Ver. 5. διὰ τὴν ἐλπίδα. This is con- nected by Bengel, followed by several recent commentators (Hofm., ΚΙ., OL, Haupt, Weiss, Abb.), with εὐχαριστοῦμεν. Having heard of their faith and love, Paul gives thanks for the hope laid up for them in heaven. Lightfoot and Soden urge that in this way the triad of Christian
3—6.
Απροηκούσατε ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῆς ἀληθείας τοῦ εὐαγγελίου,
497
Ώ h Class. 6. τοῦ only here
i ἢ ae ert κι θὲ Nes <A , πὶ k ο in Bib. πάροντος εἰς υμας, κανὼς και εν παντι τῷ κοσμῳ ἐστιν, ᾿ καρτπο- Gk.
φορούμενον καὶ αὐξανόμενον καθὼς καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν, ἀφ᾽ ἧς ἡμέρας ἠκού- ! Withes.r
here in N.T.; often in class. Gk.; with πρὸς four times in N.T.
graces, faith, hope and love, is broken up. But “hope” is objective here, not the grace of hope, but the object of that hope. It is true that Paul glides from the subjective to the objective use of ἐλπίς in Rom. viii. 24, but if this com- bination had been intended here he would probably have simply co-ordinated the three terms. A more serious objec- tion is that εὐχαριστ. is so far away, though Haupt urges that διὰ τ. ἐλπ. could not have come inearlier. Further, Paul never uses this constr. εὐχαριστ. διὰ. It is also his custom, at the be- ginning of his Epistles, to give thanks for the Christian character of his readers (which he hardly does in ver. 4), not for the heavenly reward that awaits them. Others (De W., Lightf., Sod.) connect it with τ. πίστιν ... καὶ τ. ἀγάπην. This gives a good sense, their faith and love have their ground in their hope of (reward. But we should have expected _ the article before a clause thus added to substantives. It is simplest to refer it to ν΄“ πὴν ay. ἣν ἔχετε (Chrys., Mey., Ell., Alf., Franke), and interpret it of the love which is due to the hope of a heavenly reward. It is urged that a love of this calculating kind is foreign to Paul, but cf. 2 Cor. ix. 6, Gal. vi. 9.—év τ. οὐρανοῖς. Cf. the reward or treasure in heaven (Matt. v. 12, vi. 20, xix, 21), the citizenship in heaven (Phil. iii. 20), the inheritance reserved in heaven (1 Pet. i. 4).--ἣν προηκούσατε. The reference in προ. is disputed. Bengel and Klépper think it means before the writing of this letter ; Meyer, Hofmann and Haupt before its fulfilment... But more probably it is to be taken of their first hearing of the Gospel (so Lightf., Ol., Abb.), perhaps in tacit contrast to the false teaching they had recently heard. Haupt, it is true, denies that there is any reference to the false teachers in vy. 2-8; but though none can be proved, it is surely probable that the turn of several expressions should be determined by the subject which was uppermost in the Apostle’s mind, and that ke should thus prepare his readers for the direct attack.—ddy τῆς ἀληθείας τοῦ εὐαγγελίου. Cf. Eph. i, 13, according to which τ. evayy. should be taken as in apposition to Ady. τ. ἀλ.,