Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 Thessalonians 4:8 - 4:8
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Th_4:8. An inference from 1Th_4:7 (not likewise from 1Th_4:3, Flatt), and thereby the conclusion of the matter treated of from 1Th_4:3 and onwards.
τοιγαροῦν ] (Heb_12:1) therefore: not atqui (Koppe, Pelt). See Hartung, Partikell. II. p. 354.
ὁ ἀθετῶν ] the rejecter (Gal_2:21; Gal_3:15; 1Co_1:19), stands absolutely (used as a substantive). Comp. Winer, p. 316 [E. T. 444]. What is rejected by him is evident from the context, namely, the above exhortations to chastity and disinterestedness. So already Beza. But the rejection of these exhortations is actual and practical, manifesting itself by the transgression of them. To ὁ ἀθετῶν Koppe erroneously supplies: istam τοῦ ἁγιασμοῦ legem, 1Th_4:7; Pelt and Bloomfield: τὴν τοῦ ἁγιασμοῦ κλῆσιν ; Ernest Schmid: τὸν τοιαῦτα παραγγέλλοντα ; Flatt: ἐμὲ τὸν παρακαλοῦντα . It is decisive against the last two supplements, that hitherto not the person who gave the exhortations to the Thessalonians, but only the contents of those exhortations themselves, are emphatically brought forward (even on ὁ Θεός , 1Th_4:7, there is no emphasis). To seek to determine more definitely ὁ ἀθετῶν from the following οὐκ ἄνθρωπον ἀθετεῖ were arbitrary, as the course of thought in 1Th_4:8 would be interfered with.
οὐκ ἄνθρωπον ἀθετεῖ ἀλλὰ τὸν Θεόν ] rejecteth not man (this may be excused) but God, inasmuch as he who enjoins the readers to avoid lust and covetousness, impresses on them not his own human opinion, accordingly not a mere arbitrary command of man, but delivers to them the solemn and unchangeable will of God.
οὐκ … ἀλλά ] is here, as always, an absolute contrast, therefore not to be weakened into “not, but especially,” or, “not only, but also” (Macknight, Flatt, and others). Comp. 1Co_1:17; Act_5:4; Winer, p. 440 [E. T. 623]; Klotz, ad Devar. p. 9 f. In the anarthrous singular ἄνθρωπον , moreover, Paul expresses not merely the general idea man in contrast to ὁ Θεός , but there is likewise contained therein an (untranslatable) subsidiary reference to himself, as the person from whose mouth the Thessalonians have heard these commandments. Others incorrectly understand by ἄνθρωπος the defrauded brother (1Th_4:6); so Oecumenius: τοιγαροῦν ὁ παρὰ τὴν κλῆσιν πράττων ( οὗτος γὰρ ὁ ἀθετῶν ) τὸν καλέσαντα ὕβρισε μᾶλλον ἢ τὸν πλεονεκτηθέντα · τοῦτο δὲ εἶπε , δεικνὺς ὡς οὐ μόνον , ἔνθα ὁ ἀδελφὸς ὁ ἀδικούμενος ᾖ , δεῖ φεύγειν τὴν μοιχείαν , ἀλλὰ κἂν ἄπιστος ᾖ κ . τ . λ .; and Pelt: Vestrum igitur quicunque vocationem suam spernit fratremque laedit, quem diligere potius debuisset, is sane non hominem contemnit, sed, etc.; also Alford. In a manner still more mistaken, Hofmann, referring to the whole section 1Th_4:3-6, makes ἄνθρωπον denote humanity, against which he sins who misuses the woman for the sake of lust, or injures his brother for the sake of gain; whilst with an entirely inadmissible comparison of the Hebrew áÌÈâÇã , he arbitrarily inserts into ἁθετεῖν the idea of an “act of sin which is a breach of peace, a violation of a holy or righteous relation,” and finds in 1Th_4:8 the impossible and wholly abstract thought expressed, that every action which treats man as if there were no duty towards man as such, will accordingly be esteemed as having not man, but God for its object.
τὸν καὶ δόντα τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ τὸ ἅγ . εἰς ὑμᾶς ] who besides, etc., an emphatic representation of the greatness of the crime which the Thessalonians would commit, were they to disobey these exhortations. In such a case they would not only set at nought the eternal will of God, but also repay the great grace which God had shown to them with shameful ingratitude. καί has an intensifying force, and brings prominently forward, by an appeal to the conscience of the readers, the inexcusableness of such conduct.
τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ τὸ ἅγιον ] is the Holy Spirit proceeding from God, who transforms the believer into a new personality, and produces extraordinary capabilities and gifts (1Th_5:19 f.; 1 Corinthians 12-14).
εἰς ὑμᾶς ] is not precisely equivalent to ὑμῖν (Koppe, Flatt, Pelt), but denotes, instead of the mere logical relation which the dative expresses, the communication under the form of locality; accordingly, unto you.
REMARK.
If the present tense διδόντα is read, the communication of the Holy Spirit is represented as something continuing in the present. If, along with διδόντα , the reading of the Receptus, εἰς ἡμᾶς , is retained, this may be either taken in a wide sense, as ἡμᾶς in 1Th_4:7, “to us, Christians;” or, in a narrow sense, “to us (me) the apostle.” In the first case, the addition on account of its generality would be somewhat aimless. In the second case, the following thought might be found therein: “but God, who not only commissions us to utter such exhortations, but who has also imparted to us His Holy Spirit, put us in a position to speak every moment the correct thing;” comp. 1Co_7:40.
But (1) this view is objectionable on account of the many additions and supplements which it requires; (2) τὸν καὶ διδόντα would introduce no new thought which is not already contained in the contrast οὐκ ἄνθρωπον … ἀλλὰ τὸν Θεόν ; for, being commissioned by God to give such exhortations, speaking in His name is one and the same with being qualified for this purpose by God’s Holy Spirit; (3) Lastly, it is generally improbable that the addition τὸν καὶ κ . τ . λ . should contain a statement concerning the apostle, as such a statement is too little occasioned by the preceding. For, in the contrast οὐκ ἄνθρωπον … ἀλλὰ τὸν Θεόν , the general idea not man is contained in ἄνθρωπον as the main point, whilst the reference to the apostle’s own person in ἄνθρωπον is very slight, and forms only a subsidiary point.
If, on the other hand, εἰς ὑμᾶς be received along with the present participle, this might be explained with de Wette, whom Koch follows, that the apostle for the sake of strengthening his words reminds the Thessalonians how God still continues to communicate to them His Holy Spirit; how this communicated Holy Spirit, partly by inspired persons, partly by the voice of conscience, gives the same exhortations which he, Paul, now enforces. But who does not see that here also the chief matter, by which the addition becomes appropriate, must first be introduced and supplied?