Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 Thessalonians 3:12 - 3:12
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Th_3:12. To the wish as regards himself, Paul adds a further wish as regards his readers.[49]
ὙΜᾶς ΔΈ ] Bengel puts it well: sive nos viniemus, sive minus.
If Ὁ ΚΎΡΙΟς (see critical note) is genuine, it may grammatically refer either to God or to Christ (although the latter is the more usual); also ἜΜΠΡΟΣΘΕΝ ΤΟῦ ΘΕΟῦ , 1Th_3:13, instead of ΑὐΤΟῦ , is no objection to the reference to God, as the repetition of the name in full shortly after its mention is not rare; comp. 1Th_2:2; Eph_4:12; Eph_4:16; Winer, p. 130 [E. T. 180].
The optatives (not infinitives, as Bretschneider thinks, who without justification supplies δῴη ὙΜῖΝ ) ΠΛΕΟΝΆΣΑΙ and ΠΕΡΙΣΣΕΎΣΑΙ are in a transitive sense: but the Lord make you to become rich and abound in love. On πλεονάζειν , comp. LXX. Num_26:54; Ps. 70:21; on ΠΕΡΙΣΣΕΎΕΙΝ , comp. Eph_1:8; 2Co_9:8, etc. Erroneously Theodoret, whom Cornelius a Lapide follows, takes ΠΛΕΟΝΆΣΑΙ by itself, of the external increase of the church: εὔχεται τοίνυν αὐτοὺς καὶ τῷ ἀριθμῷ πλεονάσαι καὶ τῇ ἀγάπῃ περισσεῦσαι , τουτέστι τελείαν αὐτὴν κτήσασθαι , ὥστε μηδὲν ἐλλείπειν αὐτῇ . So also Olshausen and Koch erroneously distinguish ΠΛΕΟΝΆΖΕΙΝ and ΠΕΡΙΣΣΕΎΕΙΝ as cause and effect: to increase, and arising from this increase, abundance. Similarly Fromond. as extensio and intensio charitatis.
εἰς ἀλλήλους ] towards fellow-Christians.
ΕἸς ΠΆΝΤΑς ] is not an explication of εἰς ἀλλήλους : erga vos invicem et quidem omnes, which Koppe thinks possible, but means toward all men generally. Estius: etiam infideles et vestrae salutis inimicos. Theodoret, without reason, limits it to fellow-Christians of all places; whilst he interprets εἰς ἀλλήλους of fellow-Christians in Thessalonica.
ΚΑΘΆΠΕΡ ΚΑῚ ἩΜΕῖς ΕἸς ὙΜᾶς ] sc. τῇ ἀγάπῃ πλεονάζομεν καὶ περισσεύομεν , as we also are rich in love and abound toward you. Only this completion of the ellipsis corresponds to the context, and the objection to it, that πλεονάζειν and ΠΕΡΙΣΣΕΎΕΙΝ is used first in a transitive and then in an intransitive sense, is of no force, as the passage of the one into the other here is so insensible and easy, that no reader could take objection to it. Arbitrary are the completions of Calvin: affecti sumus; Nösselt: animati sumus; Baumgarten-Crusius: ἜΧΟΜΕΝ (?); Pelt and Schott: ΠΟΛΛῊΝ ἈΓΆΠΗΝ ἜΧΟΜΕΝ ; Wolf (and so essentially already Musculus): ΠΕΡΙΣΣΕΎΣΑΙ , abundare nos in vos faciat; in which latter case the accusative ἩΜᾶς (as certainly Laurent, Neutestam. Studien, Gotha 1866, p. 188, actually reads, but without justification) must be put in place of the nominative ἡμεῖς . Also, supplying the simple copula sumus (Grotius) is to be rejected, which would suppose a form of speech entirely un-Grecian. Correctly, according to the sense, Theophylact: ἔχετε γὰρ μέτρον καὶ παράδειγμα τῆς ἀγάπης ἡμᾶς .
[49] Entirely erroneously, Piscator begins with this verse the second or exhortative portion of the Epistle.