Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Corinthians 6:14 - 6:14
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
2Co_6:14. As a contrast to the desired πλατύν ., Paul now forbids their making common cause with the heathen, and so has come to the point of stating what was said generally at 2Co_6:1 ( μὴ εἰς κενὸν τ . χ . τ . θεοῦ δέξασθαι ) more precisely, in a form needful for the special circumstances of the Corinthians, in order to warn them more urgently and effectually of the danger of losing their salvatio.
μὴ γίνεσθε ἑτεροζυγ .] Bengel: “ne fiatis, molliter pro: ne sitis.” He does not forbid all intercourse with the heathen whatever (see 1Co_5:10; 1Co_10:27; 1Co_7:12), but the making common cause with heathen efforts and aims, the entering into the heathen element of life. There is no ground for assuming exclusively special references (such as to sacrificial banquets or to mixed marriages), any more than for excluding such reference.
ἑτεροζυγοῦντες ] see, in general, Wetstein. It means here: bearing another (a different kind of) yoke. Comp. ἑτερόζυγος , Lev_19:19; Schleusner, Thesaur. II. p. 557. Paul undoubtedly has in mind the figurative conception of two different animals (as ox and ass) which are yoked together in violation of the law (Deu_22:9),—a conception, in which the heterogeneous fellowship of Christians with heathen is aptly portrayed: drawing a yoke strange to you. In this verse the dative ἀπίστοις denotes a fellowship, in which the unbelieving partner forms the standard which determines the mode of thought and action of the Christian partner. For this dative cannot mean “with unbelievers” (the usual explanation), as if συζυγοῦντες had been used; but it is not so much dativus commodi (Hofmann: for the pleasure of unbelievers), a thought which Paul would have doubtless expressed with more precision, as the dativus ethicus (Krüger, § 48. 6); so that the words mean: do not draw for unbelievers a strange yoke. The yoke meant is that drawn by unbelievers, one of a kind strange to Christians ( ἑτεροῖον ), and the latter are not to put themselves at the disposal of unbelievers by sharing the drawing it. The great danger of the relation against which Paul warns them, lies in this dative expression. According to Theophylact (comp. Chrysostom), the sense is: μὴ ἀδικεῖτε τὸ δίκαιον ἐπικλινόμενοι καὶ προσκείμενοι οἷς οὐ θέμις , so that the figurative expression is taken from the unequal balance (Phocylides, 13 : σταθμὸν μὴ κρούεις ἑτερόζυγον , ἀλλʼ ἴσον ἕλκειν ). But apart from the circumstance that Paul would in that case have expressed himself at least very strangely, the reminiscence from the O. T., which the common view assumes, must still be considered as the most natural for the apostle.[250]
ΤΊς ΓᾺΡ ΜΕΤΟΧῊ Κ . Τ . Λ .] for how utterly incompatible is the Christian with the heathen character! Observe the impressiveness of the accumulated questions, and of the accumulated contrasts in these questions. The first four questions are joined in two pairs; the fifth, mounting to the highest designation of Christian holiness, stands alone, and to it are attached, as a forcible conclusion of the discourse, the testimony and injunction of God which confirm it.[251]
δικαιοσύνῃ κ . ἀνομίᾳ ] For the Christian is justified by faith (2Co_5:21, 2Co_6:7), and this condition excludes immoral conduct ( ἀνομία , 1Jn_3:4), which is the element of heathen life (Rom_6:19). The two life-elements have nothing in common with each other, Rom_8:1 ff.; Gal_2:15 ff.
In the second question the Christian life-element appears as Φῶς , and the heathen as ΣΚΌΤΟς . Comp. Eph_5:8; Eph_5:11 f.; Col_1:12 f. In the latter is implied Ἡ ἌΓΝΟΙΑ ΚΑῚ Ἡ ἉΜΑΡΤΊΑ , and in Φῶς : Ἡ ΓΝῶΣΙς ΚΑῚ Ὁ ΒΊΟς Ὁ ἜΝΘΕΟς (in both, the intellectual and the ethical element are to be thought of together), Gregory Naz. Or. 36.
Regarding the two datives, of which the second is expressed in Latin by cum, see Matthiae, p. 883; and the ποός , in the second clause, is the expression of social relation, like our with. See Bernhardy, p. 265. Comp. Plato, Conv. p. 209 C: κοινωνίαν … πρὸς ἀλλήλους , Stobaeus, S. 28: εἰ δέ τις ἔστι κοινωνία πρὸς θεοὺς ἡμῖν , Philo, Leg. ad Cai. p. 1007 C: τίς οὖν κοινωνία πρὸς Ἀπόλλωνα τῷ μηδὲν οἰκεῖον ἐπιτετηδευκότι , Sir_13:2.
[250] Hence our view (comp. Vulgate) is to be preferred also to that of Theodoret: μὴ μιμήσησθε τοὺς ἐτέρως ἐννεύσντας βόας καὶ τὸν ζυγὸν κλίνοντας , τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων ἀπάτην τῆς ἡμετέρας προτιμῶντες διδασκαλίας .
[251] Hofmann brings the second and third questions, as well as the fourth and fifth, into closer relation. Neither the particles ἤ and δέ , nor the prepositions πρός and μετά , nor yet the contents of the questions, are decisive. But it is in favour of our division, which Lachmann has also, that only to the fifth question is there specially added the great and important scriptural testimony, vv. 16–18, which is quite in keeping with its isolated and distinctive position.