Heinrich Meyer Commentary - Galatians 6:10 - 6:10

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Heinrich Meyer Commentary - Galatians 6:10 - 6:10


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

Gal_6:10. Concluding exhortation of the section of the epistle which began at Gal_6:6, inferred from the preceding καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν μὴ ἐκλ . ( ἄρα οὖν ). The specialty of this exhortation lies in ὡς καιρὸν ἔχομεν , which is therefore emphatically prefixed: as we have a season suitable thereto (for instances of καιρὸν ἔχειν , opportunum tempus habere, see Wetstein). This seasonable time will have elapsed, when the παρουσία sets in; we must therefore utilize it as ours by the ἐργάζεσθαι τὸ ἀγαθόν . The same idea as the ἐξαγοράζεσθαι τ . καιρόν in Eph_5:16; Col_4:5. Hofmann introduces the idea, that there will come for the Christians, even before the παρουσία , an “hour of temptation,” in which they can only (?) withstand evil, but not bestow good one on another. This idea is in opposition to the context in Gal_6:9, and is nowhere else expressed; and its introduction rests on the incorrect explanation of ἐργάζ . τὸ ἀγαθόν as referring to beneficence, and on the wrong idea that the doing good will become impossible.

ὡς is the usual as, that is, as corresponds with and is suitable to this circumstance, that we καιρὸν ἔχομεν . Comp. Luk_12:58; Joh_12:35; Clement, 2 Corinthians 9 : ὡς ἔχομεν καιρὸν τοῦ ἰαθῆναι , ἐπιδῶμεν ἑαυτοὺς τῷ θεραπεύοντι Θεῷ . Others, likewise retaining the signification “as,” interpret: prout habemus opportunitatem, that is, when and how we have opportunity. Thus Knatchbull, Homberg, Wolf, Zachariae, Hilgenfeld. For this, indeed, no conditional ἄν would be necessary; but how weak and lax would be the injunction! Besides, καιρόν has obtained, by means of Gal_6:9, its quite definite reference. Others take ὡς as causal (Heindorf, ad Gorg. p. 113; Matthiae, p. 1511). So Koppe, Paulus, Usteri (because we have time and opportunity), de Wette; also Winer, who, however, does not decide between quoniam and prout. But ὡς , in the sense of because, is nowhere to be found in Paul’s writings (not even in 2Ti_1:3). Most expositors explain it as so long as (so Flatt, Rückert, Matthies, Schott, Olshausen), which, however, it never means, not even in Luk_12:58.

τὸ ἀγαθόν ] the morally good, not the useful (Olshausen). Not merely the article, but also the use of the expression by Paul, in definite connection with ἐργάζεσθαι , as applying to morality active in works (Rom_2:10; Eph_4:28), ought to have prevented the interpretation of τὸ ἀγαθόν , at variance with the context, as benefits (Erasmus, Beza, Calvin, Estius, and many others, including Schott, de Wette, and Wieseler). Hofmann’s interpretation (“do good towards others”), in more general terms evading the definite idea, amounts to the same thing. The ἀγαθόν in this passage is the same as τὸ καλόν in Gal_6:9. That which is good is also that which is morally beautiful. Comp. especially Rom_7:18 f.

πρός ] in relation to, in intercourse with. see Winer, p. 378 f. [E. T. 505]; Sturz, Lex. Xen. III. p. 698; Bernhardy, p. 265.

τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως ] the associates in the faith, believers. οἰκεῖος , primarily inmate of the house, comes to be used generally in the sense of special appertaining to (comp. LXX. Isa_58:7), without further reference to the idea of a house. So with the genitive of an abstract noun, as οἰκεῖοι φιλοσοφίας (Strabo, I. p. 13 B), γεωγραφίας (Strabo, I. p. 25 A.), ὀλιγαρχίας (Diod. Sic. xiii. 91), and the like in Wetstein, p. 236; Schweigh. Lex Polyb. p. 401. Comp. τὰ τῆς ἀρετῆς οἰκεῖα , 2Ma_15:12; τὰ τῆς φύσεως οἰκεῖα , Dem. 1117. 25. The πίστις is the Christian faith; those who belong to it are the πιστεύοντες . The opposite would be: τοὺς ἀλλοτρίους τῆς πιστ . The idea that the church is the οἶκος Θεοῦ (1Ti_3:15; Heb_3:2; Heb_5:6; Heb_10:21; 1Pe_4:17) is improperly introduced here, in order to obtain the sense: “qui per fidem sunt in eadem atque nos familia Domini” (Beza; comp. Estius, Michaelis, and others, also Schott and Olshausen, Wieseler, and Ewald, who limits the idea to the same church). For τῆς πίστεως conveys the complete definition of τοὺς οἰκείους ; and the sense mentioned above must have been expressed by some such form as τοὺς ἡμῶν οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως (comp. Php_2:30, et al.; Winer, p. 180, rem. 3 [E. T. 239]). Paul might also simply have written πρὸς τοῦς πιστεύοντας ; but the expression οἰκείους τ . π . suggests a stronger motive. Among the πᾶσι , in relation to whom we have to put into operation the morally good, those who belong to the faith have the chief claims—because these claims are based on the special sacred duty of fellowship which it involves—in preference to those who are strangers to the faith, although in respect even to the latter that conduct is to be observed which is required in Col_4:5, 1Th_4:12.

Note.

If the reading ἐργαζόμεθα (see the critical notes), which is followed by Ewald, were the original one, the indicative would not (with Winer in his Commentary, but not in his Gramm. p. 267 [E. T. 355]) have to be taken as a stronger and more definite expression instead of the hortative subjunctive (do we therefore the good), since this use of the present indicative (Jacobs, ad Ach. Tat. p. 559, ad Delect. epigr. p. 228; Heindorf, ad Gorg. p. 109; Bernhardy, p. 396) in non-interrogative language (Joh_11:47) is foreign to the N.T., although opportunities for it often presented themselves. The interpretation of the whole sentence as an interrogation has been rightly given up by Lachmann (also at Rom_14:19), because so complete an interruption by a question does not occur elsewhere in Paul’s writings, and the addition μάλιστα δέ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως indicates that the passage is of the nature of an assertion, and not of a question. ἐργάζομεθα τὸ ἀγαθόν would rather represent the matter as actually taking place (we do it, we hold it so, it is our maxim), and would thus belong to the ideal delineation of Christian life common with the apostle; which might indeed be highly appropriate in its place at the conclusion of a discourse as a note of triumph, but here, in immediate connection with mere exhortations and injunctions, would be somewhat out of place.