1Pe_5:1. New exhortations in the first place to the
πρεσβύτεροι
and the
νεότεροι
as far as 1Pe_5:5; then to all, without distinction, 1Pe_5:5-9.
πρεσβυτέρους
οὖν
τοὺς
ἐν
ὑμῖν
παρακαλῶ
]
πρεσβύτεροι
are the presidents of the congregations. The name is employed here probably not without reference to age (“the elders”) (see 1Pe_5:5), though this is disputed by Hofmann, who, however, fails to give any reason for so doing. The article is awanting “because
πρεσβ
. is considered as definite of itself” (Wiesinger), and not “because Peter had not a more accurate knowledge of the constitution of the churches” (Schott). If the reading
οὖν
be adopted, these and the following exhortations connect themselves, as conclusions drawn from it, with the preceding conception
ἀγαθοποιΐα
, for the passages 1Th_4:1 and Mat_7:15 do not prove that
οὖν
expresses “only the continuance of the exhortation” (Hofmann). The reading
ἐν
ὑμῖν
, without
τούς
, is opposed by the want of the article before
πρεσβυτέρους
.
ὁ
συμπρεσβύτερος
καὶ
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.] Peter adds these designations of himself, in order thus to give the more weight to his
παρακαλεῖν
. He calls himself
συμπρεσβύτερος
because of his office. What the elders were for the individual congregations, that were the apostles for the whole church, since they had the superintendence of the entire system of congregations.[263] By this name Peter, in humble love (Gualter: nota humilitatem Petri qui minime jus primatus in se cognovit), places himself on an equal footing with the elders proper; Bengel: hortatio mutua inter aequales et collegas imprimis valet. It is less natural to assume, with Hofmann, that in thus speaking of himself Peter “would emphasize the share he had in responsibility for the weal and woe of the congregations.”
ΚΑῚ
ΜΆΡΤΥς
ΤῶΝ
ΤΟῦ
ΧΡΙΣΤΟῦ
ΠΑΘΗΜΆΤΩΝ
] By
ΤᾺ
ΤΟῦ
ΧΡΙΣΤΟῦ
ΠΑΘΉΜΑΤΑ
must not be understood the sufferings which the apostle had to undergo in following Christ, but those which Christ Himself endured; cf. chap. 1Pe_4:13. Yet Peter calls himself a
ΜΆΡΤΥς
, not only because he was an eye-witness of them (cf. Act_10:39) (Aretius: oculatus testis, qui praecipuis ejus aerumnis interfui), but also because he proclaimed those sufferings which he himself had seen[264] (cf. Act_1:8; Act_1:22; Act_13:31). This he did, in the first place, by his words, but at the same time also by his sufferings (a fact which Hofmann should not have denied), in which he was a
κοινωνὸς
τῶν
τοῦ
Χρ
.
παθημάτων
(chap. 1Pe_4:13) (Wiesinger, Schott). What follows seems also to refer to this.[265]
De Wette thinks that whilst by “
συμπρεσβ
.” Peter puts himself on an equality with the elders, he by the second designation places himself above them. But if this had been his intention, he would hardly have included both under the one article; the elders, too, were equally called to be
μάρτυρες
τῶν
Χρ
.
παθ
., although Peter, as an eye-witness, occupied “a special position” (Brückner).
ὃ
καὶ
τῆς
μελλούσης
…
κοινωνός
] Several of the older commentators incorrectly supply “
τοῦ
Χριστοῦ
” to
δόξης
; it is not merely the glory of Christ which is meant, but the
δόξα
, which, at the revelation of that glory, shall be revealed in all those who are His; cf. Rom_8:18; Col_3:4; 1Jn_3:2.
κοινωνός
means simply the participation in that glory. Although it is not equivalent to
συγκοινωνός
(Php_1:7), still the apostle has in his soul the consciousness of being a fellow-sharer with those to whom he is speaking.
The particle
καί
, “also,” unites the two ideas:
μαρτὺς
τῶν
…
παθημάτων
and
κοινωνὸς
τῆς
…
δόξης
together; because the apostle is the former, he will also be the latter. Yet this does not compel the adoption, with Hofmann, of the reading “
ὅ
” (equal to
διʼ
ὅ
, “wherefore”) instead of
ὁ
. Although
μάρτυς
, which is closely connected with
συμπρεσβύτερος
, has no article, it does not follow that
κοινωνός
can have none either. The N. T. usage is opposed to the interpretation of
ὅ
by
διʼ
ὅ
, Gal_2:10; cf. Meyer in loc.; cf. also Winer, p. 135 [E. T. 178].
[263] Hofmann: “The apostles were the overseers of the universal church of Christ; each of them therefore in so far shared in the administration of all the single congregations, inasmuch as these were in the universal church.”
[264] It cannot be denied that, in accordance with its almost uniform usage in the N. T., the word
μαρτύς
possesses this secondary meaning (as opposed to Hofmann).