Timothy to Hebrews - The Preterist Archive

150 First Timothy VI. 4.
object ia the mention of the IrepodiSaoKaXelv. It is certainly the
apostle's manner elsewhere to take up and pursue a word in this
way, and yet at the same time not to lose the train of thought as a
whole. Comp. Schleiermacher, p. 160, seq. " If any one teach
differently, and consent not to the sound words of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and the doctrine which leads to godliness, he is surrounded
as with a fog," etc. FJ rtg = " every one who ;" a case is sui)po8ed
which already exists in concrete, i. 3, seq. The apostle then has
this definite form of the hepodiSaoicaXetv in view, and not a teaching
other\^^se in general. The trtpo6i6aoKaXeiv is to the apostle quite a
definite idea (comp. on i. 3) ; from which it is at once apparent,
how he can with propriety in the apodosis of the sentence, which
certainly begins with re-nKpiorai (De Wette), connect with the general
and hypothetical protasis el ng, etc., so definite a doscrijjtion
of the tTtpoduSaoKaXuv according to its source and its results. That
this source and these results do not correspond to "every imaginable
heresy" (De Wette) is self-evident ; the only question is, do they
correspond to the definite thing which is denoted by trtpod. We
are therefore not at liberty, with Mosheim and Heydenreich, to understand
hepoS. in strict opposition to Tavra dldacKe as a teaching of
something different respecting this particular point (the slaves).
But that it is by no means " heresy" in general (De Wette) that is
here spoken of, is evident from the following explanation of the
kregod. (comp on i. 3) : a7id consents not to sound W07'ds, etc.
TJpoatpxeodai = accedere, to assent to ; comp. the proof for this
signification of the word in Leo. 'Ty. Aoyot = vy. 6i6. Tit. ii. 1 ;
by this is not meant heresy (comp. the remark on Tit. i. 9, ii. 1,
and on i. 3 of our epistle), but sbund doctrine in opposition to that
of the seducers, which is unsound through profitless science and
moral weakness, as also De Wette himself admits, inasmuch as he
takes the expression to be synonymous with 7} Kar' evatficiav 6i6aa-
Kakia. The opposition, therefore, is directly only that between a
doctrine which leads to godliness and one which has in it no power
of godliness. Comp. also the Gen. Introd. The veiy expression,
the doctrine ivhich leads to godliness, is unnecessarily added in our
passage as a more especial explanation of the preceding ;
comp. on
the expression our observations on Tit. i. 1, dh'jOna ij Kar' datjieiav
= quae ad })ietatem ducet (Leo).
Ver. 4.—The apodosis begins with this verse, and not with n^tV
raaoj ver. 5 ;
all ground for the latter supposition, so unnatural in
itself, disajjijcars when d ng irepod. is rightly interpreted. Compare,
moreover, De Wette. TeTv«^wTot = ho is surrounded with
fog, comp. un iii. G. This is further explained by nT]