2Pe_1:17.
λαβὼν
γὰρ
…
δόξαν
]
γάρ
: “that is;” explanation of the immediately preceding:
ἐπόπται
γενηθέντες
. The participle does not require any such supplement as
ἦν
or
ἐτύγχανε
, nor is it put instead of the finite verb. For the principal thought is, not that Christ was transfigured, but that Peter was a witness of this transfiguration, which was typical of the
δύναμις
καὶ
παρουσία
of Christ. The finite verb belonging to the participle
λαβών
is wanting. Its absence is most naturally accounted for by supposing, that the addition of
φωνῆς
ἐνεχθείσης
κ
.
τ
.
λ
. caused the author to forget to notice that he had not written
ἔλαβε
γάρ
. How after writing
λαβών
he intended to proceed, cannot be definitely said; what is wanting, however, must be supplied from that which goes before, not from what follows. Winer, p. 330 [E. T. 442], incorrectly supplies the necessary complement from 2Pe_1:18, since he says that Peter should have continued:
ἡμᾶς
εἶχε
ταύτην
τὴν
φωνὴν
ἀκούσαντας
, or in a similar manner. But it is still more arbitrary to borrow the supplement from 2Pe_1:19 (as is done by Dietlein and Schott).
παρὰ
θεοῦ
πατρός
]
πατήρ
is applied here to God in His relation to Christ, with reference to the subsequent
ὁ
υἱός
μου
.
τιμὴν
καὶ
δόξαν
] “Honour and glory,” as in Rom_2:7; Rom_2:10;
δόξα
denotes not the brightness of Christ’s body at the transfiguration (Hornejus, Gerhard, etc. Steinfass would understand both expressions of the shining figure of Christ). Hofmann is unwarranted in finding in
λαβὼν
κ
.
τ
.
λ
. a confirmation of his opinion that it is the resurrection and ascension that are here referred to, inasmuch as God first conferred honour and glory upon Christ, by raising Him from the dead and exalting Him. To this it may be said that by every act of God which testified to His glory, Christ received
τιμὴ
καὶ
δόξα
, i.e. “honour and praise.”
φωνῆς
ἐνεχθείσης
αὐτῷ
τοιᾶσδε
] states through what Christ received “honour and praise:” the expression
φωνὴ
φέρεταί
τινι
, here only; Luk_9:35-36,
φωνὴ
γίγνεται
; so also Mar_1:11; Luk_3:22 (cf. Joh_12:28; Joh_12:30);
αὐτῷ
: the dative of direction, not: in honorem ejus (Pott).
ὑπὸ
τῆς
μεγαλοπρεποῦς
δόξης
]
ὑπό
is neither equivalent to “accompanied by” (Wahl), nor to “from … out of” (Winer, 5th ed. p. 442 f.): the preposition, even where in local relations it inclines to these significations, always maintains firmly its original meaning: “under;” here, as generally in passives, it signifies “by;” thus, too, Winer, 6th ed. p. 330 [E. T. 462], 7th, 346: “when this voice was borne to Him by the sublime Majesty.”
ἡ
μεγαλοπρεπὴς
(
ἅπ
.
λεγ
.)
δόξα
means neither heaven nor the bright cloud (Mat_17:5);[50] it is rather a designation of God Himself (Gerhard, de Wette-Brückner, Wiesinger, Fronmüller, Hofmann); similarly as, in Mat_26:64, God is called by the abstract expression
Ἡ
ΔΎΝΑΜΙς
. With
ΜΕΓΑΛΟΠΡΕΠΉς
, cf. Deu_33:26, LXX.
ΟὟΤΌς
ἘΣΤΙΝ
Ὁ
ΥἹΌς
ΜΟΥ
Ὁ
ἈΓΑΠΗΤΌς
] So in Matthew; only with the addition
ΑὐΤΟῦ
ἈΚΟΎΕΤΕ
, and instead of
ΕἸς
ὍΝ
: “
ἘΝ
ᾯ
” In Mar_9:7 and Luk_9:35 (where, instead of
ἈΓΑΠΗΤΌς
, there is “
ἘΚΛΕΛΕΓΜΈΝΟς
”), the words
ΕἸς
ὋΝ
ἘΓῺ
ΕὐΔΌΚΗΣΑ
are entirely wanting. The reading adopted by Tisch. 7:
Ὁ
ΥἹΌς
ΜΟΥ
Ὁ
ἈΓΑΠΗΤΌς
ΜΟΥ
ΟὟΤΌς
ἘΣΤΙ
, corresponds to none of the accounts in the Gospels; cf. with it the O. T. quotation from Isa_42:1 in Matthew (Mat_12:18):
Ὁ
ΠΑῖς
ΜΟΥ
…
Ὁ
ἈΓΑΠΗΤΌς
ΜΟΥ
,
ΕἸς
ὋΝ
ΕὐΔΌΚΗΣΕΝ
Ἡ
ΨΥΧΉ
ΜΟΥ
.
The construction of
ΕὐΔΟΚΕῖΝ
with
ΕἸς
does not occur elsewhere in the N. T.; there is no warrant for the assertion that
ΕἸς
points “to the historical development of the plan of salvation”(!) (Dietlein).
[50] Schott, indeed, interprets
ὑπό
correctly, but yet thinks that
τῆς
μεγαλ
.
δόξης
means the cloud; “not indeed the cloud in itself, but as the manifestation which God gave of Himself”(!).