tion in a less serious light than a Ver. 4. ἡἣ δὲ ὑπομονὴ ἔργον Christian (see Introduction § ᾽ν). Most τέλειον ἐχέτω: “But let endurance pointedly does Parry remark: “There is have its perfect result”; the possibility
422
ni Kgs. ili, μένοι. 9, ΧΙ. 12; Prov. ii.
ο ΑΙ Matt. vii.
IAKQBOY ας
5. Εἰ δέ τις ὑμῶν Ἀλείπεται σοφίας, “ αἰτετω παρὰ τοῦ ϑιδόντος ἢ Θεοῦ 1 πᾶσιν ὅ ἁπλῶς καὶ ph * ὀνειδίζοντος, καὶ δοθήσεται
y Soi. να, 26, xxxix. 6; Wisd. vi. 14, 22, vii. 13; cf. Job xxxii.8; Prov. viii. 17, xxviii. 5.
q Rom. xii. 8. τ Sir.xli, 22.
1 Του Θεου Tov ϑιδοντος A.
of losing heart is contemplated, which would result in something being lacking ; the words recall what is said in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Jos. ii. 7. * For endurance (μακροθυμία) is a mighty charm, and patience (ὑπομονή) giveth many good things”. Cf. Rom. v. 3.—tva ἦτε τέλειοι: Cf. Matt. v. 48, xix. 21; see Lightfoot’s note on the meaning of this word in Phil. iti. 15, “the τέλειοι are in fact the same with πνευματικοί" (Ep. to the Philippians, p. 153). That in the passage before us it does not mean perfect in the literal sense is clear from the words which occur in iii. 2 (assuming that the same writer wrote both passages), πολλὰ πταίομεν ἅπα- ντες. “The word τέλειος is often used by later writers of the baptised” (Mayor). --ὁλόκληροι: Cf. Wisd. xv. 3; in its root-meaning ὁλόκληρος implies the “ en- tire lot or destiny,” so that the under- lying idea regarding a man who is ὁλό- κληρος means one who fulfils his lot; here it would mean ‘those who fully attain to their high calling’. — év μηδενὶ λειπόμενοι : this is merely explanatory of ὁλόκληροι.
Ver. 5. There is no thought-connec- tion between this verse and what has pre- ceded, it is only by supplying something artificially that any connection can be made to exist, and for this there is no warrant in the text as it stands (see Introduction III.). In ver. 4 ὑπομονή has as its full result the making perfect of men, so that they are lacking in nothing ; when, therefore, the next verse goes on to contemplate a lacking of wisdom, there is clearly the commencement of a new. subject, not a continuation of the same one... The occurrence of λειπόμενοι and λείπεται, which is regarded by some as a proof of connection between the two verses, denotes nothing in view of the fact that the subject-matter is so different ; moreover, there is a distinct difference in the sense in which this word is used in these two verses; coming behindhand in what one ought to attain to is quite differ- ent from not being in possession of the great gift of wisdom; this difference is well brought out by the Vulgate render- ing: “ ... in nullo deficientes. Si quis autem vestrum indiger sapientia . . .”—
‘the book of Proverbs.
εἰδέτιςὑμῶνλείπεταισοφίας Cf. iii. 13-17; the position assigned to Wisdom by the” Jews, and especially by Hellenistic Jews, was so exalted that a short consideration of the subject seems called for, the more so by reason of the prominence it assumes in this Epistle. It is probable that the more advanced ideas of Wisdom came originally from Babylon; for, according to the Baby- lonian cosmology, Wisdom existed in primeval ages before the creation of the world; it dwelt with Ea, the god of Wisdom, in the depths of the sea (cf. Prov. viii. 22-30); Ea the creator was therefore guided by Wisdom in his crea- tive work (see Jeremias, Das alte Testa- ment im Lichte des alten Orients, pp. 29, 80); in Biblical literature. Wisdom _be- came_ the all-discerning intelligence of God in His work of Creation; as it was needed by God Himself, how much more by men! Hence the constant insistence on its need which is so characteristic of This laid the foundation for the extensive Hokmah (or Wisdom) literature of the Hellenistic Jews, which exercised also a great influ ence upon the Jews of later times. Under the influence of Greek philosophy Wis- dom became not only a divine agency, but also assumed a personal character (Wisd. vii. 22-30). According to the Jerusalem Targum to Gen. i. 1 Wisdom was the princip ¢ whereby God created the world. Generally speaking, in the later Jewish literature Wisdom refers to worldly knowledge as distinct from reli- gious knowledge which is all comprised under the term Torah (“Law”); and therefore Wisdom, unlike the Torah, was not regarded as the exclusive possession of the Jews, though these had it in more abundant measure, 6.σ., it is said in Kiddushin, 49 δ: ‘*Ten measures of wis- dom came down from heaven, and nine of them fell to the lot of the Holy Land”. On the other hand, Wisdom and the Torah are often identified.—aitetrw: for the prayer for Wisdom, cf. Prov. ig fs Wisd. vii. 7, τὰς 45 Si ἘΠ τα li. 13; in the Epistle of Barnabas xxi. 5, it says: 6 Θεὸς δῴη ὑμῖν σοφίαν... ὑπομονὴν--παρὰ τοῦ διδόντος θεοῦ πᾶσιν ἁπλῶς: there is an in-