2Pe_3:14.
διὸ
,
ἀγαπητοὶ
,
ταῦτα
προσδοκῶντες
] The participle does not give the explanation of the
διό
: “wherefore, because we expect this” (Wiesinger, Schott), but the waiting for it belongs to the exhortation (Dietlein, Brückner, Steinfass).
σπουδάσατε
ἄσπιλοι
…
ἐν
εἰρήνῃ
]
ἄσπιλοι
, cf. 1Pe_1:19 :
ἀμώμητοι
, besides here only in Php_2:15, “unblamable” (Deu_32:5 :
τέκνα
μώμητα
); reverse of the false teachers:
σπῖλοι
καὶ
μῶμοι
, chap. 2Pe_2:13.
αὐτῷ
] not equal to
ὑπʼ
αὐτοῦ
, nor is it the dat. comm. (Schott); and as little: “with reference to him” (Hofmann); but: “according to His (i.e. God’s) judgment.”
εὑρεθῆναι
] refers not to the future time of the judgment, but to the present time of the expectation.
ἐν
εἰρήνῃ
] This adjunct does not belong to
προσδοκῶντες
, as Beza considers probable, but to
εὑρεθῆναι
ἄσπιλοι
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.; it gives the life-element, in which the Christian must move (so, too, Brückner); cf. Eph_1:4 :
ἐν
ἀγάπῃ
; 1Th_3:13 :
ἐν
ἁγιωσύνῃ
, if he would be found an
ἄσπιλος
:
εἰρήνῃ
is here not “concord” (Pott, Augusti), nor is it “the good conscience,” but peace, in the full meaning of the word; the addition is explained from 2Pe_3:15. Dietlein incorrectly takes
ἐν
εἰρήνῃ
as the object to be supplied to
ἄσπιλοι
καὶ
ἀμώμητοι
, which are here used not as relative, but as absolute adjectives; at the same time, too, he limits
εἰρήνη
, in the conception of it, to “peace of the church, especially to peace in relation to the church authorities.” Not less erroneous is it to regard, with Steinfass,
ἐν
εἰρήνῃ
as the opposite “of all division between the Jewish and the Gentile elements.” The interpretation of de Wette: “to your peace,” equivalent to
εἰς
εἰρήνην
(Beza: vestro bono, clementem illum videlicet ac pacificum experturi), cannot be justified on linguistic grounds.