Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 Peter 2:7 - 2:7
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Pe_2:7. ὑμῖν οὖν ἡ τιμὴ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ] Conclusion, with special reference to the readers, ὑμῖν , drawn from 1Pe_2:6 ( οὖν ), and in the first instance from the second half of the O. T. quotation, for τοῖς πιστεύουσιν evidently stands related to ὁ πιστεύων ἐπʼ αὐτῷ , hence the definite article. On the position of τοῖς πιστ ., cf. Winer, p. 511 [E. T. 687]; only, with Winer, it must not be interpreted: “as believers, i.e. if ye are believers,” but: “ye who are believers.”
From the fact that ἡ τιμή echoes ἔντιμον , it must not be concluded that ἡ τιμή here is the worth which the stone possesses, and that the meaning is: “the worth which the stone has, it has for you who believe” (Wiesinger). The clause would then have read perhaps: ὑμῖν οὖν ὁ λίθος ἐστι ἡ τιμή , or the like. ἡ τιμή stands rather in antithesis to καταισχυνθῆναι , and takes up positively what had been expressed negatively in the verse immediately preceding. Gerhard: vobis, qui per fidem tanquam lapides vivi super eum aedificamini, est honor coram Deo (so, too, de Wette-Brückner, Weiss, Schott); ὑμῖν , sc. ἐστι : “yours therefore is the honour;” the article is not without significance here; the honour, namely, which in that word is awarded to believers (Steiger).
τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ] an explanatory adjunct placed by way of emphasis at the end.
ἀπειθοῦσι [ ἀπιστοῦσιν ] δέ ] antithesis to τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ; ἀπειθεῖν denotes not only the simple not believing, but the resistance against belief; thus also ἀπιστοῦσιν here, if it be the true reading. Bengel wrongly explains the dative by: quod attinet; it is the dat. incommodi (Steiger, de Wette, etc.). The words: λίθος ( λίθον ) … γωνίας , are borrowed literally from Psa_118:22, after the LXX. What is fatal for unbelievers in the fact that the stone is become the corner-stone ( κεφ . γων . equals λιθ . ἀκρογ .) is stated in the following words, which are taken from Isa_8:14 : ìÀàÆáÆï ðÆâÆó åÌìÀöåÌø îÄëÀùÑåÉì .[121] In a manner similar though not quite identical, these passages of the O. T. are woven together by Paul in Rom_9:33. The words do not denote the subjective conduct of the unbelievers (according to Luther, the occasion of stumbling or offence which they find in the preaching of the cross), but the objective destruction which they bring upon themselves by their unbelief (Steiger, de Wette-Brückner, Wiesinger, Schott, Fronmüller); cf. Luk_20:17-18, where the corner-stone is also characterized as a stone of destruction for unbelievers. It is therefore without any foundation that Hofmann asserts “the thought that, to the disobedient, Christ is become the corner-stone seems impossible,” if ἀπειθοῦσιν be taken as the dat. incommodi. So that it is in no way necessary to accept a construction so uncommon as that adopted by Hofmann, who considers the two clauses: ὑμῖν … οἰκοδομοῦντες to be, with an omitted ὤν , in apposition to the following οὗτος , looking on ἡ τιμή as a kind of personal designation of the stone, and separating the three following expressions: εἰς κεφ . γων ., λιθ . προκόμμ ., and πέτρα σκανδ . in such a way as to refer the first to believers and the other two to unbelievers, although no such division is anywhere hinted at.
[121] Schott rightly observes that κεφαλὴ γωνίας , as the corner-stone, must not be understood, with Gerhard and Steiger, as one on which one stumbles and falls. This is not contained in the idea, corner-stone, in itself.