Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 Corinthians 2
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
The readings which alter πειθοῖς ( ΠΕΙΘΟῖ : 1, 18*, 48, al[306] Or. Eus. al[307]; ΠΕΙΘΑΝΟῖς , Macar.), and those which either leave out ΛΌΓΟΙς (F G, 74, al[308] Erp. Boern. Ambrosiast. Sedul.) or alter it ( ΛΌΓΩΝ : Syr[309] Armen. Or. twice over, and several others: ΛΌΓΟΝ ), are old shifts resorted to on failure to understand ΠΕΙΘΟῖς , as also the short reading ἘΝ ÐÅÉÈÏ ͂ ΣΟΦΊΑς must be so accounted. See the exegetical remarks, and Reiche, p. 133.—1Co_2:7. The order of the words ΘΕΟῦ ΣΟΦΊΑΝ (Elz. and Matth. invert it) is decisively attested, as also the order in 1Co_2:10 : ἈΠΕΚΆΛ . Ὁ ΘΕΌς .—1Co_2:9. In place of the second Ἅ , Lachm. and Tisch. have ὍΣΑ , with A B C and some Fathers.[310] Rightly; ἅ is a mechanical repetition from what goes before.—1Co_2:10. Instead of δέ Tisch. reads γάρ , supported only by B, min[311] Copt. Sahid. Clem.
αὐτοῦ ] is wanting in A B C à , Copt. Clem. Bas. Cyr. It is deleted by Lachm. and Rückert. But considering the independent τὸ γὰρ πνεῦμα which follows, it would have been more natural to omit αὐτοῦ or to add ἁγίου (so Didym.) than to insert αὐτοῦ .—1Co_2:11. ἔγνωκεν is, in accordance with the vast preponderance of evidence, approved by Griesb. and adopted by Lachm. Tisch. and Rückert. Elz., however, Matth. and Scholz, have οἶδεν . Repetition of the preceding οἶδεν , done mechanically or by way of gloss. In favour of ἔγνωκεν there is also the reading ἔγνω in F G, 23, and Fathers.—1Co_2:13. πνεύματος ] Elz. adds ἁγίου , against decisive evidence to the contrary. A superfluous and weakening definition.—1Co_2:15. The μέν after ἀνακρ . in Elz. and Scholz (deleted by Lachm. Tisch. and Rück.) is wanting in A C D* F G, 17, and many VSS[312] and Fathers. It has arisen from the δέ which follows. In à * the whole verse is omitted through Homoioteleuton. à ** has μέν .
τὰ πάντα ] so also Rück. and Tisch.; Lachm. brackets τά ; Elz. and Scholz have simply πάντα . But τά is attested by A C D, min[313] Ir. ms. Or. Nyss. Chrys.; πάντα is an old correction of the text, with the view of bringing in the masculine to correspond with the οὐδενός which comes after; hence, too, Didym. and Theodoret have πάντας .—1Co_2:16. Χριστοῦ ] Lachm. has Κυρίου , with B D* F G, Theophyl. Ambrosiast. Aug. Sedul. Mechanical repetition of the preceding Κυρίου . Had Κυρίου been the original reading and explained by a gloss, the substitute for it would have been not Χριστοῦ , but Θεοῦ , seeing that every marginal annotator must have been aware from Isa_40:13 that the preceding Κυρίου referred to God.
[301] min. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.
[302] yr. Peschito Syriac
[303] in. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.
[304] in. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.
[305] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
[306] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
[307] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
[308] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
[309] yr. Peschito Syriac
[310] Clement, too, Cor. I. 34, has ὅσα , which certainly was not first imported from his quotation into that of the apostle (Hofmann). A converse proceeding on the part of the transcribers might rather seem more natural.
[311] in. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.
[312] SS. vss. = versions.
[313] in. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.