Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 Timothy 2:7 - 2:7
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Ti_2:7. This verse defines more precisely the previous μαρτύριον ; it was for proclaiming the μαρτύριον that the apostle received the office entrusted to him. The chief emphasis rests on the universality; the subject of the μαρτύριον is the fact that Christ gave Himself a ransom for all.
εἰς ὃ ἐτέθην ἐγὼ κήρυξ καὶ ἀπόστολος ] Comp. on this, Eph_3:1-12; Col_1:25-28; 2Ti_1:9-11.
εἰς ὅ : for which ( μαρτύριον ), viz. “for proclaiming which.” ἐτέθην is to be taken in close connection with κήρυξ κ . τ . λ .
κήρυξ , it is true, only occurs here and in 2Ti_1:11 as a name for the preacher of the gospel (in 2Pe_2:5, Noah is called a κήρυξ δικαιοσύνης ); but κηρύσσειν is used very frequently of the preaching of the gospel. In 1Co_1:21, κήρυγμα is identical with εὐαγγέλιον . In order to direct attention to his peculiar apostolic authority, Paul adds to the general idea of κήρυξ , the more specific expression ἀπόστολος . By the addition of ἀλήθειαν λέγω , οὐ ψεύδομαι , the truth of the εἰς ὅ is confirmed;[95] he explains himself sufficiently on account of the heretics who wished that Paul should not be considered an apostle by the appointment of God.
The further definition: ΔΙΔΆΣΚΑΛΟς ἘΘΝῶΝ , is to be taken in apposition to ΚΉΡΥΞ Κ . ἈΠΌΣΤΟΛΟς . It was added to make clearer the reference to the heathen already indicated in ΕἸς Ὅ , not, as Hofmann thinks, to form an apposition to the subject of ἈΛΉΘΕΙΑΝ ΛΈΓΩ ; had that been so, we should have had an emphatic ἘΓΏ . The connected words ἘΝ ΠΊΣΤΕΙ ΚΑῚ ἈΛΗΘΕΊᾼ do not form the object of ΔΙΔ . (Heydenreich takes it as “equivalent to ἘΝ Τῇ ΠΊΣΤΕΙ Τῇ ἈΛΗΘΙΝῇ , a teacher of the Gentiles who is to instruct them in the true religion”); they are loosely added, according to a common usage of the N. T., and denote here the sphere in which he was appointed to discharge his office as teacher of the Gentiles. The peculiar point of view must not be lost by arbitrarily changing the words into ἘΝ Τῇ ΠΊΣΤΕΙ Τ . ἈΛΗΘΙΝῇ , or, as Leo does, into ΠΙΣΤῸς ΚΑῚ ἈΛΗΘΙΝΌς . It is wrong also to render ΠΊΣΤΙς here by “faithfulness,” and ἈΛΉΘ . by “verity” (Hofmann: ἘΝ ΠΊΣΤΕΙ , equivalent to “faithfully,” and ἘΝ ἈΛΗΘΕΊᾼ to “in verity”). ΠΊΣΤΙς is faith, the subjective relation, and ἈΛΗΘΕΊΑ is truth, the objective benefit, appropriated in faith (so also Plitt and van Oosterzee).[96]
[95] Wiesinger less suitably refers the addition to the διδ . ἐθνῶν , which in that case should have been preceded by a καί . Otto (p. 117) unjustifiably uses this asseveration of the apostle to confirm his assertion that the epistle was written during the apostle’s stay at Ephesus, insisting that Paul, after he was put in prison in Jerusalem, was acknowledged an apostle in all Christian churches, and from that time, therefore, had no occasion for this asseveration. Apart from other points, Otto errs in referring the words ἀλήθειαν κ . τ . λ . only to the expression ἀπόστολος , whereas they apply to the entire thought in εἰς ὃ κ . τ . λ . Paul does not make asseveration that he was appointed an apostle, but that he was appointed an apostle of the μαρτύριον , the subject of which he had already mentioned. Comp. on this the passages quoted above.
[96] Bengel seems to take the words in a sense corresponding to the formula of asseveration, ἀληθ . λέγω κ . τ . λ . He says in regard to this formula: “pertinet haec affirmatio ad comma praecedens; nam subsequenti additur parallela: ἐν π . καὶ ἀληθ .;” a view for which there is no justification.—Matthies expresses himself somewhat obscurely; for while he in the first place mentions faith and truth not only as the elements, but also as the aims of the teaching, he says at the end of the discussion: “The apostle is teacher of the Gentiles in such a way that he knows himself to be impregnably established thereby in faith and truth.”