Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 Timothy 1:20 - 1:20
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Ti_1:20. Ὧν ἐστὶν Ὑμέναιος καὶ Ἀλέξανδρος ] In 2Ti_2:17, the apostle names two false teachers whose words eat like a cancer
Hymenaeus and Philetus. There is no ground for distinguishing between the Hymenaeus there and the one here mentioned. No difficulty is caused even by the fact that “the one here is mentioned as a man cast out from the church, and the other merely as an example of error” (de Wette); for Hymenaeus and Philetus are not so tenderly dealt with in the other passages as de Wette seems to think. As to Alexander, we must leave it unsettled whether he is the same as the one mentioned in 2Ti_4:14. The reasons are not decisive which seem to tell against the identity, viz. that in the other passage the surname ὁ χαλκεύς is added, and that “he is mentioned there not as excommunicated, but rather as still coming in contact with the apostle; not as a heretic, but as an opponent” (de Wette). It is, however, quite arbitrary to regard the Alexander (Act_19:33) who took part in the uproar at Ephesus as identical with the one mentioned here (see Meyer on the passage).[80]
ΟὛς ΠΑΡΈΔΩΚΑ Τῷ ΣΑΤΑΝᾷ ] the same excommunication of which the apostle speaks in 1Co_5:5 (comp. Meyer on the passage). It is not simply excommunication from the church, but with the purpose of ensuring, through Satan’s means, ὌΛΕΘΡΟς Τῆς ΣΑΡΚΌς to the one excommunicated. This is shown not only by the formula itself, but also by the solemnity with which Paul there expresses himself. The added clause, ἽΝΑ ΠΑΙΔΕΥΘῶΣΙΝ Κ . Τ . Λ ., makes it clear that here also the apostle had in mind ΕἸς ὌΛΕΘΡΟΝ Τ . ΣΑΡΚ ., for that clause at the same time gives the purpose of the ΠΑΡΈΔΩΚΑ , which is the reformation ( ἽΝΑ ΤῸ ΠΝΕῦΜΑ ΣΩΘῇ , 1Co_5:5), or at least the preservation, of the excommunicated man from ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜΕῖΝ .[81]
ΠΑΙΔΕΎΕΙΝ ] in classical Greek equivalent to “educate, especially by instruction,” so also Act_7:22; Act_22:3, has elsewhere in the N. T. the meaning of “punish in order to reform,” i.e. chastise; comp. 2Ti_2:25; 1Co_11:32; 2Co_6:9, especially Heb_12:5-11. In Rev_3:19 it stands connected with ἐλέγχειν (in Luk_23:16; Luk_23:22, the purpose of reformation falls quite into the background).
The ὌΛΕΘΡΟς Τῆς ΣΑΡΚΌς is intended by the apostle to be a chastisement to the one named, that he may be kept from further reviling. The expression ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜΕῖΝ shows that they had not only suffered shipwreck in faith, but in their unbelief were on the point of proceeding actually to revile the Lord.
[80] Otto (pp. 98–112) gives a very vivid and detailed picture of the tumult at Ephesus in which a certain Alexander took part, in order to prove the identity of the two Alexanders, and confirm his view regarding the date of the composition of this epistle. But even if the course of that tumult was as Otto describes it, with the aid of many arbitrary suppositions, still we can by no means infer the identity he maintains. In order to prove it, Otto does not despise many strange assumptions, such as, that the designation χαλκεύς (2Ti_4:14) was given to Alexander because he was one of those who manufactured the miniature silver temples; further, that he, deceived by the soothsayers, had made no objection to the union of the worship of Jehovah with heathen idolatry.
[81] In opposition to Hofmann’s opinion, that neither here nor in the passage of Corinthians we are to think of an excommunication from the church, comp. Meyer on 1Co_5:5.