138
w 2 Cor. xi. ἁννὸν * τήρει. 9, Jas. i. γ ΤΡ 27, cf. 1 Tim. vi.
, τὸν *oTdpaxov! καὶ τὰς " πυκνάς σου » ἀσθενείας.
Ms
23. μηκέτι " ὑδροπότει, ἀλλὰ οἴνῳ ὀλίγῳ 7 χρῶ διὰ
τινῶν
24.
la 14,2Tim. ἀνθρώπων at ἁμαρτίαι “ πρόδηλοί εἰσιν, “ προάγουσαι εἰς κρίσιν,
iv. 7. x Here only Ν.Τ., Dan. i. 12, LXX. only, Ν.Τ., as adj. 1 Cor. ii. 3, Gal. iv. 13. ο ἃ 1 Tim. i. 18.
1Ins. σου DcFGKL, f, g, vg., go., sah.,
d, r.
Timothy is bidden to restrain by deli- berate prudence the impulses of mere pity. A hasty reconciliation tempts the offender to suppose that his offence can- not have been so very serious after all; and smoothes the way to a repetition of the sin. ‘‘Good-natured easy men” cannot escape responsibility for the dis- astrous consequences of their lax admini- stration of the law. They have a share in the sins of those whom they have encouraged to sin. Those who give letters of recommendation with too great facility fall under the apostolic condem- nation.
On the other hand, the ancient com- mentators —Chrys., Theod., Theoph., Oecumen.—refer χεῖρας ἐπιτίθει to hasty ordinations; and in support of this, the generally adopted view, it must be granted that ἐπίθεσις χειρῶν undoubtedly refers to ordination in iv. 14, 2 Tim. 1. 6. If we assume the same reference here, the intention of the warning would be that Timothy will best avoid clerical scandals by being cautious at the outset as to the character of those whom he ordains. The clause in iii. 10, καὶ οὗτοι δὲ δοκιμαζέσθωσαν πρῶτον, would, in this case, have the same reference; and we should explain ἁμαρτίαι ἀλλότριαι as possible future sins, for the commis- sion of which a man’s advancement may give him facilities, and responsibility for which attaches, in various degrees of blameworthiness, to those who have ren- dered it possible for him to commit them.
σεαυτόν is emphatic, repeating in brief the warning of the previous clause.
ayvov: The context demands that the meaning should not be chaste (castum Vulg.), as in Tit. ii. 5, 2 Cor. xi. 2; but pure in the sense of upright, honourable, as in 2 Cor. vii. 11, Phil. iv. 8, Jas. iii. 17.
Ver. 23. μηκέτι ὑδροπότει: An ade- quate explanation of this seemingly ir- relevant direction is that since there is a certain degree of ambiguity in ayvds, St. Paul thought it necessary to guard against any possible misunderstanding
y Here only (N.T.) of food. : Η b Matt. viii. 17, Luke v. 15, viii. 2, xiii. 11, 12, John v. 5, xi. 4, Acts καν]. 9, Vv. 24, 25, Heb. vii. 14, Judith viii. 29, 2 Macc. iii. 17, xiv. 39.
z Here only, not LXX. a Here
boh., syrr., arm.; om. σου NAD*P, 17,
of Keep thyself pure: “1 do not mean you to practice a rigid asceticism; on the contrary, I think that you are likely to injure your health by your complete abstinence from wine; so, be no longer a water-drinker, εἴς." So Hort, who thinks that this is “ not merely a sanitary but quite as much a moral precept” (Fudaistie Christianity, p. 144). This explanation is preferable to that of Paley who regards this as an example of ‘“‘ the negligence of real correspondence. . . when a man writes as he remembers: when he puts down an article that occurs the moment it occurs, lest he should afterwards forget it’? (Horae Paulinae). Similarly Calvin suggested that σεαυτὸν --ἀσθενείας was a marginal note by St. Paul himself. Alford’s view has not much to commend it, viz., that Timothy’s weakness of character was connected with his constant ill health, and that St. Paul hoped to brace his deputy's will by a tonic.
For this position of μηκέτι cf. Mark ix. 25, xi. 14, Luke viii. 49, John v. 14, viii. τι, Rom. xiv: 13, Eph. iv. 28; and see note on chap. iv. 14.