ὅτι
] not that, as Koch and Hofmann think, so that 1Th_4:16-17 (according to Hofmann, only 1Th_4:16!) still depend on
λέγομεν
ἐν
λόγῳ
κυρίου
, 1Th_4:15; but for.
αὐτὸς
ὁ
κύριος
] the Lord Himself.
αὐτός
is neither a mere introductory subject (“He, the Lord,” de Wette, Hofmann); nor added with the design to refer “the coming of Christ expressly to His holy personality and corporality,” accordingly designed to exclude “every manifestation of Him by mere instruments,” or by angels (so Olshausen and Bisping, and already Musculus, Estius, and Fromond.[58]); also is not inserted here “for solemnity’s sake, and to show that it will not be a mere gathering to Him, but He Himself will descend, and we shall be summoned before Him” (Alford);—but it represents Christ as the chief Person and actor at the advent, emphatically opposed to His faithful ones—both those already asleep (
οἱ
νεκροὶ
ἐν
Χριστῷ
) and those still living—as they who are acted upon.
κέλευσμα
] in the N. T. an
ἅπαξ
λεγόμενον
, denotes an imperative call, e.g. of a commander to his host to exhort them to the conflict or to warn them to decamp, of a driver to excite his horses to greater speed, of a huntsman to encourage his hounds to the pursuit of the prey, of sailors to excite themselves to vigorous rowing, etc. Comp. Thucyd. ii. 92; Xen. de venat. vi. 20; Lucian, Catapl. 19. Here the
κέλευσμα
might be referred to God. Only then we must not, as Hunnius does, identify it with the
σάλπιγξ
Θεοῦ
, and find represented in the two expressions the “horribilis fragor inclarescentium tonitruum;” but, in conjunction with the statement that God only knows beforehand the time and hour of the advent (Mat_24:3), it must refer to the imperative call to bring about the advent. So recently Bisping. This interpretation is, however, to be rejected, because the three sentences introduced with
ἐν
are evidently similar, i.e. all three are a statement of the mode of
καταβαίνειν
, accordingly contain the description of the circumstances with which the descent during the course of its completion will be accompanied. But, understood in the above manner,
ἐν
κελεύσματι
would denote an act preceding the
καταβαίνειν
, and thus another preposition instead of
ἐν
would necessarily be chosen. Others, as Theodoret, Oecumenius, Grotius, and Olshausen, refer
ἐν
κελεύσματι
to Christ. But in this case we would be puzzled so to define the contents of the
κέλευσμα
, as to prevent them coming into collision with the
φωνεῖν
of the
ἀρχάγγελος
. For that we are not justified, with Theodoret, in distinguishing the
κέλευσμα
and the
φωνή
by a prius and post (
ὁ
κύριος
…
κελεύσει
μὲν
ἀρχάγγελον
βοῆσαι
) is evident, as both are simultaneous—both in a similar manner are represented as accompanying the
καταβαίνειν
. It is accordingly most probable that Paul places
ἐν
κελεύσματι
first as a primary, and on that account absolute expression, and then, in an epexegetical manner, more fully developes it by
ἐν
φωνῇ
ἀρχαγγέλου
καὶ
ἐν
σάλπιγγι
Θεοῦ
. If this is the correct interpretation, the apostle considers the
κέλευσμα
as given by the archangel,[59] directly afterwards mentioned, who for the publication of it uses partly his voice and partly a trumpet; and, as the contents of the
κέλευσμα
, the imperative call which reaches the sleeping Christians to summon them from their graves (comp. also the following
καὶ
οἱ
νεκροὶ
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.), consequently the resurrection-call (Theodoret, John Damascenus, Calixt, and others).
ἐν
φωνῇ
ἀρχαγγέλου
καὶ
ἐν
σάλπιγγι
Θεοῦ
] with the call, namely, of an archangel, and with (the sound) of the trumpet of God. Christ will return surrounded by hosts of angels; comp. 1Th_3:13; 2Th_1:7; Mat_16:27; Mat_24:30 f., Mat_25:31; Mar_8:38; Mar_13:26 f.; Luk_9:26. According to the post-exile Jewish notion, the angels were distinguished into different orders and classes, over each of which presided an
ἀρχάγγελος
. (See Winer’s bibl. Realwörterb. 2d ed. vol. I. p. 386 f.) One of these
ἀρχάγγελοι
(
ùÒÈøÄéí
)—whom Nicolas de Lyra, Hunnius, Estius (appealing to Jud_1:9 and Revelation 12), Bern, a Picon., Bisping suppose to be the archangel Michael; and Cornelius a Lapide, Michael or Gabriel; whilst Ambrosiaster and Olshausen, as well as Alphen and Honert (in Wolf), understand no angel at all, but the two first understand Christ (!), and the two last the Holy Ghost (!)—is considered as the herald at the commencement of the advent, who with a loud voice calls upon the dead, and arouses them by the sound of a trumpet. The Jews used trumpets for summoning the people together; comp. Num_10:2; Num_31:6, Joe_2:1. Also the manifestations of God were considered as accompanied by the sound of a trumpet; comp. Exo_19:16; Psa_47:6; Zec_9:14; Isa_27:13;—and as it was the opinion of the later Jews that God will use a powerful and far-sounding trumpet to raise the dead (comp. Eisenmenger’s entdecktes Judenthum, II. p. 929 f.), so in the N. T. mention is made of a
σάλπιγξ
in reference to Christ’s advent; comp. 1Co_15:52; Mat_24:31. The trumpet is called
σάλπιγξ
Θεοῦ
, either because it excels all human or earthly trumpets in the power of its sound (so Cornelius a Lapide, Calov, Wolf, Benson, Bengel, Baumgarten, Bolten, and several); or because it will be blown at the command of God (so Balduin, Jac. Laurentius, Pelt, Schott, Olshausen, and others); or, lastly, because it belongs to God and is used in His service (so de Wette, who refers to the expression “harps of God,” 1Ch_16:42; Rev_15:2 [see also Winer, p. 221, E. T. 310], Koch, and Alford).
ἀπʼ
οὐρανοῦ
] down from heaven. For the crucified and risen Christ is enthroned in heaven at the right hand of God; comp. Rom_8:34; Eph_1:20; Col_3:1; Php_3:20.
ἐν
Χριστῷ
] is not to be connected with
ἀναστήσονται
(Pelt, Schott), but with
οἱ
νεκροί
; comp. 1Co_15:18; Winer, p. 123 [E. T. 169]. For if connected with
ἀναστήσονται
, then
ἐν
Χριστῷ
would receive an emphasis which, according to the context, it cannot have; as the apostle does not intend to bring forward the person by whom the resurrection is effected, which is evident of itself, but designs to show what relation it will have to those who sleep on the one hand, and to those who are alive on the other. Theodoret has arbitrarily inserted into the text:
ΝΕΚΡΟῪς
ΤΟῪς
ΠΙΣΤΟῪς
ΛΈΓΕΙ
,
Οὐ
ΜΌΝΟΝ
ΤΟῪς
Τῷ
ΕὐΑΓΓΕΛΊῼ
ΠΕΠΙΣΤΕΥΚΌΤΑς
,
ἈΛΛᾺ
ΚΑῚ
ΤΟῪς
ἘΝ
ΝΌΜῼ
ΚΑῚ
ΤΟῪς
ΠΡῸ
ΝΌΜΟΝ
ΔΙΑΛΆΜΨΑΝΤΑς
; and Musculus, that there are also to be reckoned among the
ΝΕΚΡΟῚ
ἘΝ
ΧΡΙΣΤῷ
the dead children of Christians before they believed on Christ, and the “patres priorum saeculorum qui ante tempora Christi vixerunt. Nam et illi cum semine ipsorum propter fidem venturi servatoris in Christo fuerunt.”
ΠΡῶΤΟΝ
] does not denote, as Oecumenius (
ΟἹ
ἘΝ
ΧΡΙΣΤῷ
,
ΤΟΥΤΈΣΤΙΝ
ΟἹ
ΠΙΣΤΟΊ
,
ΠΡῶΤΟΝ
ἈΝΑΣΤΉΣΟΝΤΑΙ
,
ΟἹ
ΔῈ
ΛΟΙΠΟῚ
ἜΣΧΑΤΟΙ
,
Ὡς
ΜῊ
ἉΡΠΆΖΕΣΘΑΙ
ΜΉΤΕ
ἈΠΑΝΤᾶΝ
ΜΈΛΛΟΝΤΕς
) and others maintain, the first resurrection,—the so-called resurrection of the just,—in contrast to the resurrection of all men following at a much later period; a distinction which is left entirely unnoticed in our passage, and in the form stated would be un-Pauline. Rather
ΠΡῶΤΟΝ
is in contrast to
ἜΠΕΙΤΑ
, 1Th_4:17, and denotes that the first act of Christ at His reappearance will be the resurrection of the Christian dead, and then the
ἁρπάζεσθαι
of the living, 1Th_4:17, will follow as the second act.
[58] Koch accepts both de Wette’s interpretation and the meaning of Olshausen, and thus falls into the contradiction of making
αὐτός
at the same time unaccented and emphatic.
[59] Macknight incorrectly refers the
κέλευσμα
to the whole of the attendant angelic host, and finds therein “the loud acclamation which the whole angelic hosts will utter to express their joy at the advent of Christ to judge the world,”—an interpretation which finds no support in the context, and militates against the meaning of
κέλευσμα
.