14
3. εἴ τις " ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ καὶ μὴ g Seer Tim.
> a 1. 3. Ingo h See note. 12 Tim. i. 13, see I Tim. 1. 1Ο.
μηδὲν " ἐπιστάμενος, ἀλλὰ “ νοσῶν περὶ " ζητήσεις καὶ “ λογομαχίας, k Tit. i. τ.
m ὅϑεει Tim. iii. 6. 8 (bts) only. only, not LXX, cf. 2 Tim. ii. 14.
κ
1 προσέχεται ὼ.
to help, as in reff.; and the Harclean Syriac gives that sense here. Like our English word apprehend, it passes from an association with the sense of touch to an association with the other senses or faculties which connect us with things about us. Field (iz loc.) gives examples of the use of ἀντιλαμβάνεσθαι as expres- sive of a person being sensible of anything which acts upon the senses, ¢g., the smell of a rose. The Peshitta agrees with this. Alford renders mutually receive, by which he seems to intend the same thing as Ell., who suggests that ἀντί has “a formal reference to the reciprocal relation between master and servant”. Field rejects this because “‘ receive in ex- change” is ἀντιλαμβάνειν, and the ex- amples cited by Alf. are middle only in form. ;
δίδασκε καὶ παρακάλει : See note on iv. 13.
Vy. 3-21. Thoughts about the right
use of wealth are suggested by the slave problem, a mischievous attitude towards which is associated with false doctrine. If a man possesses himself, he has enough. This possession is eternal as well as temporal. This is my lesson for the poor, for you as a man of God (and I solemnly adjure you to learn and teach it), and for the rich. _ Ver. 3. ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ: See note on 1 3. καὶ μὴ: Blass (Gramm. p. 514) notes this case of py following et with the in- dicative (supposed reality) as an abnor- mal conformity to classical use. The usual N.T. use, εἰ. . . οὐ, appears in τ Tim, iii. 5, v. 8. In these examples, however, the οὐ is in the same clause as εἰ, not separated from it, as here, by a kat.
προσέρχεται: assents to. The noun προσήλυτος, proselyte, “one who has pome over,” might alone render this use af προσέρχομαι defensible. But ΕἸ]. zives examples of this verb from Irenzus ind Philo; and Alf. from Origen, which iompletely justify it. The reading προ-
n Mark xiv. 68, Acts (9), Heb. xi. 8, Jas. iv. 14, Jude το. p John iii. 25, Acts xv. 2, 7, Xxv. 20, 2 Tim. 11. 23, Tit. ili. 9, not LXX.
1 See x Tim. li. 2
ο Wisd. xvii.
q Here
So Bentley conj. from Latin adqutescit.
σέχεται, which seems to derive support from the use of προσέχειν, i. 4, Tit. i. 14, has not exactly the same force; “ to give heed,” or “attend to,” a doctrine falls short of giving in one’s adhesion to it. ὑγιαίνουσι λόγοις: See on i. ΤΟ.
τοῖς τοῦ Κυρίου: This is in harmony with St. Paul’s teaching elsewhere, that the words spoken through the prophets of the Lord are the Lord’s own words. It is thus we are to understand Acts xvi. 7, “The Spirit of Jesus suffered them not,” and τ Cor. xi. 23, “1 received of the Lord,” etc. The words of Jesus, “He that heareth you heareth me” (Luke x. 16) have a wider reference than was seen at first.
τῇ κατ᾽ εὐσέβειαν διδασκαλίᾳ: See ref. and notes on i. 10, ii. 2.
Ver. 4. τετύφωται: inflatus est (d, ταῦθ τ) ; superbus est (Vulg.). See oniii. 6.
νοσῶν: morbidly busy (Liddon), /an- guens (Vulg.), aegrotans (m*°). His disease is intellectual curiosity about trifles. Both doting and mad after (ΑΗ.) as translations of νοσῶν, err by excess of vigour. The idea is a simple one of sick- ness as opposed to health. See oni. ΤΟ.
περὶ: For this use of περί see on i. 19.
ζητήσεις: See oni. 4.
Aoyopaxias: It is not clear whether what is meant are wordy quarrels or quarrels about words. The latter seems the more likely. There is here the usual antithesis of words to deeds. The heretic spoken of is a theorist merely ; he wastes time in academic disputes; he does not take account of things as they actually are. On the other hand, it is interesting and suggestive that to the heathen, the controversy between Chris- tianity and Judaism seemed to be of this futile nature (see Acts xviii. 15, xxiii. 29, XXV. IQ).