Ver. 15. ἐπισκοποῦντες μή
24 τ
379
Gen. xxv. τες μή τις ὑστερῶν ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος τοῦ Θεοῦ: μή τις ῥίζα πικρίας
33: Eph
v.3; Col.dvw φύουσα ἐνοχλῇ, καὶ διὰ ταύτης! μιανθῶσι πολλοί 2:
iii. 5;
16. ‘py
x > A , - Ὑδέβε.ῖν. τις πόρνος, ἢ βέβηλος, ὡς ᾿Ησαῦ, ὃς ἀντὶ βρώσεως μιᾶς ἀπέδοτο ὃ τὰ
3. Ἑ k Gen. πρωτοτόκια αὑτοῦ. XXVii. 34,
εἰς.
17. “tore γὰρ ὅτι καὶ μετέπειτα θέλων κληρο-
1T.R. in SDKL; δι᾽ αντης AP, 17, 47. 2T.R. in DELP; οι πολλοι in WA, 17, 47. Τ.Ε. SDKLP, 17; απεδετο AC.
τις ὑστερῶν. .. “watching” “ tak- ing the oversight’’ (thoroughly scrutinis- ing as in the case of sick persons,” Chrys.) addressed not to the teachers or tulers but to all. The object of this supervision is to prevent the defection of any one of their number. ‘As if they were travelling together on some long journey, in a large company, he says, Take heed that no man be left behind; I do not seek this only, that ye may arrive yourselves, but also that ye should look diligently after the others’ (Chrys.), and cf. Μ. Arnold’s In Rugby Chapel. μή τις ὑστερῶν « . . may be construed either by supplying ᾖ, or by supposing a break at θεοῦ (so Davidson), or by carry- ing on the τις ὑστερῶν to ἐνοχλῇ. The simplest seems to be the first: “lest any be failing ( = fail) of the grace of God,” i.e., lest he never reach the blessings which the grace of God offers. Cf. iv. 1. Another contingency to be guarded against by careful watching is expressed inpy tes ῥίζα πικρίας . . . words borrowed from Deut. xxix. 18, μή τίς ἐστιν ἐν ὑμῖν pila ἄνω φύουσα ἐν χολῇ καὶ πικρίᾳ, “lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you”. As in Deu- teronomy so here the bitter root which might spring up and bring forth its poisonous fruit among them, was one of their own members who might lead them astray or introduce evil practises and so the whole community [ot πολλοί] might be defiled [μιανθῶσιν], {.ε., rendered unfit for that approach to God and fellowship with Him to which they were urged in the preceding verse. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump, Gal. v. 9, where also it is a person that is referred to.
Ver. 16. μή τις wépvos... specific forms in which roots of bitter- ness might appear among them. πόρνος is to be taken in its literal sense and not as signifying departure from God [but cf. Weiss]. Neither is it to be applied to Esau, in spite of the passages adduced by Wetstein to show that he was com- monly considered a fornicator, and of
Philo’s interpretation of “ hairy” as “intemperate and libidinous’’; v. Del- itzsch. From xiii. 4 it appears that for- nication was one of the dangers to which these Hebrews were exposed. 4 βέβ- ηλος ὡς Ἠσαῦ, α profanity which was especially betrayed in his bartering for a single meal [ἀντὶ βρώσεως μιᾶς] his own rights of primogeniture. Esau lightly parting with his religious privileges and his patrimony for a present gratification is an appropriate warning to those who day by day were tempted to win comfort and escape suffering by parting with their hope in Christ. The warning is pointed by the fate of Esau. tore yap ὅτι καὶ peréweita... “for ye know that even though he was afterwards desirous to inherit the blessing he was rejected, though he sought it with tears ; for he found no place of repentance”. ‘« The term ‘repentance’ is here used not strictly of mere change of mind, but ofa change of mind undoing the effects of a former state of mind” (Davidson). In other words, his bargain was irrevocable. The words must be interpreted by the narrative in Genesis (xxvii. I-41), where we read that some time after the sale of the birthright (μετέπειτα) Esau sought the blessing with tears (xxvii. 38, ave- βόησε φωνῇῃ Ἡσαῦ καὶ ἔκλαυσεν) but found his act was unalterable. The les- son written on Esau’s life as on that of all who miss opportunities is that the past is irreparable, and however much they may desire to recall and alter it, that cannot be. It was this which the writer wished to enforce. If now, through any temptation or pressure, you let go the benefits you have in Christ, you are committing yourselves to an act you can- not recall. It must also be observed that the author is confining his attention to the one act of Esau, not pronouncing on his whole life and ultimate destiny. [μετανοίας τόπον. So Pliny, Ep., x. 97, *‘poenitentiae locus ;’’ and Ulpian, Di- gest., xl. Tit. 7, “ poenitentiae haeredis is locum non esse” (Wetstein)].