Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 Peter 1
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
λυπηθέντες ] The reading λυπηθέντας , in L à and several min., is probably only an error in copying.—1Pe_1:7. πολυτιμότερον ] adopted by Griesb. already, instead of πολὺ τιμιώτερον in K, etc.
Instead of τιμὴν καὶ δόξαν (Rec., according to K L P, etc.), Lachm. and Tisch. read δόξαν καὶ τιμήν , which is supported by A B C à , many min., several vss. etc.—1Pe_1:8. εἰδότες ] Rec. after A K L P, etc., Copt. Clem. Theoph. etc.; Lachm. and Tisch., following B C à 27, etc., Syr. Aeth. etc., read ἰδόντες ; as both readings give a fitting sense, and as both are attested by high authorities, it cannot with certainty be decided which is the original. Brückner and Hofmann are in favour of ἰδόντες , Schott of εἰδότες , Wiesinger uncertain.—1Pe_1:9. After πίστεως , Tisch. 7, following B, several min. Clem. Aeth. etc., omits ὑμῶν , attested though it be by most of the authorities (A C K L P à , al., etc.); Tisch. 8 has retained. Although it may be superfluous for the meaning, yet its omission is not justified.—1Pe_1:10-11. Instead of ἐξηρεύνησαν and ἐρευνῶντες , Tisch., following A B, has adopted ἐξηραύνησαν , and after B* ἐραυνῶντες .—1Pe_1:11. B omits Χριστοῦ , which must be regarded as a correction.—1Pe_1:12. Instead of the Received ἡμῖν δέ (K, al., Copt, etc.), Griesb. Scholz, Lachm. Tisch. have rightly adopted the reading ὑμῖν δέ , attested by A B C L P à , al., Vulg. etc.[31]
ἘΝ ΠΝΕΎΜΑΤΙ ἉΓΊῼ ] Rec., after C K L P à , etc., Copt. Theoph. etc. (Tisch. 8); Lachm. and Tisch. 7 omit ἘΝ , after A B, al., Slav. Vulg. Cypr. Didym. etc. Possibly ἐν was interpolated on account of the usage prevalent elsewhere in the N. T.—1Pe_1:16. Tisch. 7 reads after γέγραπται : ὅτι ἅγιοι ἔσεσθε , ὅτι ; on the other hand, Tisch. 8 omits ὅτι before ἅγιοι , and has after ἔσεσθε : διότι . With the preponderance of authorities ἅγιοι ἔσεσθε , ὅτι is to be read; almost B alone is in favour of ὅτι before ἅγιοι ; and for διότι , only à .
γένεσθε ] Rec., after K P, etc.
Lachm. and Tisch. rightly read ἜΣΕΣΘΕ , after A B C à , al., Vulg. Clem. Syr.; γένεσθε is a correction after the preceding γενήθητε . In the LXX. ἔσεσθε stands.
In A B* à Clem. Cyr. εἰμι is wanting after ἅγιος ; Lachm. and Tisch. have justly omitted it.—1Pe_1:20. Lachm. and Tisch. rightly read, instead of ἐπʼ ἐσχάτων (Rec., after K L P, etc.): ἘΠʼ ἘΣΧΆΤΟΥ (A B C à , al., Copt. Syr. utr. etc.).
Instead of ὑμᾶς , A and several min. have ἡμᾶς , which, however, must be considered as a correction.—1Pe_1:21. πιστεύοντας ] Rec., according to C K L P à , etc., several vss. Theoph. Oec.; still the reading ΠΙΣΤΟΎς might be preferred as the more difficult, with Lachm. and Tisch., after A B, especially as ΠΙΣΤῸς ΕἸς does not occur elsewhere in the N. T.; Wiesinger and Schott also consider ΠΙΣΤΟΎς the original reading, whilst Hofmann gives the preference to the Rec.—1Pe_1:22. The Rec. has the words ΔΙᾺ ΠΝΕΎΜΑΤΟς after ἈΛΗΘΕΊΑς , following K L P, Theoph. etc., which Griesb. already considers suspicious; Lachm. and Tisch. have justly omitted them (following A B C à , many min. etc.).
Lachm. and Tisch. read ἘΚ ΚΑΡΔΊΑς (A B, Vulg.); the Rec. is ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας (C K L P à , al., nearly all the vss. etc.); ΧΑΘΑΡᾶς is certainly very suspicious, since its addition is more easily explained than its omission; cf. 1Ti_1:5; 2Ti_2:22; on the other hand, however, see Rom_4:17. Hofmann assumes that ΚΑΘΑΡᾶς is omitted only by mistake.—1Pe_1:23. The words ΕἸς ΤῸΝ ΑἸῶΝΑ , following in the Rec. after μένοντος , which in A B C à and other authorities are wanting, were justly omitted already by Griesb.—1Pe_1:24. Lachm. omits ὡς before χόρτος , after A, several min. Syr. etc. Most of the witnesses are in favour of ὡς , the omission of which is to be regarded as a correction after the text of the LXX.
δόξα αὐτῆς ] after A B C K L P, etc., instead of the Rec., to be found almost only in min. Rec.: δόξα ἀνθρώπου . In à pr. m. is to be found the reading: ἡ δόξα αὐτοῦ .
After τὸ ἄνθος the Rec. has ΑὐΤΟῦ , retained by Tisch. 7, after C K L P, etc., Vulg. Copt. Lachm. and Tisch. 8 have omitted it after A B à , etc.; it is certainly suspicious, since it may have been interpolated as an explanation; on the other hand, its omission may be a correction after Isa_40:7, LXX.
[31] Buttmann has retained the Rec. ἡμῖν δέ , after B, as he asserts. De Wette holds the Rec. to be the original reading, it being natural that the apostle should include himself, and οἷς rather than ἃ … ὑμῖν would be expected after ὑμῖν ; Brückner justly gives preference to the opposing testimony.