1Pe_3:15.
κύριον
δὲ
τὸν
Χριστόν
]
κύριον
, in Isaiah equivalent to
τὸν
Θεόν
; a substitution of this kind is frequently found in the N. T., where reference is made to passages in the O. T., and can be easily explained on the principle that a consciousness distinctively Christian was asserting itself; “
κύριον
is placed first, as antithesis to
αὐτῶν
” (Wiesinger). Schott denies that
κύριον
stands in apposition to
τὸν
Χριστόν
, holding that
κύριον
is to be taken rather as a predicate of the object, equivalent to, “as Lord;” for this reason, that
κύριος
stands here without the article, and that the simple conjunction of
κύριος
and
Χριστός
does not occur. But against the first objection the expression
κύριος
ὁ
Θεός
may be urged, and against the second the verse Luk_2:11. It is more natural, and at the same time more in harmony with the passage in the O. T., to connect
κύριος
directly with
τὸν
Χριστόν
: “but … the Lord, the Messiah.”
ἁγιάσατε
] in antithesis to
φοβηθῆτε
and
ταραχθῆτε
; “hold, i.e. honour, fear as holy” (de Wette); the sanctifying comprehends within it the fear of God; cf. Isa_8:18; Isa_29:23; it thus forms the contrast to the fear of man; where the former is, the latter must give way.
ἐν
ταῖς
καρδίαις
ὑμῶν
] added by the apostle in order to mark the inward nature of the
ἁγιάζειν
.
ἕτοιμοι
] Whether
δέ
be the original reading or not, this clause is undoubtedly intimately connected in thought with that which precedes it. Without
δέ
this being ready is conceived as a proof of the
ἁγιάζειν
Χρ
.; with
δέ
the thought is this, that the
ἁγιάζειν
Χρ
.
κ
.
τ
.
λ
., which banishes all fear of man, should not exclude the
ἀπολογία
before men (de Wette, Wiesinger). Hofmann takes the particle here as equal to “rather;” but against this is the fact that here
κύριον
…
ὑμῶν
would have to be taken as a simple parenthesis, inasmuch as
δέ
would refer only to what precedes, and a second antithesis would then be added to the already antithetical
κύριον
δὲ
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.
ἀεὶ
πρὸς
ἀπολογίαν
παντὶ
τῷ
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.]
ἕτοιμος
πρός
, cf. Titus 3 :.—“The injunction exempts neither time (
ἀεί
) nor person (
παντί
)” (Steiger).
To limit its application to a judicial examination is arbitrary, and militates against
παντί
.
ἀπολογία
not equal to satisfactio (Vulg.), but here rather quaevis responsio, qua ratio fidei (more correctly spei) nostrae redditur (Vorstius; Php_1:7; Php_1:16; Act_26:2).
παντὶ
τῷ
αἰτοῦντι
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.] The dative depending on
ἀπολογίαν
, cf. 1Co_9:3; for
αἰτέω
with double accusative, cf. Winer, p. 212 f. [E. T. 281].
λόγον
αἰτεῖν
: “to demand account of,” only here, cf. chap. 1Pe_4:5; Rom_14:12.
περὶ
τῆς
ἐν
ὑμῖν
ἐλπίδος
]
περί
: as to its nature and ground.
ἐλπίς
, not equivalent to
πίστις
(Calvin: spes hic per synecdochen pro fide capitur), but the hope of the Christian looking, on the ground of faith, into the future salvation.[190]
ἀλλὰ
μετὰ
πραΰτητος
καὶ
φόβου
] If
ἀλλά
be the true reading, as there can hardly be any doubt it is, it will serve to make more sharply prominent the way and manner, in which the
ἀπολογία
should be conducted; de Wette: “as it were: but remember.”
μετά
, to be connected not with
ἕτοιμοι
, but with
ἀπολογίαν
;
πραΰτητος
opposed to passionate zeal.
φόβου
is to be applied directly neither to God (Aretius: reverentia et timor Dei; thus Weiss also, p. 169), nor to men before whom testimony is to be borne (according to some: the civil authorities); but it denotes the being afraid—based, of course, on the fear of God—of every unseemly kind of
ἀπολογία
, and stands especially opposed to all arrogant self-confidence (Wiesinger).
[190] That this “account” had special reference to the removal of the suspicion that the kingdom of Christ was of this world, is nowhere alluded to in the context (de “Wette, Schott). And Schott is hardly justified in giving the apostle’s exhortations special application “to the divinely ordained ordinances of natural social life.”