1Pe_3:9. Behaviour towards the hostile world,
μὴ
ἀποδιδόντες
κακὸν
ἀντὶ
κακοῦ
] the same phrase occurs Rom_12:17, 1Th_5:15; comp. Mat_5:43 ff.
ἢ
λοιδορίαν
ἀντὶ
λοιδορίας
] comp. chap. 1Pe_2:23. Nicol. de Lyra: non reddentes malum pro malo in factis injuriosis, nec maledictam pro maledicta in verbis contentiosis.
τοὐναντίον
δὲ
εὐλογοῦντες
] i.e. in return for
κακόν
and
λοιδορία
;
εὐλογεῖν
in the N. T., when used of man, is equal to bona apprecari, opposed to
καταρᾶσθαι
; cf. Mat_5:44; Luk_6:28; Rom_12:14; 1Co_4:12; Jam_3:9. Taken in this sense (Wiesinger, Brückner, Hofmann[184]), it expresses simply the opposite of the preceding
λοιδορίαν
ἀντὶ
λοιδορίας
. It is more in harmony with the context, however, to understand it as referring equally to
κακὸν
ἀντὶ
κακοῦ
; in which case it will have a wider sense, and be equivalent to “wishing well and showing kindness by word and deed” (Fronmüller). This is supported by the subsequent
εὐλογίαν
; nor does the N. T. usage stand in the way, in so far as in 2Co_9:5-6, at least,
εὐλογία
denotes something accomplished by human action, though Hofmann strangely seeks to lessen its force by understanding it of “a personal greeting.”
ὅτι
εἰς
τοῦτο
ἐκλήθητε
] comp. chap. 1Pe_2:21.
ἵνα
εὐλογίαν
κληρονομήσητε
] From chap. 1Pe_2:21 it is natural to take
εἰς
τοῦτο
as referring to what precedes (
εὐλογοῦντες
) (Oecumenius, Grotius, Calvin, Steiger, de Wette-Brückner, Fronmüller, Reiche, Hofmann, etc.); in which case
ἵνα
would belong either to
εὐλογοῦντες
,
ὅτι
…
ἐκλήθητε
thus forming a parenthesis, or to
ἐκλήθητε
. But in the first case the close connection of the clauses is broken, whilst in the second the somewhat inadequate idea arises, that we are called upon to bless, in order that we ourselves may obtain a blessing. It is therefore better to take
εἰς
τοῦτο
with the subsequent
ἵνα
(Luther, Beza, Bengel, Wiesinger, Schott, etc.); comp. chap. 1Pe_4:6; Joh_18:37; Rom_14:9. The consciousness that we, as Christians, are called to obtain a blessing, should be an incitement to us to bring blessing to others; the more so, that otherwise we shall fall short of the blessing to which we are called. On
εὐλογίαν
Bengel rightly remarks: benedictionem aeternam, cujus primitias jam nunc pii habent. If
εἰδότες
before
ὅτι
be the correct reading, it must be taken as in chap. 1Pe_1:18.
[184] Schott no doubt insists that the blessing of man is accomplished in word only and not in deed, but he does not say whether it means a wish expressed in prayer (bona apprecari), or whether any operation through the word is to be understood, for he renders
εὐλογεῖν
by “to bestow good in word.” If the former be implied, then it is wrong to say: “that God’s blessing is in truth accompanied by deeds, but man’s must stop short at the word.” If the second, then man’s blessing is also in deed.