- May 19, 2015
- 125,492
- 28,587
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Discuss..........
Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon
2 Timothy 2:
17 and their word as a gangrene will have pasture/spread, of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus,
18 who about the truth swerve<795>, saying the resurrection/ἀνάστασιν<386> already to have become/γεγονέναι<1096>
and they are subverting<396> someof the faith.
Hymenaeus is mentioned in 1 other verse along with Alexander:
1Ti 1:20
of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.
Alexander is mentioned in 6 times in 5 verses:
2Ti 4:14
Alexander the coppersmith did me much harm. May the Lord repay him according to his works.
======================================================
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
18. who concerning the truth have erred]
More exactly, men who concerning the truth erred by maintaining. For the compound relative indicating the class see on Titus 1:11; for the verb 1 Timothy 1:6; 1 Timothy 6:21. The present participle, with the aorist verb, may indicate the repetitions of their ‘saying’ and so their ‘maintaining,’ and leads the way to the following verb being present.
that the resurrection] The ms. authority for the omission of the article is hardly strong enough to be followed, though R.V. notes the variant in the margin by the rendering ‘a resurrection.’ Curiously, in Acts 17:32, where there is no article, R.V. still renders ‘when they heard of the resurrection,’ there evidently intending the rule to apply that ‘the article is omitted before many abstract nouns.’ Why not here also?
So that the retention or omission of the article will make no difference in translation. Winer has no notice of either passage in his full chapter on this, Pt iii. § xix.
is past already] Some identified the resurrection with the soul’s spiritual renewal by the doctrine of the Gospel causing it ‘to burst forth from the sepulchre of the old man’; others with the departure of the soul from the body, the world in their view being only the habitation of the dead. See Fairbairn. Irenæus and Tertullian both allude to the former error, which may well have been the view here referred to.
and overthrow] Better are subverting; for the word see note on Titus 1:11.
=======
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Who concerning the truth have erred,.... That is, the two persons just mentioned; they fell from the truth, wandered and departed from it; they did not keep to the Scriptures of truth, but deviated from them; they missed that mark, and went astray into gross errors and mistakes; rejected the Gospel, the word of truth, in general, and particularly in
saying, that the resurrection is past already; and no other is to be expected; or that there was no future resurrection of the dead: their error was, as some think, that there is no other resurrection than that of parents in their children, who, though they die, live in their posterity; or than the resurrection of Christ, and of the saints, that rose at the same time; or rather, that there is no other resurrection than the spiritual one, or regeneration, which is a quickening of dead sinners, or the resurrection of them from the death of sin, to a life of grace; which seems to be the truest account of their principle, seeing this is what has been received and propagated by others since; though some have thought that they gave into the Palingenesia of the Pythagoreans, who supposed that when men die, their souls go into other bodies; and that these men imagined, that this is all the resurrection that will be: and others have been of opinion, that their notion was, that whereas the deliverance of the Jews out of the Babylonish captivity is signified by a resurrection of them, in Ezekiel 37:1 that this is the resurrection they meant was past, and no other to be looked for; but that which has been fixed upon seems to be the truest account:
and overthrow the faith of some; the Ethiopic version reads, "of many"; that is, of nominal professors of religion; not of true believers, for true faith cannot be overthrown. Hence it follows,
Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon
2 Timothy 2:
17 and their word as a gangrene will have pasture/spread, of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus,
18 who about the truth swerve<795>, saying the resurrection/ἀνάστασιν<386> already to have become/γεγονέναι<1096>
and they are subverting<396> someof the faith.
Hymenaeus is mentioned in 1 other verse along with Alexander:
1Ti 1:20
of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.
Alexander is mentioned in 6 times in 5 verses:
2Ti 4:14
Alexander the coppersmith did me much harm. May the Lord repay him according to his works.
======================================================
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
18. who concerning the truth have erred]
More exactly, men who concerning the truth erred by maintaining. For the compound relative indicating the class see on Titus 1:11; for the verb 1 Timothy 1:6; 1 Timothy 6:21. The present participle, with the aorist verb, may indicate the repetitions of their ‘saying’ and so their ‘maintaining,’ and leads the way to the following verb being present.
that the resurrection] The ms. authority for the omission of the article is hardly strong enough to be followed, though R.V. notes the variant in the margin by the rendering ‘a resurrection.’ Curiously, in Acts 17:32, where there is no article, R.V. still renders ‘when they heard of the resurrection,’ there evidently intending the rule to apply that ‘the article is omitted before many abstract nouns.’ Why not here also?
So that the retention or omission of the article will make no difference in translation. Winer has no notice of either passage in his full chapter on this, Pt iii. § xix.
is past already] Some identified the resurrection with the soul’s spiritual renewal by the doctrine of the Gospel causing it ‘to burst forth from the sepulchre of the old man’; others with the departure of the soul from the body, the world in their view being only the habitation of the dead. See Fairbairn. Irenæus and Tertullian both allude to the former error, which may well have been the view here referred to.
and overthrow] Better are subverting; for the word see note on Titus 1:11.
=======
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Who concerning the truth have erred,.... That is, the two persons just mentioned; they fell from the truth, wandered and departed from it; they did not keep to the Scriptures of truth, but deviated from them; they missed that mark, and went astray into gross errors and mistakes; rejected the Gospel, the word of truth, in general, and particularly in
saying, that the resurrection is past already; and no other is to be expected; or that there was no future resurrection of the dead: their error was, as some think, that there is no other resurrection than that of parents in their children, who, though they die, live in their posterity; or than the resurrection of Christ, and of the saints, that rose at the same time; or rather, that there is no other resurrection than the spiritual one, or regeneration, which is a quickening of dead sinners, or the resurrection of them from the death of sin, to a life of grace; which seems to be the truest account of their principle, seeing this is what has been received and propagated by others since; though some have thought that they gave into the Palingenesia of the Pythagoreans, who supposed that when men die, their souls go into other bodies; and that these men imagined, that this is all the resurrection that will be: and others have been of opinion, that their notion was, that whereas the deliverance of the Jews out of the Babylonish captivity is signified by a resurrection of them, in Ezekiel 37:1 that this is the resurrection they meant was past, and no other to be looked for; but that which has been fixed upon seems to be the truest account:
and overthrow the faith of some; the Ethiopic version reads, "of many"; that is, of nominal professors of religion; not of true believers, for true faith cannot be overthrown. Hence it follows,