ὌΠ ΤῊΣ 9 
 
 Καθὼς παρεκάλεσά σε προσμεῖναι ἐν 3 
 
 ὃ , ’ , 7 
 other, doctrine and Héow, πορευόμενος εἰς Μακεδονίαν, ἵνα 
 
 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. 
 
 3. Καθώς] ‘Even as;’ protasis, to 
 which there is no expressed apodosis 
 (neither at ver. 5, nor ver. 18, Beng.), 
 but to which the obvious and natural 
 one, οὕτω καὶ νῦν παρακαλῶ (comp. 
 ch. ii. 1), can easily be supplied; see 
 Winer, Gr. § 63. 1, p. 503, where 
 there is a good list of the imaginary 
 parentheses in St Paul’s Epp. All 
 other explanations, whether by an in- 
 terpolation before wa (‘ita facito,’ 
 Erasm.), or by an arbitrary change 
 of reading (apocpeivas, —Schneckenb, 
 Beitr, p. 183), seem forced and un- 
 satisfactory. παρεκάλεσα] 
 ‘I besought, Auth.: ἄκουε τὸ προσ- 
 ΠΑ͂ΜΕΝ οὐ γὰρ εἶπεν ἐπέταξα, οὐδὲ 
 ἐκέλευσα, οὐδὲ παρήνεσα, ἀλλὰ τί; 
 παρεκάλεσά σε, Chrys.; comp, Philem. 
 8, παῤῥησίαν ἔχων ἐπιτάσσειν... μᾶλλον 
 παρακαλῷ. The above comment is 
 certainly not invalidated by Tit. i, 5 
 (Huther); for there the use of διεταξά- 
 μὴν was probably suggested by the 
 specific instructions which follow the 
 general order. It may be observed 
 however that παρακαλῶ is a word of 
 most frequent occurrence in St Paul’s 
 Epp., being used more than fifty 
 times, and with varying shades of 
 meaning (comp. notes on Eph. iv. 1, 
 1 Thess. v. 11), while of the other 
 words mentioned by Chrys., one only 
 (ἐπιτάσσω) is used by the Apostle, 
 and that only once, Philem. l.c. 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 obviate supposed his- 
 torical difficulties: see Wieseler, Chro- 
 
 nol. p. 302. The tense cannot be 
 pressed; as the aor. inf. is only used 
 on the principle of the ‘temporum τὸ 
 κατάλληλον᾽ (Schaefer, Demosth. Vol. 
 III. p. 432),—a usage not always suffi- 
 ciently borne in mind. Ali that can 
 be said is, that if the pres. inf. had 
 been used (comp. Acts xiv. 22), the 
 contemplated duration of Timothy’s 
 stay at Ephesus would have been 
 more especially marked, In the pre- 
 sent case no inference can be safely 
 drawn. On the use of the inf. pres. 
 and aor. after ἐλπίζειν, κελεύειν, παρα- 
 καλεῖν x.7.A., See Winer, Gr.§ 44. 7. 6, 
 p- 296, comp. Lobeck, Phryn. p. 748 
 sq.; and on the general distinction 
 between these tenses in the inf., con- 
 sult the good note of Stallbaum on 
 Plato, Luthyd. p. 288 c. 
 
 πορευόμενος] ‘when I was 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. 
 § 44. 3, p. 287. Such participial ana-~ 
 colutha as those cited by Matth., e.g. 
 Eph. iii. 18, 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 depen- 
 dent, and still more the obvious pro- 
 minence of the clause (see notes on 
 Eph, iii. 18) render such a construc- 
 tion perfectly intelligible ; here nosuch 
 reasons can possibly be urged; see exx. 
 in Winer, Gr. § 63. 2, p. 505. There 
 is confessedly great difficulty in har- 
 monizing this historical notice with 
 those contained in the Acts. Three 
 hypotheses have been proposed, to all 
 of which there are very grave objec- 
 tions, historical and exegetical. These 
 
 B2 
 
4 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 TIMOOEON A. 
 
 4 παραγγείλης τισὶν μὴ ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν μηδὲ προσέχειν 
 
 can only be noticed here very briefly. 
 (a) If the journey here mentioned be 
 that related Acts xx. 1, 2 (Theod., 
 Hemsen), how is it possible to recon- 
 cile 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 place (2 Cor. i. 1) with the 
 Apostle? Moreover, when St Paul 
 then left Ephesus, he certainly con- 
 templated no speedy return (1 Tim. 
 111, 14), for see Acts xix. 21, xx. 3: 
 compare Huther, Finleit. p. 13, 14, 
 Wieseler, Chronol. p. 290 sq. (b) If 
 St Paul be supposed to have sent 
 Timothy forward to Ephesus from 
 Achaia (Matth.), having himself the 
 intention of following, can this be re- 
 conciled with Acts xx. 4, συνείπετο, 
 and with the fact that when St Paul 
 was near Ephesus, and might have 
 carried out his intention, he κεκρίκει 
 παραπλεῦσαι τὴν "Ἐφ. ὃ see Wieseler, 
 Ῥ. 294, Wiesinger, Kinleit. p. 370 sq. 
 (c) Even Wieseler’s opinion (Chronol. 
 p- 313, comp. p. 2958q.) that this 
 was an unrecorded journey during St 
 Paul's 2-3 years’ stay at Ephesus, 
 though more reconcilable with histo- 
 rical data, seems inconsistent with the 
 character of an Epistle which cer- 
 tainly recognizes (a) a fully developed 
 form of error (contrast the future 
 εἰσελεύσονται, Acts xx. 29), (8) an 
 advanced state of Church discipline 
 not wholly probable at this earlier 
 date, and further (y) gives instruc- 
 tions to Timothy that seem to con- 
 template his continued residence at 
 Ephesus, and an uninterrupted per- 
 formance of his episcopal duties; see 
 Huther, Hinleit. p. 17. These 
 objections are so grave that we seem 
 
 justified in remanding this journey 
 (with Theoph., Gicum., 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, Ὁ. 396 (ed. 2), 
 Paley, Hor. Paul. ch, x1. 
 
 ἵνα παραγγείλῃς] ‘ that thou mightest 
 command:’ purpose contemplated in 
 the tarrying of Timothy. The verb 
 here used does not apparently mark 
 that it was to be done openly (Matth.), 
 but authoritatively ; παρακαλεῖν being 
 the milder, παραγγέλλειν the stronger 
 word; comp. 2 Thess. iii. 12. In the 
 Epistle to Titus the Cretan character 
 suggests the use of still more decided 
 language; e.g. Tit. i. 11, ἐπιστομίζειν, 
 ver. 13, ἐλέγχειν ἀποτόμως. 
 
 τισίν] ‘certain persons,’ ‘quibusdam,’ 
 Vulg.: so ver. 6, iv. 1, V. 15,24, Vi. 21. 
 We cannot safely deduce from this 
 that the number of evil teachers was 
 small (Huther) ; the indef. pronoun is 
 more probably slightly contemptuous ; 
 ‘le mot τινες a quelque chose de mé- 
 prisant,’ Arnaud on Jude 4; comp. 
 Gal. ii. 12. ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν] 
 ‘to be teachers of other doctrine,’ 
 
 = oe (TF n © ὃς ν 
 ladn.a8o fratos ΟΝ. 
 [docere diversas doctrinas] Syr.; δὲς 
 λεγόμ., here and ch. vi. 3. Neither 
 the form nor meaning of this word 
 presents any real difficulties. In form 
 it isanalogous with ἑτεροζυγεῖν, 2 Cor. 
 vi. 14, and is the verbalized derivative 
 of ἑτεροδιδάσκαλος (comp. καλοδιδάσκα- 
 Nos, 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 of kind, 
 —see notes on Gal, i. 6): thus érepo- 
 
ΤῊ] 5 
 
 μύθοις καὶ γενεαλογίαις ἀπεράντοις, αἵτινες ζητήσεις παρ- 
 
 6.6. implies ‘ teaching,’— not necessa- 
 rily ‘ what is doctrinally false,’ nor 
 even so much as ‘what is strange,’ 
 but ‘what is different to, what de- 
 viates from (‘afvigende,’ Moller) sound 
 doctrine ;’ see ch. vi. 3, where this 
 meaning is very clearly confirmed. 
 Just as the εὐαγγέλιον of the Gala- 
 tians was ἕτερον from its assimilation 
 of Judaical elements, so here the δι- 
 δασκαλία was ἑτέρα from its commix- 
 ture with an unedifying (ver. 4), vain 
 (ver. 6), and morbid (ver. το) theoso- 
 phy of similarly Jewish origination, 
 It will thus be seen that, with Chrys., 
 Theod., and the other Greek com- 
 mentators, we regard the error which 
 St Paul is here condemning, not so 
 much as a settled form of heresy, 
 pre-Marcionite or otherwise, as a pro- 
 fitless and addititious teaching which, 
 arising from Jewish (comp. Tit. i. 14), 
 perhaps Cabbalistic sources, wasafter- 
 wards an affluent of the later and more 
 definite Gnosticism; see especially 
 Wiesinger, Hinieit. § 4,p.212, Huther, 
 Einleit. p. 41, and (thus far) Schleier- 
 macher, iiber 1 Tim. p. 83 sq. 
 
 4. προσέχειν] ‘give heed to,’ Auth., 
 a felicitous translation; so Tit. i. 
 14. The verb προσέχειν does not 
 imply ‘ fidem adhibere’ (Heinr.), and 
 is certainly not synonymous with m- 
 arevew (Krebs, Obs. p. 204), either 
 here or elsewhere (Acts viii. 6, 11, 
 xvi. 14, al.), but simply indicates a 
 prior and preparatory act, and is, as 
 it were, a mean term between ἀκούειν 
 and πιστεύειν ; comp. Polyb. Hist. 1v. 
 84. 6, διακούσαντες οὐδὲν προσέσχον, 
 Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 5. 3, οὔτε προσ- 
 εἶχον οὔτε ἐπίστευον. The examples 
 adduced by Krebs and Raphel (Obs. 
 Vol, 11. p. 113) only serve to confirm 
 the strict interpretation. The canon 
 of Thom. Mag., “προσέχω σοι τὸν νοῦν ᾽ 
 
 κάλλιον ἢ " προσέχω cou’ μόνον, is abun- 
 dantly disproved by his commenta- 
 tors; see p. 749, ed. Bernard. 
 
 μύθοις kal yeveadoy. ἀπεράντ.] ‘fables 
 and endless genealogies.’ It is very 
 doubtful whether the popular refer- 
 ence of these terms to the spiritual 
 myths and emanations of Gnosticism 
 (Tertull. Valent. 3, de Prescr. 33, 
 Tren. 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, lii. 9. In the former of these the 
 μῦθοι are defined as ᾿Ιουδαϊκοί, in the 
 latter the γενεαλογίαι are connected 
 with μάχαι νομικαί ; in both cases then 
 the words have there a Jewish refer- 
 ence. The same must hold in the 
 present case; for the errors described 
 in the two Epp. are palpably too simi- 
 lar to make it at all probable that the 
 terms in which they are here alluded 
 to have any other than a Jewish re- 
 ference also; so Chrys., Theod., al., 
 comp. Ignat. Magn. 8: see esp. Wie- 
 singer, Hinleit. p. 211 sq., Neander, 
 Planting, Vol. 1. p. 342 (ed. Bohn). 
 For a discussion of the various re- 
 ferences that have been assigned to 
 γενεαλ. in the present passage see the 
 note of De Wette translated by Alford 
 inloc. Thus then μῦθοι will most pro- 
 bably be, not specifically τὰ παράσημα 
 doyuara(Chrys.),nor a supplementary 
 ἑρμηνεία, & δευτέρωσις (Theod.), but 
 generally, Rabbinical fables and fabri- 
 cations whether in history or doctrine. 
 Again γενεαλογίαν will be ‘ genealo- 
 gies’ in the proper sense, with which 
 however these wilder speculations 
 were very probably combined, and to 
 which an allegorical interpretation 
 may have been regularly assigned ; 
 comp. Dihne, Stud. wu. Krit. for 1833, 
 
6 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOGEON A. 
 
 ΄σ ΄ ‘ ν , a A 
 5 éxovow μᾶλλον ἢ οἰκονομίαν Θεοῦ τὴν ἐν πίστει" τὸ δὲ 
 
 p. 1008. It is curious that Polybius 
 uses both terms in similarly elose con- 
 nexion, Hist. 1x. 2. 1. 
 
 ἀπεράντοις] ‘endless,’ ‘interminable,’ 
 “quibus finis non est,’ Syr.: πεδίον 
 ἀπέραντον, Pind. Nem. vut. 38 [63]; 
 so 3 Mace. ii. 9, ἀπέραντον γῆν, and 
 Job xxxvi. 26, ἀριθμὸς... ἀπέραντος. 
 It does not seem necessary to adopt 
 either the ethical (ἀτελείωτον Hesych., 
 Chrys. 2) or logical (λόγοι ἀπέραντοι 
 opp. to λόγοι περἀάντικοί, Diog. Laert. 
 vit. 78) meaning of this word. The 
 genealogies were vague, rambling, in- 
 terminable; it was an ἄμετρος καὶ ἀπέρ. 
 διήγησις (Philo, de Abrah. § 3, Vol. τι. 
 p- 4, ed. Mangey) that had no natural 
 or necessary conclusion; comp. Polyb. 
 Hist. 1. 57. 3, where the simple sense 
 appears similarly maintained. 
 αἵτινες] ‘inasmuch as they,’ ‘seeing 
 they ;’ explanatory use of ὅστις, see 
 notes on Gal. iv. 24. 
 
 ζητήσεις] ‘questions;’ either subjec- 
 tively, ‘disputings,’ Acts xv. 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 μάχαι are the natural and speci- 
 fied results; see ch, vi. 4, 2 Tim. ii. 
 23, Tit. iii. 9g. οἰκονομίαν 
 Θεοῦ] ‘God’s dispensation, not ‘ edi- 
 fying,’ Raphel, Wolf,—a translation 
 which οἰκονομία cannot bear; see Po- 
 lyb. Hist. 1v. 65. 11 (cited by Raphel), 
 where the proper translation is ‘ exse- 
 cutio instituti;’ and comp. Schweigh. 
 Lex. Polyb. s.y. The exact meaning 
 of the term is however doubtful. If 
 olkovoulabeexplained subjectively, ‘the 
 stewardship,’ scil. ‘the exercising of 
 the stewardship ’(Conyb. and Hows.), 
 ‘the discharge of the functions of an 
 οἰκονόμος Θεοῦ ᾿ (‘actum non statum,’ 
 Beng. ; comp. 1 Cor, ix. 17, iv. 1), the 
 
 use of παρέχειν must be zeugmatic, 
 i.e. involve two different meanings 
 (‘preebere, promovere’), unless {yrjaes 
 be also explained actively, in which 
 case παρέχειν will have a single mean- 
 ing, but the very questionable one, 
 ‘promoyere.’ If however οἰκονομία 
 Θεοῦ be taken objectively and passively 
 (Chrys.), the ‘dispensation of God’ 
 (gen. of the origin or author ; comp. 
 notes on 1 Thess. i. 6), i.e. ‘the seheme 
 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 (mr. and οἶκον. will be more logi- 
 cally symmetrical, and παρέχειν can 
 retain its simple sense ‘prebere :’ the 
 fables and genealogies supplied ques- 
 tions of a controversial nature, but 
 not the essence and principles of the 
 divine dispensation. τὴν ἐν 
 πίστει] ‘which is in faith:’ farther 
 definition of the nature of the olxo- 
 voula by a specification of the sphere 
 of its action,—‘ faith, not a question- 
 ing spirit,’—thus making the contrast 
 with ζητήσεις more clear and emphatic. 
 The easier readings οἰκοδομίαν (found 
 only in D®) or οἰκοδομήν (D!; Iren. 1. 1), 
 though appy. supported by several 
 Vv. (adificationem, Vulg., Clarom., 
 Goth., Syr., al.), cannot possibly be 
 sustained against the authority of all 
 the other uncial MSS., and are pro- 
 bably only due to erroneous transcrip- 
 tion, ὃ and y being confused. How 
 can Bloomf. (ed. 9) adduce the Alex. 
 MS. in favour of οἰκοδομίαν, and (ex- 
 cept 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.} ‘but (not 
 ‘now,’ Auth., Conyb.) the end (aim) 
 of the commandment, &e.;’ a con- 
 
Me 
 
 “I 
 
 5. 
 
 - a , ’ iy PPK) eae ’ κ , 
 τέλος THs παραγγελίας ἐστὶν ἀγαπη ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας 
 
 trasted statement of the purpose and 
 aim ofsound practicalteaching. There 
 ought not to be here any marks of 
 parenthesis (Griesb., Lachm.), as the 
 verse does not commence a new train 
 of thought, but stands in simple anti- 
 thetical relation (δὲ) to ver. 4, form- 
 ing at the same time an easy and 
 natural transition to ver. 6 sq., where 
 the errors of the false teachers are 
 more particularly specified. Τέλος is 
 thus not the συμπλήρωμα (Chrys. ; 
 comp. Rom, xiii. ro), the ‘ palmarium, 
 precipuum’ (Schoettg.), or the ‘sum’ 
 (‘die Hauptsumme,’ Luther),—mean- 
 ings 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 cer- 
 tain. The distinction of Cassian (cited 
 by Justiniani) between σκοπός, ‘id 
 quod artifices spectare solent,’ and 
 τέλος, ‘quod expetitur ab arte,’ is not 
 fully satisfactory. ἡ Tapayyedia 
 is not the ‘ lex Mosaica’ (‘hic pro lege 
 ...pars pro toto,’ Calv.), nor even the 
 ‘lex Evangelica’ (Corn. a Lap.), both 
 of which meanings are more inclusive 
 than the context seems to require, or 
 the usage of παραγγέλια 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 wapayy. simply to the 
 preceding παραγγείλῃς (Theoph., ἐὰν 
 παραγγέλλῃς μὴ ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν, τοῦτο 
 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,—‘ practi- 
 cal teaching’ (De W.), seems required 
 by the context, and confirmed by the 
 recurrence of the verb in this Ep. ; 
 
 comp. eh. iy. 11, V-.7,. Vi. 12; 17: 
 ἀγάπη] ‘love ;’ the ἕητήσεις engen- 
 dered μάχας, 2 Tim. ii, 23. The love 
 here mentioned is clearly love to men 
 (ἡ ἐκ διαθέσεως Kal τοὺ συναλγεῖν συν- 
 ἰισταμένη, Theoph.) not love to God 
 and men (Matth.): ‘quum de cari- 
 tate fit mentio in Scriptura, sepius 
 ad secundum membrum restringitur,’ 
 Calv.: see esp. Usteri, Lehrb. τι. 1. 4, 
 p. 242. ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας] 
 ‘out of, emanating from, a pure heart;’ 
 ἐκ with its usual and proper force 
 (Winer, Gr. § 47. b, p. 328) pointing 
 to and marking the inward seat of 
 the ἀγάπη : comp. Luke x. 27, 1 Pet. 
 i. 22. The καρδία, properly the (ima- 
 ginary) seat of the ψυχή (Olsh. Opusc. 
 p. 155), appears very commonly used 
 in Seripture (like the Hebrew 335) to 
 denote the ψυχὴ in its active aspects 
 (‘quatenus sentit et agitur et movetur 
 duce spiritu vel carne,’ Olsh. id.), and 
 may be regarded as the centre both of 
 the feelings andemotions (John xvi.6, 
 Rom. ix. 2, al.) and of the thoughts 
 and imaginations (Matth. ix. 4, xv. 
 19, 1 Cor. iv. 5, al.), though in the 
 latter case more usually with the asso- 
 ciated ideas of activity and practical 
 application; see Beck, Bibl. Seelenl. 
 III. 24. 3, Ῥ. 94 Sq., and esp. the good 
 collection of exx. in Delitzsch, Bibl. 
 Psychol. iv. 12, p. 204. 
 
 συνείδησις ἀγαθὴ here and ver. 19 
 (comp. 1 Pet. iii. τό ; καλὴ Heb. xiii. 
 18; καθαρὰ τ Tim. 111. 9, 2 Tim. i. 3) 
 is connected with πίστις as the true 
 principle on which its existence de- 
 pends. 
 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 formerly evil 
 conscience ἀγαθή. - Thus considered, 
 συνείδησις ay. would seem to be, not 
 
 Faith,—zioris ἀνυπόκριτος, 
 
8 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 A. 
 
 ~ A , 9 ’ ᾿ 4 
 6 καὶ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς καὶ πίστεως ἀνυποκρίτον, ὧν τινὲς 
 
 7 ἀστοχήσαντες ἐξετράπησαν εἰς ματαιολογίαν, θέλοντες 
 
 the antecedent 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 testi- 
 monium anime affirmantis se pure et 
 sancte vivere,’ Menoch. ap. Pol. Syn. ; 
 compare Pearson, Creed, Art. vit. Vol. 
 I. p. 347 (ed. Burton). On the exact 
 meaning of συνείδησις see Sanderson, 
 de Obl. Consc. 1. 4 8q., Vol. Iv. p. 3 
 (ed. Jacobs.); on its nature and 
 power, Butler, Serm, 2, 3; and on its 
 threefold character (an exponent of 
 moral law, a judge, and a sentiment) 
 the very clear discussion of M‘Cosh, 
 Divine Gov, ul. 1. 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 viewed, not in 
 its abstract nature, but in its practical 
 manifestations; see Harless, Ethik, 
 § 9. B, Pp. 35- ἀνυποκρίτου] 
 ‘unfeigned,’ ‘undissembled;’ an epi- 
 thet of πίστις here and 2 Tim.i. 5; of 
 ἀγάπη, Rom. xii. g, 2 Cor. vi. 6; of 
 φιλαδελφία, τ Pet. i. 22; of ἡ ἄνωθεν 
 σοφία, James 111. 17, marking the ab- 
 sence of everything ἐπίπλαστον and 
 ὑποκεκριμένον (Chrys.). It was a faith 
 not merely in mask and semblance, 
 but in truth and reality: ‘ notandum 
 est epithetum ; quo significat fallacem 
 esse ejus professionem ubi non appa- 
 ret bona conscientia,’Caly. All these 
 epithets have their especial force as 
 hinting at the exact opposite in the 
 false teachers: they were διεφθαρμένοι 
 τὸν νοῦν (ch. vi. 5), κεκαντηριασμένοι 
 τὴν συνείδησιν (ch, iv. 2), ἀδόκιμοι περὶ 
 τὴν πίστιν (2 Tim. iii. 8). It may be 
 remarked that the common order of 
 subst. and epith. (see Gersdorf, Bei- 
 triige, p. 334 sq.) is here reversed in 
 
 καθαρὰ καρδ.; so 2 Tim. ii. 22, Heb. 
 X. 22, comp. Rom. ii. 5; on the other 
 hand contrast Luke viii. 15, and 
 esp. Psalm li. 12, καρδίαν καθαρὰν 
 κτίσον ev ἐμοί. This is possibly not 
 aceidental; 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 promi- 
 nence: see Winer, Gr. ὃ 59. 2, Ρ. 464. 
 
 6. ὧν τινὲς 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: yer. 5 has an anti- 
 thetical relation to ver. 4; it states 
 what the true aim of the rapayyeNla 
 was, and thus forms a natural trans- 
 ition 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. Ὧν (governed of course 
 by ἐξετράπησαν) refers only to the three 
 preceding genitives, not to ἀγάπη also 
 (De W.?): ἀγάπη, the principle ema- 
 nating from them, forms the true aim, 
 and stands in contrast with paraon., 
 the state consequent on missing them, 
 and the result of false aim; comp. 
 Wiesing. in loc. ἀστοχήσαντες] 
 ‘ having missed their aim.’ This word 
 only occurs again in 1 Tim. vi. 21, 
 2 Tim. 11, 18, in both cases with 
 περί: in its meaning it is opposed 
 to εὐστοχεῖν (Kypke; comp. τέλος, 
 ver. 5), and, far from being ill chosen 
 (Schleierm. p. 90), conveys more suit- 
 ably than ἁμαρτόντες the factthat 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 σκοποῦ, 
 
> , A ~ a 
 εἶναι νομοδιδάσκαλοι, μὴ νοοῦντες μήτε ἃ λέγουσιν μήτε 
 
 Chrys.; see exx. in Kypke, Obs. Vol. 
 II. p. 348. ἐξετράπησαν] 
 ‘swerved, turned themselves, from; ἐξέ- 
 κλιναν, Hesych.: see ch. y. 15, Vi. 20, 
 2 Tim. iv. 4, Heb. xii. 13. ’Exrpé- 
 πεσθαι is properly ‘a vid deflectere’ 
 (Alberti, Obs. p. 392), the éx referring 
 to the original direction from which 
 they swerved; comp. Joseph. Ant. 
 XIII. 10, 5, τῆς ὁδοῦ ἐκτρεπόμενον, and 
 simply, ib. Ant. vir, ro. 2, els ἀδί- 
 kous ἐξετράπη πράξεις. ‘ Aversi sunt’ 
 (Beng.) is thus a more exact transl. 
 than ‘ conversi sunt’ (Vulg.). 
 
 ματαιολογίαν] ‘vaniloqguium’ (Vulg.), 
 or,inmore classical Lat. (Livy, xxxrv. 
 24, Tac, Ann. 111. 49), ‘vaniloquentia,’ 
 Beza. This was an especial charac- 
 teristic of the false teachers (comp. 
 Tit. i. 10, 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.λ., Seem distinctly to show,—and 
 this much Schleiermacher (p. 80 sq.) 
 has not failed to perceive,—that Ju- 
 daism proper (Leo, comp. Theod.) 
 cannot be the error here assailed. The 
 νόμος is certainly the Mosaic law, but 
 at the same time it was clearly used 
 by the false teachers on grounds es- 
 sentially differing from those taken up 
 by the Judaists, and in a way which 
 betrayed their thorough ignorance of 
 its principles: see Hutherin loc. The 
 assertion of Baur (Pastoralbriefe, p. 
 15), that Antinomians (Marcionites, 
 dc.) are here referred to, is opposed 
 to the plain meaning of the words, 
 and the obvious current of the pas- 
 sage; comp. ver. 8 sq. 
 μὴ νοοῦντες] ‘yet understanding not, 
 though they understand not ;’ the par- 
 ticiple having a slight antithetical or 
 perhaps even concessive force (Do- 
 
 nalds. Gr. § 621): the total want of 
 all qualifications 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, as it is from 
 this alone that we can infer which of 
 its five possible uses (temporal, causal, 
 modal, concessive,conditional) mainly 
 prevails in the passage before us: for 
 exx, in the New Test. see Winer, Gr. 
 § 45. 2, p. 307 (where however the 
 uses of the part. are not well defined), 
 and for exx. in classical Greek, the 
 more satisfactory lists of Kriiger, 
 Sprachl. ὃ 56. 10 sq. On the negative 
 with the part., comp. notes on ch. Vi. 
 4. μήτε ἃ «.t.A.] The nega- 
 tion 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 nega- 
 tives pyre...unre; comp. Matth. vy. 
 34, James vy. 12, and see Winer, Gr. 
 § 55. 6, p. 433. Their ignorance was 
 thus complete, it extended alike tothe 
 assertions they made and the subjects 
 on which they made them. 
 
 περὶ τίνων διαβεβαιοῦνται] ‘whereof 
 they affirm,’ Auth. ,—scil. ‘the subject 
 about which (Syr., Vulg.) they make 
 their asseyerations ;’ not ‘ what they 
 maintain,’ Luther, Bretschn., comp. 
 De Wette. The compound verb δια- 
 βεβαιοῦσθαι does not here necessarily 
 
 imply ‘ contention,’ Syr. alee 
 
 [contendentes], but, as in Tit. iii. 8, 
 is simply equivalent to λέγειν μετὰ 
 βεβαιώσεως (‘stiurjan,’ Goth. ; comp. 
 Pollux, Onomast. Vv. 152, διεγγυῶμαι, 
 διαβεβ., διϊσχυρίζομαι), περὶ referring 
 to the object about which the action 
 of the verb takes place (Winer, Gr. 
 § 47. 6, p. 333); compare Polyb. Hist, 
 
10 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOGEON A. 
 
 8 περὶ τίνων διαβεβαιοῦνται. 
 
 οἴδαμεν δὲ ὅτι καλὸς ὁ 
 
 , MLA " ΄“ , a“ A -“ “ 
 Q vomos εαν τις αὐτῷ νομίμως χρῆται, εἰδὼς τοῦτο, ὅτι 
 
 XII. 12.6, διοριζόμενος καὶ διαβεβαιού- 
 μενος περὶ τούτων. Thus then ἃ and 
 περὶ τίνων refer to different objects 
 (opp. to 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 interrogative in paral- 
 lel clauses involves no difficulty; see 
 Winer, Gr. § 25.1, p. 152, Bernhardy, 
 Synt. X11. 11, p. 443, and the copious 
 list of exx. cited by Stallbaum on 
 Plato, Crito, p. 48 A. 
 
 8. οἴδαμεν δέ] ‘Now we know; 
 ὡσανεὶ ἔλεγεν ὡμολογημένον τοῦτο καὶ 
 δῆλόν ἐστι, Chrys. (on Rom. vii. 14): 
 comp. Rom. ii. 2, 111. 19, vii. 14 
 (Lachm. marg.), viii. 28. The δέ, 
 though certainly ποῦ- μέν, Moller (an 
 unfortunate comment), is still not 
 directly oppositive but rather μεταβα- 
 τικόν (in a word, not ‘at’ but ‘autem,’ 
 Hand, Tursell. Vol. 1. p. 562, comp. p. 
 425), and the whole clause involves a 
 species of concession: the false teach- 
 ers made use of the law; so far well; 
 their error lay in their improper use 
 of it; οὐ τῷ νόμῳ μέμφομαι, ἀλλὰ τοῖς 
 κακοῖς διδασκάλοις τοῦ νόμου" Theod. 
 καλός] ‘ good,’ morally; not ὠφέλιμος, 
 Theod., De W. It would seem to be 
 the object of the Apostle to make a 
 full admission, not merely of the use- 
 fulness, butof the positive excellence of 
 the law; comp. Rom. vii. 12, 14, 16. 
 ὁ νόμος] ‘the law ;’ surely not ‘law 
 in the abstract’ (Peile), but, as the 
 preceding expression νομοδιδάσκαλοι 
 unmistakeably implies, ‘the Mosaic 
 law,’ the law which the false teachers 
 improperly used and applied to Chris- 
 tianity. τις] ‘any one,’ 
 i.e., a8 the context seems here to sug- 
 gest, 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 in- 
 stance of that effective paronomasia 
 (repetition of a similar or similar- 
 sounding word) which we so often 
 observe in St Paul’s Epp.; see exx. in 
 Winer, Gr. § 68. 1, p. 560 sq. The 
 legitimate use of the law has been 
 very differently defined, e.g. ὅταν [71s] 
 ἐκπληροῖ αὐτὸν δ᾽ ἔργων, Chrys. 1, 
 Theoph. 1; τὸ παραπέμπειν πρὸς τὸν 
 Χριστόν, Chrys. 2, Theod., Theoph. 2; 
 ὅταν ἐκ πολλῆς αὐτὸν φυλάττῃς τῆς 
 περιουσίας, Chrys. 3, dc. The con- 
 text however seems clearly to limit 
 this legitimate use, not to a use con- 
 sistent with its nature or spirit in 
 the abstract (Mack,comp. Justiniani), 
 but with the admission of the particu- 
 lar principle ὅτι δικαίῳ οὐ κεῖται ἀνό- 
 pots δὲ καὶ ἀνυποτ. x.t.X. The false 
 teachers, on the contrary, assuming 
 that it was designed for the righteous 
 man, urged their interpretations of it 
 as necessary appendices to the Gos- 
 pel; so De W., Wiesing., al., and 
 similarly, Alf. 
 
 9. εἰδὼς τοῦτο] ‘knowing this,’ 
 ‘being aware of (‘mit dem Bewusst- 
 sein,’ Wegsch.) this great truth and 
 principle ;’ secondary and participial 
 predication, referring, not to the sub- 
 ject of οἴδαμεν (‘per enallagen nu- 
 meri,’ Elsner, Obs. Vol. τι. p. 288), 
 but to the foregoing τις, and specify- 
 ing the view which must be taken of 
 the law by the teacher who desires to 
 use it rightly. νόμος οὐ κεῖται] 
 ‘the law is not ordained.’ The trans- 
 lation of Peile, ‘no law is enacted,’ 
 is fairly defensible (see Middleton, 
 Greek Art. p. 385 sq. and comp. m1. 
 3. 5, p. 46, ed. Rose), and not without 
 
I. 8, 9. 11 
 
 , , 3 - -" , A x 3 , " 
 δικαίῳ νομος OU KELTAL, ἀνομοις δὲ και ανυποτακτοὶς, UTE- 
 
 , A « - " , 4 , 
 βέσιν καὶ ἁμαρτωλοῖς, ἀνοσίοις καὶ βεβήλοις, πατρο- 
 
 plausibility ; the absence of the article 
 being regarded as designed to imply 
 that νόμος is taken indefinitely, and 
 that the sentiment isperfectly general, 
 —e.g. ὁ μηδὲν ἀδικῶν οὐδενὸς δεῖται 
 νόμου, Antiph. ap. Stob. 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.§ 19. 1, p. 109 S8q.), even when 
 anarthrous, can and commonly does 
 signify ‘the Mosaic law’ (comp. Alf. 
 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 general view of its re- 
 lation to the Christian (comp. Rom. 
 vi. 14, Gal. iii. 19, al.), we retain with 
 Chrys. and the Greek expositors the 
 definite reference of νόμος: so De W., 
 Huther, Wiesing., al. δικαίῳ] ‘a 
 righteous man.’ The exact meaning 
 of δίκαιος has been somewhat differ- 
 ently estimated: it would seem not so 
 much, on the one hand, aso δικαιω- 
 θείς, witha formal reference to δικαιοσ. 
 ἐκ πίστεως, nor yet, on the other, so 
 little as ὁ κατορθωκὼς τὴν ἀρετήν, 
 Theoph., but rather, as the context 
 seems to require and imply, ‘justus 
 per sanctificationem,’ Croc. (comp. De 
 W.), he who (in the language of 
 Hooker, Serm. 11. 7) ‘has his measure 
 of fruit in holiness;’ comp. Waterl. 
 Justif. Vol. νι. p. 7. κεῖται] ‘is 
 enacted,’ ‘est posita,’ Vulg., ‘ist sa- 
 tith,’ Goth. No special or peculiar 
 force (‘onus illud maledictionis,’ Pisc. ; 
 ‘consilium et destinatio,’ Kiittn. ap. 
 Peile) is here to be assigned to κεῖσθαι, 
 it being only used in its proper and 
 classical sense of ‘enactment,’ dc. of 
 laws; comp. (even passively, Jelf, Gr. 
 
 § 359. 2) Xen. Mem. tv. 4. 21, τοὺς 
 ὑπὸ τῶν θεῶν κειμένους νόμους, and the 
 numerous exx. in Wetstein, Kypke, 
 and the phraseological annotators. 
 The origin of the phrase seems due to 
 the idea, not of mere local position 
 (‘in publico exponi ibique jacere,’ 
 Kypke, Obs. Vol. 11. p. 349), but of 
 ‘fixity,’ @c. (comp. Rost u. Palm, 
 Tex. s.v. 12, Vol. 1. p. 1694) which 
 is involved in the use of κεῖσθαι. 
 ἀνόμοις δὲ K.7.A.] ‘but for lawless 
 and unruly persons.’ 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 derivation seems to 
 convey, amore passive disregard of it; 
 the latter, as its deriv. also suggests 
 (ὑποτάσσεσθαι = sponte submittere, 
 Tittm. Synon. 11. p. 3), a more active 
 violation of it arising from arefractory 
 will; comp. Tit. i. το, where ἀνυπό- 
 ταάκτοι Stands in near connexion with 
 ἀντιλέγοντες. ἀσεβέσιν καὶ 
 ἁμαρτ.] ‘ungodly and sinful.’ These 
 epithets are also connected in τ Pet. 
 iv. 18 (Prov. xi. 31), Jude rs. This 
 second pair points to want of rever- 
 ence to God; the third to want of 
 inner purity and holiness; the fourth 
 towant ofeven the commonest human 
 feeling. The list is closed by an enu- 
 meration 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’ (see notes 
 on Eph. iv. 24, and Harless in loc. ; 
 comp. also Trench, Synon. Part τι. 
 § 38), the same idea is probably in- 
 volved in the negative. The ἀσεβὴς is 
 unholy through his lack of reverence ; 
 
12 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 10 λῴαις καὶ μητρολῴαις, ἀνδροφόνοις, πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοί- 
 
 " ὃ } a , , , ‘ ” 
 ταις, αν βαπο ἐσταις, ψεύσταις, ETLOPKOLS, Και Εἰ Tl 
 
 4 ~ « ’ὔ , , , 4 ἣν 
 II erepov Tn vytatvoucn διδασκαλίᾳ αντικειταῖ, KATA TO 
 
 the ἀνόσιος through his lack of inner 
 purity. The use in classical au- 
 thors is appy. somewhat different; it 
 seems there rather to mark ‘impiety’ 
 (Plato, Euthyphr. p. 9 D, 6 ἂν πάντες 
 οἱ θεοὶ μισῶσιν ἀνόσιόν ἐστιν), the viola- 
 tion of fas in contradistinction to jus, 
 whether in its highest sense in relation 
 to the Gods (e.g. Schol. Eurip. Hee. 
 776, τὸ μὲν πρὸς θεοὺς ἐξ ἀνθρώ- 
 Tuy γενόμενον ὅσιον καλοῦμεν : Comp. 
 Suppl. 377), or in its lower sense in 
 relation to parents and kindred, e.g. 
 Xen. Cyrop. vu. 8. 27, ἀνοσιωτέρους 
 περὶ συγγενεῖς : see Tittmann, Synon. 
 I. p.25. Hence the frequent combi- 
 nation of ἀνόσιος and ἄδικος, e.g. Plato, 
 Gorg. p. 505 B, Legg. VI. p. 777 E, 
 Republ. 11. p. 363 D, comp. Theat. 
 p. 176 D. πατρολῴαι-] ‘smiters 
 
 x» ee Y O nN ὃ 
 of fathers, eons) rio? 
 
 [qui percutiunt patres eorum] Syr. ; 
 not ‘murderers of fathers,’ Auth. 
 Both the derivation (ἀλοάω, comp. 
 Aristoph. Ran. 149) and the similar 
 use of the word in good authors (e.g. 
 Demosth. Timocr, 732,Aristoph. Nub. 
 1327, compared with 1331, and esp. 
 Lysias, Theomn. 116. 8) will certainly 
 warrant this milder translation; comp. 
 Suidas, πατραλοίας, πατροτύπτης" καὶ 
 πατραλῷας ὁ αὐτός, and Poll. Onomast. 
 11. 13, who even extends it to οἱ περὶ 
 τοὺς γονεῖς ἐξαμαρτάνοντες : sim. He- 
 sych. πατραλ." ὁ τὸν πατέρα ἀτιμάζων, 
 τύπτων, ἢ κτείνων. It seems also 
 more consistent with the context, as 
 the crime of parricide or matricide 
 wouldnaturally becomparativelyrare, 
 and almost (even in a pagan’s idea, 
 comp. Cicero, pro Rose. ὁ. 25) out of 
 the special contemplation of any law. 
 Against the crime of the text the 
 
 Mosaic law had made a provision, 
 Exodus xxi. 15 (obs. there is no addi- 
 tion Ni), as in ver. 12), comp. Lev. 
 xx. 9. The following ἀνδροφόνοις sup- 
 plies no argument against this transl. 
 (De W.); St Paul is obviously follow- 
 ing the order of the commandments. 
 The usual Attic form is πατραλοίας; 
 Thom. Mag. p. 695 (ed. Bern.), Al- 
 berti, Obs. p. 394. 
 
 10. ἀνδραποδισταῖς] ‘men-stealers ;’ 
 ‘plagiariis’ (Cicero, Quint. Frat. 1. 2. 
 2. 6), i.e. ‘qui vel fraude yel aperta vi 
 homines suffurantur ut pro mancipiis 
 vendant,’ Vorst, ap. Pol. Syn. ; comp. 
 Pol. Onomast. 111. 78, ἀνδραπ. ὁ τὸν 
 ἐλεύθερον καταδουλούμενος ἢ τὸν ἀλλό- 
 τριον οἰκέτην ὑπαγόμενος (ed, Bekk.); 
 a repulsive and exaggerated violation 
 of the eighth commandment, as dpce- 
 νοκοιτεῖν is similarly of the seventh: 
 they are grouped with δραπεταὶ and 
 μοιχοί, Polyb, Hist. x11. 9. 2, 10. 6; 
 comp. Rein, Criminalrecht, Ὁ. 386 sq. 
 The penalty of death is attached to 
 this crime, Exodus xxi. 16, Deut. 
 Xxiv. 7: SO appy. in some pagan codes ; 
 see Sturz. Lex. Xenoph. 5.0. 
 émidpkots] ‘perjured persons,’ Auth. : 
 ‘érlopxo: sunt et ii qui quod jura- 
 verunt non faciunt (Xen. Agesil. 1. 
 12, comp. 11) et ii qui quod falsum 
 esse norunt jurato aflirmant,’ Raphel. 
 Perjury is specially mentioned in Lev. 
 Mix. 12. εἴ τι κιτιὰλ, is not for 
 6 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 in- 
 cluded: Raphel (Obs, Vol. 1. p. 562) 
 very appositely cites Polyb. Hist. p, 
 983 [xv. 18. 5], οἰκίας καὶ χώραν καὶ 
 πόλεις Kal ef τι ἕτερόν ἐστι Μασσα- 
 
το τὰ, 19 
 
 εὐαγγέλιον τῆς δόξης τοῦ μακαρίου Θεοῦ, ὃ ἐπιστεύθην 
 
 9 ’ 
 Ε yo. 
 
 νίσσου. τῇ ὕγιαι- 
 νούσῃ διδασκ.] ‘the sound (healthful, 
 —not healthgiving, Mosh.) doctrine.’ 
 καλῶς εἶπε τῇ ὑγιαιν. διδασκαλίᾳ, 
 ἐκεῖνα γὰρ πάντα πάθη ψυχῆς ἦν δι- 
 εφθαρμένης, Chrys.;comp. Plutarch,de 
 Liber. Educ. § 9, τῆς ἀδιαφθόρου καὶ 
 ὑγιαινούσης παιδείας, ib. § 7, ὑγιαίνον- 
 Tos καὶ τεταγμένου βίου. The formula 
 is nearly identical in meaning with 
 ἡ καλὴ διδασκαλία, ch. iv. 6, and ἡ 
 kar εὐσέβειαν διδασκ., ch. vi. 3, and 
 stands in clear and suggestive con- 
 trast to the sickly (ch. vi. 4) and mor- 
 bid (2 Tim. ii. 17) teaching of Jewish 
 gnosis. The present part. seems to 
 conyey the idea of present existing 
 healthiness, which was to be main- 
 tained and not depraved: comp. 
 Waterl. Trinity, Vol. 111. p. 400. 
 
 The expressions ὑγιαίνουσα διδασκαλία, 
 2 Tim. iv. 3, Tit. i. 9, 11. 1, and ὑγιαί- 
 vovres λόγοι, τ Tim, vi. 3, 2 Tim. i. 
 13 (comp. Tit. ii. 8), are peculiar to 
 the Pastoral Epistles, and have fre- 
 quently been urged as ‘un-Pauline:’ 
 to this the answer of Wiesinger (on 
 Tit.i. 9) seems fair and satisfactory— 
 viz. that it is idle to lay stress upon 
 such an usage, 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 
 Schleiermacher, Planck, Bemerkun- 
 gen, Gott. 1808, Beckhaus, Specimen 
 Obs. Ling. 1810. The majority of 
 these objections are really fundament- 
 ally uncritical. If in these Epp. the 
 Apostle is characterizing a different 
 form of error from any which he had 
 previously described, and if the ex- 
 pressions he has made use of admira- 
 bly and felicitously depict it, why are 
 we to regard them with suspicion be- 
 
 cause they do not occur in other Epp. 
 where really dissimilar errors are de- 
 scribed? That there is a certain dif- 
 ference in the language of these Epp. 
 we freely admit, yet still it is not one 
 whit more than we may naturally ex- 
 pect from the form of errors described 
 (see Huther, Einleit. p. 52), the date © 
 of the composition (see notes on ver. 
 3), and, possibly, the age and expe- 
 riences of the inspired author; comp. 
 Guerike, Hinleit. § 48. 2, p. 402 (ed. 
 2). Itis to be regretted that so able 
 a writer as Reuss should still feel 
 difficulties about the authorship of 
 this Ep.; see his Gesch. des N.T.§ 90, 
 p. 76. 
 
 11, κατὰ TO εὐαγγέλιον] ‘accord- 
 ing to the Gospel;’ specification of 
 that with which all the foregoing is 
 in accordance. There is some little 
 difficulty in the connexion. Three 
 constructions have been proposed: the 
 clause has been connected (a) with 77 
 vy. διδασκ., Beng., Leo, Peile, al.; (4) 
 with ἀντίκειται, Mack, Matth., comp. 
 Justin. 2; (c) with the whole foregoing 
 sentence, ver. 9 sq., De W., Huther, 
 Wiesing. Of these (a) seems clearly 
 grammatically untenable; for the ar- 
 ticle [inserted in D!; Clarom., Aug., 
 Boern., Vulg.; Bas.] cannot be dis- 
 pensed with, as Theoph. in his gloss. 
 τῇ οὔσῃ κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλ. tacitly ad- 
 mits. Again (6) is exegetically un- 
 satisfactory, as the sentence would 
 thus be tautologous, the vy. διδασκ. 
 being obviously the import of the 
 evayyéX., if not even synonymous with 
 it; comp. ch. vi. 1, 3. Thus then 
 (c) is alone tenable: the Apostle sub- 
 stantiates his positions about the law 
 and its application by a reference tothe 
 Gospel. His present assertions were 
 coincident with its teaching and prin- 
 
14 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 I thank Him who en- 
 trusted that Gospel to 
 me, and who was mer- 
 ciful to me in my ignorance and unbe- 
 lief: to Him be all honour and glory. 
 
 12 Kai χάριν ἔχω τῷ ἐνδυναμώσαντί pe 
 
 12. Καὶ χάριν ἔχω] So Tisch. (ed. 2, 7) with DKL; great majority of mss. ; 
 Clarom,, Goth., Syr. (both), al.; Dam., Gcum. (text); Lucif., Ambrst. (Rec., 
 Griesb., Scholz). The connecting καὶ is omitted in AFGN; about ro mss.; 
 Aug., Boern., Vulg., Copt., ith. (both), Arm.; Chrys., Theod., al.; Pel, 
 Vig., Bed. (Mill, Prolegom. p. uxxx1v, Lachm., Huther, Tisch. ed. 1). The 
 preponderance of external authority is thus appy. in favour of the omission. 
 Perhaps the internal arguments slightly preponderate in the other direction: 
 for if, on the one hand, the important critical principle, ‘ proclivi lectioni 
 prestat ardua’ (comp, Tregelles, Printed Text of N.T., p. 221), seems here to 
 find an application, still, on the other, the insertion of καὶ is distinctly in ae- 
 cordance with St Paul’s use of that particle. Thus then as it is possible that 
 the omission of καὶ may have arisen from a mistaken idea of the connexion of 
 ἐγὼ with χάριν ἔχω, and also as it would leave an abruptness here hardly 
 natural, we still retain, though not by any means with confidence, the reading 
 
 of Tischendorf. 
 
 ciples: so, very similarly, Rom. ii. 16; 
 see Meyer in loc., and on κατά, Winer, 
 Gr. § 49. ἃ, p. 357, comp. notes on 
 Eph. i. 5. τῆς δόξης] 
 is not a mere genitive of quality 
 (comp. Winer, Gr. ὃ 34. 3. Ὁ, p. 211), 
 and only equivalent to ἔνδοξος, Beza, 
 Auth., al., but is the gen. of the con- 
 tents; see Bernhardy, Synt. 111. 44, 
 p. 161, Scheuerl, Synt.§ 17. 1, p. 126, 
 and notes on Eph. i. 13; and comp, 
 2 Cor. iv. 4. The glory of God, whe- 
 ther 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 re- 
 vealed by the Gospel, ‘quod Dei ma- 
 jestatem et immensam gloriam {Rom. 
 ix. 23, Eph. iii. 16] explicet,’ Justi- 
 niani, 2. The gen. τοῦ Θεοῦ is con- 
 sequently not the gen. originis (rip 
 μέλλουσαν δόξαν ἐπαγγέλλεται, Theod., 
 comp. also Chrys.), but the simple 
 possessive gen., the glory which essen- 
 tially belongs to and is immanent in 
 God. μακαρίου] This epithet 
 (only in this connexion here and ch, 
 vi. 15), When thus applied to God, 
 seems designed still more to 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, Theoph. in 1 Tim, vy. 15), 
 but on account of the riches of His 
 mercy in this dispensation to man; 
 comp. Greg. Nyss. in Psalm. i. 1, 
 Vol. 1. p. 258 (ed. Morell), τοῦτο μόνον 
 ἐστὶ μακάριον τῇ φύσει ov πᾶν τὸ 
 μετέχον μακάριον γίγνεται: comp. also 
 Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. 11. p. 280. 
 
 ὃ ἐπιστεύθην ἐγώ] ‘with which I was 
 entrusted ;’ acommon construction in 
 St Paul’s Epp., especially in reference 
 to this subject; see 1 Cor. ix. 17, 
 Gal. ii. 7, 1 Thess. ii. 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 commis- 
 sion, the aor. is perfectly suitable; see 
 notes on Gal, ii. 7. 
 
 12. Καὶ χάριν ἔχω] ‘dnd I give 
 thanks;’ appended paragraph (not 
 however, as Alf., only with a comma 
 after ἐγὼ) expressive of the Apostle’s 
 profound thankfulness for God’s mer- 
 cy toward him, as implied in the 6 
 ἐπιστεύθην of the preceding verse. It 
 
ΠΕ Ts. iL 
 
 on 
 
 xX A a f a “ Κ , © e , e , 
 ριστῳ ingov TH Ἰλυριῷ ἡμῶν, OTL πιστον με ἡγήσατο, 
 
 θέμενος εἰς διακονίαν, τὸ πρότερον ὄντα βλάσφημον καὶ 13 
 
 has been urged by Schleierm. (p. 163 
 sq.) in his arguments against the 
 genuineness of this Ep., that there is 
 here a total want of connexion. Were 
 it even so, no argument could be 
 fairly founded on it, for what is more 
 noticeable than St Paul’s tendency to 
 digression whenever anything con- 
 nected with his mission and the mercy 
 of God towards him comes before his 
 thoughts? comp. 1 Cor. xy. 9 sq., 
 Eph. iii. 8. Here however there is 
 scarcely any digression ; the Apostle 
 pauses on the weighty words ¢ ém- 
 στεύθην ἐγώ (what a contrast to the 
 ignorance and uncertainty of the false 
 teachers! ver. 7), to express with deep 
 humility (comp. Chrys.) his thankful- 
 ness ; with this thankfulness he inter- 
 weaves, ver. 13 Sq., a demonstration 
 founded on his own experiences, of the 
 transforming grace of the Gospel, and 
 the forgiveness (not the legal punish- 
 ment) of sin. Thus, without seeking 
 to pursue the subject in the form of a 
 studied contrast between the law and 
 the Gospel (he was not now writing 
 against direct Judaizers), or of a de- 
 claration how the transgressors of the 
 law were to attain righteousness (see 
 Baumgarten, Pastoralbr. Ὁ. 224 sq.), 
 he more than implies it all in the his- 
 tory of his own case. In a word, the 
 law was for the condemnation of sin- 
 ners; the Gospel of Jesus Christ was 
 for the saving of sinners and the 
 ministration of forgiveness: verily it 
 was an εὐαγγέλιον τῆς δόξης τοῦ μακα- 
 ρίου Θεοῦ ; comp. Huther in loc. 
 
 τῷ ἐνδυναμώσαντί pe] ‘to Him who 
 strengthened me within,’ sc. for the 
 discharge of my commission, for bear- 
 ing the λάβουρον (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. το, Phil. iv. 13, 
 2 Tim. ii. 1, iv. 17) and Heb. xi. 34: 
 comp. notes on Eph, vi. το. There 
 does not seem any reference to the 
 δυνάμεις which attested the Apostle- 
 ship (Macknight), nor specially tomere 
 bravery inconfronting dangers (comp. 
 Chrys.), but generally to spiritual δύ- 
 ναμις for the functions of his apostle- 
 ship. πιστόν] ‘faithful,’ 
 ‘trusty ;’ comp. 1 Cor. vii. 25. Eadie, 
 on Eph. i. 1, p. 4, advocates the par- 
 ticipial translation ‘believing’ (comp. 
 Goth, ‘galéubjandan ’): this however 
 seems here clearly untenable ; the ad- 
 dition of the words εἰς διακονίαν shows 
 that the word is used in its ordinary 
 ethical, not theological sense. 
 θέμενος εἰς StaK.] ‘appointing me, or 
 in that he appointed me, for the 
 ministry ;’ not ‘postquam,’ Grot., but 
 ‘dum posuit, dc.’ Beng. The act, τὸ 
 θέσθαι eis διακ., furnished proof and 
 evidence ὅτι πιστόν με ἡγήσατο: πῶς 
 γὰρ ἂν ἔθετό με εἰ μὴ ἐπιτηδειότητα 
 εὗρεν ἐν ἐμοί; Theoph.; see Winer, Gr. 
 § 45. 4, p. 311. Schleiermacher takes 
 exception at this expression; why 
 may we not adduce 1 Thess. v. 9, 
 ἔθετο ἡμᾶς εἰς ὀργήν ὃ 
 
 13. ὄντα! The participle seems 
 here to involve a concessive meaning, 
 ‘though I was,’ ‘cum tamen essem,’ 
 Justiniani,—not, ‘a man who was,’ 
 Alf., as this gives it a predicative 
 character. On the use of participles 
 in concessiye sentences, see Donald- 
 son, Gr. § 621, and comp. notes on 
 ver. 7. βλάσφημον] ‘a blas- 
 phemer;’ in the full and usually re- 
 ceived meaning of the word, as it was 
 specially against the name of our 
 Lord (Acts xxvi. 9, 11) that St Paul 
 both spoke and acted. The verb 
 
 ᾽ 
 
16 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΊΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 ἊΣ 
 
 ‘ A 
 διώκτην καὶ ὑβριστήν: ἀλλὰ ἠλεήθην, ὅτι ἀγνοῶν ἐποί- 
 
 , J , ε , ἢ. ἐφ , “ , 
 I4 yoa ev απίστιᾳ, ὑπερεπλεόνασεν δὲ ἡ χαρις του Κυρίου 
 
 βλασφημεῖν (i.e. βλαψιφημεῖν, Pott, 
 Etym. Forsch. Vol. τ. p. 47, Vol. 1. 
 Ῥ. 49) taken per se is nearly equiva- 
 lent in meaning to λοιδορεῖν (e.g. Mar- 
 tyr. Polyc. 9, λοιδόρησον τὸν Χριστόν, 
 compared with the martyr’s answer, 
 πῶς δύναμαι βλασφημῆσαι τὸν βασιλέα 
 μου ; compare Clem, Alex. Pedag.t. 8, 
 p- 137, ed. Potter); when however it 
 stands in connexion with God’s name 
 it naturally has the more special and 
 frightful meaning of ‘ blasphemy,’ 7 
 els Θεὸν ὕβρις, Suidas: see Suicer, 
 Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 1. p. 696 sq. 
 
 διώκτην] ‘persecutor ;’ ob μόνον ἐβλασ- 
 φήμουν ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους διώκων 
 βλασφημεῖν ἠνάγκαζον, Gicum.: see 
 Acts xxii. 4, xxvi. 11, Gal. i. 13.223. 
 ὑβριστήν] ‘doer of outrage,’ Conyb. 
 and Hows.; only here and Rom. i. 30; 
 ὑβριστὴς [perhaps from ὑπέρ, Donalds. 
 Cratyl. ὃ 335, with verbal root, / (ire), 
 Pott, Etym. Forsch. Vol. 1. p. 144] 
 is one who displays his insolence not 
 in words merely, but in deeds of vio- 
 lence and outrage: see Trench, Synon. 
 §29. ‘Paulus nequitiam quibusdam 
 veluti gradibus amplificat. Primus 
 gradus est maledicere, ideo se vocat 
 blasphemum; secundus insectari, ideo 
 se appellat persecutorem; et quia po- 
 test insectatio citra vim consistere, ad- 
 dit tertio sefuisse oppressorem, ’ Justi- 
 niani. The translation of the Vulgate 
 ‘ contumeliosus,’ is scarcely critically 
 exact, as, although ‘ contumelia’ [per- 
 haps from ‘ contumeo,’ Voss, Ztymol. 
 s.v., comp. Pott, Vol. 1. Ρ. 51] is fre- 
 quently applied to deeds (e.g. Cesar, 
 Bell. Gal. 11, 13, quamvis vim et con- 
 tumeliam [fluctuum] perferre), ‘con- 
 tumeliosus’ seems more commonly 
 applied to words. The distinction be- 
 tween ὑπερήφανος (thoughts), ἀλαξών 
 (words), and ὑβριστής (deeds), is in- 
 
 vestigated in Trench, J.c.; see also 
 Tittm. Synon. 1. 74. ἀλλὰ 
 ἠλεήθην] “ still, notwithstanding, I ob- 
 tained mercy.’ ᾿Αλλὰ has here its full 
 and proper seclusive (‘aliud jam hoe 
 esse de quo sumus dicturi,’ Klotz, 
 Devar. Vol. τι. p. 2), and thence com- 
 monly adversative force: God’s merey 
 and St Paul’s want of it are put in 
 sharpest contrast. In the following 
 words the Apostleclearly does notseek 
 simply to excuse himself (De W.), but 
 to illustrate the merciful procedure of 
 divine grace. His ignorance 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 unbelief, Peile) then further 
 defines the ground of his ἄγνοια : his 
 ignorance was due to his ἀπιστία. 
 How far that ἀπιστία was excusable 
 is, as Huther observes, left unnoticed: 
 it is onlyimplied that thedyvo.a which 
 resulted from it was such as did not 
 leave him wholly ἀναπολόγητος; οὐ 
 γὰρ φθόνῳ βαλλόμενος ἐπολέμουν, ἀλλ᾽ 
 ὑπὲρ τοῦ νόμου δῆθεν ἀγωνιζόμενος, 
 Theod.: comp. Acts iii. 17, Rom. x. 2, 
 and see esp. the excellent sermon of 
 Waterland, Part 11. Vol. v. p. 731. 
 14. ὑπερεπλεόνασεν] ‘was (not 
 ‘hath been,’ Peile) exceeding abun- 
 
 y n 
 dant,’ Las {magna fuit] Syr. ; 
 
 comp. Rom. v. 20, ὑπερεπερίσσευσεν 
 ἡ χάρις, 2 Thess. i. 3, ὑπεραυξάνει ἡ 
 πίστις. There is not here any com- 
 parative force in ὑπερεπὰ., 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. 1. 
 
 O_O δου μννμν μων μαι, οὐ μ ΜδΝΝμμνμΝννυνμμνῶνα 
 
eo 4 BS. 
 
 ay 
 
 ς - 4 77 4 9 - 9 ~ 9 ~ 
 ἡμῶν μετὰ πίστεως Kal ἀγάπης τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 
 
 πιστὸς ὁ λόγος καὶ πάσης ἀποδοχῆς ἄξιος, ὅτι Χριστὸς 15 
 
 Ῥ. 350; the Apostle thus only explains 
 more fully how, and in what measure, 
 he obtained mercy. This, it may be 
 observed, he introduces, not by an ex- 
 planatory καί, or a confirmatory γάρ, 
 but by δέ; a gentle adversative force 
 being suggested by the last words, év 
 ἀπιστίᾳ: ‘yes, unbelieving I was, but 
 Ged’s grace was net on that account 
 given in scanty measure:’ see espe- 
 cially Klotz, Devar. p. 363 sq., and 
 compare the remarks in notes on Gal. 
 iii. 8, 11, and 8]. pass. The word 
 ὑπερπὰ. is excessively rare; it has at 
 present only been found in the Psalt. 
 Salom. v. 19, and Herme Past. τι. 
 Mand. vy. 2, where it is used with a 
 semi-local reference,—ov χωρεῖ ἐκεῖνο 
 τὸ ἄγγος, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπερπλεονάζει τὸ τρυφε- 
 On St Paul’s frequent 
 use of verbs compounded with ὑπέρ, 
 see notes on Hph, 111. 20. 
 
 peta πίστ. καὶ ay.) Faith and love 
 are ‘ the concomitants of the grace of 
 our Lord Jesus;’ on which proper 
 force of wera, see notes on Eph. vi. 23, 
 and comp. ib. iv. 2. Leo has rightly 
 felt and expressed this use of the 
 prep.,—‘verbis μετὰ x.7.\. indicatur 
 πίστ. kK. ay. quasi comites fuisse illius 
 xXtptros.’ Of the two substantives the 
 first, πίστις, standsin obvious antithe- 
 sis to ἐν ἀπιστίᾳ, ver. 1.3 (on its more 
 inclusive sense as also implying ἐλπίς, 
 see Usteri, Lehrb, τι. 1. 4, p. 241), 
 while ἀγάπη, which here seems clearly 
 to imply Christian love, leve to man 
 (Justin.) as well as to God, suggests a 
 contrast to his former cruelty and 
 hatred; ‘dilectio in Christo [opponi- 
 tur] sevitie quam exercuerat adversus 
 fideles,’ Calv. τῆς ἐν Xp. 
 ἼἼησ.7 ‘which is in Christ Jesus,’—not 
 ‘per Christum,’ Justin. (comp. Chrys., 
 τὸ ἐν διά ἐστιν), but in Him, as its 
 
 pov πνεῦμα. 
 
 true sphere and element, 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 meaning of ἐν has fre- 
 quently been vindicated in these com- 
 mentaries; see notes on Gal. 11. 17, 
 on Eph.i. τ, al, Onthe insertion ofthe 
 article see notes en ch. ili. 13. 
 
 15. πιστὸς ὁ λόγος] ‘Faithful ts 
 the saying,’ triggy [trusty, sure] thata 
 vaurd,’ Goth.; πιστός,---ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀψευ- 
 dys καὶ ἀληθής, Theod. This ‘gra- 
 vissima preefandi formula’ (Beng.) is 
 found only in the Pastoral Epp.; ch. 
 iii. x, iv..9, 2 Tim. il, 11, Tit. lil. 8; 
 comp, the somewhat similar forms, 
 οὗτοι οἱ λόγοι πιστοὶ Kal ἀληθινοί εἰσιν, 
 Rey. xXi. 5, xxii. 6 (om. εἰσιν), and ἀλη- 
 θινὸς ὁ λόγος, τ 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. I, p-. 400 
 (ed. 2). πάσης ἀποδοχῆς] ‘all 
 (i.e. every kind of ) acceptation,’ Auth.; 
 an excellent translation. ᾿Αποδοχή, 
 ‘exceptio studii et favoris plena,’ 
 Schweigh. Lex. Polyb. 5.0. (comp. 
 ἀποδεκτός, ch, ii. 3, V. 4), is used very 
 frequently and in very similar con- 
 structions by later Greek writers; e.g. 
 amos. ἀξιος, Philo, de Prem. ὃ 23, 
 Vol. 1. p. 565, ib. de Profug. ὃ 2, Vol. 
 1. p. 410, al. In Polybius (where it 
 very frequently occurs) it is occasion- 
 ally found in union with πίστις, e.g. 
 Hist, τ, 43. 4, VI. 2. 13,—‘etiam fides 
 est species acceptionis,’ Beng.; see the 
 collections of Elsner and the phra- 
 seological annotators, by all of whom 
 the word is abundantly illustrated. 
 On this use of πᾶς with abstract 
 
 σ 
 
18 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 2 - > ΕἸ 4 , e ‘ ~ a ~ 
 Ἰησοῦς ἦλθεν εἰς TOV κόσμον ἁμαρτωλοὺς σῶσαι, ὦν πρῶ- 
 
 16 tos εἰμι ἐγώ: ἀλλὰ διὰ τοῦτο ἠλεήθην, ἵνα ἐν ἐμοὶ 
 
 ’ , ὃ (ἕξ +. 4 ‘ dl | ~ ‘ »“ 
 πρώτῳ EVOELCHTAL βιστος σοὺς τὴν απασαν μακρο- 
 
 nouns, commonly denoting extension 
 (‘omnium totius anime facultatum,’ 
 Beng. )rather than intension, see notes 
 on Eph. i. 8. ἦλθεν els τὸν 
 κόσμον] ‘came into the world:’ see 
 John xvi. 28, and (according to the 
 most probable construction) ib. i. 9. 
 In these passages κόσμος is appy. used 
 in its physical or perhaps rather (see 
 John iii. 16 sq.) collective sense; 
 comp. Reuss, Théol. Chrét. 1v. 20, p. 
 228, and notes on Gal. iv. 3. The 
 allusion they involve to the προὔπαρξις 
 of Christ is clear and unmistakeable ; 
 comp. Pearson, Creed, Vol. 1. p. 141 
 (ed. Burton), ὧν πρῶτός εἰμι 
 ἐγώ] ‘of whom I am chief ;’ ‘antece- 
 dens omnes non tempore sed maligni- 
 tate,’ August. in Psal. Ixx. 1.1. Jus- 
 tiniani 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 50. σωζομένων, 
 Wegsch. : similarly Mack, and, as we 
 might hardly have expected, Water- 
 land, Serm, xxx. Vol. v. p. 729. As 
 however the words Χριστὸς ἦλθεν... 
 σῶσαι must clearly be taken in their 
 widestextent,— ‘non solos illos Judxos 
 sed et omnes omuino homineset pecea- 
 tores venitsalvos facere,’ Corn.a Lap., 
 —any interpretation which would 
 limit either ἁμαρτωλοὺς or its relative 
 seems exegetically untenable. Equally 
 unsuccessful is any grammatical argu- 
 ment 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), Thus to ex- 
 plain away the force of this expression 
 
 is seriously to miss the strong current 
 of feeling with which, even in terms 
 of seeming hyperbole (αὐτὸν ὑπερβαί- 
 νει τῆς ταπεινοφροσύνης ὅρον, Theod.), 
 the Apostle ever alludes to his con- 
 version, and his state preceding it; 
 see notes on Eph. iii. 8. 
 
 εἰμι] Not ἦν; ‘cave existimes mo- 
 destia causi Apostolum mentitum 
 esse. Veram enim non minus quam 
 humilem confessionem edere yoluit, 
 atque ex intimo cordis sensu depromp- 
 tam,’ Calv. See the excellent ser- 
 mons on this text by Hammond, Serm. 
 XXX, XXXI. p. 632 sq. (A.-C. Libr.), 
 and compare August. Serm. CLXxIv. 
 cixxy. Vol. v. p. 939 sq. (ed. Migne), 
 Frank, Serm. vi. Vol. 1. p. 108 sq. 
 (A.-C. L.). 
 
 16. ἀλλά] ‘Howbeit,’ Auth.; 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 merey which God 
 was pleased to show him: ἁμαρτωλὲς 
 (μέν) εἰμι, ἀλλὰ ἠλεήθην. Beza has 
 here judiciously changed ‘sed,’ Vulg., 
 into ‘verum;’ see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 
 Il. p. 3, and compare some remarks 
 of Waterland on this particle, Serm. 
 v. (Moyer’s Lect.), Vol. τι. p. 108. 
 διὰ τοῦτο] ‘on this account,’ ‘for this 
 end;’ pointing to, and directing more 
 especial attention to the ἵνα. 
 ἐν ἐμοί] ‘in me;’ not equiv. to δι 
 ἐμοῦ (Theod.), but with the usual and 
 full force of the prep.; the Apostle 
 was to be as it were the substratum 
 of the action: comp, Exod. ix. 16, 
 and see exx. in Winer, Gr. § 48. a, 
 Ῥ. 345, and notes on Gal. i. 24. 
 πρώτῳ] ‘chief,’ not ‘first,’ Auth. : 
 ‘alludit ad id quod nuper dixerat se 
 
he. 
 
 19 
 
 ’ 4 e , A , , 4“- 3 
 θυμίαν, προς UTOTUTWOLY τῶν μελλόντων πιστευειν ἐπ 
 
 primum esse inter peccatores,’ Calv. 
 ἐνδείξηται] ‘might show forth;’ in- 
 tensive, or, as it has been termed, 
 dynamic middle; comp. Donalds, Gr. 
 § 432. 2. bb, Kriiger, Sprachl. § 52. 
 8, and see notes on Eph. ii. 7, where 
 this word and its uses are noticed 
 and investigated. τὴν 
 ἅπασαν pakp.] ‘the whole of His 
 long-sufering;’ i.e. ‘the fulness of 
 long-suffering,’ Peile; οὐκ ἔφη, iva ἐν δ. 
 ἐν ἐμοὶ τὴν μακρ., ἀλλὰ 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 preponde- 
 rance of uncial authority [AFGN opp. 
 to DKL] is 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 Lachm. 
 is very doubtful), while the more 
 common form occurs about 420 times. 
 St Luke uses ἅπας far more (23 times 
 certain) than any other of the sacred 
 writers. On the less usual position of 
 the article, see Middl. Greek Art. ch. 
 vil. p. 104 note, and comp. Gersdorf, 
 Beitriige, p. 381, who has however 
 omitted this instance and Acts xx. 18: 
 comp. Green, Gramm. Ὁ. 104. 
 
 We need not here modify the mean- 
 ing of μακροθ.: ‘Deo tribuitur μακροθ. 
 quia peenas peccatis debitas differt 
 propter gloriam suam, et ut detur pec- 
 catoribus resipiscendi locus,’ Suicer, 
 Thesaur. 8.v. Vol. 11. p. 293. The 
 distinction of Theoph. (on Gal. v. 22) 
 between μακροθυμία (σχολῇ ἐπιτιθέναι 
 τὴν προσήκουσαν δίκην) and πρᾳότης 
 (ἀφιέναι παντάπασι) cited by Suicer, 
 s.y., and Trench, Synon. ὃ 50. ε, may 
 perhaps be substantiated by compar- 
 ing this passage with Tit. iii, 2. 
 πρὸς ὑποτύπωσιν K.T.A.] ‘to exhibit 
 
 a pattern for them, &c.,’ πρὸς ἀπόδειξιν, 
 
 CGicum. 2: ὑποτύπ., ἸΔιουυ [os- 
 ° x y 
 
 tensio, exemplum, 2 Pet. ii. 6] Syr., 
 is a dls Aeyou.; here, and in a some- 
 what modified sense, 2 Tim. i. 13. St 
 Paul’s more usual expression is τύπος 
 (Rom, v. 14, Vi. 17, 1 Cor. x. 6, Phil. 
 iii. 17, al.), but for this tor. is per- 
 haps here substituted, as it is not so 
 much themere 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 ὑπό- 
 δειγμα (2 Pet. ii. 6), the standing type 
 and representative, the‘ all-embracing 
 example’ (Moller), of those who were 
 hereafter to believe on Christ (‘si 
 credis ut Paulus, salvabere ut Pau- 
 lus,’ Beng.), is scarcely satisfactory. 
 It was not so much the Apostle as the 
 μακροθ. shown to him that was the 
 object of the ὑποτύπ. ; comp, Wiesing. 
 in loc. On the technical meaning 
 (adumbratio et institutio brevis) see 
 thenotes of Fabricius on Sext, Empir. 
 p. 1, and Suicer, Thesawr. 8.0. Vol. 
 1. p. 1398. The gen. τῶν μελλόντων 
 (‘in respect of,’ ‘pertaining to,’ see 
 Donaldson, Gr. § 453) may be more 
 specifically defined as the gen. of the 
 point of view (Scheuerl. Synt. ὃ 18, p. 
 129), or perhaps, more correctly, as an 
 extended application of the possessive 
 gen.; the ὑποτύπωσις 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. 
 § 343. 1 (not 2, where Soph, J. ὁ. is 
 misinterpreted, see Wunder in loc.). 
 If the dative had been used, the idea 
 of the ‘convenience,’ ‘benefit,’ of the 
 parties concerned would have come 
 more prominently into notice: con- 
 
 C2 
 
20 
 17 αὐτῷ εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 
 
 trast Ecclus. xlivy. 16 with 2 Pet. 1. c. 
 The explanation of Bretsch., ‘ut (hoc 
 meo exemplo) adumbraret conyersio- 
 nem futuram gentium,’ is grammati- 
 cally defensible but not exegetically 
 satisfactory. πιστεύειν ἐπ᾽ 
 αὐτῷ] ‘to believe on Him.’ In this con- 
 struction, which only occurselsewhere 
 in Luke xxiy. 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 doubt- 
 ful), Christ is represented as the basis, 
 foundation, on which faith rests; ἐπὶ 
 with dat. marking ‘absolute super- 
 position’ (Donalds. Gr. § 483), and 
 thence the accessory notion of ‘de- 
 pendence on;’ see Bernhardy, Synt. v. 
 24, Ῥ. 250, Kriiger, Sprachl.§ 68. 41, 
 p. 541. Ifweadopt the usual reading 
 and explanation in Mark i. 15 (comp. 
 John iii. 15 [Tisch., Lachm. marg.], 
 Gal. 111. 26, Jerem. xii. 6; Ignat. 
 Philad. 8), it may be observed that 
 πιστεύω has five constructions in the 
 N.T., (2) with simple dat.; (Ὁ) with 
 év; (c) with els; (4) with ἐπὶ and dat.; 
 (e) with ἐπὶ and accus. Of these it 
 seems clear that the y repositionalcon- 
 structions have a fuller and more 
 special force than the simple dative 
 (see Winer, Gr. ὃ 31. 5, p. 191), 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. τι. 
 p. 8, ed. Burt.), still the grammati- 
 cal distinctions seem clearly marked. 
 In a word, the exercise of faith is con- 
 templated under different aspects : (a) 
 expresses only the simple act ; (b) in- 
 volves also the idea of union with; (c) 
 union with, appy. ofa fuller and more 
 mystical nature (comp. notes on Gal. 
 iii. 27), with probably some accessory 
 idea of moral motion, mental direction 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 A. 
 τῷ δὲ βασιλεῖ τῶν αἰώνων, 
 
 toward; see Winer, Gr. ἃ 49. ἃ, DP. 3543 
 (4) repose, reliance on; (6) mental di- 
 rection with a view to it; Fritz. Rom. 
 iv. 5, Vol. 1. p. 217, comp. Donalds. 
 Gr. § 483. Of the four latter 
 formule it may be remarked in con- 
 clusion that (b) and (d) are of rare 
 occurrence; (6) only (John 111, 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 will be found in Reuss, 
 Théol. Chrét. Iv. 14, Ῥ. 229; Comp. 
 also Tholuck, Beitrége, p. 94 56. 
 εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον] ‘unto eternal life;’ 
 object to which the exercise of πίστις 
 ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ was directed. It is singular 
 that Bengel should have paused to no- 
 tice that this clause can be joined with 
 ὑποτύπωσιν : such a construction has 
 nothing to recommend it. 
 
 17. τῷ... βασιλεῖ τῶν αἰώνων] ‘to the 
 
 king of the ages, δον JoXto\ 
 [regi seculorum] Syr.,—a noticeable 
 title, that must not be diluted into‘ the 
 king eternal’ of Luth. and Auth., even 
 if Hebraistic usage (comp. Winer, Gr. 
 § 34. b, p. 211) may render such a dilu- 
 tion grammatically admissible: comp. 
 Heb. i. 2, xi. 3. The term οἱ αἰῶνες 
 seems to denote, not ‘the worlds’ inthe 
 usual concrete meaning of the term 
 (Chrys., and appy. Theod., Theoph.), 
 but, in accordance with the more usual 
 temporal meaning of aidy in the N.T., 
 ‘the ages,’ the temporal periods whose 
 sum and aggregation (αἰῶνες τῶν ald- 
 νων) adumbrate the conception of 
 eternity: see notes on Eph. i. 21. 
 The βασιλεὺς τῶν αἰώνων will thus be 
 ‘the sovereign dispenser and disposer 
 of the ages of the world;’ see Psalm 
 exly, 13, ἡ βασιλεία σου βασιλεία 
 
 
 
fi, TS. 
 
 at 
 
 ἀφθάρτῳ ἀοράτῳ μόνῳ Θεῷ, τιμὴ καὶ δόξα εἰς τοὺς 
 
 94 A F. 3 , 
 αἰῶνας τῶν ALWYWY αμῆν.- 
 
 I charge thee, son Timo- 
 thy, to fight the good 
 
 Ταύτην τὴν παραγγελίαν παρατί- 18 
 
 fight of faith, and not to make shipwreck of it as some have done. 
 
 πάντων τῶν αἰώνων, καὶ ἡ δεσποτεία 
 σου ἐν πάσῃ γενεᾷ καὶ γενεᾷ, and 
 see Exod. xv. 18; so Hamm. 1, 
 comp. Usteri, Lehrb. 11, 2. 4, p. 315. 
 Any reference to the Gnostic sons 
 (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, ro ; comp. Ecclus. 
 XXKVi. 17 (19 OY 22), ὁ Θεὸς τῶν αἰώνων. 
 ἀφθάρτῳ] ‘incorruptible ;’ nearly equi- 
 valent to 6 μόνος ἔχων ἀθανασίαν, ch. 
 vi. 16. This epithet is only found in 
 union with Θεὸς here and Rom. i. 
 23; comp. Wisd. xii. τ. Both this 
 and the two following epithets must 
 be connected with Θεῷ, not βασι- 
 Ae (Auth., Conyb., al.), which is 
 scarcely grammatically tenable. Hu- 
 ther urges against this the omission 
 of the article before the epithet, which 
 however frequently takes place in the 
 case of a title in apposition ; see Mid- 
 dleton, Greek Art. p. 387 (ed. Rose), 
 ἀοράτῳ] ‘invisible ;’ see Col. i. 15, 
 and comp. 1 Tim. vi. 16; νῷ μόνῳ 
 σκιαγραφούμενος καὶ τοῦτο λίαν ἀμυ- 
 δρῶς καὶ μετρίως, Greg. Naz. Orat. 
 XXXVIII. 11 (a noble passage), p. 615 D 
 (ed. Morell). μόνῳ Θεῷ] ‘ only 
 God ;’ comp. ch, vi. 15, 6 μακάριος καὶ 
 μόνος δυνάστης. It is not of serious 
 importance whether, with Pseud.- 
 Ambrose in loc., we refer this appel- 
 lation to the First Person (‘particula 
 μόνῳ extraneas tantum personas, non 
 autem divinas excludit,’ Just., comp. 
 Basil, Hunom. Book tv. ad fin.) or, 
 with Theod. and Greg. Naz. (Orat. 
 ΧΧΧΥ͂Ι. 8, p. 586 8, ed. Morell), to the 
 three Persons of the blessed Trinity. 
 The former seems most probable; 
 
 comp. John xvii. 3. The read- 
 ing of the text, a ‘magnifica lectio,’ 
 as Bengel truly calls it, is supported 
 by such preponderating authority 
 [ADIFGN! opp. to KLN4] that it 
 seems difficult to imagine how Leo can 
 still defend the interpolated σοφῷ. 
 τιμὴ Kal δόξα] ‘honour and glory ;’ 
 a combination in doxology only found 
 here and (with the art.) in Rev. v. 13, 
 comp. iv.g sq. St Paul’s usual for- 
 mula is δόξα alone, with the art.: see 
 notes on Gal. i. 5. 
 
 εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας κ. τ. A.] ‘to the ages of 
 the ages, 1.6. ‘for all eternity ;’ see 
 notes on Gal. 1. 5. 
 
 18. Ταύτην τὴν παραγγελίαν] 
 ‘This command ;’ τί δὲ παραγγέλλεις, 
 εἰπέ; ἵνα στρατεύῃ κ.τ.λ., Chrys. The 
 reference of these words has been very 
 differently explained: they have been 
 referred (a) directly to παραγγείλῃς, 
 ver. 3, Calv., Est., Mack; (Ὁ) to παρ- 
 ayyeNlas, ver. 5, Beng.; (6) to m- 
 στὸς ὁ λόγος x.T.d., Peile; (d) to wa 
 otpar., Chrys., De Wette, al., comp. 
 John xiii. 34. The objection to (a) 
 lies in the fact that in ver. 3 the 
 mapayy. is defined and done with ; 
 to (b) that the purport of the rapayy. 
 is not defined, but onlyits aim stated ; 
 and to both that the length of the 
 digression, and the distance of the 
 apodosis from the protasis, is far too 
 great: (c) is obviously untenable as 
 ver. 15 involves no παραγγελία at all. 
 It seems best then (d), with Chrys, 
 and the principal modern expositors, 
 to refer παραγγ. directly to ἵνα orpar., 
 and indirectly and allusively to ver. 
 3 Sq., inasmuch as obedience to the 
 command there given must form a 
 part of the καλὴ στρατεία. This verse 
 
22 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 Α. 
 
 ’ : , 3 4 4 , , 4 
 θεμαί σοι, τέκνον Γιμόθεε, κατὰ τὰς προαγούσας ἐπὶ 
 
 4 , ce ’ , ’ - ‘ ‘4 
 σε προφητείας, ἵνα στρατεύη εν αὐταῖς THY καλὴν στρα- 
 
 thus forms a general and appropriate 
 conclusion ; ver. 3—11 convey the di- 
 rect injunctions ; ver. 12—16 the au- 
 thority of the Apostle; ver. 18 sq. 
 the virtual substance of his previous 
 injunctions expressed in the simplest 
 form. 
 
 παρατίθεμαί σοι] “1 commit to thee, 
 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 
 perhaps felt by observing that the 
 object is represented, as it were, as 
 emanating from, or belonging to, the 
 subject of the verb; see Kriiger, 
 Sprachl. § 52. 8. 6, p. 365, and comp. 
 Donalds, Gr. § 432. 2. bb. 
 
 κατὰ τὰς kK.t.A.] ‘in accordance with 
 the forerunning prophecies about thee ;’ 
 defining clause apparently intended to 
 add weight tothe Apostle’s exhortation 
 (ἀφορῶν πρὸς éxelvas...rapawa σοι, 
 Theoph.), and to suggest to Timothy 
 an additional ground of obligation ; 
 ἐκείνων ἄκουσον, ἐκείναις πείθου...... 
 ἐκεῖναί σε εἵλοντο εἰς ὃ εἵλοντό σε, 
 Chrys. There 15 thus no necessity for 
 here assuming an hyperbaton, scil. 
 ἵνα στρατεύῃ κατὰ τὰς κιτ.λ. (Ccum., 
 Moller), a very forced and untenable 
 construction. προαγούσας] 
 ‘forerunning,’ ‘ precursory ;’ see Heb. 
 vii. 18, προαγούσης ἐντολῆς. The 
 order of the words might seem to 
 imply the connexion of ἐπὶ σὲ with 
 mpoayovoas (‘leading the way to thee, 
 pointing to thee as their object,’ 
 Matth.), but as this involves a modi- 
 fication of the simple meaning of 
 mpoayw, and also (see below) of προφη- 
 τεῖαι as well, it is best, with De W., 
 Huther, and most modern commenta- 
 tors, to connect ἐπὶ σὲ with προφη- 
 
 τείας. It isnot however necessary to 
 
 give mpo-ayovcas a purely temporal 
 sense (Syr.); the local or quasi-local 
 meaning which nearly always marks 
 the word in the N.T. may be fully re- 
 tained; the prophecies went forward, 
 as it were, the heralds and avant- 
 couriers of the actions which they 
 foretold ; compare ch. v. 24. 
 
 ἔπὶ σέ] ‘upon thee,’ or, more in ac- 
 cordance with our idiom, ‘ concerning 
 thee,’ ‘respecting thee,’ Peile. ᾿Επὶ 
 marks the ethical direction, which, as 
 it were, the prophecies took (see 
 Winer, Gr. § 49. 1, p. 362), and, with 
 its proper concomitant idea of ‘ ulti- 
 mate super-position,’ points to the ob- 
 ject on whom they came down (from 
 above) and rested ; see Donalds. Gr. 
 § 483,and compare the exx.in Kriiger, 
 Sprachl. § 68. 42. 1, p. 543. 
 
 τὰς προφητείας] ‘the prophecies :’ not 
 ‘the premonitions of the Holy Spirit ’ 
 (κατὰ θείαν ἀποκάλυψιν τὴν χειροτο- 
 νίαν ἐδέξω, Theod.) which led to the 
 ordination of Timothy (Hamm. inloc., 
 Thorndike, Gov, of Churches, ch, tv. 
 8,—an interpretation which involves 
 a modification of the meaning of προ- 
 φητεία 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 per- 
 haps conversion, Fell, comp. Theoph.), 
 foretelling his future zeal and success 
 in the promulgation of the Gospel. 
 The plwral may point to prophecies 
 uttered at his circumcision and other 
 chief events of his spiritual life 
 (Theoph.), or, more probably, to the 
 several sources (the presbyters per- 
 haps) from whence they proceeded at 
 his ordination ; comp. ch. iv. 14, vi. 
 12. ἵνα στρατεύῃ] ‘ that 
 
 
 
Ee10},.30. 23 
 
 , x , % 5 A , ae. 9 
 TELQV, EXWY πιστίν Και ἀγαθὴν συνείδησιν, HV τινες aTw- IQ 
 
 , 4 A , , 
 σάμενοι TEDL THY πίστιν ἐναυάγησαν. 
 
 thou mayest war,’ &c. In this use of 
 ἵνα after verbs implying ‘ command,’ 
 ‘exhortation,’ @c., the subjunctive 
 clause is not a mere circumlocution 
 for a simple infinitive, but serves to 
 mark the purpose contemplated by the 
 command as well as the immediate 
 subject of it; comp. Luke x. 40, al., 
 and see Winer, Gr. ὃ 44. 8, p. 299 54. 
 On the uses of ἵνα in the N.T. see 
 notes on Eph. i. 17. 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. @cum.), or 
 with κατά (Kypke, Obs. Vol. τι. p. 351, 
 and virtually Huther), but, in accord- 
 ance with the image, marks, as it 
 were, the armour im which Timothy 
 was to wage his spiritual warfare; so 
 Mack, Matth., and Winer, Gr. § 48. 
 a, p. 346 ; comp, also Green, Gr. p. 289. 
 Huther objects to this as artificial, 
 but surely his own interpretation 
 ‘within, in the bounds of their appli- 
 cation,’ is more open to the charge, 
 and scarcely so intelligible. 
 στρατείαν] ‘warfare;’ not μάχην, 
 Theod. (‘Kampf,’ De W.), but more 
 inclusively, ‘militiam,’ Vulg., Clarom., 
 —the service of a στρατιώτης in allits 
 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. 201, and for 
 a correct valuation of the supposed 
 rhetorical force, the excellent article 
 by Lobeck, Paralipom. Ὁ. 301 sq. 
 
 19. ἔχων] ‘having,’ Hamm.; not 
 ‘retinens’ (Beza) as a shield or weapon 
 
 io 9 
 ὦν ἐστιν Ὑμέ- 20 
 
 (Mack, Matth.), in reference to the 
 preceding metaphor,—this would have 
 been expressed by a more precise 
 word, 8.9. ἀναλαβών, Eph. vi. 16,— 
 or ‘innitens’ as a ship on an anchor 
 (Priczus), in reference to the succeed- 
 ing metaphor, but simply, ‘ habens,’ 
 5011, as an inward and subjective 
 possession: so Syr., where the verb 
 is simply replaced by the prep. 2 (in, 
 with) ; see also Meyer on Rom. xv. 4. 
 ἀγαθὴν ovveld.] ‘a good conscience ;’ 
 see notes on ver. 5 supra. ἥν] 
 Se. ἀγαθὴν συνείδησιν. ἀπωσά- 
 μενοι] " having thrust away ; ἀπώσατο" 
 μακρὰν 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 nature. 
 ᾿Απώσατο (appy. 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, Alea. ; 
 ἐλπίδα, Jer. ii. 36; νόμον, Jer. vi. το; 
 ἑορτάς, Amos y. 21), as a transl. of 
 ὌΝ. The objection of Schleierm, 
 (ib. x Tim. p. 36) that St Paul else- 
 where uses this word properly (Rom. 
 xi. 1, 2) as in reference to something 
 external, not internal, is pointless; 
 Rom. l. 6. is a quotation. Conscience 
 is here suitably represented as, so to 
 say, 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 ἐναυάγ.] ‘made ship- 
 wreck concerning, in the matter of, the 
 
 faith :’ result of the deliberate rejec- 
 
 tion of the second of the two things 
 specified in the preceding clause ; the 
 rejection of the second involves the 
 
24 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 A. 
 
 vatos καὶ ᾿Αλέξανδρος, ots παρέδωκα τῷ Σατανᾷ ἵνα 
 
 παιδευθῶσιν μὴ βλασφημεῖν. 
 
 shipwreck of the first. Loesner com- 
 pares Philo, de Somn. p. 1128 D [it. 
 § 21, Vol. 1. p. 678, ed. Mang. ], vava- 
 ynoavres ἢ περὶ γλῶτταν ἄθυρον, ἢ 
 περὶ γαστέρα ἄπληστον, ἢ περὶ τὴν τῶν 
 ὑπογαστρίων ἀκράτορα λαγνείαν. There 
 is however some difference in the use 
 of the prep. In Philo 7. c. 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. 
 § 49. i, p. 361, Donalds. Gr. § 482. ¢: 
 in the present case merely the object 
 in reference to which it happened, 
 perhaps more usually expressed by the 
 gen., see Rost τι. Palm, Lez, s. v. περί, 
 1. i.e, Vol. 11. 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 l.c. (the rock on 
 which they split,—comp. Soph. Frag. 
 147, περὶ δ᾽ ἐμῷ κάρᾳ κατάγνυται τὸ τεῦ- 
 xos), but certainly not in the present 
 passage. Kypke (Obs. Vol. τι. p. 353) 
 cites a somewhat different use, περὶ 
 τὴν Κώαν θάλασσαν ναναγῆσαι, Diog. 
 Laert. 1. 1. 7, where the acc. seems 
 to mark the area where the disaster 
 took place, see Rost u. Palm, Lez. s.y. 
 περί, 111. 2, Vol. 11, p. 825. 
 
 20. ‘Ypévatos] There does not seem 
 any sufficient ground for denying the 
 identity of Hymenzus with the here- 
 tic of that name in 2 Tim. ii. 17. 
 Mosheim (de Rebus, &c., p. 117 8q.) 
 urges the comparatively milder terms 
 in which Hymenrus is spoken of, 
 
 2 Tim. l.c.; the one he says was the 
 ‘open enemy,’ the other ‘ the insidious 
 corrupter’ of Christianity. On com- 
 paring however the two passages, it 
 will be seen that the language and 
 even structure is far too similar to 
 render any such distinction either 
 plausible or probable. The only dif- 
 ferenceis, that here the Apostle notices 
 the fact of his excommunication, there 
 his fundamental error; that error 
 however was a βέβηλος κενοφωνία, 
 2 Tim. ii. 16. This certainly affords 
 a hint (somewhat too summarily repu- 
 diated by Wieseler, Chronol. p. 314) 
 in favour of the late date of this 
 epistle ; see notes on ver. 3. 
 
 ᾿Αλέξανδρος] It is more difficult to 
 decide whether this person is identical 
 (a) with Alexander ὁ χαλκεύς, 2 Tim. 
 iv. 14, or (Ὁ) with Alexander, Acts 
 xix. 33, or (as seems most probable) 
 different from either, The addition of 
 ὁ χαλκεὺς 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 (Ὁ) is that the 
 Alexander mentioned in Acts 1. c. was 
 probably a Christian; see Meyer in 
 loc., and Wieseler, Chronol. p. 56. 
 The commonness of the names makes 
 any historical or chronological infer- 
 ences very precarious ; see Neander, 
 Planting, Vol. 1. p. 347, note (Bohn). 
 παρέδωκα τῷ Σατανᾷ] “1 delivered 
 over to Satan,’ ‘ tradidiSatane,’ Vulg., 
 —scil. at some former period. The 
 exact meaning of this formula has 
 been much discussed. Does it mean 
 (a) simply excommunication? Theod. 
 in loc, and on 1 Cor. Υ. 5, Theoph. 
 in loc., Balsamon, on Can. vi. 
 
 
 
car 
 
 T exhort that prayers 
 be offered for all, for 
 
 this is acceptable to ¢7 NE 
 God, who willeth the εἶσθαι δεήσεις, 
 
 salvation of all, and whose Gospel I preach. 
 
 (Basilii), al. ; comp. J. Johnson, Unbl. 
 Sacr. ch. 4, Vol. 11. p. 233 (A.-C. 
 Libr.); or (0) simply supernatural 
 infliction of corporeal suffering, Wolf 
 on Cor, l.c., and appy. Chrys., who 
 adduces 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. v. 2, 
 where simple exclusion from the 
 Church is denoted by αἴρειν ἐκ μέσου 
 ὑμῶν. We conclude then with Water- 
 land, that the ‘ delivering over to Satan’ 
 was aform of Christian excommunica- 
 tion, declaring the person to be re- 
 duced to the state of a heathen, ac- 
 companied with the authoritative in- 
 fliction of bodily disease or death; on 
 Fundamentals, ch. 4, Vol. 111. p. 460. 
 The patristic views will be found in 
 Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. 11. p. 940, and 
 Petavius, Theol. Dogm. Vol. Iv. p. 108. 
 In this fearful formula, the offender is 
 given over τῷ arava, to the Evil 
 One in his most distinct personality; 
 comp, notes on Eph. iv. 27. 
 παιδευθῶσιν] ‘be disciplined,’ Hamm. ; 
 ‘taught by punishment,’ Conyb. The 
 true Christian meaning of παιδεύειν, 
 ‘per molestias erudire,’ is here dis- 
 tinctly apparent; see Trench, Synon. 
 § 32, and notes on Eph. vi. 4. 
 
 CuartTer II. τ. Παρακαλῶ οὖν] “1 
 exhort, then;’? ‘in pursuance of my 
 general admonition (ch. i. 18) I pro- 
 ceed to special details.’ It is singular 
 that Schleierm., and after him De W., 
 should find here no logical connexion, 
 when really the sequence of thought 
 seems so easy and natural, and has 
 been so fairly explained by several 
 older (comp, Corn. a Lap.), and most 
 
 i? 25 
 
 Παρακαλῶ οὖν πρῶτον πάντων ποι- II. 
 
 if ᾽ , 3 
 προσεύχας, ἐντεύξεις, ευ- 
 
 modern expositors. In ch. i. 18, the 
 Apostle gives Timothy a commission 
 in general terms, ἵνα στρατεύῃ K.T.r. 
 This, after the very slight digression 
 in ver. 19, 20, he proceeds to unfold 
 in particulars, the first and most im- 
 portant 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 revo- 
 cat,’ Klotz; ‘continuation and retro- 
 spect,’ Donalds. Gr. § 604), and could 
 not properly be replaced by any other 
 particle; see Klotz, Devar. Vol. u. 
 p- 717- For the use of this and 
 similar particles, the student is espe- 
 cially referred to Euclid (e.g. Book 
 I. 4, 5): the careful perusal in the ori- 
 ginal language of three or four leading 
 propp. will give him more exact views 
 of the real force of dpa, οὖν k.T.r. 
 than he could readily acquire in any 
 other way. πρῶτον πάντων] 
 ‘first of all,’ ‘imprimis;’ not priority 
 in point of time, se. ἐν τῇ λατρείᾳ TH 
 καθημερινῇ, Chrys. (comp, Conyb. and 
 Hows.), ‘diluculo,” Erasm.,—but of 
 dignity; see Bull, Serm. x11. p. 243 
 (Oxf. 1844), and comp. Matt. vi. 33. 
 The adverb is thus less naturally con- 
 nected with ποιεῖσθαι (Auth.) than 
 with the leading word παρακαλῶ 
 (Syr.) The combination πρῶτον πάν- 
 τῶν only occurs in the N.T. in this 
 place.. δεήσεις K.T.A.] ‘petitions, 
 prayers, supplications, thanksgivings:” 
 see Trench, Synon. Part 1. § 1. 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 
 cumulatively denote prayer. On the 
 other hand several special distinctions 
 (comp. Theod, in loc., Greg. Naz. 
 
20 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 Ἐπ (ἢ, , , , aes! , 4 
 2 χαριστιας, ὑπερ TavTwy ἀνθρώπων, ὑπερ βασιλέων και 
 
 , - ᾽ ΄- v ” ὦ». , 
 πάντων τῶν ἐν UTEPOX) ὄντων, ἵνα ἤρεμον καὶ ἡσύχιον 
 
 Carm. 15, Vol. 11. p. 200) and appli- 
 cations (August. Epist. urx. [cxurx, 
 12—16]) 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 (évrvyxdyw) suggests, prayer 
 in its most individual and urgent form 
 (ἐντ. καὶ éxBonoes, Philo, Quod Det. 
 Pot. § 25, Vol. 1. p. 209), prayer in 
 which God is, as it were, sought in 
 audience (Polyb. Hist. v. 35. 4, 111. 
 15. 4), and personally approached; 
 comp. Origen, de Orat. ὃ 44, ἐντεύξεις 
 τὰς ὑπὸ τοῦ παῤῥησίαν τινὰ πλείονα 
 ἔχοντος. Thus then, as Huth. ob- 
 serves, the first term marks the idea 
 of our insufficiency [de?, comp. Beng. ], 
 the second that of devotion, the third 
 that of childlike confidence. The 
 ordinary translation, ‘intercessions,’ 
 as Auth., Alf., al. (comp. Schoettg. in 
 loc.), too much restricts ἔντευξις, as it 
 does not per se imply any reference to 
 others,—the meaning we now usually 
 associate with the above translation 
 (but see Jer. xxvii. 18; xxxvi. 25): 
 see ch. iv. 5, where such a meaning 
 would be inappropriate, and comp. 
 Rom. viii. 27, 34, xi. 2, Heb. vii. 25, 
 where the preposition, ὑπὲρ or κατά, 
 marks the reference and direction of 
 the prayer ; seeespecially theexamples 
 in Raphel, Annot. Vol. 11. p. 567 sq., 
 who has very copiously illustrated this 
 word. εὐχαριστίας]  thanks- 
 givings:’ thanksgiving was to be the 
 perpetual concomitant of prayer; see 
 esp. Phil. iv. 6, Col. iv. 2; Justin M. 
 Apol. 1. 13, 67, al., and comp. Harless, 
 Ethik, § 31... It is scarcely neces- 
 
 sary to say that the special translation 
 ‘eucharists’ (J. Johnson, Unbl. Sacr. 
 1. 2, Vol. m. p. 66, A.-C. Libr.) is 
 wholly untenable. ὑπὲρ πάντων 
 ἀνθρ. is to be connected, not merely 
 with the last, but with all the fore- 
 going substantives; ταῦτα δὲ ποιεῖν 
 ὑπὲρ ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων παρεγγυᾷ, 
 ἐπειδὴ καὶ X. “I. ἦλθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον 
 ἁμαρτωλοὺς σῶσαι, Theod, To en- 
 courage further this universality in 
 prayer (Justin M. Apol. τι. 15), the 
 Apostle proceeds to specify nominatim 
 particular classes for whom it ought 
 to be offered; comp. Chrys. in loc. 
 2. ὑπὲρ βασιλέων] ‘ for kings, — 
 generally, without any special refer- 
 ence to the Roman emperors. It is 
 an instance of the perverted ingenuity 
 of Baur (comp. De W.) to refer the 
 plural to the emperor andhis associate 
 in rule, as they appear in the age of 
 the Antonines; surely this would have 
 been τῶν βασιλέων. On the custom, 
 generally, of praying for kings (Ezra 
 vi. 10 [30], Baruch i. rr), see Joseph. 
 Antiq. XII, 10. 5, Justin, Apol. 1. 17, 
 Tertull. Apologet. cap. 39, and the 
 passages collected by Oitius, Spicil. 
 Ρ. 433- 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. 
 xiii. 1; comp. 2 Mace. iii. τι, ἀνδρὸς 
 ἐν ὑπεροχῇ κειμένου, Polyb. Hist. v. 
 41. 3, Tots ἐν ὑπεροχαῖς οὖσιν. 
 ἵνα ἤρεμον κιτ.λ.} ‘in order that we 
 may pass a quiet and tranquil life? 
 contemplated end and object, not im- 
 port of the intercessory prayer; ὅρα τί 
 φησι, kal πῶς τίθησι τὸ κέρδος ἵνα κἂν 
 
eR 3253. 27 
 
 Bi ὃ , 9 , ΕῚ β Υ̓ \ , A 
 tov εαγωμεν εν πασὴ ευσε ela καὶ σεμνοτῆτι. TOUTO 3 
 
 ε 
 
 οὕτω δέξῃ τὴν παραίνεσιν... ἡ ἐκείνων 
 σωτηρία ἡμῶν ἀμεριμνία ὑπάρχει, 
 Chrys. The prayer has clearly not a 
 purely subjective reference, ‘ that we 
 may lead a life of quietude and sub- 
 mission’ (Mack, comp. Heydenr.), nor 
 again apurely objective reference, ‘that 
 they may thus let us live in quiet,’ 
 but in fact involves both, and has 
 alike a personal and a political appli- 
 cation,—‘that through their good go- 
 vernment 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. Wiesing. in loc. 
 “Hpewos is a late form of adjective 
 derived from the adv. ἠρέμα ; comp. 
 Lucian, Tragod. 209, Eustath. Il. v1. 
 p. 142. 9. Lobeck (Pathol. p. 158) 
 cites a single instance of its usage in 
 early Greek ; Inser. Olbiopol. No. 2059. 
 The correct adjectival form is ἦρε- 
 μαῖος. ἡσύχιον] ‘tranquil ;’ 
 once only again, 1 Pet. ili, 4, τοῦ 
 πραέως Kal ἡσυχίου᾽ πνεύματος. The 
 distinction drawn by Olsh. between 
 ἤρεμος and ἡσύχιος can appy. be sub- 
 stantiated ; the former [connected 
 appy. With Sanscr. ram, ‘rest in a 
 chamber,’—the fundamental idea ac- 
 cording to Pott, Htym. Forsch. Vol. 1. 
 p. 262] seems to denote tranquillity 
 arising from without, ‘quiab aliis non 
 perturbatur,’ Tittmann ; comp. Plato, 
 Def. p. 412 A, ἠρεμία ψυχῆς περὶ τὰ 
 δεινά; Plutarch, Sol. 31, τήν τε χώραν 
 ἐνεργεστέραν καὶ τὴν πόλιν ἠρεμαιοτέραν 
 ἐποίησεν : the latter [connected with 
 ‘AHD-, ἦμαι, Benfey, Wurzellex. Vol. 1. 
 p. 418] tranquillity arising from with- 
 in, 1 Pet. l.c.; comp. Plato, Charm. 
 p. 160 8, ἡσύχιος ὁ σώφρων βίος. So, 
 in effect, Tittmann, except that he 
 assigns to ἡσύχ. more of an active 
 meaning, ‘qui aliis nullas turbas ex- 
 
 citat,’ Synon, 1. p. 65. On the use 
 of βίος for ‘manner of life,’ comp. 
 Trench, Synon. § 27. 
 
 ἐν πάσῃ εὐσεβείᾳ K.t.A.] ‘in all god- 
 liness and gravity ;’ the moral sphere 
 in which they were to move. Mera 
 might have been used with σεμνότης 
 (comp. ch. ili. 4), but would have been 
 less appropriate with εὐσέβεια ; the 
 latter is to be not merely an accom- 
 paniment but a possession (comp. 
 Heb. xi. 2, and Winer, Gr. § 48. a, 
 p- 346), 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 
 Epistles. εὐσέβεια, 
 
 la AN [timor Dei] Syr., is 
 ρ Le 
 
 a word which occurs several times in 
 these Epp. e.g. ch. iii. 16, iv. 7, 8, 
 ΜΠ 2; y ὅτ omen Ὁ. ἥστη, τἴ. iy Mei Te a 
 see also Acts 11]. 12, 2 Pet. i. 3, 6, 7, 
 iii. r1. It properly denotes only ‘ well- 
 directed reverence’ (Trench, Synon. 
 § 48), but in the N.T. is practically 
 the same as θεοσέβεια (ch. 11. 10), and 
 is well defined by Tittmann, Synon. 1. 
 Ῥ. 146, as ‘vis pietatis in ipsa vita 
 vel externa vel interna,’ and more 
 fully but with accuracy by Husebius, 
 Prep. Evang. 1. p. 3, aS ἡ πρὸς τὸν 
 ἕνα καὶ μόνον ὡς ἀληθῶς ὁμολογούμενόν 
 τε καὶ ὄντα Θεὸν ἀνάνευσις, καὶ ἡ κατὰ 
 τοῦτον ζωή. Thus then εὐσέβ. conveys 
 the idea, not of an ‘inward, inherent 
 holiness,’ but, as Alford (on Acts iii. 
 12) correctly observes, of an ‘ opera- 
 tive, cultive piety:’ see other, but less 
 precise, definitions in Suicer, Thesaur. 
 s.v. Vol. 1. p. 1264, and esp. the disceri- 
 minating remarks of Harless, Hthik, 
 § 37- σεμνότης (only here, 
 ch, iii. 4, and Tit. ii. 7) appears to 
 denote that ‘ decency and propriety of 
 deportment,’ ‘morum gravitas et cas- 
 
28 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 ‘4 ‘ 4A Φ Ἁ 2. cal ~ e ΄- 
 γὰρ καλὸν καὶ ἀποδεκτὸν ἐνώπιον τοῦ σωτῆρος HMw 
 
 4 Θεοῦ, ὃς πάντας ἀνθρώπους θέλει σωθῆναι καὶ εἰς ἐπίγνω-- 
 
 titas,’ Estius (‘Ehrbarkeit,’ Luther), 
 which befits the chaste (Chrys.; comp., 
 in an exaggerated sense, Eur. Iph. 
 Aul. 1350), the young (ch. iii. 4), and 
 the earnest (Joseph. Bell, Jud. τι. 8. 
 2), and is, as it were, the appropriate 
 setting of higher graces and virtues ; 
 compare Joseph. Vit. ὃ 49, μετὰ πά- 
 ons σεμν. καὶ πάσης δὲ ἀρετῆς ἐνθάδε 
 πεπολίτευμαι. 
 
 3. τοῦτο] Scil. τὸ εὔχεσθαι ὑπὲρ 
 πάντων : τοῦτο ἀποδέχεται ὁ Θεός, τοῦ- 
 το 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 AN!; 17.67**; 
 Copt., Sahid. (not Pesch., as Bloomf. 
 asserts), evidence however that can- 
 not be regarded as sufficient. The 
 omission very probably arose from a 
 want of perception of the true con- 
 nexion between ver. 1, 2, and 3. 
 καλὸν kal ἀποδεκτόν] Not ‘good and 
 acceptable before ’—Huth., Wiesing., 
 Alf., but ‘good (per se), and accept- 
 able before God,’ Mack, De Wette, 
 al.; καὶ τῇ φύσει ἐστὶ καλόν...καὶ τῷ 
 Θεῷ δὲ ἀποδεκτόν, Theoph. Huther 
 urges against this 2 Cor. viii. 21, προ- 
 νοοῦμεν yap καλὰ οὐ μόνον ἐνώπιον 
 Κυρίου κιτ.λ., but there, as still more 
 clearly in Rom. xii. 17, προνοούμενοι 
 καλὰ [opp. to κακόν, ver. 16] ἐνώπιον 
 πάντων ἀνθρώπων, the latter clause 
 ἐνώπιον x.T.X. is not connected simply 
 with καλά, but with προν. καλά, see 
 Meyer in loc. ’Amodexrds (not ἀπό- 
 dexros, as Lachm., Tisch. ; see Lobeck, 
 Paralip. vu. 11, p. 490) is used in 
 N.T. only here and ch. v. 4; comp. 
 ἀποδοχή, chi. 15. | Tod σωτῆρος 
 K.T.A.] ‘our Saviour, God;’ 566 notes 
 
 on ch, i, 1. The appropriateness of 
 the title is evinced by the following 
 verse. 
 
 4. ὃς πάντας k.T.A.] ‘whose, i.e. 
 seeing His, will is (not ‘whose wishis,’ 
 Peile; comp. notes on ch. vy. 14) that 
 all men should be saved,’ &c.; expla- 
 natory and faintly confirmatory of the 
 preceding assertion; see Col. i. 25. 
 On this slightly causal, or perhaps 
 rather explanatory force of és, see 
 Ellendt, Lex. Soph. 8. v. m1. 3, Vol. 
 II. p. 371, and comp. Bernhardy, Synt. 
 VI. 12. & p. 261 Sq. 
 πάντας] Emphatic, Rom. viii. 32; 
 ‘omnes, etiam non credentes, vult 
 salvari, Beng.; μιμοῦ τὸν Θεόν" el 
 πάντας ἀνθρώπους θέλει σωθῆναι, θέλε 
 καὶ σύ" εἰ δὲ 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 Petavius, Theol. 
 Dogm. Vol. 1. Book x. 1. 2 sq., Vol. 
 v. Book xm. 1. 3, 4, Forbes, In- 
 struct. yi. 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; comp. contr, 
 Winer, Gr. § 18. 4, p. ror) 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 ὁ θάνατος ὁ δεύτερος (Rev. ᾿ 
 xxi. 8): the remarks of Usteri, Lehrb. 
 11. B, p. 352 Sq. are very unsatisfactory. 
 Setting aside all technical, though per- 
 
ΠῚ ἂν ἰδ 29 
 
 σιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν. εἷς γὰρ Θεός, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης Θεοῦ 5 
 
 haps plausible, distinctions between 
 the ‘voluntas antecedens’ and ‘vo- 
 luntas consequens’ of God (Damasc, 
 Orth, Fid. 11. 29), it seems enough to 
 say, that Scripture declares in terms 
 of the greatest latitude (see esp. Ham- 
 mond, Fundamentals, xtv. 2, and 
 comp. Pract. Catech. 11. 2, p. 18, 
 A.-C. Libr.) that God does will the 
 salvation (σωθῆναι not σῶσαι) of all; 
 all are rendered (through Jesus Christ) 
 ‘salvabiles’ and ‘salvandi’ (Barrow, 
 Serm. 72). That some are indisputably 
 not saved (Matt. xxv. 41 sq., Rey. xx. 
 10, 15, Xxii. 15, al.) is not due to any 
 outward circumscription or inefficacy 
 of the Divine θέλημα (Episcop. Inst, 
 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, 111. 2. 1, Vol. 11. Ὁ. 211 
 (Clark). In a word, redemption 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. tv. p. :—97, who in four sermons 
 (71—74) has nearly exhausted the 
 subject. The two further momentous 
 questions connected with this doctrine 
 are fairly stated by Ebrard, Dogmatik, 
 ἃ 557 sq., Vol. 11. p. 689, comp. also 
 Martensen, Dogm. § 219 sq. 
 
 Kal εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν K.T.A.] ‘and come 
 to the (full) knowledge of the truth;’ 
 comp. 2 Tim. ii. 25, iii. 7, Tit. 1. 1: no 
 inversion of clauses, but a further 
 specification of the more immediate 
 object and end; see Winer, Gramm. 
 ὃ ὅτ. 3. obs., p. 488. The σωθῆναι 
 is the ultimate, the els ἐπίγν. ἀληθ. 
 ἐλθεῖν an immediate end leading natu- 
 
 rally and directly to the former, The 
 introduction of this latter moment of 
 thought is suggested by, and suitably 
 precedes, the enunciation of the great 
 truth which is contained in the fol- 
 lowing verse. On ἐπίγνωσις (‘cognitio 
 certa et accurata’) see Trench, Synon. 
 Part τι. § 25, notes on Eph.i.17, and 
 on the omissions of the art. notes 
 on 2 Tim. 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 εἰς 
 αὐτὸν πίστεως, Chrys.; see Reuss, T'héol. 
 ty. 8, Vol. 11. p. 82, <A special trea- 
 tise on this word has been written by 
 Baumann, Strasb. 1838. 
 
 5. εἷς γὰρ Θεός] ‘For there is one 
 God;’ proof of the foregoing expla- 
 natory assertion, the yap having here 
 its simple argumentative force, and 
 connecting this verse, not with ver. 1 
 (Leo, Mack), but with the verse im- 
 mediately preceding. His and πάντας 
 stand thus in correlation ; the wniver- 
 sality of the dispensation is proved 
 by the unity of the Dispenser. The 
 existence of different dispensations for 
 different portions of the human race 
 would seem inconsistent with the 
 conception of one supreme all-ruling 
 Creator; ‘unius Dei una provyidentia;’ 
 comp. Rom. iii. 30, where a similar 
 argument is introduced by the forcible 
 (Hartung, Part. Vol. 1. p. 342) ἐπεί- 
 περ [εἴπερ al.]. εἷς καὶ μεσίτης] 
 ‘one mediator also:’ ὁ ἐν ἑαυτῷ τὰ διε- 
 στῶτα συνάψας, Theod. 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- 
 Athanasian view (so to speak) of the 
 subordination of the Son; T'héol.Chrét. 
 
90 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 6 καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς, ὁ δοὺς ἑαυ- 
 
 ‘ , , a ‘ , ‘ , - “δ᾽ 
 τον ἀντιλυτρον ὑπέρ TAVTWY, TO MapTuplov καίροις ἰδίοις, 
 
 Iv. ro, Vol. 11, p. 102. This is not 
 correct: all that could reasonably be 
 inferred from sucha text as the present 
 is the catholic doctrine of a subordina- 
 tion in respect of office; see Waterland, 
 Second Vind. Vol. τι. p. 400. The 
 position of De W., after Schleierm. 
 (iiber τ 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), isnot entitled to serious attention 
 or confutation. The previous allusion 
 to redemption (ver. 4) and the anti- 
 thesis of the εἷς Θεὸς and πάντ. avOp. 
 suggest the use of a term that best 
 sustains thatrelation: 566 4150 Ebrard, 
 Dogm. § 406, and a good sermon by 
 Beveridge, Serm. Vol. 1. p. 86 sq. 
 (A.-C. Libr.). 
 
 Θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων] ‘of God and men :’ 
 both anarthrous; the former in ac- 
 cordance with its common privilege of 
 rejecting the article (see exx. Winer, 
 Gr. § 19. 1, p- 110), 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 conjunction; see 
 Green, Gr. Iv. 3, p. 181. 
 
 ἄνθρωπος Χ΄.᾽1.] ‘a man Christ Jesus.’ 
 The human nature of Christ is spe- 
 cially mentioned as being the state 
 in which His mediatorial office was 
 visibly performed; ἄνθρωπον δὲ τὸν 
 Χριστὸν ὠνόμασεν ἐπειδὴ μεσίτην ἐκά- 
 λεσεν᾽ ἐπανθρωπήσας γὰρ ἐμεσίτευσεν. 
 Theod. On the duration of Christ's 
 mediation, see Pearson, Creed, Art. v1. 
 Vol. 1. p. 334 (ed. Burton). The omis- 
 sion 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 ἀνθρ. X. “I. with 
 κύριος X. Ἰ.; but the comparison 
 fails, as κύριος has so unequivocally 
 the character of a proper name ; comp. 
 Winer, Gr. 810. 1, p. 113. Ina differ- 
 ent 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 and 
 not any relation in which He stood to 
 that nature, he designedly omits the 
 article. The distinction of Alf. be- 
 tween individual and generic huma- 
 nity seems here out of place, and 
 not involved in the context: contrast 
 Wordsw. in loc., who pertinently cites 
 August. Serm, xxv1. [Vol. v. p. 174, 
 ed. Migne]. 
 
 6. ἀντίλυτρον] ‘ransom;’ the ἀντὶ 
 being here by no means redundant 
 (Schleierm. p. 42, compare Suicer, 
 Thesaur. 8. v. Vol. 1. p. 377), but 
 serving to express the idea of ez- 
 change, ‘permutationem, qua veluti 
 capite caput et vita vitam redemit,’ 
 Just.; comp. ἀντάλλαγμα, Matt. xvi. 
 26, ἀντίψυχον, Ignat. Smyrn. 10, and 
 the valuable remarks on it of Pear- 
 son, Vind. Ign. ch. xv. p. 597 (A.-C. 
 Libr.). In this important word (a 
 ἅπαξ λεγόμ.) the idea of a substitution 
 of Christin our stead cannot be ignored 
 (see, thus far, Reuss, Théol. Chrét. 1v. 
 17, Vol. 11. 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. l.c.) and Eph. v. 2; comp. also 
 Meyer on Rom. ν. 6, and for some 
 calm and clear comments on this 
 ‘satisfactio vicaria,’ Martensen, Dog- 
 
{ΕΣ 91 
 
 5 
 
 εἰς ὃ ἐτέθην ἐγὼ κήρυξ καὶ ἀπόστολος (ἀλήθειαν λέγω, 7 
 
 οὐ ψεύδομαι), διδάσκαλος ἐθνῶν ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀληθείᾳ. 
 
 matik, § 157 sq., 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 reconciled? See M‘Cosh, Divine 
 Gov. Iv. 2.3, p. 475 (4thed.). Water- 
 land’s words are few but very weighty ; 
 on Fundam. Vol. v. p. 82. 
 
 ὑπὲρ πάντων] On the meaning of ὑπὲρ 
 in dogmatical passages, see notes on 
 Gal. ili. 13. Here ὑπὲρ (‘in commo- 
 dum’) seems to point to the benefit 
 conferred by Christ upon us, ἀντὶ (ἀντί- 
 Aurpov) to His substitution of Himself 
 in our place. τὸ μαρτύ- 
 ριον K.T.A.] ‘the (import of the) testi- 
 mony (to be set forth) in its proper sea- 
 
 sons.” σι} 5159 2213 12620100 
 
 [testimonium quod venit in tempore 
 suo] Syr., not ‘the proof of it,’ dc., 
 Middleton, Art. p. 389. Some little 
 difficulty has been felt in these words, 
 owing to the true nature of the appo- 
 sition not having been recognised. 
 Τὸ μαρτύριον is an accusative in appo- 
 sition to the preceding sentence, not 
 to ἀντίλυτρον (ὅτι ἀντίλυτρον τὸ μαρτ. 
 λέγω, τούτεστι τὸ πάθος, Theoph. 2), 
 but to ὁ δοὺς... πάντων, scil. ‘ que res 
 (nempe quod sua ipsius morte omnes 
 homines redemisset, Luke xxiv. 46, 
 47) testimonii suo tempore (ab Aposto- 
 lis) dicendi argumentum esset,’ Fritz. 
 Rom. xii. 1, Vol. 111. p. 12, where this 
 passage is very carefully investigated ; 
 see also Winer, Gr. § 59. 9, Pp. 472; 
 and Scholef. Hints, p. 118. Thus 
 there is no reason whatever for modi- 
 fying the text (Liicke, Stud. wu. Krit. 
 for 1836, p. 651 sq.); the insertion of 
 οὗ before τὸ μαρτ., with D'FG al., and 
 of ἐδόθη after ἰδίοις with D!FG are 
 incorrect (compare Fritz.) explanatory 
 
 additions, andthe omission of τὸ μαρτ. 
 in A is due apparently to accident. 
 The reading of δὲ} is καὶ apr. 
 καιροῖς ἰδίοις] ‘in its own seasons ;’ 
 scil. τοῖς προσήκουσι, Chrys. It is 
 singular that Liicke should have felt 
 any difficulty in this formula; comp. 
 Gal. vi. 9, and somewhat similarly 
 Polybs iste 1: 50: τὸ. ΣΎΓΗ 94.0 Or 
 ‘Tempus testimonio de Christi morte 
 expiatorié hominibus ab Apostolis di- 
 cendo idoneum, illud tempus est quod 
 a Spiritus Sanctiadventuad Apostolos 
 (Acts i. 8) usque ad solemnem Christi 
 reditum de ccelo (2 Thess. i. 10) labi- 
 tur,’ Fritz. 1. c. The dative then is 
 not a quasi dat. commodi (comp. 
 Scholef., Peile), but the dat. of the time 
 wherein the action takes place; comp. 
 Rom. xvi. 25, χρόνοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγη- 
 μένου, and see exx. in Winer, Gr. § 31. 
 9, Ῥ- 195. This form of the temporal 
 dative thus approximates to the ordi- 
 nary use of the temporal gen. (‘period 
 within which; comp. Donalds. Gr. 
 § 451. ff, Kriiger, Sprachl.§ 47.2), and 
 is more correctly preceded by ἐν; see 
 Kriiger, Sprachl. § 48. 2, Wannowski, 
 Constr. Abs. 11. 1, Ὁ. 88. The tem- 
 poral gen., except in a few familiar 
 forms, is rare in the N, T. 
 
 7. εἰς 6] ‘for which,’ 5611. paprv- 
 ριον; ‘cui testimonio dicendo consti- 
 tutus sum preco,’ Fritz. Rom. xii. 1, 
 Vol. 111. p. 15, note. 
 κήρυξ] ‘a herald,’ ‘ preco solennis, a 
 Deo missus,’ Beng.; only here, 2 Tim. 
 i. 11, and 2 Pet. ii. 5. There is no 
 necessity in the present case for modi- 
 fying (‘ preedicator,’ Vulg.) the primary 
 meaning of the word; comp. Kcclus. 
 XX. 15, ἀνοίξει TO στόμα αὐτοῦ ὡς κή- 
 ρυξ, and see esp. 1 Cor, ix. 27, where 
 κηρύσσειν is used of the herald of the 
 games, in accordance with the tenor 
 
92 
 
 ὃ Βούλομαι οὖν προσεύχεσθαι τοὺς 
 
 » ᾽ ‘ , ’ , εκ 
 ἄνδρας εν παντὶ τόοπῷ επαιροντας οσιοὺυς 
 
 of the foregoing verses; see Meyer in 
 loc. ἀπόστολος] ‘an Apostle,’ 
 in the higher sense of the word; μέγα 
 τὸ Tov ἀποστόλου ἀξίωμα, Kal διὰ τοῦτο 
 ἀντιποιεῖται τούτου, Theoph. : see notes 
 on Gal. i, 1. ἀλήθειαν K.T.A.] 
 41 say the truth, I lie not :’ comp. 
 Rom. ix. 1. De Wette seems clearly 
 right in maintaining that this protes- 
 tation refers to the preceding words ; 
 the asseveration with regard to his 
 apostleship was of coursenotintended 
 for Timothy, but for the false teachers 
 who doubted his apostolical authority. 
 The third official designation, διδάσκ. 
 ἐθνῶν, then follows with full climactic 
 force. To assert that ἀλήθ. x.7.d. is 
 a phrase which the Apostle used in 
 his later years ‘with less force and 
 relevance than he hadoncedone’ (Alf.) 
 appears questionable and precarious. 
 ἐν πίστει K.7.A.] ‘in faith and truth;’ 
 the spheres in which the Apostle per- 
 formed his mission. The two sub- 
 stantives are commonly taken either 
 both with objective reference, scil. ἐν 
 πίστει ἀληθινῇ,---καὶ being explana- 
 tory, Mack (comp. Peile, who inappo- 
 sitely cites 2 Thess. ii. 13), or both 
 with subjective reference, ‘ faithfully 
 and truly’ (ἐν rior. x. ἀλ.Ξε- πιστὸς Kal 
 ἀληθινός), Grinf., Leo [mis-cited by De 
 W.j]. It seems however more simple 
 to refer πίστις to the subjective faith 
 of the Apostle, a\#@. to the objective 
 truth of the doctrine he delivered; 
 ‘quidquid fides docet necessario est 
 verum,’ Justin. ᾿Αλήθεια logically 
 follows πίστις, for, as the same expo- 
 sitor remarks, ‘hee ad illam aditum 
 recludit ;? comp. John viii. 31, 32. 
 
 8. Βούλομαι οὖν] “1 desire then: 
 ‘hoe verbo exprimitur auctoritas apo- 
 stolica; cap. v. 14,’ Beng. In βούλομαι 
 the active wish is implied; it is no 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOOEON A. 
 
 I desire that the men 
 pray reverently, and 
 that the women dress 
 and comport them- 
 selves with modesty. 
 mere willingness or acquiescence. On 
 the distinction between βούλομαι and 
 θέλω, see below on chap. y. 14, and 
 comp. notes on Eph. i. 11, and espe- 
 cially the clear and satisfactory dis- 
 cussion of Donaldson, Cratyl. ὃ 463; 
 p- 694 sq. (ed. 3). οὖν] Not 
 simply illative and in reference to 
 ver. 7 (Calv.), but retrospective and 
 resumptive,—recapitulating, and at 
 the same time expanding, the desire 
 expressed in yer. 1; ‘in pursuance 
 then of my general exhortation, I 
 desire.’ The proper collective force of 
 οὖν is thus not wholly lost: on the 
 resumptive use, see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 
 τι. p. 718, and notes on Gal. ili. 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 
 ἀνδρας is thus in antithesis to γυναῖ- 
 kas, ver. 9, and marks, though here 
 not with any special force, but rather 
 allusively, the fact that the conduct- 
 ing of the public prayers more par- 
 ticularly belonged to the men; comp. 
 ver. 12, 1 Cor. xi. 4, 5. Had the 
 Apostlesaid πάντας, it would not have 
 seemed so consistent with his subse- 
 quent specific direction. 
 
 ἐν παντὶ 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 παντὶ τόπῳ might 
 have been referred to the indifferency 
 of place in regard to prayer; ‘omnis 
 locus oratorium est,’ August.; comp. 
 Schoettg. Hor. Hebr. Vol. τι. p. 865. 
 This however is not conveyed by the 
 present words. ‘There is also no po- 
 
DS +8; οὶ 33 
 
 χεῖρας χωρὶς ὀργῆς καὶ διαλογισμοῦ: ὡσαύτως καὶ γυ- 0 
 
 8. διαλογισμοῦ] So ADKLN?; Aug., Vulg., and many Vv.; Origen (3), 
 Chrys., Theod. (text), al. (Rec., Griesb., Matth., Scholz, Lachm., Huther, Alf., 
 Wordsw.). The plural διαλογισμῶν is adopted by Tisch. with FGN*; 17.67**. 
 73. 8o[MSS. that are asserted commonly to accord with B], and many others; 
 Boern., Copt., Syr. (both); Origen (4), Euseb., Basil, Theod., al. 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 ὀργῆς, 
 
 we retain the reading of the Received Text. 
 
 lemical reference to the limitation of 
 public worship among the Jews to the 
 temple (Chrys., Wolf),— a fact more- 
 over which is not historically true ; 
 comp. Est. in loc. 
 
 ἐπαίροντας «.7.A.] ‘lifting up holy 
 hands ;’ participial clause, of manner 
 or accessories (comp, Jelf, Gr. § 698, 
 Winer, Gr. § 45. 2, p. 307), defining 
 both the proper bodily gesture and 
 the spiritual qualifications required in 
 prayer. The Christian, as well as 
 Pagan (Virg. dn. τ. 93) and Jewish 
 (Psalm xxviii, 2) custom of raising 
 aloft the hands in prayer, is illustrated 
 by Suicer, Thesaur, s.v. εὐχή, Vol. 
 I. p. 1276, Bingham, Antiq. x11. 8. 
 1o. Itwas, asit were, an oblation to 
 God of the instruments of our neces- 
 sities, Chrys. in Psalm. exl. Vol. v. p. 
 431 (ed. Bened.). The folding together 
 of the hands in prayer has been 
 shown to be of Indo-Germanic origin ; 
 see Stud. κι, Krit. for 1853, p. go, and 
 Vierordt’s special treatise on the sub- 
 ject, Carlsr. 1851. ὁσίους] 
 ‘holy ;’ opp. to βέβηλοι χεῖρες, 2 Macc. 
 vy. τό. It is singular that Winer (Gr. 
 § 11. 1, p. 64) should suggest the pos- 
 sibility of so awkward a connexion 
 as ὁσίους (‘religione perfusos,’ Fritz.) 
 with ἐπαίρ., and still more so that 
 Fritzsche (Rom. Vol. 111. p. 1) should 
 actually adopt it, when the common 
 Attic use of adjectives in -.os, &c. 
 (Elmsl. Eur. Heracl. 245) with only 
 
 two terminations is so distinctly found 
 in the N.T. (ver. 9; see Winer l. c.), 
 and gives so good a sense. Contrary 
 instances of similar ‘adjectiva minus 
 mobilia’ are collected by Lobeck, 
 Phryn, p. 106. Wolf cites Demosth. 
 Mid. 531, ὁσίας δεξιὰς.. ἀνίσχοντες, but 
 the right reading 15 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. 1 Cor. 20, 
 ἁγνὰς καὶ ἀμιάντους χεῖρας αἴροντες, 
 and exx. in Suicer, Thesaur. 5.0. εὐχή. 
 The first term perhaps denotesfreedom 
 from (inward) impurity ; the second, 
 from stain (outwardly contracted) or 
 pollution; the third, from alien ad- 
 mixture: see Tittmann, Synon. I. p. 
 26 sq., and on ὅσιος, ἁγνός, Trench, 
 Synon. Part τι. § 38. χωρὶς 
 ὀργῆς K.T.A.] ‘without (or apart from) 
 wrath and doubting,’ Auth. 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 comment- 
 ators except Meyer) unconfirmed by 
 good lexical authority. The explan- 
 ation of Chrys. and the Greek expo- 
 sitors, ἀμφιβολία (χωρὶς...διαλ. Ξε πισ- 
 τεύων ὅτιλήψῃ, Theod.), ‘hesitationes,’ 
 
 o ee vy 
 
 Vulg. in Phil. Lc, ἰδῶ υδο 
 
 [cogitationes] Syr., ‘ tveiflein,’ Goth., 
 D 
 
94 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 Α. 
 
 - ’ a Ud 4 id ~ 4 , 
 ναικας ἐν καταστολῇ κοσμίῳ μετα GLOOUS Και σωφροσύ- 
 
 is perfectly satisfactory, and in accord- 
 ance with the proper meaning of the 
 word; comp. Plato, Avioch. p. 367 4, 
 φροντίδες... καὶ διαλογισμοί, and Clem. 
 Rom. 1 Cor, 21, where it is in con- 
 nexion with ἐννοιῶν ; so also Clem. 
 Alex. Strom. tv. 17, quoting from 
 Clem. Rom. On the alleged distinc- 
 tion between χωρὶς and ἄνευ, see notes 
 on Eph. li. 12. 
 
 9. ὡσαύτως κ.τ.λ.7 ‘(I desire) like- 
 wise that women also, in seemly guise, 
 with shamefastness and discretion, do 
 adorn themselves,’ &e. Omitting all 
 evasive and virtually participial (‘or- 
 nantes se,’ Vulg.) translations (comp. 
 Conyb.) of the plain infin. κοσμεῖν, 
 we have two constructions; we may 
 either supply (a) merely βούλομαι, the 
 infin. κοσμεῖν being simply dependent 
 an the supplied verb; or (b) βούλομαι 
 προσεύχεσθαι, the infinitival clause 
 κοσμεῖν k.T.d., being regarded as added 
 ‘per asyndeton’ (Mack), or with an 
 explanatory force (comp. DeW.). The 
 main objection to (a) is the less special 
 meaning that must be assigned to 
 ὡσαύτως; but comp. Tit. 11. 3, and 
 appy. Rom. viil. 26, where ὡσαύτως 
 introduces a statement co-ordinate 
 with, but not purely similar to, what 
 precedes ; see also 2 Macc. ii. 12. The 
 objection to (Ὁ) is the singularly uncon- 
 nected position of κοσμεῖν : this is far 
 less easy to surmount, for in all the 
 instances hitherto adduced of uncon- 
 nected infinitives (ch. v. 14, vi. 18, Tit. 
 iii, 1) the verbs all relate to the same 
 subject, and the construction is easy 
 and obyious. It seems best then to 
 adopt (a), and to find the force of 
 ὡσαύτως in the continued but implied 
 (ver. 11) reference to public prayers ; 
 see Bp. Moller in loc. Kal moreover 
 has thus its full and proper ascensive 
 force: the women were not mere 
 
 supernumeraries; they also had 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, 3, ἐν καταστήματι 
 ἱεροπρεπεῖς, and see notes in loc.; not 
 to be connected directly with κοσμεῖν, 
 but forming with μετὰ σωῴφροσ. k.T.d. 
 a kind of adjectival predication to be 
 appended to γυναῖκας ; comp. Peile in 
 loc., and see Matth. vi. 29, Tit. i. 6. 
 Καταστολὴ is not simply ‘dress’ (Lid- 
 dell and Scott, Lex. s.v., Huther, al.), 
 a meaning for which there is not satis- 
 factory authority, but ‘ deportment,’ 
 as exhibited externally, whether in 
 look, manner, or dress ; see Rost ἃ. 
 Palm, Lez. 8.0. Vol. 1. p. 1655, and 
 comp. Joseph. Bell. Jud. τι. 8. 4, 
 καταστολὴ Kal σχῆμα σώματος, and 
 esp. Hippocr. de Dec. Habitu, 1. 26, 
 where καταστολὴ is associated with 
 καθέδρα and περιστολή, thus appy. 
 conveying the idea of something out- 
 wardly cognizable, —external appear- 
 ance as principally exhibited in dress; 
 
 comp. Syr. laos | Welton] Es 
 Lean; [in σχήματι casto vesti- 
 
 tis]: ‘ guise’ thus perhaps approaches 
 most nearly to the idea which the 
 Apostle intended to convey. We 
 cannot (with De W.) cite the Vulg. 
 ‘habitu,’ as the following epithet (or- 
 nato) seems to show that the translator 
 referred it more definitely to ‘ apparel.’ 
 It would seem then not improbable 
 that the glosses of Hesychius (καταστ." 
 περιβολήν) and Suidas (καταστ." στο- 
 
ΤΠ To. 
 
 90 
 
 a a «ἃ 
 νης κοσμεῖν ἑαυτάς, μὴ ἐν πλέγμασιν καὶ χρυσῷ ἢ Map- 
 
 “- ἊΝ 9 
 yapiras ἢ ἱματισμῷ πολυτελεῖ, ἀλλ ὃ πρέπει γυναιξὶν Τὸ 
 
 ἐπαγγελλομέναις θεοσέβειαν, δ ἔργων ἀγαθῶν. 
 
 λήν), and the use in later writers, e.g. 
 Basil (see Suicer, Thesawr, s.v. Vol. 11. 
 p. 65), were suggested by a doubtful 
 interpretation of this passage. 
 κοσμίῳ] Only here and ch. iii. 2, and 
 with the meaning, ‘seemly,’ ‘becoming,’ 
 ‘orderly,’ (comp. Goth. ‘hrainjai’), 
 —not ‘ornato,’ Vulg., Luther: see 
 Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 11. p. 147. 
 αἰδοῦς καὶ σωφροσύνης] ‘shamefast- 
 ness and discretion;’ the inward feel- 
 ings which should accompany the out- 
 ward bearing and deportment: both 
 terms are foundunited, Arrian, EH pict. 
 Iv. 8. Αἰδὼς (only here; Heb, xii. 28, 
 referred to by Trench, Synon. ὃ 19, has 
 but little critical support) marks the 
 ‘innate shrinking from anything un- 
 becoming ;’ σωφροσύνη (ver. 15, Acts 
 xxvi, 25), the ‘well-balanced state of 
 mind resulting from habitual self-re- 
 straint;’ comp. 4 Mace. 1, 31, σω- 
 φροσύνη ἐστὶν ἐπικράτεια τῶν ἐπιθυ- 
 μιῶν, more ΘΟΙΡΥΘ ΘΠ Βίγ νυ, ΡΙαΐο, Re- 
 publ. Iv. p. 4308, καὶ ἡδονῶν τινῶν καὶ 
 ἐπιθυμιῶν ἐγκράτεια, Similarly, Symp. 
 p. τού c, and more at length, Aristotle, 
 Ethics, 111, 13. Chrys, is no less dis- 
 tinct, cwppoc. od τοῦτο μόνον ἐστὶ τὸ 
 πορνείας ἀπέχεσθαι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ τῶν 
 λοιπῶν παθῶν ἐκτὸς εἶναι, on Tit. ii. 5, 
 p. 822, see Trench, Synon. § 20, and 
 for the most plausible translation, 
 noteson Transl. It may be remarked 
 that σώφρων and its derivatives (except 
 σωφρονεῖν σωφρονίζειν, σωφρονισμός, 
 σωφρόνως, σωφροσύνη (except Acts 
 ΧΧΥΪ. 25), occur only in the Past, Epp. 
 Thisis oneamongst many hintsafford- 
 ed by the verbal characteristics of these 
 three Epp. that they were written by 
 one hand [St Paul], and probably at 
 no distant period from one another. 
 μὴ ἐν πλέγμασιν] ‘not with plaitings:? 
 
 special adornments both personal 
 (πλέγμ.) and put on the person (χρυσῷ; 
 papyap., ἱματισμῷ) inconsistent with 
 Christian simplicity; comp. 1 Pet. iil. 
 3, ἐμπλοκὴ τριχῶν, and see esp. Clem. 
 Alex. Pe@dag. 11. 11. 62, Vol. 1. Ὁ: 
 290 (Pott.), ai περιπλοκαὶ τῶν τριχῶν 
 ai ἑταιρικαί, x.7.., Where this and 
 other kinds of personal decoration are 
 fully discussed; comp. Wakef, Sylv. 
 Crit. Vol. 111. p. 133. What Clement 
 approves of is ἀναδεῖσθαι τὴν κόμην 
 εὐτελῶς περόνῃ τινὶ λιτῇ παρὰ τὸν 
 αὐχένα ἀφελεῖ θεραπείᾳ συναυξούσαις 
 [γυναιξὶν] εἰς κάλλος γνήσιον τὰς σώ- 
 φρονας κόμας. On the subject gene- 
 rally, see Smith, Dict. of Antiq. Art. 
 ‘Coma,’ andthe plates in Montfaucon, 
 L’ Antiq. Expl, Vol, 111. p. 41, Suppl. 
 Vol. τὰς 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 particleafter verbs 
 of ‘will’ being however of course μή; 
 see exx. in Gayler, Partic. Neg. p. 
 329 Sq. kal χρυσῷ] Scil. 
 περιθέσει χρυσίων, τ Pet. iil. 3; ear- 
 rings, necklaces, bracelets; comp. 
 Pliny, Nat. Hist. 1x. 35. 
 
 το. GAN ὃ πρέπει K.7.A.] Sbut,— 
 which becometh women professing (not 
 ‘who profess,” Alf.) godliness.’ The 
 construction is slightly doubtful: 6¢ 
 ἔργων ἀγαθῶν may be joined with 
 ἐπαγγελλ. (Vulg., Theod.); in which 
 case the relative 6 must be regarded 
 as equivalent to ἐν τούτῳ 6 (Matth.), 
 or καθ᾽ ὃ (Huther),—both somewhat 
 unsatisfactory explanations, It seems 
 much more simple to connect δι᾽ ἔργ. 
 ay. With κοσμεῖν (Syr., Theoph.), and 
 to regard 6 πρέπει k.7.\. aS a Common 
 relatival apposition; see Winer, Gr. 
 
 DZ 
 
90 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 ly Ὁ Ae , θ , ᾽ ’ A woman must learn 
 1 υνὴ εν yovxXia μανθανέτω εν πασὴ and ποῦ teach, for two 
 >» reasons; she was se- 
 Οὐκ cond in respect of cre- 
 ation, and first in re- 
 spect of transgression. 
 
 12 vrorayy διδάσκειν δὲ γυναικὶ 
 
 12. διδάσκειν δὲ yuv.] So Lachm. and Tisch. ed. 1, with ADFGN; τὸ mss.; 
 Clarom., Vulg., Goth., al.; Cypr., Ambrst., Jer. (much appr. by Griesb., 
 De Wette, Huther, Wiesing.). Itis difficult to understand what principle except 
 
 that of opposition to Lachm. has induced Tisch. (ed. 2, 7) to adopt the reading. 
 
 of the Rec. γυναικὶ δὲ διδάσκειν, with KL; great majority of mss.; Syr. (both), 
 Theod.-Mops., Chrys., Theod., Dam., al.; Ambr. (Jill, Scholz, Alf., Wordsw.), 
 when the uncial authority is thus noticeably weak, and the context so plainly 
 favours the reading of the text. The δὲ is not for yap (Syr.), and has 
 certainly no ‘vim copulativam’ (=‘scilicet,’ Leo), but properly, and with 
 
 its usual antithetical force, marks the opposition to μανθανέτω. 
 
 § 23. 2, p. 143, note 1. The objection 
 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, 4) were its actual constituents. 
 ἐπαγγελλομέναις] ‘professing,’ ‘pro- 
 fitentes,’ ‘pre se ferentes,’ Justin. ; 
 comp. ch. vi. 21, where this meaning 
 is perfectly clear. Huther compares 
 Xen. Mem. τ. 2. 7, ἀρετὴν ἐπαγγελλό- 
 μενος, and Ignat. Ephes. 14, πίστιν 
 ἐπαγγελλ. ; add Philo, de Human. ὃ τ, 
 Vol. 11. p. 384 (ed. Mang.), ἐπαγγέλ- 
 erat θεοῦ θεραπείαν, and see further 
 exx. in Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. Vol. r. 
 p. 1157. θεοσέβεια, a ἅπ. λεγόμ.;, 
 scarcely differs in sense from εὐσέβεια, 
 ver. 2; comp. notes. 
 
 tr. Γυνή]΄ α woman,’ i.e. any one 
 of the class, or, in accordance with'the 
 idiom ofour language (Brown, Gramm. 
 of Gr. 11. 2. obs. 6, p. 220), ‘the 
 woman,’ see notes on Eph. v. 23. 
 ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ] ‘in quiet,’ scil. ‘without 
 speaking or attempting to teach in 
 the Church :’ μηδὲ φθεγγέσθω, φησίν, 
 ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ γυνή, Chrys. 
 μανθανέτω] ‘learn,’ i.e. at the public 
 ministrations ; in antithesis to διδάσκ., 
 ver, 12. It is obvious that the Apo- 
 stle’s previous instructions, 1 Cor. xiv. 
 34 8q., 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 neglect of 
 the apostolic ordinance had crept into 
 the African Church. Women were 
 permitted however to teach privately 
 those of their own sex, ib. Can. 12; 
 see Bingham, Antiq. xIv. 4.5. 
 
 ἐν πάσῃ ὑποταγῇ] ‘in all subjection,’ 
 i.e. yielding it in all cases, not ‘in 
 voller Unterordnung,’ Huther; πᾶς 
 being extensive rather than intensive: 
 see notes on Eph. i, 8. On the posi- 
 tion occupied by women in the early 
 Church it may be remarked that Chris- 
 tianity did not abrogate the primal 
 law of the relation of woman to man. 
 While it animated and spiritualized 
 their fellowship, it no less definitely 
 assigned to them their respective 
 spheres of action ; teaching and preach- 
 ing to men, ‘mental receptivity and 
 activity in family life to women,’ 
 Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 147 
 (Bohn). What grave arguments these 
 few verses supply us with against 
 some of the unnatural and unscrip- 
 tural theories of modern times. 
 
 15, διδάσκειν δέ] Opposition to 
 μανθανέτω ver. 11, see critical note, 
 Διδάσκειν is emphatic, as its position 
 shows; it does not however follow, 
 as the Montanists maintained from 
 
II, r1—14. 
 
 37 
 
 ἐπιτρέπω, οὐδὲ αὐθεντεῖν ἀνδρός, ἀλλ᾽ εἶναι ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ. 
 
 Ἀδὰκ γὰρ πρῶτος ἐπλάσθη, εἶτα Εἶδα. 
 
 καὶ ᾿Αδὰμ 
 
 οὐκ ἠπατήθη, ἡ δὲ γυνὴ ἐξαπατηθεῖσα ἐν παραβάσει 
 
 1 Cor. xiv. 5, that a woman might 
 προφητεύειν in public. Every form of 
 public address or teaching is clearly 
 forbidden, as at variance with woman’s 
 proper duties and destination; see 
 Neander, Planting, 1. c. note. Wolf 
 cites Democrates, Sentent. [ap. Gale, 
 Script. Myth.] γυνὴ μὴ ἀσκείτω λόγον, 
 δεινὸν γάρ. 
 
 αὐθεντεῖν] ‘to exercise dominion over;’ 
 
 As Qu; Soto\ [audacter agere 
 
 super] Syr.; not ‘to usurp authority 
 over,’ Auth., a further meaning not 
 contained inthe word. Αὐθεντεῖν (ar. 
 λεγόμ. in N.T.), found only in late 
 and eccl. writers (Basil, Zpist. 52), in- 
 volves the secondary and less proper 
 meaning of αὐθέντης (Lobeck, Phryn. 
 Ῥ- 120) scil. δεσπότης, 
 Meeris; so Hesych. avdevreiv: ἐξου- 
 σιάξειν. The substantive αὐθεντία oc- 
 curs 3 Mace. ii. 29 ; see Suicer, Thesaur. 
 Vol. 1. p. 573, where verb, adj., and 
 substantive, are explained and illus- 
 trated. The immediate context shows 
 that the primary reference of the prohi- 
 bition isto publicministration (Beng.); 
 the succeeding arguments however de- 
 monstrate it to be also of universal 
 application. On this subject see the 
 brief but satisfactory remarks of Har- 
 less, Ethik, § 52. note, p. 279. 
 
 GAN εἶναι k.7.A.] ‘but to be in quiet, 
 1.6. in silence;’ infin. dependent on 
 βούλομαι or some similar verb (not 
 κελεύω, which St Paul does not use), 
 to be supplied from οὐκ ἐπιτρέπω: so 
 1 Cor. xiv. 34 (Rec.); comp. 1 Tim. iv. 
 3, Herm. Soph. Electr.72. This form 
 of brachylogy occurs most commonly 
 in the case of an antithesis (as here) 
 introduced by an adversative conjunc- 
 tion, Jelf, Gr. ὃ 893. ἢ. The antithe- 
 
 > y 
 αὐτοδίκης, 
 
 sis between each member of this and 
 of verse rr is very marked. 
 
 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, Théol. Chrét. Vol. 11. 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 creation of man and woman. 
 ἐπλάσθη] ‘was formed, fashioned ;’ 
 proper and specific word, as in Hesiod, 
 Op. 70, ἐκ γαίης πλάσσε: comp. also 
 Rom. ix. 20, and esp. Gen. ii. 7, καὶ 
 ἔπλασεν (N31) ὁ Θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον 
 χοῦν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς: so Joseph, Antiq. 
 US Tig Ve 
 
 14. καὶ ᾿Αϑάμ] Second confirmation, 
 deduced from the history of the fall: 
 ‘docet Apostolus feminas oportere 
 esse viris subjectas, quia et posteriores 
 sunt in ordine et priores in culpa,’ 
 Primas., cited by Cornel. a Lap. in 
 loc. οὐκ ἠπατήθη] There 
 is no necessity whatever to supply 
 πρῶτος, Theod., Gicum. 1. The em- 
 phasis rests on ἀπατᾶν. Adam was 
 not directly deceived, Eve was; she 
 says to God, ὁ ὄφις ἠπάτησέ με, he 
 only says, αὕτη μοι ἔδωκεν ἀπὸ τοῦ 
 ξύλου, καὶ ἔφαγον. We can hardly 
 urge with Beng., ‘mulier virum non 
 decepit sed ei persuasit, Gen. ili. 17,’ 
 for it can scarcely be doubted that the 
 woman did deceive the man (comp. 
 Chrys.), being in fact, in her very per- 
 suasions, the vehicle of the serpent’s 
 
98 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 , , ‘ 4 - , 38 , 
 I5 γέγονεν, σωθήσεται δὲ διὰ τῆς τεκνογονίας, εαν μείνω- 
 
 ᾽ , 4 95 , ‘ ς a 4 , 
 σιν ἐν πιστει και AYaTY Kal αγιάσμῳ μετὰ σωφροσύνης. 
 
 deceit: it is however the first en- 
 trance of sin which the Apostle is 
 specially regarding; this came by 
 means of the serpent’s ἀπάτη; Eve 
 directly succumbed to it (4rd 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. 14), 
 woman (ver. 16), man (ver. 17). Ac- 
 cording to the Rabbinical writers 
 (Schoettg. Hor. Hebr. Vol. τ. 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!IFGN!; 17, al. (Lachm., Tisch.), 
 seems to confirm the foregoing explan- 
 ation. To preclude appy. any miscon- 
 ception of his meaning, the Apostle 
 adds a strengthened compound, which 
 serves both to show that the moment 
 of thought turns on ἀπατάω, and also 
 to define tacitly the limitation of mean- 
 ing under which it is used. The prep. 
 ἐκ here conveys the idea of comple- 
 tion, thoroughness, Rost τι. Palm, Lex. 
 5.0. ἐκ, Vol. 1. p. 820. 1...yuv7 is here 
 clearly ‘the woman,’ 7.e. Eve, not the 
 sex generally (Chrys.). 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. γίνεσθαι ἐν occurs occasionally 
 (but not ‘frequently,’ Huther) in the 
 N. Τὶ, (e.g. ἐν ἀγωνίᾳ, Luke xxii. 44; 
 ἐν ἐκστάσει, Acts xxii. 17; ἐν δόξῃ, 2 
 Cor. 111, 7; ἐν ὁμοιώματι, Phil. ii. 7; ἐν 
 λόγῳ κολακείας, τ Thess. ii. 5) to de- 
 note the entrance into, and existence 
 in any given state. On the distinction 
 
 between εἶναι (esse) and γίνεσθαι (ex- 
 istere et evenire), see Fritz. Fritzsch. 
 Opusc. p. 284, note. , 
 
 15. σωθήσεται δέ] ‘yet she shall 
 be saved ;’ not merely ‘eripietur e nox& 
 illé’ (Beng.),butinits usual properand 
 scriptural sense, ‘ad vitam #ternam 
 perducetur ;’ comp. Suicer, Thesaur. 
 s.v. Vol. 11. 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 
 kK.T.d., see below. Sia THs 
 Tekvoyovlas] ‘by means of THE child- 
 bearing.’ Setting aside all untenable 
 or doubtful interpretations of διὰ ( ‘in’ 
 Beza, ‘cum’ Rosenm.) andrexvoyovlas 
 (=réxva αὐτῆς, Syr.; τὸ κατὰ Θεὸν 
 [τέκνα] ἀναγαγεῖν, Chrys., Fell, comp. 
 Stier, Red. Jes. Vol. 1. p. 13: ‘matri- 
 monium,’ Heinsius), we have two ex- 
 planations ; (a) ‘by child-bearing ;’ by 
 fulfilling her proper destiny and ac- 
 quiescing in all the conditions of 
 woman’s life, Beng., De Wette, Hu- 
 ther, al.; comp. Neander, Planting, 
 Vol. 1. p. 341 (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. 
 15), Hammond, Peile: ‘the peculiar 
 function of her sex (from its relation 
 to her Saviour) shall be the medium 
 of her salvation.’ This latter inter- 
 pretation has but few supporters, and 
 has even been said, though scarcely 
 justly, to need no refutation (Alf); 
 
ΠΡ ΤΕ αὶ 
 
 Qualifications of a bi- 
 shop ; he must be of ir- 
 
 39 
 
 Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος" εἴ τις ἐπισκοπῆς ITT, 
 
 reproachable morals, a good father of his family, and of good report. 
 
 when however we consider its ex- 
 treme appropriateness, and the high 
 probability that the Apostle, in speak- 
 ing of woman’s transgression, would 
 not fail to specify the sustaining pro- 
 phecy which even preceded her sen- 
 tence ;—when we add to this the satis- 
 factory meaning which διὰ thus bears, 
 —the uncircumsceribed reference of 
 σωθήσεται (opp. De W., Alf.),—the 
 force of the article (passed over by 
 mostexpositors),—and, lastly, observe 
 the coldness and jejuneness of (a), it 
 seems difficult to avoid deciding in 
 favour of (8): see the clear and satis- 
 factory note of Hammond, and we 
 may now add of Wordsw. in loc. 
 
 ἐὰν μείνωσιν] ‘if they should con- 
 tinue,’ 501]. ai γυναῖκες, or rather ἡ 
 γυνὴ taken in its collective sense: see 
 Winer, Gr. § 58. 4, p. 458: a neces- 
 sary limitation of the previous decla- 
 ration; ἡ Texvoy. of itself could effect 
 nothing. The plural is referred by 
 Chrys. and Syr. [as shown by the 
 masc. termination] to τέκνα : this ig 
 grammatically admissible (see Winer, 
 Gr. § 67. I, p. 555), but exegetically 
 unsatisfactory. On the use of ἐὰν 
 with subjunct. (objective possibility; 
 ‘experience will show whether they 
 will abide’), see Hermann, de Partic. 
 ἄν, τι. 7, p. 97, and notes on Gal. i. 8. 
 In applying these principles however, 
 it must always be remembered that in 
 the N. T. the use of ἐὰν with subj. 
 has almost entirely absorbed that of εἰ 
 with the opt.; see Green, Gr. p. 53. 
 ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀγ.] ‘in faith and love ;’ 
 sphere in which they were to con- 
 tinue. On the union of these terms, 
 and the omission, but of course virtual 
 inclusion, of ἐλπίς, compare Reuss, 
 Théol. Chrét. tv. 22, Vol. 11. p. 259. 
 Πίστις here appropriately points, not 
 
 to ‘eheliche Treue,’ Huth., but to 
 faith in the cardinal promise. 
 
 Kal ἁγιασμῷ] ‘and holiness.’ ‘Ta 
 sanctification est done l’état normal 
 du croyant, Rom. vi. 22, 1 Thess. iv. 
 3 sq.;’ Reuss, Théol. Chrét. 1v. 16, 
 Vol. τι. p. 167. On σωφροσύνη, see 
 notes on ver. 9. 
 
 CuarTer III. τ, Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος] 
 ‘Faithfulis the saying.’ ‘Hac veluti 
 prefatiuncula attentionem captat,’ 
 Justin. Chrys. refers this to what 
 has preceded (comp. ch. iv. 9); the 
 context however seems clearly to sug- 
 gest that, as in ch.i. 15, the reference 
 is to what follows. The reading 
 ἀνθρώπινος (D! and a few Lat, Vv.) is 
 of course of no critical value, but is 
 interesting as seeming to hint at a 
 Latin origin. In ch.i. 15, ‘humanus’ 
 is found in a few Lat. Vv. (see Saba- 
 tier), where it was probably a reading, 
 or rather gloss, ad sensum (hum.= 
 benignus). From that passage it was 
 ignorantly and unsuitably imported 
 here into some Lat. Vv., and thence 
 perhaps into the important Cod. Cla- 
 rom. Charges of Latinisms (though 
 by no means fully sustained) will be 
 found in the Edinburgh Rev., No. 
 cxcl.; see Tregelles, Printed Text of 
 N. T. p. 199 sq. ἐπισκοπῆς] 
 ‘office of a bishop.’ Without entering 
 into any discussion upon the origin of 
 episcopacy generally, it seems proper 
 to remark that we must fairly ac- 
 knowledge with Jerome (Epist. 73, ad 
 Ocean. Vol. tv. p. 648), that in the 
 Pastoral Epp. the terms ἐπίσκοπος and 
 πρεσβύτερος are applied indifferently 
 to the same persons; Pearson, Vind. 
 Ign, xu. p. 535 (A.-C. Libr.), Thorn- 
 dike, Gov, of Churches, 111. 3, Vol. 1. 
 p. 9 (ib.). The first was borrowed 
 
40 ΠΡῸΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 ΓΟ “ιν ᾽ bs a 4 4 eee 
 2 ὀρέγεται, καλοῦ ἔργου ἐπιθυμεῖ. δεῖ οὖν τὸν ἐπίσκοπον 
 
 from the Greeks (οἱ παρ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίων els 
 Tas ὑπηκόους πόλεις ἐπισκέψασθαι τὰ 
 παρ᾽ ἑκάστοις πεμπόμενοι, Suidas, 5.0. 
 ἐπίσκ., Dion. Hal, Antiq. 11. 76; see 
 Hooker, Eccl. Pol. vit. 2. 2, and exx. 
 in Elsner, Obs. Vol. τι. p. 293), and 
 pointed to the office on the side of its 
 duties: the second, which marked pri- 
 marily the age of the occupant, was 
 taken from the Jews (Hamm. on Acts 
 xi. 30), and pointed to the office on the 
 side of its gravity and dignity ; comp. 
 1 Pet. v.1, and see Neander, Planting, 
 Vol. τ. p. 143 (Bohn). While this can- 
 not be denied, it may be fairly urged 
 on the other hand,—(r1) that the ἰσοδυ- 
 vaula of the two words in the N. T. 
 appears to be such, that while πρεσβύ- 
 Tepos, conjointly with ἐπίσκοπος, refers 
 to what was subsequently the higher 
 order, it is rarely used in the N. Τὶ, 
 (comp. James y. 14?) to denote spe- 
 cially what was subsequently the 
 lower; comp. Hammond, Dissert. rv. 
 6, Vol. 1v. 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. 
 Ign. ch. xin. 2); and (2) that there 
 are indelible traces in the N. T. of 
 an office (by whatever name called, 
 ἄγγελος, k.7-X.) Which possibly first 
 arising from a simple προεδρία in a 
 board of πρεσβύτεροι (comp. Jerome 
 on Tit. i. 5, Vol. 1v. p. 413, ed. Ben.) 
 grew under Apostolic sanction and by 
 Apostolic institution into that of a 
 single definite rulership ‘over a whole 
 body ecclesiastical;’ see esp. Blunt, 
 Sketch of the Church, Serm. 1. p. 7 54.» 
 and comp. Saravia, de Divers. Grad. 
 ch. x. p. τὶ 8q. We may conclude 
 by observing that the subsequent 
 official distinction between the two 
 orders (traces of which may be ob- 
 served in these Epp.) has nowhere 
 
 been stated more ably than by Bp. 
 Bilson, and consists in two preroga- 
 tives of the bishop, ‘singularity in 
 succeeding, and superiority in ordain- 
 ing,’ Perpet. Gov. xl. p. 334 8q. 
 (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. 
 111.) truly says, ‘vir magni in ecclesia 
 nominis.’ ὀρέγεται] ‘ seeketh 
 after :’ there is no idea of ‘ambitious 
 seeking’ (De W.) couched in this word; 
 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 
 definitely ‘function,’ ‘occupation;’ 
 comp. 2 Tim, iv. 5, and see notes on 
 Eph. iv. 12. On the subject of this 
 and the following verses, see a disc. 
 by Bp. Kennett (Lond. 1706). 
 
 2. οὖν] ‘then;’ continuation slightly 
 predominating over retrospect; comp. 
 Donalds. Gr. § 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, 
 with his usual acuteness, Bengel, 
 ‘bonum negotium bonis committen- 
 dum,’ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον] ‘every 
 bishop’ or (according to our idiom) ‘a 
 bishop;’ the article is not due so much 
 to the implication of ἐπίσκ. in ἐπισκο- 
 πῆς (ver. 1; comp. 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 
 
PEP 2. 
 
 41 
 
 9 ’ > ΄σ A » ὃ , , 
 ἀνεπίλημπτον εἶναι, μιὰς γυναικὸς avopa, νηφαλιον, σώ- 
 
 except here and Tit. i. 7, St Paul 
 only uses the term once, Phil. i. 1; 
 we ought probably to add Acts xx. 28: 
 (2) That the singular is used here, 
 and still more noticeably in Tit. 1, ¢. 
 where πρεσβύτεροι had just preceded. 
 Of these two points, (1) seems to be 
 referable to the later date, as well as 
 to 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. ἀνεπίλημπτον] ‘irreproach- 
 able;’ ‘inreprehensibilem,’ Vulg., Cla- 
 rom.; ἄμεμπτον, ἀκατάγνωστον, He- 
 sych. There seems no authority for 
 regarding ἀνεπίλ. as ‘an agonistic 
 term’ (Bloomf., Peile); it appears 
 only used in an ethical sense, as ‘qui 
 nullum in agendo locum dat reprehen- 
 sionis’ (Tittm.; μὴ παρέχων κατηγο- 
 ρίας ἀφορμήν, Schol. Thucyd. v. 17), 
 and differs from ἄμεμπτος as implying, 
 not ‘quinon reprehenditur,’ but ‘qui 
 non dignus est reprehensione, etiamsi 
 reprehendatur;’ see Tittm. Synon. 1. 
 p. 30. Hence its union with ἄσπιλος, 
 ch. vi. 14, and with καθαρός, Lucian, 
 Pisc. 8; comp. Polyb. Hist. xxx. 7. 6, 
 where however the sense seems to be 
 simply privative: see further exx. in 
 Elsner, and Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. 
 
 μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα] ‘a husband 
 of one wife.’ These much-contested 
 words have been explained in three 
 ways; (a) in reference to any devia- 
 tion from morality in respect of mar- 
 riage, ‘whether by concubinage, poly- 
 gamy, or improper second marriages’ 
 [comp. τ Cor. vii. 2], Matthies; so 
 appy- Theod., τὸν μιᾷ μόνῃ γυναικὶ συν- 
 οἰκοῦντα σωφρόνως: (0) contemporane- 
 ous polygamy, which at that time 
 still seems to have prevailed among 
 the Jews, Joseph. Ant, xviI. I. 2, 
 πάτριον yap ἐν ταὐτῷ πλείοσιν ἡμῖν 
 
 συνοικεῖν ; Justin Mart. Trypho, § 134: 
 so Caly., Beng., al.: (c) successive poly- 
 gamy, whether (a) specially, after di- 
 vorce, Hamm., Suicer (Thesaur. 5.0. 
 dvyaula); or (8) generally, after loss 
 of first wife however happening, Fell, 
 and appy. Huth., Wiesing., al. Of 
 these (a) is clearly too undefined ; (b) 
 involves an opposition to the corre- 
 sponding expression in ch. v. 9; (6. α.} 
 is plausible, but when we consider the 
 unrestrictedness of the formula,—the 
 opinions of the most ancient writers 
 (Hermas, Past. Mand. tv. 1, Tertull. 
 de Monogam. cap. 12, Athenagoras, 
 Legat. p. 37, ed. Morell, 1636, Origen, 
 in Lucam, xvut. Vol. 1. p. 953, ed. 
 Delarue; see Heydenr. p. 166 sq., 
 Coteler’s note on Herm. /.c.),—the de- 
 cisions of some councils, e.g. Neoces. 
 (A.D. 314) Can. 3, 7, and the guarded 
 language of even Laod. (4.pD. 363?) 
 Can, 1,—the hint afforded by pagan- 
 ism in the case of the woman (‘ uni- 
 vira’),—and lastly, the propriety in 
 the particular cases of ἐπίσκοποι and 
 διάκονοι (ver. 8) of a greater temper- 
 ance (mox νηφάλιον, σώφρονα) and a 
 manifestation of that περὶ τὸν ἕνα ya- 
 μον σεμνότης (Clem, Alex. Strom. 11. 
 r. Vol. 1 p. 511, Potter) which is 
 not unnoticed in Scripture (Luke ii. 
 36, 37), we decide in favour of (c. B), 
 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 married 
 (so Maurice, Unity, p. 632), does not 
 deserve the confutation of Winer, Gr. 
 § 18. 9, p. 107, note. 
 
 νηφαλιον] ‘sober,’—either in a meta- 
 phorical sense (σώφρων, Suidas), as 
 the associated epithets and the use of 
 νήφω in good Greek (e.g. Xen. Conviv, 
 
42 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Α. 
 
 3 ppova, κόσμιον, φιλόξενον, διδακτικόν, μὴ πάροινον, 
 ‘ , ς ? , A ” “ , ~ 
 4 μὴ πλήκτην, ἀλλ ἐπιεικῆ, ἄμαχον, ἀφιλαργυρον, τοῦ 
 
 vill. 21) will certainly warrant, or 
 perhaps more probably (as μὴ πάροινον, 
 ver. 3, is not a mere synonym, see 
 notes) in its wsual and literal mean- 
 ing. Νήφειν (γρηγορεῖν, σωφρονεῖν βίῳ, 
 Hesych.) indeed occurs six times in 
 the N.T. (1 Thess. v. 6, 8, 2 Tim. iv, 
 5, I Pet. i. 13, iv. 7, v. 8), and in all, 
 except perhaps 1 Thess. J.c., is used 
 metaphorically; as however the adj. 
 both in ver. rr (see notes) and appy. 
 Tit. ii, 2 is used in its literal meaning, 
 it seems better to preserve that mean- 
 ing in the present case; so De W., 
 but doubtfully, for see ib. on Tit. 1.6. 
 Under any circumstances the deri- 
 vative translation ‘vigilant,’ Auth. 
 (διεγηγερμένος, Theod.), though pos- 
 sibly defensible in the verb (see Etym. 
 M.s8.v.vjpew),is a needless and doubt- 
 ful extension of the primary meaning: 
 on the derivation, 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 vir- 
 tue implied in the first,—dore καὶ διὰ 
 τοῦ σώματος φαίνεσθαι τὴν THs ψυχῆς 
 σωφροσύνην, Theod.: see notes on ch. 
 il. 9. φιλόξενον] See notes on Tit. 
 i. 8. διδακτικόν] ‘apt to teach,’ 
 Auth., ‘lehrhaftig,’ Luther; not only 
 ‘able to teach’ (Theod.; comp. Tit. 
 i. 9), but, in accordance with the con- 
 nexion in 2 Tim, ii. 24, ‘ready to 
 
 teach,’ ‘skilled in teaching,’ D> \ «Ὁ 
 
 [doctor] Syr.; τὸ δὲ μάλιστα χαρακτή- 
 ριζον τὸν ἐπίσκοπον τὸ διδάσκειν ἐστίν, 
 Theoph.; see Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 
 I. p. goo, comp. Hofmann, Schrift. 
 Vol. 11, 2, p.253. On the qualitative 
 termination -κός, see Donalds. Cratyl. 
 § 254, P. 454. 
 
 3. πάροινον] ‘violent over wine,’ 
 
 Tit. i. 7; not simply synonymous with 
 φίλοινον or with οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσ- 
 έχοντα, ch, ili, 8 (Ziegler, de Epise. 
 p- 350), but including drunkenness 
 and its manifestations: so appy. Syr. 
 
 118; Qo FON [‘a transgressor 
 over wine,’ Etheridge, not ‘sectator 
 vini,’ Schaaf; see Michaelis in Cast. 
 Lex., and comp. Heb. x. 28 Syr.]; 
 comp. Chrys., τὸν ὑβριστήν, τὸν αὐθάδη, 
 who however puts too much out of 
 sight the origin, olvos: comp. παροί- 
 vos Arist. Acharn. 981, and the co- 
 pious lists of exx. in Krebs, Obs. p. 
 352, Loesner, Obs. p. 396. The simple 
 state is marked by μέθυσος (1 Cor. τ. 
 II, vi. 10), the exhibitions of it by 
 mapowos; τὸ παροινεῖν ἐκ τοῦ μεθύειν 
 γίγνεται, Athen. x. § 62, p. 444. 
 
 πλήκτην] ‘a striker,’ Tit. i. 7; one 
 of the specific exhibitions of παροινία. 
 Chrys. and Theod. (comp. also Kypke, 
 Obs. Vol. τ᾿. p. 356) give this word 
 too wide a reference (πλήττειν τῶν 
 ἀδελφῶν τὴν συνείδησιν). Its con- 
 nexion both here and Tit, 1.6. certainly 
 seems to suggest the simple and strict 
 meaning; see Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. 
 Vol. τι. p. 751, where both meanings 
 are noticed. ἐπιεικῆ, ἄμαχον] 
 ‘forbearing, not contentious,’ Tit. iii. 
 2, but in a reversed order; generic 
 opposites to the two preceding terms. 
 The force of ἐπιεικὴς is here illustrated 
 by the associated adj.; the ἄμαχος is 
 the man who is not aggressive (Beng. 
 on Tit. l.c.) or pugnacious, who does 
 not contend; the ἐπιεικὴς goes further, 
 and is not only passively non-conten- 
 tious, but actively considerate and 
 forbearing, waving even just legal 
 redress, ἐλαττωτικὸς καίπερ ἔχων τὸν 
 νόμον βοηθόν, Aristot. Eth. Nicom. v. 
 14. The former word is also illus- 
 
III. 3—6. 
 
 “ὃ ” ~ oo , , 3 3 ε 
 ἰδίου οἴκου καλῶς προΐσταμενον, TEKYA EXOVTA εν ὑπο- 
 
 a 4 , , 9 δέ a AYA ” 
 TAY] META πασῆς TEMVOTNTOS, (ει € τις TOU LOLOUV οἰκου 5 
 
 A > ~ , ζ΄ 9 
 προστῆναι οὐκ οἶδεν, πῶς ἐκκλησίας Θεοῦ ἐπιμελήσεται :) 
 
 μὴ νεόφυτον, ἵνα μὴ τυφωθεὶς εἰς κρῖμα ἐμπέση τοῦ δια- O 
 
 trated by Trench, Synon. § 43: the 
 derivation, it need hardly be said, is 
 not from εἴκω but from εἰκός; see 
 Rost u. Palm. Lew, s. v. 
 ἀφιλάργυρον] ‘not a lover of money ;’ 
 only 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 retrospective reference 
 to φιλόξενον (Theoph.). On the dis- 
 tinction between φιλαργυρία (‘avarice’) 
 and πλεονεξία (‘covetousness’), see 
 Trench, Synon. § 24. 
 
 4. τοῦ ἰδίου] ‘his own;’ emphatic, 
 and in prospective antithesis to Θεοῦ, 
 ver. 5. On the use of dios in the 
 N.T., see notes on Eph. v. 22, and on 
 its derivation (from pronoun ?), comp. 
 Donalds. Cratyl. § 139, 152. 
 ἐν ὑποταγῇ is not to be connected 
 closely with ἔχοντα (Matth.), but ap- 
 pended to τέκνα ἔχοντα, and is thus 
 a kind of adjectival clause specifying 
 the moral sphere in which they were 
 to move; see ch. ii, 9, and notes 
 in loc. If the part. 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 subjection would have 
 been noticed as a kind of attribute, in 
 the present case it is represented as 
 the moral element with which they 
 were surrounded. Thetransition from 
 actual (Luke vii. 25) to figurative en- 
 vironment (Matth. vi. 29), and thence 
 to deportment (ch. ii. 9), or, as here, 
 to moral conditions, seems easy and 
 natural. μετὰ πάσης K.T.A.] 
 ‘with all gravity :’ closely connected 
 with ὑποταγῇ, specifying the attend- 
 
 ant grace with which their obedience 
 was to be accompanied; see notes on 
 ch, ii. 2. 
 
 5. εἰ δέ τις.. οὐκ οἶδεν] ‘but if any 
 man knows not (how) ;’ contrasted par- 
 enthetical clause (Winer, Gr. ὃ 53.2.b, 
 p. 401), Serving to establish the reason- 
 ableness and justice of the requisition, 
 τοῦ ἰδίου κι τ. λ.; the argument, as 
 Huther observes, is ‘a minori ad 
 majus.’ It is perhaps scarcely 
 necessary to remark that there is no 
 irregularity in the present use of εἰ 
 ov: ‘ov arctissime conjungi cum verbo 
 [not always necessarily a verb ; comp. 
 Scheefer, Demosth. Vol. 111. p. 288] 
 debet, ita ut hoc verbo conjunctum 
 unam notionem constituat, cujusmodi 
 est οὐκ olda nescio,’ Hermann, Viger, 
 No. 309. This seems more simple 
 than to refer it here, with Green (Gr. 
 p- 119), to any especial gravity or 
 earnestness of tone. The use of εἰ ov 
 in the N.T. is noticeably frequent ; 
 see exx. in Winer, Gr. § 55. 2, p. 423 
 sq., and for a copious list of exx., 
 principally from later writers, Gayler, 
 Part. Neg. v. p. 998q. 
 ἐπιμελήσεται] ‘can he take charge;’ 
 ethical future, involving the notion of 
 ‘ability,’ ‘possibility ;’ πῶς δυνήσεται; 
 Chrys.; see Winer, Gr. § 40. 6, p. 250, 
 Thiersch, de Pent. m1, 11. ἃ, p. 159, 
 and notes on Gal. vi. 5. Similar uses 
 of ἐπιμελεῖσθαι, ‘curam gerere,’ 501], 
 ‘salutialicujus prospicere’ (Bretschn.; 
 comp. Luke x. 35), are cited by Raphel 
 in loc, 
 
 6. μὴ νεόφυτον] ‘not a recent con- 
 vert’ (τὸν νεοκατήχητον, Chrys., τὸν 
 εὐθὺς πεπιστευκότα, Theod.), render- 
 ed somewhat paraphrastically in Syr. 
 
44 
 
 7 βόλου. 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ 
 
 o1sa\o2 i [puer discipulatu 
 
 suo]: the word is copiously illustrated 
 by Suicer, Thesaur, Vol. 11. p. 395. 
 This and the following qualification 
 are not specified in the parallel pas- 
 sage, Tit. i. 6sq.: there is however 
 surely no reason for drawing from the 
 present restriction any unfavourable 
 inferences against the authenticity of 
 this Ep.; see Schleierm. iiber x Tim. 
 p. 46. If the later date of the Ep. 
 be admitted, Christianity would have 
 been long enough established at Ephe- 
 sus to make such a regulation natural 
 and easy to be complied with: see 
 Wiesing. in loc. τυφωθείς] 
 ‘besotted, or clouded, with pride ;’ only 
 here, ch. vi. 4, and 2 Tim. iii. 4. Both 
 the derivation [OTII-, τύφω, Benfey, 
 Vol. 11. p. 275, less probably τυφώς, 
 Harpocr. 175, 16] and the combina- 
 tions in which τυφόω is used (6.4. 
 Polyb, Hist, 11. 81. 1, ἀγνοεῖ καὶ τετύ- 
 gwra ; sim. Demosth, Fals.Leg.p. 409, 
 μαίνομαι καὶ τετύφωμαι; ib. Phil. m1. 
 Ῥ. 116, ληρεῖν καὶ τετυφῶσθαι; Lucian, 
 Nigrin. 1, ἀνοήτου τε καὶ τετυφωμένου, 
 εἰς.) seem to show that the idea of 
 a ‘beclouded’ and ‘stupid’ state of 
 mind must be associated with that 
 of pride. Obnubilation, however pro- 
 duced, seems the primary notion ; that 
 produced by pride or vanity (κενοδοξή- 
 σας, Coray) the more usual applica- 
 tion: so Hesychius, τύφος" ἀλαζονεία, 
 ἔπαρσις, κενοδοξία ; comp. Philo, Migr. 
 Abrah. § 24, Vol. 1. p. 457 (ed. Mang.), 
 τύφου καὶ ἀπαιδευσίας καὶ ἀλαζονείας 
 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 still admit of 
 some modification in meaning from 
 the context (comp, Fritz. Rom. ii. 3, 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 A. 
 
 Bear ἊΝ ‘ , A » eh 2 a 
 εἰ € “Kae μαρτυριαν καλὴν εχεὶν απὸο τῶν 
 
 Vol. 1. p. 94), διαβόλου may be either 
 (a) gen. subjecti, ‘the accusing judg- 
 ment of the devil’ (Matth., Huther) ; 
 or (b) gen. objecti, ‘the judgment 
 passed upon the deyil.’ In the former 
 case κρῖμα has more the meaning of 
 ‘eriminatio’ (Beza), in the latter of 
 ‘condemnatio’ (Coray, al.). As the 
 gen. διαβόλου in the next verse is 
 clearly subjecti, interpr. (a) is certainly 
 very plausible. Still as 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 rod 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. Mat- 
 thies urges against this the excess of 
 lapse which would thus be implied; 
 the force of the allusion must however 
 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 6, and Suicer, Thesaur. 
 5.0. διάβυλος, Vol. 1. p. 851. On the 
 meaning and use of διάβ. see notes on 
 Eph. iv. 27; the translation ‘ calum- 
 niatoris’ (Grinf. on ver. 7, al.) is not 
 consistent with its use in the N.T. 
 
 7. δὲ 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 not implying 
 ‘among’ (Conyb.), but correctly mark- 
 
ΕΠ; 8: 
 
 ἔξωθεν, ἵνα py 
 διαβόλου. 
 
 The deacons must also 
 be similarly irreproach- 
 able, and of good re- 
 port; the deaconesses 
 too must be faithful. 
 
 ing the source from which the testi- 
 mony emanates: on the distinction 
 between ἀπὸ and παρά, esp. with verbs 
 of ‘receiving,’ see Winer, Gr. § 47. a, 
 Ῥ. 331, note. Oi ἔξωθεν (in other 
 places οἱ ἔξω, 1 Cor. v. 12, 13, Col. iv. 
 5, 1 Thess. iv. 12), like the Jewish 
 DIS, is the regular designation 
 for all not Christians, all those who 
 were not οἰκεῖοι τῆς πίστεως (Gal. vi. 
 10); see Kypke, Obs. Vol. 11. p. 198, and 
 the Rabbinical citations in Schoettg. 
 Hor. Hebr. (on 1 Cor. lc.) Vol. 1. p. 
 600. ὀνειδισμὸν K.T.A. | 
 ‘reproach, and (what is sure to follow) 
 the snare of the devil ; the absence of 
 the article before παγίδα being perhaps 
 due to the preposition ; comp. Winer, 
 Gr. ὃ 19. 2, p. 114. The exact con- 
 nexion is somewhat doubtful, as the 
 gen. may depend (a) on both, or (0) 
 only on the last of the two substan- 
 tives. The omission of the prep. be- 
 fore παγίδα (De W.) is an argument 
 in favour of (a) ; the isolated position 
 however of dyed. and the connexion 
 of thought in ch, v. 14, 15, seem to 
 preponderate in favour of (b), ὀνειδ. 
 being thus absolute, and referring to 
 ‘the reproachful comments and judg- 
 ment,’ whether of those without 
 (Chrys.) or within the Church. On 
 the termination -(σ)μος (action of the 
 verb proceeding from the subject) and 
 its prevalence in later Greek, see Lo- 
 beck, Phryn. p. 511; comp. Donalds. 
 Cratyl. § 253, p. 420. The expression 
 παγὶς τοῦ Saf. (‘snare laid by the 
 devil;’ appy. gen. originis, contrast 
 ver. 6), occurs again 2 Tim. ii. 26; 
 so similarly τ Tim. vi. 9. It is here 
 added to ὀνειδ., not epexegetically (τὸ 
 
 45 
 
 ’ 9 ὃ ‘ 9 , A ’ ~ 
 εἰς ὀνειδισμὸν ἐμπέσῃ Kal παγίδα τοῦ 
 
 A , e , , a 
 ἰακονοὺυς WOQAUTWS TELVOUS, μὴ δι- 8 
 
 λόγους, μὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσέχοντας, μὴ 
 
 εἰς σκάνδαλον προκεῖσθαι πολλῶν παγίς 
 ἐστι διαβ. Theoph.), 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. Avakovous] ‘Deacons ;’ only used 
 again by St Paul in this special sense 
 Phil. i. 1, and (fem.) Rom. xvi. 1, 
 though appy. alluded to Rom. xii. 7, 
 1 Cor, xii, 28 (ἀν τιλήψει5), and perhaps 
 1 Pet. iv. rr. The office of διάκονος 
 (διήκω Buttm. Lewil. § 40), originally 
 that of an almoner of the Church (Acts 
 vi. 1 sq.), gradually developed into 
 that of an assistant (1 Cor. l.c.) and 
 subordinate to the presbyters (Rothe, 
 Anfinge, § 23, p. 166 sq.): their fun- 
 damental employment however still 
 remained to them; hence the appro- 
 priateness of the caution, μὴ αἰσχρο- 
 κερδεῖς, Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 
 34 sq. (Bohn). On the duties of the 
 office, see esp. Bingham, Antiq. Book 
 11. 20. 1 Sq., Suicer, Thesawr. s.v. Vol. 
 I. p. 869 sq., and Thomassin, Discipl, 
 Eccl. Part 1. 2. 29 8q- 
 ὡσαύτως] ‘in like manner,’ as the 
 foregoing class included in the τὸν 
 ἐπίσκοπον, ver. 2: it was not to be ws 
 ἑτέρως (Arist. Elench. Soph. 7) in any 
 of the necessary qualifications for the 
 office of a deacon, but ὡσαύτως as in 
 the case of the bishops. It need 
 scarcely be added that the δεῖ εἶναι 
 of the preceding verses must be sup- 
 plied in the present member. 
 διλόγους] ‘ double tongued,’ Auth., 
 ‘ speaking doubly,’ Syr.: ἅπαξ λεγόμ.; 
 mentioned in Poll. Onomast. 1. 1186 
 The meaning is rightly given by The- 
 od. ἕτερα μὲν τούτῳ ἕτερα δὲ ἐκείνῳ 
 
40 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 A. 
 
 Q αἰσχροκερδεῖς, ἔχοντας τὸ μυστήριον τῆς πίστεως ἐν 
 
 10 καθαρᾷ συνειδήσει. 
 
 λέγοντες. Grinfield (Schol. Hell.) com- 
 pares δίγλωσσος, Proy. xi. 13, Barnab. 
 Epist. 19 (Hefele) :add διχόμυθος Eurip. 
 Orest. 89go. προσέχοντας] 
 ‘giving (themselves) up to ;’ προσέχειν 
 thus used is more commonly found 
 with abstract nouns, e.g. ἀναγνώσει, 
 ch. iv, 13, δικαιοσύνῃ, Job xxvii. 6. 
 Here however οἷνος 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 by St Paulin the Pastoral Epp. ; 
 comp. however Acts xx. 28. 
 αἰσχροκερδεῖς] ‘ greedy of base gains;’ 
 only here and Tit. i. 7, The adverb 
 occurs 1 Pet. v. 2. As in all these 
 cases the term is in connexion with 
 an office in the Church, it seems most 
 natural (with Huther) to refer it, not 
 to gains from unclean (comp. Syr.) or 
 disgracefulactions (Theod.), but to dis- 
 honesty with the alms of the Church, 
 or any abuse of a spiritual office for 
 purposes of gain; comp, Tit, i. rr. 
 9. ἔχοντας] ‘having,’ or (in the 
 common ethical sense, Crabb, Synon. 
 p. 252, ed, 1826) ‘ holding,’ Auth. 
 ‘ behaltend,’ De Wette: not for xaré- 
 xovras, Grot., a meaning more strong 
 than the context requires and the use 
 of the simple form will justify; see 
 notes on ch. i, 19. The emphasis falls 
 onév καθ, cvvecd., not on the participle. 
 τὸ prot. τῆς πίστεως] ‘the mystery 
 of the faith.’ Owing to the different 
 shades of meaning which μυστήριον 
 bears, the genitive in connexion with 
 it does not always admit the same 
 explanation; 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 μυστ. 
 turned (gen. oljecti, Eph. i. 9), nor the 
 
 Kat οὗτοι δὲ δοκιμαζέσθωσαν πρῶ- 
 
 subject of it (gen. of content; this 
 would tend to give πίστις an objective 
 meaning, comp. exx. in Bernhardy, 
 Synt. 111. 44, p. 161), nor exactly the 
 substance of the μυστ. (gen. materia, 
 Eph, iii. 4), 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 Tittmann, 
 Synon, I. p. 147, and comp. Reuss, 
 Théol. tv. 9, Vol. τι. p. 89. Πίστις is 
 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 Sanderson, 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- 
 nexion with the participle: the καθαρὰ 
 cuveld. was to be, as it were, the en- 
 sphering principle, see 2 Tim. i. 13. 
 On συνείδ. see notes on ch. i. 5. 
 
 Io. καὶ οὗτοι δέ] ‘And these also,’ 
 ‘and these moreover ;’ comp. 2 Tim. 
 ili. 12, καὶ mavres δὲ of θέλοντες K.T. Dr. 
 These words (appy. not clearly under- 
 stood by Huther) admit only of one 
 explanation. In the formula καὶ... δὲ 
 like the Latin ‘et...vero,’ or the ‘et 
 .. autem’ of Plautus (see Hand, Jur- 
 sell. Vol. 1. p. 588), while each particle 
 retains its proper force, both together 
 often have ‘notionis quandam conso- 
 ciationem ;’ see Klotz, Devar. Vol. 1. 
 p- 645. Thus while καὶ connects or 
 enhances, and δὲ contrasts, the union 
 
ἘΣ TT. 
 
 > , 9 ’ »» 
 τον, εἶτα διακονείτωσαν ἀνέγκλητοι ὄντες. 
 
 of the two frequently causes δὲ to 
 revert from its more marked to its 
 primary and less marked oppositive 
 force, ‘in the second place’ (comp. 
 Donalds, Cratyl. § 155), so that the 
 whole formula has more of an adjunc- 
 tive character, and only retains enough 
 of a retrospective opposition to define 
 more sharply, expand, or strengthen, 
 the tenor of the preceding words. 
 Speaking roughly we might say, "καὶ 
 conjungit, δὲ intendit;’ the true ra- 
 tionale however of the construction 
 is best seen when μὲν is found in the 
 preceding clause, e.g. Xen. Cyrop. 
 VII. 1. 30, compare Acts iii, 22, 24. 
 The formula then may be translated 
 with sufficient accuracy, ‘and...also,’ 
 ‘and...too, the translation slightly 
 varying according as the copulative or 
 ascensive force of καὶ is most predo- 
 minant. In Homer καὶ δὲ is found 
 united, in subsequent writers one or 
 more words are interpolated; see 
 Hartung, Partik. δέ, 5. 2, 3, Vol. 1. 
 p. 181 sq., Liicke on 1 John i. 3, and 
 comp. Matth. Gr. § 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 in- 
 stances however (e.g. Luke x. 8, 
 John vi. 51), owing probably to ignor- 
 ance of its true meaning, MSS. of 
 some weight omit δέ. 
 
 δοκιμαζέσθωσαν] ‘let them be proved,’ 
 not formally, by Timothy or the elder- 
 hood (De W. compares Constit. Apost, 
 vii. 4), but generally by the com- 
 munity at large among which they 
 were to minister. The qualifications 
 were principally of a character that 
 could be recognized without any for- 
 
 47 
 γυναῖκας ΤΙ 
 
 mal investigation. ἀνέγκλητοι 
 ὄντες] ‘being unaccused,’ ‘having no 
 charge laid against them,’ i.e. pro- 
 vided they are found so; conditional 
 use of the participle (Donalds. Gr. 
 § 505) specifying the limitations and 
 conditions under which they were to 
 undertake the duties of the office; 
 comp. Schmalfeld, Synt.§ 207. 5. On 
 the distinction between ἀνέγκλητος 
 (‘qui non accusatus est’) and ἀνεπί- 
 λημπτος (‘in quo nulla justa causa sit 
 reprehensionis’), see Tittm. Synon. 1. 
 p- 31, and comp. Tit. i. 6. 
 
 II. γυναῖκας ὡσαύτως] ‘Women in 
 like manner, when engaged in thesame 
 office.’ It is somewhat difficult to 
 decide whether, with the Greek com- 
 mentators and others, we are here to 
 understand by γυναῖκας (a) wives of 
 the deacons, Auth., Coray, Huth., and 
 as dependent in structure on ἔχοντας, 
 Beng. ; or (0) deaconesses proper, γυναῖ- 
 kes being used rather than διάκονοι 
 (fem.), Rom. xvi. 1, to prevent confu- 
 sion with masc. The other possible 
 interpr. ‘ wives of deacons 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 plausible; when however we ob- 
 serve the difference of class to which 
 ὡσαύτως seems to point (ver. 8, ch. 
 il. 9, Tit. ii. 3, 6),—the omission of 
 avr@v,—the order and parallelism of 
 qualifications in ver. 8 and rr, coupled 
 with the suitable change of διλόγους 
 to διαβόλους, and the substitution of 
 πιστὰς ev πᾶσιν for the more specific 
 aicxpox. (deaconesses were probably 
 almoners, Coteler, Const. Apost, 111, 
 15, but ina much less degree),—the 
 
48 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 ‘4 , 
 ὡσαύτως σεμνάς, μὴ διαβόλους, νηφαλίους, πιστὰς ἐν 
 
 12 πᾶσιν. 
 
 , - Se , 
 διάκονοι ἔστωσαν flag γυναικος ἄνδρες, TEKVMV 
 
 ~ - ΄ ῳ ~ 
 13 καλῶς προϊστάμενοι καὶ τῶν ἰδίων οἴκων. οἱ γὰρ καλῶς 
 
 ὃ , ‘ e a ‘ “ ‘ 
 (AKOVHTaVTES βαθμὸν €auTols καλον περιποιουνται και 
 
 πολλὴν παῤῥησίαν ἐν πίστει TH ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. 
 
 absence of any notice of the wives of 
 émicxomot,—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., most ancient 
 and several modern expositors (Wies., 
 Alf., Wordsw., al.), that (ὁ) ‘diaco- 
 nisse’ are here alluded to. On the 
 duties of the office, see Bingham, 
 Antiq. τι. 22, 8 sq., Suicer, Thesawr. 
 8.0. Vol. 1. p. 864, Herzog, Real-En- 
 cycl. s.v. Vol. 111. p. 368, the special 
 treatise of Ziegler, de Diacon. et 
 Diaconiss, Witeb. 1678, and the good 
 article in the Quarterly Review for 
 Oct. 1860. διαβόλους] 
 ‘slanderous,’ ‘ traducers,’ καταλάλους, 
 Theoph.; only in the Past. Epp.: 
 twice in reference to women, here and 
 Tit. ii. 3; once in ref. to men, 2 Tim. 
 iii. 3. See the useful article on the 
 word in Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. 1. p. 
 848 sq. νηφαλίους κ.τ.λ.] 
 ‘sober, faithful in all things.’ The 
 evident parallelism between the quali- 
 fications in ver, 8, and the present, 
 seems to imply that νηφάλιος has its 
 literal meaning; see notes on ver. 2. 
 The last qualification, πιστὰς ἐν πᾶσιν, 
 is stated very generally; it of course 
 does not preclude a ref. to domestic 
 calls and cares (see Huther), but it 
 certainly seems far more applicable to 
 ecclesiastical duties, 
 
 12. διάκονοι k.t.A.] Exactly the 
 same qualifications in respect of their 
 domestic relations required in the διά- 
 κονοι as in the ἐπίσκοπος : see notes on 
 ver. 2. 
 
 53. γάρ] The importance of the 
 
 office is a sufficient warrant for the 
 reasonableness of the preceding requi- 
 sitions, βαθμὸν... καλόν] 
 ‘a good degree,’ Auth., Arm. Βαθ- 
 hos, ἃ ἅπ. λεγόμ. in N.T. (not an 
 Ionic form of βασμός, Mack, but the 
 very reverse: comp. ἀριθμός, ἀρθμός, 
 and Donalds. Cratyl. § 253), has re- 
 ceived three different explanations; 
 either (a) ‘an (ecclesiastical) step, in, 
 reference to an advance to a higher 
 spiritual office, th., Jer., and appy. 
 Chrys., al. ; (Ὁ) ‘a post,’ in reference 
 to the honourable position a deacon 
 occupied in the Church, Matth., Hu- 
 ther; (c) ‘a degree,’ in reference to 
 the judgment of God, and to their 
 reward ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι Bly, Theod., 
 De Wette, al. Of these (a) appears 
 to be on exegetical grounds clearly 
 untenable (opp. to Wordsw.); for 
 surely such a ground of encourage- 
 ment asecclesiastical promotion (were 
 this even historically demonstrable, 
 which is appy. not the case in the first 
 two centuries) seems strangely out of 
 place in St Paul’s mouth, and pre- 
 serves no harmony with the subse- 
 quent words. Against (Ὁ) the aor. 
 διακον. 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 dis- 
 charge of the διακονία. Theassociated 
 clause however, and the use of the 
 term παῤῥησία, especially with its 
 modal adjunct ἐν πίστει x.7.X., both 
 seem so little in harmony with this 
 ecclesiastical reference, while on the 
 other hand they point so very natu- 
 
TF ἀρ. Ἐπεὶ 49 
 
 I write this to guard th 
 conduct in the chure 
 of the living God ; verily , 
 
 Tatra co γράφω ἐλπίζων ἐλθεῖν 14 
 
 great is the mystery of 70g σὲ τάχιον" ἐὰν δὲ βραδύνω, ἵνα ΤΆ 
 
 godliness. 
 
 rally to the position of the Christian 
 with respect to God (see notes on Eph. 
 iii. 12, and comp. Heb. iv. 16, τ John 
 11. 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 βαθμὸς to the 
 step or degree which a faithful dis- 
 charge of the διακονία would gain in 
 the eyes of God. 
 
 ἑαυτοῖς... περιποιοῦνται] ‘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. § 38. 6, 
 p. 230. 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] 
 ‘boldness,’ ‘fiduciam,’ Vulg., Clarom. ; 
 properly ‘openness’ of (Mark viii. 32, 
 al., and frequently in St John) or 
 ‘boldness of speech’ (Acts iv. 13), and 
 thence derivatively that ‘confidence 
 and boldness of spirit’ (ἄδεια, Suidas) 
 with which the believer is permitted 
 and encouraged (Heb. iv. 16) to ap- 
 proach his heavenly Father; τ John 
 ii, 28, iii. 21, dc. The use of παῤῥ. 
 in reference to the final reward is 
 clearly evinced in τ 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, Gc. Here ἐν 
 πίστει κιτ.λ. 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 K.7.A.} ‘in faith which is in 
 Christ J... By the insertion of the 
 article (comp. ch. i. 14, 2 Tim. i. 13, 
 iii. 15, al.) two moments of thought 
 are expressed, the latter of which ex- 
 plains and enhances the former: ‘in 
 fide (πίστις was the foundation, sub- 
 stratum, of the παῤῥ.), edque in Chr. 
 Jes. collocata ;’ see Fritz. Rom, ili. 25, 
 Vol. 1. p. 195. The article is not un- 
 commonly omitted (Gal. iii. 26, Eph. 
 i. 15, Col. i. 4) on the principle ex- 
 plained in notes on Eph. i. 15. On 
 the meaning of πίστις ἐν, comp. notes 
 on ch. i. 16. 
 
 14. Tatra] ‘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. 
 notes on Gal. vi, 11), the latter refer- 
 ence would have been nearly certain. 
 The use of the present leaves it more 
 doubtful, and bids us look 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, 
 Gr. § 40. 5, p- 249. ἐλπίζων] 
 ‘hoping,’ or more definitely, ‘though 
 T hope,’ the part. having its concessive 
 force; see Donalds. Gr. § 621. The 
 actual reason of his writing is implied 
 in the following verse, ἵνα εἰδῇς κιτ.λ. 
 τάχιον] ‘more quickly;’ not, on the 
 one hand, ‘compar. absoluti loco posi- 
 tum’ (Beza; τάχιστα, Coray), nor, on 
 the other, with marked compar. force, 
 ‘sooner than thou wilt need these in- 
 structions’ (Winer, Gr.§ 35. 4, P- 217); 
 but probably with a more suppressed 
 
 E 
 
50 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 A. 
 
 “ - a wn Ὁ ᾽ 4 
 εἰδῆς πῶς δεῖ ἐν οἴκῳ Θεοῦ ἀναστρέφεσθαι, ἥτις ἐστὶν 
 
 ΄ - ΄σ ε “ " ° 
 ἐκκλησία Θεοῦ ζῶντος, στῦλος καὶ ἑδραίωμα τῆς ἀλη- 
 
 compar. reference, ‘sooner than these 
 instructions presuppose,’ ‘sooner than 
 Ianticipate.’ Suchcomparatives often 
 refer to the suppressed feelings of the 
 subject ; comp. Theano, ad Eubul. p.86 
 (ed. Gale), παιδίον, dv μὴ τάχιον φαγῃ, 
 κλάει. The reading ἐν τάχει (Lachm., 
 with ACD!) seems only an explana- 
 tory gloss, 
 
 15. βραδύνω] “1 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- 
 nal plan. This tacitly involves the 
 supposition that the Epistle was writ- 
 ten in the period included in the 
 Acts,—which however (see notes on 
 ch. i. 3) does not seem probable. 
 οἴκῳ Θεοῦ] ‘the house of God;’ οἴκῳ 
 being anarthrous either owing to the 
 prep. (Winer, Gr. § 19. 2, p. 114) or 
 the anarthrous gen. which follows; 
 comp. Middleton, Gr. Art. m1. 3. 6. 
 This appellation, derived from the 
 Old Test., where it denotes primarily 
 the temple (2 Chron. vy. 14, Ezra v. 16, 
 al,, comp. Matth, xxi. 13) and second- 
 arily the covenant-people (Numb. xii. 
 7, Hosea yiii. 1), those among whom 
 God specially dwelt, is suitably ap- 
 plied in the N.T. to the Churech,— 
 either viewed as the spiritual building 
 which rests on Christ as the corner- 
 stone (Eph. 11, 20), or as the true 
 temple in which Christ is the true 
 High Priest (Heb. iii. 6, τ 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 thououghtest to walk,’ 
 Auth., De W., al. Huther urges 
 against (b) that in what precedes 
 Timothy hasno active course assigned 
 to him, but rather the supervision of 
 it in others; as however avacrpé¢. is 
 a ‘vox media’ which does not mark 
 mere activities, but rather conduct 
 and deportment in its most inclusive 
 reference (comp. Eph. ii. 3, where it 
 closely follows the Hebraistic περιπα- 
 teiv),—as the explicative clause ἥτις 
 ἐστὶν x.7.X. seems intended to impress 
 on Timothy the greatness of his olxo- 
 voula,—and as the expansion of olk. 
 Θεοῦ from the special church over 
 which Timothy presided tothe general 
 idea of the universal Church involves 
 no real difficulty (see De W.), it seems 
 best to adopt (Ὁ) and limit ἀναστρ. to 
 Timothy: so rightly Vulg., Clarom. 
 ἥτις] ‘which indeed ;’ explanatory use 
 of the indef. relative: compare notes 
 on Gal. iv. 24, where the uses of ὅστις 
 are explained at length. 
 
 ἐκκλησία Θεοῦ ζῶντος] ‘the Church 
 of the living God ;’ fuller definition of 
 the οἶκος Θεοῦ, on the side of its in- 
 ternal and spiritual glory: # was no 
 material fane (‘opponiturfano Diana,’ 
 Beng.) of false dead deities, but a 
 living and spiritual community, a life 
 stream (see Olsh. on Matth. xvi. 18) 
 of believers in an ever-living God. 
 Ἐκκλησία appears to have two mean- 
 ings, according to the context and the 
 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 (τῶν πιστῶν τὸν σύλλογον, Theod.- 
 Mops.), with a local reference of 
 greater or less amplitude; see exx. in 
 Pearson, Creed, Art. 1x. Vol. 1. p. 397 
 (ed. Burton): on the other, it involyes 
 
EP 76. δ΄ 
 θείας. καὶ ὁμολογουμένως μέγα ἐστὶν τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας τό 
 
 16. 6s] So Tisch., Lachm., Tregelles, Alf., Words., and appy. the majority 
 of modern critics. Θεὸς (Rec.) is adopted by Mill, Matth., Scholz, some com- 
 mentators, Leo, Mack, Burton, Peile, al., and, it ought not to be suppressed, 
 some of our best English divines, Bull, Waterland (Vol. 11. p. 158). The state 
 of evidence is briefly as follows. (1) “Os is read with A! [indisputably : after 
 minute personal inspection ; see note, p. 104] ΟἹ [Tisch. Prol. Cod. Ephr. § 7, 
 Ῥ. 39] FGN (see below); 17. 73. 181; Syr.-Phil., Copt., Sah., Goth. ; also (ὃς 
 or 6) Syr., Ar. (Erp.), Aith., Arm.; Cyr., Theod.-Mops., Epiph., Gelas., 
 
 Hieron. in Esaiam liii. 11. 
 all Latin Ff, 
 
 (2) 6 with D!; Clarom., Vulg.; nearly 
 (3) θεὸς with D°KL ; nearly all mss.; Arab. (Polygl.), 
 
 Slav.; Did., Chrys. (? see Tregelles, p. 227 note), Theod., Euthal., Damasc.,~” 
 
 the meaning and adaptation of Sap 
 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, Dissua- 
 sive, Part 11. τ. 1, Ebrard, Dogmatik, 
 § 467, Vol. 11. p. 392, and the various 
 usages cited by Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. 
 Vol. 1. p. 1049 sq. στῦλος K.T.A.] 
 ‘pillar and basis of the truth;’ no ἕν 
 διὰ δυοῖν (= ‘firmly-grounded,’ Beng., 
 Peile), but a climactic apposition to 
 éxkX. Θεοῦ ¢évros,—defining, with in- 
 direct allusion to nascent and de- 
 veloping heresies (see ch. iv. 1 sq.), 
 the true note, office, and vocation of 
 the Church; στῦλον αὐτὴν καὶ édpatw- 
 μα ἐκάλεσεν, ὡς ἂν ἐν αὐτῇ τῆς ἀλη- 
 θείας τὴν σύστασιν ἐχούσης, Theodorus. 
 Were there no Church, there would be 
 no witness, no guardian of archives, 
 no basis, nothing whereon acknow- 
 ledged truth could rest. Chrysostom 
 adopts the right connexion, but in- 
 verts the statement, ἡ yap ἀλήθ. ἐστι 
 τῆς ἐκκλ. καὶ στῦλος Kal 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, Dissuasive, Part 1. 7. 1. 3. 
 Such seems to be the only natural con- 
 struction of the clause. A close con- 
 
 nexion with what follows (καὶ ὁμολ.), 
 as has been advocated by Episcopius 
 (Inst. Theol. tv. τ. 8, Vol. 1. p. 241) 
 and others (it is to be feared mainly 
 from polemical reasons), is alike ab- 
 rupt (there being no connecting par- 
 ticles), illogical (a strong substantival 
 being united with a weak adjectival 
 predication), and hopelessly artificial : 
 see De Wetteinloc. It may beadded 
 that στῦλος and ἑδραίωμα (ἅπαξ Neyou.; 
 comp. θεμέλιος, 2 Tim. 11, 19) do not * 
 appy. involve any architectural allu- 
 sion to heathen temples, dc. (Deyling, 
 Obs. Art. 66, Vol. τὸ p. 317), but are 
 only simple metaphorical expressions 
 of the stability and permanence of the 
 support: see the copious illustrations 
 of this passage in Suicer, Thesaur. 
 Vol. 11. p. 1042—1066. 
 
 16. καὶ ὁμολογουμένως μέγα κ.τ.λ.] 
 ‘Andconfessedly, or indisputably, great 
 (i.e. deep, Eph. γ. 32) is the mystery, 
 
 ρ y, 
 &C.’ «9 ey ee [vere mag- 
 y x =x 
 
 num] Syr.; ‘nemo (scil. of those to 
 whom this vor. is revealed) cui mica 
 Sane mentis inest de ea re potest con- 
 troversiam moyere,’ Altmann, Welet. 
 1o, Vol. 11. p. 268. The καὶ is not 
 simply copulative, but heightens the 
 force of the predication, ‘ yes, con- 
 fessedly great,’ dc.; comp. Hartung, 
 Partiles, Kol, τς 45) VOls 1 Py 145: 
 
 E2 
 
52 ΠΡΟΣ TIMOGEON A. 
 
 μυστήριον, ὃς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί, ἐδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύ- 
 
 Theoph., @icum.,—Ignat. Eph. 19 (but very doubtful). A hand of the 12th 
 cent. has prefixed θε to os the reading of N; see Tisch. ed. maj. Plate xvi, or 
 Scriv. Collation of 8, facsim. (13). On reviewing this evidence, as not 
 only the most important Uncial MSS., but all the Vy. older than the 7th 
 century are distinctly in favour of a relative,—as 6 seems only a Latinizing 
 variation of 8s,—and lastly, as ὃς is the more difficult, though really the more 
 intelligible 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. cap, 19) than vice 
 
 versd, we unhesitatingly decide in favour of ὅς. 
 
 For further information on 
 
 this subject, see Griesbach, Symb, Crit. Vol. 1. p. 8—54, Tregelles, Printed 
 Text of N. T. p. 227, Davidson, Bibl. Criticism, ch. 66, p. 828. 
 
 Several exx. of a similar use of ὁμολ. 
 are cited by Wetstein and Raphel in 
 loc.; add Joseph. Ant. 1. το. 2, ἣν δὲ 
 τοιοῦτος duoNoy., ib. τι. 9. 6, ὁμολογ. 
 ‘EBpalwy ἄριστος; see also Suicer, 
 Thesaur. Vol. 11. p. 479, and Altmann, 
 loc. cit., where there isa discussion of 
 some merit on the whole verse. 
 
 τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον] ‘the 
 mystery of godliness ;’ ‘ipsa doctrina 
 ad quam omnis pietas sive religio 
 Christiana referenda est,’ Tittmann, 
 Synon. τ. p. 147: see notes on ver. 9, 
 where the gen. is investigated. 
 
 ὃς ἐφανερώθη K.7.A.] ‘who was mani- 
 fested in the flesh.’ The construction 
 cannot be either satisfactorily or 
 grammatically explained unless we 
 agree to abide by the plain and pro- 
 per meaning of the relative. Thus 
 then és is not emphatic, ‘He who’ 
 (Tregelles, Pr. Text, p. 278), nor * in- 
 cluding in itself both the demon- 
 strative and relative’ (Davidson, Bibl. 
 Crit. p. 846,—a very doubtful asser- 
 tion; comp. Day, Doctr. of the Relative, 
 § 1. p. 3; $60, 61. p. 98),—nor abso- 
 lute, ‘ecce! est qui’ (Matthies: John 
 i, 46, iii. 34, Rom. ii. 23, 1 Cor. vii. 
 37, 1 Johni. 3, are irrelevant, being 
 only exx. of an ellipsis of the 
 demonstr.),—nor, by a ‘constructio 
 ad sensum,’ the relative to μυστήριον, 
 Olsh. (Col, i. 26, 27 is no parallel, 
 
 being only a common case of attrac- 
 tion, Winer, Gr. ὃ 24. 3, p. 150),— 
 but is a relative to an omitted 
 though easily recognised antecedent, 
 viz. Christ; so De Wette, and appy. 
 Alf. (whose note however is not per- 
 fectly clear). To refer it to the pre- 
 ceding Θεοῦ (Wordsw., inferentially) 
 seems very forced, especially after the 
 intervention of the emphatic words 
 στῦλος κιτιλ. It may be remarked 
 that the rhythmical as well as anti- 
 thetical character of the clauses (see 
 the not improbable arrangement in 
 Mack, and comp. notes to Transl.), 
 and the known existence of such com- 
 positions (Eph. v. 19; compare Bull, 
 Fid, Nic. τι. 3. 1), render it not by 
 any means improbable that the words 
 are quoted from some well known 
 hymn, or possibly from some familiar 
 confession of faith ; comp. Winer, Gr. 
 § 64. 3, Ρ. 519, and see Rambach, 
 Anthologie, Vol. 1. p. 33, where Eph. 
 y. 14 is also ascribed to the same 
 source ; so also Huth. and Wiesinger. 
 ἐφανερώθη] ‘was manifested ;’ comp. 
 1 John i. 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, 
 
ΤῊ ΟΣ 
 
 o3 
 
 ματι, ὥφθη ἀγγέλοις, ἐκηρύχθη ἐν ἔθνεσιν, ἐπιστεύθη ἐν 
 
 κόσμῳ, ἀνελήμφθη ἐν δόξη. 
 
 Matth, xi. 19, Luke vii. 35) in 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 
 compared 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. τ. p. 163), nor ἡ θεία δύνα- 
 wuts, Coray (comp. Chrys., and see 
 Suicer, Thes. Vol. 11. p. 777), but the 
 higher principle of spiritual life (Schu- 
 bert, Gesch. der Seele, ὃ 48, Vol. τι. 
 p- 498), which was not itself the Di- 
 vinity (Wiesing.; this would be an 
 Apollinarian assertion), but especially 
 and intimately wnited (not blended) 
 and associated with it. In this higher 
 spiritual nature, in all its manifesta- 
 tions, whether in His wordsand 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. 143 compare 1 Pet. iii, 18 
 (not Rec.), and Middleton, in loc., p. 
 430, but esp. the excellent note of 
 Meyer on Rom, l.c. The assertion of 
 some commentators, that the term 
 σὰρξ includes the ‘body, soul, and 
 spirit’ of Christ, is not reconcileable 
 with the principles of biblical psycho- 
 logy; the σὰρξ may perhaps sometimes 
 include the ψυχή, but never, in such 
 passages of obvious antithesis, the 
 πνεῦμα as well; see Liicke, on John 1. 
 14. The student of St Paul’s 
 Epp. cannot be too earnestly recom- 
 mended to acquire some rudiments 
 of a most important but 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. Seelenlehre (a small but 
 excellent treatise), Delitzsch, Bibl. 
 Psychol., and Olshausen, Opuscula, 
 Art. 6. adp0n ἀγγέλοις] 
 ‘[was] seen of angels,’ Auth., i.e. ‘ap- 
 peared unto, showed Himself unto, 
 Angels.’ Both the use of ὀφθῆναι 
 (occurring 23 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 the 
 N.T. (not ‘Apostles,’ Leo, Peile, al., 
 but ‘Angels’), preclude any other 
 translation. The precise epoch refer- 
 red to cannot however be defined 
 with certainty. The grouping of the 
 clauses (see notes to T'ransl.), accord- 
 ing to which the first two in each 
 division appear to point to earthly 
 relations, the third to heavenly, seems 
 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 (Theoph., comp, Alf.), nor 
 any (assumed) specific manifestation 
 in heaven (De W.),—is here alluded 
 to: see esp, Chrys., ὠφθη ἀγγέλοις" 
 ὥστε καὶ ἄγγελοι μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν εἶδον τὸν 
 υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ πρότερον οὐχ ὁρῶντες; 
 so also Theod., τὴν γὰρ ἀόρατον τῆς 
 θεότητος φύσιν οὐδὲ ἐκεῖνοι ἑώρων, σαρ- 
 κωθέντα δὲ ἐθεάσαντο. Hammond in- 
 cludes also evil angels; this is pos- 
 sible, but the antithesis of clauses 
 seems opposed to it. 
 
 ἐπιστεύθη] ‘was believed on;’ not‘ fi- 
 dem sibi fecit,’ Raphel, but ‘fides illi 
 habita est,’ Beza; comp. 2 Thess. i. 
 10, and see Winer, Gr. § 39.1, p. 233- 
 ἀνελήμφθη ἐν δόξῃ] ‘was received up 
 
91 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOOEON A. 
 
 LV; 
 
 ε ’ - 9 , ~ 
 VITEPOLS καιροῖς ἀποστήσονται τινες τῆς 
 
 , 
 πίστεως, προσέχοντες πνεύμασιν πλανοις 
 
 in glory;’ ἐν here being used, not 
 simply for εἰς (Rosenm.), nor with 
 δόξῃ as an equivalent of ἐν δόξως (comp. 
 Hamm.), but in a sort of ‘ pregnans 
 sensus,’ se. els δόξαν καὶ ἐστὶν ἐν δόξῃ 
 (Wahl, Huther); see Winer, Gr. ὃ 50. 
 4, P- 367 Sq., and comp. Ellendt, Lez. 
 Sophocl. Vol. 1. p. 598. The event 
 here referred to is simply and plainly 
 the historical ascent of Christ into 
 heaven. No words can be more dis- 
 tinct; compare ἀνελήμφθη, Mark xvi. 
 19, Acts i. 2, 11 (part.), 22; and dve- 
 φέρετο els τὸν οὐρανόν, Luke xxiv. 51 
 (Rec., Lachm.). For a good sermon 
 on the whole verse see Sanderson, 
 Serm. 1x. (ad Aul.), p. 479 sq. (Lond. 
 1689), and for devotional comments of 
 the highest strain, Bp. Hall, Great 
 Mystery of Godliness, Vol. y111. p. 330 
 (Oxford, 1837). 
 
 Cuapter IV, 1. To δὲ Πνεῦμα] 
 ‘But the (Holy) Spirit;’ contrast to 
 the foregoing in the present and in the 
 future,—the particle δὲ here indicating 
 no transition to a new subject (Auth., 
 Conyb.; comp. notes on Gal. 111. 8), 
 but retaining its usual antithetical 
 force ; ‘great indeed as is the mystery 
 of godliness, the Holy Spirit has still 
 declared that there shall be disbelief 
 and apostasy:’ μὴ θαυμάσης, Chrys. 
 ῥητῶς] ‘distinctly,’ ‘expressly’ (dave- 
 ρῶς, σαφῶς, ὁμολογουμένως, ὡς μὴ ἀμ- 
 φιβάλλειν, Chrys.; ‘non obscure autin- 
 volute, ut fere loqui solent prophet,’ 
 Justiniani), not only in the prophecies 
 of our Lord, Matth. xxiv. 11, al., and 
 the predictions, whether of the Apo- 
 stles (comp. 1 John ii. 18, 2 Pet. iii. 3, 
 Jude 18) or of the prophets in the 
 yarious Christian churches (Neander, 
 
 To δὲ Πνεῦμα ῥητῶς λέγει ὅτι ἐν 
 
 In the latter times 
 men shall fall away 
 from the faith, and 
 shall teach principles 
 of abstinence μέ ἘΠ 
 are not approv: iy 
 God, 
 
 Planting, Vol. 1. p. 340), but more 
 particularly in the special revelations 
 which the Holy Spirit made to St 
 Paul himself; comp. 2 Thess. il. 3 sq. 
 ὑστέροις καιροῖς] ‘latter times.’ This 
 expression, used only in this place, is 
 not perfectly synonymous (Reuss, 
 Théol. Chrét. Vol. τι. p. 224) with 
 ἐσχάταις juépacs, 2 Tim. 111. 1, 2 Pet. 
 iii. 3 (not Rec.), James v. 3 (comp. 
 καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ, τ Pet. i. 5, ἔσχατος 
 χρόνος, Jude 18): the latter expression, 
 as Huther correctly observes, points 
 more specifically to the period imme- 
 diately preceding the completion of 
 the kingdom of Christ; the former 
 only to a period future to the speaker, 
 —ol ἀκόλουθοι χρόνοι, Coray; see Pear- 
 son, Minor Works, Vol. 1. p. 42. In 
 the apostasy of the present the in- 
 spired Apostle sees the commencement 
 of the fuller apostasy of the future. 
 In this and a few other passages in 
 the N.T. καιρὸς appears to be nearly 
 synonymous with xpoves; comp. Lo- 
 beck, Ajaz, p. 85. 
 
 προσέχοντες] See notes on ch. i. 4. 
 πνεύμ. πλάνοις] ‘deceiving spirits ;’ 
 certainly not merely the false teachers 
 themselves (Mack, Coray,al.),—a need- 
 less violation of the primary meaning 
 of rretua,—but, as the antithesis τὸ 
 Πνεῦμα 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 iv. 1 sq. διδασκ. δαι- 
 μονίων] ‘doctrines of devils;’ not 
 ‘doctrines about devils,’ Mede, al., 
 ‘demonolatry,’ Peile (dau. being a 
 gen. objecti), but ‘doctrines emanating 
 from, taught by, devils’ (gen. subjecti); 
 see Winer, Gr. § 30. τ. obs., p. 168, 
 
TVA; 65 ἋΣ 3: 
 
 o9 
 
 καὶ διδασκαλίαις δαιμονίων, ἐν ὑποκρίσει ψευδολόγων, κε- 2 
 
 καυτηριασμένων τὴν ἰδίαν συνείδησιν, κωλυόντων γαμεῖν, 3 
 Α 
 
 ἀπέχεσθαι βρωμάτων, ἃ ὁ Θεὸς ἔκτισεν εἰς μετάλημψιν 
 
 and comp, Thorndike, Cov. of Grace, 
 11. 12, Vol. mi. p. 195 (A.-C. Libr.). 
 The term δαιμόνιον, it may be observed, 
 is not here a ‘vox media’ (comp. Ign. 
 Smyrn. 3), but hasits usual N.T. mean- 
 ing; see Pearson, Minor Works, Vol. 11. 
 p.46. Olshausen significantlyremarks 
 on this passage, that man never stands 
 isolated; if he is not influenced by τὸ 
 Πν. τὸ ἅγιον, he at once falls under 
 the power of τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς πλάνης 
 (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 k.7.X. WAS 
 brought about and furthered; év being 
 instrumental. Leoand Matth. explain 
 the clause as a second modal definition 
 of the fallers away, parallel to προσέ- 
 xovres k.T.’., and more immediately 
 dependent on ἀποστήσονται; ‘habent 
 in se eam ὑπόκρ., qualis est ὑποκρ. 
 wevdor.,’ Heinr., and so appy. Auth. 
 This is doubtful; the third clause 
 Kw. γαμεῖν seems far too direct an 
 act of the false teachers suitably to 
 find a place in such an indirect defini- 
 tion of the falsely taught. Matth. 
 urges the absence of the art. before 
 ὑποκρίσει, but this after the prep. (Hu- 
 ther needlessly pleads N.T. laxity) 
 is perfectly intelligible (Winer, Gr. 
 § 19. 2, p. 114), even if it be not 
 referable to the principle of correla- 
 tion; comp. Middleton, Art. 11. 3. 6. 
 Thus then lying teachers will be the 
 mediate, evil spirits the immediate 
 causes of the apostasy. 
 κεκαυτ. THY ἰδίαν συνείδ.}] ‘being 
 branded on their own conscience :’ the 
 acc. with the passive verb (comp. ch. 
 
 Vi. 5, διεφθαρμένοι τὸν νοῦν, dc.) cor- 
 rectly specifies the place in which the 
 action of the verb is principally mani- 
 fested. The exact application of the 
 metaphor is doubtful: it may be re- 
 ferred to the ἐσχάτη dvadyyola after 
 cautery (Theod.), or more probably to 
 the penal brand which their depraved 
 conscience bore, as it were, on its 
 brow (Theoph.); ‘insignite nequitia 
 viros, et quasi scelerum mancipia,’ 
 Justiniani. See the numerous and 
 fairly pertinent exx. cited by Elsner, 
 Obs. Vol. 11. p. 298, Kypke, Obs. Vol. 
 1. p. 357. ᾿Ιδίαν is not without em- 
 phasis: they felt 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. 111. 6, 
 Ireneus, Her.t. 24,al.,ed. Mass, ), first 
 showed itself in the false asceticism 
 of the Essenes (see esp. Joseph. Bell, 
 Jud. τι. 8. 2, γάμου μὲν ὑπεροψία παρ᾽ 
 αὐτοῖς, Antiq. XVIII. I. 5, οὔτε γαμετὰς 
 εἰσάγονται, Pliny, Ν. H. v. 17) and 
 Therapeute, and was one of those 
 nascent errors which the inspired apo- 
 stle foresaw would grow into the im- 
 pious dogma of later times, ‘ nubere 
 et generare a Satand dicunt esse,’ 
 Trenzus, l.c.: see Suicer, Thesaur. 
 Vol. 1. p. 735. ἀπέχεσθαι 
 βρωμάτων] ‘ (bidding) to abstain from 
 meats ;’? κωλυόντων must be resolved 
 into παραγγελλόντων μή (see ch. ii. 
 12), from which zapayy. must be 
 carried on to the second clause; see 
 Winer, Gr. § 66. 2, p. 548. Distinct 
 
56 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOGSEON A. 
 
 ‘ ’ , “ a 4 
 μετὰ εὐχαριστίας τοῖς πιστοῖς Kal ἐπεγνωκόσιν τὴν 
 
 4 ἀλήθειαν. 
 
 notices of this abstinence and severity 
 in respect of food are to be found in 
 the account of the Therapeute in 
 Philo, Vit. Contempl. § 4, Vol. u. 
 p- 477 (ed. Mang.). When there are 
 thus such clear traces of a morbid 
 and perverted asceticism in the Apo- 
 stle’s own day, it is idle in Baur to 
 urge these noticesas evidences against 
 the authenticity of the epistle. It 
 may be remarked that the view taken 
 of the errors combated in this and 
 the other Past. Epp. (see notes on 
 ch, i. 3) appears to be confirmed by 
 the present passage. St Paul is allud- 
 ing throughout,not to Judaism proper, 
 but tothat false spiritualism and those 
 perverted ascetical tendencies, which 
 emanating from Judaism, and gradu- 
 ally mingling with similar principles 
 derived from other systems (comp. 
 Col. ii. 8 sq., and see Reuss, Théol. 
 Chrét. Vol. 11. pp. 645, 646), at last, 
 after the Apostolic age, became 
 merged in a fuller and wider Gnos- 
 ticism; see also Wiesinger in loc., 
 whose indirect confutation of Baur is 
 satisfactory and convincing. Onasce- 
 ticism generally, and the view taken 
 of it in the N.T., comp. Rothe, Theol. 
 Ethik, § 878 sq., Vol. 11. p. 120 sq. 
 
 ἃ ὁ Θεὸς κ-τ.λ.}] ‘ which God created 
 to be partaken of,’ &c.: confutation of 
 the second error. The reason why the 
 former error is left unnoticed has 
 been differently explained. The most 
 probable solution is that the prohibi- 
 tion of marriage hadnotas yetassumed 
 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. Tots 
 
 “ $e U A , ‘ ot 9 , 
 ὅτι πᾶν κτίσμα Θεοῦ καλόν, Kat οὐδὲν ἀπό- 
 
 πιστοῖς] ‘for those who believe,’ ‘for 
 the faithful, Hamm., Est. The dat. 
 is not the dat. of reference to, Beng. 
 (comp. notes on Gal. 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. Kal ἐπεγνωκόσιν 
 K.T.A.] ‘and who have full knowledge 
 of,’ &c.: the omission of the article 
 (Winer, Gr. § 19. 4, p. 116) shows that 
 the πιστοὶ and ἐπεγν. x.7.d. constitute 
 a single class, the latter term being 
 little more than explanatory of the 
 former (Estius). On ἐπεγνωκότες 
 (ἐπίγνωσις Ξε ἀδίστακτος γνῶσις, Coray), 
 see notes on Eph. i. 17, and Valck. 
 on Luke, Ὁ. 14 sq. ὅτι πᾶν 
 K.T.A.] ‘ because every creature of God 
 is good ;’ not explanatory of (Theoph., 
 Beng.), but giving the reason for the 
 foregoing words; i.e. not what is 
 calledan objective (Donalds. Gr. 8 584), 
 but a causal sentence. The Apostle 
 has to substantiate his former decla- 
 ration 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 nega- 
 tive sentence, καὶ οὐδὲν x.7.d. (parallel 
 to els μετάλ. μετὰ evx.), Which again 
 is finally confirmed 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 itis suffici- 
 ently answered by Planck, who cites 
 several instances, e.g. προσκοπὴ 2 Cor. 
 vi. 3, ὀφείλημα Rom. iv. 4, &c., of words 
 
ΤῊ» 4, Ss. 
 
 57 
 
 βλητον μετὰ εὐχαριστίας λαμβανόμενον' ἁγιάζεται 5 
 γὰρ διὰ λόγου Θεοῦ καὶ ἐντεύξεως. 
 
 thus only once used, when another 
 and more usual synonym might have 
 been expected. κτίσμα Θεοῦ] 
 ‘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, 
 kanov,ib.; comp. Eeclus, xxxix. 33, 34. 
 ἀπόβλητον] ‘to be refused:’ expan- 
 sion 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 
 ὃ maxim even of the heathen that 
 the good gifts of the gods were not 
 to be refused; so Hom. 11. m1. 65, 
 comp. Lucian, Timon, ὃ 37, οὔτοι ἀπό- 
 βλητά εἰσι τὰ δῶρα τὰ παρὰ Tov Διός 
 (cited by Kypke). The whole of this 
 verse is well discussed by Bp. Sander- 
 son, Serm. v. (ad Populum) p. 233 
 sq. (Lond. 1689). μετὰ εὐχ. 
 λαμβ.1 ‘if it be received,’ &e.; con- 
 ditional use of the participle; see 
 Donalds. Gr. § 505, Kriiger, Sprachl. 
 § 56. 11, and comp. Winer, Gr. § 45. 
 2, p. 307. This clause specially limits 
 the assertion οὐδὲν ἀπόβλ., and while 
 it shows how the assertion is to be 
 accepted serves also to echo and elu- 
 cidate the previous limitation, μετὰ 
 evx., in ver. 3. Wiesinger considers 
 καλὸν as also dependent on μετὰ evy. 
 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 εἰς 
 μετάλ., and that the μετάλημψις was 
 to be μετὰ εὐχαρ., so the present verse 
 containstwo confirmatory clauses, viz. 
 that the food, being God’s creation, is 
 
 absolutely good (see Sanderson, Serm. 
 v. § 4), and also that if so, μετὰ evy. 
 λαμβανόμ. it is οὐκ ἀπόβλ., or rela- 
 tively 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 par- 
 taken of; present tense corresponding 
 to λαμβανόμενον. 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- 
 cleanif partaken of with thanksgiving, 
 is substantiated by more nearly de- 
 fining εὐχαριστία and more clearly 
 showing its sanctifying effect. ‘A-yd- 
 few is thus not merely declarative, ‘to 
 account as holy,’ but effective, ‘to 
 make holy,’ ‘to sanctify.’ In some 
 few things (e.g. εἰδωλόθυτα, Chrys.) 
 the ἁγιασμὸς might actually be abso- 
 lute in its character ; in others, whe- 
 ther pronounced legally ἀκάθαρτα, or 
 accounted so by a false asceticism 
 (e.g. the Essenes avoided wine and 
 flesh on their weekly festival, Philo, 
 Vit. Contempl. § 9, Vol. 11. p. 483), 
 the ἁγιασμὸς would naturally be rela- 
 tive. Hstius and Wiesinger seem to 
 take ἁγιάζεται as comprehensively 
 absolute, and to refer the impurity 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 ἢ γῆ ἐν 
 τοῖς ἔργοις cov, and see also Joseph. 
 Ant. 1. 1. 4) took the special effect of 
 unhallowing the animal or vegetable 
 creation? If so, would not a law such 
 as that in Lev. xix. 23, 24, which ap- 
 plied to the polluted land of Canaan, 
 
8 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOOEON A. 
 
 6 Taira ὑποτιθέμενος τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς 
 καλὸς ἔση διάκονος Χριστοῦ ᾿Ἰησοῦ ἐν-- 
 
 Reject all idle teach- 
 ings and discussion, 
 and practically exer- 
 cise thyself in godli- 
 ness, Which is lasting- 
 
 - , ~ ’ 4 
 τρεφόμενος τοῖς λογοις τῆς πίστεως KAL {ly profitable. 
 
 have been of universal application ? 
 The effect of the primal curse is in- 
 deed most plain and palpable (see 
 Destiny of the Creature, p. 10 8q.), but 
 it seems doubtful whether it is to be 
 recognised in the special form here 
 alluded to. λόγου κ.τ.λ.] 
 ‘the word of God and supplication.’ 
 The regular and unvarying use of 
 λόγος Θεοῦ in the N.T. wholly pre- 
 cludes the gen. being taken as objecti, 
 —‘oratioad Deum facta,’ Wahl. The 
 λόγος Θεοῦ is the word of God as 
 uttered and revealed by Him in the 
 Scriptures, and here, as the close 
 union with évreviis clearly suggests, 
 must be referred not to any decree of 
 God (Sanders, Serm. v. § 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 evxa- 
 ριστία is expressed in the fullest man- 
 ner; on its objective side as to the 
 contents of prayer, and on its subjec- 
 tive side (ἐντυγχάνειν) as to the mode 
 in which it is made. On ἔντευξις, see 
 notes ch. ii. 1, and for an ancient 
 form of grace before meat, see Alf. 
 in loc. . 
 
 6. Ταῦτα ὑποτιθ)ῦ ‘By setting 
 forth, scil. ‘if thow settest forth, 
 teachest (Syr.), these things :’ οὐκ εἶπεν 
 ἐπιτάττων, οὐκ εἶπε παραγγέλλων, ἀλλὰ 
 ὑποτιθ., τουτέστιν, ὡς συμβουλεύων 
 ταῦτα ὑποτίθεσο, Chrys. On the con- 
 struction 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, and comp. notes on ch. i. 
 
 16) seems clearly to imply not merely 
 ‘in memoriam revocare,’ Auth., but 
 ‘docere,’ ‘ instituere,’ whether ‘ amice 
 et leniter’ (Loesn.; comp. Philo, Vit. 
 Mos. τι. ὃ 9, Vol. 11. p. 142, ed. Mang., 
 ὑποτίθεται Kal παρηγορεῖ TO πλέον ἢ 
 κελεύει; Hesych., ὑποθέσθαι" συμβου- 
 λεῦσαι), or, as in the present case, 
 somewhat more positively and pre- 
 cisely, τὸ παραινεῖν καὶ βουλεύεσθαι 
 (Budeus ; comp. Joseph, Bell. Jud. u. 
 8. 7, τὴν αὐτὴν ὑποτίθενται δίαιταν, See 
 exx. in Krebs, Obs. p. 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. τι. p. 582, 
 who well supports the latter meaning 
 of ὑποτίθεσθαι. διάκονος] 
 ‘minister :’ ‘thou wilt fitly and pro- 
 perly discharge thy dcaxovlay,’ 2 Tim. 
 iv. 5; ‘tuo muneri cumulatissime sa- 
 tisfacies,’ Just. ἐντρεφό- 
 pevos] ‘being nourished up.’ The 
 present properly and specially marks 
 a continuous and permanent nutrition 
 in ‘the words of faith;’ see Winer, 
 Gr. § 45. 5, P-311. So, with his usual 
 acuteness, Chrys., τὸ διηνεκὲς τῆς els 
 τὰ τοιαῦτα προσοχῆς δηλῶν. Loesner 
 aptly compares, among other exx. (p. 
 399, 400), Philo, Leg. ad Cai. § 29, Vol. 
 11. p. 574 (ed. Mang.), οὐκ ἐνετράφης 
 οὐδὲ ἐνησκήθης τοῖς ἱεροῖς γράμμασιν ; 
 comp. also § 26, Vol. 1. p. 571, and 
 see D’Orville, Chariton, p. 37: similar 
 exx. of ‘innutriri’ are cited in Suicer, 
 Thesaur. 5.0. Vol. 1. p. 1127. 
 
 τοῖς λόγοις τῆς πίστεως] ‘the words 
 of faith,’ gen. subjecti; ‘ words, terms, 
 in which, as it were, faith expresses 
 itself,’ Huther. Πίστις, as Beng. sug- 
 gests, involves areference to Timothy, 
 
 ἡ καλὴ διδασκ. & reference to others. 
 
EV 0, 7. 
 
 τῆς καλῆς διδασκαλίας 
 βεβήλους καὶ γραώδεις 
 
 On the meaning οὗ πίστις, see notes 
 on Gal. i. 23, and Reuss, Théol. Chrét. 
 Vol. 11, p. 127, who however too 
 much gives up the subjective reference 
 which the word always seems to in- 
 volve. Inthe following relative clause, 
 if ἧς the reading of Lachm. [ed. min.; 
 only with A, 80] be adopted, it must 
 be regarded as an instance of unusual, 
 though defensible attraction; see Wi- 
 ner, Gr. § 24. 1, p. 148. 
 
 παρηκολούθηκας] ‘thow hast closely 
 followed (as a disciple), hast been a 
 follower of;’ 2 Tim. iii. 10; perf. in 
 appropriate connexion with the pres. 
 ἐντρεφόμ. Ἰαρακολουθεῖν (‘subsequi 
 ut assequaris,’ Valck. on Luke i. 3) 
 is frequently used with ethical refer- 
 ence (e.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. τ. p. 207, 
 and comp. Dissen, on Demosth. 1. 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.c.), but of attending to a 
 course of instruction, ὡς μαθητὴς διδά- 
 oxadov, Coray; the καλὴ διδασκαλία 
 was, as it were, a school of which 
 Timothy ‘was a disciple;’ see Peile 
 
 in loc. The Syr. As] eG 
 
 y =x 
 fin qué doctus es] and the Vulg. 
 ‘quam assecutus es’ (comp. Auth.) ex- 
 press rather too strongly the simple 
 result, and too insufficiently the pro- 
 cess by which it was attained, 
 
 ἢ παρηκολούθηκας. 
 
 59 
 Tots δὲ if 
 
 μύθους παραιτοῦ' γύμναζε δὲ 
 
 7. Τοὺς δὲ βεβήλ. k.7.A.] ‘But 
 with the (current) profane and old- 
 wives’ fables having nothing todo.’ The 
 article (not noticed by the majority of 
 expositors) appears to allude to the 
 well known character and the general 
 circulation which the μῦθοι had ob- 
 tained. These Jewish fables (Chrys. , 
 see notes on ch. i. 4) are designated 
 βέβηλοι, ‘profane’ (ch. vi. 20, 2 Tim. 
 ii. 16; of persons, 1 Tim. i. 9, Heb. xii. 
 16), in tacit antithesis to εὐσέβ., 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 (ἅπ. λεγόμ.) as involving fool- 
 ish and absurd statements, Jetst. 
 aptly compares Strabo, 1. p. 32 a, τὴν 
 ποιητικὴν ypawdn μυθολογίαν ἀποφαί- 
 νει. The assertion of Baur that 
 γραώδης points to a γραῖα, the Sophia- 
 Achamoth (comp. Gieseler, Kirchen- 
 gesch. § 45), is untenable; indepen- 
 dently of other considerations, it may 
 be remarked that γραϊκὸς (Clem. Alex. 
 Ped. 111. 4, p. 270, Pott.) would have 
 been thus more grammatically exact 
 than the present ypaddys (ypaoeldys). 
 παραιτοῦ] ‘decline, have nothing to do 
 with,’ ἀπόφευγε, Coray; always simi- 
 larly used in the second person in the 
 Past. Epp., e.g. ch. v. 11 and Tit, 
 111. 10 (persons), 2 Tim. ii. 23 (things). 
 IIapair. does not occur again in St 
 Paul’s Epp. ; it is however used three 
 times in Heb. (xii. 19, 25 bis) and 
 four times by St Luke: comp. Joseph, 
 Antiq. 111. 8. 8, παραιτησάμενος πᾶσαν 
 τιμήν. Loesner, Obs. p. 404, gives a 
 copious list of exx. from Philo, the 
 most pertinent of which is Alleg. 11. 
 § 48, Vol. 1. p. 115 (ed. Mang.), where 
 προσιέμενος and παραιτούμενος are put 
 in opposition: see also notes on ch. y. 
 
00 
 
 ὃ σεαυτὸν πρὸς εὐσέβειαν. 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 fis 
 
 ἡ γὰρ σωματικὴ γυμνασία 
 
 A A , 
 πρὸς ὀλίγον ἐστὶν ὠφέλιμος" ἡ δὲ εὐσέβεια πρὸς πάντα 
 
 ’ , , τ: ᾽ ,ὔ » ~ ~ ΄ 4 
 ὠφέλιμος ἐστιν, ἐπαγγελίαν ἐχουσα ζωῆς τῆς νὺν και 
 
 Il. γύμναζε δέ] ‘and rather 
 exercise ;’ so Auth., correctly marking 
 the δέ, which serves to present anti- 
 thetically the positive side of the con- 
 duct Timothy is urged to assume. He 
 is first negatively παραιτεῖσθαι μύθους, 
 then positively γυμνάζειν x.7.X. The 
 special term γυμνάζειν (Heb. v. 14, 
 xii. 11, 2 Pet. 11, 14) appropriately 
 marks thestrenuous effort which Timo- 
 thy was to make, in contrast with the 
 studied ἄσκησις of the false teachers. 
 πρὸς evoéB.] ‘for piety; εὐσέβεια, 
 ‘practical, cultive, piety’ (see notes on 
 ch. li. 2), was the end toward which 
 Timothy was to direct his endeavours. 
 8. γὰρ confirms the preceding 
 clause by putting σωματικὴ γυμνασία, 
 the outward and the visible, in con- 
 trast with γυμνασία πρὸς εὐσέβ., the 
 internal and the unseen, 
 ἡ. σωματικὴ yupv.] ‘the exercise, or 
 
 ° τὶ n~ 
 training, of the body,’ Syr. 1250 
 
 1; ae [exercitatio corporis]. The 
 
 exact meaning of these words is some- 
 what doubtful. Τυμνασία may be re- 
 ferred, either (a) to the mere physical 
 training of the body, gymnastic exer- 
 cises proper, De W., Huth., and, as 
 might be expected, Justin., Est., 
 Mack, al.; or (b) to the ascetic train- 
 ing of the body (1 Cor. ix. 27) in its 
 most general aspect (ἡ ἄκρα ox\npa- 
 ywyla τοῦ σώμ., Coray), with refer- 
 ence to the theosophistic 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., Theoph. 
 (though on mistaken grounds), Theod., 
 (Ecum., and has been defended with 
 
 some ingenuity by De Wette: see 
 Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. Vol. 1. p. 804. 
 As however γυμνασία is not uncom- 
 monly used in less special references 
 (e.g. Aristot. Top. v1. 5, Polyb. Hist. 
 I. I. 2),—as γύμναζε (ver. 7) prepares 
 us for this modification,—as the con- 
 text seems to require a contrast 
 between external observances and in- 
 ward holiness,—and, lastly, as ascetic 
 practices formed so very distinctive 
 a feature of that current Jewish Theo- 
 sophy (Joseph. Bell. Jud. τι. 8. 2 54.» 
 Philo, Vit. Contempl. ὃ 4 sq.) which in 
 this chapter appears so distinctly al- 
 luded to, it seems impossible to avoid 
 deciding in favour of the latter in- 
 terp.; so Beveridge, Serm. ct. Vol. 
 Iv. p. 408 (A.-C. Libr.), Neander, 
 Planting, Vol. 1. p. 340 (Bohn), and 
 appy. the majority of modern expo- 
 sitors. If it be urged that 7 
 σωματικὴ γυμν. (in this sense) was un- 
 restrictedly condemned in ver. 2, 3, 
 and could never be styled even πρὸς 
 ὀλίγον ὠφέλιμος, it seems enough to 
 say that there the Apostle is speak- 
 ing of its morbid developments in the 
 ὕστεροι καιροί, here of the more inno- 
 cent though comparatively profitless 
 asceticism of the present, 
 
 πρὸς ὀλίγον taken per se may either 
 refer to the duration (Syr., Theod.; 
 comp. James iy. 14) of the ὠφέλεια, or 
 the extent to which it may be applied 
 (Huther, De Wette). The context 
 however, and the antithesis πρὸς πάν- 
 τα, seem to be decidedly in fayour of 
 the latter, and to limit the meaning to 
 ‘a little’ (‘ad modicum,’ Vulg.)—‘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. 
 
 
 
DB 195. £0. 
 
 τῆς μελλούσης. 
 ΕΣ 
 ἀξιος. 
 
 61 
 
 A e , Α , 3 - 
 πιστος O λογος Kal TWaons ἀποδοχῆς 9 
 3 A 4 A 4 9 , (4 
 εἰς TOUTO Yap κοπιωῶμεν και ὀνειδιζόμεθα, ott IO 
 
 Io. κοπιῶμεν] In ed. r, 2, and Tisch., καὶ is prefixed, with FGKL; many 
 
 mss.; Chrys., Theod., Theoph., Gicum. (Rec.). 
 
 It is omitted by ACDN; 
 
 Clarom., Aug., al.; Cyr., Chrys., Dam., al. (Lachm.), and perhaps rightly, the 
 addition of δὲ being appy. just sufiicient to turn the scale, 
 
 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 application of this clause, 
 see Barrow, Serm. 11. 11. Vol. 1. p. 
 23 sq. (Oxf. 1830). ἔπαγ- 
 γελίαν... ζωῆς] ‘promise of life.’ The 
 genitival relation is not perfectly clear. 
 If it be the gen. of identity or appo- 
 sition (comp. Scheuerl. Synt. § 12. 1, 
 p. 82), ¢w, the import or rather ob- 
 ject of the promise, would seem at 
 first sight to involve two applications, 
 quantitative (‘long life,’ Eph. vi. 3, 
 De W.) when in connexion with τῆς 
 viv, qualitative (‘holy, blessed life’) 
 when in connexion with τῆς μελλού- 
 ons. If again it be the gen. of refer- 
 ence to (Huth., comp. Alf.), or of the 
 point of view (Scheuerl. Synt. § 18. 1, 
 Ῥ. 129 Sq.), ζυὴ retains its general 
 meaning (‘vital existence,’ ¢c.), but 
 ἐπαγγελία becomes indefinite, and 
 moreover is in a connexion with its 
 dependent genitive not supported by 
 any other passage in the N.T. This 
 last objection is so grave that it seems 
 preferable to adopt the first form of 
 gen., but in both members to give {w7 
 its higher and more definitely scriptu- 
 ral sense, and to regard it as involving 
 the idea, not of mere length, or of 
 mere material blessings (contrast Mark 
 X. 30, μετὰ διωγμῶν), but of spiritual 
 happiness (εὐδαιμονία, Coray) and holi- 
 ness; in a word, as expressing ‘ the 
 highest blessedness of the creature :’ 
 see Trench, Synon. § 27, whose philo- 
 logy however, in connecting (w7 with 
 
 aw, is here doubtfu!; it is rather con- 
 nected with Lat. ‘vivere’ (Sanscr, jtv); 
 see esp. Pott, Htym. Forsch. Vol. τ. p. 
 265, Donalds. Cratyl. § 112, Benfey, 
 Wurzellex. Vol. 1. p. 684. There is 
 a good treatise on ζωὴ in Olsh. Opusc. 
 p. 187 sq. τῆς νῦν K.T.A.] 
 The two independent parts into which 
 the life promised to εὐσέβεια is di- 
 vided, life in this world, and in that 
 which is to come: the promises of the 
 Old covenant are involved and incor- 
 porated in the New (Taylor, Life of 
 Christ, 111. 13, Disc. 15. 15), and en- 
 hanced byit. On the use of the art., 
 which thus serves to mark each part 
 as separate, comp. Winer, Gr, § 19. 5, 
 De 7. 
 
 9. πιστὸς ὁ λόγος k.t.A.] See notes 
 on ch. i, 15; here the formula is con- 
 firmatory of what immediately pre- 
 cedes, τὸ ὅτι ἡ εὐσεβ. ὠφελεῖ καὶ els 
 τὴν παροῦσαν καὶ εἰς τὴν μέλλ. ἕωὴν 
 εἷναι λόγος ἄξιος νὰ πιστεύεται. Coray 
 [modern Greek]. The particle γάρ, 
 ver, 10, obviously precludes any refer- 
 ence to what follows (opp. to Conyb.) ; 
 comp. notes on ch. iil. 1. 
 
 το. εἰς τοῦτο γάρ] ‘ For looking to 
 this’ (Col.i.29, comp. Donalds. Cratyl. 
 § 170), ‘in reference to this,’ viz, the 
 realization of the promise in our own 
 cases: τί δήποτε yap τὸν πολὺν τοῦτον 
 ἀνεδεξάμεθα πόνον... εἰ μή τίς ἐστι τῶν 
 πόνων ἀντίδοσις; Theod. The refer- 
 ence of eis τοῦτο (by no means syn- 
 onymous with διὰ τοῦτο, Grot.) to 
 the following 67:,— ‘therefore we 
 both labour...because,’ Auth. (comp. 
 Theoph., Beza, al.), has been recently 
 
62 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOOGEON A. 
 
 ’ , 9. A ~ ~ “ἢ 9 ‘ ’ 4. 
 ἠλπίκαμεν ἐπὶ Θεῷ ζῶντι, ὅς ἐστιν σωτὴρ πάντων ἀν- 
 
 ’ ~ 
 θρώπων, μάλιστα πιστῶν. 
 
 defended by Wiesinger; but surely 
 this interrupts the causal connexion 
 (yap) with ver. 8, and its confirmatory 
 sequel ver. 9. It is not necessary to 
 restrict τοῦτο to ἐπαγγελ. ζωῆς τῆς 
 μελλούσης (Wiesing.), for although 
 this would naturally form the chief 
 end of the κοπιᾶν and ὀνειδίζεσθαι, 
 still ἑωὴ (in its extended sense) ἡ viv 
 might also suitably form its object, as 
 being a kind of pledge and ἀῤῥαβὼν 
 of ζωὴ ἡ μέλλουσα. κοπιῶμεν 
 K.7.A.] ‘we labour and are the objects 
 of reproach ;’ not merely St Paulalone 
 (Col. i. 29), or St Paul and Timothy, 
 but the Apostles in general (1 Cor. iv. 
 12), and all Christian missionaries 
 and teachers. Komidw is frequently 
 used in reference to both apostolic 
 and ministerial labours (Rom. xvi. 12, 
 1 Cor. xv. το, Gal. iv. 11, al.), with 
 allusion, as the derivation [ko7-, 
 xo7Tw,—not Sanscr. kap, Benfey, 
 Wurzellex. Vol. τ. p. 268] suggests, to 
 the toil and suffering which accom- 
 panied them. The reading is not 
 perfectly certain: ὀνειδ. is replaced by 
 ἀγωνιζόμεθα (Lachm.) in ACFGKN!; 
 it is however adopted appy. only by 
 one Version, Syr.-Phil., and is sus- 
 picious as being easier, and as having 
 possibly originated from Col. i. 29. 
 If καὶ κοπ. (Rec.) be adopted (see 
 critical note) the καὶ hasan emphasis 
 which, it must be said, seems pecu- 
 liarly appropriate, comp. 1 Cor. iv. 
 11; not only, ‘ toil and shame’ (καὶ) 
 nor ‘where toil, thereshame’ (τε... καὶ), 
 but ‘as well the one as the other’ 
 (καὶ... καί), both parts being simultane- 
 ously presented in one predication ; 
 see Winer, Gr. § 53. 4, p. 389, and 
 comp. Donalds. Cratyl. § 189, 195, 
 pp. 322, 338. ἠλπίκαμεν] ‘we 
 have set our hope on,’ ‘have set and 
 
 do set hope on,’—the perfect express- 
 ing the continuance and permanence 
 of the ἐλπίς ; see Bernhardy, Synt. x. 
 6, p. 378, and comp. ch. v. 5, Vi. 17; 
 John y. 45, 2 Cor.i. το. Peile and 
 Wiesinger compare 1 Cor. xy. 19, 
 ἠλπικότες ἐσμέν, but it should not be 
 forgotten that there 7Az. ἐσμὲν is not 
 merely -- ἠλπίκαμεν, see Meyer in loc. 
 ᾿Ελπίζω, like πιστεύω (comp. notes on 
 ch. i. 16), is found in the N.T, in con- 
 nexion with different prepp. ; (a) with 
 ἐν, 1 Cor. xv. 19, ‘spes in Christo re- 
 posita;’ (Ὁ) with εἰς, John v. 45, 2 
 Cor. i. 10, 1 Pet. iii. 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. i. 
 16, and on Gal. iii. 27; (c) 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 ace, (ch. v. 5), marking the 
 mental direction with a view to that 
 reliance; comp. Donalds. Gr. § 483. 
 The simple dative is found (Lachm., 
 Tisch.) in Matth. xii. 21. 
 
 ὅς ἐστιν «.7.A.] ‘who is the Saviour of 
 all men;’ relative clause, not how- 
 ever with any causal or explanatory 
 force (this would more naturally be 
 doris), 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 of all men, chiefly, 
 especially, of them that believe. De 
 Wette objects to the use of μάλιστα; 
 surely the primary notion of μάλα, 
 ‘in a great degree’ [closely connected 
 with μεγάλα, comp. ‘moles;’ Pott, 
 Etym. Forsch. Vol. 1. p, 283], is here 
 perfectly suitable and proper ; God is 
 
Ἀπ iT. 
 
 Let not thy youth in- 
 duce contempt ; be ra- 
 thera model. Neglect 
 not thy spiritual gifts, 
 but persevere in all 
 thy duties, 
 
 the σωτὴρ of all men, in the greatest 
 degree of the πιστοί; 1.6. 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 ob- 
 serves, an argumentum a minori; 
 ‘quanto magis eam [Deibeneficentiam] 
 experientur pii qui in eum sperant,’ 
 Caly. On this important text, see 
 four sermons by Barrow, Works, Vol. 
 Iv. p. 1 Sq. (Oxf. 1830). 
 
 11. Ilapayyedde]‘ Command,’ Auth., 
 Vulg., Goth.; not ‘exhort,’ Hamm., 
 or ‘mone privatim,’ Grot., but in the 
 usual and proper sense, ‘precipe,’ 
 ἐπίταττε, Chrys., who thus explains 
 the use of each term: τῶν πραγμάτων 
 τὰ μὲν διδασκαλίας δεῖται, τὰ δὲ ἐπι- 
 ΦὙγῆ5...... οἷόν τι λέγω, τὸ μὴ ἰουδαΐζειν 
 [comp. ver. 7] ἐπιταγῆς δεῖται" ἂν 
 μέντοι λέγῃς ὅτι δεῖ τὰ ὑπάρχοντα 
 KEVOUD...... ἐνταῦθα διδασκαλίας χρεία, 
 Homil. x11. init. ταῦτα] 
 ‘these things,’ not merely the last 
 statement, ὅς ἐστιν x.7.. (Wegsch.), 
 nor, on the other hand, more inclu- 
 sively, ‘omnia que dixi de magno 
 pietatis sacram.,’ &c. but, τὸ ἐν εὐσεβ. 
 γυμνάζεσθαι, τὸ προσμένειν Tas ἀντιδό- 
 σεις, τὸ τὸν ἀγωνοθέτην ὁρᾶν, Theod.,— 
 in fact all the statements included be- 
 tween the last ταῦτα (ver. 6) and the 
 present repetition of the pronoun. 
 
 12. μηϑείς σου k.T.A.] ‘Let no one 
 despise thy youth;’ covbeing connected, 
 not directly with carag¢p.,—‘ despiciat 
 te ob juvenilem xtatem’ (Bretsch. 
 Tex.; comp. Leo, al.), but with the 
 following gen. The 
 former construction is grammatically 
 tenable (Winer, Gr. § 30. 9, p. 183), 
 but is not supported by the use of 
 καταῴφρ. in the N,T.,-and is not re- 
 
 τῆς νεότητος. 
 
 63 
 
 IlapayyeAXe ταῦτα καὶ δίδασκε. 11 
 μηδείς σου τῆς νεότητος καταφρονεΐτω, 12 
 2 A , , ~ A ’ , 
 ἀλλὰ τύπος γίνου τῶν πιστῶν, ἐν λόγῳ, 
 
 quired by the context. It has been 
 doubted whether this command is ad- 
 dressed (a) indirectly to the Church 
 (Huth.), in the sense, ‘no man is to 
 infringe on your authority,’ αὐθεντι- 
 κώτερον παράγγελλε, Theoph. 1, Chrys. 
 1, or (b) simply to Timothy, 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.X., 
 seems decidedly in favour of (b); ‘do 
 not only negatively give no reason for 
 contempt, but positively 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 Apo- 
 stle (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 (according to Pear- 
 son’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 
 K.7.A.] ‘but become an example, model, 
 for the believers:’ θέλεις, φησί, μὴ Ka- 
 ταφρονεῖσθαι κελεύων; ἔμψυχος νόμος 
 γενοῦ" Theod. Tvzos is similarly ap- 
 plied in a moral sense, 1 Pet. v. 3, 
 Phil. iii, 17, 1 Thess. i. 7, 2 Thess. 
 iii. 9, Tit. ii. 7; comp. Rom, vi. 17. In 
 the following words the insertion of a 
 comma after πιστῶν (Lachm., Tisch.) 
 is distinctly to be preferred to the 
 ordinary punctuation (Mill, Scholz), 
 as serving to specify with greater force 
 and clearness the qualities and con- 
 ditions in which the example of Tim. 
 was to be shown. There is indeed, as 
 Huther suggests, a kind of order pre- 
 
64 
 
 9 Φ' “ ’ 5 , 9 Ul 4 . , 
 13 ἐν ἀναστροφῆ, ἐν ἀγαπῃ, εν πίστει, ἐν ἀγνείᾳ. 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Α. 
 
 or 
 ews 
 
 ἔρχομαι πρόσεχε TH ἀναγνώσει, TH παρακλήσει, TH διδα- 
 
 14 σκαλίᾳ. μὴ ἀμέλει τοῦ ἐν σοὶ χαρίσματος, ὃ ἐδόθη σοι 
 
 served in the five substantives, which 
 seems designedand significant; Words, 
 whether in teaching or in social inter- 
 course; Conduct(comp.noteson Trans. 
 and on Eph. iv. 22), as evinced in 
 actions; Love and Faith, motiveforces 
 in that inner Christian life of which 
 wordsand conductare the outward ma- 
 
 »~ tA 
 nifestations ; Purity (Syr. {Za.99; 
 
 not ‘castitate,’ Vulg., Beng., either 
 here or ch. v. 22,—on the true mean- 
 ing of ἁγνός, see notes on ch. v. 22), the 
 prevailing characteristic of the life as 
 outwardly manifested and developed. 
 The omissions of the article in this 
 list might be thought to confirm the 
 canon of Harless, Eph. p. 29, ‘that 
 abstracts which specify the qualities 
 of a subject are anarthrous,’ if that 
 rule were not wholly indemonstrable: 
 see Winer, Gr. ὃ 19. 1, p. 109. The 
 addition, év πνεύματι αἴζον dyday(Rec.), 
 only found in KL; great majority of 
 mss.; Arab. [Polygl.]; Theod., Dam., 
 al., is rightly rejected by Lachm., 
 Tisch., and most recent editors. It 
 might have crept into the text from 
 2 Cor. vi. 6; comp. 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, al., comp. 
 Herm. de Part. ἄν, τι. 9, p. 110 54.), 
 as implying the strong expectation 
 which the Apostle had of coming, ἐλπ. 
 ἐλθεῖν πρός σε τάχιον, Ch, iii, 14; comp, 
 John xxi. 22, and Winer, Gr. ὃ 40. 2, 
 p. 237. On the constructions of ἕως 
 see Klotz, Devar, Vol. m1. p. 505 sq. 
 πρόσεχε] ‘apply (thyself), diligently at- 
 tend to;’ comp, notes on ch. i. 4. The 
 meaning here and ch, iii, 8 seems to be 
 
 a little more definite and forcible than 
 in ch. i. 4 and iv. 1; comp. Herod. rx. 
 33, προσεῖχε γυμνασίοισι, and the good 
 list of exx. in Rost u. Palm, Lez. s. 
 γ. 3. 6, Vol. Il. p. 1192. τῇ ava- 
 γνώσει] ‘the (public) reading’ of the 
 Scriptures,the Old,andprobably(comp. 
 Col.iv. 16,1 Thess. v. 27,and Thiersch, 
 Hist. of Church, Vol. τ. p. 147, Transl.) 
 parts of the New Testament: comp. 
 Acts xiii. 15, τὴν ἀνάγν. τοῦ νόμου, 
 2 Cor, iii, 14, ἐπὶ τῇ ἀναγνώσει τῆς 
 παλαιᾶς διαθήκης. On the public read- 
 ing of the Scriptures in the early 
 church, see Bingham, Antiq. xt. 4. 
 2, and comp. notes on Gal. iv. 21. 
 
 τῇ παρακλήσεικ.τ.λ.7' the exhortation, 
 the teaching :’ both terms occur again 
 together in Rom. xii, 7, 8. The dis- 
 tinction usually made between παράκλ. 
 and &6., as respectively ‘public ex- 
 hortation’ and ‘private instruction,’ 
 seems very doubtful. Both appear to 
 mark a form of public address, the 
 former (as the derivation suggests, 
 comp. Theod.) possibly directed to the 
 feelings, and app. founded on some 
 passage of Scripture (see esp. Acts 
 xiii, 15, and Just. M. Apol. 1. 67, 
 where however the true reading is 
 mpéaxdnors), the latter (ἡ ἐξήγησις τῶν 
 γραφῶν, Coray) more to the under- 
 standing of the hearers ; perhaps some- 
 what similar to the (now obscured) 
 distinction of ‘sermon’ and ‘lecture.’ 
 On διδασκ. comp. notes on Eph. iv. 11, 
 and Suicer, Thesaur. s. v. Vol. τ. p. 
 gol. 
 
 14. μὴ ἀμέλει] ‘Be not neglectful 
 of, i.e. ‘do not leave unexercised ;’ 
 comp. 2 Tim. i. 6, ἀναξωπυρεῖν τὸ xa- 
 ρισμα. The following word χάρισμα, 
 with the exception of 1 Pet. iv. ro, 
 occurs only in St Paul’s Epp. where 
 
ray ta, FF. 
 
 διὰ προφητείας μετὰ ἐπιθέσεω; τῶν χειρῶν τοῦ πρεσβυ- 
 
 τερίου. 
 
 it is found as many as sixteen times, 
 and in all cases denotes ‘a gift ema- 
 nating from the Holy Spirit or the 
 free grace of God.’ Here probably, 
 as the context suggests, it principally 
 refers to the gifts of παράκλησις and 
 διδασκ. just specified; comp. Rom. xii. 
 6—8. On the later use to denote 
 Baptism (Clem. Alex. Pedag. τ. 6, 
 Vol. 1. p. 113, ed. Pott.), see Suicer, 
 Thesaur. Vol, τι. p. 1503. 
 
 ἐν σοί) The parallel passage, 2 Tim. i. 
 6, clearly developes the force of the 
 prep.: the χάρισμα is as a spark of 
 holy fire within him, which he is not 
 to let die out from want of atten- 
 tion; comp. Taylor, Forms of Liturg. 
 δ. 22. 25: 
 
 διὰ προφητείας] ‘by means of, by the 
 medium of prophecy.’ The meaning 
 of this preposition has been needless- 
 ly tampered with: διὰ (with gen.) is 
 not for διὰ with acc. (Just.), nor for 
 eis, nor for ἐν (Beza), nor even, ‘under 
 inspiration,’ Peile, but simply points 
 to the medium through which the gift 
 was given ; comp. Hofmann, Schrift. 
 Vol. 11. p. 256. The close union of 
 mpop. With ἐπιθ. τῶν χειρῶν (μετὰ 
 points to the concomitant act, Winer, 
 Gr. § 47. h, p. 337) renders the διὰ 
 perfectly intelligible: prophecy and 
 imposition of hands were the two co- 
 existent (Kriiger, Sprachl. § 68. 13. 
 1) cireumstances 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 
 vill. 18, 2 Tim. i. 6), that its use with 
 mpog. gains by the association a kind 
 of reflected elucidation. The ἐπίθεσις 
 χειρῶν or χειροθεσία (Conc, Nic. xix. 
 Conc. Chalced. xv.) was a symbolic 
 action, probably derived from the 
 
 a , 3 , 5 4 e 
 ταῦτα μελέτα, ἐν τούτοις ἴσθι, Wa σου ἡ 15 
 
 - 
 
 Jewish ΠΣ (see Schoettg. Hor. 
 Hebr. 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 
 undertaking (Acts xili. 3), impHed or 
 expressed: comp. Wiesinger in loc., 
 Neand. Planting, Vol. 1. p. 155 (Bohn), 
 and esp. Hammond’s treatise, Works, 
 Vol. 1. p. 632—650 (ed. 1684). In 
 the early church only the superior 
 orders of clergy, not the sub-deacons, 
 readers, &c. (hence called ἀχειροτόνη- 
 Tos ὑπηρεσία) received χειροθεσίαν : see 
 Bingham, Antiq. ut. τ. 6, and tv. 6. 
 TEs πρεσβυτερίου] ‘ presby- 
 tery,’ ‘confraternity of presbyters’ at 
 the place where Timothy was ordained 
 (perhaps Lystra, if we assume that the 
 ordination closely followed his asso- 
 ciation with St Paul), who conjointly 
 with the Apostle {2 Tim. i. 6) laid 
 their hands on him. IIpec8uréprov 
 (used in Luke xxii. 66 and Acts xxii. 
 5 for the Jewish Sanhedrin) occurs 
 very often in the epp, of Ignatius in 
 the present sense (Trall. 7,13, Philad. 
 7, al.), to denote the college of πρεσ- 
 βύτεροι, the συνέδριον Θεοῦ (Tall. 3), 
 in each particular city or district: 
 comp. Thorndike, Prim. Gov. ΧΙ. 9, 
 Vol. 1. p. 75 (A.-C. Libr.). 
 
 I5. ταῦτα μελέτα] ‘Practise these 
 things, exercise thyself in these things,’ 
 Hammond, Scholef. Hints, p. 119; 
 partial antithesis to μὴ ἀμέλει, ver. 14. 
 Μελετάω only occurs again in the 
 N.T. in a quotation from the LXX., 
 Acts iv. 25, ἐμελέτησαν κενά: Mark 
 Mili. 11, μηδὲ μελετᾶτε (rejected by 
 Tisch. ed. 2 [not 7], Tregelles, and 
 placed in brackets by Lachm.) is very 
 doubtful. As there is thus no definite 
 instance from which its exact mean- 
 ing can be elicited in the N.T., it 
 
 F 
 
00 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 “ 
 
 16 προκοπὴ φανερὰ ἢ 
 
 πᾶσιν. 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 Ν “ 4 “ 
 επέχε TEAUTW Και TH διδα- 
 
 , 3 - “ ‘ a ‘ ‘ 
 σκαλίᾳ, ἐπίμενε αὐτοῖς: τοῦτο γὰρ ποιῶν καὶ σεαυτὸν 
 
 , ‘ Keo 5 , , 
 σώσεις και TOVS ακουοντας σου. 
 
 seems most accurate to adopt the pre- 
 vailing meaning of the word, not ‘me- 
 ditari,’ Vulg., Clarom., Syr., Arm. 
 (though the idea of ‘thinking about’ 
 really does form the primary idea of its 
 root, Donalds, Cratyl. § 472), but ‘ ex- 
 ercere,’ ‘diligenter tractare,’ Bretsch., 
 ἀσκεῖν, Hesych.; comp. Diog. Laert. 
 Epicur, X. 123, ταῦτα mparre καὶ pe- 
 λέτα (cited by Wetst.), and see esp. 
 the exx. in Raphel, Annot. Vol. τι, 
 p. 586. The transl. of Conyb. (comp. 
 Alf.), after De W., ‘let these things 
 be thy care’ would be more appro- 
 priate to ταῦτά σοι μελέτω, comp. 
 Hom. Jl. v. 490, xv1tl. 463. 
 
 ἐν τούτοις ἴσθι] ‘be occupied, spend 
 thy time, inthese things,’ Hamm. ; ‘hoe 
 age, his in rebus esto occupatus,’ 
 Valck. on Luke ii. 49, comp. Prov. 
 Xxill. 17, ἐν φόβῳ Κυρίου ἴσθι ὅλην 
 τὴν ἡμέραν, and exx. in Wakefield, 
 Sylv. Crit, Vol. 1v. p. 198: a stronger 
 enunciation of the foregoing words, 
 corresponding to ἐπίμενε κι τ.Ὰ. in 
 ver. 16, προκοπή] ‘advance,’ 
 ‘progress ;’ only here and Phil. i. 12, 
 25 (with a dependent gen. in all three 
 cases): ‘non immerito hee vox a 
 Grammaticis contemta est, que nul- 
 lum antiquum nedum Atticum auc- 
 torem habet,’ Lobeck, Phryn. p. 85. 
 The ‘advance’ may be in godliness 
 generally, 2 Tim. iii. 17 (De Wette), 
 but more probably in all the parti- 
 culars 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 euri- 
 ous that Raphel should not, either 
 here or on Phil. i. 12, 25, have ad- 
 verted to the not uncommon use of 
 
 ᾽ 
 
 the word by Polyb., e.g. Hist. 1. 12. 
 7, Ts 45. 1, 10. 4. 2; Δ, 
 
 16. ἔπεχε K.t.d.] ‘Give heed to 
 thyself (thy demeanour and conduct, 
 ver. 12), and to the doctrine which 
 thou dost deliver, ver. 13.’ ᾿Επέχειν 
 (‘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 
 (Theod.), where λόγον ζωῆς ἐπέχοντες is 
 either ‘occupantes,’ comp. Syr., al., or 
 more probably ‘pretendentes,’ Beza, 
 al.; see notesinloc. St Luke mainly 
 uses the formula προσέχειν ἑαυτῷ, 
 Luke xii. 1, xvii. 3, xxi. 34, Acts v. 
 35, xx. 28. The difference in mean- 
 ing is very slight ; ἐπέχειν is perhaps 
 rather stronger, the idea of ‘rest upon’ 
 being probably united with that of 
 simple direction, see Rost u. Palm, 
 Lex. s.v. Ὁ. 3, Vol. 1. p. 1045. Timo- 
 thy was to keep his attention fixed 
 both upon himself and his teaching; 
 his teaching was to be good (ver. 6) 
 and salutary (ch. i. 10), and he him- 
 self was practically to exemplify it both 
 in word and deed (ver. 12). 
 émipeve αὐτοῖς] ‘continue in them,’ 
 comp. Col. i. 23, ἐπιμένετε τῇ πίστει, 
 and similarly Rom. vi. 1, xi. 22, 
 23: this tropical use of ἐπιμ. is pecu- 
 liar to St Paul. The reference of 
 αὐτοῖς has been very differently ex- 
 plained. 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 the Apostle had here designed to 
 refer to persons (αὐτοῖς masc., see 
 Grot., Beng.) he would more pro- 
 bably have used πρὸς with an ace.; 
 comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 7, Gal. i. 18. Αὐτὰ 
 
IV. 16—V. 3. 67 
 
 Behaviour of Timothy 
 toward the elder and 
 
 the church. Distince- 
 
 IIpecBurépm μὴ ἐπιπλήξης ἀλλὰ Υ. 
 
 younger, members. Οὗ TapaxaNet ὡς πατερα, νεωτέρους ὡς ἀδελ- 
 
 tions to be observed in 
 
 , , e , 
 the support of widows. ous, πρεσβυτέρας ως μήτερας, νεωτέ- 2 
 
 pas ὡς ἀδελφὰς ἐν πάση ἁγνείᾳ. 
 
 may then be referred either to the 
 details implied in ἔπεχε x.7.d., or per- 
 haps more probably to all the points 
 alluded to in ver. 12 sq. (Matth., Hu- 
 ther), so as to form a final recapitula- 
 tory echo, as it were, of the ταῦτα and 
 ἐν τούτοις, Ver. 15. 
 
 τοῦτο yap K.T.A.] ‘for by doing this,’ 
 &e.; confirmatory clause. The pres. 
 part. is used with a similarly gerun- 
 dial force (comp. Herm. Soph. Elect. 
 56) 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. 
 
 4 
 ἘΞ 2 .29) and may perhaps be dis- 
 
 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‘ servabisneseducamini,’ Beng. 
 (comp. Theod.), but ‘salvum facies,’ 
 Vulg., ‘salvabis,’ Clarom., and, as 
 Wiesinger well remarks, conveys the 
 important truth, ‘that in striving to 
 save others, the minister is really 
 caring for his own salvation.’ On the 
 force of καὶ... καί, see notes on Ver. Io. 
 
 Cuaprer V. 1. Πρεσβυτέρῳ] ‘an 
 elder, Auth., i.e. ‘an elderly man’ 
 (not ‘a presbyter’), so Vulg.: dpa τὸ 
 
 Xypas τίμα τὰς 3 
 
 ἀξίωμά φησιν; οὐκ οἶμαι, ἀλλὰ περὶ 
 παντὸς γὙεγηρακότος, Chrys. This in- 
 terpretation is rendered nearly certain 
 by the antithetical νεωτέρους in the fol- 
 lowing verse, and by ws πατέρα in the 
 adversative clause, The exhortation, 
 as Leo observes, follows very suitably 
 after the reference (ch. iv. 12) to the 
 νεότης Of Timothy, ‘ita se gerat erga 
 seniores ut revera deceat virum juni- 
 orem,’ μὴ ἐπιπλήξῃς] ‘do 
 not sharply rebuke, reprimand.’ ᾿Ἐπι- 
 πλήττειν (a dr. λεγόμενον in the N.T.), 
 
 Syr. on fincrepavit], νουθετεῖν μὲ 
 Υ͂ 
 
 παῤῥησίαν καὶ αὐστηρότητα, Coray 
 (mod. Greek), seems to involve the 
 notion of sharpness and severity: τὸ 
 ἐπιπλ. καὶ κόπτειν λέγεται... ἔτι δὲ Kal 
 μαστίζειν.. ἀφ᾽ οὗ καὶ τὸ λόγοις ἐπι- 
 πλήσσειν εἴρηται, Eustath. on Hom. 
 Il. x. 500 (cited by Wetst.), The 
 usual word in the N.T. is ἐπιτιμᾶν, 
 used very frequently by the first three 
 evangelists, but only once by St Paul, 
 2 Tim. iv. 2. νεωτέρους] The 
 grammatical construction requires πα- 
 ρακάλει to be supplied. The context 
 however seems to suggest a more gene- 
 ral word, 6.4. νουθέτει (comp. 2 Thess. 
 li’. 15, νουθετεῖτε ws ἀδελφόν), a Mean 
 term, as it were, between ἐπίπληττε 
 and παρακάλει, this last verb here ap- 
 pearing to mark ‘exhortation’ in its 
 most gentle and considerate form. 
 This mean term was probably omit- 
 ted on account of the following πρεσ- 
 Burépas, where a milder term would 
 again be more appropriate. 
 
 2. ἐν πάσῃ ἁγνείᾳ] ‘in all purity ;’ 
 with exclusive reference to the vewré- 
 pas: the bishop was so to order his 
 
 F2 
 
68 ΠΡῸΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 » , 3 δέ , , λ»ν » 
 4 ὄντως χηρας. εἰ OE τις χήρα TEKVA ἢ EKYOVA EXEL, μαν- 
 
 conyersation to the younger women of 
 his flock, with such purity, as not to 
 afford any ground even for suspicion 
 (Chrys.). The rule of Jerome (Lpist. 
 2) is simple; ‘omnes puellas et vir- 
 gines Christi aut equaliter ignora aut 
 wqualiter dilige.’ 
 
 3. Xrjpas τίμα] ‘Pay due regard 
 to widows,’ Conyb. The meaning of 
 τιμάω and the connexion of the fol- 
 lowing verses, 3—16, has been from 
 the earliest times so much a matter 
 of dispute, that it is very difficult to 
 arrive at a certain decision. On the 
 whole, when we observe the economic 
 terms, ἀμοιβὰς ἀποδιδ. (ver. 4), προ- 
 νοεῖν (ver. 8), and esp. ταῖς ὄντως 
 χήραις ἐπαρκ. (ver. 16), it seems best 
 with De W. (after Theod., al.) to give 
 τίμα a somewhat extended meaning, 
 —‘honour,’ not by a simple exhibition 
 of respect (πολλῆς yap δέονται τιμῆς 
 μεμονωμέναι, Chrys.,—a somewhat in- 
 sufficient reason); but also by giving 
 material proofs of it: ἐλέει καὶ τὰ 
 ἀναγκαῖα χορήγει, Theoph. The trans- 
 lation of Peile, al., ‘support, provide 
 for,’ τρέφε μὲ ἐλεημοσύνας, Coray (mod. 
 Greek), involves too great a departure 
 from the simple sense; the context 
 however does certainly seem to require 
 some intermediate translation, which, 
 without obscuring the primary and 
 proper meaning of τιμάω, may still 
 leave the latter and less proper mean- 
 ing fairly discernible : comp. τιμῆς ver. 
 17, Matth. xv. 4 sq. If this view 
 be correct, ver. 3—8 will seem to re- 
 late 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, Antig. vu. 4: 9 
 Winer, RWB, Art. ‘Witwen.’ 
 
 τὰς ὄντως χήρας] ‘who are widows 
 indeed.’ i.e. as ver. 4, 5, and esp. ver. 
 16, clearly explain it,—destitute and 
 desolate, ras μὴ ἐχούσας ἀλλαχόθεν οὐ- 
 δεμίαν βοήθειαν, Coray. There seems 
 then no sufficient ground either (a) for 
 assigning to yypaitsecclesiasticalsense 
 (Baur, Paulus, p. 497, Who compares 
 Ignat. Smyrn. 13, Tas παρθένους Tas 
 λεγομένας χήρας ; see Coteler in loc. 
 Vol. 11. p. 38), 50 that ἡ ὄντως x. 18 
 ‘a widow proper,’ opp. to a χήρα in 
 the official meaning of the term; or 
 (Ὁ) for giving ἡ ὄντως χήρα a strictly 
 ethical reference, ‘bona vidua et pro- 
 ba,’ Leo; for the ‘nervus argumenti’ 
 in both cases, viz. the clause ἤλπικεν 
 ἐπὶ τὸν Θεόν, does not mark exclu- 
 sively the religious attitude, but the 
 earthly isolation of ἡ 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. 124 (Bohn). 
 
 4. εἰ δέ τις χήρα] ‘But if any 
 widow,’ i.e, ‘in every case in which a 
 widow has,’ dc.; comp. Syr., where 
 this evident opposition to ἡ ὄντως x. 
 is even 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,’ or more spe- 
 cially, as the context implies, ‘ grand- 
 children;’ ‘children’s children,’ Syr., 
 ‘nephews,’ Auth.,—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 Rost u. 
 Palm, Lez. s.v. μανθανέ- 
 τωσαν] ‘let them learn.’ Who? The 
 
ee ἐτὸ 
 
 09 
 
 , a A 70 > " a“ %, 3 A 
 θανέτωσαν πρῶτον TOV LULOV OLKOV εὐσεβεῖν Kal ἀμοιβὰς 
 
 5 , a ’ a ’ 5) ς ‘ 
 ἀποδιδόναι τοις προγονοίς" TOUTO γαρ εστιν ἀποδεκτὸν 
 
 3 , ΄ “ 
 EVWTLOV TOU Θεοῦ. 
 
 χῆραι implied in the collectively-taken 
 xnpa? or the τέκνα and éxyova? The 
 formerissupported by Vulg., Clarom., 
 Chrys., and Theod.; the latter how- 
 ever, which has the support of Syr., 
 Theoph., Gicum. 2, al., seems more 
 in accordance both with the context 
 generally, and with the use of the 
 special terms εὐσεβεῖν (see below) and 
 ἀμοιβὰς ἀποδιδι. The explanation of 
 Chrys., ἀπῆλθον ἐκεῖνοι (of πρόγονοι) 
 εὐνἐν τοῖς ἐκγόνοις αὐτοῦ ἀμείβου, ἀπο- 
 δίδου τὸ ὀφείλημα διὰ τῶν παίδων, can 
 scarcely be regarded as otherwise than 
 artificial and unsatisfactory. 
 πρῶτον] ‘first,’ scil. ‘before thou hast 
 to do it,’ De Wette. 
 
 εὐσεβεῖν] ‘to be dutiful to,’ “ to evince 
 (filial) piety towards,’ ‘ barusnjan,’ 
 Goth. (Massm.); compare Acts xvii. 
 23, ὃ ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε. This verb 
 ean hardly be referred to the χῆραι, 
 as it certainly cannot be taken ac- 
 tively, ‘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 obscured; comp. Philo, de 
 Dec. Orac. § 23, Vol. τι. p. 200 (ed. 
 Mang.), wherestorksare similarly said 
 εὐσεβεῖν and γηροτροφεῖν. The ex- 
 pression τὸν ἴδιον οἶκον is somewhat 
 singular in such a connexion, but the 
 remark of De W. (who has elucidated 
 the whole passage with great ability), 
 that οἷκον was expressly used to mark 
 the duty as an act of ‘ family feeling 
 and family honour,’ seems fairly to 
 meet the difficulty. Tov ἴδιον marks 
 the contrast between assistance ren- 
 dered by members of the same family 
 and that supplied by the comparative 
 strangers composing the local church. 
 
 ἡ δὲ ὄντως χήρα καὶ μεμονωμένη 5 
 
 καὶ ἀμοιβὰς κιτ.λ] ‘and to requite 
 their parents ;’ further explanation of 
 τὸν ἴδ. otk. εὐσεβεῖν. The expression 
 ἀμοιβὰς ἀποδιδόναι is illustrated by 
 Elsner, and Wetst. in 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 refer- 
 ence to parents. The duty itself is en- 
 forced in Plato, Legg. iv. p. 717 Ὁ; see 
 also Stobeeus, Floril. Tit. 79, and esp. 
 Taylor, Duct. Dub. m1. 5. 3. Πρόγονοι 
 does not commonly refer to living 
 parents (De W. however cites Plato, 
 Legg. XI. p. 931 D), but in the present 
 case suitably balances the term ἔκ- 
 yova, and seems to be adopted as 
 briefly comprehending both genera- 
 tions, mothers or grandmothers. 
 τοῦτο yap K.T.A.] See notes on ch, 
 11:5: 
 
 5. ἡ δὲ ὄντως χήρα] ‘But (not 
 ‘now,’ Auth.) she that is a widow 
 indeed ;’ sharp and emphatic contrast 
 to the foregoing, serving to specify 
 still more clearly to Timothy the cha- 
 racteristics 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 ei- 
 ther μεμονωμένη ἐστίν, or ἡ μεμονω- 
 μένη. This does not seem necessary ; 
 the Apostle probably feeling and re- 
 membering the adjectival nature of 
 χήρα [XA-, perhaps Sanser. hd, ‘ de- 
 serere,’ Pott, Etym. Vol. 1. p. 199; 
 but comp. Donalds. Cratyl. § 280, 
 287, and Benfey, Wurzellex. Vol. 11. 
 p. 188] adds another epithet, which 
 explains and more exactly marks the 
 
70 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOOGEON A. 
 
 »” ee ‘ ‘ 4 , - , ‘ 
 ἤλπικεν ἐπὶ τὸν Θεὸν Kat προσμένει ταῖς δεήσεσιν καὶ 
 
 6 ταῖς προσευναῖς νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας. ἡ δὲ σπαταλῶσα, 
 ρ X ρ 
 
 characteristic (orbitas) which is in- 
 volyed in χήρα, and forms the princi- 
 pal subject of thought. 
 
 ἤλπικεν k.7.A.] ‘ hath placed her hopes 
 on God;’ ‘hath hoped and still hopes;’ 
 see Winer, Gr. § 41. 4, p. 242. On 
 the distinction between ἐλπίζω with 
 ἐπὶ and accus. and with ἐπὶ and dat. 
 see notes on ch. iv. ro. 
 
 προσμένει} ‘abides in;’ the preposi- 
 tion apparently intensifying the mean- 
 ing of the simple verb; see Acts xi. 
 23, TH προθέσει τῆς Kapd. προσμένειν 
 τῷ Κυρίῳ, xiii. 43, προσμένειν τῇ χά- 
 ριτι; Comp. τῇ προσευχῇ προσκαρτε- 
 ρεῖν, Acts i. 14, Rom. xii. 12, Col. iv. 
 2, and consult Rost u. Palm, Lez. 5.0. 
 mpos, C. 6, Vol, 1. p. 1162. On the 
 distinction between δέησις and προσ- 
 εὐχή, see notes on ch. ii. 1, and on 
 Eph, vi. 18. It may be observed 
 that the article is prefixed to both; it 
 clearly might haye been omitted be- 
 fore the latter; St Paul however 
 chooses to regard prayer under two 
 separate aspects; comp. Winer, Gr. 
 § 19. 5, Ὁ. 117, note. 
 
 νυκτὸς Kal ἡμέρας] ‘night and day,’ 
 i.e. grammatically considered, within 
 the space of time expressed by the 
 substantives: see Donalds. Gr. § 451, 
 Kriiger, Sprachl. § 47. 2, and comp. 
 notes on ch. ii. 6 ad fin. St Luke 
 (ii. 37) in the very parallel case of 
 Anna uses the acc. νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν, 
 but there the previous occurrence of 
 νηστείαις renders the accus,, and per- 
 haps the order (fasts appy. began at 
 eve, Winer, RWB. Art, ‘Fasten,’ 
 compare Ley. xxiii. 32), perfectly ap- 
 propriate ; in Acts xxvi. 7 and 2 Thess. 
 iii. 8 (Tisch.) the ace. is appy. hyper- 
 bolical. On the order νυκτ. καὶ ἡμ. 
 (always in St Paul), comp. Lobeck, 
 
 Paralip. p.62 54. It may be observed 
 that St Luke adopts the order νύκτ. 
 καὶ ju. With the acc. (comp. Mark iv. 
 27), and inverts it when he uses the 
 gen. (opp. to Mark vy. 5). St John 
 (Rev. iv. 8, vii. 15, xii. 10, xiv. ΤΊ, 
 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 7 
 ὄντως χήρα. Σπαταλᾶν only occurs 
 again in the N.T. in James v. 5, ἐτρυ- 
 φήσατε καὶ comp. 
 Ezek, loc. cit., ἐν εὐθηνίᾳ ἐσπατάλων, 
 Ecclus. xxi. 15, ὁ σπαταλῶν, As the 
 derivation of each word suggests, σπα- 
 ταλάω [SIA-, cognate with σπαθάω] 
 points more to the ‘ prodigality’ and 
 ‘wastefulness’ (Benfey, Wurzellex. Vol. 
 I. p. 592), the somewhat synonymous 
 word tpudiw (θρύπτω), more to the 
 ‘ effeminacy’ and ‘luxury’ of the sub- 
 ject: so also rightly Tittmann, Synon. 
 I. p. 193. The present verb is thus, 
 etymologically considered, moreallied 
 in meaning to ἀσώτως ζῆν, comp. notes 
 on Eph. y. 18, though it is oecasion- 
 ally found (Theano, ad Eubul. p. 86, 
 ed. Gale, τὰ σπαταλῶντα τῶν παιδίων) 
 in ἃ sense scarcely at all differing from 
 τρυφᾶν. See also Suicer, Thesaur. 
 8.0. Vol. 11. p. 992. 
 ζῶσα τέθνηκεν] ‘is dead while she 
 liveth;’ so Rev. iii. 1, fps, καὶ νεκρὸς 
 el, comp. Eph. iv. 18. The meaning 
 is rightly expressed by the Greek 
 expositors, e.g. Theoph. (most incor- 
 rectly quoted by Huther), κἂν δοκῇ ζῆν 
 
 ᾿ t 
 ἐσπαταλήσατε; 
 
 
 
Wa OF η: ὃ. 71 
 
 ~ , 
 ζῶσα τέθνηκεν. 
 
 ‘ “ ’ 
 καὶ ταῦτα παράγγελλε, ἵνα ἀνεπίλημ- 7 
 
 a 9 δέ a AVE 8 , 2 , 3 
 πτοι ὦσιν. εἰ O€ τις τῶν ἰδίων καὶ μαλιστα οἰκείων οὐ 8 
 
 A 4 ’ x 4 la i , , 
 προνοεῖ, τὴν πιστιν NovyTat Kal ἔστιν ἀπίστου χείρων. 
 
 8. οἰκείων] So Lachm. with AD!FGN: τῶν οἰκείων ΟΌΞΏΒΚΤ,; all mss.; 
 
 Chrys., Theod., Dam. (Tisch., Alf., Wordsw.). 
 
 It may be observed that this 
 
 omission of the second τῶν tends to bind the ἴδιοι and οἰκεῖοι more explicitly 
 into one class; sees-Winer, Gr. § το. 4, p. 116. 
 
 ταύτην τὴν ζωὴν τὴν αἰσθητὴν [comp. 
 Gal, ii, 20] τέθνηκε κατὰ πνεῦμα: si- 
 milarly Theod., 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, Opusc. p. 196. Nu- 
 merous quotations involving similar 
 sentiments will be found in Wetst. 
 in loc.; the most pertinent is Philo, 
 de Profug. § το, Vol. 1. p. 554 (ed. 
 Mang.), ¢vres ἔνιοι τεθνήκασι καὶ 
 τεθνηκότες ζῶσι K.T.A.; comp. Loesner, 
 Obs. p. 404. 
 
 7, ταῦτα] ‘these things;’ what 
 things? Those contained (a) in ver. 
 3—6, Theod. (appy.), and Huth.; or 
 (6) in ver. 6 only, Chrys.; or (6) in ver. 
 5 and 6, De Wette and Wiesing.? 
 Of these (a) is very plausible on ac- 
 count of the simple mandatory force 
 of παράγγελλε, but involves the diffi- 
 culty that ἀνεπίλ. must then be re- 
 ferred to τέκνα and ἔκγονα as well as 
 the widows, whereas the latter seem 
 manifestly the principal subjects. The 
 use of καὶ (not simply ταῦτα as in ch, 
 iy. 6) is in favour of (b), but then 
 again it seems impossible to disunite 
 two verses so closely connected 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 emphatic statement of the 
 rule involved in ver. 4, but not then 
 
 further expanded, as the statement of 
 the different classes and positions of 
 the widows would otherwise have been 
 interrupted. παραάγγελλε] 
 ‘command ;’? see notes on ch. iv. Ir: 
 the choice of this stronger word seem- 
 ing to imply that the foregoing con- 
 trast 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, see above. On the mean- 
 ing of the word, see notes on ch, ill. 2. 
 
 8. εἰ δὲ «.7.A.] Recurrence to the 
 same subject and the same persons, 
 τέκνα and ἔκγονα, as in ver. 4, but, as 
 the τις implies, in the form of a more 
 general statement. The δὲ (not=~yap, 
 as Syr.) is correctly used, as the sub- 
 jects of this verse stand in a sort of 
 contrast to the widows, the subjects 
 of ver. 7. τῶν ἰδίων k.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,—rovs κατοικοῦντας 
 τὴν αὐτὴν οἰκίαν συγγενεῖς, Coray; ‘ do- 
 mestici, qualis vel maxime est mater 
 aut avia vidua, domi,’ Beng. 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 
 ἐπίτροποι, though they might freely de 
 so to others in need; see Joseph. Bell. 
 Jud. τι. 8. 6. οὐ προνοεῖ] 
 ‘does not provide for;’ only again 
 
72 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Α. 
 
 9 Χήρα καταλεγέσθω μὴ ἔλαττον ἐτῶν Presbyteral | widows 
 
 must be sixty years 
 
 of age and of good character; refuse younger widows, 
 whom I desire rather to marry and not to give offence. 
 
 Rom, xii, 17, 2 Cor, viii. 21 (both 
 from Prov. iii. 4); in both cases with 
 an accus, rei (Jelf, Gr. § 496, obs. 1), 
 in the former passage in the middle, 
 in the latter (Lachm.) in the active 
 voice, On the connexion εἰ οὐ (here 
 perfectly intelligible as o is in such 
 close connexion with προνοεῖ), see the 
 copious list of exx. in Gayler, Partic. 
 Neg. pp. 99—115, and notes on ch, 11]. 
 5. τὴν πίστιν ἤρνηται] 
 *he has denied the faith ; not ‘ doc- 
 trinam Christianam,’ but ‘ the (Chris- 
 tian) 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 inseparable ; in not 
 showing the one he has practically 
 shown that he is not under the in- 
 fluence of the other, On the meaning 
 of πίστις, see Reuss, Théol, Chrét. 1v. 
 13, Vol, 11. p. 128 sq. 
 
 ἀπίστου] Not ‘ misbelieving,’ (comp. 
 2 Cor. iv. 4, Tit.i.15), but ‘unbelieving,’ 
 opp. to ὁ πιστεύων, τ Cor. xiv. 22 sq. 
 Such a one, though he might bear the 
 name of Christian, would be really 
 worse than a heathen, for the precepts 
 of all better heathenism forbad such 
 an unnatural selfishness ; see Pfanner, 
 Theol. Gent. XI. 22, p. 320, and comp. 
 the quotations in Stobeus, Floril. 
 Tit. 79. 
 
 9. Xrypa καταλεγέσθω κ-τ.λ.] ‘As 
 widow let no one be put on the list,’ &e. 
 In this doubtful passage it will be 
 best to consider (a) the simple mean- 
 ing and grammatical structure; (b) 
 the interpretation of the clause. First 
 then, καταλέγειν (xarardrrew, Suid.) 
 simply means ‘to enter upon a list’ 
 (see exx. in Rost τ. Palm, Zez, s.v. 
 Vol. 1. p. 1624), the contents and ob- 
 ject 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. 
 § 64. 4, p. 521. Grammar and lexi- 
 cography help us no further. (b) In- 
 terpretation: three explanations have 
 been advanced; (a) the somewhat 
 obyious one that the subject of the 
 preceding clause is simply continued ; 
 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 connecting 
 particle; exegetically considered, the 
 high improbability that when criteria 
 had been given, ver. 4 sq., fresh should 
 be added, and those of so very exclu- 
 sive anature: would the Church thus 
 limitheralms? (8) That of Schleierm., 
 Mack, and others, that deaconesses are 
 referred to: against this the objection 
 usually urged seems decisive,—that 
 we have no evidence whatever that 
 deaconesses and χῆραι Υ synonymous 
 terms (the passage in Ignat. Smyrn. 
 13, cannot here fairly be made use 
 of on account of the doubtful read- 
 ing), and that the age of 60, though 
 deriving a specious support from 
 Cod. Theod. xvi. 2. 27 (comp. how- 
 ever Conc. Chale. c. 15, where the age 
 is fixed at 40), is wholly incompatible 
 with the active duties (comp. Bing- 
 ham, Antiq. τι. 22. 8 sq.) of such an 
 office. (y) The suggestion of Grot., 
 ably expanded by Mosh., and followed 
 by De W., Wiesing., Huth. (Einleit. 
 § 4), that an order of widows (χηρῶν 
 xépos, Chrys. Hom. in Div. N.T. Loe. 
 31, compare Tertull. de Vel. Virg. 9, 
 and the other reff. in Mosheim) is here 
 referred to, whose duties appy. con- 
 sisted in the exercise of superintend- 
 ence over, and the ministry of counsel 
 and consolation (see Tertull. 1. 6.) to 
 
Δ Ὁ 10: is 
 
 ἑξήκοντα γεγονυῖα, ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς γυνή, ἐν ἔργοις καλοῖς ΤΟ 
 
 μαρτυρουμένη, εἰ ἐτεκνοτρόφησεν, εἰ ἐξενοδόχησεν, εἰ 
 
 the younger women; whose office in 
 fact was, so to say, presbyteral (πρεσ- 
 βύτιδες) 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 completely 
 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 Wie- 
 sing. in loc., and Huther, Hinleit. § 4, 
 p. 46. We thus find noticed in 
 this chap., the χήρα in the ordinary 
 sense; 7 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 κ.τ.λ., 
 see exx. in Raphel, Annot. Vol. 11. 
 p. 592. The construction, ἔλαττον ἢ 
 ἔτη ἑξήκοντα, Would be perhaps more 
 correct, but the somewhat concise 
 gen. is perfectly intelligible. 
 
 ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς γυνή] ‘the wife of one 
 husband ;’ comp. ch. iii. 2. It is ob- 
 vious that this can only be contrasted 
 with successive 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. 
 I. 7, ‘prescriptio Apostoli...viduam 
 allegiin ordinem [ordinationem, Sem. ] 
 nisi univiram non concedit;’ comp. 
 notes on ch. iii. 2, and the copious 
 list of exx, in Wetst. in loc. 
 
 10. ἐν ἔργοις καλοῖς k.7.A.] ‘well- 
 reported of inthe matter of good works,’ 
 seil. ‘for good works:’ comp. notes 
 on Tit. iii. 8. "Ev 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 48.a, p. 346, note. Map- 
 τυρεῖσθαι appears frequently used in 
 the N.1T., e.g. Acts vi. 3, X. 22, XVI. 
 2, al., in special reference to a good 
 testimony. The simple meaning is 
 retained by Syr., Vulg., Goth., al. 
 elérexvotpopycev] ‘if she (ever) brought 
 up children ;’ hypothetical clause, ul- 
 timately dependent on καταλεγέσθω, 
 but still also more immediately expla- 
 natory of ἔργ. καλ. It is doubtful 
 whether τεκνοτροφεῖν is to be confined 
 to the widow’s own children (Vulg. 
 [appy.], Chrys. and Greek commenta- 
 tors), or extended also to the orphans 
 she might have brought up ‘ecclesix 
 commodo’ (Beng.). The latter seems 
 most probable, especially as in three 
 passages which have been adduced, 
 Herm, Past. Mand. 8, and Simil. 1, 
 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 ex- 
 pressed in the word. 
 
 ἐξενοδόχησεν] ‘entertained strangers ;” 
 am. λεγόμ., but comp. Matth. xxv. 35. 
 The sequence of duties may have been 
 suggested by the relations of proxi- 
 mity; ὁρᾶς πῶς πανταχοῦ τῶν οἰκείων 
 τὰς εὐεργεσίας τῶν ἀλλοτρίων προτί- 
 θησι, Chrys.; the widow’s own children 
 would clearly be comprehended in, 
 and even form the first objects of the 
 τεκνοτροφία. εἰ ἁγίων κιτ.λ.] 
 ‘if she (ever) washed the feet of the 
 saints;’ an act not only connected 
 with the rites of Oriental hospitality 
 (Jahn, Archeol. § 149), but demon- 
 strative of her humility (1 Sam. xxy. 
 41,—it was commonly a servant’s 
 
74 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΌΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 ἁγίων πόδας ἔνεψεν, εἰ θλιβομένοις ἐπήρκεσεν, εἰ παντὶ 
 
 11 ἔργῳ ἀγαθῷ ἐπηκολούθησεν. Νεωτέρας δὲ χήρας πα- 
 
 ΄ , vol “-“ 
 βαιτου" ὅταν γὰρ καταστρηνιασῶσιν του Χριστοῦ, γα- 
 
 11. καταστρηνιάσωσιν] So CDKLN; most mss.; Chrys., Theod., Theoph., 
 eum. (Griesb., Scholz, De W.e sil., Wordsw.), Lachm. (ed. min.), Tisch., 
 Alf., here read καταστρηνιάσουσιν with AFG; 31; Chrys. (Cod.). Though the 
 future might fairly be borne with (comp. pres., Mark xi. 25), as in Rey. iv. 9 
 (Rec., but doubtful), the external authority doesnot seem sufticient, forit must be 
 remembered that F and G, even in errors of transcription (‘mira est utriusque 
 [codicis] consensio in lectionibus in ipsisque multis calamierroribus,’ Tisch.), are 
 
 office, Elsner, Obs. Vol. 1. p. 338), her 
 love (comp. Luke vii. 38), and, it might 
 be added, the practical heartiness 
 (comp. Chrys.) of her hospitality : ‘nee 
 dedignetur quod fecit Christus facere 
 Christianus,’ August. in Joan. Tract. 
 LYVIII. 4. ἔπήρκεσεν] ‘relieved; ’ 
 ἐβοήθησεν, Hesych., comp. Polyb. 
 Hist, τ. 51. 10, where it is used as 
 nearly synon. with ἐπιβοηθεῖν. 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 ‘pressis pauper- 
 tate’ (Beng.), but, as appy. Syr. 
 
 y 
 A035} {refocillavit], may refer to 
 
 Υ 
 
 the relief of necessity in its most gene- 
 ral form; καὶ διὰ χρημάτων, καὶ διὰ 
 προστασίας, καὶ μεσιτείας, Theoph, 
 
 ἐπηκολούθησεν] ‘followed αἴίεν ; 
 comp. 1 Pet. ii. 21, ἐπακολουθεῖν τοῖς 
 ἴχνεσιν : the ἐπὶ does not appear to 
 involve any idea of intensity, scil. προ- 
 θύμως καὶ κατ᾽ ἴχνη, Coray, Auth. 
 (comp. Steph. in Thesaur. s.v.), but 
 only that of direction, The sense is 
 thus not very different to that implied 
 in τὸ ἀγαθὸν διώκειν, 1 Thess. v. 15; 
 comp. Plato, de Rep. 11. p. 370 B, τῷ 
 πραττομένῳ ἐπακολουθεῖν, where the 
 next words, μὴ ἐν παρέργου μέρει, Sup- 
 ply the notion of προθυμία; see ib, 
 Phedo, p. 107 B, where also the force 
 of the compound does not seem very 
 
 strongly marked. The meaning is 
 rightly conveyed by Chrys., δηλοῦντός 
 ἐστιν, ὅτι εἰ καὶ μὴ αὐτὴ αὐτὸ ἐργά- 
 σασθαι ἠδυνήθη, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως ἐκοινώνησεν, 
 ὑπούργησε. 
 
 11. Newtépas] 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 καταλεγέσθω (ver. 9) 
 seems to require,—‘ decline’ (‘refuse,’ 
 Auth., ἀπόβαλλε, Coray), 501], ‘to 
 put on the κατάλογος of the pres- 
 byteral widows.’ They were not ne- 
 cessarily to be excluded from the alms 
 of the Church (Taylor, Zpise. § 14), 
 but were only to be held ineligible for 
 the ‘collegium viduarum ;’ comp. how- 
 ever ver. 16. On παραιτοῦ, comp. 
 notes on ch. iy. 7: the regular mean- 
 ing (as Huther properly observes) 
 suggested by ch. iv. 7, 2 Tim. ii. 23, 
 Tit. iii, ro, need not here be lost sight 
 of; Timothy was to shun them, and 
 not entertain their claims; ‘noli cau- 
 sam earum suscipere,’ Beng. 
 ὅταν καταστρην.] ‘when they have 
 come to wax wanton against Christ,’ 
 Auth. (‘begun’),‘lascivieru[i]nt,’ Beza; 
 the aor, subj. with ὅταν marking an 
 action which takes place at some sin- 
 gle point of time distinct from the 
 actual present, but otherwise unde- 
 
We Ἐπ 15. 7ῦ 
 
 a , 4 - [χὰ A ’ , 
 μεῖν θέλουσιν, ἔχουσαι κρῖμα ὅτι THY πρώτην πίστιν 12 
 
 practically little more than one authority, Moreover, 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 toapply. St Paul does not appy. desire to mark the mere 
 relation of time, but the ethical connexion between καταστρ. and yau. 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 Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 468—478. 
 
 fined; see Winer, Gr. § 42. 5, Ῥ. 275, 
 and notes on 2 Thess, 1. 10. This 
 translation of καταστρ. may be fully 
 retained if ‘lascivire’ be taken more 
 in its simple (‘instar jumentorum que 
 cum pabulo ferociunt,’ Scul. ap. Pol. 
 Syn.) than in its merely sexual refer- 
 ence (que fornicate sunt in injuriam 
 Christi, Jerome, Epist. 11, al. 223), 
 though this, owing to the γαμεῖν 
 θέλουσιν, not simply fut. γαμήσουσιν 
 {usual later form], cannot wholly be 
 put out of sight. Στρηνιάω, a word 
 of later comedy (see Lobeck, Phryn. 
 p. 381, Trench, Synon. Parti. § 4), im- 
 plies the exhibition of ‘ over-strength,’ 
 ‘restiveness,’ and thence of ‘fulness 
 of bread’ (Antiph. ap. Athen. 111. 127) 
 and ‘wanton luxury;’ comp. Rev. xviii. 
 7,9. The adject. στρηνὴς is far more 
 probably connected with the Sabine 
 ‘strena’ (Donalds. Varron. tv. 2), and 
 the Lat. ‘strenuus’ (Pott, Etym. Vol.t. 
 p. 198) than with ropés, τρανός, which 
 is suggested by Lobeck. The prep. 
 κατὰ expresses the direction of the 
 action (Rost u. Palm, Lez. s. v. κατά, 
 Iv. 2), and points to the object against 
 which the στρῆνος was shown: comp. 
 κατακαυχᾶσθαι, James 11. 13. 
 
 12. ἔχουσαι xpipa ὅτι] ‘having, 
 bearing about with them, a judgment 
 that,’ &c.; comp. φόβον ἔχειν, ver. 20, 
 ἁμαρτίαν ἔχειν, John xv. 22, The 
 judgment or sentence is a load which 
 they bear about with them (comp. 
 Gal. vy. to); and this judgment is ὅτι 
 
 οο, ἠθέτησαν. “Ore is thus not causal, 
 but objective, and so must not, as in 
 Mill, be preceded by a comma,—a 
 punctuation probably suggested by a 
 misinterpretation of κρῖμα. This it 
 need scarcely be said is not for κατά- 
 κριμα (‘damnationem,’ Vulg.,Clarom.; 
 κατάκρισιν, Theoph.), much less =‘ pu- 
 nishment’ (‘beladen sich mit Straf- 
 barkeit,’ Mack), but retains its usual 
 and proper meaning. The contezt will 
 alone decide the nature of the judg- 
 ment, whether favourable or unfa- 
 vourable; comp. notes on Gal. vy. 10, 
 and Fritz. Rom. Vol. 1. p. 94. 
 
 τὴν πρώτην K.T.A.] ‘they broke their 
 
 jist faith;’ clearly, as it is explained 
 
 by the Greek commentators, 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 Theod., τῷ Χριστῷ συντα- 
 ξάμενοι σωφρόνως ζῆν ἐν χηρείᾳ δευτέροις 
 ὁμιλοῦσι γάμοις. The only seeming 
 difficulty is πρώτην, not προτέραν, 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 Greek habit of speaking, 
 is put rather than the compar.; see 
 Winer, Gr. § 35. 4. note 1, p, 218. 
 The phrase ἀθετεῖν πίστιν, ‘fidem ir- 
 
78 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 13 ἠθέτησαν ἅμα δὲ καὶ ἀργαὶ μανθάνουσιν περιερχόμε- 
 
 A 
 vat τὰς οἰκίας, οὐ μόνον δὲ ἀργαί, ἀλλὰ καὶ φλύαροι καὶ 
 
 14 περίεργοι, λαλοῦσαι τὰ μὴ δέοντα. βούλομαι οὖν νεω- 
 
 ritam facere,’ is illustrated by Wetst. 
 and esp. Raphel in loc.; the latter 
 cites Polyb. Hist. vit. 2. 5, XI. 29. 3, 
 ΧΧΤΙΣ, 16. 5, xxiv. 6. 7. The numer- 
 ous 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, isa subsidiary argument 
 which ought not to be lost sight of, 
 13. ἅμα δὲ κιτ.λ.1 There is some 
 difficulty in the construction; μανθάν. 
 is usually connected with repepx., but 
 unless with De W. and Wiesing. we 
 plainly assume that the participle is 
 incorrectly used for the inf., we shall 
 have an incongruous sense, for μαν- 
 θάνω περιερχόμενος can only mean ‘I 
 learn that Iam going about,’ Jelf, Gr. 
 § 683. Again if with Wordsw. we 
 translate ‘being idle they are learners, 
 running about’ we have an absolute 
 use of μανθάνω (comp. however 2 Tim. 
 iii. 7), and a dislocation of words, that 
 seem harsh and unnatural. It will be 
 best then, with Syr., Chrys., al., and 
 also Winer, Gr. § 45. 4, p. 310, to 
 connect pavé. with dpyal, ‘they learn 
 to be idle,’ esp. as this can be sup- 
 ported by Plato, Euthyd. p. 276 8, οἱ 
 ἀμαθεῖς dpa σοφοὶ μανθάνουσιν [Bekk. 
 however omits σοφοί], and in part by 
 Dio Chrys. p. 283 (ed. Reisk.), ἐμάν- 
 Oave λιθοξόος τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς τέχνην, -- 
 both of which exx. are appositely cited 
 by Winer, 1.6. 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 reprepx. may possibly 
 refer to some portion of their official 
 duties, in the performance of which, 
 
 instead of rather acquiring spiritual 
 experiences, tlrey only contracted idle 
 and gossiping habits. Tds οἰκίας might 
 seem to confirm this, ‘the houses of 
 them they have to visit;’ but comp. 
 z Tim. iii. 6, where (as here) the ar- 
 ticle appears generic, or at most, ‘the 
 houses of such as receive them ;’ comp. 
 Winer, Gr. 8 17. 1, p. 116, note (ed. 5). 
 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., 
 e.g. Mark vi. 6, Acts ix. 3, al.; comp. 
 also Matth. Gr. § 426, Bernhardy, 
 Synt, v. 30 ad fin., p. 260. 
 
 ἀλλὰ καὶ φλύαροι k.7.A.] ‘but also 
 tattlers and busy bodies ;’ ἐπανόρθωσις of 
 preceding epithet; beside being merely 
 idle, they also contract and display a 
 ‘mala sedulitas’ in both words and 
 actions. Φλύαρος, a ἅπ. λεγόμ. in N.T. 
 (but see φλυαρεῖν, 3 John ro), as its 
 derivation (MAY-, fluere, Pott, Etymol. 
 Forsch. Vol. 1. 212] obviously sug- 
 gests, points to a babbling, profluent, 
 way of talking. Περίεργος (see Acts 
 xix. 19) marks a meddling habit, a per- 
 verted activity that will not content 
 itself with minding its own concerns, 
 but must busy itself about those of 
 others; comp. 2 Thess. iii. 11, μηδὲν 
 ἐργαζομένους ἀλλὰ περιεργαζομένους, 
 [Demosth.] Philipp. Iv. 150, ἐξ ὧν 
 ἐργάζῃ Kal περιεργάζῃ. 
 
 λαλοῦσαι k.7.A.] ‘speaking the things 
 which they ought not,’ carrying things 
 from one house to another: περιοδεύου- 
 σαι γὰρ τὰς οἰκίας οὐδὲν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τὰ ταύ- 
 
ΣῪ τὶ 
 
 rw 
 
 - a - , 9. 
 τέρας γαμεῖν, τεκνο γονεῖν, οἰκοδεσποτεῖν, μηδεμίαν ἀφορ- 
 
 μὴν διδόναι τῷ ἀντικειμένῳ λοιδορίας χάριν' ἤδη γάρ 15 
 
 τῆς πρὸς ἐκείνην φέρουσι, Theoph. On 
 τὰ μὴ δέοντα, compare notes on Tit. 
 2 11. 
 
 14. βούλομαι] “1 desire ;’ not mere- 
 ly ‘I hold it advisable,’ De Wette, 
 ‘velim,’ Beza, comp. notes on ch, ii. 8. 
 The comparison of this verse with 
 ver. 11 is instructive; there the widows 
 themselves θέλουσιν γαμεῖν ; their θε- 
 λήματα lead them to it (Eph. ii. 3); 
 their will is to 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. AS a general 
 rule, the distinction of Tittmann, 
 Synon.1.p.124,—‘dédev nihil aliudest 
 quam simpliciter velle, neque in se 
 habet notionem voluntatis propens 
 ad aliquam rem, sed βούλεσθαι deno- 
 tat ipsam animi propensionem,’—will 
 be found satisfactory, but in the ap- 
 plication of it to individual cases pro- 
 per caution must be used. It ought 
 to be remarked that θέλω is very far 
 more frequently used by St Paul than 
 βούλ., the latter oceurs only 1 Cor, 
 ΧΙ]. r1, 2 Cor. i. 15, and 17 (Lachm.), 
 Pill 1 τ, το Tim..ii. $pvi. Ὁ, Tits iii. 
 8, Philem. 13; once only 1 Cor. J. 6. 
 in reference to God (the Holy Ghost). 
 Βούλ. is most used by St Luke in the 
 Acts, where it occurs thirteen times, 
 and consequently, if we except quota- 
 tions, rather more frequently than θέ- 
 hw. οὖν has here its proper 
 collective force (Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. 
 p. 717), ‘in consequence of these 
 things being so, I desire,’ &c.; ‘igi- 
 tur,’ Beza ,—-not aninjudicious change 
 for ‘ergo,’ Vulg., as there is here no 
 ‘gravior argumentatio;’ see Hand, 
 Tursell. Vol, 111. p. 187. 
 vewtépas] ‘younger widows,’ not 
 
 merely ‘younger women,’ as Auth. ; 
 still less ‘Jungfrauen,’ as Baur. The 
 context seems to confine our attention 
 simply to widows. The true aspect of 
 this precept is, as Wiesinger observes, 
 defined by οὖν here, and yap ver. 15; 
 the precept involves its own restric- 
 tions. The Apostle desires the younger 
 widows to marry, rather than attempt 
 a course of duties which they might 
 swerve from or degrade; comp. Chrys. 
 τεκνογ., oikod.] ‘to bear children, to 
 rule the house ;’ regular inf. after verbs 
 denoting ‘a motion of the will,’ Jelf, 
 Gr. § 664; comp. Winer, Gr. § 44. 3, 
 p. 287. Both words are dm. \eyéu.in 
 the N.T.; the substantive rexvoyovia 
 however occurs ch. ii. 15, and οἰκοδεσ- 
 πότης Several times in the first three 
 gospels. Both the latter subst. and its 
 verb belong to later Greek, οἰκίας 
 δεσπότης 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. (Moller); if in- 
 cluded in any word, it would far more 
 naturally be so in οἰκοδεσποτεῖν (Leo), 
 which points to the woman’s sphere of 
 domestic duties. 
 
 λεκτέον, 
 
 τῷ ἀντι- 
 κειμένῳ] ‘to the adversary ;’ not ‘the 
 devil,’ Chrys., for though this appli- 
 cation derives some plausibility from 
 τοῦ Zar. ver. 15, yet the λοιδορ. χά- 
 pw seems far more naturally to sug- 
 gest a reference to human opponents, 
 —the adversaries of Christianity(Phil. 
 i. 28, Tit. ii. 8) among the Jews or 
 the Gentiles; so Hamm., De W., 
 Wiesing. On this word, and the pos- 
 sibly stronger ἀντιτασσόμενοι (‘qui in 
 adversd acie stantes oppugnant’), see 
 Tittm. Synon. 11. p. 11. λοι- 
 δορίας χάριν] ‘for reviling,’ lit. ‘to 
 
78 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOGEON A. 
 
 16 τινες ἐξετράπησαν ὀπίσω τοῦ Larava. 
 
 v 4 
 εἰ TIS πιστὴ 
 
 4 , , ’ ΕἸ a ‘ ‘ , a 
 EXEL KI PAS, ETAPKELTW αὐταῖς, και μὴ βαρείσθω ἡ εκκλη- 
 
 ’ a - la 9 , 
 σία, ἵνα ταῖς ὄντως χήραις ἐπαρκέση. 
 
 ι6. πιστή] So Lachm. with ACFGN; 17. 47; Vulg. (Amit., Harl.’), 
 Copt., Arm. The longer reading πιστὸς ἢ πιστὴ is adopted by Tisch. with 
 DKL; nearly all mss.; Vulg. (Fuld., Tol., Harl.2), Syr. (both), Ar., Slav. ; 
 Chrys. (distinctly), Theod., Dam., al. (Griesb., De W., Wiesing.); though less 
 easily to be accounted for than the shorter reading, it must now appy. give 
 way to the definitely better attested reading in the text. 
 
 further, promote, reviling ;’ preposi- 
 tional clause, appended to ἀφορμὴν δι- 
 δόναι to specify the manner in which, 
 and purpose for which, the occasion 
 would be used; on the meaning of 
 χάριν comp. notes on Gal. 111, το, and 
 Donalds. Cratyl.§ 278. The ‘reproach’ 
 must be understood as directed not 
 merely against the widows, butagainst 
 Christianity generally ; comp. Tit. ii. 
 δ. 
 
 15. ἤδη γάρ tives] ‘for already 
 some,’ 50. Widows; ἀπὸ πείρας ἡ νομο- 
 θεσία γεγένηται, Theod. Matthies 
 here gives the pronoun a more ex- 
 tended reference, but without sufficient 
 reason ; yap clearly confirms the com- 
 mand in the preceding verse, and thus 
 naturally refers us to the special cases 
 of those mentioned in it. The in- 
 version ἐξετράπησάν τινες now adopted 
 by Tisch. (ed. 7) with AFG; al., is of 
 less critical authority than the reading 
 in the text. ἐξετράπησαν)] 
 ‘(have) turned themselves out of the 
 way,’ se, of chastity, propriety, and 
 discretion: comp. 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 seducer. 
 
 16. εἴ τις πιστὴ κιτ.λ.1 ‘If any 
 believing woman have widows, let her 
 relieve them.’ This might fairly seem 
 a concluding reiteration of the precept 
 in ver. 4 and ver. 8, or a species of 
 supplementary command based on the 
 same principles (comp. Mosh.). The 
 connexion however, and difference of 
 terms, érapxei7w not mpovoeirw, suggest 
 a different application of the precept. 
 In ver. 4, 8, the duties of children or 
 grandchildren to the elder widow are 
 defined: here the reference is rather 
 to the younger widows. How were 
 such to be supported? If they mar- 
 ried, the questionwasat once answered; 
 if they remained 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. The reading érapkel- 
 σθω (Lachm.) is well supported [AF 
 GN] but may be due to an assimilation 
 with the βαρείσθω that follows. 
 βαρείσϑω] ‘be burdened,’ Luke xxi. 34, 
 2 Cor. 1. 8, Vv. 4; later and less correct 
 form for Sapivew, The assertion of 
 Thom. M. s.v., πλὴν ἐπὶ τοῦ mapaxe- 
 μένου οὐ βεβάρυγκα λέγουσιν ἀλλὰ Be- 
 βάρηκα, is somewhat doubtful; βεβα- 
 pws (intrans.) is used by Homer, and 
 BeSapnuévoscertainly appearsin Plato, 
 Symp. p. 203 B, a8 well as in Aristides 
 (cited by Thom. M.), but the latter 
 
 ‘ 
 
Weare ery; 13. 79 
 
 Let the elders who 
 rule well receive dou- 
 ble honour; be guard- 
 ed in receiving accu- 
 sations against them. 
 Rebuke sinners. 
 
 passage is an imitation of Homer, and 
 the former has a very poetical cast; 
 the use of BeBdpnua as the regular 
 Attic perfect (Huther) cannot therefore 
 be completely substantiated : compare 
 Buttm. Irreg. Verbs, s.v. βαρύνω. 
 
 17. Ot καλῶς προεστῶτες] ‘who 
 rule, preside (surely not ‘have pre- 
 sided,’ Alf.), well ;’ not in any special 
 antithesis to those ‘who preside ill,’ 
 butin contra-distinction to other pres- 
 byters, to the presbyter as such (Wie- 
 sing.). The meaning of καλῶς rpoec- 
 Tava. is approximately given by Chrys. 
 as μηδενὸς φείδεσθαι τῆς ἐκείνων κηδε- 
 μονίας ἕνεκεν ; this however too much 
 obscures the idea of rule and directive 
 functions (Bloomf.) implied in the par- 
 ticiple mpoecr.; comp. ch. iii. 4. 
 διπλῆς τιμῆς] ‘double honour, i.e. re- 
 muneration; double, notincomparison 
 with that of widows or deacons (Chrys. 
 1, comp. Thorndike, Relig. Assembl. 
 Iv. 22), nor even of of μὴ Kad. προεστ. 
 (comp. of ἁμαρτάνοντες, ver. 20) but, 
 with a less definite numerical refer- 
 6Π06,-- διπλῆς (not διπλασίας τιμῆς, as 
 in Plato, Legg. v. p. 730D), t.e. πολλῆς 
 τιμῆς, Chrys. 2, πλείονος τιμῆς, Theod, 
 Τιμὴ again, as τίμα in ver. 3, includes, 
 though it does not precisely express, 
 ‘salary, remuneration,’ and is well 
 paraphrased by Chrys. as θεραπεία 
 [καὶ] ἡ τῶν ἀναγκαίων χορηγία, comp. 
 Clem. Rom. 1 Cor. 1. Kypke (Obs. 
 Vol. τι. p. 361) cites several instances 
 of a similar use of τιμή, but in all, it 
 will be observed, the regular meaning 
 of the word is distinctly apparent: 
 comp, Wakef. Sylv. Crit. Vol. tv. p. 
 199. ἀξιούσθωσαν] 
 ‘be counted worthy,’ Auth., ‘digni 
 habeantur,’ Vulg., comp. Syr., not 
 
 Of καλῶς προεστῶτες πρεσβύτεροι 17 
 διπλῆς τιμῆς ἀξιούσθωσαν, μάλιστα οἱ 
 
 ~ ’ 
 κοπιῶντες εν λόγῳ καὶ διδασκαλίᾳ. λέγει 18 
 
 merely ‘be rewarded,’ Hammond. 
 They were ἄξιοι διπλῆς τιμῆς, and were 
 to be accounted as such. οἱ 
 κοπιῶντες κιτ.λ.7 ‘they who labour in 
 word and doctrine ;’ no hendiadis, scil. 
 eis τὴν διδαχὴν τοῦ λόγου (Coray, al.), 
 but with full inclusiveness,—‘in the 
 general form of oral discourse (whether 
 monitory, hortatory,or prophetic), and 
 the more special form of teaching ;’ 
 see Thorndike, Prim. Gov. 1x. 3, Vol. 
 1. p. 42 (A.-C. Libr.). Mosheim (de 
 Reb. ante Const. p. 126 sq.) throws a 
 stress upon κοπιώντες, urging that the 
 verb does not imply merely ‘ Chris- 
 tianos erudire, sed populos vere reli- 
 gionisnesciosejus cognitione imbuere,’ 
 p. 127. We should then have two, 
 if not three classes (comp. 1 Thess. v. 
 12),—the preachers 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 sub- 
 stantiated ; comp. ch. iv. το, 1 Cor. iv. 
 12, al. The concluding words, ἐν λόγῳ 
 καὶ διδασκ., 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 suppose 
 that in the large community at Ephe- 
 sus there would exist a clerical college 
 of προεστῶτες πρεσβύτεροι (Thorndike, 
 ib. 11. 2), some of whom might have 
 the χάρισμα of teaching more eminently 
 than others; see notes on Eph. iv. ΕἾΝ 
 
80 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 γὰρ ἡ γραφὴ Βοῦν ἀλοῶντα οὐ φιμώσεις, καὶ "Αξιος ὁ 
 
 and Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 149 
 sq. (Bohn). 
 
 18, λέγει yap κ-τ.λ.}] The first quo- 
 tation is taken from Deut. xxv. 4, and 
 is quoted with a similar application 
 in 1 Cor. ix.g. The law in question, 
 of which the purport and intention 
 was kindness and consideration for 
 animals (see Philo, de Human. § 19, 
 Vol. τι. p. 400, ed. Mang., Joseph. 
 Antiq. 1v. 8. 21), is applied with a 
 kind of ‘argumentum a minori’ to the 
 labourersin God’sservice. The precept 
 can hardly be said to be generalized 
 or expanded (see Kling, Stud. wu. Krit. 
 1839, p. 834 sq.), somuch 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 
 Spirit under which the Apostle gives 
 the literal meaning of the words their 
 fuller and deeper application; comp. 
 notes on Gal. iv. 24. 
 
 Botv ἀλοῶντα] ‘an ox while treading 
 out the corn; not ‘the ox that tread- 
 eth, @c., Auth.,—an inexact trans- 
 lation of the anarthrous participle; 
 comp.Donalds. Gramm. § 492. Thresh- 
 ing 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. rr, 
 comp. Micah iv. 13), or they were 
 attached to a heavy threshing-wain 
 (Heb. }90, Isaiah xxviii.27, ‘NM Im, 
 xli. 15, or D°PI3, Judges viii. 7, see 
 Bertheau in loc.), which they drew 
 over them, see esp. Winer, RWB. Art. 
 ‘ Dreschen,’ Bochart, Hieroz, Vol. 1. 
 p. 310, and the illustrations in Thom- 
 son, Land and the Book, Vol. u. p. 
 314. There is some little doubt 
 about the order; Lachm, reads οὐ qu, 
 
 8. ay. 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.c., and as the weight of MS. 
 authority is on the other side, it seems 
 best to retain the order of the text. 
 
 οὐ φιμώσεις] ‘thou shalt not muzzle ;’ 
 imperatival future, on the various 
 usages of which see notes on Gal. v. 
 14, and Thiersch, de Pentat. m1. ὃ 11, 
 p. 157. The animals that laboured 
 were not to be prevented from enjoy- 
 ing 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. 1. 40r), and even (by means of 
 a παυσικάπη, Poll. Onom, vi. 20) in 
 the case of their slaves; see Rost u. 
 Palm, Lew. s.v. παυσικ. Vol. τι. p. 774. 
 καὶ ΓΑξιος x.t.A.] Proverbial declara- 
 tion (Stier, Red. Jes. Vol. 1. p. 400) 
 made use of by our Lord (Luke x. 7, 
 comp. Matth. x. ro), and here repeated 
 by St Paul to enhance the force of, 
 and explain the application of, the 
 preceding quotation. There is nothing 
 in the connexion to justify the asser- 
 tion that this is a citation from the 
 N.T. (Theod.), and thus necessarily 
 to be connected with λέγει... ἡ γραφή, 
 as is contended by Baur and others 
 who deny the genuineness of this 
 Epistle; γραφή, it need scarcely be 
 said, being always applied by St Paul 
 to the Old Test.; comp. Wieseler, 
 Chronol. p. 303, and see notes on 2 
 Tim. iii. 16. Though a similar mode 
 of citation is found elsewhere in the 
 case of two actual passages of scrip- 
 ture (Mark vii. το, 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 compari- 
 
ἌΣΙΟΣ δ0. 
 
 , A A A 
 ἐργάτης τοῦ μισθοῦ αὐτοῦ. 
 
 81 
 
 Kata πρεσβυτέρου κατη- 19: 
 
 γορίαν μὴ παραδέχου, ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ ἐπὶ δύο ἢ τριῶν μαρ- 
 
 τύρων. 
 
 A , 9 , 
 Tovs ἁμαρτανοντας ἐνώπιον πάντων ἔλεγχε, 20 
 
 ἵνα καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ φόβον ἔχωσιν. 
 
 son therefore fails. Even De W. ad- 
 mits that Baur has only probability in 
 his fayour. 
 
 19. Kara πρεσβυτέρου] ‘Against 
 an elder,’ Vulg., Goth.; not ‘an el- 
 derly man,’ Chrys., Theoph., Gicum, 
 The context clearly relates only to 
 presbyters. κατηγορίαν] ‘a 
 charge, an accusation;’ οὐκ εἶπε δὲ μὴ 
 κατακρίνῃς, ἀλλὰ μηδὲ παραδέξῃ ὅλως, 
 Theoph. It has been asked (De W.) 
 whether Timothy is not to observe 
 the judicial rule here alluded to (Deut. 
 Xvii. 6, xix. 15, 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 the ex- 
 ercise of that office was presupposed 
 by the command. 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 it be,’ τ Cor. xiv. 
 5, Xv. 2; a pleonastic negation, really 
 compounded of two exceptive formule ; 
 comp. Thom. M. s.v. χωρίς, and see 
 the exx. cited by Wetst. on 1 Cor. xiv. 
 5, and by Lobeck, Phryn. p. 459. 
 ἔπὶ δύο K.T.A.] ‘on the authority of 
 [‘on the mouth of,’ Syr.] two or three 
 witnesses ;’? comp. Xen. Hell. νι. 5. 41, 
 ἐπ’ ὀλίγων... μαρτύρων, ‘paucis adhi- 
 bitis testibus;’ Winer, Gr. § 47. g, 
 p- 335. Huther finds a difficulty in 
 this meaning of ἐπὶ with the gen. 
 Surely nothing can be more simple. 
 
 As ἐπὶ with a gen. properly denotes 
 superposition (see Donaldson, Cratyl. 
 § 173), the κατηγορία is represented as 
 resting upon the witnesses, depending 
 on them to substantiate it: comp. 
 Hammond. The closely allied use, ἐπὲ 
 δικαστῶν, δικαστηρίου, déc., in which 
 the presence of the parties (coram) is 
 more brought into prominence (τ Cor. 
 vi. 1, 2 Cor. vil. 14), is correctly re- 
 ferred by Kiihner (Jelf, Gr. § 633) 
 to the same primary meaning. The 
 idea of ‘connexion or accompaniment,’ 
 which Peile (following Matth. Gr. § 
 584 m) here finds in ἐπί, is not sufii- 
 ciently exact: see further exx. in Rost. 
 Ue Palm) 161: δνν ἐπὶ, Vol. i) ps 
 1034. 
 
 20. Τοὺς ἁμαρτάνοντας] ‘Them 
 that sin, sinners ;’ apparently not the 
 offending presbyters (Huth., Alf.), as 
 the expression is far too comprehen- 
 sive to be so limited, but sinners gene- 
 rally, ‘persistentes in pececato’ (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. ὃ 45. 7, p. 316; 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. 
 XVili. 15), not because ‘Christus agit 
 de peccato occulto, Paulus de publico’ 
 (Justiniani), but because, first, Ti- 
 mothy is here invested with special 
 ecclesiastical authority (comp. Thorn- 
 dike, Prim. Gov. ch. x111.), and se- 
 condly, because the present participle 
 (contr. ἐὰν ἁμαρτ. Matth. 1.6.) directs 
 
 G 
 
82 
 
 21 
 
 καὶ Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ καὶ τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν 
 ἀγγέλων ἵνα ταῦτα φυλάξης χωρὶς 
 
 the thought towards the habitually 
 sinful character of the offender (ἐπιμέ- 
 vovras τῇ duapr., Theoph.), and his 
 need of an open rebuke; see notes on 
 Eph. iv. 28. 
 
 21. Διαμαρτύρομαι) ‘I solemnly 
 charge thee,’‘ obtestor,’ Beza,—or with 
 full accuracy, ‘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 x Thess. iv. 
 6, the only other passage in which it 
 occurs in St Paul’s Epp. [Heb. ii. 6], 
 it has more the sense of ‘assure, so- 
 lemnly testify ;’ comp, Acts xx. 21, 23, 
 24. In this verb (used seyeral times 
 by St Luke), the preposition appears 
 primarily to mark the presence or in- 
 terposition of some form of witness, 
 ‘intercessionis (Vermittelung),ad quam 
 omnis testimonii provincia redit, no- 
 tionem ;’ Winer, l.c. p. 21. On verbs 
 compounded with διά, see the remarks 
 of Tittmann, Synon. 1. Ὁ. 223; and on 
 the present and other uses of ἵνα (here 
 appy-. purpose and purport united), 
 comp, notesonEph.i.17. τοῦ Θεοῦ 
 «.7.A.] ‘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. (κυρ. 
 *I. X., with D°KL; mss. ; Syr., Goth., 
 al.; Chrys., al.) the reference of the 
 two substantives to one person is in 
 the highest degree doubtful and pre- 
 carious: the Greek Ff. are here for the 
 most part either silent, or adopt the 
 usual translation ; see notes on Eph. v. 
 5, Middleton, Art. p. 389 (ed. Rose), 
 Stier on Eph. Vol. 1. p. 250. 
 τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν ἀγγέλων] ‘the elect 
 
 Διαμαρτύρομαι ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOOEON A. 
 
 I solemnly charge thee 
 be not partial nor pre- 
 cipitate: some men’s 
 sins are sooner, some 
 later, in being found 
 out; so their good 
 works. 
 
 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 sub fin. (cited by Otto and 
 Krebs), μαρτύρομαι δ᾽ ἐγὼ μὲν ὑμῶν τὰ 
 ἅγια, καὶ τοὺς 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 
 Calvy., Wiesing.), nor does it seem pro- 
 bable that it refers to those of a higher, 
 as opposed to those of a lower rank 
 (Cathar. ap. Est.; comp. Tobit xii. 
 15), as all such distinctions are at best 
 uncertain and precarious ; comp. notes 
 on Col. i. 16. With such passages as 
 2 Peter ii. 4, Jude 6, before us, it 
 seems impossible to doubt that the 
 ‘elect angels’ are those who kept their 
 Jirst estate (Chrys., Theoph., Gicum.), 
 and who shall form part of that count- 
 less host (Jude 14, Dan. vii. 10) that 
 shall attend the Lord’s second advent; 
 so Stuart, Angelology,tv. 2 (in Biblioth. 
 Sacra, 1843, p. 103); comp. also Twes- 
 ten, Angelol. § 3 (translated in Bibl. 
 Sacr. for 1844, p. 782). On the exist- 
 ence and ministry of these Blessed 
 Spirits see the powerful and admirable 
 sermons of Bp, Bull, Engl. Works, p. 
 194 54. 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 Theod, (ex- 
 pressly) and the other Greek expositors. 
 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 ex- 
 tend the reference to ver. 178q. (Huth.? 
 
9 9°90 
 NG; 2322. 
 
 A -~ 4 
 προκρίματος, μηδὲν ποιῶν κατὰ πρύσκλισιν. 
 
 ταχέως μηδενὶ ἐπιτίθει, μηδὲ 
 
 al.): instruction about the exercise of 
 discipline might suitably beconnected 
 with the weighty adjuration in ver. 
 21, but scarcely mere semi-fiscal ar- 
 rangements. χωρὶς mpoxpl- 
 ματος] ‘without prejudice, prejudging’ 
 (‘fatrdémein,’ Goth.); ‘judiciwm esse 
 debet, non prejudicium,’ Beng. In 
 the participial clause that follows the 
 contrary aberration from justice is for- 
 bidden, scil. ‘inclinatio per favorem,’ 
 κατὰ προπάθειαν προσκλινόμενος τῷ 
 ἑνὶ μέρει, Theoph. The reading πρόσ- 
 κλησιν (Lachm. with ADL; al. 50; 
 Copt.? Chrys.?), though deserving some 
 consideration on the principle ‘pro- 
 clivi lectioni prestat ardua,’ can 
 scarcely be forced into yielding any 
 naturalsense. Both wpoxp.and πρόσκλ. 
 are am. λεγ. in the N.T.: the latter 
 occurs also in Clem. Rom. 1. 21, 47, 
 50 (comp. Polyb. Hist. v. 51. 8, ΥἹ. 10. 
 10), Iren. Her. τ. 6. τ (ed. Mass.), and 
 is illustrated by Krebs, Obs. p. 356 sq. 
 On the alleged distinction between 
 χωρὶς and ἄνευ see notes on Eph. il. 12. 
 
 22. Xelpas ταχέως k.t.A.] ‘Lay 
 hands hastily on no man.’ Indisput- 
 ably the most ancient interpretation 
 of these words is ‘the imposition of 
 hands in ordination,’ περὶ χειροτονιῶν, 
 Chrys.; so Theod., Theoph., Gicum., 
 and of modern expositors Alf., 
 Wordsw., and Conyb., but without 
 success in explaining thecontext. The 
 preceding warnings however, and still 
 more the decided language of the fol- 
 lowing clause (comp. ἁμαρτάνοντας ver, 
 20) appear to point so very clearly to 
 some disciplinary functions, that it 
 seems best with Hammond (so also 
 De Wette, Wiesing.) to refer these 
 words to the χειροθεσία on the absolu- 
 tion of penitents, and their re-admis- 
 sion to church-fellowship; so appy. 
 
 83 
 
 Xeipas 22 
 
 κοινώνει ἁμαρτίαις ἀλλο- 
 
 Taylor, Disswasive, Part 1.01. ΤΊ, 
 though otherwise in Episcopacy, § 14. 
 The prevalence in the apostolic age 
 of the custom of imposition of hands 
 generally, and the distinct evidence of 
 this specific application of the custom 
 in very early times (Euseb., Hist. v1. 
 2, calls it a παλαιὸν ἔθος; 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. 11. p. 1517, 
 Bingham, Antiq. xviil. 2. 1. 
 
 μηϑὲ κοινώγει «K.7.A.] ‘nor yet share 
 in the sins of others,’ i.e. μηδέν σοι καὶ 
 ταῖς du. ἀλλοτρ. κοινὸν ἔστω, Winer, 
 Gr. § 30.8, p. 180; ‘do not share with 
 them their sins, by restoring them to 
 church-fellowship on a doubtful or im- 
 perfect repentance.’ The rendering of 
 Auth., ‘be partaker of’ (‘mache dich 
 theilhaftig,’ De Wette), is not quite 
 sufficiently exact, as this would rather 
 imply a gen. Κοινων εἶν is commonly 
 used in the N.T. with a ‘dativus rei’ 
 (see notes on Gal. vi. 6), and in this 
 construction seems to involye more 
 the idea of community than of simple 
 participation; see Winer, l.c., Poppo 
 on Thucyd, x. 16, Vol. 11. 2, p. 77, 
 and comp. notes on Eph. y. τι. On 
 the continued negation μὴ... μηδέ, see 
 notes on Eph. iv. 27, and the treatise 
 of Franke, de Part. Neg. 11. 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 admit that ἁμαρτίαις 
 points to ἁμαρτάνοντας, and yet to 
 conceive that presbyters are referred 
 to in the latter expression and can- 
 didates for ordination in the former 
 
 G2 
 
84 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ TIMOOEON A. 
 
 , ‘ e ‘ , , 7) , J Ἀλλὰ 
 23 Τρίαις. σεαυτὸν αγνον τήρει. μῆκετι vopoTOTEl, ἀλλα 
 
 ” AL A ὃ ‘ ‘ , , 4 ‘ , 
 οινῳ oO tyo XP” (a TOV στομάᾶάχον σου και τας πυκνας 
 
 24 σου ἀσθενείας. 'Γινῶν ἀνθρώπων αἱ ἁμαρτίαι πρόδηλοί 
 Β ρ ρ 
 
 (Alf., Wordsw.), is a narrow and some- 
 what cheerless view of a church which, 
 with all its faults, could not bear 
 ‘them which were evil,’ and knew how 
 to reject false apostles (Rev. ii. 2). 
 σεαυτὸν K.T.A.] ‘Keep thyself (em- 
 phatic) pure;’ ‘purum,’ Beza, not 
 ‘castum,’ Vulg., Clarom. The posi- 
 tion 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 (a ζω), 
 as its termination suggests (‘object 
 conceived under certain relations,’ 
 Donalds. Cratyl. § 255), implies pro- 
 perly an outward, and thence an in- 
 ward purity; ‘dayvdv est in quo nihil 
 est impuri,’ Tittmann, Synon. 1. p. 22; 
 comp. ἁγνὴ avactpopy, τ Pet. 111. 2, 
 σοφία ἁγνή, James 111. 17, and see 
 Trench, Synon. Part m. ὃ 38. The 
 derivative sense of ‘ castitas’ (‘puritas 
 a venere,’ ἁγνὸς λέχους, γαμῶν, Valck., 
 Eur. Phan. 953) comes easily and 
 intelligibly from the primary mean- 
 ing; comp. 2 Cor. xi. 2, Tit. ii. 5, and 
 Reuss, Théol. Chrét. rv. 16, Vol. 1. p. 
 170, except that he adopts this deriva- 
 tive meaning far too generally. On 
 the distinction between it and ἅγιος 
 (‘in ἅγιος cogitatur potissimum vere- 
 cundia que dyv@ rei vel personx de- 
 betur’), compare Tittmann, loc. cit. 
 33. μηκέτι Spor. ] ‘Be no longer a 
 water-drinker.’ There is no necessity 
 to supply ‘only’ (Conyb., Coray, al.); 
 ὑδροποτ. not being exactly identical 
 with ὕδωρ πίνειν, but pointing more to 
 the regular habit ; comp. Artemidorus, 
 1. 68 (Wetst.), πίνειν ὕδωρ ψυχρὸν ἀγα- 
 θὸν πᾶσι" θερμὸν δὲ ὕδωρ νόσους ἣ 
 ἀπραξίας σημαίνει τῶν ἔθος ἐχόντων 
 ὑδροποτεῖν x.T.A., and see Winer, Gr. 
 
 § 55.8, p. 442, and the numerous exx. 
 cited by Wetst. in loc. The position 
 of this precept in ref. to the context is 
 certainly somewhat singular, and has 
 given rise to many different explana- 
 tions. The most natural view is that 
 it was 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 observe an ἄοινον ἀγνείαν (Plu- 
 tarch, de Iside et Osir. § 6), and asce- 
 tical abstinences.’ To suppose that 
 the Apostle puts it down here just as it 
 came into his mind, fearing he might 
 otherwise forget it (Coray in loc.), 
 seems very unsatisfactory; still more 
 so to regard it as a hint to Timothy to 
 raise his bodily condition above mala- 
 dies, which, it is assumed, interfered 
 with an efficient discharge of his duties 
 (Alf.). That the Apostle’s ‘genuine 
 chiid in the faith’ (ch. i. 2) was feeble 
 in body is certain from this verse; that 
 this feebleness affected his character 
 is, to say the very least, a most ques- 
 tionable hypothesis. It may be 
 remarked, in conclusion, that some as- 
 cetic sects, e.g. the Essenes, were par- 
 ticularly distinguished for their absti- 
 nence from wine, especially on their 
 weekly festival ; ποτὸν ὕδωρ vauartatov 
 αὐτοῖς ἐστιν, Philo, de Vit. Cont. ὃ 4, 
 Vol. 11. p. 477, see 8 9, p. 483, and 
 comp. Luke i. 15, Rom. xiy. 21. 
 διὰ τὸν στόμαχόν σου] ‘on account of 
 thy stomach,’ Wetstein and Kypke very 
 appropriately cite Libanius, Epist. 
 1578, πέπτωκε καὶ ἡμῖν ὁ στόμαχος 
 ταῖς συνεχέσιν ὑδροποσίαις. The pro- 
 noun is omitted by AD'N, and thus, 
 to some extent, may be considered of 
 doubtful authority. 
 
 24. Tivav ἀνθρώπων k.7.A.] The 
 
Viz 237 2). 
 
 85 
 
 s , 9. ’ 4 A Δ 9 ~ 
 εἰσιν TPOAYOUTAL εἰς κρίσιν, τισιν δὲ καὶ ἐπακολουθοῦσιν'" 
 
 connexion is not perfectly obvious. 
 Heinsius (Exercit. p. 491), not with- 
 out some plausibility, includes ver. 23 
 with the last clause of ver. 22 in a 
 parenthesis. This seems scarcely ne- 
 cessary; σεαυτὸν x.T.X. is a supple- 
 mentary command in reference to what 
 precedes; ver. 23 is a kind of limita- 
 tion of it, suggested by some remem- 
 brance of Timothy’s habits. The 
 Apostle then reverts to μηδὲ κοιν. 
 ἁμαρτ. 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 perpetrator to judgment; 
 so also there are open and hidden (τὰ 
 ἄλλως ἔχοντα) good works ; sins how- 
 ever and good works alike shall ulti- 
 mately be brought to light and to 
 judgment.’ The two verses thus seem 
 mainly added to assist Timothy in his 
 diagnosis of character; ver. 24 ap- 
 pears to caution him against being 
 too hasty in absolving others; ver. 25 
 against being too precipitate in his 
 censures ; so Huther. 
 
 πρόδηλοι] ‘openly manifest :’ the pre- 
 position does not appear to have so 
 much a mere temporal as an intensive 
 reference; see Heb. vii. 14, where 
 Theod. remarks, τὸ πρόδηλον ὡς ἀναν- 
 τίῤῥητον τέθεικε ; comp. also προγράφω 
 Gal, iii. r, and notes inloc. So simi- 
 larly Syr. and Vulg., both of which 
 suppress any temporal reference in the 
 prep. Estius compares ‘propalam,’— 
 a form in which Hand similarly gives 
 to ‘pro’ only an amplifying and in- 
 tensive force, ‘ut palam propositam 
 rem plane conspiciamus,’ Tursellinus, 
 Vol. 1v. p. 598. προάγουσαι 
 K.T.A.] ‘going before, leading the way, 
 tojudgment,’ as heralds and apparitors 
 (‘quasi anteambulones,’ Beza) pro- 
 claiming before the sinner the whole 
 
 history of his guilt. The ‘judgement’ 
 to which they lead the way is certainly 
 not any ecclesiastical xpiovs,—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, 
 perhaps with ultimate reference to 
 ‘the final judgment’ (comp. Chrys.); 
 they go before the sinner to the judg- 
 ment seat of Christ; see Manning, 
 Serm. 8, Vol. 111. p. 72, in the opening 
 of which this text is forcibly illus- 
 trated. To limit the κρίσις to the 
 case of candidates for ordination (Alf., 
 Wordsw.) is to give to a verse almost 
 obviously and studiedly general a very 
 narrow and special interpretation. So 
 much was this felt by Basil, that we 
 are told by Theoph. (on ver. 24) that 
 he conceived the present portion to 
 have no connexion with the περὶ τῶν 
 χειροτονιῶν λόγον, but to form a sepa- 
 rate κεφάλαιον : comp. Cramer, Caten. 
 Vol. vi. p. 44, where this and the 
 following verses form an independent 
 section. καὶ ἐπακολουθοῦσιν] 
 ‘they rather follow after,’ sc. εἰς κρίσιν ; 
 not merely indefinitely, ‘ they follow 
 after, and so in their shorter or longer 
 course become discovered,’ De W.,— 
 an explanation which completely de- 
 stroys theimageand apposition,—but, 
 ‘the sins crying for vengeance follow 
 the sinner to the tribunals whether of 
 his fellow-men, or, more inclusively, 
 of his all-judging Lord;’ ov γὰρ συγ- 
 καταλύονται τῷ βίῳ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπακολουθοῦ- 
 σιν, Theoph.; comp. Manning, l.c. 
 On ἐπακολ. see notes on ver. ro: the 
 antithesis mpo-dyovca precludes the 
 assumption of any special force in ἐπί, 
 scil. ‘ presse sequi,’ ἀδιασπάστως cuvo- 
 δεύουν τὸν ὑποκρινόμενον, ὡς ἡ σκία τὸ 
 σῶμα, Coray; the only relations pre- 
 sented to our thoughts seem those of 
 
80 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 A. 
 
 ‘ 4 , » 
 25 ὡσαύτως καὶ τὰ ἔργα τὰ καλὰ πρόδηλα, καὶ τὰ ἄλλως 
 
 ,᾿ A ? , 
 EXOVTa κρυβῆναι ου δύνανται. 
 
 VI. 
 
 γὼ» , [A ~ κι] , 
 ἰδίους δεσπότας πασῆς TNs ἀξίους 
 
 before and after. Ἰζ αἱ clearly does not 
 belong to τισίν (Huther), but is at- 
 tached with a kind of descensive force 
 to ἐπακολ. ; see notes on Gal. 111. 4. 
 25. ὡσαύτως] ‘in like manner ; ἢ 
 good works are in this respect not ws 
 ἑτέρως 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; Aug., Boern., 
 
 Goth, : this reading is not improbable, - 
 
 but has scarcely sufficient external 
 support, τὰ ἔργα τὰ καλά] 
 ‘their good works ;’ the repetition of 
 the article is intended to give pro- 
 minence to the epithet and more fully 
 to mark the antithesis between the 
 ἁμαρτίαι and the καλὰ ἔργα; see Mid- 
 dleton, Art. chap. vit. p. 114 (ed. 
 Rose), comp. Winer, Gr. ὃ 20. a, p. 120. 
 On the somewhat frequent use of the 
 expression καλὰ ἔργα in these Epp., 
 comp. notes on Tit. 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 concluding 
 words the paraphrase of Huther, ‘they 
 cannot always remain hidden’ (κρυβῆ- 
 vat), is scarcely exact: the aor. inf., 
 though usually found after ἔχω, δύνα- 
 μαι, ἄς, (Winer, Gr. ὃ 44. 7, p. 298), 
 cannot wholly lose its significance, 
 but must imply that the deeds cannot 
 be concealed at all. They may not 
 be patent and conspicuous (πρό-δηλα), 
 but they cannot be definitely covered 
 up: they will be seen and recognised 
 some time or other, The 
 reading in this last clause is not quite 
 
 Ὅσοι εἰσὶν ὑπὸ ζυγὸν δοῦλοι τοὺς 
 
 Servants, for the sake 
 of God's name, hon- 
 our es masters, esp. 
 if they are believers 
 and brethren. Teach this. 
 
 certain ; δύναται is supported by FG 
 KLS Ἐπ most mss.; the plural only 
 by AD and about 30 mss.; this latter 
 reading is however certainly to be 
 preferred on internal grounds, as the 
 singular may so easily have been a 
 grammatical correction. 
 
 Cuapter VI. 1, ὑπὸ ζυγὸν δοῦλοι] 
 ‘under the yoke as bond-servants ;’ 
 not ‘servants...... under the yoke,’ 
 
 Auth. ; still less ‘under the yoke of 
 Pg ἃ vy ° τ Ἄ 
 slavery’ ({Z0;29 {pad ΔυυυΣ 
 
 Syr.,) a needless ὃν διὰ δυοῖν. Δοῦλοι 
 is not the subject, but an explanatory 
 predicate appended to ὑπὸ ζυγόν, words 
 probably inserted not to mark an ex- 
 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 
 ζυγὸν δοῦλοι, let them comport them- 
 selves accordingly. Similar exhorta- 
 tions are found Eph. vi. 5 sq., Col. 
 iii. 22, Tit. ii. 9; comp. 1 Cor. vii. 21, 
 where however the meaning is not 
 perfectly certain, all apparently di- 
 rected against the very possible mis- 
 conception that Christianity was to 
 be understood as putting master and 
 bond-servant on an equality, or as in- 
 terfering with the existing social rela- 
 tions. τοὺς ἰδίους Seom.] ‘ their 
 own masters,’ those who stand in that 
 distinct personal relation to them, and 
 whom they are bound to obey; see 
 esp. the note on ἔδιος on Eph. Υ. 22. 
 On the distinction between δεσπότης 
 and κύριος [κύρ. γυναικὸς καὶ υἱῶν ἀνὴρ 
 καὶ πατήρ, δεσπ. δὲ ἀργυρωνήτων, 
 Ammonius, s.y.], see Trench, Synon. 
 
We 267 VWI. Ἢ, 2. 
 
 87 
 
 e ’ ΠΣ A Xx oF A A ce , 
 ἡγείσθωσαν, ἵνα μὴ TO ὄνομα TOU Θεοῦ καὶ ἡ διδασκαλία 
 
 βλασφημῆται. 
 
 e A 4 39 , 4 
 οἱ δὲ πιστοὺς EXOVTES δεσπότας, fy 2 
 
 καταφρονείτωσαν, ὅτι ἀδελφοί εἰσιν ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον δου- 
 
 ’ ef i bs 4 ᾿ A e A 9 
 λευέτωσαν, OTL πιστοι εἰσιν Και αγαπῆητοι ol τῆς ευερ- 
 
 “- ’ 
 γεσίας ἀντιλαμβανόμενοι. ταῦτα δίδασκε καὶ παρακάλει. 
 
 § 28. St Paul here correctly uses the 
 unrestricted term δεσπότης as More in 
 accordance with the foregoing ὑπὸ 
 ζυγόν, comp. Tit. ii. g; it is noticeable 
 that in his other Epp. he uses κύριος. 
 πάσης τιμῆς] ‘all honowr;’ honour 
 in every form and ease in which it is 
 due to them. On the true extensive 
 meaning of πᾶς, see notes on Hph.i. 8. 
 ἡ διδασκαλία] ‘the doctrine,’ sc. ‘His 
 doctrine, Syr., Auth.: comp. Tift. ii. 
 10, τὴν διδασκαλίαν τὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος 
 ἡμῶν Θεοῦ. Διδασκ. clearly points to 
 the Gospel, the evangelical doctrine 
 (Theod.), which would be evil spoken 
 of, if it were thought to inculcate in- 
 subordination; see Chrys. in loc. 
 
 2. πιστούς] ‘belicving,’ i.e. Chris- 
 tian masters; slightly emphatic, asthe 
 order of the words suggests. The 
 slaves who were under heathen mas- 
 ters were positively to regard their 
 masters as deserving of honour, the 
 slaves under Christian masters were 
 negatively not to evince any want of 
 respect, The former were not to re- 
 gard their masters as their inferiors, 
 and be insubordinate, the latter were 
 not to think them their equals, and 
 be disrespectful. μᾶλλον 
 SovA.] ‘the more serve them;’ μᾶλλον 
 is not merely corrective, ‘potius servi- 
 ant,’ Beza, but intensive, ‘the rather,’ 
 Hamm., ‘magis serviant,’ Vulg., 
 Goth. Beza’s correction, as is not 
 unfrequently the case, is therefore 
 here unnecessary; see Hand, Twrsell. 
 s.v. ‘magis,’ Vol. 111. p. 554. 
 ὅτι πιστοὶ K.T.A.] ‘because believing 
 and beloved (of God) are,’ ἄρ. There 
 is some little difficulty in the construc- 
 
 tion and explanation. The article 
 however shows that οἱ ἀντιλ. is the 
 subject, πιστοὶ καὶ dy. the predicate: 
 the recurrence 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 
 difficulty lies in the interpretation of 
 the following words. ot...avTe- 
 λαμβανόμ..] ‘they who are partakers 
 of, ‘qui...participes sunt,’ Vulg., 
 Clarom.; so too Copt., Goth., Arm., 
 ear rtlhso? [qui 
 requie fruuntur]. ᾿Αντιλαμβ. is used 
 in two other passages in the N.T., in 
 both in the sense ‘succurrere,’ Luke 
 i. 54 (Isaiah xli, 9, LXX., ΡΠ), 
 Acts xx. 35. This is obviously inap- 
 plicable. The usual (ethical) meaning 
 in classical Greek is ‘to take a part 
 in,’ ‘to engage in,’ whether simply, 
 e.g. Thucyd. 11. 8, ἀντιλ. (56. the war), 
 or with reference to the primitive 
 meaning, in a more intensive sense, 
 ‘tocling to,’ and thence ‘to secure, get 
 possession of,’ e.g. Thucyd. m1. 22 ad 
 fin., τοῦ ἀσφαλοῦς ἀντιλ. It does not 
 then seem a very serious departure 
 from the classical meaning of ἀντιλ. 
 to take it, with a subdued intensive 
 force, as ‘percipere,’ ‘ frui’ (see Euseb, 
 Hist. 1v. 15, εὐωδίας τοσαύτης ἀντελ.; 
 cited by Scholef. 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 re- 
 ceive in return (for food, protection, 
 
 comp. Syr. 
 
88 
 
 3 Εἰ τις ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ καὶ μὴ προσ- 
 έρχεται ὑγιαίνουσιν λόγοις τοῖς τοῦ 
 Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ τῇ κατ᾽ 
 
 @c.) their benefit.’ In either of these 
 latter meanings, 7 evepy. will most 
 simply and naturally refer to the 
 ‘beneficium’ (not merely the evepyia, 
 Coray) shown to the master in the 
 services and εὔνοια (Eph. vi. 7) of the 
 bondseryant. Chrys., al., refer the 
 evepyeota 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 allowed to have 
 its fullest weight in determining the 
 meaning of the separate words. To 
 refer εὐεργεσία to the divine benevo- 
 lence (‘beneficentia Dei, nimirum in 
 Christo,’ Beza) seems manifestly un- 
 tenable. ταῦτα K.T.A.] 
 ‘these things teach and exhort;’ τὸ μὲν 
 διδακτικῶς τὸ δὲ πρακτικῷς, Theod. 
 Tisch. and Lachm. both refer these 
 words to the next clause; so appy. 
 Chrys., but not Gicum. It is doubt- 
 ful whether this is correct: the oppo- 
 sition between δίδασκε and érepod. is 
 certainly thus more clearly seen, but 
 the prominent position of ταῦτα (con- 
 trast ch, iv. 11) seems to suggest a 
 more immediate connexion with what 
 precedes. For the meaning of παρακ. 
 see notes ch. 1, 3, and on Eph. iv. 1. 
 3. ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ] ‘teaches other 
 doctrine,’ ‘plays the ἑτεροδιδάσκαλος :᾽ 
 comp, λαθροδιδασκαλεῖν, Iren. Her. 
 Ill. 4. 2, and see notes on ch, i. 3, the 
 only other passage in the N.T, where 
 the word occurs. 
 προσέρχεται) ‘draws nigh to,’ ‘as- 
 
 Y F n 
 sents to,’ Syr. ;OL% [accedens]. 
 
 Bentley (Phileleuth. Lips. p. 72, Lond. 
 1713) objects to προσέρχ., suggesting 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOGEON 
 
 A. 
 
 If any one teach dif- 
 ferently, he is besot- 
 ted, fosters disputes, 
 and counts godliness 
 a mere gain. Let us 
 be contented; riches 
 are a snare and a 
 source of many sorrows. 
 
 προσέχει Οἱ προσέχεται ; there is no 
 reason however for any change in the 
 expression. IIpocépx., when thus used 
 with an abstract subst., appears to 
 convey the idea of ‘attention to,’ e.g. 
 προσελθεῖν τοῖς νόμοις, Diod, Sic. I. 95, 
 προσ. τῇ φιλοσοφίᾳ, Philostr, Zp. Socr. 
 τι. 16, and thence of ‘assent to, ad- 
 hesion to’ (comp. Acts x. 28, and the 
 term προσήλυτοι), any principle or 
 object, e.g. προσελθόντες ἀρετῇ, Philo, 
 Migr. Abr. § τό, Vol. 1. p. 449 (ed. 
 Mang.), and still more appositely, τοῖς 
 τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων δόγμασι mpocepx., Ire- 
 neus, Fragm. 36 (Pfaff, p.27). Bretsch. 
 cites Ecclus, i. 30, but there φόβῳ 
 Kup. is clearly the dat. of manner. 
 See Loesner, Obs. p. 405 8q., where 
 several other exx. are adduced from 
 Philo. ὑγιαίν. λόγοις] ‘sound 
 (healthful) words ; see notes on ch, 
 i. To. τοῖς τοῦ Kup. x.7.X.] 
 ‘those of our Lord Jesus Christ,’ i.e. 
 which emanate from our Lord,—either 
 directly, or through His Apostles and 
 teachers: not the gen. objecti, ‘ser- 
 mones qui sunt de Christo,’ Est., but 
 the gen. originis; comp, Hartung, 
 Casus, p. 23, and notes on 1 Thess. i. 6. 
 καὶ τῇ κατ᾽ εὐσέβ. δικασκ.} ‘and to 
 the doctrine whichis according to godli- 
 ness ;’clausecumulatively explanatory 
 of the foregoing; ‘verba Christi vere 
 sunt doctrina ad pietatem faciens,’ 
 Grot, The expression ἡ κατ᾽ εὐσέβ. 
 is not, ‘que ad pietatem ducit,’ Leo, 
 Méller,—a meaning however which 
 with some modifications may be gram- 
 matically defended (comp. 2 Tim, i. 1, 
 Tit. i, 1, and see Winer, Gr. s.v. κατά, 
 § 49 d.c, p. 358, Rost ἃ. Palm, Lex. 
 ib. 11. 3, Vol. 1. p. 1598),—but ac- 
 cording to the usual meaning of the 
 
le 4S 5. 
 
 89 
 
 4 , 
 εὐσέβειαν διδασκαλίᾳ, τετύφωται, μηδὲν ἐπιστάμενος, 4 
 
 [οἱ , 3 ω 
 ἀλλὰ νοσῶν περὶ ζητήσεις καὶ λογομαχίας, ἐξ ὧν γίνεται 
 
 φθόνος, ἔρεις, βλασφημίαι, ὑπόνοιαι πονηραί, διαπαρα- 5 
 
 prep., ‘que pietati consentanea est,’ 
 Est.; there were (to imitate the lan- 
 guage of Chrys. on Tit. i. 1) different 
 kinds of διδασκαλία; this was specially 
 ἡ κατ᾽ εὐσέβ. διδασκαλία. For the 
 meaning of εὐσέβ., see notes on ch. 
 li. 2. 
 
 4. τετύφωται] Not simply ‘super- 
 bus est,’ Vulg., nor even ‘inflatus est,’ 
 Clarom., but ‘he is beclouded, besotted, 
 
 with pride,’ see notes on ch. iii. 6. The 
 apodosis begins with this verse: even 
 if ἀφίστασο x.7.d. (Rec., ver. 5) were 
 genuineit wouldbe impossible to adopt 
 any other logical construction. 
 μηδὲν ἐπιστάμενος] ‘yet knowing no- 
 thing ;? see notes on ch. i. 7. If it 
 had been οὐδὲν ἐπιστ., it would have 
 been a somewhat more emphatic state- 
 ment of an absolute ignorance on the 
 part of the ἑτεροδιδάσκ.: it must be 
 always observed however that this 
 latter is a less usual construction in 
 the N.T., see Green, Gr. p.122. The 
 connexion of μὴ Δα οὐ with participles, 
 a portion of grammar requiring some 
 consideration, is laboriously illustrated 
 by Gayler, Part. Neg. p. 274—2093. 
 νοσῶν περὶ ζητ.] ‘doting, ailing (opp. 
 to ὑγιαίν. λόγοι), about questions ;’ περὶ 
 marks the object rownd about which 
 the action of the verb is taking place; 
 comp. notes on ch. i. 1g. In the use 
 of περὶ with a gen., the derivative 
 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. τ Cor. xii. τ, 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. 
 § 47- 6, p. 334, Donalds. Gr. § 482. 
 On ξητήσεις, see notes on ch. i. 4. 
 
 λογομαχίας] ‘debates about words,’ 
 ‘verbal controversies ;? adm. Neyou.; in 
 Latin, ‘verbivelitationes,’ Plaut. Asin. 
 11. 2. 41, λόγον προσάντη, Greg. Naz. 
 Carm. 15, Vol. 1. p. 200: ‘conten- 
 tiosas disputationes de verbis magis 
 quam de rebus,’ Calvy. These idle and 
 barren controversies degenerate into 
 actual strife and contention, and give 
 rise to bad feelings and bitter expres- 
 sions of them: ὑπὸ dofocodias ἐπῃρ- 
 μένοι ἐρίζοντες τελοῦσι, Clem. Alex. 
 Strom. vil. p. 759 (cited by Huth.). 
 The readingis extremely doubtful. We 
 still retain the plural ἔρεις (as in ed. 2); 
 but it must be observed that the ad- 
 dition of δὲ to the evidence in favour 
 of the singularrenders it probable that 
 the reading of ed. 1 (ἔρις) may be the 
 most correct. In this, as in some few 
 other passages, we pause till the pecu- 
 liarities of δὲ are more fully ascertained, 
 its authority in some portions of the 
 N.T. being clearly not so great as it is 
 in others. βλασφημίαι] ‘ evil 
 speakings, ‘railings,—not against 
 God (Theod.), but, asthe context clear- 
 ly implies, against one another: comp. 
 Eph. iv. 31 and notes. On the deri- 
 vation of βλασφημέω, see notes on ch. 
 een’ ὑπόνοιαι πον. is simi- 
 larly referred to God by Chrys. and 
 Theoph. ; but the context here again 
 seems clearly to limit the words to ‘evil 
 and malevolent surmisings’ against 
 those who adopt other views. Ὑπόν., 
 a am. Neyou. in the N.T., occurs not 
 unfrequently in classical Greek joined 
 with epithets or in a context which 
 convey an unfavourable meaning, e.g. 
 
90 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 A. 
 
 τριβαὶ διεφθαρμένων ἀνθρώπων τὸν νοῦν καὶ ἀπεστερη- 
 
 Demosth. Olympiod. 1178, ὑπόνοιαι 
 πλασταὶ... καὶ προφάσεις ἄδικοι; Some- 
 times even alone, e.g. Polyb. Hist. v. 
 15.1, ἐν ὑπονοίᾳ ἦσαν χαίροντες, Philo, 
 Leg. ad Caium, § 6, Vol. 11. p. 551 (ed. 
 Mang.), ἐξιώμενος τὰς ὑπονοίας τοῦ 
 Τιβερίου. 
 
 5. διαπαρατριβαί] ‘lasting con- 
 Jlicts,’ ‘ obstinate contests ;’ ‘conflicta- 
 
 o 8 
 tiones,’ Vulg., Clarom., Syr. 15... 
 
 {contritio,—see Michael. in Cast. Lex. 
 s.v.]. The prep. διὰ has here its usual 
 and primary force of ‘thoroughness,’ 
 ‘completeness,’ intensifying themean- 
 ing of the binary compound παρατρι- 
 Bal, 5011. ἀμοιβαῖαι καὶ ἁμιλλητικαὶ 
 παρατρ., Coray ; comp. Winer, Gr. 8 
 16. 4, p. 92. This latter word (πα- 
 parp.), ἃ5 its derivation suggests, pro- 
 perly signifies ‘collisions,’ thence deri- 
 vatively, ‘hostilities,’‘enmities,’ comp. 
 Polyb. Hist. τι. 36. 5, ὑποψίαι πρὸς 
 ἀλλήλους καὶ maparpiBal, Iv. 21. 5, 
 παρατριβὰς Kal φιλοτιμίας; add χχι. 
 13. 5, ΧΧΠΙ. 10. 4, al. There is then 
 no allusion to moral contagion (comp. 
 Chrys.), but to the collision of dispu- 
 tants whose mere Aoyouayla had led 
 at last to ‘truces inimicitias,’ To 
 retain παραδιατριβαί (Rec., ‘ profitless 
 disputations’), as is still done by 
 Bloomf., following Tittmann, Synon. 
 I. p. 233, is contrary to every prin- 
 ciple of sound criticism: for (1) ra- 
 padarp. is found only in a few cursive 
 mss. and Theoph., while διαπαρ. is 
 found in ADFGLN; great majority of 
 mss.; Clem., Bas., Chrys. (Griesb., 
 Scholz, Lachm., Tisch.); (2) itis highly 
 probable that the reading παραδιαρτ. 
 was a correction, as compounds of δια- 
 mapa are rare; and (3) παραδιατρ. is 
 in fact expressed in Noyouax. and su- 
 perfluous, while the reading of the 
 text is perfectly natural and consistent. 
 
 There are a few similar compounds, 
 e.g. διαπαρατηροῦμαι, 2 Sam, 111, 30, 
 διαπαράγω, Greg. Nyss. Vol. τ΄. p. 
 177, διαπαρασύρω, Schol. Lucian. Vol. 
 11. p. 796 (Hemst.). διεφθαρμ.... 
 τὸν νοῦν] ‘corrupted in their mind.’ 
 There is no reason whatever for trans- 
 lating νοῦς ‘intellect,’ as Peile in loc., 
 nor any scriptural evidence for the dis- 
 tinction he draws between the νοῦς as 
 ‘the noetic (?) faculty, the understand- 
 ing,’ and the φρὴν as ‘the reason.’ 
 Νοῦς is here, as not unfrequently in 
 the N.T. (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 15 one of its aspects, not 
 simply ‘ quatenus cogitat et intelligit’ 
 (Olsh. Opuse. p. 156), but also ‘ qua- 
 tenus vult:’ φρὴν (φρένες) on the other 
 hand only occurs twice, in 1 Cor. xiv. 
 20. Fora detailed account of νοῦς, see 
 Beck, Seelenlehre, τι. 18, p. 49 54., De- 
 litazsch, Bibl. Psych. tv. 5, p. 139 54.» 
 and comp. also Olshausen, Opuse. p. 
 156, whose definitions are however 
 rather too narrow. The accus., 
 it need scarcely be remarked, is an 
 accus. ‘of the remoter object,’ and spe- 
 cifies that part of the subject in or on 
 which the action of the verb takes 
 place, Winer, Gr. 8 32. 5, Pp. 204, 
 Scheuerl. Synt. rx. 2, p. 65. The ori- 
 gin of this construction is probably to 
 be looked for in verbs with two aecu- 
 satives, which when changed into the 
 passive retain theaccus. rei unaltered; 
 thence the usage became extended to 
 other verbs, comp. Kriiger, Sprachl. 
 § 52. 4. 2 8q., Hartung, Casus, p. 6t 
 sq. ἀπέεστερ. τῆς aX. ] 
 ‘deprived of the truth;’ immediate con- 
 sequence of the foregoing: they were 
 not only ἐστερημ. τῆς ar. (crepéw 
 however does not oceur in N.T.), but 
 
VI. 6,7, 8. 91 
 
 , i 9 , , Α 3 Q >? 
 μένων τῆς ἀληθείας, νομιζόντων πορισμον εἰναι THY εὑσε- 
 
 + A A , e 9 , A 9" 
 βειαν. "Eorw δὲ πορισμὸς μέγας ἡ εὐσέβεια μετὰ αὐταρ- 
 
 , ΕΔ, A 3 , 9. A , ~ Φ 
 κείας. οὐδὲν γὰρ εἰσηνεγκαμεν εἰς τὸν κοσμον, δῆλον ὅτι 7 
 ὃ 
 
 οὐδὲ ἐξενεγκεῖν τι δυνάμεθα" ἔχοντες δὲ διατροφὰς καὶ 
 
 ἀπεστερημ.; the truth was taken away 
 from them; comp. ch.i. 19, Tit. i. r4, 
 where its first rejection is stated to be 
 the act of the unhappy men them- 
 selves, πορισμὸν K.T.A.] 
 ‘that godliness is a source of gain;’ 
 clearly not, as the article proves (Jelf, 
 Gr. § 460. 1), ‘that gain is godl.,’ as 
 Syr. and Auth, Πορισμός, here and 
 ver.6,appears to be not so much‘ gain’ 
 in the abstract, as ‘a source or means 
 of gain’ (‘a gainful trade,’ Conyb.); 
 comp. Plutarch, Cato Major, § 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 expressed more fully in Tit. i. rr, 
 διδάσκοντες ἃ μὴ δεῖ αἰσχροῦ κέρδους 
 χάριν. The Rec, inserts ἀφίστασο ἀπὸ 
 τῶν τοιούτων With KL, Syr. (both), al., 
 but the authorities for the omission, 
 ADIFGN; Vulg., Clarom., Goth., 
 Copt., al., very distinctly preponderate. 
 
 6. πορισμὸς has here no immediate 
 spiritual reference (Matth.) to future 
 and heavenly gain (αἰώνιον πορίζει ζωήν, 
 Theod.), but points rather to the ac- 
 tual gain in this life, and the virtual 
 riches which godliness when accom- 
 panied by αὐτάρκ. (comp. notes on ch. 
 i. 14, and on Eph. vi. 23) unfailingly 
 supplies; κέρδος ἐστὶν ἡ εὐσέβεια ἐὰν 
 καὶ ἡμεῖς μὴ πλειόνων ἐφιέμεθα [sic], 
 ἀλλὰ τῇ αὐταρκείᾳ στοιχῶμεν, Gicum.; 
 similarly Chrys., Theoph.: ‘the heart, 
 amid every outward 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 εὐσέβ., and gives the mere ethical 
 truth a higher religious significance. 
 
 αὐταρκείας] ‘contentedness,’ not ‘com- 
 petency,’ Hamm.; ‘suficientia est ani- 
 mus sua sorte contentus, ut aliena 
 non appetat nec quidquam extra se 
 querat,’ Justin. in loc.: compare the 
 perhaps slightly more exact definition 
 of Clem. Alex. Ped. 11, 12, Vol. 1. 
 p. 247 (Potter), αὐτάρκ. ἕξις ἐστὶν ἀρκου- 
 μένη οἷς δεῖ [see Estius], καὶ dv αὑτῆς 
 ποριστικὴ τῶν πρὸς τὸν μακάριον συντε- 
 λούντων βίον. The subst. occurs again 
 in 2 Cor. ix. 8, but objectively, scil. 
 ‘ sufficiency,’—a meaning which ob- 
 viously would not be suitable in the 
 present case; αὐτάρκης occurs Phil. 
 iv. 11. 
 
 7. οὐδὲν yap] 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 renders the inference 
 more than probable that we shall carry 
 nothing out (comp. Jobi. 21), our real 
 source of gain must be something in- 
 dependent of what is merely additi- 
 tious, ὥστε τί δεῖ ἡμῖν τῶν περιττῶν 
 εἰ μηδὲν μέλλομεν ἐκεῖ συνεπάγεσθαι; 
 Theoph.: 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 
 κιτ.λ.7 ‘we also cannot take any thing 
 out;’ these words are clearly emphatic, 
 and contain the principal thought: 
 ‘excutit natura redeuntem sicut in- 
 trantem,’ Senec. Epist. 102. It is 
 this inability to take anything away 
 
92 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 Α. 
 
 9 σκεπάσματα, τούτοις ἀρκεσθησόμεθα. Οἱ δὲ βουλόμενοι 
 
 - ᾿ 4 4A / A..F 
 πλουτεῖν ἐμπίπτουσιν εἰς πειρασμον και παγίδα και επι- 
 
 which furnishes the most practical 
 argument for the truth of the asser- 
 tion. If we could take anything out 
 there would be an end to αὐτάρκεια ; 
 our present and future lots would be 
 felt to be too closely dependent on each 
 other for us to acquiesce patiently in 
 any assigned state: piety with content- 
 ment would then prove no great πο- 
 ρισμός. : 
 
 8. ἔχοντες δέ] ‘but if we have;’ 
 conditional member (comp. Donalds, 
 Gr. § 505), introducing a partial con- 
 trast to what precedes: the δὲ is thus 
 not for οὖν, Syr.,—a particle which 
 would give a different turn to the 
 statement,—still less equivalent to 
 καί, Auth., but points to a suppressed 
 thought suggested by οὐδὲ ἐξενεγκεῖν 
 k.T.X.; ‘something addititious we must 
 certainly have while we are in this 
 world, but if,’ ἄς, The oppositive 
 force of the particle is thus properly 
 preserved: ‘aliquid in mente habet ad 
 quod respiciens oppositionem infert,’ 
 Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11, p. 363, comp. 
 notes on Gal. iil. τα. 
 διατροφὰς καὶ ox.] ‘food and cloth- 
 ing; both words dz. λεγόμ. in the 
 N.T. The prep. in the former subst. 
 perhaps may hint at a fairly sufficient 
 and permanent supply, comp. Xen. 
 Mem, τι. 7. 6, τήν τε οἰκίαν πᾶσαν δια- 
 τρέφει καὶ ζῇ δαψιλῶς. The latter 
 substantive probably only refers to 
 ‘clothing,’ Clarom., Arm., not to ‘shel- 
 ter,’ Goth.(?), Peile, or to both, as 
 Vulg.(?) ‘quibus tegamur,’ De W.; 
 for see Aristot. Polit. vi. 17, σκέπασμα 
 μικρὸν ἀμπισχεῖν (Wetst.),and compare 
 the passage cited by Wolf out of Sext. 
 Empir. rx, 1, τροφῆς καὶ σκεπασμάτων 
 καὶ τῆς ἄλλης τοῦ σώματος ἐπιμελείας, 
 where it similarly does not seem neces- 
 sary (with Fabricius) to extend the re- 
 
 ference:soalsoChrys., all the Gk, expo- 
 ρ = ἐν 
 sitors, and appy. Syr., as Δα 
 
 [tegumentum] occurs elsewhere, 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.,— 
 though this meaning might be defend- 
 ed, see Winer, Gr. § 43. 5, p. 282, nor 
 even ethical, ‘we ought to be, we must 
 be so,’ comp. Bernhardy, Synt. x. 5, 
 P- 377,—but, as the following verse 
 seems to suggest, more definitely 
 future, and as stating what will ac- 
 tually be found to constitute αὐτάρκεια; 
 ‘simuletiam affirmare aliquid intendit 
 Apostolus,’ Estius, who with Hamm. 
 refers to Syr. (‘sufficient to us are’), 
 where this view is more roughly ex- 
 pressed: so appy. Green, Gr. p. 27, 
 and De W., who refers the future to 
 what might ‘reasonably be expected.’ 
 For the practical applications of this 
 text see ro sermons by Bp. Patrick, 
 Works, Vol. 1x. p. 448q. (Oxf. 1858). 
 9. Οἱ δὲ κιτ.λ.1 Class of persons 
 opposed to those last mentioned. 
 Chrys. with his usual acuteness calls 
 attention to βουλόμενοι; οὐχ ἁπλῶς 
 εἶπεν οἱ πλουτοῦντες, ἀλλ᾽ οἱ βουλόμ., 
 ἐστὶ γάρ τινα καὶ χρήματα ἔχοντα καλῶς 
 οἰκονομεῖν καταφρονοῦντα αὐτῶν. 
 παγίδα] ‘a snare;’ not ‘snares,’ Syr. 
 (comp. Bloomf.), but ‘a snare,’ 561]. 
 Tod διαβόλου, which is actually added 
 by D'!FG; Vulg., Clarom., al. There 
 is of course here no ὃν διὰ δυοῖν (Coray): 
 the latter substantive somewhat speci- 
 fies and particularizes the former, The 
 form the temptation assumed was that 
 of an entangling power, from which 
 it was not easy for the captive to ex- 
 tricate himself; comp, Moller in loc, 
 
WIS το. Ὁ9 
 
 θυμίας πολλὰς ἀνοήτους καὶ βλαβεράς, αἵτινες βυθίζουσιν 
 
 4 
 τοὺς ἀνθρώπους εἰς ὄλεθρον καὶ ἀπώλειαν. 
 
 ῥίζα γὰρ 10 
 
 A - 9 ’ Oo A 
 πάντων TOV κακῶν ἐστιν ἡ φιλαργυρία, ἧς τινὲς ὀρεγόμε- 
 
 ἀνοήτους] ‘foolish:’ on the proper 
 meaning of this word and its distinc- 
 tion from ἄφρων and ἀσύνετος, see 
 notes on Gal. iii. 1. Three mss., 
 Vulg., Clarom., Goth., read ἀνονήτους, 
 a wholly unnecessary correction: the 
 lusts involved elements of what was 
 foolish as well as what was hurtful. 
 Chrys. explains this by an enumera- 
 tion of several specific instances. 
 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... εἰς] ‘plunge into,’ ‘whelm 
 in;’ only here and Luke v. 7: “ἐμ- 
 πίπτ...βυθίζ. tristis gradatio,’ Beng. 
 The word, as Kypke suggests, ‘subin- 
 nuit infinita et ineluctabilia esse mala 
 in que precipites dantur avari,’ Obs. 
 Vol. 11. p. 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 ἐβύ- 
 θισαν means, as the verb always does, 
 ‘caused to sink,’ without any refer- 
 ence whatever to direction. 
 ὄλεθρον καὶ ἀπώλ.7 ‘destruction and 
 perdition.’ The force of the com- 
 pound form (ἀπὸ marks ‘completion,’ 
 comp. ἀπεργάζομαι, al., Rost τι. Palm, 
 Lex. 8.¥. ἀπό, © 4), and more abstract 
 termination of the latter word, per- 
 haps afford a hint thataclimactic force 
 is intended: ὄλεθρος (on the termina- 
 tion, see Pott, Et. Forsch. Vol. τι. p. 
 555) is ‘destruction’ in a general 
 sense, whether of body or soul; ἀπώ- 
 deca intensifies it by pointing mainly 
 to the latter. ᾿Ὄλεθρος is used by St 
 Paul alone, 1 Cor. v. 5, 6\. τῆς σαρκός, 
 1 Thess. v. 3, αἰφνίδιος... ἐφίσταται ὀλ., 
 
 where it points more to temporal de- 
 struction, and 2 Thess. i. 9, where the 
 epithet αἰώνιος is specially added to 
 support its application to final ‘ per- 
 dition.’ 
 
 το. ῥίζα] ‘a root,’ or perhaps rather 
 ‘the-root,’ Copt., the absence of the 
 article probably not leaving it to be 
 implied that there are other vices 
 which might be termed ‘roots of all 
 evils’ (ed. 1,comp. Middleton, Gr. Art. 
 ΠῚ. 4. I, p. 51 Sq.), but simply disap- 
 pearing owing to the rule of subject 
 and predicate overriding the law of 
 ‘correlation’ (Middl. Art. 111. 3. 6); 
 comp. Lysias, de Ced. Eratosth. § 7, 
 Ῥ. 92, ἐπειδὴ δέ μοι ἡ μητὴρ ἐτελεύτησε, 
 πάντων τῶν κακῶν ἀποθανοῦσα αἰτία 
 μοι γεγένηται, Demosth. de Megalop. 
 § 28, p. 208, ταυτὴν ἀρχὴν οὖσαν πάν- 
 των τῶν κακῶν. The example urged 
 by Alford (1 Cor. xi. 3) is not fully in 
 point, for (1) the article is inserted in 
 the first member, and (2) in the second 
 member the governed substantive is 
 anarthrous, and in the third a proper 
 name. In illustration of the general 
 form of the expression, comp. Plut. 
 de Lib. Educ. § 7, πηγὴ καὶ ῥίζα καλο- 
 κᾳγαθίας τὸ νομίμου τυχεῖν παιδείας. 
 ἡ φιλαργυρία] ‘the love of money ;" adr. 
 λεγόμ. in the N.T.; the adject. occurs 
 twice, Luke xvi. 14, 2 Tim, ili. 2. The 
 kindred but more general and active 
 sin πλεονεξία is that which is dwelt 
 upon by the sacred writers. On the 
 distinction between these words (which 
 however is almost self-evident) see 
 Trench, Synon. § 24, but comp. notes 
 on Eph. iv. 19. The sentiment is 
 illustrated by Suicer, Thes. Vol. 11. p. 
 1427. ἧς τινὲς Opeyou.] ‘which 
 some reaching out after.’ Commenta- 
 
94 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 ’ , 7 A A , ἃ ὦ a , 
 νοι ἀπεπλανήθησαν ἀπὸ τῆς πίστεως και εαυτοὺς περιε- 
 
 πειραν ὀδύναις πολλαῖς. 
 
 II Σὺ dé, ὦ ἄνθρωπε τοῦ Θεοῦ, ταῦτα 
 ΄- , , , sf , 
 
 φεῦγε: δίωκε δὲ δικαιοσύνην, εὐσέβειαν, 
 
 πίστιν, ἀγάπην, ὑπομονήν, πραῦπάθειαν' 
 
 tors have dwelt much upon the impro- 
 priety of the image, it being asserted 
 that φιλαργυρία is itself an ὄρεξις (De 
 W.). The image is certainly not per- 
 fectly correct, butif the passive nature 
 of φιλαργυρία (see Trench, l.c.) be 
 remembered, the violation of the image 
 will be less felt, Under any circum- 
 stances ὀρεγόμενοι cannot be correctly 
 translated ‘giving themselves up to,’ 
 Bretschn., al. Both here, ch. iii. 1, 
 and Heb. xi, 16, the only passages 
 in the N.T. where 18 word occurs, 
 
 ὠρέξατο (Syr. sew sel 
 ‘concupivit,’ ‘ desideravit’) is simply 
 ‘ desired,’ ‘coveted,’ literally ‘reached 
 out the hands eagerly to take ;’ comp. 
 Donalds. Cratyl. ὃ 477. On the deri- 
 vation (6—pey, comp. ‘rego’), see 
 Donalds. ib., and Pott, Etym. Forsch. 
 Vol. 1. p. 219, Vol. 11. p. 167. 
 ἑαυτοὺς περιέπειραν] ‘pierced them- 
 selves through;’ am. Neyou. in N.T.; 
 comp. Philo, in Flacc. ὃ τ, Vol. τι. 
 p- 517 (ed. Mang.), ἀθρόους ἀνηκέστοις 
 περιέπειρε κακοῖς, and the numerous 
 instances of asimilar metaphorical use 
 collected by Suicer, s.y. The prep. 
 περὶ does not here define the action as 
 taking place ‘round’ or ‘about’ (‘un- 
 diquaque,’ Beza), but conveys the idea 
 of ‘piercing,’ ‘going through,’—a 
 meaning well maintained by Donalds. 
 Cratyl. § 178; comp. Lucian, Gall. § 
 2, κρέα...περιπεπαρμένα τοῖς ὀβελοῖς, 
 Diod. Sic. xv1. 80, λόγχαις περιπειρό- 
 μενοι. The ὀδύναι here mentioned are 
 not merely outward evils (‘gravissima 
 mala hujus seculi,’ Estius), nor even 
 
 Follow after right- 
 eousness, and Chris- 
 tian virtues, fight the 
 pod fight, and in 
 
 hrist’s name keep 
 His commands, even 
 till His glorious com- 
 ing; glory to Him; amen. 
 
 the anxious cares (Justin.) or desires 
 (Chrys.) which accompany φιλαργυρία, 
 but more probably the gnawings of 
 conscience,—‘ conscientie de male par- 
 tis mordentis,’ Beng. The word ὀδύνη 
 (only here and Rom. ix. 2), it may be 
 remarked, is not derived from ὁδούς 
 (Bloomf.), but from a root AT- (comp. 
 δύη), With a vowel prefix; see Pott, 
 Etym. Forsch, Vol. 1. p. 210. 
 
 Ir, Σὺ δέ] ‘But thou,’ in distinct 
 contrast to the preceding τινές, ver. 10. 
 ἄνθ. τοῦ Θεοῦ] It is doubtful whether 
 this is an official term (sc. ‘internun- 
 cius Dei,’ Beng., D oN ws S, com- 
 pare 2 Pet. i. 21), or merely a pence 
 designation. The former viewisadopt- 
 ed by Theod., and is certainly plausi- 
 ble, 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 better to give the expression a 
 more extended reference, as in 2 Tim. 
 iii, 17; comp. Chrys., πάντες μὲν ἀν- 
 θρωποι τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ κυρίως ol 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, ‘avaritiam 
 et peccata qua ex ill radice proce- 
 dunt,’ Estius, δικαιοσύνην] 
 ‘ righteousness ;’ not merely ‘justice,’ 
 but either the virtue which is opposed 
 to ἀδικία (Rom, vi. 13), and to the 
 
eas aa: 12. 
 
 95 
 
 ~ A , ’ “- 
 ἀγωνίζου τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα τῆς πίστεως, ἐπιλαβοῦ 12 
 
 general tendency of the powers of evil 
 (2 Cor, xi. 15), or, as appy. here and 
 2 Tim. ii, 22, iii. 16, ina more general 
 sense,—‘right conduct conformable to 
 the law of God’ (2 Cor. vi. 14, comp. 
 Tit. ii. 12); see Reuss, Thécl. Chrét. 
 Iv. 16, Vol. 1. p. τόρ, Usteri, Lehrb. 
 Il, I. 2, p.190. On the more strictly 
 dogmatic meaning, see the excellent 
 remarks in Knox, Remains, Vol. 1. 
 p. 276. πίστιν] ‘faith,’ in 
 its usual theological sense (ἥπερ ἐστὶν 
 ἐναντία τῇ ζητήσει, Chrys.), not ‘ fide- 
 lity,’ ‘die einzelne christliche Pflicht 
 der Treue,’ Usteri, Lehrb. 11. 1. 1, p. 
 g2,note. On ὑπομονή, ‘perseverantia,’ 
 ‘brave patience’ (‘ malorum fortis to- 
 lerantia,’ Grot. on Rom. viii. 25), see 
 notes on 2 Tim. 11. το, and on Tit. 
 ji. 2. mpauTradearv] ‘ meel- 
 ness of heart or feelings ;’ a word of 
 rare occurrence (Philo, de Abrah., ὃ 37, 
 Vol. 11. p. 31, Ignat. Trall. 8), and 
 a ἅπαξ λεγόμ. in the N.T., perhaps 
 slightly more specific than πραὔτης, 
 501]. rpairns ὅλων τῶν παθῶν τῆς ψυχῆς, 
 Coray inloc. The reading of the Rec. 
 πραότητα (with ΚΙ, [πραὔτ., D'X4]; 
 al, ; Chrys., Theod.) has every appear- 
 ance of being a mere correction, and 
 is rejected even by Scholz. The 
 virtues here mentioned seem to group 
 themselves into pairs; δικαιοσ. and 
 evcéB. have the widest relations, point- 
 ing to general conformity to God’s law 
 and practical piety ; πίστις and ἀγάπη 
 are the fundamental principles of 
 Christianity; vou, and πραὔπ. the 
 principles on which a Christian ought 
 to act towards his gainsayers and op- 
 ponents; comp. Huther. The article 
 is not uncommonly omitted before 
 abstract nouns, see exx. in Winer, Gr. 
 § 19. I, p. 109. 
 
 12. τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα] ‘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 farthemetaphortaken 
 from the games is to be maintained in 
 this verse. Grammatical considera- 
 tions seem certainly in favour of the 
 two imperatives (here, on account of 
 the emphatic asyndeton, without καὶ) 
 being both referred to the metaphorical 
 contest, ‘strive the good strife, and 
 (in it and through it) seize hold on 
 eternal life,’ Winer, Gr. § 43. 2, p.279: 
 it is however very doubtful whether 
 the remaining expressions, καλεῖν (as 
 by the preco 3) ἐνώπ. πολλ. μαρτ. (the 
 spectators? see Hammond in loc.), can 
 fairly be regarded as parts of the con- 
 tinued metaphor. In εἰς ἥν, 85 De W. 
 has observed, there would in fact be 
 an impropriety; αἰών. gw is not the 
 contest or the arena into which the 
 combatants were called, but has just 
 been represented as the βραβεῖον and 
 ἔπαθλον (Theoph. ), the object for which 
 they were to contend, Similar but 
 more sustained allusions to the Olym- 
 pic contests occur in 1 Cor. ix. 24 sq., 
 Phil. iii. 12. ἐπιλαβοῦ] ‘lay 
 hold of ;? only here and yer. rg in 
 St Paul’s Epp., three times in Heb., 
 and frequently in St Luke: Grot. cites 
 Proy. iv, 13, ἐπιλαβοῦ ἐμῆς παιδείας, 
 μὴ ἀφῇς, to which we may add Martyr. 
 Ignat. 4, ws οὐρανοῦ μέλλειν ἐπιλαμ- 
 βάνεσθαι. The change to the aor. 
 imper, must not be left unnoticed ; it 
 was one act in the ἀγών : see the exx. 
 in Winer, Gr. § 43. 4, p. 281. The 
 usual sequence, first pres. imper. then 
 aor. imper. (Schémann, Iseus, Ὁ. 235), 
 is here observed : there are exceptions 
 however, e.g. 1 Cor. xv, 34. In the 
 application of the verb there is no 
 impropriety ; ἡ αἰώνιος ξωὴ (the epithet 
 slightly emphatic; see notes on ch. i. 
 
90 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 “ " , - 9 a ’ , 4 ΄ ’ ‘ 
 τῆς αἰωνίου ζωῆς, εἰς ἣν ἐκλήθης, καὶ ὡμολόγησας τὴν 
 
 13 καλὴν ὁμολογίαν ἐνώπιον πολλῶν μαρτύρων. 
 
 1αρ- 
 
 , ATE ~ “ lal fal A 
 αγγέλλω σοι ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζωογονοῦντος τὰ 
 
 , A “ ’ “A ~ , 3» 6 
 πάντα καὶ Χριστοῦ Incov τοῦ μαρτυρήσαντος ἐπὶ 
 
 8) is held out to us as the prize, the 
 crown, Which the Lord will give to 
 those who are faithful unto the end; 
 comp. James i. 12, Rey. ii. ro. 
 
 Kal ὡμολόγησας] ‘and thow con- 
 fessedst,’ or ‘madest conf. of,’ &c., not 
 ‘hast made,’ Scholef. Hints, p. 121,— 
 an inexact translation for which there 
 is here no idiomatic necessity. Kat 
 has its simple copulative power, and 
 subjoins tothe foregoing words another 
 and co-ordinate ground of encourage- 
 ment and exhortation; ‘thou wert 
 called to eternal life, and thou madest 
 the good confession.’ The extremely 
 harsh construction, καὶ (εἰς ἣν) ὡμολό- 
 γησας x.7T.r. (Leo, al.), is rightly re- 
 jected by De W. and later expositors, 
 τὴν καλὴν ὁμολογ.] ‘the good con- 
 fession,—of faith’ (De W.), or,—‘ of 
 the Gospel’ (Scholef.); good, not with 
 reference to the courage of Timothy, 
 but toits own import (Wiesing.). But 
 made when? Possibly on the occasion 
 of some persecution or trial to which 
 Timothy was exposed, ws ἐν κινδύνοις 
 ὁμολογήσαντος τὸν Xp., Theoph. 1; 
 more probably at his baptism, ὁμολ. τὴν 
 ἐν βαπτίσματι λέγει, Gicum., Theoph. 
 2,and appy. Chrys. ; but perhaps most 
 probably at his ordination, Neander, 
 Planting, Vol. 11. p. 162 (Bohn); see 
 ch. iv. 14, and comp, i. 18. The gene- 
 ral reference to a ‘confessio non verbis 
 conceptased potiusreipsa& edita, neque 
 id semel duntaxat sed in toto mini- 
 sterio’ (Caly., see also Theod.), seems 
 wholly precluded by the definite cha- 
 racter of the language. The meaning 
 ‘oblation,’ urged by J. Johnson (Unbi. 
 Sacr. 11. 1, Vol. 1. p. 223, A.-C, Libr.), 
 is an interpr, which ὁμολογία cannot 
 
 possibly bear in the N.T.; see 2 Cor. 
 ix, 13, Heb. dil. 1, iv. 14, 23s 
 
 13. Παραγγέλλω σοι κ. τ. λ.] The 
 exhortation, as the Epistle draws to 
 its conclusion, assumes a yet graver 
 and more earnest tone. The Apostle 
 haying reminded Timothy of the con- 
 fession he made ἐνώπ. πολλ. papr., 
 now gives him charge in the face of a 
 more tremendous Presence, ἐνώπ. τοῦ 
 Θεοῦ τοῦ Swoy. κιτ.λ., not to disgrace 
 it by failing to keep the commandment 
 which the Gospel imposes on the Chris- 
 tian. τοῦ ζωογονοῦντος] 
 ‘who keepeth alive ;’ not perfectly syn- 
 onymous (De W., Huth.) with ἕωοποι. 
 the reading of the Rec.. the latter 
 points to God as the ‘auctor vite,’ 
 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. In- 
 dependently of the apparent prepon- 
 derance in external evidence [ADFG 
 opposed to KLN], the reading of the 
 text seems on internal grounds more 
 fully appropriate; Timothy is exhorted 
 to persist in his Christian course in 
 the name of Him who extends His 
 almighty protection oyer all things, 
 and is not only the Creator, but the 
 Preserver of all His creatures; comp. 
 Matth. x. 29 sq. τοῦ μαρτυρή- 
 σαντος «.T.A.] ‘who witnessed, bore 
 witness to, the good confession.’ Itseems 
 by no means correct to regard papru- 
 ρεῖν τὴν ὁμολ. aS Simply synonymous 
 with ὁμολογεῖν τὴν ὁμολ. (Leo, Huther, 
 al.), the difference of persons and cir- 
 cumstances clearly caused the differ- 
 ence of the expressions, ‘ testari con- 
 
Wore τ ΤΉ. 
 
 97 
 
 Ποντίου Πιλάτου τὴν καλὴν ὁμολογίαν, τηρῆσαί σε 14 
 
 A 9 4 37 ° , , “ἢ 9 ἐφ 
 τὴν ἐντολὴν ἀσπιλον ἀνεπίλημπτον μέχρι τῆς ἐπιφανείας 
 
 fessionem erat Domini, οοη ἐογὶ con- 
 fessionem Timothei,’ Beng. Our Lord 
 attested by his sufferings and death (δι᾿ 
 . ὧν ἔπραττεν, Gicum.) the truth of the 
 ὁμολογία (‘martyrio complevit et con- 
 signavit,’ Est.), Timothy only con- 
 esses that which his Master had thus 
 authenticated. The use of apr. with 
 an accus, is not unusual (comp. De- 
 mosth, Adv. Steph. 1, p. 1117, δια- 
 θήκην μαρτυρεῖν), but μαρτ. ὁμολογίαν 
 is an expression confessedly somewhat 
 anomalous: it must be observed how- 
 ever 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. νι. p. 
 386), nor that before Pilate, John 
 Xviil. 36 (Leo, Huther), but, asin ver. 
 12 (see notes), the Christian confession 
 generally, the good confession κατ᾽ 
 ἐξοχήν. The expression thus consi- 
 dered seems less harsh. ἐπὶ 
 Ποντίου II., in accordance with the 
 previous explanation of ὁμολογία, is 
 thus ‘ sub Pontio Pilato,’ Vulg., Est., 
 De Wette, not ‘before Pontius Pilate,’ 
 Auth., Syr., ith. (Platt), Arm., 
 Chrys., al.,—a meaning quite gram- 
 matically admissible (see notes on ch. 
 v. 19, Herm, Viger, No. 394, comp. 
 Pearson, Creed, Vol. τι. p. 153, ed. 
 Burt.), but irreconcileable with the 
 foregoing explanation of ὁμολογία. 
 The usualinterpretation ofthisclause, 
 and of the whole verse, is certainly 
 plausible, but it rests on the assump- 
 tion that papr. τὴν ὁμολ. is simply 
 synonymous with ὁμολογεῖν τὴν ὁμολ., 
 and it involves 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 con- 
 trary, the ὁμολογία of Christ before 
 Pilate must be regarded (with De W.) 
 
 as a very inexact parallel to that of 
 Timothy, whether at his baptism or 
 ordination; and for any other confes- 
 sion, before a tribunal, d'c., we have 
 not the slightest evidence either in the 
 Acts οὐ ἴῃ these two Epp. We retain 
 then with Vulg., Clarom., Goth. (De 
 Gabel.), and perhaps Copt., the tem- 
 poral and not local meaning of ἐπί. 
 14. τηρῆσαι] Infin. dependent on 
 the foregoing verb rapayyé\\w. The 
 purport of the ἐντολὴ which Timothy 
 is here urged to keep has been differ- 
 ently 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, Theod. (who 
 howeyer afterwards seems to regard 
 it as -- θεία διδασκαλία), and perhaps 
 Auth.; or, most probably, (c) the 
 commandment of Christ, —not specially 
 the ‘mandatum dilectionis,’ John xiii. 
 34, but generally the law of the Gos- 
 pel (comp. ἡ παραγγελία, ch. i. 5), 
 the Gospel viewed as a rule of life, 
 Huth.; see esp. Tit. ii. 10, where the 
 context seems distinctly to favour this 
 interpretation. ἄσπιλον 
 ἀνεπίλημπτον) ‘spotless, irreproach- 
 able,’ i.e. so that it receive no stain 
 and suffer no reproach; μήτε δογμάτων 
 ἕνεκεν μήτε βίου κηλῖδά Twa προστριψά- 
 μενος, Chrys. [the usual dat. with 
 mpootp., 6.6. Plut. Mor. p. 89, 859, 
 869, is omitted, but seems clearly év- 
 τΤολῇ]; comp. Theod. μηδὲν ἀναμίξῃς 
 ἀλλότριον τῇ θείᾳ διδασκαλίᾳ. As both 
 these epithets are in the N.T. referred 
 only to persons (dom. James 1. 27, 
 I Pet.i. 19, 2 Pet. 111. 14; ἀνεπίλ. τ Tim. 
 lil. 2, v. 7), 10 Seems very plausible to 
 refer them to Tim. (Copt., Beza, al.) ; 
 the construction however seems so 
 distinctly to favour the more obvious 
 
 H 
 
98 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOGEON 
 
 Ἂν; 
 
 15 τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἣν καιροῖς ἰδίοις 
 
 ὃ , id , ‘ , ’ e s “ 
 εἰξει ὁ μακάριος καὶ μόνος δυνάστης, ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν 
 
 connexion with ἐντολήν (comp. ch. v. 
 22, 2 Cor. xi, 9, James i. 27; [Clem. 
 Rom.] τι. 8, ryp. τὴν σφραγῖδα ἄσπι- 
 λον), and the ancient υ., Vulg., 
 Clarom., Syr. (appy.), al., seem mainly 
 sounanimous, that thelatterreference 
 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, Phileb. p. 43 c, Philo, de 
 Opif. § 24, Vol. 1. p. 17; add Polyb. 
 Hist. xtv. 2. 14, ἀνεπίληπτος mpoalpe- 
 σις. The more grave objection, that 
 τηρεῖν ἐντολὴν Means ‘to observe, not 
 to conserve, ὃν commandment’ (comp. 
 Wiesing.), may be diluted by obsery- 
 ing that τηρεῖν in such close connexion 
 with the epithets may lose the normal 
 meaning it has when joined with ἐντο- 
 Aw alone: itis not merely to keeping 
 the command, but to keeping it spot- 
 less, that the attention 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, iii. 2, τῆς ἐπιφα- 
 velas] ‘the appearing,’ the visible 
 manifestation of our Lord at His 
 second advent; see 2 Tim. iv. 1, 8, Tit. 
 ii. 13, and comp. Reuss, Théol. Chrét. 
 Iv. 21, Vol. 1. p. 230. This expres- 
 sion, which, as the context shows, can 
 only be 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 to be near ; 
 Β0 even Reuss, Théol. 111, 4, Vol. 1- 
 p- 308. It may perhaps be admitted 
 that the sacred writers have used lan- 
 guage in reference to their Lord’s re- 
 turn (comp. Hammond, on 2 Thess. ii. 
 
 8) which seems to show that the long- 
 ings of hope had almost become the 
 convictions 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] ‘in His own 
 seasons.’ see notes on ch. ii. 6, and on 
 Tit.i. 3. ‘Numerus pluralis observan- 
 dus, brevitatem temporum non valde 
 coarctans,’ Beng. δείξει] ‘shall 
 display ; not a Hebraism for ποιήσει 
 or τελέσει, Coray: the ἐπιφάνεια of our 
 Lord is, as it were, a mighty σημεῖον 
 (comp. John ii, 18) which God shall 
 display to men. ὁ μακάριος] 
 Compare notes on ch.i. 11. Chrys. 
 and Theoph. regard the epithet as 
 consolatory, hinting at the absence of 
 every element of τὸ λυπηρὸν ἢ ἀηδὲς 
 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] ‘only 
 potentate ;’ it is scarcely necessary to 
 say that μόνος involves no allusion to 
 the polytheism ofincipient Gnosticism 
 (Conyb., Baur, al.), but is simply in- 
 tended to enhance the subst., by 
 showing the uniqueness of the duva- 
 otela. God is the absolute δυνάστης, 
 
 you y 0 ο, an 7 
 “σιοσα δ ΔΝ... [vali- 
 dus solus 1116] Syr.; to no 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, 2 Mace. iii. 24, 
 
ὙΠ 5320; 1γ.: 
 
 99 
 
 , A , ~ , e , 
 βασιλευόντων καὶ Κύριος τῶν κυριευόντων, ὁ μόνος τό 
 
 cy 3) , A soa ς , ad > τ A 
 eX wy ἀθανασίαν, φῶς OlKWY ἀπρόσιτον, OV εἶδεν οὐδεὶς 
 
 3 , "ΔΑ ἮΝ a du cs 4 4 U OF, 
 ἀνθρώπων οὐδὲ LOELV wWaTal, ῳ τιμη Και κρατος αἰώνιον, 
 
 5 , 
 
 AMKHV. 
 
 Charge the rich not to 
 trust in riches, but in 
 God, and to store up 
 a good foundation. 
 
 xii. 15, XV. 4, 23. On the dominion 
 of God, see Pearson, Creed, Art. 1. 
 Vol. 1. p. 51 (ed. Burt.), Charnock, 
 Aitributes, x11. p. 638 (Bohn). 
 βασιλεὺς k.7.A.] ‘King of kings and 
 Lord of lords:’ so βασιλεὺς βασιλέων, 
 Rey. xvii. 14, xix. 16 (both in refer- 
 ence to the Son; see Waterl. Def. 5, 
 Vol. τ. p. 326), and similarly, κύριος 
 τῶν κυρίων, Deut, x. 17, Psalm cxxxvi. 
 3,—both formule added still more to 
 heighten and illustrate the preceding 
 title. Loesner cites from Philo, de 
 Dec. Orac. p. 749 [Vol. 11. p. 187, ed. 
 Mang.], a similar enumeration of 
 various attributes; ὁ ἀγέννητος καὶ 
 ἄφθαρτος καὶ ἀΐδιος, καὶ οὐδενὸς ἐπιδεής, 
 καὶ ποιητὴς τῶν ὅλων, καὶ εὐεργέτης, 
 καὶ βασιλεὺς τῶν βασιλέων καὶ Θεὸς 
 Θεῶν : comp. Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. 1. 
 p. 670. 
 
 16. ὁ μόνος K.T.A.] ‘ who alone hath 
 immortality ; Hein whom immortality 
 essentially exists, and who enjoys it 
 neither derivatively nor by participa- 
 tion: οὐκ ἐκ θελήματος ἄλλου ταύτην 
 ἔχει καθάπερ οἱ λοιποὶ πάντες ἀθάνατοι, 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῆς οἰκείας οὐσίας, [Just. Mart.] 
 Quest. 61, οὐσίᾳ ἀθάνατος οὐ μετουσίᾳ, 
 Theod, Dial. mt. p. 145; see Suicer, 
 Thesaur. Vol.1.p. 109, Petavius, Theol. 
 Dogm. ut. 4. 10, Vol. 1. p. 200. 
 φῶς οἰκῶν dmpdc.] ‘dwelling in light 
 unapproachable.’ In this sublime 
 image God is represented as dwelling, 
 as it were, in an atmosphere of light, 
 surrounded by glories which no created 
 nature may ever approach, no mortal 
 eye may ever contemplate; see below. 
 
 ~ , 9 “ “- aA 
 Tots πλουσίοις ἐν τῷ νῦν αἰῶνι 17 
 
 παράγγελλε μὴ ὑψηλοφρονεῖν, μηδὲ ἠλπι- 
 
 Somewhat similar images occur in the 
 O.T. ; comp. Psalm civ, 2, ἀναβαλλόμε- 
 vos φῶς ὡς ἱμάτιον, Dan. ii. 22 (Theod.), 
 καὶ τὸ φῶς μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐστί. 
 
 ὃν εἶδεν οὐδεὶς κιτ.λ.7 ‘ whom no man 
 ever saw or can see: so Exodus xxxiil. 
 20, Deut. iv. 12, John i. 18, 1 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. 1. p. 118 54. 
 (ed. Churton). Thepositionslaiddown 
 by Pearson are ‘ Deus est invisibilis 
 (1) oculo corporali per potentiam natu- 
 ralem, (2) oculo corporaliin statu su- 
 pernaturali, (3) oculo intellectuali in 
 statu naturali,’ and (4) ‘invisibilitas 
 essentie divine non tollit claram visio- 
 nem intellectualem in statu super- 
 naturali:’ Petay. Theol. Dogm. vi. 
 I, I sq. Vol. 1. p. 445 8q. 
 
 17. Tots πλουσίοις k.t.A.] ‘ Tothe 
 rich in the present world;’ ‘multi 
 divites Ephesi,’ Beng. Ἔν τῷ viv 
 αἰῶνι must be closely joined with τοῖς 
 πλ., 50 as to make up with it one 
 single idea; see notes on Eph, i. 15, 
 where the rules for the omission of 
 the article with the appended nounare 
 briefly stated; see also Fritz. Rom. ili. 
 25, Vol. 1. p. 195, and Winer, Gr. ὃ 20. 
 2, p.123. Theclause isperhaps added 
 to suggest the contrast between the 
 riches of this worldand the true riches 
 
 _in the world to come; καλῶς εἶπεν Ἔν 
 
 τῷ νῦν αἰῶνι, εἰσὶ yap Kal ἄλλοι πλού- 
 σιοι ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι, Chrys. The ex- 
 pression appears to have a Hebraistic 
 
 H2 
 
100 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ A. 
 
 , ’ 3 , ’ -“ ~ ~ 
 κέναι ἐπὶ πλούτου ἀδηλότητι, GAN ἐν TH Θεῷ TH Tape- 
 
 8 ς ε , , 9 J , ‘) 
 18 χοντι ἡμῖν πάντα πλουσίως εἰς ἀπόλαυσιν, ἀγαθοερ- 
 
 - a Μ - > 
 γεῖν, πλουτεῖν ἐν ἔργοις καλοῖς, εὐμεταδότους εἶναι, κοι- 
 
 cast codyy WY); seeexx.in Schoettg. 
 Hor. Hebr. Vol.1.p.883. Fora power- 
 ful sermon on this and the two follow- 
 ing verses, see Bp. Hall, Serm. v1. 
 Vol. v. p. 102 sq. (Oxf. 1837). 
 
 ἠλπικέναι] ‘to set hopes,’ ‘to have 
 hoped and continue to hope;’ see Wi- 
 ner, G7. § 40. 4. ἃ, Ῥ. 244, Green, Gr. 
 p. 21. On the construction of ἐλ- 
 mifw With ἐπὶ and ἐν, see notes on ch. 
 EV. 10. πλούτου ἀδηλότητι] 
 ‘the uncertainty of riches ;" an expres- 
 sion studiedly more forcible than ἐπὶ 
 τῷ πλούτῳ τῷ ἀδήλῳ ; comp. Rom. vi. 
 4. The distinction between such ex- 
 pressions and ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ evayyen. 
 Gal, ii. 5, 14, though denied by Fritz. 
 Rom. Vol. τ. p. 368, is satisfactorily 
 maintained by Winer, Gr. ὃ 34. 3, p- 
 211. In such cases the expression has 
 a rhetorical colouring. In 
 the following words, instead of ἐν τῷ 
 Θεῴ, Lachm. reads ἐπὶ τῷ Θ. with ΑΔ) 
 ἘᾺΝ (D'FGN om, τῷ); 15 mss.; Orig. 
 (mss.), Chrys., Theoph, The external 
 authority is confessedly of very great 
 weight; the probability however of 
 a confirmation of the second clause 
 to the first, and St Paul’s known love 
 of prepositional variation, are such 
 important arguments in favour of the 
 text [supported by D*KL; great ma- 
 jority of mss. ; Orig., Theod. ,Dam.,al., 
 and adopted by the majority of recent 
 editors], that we may perhaps be justi- 
 fied in still retaining the present read- 
 ing. The attribute τῷ ζῶντι, added to 
 Θεῷ in Ree., though fairly supported 
 [DE (bothom.7@) KL; al.; Syr. (both), 
 Clarom., al.], does not seem genuine, 
 but is perhaps only a reminiscence of 
 ch. iv. το. els ἀπόλαυσιν) 
 ‘for enjoyment,’ ‘to enjoy, not to place 
 
 our heart and hopes in,’ comp. ch. iv. 
 3, εἰς μετάλημψιν. ‘Observa autem 
 esse tacitam antithesin quum predicat 
 Deum omnibus affatim dare, Sensus 
 enim est, etiamsi plendrerumomnium 
 copia affluamus, nos tamen nihil ha- 
 bere nisi ex sola Dei benedictione,’ 
 Caly. 
 
 18. ἀγαθοεργεῖν]7' that they do good,’ 
 ‘show kindness ; inf. dependent on 
 παράγγελλε, enjoining on the positive 
 side the use which the richare to make 
 of their riches. The open form dya- 
 θοερΎ. only occurs here ; the contracted 
 ἀγαθουρ. in Acts xiv.17. Thedistine- 
 tion of Bengel between the adjectives 
 involved in this and the following 
 clause is scarcely exact, ‘daya@os in- 
 fert simul notionem beatitudinis (coll. 
 Mare. x. 18, not.), καλὸς connotat 
 pulchritudinem.’ The latter word is 
 correctly defined, see Donalds. Cratyl. 
 § 324; the former, as its probable deri- 
 vation (-ya, cogn. with ya, Donalds. 
 ib. § 323, comp. Benfey, Wurzellex. 
 Vol. 1. p. 64) seems to suggest, marks 
 rather the idea of ‘kindness, assist- 
 ance ;’ comp. notes on Gal. v. 22. 
 εὐμεταδότους... κοινωνικούς}] ‘free in 
 distributing, ready to communicate ;’ 
 scarcely ‘ready to distribute,’ Auth. 
 (comp. Syr.), as this seems rather to 
 implythe qualitative termination-cxos : 
 on the passive termination -ros (here 
 used with some degree of laxity), see 
 Donalds. Cratyl. § 255. Κοινωνικὸς is 
 not ὁμιλητικός, προσηνής, Chrys. and 
 the Greek expositors (‘ facilis convic- 
 tus,’ Beza), but, as the context clearly 
 shows, ‘ready to impart to others,’ 
 see Gal. vi. 6. Both adjectives are 
 dm. Neyou’ in the N. T. For a prac- 
 tical sermon on this and the preceding 
 
ἈΠ a> 195° 20: 
 
 101 
 
 , 9 a A 
 νωνικούς, ἀποθησαυρίζοντας ἑαυτοῖς θεμέλιον καλὸν εἰς 19 
 
 8 , , A A 
 TO μέλλον, ἵνα ἐπιλάβωνται τῆς ὄντως ζωῆς. 
 
 Keep thy deposit, and 
 avoid all false know- 
 ledge. 
 
 verses see Beveridge, Serm, cxxvit. 
 Vol. v. p. 426 (A.-C. Libr.). 
 
 19. ἀποθησαυρίζοντας] ‘laying up 
 in store,’ Auth. There is no necessity 
 for departing from the regular mean- 
 ing 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 actual- 
 ly to treasure it up as a good founda- 
 tion 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. cxxvir. Vol. 1v. 
 p. 439 (A.-C. Libr.). The preposition 
 ἀπὸ does not exactly mean ‘seorsum,’ 
 ‘in longinquum’ (Beng.), but seems 
 to point to the source from which, and 
 the process by which (‘seponendo the- 
 saurum colligere,’ Winer, de Verb. 
 Comp. Iv. p. 11), they are to make 
 their θησαυρούς ; compare Diodor. Sic, 
 Bibl. v. 75, πολλοὺς τῶν ἐκ τῆς ὀπώρας 
 καρπῶν ἀποθησαυρίζεσθαι. 
 θεμέλιον καλόν] ‘a good foundation ;’ 
 τοῦ πλούτου τὴν κτῆσιν ἐκάλεσεν ἄδη- 
 λον, τῶν δὲ μελλόντων ἀγαθῶν τὴν ἀπό- 
 λαυσιν θεμέλιον κέκληκεν, ἀκίνητα γὰρ 
 ἐκεῖνα καὶ ἄτρεπτα, Theod. Θεμέλιος, 
 it need scarcely be said, is not here 
 used for θέμα (comp. Tobit iv. 9), nor 
 as equivalent in meaning 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. 
 ill. 13, βαθμὸν ἑαυτοῖς καλὸν περι- 
 ποιοῦνται. There is not here, as Wie- 
 singer remarks, any confusion, but 
 only a brevity of expression which 
 
 τ Tinobee, τὴν παραθήκην φύλαξον, 20 
 
 might have been more fully but less 
 forcibly expressed by ἀποθησαυρ. πλοῦ- 
 Tov καλῶν ἔργων ws θεμέλιον (Maller) : 
 the rich out of their riches are to lay 
 up a treasure; this treasure is to bea 
 θεμέλιος καλός, on which they may 
 rest in order to lay hold on τῆς ὄντως 
 wns. The form θεμέλιος is properly 
 an adj. (comp. Arist. Aves, 1137, θεμε- 
 Nous λίθους), but is commonly used in 
 later writers as a subst., e.g. Polyb. 
 Hist. τ. 40. 9, comp. Thom, M. 5.ν. 
 τῆς ὄντως ζωῆς] ‘the true life,’ ‘that 
 which is truly life;’ ‘celle qui mérite 
 seule ce nom, parceque la perspective 
 de la mort ne jette plus d’ombre sur 
 ses jours,’ Reuss, Théol. Chrét. 1v. 22, 
 Vol. 11. p. 252: that life in Christ 
 (2 Tim, i. 1) which begins indeed here 
 but is perfected hereafter; τὸ κυρίως 
 ζῆν παρὰ μόνῳ τυγχάνει τῷ Θεῷ, Ori- 
 gen, in Joann. 11. 11, Vol, Iv. p. 71 
 (ed. Bened.), see notes on ch, iv. 8. On 
 the meaning of fw7, see Trench, Synon. 
 § 27, and the deeper and more com- 
 prehensive treatise ofOlshausen, Opus- 
 cula, p. 187 sq. The reading αἰωνίου 
 (Rec. with D°E?KL] for ὄντως is re- 
 jected even by Scholz, and 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. 11, al., con- 
 tains the sum and substance of the 
 Epistle, and brings again into view 
 the salient points of the Apostle’s 
 previous warnings and exhortations. 
 τὴν παραθήκην] ‘the deposit;’ only 
 (a) here, and (8) 2 Tim. i. 12, δυνατός 
 ἐστιν τὴν παραθήκην μου φυλάξαι, and 
 (γ) 2 Tim. i. 14, τὴν καλὴν παραθήκην 
 φύλαξον διὰ Πνεύμ, ἁγίου. In these 
 
102 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 TIMOOEON 
 
 A. 
 
 ἐκτρεπόμενος Tas βεβήλους κενοφωνίας καὶ ἀντιθέσεις τῆς 
 
 three passages the exact reference of 
 παραθήκη is somewhat doubtful. It 
 seems highly probable that the mean- 
 ing in all three passages will be 
 Jundamentally the same, but it is not 
 necessary to hamper ourselves with the 
 assumption that in all three passages 
 itis exactlythe same,—the unnecessary 
 supposition which interferes with De 
 Wette’s otherwise able analysis. What 
 is this approximately common mean- 
 ing? Clearly not either ‘his soul,’ 
 I Pet. iv. 19, Beng. on(§), or his ‘soul’s 
 salvation,’ for this interpretation, 
 though plausible in (8), would by no 
 means be suitable either in (a) or (y); 
 nor again τὴν χάριν τοῦ Πνεύματος, 
 Theod. ἢ.1., for this would in effect 
 introduce a tautology in (y). Notim- 
 probably, as De W., Huther, al., ‘the 
 ministerial office,’ i.e. ‘the apostolic 
 office’ in (a), ‘the office of an evan- 
 gelist’ in (8) and (y): there is however 
 this objection, that though not un- 
 suitable in (8) it does not either here 
 or in (y) present any direct opposition 
 to what follows, τὰς βεβήλους κενοφω- 
 vlas καὶ ἀντιθ. x.7.X. On the whole 
 then, the gloss of Chrys. on (8), ἡ 
 πίστις, τὸ κήρυγμα (comp, Theoph. 1, 
 Gicum. 1), or rather, more generally, 
 ‘the doctrine delivered (to Timothy) 
 to preach,’ ‘ Catholice fidei talentum,’ 
 Vincent. Lirin. (Common. cap. 22, 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 
 1 Tim, i, 18 and 2 Tim, ii. 2, both of 
 which, especially the former, seem 
 satisfactorily to confirm this interpre- 
 tation. On παραθήκη and παρακατα- 
 θήκη (Rec.,—but with mostinsufficient 
 authority, the latter of which is appy. 
 the more idiomatic form, see Lobeck, 
 
 Phryn. p. 312, and compare the nume- 
 rous exx. in Wetst. in loc. 
 ἐκτρεπόμενος] ‘avoiding,’ Auth., ‘de- 
 vitans,’ Vulg., Clarom.; the middle 
 voice, esp. with an accus, objecti, be- 
 ing sometimes suitably rendered by a 
 word of different meaning to that by 
 which the act. voice is expressed: 
 comp. Winer, Gr. § 38. 2, p. 226. 
 Kevohovlas] ‘babblings,’ ‘empty-talk- 
 ings,’ ‘yvanos sine mente sonos,’ Ra- 
 phel,—only here and 2 Tim. ii. 16, 
 and scarcely different in meaning from 
 ματαιολογία, τ Tim, 1, 6; contrast 
 James iy. 5, and comp. Deyling, Obs. 
 Vol. tv. 2, Ὁ. 6.4.2. On βεβήλους (which, 
 as the omission of the article shows, 
 belongs also to ἀντιθέσει5) and the 
 prefixed art., comp, notes on ch. iy, 7. 
 ἀντιθέσεις K.T.A.] ‘oppositions of the 
 falsely-named Knowledge,’ ‘of the 
 Knowledge which falsely arrogates to 
 itself that name,’ ‘non enim vera 
 scientia esse potest que veritati con- 
 traria est,’ Est. The exact meaning 
 
 of dv7d., ἢ ASQ 61 [contorsiones, op- 
 
 positiones] Syr.,itissomewhatdifficult 
 to ascertain, Baur (Pastoralbr, Ὁ. 26 
 sq.), for obvious reasons, presses the 
 special allusion to the Marcionite oppo- 
 sitions between the law and the Gospel 
 (see Tertull. Mare. 1. 19), but has been 
 ably answered by Wieseler, Chronol. 
 p- 304. Chrys. and Theoph, (comp. 
 Gicum.) refer it to personal contro- 
 versies and to objections against the 
 Gospel; αἷς οὐδὲ ἀποκρίνεσθαι χρή; 
 this however is not quite sufficiently 
 general. The language might be 
 thought at first sight to point to some- 
 thing specific (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 
 
eile 
 
 109 
 
 ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως, ἥν τινες ἐπαγγελλόμενοι περὶ 21 
 
 4 , 
 THY πίστιν ἠστόχησαν. 
 
 Benediction. 
 
 the latter word than in the former. 
 These ἀντιθέσεις then are generally 
 the positions and teachings of false 
 knowledge which arrayed themselves 
 against the doctrine committed to 
 Timothy,—ras 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 addi- 
 titious 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. andesp. Theod. 
 in loc., and see notes on ch, i. 4. 
 
 21. ἔπαγγελλόμενοι] ‘making apro- 
 fession of;’ ‘pre se ferentes,’ Beza; 
 see notes on ch. il. ro. 
 ἠστόχησαν] ‘missed their aim ;’ Wie- 
 singer here urges most fairly that it 
 is perfectly incredible that any forger 
 in the second century should have ap- 
 plied so mild an expression to followers 
 
 Ἡ χάρις μετὰ σοῦ. 
 
 of the Marcionite Gnosis. On ἀστοχέω 
 see notes on ch. i. 6, and for the use 
 of περί see notes on ch. i. 19. 
 
 peta σοῦ] So Tisch. with DEKL; 
 nearly all mss.; majority of Vv., and 
 many Ff., and perhaps rightly. The 
 plural ὑμῶν is very strongly supported 
 [AFGS; 17; Boern., Copt., al.], but 
 still may be so far regarded with pro- 
 bability as a correction derived from 
 2 Tim, v. 22, or Tit. 111. 15, that we 
 may hesitate to reverse the reading 
 until the exact value of the additional 
 evidence of δὲ is more fully known. 
 At any rate, if ὑμῶν be retained, no 
 stress can safely be laid on the plural 
 as implying that the Epistle was ad- 
 dressed to the Church as well as to 
 Timothy, All that could be said 
 would be that St Paul sent his bene- 
 diction to the Church in and with that 
 to its Bishop. Huther somewhat sin- 
 gularly maintains σοῦ in his critical 
 notes, and, as it would seem, ὑμῶν in 
 his commentary, 
 
 Nove on 1 Tim. 111, τό. 
 
 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 bluckink; (0) 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 (b): the latter demanded careful 
 examination. After inspection with a strong lens it seemed more than pro- 
 bable that Wetstein’s opinion (Prolegom. Vol. 1. p. 22) was correct. Careful 
 measurements showed that the first ε of εὐσέβειαν, ch. vi. 3, on the other side of 
 the page, was exactly opposite, the circular portion of the two letters almost 
 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 O. It 
 
104 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Α. 
 
 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 British 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 ε as 
 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 point of shade 
 was seen to trace out exactly the suspected diameter of the Ὁ. It would thus 
 seem certain that (b) is no part of O, and that the reading of A is ὅς, 
 
ΠΡῸΣ TIMOOEON ΒΡ. 
 

 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 HIS Second Epistle to his faithful friend and follower was 
 
 written by the Apostle during his second imprisonment at 
 Rome (see notes on ch, iv. 12, and comp. ch. i. 18), and, as the 
 inspired writer’s own expressions fully justify our asserting 
 (ch. iv. 6), but a very short time before his martyrdom, and in the 
 interval between the ‘actio prima’ (see notes on ch, iv. 16) and 
 its mournful issue ; comp. Euseb, Hist. Heel. 11. 22. 
 
 It would thus have been written about the year A. D. 67 or 
 perhaps A. D. 68, ἡ. 6. the last but one or last year of the reign of 
 Nero, which tradition (Euseb. Chron. ann. 70 A. Ὁ. ; Jerome, Ca- 
 tal. Script. cap. 5, p. 35, ed. Fabric.), apparently with some degree 
 of plausibility, fixes upon as the period of the Apostle’s martyr- 
 dom; see Conybeare and Howson, St Paul, Vol. τι. p. 596, note 
 (ed. 2), and compare Pearson, Annal. Paul. Vol. 1. p. 396 (ed. 
 Churton). 
 
 Where Timothy was at this time cannot very readily be de- 
 cided, as some references in the Epistle (ch. i. 15 sq. compared with 
 iv. 19, ch. ii. 17, al.) seem to harmonize with the not unnatural sup- 
 position that he was at Ephesus, while others (ch. iv. 12, 20) have 
 been thought to imply the contrary; comp. notes on ch. iv. 12, On 
 the whole the arguments derived from the generally similar terms 
 in which the present tenets (comp. ch. ii. 16 with 1 Tim. vi. 20, 
 and ch, ii. 23 with τ Tim. vi. 4), future developments (comp. ch. 
 ili, 1, 5 with 1 Tim. iv. 1 sq.), and even names (comp. ch. 11. 17 
 with 1 Tim. i. 20), of the false teachers are characterized in the 
 two Epistles, seem to outweigh those deduced from the topogra- 
 phical notices, and to render it slightly more probable that, at the 
 time when the Second Epistle was written, Timothy was conceived 
 by the Apostle to be at the scene of his appointed labours (1 Tim. 
 
108 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 i. 3), and as either actually in Ephesus or visiting some of the 
 dependent churches in its immediate neighbourhood : see Conybeare 
 and Howson, St Paul, Vol. 11. p. 582, note (ed. 2). 
 
 The Apostle’s principal purpose in writing the Epistle was to 
 nerve and sustain Timothy amid the now deepening trials and 
 persecutions of the Church from without (ch. i. 8, ii. 3, 12, iii. 12, 
 iv. 5), and to prepare and forewarn him against the still sadder 
 trials from threatening heresies and apostasies from within (ch. 
 ill, τ. sq.). The secondary purpose was the earnest desire of the 
 Apostle, forlorn as he now was (ch. iv. 16), and deserted by all 
 save the faithful Luke (ch. iv. 11), to see once more his true son 
 in the faith (ch. iv. 9, 21), and to sustain him not by his written 
 words only, but by the practical teaching of his personal example. 
 In no Epistle does the true, loving, undaunted, and trustful heart 
 of the great Apostle speak in more consolatory yet more moving 
 accents: in no portion of his writings is there a loftier tone of 
 Christian courage than that which pervades these, so to speak, 
 dying words ; nowhere a holier rapture than that with which the 
 reward and crown of faithful labour is contemplated as now ex- 
 ceeding nigh at hand. 
 
 The question of the genuineness and authenticity stands in 
 connexion with that of the First Epistle. This only may be added, 
 that if the general tone of this Epistle tends to make us feel con- 
 vinced that it could have been written by no hand save that of 
 St Paul, its perfect identity of language with that of the First 
 Epistle and the Epistle to Titus involves a further evidence of the 
 genuineness and authenticity of those Epistles which it thus re- 
 sembles, and with which it stands thus closely connected. 
 
ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Β. 
 
 RR) , a? A 
 Apostolic address and AYAOZ ἀπόστολος Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ i 
 
 salutation. 
 
 διὰ θελήματος Θεοῦ Kat’ ἐπαγγελίαν 
 ~ - 3 ~ 3 ~ LA , 2) ~ , 
 ζωῆς τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, “Γιμοθέῳ ἀγαπητῷ τέκνῳ. 
 
 nN 
 
 χάρις, ἔλεος, εἰρήνη ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς καὶ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ 
 
 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 Θεοῦ] ‘ through 
 the will of God:’ ‘apostolatum suum 
 voluntati et electioni Dei adscribit, 
 non suis meritis,’ Est.; so 1 and 2 
 Cor. i. 1, Eph. i. 1 (where see notes), 
 Col.i. 1. In the former Epistle the 
 Apostle terms himself ἀπόστ. X. Ἴ 
 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. 
 kat ἐπαγγελίαν must be joined, as 
 the omission of the article clearly de- 
 cides, not with διὰ θελήματος, but with 
 ἀπόστολος (comp. Tit. i. 1); the prep. 
 κατὰ denoting the object and intention 
 of the appointment, ‘to further, to 
 make known, the promise of eternal 
 life,’ ἀπόστολόν με προεβάλετο ὁ δεσ- 
 πότης Θεός... ὥστε με τὴν ἐπαγγελθεῖ- 
 σαν αἰώνιον ζωὴν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις κηρύ- 
 ξαι, Theod,, Gicum.; see Tit. i. 1, 
 κατὰ πίστιν, and comp, Winer, Gr. 
 8 49. d, p. 358, and notes on τ Zim. 
 vi. 3. On the expression ἐπαγγελ. 
 
 Χάριν ἔχω τῷ Θεῷ, ᾧ λατρεύω ἀπὸ 3 
 , 9 ἘΞ , e . , 
 προγόνων ev καθαρᾷ συνειδήσει, ὡς ἀδιά- 
 
 wns, and the nature of the genitival 
 relation, see notes on 1 Tim. iv. 8. 
 
 2. ἀγαπητῷ τέκνῳ] ‘my beloved 
 child:’ so int Cor, iv. 17, but γνησίῳ 
 Téxvy in τ Tim. i, 2 and Tit. i. 4; 
 ‘iud quidem (γνησ.) ad Timothei 
 commendationem et laudem pertinet; 
 hoc vero Pauli inillum benevolentiam 
 et charitatem declarat, quo ipsum 
 tamen, ut monet Chrys., in ejus lau- 
 dem recidit,’ Justiniani. It is strange 
 indeed in Mack (comp. Alf.) to find 
 here an insinuation that Timothy did 
 not now deserve the former title. 
 Scarcely less precarious is it (with 
 Alf.) to assert that there is more of 
 love and less of confidence in this 
 Epistle; see ver. 5. On the construe- 
 tion see notes on 1 Tim. i. 2. 
 χάρις, ἔλεος k.T.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 Water- 
 land, Huch. ch. x. Vol. rv. p. 666 sq. 
 
 3. Χάριν ἔχω] “1 give thanks;’ 
 
110 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 TIMOOEON Β. 
 
 ΕΣ ‘ 4 ~ , 9 .-“- , , 
 λειπτον ἔχω τὴν περὶ σοῦ μνείαν Ev ταῖς δεήσεσίν μου 
 
 A ~ - “ 
 4 vuKTOS καὶ ἡμέρας, ἐπιποθῶν σε ἰδεῖν, μεμνημένος σου τῶν 
 
 more commonly εὐχαριστῶ, but see 
 1 Tim. i. 12. The construction of this 
 verse is not perfectly clear. The usual 
 connexion χάριν ἔχω ὡς x.7.d., in 
 which ws is taken for ὅτι (Vulg., 
 Chrys.), or guoniam (Leo), indepen- 
 dently of its exegetical difficulties,— 
 for surely neither the prayers them- 
 selves, nor the repeated mention of 
 Timothy in them (Leo), could form a 
 sufficient reason for the Apostle’s re- 
 turning thanks to God,—is open to 
 the grammatical objections that ws 
 could scarcely thus be used for ὅτι (see 
 Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 765, comp. 
 Ellendt, Lex. Soph. Vol. 11. p. 1002), 
 and that the causal sense is not found 
 in St Paul’s Epp. (see Meyer on Gal, 
 vi. 10). Less tenable is the modal 
 (‘how unceasing,’ Alf.), and still less 
 the temporal meaning, ‘ quoties tui re- 
 cordor,’ Caly., Conyb. (comp. Klotz, 
 Vol. 11, p. 759), and least of all so the 
 adverbial meaning assigned by Mack, 
 ‘recht unablissig.’ In spite then of 
 the number of intervening words (De 
 W.), it seems most correct, as well as 
 most simple, to retain the usual mean- 
 ing of ὡς (‘as,’ Germ ‘da,’ scil. ‘as it 
 happens that Ihave’), torefer χάριν ἔχω 
 to ὑπόμν. λαβών, ver. 5, and to regard 
 ws ἀδίαλ. x.7.A. aS marking the state 
 of feelings, the mental circumstances, 
 as it were, under which the Apostle 
 expresses his thanks; ‘I thank God 
 ...a8 thou art ever uppermost in my 
 thoughts and prayers...when thus put 
 in remembrance,’ éc. Thisseemsalso 
 best to harmonize with the position of 
 the tertiary predicate ἀδιάλειπτον ; 
 see below. Under any circumstances, 
 it seems impossible to suppose with 
 Coray an ellipsis of καὶ μαρτύρομαι be- 
 fore ws; Rom. i. 9 is very different. 
 On the use of ὡς, compare notes on 
 
 Gal. vi. το. ἀπὸ προγόνων 
 ‘ from my forefathers,’ ‘ with the feel- 
 ings and principles inherited and de- 
 rived from them, ’—not ‘asmy fathers 
 have done before me,’ Waterland, 
 Serm. ut. Vol. v. p. 4543; see Winer, 
 Gr. ὃ 47. Ὁ, p. 333. These were not 
 remote (Hamm. ), but more immediate 
 (comp. 1 Tim. y. 4) progenitors, from 
 whom the Apostle had received 
 that fundamental religious knowledge 
 which was common both to Judaism 
 and Christianity; comp. Acts xxii. 3, 
 XXIV. 14. ἐν καθαρᾷ συνειδ. ] ‘in 
 apure conscience ;’ as the sort of spirit- 
 ual sphere in which the λατρεία was 
 offered; see Winer, Gr. § 48. a, p. 346. 
 On καθ. συνειδ. see notes on 1 Tim. 
 ie; ὡς ἀδιάλειπτον K.T.A.] 
 ‘as unceasing, unintermitted, is the re- 
 membrance which,’ &c., not ‘uninter- 
 mitted as is,’ &c., Peile; the tertiary 
 predicate must not be obscured in 
 translation: see Donalds. Cratyl. § 301, 
 ib. Gr. § 489 sq. νυκτὸς καὶ 
 ἡμέρας must not be joined with ἐπιπο- 
 θῶν ce ἰδεῖν (Matth.), and still less, on 
 account of the absence of the article, 
 with δεήσεσίν μου (Syr.), but with 
 add. ἔχω, which these words alike 
 explain and enhance. On the expres- 
 sion see notes on 1 Tim. Υ. 5. 
 
 4. ἐπιποθῶν] ‘longing;’ part. de- 
 pendent on ἔχω μνείαν, expressing the 
 feeling that existed previously to, or 
 contemporaneously with that action 
 (comp. Jelf, Gr. 8 685),and connected 
 with the final clause ἵνα πληρωθῶ. 
 The following participial clause, με- 
 pv nuévos k.T.d. (‘memor lacrymarum 
 tuarum,’ Vulg., Clarom.), does not 
 refer to χάριν ἔχω, as the meaning of 
 ἵνα would thus be wholly obscured, 
 but further illustrates and explains 
 ἐπιποθῶν, to which it is appended 
 
ΡΟΣ Ὁ. 
 
 111 
 
 δακρύων, ἵνα χαρᾶς πληρωθῶ, ὑπόμνησιν λαβὼν τῆς 5 
 , ΙΑ A nw 
 ἐν σοὶ ἀνυποκρίτου πίστεως, ἥτις ἐνῴκησεν πρῶτον ἐν τῇ 
 
 μάμμη σου Λωίδι καὶ τῇ μητρί σου Εἰὐνίκῃ, πέπεισμαι δὲ 
 
 ΦΨ ἈΠ ὧν , 
 OTL και εν GOL. 
 
 with a faint causal force; ‘longing to 
 see thee, in remembrance of (as I 
 remember) thy tears, in order that I 
 may,’ ἔς. The ἐπὶ in ἐπιποθῶν might 
 at first sight seem to be intensive (‘ve- 
 hementer optans,’ Just., ‘greatly de- 
 siring,’ Auth.) both here and Rom. 
 i. τι, al, As however the simple 
 form ποθέω is not used in the N.T., 
 and as this intensive force cannot 
 by any means be certainly substan- 
 tiated in other authors, ἐπὶ will be 
 more correctly taken as marking the 
 direction (Rost ἃ. Palm, Lew. sg, v. 
 ἐπί, ο. Ὁ.) of the πόθος, comp. Psalm 
 xlii. 2, ἐπιποθεῖ... ἐπὶ Tas πηγάς : see 
 esp. the good note of Fritz. Rom. Vol. 
 He 10s 81. σοῦ τῶν δακρύων] 
 ‘the tears which thou sheddest,’—pro- 
 bably at parting; εἰκὸς ἦν αὐτὸν ἀπο- 
 σχιζόμενον κλαίειν καὶ ὀδύρεσθαι μᾶλλον 
 ἢ παιδίον τοῦ μαστοῦ καὶ τῆς τιτθῆς 
 ἀποσπώμενον, Chrys. Coray compares 
 the case of the πρεσβύτεροι at Ephe- 
 sus, Acts xx. 37; see also Wieseler, 
 Chronol. p. 463. 
 
 5. ὑπόμνησιν λαβών] ‘being put 
 in remembrance ;’ literally, ‘having re- 
 ceived reminding,’ not, with a neglect 
 of tense, ‘dum in mem. revoco,’ Leo 
 (who reads λαβών). The assertion of 
 Bengel, founded on the distinction of 
 Ammonius (ἀνάμνησις ὅταν τις ἔλθῃ 
 εἰς μνήμην τῶν παρελθόντων, ὑπόμν. δὲ 
 ὅταν ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρου εἰς τοῦτο προάχθῃ, 
 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- 
 
 5». ἃ 28: κ᾿] , 5" 
 Δι ἣν αἰτίαν ἀναμιμνήσκω σε ἀναζω- 6 
 
 tory; comp. 2 Pet. i. 13, iii. 1, the 
 only other passages in the N.T. where 
 the word occurs. The intrans. mean- 
 ing is fully defensible (μνήμην, καὶ 
 ἰδιωτικῶς εἰπεῖν ὑπόμνησιν, Eustath. 
 Il. χχτιτ. p. 1440, see also Polyb. Hist. 
 I. I. 2, 11. 31. 6), and λήθην λαβών, 
 2 Pet.i.9, is certainly analogous, still 
 on the whole the transitive meaning 
 seems preferable; comp, Eph. i. 15, 
 where theconstructionissimilar. The 
 reading is scarcely doubtful: λαμβάνων 
 is found in DEKLN?; most mss.; but 
 seems clearly inferior in authority to 
 the text, which is supported by ACF 
 GN1; 17. 31. 73. 8 —1mss. of some au- 
 thority [Lachm., Tisch. ]. τῆς ἐν 
 σοὶ k.T.A.] ‘the unfeigned faith that is 
 (not ‘was,’ Alf.) in thee,,—more ex- 
 actly, ‘que est in te non ficta,’ Vulg., 
 sim. Goth.; object which called forth 
 the Apostle’s thankfulness, On dyv- 
 πόκριτος, see notes on 1 Tim. i. 5. 
 πρῶτον] ‘first;’ not for τὸ πρῶτον, 
 nor again for πρότερον (‘prius quam 
 in te,’ Leo), but simply ‘first:’ the 
 indwelling of faithin Timothy’s family 
 first began in the case of Lois. The 
 relative ἥτις here seems used, not, as 
 often, with an explanatory, but with 
 a specifying, and what may be termed 
 a differentiating force,—‘ this particu- 
 lar ἀνυπόκρ. πίστις, no other, dwelt 
 first,’ @c.; see notes on Gal. iv, 24, 
 and comp. Jelf, Gr. § 816. 
 
 poppy] ‘grandmother.’ The Atticists 
 condemn this form, the correct expres- 
 sion being 770 (not τίτθη), Lobeck, 
 Phryn. p. 134, Thom, Mag. s.v. τίθη. 
 The mother Eunice (possibly the 
 daughter of Lois) is alluded to in Acts 
 ΣΎ ΤῸ καὶ ἐν σοί] Scil. 
 
112 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOGEON B. 
 
 . \ ’ a a sa 2 ’ ‘ ‘ a 
 πυρειν το χάρισμα του Θεοῦ, O εστιν εν σοι διὰ τῆς 
 
 ἐνοικεῖ; comp, Arm., ‘et in te est.’ 
 De W. seems inclined to favour the 
 supplement of Grot., al., ἐνοικήσει, on 
 the hypothesis that Tim. had become 
 weak in faith (ver. 13, ch. iii. 14), — 
 an hypothesis, which though δᾶνο- 
 cated by Alf. throughout this Epistle, 
 is certainly precarious, and, it seems 
 reasonable to add, improbable. 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 χάρισ- 
 μα τοῦ Θεοῦ, quo gauderet,’ Leo. 
 
 6. Av ἣν αἰτίαν] ‘For which cause,’ 
 sc. διότι οἷδά σε ἀνυπόκριτον ἔχοντα 
 πίστιν, Theoph.; ταῦτα περί σου πε- 
 πεισμένος παρακαλῶ κ.τ.λ., Theod., 
 comp. notes on ver. 12: as the Apostle 
 knew that this faith was in Timothy, 
 he reminds him (‘in memoriam red- 
 igit,’ 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; 
 Opa πῶς δεῖκνυσιν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀθυμίᾳ ὄντα 
 πολλῇ, πῶς ἐν κατηφείᾳ, Chrys. This 
 we may reasonably assume, but the 
 theory that this ‘dear child’ of the 
 Apostle was showing ‘signs of back- 
 wardness and timidity’(Alford, Proleg. 
 on 1 Tim. § 2. 9) in his ministerial 
 work needs far more proof than has 
 yet been adduced. ἀναζωπυρεῖν] 
 ‘to kindle up,’ ἀεὶ ζῶσαν καὶ ἀκμάζου- 
 σαν ἐργάζεσθαι, Theoph., πυρσεύειν, 
 
 Theod., panes [ut excites] Syr. ; 
 
 see Suicer, 7'hesaur. 5,0. Vol. 1. p. 265. 
 There is no lexical necessity for press- 
 ing the meaning of this word, ‘ sopitos 
 
 ignes suscitare,’ Grot., al. Indeed it 
 may be further said that ἀναζωπυρεῖν 
 (a ἅπαξ λεγόμ. in the N.T.) is not 
 here necessarily ‘resuscitare,’ Vulg., 
 ‘wieder anfachen,’ Huther, but rather 
 ‘exsuscitare,’ Beza, ‘anzufachen,’ De 
 Wette,—the force of dvd being up, 
 upwards, 6.4. ἀνάπτειν, ἀναπνεῖν, ἀν- 
 εγείρειν κιτ.λ.; See Winer, de Verb. 
 Comp. 111. p. 1, note, Rost ἃ. Palm, 
 Lex. 8.Vv. ἀνά, E. 13 comp. Plutarch, 
 Pomp. 41, αὖθις ἀναζωπυροῦντα καὶ 
 παρασκευαζόμενον. The simple form 
 ζωπυρεῖν is ‘to kindle to flame’ (rods 
 ἄνθρακας φυσᾶν, Suidas), the com- 
 pound ἀναζωπυρεῖν is either (a) to ‘re- 
 kindle,’ and in a metaphorical sense 
 ‘revivify,’ Joseph. Antig. vim. 8. 5, 
 ἀναζωπυρῆσαι τὴν δεξιάν (Jeroboam’s 
 hand), comp. Plato, Charm. p. 156 Ὁ, 
 ἀνεθάῤῥησά τε.. καὶ ἀνεζωπυρούμην;; or 
 (Ὁ) as here, ‘to kindle wp’ (ἀνεγεῖραι, 
 ἐκζωπυρῆσαι, Suidas), ‘to fan into a 
 flame,’ without however involving any 
 necessary reference to a previous state 
 of higher ardour or of fuller glow: 
 comp. Mare. Anton, VII. 2, ἀναζωπυ- 
 ρεῖν φαντασίας opp. to σβεννύναι, and 
 appy. Plato, Republ. vit. 527 D, éxxa- 
 θαίρεταί τε καὶ ἀναζωπυρεῖται. As 
 has been before said, it is not wholiy 
 improbable that Timothy might now 
 have been in a state of ἀθυμία, but 
 this inference rests more on the gene- 
 ral fact of the ἀνάμνησις than on the 
 meaning of an isolated word. Nu- 
 merous exx. of the use of ἕωπ. and 
 ἀναζωπ. will be found in Wetst. in 
 loc., Krebs, Obs. p. 360, Loesner, Obs. 
 Ῥ. 412; see also Pierson, Wer. p. 170. 
 τὸ xaplopa] ‘the gift, the charism,’ 
 —not the Holy Spirit generally, τὴν 
 χάριν τοῦ Πνεύματος, Theod., and appy. 
 Waterland, Serm. xx1. Vol. y. p. 641 
 (whose clear remarks however on the 
 concurrence of our spirit with the 
 
 ΡΥ νὰ ἃ 
 
1376.55: 
 
 ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν μου. 
 
 119 
 
 ᾽ 4 » ες oa e 
 ov yap ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν ὁ 7, 
 
 Θεὸς Πνεῦμα δειλίας, ἀλλὰ δυνάμεως καὶ ἀγάπης καὶ 
 
 σωφρονισμοῦ. 
 
 Do not then shrink 
 from afflictions, for the 
 sake of Him who made 
 death powerless. I am 
 
 His preacher, and know that He will keep my deposit. 
 
 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, els σημεῖα, els λατρείαν 
 ἅπασαν, Chrys.: compare Hooker, 
 Eccl. Pol. v. 77. 5. διὰ 
 τῆς ἐἔπιθ.1 ‘through the laying on,’ 
 &c.; the hands were the medium by 
 which the gift of the Holy Spirit was 
 imparted. On the ἐπίθεσις χειρῶν, 
 see notes on 1 Tim. iv. 14, where it is 
 mentioned that the presbytery joined 
 with the Apostle in the performance 
 of the solemn act. 
 
 7. Πνεῦμα δειλίας] ‘the Spirit of 
 cowardice,’ οὐ διὰ τοῦτο τὸ Πνεῦμα 
 ἐλάβομεν ἵνα ὑποστελλώμεθα, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα 
 παῤῥησιαζώμεθα, Chrys.; not ‘a spirit, 
 anaturalandinfused 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 men- 
 tioned in connexion with διδόναι k.T.X., 
 it is better to refer it directly to the 
 personal Holy Spirit and the abstract 
 gen. to His specific χάρισμα. Where 
 however, as in 1 Cor. iy. 21, Gal. 1. c., 
 the connexion is different, the πνεῦμα 
 may be referred immediately to the 
 humanspirit (comp. Olshausen, Opusce. 
 p- 154), though even then ultimately 
 to the Holy Spirit as the inworking 
 power. In such formule then, the 
 meaning of πνεῦμα, whether it be the 
 human spirit as wrought on by the 
 Holy Spirit, or the Holy Spirit as 
 working on the human spirit, will be 
 best deduced from the context: with 
 
 4 4 ’ - A , A 
 Μὴ οὖν ἐπαισχυνθῆς τὸ μαρτύριον τοῦ ὃ 
 A A 4 ΄“ 
 Κυρίου ἡμῶν, μηδὲ ἐμὲ τὸν δέσμιον αὐτοῦ, 
 
 Guard thine. 
 
 the present passage comp. Rom. viii. 
 15, Gal. iv. 6. On the omission of the 
 article with πνεῦμα, see notes on Gal. 
 Vo GE σωφρονισμοῦ] 
 
 lg dr ρ y 
 ‘ self-control; {2a1.2;%09 [institu- 
 
 tionis] Syr., ‘ sobrietatis,’ Vulg., Cla- 
 rom.; ἃ dm. λεγόμ. in N.T., but 
 compare Tit, ii, 4. Σωφρονισμός, as 
 its termination suggests (Donalds. 
 Cratyl. § 253, Buttm. Gr. § 119. 7, see 
 exx. in Lobeck, Phryn. p. 511), has 
 usually atransitive force, e.g.Plutarch, 
 Cat. Maj. 5, ἐπὶ σωφρονισμῷ τῶν ἄλλων, 
 comp. Joseph. Antig.xvut.9.2, Bell. τι. 
 I. 3; as however both the substantives 
 with which it is connected are abs- 
 tract and intransitive, and as the ordi- 
 nary meaning of nouns in - μος (‘action 
 proceeding from the subject’) is liable 
 to some modifications (e.g. χρησμός, 
 comp. Buttm. J.c.), it seems on the 
 whole best, with De W., Wiesing., 
 al., to give it either a purely intransi- 
 tive (Plutarch, Quest. Conviv. vit. 3, 
 σωφρονισμοῖς τισιν ἢ peTavolats), or 
 perhaps rather reflexive reference; ἵνα 
 σωφρονίσωμεν τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν κινουμένων 
 παθημάτων τὴν ἀταξίαν, Theod., Chrys. 
 2; comp. Suicer, Thesaur. 5.0. Vol. 11. 
 p. 1224, Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 
 486 (Bohn). 
 
 8. Μὴ οὖν κιτ.λ.] Exhortation, im- 
 mediately dependent on the foregoing 
 verse; ‘as God has thus given us the 
 spirit of power, love, and self-control, 
 therefore be not ashamed of testify- 
 ing about our Lord.’ On the cor- 
 nexion of αἰσχύνομαι and similar verks 
 with the accus., see Bernhardy, Synt. 
 
 I 
 
114 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ B. 
 
 s , ~ 4 ol 
 ἀλλὰ συνκακοπάθησον τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ κατὰ δύναμιν Θεοῦ, 
 
 ~ , e σι 4 , , « ’ ᾽ s 
 Q τοὺ σώσαντος ἡμᾶς Kat καλέσαντος κλήσει ayia, οὐ κατα 
 
 ΠῚ. 10, p. 113, Jelf, Gr. ὃ 550. The 
 compound form ἐπαισχ. [ἐπὶ probably 
 marks the imaginary point of applica- 
 tion, that on which the feeling is based, 
 Rost u. Palm, Lez. s.v. c. 3] is fre- 
 quently thus used in the N.T., both 
 with persons (Mark viii. 38, Luke ix. 
 26), and with things (ver. 16, Rom, i. 
 16), but not so the simple form. Ob- 
 serve the aor. subj. with μή, ‘ne te 
 pudeat unquam,’ Leo; Timothy had 
 as yet evinced no such feeling; see 
 Winer, Gr. § 56. 1, p. 445. 
 
 τοῦ Κυρίου] ‘of the Lord,’ i.e. ‘about 
 the Lord,’ gen. objecti; see Winer, Gr. 
 § 30. 1, p. 168, and esp. Kriiger, 
 Sprachl.§ 47.7.1sq. The subject of 
 this testimony was not merely the 
 sufferings and crucifixion of Christ 
 (Chrys. and the Greek commentators), 
 but generally ‘omnis predicatio vel 
 confessio que de Christo fit apud 
 homines,’ Est.; comp. Actsi. 8, ἔσεσθέ 
 μου μάρτυρες. Bengel remarks on the 
 rareness of the formula ὁ Kip. ἡμῶν 
 in St Paul, without I. X.; add how- 
 ever τ Tim. i. 14: see also Heb. vii. 
 14, but not 2 Pet, iii. 15, where the 
 reference appears to be to the Father. 
 τὸν δέσμιον αὐτοῦ] ‘His prisoner,’ i.e. 
 whom He has made a prisoner, gen. 
 auctoris; see notes on Eph, iii. 1, and 
 also Harless, in loc. p.273. ‘Ne gra- 
 veris vocari discipulus Pauli hominis 
 captivi,’ Est., Gicum. 
 
 ἀλλὰ συνκακοπάθησον K.T.A.] ‘but 
 (on the contrary) join with me in suffer- 
 ing ills for the Gospel;’ ἀλλὰ (as usual 
 after negatives, Donalds. Cratyl. § 201) 
 marking the full opposition between 
 this clause and the words immediately 
 preceding (comp. Klotz, Devar. Vol. 
 Il, p. 2, 3), ‘do not be ashamed of me, 
 but rather suffer with me.’ It is thus 
 perhaps better to retain with Lachm, 
 
 the comma after ἡμῶν. The preposi- 
 tion σὺν must be referred, not to 
 τῷ evayy. (Syr., Theod.), as this would 
 involye a very unusual and unneces- 
 sary prosopopcia (πάντας τοὺς τοῦ 
 εὐαγγ. κήρυκας καὶ μύστας, Theoph. 2), 
 but to μοι supplied from the preceding 
 ἐμέ. The dat. τῷ evayy. 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 
 μοι, and below, ch. ii. 9), or more 
 probably and more simply the dat. 
 commodi, ὑπὲρ τοῦ εὐαγγ. πάσχειν, 
 Chrys., Theoph. 1. κατὰ 
 δύναμιν] ‘in accordance with, corre- 
 spondingly to, that δύναμις which God 
 has displayed towards us in our calling 
 and salvation,’ ver. g 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. 
 § 49. ἃ, p. 358); the δύναμις, as ver. 9 
 shows, was great, our readiness in 
 κακοπάθεια ought to be proportionate 
 to it. It need scarcely be added that 
 this clause must be connected, not 
 with εὐαγγελίῳ (Heinrich, al.), but 
 with συνκακοπάθησον; ἐπεὶ φορτικὸν ἦν 
 τὸ κακοπαθεῖν, παραμυθεῖται αὐτόν, μὴ 
 γάρ φησι δυνάμει τῇ σῇ ἀλλὰ τῇ τοῦ 
 Xp. [Θεοῦ], Theoph., Geum. 
 
 9. τοῦ σώσαντος ἡμᾶς] ‘who saved 
 us,’ ‘exercised His saving agency to- 
 wards us;’ ‘servatio hecestapplicativa, 
 non tantum acquisitiva, eam ipsam ob 
 causam quia tam arcte cum vocatione 
 connectitur,’ Beng., comp. also Green, 
 Gr. p. 318; we must however in all 
 cases be careful not to assign too low 
 a meaning to this vital word (comp. 
 notes on Eph, ii. 8); the context will 
 generally supply the proper explana- 
 tion; see the collection of passages in 
 
δ Ὁ, τὸ: 
 
 115 
 
 Nose e - 3 A \ 3s , 4 Τὰ 4 
 τὰ Epya nuwy ἀλλὰ κατὰ ἰδίαν πρόθεσιν και χαριν τὴν 
 
 δοθεῖσαν ἡμῖν ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων, 
 
 φανερωθεῖσαν δὲ νῦν διὰ τῆς ἐπιφανείας τοῦ σωτῆρος 10 
 
 Reuss, Théol. 1v. 22, Vol. 11. p. 250. 
 On the act of σωτηρία applied to God, 
 see notes on r Tim. i. τ. 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 al- 
 ways regularly and solemnly ascribed 
 to God the Father; see notes on Gal. 
 i. 6, and compare Reuss, Théol. tv. 
 15, Vol. τί. Ὁ. 144 sq. This κλῆσις 
 is essentially and intrinsically ἁγία; it 
 is a κλῆσις els κοινωνίαν τοῦ Xp., 1 Cor. 
 i. g. On the ‘vocatio externa and 
 interna,’ see esp. Jackson on the Creed, 
 Book x11. 7 (init.). 
 
 οὐ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα ἡμ.1 ‘not according 
 to our works ;’ comp. Tit. ili. 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. ὃ 40. 
 d, p. 358: it seems however equally 
 satisfactory, and perhaps moretheolo- 
 gically exact, especially in the latter 
 clause, to retain (with Vulg., Clarom., 
 al.) the more usual meaning ‘in ac- 
 cordance with ;’ comp. i. 11, iii. rr, al. 
 ἰδίαν πρόθεσιν] ‘His own purpose ;’ 
 observe the ἐδίαν ; ‘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. 1. 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, ‘pro- 
 positum gratiosum’ (comp. Bull, Prim. 
 Trad. v1. 38), but simply an explan- 
 ation of the πρόθεσις by a statement 
 
 of what it consisted in and what it 
 contemplated. τὴν δοθεῖσαν 
 κιτ.λ.7 ‘which was given to us in Christ 
 Jesus ;’ scil. the χάριν immediately pre- 
 ceding. The literal meaning of these 
 words must not be infringed on. Δοθεῖ- 
 σαν is simply ‘given,’ not ‘ destined;’ 
 it was given from the beginning, it 
 needed only time for its manifestation: 
 again ἐν Xp. is not ‘per Christum,’ 
 Est., but ‘in Christo,’ ‘in His person,’ 
 avapXws ταῦτα προτετύπωτο ἐν Xp. 
 "Inc. γενέσθαι, Chrys.; comp. 1 Pet. i. 
 20, see notes on Eph. i. 7, and the 
 good remarks of Hofmann, Schri/tb. 
 Voller. Ὁ: 295: πρὸ χρόνων 
 αἰωνίων] ‘before eternal times ;’ comp. 
 1 Cor. ii. 7, mpd τῶν αἰώνων, Eph, iii. 
 11, πρόθεσιν τῶν αἰώνων, and see notes. 
 The exact meaning of the term χρόνοι 
 αἰώνιοι (Rom. xvi. 25, Tit. i. 2) must 
 be determined from the context; in 
 the present case the meaning is ob- 
 viously ‘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, in and during which the μυστή- 
 ριον lay σεσιγημένον, Rom, xvi. 253 
 see Meyer in loc., and comp. notes on 
 Tit. i, 2, where however the meaning 
 is not equally certain. 
 
 10. φανερωθεῖσαν] ‘made manifest,’ 
 —not ‘realized,’ Heydenr. The word 
 implies what is expressed in other 
 passages, 6.9. 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] 
 
 12 
 
110 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 Β. 
 
 eon ’ “ fol , ‘ ‘ ’ 
 ἡμῶν Incov Χριστοῦ, καταργήσαντος μὲν TOV θανατον, 
 
 φωτίσαντος δὲ ζωὴν καὶ ἀφθαρσίαν διὰ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, 
 
 ‘the appearing ;’ not merely the sim- 
 ple act of the incarnation (τῆς ἐναν- 
 θρωπήσεως, Theod.), but, as the con- 
 text and the verb ἐπεφάνη in Tit. iii. 
 4 seem to suggest, the whole mani- 
 festation of Christ on earth (ἔνσαρκος 
 οἰκονομία, Zonaras, Lex, Vol. 1. p.806), 
 the whole work of redemption, sc. 
 ‘tota commoratio Christi inter homi- 
 nes,’ Bengel; so Wiesing. and De W. 
 In the words that follow, the order 
 Ἰησοῦ Xp. [CD°E?FGKLN‘] is per- 
 haps to be preferred to Xp. Ἰησοῦ 
 [AD'E!N!; Tisch.], both on account 
 of the weight of the external evidence, 
 and the probability of a conforma- 
 tion to ver. 9. καταργή- 
 σαντος] ‘when He made of none effect,’ 
 or, more exactly, ‘having made, as 
 He did, of none effect,’ not ‘who,’ &c., 
 Alf.; it being always desirable in a 
 literal translation to preserve the fun- 
 damental distinction between a parti- 
 ciple with, and a part. without the 
 article; see Donalds. Gr. § 492, and 
 comp. Cratyl. § 305. TOV 
 θάνατον] ‘death,’—either regarded (a) 
 objectively, as a personal adversary 
 and enemy of Christ and His kingdom, 
 1 Cor. xv. 26, ἔσχατος ἐχθρὸς καταρ- 
 γεῖται ὁ θάνατος ; or (Ὁ) as a spiritual 
 state or condition,including the notions 
 of evil and corruption, 1 John iii. r4, 
 μεταβεβήκαμεν ἐκ τοῦ θανάτου els τὴν 
 ζωήν ; or more probably (6) 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 θανάτου. The objection to 
 (a) lies in the fact that 1 Cor. xy. 26 
 refers specially to the second advent of 
 Christ, when Death and the powers of 
 evil, aggregated as it were into per- 
 
 sonalities (comp. Rev. xx. 13, 14), 
 will be individually ruined and over- 
 thrown. In (Ὁ) again, the usual and 
 proper force of xarapyéw (‘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 (c) this 
 is fully maintained, and in the opposed 
 clause (μὲν... δέ) the force of φωτίσαντος 
 (not προμηνύσαντος, Theod., but els 
 φῶς ἀγαγόντος, Suid., comp. 1 Cor. iv. 
 5; the principle of death cast a shade 
 over the world, Matt. iv. 16) is more 
 distinctly felt. On xarapyéw, comp. 
 notes on Gal. v. 4. ζωὴν Kal 
 ἀφθαρσίαν] ‘life and incorruption ;’ 
 of course no ἕν διὰ δυοῖν, as Coray, 
 and Wakefield, Sylv. Crit. Vol. 1v. p. 
 208: the latter substantive charac- 
 terizes and explains the former, not 
 however with any special reference to 
 the resurrection of the body (1 Cor. 
 Xv. 42), as this would mark ἀφθαρσία 
 as a condition (‘conditio illa felicis- 
 sima,’ Leo), but with a reference to 
 the essential quality of the gw7, its 
 imperishable and incorruptible nature 
 (1 Pet. i. 4), and its complete exemp- 
 tion from death (Rev. xxi. 4): comp. 
 Rom, ii. 7. It may be observed that 
 θάνατος as being a known and ruling 
 power has thearticle, ~wjandadéapcla 
 as haying been only recently revealed 
 are anarthrous. διὰ τοῦ 
 εὐαγγελίου is perhaps more correctly 
 referred to φωτίσαντος x.7.d. (Alf.) 
 than considered as loosely appended to 
 the whole foregoing sentence (ed. 1, 
 Wiesing.), as it thus seems suitably to 
 define the medium by which the ¢w- 
 τισμὸς took place, and to form a na- 
 tural transition and introduction to 
 ver. 11 Sq. All that follows Inc. Xp. 
 thus forms (as seems most natural) 
 
i pa, ‘Te. 
 
 117 
 
 εἰς ὁ ἐτέθην ἐγὼ κήρυξ καὶ ἀπόστολος καὶ διδάσκαλος II 
 
 A ~ , 
 ἐθνῶν: ov ἣν αἰτίαν καὶ ταῦτα πάσχω, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ 12 
 
 ’ , PAY ‘ Ὁ , ‘ , Ψ 
 επαισχυνομαι" οἱοα γὰρ ῳ πεπιστεῦυκα, Και πεπεισμαιοτι 
 
 , - Α , ’ J] ’ , A 
 δυνατός ἐστιν τὴν παραθήκην μου φυλάξαι εἰς ἐκείνην τὴν 
 
 one connected and subordinate (terti- 
 ary) predication: comp, Donalds. Gr, 
 § 489 sq. 
 
 11. εἰς 6] 561]. εὐαγγέλιον ; ‘ad quod 
 evangelium predicandum,’ Est., not 
 ‘in quo,’ Vulg., Clarom. On the re- 
 maining words, see notes on 1 Tim. ii. 
 7, where there is the same designation 
 of the Apostle’s offices, though, as the 
 context shows, theapplication is some- 
 what 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 sus- 
 tained it. The ἐγὼ here thus marks 
 not ‘dignitatem predicantis,’ but ‘dig- 
 nitatem cohortantis;’ μὴ καταπέσῃς 
 τοίνυν ἐν τοῖς ἐμοῖς παθήμασι' καταβέ- 
 βληται τοῦ θανάτου τὰ νεῦρα, Chrys. 
 ἐτέθην ἐγώ] ‘I was appointed ;’ comp. 
 1 Tim. i. 12. 
 
 12. δι ἣν αἰτίαν] ‘for which cause ; 
 5011. because Iam thus appointed 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. ii. 11, and Acts 
 X. 21, Xxil. 24, xxiii. 28, xxviii. 20. 
 καὶ ταῦτα] ‘even these things;’ bonds, 
 imprisonment, and sufferings, see ver. 
 
 Ε] 
 
 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. 
 noteson ph, ii, 8), literally, ‘towhom 
 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 construc- 
 tions are discussed. It need scarcely 
 be said that ᾧ refers to God the Father, 
 
 not to Jesus Christ (ver. 10). 
 δυνατός ἐστιν] ‘is able,’ has full and 
 sufficient δύναμις, in apparent refer- 
 ence to the δύναμις Θεοῦ, ver. 8. 
 
 τὴν παραθήκην μου] ‘the trust com- 
 mitted to me,’ ‘my deposit,’ τὴν πί- 
 στιν φησὶ καὶ τὸ κήρνγμα, Theoph. 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 τ Tim. vi. 20. The mean- 
 ings assigned to παραθήκην are very 
 numerous, 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 
 pov 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., Alf., comp. 
 Whitby), isatfirst sight very specious ; 
 butif, as the context would then seem 
 certainly to require, it had any refer- 
 ence to life, surely εἰς ἐκείνην τ. ἡμ. 
 must be wholly incongruous; and if 
 again we refer to 1 Thess, v. 23 (Alf.), 
 the prayer for the entire preservation 
 of the personality is there intimately 
 blended with one for its ἀμεμφία 
 (duéurrws...7npndein), & moral refer- 
 ence, which finds no true parallel in 
 the simple φυλάξαι. It is moreover 
 an interpr. unknown to the Greek ex- 
 positors. Less probable seems theidea 
 of an ἀντιμισθία, Theoph. 3, main- 
 tained also by Wiesing., 1.6. στέφανον 
 ζωῆς, comp. ch. iv. 7, 8, for how can 
 this consistently be termed a deposit ? 
 We retain therefore the meaning ad- 
 vocated in notes on 1 Tim. vi. 20, with 
 that expansion only which the context 
 
118 
 
 13 ἡμέραν. 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 B. 
 
 e , » e , , o ᾽ 
 ὑποτύπωσιν ἔχε ὑγιαινόντων λόγων, ὧν παρ 
 
 ᾽ ~ » ’ ’ a9 , =~ 9 a? a 
 ἐμοῦ ἤκουσας, ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀγάπη TH ἐν Χριστῷ [ησοῦ' 
 14 τὴν καλὴν παραθήκην φύλαξον διὰ ΠΕνεύματος ἁγίου 
 
 ~ , Lal 9 - 
 τοῦ ἐνοικοῦντος ἐν ἡμῖν. 
 
 here seems itself adequately to sup- 
 ply. The only difficulty is in φυλάξαι, 
 which is certainly more suitably ap- 
 plied to the holder than the giver of 
 the deposit. The gen. μου 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. εἰς ἐκείνην 
 τὴν Hp] ‘against that day,’ Auth., i.e. 
 to be produced and forthcoming when 
 that day—not τοῦ @avarov (Coray), 
 but of final reckoning—comes; I shall 
 then render up my trust, through 
 God’s preserving grace, faithfully dis- 
 charged and inviolate. Eis does not 
 seem here merely temporal (John xiii. 
 1), but has its more usual ethical sense 
 of ‘destination for;’ comp, Eph. iy. 30, 
 Phil. i. ro, ii. 16, al. 
 
 13. ὑποτύπωσιν] ‘The delineation, 
 
 pattern,’ ἡ: 5 [‘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 
 tumos (see Rost τι. Palm, Lez. s.v.); 
 there however, as the context seems 
 to require, the transitive force is more 
 apparent, here the word is simply in- 
 transitive; comp. Beveridge, Serm. v1. 
 Vol. 1. p. rrr (A.-C. Libr.). What 
 St Paul had delivered to Timothy was 
 to be to him a ‘pattern’ and ‘exem- 
 plar’ to guide him; ὑπετυπωσάμην 
 εἰκόνα καὶ ἀρχέτυπον... ταύτην τὴν ὑπο- 
 Tim. τούτεστι τὸ ἀρχέτυπον ἔχε, Kav 
 δεῇ ζωγραφῆσαι am’ αὐτῆς λάμβανε καὶ 
 ζωγράφει, Theoph., after Chrys. and 
 Theod. The subst. ὑποτύπ., dispenses 
 
 with the article on the principle of 
 correlation (see Middl. Art. m1. 3. 6, 
 p. 48, ed. Rose), and is moreover sufii- 
 ciently defined by the following gen. ; 
 comp. Winer, Gr. § 19. 2. b, p. 114. 
 ἔχε] ‘have,’ ‘habe,’ Vulg., as a pos- 
 session, ‘let the ὑποτ. be to thee,’ 
 Syr.; not for κάτεχε, Huth., Wiesing., 
 though somewhat approaching it in 
 meaning; see notes on 1 Tim. iii. 9, 
 and comp. id. ch. i. 19. 
 ὑγιαινόντων λόγων] ‘of sound words ;’ 
 comp. notes on 1 Tim, i. 10. The 
 omission of the article seems properly 
 accounted for (De W.) by the proba- 
 ble currency (comp. νόμος) of the for- 
 mula, comp. 1 Tim. vi. 3. 
 ἐν πίστει κιτιλ. specifies the principles 
 in which the ὑποτύπ. is to be held. 
 Ἔν is not to be joined with ἤκουσας, 
 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 of the vor. was to be re- 
 stricted; comp. 1 Tim. iii. 9. 
 τῇ ἐν Xp. Ἴησ.] 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 prominence 
 and emphasis; ‘in Christo omnis fides 
 et amor nititur, sine Christo [extra 
 Christum] labitur et corruit,’ Leo: see 
 Winer, Gr. § 20. 4, p. 126, and notes 
 on 1 Tim. iii. 13. Huther joins τῇ ἐν 
 Xp. only with ἀγάπῃ, but is thus in- 
 consistent with his own note on 1 Tim. 
 I. TA 
 
 14. τὴν καλὴν παραθήκην] ‘the 
 
I, 13—16. 
 
 They which arein Asia 
 all deserted me. The 
 Lord give mercy at 
 the last day to Onesi- 
 phorus. 
 
 good deposit, ‘the good trust com- 
 mitted (to thee); the doctrine deli- 
 vered to Timothy to preach, ‘ catho- 
 lice fidei talentum,’ as in 1 Tim, vi. 
 20; compare ver. 12 above, and see 
 notes on both passages. It is here 
 termed the good trust, as ἡ καλὴ δι- 
 δασκαλία, 1 Tim, iv. 6, 6 καλὸς ἀγών, 
 1 τη; 1: 12. διὰ Πνεύματος 
 ἁγίου] Themedium by which Timothy 
 was to guard his deposit was the 
 Holy Spirit, still further specified (not 
 without a slight hortatory notice and 
 emphasis) as τοῦ ἐνοικοῦντος ἐν ἡμῖν ; 
 compare notes on yer. 13: σπούδασον 
 οὖν φυλάττειν τὸ Πνεῦμα καὶ αὐτὸ 
 πάλιν τηρήσει σοι τὴν παρακαταθήκην, 
 Theoph. 
 
 15. Οἶδας toiro] The Apostle 
 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 the affectionate and 
 faithful Timothy is actually made, by 
 the contrast which St Paul implies 
 and suggests (σὺ οὖν τέκνον μου, ch. ii. 
 1), aN inspiriting and quickening call 
 to fresh efforts in the cause of the 
 Gospel. ἀπεστράφησάν 
 pe] ‘turned away from me:’ not an 
 apostasy from the faith (Erasm.), but, 
 as the context implies (comp. ver. 8, 
 16), defection from the cause and in- 
 terests 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 force of the aor. 
 middle; ἀποστρέφομαι with an ace. 
 persone (Heb, xii. 25), or an accus. 
 rei (Tit. i. 14), being both of them 
 
 Φύγελος καὶ Ἑρμογένης. 
 
 119 
 
 > ”~ Φ 3 , , 
 Oidas τοῦτο, ὅτι amectpadycay 15 
 , ε ’ ~ 9 7? ᾿ ᾽ 
 με πάντες οἱ ἐν τῇ ᾿Ασίᾳ, ὧν ἐστιν 
 
 Δῴη ἔλεος ὁ τό 
 
 legitimate and intelligible construc- 
 tions; comp. Winer, Gr. § 39. 2, 
 p. 233. πάντες οἱ ἐν TH 
 ᾿Ασίᾳ] ‘all who are in Asia,’ 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., Theoph., 
 Cicum., al.) so to invert the meaning 
 of the prep. (ἐν -ξ ἐξ or ἀπό), as to 
 refer it to Asiatic Christians then at 
 Rome. The ἀποστροφὴ however may 
 have taken place in Asia or else- 
 where; 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, cou- 
 pled with ch. iv. 16, seems most in 
 favour of the latter supposition; so 
 also Wieseler, Chronol. p. 405. Of 
 Phygelus (‘Fygelus,’ Clarom., Aug.) 
 and Hermogenes nothing is known. 
 On the geographical limits of ’Acla 
 (Acia ἰδίως καλουμένη," Asia propria’), 
 and the wider (Acts xx. τό, 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, 
 wherethe subject is very satisfactorily 
 investigated. 
 
 16. Ady] On this form see notes 
 on Eph. i. 17. The term διδόναι ἔλεος 
 (ποιῆσαι ἔλεος, Luke i. 72, Χ. 37, James 
 ii. 13) 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 Ὄνησ. οἴκῳ 
 here and ch. iy. το, but still more the 
 terms of the prayer in ver. 18, it has 
 
120 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Β. 
 
 Κύριος τῷ ᾿Ονησιφόρου οἴκῳ, ὅτι πολλάκις pe ἀνέψυξεν 
 
 4 ‘ ov 
 17 καὶ τὴν ἅλυσίν μου οὐκ ἐπαισχύνθη, ἀλλὰ γενόμενος ἐν 
 
 ε , , oad , 4 » , 7, A 
 18 ‘Pony σπουδαιότερον ἐζήτησέν με Kal εὕρεν. δῴη αὐτῷ 
 
 ε , «ε - » ‘ , ᾽ ᾽ , ἘΝ. , 
 oO Κύριος ευρβρειν ἔλεος παρα Κυρίου εν εΚ ει νἢ τὴ EPG. 
 
 ‘ , , , 
 καὶ ὅσα ἐν ᾿Εἰφέσῳ διηκόνησεν, βέλτιον σὺ γινώσκεις. 
 
 been concluded, not without some 
 show of probability, that Onesiphorus 
 was now dead; so De W., Huth., 
 Wiesing., Alf., and, as might easily 
 be imagined, Estius and Mack. It 
 does not however at all follow that 
 the Romanist doctrine of praying for 
 the dead is in any way confirmed by 
 such an admission, see Hammond in 
 loc., and comp. Taylor, Sermon ὙἼΠΙ. 
 (on 2 Sam, xiv. 14). ἀνέψυξεν] 
 ‘refreshed;’ ἃ am. λεγόμ. in the N.T. 
 (the subst. avayvéts occurs, Acts ili. 
 1g); comp, ἀνέπαυσαν, τ Cor. xvi. 18. 
 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 
 merely to bodily refreshment (Mosh., 
 De W.); comp. e.g. Xen. Hell. vu. 
 I. 19, ταύτῃ... ἀνεψύχθησαν οἱ τῶν 
 Λακεδ. σύμμαχοι. τὴν 
 ἅλυσίν μου] ‘my chain.’ On the sin- 
 gular‘catenam meam,’ Vulg., Clarom., 
 but not Syr. [comp. Mark v. 4, 
 Luke viii. 29] or Goth., comp. notes 
 on Eph. vi. 20. As is there remarked, 
 an allusion to the ‘custodia militaris,’ 
 though not certainly demonstrable, is 
 not wholly improbable; comp. Wie- 
 seler, Chronol. p. 405. 
 ἐπαισχύνθη] The evidence of the 
 MSS. is here decidedly in favour of 
 this irregular form; comp. Winer, Gr. 
 § 12, p. 68, 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 answering to the 
 preceding negative, and serving to 
 introduce a contrast of conduct which 
 still more enhances the exhortation 
 in ver. 8. The correction of Beza, 
 ‘cum esset Rome,’ for ‘cum Romam 
 venisset,’ Vulg., Clarom. [Rome], 
 
 (| 2y OD 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. S. S. loc. p. 733), but literally 
 ‘when he arrived and was there;’ 
 comp. Xen, Anab. Iv. 3. 29, ὃς ἂν 
 πρῶτος ἐν τῷ πέραν γένηται, ib. Cyrop. 
 Vil. 5. 28, ἀπιὼν ἐγένετο ἐν Μήδοις. 
 σπουδαιότερον] ‘with greater dili- 
 gence, not merely ‘ with diligence,’ 
 Syr., nor even ‘very diligently,’ Auth., 
 both of which obscure the tacit com- 
 parison. The comparative does not 
 imply any contrast between Onesi- 
 phorus and others, nor with ‘the 
 diligence that might have been ex- 
 pected’ (Huther), but refers to the 
 increased diligence with which Onesi- 
 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, Gr. ὃ 35. 
 4, P- 217. καὶ εὗρεν] 
 ‘In carcerem conjicitur et αγοίᾷ cus- 
 todié tenetur, non ut antea in domo 
 conduct& omnibus nota; unde Onesi- 
 phorus non nisi postquam sollicite 
 quesivisset invenit eum,’ Pearson, An- 
 nal, Paul. Vol. τ. p. 395 (ed. Churton). 
 18. ὁ Κύριος x.t.A.] The repe- 
 tition of Ἰζύριος is certainly not to be 
 
ΤΑΙ wet ἘΠ. τὶ 
 
 Re strong, faithful, and 
 enduring. No one, whe- 
 
 121 
 
 Σὺ οὖν, τέκνον μου, ἐνδυναμοῦ ἐν τῇ 1]. 
 
 ther soldier, athlete, or husbandman, reaps reward without toil. 
 
 explained away as a Hebraistic peri- 
 phrasis for the pronoun, Coray, Peile; 
 the exx. cited in Winer, Gr. § 22. 2, 
 p. 130, are, as all recent commenta- 
 tors seem agreed, quite of a different 
 nature. It is however doubtful whe- 
 ther the first Κύριος is Christ and the 
 second God, or vice versa. The ex- 
 press allusion in ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ to 
 that day when all judgment is com- 
 mitted to the Son (John v. 22) would 
 seem to be in favour of the latter sup- 
 position : as however in ver. 16 ὁ Kup., 
 in accordance with the prevailing use 
 in these and St Paul’s Epp. generally 
 (see Winer, Gr. § 19. 1, p. 113), Seems 
 to be ‘our Lord,’ ὁ Κύριος can scarcely 
 be otherwise in the present verse; 
 see Wiesing. in loc. It may be added 
 too, that if the idea of the judicial 
 function of our Lord were intended 
 to bein especial prominence, we should 
 rather have expected παρὰ Κυρίῳ, 
 2 Pet. ii. 11, see Winer, Gr. § 48. d, 
 p. 352. Evenif this be not pressed, 
 it need scarcely be said that (as would 
 seem to be the case here) judgment is 
 not unfrequently ascribed to the Fa- 
 ther; see Rom. ii. 5, τό, Heb. xii. 23, 
 al. It may be observed that some 
 MSS. and Vy. (D1/E!; Clarom., San- 
 germ., al.) read Θεῷ: this however 
 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.), 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.’ 
 The assertion of Wieseler, Chronol. p. 
 463, that Onesiphorus was a deacon 
 at Ephesus, cannot safely be consider- 
 ed as deducible from this very general 
 
 expression, βέλτιον] ‘ better 
 than I can tell you,’ Beza, Huther, 
 al.; see above, and Winer, Gr. ὃ 35. 
 
 4, P. 217. 
 
 Cuarter II, τ, Σὺ οὖν, τέκνον 
 μου] ‘ Thow then, my child;’ affec- 
 tionate and individualizing address to 
 Timothy, with retrospective reference 
 to ver. 15 sq. The οὖν is thus not 
 merely in ref. to the example of Onesi- 
 phorus (Moller), ver. 16, still less in 
 mere continuation of the precepts in 
 ch. i, 1—14 (Matth., Leo), as the σὺ 
 would thus be otiose, but naturally 
 and appropriately refers to the whole 
 subject of the foregoing verses, the 
 general defection of οἱ ἐν τῇ ᾿Ασίᾳ from 
 St Paul, and the contrasted conduct 
 of Onesiphorus. This address then is 
 not simply intended to prepare Timo- 
 thy for suffering after his teacher’s 
 example (εἰ ὁ διδάσκαλος πολλῷ μάλλον 
 ὁ μαθητής, Chrys.), butrather tostimu- 
 late himtomake up byhis ownstrength 
 in grace for the cowardice and weak- 
 ness of others; see notes on ch. i. 15. 
 ἐνδυναμοῦ] ‘be inwardly strengthened ;’ 
 not with a medial force, ‘fortis esto,’ 
 Bretschn. (a meaning which it never 
 has in the N.T.), but simply passive: 
 see notes on Eph. vi. 10, and Fritz. 
 Rom. iv. 20, Vol. 1. p. 245. The 
 element and principle in which his 
 strength is to be sought is im- 
 mediately subjoined; comp. Eph. vi. 
 10 sq. ἐν τῇ χάριτι] ‘in 
 the grace ;’ not διὰ τῆς χάριτος, Chrys., 
 Beza. The prep., as its involution in 
 the verb also confirms, points (as 
 usual) to the spiritual sphere or ele- 
 ment in which all spiritual strength is 
 to be found, Χάρις is clearly not to 
 be explained as the ‘preaching of the 
 Gospel’ (Hammond on Heb, xiii. 9), 
 
122 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ TIMO®OEON Β. 
 
 ’ on ~ 3 cal 4 A + ᾽ ᾿ - 
 2 χαριτι TH εν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, καὶ α ἤκοῦυσας παρ εμου 
 
 διὰ πολλῶν μαρτύρων, ταῦτα παράθου πιστοῖς ἀνθρώ- 
 
 3 ποις, οἵτινες ἱκανοὶ ἔσονται καὶ ἑτέρους διδάξαι. Συνκακο- 
 
 nor regarded as merely equivalent to 
 τὸ χάρισμα, ch. i. 6 (comp. Leo), but 
 has its more usual reference to the 
 grace of ‘inward sanctification’ (comp. 
 Hooker, Append. to Book V. Vol. 11. 
 p- 696), and betokens that element 
 of spiritual life ‘which enables a man 
 both to will and to do according to 
 what God has commanded,’ Water- 
 land, Euch. ch. x. Vol. rv. p. 666. 
 τῇ ἐν Xp. Ino.) ‘which is in Christ 
 Jesus,’ which is only and truly cen- 
 tered in Him, and of which He is the 
 mediator to all who are in fellowship 
 and union with Him; further specifi- 
 cation of the true nature of the χάρις, 
 ‘ut doceat non aliunde contingere 
 quam a solo Christo, et nemini Chris- 
 tiano [qui est in Christo] eam defutu- 
 ram,’ Caly.: comp. Reuss, Théol. 
 Chrét. rv. 9, Vol. 11. p. 92, and Meyer 
 on Rom. viii. 39. 
 
 2. καὶ ἃ «.t.A.] The connexion 
 with ver. 1, though not at first sight 
 very immediate, is sufficiently per- 
 spicuous. Timothy is tobestronghim- 
 self in grace, and in the strength of it 
 is to provide for others: he has re- 
 ceived the true doctrine (comp. ch. i. 
 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. Preser. cap. 
 25; nearly=évwmov, τ Tim. vi. 12 
 (Coray in metaph.): so Chrys., πολλῶν 
 παρόντων, correctly in point of verbal 
 interpr., but he is too vague in his 
 explanation, οὐ λάθρα ἤκουσας οὐδὲ 
 κρυφῇ. The prep. διὰ has here its 
 primary meaning somewhat obscured, 
 though it can still besufficiently traced 
 
 to warrant the translation. Timothy 
 heard the instruction by the media- 
 tion of many witnesses (‘interveni- 
 entibus multis testibus’); their pre- 
 sence was deemed necessary to attest 
 the enunciation of the fundamentals 
 of Christian doctrine (scarcely ‘a 
 liturgy,’ J. Johns. Unbl. Sacr., Part 
 u. Pref., Vol. 11. p. 20, A.-C. Libr.) 
 at his ordination ; they were adjuncts 
 to the solemnity, comp. Winer, Gr. 
 § 47.1, p. 338. There is some doubt 
 who the πολλοὶ μάρτυρες were, and 
 what is the exact occasion referred 
 to. The least probable opinion is that 
 they were ‘ the law and the prophets,’ 
 (Cicum., 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. 12,2 Tim. 
 1. 6; see Scholef. Hints, p. 122. 
 
 πιστοῖς] ‘ faithful,’—not ‘ believing:’ 
 the context evidently requires the for- 
 mer meaning; the παραθήκη was to 
 be delivered to trusty guardians, τοῖς 
 μὴ προδιδοῦσι τὸ κήρυγμα, Chrys.; see 
 notes on 1 Tim. i. 12. The verb 
 παράθου seems clearly to point to the 
 παραθήκη alluded to in ch. i. 12, 14, 
 and τ Tim. vi. 20. οἵτινες 
 does not appear to have here any 
 explanatory 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,’ dc.; 
 δύο πράγματα ζητεῖ ὁ ᾿Απόστολος ἀπὸ 
 τὸν ἐκκλησιαστικὸν διδάσκαλον, πρῶτον 
 πίστιν διὰ νὰ μὴ φθείρῃ τὴν παρακατα- 
 θήκην, δεύτερον ἱκανότητα νὰ τὴν διδάξῃ, 
 Coray (Romaic): see notes on Gal. ii. 
 4 and iv. 24. The future ἔσονται 
 
PPP ANS ἘΔ. 
 
 123 
 
 a? A 
 πάθησον ws καλὸς στρατιώτης Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ. οὐδεὶς 4 
 
 a a“ UU i? 
 στρατευόμενος ἐμπλέκεται ταῖς τοῦ βίου πραγματείαις, 
 
 does not necessarily point to the spe- 
 cial time of Timothy’s removal or 
 death (Beng., Leo), but simply and 
 generally to the result that will na- 
 turally follow the παράδοσις. 
 
 Though this verse certainly does not 
 refer to any παράδοσις of doctrines of 
 a more mystical character (Theoph.), 
 and can never be fairly urged as recog- 
 nizing any equal and co-ordinate au- 
 thority with the written Word (comp. 
 Mack), it still may be said that the 
 instructions seem definitely to contem- 
 plate a regular, orderly, and successive 
 transmission of the fundamentals of 
 Christian doctrine to Christian minis- 
 ters and teachers, see Mosheim, de 
 Rebus Christ. p.130. On this subject 
 generally, see the calm and sensible 
 remarks of Waterland, Doctr. of Trin. 
 vil. 5 sq., Vol. 111. p. 610 Sq. 
 
 3. Συνκακοπάθησον] ‘ Suffer afflic- 
 tions with me ;’ compare notes on ch. 
 i. 8. This reading, supported as it is 
 by ACID!EJFG (cuyx. δὲ); 17. 31, 
 al.; Syr.-Phil. in marg., and appy. 
 Syr., Vulg., Clarom., Copt., Arm. 
 (Lachm., Tisch.), is now rightly adopt- 
 ed by all recent critics and commenta- 
 tors except Leo; so also Mill, Prole- 
 gom. Ὁ. CXXXVI: σὺ οὖν (Rec.) only 
 rests on. C?D2D°KL; mss. It is 
 doubtful on what grounds Bloomf. 
 (ed. 9) can assert that the Syr. (Pesh.) 
 must have read σὺ οὖν, when the 
 
 Ysa As} [tu igitur] of ver. 1 
 
 y 
 is omitted in the present verse; and 
 wholly inconceivable how it ean ‘be 
 found in the Vatican B,’ when, as is 
 perfectly well known, the Past. Epp. 
 and Philem. are not fownd in that 
 venerable MS. at all; comp. Tisch. 
 Prolegom. Ὁ. CLXXXI. στρατιώτης 
 
 X. ᾽1.] ‘a soldier of Jesus Christ,’ 
 ‘miles quem Christus sibi obstrinxit,’ 
 Leo; on the gen. compare notes on 
 Eph. i. 1. The nature of the service 
 and its trials and sufferings are vigo- 
 rously depicted by Tertull. ad Mart. 
 cap. 3 56. ; the scriptural and Pauline 
 (e.g. 1 Cor. ix. 7, 2 Cor. x. 3 sq.) cha- 
 racter of the image is vindicated by 
 Baumg. Pastoralbr. p. 106. 
 
 4. στρατευόμενος] ‘serving as a 
 soldier,’ 4 X 2 [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. § 52.8. 7, and 
 the exx. (esp. of verbs in -eJw) in 
 Donalds. Gr. § 432.2, p. 437, Jelf, Gr. 
 § 362. 6. ἐμπλέκεται] ‘en- 
 tangleth himself,’ Auth., ‘implicat se,’ 
 Vulg., Clarom. ‘Hoc versu commen- 
 datur 7d abstine, accedit versu seq. 
 τὸ sustine,’ Beng.; comp. Chrys. on 
 ver. 5. ‘There does not seem any ne- 
 cessity for pressing the meaning of 
 
 “the yerb beyond that of ‘being in- 
 
 volved in,’ ‘implicari’ (Cie, Off. τι. 11. 
 40); comp. 2 Pet. il. 20, τούτοις [μιάσ- 
 μασιν] ἐμπλακέντες, Polyb. Hist. xxv. 
 9. 3, τοῖς ᾿Ελληνικοῖς πράγμασιν ἐμ- 
 πλεκόμενος, and (with eds) ib. 1. 17. 3, 
 XXVI. 6, II. 
 
 ταῖς Tov βίου πραγματείαις] ‘with the 
 affairs of life,’ ‘negotiis vite civilis,’ 
 Leo: on the distinction between Bios 
 and the higher term ζωή, see Trench, 
 Synon. § 27. It does not seem ne- 
 cessary to restrict πραγμ. (a ἅπαξ 
 λεγόμ. in the N.T.) to ‘mercatura’ 
 (Schoettg. Hor. Hebr. Vol. 1. p. 887; 
 comp. πραγματεύεσθε, Luke xix. 13): 
 
124 
 
 5 ἵνα τῷ στρατολογήσαντι ἀρέσῃ. 
 
 ΕἸ ΄ 78 4 
 6 οὐ στεφανοῦται ἐὰν μὴ 
 
 it rather includes, as the contrast 
 seems to require, all the ordinary call- 
 ings and occupations of life, which 
 would necessarily be inconsistent with 
 the special and seclusive duties of a 
 soldier; comp. Philo, Vit. Mosis, m1. 
 27, Vol. 11. p. 167 (ed. Mang.), ἔργων 
 kal τεχνῶν τῶν els πορισμόν, καὶ mpay- 
 par. ὅσαι κατὰ βίου ζήτησιν, ib. § 28, 
 p. 168, τέχναι καὶ πραγμ. καὶ μάλιστα 
 οἱ περὶ πορισμὸν καὶ βίον ζήτησιν 
 (Wetst.). Compare Beveridge, Can. 
 Apost. v1. Annot. p. 17, who specifies 
 what were considered ‘secularia ne- 
 gotia.’ 
 
 τῷ στρατολογήσαντι] ‘him who en- 
 rolled him as a soldier:’ στρατολ., & 
 dm. Neyou. in N.T. and a λέξις τοῦ 
 παρακμάζοντος ᾿Ελληνισμοῦ (Coray), is 
 properly ‘milites conscribere’ (Plu- 
 tarch, Mar. § 9, al., comp. Dorvill. 
 Charit. I. 2, p. 29), and thence, by a 
 ace ΘΆΒΙΟΡΝ ,‘deligere militem,’ 
 
 “σι, Ὁ {qui elegit eum] Syr.: 
 
 comp. Joseph. Bell. v. 9. 4, βοηθὸν 
 ἐστρατολόγησε. 
 
 5. ἐὰν δὲ x.7.A.] ‘Again if a man 
 also contend in the games,’ ‘certat in 
 agone,’ Vulg.,comp. Scholef. Hints, p. 
 123: δὲ introduces a new image (Ἢ qua- 
 sinovam rem unamquamque enuntia- 
 tionem affert,’ Klotz, Devar. Vol. 1. 
 p. 362, ‘in the second place,’ Donalds. 
 Cratyl. § 155) derived from athletic 
 contests, 1 Cor. ix. 24sq. In the for- 
 merimagethe Christian, asthesoldier, 
 was represented as one of many ; here, 
 as the athlete, he is a little more in- 
 dividualized, and the personal nature 
 of the encounter is a little more hinted 
 at; comp. notes on Eph. vi. 12. The 
 καί, as usual, has its ascensive force, 
 pointing to the previous image of the 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 Β. 
 
 ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἀθλῇ τις, 
 
 νομίμως ἀθλήση. τὸν κοπι- 
 
 soldier; what applied in his case ap- 
 plies also and further in the case of 
 the athlete; comp. Klotz, Devar. Vol. 
 11. p. 638. Of the two forms, ἀθλέω 
 and ἀθλεύω, it is said that (in the best 
 Attic Greek) the latter is more com- 
 mon in allusions to the games, the for- 
 mer in more general references (Rost 
 u. Palm, Lex, s.v. ἀθλεύω); comp. 
 however Plato, Legg. vi. p. 830 4, 
 
 with ib. 1x. p. 873 E. νομίμως] 
 ‘according to rule,’ laodto15 
 
 [in lege] Syr.; ἡ ἀθλητικὴ νόμους ἔχει 
 τινάς, καθ᾽ ovs προσήκει τοὺς ἀθλητὰς 
 ἀγωνίζεσθαι, Theod. 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 preparation 
 (πάντα τὰ τοῖς ἀθληταῖς προσήκοντα, 
 Chrys.) before it as well; comp, Ar- 
 rian, Epict. 111. το, εἰ νομίμως ἤθλησας, 
 εἰ ἔφαγες ὅσα δεῖ, εἰ ἐγυμνάσθης, εἰ 
 τοῦ ἀλείπτου ἤκουσας (Wetst.), and 
 see Suicer, Thesaur. 5.0. Vol. τι. p. 
 414, Where the force of this word is 
 well illustrated by patristic citations, 
 The tacit warning διαπαντὸς ἐν ἀσκήσει 
 ἐΐναι (Chrys.) thus has its full force. 
 6. τὸν κοπιῶντα k.t.A.] ‘The la- 
 bouring husbandman must needs first 
 partake of the fruits (of his labour).’ 
 There is some difficulty in (a) the con- 
 nexion and (b) the application of this 
 verse. With respect to (a) it seems 
 wholly unnecessary to admit an hyper- 
 baton, se. τὸν τῶν καρπ. μεταλ. θέλοντα 
 yewpy. δεῖ πρῶτον κοπιᾶν, ἃ gramma- 
 tical subterfuge still partially advocat- 
 ed by Winer, Gr. § 61. 4, p. 490; 80 
 Wakefield, Sylv. Crit. Vol. 1. p. 155. 
 The ex. which Winer adduces, Xen. 
 Cyrop. 1. 3. 5, ὁ σὸς πρῶτος πατὴρ τὰ 
 
ἘΠ ὁε 8. 125 
 
 ὥντα γεωργὸν δεῖ πρῶτον τῶν καρπῶν μεταλαμβανειν. 
 ᾿ Ρ "- 
 
 νόει ὃ λέγω" δώσει γάρ σοι ὁ Κύριος σύνεσιν ἐν πᾶσιν. 7 
 
 Remember Christ and 
 His resurrection ; I suf- 
 
 Μνημόνευε Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐγηγερ- 8 
 
 fer in His Gospel for the sake of the elect; if however we endure, He will reward us. 
 
 τεταγμένα... ποιεῖ, iS surely very dif- 
 ferent, being obvious and self expla- 
 natory. The meaning of the words 
 seems sufficiently clear if a slight em- 
 phasis be laid on κοπιῶντα (οὐχ ἁπλῶς 
 yewpy. εἶπε ἀλλὰ τὸν κοπ., Chrys.), 
 and if πρῶτον (certainly not ‘ita de- 
 mum,’ Grot.) be referred to other par- 
 ticipators; ‘the labouring husbandman 
 (not the idle one) ought to partake 
 first (before all others) of the fruits:’ 
 it is his inalienableright (‘lex quedam 
 nature,’ Est.) in consequence of his 
 κόπος. Τκοπιῶντα δ; πρῶτον had been 
 omitted, it would have been a mere 
 general and unconnected sentiment; 
 their insertion however turns the de- 
 claration into an indirect exhortation, 
 closely parallel to that of ver. 5: ‘that 
 athlete only στεφανοῦται Who νομίμως 
 ἀθλεῖ, only the husbandman who 
 xorighas the first claim on the fruits.’ 
 On the derivation, and intension im- 
 plied in kor. (οὐχ ἁπλῶς τὸν κάμνοντα 
 ἀλλὰ τὸν κοπτόμενον, Chrys.), compare 
 notes on 1 Tim.iv. 10. The real diffi- 
 culty is in (b) the application; what 
 are the καρποί Clearly not the sup- 
 port which must be given to ministers 
 (Mosh.), as this would be completely 
 alien to the context;—nor the fruits 
 of his labour and instruction which 
 St Paul was to reap from Timothy 
 (Beng.),—northe spiritual gifts which 
 Timothy imparted to others and was 
 
 to show first in himself (comp. Greg. ~ 
 
 Nyss. ap. (icum.),—but, as the con- 
 text seems to require and even sug- 
 gest,—the future reward (comp, στε- 
 φανοῦται) which the faithful and 
 laborious teacher is pre-eminently to 
 receive in the world to come (comp. 
 Matth. v. 12, xix. 21), not perhaps 
 
 excluding that arising from theconver- 
 sion of souls (Theod., and appy. Syr. 
 
 0105/2 «Ὁ [fructuum 6] 85], 
 y 
 
 comp. Hamm.) to be partaken of 
 
 even in the present world. 
 
 7. νόει] ‘understand, grasp the 
 meaning of;’ not ‘perpende,’ Beza, 
 or ‘attende,’ Beng.,—translations of 
 voéw which can hardly be substan- 
 tiated in the N.T., but ‘intellige,’ 
 Vulg., shoo} [intellige] Syr., as 
 the context and prevailing meaning of 
 the word (see esp. Beck, Bibl. Seelenl. 
 Il. 19. p. 56) evidently require: ἐπειδὴ 
 αἰνιγματωδῶς πάντα εἶπε, τὰ TOU oTpa- 
 τιώτου, τὰ τοῦ ἀθλητοῦ, τὰ τοῦ γεωρ- 
 you, νόει φησί, Theoph. The reading 
 in the following clause is not quite 
 certain ; δῴη yap x.T.\. (Rec.) deserves 
 some consideration on the principle, 
 ‘proclivi lectioni prestat ardua;’ the 
 uncial authority [AC'DEFGN] 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. τ᾿. p. 232, comp. notes 
 on Gal. ii. 6), or, more probably, in 
 its usual argumentative sense (De W., 
 Peile), the command being explained 
 by the prayer. σύνεσιν] 
 ‘understanding ;’ according to the 
 somewhat elaborate definition of Beck 
 (Bibl. Seelenl.11. 19, Ὁ. 60), the faculty 
 by which we mentally apprehend and 
 are enabled to pass judgment upon 
 what is presented to us; comp. notes 
 on Eph. iii. 4, and Schubert, Gesch. 
 d. Seele, ὃ 40, notes, Vol. 11. p. 345 
 (ed. 4). 
 
 8. Mvnpdveve] ‘Bear in remem- 
 
 ? 
 
126 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 B. 
 
 , : lad , , 7 s . ’ , 
 μένον ἐκ νεκρῶν, EK σπέρματος Δαυίδ, κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέ- 
 eo 
 
 9 λιόν μου, ἐν ᾧ κακοπαθῶ 
 
 brance;’ here only with an ace. per- 
 sone: it is found with an acc. rei, 
 Matth. xvi. 9, 1 Thess. ii. 9, Rev. 
 Xvili. 5, but more commonly with a 
 genitive. The distinction between the 
 two cases seems to be, that with the 
 gen. the meaning is simply ‘to re- 
 member,’ the object being perhaps 
 regarded as that from which, as it 
 were, the memory emanates (comp. 
 Donalds. Gr. ὃ 451. gg); with the 
 accus. the meaning is rather to ‘ keep 
 in remembrance,’ ‘to bear in mind;’ 
 see Winer, Gr. § 30. 10, p. 184, and 
 comp. Bernhardy, Synt. 111. 51, p. 177. 
 The exhortation does not seem dog- 
 matical (πρὸς τοὺς aiperixods ἀποτεινό- 
 μενος, Chrys., Est.), nor even directly 
 hortatory (‘recordare, ita ut sequare,’ 
 Beng.), but intended to console and 
 encourage. Timothy was to take cou- 
 rage, by dwelling on the victory over 
 death and the glory of his Master,— 
 his Master who was pleased to assume 
 indeed man’s nature, yet came, 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,’ éc., Vulg., 
 Auth., Alf. (in loc.), but ‘as one raised,’ 
 ἄο. (Goth. ‘urrisanana’); compare 
 Winer, Gr. ὃ 45. 4, p. 309, and see 
 Alford on 1 John iy. 2, but correct 
 ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ into ‘se- 
 condary’ and ‘tertiary’ (Donalds. Gr, 
 § 417). On the use of the perfect 
 (éynyepu.) in this and other events in 
 our Lord’s life as marking their per- 
 manentcharacter, see Green, Gr. p.22. 
 ἐκ σπέρματος Δανίδ] Scil. γενόμενον, 
 not τὸν γενόμενον, De W. The mean- 
 ing of this clause, thus placed (appy. 
 with studied emphasis) out of its na- 
 tural order, can only be properly un- 
 
 μέχρι δεσμῶν ὡς κακοῦργος, 
 
 derstood 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 asa 
 bare antithesis to ἐγηγερμ.: much less 
 has it any reference to current Doce- 
 tist doctrines (De W., Baur, Pasto- 
 ralbr. p. 102). It points indeed, as 
 the context here suggests, and the 
 words κατὰ σάρκα in Rom. l.c. seem 
 to render certain, to Christ’s human 
 nature, but it points to it at the same 
 time as derived through the greatest 
 of Israel’s Kings, and as in the fulfil- 
 ment of the sure word of prophecy, 
 Jer. xxiii. 5, Matth. xxii. 42, John vii. 
 42; see Wiesing. in loc., who has very 
 ably elucidated the force and mean- 
 ing of this clause. 
 
 κατὰ τὸ evayy. μου] ‘according to my 
 Gospel,’ i.e. ‘the Gospel entrusted to 
 me to preach,’ τὸ εὐαγγέλ. ὃ εὐαγγελί- 
 ἕομαι, 1 Cor, xv. 1, comp. Rom. ii, 16, 
 xvi. 25; ‘suum appellat ratione mi- 
 nisterii,’ Caly. on Rom. ii. 16. The 
 remark of Jerome, ‘quotiescunque in 
 epistolis suis dicit Paulus juxtaevang, 
 meum de Luce significat volumine,’ 
 noticed by Fabricius (Cod. Apocr. N.T. 
 p- 372), and here pressed by Baur 
 (Pastoralbr, p. 99), cannot be sub- 
 stantiated. There may be an allusion 
 to the τινὲς ἕτερα εὐαγγελιζόμενοι, 
 Theoph., but it here scarcely seems 
 intended. 
 
 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 ᾧ to 
 Christ; suchaconstructionis ofcourse 
 possible (comp. Eph. iv. 1), but in- 
 yolyes a departure from the ordinary 
 
ΠΕ 264 FO. 
 
 ‘ A ~ 
 ἀλλὰ ὁ λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ οὐ δέδεται. 
 
 127 
 
 ἊΝ cal 4 
 διὰ τουτο παντὰα IO 
 
 ε , ‘ vhs ae: 4 Sa ’ , 
 ὑπομενῶ διὰ TOUS ἐκλεκτοὺς, tv@ Και QuTOl TwWTHPLAS TU= 
 
 rule of connexion, which does not 
 seem required by the context. 
 
 μέχρι Seop..] ‘even unto bonds,’ Auth.; 
 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 [usque ad], 
 in quo aliquid factum est,’ independ- 
 ently of being appy. exactly at vari- 
 ance with the respective derivations 
 {connected with ἀκρός, μακρός, see Do- 
 nalds. Cratyl. § 181], has been fully 
 disproved by Fritz. Rom. v. 14, Vol. τ. 
 p. 308, note. The only reasonable 
 and natural distinction is that sug- 
 gested by derivation, viz. that ἄχρι, in 
 some passages, seems to preserve an 
 ascensive, μέχρι an extensive reference 
 (see esp. Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 225); 
 yet still usage so far contravenes this, 
 that the real difference between the 
 particles seems only to consist in this, 
 that ἄχρι is also an adverb, 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 fre- 
 quently than the other, and yet that 
 this again seems only fairly referable 
 to the ‘ usus scribendi’ of the author. 
 The note of Fritzsche, Rom. l.c., on 
 these particles, and the goodarticle by 
 Klotz, Devar, Vol. m. p. 224—231, 
 will both repay the trouble of consult- 
 ation. 
 
 κακοῦργος] ‘a malefactor,’ only here 
 and Luke xxiii. 32, 33, 39. It en- 
 hances the preceding words τὰ τῶν 
 κακούργων ὑπομένω πάθη, Theod, : there 
 may be too perhaps a paronomasia, 
 κακοπαθ. kakovp., ‘mala patior tan- 
 quam malefactor,’ Est. 
 
 ov δέδεται] ‘is not (has not been and 
 is not) bound,’ with evident allusion 
 (per paronomasiam) to the preceding 
 The reference must not be 
 limited to the Apostle’s particular case 
 (δεσμοῦνται αἱ χεῖρες, ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ἡ γλώτ- 
 τα, Chrys.; ‘this hath not restrained 
 me in mine office,’ Hamm.), but seems 
 perfectly general, whether in refer- 
 ence to himself or others, ἡμῶν δεδε- 
 μένων λέλυται καὶ τρέχει, Theoph. ; 
 comp. Phil. i. 12. The full adversa- 
 tive force of ἀλλά, ‘ yet, nevertheless,’ 
 must not be left unnoticed; comp. 
 Klotz, Devar. Vol. 1. p. 3. 
 
 10. διὰ τοῦτο] Scarcely ‘quia me 
 vincto evangelium currit,’ Beng., still 
 less a πλεονασμὸς ἑβραϊκός, Coray, but 
 rather, ‘propter hoc, id est, ut evan- 
 gelium disseminetur, ut verbum Dei 
 currat 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, sufferings, 
 death: see Acts xxi. 13. 
 ὑπομένω] ‘endure,’ ‘sustain,’ ‘sus- 
 tineo,’ Vulg.,—not exactly ‘am con- 
 tent to suffer anything,’ Peile (πάσχω, 
 Chrys.), as this too much obscures the 
 normal meaning of ὑπομ. inthe N.T., 
 which is rather that of a brave bear- 
 ing up against sufferings (‘animum in 
 perferendo sustinet,’ Tittm. Synon. 1. 
 p. 194, see Trench, Synon. Part 11. 
 § 3) than a mere tame and passive 
 sufferance (ἀνέχεσθαι) of them; see 
 below, ver. 12, Rom, xii, 12, Jamesi. 
 12, al., and contrast ἀνεχόμεθα, τ Cor. 
 iv. 12 (ὑπέσχον, Psalm l1xxxix, 51), 
 where a meek suffering is intended to 
 be specially depicted. Even in the 
 
 δεσμῶν. 
 
128 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 B. 
 
 11 xwow τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ μετὰ δόξης αἰωνίου. πιστὸς 
 ε U ’ ‘ / 4 , ’ 
 12 ὁ λογος' εἰ yap συναπεθάνομεν, καὶ συνζήσομεν" εἰ 
 
 case οὗ παιδεία, the Christian ὑπομένει 
 (Heb. xii. 7 Rec., 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, Théol. Chrét. tv. 20, Vol. 11. 
 Ῥ. 225, a8 its primary one, viz. ‘la sou- 
 mission 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. 7, 
 Fritz. Rom. Vol. 1. p. 258. 
 
 τοὺς ἐκλεκτούς] ‘ the elect,’ thosewhom 
 God in His infinite mercy, and in ac- 
 cordance with the counsels of His 
 ‘ voluntas liberrima,’ has been pleased 
 ἐκλέξασθαι; see notes on Eph. 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 adhuc ad 
 Christi ovile sunt adducendi’ (Menoch. 
 ap. Pol. Syn.), and still less for con- 
 fining it to those who had already 
 received it (Grot.): the reference is 
 perfectly general, timeless, and unre- 
 stricted. On St Paul’s use of ἐκλεκ- 
 τοί, comp. Reuss, Théol. Chrét. tv. 14, 
 Vol. 11. p. 133. καὶ αὐτοί] 
 ‘they too,’ they as well as I; ὡς καὶ 
 ἡμεῖς" καὶ γὰρ καὶ ἡμᾶς ὁ Θεὸς ἐξελέξ- 
 aro, Chrys. The reference advocated 
 by De W., ‘they as well as those who 
 already believe,’ seems certainly un- 
 tenable, —on this ground, thatit would 
 imply a kind of contrast between the 
 πιστοὶ and ἐκλεκτοί; whereas the m- 
 orol, 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 Xp. ᾽1.] Emphatic; τῆς ὄντως 
 σωτηρίας, Chrys. On the use of the 
 article, see notes on ch, i. 13. 
 
 μετὰ δόξης αἰων. is appended to cwrn- 
 pla, and, while serving to enhance it, 
 also marks it as in its highest and 
 completest realization belonging tothe 
 future world; ἡ ὄντως δόξα ἐν ovpa- 
 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] “ Faithful is 
 the saying :’ compare notes on 1 Tim. 
 i. 15. Here, as in 1 Tim. iv. 9, the 
 use of yap in the following clause 
 seems to suggest a reference to the 
 preceding words ; mist. ὁ λόγ. ποῖος; 
 ὅτι οἱ ἐκλεκτοὶ ἐνδόξου καὶ αἰωνίου 
 σωτηρίας ἐπιτεύξονται, Theoph. after 
 Chrys. ; similarly G@cum. If with 
 Huth., Leo, al., the formula be re- 
 ferred to what follows, the proper 
 force of yap can scarcely be main- 
 tained: even in its most decidedly 
 explanatory uses, the conclusive force 
 (the ἄρα portion, see Klotz, Devar. 
 Vol. 1. p. 232), though subordinated 
 to the affirmative, is never so com- 
 pletely obscured (‘ videlicet,’ Peile, ‘ ni- 
 mirum,’ Leo) as must be the case in 
 the present passage. In Matth. i. 18, 
 noticed by De W., the use of γὰρ was 
 suggested by the preceding οὕτως, be- 
 sides the reading is doubtful; see 
 Kiihner on Xen. Mem. 1. 1. 6. 
 el γὰρ «.t.A.] It has been asserted by 
 Miinter (Christl. Poes. Ῥ. 29), Mack, 
 Conyb., al., that the latter part of 
 this, and the whole of the two follow- 
 ing verses are taken from some Chris- 
 tian hymn. Though the distinctly 
 
ΕΠ ars 15 12. 
 
 129 
 
 e , 4 ’ ee , 3 - 
 ὑπομένομεν, καὶ συνβασιλεύσομεν" εἰ ἀρνησόμεθα, κακεῖ- 
 
 Lal 9 9 ~ 9 - Α 
 νος ἀρνήσεται ἡμᾶς: εἰ ἀπιστουμεν, εκεῖνος πιστος 13 
 
 , 5 , A ε ‘ ᾿] , 
 μένει" ἀρνήσασθαι γὰρ εαυτον ou δύναται. 
 
 rhythmical character of the clauses 
 (see the arrangement in Mack, who 
 however erroneously includes the first 
 yap in the quotation), and the appa- 
 rent occurrence of another specimen 
 in 1 Tim. iii. 16, certainly favour such 
 a supposition; still the argumentative 
 yap (Lachm., Tisch., with all the un- 
 cial MSS. [probably A] except KN?) 
 in ver. 13 seems so far opposed to the 
 hymnal character of the quotation as 
 to leave the supposition very doubtful. 
 It is not noticed in Rambach’s An- 
 thologie, Vol. 1. p. 33, where it would 
 scarcely have been omitted if the hy- 
 pothesis had not seemed untenable. 
 
 εἰ συναπεθάνομεν] ‘if we died with 
 (Him);’ the σὺν obviously refers to 
 Xp. "Inc. ver. 10. The death here 
 alluded to must, in accordance with 
 the context, be simply ὁ διὰ παθημά- 
 των θάνατος, not also ὁ διὰ τοῦ λου- 
 τροῦ, Chrys., and the Greek exposi- 
 tors. In the very similar passage, 
 Rom. vi. 8, the reference, as ver. 11 
 sq. clearly show, is ethical; here how- 
 ever such a reference would seem in- 
 consistent with the general current of 
 the argument, and esp. with ver. 12. 
 The aorist must not be passed over ; 
 it marks a single past act that took 
 place when we gaye ourselves up to a 
 life that involved similar exposure to 
 sufferings and death; the Apostle 
 died when he embraced the lot of a 
 daily death (ka@’ ἡμέραν ἀποθνήσκω, 
 1 Cor, xy. 31), and of a constant bear- 
 ing about the νέκρωσιν τοῦ “Incot, 2 
 Cor. iv. 10. Kal συνΐζήσ.] 
 ‘we shall also live with (Him),’ uot in 
 an ethical sense, but, as the antithesis 
 necessarily requires, with physical re- 
 ference 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, εἰ ὑπομένομεν] ‘if we endure,’ 
 scil. with Him; present; this was a 
 continuing state. On the meaning of 
 ὑπομένειν, See notes on ver, Io. 
 kal συνβασιλεύσομεν] ‘we shall also 
 reign with (Him);’ extension of the 
 previous idea σὺν ξήσομ.; not only shall 
 we live, but also be kings with Him ; 
 comp. Rom. v. 17, viii. 17, Rev. i. 6. 
 DuvBac. is only a dls λεγόμ. in N.T., 
 here and 1 Cor. iv. 8; comp. Polye. 
 Phil. 5. εἰ ἀρνησόμεθα] ‘if 
 we shall deny (Him),’—‘ aut facto, aut 
 verbo, aut etiam silentio,’ Est.; comp. 
 Matth. x. 32, 33: οὐκ ἐν τοῖς χρηστοῖς 
 μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἐναντίοις αἱ 
 ἀμοιβαί, Chrys. The future conveys 
 the idea of the ethical possibility of 
 the action; comp. Winer, Gr. § 40. 6, 
 p. 250: we have thus in the hypotheti- 
 cal clauses, aorist, present, andfuture. 
 The precedence of ἀρνεῖσθαι to ἀπι- 
 orew is not to be ascribed to the fact 
 that ‘abnegatio...fidem que fuerat ex- 
 tinguit,’ Beng., but rather to this, that 
 a persistent state of unbelief (ἀπιστοῦ- 
 μεν) 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: ἀρνησόμ. 
 is supported by ACN}; Syr., Vulg. 
 (FG here omit some words), while ap- 
 νούμ. (Rec.) has DEKLN*; Clarom., 
 Vulg. (Amiat.), but seems, on the 
 whole, more probably corrected to 
 harmonize with the pres, ὑπομένομεν, 
 than altered to balance ἀρνήσεται. 
 
 13. εἰ ἀπιστοῦμεν] ‘if we are un- 
 believing, —or, to preserve the paro- 
 nomasia, ‘are faithless,’ ἄπιστοί ἐσμεν 
 
 K 
 
190 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Β. 
 
 Charge men to avoid 
 
 I4 Tatra ὑ ὑπομίμνησκε, διαμαρτυρόμενος babblings which really 
 
 ἐνώπιον τοῦ Κυρίου μὴ λογομαχεῖν, ἐ ἐπ᾽ 
 
 lead to the subversion 
 of faith. God 
 knows His own. 
 
 Follow practical religion, be meek and eschew contentions. 
 
 (comp. Fritz. Rom, iii. 3),—not speci- 
 fically ‘in Him’ (Syr.), or ‘in His 
 resurrection,’ ὅτι ἀνέστη (Chrys.), or 
 ‘in His divinity,’ ὅτι Θεός ἐστι (cum. 
 2),—but generally, ‘if we exhibit un- 
 belief,’ whether as regards His attri- 
 butes, His promises, or His Gospel; 
 ‘infidelitas positiva significatur, que 
 est eorum qui veritatem auditam reci- 
 pere nolunt, aut semel receptam dese- 
 runt,’ Estius. De W., Wiesing., and 
 others, following Grot., translate 
 amor. ‘untreu sind,’ ‘are unfaithful,’ 
 appealing to the similar passage, 
 Rom. iii. 3. This is certainly plausible 
 on account of the following πιστός, still 
 neither there (see esp. Mex in 
 
 nor here is there sufficie:, reason for 
 departing from the regula: meaning 
 of ἀπιστεῖν (Mark xvi. 11, τό, Luke 
 xxiv. 11, 41, Acts xxviii. 24), which, 
 like ἀπιστία, seems always in the 
 N. T. to imply not ‘untrueness,’ ‘un- 
 faithfulness,’ 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.g, Rom. 
 iii. 3, 4. Though we believe not Him 
 and His promises, yet He remains un- 
 changed in His faithfulness and truth; 
 πιστός ἐστι καὶ αὐτός, ὀφείλων πιστεύ- 
 εσθαι ἐν οἷς ἂν λέγῃ καὶ ποιῇ, αὐτὸς 
 ἄτρεπτος μένων καὶ μὴ ἀλλοιούμενος 
 x.7.r., Athan. cont. Arian. ττι. Vol. 
 1. p. 377 (Paris, 1627). 
 
 ov δύν. κιτ.λ.] ‘He cannot deny Him- 
 sel/,’ or be untrue to His own essential 
 nature; δύναται καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς πάντα ὁ 
 Θεός, ἅπερ δυνάμενος τοῦ Θεὸς εἶναι καὶ 
 τοῦ ἀγαθὸς εἷναι καὶ τοῦ σοφὸς εἶναι 
 οὐκ ἐξίσταται, Orig. Cels. Lib. 111. § 70; 
 see also Pearson, Creed, Art. v1. Vol. 
 
 I. p. 339 (ed. Burt.). On the aor. infin. 
 after δύναται see notes on Eph. iii. 4. 
 14. Ταῦτα ὑπομίμν.} ‘put (them) 
 in remembrance of these things,’ scil. of 
 the truths mentioned in ver. 11—13; 
 comp. Tit. iii, 1, 2 Pet. i.12, The 
 most natural supplement to ὑπομίμνη- 
 σκε is not ἀλλοὺς (Theoph., Gicum.), 
 but αὐτούς (Syr.), whether generally 
 ‘eos quibus pres,’ 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. in Polyb. 
 Hist. 1. 33. 5, ib. 37. 4, Ill. 15. 53 see 
 notes on 1 Tim. Υ. 21. 
 μὴ λογομαχεῖν] ‘not to contend about 
 words,’ ‘not to indulge in Noyouaxlat,’ 
 see notes on t Tim. vi. 4. The read- 
 ing is somewhat doubtful: Lachm. 
 reads λογομάχει with AC; Clarom., 
 Aug., Vulg., Aith.; Latin Ff.; so 
 also Tisch. ed. 1, who however in ed. 
 2, 7, has (as it would seem, rightly) 
 restored the inf. with C3DEFGKLN; 
 nearly all mss.; Syr. (both), Goth.; 
 Clem., Chrys., Theod., al.; so Mill, 
 Prolegom. p. xu1x. Though the change 
 from the imper. to the infinitive might 
 be thought not wholly improbable, as 
 the inf. might seem an easier reading 
 (comp. however ch. iv. 2), yet a con- 
 formation of the inf. to the preceding 
 and succeeding imp. seems equally 
 plausible. The preponderance of ex- 
 ternal authority may thus be allowed 
 to decide the question. If the imper. 
 be adopted, a stop must be placed 
 after Κυρίου. ἐπ᾿ οὐδὲν 
 χρήσιμον] ‘(a course) useful for no- 
 thing ;’ not an independent clause in- 
 volving a separate predication (‘ad 
 
Δ ΠΟ ΤΩ; 15. 
 
 191 
 
 δὲ , 9 4 - A 9 , , 
 οὐδεν χρήσιμον, ETL καταστροφὴ τῶν ἀκουοντῶν. σποῦ- 15 
 
 δασον σεαυτὸν δόκιμον παραστῆσαι τῷ Θεῷ, ἐργάτην 
 
 nihil enim utile est, nisi,’ éc., Vulg., 
 sim. Clarom.), but in opposition tothe 
 preceding sentence; comp. Mark vii. 
 19, and see Winer, Gr. ὃ 59. 9, p- 472. 
 The reading is here again by nomeans 
 certain. The balance of critical au- 
 thority seems now in favour of ἐπ᾽ ov- 
 δὲν with ACN! (ἐπ᾽ οὐδενὶ γάρ, FG); 
 17 (Lachm., Tisch. ed. 7); so Huther. 
 Still the reading retained in ed. 1, 2, 
 eis οὐδὲν With DEKLN?! (Tisch. ed. 2), 
 deserves much consideration, espe- 
 cially on internal grounds; forthough, 
 on the one hand, it is possible that εἰς 
 might have been the result of a change 
 to avoid the seeming difficulty of ἐπὶ 
 twice used thus contiguously, and the 
 ἐπ᾽ οὐδενὶ of FG might have been a 
 correction; it is certainly not impro- 
 bable, on the other hand, that the eye 
 of the transcriber might have been 
 caught by the following ἐπί, and that 
 thesubstitutionisaccidental. St Paul’s 
 love of prepositional variation (comp. 
 notes on Gal. 1. 1) is also an argument 
 of no inconsiderable weight. In els 
 οὐδὲν the idea of destination ismarked 
 perhaps a little more laxly (comp. Acts 
 xvii. 21,and Winer, Gr.§ 49. a, p. 354), 
 in ἐπ᾽ οὐδὲν (comp. ἐφ᾽ 6, Matth. xxvi. 
 50, scil. τὸ κατὰ σκόπον πράττε, Eu- 
 thym.; [Demosth.] Aristog. p. 779, 
 ἐπὶ kahov...mpaypua...xpjoiuos) a little 
 more stringently. It is singular that 
 χρήσιμον is a ἅπαξ λεγόμ. in the N.T.; 
 εὔχρηστος however is found with εἰς 
 in ch, iv. 11. ἔπὶ κατα- 
 στροφῃ] ‘for the subversion,’ not, as it 
 ought to be, for the edification (olko- 
 δομή) of the hearers; comp. els καθαί- 
 peow, 2 Cor. xiii, ro. ‘Emi here seems 
 to include with the idea of purpose 
 and object (comp, notes on Gal. vy. 13, 
 and on Eph, ii. 10) that also of the 
 result to which the λογομαχίαι inevit- 
 
 ably led, ‘subyersionem pariunt,’ Just. 
 The primary object of the false teach- 
 ers, in accordance with their general 
 character, mighthavebeen to convince, 
 or to make gain out of the hearer 
 (comp. Tit. i. rr); the result, whether 
 contemplated or not, was his κατα- 
 στροφή. These ideas of purpose and 
 result are frequently somewhat blend- 
 ed in the use of ἐπὶ with the dat.; 
 comp. Xen. Mem. τι. 3. 19, τοῖς ἐπ᾽ 
 ὠφελείᾳ πεποιημένοις ἐπὶ βλάβῃ χρῆ- 
 σθαι, and compare the formula τὴν ἐπὶ 
 θανάτῳ, Arrian, Anab. vi. 8. 7 (Xen. 
 Anab., τ. 6. το) ; see Winer, Gr. ὃ 48.¢, 
 p. 351, Bernhardy, Synt. v.24, p. 251- 
 1“ 8éxktpov] ‘approved,’ one who 
 san *e test (comp. δόκιμον dp- 
 “γύριον, Poll Jnomast. 111. 86), just as 
 ἀδόκιμος (ch. 111. 8, Tit. i, 16, al.) is one 
 who cannot (comp. Rom. xiv. 18, xvi. 
 10, 1 Cor. xi. 19, al.), explained more 
 fully in the following clause, but ob- 
 viously not to be joined with épya- 
 τὴν (Mack). The termination -c-os 
 (the first part of which points to 
 quality, the second to action, Donalds. 
 Cratyl. § 258) is annexed according to 
 somewhat differing analogies; comp. 
 Buttm. Gr. § 118. 13. 
 παραστῆσαι τῷ Θεῴ] ‘exhibere Deo,’ 
 Vulg., Clarom.; comp. Rom. vi. 13, 
 1 Cor. viii. 8, Eph. v. 27: the asser- 
 tion of Tholuck (on Rom. l.c.), that 
 παριστάνειν τινί τι is ‘jemandem etwas 
 zu freiem Gebrauch vorlegen,’ cannot 
 be substantiated ; it is simply ‘ sistere, 
 exhibere, alicui aliquid’ (Fritz. Rom. 
 Vol. 1. p. 403), the context defining 
 the application and modifying the 
 translation. ἐργάτην] ‘a 
 workman,’ not perhaps without refer- 
 ence to the laborious nature of the 
 work, the ἔργον εὐαγγελιστοῦ, ch. iv. 
 5, 81. : similarly, but in a bad refer- 
 
 K2 
 
192 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Β. 
 
 9 , . lol A , ~ 4 Υ 
 ἀνεπαίσχυντον, ὀρθοτομοῦντα τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθεΐας. 
 
 A A of. - 
 16 τὰς δὲ βεβήλους κενοφωνίας περιΐστασο' ἐπὶ πλεῖον 
 
 ence, 2 Cor, xi. 13, Phil. iii. 2 ; comp. 
 Deyling, Obs. Vol. rv. 2, p. 623. 
 ἀνεπαίσχυντον]ἤ ‘not ashamed;’ ar. 
 Aeyou.: not with any active or middle 
 force (ὁ ἐργάτης οὐδὲν αἰσχύνεται mpar- 
 τειν, Chrys.), with reference to feeling 
 shame in the cause of the Gospel 
 (Theoph., Gicum.; comp. μὴ ἐπαι- 
 σχυνθῇς, ch. i. 8), but passively, ‘non 
 pudefactum,’ Bengel; comp. Phil. i. 
 20, ἐν οὐδενὶ αἰσχυνθήσομαι. 
 ὀρθοτομοῦντα] ‘cutting, laying out, 
 straight,’ as aroad, &c.; comp. Theod., 
 ἐπαινοῦμεν καὶ τῶν γεωργῶν τοὺς εὐ- 
 θείας τὰς αὔλακας ἀνατέμνοντας. Vari- 
 ousinterpretations have beenassigned 
 to this passage, in most of which the 
 idea of réuvew,—e.g. τέμνε τὰ νόθα, Kal 
 Ta τοιαῦτα ἔκκοπτε, Chrys.; ‘transla- 
 tio sumpta ab illa legali victimarum 
 sectione,’ Beza; ‘acsi pater alendis 
 filiis panem in frusta secando distri- 
 bueret,’ Caly.,—is unduly pressed and 
 arbitrarily explained. The real em- 
 phasis however rests rather on the 
 ὀρθός; comp. ὀρθοποδεῖν, Gal. ii. 14, 
 and the force of the adj. in καινοτο- 
 μεῖν, Plato, Legg. vu. p. 797 8, al.; 
 but this again must not be pressed to 
 the complete exclusion of the verbal 
 element, as in Greg. Naz. Orat. τι. p. 
 23, where ὀρθοτ. nearly = ὀρθῶς ὁδεύειν, 
 see Kypke, Obs. Vol. 11. p. 370. Thus 
 then it will be most correct to adhere 
 closely to the primary meaning ‘to 
 cut in a straight line’ (Rost u. Palm, 
 Lex. s.v.), and to regard it as a meta- 
 phor from laying out a road (comp. 
 Proy. iii. 6, ἵνα ὀρθοτομῇ τὰς ὁδούς cov), 
 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 is, as it were, 
 an ὁδός (comp, De W.), which is to be 
 
 laid out straightly and truly. The 
 meaning is rightly retained by Syr. 
 
 Δ: wl 1:30 [preedicans recte] 
 
 and Vulg., ‘recte tractantem,’ but 
 the metaphor is thus obscured. For 
 thevarious interpretations of thispas- 
 sage, see Wolf, in loc. Vol. Iv. p. 513 
 sq., and esp. Deyling, Obs. Vol. Iv. 2, 
 exerc. II, 10 8q., Pp. 618 sq., where 
 this expression is very elaborately in- 
 vestigated. τῆς ἀληθείας] 
 ‘of Truth,’ not the gen. of apposition, 
 but substantie; see notes on Eph. i. 
 13, and compare Scheuerlein, Synt. 
 § 12. 1, p. 82. 
 
 16. Kevopovlas] ‘babblings ; ’ only 
 here and 1 Tim. vi. 20, where see 
 notes. περιΐστασο] ‘withdraw 
 
 from,’ So \jds| [subdue te a] 
 
 Syr., περίφευγε, Hesych, ,—not ‘cohibe, 
 56. ne ulterius grassarentur’ (Raphel, 
 Beza, and even Suicer, Thesaur. 5.0. 
 Vol. 1. p. 673), ἃ meaning not lexi- 
 cally tenable. It occurs in the N.T. 
 (in the present form) only here and 
 Tit. iii, 9; comp. Lucian, Hermot. 
 § 86, ἐκτραπήσομαι Kal περιστήσομαι, 
 but not Polyb. Hist. m1. 84. 11 (cited 
 by Raphel), as there the verb has its 
 usual meaning. The expression περι- 
 ἵστασθαί τι or τινα (the latter [in the 
 sing.] condemned by Lucian, Pseudos. 
 § 4, and Thom. Μ. 5. v. p. 708, ed. 
 Bern., but defended by Lobeck, Soph. 
 Ajax, 82, p. 109), in the sense of 
 ‘making a circuit so as to ayoid,’— 
 surely not ‘to hedge oneself in,’ Peile, 
 —occurs occasionally in later writers, 
 see exx. in Elsner, Obs. Vol. 11. p. 314, 
 Rost ἃ. Palm, Lew. 5. vy. Vol. 11. p.846, 
 and comp. Dorville, Chariton, 1. 13, 
 p. 136, by whom this use of περιΐστ. 
 is fully illustrated. 
 
ἘΠ ΟΕ 18: 
 
 133 
 
 γὰρ προκόψουσιν ἀσεβείας, καὶ ὁ λόγος αὐτῶν ὡς 17 
 
 γάγγραινα νομὴν ἕξει. ὧν ἐστὶν Ὑμέναιος καὶ Φίλητος, 
 
 οἵτινες περὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἠστόχησαν, λέγοντες τὴν 18 
 
 προκόψουσιν] ‘they will make ad- 
 vance,’ 801]. ‘the false teachers,’ those 
 who utter the κενοφωνίας (comp.airarv, 
 ver. 17, and ch. ili. 0, 13), not the 
 κενοφωνίαι 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. i. 3, 
 iv. 1. The form προκόπτω, though 
 condemned by Lucian, Pseudos. ὃ 5, is 
 rightly maintained by Thom. M, and 
 Phrynichus; the subst. προκοπὴ is 
 however indefensible, see notes on I 
 Tim. iv. 15. It is used in the N. T. 
 de bono (Luke ii. 52), de malo (here, 
 and ch, iii. 9, 13) and de neutro (Rom. 
 xiii, 12). ἀσεβείας] ‘of 
 impiety,’ or, better to preserve the 
 antithesis to evcéB., ‘of wngodliness ;’ 
 gen. dependent on πλεῖον, and either 
 the gen. of the point of view (Scheuerl. 
 Synt. § 18. 1, p. £29), or more proba- 
 bly the gen. materie, as in the gen. 
 after τοῦτο, τοσοῦτο, x.T.\.3 Comp. 
 Joseph, Bell. v1. 2. 3, προὔκοψαν els 
 τοσοῦτον παρανομίας (De W.), and see 
 Kriiger, Sprachl. § 47. 10.3. Insuch 
 cases, as Kriiger observes, the gen. is 
 commonly anarthrous, and a prepo- 
 sition (as here) not unfrequently pre- 
 cedes. 
 
 17. ydyypatva] ‘a gangrene,’ ‘an 
 eating sore;’ according to Galen on 
 Hippocr. de Artic. Vol. ΧΙ. p. 407, 
 intermediate between the φλεγμονὴ 
 and the σφάκελος, and leading the way 
 to thelatter. The rather singular ex- 
 pression νομὴν ἕξει (‘ pastionem habe- 
 bit,’ Erasm.) and the deriv. of γαγγρ. 
 [γράω, γραίνω, connected with Sanscr. 
 gras. ‘devorare,’ comp. Pott, Etym. 
 Forsch, Vol. τ. 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 ; 
 see Bopp, Gr.p. 569. Soalso distinctly, 
 though with a retention of the origi- 
 
 nal word, Syr. edoul2 Ἰκρα. 
 
 send) ce 
 
 Lymn [νομὴν habebit in mul- 
 
 tis]; comp. Ovid, Metam. 11. 825, ‘so- 
 let immedicabile cancer Serpere, et 
 illesas vitiatis addere partes.’ The 
 error of these teachers was spreading, 
 and the Apostle foresees that it was 
 yet further to spread, and to corrupt 
 the Ephesian community to a still 
 more lamentable extent; ‘res misera- 
 bili experimento notior quam ut plu- 
 ribus verbis declarari debeat,’ Est. 
 “Ypév. kal Φίλ.] Two false teachers of 
 whom nothing certain is known; Vi- 
 tringa (Obs. Sacr. tv. 9, Vol. 1. p. 926) 
 thinks that they were Jews, and pro- 
 bably Sadducees. The latter suppo- 
 sition 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. oltives] ‘men who,’ pointing 
 to them with a very faint explanatory 
 force as members of a class; see notes 
 on Gal. ii. 4. περὶ τὴν 
 ἀλήθ. κι τ.λ.1 ‘as concerning the truth 
 missed their aim:’ so 1 Tim. vi. 21. 
 On ἠστόχ. compare notes on τ Tim. 1. 
 6, and on the use of περί, notes on ib. 
 i. 19. λέγοντες K.7.A.] ‘saying 
 that the resurrection has already taken 
 place:’ characteristicand distinguish- 
 ing feature of their error. All recent 
 
194 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOOEON B. 
 
 . if , 4A 9 ’ 
 ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι, καὶ ἀνατρέπουσιν τήν τινων 
 
 4 “ «-Φ 
 10 πίστιν. ‘O μέντοι στερεὸς θεμέλιος τοῦ Θεοῦ ἕστηκεν, 
 
 commentators very pertinently adduce 
 Tren. Her. τι. 31. 2. ed. Mass., ‘esse 
 resurrectionem a mortuis agnitionem 
 ejus que abipsisdicitur veritatis;’ Ter- 
 tull. de Resurr. 19, ‘asseverantes...re- 
 surrectionem eam vindicandam qua 
 quis adité [addita, Rhen., Seml.] veri- 
 tate redanimatus et revivificatus Deo, 
 ignorantie morte discuss4, velut de 
 sepulchro veteris hominis eruperit ;’ 
 August. Epist.55 [119]. 4, ‘nonnulli... 
 arbitrati sunt jam factam esse resur- 
 rectionem, nec ullam ulterius in fine 
 temporum esse sperandam,’ 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- 
 demned in these Epp. led very probably 
 to an undue contempt for the body 
 (developed fully in the‘ hylic’ theory of 
 the Gnostics, Theod. Her, 1. 7, comp. 
 Neand. Hist. of Ch. Vol. τι. p. 116, 
 Clark), to false views of the nature of 
 death (see Tertull. U.c.), and thence to 
 equally false views of the resurrection: 
 death and resurrection were terms 
 which had with these false teachers 
 only a spiritual meaning and applica- 
 tion; ‘they allegorized away the doc- 
 trine, and turned all into figure and 
 metaphor,’ Waterl. Doct. of Trin. tv. 
 Vol. 11. p. 459. Grinfield (Schol. Hell. 
 p. 603) cites Polye. Phil. 7, but there 
 the heterodoxy seems to be of a more 
 fearfulandantinomiancharacter. The 
 error of Marcion, to which Baur (Pas- 
 toralbr. p. 38) here finds an allusion, 
 was of a completely different kind; 
 ‘Marcion in totum carnis resurrectio- 
 nem non admittens, et soli anime sa- 
 lutem repromittens, non qualitatissed 
 substantiw facit questionem,’ Tertull. 
 
 adv. Mare.v.10. The reference to the 
 renewal of generations ἐκ παιδοποιΐας 
 (Theod.), or to the resurr. at the cruci- 
 fixion, Matth. xxvii. 52 (Schoettg.), 
 scarcely need be alluded to. Further 
 notices of this early heresy will be 
 found in Walch, Gesch. der Ketz. Vol. 
 I, p. 129, Burton, Bampt. Lect. Note 
 59, p. 428; comp. Usteri, Lehrb. τι. 
 as. De Ρ 211. ἀνατρέπουσιν 
 κιτ.λ.7 ‘subvert the faith of some ;’ see 
 Tit. i. rr. We cannot safely infer 
 from this use of rwwy that the number 
 of the subverted was small (comp. 
 Chrys. οὐ πάντων ἀλλά τινων); τινὲς 15 
 simply ‘sundry persons,’ theold Germ. 
 ‘etwelche,’ Kriiger, Sprachl. § 51. 16. 
 14; comp. Meyer on Rom. 111. 3. 
 
 19. μέντοι] ‘however,’ ‘neverthe- 
 less ;’ this compound particle—which 
 primarily conveys ‘majorem quandam 
 asseverationem’ (Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. 
 p. 663), and, as its composition shows, 
 unites both confirmation (μὲν) and 
 restriction (τοί), ‘certe quidem’ (Har- 
 tung, Partik. Vol. 1. p. 593),—fre- 
 quently, as in the present case, in- 
 volves an opposition to a preceding 
 clause, and meetsa possible objection; 
 ‘though some may be subverted, yet 
 assuredly the firm foundation of God 
 stands unshaken as ever;’ ‘quamvis 
 quorundam subyertatur fides, non ta- 
 men fundamentum Dei,’ Est. The 
 particle only occurs here in St Paul’s 
 Epp., five times in St John (ch. iv. 27, 
 Vil. 13, Xil. 42, XX. 5, XX1, 4) OnGe 
 in St James (ch. ii. 8), and once in _ 
 St Jude (ver. 8). As a general rule, 
 μέντοι ΙΒ perhaps most correctly printed 
 as one word, as by Lachm., Tisch., 
 especially when other enclitics are 
 joined with it; see Ellendt, Lex. Soph. 
 Vol. 1. p. 80. 
 
 &...07ep. θεμέλ. τοῦ Θεοῦ] ‘the firm 
 
II. 
 
 10. 135 
 
 ἔχων τὴν σφραγῖδα ταύτην "Eyvw Κύριος τοὺς ὄντας 
 
 ) A ar) ; Oa aN , ot BED ’ A 
 QUTOU, Και Αποστήτω απο AOLKLAS πὰς O ὀνομάζων το 
 
 foundation of God;’ i.e. laid by Him,’ 
 not so much a possessive gen. as a gen. 
 auctoris or originis, see Scheuerl. Synt. 
 § 17. I, p.125, compared with p. 115, 
 and with notes on 1 Thess. i. 6. It is 
 unnecessary to recount the different 
 and very arbitrary interpretations 
 which this expression has received. 
 The only satisfactory interpr. is that 
 adopted by Est. 1, Tirin. (ap. Pol. 
 Syn.),and now nearly all modern com- 
 mentators, according to which the 
 θεμέλ. τοῦ Θεοῦ is the Church,—not 
 merely the orepeal ψυχαί (Chrys.), the 
 ἀπερίτρεπτοι (Gicum.) viewed sepa- 
 rately, and in contrast with the sub- 
 verted (comp. Neander, Planting, Vol. 
 I. p. 492 Bohn), but collectively, the 
 ἐκκλησία ὑπὸ Θεοῦ τεθεμελιωμένη. It 
 is here called a θεμέλιος, not ‘per me- 
 tonymiam’ 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 fu- 
 ture οἰκοδομὴ rests (comp. Eph. li. 20 
 sq.); and (b) to convey the idea of its 
 firmness, strength, and solidity; comp. 
 especially 1 Tim. ili. 15. On θεμέλ. 
 compare notes on 1 Tim. vi.19. No- 
 tices of the various aberrant interpre- 
 tations will be found in De W. in loc. 
 ἔχων] ‘seeing it hath;’ part. with a 
 very faint causal force, illustrating 
 the previous declaration; comp. Do- 
 nalds. Gr. § 615. τὴν σφραγῖδα 
 ταύτην] ‘this seal, i.e. ‘this impres- 
 sion, inscription;’ 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. 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 inscriptions, the first ἔγνω 
 
 «.7.A. seems certainly to involve an 
 allusion to Numb. xvi. 5, ἔγνω ὁ Θεὸς 
 τοὺς ὄντας αὐτοῦ [Heb. fut. Hiph. vai 
 and is in the language of grave conso- 
 lation, John x. 14, 27; ‘He knoweth 
 (not necessarily ‘novitamanter,’Beng., 
 comp. notes on Gal. iv. 9) who are His 
 true servants, and will separate them 
 from those who are not.’ On the prac- 
 tical aspects of this declaration, comp. 
 Taylor, Life of Chr. 11. 13, disc. 16, 
 and the brief but consolatory remarks 
 of Jackson, Creed, x11. 6. 3. The 
 second ᾿Αποστ. «.t.A. possibly has 
 continued allusion to Numb. xvi., see 
 ver. 26, ἀποσχίσθητε ἀπὸ τῶν σκηνῶν 
 τῶν ἀνθρ. τῶν σκληρῶν τούτων, though 
 expressed in a wider and more general 
 form (comp. Isaiah 11]. 11), and is in 
 the language of warning. 
 
 nN 0 
 
 ὁ ὀνομάζων] ‘who nameth;’ not 1:22 
 [qui vocat] Syr., ‘qui invocat,’ Wahl, 
 but ‘qui nominat, Vulg. (misquoted 
 by Beza), Goth.,—scil. as his Lord 
 and God, ‘qui rogatus cujus sit disci- 
 pline Christum nominat ut magis- 
 trum,’ Grot.; comp. Isaiah xxvi. 13, 
 Κύριε ἐκτός cou ἄλλον οὐκ οἴδαμεν, τὸ 
 ὀνομά σου ὀνομάζομεν. ἀδικίας] ‘ wn- 
 righteousness ;’ the opposite οὗ δικαιο- 
 σύνη, Aristot. Rhet. 1. 9. 7, joined by 
 Plato, Gorg. p. 477 6, with σύμπασα 
 ψυχῆς πονηρία. In its Christian usage 
 and application it is similar in mean- 
 ing to, but of wider reference than 
 ἀνομία, comp. 1 John ν. 173 " ἀδικία 
 de quadcunque improbitate dicitur, 
 quatenus τῷ δικαίῳ repugnat,’ Titt- 
 mann, Synon, 1. p. 48; as δικαιοσύνη 
 is συναγωγὴ καὶ ἕνωσις πάντων τῶν 
 καλών καὶ ἀγαθῶν (Chrys. Caten. in 
 Job. 1.), 50 ἀδικία is the union and ac- 
 cumulation of all that is the reverse; 
 comp. notes on Tit. ii. 14. 
 
190 
 
 20 ὄνομα Κυρίου. 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Β. 
 
 ’ , A S08 ? » , 
 ἐν μεγάλη δὲ οἰκίᾳ οὐκ ἔστιν μόνον 
 
 , “ ΟῚ μας ‘ ‘ , ais , 
 σκεύη χρυσά Kal ἀργυρᾶ, ἀλλα καὶ ξύλινα και ooTpakiva, 
 
 ‘ a ‘ “ ‘ a A ΠῚ “ , ἽΝ 9 
 21 kat ἃ μὲν εἰς τιμὴν a δὲ εἰς ατιμιαν' εαν οὐν τις 
 
 J ’ e 4 ᾽ ‘ , "» “ ’ , 
 ἐκκαθάρη εαὐτον απὸ τούτων, εσται σκεῦος εἰς τιμὴν, 
 
 20. Stiscertainly πού “ἴον (Bloomf.), 
 but, with its proper antithetical force, 
 notices a tacit objection which the im- 
 plied 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 to be really in 
 accordance with the counsels and will 
 of God; ‘the Church is indeed intrin- 
 sically holy, but in a large house,’ dc. ; 
 comp. notes on Gal. iii. 11. The con- 
 nexion 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 invisible, in the 
 present verse more as a visible commu- 
 nity: on the true import and proper 
 application of these terms, see Jack- 
 son, Creed, x11. 7.6, and Field, Of the 
 Church, τ. 10, Pp. 14. 
 ἐν μεγάλῃ οἰκίᾳ] ‘in a large house ;’ 
 observe the epithet, and its position, 
 Winer, Gr. § 59. 2, p. 464. The olxla 
 is not the world (Chrys., Theoph.), 
 but, in continuation of the previous 
 image, the visible Church of Christ 
 (Cypr. Ep. 55); the Apostle changes 
 however the term θεμέλιος, which 
 marked the inward and essential cha- 
 racter of the Church, into οἰκία, which 
 serves better to portray it in its visible 
 and outward aspect. The Church was 
 μεγάλη, it was like a net of wide 
 sweep (σαγήνη, Matth. xiii. 47) that 
 included in it something of every kind; 
 see especially, Field, Of the Church, 
 I. 7 8q., Ρ. 11 8q., Pearson, Creed, 
 Art. 1x. Vol. 1. p. 405 (ed. Burton), 
 and Hooker, Eccl. Pol. 1. 1. 8. 
 σκεύη χρυσᾶ «.T.A.] ‘vessels of gold 
 and silver,’ By this and the following 
 
 metaphorical expressions the genuine 
 and spurious members of the Church 
 are represented as forming two distinet 
 classes, each of which, as the terms 
 χρυσᾶ, ἀργυρᾶ, and again ξύλ. and 
 ὀστράκ., seem to imply, may involve 
 different degrees and gradations; the 
 former the σκεύη els τιμήν, who are 
 called by a ‘vocatio interna,’ and are 
 united in heart to the Church; the 
 latter the σκεύη els ἀτιμίαν, who are 
 called by a‘ vocatio mere externa,’ and 
 who pertain not to the ‘compages do- 
 miis’ (August. de Bapt. vit. 99 [li],— 
 a chapter that will repay consulting), 
 but belong to it merely outwardly and 
 in name; comp. Jackson, Creed, χα. 7. 
 1 sq., Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 492 
 (Bohn), and on the whole subject, esp. 
 the great work of Field, supr. cit., 
 particularly Book 1, 6—11. Thus 
 then the τιμὴ and ἀτιμία have no re- 
 ference to the honour or dishonour 
 that redound to the οἰκία or to the 
 οἰκοδεσπότης (comp. Mack, Matth.), 
 but, as in Rom. ix. 21 (see Meyer in 
 loc.), simply appertain to, and quali- 
 tatively characterize, the vessels them- 
 selves. Moller (p. 106) justly finds in 
 the image being thus left for interpre- 
 tation to Timothy’s spiritual discern- 
 ment (see ver. 14.8q.) a mark of genu- 
 ineness; a forger would have hardly 
 left it unexpanded and unexplained. 
 21. ἐὰν οὖν τις K.7.A.] An encou- 
 raging and consolatory exhortation, 
 general in form, yet not without spe- 
 cial reference to Timothy; ἐάν τις τε 
 ‘si ergo quis, verbi gratia, Timo- 
 theus,’ Beng. ἐκκαθάρῃ éavr. | 
 ‘shall have purged himself,’ ‘expur- 
 garit se,’ Beza; not παντελῶς καθάρῃ, 
 
HT 50: ΟἿ 22. 
 
 197 
 
 ~ “ ΕΣ 
 ἡγιασμένον, εὔχρηστον τῷ δεσπύτη, εἰς σαν εργον 
 
 " Ν e , 
 ἀγαθὸν ἡτοιμασμένον. 
 
 Tas δὲ νεωτερικὰς ἐπιθυ- 22 
 
 , a , A , , ? U ey 
 μιας φεῦγε, δίωκε δὲ δικαιοσύνην, σπιστιν, ayaTny, ειρηνὴν 
 
 Chrys., but (in sensu pregnanti) ‘pur- 
 gando sese exierit,’ Beng.,—the ἐκ re- 
 ferring to those whose communion was 
 to be left, comp. ver. 19, ἀποστήτω. 
 The verb éxxa@. occurs again in 1 Cor, 
 v. 7, where the force of the prep., in 
 allusion to the ‘purging-out’ from the 
 housesof the παλαιὰ ζύμη (see Schoettg. 
 Hor. Hebr. Vol. 1. 598), is fully appa- 
 rent. Theod. (comp. Chrys.) calls at- 
 tention to τῆς γνώμης ἐξηρτημένην τὴν 
 τοῦ κρείττονος αἵρεσιν, here fully con- 
 veyed by the act. verb with the re- 
 flexive pronoun (Beng.), and denied in 
 a manner very unconvincing by Beza. 
 On the great practical principle in- 
 volved in this verse, —‘no communion 
 with impugners of fundamentals,’ see 
 the sound remarks of Waterland, 
 Doctr.of Trin.ch. tv. Vol. 11. p. 456 54. 
 ἀπὸ τούτων seems clearly to refer to 
 ἃ eis ἀτιμίαν, i.e. the persons included 
 in that simile,—not to the βεβήλους 
 κενοφωνίας mentioned in ver. 16 (Est.), 
 nor to ἀδικίας, ver. tg (Coray), which 
 latter seems a very far-fetched refer- 
 ence. In using the terms ἃ els dri, 
 the thoughts of the Apostle were in 
 all probability dwelling on the Wevdo- 
 διδάσκαλοι to whom he had been re- 
 cently alluding. εἰς τιμὴν 
 is not to be connected with ἡγιασμένον, 
 Syr., Vulg., Chrys., Lachm., Leo (who 
 however adopts in his text a contrary 
 punctuation), but, asthe previouscon- 
 nexion in ver. 20 obviously suggests, 
 immediately with σκεῦος, the three 
 defining clauses more fully explaining 
 the meaning of the term, 
 
 εὔχρηστον) ‘serviceable,’ ch. iv. 11, 
 Philem. 11; dpa ἐκεῖνα ἄχρηστα, εἰ καί 
 τινα χρείαν ἐπιτελεῖ; Chrys. The εὐ- 
 χρηστία, as the following clause shows, 
 
 is ‘per opera bona, quibus et sue et 
 aliorum saluti ac necessitati ad Dei 
 gloriam subserviant,’ Estius. 
 
 εἰς πᾶν ἔργον k.t.A.] ‘prepared for 
 every good work;’ eis, as usual, refer- 
 ring to the ultimate end and objects 
 contemplated in the preparation ; 
 comp. Rev. ix. 7, and Winer, Gr. § 49. 
 a,p.354- Thoughopportunities might 
 not always present themselves for an 
 exercise of the ἑτοιμασία, yet it was 
 there against the time of need; κἀν 
 μὴ πράττῃ, GAN ὅμως ἐπιτήδειόν ἐστι, 
 δεκτικόν, Chrys. 
 
 22. Ἰὰς δὲ νεωτερικὰς ἐπιθ.1 ‘ But 
 the lusts of youth,’ ‘juvenilia deside- 
 ria,’ Vulg., Clarom. ; certainly not ‘cu- 
 piditates novarum rerum,’ Salmas., 
 nor ‘acres, vehementes, cupid.,’ Loes- 
 ner, Obs. p. 417; see esp. Pearson, 
 Vind. Ign. (ad lect.), Vol. 1. p. 7 sq. 
 (A.-C. Libr.). The previous indirect 
 exhortation is now continued in a di- 
 rect form both negatively and posi- 
 tively: the δὲ (which must not be 
 omitted, as Conyb.) marks the con- 
 trast between vewr. ἐπιθ. and ἑτοιμα- 
 σία els πᾶν x.T.X. The ἐπιθυμίαι do 
 not merely refer to πορνεία, but, as 
 the Greek commentators remark, in- 
 clude πᾶσαν ἐπιθυμίαν ἄτοπον (Chrys. ), 
 τρυφήν, γέλωτος ἀμετρίαν, δόξαν κενήν, 
 καὶ τὰ τούτοις προσόμοια (Theod.), in 
 ὃ word, allthelusts 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 τ Tim, iv. 12. δίωκε] ‘follow 
 after. So, with the same subst., 
 1 Tim, vi. 11; comp. also Rom. ix. 
 203, 231. Xl 1.5, ΣΙΝ 19,8 Core xiv. 1, 
 
198 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΦΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ B. 
 
 μετὰ τῶν ἐπικαλουμένων τὸν Κύριον ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας. 
 
 23 Tas δὲ μωρὰς καὶ ἀπαιδεύτους ζητήσεις παραιτοῦ, εἰδὼς 
 
 24 ὅτι γεννῶσιν μάχας" δοῦλον δὲ Κυρίου οὐ δεῖ μάχεσθαι, 
 
 > U 9 f 
 ἀλλὰ ἤπιον εἶναι πρὸς πάντας, διδακτικόν, ἀνεξίκακον, 
 
 ι Thess. v. 15 [Heb. xii. 14], where 
 διώκειν [Heb. I Prov. xxi. 21, 
 Psalm xxxiy. 15] is used by St Paul 
 in the same characteristic way with 
 abstract substantives; the correlative 
 term is καταλαμβάνειν, Rom. ix. 30, 
 Phil. iii. 12. On δικαιοσ. and πίστις, 
 see notes on 1 Tim. vi. 11: ὅταν λέγῃ 
 δικαιοσύνην, νοεῖ ὅλας Tas ἀρετάς, Coray. 
 εἰρήνην must be joined with μετὰ τῶν 
 ἐπικαλ., not with δίωκε, Heydenr. : 
 comp. Heb. xii. 14, εἰρήνην διώκετε 
 μετὰ πάντων. It denotes not merely 
 ‘peace’ in the ordinary sense, i.e. ab- 
 sence of contention, but ‘concordiam 
 illam spiritualem’ (Caly.) which unites 
 together all who call upon (1 Cor. i. 2) 
 and who love their Lord; comp. Rom. 
 x. 12, Eph, iv. 3. ἐκ καθαρᾶς 
 καρδ. (see notes on 1 Tim. i. 5) be- 
 longs 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. Ἰὰς δὲ μωρὰς k.t.A.] ‘The 
 foolish and ignorant questions which 
 the false teachers especially loved to 
 entertain and propound;’ comp. Tit. 
 iii. 9. ἀπαιδεύτους (a ar. λεγόμ. 
 in N.T.) is not exactly ‘sine disci- 
 plina,’ Vulg. (comp. Syr.), but, in ac- 
 cordance with its usual lexical mean- 
 ing (Suid. ἀνόητος, Hesych. ἀμαθής), 
 ‘indoctus,’ and thence, as here, ‘ inep- 
 tus,’ ‘insulsus,’ Goth. ‘ dvaléns’ [cog- 
 nate with ‘dull’]; comp. Prov. viii. 
 5, xv. 14, and esp. Ecelus, x. 3, where 
 βασιλεὺς ἀπαίδευτος stands in a kind 
 of contrast to κριτὴς σοφός, ver. 13 
 comp. Winer, Gr. § 16. 3, p. 88. 
 ζητήσεις] ‘ questions (of controversy); 
 
 see notes ont Tim. i. 4. On παραιτοῦ 
 see notes ib. iv. 7. εἰδὼς ὅτι k.T.A.] 
 ‘knowing (as thou dost) that they en- 
 gender contentions ;’ comp. 1 Tim. vi. 
 4, λογομαχίας ἐξ ὧν γίνεται... ἔρεις, 
 Tit. ili. 9, μάχας νομικάς. The use of 
 μάχη in such applications is more ex- 
 tended than that of πόλεμος ; ‘ dici- 
 tur autem μάχεσθαι de quacunque 
 contentione etiam animorum etiamsi 
 non ad verbera et cedes [πόλεμον 
 pervenerit,’ Tittm. Synon. 1. p. 66: 
 comp. Eustath. on Hom. 1]. 1. 177, 
 μάχεται μέν τις Kal λόγοις, ws Kal ἡ 
 λογομαχία δηλοῖ: see also Trench, 
 Synon. Part τι. § 36. The terms are 
 joined in James iv. 1, but there the 
 conflicts are not, as here, upon abs- 
 tract questions between rival teachers 
 or rival sects, but are about the rights 
 of property, compare ver. 2, 3. It 
 need scarcely be said that μάχη has 
 no connexion with AK- or αἰχμή (Pape, 
 Worterb. s.v.); the most plausible de- 
 rivation seems Sanscr. maksh, ‘irasci’ 
 (x=ksh), see Benfey, Wurzellex. Vol. 
 Il. p. 42; ‘si recte suspicamur, pro- 
 pria ab initio illi verbo fuit notio con- 
 tentionis seu impetus quo quis se in 
 alium infert,’ Tittmann, Synon. l.c. 
 24. ϑοῦλον Kup.] ‘a servant (so 
 Copt.) of the Lord,’—not merely in a 
 general reference (comp. Eph. vi. 6, 
 1 Pet. ii. 16), but, as the context 
 seems to require, with a more special 
 reference to Timothy’s office as a 
 bishop and evangelist, τὸν ἐπίσκοπον 
 λέγει, Coray ; comp. Tit. i, 1, James 
 εν alee 2 ἤπιον] ‘gentle,’ 
 ‘mild’ (‘mitem,’ Clarom., not very 
 happily changed into ‘mansuetum,’ 
 Vulg.), both in words and demeanour ; 
 
IT. 55--. 6. 
 
 199 
 
 . of ὃ , 4 ? ὃ , , 
 εν πραύτητι παιθεύοντα τοὺς ἀντι ιατιθεμένους, μή ποτε 25 
 
 ’ ’ - e ‘ , cD eae ee ἢ τ , ‘ 
 δῴη αὐτοῖς ὁ Θεὸς μετάνοιαν εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας, καὶ 26 
 
 only found here and (if we adopt the 
 reading of Rec., Tisch.)in 1 Thess. ii. 7, 
 δυνάμενοι ἐν βάρει εἶναι... ἐγενήθημεν 
 ἤπιοι. “Hos (derived probably from 
 "ENO, comp, ἤπια φάρμακα, Hom, 1]. 
 Iv. 218, al., with primary ref. perhaps 
 to healing by incantation) appears to 
 denote an outward mildness and gen- 
 tleness, especially in bearing with 
 others: “πρᾷος (when not in its speci- 
 fic scripturalsense,comp. notes onEph. 
 iv. 2) ipsam animi lenitatem indicat, 
 ἤπιος qui hance lenitatem in aliis feren- 
 dis monstrat,’ Tittm. Synon. τ. 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. 111. 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 will- 
 ing ἀμάχως προσφέρειν τὰ θεῖα παιδεύ- 
 ματα, Theod. ἀννεξίκακον] ‘patient 
 of wrong,’ ‘forbearing :’ ἀνεξικακία, ἡ 
 ἀνοχὴ τοῦ κακοῦ, Hesych.; comp. Wis- 
 dom ii. 19, where it is in connexion 
 with ἐπιείκεια, and see Dorvill. Charit. 
 VIII. 4, p. 616. 
 
 25. πραὕὔτητι] ‘meckness:’ see notes 
 on Gal. v. 23, and on Eph. iv. 2. Ἔν 
 πραὔτ. is obviously not to be connect- 
 ed with dvegix.,asTynd., Cran., Gen., 
 but with the part., defining the man- 
 ner in which the παιδεύειν is to be 
 conducted. τοὺς ἀντιδιατιθεμένους] 
 ‘those who are contending against him ;’ 
 ‘those that are of different opinions 
 from us,’ Hamm., ‘qui diversam sen- 
 tentiam fovent,’ Tittmann,—who dis- 
 tinguishes between ἀντιδ., the perhaps 
 stronger ἀντιλέγοντες, Tit. i, 9, and 
 the more decided ἀντίδικοι ; see Synon. 
 
 1. p. 9. The allusion is thus not so 
 much to positively and wilfully hereti- 
 cal teachers, as to the νοσοῦντας περὶ 
 ζητήσεις (τ Tim. vi. 4), those of weak 
 faith and morbid love of ἀντιθέσεις 
 (Theod.) and controversial questions. 
 The definite heretic was to be ad- 
 monished, and in cases of stubborn- 
 ness was to be left to himself (Tit. 11], 
 10); such opponents as the present 
 were to be dealt with gently, and to be 
 won back to the truth: comp. Nean- 
 der, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 343, note 
 (Bohn). μή ποτε k.7.X.] ‘if per- 
 chance at any time God might grant to 
 them,’ &c.; ‘in the hopes that,’ &c., 
 see Green, Gramm. p.83. Μὴ is here 
 used, somewhat irregularly, in its du- 
 bitative sense; ποτέ, with which it is 
 united, is not otiose, but ‘adfert suam 
 indefiniti temporis significationem’ 
 (Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 674), and 
 while marking clearly the complete 
 contingency 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, περὶ ὧν δυνάμεθα 
 σαφῶς ἀποφήνασθαι, καὶ ὑπὲρ ὧν πεπεί- 
 σμεθα, ὅτι οὐδ᾽ ἂν ὁτιοῦν γένηται μετα- 
 στήσονται, Chrys. The optative δῴη 
 (see notes on Eph. i. 17), with ACD! 
 FGN!}, al., is not here treated simply 
 as a subjunctive (Wiesing.), but seems 
 used to convey an expression of hope 
 and subjective possibility; comp. Wi- 
 ner, Gr.§ 41.2.¢,p.260. On the con- 
 struction of the dubitative μή, see the 
 good article in Rost u. Palm, Lez. 
 s.v. 0, Vol. 11. p. 226, and on μήποτε, 
 comp. Viger, Idiot. p. 457, but ob- 
 serve that the comment is not by Her- 
 mann, as cited by Alf. in loc. 
 
 μετάνοιαν] ‘repentance,’ — certainly 
 not ‘conversion from paganism to 
 
140 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕῸΟΝ B. 
 
 ἀνανήψωσιν ἐκ τῆς τοῦ διαβόλου παγίδος, ἐζωγρημένοι 
 
 « ᾽ ᾿] ΄“ 9. ‘ , , , 
 ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ, εἰς τὸ ἐκείνου θέλημα. 
 
 Christianity’ (Reuss, Théol. Chrét. 1v. 
 16, Vol. 1. p. 163), but ‘poeniten- 
 tiam’ in its usual and proper sense, 
 501]. an ἀπόστασιν ἀπ᾽ ἀδικίας and an 
 ἐπιστροφὴν πρὸς Θεόν (see esp. Taylor 
 on Repent. τι. 1), a change of heart 
 wrought by God’s grace within. It 
 may be observed that peravoéw (only 
 2 Cor, xii. 21) and μετάνοια (only 
 Rom, ii. 4, 2 Cor. vii. g, 10) occur less 
 frequently in St Paul’s Epp. than 
 we might otherwise have imagined, 
 being not seldom partially replaced by 
 καταλλάσσω and καταλλαγή, terms 
 peculiar to the Apostle; see Usteri, 
 Lehrb, τι. τ. 1, p. 102, and comp. Tay- 
 lor, on Repent. τι. 2. 11. 
 ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθ.1 ‘full knowledge of 
 the truth,’ i.e. of gospel-truth, Beza: 
 the Gospel is the Truth κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν, 
 it contains all the principles and ele- 
 ments of practical truth; see Reuss, 
 Théol. Chrét. tv. 8, Vol. um. p. 82. 
 The omission of the article before ad. 
 is due to the principle of correlation, 
 the article before ἐπίγν. being omitted 
 in consequence of the prep.; see Mid- 
 dleton, Art. 111. 3. 7, p. 49 (ed. Rose). 
 26. Kal ἀνανήψωσιν κ.τ.λ.} ‘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 difti- 
 culty of this verse rests entirely in 
 the construction. Of the various in- 
 terpretations, three deserve considera- 
 tion; (a) that of Auth., Vulg., Syr. 
 (appy.), followed by De W., Huth., 
 Alf., and the majority of modern com- 
 mentators, according to which αὐτοῦ 
 and ἐκείνου both refer to τοῦ διαβόλου; 
 (0) that of Wetst., Beng., al., accord- 
 ing to which αὐτοῦ is referred to the 
 δοῦλος Kup., ἐκείνου to God, and étw- 
 γρημένοι to the spiritual capture and 
 
 reclaiming of sinners, Luke v. 10, 
 
 comp. 2 Cor. x. 5; (c) that of Beza, 
 Grot., Hammond, and appy. Clarom. 
 (‘eo...ipsius’), according to which ἀναν. 
 οὐ παγίδος is to be connected with εἰς 
 τὸ ἐκ θέλ.; αὐτοῦ referring to the 
 devil, ἐκείνου to God, and éfwyp. ὑπ᾽ 
 αὐτοῦ being an explanatory clause to 
 avay. ἐκ may. (almost, ‘though held 
 captive,’ &c.), marking more distinctly 
 the state preceding the ἀνάνηψις. Of 
 these (a) labours under the almost in- 
 surmountable objection of referring 
 the two pronouns to the same subject, 
 esp. when a few verses below, ch. iii. 
 9, they are used correctly. De W. and 
 his followers imperfectly quote Plato, 
 Cratyl. p. 430E, aS an instance of a 
 similar use of the pronouns, but if the 
 passage be properly cited, e.g. προσεὰ- 
 θόντα ἀνδρί τῳ...δεῖξαι αὐτῷ, av μὲν 
 τύχῃ ἐκείνου εἰκόνα, ἂν δὲ τύχῃ γυναι- 
 κός, it will be seen that the antithesis 
 of the last clause (omitted by De W.) 
 suggests some reason for the irregular 
 introduction of the more emphatic 
 pronoun ; the other instances referred 
 to in Kiihner, Gr. ὃ 629 (add Bern- 
 hardy, Synt. ΥἹ. 5, p. 277), in which 
 ἐκεῖν. 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 rst, ζωγρηθέντες 
 (as indeed it is used by Theoph.), 
 which marks the act (comp. δῴη a- 
 vavny.), would certainly have been 
 used rather than the perf. part. which 
 marks the state: and 2ndly, αὐτοῦ is 
 separated from its subject by two in- 
 terposed substantives, 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᾽ avrov; this however may 
 
PRD? Fr. 141 
 
 In the last days there 
 shall be every form of 
 vice. Avoid all exam- 
 ples of such ; they ever 
 strive to seduce others 
 and thwart the truth. 
 
 Τοῦτο δὲ γίνωσκε, ὅτι ἐν ἐσχάταις IIT. 
 
 , 
 ἡμέραις ἐνστήσονται καιροὶ χαλεποί. 
 
 I, γίνωσκε] Lachm. reads γινώσκετε with AFG; 3 mss.; Boern., Aith.-Pol. ; 
 Aug, (Tisch. ed. 1, Huther). Being a more difficult reading, it has some claim 
 on our attention; as howeyer the reading of the text is so strongly supported— 
 viz. by CDEKLN; nearly all mss.; Syr., Vulg., Clarom., Sangerm., Aug., 
 Copt., Aith.-Platt, Goth., al.; several Greek and Latin Ff. (Rec., Griesb., De 
 Wette, Alf., Wordsw.)—and as it is possible that the following ὅτι may have given 
 rise to the reading [γίνωσκε ὅτι being changed by an ignorant or careless writer 
 into γινώσκετε], it would seem that the easier and more natural reading must 
 
 certainly be retained. 
 
 be diluted by observing that the simile 
 involved in παγὶς did seem to require 
 a semi-parenthetical illustration. As 
 then (c) yields a very good sense, as 
 avay...es is similar and symmetrical 
 to μετάνοιαν els ἐπίγν., as the force of 
 the perfect is unimpairedand the ‘pro- 
 prietas utriusque pronominis’ (Beza) is 
 thus fully preserved, we adopt, with 
 but little hesitation, the last interpre- 
 tation: see Hammond in loc., and 
 Scholef. Hints, p. 123. We now no- 
 tice a few individual expressions. 
 ἀνανήφειν (‘resipiscere, Vulg.) a 
 ἅπαξ λεγόμ. in the N.T. (comp. how- 
 ever ἐκνήφειν, 1 Cor. xv. 34), implies 
 ‘a recovering from drunkenness to a 
 state of former sobriety, ‘crapulam 
 excutere’ (Porphyr. de Abst. Iv. 20, 
 ἐκ τῆς μέθης ἀνανῆψαι), and thence me- 
 taphorically ‘ad se redire,’ e.g. ἐκ τῶν 
 θρήνων, Joseph, Antiq. VI. 11. 10; see 
 further exx. in Wetst., Kypke, and 
 Elsner in loc. There isappy.a slight 
 confusion of metaphor, but it may be 
 observed that avav. ἐκ παγίδος is really 
 a ‘constructio pregnans,’ scil. ‘come 
 to soberness and escape from,’ see 
 Winer, Gr. § 66. 2, p. 547- 
 
 τοῦ διαβόλου] See 1 Tim, iii. 7; and 
 on the use of the term διάβ., see notes 
 on Eph. iv. 27. {wypetv is properly 
 ‘to capture alive’ (ζωγρεῖ" ξώντας λαμ- 
 βάνει, Suid.), e.g. Polyb. Hist. 11. 
 84. 10, δεόμενοι ζωγρεῖν in contrast 
 
 with διαφθείρειν, and with ἀποκτείνειν, 
 Thucyd. Hist. 11. 92, al.; thence ‘to 
 capture,’ in an ethical sense, Luke v. 
 10,—but even there not without some 
 allusive reference to the primarymean- 
 ing; see Meyer in loc. In the LXX. 
 it is used several times in the sense of 
 ‘in vita servare’ (Heb. 1°), Numb. 
 XXxi.15, Josh. vi. 25, al. ; comp.Hom. 
 Tl. x. 575. and see Suicer, Thesaur. 
 8. Vv. Vol. ας p. 1302. 
 
 Carter II. τ. Τοῦτο δέ] The δὲ 
 is not μεταβατικόν, but continues the 
 subject implied in ch. ii. 26 in an 
 antithetical 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. 11. 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 1 Tim. iv. 1. It 
 would seem however clear, from ver. 
 5, that the evil was beginning to work 
 even in the days of Timothy; see 
 Bull, Serm. xv. p. 276 (Oxford, 1844). 
 On the omission of the article, com- 
 
142 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕῸΟΝ Β. 
 
 2 ἔσονται γὰρ οἱ ἄνθρωποι φίλαυτοι, φιλάργυροι, ἀλαζόνες, 
 
 ὑπερήφανοι, βλάσφημοι, γονεῦσιν ἀπειθεῖς, ἀχάριστοι, 
 
 pare Winer, Gr. § 19. 1, p. 113, Where 
 a list is given of similar words found 
 frequently anarthrous. 
 
 ἐνστήσονται)] ‘will ensue,’ ‘will set 
 in; not ‘imminebunt,’ but ‘ade- 
 
 runt.’ Beng., e2b [venient] Syr., 
 
 i.e. will become present (évecrdres); 
 see notes on Gal. i. 4. De Wette 
 objects to Vulg. ‘instabunt ’ [‘ adve- 
 nient,’Clarom. ], but ‘instare’ appears 
 frequently used in Latin to denote 
 present time, compare Cie. Tusc. Iv. 6. 
 11, 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 Apo- 
 stle’s prophetic knowledge that the 
 eyil which was more definitely to work 
 in times farther future was now be- 
 ginning to develop itself even in the 
 early days of the Gospel; ἐστὶν εὑρεῖν 
 ἐν ἡμῖν ἃ προηγόρευσεν ὁ θεῖος ἀπόστο- 
 dos, Theod.: 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 διαβάλ- 
 λὼν λέγει οὐδὲ τοὺς καιρούς, ἀλλὰ τοὺς 
 ἀνθρώπους τοὺς τότε ὄντας, Chrys. ; 
 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 
 temporal dangers of the days in which 
 he was living; comp, 2 Macc. iv. 16, 
 περιέσχεν αὐτοὺς χαλεπὴ περίστασις. 
 
 2. οἱ ἄνθρωποι] ‘men, generally :’ 
 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;? a am 
 λεγόμ. in the N.T., defined by Theod.- 
 Mops. as οἱ πάντα πρὸς τὴν ἑαυτῶν 
 ὠφέλειαν ποιοῦντες. It may be ob- 
 served that φιλαυτία properly occu- 
 pies this προεδρία in the enumeration, 
 being the represser of ἀγάπη (τὴν 
 ay. συστέλλει Kal εἰς βραχὺ συνάγει, 
 Chrys.), the true root of all evil, and 
 the essence of all sin; see esp. Miiller, 
 Docir. of Sin, 1. τ᾿ 2, Vol. po eae 
 sq. (Clark), and foran able delineation 
 of its nature and specific forms, Bar- 
 row, Serm, LXx—xxin. Vol. 111. p. 333 
 sq.,and Waterland, Serm, ur. Vol. v. 
 p. 446 sq. On ¢gidapyvpa, which here 
 very appropriately follows φίλαυτοι 
 (φιλαργυρία θυγάτηρ τῆς φιλαυτίας, 
 Coray), comp. notes on 1 Tim. vi. το. 
 ἀλαζόνες, ὑπερήφανοι] ‘ boastful, 
 haughty,’ Rom. i. 30, where ὑβρισταὶ 
 isalsoadded, The distinction between 
 these terms (‘ ἀλαζον εἰα in verbis magis 
 est ostentatio, ὑπερηφανία superbia 
 cum aliorum contemtu et contumelia 
 conjuncta,’ Tittm.) is investigated by 
 Trench, Synon. § 29, and Tittmann, 
 Synon. τ. p. 73. The derivation of the 
 latter word is to a certain extent pre- 
 
 served in the Syr. (S03 [alti], the 
 
 Lat. ‘superbi,’ andthe Engl. ‘haughty;’ 
 see notes to Zransl. In the case of 
 the former word, the transl. of the 
 Vulg. ‘elati’ [‘fastidiosi,’ Clarom. ], is 
 judiciously changed by Beza into ‘glo- 
 riosi.’ βλάσφημοι) 
 ‘blasphemers,’ or ‘ evil speakers,’ κατη- 
 yoplats χαίροντες, Theod.-Mops.; most 
 probably the former, both ‘vi ordinis’ 
 (Caloy.), and because διάβολοι follows 
 
MEAs ΓΟ, 42 
 
 145 
 
 een 2 9 ” ὃ ὃ , , a ον 
 ανοσιοι, ἀστοργοι, ἀσπόονοοι, ιάβολοι, ἀκρατεῖς, ανήμεροι, 3 
 
 ἀφιλάγαθοι, προδόται, προπετεῖς, τετυφωμένοι, φιλήδο- 4 
 
 in ver. 3; comp. notes on1 Tim. i. 13. 
 The ὑπερηφανία, a vice of the mind 
 (see Trench, l. c.), develops itself still 
 more fearfully in ὕβρις against God ; 
 ὁ yap κατὰ ἀνθρώπων ἐπαιρόμενος εὐ- 
 κόλως καὶ κατὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, Chrys. The 
 transition to the following clause is 
 thus also very natural and appropri- 
 ate; they alike reviled their heavenly 
 Father and disobeyed their earthly pa- 
 rents. ἀχάριστοι (Luke 
 vi. 35) naturally follows; ingratitude 
 must necessarily be found where there 
 is ἀπείθεια to parents; ὁ δὲ γονεῖς μὴ 
 τιμῶν καὶ πρὸς πάντας ἔσται ἀχάριστος, 
 Theoph. ἀνόσιοι] See 
 notes on 1 Tim. i. 9. 
 
 3. ἄστοργοι] ‘without natural affec- 
 tions ;’ δὶς λεγόμ., here and Rom, i. 31; 
 περὶ οὐδένα σχέσιν ἔχοντες, Theod.- 
 Mops., μὴ ἀγαπῶντές τινα, Hesych., 
 but most exactly, Gicum., ἄφιλοι πρὸς 
 τοὺς olketLous,—destitute of love towards 
 those for whom nature herself claims 
 it. Στέργω, a word of uncertain 
 derivation [possibly connected with 
 orep-, and Sanscer. sprih, ‘ desiderare,’ 
 Pott, Htym. Forsch, Vol. 1. p. 284], 
 denotes primarily and properly the 
 love between parents and children 
 (compare Plato, Legg. v1. Ὁ. 754 8; 
 Xen. Gicon. vit. 24), and thence be- 
 tween 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., except in Ecclus. xxvil. 17, 
 στέρξον φίλον (Ecclus. vill. 20 is more 
 than doubtful). ἄσπονδοι] 
 ‘implacable ;’ a ἅπ. Neyou.,—Rom. 1. 
 31 (Rec.) being of very doubtful autho- 
 rity. The difference between ἄσπονδοι 
 and ἀσύνθετοι (Rom. i. 31), as stated 
 by Tittmann, Synon. 1. p. 75, ‘ ἀσύνθ. 
 
 qui non ineunt pacta, dor. qui redire 
 in gratiam nolunt,’ is lexically doubt- 
 ful, 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. 
 ii.8, 10; Demosth. de Fals. Leg. p. 383, 
 connected with dard@unros) ; ἄσπονδος 
 one who will not enter upon them at 
 all; see Trench, Synon. Part τι. § 2. 
 This and the foregoing epithet are 
 omitted in Syr. διάβολοι] 
 Comp. notes on 1 Tim. iii. 11. 
 ἀκρατεῖς] ‘incontinent,’ ἥττους τῶν 
 παθῶν, Theod.-Mops., ‘intemperantes,’ 
 Beza; dm. \eyou.: the opposite éyxpa- 
 τὴς occurs in Tit. i. 8, the subst. axpa- 
 ola (Lobeck, Phryn. p. 524) in Matt. 
 XXill. 25, 1 Cor. vil. 5. 
 
 ἀνήμεροι] ‘savage,’ ‘brutal,’ lite- 
 rally ‘untamed,’ ἅπ. λεγόμ.; θήρια 
 ἀντὶ ἀνθρώπων, Theoph., comp. Syr. 
 
 AN Cee y 
 bps5 [feri]: ‘ungentle’ (Peile) 
 seems far too mild a translation, w- 
 porns and ἀπήνεια (Chrys., comp. 
 CGicum.) are rather the characteristics 
 ἀφιλάγαθοι] 
 ‘haters of good,’ ἐχθροὶ παντὸς ἀγαθοῦ, 
 Cicum., Theoph.; another az. λεγόμ.: 
 the opposite φιλάγαθοι occurs Tit. 1, 8, 
 where see notes; comp. Wisd. vii. 22. 
 It does not seem necessary, with Beza 
 and Auth., to limit the reference to 
 persons, either here or Tit. J.c.; comp. 
 Suicer, Thesaur. Vol. 11. p. 1426. So 
 appy. Goth. ‘unséljdi’ [cognate with 
 ‘selig’], Vulg., Clarom., ‘sine benigni- 
 tate,’ and, so far as we can infer from 
 the absence of any studied reference to 
 persons, Syr., Arm., Copt., th. This 
 is a case in which the best ancient 
 Vv. may be profitably consulted. 
 
 4. προδόται] ‘betrayers,’ most pro- 
 bably of their (Christian) brethren 
 
 of the ἀνήμερος. 
 
144 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ B. 
 
 ΄. ’ 
 5 νοι μᾶλλον ἢ φιλοθεοι, ἔχοντες μόρφωσιν εὐσεβείας τὴν 
 6 δὲ δύναμιν αὐτῆς ἠρνημένοι" καὶ τούτους ἀποτρέπου. ἐκ 
 
 and friends; προδόται φιλίας καὶ ἑται- 
 ρείας, CGicum.: comp. Luke vi. 16, 
 Acts vii. 52. προπετεῖς] 
 ‘headstrong,’ headlong in action,—not 
 merely in words (Suid., προπετής, ὁ 
 πρόγλωσσος), or in thoughts (comp. 
 Hesych., πρὸ τοῦ λογισμοῦ) ; see Acts 
 xix. 36, μηδὲν προπετὲς πράσσειν, and 
 comp. Herodian, Hist. 1. 8. 4, τὸ 
 τολμᾶν...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.). τετυφωμένοι] 
 See notes on 1 Tim. iii. 6. 
 φιλήδονοι k.7.A.] ‘lovers of pleasure 
 rather than lovers of God ;’ both words 
 ar. λεγόμ. in the N.T. Wetstein 
 cites very appositely Philo, de Agricult. 
 § το, Vol. 1. p. 313 (ed. Mang.), φιλή- 
 δονον καὶ φιλοπαθῇ μᾶλλον ἢ φιλάρετον 
 καὶ φιλόθεον ἐργάσηται. 
 
 5- μόρφωσιν εὐσεβείας] ‘an out- 
 
 ward form of godliness,’ Ἰλο. σοοὴ 
 
 [σχῆμα] ΞγΥ.» ‘speciem pietatis,’ Vulg., 
 Clarom. ; μόρφωσιν, ἄψυχον καὶ νεκρόν, 
 καὶ σχῆμα μόνον καὶ τύπον καὶ ὑπόκρι- 
 σιν δηλοῦν, Chrys. Μορῴωσις 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 (d’vauis). The 
 more correct word would be μόρφωμα 
 (isch. Agam. 873, Eum. 412), μόρφω- 
 σις being properly active, e.g. σχημα- 
 τισμὸς καὶ μόρφωσις τῶν δένδρων, 
 Theophr. Caus. Plant. 111. 7. 4: there 
 is however a tendency in the N.T., as 
 in later writers, to replace the verbal 
 nouns in -μα by the corresponding 
 nouns in -o.s; comp, ὑποτύπωσις, ch. i. 
 
 13. Foraplausible distinction between 
 μορφὴ and σχῆμα, the former as what 
 is ‘intrinsic and essential,’ the latter 
 as what is ‘outward and accidental,’ 
 —hence μόρφωσις here (an aiming at, 
 affecting, μορφὴ) not μορφή, --- see 
 Lightfoot in Journ. Class. Philol. No. 
 7, p. 115. On the meaning of εὐσέβεια, 
 see notes on 1 Tim. ii. 2. This 
 enumeration of vices may be com- 
 pared with Rom. i. 29 sq., though 
 there absolute heathenism is described, 
 while here the ref. is rather to a kind 
 of heathen Christianity; both lists 
 hawever have, as indeed might well 
 beimagined, several terms in common. 
 The various attempts to portion out 
 these vices into groups (comp. Peile) 
 seem all unsuccessful; a certain con- 
 nexion may be observed in some 
 parts, 6. 9. ἀλαζόνες x.7.d., βλάσφημοι 
 κιτιὰ,, but it appears so evidently in 
 other parts to give way to similarity 
 in sound or similarity of composition 
 (e.g. mpod., mpor.), that no practical 
 inferences can safely be drawn. 
 
 τὴν δὲ δύναμιν κιτ.λ.} ‘but having 
 denied the power thereof.’ ‘To deny 
 the power of godliness is for a man 
 by indecent and vicious actions to 
 contradict his outward show and pro- 
 fession of godliness,’ Bull, Serm. xy. 
 p. 279 (Oxf. 1844): comp. Tit. i. 16. 
 The term δύναμις appears to mark the 
 ‘practical influence’ which ought to 
 pervade and animate the εὐσέβεια; 
 comp. 1 Cor. iv. 20, On the character 
 depicted in this and the preceding 
 clauses see a striking Sermon by Bp. 
 Hall, Serm. xxvm. Vol. y. p. 366 
 (Oxf. 1837). καὶ 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 
 
Tiis5,. 6. 
 
 145 
 
 , , 4 Bind , 9 A S22 4 9 
 τούτων γάρ εἶσιν οἱ ἐνδύνοντες εἰς τὰς οἰκίας καὶ αἰχμα- 
 , , , 9 
 λωτίζοντες γυναικάρια σεσωρευμένα ἁμαρτίαις, ἀγόμενα 
 
 of whom hopes might be entertained 
 (ch. il. 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; ‘xai ponimus 
 si duas personas taciti contendimus,’ 
 Klotz, Devar. Vol. τι. p. 636,—by 
 whom this and similar usages of cat 
 are well illustrated. Heydenr. seems 
 to have missed this prelusive and pro- 
 phetic reference, when he applies all 
 the evil characteristics above men- 
 tioned specially and particularly to 
 the erroneous teachers of the present: 
 these latter, as the following verses 
 show, had many evil elements in com- 
 mon with them, but the two classes 
 were not identical. ᾿Αποτρέπ. (a ar. 
 Neyou.) is nearly synonymous with 
 éxtpém., τ Tim. vi. 20, and joined 
 similarly with an accusative. 
 
 6. ἐκ τούτων γάρ] The γὰρ (not to 
 be omitted in transl., as Conyb., al.) 
 serves clearly and distinctly to connect 
 the future and the present. The seeds 
 of all these evils were germinating 
 even at the present time; and Timo- 
 thy, by being supplied with criteria 
 derived from the developed future(some 
 indeed of which, ἔχοντες μόρφωσιν 
 k.T.A., applied obviously enough to the 
 teachers of his own days), was to be 
 warned with respect to the developing 
 present: comp. Chrys. in. loc. There 
 is thus no reason whatever with Grot. 
 to consider εἰσὶν a ‘pres. pro futuro.’ 
 ot ἐνδύνοντες] ‘they who creep in,’ 
 like serpents (Méller), or wolves into 
 a fold (Coray); εἶδες τὸ ἀναίσχυντον 
 πῶς ἐδήλωσε διὰ τοῦ εἰπεῖν, évd.; τὸ 
 ἄτιμον, τὴν ἀπάτην, τὴν κολάκειαν; 
 Chrys.: compareJude 4, παρεισέδυσαν, 
 
 where the covertness and furtive cha- 
 racter of the intrusive teachers is yet 
 more fully marked. The verb is (in 
 this form) a dz. Ney. in the N.T., but 
 is used sufficiently often in classical 
 Greek in similar meanings, both 
 with εἰς, e.g. Aristoph. Vesp. 1020, 
 els... yaorépas ἐνδύς, and with a simple 
 dat., Xen. Cyr. 1. 1. 13, ἐνδύονται 
 ταῖς ψυχαῖς τῶν ἀκουόντων. 
 
 αἰχμαλωτίζοντες] ‘leading captive ;’ 
 Luke xxi. 24, Rom. vii. 23, 2 Cor. x. 5. 
 This verb is usually specified as one of 
 those words in the N.T. which have 
 been thought to be of Alexandrian or 
 Macedonian origin ; comp. Fischer, 
 Prolus. XXI, 2, Ὁ. 693: it is condemned 
 by the Atticists (Thom. M. p. 23, ed. 
 Bern., Lobeck, Phryn. p. 442), the 
 Attic expression being αἰχμάλωτον 
 mow. Examples of the use of the 
 words in Josephus, Arrian, dc., are 
 given in the notes on Thom. Mag. l.c. 
 γυναικάρια] ‘silly women,’ ‘muliercu- 
 las,’ Vulg., ‘kvineina’ [literally ‘mu- 
 liebria,’ an abstr. neut.], Goth; the 
 diminutive expressing contempt, γυ- 
 ναικῶν δὲ τὸ ἀπατᾶσθαι, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐδὲ 
 γυναικῶν, ἀλλὰ γυναικαρίων, ΟἾγΥΒ.: 
 compare ἀνδράρια, Aristoph. Acharn. 
 517, ἀνθρωπάρια, ib, Plut. 416, This 
 mention of women in connexion with 
 the false teachers is, as might be ima- 
 gined, 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 
 centuries made use of women in the dis- 
 semination of their heresies is a mere 
 matter of history; comp. Epiphan. 
 Her, XXVI, τι, ἀπατῶντες τὸ αὐτοῖς 
 πειθόμενον γυναικεῖον γένος, add Iren. 
 Her. 1. 13. 3, al. (ed. Mass.), Are 
 we however hastily to conclude that a 
 
 L 
 
140 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ B. 
 
 9 U , , θ ’ ι δέ 
 7 ἐπιθυμίαις ποικίλαις, πάντοτε μανθάνοντα καὶ μηδέποτε 
 
 - , 
 8 εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν δυνάμενα. 
 
 a , A 
 ον τρόπον δὲ 
 
 ᾿Ιαννῆς καὶ ᾿Ιαμβρῆς ἀντέστησαν Μωὺῦσεῖ, οὕτως καὶ 
 
 course of action, which was in fact as 
 old as the fall of man (τ Tim. ii. 14), 
 belonged 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. Antiq. xvit. 2. 4. Justiniani 
 adduces a vigorous passage of Jerome 
 (Epist. ad Ctesiph. 133. 4) on the 
 femaleassociates of heresiarchs,which 
 however is too long for citation. 
 σεσωρευμένα] ‘laden,’ ‘up-heaped :’ 
 the verb owpevew (connected probably 
 with copés) occurs again, in a quota- 
 tion, Rom. xii. 20, and forcibly depicts 
 τὸ πλῆθος τῶν ἁμαρτιών, Kal τὸ ἄτακ- 
 τον καὶ συγκεχυμένον, Chrys. On the 
 instrumental dative in connexion with 
 ἄγεσθαι, see notes on Gal. v. 18, and 
 on the form ποικίλος [MIK-, connect- 
 ed with πικρός], see Donalds. Crat. 
 § 266, Pott, Etymol. Forsch. Vol. τι. 
 Pp. 600. 
 
 7. πάντοτε μανθ. 7 ‘ever learning,’ 
 —not necessarily ‘in conventibus 
 Christianorum’ (Grot.), but from any 
 source open to them. It was no love 
 of truth that impelled them to learn, 
 but only a morbid love of novelty; 
 ‘precuriositate et instabilitate animi 
 semper nova querunt, eaque suis de- 
 sideriis accommoda,’ Estius. 
 καὶ μηδέπ. K.7..] Sand yet never able 
 to come to the full knowledge of the 
 truth ;? comp. notes on ver. 11, where 
 the faint antithetic force of καὶ is more 
 strongly marked. The δυνάμενα is not 
 without some significance ; in their 
 bettermoments they might endeavour 
 to attain to some knowledge of the 
 truth, but they never succeed; érw- 
 ρώθη ἡ καρδία, Chrys. The conditional 
 
 negative μηδέπ. is used with the par- 
 ticiple, as the circumstance of their 
 inability to attain the truth is stated 
 not as an absolute fact, but as subse- 
 quently a characteristic of their class, 
 and of the results to which it led; 
 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. § 55. 5, p. 428, and the copious 
 list of exx. in Gayler, Partic. Neg. 
 ch. 1x. p. 284sq. 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. Thesubjectgenerallyislargely 
 illustrated by Gayler, chap. rx., but it 
 is much to be regretted that a work 
 so affluent in examplesshould often be 
 so deficient in perspicuity. On ἐπί- 
 yvwow x.T.r., See reff. in note on 1 
 Tine 11 ἢν 
 
 8. ᾿Ιαννῆς καὶ IapBpys] ‘Jannes 
 and Jambres;’ τὰ τούτων ὀνόματα 
 οὐκ ἐκ τῆς θείας γραφῆς μεμάθηκεν ὁ 
 θεῖος ἀπόστολος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῆς ἀγράφου 
 τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων διδασκαλίας, Theod. in 
 loc. Jannes and Jambres [Ἰωάννης 
 Cl; and Μαμβρῆς FG; Vulg., al.], ac- 
 cording to ancient Hebrew tradition, 
 were chief among the magicians who 
 opposed Moses (Exodus vii. 11, 22), 
 Αἰγύπτιοι ἱερογραμματεῖς ἄνδρες οὐδενὸς 
 ἥττους μαγεῦσαι κριθέντες εἶναι, Nu- 
 menius in Orig. Cels. 1v. 51; see Tar- 
 gum Jonath. on Exod. i. 15, and vii. 
 11, and comp. Euseb. Prep. 1x, 8. 
 They are further said to have been 
 sons of Balaam, and to have perished 
 either in the Red Sea, orat the slaugh- 
 ter after the worship of the golden 
 
ii Bt Ὁ. 
 
 147 
 
 οὗτοι ἀνθίστανται τῇ ἀληθείᾳ, ἄνθρωποι κατεφθαρμένοι 
 
 ‘ lel 
 TOV νοῦν, ἀδόκιμοι περὶ τὴν πίστιν. ἀλλ᾽ οὐ προκόψου- g 
 
 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 
 (Comment. in Matth. § 117, Vol, 111. 
 p- 916, ed. Bened.), that the names 
 were derived 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 to be of no weight whatever ; 
 why was the inspired Apostle not to 
 remind Timothy of the ancient tradi- 
 tions 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 further reff, 
 see Spencer’s note on Orig. Cels. l.c., 
 and for literary notices, ¢c., Winer, 
 RWB. Art. ‘ Jambres,’ Vol. 1. p. 535. 
 There is a special treatise on the sub- 
 ject by J. G. Michaelis, 4to, Hal. 1747. 
 οὕτως Kal οὗτοι] ‘thus do these men 
 also withstand the truth.’ The points 
 of comparison between the false and 
 depraved teachers of the present and 
 the sorcerers of the past consist in 
 (a) an opposition to the truth, ἀνθί- 
 στανται τῇ ἀληθείᾳ (comp. Acts xiii. 8, 
 ἀνθίστατο δὲ αὐτοῖς ’ENvyas), and () 
 the profitless character of that oppo- 
 sition, and notorious betrayal of their 
 folly; ἡ.. ἄνοια αὐτῶν ἔκδηλος... ὡς καὶ 
 ἡ ἐκείνων ἐγένετο. At the same time, 
 without insisting on a further ‘tertium 
 comparationis,’ it is certainly consist- 
 ent both with the present context 
 (comp. γόητες ver. 13) and with other 
 passages of Scripture (e.g. Acts viii. 
 9 8q., xiii. 6 Sq., Xix. 13, 19) toassume 
 that, like Jannes and Jambres, these 
 
 false teachers were permitted to avail 
 themselves of occult powers incommu- 
 nicable and inaccessible to others; see 
 Wiesing. in loc., and comp. Neander, 
 Planting, Vol. 1. p. 216, note, 
 κατεφθαρμένοι τὸν νοῦν] ‘corrupted 
 in their mind ;’ comp. 1 Tim. vi. 5, 
 διεφθαρμ. Tov νοῦν, and see notes and 
 references. Theclause marks theutter 
 moral deprayation of these unhappy 
 men; their νοῦς (the human spirit 
 viewed both in its intellectual and 
 moralaspects, Delitasch, Bibl. Psychol. 
 IV. 15, p. 244) is corrupted, the me- 
 dium of communication with the Holy 
 Spirit of God polluted; the light that 
 is within is becoming, if not actually 
 become, darkness; comp. Eph. iy. 17 
 sq., and notes in loc. The difference 
 between the compounds διαφθ. (τ Tim. 
 l.c.) and καταφθ. is very slight; both 
 are intensive, the former pointing per- 
 haps more to the pervasive nature, the 
 latter to the prostrating character of 
 the φθορά. So somewhat similarly 
 Zonaras, καταφθορά, ἡ παντελὴς ἀπώ- 
 Reva’ διαφθορὰ δέ, ὅταν ἄλλη οὐσία δι᾽ 
 ἑτέρας ἀφανίζεται, ὥσπερ τὸ σῶμα ὑπὸ 
 σκωλήκων, Lex. p. 1154. 
 ἀδόκιμοι K.T.r.] ‘reprobate concerning 
 the faith;’ unapproved of (‘unprobe- 
 haltig,’ De W.), and consequently ‘ re- 
 jectanei,’ in the matter of the faith. 
 The active translation (‘nullam pro- 
 bandi 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, τό, and see notes on ch. ii. 15, 
 and Fritz, Rom. Vol. 1. p. 81. On 
 this use of περί, see notes on 1 Tim. 
 τ ΤῊΣ 
 
 9. GAN οὐ προκόψ. κ.τ.λ.] “ Νοί- 
 withstanding they shall not make fur- 
 ther advance ;’ ἀλλὰ with its full ad- 
 
 L2 
 
148 ΠΡΟΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Β. 
 
 ἌΓΑΝ - « ‘ ” . A Μ Ψ ᾿ aie 
 σιν ἐπὶ πλεῖον: ἡ γὰρ ἄνοια αὐτῶν ἔκδηλος ἔσται πᾶσιν, 
 >," ’ , 9 , 
 ὡς καὶ ἡ ἐκείνων ἐγένετο. 
 Thou knowest alike my 
 
 10 Σὺ δὲ παρηκολούθησάς μου τῇ Thonn 
 
 Evil men shall advance, but do thou hold fast to the Holy 
 
 Scriptures, which will make thee wise and perfect. 
 
 10. παρηκολούθησας] So Tisch. ed. 1, with ACFGN (FG ἠκολούθησαΞ); 17; 
 (Lachm., Huther, Wiesing., Leo, Alf.). In his 2nd and 7th edd. Tisch, adopts 
 παρηκολούθηκας With DEKL; appy. nearly all mss.; Chrys., Theod., Dam., al. 
 (Rec., Griesb., Scholz, Wordsw.). The change does not seem to be for the better. 
 External evidence seems now to be clearly in favour of the aorist; internal 
 evidence is also equally clear, the hortatory tone of the chapter (comp. ver. 5, 
 14) being far more in harmony with the aorist than with the perfect. 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, on the contrary, by drawing attention to the past, and being simply 
 silent as to the present (see notes on 1 Thess. ii. 16), suggests the latent ex- 
 
 hortation to be careful to act now as then. 
 
 versative force (ubi gravior quedam 
 oppositio inter duo enuntiata interce- 
 dit, Klotz, Devar. Vol. 11. p. 3) here 
 contrasting the opposition and its ulti- 
 mate results, and thus introducing a 
 ground for consolation ; ‘fiducia victo- 
 rie Timotheum animat ad certamen,’ 
 Calv. There is however no statement 
 contradictory to ver. 13 and ch. ii. 16 
 (De W.); all the Apostle says in fact 
 is that there shall be no real and ulti- 
 mate advance; κἂν πρότερον ἀνθήσῃ 
 τὰ τῆς πλάνης, εἰς τέλος οὐ διαμένει, 
 Chrys. 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. ver. 13, πλανῶντες, 
 and ch. 11. 17, νομὴν ἕξει. The advance 
 is not denied, but the successful ad- 
 vance, i.e. without detection and ex- 
 posure, is denied; οὐ λήσουσι μέχρι 
 πολλοῦ σχηματιζόμενοι τὴν εὐσέβειαν, 
 ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι τάχιστα γυμνωθήσονται, Theod., 
 see Est. in loc, ἄνοια] ‘senseless- 
 ness,’ ‘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 Wette, al. (see Thucyd. m1. 42, 
 where it is spoken of as an accompa- 
 niment of τάχος and as such unfayour- 
 able to εὐβουλία), 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. Seelenl. 11. 18, p. 51, and 
 see 2 Macc. xiv. 5, esp. xv. 33, and 
 Joseph. Antiq. VIII. 13. 1, 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. The word is a dz. dey. in the 
 N.T., but is found in earlier (Hom. 
 Il. v.2), and is of common occurrence 
 in later writers, 3 Mace. iii. 19, Vi. 5, 
 Polyb. Hist. mt. 12. 4, 111. 48. 5, al. 
 10. παρηκολούϑησας] ‘ wert a fol- 
 
 lower of,’ 51D A.2) [venisti post] 
 + de) 
 
 Syr., i.e. ‘followedst as a disciple,’and 
 thence ‘hast fully known,’Auth., which 
 however is rather too distant from the 
 primary meaning, see notes on 1 Tim. 
 iy. 6, where the meaning of this word 
 
ΠΟ, τῇ 
 
 149 
 
 , rm 3 A ~ “-“ ~ 
 διδασκαλίᾳ, TH AYOYN, TH προθέσει, TH πίστει, TH μα- 
 
 , na 9 , ~ a a a a 
 κροθυμίᾳ, TH ἀγαπή; TH ὑπομονῇ" τοις διωγμοῖς, ΤΟΙ Τὰ 
 , OF bea ay} ? τ ; Ω 9 , Ω 
 
 παθήμασιν, οἷα μοι evyeveTo ev Αντιοχείᾳ, εν Ἱκονίῳ, εν 
 
 is investigated, On the force of the 
 aor., see critical note. In the follow- 
 ing words, μου τῇ διδασκ.. the pronoun, 
 though not necessarily always so (see 
 Winer, Gr. § 22. 7, p. 140), seems to 
 stand in emphatic opposition to the 
 subjects of the preceding verse. 
 
 τῇ ἀγωγῇ] ‘my manner of life, con- 
 duct, τῇ διὰ τῶν ἔργων πολιτείᾳ, Theod., 
 —nearly equivalent to τὰς ὁδούς μου 
 τὰς ἐν Χρ., τ Cor.iv.17. The word is 
 ἃ dm. λεγόμ. in N.T.; see however 
 Esther ii. 20, οὐ μετήλλαξε τὴν ἀγωγὴν 
 αὐτῆς (‘vite suzrationem,’ Schleusn.), 
 and comp. 2 Mace. iy. 16, vi. 8, xi. 24. 
 The meaning is rightly given by He- 
 sych., ἀγωγή᾽ τρόπος, ἀναστροφή ; see 
 also Suicer, Thesaur.s.v. Vol.1. p. 72. 
 Leo refers ἀγωγὴ to the ‘doctrine ra- 
 tio’ followed by the Apostle, referring 
 to Diod. Sic. Hist. 1. 52, 92, but both 
 reff. are false. τῇ προθέσει] 
 ‘my purpose,’ 5611. (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 otherpassagesin St Paul’s 
 Epp. πρόθεσις is used with reference 
 to God; see Rom. viii. 28, ix. 11, Eph. 
 i. 11, 111. 11,2 Tim. i. 9. The peculiar 
 and ecclesiastical meaning (‘altare 
 propositionis’) is noticed in Suicer, 
 Thes. 8. Vv. Vol. 11. p. 842. 
 
 τῇ πίστει is referred by some commen- 
 tators to ‘faith’ in its usual accepta- 
 tion, τῇ ἐν Tots δόγμασιν, Theoph. 1, on 
 account of the near position of ἀγάπη; 
 by others to ‘trust’ in God, τῇ μὴ ἀπο- 
 γιγνώσκειν ποιούσῃ, Ecum., Theoph. 2, 
 so also Usteri, Lehrb. τι. 1. 4, p. 240. 
 Perhaps the gloss of Theod., ὁποίαν 
 
 ἔχω περὶ τὸν δεσπότην διάθεσιν, is the 
 most inclusive and satisfactory. 
 τῇ μακροθυμίᾳ] ‘my long-suffering,’ 
 forbearing patience, whether towards 
 sinners generally (Theod.), or the ἀν- 
 τιδιατιθέμενοι (ch. ii. 25) specially; see 
 notes on Zph. iv. 2, and on the dis- 
 tinction between μακροθυμία and πρᾳό- 
 τῆς, notes on 1 Tim. i, 16. The defi- 
 nition of Zonaras (Lex. p. 1330) isbrief, 
 but pithy and suggestive; μακροθυμία, 
 πέψις λύπης. The concluding word 
 ὑπομονὴ marks further his brave pa- 
 tience in enduring not only contradic- 
 tion and opposition, but even injury 
 and wrong, and leads on naturally to 
 τοῖς διωγμ.κι.τ. Δ. VEY. 11. Onvrrou., see 
 notes on ch, li, 10, and on Tit. ii, 2. 
 11. Tots διωγμ.7 ‘my persecutions,’ 
 ‘injurias complectitur quas Judzi et 
 ethnici Christianis propter doctrins 
 Christiane professionem imposue- 
 runt, ut verbera, delationes, vincula, 
 relegationem,’ Fritz. Rom. viii. 35, 
 Vol. τὸ p. 221. οἷά μοι K.T.A.] 
 ‘such (sufferings) as befel me in Antioch 
 (Acts xiii. 50), in Iconiwm (Acts xiv. 
 2 sq.), in 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. Chrys. 
 refers it to the fact of Timothy’s ac- 
 quaintance 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 mention; 
 comp. Acts xiv. 19, voulfovres αὐτὸν 
 
ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 TIMOOEON Β. 
 
 ‘ v9 , 
 Λύστροις, οἵους διωγμοὺς ὑπήνεγκα" καὶ ἐκ πάντων με 
 
 12 ἐῤῥύσατο ὁ Κύριος. καὶ πάντες δὲ οἱ θέλοντες εὐσεβῶς 
 
 [Παῦλον] τεθνηκέναι. οἵους Stwyp.. | 
 ‘such persecutions as I endured;’ as 
 these (particularly at Lystra) were 
 especially διωγμοί, not merely general 
 παθήματα, but sharp and active inflic- 
 tions, by stoning, d&c., St Paul repeats 
 the word, joining it emphatically with 
 olos, still more to specify the peculiar 
 cases which he is mentioning asexam- 
 ples. It is certainly not necessary to 
 regard the clause as an exclamation 
 (Heydenr., Mack), nor is there even 
 any occasion for supplying ‘[thou hast 
 seen] what, dc.’ (Conyb., comp. Alf.), 
 as this seems to weaken the force of 
 the sentence, and indeed to vitiate the 
 construction. καὶ ἐκ πάντων] 
 ‘and out of all; ἀμφότερα παρακλή- 
 σεως ὅτι Kal ἔγὼ προθυμίαν παρειχόμην 
 γενναίαν, καὶ οὐκ ἐγκατελείφθην, Chrys. 
 This is no ‘Hebraica constructio pro 
 ex quibus omnibus,’ Grot.; καὶ with its 
 usual ascensive force gives a distinct 
 prominence to the oppositioninvolved 
 in the clause which it introduces,— 
 ‘my persecutions were great, and yet 
 God delivered me out of all;’ compare 
 Eurip. Herc. Fur. 508, ὁρᾶτέ μ᾽, ὅσπερ 
 ἦν περίβλεπτος...καί μ᾽ ἀφείλεθ᾽ ἡ τύχη, 
 see Rost u. Palm, Lex. s.v. 11. 1. ¢, 
 Vol. 1. p.1540,and further exx.in Har- 
 tung, Partik. καί, 5. 6, Vol. 1. p. 148. 
 It may be added that Tisch. reads épv- 
 caro with AD!: the more common 
 form ἐῤῥύσατο has suchclearly prepon- 
 derant evidence in its fayour [CD? 
 EFGEK (e sil.) LN] as rightly to retain 
 its place in the text. 
 
 12. καὶ πάντες δέ] ‘And all too,’ 
 orsufliciently approximately, ‘yea and 
 all,’ Auth.; see esp. notes on τ Tim. 
 iii, 10, where this construction is in- 
 vestigated. De Wette is here slightly 
 incorrect on two points; first, ‘et... 
 autem,’ Beng., is a translation of καὶ 
 
 ...6¢ which need not be rejected, see 
 Hand, Tursellin. Vol. 1. p. 584; se- 
 condly, xal...6é(even supposing 1 Tim. 
 111. 10 be not taken into account) oc- 
 curs elsewhere in St Paul’s Epp. ; viz. 
 Rom. xi. 23. The verse involves a 
 perfectly general declaration (Calv.), 
 and seems intended indirectly to pre- 
 pare Timothy for encountering perse- 
 cutions, and may be paraphrased, ‘but 
 such persecutions are not confined to 
 me or to a few; they will extend even 
 to all,and consequently to thee among 
 the number ;’ comp. Liicke on 1 John 
 1. Js οἱ θέλοντες] ‘whose 
 will is to,’ &c.; ‘computa igitur an 
 velis,’ Beng.: the verb θέλ. is not ple- 
 onastic, but points to those whose will 
 is enlisted in the matter, and who 
 really havesome desires to lead a godly 
 life; see Winer, Gr. § 65. 7, p. 541- 
 The Vulg., ‘qui pie volunt vivere,’ by 
 its departure from what seems to have 
 been the order of the older Lat. Vv. 
 (comp. Clarom.), apparently desires to 
 mark the connexion of this participle 
 with εὐσεβῶς; it seems however almost 
 certain that the ady. belongs to ζῆν, 
 comp. Tit, ii, 12. On the meaning of 
 εὐσεβῶς, see notes on τ Tim, ii. 2. 
 
 ἐν Xp. *Ino.] ‘in Christ Jesus,’ in 
 fellowship, in union with Him; ‘mo-_ 
 dum exponit sine quo non contigit pie 
 vere,’ Est.; ‘extra Christum Jesum 
 nulla pietas,’ Beng.: compare notes on 
 Gal. ii. 17, Eph. ii. 6,7, andelsewhere. 
 διωχθήσονται] ‘shall be persecuted.’ 
 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. 3, dc. This 
 declaration clearly refers to the out- 
 ward persecutions which the Apostles 
 and their followers were to undergo; 
 it may be extended however, in a prac- 
 
Pres, 6A: 
 
 151 
 
 Civ ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ διωχθήσονται. Ἰ]Τονηροὶ δὲ ἄνθρω- 13 
 
 A a ΄“ 
 Tot καὶ γόητες προκόψουσιν ἐπὶ TO χέίρον, πλανῶντες 
 
 οὗ ’ A A , 3 fe sh ἌΝ 5, ’ 
 καὶ πλανώμενοι. σὺ δὲ μένε ἐν οἷς ἔμαθες καὶ ἐπιστώθης, 14 
 
 tical point of view, to all true Chris- 
 tians ; comp. August. Hpist. 248[145], 
 de Civ. Dei, xvi. 51, and ver. 1 of 
 that noble chapter, Ecclus. ii. 
 
 13. ἹἸΠονηροὶ δὲ ἄνθρ.] ‘But evil 
 men;’ immediate contrast with οἱ θέλ. 
 evo. (nv; the subject of the verse 
 however 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 
 ἄνθρ. ; evil men, and consequently 
 they among the number, 
 γόητες] ‘deceivers,’—Goth., ‘liutdi’ 
 [deceivers,—cogn. with Angl.-Sax. ly- 
 tig]; sim., though a little less exactly, 
 
 Syr., [1a Ὁ ΛΟ [seducentes]. The 
 
 vy 
 καὶ appends to the general πονηροί, 
 apparently with somewhat of an ex- 
 planatory force, a more specific and 
 definite appellation, comp. Fritz. on 
 Mark i. 5, p. 11. Τόης (derived from 
 yodw) has properly reference to incan- 
 tations by howling; εἴρηται ἀπὸ τῶν 
 γόων τῶν περὶ τάφους γινομένων, Sui- 
 das, s.v. (comp. Soph. Ajax, 582, 
 Herodot. vit. 191); thence to the prac- 
 tice of magic arts generally, δεινὸς γόης 
 καὶ φαρμακεὺς καὶ σοφιστής, Plato, 
 Symp. p. 203 D, and thence by a very 
 natural transition to deceptionandim- 
 posture generally,—appy. the prevail- 
 ing meaning; Etymol. M. “γόης, ψεύ- 
 στης, ἀπατεών, Pollux, Onom. tv. 6, 
 γόης, ἀπατεών, similarly Timeus, Lex. 
 Plat. s.v.; comp. Demosth. de Fals, 
 Leg. p. 374, ἄπιστος, γόης, πονηρός, 
 Joseph. contr. Ap. τι. 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 thereis certainly nothing in such 
 a supposition inconsistent either with 
 the context, the primary meaning of 
 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, Thesaur, s.v. 
 Vol. 1. p. 776. προκόψου- 
 σιν κιτ.λ.] ‘will make advance toward 
 the worse :’ ἐπὶ pointing to the χεῖρον 
 as the degree to which the wickedness 
 was, as it were, advancing andascend- 
 ing ; compare Winer, Gr. § 49. 1, Ὁ. 363. 
 The προκοπὴ is here considered rather 
 as intensive, in verse g rather as exten- 
 sive. On the apparent contradiction 
 in the two verses, see above, notes 
 in loc. πλανῶντες Kal πλ.] 
 ‘deceiving and being deceived;’ cer- 
 tainly not middle, ‘letting themselves 
 bedeceived’ (Beng.,appy.), 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 remarks, is never 
 without self-deceit. 
 
 14. σὺ δὲ K.7.A.] ‘But do thou 
 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 appy. be supplied, not only to 
 ἔμαθες but ἐπιστώθης, the accus. being 
 that of the ‘remoter object;’ comp. 
 Winer, Gram, ὃ 32. 5, p. 204. Bret- 
 schneider (Lex. s.v. mior.), and per- 
 haps Syr., connect ἐν οἷς with ἐπιστ. ;, 
 
152 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ TIMOOEON 8. 
 
 15 εἰδὼς παρὰ τίνων ἔμαθες, καὶ ὅτι ἀπὸ βρέφους τὰ 
 ἱερὰ γράμματα οἶδας τὰ δυνάμενά σε σοφίσαι εἰς σωτη- 
 
 this can be justified, see Psalm Ixxviii. 
 37, but involves a less satisfactory 
 meaning of the verb, 
 ἐπιστώθης] ‘wert assured of,’ ampli- 
 fication of ἔμαθες ; not ‘credita sunt 
 tibi,’ Vulg., Clarom., Goth. (‘gatrau- 
 aida,’ a hint perhaps of the occasional 
 Latinizing of this Vers.), which would 
 require ἐπιστεύθης, but ‘quorum firma 
 fides tibi facta est,’ Fuller, ap. Pol. 
 Syn.; μετὰ πληροφορίας ἔμαθες, Theoph.; 
 comp. Luke i. 4, ἵνα ἐπιγνῷς...τὴν 
 ἀσφάλειαν. Πιστοῦν is properly ‘to 
 make micros’ (1 Kings i. 36, πιστώσαι 
 ὁ Θεὸς τὸ ῥῆμα), thence in the pass. 
 ‘stabiliri,’ ‘confirmari’ (2 Sam. vii. 
 16, πιστωθήσεται 6 οἶκος αὐτοῦ, comp. 
 Psalm lxxviii. 8), and with an accus, 
 objecti‘plene certiorari;’ comp, Suicer, 
 Thesaur. 8.v. Vol. 11. p. 744, Where 
 this meaning of the verb is well ex- 
 plained and illustrated. 
 εἰδώς] ‘knowing as thou dost,’ comp. 
 ch. ii. 23. παρὰ τίνων] 
 ‘from whom,’ 5011. from Lois and Eu- 
 nice (ch. i. 5), not also from St Paul 
 and others (comp. Grot., Matth.), as 
 the ἀπὸ βρέφους which follows seems 
 rather to limit the reference to the 
 period when Timothy was first in- 
 structed in divine truth. The reading 
 is somewhat doubtful. The text is 
 supported by AC'FGN; 17. 71; Cla- 
 rom., Boern. (Tisch.ed. 7, Huth., Alf., 
 Wordsw.), and is now perhaps to be 
 preferred: the reading however of 
 ed. 1, 2, mapa τίνος, with C?7DEKL; 
 nearly all mss.; Aug., Vulg., Goth., 
 Copt., Syr. (both),Chrys.,Theod. (Mill, 
 Griesb.), has fair external authority 
 in its favour, and is not without some 
 support from internal considerations; 
 comp. Mill, Prolegom. p. Ixxy. 
 
 15. καὶ ὅτι κιτιλ. does not seem 
 parallel to and co-ordinate with εἰδὼς 
 
 k.7.X., ‘sciens...et quia nosti,’ Vulg., 
 Beng.,—or having the meaning ‘be- 
 cause,’ and the participial construc- 
 tion ‘per orationem variatam’ (comp. 
 Winer, Gr. ὃ 63. 11. 1, Ῥ. 509) pass- 
 ing into the indicative, —but is rather 
 to be considered as simply dependent 
 upon εἰδώς, the particle ὅτι retaining 
 its more usual meaning ‘that,’ and the 
 direct sentence presenting a second 
 fact which Timothy was to take into 
 consideration: δύο αἰτίας λέγει τοῦ 
 δεῖν αὐτὸν ἀπερίτρεπτον μένειν, ὅτι τε 
 οὐ παρὰ τοῦ τύχοντος ἔμαθες... καὶ 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. 1. p. 572. 
 
 ἀπὸ βρέφους] ‘from a very child,’ 
 ‘from infancy;’ ἐκ πρώτης ἡλικίας, 
 Chrys. The expression is perhaps used 
 rather than ἐκ παιδιόθεν, Mark ix. 21 
 (om. éx, Rec.), to mark still more de- 
 finitely the very early age at which 
 Timothy’s instruction in the Holy 
 Scriptures commenced; comp. ch. i. 5. 
 Βρέφος in two instances in the N.T. 
 (Luke i. 41, 44) has its primary mean- 
 ing, ἔμβρυον, Hesych.; in all others 
 (Luke ii. 12, 16, xviii, 15, Acts vii. 
 19, 1 Pet. ii. 2, ἀρτιγέννητα Bp.) it 
 points to a very early and tender 
 age. This remark is of some little 
 importance in reference to Luke xviii, 
 15, where the ascensive or rather de- 
 scensive force of καὶ is not to be over- 
 looked, τὰ ἱερὰ 
 ypdpp.] ‘the sacred writings,’ i.e. of 
 the Old Test., or, possibly with more 
 lexical exactness,—‘sacras literas,’ 
 Vulg., ‘the principles of seriptural 
 learning’ (surely not letters, in the 
 ordinary educational sense, Hervey, 
 
PR £5776. 
 
 153 
 
 ρίαν, διὰ πίστεως τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. πᾶσα γραφὴ τό 
 
 Serm. on Insp. p. 11); comp. John 
 yii. 15, Acts xxvi. 24, and see Meyer 
 on both passages. It is doubtful 
 however whether this latter meaning 
 is here suitable to the context, and 
 whether γράμματα does not simply 
 mean ‘writings’ (see Suicer, Thesaur. 
 s.v. Vol. 1. p. 780), with perhaps the 
 associated 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. p. 858 E, where it is 
 contrasted with συγγράμματα, and ib. 
 Gorg. p. 484 A, where comp. Stall- 
 baum’s note, ‘Thus then the state- 
 ment in Ztym. Magn., γράμματα ἐκά- 
 Novy of παλαιοὶ τὰ συγγράμματα, will 
 require modification. The expression 
 is a ἅπαξ λεγόμ. in N.T., but comp. 
 Joseph. Antig, Procem. 8 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; 566 notes on yer. τύ. 
 τὰ δυνάμενα] ‘which are able,’ not 
 ‘que poterant,’ Beng. The present 
 is used conformably with the virtual 
 present οἶδας, to denote the perma- 
 nent, enduring, property of the Holy 
 Scriptures. σοφίσαι] ‘to 
 make wise;’ comp. Psalm xix. 8, co- 
 φίζουσα νήπια, CY. 22, τοὺς πρεσβυτέ- 
 ρους αὐτοῦ σοφίσαι, and with an acc. 
 rei, cxix. 98. This meaning must be 
 retained without any dilution; σοφίζω 
 is not merely equivalent to διδάσκω, 
 but marks the true wisdom which the 
 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. εἰς 
 σωτηρίαν must be joined immediately 
 with σοφίσαι, pointing out the direc- 
 
 ful, &e. ; 
 
 tion and destination of the wisdom, 
 the object at which it aimed; ἡ ἔξω 
 γνῶσις σοφίζει τὸν ἄνθρωπον els ἀπά- 
 τὴν καὶ σοφίσματα καὶ λογομαχίας... 
 ἀλλὰ αὐτὴ [ἡ θεία γνῶσις] σοφίζει els 
 σωτηρίαν, Theoph. 
 
 διὰ πίστ. τῆς κιτ.λ.7 ‘per fidem, eam- 
 que in Christo Jesu collocatam;’ see 
 notes on 1 Tim, iii. 12. This clause 
 cannot be joined with σωτηρίαν (Hey- 
 denr.), as the article in such a case 
 could not be dispensed with before 
 διά; comp. notes on Eph. i. 15, where 
 the only cases in which such an omis- 
 sion can take place are recounted. 
 The clause obviously limits the pre- 
 vious 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, Hecl. Pol. 1. 14. 4 
 (quoted by Bloomf, and Peile). In the 
 same section the difference between 
 the two Testaments is thus stated 
 with admirable perspicuity ; ‘the Old 
 did make wise by teaching Salvation 
 through Christ that should come, the 
 New by teaching that Christ the Sa- 
 viour is come.’ On πίστις ἐν Xp., see 
 notes on τ Tim. i. 16. 
 
 16. πᾶσα γραφὴ K.T.A.] ‘Every 
 Scripture inspired by God is also use- 
 so Origen expressly, πᾶσα 
 yp.» θεόπν. οὖσα, ὠφέλ. ἐστιν, in Jos, 
 Hom. xrx. Vol. 11. p. 443 (ed. Bened.), 
 Syr. [both however omit καί], Ham- 
 mond, and the Vv. of Tynd., Cov., and 
 Cranmer. Inthisimportantandmuch 
 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 certain, καὶ 
 being omittedin some Vv. (Aug., Vulg., 
 Copt., Syr., Ar.) and Ff.; it seems 
 however highly probable that this is 
 
154 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Β. 
 
 θεόπνευστος καὶ ὠφέλιμος πρὸς διδασκαλίαν, πρὸς 
 
 due rather to non-observance of the 
 true ascensive force of the particle 
 than to its absence in the original 
 MSS. With regard then to (a) con- 
 struction it is very difficult to decide 
 whether (a) θεόπν. is a part of the 
 predicate, καὶ being the simple copula 
 (Auth., al.); or whether (8) it is a 
 part of the subject, καὶ being ascen- 
 sive, and ἐστι being supplied after 
 ὠφέλιμος (as Clarom., Syr.-Phil., 
 al.). Lexicography and grammar 
 contribute but little towards a deci- 
 sion: for on the one hand, as γραφὴ 
 here appy. does mean Scripture (see 
 below), the connexion by means of 
 καὶ copulativum is at first sight both 
 simple and perspicuous (see Middle- 
 ton 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, 1 Tim. 
 τ τὸ, 5. Lim, 1 0 ἰἰ 7, Ven 18; 
 Tit. i. τό, ili. τ, 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. made to mark the emphasis, see 
 Winer, Gr. § 59. 2, p. 464. We are 
 thus remanded wholly to the contezt : 
 and here when we observe (1), on the 
 negative side, the absence of every- 
 thing in the preceding verses calcu- 
 lated to evoke such a statement, the 
 θεοπνευστία of Scripture not having 
 been denied evenby implication, comp. 
 Huther; (2) that if καὶ be copulative, 
 it would seem to associate two predi- 
 cations, one relating to the essential 
 character of Scripture, the other to 
 its practical applicabilities, which ap- 
 pear 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 γράμματα, 
 θεόπν. than ἱερός (see Tittm. Synon, 
 I. p. 26), and καὶ ὠφελ. x.7.d. show- 
 ing 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 
 conyey, the various practical applica- 
 tions of Scripture; when (4) we add 
 that Chrys.,—whose assertion πᾶσα 
 οὖν ἡ τοιαύτη θεύπνευστος [see below] 
 would really be pointless if the 
 declaration in the text were explicit, 
 and not, as it is, implicit—Theod. 
 (ἐπειδὴ κιτ.Ὰ. καὶ THY ἐξ αὐτῶν ὠφέ- 
 λειαν διδάσκει), and, as far as we can 
 infer from collocation of words, nearly 
 all the best Vv., viz. Syr. (both), 
 Vulg., Clarom., Goth., Copt., appy. 
 Jith., and in effect Arm. (inserts 
 copula after διδασκ.), all adopt con- 
 struction (8), we have an amount of 
 external evidence, which, coupled with 
 the internal evidence, it seems impos- 
 sible to resist. We decide therefore, 
 not without some confidence, in favour 
 of (8); so Huth., Wiesing., but not 
 De Wette. We now notice (b) some 
 individual expressions, 
 
 πᾶσα γραφή] ‘Every Scripture,’ not 
 ‘tota Scriptura,’ Beza, Auth.,—a 
 needless departure from the regular 
 rulesofgrammar. Hofmann (Schriftb. 
 Vol. 1. p. 572) and others (Hervey, al.) 
 still defend this inexact translation, 
 adducing Eph. ii. 21; but it may be 
 observed that in Eph, 1.6. there are 
 strong reasons for a deviation from 
 the correct transl. which do not apply 
 to the present case; see notes in loc. 
 Here πᾶσα yp. implies every indivi- 
 dual γραφὴ of those previously alluded 
 to in the term ἱερὰ yp.; πᾶσα, rola; 
 περὶ ἧς εἶπόν, φησι, πᾶσα ἱερά,...πᾶσα 
 οὖν ἡ τοιαύτη θεόπνευστος, Chrys, ; see 
 (thus far) Middleton, Greek Art. p. 
 
LIT? τό. 155 
 
 4. , A 9 , A , A 9 
 ἐλεγμον, πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν, προς παιδείαν τὴν ἐν δικαιο- 
 
 392, ed. Rose, comp. also Lee, on Insp. 
 Lect. vi. p. 254 sq., and Winer, Gr. 
 § 18. 4, p. Tor. γραφὴ 
 has by some interpreters been trans- 
 lated ‘writing;’ so appy. the τινες 
 noticed by Theoph., and perhaps 
 Theod., τῷ διορισμῷ χρησάμενος ἀπέ- 
 κρινε τὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης σοφίας συγ- 
 γράμματα. This however, owing to 
 the usual meaning of γραφὴ in 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 Scripture,’ and 
 as the context requires the same in 
 2 Pet. 1.6. (comp. Huth.), so here and 
 in Rom. ll. cc. there is no reason to 
 depart from the current qualitative 
 interpretation, especially as the asso- 
 ciated epithets, and here moreover the 
 preceding ἱερὰ γράμμ., show that that 
 special meaning was indisputably in- 
 tended by the inspired writer. 
 
 θεόπνευστος is a passive verbal, see 
 Winer, Gr. § 16. 3, p. 88; it simply 
 denotes ‘inspired by God’ (comp. 
 Phocyl. 121, θεόπνευστος σοφίη, Plu- 
 tarch, Mor. p. 904 F, τοὺς ὀνείρους 
 τοὺς θεοπνεύστους ; Comp. θεόπνοος, 
 Porphyr. de Antr. Nymph. p. 116), and 
 only states what is more definitely ex- 
 
 pressed by Syr. ohol| 16.59 
 
 {quod a Spiritu scriptum est] and still 
 more by 2 Pet. i. 21, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὸ πνεύ- 
 ματος ἁγίου φερόμενοι ἐλάλησαν ἅγιοι 
 Θεοῦ ἄνθρωποι. Thus then, without 
 overstepping the proper limits of this 
 commentary, we may fairly say, that 
 while this pregnant and inclusive epi- 
 
 thet yields no support to any artificial 
 theories whether of a ‘dynamical’ or 
 a ‘mechanical’ inspiration, it certainly 
 seems distinctly to imply(comp.Chrys., 
 —in the other translation it would for- 
 mally enunciate) this vital truth, that 
 every separate portion of the Holy Book 
 is inspired, and forms a living portion 
 ofa living and organic whole; see (thus 
 far) Hofmann, Schriftb. Vol. τ. p. 572, 
 Reuss, Théol. Chrét. 111. 3, Vol. 1. p. 
 297. While, on the one hand, this 
 expression does not exclude such ver- 
 bal errors, or possibly such trifling 
 historicalinaccuracies, as man’s spirit, 
 even in its most exalted state, may 
 not be wholly exempt from (comp. 
 Delitzsch, Bibl. Psychol. v. 5, Ὁ. 319), 
 and human transmission and tran- 
 scriptions 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. 1. 45, and our 
 assertion of the full Inspiration of the 
 Bible; comp. Pref. to Galatians, p. 
 xvi (ed. 3), Aids to Faith, 1x. p. 417 
 Sq. 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. ux. Vol. 111. p. 150 (A.-C. Libr.). 
 Beza refers the two former ‘ad dog- 
 mata,’ 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, 15. 
 
 πρὸς ἐλεγμόν] ‘for reproof, confuta- 
 tion,’ ἐλέγξαι τὰ ψευδῆ, Chrys., or 
 better more generally, ἡμῶν τὸν παρά- 
 vouov βίον, Theod.; comp. Eph. y, 11. 
 The reading ἔλεγχον [ed. 1, 2, with 
 
150 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Β. 
 
 Ω A ΄“΄ 4 r 
 17 σύνῃ, ἵνα ἄρτιος ἣ ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἄνθρωπος, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον 
 
 3 ‘ 9 , 
 ἀγαθὸν ἐξηρτισμένος. 
 
 DEKL; most mss.; Chrys.;] occurs 
 several times in the LXX, e.g. Lev. 
 xix. 17, Numb. v, 18, 2 Kings xix. 3, 
 al.: but must now give way to ἐλεγμόν 
 [ACFGN; 4 mss, (Lachm., Tisch.)]. 
 
 Ξ i Ρ ρρῷ, 
 ἔπανόρθωσιν] ‘correction,’ Syr. ἢ, 50 7 
 ρ Σ toe 
 
 [directionem, emendationem]; παρα- 
 καλεῖ τοὺς παρατραπέντας ἐπανελθεῖν 
 εἰς τὴν εὐθεῖαν ὁδόν, Theod. This 
 word is a dm. λεγόμ. in N.T., but 
 sufficiently common elsewhere, e.g. 
 Philo, Quod Deus Imm. § 37, Vol. 1. 
 P. 299, ἐπανόρθωσις τοῦ βίου, Arrian, 
 Epict. 11. 16, ἐπὶ παιδείᾳ καὶ ἐπανορ- 
 θώσει τοῦ βίου, Polyb. Hist. τ. 35. 1, 
 ἐπανόρθωσις τοῦ τῶν ἀνθρώπων βίου, 
 comp. also 111. 7. 4, v. 88. 3, xxvit. 6. 
 12, al, The prep. ἐπὶ is apparently 
 not merely directive but intensive, im- 
 plying restoration to a previous and 
 better state, Plato, Republ. x. p. 604 
 Ὁ, ἐπανορθοῦν τὸ πεσόν τε Kal νοσῆσαν; 
 see Rost u. Palm, Lez. s. v. 1v. c. 5, 
 Vol. 1, p. 1046. The distinction be- 
 tween é\eyu. and ézay. is thus not 
 incorrectly stated by Grot., ἐλέγχονται 
 inverecundi, ἐπανορθοῦνται teneri, fra- 
 giles,’ παιδείαν K.T.A.] 
 ‘discipline which is in righteousness;’ 
 not exactly ‘que veram perfectamque 
 justitiam affert,’ Just.,comp.Theoph., 
 but ‘which has its proper sphere of ac- 
 tion in righteousness,’—in that which 
 is conformable to the law of God, 
 Conybeare, in translating the clause 
 ‘righteous discipline,’ seems to regard 
 ἐν as merely equiy. to the ‘ Beth essen- 
 tix ;’ this however appearsto be unten- 
 able; comp. Winer, Gr. § 29. 3. obs. p. 
 166, On the proper meaning of παιδεία 
 (‘disciplinary instruction,’ a meaning 
 which Theod., al., here unnecessarily 
 obscure), see notes on Eph. vi. 4; 
 and on δικαιοσύνῃ, see notes on 1 Tim. 
 
 vi. rr. Thus to state the uses of Holy 
 Scripture in the briefest way; it διδά- 
 σκει 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 perfection. For a good 
 sermon on the sufficiency of Scripture 
 see Beveridge, Serm, ux. Vol, 111. p. 
 144 Sq. (A.-C. Libr.), 
 
 17. ἄρτιος] ‘complete’ in all parts 
 and proportions (‘in quo nihil sit mu- 
 tilum,’ Caly.), a ἁπαξ λεγόμ. in the 
 N. T., explained more fully by the 
 ἐξηρτισμένος which follows, A sub- 
 stantially correct definition is given by 
 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 
 koho80s,—comp, Lucian, Sacrif. § 6, 
 where he speaks of Vulcan as οὐκ ἄρτιος 
 τῶ πόδε, and see Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. 
 Vol. 1. p. 515. It is not easy to state 
 positively the distinction between τέ- 
 Aecos and ἄρτιος, as in practice the 
 two words seem nearly to interchange 
 meanings; e.g. comp. Philo, de Plant. 
 Noe, ὃ 29, Vol. 1. p. 347, ἄρτιον καὶ 
 ὁλόκληρον, With James i. 4, τέλειοι καὶ 
 ὁλόκληροι : aS ἃ general rule ἄρτιος 
 seems to point to perfection in regard 
 of adaptation of parts (‘qui suam re- 
 tinet compagem,’ Just.) and special 
 aptitude for any given uses; τέλειος, 
 like‘ perfectus’ (comp. Doederl. Synon. 
 Vol. 1v. 366), seems to imply a more 
 general and absolute perfection; comp. 
 Matth. v. 48. 
 
 ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἄνθρωπος] ‘the man of 
 God.’ 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 
 
FEE 
 
 I solemnly charge thee 
 to be active and urgent, 
 for evil teachers will 
 abound. Discharge thy 
 ministry: mine is well 
 nigh done, and my re- 
 ward is ready, 
 
 Wette), but the Christian generally, 
 ‘qui se Deo penitus devovit,’ Just.: 
 see Philo, de Nom. Mut. § 3, Vol. τ. 
 p. 582, where ἀνθρ. Θεοῦ is used in a 
 similar extended reference, and comp. 
 notes on τ Tim, vi. 11. 
 
 πρὸς πᾶν K.T.A.] ‘fully furnished for, 
 or (to preserve the paronomasia) made 
 complete for, every good work: ἐξαρτ. 
 (πληροῖ, τελειοῖ, Hesych.) is a dis λε- 
 you. in the N.T.; see Acts xxi. 5, 
 where however it is used somewhat 
 differently, in reference appy. to the 
 completion of a period of time; see 
 Meyer in loc. It occurs in its present 
 sense, Joseph. Ant. 111. 2. 2, καλῶς 
 ἐξηρτισμένους, comp. Lucian, Ver. 
 Hist. τ. 33, τἄλλα ἐξήρτιστο. The com- 
 pound καταρτίζω is of frequent occur- 
 rence. In accordance with the view 
 taken of ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ avOp., the words 
 πῶν ἔργ. ay. must obviously be refer- 
 red, not specially to the ἔργον εὐαγγε- 
 λιστοῦ, ch. iv. 5 (De Wette), but to 
 any good works generally; so Huth., 
 Wiesing., and Leo. 
 
 CHapter IV. τ. Διαμαρτύρομαι] “7 
 solemnly charge thee ;’ see notes on 1 
 Tim. vy. 21. The words οὖν ἐγώ, in- 
 serted after dau. in Rec. [with D?K; 
 —Syr.-Phil., Theod. omit ἐγώ, others 
 οὖν], are rightly rejected by Griesb., 
 Lachm., Tisch., as ‘injecta ob cohe- 
 rentiam,’ Mill, Prolegom. p. cxxix. 
 The longer reading of Rec., τοῦ Kup. 
 I, X. (with D°EKL) for X. ’I., is 
 equally untenable. 
 τοῦ μέλλοντος K.T.A. ] ‘who shall here- 
 after judge the quick anddead:’ clearly 
 those alive at His coming, and the 
 dead, Chrys. 2 (comp. 1 Cor. xy. 51, 
 52, 1 Thess. iv. 16, 17), not ‘ the spi- 
 
 ry τὶ 157 
 
 Διαμαρτύρομαι ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ EV. 
 καὶ Χριστοῦ ᾽Ιησοῦ τοῦ μέλλοντος 
 
 ’ a Q , 4 A 
 κρίνειν ζῶντας και νεκβους, καὶ τὴν 
 
 ritually alive and dead,’ ἁμαρτωλοὺς 
 λέγει καὶ δικαίους, Chrys. 1, Peile. 
 The mention of the solemn account 
 which all must render is not without 
 emphasis in its application to Timo- 
 thy; he had a weighty office intrusted 
 to him, and of that His Lord εὐθύνας 
 ἀπαιτήσει (Chrys.). 
 
 Kal τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν] ‘and (I solemnly 
 charge thee) by Hismanifestation.’ The 
 reading κατὰ [Rec. with D®KKLN?+; 
 Goth., Syr. (both); Theod., 41.115 here 
 rightly rejected by Griesb., Lachm., 
 Tisch., with ACD'FGN!; 17. 67**; 
 Clarom., Aug., Am., Harl., al., for 
 the less easy καί. With this latter 
 reading the most natural construction 
 seems to be the connexion of τὴν ἐπιφ. 
 with διαμαρτ. as the usual accus. in 
 adjuration; comp. Mark v. 7, Acts xix, 
 13, 1 Thess. v.27. As the foregoing 
 ἐνώπιον could not be joined with ἐπιῴ. 
 x.7.., the nouns naturally pass into 
 the accusative; so Vulg., Clarom., 
 ‘per adventum ejus,’ comp. 1 Cor. 
 xv. 31. De Wette regards τὴν ἐπιφ. 
 as the accus. objecti, e.g. Deut. iv. 
 29, διαμ. ὑμῖν. «τόν τε οὐρανὸν Kal τὴν 
 γῆν; this seems undesirable, as it in- 
 volves a change of meaning of the 
 verb in the two clauses. 
 
 kal τὴν Bao. αὐτοῦ] ‘and by His 
 kingdom;’ no ἕν διὰ δυοῖν, ‘the reve- 
 lation of His kingdom’ (Syr., Beng.), 
 nor an expression practically equiva- 
 lent to τὴν émip. air. (Calv.), but 
 introductory of a second subject of 
 thought,—‘and by His kingdom’ (ob- 
 serve the rhetorical repetition of av- 
 τοῦ), that kingdom (regnum glori«) 
 which succeeding the ‘modificated 
 eternity’ of His mediatorial kingdom 
 (regnum gratic) is to commence at 
 
158 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ 
 
 B. 
 
 ᾿ , ᾽ a 4 ‘ , ’ ~ U I) 
 2 επιφανειαν αὐτοῦ Kat THY βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ, κήρυξον τον 
 
 λόγον, ἐπίστηθι εὐκαίρως 
 
 His ἐπιφάν., and to know neither end 
 nor modification; see Pearson, Creed, 
 Art, vi. Vol. 1. p. 335 (ed. Burt.). 
 
 2. κήρυξον] ‘proclaim,’ ‘preach.’ 
 ‘Notanda est diligenter illatio, qué 
 apte Scripturam (ch. iii, 16) cum pre- 
 dicatione connectit,’ Calv.. Thesolemn 
 charge is not succeeded as in τ Tim. 
 v. 21 by ἵνα with the subj., nor by the 
 inf. as in 2 Tim. 11. 14, but with un- 
 connected yet emphatic aorists; com- 
 pare the very similar instance in 
 1 Thess. y. 14. Examples of such 
 asyndeta are, as might be expected, 
 not uncommon in a style so forcible 
 and sententious as that of St Paul; 
 see the list in Winer, Gr. § 60. 1, 
 p- 475. The aor. is here used rather 
 than the present (1 Thess. l.c.), as 
 being more suitable to the vivid na- 
 ture of the address; comp. Winer, Gr. 
 § 60. 2, p. 476. The distinction in 
 the N.T. between the imper. aor. and 
 pres. can usually be satisfactorily ex- 
 plained, 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 
 Schémann, Iseus, p. 235. 
 ἔπίστηθι] ‘be attentive,’ ‘be ready,’ 
 
 n~ bf a» 
 [absawD $00.00 [et sta in 
 diligentia] Syr. This, on the whole, 
 seems the simplest translation of ἐπι- 
 στῆναι: while it scarcely amounts 
 quite to ‘instare,’ Vulg., it is cer- 
 tainly stronger than ἐπίμενε, 1 Tim. 
 iv. 16, and appears to mark an atti- 
 tude of prompt attention that may at 
 any moment pass into action; comp. 
 Demosth. Phil.11. 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.), 
 
 “2 , ᾿ , 
 ἀκαίρως, ἔλεγξον, ἐπιτίμησον, 
 
 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 Theoph., 
 μετὰ ἐπιμονῆς καὶ ἐπιστασίας λάλησον, 
 except that the action, rather than the 
 readiness to action, is made somewhat 
 too prominent. De Wette and Huth. 
 (after Bretschn. Lez.) retain the semi- 
 local use ‘accede ad ceetus Chris- 
 tiaifos,’ a meaning lexically tenable, 
 (see exx, in Sthweigh. Lex, Polyb. 
 5.0. p. 211), but involving an ellipsi» 
 which St Paul would hardly have 
 made, when τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς x.7.A. could 
 so easily have been supplied: see Leo 
 in loc. εὐκαίρως ἀκαίρως] 
 ‘in season, out of season;’ an ΟΧΥ- 
 moron, made still more emphatic by 
 the omission of the copula; comp. 
 ‘nolens volens, ultro citro,’ éc., Winer, 
 Gr. ὃ 58. 7, p. 461. De Wette cites, 
 as from Wetst., Nicetas Choniates (a 
 Byzantine historian), εὐκαίρως ἀκαίρως 
 ἐπιπλήττειν, but the citation is due to 
 Bengel. The Greek commentators 
 principally refer the εὐκαιρία and 
 ἀκαιρία to Timothy, μὴ καιρὸν ἔχε 
 ὡρισμένον, ἀεί σοι καιρὸς ἔστω, Chrys. ; 
 Calv., Beng., and others to both Ti- 
 mothy and his hearers. The context 
 seems to show that the latter (comp. 
 yer. 3) are principally, if not entirely, 
 in the Apostle’s thoughts, and that 
 the adverbs will be referred most na- 
 turally to them alone ; comp. August. 
 Serm. xtyl. 41 [vil.], ‘Quibus oppor- 
 tune, quibus importune? Opportune 
 utique volentibus, importune nolen- 
 tibus.’ ἔλεγξον) ‘re- 
 prove,’ ‘convict them of their want 
 of holiness and truth;’ comp. ch, iii. 
 16, πρὸς ἐλεγμόν : the stronger term 
 ἐπιτίμησον (-cat, Jude 9), ‘rebuke as 
 
τ ἃ. 
 
 159 
 
 παρακάλεσον. ἐν Ta θυμί i διδαγῆ. ἔ ᾿ 
 ρ ον, ἐν πασῃ μακροθυμίᾳ καὶ διδαχῆ. ἔσται γὰρ 3 
 
 A oe A e , δι , 9 Shi 
 Kalpos re τῆς υγιαινουσῆης t ασκαλιας OUK aveEovrat, 
 
 aha ‘ 8 ὯΝ ’ t e aL 3 , 
 a α κατα Tag toiags ἐπιθυμίας EQUTOLS επισωρευσουσιν 
 
 blameworthy,’ suitably follows. There 
 is some parallelism between the verbs 
 here and the nouns in ch. ili. 16, but it 
 is not by any means exact ; ἐπιτίμησον 
 cannot tally with ἐπανόρθωσις, nor in- 
 deed παρακάλ. with παιδεία (Leo), if 
 the usual force of the latter word be 
 retained. Thechange oforderinFGN!; 
 al.; Vulg., Clarom., Copt., Goth., al., 
 ἔλεγξ. mapax., 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 
 teaching ;’ clause appended notmerely 
 to rapaxdX. (Huth. ), but,asin Lachm., 
 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.?) force of πᾶς may be clearly 
 seen in this combination; it gives to 
 both abstract nouns, esp. to theformer, 
 a concrete application, see notes on 
 Eph.i.8. There is thus no reason for 
 supposing an ἕν διὰ δυοῖν (Grot.), or 
 for tampering with the normal mean- 
 ing of διδαχή, scil. ‘teaching,’—not 
 ‘studium docendi,’ Heinr., Flatt, ‘rea- 
 diness to teach,’ Peile. It may be re- 
 marked that διδαχὴ is only used twice 
 in the Past. Epp., here and Tit. i. 9, 
 while διδασκαλία occurs no less than 
 fifteen times. As a 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. tv. 126, where 
 διδαχὴ is joined with a verbal in -σις, 
 παρακέλευσις. This distinction how- 
 ever 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 James, Peter, Jude, who use 
 neither) use only διδαχή ; Matth. xv. 
 g and Mark vii. 7 are quotations. It 
 is just possible that the more frequent 
 use of διδασκαλία in these Epp. may 
 point to their later date of composi- 
 tion, 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 include Heb.) διδαχὴ and διδασκ. 
 occur exactly an equal number of 
 times. 
 
 3. ἔσται γὰρ καιρός] ‘For there 
 shall be a time:’ argument drawn 
 from the futwre to urge diligence in 
 the present; πρὶν ἢ ἐκτραχηλισθῆναι, 
 προκατάλαβε πάντας αὐτούς, Chrys. 
 It is singular that Beng. should force 
 ἔσται to mean ‘erit et jam est,’ as the 
 allusion to the future is distinctly 
 similar to that in ch. ii. 16, 17, ili. 1, 
 1 Tim. iv. τ. On ὑγιαίνουσα διδασκ., 
 see notes on 1 Tim. 1. το. 
 οὐκ ᾽νέξονται] ‘they will not endure, 
 put up with;’ ‘sordet iis doctrina vera 
 quia eorum cupiditatibus adversatur,’ 
 Leo. ᾿Ανέχομαι occurs Io times in St 
 Paul’s Epp. and 5 times with persons 
 expressed : comp. however 2 Thess. 
 i. 4, Tals θλίψεσιν als ἀνέχεσθε. In 
 the following words observe the force 
 of ἰδίας ; their selfish lusts (surely not 
 ‘inclinations,’ Conyb.) are what they 
 especially follow in the choice of 
 teachers. ἐπισωρεύ- 
 σουσιν] ‘they will heap up,’ ‘will 
 gather round them a rabble, a συρφε- 
 ros, of teachers;’ τὸ ἀδιάκριτον πλῆθος 
 τῶν διδασκάλων διὰ τοῦ σωρεύσουσι 
 ἐδήλωσε, Chrys. The compound form 
 (éxi=‘hinzu;’ addition, aggregation, 
 
100 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TIMOOEON 8. 
 
 διδ , Ε ἢ , 4 , , A 3 4A ‘ ~ 
 4 διδασκαλοὺυς κνηθόμενοι τὴν ἀκοήν, καὶ ἀπὸ μεν τῆς 
 
 4 , 9 A s a 9. , ᾽ ‘4 A 4A ’ 
 ἀληθείας τὴν ἀκοὴν ἀποστρέψουσιν, ἐπὶ δὲ τοὺς μύθους 
 
 5 ἐκτραπήσονται. 
 
 Rost u. Palm, Lea. s.v. ἐπί, c. 4) only 
 occurs here and Cant. ii. 4 (Symm.); 
 the simple in ch. iii. 6, Rom. xii. 20, 
 and in the LXX. 
 
 κνηθόμενοι τὴν ἀκοήν] ‘having itch- 
 ing ears,’ Auth., ‘prurientes auribus,’ 
 Vulg., sim. Clarom.,—both excellent 
 translations ; ‘metaphora desumpta a 
 scabiosis quibus cutis prurit adeo ut 
 scalpendi libidine ardeant,’ Suicer, 
 Thesaur. s.v.: this itch for novelty 
 the false teachers gratified; comp. 
 Philo, Quod Det. Pot. § 21, Vol. 1. 
 p. 205 (ed. Mang.), ἀποκναίουσι γοῦν 
 [οἱ σοφισταὶ] ἡμῶν τὰ ὦτα. Κνήθω 
 (connected with κνάω, Lobeck, Phryn. 
 p- 254) in the active is ‘to scratch,’ in 
 the mildle ‘to scratch oneself’ (Arist. 
 Hist. An. 1x, τὴ, in the pass. ‘to be 
 scratched or tickled,’ and thence (as 
 appy. here) ‘prurire’ in a tropical 
 sense, ξητεῖν τὶ ἀκοῦσαι καθ᾽ ἡδονήν, 
 Hesych., τέρποντας τὴν ἀκοὴν ἐπιζη- 
 τοῦντες, Chrys. In the present pas- 
 sage Theod. and Theoph. (not Chrys., 
 as De W. asserts), and so too, it 
 would seem, Goth., al.,—unless they 
 read κνηθόντας,--- [ἀκα κνηθόμ. as purely 
 passive, paraphrasing it by τερπόμε- 
 νοι: 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, yapyaNifw, is 
 found occasionally in similar applica- 
 tions; 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.λ.] ‘and they will 
 turn away their ears from the truth.’ 
 The result is a complete turning away 
 from every doctrine of Christian truth ; 
 
 ‘ A “ "» lod , 
 σὺ δὲ vide ἐν πᾶσιν, κακοπαθησον, 
 
 ὁρᾶς ὅτι οὐχ ὡς ἀγνοοῦντες σφάλλονται 
 ἀλλ᾽ ἕκοντες, Theoph. On the μῦθοι 
 compare notes on 1 Tim. i. 4; it must 
 be observed however that as the re- 
 ference is future their nature can- 
 not be specifically defined; still, as 
 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 
 more intelligible. ἐκτραπή- 
 σονται] ‘will turn themselves aside ;’ 
 pass. with appy. a middle force, as 
 in x Tim. 1. 6, v. 15; see Winer, Gr. 
 § 39. 2, p. 233, Kriiger, Sprachl. § 52. 
 6, p. 361 sq., and the exx. in notes on 
 1 Tim. 1. 6. 
 
 5. σὺ δέ] ‘But do thou ;’ inmarked 
 contrast to the false teachers; comp, 
 roe a νῆφε ἐν πᾶσιν] 
 ‘be sober in all things,’ ‘sobrius esto,” 
 Clarom., Goth., not ‘be watchful,’ 
 Syr., Vulg. Νήφειν is connected with 
 γρηγορεῖν in τ Thess. v. 6, τ 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 τ Tim. ili. 2. Theod. 
 here, and the Greek expositors on 
 other passages, all seem to refer it 
 to ‘wakefulness,’ appy. of an intensive 
 nature, ἐπίτασις ἐγρηγόρσεως τὸ νή- 
 φειν, Gicum, on 1 Thess. l.c., νήφειν 
 καὶ διεγηγέρθαι, ib. in 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 to be no sufficient grounds for 
 departing from the regular use and 
 
ΒΕΓ Bs: G: 
 
 ι΄ 
 χ- 
 
 161 
 
 wv , Ἵ “ A ὃ ͵ 
 εἐργον ποιησον εὐαγγελιστοῦ, τὴν οιακονίαν σου πληρο- 
 
 φόρησον. 
 
 applications of the word. The deri- 
 vation is doubtful, but it does not 
 seem improbablethat the idea of drink- 
 ing is involved in the root. Benfey 
 (Wurzellex. Vol. 11. p. 74) derives it 
 fromyy and é¢, compared with Sanscr. 
 ap, ‘water ;’ comp. eb-rius. 
 
 κακοπάθησον] ‘suffer aglictions ;’ aor. 
 imp. following the pres. imp., possibly 
 with some degree of emphasis; see 
 notes on ver. 2,and on τ Tim. Vi. 12. 
 εὐαγγελιστοῦ] ‘of an evangelist:’ the 
 εὐαγγελισταὶ did not form a special 
 and separate class, but were generally 
 preachers of the Gospel in different 
 countries, subordinates and mission- 
 aries of the Apostles; comp. Euseb. 
 Hist, 111. 37, ἀποδημίας στελλόμενοι 
 ἔργον ἐπετέλουν εὐαγγελιστῶν, and see 
 Suicer, Thesaur. 5. ν. Vol. I. Ὁ. 1234, 
 and notes on Eph. iv. τι. This was 
 the work to which Timothy was called 
 when he journeyed with St Paul (Acts 
 Xvi. 3); the same duties, as far as con- 
 cerned preaching the Gospel to all 
 within the province of his ministration, 
 still were to be performed, The sphere 
 was only more circumscribed, but 
 there would be many occasions on 
 journeys, dc., ver. g, when Timothy 
 could resume the functions of an ev- 
 ayyeX. in their fullest sense; comp. 
 Taylor, Episcopacy, ὃ 14, Hofmann, 
 Schriftb. Vol. 11. 2, p.250. Theterm 
 épyov has probably an allusion to the 
 laborious nature of the duties; see 
 notes on ch, ii. 15, and comp. exx. in 
 Raphel, Obs. Vol. 11. p. 622. τὴν 
 διακονίαν σου πληρ.] ‘fully perform 
 thy ministry ;’ ‘ministerium tuum im- 
 ple,’ Vulg., Clarom.; πληροφ. τουτέστι 
 πλήρωσον, Chrys. Bezatranslates πλη- 
 pop. somewhat artificially ‘ministerii 
 tui plenam fidem facito,’ i.e. ‘ veris 
 argumentis comproba;’ this is unne- 
 
 Ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπένδομαι, καὶ ὁ καιρὸς 6 
 
 cessary, itis here nearly synonymous 
 
 with, though perhaps a little stronger 
 ¥ 
 
 than πλήρωσον, SON» [absolve, 
 
 adimple]Syr., ‘usfullei,’ Goth. ; comp. 
 τὴν διακονίαν πληροῦν, Acts xii. 25, 
 Col. iv. 17, see Suicer, Thesaur. 5.0. 
 Vol. 11. p. 753. It appy. differs only 
 from the simple form in being a little 
 more intensive in meaning. 
 
 6. “Eye γάρ] ‘For I,’ ἐγώ, with 
 emphasis in reference to the preceding 
 σύ. The force of yap is differently 
 explained; it does not enforce the ex- 
 hortation by showing Timothy that he 
 must soon rely on himself alone (‘jam 
 tempus est ut...natare incipias sine cor- 
 tice,’ Calv.), nor urge him toimitation, 
 comp. ver. 7 (Heinr.), but, as the con- 
 cluding words of ver. 5 seem to sug- 
 gest, urges him to additional zeal on 
 account of the Apostle’s departure; 
 ‘ tuum est pergere quo cepi,’ Leo, On 
 the different modes of explaining the 
 connexion, see Alf, on ver. 5 sq. 
 ἤδη σπένδομαι] ‘am already being 
 poured out (as a drink-offering) ;’ his 
 present sufferings form the commence- 
 ment of the ‘libatio;? not ‘am now 
 ready to be offered,’ Auth., which 
 slightly infringes on the exact force of 
 ἤδη and σπένδ. The particle ἤδη is 
 not simply equivalent to viv, but in 
 its primary use appears rather to de- 
 note what is ‘near to the here’ (comp. 
 Herod. 11. 5, ἀπὸ ταύτης ἤδη Aiyur- 
 Tos), and thence by an intelligible 
 transition ‘ what is near to the nov,’ 
 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. Rost u. 
 Palm, Lex. s, v. 6, where this particle 
 is well discussed. Klotz (Devar. Vol. 
 11. p. 598) is thus far right in not re- 
 
 M 
 
162 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ B. 
 
 7 τῆς ἀναλύσεως μου ἐφέστηκεν. τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα 
 
 6. ἀναλύσεως μου] So Lachm, with ACFGN; 5 mss.; Euseb., Ath.; and 
 appy. rightly. The reading of ed. 1, 2, ἐμῆς dvad., with DEKL; most mss. ; 
 Chr., Theod. (Tisch.), is fairly supported, but by critical authority inferior to 
 that in favour of the text. 
 
 7. καλὸν ἀγῶνα] So Lachm. with ACFGN; 2 mss,; Ath., Chrys. The 
 reading of ed. 1, 2, dy. τὸν καλόν, with DEKL; most mss.; Orig., Euseb. 
 (Tisch.), is apparently now to be withdrawn in favour of the text, the chief 
 
 authorities being divided exactly as in the previous verse, 
 
 ferring ἤδη originally to time, but his 
 derivation from ἤδη, ‘novi,’ is as hope- 
 less as that of Hartung (Partik. Vol. 
 I. p. 223), who refers the δὴ to the 
 Sanser. dina, ‘a day,’ and makes the 
 particle originally temporal; comp. 
 Donalds, Cratyl. § 201. Σπένδομαι, 
 ‘delibor,’ Vulg. (not middle ‘sangui- 
 nem meum libo,’ Wahl, and certainly 
 not ‘aspergor vino,’ 56, ‘preparor ad 
 mortem,’ Grot.), is not synon. with 
 
 θύομαι, ἸΣ] Lash [jugulor, sa- 
 
 crificor] Syr., but points to the drink- 
 offering of wine whichamong the Jews 
 accompanied the sacrifice (Numb, xv. 
 5, xxviii. 7), and was poured περὶ τὸν 
 βωμόν (Joseph. Antiq. UI. 9. 4, comp. 
 Ecclus. 1. 15), while among the hea- 
 then it was commonly poured upon 
 the burning victims (Smith, Dict. An- 
 tig. Art. ‘Sacrificium’). See the very 
 similar passage Phil. ii. 17, in which 
 however there is no reason to refer 
 the allusion to this latter Gentile prac- 
 tice, as Jahn, Antiq. § 378, and appy. 
 Suicer, Zhesaur.s.v. ; see Meyer inloc. 
 Chrys. urges the use of σπένδ. not 
 θύομαι, because τῆς μὲν θυσίας οὐ τὸ 
 πᾶν ἀναφέρεται τῷ Θεῷ, τῆς δὲ σπονδῆς 
 τὸ ὅλον : the allusion seems rather to 
 the Apostle’s anticipated bloody death; 
 see Waterl. Distinct. of Sacr. § 10, 
 Vol. v. p. 264. ἀναλύσεως] 
 ‘departure ; not ‘resolutionis,’ Vulg., 
 
 sd0]> [ut dissolvar] Syr., comp. 
 
 Goth, ‘disvissdis,’ but ‘discessus e 
 
 vita,’ Loesner, ἀπὸ τὸν παρόντα els 
 ἄλλον κόσμον, Coray (Romaic) ; comp. 
 Phil. i. 23, ἐπιθυμίαν ἔχων els τὸ ava- 
 λῦσαι, There is no reason whatever 
 for adopting the explanation of Elsner 
 (Obs. Vol. τι. p. 317) whorefers ava. 
 to “ discessus e convivio,’ comp. Luke 
 xii. 36, and σπένδομ. to the libations 
 of the parting guests: the term is per- 
 fectly general, comp. Philo, Flac. ὃ 21, 
 Vol. 11. p. 544 (ed. Mang.), τὴν ἐκ τοῦ 
 βίου τελευταίαν avadvow, ib.§ 13, p. 534, 
 Joseph, Antig. xx. 4. 1, Clem. Rom. 
 1. 443 see also Deyling, Obs. Vol. τι. 
 No. 46, p. 540, who has commented 
 upon the whole of this and the follow- 
 ing verses with his usual ponderous 
 learning. His interpr. of o7évé., scil. 
 θυσιάζομαι, is however incorrect. 
 ἐφέστηκεν] ‘is at hand,’ Auth.; surely 
 not ‘hath beennighathand,’ Hamm., 
 nor ‘ist vorhanden,’ Luther, comp. 
 Goth. ‘atist’ [adest], but ‘stands by’ 
 (Acts xxii. 20), ‘is all but here,’ ‘steht 
 nihe beyor,’ Huther; comp. Acts 
 XXviii. 2, and notes on ver. 2. 
 
 7. τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα] ‘the good 
 strife,’ scil, πίστεως ; see 1 Tim, Vi. 12. 
 The metaphor itself is thus nobly ex- 
 panded by Chrys.; οὐδὲν τούτου βέλ- 
 τιον TOU ἀγῶνος" οὐ λαμβάνει τέλος ὁ 
 στέφανος οὗτος" οὗτος οὐκ ἀπὸ κοτίνων 
 ἐστίν, οὐκ ἔχει ἄνθρωπον ἀγωνοθέτην, 
 οὐκ ἔχει ἀνθρώπους θεατάς" ἀπὸ ἀγγέ- 
 λων σύγκειται τὸ θεάτρον. How amply 
 does this great expositor repay perusal. 
 If the reading of Rec., τὸν ἀγῶνα τὸν 
 καλόν (comp. critical note), beretained, 
 
ΤΥ 9. 
 
 163 
 
 τ fd A , , A 
 ἠγώνισμαι, τὸν δρόμον τετέλεκα, τὴν πίστιν τετήρηκα' 
 A ) , a 
 λοιπὸν ἀπόκειταί μοι ὁ τῆς δικαιοσύνης στέφανος, ὃν 8 
 
 then the repetition of the article with 
 the epithet must be regarded as giving 
 special force and emphasis; οὗτος ὁ 
 ἀγὼν καλός; val, φησιν" ὑπὲρ yap Xp. 
 ylyverat,Chrys.: comp, Green, Gramm. 
 p. 165. 
 
 ἠγώνισμαι] ‘I 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 
 nunc 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, Gramm. p. 23. 
 τὸν δρόμον τετέλ.] The more general 
 metaphor taken from the games here 
 passes into the more specific one of 
 the course; πῶς δὲ τετέλεκε τὸν δρό- 
 μον; τὴν οἰκουμένην ἅπασαν περιῆλθεν, 
 Chrys.; ‘finivi cursum non tam vite 
 quammuneris,’Leo. See esp. Actsxx. 
 24, Where the Apostle expresses his 
 resolution to do what now he is able 
 to speak of as done, 56. τελειῶσαι τὸν 
 δρόμον μου καὶ τὴν διακονίαν ἣν ἔλαβον 
 παρὰ τοῦ Kupiov Incod. 
 
 τὴν πίστιν τετήρηκα] ‘I have kept the 
 faith;’ the faith entrusted tome I have 
 kept as asacred and inviolable deposit; 
 comp. 2 Tim. i. 14. Πίστις is not 
 ‘ fidelity’ (Kypke, Obs, Vol. 11. p. 375, 
 Raphel, Annot. Vol. τι. p. 623), but 
 ‘faith,’ in its usual and proper sense; 
 ‘res bis per metaphoram expressa 
 nune tertio loco exprimitur proprie,’ 
 Beng. In this noble passage, so cal- 
 culated to cheer the sorrowing heart 
 of Timothy (Chrys.), yea, so full 
 of unutterable consolation to every 
 thoughtful Christian, Chrysostom con- 
 fesses to have long felt a difficulty 
 (ἀπορῶν διετέλουν); and even still De 
 
 Wette finds in it only a contrast to 
 the Apostle’s usual humility (τ Cor. 
 iv. 3 sq.), and but a doubtful adapta- 
 tion of Phil. iii, 12 sq. It is true that 
 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. 
 Serm. xxy. Vol. v. p. 679, Hammond, 
 Pract. Catech.t. 3, p. 41 (A.-C. Libr.), 
 also Neander, Planting, Vol.1. p. 346 
 (Bohn). 
 
 8. λοιπὸν is not for τοῦ λοιποῦ or 
 τὸ λοιπόν, aS any reference, whether 
 to a period in the future, or to dura- 
 tion in the future (see notes on Gal. 
 vi. 17), would not accord with the pre- 
 sent passage; nor can it be for ἤδη, 
 which, if admissible in later writers 
 (Schefer, Longin. Ὁ. 400, cited by De 
 W.), is not demonstrable in St Paul’s 
 Epp. The context seems to show that 
 it is in its most literal meaning, ‘quod 
 reliquum est’ (Beza), sufficiently pre- 
 served in translation by the Syr. 
 
 Ἰοσι oe [a nunc] ‘henceforth,’ 
 
 Auth. ( This adverbial adjective is 
 very frequently used in Polybius ; 
 often, as here, at the beginning of sen- 
 tences, }e. g. Hist. 1. 68. 9, IV. 32. 5, 
 Σ. 45. 2, but usually in the sense ‘pro- 
 inde igitur,’ and answering to our 
 ‘further,’ ‘furthermore:’ a more dis- 
 tinctly temporal use oceurs Hist, 1. 12. 
 4, Where it is carried on by τὸ δὲ τε- 
 λευταῖον. ἀπόκειται] 
 ‘is reserved,’ ‘reposita est,’ Vulg., 
 Clarom. The verb ἀποκεῖσθαι is ap- 
 plied both to future rewards, as here 
 and Col. i. 5, τὴν ἐλπίδα τὴν ἀποκειμ. 
 
 M2 
 
104 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ Β. 
 
 9 ὃ , « age | 3 J Y ~ . , e ’ 
 ATOOWTEL- μοι O Κύριος ἐν ἐκεϊνη TH ἥμερᾳ, ὁ δίκαιος 
 
 , ᾽ , oy > . 5 4 4 a S 9 
 κριτῆς, οὐ μόνον OE ἐμοί ἄλλα καὶ πάσιν τοῖς ἠἡγαπη- 
 
 , A ᾽ , 9 “ 
 κόσιν τὴν ἐπιφανειαν αὐτοῦ. 
 
 ὑμῖν ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς (comp. Matth. vi. 
 20,xix. 21), and to future punishments 
 (Plato, Locr. p. 104 D), and in fact to 
 anything which is set aside, as it were, 
 as a treasure, for future uses and ap- 
 plications; comp. Philo, Quod Det. 
 Pot. ὃ 34, Vol. 1. p. 216 (ed. Mang.), 
 καθάπερ τὰ ἀποκειμένα ἐν σκότῳ Ké- 
 κρυπται, comp. Kypke, Obs. Vol. τι. 
 Ρ. 320. 
 
 ὁ 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 refer- 
 ence (see notes on 1 Tim. vi. 11), 50. 
 τὴν καθόλου ἀρετήν, Chrys., the gen. 
 will most naturally be objecti, ‘the 
 crown for which (so to speak) δικαιο- 
 σύνη has a claim,’ βραβεῖον διδόμενον 
 els τὴν δικαιοσύνην, Coray (Romaic), 
 and is in fact a sort of (proleptic) gen. 
 possessivus; comp. Kriiger, Sprachl. 
 8 47. 7. 6 sq. Huther and Leo, with 
 less probability, make it the gen. of 
 apposition, comparing James i, 12, I 
 Pet. v. 4, Rev. ii. 10, where however 
 ζωὴ δᾶ δόξα are not strictly analogous 
 to the present use of δικαιοσύνη. 
 ἀποδώσει] ‘will give,’ ‘reddet,’ Vulg. 
 In this compound the ἀπὸ does not 
 necessarily convey any sense of due 
 (ὡσανείτινα ὀφειλὴν Kal χρέος, Theoph.), 
 though such a meaning can be gram- 
 matically sustained, and confirmed by 
 occasional exx.; comp. Winer, de Verb. 
 Comp. Iv. p. 132. Here, and for the 
 most part elsewhere, the preposition 
 only seems to allude to the reward as 
 having been laid up, and being taken, 
 so to say, out of some reserved trea- 
 
 sures; ‘ibi hujus verbi sedes propria 
 est, ubi quid de aliqua copia das,’ Wi- 
 ner, p. 12; comp. in acontrary sense, 
 Rom. ii. 6, aud see notes on Gal. iv. 5. 
 ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμ.7 ‘in that day,’ scil. 
 of final retribution. The expression 
 ἐκείνη ἣ ἡμέρα is used three times in 
 this Epistle (ch. i. 12, 18), and once 
 in 2 Thess. (i. 10), the context there 
 referring more especially to the com- 
 ing of the Lord; see Reuss, Théol. 
 Chrét. tv. 21, Vol. τι. p. 243. The 
 following words, ὁ δίκαιος κριτής, stand 
 in apposition to ὁ Κύριος with great 
 weight and emphasis: how this decla- 
 ration of God’s justice is out of har- 
 mony with St Paul’s views of grace 
 (De W.) it is difficult to conceive. 
 The Apostle, as Huther well observes, 
 uses the δικαία κρίσις τοῦ Θεοῦ not only 
 as a ground of warning, but even of 
 consolation; see 2 Thess i. 5. 
 
 τοῖς ἠγαπηκόσιν K.T.A.] ‘who have 
 loved (and do love) His appearing,’ 
 5011. His second ἐπιφάνεια: not His 
 first coming in the flesh (ch. i. 10), nor 
 the first and second (Beng.), but, as 
 the context 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 persist- 
 ence 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 thus no 
 need to give to ἀγαπᾶν the sense of 
 ‘longing for’ (Beza, Wiesing.); it is 
 simply ‘diligere,’ and implies a com- 
 bined feeling of reverence and love, 
 ‘inest notio admirandi et colendi,’ 
 Tittm. Synon. 1. p. 55; seealso Trench, 
 Synon. ὃ 12. Ina practical point of 
 view, the remark of Calv. is gravely 
 
ΤΟ. 
 
 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. 
 
 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 nos- 
 tra.’ 
 
 9. Σπούδασον] ‘ Larnestly endea- 
 
 vour,’ ‘Do thy best,’ Qdods [cure 
 
 sit] Syr.; comp. ver. 21, Tit. iii. 12. 
 There is scarcely a pleonasm in the 
 expression orovdacor...Taxéws( Winer, 
 Gr. § 65.1, p. 531), AS σπουδάζειν in- 
 volves more the idea of earnest and 
 diligent endeavour than that of mere 
 haste (σπεύδειν), though the latter 
 meaning is also sometimes found, 6.0. 
 Aristoph. Thesm. 572, ἐσπουδακυῖα 
 προστρέχει, al.: thus then, as a gene- 
 ral rule, “σπεύδειν est festinare (de 
 tempore), σπουδάζειν properare, 1.6. 
 festinanter et sedulo aliquid facere,’ 
 Tittm. Synon. 1. p. 190. According 
 to Pott, Etym. Forsch. Vol. 1. p. 239, 
 the fundamental idea of both verbs is 
 ‘premere,’ ‘pressare.’ On thestrength- 
 ened vowel (guna), see Donalds. Cratyl. 
 § 223. ταχέως] More fully 
 explained in yer, 21, πρὸ χειμῶνος. It 
 is singular that so intelligent a com- 
 mentator as De W. should represent 
 this invitation as the main object of 
 the letter (Hinleit. § 3); surely the 
 solemn and prophetic warnings of the 
 previous chapters cannot be merely 
 ‘obiter dicta.’ 
 
 10. Anpds] Mentioned with St 
 Luke (Col. iv. 14) as sending saluta- 
 tions to the Colossians, and with the 
 same evangelist and others as a συν- 
 epyés (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 
 
 165 
 
 Σ) πούδασον ἐλθεῖν πρός με ταχέως. 9 
 Δημᾶς γάρ με ἐγκατέλιπεν, ἀγαπήσας 10 
 τὸν νῦν αἰῶνα, καὶ ἐπορεύθη εἰς Θεσσα- 
 
 apostasy (Epiph. Her. 41. 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 thenearly 
 desolate Apostle; τῆς ἀνέσεως ἐρασθείς, 
 τοῦ ἀκινδύνου καὶ τοῦ ἀσφαλοῦς, μᾶλ- 
 λον εἵλετο οἴκοι τρυφᾶν ἢ μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ 
 ταλαιπωρεῖσθαι καὶ συνδιαφέρειν μοι 
 τοὺς παρόντας κινδύνους, Chrys.; see 
 Mosheim, de Reb. Christ. § 60, p. 174, 
 and comp. Taylor, Duct. Dub. 1. 2. 5. 
 19, who however makes the singular 
 mistake of asserting (from Col. and 
 Philem.) that Demas returned to his 
 duty. The name is probably a short- 
 enedform of Demetrius; comp, Winer, 
 RWB. s.v. Vol. i. p. 264. 
 ἐγκατέλιπεν] ‘forsook,’ ‘derelequit,’ 
 Vulg.(codd.),Clarom. Thecompound 
 form seems here to imply leaving be- 
 hind in his troubles and dangers; 
 comp, ver. 16, 2 Cor. iv. 9, and esp. 
 Plato, Symp. p. 179 A, ἐγκαταλιπεῖν... 
 ἢ μὴ βοηθῆσαι κινδυνεύοντι. This 
 meaning however must not always be 
 pressed, as there are severalinstances, 
 esp. in later Greek, in which ἐγκαταλ. 
 seems scarcely different from καταλ.; 
 see Ellendt on Arrian, Alex. 1, 20. 6, 
 p. too. The reading ἐγκατάλειπεν is 
 adopted by Tisch. (ed. 7) with ACD? 
 D3EFGL,—strong uncial authority, 
 The itacism (ει for 1, dc.) however 
 that is found eyen’in the very best 
 MSS. renders it doubtful whether the 
 same tense is not intended, whichever 
 reading be adopted: see ver. 13, 16, 
 20, Tit. i. 5; and Tisch. Prolegom. p. 
 XXXVli, (ed. 7). 
 
 ἀγαπήσας] ‘having loved,’ se, ‘be- 
 
100 ΠΡῸΣ 
 
 TIMOOEON B. 
 
 λονίκην, Konokns εἰς Γαλατίαν, Tiros εἰς Δαλματίαν" 
 ρ 
 
 ΄ ral is » 
 ΤΙ Λουκᾶς ἐστὶν μόνος μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ. Μάρκον ἀναλαβὼν ἄγε 
 
 11. aye] So CDEFGKLN; most mss.; Chrys., al. (Griesb., Scholz, ᾿ 
 
 Lachm. ed. maj., Wordsw., Huther, and appy. Wiesing.). 
 
 The aor. ἄγαγε is 
 
 adopted by Tisch. (ed. 1, 2, 7) on the authority of A; some mss. ; Theod., 
 Dam. (Lachm, ed. stereot., Alf.). It would seem however that thisisinsufficient 
 authority for the change, and that Lachm, was right in the alteration adopted 
 
 in his larger edition. 
 
 cause he loved:’ apparently rather a 
 causal (comp. Donalds. Gr. § 616) 
 than a temporal use of the participle; 
 his love of the world was the cause of 
 his leaying. There is apparently a 
 contrast between this clause and ἠγα- 
 πηκόσιν τὴν émp., ver. 8; ‘luctuosum 
 antitheton,’ Beng. on ver. 8. 
 
 τὸν νῦν 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- 
 
 poral meaning [Syr. ba Pos] 
 which is always more or less apparent 
 in the word, an ethical meaning (as 
 here) may often be traced; see Reuss, 
 Théol. Chrét. tv. 20, Vol. 11. p. 228. 
 
 Θεσσαλονίκην] Perhaps his home; 
 εἵλετο οἴκοι τρυφᾶν, Chrys. For an 
 account of this wealthy city, see notes 
 on 1 Thess. i. 1, Κρήσκης] 
 Of Crescens nothing is known; the 
 accounts of his having been a preacher 
 in Galatia (Const. Apost. vu. 46, Vol. 
 I. p. 385 ed. Cot.) or in Gaul (Epiph.), 
 and having founded the church of 
 Vienne, are mere legendary glosses on 
 this passage. The reading Ταλλίαν 
 [CN ; 5 mss.; Amit.!, 4ith.-Rom.; Eu- 
 seb., Theod.-Mops., Epiphan., Hier.] 
 is probably due to these current tradi- 
 tions. 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 Na- 
 rona a little inland; comp. Plin. Hist. 
 Nat. 11. 26, Cellarins, Notit. Lib, 1. 
 8, Vol. 1. p. 614, and Forbiger, Alt. 
 Geogr. § 121, Vol. 111. p. 838. 
 
 11. Aovkds] Comp. Col. iv. 14, 
 Philem. 24; the evangelist accompa- 
 nied St Paul on his second mission- 
 ary journey (Acts xvi. 10), again, in 
 his third journey, goes with him to 
 Asia (ch, xx. 6) and Jerusalem (ch. 
 xxi. 15), and is with him during his 
 captivity at Cesarea (ch. xxiv. 23 
 compared with ch. xxvii. 1) and his 
 first captivity at Rome (ch. xxviii. 16). 
 Of the later history of St Luke no- 
 thing certain is known; according to 
 Epiphanius (Her. τι. 11), he is said 
 to have preached principally in Gaul; 
 see Winer, RWB. s.y. Vol. 11. p. 35, 
 and comp. the modern continuation 
 of the Acta Sanct. (Octr. 18), Vol. vim. 
 p. 295sq. The name is probably a 
 contraction of Λουκανός, and is said to 
 indicate that he was either a slave or 
 a ‘libertus;’ see Lobeck’s article on 
 substantives in -as, in Wolf, Analecta 
 Lit. Vol. τὰ p. 47 8q. 
 
 Μάρκον] The Evangelist St Mark 
 wasconyertedappy. by St Peter (1 Pet. 
 y. 13); he however accompanied St 
 Paul and his ἀνεψιὸς St Barnabas (Col. 
 iv, 10) on their first missionary jour- 
 ney (Acts xii. 25), but departed from 
 them (ch. 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. το), and 
 
Veit 197 το; 
 
 167 
 
 ‘ lal Yi , lA 
 μετὰ TEeavTOU’ ἔστιν Yap μοι εὔχρηστος εἰς διακονίαν. 
 
 ύχικον δὲ ἀπέστειλα εἰς 
 
 lastly is here invited to return to him, 
 haying been a short time previously 
 (if we adopt a.p. 65—67 as the pro- 
 bable date of 1 Pet.) with St Peter 
 (x Pet. v. 13). Of his after history 
 nothing certain is known; the most 
 current tradition assigns his latest la- 
 bours to Egyptand Alexandria, Epiph. 
 Her. ut.; comp. Acta Sanct. (April 25) 
 Vol, 111. p: 351. ἀναλαβών] 
 ‘having taken (to thee);’ in the pre- 
 sent use of this compound the primary 
 local force of ἀνὰ (more clearly seen 
 Eph. vi. 13, 16) is somewhat obscured 
 (comp. αἀναδιδόναι), though still not to 
 be wholly passed over; Timothy was 
 to take to himself as a companion the 
 evangelist; see Winer, de Verb. Comp. 
 Fase. 111. Ὁ. 1, who very clearly defines 
 the two uses of this prep. in compo- 
 sition, (a) the usual physical sense; 
 (b) the derivative sense, involving the 
 ideas of return or repetition. 
 εὔχρηστος] ‘serviceable,’ ch. 11. 21; 
 possibly, as Grot. suggests, on account 
 of his knowledge of Latin; though 
 more probably in reference to assist- 
 ance in preaching the Gospel; eds τὴν 
 διακονίαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου" καὶ yap ἐν 
 δεσμοῖς ὧν οὐκ ἔληγε [Παῦλος] κη- 
 ρύττων, Chrys. The translation of 
 Auth. ‘for the ministry’ (objected to 
 by Conyb.) may thus be defended; the 
 omission of the art. (after the prep.) 
 of course causing no difficulty; see 
 Winer, Gr. § 19. 2, p. 114. On the 
 wholehowever itis perhaps more exact 
 to retain a neutral translation ‘ for 
 ministering,’ which, while it does not 
 exclude other services, may still leave 
 the idea of the εὐαγγελικὴ διακονία 
 fairly prominent. 
 
 12. ἸΤύχικον δέ] ‘But Tychicus ;’ 
 the δὲ appears to refer to a suppressed 
 thought; not however to one sug- 
 
 "i φεσον. Tov φελόνην 
 
 13 
 gested by the first member of ver, 11 
 (Wieseler, Chronol. p. 428), but, as 
 the more immediate context seems to 
 require, by the concluding portion, 
 εὔχρηστος k.T.r.; ‘bring Mark, I need 
 one who is εὔχρ.; I had one in Tychi- 
 cus (Eph. vi. 21), but he is gone.’ On 
 the accent, see Winer, Gr. § 6, p. 49. 
 
 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 Co- 
 loss. cannot with any show of reason 
 be assumed 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 
 during the 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 Wie- 
 seler (Chronol. p. 472 sq.), and but 
 doubtfully noticed by Winer, RWB. 
 Vol, 11. p. 220 (ed. 3), the ancient opi- 
 nion ofasecondimprisonment(Huseb. 
 Hist. 11. 22) isin such perfect harmony 
 with the notices in these Epp., and 
 has, to say the least, such very plau- 
 sible external arguments in its fa- 
 your, that it seems still to be by far the 
 most satisfactory of all the hypotheses 
 that have as yet been advanced; see 
 esp. Neander, Planting, ch. x. Vol. 1. 
 p. 331 sq. Bohn), Wiesinger, Einleit. 
 § 3, p. 575. εἰς "Hderoy] 
 
108 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 TIMOOEON ΒΡ. 
 
 ὃν ἀπέλιπον ἐν Tpwadi παρὰ ἹΚάρπῳ ἐρχόμενος φέρε, 
 
 14 καὶ τὰ βιβλία, μάλιστα τὰς μεμβράνας. ᾿Αλέξανδρος ὁ 
 
 These words have been urged by Theod. 
 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 is in many 
 respects a very unsatisfactory hypo- 
 thesis. Does however the language 
 wholly forbid the conjecture that Ty- 
 chicus was the bearer of the first epi- 
 stle? It has been frequently remarked 
 in these notes that the first Ep. seems 
 to have been written at no great dis- 
 tance of time from the second, 
 
 13. Τὸν φελόνην] ‘The cloke,’ Auth., 
 ‘penulam,’ Vulg., ‘hakul,’ Goth.,—a 
 long, thick, and appy. sleeveless cloke, 
 with only an opening for the head, 
 Smith, Dict. Antiq. s.v.; φελόνην ἐν- 
 ταῦθα TO ἱμάτιον λέγει" τινὲς δέ [Syr., 
 al.] φασι τὸ γλωσσόκομον ἔνθα τὰ βι- 
 βλία ἔκειτο, Chrys. There seems no 
 reason to depart from the former and 
 usual sense; the second interpr. no- 
 ticed by Chrys., ‘case for writings’ 
 
 (ods As Syr., Wieseler, Chro- 
 
 nol. 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 unimport- 
 ant as a cloke, esp. when near his 
 death. One reason at any rate seems 
 suggested by πρὸ χειμῶνος, ver. 21. 
 The word is found in several other 
 passages, e.g. Poll. Onomast, vit. 65, 
 Athen. Deipn. 111. p. 97, Arrian, Epict. 
 tv. 8; see also Suicer, Thesaur. s.v. 
 Vol. 11. p. 1422, who however, with 
 but little probability, seems to advo- 
 
 cate two forms, φαινόλης and φελόνης 
 (comp. Hesych.) deriving appy. the 
 former from φαίνω and the second 
 from φελλός, ‘pellis.? There is in- 
 deed an almost hopeless confusion 
 among the Greek lexicographers on 
 this word or words, some making φαι- 
 λώνης (Suid.), aliter φελόνης (Etym.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 ‘penula’ (Rost ἃ. Palm, 
 Lex. s.v.), not vice versa, as in Voss, 
 Etymol, s.v. Here Tisch. rightly adopts 
 the orthography best supported by 
 MS. authority. For further informa- 
 tion, see the dissertation ‘de Pallio 
 Pauli’ in Crit. Sacr. Thes. Vol. 11. p. 
 707, the special treatise on the ‘px- 
 nula’ byBartholinusinGreyius,Antiq. 
 Rom. Vol. vi. p. 1167 sq., and the nu- 
 merous archxological notices and reff. 
 in Wolf, Cur. Phil. in loc. 
 
 ἀπέλιπον] On this reading comp. . 
 notes on ver. 10; the authority for 
 ἀπέλειπον (Tisch.) here is ACFGL ; 
 most mss.,—evidence appy. scarcely 
 sufficient to justify the adoption of the 
 somewhat improbable imperfect. 
 
 καὶ τὰ βιβλία] Τί δὲ αὐτῷ τῶν βιβλίων 
 ἔδει μέλλοντι ἀποδημεῖν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν ; 
 καὶ μάλιστα ἔδει, wore αὐτὰ τοῖς πι- 
 στοῖς παραθέσθαι, καὶ ἀντὶ τῆς αὐτοῦ 
 διδασκαλίας ἔχειν αὐτά, Chrys.: more 
 probably perhaps, books generally, 
 Bull, Serm. xv. p. 180 (Oxf. 1844). It 
 is however useless to guess at either 
 the contents of the βιβλία, or the rea- 
 sons for the request, 
 
 μάλιστα tas μεμβρ.] ‘especially the 
 parchments ;’ the former were probably 
 written on papyrus, the latter on 
 parchment, ‘membrana’ (membrum, 
 
eae g ΕΣ 169 
 
 ’ Α ~~ 
 χαλκεὺς πολλά μοι κακὰ ἐνεδείξατο: ἀποδώσει αὐτῷ ὁ 
 , 4 4 wv 9 aA εἴ A x , , 
 Κύριος κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ. ὃν καὶ σὺ φυλάσσου, λίαν 15 
 
 14. ἀποδώσει] This reading is still not free from doubt: the text is sup- 
 ported by ACD'E'FGN; 15 mss.; Aug., Boern., Vulg.; Chrys. (Griesb., 
 Scholz, Lachm., Alf., Wordsw.), and perhaps is now to be preferred. In Ed. 
 1, 2 the later and incorrect form ἀποδῴη (comp. Lobeck, Phryn. p. 348, Sturz, 
 de Dial. Maced. p. 52) was adopted with D®E? (Κ -δωει) L; most mss.; Clarom. 
 (Rec., Tisch.), and with the support of internal considerations of no little 
 weight: see notes. These however now appear to be fairly outweighed by 
 the amount of external evidence (δὲ being added to the authorities for the 
 
 future), and the reading is changed accordingly. 
 
 membrana cutis); comp. Hug, Hinl. 
 Vol.1.§ 11. Itis not wholly improba- 
 ble, as the μάλιστα seems to indicate, 
 that the parchments were writings, 
 whether ‘ adversaria’ or otherwise, of 
 the Apostle himself; comp. Bull, Serm. 
 XY. p. 183 sq.,—a sermon well worthy 
 of perusal. Of Carpus nothing is 
 known, nor of the journey to Troas; 
 it certainly could not have been that 
 mentioned Acts xx. 6, a visit which 
 took place more than six years before. 
 
 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 
 K.T.A.] ‘shewed me much ill treat- 
 ment ;? ‘multa mihi mala ostendit,’ 
 Clarom., Vulg. [mala mihi]; ἔθλιψέ 
 με διαφόρως, Chrys. The trans. ‘hath 
 (2) shown much ill feeling’ (Peile) is 
 unnecessarily restricted, and that of 
 Conyb., ‘charged me with much evil 
 in his declaration’ (forensic use of the 
 active), in a high degree improbable. 
 The ‘intensive’ middle (see Kriiger, 
 Sprachl. § 52. 8. 5, and notes on Eph. 
 ii. 7) ἐνδείξασθαι, with a dat. persone 
 and ace. rei, is frequently used both 
 in a good (e. g. [Demosth.] Halonn. 
 p. 87) and a bad sense (Gen. 1. 15, 
 17), and seems clearly to point to the 
 exhibition of outward acts of injury 
 and wrong to the Apostle. 
 
 ἀποδώσει K.T.A.] ‘the Lord shall re- 
 ward him according to his works ;’ 
 προῤῥησίς ἐστιν, οὐκ dpa, Theod., who 
 however adopts the more difficult 
 reading dodgy. Even if we adopt 
 this latter reading (see crit. note) we 
 may rightly urge that St Paul might 
 properly wish that one who had so 
 withstood the cause of the Gospel 
 (rots ἡμετέροις λόγοις, See Ver. 15), and 
 who had as yet shown no symptom of 
 repentance (ὃν καὶ σὺ k.7.X.), might be 
 rewarded according to his works. On 
 the late and incorrect form ἀποδῴη 
 for ἀποδοίη, comp. Lobeck, Phryn. p. 
 345, Sturz, de Dial. Maced. p. 52. 
 15. ὃν καὶ od K.T.A.] ‘Of whom 
 do thow also beware.’ This advice 
 seems to confirm the supposition that 
 Alexander was then at Ephesus (see 
 ver. 14), unless indeed we also adopt 
 the not very probable opinion of 
 Theod., noticed in notes on ver. 12, 
 that Timothy was not now at Ephe- 
 sus, λίαν γὰρ k.7.A.] 
 ‘for he greatly withstood our words ;’ 
 reason why Timothy should beware of 
 Alexander. If the ἡμέτεροι λόγοι 
 allude to the defence which St Paul 
 made, and which Alexander opposed 
 (see Wieseler, Chronol. p. 464), Alex- 
 ander must be conceived (if he came 
 originally from Ephesus) to have gone 
 to Rome and returned again. It must 
 be observed however, that the studied 
 connexion of this clause with ὃν καὶ 
 
170 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 τό γὰρ ἀντέστη τοῖς ἡμετέροις λόγοις. 
 
 ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ B. 
 
 Ἔν τῆ 
 
 , 9 , ° , , 8 Ν 
 πρώτῃ μου ἀπολογίᾳ οὐδείς μοι παρεγένετο, ἀλλὰ 
 
 17 πάντες με ἐγκατέλιπον μὴ αὐτοῖς λογισθείη: ὁ δὲ 
 
 ’ , , me 9 , , “ a ~ A 
 Κύριός μοι παρεστὴ και ἐνεδυνάμωσέν με, ἵνα δί ἐμοῦ τὸ 
 
 15. αντέστη] So ACD!N! (FG ἀνθέστη); 17; (Lachm., Alf., Wordsw.). 
 The less natural reading ἀνθέστηκεν was adopted in Ed. 1, 2 with D®9EKLN!; 
 most mss.; and many Ff. (Rec., Tisch.); but now on the authority of N! is 
 perhaps rightly changed for the more strongly attested reading in the text. 
 
 16. παρεγένετο] So ACF (rapay.)GN! (Lachm.): συνπ. DEX4 [συμπ. KL; 
 
 al.]; (Tisch.). 
 
 σὺ x.7.., rather than with πολλά μοι 
 kK.T.A., Seems somewhat to militate 
 against this supposition, and to sug- 
 gest a more general reference, τοῖς τοῦ 
 εὐαγγελίου λόγοις. 
 
 16. Ἔϊν τῇ πρώτῃ κιτ.λ.] ‘At my 
 Jirst defence ;’ comp. Phil. i. 7, but 
 observe that there τῇ ἀπολ., on ac- 
 count of the article, must be connect- 
 ed with τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, and that the 
 circumstances alluded to are in all 
 probability 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 dzon. 
 πρώτη was in all probability the ‘actio 
 prima,’ after which, as a ‘non liquet’ 
 (see Smith, Dict. Antiq. 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 sq., and comp. Rein, 
 Rim. Privatrecht, v. 2. 6, p. 450. 
 Conyb. and Howson (St Paul, Vol. 11. 
 Ῥ. 580, ed. 2) deny the continuance 
 under the emperors of this custom of 
 ‘ampliatio,’ on the authority of Geib, 
 Rim. Crim.-Proc. p. 377: this how- 
 ever does not appear to have been 
 fully made out. 
 παρεγένετο] ‘stood forward for me,’ 
 ‘adfuit,’ Vulg., scil. as a ‘patronus’ 
 to plead in my defence, or more 
 
 probably as an ‘advocatus’ to support 
 by his counsel; comp. Herod. vit. 109, 
 πολλοῖσι παρεγενόμην, and, as regards 
 the practice of Christians supporting 
 and comforting their brethren in pri- 
 son, Lucian, de Morte Peregr.§ 13. Ex- 
 amples of the similarly forensic expres- 
 sions συνπαραγίγνεσθαί τινι, παρεῖναί 
 τινι, are cited by Elsner, Obs. 0]. 1. p. 
 319. On the respective offices and du- 
 ties of ‘advocatus’ and ‘patronus,’ see 
 Rein, Rim. Privatrecht, V.1.3,p.425- 
 ἐγκατέλιπον] On the meaning of this 
 compound, see notes on yer. ro. The 
 reason of the desertion was obviously 
 fear; ov 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 
 asI do.’ The reading of ACD*D°EF 
 GL (-λειπον, so Tisch.) appears simply 
 due to itacism; see notes on ver, ro. 
 17. ὁ δὲ Κύριος] In marked con- 
 trast to ver. 16; ‘man, even my 
 friends, deserted me,—but my Lord 
 stood by me.’ ἐνεδυνάμωσέν pe] 
 ‘gave me inward strength,’ i.e, παῤῥη- 
 σίαν ἐχαρίσατο, οὐκ ἀφῆκε καταπεσεῖν, 
 Chrys.; see notes on 1 Tim. i. 12. 
 The purpose of the ἐνδυνάμωσις then 
 follows. The Apostle here, as always, 
 loses all thought and feeling of self, 
 and sees only in the gracious aid min- 
 istered to him a higher and a greater 
 
ἘΣΤΙ 18. 
 
 171 
 
 κήρυγμα aeyperep ies Kal ἀκούσωσιν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη: 
 
 καὶ ἐῤῥύσθην ἐκ στόματος 
 
 purpose: so Chrys., and after him 
 Theoph. and Gicum, 
 
 πληροφορηθῇ] ‘might be fully per- 
 formed, fulfilled,’ ‘impleatur,’ Vulg., 
 ‘adimp.,’ Clarom., Syr.,—not ‘ might 
 be fully known,’ Auth., ‘certiorare- 
 tur,’ Beza, There seems no reason 
 to depart here from the meaning as- 
 signed to πληροῴ. in ver. 5 (see notes); 
 the κήρυγμα (observe, not εὐαγγέλιον) 
 was indeed fully performed, when in 
 the capital of the world, at the highest 
 earthly tribunal, possibly in the Ro- 
 man forum (Dio Cass. LVI. 7, Lx. 4, 
 —this however after the time of Clau- 
 dius is considered somewhat doubtful), 
 and certainly before a Roman multi- 
 tude, Paul the prisoner of the Lord 
 spake for himself and for the Gospel; 
 see Wieseler, Chronol. p. 476, who 
 has illustrated and defended this ap- 
 plication with much ability. 
 
 Kal ἀκούσωσιν «.t.A.] ‘and all the 
 Gentiles might hear:’ further amplifi- 
 cation of the preceding words; not in 
 reference to any preachings after his 
 first captivity (comp. Theod., De W.), 
 but simply in connexion with his public 
 ἀπολογία in this his second captivity. 
 The position of ἵνα, after παρέστη καὶ 
 éved. rather than after ἐῤῥύσθην, seems 
 certainly to confirm this: see Wiese- 
 ler, Chronol. p. 476. The reading of 
 Ree. ἀκούσῃ (with Kl; most mss.; 
 Chrys., Theod.) is only a grammatical 
 correction. kal ἐῤῥύσθην] 
 ‘and I was rescued ; second and fur- 
 ther act of the Lord towards His ser- 
 vant; He inspired him with strength, 
 and more, He rescuedhim. The aor. is 
 purely passive; several of these ‘ de- 
 ponentia media;’ e.g. θεάομαι, ἰάομαι, 
 χαρίζομαι x.7-. have, besides an aor, 
 med,, an aor. in the pass. form which 
 (unlike ἠβουλήθην, ἠδυνήθην K.7T-r.) 15 
 
 λέοντος. ῥύσεταί με ὁ 18 
 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 fur- 
 ther exx. in Winer, Gr. 8 38. 7, p. 
 231. Lachm. and Tisch. read ἐρύσθην 
 with ACN. ἐκ στόματος 
 λέοντος is very differently explained. 
 The least probable interpr. makes 
 it refer to the lions of the amphi- 
 theatre (Mosheim, and even Neand. 
 Plant. Vol. τ. p. 345, note), the most 
 probable perhaps is that of the later 
 expositors (De W., Huth., al.), that 
 it is a figurative expression for the 
 greatest danger, ‘generaliter pericu- 
 lum,’ Calv., comp. 1 Cor. xy. 32, €07- 
 ριομάχησα (see Meyer in loc.), Ignat. 
 Rom. 5, ἀπὸ Συρίας μέχρι Ῥώμης θη- 
 ριομαχῶ, where the somewhat parallel 
 allusions are equally figurative. The 
 most current interpr. is that of the 
 Greek commentators, 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 
 Cesareanus. Wieseler finds in λέων 
 the principal accuser (Chronol. p. 476); 
 alii alia. Leo, with very good sense, 
 retracts in his preface, p. xxxviii., his 
 reference of λέων to Nero, observing 
 the omission of the article (which 
 might have been expected, as in Jo- 
 seph, Antig. xv. 6. 10, τέθνηκεν ὁ 
 λέων). This omission cannot indeed 
 be pressed, as it might be due to cor- 
 relation (Middleton, Art. 111. 3. 7); it 
 may be said however, that it is highly 
 probable that if Nero, or a definite 
 person (human or spiritual, e.g. Satan, 
 comp. Alf. in loc.), had been here 
 meant, it would have been inserted, 
 
172 
 
 Κύριος ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔργου πονηροῦ καὶ 
 βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐπουράνιον" 
 
 3A a Bie. ον ’ 
 αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, αμῆν. 
 
 as in the exx. in Winer, Gr. ὃ 18. 2. Ὁ, 
 p. 114 sq. The most pertinent re- 
 mark is that of Huth., that it is to 
 the στόμα λέοντος (Lwenrachen), not 
 to the λέων, that the attention is prin- 
 cipally directed. 
 
 18. ῥύσεται κιτ.λ.7 ‘The Lord shall 
 rescue me from every evil work ;’ con- 
 tinuation of the foregoing declaration, 
 in a somewhat changed application: 
 καί, which would make the connexion 
 more close, is rightly omitted by 
 Lachm.and Tisch.,with ACD!N; 31, al.; 
 Clarom.,Sangerm., Aug., Vulg., Copt., 
 Arm., al. The change of prep. (cu- 
 riously enough not noticed by appy. 
 any commentator, but marked in 
 Auth.), points more generally to the 
 removal from (see Winer, Gr. § 47, 
 p. 331 compared with p. 327) 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 thwarted the Gospel in his per- 
 son, Thus πονηρὸς retains its proper 
 sense of ‘active wickedness’ (παρὰ τοῦ 
 πόνος γινόμενος, Suidas; comp. Trench, 
 Synon. ὃ 11), 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 ob- 
 jective in ver. 17 to the subjective 
 which is not very satisfactory,—or 
 take ἔργον as equivalent to πρᾶγμα, 
 χρῆμα, ἃ Meaning which though de- 
 fensible (see exx. in Rost u. Palm, 
 Lex. s.y.) 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 
 
 IIPOZ TIMOGEON B. 
 
 “ ‘ z 5" A 
 σωσει ELS τὴν 
 io « 
 
 ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς 
 
 is only said in effect in ver. 7, 8, that 
 he shall be removed from the sphere 
 of evil in every form: ‘decollabitur? 
 liberabitur, liberante Domino,’ Beng. 
 The transition to the next clause, from 
 the ἀπὸ to the eis, becomes 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. § 66. 2, 
 p- 547. There is thus no reason for 
 modifying σώξειν (scil. ἄξει με els 
 k.T.., Coray; comp. Eurip. Iph. T. 
 1068), still less for referring it merely 
 to preservation from earthly troubles 
 (Reuss, Théol. Chrét. 1v. 22, Vol. 11. 
 p. 251), followed as it is by the explicit 
 τὴν βασιλείαν τὴν ἐπουράνιον. In these 
 last words, it has been urged by De 
 Wette and others that we have a 
 thought foreign to St Paul. Surely 
 this is an ill-considered statement: 
 though the mere expression ἡ βασιλ. 
 ἡ ἐπουρ. May not occur again in the 
 N.T., still the idea of a present sove- 
 reignty and kingdom of Christ in 
 heaven is conveyed in some passages 
 (Eph. i. 20, Col. iii. 1), and expressed 
 in others (1 Cor. xy, 25, βασιλεύειν) 
 too plainly to give any cause for diffi- 
 culty in the present case ; comp. Pear- 
 son, Creed, Art. τι. and vi. Vol. 1. p. 
 124, 328 (ed. Burt.), Had this ex- 
 pression 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 «.7.A.] Observe especially 
 this doxology to Christ; ἰδοὺ δοξολογία 
 Tov Ὑἱοῦ ὡς καὶ τοῦ Πατρός, οὗτος γὰρ 
 ὁ Κύριος, Theoph, Waterland might 
 have added this, Def, of Queries, xvm, 
 
EVA To, 
 
 Salutations and per- 
 sonal notices. 
 
 20, 21. Tas 
 
 ἴἼἌσπασαι Ἰ]ρίσκαν καὶ ᾿Ακύλαν καὶ 19 
 
 τὸν ᾿Ονησιφόρου οἶκον. “Epacros ἔμεινεν ἐν Κορίνθῳ, 20 
 
 Τρόφιμον δὲ ἀπέλιπον ἐν Μιλήτῳ ἀσθενοῦντα. Zrov- 21 
 
 Vol. τ. p. 422. On the expression εἰς 
 τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, set notes on 
 Gal. i. 5. 
 
 19. Πρίσκαν καὶ ᾿Ακύλαν] Prisca 
 or Priscilla (like Livia or Livilla, Drusa 
 or Drusilla, Wetst. on Rom. xvi. 3) 
 was the wife of Aquila of Pontus. 
 They became first known to the Apo- 
 stle 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 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 proba- 
 bly gone temporarily, perhaps for pur- 
 poses of trade: of their after history 
 nothing is known, see Winer, RWB. 
 s.v. ‘Aquila,’ Vol. 1. p. 73, and Her- 
 zog, Real-Encycl. Vol. τ. p. 456, who 
 however ascribes their migrations to 
 the difficulties and troubles encoun- 
 tered in preaching the Gospel. 
 τὸν ᾽Ονησ. οἶκον] See notes on ch. i. 
 16. Onesiphorus is said to have been 
 bishop of Corone in Messenia ; Fabri- 
 cius, Lux Evang. p. 117 (cited by Wi- 
 ner). This however must be consi- 
 dered 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 possibly be 
 determined; but it may be said, in 
 spite of the positive assertion of Wie- 
 seler (Chronol. p. 471) to the contrary, 
 that the identity of the Erastus of 
 
 Corinth and Erastus the missionary 
 seems very doubtful. It is scarcely 
 likely that the οἰκονόμος of Corinth 
 would be able to act as one διακονῶν 
 (Acts 1. c.) ; see Meyer, Rom. l. c., and 
 Winer, RWB. s.v. Vol. 1. p. 3353 80 
 also Neand. Planting, Vol. 1. p. 334 
 (Bohn). It is perhaps more probable, 
 from the expression ἔμεινεν ἐν Ἱζορίνθῳ, 
 that the present Erastus was identical 
 with Erastus of Corinth; comp. Hu- 
 ther. All however is conjecture. 
 τρόφιμον] ‘ Trophimus,’ a Gentile 
 Christian of Ephesus, who accompa- 
 nied St Paul (on his third missionary 
 journey) from Troas (Acts xx. 4) to 
 Miletus, Syria, and ultimately Jeru- 
 salem, where his presence was the 
 cause of an uproar (Acts xxi. 29). Le- 
 gendary history says that he was be- 
 headed under Nero: Menolog. Grec. 
 Vol. 111. p. 57 (Winer). 
 ἀπέλιπον] ‘I left;’ certainly not plu- 
 ral, ‘they left,’ 5011, ‘his comrades,’ 
 an artificial interpretation (see Winer, 
 RWB. Art. ‘Troph.’ Vol. 1. p. 634) 
 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 
 Adramyttian ship from which St Paul 
 parted at Myra (Acts xxvii. 6), may 
 be ingenious, but seems in a high de- 
 gree improbable, and is well answered 
 by Wiesinger in hisnoteson 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 
 
174 ΠΡῸΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ B. 
 
 δασον πρὸ χειμῶνος ἐλθεῖν. ᾿Ασπάζεταί σε 
 Εὔβουλος, καὶ Ilovdys, καὶ Λίνος, καὶ ἸΚλαυδία, καὶ οἱ 
 ᾿] A Ld 
 ἀδελφοὶ πάντες. 
 
 22 Ὁ Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς μετὰ τοῦ Benediction. 
 πνεύματος σου. ἡ χάρις μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν. 
 
 22. Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός] So Rec., Griesb., Scholz, with CDEKLN%; al.; 
 Syr., Vulg., al.; Lachm. reads Kup. Ἰησοῦς with A; 31. 1143 Tisch. reads 
 only Κύριος with FGN!; 17. al.; Boern., Ath. Though an interpolation is 
 not improbable, yet the uncial authority for the omission is not strong, F and 
 
 G being little more than equivalent to one authority. 
 
 we suppose this journey to have taken 
 place after the period recorded in the 
 Acts (see notes on 1 Tim. i. 3), and 
 adopt the theory of a secondimprison- 
 ment, all difficulty ceases. Here 
 too the form ἀπέλειπον is found in 
 CL, but the uncial authority greatly 
 preponderates on the other side: see 
 Ver. 10; 13, 10: 
 
 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; mpd χειμῶνος, ἵνα μὴ 
 κατασχεθῇς (Chrys.), whether by dan- 
 gers on the sea (Coray), or difficulties 
 of travelling on the land. In this re- 
 peated desire of St Paul to see his son 
 in the faith, and the mention of a pos- 
 sible cause which might detain him, 
 we see tokens of the Apostle’s pre- 
 science of his approaching death; διὰ 
 πάντων μηνύει τὴν τελευτήν, Theod. 
 Εὔβουλος k.t.A.] Of Eubulus, Pudens, 
 and Claudia, nothing certain is known; 
 they were not companions of the Apo- 
 stle (ver. rr), but only members of the 
 Church at Rome. The identity of the 
 two latter with the Pudens and Clau- 
 dia of Martial (Hpigr. rv. 13, ΧΙ. 53) 
 
 seems very doubtful; see however 
 Conyb. and Hows. St Paul, Vol. τι. 
 p- 595 (ed. 2), Alf. Prolegom. on 2 
 Tim. § 2. 4. Linus is in all probabi- 
 lity the first bishop of Rome of that 
 name; see Iren, Her. 11. 3, Euseb. 
 Hist. ΤΕ. 2. 
 
 22. μετὰ TOU πνεύμ. Tov] ‘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 πνεῦ- 
 μα is the human πνεῦμα (not merely 
 the ψυχή, Coray), the third and high- 
 est part in man; compare Olshausen, 
 Opusc. VI. p. 145 8q., and Destiny of 
 the Creature, Ὁ. 115 Sq. 
 μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν] ‘with you; not exactly 
 ‘tecum et cum tota ecclesia tibi com- 
 miss’ (Mill, Prolegom. Ὁ. 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 separately, 
 and to Tim. and those with him: 1 
 Cor. xvi. 23, 24, is also twofold, but 
 relates to the same persons. 
 
ΠΡΟΣ TITON. 
 

 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 HE Epistle to Titus was written by St Paul apparently only 
 
 a short time after his missionary visit to the island of Crete 
 
 (ch. i. 5), and when on his way to Nicopolis to winter (ch. iii. 12). 
 
 On the occasion of that visit he had left his previous companion 
 
 Titus in charge of the churches of that island, and may not un- 
 
 reasonably be supposed to have availed himself of an early oppor- 
 
 tunity of writing special instructions to him concerning the duties 
 with which he had been entrusted. 
 
 If we are correct in supposing that the Nicopolis above 
 alluded to was the well-known city of that name in Epirus (see 
 notes on ch. ill, 12), we may conceive this Epistle to have been 
 written from some place in Asia Minor, perhaps Ephesus (Conyb. 
 and Hows. St Paul, Vol. 1. p. 566, ed. 2), at which the Apostle 
 might have stayed a short time previous to the westward journey. 
 If we further adopt the not unreasonable supposition that the 
 Apostle was arrested soon after his arrival at Nicopolis, and for- 
 warded from thence to Rome (Conyb. and Hows. loc. cit.), and 
 also agree to consider A.D. 67 or 68 the year of his martyrdom 
 (see Introd. to 2 Tim.), we may roughly fix the date of this 
 Epistle as the summer of A.D. 66 or 67, according as we adopt the 
 earlier or later date for the Apostle’s martyrdom. Whichever 
 date we select, it will clearly be most natural to suppose that the 
 winter alluded to in this Epistle (chap. iii. 12) is not the same as 
 that referred to in 2 Zim. iv. 21, but belongs to the year before it. 
 If we suppose them the same (comp. Alford, Prolegom. on Past. 
 Epp. § 2. 32), the occurrences of 2 ‘Tim. will seem somewhat un- 
 duly crowded; compare Conyb. and Hows. δὲ Paul, Vol. 11. p. 573, 
 note (ed. 2). 
 
 The object of the Epistle transpires very clearly from its con- 
 tents. The Apostle not having been able to remain long enough 
 
 N 
 
178 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 in Crete to complete the necessary organization of the various 
 churches in the island, but having left Titus to complete this re- 
 sponsible work, sends to him all necessary instruction both in 
 respect of the discipline, ecclesiastical (ch. i. 5 sq., comp. ch. iii. 10) 
 and general (ch, ii. 1 sq., ch. 111, 1 sq.), which he was to maintain, 
 and the erroneous teaching which he was to be ready to con- 
 front (ch. 1. 13 sq., ch. iil. 9, al.). The Cretan character had long 
 been unfavourably spoken of (ch. i. 12), and, as we learn from 
 this Epistle, with so much truth (ch. i. 13, 16, ch. iii. 1 sq.), that 
 though Titus was instructed by the Apostle to come to him at 
 Nicopolis (ch. iii. 12), but a short time probably after he would 
 have received the Epistle, it was deemed fitting by the Apostle 
 that he should have written instructions for his immediate guid- 
 ance. On the adaptation of the contents to the object of the 
 writer, see Davidson, Introduction, Vol. 111. p. 90 sq. 
 
 On the genuineness and authenticity of the Epistle, see the 
 Introduction to the First Epistle to Timothy. The Pastoral 
 Epistles in respect of this question must be regarded as a whole ; 
 no writer of credit, except Schleiermacher, having failed to admit 
 that they must all be attributed to one writer. 
 
ΠΡῸΣ TITON. 
 
 ΑΥ̓ΛΟΣ δοῦλος Θεοῦ, ἀπόστολος δὲ I. 
 
 " “ ΄- ‘ , 9 
 Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ κατα πιστιν εκλε- 
 
 Apostolic address and 
 salutation, 
 
 1. Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ] So Lachm. with D°(D! om. Inc.) EFGHIKLN; most 
 mss. (Rec., Griesb., Scholz, De W., and Huth. e sil.); the order is inverted by 
 Tisch, only with A; 3 mss.; Tol., Copt., Syr.-Phil.; Ambrst. (ed.), Cassiod. 
 There certainly does not seem sufficient authority for any change of the re- 
 ceived Text in the present case; indeed it may be remarked that Tisch. appears 
 to have been somewhat precipitate in always maintaining the sequence ἀπόστ. 
 Xp. Inc. in St Paul’s introductory salutations. In τ Cor. i. 1 and 2 Tim.i.1 
 certainly, in Col, i. τ and 1 Tim. i. 1 probably, and perhaps in Phil. i. 1 (δοῦλοι), 
 this order may be adopted; but in 2 Cor. i. 1, and especially in Rom. i. r and 
 here, it seems to be insufliciently supported, and is rightly rejected by Lachm.; 
 in Eph. i. 1 the authority is slightly in favour of Inc. Xp. 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. ‘Ine. (Tisch.) 
 seems more probable, Ἰησοῦ and σωτῆρος being thus brought in more imme- 
 diate contact. It is not well to be hypercritical, but variations even in these 
 frequently recurring words should not wholly be passed over. 
 
 δὲ here has not its full antithetical 
 force (Mack), but, as in Jude 1, ap- 
 pears only to distinguish and specify, 
 by the notice of another relation in 
 which the subject stood to another 
 
 CuHarrer I. 1. ϑοῦλος Θεοῦ] ‘a 
 servant of God;’ the more general de- 
 signation succeeded by ἀπόστ....Ἰ. X. 
 the more special. On all other occa- 
 sions St Paul terms himself δοῦλος 
 
 Ἴ. X., Rom. i. 1, Phil. i. r, comp, Gal. 
 i. 10; so also 2 Pet, i. 1, Jude 1, comp. 
 Rey. i. 1, and see James i. 1. Surely 
 a forger would not have made a devi- 
 ation so very noticeable: in saluta- 
 tions more than in anything else pe- 
 culiarities would have been avoided. 
 The expression itself occurs in Acts 
 xvi. 17, Rev. xv. 3, compare ib. x. 7; 
 and in a slightly different application, 
 1 Pet. ii. 16, Rev. vil. 3. 
 
 ἀπόστολος δέ] ‘and further an Apo- 
 stle,’ &c.; more exact definition. The 
 
 genitive; see esp. Klotz, Devar. Vol. 
 11. p. 359; comp. Winer, Gr. ὃ 53. 7. 
 b, p. 393, and the list of exx. (though 
 not very critically arranged) in E1- 
 lendt, Lex, Soph. Vol, 11. p. 388. For- 
 getfulness of this common, perhaps 
 even primary (comp. Donalds. Cratyl. 
 § 155) use of δὲ has led several expo- 
 sitors into needlessly artificial and el- 
 liptical translations; comp. even Peile 
 in loc. κατὰ πίστιν κ-.τ.λ.] 1.6. ‘for 
 (the furtherance of ) the faith of God’s 
 elect ;’ the πίστις τῶν ἐκλὰ. is the desti- 
 
 N 2 
 
180 ΠΡῸΣ 
 
 TITON. 
 
 a“ lal ae. 3 Φ , a 93 ’ , a= 9 
 2 Krav Θεοῦ καὶ ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας τῆς κατ᾽ εὐσέβειαν, er 
 
 nation of the apostleship: not ‘secun- 
 dum fidem,’ Vulg., Clarom., which, 
 though defended by Matthies, seems 
 very unsatisfactory ; the faith or know- 
 ledge of individuals cannot, without 
 much explaining away (comp. Peile), 
 ever be the rule or norma of the Apo- 
 stle’s office, The meaning is thus 
 nearly as enunciated by Theoph., πρὸς 
 τὸ πιστεῦσαι τοὺς ἐκλεκτοὺς Ot ἐμοῦ, 
 scarcely 50 much as νὰ διδάσκω τοὺς 
 ἐκὰλ, τὴν εἷς αὐτὸν πίστιν (Coray), and 
 the sentiment is parallel to Rom. 1. 5. 
 Though it may be admitted that the 
 idea of ‘object,’ ‘intention,’ is more 
 fully expressed by efsand rpés(Matth.), 
 it still seems hopeless to deny that 
 κατὰ in such exx. as κατὰ θέαν, Thu- 
 cyd. VI. 30, καθ᾽ ἁρπαγήν, Xen. Anab, 
 Ill. 5. 2, al., plainly points to and im- 
 plies some idea of purpose; see Rost 
 τ. Palm, Lew. s.v. 11. 3, Vol. 1. p. 1598, 
 Jelf, Gr. § 629. If it be not undue 
 refinement, we may say that in the 
 three prepp., els, πρός, κατά, ‘object’ 
 is expressed in its highest degree by 
 the first, and in its lowest by the last; 
 but that the two former are very near 
 to each other in meaning, while κατὰ 
 does not rise much above the idea of 
 ‘specialreference to,’ ‘destination for,’ 
 We might thus perhaps say εἰς rather 
 marks immediate purpose, πρὸς ulti- 
 mate purpose, kara destination; comp. 
 notes on Eph. iv. 12. These distine- 
 tions must however be applied with 
 great caution. It need scarcely be 
 said that there is here no parenthesis; 
 see Winer, Gr. § 62. 4, p. 499. 
 
 ἐκλεκτῶν Θεοῦ] ‘of the chosen of God.’ 
 There is nothing proleptic in the ex- 
 pression, sc. τῆς ἐκλογῆς τοὺς ἀξίους, 
 Theod., and more expressly, De Wette: 
 ‘the faith of the elect’ forms one com- 
 pound idea, it is on the πίστις rather 
 than the defining gen. that the mo- 
 
 ment of thought principally rests. 
 Nay further, Acts xiii. 48 shows this, 
 —that election is not in consequence 
 of faith, but faith in consequence of 
 election; comp, Eph. 1, 4, and notes 
 in loc. 
 
 ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθ.1 ‘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,’ Es- 
 tius. ᾿Αλήθεια 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. 1.5.1 Τ τη: 11, 19: τῆς κατ᾽ 
 εὐσέβειαν may be translated ‘ which is 
 according to godliness’ (see notes on 1 
 Tim. vi. 3), but as Gospel truth can 
 scarcely be said to be conformable to 
 εὐσέβεια (still less to be ‘regulated by’ 
 it, Alf.), and as it is not probable that 
 the prep. would be used in the same 
 sentence in different senses, the more 
 naturalmeaningis, ‘whichis(designed) 
 for godliness,’ scil. which is ‘most na- 
 turally productive of holy living and 
 a pious conversation,’ South, Serm. 5, 
 Vol. 11. p. 214 (Tegg). The meaning 
 adopted by Huther, ‘which is allied 
 to’ (‘bezeichnet die AngehGrigkeit’), 
 even in such passages as Rom, x. 2, 
 is more than doubtful; see Winer, Gr. 
 § 49. ἃ, p. 359. On the meaning of 
 εὐσέβεια, see notes on τ Tim, ii. 2. 
 
 2. ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι K.7.d.] ‘resting on 
 hope of eternal life,’-—not ‘in spem,’ 
 Vulg., Clarom,, Goth, (‘du’): comp. 
 Rom. iy. 18, vill. 20, 1 Cor. ix. 10; 
 hope is the basis on which all rests, 
 see Winer, Gr. § 48. 6, p. 349. The 
 connexion of the clauseisnot perfectly 
 
ΤΡ; τὸ: 
 
 181 
 
 ἐλπίδι ζωῆς αἰωνίου, ἣν ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ ἀψευδὴς Θεὸς πρὸ 
 , +} , 5 , A a “Ὁ, A ’ 
 χρόνων αἰωνίων, εφανερωσεν δὲ καιροῖς ἰδίοις τὸν λογον 3 
 
 clear ; it can hardly be connected with 
 ἀπόστολος, as it would thus form a co- 
 ordinate clause to κατὰ πίστιν K.T.d.; 
 and would more naturally be intro- 
 duced by some specifying particle ; 
 nor can it be attached to ἐπίγνωσιν 
 k.T.X., 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 πί- 
 στιν---εὐσέβειαν : the Apostle’s calling 
 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. 
 ἔπηγγείλατο] ‘promised,’ ‘proclaimed, 
 50. in the way of a promise ;’ so Rom. 
 iv. 21, Gal. ili. 19. The force and 
 truth of the ἐπαγγελία is then en- 
 hanced by the expression, unique in 
 the N. T. ὁ ἀψευδὴς Θεός. Comp. 
 however for the sentiment, Heb. vi. 18, 
 and for the expression, Eurip. Orest. 
 364, Τλαῦκος ἀψευδὴς θεός. 
 
 πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων] ‘before eternal 
 times.’ It is not easy to decide whe- 
 ther χρόνοι αἰώνιοι are here to be con- 
 sidered (a) as simply ‘very ancient 
 times’ (ed. 1, Wiesing.), πολλοὺς καὶ 
 μακροὺς χρόνους (Coray), comp. Caly. 
 in loc.; or (Ὁ) as equivalent to mpd τῶν 
 αἰώνων (Theod., Alf., Wordsw., al.), 
 asin 2 Tim.i. 9. In favour of (a) is 
 the reflection that though it may be 
 truly said that God loved us from all 
 eternity (Cicum.),itstill cannot strictly 
 be said that {wn αἰώνιος was promised 
 before all eternity (see Hammond in 
 loc.): in favour of (0) is the use of 
 αἰώνιος in the preceding member, and 
 the partial parallel afforded by 2 Tim. 
 i. g. On careful reconsideration the 
 preponderance is perhaps to be regard- 
 ed as slightly in favour of (0), and the 
 
 ἐλπὶς itself and general counsels re- 
 lating to it, rather than the specific 
 promise of it, to be conceived as 
 mainly referred to. 
 
 3. ἐφανέρωσεν δέ] ‘but manifested; 
 in practical though not verbal anti- 
 thesis to ἐπηγγείλατο, ver. 2; the 
 primary ἐπαγγελία (Gen. 111, 15), yea, 
 even the cardinal ἐπαγγελία to Abra- 
 ham (Gal. iii. 8), required some fur- 
 ther revelation to make it fully dave- 
 pov. The more strict antithesis occurs 
 in Col. 1. 26, where however the al- 
 lusion is different; comp. Rom. xvi. 
 25,26, 2 Tim. 1, 9, 10. The accus, 
 objecti after ἐφανέρωσεν is clearly τὸν 
 λόγον αὐτοῦ, not ζωήν (icumen., al.), 
 or ἐλπίδα ἑωῆς (Heinr.). The Apostle 
 changes the accus. for the sake of 
 making his language more exact; ζωὴ 
 αἰώνιος was, strictly speaking, in re- 
 gard of its appearance, future: the 
 Gospel included both it and all things, 
 whether referring to the present or 
 the future; see Theoph. in loc., who 
 has explained the structure clearly 
 and correctly. καιροῖς 
 ἰδίοις] ‘in His own,’ i.e. ‘in due sea- 
 sons ;’ τοῖς ἁρμόζουσι, Tots ὠφελημένοις, 
 Theoph, On the expression and the 
 peculiar nature of the dat., see notes 
 on: Tim. ii, 6. Here and in τ Tim, 
 vi. 15 (comp. Acts i. 7) the reference 
 to the subject, God, is so distinct, that 
 the more literal translation may be 
 maintained. τὸν λόγον 
 αὐτοῦ] ‘His word,’ i.e. as more fully 
 defined by ἐν κηρύγματι x.7.d., the 
 Gospel, which was the revelation both 
 of the primal mystery (Rom. xvi. 26), 
 and all succeeding ἐπαγγελίαι, and 
 was announced to man in the κήρυγμα 
 (‘the message,’—not, as sometimes 
 understood, -ε κήρυξι) of the Lord 
 and His Apostles. To refer it to the 
 
182 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ ΤΙΤΟΝ. 
 
 ᾽ “ιν , a? 5. a ee) ‘ “- 
 QUTOU EV κηρύγματι ὁ ἐπιστεύθην εγω κατ επιταγὴν TOV 
 
 ΄ e ~ QO cal Ti , , ‘ A 
 4 σωτῆρος yuwv Ocov, λιτῷ γνησίῳ τέκνῳ κατα κοινὴν 
 
 ’ 
 πιστιν. 
 
 ’ epee [oe 2 ee, Θ A ‘ ‘ : 4 
 χάρις και εἰιρηνῆ απο εου πατρος Kal ρι- 
 
 στοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν. 
 
 Logos, with Jerome, Cicum., and 
 others, is wholly unsatisfactory. On 
 the change of construction, see Winer, 
 Gr. § 63. 1, p. 501, where numerous 
 exx. are cited of far more striking 
 anacolutha. 6 ἐπιστεύθην 
 ἐγώ] ‘with which I was intrusted;’ 
 on this construction, see Winer, Gr. 
 § 32. 5, p. 204, and for a similar ex- 
 ample, Gal. ii. 7. κατ᾽ ἐπιταγὴν 
 κιτ.λ.] ‘according to the command- 
 ment of our Saviour God;’ so, but 
 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 intended; comp. notes 
 on ch. 111. 6, and Usteri, Lehrb. τι. 2. 
 4, Pp. 310: the analogy of 1 Tim. i. 1 
 renders this here, and perhaps also 
 in ch, il. 11, very doubtful. The ἀξιό- 
 πίστον implied in the ὃ ἐπιστεύθην 
 (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, i. 1, where the clause is consi- 
 dered. 
 
 4. Τίτῳ γνησίῳ τέκνῳ] ‘to Titus, 
 my true (genuine) child,’ The receiver 
 of this epistle is far too distinctly 
 mentioned to make the supposition 
 admissible thatit wasaddressed(comp. 
 ch. iii. 15) to the Church, see Wiesing. 
 Einleit. τ. 1, p. 260. Of Titus com- 
 paratively littleis 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 him- 
 self, and with the Apostle at Jerusa- 
 lem on his third visit (notes on Gal. ii. 
 1). He was sent by St Paul, when 
 
 at Ephesus, to Corinth (2 Cor. vii. 6), 
 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 vil. 6), and is sent by 
 him with the second Ep. to Corinth 
 (2 Cor. viii. 6, 16 sq.). The remaining 
 notices of Titus are supplied by the 
 Pastoral Epp.; see 2 Tim. iv. το, Tit. 
 i, 5 sq.,iii.12. According to tradition, 
 Titus was bishop of Crete (Euseb. 
 Hist. 11. 4), and died on that island 
 (Isid. de Vit. Sanct. 87); see Winer, 
 RWB. 's.v. ‘Titus,’ Vol. 1. p. 625, 
 and comp. Acta Sanct. (Jan. 4), Vol. 
 I. p. 163. On the expression γνησίῳ 
 τέκνῳ, see notes on 1 Tim. i. 2. 
 
 κατὰ κοινὴν πίστιν] ‘in respect of 
 (our) common faith;’ ‘fidei respectu 
 que quidem et Paulo patri et Tito 
 filio communis erat,’ Beza, τὴν ἀδελὰ- 
 φότητα ἡνίξατο, 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. 3, and on Eph. i. 
 2. There seems now fully sufficient 
 authority to justify Tisch. in his in- 
 sertion of καὶ and omission of the 
 more individualizing ἔλεος, with C!D 
 EFGIN, 17. 73.137; Vulg., Clarom., 
 Copt., Syr., Aath.-Platt, Arm.; Chrys. 
 (expressly), and many others. The 
 
B45: 
 
 I left thee in Crete to 
 ordain elders, who must 
 have all high moral 
 qualities and teach 
 sound doctrine. 
 
 reading however is not perfectly cer- 
 tain, as ἔλεος (Rec.) is retained in 
 AC?KL; Syr.-Phil., al.; Theod., al., 
 and is adopted by Lachm. The addi- 
 tion of τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν to Xp. Ino. 
 (comp. ch, iii. 6) is peculiar to this 
 salutation. 
 
 5. ἀπέλιπόν oe k.T.Xd.] “1 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 (comp. Wieseler, 
 Chronol. p. 329 sq.) seem all to be un- 
 satisfactory, and have been well in- 
 vestigated by Wiesinger, Hinleit. τ. 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 not 
 very long after the Apostle’s release 
 from his first imprisonment at Rome; 
 see Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 338 
 sq. (Bohn), Conyb. and Hows. St 
 Paul, Vol. 11. p. 565 (ed. 2), Guerike, 
 Einleit. ὃ 48. τ, p. 396 (ed. 2). There 
 seems to be no sufficient reason for 
 supposing, 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 
 established, and had indeed taken 
 sufficient root to break out into here- 
 sies. Christianity might have been 
 planted there after one of the early 
 dispersions ; Cretans were present at 
 the Pentecostal miracle (Acts 11. 11): 
 see esp. Wiesing. on ver. 5. Tisch. 
 
 183 
 
 , , > >? , 5 ’ 
 Tovrov χάριν ἀπέλιπόν σε ἐν Κρήτῃ, 5 
 e A , ΟἹ ’ A 
 iva τὰ λείποντα ἐπιδιορθώσῃ καὶ KaTa- 
 
 , x , , e 
 στήησης κατα πολιν πρεσβυτέρους, ως 
 
 here reads ἀπέλειπον, with ACFGI 
 (Li κατέλειπ.) : see however notes on 2 
 Tim, iv. το. κατέλιπον (Rec.) has only 
 the support of D?EKL; most mss. 
 τὰ λείποντα] ‘the things that are lack- 
 ing ;? ‘que ego per temporis brevita- 
 tem non potui coram expedire,’ Beng. 
 The more special directions at once 
 follow. ἐπιδιορθώσῃ] ‘thou 
 mightest further set in order ;’ the prep. 
 ἐπί, according to its common force 
 in composition, denoting ‘insuper;’ 
 St Paul διωρθώσατο, Titus ἐπιδιορθοῦ- 
 ται, 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 δειορθώσῃς), might 
 have had its termination suggested 
 by καταστήσῃς below. The middle, it 
 must be owned, has here scarcely any 
 force (Winer, Gr. § 38. 6, p. 230), un- 
 less it be taken as an instance of what 
 is now called an intensive or ‘dynamic’ 
 middle; see Kriiger, Sprachl. § 52.8 
 sq., and comp. notes on 1 Tim. iv. 6. 
 κατὰ πόλιν] ‘in every city, ‘from 
 city to city ; ‘oppidatim,’ Caly.; comp. 
 Acts xiv. 23, χειροτονήσαντες... κατ᾽ 
 ἐκκλησίαν πρεσβυτέρους, and as regards 
 the expression, Luke viii. 1, Acts xv. 
 21, xx. 22. The deduction of Bp. 
 Taylor, ‘one in one city, many in 
 many’ (Hpisc. § 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 k.7.4.] ‘as I directed thee,’ ‘ dis- 
 posui tibi,’ Vulg.; in reference, as De 
 W. says, not only to the ‘Dass,’ but 
 the ‘Wie,’ as the following requisi- 
 
184 ΠΡῸΣ 
 
 ΤΊΎΓΟΝ. 
 
 ee | A , ” ’ 4 o ὑἱὰ ce 
 6 eyo σοί διεταξάμην, εἰ τις εστίν ἀνέγκλητος, μιας γυναι- 
 
 ‘ ’ , ” , 4 Ω , " , 
 κος ἀνήρ, τέκνα EXWY TITTA, μὴ εν κατηγορίᾳ ἀσωτιας 
 
 A 9 , a A ‘ 425 ἐν awe > 
 7 ἢ ανυποτακτα. δεῖ yap τον επισκοπον ἀνέγκλητον εἰναι 
 
 tions further explain; the Apostle not 
 only bid Titus perform this duty, but 
 taught him how to do it wisely and 
 efficiently. The verb is elsewhere in 
 the N.T. active when joined with a 
 dat. (Matt. xi, 1, 1 Cor. ix. 14, xvi. 
 1), except in Acts xxiv. 23. This 
 again seems to be more a ‘dynamic’ 
 middle than the ordinary middle ‘of 
 interest.’ The force of the compound 
 διατάσσω may be felt in the ‘ disposi- 
 tio (se. eorum que incomposita vel im- 
 plicata et perplexa erant;’ comp. 1Cor. 
 xi. 34) which a directive command 
 tacitly involves: see Winer, de Verb. 
 Comp. Fase, v. p. 7. 
 
 6. εἴ τις κιτ.λ.] Sif any one be un- 
 accused,havenaught laid to his charge;’ 
 el μηδεὶς ἔσχεν ἐπισκῆψαι ἐν τῇ ζωῇ, 
 Chrys. ; substance of the directive or- 
 der, and in close connexion with what 
 precedes. The form of expression cer- 
 tainly does not seem intended to im- 
 ply 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 
 ἀνέγκλητος (‘sine crimine,’ Vulg.), see 
 notes on 1 Tim. 111, ro, and Tittm. 
 Synon. τ. p. 31. μιᾶς γυναικὸς 
 ἀνήρ] ‘a husband of one wife.’ for the 
 meaning of this expression see notes 
 on 1 Tim. ili, 2. The remark of Chrys. 
 may be here adduced, as certainly 
 illustrative of the opinion held in the 
 early Church; tore yap ἅπαντες, tore, 
 ὅτι el μὴ κεκώλυται παρὰ τῶν νόμων τὸ 
 μὴ δευτέροις ὁμιλεῖν γάμοις, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως 
 πολλὰς ἔχει τὸ πρᾶγμα κατηγορίας. 
 τέκνα K.T.A.] ‘having believing chil- 
 dren;’ the emphasis seems to rest on 
 πιστά; the Christian πρεσβύτερος was 
 
 not to have heathen, Judaizing, or 
 merely nominally-believing children; 
 comp. 1 Tim. 111. 4, 5, where the duty 
 of the father is more fully specified. 
 The expression, not perhaps without 
 reason, has been urged as a hint that 
 Christianity had been established in 
 Crete for some time. 
 
 μὴ ἐν κατηγορίᾳ ἀσωτίας] ‘not in 
 accusation of dissoluteness,’ i.e. ‘not 
 accused of,’ Auth. The κατηγορία 
 (John xviii. 29, 1 Tim. vy. 19) is, as 
 it were, something in which they 
 might be inyolved, and out of which 
 they were to take care to be always 
 found: οὐκ εἶπε μὴ ἁπλῶς ἄσωτος 
 [εἶπεν ἁπλῶς μὴ ἄσ., conject, Bened.], 
 ἀλλὰ μηδὲ διαβολὴν ἔχειν τοιαύτην, 
 Chrys. On the meaning and deriva- 
 tion of ἀσωτία, see notes on Eph. v. 18. 
 ἢ ἀνυπότακτα] ‘or unruly,’ scil. dis- 
 obedient to their parents; the reason 
 is given in 1 Tim. ili. 5, paraphrased 
 by Theoph., ὁ yap τὰ οἰκεῖα τέκνα μὴ 
 παιδεύσας, πῶς ἄλλοις ῥυθμίξει; For 
 the meaning of ἀνυπότ., see notes on 
 1 Tim. i. 9. 
 
 7. τὸν ἐπίσκοπον] ‘every bishop,’ 
 or, according to our idiom, ‘a bishop,’ 
 Auth.; on the article, see notes on 
 Gal. iii. 20, and on the meaning of 
 the term ézicx., 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 official 
 capacity, the one in which his rela- 
 tions to those under his rule would be 
 most necessary to be defined. The ex- 
 cellent treatise of Bp. Pearson, Minor 
 Works, Vol. 1. p. 271 8q., may be 
 added to the list of works on episco- 
 pacy noticed on τ Tim. l.c,: his posi- 
 
IEG, «7p 50. 
 
 185 
 
 e a 9 , 4 9 , 4 5" , A , 
 ὡς Θεοῦ οἰκονόμον, μὴ αὐθάδη, μὴ ὀργίλον, μὴ πάροι- 
 νον, μὴ πλήκτην, μὴ αἰσχροκερδῆ, ἀλλὰ φιλόξενον, φιλ- ὃ 
 
 tions are, that episcopal government 
 was ‘sub Apostolis, ab Apostolis, in 
 Apostolis,’ p. 278. ὡς Θεοῦ 
 οἶκον. ] ‘as being God’s steward ;’ Θεοῦ 
 not without prominence and emphasis. 
 While the previous title is enhanced 
 and expanded, the leading requisition 
 (ἀνέγκλ.) is made more evidently ne- 
 cessary from the position occupied by 
 thesubject: hemust indeed be dvéyxx., 
 as he is a steward of the οἶκος Θεοῦ, 
 the Church of the living God (τ Tim. 
 iii, 15). On this use of ws, see notes 
 on Eph. v. 28. From what has been 
 said, and from the more pregnant 
 meaning of οἰκονόμος in that passage, 
 we can hardly consider 1 Cor. iv. 1 
 (compare τ Pet. iv. ro) as a strict 
 parallel of the present passage. 
 
 μὴ αὐθάδη] ‘ not self-willed ;’ not, in 
 a derivative sense, ‘haughty,’ Goth, 
 (‘héuh-hdirts’), but,as Syr. correctly, 
 though somewhat paraphrastically, 
 
 n vy Bam Vu. 
 
 Ole) 2829 ;57A% [auc- 
 tus voluntate sui-ipsius]; τὴν δ᾽ αὐθά- 
 decay αὐταρέσκειαν λέγω, Greg. Naz. 
 Vol. u. p. 199. Theadj., as its deri- 
 vation suggests (αὐτός, ἥδομαι), implies 
 a self-loving spirit, which in seeking 
 only to gratify itself is regardless of 
 others, and is hence commonly ὑπερ- 
 npavos, θυμώδης, παράνομος, Hesych. ; 
 rightly defined as ‘qui se non accom- 
 modat aliis, ideoque omnibus incom- 
 modus est, morosus,’ Tittm. Synon. 1. 
 p- 743; see esp. Theophrast. Charact. 
 xy., [Aristot.] M. Moral. 1. 29, the 
 essay on this word in Raphel, Annot. 
 Vol. 11. p. 626, and the numerous exx. 
 in Wetst. in loc., and Elsner, Obs. 
 Vol, 11. p. 320. It occurs in the N.T. 
 only here and 2 Pet. 11. 10, τολμηταὶ 
 αὐθάδεις. Winer has here re- 
 marked that μὴ rather than οὐ is pro- 
 
 perly used, as the qualities are marked 
 which the assumed model bishop ought 
 to have to correspond to his office (Gr. 
 § 59. 4. obs., p. 566, ed. 5,—appy. 
 withdrawn from ed. 6): in a general 
 point of view the observation is just, 
 but in this particular case the μὴ is 
 probably due to the objective form of 
 the sentence in which it stands; see 
 Donalds. Gr. § 594. ὀργίλον] 
 ‘soon angry,’ ‘irascible;’ dm. λεγόμ. 
 in N.T.; thus specially defined by 
 Aristotle (Ethic. tv. 11), of μὲν οὖν 
 ὀργίλοι ταχέως μὲν ὀργίζονται καὶ οἷς 
 οὐ δεῖ καὶ ἐφ᾽ οἷς οὐ δεῖ καὶ μᾶλλον ἢ 
 δεῖ, παύονται δὲ ταχέως. The length- 
 ened termination -λος, esp. in -ηλός, 
 -ωλός, denotes ‘habit,’ ‘custom,’ 
 Butim. Gr. ὃ 119. 13 6. μὴ 
 πάροινον, μὴ πλήκτην] See notes on 
 1 Tim. ili. 3, and on αἰσχροκερδῆ, ib. 
 ili. 8, and comp. below, ver. 11. 
 
 8. φιλόξενον] ‘hospitable ;’so1 Tim. 
 ill, 2, comp. y. 10, 3 John 5, 6. This 
 hospitality,as Conyb. remarks, would 
 be especially shown when Christians 
 travelling from one place to another 
 were received and forwarded on their 
 journey by their brethren. The pre- 
 cept must not however be too much 
 limited; comp. Heb. xiii. 2. 
 φιλάγαθον] ‘a lover of good,’ ‘benig- 
 num,’ Vulg., Clarom.; see notes on 2 
 Tim. 111. 3. Here at first sight the 
 masculine reference (‘ bonorum aman- 
 tem,’ Jer.) might seem more plausible 
 as following φιλόξενον (Est.); still, on 
 the other hand, the transition from the 
 special to the general, from hospita- 
 lity to love of good and benevolence, 
 would appear no less appropriate; see 
 Wisd. vil. 22, where the ref. (though so 
 implied by Schleusner, Lez. s.v.) does 
 notseemto be to persons. Bothmean- 
 ings are probably admissible (Rost 
 
180 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 1G ig 
 
 Q ayabor, σώφρονα, δίκαιον, ὅσιον, ἐγκρατῆ, ἀντεχόμενον 
 
 > 
 
 σ΄ ‘ A ‘ a , e ὃ ‘ ‘ 
 TOU κατὰ τὴν διδαχὴν πίστου λόγου, (va θυνατος ἡ και 
 
 a“ ’ ~ U ~ e , ‘ ‘ 
 παρακαλεῖν ἐν τὴ διδασκαλίᾳ TH ὑγιαινούση Kat τοὺς 
 
 ’ , 9 ,’ 
 ἀντιλέγοντας ελεγχειν. 
 
 u. Palm, Lew. 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. g, where the 
 meaning of σωφροσύνη is briefly inves- 
 tigated. 
 δίκαιον, dovov} ‘righteous, holy;’ comp. 
 1 Thess. ii. 10, Eph. iv. 24. The 
 ordinary distinction recapitulated by 
 Huth., περὶ μὲν ἀνθρώπους δίκαιος, 
 περὶ δὲ θεοὺς ὅσιος (see Plato, Gorg. p. 
 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 «#quum 
 postulat,’ Synon. I. p. 21: ὅσιος, as 
 the same author admits (p. 25), is 
 more allied with ἁγνός, and, as Har- 
 less has shown (phes, p. 427), in- 
 volves rather the idea of a ‘holy 
 purity,’ see notes on Eph. iv. 24. The 
 derivation of ὅσιος seems to be very 
 doubtful; see Pott, Ltym. Forsch. Vol. 
 I. p. 126, compared with Benfey, Wur- 
 zellex. Vol. 1. p. 436. 
 ἐγκρατῆ] ‘temperate ;’ am. λεγόμ. in 
 N.T., but the subst. occurs in Acts 
 xxiv. 25, Gal. v. 23, 2 Pet. i. 6, and 
 the (nearly unique) verb éyxparev- 
 εσθαι, in τ Cor. vii. g, ix. 25. The 
 meaning is sufficiently clear from the 
 derivation (τὸν πάθους κρατοῦντα, τὸν 
 καὶ γλώττης καὶ χειρὸς καὶ ὀφθαλμῶν 
 ἀκολάστων, Chrys.), and though of 
 course very pertinent in respect of 
 ‘libido’ (comp. De W.), need in no 
 way belimited initsapplication;comp. 
 Suicer, Thesaur. 5.0. Vol. 1. p. rooo. 
 9. ἀντεχόμενον] ‘holding fast ;’ 
 comp. Matth. vi. 24, Luke xvi. 13, 
 
 and in a somewhat more restricted 
 sense 1 Thess, vy. 14, ἀντεχ. τῶν ἀσθε- 
 νῶν. The ἀντὶ appears to involve a 
 faint idea of holding out against some- 
 thing hostile or opposing (comp. Rost 
 u. Palm, Lex. s.v.), which however 
 passes into that of ‘steadfast appli- 
 cation to,’ €c.; e.g. τῆς θαλάσσης, 
 Thucyd. 1. 13, Polyb. 1. 58. 3; ἐλπί- 
 dos μηδεμιᾶς, Polyb., 1. 56. 9, in which 
 latter author the word is yery com- 
 mon; see Schweigh. Lex. Polyb. 5.0. 
 τοῦ κατὰ K.T.A.] ‘the faithful word 
 which is according tothe teaching ;’ i.e. 
 the true Christian doctrines set forth 
 by, and agreeing with Apostolic teach- 
 ing; comp. 2 Tim. i. 13, λόγων ὧν 
 παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἤκουσας, ib. 111. 14, μένε ἐν 
 οἷς ἔμαθες. There is some slight diffi- 
 cultyin theexplanation. Theposition 
 of the words shows plainly that there 
 are not two distinct specifications in 
 respect of the λόγος (Heydenr.), but 
 one in respect of the πιστὸς λόγος, Viz. 
 that it is κατὰ διδαχήν, ‘eum qui se- 
 cundum doctrinam est fidelem sermo- 
 nem,’ Vulg.: the only doubt is what 
 meanings are to be assigned to κατὰ 
 and διδαχή; is it (a) ‘sure with re- 
 spect to teaching others’ (‘verba ip- 
 sius sint regula veritatis,’ Jerome), 
 διδαχὴ having thus an active refer- 
 ence? or (ὁ) ‘sure in accordance with 
 the teaching received’ (‘as he hath 
 been taught,’ Auth.), διδαχὴ being 
 taken passively? Of these (b) seems 
 certainly to harmonize best with the 
 normal meaning of πιστός ; the faith- 
 ful word is so on account of its ac- 
 cordance with Apostolic teaching. 
 Of the other interpr. that noticed by 
 Flatt, 2 (compare Caly.), ‘doctrina eru- 
 
10,5 LO; 0 
 
 There are many evil 
 teachers and seducers ; 
 the Cretan character 
 has always been bad, 
 so rebuke and warn 
 them. In the unbe- 
 lieving and polluted 
 there is neither purity, faith, nor obedience. 
 
 diendis hominibus inserviens,’ seems 
 as unduly to press κατὰ (comp. ver. τ) 
 as that of Raphel (Annot. Vol. 1. 
 p. 681), ‘sermo doctrine,’ unduly ob- 
 scures it. καὶ παρακαλεῖν 
 Κιτλ.] ‘as well to exhort with the 
 sound doctrine as,’ &c.: on the con- 
 nexion xal...kal, see notes on 1 Tim. 
 iv. 10. Ἔν is here instrumental, a 
 construction perfectly natural, espe- 
 cially in cases like the present, when 
 ‘the object may be conceived as exist- 
 ing in the instrument or means,’ Jelf, 
 Gr. §622. 3; see Winer, Gr.§ 48. a, p. 
 346, and notes on 1 Thess. iv. 18. On 
 ὑγιαιν. didack., See notes on τ Tim.i. 10. _ 
 ἐλέγχειν] ‘to confute:’ the words of 
 Chrys. are definite, ὁ yap οὐκ εἰδὼς μά- 
 χεσθαι τοῖς ἐχθροῖς...καὶ λογισμοὺς Ka- 
 θαιρεῖν... πόῤῥω ἔστω θρόνου διδασκαλι- 
 κοῦ. The clause leads on the subject 
 of ver. το. 
 ‘gainsayers,’ see notes on ch. il. 9. 
 το. γάρ] In confirmation more es- 
 pecially of the preceding clause. 
 πολλοὶ Kal ἀνυπ. | ‘many unruly vain- 
 talkers and inward deceivers.’ In his 
 second edition Tisch. has here made 
 two improvements; he has restored καὶ 
 with DEFGKL; al.; Clarom., Aug., 
 Vulg., al.; Chrys., Dam. (Rec.)—its 
 omission though well supported [ACI 
 ἐξ ;30mss. ; (Lachm.)]being apparently 
 referable to an ignorance of the idi- 
 omatic πολὺς καί (Jelf, Gr. § 759. 4. 
 2); he has also removed the comma 
 (Lachm.) after dvu7., as that word is 
 clearly a simple adjective, prefixed to 
 ματαιολ. and φρεναπ., and serving to 
 enhance the necessity for ἐπιστομίζειν. 
 The ματαιολ. (ἅπ. λεγόμ., but see 1 
 Tim. i. 6) and φρεναπάται (am. λεγόμ., 
 but see Gal. vi. 3) are the leading 
 
 On τοὺς ἀντιλέγοντας, 
 
 187 
 
 A 4 
 Εἰσὶν yap πολλοὶ καὶ ἀνυπότα- ΤΟ 
 , , 
 KTOL ματαιολόγοι καὶ φρεναπαται, μα- 
 A A a 
 ATTA οἱ EK περιτομῆς, OVS δεῖ ἐπιστο- II 
 
 substantival words. On φρεναπάτης 
 (‘mentis deceptor,’ Jerome, ‘making 
 to err the minds of men,’ Syr.), which 
 seems to mark the inward-working, 
 insinuating, character of the deceit 
 (‘quia...mentes hominum demulcent 
 et quasi incantant,’ Calv.), see notes 
 on Gal, vi. 3, and on ‘the case of 
 deceivers and deceived’ generally, 
 Waterl. Serm. xxrx. Vol. v. p. 717 564. 
 ot ἐκ περιτομῆς defines more particu- 
 larly the origin of the mischief; comp. 
 ver. 14. The deceivers here mentioned 
 were obviously not unconverted Jews, 
 but Judaizing Christians, a state of 
 things not unlikely when it is remem- 
 bered that more than half a century 
 before this time Jews (perhaps in 
 some numbers) were living in Crete; 
 see Joseph. Antiq. xv. 12. 1, ib. Bell. 
 Jud. τι. 7. 1, and Philo, Leg. ad Caium, 
 8 36, Vol. 1. p. 587 (ed. Mang.). On 
 the expression οἱ ἐκ mepir., comp. 
 notes on Gal. ill. 7. 
 
 II. οὕς δεῖ «.7.A.] ‘whose mouths 
 must be stopped,’ Auth.; a good idio- 
 matic translation, very superior to the 
 Vulg., ‘quos oportet redargui,’ which, 
 though making the reference to τοὺς 
 ἀντιλ. ἐλέγχ. (Ver. g) a little more evi- 
 dent, is not sufficiently exact. ’Em- 
 στομίζειν has two meanings; either (a) 
 ‘frenis coercere,’ ἐπιστομιεῖ καὶ éyxa- 
 λινώσει, Philo, Leg. Alleg. m1. 53, 
 Vol. τὸ, 117 (ed. Mang.); comp. 
 James iii, 3, and the large list of exx. 
 in Loesner, Observ. Ὁ. 4253; or (0) ‘ ob- 
 turare os,’ Beza, Soa@ O;,2a%o 
 
 ΕΝ ΡΥ. 
 [oceludere os] Syr., Theoph.,—the 
 meaning most suitable in the present 
 case, and perhaps most common; see 
 the exx. in Wetst. and Elsner in loc., 
 
188 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ ΠΠΌΝ. 
 
 , 4 ¢ x 4 , YU aA 
 μίζειν, OLTLVES ὅλους OlKOUS ανατρεπουσιν διδάσκοντες α 
 
 12 μὴ δεῖ αἰσχροῦ κέρδους χάριν. εἶπέν τις ἐξ αὐτῶν ἴδιος 
 
 the most pertinent of which is perhaps 
 Lucian, Jup. Trag. § 35, ἰχθύν σε ἀπο- 
 φανεῖ ἐπιστομίζων. 
 
 οἵτινες} ‘inasmuch as they;’ explana- 
 tory force of ὅστις, see notes on Gal. 
 iv. 24. ὅλους K.T.A.] 
 ‘overthrow whole houses; ’ i.e. ‘subvert 
 the faith of whole families,’ the em- 
 phasis resting appy. on the adjective. 
 ᾿Ανατρέπω occurs again 2 Tim. ii. 18, 
 but here, from its combination with 
 οἴκους, is a little more specific: exx. of 
 ἀνατρέπειν, the meaning of which how- 
 ever is quite clear, are cited by Kypke, 
 Obs. Vol. τι. p. 378. The formula is 
 adopted in Cone. Chalced. Can. 23. 
 ἃ μὴ δεῖ] ‘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 exist- 
 ence, though really that existence was 
 not doubtful; see Winer, Gr. ὃ 55. 3, 
 p- 426. In reference to the distinc- 
 tion between ἃ ov δεῖ and ἃ μὴ δεῖ, 
 Winer refers to the exx. collected by 
 Gayler, Part. Neg. p. 240; as however 
 that very ill-arranged list will proba- 
 bly do little for the reader, it may be 
 further said that ἃ οὐ 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 subject is presented. On 
 the use of ov and μὴ with relatives, 
 see the brief but perspicuousstatement 
 of Herm. on Viger, No, 267, and Krii- 
 ger, Sprachl. § 67. 4. 3. 
 
 αἰσχροῦ κέρδους] ‘base gain,’—mark- 
 ing emphatically the utterly corrupt 
 character of these teachers. It was 
 not from fanatical motives or a mor- 
 bid 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 πλεονεξίαν τρόπος 
 οὕτως ἐπιχωριάζει παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς, ὥστε 
 παρὰ μόνοις Ἰρηταιεῦσι τῶν ἁπάντων 
 ἀνθρώπων μηδὲν αἰσχρὸν νομίζεσθαι 
 κέρδος, Hist. v1. 46. 3; see Meursius, 
 Creta, Iv. το, 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 THs γνώμης ἀβέβαιον, 
 Theod. To refer the pronoun to the 
 preceding οἱ ἐκ περιτ., ΟΥ̓ πολλοὶ κ.τ.λ. 
 (as appy. Matth.), would involve the 
 assumption that the Cretan Jews had 
 assimilated all the peculiar eyil ele- 
 ments of the native Cretan (seeDeW.), 
 a somewhat unnecessary hypothesis. 
 The Cretans deserved the censure, not 
 as being themselves false teachers, but 
 as readily giving ear to such. 
 ἴδιος αὐτῶν mpod.] ‘their own pro- 
 phet. 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 ano- 
 ther country, οὐ yap Ιουδαίων προφή- 
 της, Theod.; see Winer, Gr. ὃ 22. 7, 
 p. 139. 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 
 mpod. in its fullest sense, being termed 
 a θεῖος ἀνήρ, Plato, Legg. 1. p. 642 D, 
 and coupled with Bacis and the Ery- 
 threan Sibyl by Cicero, de Div. 1. 18, 
 
ἘΠῚ Σ τὸ. 
 
 189 
 
 αὐτῶν προφήτης Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσται, κακὰ θηρία, γα- 
 
 στέρες ἀργαί. 
 
 e , a 3 4 . , 
 ἡ μαρτυρία αὕτη ἐστὶν ἀληθής. 
 
 δι᾿ ἣν 13 
 
 Se 8 4“) 5 A 9 , 4 « , 3 - 
 αἰτίαν ἔλεγχε αὐτοὺς ἀποτόμως, να υγιαινωσιν ἐν TH 
 
 The verse in question is referred by 
 Jerome to the work of Epim. περὶ 
 χρησμῶν. For further details see Fa- 
 bricius, Bibl. Greca,t. 6, Vol. τ. p. 36 
 (ed. 1708), and Heinrich, Epimenides 
 (Leips. 18or). del ψεῦσται} 
 ‘always liars.’ Repeated again by 
 Callimachus, Hymn. ad Jov. 8, and if 
 antiquity can be trusted, a character 
 only too well deserved: hence the cur- 
 rent proverb, πρὸς Κρῆτα κρητίζειν, 
 Polyb. Hist. vir. 21. 5, see also ib. 
 vi. 48. 5, Ovid, Art. Am. τ. 298 ; comp. 
 Winer, RWB. s.v. ‘Kreta,’ Vol. 1. 
 p. 676, Meursius, Creta, Iv. το, Ὁ. 223. 
 Coray regards this despicable vice as 
 not improbably a bequest which they 
 received from their early Phoenician 
 colonists; comp. Heeren, Histor, Re- 
 searches, Vol, τι. p. 28 (Transl.). 
 κακὰ θηρία] ‘evil beasts,’ in reference 
 to their wild and untamed nature 
 (comp. Joseph. Antiq. XVII. 5. 5, πονη- 
 pov θηρίον in reference to Archelaus, 
 and the exx. in Wetst. and Kypke), 
 and possibly, though not so pertinent- 
 ly, to their aicxpoxépdeca and utter 
 worthlessness, Polyb. Hist. v1. 46. 3. 
 They formed the first of the three bad 
 κάππα᾽5 (Κρῆτες, Καππάδοκαι, Κίλικες, 
 τρία κάππα κάκιστα), and appy. de- 
 served their position. 
 
 γαστέρες ἀργαί] ‘idle bellies,’ i.e. ‘do- 
 nothing gluttons,’ Peile, comp. Phil. 
 iii, 19; in ref. to their slothful sen- 
 suality, their dull gluttony and licen- 
 tiousness; ‘gule 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 ex- 
 amples of ἀργὸς in the fem. form, 
 nearly all from late writers, are given 
 by Lobeck, Phryn. p. 105. 
 
 13. ἡ μαρτυρία K.t.A.] ‘This testi- 
 mony is true.’ It is very hasty in De 
 W. to find in this expression 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 quid deterrimi fuerint,’ Caly.), 
 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, Doct. of 
 Trin. ch, 4, Vol, 11. p. 460 sq. 
 δι’ ἣν αἰτίαν] ‘for which cause,’ on 
 account of these national characteris- 
 tics; ἐπειδὴ ἦθος αὐτοῖς ἐστιν ἱταμὸν 
 καὶ δολερὸν καὶ ἀκόλαστον, Chrys. 
 Compare notes on 2 Zim. i. 12. 
 ἔλεγχε K.7.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 propagate the error. The ad- 
 verb ἀποτόμως (σκληρῶς, ἀπαραιτήτως, 
 Hesych.) only occurs again in 2 Cor. 
 xiii. 10 (ἀποτομία is found in Rom. 
 xi. 22, in opp. to χρηστότηΞ), and, as 
 the derivation suggests, marks the as- 
 perity (‘asperum et abscissum castiga- 
 tionis genus,’ Valer. Max. 11. 7. 14) of 
 the rebuke: in Dion, Hal. vim. 61, 
 the substantive stands in opp. to τὸ 
 ἐπιεικές, and in Diod. Sic. ΧΧΧΙΙΙ. 
 frag. 1, to ἡμερότης. See further exx. 
 in Wetst. Vol.11.p. 75, and esp. Kypke, 
 Obs. Vol, 11. p. 179, compared with 
 Fritz. Rom. Vol. 11. p. 508. 
 ἵνα K.7.A.] ‘in order that they may be 
 sound in the faith;’ object and intent 
 of the recommended course of action. 
 De Wette here modifies the meaning 
 of ἵνα as if it were used to specify 
 the substance of the reproof: suchan 
 
190 
 
 TIPO. SEFTON. 
 
 ᾽ ,.᾿ . “ -“ 
 14 πίστει, μὴ προσέχοντες [Ιουδαϊκοῖς μύθοις καὶ ἐντολαῖς 
 
 15 ἀνθρώπων ἀποστρεφομένων τὴν ἀλήθειαν. 
 
 , 
 σαντα Κα» 
 
 θαρὰ τοῖς καθαροῖς" τοῖς δὲ μεμιαμμένοις καὶ ἀπίστοις 
 
 interpr. is grammatically admissible 
 (Winer, Gr. § 44. 8, p. 299, see notes 
 on ch, ii. 12 and on Eph. i. 17), but in 
 the present case not necessary; the 
 Cretan disciples were doctrinally sick 
 (νοσοῦντες, τ Tim, vi. 4), the object of 
 the sharp reproof was to restore them 
 to health; comp. Theod. The sphere 
 and element in which that doctrinal 
 health was to be enjoyed was πίστις. 
 
 14. μὴ προσέχοντες] ‘not giving 
 heed;’ see notes on 1 Τίηι. ἱ. 4; and 
 on the μῦθοι, here specially character- 
 ized as Ἰουδαϊκοί, see also notes on the 
 same verse, where the nature of the 
 errors condemned by these Epp. is 
 briefly stated. ἐντολαῖς 
 ἄνθρ.7 ‘commandments of men’ (comp. 
 Matth. xv. 9, Col. ii, 22), in antithesis 
 to the commandments of God (Wie- 
 sing.), though this antithesis, owing to 
 the necessarily close connexion of ἀν- 
 θρώπων and the tertiary predicate ἀπο- 
 στρεφομένων, must not be too strongly 
 pressed: compare the following note. 
 The context seems clearly to show 
 that these ἐντολαὶ were of a ceremonial 
 character, and involved ascetical re- 
 strictions, τὰς παρατηρήσεις τῶν Bpw- 
 μάτων, Theoph. They had moreover 
 an essentially bad origin, viz. ἀνθρ. 
 ἀποστρ. THY ἀλήθειαν : a γυμνασία σω- 
 ματική, based not on the old ceremo- 
 nial law but on the rules of a much 
 more recent asceticism, formed the 
 background of all these command- 
 ments, ἀποστρεφ. THY ἀλήθ.] 
 ‘turning aside from the truth,’ se. 
 ‘turning aside as they do,’—not (if we 
 adopt the strictest rules of translation) 
 ‘who are turning away,’ &c. Alf.; see 
 Donalds. Gr. § 492, and comp, notes 
 to Transl. On ἀποστρέφ. compare 
 notes on 2 Tim. i. 15, and on the ab- 
 
 sence of the article before droarpedo- 
 μένων, Winer, Gr. § 20. 4, p. 126. If 
 the article had been prefixed to the 
 two substantives and to the participle, 
 then the two thoughts, that they were 
 ordinances of men, and that these men 
 were also very bad men, would have 
 been made more prominent; comp. 
 notes on Gal, iii. 26: if the art. had 
 stood before the part. only, then the 
 ἄνθρωποι would be regarded as an un- 
 defined class, which it was the object 
 of the participial clause more nearly 
 to specify; see notes on 1 Tim. iii. 13. 
 15. πάντα ‘All  things,—not 
 merely in reference to any ‘ciborum 
 delectum,’ Caly., but with a greater 
 comprehensiveness (comp. οὐδὲν be- 
 low), including everything to which 
 the distinction of pure and impure 
 couldbe applied. Herehowever Chrys, 
 seems unduly inclusive when he says, 
 οὐδὲν ἀκάθαρτον, el μὴ ἁμαρτία μόνη ; 
 thestatement must necessarily be con- 
 fined to such things and such objects 
 as can be the materials and, as it were, 
 the substrata for actions (De W.); 
 comp. Rom. xiv. 20. The insertion of 
 μὲν after πάντα is rightly rejected by 
 Lachm. and Tisch. with ACD'E!F GN); 
 al.; as being very probably occasioned 
 by the following δέ. Winer, Gr. ὃ ὅτ, 
 5, Ῥ. 493 Sq., urges its juxtaposition 
 to a word with which it is not natu- 
 rally connected (Acts xxii. 3, 1 Cor. 
 ii. 15) as a reason why it was struck 
 out; this is plausible, the uncial au- 
 thority however seems too decided to 
 admit of this defence. 
 τοῖς καθαροῖς] ‘for the pure,’ scil. 
 ‘for them to make use of ;’ dat. com- 
 modi, not dat. judicii, ‘in the estima- 
 tion of,’ which, though admissible in 
 this clause (see exx. in Scheuerl. Synt. 
 
Tf tka 15, ΤῸ: 
 
 191 
 
 e 
 
 204 ’ 9 ‘ , Ἐπ σι 4 a ι ε 
 οὐδὲν καθαρόν, αλλὰα μεμίανται αὐτῶν Kal O VOUS καὶ ἡ 
 
 , 
 συνείδησις. 
 
 Θεὸν ὁμολογοῦσιν εἰδέναι, τοῖς δὲ ἔργοις 16 
 
 ° “ Ἄν. ἊΝ A ω “ 4 A lal 
 apvovv7al, βδελυκτοὶ οντες Και ἀπειθεῖς και προς παν 
 
 Ε " A " , 
 epyov ἀγαθὸν ἀδόκιμοι - 
 
 § 21. 5, p. 163, Winer, Gr. § 31. 4, 
 p. 190), would not be equally so in the 
 second; the μεμιαμμένοι and ἄπιστοι do 
 not merely account all things as im- 
 pure (παρὰ τὴν μεμιασμ. γνώμην ἀκά- 
 θαρτα γίγνεται, Cicum.), but convert 
 them into such; ‘pro qualitate vescen- 
 tium et mundum mundis et immun- 
 dum contaminatis fit,’ Jerome. Their 
 own inwardimpurityis 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. 
 Not only are they deficient in all moral 
 purity, but destitute of all πίστις. 
 The former epithet stands in more ex- 
 act antithesis to καθαροῖς, while the 
 latter heightens the picture. Practical 
 unbelief (ver. 16) is only too commonly 
 allied with moral pollution. On the 
 form μεμίαμμ. [with AC(D! pemavy., 
 FG μεμειαμμ.) KLN; al.], comp. Lo- 
 beck, Phryn. p. 35. 
 
 ἀλλὰ μεμίανται κ.τ.λ.7 ‘but both their 
 mind and their conscience have been 
 polluted;’ declaration on the positive 
 side of what has just been expressed 
 on the negative, and in direct confirm- 
 ation of it. It need scarcely be ob- 
 served that ἀλλὰ is by no means equi- 
 valent to yap; the latter would give a 
 reason why nothing was pure to the 
 polluted; the former states with full 
 adversative force the fact of an internal 
 pollution, which makes the former 
 statement ‘that nothing external was 
 pure to them’ feeble when contrasted 
 with it; seeesp. Klotz, Devar. Vol. τι. 
 p. 9. On the more emphatic enume- 
 ration καὶ... καί, see notes on 1 Tim. iv. 
 
 το, and Donalds. Gr. § 550 sq. 
 
 ὁ νοῦς is here not merely the ‘mens 
 speculativa’ (comp. Sanderson, de ODI. 
 Conse. § 17, Vol. Iv. p. 13, ed. Jacobs.), 
 but the willing as well as the thinking 
 part of man (Delitzsch, Psychol. tv. 5, 
 p. 140, Beck, Bibl. Seelenl. 11. 18. Ὁ, 
 Ῥ. 54); see also the notes on 1 Tim. 
 Vi. 5. ἡ συνείδησις is the conscience, 
 the moral consciousness within (see 
 esp. notes on 1 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. τ. 
 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, to- 
 ties Deum negamus,’ Jerome. 
 ἀρνοῦνται] ‘deny (Him); in opposi- 
 tion to ouot, The Vulg. (perhaps) 
 anda fewcommentators(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 con- 
 struction. Though so common in the 
 N.T., ἀρνεῖσθαι is only used by St 
 Paul in the Past. Epp.; add Heb. 
 Xd, 2H βδελυκτοί] ‘ abomi- 
 nable ;’? dm. λεγόμ. in N.T.; comp. 
 Prov. xvil. 15, ἀκάθαρτος καὶ βδελυ- 
 KTOS (TayiNn), 2 Mace. i. 27, ἐξουθενη- 
 μένους καὶ βδελυκτούς. There is no 
 oblique reference to idolatry (βδελύγ- 
 ματα, Deut. xxix. 17, al.), nor neces- 
 sarily to the abomination in which 
 
192 
 if. 
 
 2 διδασκαλίᾳ: πρεσβύτας νηφαλίους εἶναι, fj, the a8 
 σεμνούς, σώφρονας, ὑγιαίνοντας TH πί- 
 
 ‘ , lal 
 Σὺ δὲ λάλει ἃ πρέπει τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ  TITON. 
 
 Charge the aged men 
 to be sober and faith- 
 ed women 
 to be holy themselves 
 and to school the 
 younger women. 
 
 A , - ~ , e , > 
 3 OTE, TH ἀγάπη, τὴ ὑπομονῇ" πρεσβύτιδας WTQAUTWS EV 
 
 certain animals, @c., were formerly 
 held (Lev. xi. 10), and which they 
 might still have felt, though this is 
 more plausible; comp. Wiesing. It is 
 simply said that their actions and prin- 
 ciples made them ‘abominable’ (μιση- 
 τοί, Hesych.) in the sight of God. The 
 verb is used metaphorically in Attic 
 writers, but not in a sense so far re- 
 moved from the primary notion (βδέω) 
 as in the LXX,. and eccl. writers; 
 comp, Aristoph. Vesp. 792. 
 ἀδόκιμοι] ‘reprobate ;’? not actively 
 ‘quia bonum probare non possunt,’ 
 Beng., but passively, ‘reprobi,’ Vulg., 
 Clarom., Goth. (‘uskusandi,’ cogn, 
 with ‘ choose’), as in 2 Tim. iii. 8, and 
 elsewhere in the N.T.; see notes in 
 loc. The use of the word, if we except 
 Heb. vi. 8, is confined to St Paul. 
 
 Cuarter 11. 1. Σὺ δέ] ‘But do 
 thou;’ address to Titus in contrast to 
 these false teachers; so 2 Tim. iii. ro, 
 iv.5. Chrys, has here missed the force of 
 the contrasted address, αὐτοί εἰσιν ἀκά- 
 Oaprot, ἀλλὰ μὴ τούτων ἕνεκεν σιγήσῃς, 
 comp. also Theod.; Titus is not tacitly 
 warned not to be deterred or disheart- 
 ened, but is exhorted to preach sound 
 doctrine in opposition to their errors. 
 λάλει] ‘speak,’ ‘utter;’ ‘ore non co- 
 hibito,’ Beng. On the difference be- 
 tween λαλεῖν, ‘vocem ore mittere’ 
 [AaA-, Germ. lallen, comp. Benfey, 
 Wurzellex, Vol. 11. p. 9], λέγειν, ‘ di- 
 cere, sc. colligere verba in sententiam ’ 
 (comp. Donalds. Cratyl. § 453), and 
 εἰπεῖν, ‘verba facere,’ see Tittmann, 
 Synon. 1. p. 808q.; comp. also Trench, 
 Synon. Part τι, § 26, 
 τῇ ὑγιαιν, διδασκ.] ‘the sound doc- 
 trine;’ see notes on 1 Tim. 1. 10, 
 
 2. πρεσβύτας] ‘aged men,’ ‘senes,’ 
 Vulg., Clarom.; not πρεσβυτέρους, in 
 an official sense; ‘in duas classes vew- 
 τέρων et πρεσβυτέρων dividunt Apo- 
 stoli populum Christianum in una- 
 quique Ecclesia,’ Pearson, Vind. Ign. 
 (ad Lect.), p. 12 (A.-C. Libr.). The 
 inf. with the accusative specifies the 
 substance of the order which was con- 
 tained in what Titus was to enunciate; 
 comp. Madyig, Synt. § 146. 
 νηφαλίους] ‘sober,’ Vulg., Clarom.; 
 
 not ‘watchful,’ Syr. aes [exci- 
 
 tati], and even Chrys.; see notes on 
 1 Tim. iii. 2, and on2 Tim.iv. 5. On 
 the meaning of σεμνός, comp. notes on 
 1 Tim. ii. 2, and on that of σώφρων, 
 ib. il, 9. τῇ πίστει] ‘in 
 respect of faith;’ dative ‘ of reference 
 to,’ see notes on Gal. i, 22, and Winer, 
 Gr. § 31. 6, p. 193. It may be ob- 
 served that this expression mayalmost 
 be interchanged with ἐν and the dat. 
 as in ch, i. 13: this seems to confirm 
 the remark in Gal, l.c., that this class 
 of datives may not uncommonly be 
 considered as a species of the local 
 dat. ethically used, Here the τὸ ὑγιαί- 
 vew of the aged men was to be shown 
 in their faith; it was to the province 
 of that virtue that the exhibition of it 
 was to be limited. τῇ ὑπομονῇ] 
 ‘in patience;’ ‘in ratione bene consi- 
 derataé stabilis et perpetua mansio,’ 
 Cicero, de Invent. τι. 54. 164. It is 
 here joined with πίστις and ἀγάπη, as 
 in τ Tim, vi. rr (comp, 1 Thess, i. 3), 
 and serves to mark the brave patience, 
 the enduring fortitude, which mark 
 the true Christian character; see notes 
 on 2 Tim, ii. 10, and comp, Usteri, 
 Lehrb. 11. 1. 45) Ῥ. 240, 
 
ES 7 
 
 ee 
 
 193 
 
 a A. ae 
 καταστήματι ἱεροπρεπεῖς, μὴ διαβόλους, μὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ 
 
 δεδουλωμένας, καλοδιδασκάλους, ἵνα σωφρονίζωσιν τὰς 4 
 
 4- σωφρονίζωσιν] So Rec. with ΟΠ ΚΤ δ 1; al. (Griesb., De Wette, Huther, 
 al.). Both Tisch. and Lachm. read cw¢povifovow with AFGHN!; al, Although 
 this evidence is strong, we may well hesitate to adopt a solecism so glaring, 
 especially when in the very next verse iva is used again and correctly. In 
 1 Cor. iy. 6, Gal. iv. 17, this may be more easily accounted for; see notes on 
 Gal. l.c., and comp. Winer, Gr. § 41. 1, p. 259. 
 
 3. πρεσβύτιδας] ‘aged women;’ a 
 dur. λεγόμ., SyROnymous with the πρε- 
 σβύτεραι, τ Tim. vy. 2. They were to 
 be ὡσαύτως, and not ὡς ἑτέρως in re- 
 spect of any of the foregoing qualifi- 
 cations: comp. 1 Tim. 11]. 8. 
 
 ἐν καταστήματι] ‘in demeanour,’ 
 
 [Soraclo [ἐν σχήματι] Syr.; a 
 
 ἄπ. λεγόμ., ἴῃ Meaning a little, but a 
 little only, different from καταστολή, 
 1 Tim. ii. 9. In the latter place the 
 prevailing idea is perhaps outward 
 deportment as enhanced by what is 
 purely external, dress, &c., in the pre- 
 sent case outward deportment as de- 
 pendent on something more internal, 
 é.g. manner, gesture, &c., ‘incessus et 
 motus, vultus, sermo, silentium,’ Je- 
 rome; 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 (ra 
 περιβολαῖα, Gicum.), and it seems in- 
 exact, without more precise adjuncts 
 in the context, to limit it solely to in- 
 ternals (‘ornatus virtutum,’ Beng.) on 
 the other. Wetst. cites Porphyr. de 
 Abst. 1v. 6, τὸ δὲ σεμνὸν κἀκ τοῦ KaTa- 
 στήματος ἑωρᾶτο, with which comp. 
 Ignat. Trall. § 3, οὗ αὐτὸ τὸ κατάστημα 
 μεγάλη μαθητεία. Plutarchusessome- 
 what similarly the curious adjective 
 καταστηματικός, 6.4. Tib. Gracch. § 2, 
 ἰδέᾳ προσώπου καὶ βλέμματι καὶ κινή- 
 ματι πρᾷος καὶ καταστ. ἦν. 
 
 ἱεροπρετεῖς] ‘ holy-beseeming,’ ‘as be- 
 cometh holiness,’ Auth. ; the best gloss 
 
 is the parallel passage, τ Tim. ii. ro, 6 
 πρέπει γυναιξὶν ἐπαγγελλομέναις θεοσέ- 
 βειαν; comp. Eph. vy. 3, καθὼς πρέπει 
 ἁγίοις. The word is a dr. λεγόμ. in 
 the N. T., but not very uncommon 
 elsewhere, e.g. Xen. Sympos. VIII. 40, 
 Plato, Theages, p. 122 Ὁ: see these 
 and other exx. in Wetst. On δια- 
 βόλους, see notes on τ Tim, 111. 11. 
 μὴ οἴνῳ k.T.A.] ‘not enslaved to much 
 wine ;’ an expression a little stronger ἢ 
 than τ Tim. 111. 8, μὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσ- 
 έχοντες, and possibly due to the greater 
 prevalence of that vice in Crete: this 
 transpires clearly enough in Plato, 
 Legg. τ. and 11., comp. Book 1. § 11, 
 Ῥ: δ6ή1τ: 
 
 καλοδιδασκάλους] ‘teachers of what 
 is good,’ ‘honestatis magistre,’ Beza, 
 not by public teaching, but, as the 
 context implies by its specifications, in 
 domestic privacy, ἐπ᾽ οἰκίας, Chrys. 
 On καλὸς compare notes on τ Tim. 
 iv. 4. 
 
 4. ἵνα σωφρονίζωσιν κ.τ.λ.] ‘ that 
 they may school the young womento be, 
 &e.;’ madevwow, Theoph.,—not ex- 
 actly ‘prudentiam doceant,’ Vulg., 
 Clarom. (comp. Syr.), which, though 
 perfectly correct per se, would here, on 
 account of the following σώφρονας, be 
 somewhat tautologous : numerous exx. 
 of this less special sense of σωφρονίζειν 
 are cited by Loesn, (Obs. p. 427) from 
 Philo, all appy. confirmed by its con- 
 nexion with, and juxtaposition to, the 
 weaker νουθετεῖν. It may be remarked 
 that in the corresponding passage, 1 
 
 O 
 
194 
 
 TPO? ΤΟΝ. 
 
 , “ > Ω 
 5 veas φιλανδρους εἶναι, φιλοτέκνους, σώφρονας, ἁγνάς, 
 9 bd ’ n 
 οἰκουργούς, ἀγαθάς, ὑποτασσομένας τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀνδρά- 
 
 σιν, ἵνα μὴ ὁ λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ βλασφημῆται. 
 
 Tim. v. 2, Timothy is himself directed 
 to exhort the νεωτέρας, 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, It 
 does not seem necessary to adopt, with 
 Tisch., a solecistic reading when the 
 correct mood is fairly supported; see 
 crit, note. φιλάνδρους] 
 ‘lovers of their husbands; τὸ κεφά- 
 λαιον τοῦτο τῶν κατὰ THY οἰκίαν aya- 
 θῶν, Chrys. This and the adjectives 
 which follow are, as εἶναι further sug- 
 gests, dependent on the verb immedi- 
 ately preceding, and serve more speci- 
 fically to define the nature and sub- 
 stance 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 re- 
 ferring φιλάνδρ. and φιλοτέκν. to the 
 νέαι, but σώφρονας x.7.X., to the πρεσ- 
 βύτιδες: this however wholly mars 
 the natural sequence of the epithets, 
 The véa are here, as the immediate 
 context shows, primarily the young 
 married women, but of course not 
 exclusively, as four out of these epi- 
 thets can belong equally to married 
 or single ; comp. notes on ver, 6. 
 
 5. σώφρονας] ‘sober-minded,’ ‘ dis- 
 creet;’ see notes on 1 Tim. ii.g. The 
 more general σώφρ. is then followed 
 by the more special ἁγνάς, which here, 
 as the subject and the context seem 
 to require, has reference, not to purity 
 from πνευματικὸς μολυσμός (Coray), 
 but more particularly to ‘chastity;’ 
 καὶ σώματι καὶ διανοίᾳ καθαρὰ ἀπὸ τῆς 
 τῶν ἀλλοτρίων καὶ μίξεως καὶ ἐπιθυμίας, 
 Theoph. olkovpyovs] ‘ workers 
 
 at home;’ there is to be no desire or 
 attempt περιέρχεσθαι (τ Tim. v. 13); 
 home occupations are to preclude it. 
 We now (with Lachm. and Tisch.) 
 adopt this reading owing to the very 
 distinct preponderance of external evi- 
 dence [ACD'!EFGN'], but, as the 
 spaced Greek in the text is intended 
 to imply, with much hesitation, no 
 other clear example of its use having 
 yet beenadduced, and no distinct trace 
 of this reading being recognizable in 
 the older versions. The verb occurs 
 Clem. Rom, 1. 1, and appy. in refer- 
 ence to this passage. It has also been 
 found in Soranus (A.D. 120), de Arte 
 Obst. vim. 21, but its association with 
 καθέδριον makes the reading verydoubt- 
 ful. If we retain the more familiar 
 οἰκουρούς [Rec. with D°HKL (not I as 
 Tisch.) 8+; nearly all mss.], the mean- 
 ing will be, ‘keepers at home,’ Auth., 
 ‘domisedas,’ ‘casarias,’ Elsner, or 
 more literally, ‘domum custodientes,’ 
 Clarom., ‘domus curam habentes,’ 
 Vulg., sim. Syr. According to Hesych. 
 olxoupds is ὁ φροντίζων τὰ τοῦ οἴκου Kal 
 φυλάττων, the Homeric οὖρος, ‘ watch- 
 er’ [possibly from OP- ‘watch’ (?), 
 Pott, Etym. Forsch. Vol. 1. p. 123, 
 comp. φρουρά], giving the compound 
 its definite meaning : see Suicer, Thes. 
 s.v., and the large collection of exx. 
 in Elsner, Obs. Vol. 11. p. 324 Sq. 
 
 ἀγαθὰς is not to be joined with olxoup- 
 yous, as Syr. and Theoph. but regard- 
 ed as an independent epithet =‘benig- 
 nas,’ Vulg., Arm., al.; comp. Matth, 
 xx. 15. On the distinction between 
 ἀγαθὸς (‘quicommodum aliis prestat’) 
 and δίκαιος (‘qui recti et honesti legem 
 sequitur’), see Tittm, Synon. I. p. 19 
 sq.; comp. also notes on Gal. v. 22. 
 
| il Ὁ: 
 
 Exhort young men to 
 be sober, being thy- 
 self a pattern; exhort 
 servants both to please 
 their masters and to be trusty. 
 
 The interpr. of Bloomf., ‘good mana- 
 gers,’ according to which it is to be 
 considered as ‘exegetical of the pre- 
 ceding,’ is wholly untenable. It is 
 rather added with a gentle contrast ; 
 the οἰκουρία was not to be marred by 
 ‘austeritas,’ 50. ‘in servulos’ (Jerome), 
 or by improper thrift (Heydenr.). 
 ὑποτασσομένας K.T.A.] ‘submitting 
 themselves to their own husbands.’ On 
 the distinction between 
 (sponte) and πειθαρχεῖν (coactus), see 
 notes on ch. 111. 1, Tittmann, Synon. 
 Part τι. p. 3, and on the proper force 
 of the pronominal ἴδιος (Donalds. Cra- 
 tyl. § 139) when thus connected with 
 ἀνήρ, see notes on Eph. v. 22. The 
 concluding words of the verse, iva μὴ 
 k.T.A., may be regarded as dependent 
 on all that precedes, but perhaps are 
 more naturally connected with this 
 last clause (Est.); the λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ 
 (the Gospel) would be evil spoken of 
 if it were practically apparent that 
 Christian wives did not duly obey 
 their husbands; comp. 1 Tim. vi. 1. 
 Theodoret refers it, somewhat too nar- 
 rowly, to the fact of women leaving 
 their husbands προφάσει θεοσεβείας : 
 the implied command here, and the 
 expressed command in Eph.v, 22, are 
 perfectly general and inclusive. 
 
 6. Τοὺς νεωτέρους] ‘The younger 
 men,’ in contrast with the πρεσβύτας, 
 ver. 2; just as the νέαι form a con- 
 trasted class to the πρεσβύτιδες, ver. 3. 
 There is thus no good reason for ex- 
 tending it, with Matth., to the young 
 of both sexes. It seems to have been 
 the Apostle’s desire that the exhorta- 
 tions to the Cretan véa should be spe- 
 cially administered by those of their 
 own sex; contrast 1 Tim. v. 2. 
 σωφρονεῖν] ‘to be sober-minded,’ in 
 
 ὑποτάσσ. 
 
 195 
 
 Τοὺς νεωτέρους ὡσαύτως παρακάλει 6 
 a” A , ci 
 σωφρονεῖν, περί πάντα σεαυτὸν παρ- 7 
 
 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. 1. 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 that statement in 
 i. 12, 13, Which De W. and others so 
 improperly and unreasonably presume 
 to censure. 
 
 7. περὶ πάντα is not to be con- 
 nected with σωφρονεῖν (‘ut pudici sint 
 in omnibus,’ Jerome), but, as Syr., 
 Vulg., Chrys., and in fact all the 
 leading versions and expositors, with 
 σεαυτ. παρεχόμενος. It can scarcely 
 be necessary to add that πάντα is 
 neuter; for the uses of περί, see notes 
 on τ Tim. 1. το. 
 σεαυτὸν παρεχ.] ‘exhibiting thyself ;’ 
 reflexive pronoun with the middle 
 voice; see Winer, Gr. § 38.6, p. 230. 
 In this use, not without precedent in 
 earlier Greek, e.g. Xen. Cyrop. vit. 
 I. 39, Plato, Legg. x. p. 890 Ο, empha- 
 sis and perspicuity are gained by the 
 special addition of the pronoun, Here 
 for instance without the pronoun 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 betaken to discriminate between 
 what is now termed an intensive or 
 ‘ dynamic’ middle (Κα ἴσου, comp, notes 
 on τ Tim. iy. 6) anda simple reflexive 
 middle: in the former case the pro- 
 
 02 
 
196 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ ΤΊΤΟΝ. 
 
 ~ ~ “ 
 εχόμενος τύπον καλῶν ἔργων, ἐν τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀφθο- 
 ~ «ε Ἔ 
 ὃ ρίαν, σεμνότητα, λόγον ὑγιῆ ἀκατάγνωστον, ἵνα ὁ ἐξ 
 9 ἐναντίας ἐντραπῆ, μηδὲν ἔχων λέγειν περὶ ἡμῶν φαῦλον. 
 
 noun would seem to be generally ad- 
 missible, in the latter (the present case) 
 it can only legitimately appear when 
 emphasis or precision cannot be se- 
 cured without it; see Kriiger, Sprachl. 
 § 52. 10. ro, andon the uses of παρέχ. 
 comp. Kuster, de Verb. Med. § 49. 
 καλῶν ἔργ. On this expression, which 
 is perfectly comprehensive and inclu- 
 sive, comp. notes on ch. iii. 8. Few 
 will be disposed to agree with Calvin 
 in his connexion of these words with 
 ἐν τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ. 
 
 ἀφθορίαν] ‘uncorruptness,’ ‘sincerity, 
 SC. παρεχόμενος ; ‘integritatem,’ Vulg., 
 Clarom.: Syr.paraphrases. The asso- 
 ciated word σεμνότης as well as what 
 would otherwise 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 ceuvds : achaste sincerity 
 of mind was to be combined with a 
 dignified σεμνότης of manner. This 
 connexion is rendered perhaps still 
 more probable by the reading of the 
 text (Lachm., Tisch.): of two similarly 
 abstract substantives, it would seem 
 hardly natural to refer one to the 
 teaching and the other to the teacher. 
 For ἀφθορίαν, FG read ἀφθονίαν, and 
 D°E*LN* ἀδιαφθ. but neither reading 
 deserves consideration. The addition 
 ἀφθαρσίαν (Steph. 1550, but not Rec.) 
 is not well supported, viz. only by 
 D5E[??}KL; about 30 mss.; and a 
 few Vy.: still less so is the addition 
 ἁγνείαν with C, 3 mss,, Syr.-Phil. On 
 σεμνότης, see notes on x Tim. ii. 2, and 
 on the practical applications of the 
 verse, Bp Taylor, Serm. x. ΧΙ. 
 
 ᾽ 
 
 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. 
 v. 17: ‘inter docendum nihil aliud 
 loquere quam quod sane fidei conve- 
 niat,’ Estius. Several exx. of this use 
 of ὑγιὴς are cited by Raphel, Annot. 
 Vol. 11. p. 636. The λόγος is more- 
 over not only to be intrinsically ὑγιής, 
 but so carefully considered and ex- 
 pressed as to be ἀκατάγνωστος, open 
 to neither contempt nor animadver- 
 sion ; ‘nihil dignum reprehensione di- 
 cat aut faciat, licet adversarii sint ad 
 reprehendum parati,’ Jerome : comp. 
 1 Tim. vi. 14. ὁ ἐξ ἐναντίας, 
 Sc. χώρας (Bos, Ellips. p. 562 [325], 
 ed. Schaef.), if indeed it be thought 
 necessary to supply the ellipsis at all. 
 The reference is doubtful; the ‘ ad- 
 versary’ (‘he who riseth against us,’ 
 Syr.) seems certainly not ὁ διάβολος 
 (Chrys.), but rather πᾶς ὁ ἐκείνῳ δια- 
 πονούμενος, Whether the opposing false 
 teacher, or the gainsaying heathen. 
 On the whole, the allusion in ver. 5, 
 compared with the reading ἡμῶν (us 
 Christians), makes the latterreference 
 (to the heathen) the most plausible; 
 comp. 1 Tim. v. r4. 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 shamed,’—not mid- 
 dle ‘sich schiime,’ Huther, but appy. 
 here with a purely passive sense 
 
 v n 
 (comp. Syr. lna4, ‘pudefiat,’ ‘eru- 
 
 bescat’), as in 2 Thess. iii. 14; comp. 
 1 Cor. iv. 14, Psalm xxxy. 26, αἱσ- 
 
ΠΕΡ Ὁ το 107 
 
 Δ ἫΝ ἰδέ ὃ , - , a) εἰ ’ " 
 Δούλους ἰδίοις δεσπόταις ὑποτασσεσθαι, ev πασιν εὐα- 
 
 , > Α ° ’ 4 , 5 4 
 ρέστους εἶναι, μὴ ἀντιλέγοντας, μή νοσφιζομένους, ἄλλα IO 
 
 9. ἰδίοις δεσπ.] So Rec. with CFGKLN; most mss.; Chrys., Theod., Dam. 
 Lachm. and Tisch. (ed. 7) reverse the order with ADE; 6 mss., but on evidence 
 inferior in critical value to that in favour of the text. 
 
 10. πᾶσαν πίστιν] So Lachm. with ACDEN! (FG πᾶσαν ἐνδ. πίστιν ; SI 
 om. πίστιν) ; 5 mss.; Clarom., Sangerm., al.; Lat. Ff. The order is reversed 
 by Tisch. with KL; great majority of mss.; Copt., al.; Chrys., Theod., Dam., 
 al, (Rec., Griesb., Scholz), but the weight of uncial authority is certainly in 
 favour of the reading of the text. It may be alsoremarked that appy. in every 
 other instance in St Paul’s Epp. (except Eph. iv. 19) where πῶς is in connexion 
 with an abstract and anarthrous substantive, it does not follow but precede the 
 
 noun, 
 
 χυνθείησαν Kal ἐντραπείησαν. 
 
 φαῦλον] ‘bad,’ 1 Kikes) [odiosum] Syr.; 
 John iii. 20, v. 29 (in opp. to dyads), 
 James lil. 16; Rom. ix. 11 and 2 Cor. 
 v. to are both doubtful. This adjec- 
 tive, 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 Rost. u. Palm, 
 Lex. 8.v.); in the latter however it is 
 used in more frequent antithesis to 
 ἀγαθός, and comes to mean little less 
 than κακὸς (Thom. M. p. 889, ed. 
 Bern.) or πονηρός ; see Trench, Synon. 
 Part τι. ὃ 34, and comp. Fritz, Rom. 
 Vol. 1. p. 297. 
 
 9. Δούλους κ-τ.λ.] ‘(Lxhort) bond- 
 servants to be in subjection to their own 
 masters.’ It does not seem necessary 
 to refer this construction to ver. 1 
 (Matth.); the infin. is dependent on 
 παρακάλει, ver. 6, the two following 
 verses being dependent on the parti- 
 ciple παρεχ. and practically paren- 
 thetical. On the general drift of 
 these exhortations to slaves, and on 
 the meaning of some particular terms 
 (ἰδίοις, δεσπόται5), see notes and reff, 
 on τ Tim, vi. 1 sq. The deportment 
 and relations of women and servants 
 to the οἰκοδέσποται were practically to 
 teach and edify the heathen; οὐ yap 
 
 amd δόγματος δόγματα ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ mpay- 
 μάτων καὶ βίου τὰ δόγματα κρίνουσιν 
 
 Ἕλληνες, Chrys. ,—who however in an 
 
 interesting passage speaks very de- 
 spondingly of the moral and religious 
 opportunities of δοῦλοι. 
 
 εὐαρέστους] ‘well-pleasing;’ aterm fre- 
 quently used by St Paul, Rom. xii. 1, 
 2,xiv. 18,2 Cor, v. 9, al., but in all pas- 
 sages except the present with relation 
 to God or our Lord. Fritz. (Rom. lc. 
 Vol, 11. p. 31) rightly objects to the 
 translation‘obsequiosus,’ Bretschn.,— 
 
 » vy n 
 comp. Syr. .;9 Δ... [placentes se 
 
 prebeant], but doubtfully advocates 
 a purely passive or rather neutral 
 translation, ‘is cui facile satisfacias,’ 
 ‘homo contentus,’ similarly Jerome, 
 ‘complacentes conditioni sux,’ 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, vit. 13 (83', p. 883 (ed. 
 Pott.), πρὸς τὸν Κύριον εὐάρεστος ἐν 
 πᾶσι γένηται, καὶ πρὸς τὸν κόσμον 
 ἐπαινετός, Where this passage or Rom, 
 xiv. 18 seems to have been in the 
 thoughts of the writer. 
 
 ἀντιλέγοντας] ‘gainsaying,’ ‘con- 
 tradicting,’ ‘contradicentes,’ Vulg., 
 Clarom., and perhaps even more de- 
 
198 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ TITON. 
 
 ct f ἐνὸ : ἀγαθήν, ἵ nv διὸ 
 πᾶσαν πίστιν ἐνδεικνυμένους ἀγαθήν, ἵνα τὴν διδασκα- 
 
 A a ΄- A ΄ ΄ " ΄σ΄ 
 λίαν τὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Θεοῦ κοσμῶσιν ἐν πᾶσιν. 
 
 II ᾿Επεφάνη γὰρ ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ 
 
 The grace of God has 
 appeared, and teaches 
 us to be godly in this 
 
 world, and to look forward to our Redeemer’s coming. 
 
 finitely Syr. eo alto [obsistentes], 
 vy 
 
 thwarting, or setting themselves 
 against their masters’ plans, wishes, 
 or orders; opp. to ὑπείκοντας ἐν τοῖς 
 ἐπιτάγμασι, Chrys. The Auth., ‘not 
 answering again’ (‘non responsato- 
 res,’ Beza), seems too narrow; comp. 
 John xix. 12, ἀντιλέγει τῷ Καίσαρι, 
 Rom, x. 21, λαὸν ἀπειθοῦντα καὶ ἀντι- 
 λέγοντα (LXX.), and in this Epistle, 
 ch. i. g, where ἀντιλέγειν probably 
 involves some idea of definite opposi- 
 tion; comp, Tittm. Synon. τι. p. 9. 
 10. voordifopévous] ‘purloining;’ 
 Acts v. 2, 3, with ἀπὸ of the thing 
 from which purloined; comp. Josh. 
 vii. 1, 2 Macc. iv. 32. This use of 
 voogiy.=arepay, κλέπτων (Hesych.), 
 or with more accurate reflexive refe- 
 rence, ἐδιοποιούμενος (Suidas), requires 
 no illustration; exx. if needed will be 
 found in Wetst. πᾶσαν 
 πίστιν κιτ.λ.] ‘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, and comp. Donalds. 
 Gr. § 434, Ῥ- 447. The appended epi- 
 thet ἀγαθὴν can scarcely refer to the 
 actions, ‘in rebus non malis,’ Beng., 
 but seems merely to specify the ‘ fide- 
 lity’ 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, Lehrb. τι. 1. 1, p. gt, note, 
 and on the use of πᾶσαν, ‘every form 
 of’ (comp. ἐν πᾶσιν below), see notes 
 on Eph, i. 8. ἵνα... 
 κοσμῶσιν] ‘in order that they may 
 adorn;’ definite object and purpose 
 contemplated by such conduct. The 
 
 Apostle knew well the force of prac- 
 tical teaching; a δοῦλος ἐν Χριστῷ φι- 
 λοσοφῶν, 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 the 
 Father (1 Tim. i, 1, ii. 3, iv. 10, Tit. 
 i. 3), not to God the Son, specify the 
 διδασκ. as being ‘the doctrine of sal- 
 vation,’ ‘the Gospel,’—an expression 
 at which De W. unnecessarily takes 
 exception. 
 
 It. γὰρ gives the reason for the 
 foregoing practical exhortations, and 
 seems to have been immediately sug- 
 gested by the last words of ver. το, 
 which, though specially referring to 
 slaves, may yet be extended to all 
 classes, It is thus really a reference 
 to ver. g, το, but virtually to all that 
 precedes from ver. xsq. The saving 
 grace of God had among its objects 
 the ἁγιασμὸς of mankind ; comp. Eph. 
 i. 4, and the four good sermons by 
 Beveridge, Serm. xc.—xcri. Vol. tv. 
 p- 225sq. (A.-C. Libr.). This χάρις 
 need not be limited to the incarnation 
 (Theod., Jerome, al.), though this, as 
 thecontextand perhaps ἐπεφάνη show, 
 is the leading reference ; ‘the grace of 
 God doth not so bring salvation as to 
 exclude the satisfaction of Christ for 
 our sins,’ Beveridge, l.c. p. 229. 
 ᾿Ἐπιφαίνειν (ch. iii, 4, Luke i. 79) and 
 ἐπιφάνεια are normal words in con- 
 nexion with our Lord’s first or second 
 advent (Waterl. Serm. v1. [Moyer’s 
 Lect.] Vol. 1. p. 134), possibly with a 
 metaphorical reference, comp. Luke i. 
 78, 79, with Acts xxvii. 20; the dog- 
 matical reference inyolved in the com- 
 pound ἵνα τὴν ἄνωθεν ὕπαρξιν μηνύσῃ 
 
DPE EL, £2: 
 
 199 
 
 ’ “ 9 , Va Cars e 
 TWTHPLOS πασιν ἀνθρώποις, “αιοευουσα μας, tva 12 
 
 9 , \ 9 , A ‘ A 3 , 
 αρνησάμενοι THY ἀσέβειαν καὶ τὰς κοσμικας ἐπιθυμίας 
 
 It. σωτήριος] So Lachm. with AC!D1N*; Syr. (both); ἘΝῚ also omit the 
 article, but for σωτήριος read σωτῆρος, FG further inserting rod before it. In 
 ed. τ and 2 ἡ σωτήριος was adopted with C*D?D°EKL; mss. (Rec., Tisch.), but 
 is now altered, though not by any means with confidence, in consequence of 
 the further testimony of δὲ in favour of the omission of the article. 
 
 (Zonaras, Lex, Vol. 1. p. 831), seems 
 to be clearly indemonstrable. ἡ 
 χάρις K.T.A.] ‘the grace of God, bring- 
 ing salvation to all men,’ ‘that grace of 
 God whereby alone it is possible for 
 mankind to be saved,’ Beveridge, l.c. 
 Ῥ. 229; σωτήριος, aS its position shows, 
 introducing a further predication, scil. 
 ‘and it is a saving grace to all men’ 
 (Donalds. Gr. § 400), which more fully 
 defines the ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ. ~The read- 
 ing is not certain (see critical note): 
 uncial authority appy. now preponder- 
 ates in favour of the text, but internal 
 arguments would seem to be in favour 
 of the insertion of the article before 
 σωτήριος, aS the principal thought 
 would then rest more completely on 
 Huther, in contending 
 for the omission of the art. on the same 
 internal grounds, does not appear to 
 have been fully aware of the nature 
 and force of these predicates. In either 
 case, on account of the following ἡμᾶς, 
 the dative πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις is most na- 
 turally and plausibly appended to cw- 
 τήριος; joined with ἐπεῴ., it would be, 
 as Wiesinger remarks, aimless and ob- 
 structive. 
 
 12. παιδεύουσα ἡμᾶς] ‘disciplin- 
 ing us.’ The proper force of this word 
 in the N.T., ‘per molestias erudire’ 
 (seenoteson Eph. vi. 4, Trench, Synon. 
 § 32), preserved in the ‘corripiens’ of 
 Clarom., must not here be lost sight 
 of or (asin Bloomf.) obscured, Grace 
 exercises its discipline on us (1 Cor. xi. 
 32, Heb, xii. 6) before its benefits can 
 be fully felt or thankfully acknow- 
 
 παιδεύουσα. 
 
 ledged: the heart must be rectified 
 and the affections chastened before 
 sanctifying grace can have its full 
 issues ; comp. (on the work of grace) 
 the excellent sermon of Waterland, 
 Serm. xxvi. Vol. v. p. 688. 
 
 ἵνα] ‘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 Wi- 
 ner, Gr. ὃ 44. 8, p. 299, comp. notes 
 on ch, i. 13 and on Eph. i. 17), but 
 doubtful after a verb so full of mean- 
 ἴῃς ἃ5 παιδεύειν. Theopinion of Chrys. 
 seems definite with regard to ἵνα, but 
 he is appy. inclined to join it with the 
 finite verb, ἦλθεν ὁ Xp. ἵνα ἀρνησώμεθα 
 τὴν ἀσέβειαν : this does not appear to 
 be admissible. ἀρνησάμενοι] 
 ‘having denied ;’ not ‘denying,’ Auth., 
 Alf.,—which, though grammatically 
 defensible, seems to obscure that for- 
 mal renunciation of ἀσέβειαν κ.τ.λ. 
 which was characteristic of the Chris- 
 tian profession, and to which the Apo- 
 stle seems here toallude. On the use 
 of the verb, comp. notes on ch. i. 16. 
 The participle, as Wiesinger remarks, 
 states on the negative side the pur- 
 pose of the παιδεία, which is further 
 expressed on the positive in cwdp. 
 ζήσωμεν. τὴν ἀσέβειαν, here not 
 εἰδωλολατρεία καὶ τὰ πονηρὰ δόγμα- 
 τα, Theoph,, but ‘practical impiety’ 
 (‘whatsoever is offensive or dishonour- 
 able to God,’ Beveridge, Serm. xc. 
 
200 ΠΡΟΞ 
 
 WITON. 
 
 ¥ 4 js 4 " - , 9 - ΄ 
 σωφρόνως καὶ δικαίως καὶ εὐσεβῶς ζήσωμεν ἐν τῷ νῦν 
 
 9A ’ | , 9 id 4 9 
 13 αἰῶνι, προσδεχόμενοι τὴν μακαρίαν ἐλπίδα καὶ ἐπι- 
 , ~ ΄ a ~ - 
 φάνειαν τῆς δόξης τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν 
 
 Vol. tv. p. 239 sq-), is the exact anti- 
 thesis to εὐσέβεια, on which latter word 
 see notes on 1 Tim. ii, 2. Tas 
 Koop. ἐἔπιθ.} ‘the lusts of the world, 
 ‘all inordinate desires of the things of 
 this world,’ Beveridge, 1. 6., comp. 
 t John ii. 16; ὅσα πρὸς τὸν παρόντα 
 βίον ἡμῖν χρησιμεύει κοσμικαί εἰσιν ἐπι- 
 θυμίαι, πάντα ὅσα ἐν τῷ παρόντι βίῳ 
 συγκαταλύεται κοσμική ἐστιν ἐπιθ., 
 Chrys. The 84]. κοσμικὸς is only found 
 twice in the N.T., here (ethical) and 
 in Heb. ix. τ (local), being commonly 
 replaced in such combinations as the 
 present by words or expressions of a 
 more distinct ethical force, Gal. v. 16, 
 Eph. ii. 3, τ Pet. ii. 11, 2 Pet. ii. 10, 
 al. It is here probably used in pre- 
 ference to σακρικός (1 Pet. l.c.), as 
 being more general and inclusive, and 
 as enhancing theextent of the abnega- 
 tion: all ἐπιθυμίαι are here included 
 which, in a word, els τοῦτον μόνον τὸν 
 κόσμον γεννῶνται καὶ ὄχι els ἄλλον, 
 Coray; comp. esp. 1 John ii. 15. In 
 later writers the moral reference is 
 very decided; κοσμικούς, τοὺς εἰς τὴν 
 γῆν ἐλπίζοντας καὶ τὰς σαρκικὰς ἐπιθυ- 
 μίας, Clem, Alex. Strom. 11, 9. 41, 
 Vol. 1. p. 430 (ed. Potter), Suicer, 
 Thesaur. Vol. 11. p. 147. On the va- 
 rious meanings of κόσμος, comp. notes 
 on Gal. iv. 3. σωφρόνως K.T.A. | 
 ‘soberly, righteously, and godly.’ The 
 meanings assigned to cw¢p. (notes on 
 1 Tim. il. g), δικαίως (comp. note on 
 ἀγαθάς, ver. 5), and εὐσεβῶς must not 
 be too much narrowed, stillin a gene- 
 ral way they may be conceived as 
 placing Christian duties under three 
 aspects, to ourselves, to others, and to 
 God; comp. Beveridge, Serm. xct. 
 Vol. tv. p. 253. The terms indeed are 
 all general and comprehensive, —6i- 
 
 kaos, for example (‘qui jus fasque 
 servat,’ Tittm. Synon. 1. p. 21), in- 
 cludes more than duty to others, but 
 the order as well as the meaningsalike 
 hint that this distinction is not to be 
 wholly ignored; comp, Raphel, Annot. 
 Vol. τι. p. 639, Storr, Opusc. Vol. 1. 
 Ῥ. 197 Sq. ἐν τῷ νῦν αἰῶνι] 
 ‘in the present world,’ ‘the present 
 course of things.’ On the meaning of 
 αἰών, see notes on Eph. ii. 2, comp. 
 also notes on 2 Tim. iy. to. 
 
 13. προσδεχόμενοι k.7.X.] ‘looking 
 
 for the blessed hope and manifestation 
 
 of the glory ; comp. Acts xxiy. 15, and 
 Gal. v. 5, ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχ., 
 where see notes. In this expression, 
 which, on account of the close union 
 of ἐλπίδα with ἐπιῴ., is slightly differ- 
 ent to Gal. l.c., ἐλπὶς is still not purely 
 objective, sc. the ‘res sperata,’ τὸ ἐλ- 
 πιζόμενον (Huth., al.), butis only con- 
 templated under objective aspects (‘ ob- 
 jectivirt’), our hope being considered 
 as something definite and substantive, 
 comp. Col. i. 5, τὴν ἐλπίδα τὴν ἀποκει- 
 μένην...ἐν Tots οὐρανοῖς, see notes in 
 loc., and notes on Eph. i. 18. The 
 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 amere ὃν διὰ δυοῖν, scil. τῆς ἐνδόξου 
 παρουσίας αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐλπίδα : this is not 
 satisfactory; though themeaning may 
 sometimes be practically not very dif- 
 ferent, yet such systems of interpreta- 
 tion are at best only evasive and pre- 
 carious; see Fritzsche’s careful Exeur- 
 sus, in his Comm. on Matth. p. 853 sq. 
 The different objects of ἐλπίς, e.g. δό- 
 Ens, δικαιοσύνης, ἀναστάσεως, K.T.A., are 
 grouped together by Reuss, Théol. 
 Chrét. tv. 20, Vol. 11. p. 221. 
 
ΤΠ, ΤᾺ 
 
 201 
 
 Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὃς ἔδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἵνα ΤΆ 
 
 λυτρώσηται ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀνομίας καὶ καθαρίσῃ 
 
 τῆς δόξης is thus certainly not to be 
 explained awayasamere epithet, ‘ glo- 
 rious appearing,’ Auth., Scholef., but 
 is a true and proper genitive, see notes 
 on Eph. i. 6: there is a twofold ém- 
 φάνεια, the one an ἐπιῴ. τῆς χάριτος, 
 ver. 11, the other an ἐπιῴ. τῆς δόξης, 
 see Beveridge, Serm. xcrt. Vol. tv. p. 
 271 (A.-C. Libr.). It is also plainly 
 dependent on ἐλπίδα, as well as on 
 ἐπιφ. (De W., Wiesing.), the two sub- 
 stantives being closely united, and un- 
 der the yinculum of a common article; 
 see Winer, Gr. § 19. 4, p. 116. It is 
 singular that Scholef. (Hints, p. 126, 
 ed. 4) should not have given this in- 
 terpr. more prominence. 
 
 τοῦ μεγάλου K.T.A.] ‘of owr great God 
 and Saviour Jesus Christ;’ μέγαν δὲ 
 Θεὸν ὠνόμασεν τὸν Χριστόν, Theod., sim. 
 Chrys. It must be candidly avowed 
 that it is very doubtful whether on the 
 grammatical principle alluded to in 
 the preceding note (the identity of re- 
 ference of twosubstantives when under 
 the vinculum ofa common article) the 
 interpretation of this passage can be 
 fully settled; see Winer, Gr. § 19. 5, 
 p. 118, and comp. notes on Eph. v. 5. 
 There is a presumption in favour of 
 the adopted interpr., but, on account 
 of the (defining) genitive ἡμῶν (Winer, 
 p. 114), nothing more: comp. Alf. in 
 loc. (ed. 1) who, it may be observed, 
 by an oversight has cited this note as 
 advocating the view to which it is op- 
 posed. When however we turn to ew- 
 egetical considerations, andremember 
 (a) that ἐπιφάνεια is a term specially 
 and peculiarly applied to the Son, and 
 never to the Father, see esp. Water- 
 land, Serm. v1. (Moyer’s Lect.) Vol, τι. 
 p- 134, comp. Beveridge, Serm. ΧΟῚΙ, 
 Vol. rv. p. 268; (0) that the immedi- 
 ate context so specially relates to our 
 
 Lord; (c) that the following mention 
 of Christ’s giving Himself up for us,— 
 ofHisabasement,—does fairlyaccount 
 for St Paul’s ascription of a title, other- 
 wise unusual, that specially and anti- 
 thetically marks His glory; (4) that 
 μεγάλου would seem uncalled for if 
 applied to the Father, see Usteri, Lehrb. 
 11. 2. 4, Ῥ- 310, Hofmann, Schriftb. 
 Vol. 1. p. 1273 and (e) lastly, observe 
 that appy. two of the ante-Nicene 
 (Clem. Alex. Protrept. ὃ 7, Vol. 1. Ὁ. 7, 
 ed. Potter, and Hippolytus, quoted 
 by Wordsw.), and the great bulk of 
 post-Nicene writers (see Middleton, 
 Gr, Art. p. 393, ed. Rose, Wordsworth, 
 Six Letters, p.67 sq.) concurred in this 
 interpretation,—when we candidly 
 weigh all this evidence, it does indeed 
 seem difficult to resist the conviction 
 that our blessed Lord is here said to 
 be our μέγας Θεύς, and that this text 
 is a direct, definite, and even studied 
 declaration of the divinity of the HKter- 
 nal Son. For further patristic cita- 
 tions, see the good note of Words- 
 worth in loc. It ought not to be 
 suppressed that some of the best Vv., 
 Vulg., Syr., Copt., Arm. (not however 
 Aith.), and some Fathers of unques- 
 tioned orthodoxy adopted the other 
 interpr. ; in proof of which latter as- 
 sertion Reuss refers to Ulrich, Num 
 Christus in Tit. 11. 13 Deus appellatur, 
 Tig. 1837,—a treatise however which 
 the present editor has not seen. The 
 note of De W., in keeping in the back- 
 ground the palmary argument (a), 
 scarcely reflects his usual candour; the 
 truerendering of the clause really turns 
 more upon exegesis than upon gram- 
 mar, and this the student should not 
 fail clearly to bear in mind. 
 
 14. ὃς ἔδωκεν ἑαυτόν] ‘who gave 
 Himself,’ Gal.i. 4, Eph. v. 25; expan- 
 
202 
 
 ΤΡΟΣ TITON. 
 
 lal A Ἢ ~ 
 15 ἑαυτῷ λαὸν περιούσιον, ζηλωτὴν καλῶν ἔργων. Taira 
 
 sion of the preceding word σωτῆρος, 
 with a distinct retrospective reference 
 to ἡ χάρις σωτήριος, Ver. 11. The for- 
 cible ἑαυτόν, ‘Himself, His whole self, 
 the greatest gift ever given,’ must not 
 be overlooked; comp. Beveridge, Serm. 
 xcut. Vol. tv. p. 285. 
 
 ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν] ‘for us.’ On the mean- 
 ing of this expression, which must not 
 be here too hastily pronounced to be 
 equivalent to av7l ἡμῶν (Beveridge, 
 l.c.), see notes on Gal. ili. 13. 
 λυτρώσηται] ‘He might ransom,’ ‘pay 
 a λύτρον, that λύτρον being His preci- 
 ous blood; see noteson Eph. i. 7, and 
 comp. Matth. xx. 28, Markx.45. Not 
 only does our Lord’s death involve our 
 reconciliation and our justification, 
 but, what is now often too much lost 
 sight of, ourransoming andredemption 
 (Beveridge, Serm. xc. Vol. tv. p. 230), 
 whether, as here, from the bondage, 
 or, as elsewhere, from the penalties of 
 ἀνομία; see Reuss, Théol. Chrét. rv. 
 17, Vol. 11. p. 182 sq., who, with some 
 exceptions, has expressed himself 
 clearly and satisfactorily. 
 
 ἀνομίας] ‘iniquity;’ properly ‘law- 
 lessness,’ the state of moral licence (ἡ 
 ἀκαθαρσία καὶ ἡ 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 cogi- 
 tatur potissimum legem non servari, 
 sive quod ignota sit lex, sive quod 
 consulto violetur,’ Tittmann, Synon. 
 I. p. 48, where a distinction between 
 ἀνομία and the more inclusive ἀδικία 
 (see notes on 2 Tim. ii. 19) is stated 
 and substantiated ; see also Trench, 
 Synon. Part 1. § 16. 
 
 καθαρίσῃ K.t.A.] ‘purify to Him- 
 self a peculiar people;’ affirmative 
 statement (according to St Paul’s ha- 
 bit) 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 in- 
 correctly translated by Etheridge), De 
 W., Wiesing., al., to supply ἡμᾶς and 
 understand λαὸν as an aceus. ‘of the 
 predicate,’ scil. ‘for a peculiar people:’ 
 the Greekcommentt. (see esp. Theod. ) 
 all seem clearly to regard it as a plain 
 aceus, objecti ; so Vulg., Clarom., and 
 Ath. The Coptic Version, on the 
 contrary, distinctly advocates the ‘pre- 
 dicative’ accusative. περιούσιον] 
 ‘peculiar,’ Auth., Theod. ; 
 very doubtfully interpreted by Syr. 
 
 οἰκεῖον, 
 
 vy 
 12,05 [novum], and but little better 
 
 by Vulg., ‘acceptabilem,’ and Chrys., 
 ἐξειλεγμένον, both of which seem to 
 recede too far from the primary mean- 
 ing. The most satisfactory commen- 
 tary on thisword (dz. λεγόμ. in N.T.) 
 is supplied by 1 Pet. ii. 9, λαὸς εἰς πε- 
 ριποίησιν, compared with the nbsp doy 
 of the Old Test., translated λαὸς περι- 
 ούσιος, Exod. xix. 5, Deut. vii. 6, ἃ]. ; 
 see notes on Eph.i. 14. It would thus 
 seem thatthe primary meaning, ‘what 
 remains over and above to’ (comp. 
 Bretsch. Lex.),—a little too coarsely 
 expressed by the ‘populum abundan- 
 tem’ of the Clarom.,—has passed by 
 an intelligible gradation into that of 
 περιποιητόν, Hesych., ἔγκτητον, Suid., 
 and thence, with a little further re- 
 striction, οἰκεῖον ;ἢ the connexion of 
 thought being that indicated by Steph. 
 (in Thesaur. s.v.), ‘que supersunt a 
 nobis reconduntur.’ On the deriva- 
 tion of this word, see Winer, Gr. § 16. 
 3,p. 88, and on the general meaning, 
 see Suicer, Thesaur.s.v. Vol. m.p. 678, 
 and Hammond in loc. In this clause 
 the sanctifying, as in the former the 
 redeeming purpose ofthe atoning death 
 
PET Ts... Leek: 
 
 203 
 
 ’ 4 , \ +» A , 93 ~ 
 λάλει Kat παρακαλεῖ καὶ ἔλεγχε μετὰ πασῆς ἐπιταγῆς" 
 
 μηδείς σου περιφρονείτω. 
 
 Teach men to be obe- 
 dient: we were once 
 
 Ὑπομίμνησκε αὐτοὺς ἀρχαῖς ἐξου-111. 
 
 the contrary, but have been saved and regenerated through God’s mercy in Jesus Christ. 
 
 of Christ comes mainly into promi- 
 nence; see Hammond, Pract. Catech. 
 I, 2, p. 24 (A.-C, Libr.). 
 
 ζηλωτὴν καλῶν ἔργων] ‘zealous of good 
 works ;’ the gen. objecti specifying the 
 objects about which the ζῆλος was dis- 
 played; compare Acts xxi. 20, xxii. 3, 
 1 Cor. xiv. 12, Gal. i. 14. 
 
 15. Ταῦτα «.t.d.] Retrospective 
 exhortation (ver. 1), serving as an easy 
 conclusion to the present, and a pre- 
 paration for a new portion of the Epi- 
 stle. Ταῦτα may be united with πα- 
 ρακάλει (comp. τ Tim. vi. 2), but on 
 account of the following ἔλεγχε is 
 more naturally attached only to λάλει; 
 Titus is however not to stop with λα- 
 λεῖν, he is to exhort the faithful, and 
 reprove the negligent and wayward. 
 On the practical duties of Titus’s 
 office, comp. South, Serm. vy. Vol. 1, 
 p. 76 (Tegg). 
 μετὰ πάσης ἐπιταγῆς] ‘with all (i.e. 
 every exhibition of) authority ; μετὰ 
 αὐθεντίας καὶ μετὰ ἐξουσίας, Chrys., 
 who also remarks on the inclusive πά- 
 ons. The term émrayi occurs in 1 
 Tim. i. 1, Tit. i. 3, in the more speci- 
 fic sense of ‘commandment;’ in the 
 N.T. it is only used by St Paul, viz. 
 Rom, xvi. 26, 1 Cor. vii. 6, 25, and 
 2 Cor. viil. 8. The present clause is 
 probably only to be connected with 
 the last verb (as Chrys. and Theoph.), 
 thus far corresponding to ἀποτόμως, 
 Chsti. 15, μηδείς σου περιφρ. 
 ‘let no one despise thee,’ ‘slight thee ;’ 
 not ‘give no one just cause to do so,’ 
 Bloomf. (comp. Jerome), a meaning 
 which is here purely imported; con- 
 trast 1 Tim, iv. 11, where the context 
 supplies the thought. All the Apostle 
 says here is, as Hamm. rightly para- 
 
 phrases, ‘permit not thy admonitions 
 to be set at naught,’ ‘speak and act 
 with vigour;’ the Cretan character 
 most probably required it. The verb 
 περιῴρ. is a ἄπ. Neyou. in the N.T., 
 probably somewhat milder (comp. 
 Thucyd. 1. 25, with accus.) than the 
 more usual καταφρονεῖν. The ethical 
 distinetion urged by Jerome, that πε- 
 ριφρ. Means an improper, while κα- 
 Tapp. may Mean a proper contempt 
 (e.g. of sufferings, d&c.), does not seem 
 tenable. 
 
 Cuarter III. 1. “Ὑπομίμνησκεῖ 
 ‘Put in mind,’ ‘admone,’ Vulg., Cla- 
 rom. It is almost perverse in the op- 
 ponents 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., except 2 Tim. ii. 14, is nearly 
 theonly word which suitably expresses 
 thispeculiar part of the teacher’s oftice; 
 in 1 Cor. iv. 17, another compound, 
 ἀναμνήσει, is properly used as imply- 
 ing that previous instructions had been 
 forgotten; see Meyer in loc. 
 ἀρχαῖς ἐξουσίαις] ‘to powers, author- 
 ities,’ Luke xii. 113 general, including 
 all constituted governors, Roman and 
 others. It is far from improbable that 
 there is here an allusion to an insub- 
 ordinate spirit which might have been 
 showing itself not merely among the 
 Cretan Jews (comp. Conyb.), but the 
 Cretans generally (Wetst.). They 
 had been little more than 125 years 
 under Roman rule (Metellus subju- 
 gated Crete B.c. 67), their previous 
 institutions had been of a democratic 
 τοπε(δημοκρατικὴν ἔχει διάθεσιν), ῬΟΙΥΌ. 
 Hist. vt. 46. 4), and their own preda- 
 
204 ΠΡΟΣ 
 
 ΤΊΤΟΝ, 
 
 , a , ΄σ v 
 σίαις ὑποτάσσεσθαι, πειθαρχεῖν, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον 
 
 . ‘ ε , > δέ A tee 
 2 ἀγαθὸν ἑτοίμου; εἶναι, μηδένα βλασφημεῖν, ἀμάχους 
 > - “ ᾿ , nA 4 
 εἶναι, ἐπιεικεῖς, πᾶσαν ἐνδεικνυμένους πρᾳὕτητα πρὸς 
 
 3 πάντας ἀνθρώπους. 
 
 tory and seditious character was ouly 
 too marked; στάσεσι καὶ φόνοις καὶ 
 πολέμοις ἐμφυλίοις ἀναστρεφομένους, 
 Polyb. v1. 46. 9; see Meursius, Creta, 
 ιν. 8, p. 226. This perhaps may be 
 rendered still further plausible by the 
 use of πειθαρχεῖν (‘coactus obsequi’) 
 as well as ὑποτάσσεσθαι (‘lubens et 
 sponte se submittere’), see Tittm. Sy- 
 non. II. p. 3, and comp. Syr., which by 
 
 “Δ Δ 9] [subditus est=7ed.] and 
 
 ge By a 
 
 Wols} [audivit=vzo7.] seems to 
 vy n 
 
 observe a similar distinction: contr. 
 Vulg.,Clarom, When πειθαρχ. stands 
 alone, this meaning must not be too 
 strongly pressed, comp. Acts v. 32, 
 XXvii. 21; the idea of obeying a supe- 
 rior power seems however never to be 
 wholly lost; comp. Ammonius, de 
 Vocab. Diff. p. 121. The omis- 
 sion of καὶ after ἀρχαῖς is justified by 
 preponderant uncial authority, ACD! 
 ἘΠΕ ΣΝ; al., and is rightly adopted by 
 Lachm., Tisch., and the majority of 
 recent expositors. πειθαρ- 
 χεῖν may be connected with ἐξουσίαις, 
 Theod., Huth., al., but, on account of 
 the preceding ἀρχαῖς, seems more na- 
 turally taken absolutely; so Vulg., 
 Syr. (appy.), and most modern com- 
 mentators. Coray extends the refer- 
 ence to τὴν αὐτοῦ els ἑαυτὸν ὑποταγήν 
 (comp. Aristot. Nic. Zth. x. 9), but 
 this is scarcely in harmony with the 
 immediate context. 
 
 2. μηδένα βλασφ.] ‘to speak evil 
 of no man,’ μηδένα ἀγορεύειν κακῶς, 
 Theod.; extension of the previous in- 
 junctions: not only rulers, but all men 
 are to be treated with consideration 
 
 > ’ 4 ἃς: | Ph 
 ἥμεν yap ποτε Kal ἡμεῖς ἀνόητοι, 
 
 both in word and deed. On Bdacd. 
 see notes on 1 Tim. i. 13, and on the 
 practical applications and necessary 
 limitations of the precept, the exhaus- 
 tive sermon of Barrow, Serm. xv. 
 0] τ 756: 
 
 ἀμάχους...ἐπιεικεῖς] ‘not contentious, 
 forbearing ; on the distinction between 
 these two words, see notes on 1 Tim. 
 ili. 3. The ἐπιεικὴς must have been, 
 it is to be feared, a somewhat excep- 
 tional character in Crete, where an 
 ἔμφυτος πλεονεξία, exhibited in out- 
 ward acts of aggression, καὶ ἰδίᾳ καὶ 
 κατὰ κοινόν (Polyb. v1. 46. 9), is de- 
 scribed as one of the prevailing and 
 dominant vices. πρᾳὕὔτητα] 
 ‘meekness,’ a virtue of the inner spirit, 
 very insufficiently represented by the 
 
 Syr. Ἰοΐου (“5 [benignitas]; 
 see notes on Eph. iv. 2, Gal. v. 23, 
 and Trench, Synon. § 42. 
 
 ἐνδεικνυμ.} See notes on Eph. ii. 7; 
 and on the practical doctrine of uni- 
 versal benevolence involved in πάντας 
 ἀνθρ. (καὶ Ἰουδαίους καὶ “Ἑλληνας, μοχ- 
 θηροὺς καὶ πονηρούς, Chrys.), see Wa- 
 terl. Serm. 11. § 1, Vol. v. p. 438. 
 
 3. ἦμεν γάρ] ‘For we WERE;’ ἦμεν 
 put forward emphatically, and involv- 
 ing a sharp contrast to the better pre- 
 sent (ver. 4). ΤῊΘ γὰρ 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 ex- 
 perienced it. Ἡμεῖς, as the context 
 shows (comp. ver. 5), implies the Apo- 
 stle and all believers ; comp. Eph. 11. 3, 
 where the reference is equally compre- 
 
BR... 2, 5. 1: 
 
 205 
 
 » a , y , ’ , Nae a 
 ἀπειθεῖς, πλανώμενοι, ὀουλεύοντες ἐπιθυμίαις καὶ ἡδοναῖς 
 
 , 5" , A , , ’ 
 ποικίλαις, ἐν κακίᾳ καὶ φθόνῳ διάγοντες, στυγητοι, 
 
 μισοῦντες ἀλλήλους" ὅτε δὲ ἡ χρηστότης καὶ ἡ φιλαν- 4 
 
 hensive. ἀνόητοι] ‘ foolish ;" 
 see notes on Gal. iii. 1. The meaning 
 is said to be here somewhat more spe- 
 cific, nearly approaching to ἐσκοτισμέ- 
 νοι τῇ διανοίᾳ, Eph. iv. 18 (De W., 
 Huth.); this however is not involved 
 in the word itself (Hesych. ἀνόητος. 
 μωρός, ἠλίθιος, ἀσύνετος), but only re- 
 flected on it from the context. 
 πλανώμενοι] ‘going astray,’ ‘errantes,’ 
 Vulg., Clarom., Syr.; not ‘led astray,’ 
 Conyb., Alf. The associated partici- 
 ples as well as the not uncommon use 
 of r\avadoOain asimilar sense (simply, 
 Matth. xviii. 12, 1 Pet. ii. 25, al.; me- 
 taphorically, Heb. v. 2, James y. 19) 
 seem in favour of theneutral meaning. 
 In 2 Tim. iii. 13, the antithesis sug- 
 gests the passive meaning. 
 
 ἡδοναῖς] ‘pleasures ; a word not else- 
 where used by St Paul (a fact not lost 
 sight of by De W.), and only some- 
 what sparingly in the N.T. (see Luke 
 Vili. 14, James iv. 1, 3, 2 Pet. il. 13), 
 but possibly suggested here by the no- 
 torious character in that respect of 
 those indirectly alluded to; comp. 
 Chrys. in loc. Jerome (τ) illustrates 
 the clause by references to St Paul ‘in 
 his Saulship’ (to use Hammond’s lan- 
 guage, Serm. xxx.): the vices enume- 
 rated are however far more probably 
 those of the people with whom for the 
 time being the Apostle is grouping 
 himself, On the derivation of ποικί- 
 Nats (used by St Paul only in the Past. 
 Epp.), see notes on 2 Tim. iii. 6. 
 κακίᾳ] ‘malice ;’ evilhabit of the mind 
 as contrasted with πονηρία, which ra- 
 ther points to the manifestation of it; 
 see notes on Eph. iv. 31 (Transi.), 
 Trench, Synon. § 11. It issurely very 
 hasty in Huther toassert that in 1 Cor, 
 
 y. 8 itis merely synonymous with πο- 
 νηρία; see Taylor, on Repent. tv. 1, 
 who however is too narrow in his in- 
 terpretation of κακία, though correct 
 in that of πονηρία. The verb διά- 
 yew that follows occurs only here and 
 (with βίον) τ Tim. ii. 2. 
 στυγητοί] ‘hateful,’ μισητοί, Hesych., 
 ‘odibiles,’ Vulg. : itforms, as Wiesing. 
 observes, a species of antithesis to μισ- 
 odvres ἀλλήλους. Their conduct was 
 such as to awaken hatred in others. 
 4. ἡ χρηστότης] ‘the kindness,’ 
 ‘benignity,’ ‘benignitas,’ Vulg., Cla- 
 rom., sc. ‘que in dandis beneficiis cer- 
 nitur,’ Fritz. Rom. ii. 4, Vol. 1. p. 98; 
 used by Paul alone, in reference to 
 God, Rom. ii. 4, xi.22, Eph. ii. 7(comp. 
 Clem. Rom. 1. 9, Epist. ad Diogn. ὃ 9); 
 in reference to man (Rom. iii. 12, 
 quot.), 2 Cor. vi. 6, Gal. vy. 22, Col. iii. 
 12. See notes on Gal. l.c., where it 
 is distinguished from ἀγαθωσύνη. 
 ἡ φιλανθρωπία] ‘the love,’ or more 
 exactly ‘love towards men,’ Alf., ‘hu- 
 manitas,’ Vulg.; used only again, in 
 ref. to men, Acts xxvill. 2; comp. 
 Philo, Leg. ad Cai. § το, Vol. 11. p. 
 556 (Mang.),—where both words are 
 associated,—Raphel in loc., and for 
 the general sentiment, John iii, 16. 
 The articleisrepeated witheach subst. 
 to give prominence to each attribute, 
 Green, Gr. p.213. On ἐπεφάνη, comp. 
 notes on ch. ii. rr. τοῦ 
 σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Θεοῦ] ‘our Saviour 
 God;’ see notes on 1 Tim. i. 1, and 
 Middleton, Gr. Art. p. 396, who re- 
 marks that it may be questioned 
 whether in this place, as well as in ch. 
 i. 3, ii, το, 1 Tim, ii. 3, the σωτὴρ 
 Θεὸς be not Christ, though the title 
 is usually referred to the Father. In 
 
200 WPpoz TITON. 
 
 ’ lol ΄- A col 9. 
 5 θρωπία ἐπεφάνη τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Θεοῦ, οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων 
 -“ ΕἸ ,ὕ A , , € . s 4 εἶ 4 
 τῶν εν δικαιοσύνη ἃ εποιήσαμεν ἡμεῖς, ἀλλα κατὰ TO 
 " “ΙΝ » eee ‘ “ , 4 
 αὐτοῦ ἔλεος ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς διὰ λουτροῦ παλινγενεσίας καὶ 
 
 5. ἃ ἐποιήσαμεν] So Lachm. with AC'D!IFGN; al.; Clem., al. (Huther, 
 Alf.), and now perhaps rightly. Tisch. reads ὧν ἐποιήσαμεν with C*D°EKL; 
 nearly all mss.; Ath., Chrys., Theod., al. (Rec., Griesh., Scholz, Words.,—and 
 ed. τ and 2), and not without considerable internal probability, as the law of 
 attraction seems to be preserved very regularly in the N.T, Huther urges the 
 probability of a correction from the acc. to the gen., but it may be considered 
 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. 147) 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 have reversed then the reading of ed. τ and 2 on the pre- 
 
 ponderance of external authority, but not with full confidence. 
 
 the present verse this surely cannot be 
 the case (see ver. 6, and comp. Usteri, 
 Lehrb. τι. 2. 4, p. 310), still we seem 
 bound to mark in translation the dif- 
 ferent collocation of the words. 
 
 5. οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων] ‘not by works,’ 
 i.e. in consequence of works; see 
 notes on Gal. 11. 16, where this and 
 other uses of ἐκ are compared and in- 
 vestigated. The negative isemphatic, 
 and, as Bengel observes, refers to the 
 whole sentence; οὔτε ἐποιήσαμεν ἔργα 
 δικαιοσύνης, οὔτε ἐσώθημεν ἐκ τούτων, 
 ἀλλὰ τὸ πᾶν ἡ ἀγαθότης αὐτοῦ ἐποίησε, 
 Theoph. 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. § 48. a, p. 348. 
 ἐποιήσαμεν ἡμεῖς] ‘we did: ἡμεῖς 
 emphatic; the pronoun being added 
 to make the contrast with τὸ αὐτοῦ 
 ἔλεος still more clear and forcible. In 
 the following clause κατὰ denotes the 
 indirect reason that an agreement with 
 a norma suggests and involves, = ‘in 
 consequence of,’ ‘qué est misericor- 
 dia,’ Fritz. Rom. ii. 4, Vol. 1. p. 993 
 so Acts iil, 17, κατὰ ἄγνοιαν, τ Pet. i. 
 
 3, κατὰ τὸ...ἔλεος, comp. Phil. ii, 3, 
 see Winer, Gr. § 49. ἃ, p. 358. The 
 transition from the regular meaning 
 of the ‘model’ to that of the ‘course 
 of thingsin accordance with it’ is suf- 
 ficiently easy and intelligible; comp. 
 Phil. ii. 3 (where κατ᾽ ἐρίθειαν stands 
 in a kind of parallelism to the dative 
 τῇ ταπεινοφροσύνῃ), and still more de- 
 finitely Arrian, Alex. 1. 99 (cited by 
 Winer), car’ ἔχθος τὸ Πόρου μᾶλλον ἢ 
 φιλίᾳ τῇ ᾿Αλεξάνδρου: see also Bern- 
 hardy, Syntax, v. 20.b, p. 240. Hu- 
 ther on 1 Pet. i. 2 draws a distine- 
 tion between this use of κατὰ and ἐξ, 
 but a bareremembrance of theprimary 
 meanings of the two prepp., origin 
 (immediate) and model, will render 
 such distinctions almost self-evident. 
 ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς] ‘He saved us,’ ‘put us 
 into a state of salvation,’ Hammond; 
 see esp. 1 Pet. ili. 21, and comp. Tay- 
 lor, Life of Chr. τ. § 9, Disc. v1. 29. 
 In this important dogmatical state- 
 ment 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 πίστεως, Eph. 11. 8, comp. 1 Pet. 
 
ΤῊ. 5, 6. 207 
 
 ἀνακαινώσεως Πνεύματος ᾿Αγίου, οὔ ἐξέχεεν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς 6 
 
 l.c.), because the object of the whole 
 passage is to enhance the description 
 of the saving mercy of God, see Wies- 
 ing. in loc. ; (2) that St Paul speaks of 
 baptism on the supposition that it was 
 no mere observance, but that it was a 
 sacrament in which all that was in- 
 ward properly and completely accom- 
 panied all that was outward: he thus 
 can say, in the fullest sense of the 
 words, that it was a λοῦτρον παλινγε- 
 veotas, as he had also said, Gal. ili. 27, 
 that as many as were baptized into 
 Christ Χριστὸν ἐνεδύσαντο, 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 re- 
 surrection and salvation, so, if abided 
 in, most surely leads to final σωτηρία ; 
 see Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 495 
 (Bohn), and esp. the brief but most 
 perspicuous remarks of Waterl., Hu- 
 char. vu. 3, Vol. Iv. p. 578 (comp. ib. 
 IX. 3, p. 645),compared with the fuller 
 statements of Taylor, Life of Chr. τ. 
 9. Disc. vi. 14.sq. On the meaning of 
 σώζω, compare (with caution) Green, 
 Gramm. p. 318, but observe that ‘ to 
 embrace the Gospel’ (id. 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 ina state of 
 salvation ;’ comp. Beveridge, Church 
 Cat. qu. 4, and notes on Eph. ii. 8. 
 
 διὰ λουτροῦ παλινγ.] ‘by means of the 
 laver of regeneration,’ ‘per lavacrum 
 regenerationis,’ Vulg., Clarom.; the 
 λουτρ. παλινγ. is the ‘ causa medians’ 
 of the saving grace of Christ, it is ‘a 
 means whereby we receive the same, 
 and a pledge to assure us thereof ;’ 
 ‘partam a Christo salutem Baptismus 
 nobis obsignat,’ Calv. Less than this 
 cannot be said by any candid interpre- 
 
 ter. The gen. παλινΎ. appy. marks 
 the attribute or inseparable accompa- 
 niments of the λουτρόν, thus falling 
 under the general head of the posses- 
 sive gen., Scheuerl. Synt. § 16. 3, p. 
 115: for exx. in the N.T. of this sort 
 of gen. of ‘inner reference,’ see esp. 
 the collection in Winer, G7. § 30. 2. B, 
 p- 169. As forany (exegetically consi- 
 dered) inadmissible attempts (Matth., 
 al.) to explain away the plain forceand 
 lexical meaning of λουτρόν (see notes 
 on Eph. v. 26), it may be enough to 
 say in the words of Hooker on this 
 subject, that ‘where a literal construc- 
 tion will stand, the farthest from the 
 letter is commonly the worst,’ Eccl. 
 Pol. v. 59. 2; see Johniii. 5, the reff. 
 in Waterland, Works, Vol. tv. p. 428, 
 and comp. the fair comments of Hof- 
 mann, Weiss. wu. Hrf. τι. p. 233 8q., 
 and Schriftb. 1. 2, p. 170 sq. On 
 the truemeaning of παλινγενεσία (ΞΥΥ. 
 
 235) 0? {Soko [partus qui 
 
 est de principio, de novo]; οὐκ ἐπεσκεύ- 
 ασεν ἡμᾶς ἀλλ᾽ ἀνωθεν κατεσκεύασεν, 
 Chrys.), see the able treatise on this 
 text by Waterland, Works, Vol. tv. 
 p- 427 sq., a tract which, though ex- 
 tending 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) and 
 the very good note of Wordsworth in 
 loc. may also be profitably consulted. 
 καὶ ἀνακαιν. K.T.A.] ‘and renewing of 
 the Holy Spirit,’ i.e. ‘by the Holy 
 Spirit,’ the second gen. being that of 
 the agent, more definitely expressed 
 by DI HFG, al., ἀνακαιν. διὰ mv. ay., 
 Clarom. (‘renoy. per Sp. sanctum’), 
 and some Latin F'f.: comp. notes on 
 Eph. iv. 23. The construction of the 
 first gen, ἀνακαιν. is somewhat doubt- 
 
208 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ TITON. 
 
 7 πλουσίως διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν, ἵνα 
 
 ful. It may be regarded either (a) as 
 dependent on the preceding διά, as in 
 Syr., Jerome (‘per renovationem’), 
 al. ; see John iii. 5, and comp. Blunt, 
 Lect. on Par. Priest, p. 56; or (b) as 
 dependent on Aoutpod, Vulg., Clarom., 
 Copt., Arm., Alth.-Platt, none of 
 which repeat the prep. before ἀνα- 
 kaw. ; see Waterland, Regen. Vol. tv. 
 Ῥ. 428, who briefly notices and re- 
 moves the objection (comp. Alf.) 
 founded on the inclusive character 
 that will thus be assigned to Baptism. 
 On the whole the latter seems most 
 simpleandsatisfactory: avaxaw.x.T.d. 
 must not however be considered as 
 merely explanatory of παλινγενεσίας 
 (De W., Huther), but as co-ordinate 
 with it, παλινγ. and ἀνακαιν. (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,’ Water- 
 land, 1. 6. p. 428; see Hofmann, 
 Schriftb. τι. 2, p. 171. The exact 
 genitival relation παλινγ. andavaxaw. 
 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 
 λουτρὸν involves, comprises, brings 
 with it, and of which it is 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. § 30. 2, p- 168, 
 169. The distinction between Rege- 
 neration and Renovation (preserved 
 in our Service of Confirmation), in 
 respect of (a) the ‘causa efficiens,’(b) 
 duration, and (c) recurrence,—three 
 important theological differentia, is 
 nowhere more perspicuously stated 
 than by Waterl. 1.6. 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. οὗ] scil. Πνεύματος ἁγίου; not 
 referring to Nourpou(Caly.), ordepend- 
 ent on an omitted prep. (Heydenr.), 
 but, according to the usual rule of at- 
 traction, on the gen. immediately pre- 
 ceding: οὐ μόνον yap δ αὐτοῦ ἀνέπλα- 
 σεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ δαψιλῶς τούτου μετέδω- 
 κεν, Theoph. ἐξέχεεν] 
 ‘ poured out,’ ‘shed,’ non dicit dedit 
 sed effudit,’ Corn. a Lap.; in similar 
 reference to the Holy Spirit, Acts ii. 
 17, 18, 33. There does not however 
 appear to be hereany specialreference 
 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 bap- 
 tism. The next clause points out 
 through whose mediation this blessed 
 effusion is bestowed. 
 
 Sid Ἴησ. Xp. is not to be separated, 
 as in Mill, Griesb., Luchm., by acom- 
 ma from the clause ἐξέχεεν k.7.X., but 
 connected closely with it: if the words 
 be referred to ἔσωσεν, there will be 
 not only a slight tautology ἔσωσεν... 
 διὰ τοῦ σωτῆρος, but the awkwardness 
 of two clauses with διὰ each depend- 
 ent 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 
 of the regenerating and renewing 
 Spirit; that Spiritagain 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 diffe- 
 rent ways; ‘ Pater nostra salutis pri- 
 
117. γ, 8. 
 
 209 
 
 δικαιωθέντες τῇ ἐκείνου χάριτι κληρονόμοι γενηθῶμεν 
 
 a ys , A 9 , 
 κατ ἐλπίδα ζωῆς αἰωνίου. 
 Teach men to main- 
 tain good works; avoid 
 
 idle questions, and shun 
 an obstinate heretic. 
 
 mus auctor, Christus vero opifex et 
 quasi artifex,’ Justiniani. 
 
 7. ἵνα «.7.A.] Design of the more 
 remote ἔσωσεν (De W.), not of the 
 nearer ἐξέχεεν (Wiesing., Alf.). The 
 latter construction isfairly defensible, 
 butappy. notsosimple or satisfactory. 
 Though some prominence is given to 
 ἐξέχεεν, both by the adv. πλουσίως, 
 and by the defining words διὰ “Inc. 
 Xp., yet the whole context seems to 
 mark ἔσωσεν as the verb on which 
 the final clause depends. We were 
 once in a hopeless and lost state, but 
 we were rescued from it by the φιλαν- 
 θρωπία of God, who not merely saved 
 us from the δουλεία of sin, but asso- 
 ciated with it the gracious purpose 
 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. 5: in the words of the 
 same writer, ‘justification cannot be 
 conceived without some work of the 
 Spirit in conferring a title to salva- 
 tion,’ ib. p. 6. ἐκείνου may 
 be referred to the Holy Spirit (Wies- 
 ing.), but is appy. more correctly 
 referred to God the Father. The 
 Holy Spiritis undoubtedly the efficient 
 (1 Cor. vi. 11}, as our Lord is the 
 meritorious cause of our justification; 
 the use however of the expression 
 χάρις, which in reference to δικαιοσύνη 
 and δικαιόω seems almost regularly 
 connected with the principal cause, 
 the Father (Rom. iii. 24), and its 
 
 Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος, καὶ περὶ τούτων 8 
 βούλομαί σε διαβεβαιοῦσθαι, ἵνα φρον- 
 
 apparent retrospective reference to ἐξ 
 ἔργων, ver. 5, renders the latter in- 
 terpr. much more probable; comp. 
 Waterl. Justif. Vol. γι. p. 9. The 
 pron. ἐκείνου seems to have been used 
 to preclude a reference to ’Incod Xp. 
 which so immediately precedes, 
 kat ἐλπίδα] ‘in respect of hope,’ 
 ‘according to hope,’ ‘secundum spem,’ 
 Vulg., Clarom., surely not ‘through 
 hope,’ Conyb.,—a needless violation 
 of the usual force of the prep. These 
 words may be connected with {wis 
 αἰωνίου (Coray, Matth., Alf.; comp. 
 ch, i. 2), but as κληρονόμοι, a term 
 not in any way elucidated by a fore- 
 going context (as is the case in all 
 other passages where it stands alone) 
 would thus be left wholly isolated, it 
 seems more natural to regard them as 
 a restrictive addition to the latter 
 words,—xKaws ἠλπίσαμεν, οὕτως ἀπο- 
 λαύσομεν, Chrys.; so, very distinctly, 
 Theoph, in loc, The κληρονομία ζωῆς 
 αἰων. is really future (comp. Rom. viii. 
 24, Where ἐλπίδι is probably a dat. 
 modi, see Meyer in loc.), though pre- 
 sent in respect of hope; εἰ yap οὕτως 
 ἀπεγνωσμένους, ws ἄνωθεν γεννηθῆναι, 
 ὡς χάριτι σωθῆναι, ὡς μηδὲν ἔχοντας 
 [Cod. Colb.] ἀγαθόν, ἔσωσε, πολλῷ 
 μᾶλλον ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι τοῦτο ἐργάσε- 
 ται, Chrys. The remark of De W. that 
 St Paul does not elsewhere specifically 
 join k\ypoy. or even ἐλπὶς (except in 
 this Ep.) with gw αἰών. is true, but 
 can scarcely be considered of moment, 
 as substantially analogous sentiments 
 (comp. Eph. i. 18, 1 Thess. v. 8) can 
 be adduced without difficulty; comp. 
 Wieseler in loc. 
 
 8. Πιστὸς ὁ λόγος] ‘Faithful is 
 the saying, in emphatic reference to 
 
 12 
 
210 
 
 IPOS. TITON. 
 
 ’ “A Ν af € , 
 τίζωσιν καλῶν epyov προΐστασθαι οἱ πεπιστευκοτες 
 
 “ ΄“ ’ , 4 ἘΝ , - ’ 
 Θεῷ. ταῦτά ἐστιν καλὰ καὶ ὠφέλιμα τοῖς ἀνθρώποις" 
 
 what has been asserted in the preced- 
 ing vers. 4—7 (to the last of which 
 verses they are here, and here only, 
 joinedin&), and to the important doc- 
 trines they involve; ἐπειδὴ περὶ μελ- 
 λόντων διαλεχθῇ καὶ οὔπω παρόντων, 
 ἐπήγαγε τὸ ἀξιόπιστον, Chrys. On this 
 formula see notes on 1 Tim. i. 15. 
 περὶ rovTwy...Sia Bef. ]‘ make assevera- 
 tion concerning these things ;’ not ‘hec 
 asseverare,’ Beza, Auth., De Wette, 
 but, asin τ Tim. i 7 (where see notes), 
 ‘de his [‘non de rebus frivolis,’ Beng. ] 
 affirmare,’ Clarom., changed for the 
 worse in Vulg. to ‘confirmare :’ comp. 
 Scholef. Hints, p. 127 (ed. 4). The 
 object and intent of the order is given 
 in the following clause. 
 
 φροντίζωσιν] ‘be careful ;’ ἅπ. λεγόμ. 
 in the N.T.; ἔργον καὶ σπούδασμα δι- 
 ἡνεκὲς ἔχωσι, Theoph. ‘Vult eos stu- 
 dium suum curamque huc applicare, 
 et videtur Apost, quum dicit φροντ. 
 eleganter alludere ad inanes eorum 
 contemplationes, quisine fructu et ex- 
 tra vitam philosophantur,’ Calv. The 
 constructions of φροντ. and ἐκῴροντ. 
 are noticed by Thomas M. p. 280 (ed. 
 Bern.). 
 
 καλῶν ἔργων] ‘good works ; ’ not mere- 
 ly with reference to works of mercy 
 (Chrys.), but generally and compre- 
 hensively. The recurrence of this ex- 
 pression in the Past. Epp. (ver. 14, 
 Ch. 11 7, <4, CLM, Ὁ 10,190. vi. 15, 
 see 1 Tim. iil, 1, and comp. 1 Tim. ii. 
 1o, 2 Tim. ii. 21, Tit. iii. 1) has been 
 often noticed; all that need be said 
 is, that the nature of the errors con- 
 demned in these Epp. wasexactly such 
 as required the reiteration of such a 
 command. It was not to bea hollow, 
 specious, falsely ascetic, and sterile 
 Christianity, but one that showed it- 
 self in outward actions; comp. Wies- 
 
 ing. Einleit. § 4, Neander, Planting, 
 Vol. 1. p. 343 (Bohn). 
 προΐστασθαι] ‘to be forward in, to 
 
 v n 
 practise,’ Syr. wo Sato [operari, 
 
 facere] ; so προΐστ. τέχνης, Athen. x11. 
 612, see Rost u. Palm, Lez. s.y. Vol. 
 Il.p. 1122. Thetranslation of Vulg., 
 Clarom., al., ‘bonis operibus preesse,’ 
 makes an endeavour to retain the 
 primary meaning of the verb, but not 
 successfully nor idiomatically. Justi- 
 niani compares ‘ prefectus annone;’ 
 Estiusadopts the gloss, ‘ tanquam ope- 
 rum exactores et prefecti;’ Priceus 
 (ap. Poli Syn.) paraphrases by ἡγεμό- 
 vas εἶναι; alii alia. All this however 
 seems slightly forced; the word ap- 
 pears chosen to mark a ‘prompt sedu- 
 lous attention to (comp. Polyb. Hist. 
 VI. 34. 3, προΐστανται xpelas), and prac- 
 tice of good works,’ but, as the exx. 
 adduced appear to show, scarcely in- 
 volves any further idea of ‘bene agen- 
 do precedere,’ Beza, al.: see the nu- 
 merous exx. quoted by Kypke, Obs. 
 Vol. 11. 381, Loesner, Obs. p. 430. 
 
 ot πεπιστ. Θεῷ | ‘theywho have believed 
 God,’—God,not perhaps without some 
 slight emphasis ; ‘non dixit quicredunt 
 hominibus sed qui credunt Deo,’ Je- 
 rome. The expression is certainly 
 not to be limited to the Gentile Chris- 
 tians (Mack), but includes all who by 
 God’s grace had been led to embrace 
 His λόγον and διδασκαλίαν (ch. i. 3, 
 ii. 10), De W., Wiesing. On the con- 
 structions of πίστις and πιστεύω, see 
 notes on 1 Tim. i. 16. 
 
 ταῦτα] ‘These things,’ scil. these in- 
 structions, this practical teaching 
 (Fell), to which the μωραὲ ἕξητήσεις in 
 the next verse form a sharp and clear 
 contrast. Wiesinger refers the pro- 
 noun to καλὰ ἔργα; this however, even 
 
FARES το, 10, 211 
 
 μωρὰς δὲ ζητήσεις καὶ γενεαλογίας καὶ ἔρεις καὶ μάχας 9 
 νομικὰς περιΐϊστασο' εἰσὶν γὰρ ἀνωφελεῖς καὶ μάταιοι. 
 
 ς A ld ‘ , 4 i , 
 Aiperixoy ἄνθρωπον μετὰ μίαν καὶ δευτέραν νουθεσίαν 10 
 
 10. μίαν καὶ δευτέραν νουθεσίαν] So Rec. with ACKLN; mss.; Vulg., 
 al.; many Gr. and Lat. Ff. (Griesb., Scholz, Lachm., Huth., Alf., Wordsw.). 
 The reading adopted by Tisch., μίαν νουθεσίαν καὶ δευτέραν, with DEFG (but καὶ 
 δύο DE; Clarom., Copt.: ἢ δευτέρα FG); Clarom., Sangerm., Copt., Syr.-Phil.; 
 Chrys., Theod. (1); Lat. Ff., though fairly supported, does not seem 50 satis- 
 factory; transcribers appear to have felt a difficulty about the close union of 
 μίαν and δευτέραν, and to have introduced in consequence variations in the 
 
 text. 
 
 if it escapes tautology, does not equal- 
 ly well maintain the antithesis to the 
 meaning here assigned to ζητήσεις. 
 In the following words καλὰ (‘ good’ 
 per se, opp. to μάταιοι, ver. 9) forms 
 one predication, καὶ ὠφέλιμα τοῖς ἀν- 
 θρώποις another; comp. notes on 1 
 Tim. ii. 3. 
 
 9. ἵητήσεις] ‘questions (of contro- 
 versy);’ exactly asin 1 Tim. i. 4, where 
 see notes. In the latter passage De 
 W. here assigns the meaning ‘Strei- 
 tigkeiten,’ and yet in his note on the 
 passage adopts the present meaning 
 ‘ Streitfragen,’—a _ self-contradiction 
 by no means usual in that careful 
 commentator. The word is used by 
 St Paul only in the Pastoral Epp., 1 
 Lim. 1. 4, Vi. 4, 2 Tim. ii, 22. On 
 γενεαλογίας, see notes on τ Tim. i. 4, 
 where the expression is investigated: 
 it is here associated with yr. as pro- 
 bably marking the leading subject 
 and theme of these controversial dis- 
 cussions. Epets Kal pox. νομ.] 
 ‘strifes,and contentions about the law,’ 
 are the results of these foolish and un- 
 practical questions; see 1 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. vou. Were a special and prevailing 
 form of the épes, just as the yevean. 
 were of the {yr7joe1s (Wiesing.). The 
 contentions perhaps turned on the 
 
 authority and application of some of 
 the precepts in the law; comp. 1 Tim. 
 i. 4. περιΐστασο] ‘avoid, 
 go out of the way of,’ ‘devita,’ Vulg., 
 Clarom.; see notes on 2 Tim. ii, 16, 
 the only other passage where the word 
 occurs in its present form. 
 
 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 termina- 
 tions; the fem. occurs 1 Cor. xv. 17, 
 1 Pet. i. 18. On the distinction be, 
 tween xévos (contents,—‘das Gehalt- 
 lose’) and μάταιος (results, —‘das Er- 
 folglose’) see Meyer on 1 Cor. xv. 17: 
 Tittmann (Synon. 1. p. 173) compares 
 them with the Lat. ‘inanis’ and ‘ya- 
 nus.’ 
 
 10. Αἱρετικὸν ἄνθρωπον]. ‘An he- 
 retical man,’ ‘a man who causeth divi- 
 sions ;’ ‘quisquis sua protervia unita- 
 tem ecclesize abrumpit,’ Calvy. The 
 exact meaning here of this word (a 
 am. Aeyou. in N.T.) must not be de- 
 duced from the usage of later writers, 
 but simply from the Apostle’s use 
 of the subst. from which it is de- 
 rived. The term αἱρέσεις is found (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 
 
 P2 
 
212 
 
 ΠΡῸΣ TITON. 
 
 ~ sat A 
 II παραιτοῦ, εἰδὼς ὅτι ἐξέστραπται ὁ τοιοῦτος καὶ duap- 
 
 , a ’ ’ 
 TAVEL WY αυτοκατακριτος. 
 
 heresim,’ Jerome), and Gal. v. 20, 
 where it is enumerated after διχοστα- 
 σίαι. In neither case however does 
 the word seem to imply specially ‘the 
 open espousal of any fundamental er- 
 ror’ (the more definite eccles. meaning; 
 comp. Origen on Tit. Vol. rv. p. 695, 
 ed. Bened., Waterl. Doct. of Trin. ch. 
 Iv. Vol. 11. p. 641), but more gene- 
 rally ‘ divisionsin church matters,’ pos- 
 sibly of a somewhat matured kind, τὰς 
 φιλονεικίας λέγει, Theod. on 1 Cor. l.c., 
 see Suicer, Thesaur. 5. v. 1. 3, Vol. 1. 
 p- 120. Thus then αἱρετικὸς ἄνθρ. 
 will here be one who gives rise to such 
 divisions by erroneous teaching, not 
 necessarily of a fundamentally hetero- 
 dox nature, but of the kind just de- 
 scribed, ver.g; comp.ch.i.14. Ifwe 
 adopt this appy. fair and reasonable 
 interpretation, the objections of De W. 
 and others, founded on the later and 
 more special meanings of αἵρεσις and 
 αἱρετικός, Wholly fall to the ground. 
 
 μετὰ μίαν K.7.A.] ‘after one and a se- 
 cond [unavailing] admonition ;’ Titus 
 is not to contend, he is only to use νου- 
 θεσία, if that fail he is then to have 
 nothing further to do with the offender. 
 On the distinction between νουθεσία 
 (‘que fit verbis’) and παιδεία (‘que 
 fit per penas’), see notes on Eph. vi. 
 4; and on the use of εἷς for πρῶτος, 
 here associated with δεύτερος, and con- 
 sequently less peculiar and Hebraistic 
 than when alone, as in Matth. xxviii. 1, 
 Mark xvi. 2, al., see Winer, Gr. § 37. 
 I, Pp. 222. παραιτοῦ] ‘shun,’ 
 
 mY.) ΝΔοὴ [subdue te a] Syr., 
 
 ‘devita,’ Vulg., Clarom.; ‘monere de- 
 sine; laterem lavares,’ Beng.: seenotes 
 on τ Tim, iv. 7. There is nothing in 
 this or the associated words which fa- 
 
 vours any definite reference to formal 
 excommunication, = ἔκβαλλε, Vitringa 
 (de Vet. Syn. 11. 1. 10, p. 756), who 
 compares the νουθεσία to the ‘correp- 
 tio’ or ‘excommunicatio privata’ of 
 the Jews; sim. Taylor, Episc. ὃ 15. 
 This however is importing into a ge- 
 neral word a special meaning. As we 
 certainly have such expressions as 7ra- 
 ραιτεῖσθαιτὴν γυναῖκα (repudiare), Plut. 
 Apophth. 206 a, and even ἀπωθεῖσθαι 
 καὶ τῆς οἰκίας παραιτεῖσθαι, Lucian, 
 Abdic. § 19, we perhaps may say with 
 Waterland (Doct. of Trin. ch. rv. Vol. 
 11. p. 466) that παραιτοῦ ‘implies and 
 infers a command to exclude 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 Transl. 
 
 11. εἰδώς] ‘as thow knowest,’ by 
 the ill success of thy admonitions; 
 reason for the injunction to have no- 
 thing to do with him: ὅταν δὲ δῆλος ἦ 
 πᾶσι καὶ φανερός, τίνος ἕνεκεν πυκτεύεις 
 εἰκῇ; Chrys. ἐξέστραπται] 
 
 ‘is perverted,’ Watts [perversus] 
 Syr., lit. ‘hath been turned tho- 
 roughly, inside out;’ Schol. on Arist. 
 Nub. 88, ἀπὸ μεταφορᾶς τῶν ῥυπουμέ- 
 νων ἱματίων καὶ ἐκστρεφομένων" ἐκστρέ- 
 ψαι δὲ ἱμάτιον τὸ ἀλλάξαι τὸ πρὸς τὸ 
 ἔσω μέρος ἔξω (cited by Wetst.): so 
 Deut, xxxii, 20, yevéa ἐξεστραμμένη, 
 Heb. nasnan 1. The strengthened 
 compound thus appears to denote the 
 complete inward corruption and per- 
 verseness of character which must be 
 predicated of any man who remains 
 proof against twice-repeated admo- 
 nitions. Baur, it is to be feared 
 only to support his meaning of αἱρετι- 
 κός, refers ἐξέστρ. to the outward act 
 of the man, ‘has gone away from us;’ 
 
PPE ar, Fy 75 
 
 Come to me at Nico- 
 polis; bring Zenas and 
 Apollos. Our brethren 
 must not be unfruitful. 
 
 213 
 
 Ὅταν πέμψω ᾿Αρτεμᾶν πρός σε ἢ 12 
 Τύχικον, σπούδασον ἐλθεῖν πρός με εἰς 
 
 Νικόπολιν" ἐκεῖ γὰρ κέκρικα παραχειμάσαι. Ζηνᾶν τὸν 13 
 
 this, as Wiesing. properly remarks, 
 would more naturally be ἀποστρέφε- 
 σθαι. αὐτοκατάκριτος] 
 ‘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 ὅτι οὐδεὶς εἶπεν, 
 οὐδεὶς ἐνουθέτησεν, Chrys. The aggra- 
 vating circumstance is not that the 
 man condemns himself directly and 
 explicitly, as this might be a step to 
 recovery, but that he condemns him- 
 self indirectly and implicitly, as acting 
 ‘against the law of his mind, and doing 
 in his own particular case what in 
 general he condemns; see esp. Wa- 
 terland, Doct. of Trin. ch. 1v. Vol. 111. 
 p. 464, where this expression is fully 
 investigated. 
 
 12. Τύχικον] On Tychicus, whom 
 the Apostle (Col. iv. 7) terms ὁ dya- 
 πητὸς ἀδελφὸς 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, 
 Σιν. 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 dif- 
 ficult to decide which of these cities is 
 here alluded to; Schrader (Paulus, 
 Vol. 1. p. 118) fixes on the first; the 
 Greek commentators, the subscription 
 at the end of the Ep. (ἀπὸ Νικοπ. τῆς 
 Μακεδονίας, to which country it was 
 near, comp. Theod.), and some mo- 
 dern writers, on the second ; Wieseler 
 
 (Chronol. p. 335) and others on the 
 third. The second indeed may seem 
 to harmonize better with the scanty 
 notices of the last journey from Asia 
 Minor to the West in 2 Tim. iv. 10 54. 
 (Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 344, 
 Bohn), but as the city in Epirus ap- 
 pears 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. 572 (ed. 2). κέκρικα] 
 ‘I have determined,’ with dependent 
 inf., a form of construction adopted 
 elsewhere by St Paul, 1 Cor. vii. 37 
 (perf.), 2 Cor. ii. 1 (aor.). παρα- 
 χειμάσαι] ‘to winter ; Demosth. adv. 
 Phorm. p. 909, παραχειμάζοντι ἐκεῖ, 
 10. Dionys. p. 1292, Polyb. Hist. τι. 
 64.1, II. 33. 5. al.: in this compound 
 the prep. παρὰ seems to mark the lo- 
 cality at which the action was to take 
 place, comp. Rost. ἃ, Palm, Lez. 8.0. 
 Ivy. 1, Vol. 11. p. 670. There does not 
 appear to be anything in the expres- 
 sion from which a historical deduction 
 can be safely drawn; possibly the win- 
 ter was drawing near, and the Apostle 
 was on his way (ἐκεῖ, ‘non dicit hie,’ 
 Beng.) to Nicopolis. 
 
 13. Znvav] A name perhaps con- 
 tracted from Ζηνόδωρος: of the bearer 
 of it nothing is known. It is doubt- 
 ful whether the term νομικὸς 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 attributed to Zenas, ‘De vita et 
 
214 
 
 ΠΡΟΣ. TITON. 
 
 A y 2 A 
 νομικὸν καὶ ᾿Απολλὼ σπουδαίως πρόπεμψον, ἵνα μηδὲν 
 
 14 αὐτοῖς λείπη. 
 
 , ‘ 4 ε « , - 
 μανθανέτωσαν δὲ Kat ot ἡμέτεροι καλῶν 
 
 Ε] aA 9 s " 4 ’ a 4 
 ἐργων προΐστασθαι εἰς τὰς ἀναγκαίας χρείας, iva μὴ 
 
 ᾿ » 
 Waly ακαρτοι. 
 
 , > 9 “ , 
 15 ᾿Ασπαζονταί σε οἱ MET ἐμοῦ πάντες" 
 
 actis Titi,’ compare Fabric. Cod. Apocr. 
 Vol. 11. p. 831. ᾿Απολλώ] ‘ Apol- 
 los,’ sc. Apollonius [as in codex Beze, 
 Acts xviii. 24], or possibly Apollo- 
 dorus,—an eloquent (λόγιος, Acts, l.c., 
 see Meyer in loc.) Jew of Alexandria, 
 well versed in the Scriptures, and a 
 disciple of St John the Baptist; he was 
 instructed in Christianity by Aquila 
 and Priscilla (Acts xviii. 26), preached 
 theGospel with signal success inAchaia 
 and at Corinth, and appears to have 
 maintained relations of close intimacy 
 with St Paul, comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 12. 
 There appears no good reason for sup- 
 posing any greater differences between 
 the teaching of St Paul and Apollos 
 (Neander, Planting, Vol. 1. p. 230 56.» 
 Bohn) than may be referred to the mere 
 outward form in which that teaching 
 was perhaps communicated,and which 
 comes from the one and the same 
 Spirit who διαιρεῖ ἰδίᾳ ἑκάστῳ καθὼς 
 βούλεται (1 Cor. xii. rr); see Winer, 
 RWB, Art. ‘ Apollos,’ Vol. 1. p. 68. 
 Much that has been recently advanced 
 on the differences between St Paul and 
 Apollos is very doubtful and very un- 
 satisfactory. 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 quo in loco rese- 
 derint’ (Grot.), as this would imply a 
 comparison between them and St Paul, 
 and wouldinyolvea meaning of προΐστ. 
 kan. ἔργ. (‘habere domi officinam ali- 
 
 Salutations and Bene- 
 diction. 
 
 quam, me imitantes, Act. xx. 34,’ 
 Grot.), somewhat arbitrary,and wholly 
 different to that in ver, 8. The ἡμέ- 
 repo. are rather οἱ περὶ σέ (Theoph.), 
 the καὶ tacitly comparing them not 
 with heathens (Hofmann, Schriftb. 
 Vol. m. 2, p. 429) but with Titus; 
 ‘let these Cretan brethren of ours be 
 not backward in co-operating with 
 thee in these acts of duty and benevo- 
 lence.’ On προΐστ. see notes on ver. 8. 
 els τὰς ἀναγκ. χρείας] ‘ with reference 
 to the necessary wants ;’ i.e. to supply 
 them: comp. Phil. iv. 16, els τὴν χρείαν 
 μοι ἐπέμψατε. The article appears to 
 mark the known and existing wants, 
 ἄκαρποι] ‘unfruitful,’ not solely and 
 specially with reference to the wants 
 of their teachers (‘ quicunque evange- 
 listis non ministraverint,’ Just.), but 
 also with reference to their own moral 
 state, i.e. without showing practical 
 proofs of their faith by acts of love. 
 15. οἱ per ἐμοῦ] ‘those with me,’ 
 in my company, journeying or abiding 
 with me ; comp. Gal. i. 2, of σὺν ἐμοί, 
 where the idea of union in action (co- 
 herence), rather than mere local union 
 (coexistence), seems intended to be ex- 
 pressed; see Kriiger, Sprachl. § 68, 
 ete? τοὺς 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, Ccum., but ‘in faith,’ as 
 the common principle which bound 
 together and hallowed their common 
 love. From the concluding words, ἡ 
 χάρις μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν (Col. iv. 18), 
 there is no reason to infer that the 
 Epistle was intended for the church as 
 
ΠῚ ὙΠ απ 
 
 215 
 
 ” 4 - Cow ’ , ε , a 
 ἄσπασαι τοὺς φιλοῦντας ἡμᾶς εν πίστει. ἡ χάρις μετα 
 
 [ὦ e ~ 
 TAVTWV ὑμῶν. 
 
 well as Titus, It is merely an inclu- 
 sive benediction that comprehends the 
 ἐπίσκοπος and those committed to his 
 oversight, Titus and all the faithful in 
 Crete. ἀμὴν (Rec. with D?D?EFG 
 HKLMN4) here, as well as in τ Tim. vi. 
 21, 2 Tim. iv. 22, seems to be an inter- 
 polation, thoughin thiscase supported 
 by stronger external evidence. It is 
 
 bracketed by Lachm., and rejected by 
 Griesb., Scholz, Tisch., with ACD1N}; 
 17;Clarom., th.-Pol.; Hier.,Ambrst. 
 
 In the conclusion of all St Paul’s 
 Epp. except Rom. (om. 2 mss. and 
 Am. only) and Gal. (om. G; Boern., 
 Ambrst., only) there are similar varia- 
 tions. Accidental omission seems less 
 probable than insertion. 
 

 
TRANSLATION. 
 
NOTICE. 
 
 HE same principles are observed in this translation as in those 
 of the GaLaTIANs and Epuesians. The Authorised Version is 
 altered only 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 has made me feel 
 the necessity of preserving a certain degree of uniformity in the 
 meanings 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 unifor- 
 mity 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 therefore trusted 
 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 characterizes our admirable Version. A slight change has 
 been introduced in the Versions cited, which however does not at 
 all affect the general plan. The Versions of Wiclif, Cranmer, and 
 Geneva, are no longer cited from Bagster’s Hexapla, as it is asserted 
 by competent judges that those there given have not the best 
 claim to the names affixed to them. Wiclif’s version is now 
 quoted from the edition of the New Testament published by 
 Pickering in 1848, Cranmer’s from a copy of the edition of April 
 1540, and the Genevan from the edition of 1560, which alone has 
 claim to be called the first edition of the Genevan Version. The 
 citations from the Bishops’ Bible are made from the first edition 
 1568. 
 
 In the present edition I have added citations from the 
 Revised Version of 1881. 
 
 The remaining Vy. are cited as before from Bagster’s reprints, 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 
 
 ΡΟ..." an apostle of Christ Jesus, according to the com- I. 
 +L mandment of God our Saviour and Christ Jesus our 
 Hope, to Timothy, my true child in the faith. Grace, 2 
 mercy and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus 
 
 our Lord. 
 
 Even as I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, 3 
 when I was on my way into Macedonia, that thou might- 
 est command some not to be teachers of other doctrine, 
 
 1. Christ Jesus] *Jesus Christ, 
 AuvTH. According to] So Coy. 
 (both), Roem,,and AutH.in Rom, xvi. 
 26 and Tit. i. 3: aftir, Wicu.; by, 
 Auto. and remaining Vv. Christ 
 Jesus] * Lord J.C,, Auru. The trans- 
 lation of ἐπιταγὴν adopted by Cran., 
 BisH., ‘commission,’ deserves atten- 
 tion, but perhaps too much obscures 
 the idea of the divine ordinance and 
 command under which the Apostle 
 acted; comp. Acts ix. 16, ὅσα δεῖ 
 κιτ.λ., and 1 Cor. ix. 16. 
 
 It may be remembered too that ‘com- 
 mand’ originally seems to have meant 
 ‘power’ or authority, Synon. ed. by 
 Whately, p. gr. Our Hope] 
 So Wict., Cov. Test., Gen., RHEm., 
 Rey. : which is our hope, AuTH. and 
 remaining Vy. 
 
 2. True child] So Rev.: own son, 
 AutH.; lowede sone, Wict.; beloued 
 sonne, Coy. Test., Ruem.; naturall 
 sonne, TyND. and remaining Vy. ; see 
 notes on 2 Tim. i. 2 and Eph. vi. 21 
 (Transl.). It is desirable to retain 
 
 the more literal translation of τέκνον 
 wherever it does not seem to be at 
 variance with our ordinary or idioma- 
 tic mode of expression (e. g. ver. 18): 
 the distinction between τέκνον and 
 vids is occasionally of considerable im- 
 portance. 
 
 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 all 
 other Vy. Was on my way] 
 Went, Autu., Wicu., Cov. Test., 
 Ruem.; departed, Tynp, and _ re- 
 maining Vy. Command] So 
 Tyrnp., Coy., Cran., GEn., Bisx., by 
 far the most usual translation of the 
 word elsewhere in AvurTuH.: charge, 
 AutH., Rev.; denounse to, WICcL., 
 RuEmM.; geue...charge vnto, Coy. Test. 
 The full authoritative meaning of the 
 word should not be here impaired in 
 translation; see notes, Not 
 to be teachers, &c.]Sim., not to teache 
 othervvise, RHEM.; not to teach a 
 
220 
 
 1 TLMOTEY. 
 
 4 nor yet to give heed to fables and endless genealogies, 
 seeing they minister questions rather than God’s dispensa- 
 5 tion which is in faith,—so J do now. But the end of the 
 commandment is love out of a pure heart, and a good con- 
 6 science, and unfeigned faith: from which some having 
 gone wide in aim have turned themselves aside unto vain 
 
 different doctrine, Rey.: that they 
 teach no other doctrine, AUTH., GEN. 
 (none), ΒΙΒΗ. 
 
 4 Nor yet] Neither, Αὐτη. and 
 all Vy. except Ruem., 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 character the ordinary transla- 
 tion will perhaps be sufficiently exact; 
 here however the τινες are not merely 
 to abstain from teaching others such 
 profitless subjects, but are themselves 
 not to study them. On the full force 
 of οὐδὲ or μηδὲ after οὐ and μῆ, see 
 Franke’s very good treatise de Part. 
 Neg. τι. 5, and illustrate his remark, 
 —that οὐδὲ hints at anindefinite num- 
 ber of consequent terms, by Judges 
 i. 27, where ov is followed by fourteen 
 clauses with οὐδέ, To give] 
 Give, AuTH. Seeing they] 
 The whiche, Wict., Rev.; which, 
 AutuH. and all other Vy., but Tynp., 
 Coy., give which are endl., and, 
 God’s dispensation] Sim. a disp. of 
 God, Rerv.: edificaciowne of god, 
 Wicu.; edifyenge to Godwarde, Cov. 
 Test.; the edifying of God, Rurm. ; 
 godly edyfyinge, Tyxp. and remain- 
 ing Vvy., but Aurn. (ed. 1611) omits 
 godly, which has been restored in 
 modern edd. 
 
 I do now] So Rey.: do, Autx, 
 
 5. But] So Bisu., Ruem., Rev. : 
 now, AuTH.; forsothe, Wict.; for, 
 Tynp. and remaining Vy, Love] 
 So all Vv. except Aurn., Wicn., Coy. 
 Test., Ruem., charity. It is doubtful 
 
 why this change was made, except 
 for variation from verse 14; comp. 
 Vulg. Our last translators were by 
 no means uniform in their transla- 
 tion of ἀγάπη : even in cases where it 
 is associated with πίστις and they 
 might have wished to mark a quasi- 
 theological meaning, it is not uncom- 
 monly translated ‘love ;’ compare ch. 
 vi. 11 with 1 Thess. iii. 6, al. 
 
 And (bis)] So Rey. : and of, AuTH. 
 Unfeigned fuith] Faith unfeigned, 
 Autu., Rey. Slight change to pre- 
 serve the unemphatic order of the 
 Greek; see Winer, Gr. § 59. 2, p. 464. 
 English usage is here just the reverse 
 of the Greek. 
 
 6. Having gone wide in aim] 
 Having swerved, AutH., Rrv.; erryng, 
 Wicu.; hauyng erred, Bisu.; stray- 
 ing, Rurem.; have erred, and, Tynp., 
 Coy, (both), Grn. It would 
 seem that our translators made the 
 change from a desire to preserve the 
 construct. of ἀστοχεῖν with a gen. 
 (Vulg., al.), and yet not, as Wict., 
 to fall into barbarous English, or as 
 Tynp., al., to change the part. into a 
 finite verb,—an inexactness which 
 Conyb. has not avoided. Perhaps the 
 more immediate connexion of ὧν 
 may be with éferp., especially as 
 ἀστοχεῖν in the two other passages 
 where it occurs (1 Tim. vi. 21,2 Tim. 
 ii. 18) is used absolutely (with περὶ 
 and 800.) ; stillit seems desirable and 
 correct also to preserve in translation 
 the possibility of the connexion with 
 the participle. To ‘go wide from’ is 
 perfectly correct according to the exx. 
 
Cuap. I. 4—12. 
 
 babbling ; 
 
 Θ᾽) 
 
 221 
 
 willing to be teachers of the law; yet not un- 7 
 
 derstanding either what they say, or about what they make 
 
 asseveration. 
 
 Now we know that the law ἐ5 good, if a 8 
 
 man use it lawfully, knowing this, that the law is not g 
 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 
 
 d 
 
 for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with τὸ 
 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 11 
 the blessed God, which was committed to my trust. 
 
 And I thank Him who gave me inward strength, 12 
 
 in Johnson s.y, ‘ wide.’ 
 
 Have turned themselves] Have turned, 
 Αὐτὴ. and the other Vy. except 
 Wict., Cov. Test., Cran., ΒΗΕΜ., 
 which give a passive translation: it 
 is perhaps desirable to retain here the 
 medial force of the passive form 
 ἐξετράπησαν. 
 
 Babbling] Jangling, Αὐτη. and all 
 Vy. except Wicu., speche; Ruem., 
 talke; Rey., talking. 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 to be] So Wictu. (for to 
 be), Coy. (both): desiring to be, AUTH., 
 Rev.; because they wolde be, Tynp., 
 Cran., GEN. (om. bec.) ; cowetyng to 
 be, Bisu.; desirous to be, RuEm. 
 Though it is not always possible in 
 the N.T. to keep up the exact dis- 
 tinction between θέλω and βούλομαι 
 (see notes on ch. li. 8, and νυ. 14), 
 this perhaps is a case where it may 
 be maintained: the false teachers 
 were quite willing to undertake the 
 office though they had really no quali- 
 fications for it. Yet not] So Tynp., 
 Cran., GEN.; not, Wict., Cov. (both), 
 Bisu., RuEM., though they understand 
 
 not, Ruv.; AutH. expresses the nega- 
 tive by the following neither. 
 Hither...or| Neither...nor, AUTH. 
 About what] Whereof, Auru., Rey. 
 Make asseveration] Afirm, Αὐτη. 
 and all Vy. except Rey. confidently 
 affirm. 
 
 8, Now] But, AurH., Coy., Bisu., 
 Ruem., Rey.; forsothe, Wicu.; and, 
 GEN.: remaining Vy. omit. 
 
 9. Unruly] So Rery., and so 
 AutH. in Tit. 1. 6, 10, but here dis- 
 obedient, with Tynp. and all Vv. ex- 
 cept WICL., not suget. Sinful] 
 For sinners, AutuH. All Vy. (except 
 Coy. Test., which omits) give the 
 subst., perhaps it is a little more ex- 
 act to retain the adj. 
 
 For the unholy] So Cov., GEn., Rey.: 
 for unh., Αὐτη.; the idiomatic 
 English article is repeated for the 
 sake of consistency. 
 
 Smiters] Sleers, Wicu.; killers, 
 Ruem.; murderers, Αὐτὴ. and all 
 other Vv. 
 
 10, The sound doctrine] AutH. 
 omits the art. with all Vy. except 
 Coy., Cran., Rev. 
 
 11. Of the glory] So rightly all 
 the Vv. (om. the, BisH.) except 
 AvutH., GEN., glorious (before Gospel). 
 
 12. Him who, &c.] Sim, as to order 
 
229 
 
 τῷ 
 
 14 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 a7 
 
 1 TIMOTHY. 
 
 Christ Jesus our Lord, that he counted me faithful, having 
 appointed me for the ministry, 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 grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with 
 faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. Faithful ¢s the 
 saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus 
 came into the world to save sinners ; of whom I am chief. 
 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me as 
 chief Christ Jesus might shew forth the whole of His 
 long-suffering, to display a pattern for them which should 
 hereafter believe on Him unto eternal life. Now to the 
 King of ages, the immortal, invisible, only God, be honour 
 and glory unto the ages of the ages. Amen. 
 
 GeN., Ruem., Rev.; comp. Wict., 
 Cov. Test., and, it may be added, 
 Syr. and Vulg., rightly preserving the 
 more emphatic position: C. J. our 
 Lord, who hath enabled me, AuTH., 
 and sim. the remaining Vy. (Tynp., 
 Cov., Cran., Bisu.), which translate 
 ἐνδυν. με hath made me stronge. 
 That] For that, AutH., Rey. 
 
 Having appointed me for] Sim. ap- 
 pointing, Rey.: putting me into, 
 Auru., Bisx. (in, Wict., RuEm.), 
 
 13. Though formerly I was] Sim. 
 Rev.: *who was before, AUTH. 
 
 A doer of outrage] Sim., a doer of 
 iniurye, Coy. Test.: injurious, AUTH., 
 Rey.; ful of wrongis, Wict., atyraunt, 
 Tynp., Cov., Cran.; an oppresser, 
 Gen., Bisu.; contumelious, RuEm. 
 
 Still] But, Auru. and all Vv. except 
 Cran., Bisu., but yet, Rev., howbeit. 
 
 14. Tea] And, AvutTH., ΒΗΕΜ., 
 Rev.; but, Cov. Test., GEN.; never- 
 thelater, Tynp.; neuertheles, Covy., 
 Cran., Bisx. 
 
 15. Faithful is, &c.] So Rev.: 
 thys sayenge is true, Coy. Test, ; this 
 is a faithful saying, AuTH., BisH.; 
 this is a true s., Tynp., Cov., Cran., 
 GEN.: a trewe worde,Wicu.; a faith- 
 
 ful s., Roem. 
 
 16. Am chief] So Rev.: /irst, 
 AvuTH. and remaining Vy. (the f., 
 Bisu.) except Cov. (both), pryncipally; 
 RueEm.,, first of al. 
 
 Christ Jesus] * Jes. Chr., AUTH. 
 
 The whole of His] All, Autx, and all 
 Vv. To display a pattern for] 
 Sim., to declare an ensample vnto, 
 Cran. ; for a pattern to, AUTH. ; to the 
 enfourmyng of, Wicu., sim. Cov. 
 Test., Ruem.: unto the ensample of, 
 Tynp,, GEN. (to the, Coy., Brsx.); for 
 an ensample, Rry. 
 
 Eternal life] So ΤΎΝΡ., Cov., Cran, 
 Gen., Rey, : life everlasting, AuTH., 
 Coy. Test., Bisu., Roem. It seems 
 best both to adopt the order which, 
 properly considered, most exactly 
 corresponds to that of the Greek, and 
 to adopt the most general and in- 
 clusive transl. of αἰώνιος; see notes 
 on 2 Thess. i. ἡ (Transl.). 
 
 17. Of ages] Sim., of worldis, 
 Wict., ΒΗΕΜ. (the vv.): eternal, 
 Autu., Rey.; everlastinge, Tynp. and 
 remaining Vy. 
 
 The immortal, &c.] Immortal, in- 
 visible, the only * wise God, AuTH. 
 Unto the ages, ἄο.} Sim., in worldis 
 
Cuap. I. 13—II. 1. 
 
 223 
 
 This charge I commit to thee, son Timothy, in accord- 18 
 ance with the forerunning prophecies about thee, that thou 
 mayest war in them the good warfare ; having faith, anda 19 
 good conscience ; which some having thrust away, have 
 made shipwreck concerning the faith : of whom is Hyme- 20 
 neus and Alexander; whom I delivered to Satan, that they 
 might be taught by discipline not to blaspheme. 
 
 I exhort then first of all, that petitions, prayers, sup- II. 
 
 of worldis, Wicu.; for ever and ever, 
 Auvtu. and all other Vv. 
 
 18. In accordance with, &c.] Ac- 
 cording to the prophecies which went 
 before on thee, AutH., Rev. (vpon, 
 Gen., Bisu.), and sim. Wicu., RHEM.; 
 accordynge tothe proph, which in tyme 
 past were prophisied of the, TYND., 
 Coy., Cov. Test. (tymes), CRAN. 
 Mayest] So Rey.: mightest, AUTH.; 
 shuldest, Tynp., Cov., Cran., GEN., 
 Bisu. Change necessary to preserve 
 the law of the succession of tenses; see 
 Latham, Engl. Lang.§616. In them] 
 So all Vy. except AuTH., GrN., Rev., 
 which change (not for the better) the 
 év into by; see notes. The order of 
 the Greek orpdr. ἐν air., reversed 
 by Auru., is restored in the text. 
 The good] A g., AurH. and all Vv. 
 
 19. Having] So τοι. and all 
 Vv. except AuTH., Rry., which adopt 
 holding. Having thrust away] Sim. 
 Rey. : castynge awey, Wicu,; repelling, 
 RueEm.; having put away, AuTH. and 
 remaining Vv.; but Txnp., Cov. (both), 
 Cran., Grn. use the finite verb, and 
 Tynp., Cov., Cran., Rev, (omit away) 
 add from them. The faith] So Wict., 
 Ruem., Rey.: faith, AurH. and re- 
 maining Vv. When the article is 
 inserted after a preposition, it should 
 never be overlooked in translation, 
 if the English idiom will permit it to 
 be expressed, 
 
 20. Delivered] So Rey. : have de- 
 livered, AutH. and all Vv. except 
 Wict., bitoke. There are cases where 
 
 the idiom of our language may seem 
 positively violated by an aoristic trans- 
 lation, 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 recognise an 
 idiomatic power in the Greek aorist 
 which does not exist in our English 
 past tense. Where idiom requires 
 us to insert ‘have’ (as perhaps just 
 above, ver. 19), it must be inserted, 
 but these cases are fewer than modern 
 translators seem generally aware of. 
 
 Might be taught, &.] So (omitting 
 by disc.) Tynp., Coy., REv. ; may learn, 
 AutTH., and sim. all remaining Vy. 
 The addition by discipline is necessary 
 to convey the true meaning of radevw, 
 
 Cuaprer II. 1, Then] Therefore, 
 Aut. and all Vv. On this particle 
 see notes in loc. It may be observed 
 as a very general rule, that it is bet- 
 ter to translate οὖν ‘then,’ dpa ‘there- 
 fore,’ or at any rate if ‘therefore’ be 
 retained asa translation of the former 
 particle, to place it as far onward in 
 the clause as idiom will permit, so as 
 to weaken its full illative force. The 
 present seems an instance where the 
 more exact distinction (see notes on 
 Gal. iii. 5) 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 
 
224 
 
 1 TIMOTHY, 
 
 2 plications, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for 
 kings, and all that are in authority; that we may pass a 
 3 quiet and tranquil life in all godliness and gravity. For 
 this is good, and acceptable in the sight of our Saviour 
 4 God; whose will is that all men should be saved, and 
 5 should come unto the full knowledge of the truth. For 
 there is one God, and one mediator also between God and 
 6 men, a man Christ Jesus; who gave Himself a ransom for 
 all—the testimony to be set forth in its own seasons. 
 
 due weight in fixing the translation. 
 For example, St John’s use of οὖν 
 appears to deserve considerable atten- 
 tion, especially as he never uses dpa; 
 and even St Paul, it should be re- 
 membered, uses οὖν on an average 
 four times to ἄρα once, A really 
 faithful translation must take all these 
 things into account. 
 
 First...that] So Rey.: that first, AurH. 
 and sim. all Vy. except Wicu., RuEm., 
 which apparently adopt the order of 
 the text. 
 
 Petitions, prayers, &¢.] Supplications, 
 prayers, intercessions, AuTH,, Coy. 
 Test.,Gun., Rev.; bisechyngis,preyers, 
 axingis, WIcL.; prayers, supplicacions, 
 intercessions, Txnp., Cov., CRAn., 
 Bisu.; obsecrations, praiers, postula- 
 tions, RuEM, ‘Supplications’ is by no 
 meansabad translation for dejo. (Eph. 
 vi. 18); but as this is a technical pas- 
 sage, it seems more suitable to reserve 
 it for ἐντεύξεις ; see notes, 
 
 2. All] So Wicu., Ruem., Rev.: for 
 all, AurH. and all other Vy. = Pass] 
 Lead, Auru., Rey.: slight change, but 
 perhaps maintaining better the mixed 
 subjective and objective ref. of the 
 clause; comp. notesinloc. Quiet... 
 tranquil] Quiet...peaceable, AutH.and 
 all other Vy. except Rev., tranquil and 
 quiet. Perhaps ‘tranquil’ expresses 
 the idea of the rest ‘arising from with- 
 in’ (see notes) a little more fully than 
 ‘peaceable ;’ comp. τ Pet. iii. 4. 
 Gravity] So Rey.: chastite, Wrcu., 
 
 Rueo. ; honesty, Auto. and remaining 
 Vv. In the preceding word εὐσέβεια, 
 the transl. of AuTH. has beenretained. 
 Though ‘godliness’ more exactly re- 
 presents θεοσέβ., yet it is used in all 
 the older Vy. (except only Wict., 
 Ruem., pitee, i.e. piety) as the trans- 
 lation of εὐσέβ., and seems fairly to 
 suit all the passages where it occurs. 
 The deviation of Auru., al., in Acts 
 ili. 12 is not for the better. 
 
 3. Our Saviour God] So Ruem.: 
 God our Sav., AutH. and the re- 
 maining Vv. 
 
 4. Whose will is that] Who will 
 
 have, AuTH. and sim. all Vy. 
 Should be] To be, AutH. Should 
 come] To come, AuTH. The 
 full knowledge] The knowledge, AutH. 
 and all Vv. (knowynge, Wict.). 
 
 5. And one med. also] Sim., one also 
 med., RuEM. ; also one med., Revy.: and 
 one Med., AutH. and remaining Vy 
 (except Wicr., who omits one). The 
 addition of ‘and’ in italics seems re- 
 quired by our idiom: indeed we may 
 perhaps sometimes rightly say that 
 the Greek καὶ is occasionally in itself 
 almost equivalent to our ‘and.,.also.’ 
 A man] So Wict.; man, RuEm.: the 
 man, AuTH. and remaining Vy. 
 
 6. The testimony, &ec.] Sim. Rev.: 
 to be testified in due time, AurH., and 
 sim. Tynp., Cov., Cran. The true 
 construction appears to have been 
 observed in Gen., to be a testimonie 
 in due time, and Bisu,, a testimonie 
 
Curr, ΠΡ 6-75. 
 
 225 
 
 Whereunto I was appointed a herald, and an apostle (I 7 
 speak the truth, I lie not), a teacher of the Gentiles in 
 
 faith and truth. 
 
 I desire then that men pray in every place, lifting up 8 
 holy hands, without wrath and doubting: likewise that 9 
 women also, in modest guise, with shamefastness and sober- 
 mindedness, do adorn themselves,—not with braided hair, 
 and gold, or pearls, or costly apparel, but (which becometh 10 
 women professing godliness) through good works. 
 
 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 11 
 But I suffer not the woman to TEACH, nor yet to have 12 
 
 in due tymes. All the Vv., except 
 AutH., Gren., BisH., retain a more 
 literal transl. of ἔδιος, ‘his.’ 
 
 ἡ. Was] Am, AutH. and all Vv. 
 Appointed] So Rurm. (and AvurH. in 
 2 Tim. i. 11): putte, Wicu.; ordained, 
 AutH. and all other Vv. Herald] 
 Preacher, AurH, and all Vy. 
 
 Truth (1)] Truth *in Christ, Aur. 
 Truth (2)] So Wict., Coy. (both), 
 Ruem., Rey.: verity, AurH. and re- 
 maining Vy. 
 
 8. I desire then] Sim. Rey, : I will 
 therefore, AuTH. and all Vv. (th. I wole, 
 Wict.). In every place] So Wict. 
 (al pl.), Cov. Test., Rurm., Rev.: in 
 all places, Coy.; everywhere, AuTH. 
 and remaining Vv. 
 
 9. Likewise...also] So Trnp., Coy, 
 (both), Cran., GEeN., BisH., except 
 that they insert also immediately 
 after likewise: in like manner also, 
 Autu,, Rurm., Rey. (omits also). 
 
 In modest, &e.] Adorn themselves in 
 modest apparel, Autu., Rry.; araye 
 them selves in comlye ap., TyND., Cov., 
 Coy. Test. (arayenge, omitting the 
 preceding that), Cran., Gun., BisH. 
 
 Shamefastness] So Αὐτὴ. (ed. 1611) 
 and Rey. following all the Vv. except 
 Ruem. (demuwrenesse). We may agree 
 with Trench (Synon. § 20) in regretting 
 that this spelling has been displaced 
 in the modern editions by ‘shame- 
 
 facedness,’ a form in which the true 
 etymology is perverted. 
 Sobermindedness| Sobriety, AutH., 
 RuEm., Rey.; sobrenesse, Wi1cu., Cov. 
 Test. ; discrete behaveour, TYND., Cov., 
 Cran., Bisu.; modestie, Gen. It is 
 very difficult to select a translation for 
 σωφροσύνη. Our choice seems to lie 
 between ‘sobermindedness’ and ‘ dis- 
 cretion ;’ the latter (more especially 
 in the adjective; see two pertinent 
 exx. in Richardson, Dict. 5. v., from 
 Chaucer, Persones Tale, and Milton, 
 Par, Reg. τι. 157) is very suitable in 
 ref. to women (and is so used by 
 Tynp., Coy., Cran., in ver. 15), but 
 the former seems best to preserve the 
 etymology of the original word. 
 
 Braided] Broided, Autu., the older 
 form of the same word: some modern 
 editions give broidered appy. by mis- 
 take. And gold] * Or 
 gold, AUTH, Apparel] So GEnN., 
 Ruem,: clothes, Wicu.; cloth, Cov. 
 Test.; raiment, Ruv.; array, Autu. 
 and other Vv. 
 
 1o. Through] So Tynp., Coy. 
 (both), Cran., Βιβη., Rey.: with, 
 AutH., Gen.; by, Wict., Roem. 
 
 12. Lhe woman] A woman, Αὐτη. 
 The insertion of the article seems 
 required by our idiom, as in ver. rr, 
 see notes. Nor yet] Nor, 
 Autn. As the command seems to 
 
 Q 
 
226 
 
 13 authority over the man, but to be in silence. 
 14 was first formed, then Eve. 
 
 : TIMOTELY. 
 
 For Adam 
 And Adam was not deceived, 
 
 but the woman being plainly deceived fell into transgres- 
 
 15 sion. 
 
 Yet she shall be saved by means of THE CHILD- 
 
 BEARING, if they continue in faith and love and holiness 
 
 with sobermindedness. 
 
 {ΠῚ 
 
 Faithful is the saying, If a man desire the office of a 
 
 2 bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be 
 irreproachable, a husband of one wife, sober, discreet, 
 3 orderly, a lover of hospitality, apt to teach; not fierce 
 over wine, no striker, but forbearing, averse to contention, 
 
 have also a general reference (see 
 notes), it is perhaps better to be exact 
 in οὐδέ; see notes on ch. i. 4 (Transl.). 
 Have auth.| So Tynp., Cov.: haue 
 lordeschip, Wict.; vse authorite, Cov. 
 Test.; haue dominion, Rurm., Rev.; 
 usurp authority, AutH. and the re- 
 maining Vy. 
 
 14. Plainly deceived] * Deceived, 
 Avtu.; beguiled, Rev. Fellinto] 
 Was in the, Autu., Coy. Test., GEN., 
 Bisu. (om. the, Tynp., Ruem.); hath 
 brought in the, Cov.; was subdued to 
 the, Cran., hath fallen into, Rev. 
 
 15. Yet] So Ruem.: sothely, 
 Wicr.; but, Rey.; notwithstanding, 
 Αὐτη. and the other Vv, By 
 means of the childbearing] Sim. 
 through the childbearing, Ἔν. : in 
 childbearing, AutH.; by generacon of 
 sones, WicL., πεν. (children) ; thorow 
 bearinge of chyldren, Tynp. and re- 
 maining Vy. Love] So all 
 Vv. except Autu., which here gives 
 charity ; see notes on ch. i. 5 (Transl.). 
 Sobermindedness] Sobriety, Autu.; 
 see notes on ver, 9 (Transl.). 
 
 CHarter ΠῚ. τ. Faithful is the 
 saying] So Rev.: a feithful worde, 
 Wicu.; thys is a true w., Cov. Test. ; 
 {this is] a faithful saying, Bisn.; a. f. 
 s., RuEM.; this is a true saying, AUTH. 
 and remaining Vv. 
 
 2. Irreproachable} Sim., withouten 
 reproue, Wicu.; without reproach, 
 Rey.: blameless, Autu., Coy., Cran., 
 Bisu. ; fautlesse, Tynp. ; vnrebukeable, 
 Coy. Test.; vnreproueable, GEN.; ir- 
 reprehensible, Ruzm, If the definition 
 of Webster (Dict.) is right, ‘irre- 
 proachable=that cannot be justly 
 reproached,’ this seems the transla- 
 tion needed; see notes in loc. 
 
 A husband] The h., Autu., Rev. 
 Sober, discreet] So Tyrnp., Cov.: 
 vigilant, sober, AUTH. ; sobre, prudent, 
 Wicu.; sobre, wyse, Cov. Test., 
 RueEq. ; dilygent, sober, CRAN.; watch- 
 ing, sober, GEN., BisH.; temperate, 
 soberminded, Rev. Orderly] So 
 Rey.: of good behaviour, AUTH. ; 
 honestly aparelled, Tyxp.; comely 
 app., Bisu.; manerly, Coy. (both); 
 discrete, CRAN.; modest, GEN.; comely, 
 RueEm, A lover of hosp.] So 
 Bisu., and Aut. in Tit. 1, 8.: given 
 to hosp., AurH. (here), Rey. ; holdynge 
 hosp., Wicu.; harberous, Txynp., Coy. 
 (both), Grn.—a noticeable transl.; a 
 keper of hosp., CRAN.; a man of hosp., 
 Ruem, 
 
 3. Fierce over wine] Given to wine, 
 AutH., Gen., Ruem., and sim. other 
 Vv.except Tynp., dronken; Cov. Test., 
 dronkarde. The marginal note [not 
 ready to quarell and offer wrong, as 
 one in wine] shows that our last trans- 
 
Cuap. II. 13—III. 10. 
 
 227 
 
 not a lover of money, one that ruleth well his own house, 4 
 having Azs children in subjection with all gravity; (Butif 5 
 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 6 
 being besotted with pride he fall into the judgment of 
 
 the devil. 
 
 Moreover he must have a good report also 7 
 
 from them which are without, lest he fall into reproach 
 
 and the snare of the devil. 
 
 Deacons in like manner must be grave, not double- 8 
 tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of base gain ; 
 holding the mystery of the faith. in a pure conscience. 9 
 And let these also first be proved; then let them serve as 10 
 
 lators (so too Rrv., brawler) saw cor- 
 rectly themeaning of the word, though 
 they have not expressed it. 
 
 No striker] Autu. adds * not greedy of 
 jilthy lucre. Forbearing] 
 Patient, AutH.; temperaunt (or pa- 
 cient), Wict.; gentle, Tynp., Cov., 
 Cran., Grn., Bisu., Rev.; styll, Cov, 
 Test.; modest, Roem, Averse to 
 contention] Sim. not contentious, REV.: 
 not a brawler, Autu. (so Tit. iii, 2); 
 not litigious (or ful of strife or 
 chydynge), Wicu.; abhorrynge jfight- 
 ynge, Tynp., Cran., ΒΙΒΗ., and sim, 
 Cov. (abh. stryfe); no stryuer, Cov. 
 Test.; no fighter, GEN. A lover of 
 money] Sim. Rey.: covetous, AuTH., 
 and sim, all other Vv. It is better 
 to keep ‘ covetous’ for πλεονέκτης. 
 
 4. His (2)] So Rev. Not in italics 
 in AurH.: it is omitted by all other 
 Vy. except RuEm. 
 
 5. But] So Coy. (both), Ruerm., 
 Rev.: forsothe, Wict, ; for, AuTH. and 
 the other Vv. 
 
 6. A new convert] Sim., newe con- 
 uertide to the feith, WicL.: a novice, 
 Autu., Rrv.; a yonge skoler, Tyrnp., 
 Coy. (both), Cran., GEN., BisH.; ἃ 
 neophyte, RuEM. 
 
 Besotted, ἄς. Lifted up with pride, 
 AutH.; puft vp, Cov., Gzn., Bisu., 
 Rey. The idea of a stupid, insensate, 
 pride ought to be conveyed in trans- 
 
 lation; see notes. 
 
 Judgment] So Tynp., Coy., Cran., 
 RueEm.: condemnation, AuTH., GEN., 
 Bisu., Rey.; dome (or synne), Wicu. 
 
 4. Also from] Of, AuTH.; the 
 word moreover, AutH., Rry., may be 
 properly assigned to δέ, which, as has 
 been observed several times in the 
 notes (comp.on ver. το), often appears 
 to revert to its primary meaning. 
 
 8. Deacons, &c.] So Rry., and sim. 
 Ruem.: likewise must the deacons be, 
 AUTH, Deacons] 
 Mynisters, Coy. (both), Cran., Bisz. 
 The rest give ‘deacons,’ either with 
 (AurH., Tynp., REvy.), or without the 
 article. Base gain] Youle 
 wynnynge, Wict.; filthy lucre, AUTH. 
 and all other Vv. 
 
 10. Serve as deacons] So Rey.: 
 use the office of a Deacon, AutH. This 
 periphrasis might be avoided by using 
 ‘minister’ with all the other Vy.; we 
 seem however to require in ver. 13 
 an allusion to the office ‘nominatim.’ 
 If they be, ἄς. Sim., yf they be 
 blamelesse, Cov.; being found blame- 
 less, AuTH,; yf they be founde faut- 
 lesse, Tynp., GEN. (blameles), Rey. (ve 
 blameless) ; beyng bl., Bisu.: hawynge 
 no cryme, Wicu, [adding (or greet 
 synne)], Ruem., sim, Coy, Test, 
 (blame). 
 
228 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 19 
 
 14 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 1 TIMOPEY. 
 
 deacons, if they be under no charge, The women in like 
 manner must be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all 
 things. Let the deacons be 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. 
 
 These things write I to thee, though I hope to come 
 unto thee somewhat quickly; but if I should tarry long, 
 that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave 
 thyself in the house of God, which truly is the church of 
 the living God, the pillar and basis of the truth. And 
 confessedly, great is the mystery of godliness; “Who was 
 manifested in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of 
 angels, preached among the Gentiles, believed on in the 
 world, received up into glory.” 
 
 11. The women] So Wicu., Rev., 
 
 (both om. the), Rurem.: their wives, 
 Aura. and all other Vv. 
 In like manner] So Ruem., Rev. : 
 even so, AuTH., Tynp., Cov., Cran., 
 Bisu., all placing it at the beginning 
 of the verse. 
 
 12. Husbands] So Rev.: the h., 
 AUTH. Well] So, in a 
 similar place, all Vv. except Auru., 
 Rey., which 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 
 of the Greek. 
 
 13. Served well as d.] So Rev.: 
 used the office of a Deacon well, AuTH. 
 Obtain for] Purchase to, AvtE., 
 Ruem.; get, Tynp.; gain to, Rev. ; and 
 the remaining Vy. (gete...to, Wict.). 
 
 14. Though I hope] Hoping, 
 Autu., Rey.; and sim, all other Vv. 
 use a participle. Somewhat 
 quickly] Sone, Wicu.; very shortely, 
 Gen.; quickly, Ruem.; shortly, AurH. 
 and remaining Vy. 
 
 15. Should tarry long] Schal t., 
 Wict. ; t. long, Aurn.and all other Vy. 
 
 Which truly] The whych, Cov. Test. ; 
 which, AutH. and all other Vv. (that, 
 Wicu.). Basis] Ground, Aurn. and 
 all Vy. exe. Wict., sadnesse, and Cov. 
 Test., stablyshmente. 
 
 16. Confessedly] Without contro- 
 
 versy, AutH., GEN., Rev.; with out 
 naye, ΤΎΝΡ., Coy.; without doute, 
 Cran., BisH. Who] * God, 
 Aut. Manifested] So 
 Gen., Ruem., Rry.: manifest, AUTH. ; 
 shewed, Tynp. and remaining Vv. 
 (but Wict. omits). 
 Among] So Rey.: unto, Auru. and the 
 other Vy. (some to), followingthe Vulg. 
 We may here briefly remark that the 
 six concluding clauses of this verse 
 may be arranged stichometrically in 
 the following way: 
 
 Ὃς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί, 
 ᾿Εδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύματι, ᾿ 
 ᾿ὭὨφθη ἀγγέλοις" 
 Ἐκηρύχθη ἐν ἔθνεσιν, 
 ᾿Επιστεύθη ἐν κόσμῳ, 
 ᾿Ανελήμφθη ἐν δόξῃ. 
 
 Without urging too strongly the me- 
 trical character of the clauses, it 
 
Cuap. IIT. 11—IV. 5. 
 
 229 
 
 Howbeit the Spirit saith expressly, that in the latter IV. 
 times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to 
 seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils, through the 2 
 hypocrisy of speakers of lies, men bearing a brand on their 
 own conscience, forbidding to marry, and commanding to 3 
 abstain from meats, which God created for them that be- 
 lieve and have full knowledge of the truth to partake of 
 with thanksgiving. For every creature of God is good, and 4 
 nothing zs to be refused, if it be received with thanks- 
 giving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and sup- 5 
 
 plication. 
 
 would still seem that the supposition 
 advanced in notes in loc. does not ap- 
 pear wholly without plausibility. Al- 
 ford (in loc.) objects to this view, but 
 appears clearly to lean to it in his 
 note on 2 Tim. il. 11. 
 
 Cuarter IV. 1. Howbeii] For- 
 sothe, Wicu. ; now, AUTH., GEN., BIsH.; 
 and, RuEm.; but, Rry.; the other Vv. 
 omit. Saith] 
 So Wrct., Coy. Test., Ruzm., Rrv.: 
 speaketh, AurH. and the other Vv. 
 All the Vy. except RuxEm. preserve 
 the order of verb and adverb adopted 
 in the text, and appy. correctly; the 
 slight emphasis is thus retained on 
 ῥητῶς : comp. notes on 2 Thess. iii. 8 
 (Transl.). 
 
 2. Through the hyp. &¢.| Similarly 
 as to ἐν ὑποκρ., of them which speake 
 falce thorow yp., Tynp., Cov., CRAN.; 
 which speake lyes through h., GEN.; 
 through the hypocrisy of men that 
 speak lies, Ruy.; Wevdor. is however 
 by some (GEn., Bisx., appy.) referred 
 to δαιμονίων : speaking lies in hyp., 
 AurH. (sim. Wict.), is ambiguous. 
 The above, it must be said, is a some- 
 what lax translation of ἐν; it seems 
 however to be positively required by 
 the idiom of our language. Whether 
 we connect ἐν ὕποκρ. with ὠἀποστήσον- 
 Tat ΟΥ̓ προσέχοντες, it seems scarcely 
 English to say ‘by the hypocrisy.’ 
 
 Men bearing, &c.] And hauynge here 
 conscience brente, WicL. 3 having their 
 conscience seared with a hot iron, 
 AutH., Bisu., and similarly all Vv., 
 but Ruem. omits with a hot iron, and 
 sim. Rev., branded in their own con- 
 science. The insertion of men in the 
 text seems to make the construction 
 a little more clear. 
 
 3. Created] So Ruem., Rey., sim. 
 Wict.: hath created, AurH. and all 
 other Vv. For them that, &e.] To 
 be received with thanksgiving of them, 
 AvutH., and in like order all other 
 Vy. It is very difficult to preserve 
 both the correct translation of the 
 words and the order of the original ; 
 the latter must appy. here be sacri- 
 ficed. Have full knowledge 
 of] Sim., haue kn. of, Cov. Test.: 
 know, Aur. and all other Vv. ex- 
 cept Wict., Ruzm., which give haue 
 knowen. The transl. of πιστοῖς is 
 perhaps not perfectly satisfactory, 
 but any change will involve an in- 
 sertion of the article before the 
 next words, which is certainly very 
 undesirable; see notes. 
 
 4. Is to be] So Wictu., Rey., and 
 similarly Gzn., oght to be: simply, 
 to be, AutH. and the other Vv. 
 
 5. Supplication] Prayer, Aurn. 
 and all Vv.; it seems however neces- 
 sary, as évrevéis occurs only twice in 
 the N.T., here and ch. ii. 1 (see notes 
 
290 
 
 τε ΘΙ ΕΓ 
 
 6 If thou settest forth these things to the brethren, thou 
 wilt be a good minister of Christ Jesus, being nourished in 
 the words of faith, and of the good doctrine of which thou 
 
 7 hast been a disciple. 
 
 But eschew profane and old-wives’ 
 
 8 fables; and 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 
 
 g that now is, and of that which is to come. Faithful zs the 
 
 10 saying and worthy of all acceptation. For looking to this 
 
 in loc.), to mark it by a special and 
 uniform translation. 
 
 6. If thou settest forth these things 
 to] Sim., puttynge forth, &e., WicL.; 
 proposing, &¢c., Ruem.: if thow put 
 ...dm remembrance of these things, 
 AutH. and sim. all other Vv., which 
 from the exx. of ὑποτίθεσθαί τινι 
 cited by Krebs and Loesner (see 
 notes) seems certainly too weak. The 
 translation ‘ifthou,’ éc.is perhaps not 
 quite so critically correct as ‘by setting 
 forth,’ &e., or ‘in setting forth,’ de. 
 (see notes on ver. 16), but may still 
 be left unchanged, as it certainly can- 
 not be termed definitely inexact. 
 Wilt be] Shalt be, AurH. and all Vy. 
 Christ Jesus] *Jesus Christ, AurH. 
 Being nourished] So Coy. Test.: 
 nourished up, AutH., Rey. (omits up); 
 norrischide, Wicu., Ruem.; which 
 hast bene n. vp, ΤΎΝΡ. and the re- 
 maining Vy. The good] So 
 Ruem., Rey.: good, Aurn. and all 
 the other Vy. The article ought per- 
 haps also to be inserted before ‘faith’ 
 (τῆς πίστεως), but it would tend to 
 give it an objective meaning, which 
 does not seem desirable; see notes. 
 Of which, &e.] Whereunto thou hast 
 attained, AurH., and sim. Cov. Test., 
 Ruem.; that thou hast geteninsuynge, 
 Wicu.; which doctryne thou hast con- 
 tinually followed, Txnp. (om. doctr., 
 Cran., Gen., Bisu.); which thou hast 
 folowed hither to, Coy., Rey. (but, 
 until now for hither to). 
 
 7. Eschew] So Coy. Test.: refuse, 
 Autu., Rry.; schone, Wicu. ; auoid, 
 RuEM.; cast awaye, Tynp. and the re- 
 maining Vy. And...rather] So AurH. : 
 rather, CRAN., Bisu.; and, Cov. Test., 
 Gen., RuEm., Rey.: Tynp. omits both. 
 The transl. of Coy., as for vngoostly 
 ...fables, cast them awaye, but,is good, 
 but in thus preserving the second δὲ 
 it misses the first. The punctuation 
 of Lachm. and Tisch., who place a 
 period after παραιτοῦ, is perhaps not 
 an improvement on the ordinary co- 
 lon: the antithesis between the two 
 members ought not to be too much 
 obscured. 
 
 8, The exercise, &c.] Bodily exer- 
 cise, AuTH., and similarly all other 
 Vv.: it seems desirable to try to 
 retain the article, ‘the bodily exercise 
 these teachers affect to lay such stress 
 upon,’ Is profitable, &e.] Sim., to 
 litil thing is prof., Wict.; is prof. 
 ento lytle, Coy. Test., Ruem. (to), Rev. 
 (for a): profiteth little, AurH. and re- 
 maining Vy. As it hath] Asa 
 thynge which hath, Tynxp., Cov., 
 CRAN. ; w hathe, Gen.; having, AvTH. 
 and remaining Vv. 
 
 9. Faithful is the saying] So Rrv.: 
 this isa faithful s., AutH., Cov. Test.; 
 this is a sure s., TyND., Cov., CRAN., 
 Bisu.; this is a true s,, GEN.: ἃ 
 trewe worde, Wicu.; a faithfulsaying, 
 Ruem. 
 
 10. Looking to this] Therefore, 
 Avtu. and the other Vy. except 
 
Cuap. IV. 6—15. 231 
 
 we labour and suffer reproach, because we have placed our 
 hope on the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, spe- 
 
 cially of believers. 
 
 These things command and teach. 
 
 Let no man de- 11 
 
 spise thy youth; but become an example to the believers, 12 
 in word, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity. Til I 13 
 come give attention to the reading, to the exhortation, to 
 
 the doctrine. 
 
 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which 14 
 
 was given thee through prophecy with the laying on of the 
 hands of the presbytery. These things practise, in these 15 
 things be occupied,—that thy advance may be manifest to 
 
 Wict., in this thing; RuEm., to this 
 purpose; Rny., tothisend. Labour] 
 * Both labour, AuTH. Have 
 placed, 6.1 Trust in, AUTH., GEN.; 
 hopen in, Wicu., Cov. (both), Ruem.; 
 beleve in, Tynp.; haue a stead fast 
 hope in, Cran.; hawe hoped in, Bisu.; 
 have our hope set, Rey. 
 
 Believers] As AuTH. in ver. 12: here 
 those that believe, with Tynp., Cov., 
 Coy. Test. (them), Cran., GEN., Bisu., 
 Rey. (them), which is perhaps a little 
 too emphatic for the simple anarth- 
 ‘Faithful’ (Wict., 
 RueEm.) is by very far the more usual 
 translation in AurH.; there are cases 
 however (e.g. ch. v. 16, vi. 2) where 
 perspicuity seems to require the 
 change. It is noticeable too that 
 πιστοὶ (per se, not ἐν Xp. Ἴησ., Eph, 
 i. τ, &c.) in these Epp. (as our Trans- 
 lators appear to have clearly felt) 
 seems to have become a more definite 
 expression for ‘believers,’ i.e. Chris- 
 tians, and to haye almost displaced 
 οἱ πιστεύοντες, the expression which 
 so greatly predominates in the Apo- 
 stle’s earlier Epistles. 
 
 12. Become] Be thou, AurH., WIct., 
 Cov., BisH., Rev.; be, Tynp. and re- 
 maining Vy, To] So Rey,; wnto, 
 Tynp., Coy., CRAN., GEN.: of, AUTH. 
 and remaining Vv. Conduct] 
 Conversation, AuTH. and the other 
 Vy. except Wicu., lyuynge; ReEv., 
 
 rous πιστῶν. 
 
 manner of life, Change made only to 
 obviate a possible misunderstanding 
 owing to word preceding. 
 
 Love] So all Vv, except Autu., Wict., 
 RueEm., charity; see notes on ch. i. 5 
 (Transl.). AvrH. inserts *in 
 spirit after charity. 
 
 13. Give attention] Take tente, 
 Wictu.; gewe hede, Cov. Test., Rrv.; 
 attend, Rurm.: give attendance, 
 Αὐτὴ. and remaining Vv. 
 
 The reading, &c.] AuTH. and all Vv. 
 omit the articles. 
 
 14. Through] So Tyrnp., Cov., 
 Cran., Bisu.: by, AuTH. and remain- 
 ing Vv. 
 
 15. These things, &c.] Sim., these 
 thynges exercyse, TyND., Coy., CRAN., 
 GEN.; these things doe thou meditate, 
 Ruem.: meditate upon these things, 
 Autu.; thenke thouthes thingis, Wc. 3 
 thynke vpon these th., Cov. Test.; be 
 diligent in these things, Rey. It 
 seems best here to maintain the order 
 of the original; so also Syr., Vulg. 
 Inthese things, &e.] Give thyself wholly 
 to them, AuTH., Rev.; in thes be thou, 
 Wict., sim. Ruem.; geve thy silfe 
 vnto them, ΤΎΝΡ., Coy., CRAN., GEN., 
 Bisu.; be diligente in them, Cov. 
 Test.—a good transl., though per- 
 haps a little more periphrastic than 
 that in the text. 
 
 Advance] Profiting, AUTH.; progress, 
 Rey. Be manifest] So 
 
to 
 we) 
 
 16 all. 
 
 2 1 TIMOPSY., 
 
 Give heed to thyself and to the doctrine; continue in 
 
 them : for in doing this thou shalt save both thyself and 
 
 them that hear thee. 
 
 V. Do not sharply rebuke an elder, but exhort him as a 
 2 father; the younger men as brethren: the elder women as 
 3 mothers; the younger as sisters, in all purity. Pay due 
 4 regard to widows that are widows indeed. If however any 
 
 widow have children or grandchildren, let them learn first 
 to shew piety towards their own family, and to requite their 
 5 parents: for this is acceptable before God. But she that 
 
 Cov, (both), Ruem., Rey.: appear, 
 AUTH. To all] So AutH.,— 
 though, as Marg. [in all things] shows, 
 it read ἐν πᾶσιν. 
 
 16. Give heed] Take heed, AurH. 
 and the other Vv. except Wict., take 
 tente ; and Ruem., attend. Save 
 both] So Coy. Test., Rurem., Rev.: 
 both save, Auru., GEN., BisH.; the 
 remaining Vy. omit the first καὶ in 
 translation. 
 
 Cuarter V. 1. Do not, &c.] Rebuke 
 not...rygorously, Cran.; rebuke not, 
 Avra. and all other Vy. except Wict., 
 blame thou not, ‘Reprimand’ would 
 perhaps be the most exact transl. 
 Exhort] So Tynp., Cov., Cran., GEN., 
 Bisu., Rey.: intreat, AuTH.; praye, 
 Cov. Test.; biseche, Wicu., ΒΗΕΜ. 
 It does not appear clear why AuTH. 
 made this change. The younger] 
 And the y., AUTH, 
 
 2. In] So Wict., Cov. Test., Bisu., 
 Ruem., Rev.: with, Aur. and the 
 remaining Vy. It may be observed 
 that in the original edition of AuTH. 
 (so also Coy.) there is no comma after 
 sisters; see notes. 
 
 3. Pay due regard to] Honour, 
 Auta. and all Vv. 
 
 4. If however] But if, Auru., Gen., 
 Bisu., Ruem., Rev. ; forsotheif, Wicu.; 
 the rest give if only. 
 
 Have) So Auru. and all Vy. except 
 Wicu., Coy. Test., Rey., which, pro- 
 
 bably following the Latin ‘habet,’ use 
 the indicative, and so Conyb. This 
 however does not appear critically 
 exact; see Latham, Eng. Lang. ὃ 537 
 (ed. 4), and comp. notes on 2 Thess. 
 ili. 14 (Transl.). The English and 
 Greek idioms seem here to be differ- 
 ent. Grandchildren] So 
 Rey.: nephews, Αὐτη. and all other 
 Vy. except Wict., children of sones 
 (cosyns), and Coy. Test., chylders 
 chyldren. Though archaisms as such 
 are not removed from this translation, 
 yet here a change seems desirable, as 
 the use of the antiquated term 
 ‘nephews’ (nepotes) is so very likely to 
 be misunderstood. Shew piety 
 towards, &c.] So Rry.: shew piety at 
 home, AuTH.; rule their awne houses 
 godly, Tyxp., Cov., Cran., BisH.; rule 
 theyr owne house, Cov. Test.; shewe 
 godlines towarde their owne house, 
 GEN. This is acceptable] 
 That is * good and acceptable, AuTH. 
 5. But] So Cov., Ruem.: now, 
 Αὐτη., Rey.; and, Gen., Bisn.; omit- 
 ted in Tynp., Coy. Test., Cran. 
 Hath turned, &e.] Trusteth in, AuTH., 
 GEN.; putteth her trust in, Tynp., 
 Cov., Cran.; hopeth in, Bisu.; hath 
 her hope set on, Rey. The force of 
 ἐλπίζω with ἐπὶ and the accus. should 
 not be left unnoticed; see notes on 
 ch. iy. Io. 
 Abideth] Continueth, Auru, (let her... 
 continue, Coy, Test., Ruem.) and all 
 
Onin τὸ Vi. rT, 985 
 
 is a widow indeed, and desolate, hath turned her hopes 
 toward God, and abideth in her supplications and her 
 prayers night and day: but she that liveth riotously is 6 
 
 dead while she liveth. 
 they may be irreproachable. 
 
 And these things command, that 7 
 But if any one provide not 8 
 
 for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he 
 hath denied the faith, and is worse than an unbeliever. 
 
 Let no one be placed on the list as a widow under three- g 
 score years old, the wife of one husband, being well re- 10 
 ported of in good works; if she ever brought up children, 
 if she entertained strangers, if she washed the saints’ fect, 
 if she relieved the afflicted, if she followed after every good 
 work. But younger widows refuse: for when they have 11 
 
 Vv. except Wict., wake. A some- 
 what marked translation seems re- 
 quired by προσμένει with a dat. 
 
 Her suppl. &c.] Aurn. and all the 
 Vv. leave both articles unnoticed. 
 
 6. Liveth riotously] Is lyuyng in 
 delicis, Wict.; is in deliciousnes, 
 Ruem.; liveth in pleasure, Autu. 
 [pleasures, Coy, (both)]and the other 
 Vy. except Rev., giveth herself to 
 pleasure. 
 
 7. Command] So all Vy. except 
 Aurtu., give in charge. 
 Irreproachable] Blameless, Autn., 
 GeEN., BisH., RHEM.; with outen re- 
 proue, Wicu.; without faut, TyNnp.; 
 without blame, Coy. (both); without 
 rebuke, CRAN.; without reproach, Rry. 
 See notes on ch. iii. 2 (Transl.). 
 
 8. Any one] Any, AurH., Rey. 
 Unbeliever] So Rey.: infidel, AuTH. 
 and all Vv. except Wict., vnfeithful 
 (or hethen man). 
 
 9. Let no one, &c.] So Rev. (none 
 be enrolled): let not awidow be taken 
 into the number, AuTH., GEN.; some- 
 what similarly to text, Tynp., Coy. 
 (both), Cran., let no (not a, Bisu.) 
 wyddowe be chosen; except that they 
 appear to miss the fact that χήρα is a 
 predicate. Old] So all Vv. 
 
 except Wict., Rurem., which omit: 
 the archaism is not changed, being 
 perfectly intelligible. The 
 wife] Having been the w., AUTH., 
 Bisu., Rey.; and soche a one as was 
 the w., Tynp., Cov., Cran.; whych 
 hath ben the w., Cov. Test., Grn. 
 (that). Husband] So Wict., 
 Coy. Test., Gzn., Romm.: man, AUTH. 
 and the other Vv. 
 
 to. In] So all the Vy. except 
 AutH., Grn., REy., for. Ever 
 brought up] Have brought wp, AuTH.; 
 change only made to endeavour to 
 preserve the force of the aorist. 
 Wict. alone omits the aux. verb. 
 Entertained strangers] Have lodged 
 str., AUTH., CrAN., GEN. (the str.), 
 Bisu.; have bene liberall to str., 
 Tynp.; haue bene harberous, Cov. 
 (both) ; hath used hospitality to, Rev. 
 Washed] Have washed, Aut. 
 Relieved] Have relieved, Autu. 
 Followed after] Folowide, Wrictu., 
 Coy. Test. (hath f.), Rum. (haue f.); 
 have diligently foliowed, AuTH., sim. 
 Rev.; were continually geven vnto, 
 Tynp. and sim. remaining Vv. 
 
 11. Younger] So Wict., Rev.: the 
 y., AurH. and all the other Vy. 
 Have come, &c.| Haue done leccherie, 
 
294 1 TEMOTEHY- 
 
 come to wax wanton against Christ their will is to marry; 
 12 bearing about a judgment that they broke their first faith. 
 13 Moreover they learn withal to be idle, going round from 
 
 house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and 
 busy-bodies, speaking the things which they ought not. 
 14 I desire then that younger widows marry, bear children, 
 guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary for 
 
 15 reviling. 
 16 after Satan. 
 
 For some have already turned themselves aside 
 If any woman that believeth have widows, 
 
 let her relieve them, and let not the church be burdened, 
 that it may relieve them that are widows indeed. 
 
 i Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of 
 double honour, especially they who labour in the word and 
 
 Wict.; shal. be vv., Ruem.; have 
 waxed wanton, Rry.; have begun to 
 wax w., AUTH. and remaining Vy. 
 (Cov. Test. omits). Their will 
 is, &e.] They will marry, ΑΥΤΗ. 
 and all Vv. (will they, Tynp., Cov.) 
 except Wict. (be weddide), Rev. (de- 
 sire to). Change to prevent a con- 
 fusion with the simple future; see 
 notes. 
 
 12. Bearing about ajudg.] Having 
 damnation, AurH., Rry. (condemna- 
 tion) and all Vv. (their d., Cov.). 
 That| Because, AutH. and all Vv. ex- 
 cept Wict., for. Broke] Similarly 
 Tynp., Coy., GEN., (have broken): have 
 cast off, Auru.; haue made.. voyde, 
 Wict., Ruem.; haue abhorred, Coy. 
 Test.; haue cast awaye, Cran., BisH.; 
 have rejected, Rry. 
 
 13. Moreover...withal] And withal, 
 Autu., Rey. Going round] 
 Similarly (as to the transl. of repepx.) 
 Tynp., Cran., to goo: to go aboute, 
 Cov. Test., Gen., sim. Rev, ; wander- 
 ing about, AutTu., sim. Bisu,; to 
 runne aboute, Coy. All Vv. except 
 Avutn., Rev., connect μανθάνουσιν 
 with περιερχόμεναι. The things] 
 Things, Auru, and all Vv. 
 
 14. Desire] Will, Aurn., Rey. 
 
 Then| But, Cov. Test.; therefore, 
 Aurtu, and all other Vv. 
 
 Younger widows] Sim, Rey. (omits 
 the): the younger women, AuTH. and 
 all the other Vy. except WIct., 
 Ruem., which do not supply any 
 noun. 
 
 For reviling] So Rrv.; to speak re- 
 proachfully, Autu. [in Marg., for 
 their railing]; to speake evill, Tynp., 
 Cov. (both), Cran., Gen., Ruem. (for 
 to); to speake slaunderously, Bisx. 
 Very singularly Wict., bicause of 
 curside thing, misunderstanding the 
 Vulg. ‘maledicti gratia.’ 
 
 15. Have already, &c.] Are already 
 turned, AurH., and similarly all other 
 Vy. It seems however desirable to 
 retain the medial force which appears 
 to be involved in the passive form 
 éferp., see notes on ch. vi. 20 and 2 
 Tim. iv. 4. The aorist cannot here be 
 translated without inserting ‘have ;’ 
 the Greek idiom permits the union of 
 aor. With ἤδη x.7.d., the English does 
 not; see notes on ch. i. 20 (Z’ransl.). 
 
 16. Woman] *Man or w., AuTH. 
 Her] Them, Autu. 
 
 Burdened] So Ruem., Rey.: charged, 
 Avurn. and all the other Vy. except 
 Wict., greuyde. 
 
Cuap, V. 12—24. 
 
 doctrine. For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle 
 an ox while he is treading out the corn; and, the labourer 
 is worthy of his hire. Against an elder receive not an 
 accusation, except on the authority of two or three wit- 
 nesses. 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. 
 Lay hands hastily on no man, nor yet share in other men’s 
 
 235 
 
 18 
 
 = 
 
 20 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 sins. 
 
 Keep THYSELF pure. Be no longer a waterdrinker, 
 
 3 
 
 but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine often 
 
 infirmities. 
 
 18. Ano, &e.] The ox that tread- 
 eth, στη. and all Vv. except Wict. 
 which retains a bare participle, and 
 Rey., when he treadeth. 
 
 Hire] So Wict., Ruem., Rey.: wages, 
 GeEN.; reward, Auru. and the other 
 Vv. 
 
 19. Except] So Rrv.: no but, 
 Wict. ; sawe, Coy. Test.; but, AUTH. 
 and all other Vv.; the strong formula 
 ἐκτὸς ef μὴ perhaps requires a little 
 more distinctness, 
 
 On the authority of ] At the mouth of, 
 
 Rev. All other Vv., appy. with a 
 
 similar meaning, under; AurH.alone, 
 - before, but in Margin, under. 
 
 20. The rest] So Cov. Test., GEN., 
 Ruem., Rey.: others, AutH.; other, 
 all remaining Vy. May 
 have fear] So Ruem.: haue drede, 
 Wictu. ; maye be afrayed, Coy. Test. ; 
 may be in fear, Rrv.; may fear, 
 AurH. and remaining Vy. 
 
 21. Solemnly charge thee] Charge 
 thee, AurH., GEN., Rev.;  testifie, 
 Tywnp. and all other Vv. except Wict., 
 preye (or coniure). The translation 
 ‘adjure,’ Conyb., is better reserved 
 for ὁρκίζω, Mark v. 7, Acts xix. 13, 
 1 Thess, v. 27. Christ Jesus] 
 * The Lord Jesus Christ, AuTH. 
 Forejudgment] Sim., bifore doom, 
 
 Some men’s sins are openly manifest, going 
 
 24 
 
 Wicu.; preiudice, ἜΠΕΜ., Αὐτη. 
 Marg., ΒΕν.: preferring one before 
 another, AuTH., GEN. (to); hasty 
 iudgement, Tynv., Coy. (both); hasty- 
 nesse of i., CRAN., ΒΙΒΗ. There seems 
 no reason for rejecting the genuine 
 Engl. translation given in the text; 
 ‘forejudgment’ is used by Spenser. 
 
 22. Hastily] So Cov. Test., Rrv.: 
 
 sone, Wicu.; lightly, Rumm.; sud- 
 denly, AutH. and the other Vy. 
 Nor yet, &c.] Nether thou schalt 
 comyne with, Wicu.; nether be parte- 
 ner of, Coy. Test.; neither do thou 
 communicate vvith, Rurm.; neither 
 be partaker of, Aura. and the other 
 Vv. 
 
 23. Beno longer, &c.] Sim. Rev.: 
 nyl thou yit drynke w., Wicu.; drynke 
 nomore w., Cov. Test.; dr. not yet 
 vv., Rusem.: drink no longer water, 
 Auta. and the other Vv. 
 
 24. Openly manifest] Open, Wict., 
 Coy.; manifest, Cov. Test., Rurm. ; 
 evident, Rrv.; open beforehand, AutH. 
 and remaining Vv. Rather 
 follow] Also they follow after, Rry.: 
 follow, AutH. Forsothe of summen & 
 thet folowen, Wicu., is the only 
 transl. (except Rev.) which has pre- 
 served, though not quite correctly, 
 the καὶ of the original. 
 
296 
 
 1 TIMOTHY. 
 
 before to judgment; and some men they rather follow after. 
 25 In like manner the Goop works also of some are openly 
 manifest ; and they that are otherwise cannot be hid. 
 
 Vi 
 
 Let as many as are under the yoke as bond-servants 
 
 count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the 
 2 name of God and His doctrine be not blasphemed. They 
 again that have believing masters, let them not slight them 
 because they are brethren; but the rather serve them, be- 
 cause 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 
 
 25. In like manner...also] So 
 Ruem., and sim. Rev., in like manner 
 also: also and, Wicu.; likewise also, 
 Aura. and the remaining Vv. 
 
 Openly manifest] Manifest beforehand, 
 Autu.; evident, Rev. 
 
 Cuarrer VI. 1. As many, &c.] 
 Sim. Rey.: as many servants as are, 
 Aurn. and all the Vy. except Wict., 
 whoeuer ben s.; and Rurm., whoso- 
 ever ares. 
 
 2. They again] And they, ἄστη. 
 Gen., Bisu., Rev.; forsothe thei, 
 WIcL, ; but they, Cov. Test., Ruem. ; 
 the remaining Vy. omit the particle. 
 In a case like the present, the omis- 
 sion in translation is certainly to be 
 preferred to ‘and,’ as the contrast be- 
 tween the two classes, those who have 
 heathen, and those who have Christian 
 masters, is thus less obscured. In 
 such cases the translation of δὲ is 
 very difficult; ‘but’ is too strong, 
 ‘and’ is inexact; omission, or some 
 turn like thatin the text, seems to be 
 the only way of conveying the exact 
 force of the original. Slight] 
 Despise, Auru. and all Vy. except 
 RuEM.,, contemne. 
 
 The rather] So Ruem., Rev.; and 
 sim., more,: Wicu.: so moche the 
 rather, TyND.; rather, AuTH. and re- 
 
 maining Vy. Serve them] 
 So Coy. Test., and (omitting them) 
 Wict., Ruem., Rev.: do them ser- 
 vice, AuTH.; do service, TynD. and 
 remaining Vy. 
 
 Believing, &c.] Sim. Wicu., RuEm., 
 Rey.: they are faithful and beloved, 
 partakers of, AutH.; they are be- 
 levynge and bel. and p. of, Tynp., 
 Cov., Cran., GEN. (faithful, and bel.), 
 Bisu.; they are f. and bel., for they 
 are p. of, Coy. Test. 
 
 Their good service] The benefit, AuTH. 
 and all Vy. except Wictu. 
 
 3. Is a teacher, &c.] Folowe other 
 doctrine, Cran.; teacheth a different, 
 Rey.; teach otherwise, AurH. and all 
 other Vy.: see notes on ch. i. 3. The 
 εἴ tis, as the context here shows 
 (comp. ch. i, 3), contemplates a case 
 actually in existence; we use then in 
 Engl. the indicative after ‘if;’ see 
 Latham, Eng. Lang. § 537 (ed. 4). 
 Assenteth not to] Consent not to, AUTH., 
 Ruem.; consenteth not to, Gen., Rev., 
 Bisu. (vnto): acordith not to, Wicu. ; 
 agreeth not vnto, Coy. (both); is not 
 content with, Tynp.; enclyne not vnto, 
 Cran, Sound] So Ruem., 
 Rey.; and Aurn. everywhere else in 
 these Epp.: here Aurx. and all Vv. 
 adopt wholesome [hool (or holsom), 
 Wict. }. 
 
Cuap. V. 25—VI. 8. 
 
 237 
 
 not to sound words, even the words of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness, 
 he is besotted with pride, yet knowing nothing, but ailing 4 
 about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, 
 contentions, railings, evil surmisings, obstinate contests of 5 
 men corrupted in their mind and deprived of the truth, 
 
 supposing that godliness is a means of gain. 
 ness with contentment IS a great means of gain. 
 
 But godli- 6 
 For we 7. 
 
 brought nothing into the world, and it is evident we can 
 
 also carry nothing out. 
 
 4.  Besotted with pride] Proud, 
 
 AutH., Wict., Cov. Test., RHEmM.; 
 pufte vp, Tynp. and the remaining 
 Vy.; see notes on ch. 111, 6. 
 Yet knowing] Knowing, AutTH., Wicu. 
 (kunnynge), Coy. Test., Bisu., RuEm., 
 Rev.; and knoweth, Tynp., Cov., 
 GEN. Ailing] Doting, AutH., 
 Bisu., Rev. ; doteth, Gun.; langwisch- 
 ynge, Wict., RHEM.; wasteth his 
 braynes, Tynv. (brayne, Coy.) and the 
 remaining Vy. Contentions | 
 * Strife, AUTH. 
 
 5. Obstinate contests] * Perverse 
 disputings, AUTH. Corrupted 
 in their mind] So Rurm., and sim. 
 Wict., Rev. ; of corrupt minds, AutH., 
 Gen., ΒΙΒΗ. ; with corrupte m., Tynp.; 
 soch...as haue cor. m., Cov.; that 
 haue cor. m., CRAN.: that are corrupt 
 mynded, Coy. Test. deprived| 
 So Ruem.: pryuede, Wict.; robbed, 
 Coy. (both), Cran.; bereft, Rev. ; 
 destitute, AutH. and remaining Vv. 
 
 Godliness, &¢.] Gain is godliness, 
 Auru., Gen., and sim. all the other 
 Vy. except only Coy. (both), and 
 Rey., which observe correctly the 
 order of the text. This is not the 
 only instance in which this able 
 translator stands alone, among those 
 of his own time, in accuracy and 
 good scholarship. Though he used 
 Tyndale’s translation as his basis, 
 his care in revision still entitles him 
 
 If however we have food and 8 
 
 to be considered as a separate autho- 
 rity of great importance. The English 
 translation however in his Diglott 
 Testament (Test.) being somewhat 
 conformed to the Lat., has not always 
 the same claim on attention as the 
 earlier translation put forth in his 
 Bible. A means of gain] 
 Sim. ReEv.,a way of gain; gain, AUTH., 
 and so in the next verse. After this, 
 AutH. inserts *from such withdraw 
 thyself. 
 
 4. The] So Tynp., Cov., Cran., 
 Gen., Bisu., Rev. : this, AUTH., WICL., 
 Coy. Test., Rum. Evident] 
 Certain, AutH., GEN., BisH. ; a playne 
 case, Tynp., Cov., a curious transla- 
 tion: Rey. * omits. Can also] 
 Can, AuTH., and sim. all Vv. omit 
 to translate δέ. 
 
 8. If however we have] Somewhat 
 similarly Cran., but when we haue; 
 so also, omitting but, Tynp., Cov.; 
 therefore when we h., GEN.: and 
 having, AutH.; but hawynge, Cov. 
 Test., Biso., Ruem., Rev. It may 
 be observed that Auru. stands alone 
 in its translation of δέ, ‘and.’ 
 Therewith, &c.] Sim. Rey.: let us be 
 therewith content, AutH., and (th. be) 
 Tynp., Cov., Gen.; with thes thingis 
 be we payede, Wich.; we must ther 
 with be content, Cran., Bisu.; vvith 
 these vve are c., RHEM. 
 
298 
 
 g raiment, therewith we shall be content. 
 
 1 TIMOTHY. 
 
 But they that 
 
 desire to be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into 
 many foolish and hurtful lusts, the which plunge men into 
 
 10 destruction and perdition. 
 
 For the love of money is the 
 
 root of all evils; which while some were coveting after, 
 they erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through 
 
 with many sorrows. 
 
 II But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow 
 after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meek- 
 
 12 ness of heart. 
 
 Strive the good strife of faith, lay hold on 
 
 eternal life, whereunto thou wert called, and thou con- 
 
 9. Desire to] So Rey. : will, Αὐ ΤῊ. 
 
 and all other Vv.; see notes on 
 Chia Ὺ 11: 
 Into many] So Αὐτη. and all the 
 other Vy. except Wict., RuEem., Rev. 
 This insertion of the preposition, 
 where not expressed in the text, is 
 sometimes yery undesirable (comp. 
 John 111. 5, and see Blunt, Parish 
 Priest, p. 56); here however it would 
 seem permissible; πειρασμὸν and 
 παγίδα thus stand in closer union (see 
 notes), and the relative becomes better 
 associated with its principal ante- 
 cedent. The which] So Wicu., 
 marking the force of theairwes, though 
 in the Lat. it is only ‘que :’ which, 
 Auru. and all other Vy. except Rrv., 
 suchas. Plunge...into] Drenchen 
 ...into, Wicu.; droune...into, Cran., 
 Ruem., sim. dr...vnto, Cov. Test.: 
 dr...in, AuTH. and remaining Vy. 
 
 10. Evils] So Wicu., Ruem.; all 
 kinds of evil, Rry.: evil, AurH. and 
 remaining Vy.—appy. without any 
 reason. While...were coveting 
 after] While...coveted after, AuTH.; 
 whill...lusted after, Tynp., Cov., 
 Cran., GEN., Bisu.: coueytynge, 
 Wicu. ; lustynge after, Coy. Test.; 
 which some reaching after have, &c., 
 Rey. The sentence is somewhat 
 awkward, but seems preferable to 
 the diluted translation ‘and some 
 
 through coveting it have, &c.,’ as 
 Conyb. and others, Erred] 
 So all Vv. except Autu., Coy. Test., 
 and Ruem., which insert have. Per- 
 haps the translation ‘wandered,’ or 
 ‘strayed away’ (have been led astray, 
 Rey.: comp. notes on Tit. ili. 3), may 
 be thought a little preferable. 
 
 11. And follow] So AurH., GEN., 
 Bisu., Ruem., Revy.; the extreme 
 awkwardness of ‘ but’ so closely follow- 
 ing ‘but thou’ may justify this in- 
 exactness, Tynp. and the remaining 
 Vy. except Wict. (forsothe...sothely) 
 omit the second δὲ in translation. 
 Patience] So Αὐτὴ. and all Vy. 
 This is the regular translation of ὑπο- 
 μονὴ in the N. T., where it occurs 32 
 times. The only exceptions to this 
 translation are in Rom. il. 7, 2 Cor. 
 i. 6, 2 Thess. iii. 5. On the true 
 meaning see notes on 2 Tim. ii. 10, 
 and on Tit. ii. 2. Meekness of 
 heart] * Meekness, AutH. 
 
 12. Strive the good strife] Sim., 
 strife thou ag. str., WicL.: fight the 
 good fight, AutH. and all other Vv. 
 [a. g., Cov. (both)]. The transl. in 
 the text is undoubtedly not satisfac- 
 tory, but is perhaps a little more exact 
 than that of AurH. 
 
 Wert called] Art * also called, Autn. 
 Thou confessedst] Sim. Rey., didst 
 confess: haste knowelechide, Wict.; 
 
Cuap. VI. 9—16. 
 
 fessedst the good confession before many witnesses. 
 
 239 
 1515 
 
 charge thee before God, who preserveth alive all things, 
 and before Christ Jesus, who under Pontius Pilate bore 
 witness to the good confession, that thou keep the com- 14 
 mandment without spot, without reproach, until the ap- 
 pearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: which in His ownseasons 15 
 He shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, 
 the King of kings and Lord of lords; who alone hath im- 16 
 mortality, dwelling in light unapproachable ; whom never 
 man saw, nor can see: to whom ὧδ honour and eternal 
 
 might, Amen, 
 
 hast made, Cov. Test.; hast confessed, 
 Ruem.; hast professed, Αὐτη. and 
 the other Vv. The good} 
 A good, Aur. and all Vy. 
 Confession] So RuEm.: profession, 
 Autu. and the remaining Vv. except 
 Wict., knowelechynge. 
 
 13. Charge thee] So Grn., Rrv.: 
 comaunde to thee, Wicu., Roem. (om. 
 to); give thee charge, AurH. and the 
 other Vy. Before] So Wict., 
 Coy. (both), Ruem.: in the sight of, 
 AutH. and remaining Vy. It cer- 
 tainly here seems desirable to pre- 
 serve ‘before’ in both places: comp. 
 notes. Preserveth alive] 
 * Quickeneth, AuTH. Under] 
 So all the Vv. except Autu., Cov. Test., 
 and Rey., which adopt the local 
 before. Bore witness to 
 the, &c.] Witnessed a good conf., 
 Autu., GEn., Bisu. (prof.), REv. (the 
 good); witn. a g. witnessinge, TyND., 
 Cov., CRAN. 
 
 14. The (1)] So all the Vv. except 
 AutH., GEN., this. Without re- 
 proach] So Rev.: unrebukeable, Auru., 
 Tynp., Cran., GEN., BisH.; irrepre- 
 hensible, Wich. ; vnreproueable, Coy. 
 (both); blamelesse, Ruzm. The con- 
 nexion of the adjectives with ἐντολὴν 
 is perhaps made a little clearer by 
 the change: so Syr., ‘without spot, 
 without blemish;’ comp. notes. 
 
 15. His own] Sim. Rev.: his, AuTH. 
 Seasons] Tyme, Tynv., Cov. (both), 
 Cran., GEN.; times, AUTH. and the 
 remaining Vv. Who is] So 
 Autu., following all the older Vv. 
 except Wict., RuEem., which put the 
 nominative first, and Cov. Test., 
 which is defective. It would seem 
 that the insertion of ‘who is’ is here 
 a far less evil than the loss of order. 
 Conybeare changes the active into 
 pass., ‘be made manifest (?) by the 
 only, dc.,’—a diluted translation that 
 wholly falls short of the majesty of 
 the original. 
 
 16. Alone] So Wicu.: only, AuTH. 
 and all other Vv. Immortality] 
 Wict. alone has the noticeable trans- 
 lation vndeadelynes. Light] 
 So Wict., Tynp., Ruem., Reyv.: the 
 light, AurH. and the remaining Vv. 
 except Coy., a lighte. Un- 
 approachable] So Rerv.; similarly 
 Ruem., not accessible: which no man 
 can approach unto, AutH.; to whiche 
 noman may come, Wicu.; that no man 
 canattayne, Tynv., Cov. (both), Cran. ; 
 that none can atteine vnto, GEN., 
 BisuH. (no man). Never man 
 saw] So Tynp., GEN.: none of men 
 siye, Wicu.; noman dyd euer se, Cov. 
 Test. ; no man hath seen, AutTH. and 
 remaining Vv. 
 
 Eternal might] Power everlasting, 
 
240 
 
 Σ TIMOTHY. 
 
 17 Charge them that are rich in this world not to be 
 highminded, nor to place their hopes on the uncertainty 
 of riches, but in God, who giveth us all things richly for 
 
 18 enjoyment; that they do good, that they be rich in good 
 works, be free in distributing, ready to communicate; 
 
 19 laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against 
 the time to come, that they may lay hold on the true life. 
 
 20 O Timothy, keep the trust committed to thee, avoiding 
 the profane babblings and oppositions of the falsely-called 
 
 21 knowledge; which some professing have gone wide in aim 
 concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. 
 
 AutH.; power eternal, Rey. The 
 same adj. is preserved by all remain- 
 ing Vv. except WIcL. (into withouten 
 ende). 
 
 17. Not to be] So Cov. Test., 
 Ruem, ; sim, Wicu.: that they be not, 
 Αὐτη. and rem. Vv. Slight change, 
 designed to obviate the supposition 
 that the original is wa μὴ κ. τ. λ. 
 The transition to the positive side 
 of the exhortation in ver, 18 thus 
 also becomes slightly more telling and 
 distinct. 
 
 To place their hopes on] Sim, Rev., 
 have their hope set on: trust in, AUTH, 
 and the other Vy. (to tr., Cov. Test., 
 Ruem.) except Wicu., to hope in. 
 The uncertainty of] So Cov. Test., 
 Ruem., Rey., and sim. (omitting the) 
 Wicu. and Auta. Marg.: uncertain, 
 Aurtu., Cran., Gun., ΒΙΒΗ.; the vn- 
 certayne, Tynp., Cov. 
 
 God] The *living God, AurH. 
 
 All things richly] * Richly all things, 
 AUTH. For enjoyment] For 
 to vse, Wicu.; to enioye them, TynD., 
 Coy., Cran.; to enjoy, AurH, and re- 
 maining Vv. 
 
 18. Be free in, ἄς. Ready to dis- 
 tribute, Auru., Grn., Rev.; ligtely 
 for to gyue, Wicu.; redy to geve, 
 Tynp. (Cran., BisH., be 7.); geue... 
 
 with a good wyll, Cov. (both); giwe 
 easily, Rue, Ready) Willing, 
 AvuTH., Rey. 
 
 19. The true] * Eternal, AuTH. 
 
 20. The trust, &c.| That which is 
 committed to thy trust, AurH.; thi de- 
 post (or thing bitaken to thee), Wict. ; 
 that which is geven the to kepe, Tynv. , 
 Cran., GEN., Bisu.; that which is 
 committed unto the, Coy. (both), Grn., 
 Rey.; the depositum, Rurm. 
 The prof.| Aurn. and the other Vy. 
 except Ruem., Rry., omit the article. 
 The translation of βεβήλους, vngostly, 
 Tynp., Cov. (both), Cran., deserves 
 recording. Profane] Pro- 
 fane and vain, AutH. The 
 falsely-called knowledge] So Ruem. 
 (omitting the): false name of kun- 
 nynge, WicL.; a false name of know- 
 lege, Coy. Test.; knowledge which is 
 falsely so called, Rev.; science, falsely 
 so called, AurH. and remaining Vy. 
 
 21. Have gone wide, &c.] Fellen 
 doune, Wicu.; dyd fall awaye, Cov. 
 Test.; erred, Cran.; have erred, 
 AurH. and remaining Vy. English 
 idiom seems here to require the in- 
 sertion of ‘have’ after the present 
 participle. At the end of the verse 
 Auru. adds * Amen. 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 
 
 μι an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, I. 
 for the promise of the life which is in Christ Jesus, 
 
 to Timothy, my beloved child. 
 
 Grace, mercy, peace, from 2 
 
 God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. 
 
 I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with a 3 
 pure conscience,—as unceasing is the remembrance which 
 I have of thee in my prayers night and day, longing to 4 
 see thee, being mindful of thy tears, that I may be filled 
 with joy ; being put in remembrance of the unfeigned faith 5 
 that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother 
 Lois, and thy mother Eunice, and I am persuaded that 7¢ 
 dwelleth also in thee. For which cause I remind thee to 6 
 
 1. Christ Jesus] *Jes. Chr., AUTH. 
 For the] Similarly but more peri- 
 phrastically, Tynp., Cov., to preache 
 the: aftir the, Wicu.; according to the, 
 ΑΥΤΗ. and remaining Vv. 
 
 The life] So Coy. (both), Raem., 
 Rev.: life, Aurx. and remaining Vy. 
 
 2. My beloved child] So Rrv.: my 
 dearly beloved son, AUTH.; his moste 
 derworth sone, Wict.; his beloved s., 
 Tynp., Cran.; my deare s., Cov.; my 
 moost deare s., Cov. Test.; my be- 
 loued s., GEN.; a beioued s., Bisx.; 
 my deerest s., RubM.; see notes on 
 : Tim. i, 2 and Eph. vi. 21 (Transl.). 
 Peace] And peace, AuTH. 
 
 3. A pure] So Coy. (both), Rurm., 
 Rey.: pure, AutH. and the remaining 
 Vv. except WIct., clene. As 
 wnceasing, &c.] That without ceasing 
 I have remembrance, AvtH., GEN., 
 Bisu.; for with outen ceesynge I haue 
 mynde, Wicu.; that without c. I make 
 mencion, Tyxp., Coy. (both), Cran. 
 
 (anye c.); that vvithout intermission 
 I haue a memorie, Rurm. ; how un- 
 ceasing is my remembrance, Rey. 
 
 4. Longing] So Rey.; and longe, 
 Cov.; desirynge (without any inten- 
 sive force given to ἐπί), Wict, and 
 all other Vv., except Auru., greatly 
 desiring. 
 
 5. Being put, ἄς. *When I call 
 
 to remembrance, AUTH. 
 That it, &c.] So Tynp., Coy. (both), 
 Cran., GEN., Bisu., except that they 
 put also last: that in thee aiso, AuTH., 
 Ruem., Key. (omits that); that & in 
 thee, Wicu. Perspicuity seems to 
 require in English the repetition of 
 the verb. 
 
 6. For which cause] So Wict., 
 and (the whych) Coy. Test., Ruem., 
 Rey.: wherefore, AutH. and the re- 
 maining Vy. Comp, ver. 12, where 
 ΑΥΤΗ. preserves the more literal 
 translation. 
 
> ΤΟΥ, 
 
 stir up the gift of God, which is in thee through the laying 
 
 7 on of my hands. 
 
 For God gave us not the Spirit of 
 
 cowardice, but of power, and of love, and of self-control. 
 8 Be not thou ashamed then of the testimony of our 
 Lord, nor yet of me His prisoner; but rather suffer afflic- 
 tions with me for the Gospel in accordance with the power 
 g of God, who saved us, and called ws with an holy calling, 
 not according to our works, but according to His own pur- 
 pose and the grace which was given us in Christ Jesus 
 10 before eternal times; but hath been now made manifest 
 
 I remind thee to] I put thee in remem- 
 brance that thou, AuTH., GEN., Bisu., 
 Rey.; I moneste that thou, Wicu.; I 
 warne the that thou, Tynp., Coy., 
 Cran.; I exhorte the, y* thou, Cov. 
 Test.; 7 admonish thee that thou, 
 Ruem. Though all the Vy. adopt 
 this periphrasis, it still seems desira- 
 ble to preserve the simple inf., if 
 only to distinguish it from wa with 
 subj., which the transl. of Conyb., 
 ‘I call thee to remembrance, that 
 thou mayest,’ dc., seems still more 
 decidedly to imply. 
 
 Through] So Rey.: by, AutH, and 
 all the other Vv. Laying on] 
 So Coy. Trst., Rry.: imposition, 
 Ruem.; putting on, Aura. and the 
 other Vv. (on put., Wict.). 
 
 7. Gave] So Wicu., Rey.: hath 
 ...given, AutH. and all the other Vv. 
 Cowardice] Fear, Aur. and the 
 other Vv. except Wict., drede; Rry. 
 fearfulness. It may be remarked 
 that the Genevan is the only version 
 which uses a capital to ‘ Spirit.’ 
 
 And of love] Αὐτη. ed. 1611 omits 
 
 and, Self-control] A sound 
 mind, Autu., GEN., ΒΙΒΗ.; sobre- 
 messe, Wicu., Cov. Test., Cran.; 
 
 sobrenes of mynde, Tynp.; right vn- 
 derstondynge, Cov.; sobrietie, RuEm. ; 
 discipline, Rry. 
 
 8. Ashamed then] Aszhamed ther- 
 fore, Cov., Rry,; therefore ash., AuTH., 
 
 Cov. Test., Cran., GeEN., Busu., 
 Ruem. Nor yet] Nor, Autu., 
 Coy. Test.. Ruem., Rev.; nether, 
 Wict. and the remaining Vy. 
 
 But rather] But, Auru. and all Vv. 
 Tynp. however adds also after gospell; 
 Coy. after aduersite. Suffer, 
 &e.] Sim., traueyl with me in the 
 gospel, Wicu.: be thow partaker of 
 the afflictions of the G., AurH., GEN. 
 (om, thou); suffre thow adversite 
 with the g., Tynp. (om. thou), Cov., 
 Cran., Bisu.; laboure wyth the G., 
 Coy. Test.; trauail vvith the G., 
 Ruem.; suffer hardships with the 
 gospel, Rry. In accordance 
 with] Aftir, Wicu.; thorow, ΤΎΝΡ.; 
 according to, AUTH. and remaining 
 Vv. 
 
 9. Saved] So Trnp., Cran., Rev., 
 and sim. Wict., delyuweride: hath 
 saved, AutH., Cov., GeEn., Brsu.; 
 hath delyuered, Coy. Test., Ruem. 
 The grace] Grace, AutH. and all the 
 other Vvy.: but Tynp. gives which 
 grace in the next clause. See Scholef. 
 Hints, p. 121 (ed. 4). Eternal 
 times] Sim. Rev., times eternal: the 
 world began, AuTH., CRAN., ΒΙΒΗ.; 
 the worlde was, TyND., GEN.; worldely 
 tymes, Wicu.; the tyme of the worlde, 
 Cov. (both); the secular times, Ruem. 
 
 το. Hath been] Is, Aurn, and all 
 Ws Through] By, AurH. and 
 all Vv, Though ‘by’ has appy. often 
 
Ghar. I, 7—r14. 
 
 through the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, when 
 He made death of none effect, and brought life and incor- 
 ruption to light through the Gospel: whereunto I was 
 appointed a herald, and an apostle, and a teacher of the 
 Gentiles. For which cause I suffer also these things : ne- 
 vertheless I am not ashamed; for I knowin whom I have 
 put my trust, and I am persuaded that He is able to keep 
 the trust committed to 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 to thee keep through the Holy Ghost which 
 
 243° 
 
 ΤῚ 
 
 14 
 
 dwelleth in us. 
 
 in English the force of ‘by means of,’ 
 yet here, on account of the 5a below, 
 it seems best to be uniform in transla- 
 tion. When He] Who, AutH. 
 and sim. all other Vy. Made 
 death, &c.] Comp., hath taken awaye 
 y° power of d., Coy.: hath abolished 
 death, AutH., GEN,, Rev. (omits 
 hath); distruyede deth, Wicu., and 
 (hath d.) Cov. Test., Rurm.; hath 
 put away d., Tynp., Cran., BIsH. 
 Brought] Hath brought, στη. 
 Incorruption] So Wricu. (vncor.), 
 Ruem., Rev.: immortality, AutH. 
 and the remaining Vv. 
 
 11. Iwas] So Rev.: Zam, Auta. 
 and all other Vy. Herald] 
 Preacher, Aur. and all Vv. 
 
 12. Which] Asin ver.6; so WICcL.: 
 the which, AurH. and remaining Vy. 
 I suffer also] So Rev.: I also suffer, 
 AuruH. and the other Vy. except WIct., 
 Coy. Test., Rurm., also I suffre. 
 
 In whom, &¢.] So Cran., but with a 
 different connexion: whom I have be- 
 lieved, Auru, and all other Vy. (to 
 whom, Wict.). The trust, &e.] 
 My depost (or thing putte in kepynge), 
 Wict.; my depositum, Ruem.; that 
 which I have committed unto him, 
 Avuru., Rerv., and (to him) ΟἘΝ., 
 Bisu.; that which I have commit- 
 
 ted to his kepynge, Txynp., Cov. 
 (unto), Cov. Test. (i that I...vnto), 
 CRAN. 
 
 13. Hold] So Rev.: hold fast, 
 AutH.; haue thou, Wicu., Cov. Test., 
 RueEm.; se thow have, Tynp., Cran. 
 (se that), Bisu.; kepe, Gen. The 
 transl. of AuTH., thus at variance 
 with the old versions, is still retained 
 by Conybeare, but is clearly inexact. 
 Pattern] So Bisu., Rev.; true pat., 
 Gen.: form, Autu., Wict., RHEm.; 
 ensample, Tynp., Coy. (both), Cran. 
 Heardest] So Wicu., Tynp., Cov.: 
 hast heard, Auru. and the remaining 
 Vy. From me] So Rerv.: of 
 me, AuTH. and all Vv. 
 
 14. The good trust, &e.] That 
 good thing which was committed unto 
 thee, AurH., Rry.; a gode depost (or 
 a thing taken to thi kepynge office), 
 Wictu.; that good thinge, which was 
 com. to thy kepynge, Tynp., Cran., 
 Bisn.; this hye charge, Cov.; the 
 good thyng that is com. vnto the, 
 Cov. Test.; that worthie thing, which 
 was com. to thee, GEN.; the good de- 
 positum, Ruem. Through] 
 So Cov. (both), Cran., Grn., Bisu., 
 Rev.: by, AutH., Wict., RuEem.; in, 
 Tynp. 
 
244 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 18 
 
 i: 
 
 2 TIMOTHY. 
 
 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 to the house of Onesipho- 
 rus ; for he oft refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my 
 chain: but on the contrary, when he arrived in Rome, 
 he sought me out the more diligently, and found me. The 
 Lord grant to him that he may find mercy of the Lord in 
 that day: and in how many things he ministered at Ephe- 
 sus, thou knowest better than J. 
 
 Thou therefore, my child, be inwardly strengthened in 
 the grace that is in Christ Jesus. And the things that 
 thou heardest from me among many witnesses, these com- 
 mit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others 
 
 3 also. 
 
 15. Thou knowest this] So Ruem.: 
 this thou knowest, AutH. and remain- 
 ing Vv. except Wicw. (sothely thou 
 woste). Turned away] So 
 Revy.: be turned away, AUTH.; are... 
 turned, Cov. Test.; be auerted, RuEm.; 
 ben turnyde, Wicu. and remaining 
 Vv. Phygelus] *Phygellus, 
 ΑὐἹΗ. 
 
 17. But on the contrary] But, 
 Autu. and all Vv. Arrived in} 
 Was in, Auru., Bisu., Rrv.; came to, 
 Wict., Coy. Test.; was at, Tynp., 
 Cov., Cran., GEN.; vvas come to, 
 Ruem. The more dil.] Bisily, 
 Wicu.; diligently, Cov. Test., Rerv.; 
 carefully, Rurm.; very diligently, 
 AurH. and remaining Vy. 
 
 18. Ministered] So Rev.: minis- 
 tered unto me, AurH. (hathe m., Grn.) 
 and all the other Vy. (some give to) 
 except Coy. Test., dyd for me. 
 Better than I] Very well, Aurm. and 
 the other Vv. except Wicu., Ruem., 
 better. 
 
 Cuarter II. 1. Therefore] So Autu. 
 and all Vy. Here perhaps this trans- 
 lation may be retained; ‘then’ may 
 be thought slightly too weak, as the 
 
 Suffer with me afflictions as a good soldier of Christ 
 
 meaning seems to be, ‘as others have 
 fallen away do thou make up for their 
 defection :᾿ comp. notes on 1 Tim. ii. 
 1 (Transl.). Child] so Rev.: 
 son, AurH. and all Vv. 
 
 Be inwardly strengthened] Be strong, 
 Aut. and the other Vv. except WIct., 
 be comfortide ; Ruy., be strengthened, 
 where the passive voice is rightly 
 preserved, 
 
 2. Heardest from] Hast heard of, 
 Auru. and all Vv. (om. heard, Coy. 
 Test.; from, REv.). Among, 
 &e.] So Avuru., Rey.: many bear- 
 ynge witnes, TyND.; by many witn.; 
 Wicu. and remaining Vy. Perhaps 
 ‘in the presence of,’ or ‘with many 
 to bear witness,’ may conyey the 
 idiomatic use of διὰ a little more ex- 
 actly ; as both translations are how- 
 ever somewhat periphrastic, the 
 Avurn. is retained. These] 
 So Wict. (with a different order), 
 Ruem.: the same, AurH. and remain- 
 ing Vv. 
 
 3. Suffer, &c.] Autu. prefixes *thou 
 therefore. Suffer...afflictions] 
 So Cran., Bisu. (afliccion, Tynp., 
 Coy., GENn.), but omitting ‘with me: 
 endure hardness, AutH. (but comp. 
 
Cuap. I. 
 
 15—II. 9. 245 
 
 Jesus. No man serving as a soldier entangleth himself 4 
 with the affairs of life; that he may please him who chose 
 
 him to be a soldier. 
 
 Again, if a man also strive in the 5 
 
 ‘games, he is not crowned, except he strive according to 
 
 rule. 
 -of the fruits. 
 
 The LABOURING husbandman ought to partake first 6 
 Understand what I say, for the Lord will 7 
 
 give thee apprehension in all things. 
 
 Bear in remembrance Jesus Christ as raised from the 8 
 dead, born of the seed of David, according to MY gospel : 
 in the which I suffer afflictions as an evil doer even unto 9 
 bonds; howbeit the word of God hath not been bound. 
 
 ch, iv. 5); trauel, Wict.; laboure, 
 Coy. Test., Ruem.; suffer hardship, 
 “Rev. Christ Jesus] *Jesus 
 Christ, AUTH. 
 
 4. Serving as, &e.] Holdyng knygt- 
 hode to god, Wicu.; warrynge, goyng 
 a warre fare vnto God, Cov. Test.; 
 being a souldiar, to God, Ruem. (all 
 following the Vulg.); on service, Rrv.: 
 that warreth, AutH, and remaining 
 Vv. The affairs &e.] 
 The a. of this life, AurH., GEN., 
 Bisu., Rey.: worldely nedis, Wit. ; 
 _ worldely busynes, Tynp., Cov. (both) 
 [plural], Cran.; secular businesses, 
 Reem. Chose] Hath 
 chosen, AutH. So all the other Vy, 
 give a perf. with ‘have.’ 
 
 5. Again] And, Αὐτη. and the 
 other Vy. except Wict., forwhi; Cov. 
 Test., Ruem., for. Strive in, &c.] 
 Strive for masteries, AuTH.; str. fora 
 mastery, TynD., Coy. (both), Cran., 
 Gen., Roem. (the m.); wrestle, BIsH. ; 
 contend in the games, REv. 
 
 He is] So Rev.: yet is he, AuTH. 
 According to rule] Lawfully, AvtH. 
 and all the other Vy. except GEN., as 
 he oght to do. 
 
 6. The labouring husb.] So Cov. 
 Test., Biso.: the husb. that laboureth, 
 AurH., Tynp., Cov., Cran., RHEm., 
 _ Rev.; an erthe tilier, Wicu. - 
 
 Ought to, &e.| Must be first partaker 
 
 of, Autu., Bisu. (first be), Rev. (to 
 partake); it behoueth...for to receyue 
 Jirste of, Wich. ; must fyrst receave of, 
 Tynp., Cov. Test., Cran.; must first 
 enioye, Coy. 
 
 7. Understand] So Wict., Ruem. ; 
 
 consider, AutH. and the remaining 
 Vy. except Coy. Test., marke. 
 For the Lord, &c,] And the Lord * give, 
 AUTH. Apprehension] 
 Understanding, AutH. and all the Vv. : 
 change made only to avoid the repe- 
 tition wnderst...understanding, as in 
 Wicu., Rue. 
 
 8. Bear in remembrance] Sim. 
 Rey., remember J.C.: be thow mynde- 
 ful, Wicu.; be m. that, Ruem.; re- 
 member that, AUTH. and remaining Vv. 
 As raised, &¢.] Of the seed of David, 
 was raised from the dead, &c., AUTH., 
 Brsu., and similarly, with a few slight 
 variations, all the other Vy. except 
 Wicu., Ruem., Rey., which keep the 
 order of the original, retained in the 
 text. 
 
 9g. Inthe which} So Cov, Test. and 
 Wict. (om. the): wherein, AurH. and 
 the remaining Vy. Suffer 
 afflictions] Traueyl, Wricu.; suffre, 
 Coy.; laboure, Cov. Test., Ruem.; 
 suffer hardship, Rev.; suffer trouble, 
 Aur. and the other Vv. 
 
 Howbeit]) But, Auru. and all the Vv. 
 Hath not been] Is not, AurH., Rrv. 
 
240 2 TIMOTHY. 
 
 10 For this cause I endure all things for the sake of the elect, 
 that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ 
 11 Jesus with eternal glory. Faithful is the saying: For if 
 12 we died with Him, we shall also live with Him: if we 
 endure, we shall also reign with Him: if we shall deny 
 13 Him, He also will deny us: if we be faithless, yet He con- 
 
 tinueth faithful; for He cannot deny Himself. 
 14 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. 
 15 Study to present thyself approved to God, a workman not 
 
 10. For this cause] So AurH. in 
 1 Thess. ii. 13, ili. 5: therefore, AuTH. 
 and all other Vy. (herefore, Tynp.). 
 For the sake of, &c.] For the chosen, 
 Wict.; for the chosens sake, Cov. Test. ; 
 for the elect, Rurem.; for the elect’s 
 sakes, Autu. (sake, Grn., Rev.) and 
 the other Vy. They also may} 
 So, as to order, Coy. (both), Rurm., 
 Rey.: they may also, AurH. and (as 
 to order) the rem. Vy. except Wicu. 
 (and thei). 
 
 11. Faithful is thes.] SoRry.: it 
 is a faithful saying, Auru., Bisu.; a 
 trewe worde, Wicu.; it is a true say- 
 inge, Txnp., Cran., GEN.; this is a 
 true s., Cov. (both); a faithful s., 
 Riuem. Died] So Rey.: 
 be dead, Aurn. and all Vy. 
 
 12. Endure] So Rey.: suffer, 
 Αὐτη., GEen.; be pacient, Tynp., Cov., 
 Cran., Bisu.; haue pacience, Cov. 
 Test.; schulen susteyne, Wicu., Roem. 
 A change of rendering in two verses 
 so contiguous as this and ver. 10 
 does not seem desirable. Shall 
 deny] * Deny, AurH. 
 
 13. Le faithless] Similarly Bisu., 
 be vnfaythjul; Rev., are faithless, to 
 preserve the paronomasia of the 
 original: believe not, Aurm. and all 
 other Vy. Continueth] So 
 
 Ruem.: dwellith, Wicu.; abideth, 
 
 AurH. and remaining Vv. 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) re- 
 marks, is oftenreferred toinyoluntary, 
 if not compulsory actions. For 
 He] *He, Autu. 
 
 14. Solemnly, &¢.] Charging them, 
 AutH., Rey.; and testifie, Tynp., 
 Coy. (both), Cran., Bisu. (om. and); 
 and protest, Grmn.; testifying, Ruem. 
 Not to contend] That they strive not, 
 Autu., Rry.,—a periphrasis for the 
 inf. that does not here seem neces- 
 sary. The same rendering also oc- 
 curs in Tynp., Coy., Gen., BisH., and 
 (as to constr.) Cran., but is made 
 necessary in these Vy. by their trans- 
 lation of διαμαρτυρόμενος; see above. 
 On the true meaning of μάχομαι, see 
 notes on ver. 23. 
 
 A profitless course] To no profit, AUTH., 
 Bisu., Rev.; fforsothe to no thing is 
 it profitable, Wicu.; for that is profyt- 
 able for nothynge, Coy. Test., Rurm. 
 (it); which is to no proffet, Tynp., 
 Coy., Cran. (wh. are), GEN. 
 
 To (ult.)] So Rev.: but to, AurH. 
 and the other Vy. except Wict., no 
 but to; Cov, Test., saue to; Ruem., 
 but for. 
 
 15. Present] So Ruem., Rry.: shew, 
 
Crier ΤΠ τὸ ἐἵἱ. 
 
 ashamed, rightly laying out the word of truth, But avoid 
 profane babblings; for they will advance to greater mea- 
 sures 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 passed 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 stand aloof 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 
 
 247 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 18 
 
 το 
 
 to dishonour, 
 
 Autu. and all Vv. except WicL., gywe. 
 Not ashamed] Vuschamyde, Wicu.; 
 not beynge ash., Cov, Test.; not to be 
 ash., BisH.; not to be confounded, 
 Riueq. ; thatneedeth not to be ashamed, 
 AurH. and remaining Vy. 
 
 Laying out] Dividing, Autu.; hand- 
 ling, Rry.; see notes. 
 
 16. Avoid] So Ruem. (and AuTH. 
 in Tit. iii. 9): shun, AuTH., WIcL., 
 
 Εν. : eschue, Cov. (both); passe over, 
 Tynp., Cran., Bisu.; stay, GEN. 
 Profane] Auru. adds and vain, with 
 Wict., Tynp., Cov. (both), Gxn., 
 Ruem.; comp. (vanyties of) CRANn., and 
 sim. Bisx. Will advance, &e.] 
 Will increase unto more, AUTH.; pro- 
 Jiten myche to, Wicn.; helpe moch to, 
 Coy.; auaill much vnto, Cov. Test.; 
 shall encreace vnto greater, 'ΤΎΝΡ., 
 Cran. (wyll), GEN. (more); Buisu. 
 (wyll); doe much grovv to, Ruem.; 
 proceed further in, Rrv. 
 
 17. Willspread] So Rueq. (spread- 
 eth): will eat, Auru., Ruy.; crepith, 
 Wicu.; fretteth, Coy. (both); shall 
 fret, Tynp. and remaining Vy. 
 Gangrene] So ἄστη. in Marg., Rey.: 
 canker, AutH. and all other Vy. ex- 
 cept Cran., disease of a cancre. 
 
 18, Men who] So Rav.: the whiche, 
 
 If a man then shall purge himself from 21 
 
 Wicu.; who, Aut. and sim. all other 
 Vv. Have missed their 
 aim] Have erred, AurH. The con- 
 nexion of the aor. with the present 
 part. seems to require in English an 
 insertion of the auxiliary verb; see 
 notes on 1 Tim. i. 20 (Transl). 
 
 19. Firm foundation, &c.] Sim. 
 Rey.: foundation of God standeth 
 sure, AurH.:all other Vv. except Grn. 
 rightly join the adj. immediately 
 with the subst., as is done in the 
 text, Doth stand] 
 So Coy. Test., sim. AurH., WICcL., 
 Ruem., Rey., standeth: remayneth, 
 Tynp., GEN.; stondeth fast, Cov.; 
 standeth still, Cran., BisH. 
 
 Of the Lord] *Of Christ, Aurx, 
 Stand aloof] depart, Αὐτη. and all 
 Vy. (departith, Wict.). 
 Unrighteousness| So Ruv.: iniquity, 
 Auru. and the other Vv. except WICt., 
 Coy. Test., wickidnesse; the prevail- 
 ing translation of ἀδικία throughout 
 Aut. is ‘unrighteousness,’ which 
 there seems here no reason to mo- 
 dify ; see notes. 
 
 21. Then] Therefore, Autu. and 
 all the other Vv. except Tynp., Cov., 
 but. Shall purge] Similarly 
 
 Wicu., Cov. Test., RueEm., schal 
 
248 
 
 3° TI MOtar v. 
 
 these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, meet 
 for the master’s use, prepared unto every good work. 
 22 But flee the lusts of youth; and follow after righteous- 
 ness, faith, love, peace with them that call on the Lord 
 23 out of a pure heart. But foolish and unlearned questions 
 
 24 eschew, knowing that they do gender contentions, 
 
 And 
 
 a servant of the Lord must not contend; but be gentle 
 25 unto all men, apt to teach, patient of wrong, in meekness 
 disciplining those that oppose themselves; if God perad- 
 
 clense: purge, AurH. and the other 
 Vv. The more exact translation, 
 ‘shall have purged himself out of,’ is 
 perhaps somewhat too literal. 
 
 Meet] *And meet, Αὐτὴ. In ch. iv. 
 11, εὔχρηστον is translated differently ; 
 the sense however is so substantially 
 the same, that if seems scarcely de- 
 sirable to alter, merely for the sake of 
 uniformity, the present idiomatic 
 translation. Prepared] 
 So Ruem., Rev.; sim. reedy, WIct., 
 Coy. Test.: and prep., AurH, and re- 
 maining Vy. 
 
 22. But flee] So Ruem., Rev.: jlee 
 
 also, AurH.; fice also from, GEN.; 
 forsothe flee, Wicu.; the rest omit the 
 particle. The lusts 
 of youth] So Coy. (both), Grn. : youth- 
 Jul lusts, Aurn., Rev.; desiris of 
 youthe, Wicu. ; lustes of youth, TYND., 
 Cran., Bisu.; youthful desires, Roem. 
 And] So Tynp., Gren., Ruem., Rev.: 
 but, AurH.; comp. notes on 1 Tim. 
 vi. rr (Zransl.). Follow after] 
 So Gen., Rey.: follow, AurH. 
 Love] Soall Vy. except Aurn., Wict., 
 Ruem., charity ; see notes on 1 Tim. 
 i. 5 (T'ransl.). Peace] Aurn. 
 (ed. 1611), Cov. Test., and Ruem., 
 have no comma after this word. 
 
 23. Foolish, ἄς. So AurH. and 
 the other Vy. except Cov. Test., soch 
 ...as be foolish; the article, which ap- 
 pears to mark the ‘current,’ ‘ préva- 
 lent,’ questions of this nature, can 
 
 scarcely be expressed; the resolution 
 of Conyb., ‘the disputations of the 
 foolish, &c.,’ fails to mark sufficiently 
 the intrinsic μωρία and ἀπαιδευσία of 
 the questions themselves. 
 
 Eschew] So Coy. Test. : avoid, AUTH., 
 Ruem.; schone, Wict.; put away, 
 Gen.; refuse, Rev. ; put from the, 
 Tynp. and remaining Vy. 
 Contentions] Strifes, AurH., Rev. ; 
 stryfe, Tynp. and the other Vy. except 
 Wict., chydyngis; Ruem., braules; 
 see notes. 
 
 24. A servant] The servant, AuTH. 
 
 and all Vv. except Rey., the Lord’s 
 servant. Contend] Chide, 
 Wict. ; vvrangle, Ruem.; strive, AUTH. 
 and remaining Vv. 
 Patient of wrong] Patient, Αὐτη., 
 Wictu., Cov. Test., Rurm.; one that 
 can suffre the evyll, Txynp., CRran., 
 (both connect ἀνεξίκακον with ἐν πραὔ- 
 TTL); one that can forbeare the euell, 
 Cov. ; suffring the euill men patiently, 
 Gen.; sufferyng euyll, Bisa. (which 
 also connects dveé. with ἐν mp.); for- 
 bearing, Rry. 
 
 25. Disciplining] See notes on 1 
 Tim, i. 20, and Tit. ii. 12; correcting, 
 Rev.: instructing, AurH., Gen., BisH. 
 (so Conyb.), is not strong enough. 
 May give] So Rev.: will give, Αὐτὴ. 
 and the other Vv. except Wict., 
 RuEM., gyue. To come to, 
 &e.] To the acknowledging of, AUTH. ; 
 
 for to knowe, Wicu., Tynp., Cov., 
 
Crare itso TTT. Ὁ. 
 
 249 
 
 venture may give them repentance to come to the know- 
 ledge of the truth; and that they may return to soberness 26 
 out of the snare of the devil, though holden captive by 
 
 him, to do His will. 
 
 But know this, that in the last days grievous timesIII. 
 
 shall ensue. 
 
 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, 2 
 
 lovers of money, boasters, haughty, blasphemers, diso- 
 bedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural 3 
 affection, implacable, slanderers, incontinent, savage, haters 
 
 Cran.; to knowe, Coy. Test., Ruem. ; 
 that they may knowe, GxEN.; to the 
 knowledge of, Bisu., Rey. (unto). It 
 will be observed that there is a slight 
 fluctuation in our translation of ézi- 
 7yvwots. In some passages the con- 
 text renders it desirable to express 
 more ‘fully the compound form (see 
 notes on Eph. i. 17); in other cases 
 (like the present) it seems to transpire 
 with sufficient clearness, and may be 
 left to be inferred by the reader. The 
 truth really is that ‘knowledge’ alone 
 is too weak, ‘full knowledge’ rather 
 too strong, and between these there 
 seems to be no intermediate term. 
 26. Return to soberness] Recover 
 themselves, AurH., Ruem., Rery.; rise 
 agen, Wict.; come to them selves 
 agayne, TyND., Cran., BisH.; turne 
 agayne, Coy.; repent, Coy. Test. ; 
 come to amendment, GEN. 
 Though holden captive by him] Some- 
 what sim. Cran., Bisu., which are 
 holden captiue of hym (h. in preson of, 
 Coy.); who are taken captive by him, 
 Avuru., Rey. (having been...by the 
 Lord’s servant); of whom thei ben 
 holden caytifes, Wicu., and similarly 
 Coy. Test., Ruzm.; which are now 
 taken of him, Tynp., GEN. (om. now). 
 Perhaps the slight modification in 
 the translation of the part., and the 
 attempt to express the tense, may 
 help to clear up this obscure passage. 
 
 To do His will] At his will, Αὐτη. 
 and the other Vy. except Cov. Test., 
 after hys wyll; Rey., unto the will of 
 God. 
 
 Cuarter III. τ, But know this] 
 
 So Rey., and similarly, but this shalt 
 thou knowe, Cov.; but be sure of thys, 
 Coy. Test.: this know also, AuTH., 
 Gen., Bisu.; this vnderstonde, Tynp.; 
 thys knowe, Cran.; and this knovv 
 thou, Ruem. 
 Grievous] So Rry.: perilous, AurH, 
 and all the Vv. The translation 
 ‘times’ (καιροὶ) is defensible; see 
 notes on τ Tim. iv. 1. Ensue} 
 Stande nyg, Wicu.; be at hande, 
 Bisu.; approche, Ruem. ; come, AuTH. 
 and remaining Vv. 
 
 2. Lovers of money] So Rev.; 
 
 comp. AuTH, in 1 Tim. vi, 10: covet- 
 ous, AuTH. and all Vy. 
 Haughty] So Rry.: proud, AurH. and 
 all the Vv. The term ὑπερήφανοι, 
 coupled with the climactic character 
 of the context, seems to mark not 
 only pride, but the ‘strong mixture of 
 contempt for others’ which is in- 
 volved in ‘haughty;’? see Crabb, 
 Synon, p. 54. 
 
 3. Implacable] So Rey.: truce 
 breakers, AutH. and the other Vv. 
 except Wicu., Cov. Test., Ruem., 
 with outen pees. Slanderers] 
 So Rey., and Aurn, in 1 Tim. iii, 11: 
 
250 
 
 2 TIMOTHY. 
 
 4 of good, traitors, heady, besotted with pride, lovers of 
 5 pleasures more than lovers of God; having an outward 
 form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from 
 6 these turn away. For of these are they which creep into 
 houses, and lead captive silly women, laden with sins, led 
 
 oo “IT 
 
 away with divers lusts, ever learning, and yet never able 
 to come to full knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes 
 
 and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also withstand 
 the truth: men corrupted in their mind, reprobate con- 
 g cerning the faith. Howbeit they shall not make further 
 advance ; for their folly shall be fully manifest to all men, 
 
 as theirs also was. 
 
 10 But thou wert a follower of My doctrine, manner of life, 
 
 false accusers, AutH. and the other 
 Vv. except Wict., false blamers; Cov. 
 Test., RuEM., accusers. 
 
 Savage] Fierce, Auru. and the other 
 Vv. except Wicu., vnmylde; Cov. 
 Test., Ruwm., vnmercifull. 
 
 Haters of good| Despisers of those that 
 are good, Aurn. and the other Vy. 
 (them which) except Wicu., Ruem., 
 with outen benyngnyte; Cov. Test., 
 without kindnesse ; Rev., no lovers of 
 good. 
 
 4. Besotted with pride] High- 
 minded, AurH, and the other Vy. 
 except Wicr., bolne (with proude 
 thougtis); Cov. Test., Ruem., Rev., 
 puft vp; see notes on τ Tim. iii. 6. 
 
 5. Outward form] Form, Avurn., 
 Bisu., Rev.; lickenesse, Wicu.; simi- 
 litude, Tynp., Cran.; shyne, Cov. 
 (both); shewe, GEN.; appearance, 
 Ruem, These] So Wict., 
 Bisu., Ruem., Rey. : such, Auru. and 
 the other Vy. 
 
 6. Of these] So Wricu., Ruem., 
 tnv.: of them, Cov. Test.; these, Bisu.; 
 of this sort, Aur. and remaining 
 Vv. 
 
 7. Yet never] Never, AutH, and 
 all the other Vy. Full know- 
 ledge] The knowledge, Avurn. and all 
 
 Vy. (the kunnynge, Wicu.). Here 
 the antithesis seems to suggest the 
 stronger translation of ἐπίγνωσις ; see 
 above, notes on ch. ii. 25 (Transl.). 
 
 8. Withstand] So Rey.: resist, 
 Aur. and the other Vy. except Wict., 
 agenstonden. Corrupted, &e.] 
 Sim. Rev. : corrupte in soule, WIct. ; 
 corrupte of mynde, Coy. Test.; cor- 
 rupted in minde, Ruem.; of corrupt 
 minds, AutH. and remaining Vv. 
 
 9. Howbeit] But, Auru., Rev. 
 Not make, &c.] Proceed no further, 
 Αὐτη., Rey.; not profite, Wict.; 
 farther...not profyt, Cov. Test. ; 
 prosper no further, Ruem.: prevayle 
 no lenger, Tynp. and remaining Vv. 
 Fully manifest] Knowen, Wrcu.; 
 uttered, Tynp., CRAN.; euident, GEN., 
 Rey.; manifest, AvrH. and remaining 
 Vv. 
 
 10. Wert a follower of} Sim., hast 
 been a diligent follower of, Auru. 
 Marg.: *hast fully known, Avru., 
 Gren.; hast geten, Wicu.; hast sene the 
 experience of, Txnp., Coy., Cran. ; 
 hast attayned vnto, Coy. Test., Roem, 
 (to); hast folowed, Bisu. ; didst follow, 
 Rey. Love] So all the Vv. 
 except AurH., charity: see notes on 
 1 Tim. i, 5 (Transl.). 
 
Cuap, IIT, --τό. 
 
 purpose, faith, long-suffering, love, patience, persecutions, 
 sufferings,—such sufferings as happened to me at Antioch, 
 at Iconium, at Lystra; such persecutions as I endured: 
 and yet out of them all the Lord delivered me. Yea, and 
 all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer perse- 
 cution, But evil men and impostors shall make advance 
 toward the worse, deceiving and being deceived. But 
 thou, continue in the things which thou learnedst and 
 wert assured of, knowing of whom thou didst learn them; 
 and that from a very child thou knowest the holy scrip- 
 tures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation 
 
 251 
 
 ICU 
 
 15 
 
 through faith which is in Christ Jesus, 
 
 Every scripture 16 
 
 inspired by God is also profitable for doctrine, for reproof, 
 
 11. Sufferings] So Cov. Test., Rev.: 
 
 afflictions, AurH. and the other Vv. 
 except Wicu., RueM., passiouns. 
 Such sufferings, ὅσο. 1 Similarly, sueh 
 as happened vnto me, Coy. Test.: 
 which came unto me, ΑΥΤΗ., GEN., 
 BisH.; what maner ben made to me, 
 Wicu.; vvhat maner of things vvere 
 done to me, Rurm. ; which happened 
 wnto me, TynD., Cov., Cran.; what 
 things befell me, Rry. 
 Such persecutions as] What persecu- 
 tions, Autu., Rev.; what maner of 
 pers., Wicu. (om. of), Cov. Test., 
 Ruem.; which persec., Tynp. and 
 remaining Vv. And yet] But, 
 Αὐτη., GEN.; and, Wict. and all 
 other Vv. 
 
 13. Impostors] So Rrv.: seducers, 
 AutuH., Ruem.; deceyuours, Wicu. and 
 remaining Vy. ‘Deceivers’ is appy. 
 the most satisfactory transl. (see 
 notes), but some change seems re- 
 quired on account of πλανῶντες καὶ 
 πλανώμ. following. Tynp., Cov., 
 Cran., GEn., BisH., retain ‘deceive’ 
 in both eases, Make advance, 
 &e.] Wax worse and worse, AuTH. and 
 the other Vy. except Wict., projite 
 into worse; RuemM., prosper to the 
 vvorse, 
 
 14. Thou, continue] So Ruem.: 
 dwelle thou, Wicu.; abide thou, Rrv.; 
 continue thou, AutH, and the other 
 Vv. Learnedst] Hast 
 learned, AutTH, and all the other Vv. 
 Wert assured of | Hast been asswred 
 of, AurH., Rrv.; ben bitaken to thee, 
 Wict.; were committed vnto thee, 
 Tynp., Cov., Cran., BisH.; are comm. 
 vento the, Cov. Test., RHEM. (to); art 
 persuaded thereof, GEN. 
 
 Didst learn] Hast learned, AvtTH. 
 and all Vy. 
 
 15. From a very child] From a 
 child, AurH.; fro thi youthe, Wict., 
 Coy. Test.; of a chylde, Tynp., Cov., 
 Cran., GEN.; from an infant, Bisu. ; 
 from thine infancie, Ruxzm.; from a 
 babe, Rry. Knowest] 
 Hast known, Auta. and all Vv. 
 
 16. Every scripture] So Rev.: 
 all Scripture, Aur. and all Vv. ex- 
 cept GEN., the whole Scr. 
 
 Inspired by God is] Sim., of God 
 enspirit is, Wicu.; inspired of God, 
 is, Rurm., Rev.: is given by inspira- 
 tion of God and is, AuTH., GEN., 
 Bisu.; geven by insp. of god, is, 
 Tynp., Cov. (both), Cran. 
 
 For discipline, &c.] Sim., to in- 
 struction which is in, Bisu., Rev. 
 
252 
 
 » TIMOTHY. 
 
 for correction, for discipline which is in righteousness; 
 17 that the man of God may be complete, completely fur- 
 
 nished unto all good works. 
 I solemnly charge thee before God, and Christ Jesus, 
 
 TV. 
 
 who shall hereafter judge the quick and the dead, and by 
 2 His appearing and by His kingdom ; preach the word; be 
 attentive in season, out of season; confute, rebuke, exhort, 
 
 3 with all longsuffering and teaching. 
 
 For the time will 
 
 come when they shall not endure the sound doctrine ; but 
 after their own lusts theyshall heap to themselves teachers, 
 4 having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears 
 from the truth, and shall turn themselves aside unto 
 
 (for instr.): for instr. in, AuTH.; for 
 to lerne in, Wicu.; to enfourme in, 
 Cov. Test.; to instruct in, Tynp. and 
 remaining Vv. 
 
 17. Complete] So Rey.: perfect, 
 Auta. and all the other Vv. except 
 GeEn., absolute. Completely] 
 So Rev.:; throughly, AuTH. 
 
 Cuarter IV. 1. Solemnly charge 
 thee] Charge thee, AurH., GEN., 
 Rev.; witnesse, Wict.; testifie, TyNp. 
 and remaining Vy.; comp. notes on 
 1 Tim. v. 21 (Lransl.). 
 
 Thee] Αὐτη. adds *therefore. 
 Christ Jesus] *The Lord Jesus 
 Christ, AurH. Shall 
 hereafter judge] Shall judge, Auru. 
 and the other Vy. except Wict., is 
 to demyng (‘judicaturus est,’ Vulg.); 
 and Cov., shal come to iudge: which 
 last appy. endeavours thus to dis- 
 tinguish between μέλλοντος and a 
 common future, And by 
 His (1)] *At his, Aurn. And 
 by His (2)] And his, Aurn. 
 
 2. Be attentive] Be instant, Autu., 
 Gen., Bisu., Rey., sim. vrge, RHEM.: 
 be thou bisie, Wicu.; be fervent, Tynp., 
 Cov., Cran.; be earnest, Cov. Test. 
 Confute] Reprove, Auru., Cov. Test., 
 Ruem., Rev.; argue (or proue), W1cL.; 
 
 improve, Tynp. and the remaining 
 Vv. Teaching] So 
 Rey.: doctrine, AuTH. and all Vy.; 
 see notes, 
 
 3. Shall not] So Wrct., Cov. 
 (both), Cran., Bisu.: will not, AuTH. 
 and remaining Vy. 
 
 It seems desirable to preserve ‘shall’ 
 throughout ver. 3 and 4, as there is 
 no apparent reason for the change. 
 We now should probably use ‘ will’ 
 throughout; the ‘usus ethicus’ how- 
 ever, which is said to limit the pre- 
 dictive ‘ shall’ to the first person, was 
 unknown to our Translators; comp. 
 Latham, Engl. Lang. § 521 (ed. 4). 
 
 The sound] So Rev.: sound, AurH. 
 
 They shall (2)] So Wicu.: shal, GEn.; 
 they vvil, Ruem.; shall they, AUTH., 
 following Tynp, and the remaining 
 Vy., which however all change the 
 order of the Greek, giving, shall they 
 (whose eares ytche) gett them an heepe 
 of teachers, and thus the other inyer- 
 sion becomes natural. Sim., as to 
 order, Rey., having itching ears will. 
 
 4. Turn themselves aside] Be turned, 
 Auru., Cran., Bisu.; be turnyde to 
 gedir, Wict.; be geven, ΤΎΝΡ., Coy. 
 (both), Grn.; be conuerted, Rurm.; 
 turn aside, Rey. 
 
CHap, ΠΗ ΤΥ, rt. 
 
 fables. 
 tions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfil thy ministry. 
 For = am already being poured out, and the time of my 
 departure is at hand. I have striven the good strife, I 
 have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Hence- 
 forth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, 
 which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me in 
 that day; and not to me only, but to all them also that 
 love His appearing. 
 
 Use diligence to come shortly unto me: for Demas hath 
 forsaken me from love of the present world, and is gone 
 unto Thessalonica; Crescens unto Galatia, Titus unto Dal- 
 matia, Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him 
 
 253 
 
 But do THOU be sober in all things, suffer afflic- 5 
 
 6 
 7, 
 ὃ 
 
 Io 
 
 Dy 
 
 5. Do thou be sober] Sim. Rev.: 
 
 watch thou, AutH. and the other Vv. 
 except Wicu., wake thou; Rurm., be 
 thou vigilant. Suffer] 
 So Tynp., Cov., Cran., Gren., Bisu., 
 Rey.: endure, AuTH. 
 Fuljil] So Wicu., Cov. Test., Bisu., 
 Ruem., Rev., and AvutH. Marg.; 
 make full proof of, Auru.; fulfill... 
 wnto the vtmost, Tynp., Coy., CRAN.; 
 make,.,fully knowen, GEN. 
 
 6. Already being, &c.] Sacrifiede 
 nowe, WicL.; euen novv be sacrificed, 
 Ruem.; already being offered, Rxv.; 
 now ready to be offered, AurH. and 
 remaining Vy. 
 
 7. Striven the good strife] So 
 Wict. (a good): fought a good fight, 
 AutH., Rey. (the), and all the other 
 Vvy.; comp. notes on 1 Tim. vi. 12 
 (Transl.). 
 
 8. The crown] So Gen., Rev.: 
 acr., AurH. and all other Vv. 
 In] So Wict., Cov. (both), Rurm.: 
 at, AuTH. and the remaining Vy. 
 All] Omitted by Aurn. ed. 1611, 
 and by Wicu., Cov. Test., Bisu., 
 Ruem., following the Vulg. 
 
 9. . Use diligence] Do thy dili- 
 gence, AptH., Cran., ΒΙΒΗ., ReEv.; 
 
 hiye, Wict.; make spede, Tynp., 
 Cov., GuN.; make hayst, Cov. Test., 
 RuEM. 
 
 10. From love of] Having loved, 
 
 AutH., Bisx.; lowyng, Wuicu., Coy. 
 Test., Raem.; and hath loved, TYND.; 
 and loueth, Cov., Cran.; and hathe 
 embraced, GEN. The present] 
 This, Wicu., Coy. Test., Ruum.: this 
 present, AurH. and remaining Vy. 
 Is gone] So Coy. Test., Ruem.: wente, 
 Wictu., Rey.; is departed, AurH. and 
 remaining Vy. On reconsideration 
 it would seem that the purely aoristic 
 translations ‘forsook.,.went’ (ed. 1) 
 throw the events too far backward 
 into the past. As the desertion ap- 
 pears to have been recent, our idiom 
 seems here to require the use of the 
 auxiliaries. In verse 16 the case is 
 different: there the epoch is defined 
 in the context. Unto Galatia] 
 To G., AUTH. 
 
 11. Serviceable] See notes on ch. 
 li. 21 (Transl.); necessary, ΤΎΝΡ. ; 
 useful, Ruv.; profitable, Auto. and 
 remaining Vv. 
 
 For ministering] So Rrv.; sim., for 
 to minister, Tynp., GEN. (om. for): 
 for the ministry, Auru., RuEm. ; into 
 
17 
 
 2 TIMOTHY. 
 
 with thee: for he is serviceable to me for ministering. But 
 Tychicus I sent to Ephesus. The cloak that I left at 
 Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and 
 the books, especially the parchments, Alexander the 
 coppersmith shewed me much ill-treatment: the Lord 
 shall reward him according to his works. Of whom be 
 thou ware also; for he greatly withstood our words. 
 
 At my first answer no man stood forward with me, but 
 all men forsook me: may it not be laid to their charge. 
 But the Lord stood by me, and gave me inward strength ; 
 that by me the preaching might be fulfilled, and that all 
 the Gentiles might hear: and I was delivered out of the 
 
 seruyce, WicL.; to the mynistracion, 
 Cov. ; for the m., Cran., Bisu. ; in the 
 m., Cov. Test. 
 
 12. But] So Ruem., Rev.: omitted 
 by Cov. (both); and, Aur. and re- 
 maining Vv. JI sent] So Rev.: have 
 1 sent, Aurn. and all the other Vy. 
 (I haue, Ruem.), τοι, omits this 
 verse, 
 
 13. And the books] These words 
 are omitted by Auru. ed. τότε. 
 Especially] So Rurem., Rev.: but 
 especially, AurH. and all the remain- 
 ing Vv. except Wick. (moste forsothe). 
 
 14- Shewed me] So Wict. (to me), 
 
 Bisu.: hath shevved me, RuEm. ; hath 
 done me, Coy. Test., Grn.; did me, 
 Aura. and remaining Vy. 
 Much ill-treatment] Many euyl thingis 
 Wict.; much evil, Αὐτὴ. and all 
 other Vv. Shall reward} 
 *Reward, AuTH. 
 
 15. Greatly] Hath greatly, AuTH., 
 Cran., Bisu., Ruem.; dyd greatly, 
 Cov. Test.; the rest omit the auxi- 
 liary. 
 
 16. Stood forward with] Stood with, 
 AvutH.; was to, Wich.; vvas with, 
 Ruem.; stood forward, Rev.; as- 
 sissted, Tynp. and remaining Vv. 
 (dyd,..ass., Cov. Test.),—by nomeans 
 an inappropriate transl. 
 
 May it not be] So Revy., and sim., be 
 it not, Wicu., Ruem.: I pray God 
 that it may not be, Aur. and the 
 remaining Vv. [it be not, Cov. (both)]. 
 17. But] So Cov. Test., Ruem., 
 Rev.: fforsothe, Wicu.; notwithstand- 
 ing, AuTH. and the remaining Vv. 
 The transl. of these latter Vv. is 
 perhaps slightly too strong for the 
 simple δέ. Stood by 
 me] So Cov. (both), Rry.: stood with 
 me, AutH.; stoode to me, Ruem.; 
 stode nyg to me, Wict.; assisted 
 me, Tynp. and remaining Vy. 
 Gave me inward str.] As in τ Tim. 
 i, 12: strengthened me, AuTH. and the 
 other Vy. except Wicu., Cov. Test., 
 comfortide me. Fulfilled] 
 (As in ver. 5) So Wicr., Cov. Test. ; 
 fulf. tothe vtmost, Tynp., Cov., Cran., 
 Bisu.: fully known, Autu., GEN.; 
 accomplished, Rue. ; fuliy proclaim- 
 ed, Rey. As Autn, and all the Vv. 
 have ‘by’ in connexion with this 
 verb, and as this prep. appears for- 
 merly (as indeed not uncommonly at 
 present) to have been used as equiva- 
 lent to ‘ by means of,’ no change has 
 been made. The lion’s mouth] 
 So Coy. Test.: the mouth of the Lion, 
 Avr. and all the other Vv. (om. 
 first the, Wicu.); see notes. 
 
{τὸ 55 25 
 
 lion’s mouth. 
 
 Or 
 
 The Lord shall deliver me from every evil 18 
 
 work, and shall save me uuto His heavenly kingdom: to 
 
 whom be glory for ever and ever. 
 
 Amen. 
 
 Salute Prisca and Aquila, and the household of One- 19 
 
 siphorus. 
 I left sick at Miletus. 
 winter. 
 
 Erastus remained at Corinth: but Trophimus 20 
 Use diligence to come before 21 
 Eubulus greeteth thee, and Pudens, and Linus, 
 
 and Claudia, and all the brethren. The Lord Jesus Christ 22 
 
 be with thy spirit. 
 
 18 The Lord] *And the Lord, 
 AUTH. Shall save me unto} 
 Sim., schal make saaf into, Wict.; 
 will save me unto, Rev. : will preserve 
 me unto, AutH., Grn., BisH.; shall 
 kepe me vnto, Tynp., Cov. (both), 
 Cran.; vvil saue me vnto, Ruem. 
 Perhaps the very pregnant expres- 
 sion σώζειν εἰς may admit of this 
 literal translation. 
 
 20. Remained] SoRuem. and Cov. 
 Test. (ἀγα rem.): dwellide, Wict.; 
 
 Grace be with you. 
 
 abode, AurH. and remaining Vv. 
 
 I left, &e.] Have I left at M. sick, 
 AUTH. Miletus] So Coy. Test., 
 Rev., and AutH. in Acts xx. 15, 17: 
 mylite, Wict.; Miletum, Auru. and 
 remaining Vv. 
 
 21. Use diligence] Do thy dil., 
 AuTH., CRAN., BisH.; hiye, WICL. ; 
 make spede, Tynv., Cov., Gun.; make 
 haist, Cov. Test., Roem. 
 
 22. AurTH. adds *Amen. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO TITUS. 
 
 ib AUL, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, 
 for the faith of God’s elect and the full knowledge of 
 
 2 the truth which leadeth unto godliness; upon the hope of 
 eternal life, which God that cannot lie promised before 
 
 3 eternal times, but made manifest in His own seasons His 
 word in the preaching with which I was entrusted ac- 
 4 cording to the commandment of our Saviour, God; to 
 
 Titus, my true child after the common faith. 
 
 Grace and 
 
 peace from God the father and Christ Jesus our Saviour. 
 
 CuaprerlI, 1. For] Similarly, to 
 preache, Txnp., Cov.: according to, 
 Avuru, and remaining Vy. except 
 Wict., aftir. Full knowledge] 
 Acknowledging, AutTH.; knowynge, 
 Wict. ; knowledge, Tynp. and remain- 
 ing Vv. Leadeth unto] 
 So Cov.: is according to, Cov. Test., 
 Gen., Ruem., Rev. ; ts after, AuTH. 
 and remaining Vy. 
 
 2. Upon the] So Tynp., Cov.: in, 
 
 Autu., Wicu., Rev.; in y*, Cran., 
 Bisu.; to the, Coy. Test.; into the, 
 Ruem. ; under the, GEN. 
 Eternal times] Sim. Rey., times 
 eternal: worldely tymes, Wicu. ; the 
 times of the worlde, Coy. (both) ; the 
 secular times, Ruem.; the world be- 
 gan, Aurn. and remaining Vv. 
 
 3. Made manifest] Sim., hathe 
 made,..manifest, Gen., Bisu.: hath... 
 manifested, Avuru., Ruem., Rey. 
 (omits hath) ; schewide, Wicu. ; hath 
 ...8h., Cov, Test.; hath opened, Trnv. 
 and remaining Vv. 
 
 His own seasons] So Rey., and sim., 
 hys seasons, Coy. Test.: due times, 
 
 AutH., GEN. (tyme), Rueum.; his 
 tymes, Wicu., Cov. (tyme); the tyme 
 apoynted, Txnp,, Cran,, BisH, 
 
 In (2)] So Wret., Raem., Rey. : 
 through, AurH. and the remaining 
 Vy. except Cov. Test., by. 
 
 The preaching] So Grn.: AuTH. and 
 all other Vy. except Rev. omit the 
 article. With which, ἄς. 
 Very sim. Rey. (wherewith): which 
 is committed unto me, AuTH. and the 
 other Vv. (which preachynge, TYND. ; 
 to me, Rue.) except Wicu., that is 
 bitaken to me. 
 
 Our Saviour, God] So Wict., Ruem.: 
 God our Saviour, AurH. and the re- 
 maining Vy. ; see notes on ch. iii. 4 
 (Transl.). 
 
 4. My true child] So Rev. : mine 
 own son, AuTH. ; bilouede sone, Δ τοι, ; 
 his naturall s., Tynp., Cran.; my 
 naturall s., Cov., GEN. ; my deare s., 
 Coy. Test.; a natural s., BisH.; my 
 beloued s., RueM.: see notes and reff. 
 on τ Tim, i. 2 (Transl.). Grace] 
 Aur. adds * mercy. Christ Jesus] 
 *The Lord J. C., AuTH. 
 
Cusp, ΤΠ 19. 
 
 257 
 
 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou should- 5 
 est further set in order the things that are wanting, and 
 ordain elders in every city, as I gave thee directions ; if 6 
 any be under no charge, a husband of one wife, having 
 BELIEVING children, not accused of dissoluteness, or un- 
 ruly. For a bishop must be blameless, as being God’s 7 
 steward; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not fierce over 
 wine, no striker, not greedy of base gain; but a lover of 8 
 hospitality, a lover of goodness, soberminded, righteous, 
 holy, temperate: holding fast the faithful word according 9 
 to the teaching, that he may be able both to exhort by 
 the sound doctrine and to refute the gainsayers. 
 
 5. Further set, &c.] Set in order, 
 
 Autu., Rrev.; amende, Wict.; per- 
 forme, Trnpv., Cov. ; refourme, Cran., 
 Bisu., Ruem.; redresse, Cov. Test. ; 
 continue to redresse, GEN. 
 Gave thee dir.] Had appointed thee, 
 Auru., Cran., Brisu.; disposide to 
 thee, Wict.; apoynted the, Tynp., 
 Cov., GEN., Ruem.; haue ap. the, 
 Cov. Test.; gave thee charge, Rrv. 
 
 6. Under no charge] Blameless, 
 
 AutH., Cov., CRan., BisH., Rev. ; 
 with outen cryme or greet gilte, WIcu.; 
 vvithout crime, Ruem. ; fautelesse, 
 TynpD.; without blame, Coy. Test.; 
 vnreproucable, GEN. 
 A husband] The husband, AutH. and 
 all the other Vv. except Wicu. (omits 
 a or the). Believing] Sim. 
 Rev. that believe: faithful, AutH. and 
 all the Vv. Dissoluteness] 
 Riot, Aut. and all the other Vv. ex- 
 cept Wict., leccherie. 
 
 7. A bishop] So Auru.,and all the 
 Vy. except Rey., the bishop. 
 
 As being, &¢.] Sim., as it be commeth 
 the minister of God, Txnv.; as dis- 
 pendour of god, Wicu.; as Gods 
 stewarde, Gun., Rev.; as the steward 
 of God, AutH. and the other Vv. 
 
 Not fierce over wine] Not given to wine, 
 AutH., GeEn., BisH., RuEemM.; not 
 vynolent (that is myche gouen to wiin), 
 
 x 
 
 Wict.; no dronkarde, Tynp.; not 
 geuen vnto moch wyne, Cov., Cov. 
 Test. (to), Cran. (to); no brawler, 
 Rev. Greedy, &c.] 
 Coueytouse of foul wynnynge, του, ; 
 gredye of filthye lucre, Coy. (both), 
 Rev.; couetous of f. l., RumMm.; given 
 to filthy lucre, AutH. and remaining 
 Vv. 
 
 8. Goodness] SoTynp., Cov., Cran., 
 
 GeEN., BisH., and sim. Rery., good; 
 good men, AuTH. 
 Soberminded] So Tyrnp., Cov., Rev. : 
 sober, AutH. and the remaining Vv. 
 except GEN., wise. Righteous} 
 So all Vv. except Auru., WIct., 
 Ruem., Rev., just: ‘righteous’ is 
 adopted by AuTH. in 1 Tim. i. 9, 
 2 Tim. iy, 8. 
 
 9. According to, &c.] So Rxy., and 
 similarly, acc. to doctrine, GEN. ; 
 whych is ace. to doctr., Cov. Test., 
 Biso., Raem,; that is vp doctr., 
 Wictu.: as he hath been taught, AuTH. ; 
 of doctryne, Tynp., Cov., Cran, 
 Both...and| So Autu., Bisu., Rev.: 
 also...and, Cran., Gren.; the remain- 
 ing Vv. omit the first καὶ in transla- 
 tion. Both to exhort by the, 
 ἄς. By sound doctrine, both to ex- 
 hort, and to, &c., AuTH.; both to ex- 
 hort in the sound doctrine, Rry. 
 Refute] Convince, AuTH.; reproue, 
 
 5 
 
258 
 
 TITUS. 
 
 10 For there are many unruly vain talkers and inward 
 11 deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: whose 
 mouths must be stopped, seeing they overthrow whole 
 houses, teaching things which they should not, for the 
 
 12 sake of base gain. 
 
 One of themselves, even a prophet 
 
 of their own, said, The Cretans are alway liars, evil 
 
 13 beasts, slothful bellies. 
 
 This witness is true. 
 
 For which 
 
 cause refute them sharply, in order that they may be 
 14 sound in the faith; not giving heed to Jewish fables and 
 commandments of men that turn themselves away from 
 
 the truth. 
 
 Wicu., Rurm.; convict, Rev. ; im- 
 prove, Tynp. and remaining Vv. 
 
 to. Unruly] Αὐτη., and all Vv. 
 except Cov. Test. and Ruem. (add 
 and), and Rev. (adds men); comp. 
 however Scholef. Hints, p. 125. 
 Vain talkers] So Auru., GEN., Brsu., 
 Rev.; talkers of vanite, Tynp., Cov., 
 Cran.: veyne spekers, Wicu., Ruem.; 
 v. tanglers, Cov. Test. ‘Vain bab- 
 blers’ would have been more in 
 conformity with the translation of 
 1 Tim. i. 6, but a change is searcely 
 necessary. Inward de- 
 ceivers] Similarly, Tynp., Coy., Cran., 
 Gen., Bisu., disceavers of myndes: 
 deceivers, Auru., Wicu., Cov. Test., 
 Rey.; seducers, Ruem. 
 
 11, Seeing they) The whiche, 
 Wicu.: who, Aur. and sim. all other 
 Vv. Overthrow] So 
 Rev.; pervert, Tynp., Cov., Cran. : 
 subvert, Aura. and the remaining 
 Vy. It seems desirable to preserve 
 the more exact translation of οἵτινες, 
 and the simpler transl. of dvarpé- 
 movow adopted by AurH. in 2 Tim. 
 ii, 18. They should 
 not] They ought not, Aura. and all 
 the Vv. except Wicw., it bihoueth 
 not. For the sake, &e.] 
 For filthy lucre’s sake, Autu., GEN., 
 Bisu. (luere), Rev.; for grace of foul 
 wynnynge, Wich.; because of filthy 
 
 lucre, Tynp., Cov. (both), Cran.; for 
 f. l., Raem. 
 
 12. Cretans] Cretians, AuTH, 
 Slothful] So Ruem.: slow, Auta, and 
 all the remaining Vv. ; 
 
 13. For which cause] So Rey., 
 and similarly, for what c., Wuct.; 
 for the vvhich c., Ruem.: wherefore, 
 Aut. and the remaining Vy. 
 Refute] Rebuke, AurH. and all the 
 other Vy. except Wict., blame; Rev., 
 reprove. In order that] 
 That, AurH. and all the other Vv. 
 
 14. That turn themselves away 
 from] Similarly, which turne them 
 awaye from, Coy.; turnynge hem 
 aweye fro, Wict.; auerting them selues 
 from, Ruem.: that turn from, AUTH., 
 Tynp., GEN.; that turne awaye, CRAN.; 
 who turn away from, Rey. The 
 translation, owing to the absence of 
 the article, is not critically exact 
 (see notes); a second participle how- 
 ever, as in Coy. Test., BisH., turnyng 
 from, and Wict., Ruem. (see aboye), 
 is here so awkward, that in this par- 
 ticular case we may perhaps aequi- 
 esce in the insertion of the relative. 
 If there be any truth in the distine- 
 tion between ‘that’ and ‘which’ 
 alluded to in the notes on Eph. i. 23 
 (Zransl.), the substitution of ‘who’ 
 (Conyb.) for ‘that’ is far from an 
 improvement. 
 
Cuap..I. 1το--- 1. 4. 
 
 259 
 
 For the pure all things are pure: but for them that 15 
 are defiled and unbelieving there is nothing pure; but 
 both their mind and their conscience have been defiled. 
 They profess that they know God; but in their works 16 
 they deny Him, being abominable, and disobedient, and 
 unto every good work reprobate. 
 
 But do THOU speak the things which become the II. 
 sound doctrine: that the aged men be sober, grave, dis- 2 
 
 creet, sound in faith, in love, in patience. 
 
 The aged 3 
 
 women likewise, that in demeanour they beseem holiness, 
 not being slanderers, not enslaved to much wine, teachers 
 of good things; that they may school the young women 4 
 
 15. Jor (bis)] Unto (bis), AurH. 
 and all the other Vv. (to [bis], Wict., 
 Ruem., Rey.; vnto...to, Cov.). 
 
 There 18] So Cov.: is, AurH. and the 
 remaining Vv. except Rey., nothing 
 is. Both...and] So Coy., 
 Ruem., Rev.: and...and, Wicu.; even 
 ...and, AurH. and the remaining Vy. 
 except Cov. Test. which omits the 
 first καί. Their con- 
 science] So Rrv.: Aura. and all the 
 other Vy. omit their, but the clause 
 is translated differently by Tynp., 
 even the very myndes and consciences 
 of them, and Cran., Bisu., euen the 
 mynde and conscience of them. 
 
 Have been] Is, Aurx., Coy., Cran., 
 Bisu.; be, Wict.; are, Tynp. and 
 remaining Vv. 
 
 16. Their works] So Ruem., Rrv.: 
 works, AurH., Grn., Bisu.; dedis, 
 Wicu.; the dedes, Tynv., Cov. (both), 
 CRAN, 
 
 Cuarter II. 1. Do thow speak] 
 So Ruem.: thou...sp., Wicu.; speak 
 thou, AurH. and all other Vv. 
 
 The sound] So Rev.: sound, Auru., 
 Ruem.; holsum (no art.), τοι. and 
 remaining Vy. 
 
 2. Discreet] So Tynp., Cov., Cran., 
 GEN.: temperate, AUTH.; prudent, 
 Wict.; wyse, Cov. Test., Ruzm:;; sober, 
 
 Bisu., giving watchyng for νηφαλίους. 
 The usual translation ‘soberminded’ 
 (so Rey.) would perhaps here tend to 
 imply a limitation of the preceding 
 νηφαλίους to ‘sober’ in the primary 
 sense, which the present context 
 does not seem to involve; contrast 
 1 Tim. iii. 2, and see notes on that 
 passage. Love] So all 
 Vy. except AurH., charity; see notes 
 on τ Tim. 1. 5 (Transl.). 
 
 3. That in demeanour, &c.] Sim. 
 
 Rey., be reverent in demeanour: that 
 they be in behaviour as becometh 
 holiness, AUTH. and sim. Grn., BisH. 
 (in suche beh.); in holy habite, Wict.; 
 that they be in soche rayment as be- 
 commeth h., Tynp., Cran.; that they 
 shewe them selues as it becommeth h., 
 Coy.; that they vse holy apparell, Cov. 
 Test.; in holy attire, Rue. 
 Not being] So Coy. Test., CRan.: not, 
 AUTH. Slanderers] 
 So Rey., and Auta, in τ Tim. iii. rr: 
 bacbiters (or seyinge false blame on 
 other men), Wicu.; il speakers, RHEM.; 
 false accusers, AuTH. and remaining 
 Vv. Enslaved] So 
 Rev.: seruynge, Wict.; given, AUTH. 
 and the other Vv. 
 
 4. School] Teach......to be sober, 
 AuruH.; teche prudence, Wicu.; make 
 .. sobremynded, Tynp., Cran., Bisu.; 
 
200 
 
 5 
 
 com! 
 
 Io 
 
 LLLUS, 
 
 to be loving to their husbands, loving to their children, 
 soberminded, chaste, workers at home, good, submitting 
 themselves to their own husbands, that the word of God 
 be not blasphemed. 
 
 The younger men likewise exhort to be soberminded. 
 In all respects shewing thyself a pattern of good works; 
 in thy doctrine shewing 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 of us. Lxhort bond-servants to submit themselves to 
 their own masters, in all things to be well pleasing to 
 them, not gainsaying, not purloining, but shewing forth 
 all good fidelity ; that they may adorn the doctrine of our 
 
 Saviour God in all things. 
 
 enfourme...to be sober mynded, Cov.; 
 instruct...to be sobre minded, GEN.; 
 teach vvisedom, Ruem.; train, Rey. 
 To be loving, ἄς | To love their hus- 
 bands, to love their children, Auru. 
 and sim. the other Vv. Change 
 made to preserve the sequence of 
 adjectives. 
 
 5. Sober-minded] So Rrv.: to be 
 
 discreet, AutH., Tynp., Cov., Cran., 
 Bisu.; thei prudent, Wicu.; to be 
 wyse, Coy. Test., Ramm. (om. to be); 
 that thei be discrete, Gun. 
 Workers at home] *IKeepers at home, 
 Aura. Submitting them- 
 selves] (So AurH. in Eph. v. 21) 
 Obedient, Auru. and all Vv. except 
 Wict., Gen., Ruem., suget; Rev. 
 being in subjection to. 
 
 6. The younger] So Rev.; young, 
 Aur. and all Vy. except Coy. (both), 
 the yonge. 
 
 7. In all respects] In all things, 
 Aura. and the other Vv. except 
 Tynp., Cov. (thinge), Gun., above all 
 thynges. Thy doctrine] 
 So Rey., and similarly, y* doctr., 
 Cran., Bisu.: doctrine, AuTH., RHEM. ; 
 
 techynge, Wicu.; learnynge, Cov. 
 
 Test. 
 adds * sincerity. 
 
 8. Discourse] Speech, AurH., Rrv.; 
 all the other Vv., word. A trans- 
 lation should be chosen which will 
 not limit λόγον too much to ‘speech’ 
 in private life: see notes. 
 
 Us] * You, AurH. 
 
 g. Bond-servants] As in Eph, vi. 
 5: servants, AutH. and all the other 
 Vv. Submit themselves] 
 As in ver. 5: be obedient, AuTH.; be 
 in subjection, Rry. 
 
 In all things, &e.] Sim. Rry.: and to 
 please them well in all things, AuTH., 
 and, omitting well, Cov. Test. (om. 
 and), CRrAN., GEN. (om. to), BisH.; in 
 alle thingis plesynge, Wicu., RHEM. ; 
 and to please in all thynges, Tynb., 
 Coy. (om, and). 
 
 Gainsaying] So Wict. (agens.), RHEM., 
 Rev., and AutH. Marg.: answering 
 again, Aur. and the other Vy. 
 
 to. Shewing forth] That they shewe, 
 Tynp., Cran., GEN.; to shewe, Cov. ; 
 shewing, Δύση. and remaining Vv. 
 Our Saviour God] So Tynp., Ruem.: 
 God our Saviour, AurH. and remain- 
 ing Vv. 
 
 Gravity] AurH. 
 
Cuap. ΕἸ. 5—IIT. 1. 261 
 
 For the grace of God hath appeared bringing salva- 11 
 tion to all men, disciplining us to the intent that having 12 
 denied ungodliness and worldly lusts we should live 
 
 soberly, righteously, and godly, in the present world; 
 
 ? 
 
 looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory 13 
 of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ; who gave 14 
 HIMSELF for us, that He might ransom us from all ini- 
 quity, and purify to Himself a peculiar people, zealous of 
 good works. These things speak, and exhort, and reprove 15 
 with all authority. Let no man despise thee. 
 
 Put them in mind to submit themselves to rulers,III. 
 to authorities; to be obedient, to be ready to every 
 
 11. Bringing] * That bringeth, AutH. 
 Salv. to all men] So Revy., Avr. 
 Marg., and (vnto) Tynp., Cov., Cran., 
 Gen., and similarly, as to connexion, 
 Bisu.: hath app. toallmen, στη. The 
 slight inversion of clauses in the text 
 ismade both to preserve the connexion 
 of σωτήριος with πᾶσιν ἀνθρ., and also 
 to leave ἐπεφάνη as much as possible 
 in the prominent position it occupies 
 in the original. 
 
 12. Disciplining|Teaching, AutH., 
 Wict., Cov. Test., Bisu.; and teach- 
 eth, Tynp., Cov., Cran., Grn.; in- 
 structing, Ruem., Rey. ‘Teaching 
 by discipline’ would be perhaps a 
 more easy translation (comp. 1 Tim. 
 1. 20); the verb however is occasion- 
 ally used absolutely (as here) by some 
 of our older writers, e.g. Shakspeare 
 and Milton. To the 
 intent, &e.] That denying, Avru., 
 Coy. Test., Bisu., Ruem.; that...for- 
 sakynge, Wicu.; that we shuld denye... 
 and, Tynp., Cov., Cran., GEN. 
 
 The present] This present, AutH. and 
 the other Vv. except Wict., Cov. 
 (both), Ruem., this. 
 
 13. The blessed] So Wicu., Cov. 
 Test., Gen., RoEm., Rey.: that blessed, 
 Aur. and the remaining Vy. 
 Appearing of, ἄς. So Coy., Cran., 
 
 Gen., Biso., Rev.; the comynge of 
 the glorie, Wicu., Cov. Test.; aduent 
 of the gl., Ruem.: the glorious ap- 
 pearing, AuTH., Tynp. (om. the). 
 It is noticeable that our older Vv. 
 (except Tynp.) have all avoided a 
 doubtful interpretation of the gen., 
 into which even accurate scholars 
 like Green (Gramm. p. 215) have al- 
 lowed themselves to be betrayed. 
 Our] So Rey.: the, AutH. and all Vv. 
 except Wict. which omits it. 
 And Saviour] So Rey.: and our S., 
 AurH., Wicu., Cov. Test., Buisx., 
 Ruem.; and of oure s., Tynp., Cov. 
 (but no preceding comma), CRan., 
 GEN. 
 
 14. Ransom] Redeem, Auru. and 
 the other Vv. except Wict., agen bie. 
 
 15. Reprove] So Rev.: rebuke, 
 Auru. and all Vy. except WICL., argue 
 (or proue). 
 
 CuaprerR III. 1. Submit themselves] 
 So Tynp., Coy., Cran.: be obediente, 
 Cov. Test.; be in subjection to, Rrv.; 
 be subject, AUTH. and remaining Vy. 
 To rulers, toauth.] So Rev.: to Prin- 
 cipalities *and Powers, AuTH., GEN. 
 (the Pr.); to prynces & powers, WIcL., 
 Coy. Test. (vnto); to rule and power, 
 Tynp., Cnray., Bisu., unto Prynces 
 
2602 
 
 TITUS: 
 
 2 good work, to speak evil of no man, to be averse to con- 
 tention, forbearing, shewing forth all meekness unto 
 
 3 all men, 
 
 For we WERE once ourselves also foolish, dis- 
 
 obedient, going astray, serving divers lusts and plea- 
 sures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one 
 
 another. 
 
 οι -ἩἙ- 
 
 But when the kindness and the love toward 
 man of our Saviour God appeared, not by works of righte- 
 
 ousness which WE did, but after His mercy He saved us, 
 by the laver of regeneration and renewing of the Holy 
 6 Ghost; which He poured out upon us richly through 
 7 Jesus Christ our Saviour; that being justified by His 
 
 and to the hyer auctorite, Cov.; to 
 Princes and Potestates, Ruzm. The 
 occasional use of the term ‘princi- 
 palities’ in Aurn. with reference to 
 orders of angels makes a change de- 
 sirable. Be obedient] 
 So Gen., Rey.: obey magistrates, 
 Avuru., BisH. 
 
 2. Averse to contention] No brawl- 
 ers, AutH.; not litigious (or ful of 
 chydynge), Wicu.; no fyghters, Tynp., 
 Cran., Gen., Bisu.; no stryuers, Cov. 
 (both); not...litigious, Roem. ; not to 
 be contentious, Rrv. 
 
 Forbearing] But gentle, AuTH., CRraAN., 
 Bisu., Rey. (omits but, and inserts to 
 be); but temperaunt (or pacient), WIcL.; 
 but softe, Tynv., Cov. (both), Gun. 
 Shewing forth] Asin 1 Tim.i. τύ, al.: 
 shewing, AurH. and all Vy. 
 
 3. Were once ourselves also] Our- 
 selves also were sometimes, AUTH. ; and 
 so, as to the position of ποτε in trans- 
 lation, all Vv. Going 
 astray] So Cov. Test.: errynge, Wict., 
 RueEm.; in erroure, Cov.; deceived, 
 Auru. and remaining Vy. 
 
 Hating] So all Vy. except AvurH., 
 Gen., and hating. 
 
 4. When] So Cov. Test., Gen., 
 Ruem., Rey.: after that, Aurn. and 
 remaining Vy. except Wicb. which 
 
 omits it. The love 
 toward man, ἄς. So, as to order, 
 Ruem.: love of God our Saviour to- 
 ward man, AuTH., GEN.; kindness of 
 God our Saviour, and his love toward 
 man, Rey. Our 
 Saviour God] So the other Vy. except 
 AurH., Wict., Cov., GeNn., Rev., God 
 our Saviour. 
 
 5. Did] So Wicu., Ryem., Rev. 
 
 and sim. Tynp., Cov., Cran., wrought: 
 have done, AutuH., Coy. Test.; had 
 done, GEN. After] So 
 Wicu., Cov.: of, Tynp.; according to, 
 AuvrH. and remaining Vy. 
 Laver] So Ruem.: washing, AuTH., 
 Grn., Rry.; waschynge (or baptym), 
 Wict. ; fountayne, Tynp. and remain- 
 ing Vv. The comma after παλινγεν. 
 of AutH., Tynp., Cov., Cran., GEN., 
 is not found in Wicu., Coy. Test., 
 Bisu., Ruem., Rev. 
 
 6. Poured out upon] So Rev.: 
 sched oute into, Wicu.; hath poured 
 
 forth vpon, Coy. Test., Rurm. (om. 
 forth); shed on, AurH. and the other 
 
 Vv. Richly] So 
 Bisu., Rev., Αὐτη. Marg.: plen- 
 teuously, Wicu.; plentyfully, Cov. 
 Test.; abundantly, Aur. and re- 
 maining Vv. 
 
rae ΠΣ τ΄ 
 
 263 
 
 grace, we should become heirs of eternal life, according 
 
 to hope. 
 
 Faithful is the saying, and about these things I desire 8 
 that thou make asseveration, to the intent that they which 
 have believed God may be careful to practise good works. 
 
 These things are good and profitable unto men. 
 
 But 9 
 
 avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and strifes, and 
 contentions about the law; for they are unprofitable and 
 
 vain. 
 
 A man that is an heretick, after a first and second 10 
 
 admonition, shun; knowing that he that is such is per- 11 
 verted, and sinneth being self-condemned. 
 
 7. Become] Be made, Autu., Rey. 
 Heirs of, &c.] So Typ. (thorowe h.), 
 Coy., Cov. Test. (ewerlastynge): heirs 
 according to the hope of et. l., AUTH., 
 Cran., Gren., Bisu., Ruv.; eyres aftir 
 hope of euerlastynge l., Wicu.; heires 
 acc. to hope of life euerl., RHEM, 
 
 8. Faithful is the saying] So Rev. : 
 this is a faithful saying, AuTH., BIsH. ; 
 a trewe worde, Wicu.; this is a true 
 sayinge, Tynp., Cov. (both), Cran., 
 Gen. (Cov. Test. adds, it is a fayth- 
 full worde) ; it is a 7. saying, Rue. 
 About these] Of th., Wict. and all the 
 other Vv. except AurH., GEn., these; 
 concerning these, Rry. 
 
 Desire] Wolde, Tynp., Coy. (both): 
 will, AuTH. and remaining Vv. 
 Make asseveration] Affirm constantly, 
 AvutTH.; conferme other men, WIctL.; 
 certifie, Tynp., CRAN.; speake ear- 
 mestly, Cov.; strengthen them, Cov. 
 Test.; affirme, Gun.; confirme, Brsu. ; 
 auouch earnestly, RuEM.; affirm con- 
 jidently, Rry. To the 
 intent that] Sim. Rev., to the end 
 that: that, AuTH. and all the remain- 
 ing Vy.: the addition in the text 
 seems necessary to obviate miscon- 
 ception of the meaning. 
 
 God] So Wict. (to g.), Tynp., Rev. : 
 in God, Auru. and remaining Vv. 
 May] So Rey.: might, AuTH. 
 
 Practise] Maintain, Autu., Rrvy.; be 
 bifore in, Wicu.; go forwarde in, 
 Tynp., Cran.; excell in, Cov. (both), 
 RueEm. ; shewe forthe, GrN., Bisu. 
 Are good] So Aurx., Rrv., but ob- 
 serve that in Rec. the reading is τὰ 
 καλὰ x.7.X., Which should have been 
 translated ‘are the things which are 
 good;’ comp. Scholef. Hints, p. 128. 
 
 g- Strifes, and contentions] Con- 
 tentions, and strivings, AUTH.; strifes, 
 and fightings, Rry. All the Vv. ex- 
 cept Tynp., Coy., place a comma 
 after ἔρεις. 
 
 10. A first] SoRnv.: the first, AUTH. 
 Shun] So Wict.: eschue, Coy. Test.; 
 reject, AutTH., GEN.; refuse, Rrv.; 
 avoyde, Tynp. and remaining Vy. 
 The translation of AvrH., though 
 lexically tenable, appears stronger 
 than the use of παραιτεῖσθαι in these 
 Epp. will fully warrant. The transl. 
 ‘refuse,’ 1 Tim. v. r1 (AuTH.), is open 
 to this objection, that the context 
 affords no clue to the character of 
 the refusal; the meaning is simply 
 ‘have nothing to do with,’ ‘monere 
 desine;’ see notes in loc. 
 
 11. Perverted] So Tynp., Cov. 
 (both), Cran., Gun., Rey.: subverted, 
 ΑΥΤΗ. and remaining Vy. Self- 
 condemned] So Rry.: condemned of 
 himself, AutH., Bis. (dampned); 
 
204 TITUS. 
 
 12 
 
 Crap, TIT. 12—15. 
 
 When I shall send Artemas unto thee, or Tychicus, use 
 
 diligence to come unto me to Nicopolis: for there 1 have 
 
 13 determined to winter. 
 
 Forward zealously on their jour- 
 
 ney Zenas the lawyer and Apollos, that nothing be want- 
 
 14 ing to them. 
 
 And let ours also learn to practise good 
 
 works for necessary wants, that they be not unfruitful. 
 
 19 
 love us in the faith. 
 Grace be with you all. 
 
 dampnyde by his owne doom, Wicu.; 
 d. by his awne iudgement, Trnv., Coy., 
 and Coy. Test., Roem. (both giving 
 cond.); d.byhym selfe, Cran.; d. of his 
 owne self, GEN. 
 
 12. Shall send] So Aurn. and all 
 Vv. except Cov. Test., send. The 
 translation ‘shall have sent,’ though 
 perhaps critically exact, appears to 
 have been very rarely adopted by our 
 Translators (comp. Matth. xxi. 40, 
 Mark viii. 38, John iv. 25, xvi. 13, 
 Acts xxiii. 35, Rom. xi. 27, 1 Cor. 
 xvi. 3), and except where strict ac- 
 curacy may be required, or where an 
 idiomatic turn (as in τ Tim. v. 11) 
 adds force and perspicuity, is best 
 avoided, as not fully in accordance 
 with our usual mode of expression. 
 Use diligence] Sim. Rey., give dili- 
 gence: hiye thou, Wicu. ; make spede, 
 Coy.; make haist, Cov. Test.; hasten, 
 Ruem.; be diligent, AurH. and re- 
 maining Vy. There I have 
 det.] So Ruem., Rev. ; sim. there haue 
 I purposed, Cov. Test.: I have de- 
 termined there, AutH. and the re- 
 
 THE 
 
 {Aw 4 
 
 All that are with me salute thee. 
 
 Salute them that 
 
 maining Vv. except Wicu., I haue 
 purposide for to dwelle in wynter 
 there. 
 
 13. Forward zealously, &e.] Bisily 
 sende bifore, Wicu.; sende...diligently 
 afore, Cov. Test.; set forvvard...care- 
 fully, RuEm.; set forward...diligently, 
 Rey.; bring...on their journey dili- 
 gently, AurH. and remaining Vy. 
 
 14. Ours] So AurH. and all Vv, 
 
 except Wicu., Ruem., owre men; Rey., 
 our people. Practise] 
 Maintain, Auru., Rev.; be bifore in, 
 Wict.; shewe forthe, GEN.; excell in, 
 Tynp. and the other Vy. 
 For necessary wants] For necessary 
 uses, AuTH. and the other Vy. (and n., 
 Wict.; unto, Cov. Test.; to, Bisu.; 
 Ruem.) except Tynp., Coy., Cran., 
 as farforth, as nede requyreth. 
 
 15. Salute...Salute] SoCoy. Test., 
 Ruem., Rey.: greten...grete, Wict.; 
 salute...Greet, AuTH. and remaining 
 Vy. As the same word (ἀσπάζεσθαι) 
 is used in both cases, a change of 
 rendering seems scarcely desirable. 
 All] Auru. adds * Amen. 
 
 EN D. 
 
 
 
 
 
 CAMBRIDGE ; PRINTED BY Ὁ, J. CLAY, M.A. AND SON, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
 

 

 
 
 
 Signy 
 Ν wait , Bs 
 ΩΣ 
 
 ᾿ “4 Ὗ ΓΝ Ὁ αὐτὰ idee Ν᾽ " ΤῊ hy a ue a | 
 
 ¥ 
 ᾿ ᾿ Ae, i 7 m ῖ : i, y id saith δ ἰὼν 
 ἊΝ Ly ἢ ᾿ . ‘ a [ ἀν path ‘ 
 «ἡ ΤΉ, ay AY 7h ὶ ᾿ ὯΝ i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i TL 
 4 ey ᾿ 
 Oe | 
 i | 
 a ᾿ ‘ img 
 ire ‘ t , 
 Ὗ 1 re | 
 

 
DATE DUE 
 
 17 Ἐ τὸ z 
 Μ ΜΈ, ᾿ Ξ 
 
 yal ἢ [ἢ 
 αν . 4 
 
 = 
 καὶ 
 
 PRINTEOINU.S.A. 
 
 GAYLORO 
 

 
BS2735 .Ε46 1883 
 The ee epistles of St Paul : rch 
 
 on Theological Seminary—Speer 
 
 1 1012 00069 2055