1Pe_3:14.
ἀλλʼ
εἰ
καὶ
πάσχοιτε
]
ἀλλά
expresses the antithesis to the negation contained in the preceding question: “but even though you should suffer;” cf. Winer, p. 275 [E. T. 367]; a species of restriction which, however, is not intended to weaken the force of the foregoing thought. No doubt the possibility of suffering is admitted, yet in such a way that the Christian is considered blessed on account of that suffering.
πάσχειν
is not identical with
κακοῦσθαι
, but, as Bengel rightly remarks: levius verbum quam
κακοῦσθαι
. Every Christian has a
πάσχειν
, but he need never fear a
κακοῦσθαι
.[189]
διὰ
δικαιοσύνην
] recalls Mat_5:10.
δικαιοσύνη
is here (cf. chap. 1Pe_2:24) synonymous with
τὸ
ἀγαθόν
and
ἡ
ἀγαθὴ
ἐν
Χριστῷ
ἀναστροφή
, 1Pe_3:16.
μακάριοι
] sc.
ἐστέ
. Even suffering itself contributes to your blessedness.
τὸν
δὲ
φόβον
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.] These and the words which begin the following verse are “a free use” (Schott) of the passage, Isa_8:12-13, LXX.:
τὸν
δὲ
φόβον
αὐτοῦ
(i.e.
τοῦ
λαοῦ
)
οὐ
μὴ
φοβηθῆτε
,
οὐδὲ
μὴ
ταραχθῆτε
·
κύριον
αὐτὸν
ἁγιάσατε
. The thought here is not quite the same, the sense of the Old Testament passage being: do not share the terror of the people, and do not be moved by what alarms them. If
φόβος
be here taken objectively, then
φόβος
αὐτῶν
is “the fear emanating from them,” or “the fear which they excite” (de Wette, Brückner); cf. Psa_91:5 :
οὐ
φοβηθήσῃ
ἀπὸ
φόβου
νυκτερινοῦ
; cf. also in this chap. 1Pe_3:6. If, on the other hand, it be taken in a subjective sense, then
αὐτῶν
is equal to “of them,” therefore: “do not fear with the fear of them, i.e. do not be afraid of them” (Schott and Hofmann also). In both cases the meaning is substantially the same. Wiesinger is inaccurate when he takes
φόβος
subjectively, and interprets
αὐτῶν
as de Wette does.
[189] These words also are wrongly explained by Schott, since he takes
ἀλλʼ
as quickly denying the previous statement, and introducing a new turn of thought, separates
εἰ
καί
from each other, and connects
καί
with
πάσχοιτε
in the sense of “even.” For the first, Schott appeals to Hartung’s Partikell. II. p. 37; for the second, to Hartung, I. p. 140, note; but without any right to do so. For, as to the former, he overlooks that
ἀλλʼ
here follows on a sentence negative in meaning; and as to the latter, that
καί
has here a position, in which a separation of it from
εἰ
could not for a moment be thought of. The apostle would have expressed the idea: “if for righteousness’sake you should have to experience (not only not happiness and blessing, but) even suffering,” by
εἰ
διὰ
δικαιοσύνην
καὶ
πάσχοιτε
.