Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Galatians 6:1 - 6:1
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Gal_6:1. Loving ( ἀδελφοί ) exhortation to a course of conduct opposed to κενοδοξία .
ἐὰν καὶ προληφθῇ κ . τ . λ .] Correctly rendered in substance by the Vulgate: “etsi praeoccupatus fuerit homo in aliquo delicto.” The meaning is: “if even any one ( ἄνθρωπος , as in Gal_6:7, and 1Co_11:28; 1Co_4:1, et al.) shall have been overtaken by any fault,—so, namely, that the sin has reached him more rapidly than he could flee from it (1Co_6:18; 1Co_10:14; 1Ti_6:11; 2Ti_2:22). So Chrysostom, Theophylact, Erasmus, Luther, Calvin, Beza, and most expositors, including Rückert and de Wette; and in substance also Wieseler, who, however, explains προλ . figuratively of a snare, in which ( ἐν ) one is unexpectedly ( προ ) caught.[248] There is, however, no intimation of this figure in the context ( καταρτίζετε ); and to explain ἘΝ the quite common instrumental use amply suffices, according to which the expression is not different from the mere dative. In a mild and trustful tone Paul conceives the sin, which might occur among his Galatians, only as “peccatum praecipitantiae;” for this is, at any rate, intimated by προληφθῇ . On ΠΡΟΛΑΜΒΆΝΕΙΝ , to overtake, comp. Xen. Cyn. 5, 19; 7, 7; Theophr. H. pl. viii. 1. 3; Polyb. xxxi. 23. 8; Diod. Sic. xvii. 75; Strabo, xvi. p. 1120. In ἐὰν καί the emphasis is laid on ΕἸ (if even, if nevertheless); see Klotz, ad Devar. p. 519; Baeuml. Partik. p. 151. Others (Grotius, Winer, Olshausen, Hilgenfeld, Ewald, Hofmann) have explained προληφθῇ as deprehensus fuerit, is seized; but against this view it may be urged that, as the word cannot be used as merely equivalent to the simple verb, or to καταληφθῇ (Joh_8:4), or ἘΓΚΑΤΑΛΗΦΘῇ (Aeschin. Ctes. p. 62. 17), no reference for the προ can be got from the context.[249] Even in Wis_17:17, προληφθείς means overtaken, surprised by destruction. And the καί does not require that interpretation, because, while it might belong to προληφθῇ (Klotz, p. 521; Kühner, § 824, note 1), so as to mean also actually caught (comp. 1Co_7:17), or, by way of climax, even caught, it does not necessarily belong to it.
ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοί ] Paul thus puts it to the consciousness of every reader to regard himself as included or not: ye, the spiritual, that is, who are led by the πνεῦμα ἅγιον . The opposite: ΨΥΧΙΚΟΊ , ΣΑΡΚΙΚΟΊ (1Co_2:13 f., Gal_3:1). In the case of ΔΥΝΑΤΟΊ , Rom_15:1, the circumstances presupposed and the contrast are of a different character. Those very ΠΝΕΥΜΑΤΙΚΟΊ might readily be guilty of an unbrotherly exaltation and severity, if they did not sufficiently attend to and obey the leading of the Spirit towards meekness.
ΚΑΤΑΡΤΊΖΕΤΕ ] bring him right, into the proper, normal condition; διορθοῦτε , Chrysostom. Comp. on 1Co_1:10. A figurative reference to the setting of dislocated limbs (Beza, Hammond, Bengel, and others) is not suggested by the context.
ἐν πνεύματι πραότητος ] through the Spirit of meekness, that is, through the πνεῦμα ἅγιον producing meekness. For ΠΝΕῦΜΑ should be understood, not with Luther, Calvin, and many others, of the human spirit (1Pe_3:4), of the tendency of feeling or tone of mind (Rückert, de Wette, Wieseler, and others), but of the Holy Spirit, as is required by the very correlation with πνευματικοί . See on 1Co_4:21. But among the manifold ΚΑΡΠῸς ΤΟῦ ΠΝΕΎΜΑΤΟς (Gal_5:22), ΠΡΑΎΤΗΤΟς brings prominently forward the very quality which was to be applied in the ΚΑΤΑΡΤΊΖΕΙΝ . In that view it is the “character palmarius hominis spiritualis,” Bengel.
σκοπῶν σεαυτὸν κ . τ . λ .] looking (taking heed) to thyself lest, etc. Comp. Soph. Phil. 506. In Plat. Theaet. p. 160 E, Luk_11:35, it is differently used. Comp. Buttmann, neut. Gr. p. 209. There is here a transition to the singular, giving a more individual character to the address; just as we frequently find in classical authors that, after the plural of the verb, the singular of the participle makes the transition from the aggregate to the individual. See Bernhardy, p. 421; Lobeck, ad Soph. Aj. 191. Erasmus aptly remarks that the singular is “magis idoneus ad compellandam uniuscujusque conscientiam.” There is therefore the less ground for considering these words as an apostolical marginal note (Laurent).
μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρ .] lest thou also (like that fallen one) become tempted, enticed to sin,—wherein the apostle has in view the danger of the enticement being successful. Comp. 1Co_7:5. Lachmann places a full stop after πραύτητος , and connects ΣΚΟῶΝ … ΠΕΙΡΑΣΘῇς with the words which follow; a course by which the construction gains nothing, and the connection actually suffers, for the reference of ΚΑῚ ΣΎ to ΤῸΝ ΤΟΙΟῦΤΟΝ is far more natural and conformable to the sense than the reference to ἈΛΛΉΛΩΝ .
[248] Comp. Goth. “gafaháidáu,” that is, caught.
[249] Grotius strangely interprets: “deprehensus antequam haec epistola ad vos veniat.” Winer introduces more than the text warrants: “etiamsi quis antea deprehensus fuerit in peccato, eum tamen (iterum peccantem) corrigite.” Paul must have expressed this by ἐὰν καὶ πάλιν ληφθῇ . Olshausen affirms that by προ the λαμβάνεσθαι is indicated as taking place before the καταρτίζειν . But this relation of time was so obvious of itself, that it would have been strange thus to express it. Hofmann interprets not more aptly: “ere he repents of the sin;” as if this idea could only be thus mentally supplied! Luther appropriately remarks, “if a man should somehow be overtaken by a fault.”