Ver. 4. προδόται: has no special re- ference to persecution of Christians.
τετυφωμένοι: See note onx Tim. iii..
Ver. 5. ἔχοντες (See note oni Tim. i.
ως, ΠΡΟΣ ΤΙΜΟΘΕΟΝ B
- Ἂν εὐσεβείας τὴν δὲ "δύναμιν αὐτῆς " ἠρνημένοι - καὶ τούτους
4 > , , 3 ε τρέπου. 6. ἐκ τούτων γάρ εἰσιν οἱ
ἃ αἰχμαλωτίζοντες 1 " γυναικάρια ΄ σεσωρευμένα ἁμαρτίαις, " ἀγόμενα Ὁ ἐπιθυμίαις ®t ποικίλαις, 7. πάντοτε μανθάνοντα καὶ μηδέποτε κ εἰς
κ
N.T., 4 Macc. i. 33, etc. e Here only, not LXX.
1 Cor. xil. 2, Gal. v. 18. ἢ ΤΊΣ 111: 3.
40, Heb. ii. 4, xiii. 9, Jas. i. 2, 1 Pet. i. 6, iv. 10.
ἐπίγνωσιν " ἀληθείας " ἐλθεῖν δυνάμενα.
c Here only, N.T. i f Prov. xxv. 22, Judith xv. 11, Rom. xii. 20,
171
Ὁ ἀπο- ν See 1Tim. π-
5 ἐνδύνοντες εἰς τὰς οἰκίας καὶ 21 Cor. ii.
5, iv. 19,
20,1
Thess. i.
5, Heb.
a vii. 16.
8. ὃν τρόπον δὲ ᾿Ιαννῆς aSee1 Tim. 8
v. 5. 4 b Hereonly, d Luke xxi. 24, Rom. vii. 23, 2 Cor. x. 5. g Rom. ii. 4, viii. 14,
i Matt. iv. 24 (7. νόσοις) = Mark i. 34 = Luke iv.
k See 1 Tim. ii. 4.
1 αἰχμαλωτεύοντες [Eph. iv. 8] DeKL; add τὰ a few cursives.
10) μόρφωσιν, κ.τ.λ.: Habentes speciem quidem pietatis, We have an exact parallel in Tit. 1. 16, θεὸν ὁμολογοῦσιν εἰδέναι, τοῖς δὲ ἔργοις ἀρνοῦνται. They were professing Christians, but nothing more; genuine Christians must also be professing Christians. This considera- tion removes any difficulty that may be felt by a comparison of this passage with Rom. ii. 20, where it is implied that it is a point in the Jew’s favour that he has τὴν μόρφωσιν τῆς γνώσεως καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας ἐν τῷ νόμῳ. The µόρφωσις, embodiment, is external in both cases, but not unreal as far as it goes. The ineffectiveness of it arises from the co- existence in the mind of him who “ holds” it of some other quality that neutralises the advantage naturally derivable from the possession of the μόρφωσις in question. In this case, it was that they of whom St. Paul is speaking hada purely theoretical, academic apprehen- sion of practical Christianity (εὐσέβεια, see 1 Tim. Π. 2), but a positive disbelief in the Gospel as a regenerating force. Com- pare what St. John says of the rulers who believed on Jesus but did not con- fess Him (John xii. 42, 43). They too were φιλήδονοι μᾶλλον ἢ φιλόθεοι. In Romans the case is similar: the posses- sion of an admirable moral code did not make the Jew’s moral practice better than that of the Gentile (see Sanday and Headlam on Rom. ii. 20). There is therefore no necessity to suppose with Lightfoot that “the termination -ωσις denotes the aiming after or affecting the μορφή (Fournal of Class. and Sacr. Philol. (1857), iii. 115).
δύναμιν: the opposition between μόρφωσις and δύναμις here is the same as that between δύναμις and σοφία in 1 Cor. ii. 5, or λόγος, 1 Cor. iv. 19, 20, I Thess. i. 5; see also Heb. vii. 16.
ἠρνημένοι: To deny a thing or a per- son involves always more than an act of
the mind; it means carrying the negation into practice. See oni Tim. v. 8.
καί: perhaps refers back to ii. 22, 23.
Ver. 6. ἐνδύνοντες: who insinuate themselves into houses [which they over- throw], Tit. i. rz. ‘‘Observe how he shows their impudence by this expres- sion, their dishonourable ways, their deceitfulness’’ (Chrys.). παρεισέδυησαν (Jude 4) and παρεισῆλθον (Gal: ii. 4) are similar expressions.
γυναικάρια: Mulierculas. Chrys. acutely implies that the victims of the crafty heretics were “silly women” of both sexes: ‘‘ He who is easy to be deceived is a silly woman, and nothing like a man; for to be deceived is the part of silly women”. St. Paul, how- ever, refers to women only.