1Pe_4:2.
εἰς
τὸ
μηκέτι
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.] The words may be connected either with the exhortation
ὁπλίσασθε
or with
πέπαυται
ἁμαρτίας
. De Wette, Brückner, Wiesinger, Schott, and Hofm. justly prefer the former connection, inasmuch as the infinitival clause expressive of a purpose stands related more naturally to the imperative, than to a subordinate clause containing a general statement (otherwise Zezschwitz and the former exposition in this commentary). Still, it is incorrect to connect
εἰς
here with
ὁπλίζεσθαι
, as in the common phrase:
ὁπλίζεσθαι
εἰς
τὸ
μάχεσθαι
(Schott). Had the apostle meant this, he could not have separated by a parenthesis words which so directly belong to each other;
εἰς
can only add the nearer definition of the aim to which
ὁπλιζ
. is directed.
ἀνθρώπων
ἐπιθυμίαις
.
ἀλλὰ
θελήματι
Θεοῦ
] The datives are to be explained either as
τῇ
δικαιοσύνῃ
ζῆν
, chap. 1Pe_2:24 (Brückner, Wiesinger), or they express the pattern according to which (Hofm.); as in Act_15:1, Gal_5:16; Gal_5:25, etc. Gerh.: praecipit ut normam vitae nostrae statuamus non hominum voluntatem, sed Dei voluntatem. The latter view is to be preferred on account of the idea
τὸν
…
βιῶσαι
χρόνον
. “
ἀνθρώπων
and
Θεοῦ
are antitheses, as are also the manifold lusts of men and the one uniform will of God” (Wiesinger). The notion that by
ἐπιθυμίαι
are to be understood the lusts, not of the readers, but of those only by whom they were surrounded (Schott, Hofm.), must be rejected as arbitrary.
τὸν
ἐπίλοιπον
ἐν
σαρκὶ
βιῶσαι
χρὸνον
] With
ἐν
σαρκί
, comp. 2Co_10:3, Gal_2:20; Php_1:22; Php_1:24.
σάρξ
expresses as little here as in 1Pe_4:1 an ethical conception; it denotes the earthly human nature to which the mortal body belongs.
The verb
βιοῦν
is
ἅπ
.
λεγ
. in the N. T. The form
βιῶσαι
is to be found in the Attic writers, but it is less common than the 2 aor.:
βιῶναι
.
ἐπίλοιπος
, in like manner,
ἅπ
.
λεγ
.: “the remaining time in the flesh;” an idea similar to
ὁ
τῆς
παροικίας
χρόνος
, chap. 1Pe_1:17. With the whole thought, comp. Rom_12:2.