perfectness of hope—a hope which should are many who are fairly described as only disappear in fruition. πληροφορία κληρον. τὰς ἐπαγγελίας. Whether alive *“‘ hic non est certitudo, sed impletio sive or now dead, they have entered on consummatio, quo sensu πληροφ. habe- possession of that good thing which mus, Col. ii. 2, ef 1 Thess. i. 5, πληρο- they could not see but which God had φορεῖν 2 Tim. iv. 5, 17” (Grotius). promised. Alford, apparently following Alford insists that the subjective sense Peirce, denies that κληρονομούντων can of the word is uniform in N.T. and mean “who are inheriting,” and renders
therefore translates ‘‘ the full assurance ’’. But the objective meaning, ‘ complete- ness,” certainly suits Col. ii. 2 πᾶν τὸ
“who are inheritors”. To this con- clusion he is led, as also Peirce, by the consideration that in c. xi. it is said of
302
dGen. xii. 13. Τῷ γὰρ ᾿Αβραὰμ ἐπαγγειλάμενος 6 Θεὸς, ἐπεὶ κατ᾽ οὐδενὸς
3ν εἰ XVII. ὁ 7 Ae ee
4, et xxiielye μειζονος ὀμόσαι, 16,17;
Ps. ἐν. ο; λογῶν εὐλογήσω σε, Luc. i. 73.
kat πληθύνων πληθυνῶ σε”.
ὤμοσε καθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, 14. λέγων, ““Ἦ μὴν 1 εὐ-
15. καὶ οὕτω
1T.R. in KL*, αἱ pler and Greek fathers; εἰ µην in ΝΔΒΡ3ΕΡ, 17, 23, 31, 47”,
71, 137; ει μη in CDbLcon, d, e, ἢ, vg., Ambr., Primas. nisi.
Bleek is of opinion
that εἰ μήν is a corrupt form resulting from the mixture of the classical 4 μήν and
the Hebraizing et μή.
But Deissmann (Neue Bibelstud., p. 34) adduces examples of
«εἰ μήν from the Papyri, which prove that it is not a merely Biblical form.
Abraham and the other heroes of faith that they did not receive the promise. But it is also indicated in the same passage that by the coming of Christ the fulness of the promise was fulfilled. It was only “without us” of the Chris- tian period that the patriarchs were imperfect. Those who are presently enjoying the promises attained their present victory and joy, διὰ πίστεως καὶ μακροθυμίας. Necessarily, they first had to believe the promises, but faith had to be followed up by patient waiting. Alford translates μακροθ. by ‘endurance,’ but this word rather re- presents ὑπομονή, while μακροθ. indi- cates the long-drawn-out patience which is demanded by hope deferred.
Vv. 13-20. Reasons for diligently
cultivating hope and exercising patience, .
thus becoming imitators of those who have patiently waited for the fulfilment of the promises, the reasons being that God has made the failure of the pro- mises impossible, and that already Jesus has passed within the veil as our forerunner.
Ver.13. Τῷ yap ᾿Αβραὰμ. . . . ‘‘ For when God made promise to Abraham, since he could sware by none greater, He sware by Himself, saying, etc.” Abraham is introduced because to him was made the fundamental and compre- hensive promise (cf. Luke i. 73, and Gal. iii.) which involved all that God was ever to bestow. And in Abraham it is seen that the promise is secure, but that only by patient waiting can it be in- herited. It is secure because God pledged Himself to perform it. The promise referred to in ἐπαγγειλάμενος seems to be that which was confirmed by an oath, and which is recorded in Gen. xxii, 16-18, κατ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ ὥμοσα «.7.A. But Westcott prefers to consider that previous promises are referred to, as in Gen. απ. 3507, XI. 14, XV. 5, σνι- 5. The aorist participle ἐπαγγ. admits of either construction. ἐπεὶ kat’ οὐδενὸς - . ὀμνύω followed by κατά as fre- quently in classics (Arist., Frogs, 94)
and LXX, Isa. xlv. 23, Amos iv. 2, viii. 7, Zeph. i. 5, Matt. xxvi. 63. See refer- ences. εἶχε. . . ὀμόσαι, a classical use of ἔχειν from Homer downwards, “ to have means or power to do,” “to be able”. The greater the Being sworn by, the surer the promise. Cf. Lon- ginus, De Subl., c. 16, on swearing by those who died at Marathon. ὥμοσε καθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, how this oath was given, and how the knowledge of it was con- veyed to men, this writer does not say. But it was somehow conveyed to the mind of Abraham that the fulfilment of this promise was bound up with the life of God; that it was so implicated with His purposes that God could as soon cease to be, as neglect the fulfilment of it. Lying as it did at the root of all further development, and marking out as it did the true end for which the world exists, it seemed to be bound up with the very being of God. Paul’s way of expressing a similar idea is more con- gruous to our ways of looking at things, cf. 2 Cor. i. 20. Cf. Philo’s discussion in De Leg. Allegor., iii. 72, 3.