Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadInternational Critical Commentary NT - 1 Thessalonians 2:1 - 2:99
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
(2) The Visit of the Missionaries (2:1-12)
The account of the visit (2:1-12; cf. 1:5, 8a, 9a) takes the form of a self-defence against insinuations made by Jews. With the same subtlety that led them to accuse the missionaries of preaching another king, namely, Jesus (Act_17:7), the Jews were insinuating that the renegade Paul, like many a pagan itinerant preacher, was self-deluded, sensual, and deceiving, delivering his message in flattering words as a foil to cover selfish greed and requiring honour to be paid him. Paul’s failure to return lent some colour to these assertions, and the converts became anxious. In his defence, Paul, speaking mainly for himself but including his associates, conscious both of the integrity of his motives and of the unselfishness of his love, and aware of the straightforwardness of his religious appeal, reminds his readers that he came not empt-yhanded but with a gospel and a courageous power inspired by God (vv. 1-2). Wherever he goes, he preaches as one with no delusion about the truth, for his gospel is of God; with no consciousness of moral aberration, for God had tested him and commissioned him to preach; with no intention to deceive, for he is responsible to God who knows his motives (vv. 3-4). Furthermore, when he was in Thessalonica, he never used cajoling speech, as the readers know, never used the gospel to exploit his ambitions, and never required honour to be given him, although he had the right to receive it as an apostle of Christ (vv. 5-6). On the contrary, he waived his right, becoming just one of them, not an apostle but a babe, and waived it in love for his dear children. Instead of demanding honour, he worked incessantly to support himself while he preached, in order to save the readers from any expense on his account (vv. 7-9). His sincerity is evident from the pious, righteous, and blameless conduct which they saw in him (v. 10). Not as a flatterer but as a father, he urged them one and all, by encouragement and by solemn appeal, to behave as those who are called of God into his kingdom and glory (vv. 11-12).
The disposition of 2:1-12 is clearly marked by γ (vv. 1, 3, 5-6) and ἀλ (vv. 2, 4, 7-12) and by the parallel comparisons attached to λλῦε(v. 4) and ὑῶ(v. 8). The three points of v. 3 are met in the clause with ἀλ (v. 4); and the three points of vv. 5-6 are met in vv. 7-12, the γ (v. 9) resuming and further elucidating ἀλ (v. 7); thus ζτῦτςδξ is considered in vv. 7-9, πενξ in v. 10, and κλκ in vv. 11-12.—A careful exegesis of 2:3-8 is given by Zimmer in Theol. Studien B. Weiss dargebracht, 1897, 248-273.
1Indeed you yourselves know, brothers, that the visit we paid you has not proved to be void of power. 2On the contrary, although we had previously undergone suffering and insult in Philippi, as you know, still we in the power of our God took courage to tell you the gospel of God in the midst of much opposition.
3Indeed the appeal we are wont to make comes not from delusion nor from impurity nor with any purpose to deceive. 4On the contrary, as we stand approved by God to be intrusted with the gospel, so we are wont to tell it, concerned not with pleasing men but God who tests our hearts.
5Indeed, we never once came before you with cajoling address, as you know, or with a pretext inspired by greed, God is witness, 6or requiring honour of men—from you or from others, although we were ever able to be in a position of honour as Christ’s apostles. 7On the contrary, we became babes in the midst of you—as a nurse cherishes her own children 8so we yearned after you, glad to share with you not only the gospel of God but our very selves as well, for you had become dear to us. 9You remember of course, brothers, our toil and hardship; night and day we worked for our living rather than put a burden on any of you while we preached to you the gospel of God. 10You are witnesses and God as well how piously and righteously and blamelessly we behaved in the sight of you believers. 11As you know, we were urging you individually, as a father his own children, both by encouragement 12and by solemn appeal, to walk worthily of God who calls you into his own kingdom and glory.
1. ατὶγροδτ κλ With an explanatory γ, Paul resumes ὁοα εσδνἔχμ (1:9) and takes up explicitly the defence already touched upon in 1:5 (which is strikingly parallel to 2:1-2). Addressing the readers affectionately as (ἀεφιin 1:4), he recalls to their knowledge that the visit which he paid them was not empty (κν), meaning not that it was fruitless, for the welcome by the converts (1:6) is not resumed until v. 13; but that, as the ἀλ cause certifies, the visit was not empty-handed, was not, as 1:5 says, “in word only but also in power,” for he came with a gospel of which God is the author, and preached with a courage (cf. 1:5 πηοοί) which was due to the power of God operating in him (cf. 1:5 ἐ δνμικὶἐ πεμτ ἁί). That he thus preached, notwithstanding recent experiences of persecution and insult in Philippi and great opposition in Thessalonica, is further proof of the divine inspiration both of his message and of his power in proclaiming it.
γ resumes and explains 1:5 (Bengel) by way of 1:9 where πρ ἡῶis put significantly at the beginning. On ατὶγροδτ see 1:5; and on the construction οδτ τ …ὅ cf. 1Co_3:20. The article (τ) is repeated as in 1:8 (ἡπό κλ The perfect γγν with which the aorists (1:5, 2:5, 7, 10) are to be contrasted denotes completed action; the facts of the visit are all in, and the readers may estimate it at its full value. ἡῶshows that Paul includes Silas and Timothy with him in the defence.
2. ἀλ ποαότςκλUsing a strong adversative (ἀλ; cf. vv. 4, 7), he describes positively the character of his visit and defines ο κν (v. 1). Equipped with a gospel inspired by God (cf. vv. 4, 8, 9, and see note on τ εαγλο ἡῶ1:5) and emboldened to preach by the indwelling power of their God (ἐ τ θῷἡῶ the visit of the missionaries was not devoid of power. Paul had already told them of his persecution and especially (κιis perhaps ascensive as in 1:6 κὶτῦκρο of the illegal treatment previously experienced at Philippi, and had mentioned the matter with feeling; for, as Lft. remarks, it was not the physical distress (ποαότ) that disturbed him but the insult (ὑρσέτ) offered to his Roman citizenship (Act_16:22 ff.). He recalls the fact now (κθςοδτ cf. 1:5) for apologetic reasons (see above on v. 1).
The aorist participles are of antecedent action and probably concessive. ποάχι(only here in Gk. Bib.) is one of the compounds with ποwhich Paul is fond of using (3:4, Gal_3:1) even when there is no classic or Lxx precedent (e. g. Gal_3:8, Gal_3:17, Gal_1:2, 2Co_8:6, 2Co_8:10, 2Co_8:9:5). ὑρζι which Ruther translates “to treat illegally,” occurs only here in Paul and rarely in Lxx—πρηιζσα(here and Eph_6:20 in Paul; frequent in Acts) denotes here, as λλσ shows, not “to speak boldly” (πρηί λλῖ but “to be bold,” “to take courage” (cf. Sir. 6:11), fiduciam sumpsimus (Calv.). The aorist may be inceptive, “we became bold.” According to Radermacher (Neutestamentliche Grammatik, 1911, 151), this ἐαρσαάε is only a more resonant and artificial expression for ἐομσμ (cf. Php_1:14) which an Attic author would have rather used, since ἐαρσαάεαλλσ is ultimately a tautology. Paul does not elsewhere use πόwith λλῖ but this directive preposition instead of a dative is natural after verbs of saying (cf. 2Co_6:11, 2Co_13:7, Php_4:6).
ἐ τ θῷἡῶThe missionaries are “in God” (see on ἐ θῷ1:1) because God is in them (ὑʼἐενυἐδνμύεοTheophylact; cf. Php_4:13). Characteristic of our epistles (3:9, II 1:11, 12; 1Co_6:11) and of Revelation (4:11, 5:10, 7:3 ff. 12:10, 19:1 ff.) is ὁθὸ ἡῶThe ἡῶhere (cf. τςκρίςἡῶv. 4) seems to refer primarily to the God whom Paul and his two associates preach (hence ἡῶ not μ Rom_1:8, 1Co_1:4 (ACD) 2Co_12:21, Php_1:3, Php_4:19, Phm_1:4), but does not exclude the further reference to the converts and other believers who feel themselves in common touch with the Christian God, our God Father (1:3, 3:11, 13, Gal_1:4, Php_4:20). There may be in ὁθὸ ἡῶa latent contrast with pagan idols and deities (1:9).
Both κρο ὁθὸ ἡῶ(Mar_12:29, Act_2:39, Rev_19:6) and ὁθὸ ἡῶ(Heb_12:29, Luk_1:78, Jud_1:4, 2Pe_1:1) are frequent in Lxx (e. g. Deu_11:22, Ps. 43:20, Psa_97:3, Isa_40:3, Jer_16:19, Jer_49:4 Sap. 15:1 Baruch (passim); cf. πτρἡῶTob. 13:4) and express Israel’s sense of devotion to her God, often in opposition tacit or expressed to the gods of other nations (cf. 1 Reg. 5:7 Δγνθὸ ἡῶ also Act_19:37 ἡθὸ ἡῶ For ἐ τ θῷμ, cf. 2 Reg. 32:30 = Ps. 17:30.
ἑ πλῷἀῶ. “In the midst of much opposition” or “in great anxiety” (Vulg in multa sollicitudine). Whether persecution is meant, as the reference to the experiences at Philippi at first suggests, or inward trouble, as the change from θίε(1:6) to ἀῶ (cf. Heb_12:1 Sap. 10:12) may indicate, is uncertain.
Most comm. find here as in Php_1:30 a reference to outward troubles, whether persecutions (Ephr.), danger, or untoward circumstances of all sorts (e. g. De W., Lü Ell., Lft., Mill., Born). Since, however, ἀώin Col_2:1 refers to anxiety (cf. also ἀωίεθ 1Co_9:25, Col_1:29, Col_4:12 and σνγνζσαRom_15:30), it is not impossible that inward struggle is meant (so Fritzsche apud Lillie and Dob.). In later Gk. ἀώtends to mean “anxiety” (Soph. Lex who notes Iren. I 2:2 ἐ πλῷπν ἀῶ). Chrys., who speaks first of danger and then quotes 1Co_2:3, apparently understands ἀώof both external and internal trouble; so Lillie: “at least this restriction (to the external) in the present case must be justified from the context, not from Paul’s use of the word elsewhere.”
3-4. The self-defence is continued with direct reference to the insinuation that the missionaries were of a kind with the wandering sophists, impostors, and propagandists of religious cults. First negatively (as v. 1) it is said: “Indeed (γ as v. 1) our appeal never comes from delusion, nor from impurity, nor is it ever calculated to deceive.” Then positively (ἀλ as v. 2): “On the contrary, we are wont to speak as men approved by God to be intrusted with the gospel, concerned not with pleasing men but God who tests our motives.” The three specifications of v. 3 are not replied to formally but are nevertheless adequately met: Not ἐ πάηfor the gospel is in origin divine not human; not ἐ ἀαασα, for the gospel has been committed to tested missionaries; and not ἐ δλ, for our responsibility is not to men but to God who sounds the depths of our inner lives. ἡπρκηι ἡῶ “The appeal we make,” taking up λλσιτ εαγλο τῦθο. πρκηι(often in Paul) may mean “summons,” “address,” “encouragement” (1, 2 Mac.; cf. II 2:16) “comfort” (so usually in Lxx). In this connection, however, as λλσ (v. 2) and λλῦε(v. 4) make evident, the address itself, not the content (δδχ Chrys.), is meant; hence “appeal” (Lft.), and that too in virtue of ἐ τ θῷἡῶand τ εαγλο τῦθο, a religious appeal, not without reference to ποηε (5:20, 1Co_14:1, 1Co_14:39; Rom_12:8).
ἐτ is to be supplied in view of λλῦε(V. 4). The habitual principle (Bengel) is intended. As the Thess. could have no direct knowledge of Paul’s custom elsewhere, he does not in vv. 3-4 appeal to them in confirmation (contrast vv. 5 ff).
ἐ πάη Our religious appeal does not come “from delusion,” for our gospel is of God. πά, as δλ shows, is not “deceit” (active) but “error” (passive), the state of παᾶθ “delusion” (Lillie). “Homo qui errat cannot but be undecided; nor is it possible for him to use boldness without consummate impudence and folly” (Cocceius, quoted by Lillie). οδ ἐ ἀαασα “Nor does it come from an impure character.” ἀαασ (elsewhere in N. T. only in Paul, except Mat_23:27) regularly appears directly with πρε or in contexts intimating sexual aberration. Hence here, as 4:7, Rom_6:19, the reference is not to impurity in general, not to covetousness, but to sensuality (Lft.). The traducers of Paul, aware both of the spiritual excitement (5:19 ff.) attending the meeting of Christian men and women and of the pagan emotional cults in which morality was often detached from religion, had subtly insinuated that the missionaries were no better morally than other itinerant impostors. That such propagandists would be repudiated by the official representatives of the cult would aid rather than injure a comparison intended to be as odious as possible.
“St. Paul was at this very time living in the midst of the worship of Aphrodite at Corinth and had but lately witnessed that of the Cabiri at Thessalonica” (Lft.). The exact nature of this latter cult, the syncretistic form which it assumed, and the ritual which it used are uncertain, but Lightfoot’s phrase, “the foul orgies of the Cabiric worship,” may not be too strong. The maligners of Paul may have had some features of this cult in mind when they charged him with ἀαασ The cult of the κβρ or κβιο(perhaps from the root כר ηνεμγλ, (δντί ἰχρι θο) originated, it would appear, in Phœ and was carried thence to Lemnos, Samothrace (cf. Herod. 2:51), Macedonia (cf. Lactant. div. instil. I, 1518 and Bloch, cols. 2533-34) and elsewhere, and became in the Hellenic-Roman period second in importance only to the Eleusinian mysteries. That it was well known in the seaport town of Thessalonica. is evident from coins and from Jul. Firmicus Maternus (de errore prof. relig. 11). On the Cabiri, see Lft. Bib. Essays, 257 ff. where the older literature including Lobeck’s Aglaophanes, 1202 ff. is given; also the articles by Hild (Cabires in La Grande Encyc. 606-610) and by Bloch (in Roscher, 1897), Megaloi Theoi, cols. 2522-2541.
οδ ἐ δλ. “Nor is it with craft, with any purpose to deceive,” for they are ever engaged in pleasing not men but God. Over against the ἐof origin, ἐdenotes the atmosphere of the appeal. It is not clothed with deception or deceit, that is, with any deliberate intention to deceive (Ell.). This charge may have suggested itself to the critics in view of the devices of sophists and the tricks of jugglers and sorcerers (cf. Chrys.) by which they sought to win the attention and the money of the crowd (cf. 2Co_12:16).
The reading οδ before ἐ δλ is well attested, but the οτof KL after an οδ has a parallel in Gal_1:12 (BEKL); cf. Bl 77:10. Note in 1 Mac. ἐ δλ (1:30), μτ δλ (7:10), and δλ (13:17).
4. With ἀλ (as v. 2), the origin and purpose of the λλῖare positively affirmed. λλῦε“we are wont to speak” resumes ἡπρκηι ἡω(v. 3) and λλσ (v. 2). As already noted, the points made in v. 3 are reckoned with: The gospel is of God, hence they are not deluded; they were commissioned to preach, hence their character is not unclean; they are pleasing not men but God, hence their appeal is not meant to deceive.
On the correlation κθ …οτ 2Co_1:5, 2Co_8:6, 2Co_10:7, etc.; on οχ …ἀλ “not as such who …but as such who,” cf. Col_3:22.—Like Apelles (Rom_16:10), they are δκμιἐ Χιτ their λλῖis ἐ τ θῷnot ἐ δλ—ἀέκνε(Gal_1:10) indicates action going on; on the Pauline ἀέκι θῷ(2:15, 4:1, Rom_8:8; 1Co_7:32), cf. Num_23:27, Psa_68:32; on ἀέκι ἀθώο, cf. Gal_1:10; on ἀθωάεκ (Col_3:22 = Eph_6:6), cf. Psa_52:6.—On ο (Gal_4:8, Php_3:3) with participle instead of μ (v. 15), see BMT 485.—δκμζι“prove,” “test” (of metals Sir. 2:6, 34:25), as in Rom_1:28, Sir. 39:34; on the perfect “approve after test,” cf. Sir. 42:8, 2 Mal_4:3.
τ δκμζνιτςκπίςἡῶ As the motive is in question, Paul refers to God as one who sounds the depths of the hearts, the inner life (Mar_7:21). ἡῶrefers to Paul and his associates (contrast ὑῶ3:13, II 2:17, 3:5).
In Psalms and Jeremiah, δκμζιof God’s testing is frequent (cf. also Sap. 3:6); e. g. Jer_12:3 κίσ, κρε γνσεςμ, δδκμκςτνκρίνμυἐατο σ; cf. also Psa_16:3, and with the possessive omitted, Jer_11:20, Jer_17:10.
5. γ parallel to γ in vv. 1, 3, resumes γ (v. 3) and further explains that what is true in general (vv. 3-4) of the principles of the missionaries, about which the readers could not know directly (hence no appeal to their knowledge in vv. 3-4), is also true of their behaviour in Thessalonica of which the readers are directly aware (hence the κθςοδτas in VV. 1-2). As in vv. 1, 3, the γ clause is negative; and again as in v. 3, there are three separate charges denied, each one being phrased differently: not ἐλγ κλκα not ποάε πενξα and not ζτῦτςδξ. The points are similar to but not identical with those made in v. 3: ἐ λγ κλκαcorresponds, indeed, rather closely to ἐ δλ, but ποάε πενξαis less specific than ἐ ἀαασαand is distinct from it in meaning, and ζτῦτςδξ is quite different from ἐ πάη Following the γ clause (vv. 5-6) is the ἀλʼclause (vv. 7-12; cf. vv. 2, 4) in which the three points of vv. 5-6, are positively answered,—ζτῦτςδξ in vv. 7-9, πενξ in v. 10, and κλκ in vv. 11-12.
On οτ(vv. 5-6), cf. Rom_8:38 ff. 1Co_6:9 ff.; on οτ γ …οτ…ἀλ cf. Gal_6:15.—πτ = “ever” is common in Paul and Lxx—ἐεήηεgoverns first a dative with ἐ(λγ), then a dative without ἐ(ποάε and finally a participle (ζτῦτ). Since γνσα= ἔχσα(1:4), we may render: “Indeed we never came before you with cajoling address (ἐas in 1:4), nor using (dative of means) a pretext inspired by greed, nor demanding honour,” etc. (participle of manner). —The ἐbefore ποάεwhich Tisch, Zim, Weiss retain, is probably to be omitted as conformation to the first ἐ(Bא WH., Dob.).
ἐ λγ κλκα “With cajoling address.” λγ is here (as 1:5) “speech,” as λλσι πρκηιand λλῦε(vv. 2-4) demonstrate (Lü κλκ is either “flattery,” the subordination of one’s self to another for one’s own advantage; or, as ἐ δλ intimates, “cajolery,” a word that carries with it the additional notion of deception. The genitive describes the character of the speech. The hearers could tell whether Paul’s address was straightforward or not; hence κθςοδτ
ἐ λγι ἐοάεέμ κὶμτ δλυδὰῥμτνἐαν (Test. xii, Jos_4:1). In classic usage (cf. Schmidt, Syn. 1879, III, 438 ff.), ακλε (not in Gk. Bib.) indicates flattery in the sense of complimentary remarks designed to please; θπύι(not in Gk. Bib.) means any kind of subordination by which one gets one’s own way with another; while κλκύι(1 Esd. 4:31, Job_19:17 Sap. 14:17) hints at guile, a flattery calculated to deceive; cf. Aristophanes, Eq. 46. ff. ᾔαλ ἐώεʼἐοάεʼἐηάα κλκ is only here in Gk. Bib. Ell. notes Theophrastus (Char. 2) and Aristotle (Nic. Etk. 4:12 ad fin.): “he who aims at getting benefit for money and what comes through money is a κλ”
ποάε πενξα The “cloke of covetousness” is literally “pretext of greediness.” The point is that Paul did not use his message as a foil to cover selfish purposes (cf. ἐιάυμ1Pe_2:16). As the appeal to God (θὸ μρυ indicates, the motive is in question (cf. Chrys.). The genitive is subjective, “a pretext which greediness (Lft.) uses or inspires.” πόαιhere is not excuse but specious excuse (cf. Php_1:18, Psa_140:4, Hos_10:4). πενξ is more general than φλρυίand denotes the self-seeking, greedy, covetous character of the πενκη
The context here does not allow a more specific meaning of πενξ In the Lxx (Jdg_5:19 (A) Ps. 118:36, Hab_2:9, etc.), advantage in respect of money is sometimes intended, cupidity. In 4:6 below, it is joined with ἀαασ; but it “does not appear that πενξ can be independently used in the sense of fleshly concupiscence” (Robinson on Eph_5:5; but see Hammond on Rom_1:29 and Abbott in ICC on Eph_5:5). Lft. (Col_3:5) translates: “‘greediness,’ an entire disregard for the rights of others.”—On θὸ μρυ(sc. ἐτ as Rom_1:9), cf. not only Paul (Php_1:8, 2Co_1:23) but Jewish usage (e. g. Gen_31:44; Gen_1 Reg. 20:23. 42 Sap. 1:6 and especially Test. xii, Lev_19:3).
6. οτ ζτῦτςκλ “Nor did we ever come (v. 5) requiring honour,” etc. The participle of manner, in apposition to the subject of ἐεήηε(v. 5), introduces the third disclaimer, which, like the other two (v. 5) may reflect the language of the traducers (Zimmer). Paul denies not that he received honour from men, not that he had no right to receive it, but that he sought, that is, required honour from men either in Thessalonica or elsewhere.
δνμνιἐ βρικλ “Although we were ever (sc. πτ from v. 5) able to be in a position of weight (i. e. honour) as Christ’s apostles.” This concessive clause, subordinated to ζτῦτςδξ, qualifies the fact, “we never came requiring honour,” by asserting the principle (cf. II 3:9) that the authority to demand honour inheres in their place of preponderance as Christ’s apostles.
δξ= “honour,” as in classic usage. There is no evidence that it is equivalent to honor in the later sense of honorarium. On the rare ζτῖ ἐ cf. Gen_43:8, Nah_3:11, Eze_22:30; and for the rarer ζτῖ ἀοcf. Barn. 21:6.—Since βρ may mean not only “burden” (Gal_6:2, 2Co_4:17, Sir. 13:2) but also “importance” (as in later Gk.; cf. Soph. Lex sub voc. and βρ 2Co_10:10), it is possible to take ἐ βριεν (a unique phrase in Gk. Bib.) as equivalent to ἐ τμ εν (Chrys.), in pondere esse (Calv.), the ἐindicating the position in which they were able to stand and from which, if necessary, they were able to exercise authority; “to take a preponderant place” (Ruther). On the other hand, ἐ βριεν may = βρςεν “to be burdensome.” In a letter to the present editor under date of March 15, 1910, Dr. Milligan writes that he “is inclined to think the more literal idea of ‘burden,’ ‘trouble’ was certainly uppermost in the Apostle’s thought and that the derived sense of ‘gravitas,’ ‘honor” was not prominent, if it existed at all.” He calls attention to P Oxy. 1062:14 (ii, a.d.) ε δ τῦόσιβρςφρ; and to BGU, 159:5 (a.d. 210) ο δνμνςὑοτνιτ βρςτςλιορί Assuming the translation “to be burdensome,” expositors find a reference either (1) to the matter of a stipend (cf. v. 9, II 3:8, 2Co_12:16 and especially 2Co_11:9 ἀαῆἐατνἐήη); so for example Theodoret, Beza (who takes πενξ = φλρυί Grot., Flatt, Zim, Drummond, and Field (Otium Norv. III, 122); or (2) to both the stipend and the authority; so Chrys., Crocius (non tantum de ambitione sedet de avaritia), Lft., Find., Wohl., Moff. and others. The immediate context, however, does not distinctly suggest a reference to a stipend, unless δξ furthermore the omission of ὑῖ(Dob.). which Vulg reads (cum possemus vobis oneri esse), makes the translation “to be burdensome” less likely than “to be in honour,” “in pondere esse” (cf. Erasmus, Hammond, Pelt, De W., Lü Ell., Schmidt, Schmiedel, Born, Dob.).—On Χιτῦἀότλιcf. 2Co_11:3. Paul uses ἀότλ not only of himself and the twelve, but also of Silvanus and Timothy (here), Junias and Andronicus (Rom_16:7), Apollos (1Co_4:9), Epaphroditus (Php_2:25). See further 2Co_8:23, 2Co_11:13, Act_14:14 and McGiffert, Apostolic Age, 648. The word ἀότλ occurs once in Lxx ( 3 Reg.14:6 A). As after γγν (v. 1) and δλ (v. 3), so after ἀότλ, a comma is to be placed.
7. ἀλ ἐεήηε νπο “On the contrary, we became babes in the midst of you.” ἀλ is parallel to ἀλ in v. 4 and controls vv. 7-12, the γ (v. 9) resuming the ἀλ here. A colon is to be put after ὑῶAlthough they were entitled to demand honour as Christ’s apostles, yet they waived that right, choosing to be not apostles but babes in the midst of them. To contrast with ἀότλ and to fit ἐ μσ ὑῶ we rather expect not an adjective but a noun. νπο(Gal_4:1, Gal_4:3, 1Co_13:11, Rom_2:20, etc.), with its implication of the unripe and undeveloped, far from being meaningless (Schmidt) is a capital antithesis of ἀότλ. Not only does νποfit the immediate context admirably, it is also in keeping with the spirit of brotherly equality that characterises Paul’s attitude to his readers not only in I but also in II. He is just one of them, ὡ εςἐ ὑῶ(Chrys.).
Not only is νποadmirably adapted to the context, it is also the better attested reading (א Vulg, Boh, Ephr., Ambst, Orig. ad Mat_19:14) as Tisch admits; and is accepted by WH., Zim, Baljon, Lft., Find., Wohl. Indeed WH. will not allow an alternative reading (cf. App.2 128). On the other hand, Weiss is equally insistent on ἤι as alone worthy of attention (AEKLP, Pesh Arm; Tisch, Ell. Schmiedel, Born, Dob., Moff.). While on purely transcriptional grounds ἤι may be accounted for by haplography or νποby dittography, internal evidence favours νποSix of the ten cases of νποin N. T. (including Eph_4:14, Heb_5:13) are found in Paul; ἤι is found in the Gk. Bib. only 2Ti_2:24. The objection (urged by Ell., Schmiedel, Born, and others) that νπο“mars the metaphor” in the succeeding comparison (whose point, however, is not gentleness but unselfish love) is met by Lft. who observes that “rhetorical rules were as nothing compared with the object which he had in view.” ἐ μσ with gen. occurs only here in Paul; it is frequent elsewhere in Gk. Bib.
7-8. ὡ ἐντοό…οτςκλ“As a nurse cherishes her own children so we yearning after you were glad to share not only the gospel of God but our very selves as well, because you had become dear to us.” The change from νποto τοόis due to a natural association of ideas. The point of the new metaphor is love, the love of a mother-nurse for her own children. Not only did the missionaries waive their right to demand honour, they waived it in motherly affection for their dear children (cf. 1:5 δʼὑᾶ No punctuation is necessary before οτ (cf. v. 4 and Mar_4:26).
The construction is similar to Mar_4:26 (AC) οτς…ὡ ἐνβλ On the difference between ὡ ἐ = ὡ ἅ(א with subjunctive indicating the contingency of the act and ὠwith the indicative, note with Viteau (I, 242) 2Co_8:12 κθ ἐνἔῃ…χθ οκἔε. τοόhere as elsewhere in Gk. Bib. (Gen_35:8, Isa_49:23, Isa_49:4 Reg. 11:2 = 2Ch_22:11) is feminine. θλε = “to warm” is used of the mother-bird (Deu_22:6, Job_39:14) and of Abishag (3 Reg. 1:2, 4; cf. θρανι1:2 ff); here and Eph_5:29, the secondary sense “to cherish” is appropriate (see Ell. on Eph_5:29). Neither τοόnor θλε suggests that the τκ are θλζν; hence it is unnecessary to press the metaphor in the clause with οτ as some do (e. g. Lü Grot. compares Num_11:22 λβ ατνεςτνκλο σ (Moses) ὡε ἄα τθν (nurshing-father as Isa_49:23) τνθλζν, a passage, which, according to Zimmer, may have been in Paul’s mind.—If ἑυῆis emphatic, as in classic usage, the nurse is also the mother; if it is = ατ (Bloomfield apud Lillie; cf. Moult I, 87 ff.), the nurse may or may not be the mother. Zimmer, accepting ἑυῆas emphatic (cf. v. 11), but finding difficulty with the idea of a mother-nurse in service, takes ἐυῆmetaphorically, understanding that the professional nurse treats the children of her mistress as if they were “her own”; cf. Chrys.: “Are they (the nurses) not more kindly disposed to them (ποηε) than mothers?”—ἑυο in Paul, when used with the article and substantive, has regularly, as in classic Gk., the attributive position (2:8, 12, 4:4, II 3:12); the exceptions are Gal_6:4, Gal_6:8, 1Co_11:5 (B) 2Co_3:13 (א where the position is predicate.
8. ὀερμνιὑῶ κλ“yearning after you” (Lillie; cf. ἐιοονε3:6). With the affection of a mother-nurse, they were eager to share not only what they had but what they were (Schmidt), because, as is frankly said, the converts had become dear to them, τκαἀαηα(1Co_4:14, Eph_5:1).
ὀερσα(the breathing is uncertain) is found also in Job_3:21 (Lxx) and Psa_62:2 (Sym.). In meaning, it is similar to ἐιοε and ἱερσα(see Wetstein, ad loc.); but the derivation is unknown (cf. WH. App. 151, 159; WS 16:6; Bl 6:4). Thackeray (Gram. O. T. Greek, I, 97, note 5), following Moult, thinks the ο“comes from a derelict preposition ωThere is therefore no connection between ὁand ἱερσα—The usual reading εδκῦε(B has ηδκῦε so WH., Weiss) is not here a present (2Co_5:8) but an imperfect, as ἐεήηε(v. 7) and ἐεήη (v. 8) demand (cf. Zim). εδχῖis common in later Gk. (cf. Kennedy, Sources, 131). In Lxx θλιis sometimes a variant of εδκῖ(Jdg_11:17, Jdg_11:19:10, Jdg_11:25), sometimes a parallel (Psa_50:18) to it. In papyri, εδκῖis often used of consent to an agreement (P Oxy. 261:17 97:24; cf. Mill. ad loc.). In Paul, εδκῖis frequent with infin. (3:1, Gal_1:15, etc.), but rare with ἐ(1Co_10:5, 2Co_12:10; Lxx frequently) or with dative alone (II 2:12; cf. Sir. 18:31 A); the construction with accus., with ἐιand dat. or accus., or with ε does not appear in Paul.—The construction μτδδνιτ τνis found also in Rom_1:11, Tob. 7:18 (B); the accusative is of the part shared; hence μτδῦα ψχ is not a zeugma for δῦα ψχςὐὲ ὐῶ. ψχι(2Co_12:15) is plural, for Paul and his associates are in mind. ψχ like κρί(v. 4) is the inner self. On ἑυῶfor ἡῶ ατ, cf. WS 22:10; on ο μν …ἀλ κι see 1:5.
δό (2:18, 4:6) is regularly “because” in Gk. Bib.; in 2 Mac. 7:37, it may mean “that” (Mill.); cf. WS 5:7 d. After ἀαηόin Paul we expect a genitive (Rom_1:7) not a dative; but cf. Sir. 15:13 κίοχἔτνἀαηὸ τῖ φβυέοςάτ
9. μηοεεεγρκλ “you remember of course brothers (v. 1).” The γ resumes ἀλ (v. 7) and further illustrates οτ ζτῦτςδξ (v. 6). “Instead of requiring honour of you, we worked hard and incessantly to support ourselves while we preached to you the gospel of God” (cf. II 3:8).
μηοεε is indicative as οδτ(vv. 1, 5, 11) suggests. The accus. with μηοεε occurs only here in Paul; Lxx has both gen. and accus. (cf. v. l. in Tob. 4:19). The phrase κπςκίμχοis Pauline (II 3:8, 2Co_11:27); cf. also Jer_20:18 Test. xii, Jud_1:18:4. In fact in Paul μχοalways appears with κπ (cf. Hermas, Sim. V, 6:2). Beza, with Lillie’s approval, makes labeur, peine, travail the equivalents respectively of πνς κπ and μχοGrot. (cf. Lft. and Trench, Syn. 102) considers κπ passive, in ferendo and μχοactive, in gerendo. Lft. translates: “toil and moil.”
νκὸ κὶἡέα κλWithout connecting particle (EKL insert γ), the ceaselessness of the labour and the purpose of it as a “labour of love” are indicated. They worked not through the whole night and day (accus.) but during the night and day (gen.). The purpose of this incessant labour (πὸ τ μ II 3:8, 2Co_3:13) was to avoid putting upon the converts individually or collectively a financial burden. ἐγζμν marks the circumstances attending the preaching. As in Corinth (1Co_4:12, 1Co_9:6) where there were not many wise, mighty, or noble, so in Thessalonica (II 3:8 ff.) where the converts were mainly working people, Paul finds it necessary to work with his hands (4:11, 1Co_4:12, Eph_4:28) for wages.
The phrase νκὸ κὶἡέαoccurs in Paul elsewhere only 3:10 and II 3:8; cf. 1Ti_5:5, 2Ti_1:3, Mar_5:5, Judith 11:17. In the Lxx the usual order is ἡέα κὶνκό(e. g. Jos_1:8, Jos_1:3 Reg. 8:59, etc.; cf. Luk_18:7, Act_9:24, Rev_4:8, etc.). ἐιαε a late word, appears in Gk. Bib. elsewhere only in Paul (II 3:8, 2Co_2:5) and is “nearly but not quite equivalent in meaning to κτβρῖ (Ell.), which is found in Gk. Bib. only 2Co_12:16 and Mar_14:10 (cf. κτβρνι2 Reg. 13:25, etc.). With κρσενPaul uses ἐ(Gal_2:2, 2Co_1:19, Col_1:23), ε (here, as Grot. notes, for dative), or the dative (1Co_9:27 and אhere)—all permissible Attic constructions (Bl 39:4). The phrase κρσεντ εαγλο τῦθο recurs in Mar_1:14; cf. Gal_2:2, Col_1:23, Mar_13:10, Mar_14:9.
10. ὑεςμρυε κλ As vv. 7-9 referred to the charge of ζτῦτςδξ (v. 6), so this verse refers probably to the charge of πενξ (v. 5), and vv. 11-12 to that of κλκ The ἀλ of v. 7 still controls, as the asyndeton (H inserts γ) suggests. The fact that Paul and his associates carried themselves in a pious, righteous, and blameless manner (on the adverbs with ἐεήηε cf. 1Co_16:10, Tob. 7:11) is evidence that they were not using the gos