2Pe_1:9 gives in negative form an explanation of the preceding verses.
ᾧ
γὰρ
μὴ
πάρεστι
ταῦτα
] antithesis to
ταῦτα
…
πλεονάζοντα
, 2Pe_1:8. The possession of these graces furthers knowledge, for he who does not possess them is
τυφλός
, that is, in so far as he is, and remains, without the true knowledge of Jesus Christ.
μή
is explained thus, that the idea which lies at the basis is: “he who is so constituted, that he is without these virtues” (Hofmann), or so that he must be judged as being without them.[36]
τυφλός
ἐστι
,
μυωπάζων
]
ΜΥΩΠΆΖΕΙΝ
(
ἍΠ
.
ΛΕΓ
.) means: to be a
ΜΎΩΨ
, i.e. one short-sighted:[37] accordingly
μυωπάζων
serves more nearly to define the term
τυφλός
as one who can see only what is near, not what is far off. Schott correctly explains
μυωπάζων
by “weak-sighted.” The older commentators, following Oecumenius, for the most part take
μυωπάζειν
as synonymous with
τυφλώττειν
; thus Calvin, Hornejus, etc.; but the identification in meaning of these two terms cannot be justified, whilst it gives rise to an intolerable tautology. The translation of the Vulgate: manu tentans (similarly Erasmus: manu viam tentans; Luther: “and gropes with the hand;” Calvin: manu palpans), has arisen probably from the gloss:
ψηλαφῶν
, perhaps with reference to Deu_28:28-29; Isa_59:10. Wolf interprets the word, after Bochart (Hierozoic l. l. c. 4), by
καμμύειν
oculos claudere;[38] but
ΜΥΩΠΆΖΕΙΝ
is not derived from
ΜΎΕΙΝ
ΤᾺς
ὮΠΑς
, but from
ΜΎΩΨ
. A
ΜΎΩΨ
, however, is not one who arbitrarily closes his eyes, but one who, from inability to see far enough, is obliged to blink with his eyes, in order to see a distant object. The same applies to Dietlein, who translates: “one who closes his eyes,” by which he conceives a voluntary closing of the eyes, precisely that which is opposed to the meaning of the word. If, then,
μυωπάζων
mean a short-sighted person, the question arises: What is that near at hand which he sees, and that far off which he does not see? The first expression is generally understood as applying to earthly, and the second to heavenly things. Hofmann, on the other hand, explains: “he sees only what is present to him: that he is a member of the Christian church; but how he has become so, that lies outside his horizon.” Here, however, the first thought is purely imported, and the second has only an apparent justification in the clause which follows.
ΛΉΘΗΝ
ΛΑΒΏΝ
]
ἍΠ
.
ΛΕΓ
. equal to oblitus; Vulgate: oblivionem accipiens; cf.
ὙΠΌΜΝΗΣΙΝ
ΛΑΒΏΝ
, 2Ti_1:5 (cf. Joseph. Ant. ii. vi. 9; Wetstein, Lösner, Krebs in loc.); taken strictly, the translation is: “having received the
λήθη
.” Hofmann justly remarks: that this aoristic clause is not only co-ordinate with the preceding, but is added to it by way of explanation. He is wrong, however, when he thinks that it is intended to elucidate
ΜΥΩΠΆΖΩΝ
. By it the author refers not to the consequences (Steinfass, and formerly here), but rather to the reason of the blindness, or, more strictly, short-sightedness, which manifests itself in the want of the Christian graces. Dietlein arbitrarily emphasizes this forgetting as a voluntary act. This is justified neither by the expression itself nor by the connection of thought.
τοῦ
καθαρισμοῦ
τῶν
πάλαι
αὑτοῦ
ἁμαρτημάτων
] “the (accomplished) cleansing from the former sins;” not as Winer formerly, in the 5th ed. p. 214, conjectured: “the purification, i.e. the removal of sins;” cf. Heb_1:3. As
πάλαι
shows,
ΚΑΘΑΡ
. does not here mean a continuous (to be obtained by repentance perhaps, etc.), but a completed process. Not, however, the (ideal)
ΚΑΘΑΡΙΣΜΌς
of sins for the whole world of sinners, accomplished through Christ’s death on the cross;
ΑὙΤΟῦ
is opposed to this; but the cleansing, i.e. forgiveness, procured by the individual in baptism (thus to Brückner, Schott, Hofmann; Wiesinger less aptly applies it to the calling), so that
πάλαι
denotes the time preceding baptism; cf. 1Co_6:11.
[36] Schott unwarrantably maintains, on the interpretation of ver. 8 here adopted, that the translation must be: “he becomes blind.”