Col_1:12. While ye give thanks with joyfulness, etc.,—a third accompanying definition of
περιπατῆσαι
ἀξίως
κ
.
τ
.
λ
. (Col_1:10), co-ordinate with the two definitions preceding, and not to be connected with
οὐ
παυόμεθα
κ
.
τ
.
λ
. (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Calvin: “iterum redit ad gratulationem,” Calovius, Böhmer, Baumgarten-Crusius).
τῷ
παρτί
] of Jesus Christ; comp. Col_1:13, and
τοῦ
Κυρίου
in Col_1:10, not: “the Father absolutely” (Hofmann). It is always in Paul’s writings to be gathered from the context, whose Father God is to be understood as being (even at Eph_1:17); never does he name God absolutely (in abstracto)
ὁ
πατήρ
. Comp. Col_1:3, which, however, is held by Holtzmann to be the original, suggesting a repetition by the editor at our passage, in spite of the fact that the two passages have different subjects. Just as little does
εἰς
τὴν
μερίδα
κ
.
τ
.
λ
. betray itself as an interpolation from Eph_1:18; Eph_1:11 (Holtzmann), seeing that, on the one hand, the expression at our passage is so wholly peculiar, and, on the other hand, the idea of
κληρονομία
is so general in the N. T. Comp. especially Act_26:18.[19]
τῷ
ἱκανώσαντι
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.] Therein lies the ground of the thanksgiving, quippe qui, etc. God has made us fit (
ἡμᾶς
applies to the letter-writers and readers, so far as they are Christians) for a share in the Messianic salvation through the light, inasmuch as, instead of the darkness which previously prevailed over us, He has by means of the gospel brought to us the
ἀλήθεια
, of which light is the distinctive element and the quickening and saving principle (Eph_5:9) of the Christian constitution both in an intellectual and ethical point of view (Act_26:18); hence Christians are children of the light (Eph_5:8; 1Th_5:5; Luk_16:8). Comp. Rom_13:12; 2Co_6:14; 1Pe_2:9. In Christ the light had attained to personal manifestation (Joh_1:4 ff; Joh_3:9; Joh_8:12; Mat_4:16, et al.), as the personal revelation of the divine nature itself (1Jn_1:5), and the gospel was the means of its communication (Eph_3:9; Heb_6:4; 2Co_4:4; Act_26:23, et al.) to men, who without this enlightenment were unfit for the Messianic salvation (Eph_2:1 ff; Eph_4:18; Eph_5:11; Eph_6:12; 1Th_5:4, et al.). The instrumental definition
ἐν
τῷ
φωτί
is placed at the end, in order that it may stand out with special emphasis; hence, also, the relative sentence which follows refers to this very element. An objection has been wrongly urged against our view (which is already adopted by Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theophylact; comp. Estius and others, including Flatt and Steiger), that Paul must have used
πνεῦμα
instead of
φῶς
(see Olshausen). The
ἱκανοῦν
ἐν
τῷ
φωτί
is, indeed, nothing else than the
καλεῖν
εἰς
τὸ
φῶς
(1Pe_2:9) conceived in respect of its moral efficacy, and the result thereof on the part of man is the
εἶναι
φῶς
ἐν
κυρίῳ
(Eph_5:8), or the
εἶναι
υἱὸν
τοῦ
φωτός
(1Th_5:5; Joh_12:36),
ὡς
φωστῆρες
ἐν
κόσμῳ
(Php_2:15). But the light is a power; for it is
τὸ
φῶς
τῆς
ζωῆς
(Joh_8:12), has its armour (Rom_13:12), produces its fruit (Eph_5:9), effects the Christian
ἐλέγχειν
(Eph_5:13), endurance in the conflict of affliction (Heb_10:32), etc.
Ἐν
τῷ
φωτί
is usually connected with
τοῦ
κλήρου
τῶν
ἁγίων
, so that this
κλῆρος
is described as existing or to be found in light, as the kingdom of light; in which case we may think either of its glory (Beza and others, Böhmer, Huther), or of its purity and perfection (Olshausen, de Wette, and Dalmer) as referred to. But although the connecting article
τοῦ
might be wanting, and the
κλῆρος
τ
.
ἁγ
.
ἐν
τῷ
φωτί
might thus form a single conception, it may be urged as an objection that the heritage meant cannot be the temporal position of Christians, but only the future blessedness of the Messianic glorious kingdom; comp. Col_1:13,
τὴν
βασιλ
.
τοῦ
υἱοῦ
. Hence not
ἐν
τῷ
φωτί
, but possibly
ἐν
τῇ
δόξῃ
,
ἐν
τῇ
ζωῇ
,
ἐν
τοῖς
οὐρανεῖς
, or the like, would be a fitting definition of
κλῆρος
, which, however, already has in
τῶν
ἁγίων
its definite description (comp. Eph_1:18; Act_20:32; Act_26:18). Just as little—for the same reason, and because
τ
.
μερίδα
already carries with it its own definition (share in the
κλῆρος
)—is
ἐν
τῷ
φωτί
to be made dependent on
τὴν
μερίδα
, whether
ἐν
be taken locally (Bengel: “Lux est regnum Dei, habentque fideles in hoc regno partem beatam”) or as in Act_8:21 (Ewald), in which case Hofmann finds the sphere expressed (comp. also Bleek), where the saints have got their peculiar possession assigned to them, so that the being in light stands related to the future glory as that which is still in various respects conditioned stands to plenitude—as if
κλῆρος
(comp. on Act_26:18) had not already the definite and full eschatological sense of the possession of eternal glory. This
κλῆρος
, of which the Christians are possessors (
τῶν
ἁγίων
), ideally before the Parousia, and thereafter really, is the theocratic designation (
ðçìä
) of the properly of the Messianic kingdom (see on Gal_3:18; Eph_1:11), and the
ΜΕΡῚς
(
çì÷
)
ΤΟῦ
ΚΛΉΡΟΥ
is the share of individuals[20] in the same. Comp. Sir_44:23.
[19] The mode in which Act_26:18 comes into contact as regards thought and expression with Col_1:12-14, may be sufficiently explained by the circumstance that in Acts 26 also Paul is the speaker. Holtzmann justly advises caution with reference to the apparent echoes of the Book of Acts in general, as Luke originally bears the Pauline stamp.
[20] Comp. also Bleek. Hofmann incorrectly says that
τοῦ
κληροῦ
serves only to designate the
μερίς
as destined for special possession. In that case, at least, the qualitative genitive of the abstract must have been put
τῆς
κληρονομίας
, as in Psa_16:5). But the concrete
τοῦ
κλήρου
τ
.
ἁγ
. is, as the literal sense of
μερίς
, portio, most naturally suggests, the genitivus partitivus (G. totius), so that the individual is conceived as
μερίτης
of the
κλῆρος
of the saints, in which he for his part
συμμετέκει
.