1Ti_1:15.
Πιστὸς
ὁ
λόγος
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.] With this formula, which is peculiar to the Pastoral Epistles (found besides here in 1Ti_3:1, 1Ti_4:9; 2Ti_2:11; Tit_3:8; only in Rev. is there a similar formula:
οὗτοι
οἱ
λόγοι
πιστοὶ
καὶ
ἀληθινοί
εἰσι
, Rev_21:5, Rev_22:6), the apostle introduces the general thought whose truth he had himself experienced.
καὶ
πάσης
ἀποδοχῆς
ἄξιος
] This addition is also in 1Ti_4:9; the word
ἀποδοχή
occurs nowhere else in the N. T. (comp.
ἀπόδεκτος
, 1Ti_2:3, 1Ti_5:4). As Raphelius has shown by many proofs from Polybius, it is synonymous in later Greek with
πίστις
: the verb
ἀποδέχεσθαι
(“receive believing”) is used in the same sense in Act_2:41. The adjective
πάσης
describes the
ἀποδοχή
of which the word is worthy, as one complete and excluding all doubt.
ὅτι
Χρ
.
Ἰησ
.
ἦλθεν
εἰς
τὸν
κόσμον
] This expression, found especially in John, may be explained from the saying of Christ:
ἐξῆλθον
παρὰ
τοῦ
πατρὸς
καὶ
ἐλήλυθα
εἰς
τὸν
κόσμον
, Joh_16:28,
κόσμος
having here a physical, not an ethical meaning: “the earthly world.”
Ἁμαρτωλοί
stands here in a general sense, and is not with Stolz to be limited to the opponents of Christianity, nor with Michaelis to the heathen. As little can the idea of
σῶσαι
be limited in the one direction or the other. After this general thought, that the aim of Christ’s coming is none other than the
σωτηρία
of sinners, the apostle returns to his own case, adding, in consciousness of his guilt (1Ti_1:13):
ὧν
πρῶτός
εἰμι
ἐγώ
, “of whom I am first.” Paul says this, conscious of his former determined hostility to Christ when he was a
βλάσφημος
κ
.
τ
.
λ
. (1Ti_1:13), and considering himself at the same time as standing at the head of sinners. It is inaccurate to translate
πρῶτος
without qualification by “the foremost” (in opposition to Wiesinger and others). Even in Mar_12:28-29,
πρώτη
πάντων
ἐντολή
is the commandment which stands at the head of all, is first in the list, and
δευτέρα
is the one following. In order to qualify the thought, Flatt wishes to translate
πρῶτος
by “one of the foremost,” which he thinks he can justify by the absence of the article. Wegscheider, again, wishes not to refer
ὧν
to
ἁμαρτωλούς
, but to supply
σωζομένων
or
σεσωσμένων
; and similarly Mack explains
ὧν
by “of which saved sinners.” All these expositions are, however, to be rejected as pieces of ingenuity. The thought needs no qualification—at least not for any one who can sympathize with the apostle’s strong feeling. The apostle does not overstep the bounds of humility in what he says in 1Co_15:9 and Eph_3:8; neither does he overstep them here.