Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 2 Timothy 4
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
The same is the case with the words τοῦ κυρίου , against which there is the testimony of A C D* F G à 31, 37, al.
For κρίνειν the aorist κρῖναι is found in F G, several cursives, Theodoret, and Theoph.; this construction does occur sometimes in the N. T. (also in classic Greek), but there is not sufficient authority for it here.
κατὰ τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν ] For κατά (Rec. after D*** E K L, etc.), καί is the reading of A C D* F G à 17, al., Copt. Vulg. ms. It. Harl. etc. This reading, as it implies a change of construction in the verb, and even then makes the connection difficult, is of a kind which would easily give occasion for correction; the easiest correction was into κατά . Chrysostom in his commentary reads: ἐν τῇ ἐπιφανείᾳ . Lachm. Buttm. Tisch. rightly adopted καί , which is approved also by Matthies, de Wette, Wiesinger, and van Oosterzee. Reiche, on the other hand, because of the difficulty of the reading καί , regards the Rec. as the original reading, while he connects κατά with μέλλοντας κρίνειν as a preposition of time.—2Ti_4:2. Tisch. 7 reads ἐπιτίμησον , παρακάλεσον , with the majority of the authorities; whereas Tisch. 8 reads παρακάλεσον , ἐπιτίμησον . The placing of ἐπιτίμησον first may be a correction, because this word is related in meaning to the previous ἔλεγξον .—2Ti_4:3. τὰς ἰδίας ἐπιθυμίας ] adopted by Griesb. in place of τὰς ἐπιθυμίας τὰς ἰδίας , on the authority of A C D E F G à 3, 37, al., Arm. Vulg. etc.—2Ti_4:6. Instead of τῆς ἐμῆς ἀναλύσεως , which is the Rec. supported by D E K L, al. (Tisch. 7), it is more correct, with Lachm. Buttm. and Tisch. 8, to read τῆς ἀναλύσεώς μου , on the authority of A C F G à , al.—2Ti_4:7. For τὸν ἀγῶνα τὸν καλόν (Tisch. 7), Lachm. Buttm. Tisch. 8, on the authority of A C F G à , al., adopted τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα , which is certainly in harmony with the usage of the Pastoral Epistles, but for that very reason may be a correction.—2Ti_4:10. For the Rec. ἐγκατέλιπεν (D* K à , etc.), Tisch. 7 adopted the imperfect ἐγκατέλειπεν , on the authority of A C D** and *** E F G L, etc.; Tisch. 8 retained the Rec., which is supported by D* K à , etc.
In C à , several cursives, and Fathers, Γαλίαν is found instead of the Rec. Γαλατίαν ; Epiph. Haer. 57, dis. says: οὐ γὰρ ἐν Γαλατίᾳ , ὡς τίνες πλανηθέντες νομίζουσιν , ἀλλὰ ἐν τῇ Γαλίᾳ ; of this reading Reiche says: est utique notatu digna; … me cum Bengelio in hanc lectionem inclinare sentio. But the MSS. almost all support the Rec.; and it cannot be inferred from the name Κρήακης (Crescens) that this man was sent more probably to Gaul, where Latin was in use, than to Galatia, where Greek was spoken (Reiche); it is too rash, therefore, to regard this as the original reading. Tisch. 8, however, adopted it, whereas Tisch. 7 does not even mention it; Hofmann thinks it the correct reading.—2Ti_4:11. For ἄγε , Lachm. Buttm. and Tisch. 7 read the form ἄγαγε , which, however, does not seem to have sufficient testimony in A 31, 58, etc.; Tisch. 8 retained the Rec., with the support of almost all authorities.—2Ti_4:13. For φελόνην are found also the forms φαιλώνην , φαιλόνην , φελώνην ; but φελόνην is best supported. While Tisch. 7 adopted the imperfect ἀπέλειπον , on the authority of A C F G, etc., Tisch. 8 read the aorist ἀπέλεπον (Rec.), on the authority of D E K à , al.; so, too, Lachm. and Buttm.—2Ti_4:14. ἀποδώσει ] This is rightly read by Scholz, Lachm. Buttm. Tisch. 8, on the authority of A C D* gr. E F G à 6, 17, al., Copt. Arm. etc., Chrys. Theodoret, instead of ἀποδώῃ , which has the support of D*** E** K L, etc., Tisch. 7, Reiche.—2Ti_4:15. ἀνθέστηχε ] Lachm. Buttm. Tisch. 8 rightly read ἀντέστη , on the authority of A C D* F G à , al.; Tisch. 7 read ἀνθέστηχεν , on the authority of D*** E K L, etc.—2Ti_4:16. συμπαρεγένετο ] Following A C F G à 17, al., Lachm. Buttm. Tisch. 8 adopted the simple παρεγένετο ;—no doubt the compound συμπαραγ . (Tisch. 7) occurs seldom in the N. T., being found elsewhere only in Luk_23:48; but it seems nevertheless to be a correction made on account of μοι . Here, too, the readings vary between the imperfect ἐγκατέλεπον (Rec.) and the aorist ἐγκατέλιπον ; Tisch. 7 has the former, Tisch. 8 the latter; comp. 2Ti_4:10; 2Ti_4:13.—2Ti_4:17. Instead of the singular ἀκούσῃ , Lachm. Buttm. and Tisch. rightly read the plural ἀχούσωσι , supported by A C D E F G à 17, 39, al.—2Ti_4:18. Καί at the beginning of the verse was rightly omitted by Lachm. Buttm. and Tisch., on the authority of A C D* à 31, al., versions, Fathers; it was inserted to connect this verse with the preceding one.—2Ti_4:20. Μιλήτῳ ] For this A has Μηλωτῷ , and Arab. Μελίτῃ .—2Ti_4:22. For the Rec. ὁ κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (C D E K L), Lachm. and Buttm. have ὁ κύριος Ἰησοῦς (A 31), Tisch. only ὁ κύριος (F G 17, etc.). Lachmann’s reading should perhaps have the preference, as it is the one most open to correction.
ἀμήν was omitted by Griesb. as a later addition.