Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Thessalonians 1:11 - 1:11
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
2Th_1:11. Εἰς ὅ in reference to which, namely, that such a glorification of Christ in His people is to be expected. Comp. Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 220; Kühner, II. p. 279. Philologically incorrect, Grotius, Flatt, Pelt, Baumgarten-Crusius take εἰς ὅ as equivalent with quapropter, and Koppe as “mera particula transeundi,” equivalent with itaque. Logically incorrect, de Wette, Bloomfield, Hofmann, and Riggenbach: “to which end.” For, since εἰς ὅ must refer to the chief thought in 2Th_1:10, this could only be analysed by: “in order that the ἐνδοξασθῆναι and the θαυμασθῆναι of Christ may be realized in believers.” But this fact in itself is clear to the apostle as a settled truth; he cannot think on it as dependent on his prayer; he can only have it in view in his prayers, that the Thessalonians also may find themselves in the number of those among whom Christ will be glorified.
καί ] belongs not to εἰς ὅ , so that the suitableness of this (supposed) design was denoted (de Wette), but to προσευχόμεθα . It imports that the prayer of the apostle was added on behalf of the Thessalonians to the fact of the ἐνδοξασθῆναι .
ἵνα ] The contents of the prayer in the form of a purpose. ἀξιοῦν τῆς κλήσεως is that to which Paul would attain through his prayer. Comp. Meyer on Php_1:9.
ἀξιοῦν ] means to judge worthy; comp. 1Ti_5:17; Heb_3:3; Heb_10:29. It never has the meaning to make worthy, which Luther, Grotius, Flatt, Olshausen, Ewald attribute to it. From this it follows that κλῆσις cannot express the act[40] of the divine calling, already belonging to the past, but must denote something future. ΚΛῆΣΙς is accordingly to be understood, as in Php_3:14, in a passive sense, as the good thing to which we are called, i.e. the future heavenly blessedness of the children of God.[41] Col_1:5 (see Meyer on that passage) is entirely analogous, where ἐλπίς , elsewhere active, is used in a passive or objective sense.
With καὶ πληρώσῃ κ . τ . λ ., which is grammatically subordinate to ἀξιώσῃ , Paul adds, logically considered, the means which is to lead to the result of being judged worthy.
πληροῦν ] to bring to completion or perfection.
πᾶσαν εὐδοκίαν ἀγαθωσύνης ] cannot be referred to God, as if it meant all His good pleasure, and denoted the divine decree of election (Oecumenius, Zwingli, Calvin, Estius, Justinian, Beza, Calixt, Wolf, Benson, Bengel, Macknight, Koppe, Flatt, Pelt, Bisping, and others). It is against this that ἔργον πίστεως , which forms an additional accusative to πληρώσῃ , is undoubtedly to be referred to the Thessalonians; that ἁγαθωσύνη is never used by Paul of God; and lastly, that πᾶσαν τὴν εὐδοκίαν would require to have been written instead of πᾶσαν εὐδοκίαν . Others refer πᾶσαν εὐδοκίαν partly to God and partly to the Thessalonians. Thus Theophylact: ἵνα πᾶσα εὐδοκία τοῦ Θεοῦ , τουτέστι πᾶσα ἀρέσκεια , πληρωθῇ ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ πᾶν ἀγαθὸν διαπράττησθε , καὶ οὕτως ἦτε ὡς βούλεται ὁ Θεός , μηδενὸς ὑμῖν λείποντος . Grotius: Omnem bonitatem sibi gratam … ἀγαθωσύνην , ἥ ἐστιν αὐτοῦ εὐδοκία . Olshausen,[42] with whom Bloomfield agrees: May God fill you with all the good which is pleasing to Him. This second explanation is even more inadmissible than the first. It is not even supported by the appearance of justification, as at least πᾶσαν ἀγαθωσύνην εὐδοκίας must be put, in order to afford a point of connection for it. The exclusively correct meaning is to understand both εὐδοκίαν and ἈΓΑΘΩΣΎΝΗς of the Thessalonians. But ἀγαθωσύνη does not denote benevolence (Chandler, Moldenhauer, Nösselt, Schott), but moral goodness generally. Comp. Rom_15:14; Gal_5:22; Eph_5:9. Accordingly, with πᾶσα εὐδοκία ἀγαθωσύνης is expressed every satisfaction in moral goodness.
ἔργον πίστεως ] here, as in 1Th_1:3, represents faith as an ἜΡΓΟΝ , i.e. as something begun with energy, and persevered in amid persecution.
ἐν δυνάμει ] belongs to ΠΛΗΡΏΣῌ , and takes the place of an adverb. See Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 209. Comp. Rom_1:4; Col_1:29. Thus powerfully.
[40] So also Meyer on Php_3:14; likewise Grimm in the Theol. Stud. u. Krit. 1850, Part 4, p. 806 f.: “The Christians are declared worthy of the call already promulgated to them, or the κλῆσις τοῦ Θεοῦ may be in reference to them ἀμεταμέλητος (Rom_11:29), because the Christian can again make himself unworthy of the divine grace which he has received (Rom_11:20 ff.; 2Co_6:1; Gal_5:4).”
[41] Alford incorrectly objects to the passive interpretation adopted by me, that the position of the words would require to be τῆς κλήσεως ἀξιώσῃ . For the emphasis rests on ἀξιώσῃ placed first, whilst with τῆς κλήσεως the idea, already supposed as well known by καταξιωθῆναι ὑμᾶς τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ Θεοῦ , ver. 5, as well as by the contents of ver. 10, is only resumed, although under a different form. Alford, appealing to 1Co_7:20, understands κλῆσις “not merely as the first act of God, but as the enduring state produced by that act, the normal termination of which is glory.”
[42] In an excess of arbitrariness, Olshausen besides takes εὐδοκίαν and ἔργον as absolute accusatives, whilst he unites ὑμᾶς not only with ἀξιώσῃ , but likewise with πληρώσῃ .