Heinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 Thessalonians 3:13 - 3:13

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Heinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 Thessalonians 3:13 - 3:13


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

1Th_3:13. The final aim is derived from the wish, 1Th_3:12, because love is the fulfilling of the law (Rom_13:10), and the band of perfection (Col_3:14).

εἰς τὸ στηρίξαι ] not so that (Pelt, Baumgarten-Crusius); also, not so much as καὶ στηρίξαι (Koppe), by which the words would only annex a new wish to the preceding. It is designed to introduce a majus, a greater, specifying the higher or final aim to which πλεονάζειν and περισσεύειν are to conduct. But the subject in στηρίξαι is not τὴν ἀγάπην (Oecumenius), but τὸν κύριον (which, however, is not, with Theophylact and Schrader, to be converted into the idea τὸ πνεῦμα ), or, with the contingent spuriousness of κύριος in 1Th_3:12 : God and Christ, 1Th_3:11.

στηρίξαι denotes confirming, strengthening generally, not confirming in the faith (Flatt, Pelt), against which is the context.

τὰς καρδίας ] Chrysostom: οὐκ εἶπεν ὑμᾶς στηρίξαι , ἀλλὰ τὰς καρδίας ὑμῶν . Ἐκ γὰρ τῆς καρδίας ἐξέρχονται διαλογισμοὶ πονηροί .

ἀμέμπτους ] proleptic: so that you will be blameless. Comp. 1Co_1:8; Php_3:21 (according to the correct reading); Winer, p. 549 [E. T. 779]; Kühner, II. p. 121.

ἐν ἁγιωσύνῃ ] belongs not to στηρίξαι , but to ἀμέμπτους , specifying the sphere in which the blamelessness is to be shown. The expression denotes the condition of holiness, comp. Rom_1:4; 2Co_7:1; erroneously Koppe: alias ἁγιασμός , and Olshausen: ἁγιωσύνη is the process of becoming holy, the result of which is ἁγιασμός .

ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Θεοῦ ] before God, according to His judgment, His judicial sentence, belongs neither to ἁγιωσύνῃ (Koppe, Pelt), nor to ἀμέμπτους (de Wette, Koch), but to the whole ἀμέμπτους ἐν ἁγιωσύνῃ .

μετὰ πάντων τῶν ἁγίων αὐτοῦ ] Flatt, with whom Hofmann, in his Schriftbeweis, II. 2, ed. 1, p. 595, agrees (he construes the passage differently in ed. 2, p. 649, and in his H. Schr. N. T., without altering his interpretation of οἱ ἅγιοι ), unites the clause with ἀμέμπτους ἐν ἁγιωσύνῃ : “in order that ye may appear blameless on that day with all who are consecrated to God, who are the genuine members of His people, who truly honour God and Christ.” So also Musculus; and also Benson and Olshausen (comp. also Bouman, Chartae theol. I. p. 81 ff.), although they do not construe with Musculus and Flatt, understand by ἅγιοι the earlier perfected believers. But the difficulty which impelled Flatt to this interpretation (and in which Schrader finds even an objection against the authenticity of the Epistle), namely, that ἅγιοι in the New Testament never denotes the angels when it is by itself, that is, without the addition of ἄγγελοι , vanishes, as—(1) The advent is considered as glorified by the appearance of angels; comp. 2Th_1:7; Mat_16:27; Mat_25:31; Mar_8:38; Luk_9:26. (2) In the Old Testament without any further addition ÷ÀãÉùÑÄéí , and in the LXX. οἱ ἅγιοι , is a designation of the angels; comp. e.g. Zec_14:5; Dan_4:10; and therefore this current designation cannot surprise us in Paul. Also, what Hofmann in the above-mentioned place urges in favour of Flatt’s interpretation is without force. For to “the probability of the three prepositions ἔμπροσθεν , ἐν , and μετά being used in a similar connection,” is opposed the greater naturalness and easiness of the connection of μετὰ πάντων τῶν ἁγίων αὐτοῦ with the directly preceding ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ . “And that also the connection” supports Flatt’s explanation, “since the brotherly love in which the Thessalonians are to grow finds its suitable reward in sharing at length the blessed fellowship of all the saints of God,” so that hereby is already introduced “what the apostle has particularly to teach the Christians of Thessalonica for their comfort, that those believers who fell asleep before the Advent of the Lord will not be wanting at it,” can only be maintained without arbitrariness, if not only the explanation in 1Th_4:1-12, but the section 1Th_4:13 ff., be directly joined to 1Th_3:13; and then this section would be introduced with Οὐ θέλομεν γὰρ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν , instead of with Οὐ θέλομεν δὲ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν .

Moreover, the concluding word αὐτοῦ is more correctly referred to τοῦ Θεοῦ , than, with Pelt, Riggenbach, and others, to τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ .