392
f Col. iv. 7; ch. i. 15.
g Here only.
h (Ch, v. 1 reff.); see 1 Cor. xv. 58 reff.
Vi.
21. Ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε καὶ bpeis! ' τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμὲ, © τί πράσσω, πάντα ὃ ὑμῖν ” γνωρίσει ὃ Τυχικὸς ὁ ἢ ἀγαπητὸς " ἀδελφὸς καὶ πιστὸς ' διά- i Col. iv. 7 only.
1 και up. ἐιδ. (ιδ. AD*FG, al.) NADEFG, 108-14-18-20, al., It., Vulg., al., Thdrt., some Lat. Fathers; ειδητε και υμεις BKL, etc., Syr. Arm., Eth., Chr., Dam., Jer.,
Ambrst., etc. παντα om. D*FG, it., Syr., Jer.
5 yv. up. NBDEFGP 37, 116-20, It., al.,
Syr.-P., Chr., Thdrt., Dam., etc.
16; Beza, Grot., Paley, Steyer, etc.). That is possible, and indeed even prob- able, so far as the custodia is concerned. But the description might apply to the imprisonment in Czsarea as well as to thatin Rome. The real point of the clause is in the view it gives of the need of the παρρησία and of the intercessions that should bring that gift.—Tva ἐν αὐτῷ παρ- ρησιάσωμαι ὡς δεῖ µε λαλῆσαι : in order that therein I may speak boldly, ας] ought to speak. How is this purpose-clause to be connected? Some attach it to the πρεσβεύω (Beng., Meyer, Von Soden), as if = “ I act as ambassador in a chain with the object of speaking boldly,” etc. Others connect it with the whole fore- going clause, making it subordinate to that, and an explanation of the object of the gift of utterance, = “" that utterance may be given to me to make known the mystery, with the view that I should speak boldly ” (Harl.). But ἵνα is repeatedly used to introduce something that is not subordinate to, but coordinate with, what is stated in a former ἵνα clause (Rom. viii. 13; Gal. iii. 14; 1 Cor. xii, 20; 2 Cor. ix. 3). It is best, therefore, to take it so here, and to understand the clause as giving a second object contemplated in the π οἱ and ἀγρυπνοίντες, etc. First the gift of utterance, and now secondly the gift more particularly of a boldness or freedom (παρρησιάσωμαι) in preaching such as became the Apostle’s office and responsibility (ὡς δεῖ pe λαλῆ- σαι). The αὐτῷ refers to the μυστήριον which was to be preached. The ἐν is taken by some (e.g., Harl.) to denote the source or ground of the boldness in speaking (παρρησιάσωμαι). But it is God who is named as the source of such boldness (ἐπαρρησιασάµεθα ἐν τῷ Θεῷ, 1 Thess. ii. 2). It might be an instance of ἐν expressing that on which a certain power operates or in which it shows it- self (as in ἵνα οὕτω γένηται ἐν ἐμοί, 1 Cor. ix. 15; ἐν ἡμῖν μάθητε, τ Cor. iv. 6; cf. Thayer-Grimm, Lex., p. 210). But it
Ambrst. ; vpiv γνωρισει AKL, εἰς, Vulg.,
is best understood as the note of that in which one is busted (cf. Acts xxii, 12; 1 Tim. iv. 15; Col. iv. 2, εἴς.), and so= “that, occupied with that mystery, {.ε., in proclaiming it, I may speak boldly” (Mey.).
Vv. 21-22. Statement regarding Tych- icus and his mission.
Ver. 21. ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε καὶ ὑμεῖς [καὶ ὑμεῖς εἰδῆτε) τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμέ, τί πράσσω: but that ye also may know my affairs, how I do. The metabatic δέ, passing on to a different subject. The order καὶ ὑμεῖς εἰδῆτε is given in ΝΑΡΕ, etc.; εἰδῆτε καὶ ὑμεῖς in BKL, Syr., ete. The evi- dence is almost equally balanced. LTTr prefer the former order; WH give it in the margin. The καί has its proper force of “also,” and points, therefore, to others as well as the Ephesians as possessing or being interested in the knowledge of Paul's affairs. Those who take the Epistle to the Colossians to be prior to this one, naturally think of the Colos- sians as in view. But in the Epistle itself there is nothing to indicate who these others were. For τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμέ = “my circumstances,” ¢f. Phil. i. 22; Col. iv. 7; also Tob. x. 8; 1 Esdr.i. 22. τί πράσσω, not = ‘what I do,” but “how I fare,” in the reflexive sense (Lat., me habeo) common from éschylus down- wards. Here it is explanatory of τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμέ. --- πάντα ὑμῖν γνωρίσει [γνωρίσει ὑμῖν] Τνχικός: Tychicus shall Sake known to you. πάντα is omitted in D'F, Syr., etc. ὑμῖν is placed by the TR before γνωρίσει (as in AKL, Syr.-P., Chr., Theod., etc.; after it by LTTr _ WHRY (as in gap 17, 37, 116, 120, Syr.-Sch., Copt., etc.). τΤυχικός, usually so accented, but Τύχικος in WH, is mentioned again in Acts xx. 4; Col. iv. 7; 2 Tim. tv. 12; Tit. iii. 12. We gather from these passages that he was a native of proconsular Asia (Acts xx. 4), possibly of Ephesus itself (see πο. Philip., p. 11); that he was with Paul towards the close of his third missionary