Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 Peter 3
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
Almost all authorities (as also à ), even Griesb., along with Lachm. and Tisch., support the reading κερδηθήσονται instead of κερδηθήσωνται . The future conjunct., occurring only in later writers (see Winer, p. 72 [E. T. 89]), is to be found only in min.; it is put here because of ἵνα ; superfluously, however, as ἵνα in the N. T. is often construed cum. Ind., Joh_17:2; Rev_22:14.—1Pe_3:3. ἐμπλοκῆς τριχῶν καὶ περιθέσεως ] Lachm. substitutes: ἐμπλοκῆς ἢ περιθέσεως , in C.
The most important authorities, however, support the usual reading (Tisch.).—1Pe_3:4. πρᾳέος καὶ ἡσυχίου ] Rec. after A C L K P à , most min. Clem. Thph. etc.
Lachm.: ἡσυχίου καὶ πρᾳέος , in B, Vulg. Copt. etc. Instead of πρᾳέος , Tisch. reads πρᾳέως , cf. A. Buttmann, p. 23.—1Pe_3:5. Millius, without sufficient reason, regards the words: αἱ ἐλπίζουσαι ἐπὶ τὸν Θεόν , as spurious, because they are not in the vss. Aethiop.
However, according to A B C, etc., and Lachm. and Tisch., εἰς should probably be read for ἐπί . The article τόν , which is found almost only in min., must be deleted (Lachm. Tisch.), so that the original text probably runs: αἱ ἐλπίζουσαι εἰς Θεόν . à reads αἱ ἐλπ . ἐπὶ τὸν Θεόν after the word ἑαυτάς .—1Pe_3:6. ὑπήκουσε ] Lachm.: ὑπήκουεν , is insufficiently attested by B, Vulg.—1Pe_3:7. The Rec. συγκληρονόμοις (Tisch.) is found in several min. (3, 7, 8, etc.), in Vulg. Syr. Aeth. Arm. Arr., in Thph. Oec. Aug. etc.; it is doubtful if in B.[165] In à we find at first hand: συγκληρονόμους , and as correction: συγκληρονόμοις (according to Buttm.). In A C K L P, many min., several versions, and Hier., on the other hand, we find the nominative: συγκληρονόμοι (Lachm.). The opinion of critics as to which is the original reading, is much divided; almost all commentators prefer the Rec.; so, too, Reiche; whilst Hofm. holds an opposite view. According to the handwriting, the nominative appears clearly to be the better attested reading; but for this see the commentary on the verse.
A C** à , several min. Hier. add the adjective ΠΟΙΚΊΛΗς to ΧΆΡΙΤΟς , which is probably taken from chap. 1Pe_4:10, but which Hofm. nevertheless considers genuine.
Instead of Rec. ἐκκόπτεσθαι , after C** K L, several min. and Theoph. (Tisch. 7), Lachm. and Tisch. 8 read, after AB à , etc.: ἐγκόπτεσθαι (Tisch. 8: ἐνκ .), which Hofmann also considers the original reading. Both readings occur in Oec. It cannot be decided with certainty. Buttm., following B, has accepted the dative ταῖς προσευχαῖς in place of the accus. τὰς προσευχάς . Grammatically no objection can be raised (“so that no hindrance be given to your prayers”); but as this reading is only found in B, it can hardly be considered the original one.—1Pe_3:8. ταπεινόφρονες ] after A B C à , etc., Syr. Erp. etc.; accepted even by Griesb. and Scholz instead of the φιλόφρονες of K and several min. In some Cod. both words are placed side by side, which may, according to Hofmann, be taken as the original reading.—1Pe_3:9. According to almost all authorities: A B C K à , al., Syr. utr. Copt, etc., as also Lachm. and Tisch., ΕἸΔΌΤΕς should be deleted.—1Pe_3:10. The Rec. gives the pronoun αὐτοῦ after γλῶσσαν (K L P à , etc.); in A B C and several min. it is wanting here, as also after χείλη ; Lachm. and Tisch: have accordingly omitted it in both passages.—1Pe_3:11. After ἐκκλινάτω several Codd.: A B C* have the particle δέ (Lachm. Tisch. 7), which in the Rec. is wanting after C** K L P à , etc. (Tisch. 8). The omission seems to be a correction.—1Pe_3:12. ΟἹ ὉΦΘΑΛΜΟΊ ] The article is wanting in A B C* K L P à , etc.; omitted by Scholz, Lachm. Tisch.; Griesb., too, regards ΟἹ as doubtful. In the original passage, Psa_34:6, LXX., it is wanting.—1Pe_3:13. ΖΗΛΩΤΑΊ ] after A B C à , al. (Lachm. Tisch. 8), instead of the Rec. ΜΙΜΗΤΑΊ in K L P, several min. Oec. (Tisch.). ΜΙΜΗΤΑΊ appears to be a correction. ΤΟῦ ἈΓΑΘΟῦ having been taken as masc., and ΖΗΛΩΤΑΊ not being suitable thereto, ( ΜΙΜΗΤΑΊ , following such passages as Eph_5:1, 1Th_1:6, very naturally presented itself; de Wette, Wiesinger, Reiche, Hofmann prefer ΜΙΜΗΤΑΊ ; Brückner and Schott: ΖΗΛΩΤΑΊ . Instead of ἘᾺΝ … ΓΈΝΗΣΘΕ , B reads: ΕἸ … ΓΈΝΟΙΣΘΕ , as Buttm. notes, without, however, receiving it into the text.—1Pe_3:14. Instead of ἈΛΛʼ ΕἸ in A and several min.: ΕἸ ΔΈ .
ΜΗΔῈ ΤΑΡΑΧΘῆΤΕ , omitted in B L 43, but yet received into the text by Buttm.—1Pe_3:15. ΤῸΝ ΘΕΌΝ ] Rec. after K L P, several min. Thph. Oec. Instead of this, Lachm. and Tisch. read τὸν Χριστόν (considered by Griesb. to be probably the genuine reading); attested by A B C à 7, al., Syr. utr. Copt, etc., Clem. Fulgent. The alteration to ΤῸΝ ΘΕΌΝ is explained by Isa_8:13.
After ἝΤΟΙΜΟΙ the Rec. adds δέ ; according to Tisch.’s statement, it stands in A K, etc., but not in B C à , etc.; Buttm. affirms that it is also to be found in B; Tisch. 7 has retained it; Lachm. and Tisch. 8 have not.
In place of αἰτοῦντι , à has the correction: ἀπαιτοῦντι .
A B C à 5, al., Copt. Syr. etc., have ἈΛΛΆ before ΜΕΤΆ , which Lachm. and Tisch. have justly accepted; it may be considered as the original, not only from the testimony of the authorities (it is wanting only in K L P, some min. and versions, in Oec. Beda), but also as being the more difficult reading.—1Pe_3:16. The reading which is best attested by the authorities is: ἘΝ ᾯ ΚΑΤΑΛΑΛΟῦΣΙ ὙΜῶΝ Ὡς ΚΑΚΟΠΟΙῶΝ , as in A C K à , etc. Instead of the indicative, Rec. has the conjunctive: καταλαλῶσιν . B, on the other hand, simply has καταλαλεῖσθε , which Tisch. has accepted; he is, however, hardly justified in doing so, as it is too insufficiently attested, and appears rather to be a correction for the purpose of making the passage less difficult (cf. Schott and Hofmann).—1Pe_3:17. εἰ θέλοι ] justly accepted even by Griesb. instead of the Rec. ΕἸ ΘΈΛΕΙ .—1Pe_3:18. ἩΜῶΝ , following upon ἉΜΑΡΤΙῶΝ in C** al., Syr. Arr. etc., has been accepted by Lachm. in his small edition; it appears to have been inserted in consideration of ἵνα ὑμᾶς προσαγάγῃ τ . Θ .
Instead of the Rec. ἜΠΑΘΕ in B K L P, pl. Thph. Oec. Aug. (Tisch. 7), A C à , 5, al., Cypr. Didym., several versions (Lachm. Tisch. 8) have ἀπέθανε ; de Wette-Brückner explain ἀπέθανε to be a gloss, after Rom_5:6; Rom_6:10; Heb_4:2-7; to this Wiesinger agrees; it is, however, possible that ἔπαθεν arose from chap. 1Pe_2:21, as Hofm. also thinks. According to Tisch., the reading of the Codd. A C* G before the verb is. ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν vel ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ; à has ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ; but whether this addition be genuine, cannot with certainty be decided; it may equally well have been left out as superfluous, as added in order to give prominence to the peculiar significance of the death of Christ.
Instead of ἡμᾶς (A C K L, al., pl., several versions, etc., Lachm. Tisch. 8), B and several min. have ὙΜᾶς (Tisch. 7); insufficiently attested. In the original handwriting à has neither ἩΜᾶς nor ὙΜᾶς ; in the correction: ἩΜᾶς . In B Τῷ ΘΕῷ after ΠΡΟΣΑΓΆΓῌ is wanting, for which reason Buttm. has omitted it.
ΠΝΕΎΜΑΤΙ ] accepted even by Griesb. instead of Rec.: τῷ πνεύματι .—1Pe_3:20. ἀπεξεδέχετο ] undoubtedly the correct rendering, instead of the ἅπαξ ἐξεδέχετο , which is hardly supported by any authority. Tisch. remarks: videtur ex conjectura Erasmi fluxisse, qui sic edidit inde ab ed. 2.
ἀλίγαι ] Rec. after C K L P, many min. Thph. Oec. (Griesb. Scholz); Lachm. and Tisch., on the other hand, following A B à , al., Vulg. Orig. etc., have accepted ὀλίγοι . ὀλίγαι seems to be a correction, because of the subsequent ψυχαί .—1Pe_3:21. ὅ ] Rightly accepted by Griesb., instead of the reading ᾧ in the ed. Elz.
In K, many min. Thph. etc., the opening words—evidently as a correction for the sake of simplification—are thus transposed: ὃ ἀντίτυπον íï ͂ ν ὑμᾶς σώζει .
Instead of the ἡμᾶς in the Rec. (C K L, Copt, etc., Thph. Oec.), Lachm. and Tisch. have adopted ὙΜᾶς (A B P à , several vss. and Fathers); doubtless rightly, as the change to ὙΜᾶς can be explained on the principle that the more general ἩΜᾶς seemed better suited to the context. Reiche prefers ἩΜᾶς .—1Pe_3:22. According to almost all authorities, the article ΤΟῦ stands before ΘΕΟῦ (Rec. Lachm. Tisch. 7); Tisch. 8, however, following B and à , has dropped it.
[165] Birch has given as the reading of B: συγκληρονόμοι , but has been accused of error by Majus. Buttm. in his ed. reads συγκληρονόμοι , and gives this also as the reading of B. On the other hand, in his Recensus lectt. Cod. à , he gives συγκληρονίμοις as the reading adopted by him.