<- Previous   First   Next ->

contemplantes. )

The word ejpiskopou'nte" expresses the careful regard of those who occupy a position of responsibility (as a physician, or a superintendent). Each Christian shares this in due degree. Mh; toivnun pavnta ejpi; tou;" didaskavlou" ejpirrivptete : mh; pavnta ejpi; tou;" hJgoumevnou" : duvnasqe kai; uJmei'", fhsivn, ajllhvlou" oijkodomei'n (Chrys.). Mh; movnon de; eJautw'n ajlla; kai; ajllhvlwn ejpimelei'sqe, kai; to;n klonouvmenon uJpereivdete kai; to;n ceiragwgiva" deovmenon ijatreuvsate (Theodt.).

In uJsterei'n ajpo; th'" c. t. q. the idea seems to be that of falling behind, not keeping pace with the movement of divine grace which meets and stirs the progress of the Christian (Heb. 12:11). The present participle describes a continuous state and not a single defection.

The construction uJsterei'n ajpov tino" marks a ‘falling back’ from that with which some connexion exists, implying a moral separation, while uJsterei'n tino" expresses actual defect only, a falling short of.

Compare Eccles. 6:2 (LXX.) oujk e[sti uJsterw'n th'/ yuch'/ aujtou' ajpo; panto;" ou| ejpiqumei' . Compare Ecclus. 7:34 mh; uJstevrei ajpo; klaiovntwn .

Theophylact applies the words to Christians as fellow-travellers on a long journey: kaqavper oJdovn tina makra;n oJdeuovntwn aujtw'n ejn sunodiva/ pollh'/, fhsiv, Blevpete mhv ( whether ) ti" ajpevmeinen .
mhv ti" rJ. p. ... ejnoclh'/ ] The image is taken from Deut. 29:17 f. The
original connexion points to the perils of allurements to serve strange gods.

The ‘root’ is personal (1 Macc. 1:10 rJivza aJmartwlo;" jAnt. jEpif. ) and not doctrinal: a pernicious man and not a pernicious opinion. Compare Acts 8:23.

The phrase ‘ root of bitterness ’ (as distinguished from ‘bitter root’) expresses the product and not simply the quality of the root itself. Oujk ei\pe pikra; ajlla; pikriva", th;n me;n ga;r pikra;n rJivzan e[sti karpou;" ejnegkei'n glukei'", th;n de; pikriva" rJivzan ... oujk e[sti ph gluku;n ejnegkei'n karpovn (Chrys.).

The clause a[nw fuvousa adds a vivid touch to the picture. The seed, the root, lies hidden and reveals its power slowly ( fuvein Lk. 8:6, 8).

For the image compare Ign. Eph. 10 i{na mh; tou' diabovlou botavnh ti" euJreqh'/ ejn uJmi'n . id. Trall. 6; Philad. 1.

The word ejnoclei'n occurs again in N. T. in Luke 6:18. The pres. conj. ejnoclh'/ leaves it uncertain whether the fear of such a present evil is actually realised. [The strange coincidence of letters between ENOCLH and ENCOLH of Deut. 29:18 cannot escape notice.]
mianq. oiJ polloiv ] the many be defiled. The poisonous influence spreads corruption through the society.

For miaivnein see Tit. 1:15 (2 Pet. 2:10, 20); and for oiJ polloiv —the many, the mass of men, the body considered in its members—Matt. 24:12; Rom. 5:15, 19; 12:5; 1 Cor. 10:17, 33; 2 Cor. 2:17.

Heb. 12:16. mhv ti" povrno" h] bevb. wJ" jHsau' ...] A question has been raised whether both povrno" and bevbhlo" are connected with jHsau' , or the latter only. The second view seems unquestionably to be right. Esau is presented in Scripture as the type of a ‘profane’ man, but he does not appear as povrno" either literally or metaphorically. The later Jewish traditions can hardly have a place here. And, yet again, the words of explanation which


<- Previous   First   Next ->