Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ephesians 6:2
Honor thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise;
2. Honour, &c.] Exo 20:12; Deu 5:16. The Gr. here is verbatim that of the LXX. On the duty, cp. Mat 19:19; Mar 7:10; Mar 10:19; Luk 18:20. The “honour” is that not of mere sentiment but of obedience. See for illustration, Mat 15:4-8.
which is ] He adds a significant circumstance about the Commandment.
the first with promise ] In the Decalogue, to which here the reference plainly is, it is in fact the only “commandment with” definite “promise.” But the Decalogue is, so to speak, the first page of the whole Law-Book of Revelation.
“ With ”: lit. “ in ” ; attended, surrounded, by promise.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Honour thy father and mother – see Exo 20:12; compare notes on Mat 15:4.
Which is the first commandment with promise – With a promise annexed to it. The promise was, that their days should be long in the land which the Lord their God would give them. It is not to be supposed that the observance of the four first commandments would not be attended with a blessing, but no particular blessing is promised. It is true, indeed, that there is a general declaration annexed to the second commandment, that God would show mercy to thousands of generations of them that loved him and that kept his commandments. But that is rather a declaration in regard to all the commands of God than a promise annexed to that specific commandment. It is an assurance that obedience to the law of God would be followed with blessings to a thousand generations, and is given in view of the first and second commandments together, because they related particularly to the honor that was due to God. But the promise in the fifth commandment is a special promise. It does not relate to obedience to God in general, but it is a particular assurance that they who honor their parents shall have a particular blessing as the result of that obedience.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 2. Honour thy father] See Clarke on Ex 20:12, &c., where this subject, together with the promises and threatenings connected with it, is particularly considered, and the reasons of the duty laid down at large.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
i.e. A special promise annexed to the particular duty commanded. There being promises added to only two commandments, viz. the second and this fifth; that which is annexed to the second commandment is a general one, and which relates to the whole law, but this a special one, and which respects this commandment in particular.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
2. Here the authority ofrevealed law is added to that of natural law.
which is . . . promiseThe”promise” is not made the main motive to obedience, but anincidental one. The main motive is, because it is God’s will (De5:16, “Honor thy father and mother, as the Lord thy Godhath COMMANDED thee“);and that it is so peculiarly, is shown by His accompanying it “witha promise.”
firstin the decaloguewith a special promise. The promise in the second commandmentis a general one. Their duty is more expressly prescribed tochildren than to parents; for love descends rather than ascends[BENGEL]. This verseproves the law in the Old Testament is not abolished.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Honour thy father and mother,…. This explains who parents are, and points at some branches of obedience due unto them; for they are not only to be loved, and to be feared, and reverenced, their corrections to be submitted to, offences against them to be acknowledged, their tempers to be bore with, and their infirmities covered; but they are to be honoured in thought, word, and gesture; they are to be highly thought of and esteemed; they are to be spoken to, and of, very honourably, and with great veneration and to be behaved to in a very respectful manner; and they are to be relieved, assisted, and maintained in comfortable way when aged, and in necessitous circumstances; and which may be chiefly designed. So the Jews explain , “the honour” due to parents, by, c. , “giving them food, drink”, and “clothing”, unloosing their shoes, and leading them out and in x. Compare with this 1Ti 5:4
[See comments on Mt 15:4];
which is the first commandment with promise: it is the fifth commandment in the decalogue, but the first that has a promise annexed to it: it is reckoned by the Jews y the weightiest of the weightiest commands of the law; and the reward bestowed on it, is length of days, as follows.
x T. Hieros. Kiddushin, fol. 61. 2. T. Bab. Kiddushin, fol. 31. 1, 2. Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Kiddushin, c. 1. sect. 7. y Debarim Rabba, sect. 6. fol. 241. 3.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Which (). “Which very” = “for such is.”
The first commandment with promise ( ). here means “accompanied by” (Alford). But why “with a promise”? The second has a general promise, but the fifth alone (Ex 20:12) has a specific promise. Perhaps that is the idea. Some take it to be first because in the order of time it was taught first to children, but the addition of here to points to the other view.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Honor thy father, etc. To what is essentially right the divine ordinance is added. Compare Aeschylus : “For the reverence of parents, this is written third in the laws of much – venerated justice” (” Suppliants, “687 – 689). So Euripides :” There are three virtues which thou shouldst cultivate, my child, to honor the gods, and thy parents who gave thee being and the common laws of Hellas ” (Fragment). Honor expresses the frame of mind from which obedience proceeds.
First – with promise [ ] . First in point of promise, as it also is in order the first with promise.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Honour thy father and mother” (tima ton patera sou kai matera) “Honor (each of you) his father and mother.” As obedience is a duty of children to parents, honor is a disposition of respectful attitude from which obedience is born. True honor or respect of children for parents should result in obedience in the Lord, Exo 20:12; Deu 5:16. It is the first of the commandments with promise; love, reverence, and obedience of children for parents is the will of God.
2) “Which is the first commandment with promise” (hetis estin entole prote en epangellia) “Which exists as the ranking commandment (first in order) with a promise,” Deu 5:16; Deu 27:16. The phrase “first commandment with promise” indicates priority of promise, of order or rank of all commandments to which promises for the keeping were attached; obedience to this commandment provided extension or length of physical life beyond that expectancy of the disobedient child.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
2. Which is the first commandment with promise. The promises annexed to the commandments are intended to excite our hopes, and to impart a greater cheerfulness to our obedience; and therefore Paul uses this as a kind of seasoning to render the submission, which he enjoins on children, more pleasant and agreeable. He does not merely say, that God has offered a reward to him who obeys his father and mother, but that such an offer is peculiar to this commandment. If each of the commandments had its own promises, there would have been no ground for the commendation bestowed in the present instance. But this is the first commandment, Paul tells us, which God has been pleased, as it were, to seal by a remarkable promise. There is some difficulty here; for the second commandment likewise contains a promise,
“
I am the Lord thy God, who shew mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.” (Exo 20:5.)
But this is universal, applying indiscriminately to the whole law, and cannot be said to be annexed to that commandment. Paul’s assertion still holds true, that no other commandment but that which enjoins the obedience due by children to their parents is distinguished by a promise.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(2) The first commandment with promise.It is, indeed, in the Decalogue the only commandment with promise distinctly attached to it. But it is still the first; the Decalogue being itself the introduction to the Law, in which similar promises are repeated again and again.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
(2) (18) Praying always with all prayer and Supplication.In this verse the metaphor gives place to direct exhortation, unless, indeed, in the word watch there still lingers some reference to the soldier on guard. Prayer is the general word for worship, appropriated to God alone; supplication, used also towards man, is one element of such worshipthe asking what we need from God. In Php. 4:6 we have first the general word prayer, and then the two chief elements of worship, supplication with thanksgiving. It is by prayer that all the heavenly armour is put on.
In the Spirit.That is, in the Spirit of God (as in Eph. 6:18). Compare the relation of prayer to the inspiration of the Holy Ghost in Rom. 8:26-27.
And watching thereunto with all perseverance.These words in themselves obviously supply the other part of our Lords command, Watch and pray, naturally apposite to the consideration of the Christian warfare. Perseverance implies exertion, holding out against fatigue and difficulty. The corresponding verb is used in relation to all kinds of spiritual labour (see Act. 2:42; Act. 6:4; Act. 8:13); but especially in connection with prayer (Act. 1:14; Rom. 12:12; Col. 4:2). Perhaps from this frequent connection St. Paul is induced to add to it supplication, and this time for all saints, so leading on to his usual request for the prayers of his brethren. For this he is willing to sacrifice some part of the perfect appropriateness of idea; since the whole picture hitherto has been of the fight, waged by each for himself (although side by side with others), in the combined power of watchfulness and prayer for Gods help.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
2. Honour Venerate as your natural and divinely sanctioned superiors and controllers.
Father and mother Regarding both parents with equal though distinctive honour; the father with more awe, the mother with more love.
The first commandment with promise How first in the decalogue with promise? Does not the second commandment promise that God is a Being showing mercy unto thousands of them that love him, and keep his commandments? The satisfactory reply is, that though embraced in this second commandment this promise belongs alike and expressly to all the commandments, and is not peculiar to one; whereas the promise of the fifth is expressly limited to that alone. But the apostle does not, of course, mean that its being the first in order of the decalogue is in itself important; but it is important symbolizing that it is first in promissory eminence, no other decalogue command having any promise at all. It is in this respect true first, and last, and sole, and therefore signal in its promissory character.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Eph 6:2. Which is the first commandment with promise; The church of Rome would hence argue, that the second commandment, which forbids the worship of images, having a promise added to it, of God’s shewing mercy to thousands in them that love him and keep his commandments, can be no longer obligatory under the gospel; since this which relates to honouring of parents, is said to be the first commandment with promise. But it is easy to discern the fallacy and weakness of this argument, as what is annexed to the second commandment apparently relates to the whole law, and is a general declaration of the mercy which God would shew to those who kept, not only that, but all his commandments; while this of which the Apostle speaks, is the first and only precept of the decalogue, which has a particular promise annexed to it peculiar to itself.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Eph 6:2 . The frame of mind towards the parents, from which the just demanded of the children must proceed, is the . Hence Paul continues, and that in the express hallowed words of the fourth commandment: . . . (Exo 20:12 ; Deu 5:16 ). And as he had before subjoined the general motive of morality , so he now subjoins the particular incitement ., so that the relation as well of the two precepts themselves, as of their motives, Eph 6:1-2 , is climactic , and can by no means be a parenthesis (Griesbach, Rckert, and others).
] utpote quae , specifies a reason. See on Eph 3:13 .
.] The article is not necessary with the , which is in itself defining, or with the ordinal numbers generally (Khner, ad Xen. Anab. vii. 7. 35). Comp. Act 16:12 ; Phi 1:12 , al. And the statement that the commandment first as to number in the Decalogue has a promise, is not inconsistent with the facts, since the promise, Exo 20:6 , Deu 5:10 , is a general one, having reference to the commandments as a whole . Just as little is it to be objected that no further commandment with a promise follows in the Decalogue; for Paul says , having before his mind not only the Decalogue, but also the entire series of all the divine precepts , which begins with the Decalogue. Among the commandments, which God has given at the time of the Mosaic legislation and in all the subsequent period, the commandment: “Honour father and mother,” is the first which is given with a promise. The apparent objection is thus removed in a simple manner by our taking as divine commandment in general, and not restricting it to the sense “commandment in the Decalogue.” If Paul had had merely the Decalogue in mind, he must have written: the only commandment. [293] For the assumption that “it is the first, not with regard to those which follow, but to those which have preceded” (Harless), would not even be necessarily resorted to, if it were really established which, however, is assumed entirely without proof that Paul had taken into account merely the ten commandments, seeing that he and every one of his readers knew that no other commandment of the ten had a promise. From the arbitrary presupposition, that merely the Decalogue was taken into account, it followed of necessity in the case of other expositors, either that they restricted simply to the commandments of the second table [294] (Ambrosiaster, Zachariae, Michaelis, the latter misconstruing the absence of the article before as favouring his view), in connection with which Holzhausen even maintained that never denotes a commandment in reference to God (see Mat 22:36 ; Mat 22:38 ; Mar 12:28 ); or else that they tampered with the numerical sense of , and made out of it a very important, a chief commandment (Koppe, Morus, Flatt, Matthies, Meier). What a feeble motive would thus result! and would in fact mean the most important , which, however, the fifth commandment is not (Mat 22:38 ; Rom 13:9-10 ; Gal 5:14 ). Further, the proposal of Erasmus, that . should be held to apply to the definite promise of Eph 6:3 , mention of which first occurs in the fifth commandment, is not worthy of attention (Harless), but erroneous; because the same promise occurs after the fifth commandment only with a general reference to the commandments as a whole (Deu 5:33 ; Deu 6:2 ), as it has also occurred even before the fifth commandment in such a general form (Deu 4:40 ); and because, besides, . could not but have the article .
.] is to be closely attached to , as expressing that, wherein this commandment is the first, the point in which the predicate pertains to it. Comp. Diodor. xii. 37: , Soph. O. R . 33: . In point of promise it is the first ( , Chrysostom).
[293] According to Bleek, Paul had not at the moment the form of the following commandments of the Decalogue definitely before his mind. But with such inadvertence no one is less to be charged than Paul.
[294] In opposition to this, Erasmus aptly remarks: “Haec distinctio non est fundata in s. literis, sed est commentum recentiorum theologorum.” In general it is to be observed that, according to Philo and Josephus, each of the two tables contained five commandments, not, as Augustine (whom Luther followed) supposed, the first three , and the second seven , and thus two sacred numbers, in which case, moreover, there was found in the first table a reference to the Trinity.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
2 Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;)
Ver. 2. First commandment with promise ] To wit, with special promise of long life. See Trapp on “ Mat 15:4 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
2 .] Honour thy father and thy mother, for such is (‘ seeing it is ,’ as Ellic., is rather too strong for , throwing the motive to obedience too much on the fact of the promise accompanying it. Whereas the obedience rests on the fact implied in , and the promise comes in to shew its special acceptableness to God) the first commandment (in the decalogue, which naturally stands at the head of all God’s other commandments; and which, though not formally binding on us as Christians, is quoted, in matters of eternal obligation (not of positive enactment), as an eminent example of God’s holy will) with a promise (i.e. with a special promise attached: ‘in respect of promise’ is too vague, and does not convey any definite meaning in English. The fact certainly is so, and the occurrence of the description of God as ‘shewing mercy unto thousands, &c.’ after the second commandment, does not, as Jer., al., have thought, present any difficulty for that is no special promise attached to the commandment. Nor does the fact that no other commandment occurs in the decalogue with a promise: see above. The , as in reff. in the sphere or department of characterized by accompanied with), that it may be well with thee, and thou be long-lived upon the earth (he paraphrases the latter portion of the commandment, writing for . , ., and omitting after , ( , so in Exod., but not in Deut.) : thus adapting the promise to his Christian readers, by taking away from it that which is special and peculiar to the Jewish people. It is surely a mistake, as Jer., Aq., Est., Olsh., to spiritualize the promise, and understand by the heavenly Canaan. The very fact of the omission of the special clause removes the words from the region of type into undoubted reality: and when we remember that the persons addressed are , we must not depart from the simplest Sense of the words. For the future after , see 1Co 9:18 , note: and Joh 7:3 ; Rev 22:14 . To consider it as such, is far better than to suppose a change of construction to the direct future ‘and thou shalt be, &c.’).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Eph 6:2 . : honour thy father and mother . Obedience is the duty; honour is the disposition of which the obedience is born. The authoritative terms of the OT Law (Exo 20:12 ; Deu 5:16 ), given in the exact words of the LXX, are adopted in order to enforce regard for that disposition. : which is the first commandment in point of promise , may have here a simply explanatory force (so Ell., who renders it “the which”; Abb., “for such is”) rather than the qualitative sense, or the casual, “seeing it is”. But even its explanatory use suggests a reason for the fulfilment of the commandment. The prep. is understood by some ( e.g. , Alf.) to be the local , expressing the sphere of the commandment, and so conveying the idea of being “accompanied by”. But more probably it expresses the simple sense of relation , “in regard of,” “in point of” (Mey., Ell.; cf. Win.-Moult., p. 488). , like other ordinals, being specific enough in itself, dispenses with the article. But what is meant by this definition of the fifth commandment as the first in point of promise? The second commandment also has a kind of promise. But if that commandment is discounted because its promise is general, not peculiar to itself, but applicable to all, and if the fifth alone has attached to it a promise relevant to itself, why is it called the “first” and not rather the “only” commandment in point of promise? Some meet the difficulty by supposing it to mean the first in the second table (Mich., etc.). But in the second table it would still be not only the first but the only one of the kind; and if the Jewish division of the Decalogue, which assigned five commandments to each of the two tables, reaches thus far back, it would not be even in the second table. Nor can be taken in the sense of first in importance ; for it is never described as such ( cf. per contra Mat 22:38 ; Rom 13:9-10 ; Gal 5:14 ). The most probable explanation is that Paul has not the Decalogue alone in view, but the whole series of Divine Commandments, Mosaic and later (Mey., etc.). Westcott and Hort notice another possible pointing, viz. , , , = “the which is the first commandment, with the promise that,” etc. But this still leaves it unexplained why this commandment is called the first . The whole sentence is dealt with as a parenthesis by the RV. But this is to miss the real point of the statement, which is to advance from the duty of obedience ( ) enforced by its relation to the requirement of law (the ), to the higher idea of filial honour as inculcated in the highest summary of Divine Law, the Decalogue. The clause, therefore, is an integral part of the statement, and instead of being a remark by the way conveys an advance in the thought.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Honour, &c. From Exo 20:12.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
2.] Honour thy father and thy mother, for such is (seeing it is, as Ellic., is rather too strong for , throwing the motive to obedience too much on the fact of the promise accompanying it. Whereas the obedience rests on the fact implied in , and the promise comes in to shew its special acceptableness to God) the first commandment (in the decalogue, which naturally stands at the head of all Gods other commandments; and which, though not formally binding on us as Christians, is quoted, in matters of eternal obligation (not of positive enactment), as an eminent example of Gods holy will) with a promise (i.e. with a special promise attached: in respect of promise is too vague, and does not convey any definite meaning in English. The fact certainly is so, and the occurrence of the description of God as shewing mercy unto thousands, &c. after the second commandment, does not, as Jer., al., have thought, present any difficulty-for that is no special promise attached to the commandment. Nor does the fact that no other commandment occurs in the decalogue with a promise: see above. The , as in reff.-in the sphere or department of-characterized by-accompanied with), that it may be well with thee, and thou be long-lived upon the earth (he paraphrases the latter portion of the commandment, writing for . , .,-and omitting after , ( , so in Exod., but not in Deut.) : thus adapting the promise to his Christian readers, by taking away from it that which is special and peculiar to the Jewish people. It is surely a mistake, as Jer., Aq., Est., Olsh., to spiritualize the promise, and understand by the heavenly Canaan. The very fact of the omission of the special clause removes the words from the region of type into undoubted reality: and when we remember that the persons addressed are , we must not depart from the simplest Sense of the words. For the future after , see 1Co 9:18, note: and Joh 7:3; Rev 22:14. To consider it as such, is far better than to suppose a change of construction to the direct future-and thou shalt be, &c.).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Eph 6:2. , honour) Their duty is more expressly prescribed to children than to parents; for love rather descends than ascends; and from being children men become parents.-, commandment) Deu 5:16, Honour thy father and thy mother, as the Lord thy God ENETEIAATO, COMMANDED thee, that it may be well, etc.- , the first with promise) The commandment in regard to having no strange gods,[94] carries indeed a promise with it, but likewise a threatening, and of these, either the one or the other belonging to [applying to] all the commandments. The commandment respecting the profanation of the name of God has a threatening. For our duties to God are especially due, and most necessary; therefore they are guarded with such sanctions: our duties towards men are due in a less degree to men, and so far [in that point of view] are not so necessary; they have therefore a promise attached to them. The commandment about honouring parents, of which Paul is speaking, has a peculiar promise above them all, if we look at the whole Decalogue: if we look only at the second table, it also alone has a promise; moreover, it is the first with a promise, even in respect to all the commandments, subsequent to the Decalogue. And very properly so, too; for, taking for granted the pious affection of parents in training their children to submit to the commandments of God, the honour, which is shown to parents chiefly by obedience, includes obedience to all the commandments in the early period of life. This apostolic observation is a proof that the observance of the law in the New Testament is not abolished.
[94] Beng. joins in one our first and second commandment (it being the second to which a threat and a promise are attached; whereas to our first commandment there is attached neither).-ED.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Eph 6:2
Eph 6:2
Honor thy father and mother (which is the first commandment with promise),-This is one of the ten commandments written on tables of stone at Sinai. To honor father and mother is to discharge faithfully the duties the child owes them-obedience in childhood, respect, reverence through life, tender care, and support in old age, and kindness and love at all times. This is the first commandment that has a specific promise connected with it.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Exo 20:12, Deu 27:16, Pro 20:20, Jer 35:18, Eze 22:7, Mal 1:6, Mat 15:4-6, Mar 7:9-13, Rom 13:7
Reciprocal: Rth 1:8 – the dead 1Sa 17:20 – left the sheep Pro 23:22 – Hearken Jer 35:6 – Ye shall Mat 19:19 – Honour Luk 2:51 – and was Luk 18:20 – Do not commit
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
(Eph 6:2.) -Honour thy father and thy mother-a quotation from the fifth commandment- . Exo 20:12; Deu 5:16. This citation does not, as Harless supposes, give the ground of the preceding injunction, for contains a specific reason; but it is another form of the same injunction, based not upon natural right, but upon inspired authority. Honour comprehends in it all that respect, reverence, love, and obedience, which the filial relation so fully implies. Though the Mosaic law did not by any means place man and woman on the same level in respect of conjugal right, yet here, in special and delicate homage to maternal claim, it places the mother in the same high position with the father himself. Marcion, according to Tertullian, left out this quotation in his so-called Epistle to the Laodiceans, because it recognized the authority of the God of the Old Testament, p. 329, vol. ii., Op. ed. Oehler.
-for such is, or as it is the first command with promise; giving explanation, or expressing reason. Winer, 24. Some critics give the sense of prime or chief-which is the chief commandment connected with promise. Such is the view of Wetstein, Koppe, Flatt, Meier, Matthies, Hodge, and Robinson. The adjective may bear this signification; but such cannot be its meaning here, for the fifth commandment cannot surely be deemed absolutely the most important which God has ordained with promise. Mat 22:38-39; Rom 13:9. Stier regards it as a first command, in point of importance, to the children whom Paul directly addresses. Ambrosiaster, Michaelis, von Gerlach, and Holzhausen propose to take as meaning first in a certain position; and the last affirms that denotes only the statutes which belong to the second table-duties not of man to God, but of man to man. This is only a philological figment, devised to escape from a theological difficulty. The division of the decalogue into first and second tables has no direct foundation in Scripture; but if it be adopted, we quite agree with Stier that the fifth commandment belongs to the first table. Its position in Lev 19:3, and its omission in Rom 13:9, seem to prove this. The second table is comprised in this, Love thy neighbour as thyself; but obedience to parents cannot come under such a category. The parent stands in God’s place to his child. On the division of the ten commandments separately, and on that into two tables, see Sonntag and Zllig, Stud. und Kritik. 1836-37; and Kurtz, Geschichte des Alten Bundes, vol. iii. 10. We are obliged to join with , and render-whic h is the first command with a promise, pointing to that in which the firstness consists, and the promise being expressed in the following verse. Such is the view of the Greek commentators, of Jerome, of the Reformers, of Bodius, a-Lapide, Aretius, Zanchius, Crocius, and of Harless, de Wette, Meyer, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, and Winer, 48, a. It has been remarked by others, that what appears a promise in the second commandment is only a broad declaration of the great principles of the divine government, and that this is really, therefore, the earliest or first of the ten commands with a promise-first, as Chrysostom says, not . It has been objected that there is only one command with a promise in the decalogue, and that the apostle, if he thought of the decalogue alone, would have said, not the first, but the only command with promise. Harless says that first refers to what precedes, not to what follows; and Meyer suggests that Paul included in his reckoning, not the decalogue alone, but other succeeding injunctions of the Mosaic code. As a first implies a second, we should be inclined to adopt the last view, limiting, however, the calculation of the apostle to the first body of commands delivered at Sinai. The fifth is thus the first commandment in point of promise. The article is not needed, for ordinals having a specific power in themselves often want it. Php 1:12; Middleton on the Greek Article, p. 100.
Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians
Eph 6:2. Honor does not contradict the preceding verse. If a parent asks his child to do something that is contrary to the word of the Lord, then he is not required to obey it. But while refusing to obey the request of his parent because it is unscriptural, he should do so in a manner that does not show disrespect for the parent. The overbearing attitude that so many boys and girls manifest toward their parents is never right under any circumstances. With promise. (See next verse.)
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Eph 6:2. Honor thy father and thy mother. See marginal references for repetitions and citations of Exo 20:12. Honor includes more than obedience; Luther: serve, love and esteem. Thy should be repeated with mother, to give the force of the article which occurs twice: both parents standing on an equality with respect to the honor due them.
Which is. The relative may be taken as explanatory (= the which), or as causal = seeing that it is. The latter lays too much stress upon the promise as the motive to obedience.
The first commandment with (lit, in) promise. First in order, the first one involving a promise. The second commandment in the Decalogue does not contain a specific promise, but adds the general principles of Gods dealings: showing mercy, etc. Other explanations: the first that meets us in life; the first of the second table of the law, an important commandment. The first is for fetched; the second is opposed by the fact that the fifth commandment belongs to the first table, respecting duties to God, since parents stand for the time being in the place of God. It is true no commandment with promise follows in the Decalogue; but first may refer only to what precedes, or, as is preferable, other Mosaic commands may be regarded as forming the rest of the series.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;)
Not only are they to be obedient, but they are to honor their parents. Now, the usual question is “How long do I have to honor them?” and the answer is not given in this text, but since there is silence on the when, maybe we should take it to mean that the child is to always honor their parent. This would seem logical to me.
“Which is the first commandment with promise” is from the ten commandments. Exo 10:12 “Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.” It however is not the “first” commandment, it is indeed the fifth in the Exodus listing. It is however the first of the second section of commandments. The first four are related to God and His worship, while the last six relate to our relationships to man. (See also Deu 5:16″Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.”)
Might we take a moment and review the ten – we all tend to think we know them, but I wonder how many of us could list them if asked.
1. Don’t have any other Gods before Him.
2. Don’t make any graven images.
3. Don’t bow down to them if there are some already made.
4. Don’t take the name of the Lord in vain.
5. Honor thy father and mother.
6. Thou shalt not kill.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s belongings.
Note should be made also that this is the only commandment put in the positive spin. Years ago when on the faculty of a small Bible institute the faculty was admonished that the student handbook was made up of negative rules. The board suggested we redo the handbook in positive terms, so the faculty spent many hours rewriting the entire book to show a positive spin rather than a list of don’ts. Humm, if don’ts are good enough for the Lord why not us?
Don’t is not a bad word, and parents need to know this and use the word now and then when speaking to their children. Restrictions are not always bad; they indeed are good in the family. God has many restrictions in His family, why in the world shouldn’t we?
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
6:2 {4} Honour thy father and mother; {5} (which is the first commandment with {b} promise;)
(4) A proof of the first argument.
(5) The third argument taken of the profit that ensues from it: because the Lord gave this commandment among all the rest a special blessing.
(b) With a special promise: for otherwise the second commandment has a promise of mercy to a thousand generations, but that promise is general.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Even though as Christians we are no longer under the Mosaic Law (Rom 7:6; Rom 10:4; et. al.), Paul quoted the fifth commandment (Exo 20:12; Deu 5:16) to stress the importance of children obeying their parents. He restated this command as part of the Law of Christ. Honoring (Eph 6:2) is a larger concept than obeying (Eph 6:1). It involves a proper attitude as well as appropriate behavior. [Note: See Mollie Ann Frye, "How to Honor Your Parents When They’ve Hurt You," Psychology for Living 28:6 (June 1986):12-14.]
The first commandment in the Decalogue with a promise was really the second commandment. Evidently Paul meant that for children the fifth was the primary commandment, and it contained a promise.