Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Peter 2
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
In place of the Rec. τετηρημένους (in several min., Thph. Oec.), Griesb. Tittm. Tisch. (Reiche) have accepted τηρουμένους , after B C* K L P.
Lachmann reads κολαζομένους τηρεῖν (A C** à , etc., Syr. Erp. Copt. Vulg. etc.); this appears, however, to be taken from 2Pe_2:9; Tisch.: “fluxit e v. 9.”—2Pe_2:6. The word καταστροφῇ is wanting in B C* 27, al., Copt.—2Pe_2:8. ὁ δίκαιος ] Lachm. omits ὁ , after B,—without sufficient reason.—2Pe_2:9. Tisch. 7 reads πειρασμοῦ (Rec., according to almost all authorities); on the other hand, Tisch. 8 has πειρασμῶν , after à , corr. and several min. Tischendorf’s observation on πειρασμοῦ : quod multo magis usu venit, does not justify the reading accepted by him in ed. 8.—2Pe_2:11. παρὰ κυρίῳ ] Rec. after B C K L P à , etc., Thph. Oec. (Tisch. 8).
Lachm. and Tisch. 7 are hardly correct in omitting it; it is wanting in A, al., Syr. Erp. Vulg. etc.—2Pe_2:12. Instead of γεγεννημένα (Rec. after A* B C P, al., m. etc., Scholz, Lachm. Tisch. 7), A** K L à , al., read: γεγενημένα (Tisch. 8). Whilst the Rec. has φυσικά before γεγ . (K L, al., pl. Oec.), Lachm. and Tisch. have placed it after γεγ . (A B C P à , al.), and rightly; the transposition is easily explained by assuming that it was thought necessary to connect γεγεννημένα directly with the: εἰς ἅλωσιν belonging to it. Mill, without reason, regards γεγενν . as a Scholion, which has come into the text by way of explanation of φυσικά . Dietlein considers the Rec. to be the original reading.
καταφθαρήσονται ] Rec., after C** K L, etc., Thph. Oec. (Griesb. Scholz); on the other hand, A B CP à (pr. m.), 7, al., Aeth. Arm. Syr. etc., support καὶ φθαρήσονται (Lachm. Tisch.). This reading is to be preferred: καί gives peculiar point to the idea; since this was overlooked, and καί only regarded as being in the way, it might easily have been changed into κατα .—2Pe_2:13. ἀπάταις ] Rec. after A* C K L P à , al., Copt. etc., Thph. Oec. (Griesb. Scholz, Tisch.). In its place A** B, Syr. Arr. Vulg. Ephr. etc., have ἀγάπαις ; approved of by Erasmus, Luther, Camerarius, Grotius, etc.; adopted into the text by Lachm.; though hardly justly, for in one passage (either here or Jud_1:12) ἀπάταις , as de Wette also thinks, is probably the original reading; if so, then rather here than in Jude, all the more that ὑμῶν (in Jude) may be adapted to ἀγάπαις , but not so much αὑτῶν ; B has ἀγάπαις in both passages; C, on the other hand, ἀπάταις , which is explained by the one having stood originally in the one passage, and the other in the other. Elsner, Wolf, Wetstein, Bengel, de Wette, and the modern commentators generally, are in favour of ἀπάταις in this passage; so, too, Reiche.—2Pe_2:14. The reading μοιχαλίας in A à , several min., Copt. Vulg. etc., instead of μοιχαλίδος , can only be looked upon as a correction for the sake of simplification.
ἀκαταπαύστους ] Rec. after C K L P à , etc. (Griesb. Scholz, Tisch.); instead of which Lachmann reads ἀκαταπάστους , following A B, a word which does not occur elsewhere, and which Reiche accordingly declares to be an error in transcription; Buttmann, p. 57, thinks it is not unlikely that the original reading was: καταπάστους , i.e. “polluted, defiled,” that then, by mistake, an α , perhaps taken from the previous και , had been added, out of which ἀκαταπαύστους arose. The reading occurring in several min.: ἀκαταπαύστου , gives indeed an appropriate meaning, but cannot be regarded as original.
πλεονεξίας ] the reading attested by A B C K L P à , etc. (Griesb. Scholz, Lachm. Tisch.), instead of the Rec. πλεονεξίαις , which is a mere correction.—2Pe_2:15. Tisch. 7 reads καταλιπόντες ; Rec. after B*** C K L P; Tisch. 8, on the contrary, has καταλείποντες , following A B* à , etc.
Griesb. already has rightly omitted the article τήν before εὐθεῖαν ; it is opposed by almost all authorities.—2Pe_2:17. Instead of the Rec. νεφέλαι (L, etc., Thph. Oec.), Griesb. correctly has admitted: ὁμίχλαι into the text, following A B C à , etc.; so, too, Scholz, Tisch. Lachm. On the other hand, Dietlein, though without sufficient reason, considers the Rec., which is evidently taken from Jud_1:10, to be original; so, too, Reiche.
εἰς αἰῶνα ] according to A C L P, etc., Thph. Oec.
Lachm. and Tisch. have omitted it (following B à ); it seems to have been added from Jud_1:13; Reiche, however, regards it as original.—2Pe_2:18. The prepos. ἐν before ἀσελγ . in the ed. Elz. occurs in a few min. Theoph. Oec. only.
ὀλίγως ] accepted by Griesb. already, in place of the Rec.: ὄντως , according to the testimony of A B, al., Syr. utr. Copt. etc., Aug. Hier.; so, too, by Scholz, Lachm. Tisch.
ἀποφεύγοντας ] after A B C à , many min. Syr. Arm. Vulg. etc. (Lachm. Tisch.), instead of the Rec.: ἀποφυγόντας , according to K L P, etc. Reiche seeks to prove the originality of the Rec. from internal reasons, but these are insufficient; he prefers also ὄντως to ὀλίγως .—2Pe_2:19. Tisch. 7 has τούτῳ καί (Rec. according to A C K L P, etc.); on the other hand, Tisch. 8 has τούτῳ , and omits καί , following B, etc.; the greater number of authorities are in favour of the Rec.—2Pe_2:20. A C L P à , etc., read ἡμῶν after κυρίου (Lachm. Tisch. 8); the Rec. omits ἡμῶν , according to B K (Tisch. 7).—2Pe_2:21. ἐπιστρέψαι ] Rec. according to K L, al., Thph. Oec. (Griesb. Scholz, Tisch. 7, de Wette, etc.); B C P, etc., read ὑποστρέψαι (Tisch. 8); A à , on the other hand, has εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω ἀνακάμψαι ἀπό . This latter reading is probably only an explanatory gloss; but whether ἐπιστρ . or ὑποστρ . be the original reading or not, it is difficult to decide with certainty; since the verb has not here the simple meaning of “turning back,” but of “turning back again to what has gone before,” a meaning in no way peculiar to the expression ἐπιστρέφειν itself, without any nearer definition, it lies to hand to look upon ὑποστρέψαι as a correction. Lachm. has adopted εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω ὑποστρέψαι ἀπό ; but no codex has this reading.—2Pe_2:22. In A B à (pr. m.), Sahid. (Lachm. Tisch.) δέ is awanting; it is probably added in order to connect 2Pe_2:22 more closely with 2Pe_2:21.
In the place of κύλισμα (A K L P à , etc., Lachm.), B C* 29 (Tisch.) have the form κυλισμόν .