may be the case, he subjoins a precept very necessary for the preservation of benevolence, — that
every one is to give honor to his brethren and not to himself; for there is no poison more effectual
in alienating the minds of men than the thought, that one is despised. But if by honor you are
disposed to understand every act of friendly kindness, I do not much object: I however approve
more of the former interpretation. For as there is nothing more opposed to brotherly concord than
contempt, arising from haughtiness, when each one, neglecting others, advances himself; so the
best fomenter of love is humility, when every one honors others.
11.Not slothful in business, etc. This precept is given to us, not only because a Christian life
ought to be an active life; but because it often becomes us to overlook our own benefit, and to spend
our labors in behalf of our brethren. In a word, we ought in many things to forget ourselves; for
except we be in earnest, and diligently strive to shake off all sloth, we shall never be rightly prepared
for the service of Christ.^392
By adding fervent in spirit, he shows how we are to attain the former; for our flesh, like the ass,
is always torpid, and has therefore need of goals; and it is only the fervency of the Spirit that can
correct our slothfulness. Hence diligence in doing good requires that zeal which the Spirit of God
kindles in our hearts. Why then, some one may say, does Paul exhort us to cultivate this fervency?
To this I answer, — that though it be the gift of God, it is yet a duty enjoined the faithful to shake
off sloth, and to cherish the flame kindled by heaven, as it for the most part happens, that the Spirit
is suppressed and extinguished through our fault.
To the same purpose is the third particular, serving the time: for as the course of our life is
short, the opportunity of doing good soon passes away; it hence becomes us to show more alacrity
in the performance of our duty. So Paul bids us in another place to redeem the time, because the
days are evil. The meaning may also be, that we ought to know how to accommodate ourselves to
the time, which is a matter of great importance. But Paul seems to me to set in opposition to idleness
what he commands as to the serving of time. But as κυρίῳ, the Lord, is read in many old copies,
though it may seem at first sight foreign to this passage, I yet dare not wholly to reject this reading.
And if it be approved, Paul, I have no doubt, meant to refer the duties to be performed towards
brethren, and whatever served to cherish love, to a service done to God, that he might add greater
encouragement to the faithful.^393
12.Rejoicing in hope, etc. Three things are here connected together, and seem in a manner to
belong to the clause “serving the time;” for the person who accommodates himself best to the time,
and avails himself of the opportunity of actively renewing his course, is he who derives his joy
from the hope of future life, and patiently bears tribulations. However this may be, (for it matters
not much whether you regard them as connected or separated,) he first; forbids us to acquiesce in
full of tender affection,” Doddridge. “In brotherly love, be kindly disposed toward each other,” Macknight. It may be thus
rendered, “In brotherly love, be tenderly affectionate to one another.”
Calvin’s version of the next clause is, “Alii alios honore praevenientes;” so Erasmus; μ μ ; “honore alii aliis
praeuntes — in honor (that is, in conceding honor) going before one another,” Beza, Piscator, Macknight. It is thus explained
by Mede, “Wait not for honor from others, but be the first to concede it.” The participle means to take the lead of, or outrunning,
one another.” See Philippians 2:3 — Ed.(^392) “Studio non pigri,” μ ; “Be not slothful in haste,” that is, in a matter requiring haste. “We must strive,” says
Theophylact, “to assist with promptness those whose circumstances require immediate help and relief.” — Ed
(^393) The balance of evidence, according to Griesbach, is in favor, of , “time,” though there is much, too, which countenances
the other reading. Luther, Erasmus, and Hammond prefer the former, while Beza, Piscator, Pareus, and most of the moderns,
the latter. The most suitable to the context is the former. — Ed.