Timothy to Hebrews - The Preterist Archive

FiKST Timothy III. 16. 89
ETTKpaiveadai, kmcpdveia^ a mode of conception that has an affinity to
Gnosticism. Comp. against this, on l-nKpaiv. Tit. ii. 11 ; and on
ercKpaveia, Tit. ii. 13. With respect to (pavepovadai, comp. Rom. iii.
21, xvi. 26 ; Col i. 26 (Heb. ix. 8), in all of which passages the expression
is used with reference to the appearance of salvation in
Christ. In Col iii. 4 it is used with reference to the person of
Christ himself, not indeed, as here, of the first coming of Christ, but
of his second coming ; it is clearly, however, only accidental that it
does not occur with reference to the person of Christ in his first
coming. We find the expression repeatedly used in precisely the
same manner as here by the apostle John, in the same epistle in
which he combats the Grnostic denial of the truth that Jesus Christ
is come in the flesh (1 John iii. 5, 8) ; and how often is the same
expression used of the revelation of the love of God in Christ,- the
66^a, the ^W7/ ! How little ground, then, for the alleged relationship
found in these epistles to the Gnostic view of the incarnation is
given in this passage, and in 2 Tim. i. 9, iv. 1, 8 ; Tit. ii. 11, iii. 4!
Finally, Dr. Baur's objection of a doctrinal contradiction between
1 Tim. ii. 4 and the present passage, inasmuch as there Christ is
represented as a mere man—has been obviated by the remarks on
that passage. De Wette, also, has rejected this supposition of a
— contradiction (p. 86). 'Ev oapd^ antithetical with the following iv
nvsvixart ; it designates the one side of his being, the visible, human,
in opposition to the divine (comp. Harless, p. 162, seq.) ; he took
on him the human nature in its weakness (Rom. viii. 3, he was sent
in the likeness of sinfulfiesh). Over against this clause, in the description
of the great mystery, stands the following iSticaMd?] iv
TTvevixart. When we attend to the antithesis in iv oapd, and observe
further, how in the two following pairs the two members always
correspond, it will be evident that every explanation of these words
must be rejected, which would make iv Trvevnart. = " through the
spirit, by virtue of the spirit," and would then interpret accordingly.
Uvevfia can denote here only the delov in him, in opposition to the
odp^ in him, and sv, not " through" but as before only " in." So
also Olshausen. The great mystery of godliness is here represented
by the wondrous union of opposite things in his person, namely, of
the human and the divine life."' He was Justijied in the Spi^-it—the
other side of his being, which is opposed to the flesh. The meaning
of the expression iSmatc^dr] can, it is evident, be only this—that he
who is manifested in the flesh is shewn at the same time in his
higher nature, the other side of his being (comp, the similar passage
in Rom. i. 3, 4). Why idcKaccodrj ? The general signification of the
expression is, Justus declaratus est. How is it to be applied here ?
* Huther : the spiritual principle of life dweUing in him, but at the same time emanating
from him.