348
h=Rom. τοῖς ἀκούουσιν.
xiv. 15.
30. καὶ μὴ " λυπεῖτε! τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον 3 τοῦ
i Ch. i 33 θεοῦ, ἐν ᾧ | ἐσφραγίσθητε “eis ' ἡμέραν ' ἀπολυτρώσεως. 31. πᾶσα k=Phil. ii, "πικρία καὶ θυμὸς καὶ ὀργὴ “ καὶ " κραυγὴ καὶ "βλασφημία ” dp-
16;2Tim, i. 12. 1 Here only; see ch. i, 7 reff. m Acts viii. 23; Rom. iii. 14, from Ps. ix. 27; Heb. xii. 15 only. n=Acts xxiii. 9 only; see Matt. xii. το. o=Col. iii. 8 al. p=(in epp.)
Col. ii. 14 only; Matt. xiii, 12 and Gosp. passim; Acts xxii. 22.
ἔλυπητε KL, Cyr., al., Bas., Thdrt.
Στο ay. wv. DEFG, ἆ, e, g, Goth.
ὅτι θεον om. 2, 49, AZth., Chr., Epiph., Tert. ‘opy. x. θυμ. DEFG 37, 46, 55, 73, 116, ἆ, e, f, g, Vulg., Copt., Clem., Ambrst., etc.
Plato, Laws, iii., p. 702 ο; Exod. iii, 21; Ps. Ixxxiv. 11); and in the NT it has this sense with the specific notion of gracious kindness or service (2 Cor. i. 15, viii. 6; James iv. 6; 1 Pet. v. 5). So it is here. The λόγος is the subj., and the clause gives the Christian object of every speech or utterance, viz., to do good to the hearers, to impart a blessing to them (Ell.). For words with a different result cf. 2 Tim. ii. 14.
Ver. 30. καὶ μὴ λνπεῖτε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον τοῦ Θεοῦ: and grieve not the Holy Spirit of God. This is not a general exhortation, but one bearing, as the καί indicates, particularly on the preceding injunction. The utterance of evil or worthless words is repugnant to the holi- ness of the Spirit, and is to be refrained from as calculated to grieve Him. The injunction is made the more solemn by the designation of the Spirit as “the Holy Spirit” and the Spirit “" of God”, The Spirit is here regarded as capable of feeling, and so as personal. In Isa. Ixiii. 1o we have a similar idea, following the statement that Jehovah was afflicted in all His people's affliction. These terms, no doubt, are anthropopathic, as all terms which we can use of God are anthropo- morphic or anthropopathic, But they have reality behind them, and that as regards God's nature and not merely His acts. Otherwise we should have an unknown God and One who might be essentially different from what we are under the mental necessity of thinking Him to be. What love is in us points truly, though tremulously, to what love is in God. But in us love, in proportion as it is true and sovereign, has both its wrath-side and its gricf-side ; and so must it be with God, however difficult for us to think it out.—év ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε: in whom ve were sealed. ἐν ᾧ, not “by whom” (Tynd., Cranm., Gen., Bish.), or “whereby” (AV), but η whom,” the Holy Spirit being the environment of the seal, the sphere or element in which
it takes effect. On the sealing see on i. 13 above.—els ἡμέραν ἀπολυτρώσεως: unto the day of redemption. εἰς is most simply taken as=withaview to. ἀπολύ- τρωσις, as ini. 14, Luke xxi. 28, Romans viii. 23, is the redemption of the future, and here specifically that redemption in its completeness and finality. The gen. is the gen. of temporal relation, = the day on which redemption will take effect, or manifest itself; cf. ἡμέρα ὀργῆς (Rom. ii. 2); κρίσις μεγάλης ἡμέρας (Jude 6). The consideration, therefore, that it is in the Spirit they have their security and their assurance of reaching the day when their redemption shall be made perfect, is an additional reason for avoiding everything out of harmony with His holy being and action.
Ver. 31. πᾶσα πικρία: let all bitter- ness. The noun πικρία occurs thrice — in the NT, and with different shades of meaning (Acts viii. 23; Rom. iii. 143 Heb. xii. 15). Meyer makes it = fretting spitefulness here. Butit seems to be more than that (cf. χολὴ πικρίας as a descrip- tion of exceptional wickedness in Acts viii. 23), and to mean _ resentfulness, harshness, virulence. In James iii. 11 τὸ πικρόν is contrasted with τὸ γλυκύ, and in ver. 14 it qualifies ζῆλον which again is coupled with ἐρίθειαν. The πᾶσα has the force of ‘all manner of”. Harshness in all its forms whether in speech or in feeling (the latter, perhaps, being specially in view as the contrasting χρηστοί suggests) is to be put away. --καὶ θυμὸς καὶ ὀργή: and wrath and anger. ‘These two words are often con- joined in non-biblical Greek, in the LXX and in the NT (e.g., Rom. ii. 8; Col. iii. 8; Rev. xvi. το, xix. 15). So far as they differ, the distinction is that θυμός is p Ae the more passionate and passing sentiment, the burst of anger, and ὀργή the settled disposition. So in Ecclus. xlviii. τὸ we get the phrase κοπάσαι ὀργὴν πρὸ θυμοῦ. See Trench, Syv., ΡΡ. 123-125.—Kal κρανγή: and clamour,